The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Pat Buchanan ArchiveBlogview
Is the Left Playing with Fire Again?
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Strings  Include Comments

To those who lived through that era that tore us apart in the ’60s and ’70s, it is starting to look like “deja vu all over again.”

And as Adlai Stevenson, Bobby Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey did then, Democrats today like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are pandering to the hell-raisers, hoping to ride their energy to victory.

Democrats would do well to recall what happened the last time they rode the tiger of social revolution.

As the riots began in Harlem in 1964 and Watts in 1965, liberals rushed to render moral sanction and to identify with the rioters.

“In the great struggle to advance civil and human rights,” said Adlai at Colby College, “even a jail sentence is no longer a dishonor but a proud achievement. … Perhaps we are destined to see in this law-loving land people running for office … on their prison records.”

“There is no point in telling Negroes to obey the law,” said Bobby; to the Negro, “the law is the enemy.” Hubert assured us that if he had to live in a slum, “I could lead a mighty good revolt myself.”

Thus did liberals tie themselves and their party to what was coming. By 1967, Malcolm X had been assassinated, Stokely Carmichael with his call to “Black Power” had replaced John Lewis at SNCC, and H. Rap Brown had a new slogan: “By any means necessary.”

Came then the days-long riots of Newark and Detroit in 1967 where the 82nd Airborne was sent in. A hundred cities were burned and pillaged following the assassination of Dr. King on April 4, 1968.
And what happened in our politics?

The Democratic coalition of FDR was shattered. Gov. George Wallace rampaged through the Democratic primaries of Wisconsin, Indiana and Maryland in 1964, then ran third party and carried five Southern states in 1968.

His presidency broken by Vietnam and the riots, LBJ decided not to run again. Vice President Humphrey’s chances were ruined by the violent protests at his Chicago convention, which were broken up by the club-wielding cops of Democratic Mayor Richard J. Daley.

Race riots in the cities, student riots on campus, and that riot of radicals in Chicago helped deliver America to Richard Nixon.

Came then the huge anti-Nixon, anti-war demonstrations of the fall of 1969, the protests in the spring of 1970 after the Cambodian invasion and the Kent State killings, and the Mayday siege by thousands of anarchists to shut down D.C. in 1971.

Again and again, Nixon rallied the Silent Majority to stand with him — and against them. Middle America did.

Hence, what did its association with protesters, radicals and Black Power militants do for the Democratic Party?

Where LBJ swept 44 states in 1964 and 61 percent of the vote, in 1968 Humphrey won 13 states and 43 percent.

In 1972, Nixon and Spiro Agnew swept 49 states, routing the champion of the countercultural left, George McGovern.

And the table had been set for California Governor Ronald Reagan, who defied campus rioters threatening him with violence thusly: “If it takes a bloodbath, let’s get it over with.”

Without the riots and bombings of the ’60s and ’70s, there might have been no Nixonian New Majority and no Reagan Revolution.

Today, with the raucous protests against President Trump and his travel ban, the disruption of Congressional town meetings, the blocking of streets every time a cop is involved in a shooting with a black suspect, and the rising vitriol in our politics, it is beginning to look like the 1960s again.

There are differences. In bombings, killings, beatings, arrests, arson, injuries and destruction of property, we are nowhere near 1968.

Still, the intolerant left seems to have melded more broadly and tightly with the Democratic Party of today than half a century ago.

Where Barry Goldwater joked about sawing off the East Coast and “letting it drift out into the Atlantic,” Californians today talk of secession. And much of Middle America would be happy to see them gone.

Where Nixon was credited with the “cooling of America” in 1972, and Reagan could credibly celebrate “Morning in America” in 1984, any such “return to normalcy” appears the remotest possibility now.

As with the EU, the cracks in the USA seem far beyond hairline fractures. Many sense the country could come apart. It did once before. And could Southerners and Northerners have detested each other much more than Americans do today?

Fifty years ago, the anti-Nixon demonstrators wanted out of Vietnam and an end to the draft. By 1972, they had gotten both. The long hot summers were over. The riots stopped.

But other than despising Trump and his “deplorables,” what great cause unites the left today? Even Democrats confess to not knowing Hillary Clinton’s presidential agenda.

From those days long ago, there returns to mind the couplet from James Baldwin’s famous book, from which he took his title:

“God gave Noah the rainbow sign/ No more water, the fire next time.”

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.”

