The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Herculean Courage and Perseverance
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Twinkie on how rather than weakening European Jewry, the Nazis inadvertently strengthened them after their brutal trial by fire:

The Third Reich was the one that ushered in the Age of the Jews by making them the greatest of the historical victims and making it impossible for anyone to ever criticize, let alone persecute, them. If there were ever a contest for the most incompetent, venal, and counterproductive leadership force in history, the Nazis are in the running. Their leader died cowardly blaming the Germans as an unworthy people, despite the heroic and Herculean courage and perseverance the latter showed in war in spite of the titanic forces arrayed against them.

Duck, er, beavertales on how the family man and the devoted wife and mother of his children are the new counterculture:

People I’d call ‘the alternative set’ back then were kind of in opposition to the majority ‘normies’. The alternative set had Chomsky and Orwell in their library, the normies aspired to nothing more than a POLO Ralph Lauren shirt and a sports car.

Now, the two positions have flipped. The ‘normies’ are falling all over themselves to virtue signal progressive BLM and tranny mantras in the workplace, while the ‘alt’ people (in private) embrace the Bell Curve and dismiss trannies as people in need of mental health counseling.

dfordoom on how Boomers didn’t start the fire, it was always burning since at least as long as they were turning through childhood:

There’s nothing wrong or irrational in thinking that it would be better to go back to the world of the 1980s. It was a better and more sane world.

Boomers weren’t the ones who made the decisions that destroyed Norman Rockwell’s America. Those decisions were made by the Silent Generation, and by the generation before the Silent Generation.

Boomers didn’t invent liberalism. They also didn’t start the Sexual Revolution. That was started by the Silent Generation. Boomers didn’t invent the contraceptive pill. Boomers didn’t invent the drug culture. The drug culture was starting to emerge during the late 50s. It was accelerated dramatically by the Vietnam War. And Boomers didn’t start the Vietnam War. Boomers weren’t the ones who were responsible for mass immigration – those decisions were made by the Greatest Generation and the Silent Generation. Boomers weren’t the ones who started pushing the homosexual agenda – that was the Silent Generation as well.

Boomers had no decisive influence on the culture until the 80s. The 80s was a period of sanity compared to today but the seeds of destruction were sown in the 1950s and the 1960s.

And none of the crucial decisions that changed our civilisation beyond all recognition were made by ordinary people. They were made by politicians and bureaucrats and academics and (even more especially) by corporate types in the boardrooms of giant corporations.

And dfordoom again on how crucial social media was to ushering in the Great Awokening:

If you look at the cultural landscape of the 60s, 70s and 80s and the social and sexual mores of those decades the situation wasn’t so awful.

Crime was a problem but that was mostly due to drugs and social liberals may have a point when they argue that prohibition of drugs made the problem much much worse than it needed to be.

Those were “live and let live” decades. If you wanted to get married and have kids that was fine. If you didn’t want to do that, that was fine as well. If homosexuals wanted to live their lifestyle nobody cared too much as long as it wasn’t shoved into their faces. If you wanted to be monogamous that was fine. If you didn’t want to be monogamous that was fine.

Things didn’t start to get bad until social media came along. There had been political correctness as far back as the 70s but it was strongly resisted and it was possible to ignore it. Social media changed all that. Social media made it possible for political correctness to be enforced. Social media made it possible for people’s lives to be destroyed for offences against political correctness. Social media handed the Thought Police the weapon they needed to enforce rigid social conformity.

Most older people (those born before the 80s) would probably like to return to the “live and let live” atmosphere of the 60s, 70s and 80s. Moderate social and cultural liberalism without the Thought Police and the Woke Police and the SJW Police.

I don’t think that what older people would like to see is so unreasonable.

The problem is that social media makes it impossible to return to a Live And Let Live world.

V. K. Ovelund on how, in concert with the state, mega corporations leverage moral hazard, regulatory capture, and scale to bankrupt their small business competitors ahead of buying their shells at fire sale prices:

Here is what happens: [i] Goldman Sachs does something dastardly; [ii] angry citizens react by demanding restraints on abusive corporations; [iii] the legislature responds with anti-business action that punishes your local auto repair shop; [iv] the auto repair shop lays off one employee and hikes its prices by 10 percent; and [v] Goldman Sachs profits.

Occupy Wall Street arose in reaction to Goldman president Barack Obama facilitating the very financial rapacity he ran on combating gave rise to an organic populist left that in an alternative universe might have paired up with the populist right tea party to challenge the neo-liberal establishment. Instead, the establishment responded by turning the Wokeism dial up to 11 and in so doing watched the prospect of some sort of solidarity among the 99% dashed on the rocks of intersectionality.

This predates Trump. Wikileaks revealed how before he’d been sworn in for the start of his first term, Obama was wrapping neo-liberal corporatism in POC packaging. A 2008 email from then Citigroup executive Mike Froman to Democrat presidential nominee Barack Obama:

Barack –

Following up on your conversations with John over the weekend, attached are two documents: —

A list of African American, Latino and Asian American candidates, divided between Cabinet/Deputy and Under/Assistant/Deputy Assistant Sectetary levels, as well as lists of senior Native Americans, Arab/Muslim Americans and Disabled Americans.

We have longer lists, but these are candidates whose names have been recommended by a number of sources for senior level jobs in a potential Administration. — A list of women, similarly divided between candidates for Cabinet/Deputy and other senior level positions.

Please let us know if you have any questions.

Mike Froman

The perspicacious nebulafox takes the same view as this blogger on the chances of the GOPe reasserting itself in the post-Trump era:

The coming GOP “civil war” is going to be stillborn: nobody outside their donors wants what the tricorn hat crowd is selling, and Trump has shown that merely showing the promise of something-anything-different is a one way ticket to the nomination, no matter how bizarre or ridiculous you otherwise are.

In 2016, despite–or more accurately, because–unified GOPe opposition to his candidacy, Trump dominated the Republican primaries. Only Ted Cruz came within a mile of him, and Cruz was himself a thorn in the GOPe’s side. The anti-establishment vote in the 2016 Republican primaries pushed 80%. When the corporate media tried to prop up Lincoln Log challengers to primary Trump in 2020, they were humiliated even worse than Evan McMullin was in 2016. There is simply no base of electoral support for the Cheney/Romney/Bush wing of the Republican party anymore. Neoconnery is headed for the dustbin of history, it’s remnant being absorbed into the increasingly dominant corporatist wing of the Democrat party.

To complete the literary twinkie, Twinkie on what should be obvious but nonetheless bears repeating:

Although most Americans are repelled by the hard racist stuff (“It’s always the Jews!” or “white ethno-state!”), they are in the main sympathetic to much of what dissident rightists advocate (dismantling affirmative action, limiting immigration, critiquing and combating anti-white racism, reversing the valorization of blacks – the list goes on).

Why then won’t this broad agreement translate to substantive following? First, the hard racist stuff is hard to swallow for most people – enough Americans have family members, friends, neighbors, colleagues, relatives, and other people they care about who are of a difference race and won’t tolerate people who call for some harsh measures against them (what I call the “gas oven” talk or the “day of the rope” talk). Even among blacks, who are statistically much more obsessed about their own race on average, most are opposed to harming whites (even if they incorrectly blame whites for their problems). And blacks are not even the majority or plurality of nonwhites in this country anymore and there are millions of whites whose kinship and social network is enmeshed with Asians and Hispanics.

A good rule of thumb is if the UR commentariat balks at it, it has a snowball’s chance in hell of selling to the broader public.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy, History, Ideology • Tags: COTW 
Hide 100 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. A good rule of thumb is if the UR commentariat balks at it, it has a snowball’s chance in hell of selling to the broader public.

    Why is that a rule? The UR commentariat balks at all kinds of things that are popular with the general public.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @RSDB

    Ok, I’ll bite. Name some?

    Replies: @RSDB

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @RSDB

    Balks at it as being too outside the Overton Window, that is. There are of course plenty of things inside that window that the UR commentariat balks at!

  2. @RSDB

    A good rule of thumb is if the UR commentariat balks at it, it has a snowball’s chance in hell of selling to the broader public.
     
    Why is that a rule? The UR commentariat balks at all kinds of things that are popular with the general public.

    Replies: @Curle, @Audacious Epigone

    Ok, I’ll bite. Name some?

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @Curle

    Homosexual marriage, for starters, no?

  3. Although most Americans are repelled by the hard racist stuff (“It’s always the Jews!” or “white ethno-state!”), they are in the main sympathetic to much of what dissident rightists advocate (dismantling affirmative action, limiting immigration, critiquing and combating anti-white racism, reversing the valorization of blacks – the list goes on).

    Soft right sells, hard right doesn’t. But the problem is that soft right is so easily made into hard right. First “dismantling affirmative action, limiting immigration, critiquing and combating anti-white racism, reversing the valorization of blacks” – then, the ovens! There’s a fairly straightforward slippery slope argument at play. How do you argue against that?

    • Troll: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Barack Obama's secret Unz account


    Soft right sells, hard right doesn’t. But the problem is that soft right is so easily made into hard right.
     
    Au contraire. The problem with soft right is that it so easily into the softer right, and from there into a shadow of the Left.

    The civnats offer nothing but more of the same failed policies of the past. You know the drill. We advocate for policies that are good for White people without mentioning White people. The controlled media call us "racist." We deny it, which further reinforces the narrative that "racism" is evil (but only when White people do it. The Leftist establishment demands that we support policies that are bad for White people to prove our claims that we're not "racist." Thus backed into a corner, we surrender.

    The civnats have no solution for this problem.

    Replies: @iffen, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Audacious Epigone

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Barack Obama's secret Unz account

    The troll tag is left affectionately.

  4. The Third Reich was the one that ushered in the Age of the Jews

    Always this nonsense argument. The jews that rule you now were there at the time of the Third Reich, they already ruled the USA/UK/others then, so to say the Third Reich is to blame for fighting against the people that were already ruling then is illogical. At least there is acknowledgement that the jews do rule now, which is already much better than those that are too afraid or simply too stupid to admit this truth.

    • Thanks: nokangaroos
    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
    @neutral

    Bizarre to criticise the Nazis for trying to stop Jewish power but failing.

    Of course, AE is a coward so he loves this argument.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @V. K. Ovelund

    , @Twinkie
    @neutral


    The jews that rule you now were there at the time of the Third Reich, they already ruled the USA/UK/others then
     
    The Jews didn't rule over the U.S. or the UK in the 1930's and 1940's, and to say that is historical ignorance. Although Jews were a highly influential minority, the upper crust in both countries was strongly and preponderantly dominated by "Anglo-Saxon protestants." In contrast, Jews are not just influential today - they actually wield power (note that influence and power are not same things).

    As a quick and crude example, prior to 1940, there had been six U.S. senators of Jewish background in the entire history of the Republic in toto. At most two served at the same time. Indeed between 1914-1948, there was no serving Jewish senator in the U.S. Since then, there have been 31 Jewish senators, of whom 10 are currently serving - in the same year!

    the Third Reich is to blame for fighting against the people
     
    Let's look at the objective results, shall we? Setting aside the moral question, let's look at what happened as a direct result of the Nazi policies. Were they able to contain ("Madagascar") or exterminate the Jews as they wished to do so? The answer: clearly no (there were 1.5 million Jews in the U.S. in 1900; by 1942, that number grew to over 4 million and then over 5 million by 1970). A spectacular failure by any measurement. There is even a whole nation-state made up of Jews (where about 7 million are Jewish, more than the number killed by the Germans)! And this state even has nuclear weapons and can make any future attempt to annihilate them into a global catastrophe.

    At the conclusion of the war, were Jews more or less influential in the world? Clearly more. Indeed, the Nazi policies gave an influential Jew (Henry Morgenthau) the justification to put forth a plan to turn Germany into a giant, deindustrialized potato patch - until cooler heads prevailed and the Marshall Plan was implemented instead. Indeed, the incredible industrialized brutality of the Nazis made Jews sacrosanct and made it possible for them to be the Victim-est People Ever in human history and made them an object of sympathy, paving the way for their greater influence and power.

    What then should the Nazis have done if the goal was to marginalize the Jews and make them less powerful and perhaps even reduce their number? There were many different things they could have done, but here is a thought - they should have let some of the acculturation process that was already taking place in Germany to keep going. Unlike the Jews in Eastern Europe who lived highly ghettoized lives, the Jews in Germany were rather rapidly Germanizing and even becoming Christian in the early 20th century. Per the 1933 census in Germany, the Jewish population was already only half a million - less than 1% of the total German population. Because the Nazi Nuremberg laws stupidly decided to count even those with a Jewish grandparent as a Jew, among the persecuted and killed were Catholic priests and nuns as well as Protestant ministers! In other words, the Nazis made the partial Jewish ancestry of such people more, not less, salient - that's not how you intelligently make a distinct people disappear.

    The truth is, if you want to marginalize and "disappear" a group of people within a population, you don't turn into cartoon villains that the much of the world condemns as barbaric and inhuman. You certainly don't invade other countries violently and try to do their dirty work for them (note how the Polish and Ukrainian role in the Holocaust is all but forgotten and only the Germans are the bad guys). Heck no, that's frankly counterproductive and stupid. Instead, you make the status of such a minority mildly disreputable and, at the same time, encourage intermarriage and conversion (to Christianity in the case of Germany) by treating the products of such unions and said converts well.

    But guess what? This was exactly what was happening in Germany prior to the rise of the Nazis who interrupted that process. But then the Nazis were not interested in a multi-generational plan to (however unintentionally humanely) defang the Jews and make the half a million dilute into the 70 million Germans. No, they were venal and bloodthirsty, so they wanted to rob them NOW! and put them on cattle cars. All the Nazis did was forever blacken the name of Germany and cull the weak and the old among the Jews, and turn the survivors into dashing fighter pilots and tank-commanders who became the bane of the Arab world.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @iffen

  5. @neutral

    The Third Reich was the one that ushered in the Age of the Jews
     
    Always this nonsense argument. The jews that rule you now were there at the time of the Third Reich, they already ruled the USA/UK/others then, so to say the Third Reich is to blame for fighting against the people that were already ruling then is illogical. At least there is acknowledgement that the jews do rule now, which is already much better than those that are too afraid or simply too stupid to admit this truth.

    Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Twinkie

    Bizarre to criticise the Nazis for trying to stop Jewish power but failing.

    Of course, AE is a coward so he loves this argument.

    • Disagree: Yahya K.
    • Troll: Twinkie
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Kent Nationalist

    There is an argument to make that the Germans overcorrected, so to speak. It's really a moot point though, because all that matters is who controls the media and the banks, and we know who that is.

    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @Kent Nationalist

    I've a high opinion of you, Kent, but let's be fair: the charge of cowardice is baseless. Besides, one cannot pseudonymously online impugn cowardice. It doesn't work.


    Of course, AE is a coward so he loves this argument.
     
    Isn't it more likely that AE just disagrees? It's pretty obvious that most good, decent Americans concur with AE rather than with you and me.

    Bizarre to criticise the Nazis for trying to stop Jewish power but failing.
     
    The anti-Nazi crowd here is simply mistaken. (For example, the anti-Nazi crowd thinks that the last sentence was a pro-Nazi statement.)

    Facts are not largely on the anti-Nazi crowd's side.

    AE observes:


    A good rule of thumb is if the UR commentariat balks at it, it has a snowball’s chance in hell of selling to the broader public.
     
    That's about right.

    However, it has no answer to the clever, ongoing ethnic triangulation being leveraged against us.

    In general, I would recommend less packaging, less selling, and more plain attempts at the truth. Packaging and selling have their place, but the United States has too much of them. Besides, consideration and tact beat packaging and selling in the long run, anyway, and they're friendlier to the truth.

  6. Social media made it possible for political correctness to be enforced.

    Is it social media? I think the only thing that social media changed, was that a small number of people now can create a scandal, i.e. just one tweet or one social media post might create a “trending topic” in response but when you look into it, it could be perhaps just a few hundred of people.

    But this still needs to be amplified by mainstream media. How many people were angry at J. K. Rowling because of her comments about transgenders? Not too many, I would say. But this was amplified. It’s like a media version of the PCR test.

    Another example: NYT columnist accused Pepe Le Pew of promoting “rape culture”, something no one had ever even thought of before. Days later, Warner cancels Pepe Le Pew.

    So, it’s still the big media. Social media just creates the “fake popular outrage”, but when you look into it, it’s not that popular. It’s all artificial. Are there really millions of people who care about Pepe Le Pew promoting “rape culture”? Or even, about “rape culture” at all? (Which incidentally has nothing to do with real rape).

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Dumbo

    I hadn't heard about Blow getting Monsieur Le Pew cancelled. Wow. My hatred for this vile [redacted so as not to trigger our delicate host] cannot be overstated.

    Replies: @anonymous, @TomSchmidt

    , @Mitchell Porter
    @Dumbo

    "accused Pepe Le Pew of promoting “rape culture”"

    This morning I saw a headline saying, is it time to cancel Pepe Le Pew, but didn't read the article. In the wake of Dr Seuss books being cancelled for containing old-fashioned cartoon-Asian images, I had assumed that this must be about Pepe perpetuating the stereotype of the unwashed Frenchman...

  7. To complete the literary twinkie

    Ha, Ha, ha! Well done, sir, well done!

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  8. “If you wanted to be monogamous that was fine. If you didn’t want to be monogamous that was fine.”

    In real reality, this is and was the very heart of the rot. Whatever one thinks about the permissibility of alternative lifestyles, without a strong nuclear family furnace the whole enterprise turns to ROT

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
    @ravin' lunatic

    I was a chad when I was younger. No holds barred chasing skirt. But then you get married and have children, you realise you are responsible for children's lives and have a stake in the future and the past. The responsibility is rewarding and liberating. These sentiments are increasingly radical. We will become a hunted species going forward.

    , @TomSchmidt
    @ravin' lunatic

    Extended family. The nuclear family is easy pickings for cultural warriors. Grandparents, who don't give a fuck, can say things to granddaughters and grandsons that parents cannot.

    Of course, the Trust Nobody over 30 generation did away with the extended family, probably because Social Security transferred so much wealth to the Silents and Greatest that it was for the first time economically possible. But the loss has been extreme.

    , @Wency
    @ravin' lunatic

    Social liberalism always seems to win out if it's viewed as a valid option. dfordoom himself seemed to be backing this up -- I recall him observing that no young person looks to the Amish lifestyle with admiration, they look at tattooed pop stars and so on.

    As a younger man, I used to look at things like imposing the death penalty for homosexuality in Leviticus and I couldn't grok it. How could that ever be appropriate and proportionate? But now I get it. Social conservatism needs to be enforced, for the good of all, or it breaks down. It relies mostly on taboos that keep it in place. The criminal punishments are only there to preserve the taboo, they can't survive without the taboo, but so long as the taboo is intact, they will only need to be applied sparingly.

    Once you no longer enforce the taboo, this inevitable process proceeds where what were once viewed as perverts are now viewed as normal and even admired people.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  9. @Kent Nationalist
    @neutral

    Bizarre to criticise the Nazis for trying to stop Jewish power but failing.

    Of course, AE is a coward so he loves this argument.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @V. K. Ovelund

    There is an argument to make that the Germans overcorrected, so to speak. It’s really a moot point though, because all that matters is who controls the media and the banks, and we know who that is.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund, Rosie
  10. @neutral

    The Third Reich was the one that ushered in the Age of the Jews
     
    Always this nonsense argument. The jews that rule you now were there at the time of the Third Reich, they already ruled the USA/UK/others then, so to say the Third Reich is to blame for fighting against the people that were already ruling then is illogical. At least there is acknowledgement that the jews do rule now, which is already much better than those that are too afraid or simply too stupid to admit this truth.

    Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Twinkie

    The jews that rule you now were there at the time of the Third Reich, they already ruled the USA/UK/others then

    The Jews didn’t rule over the U.S. or the UK in the 1930’s and 1940’s, and to say that is historical ignorance. Although Jews were a highly influential minority, the upper crust in both countries was strongly and preponderantly dominated by “Anglo-Saxon protestants.” In contrast, Jews are not just influential today – they actually wield power (note that influence and power are not same things).

    As a quick and crude example, prior to 1940, there had been six U.S. senators of Jewish background in the entire history of the Republic in toto. At most two served at the same time. Indeed between 1914-1948, there was no serving Jewish senator in the U.S. Since then, there have been 31 Jewish senators, of whom 10 are currently serving – in the same year!

    the Third Reich is to blame for fighting against the people

    Let’s look at the objective results, shall we? Setting aside the moral question, let’s look at what happened as a direct result of the Nazi policies. Were they able to contain (“Madagascar”) or exterminate the Jews as they wished to do so? The answer: clearly no (there were 1.5 million Jews in the U.S. in 1900; by 1942, that number grew to over 4 million and then over 5 million by 1970). A spectacular failure by any measurement. There is even a whole nation-state made up of Jews (where about 7 million are Jewish, more than the number killed by the Germans)! And this state even has nuclear weapons and can make any future attempt to annihilate them into a global catastrophe.

    At the conclusion of the war, were Jews more or less influential in the world? Clearly more. Indeed, the Nazi policies gave an influential Jew (Henry Morgenthau) the justification to put forth a plan to turn Germany into a giant, deindustrialized potato patch – until cooler heads prevailed and the Marshall Plan was implemented instead. Indeed, the incredible industrialized brutality of the Nazis made Jews sacrosanct and made it possible for them to be the Victim-est People Ever in human history and made them an object of sympathy, paving the way for their greater influence and power.

    What then should the Nazis have done if the goal was to marginalize the Jews and make them less powerful and perhaps even reduce their number? There were many different things they could have done, but here is a thought – they should have let some of the acculturation process that was already taking place in Germany to keep going. Unlike the Jews in Eastern Europe who lived highly ghettoized lives, the Jews in Germany were rather rapidly Germanizing and even becoming Christian in the early 20th century. Per the 1933 census in Germany, the Jewish population was already only half a million – less than 1% of the total German population. Because the Nazi Nuremberg laws stupidly decided to count even those with a Jewish grandparent as a Jew, among the persecuted and killed were Catholic priests and nuns as well as Protestant ministers! In other words, the Nazis made the partial Jewish ancestry of such people more, not less, salient – that’s not how you intelligently make a distinct people disappear.

    The truth is, if you want to marginalize and “disappear” a group of people within a population, you don’t turn into cartoon villains that the much of the world condemns as barbaric and inhuman. You certainly don’t invade other countries violently and try to do their dirty work for them (note how the Polish and Ukrainian role in the Holocaust is all but forgotten and only the Germans are the bad guys). Heck no, that’s frankly counterproductive and stupid. Instead, you make the status of such a minority mildly disreputable and, at the same time, encourage intermarriage and conversion (to Christianity in the case of Germany) by treating the products of such unions and said converts well.

    But guess what? This was exactly what was happening in Germany prior to the rise of the Nazis who interrupted that process. But then the Nazis were not interested in a multi-generational plan to (however unintentionally humanely) defang the Jews and make the half a million dilute into the 70 million Germans. No, they were venal and bloodthirsty, so they wanted to rob them NOW! and put them on cattle cars. All the Nazis did was forever blacken the name of Germany and cull the weak and the old among the Jews, and turn the survivors into dashing fighter pilots and tank-commanders who became the bane of the Arab world.

    • Agree: Dissident
    • Troll: Gordo
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Twinkie

    Reasonable people can disagree on what the Germans should have done, but your parrotting of the 6 gorillion number means your opinion can be safely discarded due to your gullibility and unseriousness.

    Also, for the record, "Anglo-Saxon Protestants" have been puppets of the Juice ever since that demon Cromwell let them back in to fund his reign of terror.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Rosie

    , @iffen
    @Twinkie

    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Twinkie, @Anonymous

  11. @Dumbo

    Social media made it possible for political correctness to be enforced.
     
    Is it social media? I think the only thing that social media changed, was that a small number of people now can create a scandal, i.e. just one tweet or one social media post might create a "trending topic" in response but when you look into it, it could be perhaps just a few hundred of people.

    But this still needs to be amplified by mainstream media. How many people were angry at J. K. Rowling because of her comments about transgenders? Not too many, I would say. But this was amplified. It's like a media version of the PCR test.

    Another example: NYT columnist accused Pepe Le Pew of promoting "rape culture", something no one had ever even thought of before. Days later, Warner cancels Pepe Le Pew.

    So, it's still the big media. Social media just creates the "fake popular outrage", but when you look into it, it's not that popular. It's all artificial. Are there really millions of people who care about Pepe Le Pew promoting "rape culture"? Or even, about "rape culture" at all? (Which incidentally has nothing to do with real rape).

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Mitchell Porter

    I hadn’t heard about Blow getting Monsieur Le Pew cancelled. Wow. My hatred for this vile [redacted so as not to trigger our delicate host] cannot be overstated.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    @AndrewR

    According to this article (Yahoo news, so FWIW), the Pepe Le Pew scene from Space Jam II was cut prior to the latest dust-up and not for PC reasons:
    https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/pepe-le-pew-removed-space-024605432.html

    So for now Pepe has not actually been cancelled by Warner Brothers, although as with everything else it is just a matter of time.

    Replies: @Wency

    , @TomSchmidt
    @AndrewR

    Good thing I own the DVDs.

  12. @Twinkie
    @neutral


    The jews that rule you now were there at the time of the Third Reich, they already ruled the USA/UK/others then
     
    The Jews didn't rule over the U.S. or the UK in the 1930's and 1940's, and to say that is historical ignorance. Although Jews were a highly influential minority, the upper crust in both countries was strongly and preponderantly dominated by "Anglo-Saxon protestants." In contrast, Jews are not just influential today - they actually wield power (note that influence and power are not same things).

    As a quick and crude example, prior to 1940, there had been six U.S. senators of Jewish background in the entire history of the Republic in toto. At most two served at the same time. Indeed between 1914-1948, there was no serving Jewish senator in the U.S. Since then, there have been 31 Jewish senators, of whom 10 are currently serving - in the same year!

    the Third Reich is to blame for fighting against the people
     
    Let's look at the objective results, shall we? Setting aside the moral question, let's look at what happened as a direct result of the Nazi policies. Were they able to contain ("Madagascar") or exterminate the Jews as they wished to do so? The answer: clearly no (there were 1.5 million Jews in the U.S. in 1900; by 1942, that number grew to over 4 million and then over 5 million by 1970). A spectacular failure by any measurement. There is even a whole nation-state made up of Jews (where about 7 million are Jewish, more than the number killed by the Germans)! And this state even has nuclear weapons and can make any future attempt to annihilate them into a global catastrophe.

    At the conclusion of the war, were Jews more or less influential in the world? Clearly more. Indeed, the Nazi policies gave an influential Jew (Henry Morgenthau) the justification to put forth a plan to turn Germany into a giant, deindustrialized potato patch - until cooler heads prevailed and the Marshall Plan was implemented instead. Indeed, the incredible industrialized brutality of the Nazis made Jews sacrosanct and made it possible for them to be the Victim-est People Ever in human history and made them an object of sympathy, paving the way for their greater influence and power.

    What then should the Nazis have done if the goal was to marginalize the Jews and make them less powerful and perhaps even reduce their number? There were many different things they could have done, but here is a thought - they should have let some of the acculturation process that was already taking place in Germany to keep going. Unlike the Jews in Eastern Europe who lived highly ghettoized lives, the Jews in Germany were rather rapidly Germanizing and even becoming Christian in the early 20th century. Per the 1933 census in Germany, the Jewish population was already only half a million - less than 1% of the total German population. Because the Nazi Nuremberg laws stupidly decided to count even those with a Jewish grandparent as a Jew, among the persecuted and killed were Catholic priests and nuns as well as Protestant ministers! In other words, the Nazis made the partial Jewish ancestry of such people more, not less, salient - that's not how you intelligently make a distinct people disappear.

    The truth is, if you want to marginalize and "disappear" a group of people within a population, you don't turn into cartoon villains that the much of the world condemns as barbaric and inhuman. You certainly don't invade other countries violently and try to do their dirty work for them (note how the Polish and Ukrainian role in the Holocaust is all but forgotten and only the Germans are the bad guys). Heck no, that's frankly counterproductive and stupid. Instead, you make the status of such a minority mildly disreputable and, at the same time, encourage intermarriage and conversion (to Christianity in the case of Germany) by treating the products of such unions and said converts well.

    But guess what? This was exactly what was happening in Germany prior to the rise of the Nazis who interrupted that process. But then the Nazis were not interested in a multi-generational plan to (however unintentionally humanely) defang the Jews and make the half a million dilute into the 70 million Germans. No, they were venal and bloodthirsty, so they wanted to rob them NOW! and put them on cattle cars. All the Nazis did was forever blacken the name of Germany and cull the weak and the old among the Jews, and turn the survivors into dashing fighter pilots and tank-commanders who became the bane of the Arab world.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @iffen

    Reasonable people can disagree on what the Germans should have done, but your parrotting of the 6 gorillion number means your opinion can be safely discarded due to your gullibility and unseriousness.

    Also, for the record, “Anglo-Saxon Protestants” have been puppets of the Juice ever since that demon Cromwell let them back in to fund his reign of terror.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @AndrewR

    Did I miss something?


    Reasonable people can disagree on what the Germans should have done, but your parrotting of the 6 gorillion number means your opinion can be safely discarded due to your gullibility and unseriousness.
     
    I didn't see any mention of 6 million or 6 gorillion or 6 anything else, except 6 Jewish U.S. senators.

    Twinkie's reply was level-headed and fact-filled. It showed that, unlike many Americans, Twinkie is actually listening to the other side.

    A more effective response might be to ask Twinkie if he knows who Erhard Milch is.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @AndrewR

    , @Rosie
    @AndrewR


    Also, for the record, “Anglo-Saxon Protestants” have been puppets of the Juice ever since that demon Cromwell let them back in to fund his reign of terror.
     
    The problem that Twinkie fails to recognize is that Jews, though initially small in number, began to change the intraelite balance of power from the very beginning. A great many WASP elites were already prone to treachery, and I have no interest in denying that. That said, there were enough honest elites with the power to keep them in check.

    Corrupt elites have always been terrified of populists, because they have the support of the people and are therefore a serious threat however few in number. The ascent of the Jews, and especially Jewish media power cut off the ability of populist elites to communicate with the people without Jewish mediation. Thus defanged, they could no longer keep treacherous elites in check, and here we are.

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Gaius-Sempronius-Gracchus

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt

  13. @Kent Nationalist
    @neutral

    Bizarre to criticise the Nazis for trying to stop Jewish power but failing.

    Of course, AE is a coward so he loves this argument.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @V. K. Ovelund

    I’ve a high opinion of you, Kent, but let’s be fair: the charge of cowardice is baseless. Besides, one cannot pseudonymously online impugn cowardice. It doesn’t work.

    Of course, AE is a coward so he loves this argument.

    Isn’t it more likely that AE just disagrees? It’s pretty obvious that most good, decent Americans concur with AE rather than with you and me.

    Bizarre to criticise the Nazis for trying to stop Jewish power but failing.

    The anti-Nazi crowd here is simply mistaken. (For example, the anti-Nazi crowd thinks that the last sentence was a pro-Nazi statement.)

    Facts are not largely on the anti-Nazi crowd’s side.

    AE observes:

    A good rule of thumb is if the UR commentariat balks at it, it has a snowball’s chance in hell of selling to the broader public.

    That’s about right.

    However, it has no answer to the clever, ongoing ethnic triangulation being leveraged against us.

    In general, I would recommend less packaging, less selling, and more plain attempts at the truth. Packaging and selling have their place, but the United States has too much of them. Besides, consideration and tact beat packaging and selling in the long run, anyway, and they’re friendlier to the truth.

  14. V. K. Ovelund on how, in concert with the state, mega corporations leverage moral hazard, regulatory capture, and scale to bankrupt their small business competitors ahead of buying their shells at fire sale prices:

    Along these same lines, how is it that jitney operators and unauthorized “boarding house” owners were harassed and prosecuted in the courts forever, but then slick Silicon Valley type businesses show up and suddenly it’s okay to use your personal vehicle as a taxi and okay to use your residence as a motel?

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    Along these same lines, how is it that jitney operators and unauthorized “boarding house” owners were harassed and prosecuted in the courts forever, but then slick Silicon Valley type businesses show up and suddenly it’s okay to use your personal vehicle as a taxi and okay to use your residence as a motel?
     
    I mentioned the jitney once in the presence of my father and my wife. No one responded so I dropped it. Your mention is the first I've heard of it otherwise.

    How did this happen? Taxi medallions used to be enforced. Now all of a sudden they aren't?
  15. @AndrewR
    @Twinkie

    Reasonable people can disagree on what the Germans should have done, but your parrotting of the 6 gorillion number means your opinion can be safely discarded due to your gullibility and unseriousness.

    Also, for the record, "Anglo-Saxon Protestants" have been puppets of the Juice ever since that demon Cromwell let them back in to fund his reign of terror.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Rosie

    Did I miss something?

    Reasonable people can disagree on what the Germans should have done, but your parrotting of the 6 gorillion number means your opinion can be safely discarded due to your gullibility and unseriousness.

    I didn’t see any mention of 6 million or 6 gorillion or 6 anything else, except 6 Jewish U.S. senators.

    Twinkie’s reply was level-headed and fact-filled. It showed that, unlike many Americans, Twinkie is actually listening to the other side.

    A more effective response might be to ask Twinkie if he knows who Erhard Milch is.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @V. K. Ovelund


    A more effective response might be to ask Twinkie if he knows who Erhard Milch is.
     
    I will one-up you, sir, with an Emil Maurice.

    The Nazis were not a principled lot. If you were BFF with der Führer, you could have Jewish ancestry and still get to be an SS commander and cuck his woman.
    , @AndrewR
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Can you read?


    where about 7 million are Jewish, more than the number killed by the Germans
     
    This clearly implies that he believes the official narrative.

    I would phrase it as "more than the number of Jews allegedly killed according to even the official narrative"

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Twinkie

  16. @ravin' lunatic
    "If you wanted to be monogamous that was fine. If you didn’t want to be monogamous that was fine."

    In real reality, this is and was the very heart of the rot. Whatever one thinks about the permissibility of alternative lifestyles, without a strong nuclear family furnace the whole enterprise turns to ROT

    Replies: @Agathoklis, @TomSchmidt, @Wency

    I was a chad when I was younger. No holds barred chasing skirt. But then you get married and have children, you realise you are responsible for children’s lives and have a stake in the future and the past. The responsibility is rewarding and liberating. These sentiments are increasingly radical. We will become a hunted species going forward.

  17. Thanks to dfordoom for a defense of Boomers (full disclosure, I am one). Boomers may have been self-centered and more than ordinarily narcissistic, but they did not make the catastrophically bad public policy decisions of the 1960s and the 1970s; those were the contributions mostly of the “Greatest Generation.” I sometimes reflect on the observations of Sayyib Qutb, one of the founders of the Muslim Brotherhood, who was shocked by the sexual licentiousness, violence and materialism in the United States of Dwight Einsenhower. Perhaps the outsider saw more clearly since the seeds of the 1960s and 70s were clearly present in the 40s and 50s. The first half of the 20th Century was a civilizational catastrophe from which consequences we still suffer.

    The fact that the German and Japanese militaries and societies perservered until the very end in WWII is a testament to their strength and courage, albeit in bad causes and suffering from catastrophically poor leadership.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    @Diversity Heretic

    Qutb was here in the late 40s.

    One thing we forget is that most of history is story-telling, less facts. There was plenty of divorce, pre-marital sex, drug use, and the like before the Eisenhower era. Ike clamped down on the military-industrial complex which freed up capital to build suburbia. Our impressions of that era come somewhat from the TV shows praising the conversion of farms and fields to housing, with the sponsors like Texaco (star theater) profiting from the growth.

    What changed in the 60s was the pill and also antibiotics to kill off any social diseases, at least until herpes and HIV came along.

    , @Hermes
    @Diversity Heretic

    I've made the same point about Boomers elsewhere. If you're like me, a Gen X'er with an innate inclination toward traditionalism, you grew up thinking it was your own parents' generation, the Baby Boomers, who ruined everything, by becoming hippies, growing long hair, doing drugs, turning on, tuning in, and dropping out, embracing liberal sexual behavior, and influencing policy with their student protests of the 1960's (really more like the mid-sixties through the mid-seventies.) But then I realized that officially, the Baby Boom generation starts with those born in 1946, and the voting age wasn't lowered from 21 to 18 until 1970, so the first Boomers didn't become eligible to vote until 1967. Meaning that not a single Boomer voted for the politicians who enacted the 1964 Civil Rights Act or the 1965 nor the 1965 Hart-Celler immigration act. That was done by the older generations, who I grew up thinking of as the "good guys" who believed in Leave it to Beaver or Ozzie and Harriet lifestyles.

  18. @V. K. Ovelund
    @AndrewR

    Did I miss something?


    Reasonable people can disagree on what the Germans should have done, but your parrotting of the 6 gorillion number means your opinion can be safely discarded due to your gullibility and unseriousness.
     
    I didn't see any mention of 6 million or 6 gorillion or 6 anything else, except 6 Jewish U.S. senators.

    Twinkie's reply was level-headed and fact-filled. It showed that, unlike many Americans, Twinkie is actually listening to the other side.

    A more effective response might be to ask Twinkie if he knows who Erhard Milch is.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @AndrewR

    A more effective response might be to ask Twinkie if he knows who Erhard Milch is.

    I will one-up you, sir, with an Emil Maurice.

    The Nazis were not a principled lot. If you were BFF with der Führer, you could have Jewish ancestry and still get to be an SS commander and cuck his woman.

  19. anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @AndrewR
    @Dumbo

    I hadn't heard about Blow getting Monsieur Le Pew cancelled. Wow. My hatred for this vile [redacted so as not to trigger our delicate host] cannot be overstated.

    Replies: @anonymous, @TomSchmidt

    According to this article (Yahoo news, so FWIW), the Pepe Le Pew scene from Space Jam II was cut prior to the latest dust-up and not for PC reasons:
    https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/pepe-le-pew-removed-space-024605432.html

    So for now Pepe has not actually been cancelled by Warner Brothers, although as with everything else it is just a matter of time.

    • Replies: @Wency
    @anonymous

    See, that was my first thought in this. Who was it that actually wanted Pepe Le Pew? Did anyone ever like him? I recall hating him as a kid, and not as a villain, but just as someone annoying to watch and listen to. Romance isn't a language that little boys speak. I could relate in some way to the motivations of every other Loony Toons character, but not him.

  20. @V. K. Ovelund
    @AndrewR

    Did I miss something?


    Reasonable people can disagree on what the Germans should have done, but your parrotting of the 6 gorillion number means your opinion can be safely discarded due to your gullibility and unseriousness.
     
    I didn't see any mention of 6 million or 6 gorillion or 6 anything else, except 6 Jewish U.S. senators.

    Twinkie's reply was level-headed and fact-filled. It showed that, unlike many Americans, Twinkie is actually listening to the other side.

    A more effective response might be to ask Twinkie if he knows who Erhard Milch is.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @AndrewR

    Can you read?

    where about 7 million are Jewish, more than the number killed by the Germans

    This clearly implies that he believes the official narrative.

    I would phrase it as “more than the number of Jews allegedly killed according to even the official narrative”

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @AndrewR

    Damned white-nationalist dissident right is getting too touchy. It's also turning into something I didn't sign up for.

    When I signed up for it, it consisted mainly of robust, regular guys who liked to grill, valued the towering achievements of their ancestors, and didn't appreciate their people being replaced. Recently, it's being taken over by crypto-anarchists, social engineers, anti-Americans, and men who vent grudges against their own fathers.

    I'm a white nationalist like Joe Manchin is a Democrat.

    Online, where did all the regular white nationalists go? I still see them in real life, but online, it's like they're evaporating.


    This clearly implies that he believes the official narrative.
     
    No, it doesn't.

    Twinkie might believe that. You haven't asked. And if he does believe it, then he's got a shelfful of well-known, broadly accepted books to back him up.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Citizen of a Silly Country

    , @Twinkie
    @AndrewR


    Can you read?
     
    As Jews (of a certain generation) would say, you have some Chutzpah to accuse another of deficiency in reading comprehension. You obviously don’t realize that what I wrote makes sense provided the Nazi regime killed between 0 and 6,999,999 Jews (the two brackets inclusive). The only way a logical person (and one with a basic reading comprehension proficiency) would object to my sentence would be if the Nazis killed more than seven million Jews.
  21. @Dumbo

    Social media made it possible for political correctness to be enforced.
     
    Is it social media? I think the only thing that social media changed, was that a small number of people now can create a scandal, i.e. just one tweet or one social media post might create a "trending topic" in response but when you look into it, it could be perhaps just a few hundred of people.

    But this still needs to be amplified by mainstream media. How many people were angry at J. K. Rowling because of her comments about transgenders? Not too many, I would say. But this was amplified. It's like a media version of the PCR test.

    Another example: NYT columnist accused Pepe Le Pew of promoting "rape culture", something no one had ever even thought of before. Days later, Warner cancels Pepe Le Pew.

    So, it's still the big media. Social media just creates the "fake popular outrage", but when you look into it, it's not that popular. It's all artificial. Are there really millions of people who care about Pepe Le Pew promoting "rape culture"? Or even, about "rape culture" at all? (Which incidentally has nothing to do with real rape).

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Mitchell Porter

    “accused Pepe Le Pew of promoting “rape culture””

    This morning I saw a headline saying, is it time to cancel Pepe Le Pew, but didn’t read the article. In the wake of Dr Seuss books being cancelled for containing old-fashioned cartoon-Asian images, I had assumed that this must be about Pepe perpetuating the stereotype of the unwashed Frenchman…

  22. @Twinkie
    @neutral


    The jews that rule you now were there at the time of the Third Reich, they already ruled the USA/UK/others then
     
    The Jews didn't rule over the U.S. or the UK in the 1930's and 1940's, and to say that is historical ignorance. Although Jews were a highly influential minority, the upper crust in both countries was strongly and preponderantly dominated by "Anglo-Saxon protestants." In contrast, Jews are not just influential today - they actually wield power (note that influence and power are not same things).

    As a quick and crude example, prior to 1940, there had been six U.S. senators of Jewish background in the entire history of the Republic in toto. At most two served at the same time. Indeed between 1914-1948, there was no serving Jewish senator in the U.S. Since then, there have been 31 Jewish senators, of whom 10 are currently serving - in the same year!

    the Third Reich is to blame for fighting against the people
     
    Let's look at the objective results, shall we? Setting aside the moral question, let's look at what happened as a direct result of the Nazi policies. Were they able to contain ("Madagascar") or exterminate the Jews as they wished to do so? The answer: clearly no (there were 1.5 million Jews in the U.S. in 1900; by 1942, that number grew to over 4 million and then over 5 million by 1970). A spectacular failure by any measurement. There is even a whole nation-state made up of Jews (where about 7 million are Jewish, more than the number killed by the Germans)! And this state even has nuclear weapons and can make any future attempt to annihilate them into a global catastrophe.

    At the conclusion of the war, were Jews more or less influential in the world? Clearly more. Indeed, the Nazi policies gave an influential Jew (Henry Morgenthau) the justification to put forth a plan to turn Germany into a giant, deindustrialized potato patch - until cooler heads prevailed and the Marshall Plan was implemented instead. Indeed, the incredible industrialized brutality of the Nazis made Jews sacrosanct and made it possible for them to be the Victim-est People Ever in human history and made them an object of sympathy, paving the way for their greater influence and power.

    What then should the Nazis have done if the goal was to marginalize the Jews and make them less powerful and perhaps even reduce their number? There were many different things they could have done, but here is a thought - they should have let some of the acculturation process that was already taking place in Germany to keep going. Unlike the Jews in Eastern Europe who lived highly ghettoized lives, the Jews in Germany were rather rapidly Germanizing and even becoming Christian in the early 20th century. Per the 1933 census in Germany, the Jewish population was already only half a million - less than 1% of the total German population. Because the Nazi Nuremberg laws stupidly decided to count even those with a Jewish grandparent as a Jew, among the persecuted and killed were Catholic priests and nuns as well as Protestant ministers! In other words, the Nazis made the partial Jewish ancestry of such people more, not less, salient - that's not how you intelligently make a distinct people disappear.

    The truth is, if you want to marginalize and "disappear" a group of people within a population, you don't turn into cartoon villains that the much of the world condemns as barbaric and inhuman. You certainly don't invade other countries violently and try to do their dirty work for them (note how the Polish and Ukrainian role in the Holocaust is all but forgotten and only the Germans are the bad guys). Heck no, that's frankly counterproductive and stupid. Instead, you make the status of such a minority mildly disreputable and, at the same time, encourage intermarriage and conversion (to Christianity in the case of Germany) by treating the products of such unions and said converts well.

    But guess what? This was exactly what was happening in Germany prior to the rise of the Nazis who interrupted that process. But then the Nazis were not interested in a multi-generational plan to (however unintentionally humanely) defang the Jews and make the half a million dilute into the 70 million Germans. No, they were venal and bloodthirsty, so they wanted to rob them NOW! and put them on cattle cars. All the Nazis did was forever blacken the name of Germany and cull the weak and the old among the Jews, and turn the survivors into dashing fighter pilots and tank-commanders who became the bane of the Arab world.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @iffen

    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen

    I have no idea whether to agree or disagree, but ...


    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.
     
    ... that's the best one-liner of the week.
    , @Twinkie
    @iffen


    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.
     
    While there actually were Zionist Jews who sought to ally with the Nazis to increase emigration to Palestine, that’s going much too far.

    What Nazism demonstrates is that those who subscribe to mystical pagan fantasies of destiny and will to power and ignore rational realities as well as the well-grounded traditional religion of Christianity, that is the bedrock of medieval and early modern Europe, are liable to bring ruin and destruction to themselves and those whom they purport to champion. A food for thought for the present-day white advocates.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @iffen, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnPlywood

    , @Anonymous
    @iffen


    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.
     
    Ron Unz wrote a long ‘America Pravda’ piece on this a couple years ago.

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-jews-and-nazis/

    ...The importance of the Nazi-Zionist pact for Israel’s establishment is difficult to overstate. According to a 1974 analysis in Jewish Frontier cited by Brenner, between 1933 and 1939 over 60% of all the investment in Jewish Palestine came from Nazi Germany. The worldwide impoverishment of the Great Depression had drastically reduced ongoing Jewish financial support from all other sources, and Brenner reasonably suggests that without Hitler’s financial backing, the nascent Jewish colony, so tiny and fragile, might easily have shriveled up and died during that difficult period...

    In 1934, Zionist leaders invited an important SS official to spend six months visiting the Jewish settlement in Palestine, and upon his return, his very favorable impressions of the growing Zionist enterprise were published as a massive 12-part series in Joseph Goebbel’s Der Angriff, the flagship media organ of the Nazi Party, bearing the descriptive title “A Nazi Goes to Palestine.”

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-jews-and-nazis/
     
  23. @AndrewR
    @Dumbo

    I hadn't heard about Blow getting Monsieur Le Pew cancelled. Wow. My hatred for this vile [redacted so as not to trigger our delicate host] cannot be overstated.

    Replies: @anonymous, @TomSchmidt

    Good thing I own the DVDs.

  24. @AndrewR
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Can you read?


    where about 7 million are Jewish, more than the number killed by the Germans
     
    This clearly implies that he believes the official narrative.

    I would phrase it as "more than the number of Jews allegedly killed according to even the official narrative"

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Twinkie

    Damned white-nationalist dissident right is getting too touchy. It’s also turning into something I didn’t sign up for.

    When I signed up for it, it consisted mainly of robust, regular guys who liked to grill, valued the towering achievements of their ancestors, and didn’t appreciate their people being replaced. Recently, it’s being taken over by crypto-anarchists, social engineers, anti-Americans, and men who vent grudges against their own fathers.

    I’m a white nationalist like Joe Manchin is a Democrat.

    Online, where did all the regular white nationalists go? I still see them in real life, but online, it’s like they’re evaporating.

    This clearly implies that he believes the official narrative.

    No, it doesn’t.

    Twinkie might believe that. You haven’t asked. And if he does believe it, then he’s got a shelfful of well-known, broadly accepted books to back him up.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @V. K. Ovelund


    No, it doesn’t.
     
    Indeed.

    Twinkie might believe that. You haven’t asked. And if he does believe it, then he’s got a shelfful of well-known, broadly accepted books to back him up.
     
    Nobody asked me, but since you touched upon it, I’ll volunteer. I’m somewhat agnostic on the issue of precisely how many Jews were killed by the Nazi regime and its agents and allies. But the Germans kept meticulous records, so it’s clear from the logistical records alone that they intended harm on the Jews and others (gypsies, political dissidents, etc.) on an industrial scale. I also think that the exact number is a somewhat pointless topic, a diversion, to discuss in the context of what I wrote.

    By the way, one interesting point: even Yad Vashem’s (Israel’s Holocaust memorial center’s) official tally for Jews killed shows “only” about 130K out of about 500K+ Jews killed from Germany. The bulk of the killings were in German controlled Poland and the Soviet Union (mostly Ukraine) and also allied Hungary. In general, the Holocaust was rather less intense in Western and Northern Europe, and was highly concentrated in Eastern Europe. This would be strange if the Nazi goal was to rid the West of its “pernicious” and “powerful” Jews. What this leads me to speculate is that the Nazis were opportunistic and went after the more segregated and vulnerable Jews in Eastern Europe and took advantage of the much more intense anti-Jewish sentiments there.
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @V. K. Ovelund


    When I signed up for it, it consisted mainly of robust, regular guys who liked to grill, valued the towering achievements of their ancestors, and didn’t appreciate their people being replaced.
     
    And what did they achieve?

    I consider myself a White nationalist in that I want to live among and be ruled by my own. That's obviously a very distant dream, but it's my (and many others') dream.

    Over the years, I've found many - perhaps yourself - who are sympathetic with that dream in theory but balk at what it would take in practice. They find it distasteful that to have a White community, you need to exclude - not hate, not direct violence at but exclude - non-Whites such as Twinkie, who seems a fine, fine person. They find it distasteful that I would hire a less-qualified White over a black or Asian. They find it distasteful that our community would wish our sons and daughters who want to marry non-Whites the best in their lives but that they cannot return home.

    Many Whites like the idea of their own community . . . until it comes time to create and maintain that community, much as many Whites lament the loss of what was the United States while forgetting their ancestors carved out that country by ruthless killing the natives and excluding non-Whites from moving into this land.

    Time for Whites to put away childish things or time for us to die away as a people.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  25. @ravin' lunatic
    "If you wanted to be monogamous that was fine. If you didn’t want to be monogamous that was fine."

    In real reality, this is and was the very heart of the rot. Whatever one thinks about the permissibility of alternative lifestyles, without a strong nuclear family furnace the whole enterprise turns to ROT

    Replies: @Agathoklis, @TomSchmidt, @Wency

    Extended family. The nuclear family is easy pickings for cultural warriors. Grandparents, who don’t give a fuck, can say things to granddaughters and grandsons that parents cannot.

    Of course, the Trust Nobody over 30 generation did away with the extended family, probably because Social Security transferred so much wealth to the Silents and Greatest that it was for the first time economically possible. But the loss has been extreme.

  26. @AndrewR
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Can you read?


    where about 7 million are Jewish, more than the number killed by the Germans
     
    This clearly implies that he believes the official narrative.

    I would phrase it as "more than the number of Jews allegedly killed according to even the official narrative"

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Twinkie

    Can you read?

    As Jews (of a certain generation) would say, you have some Chutzpah to accuse another of deficiency in reading comprehension. You obviously don’t realize that what I wrote makes sense provided the Nazi regime killed between 0 and 6,999,999 Jews (the two brackets inclusive). The only way a logical person (and one with a basic reading comprehension proficiency) would object to my sentence would be if the Nazis killed more than seven million Jews.

  27. @iffen
    @Twinkie

    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Twinkie, @Anonymous

    I have no idea whether to agree or disagree, but …

    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.

    … that’s the best one-liner of the week.

  28. @Diversity Heretic
    Thanks to dfordoom for a defense of Boomers (full disclosure, I am one). Boomers may have been self-centered and more than ordinarily narcissistic, but they did not make the catastrophically bad public policy decisions of the 1960s and the 1970s; those were the contributions mostly of the "Greatest Generation." I sometimes reflect on the observations of Sayyib Qutb, one of the founders of the Muslim Brotherhood, who was shocked by the sexual licentiousness, violence and materialism in the United States of Dwight Einsenhower. Perhaps the outsider saw more clearly since the seeds of the 1960s and 70s were clearly present in the 40s and 50s. The first half of the 20th Century was a civilizational catastrophe from which consequences we still suffer.

    The fact that the German and Japanese militaries and societies perservered until the very end in WWII is a testament to their strength and courage, albeit in bad causes and suffering from catastrophically poor leadership.

    Replies: @TomSchmidt, @Hermes

    Qutb was here in the late 40s.

    One thing we forget is that most of history is story-telling, less facts. There was plenty of divorce, pre-marital sex, drug use, and the like before the Eisenhower era. Ike clamped down on the military-industrial complex which freed up capital to build suburbia. Our impressions of that era come somewhat from the TV shows praising the conversion of farms and fields to housing, with the sponsors like Texaco (star theater) profiting from the growth.

    What changed in the 60s was the pill and also antibiotics to kill off any social diseases, at least until herpes and HIV came along.

    • Agree: Nodwink
  29. @V. K. Ovelund
    @AndrewR

    Damned white-nationalist dissident right is getting too touchy. It's also turning into something I didn't sign up for.

    When I signed up for it, it consisted mainly of robust, regular guys who liked to grill, valued the towering achievements of their ancestors, and didn't appreciate their people being replaced. Recently, it's being taken over by crypto-anarchists, social engineers, anti-Americans, and men who vent grudges against their own fathers.

    I'm a white nationalist like Joe Manchin is a Democrat.

    Online, where did all the regular white nationalists go? I still see them in real life, but online, it's like they're evaporating.


    This clearly implies that he believes the official narrative.
     
    No, it doesn't.

    Twinkie might believe that. You haven't asked. And if he does believe it, then he's got a shelfful of well-known, broadly accepted books to back him up.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Citizen of a Silly Country

    No, it doesn’t.

    Indeed.

    Twinkie might believe that. You haven’t asked. And if he does believe it, then he’s got a shelfful of well-known, broadly accepted books to back him up.

    Nobody asked me, but since you touched upon it, I’ll volunteer. I’m somewhat agnostic on the issue of precisely how many Jews were killed by the Nazi regime and its agents and allies. But the Germans kept meticulous records, so it’s clear from the logistical records alone that they intended harm on the Jews and others (gypsies, political dissidents, etc.) on an industrial scale. I also think that the exact number is a somewhat pointless topic, a diversion, to discuss in the context of what I wrote.

    By the way, one interesting point: even Yad Vashem’s (Israel’s Holocaust memorial center’s) official tally for Jews killed shows “only” about 130K out of about 500K+ Jews killed from Germany. The bulk of the killings were in German controlled Poland and the Soviet Union (mostly Ukraine) and also allied Hungary. In general, the Holocaust was rather less intense in Western and Northern Europe, and was highly concentrated in Eastern Europe. This would be strange if the Nazi goal was to rid the West of its “pernicious” and “powerful” Jews. What this leads me to speculate is that the Nazis were opportunistic and went after the more segregated and vulnerable Jews in Eastern Europe and took advantage of the much more intense anti-Jewish sentiments there.

  30. @iffen
    @Twinkie

    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Twinkie, @Anonymous

    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.

    While there actually were Zionist Jews who sought to ally with the Nazis to increase emigration to Palestine, that’s going much too far.

    What Nazism demonstrates is that those who subscribe to mystical pagan fantasies of destiny and will to power and ignore rational realities as well as the well-grounded traditional religion of Christianity, that is the bedrock of medieval and early modern Europe, are liable to bring ruin and destruction to themselves and those whom they purport to champion. A food for thought for the present-day white advocates.

    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    @Twinkie

    What Nazism demonstrates is that those who subscribe to mystical pagan fantasies of destiny and will to power and ignore rational realities as well as the well-grounded traditional religion of Christianity, that is the bedrock of medieval and early modern Europe, are liable to bring ruin and destruction to themselves and those whom they purport to champion. A food for thought for the present-day white advocates.

    Napoleon shouldn't have invaded Russia.

    Hitler shouldn't have invaded Russia.

    The JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire shouldn't have been so impressed with their Japanese pets when the Japanese got the better of the Russians a hundred and twenty years or so ago.

    The JEW portion of the Ruling Class had financial power a long time before WWII.

    Pratt and China and always oil it seems because Hitler wanted that oil but what was Napoleon's excuse for baiting the Bear?

    , @iffen
    @Twinkie

    While there actually were Zionist Jews who sought to ally with the Nazis to increase emigration to Palestine, that’s going much too far.

    Well, it was, of course, a satirical comment, which you know, but you can’t keep from sweeping up the clutter.

    mystical pagan fantasies of destiny and will to power

    Here you just leave your normal informative comments and go to some mystical place that no one else knows about.

    the well-grounded traditional religion of Christianity, that is the bedrock of medieval and early modern Europe

    I value this as well, but it is not “the” explanation.

    A food for thought for the present-day white advocates.

    Hints and tips for people who despise you and yours. Why?

    Replies: @Twinkie

    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Twinkie

    So, you're a colorblind CivNat?

    My people will disappear from the earth if we follow that discredited ideology.

    Twinkle, you seem to be a damn fine human being, but I'll ask a simple question: Who are your people?

    Replies: @Twinkie

    , @JohnPlywood
    @Twinkie

    Medieval and early modern Europe were the weakest and most derelict periods in European history; economically, culturally, architecturally, militarily, spiritually, physically. You're basically championing the time when Europe was like Detroit. Christianity is neither traditional nor well grounded (Pagan stuff is just as fake and gay, of course)

  31. Anonymous[272] • Disclaimer says:
    @iffen
    @Twinkie

    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Twinkie, @Anonymous

    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.

    Ron Unz wrote a long ‘America Pravda’ piece on this a couple years ago.

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-jews-and-nazis/

    …The importance of the Nazi-Zionist pact for Israel’s establishment is difficult to overstate. According to a 1974 analysis in Jewish Frontier cited by Brenner, between 1933 and 1939 over 60% of all the investment in Jewish Palestine came from Nazi Germany. The worldwide impoverishment of the Great Depression had drastically reduced ongoing Jewish financial support from all other sources, and Brenner reasonably suggests that without Hitler’s financial backing, the nascent Jewish colony, so tiny and fragile, might easily have shriveled up and died during that difficult period…

    In 1934, Zionist leaders invited an important SS official to spend six months visiting the Jewish settlement in Palestine, and upon his return, his very favorable impressions of the growing Zionist enterprise were published as a massive 12-part series in Joseph Goebbel’s Der Angriff, the flagship media organ of the Nazi Party, bearing the descriptive title “A Nazi Goes to Palestine.”

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-jews-and-nazis/

  32. Mr. dfordoom says:

    Boomers didn’t invent liberalism. They also didn’t start the Sexual Revolution. That was started by the Silent Generation. Boomers didn’t invent the contraceptive pill. Boomers didn’t invent the drug culture. The drug culture was starting to emerge during the late 50s. It was accelerated dramatically by the Vietnam War. And Boomers didn’t start the Vietnam War. Boomers weren’t the ones who were responsible for mass immigration – those decisions were made by the Greatest Generation and the Silent Generation. Boomers weren’t the ones who started pushing the homosexual agenda – that was the Silent Generation as well.

    I say:

    Sam Francis was a baby boomer and Sam Francis took after James Burnham who wasn’t a baby boomer and both Francis and Burnham wrote about RULING CLASSES.

    We all know that after Bush’s baked beans the best baked beans are Burnham and Morrill baked beans and the Bush’s Tennessee baked beans are mushier and more fun to eat and the New England Morrill and Burnham baked beans are a bit more bothersome to chew on but the New Englanders like to exercise and strive and they get a good godly workout from eating the sturdy beans of B and M baked beans.

    RULING CLASSES!

    Let us talk a while of generational cohorts but let us set a place at the table for all manner of conceptual frameworks to make sense of the rancid political atmosphere in the European Christian nations. I love to bash the baby boomers but I also talk of RULING CLASSES and I occasionally drop the new obsession for India Pale Ale in the USA by drinking porter or some other damn type of ale. Baked beans and ale are proof that God loves us.

    I wrote about RULING CLASSES here in August of 2019:

    I think the JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire never, ever put the needs of America nor Americans first.

    I think the JEW/WASP ruling class has been involved in a smash and grab job from the get-go. The JEW/WASP ruling class has used the power structure of the US government to ramp up their opportunity to plunder the Hell out of the USA and other parts of the globe and to pauperize regular Whites in the USA.

    LBJ’s 1965 Immigration Act was designed to flood Third Worlders into the USA. That rancid warmonger scumbag LBJ was born in 1908.

    Reagan was a treasonous rat who pushed mass legal immigration and mass illegal immigration. Reagan’s 1986 amnesty for illegal alien invaders was an attack upon the European Christian ancestral core of the USA.

    George HW Bush was another treasonous rat who pushed mass legal immigration and mass illegal immigration. George HW Bush’s 1990 Immigration Act opened the floodgates to more mass legal immigration and mass illegal immigration.

    LBJ’s 1965 Immigration Act and Reagan’s 1986 amnesty for illegal alien invaders and George HW Bush’s 1990 Immigration Act were attacks on White Core America and American sovereignty.

    LBJ and Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush are roasting and rotting in the hottest pits of fiery Hell.

    I won’t blame Obama — who is half old stocker himself — for what the JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire has been doing for a hundred years or more.

    https://www.unz.com/anepigone/restrictionism-in-retreat/#comment-3374419

  33. @Twinkie
    @iffen


    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.
     
    While there actually were Zionist Jews who sought to ally with the Nazis to increase emigration to Palestine, that’s going much too far.

    What Nazism demonstrates is that those who subscribe to mystical pagan fantasies of destiny and will to power and ignore rational realities as well as the well-grounded traditional religion of Christianity, that is the bedrock of medieval and early modern Europe, are liable to bring ruin and destruction to themselves and those whom they purport to champion. A food for thought for the present-day white advocates.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @iffen, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnPlywood

    What Nazism demonstrates is that those who subscribe to mystical pagan fantasies of destiny and will to power and ignore rational realities as well as the well-grounded traditional religion of Christianity, that is the bedrock of medieval and early modern Europe, are liable to bring ruin and destruction to themselves and those whom they purport to champion. A food for thought for the present-day white advocates.

    Napoleon shouldn’t have invaded Russia.

    Hitler shouldn’t have invaded Russia.

    The JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire shouldn’t have been so impressed with their Japanese pets when the Japanese got the better of the Russians a hundred and twenty years or so ago.

    The JEW portion of the Ruling Class had financial power a long time before WWII.

    Pratt and China and always oil it seems because Hitler wanted that oil but what was Napoleon’s excuse for baiting the Bear?

  34. @ravin' lunatic
    "If you wanted to be monogamous that was fine. If you didn’t want to be monogamous that was fine."

    In real reality, this is and was the very heart of the rot. Whatever one thinks about the permissibility of alternative lifestyles, without a strong nuclear family furnace the whole enterprise turns to ROT

    Replies: @Agathoklis, @TomSchmidt, @Wency

    Social liberalism always seems to win out if it’s viewed as a valid option. dfordoom himself seemed to be backing this up — I recall him observing that no young person looks to the Amish lifestyle with admiration, they look at tattooed pop stars and so on.

    As a younger man, I used to look at things like imposing the death penalty for homosexuality in Leviticus and I couldn’t grok it. How could that ever be appropriate and proportionate? But now I get it. Social conservatism needs to be enforced, for the good of all, or it breaks down. It relies mostly on taboos that keep it in place. The criminal punishments are only there to preserve the taboo, they can’t survive without the taboo, but so long as the taboo is intact, they will only need to be applied sparingly.

    Once you no longer enforce the taboo, this inevitable process proceeds where what were once viewed as perverts are now viewed as normal and even admired people.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Wency


    Social conservatism needs to be enforced, for the good of all, or it breaks down.
     
    The problem is that most people don't want social conservatism. They don't want the madness that we have today either. They want something in the middle. Most people want some form of monogamy although they don't necessarily see formal marriage as a requirement. Most people want something resembling the nuclear family.

    Most people don't want Drag Queen Story Hour and they don't want bearded men in frocks sharing locker rooms with their daughters. On the other hand they don't want homosexuals to be persecuted.

    Most people don't want to spend their lives getting stoned but they're also increasingly suspicious of Health Nazis who want to tell us what we're allowed to do with our own bodies.

    Most people don't want the government to act as a moral policeman.

    I'm sceptical about the chances of imposing social conservatism, or at least any kind of extreme social conservatism. And I don't think there's any chance at all of imposing Christian moral values on increasingly secular western societies. The best that conservative Christians can hope for is to be allowed to follow their own values but imposing those values on non-Christians is just a non-starter.

    Most people want to return to the 1980s, not the 1880s.

    Replies: @Wency

  35. @iffen
    V. K. Ovelund on how, in concert with the state, mega corporations leverage moral hazard, regulatory capture, and scale to bankrupt their small business competitors ahead of buying their shells at fire sale prices:

    Along these same lines, how is it that jitney operators and unauthorized "boarding house" owners were harassed and prosecuted in the courts forever, but then slick Silicon Valley type businesses show up and suddenly it's okay to use your personal vehicle as a taxi and okay to use your residence as a motel?

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Along these same lines, how is it that jitney operators and unauthorized “boarding house” owners were harassed and prosecuted in the courts forever, but then slick Silicon Valley type businesses show up and suddenly it’s okay to use your personal vehicle as a taxi and okay to use your residence as a motel?

    I mentioned the jitney once in the presence of my father and my wife. No one responded so I dropped it. Your mention is the first I’ve heard of it otherwise.

    How did this happen? Taxi medallions used to be enforced. Now all of a sudden they aren’t?

  36. Re the boomers, I’ve always found them more pitiable than contemptible. Their biggest sins are greed and selfishness, and that exacts a psychological toll on them which I think is punishment enough.

  37. @Curle
    @RSDB

    Ok, I’ll bite. Name some?

    Replies: @RSDB

    Homosexual marriage, for starters, no?

  38. Americans and Brits were suckered by the Lugenpresse to fight Hitler.
    Hitler saved Weimar’s victims from the Jew Tyranny you are experiencing now.

    How have you been rewarded by the Jews for doing their dirty work?
    You’re the Nazis now SUCKER.

    Nazi is just a White Man that doesn’t follow the “programming” of the Lugenpresse.
    You are a threat to their delusions of grandeur.

    The self “chosen”. The Babylonian Talmud reading jerkoffs that worship Satan.
    Even Satan wouldn’t hang with these delusional idiots.

    They are building their own tombs and slitting their own throats.
    Let them surround themselves with brown people.
    Its a self-correcting problem if you think about it.

    You just have to give them what they are asking for.
    2800 thieves and murderers that don’t want to work and cannot feed themselves.

    You mission which is far from impossible is to expel them from your midst.
    Eliminate FEDGOV. Replace it with a pro-White Administration.
    Weimar 2.0 is about to implode. A New Order is about to rise.

    There is no real Left or Right. Its an illusion of the Lugenpresse.
    There is a tiny insignificant minority of parasites. You are still the Majority.

    Its not about optics or language. Keep it simple.
    Avoid buying from corporations. Avoid making taxable income.
    Make your own mini economy of barter and trade.

    Starve the beasts. Eliminate their hold over you.
    Do not buy a single thing from large corporations.
    You can do this. The lives you save will be your own.

  39. @V. K. Ovelund
    @AndrewR

    Damned white-nationalist dissident right is getting too touchy. It's also turning into something I didn't sign up for.

    When I signed up for it, it consisted mainly of robust, regular guys who liked to grill, valued the towering achievements of their ancestors, and didn't appreciate their people being replaced. Recently, it's being taken over by crypto-anarchists, social engineers, anti-Americans, and men who vent grudges against their own fathers.

    I'm a white nationalist like Joe Manchin is a Democrat.

    Online, where did all the regular white nationalists go? I still see them in real life, but online, it's like they're evaporating.


    This clearly implies that he believes the official narrative.
     
    No, it doesn't.

    Twinkie might believe that. You haven't asked. And if he does believe it, then he's got a shelfful of well-known, broadly accepted books to back him up.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Citizen of a Silly Country

    When I signed up for it, it consisted mainly of robust, regular guys who liked to grill, valued the towering achievements of their ancestors, and didn’t appreciate their people being replaced.

    And what did they achieve?

    I consider myself a White nationalist in that I want to live among and be ruled by my own. That’s obviously a very distant dream, but it’s my (and many others’) dream.

    Over the years, I’ve found many – perhaps yourself – who are sympathetic with that dream in theory but balk at what it would take in practice. They find it distasteful that to have a White community, you need to exclude – not hate, not direct violence at but exclude – non-Whites such as Twinkie, who seems a fine, fine person. They find it distasteful that I would hire a less-qualified White over a black or Asian. They find it distasteful that our community would wish our sons and daughters who want to marry non-Whites the best in their lives but that they cannot return home.

    Many Whites like the idea of their own community . . . until it comes time to create and maintain that community, much as many Whites lament the loss of what was the United States while forgetting their ancestors carved out that country by ruthless killing the natives and excluding non-Whites from moving into this land.

    Time for Whites to put away childish things or time for us to die away as a people.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    I salute you. Yours is the spirit of 2016. It is the spirit that drew me to the Alt-Right in the first place.

    This reply will be too esoteric for most readers to follow, unfortunately, but I suspect that it will make sense to you.

    What remains of the online Alt-Right has little left of the spirit of 2016. Prominent among their new priorities seem to be the following.

    1. The preposterous, insulting proposition that America were “asphalt all the way down.”

    2. Abstract, increasingly unhinged notions of White Sharia, aping the interesting, based things the Alt-Right was saying about women in 2016, but today without any actual understanding of actual, normal women. (I suspect that the men of the Alt-Right, 2016, who had a clue, are mostly married now and that the conversation is now being carried forward in their absence by those who never got the clue.)

    3. Movement feuds that make, say, Nick Fuentes out to be a greater villain than Charles Schumer.

    4. Paganism, which I don't mind; but also a crude, dogged intolerance of Christianity.

    5. Delusions that several guys isolated each behind his own computer monitor somehow together constituted a “wolf pack.”

    6. Worst of all, shameful competitions to see who can most harshly curse his own father.

    The face-to-face movement though small still has good spirit, but it recruits from the larger online movement, which is going crypto-communist. I didn't sign up for that, and neither did you. Defending these guys is just too exhausting—which is a shame, because I'm one of them.

    With regard to Twinkie, I don't think that he owes either of us an answer. He's got to work out his own life, and he is trying to do it in a way that does not cause unnecessary problems for you and me. It's hard to ask much more.

    I completely agree with you that history is a slaughterbench. I await a turn of events.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  40. anonymous[660] • Disclaimer says:

    A good rule of thumb is if the UR commentariat balks at it, it has a snowball’s chance in hell of selling to the broader public.

    On Sailer’s blog, in an entry on the Papa John’s scandal, a call by a comment writer to harm Jews with violence didn’t get any flak from the other Sailer readers. I think Sailer’s crowd is on the cusp of accepting violent antisemitism. https://www.unz.com/isteve/new-plot-twist-in-papa-johns-scandal/#comment-4505506

  41. @Twinkie
    @iffen


    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.
     
    While there actually were Zionist Jews who sought to ally with the Nazis to increase emigration to Palestine, that’s going much too far.

    What Nazism demonstrates is that those who subscribe to mystical pagan fantasies of destiny and will to power and ignore rational realities as well as the well-grounded traditional religion of Christianity, that is the bedrock of medieval and early modern Europe, are liable to bring ruin and destruction to themselves and those whom they purport to champion. A food for thought for the present-day white advocates.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @iffen, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnPlywood

    While there actually were Zionist Jews who sought to ally with the Nazis to increase emigration to Palestine, that’s going much too far.

    Well, it was, of course, a satirical comment, which you know, but you can’t keep from sweeping up the clutter.

    mystical pagan fantasies of destiny and will to power

    Here you just leave your normal informative comments and go to some mystical place that no one else knows about.

    the well-grounded traditional religion of Christianity, that is the bedrock of medieval and early modern Europe

    I value this as well, but it is not “the” explanation.

    A food for thought for the present-day white advocates.

    Hints and tips for people who despise you and yours. Why?

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @iffen


    Well, it was, of course, a satirical comment
     
    Was it? Hard to tell as comments of the sort are common around here.

    Here you just leave your normal informative comments and go to some mystical place that no one else knows about.
     
    Nazism extolled "folkish" paganism, and many Nazis, Hitler included, believed in some kind of a mystical destiny for themselves.* Near the end of the war, when all was seemingly lost, he kept waiting for the kind of a miraculous deus ex machina that Frederick II enjoyed to reverse his regime's fortune and end the war less than disastrously.

    *This is not a uniquely Nazi phenomenon. Many athletes who enjoy an unbroken run of victories tend to start talking about "destiny" - most of them end up having a rude awakening.

    I value this as well, but it is not “the” explanation.
     
    Christianity is the the wellspring from which medieval and then modern Europe arose. It is the foundation of Western civilization.

    Hints and tips for people who despise you and yours. Why?
     
    I'd like to give the people who purport to advocate for American whites the benefit of doubt that they actually mean to advocate for American whites, not venting childish anger or LARPing online. People who do the latter aren't going to pay serious attention to what I write in any case, I reckon.
  42. @Twinkie
    @iffen


    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.
     
    While there actually were Zionist Jews who sought to ally with the Nazis to increase emigration to Palestine, that’s going much too far.

    What Nazism demonstrates is that those who subscribe to mystical pagan fantasies of destiny and will to power and ignore rational realities as well as the well-grounded traditional religion of Christianity, that is the bedrock of medieval and early modern Europe, are liable to bring ruin and destruction to themselves and those whom they purport to champion. A food for thought for the present-day white advocates.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @iffen, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnPlywood

    So, you’re a colorblind CivNat?

    My people will disappear from the earth if we follow that discredited ideology.

    Twinkle, you seem to be a damn fine human being, but I’ll ask a simple question: Who are your people?

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    colorblind CivNat?
     
    Please elaborate what this means. I prefer not to jump into other people's labels without knowing well what they mean by them.

    Meanwhile, I'll describe myself. I am someone who is an orthodox Catholic and is temperamentally a Burkean conservative. I would also call myself someone who advocates for white majoritarianism, meaning I support policies that would keep the population of the United States majority white and maintain Anglo-American institutions and civic culture as the dominant norms in the society. I think that is good for most all Americans, white or otherwise. That means I subscribe to immigration-restriction, oppose multiculturalism, and favor economic policies of what Steve Sailer calls affordable family-formation. What this means for the nonwhites - including me - in this country is that they would be treated equally under the law, provided they assimilate into the dominant norms - learn and speak English, be loyal and patriotic to the country and its people, be productive, and express admiration and gratitude for the very fine institutions, civic culture, and indeed the country the Founding Fathers built and bequeathed and then help to perpetuate them.

    As for "color blind" - no, I am not. I think science provides ample evidence that - on average - people of different races exhibit variations on physical and psychological traits. These differences and their effects should be studied (as with any aspect of science) and allowances should be made in public policy to address/incorporate them. However, I also subscribe to the idea of treating people based on their behaviors as individuals under the law. There shouldn't be collective punishments or collective rewards, and society should be molded as much as practicable to have people "reap what they sow."

    I welcome into my own social spheres all Americans of good will.

    Twinkle, you seem to be a damn fine human being, but I’ll ask a simple question: Who are your people?
     
    First, many thanks for the compliment.

    Second, my people are foremost my immediate family - my wife and children - as well as my mother, my wife's family and her extended kin (who welcomed me into their clan), my friends, my former colleagues (who shielded me with their lives and for whom, in turn, I was and am willing to take a bullet), my neighbors, the people who worship with my family and me, those who homeschool their children together with mine, the men and women (and children) who train with me and my children in Judo and Jiujitsu, the folks who work on the same charities as my family and I do, the men who belong to my militias, I mean neighborhood watch groups, the guys (and a few gals) who belong to my gun club, and, in general, those "damn fine human beings" with whom I am privileged share geography. In other words, my people are those who belong to intersecting groups of organic communities that I do.

    I haven't done a head count, but I'd say about 90-95% of them are white (or white mixes, including, as prime examples, my own children).

    My people
     
    Now, who are your people?

    Replies: @China Japan and Korea Bromance of Three Kingdoms

  43. @Barack Obama's secret Unz account

    Although most Americans are repelled by the hard racist stuff (“It’s always the Jews!” or “white ethno-state!”), they are in the main sympathetic to much of what dissident rightists advocate (dismantling affirmative action, limiting immigration, critiquing and combating anti-white racism, reversing the valorization of blacks – the list goes on).
     
    Soft right sells, hard right doesn't. But the problem is that soft right is so easily made into hard right. First "dismantling affirmative action, limiting immigration, critiquing and combating anti-white racism, reversing the valorization of blacks" - then, the ovens! There's a fairly straightforward slippery slope argument at play. How do you argue against that?

    Replies: @Rosie, @Audacious Epigone

    Soft right sells, hard right doesn’t. But the problem is that soft right is so easily made into hard right.

    Au contraire. The problem with soft right is that it so easily into the softer right, and from there into a shadow of the Left.

    The civnats offer nothing but more of the same failed policies of the past. You know the drill. We advocate for policies that are good for White people without mentioning White people. The controlled media call us “racist.” We deny it, which further reinforces the narrative that “racism” is evil (but only when White people do it. The Leftist establishment demands that we support policies that are bad for White people to prove our claims that we’re not “racist.” Thus backed into a corner, we surrender.

    The civnats have no solution for this problem.

    • Agree: Charles Pewitt
    • Replies: @iffen
    @Rosie

    We advocate for policies that are good for White people without mentioning White people.

    LOL

    The civnats offer nothing but more of the same failed policies of the past.

    Aksully,the past was not a failure, in fact, it was quite nice. We've just hit a rough patch. It's gonna be okay.

    Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country

    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Rosie

    Damn, that was well said.

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Rosie

    Has there been an upapologetically white movement that isn't white nationalist? It seems like what you present is a false dichotomy in terms of what is possible albeit not necessarily in terms of what has come before.

    I suppose the America First movement is a novel attempt to fill that void. They're pro-white but not anti-anyone else, at least not categorically so. They have many non-whites who are part of the movement. The corporate media doesn't really know how to respond to this, so it ignores that and instead tries to portray them as exclusionary white nationalists/supremacists/[insert insult].

  44. Yes, Boomers DID destroy our society!!!

    Our society was not destroyed by policies but by social degeneration, individualism, selfishness, infertility, etc. All originated mostly in boomers, and the 1980s were neither sane nor pleasant.

    The results speak for themselves. Baby boomers are the first generation to lose life expectancy after the advancement of vaccination. The causes? Alcohol, drug abuse, insomnia, poor habits, suicide, etc. Nobody was doing this shit before boomers and you all know it.

    If you think policy rather than individualism is the cause of our dysfunction, you are hopelessly enslaved by political rhetoric and bad logic.

    • Agree: Supply and Demand
    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    @JohnPlywood

    You only look favorably on the 1980s because:

    1.) you were a kid

    2.) you like the make-believe stuff of that era, like movies and music

    3.) the dollar had more value

    4.) standards were lower for just about everything

    and, finally,

    5.) you have selective amnesia



    That's it. Actual life was not much different back then, except the women were uglier and ghastlier, more aggressively feminist, just as infertile and useless, actually more likely to initiate a divorce, etc. Crime was worse then than it is now, pollution was worse, everything was dirty and garish looking and of inferior quality, the cars were junkmobiles, taxes were higher, etc. If you were able to travel back in time to the 1980s you would feel viscerally disgusted, isolated and disappointed. It would be like falling in to an abandoned water well in a ghost town.

  45. @Rosie
    @Barack Obama's secret Unz account


    Soft right sells, hard right doesn’t. But the problem is that soft right is so easily made into hard right.
     
    Au contraire. The problem with soft right is that it so easily into the softer right, and from there into a shadow of the Left.

    The civnats offer nothing but more of the same failed policies of the past. You know the drill. We advocate for policies that are good for White people without mentioning White people. The controlled media call us "racist." We deny it, which further reinforces the narrative that "racism" is evil (but only when White people do it. The Leftist establishment demands that we support policies that are bad for White people to prove our claims that we're not "racist." Thus backed into a corner, we surrender.

    The civnats have no solution for this problem.

    Replies: @iffen, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Audacious Epigone

    We advocate for policies that are good for White people without mentioning White people.

    LOL

    The civnats offer nothing but more of the same failed policies of the past.

    Aksully,the past was not a failure, in fact, it was quite nice. We’ve just hit a rough patch. It’s gonna be okay.

    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @iffen


    Aksully,the past was not a failure, in fact, it was quite nice. We’ve just hit a rough patch. It’s gonna be okay.

     

    Dickweed, she's talking about the recent past, maybe 1965 to the present, not 1000 to to 1900.

    In the past 55 years, the United States has gone from ~90% White to less than 70% White. My children are a despised (and soon to be persecuted) minority in their age group. The government now hunts down any White who publicly shows pride in being White. Corporations demand that you acknowledge your "white privilege." Etc., etc., etc.

    Births is France are ~22% Muslim. Births in England are 10% Muslim and probably much higher Indian and Paki. Canada's Whites will be a minority by 2050.

    Rough patch?!

    You're either an idiot, a coward or both.
  46. @Rosie
    @Barack Obama's secret Unz account


    Soft right sells, hard right doesn’t. But the problem is that soft right is so easily made into hard right.
     
    Au contraire. The problem with soft right is that it so easily into the softer right, and from there into a shadow of the Left.

    The civnats offer nothing but more of the same failed policies of the past. You know the drill. We advocate for policies that are good for White people without mentioning White people. The controlled media call us "racist." We deny it, which further reinforces the narrative that "racism" is evil (but only when White people do it. The Leftist establishment demands that we support policies that are bad for White people to prove our claims that we're not "racist." Thus backed into a corner, we surrender.

    The civnats have no solution for this problem.

    Replies: @iffen, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Audacious Epigone

    Damn, that was well said.

    • Thanks: Rosie
  47. @AndrewR
    @Twinkie

    Reasonable people can disagree on what the Germans should have done, but your parrotting of the 6 gorillion number means your opinion can be safely discarded due to your gullibility and unseriousness.

    Also, for the record, "Anglo-Saxon Protestants" have been puppets of the Juice ever since that demon Cromwell let them back in to fund his reign of terror.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Rosie

    Also, for the record, “Anglo-Saxon Protestants” have been puppets of the Juice ever since that demon Cromwell let them back in to fund his reign of terror.

    The problem that Twinkie fails to recognize is that Jews, though initially small in number, began to change the intraelite balance of power from the very beginning. A great many WASP elites were already prone to treachery, and I have no interest in denying that. That said, there were enough honest elites with the power to keep them in check.

    Corrupt elites have always been terrified of populists, because they have the support of the people and are therefore a serious threat however few in number. The ascent of the Jews, and especially Jewish media power cut off the ability of populist elites to communicate with the people without Jewish mediation. Thus defanged, they could no longer keep treacherous elites in check, and here we are.

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Gaius-Sempronius-Gracchus

    • Agree: AndrewR, Charles Pewitt
    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    @Rosie

    Rosie is hitting line drive home runs over the centerfield wall and I love it!

    Rosie is putting on an impressive batting practice home run demonstration and there is no doubt in my mind that she could do it in the seventh game of the World Series when everything is on the line and her team needs her to put them over the top for the victory!

    Tweets from 2015:

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/622061914751922176?s=20

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/622062818599288832?s=20

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/630019260279074816?s=20

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/601036135079477248?s=20

    https://twitter.com/CharlesPewitt/status/660904479533977602?s=20

  48. @iffen
    @Rosie

    We advocate for policies that are good for White people without mentioning White people.

    LOL

    The civnats offer nothing but more of the same failed policies of the past.

    Aksully,the past was not a failure, in fact, it was quite nice. We've just hit a rough patch. It's gonna be okay.

    Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country

    Aksully,the past was not a failure, in fact, it was quite nice. We’ve just hit a rough patch. It’s gonna be okay.

    Dickweed, she’s talking about the recent past, maybe 1965 to the present, not 1000 to to 1900.

    In the past 55 years, the United States has gone from ~90% White to less than 70% White. My children are a despised (and soon to be persecuted) minority in their age group. The government now hunts down any White who publicly shows pride in being White. Corporations demand that you acknowledge your “white privilege.” Etc., etc., etc.

    Births is France are ~22% Muslim. Births in England are 10% Muslim and probably much higher Indian and Paki. Canada’s Whites will be a minority by 2050.

    Rough patch?!

    You’re either an idiot, a coward or both.

    • LOL: iffen
    • Troll: JohnPlywood
  49. @JohnPlywood
    Yes, Boomers DID destroy our society!!!


    Our society was not destroyed by policies but by social degeneration, individualism, selfishness, infertility, etc. All originated mostly in boomers, and the 1980s were neither sane nor pleasant.


    The results speak for themselves. Baby boomers are the first generation to lose life expectancy after the advancement of vaccination. The causes? Alcohol, drug abuse, insomnia, poor habits, suicide, etc. Nobody was doing this shit before boomers and you all know it.


    If you think policy rather than individualism is the cause of our dysfunction, you are hopelessly enslaved by political rhetoric and bad logic.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood

    You only look favorably on the 1980s because:

    1.) you were a kid

    2.) you like the make-believe stuff of that era, like movies and music

    3.) the dollar had more value

    4.) standards were lower for just about everything

    and, finally,

    5.) you have selective amnesia

    That’s it. Actual life was not much different back then, except the women were uglier and ghastlier, more aggressively feminist, just as infertile and useless, actually more likely to initiate a divorce, etc. Crime was worse then than it is now, pollution was worse, everything was dirty and garish looking and of inferior quality, the cars were junkmobiles, taxes were higher, etc. If you were able to travel back in time to the 1980s you would feel viscerally disgusted, isolated and disappointed. It would be like falling in to an abandoned water well in a ghost town.

  50. Boomers weren’t… Boomers didn’t… Boomers didn’t… Boomers didn’t… And Boomers didn’t… Boomers weren’t… Boomers weren’t… Boomers had no

    Ok, Boomer

    • Agree: JohnPlywood
  51. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @V. K. Ovelund


    When I signed up for it, it consisted mainly of robust, regular guys who liked to grill, valued the towering achievements of their ancestors, and didn’t appreciate their people being replaced.
     
    And what did they achieve?

    I consider myself a White nationalist in that I want to live among and be ruled by my own. That's obviously a very distant dream, but it's my (and many others') dream.

    Over the years, I've found many - perhaps yourself - who are sympathetic with that dream in theory but balk at what it would take in practice. They find it distasteful that to have a White community, you need to exclude - not hate, not direct violence at but exclude - non-Whites such as Twinkie, who seems a fine, fine person. They find it distasteful that I would hire a less-qualified White over a black or Asian. They find it distasteful that our community would wish our sons and daughters who want to marry non-Whites the best in their lives but that they cannot return home.

    Many Whites like the idea of their own community . . . until it comes time to create and maintain that community, much as many Whites lament the loss of what was the United States while forgetting their ancestors carved out that country by ruthless killing the natives and excluding non-Whites from moving into this land.

    Time for Whites to put away childish things or time for us to die away as a people.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    I salute you. Yours is the spirit of 2016. It is the spirit that drew me to the Alt-Right in the first place.

    [MORE]

    This reply will be too esoteric for most readers to follow, unfortunately, but I suspect that it will make sense to you.

    What remains of the online Alt-Right has little left of the spirit of 2016. Prominent among their new priorities seem to be the following.

    1. The preposterous, insulting proposition that America were “asphalt all the way down.”

    2. Abstract, increasingly unhinged notions of White Sharia, aping the interesting, based things the Alt-Right was saying about women in 2016, but today without any actual understanding of actual, normal women. (I suspect that the men of the Alt-Right, 2016, who had a clue, are mostly married now and that the conversation is now being carried forward in their absence by those who never got the clue.)

    3. Movement feuds that make, say, Nick Fuentes out to be a greater villain than Charles Schumer.

    4. Paganism, which I don’t mind; but also a crude, dogged intolerance of Christianity.

    5. Delusions that several guys isolated each behind his own computer monitor somehow together constituted a “wolf pack.”

    6. Worst of all, shameful competitions to see who can most harshly curse his own father.

    The face-to-face movement though small still has good spirit, but it recruits from the larger online movement, which is going crypto-communist. I didn’t sign up for that, and neither did you. Defending these guys is just too exhausting—which is a shame, because I’m one of them.

    With regard to Twinkie, I don’t think that he owes either of us an answer. He’s got to work out his own life, and he is trying to do it in a way that does not cause unnecessary problems for you and me. It’s hard to ask much more.

    I completely agree with you that history is a slaughterbench. I await a turn of events.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @V. K. Ovelund


    With regard to Twinkie, I don’t think that he owes either of us an answer. He’s got to work out his own life, and he is trying to do it in a way that does not cause unnecessary problems for you and me. It’s hard to ask much more.
     
    Allow me to disagree a tad bit.

    I do think I owe you and other Americans "an answer" as much as you do me as well. We all share a country still. We are still all Americans. We still owe each other something as fellow citizens of the Republic. I've laid my cards before you more than once. I suspect you have a pretty good sense of what I am about.

    And I don't just live for myself. I belong to communities - communities that require reciprocal obligations and also confer (mutual) benefits. Furthermore, as an obedient Catholic and Christian, I value highly the timeless notion of justice - an objective, God-derived sense of justice, not the "social justice" monstrosity that is increasingly dominant in our society. This obligates me to speak out against injustice when it rears its ugly head. As you well know, I am vehemently critical of anti-white ideology (as much as it is often for virtue signaling by elites and elite-aspirants and their imitators) - not just because the vast majority of people I deeply love are whites, but also because it is objectively wrong and greatly offends and damages real justice, without which we would not have a civilization worth living for as human beings.

    history is a slaughterbench
     
    History is not just a "slaughterbench." Otherwise we wouldn't have a civilization.

    Replies: @iffen, @V. K. Ovelund, @V. K. Ovelund

  52. @Twinkie
    @iffen


    Nazism looks more and more like a Jewish long-game plan every day.
     
    While there actually were Zionist Jews who sought to ally with the Nazis to increase emigration to Palestine, that’s going much too far.

    What Nazism demonstrates is that those who subscribe to mystical pagan fantasies of destiny and will to power and ignore rational realities as well as the well-grounded traditional religion of Christianity, that is the bedrock of medieval and early modern Europe, are liable to bring ruin and destruction to themselves and those whom they purport to champion. A food for thought for the present-day white advocates.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @iffen, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnPlywood

    Medieval and early modern Europe were the weakest and most derelict periods in European history; economically, culturally, architecturally, militarily, spiritually, physically. You’re basically championing the time when Europe was like Detroit. Christianity is neither traditional nor well grounded (Pagan stuff is just as fake and gay, of course)

  53. @iffen
    @Twinkie

    While there actually were Zionist Jews who sought to ally with the Nazis to increase emigration to Palestine, that’s going much too far.

    Well, it was, of course, a satirical comment, which you know, but you can’t keep from sweeping up the clutter.

    mystical pagan fantasies of destiny and will to power

    Here you just leave your normal informative comments and go to some mystical place that no one else knows about.

    the well-grounded traditional religion of Christianity, that is the bedrock of medieval and early modern Europe

    I value this as well, but it is not “the” explanation.

    A food for thought for the present-day white advocates.

    Hints and tips for people who despise you and yours. Why?

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Well, it was, of course, a satirical comment

    Was it? Hard to tell as comments of the sort are common around here.

    Here you just leave your normal informative comments and go to some mystical place that no one else knows about.

    Nazism extolled “folkish” paganism, and many Nazis, Hitler included, believed in some kind of a mystical destiny for themselves.* Near the end of the war, when all was seemingly lost, he kept waiting for the kind of a miraculous deus ex machina that Frederick II enjoyed to reverse his regime’s fortune and end the war less than disastrously.

    *This is not a uniquely Nazi phenomenon. Many athletes who enjoy an unbroken run of victories tend to start talking about “destiny” – most of them end up having a rude awakening.

    I value this as well, but it is not “the” explanation.

    Christianity is the the wellspring from which medieval and then modern Europe arose. It is the foundation of Western civilization.

    Hints and tips for people who despise you and yours. Why?

    I’d like to give the people who purport to advocate for American whites the benefit of doubt that they actually mean to advocate for American whites, not venting childish anger or LARPing online. People who do the latter aren’t going to pay serious attention to what I write in any case, I reckon.

  54. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Twinkie

    So, you're a colorblind CivNat?

    My people will disappear from the earth if we follow that discredited ideology.

    Twinkle, you seem to be a damn fine human being, but I'll ask a simple question: Who are your people?

    Replies: @Twinkie

    colorblind CivNat?

    Please elaborate what this means. I prefer not to jump into other people’s labels without knowing well what they mean by them.

    Meanwhile, I’ll describe myself. I am someone who is an orthodox Catholic and is temperamentally a Burkean conservative. I would also call myself someone who advocates for white majoritarianism, meaning I support policies that would keep the population of the United States majority white and maintain Anglo-American institutions and civic culture as the dominant norms in the society. I think that is good for most all Americans, white or otherwise. That means I subscribe to immigration-restriction, oppose multiculturalism, and favor economic policies of what Steve Sailer calls affordable family-formation. What this means for the nonwhites – including me – in this country is that they would be treated equally under the law, provided they assimilate into the dominant norms – learn and speak English, be loyal and patriotic to the country and its people, be productive, and express admiration and gratitude for the very fine institutions, civic culture, and indeed the country the Founding Fathers built and bequeathed and then help to perpetuate them.

    As for “color blind” – no, I am not. I think science provides ample evidence that – on average – people of different races exhibit variations on physical and psychological traits. These differences and their effects should be studied (as with any aspect of science) and allowances should be made in public policy to address/incorporate them. However, I also subscribe to the idea of treating people based on their behaviors as individuals under the law. There shouldn’t be collective punishments or collective rewards, and society should be molded as much as practicable to have people “reap what they sow.”

    I welcome into my own social spheres all Americans of good will.

    Twinkle, you seem to be a damn fine human being, but I’ll ask a simple question: Who are your people?

    First, many thanks for the compliment.

    Second, my people are foremost my immediate family – my wife and children – as well as my mother, my wife’s family and her extended kin (who welcomed me into their clan), my friends, my former colleagues (who shielded me with their lives and for whom, in turn, I was and am willing to take a bullet), my neighbors, the people who worship with my family and me, those who homeschool their children together with mine, the men and women (and children) who train with me and my children in Judo and Jiujitsu, the folks who work on the same charities as my family and I do, the men who belong to my militias, I mean neighborhood watch groups, the guys (and a few gals) who belong to my gun club, and, in general, those “damn fine human beings” with whom I am privileged share geography. In other words, my people are those who belong to intersecting groups of organic communities that I do.

    I haven’t done a head count, but I’d say about 90-95% of them are white (or white mixes, including, as prime examples, my own children).

    My people

    Now, who are your people?

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @China Japan and Korea Bromance of Three Kingdoms
    @Twinkie

    Twinkie, I respect your writings would to ask you this, do you speak Korean or would you have to liked to pass it your children?

    I ask because you’ve noted that Chinese have some of the lowest assimilation rates in US. I’m familiar the PRC community in coastal Blue areas and know exactly what you are referring to. Often they stay endogamous and send their kids to suburban public schools with large Asian percentage, and Chinese language schools on Saturdays. A smaller subset send kids to private schools in posh neighborhoods. The fertility rate must be no higher than 1

    Many of the parents are in technical professions who came to the US for grad school. One can see at large corporations they hit a ceiling very quickly, compared to ABCs, much less other groups.

    They usually hold US passports and recently there’s been a trend of some in this group who’s been enticed to returned to big cities in China with high paying jobs. Any probably many others reserve this option. I must say its hard to blame them for a few reasons,

    1. China’s economy is rapidly growing and Mandarin’s status as international language is increasing, so they would be keen to not lose that connection
    2. The delicate state of US-China relations. Increasing anti-Chinese sentiments in US, which as noted on these forums, further distorted by the media
    3. Most of these folks typically don’t have strong feelings one way or the other about PRC. But they are not at all wild about Woke/SJW indoctrination in their kid’s schools. And education in China as you know is STEM focused and SJW-free

    These mainland Chinese Americans have obviously conservative values but they congregate in blue state metros. And I feel this because for them, there does not seem to a path for to assimilation in a conservative red state, other than take the German American way, don’t pass on their native language to their children and keep low key about their heritage.

    I get that you have mixed feelings about PRC, please feel free to look up my older comments about mine.

  55. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    I salute you. Yours is the spirit of 2016. It is the spirit that drew me to the Alt-Right in the first place.

    This reply will be too esoteric for most readers to follow, unfortunately, but I suspect that it will make sense to you.

    What remains of the online Alt-Right has little left of the spirit of 2016. Prominent among their new priorities seem to be the following.

    1. The preposterous, insulting proposition that America were “asphalt all the way down.”

    2. Abstract, increasingly unhinged notions of White Sharia, aping the interesting, based things the Alt-Right was saying about women in 2016, but today without any actual understanding of actual, normal women. (I suspect that the men of the Alt-Right, 2016, who had a clue, are mostly married now and that the conversation is now being carried forward in their absence by those who never got the clue.)

    3. Movement feuds that make, say, Nick Fuentes out to be a greater villain than Charles Schumer.

    4. Paganism, which I don't mind; but also a crude, dogged intolerance of Christianity.

    5. Delusions that several guys isolated each behind his own computer monitor somehow together constituted a “wolf pack.”

    6. Worst of all, shameful competitions to see who can most harshly curse his own father.

    The face-to-face movement though small still has good spirit, but it recruits from the larger online movement, which is going crypto-communist. I didn't sign up for that, and neither did you. Defending these guys is just too exhausting—which is a shame, because I'm one of them.

    With regard to Twinkie, I don't think that he owes either of us an answer. He's got to work out his own life, and he is trying to do it in a way that does not cause unnecessary problems for you and me. It's hard to ask much more.

    I completely agree with you that history is a slaughterbench. I await a turn of events.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    With regard to Twinkie, I don’t think that he owes either of us an answer. He’s got to work out his own life, and he is trying to do it in a way that does not cause unnecessary problems for you and me. It’s hard to ask much more.

    Allow me to disagree a tad bit.

    I do think I owe you and other Americans “an answer” as much as you do me as well. We all share a country still. We are still all Americans. We still owe each other something as fellow citizens of the Republic. I’ve laid my cards before you more than once. I suspect you have a pretty good sense of what I am about.

    And I don’t just live for myself. I belong to communities – communities that require reciprocal obligations and also confer (mutual) benefits. Furthermore, as an obedient Catholic and Christian, I value highly the timeless notion of justice – an objective, God-derived sense of justice, not the “social justice” monstrosity that is increasingly dominant in our society. This obligates me to speak out against injustice when it rears its ugly head. As you well know, I am vehemently critical of anti-white ideology (as much as it is often for virtue signaling by elites and elite-aspirants and their imitators) – not just because the vast majority of people I deeply love are whites, but also because it is objectively wrong and greatly offends and damages real justice, without which we would not have a civilization worth living for as human beings.

    history is a slaughterbench

    History is not just a “slaughterbench.” Otherwise we wouldn’t have a civilization.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Twinkie

    I am vehemently critical of anti-white ideology (as much as it is often for virtue signaling by elites and elite-aspirants and their imitators) – not just because the vast majority of people I deeply love are whites, but also because it is objectively wrong and greatly offends and damages real justice, without which we would not have a civilization worth living for as human beings.

    ...

    I’d like to give the people who purport to advocate for American whites the benefit of doubt

    Why do you want to give one group the benefit of the doubt, but not the other?

    You obviously can see the destruction that accompanies the authoritarian left. Can you not see that similiar destruction would come if the "advocates" for American whites held the positions of power instead?

    Replies: @Twinkie, @dfordoom

    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @Twinkie

    I still find it remarkable that the nonwhites and non-Gentiles here understand what I am about better than the white Gentiles do. Apparently, my hound has been barking up the wrong tree.

    Don't worry. I am evidently ineffective. I have neither a coherent faction nor a coherent political plan for action, nor am I likely to obtain either one.


    History is not just a “slaughterbench.” Otherwise we wouldn’t have a civilization.
     
    Noted.

    My debating you is gratuitous. I don't mean to push against the open door, so to speak. Such a push would be impolite.

    Far too many men of European descent have allowed themselves to be baited into a false posture of harmlessness, which invites only contempt. Posturing is unnecessary. If European man declined during the 20th century, then he can rise during the 21st, if he wants to.

    But some non-Europeans that have come to count on the suicide of European man naturally won't take kindly to a resurgence of the European spirit. For example, do you think that the era of sub-Saharan colonialism is over? I don't. Too tempting.

    A resurgent European spirit will behave no more rationally than the recent, suicidal European spirit does. As Peter Brimelow puts it, “It will come to blood.”

    Replies: @A123

    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @Twinkie

    My metaphor of the slaughterbench does not appeal to you, which is fair enough. I have thought of a better way to explain.

    Individuals of analytical bent like you and me tend to look for definite answers, but many questions aren't like that. Setting aside the question of Jewish involvement (which could be debated except that readers have read enough from me on the topic), ethnic change in the United States did not happen according to any definite plan, but according to an unlooked-for cascade of circumstances coupled with the voluntary choice of tens of millions of foreign individuals to relocate to the United States. Many came peacefully. Some were driven by violence in their countries of origin.

    I know no law of nature that forbids a future, unlooked-for cascade of circumstances to meet the voluntary choice of tens of millions of domestic individuals to relocate from the United States. Many might go peacefully. Some might be driven by violence in the United States.

    Admittedly, the specific future I have just outlined is unlikely to come to pass, but something important and unpredictable will happen, and you and I do not know what that will be. Whatever happens, I will react to it and you will react to it when it comes. Opportunities will be seized. History will not stand still.

    And, unfortunately, I agree with Peter Brimelow. It will come to blood. The last likely exit from the ramp downward into bloody conflict lies behind us now. I just hope that the number slain will be in the hundreds rather than in the tens of millions.

  56. @Twinkie
    @V. K. Ovelund


    With regard to Twinkie, I don’t think that he owes either of us an answer. He’s got to work out his own life, and he is trying to do it in a way that does not cause unnecessary problems for you and me. It’s hard to ask much more.
     
    Allow me to disagree a tad bit.

    I do think I owe you and other Americans "an answer" as much as you do me as well. We all share a country still. We are still all Americans. We still owe each other something as fellow citizens of the Republic. I've laid my cards before you more than once. I suspect you have a pretty good sense of what I am about.

    And I don't just live for myself. I belong to communities - communities that require reciprocal obligations and also confer (mutual) benefits. Furthermore, as an obedient Catholic and Christian, I value highly the timeless notion of justice - an objective, God-derived sense of justice, not the "social justice" monstrosity that is increasingly dominant in our society. This obligates me to speak out against injustice when it rears its ugly head. As you well know, I am vehemently critical of anti-white ideology (as much as it is often for virtue signaling by elites and elite-aspirants and their imitators) - not just because the vast majority of people I deeply love are whites, but also because it is objectively wrong and greatly offends and damages real justice, without which we would not have a civilization worth living for as human beings.

    history is a slaughterbench
     
    History is not just a "slaughterbench." Otherwise we wouldn't have a civilization.

    Replies: @iffen, @V. K. Ovelund, @V. K. Ovelund

    I am vehemently critical of anti-white ideology (as much as it is often for virtue signaling by elites and elite-aspirants and their imitators) – not just because the vast majority of people I deeply love are whites, but also because it is objectively wrong and greatly offends and damages real justice, without which we would not have a civilization worth living for as human beings.

    I’d like to give the people who purport to advocate for American whites the benefit of doubt

    Why do you want to give one group the benefit of the doubt, but not the other?

    You obviously can see the destruction that accompanies the authoritarian left. Can you not see that similiar destruction would come if the “advocates” for American whites held the positions of power instead?

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @iffen


    “advocates” for American whites
     
    I didn’t have quotation marks on mine.

    As for fringe grifters of all races, I made my views clear on them.

    Replies: @iffen

    , @dfordoom
    @iffen


    You obviously can see the destruction that accompanies the authoritarian left. Can you not see that similiar destruction would come if the “advocates” for American whites held the positions of power instead?
     
    That's the problem. There are just as many crazies on the Right as on the Left, and they're just as dangerously crazy. The Right's lunatic fringe is no better than the Left's.

    We don't want the lunatic fringe in charge, whether it's the Left's lunatic fringe or the Right's. We don't want any lunatic fringe in charge. We don't, for example, want the Christian lunatic fringe in charge trying to go back to the Good Old Days of the 17th century. The Christian lunatic fringe is just as bad as the bigoted atheists who would like to suppress Christianity altogether.

    The last hundred years has given us too many examples of what happens when a lunatic fringe gains power.
  57. “We’ve just hit a rough patch. It’s gonna be okay.”

    One can be quantitative about “rough.” As I have detailed before, The US now ranks internationally right around number 25 to number 30 in just about anything you can think of. (The most recent examples are covid-variant tracing, and the Democracy Index of The Economist.) The Boeing Max was not merely rough. The vaccine rollout is not merely rough.

    The Fed’s printing press cannot make this “okay.” There exists no path to okay — not for the country as a whole. The will of course be proficient, conscientious, fastidious islands of okay.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @SafeNow

    Okay, okay: a very, very rough patch.

    Stop trying to make me say that it's all over.

    What about Rover? Huh?

    Replies: @SafeNow

  58. @SafeNow
    “We’ve just hit a rough patch. It’s gonna be okay.”

    One can be quantitative about “rough.” As I have detailed before, The US now ranks internationally right around number 25 to number 30 in just about anything you can think of. (The most recent examples are covid-variant tracing, and the Democracy Index of The Economist.) The Boeing Max was not merely rough. The vaccine rollout is not merely rough.

    The Fed’s printing press cannot make this “okay.” There exists no path to okay — not for the country as a whole. The will of course be proficient, conscientious, fastidious islands of okay.

    Replies: @iffen

    Okay, okay: a very, very rough patch.

    Stop trying to make me say that it’s all over.

    What about Rover? Huh?

    • Replies: @SafeNow
    @iffen

    “What about Rover? Huh?”

    The Mars Rover is impressive, granted. Good point. But... it is gadget roving. The Mars rover. Roving drones. The roving $75,000 robot police dog now roving a poor neighborhood in New York. Not so good when it comes to the “roving night watchman” that was supposed to have been roving on the dive boat, per USCG regulations. He slept, and 34 people were horribly burned alive. Different countries are good at different things. The US is world-class at fast food, video games, and fictitious money.

  59. @iffen
    @Twinkie

    I am vehemently critical of anti-white ideology (as much as it is often for virtue signaling by elites and elite-aspirants and their imitators) – not just because the vast majority of people I deeply love are whites, but also because it is objectively wrong and greatly offends and damages real justice, without which we would not have a civilization worth living for as human beings.

    ...

    I’d like to give the people who purport to advocate for American whites the benefit of doubt

    Why do you want to give one group the benefit of the doubt, but not the other?

    You obviously can see the destruction that accompanies the authoritarian left. Can you not see that similiar destruction would come if the "advocates" for American whites held the positions of power instead?

    Replies: @Twinkie, @dfordoom

    “advocates” for American whites

    I didn’t have quotation marks on mine.

    As for fringe grifters of all races, I made my views clear on them.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Twinkie

    The woke mob in near total control is not a fringe.

    I put white advocates in quotes because they are a fringe.

    My question is why do you extend the "benefit of the doubt" to one group and not the other?

    Both are (would be) lethal to America along the same lines.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  60. @Twinkie
    @iffen


    “advocates” for American whites
     
    I didn’t have quotation marks on mine.

    As for fringe grifters of all races, I made my views clear on them.

    Replies: @iffen

    The woke mob in near total control is not a fringe.

    I put white advocates in quotes because they are a fringe.

    My question is why do you extend the “benefit of the doubt” to one group and not the other?

    Both are (would be) lethal to America along the same lines.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    I put white advocates in quotes because they are a fringe ... lethal to America ...
     
    This makes no sense. On the face of it, it is lack of white advocacy that is lethal to America.

    White advocates are a fringe because you want them to be. The prophecy fulfills itself. Meanwhile, America as history knew her, as a distinct people secure in its own territory, ceases to exist.

    You are not required to have a solution, but to despise those (however imperfect) who are searching for one does not help.

    Replies: @iffen

  61. @Twinkie
    @V. K. Ovelund


    With regard to Twinkie, I don’t think that he owes either of us an answer. He’s got to work out his own life, and he is trying to do it in a way that does not cause unnecessary problems for you and me. It’s hard to ask much more.
     
    Allow me to disagree a tad bit.

    I do think I owe you and other Americans "an answer" as much as you do me as well. We all share a country still. We are still all Americans. We still owe each other something as fellow citizens of the Republic. I've laid my cards before you more than once. I suspect you have a pretty good sense of what I am about.

    And I don't just live for myself. I belong to communities - communities that require reciprocal obligations and also confer (mutual) benefits. Furthermore, as an obedient Catholic and Christian, I value highly the timeless notion of justice - an objective, God-derived sense of justice, not the "social justice" monstrosity that is increasingly dominant in our society. This obligates me to speak out against injustice when it rears its ugly head. As you well know, I am vehemently critical of anti-white ideology (as much as it is often for virtue signaling by elites and elite-aspirants and their imitators) - not just because the vast majority of people I deeply love are whites, but also because it is objectively wrong and greatly offends and damages real justice, without which we would not have a civilization worth living for as human beings.

    history is a slaughterbench
     
    History is not just a "slaughterbench." Otherwise we wouldn't have a civilization.

    Replies: @iffen, @V. K. Ovelund, @V. K. Ovelund

    I still find it remarkable that the nonwhites and non-Gentiles here understand what I am about better than the white Gentiles do. Apparently, my hound has been barking up the wrong tree.

    Don’t worry. I am evidently ineffective. I have neither a coherent faction nor a coherent political plan for action, nor am I likely to obtain either one.

    [MORE]

    History is not just a “slaughterbench.” Otherwise we wouldn’t have a civilization.

    Noted.

    My debating you is gratuitous. I don’t mean to push against the open door, so to speak. Such a push would be impolite.

    Far too many men of European descent have allowed themselves to be baited into a false posture of harmlessness, which invites only contempt. Posturing is unnecessary. If European man declined during the 20th century, then he can rise during the 21st, if he wants to.

    But some non-Europeans that have come to count on the suicide of European man naturally won’t take kindly to a resurgence of the European spirit. For example, do you think that the era of sub-Saharan colonialism is over? I don’t. Too tempting.

    A resurgent European spirit will behave no more rationally than the recent, suicidal European spirit does. As Peter Brimelow puts it, “It will come to blood.”

    • Replies: @A123
    @V. K. Ovelund


    I still find it remarkable that the nonwhites and non-Gentiles here understand what I am about better than the white Gentiles do. Apparently, my hound has been barking up the wrong tree.
     
    As a White Christian, I find your position baffling:

    • Why do White, Anti-Christian Elites deserve your support?
    • Why do you oppose non-Elite Jews who believe in Biblical values?

    Anti-Semitism is a hard Left value that aligns you with DNC leaders like Rashid Tlaib and Ilhan Omar. The majority of Orthodox Jews are GOP voters, thus you have no chance of making the GOP a racist party.

    Opposing Elites who are apostates (Fake Christians and Fake Jews) makes sense. White Elite (e.g. Macron, Merkel) misrule in Europe is a preview of what the U.S. will look like under White Elite Anti-Semitic rule.

    I do not understand your commitment to Elite Anti-Semitism. Choosing Elite values places you at odds with Biblical values. Trying to balance the two is like standing on a fraying thread. Ultimately, it cannot hold.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Twinkie

  62. @iffen
    @Twinkie

    The woke mob in near total control is not a fringe.

    I put white advocates in quotes because they are a fringe.

    My question is why do you extend the "benefit of the doubt" to one group and not the other?

    Both are (would be) lethal to America along the same lines.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    I put white advocates in quotes because they are a fringe … lethal to America …

    This makes no sense. On the face of it, it is lack of white advocacy that is lethal to America.

    [MORE]

    White advocates are a fringe because you want them to be. The prophecy fulfills itself. Meanwhile, America as history knew her, as a distinct people secure in its own territory, ceases to exist.

    You are not required to have a solution, but to despise those (however imperfect) who are searching for one does not help.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Let me be clear: it is based upon political beliefs. I have told you before that IMO the "Alt-Right" is at least 90% a creation of the MSM. I'm not worried about you and your troops going on a terrorist rampage and killing thousands of innocents. This idea is a MSM created bogey man used to scare the populace. Now this is because you are a tiny sect, a tiny slice of a tiny slice. If you and your compadres had the power and influence that the totalitarian woke leftists are wielding, then I would be worried.

    On the other hand the woke totalitarians are grinding us into the ground. I fear what the consequences are going to be for the U. S.

    I don't accept the political ideology of your side or the woke side, but they are the ones killing America right now, not you. White supremacy or separation would destroy America just as surely as the woke are trying to do now.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom, @dfordoom

  63. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Twinkie

    I still find it remarkable that the nonwhites and non-Gentiles here understand what I am about better than the white Gentiles do. Apparently, my hound has been barking up the wrong tree.

    Don't worry. I am evidently ineffective. I have neither a coherent faction nor a coherent political plan for action, nor am I likely to obtain either one.


    History is not just a “slaughterbench.” Otherwise we wouldn’t have a civilization.
     
    Noted.

    My debating you is gratuitous. I don't mean to push against the open door, so to speak. Such a push would be impolite.

    Far too many men of European descent have allowed themselves to be baited into a false posture of harmlessness, which invites only contempt. Posturing is unnecessary. If European man declined during the 20th century, then he can rise during the 21st, if he wants to.

    But some non-Europeans that have come to count on the suicide of European man naturally won't take kindly to a resurgence of the European spirit. For example, do you think that the era of sub-Saharan colonialism is over? I don't. Too tempting.

    A resurgent European spirit will behave no more rationally than the recent, suicidal European spirit does. As Peter Brimelow puts it, “It will come to blood.”

    Replies: @A123

    I still find it remarkable that the nonwhites and non-Gentiles here understand what I am about better than the white Gentiles do. Apparently, my hound has been barking up the wrong tree.

    As a White Christian, I find your position baffling:

    • Why do White, Anti-Christian Elites deserve your support?
    • Why do you oppose non-Elite Jews who believe in Biblical values?

    Anti-Semitism is a hard Left value that aligns you with DNC leaders like Rashid Tlaib and Ilhan Omar. The majority of Orthodox Jews are GOP voters, thus you have no chance of making the GOP a racist party.

    Opposing Elites who are apostates (Fake Christians and Fake Jews) makes sense. White Elite (e.g. Macron, Merkel) misrule in Europe is a preview of what the U.S. will look like under White Elite Anti-Semitic rule.

    I do not understand your commitment to Elite Anti-Semitism. Choosing Elite values places you at odds with Biblical values. Trying to balance the two is like standing on a fraying thread. Ultimately, it cannot hold.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @A123


    Anti-Semitism is a hard Left value
     
    Today, yes.

    But attaching mild disrepute to those who subscribe to an alien religion was a perfectly conservative position in Christian Europe and America of yore.

    Replies: @A123

  64. @Twinkie
    @V. K. Ovelund


    With regard to Twinkie, I don’t think that he owes either of us an answer. He’s got to work out his own life, and he is trying to do it in a way that does not cause unnecessary problems for you and me. It’s hard to ask much more.
     
    Allow me to disagree a tad bit.

    I do think I owe you and other Americans "an answer" as much as you do me as well. We all share a country still. We are still all Americans. We still owe each other something as fellow citizens of the Republic. I've laid my cards before you more than once. I suspect you have a pretty good sense of what I am about.

    And I don't just live for myself. I belong to communities - communities that require reciprocal obligations and also confer (mutual) benefits. Furthermore, as an obedient Catholic and Christian, I value highly the timeless notion of justice - an objective, God-derived sense of justice, not the "social justice" monstrosity that is increasingly dominant in our society. This obligates me to speak out against injustice when it rears its ugly head. As you well know, I am vehemently critical of anti-white ideology (as much as it is often for virtue signaling by elites and elite-aspirants and their imitators) - not just because the vast majority of people I deeply love are whites, but also because it is objectively wrong and greatly offends and damages real justice, without which we would not have a civilization worth living for as human beings.

    history is a slaughterbench
     
    History is not just a "slaughterbench." Otherwise we wouldn't have a civilization.

    Replies: @iffen, @V. K. Ovelund, @V. K. Ovelund

    My metaphor of the slaughterbench does not appeal to you, which is fair enough. I have thought of a better way to explain.

    [MORE]

    Individuals of analytical bent like you and me tend to look for definite answers, but many questions aren’t like that. Setting aside the question of Jewish involvement (which could be debated except that readers have read enough from me on the topic), ethnic change in the United States did not happen according to any definite plan, but according to an unlooked-for cascade of circumstances coupled with the voluntary choice of tens of millions of foreign individuals to relocate to the United States. Many came peacefully. Some were driven by violence in their countries of origin.

    I know no law of nature that forbids a future, unlooked-for cascade of circumstances to meet the voluntary choice of tens of millions of domestic individuals to relocate from the United States. Many might go peacefully. Some might be driven by violence in the United States.

    Admittedly, the specific future I have just outlined is unlikely to come to pass, but something important and unpredictable will happen, and you and I do not know what that will be. Whatever happens, I will react to it and you will react to it when it comes. Opportunities will be seized. History will not stand still.

    And, unfortunately, I agree with Peter Brimelow. It will come to blood. The last likely exit from the ramp downward into bloody conflict lies behind us now. I just hope that the number slain will be in the hundreds rather than in the tens of millions.

  65. @Rosie
    @AndrewR


    Also, for the record, “Anglo-Saxon Protestants” have been puppets of the Juice ever since that demon Cromwell let them back in to fund his reign of terror.
     
    The problem that Twinkie fails to recognize is that Jews, though initially small in number, began to change the intraelite balance of power from the very beginning. A great many WASP elites were already prone to treachery, and I have no interest in denying that. That said, there were enough honest elites with the power to keep them in check.

    Corrupt elites have always been terrified of populists, because they have the support of the people and are therefore a serious threat however few in number. The ascent of the Jews, and especially Jewish media power cut off the ability of populist elites to communicate with the people without Jewish mediation. Thus defanged, they could no longer keep treacherous elites in check, and here we are.

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Gaius-Sempronius-Gracchus

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt

    Rosie is hitting line drive home runs over the centerfield wall and I love it!

    Rosie is putting on an impressive batting practice home run demonstration and there is no doubt in my mind that she could do it in the seventh game of the World Series when everything is on the line and her team needs her to put them over the top for the victory!

    Tweets from 2015:

  66. @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    I put white advocates in quotes because they are a fringe ... lethal to America ...
     
    This makes no sense. On the face of it, it is lack of white advocacy that is lethal to America.

    White advocates are a fringe because you want them to be. The prophecy fulfills itself. Meanwhile, America as history knew her, as a distinct people secure in its own territory, ceases to exist.

    You are not required to have a solution, but to despise those (however imperfect) who are searching for one does not help.

    Replies: @iffen

    Let me be clear: it is based upon political beliefs. I have told you before that IMO the “Alt-Right” is at least 90% a creation of the MSM. I’m not worried about you and your troops going on a terrorist rampage and killing thousands of innocents. This idea is a MSM created bogey man used to scare the populace. Now this is because you are a tiny sect, a tiny slice of a tiny slice. If you and your compadres had the power and influence that the totalitarian woke leftists are wielding, then I would be worried.

    On the other hand the woke totalitarians are grinding us into the ground. I fear what the consequences are going to be for the U. S.

    I don’t accept the political ideology of your side or the woke side, but they are the ones killing America right now, not you. White supremacy or separation would destroy America just as surely as the woke are trying to do now.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    White supremacy or separation would destroy America just as surely as the woke are trying to do now.
     
    It's weird. Yahya, Talha, Twinkie and Jay Fink seem to grasp my position without great effort. It's the white European Gentile readers that don't quite get it.

    Not that you need to get my position. I am not an important person, and maybe I'm delusional, anyway; but it tells me that my hound is barking up the wrong tree.

    I don’t accept the political ideology of your side or the woke side, but they are the ones killing America right now, not you.
     
    Ok.

    Replies: @iffen

    , @dfordoom
    @iffen


    I have told you before that IMO the “Alt-Right” is at least 90% a creation of the MSM.
     
    And it's likely that it includes quite a few FBI agents provocateurs. Would the FBI do something like that? You bet they would. It would be more surprising if there weren't considerable numbers of informers and agents provocateurs.

    Replies: @iffen, @V. K. Ovelund

    , @dfordoom
    @iffen


    I don’t accept the political ideology of your side or the woke side, but they are the ones killing America right now, not you.
     
    Yes, I agree with that.

    In fact the Woke are killing the whole western world.
  67. @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Let me be clear: it is based upon political beliefs. I have told you before that IMO the "Alt-Right" is at least 90% a creation of the MSM. I'm not worried about you and your troops going on a terrorist rampage and killing thousands of innocents. This idea is a MSM created bogey man used to scare the populace. Now this is because you are a tiny sect, a tiny slice of a tiny slice. If you and your compadres had the power and influence that the totalitarian woke leftists are wielding, then I would be worried.

    On the other hand the woke totalitarians are grinding us into the ground. I fear what the consequences are going to be for the U. S.

    I don't accept the political ideology of your side or the woke side, but they are the ones killing America right now, not you. White supremacy or separation would destroy America just as surely as the woke are trying to do now.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom, @dfordoom

    White supremacy or separation would destroy America just as surely as the woke are trying to do now.

    It’s weird. Yahya, Talha, Twinkie and Jay Fink seem to grasp my position without great effort. It’s the white European Gentile readers that don’t quite get it.

    Not that you need to get my position. I am not an important person, and maybe I’m delusional, anyway; but it tells me that my hound is barking up the wrong tree.

    I don’t accept the political ideology of your side or the woke side, but they are the ones killing America right now, not you.

    Ok.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    It’s the white European Gentile readers that don’t quite get it.

    Maybe it's my 1% Bantu ancestry that is throwing things off. :)

    Seriously, I'm not sure what you mean by not getting it. I think I understand most of what you have to say about your political views. It's not a matter of not getting it, it's a matter of getting it and rejecting it.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  68. @Diversity Heretic
    Thanks to dfordoom for a defense of Boomers (full disclosure, I am one). Boomers may have been self-centered and more than ordinarily narcissistic, but they did not make the catastrophically bad public policy decisions of the 1960s and the 1970s; those were the contributions mostly of the "Greatest Generation." I sometimes reflect on the observations of Sayyib Qutb, one of the founders of the Muslim Brotherhood, who was shocked by the sexual licentiousness, violence and materialism in the United States of Dwight Einsenhower. Perhaps the outsider saw more clearly since the seeds of the 1960s and 70s were clearly present in the 40s and 50s. The first half of the 20th Century was a civilizational catastrophe from which consequences we still suffer.

    The fact that the German and Japanese militaries and societies perservered until the very end in WWII is a testament to their strength and courage, albeit in bad causes and suffering from catastrophically poor leadership.

    Replies: @TomSchmidt, @Hermes

    I’ve made the same point about Boomers elsewhere. If you’re like me, a Gen X’er with an innate inclination toward traditionalism, you grew up thinking it was your own parents’ generation, the Baby Boomers, who ruined everything, by becoming hippies, growing long hair, doing drugs, turning on, tuning in, and dropping out, embracing liberal sexual behavior, and influencing policy with their student protests of the 1960’s (really more like the mid-sixties through the mid-seventies.) But then I realized that officially, the Baby Boom generation starts with those born in 1946, and the voting age wasn’t lowered from 21 to 18 until 1970, so the first Boomers didn’t become eligible to vote until 1967. Meaning that not a single Boomer voted for the politicians who enacted the 1964 Civil Rights Act or the 1965 nor the 1965 Hart-Celler immigration act. That was done by the older generations, who I grew up thinking of as the “good guys” who believed in Leave it to Beaver or Ozzie and Harriet lifestyles.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  69. @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    White supremacy or separation would destroy America just as surely as the woke are trying to do now.
     
    It's weird. Yahya, Talha, Twinkie and Jay Fink seem to grasp my position without great effort. It's the white European Gentile readers that don't quite get it.

    Not that you need to get my position. I am not an important person, and maybe I'm delusional, anyway; but it tells me that my hound is barking up the wrong tree.

    I don’t accept the political ideology of your side or the woke side, but they are the ones killing America right now, not you.
     
    Ok.

    Replies: @iffen

    It’s the white European Gentile readers that don’t quite get it.

    Maybe it’s my 1% Bantu ancestry that is throwing things off. 🙂

    Seriously, I’m not sure what you mean by not getting it. I think I understand most of what you have to say about your political views. It’s not a matter of not getting it, it’s a matter of getting it and rejecting it.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    Maybe it’s my 1% Bantu ancestry that is throwing things off.
     
    So you took one of those genetic ancestry tests, did you?

    I cannot quite bring myself to do it. Maybe filing my genes in a database worries me. Or maybe it's that I'd finally have to admit that, not only are you and I distant cousins, but worse: we share the same Bantu forefather.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @iffen, @Audacious Epigone

  70. @iffen
    @SafeNow

    Okay, okay: a very, very rough patch.

    Stop trying to make me say that it's all over.

    What about Rover? Huh?

    Replies: @SafeNow

    “What about Rover? Huh?”

    The Mars Rover is impressive, granted. Good point. But… it is gadget roving. The Mars rover. Roving drones. The roving $75,000 robot police dog now roving a poor neighborhood in New York. Not so good when it comes to the “roving night watchman” that was supposed to have been roving on the dive boat, per USCG regulations. He slept, and 34 people were horribly burned alive. Different countries are good at different things. The US is world-class at fast food, video games, and fictitious money.

  71. @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    It’s the white European Gentile readers that don’t quite get it.

    Maybe it's my 1% Bantu ancestry that is throwing things off. :)

    Seriously, I'm not sure what you mean by not getting it. I think I understand most of what you have to say about your political views. It's not a matter of not getting it, it's a matter of getting it and rejecting it.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Maybe it’s my 1% Bantu ancestry that is throwing things off.

    So you took one of those genetic ancestry tests, did you?

    I cannot quite bring myself to do it. Maybe filing my genes in a database worries me. Or maybe it’s that I’d finally have to admit that, not only are you and I distant cousins, but worse: we share the same Bantu forefather.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @V. K. Ovelund


    Or maybe it’s that I’d finally have to admit that, not only are you and I distant cousins, but worse: we share the same Bantu forefather.
     
    If you were a Midwestern white and or an offshoot of the same on the West Coast, the chance of that is low. However, if you were a "heritage" white on the East Coast, you might have a percent or two.

    Funny (to me) story. I have a friend who is a South African emigre. His ancestry is mostly Dutch and German and he always rails against the English. He also, of course, doesn't think well of blacks, Indians, or Jews. He pretty much ascribes all of South Africa's ills to "Jewish financial interests." He once half-jokingly told me that he wouldn't like it if one of his daughters married one of my Hapa sons.

    Well, he and his wife took genetic tests and guess what? Indeed, he and his wife are both mostly Dutch-German, but they also have a substantial English ancestry and, moreover, have small, but statistically significant amounts of Ashkenazi, sub-Saharan African, and Southeast Asian (via Cape Malays) ancestry (which is hardly unusual for South African whites, which I have known all along).

    I told him that my wife and I also took similar tests and we came out as 99.9% Northwestern European and 99.9% Northeast Asian, respectively, and that neither of us had any Ashkenazi or African ancestry. I ribbed him ever-so gently and said, "Now that I know this, I am not sure I'd like any of my sons to marry one of your daughters. We wouldn't want those genes in the family."

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    , @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    genetic ancestry tests

    It can be a good shibboleth for a individual to determine what he "really" thinks about race. I was curious, not worried, and the ancestry analysis was a distant secondary reason for taking the test.

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @V. K. Ovelund

    If you had a Bantu ancestor, would that be upsetting? No one should apologize for who their ancestors are. Those ancestors are the reason you're here!

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  72. dfordoom on how Boomers didn’t start the fire, it was always burning since at least as long as they were turning through childhood:

    We didn’t start the fire

    [MORE]

    We didn’t start the fire
    It was always burning
    Since the world’s been turning
    We didn’t start the fire
    No, we didn’t light it
    But we tried to fight it

    Oh, wait, that was intentional, wasn’t it?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Dissident

    Haha, yes it was.

    Replies: @Dissident

  73. @A123
    @V. K. Ovelund


    I still find it remarkable that the nonwhites and non-Gentiles here understand what I am about better than the white Gentiles do. Apparently, my hound has been barking up the wrong tree.
     
    As a White Christian, I find your position baffling:

    • Why do White, Anti-Christian Elites deserve your support?
    • Why do you oppose non-Elite Jews who believe in Biblical values?

    Anti-Semitism is a hard Left value that aligns you with DNC leaders like Rashid Tlaib and Ilhan Omar. The majority of Orthodox Jews are GOP voters, thus you have no chance of making the GOP a racist party.

    Opposing Elites who are apostates (Fake Christians and Fake Jews) makes sense. White Elite (e.g. Macron, Merkel) misrule in Europe is a preview of what the U.S. will look like under White Elite Anti-Semitic rule.

    I do not understand your commitment to Elite Anti-Semitism. Choosing Elite values places you at odds with Biblical values. Trying to balance the two is like standing on a fraying thread. Ultimately, it cannot hold.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Anti-Semitism is a hard Left value

    Today, yes.

    But attaching mild disrepute to those who subscribe to an alien religion was a perfectly conservative position in Christian Europe and America of yore.

    • Replies: @A123
    @Twinkie


    But attaching mild disrepute to those who subscribe to an alien religion was a perfectly conservative position in Christian Europe and America of yore.
     
    But we are no longer in days of yore. Around ~600 AD an existential, Evil threat to those who believe in God emerged to pillage and rape across the land. Trivial differences among those who share a belief in God are best put aside in the interest of survival.

    Mistakes have been made in America and elsewhere, casting disrepute on vital allies needed to defeat the Evil. As these errors are a threat to the survival of Christianity, they must be called out to avoid repeating suicidal choices.

    PEACE 😇
  74. @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    Maybe it’s my 1% Bantu ancestry that is throwing things off.
     
    So you took one of those genetic ancestry tests, did you?

    I cannot quite bring myself to do it. Maybe filing my genes in a database worries me. Or maybe it's that I'd finally have to admit that, not only are you and I distant cousins, but worse: we share the same Bantu forefather.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @iffen, @Audacious Epigone

    Or maybe it’s that I’d finally have to admit that, not only are you and I distant cousins, but worse: we share the same Bantu forefather.

    If you were a Midwestern white and or an offshoot of the same on the West Coast, the chance of that is low. However, if you were a “heritage” white on the East Coast, you might have a percent or two.

    Funny (to me) story. I have a friend who is a South African emigre. His ancestry is mostly Dutch and German and he always rails against the English. He also, of course, doesn’t think well of blacks, Indians, or Jews. He pretty much ascribes all of South Africa’s ills to “Jewish financial interests.” He once half-jokingly told me that he wouldn’t like it if one of his daughters married one of my Hapa sons.

    Well, he and his wife took genetic tests and guess what? Indeed, he and his wife are both mostly Dutch-German, but they also have a substantial English ancestry and, moreover, have small, but statistically significant amounts of Ashkenazi, sub-Saharan African, and Southeast Asian (via Cape Malays) ancestry (which is hardly unusual for South African whites, which I have known all along).

    I told him that my wife and I also took similar tests and we came out as 99.9% Northwestern European and 99.9% Northeast Asian, respectively, and that neither of us had any Ashkenazi or African ancestry. I ribbed him ever-so gently and said, “Now that I know this, I am not sure I’d like any of my sons to marry one of your daughters. We wouldn’t want those genes in the family.”

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Twinkie


    “We wouldn’t want those genes in the family.”
     
    No one need regret his ancestry. No one owes an explanation for it.

    However, I affirm the illiberal proposition: that all men are created unequal, each with obligations he did not choose and may not shirk. Ancestry has consequences.

    Ayn Rand had it wrong, though. You have it right. Class consciousness and the in-group egalitarianism that goes with it are normal, healthy, helpful aspects of human nature, but only if the group's composition largely, roughly conforms to inegalitarian reality.

    If you have ever worked under or alongside an old-style industrial labor union, you might understand what I mean.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  75. @Twinkie
    @V. K. Ovelund


    Or maybe it’s that I’d finally have to admit that, not only are you and I distant cousins, but worse: we share the same Bantu forefather.
     
    If you were a Midwestern white and or an offshoot of the same on the West Coast, the chance of that is low. However, if you were a "heritage" white on the East Coast, you might have a percent or two.

    Funny (to me) story. I have a friend who is a South African emigre. His ancestry is mostly Dutch and German and he always rails against the English. He also, of course, doesn't think well of blacks, Indians, or Jews. He pretty much ascribes all of South Africa's ills to "Jewish financial interests." He once half-jokingly told me that he wouldn't like it if one of his daughters married one of my Hapa sons.

    Well, he and his wife took genetic tests and guess what? Indeed, he and his wife are both mostly Dutch-German, but they also have a substantial English ancestry and, moreover, have small, but statistically significant amounts of Ashkenazi, sub-Saharan African, and Southeast Asian (via Cape Malays) ancestry (which is hardly unusual for South African whites, which I have known all along).

    I told him that my wife and I also took similar tests and we came out as 99.9% Northwestern European and 99.9% Northeast Asian, respectively, and that neither of us had any Ashkenazi or African ancestry. I ribbed him ever-so gently and said, "Now that I know this, I am not sure I'd like any of my sons to marry one of your daughters. We wouldn't want those genes in the family."

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    “We wouldn’t want those genes in the family.”

    No one need regret his ancestry. No one owes an explanation for it.

    However, I affirm the illiberal proposition: that all men are created unequal, each with obligations he did not choose and may not shirk. Ancestry has consequences.

    Ayn Rand had it wrong, though. You have it right. Class consciousness and the in-group egalitarianism that goes with it are normal, healthy, helpful aspects of human nature, but only if the group’s composition largely, roughly conforms to inegalitarian reality.

    If you have ever worked under or alongside an old-style industrial labor union, you might understand what I mean.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @V. K. Ovelund

    In case I wasn’t clear - I’m not a purist regarding ancestry. I believe in free will and evaluate people based on their actions.

  76. @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    Maybe it’s my 1% Bantu ancestry that is throwing things off.
     
    So you took one of those genetic ancestry tests, did you?

    I cannot quite bring myself to do it. Maybe filing my genes in a database worries me. Or maybe it's that I'd finally have to admit that, not only are you and I distant cousins, but worse: we share the same Bantu forefather.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @iffen, @Audacious Epigone

    genetic ancestry tests

    It can be a good shibboleth for a individual to determine what he “really” thinks about race. I was curious, not worried, and the ancestry analysis was a distant secondary reason for taking the test.

  77. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Twinkie


    “We wouldn’t want those genes in the family.”
     
    No one need regret his ancestry. No one owes an explanation for it.

    However, I affirm the illiberal proposition: that all men are created unequal, each with obligations he did not choose and may not shirk. Ancestry has consequences.

    Ayn Rand had it wrong, though. You have it right. Class consciousness and the in-group egalitarianism that goes with it are normal, healthy, helpful aspects of human nature, but only if the group's composition largely, roughly conforms to inegalitarian reality.

    If you have ever worked under or alongside an old-style industrial labor union, you might understand what I mean.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    In case I wasn’t clear – I’m not a purist regarding ancestry. I believe in free will and evaluate people based on their actions.

  78. @Twinkie
    @A123


    Anti-Semitism is a hard Left value
     
    Today, yes.

    But attaching mild disrepute to those who subscribe to an alien religion was a perfectly conservative position in Christian Europe and America of yore.

    Replies: @A123

    But attaching mild disrepute to those who subscribe to an alien religion was a perfectly conservative position in Christian Europe and America of yore.

    But we are no longer in days of yore. Around ~600 AD an existential, Evil threat to those who believe in God emerged to pillage and rape across the land. Trivial differences among those who share a belief in God are best put aside in the interest of survival.

    Mistakes have been made in America and elsewhere, casting disrepute on vital allies needed to defeat the Evil. As these errors are a threat to the survival of Christianity, they must be called out to avoid repeating suicidal choices.

    PEACE 😇

  79. @Twinkie
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    colorblind CivNat?
     
    Please elaborate what this means. I prefer not to jump into other people's labels without knowing well what they mean by them.

    Meanwhile, I'll describe myself. I am someone who is an orthodox Catholic and is temperamentally a Burkean conservative. I would also call myself someone who advocates for white majoritarianism, meaning I support policies that would keep the population of the United States majority white and maintain Anglo-American institutions and civic culture as the dominant norms in the society. I think that is good for most all Americans, white or otherwise. That means I subscribe to immigration-restriction, oppose multiculturalism, and favor economic policies of what Steve Sailer calls affordable family-formation. What this means for the nonwhites - including me - in this country is that they would be treated equally under the law, provided they assimilate into the dominant norms - learn and speak English, be loyal and patriotic to the country and its people, be productive, and express admiration and gratitude for the very fine institutions, civic culture, and indeed the country the Founding Fathers built and bequeathed and then help to perpetuate them.

    As for "color blind" - no, I am not. I think science provides ample evidence that - on average - people of different races exhibit variations on physical and psychological traits. These differences and their effects should be studied (as with any aspect of science) and allowances should be made in public policy to address/incorporate them. However, I also subscribe to the idea of treating people based on their behaviors as individuals under the law. There shouldn't be collective punishments or collective rewards, and society should be molded as much as practicable to have people "reap what they sow."

    I welcome into my own social spheres all Americans of good will.

    Twinkle, you seem to be a damn fine human being, but I’ll ask a simple question: Who are your people?
     
    First, many thanks for the compliment.

    Second, my people are foremost my immediate family - my wife and children - as well as my mother, my wife's family and her extended kin (who welcomed me into their clan), my friends, my former colleagues (who shielded me with their lives and for whom, in turn, I was and am willing to take a bullet), my neighbors, the people who worship with my family and me, those who homeschool their children together with mine, the men and women (and children) who train with me and my children in Judo and Jiujitsu, the folks who work on the same charities as my family and I do, the men who belong to my militias, I mean neighborhood watch groups, the guys (and a few gals) who belong to my gun club, and, in general, those "damn fine human beings" with whom I am privileged share geography. In other words, my people are those who belong to intersecting groups of organic communities that I do.

    I haven't done a head count, but I'd say about 90-95% of them are white (or white mixes, including, as prime examples, my own children).

    My people
     
    Now, who are your people?

    Replies: @China Japan and Korea Bromance of Three Kingdoms

    Twinkie, I respect your writings would to ask you this, do you speak Korean or would you have to liked to pass it your children?

    I ask because you’ve noted that Chinese have some of the lowest assimilation rates in US. I’m familiar the PRC community in coastal Blue areas and know exactly what you are referring to. Often they stay endogamous and send their kids to suburban public schools with large Asian percentage, and Chinese language schools on Saturdays. A smaller subset send kids to private schools in posh neighborhoods. The fertility rate must be no higher than 1

    Many of the parents are in technical professions who came to the US for grad school. One can see at large corporations they hit a ceiling very quickly, compared to ABCs, much less other groups.

    They usually hold US passports and recently there’s been a trend of some in this group who’s been enticed to returned to big cities in China with high paying jobs. Any probably many others reserve this option. I must say its hard to blame them for a few reasons,

    1. China’s economy is rapidly growing and Mandarin’s status as international language is increasing, so they would be keen to not lose that connection
    2. The delicate state of US-China relations. Increasing anti-Chinese sentiments in US, which as noted on these forums, further distorted by the media
    3. Most of these folks typically don’t have strong feelings one way or the other about PRC. But they are not at all wild about Woke/SJW indoctrination in their kid’s schools. And education in China as you know is STEM focused and SJW-free

    These mainland Chinese Americans have obviously conservative values but they congregate in blue state metros. And I feel this because for them, there does not seem to a path for to assimilation in a conservative red state, other than take the German American way, don’t pass on their native language to their children and keep low key about their heritage.

    I get that you have mixed feelings about PRC, please feel free to look up my older comments about mine.

  80. @anonymous
    @AndrewR

    According to this article (Yahoo news, so FWIW), the Pepe Le Pew scene from Space Jam II was cut prior to the latest dust-up and not for PC reasons:
    https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/pepe-le-pew-removed-space-024605432.html

    So for now Pepe has not actually been cancelled by Warner Brothers, although as with everything else it is just a matter of time.

    Replies: @Wency

    See, that was my first thought in this. Who was it that actually wanted Pepe Le Pew? Did anyone ever like him? I recall hating him as a kid, and not as a villain, but just as someone annoying to watch and listen to. Romance isn’t a language that little boys speak. I could relate in some way to the motivations of every other Loony Toons character, but not him.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  81. @Wency
    @ravin' lunatic

    Social liberalism always seems to win out if it's viewed as a valid option. dfordoom himself seemed to be backing this up -- I recall him observing that no young person looks to the Amish lifestyle with admiration, they look at tattooed pop stars and so on.

    As a younger man, I used to look at things like imposing the death penalty for homosexuality in Leviticus and I couldn't grok it. How could that ever be appropriate and proportionate? But now I get it. Social conservatism needs to be enforced, for the good of all, or it breaks down. It relies mostly on taboos that keep it in place. The criminal punishments are only there to preserve the taboo, they can't survive without the taboo, but so long as the taboo is intact, they will only need to be applied sparingly.

    Once you no longer enforce the taboo, this inevitable process proceeds where what were once viewed as perverts are now viewed as normal and even admired people.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Social conservatism needs to be enforced, for the good of all, or it breaks down.

    The problem is that most people don’t want social conservatism. They don’t want the madness that we have today either. They want something in the middle. Most people want some form of monogamy although they don’t necessarily see formal marriage as a requirement. Most people want something resembling the nuclear family.

    Most people don’t want Drag Queen Story Hour and they don’t want bearded men in frocks sharing locker rooms with their daughters. On the other hand they don’t want homosexuals to be persecuted.

    Most people don’t want to spend their lives getting stoned but they’re also increasingly suspicious of Health Nazis who want to tell us what we’re allowed to do with our own bodies.

    Most people don’t want the government to act as a moral policeman.

    I’m sceptical about the chances of imposing social conservatism, or at least any kind of extreme social conservatism. And I don’t think there’s any chance at all of imposing Christian moral values on increasingly secular western societies. The best that conservative Christians can hope for is to be allowed to follow their own values but imposing those values on non-Christians is just a non-starter.

    Most people want to return to the 1980s, not the 1880s.

    • Replies: @Wency
    @dfordoom

    Yeah, I don't think you can impose those things either, at least in the West. In places that aren't the West, you can still do what Russia is doing. Social liberalism is proving to be the most slippery of slippery slopes, and the 1980s isn't a stable position -- it's just a single point in time on that steep and slippery slope.

    Once you abandon the Schelling point of persecuting homosexuality such that it remains in the shadows, social conservatism has no more Schelling points remaining and it's only ever 10-15 years away from surrender in the face of whatever zany scheme social liberalism cooks up next.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  82. @iffen
    @Twinkie

    I am vehemently critical of anti-white ideology (as much as it is often for virtue signaling by elites and elite-aspirants and their imitators) – not just because the vast majority of people I deeply love are whites, but also because it is objectively wrong and greatly offends and damages real justice, without which we would not have a civilization worth living for as human beings.

    ...

    I’d like to give the people who purport to advocate for American whites the benefit of doubt

    Why do you want to give one group the benefit of the doubt, but not the other?

    You obviously can see the destruction that accompanies the authoritarian left. Can you not see that similiar destruction would come if the "advocates" for American whites held the positions of power instead?

    Replies: @Twinkie, @dfordoom

    You obviously can see the destruction that accompanies the authoritarian left. Can you not see that similiar destruction would come if the “advocates” for American whites held the positions of power instead?

    That’s the problem. There are just as many crazies on the Right as on the Left, and they’re just as dangerously crazy. The Right’s lunatic fringe is no better than the Left’s.

    We don’t want the lunatic fringe in charge, whether it’s the Left’s lunatic fringe or the Right’s. We don’t want any lunatic fringe in charge. We don’t, for example, want the Christian lunatic fringe in charge trying to go back to the Good Old Days of the 17th century. The Christian lunatic fringe is just as bad as the bigoted atheists who would like to suppress Christianity altogether.

    The last hundred years has given us too many examples of what happens when a lunatic fringe gains power.

  83. @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Let me be clear: it is based upon political beliefs. I have told you before that IMO the "Alt-Right" is at least 90% a creation of the MSM. I'm not worried about you and your troops going on a terrorist rampage and killing thousands of innocents. This idea is a MSM created bogey man used to scare the populace. Now this is because you are a tiny sect, a tiny slice of a tiny slice. If you and your compadres had the power and influence that the totalitarian woke leftists are wielding, then I would be worried.

    On the other hand the woke totalitarians are grinding us into the ground. I fear what the consequences are going to be for the U. S.

    I don't accept the political ideology of your side or the woke side, but they are the ones killing America right now, not you. White supremacy or separation would destroy America just as surely as the woke are trying to do now.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom, @dfordoom

    I have told you before that IMO the “Alt-Right” is at least 90% a creation of the MSM.

    And it’s likely that it includes quite a few FBI agents provocateurs. Would the FBI do something like that? You bet they would. It would be more surprising if there weren’t considerable numbers of informers and agents provocateurs.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @dfordoom

    Would the FBI do something like that? You bet they would.

    I commented earlier in another section that increasingly the resources of the intelligence and police agencies are being used to "identify" and then destroy individuals and groups deemed to be a threat to the government in power because those individuals and groups are demanding transparency and accountability. (Sometimes, just groups or individuals that refuse to accept and parrot the party line are targeted). It is a major hallmark of a government that fears its own citizens because it does not have their support and does not have popular consent from significant portions of those citizens. They no longer look to protecting the country from external threats, but spend their time and resources searching for and destroying threats to the maintenance of their power.

    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom

    @iffen:


    I have told you before that IMO the “Alt-Right” is at least 90% a creation of the MSM.
     
    The caricature you believe to be the Alt-Right is at least 90% a creation of the MSM.

    @dfordoom:


    And it’s likely that it includes quite a few FBI agents provocateurs.
     
    It didn't, but I believe that it presently, probably does.

    Would the FBI do something like that? You bet they would. It would be more surprising if there weren’t considerable numbers of informers and agents provocateurs.
     
    It had never occurred to me to wish that the FBI be disbanded and abolished, but I wish that now. I am unaware of anything the FBI does that makes my and my family's lives better.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  84. @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Let me be clear: it is based upon political beliefs. I have told you before that IMO the "Alt-Right" is at least 90% a creation of the MSM. I'm not worried about you and your troops going on a terrorist rampage and killing thousands of innocents. This idea is a MSM created bogey man used to scare the populace. Now this is because you are a tiny sect, a tiny slice of a tiny slice. If you and your compadres had the power and influence that the totalitarian woke leftists are wielding, then I would be worried.

    On the other hand the woke totalitarians are grinding us into the ground. I fear what the consequences are going to be for the U. S.

    I don't accept the political ideology of your side or the woke side, but they are the ones killing America right now, not you. White supremacy or separation would destroy America just as surely as the woke are trying to do now.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom, @dfordoom

    I don’t accept the political ideology of your side or the woke side, but they are the ones killing America right now, not you.

    Yes, I agree with that.

    In fact the Woke are killing the whole western world.

  85. @dfordoom
    @iffen


    I have told you before that IMO the “Alt-Right” is at least 90% a creation of the MSM.
     
    And it's likely that it includes quite a few FBI agents provocateurs. Would the FBI do something like that? You bet they would. It would be more surprising if there weren't considerable numbers of informers and agents provocateurs.

    Replies: @iffen, @V. K. Ovelund

    Would the FBI do something like that? You bet they would.

    I commented earlier in another section that increasingly the resources of the intelligence and police agencies are being used to “identify” and then destroy individuals and groups deemed to be a threat to the government in power because those individuals and groups are demanding transparency and accountability. (Sometimes, just groups or individuals that refuse to accept and parrot the party line are targeted). It is a major hallmark of a government that fears its own citizens because it does not have their support and does not have popular consent from significant portions of those citizens. They no longer look to protecting the country from external threats, but spend their time and resources searching for and destroying threats to the maintenance of their power.

    • Agree: dfordoom
  86. @dfordoom
    @iffen


    I have told you before that IMO the “Alt-Right” is at least 90% a creation of the MSM.
     
    And it's likely that it includes quite a few FBI agents provocateurs. Would the FBI do something like that? You bet they would. It would be more surprising if there weren't considerable numbers of informers and agents provocateurs.

    Replies: @iffen, @V. K. Ovelund

    I have told you before that IMO the “Alt-Right” is at least 90% a creation of the MSM.

    The caricature you believe to be the Alt-Right is at least 90% a creation of the MSM.

    And it’s likely that it includes quite a few FBI agents provocateurs.

    It didn’t, but I believe that it presently, probably does.

    Would the FBI do something like that? You bet they would. It would be more surprising if there weren’t considerable numbers of informers and agents provocateurs.

    It had never occurred to me to wish that the FBI be disbanded and abolished, but I wish that now. I am unaware of anything the FBI does that makes my and my family’s lives better.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    It had never occurred to me to wish that the FBI be disbanded and abolished, but I wish that now. I am unaware of anything the FBI does that makes my and my family’s lives better.
     
    I agree with you on that. I think all the secret police/intelligence agencies need to be disbanded. Maybe they were necessary in the Cold War. They're not necessary now. They're like NATO. Maybe it once served a useful purpose but today it's a menace.

    I feel the same way about the Australian secret police/intelligence agencies (ASIO and ASIS). They should be abolished. Another major priority should be abolishing the Five Eyes Alliance.

    We have all the apparatus of the Cold War still in place and now it's not being used to defend us from oppression, it's being used to oppress us.
  87. @dfordoom
    @Wency


    Social conservatism needs to be enforced, for the good of all, or it breaks down.
     
    The problem is that most people don't want social conservatism. They don't want the madness that we have today either. They want something in the middle. Most people want some form of monogamy although they don't necessarily see formal marriage as a requirement. Most people want something resembling the nuclear family.

    Most people don't want Drag Queen Story Hour and they don't want bearded men in frocks sharing locker rooms with their daughters. On the other hand they don't want homosexuals to be persecuted.

    Most people don't want to spend their lives getting stoned but they're also increasingly suspicious of Health Nazis who want to tell us what we're allowed to do with our own bodies.

    Most people don't want the government to act as a moral policeman.

    I'm sceptical about the chances of imposing social conservatism, or at least any kind of extreme social conservatism. And I don't think there's any chance at all of imposing Christian moral values on increasingly secular western societies. The best that conservative Christians can hope for is to be allowed to follow their own values but imposing those values on non-Christians is just a non-starter.

    Most people want to return to the 1980s, not the 1880s.

    Replies: @Wency

    Yeah, I don’t think you can impose those things either, at least in the West. In places that aren’t the West, you can still do what Russia is doing. Social liberalism is proving to be the most slippery of slippery slopes, and the 1980s isn’t a stable position — it’s just a single point in time on that steep and slippery slope.

    Once you abandon the Schelling point of persecuting homosexuality such that it remains in the shadows, social conservatism has no more Schelling points remaining and it’s only ever 10-15 years away from surrender in the face of whatever zany scheme social liberalism cooks up next.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Wency


    Once you abandon the Schelling point of persecuting homosexuality such that it remains in the shadows, social conservatism has no more Schelling points remaining and it’s only ever 10-15 years away from surrender in the face of whatever zany scheme social liberalism cooks up next.
     
    That's possible, but you have to remember that people did not spontaneously decide to go further down the slippery slope. Most people in the 80s were quite content with the balance between social liberalism and social conservatism at that time.

    The rise of political correctness and the aggressive push towards more extreme social liberalism that both took off in the 90s were top-down social revolutions. And they were not necessarily inevitable. They were agendas that were pushed very very hard by the media and by Woke Capital, and by powerful elites and by academia. They was also the problem of corrupt opportunistic politicians.

    If you want to create a stable social situation you need to keep those elements - academia, the media and Woke Capital - under some sort of control. I'm not saying that would be easy to do but it's something we need to figure out how to do. If we don't figure out how to do it we're going to go even further down the slippery slope. If we do find a way to do it then it might be possible to create a stable balance between social liberalism and social conservatism.
  88. For some reason, Boomers get blamed for the 1965 Immigration Act. The oldest Boomer was 19 when it passed, the youngest, one. Boomers couldn’t even vote at that point.

    Assuming the average age of Congress was 45 then, most of the Congress was born 1915 to 1935. Not a Boomer in sight.

    I think a lot of Boomer hate is sheer jealousy that we got to live through the best 20 years in human history, 1945-1965 and did nothing to deserve it. I can’t blame the youth for that but still, look within. Did they choose to be born when and where they were born?

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Paperback Writer

    There's a lot to commend that.

    On the other hand, boomers were the last generation that realistically had the ability to stop things from spinning out of control. They didn't do that.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  89. @Wency
    @dfordoom

    Yeah, I don't think you can impose those things either, at least in the West. In places that aren't the West, you can still do what Russia is doing. Social liberalism is proving to be the most slippery of slippery slopes, and the 1980s isn't a stable position -- it's just a single point in time on that steep and slippery slope.

    Once you abandon the Schelling point of persecuting homosexuality such that it remains in the shadows, social conservatism has no more Schelling points remaining and it's only ever 10-15 years away from surrender in the face of whatever zany scheme social liberalism cooks up next.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Once you abandon the Schelling point of persecuting homosexuality such that it remains in the shadows, social conservatism has no more Schelling points remaining and it’s only ever 10-15 years away from surrender in the face of whatever zany scheme social liberalism cooks up next.

    That’s possible, but you have to remember that people did not spontaneously decide to go further down the slippery slope. Most people in the 80s were quite content with the balance between social liberalism and social conservatism at that time.

    The rise of political correctness and the aggressive push towards more extreme social liberalism that both took off in the 90s were top-down social revolutions. And they were not necessarily inevitable. They were agendas that were pushed very very hard by the media and by Woke Capital, and by powerful elites and by academia. They was also the problem of corrupt opportunistic politicians.

    If you want to create a stable social situation you need to keep those elements – academia, the media and Woke Capital – under some sort of control. I’m not saying that would be easy to do but it’s something we need to figure out how to do. If we don’t figure out how to do it we’re going to go even further down the slippery slope. If we do find a way to do it then it might be possible to create a stable balance between social liberalism and social conservatism.

  90. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom

    @iffen:


    I have told you before that IMO the “Alt-Right” is at least 90% a creation of the MSM.
     
    The caricature you believe to be the Alt-Right is at least 90% a creation of the MSM.

    @dfordoom:


    And it’s likely that it includes quite a few FBI agents provocateurs.
     
    It didn't, but I believe that it presently, probably does.

    Would the FBI do something like that? You bet they would. It would be more surprising if there weren’t considerable numbers of informers and agents provocateurs.
     
    It had never occurred to me to wish that the FBI be disbanded and abolished, but I wish that now. I am unaware of anything the FBI does that makes my and my family's lives better.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    It had never occurred to me to wish that the FBI be disbanded and abolished, but I wish that now. I am unaware of anything the FBI does that makes my and my family’s lives better.

    I agree with you on that. I think all the secret police/intelligence agencies need to be disbanded. Maybe they were necessary in the Cold War. They’re not necessary now. They’re like NATO. Maybe it once served a useful purpose but today it’s a menace.

    I feel the same way about the Australian secret police/intelligence agencies (ASIO and ASIS). They should be abolished. Another major priority should be abolishing the Five Eyes Alliance.

    We have all the apparatus of the Cold War still in place and now it’s not being used to defend us from oppression, it’s being used to oppress us.

  91. @RSDB

    A good rule of thumb is if the UR commentariat balks at it, it has a snowball’s chance in hell of selling to the broader public.
     
    Why is that a rule? The UR commentariat balks at all kinds of things that are popular with the general public.

    Replies: @Curle, @Audacious Epigone

    Balks at it as being too outside the Overton Window, that is. There are of course plenty of things inside that window that the UR commentariat balks at!

  92. @Barack Obama's secret Unz account

    Although most Americans are repelled by the hard racist stuff (“It’s always the Jews!” or “white ethno-state!”), they are in the main sympathetic to much of what dissident rightists advocate (dismantling affirmative action, limiting immigration, critiquing and combating anti-white racism, reversing the valorization of blacks – the list goes on).
     
    Soft right sells, hard right doesn't. But the problem is that soft right is so easily made into hard right. First "dismantling affirmative action, limiting immigration, critiquing and combating anti-white racism, reversing the valorization of blacks" - then, the ovens! There's a fairly straightforward slippery slope argument at play. How do you argue against that?

    Replies: @Rosie, @Audacious Epigone

    The troll tag is left affectionately.

  93. @Rosie
    @Barack Obama's secret Unz account


    Soft right sells, hard right doesn’t. But the problem is that soft right is so easily made into hard right.
     
    Au contraire. The problem with soft right is that it so easily into the softer right, and from there into a shadow of the Left.

    The civnats offer nothing but more of the same failed policies of the past. You know the drill. We advocate for policies that are good for White people without mentioning White people. The controlled media call us "racist." We deny it, which further reinforces the narrative that "racism" is evil (but only when White people do it. The Leftist establishment demands that we support policies that are bad for White people to prove our claims that we're not "racist." Thus backed into a corner, we surrender.

    The civnats have no solution for this problem.

    Replies: @iffen, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Audacious Epigone

    Has there been an upapologetically white movement that isn’t white nationalist? It seems like what you present is a false dichotomy in terms of what is possible albeit not necessarily in terms of what has come before.

    I suppose the America First movement is a novel attempt to fill that void. They’re pro-white but not anti-anyone else, at least not categorically so. They have many non-whites who are part of the movement. The corporate media doesn’t really know how to respond to this, so it ignores that and instead tries to portray them as exclusionary white nationalists/supremacists/[insert insult].

  94. @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    Maybe it’s my 1% Bantu ancestry that is throwing things off.
     
    So you took one of those genetic ancestry tests, did you?

    I cannot quite bring myself to do it. Maybe filing my genes in a database worries me. Or maybe it's that I'd finally have to admit that, not only are you and I distant cousins, but worse: we share the same Bantu forefather.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @iffen, @Audacious Epigone

    If you had a Bantu ancestor, would that be upsetting? No one should apologize for who their ancestors are. Those ancestors are the reason you’re here!

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Audacious Epigone


    If you had a Bantu ancestor, would that be upsetting?
     
    No, it would not.

    Ancestry matters a great deal, but people have all kinds of ancestors. One has one's own ancestors. Then one marries a woman who her own ancestors, and then one's children marry, too. It's not a mathematical theorem: it's just life.

    However, most whites do not have Bantu ancestors. If most whites did, then they would be Bantu rather than white.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  95. @Dissident

    dfordoom on how Boomers didn’t start the fire, it was always burning since at least as long as they were turning through childhood:
     
    We didn't start the fire

    We didn't start the fire
    It was always burning
    Since the world's been turning
    We didn't start the fire
    No, we didn't light it
    But we tried to fight it
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDPnsTRAvIM

    Oh, wait, that was intentional, wasn't it?

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    Haha, yes it was.

    • Replies: @Dissident
    @Audacious Epigone

    I wonder how many under a certain age got the reference (to the Billy Joel song).

  96. @Paperback Writer
    For some reason, Boomers get blamed for the 1965 Immigration Act. The oldest Boomer was 19 when it passed, the youngest, one. Boomers couldn't even vote at that point.

    Assuming the average age of Congress was 45 then, most of the Congress was born 1915 to 1935. Not a Boomer in sight.

    I think a lot of Boomer hate is sheer jealousy that we got to live through the best 20 years in human history, 1945-1965 and did nothing to deserve it. I can't blame the youth for that but still, look within. Did they choose to be born when and where they were born?

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    There’s a lot to commend that.

    On the other hand, boomers were the last generation that realistically had the ability to stop things from spinning out of control. They didn’t do that.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Audacious Epigone


    On the other hand, boomers were the last generation that realistically had the ability to stop things from spinning out of control. They didn’t do that.

     

    Things didn't start spinning out of control until the 90s. GenX could have stopped that from happening. They didn’t do that.

    And things didn't start really getting bad until Millennials started to qualify for the vote in large numbers.

    You can argue that liberalism started to become crazy in the late 50s, so you can therefore argue that the Silent Generation was the last generation that realistically had the ability to stop things from spinning out of control.

    See, you can blame any generation you like for things going wrong. Because what has gone wrong has been a very slow very gradual process and you can pick any arbitrary date you like after 1945 as the time when we passed the point of no return.
  97. @Audacious Epigone
    @V. K. Ovelund

    If you had a Bantu ancestor, would that be upsetting? No one should apologize for who their ancestors are. Those ancestors are the reason you're here!

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    If you had a Bantu ancestor, would that be upsetting?

    No, it would not.

    Ancestry matters a great deal, but people have all kinds of ancestors. One has one’s own ancestors. Then one marries a woman who her own ancestors, and then one’s children marry, too. It’s not a mathematical theorem: it’s just life.

    However, most whites do not have Bantu ancestors. If most whites did, then they would be Bantu rather than white.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @V. K. Ovelund


    However, most whites do not have Bantu ancestors. If most whites did, then they would be Bantu rather than white.
     
    One drop rule is unscientific.
  98. @Audacious Epigone
    @Paperback Writer

    There's a lot to commend that.

    On the other hand, boomers were the last generation that realistically had the ability to stop things from spinning out of control. They didn't do that.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    On the other hand, boomers were the last generation that realistically had the ability to stop things from spinning out of control. They didn’t do that.

    Things didn’t start spinning out of control until the 90s. GenX could have stopped that from happening. They didn’t do that.

    And things didn’t start really getting bad until Millennials started to qualify for the vote in large numbers.

    You can argue that liberalism started to become crazy in the late 50s, so you can therefore argue that the Silent Generation was the last generation that realistically had the ability to stop things from spinning out of control.

    See, you can blame any generation you like for things going wrong. Because what has gone wrong has been a very slow very gradual process and you can pick any arbitrary date you like after 1945 as the time when we passed the point of no return.

  99. @Audacious Epigone
    @Dissident

    Haha, yes it was.

    Replies: @Dissident

    I wonder how many under a certain age got the reference (to the Billy Joel song).

  100. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Audacious Epigone


    If you had a Bantu ancestor, would that be upsetting?
     
    No, it would not.

    Ancestry matters a great deal, but people have all kinds of ancestors. One has one's own ancestors. Then one marries a woman who her own ancestors, and then one's children marry, too. It's not a mathematical theorem: it's just life.

    However, most whites do not have Bantu ancestors. If most whites did, then they would be Bantu rather than white.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    However, most whites do not have Bantu ancestors. If most whites did, then they would be Bantu rather than white.

    One drop rule is unscientific.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS