The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / On "Democrats"
 All Comments / On "Democrats"
    Thanks to at least nine opposing Republican senators, Congress left for its July 4 break without passing a replacement bill for Obamacare. The opposition from these Republicans was two-fold: Four conservatives thought the GOP bill on the table went too far in retaining government control over the medical insurance market, while five centrist members complained...
  • In 1980, when I was still relatively young and a Reagan enthusiast,

    I bet your enthusiasm was skin deep and that you didn’t run off to fight with the Contras in Nicaragua for Reagan’s version of freedom, like many young intellectuals did in joining up to fight fascism in the Spanish Civil War.

    Of course, once Reagan got into office he probably realized that Washington bureaucracy probably provided loads of decent jobs with benefits for nice families, and that there were many worse things in the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Most ordinary people want reasonably priced, but adequate medical coverage so that a severe illness or hospitalization of a family member does not put the head of household into bankruptcy or debtor’s prison (like the father of Charles Dickens.)

    At the present time about half of all babies born in the US are born under Medicaid? Why is this?

    People who have HIV/AIDS can live almost indefinitely now if they have access to drugs which cost hundreds of thousands of dollars per patient. A large number of these patients are currently receiving this incredibly expensive medication courtesy of the state prison and penitentiary systems.

    Orthopedic care for road traffic accident injuries is mostly paid for by automobile insurance.

    People over the age of 65 get healthcare through Medicare, mainly.

    People in the military get government healthcare, then VA care, and many of their families are covered by TriCare and Tricare for Life.

    People who can qualify as poor get Medicaid.

    We need a bipartisan national debate over how healthcare is to be financed in a reasonable and effective way for working families who don’t get employer insurance, or who are self employed in small businesses.

    Under an unregulated free-for-all, it seems unlikely that their needs will be served in a cost effective way. Already ObamaCare with its high premiums and deductibles is unaffordable for many people.

    How many families of readers of Unz.com are spending more than 25% of their post tax annual income on health care premiums, medications, and deductibles as many recipients of Obamacare must do by force of law.

    I for one do not care in the least whether solutions are provided by insurance companies, HMO’s, health care collectives, single payer, or what, but I would like to see a solution that is as good as what similar families would get in any of the developed democracies. If insurance companies can provide health care that is better value for money than single payer, then let them have at it without let or hindrance.

    If the Republican party could work with Democrats in Congress, I am sure it could come up with something that would be a great improvement on ObamaCare and easily get enough votes in the Senate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Both parties are rotten to the core and both owned by the PC/Internationalist/AIPAC/Neocon/Goldman Sachs/Deep State Cabal.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Two observations.

    First, it is generally easier to be unified when you are in the opposition–you can unite better when you need only oppose an agenda, rather than having to implement one yourself. The Democrats’ coalition of the fringes may fray if and when they regain power at the national level and have to govern.

    Second, the natural unifying force of the Republican Party would be the party of white (European-origin) Americans, particularly married white Americans in stable family situations. The present GOP leadership either cannot see this or just doesn’t want to face it. And whites don’t get along well among themselves. As whites move to mere plurality status, this may change.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • GOP should commit voluntary suicide, since it is going to expire anyway.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • To those who lived through that era that tore us apart in the '60s and '70s, it is starting to look like "deja vu all over again." And as Adlai Stevenson, Bobby Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey did then, Democrats today like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are pandering to the hell-raisers, hoping to ride their...
  • @brukean
    To be fair, Trump's agenda is a bit unworkable. He is not exactly of the right. He used the right as a vehicle to get power...I find this rather painful as a conservative.

    To be fair, Trump’s agenda is a bit unworkable. He is not exactly of the right. He used the right as a vehicle to get power…I find this rather painful as a conservative.

    What I found a lot more painful, was being ruled by Trotskyites under the guise of conservatives during both big government, warmongering Bush administrations. And make no mistake, that was the “conservative” alternative to Trump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Can't speak for DH, but here's what I've tried to do. (Can't promise that it will work, but I certainly don't think that it hurts.)

    Pop Culture:

    Pop culture is trash, of course, but my kids aren't homeschooled or anything so I let them watch some TV. However, I try to watch it with them a lot. I like to make fun of the stupidity of it, a bit like we're part of Mystery Science Theater 3000.

    The other day I asked my daughter how it was possible that every main female character had a best friend who was black. (Ironically - in many different ways - my daughter does in fact have a close mulatto friend.) She said, "I don't know. Why would you ask?" I just replied that this would obviously never happen in real life. I mean, there just aren't enough black girls out there. Heck, just look at her own school, does everyone have a black friend. It shows the people who write these programs are trying to mess with your head. Are you going to let them?

    Main point is that I plant seeds in their heads. Also, I mock the shows instead of just saying how terrible they are. Kids loves media that their parent hate, but aren't so fond of media that their parents mock, if the jokes are funny and spot on.

    (Side note: Don't think that I won't be using my daughter's mulatto friend as a warning. Her black dad only works part of the time and is a screw up. The very well educated and very well paid mom earns all the money and mostly raises the kids and is fairly miserable. "Is that what you want from a husband?" I'll ask.)

    Pretty Girls

    Honestly, how girls are raised and what their parents are like are probably more important than pretty girls having it easy latter. If the girl is nice, she won't just change because she get popular. Also, making fun of stupid but popular girls in life help inoculate them.


    Show Them The Real World

    When we're out shopping or whatever, I'll often drive my girls through an area of apartment complexes in a neighboring suburb. I tell them to look around and see who lives here. Then I ask if they would want to live here. Absolutely not!, they reply. Well, you might want to avoid dating and hanging out with people who look like this. I never mention race, but the girls occasionally do.

    Teach Them Who They Are

    I do my best to remind them of where their family comes from. Not too hard since my mother in law is from Europe. I tell them about my Norwegian grandfather and Scottish grandmother. About their German and Irish grandparents. "These are your people," I tell them. "The way that you look the way that you do, the way that you act the way that you do, it all comes from family and not just your parents but from being German and Irish and Scottish and Norwegian. It's who you are and who you will always be. Be proud of what they've done."

    I even got them a 23andme test so they can look at who they are.

    Point Out What Happens to Thoughtless Women

    My wife has a friend who never married and is now desperate to meet someone to have a life with. My daughter asked why she never married earlier. I told her that she thought that she would be the young, cute girl forever. It's the truth and my daughter got the point.

    I also point out to my kids all the time that it's so much better to have kids in your 20s, especially for women. On that, I didn't follow my own advice, but, in a way, it allows me to be the example. I'm blunt to my older daughter that waiting dramatically lowers your chances of having a kid.

    Working Isn't Everything

    My wife stopped working when the kids were very young, so she points out to them all the time how important it has been that she's home. I think that they're on board with that one.

    Daddy Time

    This is just a guess, but my suspicion is that there's a period of time between ~10 and 13 where it's hugely important for girls to have a strong father in the house. They get a lot more clingy and want to snuggle together to watch a movie or whatever. My guess - and it's only a guess - is that the hormones are kicking in and they're learning how to have a connection. If the father's not there during this period, the girls have a hole in them psychologically forever and never stop trying to find that father figure.

    Get Them Ready for MultiCulti

    Quietly start giving them mental ammunition to protect themselves and to fight back when the diversity police start coming after them. If white privilege is a real thing, why do NE Asian do better than whites? Is their Asian privilege? Etc., etc.

    The hard part is that you have to do all of this quietly. You have to subversive. The media, gov't and schools are against you. You have to undermine them bit by bit. A frontal assault just doesn't work. Luckily, everything that they're promoting is bullshit so it's not hard to point out their flaws.

    I have no clue if all of this will work, but it's better than hoping for the best.

    Excellent thoughts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Can't speak for DH, but here's what I've tried to do. (Can't promise that it will work, but I certainly don't think that it hurts.)

    Pop Culture:

    Pop culture is trash, of course, but my kids aren't homeschooled or anything so I let them watch some TV. However, I try to watch it with them a lot. I like to make fun of the stupidity of it, a bit like we're part of Mystery Science Theater 3000.

    The other day I asked my daughter how it was possible that every main female character had a best friend who was black. (Ironically - in many different ways - my daughter does in fact have a close mulatto friend.) She said, "I don't know. Why would you ask?" I just replied that this would obviously never happen in real life. I mean, there just aren't enough black girls out there. Heck, just look at her own school, does everyone have a black friend. It shows the people who write these programs are trying to mess with your head. Are you going to let them?

    Main point is that I plant seeds in their heads. Also, I mock the shows instead of just saying how terrible they are. Kids loves media that their parent hate, but aren't so fond of media that their parents mock, if the jokes are funny and spot on.

    (Side note: Don't think that I won't be using my daughter's mulatto friend as a warning. Her black dad only works part of the time and is a screw up. The very well educated and very well paid mom earns all the money and mostly raises the kids and is fairly miserable. "Is that what you want from a husband?" I'll ask.)

    Pretty Girls

    Honestly, how girls are raised and what their parents are like are probably more important than pretty girls having it easy latter. If the girl is nice, she won't just change because she get popular. Also, making fun of stupid but popular girls in life help inoculate them.


    Show Them The Real World

    When we're out shopping or whatever, I'll often drive my girls through an area of apartment complexes in a neighboring suburb. I tell them to look around and see who lives here. Then I ask if they would want to live here. Absolutely not!, they reply. Well, you might want to avoid dating and hanging out with people who look like this. I never mention race, but the girls occasionally do.

    Teach Them Who They Are

    I do my best to remind them of where their family comes from. Not too hard since my mother in law is from Europe. I tell them about my Norwegian grandfather and Scottish grandmother. About their German and Irish grandparents. "These are your people," I tell them. "The way that you look the way that you do, the way that you act the way that you do, it all comes from family and not just your parents but from being German and Irish and Scottish and Norwegian. It's who you are and who you will always be. Be proud of what they've done."

    I even got them a 23andme test so they can look at who they are.

    Point Out What Happens to Thoughtless Women

    My wife has a friend who never married and is now desperate to meet someone to have a life with. My daughter asked why she never married earlier. I told her that she thought that she would be the young, cute girl forever. It's the truth and my daughter got the point.

    I also point out to my kids all the time that it's so much better to have kids in your 20s, especially for women. On that, I didn't follow my own advice, but, in a way, it allows me to be the example. I'm blunt to my older daughter that waiting dramatically lowers your chances of having a kid.

    Working Isn't Everything

    My wife stopped working when the kids were very young, so she points out to them all the time how important it has been that she's home. I think that they're on board with that one.

    Daddy Time

    This is just a guess, but my suspicion is that there's a period of time between ~10 and 13 where it's hugely important for girls to have a strong father in the house. They get a lot more clingy and want to snuggle together to watch a movie or whatever. My guess - and it's only a guess - is that the hormones are kicking in and they're learning how to have a connection. If the father's not there during this period, the girls have a hole in them psychologically forever and never stop trying to find that father figure.

    Get Them Ready for MultiCulti

    Quietly start giving them mental ammunition to protect themselves and to fight back when the diversity police start coming after them. If white privilege is a real thing, why do NE Asian do better than whites? Is their Asian privilege? Etc., etc.

    The hard part is that you have to do all of this quietly. You have to subversive. The media, gov't and schools are against you. You have to undermine them bit by bit. A frontal assault just doesn't work. Luckily, everything that they're promoting is bullshit so it's not hard to point out their flaws.

    I have no clue if all of this will work, but it's better than hoping for the best.

    Excellent points, and thank you. FWIW, this is largely what I did with my sons who are now married and 2/3rd of them) having kids of their own. It is frankly a great relief to hear you related that you perceive you’re on the path to success with your daughters.

    I truly love women (my wife is my life) but I also think there’s never been more opportunity for young people of either sex to ruin themselves. I’m a huge believer in marital partnership as the foundation for leading a happy, fulfilling life. Developing the acumen to discern the RIGHT person from among the riffraff is huge; all of the men I know who are divorced married girls I could easily see as throwbacks. Watching my sons navigate the pool of available girls was nerve-wracking to say the least. Each of them seriously considered a throwback.

    Every message of our culture tells people to engage in hedonism; it tells young people that there’s no cost to playing the field, which I believe is an utter lie. Casual intimacy habituates people to having physical intimacy without emotional intimacy, breaking a link that is hypercritical to sustaining lifelong partnership in marriage. It never occurs to people that everything you do becomes an inescapable part of you. Every single intimacy you share with someone will sit in your mind for the rest of your life, contaminating every thought. I used to ask my sons how they’d feel if they had shared a lot of intimate moments with girls in HS, then returned a decade later with their wife and every woman they “knew” came by with a wink and a hand that lingered on his shoulder. How would that land on their wife? What respect would that show her, that he’d been so flippant about the woman he’d eventually meet, come to love and marry?

    I hope my sons are able to pass this along to their kids in a way that they can accept and incorporate. The Debbie-Does-Dallas/Hugh Heffner theory of modern life has rendered tens of millions of people miserable.

    PS: I agree with your “kids early” suggestion. We had kids from 25 to 31 and are empty nest-ers with lots of energy left, which is nice. My wife, too, took 15 years off to raise our kids rather than farm it out to strangers while she worked, a path my two daughters-in-law with kids are following as well. It’s astonishing to see how easy it is to see what TO do, and what NOT to do, if you begin by rejecting the echo chamber in which we live. It sounds like you and I share that view to a T.

    I might add that I hope my grandkids grasp that Job One is to make of themselves the best potential partners possible. If you want a diamond, be a diamond. Maybe that’s oversimplified, but it’s all I’ve got.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @dc.sunsets
    DH, here's a question (I think.)

    I raised only sons, so raising girls is a foreign concept to me. In my wife and my daughters-in-law I draw the following conclusions, so I run them by you for your insights:
    1. Girls tend to be the more social sex and therefore have greater difficulty resisting the gravitational pull of Pop Culture (which is uniformly toxic.) Can involved, wise parenting overcome this?
    2. Girls who are relatively attractive are generally ruined by existing at the center of constant male orbit; it seems to mess with their minds, and the only ways I've noted that attractive young women (teens) avoid this is A) if they suffer a long-term illness or are otherwise isolated from that orbital plane during these critical years or B) if they are late bloomers, e.g., they had a physical defect like an underbite during their 13-18 years that, once corrected, allows them to suddenly emerge as Swans from ugly-duckdom.

    I have granddaughters so I do worry about this. After examining the lives of others for a long time, I've concluded that modern culture is absolutely destroying women by A) teaching them that the single most important role in any society, the production and nurture of the next generation, is unworthy of their attention and that Job One for women is to Emulate Men by seeing to career above all. Both men and women are encouraged to engage in casual sex, which permanently alters their connecting physical intimacy with emotional intimacy, insuring that their marriages will be equally casual and impermanent.

    This reflects on the OP because this vast disconnect between men and women is a product of this leftist cultural experiment, and I do wonder if it is a reflection of a fatal loss of social vitality among Americans who are of English/Northern European ancestry. How do you have a civilization if its dominant (popular) culture devalues it to the point of abandonment?

    In this regard, it's not the Left with which we're at war. It's the Left that is stabbing us in the back while we face those who seek to replace us. It's the Leftists, acting like drug pushers, encouraging our loved ones to destroy themselves.

    Can’t speak for DH, but here’s what I’ve tried to do. (Can’t promise that it will work, but I certainly don’t think that it hurts.)

    Pop Culture:

    Pop culture is trash, of course, but my kids aren’t homeschooled or anything so I let them watch some TV. However, I try to watch it with them a lot. I like to make fun of the stupidity of it, a bit like we’re part of Mystery Science Theater 3000.

    The other day I asked my daughter how it was possible that every main female character had a best friend who was black. (Ironically – in many different ways – my daughter does in fact have a close mulatto friend.) She said, “I don’t know. Why would you ask?” I just replied that this would obviously never happen in real life. I mean, there just aren’t enough black girls out there. Heck, just look at her own school, does everyone have a black friend. It shows the people who write these programs are trying to mess with your head. Are you going to let them?