Copyright 2017 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Left, Democrats, Donald Trump 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[]
  1. The U.S. of 2017 bears only a passing demographic resemblance to the U.S. of the 1960s. The divisions now are deeper and more fundamental. Another financial meltdown, for example, could result in Algeria-style civil war in the U.S.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Could being the operative word here. I'll wait for the movie to come out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    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
    http://www.unz.com/pbuchanan/is-the-left-playing-with-fire-again/#comment-1766678
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. At least, in the 60s and 70s the rioters had a cause. Today’s rioters are paid protesters without cause. The left will blame anybody and everybody but themselves. They will not admit that Hillary Clinton had no agenda, no coherent message, no charisma, and ran a lousy campaign. That is why she lost. They will blame the Russians, the FBI, every Tom, Dick, and Harry for her loss. They have no adult party leader. The sooner they admit the fact that they lost and start over, the better for them and the country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @brukean
    To be fair, Trump's agenda is a bit unworkable. He is not exactly of the right. He used the right as a vehicle to get power...I find this rather painful as a conservative.
  3. The Democrat cause is simple and obvious: they hate whitey. That is what they stand for. And…no…there will be no Calexit. When the water, food, electricity is cut off and the major ports are blockaded, their leadership will simply be arrested and executed.

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @map
    To quote whorefinder:

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

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

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

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

    This is a desperate conspiracy, not mania.
  4. Democrat Platform:

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

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

    Democrat Platform:

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

    That's just the window-dressing. The Dems are handmaidens of transnational capital, which seeks to transform the US from a sovereign nation-state to a post-national, post-colonial empire under its full control.
  5. @Diversity Heretic
    The U.S. of 2017 bears only a passing demographic resemblance to the U.S. of the 1960s. The divisions now are deeper and more fundamental. Another financial meltdown, for example, could result in Algeria-style civil war in the U.S.

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

    This has been true for a while I think.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    It could easily go either way.

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

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

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

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

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

    To be fair, Trump’s agenda is a bit unworkable. He is not exactly of the right. He used the right as a vehicle to get power…I find this rather painful as a conservative.
     
    What I found a lot more painful, was being ruled by Trotskyites under the guise of conservatives during both big government, warmongering Bush administrations. And make no mistake, that was the "conservative" alternative to Trump.
  8. Everyone assumes underlying conditions are the same. This is wrong.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    I wouldn't mind machine-gunning them myself.
  9. @Fenster
    I have been thinking for some time that the progressive stuff will wither sooner rather than later under the weight of things like snowflakes needing jobs, the fact that middle America has found a voice, and so forth. And so I see Buchanan's point. I lived through the Sixties too, and he is quite right that when the New Left went too far it created a reaction.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Isn’t culture upstream from politics?

    Read More
  12. it is starting to look like “deja vu all over again.”

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

    Read More
  13. @International Jew

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

    Look up the quotes and aphorisms of Yogi Berra.

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

    I'll allow that "RSVP please" is never intended ironically; I think there people just don't know it's redundant.
  14. @dc.sunsets
    Everyone assumes underlying conditions are the same. This is wrong.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    I wouldn’t mind machine-gunning them myself.

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

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

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

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

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

    I wouldn't mind machine-gunning them myself.

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

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

    Home field advantage and all that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    Yeah, if they're gonna tear up their own Liberal cities, well, the inhabitants that encouraged them will have to deal with the new vibrancy. All along, I've had no objection to protesters and window breakers and fire bugs having their fun in DC and NYC, Chicago, Seattle and San Fran. Even better the colleges when they go up in flames, destruction and other assorted violence. Burn it all down, Lefties, burn it all, but stay in your own playground. They're sensible, they'll never turn up to protest those awful White men in Podunk, Alabama or wherever. But if they did, they'd have a fight on their hands from just plain folks. They know to stay home..
  16. @Fenster
    I have been thinking for some time that the progressive stuff will wither sooner rather than later under the weight of things like snowflakes needing jobs, the fact that middle America has found a voice, and so forth. And so I see Buchanan's point. I lived through the Sixties too, and he is quite right that when the New Left went too far it created a reaction.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    It could easily go either way.

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

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

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

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

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

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

    , @dc.sunsets

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

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

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

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

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

    I concur with your view; I don't relish the denouement of the tragedy baked into this by the last 50 years of collective folly.
  17. @lavoisier
    Agreed. The conservative patriot assumes that when the war starts they will win. It could very easily go the other way, as it did in Russia, when the Red army defeated the White army and the massacres began. We all know what happened in Germany. Few of us are aware of what happened when the Bolsheviks took control of Russia.

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

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

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

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

    It could easily go either way.

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

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

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

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

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

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

    It could easily go either way.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Of course, I could be wrong.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    It could easily go either way.

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

    It could easily go either way.

