The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Mark Weber Archive
Why Conservatives Can’t Win
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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

Conservatism certainly seems alive and well in America. For years polls have consistently shown that more Americans identify as conservative than as liberal. In recent decades both branches of Congress, as well as the White House, have often been controlled by Republicans – who generally regard themselves as conservative. “Conservative” Fox News has for some time been the country’s most widely viewed television news source. Rush Limbaugh, who proudly calls himself a conservative, has for decades been the country’s most popular radio talk show host.

But such influence is deceptive.

Over the past century, conservatives have drastically shifted their views, abandoning their stands on one issue after another, including Medicare, federal spending, Martin Luther King Day, and more. On any given issue, the “conservative” view of today is often the “liberal” view of ten years earlier.

When the Franklin Roosevelt administration and a compliant Congress were establishing Social Security during the 1930s, conservatives opposed it. Denouncing it as “socialist,” they pointed out that it’s basically a compulsory old age insurance program. They likewise resisted Medicare in the years before it was established in 1966, calling this federal program “socialized medicine.”

Today not a single prominent politician who regards himself as conservative dares call for dismantling Social Security or Medicare. To the contrary, conservative politicians assure voters that they will “protect” these programs. Conservatives likewise fought the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. Although there is still some residual talk of repealing and replacing it, it appears that some form of the Act will remain in place. And just as they eventually accepted the once-despised Social Security and Medicare programs, conservatives very likely will come around to accepting some version of Obamacare.

Just what is it that conservatives want to conserve? One answer that’s often given is “freedom” – by which is usually meant “individual freedom.”

Well, if individual freedom is really important, those who call themselves conservative should be very pleased with the trajectory of the past century, because Americans today generally have more freedom and “rights” than those of earlier generations.

Consider life in 1930, for example – when nearly all Americans still regarded the US as a “great” country.

For one thing, employment and job opportunities were generally segregated and restricted by sex and race. Employment notices in newspapers appeared in separate sections, one for Men and another for Women. Women were effectively barred from a wide range of jobs.

There were no “gay rights.” Homosexual behavior was punished as a crime. Any suggestion that a woman might have the “right” to marry another woman, or a man another man, would have been regarded as offensive and absurd.

By law and custom, people of European ancestry could not marry persons of other races. In most states marriage between whites and blacks was a felony.

Abortion was not a “right”; it was a crime.

Americans could not buy groceries, tools or clothes on a Sunday. Stores across the country were closed on Sundays as an expression of respect for the Christian heritage and Christian sensibilities.

No one could legally order a glass of beer or enjoy a bottle of wine with a meal in a restaurant. The sale of alcoholic beverages was prohibited throughout the country.

How many Americans today who call themselves conservative would prefer life in the “great” America of 1930 to life in the “liberal” USA of our era? Is “freedom” really the most important thing that conservatives want to conserve?

For Americans who call themselves conservative, the most admired president of the past century is Ronald Reagan. He made millions of his fellow citizens feel good about themselves and their country. Given his earlier career as an actor, it’s not surprising that he was known as the “great communicator,” and that so many people found his speeches inspiring and uplifting. He was probably the last American president who actually believed what he said when he assured audiences that this country’s greatest days are still ahead.

Reagan was a relentless critic of Big Government. When he was campaigning for the presidency, he pledged to reduce the size and scope of the federal government. He specifically promised to eliminate the Department of Education, along with other allegedly unnecessary and unconstitutional federal agencies. He criticized the federal budget deficit, and promised to balance it. He opposed making Martin Luther King Day a national holiday.

His policies as president were quite different. During the eight years of his administration, the number of federal government employees increased by about 324,000 to almost 5.3 million, the great majority of them in non-military work. Federal government spending under Reagan increased by 60 percent. The Department of Education was not eliminated; in fact, its budget more than doubled. The gross federal debt nearly tripled. It was during his presidency that US shifted from being the world’s foremost creditor nation to being the world’s greatest debtor nation. And in an act with consequences far beyond his lifetime, Reagan signed into law the bill to make Martin Luther King Day a national holiday.

The contrast between Reagan’s conservative rhetoric and his actual policies are perhaps not so surprising, given his record of approval for the overall social-political trajectory of twentieth century America. One noteworthy expression of that was his praise for President Franklin Roosevelt, whose liberal “New Deal” policies vastly expanded the power and scope of the federal government, and whom conservatives of that era understandably despised.

For Ronald Reagan, race was unimportant. Perhaps a better way to put it is that, for Reagan, along with most white Americans of his generation, it was an issue he preferred to ignore. As president, Reagan acknowledged that when he was young “we didn’t even know we had a racial problem.” That’s because non-whites were all but invisible in the country’s cultural, political and social life. Until the 1960s, white America preferred to pretend that non-whites did not exist.

As President, Reagan repeatedly proclaimed his vision of the United States as a universalist society. In his 1982 Thanksgiving Day Proclamation, for example, he said: “I have always believed that this anointed land was set apart in an uncommon way, that a divine plan placed this great continent here between the oceans to be found by people from every corner of the earth who had a special love of faith and freedom.”

In keeping with this outlook, Reagan in 1986 signed into law the “Simpson-Mazzoli” Act, which legalized some three million illegal migrants – or, as they are now fashionably called, “undocumented workers” and “dreamers.” His amnesty of millions of illegal immigrants was entirely consistent with his often-repeated view of America as a color-blind nation that welcomes all those who “love freedom.”

The gap between Reagan’s rhetoric as a politician and his actual policies as president underscores the barrenness of conservatism in modern America.

In keeping with their distaste for confrontation and discord, conservatives have long tolerated the promotion of seemingly noble sentiments that have unpleasant long term consequences.

Emma Lazarus was a New York Jewish-American writer of the nineteenth century who is most famous for her poem “The New Colossus.” In 1903, a few years after her death, a bronze plaque with the poem’s text was attached to the base of the Statue of Liberty.

It concludes with the words:

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

That final stanza was made even more famous when it was set to music for the 1949 musical “Miss Liberty.”

Has any prominent conservative ever voiced an objection to the sentiment of that poem, or protested its place at the Statue of Liberty? More than that, conservatives have supported policies based on the poem’s underlying spirit and ideology, which open the country’s doors to millions of “huddled masses” from other continents. Conservative Americans only seem to get upset when the “wretched refuse” of “teeming shores” arrive in their own towns and neighborhoods. By that time, of course, it’s too late.

This view of America as a land for everyone, regardless of race, ancestry, and so forth, was already vigorously promoted and widely accepted by the 1940s. During World War II, the official “Why We Fight” US government propaganda films proclaimed the ideal of America as a universalist society. In the decades since then, the mainstream media, Hollywood, school teachers and politicians have stressed racial, cultural and religious diversity as an ideal. President Bill Clinton, for example, in his 1997 State of the Union address, said: “We must never, ever believe that our diversity is a weakness – it is our greatest strength.” Not a single prominent conservative politician disputed or protested that view.

Conservatives are generally more willing than liberals or leftists to acknowledge racial realities, at least in private, but they are unwilling to do so openly. In public, conservative leaders applaud and support the same principle of “color blind” equality that liberals promote.

Each January, Americans honor, or are supposed to honor, Martin Luther King, Jr., on the anniversary of his birth. He is the only American who is honored with a federal holiday of his own. At one time, those who called themselves conservative opposed such a national holiday. That was understandable, given that it was liberals and leftists who had provided the backing that proved crucial in enabling King’s campaign to win greater political power, rights, and economic status for African Americans.

These days, conservatives talk very differently about King and his legacy. They now claim that he was actually a “conservative” because he pushed for the supposedly “conservative” principle of equal rights for all, regardless of race. Today no prominent politician, including those who call themselves conservative, would dare denounce him.

Beginning in kindergarten, school teachers across the country tell young Americans that we must all strive to live up to the ideal of racial equality proclaimed by King. That includes support for the range of programs, regulations and policies, which he promoted, that require discrimination against European-Americans. Politicians of both major parties accept or at least tolerate these “affirmative action” policies and programs, which are based on the notion that white Americans are collectively responsible for the legacy of discrimination and racism that, we are told, has kept African-Americans from achieving the goal of equality of income and achievement that even conservatives claim to support.

Educators and political leaders have for decades told us that success in the struggle for racial equality must be measured not merely by equality of opportunity, but by equality of results. As President Lyndon Johnson explained during the 1960s: “This is the next and more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity … not just equality as a right and a theory, but equality as a fact and as a result.” In accord with that outlook, Republican President Richard Nixon ordered federal contractors to use “goals and timetables” in hiring more non-white workers, even when that meant discriminating against better qualified white workers.

In an effort to win popular support while basically accepting the prevailing egalitarian- universalist worldview, conservatives misrepresent American history. One of the country’s most popular conservative writers and film-makers of recent years has been Dinesh D’Souza. Born and raised in India, he is regarded as an outstanding spokesman for American conservativism.

His latest film is a political documentary, “Death of a Nation,” that favorably compares Donald Trump to Abraham Lincoln, and asks viewers: “Can We Save America a Second Time?” The film draws parallels between Democratic Party opposition to Lincoln in 1860, and Democratic Party opposition to Trump today. It also draws parallels between the program and outlook of Hitler’s National Socialist Party during the 1930s, and the program and outlook of the Democratic Party today. The film accuses the Democratic Party – both then and now – of racism and fascism. It also argues that the political left today unfairly and maliciously portrays conservatives and Republicans as supporters of racism, white supremacy, and fascism.

How accurate is D’Souza’s “conservative” documentary?

In late 1860 and early 1861, the southern slave states left the federal union to form the Confederate States of America, and a short time later the fighting broke out that began the American Civil War. In the years leading up to those events, the key political issue dividing Americans was whether slavery should be prohibited in the new western territories. Democrats in the South generally favored the expansion of slavery into the territories, while Democrats in the North, led by Stephen Douglas, believed that the issue should be decided by the voters in each new territory.

Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party firmly opposed any expansion of slavery beyond the states where it was already legal. But contrary to what D’Souza and many other conservatives suggest, Lincoln and most Republicans rejected political and social equality for African-Americans. When he was elected President in 1860, Lincoln and nearly all Republicans wanted to keep not only slavery, but all blacks, whether slave or free, out of the new western territories.

In the years before he became President, Lincoln repeatedly made clear that he opposed voting rights for blacks, and supported laws against interracial marriage. Both before and during his presidency, Lincoln made clear, again and again, his wish that one day slavery would be eliminated. But he also repeatedly expressed his hope that people of African ancestry would ultimately be removed from the country altogether. He supported plans and programs for “colonization” or mass resettlement of blacks in Africa or Central America.

“The enterprise is a difficult one,” Lincoln acknowledged in a June 1857 address, “but `where there is a will there is a way,’ and what colonization needs most is a hearty will. Will springs from the two elements of moral sense and self-interest. Let us be brought to believe it is morally right, and, at the same time, favorable to, or, at least, not against, our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime, and we shall find a way to do it, however great the task may be.”

Based on the views he expressed repeatedly, and the policies he supported, Abraham Lincoln should be regarded, by today’s standards, as a white nationalist and a white supremacist.

Dinesh D’Souza, along with many others who call themselves conservative, seem to believe that white racial identity and politics are evil. In this, they agree with most liberals and Democrats. But if it’s morally wrong to hold white identity views, or to support policies based on white community interests, than it’s difficult to look back without shame at the views and policies of Lincoln and nearly all white Americans during most of the country’s history.

For prominent conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh, Dinesh D’Souza and Sean Hannity, the ideal America is a country in which race is as irrelevant as hair color or shoe size. For such people, it simply doesn’t matter if the USA, racially, resembles Brazil, India or Malaysia. But in the real world race does matter. It’s certainly more important than whether tax rates are high or low, or whether gun control laws are strict or lenient.

In which country would American conservatives prefer to live: in liberal “big government” Denmark, which has strict gun control laws, comprehensive state health care, and high taxes, or in Haiti, which has no income tax, no strict gun control laws, no state health care, and a government that interferes very little in the lives of its citizens?

Whether they regard themselves as conservative or liberal, most Americans prefer to live in neighborhoods and communities of people like themselves. And whether they think in racial terms or not, most white Americans prefer life in a society that is culturally Western and racially European.

As recent election campaigns show, conservative voters seem to be motivated more by what they oppose, fear or dislike than by any solidly grounded principles. Because conservatives embrace the same egalitarian-universalist worldview that liberals relentlessly promote, they have a long record of waging predictably hopeless rearguard battles against programs and policies based on that same outlook. But even as they lose the war, conservatives comfort themselves with occasional election and legislative victories – tactical successes that are essentially meaningless.

We hear a lot these days about “identity politics” – that is, political appeals and activism based on race, ethnicity or gender. Conservatives don’t like it. “Why can’t we all just think of ourselves as Americans?,” they lament. But “identity politics” is not a game. It’s serious, play-for-keeps politics.

In the years before 1776, when the 13 colonies along the Atlantic coast broke away from British rule, the great debate was really about identity: Are we British subjects, with loyalties to the British monarch, or are we a separate, American people? Virtually all the great conflicts of our age are really conflicts about identity.

Ordinary politics involves issues of day-to-day concern to most people, such as taxes, jobs, affordable housing and health care, entitlement benefits, and so forth. Appeals for votes in routine politics like that are based on the presumption that we all share the same basic outlook and interests, and that we’re all in this together as Americans.

While white Americans are still trying to play the traditional political game – that is, by pretending that race doesn’t matter – millions of other Americans are playing identity politics. While white conservative Americans keep playing “softball,” insisting that “We’re all Americans,” the serious contenders are playing “hardball,” the only game that matters in the long run.

Even though conservatives sometimes still win battles, it’s no wonder they are losing the war. They’re not even playing the same game.

Based on their track record over the past half century, conservatives are incapable of building or even defending the kind of society that nearly all white Americans really want.

If white America has a future, it won’t be secured by conservatives. It will be secured only by European Americans who reject “business-as-usual” politics and the familiar but ultimately irrelevant “conservative” and “liberal” categories, and who instead embrace a worldview rooted in their heritage, history and identity, and act forthrightly to defend and promote their own group interests.


This item is adapted from a talk given at a meeting on Oct. 20, 2018, in southern California.

