The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
What Were the Trends and Turning Points That Led to 2016?
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

I am thinking of writing a big article to put into perspective the trends leading up to the famously unexpected political reversals of fortune in 2016.

Some are economic, some are political, but I suspect others are cultural/political: ever more spectacular hate hoaxes like Rolling Stone’s, BLM anti-cop terrorism, World War T, the rise of the word “microaggressions,” and so forth.

What are some of your suggestions? And can you think of any way to find quantitative or qualitative data supporting your insights?

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
    []
  1. White despair.

    This is different from the white death- the increasing white death rate is a symptom.

    White despair is looking into the future, and seeing demographic displacement, loss of jobs to foreign countries, decreased quality of infrastructure, decreased overall quality of life, increasing debt, an increase in illegitimacy and decrease in the nuclear family, despite whites having less sex, with a more winner take all sexual and market economy, “press 1 for english, 2 para espanol” and being told that this is the just deserts of white oppression. The thousand cuts of white despair.

    Today I heard someone say that Trump is the Good Will Hunting Candidate:

    Robin Williams: “Me, I voted for Hillary. You?”
    Matt Damon: “I voted for Trump.”
    Robin Williams: “Why?”
    Matt Damon: “Because fuck em, that’s why.”

    Read More
    • Agree: Anonym
    • Replies: @dearieme
    “Because fuck em, that’s why.” Sometimes that is a sufficient reason.
    , @Corvinus
    The trend of the year are useless memes by the Coalition of the Right and Coalition of the Left.

    From Fake News Stories to Basket of Deplorables to Black Lives Matters to You Didn't Built That, the radical right and left had a field day in the mainstream and alternative media by ramping up the rhetoric, with their respective acolytes greedily lapping it up.

    "White despair" lacks the cache of the above phrases, but it does fit into the Fake News Stories meme. Undoubtedly, SOME white people are despondent about demographic displacement. But this phenomenon is inevitable, as human history thoroughly demonstrates.

    When it comes to outsourcing, our nation's crumbling roads and bridges, high divorce rates, and rising debt, those are the problems of whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans, NOT exclusively Anglos. In other words, the citizens of the United States are despondent over these issues.

    But, as a "bad white" who dares to criticize "good whites", I suppose I will get what is coming to me in 2017, right?
    , @Je Suis Charlie Martel
    I tied it back to the Duke Lacrosse Hoax, that broke something in the narrative
    What hoaxes since then and results?
    Miller's involvement at Duke is fascinating to me because I was unaware of him until after I thought that Duke was a nexus for the disruption in the rape-time continuum...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    //www.unz.com/isteve/what-were-the-trends-and-turning-points-that-led-to-2016/#comment-1712212
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Probably not the biggest thing, but I’d guess that Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing and associated policies had something to do with it. It sounds like a lot of people have been noticing quiet, unexplained changes in the demographics of their towns in the last couple of years, or so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna
    "AFFH" definitely made me see red. It's not enough that our enemies do everything they can to wreck American society; they now plot with the force of law to prevent us from getting away from their handiwork of 'urban ills'.

    The NYT was (of course) trumpeting its enthusiasm for this wrecking job and its own readers took it to task, in no uncertain terms: http://46.105.118.169/~presstit/56.html


    Notes to Steve: "I'm thinking" (typo) and "any way" not "anyway" (grammar); also HNY ;)
    , @Olorin
    Agree with this but would put it a bit differently.

    I estimate that "a lot of people have been noticing...changes in the demographics of their towns" for longer than "the last couple of years." There's nothing new in this phenomenon. It's been in the DNA of urbanization for at least the past 50 years, where I come from. Longer if you count industrial employment (not just housing) policy.

    The "new" AFFH regulations were published (and publicized) in mid-2015. HUD insists, not without cause, that the language of AFFH was part of the "Fair Housing" Act of 1968.

    Back then, IME, many knew this is where it all would head, just as they knew "affirmative action" was a move toward racial quotas...to displace founding-stock whites. And just as they knew what Hart-Celler was about.

    Over the years, it became less and less allowable to notice that FHA68 was doing exactly what it was designed to do: a) blockbust white neighborhoods for gentrification profits and cultural/demographic warfare, b) create bigger and more lucrative human hives, c) import more and more shoppers and cheap laborers. This was all gaslighted (gaslit?) by what eventually evolved into Equality Uber Alles, the SJW state religion.

    What was originally simple observation or concern about an issue, or discussion of its impacts on actual (white) people's lives was remade by our culture masters into ill manners or mean heartedness, and later into actual crimes of heresy punishable by loss of home, career, ability to earn a living, reputation, health, even life.

    Eventually, under Barack Obama and a lesser extent his predecessors back to Bubba, only one response was allowed: cheerful--nay, hysterically overblown--support, histrionic excitement, and immediate compliance with an endless stream of Two Minutes' Hate moments, all stage managed by the MSM.

    Throughout 2016 I saw not much that was new, but a whole lot of rethinking and pushback coming to a head. The establishment of so many places online where Noticing was decriminalized helped, but I think also that rank and file people simply got terminal cases of PCheerleading Fatigue with severe Brokeback Camel.

  3. Qualitative datapoint from the UK that might serve to show the long-standing nature of the discontent/malignment of the white working class: Michael Collins (not that one) write a book about it over a decade ago.

    https://www.amazon.com/Likes-Us-Biography-White-Working/dp/1862076006

    Also useful is an entirely expected review from the Guardian:

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2004/jul/24/highereducation.biography1

    Closing sentence:

    “At a time when the future of British identity is at the centre of popular debate, the book stokes up a self-pitying and half-hidden resentment, and appeals to the most destructive form of nostalgia.”

    Read More
  4. SJW bullshit is nearing the end of it’s passage through the fat part of the population distribution.

    It can now see passé from it’s house.

    Read More
  5. I think having one identity on Facebook created a huge problem for the progressive agenda by exposing the average white to how progs actually think. My parents were absolutely aghast at how anti-Western and anti-white all their liberal friends really are. As a gen X kid who is still friends with many erstwhile punks I knew in the 1980s and 90s, it’s been horrifying (and absolutely hilarious, tbh) to watch everyone who claimed to be ‘edgy’ turn into a church lady clutching pearls at every opportunity, albeit shouting ‘RACIST!’ instead of ‘SATAN!’ I don’t know how much this experience translates throughout the Midwest and the Rust Belt, but I assume it isn’t something that only my family experienced. Even my apolitical sister voted Trump, and I think her decision to do so in the end had a lot to do with the vibe on social media (as well as her experience working with unimpressive H1-B imports). I would love to see this quantified if possible, though I doubt this is PR FB would appreciate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    I left the NE a while ago, and feel much the same way--most of my old friends turned into superlefties. None of them live in swing states though so it doesn't directly pertain.
    , @TheBoom

    My parents were absolutely aghast at how anti-Western and anti-white all their liberal friends really are. As a gen X kid who is still friends with many erstwhile punks I knew in the 1980s and 90s, it’s been horrifying (and absolutely hilarious, tbh) to watch everyone who claimed to be ‘edgy’ turn into a church lady clutching pearls at every opportunity, albeit shouting ‘RACIST!’ instead of ‘SATAN!’
     
    I had the same experience. Once upon a time you could argue with liberals then go out and grab a bite to eat. Now almost all the left is like a religious cult who, you realize on social media, hate you and the country. I was particularly struck with how quickly leftists would go to personal attacks and project their hatred since they don't have a logical argument to fall back on.
    , @Frau Katze
    I've noticed something about Facebook. I have my family and real-life friends as friends on FB. I like to keep up with pictures and news of grown children and grandkids. That's my only interest in it.

    I've noticed that leftists happily post one thing after the other on their leftist views. Horror posts about the right are also common.

    There are a few of my associates that I know have departed from SJW-leftism. None of us post on it. One woman tentatively put up a post indicating that she thinks Canada's prime minister (Boy Trudeau) needs replacing. The leftists piled on her. SJW style.

    I've read countless posts on the horror of Trump. Yet I know at least some people are in the closet about Trump, because they don't want to start family fights.

    I find it odd that leftists never think, "Gee, I'd better stay off politics lest some disagree."

    They seem to take it for granted that no one they know could possibly not agree with them.

    They don't care who they offend. At least in my circle, that's the way it is.
  6. In the US, the murder of Kate Steinle, the San Bernardino massacre, and especially the Pulse Nightclub massacre in Orlando. Having the worst mass shooting in American history committed by a 2nd generation Muslim immigrant sucked the wind out of the left’s gun control (“gun safety”) push in recent years and proved Trump right on immigration.

    In Europe, the mass sexual assaults in Cologne last year probably put Brexit over the top.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    Trump proved right on immigration -- should be a headline somewhere, maybe it was. Good work, sir!

    Jeff Sessions wearing the Make America Great Again hat at a football stadium in Mobile, Alabama. That was a big deal. Trump was overwhelmed by the joy in that stadium. It really energized him.

    Trump Must Stay On The Attack. Do not react, ATTACK!
  7. Rolling Stones’

    You mean Rolling Stone’s, unless you mean to say that Mick Jagger and Keith Richards are perpetuating hoaxes.

    Read More
  8. Obergefell v. Hodges, the Charleston flag, and Mike Brown. The far-right Twitter accounts that later became prominent promoting Trump in the primary really sprang into existence to push back against BLM when mainstream conservatives refused to.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Obergefell v. Hodges, the Charleston flag, and Mike Brown. The far-right Twitter accounts that later became prominent promoting Trump in the primary really sprang into existence to push back against BLM when mainstream conservatives refused to."

    The Fox News Channel has always been extremely anti-Black Lies Matter. Bill O'Reilly for example is public enemy number 1 in the eyes of Black Lies Matter because of what he said about them.
    https://youtu.be/7U4vJy3k9_Y
  9. - Hugh Hewitt is the happiest “loser”.
    Symbolizes the happy change of fortune here at the very end for the Midwest Nice Guys who were anxious about Trump all along, even thinking he should have stepped down after the Access Hollywood tape.
    Not the same group as Never Trump.
    These are the guys suddenly being placated and being treated well.
    In fact, their social agenda now has the greatest chance ever of becoming dominant in decades.

    Read More
  10. World War G triumphalism played a part, I think. The fact that the victors weren’t satisfied with mere recognition as a matter of Constitutional law, but were pressed to force for the total submission of every baker and restauranteur in America, was a clear signal that the Left was going to offer no honorable peace in the culture war.

    On a more intimate level, the early attempt to destroy the business of Donald Trump, for example, by NBC cutting ties with him, made it clear that the election was a “you win or you die” affair for Trump, and another example of the overreach of the SJWs.

    There are countless other examples, like the NCAA’s punishment of North Carolina. The media and IT industry were sending clear examples that free speech was not going to be tolerated in the future for having given rise to the movements that brought about Trump and Brexit (the current pushes against “fake news” are the stillbirth of these efforts). Ditto Hillary signaling that that Second Amendment would be toast under her Supreme Court appointments (gun rights supporters pay close attention to this). Overall, there was a clear message that the liberal order was going to go for a clear push to level the cultural, legal, and political terrain to their decisive advantage. Even the fig leaf of “comprehensive immigration reform” was dropped in favor of a clear push for amnesty.

    The “Deplorables” speech was a clear expression that a signfiicant portion of the population was, in the Left’s estimation, to have no future. Hillary’s own campaign people have pointed to it on several occasions since the election as a moment when their messaging fell through.

    The constant stream of terrorist or violent incidents, both Islamic and anti-cop, kept demonstrating how committed the liberal order was to not doing anything to stop it. This became pretty clear a year ago after San Bernardino, and it never stopped.

    Read More
    • Replies: @2Mintzin1
    "The fact that the victors weren’t satisfied with mere recognition as a matter of Constitutional law, but were pressed to force for the total submission of every baker and restauranteur in America.."

    Add to that every schoolgirls shower room and bathroom in America...I think this is what lost many women's votes for Hillary.

    WW G does not match up well with feminism, or with the cleared eyed common sense that (most) women have about what is good for their daughters.
  11. Alien Nation was revisited via Coulter and her “Adios America”.
    Trump read enough to declare “they are not sending their best, build a wall”.
    Putting “America First” became the clarion call for which Americans were waiting.

    Closely tied to immigration control is putting America First in trade, and in wars.
    Open borders was put on trial and found guilty of “Treason”.
    The rest is not history, it is yet to be written.

    Read More
  12. I think a lot of events combined had a sort of snowball effect, but my perception is that the Bataclan massacre in particular – especially the sheer barbarity of it and timing of it just as the presidential primary campaigns were really heating up – was a turning point.

    Read More
  13. This one is from 2015, but the first question of the first Republican debate. I was wondering what would Trump do when he started getting tough questions from the media, when the spotlight was completely on him. Would he start talking like a normal politician? Would he realize that he was out of his league and pee his pants (figuratively)?

    And then when Megyn Kelly started going on, listing the times he called women pigs and animals, I remember thinking, what the hell can he do with this? Then came the famous words: “Only Rosie O’Donnell.” And the crowd went wild.

    That’s when I knew that he’d be able to handle whatever they threw at him and whether he won or lost, he was going to remain the same guy.

    Another moment I knew was important: When it was Trump versus Cruz in Iowa in February, Drudge went on a full out assault against Cruz, even attacking him like a liberal would, putting up all these videos of his dad speaking in tongues. I mean to a movement conservative, Cruz was everything they could’ve wanted. So why did Drudge, and Breitbart for that matter, go all in for Trump, who had been a Democrat almost his entire life? I realized at that point that the concerns of the “alt right” had become the same as those of some of the most influential figures in the conservative movement.

    Read More
  14. Please don’t overweight the Rolling Stone hoax. Writers, media types and political junkies cared about it far more than the average voter.

    Read More
    • Agree: Clyde
    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    The Rolling Stone hoax / misfire was very important because that was intended to be the prime red-meat motivator Hillary would rally around to get out the women's vote. Rape culture is now all the rage because abortion has lost its punch as an issue. It is hard to care about aborting a fetus if women cannot seem to get pregnant to begin with and breast cancer can only generate so much enthusiasm.

    The flip side of that is Trump's support among men was significant. It was purely organic. Like Hillary, he never proposed a single men's rights special interest issue but every man knew that they would be legally castrated if the she-wulf sat on the throne.
    , @biz
    Completely agreed. As much as I would like it if the Rolling Stone hoax opened a lot of eyes, the fact is that both the initial article and the eventual debunking only registered with a small segment of society.

    Personally I think the biggest turning points were all Islam related. San Bernardino and Orlando were huge for the US in getting people to pay attention, and last New Year's mass rapefugee sexual assault in Cologne and the Bataclan massacre were big for Europe.

    I don't know why these events were such a wake up call when the constant drumbeat of Islamic terrorism and misbehavior for the past 15 years were not, but that's the way it turned out. Something about these events made it more difficult for the usual excuse brigade to come in and change the conversation to discrimination against Muslims, Western foreign policy in the Middle East, or something else that is utterly irrelevant when considering terrorism.
  15. The most remarkable aspect of that-and I think a lot of people forget this part-is that the “basket of deplorables” came from an actual speech. A publicly recorded speech to a gay rights gala. It wasn’t simply an offhand comment to a wealthy donor which was caught on a hot mic, but which would have confirmed what most people already suspected. The sheer political stupidity of this women-and those surrounding her-is breathtaking. In order to get a picture of how colossal her defeat was, you would have to rerun the Goldwater-LBJ election, only this time Barry kicks Lyndon Johnson’s ass.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Earlier today my husband happened to mention that he thought Hillary's basket of deplorables comment was a turning point in the election. And then, Trump's reaction to it - with the Les Miserables image and music was impressive and inspired.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UjZy2_wSuZg
    , @SFG
    I hate to burst your bubble (though I admit I am a chronically gloomy fellow), but this was actually a very close election--we lost the popular vote, for crying out loud. And a lot of the Republican congressmen still like amnesty. Trump has to move on deportation and move fast before he loses steam and the MSM start picking out every single scandal. Reversing DACA's going to create a lot of sad scenes they will use to their advantage. The most effective thing he can do to change the facts on the ground now as regards demographics would be that, IMHO.

    Remember, if the Dems retake the White House in 2004 they can just open the gates again. And we may be reaching the end of the 'up' part of a business cycle, which means Trump would take the fall for the recession. Much like his nemesis Obama, he may have less time than he thinks.

    , @Perplexed
    "It wasn’t simply an offhand comment to a wealthy donor"—in fact, Hillary had introduced the "basket of deplorables" a week before the event, speaking to an Israeli reporter. All quite premeditated.
  16. In a Spenglerian turn, politics across the West has strongly moved away from institutions and parties and latched onto personalities. It is a phase you could call “Imperial Populism”. Populism because there are genuine political enthusiasms, imperial because the issues at stake are about the nature of the international system, and who will be in charge of it.

    In terms of US politics, you might be able to use donations to the DNC compared to Hillary’s campaign directly. I haven’t looked at the long term trend in this metric, but it sure feels like the parties are losing control over time, as celebrity becomes more important.

    Read More
  17. @superposition
    I think having one identity on Facebook created a huge problem for the progressive agenda by exposing the average white to how progs actually think. My parents were absolutely aghast at how anti-Western and anti-white all their liberal friends really are. As a gen X kid who is still friends with many erstwhile punks I knew in the 1980s and 90s, it's been horrifying (and absolutely hilarious, tbh) to watch everyone who claimed to be 'edgy' turn into a church lady clutching pearls at every opportunity, albeit shouting 'RACIST!' instead of 'SATAN!' I don't know how much this experience translates throughout the Midwest and the Rust Belt, but I assume it isn't something that only my family experienced. Even my apolitical sister voted Trump, and I think her decision to do so in the end had a lot to do with the vibe on social media (as well as her experience working with unimpressive H1-B imports). I would love to see this quantified if possible, though I doubt this is PR FB would appreciate.

    I left the NE a while ago, and feel much the same way–most of my old friends turned into superlefties. None of them live in swing states though so it doesn’t directly pertain.

    Read More
  18. @Anonymous
    Probably not the biggest thing, but I'd guess that Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing and associated policies had something to do with it. It sounds like a lot of people have been noticing quiet, unexplained changes in the demographics of their towns in the last couple of years, or so.

    “AFFH” definitely made me see red. It’s not enough that our enemies do everything they can to wreck American society; they now plot with the force of law to prevent us from getting away from their handiwork of ‘urban ills’.

    The NYT was (of course) trumpeting its enthusiasm for this wrecking job and its own readers took it to task, in no uncertain terms: http://46.105.118.169/~presstit/56.html

    Notes to Steve: “I’m thinking” (typo) and “any way” not “anyway” (grammar); also HNY ;)

    Read More
  19. The idea of a pendulum swinging back and forth always correcting excesses is an old one.

    Wolfe or McLuhan? Fashion of technological determinism?

    Wolfe (Who wants to look like Pajama Boy?)
    Radical Chic is passe’ again.

    The progressive disease of virtue signaling became too fashionable.

    The Left has been caught with a closet full of polyester leisure suit poses that no one will want to be seen in soon.

    McLuhan (We will always have Pepe)
    McLuhan’s explanation of The Reversal of the Overheated Medium.

    Attempting to outlaw Whites, Males, and Heterosexuals all at the same time overheated the culture.

    http://enculturation.net/teaching-mcluhan

    “One of McLuhan’s more intriguing ideas, and one that shows how dynamic and dialectical his theories are, is his concept of the reversal of the overheated medium, or break boundaries, discussed in chapter 3 of Understanding Media where he writes: “The present chapter is concerned with showing that in any medium or structure there is what Kenneth Boulding calls a ‘break boundary at which the system suddenly changes into another or passes some point of no return in its dynamic process’” (38). The principle that at some point during their development, processes and methods go too far and reverse into their opposite, McLuhan finds to be “an ancient doctrine” (34). He cites the example from classical Greek drama of the concept of hubris, when a character’s overweening pride leads to his own fall, as well as the ancient Chinese Taoist text the Tao Te Ching, which refers to the same concept of excess leading to its opposite (38-39). McLuhan notes the way roads and highways designed to provide freedom of movement have reversed into traffic congestion and urban sprawl and the irony that mobile, nomadic tribal societies were socially static while contemporary, sedentary, specialist societies are socially dynamic and progressive (38). “

    Read More
  20. It’s a convergence of multiple things, obviously, but I’d have to say #1 is immigration. No mass waves of refugees, no populist reaction in Europe.

    Over here…the immigration thing’s a big factor as well, but Hillary was a uniquely weak candidate, and the huge field on the GOP side allowed Trump to get attention early on. The man saw his opening and he took it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    There is a global populist-nationalist trend, including in countries where immigration isn't an issue. I think Modi is the most nationalist PM India has ever had. Abe seems like the most nationalist Japanese PM since WWII. Erdogan seems like the most populist-nationalist Turkish leader in living memory. Duterte in the Philippines is populism distilled. One way of looking at ISIS is as Sunni Arab nationalism. Religion is often tribalism by proxy, and Sunni Arabs are an ethnic group. The Koran is their flag, symbol, calling card and ancient tradition.

    Where did the nationalist trend come from? Could be the Internet. Could be something else.

    It seems that the world tires of most lefty delusions after a few decades. Look at what eventually happened to Communism and Freudianism. Maybe this is happening to anti-nationalism aka universalism now. At first these ideas seem fresh and exciting, then they start seeming stale. Youth is always looking for something to rebel against.

    Or it could be something else that I'm not seeing.
    , @Pericles
    Many have claimed Hillary was uniquely weak, but would any candidate except Trump have beaten her? Rubio? Cruz? ¡Jeb!? Seems unlikely to me.
  21. The obvious long term trend is the internet and sites like Unz. Fifteen years ago, the Megaphone Holders still pretty much had a lock on public discourse. The internet existed, of course, but the credible outlets were still mostly controlled by the same people as in the offline world: the Megaphone Holders. Gradually over the last decade, the dissenters from the enforced Narrative grew to knew they weren’t alone and indeed, there might be many out there. The online discussion here and even in mainstream comments sections (before they were banned) sharpened and elaborated the dissenters’ awareness and allowed them to break the Sapir-Whorf box and state their dissent in ways that didn’t sound automatically wrong. By 2016, the Narrative was looking pretty threadbare.

    Trump deserves some personal credit. A breakthrough moment was when Macy’s threatened to boycott him over his immigration statements, and he didn’t cave! That had never happened before at that level. He was economically vulnerable and paid some financial price for sticking to his guns, but he did it, and that shattered a glass ceiling that had previously constrained discussion.

    Finally, there was a significant element of what for lack of a better word we call “luck” or “fate” or the “Hand of God”. When the Megaphone disputed that immigration was a problem, there were high profile nativ-o-cides by immigrants. When the Megaphone disputed that Muslims were a problem, Muslims got all Sudden Jihad Syndrome across former Christendom. When the Megaphone disputed that law and order could be an issue, BLM rioters and terrorists went on murder sprees. When Hillary insisted her health was great, she was wracked by coughing fits. Of course, the Megaphone Holders have been lying for a long time, but this year Hubris met Nemesis in particularly rapid and poignant ways.

    Of course, it also doesn’t hurt that the pillars of the Megaphone establishment–Hillary, Merkel, von Juncker–are all superannuated plonkers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Measuring the long term trend might be possible with a list of Narrative-friendly outlets/publications versus a list of Narrative-independent outlets/publications, then compare circulation/pageview numbers over time. Maybe there is some critical mass that the non-Narrative needed.

    The polls have been so unreliable this year, I don't see that they'd be much use in identifying actual turning points.

    And luck, who can measure that?
    , @Langley
    One of the reasons the alternatives grew in number and influence was because the owners of the megaphone became such obvious hate-filled liars.

    If Newsweek had published the Monica story in 1998 we might not have developed the alternative media.

    , @Lurker
    I think letting others know that They Are Not Alone is big and increasing factor. It boosts morale and emboldens others. I now say things in public I wouldn't even allow myself to think 15 years ago.
    , @Olorin
    This.

    It's only recently that outlets were constructed where many people could observe their local changes (as anon at #2 noted) with encouragement rather censure, comment on them, or merely listen in to others' views. As Lurker notes, that "Hey, I'm not alone!" phenomenon has been powerful.

    And not different, IMO, than "coming out" in the 1980s for queers or "consciousness raising" in the 1970s for feminists, or whatever.

    That's part of why the bolshie left is so angry--they always intended their viewpoints to be facilitated while others were silenced. They thought they'd be able to do this with the Internet. Maybe they can--they seem to be trying.

    Thinking develops socially, in conversation/interaction, or even merely observing others going through that exercise. The point of PC is to thwart that development and keep everyone dependent on the static juvenile pronouncements of the PC sanhedrin.

    Not all of the outlets for developing thinking or emerging new consensus were dissident right or whatever.

    I noted about three months after the start of the Ferguson riots that a small handful of mainstream sites began allowing more textured conversations/observations on their comments sites. Most shut down comment altogether, but a few surprised me with what they were allowing. Yahoo news comes to mind. The cynic in me says that this was merely Yahoo chasing ad revenues and clicks/eyeballs.

    So that leads me to note that one of the big turning points I've noticed is in public discussion on a variety of converging issues, all (I'd say) grounded in demographic engineering/shifts. But those started earlier than 2016.

    The big shift has been in mediation and moderation--in how populist discourse has been facilitated. Some of it was free wheeling, some of it very stoical and moderate/conservative.

    All very different from the top-down/broadcast-spectrum-as-landlord-controlled-real-estate model that dates back to the Comms Act of 1934.

  22. In this connection, Gregory Hood has much more patience than I for carefully auditing the Tao of Glenn Beck, distilling the occasional meaning of the movement Beck led from the abortive character of the man himself.

    https://www.amren.com/features/2016/12/white-renegade-glenn-beck-blaze-trump/

    That patience and attention to grainy details leads Hood to produce full historical portraits of movements of the political Left and Right. He found some turning points in the arc of Beck’s career that were news to me.

    Read More
  23. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Perhaps this is facile to point out but it isn’t events themselves so much as the media’s responses to them that makes you want to burn the whole thing down. Clinging to the narrative has sent media trust to record lows, and if they’re looking like the PR wing of the elites…

    And Twitter is here amplify the hollowness of our betters’ thinking, e.g.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Looks like the tweet got eaten by a bug: twitter.com/ad_captandum/status/811775441593892864
  24. I read Hollywood wants to reboot All In The Family. How would that work out in the extremely PC culture of 2017? The Archie Bunker character would be offensive to half of the country who voted for Crooked Cankles.

    It would suck big time if the updated version of All In The Family remade Archie Bunker as a PC liberal who hates Donald J. Trump and StandsWithHer#.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jasper Been
    It would be amusing to see the younger generation as Alt Lite or even Alt Right and the Archie generation as Clinton/Obama era neo-liberal egalitarians.
  25. I was hoping for a tell all expose of Tiny Ducks middle class upbringing in the Crown Heights district.

    Read More
  26. What about the Pulse nightclub shooter’s father, Seddique Mateen, sitting behind Hillary on national TV? His son killed 49 people. I still haven’t read what campaign advisor was responsible for that. I hope not the candidate herself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna

    What about the Pulse nightclub shooter’s father, Seddique Mateen, sitting behind Hillary on national TV? His son killed 49 people.
     
    You know, it's pretty mind-blowing. You're a political celebrity because your son slaughtered 49 innocent people. A political celebrity because of your ethnicity. (And, of course, your sacred immigrant status.)

    Does anyone here seriously believe that the Dems would celebrate a white male (native-born or otherwise) whose only claim to fame was that his son was a mass-murderer??

    Which reminds me, the smug and self-satisfied Khizr Khan pompously lecturing America on what and how we should feel in relation to the destruction of our society. Yeah, that helped.

    , @Jefferson
    "What about the Pulse nightclub shooter’s father, Seddique Mateen, sitting behind Hillary on national TV? His son killed 49 people. I still haven’t read what campaign advisor was responsible for that. I hope not the candidate herself."

    I hope it was Crooked Cankles herself. Because I want the accusations from the political Right that she is the Devil to be true.
    https://youtu.be/SwrprHZKN4I

    https://youtu.be/kVS_2567A00
    , @2Mintzin1
    Hillary has a habit of doing seriously silly things every once in a while, like the Russian Reset Button (imagine Henry Kissinger or John Foster Dulles approaching the Russians with a plastic toy for a joint photo-op), the "Deplorables" remark, and , yes, exhibiting the father of a reputed terrorist.
    Personally, I think she made these decisions herself, or they were made by a trusted advisor of long standing , whose word was, essentially, law. Any competent political advisor would have sensed the problems these stunts would cause, and cautioned her not to do. Them.

    Problem with a person like Hillary, a dictator with a tin ear for public opinion, is that she tends to assemble a group of yes-men (OK, yes-women) around her who don't dare contradict her.
  27. Football?

    U. of Missouri in 2015 and Colin Kaepernick in 2016?

    I think a lot of people just want football to be free of racial hectoring and don’t think that’s too much to ask.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    People disillusioned with politics will often transfer those feelings/interest to sports/games.

    The SJW incursion into sports pushed some disaffected conservatives into voting R. Gamergate pushed some disaffected libs away from voting D/believing the Corporate Media.
    , @nglaer
    Whites can't even play quarterback at the top college level any more, it seems from my TV today. Sad.
    , @Boomstick
    I think gamergate is under-rated as a factor, and will be remembered as a strategic mistake by the progressive left. A lot of clever young men were pestered and dissed by the SJWs, and as a result got woke and went jihad. They were fine with being bystanders to the culture war, but then they were themselves attacked. They saw first hand the fundamental dishonesty and authoritarianism of the progressives. They realized that there are no non-combatants allowed by the left and as a result picked picked a side, often the alt-right side. There's probably quite a bit of overlap between the meme warriors and gamers.

    The SJWs think they got a victory or a draw in gamergate because that's what their own media tells them. I think it's more accurate to say they created a lot of clever new opponents that fly under the elite media radar but that punch above their weight online. Don't underestimate the cultural power of intelligent but disaffected young men, even if they don't have the megaphone.

    Overall I think the anonymous online presence did a lot to undermine the elite media narrative.
    , @Paul Jolliffe
    Absolutely right - the decline in football attendance and TV viewership are metrics that show general disgust with the SJW narrative.

    We have numbers that show attendance at NCAA games is down slightly overall in 2016, but with considerable variations in different regions.

    The NFL's TV numbers were down a lot to start the season, but I don't know if that's still true in week 17. I do know the NFL vigorously denied the numbers decline had anything to do with the Kaepernick protest.

    Methinks they doth protest too much - of course the Kaepernick issue played some role, and maybe it was a huge factor, something about which the NFL was desperate enough to lie.

    I suspect that the NCAA's numbers are greatly fudged - I know from recent personal experience that the attendance figures at NCAA Div. I, Div. II, and Div. III are inflated, and sometimes by a ton.

    I predict that football game attendance numbers have peaked for the NCAA - in part because of the alternative of Hi-Def big screen TV's. Why pay for a nosebleed seat (and the hassle of attending) when you can get a much better view at home?

    For the NFL in the long-run?

    Who knows, but the disappearance of white QB's will do nothing to endear white middle-aged fans. They will fade away, and they will not be replaced, despite the screaming and hectoring of SJW's and black commentators.

    Middle-aged white guys matter, and without them, neither the NFL nor the NCAA D-I football will survive intact for long.

    http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/news/nfl-tv-ratings-rasmussen-reports-poll-colin-kaepernick-anthem-protest-reaction-effect/95jdoch1ngj103xvbkllcbvk

    http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-attendance-in-2016-crowds-decline-for-sixth-straight-year/
  28. Long term US Treasury bond prices peaked this summer after a 35 year long rise. I expect them to now decline for quite some period of time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Good observation. My view is that that's mostly (so far) a secular cycle. What's your view?
    , @Ken
    Disaster for financing our debt?
  29. @superposition
    I think having one identity on Facebook created a huge problem for the progressive agenda by exposing the average white to how progs actually think. My parents were absolutely aghast at how anti-Western and anti-white all their liberal friends really are. As a gen X kid who is still friends with many erstwhile punks I knew in the 1980s and 90s, it's been horrifying (and absolutely hilarious, tbh) to watch everyone who claimed to be 'edgy' turn into a church lady clutching pearls at every opportunity, albeit shouting 'RACIST!' instead of 'SATAN!' I don't know how much this experience translates throughout the Midwest and the Rust Belt, but I assume it isn't something that only my family experienced. Even my apolitical sister voted Trump, and I think her decision to do so in the end had a lot to do with the vibe on social media (as well as her experience working with unimpressive H1-B imports). I would love to see this quantified if possible, though I doubt this is PR FB would appreciate.

    My parents were absolutely aghast at how anti-Western and anti-white all their liberal friends really are. As a gen X kid who is still friends with many erstwhile punks I knew in the 1980s and 90s, it’s been horrifying (and absolutely hilarious, tbh) to watch everyone who claimed to be ‘edgy’ turn into a church lady clutching pearls at every opportunity, albeit shouting ‘RACIST!’ instead of ‘SATAN!’

    I had the same experience. Once upon a time you could argue with liberals then go out and grab a bite to eat. Now almost all the left is like a religious cult who, you realize on social media, hate you and the country. I was particularly struck with how quickly leftists would go to personal attacks and project their hatred since they don’t have a logical argument to fall back on.

    Read More
  30. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Gerard
    The most remarkable aspect of that-and I think a lot of people forget this part-is that the "basket of deplorables" came from an actual speech. A publicly recorded speech to a gay rights gala. It wasn't simply an offhand comment to a wealthy donor which was caught on a hot mic, but which would have confirmed what most people already suspected. The sheer political stupidity of this women-and those surrounding her-is breathtaking. In order to get a picture of how colossal her defeat was, you would have to rerun the Goldwater-LBJ election, only this time Barry kicks Lyndon Johnson's ass.

    Earlier today my husband happened to mention that he thought Hillary’s basket of deplorables comment was a turning point in the election. And then, Trump’s reaction to it – with the Les Miserables image and music was impressive and inspired.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UjZy2_wSuZg

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    The Les Miserables image and music had all the fingerprints (and hoop prints) of Steve Bannon!
  31. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous
    Perhaps this is facile to point out but it isn't events themselves so much as the media's responses to them that makes you want to burn the whole thing down. Clinging to the narrative has sent media trust to record lows, and if they're looking like the PR wing of the elites...

    And Twitter is here amplify the hollowness of our betters' thinking, e.g.

    https://twitter.com/ad_captandum/status/811775441593892864

    Comment section run amok, etc.

    Looks like the tweet got eaten by a bug: twitter.com/ad_captandum/status/811775441593892864

    Read More
  32. I think that one pernicious thing on the left was their continued condescension and contempt toward the white working class. I think that Anthony Bourdain sums it up well in this article:

    http://reason.com/archives/2016/12/29/anthony-bourdain

    Read More
  33. “I thinking of writing a big article”

    I would say what led to the outcome is the internet . Above all other things . Websites like Unz Review and a lot of others across the spectrum even Stormfront , they gave us a rallying point and as someone , I can’t remember who once said being able to rally here “kept hope alive” . We only saw the violence and poison of the left nakedly exposed on Youtube And on numerous other sites . You did your part for sure but a lot of other people with Youtube channels and websites contributed to this counteroffensive . That is why the “masters” are determined to censor and shut down internet dissent . I have little faith in Trump fulfilling his promises , Christ I’ve lied to enough women in my life to no better . The most important issue we face now IMHO is fighting censorship .

    Read More
    • Replies: @SLM
    I agree - the biggest worry now is censorship. I somewhat agree regarding Trump and his promises. I am optimistic but waiting to see.
  34. Rumbling along under it all was the 2008 financial crisis, from which deplorables did not fully recover. But the president and media kept saying everything was great, so dissonance. Then Hillary topped that with her deplorables speech. She kept on, which was as if Romney had never backed down from his 47% comment but went on to make it part of his stump speech.

    The BLM and uncontrolled immigration juxtaposed against what was observable in your formerly peaceful community: now we have gangbangers shooting people, carjackings, and kidnappings. But Obama told us they were Dreamers. The total disconnect between what the Dems said was real and what your own lying eyes saw… something had to give.

    Plus, this has gone on for decades now, this broken government that everyone thinks sucks but only gets worse. This has been a long time coming. Trump gave us an option to the status quo. Now we hope he’ll try and deliver, not be yet another neocon administration.

    YT Wurlitzer with a new email.

    Read More
  35. Follow the money. If you are looking for root causes, it is always the economy. Political/cultural factors will explain how the mechanisms unfolded, but only the economy explains why it happened.

    Read More
  36. I’ll always remember 2016 as the year of the Rise of Trump and the year when trannies went wild: The Year of the Trans.

    Read More
  37. If you are looking for mile stones the date a wikipedia article is created could be a test of first achieving common notoriety as opposed to esoteric notoriety. Microaggression theory article seems to be 19 June 2010. You could also see how long it took for the article to mature, but you would have do click through a lot of silly edits. You might also be able to find out if an article was removed due to lack or notoriety or interest, and only later reappeared.

    Google has tools that let you restrict searched to a certain date so you could find out if anything was on google.

    Maybe archive.org or the way back machine.

    One thing I noticed was people being very concerned about nooses just appeared out of nowhere. I do not remember the noose being a symbol of white racism or the klan, it was always the burning cross.

    I remember mass child molester hoaxes being almost unstoppable, but now you rarely hear of them. So hoaxes on certain topics might come and go.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The noose thing goes back to the Jena incident of around 2006 when six black football players at a southern high school stomped an unconscious white student. Suddenly, it became a big MSM story about white racism and as evidence they dug up a cowboy-oriented social event at the high school in which over-enthusiastic students hung nooses on a hangin' tree as an Old West Cowboy Movie symbol. But that got retconned into a symbol of lynching blacks in the South. As far as I can tell, that was the beginning of nooses as a purported anti-black symbol.
  38. 1. People generally have a sense of smell.

    2. Economic realities force reactions.

    3. Flyover territory feeds us (says this alert Bostonian). Let’s thank them, not insult them.

    4. World Wide Web.

    5. Government is antithetical to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

    6. The pendulum always returns.

    7. Are we to be spared nothing?

    8. Beer costs way too much now.

    9. Hispanics in Florida want to be deported. Women want to be p***y-grabbed. Gays want to be rounded up and put into camps. Blacks are fools. White workers shipped their own jobs overseas. These are the deplorables.

    10. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Re #3

    What was the great Texas response to the 73/74 energy crisis- I remember 2 great quotes

    “Let the Yankee bastards freeze in the dark”

    and

    “Drive 90 mph and freeze a Yankee”
  39. @George
    If you are looking for mile stones the date a wikipedia article is created could be a test of first achieving common notoriety as opposed to esoteric notoriety. Microaggression theory article seems to be 19 June 2010. You could also see how long it took for the article to mature, but you would have do click through a lot of silly edits. You might also be able to find out if an article was removed due to lack or notoriety or interest, and only later reappeared.

    Google has tools that let you restrict searched to a certain date so you could find out if anything was on google.

    Maybe archive.org or the way back machine.

    One thing I noticed was people being very concerned about nooses just appeared out of nowhere. I do not remember the noose being a symbol of white racism or the klan, it was always the burning cross.

    I remember mass child molester hoaxes being almost unstoppable, but now you rarely hear of them. So hoaxes on certain topics might come and go.

    The noose thing goes back to the Jena incident of around 2006 when six black football players at a southern high school stomped an unconscious white student. Suddenly, it became a big MSM story about white racism and as evidence they dug up a cowboy-oriented social event at the high school in which over-enthusiastic students hung nooses on a hangin’ tree as an Old West Cowboy Movie symbol. But that got retconned into a symbol of lynching blacks in the South. As far as I can tell, that was the beginning of nooses as a purported anti-black symbol.

    Read More
  40. @BobinVA1
    What about the Pulse nightclub shooter's father, Seddique Mateen, sitting behind Hillary on national TV? His son killed 49 people. I still haven't read what campaign advisor was responsible for that. I hope not the candidate herself.

    What about the Pulse nightclub shooter’s father, Seddique Mateen, sitting behind Hillary on national TV? His son killed 49 people.

    You know, it’s pretty mind-blowing. You’re a political celebrity because your son slaughtered 49 innocent people. A political celebrity because of your ethnicity. (And, of course, your sacred immigrant status.)

    Does anyone here seriously believe that the Dems would celebrate a white male (native-born or otherwise) whose only claim to fame was that his son was a mass-murderer??

    Which reminds me, the smug and self-satisfied Khizr Khan pompously lecturing America on what and how we should feel in relation to the destruction of our society. Yeah, that helped.

    Read More
  41. @Halvorson
    Obergefell v. Hodges, the Charleston flag, and Mike Brown. The far-right Twitter accounts that later became prominent promoting Trump in the primary really sprang into existence to push back against BLM when mainstream conservatives refused to.

    “Obergefell v. Hodges, the Charleston flag, and Mike Brown. The far-right Twitter accounts that later became prominent promoting Trump in the primary really sprang into existence to push back against BLM when mainstream conservatives refused to.”

    The Fox News Channel has always been extremely anti-Black Lies Matter. Bill O’Reilly for example is public enemy number 1 in the eyes of Black Lies Matter because of what he said about them.

    Read More
  42. @Anonymous
    Earlier today my husband happened to mention that he thought Hillary's basket of deplorables comment was a turning point in the election. And then, Trump's reaction to it - with the Les Miserables image and music was impressive and inspired.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UjZy2_wSuZg

    The Les Miserables image and music had all the fingerprints (and hoop prints) of Steve Bannon!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    There are a lot of UMC professional types who of course could never be conservatives/Republicans because everyone knows what uncouth, uncultured Neanderthals they are, but who are mightily annoyed with the usual laundry list from the SJWs/Ds. Les Mis is huge with that crowd.

    "Getting" Les Mis like that was a substantial blow against UMC bigotry.

    Likewise Pence at Hamilton. The Arts are prog territory, but there are substantial holes in their line.

    , @Perplexed
    The Les Miz banner was created by Keln, a commenter at The Conservative Treehouse and Reddit. Add those websites to the list of influencers. Hillary even name-dropped Pepe!

    The Treehouse has done great work throughout. I started reading them during L'Affaire Zimmerman. They were in on Trump from the escalator ride.

    I don't know how much influence Hillaryis44 had, but the extremely sharp Admin there was on the money about the disastrous Hillary campaign since before it started. In the time of a change election, Hillary insisted on running as Obama's third term.

    As to "famously unexpected" reversal of fortune, not if you were following Bill Mitchell, who repeatedly and succinctly showed how the polls were cooked.

  43. I also think the transgender bathroom tissue was the last square for a lot of us.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "I also think the transgender bathroom tissue was the last square for a lot of us."

    That is definitely not it because Donald J. Trump did not even run on the platform that if he is elected POTUS he would pass a law to make it illegal for Transgenders to use the ladies restroom.

    Donald J. Trump let Caitlyn Jenner use the ladies restroom at Trump Tower.

    If you voted for The Donald soley because of this issue, you are going to be extremely disappointed at his presidency.
    , @Jasper Been
    Like what you did there.
    , @Je Suis Charlie Martel
    Which makes North Carolina so weird: Trump takes the state but the incumbent governor who stood up to the transgender zeitgeist lost, barely.
    What happened in NC?
    , @Dieter Kief

    transgender bathroom tissue
     
    The transgender bathroom - ehem - problem - - :That was the first theme ever I saw comments on leftist's blogs in Europe remarking that something in the US liberal mindset is flatout wrong.
    And I think Trump did the right thing concerning this subject: Just sit and "watch with glee" (Jagger/Richards) how it slowly but steadily grows - until it's definitely and doubtlessly and widely agreed upon - - - way over the top. -
    To end with the Fabulous Furry Freak-Brothers: "This hole shit is far-out, man!"
  44. 2016 has been a long time coming. Obama’s policies have been defeated in every election that BHO himself was not on the ballot (2010, 2014. and 2016).

    I’m not sure how you empirically measure something like this, but the great body of the people were finally able to say “NO” in such a way that they would be listened to. The Brexit vote in the UK and the Trump candidacy finally created a sort of preference cascade.

    I am very thankful. Obviously, reality had to intrude at some point, and there was bound to be a lurch back to reality; now, it would appear it happened (barely) soon enough that the return to normalcy could happen without violent revolution.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    I agree, unlike Jefferson. It was pretty much the launching of World War Trans that made me realize that the world had gone pretty insane. I wouldn't have otherwise cared much, I wanted to be left alone.
  45. @SFG
    It's a convergence of multiple things, obviously, but I'd have to say #1 is immigration. No mass waves of refugees, no populist reaction in Europe.

    Over here...the immigration thing's a big factor as well, but Hillary was a uniquely weak candidate, and the huge field on the GOP side allowed Trump to get attention early on. The man saw his opening and he took it.

    There is a global populist-nationalist trend, including in countries where immigration isn’t an issue. I think Modi is the most nationalist PM India has ever had. Abe seems like the most nationalist Japanese PM since WWII. Erdogan seems like the most populist-nationalist Turkish leader in living memory. Duterte in the Philippines is populism distilled. One way of looking at ISIS is as Sunni Arab nationalism. Religion is often tribalism by proxy, and Sunni Arabs are an ethnic group. The Koran is their flag, symbol, calling card and ancient tradition.

    Where did the nationalist trend come from? Could be the Internet. Could be something else.

    It seems that the world tires of most lefty delusions after a few decades. Look at what eventually happened to Communism and Freudianism. Maybe this is happening to anti-nationalism aka universalism now. At first these ideas seem fresh and exciting, then they start seeming stale. Youth is always looking for something to rebel against.

    Or it could be something else that I’m not seeing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    But can the resurgent nationalists avoid getting in wars with other resurgent nationalists?
    , @Glossy
    I've seen a few people wonder at the lack of South Asian participation in the ISIS craze, at South Asian Muslims' reluctance to blow themselves up in Europe, etc. There are 200 million Muslims in Indonesia, and I haven't seen any stories of them becoming more radical.

    Well, for Indonesians and Pakistanis Islam is foreign, and the global trend, the spirit of the times is ethno-nationalist, not theocratic. It just so happens that for Sunni Arabs sharia and the Khalifate are their thing, something that they can be proud of in the typical ethnic way and something that fits their personalities well because it was developed by their ancestors.
    , @Almost Missouri

    "There is a global populist-nationalist trend,... Where did the nationalist trend come from?"
     
    Nationalism is the major multi-century historical trend still going on. Why? Hard to say. There are just certain implacable zeitgeists in certain periods. Nationalism has been in the current zeitgeist since at least the French revolution, though I think you can trace it back further in Anglo history (and hence in its American offshoot). It is by definition democratic, hostile to elite excess, communitarian and language-dependent. When anything stands in the way of those trends, conflict will follow. It started in and was strongest in the West, but continues to spread over the world.
  46. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The Republican leadership doing everything they could to ignore the message behind Dave Brat’s win looks huge in retrospect.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna
    A good point. The voters in Dave Brat's district sent an unmistakable early message; a virtual political earthquake. But the Republican Establishment continued as though nothing at all had happened.
  47. @BobinVA1
    What about the Pulse nightclub shooter's father, Seddique Mateen, sitting behind Hillary on national TV? His son killed 49 people. I still haven't read what campaign advisor was responsible for that. I hope not the candidate herself.

    “What about the Pulse nightclub shooter’s father, Seddique Mateen, sitting behind Hillary on national TV? His son killed 49 people. I still haven’t read what campaign advisor was responsible for that. I hope not the candidate herself.”

    I hope it was Crooked Cankles herself. Because I want the accusations from the political Right that she is the Devil to be true.

    Read More
  48. @Glossy
    There is a global populist-nationalist trend, including in countries where immigration isn't an issue. I think Modi is the most nationalist PM India has ever had. Abe seems like the most nationalist Japanese PM since WWII. Erdogan seems like the most populist-nationalist Turkish leader in living memory. Duterte in the Philippines is populism distilled. One way of looking at ISIS is as Sunni Arab nationalism. Religion is often tribalism by proxy, and Sunni Arabs are an ethnic group. The Koran is their flag, symbol, calling card and ancient tradition.

    Where did the nationalist trend come from? Could be the Internet. Could be something else.

    It seems that the world tires of most lefty delusions after a few decades. Look at what eventually happened to Communism and Freudianism. Maybe this is happening to anti-nationalism aka universalism now. At first these ideas seem fresh and exciting, then they start seeming stale. Youth is always looking for something to rebel against.

    Or it could be something else that I'm not seeing.

    But can the resurgent nationalists avoid getting in wars with other resurgent nationalists?

    Read More
    • Replies: @dearieme
    Nationalists are a problem when they are expansionist, aggressive and interested in national aggrandisement. They are not much of a problem when their motives are defensive or, at least, limited and cautious. Thus, for example, Bismarck had limited aims and a cautious outlook: he was careful not to spark general war in Europe. On the other hand, Kaiser Bill and Adolf Hitler were the other sort.
    , @Almost Missouri
    The question implies that other forms of political organization do not get into conflict. But of course, this is not true. Multinational/multicultural empires get into conflict all the time. Indeed, for many of them, constant conflict is a way of life, not only externally but internally: you have to keep all those jostling nations/cultures in their place somehow.

    A properly nationalist nation can't really expand faster than its own birth rate. You can't have a bigger nation than there are nationals to populate it. But with a multi-ethnic empire, the sky is the limit. If any population can be part of your empire, there is nothing to stop your expansion but military defeat.

    Good borders make good neighbors. And with nationalism, a good border is available: where one ethnicity ends and the next one begins, where one language ends and the next one begins. With multi-ethnic empires, no border is ever really good because the ending of one ethnicity or language and the beginning of the next is not relevant to a multi-ethnic empire. Since there is no obvious reason for anyone to be either in or out of such an empire, violent expansion and/or violent repression of internal dissent is baked in.

    All of the biggest, most violent (both externally and internally) states have been multi-ethnic: the Soviet Union, the Mongol Hordes, the Ottoman Empire, even the anti-nationalist's trump card--Nazi Germany--was really a multi-ethnic empire: the Third Reich. When it embarked on its brutal and megalomaniac Eastern conquests and associated mass civilian murders, the Nazi war machine was not only ethnic German but also had formations of Scandinavians, Dutch, Ukrainians, Russian, Vichy French, allies of Italians, Romanians, Hungarians, Finns, auxiliaries of Balts, Slavs, Croats, Slovenes and Arabs, and I'm probably forgetting some. So the favorite nationalist boogie man is really just another cautionary tale about excessive multicultural, multi-ethnic overreach.

    , @SFG
    I had that question myself earlier, but I think they'll have enough to do sending all the Syrians back and going after the Muslims. I doubt all that many Germans really want Alsace or Gdansk/Danzig back anyway.
  49. @densa
    I also think the transgender bathroom tissue was the last square for a lot of us.

    “I also think the transgender bathroom tissue was the last square for a lot of us.”

    That is definitely not it because Donald J. Trump did not even run on the platform that if he is elected POTUS he would pass a law to make it illegal for Transgenders to use the ladies restroom.

    Donald J. Trump let Caitlyn Jenner use the ladies restroom at Trump Tower.

    If you voted for The Donald soley because of this issue, you are going to be extremely disappointed at his presidency.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas

    That is definitely not it because Donald J. Trump did not even run on the platform that if he is elected POTUS he would pass a law to make it illegal for Transgenders to use the ladies restroom.
     
    The question isn't whether Trump is going to "pass a law" (Presidents don't pass laws, by the way) making it illegal for Transgenders to use the ladies room (it's questionable, to say the least, that the federal government would Constitutionally have such power). The Obama Administration, through its Justice and Education departments, threw the weight of the federal government behind forcing trannies into girls rooms. (http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/12/politics/transgender-bathrooms-obama-administration/)

    Obama committed a lot of this extreme abuse of the President's office (the "dear colleague" letter turning college campus sex assault tribunals into Star Chambers was another example), forcing it decisively into picayune culture war issues. Nobody paid any attention because he was articulate and could smile when he wanted to, and so didn't look like a vicious cultural Marxist. At least with Trump, you can count on him not pulling this sort of crapola.

  50. Obviously the Marco Rubio amnesty bill set the stage for the politics of 2016 (and 2015) more than anything else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @2Mintzin1
    Agree. N.Y. Sen. Schumer really conned him. In a phrase I've heard is in common use by politicians who have dealt with the Senator, Rubio got "Schoomed."
  51. I think [the current year] was the year The Narrative crashed into reality. There was so much narrative collapse, all at once just as liberals were really ramping things up. Also, I think the whole transgender thing embodied how ridiculous the hunt for the next civil rights issue became. Here is a sampling of what I mean:

    1) Ferguson Justice Dept. Report (Dec. 2014)
    2) UVA hoax exposed (Dec. 2014)
    3) Charlie Hebdo (Jan. 2015)
    4) Migrant Crisis (Aug. 2015)
    5) Freddie Gray/ Baltimore Riots (May 2015)
    6) Ahmed the clock boy (Sep. 2015)
    7) Bataclan (Nov. 2015)
    8) Caitlyn Jenner (June 2015)
    9) Black Autumn (Nov. 2015)
    10) San Bernardino (Dec. 2015)

    All of these were in the span of about a year from December 2014 to December 2015 when San Bernardino happened and Trump called for” a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

    I think the muslim ban might have been a big turning point. The MSM went into total panic mode and the “Trump is literally hitler” narrative got cranked up to the max. The funny thing was despite all of this, the muslim ban polled pretty well.

    There were a couple of narratives I remember getting pushed that are pretty much dead now. One was the campus rape narrative. We kept hearing this 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 statistic, and Joe Biden became like the Czar of Campus Rape, even appearing on the Oscars with “survivors” of sexual assault. There were also a lot of campuses that passed “affirmative consent” laws, and a movie called “The Hunting Ground” came out. This was a big deal not so long ago, and it’s pretty much gone now.

    Another narrative collapse was BLM. The protesters got to cherry pick incidents of hate from all over the country, and a large portion of the ones they came up with turned out to be false (e.g. Mike Brown, Trayvon, Freddie Gray, Sandra Bland). I think people also realized that the Ferguson effect is real.

    A third narrative collapse was Islamophobia. Pretty much all of things we were told were evil stereotypes were confirmed by events. Obama refused to say Islamic terrorism, and Hillary Clinton tweeted out after San Bernardino: “Let’s be clear: Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism”.

    In summary, I think [the current year] was when we saw narrative collapse on multiple fronts: race, gender, multicultualism.

    Read More
  52. @Jacobite
    Long term US Treasury bond prices peaked this summer after a 35 year long rise. I expect them to now decline for quite some period of time.

    Good observation. My view is that that’s mostly (so far) a secular cycle. What’s your view?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jacobite
    I think that the deflationary forces we have been experiencing such as manufacturing efficiencies, abundant cheap labor, and a surfeit of fossil fuels are being outmatched by the continuous money printing by the central banks, i.e., money is getting cheaper even faster than widgets.
  53. @Gerard
    The most remarkable aspect of that-and I think a lot of people forget this part-is that the "basket of deplorables" came from an actual speech. A publicly recorded speech to a gay rights gala. It wasn't simply an offhand comment to a wealthy donor which was caught on a hot mic, but which would have confirmed what most people already suspected. The sheer political stupidity of this women-and those surrounding her-is breathtaking. In order to get a picture of how colossal her defeat was, you would have to rerun the Goldwater-LBJ election, only this time Barry kicks Lyndon Johnson's ass.

    I hate to burst your bubble (though I admit I am a chronically gloomy fellow), but this was actually a very close election–we lost the popular vote, for crying out loud. And a lot of the Republican congressmen still like amnesty. Trump has to move on deportation and move fast before he loses steam and the MSM start picking out every single scandal. Reversing DACA’s going to create a lot of sad scenes they will use to their advantage. The most effective thing he can do to change the facts on the ground now as regards demographics would be that, IMHO.

    Remember, if the Dems retake the White House in 2004 they can just open the gates again. And we may be reaching the end of the ‘up’ part of a business cycle, which means Trump would take the fall for the recession. Much like his nemesis Obama, he may have less time than he thinks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Its always doom o' clock for you isn't it?

    You're handwringing about the media that couldn't stop him during the election which is going to when he's President? Hahahsh.

    The popular vote? Yeah California and Chicago. Nothing to be worried about there.
    , @Marat
    The window of opportunity begins closing as soon as the professional sob story spinners get traction. I can see the liberals getting very "bold" about this - more than they ever have about anything in their lives.

    Psychology Today has already started their campaign:

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/what-is-he-thinking/201612/the-decline-empathy-and-the-appeal-right-wing-politics
    , @Jefferson
    "we lost the popular vote, for crying out loud."

    Only because of your shitty state of California.
    , @Captain Tripps

    I hate to burst your bubble (though I admit I am a chronically gloomy fellow), but this was actually a very close election–we lost the popular vote, for crying out loud.
     
    Disagree. Leaving aside any discussion of vote fraud and improper voting (i.e. illegal immigrants casting votes in good faith, which should not be counted, etc.), which occurs more frequently in Democratic politics, Clinton garnered a PLURALITY of votes; she did not win the popular vote. Put another way, Clinton received 48% of the popular vote. Not Clinton received 52% of the popular vote. If you align the candidates with significant vote totals on a "Left/Right" scale, the totals look like:

    "Left"
    Clinton - 48.04%
    Stein - 1.06%
    Sanders - .08%
    La Riva - .05%

    "Right"
    Trump - 45.95%
    Johnson - 3.28%
    McMullin - .53%
    Castle - .15%

    Doing the math, the "right-of-center" candidates polled 49.91%, while the "left-of-center" candidates polled 49.24%. The country moved rightward during this cycle. Also, almost 1% of ballots (1,168,228) were for other candidates not officially recognized on a state ballot.

    Clinton was a poor candidate, any number of ways you want to slice it. And the country is pretty evenly divided politically. The left is not nearly as dominant in the culture as the cultural influence shapers (media, academia) have tried to portray it.
    , @MBlanc46
    We may lose. We may already have lost. But at least we're not going to go down without a fight.
  54. Ronda Rousey went from being undefeated to getting knocked the fuck out 2 fights in a row now.

    Ronda Rousey is officially past her prime now. She should retire and concentrate on Hollywood full time. I am glad she lost her last 2 fights because I read she is a stuck piece of shit in real life.

    Read More
  55. @jjbees
    White despair.

    This is different from the white death- the increasing white death rate is a symptom.

    White despair is looking into the future, and seeing demographic displacement, loss of jobs to foreign countries, decreased quality of infrastructure, decreased overall quality of life, increasing debt, an increase in illegitimacy and decrease in the nuclear family, despite whites having less sex, with a more winner take all sexual and market economy, "press 1 for english, 2 para espanol" and being told that this is the just deserts of white oppression. The thousand cuts of white despair.

    Today I heard someone say that Trump is the Good Will Hunting Candidate:

    Robin Williams: "Me, I voted for Hillary. You?"
    Matt Damon: "I voted for Trump."
    Robin Williams: "Why?"
    Matt Damon: "Because fuck em, that's why."

    “Because fuck em, that’s why.” Sometimes that is a sufficient reason.

    Read More
    • Agree: ATX Hipster
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    "Because fuck em, that’s why.” Sometimes that is a sufficient reason

     

    Wm F Buckley, Jr, called George Wallace "the 'up yours' candidate".
  56. @Glossy
    There is a global populist-nationalist trend, including in countries where immigration isn't an issue. I think Modi is the most nationalist PM India has ever had. Abe seems like the most nationalist Japanese PM since WWII. Erdogan seems like the most populist-nationalist Turkish leader in living memory. Duterte in the Philippines is populism distilled. One way of looking at ISIS is as Sunni Arab nationalism. Religion is often tribalism by proxy, and Sunni Arabs are an ethnic group. The Koran is their flag, symbol, calling card and ancient tradition.

    Where did the nationalist trend come from? Could be the Internet. Could be something else.

    It seems that the world tires of most lefty delusions after a few decades. Look at what eventually happened to Communism and Freudianism. Maybe this is happening to anti-nationalism aka universalism now. At first these ideas seem fresh and exciting, then they start seeming stale. Youth is always looking for something to rebel against.

    Or it could be something else that I'm not seeing.

    I’ve seen a few people wonder at the lack of South Asian participation in the ISIS craze, at South Asian Muslims’ reluctance to blow themselves up in Europe, etc. There are 200 million Muslims in Indonesia, and I haven’t seen any stories of them becoming more radical.

    Well, for Indonesians and Pakistanis Islam is foreign, and the global trend, the spirit of the times is ethno-nationalist, not theocratic. It just so happens that for Sunni Arabs sharia and the Khalifate are their thing, something that they can be proud of in the typical ethnic way and something that fits their personalities well because it was developed by their ancestors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
    Muslims in south of Thailand and in the Philippines are pretty ISIS-like - five or ten years back beheaded Thai schoolgirls were being found, there was lots of trouble in (Mindanao?) and Indonesians did the Bali bombings, but it all seems to have gone rather quiet, at least as far as Western media's concerned.

    Whether that's due to the Thai/Indonesian/Filipino authorities doing things to stop them or whether they're just less ISIS-y these days, I know not. The media only seems to cover a few places and issues at a time (compare Syria vs Yemen), so we don't have much information.

    , @Bill Jones
    "Well, for Indonesians and Pakistanis Islam is foreign,"

    Really? you do realise that Pakistan was carved out of India specifically to created a Muslim land?

    As the Wiki piece says

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan

    "Pakistan is unique among Muslim countries as it is the only country to have been created in the name of Islam"

    It's the equivalent of saying

    "Judaism is foreign to Israel".

    , @Frau Katze
    I'm not that familiar with Indonesia but Pakistan has huge problems with Islamic extremists (including the Taliban).

    The armed forces of Pakistan have got into a number of fights with them. In no case was there a decisive victory.

    (It could be partly down to extremist sympathizers in the armed forces).

    Pakistan is not a peaceful place. Shiites are assassinated or have their mosques blown up (they're heretics). Christians are also targeted (People of the Book? Maybe in theory only).

    Hindus & Sikhs get their land and temples seized (presumably to encourage them to move to India. It's working).

    Ahmadiyya (a splinter group who have renounced violent jihad) , same deal: they're heretics.
  57. trends?

    gop 2010 House, 2014 Senate, 2016 President, Senate, House. Also state gov’t gop control

    Read More
  58. The political rot goes back to April, 1980, when the “Mariel Boat Lift,” from Castro’s Cuba, started. It ended in October of that year. Ronald Reagan beat President Carter by 10% in November, 1980. Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton lost re-election when he decided to house and imprison the “Marielitos” in his state as a political favor to Carter.

    A senile President Reagan signed an immigration Amnesty bill into law in 1986. President George HW Bush signed various immigration bills into law during 1990 and 1991, increasing “legal” immigration by 40%.

    In January, 2015 House Speaker John Boehner and his GOP caucus funded Obama’s 2014 unconstitutional executive amnesty, which granted residency visas to more than 5 million illegal aliens. Republicans had campaigned on the promise to defund any executive Obama Amnesty order of 2014. Only about 50 GOP House members revolted but that was enough to force Boehner to resign in September, 2015.

    The Republican party was now dead. Donald John Trump saw a golden opportunity to breathe life into a political corpse. Republicans and Democrats alike laughed when he announced his candidacy in June, 2015 (“Mexico is not sending its best!”). By September, 2015 he had displaced Jeb Bush as leader in the presidential GOP polls. Jeb continued to say that Trump would never win the nomination, would never be president.

    6 delegates and 125 million dollars later, Jeb dropped out.

    During the period of September 5, 2016 thru September 11, 2016, known as “The Seven Days of Jack Ass, Donkey Hell,” Hillary Clinton suffered a series of coughing fits and Parkinson’s seizures on the campaign trail and called White Trump voters “deplorable.”

    Not to coin a phrase, the rest is history! Here’s hoping that 2017 fulfills the miraculous promise of 2016.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "The Republican party was now dead. Donald John Trump saw a golden opportunity to breathe life into a political corpse."

    No, the GOP is alive and kicking, as evident by millions of whites voting for their candidates in local, state, and national elections.

    Trump won because his words resonated with the working class. He made HUGE promises to them. Now, considering his cabinet is full of business elites, will he make good? Remember, those same voters who put Trump into the White House voted for Obama...twice.

    The only revolution was that a historically bad candidate (Hillary) took for granted her base and she paid the price for her foolishness by losing to a non-politician who has his own set of monumental character flaws.
    , @IA

    Hillary Clinton suffered a series of coughing fits and Parkinson’s seizures on the campaign trail and called White Trump voters “deplorable.”
     
    Visual input is hardwired directly to the brain bypassing reason. Age of Reason types never figure this out. Reason tries to suppress visual, aural, i.e., sensations to no avail. Ideologues nevet learn.
  59. @Steve Sailer
    But can the resurgent nationalists avoid getting in wars with other resurgent nationalists?

    Nationalists are a problem when they are expansionist, aggressive and interested in national aggrandisement. They are not much of a problem when their motives are defensive or, at least, limited and cautious. Thus, for example, Bismarck had limited aims and a cautious outlook: he was careful not to spark general war in Europe. On the other hand, Kaiser Bill and Adolf Hitler were the other sort.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    So how many irredentist flash spots are there?

    If you go back to what British statesmen like the Chamberlain brothers were worried about in, say, 1937-38 it was a debate over whether Hitler really wanted continental-scale conquest (Austen's worry) or merely semi-symbolic irredentist rectification of borders, such as the Sudetenland and Danzig (Neville's less alarming view).

    Stalin ended probably permanently German irredentist possibilities in 1945 by massive ethnic cleansing of Germans from Eastern Europe.

    From the perspective of 2016, mass conquest sounds pretty economically futile. But stoking nationalist passions over semi-symbolic irredentist projects (the West Bank, Crimea, islets in the South China Sea, etc.) sounds like it could be a winning domestic political strategy. On the other hand, it could go to far and lead to a massive shooting war.

    For example, the Sandinista president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, has pursued a national hobby of suing Nicaragua's neighbors in the World Court over disputed boundaries (and then abiding by their decisions). It's a pretty clever way to show voters whose side you are on without getting into a war, but it hasn't really spread.

    Right now, European nationalist parties have a common foe in the EU. So they are quite chummy.

    But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?

  60. “can you think of any way to find quantitative or qualitative data supporting your insights?”

    This from earlier this year has some decent data:
    Ron Inglehart and Pippa Norris, Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash

    https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2818659

    Read More
  61. I invite you, Mr Sailer, to include some sort of explanation of why the US spends fortunes on purchasing fighter planes that cannot fight, and naval vessels that are scarcely fit to put to sea. These must surely be symptoms of something chronically wrong with the federal government AND the electorate. Why don’t the people object?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Russtovich
    I think that the US electorate complains just as much as the British electorate does about Royal Navy ships that can't operate in warm water or Royal Navy aircraft carriers that don't have any aircraft.
    , @Ivy
    Many of us object and contact our Senators and Reps. We get lip service and they continue to rake in their contributions.
  62. The effects of political correctness were like looking through a kaleidoscope. Different Trump voters saw different things. Few, if any, saw everything, but no matter who looked none of them saw anything that made any sense. All you have to know if you’re a white voter is that it’s nothing that you should want to vote for.

    Read More
  63. @Steve Sailer
    Football?

    U. of Missouri in 2015 and Colin Kaepernick in 2016?

    I think a lot of people just want football to be free of racial hectoring and don't think that's too much to ask.

    People disillusioned with politics will often transfer those feelings/interest to sports/games.

    The SJW incursion into sports pushed some disaffected conservatives into voting R. Gamergate pushed some disaffected libs away from voting D/believing the Corporate Media.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "People disillusioned with politics will often transfer those feelings/interest to sports/games.

    The SJW incursion into sports pushed some disaffected conservatives into voting R. Gamergate pushed some disaffected libs away from voting D/believing the Corporate Media."

    The only sports I watch on a regular basis is UFC, WWE, boxing, and The World Cup for patriotic purposes.

    Every other sports I mostly just read the results off the internet, though I did watch The Cleveland Cavaliers defeat The Golden State Warriors last year in Game 7 to win the NBA championship.
  64. Seeing the DNC bring Michael Brown’s mother on stage and portrayed as some sort of heroine at their nominating convention should’ve be a real eye opener to a lot of people, but even the majority of staunch conservatives didn’t seem to notice or care.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Seeing the DNC bring Michael Brown’s mother on stage and portrayed as some sort of heroine at their nominating convention should’ve be a real eye opener to a lot of people, but even the majority of staunch conservatives didn’t seem to notice or care."

    If the majority of staunch Conservatives didn't seem to notice or care, why did 90 percent of them vote for Donald J. Trump on November 8 against Crooked Cankles.

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/demographics-arent-destiny-and-four-other-things-this-election-taught-me/
  65. An obvious and long term trend, but:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_pioneers

    Please don’t overweight the Rolling Stone hoax. Writers, media types and political junkies cared about it far more than the average voter.

    It’s the banner for the Big Media Hate/Hoax Machine’s Operation Barbarossa. Sort of like the peak of the mountain.

    Read More
  66. @Dan Hayes
    The Les Miserables image and music had all the fingerprints (and hoop prints) of Steve Bannon!

    There are a lot of UMC professional types who of course could never be conservatives/Republicans because everyone knows what uncouth, uncultured Neanderthals they are, but who are mightily annoyed with the usual laundry list from the SJWs/Ds. Les Mis is huge with that crowd.

    “Getting” Les Mis like that was a substantial blow against UMC bigotry.

    Likewise Pence at Hamilton. The Arts are prog territory, but there are substantial holes in their line.

    Read More
  67. Scott Alexander’s blogpost from 2.5 years ago is pretty good: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/04/22/right-is-the-new-left/

    Capsule summary: It’s easy to be a leftist these days; anyone can do it. Mass media and zero-interest college loans for everyone have made it so that even your below-average 90 IQ prole can spout a reasonable facsimile of leftist nonsense. Therefore all the smart people are moving to the right, because they don’t want to be associated with stupidity.

    Read More
  68. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    trends leading up to the famously unexpected political reversals of fortune in 2016.

    Dear Mr. Sailer:

    Your achievements are widely noted. You are “Internet-famous.”

    Your exact genetic composition has been a matter for speculation. Some believe that you are one-quarter Jew, but no one (to my knowledge) has published physical proof that your genes are one-quarter Jewish.

    Let me be plain, Mr. Sailer.

    The Jews are the cause of our misfortunes.

    We are not allowed to say it.

    That merely reinforces our awareness of it.

    If you seek the trends, Mr. Sailer, seek the ways in which the Jews have immiserated the population.

    White people are stupid enough to be immiserated for a long, long time.

    But even white people eventually wake up and say: “Who caused this misfortune?”

    Likewise, white people eventually say: “Is it good for the whites?”

    Read More
  69. @dearieme
    Nationalists are a problem when they are expansionist, aggressive and interested in national aggrandisement. They are not much of a problem when their motives are defensive or, at least, limited and cautious. Thus, for example, Bismarck had limited aims and a cautious outlook: he was careful not to spark general war in Europe. On the other hand, Kaiser Bill and Adolf Hitler were the other sort.

    So how many irredentist flash spots are there?

    If you go back to what British statesmen like the Chamberlain brothers were worried about in, say, 1937-38 it was a debate over whether Hitler really wanted continental-scale conquest (Austen’s worry) or merely semi-symbolic irredentist rectification of borders, such as the Sudetenland and Danzig (Neville’s less alarming view).

    Stalin ended probably permanently German irredentist possibilities in 1945 by massive ethnic cleansing of Germans from Eastern Europe.

    From the perspective of 2016, mass conquest sounds pretty economically futile. But stoking nationalist passions over semi-symbolic irredentist projects (the West Bank, Crimea, islets in the South China Sea, etc.) sounds like it could be a winning domestic political strategy. On the other hand, it could go to far and lead to a massive shooting war.

    For example, the Sandinista president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, has pursued a national hobby of suing Nicaragua’s neighbors in the World Court over disputed boundaries (and then abiding by their decisions). It’s a pretty clever way to show voters whose side you are on without getting into a war, but it hasn’t really spread.

    Right now, European nationalist parties have a common foe in the EU. So they are quite chummy.

    But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?

    Read More
    • Replies: @newrouter
    "But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?"

    Too busy with population transfers back to the undeveloped world for a while to worry about that.
    , @Desiderius
    That's the #2 reason we have as much globalization as we have. #1 is how lucrative it is to the oligarchs. Those who would otherwise be keeping the oligarchs in line are still too preoccupied with the nationalists as an allergic reaction to the horrors of the 20th Century.
    , @Sean
    Winning and destroying the EC will lead to them tearing each other to pieces, and the pendulum will swing back in the long run (around the year 2096).

    The entities key to 2016 were nation states (holding the loyalty of the mass of ethnic majority) but according to elite technical expertise: obsolete. The population bestirred themselves to defend their nation against economists, climate change researchers and international organisations. Not forgetting coddled elites.

    The commonest criticism in the West was to say a view is held as a religious one; liberal- scientific meliorism was received wisdom . The decisions to Brexit and elect Trump show that optimistic liberal faith in expertise is well on the way to being relegated to the same status as claims for absolute religious truth.

    What have we learned? Nothing at all; these things go in cycles. A generation or so hence it will be time for another 2016, maybe against the nation state

    , @Almost Missouri

    "European nationalist parties have a common foe in the EU. So they are quite chummy. But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?"
     
    That assumes that the EU is what is currently keeping any given pair of European opponents from fighting over ancient territorial disputes. But is that in fact the case? Does the EU have an army in Brussels to deploy to Alsace-Lorraine if the Germans get irredentist? No. What is keeping old European rivalries from going kinetic is American hegemony, or in other words, the armed nationalism of an even bigger nation. Militarily, the EU is just window dressing.

    There has been no intra-NATO warfare. Why? Because the US said there wouldn't be, that's why, and that's all you need to know if you're European. In fact there's barely been any extra-NATO warfare by NATO countries without US permission since 1956 when Eisenhower deployed the Sixth Fleet against Britain, France and Israel(!) to end the Suez Crisis. Since then, no NATO military dares lift a finger without US permission.

    This condition cannot last forever. Indeed, it is arguably this unhealthy passivity and the thrall of perpetual immaturity in which US hegemony keeps Europe that has made Europe so vulnerable to the obviously stupid migrant crisis recently. A little inter-European jousting might have served as a healthy inoculant against this ridiculous and easily preventable infection. Countries that have recently jousted with the Soviet empire (the Visegrad group) are proving the most resistant to the migrant stupidity.
    , @dearieme
    In Western Europe there may be more risk of secession (Catalonia, Scotland, Flanders) than aggression towards neighbours (Republic of Ireland coveting Northern Ireland, Spain coveting Gibraltar).

    Some problems have probably solved themselves by the passage of time: it seems that everyone in Alsace and Lorraine considers themselves French .... except .....

    Except what will Germany do about its million invaders, there at the invitation of Mad Merkel? And Sweden, and France, and Britain, etc.

    As for the rest: the Balkans aren't worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier.
    , @Anonymous
    A misconception.

    I very very doubt that it is the EU which has 'stopped' the European nations from ripping out chunks of each other in the 'old fashioned' way.
    After all, political union in the south Slav nations never stopped the Yugoslav wars of the early 90s. Neither has the EU stopped Basque separatism, for example.
    Either all the big, significant land claims are in abeyance or Europeans have gotten tired of border wars. Either way, supranational government always proves quite useless when big claims and high passions are involved.
    On the contrary, my feeling is that the EU promotion of massive third world immigration has the very real possibility of invoking these high passions.
    , @Bill Jones
    "Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?"

    I think we end up with a Stalin-like Nationalism within one country, rather than the Neocon Trotsky version.

    Invade the world, invite the world is long past its sell-by date.
    , @Charles Pewitt
    Frauke Petry speaks English in a most lovely manner. After Merkel is chased onto the grounds of Ramstein Air Base, Petry will do just fine as the German leader. Petry has a beautiful pixie charm and a patriotic love of country that will inspire German men to fight for her.

    Marine Le Pen refuses to speak English from what I can tell. Le Pen's reflexive anti-American outlook should be disregarded as a particularly delightful French personality quirk. Marine Le Pen looks to be a beautiful Norman lady who will eviscerate that Fillon fop in the present campaign. Marine Le Pen will be the next leader of the French government.

    Trump will work splendidly with both Frauke Petry and Marine Le Pen.
  70. The maturity, wide availability–some via Obama phones–and mastery of social media, and impending death of old media as a player in forming the narrative.

    Read More
  71. 2016 was a very bad year for political donors. El !Jeb! and little Marco had millions of dollars in PAC’s, but they still got Trumped. Also Hillary, who had all the corporate and Wall Street donors, lost to a guy without any political experience.

    Read More
  72. @Anonymous
    The Republican leadership doing everything they could to ignore the message behind Dave Brat's win looks huge in retrospect.

    A good point. The voters in Dave Brat’s district sent an unmistakable early message; a virtual political earthquake. But the Republican Establishment continued as though nothing at all had happened.

    Read More
  73. And then there is the rise of the Asian female math graduates who are upending a multi-billion dollar industry:

    http://article.everquote.com/?id=894&subid=60199&creativeid=32582623151&s1=0&s2=23456&h1=startup&dt=dup&auuid=mt183571wr6hdsj5e

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    One of the Asian female math grads with the smart-in-1998 idea of making an internet price bot is kinda cute. So, there's that.
  74. @Camlost
    Seeing the DNC bring Michael Brown's mother on stage and portrayed as some sort of heroine at their nominating convention should've be a real eye opener to a lot of people, but even the majority of staunch conservatives didn't seem to notice or care.

    “Seeing the DNC bring Michael Brown’s mother on stage and portrayed as some sort of heroine at their nominating convention should’ve be a real eye opener to a lot of people, but even the majority of staunch conservatives didn’t seem to notice or care.”

    If the majority of staunch Conservatives didn’t seem to notice or care, why did 90 percent of them vote for Donald J. Trump on November 8 against Crooked Cankles.

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/demographics-arent-destiny-and-four-other-things-this-election-taught-me/

    Read More
  75. The leftist media has spent the last 30+ years telling conservatives there were things “good people” weren’t supposed to say. A lot of the public didn’t believe them but a growing number of Republican politicians did. So Republican politicians didnt say those things – things like “it’s acceptable to want to control or borders, and you don’t have to make any excuses for it.”

    Along comes Donald Trump, who either didnt know or didn’t care that you weren’t supposed to say those things. So he said them. It inspired a lot of white voters who have been ignored or spat upon for a very long time. Then he won.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JohnnyD
    @Wikey,
    You're absolutely right. Before Trump, conservative writers and politicians were constantly being purged and "thrown off the conservative bus" to appease the left and neoconservatives. Trump was smart enough to realize that people were tired of being bullied and silenced by the PC enforcers.
  76. I would argue another critical element has been America’s rapid “Europeanization” in the past decade.

    A reminder that the past decade has seen:

    (1) The complete victory of the Left in the culture war.

    (2) Its ascension to ideological dominance, making into an elite religion catering to that same elite’s priorities. These priorities have been getting further and further divorced from the interests of the White working class since at least the 1980s.

    (3) The related bleeding out of both religious conservatism (demographics) and of moderate/oligarchic conservatism (conservatives realizing the Bush/Romney/Rubio/McCain cake is a lie, spurred in part by National Review conservatism becoming a joke. Hey, if we can’t have the Bible, at least give us good old American bucks and Buicks!).

    (4) Nationalism filling the void, and growing in strength due to disillusioned conservatives and even some Bernout/”Alt Left” defectors.

    (5) Due to the peculiarly binary nature of the American political system, as soon as nationalism became not even the majority but the plurality ideology of the GOP base, it flipped in their direction within a single year.

    Read More
  77. @jjbees
    White despair.

    This is different from the white death- the increasing white death rate is a symptom.

    White despair is looking into the future, and seeing demographic displacement, loss of jobs to foreign countries, decreased quality of infrastructure, decreased overall quality of life, increasing debt, an increase in illegitimacy and decrease in the nuclear family, despite whites having less sex, with a more winner take all sexual and market economy, "press 1 for english, 2 para espanol" and being told that this is the just deserts of white oppression. The thousand cuts of white despair.

    Today I heard someone say that Trump is the Good Will Hunting Candidate:

    Robin Williams: "Me, I voted for Hillary. You?"
    Matt Damon: "I voted for Trump."
    Robin Williams: "Why?"
    Matt Damon: "Because fuck em, that's why."

    The trend of the year are useless memes by the Coalition of the Right and Coalition of the Left.

    From Fake News Stories to Basket of Deplorables to Black Lives Matters to You Didn’t Built That, the radical right and left had a field day in the mainstream and alternative media by ramping up the rhetoric, with their respective acolytes greedily lapping it up.

    “White despair” lacks the cache of the above phrases, but it does fit into the Fake News Stories meme. Undoubtedly, SOME white people are despondent about demographic displacement. But this phenomenon is inevitable, as human history thoroughly demonstrates.

    When it comes to outsourcing, our nation’s crumbling roads and bridges, high divorce rates, and rising debt, those are the problems of whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans, NOT exclusively Anglos. In other words, the citizens of the United States are despondent over these issues.

    But, as a “bad white” who dares to criticize “good whites”, I suppose I will get what is coming to me in 2017, right?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    But, as a “bad white” who dares to criticize “good whites”, I suppose I will get what is coming to me in 2017, right?
     
    Who knows? What I do know is you are out to lunch and usually blocked by me. I suppose you voted for Hillary.
    , @Jefferson
    "But, as a “bad white” who dares to criticize “good whites”, I suppose I will get what is coming to me in 2017, right?"

    You are a bad White? You said you were Black in the past.
    , @ATX Hipster
    You're getting "badwhite" and "goodwhite" mixed up.

    This Derbyshire article has good examples: http://www.vdare.com/articles/john-derbyshire-cecil-the-lion-and-the-goodwhite-badwhite-cold-civil-war

    , @slumber_j
    Among the many problems with what you wrote, the word you're looking for is "cachet." For you, that's probably the easiest one to avoid in the future anyway.
  78. @Steve Sailer
    Football?

    U. of Missouri in 2015 and Colin Kaepernick in 2016?

    I think a lot of people just want football to be free of racial hectoring and don't think that's too much to ask.

    Whites can’t even play quarterback at the top college level any more, it seems from my TV today. Sad.

    Read More
  79. @Steve Sailer
    So how many irredentist flash spots are there?

    If you go back to what British statesmen like the Chamberlain brothers were worried about in, say, 1937-38 it was a debate over whether Hitler really wanted continental-scale conquest (Austen's worry) or merely semi-symbolic irredentist rectification of borders, such as the Sudetenland and Danzig (Neville's less alarming view).

    Stalin ended probably permanently German irredentist possibilities in 1945 by massive ethnic cleansing of Germans from Eastern Europe.

    From the perspective of 2016, mass conquest sounds pretty economically futile. But stoking nationalist passions over semi-symbolic irredentist projects (the West Bank, Crimea, islets in the South China Sea, etc.) sounds like it could be a winning domestic political strategy. On the other hand, it could go to far and lead to a massive shooting war.

    For example, the Sandinista president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, has pursued a national hobby of suing Nicaragua's neighbors in the World Court over disputed boundaries (and then abiding by their decisions). It's a pretty clever way to show voters whose side you are on without getting into a war, but it hasn't really spread.

    Right now, European nationalist parties have a common foe in the EU. So they are quite chummy.

    But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?

    “But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?”

    Too busy with population transfers back to the undeveloped world for a while to worry about that.

    Read More
  80. Donald Trump flying around relentlessly from one well attended rally to another, was the new trend of the year. Towards the end he was hitting four-five rallies per day and mostly in the battleground states. This was the DJT version of retail politicking and won the election for him. Hillary was static while The Donald was kinetic.
    Can’t blame Hill too much, due to her ill health she was unable to campaign half as vigorously as The Donald. The Dems bet on the horse headed to the glue factory. The Donald is the strong horse and reluctant Republicans will join forces with him in 2017 and beyond. Why? Because everybody loves a winner.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Can’t blame Hill too much, due to her ill health she was unable to campaign half as vigorously as The Donald."

    There is a strong push from Democratic Party donors like the Walton family and George Soros to have Crooked Cankles run for POTUS again in 2020. When even at 69 she has poor health, what makes them think Crooked Cankles health is going to get any better when she is 73 years old in 2020. So 2020 is going to be Weekend At Bernie's 2.
    https://youtu.be/Tam3WWL8aVU
    , @Anon87
    I think you explained it all. Americans love a winner. There are lots of inside baseball topics you could list, but your average Trump voter may have never heard of them before, bot being political junkies on the internet for hours every day. But Trump seemed like the guy who they felt represents them best (true or not), and he was on the offensive until the end. Hillary went prevent defense, and everyone hates the prevent!
  81. @Detective Club
    The political rot goes back to April, 1980, when the "Mariel Boat Lift," from Castro's Cuba, started. It ended in October of that year. Ronald Reagan beat President Carter by 10% in November, 1980. Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton lost re-election when he decided to house and imprison the "Marielitos" in his state as a political favor to Carter.

    A senile President Reagan signed an immigration Amnesty bill into law in 1986. President George HW Bush signed various immigration bills into law during 1990 and 1991, increasing "legal" immigration by 40%.

    In January, 2015 House Speaker John Boehner and his GOP caucus funded Obama's 2014 unconstitutional executive amnesty, which granted residency visas to more than 5 million illegal aliens. Republicans had campaigned on the promise to defund any executive Obama Amnesty order of 2014. Only about 50 GOP House members revolted but that was enough to force Boehner to resign in September, 2015.

    The Republican party was now dead. Donald John Trump saw a golden opportunity to breathe life into a political corpse. Republicans and Democrats alike laughed when he announced his candidacy in June, 2015 ("Mexico is not sending its best!"). By September, 2015 he had displaced Jeb Bush as leader in the presidential GOP polls. Jeb continued to say that Trump would never win the nomination, would never be president.

    6 delegates and 125 million dollars later, Jeb dropped out.

    During the period of September 5, 2016 thru September 11, 2016, known as "The Seven Days of Jack Ass, Donkey Hell," Hillary Clinton suffered a series of coughing fits and Parkinson's seizures on the campaign trail and called White Trump voters "deplorable."

    Not to coin a phrase, the rest is history! Here's hoping that 2017 fulfills the miraculous promise of 2016.

    “The Republican party was now dead. Donald John Trump saw a golden opportunity to breathe life into a political corpse.”

    No, the GOP is alive and kicking, as evident by millions of whites voting for their candidates in local, state, and national elections.

    Trump won because his words resonated with the working class. He made HUGE promises to them. Now, considering his cabinet is full of business elites, will he make good? Remember, those same voters who put Trump into the White House voted for Obama…twice.

    The only revolution was that a historically bad candidate (Hillary) took for granted her base and she paid the price for her foolishness by losing to a non-politician who has his own set of monumental character flaws.

    Read More
  82. @Steve Sailer
    So how many irredentist flash spots are there?

    If you go back to what British statesmen like the Chamberlain brothers were worried about in, say, 1937-38 it was a debate over whether Hitler really wanted continental-scale conquest (Austen's worry) or merely semi-symbolic irredentist rectification of borders, such as the Sudetenland and Danzig (Neville's less alarming view).

    Stalin ended probably permanently German irredentist possibilities in 1945 by massive ethnic cleansing of Germans from Eastern Europe.

    From the perspective of 2016, mass conquest sounds pretty economically futile. But stoking nationalist passions over semi-symbolic irredentist projects (the West Bank, Crimea, islets in the South China Sea, etc.) sounds like it could be a winning domestic political strategy. On the other hand, it could go to far and lead to a massive shooting war.

    For example, the Sandinista president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, has pursued a national hobby of suing Nicaragua's neighbors in the World Court over disputed boundaries (and then abiding by their decisions). It's a pretty clever way to show voters whose side you are on without getting into a war, but it hasn't really spread.

    Right now, European nationalist parties have a common foe in the EU. So they are quite chummy.

    But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?

    That’s the #2 reason we have as much globalization as we have. #1 is how lucrative it is to the oligarchs. Those who would otherwise be keeping the oligarchs in line are still too preoccupied with the nationalists as an allergic reaction to the horrors of the 20th Century.

    Read More
  83. @Corvinus
    The trend of the year are useless memes by the Coalition of the Right and Coalition of the Left.

    From Fake News Stories to Basket of Deplorables to Black Lives Matters to You Didn't Built That, the radical right and left had a field day in the mainstream and alternative media by ramping up the rhetoric, with their respective acolytes greedily lapping it up.

    "White despair" lacks the cache of the above phrases, but it does fit into the Fake News Stories meme. Undoubtedly, SOME white people are despondent about demographic displacement. But this phenomenon is inevitable, as human history thoroughly demonstrates.

    When it comes to outsourcing, our nation's crumbling roads and bridges, high divorce rates, and rising debt, those are the problems of whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans, NOT exclusively Anglos. In other words, the citizens of the United States are despondent over these issues.

    But, as a "bad white" who dares to criticize "good whites", I suppose I will get what is coming to me in 2017, right?

    But, as a “bad white” who dares to criticize “good whites”, I suppose I will get what is coming to me in 2017, right?

    Who knows? What I do know is you are out to lunch and usually blocked by me. I suppose you voted for Hillary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    I do hope he gets what's coming to him. And hard.
    , @Corvinus
    "Who knows? What I do know is you are out to lunch and usually blocked by me. I suppose you voted for Hillary."

    [Laughs] No, I didn't vote for that degenerate, nor Trump. Both didn't earn my vote.
  84. A significant number of Jews (especially Israeli Jews) thinking that philosemitic civic nationalism might actually be preferable to the unlimited Merkel-style third-world invasion, especially when the invasion leads to tens of thousands of Germans marching through the streets in protest.

    Read More
  85. @Wilkey
    The leftist media has spent the last 30+ years telling conservatives there were things "good people" weren't supposed to say. A lot of the public didn't believe them but a growing number of Republican politicians did. So Republican politicians didnt say those things - things like "it's acceptable to want to control or borders, and you don't have to make any excuses for it."

    Along comes Donald Trump, who either didnt know or didn't care that you weren't supposed to say those things. So he said them. It inspired a lot of white voters who have been ignored or spat upon for a very long time. Then he won.

    @Wikey,
    You’re absolutely right. Before Trump, conservative writers and politicians were constantly being purged and “thrown off the conservative bus” to appease the left and neoconservatives. Trump was smart enough to realize that people were tired of being bullied and silenced by the PC enforcers.

    Read More
  86. @Corvinus
    The trend of the year are useless memes by the Coalition of the Right and Coalition of the Left.

    From Fake News Stories to Basket of Deplorables to Black Lives Matters to You Didn't Built That, the radical right and left had a field day in the mainstream and alternative media by ramping up the rhetoric, with their respective acolytes greedily lapping it up.

    "White despair" lacks the cache of the above phrases, but it does fit into the Fake News Stories meme. Undoubtedly, SOME white people are despondent about demographic displacement. But this phenomenon is inevitable, as human history thoroughly demonstrates.

    When it comes to outsourcing, our nation's crumbling roads and bridges, high divorce rates, and rising debt, those are the problems of whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans, NOT exclusively Anglos. In other words, the citizens of the United States are despondent over these issues.

    But, as a "bad white" who dares to criticize "good whites", I suppose I will get what is coming to me in 2017, right?

    “But, as a “bad white” who dares to criticize “good whites”, I suppose I will get what is coming to me in 2017, right?”

    You are a bad White? You said you were Black in the past.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "You are a bad White? You said you were Black in the past."

    No, I have repeatedly stated I'm a white male. Praytell, what makes me a "bad white" from your perspective?
  87. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Non-college graduate non-Hispanic whites are sensing a point of inflection – that their lives will asymptotically merge with those of similarly situated NAMs. The near vertical rise of opioid/heroin/meth/alcohol abuse/deaths shows they are losing hope/purpose/meaning in life.

    Read More
  88. @Desiderius
    People disillusioned with politics will often transfer those feelings/interest to sports/games.

    The SJW incursion into sports pushed some disaffected conservatives into voting R. Gamergate pushed some disaffected libs away from voting D/believing the Corporate Media.

    “People disillusioned with politics will often transfer those feelings/interest to sports/games.

    The SJW incursion into sports pushed some disaffected conservatives into voting R. Gamergate pushed some disaffected libs away from voting D/believing the Corporate Media.”

    The only sports I watch on a regular basis is UFC, WWE, boxing, and The World Cup for patriotic purposes.

    Every other sports I mostly just read the results off the internet, though I did watch The Cleveland Cavaliers defeat The Golden State Warriors last year in Game 7 to win the NBA championship.

    Read More
  89. @SFG
    I hate to burst your bubble (though I admit I am a chronically gloomy fellow), but this was actually a very close election--we lost the popular vote, for crying out loud. And a lot of the Republican congressmen still like amnesty. Trump has to move on deportation and move fast before he loses steam and the MSM start picking out every single scandal. Reversing DACA's going to create a lot of sad scenes they will use to their advantage. The most effective thing he can do to change the facts on the ground now as regards demographics would be that, IMHO.

    Remember, if the Dems retake the White House in 2004 they can just open the gates again. And we may be reaching the end of the 'up' part of a business cycle, which means Trump would take the fall for the recession. Much like his nemesis Obama, he may have less time than he thinks.

    Its always doom o’ clock for you isn’t it?

    You’re handwringing about the media that couldn’t stop him during the election which is going to when he’s President? Hahahsh.

    The popular vote? Yeah California and Chicago. Nothing to be worried about there.

    Read More
  90. I thought this commentator was pretty close to the mark: https://thefifthwave.wordpress.com

    Personally, I got tired of being told to eat the applesauce, “cause it’s good for you, that’s why.” And being told that my old white opinion didn’t matter anymore, even though I paid more in taxes than 99% of Americans. And being told that paying attention was the same thing as being racist.

    So I kept my mouth shut, and waited, and waited. Until I got to take the sole political act allotted to me. Despite all the pearl clutching, and moralizing, and bloviating, I cast a single vote.

    I think there were, marginally speaking, a lot of people tired of being force fed applesauce.

    Read More
  91. @Almost Missouri
    The obvious long term trend is the internet and sites like Unz. Fifteen years ago, the Megaphone Holders still pretty much had a lock on public discourse. The internet existed, of course, but the credible outlets were still mostly controlled by the same people as in the offline world: the Megaphone Holders. Gradually over the last decade, the dissenters from the enforced Narrative grew to knew they weren't alone and indeed, there might be many out there. The online discussion here and even in mainstream comments sections (before they were banned) sharpened and elaborated the dissenters' awareness and allowed them to break the Sapir-Whorf box and state their dissent in ways that didn't sound automatically wrong. By 2016, the Narrative was looking pretty threadbare.

    Trump deserves some personal credit. A breakthrough moment was when Macy's threatened to boycott him over his immigration statements, and he didn't cave! That had never happened before at that level. He was economically vulnerable and paid some financial price for sticking to his guns, but he did it, and that shattered a glass ceiling that had previously constrained discussion.

    Finally, there was a significant element of what for lack of a better word we call "luck" or "fate" or the "Hand of God". When the Megaphone disputed that immigration was a problem, there were high profile nativ-o-cides by immigrants. When the Megaphone disputed that Muslims were a problem, Muslims got all Sudden Jihad Syndrome across former Christendom. When the Megaphone disputed that law and order could be an issue, BLM rioters and terrorists went on murder sprees. When Hillary insisted her health was great, she was wracked by coughing fits. Of course, the Megaphone Holders have been lying for a long time, but this year Hubris met Nemesis in particularly rapid and poignant ways.

    Of course, it also doesn't hurt that the pillars of the Megaphone establishment--Hillary, Merkel, von Juncker--are all superannuated plonkers.

    Measuring the long term trend might be possible with a list of Narrative-friendly outlets/publications versus a list of Narrative-independent outlets/publications, then compare circulation/pageview numbers over time. Maybe there is some critical mass that the non-Narrative needed.

    The polls have been so unreliable this year, I don’t see that they’d be much use in identifying actual turning points.

    And luck, who can measure that?

    Read More
  92. @SFG
    I hate to burst your bubble (though I admit I am a chronically gloomy fellow), but this was actually a very close election--we lost the popular vote, for crying out loud. And a lot of the Republican congressmen still like amnesty. Trump has to move on deportation and move fast before he loses steam and the MSM start picking out every single scandal. Reversing DACA's going to create a lot of sad scenes they will use to their advantage. The most effective thing he can do to change the facts on the ground now as regards demographics would be that, IMHO.

    Remember, if the Dems retake the White House in 2004 they can just open the gates again. And we may be reaching the end of the 'up' part of a business cycle, which means Trump would take the fall for the recession. Much like his nemesis Obama, he may have less time than he thinks.

    The window of opportunity begins closing as soon as the professional sob story spinners get traction. I can see the liberals getting very “bold” about this – more than they ever have about anything in their lives.

    Psychology Today has already started their campaign:

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/what-is-he-thinking/201612/the-decline-empathy-and-the-appeal-right-wing-politics

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    You think Bannon isn't ready for that with Kate Steinle style agitprop and story after story of raped children by multiple deportees? Rhetoric cuts both ways.

    You guys are sweating Bingo strategies for your checkers game when we've already started the chess match ffs.

    , @Frau Katze
    The "newspaper of record" (NYT) has been on this topic even before the election. Over and over. It didn't work.

    Their response: double down.

    One theme I've noticed in many comments is how the rise of the Internet and alternative sites had made a big difference.

    Not that the battle is over by any means! The left has huge resources to fight back.
  93. @Almost Missouri
    The obvious long term trend is the internet and sites like Unz. Fifteen years ago, the Megaphone Holders still pretty much had a lock on public discourse. The internet existed, of course, but the credible outlets were still mostly controlled by the same people as in the offline world: the Megaphone Holders. Gradually over the last decade, the dissenters from the enforced Narrative grew to knew they weren't alone and indeed, there might be many out there. The online discussion here and even in mainstream comments sections (before they were banned) sharpened and elaborated the dissenters' awareness and allowed them to break the Sapir-Whorf box and state their dissent in ways that didn't sound automatically wrong. By 2016, the Narrative was looking pretty threadbare.

    Trump deserves some personal credit. A breakthrough moment was when Macy's threatened to boycott him over his immigration statements, and he didn't cave! That had never happened before at that level. He was economically vulnerable and paid some financial price for sticking to his guns, but he did it, and that shattered a glass ceiling that had previously constrained discussion.

    Finally, there was a significant element of what for lack of a better word we call "luck" or "fate" or the "Hand of God". When the Megaphone disputed that immigration was a problem, there were high profile nativ-o-cides by immigrants. When the Megaphone disputed that Muslims were a problem, Muslims got all Sudden Jihad Syndrome across former Christendom. When the Megaphone disputed that law and order could be an issue, BLM rioters and terrorists went on murder sprees. When Hillary insisted her health was great, she was wracked by coughing fits. Of course, the Megaphone Holders have been lying for a long time, but this year Hubris met Nemesis in particularly rapid and poignant ways.

    Of course, it also doesn't hurt that the pillars of the Megaphone establishment--Hillary, Merkel, von Juncker--are all superannuated plonkers.

    One of the reasons the alternatives grew in number and influence was because the owners of the megaphone became such obvious hate-filled liars.

    If Newsweek had published the Monica story in 1998 we might not have developed the alternative media.

    Read More
    • Agree: ATX Hipster
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Yes, I agree. The Megaphone Holders became progressively (heh) more brazen in nudging the Narrative away from reality, which helped create the opening for small but burgeoning independent media.
  94. @Steve Sailer
    So how many irredentist flash spots are there?

    If you go back to what British statesmen like the Chamberlain brothers were worried about in, say, 1937-38 it was a debate over whether Hitler really wanted continental-scale conquest (Austen's worry) or merely semi-symbolic irredentist rectification of borders, such as the Sudetenland and Danzig (Neville's less alarming view).

    Stalin ended probably permanently German irredentist possibilities in 1945 by massive ethnic cleansing of Germans from Eastern Europe.

    From the perspective of 2016, mass conquest sounds pretty economically futile. But stoking nationalist passions over semi-symbolic irredentist projects (the West Bank, Crimea, islets in the South China Sea, etc.) sounds like it could be a winning domestic political strategy. On the other hand, it could go to far and lead to a massive shooting war.

    For example, the Sandinista president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, has pursued a national hobby of suing Nicaragua's neighbors in the World Court over disputed boundaries (and then abiding by their decisions). It's a pretty clever way to show voters whose side you are on without getting into a war, but it hasn't really spread.

    Right now, European nationalist parties have a common foe in the EU. So they are quite chummy.

    But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?

    Winning and destroying the EC will lead to them tearing each other to pieces, and the pendulum will swing back in the long run (around the year 2096).

    The entities key to 2016 were nation states (holding the loyalty of the mass of ethnic majority) but according to elite technical expertise: obsolete. The population bestirred themselves to defend their nation against economists, climate change researchers and international organisations. Not forgetting coddled elites.

    The commonest criticism in the West was to say a view is held as a religious one; liberal- scientific meliorism was received wisdom . The decisions to Brexit and elect Trump show that optimistic liberal faith in expertise is well on the way to being relegated to the same status as claims for absolute religious truth.

    What have we learned? Nothing at all; these things go in cycles. A generation or so hence it will be time for another 2016, maybe against the nation state

    Read More
    • Replies: @Langley
    I do not see this move as an endorsement of the nation state.

    Again - I think both Wolfe and McLuhan may be right in predicting that we are, respectively, going Back to Blood or becoming a tribal society.
    , @Desiderius

    A generation or so hence it will be time for another 2016, maybe against the nation state
     
    It may not take that long, but the alternative will be more local still, not globalism. Nationalism only won this go round because it is more local than the alternative on offer.
    , @Frau Katze
    I agree. The huge influx of people from vastly different cultures acts as a brake on white people infighting.

    For now. I would never say never. History is too complex.
  95. @Glossy
    I've seen a few people wonder at the lack of South Asian participation in the ISIS craze, at South Asian Muslims' reluctance to blow themselves up in Europe, etc. There are 200 million Muslims in Indonesia, and I haven't seen any stories of them becoming more radical.

    Well, for Indonesians and Pakistanis Islam is foreign, and the global trend, the spirit of the times is ethno-nationalist, not theocratic. It just so happens that for Sunni Arabs sharia and the Khalifate are their thing, something that they can be proud of in the typical ethnic way and something that fits their personalities well because it was developed by their ancestors.

    Muslims in south of Thailand and in the Philippines are pretty ISIS-like – five or ten years back beheaded Thai schoolgirls were being found, there was lots of trouble in (Mindanao?) and Indonesians did the Bali bombings, but it all seems to have gone rather quiet, at least as far as Western media’s concerned.

    Whether that’s due to the Thai/Indonesian/Filipino authorities doing things to stop them or whether they’re just less ISIS-y these days, I know not. The media only seems to cover a few places and issues at a time (compare Syria vs Yemen), so we don’t have much information.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Muslims in south of Thailand and in the Philippines are pretty ISIS-like – five or ten years back beheaded Thai schoolgirls were being found, there was lots of trouble in (Mindanao?) and Indonesians did the Bali bombings, but it all seems to have gone rather quiet, at least as far as Western media’s concerned.

    Whether that’s due to the Thai/Indonesian/Filipino authorities doing things to stop them or whether they’re just less ISIS-y these days, I know not. The media only seems to cover a few places and issues at a time (compare Syria vs Yemen), so we don’t have much information."


    Also the South Asian couple who murdered a bunch of people in San Bernardino and the South Asian guy who murdered the Hispanic Gays in Orlando.

  96. Major “turning points”:

    1. Obama’s racial sympathy for Trayvon Martin, Baltimore rioters, Ferguson rioters, and the Dallas cop shooter

    2. Trump mercilessly destroying Jeb! in the primaries

    3. Comey’s e-mail press conference, and then his re-opening of the e-mail investigation

    Read More
  97. That for at least the last 30 years, the GOP has been stabbing it’s base in the back.

    Read More
  98. Throw into the mix Pres. Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice asserting early in 2015 that Bowe Bergdahl “served the United States with honor and distinction.”
    That may be the first time in the history of any armed force that deserting to the enemy has been so praised.
    The low growls at the backs of the throats of tens of thousands of combat veterans and their families, who had endured multiple deployments, grievous wounds and deaths stoically, was also completely missed by the Democrats, as was the only half-joking grumbling of service members that if that’s the way to earn honor and distinction, why don’t we all desert, or — better yet — just refuse to deploy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dr kill
    Happy New Year to all. I have read 96 comments, most are very good, but the Bergdahl thing mentioned here would rank at the top of my list for 2016. Unbelievable, even for Obama.
    , @Je Suis Charlie Martel
    Just found out a former student is deploying again... to Ukraine. WTF?
    It's just to do "training" but jeez, a last gasp to start a war?
  99. @Almost Missouri
    Good observation. My view is that that's mostly (so far) a secular cycle. What's your view?

    I think that the deflationary forces we have been experiencing such as manufacturing efficiencies, abundant cheap labor, and a surfeit of fossil fuels are being outmatched by the continuous money printing by the central banks, i.e., money is getting cheaper even faster than widgets.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Yes, I agree, after stomping the federal funds rate down to the floor for basically the entirety of the Obama administration, the Fed has been nudging rates up again. Sensible stewardship or political scale-thumbing?
  100. The big story of 2016 was the death of the old (Ryan / Bush / Romney, etc.) GOP.

    Trump’s win buried it and it will not likely re-emerge. The stage for the death of the GOP was set by two important events, one 8 years ago (TARP) and one 4 years ago (Ogberfell ruling).

    The old GOP philosophy was based on two main principles: free market absolutism and “family values” /evangelical Christianity.

    Free market absolutism died 8 years ago: when GOP congressmen and Bush signed TARP. This complete public abandonment of free-market principles by the GOP opened the door for Trump economic populism / protectionism / managed economy along nationalist lines.

    Family values / Christian stuff took a big hit 4 years ago with the Supreme Court majority ruling on coercing the recognition of homosex marriage. The utter surrender by the GOP on WWG and WWT issues opened the door to considering a twice-divorced horndog like Trump as a reasonable GOP candidate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot

    The big story of 2016 was the death of the old (Ryan / Bush / Romney, etc.) GOP.

    Trump’s win buried it and it will not likely re-emerge.
     
    Except they control the Senate, and Ryan is Speaker of the House. For how much longer, hard to say.

    The Rubio amnesty, middle east wars, and tax cuts for the super rich all have 55-70 votes in the Senate. That's not going to change. Lindsey Graham, Kamela Harris, John McCain, Marco Rubio, and Elizabeth Warren will all be in the Senate deep into old age.
    , @Jefferson
    "Family values / Christian stuff took a big hit 4 years ago with the Supreme Court majority ruling on coercing the recognition of homosex marriage. The utter surrender by the GOP on WWG and WWT issues opened the door to considering a twice-divorced horndog like Trump as a reasonable GOP candidate."

    Elvis Presley was nothing but a hound dog, but he still has a large White Evangelical fan base in the Southern bible belt states who love his music.
    , @Dave Pinsen
    Bush and Romney bet against Trump and lost, but Ryan didn't and won. And the jury's still out on how much of the GOPe's platform versus Trump's platform gets passed.

    It's like Platoon with Trump as Charlie Sheen, Bannon as Elias, and Priebus as Barnes fighting for his soul.

  101. @Glossy
    There is a global populist-nationalist trend, including in countries where immigration isn't an issue. I think Modi is the most nationalist PM India has ever had. Abe seems like the most nationalist Japanese PM since WWII. Erdogan seems like the most populist-nationalist Turkish leader in living memory. Duterte in the Philippines is populism distilled. One way of looking at ISIS is as Sunni Arab nationalism. Religion is often tribalism by proxy, and Sunni Arabs are an ethnic group. The Koran is their flag, symbol, calling card and ancient tradition.

    Where did the nationalist trend come from? Could be the Internet. Could be something else.

    It seems that the world tires of most lefty delusions after a few decades. Look at what eventually happened to Communism and Freudianism. Maybe this is happening to anti-nationalism aka universalism now. At first these ideas seem fresh and exciting, then they start seeming stale. Youth is always looking for something to rebel against.

    Or it could be something else that I'm not seeing.

    “There is a global populist-nationalist trend,… Where did the nationalist trend come from?”

    Nationalism is the major multi-century historical trend still going on. Why? Hard to say. There are just certain implacable zeitgeists in certain periods. Nationalism has been in the current zeitgeist since at least the French revolution, though I think you can trace it back further in Anglo history (and hence in its American offshoot). It is by definition democratic, hostile to elite excess, communitarian and language-dependent. When anything stands in the way of those trends, conflict will follow. It started in and was strongest in the West, but continues to spread over the world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    Nationalism is as old as history. Ancient Egyptians wrote about the Hyksos invasion in nationalist terms more than 3,500 years ago, ancient Greeks wrote about the Persian invasion in nationalist terms 2,500 years ago, etc.

    There was an increase in nationalism in Europe at the time of the French Revolution, but not from a zero level. Jeanne of Arc was a French nationalist fighting the English in the 15th century, the Dutch fought Spanish occupiers in the 16th century for nationalist reasons, etc.

    There was a decrease in nationalism in the West after WWI, a resurgence in Germany in the 1930s, a huge decrease after WWII (but again not to a zero level), and a (so far) small increase in the last couple of years.
    , @Steve Sailer
    Nationalism has a lot to do with the decline of Latin and Greek and the rise of the printing press. Instead of languages changing ever 50 or 100 miles, all the smart people for a few hundred miles learn the language of wherever the best poet lived (e.g., Dante in Florence).

    The Arabs hated printing presses, so they didn't evolve all that many cohesive nation-states.

    There were a few exceptions like the Maronites. Carlos Slim's relatives brought an Arab printing press with them from Lebanon to Mexico and started an Arabic newspaper in Mexico in the 1800s. That's a pretty good background to come from, and Slim has done well for himself.
  102. @Anonymous Nephew
    Muslims in south of Thailand and in the Philippines are pretty ISIS-like - five or ten years back beheaded Thai schoolgirls were being found, there was lots of trouble in (Mindanao?) and Indonesians did the Bali bombings, but it all seems to have gone rather quiet, at least as far as Western media's concerned.

    Whether that's due to the Thai/Indonesian/Filipino authorities doing things to stop them or whether they're just less ISIS-y these days, I know not. The media only seems to cover a few places and issues at a time (compare Syria vs Yemen), so we don't have much information.

    “Muslims in south of Thailand and in the Philippines are pretty ISIS-like – five or ten years back beheaded Thai schoolgirls were being found, there was lots of trouble in (Mindanao?) and Indonesians did the Bali bombings, but it all seems to have gone rather quiet, at least as far as Western media’s concerned.

    Whether that’s due to the Thai/Indonesian/Filipino authorities doing things to stop them or whether they’re just less ISIS-y these days, I know not. The media only seems to cover a few places and issues at a time (compare Syria vs Yemen), so we don’t have much information.”

    Also the South Asian couple who murdered a bunch of people in San Bernardino and the South Asian guy who murdered the Hispanic Gays in Orlando.

    Read More
  103. @dearieme
    I invite you, Mr Sailer, to include some sort of explanation of why the US spends fortunes on purchasing fighter planes that cannot fight, and naval vessels that are scarcely fit to put to sea. These must surely be symptoms of something chronically wrong with the federal government AND the electorate. Why don't the people object?

    I think that the US electorate complains just as much as the British electorate does about Royal Navy ships that can’t operate in warm water or Royal Navy aircraft carriers that don’t have any aircraft.

    Read More
  104. I think Occupy wall street was a huge turning point, it was when the final holdouts of economic “liberalism” were destroyed by pro wall street identity politics.

    View post on imgur.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @Langley
    Subversion, stupidity, or stupid subversion (e.g., Victoria Nuland).

    Maybe OWS was sabotaged by a Cointelpro type subversion, maybe it was just stupid or maybe "stacked" group processes are a stupid subversion.

    Here is a video of OWS crazy "Mic Check" brainwashing/communication dissing a black veteran of the Selma march.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QZlp3eGMNI

    This is one example of the tribal conflict that has destroyed the established order.
    It is just a taste of what is to come.
  105. The big political trend is the Trump Belt, areas that swung 8% or more toward Trump over Romney. It includes the non-coastal Northeast and extends West from North Dakota to Missouri.

    Read More
  106. @dearieme
    I invite you, Mr Sailer, to include some sort of explanation of why the US spends fortunes on purchasing fighter planes that cannot fight, and naval vessels that are scarcely fit to put to sea. These must surely be symptoms of something chronically wrong with the federal government AND the electorate. Why don't the people object?

    Many of us object and contact our Senators and Reps. We get lip service and they continue to rake in their contributions.

    Read More
  107. @Almost Missouri

    "There is a global populist-nationalist trend,... Where did the nationalist trend come from?"
     
    Nationalism is the major multi-century historical trend still going on. Why? Hard to say. There are just certain implacable zeitgeists in certain periods. Nationalism has been in the current zeitgeist since at least the French revolution, though I think you can trace it back further in Anglo history (and hence in its American offshoot). It is by definition democratic, hostile to elite excess, communitarian and language-dependent. When anything stands in the way of those trends, conflict will follow. It started in and was strongest in the West, but continues to spread over the world.

    Nationalism is as old as history. Ancient Egyptians wrote about the Hyksos invasion in nationalist terms more than 3,500 years ago, ancient Greeks wrote about the Persian invasion in nationalist terms 2,500 years ago, etc.

    There was an increase in nationalism in Europe at the time of the French Revolution, but not from a zero level. Jeanne of Arc was a French nationalist fighting the English in the 15th century, the Dutch fought Spanish occupiers in the 16th century for nationalist reasons, etc.

    There was a decrease in nationalism in the West after WWI, a resurgence in Germany in the 1930s, a huge decrease after WWII (but again not to a zero level), and a (so far) small increase in the last couple of years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    I agree with all your points and even wrote iSteve comments to that effect last year.

    Here I was just speaking of the Western flavor of nationalism that emerged as a reaction to the absolutism and feudalism of pre-Enlightenment Europe. But I just wrote "multi-century" nationalism to keep it simple, assuming readers would understand.
  108. @Clyde
    Donald Trump flying around relentlessly from one well attended rally to another, was the new trend of the year. Towards the end he was hitting four-five rallies per day and mostly in the battleground states. This was the DJT version of retail politicking and won the election for him. Hillary was static while The Donald was kinetic.
    Can't blame Hill too much, due to her ill health she was unable to campaign half as vigorously as The Donald. The Dems bet on the horse headed to the glue factory. The Donald is the strong horse and reluctant Republicans will join forces with him in 2017 and beyond. Why? Because everybody loves a winner.

    “Can’t blame Hill too much, due to her ill health she was unable to campaign half as vigorously as The Donald.”

    There is a strong push from Democratic Party donors like the Walton family and George Soros to have Crooked Cankles run for POTUS again in 2020. When even at 69 she has poor health, what makes them think Crooked Cankles health is going to get any better when she is 73 years old in 2020. So 2020 is going to be Weekend At Bernie’s 2.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    No one is betting on Hillary being the Dem nominee in 2020. Not you, not me. Like Tuco Salamanca said in SE1 Breaking Bad, "You're Done". How Bill and Hill mollify their Clintoon Foundation investors is their own problem.
  109. @PennTothal
    The big story of 2016 was the death of the old (Ryan / Bush / Romney, etc.) GOP.

    Trump's win buried it and it will not likely re-emerge. The stage for the death of the GOP was set by two important events, one 8 years ago (TARP) and one 4 years ago (Ogberfell ruling).

    The old GOP philosophy was based on two main principles: free market absolutism and "family values" /evangelical Christianity.

    Free market absolutism died 8 years ago: when GOP congressmen and Bush signed TARP. This complete public abandonment of free-market principles by the GOP opened the door for Trump economic populism / protectionism / managed economy along nationalist lines.

    Family values / Christian stuff took a big hit 4 years ago with the Supreme Court majority ruling on coercing the recognition of homosex marriage. The utter surrender by the GOP on WWG and WWT issues opened the door to considering a twice-divorced horndog like Trump as a reasonable GOP candidate.

    The big story of 2016 was the death of the old (Ryan / Bush / Romney, etc.) GOP.

    Trump’s win buried it and it will not likely re-emerge.

    Except they control the Senate, and Ryan is Speaker of the House. For how much longer, hard to say.

    The Rubio amnesty, middle east wars, and tax cuts for the super rich all have 55-70 votes in the Senate. That’s not going to change. Lindsey Graham, Kamela Harris, John McCain, Marco Rubio, and Elizabeth Warren will all be in the Senate deep into old age.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    Trump will have a tough row to hoe. We must give him the benefit of the doubt. But one thing we can not permit is for Victoria Nuland of Ukraine infamy to remain in her position in the State Department. If this neocon operative is permitted to remain it would be a sure sign that the Trump administration is an outright and abject failure!
    , @Thomas
    If Trump and his people are smart, they will leverage his personal appeal and willingness to personally appear and turn out voters in locales as 2018 and 2020 approach to keep Republicans in line. The "Thank You" tour locations weren't accidental, and I would expect that Trump and Pence will throw their personal weight behind Republicans in Congress who play ball (and against those who won't). Every member of the House has to run every two years. The Senate will be a tougher road to hoe, and there are a few Republican Senators who will give Trump headaches (McCain, Graham, Murkowski, and Flake come most readily to mind). Most of these though are old time servers with particular hobby horses (neoconning, for McCain and Graham, for example) but not huge followings. The one to watch is Flake, an Arizona Mormon (and part of the Southwest Republican "Mormon revolt" this year) who is in his first term in the Senate, and has to stand for election in 2018 in a state Trump won with about 48% of the vote. If he can be brought to heel, Trump will likely have few problems with Congressional Republicans.
  110. @Detective Club
    The political rot goes back to April, 1980, when the "Mariel Boat Lift," from Castro's Cuba, started. It ended in October of that year. Ronald Reagan beat President Carter by 10% in November, 1980. Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton lost re-election when he decided to house and imprison the "Marielitos" in his state as a political favor to Carter.

    A senile President Reagan signed an immigration Amnesty bill into law in 1986. President George HW Bush signed various immigration bills into law during 1990 and 1991, increasing "legal" immigration by 40%.

    In January, 2015 House Speaker John Boehner and his GOP caucus funded Obama's 2014 unconstitutional executive amnesty, which granted residency visas to more than 5 million illegal aliens. Republicans had campaigned on the promise to defund any executive Obama Amnesty order of 2014. Only about 50 GOP House members revolted but that was enough to force Boehner to resign in September, 2015.

    The Republican party was now dead. Donald John Trump saw a golden opportunity to breathe life into a political corpse. Republicans and Democrats alike laughed when he announced his candidacy in June, 2015 ("Mexico is not sending its best!"). By September, 2015 he had displaced Jeb Bush as leader in the presidential GOP polls. Jeb continued to say that Trump would never win the nomination, would never be president.

    6 delegates and 125 million dollars later, Jeb dropped out.

    During the period of September 5, 2016 thru September 11, 2016, known as "The Seven Days of Jack Ass, Donkey Hell," Hillary Clinton suffered a series of coughing fits and Parkinson's seizures on the campaign trail and called White Trump voters "deplorable."

    Not to coin a phrase, the rest is history! Here's hoping that 2017 fulfills the miraculous promise of 2016.

    Hillary Clinton suffered a series of coughing fits and Parkinson’s seizures on the campaign trail and called White Trump voters “deplorable.”

    Visual input is hardwired directly to the brain bypassing reason. Age of Reason types never figure this out. Reason tries to suppress visual, aural, i.e., sensations to no avail. Ideologues nevet learn.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Define "reason."
    , @Bill P
    Reason is a sense just like smell or hearing, although we don't understand it as such (probably because of hubris). Reason comes directly from our understanding of storylines/language, so it's really a perception of time, or cause and effect, as a synthesis of our other perceptions in our cerebral cortex. If you look at it in that way, then it stands to reason that reason cannot stand alone.
  111. It relates to the strange tendency of whites to be hyper critical of their own group while simultaneously internalizing the faults of other groups. Whites are uniquely capable of recognizing how annoying other whites are. 2016 reached a tipping point where the most obnoxious SJW whites (and mostly white mulattos) drew the ire of other whites.

    Whites can also be uniquely annoying. And the most insufferable whites had the megaphone this year. Politically moderate whites suddenly realized that whiny leftists were more unbearable than rural conservatives, and the threshold event occurred.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sid
    SJWs became a joke in 2016. While most people are still afraid of publicly critiquing their ideas, virtually everyone who doesn't have blue hair snickers at microaggressions, jokes about being triggered, etc. when they're in trusted company.

    Consider the huge backlash last summer against Ghostbusters. Apparently the producers of Rogue One saw that and ordered massive reshoots to tone down the feminism. Makes sense.
  112. @Sean
    Winning and destroying the EC will lead to them tearing each other to pieces, and the pendulum will swing back in the long run (around the year 2096).

    The entities key to 2016 were nation states (holding the loyalty of the mass of ethnic majority) but according to elite technical expertise: obsolete. The population bestirred themselves to defend their nation against economists, climate change researchers and international organisations. Not forgetting coddled elites.

    The commonest criticism in the West was to say a view is held as a religious one; liberal- scientific meliorism was received wisdom . The decisions to Brexit and elect Trump show that optimistic liberal faith in expertise is well on the way to being relegated to the same status as claims for absolute religious truth.

    What have we learned? Nothing at all; these things go in cycles. A generation or so hence it will be time for another 2016, maybe against the nation state

    I do not see this move as an endorsement of the nation state.

    Again – I think both Wolfe and McLuhan may be right in predicting that we are, respectively, going Back to Blood or becoming a tribal society.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna
    History shows to all peoples, interested in self-preservation, a choice between Nationalism and Tribalism. Since our self-styled cultural elite have deemed Nationalism anathema, no one should be surprised if Tribalism takes its place. As most of us here know, this is a major reason for the destabilization and destruction of the Tribe of Whites in Europe and especially in America: the Ruling Tribe prefers to Divide and Conquer, and many squabbling tribes are far easier to rule than one monolithic opposed force.

    This dovetails rather neatly with the purpose of the present essay, and reminds me moreover of a discussion that took place in the Washington Post comments section before the recent election. In response to the contention (from editors and readers alike) that Trump resulted from too loose a rein on the "fringe" (by which they mean racists) of the Republican Party, I contended that in fact it was the excesses of the Establishment (in both parties, but in particular the p.c. "looney left") which gave rise to a reaction.

    Needless to say, the suggestion fell upon deaf ears. But revenge is ours, for the moment. Or so we hope. Let's not discount hope: until recently many of us didn't even have that.

    , @Sean
    Privacy and individualism from the age of print (McLuhan) carrying over into the electronic age may have been responsible for the emergent consensus for Trump and Brexit coming as a surprise. But I don't think the prestigious institutions that have been shown to be, what McLuhan might see as "overheated" are the soul of a nation state. An unheralded part of the nation state stumbled on the discovery that they have a collective worldview to go with their collective interests. This is a watershed, but there will be others.

    People view national feeling as being in a similar vein to religion, a traditional superstition that will fade away. But liberalism is itself a tradition while nation states are as natural as honey-bee hives. Nation states can be conquered by a rival, but they are not going to dissolve into private individuals or a formless undifferentiated mass of tribalism.

  113. @Almost Missouri
    The obvious long term trend is the internet and sites like Unz. Fifteen years ago, the Megaphone Holders still pretty much had a lock on public discourse. The internet existed, of course, but the credible outlets were still mostly controlled by the same people as in the offline world: the Megaphone Holders. Gradually over the last decade, the dissenters from the enforced Narrative grew to knew they weren't alone and indeed, there might be many out there. The online discussion here and even in mainstream comments sections (before they were banned) sharpened and elaborated the dissenters' awareness and allowed them to break the Sapir-Whorf box and state their dissent in ways that didn't sound automatically wrong. By 2016, the Narrative was looking pretty threadbare.

    Trump deserves some personal credit. A breakthrough moment was when Macy's threatened to boycott him over his immigration statements, and he didn't cave! That had never happened before at that level. He was economically vulnerable and paid some financial price for sticking to his guns, but he did it, and that shattered a glass ceiling that had previously constrained discussion.

    Finally, there was a significant element of what for lack of a better word we call "luck" or "fate" or the "Hand of God". When the Megaphone disputed that immigration was a problem, there were high profile nativ-o-cides by immigrants. When the Megaphone disputed that Muslims were a problem, Muslims got all Sudden Jihad Syndrome across former Christendom. When the Megaphone disputed that law and order could be an issue, BLM rioters and terrorists went on murder sprees. When Hillary insisted her health was great, she was wracked by coughing fits. Of course, the Megaphone Holders have been lying for a long time, but this year Hubris met Nemesis in particularly rapid and poignant ways.

    Of course, it also doesn't hurt that the pillars of the Megaphone establishment--Hillary, Merkel, von Juncker--are all superannuated plonkers.

    I think letting others know that They Are Not Alone is big and increasing factor. It boosts morale and emboldens others. I now say things in public I wouldn’t even allow myself to think 15 years ago.

    Read More
  114. One key point was the realization by so many that the Establishment was lying to the public, whether through the MSM, Acela Corridor or politicians. They used to lie better, more convincingly, but slowly believed more and more of their Narrative. See NYT, WaPo, CNN, NBC, others.
    Second, when Obama lit up the White House with rainbow colors, with a type of triumphalist, in-your-face petulance.
    Third, when he would not light it up in blue to support law enforcement, even, especially, after Dallas. The Texas Lt. Governor brought it up during his townhall and you could see Obama was annoyed at that. After the Beer Summit, that was corroboration of his disdain. People have a right to expect more from the President, and will be disappointed permanently by the President-Eject.

    Read More
  115. @Lot

    The big story of 2016 was the death of the old (Ryan / Bush / Romney, etc.) GOP.

    Trump’s win buried it and it will not likely re-emerge.
     
    Except they control the Senate, and Ryan is Speaker of the House. For how much longer, hard to say.

    The Rubio amnesty, middle east wars, and tax cuts for the super rich all have 55-70 votes in the Senate. That's not going to change. Lindsey Graham, Kamela Harris, John McCain, Marco Rubio, and Elizabeth Warren will all be in the Senate deep into old age.

    Trump will have a tough row to hoe. We must give him the benefit of the doubt. But one thing we can not permit is for Victoria Nuland of Ukraine infamy to remain in her position in the State Department. If this neocon operative is permitted to remain it would be a sure sign that the Trump administration is an outright and abject failure!

    Read More
  116. @Steve Sailer
    But can the resurgent nationalists avoid getting in wars with other resurgent nationalists?

    The question implies that other forms of political organization do not get into conflict. But of course, this is not true. Multinational/multicultural empires get into conflict all the time. Indeed, for many of them, constant conflict is a way of life, not only externally but internally: you have to keep all those jostling nations/cultures in their place somehow.

    A properly nationalist nation can’t really expand faster than its own birth rate. You can’t have a bigger nation than there are nationals to populate it. But with a multi-ethnic empire, the sky is the limit. If any population can be part of your empire, there is nothing to stop your expansion but military defeat.

    Good borders make good neighbors. And with nationalism, a good border is available: where one ethnicity ends and the next one begins, where one language ends and the next one begins. With multi-ethnic empires, no border is ever really good because the ending of one ethnicity or language and the beginning of the next is not relevant to a multi-ethnic empire. Since there is no obvious reason for anyone to be either in or out of such an empire, violent expansion and/or violent repression of internal dissent is baked in.

    All of the biggest, most violent (both externally and internally) states have been multi-ethnic: the Soviet Union, the Mongol Hordes, the Ottoman Empire, even the anti-nationalist’s trump card–Nazi Germany–was really a multi-ethnic empire: the Third Reich. When it embarked on its brutal and megalomaniac Eastern conquests and associated mass civilian murders, the Nazi war machine was not only ethnic German but also had formations of Scandinavians, Dutch, Ukrainians, Russian, Vichy French, allies of Italians, Romanians, Hungarians, Finns, auxiliaries of Balts, Slavs, Croats, Slovenes and Arabs, and I’m probably forgetting some. So the favorite nationalist boogie man is really just another cautionary tale about excessive multicultural, multi-ethnic overreach.

    Read More
  117. @Sean
    Winning and destroying the EC will lead to them tearing each other to pieces, and the pendulum will swing back in the long run (around the year 2096).

    The entities key to 2016 were nation states (holding the loyalty of the mass of ethnic majority) but according to elite technical expertise: obsolete. The population bestirred themselves to defend their nation against economists, climate change researchers and international organisations. Not forgetting coddled elites.

    The commonest criticism in the West was to say a view is held as a religious one; liberal- scientific meliorism was received wisdom . The decisions to Brexit and elect Trump show that optimistic liberal faith in expertise is well on the way to being relegated to the same status as claims for absolute religious truth.

    What have we learned? Nothing at all; these things go in cycles. A generation or so hence it will be time for another 2016, maybe against the nation state

    A generation or so hence it will be time for another 2016, maybe against the nation state

    It may not take that long, but the alternative will be more local still, not globalism. Nationalism only won this go round because it is more local than the alternative on offer.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    Maybe you are one of those who think nation states date from the Treaty Of Westphalia. Well if you read some Brendan Simms you'll find it was more of an armistice in which the parties accepted a limitation of the independent power of nation states.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/scottishhistory/independence/features_independence_arbroath.shtml

    The Declaration of Arbroath is without doubt the most famous document in Scottish history. Like the American Declaration of Independence, which is partially based on it, it is seen by many as the founding document of the Scottish nation. It was drafted on the 6th April 1320 - a day the United States of America has declared to be Tartan Day

    Yet if he (Bruce) should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom - for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.’
     
    Extract from the Declaration of Arbroath
     
    Nation-states are an actual thing in the world because they have emergent properties, they fight for survival. So they have to fight each other. "Only the dead have seen the end of war"(or nation states).
  118. @Lurker
    I think letting others know that They Are Not Alone is big and increasing factor. It boosts morale and emboldens others. I now say things in public I wouldn't even allow myself to think 15 years ago.

    Steve is our Mithrandir in that respect.

    Read More
  119. Obama was made possible by Tiger Woods.
    Trump was made possible by Don Draper, Roger Sterling, Tywin Lannister, Tony Soprano.

    The arts began foreshadowing a sharp turn to the reactionary 10-20 years ago. Shockingly so … and consistently so. Most surprisingly, all the lefties were into it.

    My favorite reactionary is … Lena Dunham. “Girls” is “Sex and the City” 20 years later and completely gone to hell. She got it. She helped make Trump possible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Lena Dunham as a reactionary is Douthat's schtick.
    , @Jefferson
    "Tony Soprano."

    It's a very difficult situation.
  120. @Marat
    The window of opportunity begins closing as soon as the professional sob story spinners get traction. I can see the liberals getting very "bold" about this - more than they ever have about anything in their lives.

    Psychology Today has already started their campaign:

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/what-is-he-thinking/201612/the-decline-empathy-and-the-appeal-right-wing-politics

    You think Bannon isn’t ready for that with Kate Steinle style agitprop and story after story of raped children by multiple deportees? Rhetoric cuts both ways.

    You guys are sweating Bingo strategies for your checkers game when we’ve already started the chess match ffs.

    Read More
  121. @PennTothal
    The big story of 2016 was the death of the old (Ryan / Bush / Romney, etc.) GOP.

    Trump's win buried it and it will not likely re-emerge. The stage for the death of the GOP was set by two important events, one 8 years ago (TARP) and one 4 years ago (Ogberfell ruling).

    The old GOP philosophy was based on two main principles: free market absolutism and "family values" /evangelical Christianity.

    Free market absolutism died 8 years ago: when GOP congressmen and Bush signed TARP. This complete public abandonment of free-market principles by the GOP opened the door for Trump economic populism / protectionism / managed economy along nationalist lines.

    Family values / Christian stuff took a big hit 4 years ago with the Supreme Court majority ruling on coercing the recognition of homosex marriage. The utter surrender by the GOP on WWG and WWT issues opened the door to considering a twice-divorced horndog like Trump as a reasonable GOP candidate.

    “Family values / Christian stuff took a big hit 4 years ago with the Supreme Court majority ruling on coercing the recognition of homosex marriage. The utter surrender by the GOP on WWG and WWT issues opened the door to considering a twice-divorced horndog like Trump as a reasonable GOP candidate.”

    Elvis Presley was nothing but a hound dog, but he still has a large White Evangelical fan base in the Southern bible belt states who love his music.

    Read More
  122. Oh, I just hate to contradict people, but just for old times’ sake . . .

    Hillary Clinton was the strongest candidate the Democrats ever fielded since 1968 when the leftists took over. Strongest. Ever.

    Compared to Humphrey, McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, W. Clinton, Gore, Kerry, or Obama; Hillary Clinton was THE strongest candidate the Party ran. More money. Higher ideals. Most prepared. Better, deeper, and most experienced support organizations. Most comprehensive and practical positions. Most coordinated campaign. Most solidified national committee. Most solid, coordinated, and fervent media support from every single major player. Etcetera.

    Folks who claim Clinton was a ‘weak candidate’ are those who simply don’t like her and can’t articulate why, or are (now) depressed by her loss to ‘such an idiot’.

    Disagree if you want, but use the facts. There’s no way ¿Jeb?, Carson, Christie, Cruz, Fiorina, Gilmore, Huckabee, Kasich, Paul, Rubio, or Santorum could have stood up to Clinton’s machine; she would have greased any and every other Republican nominee.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    She had the second highest unfavorability ratings in recent history going in (Trump had the highest but overcame that). I agree she almost won, but to call her a strong candidate is ridiculous--she lacks the charisma required of any politician.
    , @Entity
    "Hillary Clinton was the strongest candidate the Democrats ever fielded since 1968"
    Those are some weak candidates, but I think Hillary was still worse than some of them.

    She had no charisma. Carville and Stephanopoulos both knew that.
    She had terrible party organization. Read any of the post-election analyses, and you'll find that not only did her national campaign ignore warnings from state campaigns (specifically Michigan), but they spent millions on uncompetitive states to win the popular vote.

    Hillary Clinton's campaign was run like a robot would run a campaign. They relied too much on data and not enough on gut feeling. Democrats are coasting on the knowledge that a brown America votes for free stuff. They haven't realized that the voters aren't brown enough to be a sure thing, yet.
    , @2Mintzin1
    "Higher ideals."
    Such as what? Hiding legal files? Defaming women who accused her (reputed) husband of ...various things? Firing carreer White House Travel Office employees to put her gang in thier jobs? Hillary is the most obviously dirty politician since Tricky Dick. He, at least, was a patriot...sort of.

    "Most prepared."
    She was a robot on the stage. I can't see her as a good court room lawyer, she is just too obviously rehearsed.

    "Most comprehensive and practical positions. "

    Like what? Obama term 3? The people did not want that, and neither the candidate nor her expensive advisers recognized it in time.
    She should have had distanced herself from him.

    By the way, I would have voted for a Dem like Joe Lieberman or equivilant, in a heartbeat, over Trump.

    , @Harry Baldwin
    Most comprehensive and practical positions.

    As in, "I have a five-point plan to jump-start the economy!" I loved that one. (Googling to confirm that position, I was reminded that Mitt Romney said exactly the same thing in 2012 and Chris Christie in 2015.)
    , @dr kill
    I like your general theme and especially the final paragraph. Some version of the Hillary attack-meme prepared for Trump certainly was prepared in advance for all the GOP possibles. And they certainly would have been successful on the dopes to whom you refer. In all areas you mention she was the strongest candidate since Eisenhower. She ran to Barky's left, ffs, and she still would have crushed the others. The triumph of Trump's personal strength of ego cannot be overstated.
    , @Almost Missouri
    Also Hillary got more votes than any Democrat in history (except Obama, but he got a bonus for being black).
    , @Perplexed
    Those Republicans you listed were all Establishment candidates, enlisted to split the primary votes to grease in Jeb. Trump was the only serious alternative, the only Rude Boy willing and able to take the fight to Hillary (as he showed by being rude to the other Republicans, and knocking them down).
    , @Perplexed
    Also, Hillary had a dreadful tin ear. She attacked half the electorate as deplorable and irredeemable (isn't there a rule that you don't attack the voters?), and when a black man killed five cops in Dallas, she tweeted that white people have to listen more to blacks.

    "More money. Higher ideals. Most prepared. . . ." No accomplishments, except getting people killed and taking high-level bribes.
    , @ben tillman

    Compared to Humphrey, McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, W. Clinton, Gore, Kerry, or Obama; Hillary Clinton was THE strongest candidate the Party ran. More money. Higher ideals. Most prepared. Better, deeper, and most experienced support organizations. Most comprehensive and practical positions.
     
    No ideals and terrible policy positions. Completely without any redeeming feature in the mind of the "swing" voter.
  123. 1. Transgenderism picking Bruce Jenner as it’s poster-girl. Fresh off vehicular manslaughter and the POTUS immediately going out of his way to say how brave he/she was. It was a line too far and too easy to mock. Indeed it became a mini outrage among SJWs that late-night talkshow hosts and the Daily Show were having far too much fun with the story.

    Once respectable, normal people were fine joking and criticising a sacred cow, the flood gates were open to pry around more and more edges. It also gave a sense that SJWism, for lack of a better catch-all description, had finally run out of places to go or things to say. It increasingly had no answers or solutions for the great issues of the day.

    2. Merkels million man march in 2015-2016. The images were apocalyptic and exposed the managerial political class for what it is, totally without the will to govern and seemingly unable to dismiss any demands from non-whites, however outrageous. It also led to Cologne and a general acceptance that the media was hiding reality that was previously confined to Sweden and Germany.

    3. Brexit happened in part because of Merkels million man march and it totally destroyed TINA (There Is No Alternative), suddenly people had a sense they chart a different path, that the institutions that seemed so strong were in fact just as weak as could be expected from their indifferent leadership. A lot of British politicians who were anti-Brexit almost seemed to welcome the end of the tension, the end of the beginning.

    With Brexit came a sense that there would be no retribution or a coup. Great men really were only great because you were on your knees.

    4. The media ran a 24/7 campaign for Trump thinking they were smearing him. How they didn’t see it coming, I don’t know, but it makes me happy to know the people running it have no clue how to influence people any more.

    As much as they spent a lot of time doing character assassination of Trump, they also spent time talking about his policies, which is something novel as compared to every election since Bush v Clinton. Hilary, by contrast, gave no solid indication of policy positions (Other than turn Syria into a bigger blood bath and maybe turn Western Persia into a sheet of glass) and thus gave exactly the impression of being a corrupt hand-maiden to money and power.

    5. White America was, to paraphrase Bill Burr, ‘All outta white guilt’.

    Read More
  124. I wonder what is the most boring big city in America to celebrate New Year’s Eve in?

    Read More
  125. @johnny memonic
    I think Occupy wall street was a huge turning point, it was when the final holdouts of economic "liberalism" were destroyed by pro wall street identity politics.

    http://imgur.com/a/CumKG

    Subversion, stupidity, or stupid subversion (e.g., Victoria Nuland).

    Maybe OWS was sabotaged by a Cointelpro type subversion, maybe it was just stupid or maybe “stacked” group processes are a stupid subversion.

    Here is a video of OWS crazy “Mic Check” brainwashing/communication dissing a black veteran of the Selma march.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QZlp3eGMNI

    This is one example of the tribal conflict that has destroyed the established order.
    It is just a taste of what is to come.

    Read More
  126. I think the US energy revolution (shale gale) was a big thing in that it changed the dynamic of pie splitting to pie growing and that it was a manufacturing activity with lots of US non-migrant labor.

    Really, I think the whole development is bigger and more important on its own than Trump getting elected.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The energy boys pretty much saved the economy with their technological breakthroughs.

    Thanks.
    , @Steve Sailer
    The energy boys pretty much saved the economy with their technological breakthroughs.

    Thanks.

  127. - Urban techno-economy continues to dramatically outperform old economy

    - Widespread cellphone-videos of urban youths gone wild (flash mobs, space to loot, Ivy league-administrator struggle-sessions, polar bear hunting, etc)

    - Mass terrorism on the continent and stateside

    - Legitimate political speech newly branded as hate // racism

    - The painfully consistent narrative collapse around BLM poster-children (Trayvon, Mike Brown, Keith Scott, etc)

    - Obama second-term drift into unedited ethnocentrism

    - Murder rates exploding

    - DeBlasio // NYPD open hostilities

    - The White Death

    - “White Privilege” in Appalachia // the Rust Belt

    Read More
  128. Nice paragraph from the Atlantic, which is why it pays to read the other side:

    It seems to me, then, trivially true that if there were fewer racists in America, Hillary Clinton would be president elect. Just as it seems trivially true that she’d be president elect if she’d used a State Department email server, or advocated a pro-coal energy policy, or visited Wisconsin and Michigan a dozen times more each.

    He’s actually refuting Ta-Nehisi Coates, and is a worthwhile read from the left.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/obamas-faith-in-white-america-was-not-misplaced/511901/

    He’s not going to talk about immigration or trade, of course. Though he does allude to how sick people were of PC in passing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "It seems to me, then, trivially true that if there were fewer racists in America, Hillary Clinton would be president elect."

    White racists didn't vote for Crooked Cankles because she is a Person Of Color?

  129. @Langley
    One of the reasons the alternatives grew in number and influence was because the owners of the megaphone became such obvious hate-filled liars.

    If Newsweek had published the Monica story in 1998 we might not have developed the alternative media.

    Yes, I agree. The Megaphone Holders became progressively (heh) more brazen in nudging the Narrative away from reality, which helped create the opening for small but burgeoning independent media.

    Read More
  130. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “…From the perspective of 2016, mass conquest sounds pretty economically futile.”

    This may be a bit too “geopolitical” and wasn’t the most important thing domestically, but 2016 seems to be the year the gas finally ran out on real plans to “Invade the World, Invite the World”.

    Not only does mass conquest seem futile, but so does New World Order soft-multinational-conquest-colonialism. It literally doesn’t make sense to bomb them there to displace them to make them come here.

    No way decades of never ending quasi-wars are good for maintenance of the established order and, in particular, of the 60s “fight any fight and bear any burden”. It is sooo obvious that the US military is not going to be remaking the world in the image of some intellectual vision of a New World Order any time real soon now. Also that “magic dirt” no longer seems to work.

    The whole Arab Spring thing is history. Was it inspired by western intelligence agencies as part of a plan to re-make the Arab world into Walmart world? A triple bank shot involving the Saudis to make the Middle East safe for Israel, at least in some people’s minds? Who knows, but it doesn’t matter any more. It came, it happened, it went.

    Libya. Well, that sure worked out. How about all those high-class immigrants Gaddafi used to keep bottled up or on his own payroll? Good thing to see the Italian navy is on the job, assuring everybody of free transportation. It’s like a human right. What was that snarky think Hillary said? “We came… he died.” Great! And then? Makes you think people confused Hollywood movies with reality. We killed the Big Bad Man. And not much changed.

    We’ve been fighting in Libya against ISIS. It’s hard to tell from the news how it’s going.

    “US military ends anti-IS operation in Libya’s Sirte”:

    “…The US has ended a military operation to support Libya’s fledgling government in its efforts to retake the former IS stronghold of Sirte. The militant group still retains a presence in the country…

    …formally ended operations to drive the so-called “Islamic State” (IS) from its former stronghold in Libya, US military’s Africa Command said in a statement…

    …The United States on August 1 launched Operation Odyssey Lightning to help government-aligned forces push IS from Sirte…

    US drones, warships and jets conducted 495 strikes on IS vehicles, tanks, heavy guns, fighting positions and command centers as GNA-aligned forces fought to retake the city…”

    Afghanistan. I suppose we’re still fighting, I see a Sergeant Allan Brown, died on 6-Dec-2016 and that there were 4 US casualties in November. I notice a so-called “Afghan Division”, has done a lot of fighting on the side of the government in Aleppo and Palmyra. US for the win!

    Iraq. The war with ISIS is still there. There were 5 US KIA in November. We’re currently assisting in the siege of Mosul, which, like Aleppo, will most likely fall. For some reason Aleppo’s been getting more press.

    “Caution marks Iraqi army advance against Islamic State north of Mosul”:

    “…several weeks of deadlock in the most complex operation in the country since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion

    Conventional U.S. forces deploying more extensively in this phase are now visible very close to the front lines…

    …”They don’t have to be as good as us, they just have to be better than Daesh,” one U.S. military official told Reuters earlier this year, using an Arabic acronym for Islamic State…”

    Syria. Our strategy, apparently to “arm the heroic freedom fighters” using Saudi money to overthrow the Big Bad Man, foundered most miserably. I imagine there’s still a UAV flying around trying to find heroic freedom fighters in Syria. The Syrian government, the Iranians, the Russians, and Hezbollah and other Shiite militias called the west’s bluff. Bullets and bombs versus all the women in the west hissing? Not a difficult decision, apparently.

    Things have gotten just weird and dangerous in Syria, with the US, Russians, Syrians, Turks, Kurds, Isis, Iranians, Lebanese Hezbollah, Iraqis, and assorted others (Afghans, Pakistanis) all conducting sizeable combat operations. If the US was the sole superpower after the end of the Cold War, we didn’t do a good job of keeping the peace, in the end. And just where did all those Color Revolutions come from?

    Yemen. We seem to be on the job fighting the Houthis. We’ve also done a lot of drone strikes, mostly trying to assassinate Al-Qaeda types) and in October launched Tomahawk strikes on the Houthis. Like Syria, there’s multiple forces involved, including both ISIS and Al-Qaeda (fighting everyone, including each other). Hard to smell victory just around the corner. This war has in some ways been going on since the British left after WWII. Peace is not likely at hand.

    Unlike the Cold War, none of these places can directly threaten the US. The problem isn’t military, so much as dealing with primitive chaos. Our strategy of somehow directing the chaos with small numbers of special forces, surgical airpower, and key “good guys” doesn’t seem to work as we get dragged into ever more primitive, chaotic places, with numerous players and large populations. They’re not coherent enough to get the message.

    We seem to be trying to make the world safe as if we were fighting the last of the Indian Wars, but instead of fighting the last band of a few hundred Apache, we’re potentially fighting billions-and-billions who effectively have an infinite supply of light weapons.

    The man-on-the-street might not be up on all this, but if he’s paying any attention at all he’s go to sense that things are… a mess. This much of a mess means somebody’s wrong at the top.

    Even though most people in the US can stay safe in their bubble and never have to worry about these little wars, a world order that results in never ending war can’t be a good thing. If our glorious leaders got this wrong, what else do they have wrong? It’s a challenge to the political order.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Yemen. We seem to be on the job fighting the Houthis.

    This is kind of like when Reagan had the USS New Jersey shelling the Druze in the hills of Lebanon in 1983. After awhile, Reagan got tired of it and stopped.

    , @Jacobite
    Preach it, brother!
    , @Almost Missouri

    "we’re potentially fighting billions-and-billions who effectively have an infinite supply of light weapons."
     
    "Never fight a land war in Asia" was a bit of military wisdom for Westerners dating from at least WWII. Why? Because there are a lot of Asians--far more than of Westerners--and they can be cheaply armed for land war, so man-for-man superiority of professional Western soldiers quickly loses out to the sheer mass of Asiatic numbers. It's a shorthand version of Kipling's "Arithmetic on the Frontier" (1886).

    But the reality is that there are a lot of places where life is cheap, and there are no places that cannot be cheaply armed in the Age of the AK, and since in the Current Year precious few Westerners see nobility in dying for their country, land war in Asia is more suicidal than ever. "Asia" now applies to everything east and south of the Dardanelles.

    Our failure to heed this obvious wisdom is being relearned piecemeal, death by death.

  131. The left is calling Trump a traitor and a Kremlin pawn. This hasn’t hurt him much because his chief issue is nationalist immigration policy. If the people calling him a foreign agent were patriotic, they’d be for the wall, but they’re not, so their patriotism seems fake to the Trump electorate.

    If Trump chickens out on immigration, his implicit defense against the Kremlin agent accusation will collapse. If he makes real progress on the wall and deportation issues, the left will have to drop the Kremlin agent accusation because it won’t be effective. They’ll be left with their old fascist/racist/stupid/low-class inventory of opponent characterization.

    I’m worried about Trump’s safety, health and impeachment possibilities. One color rev tactic is to provoke a government crackdown or stage a false flag crackdown if a real one isn’t forthcoming. They want martyrs. In America the goal would be to impeach Trump for the excesses of a real or fake crackdown against demonstrators. Unfortunately the number of young, lefty, bored and unemployed people is high, so staffing a US maidan won’t be difficult.

    Read More
  132. While there are certainly things that contributed, I think the bulk of it has to be this: someone came along with the right disdain for the elites and the necessary money to ignore them, coupled with his own celebrity and genuine political visions that were shared by half of the country.

    I view the elections as a series of tests administered to Trump and his followers. Trump had the most tests, and he passed them all. He didn’t apologize for offending Mexicans in that first speech, or John McCain, or Curiel, or the Khans.. He didn’t give in to the GOP elites in an effort to win their approval. He didn’t spend money on meaningless ads and polls. He came back after the Access Hollywood tape and debated Hillary to a draw. He never backed down.

    His followers had to show up and vote for him despite being told by everyone–and I mean, everyone–he’d lose.

    It was that simple. Everything else was glorious theater.

    The only reason he couldn’t have done the same thing in 2012 was that blacks would have still showed up for Obama. There’s nothing else about the 2012 landscape that would have made his run impossible.

    Read More
  133. My first pick as the possible top story of the year is how the internet has officially surpassed the MSM in terms of information and political influence. This is hard to measure and the MSM is a long way from dead but we now all know that it has limits and that it can be bypassed. This has led whites in particular to begin speaking ( and voting ) their own mind and it will only get stronger.

    My second observation-theory-revelation is that the left has now become so diverse that it is literally headless. There is no one person or group that is or can lead the coalition. The old white liberal (((and jewish))) leadership has now lost control of the Democratic party and each constituent group is now just lashing out without any real goal other than to attack whitey. Much of the panic we are witnessing among the left and the neo-con cucks, is a rearguard uncoordinated banzai. Until they can realign and establish order they will keep bleeding from the neck. No one group is strong enough to take charge. The white liberal are aging and shrinking, Hispanics are growing but cannot lead anyone anywhere, and blacks are assuming their normal place on the left side of every bell curve.

    My third revelation is that Lindsey Graham, Jeb Bush, and John McCain need to disappear and never be seen again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Hispanics are growing but cannot lead anyone anywhere,"

    So Julian Castro is not going to lead shit?
  134. @SIMPLE
    I think the US energy revolution (shale gale) was a big thing in that it changed the dynamic of pie splitting to pie growing and that it was a manufacturing activity with lots of US non-migrant labor.

    Really, I think the whole development is bigger and more important on its own than Trump getting elected.

    The energy boys pretty much saved the economy with their technological breakthroughs.

    Thanks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Another one might be the growing realisation that advances in robotics will lead to the loss of tens of millions of low-skill jobs and thus destroys the "the economy needs immigrants" argument.

    Uber, for example, is investing heavily in self-driving cars with a stated goal of eliminating one million drivers.

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/driverless-cars-are-coming-to-take-your-job-2016-01-30
  135. @SIMPLE
    I think the US energy revolution (shale gale) was a big thing in that it changed the dynamic of pie splitting to pie growing and that it was a manufacturing activity with lots of US non-migrant labor.

    Really, I think the whole development is bigger and more important on its own than Trump getting elected.

    The energy boys pretty much saved the economy with their technological breakthroughs.

    Thanks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SIMPLE
    No worries. Pulling dragons from the ground. What a great industry.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yXzZTYjUl0
    , @Opinionator
    Very shortsighted to be using up this energy right now when we don't need it.

    Also, to what extent does this short-term "saving of the economy" reduce incentives to address looming structural issues in our country and economy--mass immigration, overpopulation. If Trump had lost, and he came very close to doing so, it could well have been blamed on the temporary economic cushion to the electorate provide by this nonrenewable industry.
  136. @hooodathunkit
    Oh, I just hate to contradict people, but just for old times' sake . . .

    Hillary Clinton was the strongest candidate the Democrats ever fielded since 1968 when the leftists took over. Strongest. Ever.

    Compared to Humphrey, McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, W. Clinton, Gore, Kerry, or Obama; Hillary Clinton was THE strongest candidate the Party ran. More money. Higher ideals. Most prepared. Better, deeper, and most experienced support organizations. Most comprehensive and practical positions. Most coordinated campaign. Most solidified national committee. Most solid, coordinated, and fervent media support from every single major player. Etcetera.

    Folks who claim Clinton was a 'weak candidate' are those who simply don't like her and can't articulate why, or are (now) depressed by her loss to 'such an idiot'.

    Disagree if you want, but use the facts. There's no way ¿Jeb?, Carson, Christie, Cruz, Fiorina, Gilmore, Huckabee, Kasich, Paul, Rubio, or Santorum could have stood up to Clinton's machine; she would have greased any and every other Republican nominee.

    She had the second highest unfavorability ratings in recent history going in (Trump had the highest but overcame that). I agree she almost won, but to call her a strong candidate is ridiculous–she lacks the charisma required of any politician.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Look at this pic:

    http://static2.politico.com/dims4/default/da68727/2147483647/resize/1003x%3E/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F77%2F2f%2Fc96bf5bd4c0c8f9d4862a3c5a09a%2F161229-littlerock-electionnight-ap.jpg

    I don't ever remember her looking like that. Maybe it was just as simple as her losing the battle of the bulge.
  137. PJB’s purge from MSNBC had at least two effects :
    1) the MSM viewer lost access to a brilliant articulate Christian man, and the MSM commentators lost a true veteran who could check their insanity due to PJB being permanently banished from any panel apart from TMG
    2) It drove home (yet again) to Conservatives etc that playing nice and reasonable had proven fruitless. They would forgive Trump’s brashness/buffoonishness, maybe even prefer it.

    I think the nadir was Romney’s half-hearted 2012 campaign with the 47% dismissal and unwillingness to even try which made GOP base long for a fighter.

    Read More
  138. @JA
    Please don't overweight the Rolling Stone hoax. Writers, media types and political junkies cared about it far more than the average voter.

    The Rolling Stone hoax / misfire was very important because that was intended to be the prime red-meat motivator Hillary would rally around to get out the women’s vote. Rape culture is now all the rage because abortion has lost its punch as an issue. It is hard to care about aborting a fetus if women cannot seem to get pregnant to begin with and breast cancer can only generate so much enthusiasm.

    The flip side of that is Trump’s support among men was significant. It was purely organic. Like Hillary, he never proposed a single men’s rights special interest issue but every man knew that they would be legally castrated if the she-wulf sat on the throne.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "The flip side of that is Trump’s support among men was significant. It was purely organic. Like Hillary, he never proposed a single men’s rights special interest issue but every man knew that they would be legally castrated if the she-wulf sat on the throne."

    I would appreciate it if you put White before men when talking about Donald J. Trump's male support. Donald J. Trump was not appealing to men of all races. This is what the vast majority of Nonwhite men think of Donald J. Trump.

    https://youtu.be/39jhm-ip2oE
  139. Walking into stores and wondering what country I live in. Seeing Muslims. Sending large sums of tax money to pay for a public school that is comprised almost entirely of non-English speakers. Not wanting to go to a mall or movie theater anymore because it feels like the third world. Having unpleasant interactions at almost every restaurant where the person behind the register barely speaks English. Understanding that Obama (a 1950′s third world style, anti-American) got elected because of a third world invasion. Realizing that we wouldn’t have a country anymore if the invasion wasn’t immediately halted. Realizing that bringing in any amount of Muslims was suicidal. I understood this one prior to 9/11 though. That took me in 2013/2014 to Jeff Sessions/Stephen Miller/Vdare/Steve Sailer. When Trump announced, I pretty much knew. He got better and better over time. I think he might just save America and Western Civilization. But it won’t be easy. Cheers to America possibly getting one more chance in 2017.

    And Steve – what can I say, the Sailer Strategy was correct. You were right. Very rare is it that a blogger has such an impact. Obvious that Ann Coulter took a lot from you. Coulter gave to Trump. Trump gave to us all. Kudos to you, Steve.

    Read More
    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    This right here:

    Walking into stores and wondering what country I live in …
     
    Human group aesthetics (#26) is not exactly an official iSteve topic, and is probably not scientifically quantifiable, but seeing demographic change, especially as it has ramped up in recent years, may have woken up many whites. Not to mention the (more discussed) correlation of non-white (particularly NAM) phenotypes and less-than-desirable behavior/intelligence/temperament.

    Combine all that with outright disdain/triumphalism from ‘elites’ and their proxies telling Core Americans (and Europeans) “Change is inevitable, you’ll just have to get used to it” and you’ve got the explanation for much of 2016.
    , @Almost Missouri

    "Obvious that Ann Coulter took a lot from you."
     
    I wonder if Steve knows when and how Coulter first became iSteve-y? I remember when Steve's VDare articles first started turning up in Coulter's right column webpage feed, conveniently scrambled behind URL-shorteners (pre-Twitter). She simultaneously became more sharply ethno-nationalist, which she had been more diffident about before.
    , @Bleuteaux
    One of the experiences that is hard to convey to those who have not gone through it is for your company or town to turn about 20% subcontinental over the course of maybe a decade and a half. For the Rubio supporter, FIRE types, this doesn't exist. But when your company decides to stop hiring white people in favor of indentured servants, it upends your ideas about big business and stale political parties.
  140. @SFG
    She had the second highest unfavorability ratings in recent history going in (Trump had the highest but overcame that). I agree she almost won, but to call her a strong candidate is ridiculous--she lacks the charisma required of any politician.
    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    I recall that the Clinton inaugural in 1992 coincided with an LGBT rally in Washington, DC. One of the lesbians declared, "At last we have a First Lady that I'd like to f--k!"
    , @ATX Hipster
    That combined with the unfortunate shrillness of her voice and need to lecture her opposition made her seem too much like a humorless schoolmarm. It's hard to imagine anybody, especially men, liking her after seeing the "how am I not 50 points ahead?" clip.
  141. @SFG
    Nice paragraph from the Atlantic, which is why it pays to read the other side:

    It seems to me, then, trivially true that if there were fewer racists in America, Hillary Clinton would be president elect. Just as it seems trivially true that she’d be president elect if she’d used a State Department email server, or advocated a pro-coal energy policy, or visited Wisconsin and Michigan a dozen times more each.

    He's actually refuting Ta-Nehisi Coates, and is a worthwhile read from the left.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/obamas-faith-in-white-america-was-not-misplaced/511901/

    He's not going to talk about immigration or trade, of course. Though he does allude to how sick people were of PC in passing.

    “It seems to me, then, trivially true that if there were fewer racists in America, Hillary Clinton would be president elect.”

    White racists didn’t vote for Crooked Cankles because she is a Person Of Color?

    Read More
  142. @anonymous
    "...From the perspective of 2016, mass conquest sounds pretty economically futile."

    This may be a bit too "geopolitical" and wasn't the most important thing domestically, but 2016 seems to be the year the gas finally ran out on real plans to "Invade the World, Invite the World".

    Not only does mass conquest seem futile, but so does New World Order soft-multinational-conquest-colonialism. It literally doesn't make sense to bomb them there to displace them to make them come here.

    No way decades of never ending quasi-wars are good for maintenance of the established order and, in particular, of the 60s "fight any fight and bear any burden". It is sooo obvious that the US military is not going to be remaking the world in the image of some intellectual vision of a New World Order any time real soon now. Also that "magic dirt" no longer seems to work.

    The whole Arab Spring thing is history. Was it inspired by western intelligence agencies as part of a plan to re-make the Arab world into Walmart world? A triple bank shot involving the Saudis to make the Middle East safe for Israel, at least in some people's minds? Who knows, but it doesn't matter any more. It came, it happened, it went.

    Libya. Well, that sure worked out. How about all those high-class immigrants Gaddafi used to keep bottled up or on his own payroll? Good thing to see the Italian navy is on the job, assuring everybody of free transportation. It's like a human right. What was that snarky think Hillary said? "We came... he died." Great! And then? Makes you think people confused Hollywood movies with reality. We killed the Big Bad Man. And not much changed.

    We've been fighting in Libya against ISIS. It's hard to tell from the news how it's going.

    "US military ends anti-IS operation in Libya's Sirte":


    "...The US has ended a military operation to support Libya's fledgling government in its efforts to retake the former IS stronghold of Sirte. The militant group still retains a presence in the country...

    ...formally ended operations to drive the so-called "Islamic State" (IS) from its former stronghold in Libya, US military's Africa Command said in a statement...

    ...The United States on August 1 launched Operation Odyssey Lightning to help government-aligned forces push IS from Sirte...

    ...US drones, warships and jets conducted 495 strikes on IS vehicles, tanks, heavy guns, fighting positions and command centers as GNA-aligned forces fought to retake the city..."

     

    Afghanistan. I suppose we're still fighting, I see a Sergeant Allan Brown, died on 6-Dec-2016 and that there were 4 US casualties in November. I notice a so-called "Afghan Division", has done a lot of fighting on the side of the government in Aleppo and Palmyra. US for the win!

    Iraq. The war with ISIS is still there. There were 5 US KIA in November. We're currently assisting in the siege of Mosul, which, like Aleppo, will most likely fall. For some reason Aleppo's been getting more press.

    "Caution marks Iraqi army advance against Islamic State north of Mosul":


    "...several weeks of deadlock in the most complex operation in the country since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion...

    ...Conventional U.S. forces deploying more extensively in this phase are now visible very close to the front lines...

    ..."They don't have to be as good as us, they just have to be better than Daesh," one U.S. military official told Reuters earlier this year, using an Arabic acronym for Islamic State..."

     

    Syria. Our strategy, apparently to "arm the heroic freedom fighters" using Saudi money to overthrow the Big Bad Man, foundered most miserably. I imagine there's still a UAV flying around trying to find heroic freedom fighters in Syria. The Syrian government, the Iranians, the Russians, and Hezbollah and other Shiite militias called the west's bluff. Bullets and bombs versus all the women in the west hissing? Not a difficult decision, apparently.

    Things have gotten just weird and dangerous in Syria, with the US, Russians, Syrians, Turks, Kurds, Isis, Iranians, Lebanese Hezbollah, Iraqis, and assorted others (Afghans, Pakistanis) all conducting sizeable combat operations. If the US was the sole superpower after the end of the Cold War, we didn't do a good job of keeping the peace, in the end. And just where did all those Color Revolutions come from?

    Yemen. We seem to be on the job fighting the Houthis. We've also done a lot of drone strikes, mostly trying to assassinate Al-Qaeda types) and in October launched Tomahawk strikes on the Houthis. Like Syria, there's multiple forces involved, including both ISIS and Al-Qaeda (fighting everyone, including each other). Hard to smell victory just around the corner. This war has in some ways been going on since the British left after WWII. Peace is not likely at hand.


    Unlike the Cold War, none of these places can directly threaten the US. The problem isn't military, so much as dealing with primitive chaos. Our strategy of somehow directing the chaos with small numbers of special forces, surgical airpower, and key "good guys" doesn't seem to work as we get dragged into ever more primitive, chaotic places, with numerous players and large populations. They're not coherent enough to get the message.

    We seem to be trying to make the world safe as if we were fighting the last of the Indian Wars, but instead of fighting the last band of a few hundred Apache, we're potentially fighting billions-and-billions who effectively have an infinite supply of light weapons.

    The man-on-the-street might not be up on all this, but if he's paying any attention at all he's go to sense that things are... a mess. This much of a mess means somebody's wrong at the top.

    Even though most people in the US can stay safe in their bubble and never have to worry about these little wars, a world order that results in never ending war can't be a good thing. If our glorious leaders got this wrong, what else do they have wrong? It's a challenge to the political order.

    Yemen. We seem to be on the job fighting the Houthis.

    This is kind of like when Reagan had the USS New Jersey shelling the Druze in the hills of Lebanon in 1983. After awhile, Reagan got tired of it and stopped.

    Read More
  143. @Prof. Woland
    My first pick as the possible top story of the year is how the internet has officially surpassed the MSM in terms of information and political influence. This is hard to measure and the MSM is a long way from dead but we now all know that it has limits and that it can be bypassed. This has led whites in particular to begin speaking ( and voting ) their own mind and it will only get stronger.

    My second observation-theory-revelation is that the left has now become so diverse that it is literally headless. There is no one person or group that is or can lead the coalition. The old white liberal (((and jewish))) leadership has now lost control of the Democratic party and each constituent group is now just lashing out without any real goal other than to attack whitey. Much of the panic we are witnessing among the left and the neo-con cucks, is a rearguard uncoordinated banzai. Until they can realign and establish order they will keep bleeding from the neck. No one group is strong enough to take charge. The white liberal are aging and shrinking, Hispanics are growing but cannot lead anyone anywhere, and blacks are assuming their normal place on the left side of every bell curve.

    My third revelation is that Lindsey Graham, Jeb Bush, and John McCain need to disappear and never be seen again.

    “Hispanics are growing but cannot lead anyone anywhere,”

    So Julian Castro is not going to lead shit?

    Read More
  144. When Hillary gave her victory speech after the Super Tuesday primary, there was not a single straight white male in the crowd tableau behind her:

    https://images.c-span.org/Files/e9a/20160302062838001_hd.jpg

    That was when I realized that Trump really could win the general.

    Read More
  145. @Prof. Woland
    The Rolling Stone hoax / misfire was very important because that was intended to be the prime red-meat motivator Hillary would rally around to get out the women's vote. Rape culture is now all the rage because abortion has lost its punch as an issue. It is hard to care about aborting a fetus if women cannot seem to get pregnant to begin with and breast cancer can only generate so much enthusiasm.

    The flip side of that is Trump's support among men was significant. It was purely organic. Like Hillary, he never proposed a single men's rights special interest issue but every man knew that they would be legally castrated if the she-wulf sat on the throne.

    “The flip side of that is Trump’s support among men was significant. It was purely organic. Like Hillary, he never proposed a single men’s rights special interest issue but every man knew that they would be legally castrated if the she-wulf sat on the throne.”

    I would appreciate it if you put White before men when talking about Donald J. Trump’s male support. Donald J. Trump was not appealing to men of all races. This is what the vast majority of Nonwhite men think of Donald J. Trump.

    https://youtu.be/39jhm-ip2oE

    Read More
    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    As little support Trump had from black men, it was worse from black women. There was a 14% gender gap among blacks this election cycle. With 94% of black women voting for Hillary (and 97% voted for Obama) the Republicans should just right them off. Any reach out efforts they make towards blacks should be aimed at either black men or lowering turnout.
  146. One development was the things that didn’t happen. Hillary ran on an implicit promise of Disarming Evil White Guys.

    She seemed to be betting on more Dylann Roofs and Sandy Hooks happening to help her out, but they largely didn’t.

    Instead she got Muslim and BLM terrorism.

    Some of that was just bad luck for her, some of it was her lack of critical thinking skills at deconstructing The Narrative in the corporate press so she wasn’t good at noticing patterns and trends.

    Some of it was that she (and her side) were encouraging dangerous trends like black rage and Muslim immigrant resentfulness.

    Read More
    • Agree: Dahlia
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "some of it was her lack of critical thinking skills at deconstructing The Narrative in the corporate press so she wasn’t good at noticing patterns and trends."
     
    In other words, she huffed her own exhaust, believed her own hype. She thought Dylann Roofs and Sandy Hooks were common and Muslim and BLM terrorism were rare, when it was the other way around.

    Of course, as you point out, part of the reason Roofs and Hooks were rare was that everyone condemned them, while only conservatives condemned Muslim and BLM terror, while Hillary and the Media said that condemnation was invalid. So they got more of it because they were politically subsidizing it.
    , @anonymous
    Half right.

    Dylann Roof happened.

    Sandy Hook did not.

    Of course, since it was a completely contrived event, there was no reason to think another one, this time executed with better political timing, would have been bad for HRC.

    The covert ops capacity of the ruling class is enormous - something will happen to DJT if he doesn't back off his threat to end our disastrous trade agreements.
  147. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The invention of the term ‘cuck’ and ‘cuckservative’ changed everything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dearieme
    "The invention of the term ‘cuck’ and ‘cuckservative’ changed everything." Great; can you explain them to me, please?
  148. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “Some of it was that she (and her side) were encouraging dangerous trends like black rage and Muslim immigrant resentfulness.”

    Smart phones that can video these “trouble” breakouts have probably opened a lot of eyes.

    Read More
  149. @Almost Missouri

    "There is a global populist-nationalist trend,... Where did the nationalist trend come from?"
     
    Nationalism is the major multi-century historical trend still going on. Why? Hard to say. There are just certain implacable zeitgeists in certain periods. Nationalism has been in the current zeitgeist since at least the French revolution, though I think you can trace it back further in Anglo history (and hence in its American offshoot). It is by definition democratic, hostile to elite excess, communitarian and language-dependent. When anything stands in the way of those trends, conflict will follow. It started in and was strongest in the West, but continues to spread over the world.

    Nationalism has a lot to do with the decline of Latin and Greek and the rise of the printing press. Instead of languages changing ever 50 or 100 miles, all the smart people for a few hundred miles learn the language of wherever the best poet lived (e.g., Dante in Florence).

    The Arabs hated printing presses, so they didn’t evolve all that many cohesive nation-states.

    There were a few exceptions like the Maronites. Carlos Slim’s relatives brought an Arab printing press with them from Lebanon to Mexico and started an Arabic newspaper in Mexico in the 1800s. That’s a pretty good background to come from, and Slim has done well for himself.

    Read More
    • Agree: Dave Pinsen
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "Nationalism has a lot to do with the decline of Latin and Greek and the rise of the printing press"
     
    Which was the cart and which was the horse?

    Also, you just gave me the idea that prior to modern-style nationalism, one could that there was a sort of Ur-nationalism in Europe: Europe was the Land, Christendom was the People, and Latin was the Language. Or Greek in the Orthodox East.
  150. @hooodathunkit
    Oh, I just hate to contradict people, but just for old times' sake . . .

    Hillary Clinton was the strongest candidate the Democrats ever fielded since 1968 when the leftists took over. Strongest. Ever.

    Compared to Humphrey, McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, W. Clinton, Gore, Kerry, or Obama; Hillary Clinton was THE strongest candidate the Party ran. More money. Higher ideals. Most prepared. Better, deeper, and most experienced support organizations. Most comprehensive and practical positions. Most coordinated campaign. Most solidified national committee. Most solid, coordinated, and fervent media support from every single major player. Etcetera.

    Folks who claim Clinton was a 'weak candidate' are those who simply don't like her and can't articulate why, or are (now) depressed by her loss to 'such an idiot'.

    Disagree if you want, but use the facts. There's no way ¿Jeb?, Carson, Christie, Cruz, Fiorina, Gilmore, Huckabee, Kasich, Paul, Rubio, or Santorum could have stood up to Clinton's machine; she would have greased any and every other Republican nominee.

    “Hillary Clinton was the strongest candidate the Democrats ever fielded since 1968″
    Those are some weak candidates, but I think Hillary was still worse than some of them.

    She had no charisma. Carville and Stephanopoulos both knew that.
    She had terrible party organization. Read any of the post-election analyses, and you’ll find that not only did her national campaign ignore warnings from state campaigns (specifically Michigan), but they spent millions on uncompetitive states to win the popular vote.

    Hillary Clinton’s campaign was run like a robot would run a campaign. They relied too much on data and not enough on gut feeling. Democrats are coasting on the knowledge that a brown America votes for free stuff. They haven’t realized that the voters aren’t brown enough to be a sure thing, yet.

    Read More
  151. @Steve Sailer
    So how many irredentist flash spots are there?

    If you go back to what British statesmen like the Chamberlain brothers were worried about in, say, 1937-38 it was a debate over whether Hitler really wanted continental-scale conquest (Austen's worry) or merely semi-symbolic irredentist rectification of borders, such as the Sudetenland and Danzig (Neville's less alarming view).

    Stalin ended probably permanently German irredentist possibilities in 1945 by massive ethnic cleansing of Germans from Eastern Europe.

    From the perspective of 2016, mass conquest sounds pretty economically futile. But stoking nationalist passions over semi-symbolic irredentist projects (the West Bank, Crimea, islets in the South China Sea, etc.) sounds like it could be a winning domestic political strategy. On the other hand, it could go to far and lead to a massive shooting war.

    For example, the Sandinista president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, has pursued a national hobby of suing Nicaragua's neighbors in the World Court over disputed boundaries (and then abiding by their decisions). It's a pretty clever way to show voters whose side you are on without getting into a war, but it hasn't really spread.

    Right now, European nationalist parties have a common foe in the EU. So they are quite chummy.

    But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?

    “European nationalist parties have a common foe in the EU. So they are quite chummy. But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?”

    That assumes that the EU is what is currently keeping any given pair of European opponents from fighting over ancient territorial disputes. But is that in fact the case? Does the EU have an army in Brussels to deploy to Alsace-Lorraine if the Germans get irredentist? No. What is keeping old European rivalries from going kinetic is American hegemony, or in other words, the armed nationalism of an even bigger nation. Militarily, the EU is just window dressing.

    There has been no intra-NATO warfare. Why? Because the US said there wouldn’t be, that’s why, and that’s all you need to know if you’re European. In fact there’s barely been any extra-NATO warfare by NATO countries without US permission since 1956 when Eisenhower deployed the Sixth Fleet against Britain, France and Israel(!) to end the Suez Crisis. Since then, no NATO military dares lift a finger without US permission.

    This condition cannot last forever. Indeed, it is arguably this unhealthy passivity and the thrall of perpetual immaturity in which US hegemony keeps Europe that has made Europe so vulnerable to the obviously stupid migrant crisis recently. A little inter-European jousting might have served as a healthy inoculant against this ridiculous and easily preventable infection. Countries that have recently jousted with the Soviet empire (the Visegrad group) are proving the most resistant to the migrant stupidity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Can the US enforce their hegemony -- at least enough to prevent European infighting -- without an EU or a NATO?
    , @Thirdeye

    Countries that have recently jousted with the Soviet empire (the Visegrad group) are proving the most resistant to the migrant stupidity.
     
    That's because they're moribund hellholes that nobody in their right mind would ever want to move to.
  152. @Steve Sailer
    The energy boys pretty much saved the economy with their technological breakthroughs.

    Thanks.

    No worries. Pulling dragons from the ground. What a great industry.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yXzZTYjUl0

    Read More
  153. Now there’s cognitive distortion if I ever saw it! That Clinton was viewed unfavorably . . . except her opponent was even worse . . . but “overcame” it. LOL

    Trump did not overcome it; not in the least. Trump’s unfavorability was below Clinton’s before the election and became worse on election day: -54% Clinton v -61% Trump!!! You are trying to make the facts fit the narrative; everyone’s entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts.

    Clinton was the single, strongest, and best prepared candidate the Democrats have ever run in modern history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna
    That you can wax so intensely nostalgic over the most corrupt and cynical presidential candidate in memory (if not in history) is almost touching.

    Alas, however, your candidate lost the election, though, didn't she. And to make it even worse for you guys, she lost in a way that indicated that you guys don't even understand how the election is run.

    So let's recap, shall we? In addition to craven, shameless cynicism you threw in a healthy dose of basic incompetence. For those among you who are able to perceive this, peering outside of your sealed bubble of self-regard, that's got to smart a bit.
    , @Jasper Been
    She did not win, so clearly she was not the greatest modern Democratic candidate.

    But if you would like to belive that, fine. Lets have it inscribed on her tombstone.

  154. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Almost Missouri

    "European nationalist parties have a common foe in the EU. So they are quite chummy. But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?"
     
    That assumes that the EU is what is currently keeping any given pair of European opponents from fighting over ancient territorial disputes. But is that in fact the case? Does the EU have an army in Brussels to deploy to Alsace-Lorraine if the Germans get irredentist? No. What is keeping old European rivalries from going kinetic is American hegemony, or in other words, the armed nationalism of an even bigger nation. Militarily, the EU is just window dressing.

    There has been no intra-NATO warfare. Why? Because the US said there wouldn't be, that's why, and that's all you need to know if you're European. In fact there's barely been any extra-NATO warfare by NATO countries without US permission since 1956 when Eisenhower deployed the Sixth Fleet against Britain, France and Israel(!) to end the Suez Crisis. Since then, no NATO military dares lift a finger without US permission.

    This condition cannot last forever. Indeed, it is arguably this unhealthy passivity and the thrall of perpetual immaturity in which US hegemony keeps Europe that has made Europe so vulnerable to the obviously stupid migrant crisis recently. A little inter-European jousting might have served as a healthy inoculant against this ridiculous and easily preventable infection. Countries that have recently jousted with the Soviet empire (the Visegrad group) are proving the most resistant to the migrant stupidity.

    Can the US enforce their hegemony — at least enough to prevent European infighting — without an EU or a NATO?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Yes. At bottom, US hegemony rests on military power. The rest is commentary!

    Or to enlarge my earlier allegory, the EU is window dressing--purely decorative and obscurantist--and NATO is window framing--helpful but not strictly necessary.

    Europe might be better off with rather less US hegemony. It's been two generations since they've had to exercise any real look-out-for-yourself-ism. A lot of their politics is juvenile poseurism.
  155. @Thomas
    World War G triumphalism played a part, I think. The fact that the victors weren't satisfied with mere recognition as a matter of Constitutional law, but were pressed to force for the total submission of every baker and restauranteur in America, was a clear signal that the Left was going to offer no honorable peace in the culture war.

    On a more intimate level, the early attempt to destroy the business of Donald Trump, for example, by NBC cutting ties with him, made it clear that the election was a "you win or you die" affair for Trump, and another example of the overreach of the SJWs.

    There are countless other examples, like the NCAA's punishment of North Carolina. The media and IT industry were sending clear examples that free speech was not going to be tolerated in the future for having given rise to the movements that brought about Trump and Brexit (the current pushes against "fake news" are the stillbirth of these efforts). Ditto Hillary signaling that that Second Amendment would be toast under her Supreme Court appointments (gun rights supporters pay close attention to this). Overall, there was a clear message that the liberal order was going to go for a clear push to level the cultural, legal, and political terrain to their decisive advantage. Even the fig leaf of "comprehensive immigration reform" was dropped in favor of a clear push for amnesty.

    The "Deplorables" speech was a clear expression that a signfiicant portion of the population was, in the Left's estimation, to have no future. Hillary's own campaign people have pointed to it on several occasions since the election as a moment when their messaging fell through.

    The constant stream of terrorist or violent incidents, both Islamic and anti-cop, kept demonstrating how committed the liberal order was to not doing anything to stop it. This became pretty clear a year ago after San Bernardino, and it never stopped.

    “The fact that the victors weren’t satisfied with mere recognition as a matter of Constitutional law, but were pressed to force for the total submission of every baker and restauranteur in America..”

    Add to that every schoolgirls shower room and bathroom in America…I think this is what lost many women’s votes for Hillary.

    WW G does not match up well with feminism, or with the cleared eyed common sense that (most) women have about what is good for their daughters.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    Just as long as nobody pees on the toilet seat in the ladies room.....
  156. @The Only Catholic Unionist
    2016 has been a long time coming. Obama's policies have been defeated in every election that BHO himself was not on the ballot (2010, 2014. and 2016).

    I'm not sure how you empirically measure something like this, but the great body of the people were finally able to say "NO" in such a way that they would be listened to. The Brexit vote in the UK and the Trump candidacy finally created a sort of preference cascade.

    I am very thankful. Obviously, reality had to intrude at some point, and there was bound to be a lurch back to reality; now, it would appear it happened (barely) soon enough that the return to normalcy could happen without violent revolution.

    I agree, unlike Jefferson. It was pretty much the launching of World War Trans that made me realize that the world had gone pretty insane. I wouldn’t have otherwise cared much, I wanted to be left alone.

    Read More
  157. @Desiderius
    Look at this pic:

    http://static2.politico.com/dims4/default/da68727/2147483647/resize/1003x%3E/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F77%2F2f%2Fc96bf5bd4c0c8f9d4862a3c5a09a%2F161229-littlerock-electionnight-ap.jpg

    I don't ever remember her looking like that. Maybe it was just as simple as her losing the battle of the bulge.

    I recall that the Clinton inaugural in 1992 coincided with an LGBT rally in Washington, DC. One of the lesbians declared, “At last we have a First Lady that I’d like to f–k!”

    Read More
    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "recall that the Clinton inaugural in 1992 coincided with an LGBT rally in Washington, DC. One of the lesbians declared, “At last we have a First Lady that I’d like to f–k!”

    Scissoring is not considered real fucking.

    Also is that Lesbian saying First Lady Jackie-O was just chopped liver?
    , @Alec Leamas

    I recall that the Clinton inaugural in 1992 coincided with an LGBT rally in Washington, DC. One of the lesbians declared, “At last we have a First Lady that I’d like to f–k!”
     
    . . . and vice versa.
    , @Jacobite
    We certainly had a Vice-Lady I would have liked to!
    , @BB753
    "One of the lesbians declared, “At last we have a First Lady that I’d like to f–k!”


    Melania is easy on the eyes too, for this heterosexual man.
  158. @IA

    Hillary Clinton suffered a series of coughing fits and Parkinson’s seizures on the campaign trail and called White Trump voters “deplorable.”
     
    Visual input is hardwired directly to the brain bypassing reason. Age of Reason types never figure this out. Reason tries to suppress visual, aural, i.e., sensations to no avail. Ideologues nevet learn.

    Define “reason.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @IA
    According to my dictionary: "the power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic"
  159. The deleterious effects of unrestricted free trade and mass third-world immigration in the post Cold War period — neither of which were politically correct topics for honest public discussion — reached the breaking point (which was bound to happen sooner or later). The politics of distraction finally broke down.

    Read More
  160. @hooodathunkit
    Oh, I just hate to contradict people, but just for old times' sake . . .

    Hillary Clinton was the strongest candidate the Democrats ever fielded since 1968 when the leftists took over. Strongest. Ever.

    Compared to Humphrey, McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, W. Clinton, Gore, Kerry, or Obama; Hillary Clinton was THE strongest candidate the Party ran. More money. Higher ideals. Most prepared. Better, deeper, and most experienced support organizations. Most comprehensive and practical positions. Most coordinated campaign. Most solidified national committee. Most solid, coordinated, and fervent media support from every single major player. Etcetera.

    Folks who claim Clinton was a 'weak candidate' are those who simply don't like her and can't articulate why, or are (now) depressed by her loss to 'such an idiot'.

    Disagree if you want, but use the facts. There's no way ¿Jeb?, Carson, Christie, Cruz, Fiorina, Gilmore, Huckabee, Kasich, Paul, Rubio, or Santorum could have stood up to Clinton's machine; she would have greased any and every other Republican nominee.

    “Higher ideals.”
    Such as what? Hiding legal files? Defaming women who accused her (reputed) husband of …various things? Firing carreer White House Travel Office employees to put her gang in thier jobs? Hillary is the most obviously dirty politician since Tricky Dick. He, at least, was a patriot…sort of.

    “Most prepared.”
    She was a robot on the stage. I can’t see her as a good court room lawyer, she is just too obviously rehearsed.

    “Most comprehensive and practical positions. ”

    Like what? Obama term 3? The people did not want that, and neither the candidate nor her expensive advisers recognized it in time.
    She should have had distanced herself from him.

    By the way, I would have voted for a Dem like Joe Lieberman or equivilant, in a heartbeat, over Trump.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Obama term 3? The people did not want that, and neither the candidate nor her expensive advisers recognized it in time.
    She should have had distanced herself from him.
     
    I thought his approval ratings were pretty high at the end there? There was an obvious I wish Obama could run again so I don't have to vote for the lesser of two evils sentiment among liberals.
  161. @Harry Baldwin
    I recall that the Clinton inaugural in 1992 coincided with an LGBT rally in Washington, DC. One of the lesbians declared, "At last we have a First Lady that I'd like to f--k!"

    “recall that the Clinton inaugural in 1992 coincided with an LGBT rally in Washington, DC. One of the lesbians declared, “At last we have a First Lady that I’d like to f–k!”

    Scissoring is not considered real fucking.

    Also is that Lesbian saying First Lady Jackie-O was just chopped liver?

    Read More
  162. @anonymous
    "...From the perspective of 2016, mass conquest sounds pretty economically futile."

    This may be a bit too "geopolitical" and wasn't the most important thing domestically, but 2016 seems to be the year the gas finally ran out on real plans to "Invade the World, Invite the World".

    Not only does mass conquest seem futile, but so does New World Order soft-multinational-conquest-colonialism. It literally doesn't make sense to bomb them there to displace them to make them come here.

    No way decades of never ending quasi-wars are good for maintenance of the established order and, in particular, of the 60s "fight any fight and bear any burden". It is sooo obvious that the US military is not going to be remaking the world in the image of some intellectual vision of a New World Order any time real soon now. Also that "magic dirt" no longer seems to work.

    The whole Arab Spring thing is history. Was it inspired by western intelligence agencies as part of a plan to re-make the Arab world into Walmart world? A triple bank shot involving the Saudis to make the Middle East safe for Israel, at least in some people's minds? Who knows, but it doesn't matter any more. It came, it happened, it went.

    Libya. Well, that sure worked out. How about all those high-class immigrants Gaddafi used to keep bottled up or on his own payroll? Good thing to see the Italian navy is on the job, assuring everybody of free transportation. It's like a human right. What was that snarky think Hillary said? "We came... he died." Great! And then? Makes you think people confused Hollywood movies with reality. We killed the Big Bad Man. And not much changed.

    We've been fighting in Libya against ISIS. It's hard to tell from the news how it's going.

    "US military ends anti-IS operation in Libya's Sirte":


    "...The US has ended a military operation to support Libya's fledgling government in its efforts to retake the former IS stronghold of Sirte. The militant group still retains a presence in the country...

    ...formally ended operations to drive the so-called "Islamic State" (IS) from its former stronghold in Libya, US military's Africa Command said in a statement...

    ...The United States on August 1 launched Operation Odyssey Lightning to help government-aligned forces push IS from Sirte...

    ...US drones, warships and jets conducted 495 strikes on IS vehicles, tanks, heavy guns, fighting positions and command centers as GNA-aligned forces fought to retake the city..."

     

    Afghanistan. I suppose we're still fighting, I see a Sergeant Allan Brown, died on 6-Dec-2016 and that there were 4 US casualties in November. I notice a so-called "Afghan Division", has done a lot of fighting on the side of the government in Aleppo and Palmyra. US for the win!

    Iraq. The war with ISIS is still there. There were 5 US KIA in November. We're currently assisting in the siege of Mosul, which, like Aleppo, will most likely fall. For some reason Aleppo's been getting more press.

    "Caution marks Iraqi army advance against Islamic State north of Mosul":


    "...several weeks of deadlock in the most complex operation in the country since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion...

    ...Conventional U.S. forces deploying more extensively in this phase are now visible very close to the front lines...

    ..."They don't have to be as good as us, they just have to be better than Daesh," one U.S. military official told Reuters earlier this year, using an Arabic acronym for Islamic State..."

     

    Syria. Our strategy, apparently to "arm the heroic freedom fighters" using Saudi money to overthrow the Big Bad Man, foundered most miserably. I imagine there's still a UAV flying around trying to find heroic freedom fighters in Syria. The Syrian government, the Iranians, the Russians, and Hezbollah and other Shiite militias called the west's bluff. Bullets and bombs versus all the women in the west hissing? Not a difficult decision, apparently.

    Things have gotten just weird and dangerous in Syria, with the US, Russians, Syrians, Turks, Kurds, Isis, Iranians, Lebanese Hezbollah, Iraqis, and assorted others (Afghans, Pakistanis) all conducting sizeable combat operations. If the US was the sole superpower after the end of the Cold War, we didn't do a good job of keeping the peace, in the end. And just where did all those Color Revolutions come from?

    Yemen. We seem to be on the job fighting the Houthis. We've also done a lot of drone strikes, mostly trying to assassinate Al-Qaeda types) and in October launched Tomahawk strikes on the Houthis. Like Syria, there's multiple forces involved, including both ISIS and Al-Qaeda (fighting everyone, including each other). Hard to smell victory just around the corner. This war has in some ways been going on since the British left after WWII. Peace is not likely at hand.


    Unlike the Cold War, none of these places can directly threaten the US. The problem isn't military, so much as dealing with primitive chaos. Our strategy of somehow directing the chaos with small numbers of special forces, surgical airpower, and key "good guys" doesn't seem to work as we get dragged into ever more primitive, chaotic places, with numerous players and large populations. They're not coherent enough to get the message.

    We seem to be trying to make the world safe as if we were fighting the last of the Indian Wars, but instead of fighting the last band of a few hundred Apache, we're potentially fighting billions-and-billions who effectively have an infinite supply of light weapons.

    The man-on-the-street might not be up on all this, but if he's paying any attention at all he's go to sense that things are... a mess. This much of a mess means somebody's wrong at the top.

    Even though most people in the US can stay safe in their bubble and never have to worry about these little wars, a world order that results in never ending war can't be a good thing. If our glorious leaders got this wrong, what else do they have wrong? It's a challenge to the political order.

    Preach it, brother!

    Read More
  163. 9/11.

    Hillary’s collapse on 9/11, that is. Followed by her people saying it was the heat, when everyone knew it was a very mild day. Then she comes out of Chelsea’s apartment and says she feels, “Great!”

    A cascade of lies from a candidate already truth-challenged.

    We didn’t find out about her collapse from the press, and might not have ever if not for the cameras everyone carries around now.

    The biggest story IMO is the collapse of establishment media credibility. They used to intimidate the public with their cleverness, but the newsrooms are full of SJW dingbats & low-paid Asians willing to write anything for a Prestige Job at the Times.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boomstick
    Agree about the collapse of establishment media credibility. Gallup had trust in the press by conservatives at about 15%, and independents at 30% back in September. I can't imagine that it got any better over the course of the campaign. Their power over anyone other than their ideological base is decreasing, perhaps terminally.

    The interesting question is what fills the void.
  164. @jjbees
    White despair.

    This is different from the white death- the increasing white death rate is a symptom.

    White despair is looking into the future, and seeing demographic displacement, loss of jobs to foreign countries, decreased quality of infrastructure, decreased overall quality of life, increasing debt, an increase in illegitimacy and decrease in the nuclear family, despite whites having less sex, with a more winner take all sexual and market economy, "press 1 for english, 2 para espanol" and being told that this is the just deserts of white oppression. The thousand cuts of white despair.

    Today I heard someone say that Trump is the Good Will Hunting Candidate:

    Robin Williams: "Me, I voted for Hillary. You?"
    Matt Damon: "I voted for Trump."
    Robin Williams: "Why?"
    Matt Damon: "Because fuck em, that's why."

    I tied it back to the Duke Lacrosse Hoax, that broke something in the narrative
    What hoaxes since then and results?
    Miller’s involvement at Duke is fascinating to me because I was unaware of him until after I thought that Duke was a nexus for the disruption in the rape-time continuum…

    Read More
  165. @IA

    Hillary Clinton suffered a series of coughing fits and Parkinson’s seizures on the campaign trail and called White Trump voters “deplorable.”
     
    Visual input is hardwired directly to the brain bypassing reason. Age of Reason types never figure this out. Reason tries to suppress visual, aural, i.e., sensations to no avail. Ideologues nevet learn.

    Reason is a sense just like smell or hearing, although we don’t understand it as such (probably because of hubris). Reason comes directly from our understanding of storylines/language, so it’s really a perception of time, or cause and effect, as a synthesis of our other perceptions in our cerebral cortex. If you look at it in that way, then it stands to reason that reason cannot stand alone.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Is "reason" not simply formal logic? How are you defining it?
  166. @Harry Baldwin
    I recall that the Clinton inaugural in 1992 coincided with an LGBT rally in Washington, DC. One of the lesbians declared, "At last we have a First Lady that I'd like to f--k!"

    I recall that the Clinton inaugural in 1992 coincided with an LGBT rally in Washington, DC. One of the lesbians declared, “At last we have a First Lady that I’d like to f–k!”

    . . . and vice versa.

    Read More
  167. When Hillary gave her victory speech after the Super Tuesday primary, there was not a single straight white male in the crowd tableau behind her:

    https://images.c-span.org/Files/e9a/20160302062838001_hd.jpg

    That was when I realized that Trump really could win the general.

    Read More
  168. @Clyde

    But, as a “bad white” who dares to criticize “good whites”, I suppose I will get what is coming to me in 2017, right?
     
    Who knows? What I do know is you are out to lunch and usually blocked by me. I suppose you voted for Hillary.

    I do hope he gets what’s coming to him. And hard.

    Read More
    • Agree: Clyde
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I do hope he gets what’s coming to him. And hard."

    Why don't you really speak your mind rather than in code?
    , @Clyde
    You must be one of the few Chinese origin commenters here. :)
  169. @Steve Sailer
    Football?

    U. of Missouri in 2015 and Colin Kaepernick in 2016?

    I think a lot of people just want football to be free of racial hectoring and don't think that's too much to ask.

    I think gamergate is under-rated as a factor, and will be remembered as a strategic mistake by the progressive left. A lot of clever young men were pestered and dissed by the SJWs, and as a result got woke and went jihad. They were fine with being bystanders to the culture war, but then they were themselves attacked. They saw first hand the fundamental dishonesty and authoritarianism of the progressives. They realized that there are no non-combatants allowed by the left and as a result picked picked a side, often the alt-right side. There’s probably quite a bit of overlap between the meme warriors and gamers.

    The SJWs think they got a victory or a draw in gamergate because that’s what their own media tells them. I think it’s more accurate to say they created a lot of clever new opponents that fly under the elite media radar but that punch above their weight online. Don’t underestimate the cultural power of intelligent but disaffected young men, even if they don’t have the megaphone.

    Overall I think the anonymous online presence did a lot to undermine the elite media narrative.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "I think gamergate is under-rated as a factor,"

    Not many people who's life revolves around video games tend to vote Republican. They tend to be huge Libs on average.
    , @Opinionator
    Overall I think the anonymous online presence did a lot to undermine the elite media narrative.

    Hard to know if we aren't all in our own little bubble, along with the MSM Twitter pundits.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    Certainly Vox Day made a big point of this in his SJWs Always Lie. As I have zero interest in or knowledge of gaming, Gamergate went right by me without notice and I had trouble following Vox Day's argument for its significance.
    , @dfordoom

    Overall I think the anonymous online presence did a lot to undermine the elite media narrative.
     
    I think that those of us who spend a lot of time at sites like this do tend to overestimate the influence of "alternative" media. It has some influence but it's still very small, and it's likely to remain small. I'd wager that the overwhelming majority of voters have never heard of gamergate.

    These days most people live in a bubble. They don't really interact with people who hold different opinions. That applies to SJWs and to the alt-right. It's just that the SJW bubble is bigger.

    When Hillary referred to the alt-right in her infamous speech I'd also wager that the vast majority of the population had no idea what she was talking about.
  170. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “after securing the party base, go for victory in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin, by campaigning against the Clinton trade policies that de-industrialized Middle America and on a new Trump trade agenda to re-industrialize America.”

    Pat Buchanan JAN 2016, predicting the Blue Wall cracking strategy.

    Read More
  171. @Harry Baldwin
    I recall that the Clinton inaugural in 1992 coincided with an LGBT rally in Washington, DC. One of the lesbians declared, "At last we have a First Lady that I'd like to f--k!"

    We certainly had a Vice-Lady I would have liked to!

    Read More
  172. @Boomstick
    I think gamergate is under-rated as a factor, and will be remembered as a strategic mistake by the progressive left. A lot of clever young men were pestered and dissed by the SJWs, and as a result got woke and went jihad. They were fine with being bystanders to the culture war, but then they were themselves attacked. They saw first hand the fundamental dishonesty and authoritarianism of the progressives. They realized that there are no non-combatants allowed by the left and as a result picked picked a side, often the alt-right side. There's probably quite a bit of overlap between the meme warriors and gamers.

    The SJWs think they got a victory or a draw in gamergate because that's what their own media tells them. I think it's more accurate to say they created a lot of clever new opponents that fly under the elite media radar but that punch above their weight online. Don't underestimate the cultural power of intelligent but disaffected young men, even if they don't have the megaphone.

    Overall I think the anonymous online presence did a lot to undermine the elite media narrative.

    “I think gamergate is under-rated as a factor,”

    Not many people who’s life revolves around video games tend to vote Republican. They tend to be huge Libs on average.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boomstick
    As a class I think the gamers have inchoate or incoherent politics. But at the same time they despise the SJWs who hector them about games. They aren't exactly conservative allies. More like co-belligerents against the cultural progressive left. They'd make a separate peace if they could, but that's not in the nature of the SJWs.

    There's a subset of gamers that red-pilled. They're in the minority but have an online impact.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    You'd think that, no? But then the liberals forced us to hate them by destroying one of the major cornerstones of enjoyment that we had. And they were thorough, pitiless, and self-righteous enough to make people who might have been allies or at least indifferent, into genuine enemies to the liberal cause.

    Its amazing, really.
    , @SFG
    Yeah, but I think it drew enough white male nerds into the neutral column, and a few into the alt-right column, to make a difference. Look at all the pro-Trump Youtube videos.

    There's also the whole 'cultural libertarian' phenomenon--not really alt-right, but anti-PC. A lot of guys have that worldview, and some of them probably voted for Trump. Certainly the big change is that the Left no longer has a monopoly on ingenuity, creativity, irony, and sarcastic humor.
  173. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    9/11.

    Hillary's collapse on 9/11, that is. Followed by her people saying it was the heat, when everyone knew it was a very mild day. Then she comes out of Chelsea's apartment and says she feels, "Great!"

    A cascade of lies from a candidate already truth-challenged.

    We didn't find out about her collapse from the press, and might not have ever if not for the cameras everyone carries around now.

    The biggest story IMO is the collapse of establishment media credibility. They used to intimidate the public with their cleverness, but the newsrooms are full of SJW dingbats & low-paid Asians willing to write anything for a Prestige Job at the Times.

    Agree about the collapse of establishment media credibility. Gallup had trust in the press by conservatives at about 15%, and independents at 30% back in September. I can’t imagine that it got any better over the course of the campaign. Their power over anyone other than their ideological base is decreasing, perhaps terminally.

    The interesting question is what fills the void.

    Read More
  174. @Jacobite
    I think that the deflationary forces we have been experiencing such as manufacturing efficiencies, abundant cheap labor, and a surfeit of fossil fuels are being outmatched by the continuous money printing by the central banks, i.e., money is getting cheaper even faster than widgets.

    Yes, I agree, after stomping the federal funds rate down to the floor for basically the entirety of the Obama administration, the Fed has been nudging rates up again. Sensible stewardship or political scale-thumbing?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jacobite
    Short term money can certainly be manipulated but when all is said and done central bankers have precious little control over long-term bond prices as they are determined by supply and demand. Devalue the currency and lenders will demand a higher rate of return for the depreciating money.
  175. There is a lot of great commentary on this thread. I am struggling to find anything I disagree with.

    It seems like a perfect storm of events that came together to tip things for Brexit and Trump. I agree with those who said Merkel’s boner was key. Without that you’d probably not have Brexit and quite possibly not have pushed Trump over the edge, although that is less sure. When I think of Merkel I think of this:

    https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0535/6917/products/mistakesdemotivator.jpeg?v=1416776264

    The internet as a means to comment on politics has been a huge enabler. I haven’t written a letter to the editor since I was a kid, but I must have spent man months commenting online, not just on here. It all adds up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    Remarkably, not only did Hillary identify Merkel as her hero among national leaders before the immivasion, she repeated it afterward, saying on 9/30/2016, "“One of my favorites is Angela Merkel because I think she’s been an extraordinary, strong leader during difficult times in Europe, which has obvious implications for the rest of the world and, most particularly, our country,” adding, “her bravery in the face of the refugee crisis is something that I am impressed by.”

    I don't know how many voters picked up on that. We really dodged a bullet there.
  176. Others have mentioned it here, but it bears repeating, especially for iSteve fans who tend to be older, more civic than ethnic in their nationalism, and less radical than the new young crowd: the media and Obama administration reactions to the Trayvon Martin case did the most to show White millennial men that they are hated and lied to by the elites that rule them. When asked about their first red pill, many, many millennials say it was a Skittle.

    Read More
  177. @Bill P
    Reason is a sense just like smell or hearing, although we don't understand it as such (probably because of hubris). Reason comes directly from our understanding of storylines/language, so it's really a perception of time, or cause and effect, as a synthesis of our other perceptions in our cerebral cortex. If you look at it in that way, then it stands to reason that reason cannot stand alone.

    Is “reason” not simply formal logic? How are you defining it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill P
    Formal logic is one kind of reason, yes, but that isn't my point. Reason derives from semantics, and it connects events in a temporal chain. It creates sense out of a timeline, much as we create sense out of patterns of light to form a meaningful picture in our minds. The patterns of light have no meaning besides what our brains give them, but they are immensely important to us. Likewise, these sequences of events that we can semantically contemplate have no meaning besides what our minds assign to them.

    Therefore, reason functions as a sense just like sight or hearing. You could say that's a leap, but do our minds assign meaning to anything besides those things we sense? Maybe you'd say it's only because of our reason that our minds assign meaning to these things we sense, but I don't think that's true, because animals have senses yet they do not reason, and they certainly make sense of what they perceive.

    What sets us apart from animals is that we can sense these cause and effect sequences with conscious effort and therefore "see" time in a way that they cannot. I think this is the origin of language, among other uniquely human abilities, and I think it should be classified as another sense.

    It's just a thought I had the other day, but I think it's an interesting idea.
  178. @Jefferson
    "I think gamergate is under-rated as a factor,"

    Not many people who's life revolves around video games tend to vote Republican. They tend to be huge Libs on average.

    As a class I think the gamers have inchoate or incoherent politics. But at the same time they despise the SJWs who hector them about games. They aren’t exactly conservative allies. More like co-belligerents against the cultural progressive left. They’d make a separate peace if they could, but that’s not in the nature of the SJWs.

    There’s a subset of gamers that red-pilled. They’re in the minority but have an online impact.

    Read More
  179. @Jefferson
    "I think gamergate is under-rated as a factor,"

    Not many people who's life revolves around video games tend to vote Republican. They tend to be huge Libs on average.

    You’d think that, no? But then the liberals forced us to hate them by destroying one of the major cornerstones of enjoyment that we had. And they were thorough, pitiless, and self-righteous enough to make people who might have been allies or at least indifferent, into genuine enemies to the liberal cause.

    Its amazing, really.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I mentioned Gamergate right after the 2014 election. From VDARE on November 10, 2014:

    One little discussed problem that came home to roost for liberals in 2014 is that the transparent bogusness of their narrative about the evils of cisgendered straight white men tends to attract sleazeballs. For example, here we are in 2014 and veteran sleazeball Rev. Al Sharpton is at the apogee of his influence over the White House. The talking points of the mainstream media’s war on whites repel individuals of conscience but attract those hungry for money and attention. In turn, the poor human quality of the loudest liberal voices drives away normal voters.

    For example, 2014 saw the Rise of the Politically Correct Adventuress. We’re used to being lectured on our sins by indignant lesbians, but the emergence of hot babes as politicized scolds wherever men with money were to be found was a recurrent pattern over the last 12 months. The most notorious example was Donald Sterling’s treacherous mistress V. Stiviano, while Silicon Valley was overrun by faux feminists, egged on by a press corps penning implausible stories about alpha male computer programmers.

    In 2014, one set of cisgendered straight white males—guys who really like playing video games—noticed that the liberal journalists that cover their hobby (but mostly seem to denounce their own readers for being straight white guys) were in bed—sometimes literally—with various untalented female game developers they kept promoting as the exciting diverse alternative to boring old stale pale maleness.

    This mainstream media scandal was dubbed Gamergate. In a unique incident in recent American history, the famous computer chip company Intel announced that it would stop advertising at one corrupt publication.

    Aghast, the mainstream media swung into action to defend its journalistic colleagues by denouncing those uncovering press corruption as rapists implicitly violating the central if unspoken taboo of modern America: members of the Core cannot self-organize explicitly to defend their own interests; and everybody knows that videogamers are CSWMs, and thus deserve to lose.

    The gamers replied that they were organizing not as straight white males defending themselves from denigration, but as consumers trying to clean up a conflict of interest. The mainstream media, however, was relentless in its umbrage at Gamergaters for valuing honesty over diversity. Moreover, gamers are seen as an implicit core defense group and thus should have no right to organize.

    Did Gamergate open many voters’ eyes? Perhaps not, although here’s one example. But this novel controversy is highly representative of the cultural dynamics of the last 24 months that culminated in the Democrats’ repudiation last week.

    Have you ever noticed that basically everything you are supposed to believe in these days—feminism, diversity, etc.—turns out in practice to just be another way for hot babes, rich guys, super salesmen, cunning financiers, telegenic self-promoters, and powerful politicians to get themselves even more money and power?

    , @Boomstick
    Breitbart was one of the leading platforms for gamergate. Milo got his start there. The chans were players as well, and they swung to Trump overall in 2016.

    The reaction of much of the populace to the media's obsessions, from #BLM to St Travon to gamergate to immigration to World War T, can be summed up as "Oh, bullshit." Once the bullshit flag has been thrown it takes some effort to rebuild credibility. It's also harder to drag elderly, untalented politicians across the finish line.
  180. @Steve Sailer
    The energy boys pretty much saved the economy with their technological breakthroughs.

    Thanks.

    Very shortsighted to be using up this energy right now when we don’t need it.

    Also, to what extent does this short-term “saving of the economy” reduce incentives to address looming structural issues in our country and economy–mass immigration, overpopulation. If Trump had lost, and he came very close to doing so, it could well have been blamed on the temporary economic cushion to the electorate provide by this nonrenewable industry.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    It's not for sure that oil is non-renewable.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin
  181. @Jefferson
    "I think gamergate is under-rated as a factor,"

    Not many people who's life revolves around video games tend to vote Republican. They tend to be huge Libs on average.

    Yeah, but I think it drew enough white male nerds into the neutral column, and a few into the alt-right column, to make a difference. Look at all the pro-Trump Youtube videos.

    There’s also the whole ‘cultural libertarian’ phenomenon–not really alt-right, but anti-PC. A lot of guys have that worldview, and some of them probably voted for Trump. Certainly the big change is that the Left no longer has a monopoly on ingenuity, creativity, irony, and sarcastic humor.

    Read More
  182. @Boomstick
    I think gamergate is under-rated as a factor, and will be remembered as a strategic mistake by the progressive left. A lot of clever young men were pestered and dissed by the SJWs, and as a result got woke and went jihad. They were fine with being bystanders to the culture war, but then they were themselves attacked. They saw first hand the fundamental dishonesty and authoritarianism of the progressives. They realized that there are no non-combatants allowed by the left and as a result picked picked a side, often the alt-right side. There's probably quite a bit of overlap between the meme warriors and gamers.

    The SJWs think they got a victory or a draw in gamergate because that's what their own media tells them. I think it's more accurate to say they created a lot of clever new opponents that fly under the elite media radar but that punch above their weight online. Don't underestimate the cultural power of intelligent but disaffected young men, even if they don't have the megaphone.

    Overall I think the anonymous online presence did a lot to undermine the elite media narrative.

    Overall I think the anonymous online presence did a lot to undermine the elite media narrative.

    Hard to know if we aren’t all in our own little bubble, along with the MSM Twitter pundits.

    Read More
  183. @Daniel Chieh
    You'd think that, no? But then the liberals forced us to hate them by destroying one of the major cornerstones of enjoyment that we had. And they were thorough, pitiless, and self-righteous enough to make people who might have been allies or at least indifferent, into genuine enemies to the liberal cause.

    Its amazing, really.

    I mentioned Gamergate right after the 2014 election. From VDARE on November 10, 2014:

    One little discussed problem that came home to roost for liberals in 2014 is that the transparent bogusness of their narrative about the evils of cisgendered straight white men tends to attract sleazeballs. For example, here we are in 2014 and veteran sleazeball Rev. Al Sharpton is at the apogee of his influence over the White House. The talking points of the mainstream media’s war on whites repel individuals of conscience but attract those hungry for money and attention. In turn, the poor human quality of the loudest liberal voices drives away normal voters.

    For example, 2014 saw the Rise of the Politically Correct Adventuress. We’re used to being lectured on our sins by indignant lesbians, but the emergence of hot babes as politicized scolds wherever men with money were to be found was a recurrent pattern over the last 12 months. The most notorious example was Donald Sterling’s treacherous mistress V. Stiviano, while Silicon Valley was overrun by faux feminists, egged on by a press corps penning implausible stories about alpha male computer programmers.

    In 2014, one set of cisgendered straight white males—guys who really like playing video games—noticed that the liberal journalists that cover their hobby (but mostly seem to denounce their own readers for being straight white guys) were in bed—sometimes literally—with various untalented female game developers they kept promoting as the exciting diverse alternative to boring old stale pale maleness.

    This mainstream media scandal was dubbed Gamergate. In a unique incident in recent American history, the famous computer chip company Intel announced that it would stop advertising at one corrupt publication.

    Aghast, the mainstream media swung into action to defend its journalistic colleagues by denouncing those uncovering press corruption as rapists implicitly violating the central if unspoken taboo of modern America: members of the Core cannot self-organize explicitly to defend their own interests; and everybody knows that videogamers are CSWMs, and thus deserve to lose.

    The gamers replied that they were organizing not as straight white males defending themselves from denigration, but as consumers trying to clean up a conflict of interest. The mainstream media, however, was relentless in its umbrage at Gamergaters for valuing honesty over diversity. Moreover, gamers are seen as an implicit core defense group and thus should have no right to organize.

    Did Gamergate open many voters’ eyes? Perhaps not, although here’s one example. But this novel controversy is highly representative of the cultural dynamics of the last 24 months that culminated in the Democrats’ repudiation last week.

    Have you ever noticed that basically everything you are supposed to believe in these days—feminism, diversity, etc.—turns out in practice to just be another way for hot babes, rich guys, super salesmen, cunning financiers, telegenic self-promoters, and powerful politicians to get themselves even more money and power?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    And just when they thought everything was coming together perfectly, a rich guy, super salesman, and telegenic self-promoter with a hot-babe wife got his hands on power with the promise to throw a monkey wrench in the works.
  184. @anonymous
    "...From the perspective of 2016, mass conquest sounds pretty economically futile."

    This may be a bit too "geopolitical" and wasn't the most important thing domestically, but 2016 seems to be the year the gas finally ran out on real plans to "Invade the World, Invite the World".

    Not only does mass conquest seem futile, but so does New World Order soft-multinational-conquest-colonialism. It literally doesn't make sense to bomb them there to displace them to make them come here.

    No way decades of never ending quasi-wars are good for maintenance of the established order and, in particular, of the 60s "fight any fight and bear any burden". It is sooo obvious that the US military is not going to be remaking the world in the image of some intellectual vision of a New World Order any time real soon now. Also that "magic dirt" no longer seems to work.

    The whole Arab Spring thing is history. Was it inspired by western intelligence agencies as part of a plan to re-make the Arab world into Walmart world? A triple bank shot involving the Saudis to make the Middle East safe for Israel, at least in some people's minds? Who knows, but it doesn't matter any more. It came, it happened, it went.

    Libya. Well, that sure worked out. How about all those high-class immigrants Gaddafi used to keep bottled up or on his own payroll? Good thing to see the Italian navy is on the job, assuring everybody of free transportation. It's like a human right. What was that snarky think Hillary said? "We came... he died." Great! And then? Makes you think people confused Hollywood movies with reality. We killed the Big Bad Man. And not much changed.

    We've been fighting in Libya against ISIS. It's hard to tell from the news how it's going.

    "US military ends anti-IS operation in Libya's Sirte":


    "...The US has ended a military operation to support Libya's fledgling government in its efforts to retake the former IS stronghold of Sirte. The militant group still retains a presence in the country...

    ...formally ended operations to drive the so-called "Islamic State" (IS) from its former stronghold in Libya, US military's Africa Command said in a statement...

    ...The United States on August 1 launched Operation Odyssey Lightning to help government-aligned forces push IS from Sirte...

    ...US drones, warships and jets conducted 495 strikes on IS vehicles, tanks, heavy guns, fighting positions and command centers as GNA-aligned forces fought to retake the city..."

     

    Afghanistan. I suppose we're still fighting, I see a Sergeant Allan Brown, died on 6-Dec-2016 and that there were 4 US casualties in November. I notice a so-called "Afghan Division", has done a lot of fighting on the side of the government in Aleppo and Palmyra. US for the win!

    Iraq. The war with ISIS is still there. There were 5 US KIA in November. We're currently assisting in the siege of Mosul, which, like Aleppo, will most likely fall. For some reason Aleppo's been getting more press.

    "Caution marks Iraqi army advance against Islamic State north of Mosul":


    "...several weeks of deadlock in the most complex operation in the country since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion...

    ...Conventional U.S. forces deploying more extensively in this phase are now visible very close to the front lines...

    ..."They don't have to be as good as us, they just have to be better than Daesh," one U.S. military official told Reuters earlier this year, using an Arabic acronym for Islamic State..."

     

    Syria. Our strategy, apparently to "arm the heroic freedom fighters" using Saudi money to overthrow the Big Bad Man, foundered most miserably. I imagine there's still a UAV flying around trying to find heroic freedom fighters in Syria. The Syrian government, the Iranians, the Russians, and Hezbollah and other Shiite militias called the west's bluff. Bullets and bombs versus all the women in the west hissing? Not a difficult decision, apparently.

    Things have gotten just weird and dangerous in Syria, with the US, Russians, Syrians, Turks, Kurds, Isis, Iranians, Lebanese Hezbollah, Iraqis, and assorted others (Afghans, Pakistanis) all conducting sizeable combat operations. If the US was the sole superpower after the end of the Cold War, we didn't do a good job of keeping the peace, in the end. And just where did all those Color Revolutions come from?

    Yemen. We seem to be on the job fighting the Houthis. We've also done a lot of drone strikes, mostly trying to assassinate Al-Qaeda types) and in October launched Tomahawk strikes on the Houthis. Like Syria, there's multiple forces involved, including both ISIS and Al-Qaeda (fighting everyone, including each other). Hard to smell victory just around the corner. This war has in some ways been going on since the British left after WWII. Peace is not likely at hand.


    Unlike the Cold War, none of these places can directly threaten the US. The problem isn't military, so much as dealing with primitive chaos. Our strategy of somehow directing the chaos with small numbers of special forces, surgical airpower, and key "good guys" doesn't seem to work as we get dragged into ever more primitive, chaotic places, with numerous players and large populations. They're not coherent enough to get the message.

    We seem to be trying to make the world safe as if we were fighting the last of the Indian Wars, but instead of fighting the last band of a few hundred Apache, we're potentially fighting billions-and-billions who effectively have an infinite supply of light weapons.

    The man-on-the-street might not be up on all this, but if he's paying any attention at all he's go to sense that things are... a mess. This much of a mess means somebody's wrong at the top.

    Even though most people in the US can stay safe in their bubble and never have to worry about these little wars, a world order that results in never ending war can't be a good thing. If our glorious leaders got this wrong, what else do they have wrong? It's a challenge to the political order.

    “we’re potentially fighting billions-and-billions who effectively have an infinite supply of light weapons.”

    “Never fight a land war in Asia” was a bit of military wisdom for Westerners dating from at least WWII. Why? Because there are a lot of Asians–far more than of Westerners–and they can be cheaply armed for land war, so man-for-man superiority of professional Western soldiers quickly loses out to the sheer mass of Asiatic numbers. It’s a shorthand version of Kipling’s “Arithmetic on the Frontier” (1886).

    But the reality is that there are a lot of places where life is cheap, and there are no places that cannot be cheaply armed in the Age of the AK, and since in the Current Year precious few Westerners see nobility in dying for their country, land war in Asia is more suicidal than ever. “Asia” now applies to everything east and south of the Dardanelles.

    Our failure to heed this obvious wisdom is being relearned piecemeal, death by death.

    Read More
  185. @PennTothal
    The big story of 2016 was the death of the old (Ryan / Bush / Romney, etc.) GOP.

    Trump's win buried it and it will not likely re-emerge. The stage for the death of the GOP was set by two important events, one 8 years ago (TARP) and one 4 years ago (Ogberfell ruling).

    The old GOP philosophy was based on two main principles: free market absolutism and "family values" /evangelical Christianity.

    Free market absolutism died 8 years ago: when GOP congressmen and Bush signed TARP. This complete public abandonment of free-market principles by the GOP opened the door for Trump economic populism / protectionism / managed economy along nationalist lines.

    Family values / Christian stuff took a big hit 4 years ago with the Supreme Court majority ruling on coercing the recognition of homosex marriage. The utter surrender by the GOP on WWG and WWT issues opened the door to considering a twice-divorced horndog like Trump as a reasonable GOP candidate.

    Bush and Romney bet against Trump and lost, but Ryan didn’t and won. And the jury’s still out on how much of the GOPe’s platform versus Trump’s platform gets passed.

    It’s like Platoon with Trump as Charlie Sheen, Bannon as Elias, and Priebus as Barnes fighting for his soul.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "It’s like Platoon with Trump as Charlie Sheen,"

    Don't compare Donald J. Trump to a crackhead.
  186. @Steve Sailer
    One development was the things that didn't happen. Hillary ran on an implicit promise of Disarming Evil White Guys.

    She seemed to be betting on more Dylann Roofs and Sandy Hooks happening to help her out, but they largely didn't.

    Instead she got Muslim and BLM terrorism.

    Some of that was just bad luck for her, some of it was her lack of critical thinking skills at deconstructing The Narrative in the corporate press so she wasn't good at noticing patterns and trends.

    Some of it was that she (and her side) were encouraging dangerous trends like black rage and Muslim immigrant resentfulness.

    “some of it was her lack of critical thinking skills at deconstructing The Narrative in the corporate press so she wasn’t good at noticing patterns and trends.”

    In other words, she huffed her own exhaust, believed her own hype. She thought Dylann Roofs and Sandy Hooks were common and Muslim and BLM terrorism were rare, when it was the other way around.

    Of course, as you point out, part of the reason Roofs and Hooks were rare was that everyone condemned them, while only conservatives condemned Muslim and BLM terror, while Hillary and the Media said that condemnation was invalid. So they got more of it because they were politically subsidizing it.

    Read More
  187. @Corvinus
    The trend of the year are useless memes by the Coalition of the Right and Coalition of the Left.

    From Fake News Stories to Basket of Deplorables to Black Lives Matters to You Didn't Built That, the radical right and left had a field day in the mainstream and alternative media by ramping up the rhetoric, with their respective acolytes greedily lapping it up.

    "White despair" lacks the cache of the above phrases, but it does fit into the Fake News Stories meme. Undoubtedly, SOME white people are despondent about demographic displacement. But this phenomenon is inevitable, as human history thoroughly demonstrates.

    When it comes to outsourcing, our nation's crumbling roads and bridges, high divorce rates, and rising debt, those are the problems of whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans, NOT exclusively Anglos. In other words, the citizens of the United States are despondent over these issues.

    But, as a "bad white" who dares to criticize "good whites", I suppose I will get what is coming to me in 2017, right?

    You’re getting “badwhite” and “goodwhite” mixed up.

    This Derbyshire article has good examples: http://www.vdare.com/articles/john-derbyshire-cecil-the-lion-and-the-goodwhite-badwhite-cold-civil-war

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "You’re getting “badwhite” and “goodwhite” mixed up."

    These terms are yet another meme popularized by the Coalition of the Right Fringe groups. If you would ask your average white American what is the definition for each word, you would get a variety of responses.

    Why don't you author a picturebook for small white kids so that the next generation will understand clearly the difference?
  188. @Daniel Chieh
    You'd think that, no? But then the liberals forced us to hate them by destroying one of the major cornerstones of enjoyment that we had. And they were thorough, pitiless, and self-righteous enough to make people who might have been allies or at least indifferent, into genuine enemies to the liberal cause.

    Its amazing, really.

    Breitbart was one of the leading platforms for gamergate. Milo got his start there. The chans were players as well, and they swung to Trump overall in 2016.

    The reaction of much of the populace to the media’s obsessions, from #BLM to St Travon to gamergate to immigration to World War T, can be summed up as “Oh, bullshit.” Once the bullshit flag has been thrown it takes some effort to rebuild credibility. It’s also harder to drag elderly, untalented politicians across the finish line.

    Read More
  189. @Kgaard
    Obama was made possible by Tiger Woods.
    Trump was made possible by Don Draper, Roger Sterling, Tywin Lannister, Tony Soprano.

    The arts began foreshadowing a sharp turn to the reactionary 10-20 years ago. Shockingly so ... and consistently so. Most surprisingly, all the lefties were into it.

    My favorite reactionary is ... Lena Dunham. "Girls" is "Sex and the City" 20 years later and completely gone to hell. She got it. She helped make Trump possible.

    Lena Dunham as a reactionary is Douthat’s schtick.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Lena Dunham as a reactionary is Douthat’s schtick."

    Lena Dunham is way more famous for being a Social Justice Warrior than she is for being an actress. Her Hollywood resume is pathetic.
  190. @Jefferson
    I wonder what is the most boring big city in America to celebrate New Year's Eve in?

    There are bored and lonely people in all of them.

    Read More
  191. @Desiderius
    Look at this pic:

    http://static2.politico.com/dims4/default/da68727/2147483647/resize/1003x%3E/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F77%2F2f%2Fc96bf5bd4c0c8f9d4862a3c5a09a%2F161229-littlerock-electionnight-ap.jpg

    I don't ever remember her looking like that. Maybe it was just as simple as her losing the battle of the bulge.

    That combined with the unfortunate shrillness of her voice and need to lecture her opposition made her seem too much like a humorless schoolmarm. It’s hard to imagine anybody, especially men, liking her after seeing the “how am I not 50 points ahead?” clip.

    Read More
  192. A turning point anecdote :

    A young woman known to me since birth, raised in a Whitopia county, schooled in a SJW factory where the greatest crime of all is to hate blacks, learns all Left-approved attitudes, beliefs, talking points … Now grown up very pretty, very fair, Nordic-looking, sought after by every male within eyeshot, goes to NYC to make her actress/model career, lives in Harlem(!), gets harassed by black guys every day, usually with sexual overtones (which I could have told her would happen) … Comes home and declares she hates blacks and doesn’t care if she is racist, plainly and unapologetically breaking the highest Commandment of her SJW Goodwhite milieu. Who is going to contradict her? No male. No less pretty female = no female. Many converts that day.

    I had to laugh.

    Read More
    • LOL: Daniel Chieh, Clyde
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    I propose a Rule of Thumb similar to Sailer's Law of Female Journalism.

    The Missouri Rule of Heterosexual Public Political Discourse is that the right-hand constraint of publicly espoused politics for the majority of males is the right-most position they have heard a desirable woman espouse. In other words, most men don't want to appear further to the right than at least one woman they would want to be with.

    I myself don't follow this Rule, but perhaps that is connected to being divorced and single.
    , @neutral
    I have never encountered someone who had such a transformation of mindset personally, one comes across the occasional story about where some SJW female gets raped by migrants in Sweden for example and they double down in their faith (migrants were the true victims). How many have this sincere absolute belief as opposed to those that do because it is expected to remain accepted in polite society is anyones guess (my guess that only 30% are true believers).

    In the case of your friend I am guessing she was never a true believer to begin with, she would not have had to read Unz or similar such sites to be aware that blacks in sports or the poverty of Africa indicates that racial equality is not real. She probably went to Harlem because she wanted to rebel against the stifling order (according to her) of Whitetopia and experience the exciting "vibrancy" of Harlem

  193. @Kgaard
    Obama was made possible by Tiger Woods.
    Trump was made possible by Don Draper, Roger Sterling, Tywin Lannister, Tony Soprano.

    The arts began foreshadowing a sharp turn to the reactionary 10-20 years ago. Shockingly so ... and consistently so. Most surprisingly, all the lefties were into it.

    My favorite reactionary is ... Lena Dunham. "Girls" is "Sex and the City" 20 years later and completely gone to hell. She got it. She helped make Trump possible.

    “Tony Soprano.”

    It’s a very difficult situation.

    Read More
  194. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @2Mintzin1
    "Higher ideals."
    Such as what? Hiding legal files? Defaming women who accused her (reputed) husband of ...various things? Firing carreer White House Travel Office employees to put her gang in thier jobs? Hillary is the most obviously dirty politician since Tricky Dick. He, at least, was a patriot...sort of.

    "Most prepared."
    She was a robot on the stage. I can't see her as a good court room lawyer, she is just too obviously rehearsed.

    "Most comprehensive and practical positions. "

    Like what? Obama term 3? The people did not want that, and neither the candidate nor her expensive advisers recognized it in time.
    She should have had distanced herself from him.

    By the way, I would have voted for a Dem like Joe Lieberman or equivilant, in a heartbeat, over Trump.

    Obama term 3? The people did not want that, and neither the candidate nor her expensive advisers recognized it in time.
    She should have had distanced herself from him.

    I thought his approval ratings were pretty high at the end there? There was an obvious I wish Obama could run again so I don’t have to vote for the lesser of two evils sentiment among liberals.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    It's interesting that Obama's approval ratings remained reasonable high throughout his presidency and have risen near the end of it. The latter is partially due, I think, to the fact that he hasn't been the focus of news coverage and is soon to leave office, so people give him their approval on the basis of his personality and as a virtue signal. It no longer means anything.

    As far as his approval throughout his terms, Limbaugh attributes that partly to the immunity from harsh criticism that his race gives him, partly to a sympathetic media, and partly to his technique of managing to distance himself from the negative effect of his own policies.

  195. @Almost Missouri
    A turning point anecdote :

    A young woman known to me since birth, raised in a Whitopia county, schooled in a SJW factory where the greatest crime of all is to hate blacks, learns all Left-approved attitudes, beliefs, talking points ... Now grown up very pretty, very fair, Nordic-looking, sought after by every male within eyeshot, goes to NYC to make her actress/model career, lives in Harlem(!), gets harassed by black guys every day, usually with sexual overtones (which I could have told her would happen) ... Comes home and declares she hates blacks and doesn't care if she is racist, plainly and unapologetically breaking the highest Commandment of her SJW Goodwhite milieu. Who is going to contradict her? No male. No less pretty female = no female. Many converts that day.

    I had to laugh.

    I propose a Rule of Thumb similar to Sailer’s Law of Female Journalism.

    The Missouri Rule of Heterosexual Public Political Discourse is that the right-hand constraint of publicly espoused politics for the majority of males is the right-most position they have heard a desirable woman espouse. In other words, most men don’t want to appear further to the right than at least one woman they would want to be with.

    I myself don’t follow this Rule, but perhaps that is connected to being divorced and single.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paul Jolliffe
    Well said, sir!

    What a great encapsulation of a rule that I've never articulated, but know to be true!
  196. @Anonymous
    Can the US enforce their hegemony -- at least enough to prevent European infighting -- without an EU or a NATO?

    Yes. At bottom, US hegemony rests on military power. The rest is commentary!

    Or to enlarge my earlier allegory, the EU is window dressing–purely decorative and obscurantist–and NATO is window framing–helpful but not strictly necessary.

    Europe might be better off with rather less US hegemony. It’s been two generations since they’ve had to exercise any real look-out-for-yourself-ism. A lot of their politics is juvenile poseurism.

    Read More
  197. People were absolutely sick of Cuttlefish Journalism (using ink to repel and conceal, rather than to reveal). Journalists seems they have constructed some alternate reality that they report on, rather than reflect what is going on. They even convinced themselves, until reality came crashing into their ivory towers.

    Read More
    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @res

    Cuttlefish Journalism (using ink to repel and conceal, rather than to reveal)
     
    Nice phrase. I like that you can even extend the analogy to the ink being "release(d) from its siphon when it is alarmed". From Wikipedia
    Sounds like Crimestop to me.
  198. I think the annual Google “Year in Search” ads represent an interesting window into these trends.

    For many years, they followed a similar template with inspirational images from the worlds of sport, technology, and celebrity, usually culminating in a disabled kid walking with a space-age prosthetic. Here and there, a few token PC images (e.g., rainbow flag) are tossed in for a few seconds.

    Then, one year ago, the whole thing becomes essentally Triumph of the SJW Will, literally narrated by Caitlyn Jenner: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7o7R5BgWDY

    The brazenness of the world’s largest corporation and source of information issuing this level of propaganda was, for me, jaw-dropping.

    Needless to say, the most recent Year in Search ad is a little less triumphalist, but no less revelatory of the SJW mindset: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIViy7L_lo8

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I presume that in the Google 2016 video, the celebration of the Free Hugs guy at 0:24 is of a different Free Hugs guy than the famous Free Hugs guy who kept punching girls in Times Square, but then again he may not be. If Larry Page is reading this: I'm triggered.
  199. @Jefferson
    "I also think the transgender bathroom tissue was the last square for a lot of us."

    That is definitely not it because Donald J. Trump did not even run on the platform that if he is elected POTUS he would pass a law to make it illegal for Transgenders to use the ladies restroom.

    Donald J. Trump let Caitlyn Jenner use the ladies restroom at Trump Tower.

    If you voted for The Donald soley because of this issue, you are going to be extremely disappointed at his presidency.

    That is definitely not it because Donald J. Trump did not even run on the platform that if he is elected POTUS he would pass a law to make it illegal for Transgenders to use the ladies restroom.

    The question isn’t whether Trump is going to “pass a law” (Presidents don’t pass laws, by the way) making it illegal for Transgenders to use the ladies room (it’s questionable, to say the least, that the federal government would Constitutionally have such power). The Obama Administration, through its Justice and Education departments, threw the weight of the federal government behind forcing trannies into girls rooms. (http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/12/politics/transgender-bathrooms-obama-administration/)

    Obama committed a lot of this extreme abuse of the President’s office (the “dear colleague” letter turning college campus sex assault tribunals into Star Chambers was another example), forcing it decisively into picayune culture war issues. Nobody paid any attention because he was articulate and could smile when he wanted to, and so didn’t look like a vicious cultural Marxist. At least with Trump, you can count on him not pulling this sort of crapola.

    Read More
  200. @Almost Missouri

    "European nationalist parties have a common foe in the EU. So they are quite chummy. But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?"
     
    That assumes that the EU is what is currently keeping any given pair of European opponents from fighting over ancient territorial disputes. But is that in fact the case? Does the EU have an army in Brussels to deploy to Alsace-Lorraine if the Germans get irredentist? No. What is keeping old European rivalries from going kinetic is American hegemony, or in other words, the armed nationalism of an even bigger nation. Militarily, the EU is just window dressing.

    There has been no intra-NATO warfare. Why? Because the US said there wouldn't be, that's why, and that's all you need to know if you're European. In fact there's barely been any extra-NATO warfare by NATO countries without US permission since 1956 when Eisenhower deployed the Sixth Fleet against Britain, France and Israel(!) to end the Suez Crisis. Since then, no NATO military dares lift a finger without US permission.

    This condition cannot last forever. Indeed, it is arguably this unhealthy passivity and the thrall of perpetual immaturity in which US hegemony keeps Europe that has made Europe so vulnerable to the obviously stupid migrant crisis recently. A little inter-European jousting might have served as a healthy inoculant against this ridiculous and easily preventable infection. Countries that have recently jousted with the Soviet empire (the Visegrad group) are proving the most resistant to the migrant stupidity.

    Countries that have recently jousted with the Soviet empire (the Visegrad group) are proving the most resistant to the migrant stupidity.

    That’s because they’re moribund hellholes that nobody in their right mind would ever want to move to.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    That razor wire around Hungary is chafing somebody's butt.

    Or just look at pre-fence videos of migrants in Hungary. There were droves.

    Anyway, have you been to these countries lately? They're pretty nice. I'd gladly go back.

    , @Frau Katze
    The people in the former Communist countries of Europe did not get brainwashed with the type of leftism that the rest of Europe got.

    Most important: mass immigration of strange cultures is wonderful! Otherwise you're a hater, a xenophobe, etc., plus socially unacceptable (might even lose your job if you're unwise enough to express yourself in public).

    The Communists got a different type of propaganda. But many did not take it seriously. They knew how bad Stalin had been.

    That's the main difference as I see it. Yet, that effect will wear off as time goes on...unless we can stop what I see as single worst threat: third world immigration. That has to end. If it doesn't, Europe is doomed (all of it).

    The rest of the West is like Western Europe, but with less obnoxious and violent immigrants.
  201. @O'Really
    I think the annual Google "Year in Search" ads represent an interesting window into these trends.

    For many years, they followed a similar template with inspirational images from the worlds of sport, technology, and celebrity, usually culminating in a disabled kid walking with a space-age prosthetic. Here and there, a few token PC images (e.g., rainbow flag) are tossed in for a few seconds.

    Then, one year ago, the whole thing becomes essentally Triumph of the SJW Will, literally narrated by Caitlyn Jenner: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7o7R5BgWDY

    The brazenness of the world's largest corporation and source of information issuing this level of propaganda was, for me, jaw-dropping.

    Needless to say, the most recent Year in Search ad is a little less triumphalist, but no less revelatory of the SJW mindset: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIViy7L_lo8

    I presume that in the Google 2016 video, the celebration of the Free Hugs guy at 0:24 is of a different Free Hugs guy than the famous Free Hugs guy who kept punching girls in Times Square, but then again he may not be. If Larry Page is reading this: I’m triggered.

    Read More
  202. @2Mintzin1
    "The fact that the victors weren’t satisfied with mere recognition as a matter of Constitutional law, but were pressed to force for the total submission of every baker and restauranteur in America.."

    Add to that every schoolgirls shower room and bathroom in America...I think this is what lost many women's votes for Hillary.

    WW G does not match up well with feminism, or with the cleared eyed common sense that (most) women have about what is good for their daughters.

    Just as long as nobody pees on the toilet seat in the ladies room…..

    Read More
  203. @Opinionator
    Is "reason" not simply formal logic? How are you defining it?

    Formal logic is one kind of reason, yes, but that isn’t my point. Reason derives from semantics, and it connects events in a temporal chain. It creates sense out of a timeline, much as we create sense out of patterns of light to form a meaningful picture in our minds. The patterns of light have no meaning besides what our brains give them, but they are immensely important to us. Likewise, these sequences of events that we can semantically contemplate have no meaning besides what our minds assign to them.

    Therefore, reason functions as a sense just like sight or hearing. You could say that’s a leap, but do our minds assign meaning to anything besides those things we sense? Maybe you’d say it’s only because of our reason that our minds assign meaning to these things we sense, but I don’t think that’s true, because animals have senses yet they do not reason, and they certainly make sense of what they perceive.

    What sets us apart from animals is that we can sense these cause and effect sequences with conscious effort and therefore “see” time in a way that they cannot. I think this is the origin of language, among other uniquely human abilities, and I think it should be classified as another sense.

    It’s just a thought I had the other day, but I think it’s an interesting idea.

    Read More
  204. @Lot

    The big story of 2016 was the death of the old (Ryan / Bush / Romney, etc.) GOP.

    Trump’s win buried it and it will not likely re-emerge.
     
    Except they control the Senate, and Ryan is Speaker of the House. For how much longer, hard to say.

    The Rubio amnesty, middle east wars, and tax cuts for the super rich all have 55-70 votes in the Senate. That's not going to change. Lindsey Graham, Kamela Harris, John McCain, Marco Rubio, and Elizabeth Warren will all be in the Senate deep into old age.

    If Trump and his people are smart, they will leverage his personal appeal and willingness to personally appear and turn out voters in locales as 2018 and 2020 approach to keep Republicans in line. The “Thank You” tour locations weren’t accidental, and I would expect that Trump and Pence will throw their personal weight behind Republicans in Congress who play ball (and against those who won’t). Every member of the House has to run every two years. The Senate will be a tougher road to hoe, and there are a few Republican Senators who will give Trump headaches (McCain, Graham, Murkowski, and Flake come most readily to mind). Most of these though are old time servers with particular hobby horses (neoconning, for McCain and Graham, for example) but not huge followings. The one to watch is Flake, an Arizona Mormon (and part of the Southwest Republican “Mormon revolt” this year) who is in his first term in the Senate, and has to stand for election in 2018 in a state Trump won with about 48% of the vote. If he can be brought to heel, Trump will likely have few problems with Congressional Republicans.

    Read More
  205. We did not have a major economic crisis or a major war involving the US in 2016. By most coventional indicators, the economy was ok. Afghanistan had become a chronic low intensity conflict. Ukraine and Syria had minimal US involvement.
    This allowed the malaise issues and the cultural warfare issues to become the main focus of the campaign.

    Read More
  206. Steve,

    I published this back in 2007. Discusses how voters self organizing via social media was going to lead to upsetting a corrupt, complacent elite in the U.S. Not could, but would, just a matter of time.

    Makes a particular note of Youtube, which was quite new at the time, and the utility of video in propaganda.

    http://archive.lewrockwell.com/orig8/roberts-j1.html

    That was the mechanism(s) that allowed the end run around TPTB to execute the Sailer strategy.

    It was inevitable, Trump’s twitter account, early in the campaign he used to say it was like owning his own NYT and WaPo.

    Anyhow, read it and feel free to cherry pick anything that could be useful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy
    Sample quote (written in 2007):

    "The answer is simply that the technology just now exists for like-minded individuals to form geography independent groupings that are capable of effective action at very low overhead and that do not rely upon any of the state or establishment apparatus."

    Low cost political brigandage available to the masses, in other words.

  207. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    2016 was the year that ‘the worm turned’, to use that quaint English phrase.

    Incidentally, that was the title of a strangely prophetic comedy mini-series within the BBC ‘Two Ronnies’ show.
    The absolutely hilarious sketch, made way back in 1980, featured Messrs Barker and Corbett attired as women living in a future UK entirely dominated and run by women. The Tower of London was used as a prison for recalcitrant men and renamed ‘Barbara Castle’ after a particularly strident female Labour MP of the time. Also, the sketch featured a neo-fascist female secret police force – clad in black leather – led by the actress Diana Does.

    The sketch was an absolute classic. I doubt if it was ever shown in the USA, but it’s bound to be on YouTube.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Is this it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91ak3axhUpM
    That looks like the whole thing, you can also find the individual 8 parts.
  208. @anonguy
    Steve,

    I published this back in 2007. Discusses how voters self organizing via social media was going to lead to upsetting a corrupt, complacent elite in the U.S. Not could, but would, just a matter of time.

    Makes a particular note of Youtube, which was quite new at the time, and the utility of video in propaganda.

    http://archive.lewrockwell.com/orig8/roberts-j1.html

    That was the mechanism(s) that allowed the end run around TPTB to execute the Sailer strategy.

    It was inevitable, Trump's twitter account, early in the campaign he used to say it was like owning his own NYT and WaPo.

    Anyhow, read it and feel free to cherry pick anything that could be useful.

    Sample quote (written in 2007):

    “The answer is simply that the technology just now exists for like-minded individuals to form geography independent groupings that are capable of effective action at very low overhead and that do not rely upon any of the state or establishment apparatus.”

    Low cost political brigandage available to the masses, in other words.

    Read More
  209. In both the U.K. And the US the left wing party (Labour/Dems) abandoned the working class about 15 years ago and hasn’t looked back.

    Politics abhors a vacuum and so UKIP and then Trump filled it out.

    I think this process has only just begun. Many working class people vote based on how their parents and grandparents voted. They will gradually realise that the left wing parties now represent the extremely rich and not working people ad change their voting patterns accordingly.

    Read More
  210. @Thirdeye

    Countries that have recently jousted with the Soviet empire (the Visegrad group) are proving the most resistant to the migrant stupidity.
     
    That's because they're moribund hellholes that nobody in their right mind would ever want to move to.

    That razor wire around Hungary is chafing somebody’s butt.

    Or just look at pre-fence videos of migrants in Hungary. There were droves.

    Anyway, have you been to these countries lately? They’re pretty nice. I’d gladly go back.

    Read More
  211. @Dave Pinsen
    Lena Dunham as a reactionary is Douthat's schtick.

    “Lena Dunham as a reactionary is Douthat’s schtick.”

    Lena Dunham is way more famous for being a Social Justice Warrior than she is for being an actress. Her Hollywood resume is pathetic.

    Read More
  212. @SFG
    I hate to burst your bubble (though I admit I am a chronically gloomy fellow), but this was actually a very close election--we lost the popular vote, for crying out loud. And a lot of the Republican congressmen still like amnesty. Trump has to move on deportation and move fast before he loses steam and the MSM start picking out every single scandal. Reversing DACA's going to create a lot of sad scenes they will use to their advantage. The most effective thing he can do to change the facts on the ground now as regards demographics would be that, IMHO.

    Remember, if the Dems retake the White House in 2004 they can just open the gates again. And we may be reaching the end of the 'up' part of a business cycle, which means Trump would take the fall for the recession. Much like his nemesis Obama, he may have less time than he thinks.

    “we lost the popular vote, for crying out loud.”

    Only because of your shitty state of California.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    I don't live there. Never have. Our esteemed blog host does, which goes to show you no state is homogeneous.

    Heck, he even got large bits of New York City.
  213. @Dave Pinsen
    Bush and Romney bet against Trump and lost, but Ryan didn't and won. And the jury's still out on how much of the GOPe's platform versus Trump's platform gets passed.

    It's like Platoon with Trump as Charlie Sheen, Bannon as Elias, and Priebus as Barnes fighting for his soul.

    “It’s like Platoon with Trump as Charlie Sheen,”

    Don’t compare Donald J. Trump to a crackhead.

    Read More
  214. @Steve Sailer
    So how many irredentist flash spots are there?

    If you go back to what British statesmen like the Chamberlain brothers were worried about in, say, 1937-38 it was a debate over whether Hitler really wanted continental-scale conquest (Austen's worry) or merely semi-symbolic irredentist rectification of borders, such as the Sudetenland and Danzig (Neville's less alarming view).

    Stalin ended probably permanently German irredentist possibilities in 1945 by massive ethnic cleansing of Germans from Eastern Europe.

    From the perspective of 2016, mass conquest sounds pretty economically futile. But stoking nationalist passions over semi-symbolic irredentist projects (the West Bank, Crimea, islets in the South China Sea, etc.) sounds like it could be a winning domestic political strategy. On the other hand, it could go to far and lead to a massive shooting war.

    For example, the Sandinista president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, has pursued a national hobby of suing Nicaragua's neighbors in the World Court over disputed boundaries (and then abiding by their decisions). It's a pretty clever way to show voters whose side you are on without getting into a war, but it hasn't really spread.

    Right now, European nationalist parties have a common foe in the EU. So they are quite chummy.

    But what if they win and destroy the EU? What do they do for a follow-up? Does the Afd chancellor demand Strasbourg back from the Front National President?

    In Western Europe there may be more risk of secession (Catalonia, Scotland, Flanders) than aggression towards neighbours (Republic of Ireland coveting Northern Ireland, Spain coveting Gibraltar).

    Some problems have probably solved themselves by the passage of time: it seems that everyone in Alsace and Lorraine considers themselves French …. except …..

    Except what will Germany do about its million invaders, there at the invitation of Mad Merkel? And Sweden, and France, and Britain, etc.

    As for the rest: the Balkans aren’t worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier.

    Read More
  215. @GOUSAAMER114
    Walking into stores and wondering what country I live in. Seeing Muslims. Sending large sums of tax money to pay for a public school that is comprised almost entirely of non-English speakers. Not wanting to go to a mall or movie theater anymore because it feels like the third world. Having unpleasant interactions at almost every restaurant where the person behind the register barely speaks English. Understanding that Obama (a 1950's third world style, anti-American) got elected because of a third world invasion. Realizing that we wouldn't have a country anymore if the invasion wasn't immediately halted. Realizing that bringing in any amount of Muslims was suicidal. I understood this one prior to 9/11 though. That took me in 2013/2014 to Jeff Sessions/Stephen Miller/Vdare/Steve Sailer. When Trump announced, I pretty much knew. He got better and better over time. I think he might just save America and Western Civilization. But it won't be easy. Cheers to America possibly getting one more chance in 2017.

    And Steve - what can I say, the Sailer Strategy was correct. You were right. Very rare is it that a blogger has such an impact. Obvious that Ann Coulter took a lot from you. Coulter gave to Trump. Trump gave to us all. Kudos to you, Steve.

    This right here:

    Walking into stores and wondering what country I live in …

    Human group aesthetics (#26) is not exactly an official iSteve topic, and is probably not scientifically quantifiable, but seeing demographic change, especially as it has ramped up in recent years, may have woken up many whites. Not to mention the (more discussed) correlation of non-white (particularly NAM) phenotypes and less-than-desirable behavior/intelligence/temperament.

    Combine all that with outright disdain/triumphalism from ‘elites’ and their proxies telling Core Americans (and Europeans) “Change is inevitable, you’ll just have to get used to it” and you’ve got the explanation for much of 2016.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Really good point.

    I wonder if Chinese immigrants bother many people less than Indians because their skin is lighter than any subgroup except whites.

  216. @Harry Baldwin
    I recall that the Clinton inaugural in 1992 coincided with an LGBT rally in Washington, DC. One of the lesbians declared, "At last we have a First Lady that I'd like to f--k!"

    “One of the lesbians declared, “At last we have a First Lady that I’d like to f–k!”

    Melania is easy on the eyes too, for this heterosexual man.

    Read More
  217. Not mention yet of the “Russia did it” meme that has become tiresome, obvious #GavageNews so recently (but seems to have started back when Crimea decided to rejoin Rodina, it’s as if someone “up there” lost a large dacha to Putin and wants to have it back stat). Listening to FDR lecturing the Japanese on their colonial adventures must have been on the same level of tiresome.

    Read More
  218. @Almost Missouri
    A turning point anecdote :

    A young woman known to me since birth, raised in a Whitopia county, schooled in a SJW factory where the greatest crime of all is to hate blacks, learns all Left-approved attitudes, beliefs, talking points ... Now grown up very pretty, very fair, Nordic-looking, sought after by every male within eyeshot, goes to NYC to make her actress/model career, lives in Harlem(!), gets harassed by black guys every day, usually with sexual overtones (which I could have told her would happen) ... Comes home and declares she hates blacks and doesn't care if she is racist, plainly and unapologetically breaking the highest Commandment of her SJW Goodwhite milieu. Who is going to contradict her? No male. No less pretty female = no female. Many converts that day.

    I had to laugh.

    I have never encountered someone who had such a transformation of mindset personally, one comes across the occasional story about where some SJW female gets raped by migrants in Sweden for example and they double down in their faith (migrants were the true victims). How many have this sincere absolute belief as opposed to those that do because it is expected to remain accepted in polite society is anyones guess (my guess that only 30% are true believers).

    In the case of your friend I am guessing she was never a true believer to begin with, she would not have had to read Unz or similar such sites to be aware that blacks in sports or the poverty of Africa indicates that racial equality is not real. She probably went to Harlem because she wanted to rebel against the stifling order (according to her) of Whitetopia and experience the exciting “vibrancy” of Harlem

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "one comes across the occasional story about where some SJW female gets raped by migrants in Sweden for example and they double down in their faith"
     
    This is surprisingly common. I suppose it has to do with peculiarities of female psychology.

    There was a news story in the aftermath of the Haitian earthquake of an American aid worker in Haiti who kept getting raped there but kept insisting it just showed that we need to keep helping them. At a certain point one begins to wonder if the rape isn't actually the attraction.

    Most cases aren't that extreme. I think it is more usually a need to justify what happened, and given the choice between "I was monumentally stupid" versus "They know not what they do", the latter exonerates both parties and makes the victim a kind of martyr for The Current Year, so win-win-win.

    "She probably went to Harlem because she wanted to rebel against the stifling order"
     
    It was the only place she could afford.
  219. @Langley
    I do not see this move as an endorsement of the nation state.

    Again - I think both Wolfe and McLuhan may be right in predicting that we are, respectively, going Back to Blood or becoming a tribal society.

    History shows to all peoples, interested in self-preservation, a choice between Nationalism and Tribalism. Since our self-styled cultural elite have deemed Nationalism anathema, no one should be surprised if Tribalism takes its place. As most of us here know, this is a major reason for the destabilization and destruction of the Tribe of Whites in Europe and especially in America: the Ruling Tribe prefers to Divide and Conquer, and many squabbling tribes are far easier to rule than one monolithic opposed force.

    This dovetails rather neatly with the purpose of the present essay, and reminds me moreover of a discussion that took place in the Washington Post comments section before the recent election. In response to the contention (from editors and readers alike) that Trump resulted from too loose a rein on the “fringe” (by which they mean racists) of the Republican Party, I contended that in fact it was the excesses of the Establishment (in both parties, but in particular the p.c. “looney left”) which gave rise to a reaction.

    Needless to say, the suggestion fell upon deaf ears. But revenge is ours, for the moment. Or so we hope. Let’s not discount hope: until recently many of us didn’t even have that.

    Read More
  220. A small thing that surely wasn’t a big influence but is part of the general discrediting of false authority was the replication crisis in psychology/social sciences. The internet and social media allow the vetting of information by others than anointed experts and it has turned out that much of the “well-established social science” used to prop up the liberal narrative is based on methods and publication practices that readily allow the confirmation of any pre-conceived hypotheses, no matter how ridiculous, that the overwhelmingly liberal/leftist social scientists wish to pose.

    Read More
  221. @hooodathunkit
    Now there's cognitive distortion if I ever saw it! That Clinton was viewed unfavorably . . . except her opponent was even worse . . . but "overcame" it. LOL

    Trump did not overcome it; not in the least. Trump's unfavorability was below Clinton's before the election and became worse on election day: -54% Clinton v -61% Trump!!! You are trying to make the facts fit the narrative; everyone's entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts.

    Clinton was the single, strongest, and best prepared candidate the Democrats have ever run in modern history.

    That you can wax so intensely nostalgic over the most corrupt and cynical presidential candidate in memory (if not in history) is almost touching.

    Alas, however, your candidate lost the election, though, didn’t she. And to make it even worse for you guys, she lost in a way that indicated that you guys don’t even understand how the election is run.

    So let’s recap, shall we? In addition to craven, shameless cynicism you threw in a healthy dose of basic incompetence. For those among you who are able to perceive this, peering outside of your sealed bubble of self-regard, that’s got to smart a bit.

    Read More
  222. @SFG
    I hate to burst your bubble (though I admit I am a chronically gloomy fellow), but this was actually a very close election--we lost the popular vote, for crying out loud. And a lot of the Republican congressmen still like amnesty. Trump has to move on deportation and move fast before he loses steam and the MSM start picking out every single scandal. Reversing DACA's going to create a lot of sad scenes they will use to their advantage. The most effective thing he can do to change the facts on the ground now as regards demographics would be that, IMHO.

    Remember, if the Dems retake the White House in 2004 they can just open the gates again. And we may be reaching the end of the 'up' part of a business cycle, which means Trump would take the fall for the recession. Much like his nemesis Obama, he may have less time than he thinks.

    I hate to burst your bubble (though I admit I am a chronically gloomy fellow), but this was actually a very close election–we lost the popular vote, for crying out loud.

    Disagree. Leaving aside any discussion of vote fraud and improper voting (i.e. illegal immigrants casting votes in good faith, which should not be counted, etc.), which occurs more frequently in Democratic politics, Clinton garnered a PLURALITY of votes; she did not win the popular vote. Put another way, Clinton received 48% of the popular vote. Not Clinton received 52% of the popular vote. If you align the candidates with significant vote totals on a “Left/Right” scale, the totals look like:

    “Left”
    Clinton – 48.04%
    Stein – 1.06%
    Sanders – .08%
    La Riva – .05%

    “Right”
    Trump – 45.95%
    Johnson – 3.28%
    McMullin – .53%
    Castle – .15%

    Doing the math, the “right-of-center” candidates polled 49.91%, while the “left-of-center” candidates polled 49.24%. The country moved rightward during this cycle. Also, almost 1% of ballots (1,168,228) were for other candidates not officially recognized on a state ballot.

    Clinton was a poor candidate, any number of ways you want to slice it. And the country is pretty evenly divided politically. The left is not nearly as dominant in the culture as the cultural influence shapers (media, academia) have tried to portray it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Good point. I had discounted the effects of Johnson and to a lesser extent Egg McMuffin on the popular vote. Thanks.
  223. Trump’s victory stemmed from his ability to speak to the guys wearing camouflage hats, which both parties have failed to do. The guys who wear camouflage had a brief flirtation with class climbing when they were able to buy a decent house and a couple of ATVs, but their little brothers missed out after the bubble popped. Trump is the first guy to speak to them, and they could again imagine being able to buy a decent house and a couple of ATVs. They just want to work and be left alone, and don’t want PC, gay rights, and transgender nonsense shoved down their throats. They don’t think of themselves as racist, but resent being told they are the cause of all of life’s evils because they know they are not. They thought this was their only chance to do anything about it.

    Read More
  224. @Langley
    I do not see this move as an endorsement of the nation state.

    Again - I think both Wolfe and McLuhan may be right in predicting that we are, respectively, going Back to Blood or becoming a tribal society.

    Privacy and individualism from the age of print (McLuhan) carrying over into the electronic age may have been responsible for the emergent consensus for Trump and Brexit coming as a surprise. But I don’t think the prestigious institutions that have been shown to be, what McLuhan might see as “overheated” are the soul of a nation state. An unheralded part of the nation state stumbled on the discovery that they have a collective worldview to go with their collective interests. This is a watershed, but there will be others.

    People view national feeling as being in a similar vein to religion, a traditional superstition that will fade away. But liberalism is itself a tradition while nation states are as natural as honey-bee hives. Nation states can be conquered by a rival, but they are not going to dissolve into private individuals or a formless undifferentiated mass of tribalism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Detective Club
    McLuhan was certainly a deservedly renowned theorist when it came to understanding the importance and impact of old (print) and new (electronic) media on civilization and society. But when it came to politics - - - not so much.

    In 1960, he predicted that Kennedy would handily defeat Nixon because Kennedy was "cool and detached" on television while Nixon was "hot and bossy." Television, in McLuhan's eyes, being a "cool medium," which a "cool" politician, like Kennedy, had easily mastered.

    In reality, Kennedy won only because Chicago's Mayor Daley was able to phony up the Cook County vote and LBJ could dump and stuff as many illegal Mexican votes along the Rio Grande as were needed to put the Dem. ticket over the top.

    As is often the case, theory, no matter how clever, abruptly ends when hard reality reveals its big, ugly face!
  225. @Desiderius

    A generation or so hence it will be time for another 2016, maybe against the nation state
     
    It may not take that long, but the alternative will be more local still, not globalism. Nationalism only won this go round because it is more local than the alternative on offer.

    Maybe you are one of those who think nation states date from the Treaty Of Westphalia. Well if you read some Brendan Simms you’ll find it was more of an armistice in which the parties accepted a limitation of the independent power of nation states.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/scottishhistory/independence/features_independence_arbroath.shtml

    The Declaration of Arbroath is without doubt the most famous document in Scottish history. Like the American Declaration of Independence, which is partially based on it, it is seen by many as the founding document of the Scottish nation. It was drafted on the 6th April 1320 – a day the United States of America has declared to be Tartan Day

    Yet if he (Bruce) should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be bro