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

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

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

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

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

    Read More
  20. @Zoodles
    The left will be at a tremendous advantage when the shooting starts.

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Of course, I could be wrong.

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

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

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @Zoodles
    I agree.

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

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

    Of course, I could be wrong.

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

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

    I agree.

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    Only if you even wanted the cities. Let them have the cities. Business won't be done anymore, they'll starve. Even better, keep them IN the cities..
  22. C’mon Pat. If this is the sixties where is our summer of love?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian

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

    They ain't what they used to be.
  23. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @dc.sunsets
    Leftists won the last couple hundred years of revolutions because the larger trend was toward leftism. I'm not so sure that's going to be the underlying trend going forward, so I tend to think the Left's past advantages will this time simply be training and prepped to fight the last war.

    Of course, I could be wrong.

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

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

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

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

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

    There you go.
  24. And could Southerners and Northerners have detested each other much more than Americans do today?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country

    I think flyover country would have rebelled a long time ago if not for geography
     
    Not geography, but TV and other media. That's our reality these days. But bit by bit, people are realizing that they've been seriously lied to.
  27. @map
    The Democrat cause is simple and obvious: they hate whitey. That is what they stand for. And...no...there will be no Calexit. When the water, food, electricity is cut off and the major ports are blockaded, their leadership will simply be arrested and executed.

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

    To quote whorefinder:

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

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

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

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

    This is a desperate conspiracy, not mania.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country

    The D’s have long been betting on ethnically cleansing whites through open borders. Now that’s going up in smoke. Hence why they are funding these protests.
     
    Less than 50% of births in the United States are white. I'd say that the D's have been very successful. Of course, it may become a pyrrhic victory.
  28. Left? What left?

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    You are correct top to bottom. They are tools. Calling them the left gives them too much credit.
  29. @Steel T Post
    Democrat Platform:

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

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

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

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

    I'm tired of being on an island. I want to fight that percentage of whites that are on my side and make my stand.
  30. @densa
    What happened to President Trump's 100-day honeymoon? He has been kept from setting up his administration and even the legitimacy of his election questioned. Should this soft coup to overturn the election succeed, then what? The Left will be happy with President Pence? Would they really prefer a more neocon administration, or do they want chaos and civil war?

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

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

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

    Read More
  31. @map
    To quote whorefinder:

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

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

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

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

    This is a desperate conspiracy, not mania.

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

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

    Read More
  32. @KenH
    Kill Whitey should be #1. 2,3, and 4 are used to achieve killing whitey.

    Well, whitey could stand up for himself.

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

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

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

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

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

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

    I wouldn't mind machine-gunning them myself.

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

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

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

    Home field advantage and all that.

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

    Read More
  35. @Zoodles
    The left will be at a tremendous advantage when the shooting starts.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Read More
  36. @Zoodles
    I agree.

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

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

    Read More
  37. @WorkingClass
    C'mon Pat. If this is the sixties where is our summer of love?

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

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

    They ain’t what they used to be.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    I have no clue what's going to happen, but my suspicion is that thing will need to get worse - a lot worse - before whites wake up - if they do at all.
  39. @Steel T Post
    Democrat Platform:

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

    Democrat Platform:

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

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

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

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

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

    Yep. Time will tell.

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

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

    Read More
  41. @Priss Factor
    Left? What left?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Read More
  42. @Andrei Martyanov

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

    fact:
    Those in the military overwhelmingly voted Trump.

    There you go.

    Read More
  43. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

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

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

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

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

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

    Are people hungry? No, they are obese.

    Thats not how you get revolutions.

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

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @J1234

    We are on the road to civil war II thanks to diversity and pluralism as described by author Thomas Chittum in his book by the same title.
     
    That's possible, but assessing the political future of the US by the current state of our divisiveness may be inaccurate. Trump is taking action on his most controversial campaign promises (which usually involve immigration) right at first. After these first several months, the extremely high level of confrontation between Trump and the far left will subside to just a sustainable high level. Remember the "occupy" movement? It went away because the left gets tired of self-imposed hardship. A civil war would be hardship beyond belief. They don't want a civil war, even when they act like they do. The left is all about acting like something they're not.
  45. @KenH
    The left isn't playing with fire, Pat. Perhaps they would be if the nation was still 85-90% white, but it's now 62% white at most with the highest median age and a large minority of whom have gone over to the other side. Time is not on the side of the silent majority

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

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

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH

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

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

  46. @J1234

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

    A civil war would be hardship beyond belief.

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

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

    Read More
  47. @Citizen of a Silly Country

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

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

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

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

    Enough said?