    Main point is that I plant seeds in their heads. Also, I mock the shows instead of just saying how terrible they are. Kids loves media that their parent hate, but aren’t so fond of media that their parents mock, if the jokes are funny and spot on.

    (Side note: Don’t think that I won’t be using my daughter’s mulatto friend as a warning. Her black dad only works part of the time and is a screw up. The very well educated and very well paid mom earns all the money and mostly raises the kids and is fairly miserable. “Is that what you want from a husband?” I’ll ask.)

    Pretty Girls

    Honestly, how girls are raised and what their parents are like are probably more important than pretty girls having it easy latter. If the girl is nice, she won’t just change because she get popular. Also, making fun of stupid but popular girls in life help inoculate them.

    Show Them The Real World

    When we’re out shopping or whatever, I’ll often drive my girls through an area of apartment complexes in a neighboring suburb. I tell them to look around and see who lives here. Then I ask if they would want to live here. Absolutely not!, they reply. Well, you might want to avoid dating and hanging out with people who look like this. I never mention race, but the girls occasionally do.

    Teach Them Who They Are

    I do my best to remind them of where their family comes from. Not too hard since my mother in law is from Europe. I tell them about my Norwegian grandfather and Scottish grandmother. About their German and Irish grandparents. “These are your people,” I tell them. “The way that you look the way that you do, the way that you act the way that you do, it all comes from family and not just your parents but from being German and Irish and Scottish and Norwegian. It’s who you are and who you will always be. Be proud of what they’ve done.”

    I even got them a 23andme test so they can look at who they are.

    Point Out What Happens to Thoughtless Women

    My wife has a friend who never married and is now desperate to meet someone to have a life with. My daughter asked why she never married earlier. I told her that she thought that she would be the young, cute girl forever. It’s the truth and my daughter got the point.

    I also point out to my kids all the time that it’s so much better to have kids in your 20s, especially for women. On that, I didn’t follow my own advice, but, in a way, it allows me to be the example. I’m blunt to my older daughter that waiting dramatically lowers your chances of having a kid.

    Working Isn’t Everything

    My wife stopped working when the kids were very young, so she points out to them all the time how important it has been that she’s home. I think that they’re on board with that one.

    Daddy Time

    This is just a guess, but my suspicion is that there’s a period of time between ~10 and 13 where it’s hugely important for girls to have a strong father in the house. They get a lot more clingy and want to snuggle together to watch a movie or whatever. My guess – and it’s only a guess – is that the hormones are kicking in and they’re learning how to have a connection. If the father’s not there during this period, the girls have a hole in them psychologically forever and never stop trying to find that father figure.

    Get Them Ready for MultiCulti

    Quietly start giving them mental ammunition to protect themselves and to fight back when the diversity police start coming after them. If white privilege is a real thing, why do NE Asian do better than whites? Is their Asian privilege? Etc., etc.

    The hard part is that you have to do all of this quietly. You have to subversive. The media, gov’t and schools are against you. You have to undermine them bit by bit. A frontal assault just doesn’t work. Luckily, everything that they’re promoting is bullshit so it’s not hard to point out their flaws.

    I have no clue if all of this will work, but it’s better than hoping for the best.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    Excellent points, and thank you. FWIW, this is largely what I did with my sons who are now married and 2/3rd of them) having kids of their own. It is frankly a great relief to hear you related that you perceive you're on the path to success with your daughters.

    I truly love women (my wife is my life) but I also think there's never been more opportunity for young people of either sex to ruin themselves. I'm a huge believer in marital partnership as the foundation for leading a happy, fulfilling life. Developing the acumen to discern the RIGHT person from among the riffraff is huge; all of the men I know who are divorced married girls I could easily see as throwbacks. Watching my sons navigate the pool of available girls was nerve-wracking to say the least. Each of them seriously considered a throwback.

    Every message of our culture tells people to engage in hedonism; it tells young people that there's no cost to playing the field, which I believe is an utter lie. Casual intimacy habituates people to having physical intimacy without emotional intimacy, breaking a link that is hypercritical to sustaining lifelong partnership in marriage. It never occurs to people that everything you do becomes an inescapable part of you. Every single intimacy you share with someone will sit in your mind for the rest of your life, contaminating every thought. I used to ask my sons how they'd feel if they had shared a lot of intimate moments with girls in HS, then returned a decade later with their wife and every woman they "knew" came by with a wink and a hand that lingered on his shoulder. How would that land on their wife? What respect would that show her, that he'd been so flippant about the woman he'd eventually meet, come to love and marry?

    I hope my sons are able to pass this along to their kids in a way that they can accept and incorporate. The Debbie-Does-Dallas/Hugh Heffner theory of modern life has rendered tens of millions of people miserable.

    PS: I agree with your "kids early" suggestion. We had kids from 25 to 31 and are empty nest-ers with lots of energy left, which is nice. My wife, too, took 15 years off to raise our kids rather than farm it out to strangers while she worked, a path my two daughters-in-law with kids are following as well. It's astonishing to see how easy it is to see what TO do, and what NOT to do, if you begin by rejecting the echo chamber in which we live. It sounds like you and I share that view to a T.

    I might add that I hope my grandkids grasp that Job One is to make of themselves the best potential partners possible. If you want a diamond, be a diamond. Maybe that's oversimplified, but it's all I've got.

    , @midtown
    Excellent thoughts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @brukean
    To be fair, Trump's agenda is a bit unworkable. He is not exactly of the right. He used the right as a vehicle to get power...I find this rather painful as a conservative.

    He used the right as a vehicle to get power

    And thank god he did because no conservative was going to pull the blue states votes out of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania that Trump did.

    Besides, what was so good about GOP “conservatism” since Reagan?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Diversity Heretic
    Like you, at first I thought Whiskey was outrageous, but he makes more and more sense as I watch events. I'm raising a daughter too and trying to help her see the truth, especially the truth about different races.

    DH, here’s a question (I think.)

    I raised only sons, so raising girls is a foreign concept to me. In my wife and my daughters-in-law I draw the following conclusions, so I run them by you for your insights:
    1. Girls tend to be the more social sex and therefore have greater difficulty resisting the gravitational pull of Pop Culture (which is uniformly toxic.) Can involved, wise parenting overcome this?
    2. Girls who are relatively attractive are generally ruined by existing at the center of constant male orbit; it seems to mess with their minds, and the only ways I’ve noted that attractive young women (teens) avoid this is A) if they suffer a long-term illness or are otherwise isolated from that orbital plane during these critical years or B) if they are late bloomers, e.g., they had a physical defect like an underbite during their 13-18 years that, once corrected, allows them to suddenly emerge as Swans from ugly-duckdom.

    I have granddaughters so I do worry about this. After examining the lives of others for a long time, I’ve concluded that modern culture is absolutely destroying women by A) teaching them that the single most important role in any society, the production and nurture of the next generation, is unworthy of their attention and that Job One for women is to Emulate Men by seeing to career above all. Both men and women are encouraged to engage in casual sex, which permanently alters their connecting physical intimacy with emotional intimacy, insuring that their marriages will be equally casual and impermanent.

    This reflects on the OP because this vast disconnect between men and women is a product of this leftist cultural experiment, and I do wonder if it is a reflection of a fatal loss of social vitality among Americans who are of English/Northern European ancestry. How do you have a civilization if its dominant (popular) culture devalues it to the point of abandonment?

    In this regard, it’s not the Left with which we’re at war. It’s the Left that is stabbing us in the back while we face those who seek to replace us. It’s the Leftists, acting like drug pushers, encouraging our loved ones to destroy themselves.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Can't speak for DH, but here's what I've tried to do. (Can't promise that it will work, but I certainly don't think that it hurts.)

    Pop Culture:

    Pop culture is trash, of course, but my kids aren't homeschooled or anything so I let them watch some TV. However, I try to watch it with them a lot. I like to make fun of the stupidity of it, a bit like we're part of Mystery Science Theater 3000.

    The other day I asked my daughter how it was possible that every main female character had a best friend who was black. (Ironically - in many different ways - my daughter does in fact have a close mulatto friend.) She said, "I don't know. Why would you ask?" I just replied that this would obviously never happen in real life. I mean, there just aren't enough black girls out there. Heck, just look at her own school, does everyone have a black friend. It shows the people who write these programs are trying to mess with your head. Are you going to let them?

    Main point is that I plant seeds in their heads. Also, I mock the shows instead of just saying how terrible they are. Kids loves media that their parent hate, but aren't so fond of media that their parents mock, if the jokes are funny and spot on.

    (Side note: Don't think that I won't be using my daughter's mulatto friend as a warning. Her black dad only works part of the time and is a screw up. The very well educated and very well paid mom earns all the money and mostly raises the kids and is fairly miserable. "Is that what you want from a husband?" I'll ask.)

    Pretty Girls

    Honestly, how girls are raised and what their parents are like are probably more important than pretty girls having it easy latter. If the girl is nice, she won't just change because she get popular. Also, making fun of stupid but popular girls in life help inoculate them.


    Show Them The Real World

    When we're out shopping or whatever, I'll often drive my girls through an area of apartment complexes in a neighboring suburb. I tell them to look around and see who lives here. Then I ask if they would want to live here. Absolutely not!, they reply. Well, you might want to avoid dating and hanging out with people who look like this. I never mention race, but the girls occasionally do.

    Teach Them Who They Are

    I do my best to remind them of where their family comes from. Not too hard since my mother in law is from Europe. I tell them about my Norwegian grandfather and Scottish grandmother. About their German and Irish grandparents. "These are your people," I tell them. "The way that you look the way that you do, the way that you act the way that you do, it all comes from family and not just your parents but from being German and Irish and Scottish and Norwegian. It's who you are and who you will always be. Be proud of what they've done."

    I even got them a 23andme test so they can look at who they are.

    Point Out What Happens to Thoughtless Women

    My wife has a friend who never married and is now desperate to meet someone to have a life with. My daughter asked why she never married earlier. I told her that she thought that she would be the young, cute girl forever. It's the truth and my daughter got the point.

    I also point out to my kids all the time that it's so much better to have kids in your 20s, especially for women. On that, I didn't follow my own advice, but, in a way, it allows me to be the example. I'm blunt to my older daughter that waiting dramatically lowers your chances of having a kid.

    Working Isn't Everything

    My wife stopped working when the kids were very young, so she points out to them all the time how important it has been that she's home. I think that they're on board with that one.

    Daddy Time

    This is just a guess, but my suspicion is that there's a period of time between ~10 and 13 where it's hugely important for girls to have a strong father in the house. They get a lot more clingy and want to snuggle together to watch a movie or whatever. My guess - and it's only a guess - is that the hormones are kicking in and they're learning how to have a connection. If the father's not there during this period, the girls have a hole in them psychologically forever and never stop trying to find that father figure.

    Get Them Ready for MultiCulti

    Quietly start giving them mental ammunition to protect themselves and to fight back when the diversity police start coming after them. If white privilege is a real thing, why do NE Asian do better than whites? Is their Asian privilege? Etc., etc.

    The hard part is that you have to do all of this quietly. You have to subversive. The media, gov't and schools are against you. You have to undermine them bit by bit. A frontal assault just doesn't work. Luckily, everything that they're promoting is bullshit so it's not hard to point out their flaws.

    I have no clue if all of this will work, but it's better than hoping for the best.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @International Jew
    Sure, but he meant it as a joke (or maybe he didn't but people have taken it as a joke ever since). What's the point of Pat Buchanan repeating that joke then, in what's a dead-serious context?

    I'll allow that "RSVP please" is never intended ironically; I think there people just don't know it's redundant.

    We are afflicted with lots of stuff from the Department of Redundancy Department.

    Co-conspirator is one of my fav’s. (facepalm)

    I can’t speak for PB. Maybe he’s afraid everyone’s tiring of Doom Porn, so he tries to lighten up the message?

    It’s my view that we’re in a period analogous to the regal South of the USA during the Antebellum period, and that a Sherman’s March analogue will occur in my lifetime, so I guess any attempt to lighten the mood is welcome.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Much as I hate to admit it, Whiskey was right about this point all along. White women are the issue - and I say that as a happily married man with daughters.

    I messed with one of my daughters the other day when I told her that I didn't want to watch the movie, The Help, because it was just another Nice White Lady (NWL) movie. She was a bit surprised that I used "white" in a sentence. (Don't worry, I'm making sure that my kids are proud of their heritage.)

    I told her that while I hadn't seen this particular movie, all NWL movies are always the same - and terrible. NWL gets to know some minority or minorities (never seems to be a poor white). She alone judges them as people, unlike her mean white friends/neighbors, and sees the oppression and unfairness. Naturally, the minorities are kind, loving and just as smart and hard-working (if not more) as the rich, bad whites. NWL starts to push for fair treatment. Most whites call the minorities names and say that whites are superior. (A few almost NWLs admit that NWL is right but they are afraid of being ostracized by white community, unlike our brave heroine.) Something happens to prove the minorities really our good people, just as NWL has been saying all along. (Minority saves a kid or something along with help of NWL.) Most whites - usually the women - realize that they were wrong - and, of course, NWL was right and try to change things. A few bad whites - usually men and the hottest of the bad white ladies - just won't change because they're evil. Everyone - importantly, the minorities - praises NWL for being, well, a NWL. The End.

    My daughter watched the movie and told me that it was exactly that plot.

    Huge numbers of college-educated white women believe that they are that NWL. But their fantasy is meeting reality as blacks, browns and Muslims aren't praising them for their help; in fact, their telling these NWL to "check their privilege" and get to the back of the bus. It's fun to watch the cognitive dissonance. If that NWL fantasy ever gets demolished by reality, whites stand a chance.

    Like you, at first I thought Whiskey was outrageous, but he makes more and more sense as I watch events. I’m raising a daughter too and trying to help her see the truth, especially the truth about different races.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    DH, here's a question (I think.)

    I raised only sons, so raising girls is a foreign concept to me. In my wife and my daughters-in-law I draw the following conclusions, so I run them by you for your insights:
    1. Girls tend to be the more social sex and therefore have greater difficulty resisting the gravitational pull of Pop Culture (which is uniformly toxic.) Can involved, wise parenting overcome this?
    2. Girls who are relatively attractive are generally ruined by existing at the center of constant male orbit; it seems to mess with their minds, and the only ways I've noted that attractive young women (teens) avoid this is A) if they suffer a long-term illness or are otherwise isolated from that orbital plane during these critical years or B) if they are late bloomers, e.g., they had a physical defect like an underbite during their 13-18 years that, once corrected, allows them to suddenly emerge as Swans from ugly-duckdom.

    I have granddaughters so I do worry about this. After examining the lives of others for a long time, I've concluded that modern culture is absolutely destroying women by A) teaching them that the single most important role in any society, the production and nurture of the next generation, is unworthy of their attention and that Job One for women is to Emulate Men by seeing to career above all. Both men and women are encouraged to engage in casual sex, which permanently alters their connecting physical intimacy with emotional intimacy, insuring that their marriages will be equally casual and impermanent.

    This reflects on the OP because this vast disconnect between men and women is a product of this leftist cultural experiment, and I do wonder if it is a reflection of a fatal loss of social vitality among Americans who are of English/Northern European ancestry. How do you have a civilization if its dominant (popular) culture devalues it to the point of abandonment?

    In this regard, it's not the Left with which we're at war. It's the Left that is stabbing us in the back while we face those who seek to replace us. It's the Leftists, acting like drug pushers, encouraging our loved ones to destroy themselves.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @OilcanFloyd
    Middle America is largely already knee deep in bear market conditions, and when the Left insists on more gibsmedats, Middle Americans’ response will be, “I don’t have anything to spare, I’m worried about myself, and if you keep trying to take stuff from me, I’ll support sending in the Marines to machine-gun you all.”

    I wouldn't mind machine-gunning them myself.

    I wouldn’t mind machine-gunning them myself.

    So much hate!

    You must contain the dark side.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @dc.sunsets
    Look up the quotes and aphorisms of Yogi Berra.

    Sure, but he meant it as a joke (or maybe he didn’t but people have taken it as a joke ever since). What’s the point of Pat Buchanan repeating that joke then, in what’s a dead-serious context?

    I’ll allow that “RSVP please” is never intended ironically; I think there people just don’t know it’s redundant.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    We are afflicted with lots of stuff from the Department of Redundancy Department.

    Co-conspirator is one of my fav's. (facepalm)

    I can't speak for PB. Maybe he's afraid everyone's tiring of Doom Porn, so he tries to lighten up the message?

    It's my view that we're in a period analogous to the regal South of the USA during the Antebellum period, and that a Sherman's March analogue will occur in my lifetime, so I guess any attempt to lighten the mood is welcome.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Diversity Heretic
    The U.S. of 2017 bears only a passing demographic resemblance to the U.S. of the 1960s. The divisions now are deeper and more fundamental. Another financial meltdown, for example, could result in Algeria-style civil war in the U.S.

    “The U.S. of 2017 bears only a passing demographic resemblance to the U.S. of the 1960s.”

    With the demographics being different in the 1920′s, and in the 1890′s, and in the 1850′s, and…

    “The divisions now are deeper and more fundamental. Another financial meltdown, for example, could result in Algeria-style civil war in the U.S.”

    Could being the operative word here. I’ll wait for the movie to come out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Vladimir Brovkin
    Lots of good comments here. Not much to add but here are a couple of observations. In the 1960s an average young white boy could have sensed an appeal in Make Love not War slogan. Why go to fight in Nam? Isn't it better to get stoned? Now the average white guy does not feel any appeal in the Leftist message. To fight in the barricades for Muslim God given right to come to the US? Is that an inspiring goal? To fight for gays or lesbians to have their parades and privileges? Is that an attractive proposition? The big difference is that in the 1960s the hardworking middle class or working class was well off, standard of living was rising, industries expanding. Now it is in reverse. Standard of living is declining, industries collapsing. The Left has nothing to offer to middle America and that includes family-house-two-car garage blacks and Hispanics who made it. Moreover Globalist Imperialist Free Markets border-less agenda has already generated a Trump backlash. If the Dems push Trump out they will have to deal with Pence who is even more pro Christian conservative gay skeptical, imperialism fearful kind of guy. So if the Dems provoke a clash they will feel the fury of main street America.

    Excellent points! Definitely not the same situation as it was in the 60′s – Left needs to recognize its limitations.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Old fogey
    A very nice old lady [Hillary supporter, life-long Democrat, worked at the United Nations for more than 40 years in a managerial position, Vassar graduate, etc., etc.] told me today that she was looking for a home health-aide. Her ideal candidate would not be one of the Jamaicans or Africans readily available, whom she characterized as stupid women spending all day complaining of their lot while happily taking her money for doing nothing (she's experienced, you see). No, she wanted to find a kindly and hard-working white woman that she could talk to. . .

    Enough said?

    Much as I hate to admit it, Whiskey was right about this point all along. White women are the issue – and I say that as a happily married man with daughters.

    I messed with one of my daughters the other day when I told her that I didn’t want to watch the movie, The Help, because it was just another Nice White Lady (NWL) movie. She was a bit surprised that I used “white” in a sentence. (Don’t worry, I’m making sure that my kids are proud of their heritage.)

    I told her that while I hadn’t seen this particular movie, all NWL movies are always the same – and terrible. NWL gets to know some minority or minorities (never seems to be a poor white). She alone judges them as people, unlike her mean white friends/neighbors, and sees the oppression and unfairness. Naturally, the minorities are kind, loving and just as smart and hard-working (if not more) as the rich, bad whites. NWL starts to push for fair treatment. Most whites call the minorities names and say that whites are superior. (A few almost NWLs admit that NWL is right but they are afraid of being ostracized by white community, unlike our brave heroine.) Something happens to prove the minorities really our good people, just as NWL has been saying all along. (Minority saves a kid or something along with help of NWL.) Most whites – usually the women – realize that they were wrong – and, of course, NWL was right and try to change things. A few bad whites – usually men and the hottest of the bad white ladies – just won’t change because they’re evil. Everyone – importantly, the minorities – praises NWL for being, well, a NWL. The End.

    My daughter watched the movie and told me that it was exactly that plot.

    Huge numbers of college-educated white women believe that they are that NWL. But their fantasy is meeting reality as blacks, browns and Muslims aren’t praising them for their help; in fact, their telling these NWL to “check their privilege” and get to the back of the bus. It’s fun to watch the cognitive dissonance. If that NWL fantasy ever gets demolished by reality, whites stand a chance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    Like you, at first I thought Whiskey was outrageous, but he makes more and more sense as I watch events. I'm raising a daughter too and trying to help her see the truth, especially the truth about different races.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Vladimir Brovkin [AKA "Vlad"] says:

    Lots of good comments here. Not much to add but here are a couple of observations. In the 1960s an average young white boy could have sensed an appeal in Make Love not War slogan. Why go to fight in Nam? Isn’t it better to get stoned? Now the average white guy does not fell any appeal in the Leftist message. To fight in the barricades for Muslim God given right to come to the US? Is that an inspiring goal? To fight for gays or lesbians to have their parades and privileges? Is that an attractive proposition? The big difference is that in the 1960s the hardworking middle class or working class was well off, standard of living was rising, industries expanding. Now it is in reverse. Standard of living is declining, industries collapsing. The Left has nothing to offer to middle America and that includes family house two car garage blacks and Hispanics who made it. Moreover Globalist Imperialist Free Markets border-less agenda has already generated Trump backlash. If the Dems push Trump out they will have to deal with Pence who is even more pro Christian conservative gay skeptical, imperialism fearful kind of guy. So if the Dems provoke a clash they will feel the fury of main street America.

    Click to Edit

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Vladimir Brovkin [AKA "Vlad"] says:

    Lots of good comments here. Not much to add but here are a couple of observations. In the 1960s an average young white boy could have sensed an appeal in Make Love not War slogan. Why go to fight in Nam? Isn’t it better to get stoned? Now the average white guy does not feel any appeal in the Leftist message. To fight in the barricades for Muslim God given right to come to the US? Is that an inspiring goal? To fight for gays or lesbians to have their parades and privileges? Is that an attractive proposition? The big difference is that in the 1960s the hardworking middle class or working class was well off, standard of living was rising, industries expanding. Now it is in reverse. Standard of living is declining, industries collapsing. The Left has nothing to offer to middle America and that includes family-house-two-car garage blacks and Hispanics who made it. Moreover Globalist Imperialist Free Markets border-less agenda has already generated a Trump backlash. If the Dems push Trump out they will have to deal with Pence who is even more pro Christian conservative gay skeptical, imperialism fearful kind of guy. So if the Dems provoke a clash they will feel the fury of main street America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Excellent points! Definitely not the same situation as it was in the 60's - Left needs to recognize its limitations.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • We must back President Trump 100%.

    The so called “Democratic” leadership should be tried in Nuerenberg.

    People’s Democratic Republic of North Korea boasts to be “Democratic” too.

    Do you notice the resemblance?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Citizen of a Silly Country

    And could Southerners and Northerners have detested each other much more than Americans do today?
     
    No. Probably less since they were at least the same race.

    But other than despising Trump and his “deplorables,” what great cause unites the left today?
     
    If by "deplorables" you mean white men, nothing. Even Nice White Ladies are beginning to figure out that they're hated by blacks and browns.

    The big difference today is that the country is no longer 85% white. This isn't just about politics; it's about race.

    A very nice old lady [Hillary supporter, life-long Democrat, worked at the United Nations for more than 40 years in a managerial position, Vassar graduate, etc., etc.] told me today that she was looking for a home health-aide. Her ideal candidate would not be one of the Jamaicans or Africans readily available, whom she characterized as stupid women spending all day complaining of their lot while happily taking her money for doing nothing (she’s experienced, you see). No, she wanted to find a kindly and hard-working white woman that she could talk to. . .

    Enough said?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Much as I hate to admit it, Whiskey was right about this point all along. White women are the issue - and I say that as a happily married man with daughters.

    I messed with one of my daughters the other day when I told her that I didn't want to watch the movie, The Help, because it was just another Nice White Lady (NWL) movie. She was a bit surprised that I used "white" in a sentence. (Don't worry, I'm making sure that my kids are proud of their heritage.)

    I told her that while I hadn't seen this particular movie, all NWL movies are always the same - and terrible. NWL gets to know some minority or minorities (never seems to be a poor white). She alone judges them as people, unlike her mean white friends/neighbors, and sees the oppression and unfairness. Naturally, the minorities are kind, loving and just as smart and hard-working (if not more) as the rich, bad whites. NWL starts to push for fair treatment. Most whites call the minorities names and say that whites are superior. (A few almost NWLs admit that NWL is right but they are afraid of being ostracized by white community, unlike our brave heroine.) Something happens to prove the minorities really our good people, just as NWL has been saying all along. (Minority saves a kid or something along with help of NWL.) Most whites - usually the women - realize that they were wrong - and, of course, NWL was right and try to change things. A few bad whites - usually men and the hottest of the bad white ladies - just won't change because they're evil. Everyone - importantly, the minorities - praises NWL for being, well, a NWL. The End.

    My daughter watched the movie and told me that it was exactly that plot.

    Huge numbers of college-educated white women believe that they are that NWL. But their fantasy is meeting reality as blacks, browns and Muslims aren't praising them for their help; in fact, their telling these NWL to "check their privilege" and get to the back of the bus. It's fun to watch the cognitive dissonance. If that NWL fantasy ever gets demolished by reality, whites stand a chance.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @J1234

    We are on the road to civil war II thanks to diversity and pluralism as described by author Thomas Chittum in his book by the same title.
     
    That's possible, but assessing the political future of the US by the current state of our divisiveness may be inaccurate. Trump is taking action on his most controversial campaign promises (which usually involve immigration) right at first. After these first several months, the extremely high level of confrontation between Trump and the far left will subside to just a sustainable high level. Remember the "occupy" movement? It went away because the left gets tired of self-imposed hardship. A civil war would be hardship beyond belief. They don't want a civil war, even when they act like they do. The left is all about acting like something they're not.

    A civil war would be hardship beyond belief.

    But lefties don’t realize that. They are feeling their oats and riding high because the right hasn’t started physically fighting back yet. But when they start getting their faces kicked in or worse, taking actual fire, only then will the gravity of the situation dawn on their pot addled brains.

    Conservative oriented white Americans always think bad times will just blow over and it will be like nothing ever happened. Except these days even the usually optimistic kosher cons believe the hatred and division is a permanent fixture and that civil war is brewing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @KenH
    The left isn't playing with fire, Pat. Perhaps they would be if the nation was still 85-90% white, but it's now 62% white at most with the highest median age and a large minority of whom have gone over to the other side. Time is not on the side of the silent majority

    Don't expect the virulently anti-white left to suddenly have an epiphany and start toning things down. That just isn't their nature. We are on the road to civil war II thanks to diversity and pluralism as described by author Thomas Chittum in his book by the same title.

    We are on the road to civil war II thanks to diversity and pluralism as described by author Thomas Chittum in his book by the same title.

    That’s possible, but assessing the political future of the US by the current state of our divisiveness may be inaccurate. Trump is taking action on his most controversial campaign promises (which usually involve immigration) right at first. After these first several months, the extremely high level of confrontation between Trump and the far left will subside to just a sustainable high level. Remember the “occupy” movement? It went away because the left gets tired of self-imposed hardship. A civil war would be hardship beyond belief. They don’t want a civil war, even when they act like they do. The left is all about acting like something they’re not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH

    A civil war would be hardship beyond belief.
     
    But lefties don't realize that. They are feeling their oats and riding high because the right hasn't started physically fighting back yet. But when they start getting their faces kicked in or worse, taking actual fire, only then will the gravity of the situation dawn on their pot addled brains.

    Conservative oriented white Americans always think bad times will just blow over and it will be like nothing ever happened. Except these days even the usually optimistic kosher cons believe the hatred and division is a permanent fixture and that civil war is brewing.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The left isn’t playing with fire, Pat. Perhaps they would be if the nation was still 85-90% white, but it’s now 62% white at most with the highest median age and a large minority of whom have gone over to the other side. Time is not on the side of the silent majority

    Don’t expect the virulently anti-white left to suddenly have an epiphany and start toning things down. That just isn’t their nature. We are on the road to civil war II thanks to diversity and pluralism as described by author Thomas Chittum in his book by the same title.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J1234

    We are on the road to civil war II thanks to diversity and pluralism as described by author Thomas Chittum in his book by the same title.
     
    That's possible, but assessing the political future of the US by the current state of our divisiveness may be inaccurate. Trump is taking action on his most controversial campaign promises (which usually involve immigration) right at first. After these first several months, the extremely high level of confrontation between Trump and the far left will subside to just a sustainable high level. Remember the "occupy" movement? It went away because the left gets tired of self-imposed hardship. A civil war would be hardship beyond belief. They don't want a civil war, even when they act like they do. The left is all about acting like something they're not.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • anon • Disclaimer says:

    This discussion is from another planet. The ‘left’ … the SJW’s …. they are talking about Micro Aggressions. And ‘Feeling Safe.’

    People like that aren’t signing up for the revolution.

    And in the cities … Chicago for example …. the city has been systematically gentrified, with Mexicans providing a buffer from the dangerous black neighborhoods. It took enormous effort and money to get rid of the projects, and blacks with money are moving out. The reclaimed neighborhoods aren’t getting burned down. The people who live in them need them — otherwise they have to move back to suburbia.

    The notion that hipsters and blacks and Mexicans are going to actually band together and fight? On Facebook, sure. But get real.

    Back in the day, ‘youth’ were getting drafted to fight and die for nothing. So there was some real energy behind the dissatisfaction. Now? The left wants to Feel Safe. And Trump? They think he is mean. And has bad hair.

    Are people hungry? No, they are obese.

    Thats not how you get revolutions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    Leftists won the last couple hundred years of revolutions because the larger trend was toward leftism.
     
    Oh boy, to understand a crucial difference between say "leftists" of Russian Civil War of 1918-1922 and modern day so called "Cultural Marxists" one has to have understanding of history in general and military in particular. The difference is startling to put it mildly and they have very little, if anything, in common. But for the confusion you may thank a whole US "academe" which still thinks that what emerged in the USSR has anything in common with modern "left" which is not left but a cabal of neo-liberal fringes. They and warfare do not mix well. You want example of it? During LA Rodney King riots it didn't take long for Korean and other Asian shopkeepers to organize and put down riots in their neck of the woods. That is a power of organized armed group. Now, you want to tell me that some transgender activist could be a good military leader? Of course, I simplify but there are many angry white and extremely well armed men out there, some of them are with military background--I would put my bet on them in their fight against modern so called "left".

    fact:
    Those in the military overwhelmingly voted Trump.

    There you go.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Priss Factor
    Left? What left?

    All this stuff about homo vanity and prancing trannies is about the Left?

    These thugs and morons are nothing but shills and Janissary of the GLOB.

    They are NOT FOR anything. They are just AGAINST this fantasy Nazism. But then, they grew up on MATRIX movies, punk music, and video games. They are fantasists and don't constitute any real Left.

    If they are really part of the 'left', how come they don't attack Hollywood, Las Vegas, Wall Street, elite institutions like Harvard?

    Why do they attack working class and middle class Trump supporters?

    They are tools of the globalist oligarchs. They may play at being 'anarchist' or 'communist', but we must judge them by what they DO. They are janissary of Soros.

    You are correct top to bottom. They are tools. Calling them the left gives them too much credit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @KenH
    Yes, whitey could but at least half are still brainwashed into the cult of race doesn't matter and/or self hate and probably will be forever. When you have a (((media))) that lionizes and romanticizes violent black and brown insurrectionists but demonizes white ones you shouldn't be surprised when there are few takers among the able bodied and racially healthy white male population.

    It seems when a lone white male has had enough and takes matters into his own hands a la Dylan Roof or the mosque shooter in Canada they get condemned by the self styled leaders of the racialist right. There's always hand wringing galore. Even in the early 1980's The Order was hung out to dry by virtually everyone except the late Dr. William Pierce of the National Alliance (may he rest in peace).

    But non-whites do not condemn their own when they commit senseless acts of violence against whites. In fact, most celebrate it.

    Yep. Time will tell.

    Part of the problem is that whites haven’t really had their backs against the door for 500 years. That’s a long time.

    I have no clue what’s going to happen, but my suspicion is that thing will need to get worse – a lot worse – before whites wake up – if they do at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Steel T Post
    Democrat Platform:

    1. La Raza (The Race)
    2. BLM
    3. Jews Stand with Muslims
    4. Kill Whitey

    Democrat Platform:

    1. La Raza (The Race)
    2. BLM
    3. Jews Stand with Muslims
    4. Kill Whitey

    That’s just the window-dressing. The Dems are handmaidens of transnational capital, which seeks to transform the US from a sovereign nation-state to a post-national, post-colonial empire under its full control.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Well, whitey could stand up for himself.

    Look, I hate the Left - and those who back them - but whites need to grow some nuts. No other group of men would stand for this. I can't count the number of times that I've openly said that I want immigration - all immigration - stopped or said that my kids should be proud of their heritage. The looks of horror that I get from other whites is a sight to behold.

    I'm tired of being on an island. I want to fight that percentage of whites that are on my side and make my stand.

    Yes, whitey could but at least half are still brainwashed into the cult of race doesn’t matter and/or self hate and probably will be forever. When you have a (((media))) that lionizes and romanticizes violent black and brown insurrectionists but demonizes white ones you shouldn’t be surprised when there are few takers among the able bodied and racially healthy white male population.

    It seems when a lone white male has had enough and takes matters into his own hands a la Dylan Roof or the mosque shooter in Canada they get condemned by the self styled leaders of the racialist right. There’s always hand wringing galore. Even in the early 1980′s The Order was hung out to dry by virtually everyone except the late Dr. William Pierce of the National Alliance (may he rest in peace).

    But non-whites do not condemn their own when they commit senseless acts of violence against whites. In fact, most celebrate it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Yep. Time will tell.

    Part of the problem is that whites haven't really had their backs against the door for 500 years. That's a long time.

    I have no clue what's going to happen, but my suspicion is that thing will need to get worse - a lot worse - before whites wake up - if they do at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @WorkingClass
    C'mon Pat. If this is the sixties where is our summer of love?

    C’mon Pat. If this is the sixties where is our summer of love?

    Well, there’s always the new season of Girls, starring Lena Dunham in all her fatness, having sex with this guy and that guy, naked throughout. There’s your Summer Of Love.

    They ain’t what they used to be.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Zoodles
    I agree.

    I think the left is far better prepped for this kind of warfare

    Only if you even wanted the cities. Let them have the cities. Business won’t be done anymore, they’ll starve. Even better, keep them IN the cities..

    Read More
    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Zoodles
    The left will be at a tremendous advantage when the shooting starts.

    Sure..we may have the guns, but guns are cheap. You can teach some hipster or BLM chud the basics of using an AK or an rpg in a week or two..more than enough for urban insurgency cannon fodder.

    What they have is cash from thier network of foundations..but most importantly they have structure. They have skeleton of an insurgency already in place with their vast network of activists and NGOs. They also command the terms of respectability..society finds leftwing violence far more acceptable.

    These guys are already in the process of psychologically preparing themselves for violence through dehumanisation of anyone to the right of trotsky.

    I think the first waves of violence will be mass riots, bombings and assassinations of prominent rightists along with a systematic campaign of intimidation. If it moves beyond that, then their structure will allow them to make swift gains.

    They have considerable disadvantages as well..they are heterogeneous mass of groups, many of whom don't actually like one another. I think after the initial rush, they will fall to infighting, and that will eventually be their undoing.

    If the Left has advantage, why don’t they take their ideology out for a test spin in say, Simpsonville, South Carolina? In Augusta Georgia, come outside city limits, break some windows out there. I see them rioting in Charleston but they never go out to the suburbs, to where all those awful, God-Fearing White Christians with their guns live and tell these White folks what’s wrong with them.

    Why not? Because the Left that fills in the gaps at protests are pussies, students, kids involved because there are some girls around to try to bang. Make it real for them and they’d melt away leaving behind the vocal 5% that break windows. I’ll take my chances with the Left. They’re cowards. They’d never stand up to a citizen defense outside their turf, be it campus or city streets. Leave those, they’re dead and they know it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @dc.sunsets
    If the Left & the Underclass burn the cities, I'm not sure who'll mow them down, and I'm not sure I'll care much about it. Urban renewal and all that.

    If the Left tries to bus the Underclass (or arrange a ride-share caravan) to the suburbs for the burn, I have a pretty good idea who'll mow them down.

    Home field advantage and all that.

    Yeah, if they’re gonna tear up their own Liberal cities, well, the inhabitants that encouraged them will have to deal with the new vibrancy. All along, I’ve had no objection to protesters and window breakers and fire bugs having their fun in DC and NYC, Chicago, Seattle and San Fran. Even better the colleges when they go up in flames, destruction and other assorted violence. Burn it all down, Lefties, burn it all, but stay in your own playground. They’re sensible, they’ll never turn up to protest those awful White men in Podunk, Alabama or wherever. But if they did, they’d have a fight on their hands from just plain folks. They know to stay home..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @OilcanFloyd
    Middle America is largely already knee deep in bear market conditions, and when the Left insists on more gibsmedats, Middle Americans’ response will be, “I don’t have anything to spare, I’m worried about myself, and if you keep trying to take stuff from me, I’ll support sending in the Marines to machine-gun you all.”

    I wouldn't mind machine-gunning them myself.

    I’m in. I’m old, but my eyes are good and my aim fair. Can I play in the sandbox?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @KenH
    Kill Whitey should be #1. 2,3, and 4 are used to achieve killing whitey.

    Well, whitey could stand up for himself.

    Look, I hate the Left – and those who back them – but whites need to grow some nuts. No other group of men would stand for this. I can’t count the number of times that I’ve openly said that I want immigration – all immigration – stopped or said that my kids should be proud of their heritage. The looks of horror that I get from other whites is a sight to behold.

    I’m tired of being on an island. I want to fight that percentage of whites that are on my side and make my stand.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH
    Yes, whitey could but at least half are still brainwashed into the cult of race doesn't matter and/or self hate and probably will be forever. When you have a (((media))) that lionizes and romanticizes violent black and brown insurrectionists but demonizes white ones you shouldn't be surprised when there are few takers among the able bodied and racially healthy white male population.

    It seems when a lone white male has had enough and takes matters into his own hands a la Dylan Roof or the mosque shooter in Canada they get condemned by the self styled leaders of the racialist right. There's always hand wringing galore. Even in the early 1980's The Order was hung out to dry by virtually everyone except the late Dr. William Pierce of the National Alliance (may he rest in peace).

    But non-whites do not condemn their own when they commit senseless acts of violence against whites. In fact, most celebrate it.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @map
    To quote whorefinder:

    The D’s know that without mass immigration their brand is toast for the next 10-15 years at least, and maybe permanently. You can’t have national party based on hating whitey if the coalition of hate-whitey doesn’t overwhelm whitey’s influence. The D’s have long been betting on ethnically cleansing whites through open borders. Now that’s going up in smoke. Hence why they are funding these protests.

    Second, D’s (and Neocons) are in the pocket of Big corporations, who love open borders because they get cheap labor from it. This is why Facebook, Google, et al. were part of that CA lawsuit that has (for now) stopped Trump’s immigration plan. It’s also why the Corporate media—who also benefit from cheap labor and the ads/ownership by other big corporations—are pushing it.

    Third, the Saudis and Mexicans want to offload a lot of their troublesome dudes onto the West. If The U.S. Stops it, Mexico will face a crisis, and the if Europe follows suit, the Saudis will be facing a lot of guys who might upset their power. So they are for it.

    Fourth, Soros hates the West and wants it to burn. This is a way to do it.

    This is a desperate conspiracy, not mania.

    The D’s have long been betting on ethnically cleansing whites through open borders. Now that’s going up in smoke. Hence why they are funding these protests.

    Less than 50% of births in the United States are white. I’d say that the D’s have been very successful. Of course, it may become a pyrrhic victory.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @densa
    What happened to President Trump's 100-day honeymoon? He has been kept from setting up his administration and even the legitimacy of his election questioned. Should this soft coup to overturn the election succeed, then what? The Left will be happy with President Pence? Would they really prefer a more neocon administration, or do they want chaos and civil war?

    I think flyover country would have rebelled a long time ago if not for geography. The sight of the Left now agitating for a borderless country, claiming no one should whine about terrorism because more people die in car crashes, along with the rest of the hate whitey replacement theme... hard to imagine middle America quietly accepting their success in this.

    I think flyover country would have rebelled a long time ago if not for geography

    Not geography, but TV and other media. That’s our reality these days. But bit by bit, people are realizing that they’ve been seriously lied to.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Steel T Post
    Democrat Platform:

    1. La Raza (The Race)
    2. BLM
    3. Jews Stand with Muslims
    4. Kill Whitey

    Kill Whitey should be #1. 2,3, and 4 are used to achieve killing whitey.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Well, whitey could stand up for himself.

    Look, I hate the Left - and those who back them - but whites need to grow some nuts. No other group of men would stand for this. I can't count the number of times that I've openly said that I want immigration - all immigration - stopped or said that my kids should be proud of their heritage. The looks of horror that I get from other whites is a sight to behold.

    I'm tired of being on an island. I want to fight that percentage of whites that are on my side and make my stand.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Left? What left?

    All this stuff about homo vanity and prancing trannies is about the Left?

    These thugs and morons are nothing but shills and Janissary of the GLOB.

    They are NOT FOR anything. They are just AGAINST this fantasy Nazism. But then, they grew up on MATRIX movies, punk music, and video games. They are fantasists and don’t constitute any real Left.

    If they are really part of the ‘left’, how come they don’t attack Hollywood, Las Vegas, Wall Street, elite institutions like Harvard?

    Why do they attack working class and middle class Trump supporters?

    They are tools of the globalist oligarchs. They may play at being ‘anarchist’ or ‘communist’, but we must judge them by what they DO. They are janissary of Soros.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    You are correct top to bottom. They are tools. Calling them the left gives them too much credit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @map
    The Democrat cause is simple and obvious: they hate whitey. That is what they stand for. And...no...there will be no Calexit. When the water, food, electricity is cut off and the major ports are blockaded, their leadership will simply be arrested and executed.

    The US is not losing the western seaboard to petulant children.

    To quote whorefinder:

    The D’s know that without mass immigration their brand is toast for the next 10-15 years at least, and maybe permanently. You can’t have national party based on hating whitey if the coalition of hate-whitey doesn’t overwhelm whitey’s influence. The D’s have long been betting on ethnically cleansing whites through open borders. Now that’s going up in smoke. Hence why they are funding these protests.

    Second, D’s (and Neocons) are in the pocket of Big corporations, who love open borders because they get cheap labor from it. This is why Facebook, Google, et al. were part of that CA lawsuit that has (for now) stopped Trump’s immigration plan. It’s also why the Corporate media—who also benefit from cheap labor and the ads/ownership by other big corporations—are pushing it.

    Third, the Saudis and Mexicans want to offload a lot of their troublesome dudes onto the West. If The U.S. Stops it, Mexico will face a crisis, and the if Europe follows suit, the Saudis will be facing a lot of guys who might upset their power. So they are for it.

    Fourth, Soros hates the West and wants it to burn. This is a way to do it.

    This is a desperate conspiracy, not mania.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country

    The D’s have long been betting on ethnically cleansing whites through open borders. Now that’s going up in smoke. Hence why they are funding these protests.
     
    Less than 50% of births in the United States are white. I'd say that the D's have been very successful. Of course, it may become a pyrrhic victory.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • What happened to President Trump’s 100-day honeymoon? He has been kept from setting up his administration and even the legitimacy of his election questioned. Should this soft coup to overturn the election succeed, then what? The Left will be happy with President Pence? Would they really prefer a more neocon administration, or do they want chaos and civil war?

    I think flyover country would have rebelled a long time ago if not for geography. The sight of the Left now agitating for a borderless country, claiming no one should whine about terrorism because more people die in car crashes, along with the rest of the hate whitey replacement theme… hard to imagine middle America quietly accepting their success in this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country

    I think flyover country would have rebelled a long time ago if not for geography
     
    Not geography, but TV and other media. That's our reality these days. But bit by bit, people are realizing that they've been seriously lied to.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Diversity Heretic
    The U.S. of 2017 bears only a passing demographic resemblance to the U.S. of the 1960s. The divisions now are deeper and more fundamental. Another financial meltdown, for example, could result in Algeria-style civil war in the U.S.

    Yep, Pat is living in the past on this one. The lines being drawn are less and less political and more and more racial/ethic/religious. The former has a chance of finding common ground, the latter does not.

    That being said, it doesn’t have to mean civil war. Indeed, that’s very unlikely. South America comes to mind. Of course, so does South Africa.

    Never underestimate the power of TV and the rest of the media to warp the minds of whites, especially white women.

    The big question is when does reality push its way into upper middle class white neighborhoods? When can Nice White Ladies (NWLs) no longer ignore the brown menace? Because I can tell you that right now, NWLs are a long way off from reality, and still get their marching orders from the Today Show and Facebook. It will take a lot to overcome that force.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • And could Southerners and Northerners have detested each other much more than Americans do today?

    No. Probably less since they were at least the same race.

    But other than despising Trump and his “deplorables,” what great cause unites the left today?

    If by “deplorables” you mean white men, nothing. Even Nice White Ladies are beginning to figure out that they’re hated by blacks and browns.

    The big difference today is that the country is no longer 85% white. This isn’t just about politics; it’s about race.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Old fogey
    A very nice old lady [Hillary supporter, life-long Democrat, worked at the United Nations for more than 40 years in a managerial position, Vassar graduate, etc., etc.] told me today that she was looking for a home health-aide. Her ideal candidate would not be one of the Jamaicans or Africans readily available, whom she characterized as stupid women spending all day complaining of their lot while happily taking her money for doing nothing (she's experienced, you see). No, she wanted to find a kindly and hard-working white woman that she could talk to. . .

    Enough said?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @dc.sunsets
    Leftists won the last couple hundred years of revolutions because the larger trend was toward leftism. I'm not so sure that's going to be the underlying trend going forward, so I tend to think the Left's past advantages will this time simply be training and prepped to fight the last war.

    Of course, I could be wrong.

    I also do not see the foot soldiers of this Leftist system fighting like anything resembling an army. What seems more likely is a true 4th Generation Warfare environment where it's not A vs B but more like a shifting morass of temporary alliances, tenuous allegiance, and fratricide among factions too numerous to track, varying greatly from one geography to another.
    http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/milreview/lind.pdf

    As always, history doesn't repeat, it rhymes, and often its cadence is not clearly recognized until late in the overture.

    Leftists won the last couple hundred years of revolutions because the larger trend was toward leftism.

    Oh boy, to understand a crucial difference between say “leftists” of Russian Civil War of 1918-1922 and modern day so called “Cultural Marxists” one has to have understanding of history in general and military in particular. The difference is startling to put it mildly and they have very little, if anything, in common. But for the confusion you may thank a whole US “academe” which still thinks that what emerged in the USSR has anything in common with modern “left” which is not left but a cabal of neo-liberal fringes. They and warfare do not mix well. You want example of it? During LA Rodney King riots it didn’t take long for Korean and other Asian shopkeepers to organize and put down riots in their neck of the woods. That is a power of organized armed group. Now, you want to tell me that some transgender activist could be a good military leader? Of course, I simplify but there are many angry white and extremely well armed men out there, some of them are with military background–I would put my bet on them in their fight against modern so called “left”.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jim Christian
    • Replies: @Wally
    fact:
    Those in the military overwhelmingly voted Trump.

    There you go.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • C’mon Pat. If this is the sixties where is our summer of love?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian

    C’mon Pat. If this is the sixties where is our summer of love?
     
    Well, there's always the new season of Girls, starring Lena Dunham in all her fatness, having sex with this guy and that guy, naked throughout. There's your Summer Of Love.

    They ain't what they used to be.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @dc.sunsets
    Leftists won the last couple hundred years of revolutions because the larger trend was toward leftism. I'm not so sure that's going to be the underlying trend going forward, so I tend to think the Left's past advantages will this time simply be training and prepped to fight the last war.

    Of course, I could be wrong.

    I also do not see the foot soldiers of this Leftist system fighting like anything resembling an army. What seems more likely is a true 4th Generation Warfare environment where it's not A vs B but more like a shifting morass of temporary alliances, tenuous allegiance, and fratricide among factions too numerous to track, varying greatly from one geography to another.
    http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/milreview/lind.pdf

    As always, history doesn't repeat, it rhymes, and often its cadence is not clearly recognized until late in the overture.

    I agree.

    I think the left is far better prepped for this kind of warfare

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    Only if you even wanted the cities. Let them have the cities. Business won't be done anymore, they'll starve. Even better, keep them IN the cities..
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Zoodles
    The left will be at a tremendous advantage when the shooting starts.

    Sure..we may have the guns, but guns are cheap. You can teach some hipster or BLM chud the basics of using an AK or an rpg in a week or two..more than enough for urban insurgency cannon fodder.

    What they have is cash from thier network of foundations..but most importantly they have structure. They have skeleton of an insurgency already in place with their vast network of activists and NGOs. They also command the terms of respectability..society finds leftwing violence far more acceptable.

    These guys are already in the process of psychologically preparing themselves for violence through dehumanisation of anyone to the right of trotsky.

    I think the first waves of violence will be mass riots, bombings and assassinations of prominent rightists along with a systematic campaign of intimidation. If it moves beyond that, then their structure will allow them to make swift gains.

    They have considerable disadvantages as well..they are heterogeneous mass of groups, many of whom don't actually like one another. I think after the initial rush, they will fall to infighting, and that will eventually be their undoing.

    Leftists won the last couple hundred years of revolutions because the larger trend was toward leftism. I’m not so sure that’s going to be the underlying trend going forward, so I tend to think the Left’s past advantages will this time simply be training and prepped to fight the last war.

    Of course, I could be wrong.

    I also do not see the foot soldiers of this Leftist system fighting like anything resembling an army. What seems more likely is a true 4th Generation Warfare environment where it’s not A vs B but more like a shifting morass of temporary alliances, tenuous allegiance, and fratricide among factions too numerous to track, varying greatly from one geography to another.

    http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/milreview/lind.pdf

    As always, history doesn’t repeat, it rhymes, and often its cadence is not clearly recognized until late in the overture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Zoodles
    I agree.

    I think the left is far better prepped for this kind of warfare
    , @Andrei Martyanov

    Leftists won the last couple hundred years of revolutions because the larger trend was toward leftism.
     
    Oh boy, to understand a crucial difference between say "leftists" of Russian Civil War of 1918-1922 and modern day so called "Cultural Marxists" one has to have understanding of history in general and military in particular. The difference is startling to put it mildly and they have very little, if anything, in common. But for the confusion you may thank a whole US "academe" which still thinks that what emerged in the USSR has anything in common with modern "left" which is not left but a cabal of neo-liberal fringes. They and warfare do not mix well. You want example of it? During LA Rodney King riots it didn't take long for Korean and other Asian shopkeepers to organize and put down riots in their neck of the woods. That is a power of organized armed group. Now, you want to tell me that some transgender activist could be a good military leader? Of course, I simplify but there are many angry white and extremely well armed men out there, some of them are with military background--I would put my bet on them in their fight against modern so called "left".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @lavoisier
    Agreed. The conservative patriot assumes that when the war starts they will win. It could very easily go the other way, as it did in Russia, when the Red army defeated the White army and the massacres began. We all know what happened in Germany. Few of us are aware of what happened when the Bolsheviks took control of Russia.

    The Reds (Leftists) are far more willing to engage in mass murder in devotion to their cause than the Nazis ever were.

    It is very much an open question how this will play out in the United States.

    I still think, perhaps naively, that there is something unique about Americans, something in our unique history and perhaps even in our DNA, that will allow us to defeat the leftists when the shooting starts.

    But I would be lying if I told you that I was certain of this outcome.

    It could easily go either way.

    But I would be lying if I told you that I was certain of this outcome.

    It could easily go either way.

    It really depends on which group ends up with the dominant “idea whose time has come” and thus has the heart (or ruthlessness) and/or moral component of the conflict in hand.

    Cambodians in the Khmer Rouge slaughtered everyone who even hinted of education or intelligence (unless he or she was way inside the party hierarchy) so even being smart and useful may be no protection. And pandemic disease tends to coincide with political/social strife.

    What makes the USA particularly an interesting case is 1) very widespread dependence on long supply lines for food and power (dependence on power for heat, water and sewage handling are paramount), and 2) an astonishingly large armory of small arms and ammo.

    I figure at times and places it may be like Sarajevo’s sniper alley problem during the Bosnian War, interspersed with episodes of The Walking Dead. Sometimes life does imitate art, and sometimes vague, unconscious but widespread premonitions may animate the popularity of fictional genres.

    I concur with your view; I don’t relish the denouement of the tragedy baked into this by the last 50 years of collective folly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @lavoisier
    Agreed. The conservative patriot assumes that when the war starts they will win. It could very easily go the other way, as it did in Russia, when the Red army defeated the White army and the massacres began. We all know what happened in Germany. Few of us are aware of what happened when the Bolsheviks took control of Russia.

    The Reds (Leftists) are far more willing to engage in mass murder in devotion to their cause than the Nazis ever were.

    It is very much an open question how this will play out in the United States.

    I still think, perhaps naively, that there is something unique about Americans, something in our unique history and perhaps even in our DNA, that will allow us to defeat the leftists when the shooting starts.

    But I would be lying if I told you that I was certain of this outcome.

    It could easily go either way.

    The left will be at a tremendous advantage when the shooting starts.

    Sure..we may have the guns, but guns are cheap. You can teach some hipster or BLM chud the basics of using an AK or an rpg in a week or two..more than enough for urban insurgency cannon fodder.

    What they have is cash from thier network of foundations..but most importantly they have structure. They have skeleton of an insurgency already in place with their vast network of activists and NGOs. They also command the terms of respectability..society finds leftwing violence far more acceptable.

    These guys are already in the process of psychologically preparing themselves for violence through dehumanisation of anyone to the right of trotsky.

    I think the first waves of violence will be mass riots, bombings and assassinations of prominent rightists along with a systematic campaign of intimidation. If it moves beyond that, then their structure will allow them to make swift gains.

    They have considerable disadvantages as well..they are heterogeneous mass of groups, many of whom don’t actually like one another. I think after the initial rush, they will fall to infighting, and that will eventually be their undoing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    Leftists won the last couple hundred years of revolutions because the larger trend was toward leftism. I'm not so sure that's going to be the underlying trend going forward, so I tend to think the Left's past advantages will this time simply be training and prepped to fight the last war.

    Of course, I could be wrong.

    I also do not see the foot soldiers of this Leftist system fighting like anything resembling an army. What seems more likely is a true 4th Generation Warfare environment where it's not A vs B but more like a shifting morass of temporary alliances, tenuous allegiance, and fratricide among factions too numerous to track, varying greatly from one geography to another.
    http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/milreview/lind.pdf

    As always, history doesn't repeat, it rhymes, and often its cadence is not clearly recognized until late in the overture.
    , @Jim Christian
    If the Left has advantage, why don't they take their ideology out for a test spin in say, Simpsonville, South Carolina? In Augusta Georgia, come outside city limits, break some windows out there. I see them rioting in Charleston but they never go out to the suburbs, to where all those awful, God-Fearing White Christians with their guns live and tell these White folks what's wrong with them.

    Why not? Because the Left that fills in the gaps at protests are pussies, students, kids involved because there are some girls around to try to bang. Make it real for them and they'd melt away leaving behind the vocal 5% that break windows. I'll take my chances with the Left. They're cowards. They'd never stand up to a citizen defense outside their turf, be it campus or city streets. Leave those, they're dead and they know it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @lavoisier
    Agreed. The conservative patriot assumes that when the war starts they will win. It could very easily go the other way, as it did in Russia, when the Red army defeated the White army and the massacres began. We all know what happened in Germany. Few of us are aware of what happened when the Bolsheviks took control of Russia.

    The Reds (Leftists) are far more willing to engage in mass murder in devotion to their cause than the Nazis ever were.

    It is very much an open question how this will play out in the United States.

    I still think, perhaps naively, that there is something unique about Americans, something in our unique history and perhaps even in our DNA, that will allow us to defeat the leftists when the shooting starts.

    But I would be lying if I told you that I was certain of this outcome.

    It could easily go either way.

    The city slicks will die regardless of political affiliation, being too far from the land and too far into their virtual fantasy worlds.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Fenster
    I have been thinking for some time that the progressive stuff will wither sooner rather than later under the weight of things like snowflakes needing jobs, the fact that middle America has found a voice, and so forth. And so I see Buchanan's point. I lived through the Sixties too, and he is quite right that when the New Left went too far it created a reaction.

    But just as law conditions the application of legal principles depending on the fact pattern, any conclusion about the nature and depth of a similar reaction today depends on the actual underlying situation. I am not as sure as Buchanan that this will play out in exactly the same way it did in the late Sixties or early Seventies. It could be he is something of the general fighting the last war.

    Even though New Left overreach invited Nixon and Reagan the deeper impact of the Sixties was profound. That is especially the case with culture, which is, as Breitbart said, always downstream from politics. The political side of the Sixties got throttled pretty good but the cultural stuff survived and in many ways thrived. Just as the New Left distilled out the cultural stuff from the old Left the current "progressive" left is even more cultural yet. The leading snowflakes are in, and will compose, the elite. They don't have to buy every jot and tittle of their current obsessions to carry over into later life a different tilt, just as the boomers did.

    It could be in other words that the Silent Majority, already only a majority in Electoral College terms, is not the same as it was back in the day. There are a lot of people who side with the 1%, and who is to say that their casual indifference to their fellow 'mericans won't carry the day?

    Agreed. The conservative patriot assumes that when the war starts they will win. It could very easily go the other way, as it did in Russia, when the Red army defeated the White army and the massacres began. We all know what happened in Germany. Few of us are aware of what happened when the Bolsheviks took control of Russia.

    The Reds (Leftists) are far more willing to engage in mass murder in devotion to their cause than the Nazis ever were.

    It is very much an open question how this will play out in the United States.

    I still think, perhaps naively, that there is something unique about Americans, something in our unique history and perhaps even in our DNA, that will allow us to defeat the leftists when the shooting starts.

    But I would be lying if I told you that I was certain of this outcome.

    It could easily go either way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @mtn cur
    The city slicks will die regardless of political affiliation, being too far from the land and too far into their virtual fantasy worlds.
    , @Zoodles
    The left will be at a tremendous advantage when the shooting starts.

    Sure..we may have the guns, but guns are cheap. You can teach some hipster or BLM chud the basics of using an AK or an rpg in a week or two..more than enough for urban insurgency cannon fodder.

    What they have is cash from thier network of foundations..but most importantly they have structure. They have skeleton of an insurgency already in place with their vast network of activists and NGOs. They also command the terms of respectability..society finds leftwing violence far more acceptable.

    These guys are already in the process of psychologically preparing themselves for violence through dehumanisation of anyone to the right of trotsky.

    I think the first waves of violence will be mass riots, bombings and assassinations of prominent rightists along with a systematic campaign of intimidation. If it moves beyond that, then their structure will allow them to make swift gains.

    They have considerable disadvantages as well..they are heterogeneous mass of groups, many of whom don't actually like one another. I think after the initial rush, they will fall to infighting, and that will eventually be their undoing.

    , @dc.sunsets

    But I would be lying if I told you that I was certain of this outcome.

    It could easily go either way.
     
    It really depends on which group ends up with the dominant "idea whose time has come" and thus has the heart (or ruthlessness) and/or moral component of the conflict in hand.

    Cambodians in the Khmer Rouge slaughtered everyone who even hinted of education or intelligence (unless he or she was way inside the party hierarchy) so even being smart and useful may be no protection. And pandemic disease tends to coincide with political/social strife.

    What makes the USA particularly an interesting case is 1) very widespread dependence on long supply lines for food and power (dependence on power for heat, water and sewage handling are paramount), and 2) an astonishingly large armory of small arms and ammo.

    I figure at times and places it may be like Sarajevo's sniper alley problem during the Bosnian War, interspersed with episodes of The Walking Dead. Sometimes life does imitate art, and sometimes vague, unconscious but widespread premonitions may animate the popularity of fictional genres.

    I concur with your view; I don't relish the denouement of the tragedy baked into this by the last 50 years of collective folly.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @OilcanFloyd
    Middle America is largely already knee deep in bear market conditions, and when the Left insists on more gibsmedats, Middle Americans’ response will be, “I don’t have anything to spare, I’m worried about myself, and if you keep trying to take stuff from me, I’ll support sending in the Marines to machine-gun you all.”

    I wouldn't mind machine-gunning them myself.

    If the Left & the Underclass burn the cities, I’m not sure who’ll mow them down, and I’m not sure I’ll care much about it. Urban renewal and all that.

    If the Left tries to bus the Underclass (or arrange a ride-share caravan) to the suburbs for the burn, I have a pretty good idea who’ll mow them down.

    Home field advantage and all that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    Yeah, if they're gonna tear up their own Liberal cities, well, the inhabitants that encouraged them will have to deal with the new vibrancy. All along, I've had no objection to protesters and window breakers and fire bugs having their fun in DC and NYC, Chicago, Seattle and San Fran. Even better the colleges when they go up in flames, destruction and other assorted violence. Burn it all down, Lefties, burn it all, but stay in your own playground. They're sensible, they'll never turn up to protest those awful White men in Podunk, Alabama or wherever. But if they did, they'd have a fight on their hands from just plain folks. They know to stay home..
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @dc.sunsets
    Everyone assumes underlying conditions are the same. This is wrong.

    Background premise: The socionomic hypothesis rests on the idea that people are social animals who share brain structures with herding animals, and repeatable psychology experiments prove that under conditions of uncertainty, people make their decisions in the limbic system (the seat of emotion and self...and of the urge to "fit in" and herd) and yield predictable waves of fad and fashion.

    Furthermore, social mood is regulated endogenously; outside events don't cause changes in social mood, changes in social mood lead to outside events.

    In times of upbeat (positive) social mood, stocks are bid up, society is relatively peaceful, political centrism is common, fashions are colorful, women's skirts are short, pop culture is happy, movies reflect happiness and sexual dimorphism, etc.

    In times of negative and declining social mood stocks tend to decline, society becomes angry, political polarization rises, fashion becomes dour and monochromatic, dress hemlines head lower, pop culture is angry, horror movies predominate and androgyny rises.

    Wars almost always break out after a significant decline in stock prices, which are simply a barometer of social mood. A negative enough social mood leads to war, which is why people erroneously believe that war is "good" for stocks. They think the war makes stocks go up, but that's absurd---it was declining stocks (social mood, actually) that led to war, and once social mood hits nadir, it has nowhere to go but up. The war is incidental, and once social mood rises enough, the urge to keep the war going evaporates and peace is reestablished.

    My point: In the 1960's, social mood was in a temporary bear market (stocks went nowhere from 1964 to 1982) but in general, the Utopianism of the 1950's and early 1960's had not remotely dissipated so when the Underclass sought to extort Middle Americans for gibsmedats, Middle Americans were so fat, dumb and happy that the consensus was, "sure, give 'em what they want, we can afford it."

    It is my belief that
    1) the "bull market" of 1982 to now was the last hurrah in a centuries-long rise, overall, in social mood,
    2) that this rally (capped by an unprecedented asset mania) is built entirely on the fantasy of fiat money & seemingly unlimited credit creation,
    3) when it ends, it will usher in a "bear market" in social mood, asset prices & economic conditions commensurate with the centuries-long "bull market" that preceded it.

    This means that when the Left tries to extort its way to success like last time, conditions this time will be utterly different. Middle America is largely already knee deep in bear market conditions, and when the Left insists on more gibsmedats, Middle Americans' response will be, "I don't have anything to spare, I'm worried about myself, and if you keep trying to take stuff from me, I'll support sending in the Marines to machine-gun you all."

    Middle America is largely already knee deep in bear market conditions, and when the Left insists on more gibsmedats, Middle Americans’ response will be, “I don’t have anything to spare, I’m worried about myself, and if you keep trying to take stuff from me, I’ll support sending in the Marines to machine-gun you all.”

    I wouldn’t mind machine-gunning them myself.

    Read More
    • LOL: dc.sunsets
    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    If the Left & the Underclass burn the cities, I'm not sure who'll mow them down, and I'm not sure I'll care much about it. Urban renewal and all that.

    If the Left tries to bus the Underclass (or arrange a ride-share caravan) to the suburbs for the burn, I have a pretty good idea who'll mow them down.

    Home field advantage and all that.
    , @Jim Christian
    I'm in. I'm old, but my eyes are good and my aim fair. Can I play in the sandbox?
    , @El Dato

    I wouldn’t mind machine-gunning them myself.
     
    So much hate!

    You must contain the dark side.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @International Jew

    it is starting to look like “deja vu all over again.”
     
    Why do people say that? Deja vu alone conveys the meaning. Does adding "all over again" allude to some old joke I don't know?

    Look up the quotes and aphorisms of Yogi Berra.

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew
    Sure, but he meant it as a joke (or maybe he didn't but people have taken it as a joke ever since). What's the point of Pat Buchanan repeating that joke then, in what's a dead-serious context?

    I'll allow that "RSVP please" is never intended ironically; I think there people just don't know it's redundant.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • it is starting to look like “deja vu all over again.”

    Why do people say that? Deja vu alone conveys the meaning. Does adding “all over again” allude to some old joke I don’t know?

    Read More
    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    Look up the quotes and aphorisms of Yogi Berra.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Fenster
    I have been thinking for some time that the progressive stuff will wither sooner rather than later under the weight of things like snowflakes needing jobs, the fact that middle America has found a voice, and so forth. And so I see Buchanan's point. I lived through the Sixties too, and he is quite right that when the New Left went too far it created a reaction.

    But just as law conditions the application of legal principles depending on the fact pattern, any conclusion about the nature and depth of a similar reaction today depends on the actual underlying situation. I am not as sure as Buchanan that this will play out in exactly the same way it did in the late Sixties or early Seventies. It could be he is something of the general fighting the last war.

    Even though New Left overreach invited Nixon and Reagan the deeper impact of the Sixties was profound. That is especially the case with culture, which is, as Breitbart said, always downstream from politics. The political side of the Sixties got throttled pretty good but the cultural stuff survived and in many ways thrived. Just as the New Left distilled out the cultural stuff from the old Left the current "progressive" left is even more cultural yet. The leading snowflakes are in, and will compose, the elite. They don't have to buy every jot and tittle of their current obsessions to carry over into later life a different tilt, just as the boomers did.

    It could be in other words that the Silent Majority, already only a majority in Electoral College terms, is not the same as it was back in the day. There are a lot of people who side with the 1%, and who is to say that their casual indifference to their fellow 'mericans won't carry the day?

    culture, which is, as Breitbart said, always downstream from politics

    Isn’t culture upstream from politics?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Reading Buchanan’s piece today eerily coincides with an Al Jazeera documentary which discusses the social relations history of post-war America. [see link below]

    It purports to show”how race has dominated the political landscape and continues to shape American society. We reveal the nexus of political, corporate and institutional interests that created and now curtail a withering middle-class, pushing people into polarized camps, and now furthering disaffection with the traditional ‘establishment’”.

    Its thesis is America has always been a racially divided nation and opportunistic politicians have repeated used the anxieties of “White” America to win favor and attain power.
    It seems to me the Donald has used this oft-used tactic, with the added twist of adding illegal Hispanics and Muslims to the mix, to win the approval of White America to the obvious distress of Non-White America.

    No worry folks, the Democrats have betrayed not only White America but others as well and Buchanan’s claim is baseless.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Fenster
    I have been thinking for some time that the progressive stuff will wither sooner rather than later under the weight of things like snowflakes needing jobs, the fact that middle America has found a voice, and so forth. And so I see Buchanan's point. I lived through the Sixties too, and he is quite right that when the New Left went too far it created a reaction.

    But just as law conditions the application of legal principles depending on the fact pattern, any conclusion about the nature and depth of a similar reaction today depends on the actual underlying situation. I am not as sure as Buchanan that this will play out in exactly the same way it did in the late Sixties or early Seventies. It could be he is something of the general fighting the last war.

    Even though New Left overreach invited Nixon and Reagan the deeper impact of the Sixties was profound. That is especially the case with culture, which is, as Breitbart said, always downstream from politics. The political side of the Sixties got throttled pretty good but the cultural stuff survived and in many ways thrived. Just as the New Left distilled out the cultural stuff from the old Left the current "progressive" left is even more cultural yet. The leading snowflakes are in, and will compose, the elite. They don't have to buy every jot and tittle of their current obsessions to carry over into later life a different tilt, just as the boomers did.

    It could be in other words that the Silent Majority, already only a majority in Electoral College terms, is not the same as it was back in the day. There are a lot of people who side with the 1%, and who is to say that their casual indifference to their fellow 'mericans won't carry the day?

    Mr. Buchanan may be correct about top-line political consequences, but the 1960′s were fabulously successful at obtaining the social and economic rents sought by leftists.

    By the early 1970′s courts completely eviscerated the concept of equality before the law, enshrining such blatant social alchemy as “disparate impact” and “affirmative action” in laws invading every aspect of human existence. First blacks (some but surely not all of whom were descendants of slaves), then “Hispanics” (people whose only qualification was a Spanish-sounding last name), then women, then people who eschewed normal biological sexual relationships, were deemed to have a set of superior rights in areas of employment, housing, government contracts and in the queue for welfare handouts.

    The riots of the 1960′s were a simple case of extortion. They worked.

    The evolving movement toward similar political violence as extortion is obvious. This time I think it will backfire spectacularly, and cause the USA to lunge toward Rightist authoritarianism that will make inveterate leftists wax nostalgic for the relative ease and peace under the Trump Administration.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Everyone assumes underlying conditions are the same. This is wrong.

    Background premise: The socionomic hypothesis rests on the idea that people are social animals who share brain structures with herding animals, and repeatable psychology experiments prove that under conditions of uncertainty, people make their decisions in the limbic system (the seat of emotion and self…and of the urge to “fit in” and herd) and yield predictable waves of fad and fashion.

    Furthermore, social mood is regulated endogenously; outside events don’t cause changes in social mood, changes in social mood lead to outside events.

    In times of upbeat (positive) social mood, stocks are bid up, society is relatively peaceful, political centrism is common, fashions are colorful, women’s skirts are short, pop culture is happy, movies reflect happiness and sexual dimorphism, etc.

    In times of negative and declining social mood stocks tend to decline, society becomes angry, political polarization rises, fashion becomes dour and monochromatic, dress hemlines head lower, pop culture is angry, horror movies predominate and androgyny rises.

    Wars almost always break out after a significant decline in stock prices, which are simply a barometer of social mood. A negative enough social mood leads to war, which is why people erroneously believe that war is “good” for stocks. They think the war makes stocks go up, but that’s absurd—it was declining stocks (social mood, actually) that led to war, and once social mood hits nadir, it has nowhere to go but up. The war is incidental, and once social mood rises enough, the urge to keep the war going evaporates and peace is reestablished.

    My point: In the 1960′s, social mood was in a temporary bear market (stocks went nowhere from 1964 to 1982) but in general, the Utopianism of the 1950′s and early 1960′s had not remotely dissipated so when the Underclass sought to extort Middle Americans for gibsmedats, Middle Americans were so fat, dumb and happy that the consensus was, “sure, give ‘em what they want, we can afford it.”

    It is my belief that
    1) the “bull market” of 1982 to now was the last hurrah in a centuries-long rise, overall, in social mood,
    2) that this rally (capped by an unprecedented asset mania) is built entirely on the fantasy of fiat money & seemingly unlimited credit creation,
    3) when it ends, it will usher in a “bear market” in social mood, asset prices & economic conditions commensurate with the centuries-long “bull market” that preceded it.

    This means that when the Left tries to extort its way to success like last time, conditions this time will be utterly different. Middle America is largely already knee deep in bear market conditions, and when the Left insists on more gibsmedats, Middle Americans’ response will be, “I don’t have anything to spare, I’m worried about myself, and if you keep trying to take stuff from me, I’ll support sending in the Marines to machine-gun you all.”

    Read More
    • Agree: Steel T Post
    • Replies: @OilcanFloyd
    Middle America is largely already knee deep in bear market conditions, and when the Left insists on more gibsmedats, Middle Americans’ response will be, “I don’t have anything to spare, I’m worried about myself, and if you keep trying to take stuff from me, I’ll support sending in the Marines to machine-gun you all.”

    I wouldn't mind machine-gunning them myself.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @MEexpert
    At least, in the 60s and 70s the rioters had a cause. Today's rioters are paid protesters without cause. The left will blame anybody and everybody but themselves. They will not admit that Hillary Clinton had no agenda, no coherent message, no charisma, and ran a lousy campaign. That is why she lost. They will blame the Russians, the FBI, every Tom, Dick, and Harry for her loss. They have no adult party leader. The sooner they admit the fact that they lost and start over, the better for them and the country.

    To be fair, Trump’s agenda is a bit unworkable. He is not exactly of the right. He used the right as a vehicle to get power…I find this rather painful as a conservative.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    He used the right as a vehicle to get power

    And thank god he did because no conservative was going to pull the blue states votes out of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania that Trump did.

    Besides, what was so good about GOP "conservatism" since Reagan?
    , @Useless White Male Hetero

    To be fair, Trump’s agenda is a bit unworkable. He is not exactly of the right. He used the right as a vehicle to get power…I find this rather painful as a conservative.
     
    What I found a lot more painful, was being ruled by Trotskyites under the guise of conservatives during both big government, warmongering Bush administrations. And make no mistake, that was the "conservative" alternative to Trump.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I have been thinking for some time that the progressive stuff will wither sooner rather than later under the weight of things like snowflakes needing jobs, the fact that middle America has found a voice, and so forth. And so I see Buchanan’s point. I lived through the Sixties too, and he is quite right that when the New Left went too far it created a reaction.

    But just as law conditions the application of legal principles depending on the fact pattern, any conclusion about the nature and depth of a similar reaction today depends on the actual underlying situation. I am not as sure as Buchanan that this will play out in exactly the same way it did in the late Sixties or early Seventies. It could be he is something of the general fighting the last war.

    Even though New Left overreach invited Nixon and Reagan the deeper impact of the Sixties was profound. That is especially the case with culture, which is, as Breitbart said, always downstream from politics. The political side of the Sixties got throttled pretty good but the cultural stuff survived and in many ways thrived. Just as the New Left distilled out the cultural stuff from the old Left the current “progressive” left is even more cultural yet. The leading snowflakes are in, and will compose, the elite. They don’t have to buy every jot and tittle of their current obsessions to carry over into later life a different tilt, just as the boomers did.

    It could be in other words that the Silent Majority, already only a majority in Electoral College terms, is not the same as it was back in the day. There are a lot of people who side with the 1%, and who is to say that their casual indifference to their fellow ‘mericans won’t carry the day?

    Read More
    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    Mr. Buchanan may be correct about top-line political consequences, but the 1960's were fabulously successful at obtaining the social and economic rents sought by leftists.

    By the early 1970's courts completely eviscerated the concept of equality before the law, enshrining such blatant social alchemy as "disparate impact" and "affirmative action" in laws invading every aspect of human existence. First blacks (some but surely not all of whom were descendants of slaves), then "Hispanics" (people whose only qualification was a Spanish-sounding last name), then women, then people who eschewed normal biological sexual relationships, were deemed to have a set of superior rights in areas of employment, housing, government contracts and in the queue for welfare handouts.

    The riots of the 1960's were a simple case of extortion. They worked.

    The evolving movement toward similar political violence as extortion is obvious. This time I think it will backfire spectacularly, and cause the USA to lunge toward Rightist authoritarianism that will make inveterate leftists wax nostalgic for the relative ease and peace under the Trump Administration.
    , @International Jew

    culture, which is, as Breitbart said, always downstream from politics
     
    Isn't culture upstream from politics?
    , @lavoisier
    Agreed. The conservative patriot assumes that when the war starts they will win. It could very easily go the other way, as it did in Russia, when the Red army defeated the White army and the massacres began. We all know what happened in Germany. Few of us are aware of what happened when the Bolsheviks took control of Russia.

    The Reds (Leftists) are far more willing to engage in mass murder in devotion to their cause than the Nazis ever were.

    It is very much an open question how this will play out in the United States.

    I still think, perhaps naively, that there is something unique about Americans, something in our unique history and perhaps even in our DNA, that will allow us to defeat the leftists when the shooting starts.

    But I would be lying if I told you that I was certain of this outcome.

    It could easily go either way.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Diversity Heretic
    The U.S. of 2017 bears only a passing demographic resemblance to the U.S. of the 1960s. The divisions now are deeper and more fundamental. Another financial meltdown, for example, could result in Algeria-style civil war in the U.S.

    Another financial meltdown, for example, could result in Algeria-style civil war in the U.S.

    This has been true for a while I think.

    The irreconcilable divisions are there, but as always they are papered over by (relative) economic well-being. But the divisions seem now too great to survive real and sustained economic hardship (for the nation, as opposed to for particular groups and areas).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Democrat Platform:

    1. La Raza (The Race)
    2. BLM
    3. Jews Stand with Muslims
    4. Kill Whitey

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH
    Kill Whitey should be #1. 2,3, and 4 are used to achieve killing whitey.
    , @King Baeksu

    Democrat Platform:

    1. La Raza (The Race)
    2. BLM
    3. Jews Stand with Muslims
    4. Kill Whitey
     

    That's just the window-dressing. The Dems are handmaidens of transnational capital, which seeks to transform the US from a sovereign nation-state to a post-national, post-colonial empire under its full control.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The Democrat cause is simple and obvious: they hate whitey. That is what they stand for. And…no…there will be no Calexit. When the water, food, electricity is cut off and the major ports are blockaded, their leadership will simply be arrested and executed.

    The US is not losing the western seaboard to petulant children.

    Read More
    • Replies: @map
    To quote whorefinder:

    The D’s know that without mass immigration their brand is toast for the next 10-15 years at least, and maybe permanently. You can’t have national party based on hating whitey if the coalition of hate-whitey doesn’t overwhelm whitey’s influence. The D’s have long been betting on ethnically cleansing whites through open borders. Now that’s going up in smoke. Hence why they are funding these protests.

    Second, D’s (and Neocons) are in the pocket of Big corporations, who love open borders because they get cheap labor from it. This is why Facebook, Google, et al. were part of that CA lawsuit that has (for now) stopped Trump’s immigration plan. It’s also why the Corporate media—who also benefit from cheap labor and the ads/ownership by other big corporations—are pushing it.

    Third, the Saudis and Mexicans want to offload a lot of their troublesome dudes onto the West. If The U.S. Stops it, Mexico will face a crisis, and the if Europe follows suit, the Saudis will be facing a lot of guys who might upset their power. So they are for it.

    Fourth, Soros hates the West and wants it to burn. This is a way to do it.

    This is a desperate conspiracy, not mania.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • At least, in the 60s and 70s the rioters had a cause. Today’s rioters are paid protesters without cause. The left will blame anybody and everybody but themselves. They will not admit that Hillary Clinton had no agenda, no coherent message, no charisma, and ran a lousy campaign. That is why she lost. They will blame the Russians, the FBI, every Tom, Dick, and Harry for her loss. They have no adult party leader. The sooner they admit the fact that they lost and start over, the better for them and the country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @brukean
    To be fair, Trump's agenda is a bit unworkable. He is not exactly of the right. He used the right as a vehicle to get power...I find this rather painful as a conservative.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The U.S. of 2017 bears only a passing demographic resemblance to the U.S. of the 1960s. The divisions now are deeper and more fundamental. Another financial meltdown, for example, could result in Algeria-style civil war in the U.S.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Another financial meltdown, for example, could result in Algeria-style civil war in the U.S.
     
    This has been true for a while I think.

    The irreconcilable divisions are there, but as always they are papered over by (relative) economic well-being. But the divisions seem now too great to survive real and sustained economic hardship (for the nation, as opposed to for particular groups and areas).
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Yep, Pat is living in the past on this one. The lines being drawn are less and less political and more and more racial/ethic/religious. The former has a chance of finding common ground, the latter does not.

    That being said, it doesn't have to mean civil war. Indeed, that's very unlikely. South America comes to mind. Of course, so does South Africa.

    Never underestimate the power of TV and the rest of the media to warp the minds of whites, especially white women.

    The big question is when does reality push its way into upper middle class white neighborhoods? When can Nice White Ladies (NWLs) no longer ignore the brown menace? Because I can tell you that right now, NWLs are a long way off from reality, and still get their marching orders from the Today Show and Facebook. It will take a lot to overcome that force.
    , @Corvinus
    "The U.S. of 2017 bears only a passing demographic resemblance to the U.S. of the 1960s."

    With the demographics being different in the 1920's, and in the 1890's, and in the 1850's, and...

    "The divisions now are deeper and more fundamental. Another financial meltdown, for example, could result in Algeria-style civil war in the U.S."

    Could being the operative word here. I'll wait for the movie to come out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Now that the blogosphere has discovered my finding that conservatives are outbreeding liberals by a rather large margin, many have taken it as a reason to rejoice. The genes for "pathological altruism" (which are a feature of the special evolutionary path that Northwestern Europeans have undertaken, which seems to result in such traits), which gives...
  • […] neoliberals and SJWs are already genetic dead-ends. Reproduction is a genetic arms race. They have lost. Anti-natal policies will do that. When evolutionary pressures come back into play […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “Now, at this point, I know one criticism that will be leveled at me is that the increase in the non-White share of the population will make it unlikely that Republicans will be able to capture the presidency, as was the main rant after the last election. However, I think it’s unclear if that will be the case. ”

    “However, it’s my suspicion that the non-White vote that buttresses the Democrats can only hold out so long against an increasingly Right-leaning White populace.”

    Why? Non-white fertility rates project to be higher than white ones well in to the period when the US becomes a majority-minority country.

    Plus, another key issue is the proportion of children who become more liberal than their parents vs. more conservative. Certainly on social issues, there has been more of a shift left than right when you go down through the generations since WWII.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • [...] comes to bear. In short, if you do not want a future dominated by conservative nuttiness and all that entails, you must start having children, soon, and [...]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • [...] The other factor is the lower fertility of secular, liberal-minded individuals in these populations in favor of more religious conservative ones, and all the problems that that entails. [...]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • [...] The other factor is the lower fertility of secular, liberal-minded individuals in these populations in favor of more religious conservative ones, and all the problems that that entails. [...]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • [...] fertility will eventually rebound as the non-reproducers select themselves out of the gene pool. I’m not so sure that this is that much of a good thing, but that is where we’re headed none the [...]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    The genes for “pathological altruism” (which are a feature of the special evolutionary path that Northwestern Europeans have undertaken, which seems to result in such traits)
     
    There are no genes "for" pathological altruism. Pathological altruism is extremely maladaptive, which is why it's called "pathological", suggesting disease.

    So-called "pathological altruism" is ubiquitous in nature. But it's not called that. It's called parasitism. When a Warbler feeds and raises a young Cuckoo rather than its own offspring, we could say that the Warbler is engaging in "pathological altruism". But what has really happened is that the Warbler has been parasitized by the Cuckoo.

    There may be genes "for" lesser immunity to certain parasites or certain parasitic strategies. But when we see organisms exhibiting "pathological altruism", the cause is parasitic infection, not genes "for" pathological altruism.

    You (or HBD Chick) are suggesting that “pathological altruism” is just a case of reciprocal altruism that isn’t enforced. That isn’t true. “Pathological altruism” is something else entirely.

    What we see as non-familial “altruism” in civilization is largely parasitic castration. The most general definition of parasitic castration is the extended phenotypic diversion of reproduction from the host organism’s genes to the parasite’s. This would include political economic phenomena as well as all kinds of other phenomena.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    It isn't a matter of semantics. It's an important distinction. "Pathological altruism" is a completely different concept from "reciprocal altruism". Reciprocal altruism is, put simply, tit for tat. Pathological altruism is always maladaptive, by definition. Behaviors that are always maladaptive, such as homosexuality, can appear at relatively high levels. I don't know if HBD Chick claims that pathological altruism and reciprocal altruism are the same thing, but if she does, she's confused.

    It isn’t a matter of semantics. It’s an important distinction. “Pathological altruism” is a completely different concept from “reciprocal altruism”. Reciprocal altruism is, put simply, tit for tat. Pathological altruism is always maladaptive, by definition.

    The way HBD Chick describes reciprocal altruism, as it exists among NW Europeans, does not always imply “always actively seeking to ensure that the other party is holding up his end of the bargain.” A reciprocal altruist can actually be generous, and will help a fellow in need (which the tacit expectation that that favor will one day be returned).

    The problem with that is that it leaves the giving individual open to exploitation by parasitic individuals (or individuals not so inclined to be generous). But this wasn’t a problem in a society where most people could be trusted. Cheaters were kept at bay by the institutions designed to root out cheaters.

    As we see, in the West, this system is open to exploitation by people who aren’t so inclined to give back (or, more accurately, to be generous in return).

    “Pathological” altruism is largely a product of the modern environment.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    The genes for “pathological altruism” (which are a feature of the special evolutionary path that Northwestern Europeans have undertaken, which seems to result in such traits)
     
    There are no genes "for" pathological altruism. Pathological altruism is extremely maladaptive, which is why it's called "pathological", suggesting disease.

    So-called "pathological altruism" is ubiquitous in nature. But it's not called that. It's called parasitism. When a Warbler feeds and raises a young Cuckoo rather than its own offspring, we could say that the Warbler is engaging in "pathological altruism". But what has really happened is that the Warbler has been parasitized by the Cuckoo.

    There may be genes "for" lesser immunity to certain parasites or certain parasitic strategies. But when we see organisms exhibiting "pathological altruism", the cause is parasitic infection, not genes "for" pathological altruism.

    It isn’t a matter of semantics. It’s an important distinction. “Pathological altruism” is a completely different concept from “reciprocal altruism”. Reciprocal altruism is, put simply, tit for tat. Pathological altruism is always maladaptive, by definition. Behaviors that are always maladaptive, such as homosexuality, can appear at relatively high levels. I don’t know if HBD Chick claims that pathological altruism and reciprocal altruism are the same thing, but if she does, she’s confused.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    It isn’t a matter of semantics. It’s an important distinction. “Pathological altruism” is a completely different concept from “reciprocal altruism”. Reciprocal altruism is, put simply, tit for tat. Pathological altruism is always maladaptive, by definition.
     
    The way HBD Chick describes reciprocal altruism, as it exists among NW Europeans, does not always imply "always actively seeking to ensure that the other party is holding up his end of the bargain." A reciprocal altruist can actually be generous, and will help a fellow in need (which the tacit expectation that that favor will one day be returned).

    The problem with that is that it leaves the giving individual open to exploitation by parasitic individuals (or individuals not so inclined to be generous). But this wasn't a problem in a society where most people could be trusted. Cheaters were kept at bay by the institutions designed to root out cheaters.

    As we see, in the West, this system is open to exploitation by people who aren't so inclined to give back (or, more accurately, to be generous in return).

    "Pathological" altruism is largely a product of the modern environment.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I think the “pathological altruism” is more a madness of crowds phenomenon at some point someone will say to themselves ‘a tulip bulb is not worth an estate’ Zulu tribal rhythms are not equatable to Mozart wigwams are not like Gothic cathedrals and my culture is not equatable to Islam, im not going to put the lights out on western civilization to boost my Facebook standing.and lets hope the backlash is manageable im a former liberal turned libertarian but admit i get into murderous rages at whats happening to my everything. Im surprised at your comments that conservatives don’t care for others welfare, besides the book /study “who gives” if you spent any time out of crowne heights amonf actual conservatives I think you will notice quite a difference yes liberals form lots of community organizations but getting a liberal to actually part with a dollar is like well we all know what hippies are like. i have found conservatives will load up the pick up truck and drive 500 miles to help out without even thinking about it as charity its just work needing doing.with liberals all charities about furthering the agenda

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    "Pathological altruism" is not the same thing as reciprocal altruism. Pathological altruism is always maladaptive. People see pathological altruism, and then assume therefore that it was selected for in the organism exhibiting the pathological altruism. This is the same mistake that researchers made when furiously searching for genes "for" certain cancers that are now known to be caused by infectious agents. The reasoning was similar: obviously the cancer patient has genes "for" tumors to multiply out of control and kill him, otherwise it would have never evolved. Similar reasoning informs beliefs about homosexuality being genetic as opposed to being due to pathogenic causes.

    There are countless examples of parasitism in nature. Even in cases where the "mafia hypothesis" holds, it would be valid to label it as an example of "pathological altruism", because "pathological altruism" is ultimately parasitism.

    “Pathological altruism” is not the same thing as reciprocal altruism. Pathological altruism is always maladaptive.

    Our differences lie in the semantics. If you want to define “pathological altruism” as the type that was always maladaptive, then the number of people afflicted with it would be very small indeed.

    The type of altruism that is exhibited by NW Europeans was certainly quite adaptive. See HBD Chick’s work.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @asdf
    The values are very similar. Let's take a look at what Japan has going on that used to be going on in the west.

    1) The belief that ethnicity is a thing
    2) The belief that nations/communities are a thing
    3) The belief that culture is a thing
    4) The belief that the above three are more valuable then the individual whims

    Was it so long ago that this was the norm in the west? Seems to me the abolishion of these ideas is fairly recent. Is it really that hard to see it coming back?

    Racialism existed in the North as well. It was common throughout the country. It was arguably stronger in the North and more sophisticated. The Johnson-Reed Act, or the Immigration Act of 1924, was spearheaded by Northern politicians motivated by racialist sentiment.

    Anti-racialist policies are the results of non-democratic politics, not majoritarian support.

    In the case of a Nazi dominated Europe/Russia, where Germany is the sole superpower, the US is a minor power, and there is no Soviet Union sponsored Third World, the major pockets of resistance would likely be within Europe, and be racialist/nationalist in nature and motivated by national liberation from German imperialism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    The genes for “pathological altruism” (which are a feature of the special evolutionary path that Northwestern Europeans have undertaken, which seems to result in such traits)
     
    There are no genes "for" pathological altruism. Pathological altruism is extremely maladaptive, which is why it's called "pathological", suggesting disease.

    So-called "pathological altruism" is ubiquitous in nature. But it's not called that. It's called parasitism. When a Warbler feeds and raises a young Cuckoo rather than its own offspring, we could say that the Warbler is engaging in "pathological altruism". But what has really happened is that the Warbler has been parasitized by the Cuckoo.

    There may be genes "for" lesser immunity to certain parasites or certain parasitic strategies. But when we see organisms exhibiting "pathological altruism", the cause is parasitic infection, not genes "for" pathological altruism.

    “Pathological altruism” is not the same thing as reciprocal altruism. Pathological altruism is always maladaptive. People see pathological altruism, and then assume therefore that it was selected for in the organism exhibiting the pathological altruism. This is the same mistake that researchers made when furiously searching for genes “for” certain cancers that are now known to be caused by infectious agents. The reasoning was similar: obviously the cancer patient has genes “for” tumors to multiply out of control and kill him, otherwise it would have never evolved. Similar reasoning informs beliefs about homosexuality being genetic as opposed to being due to pathogenic causes.

    There are countless examples of parasitism in nature. Even in cases where the “mafia hypothesis” holds, it would be valid to label it as an example of “pathological altruism”, because “pathological altruism” is ultimately parasitism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    “Pathological altruism” is not the same thing as reciprocal altruism. Pathological altruism is always maladaptive.
     
    Our differences lie in the semantics. If you want to define "pathological altruism" as the type that was always maladaptive, then the number of people afflicted with it would be very small indeed.

    The type of altruism that is exhibited by NW Europeans was certainly quite adaptive. See HBD Chick's work.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous

    The genes for “pathological altruism” (which are a feature of the special evolutionary path that Northwestern Europeans have undertaken, which seems to result in such traits)
     
    There are no genes "for" pathological altruism. Pathological altruism is extremely maladaptive, which is why it's called "pathological", suggesting disease.

    So-called "pathological altruism" is ubiquitous in nature. But it's not called that. It's called parasitism. When a Warbler feeds and raises a young Cuckoo rather than its own offspring, we could say that the Warbler is engaging in "pathological altruism". But what has really happened is that the Warbler has been parasitized by the Cuckoo.

    There may be genes "for" lesser immunity to certain parasites or certain parasitic strategies. But when we see organisms exhibiting "pathological altruism", the cause is parasitic infection, not genes "for" pathological altruism.

    I used quotes around “pathological” altruism because I’m not sure I buy this term, certainly not when it’s applied to societies as a whole.

    Pathological altruism is extremely maladaptive, which is why it’s called “pathological”, suggesting disease.

    It’s only maladaptive in today’s multi-racial environment. When Northwestern Europeans live in homogenous societies, with brethren, who were also reciprocal altruists, it is perfectly adaptive, as we see in societies that remain homogenous today, such as Iceland or Finland.

    Obviously so, otherwise it would have never evolved.

    When a Warbler feeds and raises a young Cuckoo rather than its own offspring, we could say that the Warbler is engaging in “pathological altruism”.

    I don’t think that’s quite the same thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    Racialist ideas and attitudes were the norm recently in the West, as you yourself suggested in the post when you noted that Jim Crow wasn't too long ago. They've been undermined and suppressed by non-democratic, political and legal action that leveraged the power of the state. It wasn't because the majorities in the West were different from the Japanese in wanting to undermine and suppress racialism or something and did so democratically. It is the product of non-democratic politics. Europe obviously would be quite different today with respect to racialism had Nazi Germany won the war. What was decisive in Europe was war, and war is the continuation of politics by other means.

    Racialist ideas and attitudes were the norm recently in the West, as you yourself suggested in the post when you noted that Jim Crow wasn’t too long ago.

    This was in the South, though. Southerners are genetically different from Northerners (the former being more inbred, for one).

    It wasn’t because the majorities in the West were different from the Japanese in wanting to undermine and suppress racialism or something and did so democratically.

    Why did these policies gain traction in the West, though?

    Europe obviously would be quite different today with respect to racialism had Nazi Germany won the war. What was decisive in Europe was war, and war is the continuation of politics by other means.

    Probably. Though perhaps not the way you think. Pockets of resistance and all…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • [...] Liberalism, HBD, Population, and Solutions for the Future A follow-up: Ethnicity and Politics Another Tale of Two Maps The Liberal/Conservative Baby Gap: Time Depth Further Testing the Pioneer Hypothesis: Canada and Russia Why sub-replacement fertility is not necessarily all that bad Expectations and reality: a window into the liberal-conservative baby gap Dystopian Conservative Future? [...]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @asdf
    The values are very similar. Let's take a look at what Japan has going on that used to be going on in the west.

    1) The belief that ethnicity is a thing
    2) The belief that nations/communities are a thing
    3) The belief that culture is a thing
    4) The belief that the above three are more valuable then the individual whims

    Was it so long ago that this was the norm in the west? Seems to me the abolishion of these ideas is fairly recent. Is it really that hard to see it coming back?

    Racialist ideas and attitudes were the norm recently in the West, as you yourself suggested in the post when you noted that Jim Crow wasn’t too long ago. They’ve been undermined and suppressed by non-democratic, political and legal action that leveraged the power of the state. It wasn’t because the majorities in the West were different from the Japanese in wanting to undermine and suppress racialism or something and did so democratically. It is the product of non-democratic politics. Europe obviously would be quite different today with respect to racialism had Nazi Germany won the war. What was decisive in Europe was war, and war is the continuation of politics by other means.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Racialist ideas and attitudes were the norm recently in the West, as you yourself suggested in the post when you noted that Jim Crow wasn’t too long ago.
     
    This was in the South, though. Southerners are genetically different from Northerners (the former being more inbred, for one).

    It wasn’t because the majorities in the West were different from the Japanese in wanting to undermine and suppress racialism or something and did so democratically.
     
    Why did these policies gain traction in the West, though?

    Europe obviously would be quite different today with respect to racialism had Nazi Germany won the war. What was decisive in Europe was war, and war is the continuation of politics by other means.
     
    Probably. Though perhaps not the way you think. Pockets of resistance and all...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The genes for “pathological altruism” (which are a feature of the special evolutionary path that Northwestern Europeans have undertaken, which seems to result in such traits)

    There are no genes “for” pathological altruism. Pathological altruism is extremely maladaptive, which is why it’s called “pathological”, suggesting disease.

    So-called “pathological altruism” is ubiquitous in nature. But it’s not called that. It’s called parasitism. When a Warbler feeds and raises a young Cuckoo rather than its own offspring, we could say that the Warbler is engaging in “pathological altruism”. But what has really happened is that the Warbler has been parasitized by the Cuckoo.

    There may be genes “for” lesser immunity to certain parasites or certain parasitic strategies. But when we see organisms exhibiting “pathological altruism”, the cause is parasitic infection, not genes “for” pathological altruism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    I used quotes around "pathological" altruism because I'm not sure I buy this term, certainly not when it's applied to societies as a whole.

    Pathological altruism is extremely maladaptive, which is why it’s called “pathological”, suggesting disease.
     
    It's only maladaptive in today's multi-racial environment. When Northwestern Europeans live in homogenous societies, with brethren, who were also reciprocal altruists, it is perfectly adaptive, as we see in societies that remain homogenous today, such as Iceland or Finland.

    Obviously so, otherwise it would have never evolved.


    When a Warbler feeds and raises a young Cuckoo rather than its own offspring, we could say that the Warbler is engaging in “pathological altruism”.
     
    I don't think that's quite the same thing.
    , @Anonymous
    "Pathological altruism" is not the same thing as reciprocal altruism. Pathological altruism is always maladaptive. People see pathological altruism, and then assume therefore that it was selected for in the organism exhibiting the pathological altruism. This is the same mistake that researchers made when furiously searching for genes "for" certain cancers that are now known to be caused by infectious agents. The reasoning was similar: obviously the cancer patient has genes "for" tumors to multiply out of control and kill him, otherwise it would have never evolved. Similar reasoning informs beliefs about homosexuality being genetic as opposed to being due to pathogenic causes.

    There are countless examples of parasitism in nature. Even in cases where the "mafia hypothesis" holds, it would be valid to label it as an example of "pathological altruism", because "pathological altruism" is ultimately parasitism.

    , @Anonymous
    It isn't a matter of semantics. It's an important distinction. "Pathological altruism" is a completely different concept from "reciprocal altruism". Reciprocal altruism is, put simply, tit for tat. Pathological altruism is always maladaptive, by definition. Behaviors that are always maladaptive, such as homosexuality, can appear at relatively high levels. I don't know if HBD Chick claims that pathological altruism and reciprocal altruism are the same thing, but if she does, she's confused.
    , @Anonymous
    You (or HBD Chick) are suggesting that "pathological altruism" is just a case of reciprocal altruism that isn't enforced. That isn't true. "Pathological altruism" is something else entirely.

    What we see as non-familial “altruism” in civilization is largely parasitic castration. The most general definition of parasitic castration is the extended phenotypic diversion of reproduction from the host organism’s genes to the parasite’s. This would include political economic phenomena as well as all kinds of other phenomena.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Hg8ih, you claim 1) that liberal fertility has always been at or below replacement, and 2) that there is no major trend of people converting to liberalism. It is possible that one of those two statements is true, but it is not possible for them both to be true.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Not to mention liberal fertility usually includes white liberals and NAMs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @T
    Once the anti-fertility shadow of the boomers is lifted liberal fertility will rebound. Children born to leftists today will probably have replacement rate fertility tomorrow. However three generations of greatly reduced fertility (boomer, x, millennial) is devastating to a population. Also conversion is going to go the other way. Right now the trend is that conservative kids run off and become liberals rather than the other way around. If liberals lose power they won't be able to attract converts, and instead will start losing their members to conversion.

    You have it completely backwards. Liberal fertility has always been at replacement level or below it. There is no major trend of “conservative kids running off and becoming liberals”. That’s a myth that only happened for the Baby Boomers (people in their 50′s to 70′s).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @The Man Who Was . . .
    The problem is that conservatives defer to authority and the authorities right now are various forms of liberalism (libertarianism, neo-conservatism). So contemporary conservatives are kind of schizophrenic and all over the place. But as conservatives become a bigger portion of the population, substantively conservative views will have more and more cultural authority and more and more cultural leaders will have conservative views. Once such views have more authority they will be reinforced by conservatives tendency to defer to whoever is in power.

    I think you are right though that a more religious society will be more and more anti-science. Religious people prefer explanations that involve personal causation while science prefers explanations with impersonal causation.

    Good points. Of course, as Steve Sailer notes, it’s hard to know how long current fertility patterns will persist. Even if they do change, population inertia will mean that future generations will be, for a good while, more conservative (genotypically, anyway) than older ones. (It’s unclear how much this is counteracted by current overall societal trends towards liberalism among young people).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Steve Sailer
    Thanks. Fascinating ideas.

    I wouldn't necessarily bet against white liberals in the long run, demographically. I think they will slowly figure out ways to up their reproduction rates. (I like to point out how the right to attend the public schools in Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, and Malibu has become hereditary, extending down to grandchildren.) A lot of the people in Beverly Hills, Manhattan, and Georgetown didn't get where they are in life by being idealistic dweebs. When they decide they need to change things so that they'll have grandchildren, they'll take action.

    I think the crucial leading indicator for America might be fertility in Israel of non-ultra-orthodox Jews. If they can figure out how to keep their fertility up, I think you'll see something similar in America.

    Fascinating ideas.

    Thank you!

    I wouldn’t necessarily bet against white liberals in the long run, demographically. I think they will slowly figure out ways to up their reproduction rates. (I like to point out how the right to attend the public schools in Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, and Malibu has become hereditary, extending down to grandchildren.) A lot of the people in Beverly Hills, Manhattan, and Georgetown didn’t get where they are in life by being idealistic dweebs. When they decide they need to change things so that they’ll have grandchildren, they’ll take action.

    There is definitely that. If they become cognizant of a fertility problem, it does stand to reason that someone somewhere will find a way to fix it.

    I think the crucial leading indicator for America might be fertility in Israel of non-ultra-orthodox Jews. If they can figure out how to keep their fertility up, I think you’ll see something similar in America.

    Great point! I’ll have to take a look. Thanks for the tip!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Once the anti-fertility shadow of the boomers is lifted liberal fertility will rebound. Children born to leftists today will probably have replacement rate fertility tomorrow. However three generations of greatly reduced fertility (boomer, x, millennial) is devastating to a population. Also conversion is going to go the other way. Right now the trend is that conservative kids run off and become liberals rather than the other way around. If liberals lose power they won’t be able to attract converts, and instead will start losing their members to conversion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hg8ih
    You have it completely backwards. Liberal fertility has always been at replacement level or below it. There is no major trend of "conservative kids running off and becoming liberals". That's a myth that only happened for the Baby Boomers (people in their 50's to 70's).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Thanks. Fascinating ideas.

    I wouldn’t necessarily bet against white liberals in the long run, demographically. I think they will slowly figure out ways to up their reproduction rates. (I like to point out how the right to attend the public schools in Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, and Malibu has become hereditary, extending down to grandchildren.) A lot of the people in Beverly Hills, Manhattan, and Georgetown didn’t get where they are in life by being idealistic dweebs. When they decide they need to change things so that they’ll have grandchildren, they’ll take action.

    I think the crucial leading indicator for America might be fertility in Israel of non-ultra-orthodox Jews. If they can figure out how to keep their fertility up, I think you’ll see something similar in America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Fascinating ideas.
     
    Thank you!

    I wouldn’t necessarily bet against white liberals in the long run, demographically. I think they will slowly figure out ways to up their reproduction rates. (I like to point out how the right to attend the public schools in Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, and Malibu has become hereditary, extending down to grandchildren.) A lot of the people in Beverly Hills, Manhattan, and Georgetown didn’t get where they are in life by being idealistic dweebs. When they decide they need to change things so that they’ll have grandchildren, they’ll take action.
     
    There is definitely that. If they become cognizant of a fertility problem, it does stand to reason that someone somewhere will find a way to fix it.

    I think the crucial leading indicator for America might be fertility in Israel of non-ultra-orthodox Jews. If they can figure out how to keep their fertility up, I think you’ll see something similar in America.
     
    Great point! I'll have to take a look. Thanks for the tip!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I think it’s gonna take awhile for “the Conservatives” to achieve their former selves Jayman. (Speaking as a conservative-leaning Independent – usually Republican for nat’l offices.) Too much in disarray.

    This is out-of-discipline I realize, but I think you might find it illuminating:

    http://www.fpri.org/articles/2012/12/crisis-american-conservatism-inherent-contradictions-and-end-road

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I think that Republicans could win the presidency if they nominated someone who appeals to rustbelt whites (to provide the votes) and to libertarians (to provide the enthusiasm). Rand Paul is probably that person and depending on circumstances he might end up president in 2016 and/or 2020. After that the non-white population will be very high, making a Republican president all but impossible. Meanwhile the white population becomes more conservative (in a variety of ways) and racialized. Yet regional differences will keep a white nationalist movement from coalescing and instituting Jim Crow laws.

    So the SWPL elite will continue to control government and universities. Once they have complete power their hubris destroys the economy (solar panel temples, General Motors, etc…) and standards of living start to fall to the point where people have less to lose. Meanwhile people are making due with rival institutions: homeschooling, religion, black markets, etc… this isn’t just whites but other groups as well. Eventually people just opt out of everything and the elite lose their power base. Taxation and propaganda are being much less efficient because the elite don’t control the channels that things flow through. Eventually it becomes clear that the government is going to be dissolved and replaced, and it turns very bloody. Many people die.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The problem is that conservatives defer to authority and the authorities right now are various forms of liberalism (libertarianism, neo-conservatism). So contemporary conservatives are kind of schizophrenic and all over the place. But as conservatives become a bigger portion of the population, substantively conservative views will have more and more cultural authority and more and more cultural leaders will have conservative views. Once such views have more authority they will be reinforced by conservatives tendency to defer to whoever is in power.

    I think you are right though that a more religious society will be more and more anti-science. Religious people prefer explanations that involve personal causation while science prefers explanations with impersonal causation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    Good points. Of course, as Steve Sailer notes, it's hard to know how long current fertility patterns will persist. Even if they do change, population inertia will mean that future generations will be, for a good while, more conservative (genotypically, anyway) than older ones. (It's unclear how much this is counteracted by current overall societal trends towards liberalism among young people).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • It’s going to take a long time for these trends to become decisive in electoral politics. During that time, the Republicans will continue to be pushed to the left in order to compete with the Democrats.

    So the party that finally takes over the new SWPL free America will be completely different than today’s Republican party.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @asdf
    The values are very similar. Let's take a look at what Japan has going on that used to be going on in the west.

    1) The belief that ethnicity is a thing
    2) The belief that nations/communities are a thing
    3) The belief that culture is a thing
    4) The belief that the above three are more valuable then the individual whims

    Was it so long ago that this was the norm in the west? Seems to me the abolishion of these ideas is fairly recent. Is it really that hard to see it coming back?

    I’m not so sure that #4 has been true for the highly individualistic West.

    The values are very similar. Let’s take a look at what Japan has going on that used to be going on in the west.

    The devil is always in the details. Superficial similarity can lead one to overlook profound differences between two peoples, in this case between Japan and conservative individuals in the West.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The values are very similar. Let’s take a look at what Japan has going on that used to be going on in the west.

    1) The belief that ethnicity is a thing
    2) The belief that nations/communities are a thing
    3) The belief that culture is a thing
    4) The belief that the above three are more valuable then the individual whims

    Was it so long ago that this was the norm in the west? Seems to me the abolishion of these ideas is fairly recent. Is it really that hard to see it coming back?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    I'm not so sure that #4 has been true for the highly individualistic West.

    The values are very similar. Let’s take a look at what Japan has going on that used to be going on in the west.
     
    The devil is always in the details. Superficial similarity can lead one to overlook profound differences between two peoples, in this case between Japan and conservative individuals in the West.
    , @Anonymous
    Racialist ideas and attitudes were the norm recently in the West, as you yourself suggested in the post when you noted that Jim Crow wasn't too long ago. They've been undermined and suppressed by non-democratic, political and legal action that leveraged the power of the state. It wasn't because the majorities in the West were different from the Japanese in wanting to undermine and suppress racialism or something and did so democratically. It is the product of non-democratic politics. Europe obviously would be quite different today with respect to racialism had Nazi Germany won the war. What was decisive in Europe was war, and war is the continuation of politics by other means.
    , @Anonymous
    Racialism existed in the North as well. It was common throughout the country. It was arguably stronger in the North and more sophisticated. The Johnson-Reed Act, or the Immigration Act of 1924, was spearheaded by Northern politicians motivated by racialist sentiment.

    Anti-racialist policies are the results of non-democratic politics, not majoritarian support.

    In the case of a Nazi dominated Europe/Russia, where Germany is the sole superpower, the US is a minor power, and there is no Soviet Union sponsored Third World, the major pockets of resistance would likely be within Europe, and be racialist/nationalist in nature and motivated by national liberation from German imperialism.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @chris
    When you discuss conservatives do you mean economic conservatives or social conservatives because there can be a big difference between the two. For instance I consider myself right-wing/conservative yet I agree with many liberal criticisms of neoliberalism and capitalism, I also support unions and a (eugenic) social safety net. I am also agnostic. In fact the main reason I consider myself conservative is my opposition to feminism and liberal pathological altruism/empathy with respect to identity/kin groups other than my own.

    We’re talking religious, sex-is-for-procreation folks (so social conservative). Basically, it seems it’s the evangelicals. The Audacious Epigone and the Inductivist have performed all sorts of analyses on the predictors of fertility. I can’t recall if economic questions were asked (Razib Khan may have looked at other political questions, though), but I’d imagine that many of these folks are economically conservative as well.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.