Mark Weber – historian, author and lecturer – studied history at the University of Illinois (Chicago), the University of Munich, Portland State University and Indiana University (M.A). He is director of the Institute for Historical Review.

Hide 165 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. “The great debate was about identity”

    I’d say that the conflict was about a distant metropolitan power enacting laws for the colonies which harmed the interests of the colonists and which they felt violated their rights as Englishmen. That was the essential nature of the conflict.

    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
    , @RWS
  2. @kerdasi amaq

    And that’s the essential nature of the conflict today. 99% of US counties voted for Trump in the last election. Votes for Clinton were concentrated in a few metropolitan areas that exert imperial dominance over the rest of the country. (Even in these “imperial counties” sizable minorities voted for Trump.) As is the case with any imperial system, race, ethnicity and religion all provide political fracture lines. The empire is broken and disintegrating. A breakup will occur. Whether it will be initiated peacefully and within some legalistic, constitutional framework or by civil war, revolution, or coup d’etat has yet to be determined.

    I live in a suburb of Boston, Massachusetts, a “ground zero” for prog sentiment. I’ve noticed that close to half the strangers, with whom I interact, would most likely be described as “deplorables” by Hilary Clinton. When talk gets around to the sad state of what was once our country, I’ve taken to mentioning civil war or revolution as a possible solution. Ten years ago such a thing would have been unimaginable. Now I find that others are not upset by my words and often agree with me.

    • Replies: @Wally
  3. Mark G. says:

    This author seems to be trying to claim the U.S. had less freedom in 1930 than today and we were better off then. Overall government spending as a percentage of GDP went from 12 per cent in 1930 to 35 per cent in 2012. That is a better yardstick to measure overall economic freedom than whether or not you can order a glass of beer. If we were better off then, it would be because of that. The twenties was a period of rapid economic growth and low government spending and it was when we started to get away from that in thirties that we started to have problems.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Bruno
    , @Hail
    , @Anonymous
  4. We haven’t had a real Conservative President since Teddy Roosevelt. Roosevelt had an environmental ethos and was against much of the Corporatism we see today. The Repubs are not Conservatives…they are Fascist Globalists.

    If the you had another Teddy Roosevelt….Conservatives would win but the Repubs have also descended into Madness and care only for cheap labor and the raping of the environment. Repubs lose tons of votes because of their environmental destruction. Add to the fact that entire Congress is run from Israel and they are nothing but whores on both sides of isle….just a few slight differences. The REpubs are afraid of everything.

    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    , @Mr. Anon
  5. Weber’s strongest suit in this important article is this message:

    Diversity is NOT our national strength.

    That progressive myth is a counter-intuitive Trojan Horse that is harming the long-term cultural, political and genetic interests of America’s founding stock: European-Americans.

    European history, European science, European exploration, European art, European literature, and European-derived laws (and peoples) have produced the world’s most dynamic, orderly, innovative, sophisticated, and livable societies. This includes the United States.

    It is time for European-Americans (AKA ‘whites’) to declare our identities as such. ‘White’ doesn’t cut it anymore. The word has been deliberately sullied.

    Strangely (and not by accident) the cultural status of ‘whites’ in America has been, and continues to be, demoted.

    Even the US census, for instance, categorizes white Americans (of European heritage) as ‘non-Hispanic whites’. That’s it. That’s who we are.

    Wow. ‘Non-Hispanic white’. You? Me? That’s who we are?

    What Jew thought that up this demeaning title for America’s founding core?

    Our skin is white and our race is Caucasoid but the time has come for us ‘whites’ to call ourselves ‘European-Americans’. This description reminds the world of our origins as well as our accomplishments.

    European-American identity will also allow us to more easily distinguish ourselves from Hispanics, not to mention overbearing Jewish identity which, curiously, allows Jews to assume white status (when it suits them) but MidEast origins whenever Israel (and global Jewry) needs it, which happens to be often.

    There’s a war underway for the soul of America. And it’s not between ‘liberals’ and ‘conservatives’. Weber has put his finger on it.

    As European-Americans approach minority status inside the US, we Americans–whose ancestors hailed from England, France, Germany, Holland, Italy, Sweden, Ireland, etc–must assert our collective interests inside our rapidly-changing civilization.

    After all, it was the energy, courage and talents of European-derived peoples who settled America that created the freest, most dynamic, prosperous and science-driven civilization that’s ever existed. No small feat.

    Is our advanced, English-speaking civilization not worth preserving? Of course it is.

    In order for us to accomplish this legitimate goal, the race taboo in America that now disfavors European-Americans (and ‘white’ identity) must be lifted.

    White identity needs to come out of the closet and take its rightful place at the negotiating table alongside other intra-national identity groups such as Hispanics, Jews and African-Americans.

    The drive fo preserve one’s culture and kin is universal. This drive is especially keen among high-functioning peoples. This is self-preservation in action. It is not evil. It is a human virtue. And self-preservation can also be achieved without bloodshed or war.

    Borders must simply be respected and protected. And we must do the same for others. No wars for Israel!

    Too much diversity inside one nation is destabilizing, alienating, and polarizing. This is common sense and history talking.

    Race matters. It always will matter since temperment, intelligence and physical appearance will always matter. It’s that simple. All the various ‘minorities’ inside America understand this age-old fact. And this truism proves that European-Americans also have distinct political interests. Of course we do. It’s time we promoted them.

    As a fading majority, European-derived Americans realize that commonality–not diversity–is our strength. The rising political gridlock in Washington proves it.

    This is what Trump’s border wall is all about.

  6. ” . . . that is, by pretending that race doesn’t matter – millions of other Americans are playing identity politics. ”

    I am not sure where you you live, but at no time have US citizens in either the republican, democratic, liberal, conservative or any other aisle pretended that skin color doesn’t matter. identity politics to skin color is main stage since the nation’s founding. And despite all the complaining is one established by whites.

    I am a conservative because it alines with how I think one should live life and how to best exist in society at large. That means being a conservative is a life style choice. And frankly, it matters not what skin tone, anyone of any color can live and adopt that lifestyle. The question is press in answered in the press. For those who consider conservative life, ideology, orthodoxy merely a strategy for winning political gambits, then perhaps what you get is what you describe — people who abandon traditional ethos for something more appealing to win elections. That’s when one should cease calling themselves conservative.

    I don’t have to be a black person to know the color issue is older than the country. It is convenient, it is preforged and takes little or no effort to sling it around, even dress it up to give it force. But if the issue is traditionalism: faith, family, and systems that aide a society to grow healthy platforms for freedom, fair play, and good order – respect and value for institutions that promote and protect the same – then skin tone is in reality inconsequential. Unless one lives in a society that structured itself around skin color regardless of its benign nature —

    Well, then skin color will matter. But that is the result of structuration – not something innate. I would like to the case that US citizens of any color are vying for anything different than what i hold dear as a conservative. The battle for conservatives as it with people of faith is a long one.

  7. KenH says:

    On any given issue, the “conservative” view of today is often the “liberal” view of ten years earlier.

    Ain’t that the truth. The conservative talking points of today were the leftist talking points of yesterday. In 10-15 years, possibly sooner, conservatives will be talking about combatting “white privilege” and hailing Barack Obama as a conservative icon in an attempt to stay relevant amidst the browning citizenry.

    In 2024 I can already see The National Review running an article titled “The conservative case for combatting white privilege.”

    When I started reading The National Review in 1992 it ran articles very similar to what one would find on sites like American Renaissance today and regularly wrote movie reviews detailing anti-white bias in Hollywood. It’s now a shell of its former self after the bloody purges of wrongthinkers starting later that decade and their need to virtue signal to the left. The one thing that hasn’t changed is their unwavering support fof Israel and the Jewish people.

    Conservatives used to regularly rail against multiculturalism, affirmative action and opposed homosexuality, but not anymore. They are now committed to making multiracialism and multiculturalism work (Dems R the real racists), have dropped opposition to affirmative action like a hot potato and greeted Trump’s support for LGBTQ at the 2016 Republican convention to raucous applause.

  8. KenH says:

    Conservative luminary (((Ben Shapiro))) recently said that “racists” should have their careers ruined. At one time those were the musings of deranged leftists and the SPLC and not to be taken seriously but if Benny has his druthers it will become mainstream conservatism.

    So Jewish “conservative” and Jewish leftist thought intersect at matters of Jewish group interest and translated from Ben’s jewspeak he’s saying that enemies of the Jewish people should be destroyed especially if they’re white and anti-semitic or refuse to accept the raceless nation the Jews are busily superimposing on America. Constitutional civil liberties and America’s long standing (until recently) tolerance of dissident views will just have to take a back seat to Jewish racial interests. This is (((Trotskyism))) and not conservatism.

    The Jewish influence on discourse cannot be understated. I’d like to dismiss soy boy Ben and his high pitched, feminine voice but there’s a lot of airheads in the Republican party and on the kosher right who listen to him and fancy him as some kind of advanced thinker.

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  9. nickels says:

    So conservatism means dismantling social security?
    Sign me up with AOC, then.

    Conservative = absolute Christian Monarchy and distributism or nothing.

    • Replies: @eah
  10. To mention the choice to engage in same behavior in the same breath as conservative orthodoxy as to support — to misunderstand conservativism.

    And I know of know conservative who embraces the community known as LGBTQ or whatever acronym is newly on its way.

    President Trump did not run as a conservative, and many of the refernces above are not about conservative ethos, but the strategy of the republican party to gain votes.

  11. Rich says:

    The author confuses “conservative” with “Republican”. Conservatives make up a plurality of the Republican party, but don’t in any way control it. The overwhelming majority of actual conservatives would happily return to the ethos of pre-WWII USA.

  12. Mulegino1 says:

    As G.K. Chesterton astutely observed: “Progressives exist to make mistakes; conservatives exist to prevent them from being corrected.”

    • Replies: @Sollipsist
  13. And therein lies the fail. Whiteness is a genetic marker not an identity. It may have an impact as one is socialized, but other than that — it has no bearing on identity.

    The person to identity is shaped and molded by environment. A white child does enter the world and drift to ward GB, Russia, Germany, Poland. They don’t exit the womb speaking english, french or latin. That is all learned and negotiated creation of self.

    I think a look at the research of George Herbert Meade as delineated by Dr. Blumer makes a very sound case. One of the tragic aspects about our US polity is that it theoretically understands this, but have never deeply invested in it.

  14. @EliteCommInc.

    But that is the result of structuration – not something innate. I would like to the case that US citizens of any color are vying for anything different than what i hold dear as a conservative.

    Around 64% of blacks are born out of wedlock compared to 18% for whites. That’s different countries.

    Around six times the rate for criminal charges. Again, distinct peoples with different notions of socially acceptable behavior. And since you seem to be under the impression that this is all just a matter of ideation, maybe write your conservative ideals on a piece of paper and pass it around the hood. All the welfare offices, the juvenile justice, the extra policing, the armed security in schools, the social workers can be shut down as blacks adopt your impeccable logic.

    A lot of the conflict arises from vestigial white local governments enforcing their social norms on people who don’t think 300-pound men walking around high and shoving shopkeepers around to steal cigars for blunts should end up shot.

    “Hispanics,” more commonly Meso-Americans, tend to have lower rates of social pathology, at least, so long as they’re not running the place. Then their social pathologies are off the charts. They also copulate way younger and their males really, really do not like formal schooling, to their credit. It might be a refreshing addition to ornery Anglo-Celt culture, if we all weren’t locked in this crazed church-lady Prussian anthill, and if white men cared to marry 5 foot tall Aztecs. Well, there’s Jeb Bush and his ubermenschen offspring.

    Where do you think Diversity comes from? People have been drawing lines around themselves and marrying within their sub-group for millenia. They’re still doing it; OK Cupid has lots of data.

    Catalonians, Basques, Czechs, Slovaks, Norwegians, Swedes, Copts and Muslims, Pakistanis and Hindu, Igbo and Yoruba, all of Europe and the British Isles are testament to how Diversity is more than just skin color.

    This is like Boomer Conservatism, back when the place was near 90% white and “immigration” was the British Brain Drain. A lot of my peer group has that model still stuck in their heads.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
  15. people who don’t think 300-pound men walking around high and shoving shopkeepers around to steal cigars for blunts should end up shot.

    That would include pretty much anybody who is not a nutjob: lethal force is the kind of thing that is supposed to be a last resort, not a mechanism to help scared weak little bitch pigs cope with normal parts of their work environment.

    What you described is petty theft and minor assault; even at their worst, the British didn’t execute petty criminals after the 1700s (they shipped them to Australia for a while).

    If Darren Wilson – the piss-weak scared little bitch who shot Brown – had been competent, Brown might have faced some prison time. Instead, he got shot 6 times (including twice in the head) and is dead. That’s another piece of evidence as to weak little bitch Wilson’s incompetence: he hit Brown 6 times, but he discharged his weapon 12 times.

    How come there was no video from Wilson’s squad vehicle?

    Wilson is a very good example of why it should be mandatory for pigs to wear body cameras, and for any evidence they give to be ignored unless it’s on video. The type of guy who wants to be a pig, is a guy who wants to wield the power of the system… but is too stupid to get into Law and too chickenshit to join the military.

    HBDers already know this: Pig departments select for stupid. There is a persistent claim that the pig cognitive testing correlates with IQ and that it equates to an upper-IQ boundary of ~110 and a mean IQ of ~104. This involves absolutely heroic assumptions about the link between their cognitive tests and IQ – assumptions that are at huge variance with the fact that most pigsties will accept a candidate with a GED.

    There has been at least one lawsuit alleging anti-high-IQ discrimination in hiring: Jordan vs City of New London (2000), an unreported case from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

    Let’s leave aside that the supposed-125IQ plaintiff – who was 46 years old when he applied to be a pig – went on to work as a fucking prison guard… so we can stipulate that a score of 33 on the test is not IQ125 (and also that Jordan’s not wired up right). Pig and prison guard are not the two best-available economic alternatives for an IQ of 125 (except if you’re a psychopath).

  16. @Kratoklastes

    NB – forgot to mention: the link to Jordan v City of New London starts with the appellate decision, in which the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower-court decision, which held that Jordan’s civil rights had not been violated.

    The initial decision is at the same link, lower down.