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

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

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

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

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

  48. We must back President Trump 100%.

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

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

    Do you notice the resemblance?

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

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

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

    Click to Edit

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

    Enough said?

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

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

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

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

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    Like you, at first I thought Whiskey was outrageous, but he makes more and more sense as I watch events. I'm raising a daughter too and trying to help her see the truth, especially the truth about different races.
  52. @Vlad
    Lots of good comments here. Not much to add but here are a couple of observations. In the 1960s an average young white boy could have sensed an appeal in Make Love not War slogan. Why go to fight in Nam? Isn't it better to get stoned? Now the average white guy does not feel any appeal in the Leftist message. To fight in the barricades for Muslim God given right to come to the US? Is that an inspiring goal? To fight for gays or lesbians to have their parades and privileges? Is that an attractive proposition? The big difference is that in the 1960s the hardworking middle class or working class was well off, standard of living was rising, industries expanding. Now it is in reverse. Standard of living is declining, industries collapsing. The Left has nothing to offer to middle America and that includes family-house-two-car garage blacks and Hispanics who made it. Moreover Globalist Imperialist Free Markets border-less agenda has already generated a Trump backlash. If the Dems push Trump out they will have to deal with Pence who is even more pro Christian conservative gay skeptical, imperialism fearful kind of guy. So if the Dems provoke a clash they will feel the fury of main street America.

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

    Peace.

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

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

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

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

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

    Read More
  54. @dc.sunsets
    Look up the quotes and aphorisms of Yogi Berra.

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

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

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

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

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

    It's my view that we're in a period analogous to the regal South of the USA during the Antebellum period, and that a Sherman's March analogue will occur in my lifetime, so I guess any attempt to lighten the mood is welcome.
  55. @OilcanFloyd
    Middle America is largely already knee deep in bear market conditions, and when the Left insists on more gibsmedats, Middle Americans’ response will be, “I don’t have anything to spare, I’m worried about myself, and if you keep trying to take stuff from me, I’ll support sending in the Marines to machine-gun you all.”

    I wouldn't mind machine-gunning them myself.

    I wouldn’t mind machine-gunning them myself.

    So much hate!

    You must contain the dark side.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    In this regard, it's not the Left with which we're at war. It's the Left that is stabbing us in the back while we face those who seek to replace us. It's the Leftists, acting like drug pushers, encouraging our loved ones to destroy themselves.
  57. @International Jew
    Sure, but he meant it as a joke (or maybe he didn't but people have taken it as a joke ever since). What's the point of Pat Buchanan repeating that joke then, in what's a dead-serious context?

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

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

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

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

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

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

    DH, here’s a question (I think.)

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

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

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

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

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

    Pop Culture:

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

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

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

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

    Pretty Girls

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


    Show Them The Real World

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

    Teach Them Who They Are

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

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

    Point Out What Happens to Thoughtless Women

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

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

    Working Isn't Everything

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

    Daddy Time

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

    Get Them Ready for MultiCulti

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

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

    I have no clue if all of this will work, but it's better than hoping for the best.
  59. @brukean
    To be fair, Trump's agenda is a bit unworkable. He is not exactly of the right. He used the right as a vehicle to get power...I find this rather painful as a conservative.

    He used the right as a vehicle to get power

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Pop Culture:

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

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

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

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

    Pretty Girls

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

    Show Them The Real World

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

    Teach Them Who They Are

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

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

    Point Out What Happens to Thoughtless Women

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

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

    Working Isn’t Everything

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

    Daddy Time

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

    Get Them Ready for MultiCulti

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    , @midtown
    Excellent thoughts.
  61. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Can't speak for DH, but here's what I've tried to do. (Can't promise that it will work, but I certainly don't think that it hurts.)

    Pop Culture:

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

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

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

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

    Pretty Girls

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


    Show Them The Real World

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

    Teach Them Who They Are

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

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

    Point Out What Happens to Thoughtless Women

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

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

    Working Isn't Everything

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

    Daddy Time

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

    Get Them Ready for MultiCulti

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Pop Culture:

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

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

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

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

    Pretty Girls

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


    Show Them The Real World

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

    Teach Them Who They Are

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

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

    Point Out What Happens to Thoughtless Women

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

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

    Working Isn't Everything

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

    Daddy Time

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

    Get Them Ready for MultiCulti

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

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

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

    Excellent thoughts.

    Read More
  63. @brukean
    To be fair, Trump's agenda is a bit unworkable. He is not exactly of the right. He used the right as a vehicle to get power...I find this rather painful as a conservative.

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

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

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.