The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
More Blue Checkmark Reaction to Douthat's Tepid Suggestion That Stephen Miller Not be Banned from Oval Office
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I thought these tweets by some journalists were parody, but they turns out to be dead serious accusations the NYT has gone “white supremacist” for allowing Ross Douthat to write that Stephen Miller shouldn’t be banned from the President’s immigration negotiating team:

 
Hide 76 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. NYT is now a white supremacist paper. The multiple Nazi puff pieces, constant pro-Trump PR, and praise for Miller…

    “I am currently an op-ed columnist for the Globe and Mail” — she has 340,000 followers on Twit.

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution–or at least, a shooting civil war–is a necessary component of our future. If we’re to have one.

    I’m not happy to have typed that. I’m not happy it’s come to this.

    • Replies: @Kylie
    Agreed. But I probably feel worse than you do. Sarah Kendzior lives in St. Louis, MO, my hometown, a place I loved till her ilk made me hate it.

    I just read one of her hit pieces about St. Louis Trump supporters. The raw hate and contempt she displays towards them are shocking.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/12/donald-trump-supporters-st-louis-rally-protest-violence

    , @Thomas

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution–or at least, a shooting civil war–is a necessary component of our future. If we’re to have one.
     
    It needs to be said again and again that what 21st century Democrats and progressives stand for is the dissolution of the United States. They're the Treason Lobby at this point, with a naked intent to destroy the United States now manifest and undeniable. That fact needs to be made widely understood and not left veiled or varnished.
    , @AndrewR
    Yes, the left has whipped itself into an astounding mass psychosis. I'm still dumbfounded when I see tweets like this, or read "NYT Pick" comments like on the article which basically say that anyone who doesn't support open borders is a "bigot."

    But don't worry. I was unhappy when I realized how extreme the left has become, but now I've accepted it and am kinda looking forward to the upcoming chemotherapy. Your unhappiness is due to losing your long-standing delusion that leftists are reasonable, moral people. But you should celebrate the loss of your delusions.

    , @BenKenobi
    "It didn't have to be like this."

    "What a tragedy." "Oh God."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5Cqc6Beqm8

    "I won't be happy with the devastation, but I will be happy that I defended my own life."
    , @Amasius

    or at least, a shooting civil war
     
    A war has to have two sides. Where is the real resistance? Who is willing to fight these people? White Champion Tucker Carlson: "Can't we just get along? You're being crazy right now. I'm shocked at the extremism of the left. I'm not a racist." White Champion Donald Trump: "We'll do an amnesty of 2 million if you fund the wall, okay? We're not actually going to do mass deportations because these are good people. We're only going after criminals, okay? I'm not a racist."

    When passive resistance meets determined fanatical hatred, determined fanatical hatred is going to win 10 times out of 10.
    , @Mr. Blank
    I came to this conclusion a few years ago. I’m just wondering what the spark will be that sets it off. My guess: The loss of a carrier battle group in a fight with China over Taiwan. Unlike Pearl Harbor back in 1941, the U.S. political system today would be unable to process a military setback of that magnitude, and things would probably fall apart pretty quickly.

    Ultimately, an unrealistic sense of American military invincibility is probably a root cause of many problems today, not just in the U.S. but in Europe as well. It’s causing people to order their lives and societies as if an entire class of political questions has been permanently solved. Even 9/11 and its aftermath didn’t really dent this attitude, because all that could be written off as mischief caused by a particularly clever and energetic bunch of goat herders. No need to fundamentally rethink anything.

    It won’t be drones vs. goat herders forever, though. When those more primal political questions return with a vengeance — which they inevitably will — I fear it will be like releasing a nasty but normally controllable pathogen into a population with compromised immune systems. Some patients — nations — will be unable to handle these new stresses (despite the fact that their forebears dealt with the same stresses on a daily basis) and will fail, probably fracturing into smaller but more cohesive entities. The United States seems ripe for this. Since large chunks of the public have starkly incompatible ideas about what America represents, they are also going to have starkly incompatible ideas about how military force ought to be employed to ensure America’s safety.

    I mean, we can’t even agree about borders, for crying out loud. How you think about borders is going to have a huge effect on how you think your nation’s military ought to be organized and deployed. This isn’t much of a problem today, because regular people casually assume the military is invincible; they tend to think of it as a giant social service agency, when they bother to think of it at all. Women in combat? Sure! It’s not like we’ll ever have to use them, right?

    In a much livelier threat environment, when regular people are forced to once again start thinking of the military as an organization whose explicit purpose is to protect America and its ideals with armed force, you’ll start to see deep political fissures suddenly open up, seemingly out of nowhere. Note that the population that will be considering these questions will possess a vastly different ethnic and ideological mix than the population which formed a rough national consensus during the Cold War.
    , @Almost Missouri
    I agree except

    "What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other."
     
    Fanaticism on their side is merely engendering mild realism on ours.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    Just in case no one has posted this yet, here is a link to Daniel Greenfield's speech to the South Carolina Tea Party Coalition Convention: https://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2018/01/this-civil-war-my-south-carolina-tea.html.

    He's right. This is a second civil war and the left is determined to win.
  2. Immigration caused the Holocaust.

    • Replies: @Colleen Pater
    meme that
  3. • Replies: @Father O'Hara
    One more time!!
    , @Twodees Partain
    Hey, Donald. Where do you get this 'we' shit?
    , @BB753
    It's not good enough. They'll still call Trump a Nazi anyway.
  4. I thought these tweets by some journalists were parody, but they turns out to be dead serious accusations the NYT has gone “white supremacist” for allowing Ross Douthat to write that Stephen Miller shouldn’t be banned from the President’s immigration negotiating team:

    We’re beyond irony now, Steve. After all, we live in a world where Rob Reiner, the man who made This Is Spinal Tap , can unironically tweet about people fearing America turning “Brown” while living in the Malibu Colony

  5. In the USSR, True Believers would hear someone suggest, meekly, that there was a very slim possibility that a couple of people sentenced to the gulag might have been innocent, and those True Believers would become hysterical and demand a new round up of counter-revolutionaries.

  6. And then they wonder why people are hating on Jews. WTF do Mexicans have to do with the holocaust?

    • Replies: @TheBoom
    If you don't went to use Mexicans to destroy white America you want to gas Jews
    , @BB753
    Everything has to do with the Holocaust and always will. It's the ultimate shakedown move.
  7. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “Long-Lost Tapes Reveal Plan Hatched by the ‘Jewish Avengers’ to Kill Six Million Germans in Revenge for the Holocaust”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5291029/Tapes-reveal-Jewish-revenge-plot-kill-six-million.html

    Long-lost tapes reveal details of a foiled plan by the Jewish Avengers to kill six million Germans by poisoning the country’s water supply in revenge for the Holocaust.

    Film maker Avi Merkado found ten tapes, buried in a museum in Israel, which detailed how a band of Jewish partisans formed after the Second World War.

    The recordings – which have never been heard in public – are at the heart of a new documentary entitled Holocaust: The Revenge Plot, due to air on January 27.

    Recorded in 1985, when their leader Vilnius Ghetto survivor and Israeli poet Abba Kovner, was dying of cancer, they provide the most detailed account of the group’s 1946 plans.

    The tapes describe how The Avengers, led by Kovner and Pasha Reichmann, funded their activities with £5 notes, forged by Jews in concentration camps and exchanged on the black market.

    They claim that the late Israeli Presidents, Chaim Weizmann and Ephraim Katzir, were instrumental in helping the Avengers acquire the poison they needed for their audacious plot.

    They describe how Avengers’ agents infiltrated the waterworks of four German cities – Hamburg, Nuremberg, Frankfurt and Munich – but plans to poison the water supplies were foiled when Kovner was arrested at sea.

    And they talk about their second mass murder attempt to poison the bread of 50,000 SS officers in Prisoner of War camps in Nuremberg and Munich, which was more successful, striking down up to 2,000 victims.

    • Replies: @LondonBob
    After the Soviet Union fell my Russian Jewish friend told me his family feared they would be killed and so took the right to move to Germany. I wonder how much of the anti Russian hysteria is fuelled by the belief Russians should take revenge for Communism?
    , @Anon

    The tapes describe how The Avengers, led by Kovner and Pasha Reichmann, funded their activities with £5 notes, forged by Jews
     
    Nudge nudge, wink wink, say no more.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGrvQ1c5khU
  8. These drama queen JAPs can relax. Stephen Miller is loyal to the tribe after all. The latest WH Mass Amnesty plan puts Obama’s DACA amnesty to shame.

    • Agree: utu
  9. What do you do when a sizable portion of an ethnic group basically go crazy?

  10. “constant pro-Trump PR”

    Yep, a perfect description of the NY Times.
    Kind of like when Paul Krugman kept talking about how anti-Hillary the Times was during the election.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    Kind of like when Paul Krugman kept talking about how anti-Hillary the Times was during the election.
     
    Their frustration really boils down to the fact that they had to have an election in the first place, which they believed until about 9 or 10 P.M. on election night 2016 was going to be a formality verging on a coronation. They were really expecting Alabama, Georgia and Texas to be competitive and that surviving House and Senate Republicans would be so spooked and in fear for their own offices that they'd be even less courageous than usual, crushed under the prodigious weight of the Iron Cankle. Never forget that they weren't only going to win, they were going to use every bit of every apparatus of the State to punish you, humiliate you for daring to oppose them in the first place.

    https://balkin.blogspot.com/2016/05/abandoning-defensive-crouch-liberal.html

    These people tweeting that they're cancelling their subscriptions to the NAZI-sympathizing NYT are funny but terribly, terribly sad. Put aside their hypocrisy for engaging in the same "epistemic closure" that they accuse others of doing. The NYT goes a fraction outside of their Democrat messaging operation to point out that there will be no immigration deal of - horror - the views of the people who elected Trump are not represented and they decide that the best way to respond is to stop hearing this contrary information.
  11. @Anonymous

    NYT is now a white supremacist paper. The multiple Nazi puff pieces, constant pro-Trump PR, and praise for Miller...

    "I am currently an op-ed columnist for the Globe and Mail" -- she has 340,000 followers on Twit.
     

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution--or at least, a shooting civil war--is a necessary component of our future. If we're to have one.

    I'm not happy to have typed that. I'm not happy it's come to this.

    Agreed. But I probably feel worse than you do. Sarah Kendzior lives in St. Louis, MO, my hometown, a place I loved till her ilk made me hate it.

    I just read one of her hit pieces about St. Louis Trump supporters. The raw hate and contempt she displays towards them are shocking.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/12/donald-trump-supporters-st-louis-rally-protest-violence

    • Replies: @Bragadocious
    It's worth noting that Kendzior takes her anti-American schtick mainly to Canada and Britain, where the locals nurse ancient grudges that she lovingly exploits. In the U.S., she's a non-entity who tries desperately to matter. Tucker Carlson would cut her to ribbons, if she ever had the guts to do his show.
    , @Brutusale
    Always check out the CV and images available online. Whenever you see mostly head shots, there's a reason.

    She's a chubby cat-lady-in-waiting who sees the future loneliness and is not happy.
  12. Yeah, Steve, why come you never excerpt and comment on any of those NAZI puff pieces? You’re the one around here who reads the NY Times. Selective bias, perhaps?

    • LOL: jim jones
    • Replies: @guest
    I have a "NYT-White Supreeemacist-Heavy Metal Drummer" file in my brain, which strongly implies that Steve actually did excerpt and comment on it. Because my brain isn't regularly exposed to such things outside of iSteve.

    Possibly you're not counting the Heavy Metal Drummer Nazi story as a puff-piece. Which is understandable, because it wasn't a puff piece. But I'm virtually certain that's what's being referenced.

  13. @Anonymous

    NYT is now a white supremacist paper. The multiple Nazi puff pieces, constant pro-Trump PR, and praise for Miller...

    "I am currently an op-ed columnist for the Globe and Mail" -- she has 340,000 followers on Twit.
     

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution--or at least, a shooting civil war--is a necessary component of our future. If we're to have one.

    I'm not happy to have typed that. I'm not happy it's come to this.

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution–or at least, a shooting civil war–is a necessary component of our future. If we’re to have one.

    It needs to be said again and again that what 21st century Democrats and progressives stand for is the dissolution of the United States. They’re the Treason Lobby at this point, with a naked intent to destroy the United States now manifest and undeniable. That fact needs to be made widely understood and not left veiled or varnished.

    • Replies: @james wilson
    What, at this point, do you have against the dissolution of the United States?
    , @Flip
    Dividing up the country sounds like a good idea to me.
  14. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    OMG! I am quaking with all sorts of mental diseases that would get me compensation from Obamacare if I had it!
    I did some googling and discovered that the owner of the NYT might have married a woman (https://www.unz.com/isteve/carlos-slims-late-wife-was-a-member-of-the-leading-lebanese-warlord-clan/) whose grandfather atttended a rally with someone who was literally Hitler! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXmDQY8IOAs)

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Sigh. Carlos Slim does not control the NYT and he never did. He never owned a majority of Class A shares or anything remotely close (17% at his max, and he has since sold off), and more importantly never owned one single Class B share–the share class which actually controls the Board of Directors and hence votes on corporate policy. The Ochs-Sulzberger family owns and controls the New York Times and has for a very, very long time.

    This "Carlos Slim Owns the NYT" meme has become so widespread and persistent that it's finally occurred to me that it may be the result of a deliberate misinformation campaign promoted by the Sulzbergers.

  15. #Unsubscribe <— I'm with stupid her!

    As a matter of fact, I’m even 3 steps ahead of her:

    #DontSubscribeInTheFirstDamnPlace
    #DontClick
    #DontTalkToNewYorkers

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Wait,

    ........ #DontTalkToNewYorkers

    #IDoNotHeartThat-WhatAboutUpstate?

    #UpstateNYIsDifferent

    Please note my last hash tag, Buffalo Joe. Can you dig it LIKE it?
  16. @Anonymous

    NYT is now a white supremacist paper. The multiple Nazi puff pieces, constant pro-Trump PR, and praise for Miller...

    "I am currently an op-ed columnist for the Globe and Mail" -- she has 340,000 followers on Twit.
     

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution--or at least, a shooting civil war--is a necessary component of our future. If we're to have one.

    I'm not happy to have typed that. I'm not happy it's come to this.

    Yes, the left has whipped itself into an astounding mass psychosis. I’m still dumbfounded when I see tweets like this, or read “NYT Pick” comments like on the article which basically say that anyone who doesn’t support open borders is a “bigot.”

    But don’t worry. I was unhappy when I realized how extreme the left has become, but now I’ve accepted it and am kinda looking forward to the upcoming chemotherapy. Your unhappiness is due to losing your long-standing delusion that leftists are reasonable, moral people. But you should celebrate the loss of your delusions.

  17. @Achmed E. Newman
    #Unsubscribe <--- I'm with stupid her!

    As a matter of fact, I'm even 3 steps ahead of her:

    #DontSubscribeInTheFirstDamnPlace
    #DontClick
    #DontTalkToNewYorkers

    Wait,

    …….. #DontTalkToNewYorkers

    #IDoNotHeartThat-WhatAboutUpstate?

    #UpstateNYIsDifferent

    Please note my last hash tag, Buffalo Joe. Can you dig it LIKE it?

  18. “today of all days”

    I realize the NYT must be aware of Holocaust Whatever Day, but aside from the fact that the holocaust has nothing to do with the subject, don’t they realize that to about 99 out of 100 people have no idea there is such a thing as Holocaust Whatever Day? And that they wouldn’t care if they did?

    Either these people have incredibly narrow interests (duh), or they’re *really* grasping at straws.

    Okay, it’s both, I know. But they don’t even believe there’s any connection between Some Guy–who’s in fact a squishy-con, not a White Supreeemist–and the holocaust. (Except that Miller’s Jewish, I suppose.) This is truly embarrassing.

    Or rather would be, but they don’t get embarrassed over stuff like this.

  19. “is not exceptional”

    Does xe mean not coincidental?

  20. @Kylie
    Agreed. But I probably feel worse than you do. Sarah Kendzior lives in St. Louis, MO, my hometown, a place I loved till her ilk made me hate it.

    I just read one of her hit pieces about St. Louis Trump supporters. The raw hate and contempt she displays towards them are shocking.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/12/donald-trump-supporters-st-louis-rally-protest-violence

    It’s worth noting that Kendzior takes her anti-American schtick mainly to Canada and Britain, where the locals nurse ancient grudges that she lovingly exploits. In the U.S., she’s a non-entity who tries desperately to matter. Tucker Carlson would cut her to ribbons, if she ever had the guts to do his show.

    • Agree: Kylie
  21. “Godwin’s Law is vindicated in record time”, again — one great thing about Twitter is that it shows ‘diversity is strength’ in real-time.

  22. By “Nazi puff pieces” I assume they mean the profiles they did on Average Joe Fascist drummers and such. They weren’t hit pieces, which I suppose is enough to make idiots and zealots think your paper is on their side. (Either you point and shriek or ignore; that’s the SJW way.)

    My guess is this sort of person doesn’t care to think of themselves as part of the Establishment or as a supporter of Corporate Media, and looks for any excuse to lash out at the Brown Scare. Which is always waiting to spring into the open; just ask Noam Chomsky.

    You’ve revealed yourselves, NYT. Crypto-fascism requires eternal vigilance, because leftists are watching every “puff piece” and article by squishy-cons defending Jewish members of presidential administrations. (You were crafty there, I admit. But no mere Jew will fool sharp-eyed Brown-watchers.)

    The point about “constant pro-Trump PR” is a head-scratcher, however. I might buy the NYT’s anti-Trump hysteria as a smokescreen, but pro-Trump PR? And constant, no less? That’s either clinical delusion or a sloppy lie.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "The point about “constant pro-Trump PR” is a head-scratcher,"

    The NYT prints the S&P 500 average five days a weeks. That's been "constant pro-Trump PR" so far.

  23. Do these people, like Sarah Kendzior, not know that Miller is jewish? They keep talking about the Trump administration as if it were the Fourth Reich. Certainly they must know that Gary Cohn and Steve Mnuchin are not exactly obersturmbannfuehrers. Is she just stupid?

    • Replies: @Gunner
    "Traitors to Judaism (a.k.a. Social Liberalism) must be persecuted blah, blah blah"
  24. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    NYT is now a white supremacist paper. The multiple Nazi puff pieces, constant pro-Trump PR, and praise for Miller on today of all days is not exceptional.

    I love it! Crazy on crazy. This seems to be spreading like a wildfire. NYT and its ilk will no doubt eventually capitulate, exposing their insanity to all.

  25. • Replies: @eah
    Observant and thoughtful Whites may want to ponder why (((Jennifer Rubin))) sees a 'whitening' of immigrant flows as undesirable, perhaps even threatening -- something to be opposed, even (actively) 'fought' -- also whether this sort of rhetoric is common, and what it might/will be like when Whites are a minority in America.

    If this was a white person saying the same about immigrant Jews, we'd be reminded (again) of the 'Holocaust' -- how such hate is paving the way for the next 'Holocaust'.

  26. On a related note, this Wired article is (unintentionally) fantastic:

    https://www.wired.com/story/the-dirty-war-over-diversity-inside-google/

    It reports on widespread hysteria within Google because the ‘alt-right’ are engaging in cruel and unjust tactics such as quoting the actual words of Google’s own diversity advocates/Gedankestapo, and asking terrifying questions on Google message boards such as “What about meritocracy? Isn’t improving diversity lowering the bar? What about viewpoint diversity? Doesn’t this exclude white men?”

    Well worth a read.

  27. @guest
    By "Nazi puff pieces" I assume they mean the profiles they did on Average Joe Fascist drummers and such. They weren't hit pieces, which I suppose is enough to make idiots and zealots think your paper is on their side. (Either you point and shriek or ignore; that's the SJW way.)

    My guess is this sort of person doesn't care to think of themselves as part of the Establishment or as a supporter of Corporate Media, and looks for any excuse to lash out at the Brown Scare. Which is always waiting to spring into the open; just ask Noam Chomsky.

    You've revealed yourselves, NYT. Crypto-fascism requires eternal vigilance, because leftists are watching every "puff piece" and article by squishy-cons defending Jewish members of presidential administrations. (You were crafty there, I admit. But no mere Jew will fool sharp-eyed Brown-watchers.)

    The point about "constant pro-Trump PR" is a head-scratcher, however. I might buy the NYT's anti-Trump hysteria as a smokescreen, but pro-Trump PR? And constant, no less? That's either clinical delusion or a sloppy lie.

    “The point about “constant pro-Trump PR” is a head-scratcher,”

    The NYT prints the S&P 500 average five days a weeks. That’s been “constant pro-Trump PR” so far.

  28. @Anonymous

    NYT is now a white supremacist paper. The multiple Nazi puff pieces, constant pro-Trump PR, and praise for Miller...

    "I am currently an op-ed columnist for the Globe and Mail" -- she has 340,000 followers on Twit.
     

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution--or at least, a shooting civil war--is a necessary component of our future. If we're to have one.

    I'm not happy to have typed that. I'm not happy it's come to this.

    “It didn’t have to be like this.”

    “What a tragedy.” “Oh God.”

    “I won’t be happy with the devastation, but I will be happy that I defended my own life.”

  29. @eah
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUraqeWXUAApwjt.jpg

    Observant and thoughtful Whites may want to ponder why (((Jennifer Rubin))) sees a ‘whitening’ of immigrant flows as undesirable, perhaps even threatening — something to be opposed, even (actively) ‘fought’ — also whether this sort of rhetoric is common, and what it might/will be like when Whites are a minority in America.

    If this was a white person saying the same about immigrant Jews, we’d be reminded (again) of the ‘Holocaust’ — how such hate is paving the way for the next ‘Holocaust’.

    • Agree: AndrewR
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Keep in mind: "Right Turn" is the Post's token Republican Op-Ed column.

    One more reason why Republicans, along with Democrats, are the Enemies of America.
    , @eah
    Not exactly John Lennon's kind of 'imagining'

    https://twitter.com/RevengeCoach/status/957811060890841089
  30. @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/957334999522533376

    One more time!!

  31. This reminds me the article which I read long time ago in Polish equivalent of NYT, Gazeta Wyborcza (GW for short).

    The article discussed the research of one historian about northeastern Poland in 1939-1941. The historian wondered why the local population uniformly related that the administration was “Jewish”. She wrote that Jews were indeed overrepresented in the administration, but they reached at most some 1/3 of the positions, and other minorities were overrepresented too, yet the perception was as it was: that administration was “Jewish”. She concluded that it was a contrast with the pre-war administration that mattered. Before the war, there were virtually no Jews in the administration. When Soviets came and installed their minions, the contrast between no Jews/30% of Jews was so shocking that locals vastly exxagerated the real Jewish overrepresentation.

    Interestingly, I’ve seen then the same phenomena in late 2000s, when because of complex deals between Left and RIght fighting against the center, a wave of right-wing publicists entered public television. They by no means dominated TV; simply, suddenly right-wing points of view had their representation. Yet the social media claimed that TV became right-wing, biased and no longer neutral. I have often confronted some of my friends, pointing that there are still left and center shows and publicists, and right-wingers are not that many – yet they seemed to be completely blind about that.

    After Lech Kaczyński death in 2010, PO quickly passed a new bill about TV which allowed them cleanse all rightwing publicists and TV became “neutral” again. That was a valuable lesson. When Law and Justice won last elections, it dumped all pretenses of “keeping all points of view” and this time really turned TV into the right-wing tube the mainstream was always claiming it to be.

    • Replies: @guest
    That exact phenomenon happened in the MSM after the advent of Fox News, of course. Despite the fact that Fox News was mostly full of the same sort of journalists as every other network (there was no pool of Republican or conservative journalists sitting around waiting for Fox News to be invented; to this day pretty much all journalists share the same brain), it had a novel--for cable news--editorial slant and preferred rightish "personalities." So it became the Republican/conservative/neocon news outlet.

    The reaction from the rest of the news world was odd. I didn't expect them to say: "Drats, why didn't we think of going after that market?" But I was surprised by the fact that they pretended Fox News invented partisanship, or something. As if beforehand everyone in news was perfectly neutral. Only after Fox discovered not everyone who watches t.v. is liberal did networks discover you can look at the news from a perspective. Well, golly gee!

    Occasionally this was couched in rationally defensible terms. For instance, Fox did "polarize" cable news, even if it didn't politicize it. And you could say they made it "more political," because beforehand there was less competition along those lines.

    But you also heard absolutely insane things, like Fox inventing attractive reporterettes or Fox inventing people yelling at eachother.

  32. It’s a sign of ugly Western decay that white people are willing to surrender the land of their forefathers and sabotage the future of their progeny(if such exist) because they are thrilled about the prospect of MORE RESTAURANTS!

  33. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    OMG! I am quaking with all sorts of mental diseases that would get me compensation from Obamacare if I had it!
    I did some googling and discovered that the owner of the NYT might have married a woman (https://www.unz.com/isteve/carlos-slims-late-wife-was-a-member-of-the-leading-lebanese-warlord-clan/) whose grandfather atttended a rally with someone who was literally Hitler! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXmDQY8IOAs)

    Sigh. Carlos Slim does not control the NYT and he never did. He never owned a majority of Class A shares or anything remotely close (17% at his max, and he has since sold off), and more importantly never owned one single Class B share–the share class which actually controls the Board of Directors and hence votes on corporate policy. The Ochs-Sulzberger family owns and controls the New York Times and has for a very, very long time.

    This “Carlos Slim Owns the NYT” meme has become so widespread and persistent that it’s finally occurred to me that it may be the result of a deliberate misinformation campaign promoted by the Sulzbergers.

    • Replies: @Faraday's Bobcat

    Sigh. Carlos Slim does not control the NYT and he never did. He never owned a majority of Class A shares or anything remotely close (17% at his max, and he has since sold off), and more importantly never owned one single Class B share–the share class which actually controls the Board of Directors and hence votes on corporate policy. The Ochs-Sulzberger family owns and controls the New York Times and has for a very, very long time.
     
    Slim still owns about 17% of the Class A stock, by far the largest portion owned by anyone. Class A stockholders elect 4/13 board members and have the right to vote on certain other issues. Sulzberger wouldn't take my call but I surmise he takes Slim's.

    Besides, why do you think Slim went to the trouble of investing such a tiny fraction of his $60B fortune in the NYT? For the dividend?
  34. @Achmed E. Newman
    Yeah, Steve, why come you never excerpt and comment on any of those NAZI puff pieces? You're the one around here who reads the NY Times. Selective bias, perhaps?

    I have a “NYT-White Supreeemacist-Heavy Metal Drummer” file in my brain, which strongly implies that Steve actually did excerpt and comment on it. Because my brain isn’t regularly exposed to such things outside of iSteve.

    Possibly you’re not counting the Heavy Metal Drummer Nazi story as a puff-piece. Which is understandable, because it wasn’t a puff piece. But I’m virtually certain that’s what’s being referenced.

  35. @eah
    Observant and thoughtful Whites may want to ponder why (((Jennifer Rubin))) sees a 'whitening' of immigrant flows as undesirable, perhaps even threatening -- something to be opposed, even (actively) 'fought' -- also whether this sort of rhetoric is common, and what it might/will be like when Whites are a minority in America.

    If this was a white person saying the same about immigrant Jews, we'd be reminded (again) of the 'Holocaust' -- how such hate is paving the way for the next 'Holocaust'.

    Keep in mind: “Right Turn” is the Post’s token Republican Op-Ed column.

    One more reason why Republicans, along with Democrats, are the Enemies of America.

  36. @szopen
    This reminds me the article which I read long time ago in Polish equivalent of NYT, Gazeta Wyborcza (GW for short).

    The article discussed the research of one historian about northeastern Poland in 1939-1941. The historian wondered why the local population uniformly related that the administration was "Jewish". She wrote that Jews were indeed overrepresented in the administration, but they reached at most some 1/3 of the positions, and other minorities were overrepresented too, yet the perception was as it was: that administration was "Jewish". She concluded that it was a contrast with the pre-war administration that mattered. Before the war, there were virtually no Jews in the administration. When Soviets came and installed their minions, the contrast between no Jews/30% of Jews was so shocking that locals vastly exxagerated the real Jewish overrepresentation.

    Interestingly, I've seen then the same phenomena in late 2000s, when because of complex deals between Left and RIght fighting against the center, a wave of right-wing publicists entered public television. They by no means dominated TV; simply, suddenly right-wing points of view had their representation. Yet the social media claimed that TV became right-wing, biased and no longer neutral. I have often confronted some of my friends, pointing that there are still left and center shows and publicists, and right-wingers are not that many - yet they seemed to be completely blind about that.

    After Lech Kaczyński death in 2010, PO quickly passed a new bill about TV which allowed them cleanse all rightwing publicists and TV became "neutral" again. That was a valuable lesson. When Law and Justice won last elections, it dumped all pretenses of "keeping all points of view" and this time really turned TV into the right-wing tube the mainstream was always claiming it to be.

    That exact phenomenon happened in the MSM after the advent of Fox News, of course. Despite the fact that Fox News was mostly full of the same sort of journalists as every other network (there was no pool of Republican or conservative journalists sitting around waiting for Fox News to be invented; to this day pretty much all journalists share the same brain), it had a novel–for cable news–editorial slant and preferred rightish “personalities.” So it became the Republican/conservative/neocon news outlet.

    The reaction from the rest of the news world was odd. I didn’t expect them to say: “Drats, why didn’t we think of going after that market?” But I was surprised by the fact that they pretended Fox News invented partisanship, or something. As if beforehand everyone in news was perfectly neutral. Only after Fox discovered not everyone who watches t.v. is liberal did networks discover you can look at the news from a perspective. Well, golly gee!

    Occasionally this was couched in rationally defensible terms. For instance, Fox did “polarize” cable news, even if it didn’t politicize it. And you could say they made it “more political,” because beforehand there was less competition along those lines.

    But you also heard absolutely insane things, like Fox inventing attractive reporterettes or Fox inventing people yelling at eachother.

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
    "That exact phenomenon happened in the MSM after the advent of Fox News, of course."

    The previous financial model of most media outlets was a dual revenue stream from both advertisers and subscribers. Internet killed the subscription revenue, leaving them with only the advertisers for their income. As that happened, media changed from an information service to a propaganda outlet for the wealthy; the subscriber class has lost their financial influence. Fox is just backlash from this shift.

    I'm sure things will shift again shortly as more and more people move to streaming.
  37. @Anonymous
    "Long-Lost Tapes Reveal Plan Hatched by the 'Jewish Avengers' to Kill Six Million Germans in Revenge for the Holocaust"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5291029/Tapes-reveal-Jewish-revenge-plot-kill-six-million.html

    Long-lost tapes reveal details of a foiled plan by the Jewish Avengers to kill six million Germans by poisoning the country's water supply in revenge for the Holocaust.

    Film maker Avi Merkado found ten tapes, buried in a museum in Israel, which detailed how a band of Jewish partisans formed after the Second World War.

    The recordings - which have never been heard in public - are at the heart of a new documentary entitled Holocaust: The Revenge Plot, due to air on January 27.

    Recorded in 1985, when their leader Vilnius Ghetto survivor and Israeli poet Abba Kovner, was dying of cancer, they provide the most detailed account of the group’s 1946 plans.

    The tapes describe how The Avengers, led by Kovner and Pasha Reichmann, funded their activities with £5 notes, forged by Jews in concentration camps and exchanged on the black market.

    They claim that the late Israeli Presidents, Chaim Weizmann and Ephraim Katzir, were instrumental in helping the Avengers acquire the poison they needed for their audacious plot.

    They describe how Avengers’ agents infiltrated the waterworks of four German cities - Hamburg, Nuremberg, Frankfurt and Munich – but plans to poison the water supplies were foiled when Kovner was arrested at sea.

    And they talk about their second mass murder attempt to poison the bread of 50,000 SS officers in Prisoner of War camps in Nuremberg and Munich, which was more successful, striking down up to 2,000 victims.
     

    After the Soviet Union fell my Russian Jewish friend told me his family feared they would be killed and so took the right to move to Germany. I wonder how much of the anti Russian hysteria is fuelled by the belief Russians should take revenge for Communism?

  38. @Thomas

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution–or at least, a shooting civil war–is a necessary component of our future. If we’re to have one.
     
    It needs to be said again and again that what 21st century Democrats and progressives stand for is the dissolution of the United States. They're the Treason Lobby at this point, with a naked intent to destroy the United States now manifest and undeniable. That fact needs to be made widely understood and not left veiled or varnished.

    What, at this point, do you have against the dissolution of the United States?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Revolution sounds like fun until you actually get it underway. Then you discover it involves lawlessness, privation, dispossession, rape, murder, and much else. That it becomes necessary is never cause for celebration --more likely despair and then, as necessary, resolution.

    Revolution should be put off as long as possible, but no longer.

  39. @Anonymous

    NYT is now a white supremacist paper. The multiple Nazi puff pieces, constant pro-Trump PR, and praise for Miller...

    "I am currently an op-ed columnist for the Globe and Mail" -- she has 340,000 followers on Twit.
     

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution--or at least, a shooting civil war--is a necessary component of our future. If we're to have one.

    I'm not happy to have typed that. I'm not happy it's come to this.

    or at least, a shooting civil war

    A war has to have two sides. Where is the real resistance? Who is willing to fight these people? White Champion Tucker Carlson: “Can’t we just get along? You’re being crazy right now. I’m shocked at the extremism of the left. I’m not a racist.” White Champion Donald Trump: “We’ll do an amnesty of 2 million if you fund the wall, okay? We’re not actually going to do mass deportations because these are good people. We’re only going after criminals, okay? I’m not a racist.”

    When passive resistance meets determined fanatical hatred, determined fanatical hatred is going to win 10 times out of 10.

    • Agree: AndrewR
  40. @Anonymous
    "Long-Lost Tapes Reveal Plan Hatched by the 'Jewish Avengers' to Kill Six Million Germans in Revenge for the Holocaust"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5291029/Tapes-reveal-Jewish-revenge-plot-kill-six-million.html

    Long-lost tapes reveal details of a foiled plan by the Jewish Avengers to kill six million Germans by poisoning the country's water supply in revenge for the Holocaust.

    Film maker Avi Merkado found ten tapes, buried in a museum in Israel, which detailed how a band of Jewish partisans formed after the Second World War.

    The recordings - which have never been heard in public - are at the heart of a new documentary entitled Holocaust: The Revenge Plot, due to air on January 27.

    Recorded in 1985, when their leader Vilnius Ghetto survivor and Israeli poet Abba Kovner, was dying of cancer, they provide the most detailed account of the group’s 1946 plans.

    The tapes describe how The Avengers, led by Kovner and Pasha Reichmann, funded their activities with £5 notes, forged by Jews in concentration camps and exchanged on the black market.

    They claim that the late Israeli Presidents, Chaim Weizmann and Ephraim Katzir, were instrumental in helping the Avengers acquire the poison they needed for their audacious plot.

    They describe how Avengers’ agents infiltrated the waterworks of four German cities - Hamburg, Nuremberg, Frankfurt and Munich – but plans to poison the water supplies were foiled when Kovner was arrested at sea.

    And they talk about their second mass murder attempt to poison the bread of 50,000 SS officers in Prisoner of War camps in Nuremberg and Munich, which was more successful, striking down up to 2,000 victims.
     

    The tapes describe how The Avengers, led by Kovner and Pasha Reichmann, funded their activities with £5 notes, forged by Jews

    Nudge nudge, wink wink, say no more.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    That caught my eye too. Just as in the old Soviet Union, nowadays we learn the truth by reading between the lines. Chefs, restaurants, gymnasiums, concerts, theatrical productions, and now counterfeiting operations.

    Is anyone keeping a list? Somehow these "details" don't make it into Hollywood movies, much less history books.
  41. Wouldn’t put it past Carlos Slim attempting to gain Cuck cred. Leftists who actually pay for thought-pieces are a smaller market.

  42. @Anonymous

    NYT is now a white supremacist paper. The multiple Nazi puff pieces, constant pro-Trump PR, and praise for Miller...

    "I am currently an op-ed columnist for the Globe and Mail" -- she has 340,000 followers on Twit.
     

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution--or at least, a shooting civil war--is a necessary component of our future. If we're to have one.

    I'm not happy to have typed that. I'm not happy it's come to this.

    I came to this conclusion a few years ago. I’m just wondering what the spark will be that sets it off. My guess: The loss of a carrier battle group in a fight with China over Taiwan. Unlike Pearl Harbor back in 1941, the U.S. political system today would be unable to process a military setback of that magnitude, and things would probably fall apart pretty quickly.

    Ultimately, an unrealistic sense of American military invincibility is probably a root cause of many problems today, not just in the U.S. but in Europe as well. It’s causing people to order their lives and societies as if an entire class of political questions has been permanently solved. Even 9/11 and its aftermath didn’t really dent this attitude, because all that could be written off as mischief caused by a particularly clever and energetic bunch of goat herders. No need to fundamentally rethink anything.

    It won’t be drones vs. goat herders forever, though. When those more primal political questions return with a vengeance — which they inevitably will — I fear it will be like releasing a nasty but normally controllable pathogen into a population with compromised immune systems. Some patients — nations — will be unable to handle these new stresses (despite the fact that their forebears dealt with the same stresses on a daily basis) and will fail, probably fracturing into smaller but more cohesive entities. The United States seems ripe for this. Since large chunks of the public have starkly incompatible ideas about what America represents, they are also going to have starkly incompatible ideas about how military force ought to be employed to ensure America’s safety.

    I mean, we can’t even agree about borders, for crying out loud. How you think about borders is going to have a huge effect on how you think your nation’s military ought to be organized and deployed. This isn’t much of a problem today, because regular people casually assume the military is invincible; they tend to think of it as a giant social service agency, when they bother to think of it at all. Women in combat? Sure! It’s not like we’ll ever have to use them, right?

    In a much livelier threat environment, when regular people are forced to once again start thinking of the military as an organization whose explicit purpose is to protect America and its ideals with armed force, you’ll start to see deep political fissures suddenly open up, seemingly out of nowhere. Note that the population that will be considering these questions will possess a vastly different ethnic and ideological mix than the population which formed a rough national consensus during the Cold War.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You write well and clearly you think deeply. A bit of concision might help, though. This is the internet and attention spans (including mine, alas) are notoriously short.
    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    It all works as long as the money's still good. The US dollar is tradeable in a vast market with generally good courts and police and military backing it all up. So long as you can take your dispute into court and reasonably rely on the judge to apply the UCC and not be bribed, and so long as the cops beat up the bad guys in exchange for a salary and a pension instead of shaking down local businesses, then the dollar's status is secure. High-trust, low time-preference is the key to everything: you don't have to track down some reliable cousin in your extended clan to get your car repaired or pay a water bill or transfer title.

    We're so confident about this state of affairs, we've leveraged it far into the future to pay public and private debts. If the future shows up and is low-trust, high time-preference, then the US dollar will be revalued accordingly. Now, you don't need me to educate you on how trust in public and private institutions is eroding, but we've got you covered there as well: Amazon is one highly reliable enabler of anonymous transactions, to the point that you need never leave your house. Complete strangers will bring everything you need and can pay for right to your door. Amazon's shareholders get rich, the Amazon delivery guy has enough money to pay the rent and go out on the weekend--everybody's happy. Everybody in the distribution chain has skin in the game such that the system is self-policing and, therefore, sustainable. "Antifragile" as Taleb would put it.

    So far, so good.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    The US will never go to war over Taiwan. The US doesn't have the backbone for real confrontation. Unless we're facing goatherders, it's all bluster. Even Trump doesn't have the balls to do something like take out the Rocket Man regime. There's been no push back against China at all in the Pacific. It's going to be all impressive war games until China absorbs Taiwan without much conflict of any kind.
    , @Forbes
    If you can imagine it, it doesn't/won't/can't have the consequences you imagine, if only because it's been thought through, or it's so fantastic its extremely low probability makes it of little consequence.

    It's the stuff people are sure can't happen that causes chaos when it occurs. It's the overweening confidence--hubris--that brings the system near/to collapse.

    Most policy/politics/partisanship has nothing to with collapse because government power is fairly dispersed.

    Prog-lefties are having a two-year old's temper tantrum. It's mostly ineffectual. Why should anyone give more than a cursory glance at a couple lunatics posting on Twitter. It's entertainment--it's not real, it's not reality. Two women have let their imaginations and their hormones run wild.

    They deserve the same attention as the nutter on the street corner...
  43. @eah
    Observant and thoughtful Whites may want to ponder why (((Jennifer Rubin))) sees a 'whitening' of immigrant flows as undesirable, perhaps even threatening -- something to be opposed, even (actively) 'fought' -- also whether this sort of rhetoric is common, and what it might/will be like when Whites are a minority in America.

    If this was a white person saying the same about immigrant Jews, we'd be reminded (again) of the 'Holocaust' -- how such hate is paving the way for the next 'Holocaust'.

    Not exactly John Lennon’s kind of ‘imagining’

    https://twitter.com/RevengeCoach/status/957811060890841089

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    I consider myself a race-realist but I'm also not so obsessed with race that I would be upset about the "browning of America" under any possible circumstances. What bothers me isn't the "browning" of this country per se but the simultaneous demonization of whites that seems to be becoming more virulent by the year. One need not be a genius or clairvoyant to put two and two together and realize that a white-minority America will likely be a much less pleasant place than the America we all grew up in. I would prefer to be neither oppressor nor oppressed but if I have to make a choice then I'm obviously not going to choose the latter.
  44. @Mr. Blank
    I came to this conclusion a few years ago. I’m just wondering what the spark will be that sets it off. My guess: The loss of a carrier battle group in a fight with China over Taiwan. Unlike Pearl Harbor back in 1941, the U.S. political system today would be unable to process a military setback of that magnitude, and things would probably fall apart pretty quickly.

    Ultimately, an unrealistic sense of American military invincibility is probably a root cause of many problems today, not just in the U.S. but in Europe as well. It’s causing people to order their lives and societies as if an entire class of political questions has been permanently solved. Even 9/11 and its aftermath didn’t really dent this attitude, because all that could be written off as mischief caused by a particularly clever and energetic bunch of goat herders. No need to fundamentally rethink anything.

    It won’t be drones vs. goat herders forever, though. When those more primal political questions return with a vengeance — which they inevitably will — I fear it will be like releasing a nasty but normally controllable pathogen into a population with compromised immune systems. Some patients — nations — will be unable to handle these new stresses (despite the fact that their forebears dealt with the same stresses on a daily basis) and will fail, probably fracturing into smaller but more cohesive entities. The United States seems ripe for this. Since large chunks of the public have starkly incompatible ideas about what America represents, they are also going to have starkly incompatible ideas about how military force ought to be employed to ensure America’s safety.

    I mean, we can’t even agree about borders, for crying out loud. How you think about borders is going to have a huge effect on how you think your nation’s military ought to be organized and deployed. This isn’t much of a problem today, because regular people casually assume the military is invincible; they tend to think of it as a giant social service agency, when they bother to think of it at all. Women in combat? Sure! It’s not like we’ll ever have to use them, right?

    In a much livelier threat environment, when regular people are forced to once again start thinking of the military as an organization whose explicit purpose is to protect America and its ideals with armed force, you’ll start to see deep political fissures suddenly open up, seemingly out of nowhere. Note that the population that will be considering these questions will possess a vastly different ethnic and ideological mix than the population which formed a rough national consensus during the Cold War.

    You write well and clearly you think deeply. A bit of concision might help, though. This is the internet and attention spans (including mine, alas) are notoriously short.

  45. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @james wilson
    What, at this point, do you have against the dissolution of the United States?

    Revolution sounds like fun until you actually get it underway. Then you discover it involves lawlessness, privation, dispossession, rape, murder, and much else. That it becomes necessary is never cause for celebration –more likely despair and then, as necessary, resolution.

    Revolution should be put off as long as possible, but no longer.

  46. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    The tapes describe how The Avengers, led by Kovner and Pasha Reichmann, funded their activities with £5 notes, forged by Jews
     
    Nudge nudge, wink wink, say no more.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGrvQ1c5khU

    That caught my eye too. Just as in the old Soviet Union, nowadays we learn the truth by reading between the lines. Chefs, restaurants, gymnasiums, concerts, theatrical productions, and now counterfeiting operations.

    Is anyone keeping a list? Somehow these “details” don’t make it into Hollywood movies, much less history books.

  47. @ben tillman
    Immigration caused the Holocaust.

    meme that

  48. @Mr. Blank
    I came to this conclusion a few years ago. I’m just wondering what the spark will be that sets it off. My guess: The loss of a carrier battle group in a fight with China over Taiwan. Unlike Pearl Harbor back in 1941, the U.S. political system today would be unable to process a military setback of that magnitude, and things would probably fall apart pretty quickly.

    Ultimately, an unrealistic sense of American military invincibility is probably a root cause of many problems today, not just in the U.S. but in Europe as well. It’s causing people to order their lives and societies as if an entire class of political questions has been permanently solved. Even 9/11 and its aftermath didn’t really dent this attitude, because all that could be written off as mischief caused by a particularly clever and energetic bunch of goat herders. No need to fundamentally rethink anything.

    It won’t be drones vs. goat herders forever, though. When those more primal political questions return with a vengeance — which they inevitably will — I fear it will be like releasing a nasty but normally controllable pathogen into a population with compromised immune systems. Some patients — nations — will be unable to handle these new stresses (despite the fact that their forebears dealt with the same stresses on a daily basis) and will fail, probably fracturing into smaller but more cohesive entities. The United States seems ripe for this. Since large chunks of the public have starkly incompatible ideas about what America represents, they are also going to have starkly incompatible ideas about how military force ought to be employed to ensure America’s safety.

    I mean, we can’t even agree about borders, for crying out loud. How you think about borders is going to have a huge effect on how you think your nation’s military ought to be organized and deployed. This isn’t much of a problem today, because regular people casually assume the military is invincible; they tend to think of it as a giant social service agency, when they bother to think of it at all. Women in combat? Sure! It’s not like we’ll ever have to use them, right?

    In a much livelier threat environment, when regular people are forced to once again start thinking of the military as an organization whose explicit purpose is to protect America and its ideals with armed force, you’ll start to see deep political fissures suddenly open up, seemingly out of nowhere. Note that the population that will be considering these questions will possess a vastly different ethnic and ideological mix than the population which formed a rough national consensus during the Cold War.

    It all works as long as the money’s still good. The US dollar is tradeable in a vast market with generally good courts and police and military backing it all up. So long as you can take your dispute into court and reasonably rely on the judge to apply the UCC and not be bribed, and so long as the cops beat up the bad guys in exchange for a salary and a pension instead of shaking down local businesses, then the dollar’s status is secure. High-trust, low time-preference is the key to everything: you don’t have to track down some reliable cousin in your extended clan to get your car repaired or pay a water bill or transfer title.

    We’re so confident about this state of affairs, we’ve leveraged it far into the future to pay public and private debts. If the future shows up and is low-trust, high time-preference, then the US dollar will be revalued accordingly. Now, you don’t need me to educate you on how trust in public and private institutions is eroding, but we’ve got you covered there as well: Amazon is one highly reliable enabler of anonymous transactions, to the point that you need never leave your house. Complete strangers will bring everything you need and can pay for right to your door. Amazon’s shareholders get rich, the Amazon delivery guy has enough money to pay the rent and go out on the weekend–everybody’s happy. Everybody in the distribution chain has skin in the game such that the system is self-policing and, therefore, sustainable. “Antifragile” as Taleb would put it.

    So far, so good.

  49. Chutzpah is invoking the Holocaust to try an exclude a Jew from political negotiations.

    Where’s my rainbow dog whistle?

  50. @Orwellian State
    And then they wonder why people are hating on Jews. WTF do Mexicans have to do with the holocaust?

    If you don’t went to use Mexicans to destroy white America you want to gas Jews

  51. @Mr. Blank
    I came to this conclusion a few years ago. I’m just wondering what the spark will be that sets it off. My guess: The loss of a carrier battle group in a fight with China over Taiwan. Unlike Pearl Harbor back in 1941, the U.S. political system today would be unable to process a military setback of that magnitude, and things would probably fall apart pretty quickly.

    Ultimately, an unrealistic sense of American military invincibility is probably a root cause of many problems today, not just in the U.S. but in Europe as well. It’s causing people to order their lives and societies as if an entire class of political questions has been permanently solved. Even 9/11 and its aftermath didn’t really dent this attitude, because all that could be written off as mischief caused by a particularly clever and energetic bunch of goat herders. No need to fundamentally rethink anything.

    It won’t be drones vs. goat herders forever, though. When those more primal political questions return with a vengeance — which they inevitably will — I fear it will be like releasing a nasty but normally controllable pathogen into a population with compromised immune systems. Some patients — nations — will be unable to handle these new stresses (despite the fact that their forebears dealt with the same stresses on a daily basis) and will fail, probably fracturing into smaller but more cohesive entities. The United States seems ripe for this. Since large chunks of the public have starkly incompatible ideas about what America represents, they are also going to have starkly incompatible ideas about how military force ought to be employed to ensure America’s safety.

    I mean, we can’t even agree about borders, for crying out loud. How you think about borders is going to have a huge effect on how you think your nation’s military ought to be organized and deployed. This isn’t much of a problem today, because regular people casually assume the military is invincible; they tend to think of it as a giant social service agency, when they bother to think of it at all. Women in combat? Sure! It’s not like we’ll ever have to use them, right?

    In a much livelier threat environment, when regular people are forced to once again start thinking of the military as an organization whose explicit purpose is to protect America and its ideals with armed force, you’ll start to see deep political fissures suddenly open up, seemingly out of nowhere. Note that the population that will be considering these questions will possess a vastly different ethnic and ideological mix than the population which formed a rough national consensus during the Cold War.

    The US will never go to war over Taiwan. The US doesn’t have the backbone for real confrontation. Unless we’re facing goatherders, it’s all bluster. Even Trump doesn’t have the balls to do something like take out the Rocket Man regime. There’s been no push back against China at all in the Pacific. It’s going to be all impressive war games until China absorbs Taiwan without much conflict of any kind.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    A Hong Kong style arrangement is probably what Beijing has in mind. No censorship, allowed to keep traditional languages, and the local government handles day to day issues unmolested provided they keep in mind who is ultimately in charge. The only immediate visible changes are that a PLA garrison gets stationed there and that Beijing handles foreign policy/defense. That's why the Chinese have been very, very careful to take a hands off attitude to Hong Kong. When they have intervened and overrule the local government, such as when they moved against the tycoons a couple years ago. By and large, many Hong Kongers, especially in the rent-squeezed middle class, were happy with that, not that you hear this from the Western media. There's a lot of support for Beijing out in the New Territories, for example. Startup founders are generally also happy with Chinese rule since they are handling Hong Kong's transition better than the aging tycoons could: now that Shanghai has usurped Hong Kong's traditional functions, they need to find something else to do.

    It's very logical when you think of what messages they want to send to pan-blue Taiwanese. "It's time to end the Civil War at last." Add in the fact that Taiwan's economic future lies in further integration with the PRC, and I don't see how reunification on Beijing's terms does not happen within the next 50 years. The major difference is that Taiwan has been a democracy for over 20 years now, whereas Hong Kong was always a British colony-a very liberal colony, but no democracy. I think the Chinese still are struggling with that hurdle. Perhaps a federation style agreement in which Taipei has more independent functions?

    , @Mr. Blank
    Possibly so, but the point is that the U.S. is eventually going to be confronted with a situation where it will HAVE to show some backbone, and THAT will be the breaking point. China seems the most logical vector for that confrontation — if not over Taiwan, then something else.

    Sooner or later, a powerful nation with global ambitions will be forced to puncture the myth of U.S. military invincibility — not necessarily to become the new King of the Hill, but just to provide themselves with freedom of action within their own limited sphere. Ultimately, if China's regional ambitions are serious, they'll have to put on a demonstration for their neighbors that says: "The Yankees can't protect you from us, even when they bring their best. Only we can guarantee your safety."
  52. @Anonymous

    NYT is now a white supremacist paper. The multiple Nazi puff pieces, constant pro-Trump PR, and praise for Miller...

    "I am currently an op-ed columnist for the Globe and Mail" -- she has 340,000 followers on Twit.
     

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution--or at least, a shooting civil war--is a necessary component of our future. If we're to have one.

    I'm not happy to have typed that. I'm not happy it's come to this.

    I agree except

    “What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other.”

    Fanaticism on their side is merely engendering mild realism on ours.

  53. @eah
    Not exactly John Lennon's kind of 'imagining'

    https://twitter.com/RevengeCoach/status/957811060890841089

    I consider myself a race-realist but I’m also not so obsessed with race that I would be upset about the “browning of America” under any possible circumstances. What bothers me isn’t the “browning” of this country per se but the simultaneous demonization of whites that seems to be becoming more virulent by the year. One need not be a genius or clairvoyant to put two and two together and realize that a white-minority America will likely be a much less pleasant place than the America we all grew up in. I would prefer to be neither oppressor nor oppressed but if I have to make a choice then I’m obviously not going to choose the latter.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    This and, I'm fine with people of any color who understand and love the Constitution, but every survey and poll and personal experience screams that they hate it and want to replicate their own corrupt free-for-all messes. The truly disgusting Khazir Khan is currently on a hectoring tour with Carl Reiner and an original copy of the Declaration of Independence to lecture Americans about what Khan thinks our system is.
    , @nebulafox
    > I would prefer to be neither oppressor nor oppressed but if I have to make a choice then I’m obviously not going to choose the latter.

    Well, in the end, peoples make the choice to decline in population, and it can be a quite rational choice-note that Japan, South Korea, China, et all have low population births, too. Iran, Indonesia, India, Brazil have all declined, too. Anyway, I'm quite the supporter of racial mixing, if in the hard Nietzschean sense rather than the wippy-dip, soft left-wing one. New blood replenishes a state and, properly applied, can breed what is vigorous. But I agree. I do think that's the calculation many whites are going to make down the road, if worst comes to worst. I don't think it'll get that far-I think rather than Yugoslavia, a more likely scenario is we become the Brazil with nukes that Tyler Cowen and people like him predict. That's noxious and not what the Founding Fathers wanted, but not the worst fate in the world, especially if you manage to bridge the gap between Saved and Damned.

    But if it does get to the worst case scenario, well, what do they want me to do? I'm not going to let myself be taken advantage of because the New York Times urges me to, all the while knowing that the "Goodwhites" aren't exactly planning on sharing in the policy prescriptions they apply to deplorables. If people screw with me or my family, they get crushed, plain and simple: I don't care what the history is or if they come from an "oppressed" group or if they are my "better". The Koreans in 1992 fought back when attacked. It could happen.

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/so-youre-about-to-become-a-minority_us_553011f0e4b04ebb92325daf

    Nothing epitomizes more how deluded and divorced from a basic understanding of human nature the cultural leftists are than *how* they expect a diminishing former majority to react to being mocked, offered false sympathy, being offered little but socioeconomic decline and fraying cultural bonds, and implied constantly that they are headed for the dustbin of history and that there is nothing they can do... and then being told they should embrace it, be happy, and gently bend over and still be productive. What precedent is there for that in human history, least of all if all these demands come in a sneering yet fundamentally effete way? They aren't going to obey, they'll stick up their middle fingers and do exactly the opposite of what is demanded of them. When constantly being told they are "white"... they, well, become more aware they are white, in a way they weren't 25 years ago. What do these people expect?

    Also-as I mentioned before, this vaunted demographic majority the liberals push is only one in the sense that white people aren't it. They are still a substantial plurality, and it isn't as though ethnic tensions don't exist between the various minority groups. As the civic nationalism that so animated the United States before the 1990s increasingly fades, the rival animosities will get stronger within the Coalition of the Nots.

    , @Bragadocious
    I consider myself a race-realist but I’m also not so obsessed with race that I would be upset about the “browning of America” under any possible circumstances

    I'm sort of in this camp too. My rationale is that if brown people are fighting amongst themselves most of the time, as they're sure to do when you have Mexicans, El Salvadorans, Indians from India, Haitians, Pakistanis, Dominicans and Somalis sloshing together in the same pot, whites may just be in a--dare I say it--privileged position. And I also know that when we were a 90% white nation, we were unable to stay out of 2 world wars in Europe, losing around 300,000 men in the process. Those were really shitty times to be in America. I'm not sure people today understand how bad it was.
    , @Forbes
    When it comes to it--you won't have a choice. It will be imposed on you, like it or not. Better pick your side now.
  54. @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/957334999522533376

    Hey, Donald. Where do you get this ‘we’ shit?

  55. @Anonymous

    NYT is now a white supremacist paper. The multiple Nazi puff pieces, constant pro-Trump PR, and praise for Miller...

    "I am currently an op-ed columnist for the Globe and Mail" -- she has 340,000 followers on Twit.
     

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution--or at least, a shooting civil war--is a necessary component of our future. If we're to have one.

    I'm not happy to have typed that. I'm not happy it's come to this.

    Just in case no one has posted this yet, here is a link to Daniel Greenfield’s speech to the South Carolina Tea Party Coalition Convention: https://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2018/01/this-civil-war-my-south-carolina-tea.html.

    He’s right. This is a second civil war and the left is determined to win.

  56. @Thomas

    Good God, these people are absolutely psychotic. What a perfect demonstration of how fanaticism on one side engenders fanaticism on the other. Because enough of these people have convinced me that violent revolution–or at least, a shooting civil war–is a necessary component of our future. If we’re to have one.
     
    It needs to be said again and again that what 21st century Democrats and progressives stand for is the dissolution of the United States. They're the Treason Lobby at this point, with a naked intent to destroy the United States now manifest and undeniable. That fact needs to be made widely understood and not left veiled or varnished.

    Dividing up the country sounds like a good idea to me.

  57. @Mr. Anon
    Do these people, like Sarah Kendzior, not know that Miller is jewish? They keep talking about the Trump administration as if it were the Fourth Reich. Certainly they must know that Gary Cohn and Steve Mnuchin are not exactly obersturmbannfuehrers. Is she just stupid?

    “Traitors to Judaism (a.k.a. Social Liberalism) must be persecuted blah, blah blah”

  58. Who can focus on griping about ancient history somewhere in Eurasia when we just last year had the #metoo Hollacaust!?!

    ( https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=holla )

  59. @Chrisnonymous
    The US will never go to war over Taiwan. The US doesn't have the backbone for real confrontation. Unless we're facing goatherders, it's all bluster. Even Trump doesn't have the balls to do something like take out the Rocket Man regime. There's been no push back against China at all in the Pacific. It's going to be all impressive war games until China absorbs Taiwan without much conflict of any kind.

    A Hong Kong style arrangement is probably what Beijing has in mind. No censorship, allowed to keep traditional languages, and the local government handles day to day issues unmolested provided they keep in mind who is ultimately in charge. The only immediate visible changes are that a PLA garrison gets stationed there and that Beijing handles foreign policy/defense. That’s why the Chinese have been very, very careful to take a hands off attitude to Hong Kong. When they have intervened and overrule the local government, such as when they moved against the tycoons a couple years ago. By and large, many Hong Kongers, especially in the rent-squeezed middle class, were happy with that, not that you hear this from the Western media. There’s a lot of support for Beijing out in the New Territories, for example. Startup founders are generally also happy with Chinese rule since they are handling Hong Kong’s transition better than the aging tycoons could: now that Shanghai has usurped Hong Kong’s traditional functions, they need to find something else to do.

    It’s very logical when you think of what messages they want to send to pan-blue Taiwanese. “It’s time to end the Civil War at last.” Add in the fact that Taiwan’s economic future lies in further integration with the PRC, and I don’t see how reunification on Beijing’s terms does not happen within the next 50 years. The major difference is that Taiwan has been a democracy for over 20 years now, whereas Hong Kong was always a British colony-a very liberal colony, but no democracy. I think the Chinese still are struggling with that hurdle. Perhaps a federation style agreement in which Taipei has more independent functions?

  60. @AndrewR
    I consider myself a race-realist but I'm also not so obsessed with race that I would be upset about the "browning of America" under any possible circumstances. What bothers me isn't the "browning" of this country per se but the simultaneous demonization of whites that seems to be becoming more virulent by the year. One need not be a genius or clairvoyant to put two and two together and realize that a white-minority America will likely be a much less pleasant place than the America we all grew up in. I would prefer to be neither oppressor nor oppressed but if I have to make a choice then I'm obviously not going to choose the latter.

    This and, I’m fine with people of any color who understand and love the Constitution, but every survey and poll and personal experience screams that they hate it and want to replicate their own corrupt free-for-all messes. The truly disgusting Khazir Khan is currently on a hectoring tour with Carl Reiner and an original copy of the Declaration of Independence to lecture Americans about what Khan thinks our system is.

  61. @AndrewR
    I consider myself a race-realist but I'm also not so obsessed with race that I would be upset about the "browning of America" under any possible circumstances. What bothers me isn't the "browning" of this country per se but the simultaneous demonization of whites that seems to be becoming more virulent by the year. One need not be a genius or clairvoyant to put two and two together and realize that a white-minority America will likely be a much less pleasant place than the America we all grew up in. I would prefer to be neither oppressor nor oppressed but if I have to make a choice then I'm obviously not going to choose the latter.

    > I would prefer to be neither oppressor nor oppressed but if I have to make a choice then I’m obviously not going to choose the latter.

    Well, in the end, peoples make the choice to decline in population, and it can be a quite rational choice-note that Japan, South Korea, China, et all have low population births, too. Iran, Indonesia, India, Brazil have all declined, too. Anyway, I’m quite the supporter of racial mixing, if in the hard Nietzschean sense rather than the wippy-dip, soft left-wing one. New blood replenishes a state and, properly applied, can breed what is vigorous. But I agree. I do think that’s the calculation many whites are going to make down the road, if worst comes to worst. I don’t think it’ll get that far-I think rather than Yugoslavia, a more likely scenario is we become the Brazil with nukes that Tyler Cowen and people like him predict. That’s noxious and not what the Founding Fathers wanted, but not the worst fate in the world, especially if you manage to bridge the gap between Saved and Damned.

    But if it does get to the worst case scenario, well, what do they want me to do? I’m not going to let myself be taken advantage of because the New York Times urges me to, all the while knowing that the “Goodwhites” aren’t exactly planning on sharing in the policy prescriptions they apply to deplorables. If people screw with me or my family, they get crushed, plain and simple: I don’t care what the history is or if they come from an “oppressed” group or if they are my “better”. The Koreans in 1992 fought back when attacked. It could happen.

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/so-youre-about-to-become-a-minority_us_553011f0e4b04ebb92325daf

    Nothing epitomizes more how deluded and divorced from a basic understanding of human nature the cultural leftists are than *how* they expect a diminishing former majority to react to being mocked, offered false sympathy, being offered little but socioeconomic decline and fraying cultural bonds, and implied constantly that they are headed for the dustbin of history and that there is nothing they can do… and then being told they should embrace it, be happy, and gently bend over and still be productive. What precedent is there for that in human history, least of all if all these demands come in a sneering yet fundamentally effete way? They aren’t going to obey, they’ll stick up their middle fingers and do exactly the opposite of what is demanded of them. When constantly being told they are “white”… they, well, become more aware they are white, in a way they weren’t 25 years ago. What do these people expect?

    Also-as I mentioned before, this vaunted demographic majority the liberals push is only one in the sense that white people aren’t it. They are still a substantial plurality, and it isn’t as though ethnic tensions don’t exist between the various minority groups. As the civic nationalism that so animated the United States before the 1990s increasingly fades, the rival animosities will get stronger within the Coalition of the Nots.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    When constantly being told they are “white”… they, well, become more aware they are white, in a way they weren’t 25 years ago. What do these people expect?
     
    One of the effects of shifting U.S. immigration away from Europe has been that white ethnicity is less distinct than it might have been otherwise and people have settled into being generally white, generic Americans. Rather than finding friends and spouses among new arrivals, American whites came to mix into the default generic white American (what foreigners would likely describe as an "American" if asked to describe one). This has coincided with the rise of hate-whitey politics, and I think that in some ways the direct efforts to erase whites have made them into a somewhat distinct identity. These were of course unintended consequences.

    As they "brown" (used as a verb) the United States and encourage the brown hordes to place their ethnic and racial identities at the heart of their social and political participation, the arguments for why whites can't return the favor become more and more ridiculous and untenable. As it stands now the argument has degenerated exclusively into social pressure and ridicule. When this stops working because people stop empowering people who quite obviously hate them, I would expect a "preference cascade" situation.
  62. @guest
    That exact phenomenon happened in the MSM after the advent of Fox News, of course. Despite the fact that Fox News was mostly full of the same sort of journalists as every other network (there was no pool of Republican or conservative journalists sitting around waiting for Fox News to be invented; to this day pretty much all journalists share the same brain), it had a novel--for cable news--editorial slant and preferred rightish "personalities." So it became the Republican/conservative/neocon news outlet.

    The reaction from the rest of the news world was odd. I didn't expect them to say: "Drats, why didn't we think of going after that market?" But I was surprised by the fact that they pretended Fox News invented partisanship, or something. As if beforehand everyone in news was perfectly neutral. Only after Fox discovered not everyone who watches t.v. is liberal did networks discover you can look at the news from a perspective. Well, golly gee!

    Occasionally this was couched in rationally defensible terms. For instance, Fox did "polarize" cable news, even if it didn't politicize it. And you could say they made it "more political," because beforehand there was less competition along those lines.

    But you also heard absolutely insane things, like Fox inventing attractive reporterettes or Fox inventing people yelling at eachother.

    “That exact phenomenon happened in the MSM after the advent of Fox News, of course.”

    The previous financial model of most media outlets was a dual revenue stream from both advertisers and subscribers. Internet killed the subscription revenue, leaving them with only the advertisers for their income. As that happened, media changed from an information service to a propaganda outlet for the wealthy; the subscriber class has lost their financial influence. Fox is just backlash from this shift.

    I’m sure things will shift again shortly as more and more people move to streaming.

  63. @Anonymous IV
    "constant pro-Trump PR"

    Yep, a perfect description of the NY Times.
    Kind of like when Paul Krugman kept talking about how anti-Hillary the Times was during the election.

    Kind of like when Paul Krugman kept talking about how anti-Hillary the Times was during the election.

    Their frustration really boils down to the fact that they had to have an election in the first place, which they believed until about 9 or 10 P.M. on election night 2016 was going to be a formality verging on a coronation. They were really expecting Alabama, Georgia and Texas to be competitive and that surviving House and Senate Republicans would be so spooked and in fear for their own offices that they’d be even less courageous than usual, crushed under the prodigious weight of the Iron Cankle. Never forget that they weren’t only going to win, they were going to use every bit of every apparatus of the State to punish you, humiliate you for daring to oppose them in the first place.

    https://balkin.blogspot.com/2016/05/abandoning-defensive-crouch-liberal.html

    These people tweeting that they’re cancelling their subscriptions to the NAZI-sympathizing NYT are funny but terribly, terribly sad. Put aside their hypocrisy for engaging in the same “epistemic closure” that they accuse others of doing. The NYT goes a fraction outside of their Democrat messaging operation to point out that there will be no immigration deal of – horror – the views of the people who elected Trump are not represented and they decide that the best way to respond is to stop hearing this contrary information.

  64. @nebulafox
    > I would prefer to be neither oppressor nor oppressed but if I have to make a choice then I’m obviously not going to choose the latter.

    Well, in the end, peoples make the choice to decline in population, and it can be a quite rational choice-note that Japan, South Korea, China, et all have low population births, too. Iran, Indonesia, India, Brazil have all declined, too. Anyway, I'm quite the supporter of racial mixing, if in the hard Nietzschean sense rather than the wippy-dip, soft left-wing one. New blood replenishes a state and, properly applied, can breed what is vigorous. But I agree. I do think that's the calculation many whites are going to make down the road, if worst comes to worst. I don't think it'll get that far-I think rather than Yugoslavia, a more likely scenario is we become the Brazil with nukes that Tyler Cowen and people like him predict. That's noxious and not what the Founding Fathers wanted, but not the worst fate in the world, especially if you manage to bridge the gap between Saved and Damned.

    But if it does get to the worst case scenario, well, what do they want me to do? I'm not going to let myself be taken advantage of because the New York Times urges me to, all the while knowing that the "Goodwhites" aren't exactly planning on sharing in the policy prescriptions they apply to deplorables. If people screw with me or my family, they get crushed, plain and simple: I don't care what the history is or if they come from an "oppressed" group or if they are my "better". The Koreans in 1992 fought back when attacked. It could happen.

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/so-youre-about-to-become-a-minority_us_553011f0e4b04ebb92325daf

    Nothing epitomizes more how deluded and divorced from a basic understanding of human nature the cultural leftists are than *how* they expect a diminishing former majority to react to being mocked, offered false sympathy, being offered little but socioeconomic decline and fraying cultural bonds, and implied constantly that they are headed for the dustbin of history and that there is nothing they can do... and then being told they should embrace it, be happy, and gently bend over and still be productive. What precedent is there for that in human history, least of all if all these demands come in a sneering yet fundamentally effete way? They aren't going to obey, they'll stick up their middle fingers and do exactly the opposite of what is demanded of them. When constantly being told they are "white"... they, well, become more aware they are white, in a way they weren't 25 years ago. What do these people expect?

    Also-as I mentioned before, this vaunted demographic majority the liberals push is only one in the sense that white people aren't it. They are still a substantial plurality, and it isn't as though ethnic tensions don't exist between the various minority groups. As the civic nationalism that so animated the United States before the 1990s increasingly fades, the rival animosities will get stronger within the Coalition of the Nots.

    When constantly being told they are “white”… they, well, become more aware they are white, in a way they weren’t 25 years ago. What do these people expect?

    One of the effects of shifting U.S. immigration away from Europe has been that white ethnicity is less distinct than it might have been otherwise and people have settled into being generally white, generic Americans. Rather than finding friends and spouses among new arrivals, American whites came to mix into the default generic white American (what foreigners would likely describe as an “American” if asked to describe one). This has coincided with the rise of hate-whitey politics, and I think that in some ways the direct efforts to erase whites have made them into a somewhat distinct identity. These were of course unintended consequences.

    As they “brown” (used as a verb) the United States and encourage the brown hordes to place their ethnic and racial identities at the heart of their social and political participation, the arguments for why whites can’t return the favor become more and more ridiculous and untenable. As it stands now the argument has degenerated exclusively into social pressure and ridicule. When this stops working because people stop empowering people who quite obviously hate them, I would expect a “preference cascade” situation.

  65. @Anonymous
    Sigh. Carlos Slim does not control the NYT and he never did. He never owned a majority of Class A shares or anything remotely close (17% at his max, and he has since sold off), and more importantly never owned one single Class B share–the share class which actually controls the Board of Directors and hence votes on corporate policy. The Ochs-Sulzberger family owns and controls the New York Times and has for a very, very long time.

    This "Carlos Slim Owns the NYT" meme has become so widespread and persistent that it's finally occurred to me that it may be the result of a deliberate misinformation campaign promoted by the Sulzbergers.

    Sigh. Carlos Slim does not control the NYT and he never did. He never owned a majority of Class A shares or anything remotely close (17% at his max, and he has since sold off), and more importantly never owned one single Class B share–the share class which actually controls the Board of Directors and hence votes on corporate policy. The Ochs-Sulzberger family owns and controls the New York Times and has for a very, very long time.

    Slim still owns about 17% of the Class A stock, by far the largest portion owned by anyone. Class A stockholders elect 4/13 board members and have the right to vote on certain other issues. Sulzberger wouldn’t take my call but I surmise he takes Slim’s.

    Besides, why do you think Slim went to the trouble of investing such a tiny fraction of his $60B fortune in the NYT? For the dividend?

  66. @Chrisnonymous
    The US will never go to war over Taiwan. The US doesn't have the backbone for real confrontation. Unless we're facing goatherders, it's all bluster. Even Trump doesn't have the balls to do something like take out the Rocket Man regime. There's been no push back against China at all in the Pacific. It's going to be all impressive war games until China absorbs Taiwan without much conflict of any kind.

    Possibly so, but the point is that the U.S. is eventually going to be confronted with a situation where it will HAVE to show some backbone, and THAT will be the breaking point. China seems the most logical vector for that confrontation — if not over Taiwan, then something else.

    Sooner or later, a powerful nation with global ambitions will be forced to puncture the myth of U.S. military invincibility — not necessarily to become the new King of the Hill, but just to provide themselves with freedom of action within their own limited sphere. Ultimately, if China’s regional ambitions are serious, they’ll have to put on a demonstration for their neighbors that says: “The Yankees can’t protect you from us, even when they bring their best. Only we can guarantee your safety.”

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    That's pretty much already happening in the South China Sea. Indonesians who attempt to get Chinese fisherman to respect boundaries find themselves confronted by larger Chinese frigates and just go home.
    , @ic1000
    The highly diverse Austrian-Hungarian Empire repeatedly found itself in a position analogous to the one you foresee for the United States. From the late 1890s through the early 1910s, the Dual Monarchy stumbled from crisis to crisis, internal and external. Everybody figured things would keep more or less working out. And they did, more or less, until the Empire came to blows with Serbia in 1914.

    But as Steve often quips, nobody remembers nothin’. So there are no sobering lessons to be learned.
  67. @Mr. Blank
    Possibly so, but the point is that the U.S. is eventually going to be confronted with a situation where it will HAVE to show some backbone, and THAT will be the breaking point. China seems the most logical vector for that confrontation — if not over Taiwan, then something else.

    Sooner or later, a powerful nation with global ambitions will be forced to puncture the myth of U.S. military invincibility — not necessarily to become the new King of the Hill, but just to provide themselves with freedom of action within their own limited sphere. Ultimately, if China's regional ambitions are serious, they'll have to put on a demonstration for their neighbors that says: "The Yankees can't protect you from us, even when they bring their best. Only we can guarantee your safety."

    That’s pretty much already happening in the South China Sea. Indonesians who attempt to get Chinese fisherman to respect boundaries find themselves confronted by larger Chinese frigates and just go home.

  68. Sarah Kendzior is pretty astute; she’s picked up on the fact that some writers for the The New York Times, don’t really care for the more nationalistic elements of the Trump administration’s ideological program. Nothing gets by this girl!

  69. @Mr. Blank
    Possibly so, but the point is that the U.S. is eventually going to be confronted with a situation where it will HAVE to show some backbone, and THAT will be the breaking point. China seems the most logical vector for that confrontation — if not over Taiwan, then something else.

    Sooner or later, a powerful nation with global ambitions will be forced to puncture the myth of U.S. military invincibility — not necessarily to become the new King of the Hill, but just to provide themselves with freedom of action within their own limited sphere. Ultimately, if China's regional ambitions are serious, they'll have to put on a demonstration for their neighbors that says: "The Yankees can't protect you from us, even when they bring their best. Only we can guarantee your safety."

    The highly diverse Austrian-Hungarian Empire repeatedly found itself in a position analogous to the one you foresee for the United States. From the late 1890s through the early 1910s, the Dual Monarchy stumbled from crisis to crisis, internal and external. Everybody figured things would keep more or less working out. And they did, more or less, until the Empire came to blows with Serbia in 1914.

    But as Steve often quips, nobody remembers nothin’. So there are no sobering lessons to be learned.

  70. @AndrewR
    I consider myself a race-realist but I'm also not so obsessed with race that I would be upset about the "browning of America" under any possible circumstances. What bothers me isn't the "browning" of this country per se but the simultaneous demonization of whites that seems to be becoming more virulent by the year. One need not be a genius or clairvoyant to put two and two together and realize that a white-minority America will likely be a much less pleasant place than the America we all grew up in. I would prefer to be neither oppressor nor oppressed but if I have to make a choice then I'm obviously not going to choose the latter.

    I consider myself a race-realist but I’m also not so obsessed with race that I would be upset about the “browning of America” under any possible circumstances

    I’m sort of in this camp too. My rationale is that if brown people are fighting amongst themselves most of the time, as they’re sure to do when you have Mexicans, El Salvadorans, Indians from India, Haitians, Pakistanis, Dominicans and Somalis sloshing together in the same pot, whites may just be in a–dare I say it–privileged position. And I also know that when we were a 90% white nation, we were unable to stay out of 2 world wars in Europe, losing around 300,000 men in the process. Those were really shitty times to be in America. I’m not sure people today understand how bad it was.

  71. @Mr. Blank
    I came to this conclusion a few years ago. I’m just wondering what the spark will be that sets it off. My guess: The loss of a carrier battle group in a fight with China over Taiwan. Unlike Pearl Harbor back in 1941, the U.S. political system today would be unable to process a military setback of that magnitude, and things would probably fall apart pretty quickly.

    Ultimately, an unrealistic sense of American military invincibility is probably a root cause of many problems today, not just in the U.S. but in Europe as well. It’s causing people to order their lives and societies as if an entire class of political questions has been permanently solved. Even 9/11 and its aftermath didn’t really dent this attitude, because all that could be written off as mischief caused by a particularly clever and energetic bunch of goat herders. No need to fundamentally rethink anything.

    It won’t be drones vs. goat herders forever, though. When those more primal political questions return with a vengeance — which they inevitably will — I fear it will be like releasing a nasty but normally controllable pathogen into a population with compromised immune systems. Some patients — nations — will be unable to handle these new stresses (despite the fact that their forebears dealt with the same stresses on a daily basis) and will fail, probably fracturing into smaller but more cohesive entities. The United States seems ripe for this. Since large chunks of the public have starkly incompatible ideas about what America represents, they are also going to have starkly incompatible ideas about how military force ought to be employed to ensure America’s safety.

    I mean, we can’t even agree about borders, for crying out loud. How you think about borders is going to have a huge effect on how you think your nation’s military ought to be organized and deployed. This isn’t much of a problem today, because regular people casually assume the military is invincible; they tend to think of it as a giant social service agency, when they bother to think of it at all. Women in combat? Sure! It’s not like we’ll ever have to use them, right?

    In a much livelier threat environment, when regular people are forced to once again start thinking of the military as an organization whose explicit purpose is to protect America and its ideals with armed force, you’ll start to see deep political fissures suddenly open up, seemingly out of nowhere. Note that the population that will be considering these questions will possess a vastly different ethnic and ideological mix than the population which formed a rough national consensus during the Cold War.

    If you can imagine it, it doesn’t/won’t/can’t have the consequences you imagine, if only because it’s been thought through, or it’s so fantastic its extremely low probability makes it of little consequence.

    It’s the stuff people are sure can’t happen that causes chaos when it occurs. It’s the overweening confidence–hubris–that brings the system near/to collapse.

    Most policy/politics/partisanship has nothing to with collapse because government power is fairly dispersed.

    Prog-lefties are having a two-year old’s temper tantrum. It’s mostly ineffectual. Why should anyone give more than a cursory glance at a couple lunatics posting on Twitter. It’s entertainment–it’s not real, it’s not reality. Two women have let their imaginations and their hormones run wild.

    They deserve the same attention as the nutter on the street corner…

  72. @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/957334999522533376

    It’s not good enough. They’ll still call Trump a Nazi anyway.

  73. @AndrewR
    I consider myself a race-realist but I'm also not so obsessed with race that I would be upset about the "browning of America" under any possible circumstances. What bothers me isn't the "browning" of this country per se but the simultaneous demonization of whites that seems to be becoming more virulent by the year. One need not be a genius or clairvoyant to put two and two together and realize that a white-minority America will likely be a much less pleasant place than the America we all grew up in. I would prefer to be neither oppressor nor oppressed but if I have to make a choice then I'm obviously not going to choose the latter.

    When it comes to it–you won’t have a choice. It will be imposed on you, like it or not. Better pick your side now.

  74. @Orwellian State
    And then they wonder why people are hating on Jews. WTF do Mexicans have to do with the holocaust?

    Everything has to do with the Holocaust and always will. It’s the ultimate shakedown move.

    • Agree: AndrewR
    • Replies: @Malla
    Holocaustity is a new religion with it's own myths as well as heretics to be burnt at the stake.
  75. @Kylie
    Agreed. But I probably feel worse than you do. Sarah Kendzior lives in St. Louis, MO, my hometown, a place I loved till her ilk made me hate it.

    I just read one of her hit pieces about St. Louis Trump supporters. The raw hate and contempt she displays towards them are shocking.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/12/donald-trump-supporters-st-louis-rally-protest-violence

    Always check out the CV and images available online. Whenever you see mostly head shots, there’s a reason.

    She’s a chubby cat-lady-in-waiting who sees the future loneliness and is not happy.

  76. @BB753
    Everything has to do with the Holocaust and always will. It's the ultimate shakedown move.

    Holocaustity is a new religion with it’s own myths as well as heretics to be burnt at the stake.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2