    The pigsty in question did not contest the material facts (i.e., they did not deny that they discriminate against people who score ‘too high’ on the cognitive portion of the entry test for their sty). They sought summary judgement of the case, on the basis that there was “a rational basis for the government’s conduct” – and the summary decision was in their favour.

    And while I’m here, another thing…

    It’s kinda weird that soi-disant ‘conservatives’ think that it’s hors jeu for ‘liberals’ to use social power to impose costs on conservatives – things like Brendan Eich’s ouster from Mozilla; James Damore’s firing from Google; Sargon of Akkad’s deplatforming on Patreon… and all that sort of thing.

    I’m not saying I support that strategy myself: I’m strongly agin it, because it’s extremely disproportionate.

    However there are some people who are so inconsistent that they also think that asymmetric, disproportionate infliction of harm is reprehensible if it’s SJWs e-mailing HR to get you sacked… but that it’s OK for a fat black petty criminal to be shot to death so long as the shooter has the right costume (and was a bit frightened).

    Just go through that process: try to hold both thoughts at once ->
    ⓐ SJW sends email to your employer calling you an antisemite or a racist or transphobic… bad, very bad.
    ⓑ High-school underachiever with a gun and a costume kills fellow untermenschnothing to see here: Darkie had it comin’ coz he was big and a bit scary.

  17. @Kratoklastes

    Brown was not shot because of petty theft and intimidation. Brown was on the attack against a uniformed officer. Brown crossed a line he never should have if he actually valued his life. The officer was in the right. It was not “asymmetric, disproportionate infliction of harm”, Brown would have committed murder if the officer didn’t stop him. Deadly force is proportional when used to stop someone from using deadly force or even “mere” serious bodily harm.

    • Agree: Mark G., silviosilver
  18. @Kratoklastes

    You don’t seem very well acquainted with the facts of the case.

    It’s very hard to take anti-cop ranters seriously when they distort the truth so blatantly.

    In pretty much every case of you’ve-got-to-see-this alleged police “brutality” outrage that I’ve come across, I’ve decided the cop acted more or less appropriately.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @EliteCommInc.
  19. @Kratoklastes

    Fake but true.

    At the hands of a pizza hut employee!

    Note neither of these people were cops, and at least one of them was black (the chick who almost got raped, don’t know about the pizza dude).

    So it’s not just pigs but pizza hut employees as well.

    I may have ample complaints about law enforcement myself but this commentary wreaks of “He dindu nuffin! He wuz jus robbin da store and dat pizza hut guy shot him! He wuz goin to college!”

    Here the perps are white (well at least 2.5 of them):

    The grandpa thinks it wasn’t a fair fight.

    The truth is the cops are there to protect the criminals from the victims at least as much as the other way around. Without these piggies the penalty for most crimes is death. John Q Public doesn’t need a jury of peers to lack reasonable doubts before he shoots an intruder.

    You think the piggies are violent wait until you see what happens without them.

  20. @mark green

    Radical Center has an Asian wife and offspring. They spend time in Asia.

    • Replies: @Ace
  21. The conservative tries to conserve the status quo. The liberal demands change x. Compromise leads to one half x. The conservative continues trying to preserve the status quo, but the liberal has learned to demand 2x.

    • Agree: mark green, Joseph Doaks
    • Replies: @Joseph Doaks
  22. If we look to the nation’s founding the “conservatives” were the anti-federalists and the “liberals” were the big-government Hamiltonian Federalists. Both groups evolved–and vanished in original form. Democrats were the conservative party because they were more anti-big business and more for protecting traditional values (which included Slavery). Republicans were all about big business supported by big government. Recall Lincoln was a railroad lawyer before he was President and Lincoln supported pro-big business legislation like steep tariffs and lad give aways to railroads.

    Move to the 20th century and the Republicans have mislead Americans into thinking that their pro-big business agenda was conservative. It was not. Republicans wooed disaffected Southern Democrats (the real conservatives) after passage of the Civil Rights Acts.

    Today there is no conservative party at all. Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the pro-big business agenda.

    A real conservative agenda would be Jeffersonian. It would be anti-big business, it would avoid foreign entanglements, it would be for steeply progressive taxes to avoid wealth inequality. Jefferson thought that vast inequality of wealth would wreck our system of government. A conservative government party would disfavor professional politicians. It would disfavor strong federal laws and prefer strong local laws–even if the dissimilarity of local laws hurt business.

    Perhaps the most Jeffersonian of moments in the recent past was the Southern Agrarian moment in the late 1920s early 1930s.

    A conservative party would favor strict environmental and zoning laws to preserve nature and to maintain the scale of communities. A conservative party would favor strong government planning because the wisdom of the community (and its values) would trump your choices.

    There are no real “conservatives” in today’s public sphere.

  23. utu says:

    I’ve decided the cop acted more or less appropriately

    I have seen several case where I had no doubt that that shootings by police wre not needed and not justified. Police can kill with impunity in the US. According to statistics only 0.35% policemen are convicted.

  24. “Not a single prominent surviving conservative politician disputed or protested that view.”

    Fixed it for you : Plenty of “prominent” conservative politicians have disputed plenty of liberal platitudes like The Magic Poem or “Diversity is our Strength” and were properly defenestrated by their own types.

  25. ababush says:

    “If white America has a future, it won’t be secured by conservatives. It will be secured only by European Americans who reject “business-as-usual” politics and the familiar but ultimately irrelevant “conservative” and “liberal” categories, and who instead embrace a worldview rooted in their heritage, history and identity, and act forthrightly to defend and promote their own group interests.”

    A kind of “Yellow vest” movement?

  26. California, Hawaii, Illinois, Wisconsin, Western Oregon, Western Washington, and the seat of the federal government are all lost, most likely permanently.

    Balkanization might still be practical. That was why 0bama started using HUD to seed low caste genetic filth in red states. “Finish up the left’s ‘Destroy Historical America’ project”. That or maybe a plague will wipe out all but european descended gun owner preppers. It’s about as likely.

  27. anon[378] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mark G.

    He also suggests that homosexuals were oppressed by the law back in 1930.
    Now, that was before my time, but I find it hard to believe.

  28. Jason Liu says:

    Conservatives just suck at fighting culture wars against domestic enemies. They don’t have the personality and skillset for it. Many don’t even recognize the enemies within, or are too distracted by potential foreign threats, or assume good faith in leftists and try to debate them rationally. They’re not as good at verbal or social attacks as the left. Many don’t realize they’re under attack until it becomes very obvious.

    Not that this is limited to America, right wingers are like this all over the world. I suspect its because the right is more “male” and therefore more oriented towards external threats than internal ones, and not as good at verbal and emotional manipulation.

  29. @utu

    It still is not very likely to happen. In a nation of probably 375 million people, things happen, but it’s a teeny tiny statistical blip, compared to number of individual contacts police have with civilians annually.

    We chose the right to keep and bear arms over having unarmed bobbies. My personal preference. When you have an armed populace, just like when you have soldiers in a vague war zone, you have, usually youngsters, with itchy trigger fingers. You are way safer around ANY US LEOs then you are around a bunch of young soldiers in a guerilla war. Black kid shoots a haji in Syria? “Unfortunate things happen.” Black kid gets shot because a LEO thought he saw a gun? “Systemic failure combined with racism”.

    blahWhatever, dude.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Chris Mallory
  30. anon[378] • Disclaimer says:

    Uniformed cops don’t carry guns in New Zealand, so Kratoklastes is probably used to giving them a bit of cheek.
    America must be a culture shock for him.

  31. @Kratoklastes

    You can do better than that. How would you treat a student essay which didn’t distinguish between a court determination of the legal issue whether a case against a defendant pleading a defence of self defence had been proven beyond reasonable doubt to the satisfaction of a jury (or was likely to be provable in the chief prosecutor’s opinion) and the use of monopolistic or oligopolistic power in the market to silence some political views?

  32. Pft says:

    Frankly there is no difference between the 2 parties except for superficial issues and appearances. No liberals or conservatives left, just corporate techno -fascists on the take.

    Obamacare was just a dusted off Republican plan from the 90’s. NAFTA was negotiated by Bush and signed as is by Clinton. Clinton balanced the Federal Budget. Republicans only care about deficits when Democrats are in office. Republicans in the 20th century used to be the peace party and favored a small military and non interference in other countries affairs , and balanced budgets. The only divorced Presidents have been modern day Republicans. Standards are slipping.

  33. @silviosilver

    And your more or less is the problem. Good grief either the officer acted in accordance of the la w or her or she did not.

    More or less means the citizen is not at fault. Because the standard for police conduct by the law has far more barriers to the state. That’s a bizarre standard — more or less.

    Just admit you are willing to give an agent of the state the benefit of the doubt. Despite the fact that you live in a country founded on distrust of state power and their agents – hence the revolution.

    More or less . . .

  34. @Mulegino1

    Thank you. The only worthwhile thing about this article was reading that quote in the comments.

  35. Bruno says:
    @Mark G.

    This answer to article illustrates how deep the conservative mind has been infected by the topics presented by the article.

    It’s true than on TV black, Latinos and Asians defend openly their races rights and only whites don’t do that. Converting the migration topic on a race topic would be nuclear. But the comments you read even here show the people are not willing to go this way

  36. Bruno says:

    Extremelly interesting historical perspectives. What are the causes ? Why are whites forbidden to express their ethnic interest when everybody else does ?Kevin McDonald hypothesis ? Or is there something else ?

  37. Franz says:

    A “real conservative” approach, Tom Jefferson-style.

    Let’s see:

    Bust up the interstate highways and high-speed railroads (only benefit Walmart and Amazon, after all).

    States rights absolutism: Right (duty) to evict anyone from any Sovereign State without visible means of support (Quite common under Eisenhower, and even in the 80s Colorado had a stop-check system for out-of-state cars containing people who might end up on the public dole. Perfectly legal.)

    Local content laws for food, clothing, durable goods: George Washington (among almost all the rest) was a total mercantilist and believed Americans should only consume what Americans produce. (Logical stuff excepted, say, bananas.)

    Show me a conservatism like that, that rebuilds solid communities that make conservatism possible, you got my vote. Till then, like the Southern Agrarians, you’re just pissin’ in the river.

    • Replies: @Cleburne
  38. Realist says:

    If white America has a future, it won’t be secured by conservatives. It will be secured only by European Americans who reject “business-as-usual” politics and the familiar but ultimately irrelevant “conservative” and “liberal” categories, and who instead embrace a worldview rooted in their heritage, history and identity, and act forthrightly to defend and promote their own group interests.

    Agreed. And if White America doesn’t have a future neither does America.

  39. @Kratoklastes

    Why are ignorant, hate-filled anti-Whites so uniformly incapable of understanding the simple point that Brown was not shot because of his strong-arm robbery of the store, or because he was walking down the middle of the street, but because he attacked Wilson?

    Is is because their virulent, unreasoning anti-White hatred blinds them to the obvious facts of the case? Or because of their worship of the Teevee as God, and their determination to accept whatever narrative it feeds them as equivalent to divine revelation?

    Just curious.

    Hatred and disdain for the differently-cognitively-abled is not only “ableist,” but “racist,” btw — you really need to be more tolerant.

  40. eah says:

    SS is just a tax — no one, no matter how much SS tax was paid, has any inherent right to any level of benefits, or any benefit payments whatsoever — courts have ruled definitively on this — Congress can change the law re SS tax and benefits at any time — it is purely a cash flow system: either there is enough tax revenue to fund benefits or there isn’t — to make it into some kind of political ‘Holy Grail’, as if there are no alternatives, is absurd.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @schrub
    , @map
  41. @KenH

    “The conservative talking points of today were the leftist talking points of yesterday.”


    Below, Republican, “conservative” Mike DeWine in action in his FIRST day as Ohio Governor. Just a few years back, this stuff would be cutting edge “progress” coming out of California.

    “DeWine, a Cedarville Republican, signed an order re-stating one put in place by former governor John Kasich late last year. It is an anti-discrimination policy for state government that includes protections against discrimination based on gender identity or expression. The order also prohibits discrimination based on “status as a parent during pregnancy and immediately after the birth of a child, status as a parent of a young child, status as a foster parent…. State Sen. Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood, an openly gay woman, said the family-friendly employment policy is a model and ‘is truly the right thing to do.’”

  42. “Why Conservatives Can’t Win”

    Conservatives can’t win for the same reason that the Washington Generals can’t beat the Harlem Globetrotters — they’re not supposed to. Winning is not their job.

    Just look at the latest Steve King witch hunt — “conservative” Republicans falling all over themselves to appease the NYT, and to demonize King, for the “crime” of suggesting that perhaps the (((media))) narrative was going a little overboard in excessively, unrelentingly demonizing Whites. Hey, it’s not as if Whites are the GOP’s core constituency, or anything…

    Meanwhile, we’re treated to the comically hypocritical spectacle of the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, and (of course) the ADL/ AJC/ Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) and innumerable other Jewish ethnic activist groups — which exist for the sole purpose of advancing specific tribal interests — bleating at length about how “immoral” it is for an elected representative to actually stand up for his own people, even implicitly. There’s been no word from AIPAC yet on the moral status of more aggressive advocacy on behalf of one’s tribe.
    “Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chair Castro Condemns Rep. Steve King’s “Racist” Comments”
    “Congressional Black Caucus wants action against Republican Steve King”
    “Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus
    CAPAC Chair Judy Chu Calls On Republicans To Take Substantive Action Against Congressman Steve King”
    “Jewish Groups Slam Republican Congressman Steve King Over “White Supremacist” Remark”

    Interestingly, the narrative for the recent NYT attack appears nearly identical to this one laid out in an ADL press release published in Mother Jones back in October — just with a couple of alleged quotes and a few more details added to lend an air of verisimilitude.
    “Anti-Semitic and Offensive”: Jewish Watchdog Group Slams GOP Rep. Steve King

    It doesn’t matter how pro-Israel you are — and Steve King is very pro-Israel — if you’re not actively anti-White, you’re not an (((acceptable))) conservative in the current year. You’ll be subjected, as King is, to constant attacks as a so-called “not-see”/ “White supreemist”/ “racist,” and all kinds of other dog whistles for anti-White hatred.

    • Agree: mark green
    • Replies: @Grace Poole
  43. The Dutch Republic was admired by most foreign visitors for, among other things, such as well regulated markets, the social security systems, widows, children, poor, old people.
    Seldom it is explained that these social security systems were not philantropy, but political survival.
    The Republic was ruled by merchants, the navy was no problem for them, admirals seldom overthrow governments, the merchants owned the ships

    But the army was a problem, in times of peace army commanders often get the idea that they should rule.
    The Republic of merchants had hired an aristocrat as army commander, a most unusual situation at the time.
    So in times of peace the army was seen as a threat, to be disbanded as soon as possible.

    Alas, the consuquence was that, if there was no army, who could protect against insurrections ?
    There were insurrections, the Dutch word ‘bijltjesdag’ reminds us, the tool of the shipbuilders was a bijl, small axe, every now and then Amsterdam had insurrections of these men, using their bijltjes as weapon.
    So preventing insurrections was of the highest importance, thus social security systems.

    Nothing particular in history, Roman emperors kept the masses quiet with free bread or free grain, and amusements.
    These ‘amusements’ also had as function to make the Roman citizens fear the barbarians.

    USA conservatives also do not want insurrections or revolutions.
    Putin, the present barbarian ?

    Sometimes I wonder if anything ever changed in history.

  44. Hope the check doesn’t bounce from the Soros guys. Just another America hater with lousy paper.

  45. @Lars Porsena

    Now the family of one of the deceased criminals is complaining. They don’t believe it was fair that Peters was allowed to defend himself with an AR-15 when the criminals were only armed with knives and brass knuckles.

    Madness all over the world, it seems.
    We had the Henriques case, someone from a Caribbean island, making the impression of being a terrorist, shouting ‘I have a gun’.
    Three policemen tried to arrest him, he resisted violently, he died in the fight, a neck grip.
    Dutch police is not trigger happy.

    For three or so years his relatives sued the policemen, without success, and tried to get the names of the arresting policemen, ‘in order to be able to grieve’, or something like that
    During the whole period the policemen were suspended.
    People like this, in my opinion, do not belong in the type of society we have, or had.
    They did not get the names, nor could they see them in court, but I fear these policemen will live with fear for several years to come.

  46. @utu

    You have no doubt.
    If three masked men had entered my house with obvious criminal intentions, I suppose I would not hesitate to shoot them all.
    Not with the intention of killing them, but simply to protect my family, my house and myself.
    A burglar takes risks, three burglars take a lot of risk.

  47. onebornfree says: • Website

    “The kind of man who wants the government to adopt and enforce his ideas is always the kind of man whose ideas are idiotic” H.L.Mencken

    “Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class.” Albert J. Nock

    “Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be “reformed”,”improved”, nor “limited” in scope, simply because of their innate criminal nature.” onebornfree


    • Agree: jacques sheete
  48. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    Come on ! Reagan was an actor , and the department of propaganda of the Regime told him what to say .

  49. @Grace Poole

    Cohen opens with the assertion that Zionism is NOT racism.

    What IS zionism, according to Professor Cohen, (then) “one of the foremost experts on contemporary Judaism, has resigned from his position as tenured professor at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion?”

    Excerpts from transcript of above video:


    “I’m an American Jew who made aliyeh, who moved to Israel in 1992, I spend 2/3 of my time here and the rest in Israel, I consider myself a zionist and I have since I was a teenager.
    Zionism is the national liberation movement of the jewish people.
    First of all, zionism says that You know what, we’re a people. We’re not just a religion, we’re not a faith, we’re a people.
    Those who think we are a faith are influenced by western , frankly American conceptions of what it means to be jewish, but even in America and all around the world, jews regard themselves as a PEOPLE, or in Greek, an ethnos, which is a people, or in Hebrew, as am Israel, the people of Israel, and as such we are a national -like group.
    Maybe you don’t want to use the word National, I do, but we’re national like group that has a religion. and let’s be honest, we’re about the most secular religious groups in america. we’re about as religious as our unchurched christians. so we’re a very strong group but it’s clearly — we’re strong not because of our religion, we’re strong because we see ourselves as a nation.

    Do zionists see themselves as “nationals” of the United States, where Cohen, himself, lives “1/3 of the time?” Does he vote in the USA or in Israel, where he is a “national” in residence 2/3 of the time?
    How about the legions of Jewish people, who may or may not be “nationalist Jews with their own language, culture” who hold critical decision-making, influencing, and money-spending positions in the government and institutions of the United States of America – nation? If their passion for Zion is so compelling, what are they doing in USA?

    This is the core of the Esther conundrum — at the time Esther and Mordechai took pains to subvert the Persian government and kill more than 75,000 innocent Persian civilians, those same Persians had pledged their financial and political support for Hebrews — Yehud — to return to their own “homeland.”
    Why didn’t they go?
    Why did Esther, Mordechai, and thousands of other Yehud elect to remain in Persia, living off the fat of the land and largesse of the Persian people, and killing them when those uppity Persians got tired of being host to Minnie-the-Moocher?

    [Cohen:] . . . a normal nation lives on its own land with its own culture and its own language , and that’s how the early zionist movement started.
    . . .

    [O]ne thing that all zionists agree on are these three principles:
    One, Jews are a nation;
    Two, we have to be liberated by having our own homeland and we have a right to our own homeland like other groups have rights to their homeland, and
    Three, we’re a movement

  50. Anonymous[424] • Disclaimer says:

    But if you are fit , and if you want to work past 65 , past 70 , depending of your work , the Government will not permit it .

    Our society is dying of old age .

    • Replies: @Joseph Doaks
  51. They can’t win because these Conservative faggot CUCKS voted to import the highly racialized nonwhite Democratic Party Voting Bloc……….They are FAGGOT CUCK LOCAL REPUBLICAN PARTY CLUBHOUSE GRIFTERS……Congressman Peter King from Seaford Long Island is an example of one of these malodorous creatures…….

  52. Sean says:

    The elite don’t need the common people now, and technology will only add to their redundancy. Only a war could alter the terms on which the ruling class dictate the direction of the country.

  53. Miro23 says:

    Ordinary politics involves issues of day-to-day concern to most people, such as taxes, jobs, affordable housing and health care, entitlement benefits, and so forth. Appeals for votes in routine politics like that are based on the presumption that we all share the same basic outlook and interests, and that we’re all in this together as Americans.

    It’s obvious that Americans don’t share the same outlook and interests – notably the Zio-Glob elite vs. the Deplorables, and that’s apart their private MSM stirring up the ethnic feuding.

    While white Americans are still trying to play the traditional political game – that is, by pretending that race doesn’t matter – millions of other Americans are playing identity politics. While white conservative Americans keep playing “softball,” insisting that “We’re all Americans,” the serious contenders are playing “hardball,” the only game that matters in the long run.

    And the most serious identity hardball players are American Jews seeking their tribal advancement. They don’t believe for a moment that “race doesn’t matter”.

    If white America has a future, it won’t be secured by conservatives. It will be secured only by European Americans who reject “business-as-usual” politics and the familiar but ultimately irrelevant “conservative” and “liberal” categories, and who instead embrace a worldview rooted in their heritage, history and identity, and act forthrightly to defend and promote their own group interests.

    And IMO the essential first step to reestablish that heritage, is to arrest, interrogate, put on trial and execute, those responsible for the murder of 3000 Americans on 9/11. The American public should know every detail of that treason. Who planned it, who cooperated, who covered for them and get (from the government and MSM) a detailed account of the whole thing.

    Of course, The President, Congress and the US system of justice are 100% incapable of taking that step, so they are illegitimate in the most basic way. They don’t represent the interest of the US public and don’t have any right to power.

  54. The elephant in the room is the Zionist control of the U.S. government and their drive for a Zionist NWO which has driven America to communism in every way since the passage of the Zionists privately owned and unconstitutional FED and IRS and these two vehicles have been the base on which stealth communism is been injected into America and totally defeats any conservative policies that have been put forth since 1913!

    If anyone doubts that America has been under communist Zionist control read the 10 planks of the communist manifesto.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @redmudhooch
  55. The author is correct in pointing out Reagan’s phony conservatism, but is wrong when he claims we have more freedom today.

    Reagan was no fiscal conservative, which seems to be what most “conservatives” want, but he was a political conservative which means he was very much for the status quo, i.e., big government exists to enforce the will of the hoi oligoi against the preferences of the hoi polloi.

    His claim about increased freedom today is wishful imagining at best. Realistically we don’t even have the freedom to choose between buying inflated, virtually worthless, “health” insurance and going “bare.” He should try to start a business sometime; if he had any brains he’d soon see how much “freedom” is left.

    Check this;

    “Men haven’t got the freedom today that they had when the Constitution was written. The men in the West had a great deal of freedoms more than the men in the East who copied the traditions of Europe.
    In that time, men could go into their own business. They could follow farming and they could do this and that.”

    -Jeanette Rankin, interview, about 1977

    Rankin, running as a Republican Progressive, was the first woman voted to congress and was the only congressperson to vote against US entry into both world wars.

    Note: Even at that, the constitution, in fact, was written for the benefit of the money bag class. It was a huge link in the chain around our necks.

    • Replies: @Ace
  56. Teddy was a dandy and a showman fraud similar to Reagan (and Trump). Any conservatism was political (i.e., for the status quo) and not at all fiscal. His “trust busting” rhetoric did not apply to the trusts of his supporters, but to the trusts of his political rivals, I believe.

    I said, “No, there is a great difference. Taft is amiable imbecility. Wilson is willful and malicious imbecility and I prefer Taft.”

    Roosevelt then said : “Pettigrew, you know the two old parties are just alike. They are both controlled by the same influences, and I am going to organize a new party ” a new political party ” in this country based upon progressive principles.

    – R. F. Pettigrew, “Imperial Washington,” The story of American Public life from 1870 to 1920 (1922), p 234;id=yale.39002002948025;view=1up;seq=7;start=1;sz=10;page=search;orient=0

    We can all bet that any progressive rhetoric issuing from his mouth was nothing more than vote getting jaw-jaw, just like Reagan’s, Trump’s and all the rest.

    • Replies: @map
  57. wayfarer says:

    Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government, those entrusted with power, have in time and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.


    Why Nationalism and a Unified Country Terrifies Wall Street.

  58. Wally says:
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    Of the counties, Trump won 2700, Hillary won 400. If not for a few big cities, where Democrats have done their best to make ‘minorities’ dependent on government, Trump would have openly won the popular vote by a landslide.

    And now we have seen strong evidence of voter fraud indicating that Trump DID win the ‘popular vote’ as well

  59. It is well to keep in mind that all political terms become meaningless over time through fraudulent usage, and that politicians will say anything to get into and maintain power.

    No matter the labels or the rhetoric, in the end, we always get continued political conservatism, more fiscally conservative rhetoric, less fiscal conservatism and less liberty.

    It should be clear that the name of the political party in power is far less important than the particular regime’s financial and banking connections.

    …and that the “permanent government” continues to rule regardless of the party nominally in power.

    -Murray N. Rothbard, Wall Street, Banks, and American Foreign Policy

    This first appeared in World Market Perspective (1984) and later as a monograph published by the Center for libertarianStudies (1995).

    Rothbard was correct. It should be clear, but it never will be apparently.

  60. Z-man says:

    Good American Conservatism fails because it is corrupted by the Zionist/NEOCON Cabal.

  61. Wally says:
    @Desert Fox

    What’s laughable is how the neo-Communists try hide their Communism by distancing themselves from the very word ‘communism’. ‘We’re Socialists’, they say, as if that is different. Not.

    Yet, as mentioned, their founding document is The Communist Manifesto.

    • Agree: Desert Fox
    • Replies: @redmudhooch
  62. @niteranger

    See my comment#58 (though the # may change in this thread) in reply.

  63. I’m not one that believes in diversity is our strength and all that. Its pretty obvious people live better when they’re with their own. But with the current capitalist ruling class, their political puppets, and their outright hostile divisive media, there is really no point in us plebs complaining about one another, when we all share a common enemy. Maybe we should first work together to get rid of our common enemy, then we plebs resolve our issues with each other. As it stands right now you’re just playing into their hands when you spend all your time fighting each other instead of fighting them. Identity politics is a tool of divide and rule used by the ruling capitalist class against the working class. It should be rejected by all middle/lower class people, no matter which race.

    You should realize by now that your capitalist overlords don’t give a fuck about your country, your race or your culture. You’re just as much a n!gger to them as a Somalian, no more special than a Mexican. More profit is all that matters under this system and ruling elite. Period. No matter the cost to you or your family, if war is what it takes, so be it. If exporting your well paying middle class jobs to the 3rd world is what it takes so be it. If importing the 3rd world to “your” country is what it takes so be it. If taking more from the lower classes is what it takes to maintain their lifestyle, they’ll take from you until you have NOTHING. Period. Globalism is just the latest stage of capitalism you fools.

    Fighting with the other slaves solves nothing, changes nothing. This is exactly what clowns like Trump, Clinton, Bush or obama want. Anybody still playing the red team vs. blue team game is a dupe. Both parties serve the same master. Partisan hacks like D’Souza, Hannity or Rachel Maddow, all work for the same war profiteers, capitalist elite, international banks.

    Go listen to Farrakhan, he’s a black nationalist, he believes blacks would be better off separated from whites, just as the alt-right believes. Boxer Muhammed Ali held the same sort of views. What I’m saying is maybe blacks and whites, browns should stop fighting with each other, since most of us hold the same views, and work together to rid ourself of the common enemy of all civilized humanity? I’m sure most of the latinos fleeing their home countries would appreciate it if our capitalist overlords would stop murdering and pillaging their home countries, so they could stay in them. Same with Africans and Middle Eastern Arabs, I’m sure they would love for our evil psychopathic leaders to stop bombing/droning the shit out of them, stealing their shit, so they could stay home where they are.

    Thats all I’m saying. stop letting them play you, its the same crap they do to the Muslims and Africans, turn one group against another, then the Muslims or Africans waste all their time killing each other, while the elite are robbing them blind. Not that hard to understand. All of us, left or right, white or black, should reject this divisive crap and focus on the common enemy.

    The New Deal—which as Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a charter member of the oligarchic class, said—saved capitalism, was put in place because socialists were strong and a serious threat. The oligarchs understood that with the breakdown of capitalism—something I expect we will again witness in our lifetimes—there was a real possibility of a socialist revolution. They were terrified they would lose their wealth and power. Roosevelt, writing to a friend in 1930, said there was “no question in my mind that it is time for the country to become fairly radical for at least one generation. History shows that where this occurs occasionally, nations are saved from revolution.”

    In other words, Roosevelt went to his fellow oligarchs and said hand over some of your money or you will lose all your money in a revolution. And his fellow capitalists complied. And that is how the government created 15 million jobs, Social Security, unemployment benefits and public works projects. The capitalists did not do this because the suffering of the masses moved them. They did this because they were scared. And they were sacred of radicals and socialists.

    • Agree: niceland, Miro23
    • Replies: @Anon
  64. schrub says:

    If the government pension systems like social security start failing, (which they, in fact, they soon will based on current actuarial tables) where exactly will the government then get the additional money needed to keep them afloat and stop rioting in the streets?

    Remember all those IRAs (individual retirement accounts) and the 401Ks and 501Ks T that the government went out of their way to push, supposedly for our benefit.

    And you believed them. Your desire to save on taxes overcame your common sense.

    These funds are trillions of dollars very low hanging fruit. I predict that a Democrat controlled congress along with a Democrat president will be more than happy to freeze these assets for those who can’t prove a dire need (or maybe that you aren’t one of those evil white nationalists). You won’t necessarily lose, de jure, this money, you will merely lose, de facto, the use of it.

    This happened in Argentina many years ago. Financial accounts of the middle class and well to do were seized by the “socialist” government and they remain frozen today. The Argentinians who had enough influence to have had prior knowledge of this seizure quickly got their money out of the country before the seizure. You can see them today making their annual trips to banks in the UK or the USA to stock up on hard cash for their living expenses for the coming year in Argentina.

    Take a hint from the Indians (i.e. not Native Americans). There is more gold contained just in Indian owned jewelry than is held in the vaults of the five biggest national central bank holders of gold COMBINED.

    • Replies: @eah
  65. 21st century wire has a good article on the matter. Worth reading the whole thing.

    Why Inciting Emotions and Playing Political ID Games are Counterproductive

    It’s a playbook that is timeless, few are able to dominate many by segregating humanity into encampments. This simple scheme of dividing the public has evolved over time; what started with color, gender and religion has burgeoned into a paradigm of perpetual schisms where artificial constructs are created on a regular basis. It has gotten to the point where people say what they are for minutes before they say their names.

    The creation of these imposed identities serves a purpose beyond just manufacturing differences. Each time a subgroup is generated, people in those subgroups are also convinced that their pains are not the same as the pains felt by others. Demagogues are then empowered by the establishment and given megaphones to whisper separable grievances and condition us to have antipathy towards others who don’t belong in our cliques. Supposed activists and advocates are propped up by mainstream media and given platforms to inject antipathy and incubate sectarianism.

    • Replies: @map
  66. @Wally

    So Adolf was a communist? That hated communists?
    I thought he was fighting the capitalists Wally.
    Wally, I’m convinced more every day you and many here are sock puppets of the establishment you claim to hate. Your worship of ZOG puppet Trump gives you away. MIGA! Not good!

  67. utu says:

    Tiny blip? No, we are talking about approx. 1000 killings by police every year. This is about 50 times higher rate than in Europe.

    Syria? Being better than Syria is good enough for you?

    Most of the 1000 killings could have been avoided if police was better trained and had better defined rules of engagement and was not unconditionally supported by people like you.

  68. @FvS


    obviously someone that has no idea what a conservative is.

    • Replies: @FvS
  69. Agent76 says:

    June 19, 2016 America’s One-Party Government

    Today’s United States is a more realistic version of the type of society that George Orwell fictionally described in his allegorical novel 1984.

    Mar 2, 2014 Jeremy Scahill: The One Party State, The War Party

    Is the United States of America an Oligarchy? During the 2014 ISFLC, Jeremy Scahill speaks on the fact that in today’s world behemoth corporations are able to buy off politicians and pull the strings to impact legislature.

  70. @KenH

    “The Jewish influence on discourse cannot be understated…”

    The disease of political correctness that has infected Western “Culture” is the deadliest plague since the Black Death. Now Western culture is all about NIGGERS and their VooDoo ways: Tattoos, piercings, rape, profanity, blasphemy, sexual degeneracy, murder, theft and mayhem. The NIGGER, spurred on by their Jew masters, have made our world a toxic waste dump. Jews and their Morlock followers need eradication NOW.

  71. @blahWhatever

    I choose to have an armed populace and unarmed cops.

    Police in the US have proven over and over again that they are unfit to be allowed any weapon while on duty.
    Government employees do not have rights, they have granted privileges that We the People can remove from them.

  72. @Desert Fox

    If anyone doubts that America has been under communist Zionist control read the 10 planks of the communist manifesto.

    I thought it was Globalists! So its communists now? Are they using directed energy weapons to scramble our brains, turning us into globali…..I mean communists Desert fox?

    You folks are something else, I gotta stay out of here. Its like an infowars and breitbart twilight zone. Keep your story straight!

    Heres you New World Order folks, and they ain’t communists. Sorry

    Revealed – the capitalist network that runs the world

    • Replies: @Stonehands
    , @Stonehands
  73. Anon[382] • Disclaimer says:

    There is virtually no difference between Islam and Jews in terms of how they see White gentiles. In fact, both religions stem from the same root and have practically mirror theologies and aggressiveness toward non-members.

    Monotheism, itself, is nothing more than theologized genocide-justification for racial out-groups. It implies the elimination of all other gods, a notion that when decoded from its thinly veiled esoterism implies the elimination of all other peoples. It differs markedly even from trinitarian theology.

    In short, you cannot trust what any Muslim says and they often are in league with their Jewish brethren. This is an open secret. For example, Israeli is much close with Saudi than it is the USA. Israel is twenty percent Muslim and not twenty percent Christian for a reason.

    In your video, this Islamist is shifting what little blame has been able to stick to Jewish American influence and attempts to place it with Whites. A ridiculous notion in a nation in which we are attacked from every angle, with zero open group power of which to speak.

    His words reminded me of this recent article in Al Jazeera, in which a Jewish-Israeli author attempts to blame Zionism on White Supremacism and casts Jews as Zionism’s victims.

    Their lies have no moral nor rational limits. But we knew that.

    Isaiah 60:12

    For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.

    • Agree: anarchyst, Catiline
    • Replies: @Grace Poole
  74. turtle says:
    @mark green

    The key phrase is “Western (i.e., Western European) Civilization.”
    Skin color, or other “racial” distinguishing characteristics, are irrelevant.
    The historical *FACT* is that light skinned Europeans are mostly responsible for what we, as a species, are today.

    Tomorrow may belong to the Asians (who knows?) but the shining light which guides us must always be impartial inquiry into observable facts, and the implementation of such knowledge in the service of mankind.

  75. Mr. Anon says:

    We haven’t had a real Conservative President since Teddy Roosevelt.

    Nonsense. Roosevelt was a (self-styled) progressive and an exponent of empire.

    The last Conservative President we had was Coolidge. The last President we had who had any real conservative instincts was probably Nixon, although he didn’t govern by them.

    • Replies: @Alden
  76. @Anon

    Israeli is much close with Saudi than it is the USA.

    And the value set of European Americans. (h/t Mark Green ) is much closer to that of Persia/Iran, the quintessential Aryans.

    • Replies: @Alden
  77. @utu

    1000 people out of 375 million IS NOTHING.

    Medical mistakes kill a half million a year, 1/6 of all deaths in the US.

    I will take owning guns and nervous young cops over no guns owned by anybody but state and criminals. I do not believe you understood my post.

    “People like me” are very unlikely to be shot by LEOs, and do not see a crisis.

    I have been arrested eight times and was never abused in any way, nor ever in fear for my life. May have been intoxicated, but I didn’t do anything stupid. When is the last time you were in fear of an imminent death by cop, besides never?

  78. Alden says:

    Achievements of President Ronald Regean

    Greatly expanded affirmative action
    Amnesty for millions of illegals
    Appointed Sandra O’Connor who became a pro affirmative action liberal judge
    Presided over the transfer of manufacturing from the USA to China.

    Achievements of Governor Regean

    Used governors legislative office to lobby for legalization of homosexuality in California
    Used governors legislative office to lobby for legalization of abortion with Drs approval in California years before federal Roe vs Wade
    Fought Cesar Chavez who was anti the importation of illegal Mexican farm workers and fought to enact laws that only Americans and green card holders be hired instead of illegals.

    Whether White Nationalist or fuddy duddy anti abortion conservative I don’t see why any White or conservative can possibly think well of Regean

    Anti abortion idiots are better called ECWMs
    Enablers of colored welfare moms

  79. Alden says:
    @Grace Poole

    Persians and other Aryans have diverged a lot since some of us went west and north and the Persians went south 8,000 years ago.

    Between Israeli Armenian and Persian corrupt crooks whose national mottoes are lie cheat and steal there’s no difference. Commenting from the West coast Persian colony, Anon 257

  80. Alden says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Nixon a conservative, section 8 created the Hispanic affirmative action race by executive order appointed EEOC administrators who turned “ do not discriminate against qualified blacks to must discriminate against the best qualified Whites. Nixon disbursed millions to ultra liberal legal foundations and other liberal NGOs. School bussing hordes of black savages to civilized White schools was at its worst under Nixon.

    Nixon carried out and vastly vastly expanded LBJs war on poverty programs which were jewish created and directed wars on Whites in job discrimination and destruction of White neighborhoods and schools

    Nixon also opened the US to the hordes of Chinese students in our universities computer coolies in SV and squalid Chinatowns all over the country.
    Nixon began the transfer of American manufacturing to China.

    The 3 most anti White presidents were LBJ, Nixon and Obama.

    • Replies: @map
  81. Thomm says:

    White Trashionalism is a left-wing ideology. The economic views of the ideology are wholly left-wing, so the ideology is left-wing.

    • Disagree: apollonian
    • Troll: Hail
    • Replies: @FvS
    , @Lars Porsena
  82. @redmudhooch

    The line of credit ( juice extracted from plantation nigger white people in America i.e. -taxes) that is the lifeblood of borderless transnational corps. was obliterated in an orgy of bad derivatives in 2008. The remedy was the socialization of bad debt to be absorbed by the plebes at the behest of the DONOR CLASS.

    Communism is the idiot global banksters vs the disinherited, propertyless masses via GRAFT to their odious carbuncles in government.

  83. FvS says:

    White nationalism itself has no economic ideology inherently attached to it. However, many white nationalists may share certain views on economics and politics.

    • Replies: @apollonian
  84. The problem with “conservatives” is that they’re little more than pro-business sycophants; notice the meltdown they had after Tucker Carlson critiqued market fundamentalism. For them, as long as they get tax cuts, that’s all that really matters. When it comes to culture wars, their hearts just aren’t in it, the rhetorical attacks on SJWs notwithstanding.

    At the end of the day, they don’t actually believe in conserving anything.

  85. FvS says:

    Do conservatives want the same things as Democrats? If no, they should be white nationalists.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  86. apollonian says: • Website

    Real Patriots Are For Freedom, Hence Free Market–Death To Socialism, Which Is Genocide

    What?–WHY wouldn’t good patriots like WNs want freedom?–like original founding fathers, Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, et al. Hence real WN would want free-market–which is actually “capitalism,” but which has been made a dirty word, a “buzz-word” nowadays, due to the morons who ape the Marxist prop. “Crony”-capitalism is diff. fm classic capitalism.

    • Replies: @FvS
  87. @FvS

    Just nonsense.

    Skin color is nothing to political ideology. Otherwise, whites would all be conservative by tend to their genetic pigment.

    But as is clear, there are plenty of liberal whites: feminists, those who choose same sex relations, those who support murdering children in the womb, open borders, no nation at all as libertarians . . . if in fact whiteness was by genetic code of superior intelligence, morality, conservative ethos, christians — then by the very determination of code to whiteness, would also stem the previously referenced traits but as is clear the nation over — whites are not by determination of skin – conservative.

    • Replies: @Ace
    , @FvS
    , @James Forrestal
  88. eah says:


    What you mean is that SS has a cash flow problem: SS tax revenue is not enough to pay benefits — and this will get worse — but per what I said, this can be dealt with in a number of ways, eg raise SS (or other) taxes, reduce benefit payments, or “quantitative easing”, aka printing money (I say nothing about the political feasibility of these, or the consequences).

    And you believed them.

    People who took advantage of eg IRAs and 401-Ks made the right decision — what will happen in the future w/ these programs, or the asset pools built up by people taking advantage of them, I cannot say — re any (hypothetical) government action, the courts would have to rule (the US is not Argentina).

    Personally, I think some kind of “quantitative easing” is the most likely stopgap remedy for the cash flow problem of SS (and other ‘entitlement’ programs) — and it will be sold that way: as a stopgap, or temporary remedy that will spare the economy the shock of tax increases and people the pain of benefit cuts while the government figures out how to ‘fix’ these programs — the question is how will the dollar be affected? — initial reaction of the financial markets will likely be negative, but not dramatically so: there is simply no alternative to the US dollar, and none in sight — after that it will be ‘ho-hum’, and everything will return to normal, as after and during the earlier QE — today no one gives a damn what’s on the Fed’s balance sheet.

  89. @The Anti-Gnostic

    Diversity is more than just skin color.

    Skin color is the absolute least interesting aspect of differences between different human sub-species and population groups. Unfortunately, for the unobservant idiots of the world it’s often the only thing they notice. We live in a world of dull witted children who, upon observing an English Mastiff and a Mexican Chihuahua next to another can only discern a slight difference in size and nothing else, “One big, one little.”

    I’m at a point in my life where I’m so fed up with stupid that I can’t look at a television, listen to a radio, or spend any time out in public. There are probably YouTube videos of me out there – I’m the guy screaming at an imbecile an average citizen, “How the hell do you even manage to breath? You can’t read, you can’t follow the simplest monosyllabic single action instructions, and your shoes are on the wrong feet you retarded monkey!”

    • Agree: Joseph Doaks
    • LOL: The Anti-Gnostic
    • Replies: @3g4me
  90. Cleburne says:

    I agree 110% with everything written here.

  91. Three points…

    White Christian Americans would prefer neither Haiti nor Denmark, for the first is a shithole and the second would qualify to be a nanny-state with state control on gun rights.

    How is a man, who most likely descended from unwitting converts, who themselves were converted most likely by the descendants of the unwilling marranos in Portuguese Goa (D’Souzas) and who even now continues to be called by his hindoo first name (Dinesh) be considered a bona fide conservative?

    And Reagan was a product of the tinsel town and later on molded by the Annenbergs of the then popular TV Guide fame… how do you expect a man, who was nurtured and promoted by the cosmopolitan crowd, to be a classical conservative and look after the interests of the majority?

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
  92. Republicans have the false assumption their party, along with its founder good ol’ “honest Abe Lincoln” were all about upholding the constitution and individual rights when nothing could be farther from the truth. If you want the true history of the republican party and Abe Lincoln I suggest you read the works of Alan Stang who states: “Many patriots these days lament that the Republican Party has lost its way and gone wrong. It has diverged from the fiscally responsible, small government philosophy of Republican heroes like Robert Taft whom Eisenhower’s handlers finagled out of the nomination for President in 1952. We are told that is why today’s Republican Establishment hates Dr. Ron Paul with such a passion; that they hate him because, like Taft, he is the quintessential Republican. Patriots who say that are mistaken, of course. The reason the Republican Establishment hates Dr. Paul is precisely that he is not a traditional, mainstream Republican, that his platform of freedom is an aberration. The Republican Party didn’t go wrong, it didn’t go left.

    It has been wrong from the beginning, from the day it was founded. From the beginning, the Republican Party has worked without deviation for bigger, more imperial government, for higher taxes, for more wars, for more totalitarianism. From the beginning, the Republican Party has been Red.”

    • Agree: apollonian
  93. @Ozymandias

    Which is why “compromise” is not desirable when one side is right and the other is wrong.

  94. @Anonymous

    The government will not permit it? I thought there were laws AGAINST age discrimination.

  95. Anonymous[421] • Disclaimer says:

    I do like Tucker Carlson for his critique of the elites in “Ship of fools.”
    His Christian faith informs us when he sermonizes against judging
    people by their skin color. Here in Central Florida blacks and whites
    take their faith very seriously and yet, Church attendance is
    segregated voluntarily. What that means is anybody’s guess.

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
  96. @utu

    “Most of the 1000 killings could have been avoided if police was better trained and had better defined rules of engagement”

    This much is true. I thought Tasers were supposed to be a substitution for deadly force… what happened?

  97. @Reuben Kaspate

    White Christian Americans … How is a man, who most likely descended from unwitting converts, who themselves were converted …

    Erm, your lack of self-awareness is showing my friend. You do realize that us honkies aren’t desert people? That our ancestors were sold the Jew messiah cult by camel buggerers? That somehow we have been more successful than any other sub-species of man despite this 2,000 year old boat anchor tied around our necks?

    We lost Rome due to the Jew messiah cult, it remains to be seen if we will yet lose America and Europe, but my money is on “yes”.

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  98. anonymous[150] • Disclaimer says:

    another Unz article reaches out to the 3rd rail of US politics to spark a sensible debate; where else do you find such stuff in good company? kudos again, Ron!

  99. @Kratoklastes

    it’s hors jeu for ‘liberals’ to use social power to impose costs on conservatives – things like Brendan Eich’s ouster from Mozilla; James Damore’s firing from Google; Sargon of Akkad’s deplatforming on Patreon…

    Ok, so “hors jeu” is the technical term for that sort of thing.

    “Youtube just deleted my channel”


    “Hors jeu”

  100. @Lars Porsena

    Poe’s law. 4chan photoshop, or real.

  101. @Kratoklastes

    it’s OK for a fat black petty criminal to be shot to death

    Criminals, poor schlubs just can’t get a break. Sigh.

  102. Sparkon says:

    My TV operates only under strict gag order. I can’t stand the babble, so mute is the default setting. I can show closed captioning, or not, usually not. Occasionally, I unmute for a minute or two. This morning I glanced at NBC’s Meet the Press. I don’t much care for Chuck Todd, who is vaguely obnoxious, but I noticed from a graphic that he was talking with Dick Cheney’s daughter Liz Cheney, 3rd ranking House Republican. I amused myself with the sudden curiosity if she perchance might possess daddy Dick’s signature flapjaw with the side-diving lower lip, so I decided to give a listen…

    CHUCK TODD: But you know what some will say? There’s always an ISIS. There’s always an Al Qaeda. They’re just going to change their name. So it means we’re always going to be there. What do you say to folks that think that no matter — that your definition means, we’re always going to have troops in the Middle East?

    REP. LIZ CHENEY: We have to fight them there, so they don’t fight us here. And the definition of victory in the Middle East, the definition of victory in Afghanistan, in Syria, is that we don’t have another 9/11.

    “We have to fight them there, so they don’t fight us here…The definition of victory…is that we don’t have another 9/11.”


    You can always count on Conservatives to come up with a good plan. Well, it’s good for somebody, but probably not for us.

    The right way to disassemble Cheney’s specious logic and deconstruct her sophistry is to appreciate the fact that fighting them there is likely to stir up –no doubt already has– all kinds of long-lasting hatred against the United States that could easily fuel passions to exact revenge far into the future due to the severe damage and loss of life inflicted on quite a few nations by our bombastic but blundering military with their wonderful bombs.

    And so we get the best enemies money can buy. Gare own teed.

    Well, maybe one fine day, somebody somewhere somehow really will “Give Peace a Chance” but that would probably raise Conservative ire for being, you know, too Liberal.

    • Replies: @dimples
  103. Ace says:
    @jacques sheete

    How did the Constitution favor particular business or moneyed interests?

    And am I, a conservative, in favor of the status quo now? I never knew.

  104. dimples says:

    REP. LIZ CHENEY: We have to fight them there, so they don’t fight us here. And the definition of victory in the Middle East, the definition of victory in Afghanistan, in Syria, is that we don’t have another 9/11.

    But wait! The alleged hijackers were mostly Saudi Arabian, America’s ally!

    • Replies: @Miro23
  105. Ace says:

    Whites may differ on various political and economic issue but, to a man, they all choose to live where there are the least number of blacks and Muslims. Hispanic areas not so much.

    Whites who seek out black and Muslims areas for their residence are in the Rachel Dolezal category of dementia.

    When things get the least bit more tense, the liberal whites will discard their stupid beliefs eo instante. Fortunately, the poisonous beliefs of liberals and progressives will fall away from them as soon a the fairy tale of the Fed, unlimited debt, and globalism goes up in smoke. The arrival of Solzhenitsyn’s “pitiless crowbar of events” will solve a boatload of problems for white.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  106. JPS says:

    A large percentage of Americans may “identify” as conservative, but in the DC metro area, who is conservative? Do white Christians have meaningful representation in judeo-masonic America? White Christians struggle to find a church where the pastor isn’t preaching and acting according to the dictates of judeo-masonic America.

  107. Thomm says:

    If white America has a future, it won’t be secured by conservatives. It will be secured only by European Americans who reject “business-as-usual” politics and the familiar but ultimately irrelevant “conservative” and “liberal” categories,

    The problem is :

    i) White Nationalism is a left-wing ideology (i.e. it espouses left-wing economic views).
    ii) Ron Unz pointed out how White Nationalism is even less successful in mainstream politics than GOPe conservatism.

    • Disagree: apollonian
  108. apollonian says: • Website

    As Long As Central-Bank Remains, Fiat Currency Accepted, There’s Little Hope

    Thomm: the (a) “theoretic,” psychologic, abstract problem is the heavy pall of HUBRIS and especially SATANISM (extreme subjectivism) which weights down American psyche and ethos in general. (b) The more specific, existential (practical) problem is the central-bank of issue which constantly pumps-out nearly INFINITE “currency”–not real MONEY–see for expo on central-bank; use their site search engine for specific terms.

    Note the amazing little factoid that central-bank is a monopoly, and consider what central-banking REALLY is–a literal criminal enterprise, legalized counterfeiting. So these criminals OWN everything and everybody but for that very few (maybe 5-10 % of population) who understand (a) healthy humans and society needs real MONEY, commodity-based, like gold/silver–a FINITE source.

    (b) Since these central-bank criminals can put-out nearly INFINITE quantity (though it will rapidly lose value) of currency, they OWN the political system, capable of out-funding any adverse political candidates. These criminals also defraud the system w. “electronic-voting” which is totally rigged, and they out-fund anyone else by means of the monopolist “Jews-media,” aside fm all the other ways of fraud, which they cover by means of owning practically all politicians, judges, and lawyers.

    So since these central-bank criminals own everything and practically everyone, it’s a fool-proof system, BUT which is doomed to CERTAIN economic collapse–which is practically the ONLY thing patriots can hope for.

    Thomm, thou keep repeating idiotically WN is “leftist,” and though SOME FEW may be leftist, the entire Christian-Western culture is against “leftism”–which is dictatorship–socialism is GENOCIDE. Christian West stands for Objective reality of Aristotle, REASON, honesty, and integrity (at least we TRY), and Republican virtue based upon RULE-OF-LAW in accord w. REASON, US Constitution being eminent monument to that reason and rule-of-law, featuring individual freedom. Hence patriots, including WNs overwhelmingly favor FREEDOM, including the free-market, fool. Quit thy dumbass lying.

    Thomm, thou give NO references whatever for thy continued repeating about WN “leftism,” either regarding WNs, or its alleged “leftism,” and thou overlooks obvious facts we patriots and WNs want states-rights, in accord w. US Constitution and Declaration of Independence–we want to secede fm thou inferior, enemy, alien, and foreign, non-white races and have our own nation–and it’s going to happen, surely, but I guess we’ll have to wait for inevitable economic collapse.

  109. Miro23 says:

    REP. LIZ CHENEY: We have to fight them there, so they don’t fight us here. And the definition of victory in the Middle East, the definition of victory in Afghanistan, in Syria, is that we don’t have another 9/11.

    But wait! The alleged hijackers were mostly Saudi Arabian, America’s ally!

    And they had links to the CIA! They trained on CIA airfields in Florida! – All so confusing.

  110. @Thomm

    There are so many children and tards in white nationalism, with fantastical discredited historical beliefs, that when they do get something right it always dissolves into rants about jews sucking off infants and the like…They would rather quibble about numbers of dead jews than do anything useful.

    • LOL: apollonian
  111. @EliteCommInc.

    There is little to distinguish your beliefs from those of a leftist. You casually call yourself a traditionalist, but then simultaneously also believe that ‘skin color’ (a deliberate motte and bailey semantic fallacy), plays no part in formulating tradionalist beliefs. If you were honest, you would instead refer to genetics and Human Biodiversity as being a necessary (albeit not sufficient) causative factor in creating and maintaining those traditions that developed within the families/tribes/nations of certain white European cultures.

    Culture is downstream of genetics. No hispanic cultures, no negroid cultures, and no oriental cultures ever developed those same set of societal traditions, norms, and standards that formed Europe and it’s Anglo extensions into the greatest civilization ever created on this planet. And don’t try to call up a strawman here; I am not advocating for some type of pan-white unity. That is nonsense, because it doesn’t take into account the different cultures within Caucasian European groups, all of which should be maintained and revered in their incipient traditionalist elements as distinct nations.

    If I could be Dictator of the World, I would force-feed into the brains of those such as yourself the idea of ‘optimality’, which is far different from perfection. At the moment, your statement of what you believe in consists of nothing but ideals, i.e., perfect fantasies devoid of reality-based feedback. In this case, reality consists of non-white cultures not being in the same league as certain white European-derived cultures primarily because of genetics. Again, don’t fall into the strawman that some oriental cultures were able to derive the same amazing set of ideas that built Western Civilization; some of them are able to maintain a subset of those ideas, but they certainly never created, disseminated, and depended upon them in the first place. Like it or not, believe it or not, the preponderance, the vast majority, the great unwashed middle of black, hispanic, and asian societies can never hope to achieve the heights of what white societies achieved, and that difference is primarily due to genetics.

    Deliberately inviting other cultures and races into Western Civilization can only degrade it over time. The more they are invited, the faster will come dystopia. Your ideals always genuflect to exceptions, but the truth of the matter is that you always refuse to require the associated tests that would otherwise be necessary to qualify for admittance as an exception. It is an existential travesty that our new masters and their theocracy of the secular religious cult called leftism are now deliberately destroying our reality for their moral fantasy called equality. Anybody such as yourself who believes in ideals not grounded in reality is simply a useful idiot for the left.

  112. @Stan d Mute

    The angry black grunting that is supposedly music, the hideous body mutilations, lack of reproduction within marriage, a coursening of public discourse, the ravages of opioid suicides are symptomatic of a sodomite culture in full blown rebellion, that has rejected Christ and the Christian education of its children in exchange for pride/pussy parades.

    The results are on full display and are indisputable- we reap what we sow.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
  113. FvS says:

    Whether or not the races are predisposed towards particular political ideologies, we do know for a fact that non-whites in the U.S. vote overwhelmingly Democrat. This can’t be disputed.

  114. FvS says:

    I tend to agree. Personally, I’m in favor of a moderate Ron Paul libertarianism within a white nationalist framework along with some pro-marriage and eugenics policies thrown in. And maybe some compromises on international trade as well.

  115. @Anonymous

    Here in Central Florida blacks and whites take their faith very seriously and yet, Church attendance is segregated voluntarily. What that means is anybody’s guess.

    It means ethnicity trump creed. Or more mildly, people view their religious faith as an expression of their racial/ethnic ancestry.

    It’s literally a statement of Who We Are.

  116. Hail says: • Website
    @Mark G.

    This author seems to be trying to claim the U.S. had less freedom in 1930 than today and we were better off then

    I believe he means to imply a moral critique: The USA was better off in 1930 than in 2020, but few alive today will even understand why because of cultural debasement and a generally-subtle form of demoralization.

    I think Weber means we are too softened-up by various things (material and ‘cultural’) to appreciate the point. I believe he means to imply, e.g., that we tend to rhetorically judge a given period of the past by how much “radical equality” existed (radical, salt-the-earth ideological egalitarianism), which is just childish.

  117. @redmudhooch

    To clarify a prior reply to you:

    Yes, it is global Capitalists who impose a rigged game through all the methods you have stated in previous posts; but it is cultural Marxism via political correctness that is endued through mass social indoctrination beginning in public schools.

  118. @Ace


    It is my understanding that whites can live wherever they so choose. They simply are not empowered to dictate where others may live based soley on the color of their skin.

    And nearly all of these issues are the results of whites not blacks. The very things you claim are at fault are to the very ones you claim whites seek to gravitate with — whites.

  119. @Monotonous Languor

    I have opted for the short answer. I am not in a state to trace civilizations from the african continent north, east and west of their ancestoral lines.

    Nothing in my comments reflects a leftist anything, if you can find said reference note it and i will address it.

    It might have been a more effective choice to ask what my traditional beliefs are. Before mouthing some nonsense about biodiversity which merely delineates biological differences and says nothing about culture. Because if i plant a black child in 1920’s Germany, he will growup German, speak German, embrace all things German as i came to discover — Germany actually had several hundred blacks — who by all accounts German. Their biological trait simply had no impact. And that is repeated time and time again —- what about that historical truth is leftist, I am unclear. But perhaps you’ll be able to explicate that out.

    I hate to break it it to you but the Vikings, predominantly white, had norms, practices and beliefs completely different than the white Romans, Normans and Britons. They did not beat off the rivals via technological genius but by brute force. Routinely put those “goodly” christians to death b y sword, despite being not a lick of threat. Pirates by any other name were those whites. I have no doubt that if some black child grew up a Viking that child too would embrace said pirate ethos.

    You apparently have no clue that all civilizations are the result of building on what others first built. We now know that the designs of cities can be found in communities in the african jungles —

    But most importantly, the assumption that what western society is the premature of human development merely because they have operated in a period of dominance is to completely miss the point of human diversity removed from the confines of biological traits — which has nothing to do with culture, religion etc.

    your complete and total fail here is that you confuse skin color with culture. They are not the same despite the nonsensical efforts and gymnastics made by many to make them so. Hence your total breakdown to the mixing of culture that would impact culture, not color.

    It is absolutely correct that cultural intracommunication and mixing would have an impact. No kidding and duh. And had you paid attention, you would note, I my case for immigration is a complete and total moratorium for five years. I embrace building a border wall, not a fence, not a barrier — but a wall. English should be the national language. Only citizens should be permitted to have jobs in education and all classes aside from language courses should be taught in english and english only. my preferred value set is conservative: I embrace heterosexual marriage, traditional family, and all things supportive of family the single most important factor in maintaining a society . . . .

    And I am also included to embrace something else staple to conservative ethos “law and order” to its purpose — justice. Anyone who thinks fair play, honesty, distrust of government, is leftist simply has no clue what they are talking about.

    So, given your comments interesting but completely off the mark to my comments or what I believe or practice, I can only offer you a kite as it seems

    you have plenty of your own

    “hot air”.

    Leftist — good grief.

  120. @Stonehands

    symptomatic of a sodomite culture in full blown rebellion, that has rejected Christ and the Christian education

    My goodness, however did we manage to create the worlds greatest civilizations before the Jew messiah cult? Why without Jesus clearly it must have been impossible for Greece, Macedonia, Egypt, or Rome to have existed. Thank God the camel buggerers showed us the way to Western Civilization…

    Or maybe we have thus far only just managed to survive the Jewish mind virus of slave mentality and are now on the brink of collapse to their desert dwelling camel urine showering greatness? Maybe, just maybe, our successes are due to US and not some alien mythology foisted upon us? Did Jew messiah decode DNA for us or was it a white dude named Watson? Did Jew messiah invent for us the transistor or was that a group of white dudes with names like Shockley and Bardeen?

    Try giving up the slave mindset for just a week and see if you don’t feel more confident in yourself and invested in your progeny and your tribe. Free your mind brother.

  121. @Monotonous Languor

    I think my final comment needlessly personal – unduly harsh and in appropriate.

    excuse me.

    • Replies: @Henry Bowman
  122. Anonymous [AKA "Mr Excitement"] says:
    @Mark G.

    You are certainly a true Conservative.

    Everything, literally everything, always boils down to government spending and economic growth.

    Conservatives will be mewling about economics up until the point the brown hordes line them up against a wall.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
  123. American Civil War.

    It was not a civil war because the Confederate states had no intention of ruling the states that did not exercise their right to quit the union.

    The War to prevent Southern Independence is apt, not Cicil War

  124. If white America has a future, it won’t be secured by conservatives. It will be secured only by European Americans who reject “business-as-usual” politics and the familiar but ultimately irrelevant “conservative” and “liberal” categories, and who instead embrace a worldview rooted in their heritage, history and identity, and act forthrightly to defend and promote their own group interests.

    Literally every single thing that Mr. Weber laments in this post was brought into being by the vote of white european men.

    Ethnos is not salvific for Ethnos requires Logos if it is to be successful.

    America was created by Judaised Protestants who desire that religion be kept private and unofficially reognised so it would not interfere with their plans.

    Only by a return to the acknowledgment of The Universal Kingship of Christ can any society/state/country hope to survive for any society/state/country that legislates against the Commandments of Jesus Christ, The Universal King, is doomed to destruction as His grace wil b withdrawn from it.

    These United States has positive law that succors the Four Sins crying to Heaven for vengeance yet this author thinks race is the answer.

    So woeful….

    • Replies: @anon
  125. St Augustine : “There is no justice save in that commonwealth whose founder and ruler is Christ” and “kingdoms without justice are but criminal gangs”.

    Thus, any country (like our American Empire) that legislates contrary to the commandments of Jesus Christ, King of Heaven and Earth, is aught but a criminal gang.

    America, the Evil Empire, is the biggest baddest ass alpha dog gang ever, compared to which the Crips and the Bloods are aught but crippled blood hound puppies.

    So what sentient Catholic Traditionalist wants to vote for the Political Crips, the Stupid Party (Republicans) or vote for the Political Bloods, the Evil Party (Democrats) and continue to validate the baddest ass gang ever?

    Gangs are violent, lawless, vicious, and always striving to conquer the territory of other gangs.

    Don’t vote in national elections

    Reasons to Quit Voting

    There are four sins crying to Heaven for vengeance and all four sins are the public policy of this Evil Empire, America, and all four sins are the favored objects of positive law in this Evil Empire, America.

    Willful Murder (Abortion, Unjust Wars, Drones, Assassinations)

    The Sin of Sodom (So-called Gay marriage, the acceptance of sodomy as permissible and praise worthy)

    Oppression of the Poor (Usury, which is state-sponsored theft of labor).

    Defrauding Laborers of their Wages (Mass immigration which undermines the wage scale, closing manufacturing in America and relocating it overseas to be done by slaves)

    So, go ahead; vote.

    Tell your own self you are discharging you civic duty because you are. As a subject of an Evil Empire, it is your duty to vote to legitimise these institutionalised evils which call to Heaven for God to destroy this Evil Empire.

    As for Mick Jagger, he ain’t voting. He’ll stay home and not participate in these evil elections. He’ll stay home, drink some quality cabernet and listen to Mozart, Vivaldi, or Beethoven

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Oleaginous Outrager
  126. anon[221] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mick Jagger gathers no Mosque


    wrote the same music a hundred times
    nice music,
    but not that original

  127. anon[221] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mick Jagger gathers no Mosque

    These United States has positive law that succors the Four Sins crying to Heaven for vengeance yet this author thinks race is the answer.

    Weber did good work at IHR on scraping barnacles of lies off the false narratives of world wars.

    He should stay away from race wars; stick to ^

  128. Mark G. says:

    You don’t have to only have the two alternatives of low government spending and lots of immigration versus high government spending and little immigration. You can also have low government spending and little immigration. High government spending actually encourages more immigrants, particularly the wrong kinds of immigrants, because the extensive welfare state acts as a magnet pulling them across the border. Businesses here can also receive the benefits of low cost labor while offloading the costs of the immigrants on to the taxpayers when you have an extensive welfare state that immigrants can use. They privatize the benefits and socialize the costs. I see some white racists arguing that socialism is a good thing as long as it’s limited to whites but I think it’s been proven over and over again that capitalism works better in providing a better standard of living. I think I actually have a higher opinion of whites than many white racists because I think white people don’t need a vast welfare state to take care of them. Us whites are intelligent enough and productive enough that we can take care of ourselves and our families on our own.

  129. map says:

    Conservatives do conserve. They conserve a liberal society. Why? Because they are a controlled opposition. They fight the globalists and the anti-Whites in name only.

    A true conservatism strengthens something that has been weakened or resurrects something that has been lost. Nationalism and Identity is an example of resurrecting something lost.

  130. 3g4me says:
    @Stan d Mute

    @92 Stan d Mute: “I’m at a point in my life where I’m so fed up with stupid that I can’t look at a television, listen to a radio, or spend any time out in public. There are probably YouTube videos of me out there – I’m the guy screaming at an imbecile an average citizen”

    LOL and AGREE (since I stopped wasting my time commenting at Sailer’s posts, I no longer have sufficient published comments to use the “lol or agree” buttons). Anyhow – that’s me as well. Thus far I generally keep my screaming to in my house or in my car with the windows rolled up, but I will undoubtedly be the subject of the 2 minute hate rather soon – I just don’t give a f&%k anymore.

  131. map says:

    And when the white numbers fall to a minority, the majority-minority will end this system and the basis of this very law.

    • Agree: eah
    • Replies: @eah
    , @Henry Bowman
  132. @Mick Jagger gathers no Mosque

    He’ll stay home, drink some quality cabernet and listen to Mozart, Vivaldi, or Beethoven

    So “Mick Jagger” is as useless a parasite as any welfare queen and as bizarrely and irrationally proud of that parasitism. Why would anyone care what he says or does?

  133. map says:
    @jacques sheete

    The problem with fiscal conservatism is that it is a dead end as a policy issue.


    Because of taxes.

    When people pay taxes, they want a return on their money. This means they want benefits from the government. The higher taxes get, the more benefits they want.

    Once benefits are established, no one wants them to go away.

    Basically, austerity is a losing issue.

  134. map says:

    The identities will dissolve the nation and foment a civil war. How is that profitable when the foundation on which a company’s profits rests falls apart?

    This makes no sense. If the US collapses, the currency collapses, the business environment collapses and the ability of corps to make profits collapses.

    Identity is in the driver’s seat, not corporate profits.

    • Replies: @Henry Bowman
  135. Corvinus says:
    @mark green

    “That progressive myth is a counter-intuitive Trojan Horse that is harming the long-term cultural, political and genetic interests of America’s founding stock: European-Americans.”

    You mean WASPs. Why do you think Founding Fathers like Benjamin Franklin were opposed to large numbers of German immigrants entering our shores? Why do you think there were immigration restrictions by nativists against Eastern and Southern Europeans?

    “European history, European science, European exploration, European art, European literature, and European-derived laws (and peoples) have produced the world’s most dynamic, orderly, innovative, sophisticated, and livable societies. This includes the United States.”

    You mean history, science, exploration, art, literature, and laws that have their antecedents from ancient civilizations and were developed primarily by the British.

    “It is time for European-Americans (AKA ‘whites’) to declare our identities as such. ‘White’ doesn’t cut it anymore. The word has been deliberately sullied.”

    It is time for white Americans to declare who they are and what they are about.

    “What Jew thought that up this demeaning title for America’s founding core?”

    That would be Fake News.

    “Our skin is white and our race is Caucasoid but the time has come for us ‘whites’ to call ourselves ‘European-Americans’.”

    “Except “European Americans” were not as united as you think in the early stages of our history.”

    That time has probably passed.

    “There’s a war underway for the soul of America.”


    “As European-Americans approach minority status inside the US, we Americans–whose ancestors hailed from England, France, Germany, Holland, Italy, Sweden, Ireland, etc–must assert our collective interests inside our rapidly-changing civilization.”

    Except there was significant ethnic rivalries between these groups in the United States. Understand there was a European pecking order here. The WASPs were not too keen on the Swedes or the Italians or the Irish barging in on the power structures they created.

    “Is our advanced, English-speaking civilization not worth preserving? Of course it is.”

    Except it’s the American society you are referring to. Furthermore, recall how Europeans in part became wealthy–through imperialism.

    “Too much diversity inside one nation is destabilizing, alienating, and polarizing. This is common sense and history talking.”

    Tell that to the WASPs who were eventually displaced.

    “Race matters.”

    Does it matter to God?

    “It always will matter since temperment, intelligence and physical appearance will always matter.”

    Does it matter to God?

  136. Corvinus says:

    As far as the author of this piece is concerned…

    “For one thing, employment and job opportunities were generally segregated and restricted by sex and race.”

    Which has been destroyed for good. The Southrons simply could not abide by the ruling set forth by the Plessy case–separate but equal.

    “By law and custom, people of European ancestry could not marry persons of other races.”

    It’s not really one’s place to say that one cannot do such a thing. That is what personal choice is all about.

    “Consider life in 1930, for example – when nearly all Americans still regarded the US as a “great” country.”

    Not accurate. The Great Depression was in full swing. Jim Crow laws dominated the southern landscape.

    “In keeping with their distaste for confrontation and discord, conservatives have long tolerated the promotion of seemingly noble sentiments that have unpleasant long term consequences.”

    Actually, conservatives are showing their true colors for confrontation and discord, as evident by the partial shutdown. Furthermore, there is an assumption that these “noble sentiments”–whatever they are–have “unpleasant long term consequences”–whatever they may be.

  137. map says:

    And Nixon ended the gold standard.

  138. eah says:

    I have made the same point before — look at how the debt is piling up — the increasing % of the federal budget (and therefore taxes paid) going to debt service and mostly white ‘boomer’ entitlements like SS and Medicare — hard to see a majority non-white America going with that status quo indefinitely.

    Borrowing to finance that deficit–in combination with an expected rise in interest rates–would lead to a fourfold increase in net interest payments over the next 10 years, from $197 billion in 2010 to $778 billion in 2020. As a percentage of GDP, net interest outlays would more than double during that period, rising from 1.4 percent to 3.4 percent.

  139. @EliteCommInc.

    Yeah, read the go between between you and him, he is right and your “muh culture” nonsense just cna not get over the fact that culture is down stream from genes, the whole “muh 700 black Germans” bit does not change the fact that if you make over a certain percentage of Germany black, even native born, their genetics that determine everything about them means that their average IQ will result in Germany becoming just like Africa, poor, crime ridden, a hellscape of misery, poverty, and death.

    The fact you can not or will not understand or accept this does not change it or make it any less true.

    • Agree: blahWhatever
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  140. @map

    LOL, really? You think that they will discover they are getting screwed by this system and vote for people who will vote to end it?

    What is you bais for believe that when all the data proves that to NOT be possible?

  141. @map

    They do not care, they just want to squeeze out the last cent of profit they can before leaving for Asia or Israel.

  142. @Henry Bowman


    First there’s not a lick of data that confirms genetics and IQ that is a matter of some debate even among geneticists —

    Second, culture is subjective and learned — so skin color is inconsequential to that fact. My example makes that clear — which is the point. Your assertion has nothing by way of support and sits only as your assertion.

    Third, nice try, but wholly wrong. It is not merely birth, it’s full exposure to the entire environment from childhood forward. And since you have no idea about what the resulting IQ would be – you narrative is again mere assertion. In your view it is because I say it is.

    Fourth, you are of that breed of rhetoricians that make up what is on the table and proceed to argue against the same. The question is not mere birth.

    Fifth, apparently, you don’t understand science, in the case of comparison all variables must be the same save the one you are testing out. That means you don’t merely grab a black child from africa and compare that child to a German. You compare children similar in every way save for that variable — hence the constant references to cancelling out that variable or this variable. But anyone who understands this kind of modeling in stats, knows, that is a very tough hoop to sink. And given the subjectivity of the artifact and it relation to biology (yet unknown) and environment — and here the evidence is clear, we can improve IQ via environmental changes.

    I am curious, identify the genetic code that determines IQ, note the pairing and then note the processes and then describe the differences between a black child and a white child to the same. Your nonsense is the same that accompanies those who claim homosexual behavior is genetic. They have not an ounce of data to support it. in fact, the data contradicts the notion, but they point a % as some kind of proof. Your playing the same game. And worse, you can’t even identify the specifics of what constitutes IQ.

    Further anyone who spends a bit of time countering the argument must be anti-science or the other silly and bizarre name call race deniers — snore spare me. All things are founded on the genetic code, but code is definitive, if you know the parameters, and variables to biology and even then, environment can make drastic changes. Your parents have more impact on your personality than your genes. Even B.F. Skinner came to question biological determinism, because there are so many subject variables and hard environmental factors — that defy prediction – the ultimate test. One simply realizes testing must be consistent to environment and biology.

    The only person who doesn’t get it is you. Here’s the standard I like to apply to your brand of rhetoricians sounding off about stats, and how scientific they are:

    Make a prediction based on the data results. If it is genetics, then one can look at coding and processes and predict IQ.

    We haven’t broached intelligence to survival and how the seemingly most intelligent lost out to those with less. But then we are getting into what defines intelligence, and to what depth intelligence is required to survive — again in any given environment.

    I can’t prove it, but a Tesla in the Outback would not have invented AC simply because his genetic code, according to your speculative nonsense would note him a genius. A Tesla who never attended x school and engaged y environment, had l parents.

    I again recall the Frederick the Great(?) study with babies in which only the babies who were nurtured survived.

    I have no doubts that a sample from X pond would read different from k pond.

  143. @Kratoklastes

    Just another bitchy minority with a grievance against The (White) Man.

    Don’t think that just because you spout some HBD stuff, you are therefore A-OK. You are still an enemy, and always will be. Go move to Venezuela, where you can lived the mestizo/socialist lifestyle with no White patrolmen to protect you.

  144. @Kratoklastes

    Ofc. Wilson was being charged by a 300lb drug addled sociopath. This was after the sociopath had tried to steal his weapon (presumably to shoot him with). He was acting in obvious self-defense, as the jury thank God correctly concluded.

    You clearly have no experience of patrolling mean streets (and probably don’t even know how to fire a gun). You just dislike Whites. Well, GTFO of my country! (presuming you’re a US passport holder, as you sound to me)

  145. @mark green

    “Ireland”? LMAO unless you mean northern, Ulster, the founding stock of Appalachia, you have no idea what you’re talking about. Blame the Jews, it was Irish Kennedy’s who brought us these social programs and mass immigration. It was the Irish vote that brought the Democrats back and propelled communist Roosevelt to power.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  146. So how precisely does one run as a white identity candidate if it’s so wanted? I guarantee anyone who says whites only, Democrat or Republican, will be nowhere near elected office. Is it dog whistles then? Would be interesting to see someone pursue leftist econ policies, but white identity. Of course, anyone who thinks single payer and other socialist schemes will be good for white nationalism is in for a rude Awakening. Hint: just look at government job demographics. Those will be your doctors and nurses.

  147. Ed says:

    These changes can be directly tied to women getting the vote and have accelerated as women delayed marriage or abandoned it altogether.

    Women tend to be more empathetic and more open to progressive arguments. It’s estimated that the Democrat party is about 2/3 female now. The Republicans are around 50/50 male & female.

    • Replies: @Endgame Napoleon
  148. @Kratoklastes

    ” Pig departments select for stupid”

    Hey buddy you yourself are the stupid pig in this constellation, your commentary reeks of non-read ignorance, leftist cliches’, leftist platitudes and a general lack of intelligence and common sense.
    You are a dumb-fucking cretin, and any discussion with you is an exercize in futility, non-plus-ultra.

    Mark Twain : “Argue with a fool and what do you get : two fools”

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro Jazz performer.

  149. @Ed

    I am an early-Xer woman. After a lifetime of thinking I never would, I have voted a straight-Republican ticket twice now—once in a midterm and once in a general election, likewise voting for Trump in the primary. Even though I did it, I still see no tangible evidence that the Republican Party represents the interests of single, childless, non-affluent individuals any more than the Democratic Party.

    The Uniparty acts against the personal, economic interests of many registered likely voters who do not have kids.

    Uniparty economic policies are also detrimental to the economic interests of single parents with kids over 18 and non-custodial parents in almost every facet of the wage-slicing womb-productivity-based welfare system and the wage-rigging progressive tax system, although the policies are not quite as grossly unfair to them as to individual childless citizens with one stream of earned-only income to cover all household bills.

    The Republican Party has also not done anything about the main issue that spurred turnout among cross-over voters of all types: mass-scale immigration.

    This issue affects me less directly than the rigging of the labor market via womb-productivity-based pay boosters from .Gov: free EBT groceries, rental subsides, free electricity, monthly cash assistance, lower paychecks due to the way withholding works in the parent-favored tax-code and the refundable child tax credits up to $6,431 that pump up the wages of single-breadwinner parents whose major household bills are also paid by taxpayers.

    This un-conservative welfare engineering, in addition to the tax-favoritism that likewise rigs the labor market for married moms with spousal income, has for decades kept wages in female-dominated jobs at non-rent-covering levels, crushing single, childless females with no unearned income, just like welfare-assisted mass immigration keeps wages down for men.

    Due to the Uniparty’s social engineering, citizen and noncitizen womb producers can afford to work for very low pay, part time and in a temp capacity.

    Likely due to pressure from cheap-labor-loving corporate donors, Republicans support the labor-market rigging no less than Democrats, using government to reward womb-productive citizens and noncitizens for helping to keep wages down for employers. All they have to do is pump out US-born kids in single-breadwinner households, staying below the earned-income limits for the programs during working months by working part time or in temp gigs.

    Both halves of the Uniparty help the highly discriminatory females who dominate voted-best-for-moms jobs, most of whom are not registered to vote and have never voted for either party.

    The Republican Party, no more or less than the Democratic Party, also rewards the dual-earner parents—the higher earners married to low earners, adding keeping-up-with-the-Jones’ money to an ample spousal income and the dual high earners in their family-friendly / absenteeism-friendly jobs.

    Through the rigged progressive tax code, it rewards the dual-earner parents halving the size of the middle class by keeping two household-supporting jobs with benefits under one roof, while low-wage daycare workers or grandparents do the work of raising their kids, giving them more non-refundable child tax credits.

    They value their votes.

    I see no evidence that they value the votes of non-rich, individual likely voters any more than the Democratic Party that I left behind, that left me or whatever. I am sure the Uniparty will keep right on hurting citizens like me, economically, using babies and mommies as the excuse for it even though many of the unearned income streams from .Gov are used by citizens and noncitizens for parent-pampering self indulgences, like expensive tattoos and beach trips with boyfriends.

    But if they actually do something significant about immigration, not just an empty appeasement gesture to pacify Déplorables, I will feel compelled to vote for them again. There are a few Republicans who give the impression that they might actually follow through on the issue that put Trump in office. Voters are always just wagering, hoping that they can read lips accurately this time, then finding out they can’t.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  150. APilgrim says:

    Usually, Ann Coulter is not the dumbest blond at the bar.

    And she is correct that President Trump has been unable to get much wall built.

    But Republican Congressmen are to blame, for this lack of progress.

    President Trump has worked his heart out, but The Wall is still stymied by congress.

  151. anarchyst says:
    @Endgame Napoleon

    The “problem” with the Republican party is that most Republican office-holders are lazy and are content with being a part of the “also-ran” party. You see, whether they hold both houses of Congress, one house, or no houses, the pay and the perks of office are the same. Despite controlling both houses, the Republicans managed to “snatch defeat from the jaws of victory” by getting almost NONE of their promised legislation passed.
    The Republican “old-guard”, along with the “deep state” types and foreign influences within MY country need to be exposed for what they are and purged.

  152. @EliteCommInc.

    >”I am a conservative ”

    >Uses “structuration” unironically

    Perhaps your argument might be better phrased as:

    “My Fellow Conservatives, if we deconstruct the presuppositions of the bioessentialist view of “racial” differences — that they deterministically establish differences in various behavioral characteristics and group interests — we find that what appear to be true ontological divisions are, in fact, merely artifacts of the intersubjective hermeneutics of systemic racism. Phenomenologically speaking, of course.”

  153. @Right wing jew

    it was Irish Kennedy’s who brought us these social programs and mass immigration.

    Fact Check:


    • Replies: @Eric Novak
  154. @EliteCommInc.

    Here we see an ignorant, hate-filled anti-White attempting to deploy two classic, long-debunked semitic canards in one short post.

    1. Muh Blank Slate! (of course), and

    2. Muh “Race = Just the Color of the Skin, Goy!™”
    [pic related]

    He has no actual argument to justify his mindless hatred beyond reflexively reciting these worn-out tropes.


  155. @Monotonous Languor

    Noice. “Motte and bailey” is particularly apt. I was going with “strawman,” but that’s more precise.

    Note that in his response, he:

    1. Completely ignores your point about his constant use of the typical leftist “skin color” trope, while repeating it yet again — attempting to reinforce this simplistic misconception by sheer mindless repetition.*

    2.Incontinently spews more “Muh Blank Slate” bafflegab. (“human diversity removed from the confines of biological traits,” etc.)

    3. Tries to claim that the existence of ethnicity somehow falsifies the established concept of race. Nonsensical. What, does the category “species” somehow invalidate “genus?” There’s also an element of both straw man and projection to this, as he’s advocating an absolutist Blank Slate position — human behavior is 100% determined by nurture — while claiming that anyone who points out the insanity of his claims simply MUST be advocating a 100% genetic determinist position.

    Note also that this “conservative” also uses both “whiteness” (3x) and “structuration” unironically in this thread. One of those “conservative” postmodernist sociologists, apparently…

    *Many Republicucks are big on the “We’re all Americans!” canard of the “proposition nation” and “assimilation,” but the way that he keeps hammering at this is obviously more than that. His goal is clearly to:
    >Redefine “race” as “just skin color”
    >Claim that skin color is the only hereditary characteristic in humans
    >Therefore… all human behavioral traits must be 100% environmentally determined, thus any apparent differences in their distribution between various groups must be due to inadequate levels of Western cultural imperialism. Or something.
    All without citing a single iota of empirical support for his claims.

  156. @Thomm

    The problem is :

    i) White Nationalism is a left-wing ideology (i.e. it espouses left-wing economic views).

    The problem is:

    1. Hasbarats are desperate to promote the fallacy of economism — that only the shekels matter.

    And the associated semitic canard of ignorant, hate-filled race denialism, of course.

    2. They’re also desperate to ignore the simple, well-established facts that you can’t have a nation-state without a nation, and that the historic American nation is White.

    3. “Diverse” polities that forcibly combine many different peoples, with different heritages, cultures, religions, languages, etc. into a single entity are hardly a new feature of history. But they’re not called “democratic republics” — they’re called “empires.” And empires require authoritarian rule.

  157. Mark Weber interviewed by Tim Kelly 20 February about the article here:

  158. @Kratoklastes

    A big stoned nagger shoving around a shopkeeper while stealing is a lethal threat and has earned himself a justified reprisal from an elephant gun. You, nutjob, have earned the butt of the gun across the mouth for advocating for lethal threats like this.

  159. @James Forrestal

    META-FACT CHECK! Kennedy lobbied the Senate and the House relentlessly for the passage of what became the 1965 Hart-Celller Act and was an essential actor is the passage of the act, without which his brother’s civil rights legacy would remain incomplete.

  160. RWS says:
    @kerdasi amaq

    The bulk of thoughtful writings (and there are many) in the lead-up to and early years of the War of Independence clearly show that the revolt began in defence of the rights of free-born Englishmen, triggered and exemplified by the imposition of direct taxes upon British subjects who had no voice in their enactment — American colonists were not able to vote for members of Parliament, and no American colonist sat in either house.

    This also is why the revolt transmuted into the first American civil war and an archetype of a conservative revolution. It was not begun because of a conception of an identity different to that of being English but, instead, precisely because the conception of the rights and character of “Englishness” was so valued even thousands of miles distant from England. Even the ethnically German colonists, the largest group of subjects in the mainland colonies after the English themselves, tended to regard themselves as “English” when born in the colonies and not themselves immigrants.

Current Commenter

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

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Mark Weber Comments via RSS
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
How America was neoconned into World War IV
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement