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
Warren's Womxn
🔊 Listen RSS
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
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

While Pete Buttigieg has managed to eat into some of Elizabeth Warren’s well-heeled white support, she has managed to finally begin gaining a foothold among blacks. In the latest YouGov survey, Warren is in second, at 17% support, among black primary voters. Biden remains far out in front, at 42%, but his advantage does appear to be starting to modestly narrow. If the last two Democrat presidential contests are any guide, gaining black support is crucial to securing the nomination. Warren’s team seems to understand that:

It might feel absurd to assess a tweet like this as tactically effective, but it is. The white support Warren risks losing to Buttigieg is the white support that likes direct appeals to blacks such as this one. That Woke word salad just means “black women”–but naming all the different varieties of black women, er, black womxn, is catnip for these affluent, highly-educated older white leftists. And courting blacks directly is something blacks like. That the tweet draws criticism from the center and the right is a feature rather than a bug for the two constituencies Warren is courting here.

While it may seem as though Warren voters’ second choice would be Bernie Sanders and vice-ver-sa, there is scant polling evidence to support as much. The predominant reason is due to the age of each candidate’s supporters. Sanders’ support comes almost exclusively from young voters:

He gets clobbered among those aged 45 and older:

Older voters are far more electorally reliable. It’s another reason I’ve never thought Sanders has had a chance.

On the other hand, younger voters are more likely to go down with the ship than take life boats over to the next most acceptable boat that floats. Sanders has a lot of power as a potential a kingmaker. I’ve also been skeptical of Warren’s chances, but a Sanders’ endorsement of her down the stretch could be decisive.

 
• Category: Culture/Society • Tags: Election 2020 
Hide 119 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. I know this interests you like a horse race or something, A.E., but they are all a bunch of PC idiot Socialists. I wish they could all lose… WAIT, THEY CAN!

    • Replies: @Hail
  2. songbird says:

    It is kind of funny that the old fogy Sanders has the youth vote – not that it is a charismatic crowd.

    • Replies: @SFG
    , @Jay Fink
    , @Bill Jones
  3. mm, a lot of older white liberals are starting to blanch pretty hard at the trans mania…especially older feminists.

    the TERF movement is almost exclusively older liberal white women.

    do agree that this is aimed at signalling to Petey Butts voters tho…although i wonder to what extent those voters actually believe in the value of transrights versus knowing it is Correct Opinion to say so.

    i work with some very prominent, very woke Bay Area tech companies–the sort that start every slide deck with “(presenter name) pronouns he/him”–and even the very progressive young people are starting to roll their eyes. they do have a “what’s the matter with indulging them? no sweat off my back” attitude, but it isnt a “this is a genuine issue of justice” belief.

  4. @Big Dick Bandit

    That’s modestly encouraging to hear.

    Otoh, my guess is the TERF movement is going to get steamrolled. They’re good at hitting chivalrous middle American provider males who don’t hit back. But the transexuals hit back hard, and it is now common to hear the far left refer to as TERFs as “white supremacists”.

    • Agree: fish, Kevin O'Keeffe
    • Replies: @dfordoom
  5. SFG says:
    @songbird

    They’re too young to remember what socialism actually looked like.

    Well, I guess there’s Venezuela.

    I suspect if push comes to shove Sanders will endorse Warren–they’ve had a nonaggression pact for a while.

    • Replies: @By-tor
    , @Kevin O'Keeffe
  6. SafeNow says:

    “ what socialism actually looked like”

    An old joke described what socialism looked in Cuba. Supposedly people muttered discreetly: “Cuba has three miracles and three problems. The three miracles are advances in education, sports, and health care. The three problems are breakfast, lunch, and dinner.”

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  7. gman says:

    “I’ve also been skeptical of Warren’s chances, but a Sanders’ endorsement of her down the stretch could be decisive”

    I kind of doubt Bernie Sanders would drop out and endorse EW. I think he will play it out until the end. He has no incentive not to. The primaries are not winner take all. He also has tons of money. He stayed in long after it became obvious HRC would win (in part because he kept on getting donations)

    My guess right now is either Warren wins the nomination outright or it goes contested. I don’t see any other candidate getting 50%+ of the vote.

    Looking back 6 months, here’s what I’ve learned
    -I never would have guessed the “unbearable whiteness” of the top 4 candidates
    -It really does help to have a loyal base (that’s why Yang and Tulsi, I would argue may end up doing better than Cory/Kamala)

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Thomm
  8. @SafeNow

    It would be great is someone would ask any of the Democratic candidates what the average hourly wage is in Cuba these days compared to China.

    Probably they wouldn’t know–but I believe that the average working stiff in a China factory makes _ten_ _times_ the wages of their Cuban counterparts.

    There is nothing more disgusting than rich white people (like Bernie) praising the Cuban government while ignoring the lives of real people that actually live and work there.

  9. anon[234] • Disclaimer says:

    It is a surprise to me that Buttigieg does so poorly with Millennials and younger voters.

    I wonder how many Hillary! supporters have already switched to Warren, and how many more are thinking about it.

    the TERF movement is almost exclusively older liberal white women.

    On that issue, the Hillary! pantsuit brigade can only fade. “Trans is the new gay, obviously, BIGOT!”

  10. Hail says: • Website
    @Achmed E. Newman

    The widely-anticipated (?) Trump second-term Amnesty could well be much worse than a moderate D-teamer winning.

    I wish they could all lose… WAIT, THEY CAN!

    If the above comes to pass, we all lose.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  11. Thomm says:
    @gman

    I kind of doubt Bernie Sanders would drop out and endorse EW. I think he will play it out until the end. He has no incentive not to. The primaries are not winner take all. He also has tons of money. He stayed in long after it became obvious HRC would win (in part because he kept on getting donations)

    Sanders is also popular among the WNs due to his combination of Nationalism + Leftism.

    • Disagree: Hail
  12. Thomm says:

    Warren is the only person who can win the nomination. Biden is too old.

    Even Warren would be the oldest person ever to take office if she were to become President. Only by a year, but still.

  13. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Audacious Epigone

    Otoh, my guess is the TERF movement is going to get steamrolled. They’re good at hitting chivalrous middle American provider males who don’t hit back. But the transexuals hit back hard, and it is now common to hear the far left refer to as TERFs as “white supremacists”.

    The virulence of the hate between the TERFs and the trannies is extraordinary. Kind of understandable though. If there’s no such thing as women then feminism is over.

    The TERFs are definitely going to get crushed. In fact they may well get purged from the Coalition of the Fringes altogether.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    , @El Dato
  14. @dfordoom

    That would be great.  There are a lot more paleo-feminists than trannies.  Anything that knocks off part of the left’s coalition of the fringes is a good thing.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  15. After years of conditiong by American TV, I’d wager American voters are cooler with a gay guy than with the annoying school marm.

  16. El Dato says:
    @dfordoom

    Eagerly awaiting YouTube videos of TERFs getting beaten up mercilessly by “womxn”.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  17. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Mr. Rational

    That would be great. There are a lot more paleo-feminists than trannies. Anything that knocks off part of the left’s coalition of the fringes is a good thing.

    And perhaps more importantly, I suspect that those old school feminists are among the most politically reliable members of that coalition – they’re the sorts of people who will always turn up to vote on election day.

    They’re also likely to be very reliable in turning up to vote in the primaries – which means they’re a constituency that Warren probably can’t afford to lose. If I were in her place and had to choose between throwing the TERFs or the trannies under the bus then the TERFS would not be the ones I’d choose to jettison.

    • Replies: @Kevin O'Keeffe
  18. Nodwink says:

    Sanders is popular with younger voters because Millennials have been stiffed by the modern economy. Biden’s support comes from affluent Boomers who want Gropey Joe to sit in the White House for four years, twiddling his thumbs.

    Those rich, white winemoms are just pretending they love blacks. I doubt they’d have one in their house.

  19. I don’t know any “womxn,” Black or otherwise.

  20. Arclight says:

    The question for the eventual Democratic nominee is a) how many white suburban women can you pick off, and b) how many black voters turn out for the general election?

    I think the latter might be Warren’s Achilles heel, particularly with black men. Hillary only got 85% of the black male vote and I think if Warren is the nominee not only does overall black voter turnout go down, but black men will vote for her at even lower levels than they did for Hillary, when at least showing up could be thought of as a continuation of the Obama legacy.

    She could potentially do well with white suburban women, but if the GOP has any brains they will hammer her for all the ways her woke white lady positions would impact the children of suburban moms – say like in ‘desegregating’ public schools or redirecting local taxes to urban schools, or by overriding local zoning so that developers can put high density affordable housing right next to your brand new neighborhood you paid a premium to live in because of the school district and low crime. The media will portray this as racist, but they’re going to call Trump and all Republicans racist anyway.

    There are a lot of woke white women that talk a good game, but if you plopped a new apartment complex in their neighborhood and their suburban school suddenly had a much bigger lower income diverse population, they’d move away as soon as they could. The right ought to fund a PAC that highlights all the diversity-enhancing stuff Warren proposes as though it’s a good thing and run commercials non-stop in suburban markets. She can protest it’s being funded by the opposition but should couldn’t deny it was inaccurate.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  21. @Arclight

    The right ought to fund a PAC that highlights all the diversity-enhancing stuff Warren proposes as though it’s a good thing and run commercials non-stop in suburban markets. She can protest it’s being funded by the opposition but should couldn’t deny it was inaccurate.

    This is a variation on the Nixon “southern strategy”.

    It was accused of being racist.

    It was racist.

    It spoke the truth.

    And–it helped the Republicans take over every southern state for decades (most to this day).

    We are close to turning a corner–where “respectable” white people finally say–“yes, I am racist, and proud of it” and stop making stupid excuses.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    , @dfordoom
  22. If the last two Democrat presidential contests are any guide, gaining black support is crucial to securing the nomination.

    The two political strategies that dare not speak their name are the GERMAN STRATEGY and the AUNT JEMIMA STRATEGY.

    We must be aristocratic in our ability to name things in a precise manner without concerning ourselves too, too much with the politically correct reactions of peasants uncomfortable with exactness and good old fashioned comedic fun.

    I brought up the AUNT JEMIMA STRATEGY in a conversation I had with Sir Randolph Nettleby and he laughed his ass off and spilled his gin and tonic. Nettleby — that’s what I call him — said the Stalinist skunks who enforce the politically correct strictures in the corporate media would never allow the AUNT JEMIMA STRATEGY appellation to be used to describe the importance of the Black lady church voters in the Democrat Party presidential nomination no matter how apt or precise the term.

    This is how I briefly described the AUNT JEMIMA STRATEGY in 2017:

    White Democrats happy to live a Black-free life in Iowa and New Hampshire voted for Bernie Sanders in droves. Hillary Clinton happily lives a Black-free life in the mostly White town of Chappaqua, New York. Hillary always knew she could snuff out the campaign of Bernie Sanders by getting the Black ladies in the South to hit Bernie over the head with an electoral handbag.

    A brief description of the GERMAN STRATEGY from September of 2019:

    The GERMAN STRATEGY is to win the votes of German Americans in the Great Lakes states in combination with the votes of Anglo-Celts in the Southern states. Trumpy put the cherry on top of the GERMAN STRATEGY by winning Florida with the votes of Anglo-Celts in the Northern portion of Florida in combination with the votes of the snowbirds from the Great Lakes states and the Northeast.

    Tweets from 2015:

  23. I wrote this in 2018 about Hillary Clinton and the AUNT JEMIMA STRATEGY:

    Black Lady Voters carried baby boomer Hillary Clinton to victory over Vermont Jew geezer Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democrat Party presidential primaries. A political expert who predicted Hillary’s plot coined the term “Aunt Jemima Strategy” to describe how Hillary Clinton was going to defeat Bernie Sanders in the states where Black Lady Voters are strong.

    BLACK LADY VOTERS!

    WHITE LADY VOTERS carried Trump to victory over Hillary Clinton in the presidential election of 2016.

    Hillary Clinton, while taking big swigs of box wine, always knew that she would eviscerate Bernie Sanders in the states where Black Lady Voters hold sway. Perhaps Hillary Clinton, while bombed on box wine, made it a point to sing Negro spirituals such as “Swing Low Sweet Chariot” while thinking of all her Black Lady Voters who would do battle against the Bernie Bros.

    Swing low, sweet chariot
    Aunt Jemima Strategy come for to carry me home

    Tweet from 2015:

  24. @Hail

    Sorry to have to point this out, Hail, but we all lose anyway. No matter who we vote for in any election, the government always wins. There is no solution that even remotely involves the electoral process.

    • Disagree: iffen
    • Replies: @dfordoom
  25. @Justvisiting

    “We are close to turning a corner–where “respectable” white people finally say–“yes, I am racist, and proud of it” and stop making stupid excuses.”

    Until that time, I’ll just keep replying to them, “Kiss my ass.” That phrase has been working for me for a long time now. When the respectable people join me, they’ll be welcome.

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
  26. dfordoom says: • Website
    @El Dato

    Eagerly awaiting YouTube videos of TERFs getting beaten up mercilessly by “womxn”.

    It’s already happening. There have been several cases of TERFs being brutalised by enraged trannies.

    The TERFs are finding out that in this Cultural Revolution they’re on the wrong side of history.

    It’s OK to punch Nazis and increasingly it seems that it’s OK for men in frocks to punch women.

    Isn’t western civilisation awesome?

    • Replies: @iffen
  27. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Justvisiting

    We are close to turning a corner–where “respectable” white people finally say–“yes, I am racist, and proud of it” and stop making stupid excuses.

    You really think so? I mean have you seen any actual sign of this happening outside of alt-right echo chambers? Sounds a bit like wishful thinking.

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
  28. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Twodees Partain

    There is no solution that even remotely involves the electoral process.

    There’s no viable solution outside of the electoral process. Unless you have magical powers and can somehow change the entire culture without first gaining some degree of political power. To change things you need to either win some hearts and minds or win over part of the elite. So far the nationalists/dissident rightists have been awesomely unsuccessful at doing either of those things. And they seem to be getting steadily more unsuccessful.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    , @Rosie
  29. Muggles says:

    Here’s a thought: none of the Dems contesting for the nomination can possibly win. Nor any of the late entrants.

    Why? Because at the end of the day they all dislike each other and the groups they each represent. Feminists dislike men (and most aren’t crazy about male gays either). Racial minorities generally dislike gays and feminist women. Few outside of the very liberal Dem ranks trust anyone from New York or the NE (unless they are non Dems). And so on.

    Now sure, every other GOP faction/leader hated Trump in 2016. He publicly ridiculed most of their candidates. None of these candidates actually endorsed Trump (well a few like Cruz did at the end). Yet Trump not only won the GOP nomination but also the general election. Why?

    Because Trump appealed to enough voters that factions/other candidates didn’t really matter. Nor did the lack of “party regulars” support hurt him. So what about the Dems this time?

    None of the current bunch has wide public appeal. Most are unknown and none appeal very much to actual casual “independents.” None have Trump’s prior media exposure or national image prior to 2016. Sure, there are voters who will vote automatically against Trump. But few will regard anyone the Dems as similar in popular awareness. They are nobodies and the more you see/hear from them, the worse they seem. Liars and fakers. Warren can’t manage to talk about her bio without lying numerous times about basic stories she tells to make herself seem virtuous.

    So the “devil you already know”? Or some new socialist/liar devil, who manages to win the Dem nomination because their minority gender/ethnic/racial/sexual preference faction scrapes together a temporary convention plurality? We shall see.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  30. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Muggles

    Here’s a thought: none of the Dems contesting for the nomination can possibly win. Nor any of the late entrants.

    Why? Because at the end of the day they all dislike each other and the groups they each represent.

    But all of those groups are united by their loathing for Republicans. Not one of those groups has any reason to jump ship and join the Nasty Party. The problem for the Republicans is that they really are greedy selfish treacherous and vicious. The only thing the Republicans will ever offer is tax cuts for the rich. Trump’s only solid achievement has been – tax cuts for the rich.

    Trump won because Rust Belt voters thought that he would bring back manufacturing jobs. That’s the only reason he won. The only constituency up for grabs is the working class and they (quite rightly) will never ever trust any other Republican and they may not even trust Trump this time.

    • Replies: @Jay Fink
  31. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    The TERFs are finding out that in this Cultural Revolution they’re on the wrong side of history.

    I predict that the TERFs will win this fight as they will be joined by women who will not stand for their sports being taken over by “men”.

    I also predict that the multiplying numbers of people adopting the homeless lifestyle will bring down some blue cities and states.

  32. @dfordoom

    “There’s no viable solution outside of the electoral process.”

    That’s a comforting delusion for you and those who share it. The electoral process in the US is tightly controlled by a single party pretending to be two parties. Ballot access is automatic for that “two” party duopoly, while upstart parties are subjected to onerous requirements for getting candidates on the ballot, and in most cases that process must be started over from scratch with each new election cycle.

    The news media are also tightly controlled and upstarts are simply ignored in the media in election coverage. If that isn’t bad enough, the votes are processed through electronic voting machines which produce unreviewable totals. Results are announced far in advance of actual vote counts via “exit polling”. That is a blatant tip off that the announced results are fraudulent.

    If you don’t already know this, then you’re too uninformed to even be voting in the first place. If you do already know this, you’re trying to gull others into believing in the myth of the sacrosanct US electoral process. I can tell that you aren’t stupid, so I have to assume that you’re pushing disinformation here. Otherwise, why would a socialist even bother commenting here, especially when you obviously don’t even read the articles?

  33. @iffen

    I have to ask; what is a TERF? I’m not up on all the latest acronyms.

  34. Jay Fink says:
    @songbird

    A big part of it is that he is a Socialist just like they are. Also, millennials don’t seem as biased against older people as previous generations were. A lot of them listen to old music and think it’s better than anything current.

  35. Jay Fink says:
    @dfordoom

    They are not into cultural liberalism either. They are not woke. I could see voter turnout declining in the rust belt as neither party has anything to offer them. For the GOP to survive they will eventually have to become the populist party of Trump’s 2016 campaign…not just talk to win votes but in actual governing.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  36. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Twodees Partain

    “There’s no viable solution outside of the electoral process.”

    That’s a comforting delusion for you and those who share it

    I think you’ve missed my point. I wasn’t saying that solutions involving the electoral process were even remotely likely. I was just saying that solutions that do not involve the electoral process are even less likely. There ain’t nothing comforting about it. But I don’t trust delusions of any variety.

  37. Dumbo says:

    This is all theater.
    Neither Warren nor Buttgig have any chance in hell of becoming president.
    And if they do, then may God have mercy on America, because it’s dead.

  38. iffen says:
    @Twodees Partain

    TERFs are feminists who reject trannies (men claiming to be women) as women. Although it started and has its main focus among radical feminists and lesbians, I have no doubt that it will become standard with most feminists and most women. Women are not going to stand by and let their girls be excluded from softball, basketball, and other sports by men claiming to be women. If I am not mistaken, some of the world olympic governing bodies are already taking steps to exclude men from womens’ sports.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    , @Haha
  39. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Jay Fink

    They are not into cultural liberalism either. They are not woke. I could see voter turnout declining in the rust belt as neither party has anything to offer them.

    I agree. I think that’s highly likely. I imagine they’re rapidly coming to the conclusion that both parties are equally bad. Voting for Trump was giving the Republicans one last chance to behave decently. If given the opportunity they’d vote for Bernie, thus giving the Democrats one last chance to behave decently. If they don’t get the opportunity to vote for Bernie then they’re probably done with the political process.

    For the GOP to survive they will eventually have to become the populist party of Trump’s 2016 campaign…not just talk to win votes but in actual governing.

    The GOP cannot and will not ever do that. They hate, fear and despise the have-nots too much. They’ve made their choice, to be the Party of Greed, and they’re not going to change. My prediction is that in 2024 we’ll see a Republican candidate running on a new and excitingly radical platform – tax cuts for the rich.

    • Replies: @Jay Fink
  40. Jay Fink says:
    @dfordoom

    If tax cuts for the rich is all the Republicans have to offer there will be room for a strong independent candidate in 2024.

  41. @dfordoom

    Whites are more cucked on race than ever lol.

    There is, however, alot of dry kindling lying on the ground. It’s just waiting for a strong leader to come by and spark it.

    SO while whites are all pozzed on race, I believe that they can quickly turn the corner, if they continue to ask simple questions, like Mr. Fuentes’ followers have been doing. Some whites can turn the racial corner pretty easily, they are just obsessed with respectability.

    That’s why the uniparty is so desperate to pour water on this kindling before anything serious erupts…. and let me tell you there is alot of wood to burn if it did happen to spark…

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  42. @Twodees Partain

    OK, Boomer.

    TERF stands for Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist.

  43. @Twodees Partain

    Until that time, I’ll just keep replying to them, “Kiss my ass.”

    This works for me, too. I don’t say “Kiss my ass”, I just kind of give the accuser a blank stare. Like “yeah, and?” mixed with “I don’t care”. Then I continue my argument.

    The general problem with debates is that most right wingers will get so defensive and angry when called racist. “I’M NOT RACIST! I [support X non whites in Y way]. DEMS R REAL RACITS” and then the whole debate is derailed from the topic at hand, to the right winger simply defending himself against charges of racism, while simultaneously conceding many points to the other side (especially on race).

    In-group preference is natural and normal. Other groups are currently threatening my own group and my own homeland. Therefore, I will say what needs to be said, without apology. They can “kiss my ass” if they don’t like it.

  44. @iffen

    Thanks. I guess those acronyms help when posting from a phone. Babylon Bee has had some fun with the subject of men competing in women’s sports. It seems pretty weird to me that anyone would want to allow men to enter events for women. If the point is just to cause conflict, they are certainly accomplishing that.

  45. anon[216] • Disclaimer says:
    @iffen

    I predict that the TERFs will win this fight as they will be joined by women who will not stand for their sports being taken over by “men”.

    Doubtful. Most women have little interest in sports. That’s why Title IX is such a wrecking ball vis a vis men’s sports. If trans were to succeed in getting the attention of men, then watch the claws come out. That’s even more doubtful, though.

  46. @LoutishAngloQuebecker

    The Uniparty knows that nothing less than the survival of both political parties is at stake.

    Political parties are _very robust, but they will not last forever…

  47. @songbird

    Sanders and the youth vote are a match made in heaven:

    He has forgotten everything that they have never known.

  48. Rosie says:
    @dfordoom

    Unless you have magical powers and can somehow change the entire culture without first gaining some degree of political power.

    Twodees is right. The marionettes in public office are irrelevant.

    What would happen if a White nationalist megabillionaire bought a news network?

    I say everything changes overnight, or very close to it.

  49. @Twodees Partain

    dfordoom appears to be a black-pilling troll.

    Not exactly a subtle one, though.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  50. @Twodees Partain

    When you come across one of these terms, Urban Dictionary is your friend:

    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=TERF

    Also look at SWERF while you’re at it.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    , @Anon
  51. Haha says:
    @iffen

    “governing bodies are already taking steps to exclude men from womens’ sports”

    Nah, the governing bodies are trying to decide how many genders need to be provided for. Remember, the wisdom of our age decrees that gender is a fluid and flexible concept. Ain’t no such thing as men and women. Just as our universities and media have been taken over by wokes, so will sports be.

    • Agree: Twodees Partain
  52. @Big Dick Bandit

    This is a video that the Illinois Department of Transportation Highway Maintainer Division has included in its orientation for new hires. No, I’m not joking:

    • Replies: @Big Dick Bandit
  53. @Twodees Partain

    My guess is he is a college aged white guy still living at home. His tone suggests to me that he has just about no knowledge of the real working world and has no 1st hand experience working and living among “vibrancy.” That is why he clings to ideals that contradict all manner of observable reality.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Twodees Partain
  54. @Mr. Rational

    My understanding of the term black pilled includes a firm understanding of race realism. dfd has proven he possesses no such thing.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Mr. Rational
  55. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    What would happen if a White nationalist megabillionaire bought a news network?

    Can you name a white nationalist megabillionaire?

    If such a creature exists then it might change things although there’s no question that pressure would be brought to bear to introduce legislation banning white nationalist megabillionaires (who are of course literally Nazis) from owning news networks.

    There would also be massive pressure brought to bear to dissuade advertisers from advertising on that network. So it would have to be a white nationalist megabillionaire prepared to run the network at a substantial loss.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  56. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    I predict that the TERFs will win this fight as they will be joined by women who will not stand for their sports being taken over by “men”.

    Every time the madness starts to accelerate sane reasonable people conclude that this time the crazies have gone too far. This time there’ll be a backlash. But there never is a backlash. You have to start to wonder whether there is anything at all that might actually provoke a backlash.

    I think TERFs will most likely lose this one. But it might lead to some TERFs drifting away from political engagement altogether.

    If they had any sense they’d try playing both sides off against each other. Threaten to stay home en masse on election day, that sort of thing. But that kind of sophisticated political strategising requires inspired leadership and discipline. If radical feminists had any sense they wouldn’t be radical feminists.

    The most likely possible positive result would be TERFs losing much of their enthusiasm for the Cultural Revolution.

    In Europe there seem to be quite a few crazy feminists and crazy lesbians in the “far right” parties – they haven’t figured out that those parties are simply zionist front organisations.

  57. dfordoom says: • Website
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    My guess is he is a college aged white guy still living at home.

    Well done. You’re ludicrously wrong but keep trying.

  58. dfordoom says: • Website
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    My understanding of the term black pilled includes a firm understanding of race realism. dfd has proven he possesses no such thing.

    My issue with the alt-right/white nationalists is that they have zero understanding of political realism. It’s hysterically funny that they think of themselves as red-pilled and yet they live in a fantasy world in which people they don’t like can be be made to disappear by magic. All you have to do is chant “They all have to go back” three times and it will magically happen. They also think that white ethnostates can be made to exist just by wishing really really hard.

    These people have no connection with the real world that exists outside of echo chambers such as this. They have no conception of political strategy. If you try to suggest that maybe they should aim for something politically achievable they hold their hands to their ears and start shouting “Cuck” and then preen themselves on their cleverness.

    What matters in a political struggle is not truth (truth has won very few political struggles) and what matters is not what you’d like to see in an ideal world. What matters is what is achievable.

    Whether race realism is true or not is irrelevant. What matters is whether you can win a political struggle with that kind of baggage. If not you either need to ditch it or find a way to make it more palatable. Maybe you’d be better off concentrating on the real enemy, the bankers and billionaires who got us into this mess and who are the puppet-masters pulling the strings where immigration is concerned. The advantage of that is that it’s not too difficult to persuade people that bankers and billionaires are their enemies. That’s called a viable political strategy.

  59. @MikeatMikedotMike

    Here’s my understanding of the pill colors:

    Black:  “We’re doomed, nothing we can do.”  Alternatively, “Keep voting, it’s gotta work SOMETIME and it’s all you CAN do.”
    Blue:  Stay inside the dream world of the Matrix.
    Red:  See things as they really are, including the realities of race and sex.
    White:  “We’re gonna win!”

    I am a firm red-piller.

    • Replies: @iffen
  60. iffen says:
    @Mr. Rational

    Here’s my understanding of the pill colors:

    One pill makes you larger
    And one pill makes you small
    And the ones that mother gives you
    Don’t do anything at all
    Go ask Alice, when she’s ten feet tall
    And if you go chasing rabbits
    And you know you’re going to fall
    Tell ’em a hookah smoking caterpillar
    Has given you the call
    To call Alice, when she was just small
    When the men on the chessboard get up
    And tell you where to go
    And you’ve just had some kind of mushroom
    And your mind is moving slow
    Go ask Alice, I think she will know
    When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead
    And the white knight is talking backwards
    And the red queen’s off with her head
    Remember what the dormouse said
    Feed your head, feed your head

    Songwriters: GRACE WING SLICK

    Sorry about triggering you with the Airplane, doom.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
    , @dfordoom
  61. @Mr. Rational

    Thanks, Mr. Yes, I do that, using DDG. I also like to see the direct answers from people here whose opinion I value, including you and iffen. It’s a form of trolling, I suppose, but it fills a need that I have.

  62. @MikeatMikedotMike

    Could be, Mike. That may be giving him a little more of the benefit of the doubt than is warranted, though.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  63. Anon[804] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Rational

    The subjunctive tense in the English language, as she is spoke:

    “If I were a feminist, I would be a TERF.”

  64. @iffen

    white rabbit…totally amazing song…..

    I never use hallucinogens because the outside world is already _way_ too crazy for me. 😉

    Would it surprise anyone if it was determined that for the past year or two the DC water supply had LSD in it? Anyone?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Twodees Partain
  65. Rosie says:
    @dfordoom

    Can you name a white nationalist megabillionaire?

    Where da rich White men at?

  66. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    Songwriters: GRACE WING SLICK

    Sorry about triggering you with the Airplane, doom.

    I’ll forgive you just this one time. But don’t let it happen again. Not the Airplane, man.

    Actually The White Rabbit should be retitled the Red-Pill Rabbit because it describes so perfectly the worldview of so many people who claim to be red-pilled. Delusions are not delusions, man, they’re real. You just gotta go with it. If you want stuff to be real, it is real. Dreams and reality are the same thing. White ethnostates will come into existence. The US Government will like totally be cool with Red States seceding. All the bad people will be deported because the Red Queen will just make them be deported.

    Too many people who think they’ve taken the red pill have just taken a different kind of blue pill. They’ve exchanged one dream world for another.

    I’ll see your Grace Slick and raise you another drug-addled hippie.

    Living is easy with eyes closed
    Misunderstanding all you see

    • Replies: @iffen
  67. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Justvisiting

    Would it surprise anyone if it was determined that for the past year or two the DC water supply had LSD in it? Anyone?

    It wouldn’t surprise me if it turned out that the entire water supply of the western world has been laced with LSD for the past half century. It’s the only explanation that makes sense!

    Our recent history is like those dreams that are really crazy and then you wake up, and then you realise you’re not awake, you’re just dreaming that you’re awake and you’re in an even crazier dream.

  68. @MikeatMikedotMike

    …this kinda knocks. for a low budget safety training video, but still.

  69. @Twodees Partain

    I’m pretty sure D is a red-diaper baby of the usual ancestry of red-diaper babies.  No one else loves communism that much.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  70. dfordoom says: • Website

    I’m pretty sure D is a red-diaper baby of the usual ancestry of red-diaper babies. No one else loves communism that much.

    I presume you’re suggesting that I must be Jewish? If so you’re once again way off beam.

    • Replies: @iffen
  71. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    Accusations of Jewish ancestry is a shortcut to stupidity.

  72. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead
    And the white knight is talking backwards
    And the red queen’s off with her head
    Remember what the dormouse said
    Feed your head, feed your head

    I take this stanza out of the drug milieu by reading “feed your head” as encouraging rational inquiry and study. Certainly our time can be described as a time when logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead.

  73. @Mr. Rational

    I think so too. Red diaper babies like Obama and the youngsters who post here just love them some communism. It’s easy to love something that monstrous when they have never seen it in action, or smelled the corpses. One thing that communism has always produced is mass graves for the corpses of its subjects who are always its victims.

    • Replies: @iffen
  74. @Justvisiting

    LSD might explain the insanity. Of course they might all be huffing solvents before they come up with the crap they try to pass. Politicians come up with shit that would never even occur to a normal human being.

  75. iffen says:
    @Twodees Partain

    the youngsters who post here just love them some communism.

    It’s the ideals!

    Besides, the actual commies up until now didn’t “do it right.” Doom and I won’t make those same mistakes. Anyway, I plan to be commissar of the guillotine and I will only use it on people who really deserve it. Promise.

  76. @iffen

    Q:  What’s the difference between communism and a pencil?

    A:  A pencil works on more than just paper.

  77. By-tor says:
    @SFG

    Venezuela’s nationalists had to federalize resource and utility assets to prevent the US and Venezuela’s Wash., DC-loyal treasonous comprador elite from robbing the country blind again. Once the thieves in NYC and their US.gov intel assets gain control of something, it’s openface Globohomo corruption forever. You know, just as in the USA.

  78. @iffen

    Well, I suppose that an idealistically performed beheading might be OK. I’m sure I deserve it just for some of the shit I say regularly.

  79. @Rosie

    May as well ask what would happen if unicorns existed.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    , @Anon
  80. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    Besides, the actual commies up until now didn’t “do it right.” Doom and I won’t make those same mistakes. Anyway, I plan to be commissar of the guillotine and I will only use it on people who really deserve it. Promise.

    Mass slaughter is only wrong when bad people do it for bad reasons. Killing people for communism bad. Killing people for freedom and democracy good. Causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children was virtuous because they died for freedom and democracy. It was OK because Madeleine Albright said it was totally worth it. Of course it wasn’t her children who were dying but I’m sure that had nothing to do with her attitude.

    Dropping nukes on civilian targets in 1945 was also totally A-OK because freedom and democracy.

    You just have to learn to look at things in the correct way. For example Islamophobia in western countries is totally bad and wicked because Muslims are good. But killing Muslims in their own countries is good because Muslims are bad.

    Enormous numbers of German civilians starved to death in the First World War because of the British blockade. But that was a good thing because the British were the good guys.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  81. @dfordoom

    Dropping nukes on civilian targets in 1945 was also totally A-OK because freedom and democracy.

    This sounds like it could be sarcasm on top of sarcasm, but it’s absolutely consistent with firm belief in everything Howard Zinn wrote.

    • Replies: @iffen
  82. iffen says:
    @Mr. Rational

    I keep seeing these references to Howard Zinn. Do I need to break down and read his history book?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Mr. Rational
  83. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    I keep seeing these references to Howard Zinn. Do I need to break down and read his history book?

    I’ve vaguely heard of him.

    Apparently he said, “Socialism basically said, hey, let’s have a kinder, gentler society. Let’s share things. Let’s have an economic system that produces things not because they’re profitable for some corporation, but produces things that people need.”

    What kind of evil man could want a kinder, gentler society? How vicious and evil would you have to be to think that there are more important things than corporate profits? That’s communism!

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @anon
    , @Mr. Rational
  84. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    Let’s have an economic system that produces things not because they’re profitable for some corporation, but produces things that people need.”

    This is the rub.

    If you let the market, and individuals, decide what is produced, you end up with some bad decisions and very bad results some of the time. If you don’t let the market and individuals decide then the Consumer Commissar has to make the decisions and that is unpalatable for most of us (and grossly inefficient). The trick is to find the happy medium where the essentials are taken off the table and the non-essentials are left to the market and individuals.

  85. anon[338] • Disclaimer says:
    @dfordoom

    Apparently he said, “Socialism basically said, hey, let’s have a kinder, gentler society.

    Lol.
    Pol Pot called. You have to go work in the countryside now. For the good of society.

  86. @iffen

    Do I need to break down and read his history book?

    I fear that that way lies madness.  However, you can get a good idea of what’s in it from the insane notions it has implanted in the victims of modern history “education”.

    I have read a bit of it and it BEGINS with the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    • Replies: @iffen
  87. @dfordoom

    Apparently he said, “Socialism basically said, hey, let’s have a kinder, gentler society. Let’s share things. Let’s have an economic system that produces things not because they’re profitable for some corporation, but produces things that people need.”

    Which works out very well for those who get to decide “what people need”.  It doesn’t include pesky details like producing shoes in the sizes that people need, which a corporation that relies on people buying its stuff has to take into account.  But the people who do the deciding… they always do just fine, in Venezuela and Cuba as in the erstwhile USSR.

    Everyone else is f***ed.

  88. iffen says:
    @Mr. Rational

    it BEGINS with the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    The concept of total war never bothered me, and I never gave it a second thought until a few months ago. I now think that asking if willfully targeting civilians is okay is a legitimate question.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Mr. Rational
  89. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    The concept of total war never bothered me, and I never gave it a second thought until a few months ago. I now think that asking if willfully targeting civilians is okay is a legitimate question.

    It’s something that has always bothered me. Even back in the days when I was a keen student of military history it bothered me. Especially when it’s done as deliberate policy. The bombings of civilian targets by the Germans, the British and the Americans in WW2 were clearly consciously intended to kill civilians. Arguing along the lines of “well they started it” or “destroying civilian morale is a legitimate objective” never did convince me. Some things are morally wrong and no amount of sophistry can make them right.

    I don’t see any moral difference between deliberately killing civilians by bombing them or by starving them. And I don’t see any moral difference between mass killings for the sake of the Revolution and mass killings for freedom and democracy.

    I’m also not persuaded by arguments that it’s OK if it’s a just war. The war against Hitler is as close as you’ll ever get to a genuinely just war but when you wage such a war by means of barbarism you become a barbarian. And apart from the war against Hitler it’s hard to think of many examples of just wars in modern times.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
  90. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    If you let the market, and individuals, decide what is produced, you end up with some bad decisions and very bad results some of the time. If you don’t let the market and individuals decide then the Consumer Commissar has to make the decisions and that is unpalatable for most of us (and grossly inefficient). The trick is to find the happy medium where the essentials are taken off the table and the non-essentials are left to the market and individuals.

    Yes, I’d go along with all that. And I think the happy medium can be found.

    The only point on which I’d differ is that I think the efficiency of free markets is overrated, and in any case no free market remains free for very long unless the government steps in to keep it free by stomping on monopolies and cartels.

    • Replies: @iffen
  91. @SFG

    I suspect if push comes to shove Sanders will endorse Warren–they’ve had a nonaggression pact for a while.

    I agree, although (and it’s unlikely to matter) I’m pretty certain Sanders won’t endorse another candidate, so long as Tulsi Gabbard remains in the race.

  92. Mark G. says:
    @dfordoom

    My mother’s old Indianapolis high school classmate Kurt Vonnegut was in Dresden as a prisoner of war during the allied bombings in World War II and his novel “Slaughterhouse Five” was based on that. After seeing it up close, Vonnegut came to the conclusion that targeting civilians during wartime is never justified. He thought the bombing of Dresden had no military value and we could have won the war just as quickly without doing it.

    • Replies: @iffen
  93. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    efficiency of free markets

    It is very efficient if there are many producers and there is free entry into the producer side of the market. The less efficient fail and go out of business. Compare that to government where failure induces a call for more employees and more resources. Trouble is, so many markets are undermined by government actions or capitalist monopolistic actions.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  94. iffen says:
    @Mark G.

    bombing of Dresden had no military value

    This seems to be a consensus among those who are informed. They can claim that they were targeting the rail yards, but it is not very convincing.

    In any case, there are many, many other examples where there is not even the claim of military targets. I have started reading Richard Overy’s The Bombers and the Bombed, (at the suggestion of commenter RT or GR, I forget which) and I am shocked (even more than an R. Unz episode) at what I am learning. He quotes the internal documents showing where the British command moves to directly targeting civilians without even the pretense of trying to tie the bombing to military targets. Apparently, if you get back into the milieu, only a few people thought that there was anything wrong with targeting civilians. The British civilians and the German civilians expected to be bombed. It was major wartime propaganda on both sides to convince the people that it was a total war: British against German, front lines didn’t have much to do with it.

    I put in a comment not too long ago that I wonder if I have some sort of moral blindness. It never occurred to me that we (the Allies) were not justified in killing as many Germans and Japanese as possible.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  95. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    It is very efficient if there are many producers and there is free entry into the producer side of the market.

    Trouble is, so many markets are undermined by government actions or capitalist monopolistic actions.

    Yeah. Free markets work just great in theory. In the real world they generally don’t work very well.

  96. @dfordoom

    If I were in her place and had to choose between throwing the TERFs or the trannies under the bus then the TERFS would not be the ones I’d choose to jettison.

    If you offend trannies, it doesn’t just hurt you among tranny voters. Pretty much every Democratic voter with a 6-figure income, thinks the Sun rises & sets on trannyhood. You think one of those Boomer clowns who plans to support Buttigeg, is going to consider switching to someone who thinks boys have a penis, and girls have a vagina? Guess again.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @dfordoom
  97. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    He quotes the internal documents showing where the British command moves to directly targeting civilians without even the pretense of trying to tie the bombing to military targets.

    The Americans seem to have made a vague effort to bomb military targets in Germany but the British policy was pure terrorism. Churchill should certainly have been hanged as a war criminal.

    The American terror-bombing of Japan was also clearly a war crime. The fire-bombing of Tokyo ranks as one of the most barbarous acts of the 20th century. Roosevelt should have been hanged alongside Churchill.

    I still think the war against Hitler was justified but the methods used were definitely not justified.

    The big question is – what the Hell went wrong with “liberal democracy” in the 20th century? How could the western democracies have degenerated to the point where such barbarism was taken for granted? I’m guessing that the rise of mass media had a lot to do with it. The decline of Christianity as well perhaps. Maybe the inherent corruption of representative democracy?

    • Replies: @iffen
  98. @iffen

    it BEGINS with the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    The concept of total war never bothered me

    No, you don’t understand.  It puts the bombings out there as some uniquely-heinous crime that was committed totally out of the blue.  No Japanese imperial conquests, no Rape of Nanking, no Bataan Death March, no attack on Pearl Harbor, no nothing.

    THAT is how Zinn portrays the USA.  And that is what our universities (and AP US History) are “teaching”.

  99. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Kevin O'Keeffe

    If you offend trannies, it doesn’t just hurt you among tranny voters. Pretty much every Democratic voter with a 6-figure income, thinks the Sun rises & sets on trannyhood. You think one of those Boomer clowns who plans to support Buttigeg, is going to consider switching to someone who thinks boys have a penis, and girls have a vagina? Guess again.

    Yep, I agree.

    What’s interesting is the incredibly dramatic turn against lesbians. Male homosexuals are still sacred but lesbians are now considered to be pretty much Nazis.

  100. anon[277] • Disclaimer says:

    I now think that asking if willfully targeting civilians is okay is a legitimate question.

    “The ends justify the means” is an old debate. It won’t be resolved any time soon, as long as humans exist.

    But it is a handy club to use, and a nifty way to propagandize low-information people, such as high school students, via one-sided “conversations” and “teaching”.

    Howard Zinn was a propagandist. Not an historian.

  101. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    Roosevelt should have been hanged alongside Churchill.

    Bullshit!

    I don’t think you understand the concept of war criminal.

    We won!

  102. @Rosie

    What would happen if a White nationalist megabillionaire bought a news network?

    I like the way you think!

    But I have my doubts the intelligence community would permit that to occur. Private planes have a funny way of crashing….

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  103. Anon[339] • Disclaimer says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    It would be very easy to tell if a girl was a virgin.

  104. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Mr. Rational

    It puts the bombings out there as some uniquely-heinous crime that was committed totally out of the blue. No Japanese imperial conquests, no Rape of Nanking, no Bataan Death March, no attack on Pearl Harbor, no nothing.

    They were pretty momentous events. The first time nukes had ever been used in war and they were used to slaughter civilians. It marked a momentous sea change.

    And nobody had ever argued that the Rape of Nanking, the Bataan Death March or the attack on Pearl Harbor were anything other than barbarous. The really shocking thing about the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is that it was seen as being perfectly normal and A-OK.

    In fact not only were war crimes such as this and the fire-bombings of Dresden and Tokyo seen as acceptable, they were widely celebrated. That marks a major step along the road to moral degeneration.

    So I can understand why he would have made a special point of it.

  105. @Mr. Rational

    To the point about the atomic bombings of Japan, the only realistic alternative was of course, an amphibious invasion of the Japanese mainland. We can quibble over the estimates, but the projections were a million Allied casualties and over 2 million Japanese casualties. Further, that the Japanese military didn’t immediately surrender after the Hiroshima bombing places as much of the blame for Nagasaki on them.

    So these silly armchair generals with their 20/20 hindsight can continue to clutch their pearls over it, but the better of two terrible decisions was made.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    , @iffen
    , @dfordoom
  106. @MikeatMikedotMike

    Now try convincing anyone brainwashed with Zinn’s book.

    Sadly, being right isn’t good enough.  You have to be believed.

  107. iffen says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    the only realistic alternative was of course, an amphibious invasion of the Japanese mainland.

    Not a given.

    As a matter of fact, some knowledgeable people have pointed out that we didn’t have to do all those amphibious assaults on those islands. It was very likely that we could have squeezed the supply lines with a lot less death and destruction.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  108. @iffen

    Food, water, clothing, shelter–these are essentials!

    • Replies: @iffen
  109. anon[315] • Disclaimer says:

    As a matter of fact, some knowledgeable people have pointed out that we didn’t have to do all those amphibious assaults on those islands. It was very likely that we could have squeezed the supply lines with a lot less death and destruction.

    Please name these people, if possible point to publications. Because they are wrong.

    The truth is different. By May of 1945 the entire Japanese naval fleet had been sunk, along with the vast majority of cargo ships and oil tankers. There were no supply lines to squeeze. Even fishing boats were being sunk. US submarines were running on the surface in daylight, looking for something to sink, sometimes shelling railroad trains on shore because they could not find anything else to attack. Food was already in short supply in Japan.

    Allied strategy called for an unconditional surrender of Japan, and that was going to happen one way or another. Either the Tojo faction would lose an internal fight as actually happened, or the US Army and Marines would invade. Operation Downfall was not just a plan on paper. It was a plan being put in motion. The first step, invasion of Kyushu, would have occurred in the autumn of 1945. This would secure airfields putting fighter/bomber aircraft within range of the island of Honshu.

    If more nuclear bombs were available, it is possible they would have been used to clear defensive positions on Kyushu. Two on the beach and one inland was proposed. The effects of fallout on Japanese and Americans downwind would have been terrible. However every weapon would be used to defeat Imperial Japan.

    In early 1946 the invasion of the home island would occur. Tank-led divisions would drive to Tokyo and it would be taken block by block if necessary. The only building to be spared destruction would be the Imperial palace, which was off limits to bomber attacks as well.

    The Imperial Japanese forces on Kyushu were expected to use every tool and weapon available to resist from the beaches inland. Precious gasoline was stored in caves to fuel Kamikaze aircraft. Suicide torpedo boats were hidden along the coastline, ready to attack transports or any other ship. Civilians were being taught suicide attacks with spears and incendiary bombs, and some were already drafted just as on Okinawa.

    Death and wounding on both sides would have been very high. Almost certainly higher than the total number of lives lost in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

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

    Plus 100,000+ Allied Prisoners of War would have been murdered as soon as the landings started. By Imperial order. That is close to the number of civilians and soldiers killed in Hiroshima.

    The Japanese military was under strict orders that under no circumstances would Allied Prisoners of War (POW) be recovered by Allied forces. This lead to the massacre at Palawan, Mindanao in the Philippines where POW’s were ordered by their Japanese guards into simple air raid shelters, then burned to death with gasoline. Some POW’s attempted to escape and were machinegunned to death, others got further and were shot by soldiers hunting for them. Some tried to swim off the beach and were shot in the water. A few managed to escape and evade until dark. They were eventually evacuated to American bases on the island of Leyte. They were fortunate. Nearly 150 American POW’s were murdered.

    http://www.mansell.com/pow_resources/camplists/philippines/palawan_atrocity_summary-grew_letter.pdf

    The only reason the POW’s in Cabanatuan weren’t murdered in a similar fashion is the US Army sent the 6th Ranger battalion to liberate them, with the able assistance of the Philipino Resistance forces.

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

    Therefore the arrival of Americans on the beaches of Kyushu would have been the trigger for Imperial Japanese forces to murder all 100,000+ America, British, Dutch, French, etc. POW’s held by Japan. Not just in the home islands but also Manchuria and other locations. This certain cost in human lives is generally ignored by most debaters for reasons I do not understand.

    The “one plane, one bomb, one city” attack proved to enough Japanese leaders that they had utterly no hope of meaningful resistance. The Emperor recorded an announcement, and the Tojo faction was kept off balance long enough for it to be broadcast. Hundreds of thousands of lives were spared, hundreds of thousands more were saved from maiming.

  110. @iffen

    It is a given you fool. In fact preparations for the invasion were under way as the deployment status of the A-bomb was completely unknown.

    https://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=54

    Hilariously, I point out that your stance is based on hindsight and your refutation is to…. invoke more hindsight.

    Here’s some hindsight that will blow your mind: You know what would have eliminated quite a bit of death and destruction? If the US had not involved itself in either WWI or WWII at all.

    • Replies: @iffen
  111. dfordoom says: • Website
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    To the point about the atomic bombings of Japan, the only realistic alternative was of course, an amphibious invasion of the Japanese mainland.

    That’s a somewhat dubious assumption. By early 1945 Japan was well and truly defeated. Their navy had effectively ceased to exist. Their ability to threaten the United States in any meaningful military sense had been reduced to zero. Their conquests in the Pacific had all been lost. There was no necessity whatsoever for the the US to invade Japan.

    The realistic alternative was a negotiated peace, which would obviously have meant the Japanese giving up their colonial empire. It was the American insistence on unconditional surrender that prolonged the war.

    So there were not just two alternatives.

    • Replies: @Willem
    , @iffen
  112. Willem says:
    @dfordoom

    The Japanese could also have surrendered to the Russians. Of course that would have been seen as a disaster for the grand world order (by the US). So the US dropped the bomb on Japan (twice) just to make clear to Japan that uncle Sam is the boss.

  113. iffen says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    In fact preparations for the invasion were under way

    All sorts of plans are made and never implemented, The Protocols, for example.

    Are you familiar with the term contingency planning?

    I never said that we shouldn’t have bombed Japan, I just said that it was legitimate to ask the question whether we should have only bombed military targets.

  114. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    So there were not just two alternatives.

    No, we could have blockaded them and put them under siege until they capitulated. We did they right thing by removing the militarists and establishing a new government.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  115. iffen says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    these are essentials!

    + health care and an employment “rice bowl”

  116. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    We did they right thing by removing the militarists and establishing a new government.

    Maybe. It was the beginning of the doctrine of regime change. That the US doesn’t just defeat its enemies, it then decides what sort of government the defeated country will have. And the defeated country gets US military occupation indefinitely to make sure the new pro-US government remains in power.

    In the case of Nazi Germany that was probably a good idea. In the case of Japan, you could make a case for it as well. Although to be honest the Japanese imperialists weren’t really much different from any other imperialists (such as the British).

    It did set an unfortunate precedent, that the only legitimate governments in other countries are governments approved by the US. That has led to an endless series of further wars most of which have ended badly.

    Turning wars into moral crusades can be a very dangerous thing.

    • Replies: @iffen
  117. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    That has led to an endless series of further wars most of which have ended badly.

    Yes, hopefully we can begin to break this habit.

    Years ago, democracy was considered a good thing, so it didn’t seem that we were doing that much harm. Anyway, hegemons have always installed puppets and created buffer states. I will put our record up against any other and let the affected peoples decide whether we helped or harmed.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS