The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Shor: Us White Democrats Could Easily Alienate Nonwhite Democrats with Our Crazy Level of Racial Resentment on Their Behalf
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

From New York:

David Shor on Why Trump Was Good for the GOP and How Dems Can Win in 2022
By Eric Levitz @EricLevitz

… Intelligencer turned to our favorite socialist proponent of ruthlessly poll-driven campaigning, David Shor. A veteran of the 2012 Obama campaign, Shor is currently head of data science at OpenLabs, a progressive nonprofit. We spoke with him last week about how his analysis of the 2020 election has changed since November, what Democrats need to do to keep Congress after 2022, and why he thinks the Trump era was great for the Republican Party (in strictly electoral terms).

Q. What are the most important things you’ve learned about the 2020 election between the last time we spoke and today?

… It really seems like the electorate was slightly more Democratic than it had been in 2016, largely due to demographic change (because there’s such a large partisan gap between younger and older voters, every four years the electorate gets something like 0.4 percent more Democratic just through generational churn). So Trump didn’t exceed expectations by inspiring higher-than-anticipated Republican turnout. He exceeded them mostly through persuasion. A lot of voters changed their minds between 2016 and 2020.

At the subgroup level, Democrats gained somewhere between half a percent to one percent among non-college whites and roughly 7 percent among white college graduates (which is kind of crazy).

Our [Democratic] support among African Americans declined by something like one to 2 percent.

Is Shor talking about a 1 or 2% decline or 1 or 2 percentage points?

And then Hispanic support dropped by 8 to 9 percent.

Trump went from getting killed in blue collar Mexican Van Nuys, CA in 2016 to merely getting trounced there in 2020.

The jury is still out on Asian Americans. We’re waiting on data from California before we say anything. But there’s evidence that there was something like a 5 percent decline in Asian American support for Democrats, likely with a lot of variance among subgroups. There were really big declines in Vietnamese areas, for example.

Looking at the map I posted below of 2016 to 2020 changes in Southern California, it looks like Biden did better than Hillary in Chinese areas. The Vietnamese have hated the Chinese for a couple of thousand years, so Trump’s policy of resistance toward China probably hurt him in Chinese-heavy Arcadia, CA and helped him in Vietnamese-heavy Westminster and Garden Grove. On the other hand, Trump did better in Monterey Park, which is more the new Chinese immigrant’s gateway to the San Gabriel Valley.

Anyway, one implication of these shifts is that education polarization went up and racial polarization went down.

Q. In other words, a voter’s level of educational attainment — whether they had a college degree — became more predictive of which party they voted for in 2020 than it had been in 2016, while a voter’s racial identity became less predictive?

A. Yeah. White voters as a whole trended toward the Democratic Party, and nonwhite voters trended away from us. So we’re now somewhere between 2004 and 2008 in terms of racial polarization. Which is interesting. I don’t think a lot of people expected Donald Trump’s GOP to have a much more diverse support base than Mitt Romney’s did in 2012. But that’s what happened.

Q. Does the available data give us any insight into why? Do you have any sense what was behind the large rightward shift among Hispanic voters?

One important thing to know about the decline in Hispanic support for Democrats is that it was pretty broad. …

But it was notably larger in some places than others. … The Colombian and Venezuelan shifts were huge.

… So I think one natural inference is that the increased salience of socialism in 2020 — with the rise of AOC and the prominence of anti-socialist messaging from the GOP — had something to do with the shift among those groups.

… But white voters are polarized on ideology, while nonwhite voters haven’t been. Something like 80 percent of white conservatives vote for Republicans. But historically, Democrats have won nonwhite conservatives, often by very large margins. What happened in 2020 is that nonwhite conservatives voted for Republicans at higher rates; they started voting more like white conservatives.

And so this leads to a question of why. Why did nonwhite voters start sorting more by ideology? And that’s a hard thing to know. But my organization, and our partner organizations, have done extensive post-election surveys of 2020 voters. And we looked specifically at those voters who switched from supporting Hillary Clinton in 2016 to Donald Trump in 2020 to see whether anything distinguishes this subgroup in terms of their policy opinions. What we found is that Clinton voters with conservative views on crime, policing, and public safety were far more likely to switch to Trump than voters with less conservative views on those issues. And having conservative views on those issues was more predictive of switching from Clinton to Trump than having conservative views on any other issue-set was.

It’s almost as if the Democrats encouraging blacks (excuse me, Blacks) to riot didn’t play well with Latinos (excuse me, Latinx).

This lines up pretty well with trends we saw during the campaign. In the summer, following the emergence of “defund the police” as a nationally salient issue, support for Biden among Hispanic voters declined. So I think you can tell this microstory: We raised the salience of an ideologically charged issue that millions of nonwhite voters disagreed with us on. And then, as a result, these conservative Hispanic voters who’d been voting for us despite their ideological inclinations started voting more like conservative whites.

… The decline that we saw was very large. Nine percent or so nationwide, up to 14 or 15 percent in Florida. Roughly one in ten Hispanic voters switched their vote from Clinton to Trump. That is beyond the margin of what can plausibly be changed by investing more in Spanish media. And I don’t think a shift that large can be plausibly attributed to what was said in WhatsApp groups or not buying enough in YouTube ads. I think the problem is more fundamental.

Over the last four years, white liberals have become a larger and larger share of the Democratic Party. There’s a narrative on the left that the Democrats’ growing reliance on college-educated whites is pulling the party to the right (Matt Karp had an essay on this recently). But I think that’s wrong. Highly educated people tend to have more ideologically coherent and extreme views than working-class ones. We see this in issue polling and ideological self-identification. College-educated voters are way less likely to identify as moderate. So as Democrats have traded non-college-educated voters for college-educated ones, white liberals’ share of voice and clout in the Democratic Party has gone up. And since white voters are sorting on ideology more than nonwhite voters, we’ve ended up in a situation where white liberals are more left wing than Black and Hispanic Democrats on pretty much every issue: taxes, health care, policing, and even on racial issues or various measures of “racial resentment.” So as white liberals increasingly define the party’s image and messaging, that’s going to turn off nonwhite conservative Democrats and push them against us.

… White liberals do give more progressive responses across a wide battery of traditional racial resentment questions like, “Do you believe that the reason why African Americans can’t get ahead is due to discrimination or due to other factors?” …

But I think the split on those abstract questions captures something real. In liberal circles, racism has been defined in highly ideological terms. And this theoretical perspective on what racism means and the nature of racial inequality have become a big part of the group identity of college-educated Democrats, white and nonwhite. But it’s not necessarily how most nonwhite, working-class people understand racism.

Q. How do they differ?

A. I don’t think I can answer that comprehensively. But if you look at the concrete questions, white liberals are to the left of Hispanic Democrats, but also of Black Democrats, on defunding the police and those ideological questions about the source of racial inequity.

Regardless, even if a majority of nonwhite people agreed with liberals on all of these issues, the fundamental problem is that Democrats have been relying on the support of roughly 90 percent of Black voters and 70 percent of Hispanic voters. So if Democrats elevate issues or theories that a large minority of nonwhite voters reject, it’s going to be hard to keep those margins. Because these issues are strongly correlated with ideology. And Black conservatives and Hispanic conservatives don’t actually buy into a lot of these intellectual theories of racism. They often have a very different conception of how to help the Black or Hispanic community than liberals do. And I don’t think we can buy our way out of this trade-off. Most voters are not liberals. If we polarize the electorate on ideology — or if nationally prominent Democrats raise the salience of issues that polarize the electorate on ideology — we’re going to lose a lot of votes.

Q. Don’t these ideological self-descriptions carry similar definitional problems as “racial resentment”? Most voters may not identify as liberals. But judging from opinion polls, most voters do reject the lion’s share of the conservative movement’s governing priorities. In Congress, a “conservative” is typically a lawmaker who supports tax cuts for the rich and funding cuts for Medicaid, while opposing a higher minimum wage and another round of stimulus checks. Those are all extremely unpopular positions.

A. Absolutely.

… But there is still a large universe of policy questions — mostly economic but not exclusively — where a large majority of the public agrees with us. A $15 minimum wage polls above 60 percent; that couldn’t happen without a lot of “moderates” and “conservatives” supporting the policy.

… In test after test that we’ve done with Hispanic voters, talking about immigration commonly sparks backlash: Asking voters whether they lean toward Biden and Trump, and then emphasizing the Democratic position on immigration, often caused Biden’s share of support among Latino respondents to decline. Meanwhile, Democratic messaging about investing in schools and jobs tended to move Latino voters away from Trump.

… I mean, Hispanic voters are more liberal on immigration than white voters. But I think that, for one thing, the extent to which Hispanic voters have liberal views on immigration is exaggerated. If you look at, for example, decriminalizing border crossings, that’s not something that a majority of Hispanic voters support. … So I think liberals really essentialize Hispanic voters and project views about immigration onto them that the data just doesn’t support.

Q. We talked a lot about the rightward drift of Hispanic voters in 2020. But the other big change was a leftward shift among college-educated whites. Understanding the cause of that shift seems pretty important. If these college-educated voters were primarily rejecting Donald Trump, Democrats might not be able to count on their support in 2022 and beyond.

A. … In 2016, non-college-educated whites swung roughly 10 percent against the Democratic Party. And then, in 2018, roughly 30 percent of those Obama-Trump voters ended up supporting Democrats down ballot. In 2020, only 10 percent of Obama-Trump voters came home for Biden.

So I think what this shows: There is a long-term trend of increasing education polarization here and in every other country in the West. But the fact that education polarization declined significantly in 2018 — when Trump wasn’t on the ballot — and picked up again in 2020 suggests that Trump is personally responsible for a significant portion of America’s education polarization. I think that there’s a really strong case that this transition was specifically about Donald Trump.

A lot of people theorized that we first alienated Obama-Trump voters during the fight over comprehensive immigration reform and that their rightward movement was already apparent in 2014. But if you actually look at panel data, it seems really clear that these people didn’t start identifying as Republicans until Trump won the GOP nomination. I think there’s a very strong empirical argument that Donald Trump was the main driver of the polarization we’ve seen since 2016. He just personally embodies this large cultural divide between cosmopolitan college-educated voters and a large portion of non-college-educated voters. Those divides take a lot of different forms: attitudes toward race, attitudes toward gender, opinions on what kinds of things you’re allowed to say, or how you should conduct yourself. And you know, as Trump became the nominee, and as the media made politics the Donald Trump Show for the last four years, that led to increasing political polarization on attitudes toward Donald Trump specifically. I think the reason why we saw less education-based voting in 2018 is that Trump was a smaller part of the media environment than he had been in 2016 or would be in 2020.

… And yet, while Trump remained historically unpopular in office, he also helped the GOP increase its structural advantages at every level of government. So I’ve long wondered: Was Donald Trump’s unpopularity with the general public more detrimental to the Republican Party than his gift for deepening education polarization was valuable?

… So Donald Trump is unpopular. And he does pay a penalty for that relative to a generic Republican. But the voters he’s popular with happen to be extremely efficiently distributed in political-geography terms.

I suggested back on November 28, 2000 and again on November 12, 2012 that working class whites in the Great Lakes region happened to be the key swing constituency in the Electoral College. The Republican Establishment (Karl Rove in 2001 and the Autopsy / Gang of Eight in 2013) insisted that the key constituency was pro-immigration Hispanics.

So I think the Trump era has been very good for the Republican Party, even if they now, momentarily, have to accept this very, very, very thin Democratic trifecta. Because if these coalition changes are durable, the GOP has very rosy long-term prospects for dominating America’s federal institutions.

Or maybe the Latinos liked Trump personally more than they will like other Republicans?

The question is: Can they get all of the good parts of Trumpism without the bad parts? And I don’t know the answer to that question. But when I look at the 2020 election, I see that we ran against the most unpopular Republican ever to run for president — and we ran literally the most popular figure in our party whose last name is not Obama — and we only narrowly won the Electoral College. If Biden had done 0.3 percent worse, then Donald Trump would have won reelection with just 48 percent of the two-party vote. We can’t control what Trump or Republicans do. But we can add states, we can ban partisan redistricting, and we can elevate issues that appeal to both college-educated liberals and a lot of working-class “conservatives.” If we don’t, things could get very bleak, very fast.

 
Hide 241 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I thought I’d heard the name “David Shor” in the news for another reason not long ago. Sure enough: https://reason.com/2020/08/27/protests-violence-david-shor-kenosha-biden-trump/

    • Thanks: Cato
    • Replies: @Anon
    @Chris Renner


    I thought I’d heard the name “David Shor” in the news for another reason not long ago. Sure enough: ...
     
    Yes, of course. This interview is a followup to the big interview Levitz did with Shor after he was fired ... or whatever happened to him. Levitz tried to get him to talk about it in the first interview, but apparently Shor must have signed an NDA on the way out the door, or just decided it was better for his career to keep his trap shut. In the intro to this interview Levitz links to the first one.
    , @Almost Missouri
    @Chris Renner

    Good catch. Steve should put that in the OP.

    Shor's analysis was probably right then and is probably right now. Unfortunately for Shor and for America, the Dems now have stitched together a nationwide ballot fixing system such that they never have to worry about losing a national election again, so they no longer need to pay attention to people like Shor or, you know, actual voters.

    Replies: @Servant of Gla'aki

    , @Lot
    @Chris Renner

    He was also in the news for getting cancelled from his previous job over a Twitter fight because he said BLM rioting and violence was bad politics.

    His initial statement was expressed in the most servile cucky way, and he still retracted and apologized for it. But blasphemy about BLM is never tolerated, and there can be no forgiveness or keeping a job after that.

    Shor has wanted to be a Dem political guy his whole life and his specialty seems to be providing friendly advice to Dems to restrain the wokeness in that same groveling offputting style.

    Replies: @ben tillman

    , @Getaclue
    @Chris Renner

    No "statistic" about voting in the 2020 Election means anything -- there was massive voter fraud to steal the Election so all these commentaries are just total bs.

  2. Nobody, including Steve, ever expects non-Whites to be outraged by anti-White hatred. That’s the interesting thing.

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet. But none of those groups speak out on behalf of Whites (or any other group). And everyone just accepts that as normal.

    This is the routine way everyone thinks Whites are different from other humans. It would never occur to anyone to wonder why Asians are silent about some White person being mistreated. And Blacks really get a pass on basic morality.

    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?

    • Disagree: Corvinus
    • Thanks: Je Suis Omar Mateen, Ragno
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @RichardTaylor

    You can't. Therefore, the US are doomed. Probably not to formal collapse & disintegration, but to some kind of Brazilified second-ratedness.

    Replies: @Marquis, @anonymous

    , @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor asked:


    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    There's no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.
     
    It's all fake -- mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left's material and political interests.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @RichardTaylor, @ic1000, @Bardon Kaldian, @Desiderius, @Almost Missouri, @Luzzatto, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnnyWalker123, @James J O'Meara

    , @AndrewR
    @RichardTaylor

    You apparently have been living in a cave recently.

    No one is asking "non-Whites" to go to bat against anti-white hatred.

    But one major theme of the last year has been not so much "whites bad" but "non-Blacks bad, or at least expendable."

    Asians, Hispanics and other groups previously deemed non-white have been relegated to the "white" bin.

    Just like no one would describe the KKK as simply an "anti-black group," BLM is much better described as an explicitly black supremacist group than as an anti-white group. And, unsurprisingly, a lot of non-black non-"whites" don't want to be demoted to second class citizenship

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

    , @Bernie
    @RichardTaylor

    "So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?"

    You don't - it just breaks down into racial warfare and/or racial politics once whites leave the scene. It won't do us much good as we will be gone but at least we can enjoy the schaudenfreude.

    , @Massimo Heitor
    @RichardTaylor


    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet. But none of those groups speak out on behalf of Whites (or any other group). And everyone just accepts that as normal.

     

    The White left has the power and controls the discussion on racial issues with an iron fist. The White Left polices speech and punishes viewpoints they don't like aggressively. Yes, we all accept this as normal, because it is the reality we live in, and regular people don't have a voice in national racial discussions.

    I know individual blacks, hispanics, and Muslim-born secular Pakistanis who think the racial climate is crazy, but they are just trying to live their lives, which is what they should do.
    , @Reg Cæsar
    @RichardTaylor


    And Blacks really get a pass on basic morality.
     
    Property usually does. We didn't spank the cat today because he broke some of our favorite cups.

    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    Another Dad has reduced the answer to two words.
    , @JohnnyWalker123
    @RichardTaylor

    Most immigrants are amoral grifters. Here to take advantage of the country as much as they can.
    They don't give a damn about America or Whites or fairness or whatever.

    They just want to line their pockets and enrich their families. Everything else in this world is irrelevant.

    That may sound harsh, but it's true for the most part. Though there are some exceptions.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  3. David Shor said:

    In the summer, following the emergence of “defund the police” as a nationally salient issue, support for Biden among Hispanic voters declined….

    I don’t think I can answer that comprehensively. But if you look at the concrete questions, white liberals are to the left of Hispanic Democrats, but also of Black Democrats, on defunding the police and those ideological questions about the source of racial inequity.

    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?

    Funny how a guy like Dave Shor, who is obviously quite bright, cannot see the obvious. I think the technical term is that he is “denying agency” to non-whites.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @IHTG
    @PhysicistDave

    I don't think he's unaware of such arguments.

    , @Ron Unz
    @PhysicistDave


    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?
     
    That's certainly part of the reason, but you may be over-thinking the situation, and it's ridiculous to mix together blacks and Hispanics. Despite massive Republican propaganda, both pre- and post-election, the former showed virtually no swing to the Trump, while the latter showed a huge swing.

    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.

    We saw many, many months of violent mobs rioting, looting, and burning major parts of 200 American cities. The response of the Democrats was "Let's Defund the Police!!!"

    Since so many whites are so totally brainwashed by the MSM, many of them thought that sounded pretty reasonable, or at least acceptable, and still voted for Biden/Harris. But since Hispanics are more like "normal" people, many of them didn't agree, and they swung in the other direction.

    Putting my cards on the table, I think you could make a pretty good case that Trump was the worst president America has ever had. But I also think you could also make a pretty good case that the other choice was even worse...

    Replies: @Anon, @JMcG, @AndrewR, @Desiderius, @Undocumented Shopper, @Paperback Writer, @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @Corvinus

    , @Paperback Writer
    @PhysicistDave

    Shor can see the obvious but if he says the obvious he'll be blacklisted Blacklisted.

  4. @RichardTaylor
    Nobody, including Steve, ever expects non-Whites to be outraged by anti-White hatred. That's the interesting thing.

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians ... in fact, every group on the planet. But none of those groups speak out on behalf of Whites (or any other group). And everyone just accepts that as normal.

    This is the routine way everyone thinks Whites are different from other humans. It would never occur to anyone to wonder why Asians are silent about some White person being mistreated. And Blacks really get a pass on basic morality.

    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don't consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PhysicistDave, @AndrewR, @Bernie, @Massimo Heitor, @Reg Cæsar, @JohnnyWalker123

    You can’t. Therefore, the US are doomed. Probably not to formal collapse & disintegration, but to some kind of Brazilified second-ratedness.

    • Troll: Corvinus
    • Replies: @Marquis
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Not sure why everyone thinks Brazil is the future model. Or democracy at all. Probably in for some sort of neo-Roman Empire or blended Chinese authoritarianism. It’s the only way to hold it all together, and the worlds leading hegemonic power is not going to let it all slip away voluntarily.

    Brazil most likely wouldn’t even be a democracy without influence from the West. There will be no outside pressure on the US to remain a democracy when it succumbs to authoritarian rule.

    , @anonymous
    @Bardon Kaldian

    California and Texas are majority non-white. The big cities are grubby but the states have top 5 and top 15 economies respectively. Far better than Brazil. America as a whole could take on another 100 million non-whites and still be in decent enough shape to be 2-3 rungs above Brazil.

    Replies: @James J O'Meara

  5. @RichardTaylor
    Nobody, including Steve, ever expects non-Whites to be outraged by anti-White hatred. That's the interesting thing.

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians ... in fact, every group on the planet. But none of those groups speak out on behalf of Whites (or any other group). And everyone just accepts that as normal.

    This is the routine way everyone thinks Whites are different from other humans. It would never occur to anyone to wonder why Asians are silent about some White person being mistreated. And Blacks really get a pass on basic morality.

    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don't consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PhysicistDave, @AndrewR, @Bernie, @Massimo Heitor, @Reg Cæsar, @JohnnyWalker123

    RichardTaylor asked:

    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?

    There’s no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.

    It’s all fake — mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left’s material and political interests.

    • LOL: 3g4me
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @PhysicistDave

    "black folks are not going to leave this country"

    Well, first of all, some already have left for the blacker pastures of Africa. Of course, some of these people have returned to Amerikkka after realizing that, shockingly, the descendants of the people who sold American blacks' ancestors into slavery aren't all rolling out the red carpet for American blacks.

    On a broader scale, who can say what the future holds? People respond to incentives. I don't think it's at all insane to think that, in the next century or so, carrots and sticks could be developed to empty the US of most of it's blacks. Personally, I have no problem sharing a country with blacks who broadly share "white values" and who like white people. As for the rest of them, there's no reason to think we will have to live with them forever.

    But I do agree that the Dems "are the real racists." Then again, we don't see a whole lot of pushback from black people who oppose BLM. The exact reasons for this are debateable.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    , @RichardTaylor
    @PhysicistDave


    There’s no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know
     
    I should be more exact. Sure, some kind of political system can be built. But not the one we've had. And it's not just Blacks. A country that is minority White (which we will be) is going to be radically different than what we were before.

    The Yuppy liberal stuff is pure virtue signaling. But I do think many Whites have sincere concern for Blacks, Native Americans, etc, whether they are liberal or conservative.

    But you'd be hard-pressed to find non-Whites who care about White people. And that implies that everyone thinks of White people as on another moral plane.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    , @ic1000
    @PhysicistDave

    Shor concludes,


    ...when I look at the 2020 election, I see that ...we only narrowly won the Electoral College. If Biden had done 0.3% worse, then Donald Trump would have won reelection with just 48% of the two-party vote... we can add states, we can ban partisan redistricting, and we can elevate issues that appeal to both college-educated liberals and a lot of working-class “conservatives.” If we don’t, things could get very bleak, very fast.
     
    Team Establishment isn't interested in Shor's ideas, they have a better plan. Here's Vox's infomercial-journalism report on HR1, just passed by the House. The bill's provisions include:

    * Increase participation by low-information and low-interest citizens via opt-out registration (you have to ask to not be registered to vote).

    * Facilitate fraud by mandating the vote-by-mail option.

    * Make it difficult or impossible for state officials to remove deceased and other disqualified people from voter rolls (assuming they want to do so).

    * Mandatory enfranchisement of non-imprisoned felons and ex-felons.

    So things are far from bleak. As Dr. Horrible would say, It's a brand new day.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Jack D, @AnotherDad

    , @Bardon Kaldian
    @PhysicistDave

    The future of US blacks is something like this...

    https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2014/11/09/362356878/in-brazil-race-is-a-matter-of-life-and-violent-death


    On June 11 — one day before the World Cup started — two policemen picked up three black teenagers in Rio de Janeiro. The three hadn't committed any crime — but they did have a history of petty offenses.

    The officers drove them up to the wooded hills above the city. One was shot in the head and killed. One was shot in the leg and the back and left for dead. Another escaped.

    We know what happened that day because the police officers left their patrol car cameras on, and the videos surfaced on Brazil's Globo TV.

    "We haven't even started beating you yet and you are already crying?" one cop says. "Stop crying! You are crying too much! Be a man!"

    But the three boys weren't men — they were about 14 years old.

    Then the cops are heard saying "gotta kill the three of them."

    And finally: "Two less. If we do this every week, we can reduce their number. We can reach the goal."

    The goal they reportedly were referring to was a crime-reduction target ahead of the World Cup.

    Brazil is one of the most violent countries in the world. In 2012, 56,337 people were murdered. Compare that to the U.S., where fewer than 15,000 people died violently the same year in a country with 60 percent more people.

    But those statistics hide a color-coded truth: Brazil actually has gotten a lot safer for white people. In the past decade, homicides among whites have decreased 24 percent. But among the black population they have increased 40 percent.
    ...........................................
    The two policemen who killed Matteos are standing trial. The boy who survived is in juvenile detention; he was caught trying to steal a bicycle. His lawyer has tried to get him into a witness protection program because he fears for the teenager's life, but was told the state has no resources to provide protection.

    Nilson Bruno Filho — the only Afro-Brazilian head of a state public defender's office — recently instituted a program to combat racism in Rio de Janeiro. He explains why the case of the murdered kids, now largely forgotten, didn't get much sustained attention.

    "There is a saying that 'black meat is cheaper.' People don't get shocked to see a dead black person, because the person in their minds can be linked to crime," he says. "And, in Brazil, if a person is linked to a crime, then he can be killed."
     

    Replies: @Nico

    , @Desiderius
    @PhysicistDave

    Maybe?

    It would be closer to the truth to say that those who support the "left" side of these issues don't dare risk thought at all.

    , @Almost Missouri
    @PhysicistDave


    It’s all fake — mere virtue signalling.
     
    I mostly agree, and yet ...

    I may have mentioned that my extended family and their friends are mostly liberals of various stripes, which has allowed me to observe these pathologies at close range over long periods of time. With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as "just virtue signalling again, zzzzz", but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers. The only thing they do in their limited spare time is watch Black movies. They seem to believe earnestly in Hidden Figures, Henrietta Lacks as a holy icon, BLM nonsense, etc. They organize "anti-racism" (i.e. anti-white) conferences. They donate religiously to the SPLC. They're like a parody out of the iSteve comments section. I could probably write a couple of sitcom screenplays with their antics. Yes, they still live in a 99% white neighborhood, but they bought that house two decades ago when they still had kids, and they haven't had cause to move yet. So I guess until they move somewhere other than a whitopia, or she leaves him to go coalburning (though they're getting kinda old for that), or some other Rubicon event, I can't say for sure, but my point is that somewhere along the line, the difference between virtue signalling and true belief ceases to exist or at least to matter. After all, that money they give to the SPLC will end up harming real people somewhere somehow, as will the antiwhite animus they whip up in antiracism rallies. Dismissing this as "mere virtue signalling" is ultimately somewhere between naive and disingenuous. Mere virtue signalling can kill.

    Replies: @Ripple Earthdevil, @Anon, @SimpleSong, @The Last Real Calvinist, @PhysicistDave, @Harry Baldwin

    , @Luzzatto
    @PhysicistDave

    Democrats tell us that if you are anti-defund the police you are a White Supremacist. At the same time Democrats also do not want Bernie Goetz style vigilante justice either as a substitute for the police if defund the police is successfully implemented nationwide because that would be White Supremacy as well. The only conclusion from this is that Democrats are moral degenerates who are pro-violent criminals!

    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @PhysicistDave


    There’s no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.
     
    First, history is replete with examples of populations being forced to move. Hell, millions of Germans were forced to leave a host of countries AFTER World War II. Imagine how many people could be forced to moved during a conflict.

    Second, we don't need black people to leave this country. We just need our own country where they're not allowed. Yeah, yeah, Whites aren't going to have their own country in what was the United States anytime soon, but we can start to form our own communities and that's a good start.

    Naturally, CivNats such as yourself find such ethnocentrism quite distasteful and beneath your giant throbbing brain. "Why I know lots of fine Indians, Asians, etc. in my university's department, blah, blah, blah." But back in the real world, ethno-nationalism remains the past and future. We're living through a childish time with childish beliefs, but children must grow up.

    Maybe only 20% of Whites will want to do what I'm working toward. But in a hundred years or so, they'll be the only Whites left - and will they ever be badass. CivNat genes, on the other hand, will be incorporated with more tribal groups or simple no longer in existence. CivNat Whites are a genetic deadend.
    , @JohnnyWalker123
    @PhysicistDave

    Trump doesn't care about ordinary Blacks or see them as fellow Americans. In general, he has a very dim view of them as a race.

    However, Trump has an extreme obsession with hanging out with celebrities, many of whom are Black. So he'll make exceptions for famous Blacks, like Kanye West, Asap Rocky, and Herschel Walker.

    Most Americans are cowardly. For whatever reason, this especially applies to liberals. So they can easily be pressured into agreeing with almost anything by the media, celebrities, HR people at Big Corp, and politicians.

    Americans are effete, having been weakened by generations of easy living. They've gone soft. So it's easy to push them around.

    Also, most Americans are very socially isolated from neighbors, relatives, coethnics, etc. So they figure there's no way to fight back against the system, so they go along to get along.

    In contrast, 100 years ago, most Americans lived in harsh circumstances. So they grew up to be tough and ornery people. Most Americans had strong social ties with others back then too, so they had one another's back. Perhaps not surprisingly, Americans of that era got in lots of race and labor riots.

    Your typical modern White urbanite is very soft and very socially isolated. So he can be pushed around easily. He's a cog in a globo-homo machine. No autonomy.

    Those same "liberal" Whites can easily be coaxed into worshipping the US military and never speaking up about wars overseas. When was the last time anyone (conservative or liberal) spoke up about the millions of people who the US murdered in the post-911 "War on Terror."

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    , @James J O'Meara
    @PhysicistDave

    "It’s all fake — mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves."

    And animals. Don't forget the animals.

    "That's the thing you gotta remember about WASPs - they love animals, they can't stand people." -- Gordon Gekko, Wall Street

  6. Hmm… Is this a case of a Jew coming around to what Steve Sailer has been trying to teach Jews? Namely, that if they truly want what is “good for the Jews,” then they need to stop stoking the anti-White fire?

    David Shor. A veteran of the 2012 Obama campaign, Shor is currently head of data science at OpenLabs, a progressive nonprofit.

    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Buzz Mohawk


    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.
     
    "This old earthquake's gonna leave me in the poorhouse.
    It seems like this whole town's insane.
    On the thirty-first floor your gold-plated door
    won't keep out the Lord's burning rain."


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dos8Ec0uOXQ

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Ganderson, @Gary in Gramercy

    , @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Buzz Mohawk


    Hmm… Is this a case of a Jew coming around to what Steve Sailer has been trying to teach Jews? Namely, that if they truly want what is “good for the Jews,” then they need to stop stoking the anti-White fire?

    David Shor. A veteran of the 2012 Obama campaign, Shor is currently head of data science at OpenLabs, a progressive nonprofit.

     

    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.

     

    Counterpoint:

    We can’t control what Trump or Republicans do. But we can add states, we can ban partisan redistricting, and we can elevate issues that appeal to both college-educated liberals and a lot of working-class “conservatives.”
     
    They're going to double down, and use the mostly peaceful protest at the Capitol and the ongoing imagined threat of a white nationalist jihad to push through structural changes ossifying Democratic control in place.

    Edit: "issues that appeal to both college-educated liberals and working class [black/brown] 'conservatives'" is KKKrazy Glue.

    , @Bardon Kaldian
    @Buzz Mohawk

    This Shor guy is a typical leftist Jewish idiot who may be very good at some narrow field of expertise, but, because he cannot see a wider picture, he is, along with his co-ethnics who constantly fight against waycism & weißer Mensch - doomed.

    , @El Dato
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Whenever I see "progressive nonprofit" I misread it as "massive for-profit".

  7. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor asked:


    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    There's no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.
     
    It's all fake -- mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left's material and political interests.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @RichardTaylor, @ic1000, @Bardon Kaldian, @Desiderius, @Almost Missouri, @Luzzatto, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnnyWalker123, @James J O'Meara

    “black folks are not going to leave this country”

    Well, first of all, some already have left for the blacker pastures of Africa. Of course, some of these people have returned to Amerikkka after realizing that, shockingly, the descendants of the people who sold American blacks’ ancestors into slavery aren’t all rolling out the red carpet for American blacks.

    On a broader scale, who can say what the future holds? People respond to incentives. I don’t think it’s at all insane to think that, in the next century or so, carrots and sticks could be developed to empty the US of most of it’s blacks. Personally, I have no problem sharing a country with blacks who broadly share “white values” and who like white people. As for the rest of them, there’s no reason to think we will have to live with them forever.

    But I do agree that the Dems “are the real racists.” Then again, we don’t see a whole lot of pushback from black people who oppose BLM. The exact reasons for this are debateable.

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @AndrewR

    AndrewR wrote to me:


    Well, first of all, some already have left for the blacker pastures of Africa. Of course, some of these people have returned to Amerikkka after realizing that, shockingly, the descendants of the people who sold American blacks’ ancestors into slavery aren’t all rolling out the red carpet for American blacks.
     
    Well, yeah. For all its faults, no sane person really doubts that America is better than what Trump called "sh*thole countries."

    Andrew also wrote:

    Personally, I have no problem sharing a country with blacks who broadly share “white values” and who like white people. As for the rest of them, there’s no reason to think we will have to live with them forever.
     
    Except, of course, what you call "white values" are just the human values needed for any advanced, industrial country to survive.

    Lots of blacks do have those values. Unfortunately, our policies -- both political and, more broadly, cultural -- during the last half century have encouraged lower-class blacks along with far too many whites to reject those values.

    And that is going to destroy our country.

    Let's lay out the values that we are talking about: honesty, perseverance, future orientation, respect for others, hard work, education (which is not the same as number of years in school!), and dedication to maintaining intact two-parent families. American history shows that whites and blacks who energetically exemplify such values do okay.

    But our current elite is afraid to say so: look at what the response was to Amy Wax when she pointed out the obvious. Many whites still pick up on those values by osmosis or genetics. But people of any race who do not acquire such values end up living disastrous lives, both for themselves and others.

    I think we more or less agree: "bourgeois values" work. Other "values" lead to misery, poverty, and oppression.

    Perhaps the real cure is that decent people need to withdraw their assent from institutions -- whether the news media or schools or churches or politicians -- who will not endorse that central point.
  8. This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this, and, therefore, this is boring and pointless stuff. As the nice young lady who just couldn’t seem to cheat herself over the top said “At this point, what difference does it make?”

    Shades of Pat Buchanan here… “one of these bright new conservatives should be able to get a position on the Ways and Means Committee, and now that we have a favorable appellate court that can rule on the … zzzzzz…. zizzer, zazzer, zuzzzzzzz.

    • Replies: @Michael S
    @Achmed E. Newman

    It boggles the mind that anyone outside of mainline conservatism would even be able to pretend, with a straight face, that elections still matter.

    2020 was the last real election. Or, depending upon your point of view, 2016 was. From now on, if "Republicans" "win", it is because they put forward an inoffensive milksop who won't try to rock the boat. If Republicans voters try to push a reformer, even an incredibly mild reformer who pines for the social norms of the stuffy old 2000s rather than the horrible everything-ist 50s or god forbid the dark ages of the 20s, he will simply be "managed out", and Democrats and Republicans and supposedly non-partisan judges will all cooperate to make it happen.

    It simply cannot be denied anymore. Not after we've actually seen them do it, out in the open, deniability be damned. The socialist wing of the Democrats may still talk about this nonsense because they themselves have a stunted view of government, but there is nothing they have to say that is worth listening to.

    Replies: @James J O'Meara

    , @Desiderius
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Put down the iPalantir, Denethor.

    We were close last time. It'll take a lot more than voting but it surely won't take less unless you're ready to lose everything.

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666, @ben tillman, @The Last Real Calvinist

    , @Travis
    @Achmed E. Newman

    You are probably correct at this point. It may be too late to change the path we are on now. But it is hard to predict the future, few envisioned Trump winning the 2016 presidential election back in 2014. Few even predicted he would run for President. The Biden administration may prove as bad as the Bush regime and result a significant revival of the American first doctrine with a man who can actually achieve some goals on immigration.

    Replies: @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco, @Achmed E. Newman

    , @Jim Don Bob
    @Achmed E. Newman


    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this,...
     
    If HR 1 becomes law, as it probably will, then the shenanigans fraud we saw last November is just a taste of things to come.

    Replies: @Ben tillman

    , @PhysicistDave
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Achmed E. Newman wrote:


    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this, and, therefore, this is boring and pointless stuff.
     
    No: as Travis said, history is unpredictable.

    Trump's one big accomplishment was to tear the veil off the people who run this country. Quite unintentionally of course, Trump caused the Deep State and the Elite Media to show their hands. Something like a quarter of the country now know that the elites that run the country really, truly hate and despise most of their fellow citizens of all races: the ruling elite may manipulate non-Asian minorities to shore up their power, but they probably despise those groups even more than they despise working-class whites. (Remember when Biden said, "“poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids"?)

    The current American regime is unstable: federal fiscal policies are unsustainable; our monetary system is rickety; we are prepping our military for anything except actually fighting a war; our schools are jokes; the American people are really not happy.

    Feels to me like France circa 1785, imperial Russia in 1914, or the Soviets circa 1980.

    As Herb Stein said, if something cannot go on forever, it won't.

    No one can foretell if the break will come in 2024 or 2030 or whatever, just as even Lenin did not foresee the 1917 revolution. But the break will come.

    The question is what direction things will take after the collapse.

    John Adams write in 1818:

    What do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people. . . . This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.
     
    Ultimately, ideas rule the world. When the fighting actually starts, it is too late.

    Conservatism Inc. had no ideas, except "Let's slow things down a bit."

    The Founders had ideas.

    And they were good ones.

    If proclaimed clearly and widely enough, those ideas just might be good enough to mobilize enough people against the Left to win.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @3g4me

  9. The Presidential election was not important, except in terms of entertaining obfuscation. The same people impelling policy and essential enforcement terms while Trump sat in the chair are calling the shots now that Mr. Biden has the privilege. Mr. Shor is no more than one of those parasitical animals (tick bird?) that lives exclusively in the exhaust of the powerful animals, which he surely is not.

    IT should be clear to everyone that voting for the national office and legislature has not mattered in some time. We get the same thing no matter what.

    • Replies: @Inquiring Mind
    @Brian Reilly

    So, the Keystone Pipeline is chopped liver?

  10. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor asked:


    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    There's no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.
     
    It's all fake -- mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left's material and political interests.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @RichardTaylor, @ic1000, @Bardon Kaldian, @Desiderius, @Almost Missouri, @Luzzatto, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnnyWalker123, @James J O'Meara

    There’s no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know

    I should be more exact. Sure, some kind of political system can be built. But not the one we’ve had. And it’s not just Blacks. A country that is minority White (which we will be) is going to be radically different than what we were before.

    The Yuppy liberal stuff is pure virtue signaling. But I do think many Whites have sincere concern for Blacks, Native Americans, etc, whether they are liberal or conservative.

    But you’d be hard-pressed to find non-Whites who care about White people. And that implies that everyone thinks of White people as on another moral plane.

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor wrote:


    The Yuppy liberal stuff is pure virtue signaling. But I do think many Whites have sincere concern for Blacks, Native Americans, etc, whether they are liberal or conservative.
     
    Sure. I'm sickened when I see some black toddler killed in cross-fire between gang-bangers. Any decent person is.

    Richard also wrote:

    But you’d be hard-pressed to find non-Whites who care about White people. And that implies that everyone thinks of White people as on another moral plane.
     
    Well, I and my family and friends have known black folks who spoke up on behalf of whites simply because it was the right thing to do. And, you know, it was black witnesses in Ferguson who told the truth about the Michael Brown incident.

    But I'll acknowledge that what you are pointing to is a tribalism that will destroy a republic, an attitude of "Is it good for my group?" instead of "Is it right and just?"

    The Founders were very fond of saying that a republic rests on the "virtue of the people." A despotism controlled by halfway decent (or even competent) despots can survive even if ordinary people have no sense of civic virtue at all.

    But not a republic.

    I think mid-twentieth-century so-called "interest group liberalism" bears a lot of the blame for this. It was a crack-pot poli-sci theory, ultimately absorbed by the news media and the culture, that pretended that a war-of-all-against-all among different contending interest groups will lead to an optimal equilibrium in the same way that market competition does.

    They ignored the fact that market competition is a positive-sum game: both sides gain in a normal market exchange. But robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul is at best a zero-sum game: in practice, it is a negative-sum game because people devote their energies to predation rather than production.

    If you're lucky you just end up with what Perón did to Argentina. If you're not lucky, you end up with Norther Ireland during the Troubles.

    Or worse.

    Our liberal-progressive elites have a lot to answer for, going back a long time, for what they have done to this country.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @RichardTaylor

  11. @Buzz Mohawk
    Hmm... Is this a case of a Jew coming around to what Steve Sailer has been trying to teach Jews? Namely, that if they truly want what is "good for the Jews," then they need to stop stoking the anti-White fire?

    David Shor. A veteran of the 2012 Obama campaign, Shor is currently head of data science at OpenLabs, a progressive nonprofit.
     
    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Bardon Kaldian, @El Dato

    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.

    “This old earthquake’s gonna leave me in the poorhouse.
    It seems like this whole town’s insane.
    On the thirty-first floor your gold-plated door
    won’t keep out the Lord’s burning rain.”

    • Agree: Dissident799
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Achmed E. Newman

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMmTkKz60W8

    , @Ganderson
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Written by Gram Parsons and Chris Hillman. Great song, great artists. Dwight Yoakum is a national treasure; nice guest shot by k d lang, thus qualifying it for Canadian content.

    , @Gary in Gramercy
    @Achmed E. Newman

    You've heard the original of this, right? From one of the great '60's albums, The Gilded Palace of Sin, by the Flying Burrito Brothers (with Gram Parsons and Chris Hillman, both of whom had left the Byrds).

    Wonderful song, supposedly written about their first manager, not the most ethical chap in the business (the only honest pop music manager in the '60's was probably Brian Epstein, and he was a mess).

    Replies: @Morton's toes

  12. @RichardTaylor
    Nobody, including Steve, ever expects non-Whites to be outraged by anti-White hatred. That's the interesting thing.

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians ... in fact, every group on the planet. But none of those groups speak out on behalf of Whites (or any other group). And everyone just accepts that as normal.

    This is the routine way everyone thinks Whites are different from other humans. It would never occur to anyone to wonder why Asians are silent about some White person being mistreated. And Blacks really get a pass on basic morality.

    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don't consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PhysicistDave, @AndrewR, @Bernie, @Massimo Heitor, @Reg Cæsar, @JohnnyWalker123

    You apparently have been living in a cave recently.

    No one is asking “non-Whites” to go to bat against anti-white hatred.

    But one major theme of the last year has been not so much “whites bad” but “non-Blacks bad, or at least expendable.”

    Asians, Hispanics and other groups previously deemed non-white have been relegated to the “white” bin.

    Just like no one would describe the KKK as simply an “anti-black group,” BLM is much better described as an explicitly black supremacist group than as an anti-white group. And, unsurprisingly, a lot of non-black non-“whites” don’t want to be demoted to second class citizenship

    • Replies: @RichardTaylor
    @AndrewR


    You apparently have been living in a cave recently.

    No one is asking “non-Whites” to go to bat against anti-white hatred.
     
    I think you're missing the point. It's not about asking non-Whites for compassion. It's the fact that it would never occur to anyone to ever ask a non-White for compassion.

    But it will always occur to everyone that Whites should have compassion for Brown people. This has been true for centuries.

    The point is, the moral status, or lack of it, that everyone assigns to non-Whites. Even the most liberal of Whites would never elevate them to full human moral agency.

    Asians, Hispanics and other groups previously deemed non-white have been relegated to the “white” bin.
     
    No they haven't. And all over Latin America, there is a clear divide between White Hispanics and vast majority of Brown Hispanics.

    Replies: @AndrewR

  13. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Buzz Mohawk


    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.
     
    "This old earthquake's gonna leave me in the poorhouse.
    It seems like this whole town's insane.
    On the thirty-first floor your gold-plated door
    won't keep out the Lord's burning rain."


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dos8Ec0uOXQ

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Ganderson, @Gary in Gramercy

  14. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor asked:


    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    There's no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.
     
    It's all fake -- mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left's material and political interests.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @RichardTaylor, @ic1000, @Bardon Kaldian, @Desiderius, @Almost Missouri, @Luzzatto, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnnyWalker123, @James J O'Meara

    Shor concludes,

    …when I look at the 2020 election, I see that …we only narrowly won the Electoral College. If Biden had done 0.3% worse, then Donald Trump would have won reelection with just 48% of the two-party vote… we can add states, we can ban partisan redistricting, and we can elevate issues that appeal to both college-educated liberals and a lot of working-class “conservatives.” If we don’t, things could get very bleak, very fast.

    Team Establishment isn’t interested in Shor’s ideas, they have a better plan. Here’s Vox’s infomercial-journalism report on HR1, just passed by the House. The bill’s provisions include:

    * Increase participation by low-information and low-interest citizens via opt-out registration (you have to ask to not be registered to vote).

    * Facilitate fraud by mandating the vote-by-mail option.

    * Make it difficult or impossible for state officials to remove deceased and other disqualified people from voter rolls (assuming they want to do so).

    * Mandatory enfranchisement of non-imprisoned felons and ex-felons.

    So things are far from bleak. As Dr. Horrible would say, It’s a brand new day.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @ic1000

    Why can't Republicans do all of the above?

    , @Jack D
    @ic1000


    * Increase participation by low-information and low-interest citizens via opt-out registration (you have to ask to not be registered to vote).
     
    Can we have opt-out voting too? You (helped by the nice lady from the community organization) will put yourself down as, for example, a Democrat and from now on (until someone notices that you are dead) your vote will automatically be cast for all of the Democrat candidates in every election until further notice. If you change your mind you can change the opt-out setting at any time but until then, you get voted automatically (Democrat) in every election. This is a reflection of your will as a voter just as much as if you stood in line and manually pressed the buttons on the voting machine but it's much more convenient. After all, you don't stand in line to pay your electric bill anymore - it just gets automatically deducted from your bank account until you change the setting on your account. It's time for voting to catch up with the 21st century. I can't see anything wrong with that, can you?

    BTW, HR1 is not passing the Senate unless they get rid of the filibuster, which they would also like to do. But it does give you an idea of what the Left would like for America.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @ic1000

    , @AnotherDad
    @ic1000

    As the crisis has gathered over the last decade or so, i've found myself fantasizing--i.e. kicking around some ideas--to do the inverse--creating a republican voting system for sustaining a nation.

    My thoughts:

    * voting only for productive net taxpaying families
    Those on the dole don't vote.

    * voting as a family block by the head of household
    I.e. wives don't vote against husbands. Couples can sit down and hash it out ... then cast a household vote that counts husband, wife, kids. Note, specifically including kids--ex. i'd be casting five votes until my kids have their own families/votes.

    * singles don't vote;
    Perhaps some criteria-- for single men to prove themselves "vote worthy"; sufficient age and economic productivity, service in combat, etc. But basically for voting "take a wife" and knock her up.

    * government employees don't vote
    Get independent employment if you want to vote.

    * criminals don't vote
    You violate the society's critical norms--you're out of having a say. There would be far fewer criminals in my nation, because most would be executed or expelled. But any readmitted--no vote.

    * immigrants and un-integrated descendants only of immigrants don't vote
    Again, there wouldn't be many immigrants in my society. Immigration is unnatural. But there might be a few excellent pickups--i know several top quality folks myself. But the idea would be immigrants should marry into the nation's population. Then they vote or their kids vote. (I'd sneak in for America due to my 1/4 founding stock background.) No power for separate minority "communities". Part of the nation or not.

    * weirdos, perverts, LGBQWERTY, other mentally ill--don't vote

    Basically voting is for normal productive heterosexual married-with-children people who sustain the nation.

    The basic thrust of this--republicanism--is what the founders had in mind, when the voting requirement was property holder. Those more footloose, unsettled, disorganized, could not. But obviously this is wild dreaming on my part. We've moved far, far away from this and are heading further away every moment. That said ...

    I think a system something like this is the evolutionary optimum for governing a nation in a sustainable manner--preserving the nation/civilization. So in the long run someone should end up with a system like this ... and they'll be able to sustain their civilization and win. Akin to eugenics--someone is eventually going to do it, and they will win.

    Yep, dreaming. But the minoritarians are spouting their ludicrous rainbow hued utopian dreams, so i'm going to offer my much more grounded republican utopian dreams.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @Corvinus

  15. @Bardon Kaldian
    @RichardTaylor

    You can't. Therefore, the US are doomed. Probably not to formal collapse & disintegration, but to some kind of Brazilified second-ratedness.

    Replies: @Marquis, @anonymous

    Not sure why everyone thinks Brazil is the future model. Or democracy at all. Probably in for some sort of neo-Roman Empire or blended Chinese authoritarianism. It’s the only way to hold it all together, and the worlds leading hegemonic power is not going to let it all slip away voluntarily.

    Brazil most likely wouldn’t even be a democracy without influence from the West. There will be no outside pressure on the US to remain a democracy when it succumbs to authoritarian rule.

  16. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Buzz Mohawk


    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.
     
    "This old earthquake's gonna leave me in the poorhouse.
    It seems like this whole town's insane.
    On the thirty-first floor your gold-plated door
    won't keep out the Lord's burning rain."


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dos8Ec0uOXQ

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Ganderson, @Gary in Gramercy

    Written by Gram Parsons and Chris Hillman. Great song, great artists. Dwight Yoakum is a national treasure; nice guest shot by k d lang, thus qualifying it for Canadian content.

  17. Us White Democrats Could Easily Alienate Nonwhite Democrats with Our Crazy Level of Racial Resentment on Their Behalf

    Sounds reasonable. Might be so with Asians and various browns (especially macho Latinos) but leftist Indians (dot not feather) and blacks love it.

    I am the very last person to suggest that Republicans pander to the Latinx/o vote, but I really think there’s an opportunity to appeal to them. How? By appealing to the white working class and letting the Democrats take care of the rest, by just being themselves. But I don’t run things.

    • Agree: Guest29048
  18. @ic1000
    @PhysicistDave

    Shor concludes,


    ...when I look at the 2020 election, I see that ...we only narrowly won the Electoral College. If Biden had done 0.3% worse, then Donald Trump would have won reelection with just 48% of the two-party vote... we can add states, we can ban partisan redistricting, and we can elevate issues that appeal to both college-educated liberals and a lot of working-class “conservatives.” If we don’t, things could get very bleak, very fast.
     
    Team Establishment isn't interested in Shor's ideas, they have a better plan. Here's Vox's infomercial-journalism report on HR1, just passed by the House. The bill's provisions include:

    * Increase participation by low-information and low-interest citizens via opt-out registration (you have to ask to not be registered to vote).

    * Facilitate fraud by mandating the vote-by-mail option.

    * Make it difficult or impossible for state officials to remove deceased and other disqualified people from voter rolls (assuming they want to do so).

    * Mandatory enfranchisement of non-imprisoned felons and ex-felons.

    So things are far from bleak. As Dr. Horrible would say, It's a brand new day.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Jack D, @AnotherDad

    Why can’t Republicans do all of the above?

  19. What has to happen is that Donald Trump needs to step aside and let a new generation of leaders come forward. His negatives are sky high and they will stay that way–he’ll see to it. He’s a walking disaster and he continues to suck all the oxygen out of the room.

    But for him even to consider doing so would require that he take into account the larger needs of party and society, rather than just his own ego. Hard to imagine, isn’t it.

    • Agree: Ben tillman
    • Disagree: Guest29048
  20. @Buzz Mohawk
    Hmm... Is this a case of a Jew coming around to what Steve Sailer has been trying to teach Jews? Namely, that if they truly want what is "good for the Jews," then they need to stop stoking the anti-White fire?

    David Shor. A veteran of the 2012 Obama campaign, Shor is currently head of data science at OpenLabs, a progressive nonprofit.
     
    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Bardon Kaldian, @El Dato

    Hmm… Is this a case of a Jew coming around to what Steve Sailer has been trying to teach Jews? Namely, that if they truly want what is “good for the Jews,” then they need to stop stoking the anti-White fire?

    David Shor. A veteran of the 2012 Obama campaign, Shor is currently head of data science at OpenLabs, a progressive nonprofit.

    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.

    Counterpoint:

    We can’t control what Trump or Republicans do. But we can add states, we can ban partisan redistricting, and we can elevate issues that appeal to both college-educated liberals and a lot of working-class “conservatives.”

    They’re going to double down, and use the mostly peaceful protest at the Capitol and the ongoing imagined threat of a white nationalist jihad to push through structural changes ossifying Democratic control in place.

    Edit: “issues that appeal to both college-educated liberals and working class [black/brown] ‘conservatives’” is KKKrazy Glue.

  21. Getting merely trounced rather annihilated among Latinos still hurts the GOP. While the Trump campaign touted how they did better with Latinos, they aren’t winning anywhere close to a majority of Latinos. As the Latino share of electorate grows due to immigration, the GOP will continue to fall behind. Simply any Republican nominee will still get his ass kicked if at slightly better rates. If you get say, 9% of Latinos in a 330+ million 2020 electorate (population rather than total votes) where they represent , getting 10% of Latinos as they grow as percentage of a 345+ million electorate in 2024 is still numerically falling behind. The Roves and Luntzes apparently wish to celebrate getting kicked in the ass rather than the balls.

    • Replies: @S. Anonyia
    @Bugg

    They get way higher than 9-10 percent among Latinos, though. It ranges between 30-43, depending on the candidate. 9-10 percent is what Republicans get among blacks.

  22. Anonymous[337] • Disclaimer says:

    The style guide for Unz is: blax and mex

  23. Black men’s support for Biden was 80 percent, but 82 percent for Hillary. Women’s support stayed the same. So assuming that black men vote as much as women (unlikely, since one third of them are felons), the overall drop for blacks would be 1 percent of black voters.

  24. Anon[662] • Disclaimer says:
    @Chris Renner
    I thought I'd heard the name "David Shor" in the news for another reason not long ago. Sure enough: https://reason.com/2020/08/27/protests-violence-david-shor-kenosha-biden-trump/

    Replies: @Anon, @Almost Missouri, @Lot, @Getaclue

    I thought I’d heard the name “David Shor” in the news for another reason not long ago. Sure enough: …

    Yes, of course. This interview is a followup to the big interview Levitz did with Shor after he was fired … or whatever happened to him. Levitz tried to get him to talk about it in the first interview, but apparently Shor must have signed an NDA on the way out the door, or just decided it was better for his career to keep his trap shut. In the intro to this interview Levitz links to the first one.

  25. anonymous[176] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bardon Kaldian
    @RichardTaylor

    You can't. Therefore, the US are doomed. Probably not to formal collapse & disintegration, but to some kind of Brazilified second-ratedness.

    Replies: @Marquis, @anonymous

    California and Texas are majority non-white. The big cities are grubby but the states have top 5 and top 15 economies respectively. Far better than Brazil. America as a whole could take on another 100 million non-whites and still be in decent enough shape to be 2-3 rungs above Brazil.

    • LOL: 3g4me, Gabe Ruth
    • Replies: @James J O'Meara
    @anonymous

    "America as a whole could take on another 100 million non-whites and still be in decent enough shape to be 2-3 rungs above Brazil."

    So, this is the bar now?

    https://youtu.be/0napnfxd-dU

    Replies: @anonymous

  26. @RichardTaylor
    Nobody, including Steve, ever expects non-Whites to be outraged by anti-White hatred. That's the interesting thing.

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians ... in fact, every group on the planet. But none of those groups speak out on behalf of Whites (or any other group). And everyone just accepts that as normal.

    This is the routine way everyone thinks Whites are different from other humans. It would never occur to anyone to wonder why Asians are silent about some White person being mistreated. And Blacks really get a pass on basic morality.

    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don't consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PhysicistDave, @AndrewR, @Bernie, @Massimo Heitor, @Reg Cæsar, @JohnnyWalker123

    “So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?”

    You don’t – it just breaks down into racial warfare and/or racial politics once whites leave the scene. It won’t do us much good as we will be gone but at least we can enjoy the schaudenfreude.

  27. anon[299] • Disclaimer says:

    Schor

    I look at the 2020 election, I see that we ran against the most unpopular Republican ever to run for president — and we ran literally the most popular figure in our party whose last name is not Obama —

    Seems to me that if “the most popular figure in our party whose last name is not Obama” is a 78 year old career apparatchik with some form of dementia there is a larger issue that Schor is not addressing. The American gerontocracy is not a pretty sight, and it gets a bit less pretty every week.

    Say, when do we start playing “Name the real President”? That is, who is actually running the earpiece that Joe Biden must always listen to?

    Is it Kamala Harris?
    Is it Susan Rice?

    Is it Barack Obama? Are we really in Obama’s third term?

    • Agree: Ben tillman
    • Replies: @Guest29048
    @anon

    I thought Harris would be the boss by now, but she has not openly asserted herself.
    So, Obama, via Rice?

    But whoever wants to get Biden's signature on their pet executive order has to go through Ron Klain, Biden's chief of staff.

    So, Klain's fingerprints would be on everything "Biden" does.

    https://www.influencewatch.org/person/ronald-klain/

    https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individuals/ronald-klain/

    , @joe_mama
    @anon

    To be fair I doubt Obama ran the show when he was in office. There's a reason his early nickname was "Empty Suit".

    The same folks that ran the show under Obama, are running the show now.

  28. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor asked:


    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    There's no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.
     
    It's all fake -- mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left's material and political interests.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @RichardTaylor, @ic1000, @Bardon Kaldian, @Desiderius, @Almost Missouri, @Luzzatto, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnnyWalker123, @James J O'Meara

    The future of US blacks is something like this…

    https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2014/11/09/362356878/in-brazil-race-is-a-matter-of-life-and-violent-death

    On June 11 — one day before the World Cup started — two policemen picked up three black teenagers in Rio de Janeiro. The three hadn’t committed any crime — but they did have a history of petty offenses.

    The officers drove them up to the wooded hills above the city. One was shot in the head and killed. One was shot in the leg and the back and left for dead. Another escaped.

    We know what happened that day because the police officers left their patrol car cameras on, and the videos surfaced on Brazil’s Globo TV.

    “We haven’t even started beating you yet and you are already crying?” one cop says. “Stop crying! You are crying too much! Be a man!”

    But the three boys weren’t men — they were about 14 years old.

    Then the cops are heard saying “gotta kill the three of them.”

    And finally: “Two less. If we do this every week, we can reduce their number. We can reach the goal.”

    The goal they reportedly were referring to was a crime-reduction target ahead of the World Cup.

    Brazil is one of the most violent countries in the world. In 2012, 56,337 people were murdered. Compare that to the U.S., where fewer than 15,000 people died violently the same year in a country with 60 percent more people.

    But those statistics hide a color-coded truth: Brazil actually has gotten a lot safer for white people. In the past decade, homicides among whites have decreased 24 percent. But among the black population they have increased 40 percent.
    …………………………………….
    The two policemen who killed Matteos are standing trial. The boy who survived is in juvenile detention; he was caught trying to steal a bicycle. His lawyer has tried to get him into a witness protection program because he fears for the teenager’s life, but was told the state has no resources to provide protection.

    Nilson Bruno Filho — the only Afro-Brazilian head of a state public defender’s office — recently instituted a program to combat racism in Rio de Janeiro. He explains why the case of the murdered kids, now largely forgotten, didn’t get much sustained attention.

    “There is a saying that ‘black meat is cheaper.’ People don’t get shocked to see a dead black person, because the person in their minds can be linked to crime,” he says. “And, in Brazil, if a person is linked to a crime, then he can be killed.”

    • Replies: @Nico
    @Bardon Kaldian

    The other point to consider is that the black TFR in America stood at 1.89 children per women in 2018 and the black illegitimacy rate around 70 to 75 percent. Before long the COVID-19 pressure is going to vastly accelerate the ongoing reduction of the value of the state subsidies denominated in dollars that fund the care and feeding of bastard children from the cradle to prison - I mean, grave - , either by spending cuts or by inflation. Imagine if we still denied public subvention to children born out of wedlock: the black TFR would fall to perhaps the most blessedly low levels in mammalian history.

  29. @Buzz Mohawk
    Hmm... Is this a case of a Jew coming around to what Steve Sailer has been trying to teach Jews? Namely, that if they truly want what is "good for the Jews," then they need to stop stoking the anti-White fire?

    David Shor. A veteran of the 2012 Obama campaign, Shor is currently head of data science at OpenLabs, a progressive nonprofit.
     
    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Bardon Kaldian, @El Dato

    This Shor guy is a typical leftist Jewish idiot who may be very good at some narrow field of expertise, but, because he cannot see a wider picture, he is, along with his co-ethnics who constantly fight against waycism & weißer Mensch – doomed.

  30. Is Shor talking about a 1 or 2% decline or 1 or 2 percentage points?

    Yeah, that’s a confusion that modern journalists more often than not make. Even ordinary arithmetic errors are pretty common with journalists now too. And then even if the math is correct and the labels are correct, the underlying data source often doesn’t actually support the figures the journalist is advancing. It’s gotten so bad that I now just assume that any numerical figure a journalist publishes (present company excepted) is wrong unless I have personally verified it.

    So we’re now somewhere between 2004 and 2008 in terms of racial polarization.

    Or put another way, Trump undid in one term the racial polarization that Obama (“The Lightworker”) built up over two terms. Not holding my breath for David Shor to explain it that way though.

    So if Democrats elevate issues or theories that a large minority of nonwhite voters reject, it’s going to be hard to keep those margins. Because these issues are strongly correlated with ideology. And Black conservatives and Hispanic conservatives don’t actually buy into a lot of these intellectual theories

    Here Shor stumbles into, but doesn’t mention, why Biden was inadvertently a good candidate for Democrats. The Democrat platform is alienating and hostile (when it’s not actually insane), but since Biden hardly did any campaigning on the Dem platform or any other, and on the rare occasions he did say something, no one could understand what he meant, if anything, so the Democrats could just coast on electoral inertia rather than drawing any undue attention to the Democrat plan to destroy America. Vegetative senescence FTW!

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Captain Tripps
    @Almost Missouri

    Yeah, essentially the Democrat campaign theme was "He's not Trump!", which was just enough to squeak him over the finish line, barely (even with a relentless 4-year, 24/7 state-run media campaign of "Trump is EEEVILLLL!"). Sort of the reverse of 2016, where Trump basically ran as "I'm not Crooked Hillary!", and he was just able to finish ahead of Clinton electorally, barely.

  31. @Chris Renner
    I thought I'd heard the name "David Shor" in the news for another reason not long ago. Sure enough: https://reason.com/2020/08/27/protests-violence-david-shor-kenosha-biden-trump/

    Replies: @Anon, @Almost Missouri, @Lot, @Getaclue

    Good catch. Steve should put that in the OP.

    Shor’s analysis was probably right then and is probably right now. Unfortunately for Shor and for America, the Dems now have stitched together a nationwide ballot fixing system such that they never have to worry about losing a national election again, so they no longer need to pay attention to people like Shor or, you know, actual voters.

    • Agree: TWS, Paul Jolliffe
    • Replies: @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Almost Missouri


    the Dems now have stitched together a nationwide ballot fixing system such that they never have to worry about losing a national election again
     
    You've correctly identified the most important feature of the political landscape at this time, but I think it would be more accurate to say that it very much remains to be seen whether the Democrats can replicate what they did in 2020, outside the context of the twin hysterias (pandemic, TDS).

    Replies: @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @J.Ross, @Almost Missouri

  32. @ic1000
    @PhysicistDave

    Shor concludes,


    ...when I look at the 2020 election, I see that ...we only narrowly won the Electoral College. If Biden had done 0.3% worse, then Donald Trump would have won reelection with just 48% of the two-party vote... we can add states, we can ban partisan redistricting, and we can elevate issues that appeal to both college-educated liberals and a lot of working-class “conservatives.” If we don’t, things could get very bleak, very fast.
     
    Team Establishment isn't interested in Shor's ideas, they have a better plan. Here's Vox's infomercial-journalism report on HR1, just passed by the House. The bill's provisions include:

    * Increase participation by low-information and low-interest citizens via opt-out registration (you have to ask to not be registered to vote).

    * Facilitate fraud by mandating the vote-by-mail option.

    * Make it difficult or impossible for state officials to remove deceased and other disqualified people from voter rolls (assuming they want to do so).

    * Mandatory enfranchisement of non-imprisoned felons and ex-felons.

    So things are far from bleak. As Dr. Horrible would say, It's a brand new day.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Jack D, @AnotherDad

    * Increase participation by low-information and low-interest citizens via opt-out registration (you have to ask to not be registered to vote).

    Can we have opt-out voting too? You (helped by the nice lady from the community organization) will put yourself down as, for example, a Democrat and from now on (until someone notices that you are dead) your vote will automatically be cast for all of the Democrat candidates in every election until further notice. If you change your mind you can change the opt-out setting at any time but until then, you get voted automatically (Democrat) in every election. This is a reflection of your will as a voter just as much as if you stood in line and manually pressed the buttons on the voting machine but it’s much more convenient. After all, you don’t stand in line to pay your electric bill anymore – it just gets automatically deducted from your bank account until you change the setting on your account. It’s time for voting to catch up with the 21st century. I can’t see anything wrong with that, can you?

    BTW, HR1 is not passing the Senate unless they get rid of the filibuster, which they would also like to do. But it does give you an idea of what the Left would like for America.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @Jack D

    The left has little power other than as a bargaining chip for the ruling class. This keeps dissidents busy just getting back to common sense/global practice.

    , @ic1000
    @Jack D

    > Can we have opt-out voting too? You put yourself down as, for example, a Democrat and from now on (until someone notices that you are dead) your vote will automatically be cast for all of the Democrat candidates in every election until further notice.

    I can't tell if you're a parodist or a consultant for the Democrats. If the latter, you are late to the game regarding "until someone notices that you are dead" -- HR1 already proposes a fix for that.

  33. @PhysicistDave
    David Shor said:

    In the summer, following the emergence of “defund the police” as a nationally salient issue, support for Biden among Hispanic voters declined....

    I don’t think I can answer that comprehensively. But if you look at the concrete questions, white liberals are to the left of Hispanic Democrats, but also of Black Democrats, on defunding the police and those ideological questions about the source of racial inequity.
     
    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?

    Funny how a guy like Dave Shor, who is obviously quite bright, cannot see the obvious. I think the technical term is that he is "denying agency" to non-whites.

    Replies: @IHTG, @Ron Unz, @Paperback Writer

    I don’t think he’s unaware of such arguments.

  34. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor asked:


    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    There's no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.
     
    It's all fake -- mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left's material and political interests.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @RichardTaylor, @ic1000, @Bardon Kaldian, @Desiderius, @Almost Missouri, @Luzzatto, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnnyWalker123, @James J O'Meara

    Maybe?

    It would be closer to the truth to say that those who support the “left” side of these issues don’t dare risk thought at all.

  35. @Jack D
    @ic1000


    * Increase participation by low-information and low-interest citizens via opt-out registration (you have to ask to not be registered to vote).
     
    Can we have opt-out voting too? You (helped by the nice lady from the community organization) will put yourself down as, for example, a Democrat and from now on (until someone notices that you are dead) your vote will automatically be cast for all of the Democrat candidates in every election until further notice. If you change your mind you can change the opt-out setting at any time but until then, you get voted automatically (Democrat) in every election. This is a reflection of your will as a voter just as much as if you stood in line and manually pressed the buttons on the voting machine but it's much more convenient. After all, you don't stand in line to pay your electric bill anymore - it just gets automatically deducted from your bank account until you change the setting on your account. It's time for voting to catch up with the 21st century. I can't see anything wrong with that, can you?

    BTW, HR1 is not passing the Senate unless they get rid of the filibuster, which they would also like to do. But it does give you an idea of what the Left would like for America.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @ic1000

    The left has little power other than as a bargaining chip for the ruling class. This keeps dissidents busy just getting back to common sense/global practice.

  36. Lot says:
    @Chris Renner
    I thought I'd heard the name "David Shor" in the news for another reason not long ago. Sure enough: https://reason.com/2020/08/27/protests-violence-david-shor-kenosha-biden-trump/

    Replies: @Anon, @Almost Missouri, @Lot, @Getaclue

    He was also in the news for getting cancelled from his previous job over a Twitter fight because he said BLM rioting and violence was bad politics.

    His initial statement was expressed in the most servile cucky way, and he still retracted and apologized for it. But blasphemy about BLM is never tolerated, and there can be no forgiveness or keeping a job after that.

    Shor has wanted to be a Dem political guy his whole life and his specialty seems to be providing friendly advice to Dems to restrain the wokeness in that same groveling offputting style.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @Lot


    He was also in the news for getting cancelled from his previous job over a Twitter fight because he said BLM rioting and violence was bad politics.
     
    He was right, and he's rehashing his opinion in this piece. BLM drives away Mexicans and Asians.
  37. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor asked:


    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    There's no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.
     
    It's all fake -- mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left's material and political interests.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @RichardTaylor, @ic1000, @Bardon Kaldian, @Desiderius, @Almost Missouri, @Luzzatto, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnnyWalker123, @James J O'Meara

    It’s all fake — mere virtue signalling.

    I mostly agree, and yet …

    I may have mentioned that my extended family and their friends are mostly liberals of various stripes, which has allowed me to observe these pathologies at close range over long periods of time. With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as “just virtue signalling again, zzzzz”, but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers. The only thing they do in their limited spare time is watch Black movies. They seem to believe earnestly in Hidden Figures, Henrietta Lacks as a holy icon, BLM nonsense, etc. They organize “anti-racism” (i.e. anti-white) conferences. They donate religiously to the SPLC. They’re like a parody out of the iSteve comments section. I could probably write a couple of sitcom screenplays with their antics. Yes, they still live in a 99% white neighborhood, but they bought that house two decades ago when they still had kids, and they haven’t had cause to move yet. So I guess until they move somewhere other than a whitopia, or she leaves him to go coalburning (though they’re getting kinda old for that), or some other Rubicon event, I can’t say for sure, but my point is that somewhere along the line, the difference between virtue signalling and true belief ceases to exist or at least to matter. After all, that money they give to the SPLC will end up harming real people somewhere somehow, as will the antiwhite animus they whip up in antiracism rallies. Dismissing this as “mere virtue signalling” is ultimately somewhere between naive and disingenuous. Mere virtue signalling can kill.

    • Replies: @Ripple Earthdevil
    @Almost Missouri

    Paragraphing is the reader's friend, especially when the reader has aging eyes like myself.

    , @Anon
    @Almost Missouri

    I agree with you. My crazy liberal relatives have lost all sense of proportion, and you can't talk them into sense anymore about anything or make them see a point. They're too far gone. They're like brain-dead zombies when it comes to politics. They've been propagandized like North Koreans, but unlike the Norks, they've always had a door they can escape through. They live in a free society where they can chose what they listen to and read for news.

    But they've chosen to ignore the door. That is entirely their own fault.

    , @SimpleSong
    @Almost Missouri

    Indeed, we are what we repeatedly do.

    Some people can consciously say one thing and believe the exact opposite, and never let the mask slip, but most people will mold themselves to believe what they say, until they say what they believe.

    , @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Almost Missouri


    With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as “just virtue signalling again, zzzzz”, but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers.

     

    This is the question I've been raising over and over in the past few years as I see many of my peers and relatives get woke.

    I was out for beers with some friends last week. One of them, a middle-aged, Ivy-educated white American, was talking about how he and his family need to move back to the USA, but he's really worried about what it's going to be like for his Chinese wife and mixed daughter there.

    Before I could ask him if it was the crime rates or the crap schools that were sure to be the biggest problem, he start explaining very earnestly how his wife just could not understand what kind of impact racism was going to have on her life in the USA. He invoked January 6 (which is now a shorthand term like 9/11 for the Woke), and recounted stories he'd heard about white supremecists marauding around in pick-up trucks, waving the Confederate flag, right in the city they were planning to move to. So I asked him what state was it, exactly, to which they were headed. The answer? New Hampshire.

    I like this guy; he's generally sensible on most other topics; but something has changed. I don't doubt anymore that he really believes in the narrative.

    Replies: @El Dato, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @Jack D

    , @PhysicistDave
    @Almost Missouri

    Almost Missouri wrote to me:


    I can’t say for sure, but my point is that somewhere along the line, the difference between virtue signalling and true belief ceases to exist or at least to matter.
     
    Sure. Most people find it easier to lie if they convince themselves of their own lies.

    And as someone suggested above, if a person just tries really hard to not think about a subject, he may not even realize that the falsehoods he spouts are lies.

    But, as you imply, it does seem to start with virtue signalling.

    AM also wrote:

    Dismissing this as “mere virtue signalling” is ultimately somewhere between naive and disingenuous. Mere virtue signalling can kill.
     
    Indeed. They harm everyone except some of the members of the ruling elite.

    Obviously, decent but poor blacks are harmed. And while whites can often escape the worst of it, they are sometimes victims.

    Bizarrely, even the thugs would be better off if they had been raised in a society that discouraged them from becoming thugs: after all, a number of them end up dead at the hands of their peers.

    One moral, I suppose, is that people should just shut the hell up about their plans for saving the world unless they have really thought things through carefully (at least the effort that most of us put in if we are considering buying a new house) and unless they are willing to "walk the walk" -- e.g., actually move into a black ghetto.

    But I do not think the Woke Whites want to hear that.

    Replies: @Nico

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @Almost Missouri

    Great post. I know people like this. One old friend, a widower my age, late 60s, had his new equally progressive out-of-town girlfriend staying with him for a weekend. He proudly told me they saw two movies that weekend: "Notorious RBG" and "Black Klansman." Current reading? First volume of Obama's autobiography. Faithfully refers to the riot at the Capitol as the "armed insurrection."

  38. Equity, coming in fast and hard from the Democrats:

    The so-called Justice in Policing Act, introduced by Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., is being touted by the Biden administration as necessary to solve “systemic misconduct — and systemic racism — in police departments.”

    “To make our communities safer, we must begin by rebuilding trust between law enforcement and the people they are entrusted to serve and protect. We cannot rebuild that trust if we do not hold police officers accountable for abuses of power and tackle systemic misconduct — and systemic racism — in police departments,” the White House said in a statement.

    Section 311 of the act identifies that officers who pull over certain identity groups, such as more black men than black women, will be defined as a “prima facie evidence” violation. If men are found to speed at higher rates than women in a given region, for example, a police department would technically be in violation of the act. The Justice in Policing Act also calls for racial quotas for “traffic stops,” “pedestrian stops,” and “interviews.” In essence, departments would be forced to deal with all people equitably, which would fundamentally contradict the notion of equal justice in a free and fair society.

    https://thefederalist.com/2021/03/04/the-sole-republican-to-vote-in-favor-of-the-george-floyd-bill-did-so-accidentally/

    What could go wrong?

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @candid_observer

    They're of the belief that everyone should be harassed by the police--law-abiding and criminal perpetrators alike. Turning policing into just another government jobs program to install favored voting constituencies into do-nothing jobs.

    , @AndrewR
    @candid_observer

    This certainly won't build trust of the cops among white people. But that's a feature not a bug for our rulers. And frankly I don't think blacks will grow to love cops any more.

  39. Hmm, with just a little different vote count, the chickens could have come home to roost vis a vis installing Slow Joe, because the sentiments of a substantial portion of the groups upon whom the democrat party depends were not in favor of rioting, looting, defunding the police, shutting down the economy, etc. And why might that be? Well, because those people were getting the shitty end of the stick through those actively fomented policies (think antifa, blm, and not least, the unhinged, full-bore media assault), and they fucking well knew it.

    Hollowing out their job prospects, destroying the viability of their communities through unleashing mayhem that would only serve to exacerbate food desertification and the flight of services, giving the thugs the green light to crapify all elements of their lives, worsening the possible outcomes of their kids’ educational prospects through lockdowns. (Family friend is a teacher in Camden, NJ, forced into “distance learning”; she had to fail a large portion of her charges, and deny them grade advancement because they, as usual, had bad parent oversight and no self-discipline, things that would have been at least partially obviated had in school instruction been in place [but this all was an important element in the plot to force easily-corrupted mail-in balloting on us in NJ, so…]). At least a percentage of these communities, those with some gumption and sense, could see all of this, and realize that the democrat party didn’t give a flying fuck about their interests, and voted accordingly.

    So, it was vitally important to falsify the vote counts for President (revealingly often being the reverse of the down ballot votes) through any, and all means necessary, otherwise the Uniparty might not win the Presidency. The culmination of years of subversion in every institution formerly thought of as reputable, in conjunction with the media shrieking, yielded the desired result of pResident Biden.

    With that in hand, along with the 50/50 Senate, and even with a slimmer democrat majority in the House, the Uniparty could advance their plans for permanent vote tampering, and with open borders, an acceleration of demographic replacement by the wretched of the earth to solidify their grip in perpetuity. For them, that was what was at stake. So it was all hands on deck in corrupting the election, and trying to make sure they could get away with it.

    But still, with the gracious loser bullshit. Okee dokee.

  40. @Jack D
    @ic1000


    * Increase participation by low-information and low-interest citizens via opt-out registration (you have to ask to not be registered to vote).
     
    Can we have opt-out voting too? You (helped by the nice lady from the community organization) will put yourself down as, for example, a Democrat and from now on (until someone notices that you are dead) your vote will automatically be cast for all of the Democrat candidates in every election until further notice. If you change your mind you can change the opt-out setting at any time but until then, you get voted automatically (Democrat) in every election. This is a reflection of your will as a voter just as much as if you stood in line and manually pressed the buttons on the voting machine but it's much more convenient. After all, you don't stand in line to pay your electric bill anymore - it just gets automatically deducted from your bank account until you change the setting on your account. It's time for voting to catch up with the 21st century. I can't see anything wrong with that, can you?

    BTW, HR1 is not passing the Senate unless they get rid of the filibuster, which they would also like to do. But it does give you an idea of what the Left would like for America.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @ic1000

    > Can we have opt-out voting too? You put yourself down as, for example, a Democrat and from now on (until someone notices that you are dead) your vote will automatically be cast for all of the Democrat candidates in every election until further notice.

    I can’t tell if you’re a parodist or a consultant for the Democrats. If the latter, you are late to the game regarding “until someone notices that you are dead” — HR1 already proposes a fix for that.

  41. @Almost Missouri
    @PhysicistDave


    It’s all fake — mere virtue signalling.
     
    I mostly agree, and yet ...

    I may have mentioned that my extended family and their friends are mostly liberals of various stripes, which has allowed me to observe these pathologies at close range over long periods of time. With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as "just virtue signalling again, zzzzz", but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers. The only thing they do in their limited spare time is watch Black movies. They seem to believe earnestly in Hidden Figures, Henrietta Lacks as a holy icon, BLM nonsense, etc. They organize "anti-racism" (i.e. anti-white) conferences. They donate religiously to the SPLC. They're like a parody out of the iSteve comments section. I could probably write a couple of sitcom screenplays with their antics. Yes, they still live in a 99% white neighborhood, but they bought that house two decades ago when they still had kids, and they haven't had cause to move yet. So I guess until they move somewhere other than a whitopia, or she leaves him to go coalburning (though they're getting kinda old for that), or some other Rubicon event, I can't say for sure, but my point is that somewhere along the line, the difference between virtue signalling and true belief ceases to exist or at least to matter. After all, that money they give to the SPLC will end up harming real people somewhere somehow, as will the antiwhite animus they whip up in antiracism rallies. Dismissing this as "mere virtue signalling" is ultimately somewhere between naive and disingenuous. Mere virtue signalling can kill.

    Replies: @Ripple Earthdevil, @Anon, @SimpleSong, @The Last Real Calvinist, @PhysicistDave, @Harry Baldwin

    Paragraphing is the reader’s friend, especially when the reader has aging eyes like myself.

  42. Voting rights are far too broad.

    We need to disenfranchise blacks; or whites.

    The voting age needs to be raised to 35. We need to impose a mandatory, voting retirement age. 60 sounds about right. We also need to impose a strict, three even-year, election limit on voters. (As things stand nowadays, I see no reason why the voting age shouldn’t be set at age six or so, i.e. when a voter is tall/strong enough to reach/pull the lever.

    [MORE]

    Anyone who works for the government, receives a material, special interest, government benefit, etc. needs to be disenfranchised. You sign up your kid for public school, you surrender all the voter ID cards in your household.

    Abolish convenience voting. No more mail-in ballots (be they solicited or not), early voting, late voting, etc. No mandated time off to vote. Reinstate the venerable poll tax, though in a fashion that progressives should love: An odd-year, March ballot costs $50. A presidential ballot costs $800, and so forth. Redistribute the money to non-registereds.

  43. @Achmed E. Newman
    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this, and, therefore, this is boring and pointless stuff. As the nice young lady who just couldn't seem to cheat herself over the top said "At this point, what difference does it make?"

    Shades of Pat Buchanan here... "one of these bright new conservatives should be able to get a position on the Ways and Means Committee, and now that we have a favorable appellate court that can rule on the ... zzzzzz.... zizzer, zazzer, zuzzzzzzz.

    Replies: @Michael S, @Desiderius, @Travis, @Jim Don Bob, @PhysicistDave

    It boggles the mind that anyone outside of mainline conservatism would even be able to pretend, with a straight face, that elections still matter.

    2020 was the last real election. Or, depending upon your point of view, 2016 was. From now on, if “Republicans” “win”, it is because they put forward an inoffensive milksop who won’t try to rock the boat. If Republicans voters try to push a reformer, even an incredibly mild reformer who pines for the social norms of the stuffy old 2000s rather than the horrible everything-ist 50s or god forbid the dark ages of the 20s, he will simply be “managed out”, and Democrats and Republicans and supposedly non-partisan judges will all cooperate to make it happen.

    It simply cannot be denied anymore. Not after we’ve actually seen them do it, out in the open, deniability be damned. The socialist wing of the Democrats may still talk about this nonsense because they themselves have a stunted view of government, but there is nothing they have to say that is worth listening to.

    • Thanks: Ragno, Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @James J O'Meara
    @Michael S

    "2020 was the last real election. Or, depending upon your point of view, 2016 was"

    1960 was. Prove me wrong, Pollyanna.

  44. @Buzz Mohawk
    Hmm... Is this a case of a Jew coming around to what Steve Sailer has been trying to teach Jews? Namely, that if they truly want what is "good for the Jews," then they need to stop stoking the anti-White fire?

    David Shor. A veteran of the 2012 Obama campaign, Shor is currently head of data science at OpenLabs, a progressive nonprofit.
     
    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Bardon Kaldian, @El Dato

    Whenever I see “progressive nonprofit” I misread it as “massive for-profit”.

  45. And this theoretical perspective on what racism means and the nature of racial inequality have become a big part of the group identity of college-educated Democrats, white and nonwhite. But it’s not necessarily how most nonwhite, working-class people understand racism.

    College-educated Democrats think nonwhite, working class people are too dumb to understand racism. That’s racist, isn’t it?

    we ran literally the most popular figure in our party whose last name is not Obama

    This is an absurd statement. Biden lost Iowa, he lost New Hampshire. Buttigieg and Klobuchar were told to leave the race before Super Tuesday and Warren told to stay in the divide the Bernie vote. In the primaries, Biden had to be dragged across the finish line by DNC shenanigans, just as he had to be dragged across the finish line in the general election, in the manner crowed about by TIME magazine.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Harry Baldwin



    And this theoretical perspective on what racism means and the nature of racial inequality have become a big part of the group identity of college-educated Democrats, white and nonwhite. But it’s not necessarily how most nonwhite, working-class people understand racism.
     
    College-educated Democrats think nonwhite, working class people are too dumb to understand racism. That’s racist, isn’t it?
     
    It makes no sense until you realize that the radical racial stuff is just a rod that goodwhites use to whip and discipline badwhites. Being a racial radical is an in-group tell for goodwhites to recognize one another. The actual people of color (but definitely not colored people) are incidental.
    , @Gary in Gramercy
    @Harry Baldwin

    I agree entirely with your second excellent paragraph. I note only that "literally the most popular figure in [the Democratic] party whose last name is not Obama" was Bernie Sanders. So, of course, the DNC and other establishment Democrats did all they could to deny him the nomination, by means fair and (mostly) foul.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin

  46. @Achmed E. Newman
    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this, and, therefore, this is boring and pointless stuff. As the nice young lady who just couldn't seem to cheat herself over the top said "At this point, what difference does it make?"

    Shades of Pat Buchanan here... "one of these bright new conservatives should be able to get a position on the Ways and Means Committee, and now that we have a favorable appellate court that can rule on the ... zzzzzz.... zizzer, zazzer, zuzzzzzzz.

    Replies: @Michael S, @Desiderius, @Travis, @Jim Don Bob, @PhysicistDave

    Put down the iPalantir, Denethor.

    We were close last time. It’ll take a lot more than voting but it surely won’t take less unless you’re ready to lose everything.

    • LOL: Abe
    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
    @Desiderius


    We were close last time. It’ll take a lot more than voting but it surely won’t take less unless you’re ready to lose everything.
     
    This true. You can't let the bastards win simply by demoralizing you.

    I think the main epiphany of the last four years is that, besides voting, we need a strategy for fighting back against the elite leftist control over the commanding heights of cultural and institutions.

    Maybe Wokeness just needs to be contained, like the Soviet Union, until it dies of its own contradictions.

    Federalism and decentralization should be major goals. In a fair competition, most normal people will chose free institutions over woke authoritarianism. So we don't need to destroy the left, but merely carve out some space for the alternative. You can already see how freer, more conservative states (Texas, Florida, Arizona) have become far more attractive than lefty states (New York, Illinois, California).

    Replies: @anon, @ben tillman, @AndrewR

    , @ben tillman
    @Desiderius

    I'm with you 100%. Take 15 minutes and vote. And do everything else you can think of. It's not either-or.

    , @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Desiderius

    I'm not sure I agree with you on this one, Desiderius, but I LOLed at the iPalantir line.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

  47. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Buzz Mohawk


    Yeah, you bet he is, and now he is realizing that the flames are getting a little too high and too hot. Especially high, as in close to the gold-plated toilet-throne he sits on.
     
    "This old earthquake's gonna leave me in the poorhouse.
    It seems like this whole town's insane.
    On the thirty-first floor your gold-plated door
    won't keep out the Lord's burning rain."


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dos8Ec0uOXQ

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Ganderson, @Gary in Gramercy

    You’ve heard the original of this, right? From one of the great ’60’s albums, The Gilded Palace of Sin, by the Flying Burrito Brothers (with Gram Parsons and Chris Hillman, both of whom had left the Byrds).

    Wonderful song, supposedly written about their first manager, not the most ethical chap in the business (the only honest pop music manager in the ’60’s was probably Brian Epstein, and he was a mess).

    • Replies: @Morton's toes
    @Gary in Gramercy

    At the end of Mayfair Set Ep 3 Curtis drags out this oldie-but-goodie many have never heard of but my goodness it is perfect.

    Nellie the Elephant

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28Rh9zRdXxA

  48. @Harry Baldwin
    And this theoretical perspective on what racism means and the nature of racial inequality have become a big part of the group identity of college-educated Democrats, white and nonwhite. But it’s not necessarily how most nonwhite, working-class people understand racism.

    College-educated Democrats think nonwhite, working class people are too dumb to understand racism. That's racist, isn't it?

    we ran literally the most popular figure in our party whose last name is not Obama

    This is an absurd statement. Biden lost Iowa, he lost New Hampshire. Buttigieg and Klobuchar were told to leave the race before Super Tuesday and Warren told to stay in the divide the Bernie vote. In the primaries, Biden had to be dragged across the finish line by DNC shenanigans, just as he had to be dragged across the finish line in the general election, in the manner crowed about by TIME magazine.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Gary in Gramercy

    And this theoretical perspective on what racism means and the nature of racial inequality have become a big part of the group identity of college-educated Democrats, white and nonwhite. But it’s not necessarily how most nonwhite, working-class people understand racism.

    College-educated Democrats think nonwhite, working class people are too dumb to understand racism. That’s racist, isn’t it?

    It makes no sense until you realize that the radical racial stuff is just a rod that goodwhites use to whip and discipline badwhites. Being a racial radical is an in-group tell for goodwhites to recognize one another. The actual people of color (but definitely not colored people) are incidental.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
  49. Is Shor talking about a 1 or 2% decline or 1 or 2 percentage points?

    Either way, the decline of black support for the Democratic ticket was pretty negligible. But losing nearly 10 points of Hispanic support in one election is a very big deal, especially since Trump directed nearly all of his effort to winning black votes and almost no effort to winning Hispanic ones.

    Put another way, if Trump had chosen his words more carefully and actually tried to win Hispanic support, he might very well have gotten a higher share of the Hispanic vote than any Republican candidate in American history. I wonder how the Trump-hating media would have spun that…

    All the post-election points Shor is making are pretty obvious, and similar to things I have writing myself for almost three decades now, going back to the early 1990s. Here are links to downloadable eBooks of my collected articles on the subject from 1994 to 2001 in ePub and Mobi/Kindle formats:

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/NewAmericanMeltingPot.epub

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/NewAmericanMeltingPot.mobi

    Plus my big 2011 article:

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/ImmigrationRepublicans.epub

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/ImmigrationRepublicans.mobi

    And my 2016 “Grand Bargain” article proposing a politically workable solution to our endless immigration conflicts (shortly available as an eBook):

    https://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    • Thanks: Not Raul
    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Ron Unz


    Either way, the decline of black support for the Democratic ticket was pretty negligible. But losing nearly 10 points of Hispanic support in one election is a very big deal, especially since Trump directed nearly all of his effort to winning black votes and almost no effort to winning Hispanic ones.
     
    I think some of the calculus surrounding the black vote arises from the fact that each of the upper Midwest "Big Ten" Swing States have large cities with significant or majority black populations, whereas the locus of Hispanic populations generally lies either in lost causes like California or secure R States (at least for now) like Texas - with Florida being the large, electoral vote rich exception. The Democrats have historically relied upon lopsided vote premiums to take statewide races in these States which would otherwise be solidly Republican. So getting a small increase in the share of the black vote in Philadelphia/Pittsburgh/Detroit/Milwaukee/Cleveland is a much more worthwhile squeeze of the electoral lemon than being seen to be chasing the Hispanic vote which is sequestered in States which are already fairly solidly red or blue. Additionally, since blacks vote at between 90-95% for Democrats, each vote won from the Democrats has a greater impact on marginal races than the still lopsided (but much less so) Hispanic vote.

    That said, we've seen the Hispanicization of the U.S. move Colorado and Nevada into fairly solid blue States, and make Arizona into a swing state. Texas, as they say, is the new prize.

    My surmise is that the dynamic in Florida is an outlier, in that Republicans are able to leverage an existing Cuban dominated political machine in South Florida to recruit Venezuelan exiles due to their Anti-Communist politics, and to make a decent play for persuadable Puerto Ricans and the like. This machine is peculiar to Florida, however, so I think the gains among Hispanics in Texas and the Southwest are probably owed to second generation and subsequent Hispanics entering the respectable middle class and crediting that ascent to conservative middle class cultural and economic values. The archetypical, patriarchal "HispaniDad" of memes is likely who was swayed rightward by Trump. Altogether, the immigration status quo is disastrous to Republicans and the prospect of any right wing politics in the U.S. with any prospect of electoral success, so the GOP's current strategy "we lose money on each unit sold but make it up in volume" has got to be jettisoned. You can't create nearly enough HispaniDads fast enough to cancel the gross numbers of newly arrived third worlders each year deposited into our toxic culture of anti-white identity politics. In any event, winning elections increasingly requires shifting the political center to the left in large part as a consequence of our suicidal immigration policy.

    Replies: @Luzzatto, @Ron Unz

    , @AnotherDad
    @Ron Unz


    And my 2016 “Grand Bargain” article proposing a politically workable solution to our endless immigration conflicts (shortly available as an eBook):
     
    I don't have any big issue with raising the minimum wage as part of some "Grand Bargain".

    But the core solution is sanity: immigration must stop. Sure we can pick up the odd really smartguy who's working on thorium cycle or something. But the US never needed and immigration hasn't made any sense for the core national project since the frontier closed in the 1880s.

    And closing immigration down is very easy to explain and sell to every ethnic group (well maybe bar one) and immigrants as well as natives.

    American jobs, at American wages, for American kids.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    , @anon
    @Ron Unz


    I wonder how the Trump-hating media would have spun that…
     
    In the aftermath of the 2020 election, the black identitarians of the NYT started claiming Florida Cubans could be considered White, apparently as a dog whistle to open the floodgates of abuse on them for their supposed betrayal. I've also heard occasional talk of "confronting Whiteness" among ... non-Whites. My suspicion is that our political class isn't so bright. They might overreact and start persecuting Hispanics just as they were doing during the BLM riots; several were arrested on various trumped-up charges and for defacing BLM graffiti cities had scrawled along highways.

    For the GOP to get appreciable Hispanic support, it must do several things. Here are 8 Simple Rules:

    1. Stop letting the democrats out-flank them on economic policies. In other words, no more talk of destroying the minimum wage and rejecting $2000 checks because they are "manna from heaven." The GOP should pursue economic policies that directly attack wealthy democrat donor constituencies, thereby forcing the Democrats to reject them and making the GOP look good in the process.

    Ex: Support unionizing Amazon and Google. Both have discriminated against conservatives, so unleash the dogs of war upon them. Sure, corporate profits will fall, but that doesn't hurt conservatives one bit.

    There are many other things they could do. They could enforce anti-monopoly regulations, for instance, with the stated purpose of making small businesses more profitable -- healthy small businesses means healthy communities with a vested interested in keeping things nice and happy.

    They could support a gradual increase in the minimum wage, or even a differential minimum wage based on industry or corporate tax paid (pay your workers more or pay more in taxes, employ more or pay more in taxes).

    Healthcare is another biggie. If a Republican congress could ever get through an affordable Medicare for All program, perhaps paid for by taxing the democrats and their donors, then they'd win elections forever. Corporate donors already heavily favor democrats, so what's really the argument favoring their interests? Promise to let private insurers exist while also offering an affordable alternative at low cost. There will be some waiting times for poor people, but consider the alternative for those without insurance: an infinite waiting time because they can't afford to see a doctor.

    Stop letting the democrats paint you as the bad guys and the party of "no." Do something popular for once!

    2. The GOP need not scale back rhetoric against immigration. Polls show Hispanics don't care unless they are personally affected and the issue energizes republican voters. The GOP might do an amnesty without citizenship while enacting immigration reductions on the grounds of protecting worker salaries against competition and protecting the environment, which would give cucky whites a convenient excuse to support it.

    3. Purge deficit hawk performance artists like Sen. Ron Johnson from the party. His rhetoric is "manna from heaven" for the democrats. I've heard Sen. Mitch McConnell is considering retirement. The party base is quickly moving away from Reaganism and towards Bryan populism. A few retirements at the top could quicken that trend.

    4. Purge neocons like Liz Cheney. Encourage them to go the democrats and poison their image with their unpopular foreign policy and economic agendas.

    5. Dog whistle against offensive black racial identity. Hispanics hate it. 44% of Hispanic Biden voters disapprove of BLM. More Americans now approve of the police. There will be a backlash against black crime soon, moreso when the the left tries passing racial equity bills preventing the police from arresting too many blacks.

    Coalitions are always "us against them." The GOP coalition should be working class whites, Hispanics, and ambitious new immigrants like Indians and Asians who wish to overthrow the current white woke and Jewish ruling class. I've noticed a nascent trend of these groups trying to appeal to Whites, almost like they are trying to build a new coalition base. It could happen because they are pretty much excluded from power by the current regime. Asians are racially discriminated against by Ivy League school admissions departments by design.

    Trying to get black support through hollow, cringe appeals dilutes the GOP's attempt to attract other groups in opposition to black grievance politics. It also makes them look weak. They should stop. This means no more invitations to cringe black conspiracy theorists and rappers to attend CPAC. Support polices that directly target groups like BLM and black crime. Support policies aimed at removing CRT from colleges and government training. Hispanics will rightfully interpret that as a dig against woke whites and unpopular black grievance politics.

    6. Full-throated attack on political correctness with the promise of using the government -- legislation and regulation -- to protect victims. Talented White professionals (and some minorities, see the Anziz Ansari witch hunt) are the primary victims, so they might be receptive. The GOP is at an extreme talent disadvantage. They need to attract smart people capable of promoting their message in the popular culture, and this is one way they could do it. One reason why Trump did better than expected is due to the fact that some White professionals lied to pollsters about their support. Steve Sailer has also noted Trump's surprising strength in Beverly Hills. I wonder why?

    Hollywood Doesn't Want WHITE DUDES Anymore, Say Movie Execs.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8513727/Actors-writers-producers-warn-reverse-racism-film-industry.html
     
    7. Make a new deal with religious conservatives: promise protection over influence. Religious conservatives might spoil this coalition, but they are needed anyway. Promise to protect them from abuse without giving them the spotlight to promote unpopular religious polices like banning video games for nudity and foul language. They won't have to bake any cakes, but they also won't make the party platform about ending gay marriage, something that is widely accepted now -- even among republicans.

    8. Find a replacement for Donald Trump. He's a terrible leader who lacks conviction and the ability to govern. Until a replacement is found, he'll stick around sucking the oxygen out of the room while continually demoralizing supporters and energizing detractors.

    Extra: Also, find a populist minority (maybe Hispanic) republican to win a major election somewhere. His campaign should be economic and against political correctness & cancel culture. Supportive of small business + anti-corporate monopolies + anti-woke. Being supportive of workers and increasing the minimum wage to a reasonable level might also help, among other issues.

    Governor Chavez, R-CA, sounds a lot better than Senator Scott, R-Token. Follow that up by recruiting locals on the ground, and between election cycles. They need to get more people involved in the party apparatus itself, which would give people cause to spread their influence among friends and neighbors.
  50. @Gary in Gramercy
    @Achmed E. Newman

    You've heard the original of this, right? From one of the great '60's albums, The Gilded Palace of Sin, by the Flying Burrito Brothers (with Gram Parsons and Chris Hillman, both of whom had left the Byrds).

    Wonderful song, supposedly written about their first manager, not the most ethical chap in the business (the only honest pop music manager in the '60's was probably Brian Epstein, and he was a mess).

    Replies: @Morton's toes

    At the end of Mayfair Set Ep 3 Curtis drags out this oldie-but-goodie many have never heard of but my goodness it is perfect.

    Nellie the Elephant

    • Thanks: SafeNow
  51. “Us White Democrats Could Easily Alienate Nonwhite Democrats with Our Crazy Level of Racial Resentment on Their Behalf”

    A man named Shor is a “White Democrat?” That’s interesting.

  52. @Harry Baldwin
    And this theoretical perspective on what racism means and the nature of racial inequality have become a big part of the group identity of college-educated Democrats, white and nonwhite. But it’s not necessarily how most nonwhite, working-class people understand racism.

    College-educated Democrats think nonwhite, working class people are too dumb to understand racism. That's racist, isn't it?

    we ran literally the most popular figure in our party whose last name is not Obama

    This is an absurd statement. Biden lost Iowa, he lost New Hampshire. Buttigieg and Klobuchar were told to leave the race before Super Tuesday and Warren told to stay in the divide the Bernie vote. In the primaries, Biden had to be dragged across the finish line by DNC shenanigans, just as he had to be dragged across the finish line in the general election, in the manner crowed about by TIME magazine.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Gary in Gramercy

    I agree entirely with your second excellent paragraph. I note only that “literally the most popular figure in [the Democratic] party whose last name is not Obama” was Bernie Sanders. So, of course, the DNC and other establishment Democrats did all they could to deny him the nomination, by means fair and (mostly) foul.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @Gary in Gramercy

    And the feckless wimp bent over and took it again, just as he did in 2016, while saying, "Please, sir (or madam as the case may be), may I have another?"

    If Sanders had been a Bolshevik in 1917, I don't think Lenin would have regarded him as worthy of anything beyond fetching coffee or shining shoes.

    Replies: @J.Ross

  53. @PhysicistDave
    David Shor said:

    In the summer, following the emergence of “defund the police” as a nationally salient issue, support for Biden among Hispanic voters declined....

    I don’t think I can answer that comprehensively. But if you look at the concrete questions, white liberals are to the left of Hispanic Democrats, but also of Black Democrats, on defunding the police and those ideological questions about the source of racial inequity.
     
    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?

    Funny how a guy like Dave Shor, who is obviously quite bright, cannot see the obvious. I think the technical term is that he is "denying agency" to non-whites.

    Replies: @IHTG, @Ron Unz, @Paperback Writer

    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?

    That’s certainly part of the reason, but you may be over-thinking the situation, and it’s ridiculous to mix together blacks and Hispanics. Despite massive Republican propaganda, both pre- and post-election, the former showed virtually no swing to the Trump, while the latter showed a huge swing.

    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.

    We saw many, many months of violent mobs rioting, looting, and burning major parts of 200 American cities. The response of the Democrats was “Let’s Defund the Police!!!”

    Since so many whites are so totally brainwashed by the MSM, many of them thought that sounded pretty reasonable, or at least acceptable, and still voted for Biden/Harris. But since Hispanics are more like “normal” people, many of them didn’t agree, and they swung in the other direction.

    Putting my cards on the table, I think you could make a pretty good case that Trump was the worst president America has ever had. But I also think you could also make a pretty good case that the other choice was even worse…

    • LOL: Gabe Ruth
    • Replies: @Anon
    @Ron Unz

    Ron,
    I think you are correct here and I think the Hispanic surge for Trump was hardly surprising, and probably not going to go away anytime soon.

    Though I would add that most of the swing occurred in the border and rural areas, which don't have lots of Blacks, while the surge in the cities was actually smaller for Hispanics, where there are lots of Blacks.

    My guess is that Spanish Media probably was more honest over who was committing the crimes, and urban more English media did not, which is why the swing there was less so. Ironically Univision may have helped Trump in this regard by showing much more honest video of the riots and the forces involved.

    Anyways, the issue of crime may be the most irritating in America, since we have had like a million homicides in the last 70 years. What sort of ideal policies would you think would reduce crime. You have given recommendations on immigration, but I think the first person who solves our \crime problem would become a national hero overnight...

    Replies: @Supply and Demand

    , @JMcG
    @Ron Unz

    I wonder how much of the disconnect over Hispanics is due to exposure to east coast Puerto Ricans as opposed to west coast Mexicans. In my experience, they are chalk and cheese. I can be sold on Mexicans, but not on Puerto Ricans.

    Replies: @Luzzatto

    , @AndrewR
    @Ron Unz

    I would just say that Trump was [a deeply incompetent] president during the worst four year period since 1945.

    , @Desiderius
    @Ron Unz

    Trump's (i.e. Jared's) efforts would have significantly reduced Black turnout if Zuck's wife hadn't spent a $Billion voting for them. Which is a scandalously small amount to do that much work.

    , @Undocumented Shopper
    @Ron Unz


    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.
     
    Many of them read Spanish-language newspapers which are relatively sane (knowing some Spanish, I checked out local Spanish newspapers.)

    The tensions between blacks and Hispanics are below the radar as far as MSM are concerned.
    I looked at statistics of shootings of blacks by police and cities of Hialeah and Albuquerque are ranked at the top; both are heavily Hispanic.
    , @Paperback Writer
    @Ron Unz

    Maybe you're overthinking it. When your own neighborhood is being burned down by BLM rioters, you don't like them. When your job depends on kissing woke ass, you'll kiss woke ass.

    , @steinbergfeldwitzcohen
    @Ron Unz

    Claiming that Trump is the worst Prez in history is complete nonsense. There is a list.

    Wilson snuck in a massive betrayal to the American people: the IRS, the Income Tax and the Fed. He created the Infrastructure of Tyranny and Perpetual War that helped destroy a once proud and promising nation.
    FDR told Americans he wanted no war while plotting to give it to his Jewish 'Advisors'. His betrayal of the American people is beyond compare. His time in office destroyed the fragment left of the Republic and ushered in Imperial America-the Jewish Attack Dog.
    These two Vermidents are currently in Hell laughing with abandon at your naivete while Lincoln chuckles and LBJ smirks. Eisenhower is still asking himself how he ever came to agree to starve 1 million German POW's AFTER the War had ended.

    When we consider the blood Trump refused to spill in the Middle East, EVEN I can give him credit.
    You sir, have lost any sense of proportion if you cannot see my point and retract your absurd claim.
    Fact: I dislike the man annd consider him a Shabbos.

    Replies: @Ron Unz

    , @Corvinus
    @Ron Unz

    "The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth."

    LOL, no, Mr. Unz, we whites are merely taking YOUR advice to heart when making their own decisions when it comes to race, culture, politics, sportsball, etc. Oddly, you (and others) characterize it as being "brainwashed".


    I apply the same historical methods I did in my academic journal articles back in the 1980s. You analyze the likely reliability of the raw information presented, look for confirming or refuting evidence, and then draw your own plausible conclusions…On a more serious note, many of my articles very heavily cite various MSM sources, so why would I do that if I believed they were always lying?”
     
    Besides, I thought whites in general have high IQ's and high time preferences, which would mean they have natural built-in defenses against being "duped".

    "Anyone who’s carefully looked into the matter knows there’s strong, perhaps even overwhelming evidence that Covid-19 outbreak was the result of an American biowarfare attack against China (and Iran), presumably by the Deep State Neocons that Trump moronically appointed to run our national security apparatus"

    Speculation and hearsay, with a dab of confirmation bias.

  54. @RichardTaylor
    Nobody, including Steve, ever expects non-Whites to be outraged by anti-White hatred. That's the interesting thing.

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians ... in fact, every group on the planet. But none of those groups speak out on behalf of Whites (or any other group). And everyone just accepts that as normal.

    This is the routine way everyone thinks Whites are different from other humans. It would never occur to anyone to wonder why Asians are silent about some White person being mistreated. And Blacks really get a pass on basic morality.

    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don't consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PhysicistDave, @AndrewR, @Bernie, @Massimo Heitor, @Reg Cæsar, @JohnnyWalker123

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet. But none of those groups speak out on behalf of Whites (or any other group). And everyone just accepts that as normal.

    The White left has the power and controls the discussion on racial issues with an iron fist. The White Left polices speech and punishes viewpoints they don’t like aggressively. Yes, we all accept this as normal, because it is the reality we live in, and regular people don’t have a voice in national racial discussions.

    I know individual blacks, hispanics, and Muslim-born secular Pakistanis who think the racial climate is crazy, but they are just trying to live their lives, which is what they should do.

  55. Anon[223] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz
    @PhysicistDave


    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?
     
    That's certainly part of the reason, but you may be over-thinking the situation, and it's ridiculous to mix together blacks and Hispanics. Despite massive Republican propaganda, both pre- and post-election, the former showed virtually no swing to the Trump, while the latter showed a huge swing.

    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.

    We saw many, many months of violent mobs rioting, looting, and burning major parts of 200 American cities. The response of the Democrats was "Let's Defund the Police!!!"

    Since so many whites are so totally brainwashed by the MSM, many of them thought that sounded pretty reasonable, or at least acceptable, and still voted for Biden/Harris. But since Hispanics are more like "normal" people, many of them didn't agree, and they swung in the other direction.

    Putting my cards on the table, I think you could make a pretty good case that Trump was the worst president America has ever had. But I also think you could also make a pretty good case that the other choice was even worse...

    Replies: @Anon, @JMcG, @AndrewR, @Desiderius, @Undocumented Shopper, @Paperback Writer, @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @Corvinus

    Ron,
    I think you are correct here and I think the Hispanic surge for Trump was hardly surprising, and probably not going to go away anytime soon.

    Though I would add that most of the swing occurred in the border and rural areas, which don’t have lots of Blacks, while the surge in the cities was actually smaller for Hispanics, where there are lots of Blacks.

    My guess is that Spanish Media probably was more honest over who was committing the crimes, and urban more English media did not, which is why the swing there was less so. Ironically Univision may have helped Trump in this regard by showing much more honest video of the riots and the forces involved.

    Anyways, the issue of crime may be the most irritating in America, since we have had like a million homicides in the last 70 years. What sort of ideal policies would you think would reduce crime. You have given recommendations on immigration, but I think the first person who solves our \crime problem would become a national hero overnight…

    • Replies: @Supply and Demand
    @Anon

    Ban firearms, give police real extrajudicial power, make said police racially and ethnically match the bantustans they patrol. Simple — Chinese, in fact.

    Replies: @Muggles

  56. @Ron Unz
    @PhysicistDave


    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?
     
    That's certainly part of the reason, but you may be over-thinking the situation, and it's ridiculous to mix together blacks and Hispanics. Despite massive Republican propaganda, both pre- and post-election, the former showed virtually no swing to the Trump, while the latter showed a huge swing.

    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.

    We saw many, many months of violent mobs rioting, looting, and burning major parts of 200 American cities. The response of the Democrats was "Let's Defund the Police!!!"

    Since so many whites are so totally brainwashed by the MSM, many of them thought that sounded pretty reasonable, or at least acceptable, and still voted for Biden/Harris. But since Hispanics are more like "normal" people, many of them didn't agree, and they swung in the other direction.

    Putting my cards on the table, I think you could make a pretty good case that Trump was the worst president America has ever had. But I also think you could also make a pretty good case that the other choice was even worse...

    Replies: @Anon, @JMcG, @AndrewR, @Desiderius, @Undocumented Shopper, @Paperback Writer, @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @Corvinus

    I wonder how much of the disconnect over Hispanics is due to exposure to east coast Puerto Ricans as opposed to west coast Mexicans. In my experience, they are chalk and cheese. I can be sold on Mexicans, but not on Puerto Ricans.

    • Replies: @Luzzatto
    @JMcG

    Mexicans are a lost cause. California has the largest Mexican population in the country and California is the Wokest out of all the 50 states. California invented Cancel Culture!

  57. @candid_observer
    Equity, coming in fast and hard from the Democrats:

    The so-called Justice in Policing Act, introduced by Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., is being touted by the Biden administration as necessary to solve “systemic misconduct — and systemic racism — in police departments.”

    “To make our communities safer, we must begin by rebuilding trust between law enforcement and the people they are entrusted to serve and protect. We cannot rebuild that trust if we do not hold police officers accountable for abuses of power and tackle systemic misconduct — and systemic racism — in police departments,” the White House said in a statement.

    Section 311 of the act identifies that officers who pull over certain identity groups, such as more black men than black women, will be defined as a “prima facie evidence” violation. If men are found to speed at higher rates than women in a given region, for example, a police department would technically be in violation of the act. The Justice in Policing Act also calls for racial quotas for “traffic stops,” “pedestrian stops,” and “interviews.” In essence, departments would be forced to deal with all people equitably, which would fundamentally contradict the notion of equal justice in a free and fair society.
     

    https://thefederalist.com/2021/03/04/the-sole-republican-to-vote-in-favor-of-the-george-floyd-bill-did-so-accidentally/

    What could go wrong?

    Replies: @Forbes, @AndrewR

    They’re of the belief that everyone should be harassed by the police–law-abiding and criminal perpetrators alike. Turning policing into just another government jobs program to install favored voting constituencies into do-nothing jobs.

  58. @candid_observer
    Equity, coming in fast and hard from the Democrats:

    The so-called Justice in Policing Act, introduced by Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., is being touted by the Biden administration as necessary to solve “systemic misconduct — and systemic racism — in police departments.”

    “To make our communities safer, we must begin by rebuilding trust between law enforcement and the people they are entrusted to serve and protect. We cannot rebuild that trust if we do not hold police officers accountable for abuses of power and tackle systemic misconduct — and systemic racism — in police departments,” the White House said in a statement.

    Section 311 of the act identifies that officers who pull over certain identity groups, such as more black men than black women, will be defined as a “prima facie evidence” violation. If men are found to speed at higher rates than women in a given region, for example, a police department would technically be in violation of the act. The Justice in Policing Act also calls for racial quotas for “traffic stops,” “pedestrian stops,” and “interviews.” In essence, departments would be forced to deal with all people equitably, which would fundamentally contradict the notion of equal justice in a free and fair society.
     

    https://thefederalist.com/2021/03/04/the-sole-republican-to-vote-in-favor-of-the-george-floyd-bill-did-so-accidentally/

    What could go wrong?

    Replies: @Forbes, @AndrewR

    This certainly won’t build trust of the cops among white people. But that’s a feature not a bug for our rulers. And frankly I don’t think blacks will grow to love cops any more.

  59. @Ron Unz
    @PhysicistDave


    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?
     
    That's certainly part of the reason, but you may be over-thinking the situation, and it's ridiculous to mix together blacks and Hispanics. Despite massive Republican propaganda, both pre- and post-election, the former showed virtually no swing to the Trump, while the latter showed a huge swing.

    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.

    We saw many, many months of violent mobs rioting, looting, and burning major parts of 200 American cities. The response of the Democrats was "Let's Defund the Police!!!"

    Since so many whites are so totally brainwashed by the MSM, many of them thought that sounded pretty reasonable, or at least acceptable, and still voted for Biden/Harris. But since Hispanics are more like "normal" people, many of them didn't agree, and they swung in the other direction.

    Putting my cards on the table, I think you could make a pretty good case that Trump was the worst president America has ever had. But I also think you could also make a pretty good case that the other choice was even worse...

    Replies: @Anon, @JMcG, @AndrewR, @Desiderius, @Undocumented Shopper, @Paperback Writer, @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @Corvinus

    I would just say that Trump was [a deeply incompetent] president during the worst four year period since 1945.

    • Agree: Gabe Ruth
  60. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor asked:


    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    There's no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.
     
    It's all fake -- mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left's material and political interests.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @RichardTaylor, @ic1000, @Bardon Kaldian, @Desiderius, @Almost Missouri, @Luzzatto, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnnyWalker123, @James J O'Meara

    Democrats tell us that if you are anti-defund the police you are a White Supremacist. At the same time Democrats also do not want Bernie Goetz style vigilante justice either as a substitute for the police if defund the police is successfully implemented nationwide because that would be White Supremacy as well. The only conclusion from this is that Democrats are moral degenerates who are pro-violent criminals!

  61. @Ron Unz
    @PhysicistDave


    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?
     
    That's certainly part of the reason, but you may be over-thinking the situation, and it's ridiculous to mix together blacks and Hispanics. Despite massive Republican propaganda, both pre- and post-election, the former showed virtually no swing to the Trump, while the latter showed a huge swing.

    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.

    We saw many, many months of violent mobs rioting, looting, and burning major parts of 200 American cities. The response of the Democrats was "Let's Defund the Police!!!"

    Since so many whites are so totally brainwashed by the MSM, many of them thought that sounded pretty reasonable, or at least acceptable, and still voted for Biden/Harris. But since Hispanics are more like "normal" people, many of them didn't agree, and they swung in the other direction.

    Putting my cards on the table, I think you could make a pretty good case that Trump was the worst president America has ever had. But I also think you could also make a pretty good case that the other choice was even worse...

    Replies: @Anon, @JMcG, @AndrewR, @Desiderius, @Undocumented Shopper, @Paperback Writer, @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @Corvinus

    Trump’s (i.e. Jared’s) efforts would have significantly reduced Black turnout if Zuck’s wife hadn’t spent a $Billion voting for them. Which is a scandalously small amount to do that much work.

  62. @Ron Unz

    Is Shor talking about a 1 or 2% decline or 1 or 2 percentage points?
     
    Either way, the decline of black support for the Democratic ticket was pretty negligible. But losing nearly 10 points of Hispanic support in one election is a very big deal, especially since Trump directed nearly all of his effort to winning black votes and almost no effort to winning Hispanic ones.

    Put another way, if Trump had chosen his words more carefully and actually tried to win Hispanic support, he might very well have gotten a higher share of the Hispanic vote than any Republican candidate in American history. I wonder how the Trump-hating media would have spun that...

    All the post-election points Shor is making are pretty obvious, and similar to things I have writing myself for almost three decades now, going back to the early 1990s. Here are links to downloadable eBooks of my collected articles on the subject from 1994 to 2001 in ePub and Mobi/Kindle formats:

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/NewAmericanMeltingPot.epub

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/NewAmericanMeltingPot.mobi

    Plus my big 2011 article:

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/ImmigrationRepublicans.epub

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/ImmigrationRepublicans.mobi

    And my 2016 "Grand Bargain" article proposing a politically workable solution to our endless immigration conflicts (shortly available as an eBook):

    https://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @AnotherDad, @anon

    Either way, the decline of black support for the Democratic ticket was pretty negligible. But losing nearly 10 points of Hispanic support in one election is a very big deal, especially since Trump directed nearly all of his effort to winning black votes and almost no effort to winning Hispanic ones.

    I think some of the calculus surrounding the black vote arises from the fact that each of the upper Midwest “Big Ten” Swing States have large cities with significant or majority black populations, whereas the locus of Hispanic populations generally lies either in lost causes like California or secure R States (at least for now) like Texas – with Florida being the large, electoral vote rich exception. The Democrats have historically relied upon lopsided vote premiums to take statewide races in these States which would otherwise be solidly Republican. So getting a small increase in the share of the black vote in Philadelphia/Pittsburgh/Detroit/Milwaukee/Cleveland is a much more worthwhile squeeze of the electoral lemon than being seen to be chasing the Hispanic vote which is sequestered in States which are already fairly solidly red or blue. Additionally, since blacks vote at between 90-95% for Democrats, each vote won from the Democrats has a greater impact on marginal races than the still lopsided (but much less so) Hispanic vote.

    That said, we’ve seen the Hispanicization of the U.S. move Colorado and Nevada into fairly solid blue States, and make Arizona into a swing state. Texas, as they say, is the new prize.

    My surmise is that the dynamic in Florida is an outlier, in that Republicans are able to leverage an existing Cuban dominated political machine in South Florida to recruit Venezuelan exiles due to their Anti-Communist politics, and to make a decent play for persuadable Puerto Ricans and the like. This machine is peculiar to Florida, however, so I think the gains among Hispanics in Texas and the Southwest are probably owed to second generation and subsequent Hispanics entering the respectable middle class and crediting that ascent to conservative middle class cultural and economic values. The archetypical, patriarchal “HispaniDad” of memes is likely who was swayed rightward by Trump. Altogether, the immigration status quo is disastrous to Republicans and the prospect of any right wing politics in the U.S. with any prospect of electoral success, so the GOP’s current strategy “we lose money on each unit sold but make it up in volume” has got to be jettisoned. You can’t create nearly enough HispaniDads fast enough to cancel the gross numbers of newly arrived third worlders each year deposited into our toxic culture of anti-white identity politics. In any event, winning elections increasingly requires shifting the political center to the left in large part as a consequence of our suicidal immigration policy.

    • Replies: @Luzzatto
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    From a political ideology standpoint I doubt a single Hispanic in those cartel funded caravans is going to be a future Julio Rosas who is the Hispanic version of Andy Ngo. Every single Hispanic in those cartel funded caravans is a future Ana Navarro!

    , @Ron Unz
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)


    I think some of the calculus surrounding the black vote arises from the fact that each of the upper Midwest “Big Ten” Swing States have large cities with significant or majority black populations, whereas the locus of Hispanic populations generally lies either in lost causes like California or secure R States (at least for now) like Texas...So getting a small increase in the share of the black vote in Philadelphia/Pittsburgh/Detroit/Milwaukee/Cleveland is a much more worthwhile squeeze of the electoral lemon than being seen to be chasing the Hispanic vote which is sequestered in States which are already fairly solidly red or blue.
     
    While there's some truth in that, I think sheer Republican stupidity and incompetence, plus donor-driven PC-sentiments, are a much stronger explanation. I've spent over 25 years arguing this issue with Republican candidates and (more importantly) their consultants and strategists, and they've been taking that position the whole time, especially in my own state of California, which has a rather small and unimportant black population.

    For about fifty years, Republicans have been trying to increase their share of the black vote with absolutely ZERO success. Didn't Trump offer blacks a half-trillion(!) dollars in financial reparations in his "Platinum Plan"? Plus letting black criminals out of prison with "criminal justice reform"? And moving heaven-and-earth to get rapper-criminals sprung from jails overseas? He probably would have done just about as well with zero dollars and effort, and perhaps might have picked up another couple points from disgruntled whites, getting himself reelected.

    Forty or fifty years ago, Republicans usually used to get between one-third and one-half of the Hispanic and Asian vote, but by their noisy attacks against immigrants and Hispanics, drove those numbers far down even while that electorate tripled or quadrupled.

    As for your state analysis, it's not quite that simple. If the Republicans lose Texas, they're permanently destroyed as a national party, and TX is very heavily Hispanic. If Trump had done better with Hispanics he might have won heavily/substantially Hispanic Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada, and been reelected. But if he'd done worse with Hispanics, he would lost Florida, and been blown out of the race.

    The irony is that I almost exactly predicted this political trajectory in my big article published a decade ago. A few key paragraphs:

    Now consider the likely political future of a state such as Arizona, ground zero of the most recent national anti-immigrant backlash by nervous whites. A severe recession and rapidly changing demographics had alarmed Arizona voters, many of them elderly retirees from elsewhere, leaving them vulnerable to wild rumors of a huge immigrant crime wave, including beheadings and kidnappings, almost all of which was complete nonsense. As a result, harsh anti-immigrant measures were passed into law, and their mostly Republican supporters won sweeping victories among an electorate that is today roughly 80 percent white.

    But buried near the bottom of a single one of the innumerable New York Times articles analyzing Arizona politics was the seemingly minor and irrelevant fact that almost half of all Arizona schoolchildren are now Hispanic. Meanwhile, according to Census data, over 80 percent of Arizonans aged 65 or older are white. A decade or more from now it seems likely that Arizona whites and Hispanics will enjoy perfectly good relations, and the former will have long since forgotten their current “immigrant scare.” But the latter will still remember it, and the once mighty Arizona Republican Party will be set on the road to oblivion.

    Even in a rock-solid Deep South Republican state like Georgia, Hispanics have now grown into a remarkable 10 percent of the population, up from almost nothing in the early 1990s, and represent an even larger share of younger Georgians. So unless the local Republican Party can somehow greatly enhance its appeal to the 30 percent of Georgians who are black, the current wave of anti-immigrant legislation may prove highly problematical ten or 20 years down the road.
     
    https://www.unz.com/runz/immigration-republicans-and-the-end-of-white-america-singlepage/

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

  63. @Ron Unz
    @PhysicistDave


    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?
     
    That's certainly part of the reason, but you may be over-thinking the situation, and it's ridiculous to mix together blacks and Hispanics. Despite massive Republican propaganda, both pre- and post-election, the former showed virtually no swing to the Trump, while the latter showed a huge swing.

    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.

    We saw many, many months of violent mobs rioting, looting, and burning major parts of 200 American cities. The response of the Democrats was "Let's Defund the Police!!!"

    Since so many whites are so totally brainwashed by the MSM, many of them thought that sounded pretty reasonable, or at least acceptable, and still voted for Biden/Harris. But since Hispanics are more like "normal" people, many of them didn't agree, and they swung in the other direction.

    Putting my cards on the table, I think you could make a pretty good case that Trump was the worst president America has ever had. But I also think you could also make a pretty good case that the other choice was even worse...

    Replies: @Anon, @JMcG, @AndrewR, @Desiderius, @Undocumented Shopper, @Paperback Writer, @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @Corvinus

    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.

    Many of them read Spanish-language newspapers which are relatively sane (knowing some Spanish, I checked out local Spanish newspapers.)

    The tensions between blacks and Hispanics are below the radar as far as MSM are concerned.
    I looked at statistics of shootings of blacks by police and cities of Hialeah and Albuquerque are ranked at the top; both are heavily Hispanic.

  64. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor asked:


    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    There's no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.
     
    It's all fake -- mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left's material and political interests.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @RichardTaylor, @ic1000, @Bardon Kaldian, @Desiderius, @Almost Missouri, @Luzzatto, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnnyWalker123, @James J O'Meara

    There’s no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    First, history is replete with examples of populations being forced to move. Hell, millions of Germans were forced to leave a host of countries AFTER World War II. Imagine how many people could be forced to moved during a conflict.

    Second, we don’t need black people to leave this country. We just need our own country where they’re not allowed. Yeah, yeah, Whites aren’t going to have their own country in what was the United States anytime soon, but we can start to form our own communities and that’s a good start.

    Naturally, CivNats such as yourself find such ethnocentrism quite distasteful and beneath your giant throbbing brain. “Why I know lots of fine Indians, Asians, etc. in my university’s department, blah, blah, blah.” But back in the real world, ethno-nationalism remains the past and future. We’re living through a childish time with childish beliefs, but children must grow up.

    Maybe only 20% of Whites will want to do what I’m working toward. But in a hundred years or so, they’ll be the only Whites left – and will they ever be badass. CivNat genes, on the other hand, will be incorporated with more tribal groups or simple no longer in existence. CivNat Whites are a genetic deadend.

    • Agree: 3g4me
    • Disagree: Corvinus
  65. “Is Shor talking about a 1 or 2% decline or 1 or 2 percentage points?”

    He is referring to a 1-2% decline in vote share, so a 2-4% change at the margin. Similarly an 8-9% change with latinos is a 16-18% change in the margin. Looking at the map that seems right, look at the heavily black zip codes of memphis, a lot of them seem to have gone from 97-2 to 95-4. Black neighborhoods in philly less, so, perhaps because it was a swing state and biden was investing more resources there, looks like that went from 97-2 to 97-3.

  66. • Replies: @Luzzatto
    @JohnnyWalker123

    People who are 65 and over are overwhelmingly White. This is why Whites are getting the Coronavirus vaccine at a higher per capita rate than Blacks. It has nothing to do with Muh White Supremacy, Muh Institutional Racism, and Muh Systemic Racism!

    , @El Dato
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Incessant Moaning by Blacks and their White Helpers is like you are really camping in a cowherd.

    Replies: @JohnnyWalker123

  67. As I have been at pains to say, manifold times, blacks (and hispanics) are not liberal, except on issues of civil rights. This ought to be a tocsin for you people. But you’d rather shoot yourselves in your own foot.

    • Replies: @AceDeuce
    @obwandiyag

    "....blacks (and hispanics) are not liberal, except on issues of civil rights."

    LOL. Funniest thing I've read all year.

    , @joe_mama
    @obwandiyag

    This may be true, but they'll still vote Democrat.

    Replies: @obwandiyag

  68. @Almost Missouri
    @Chris Renner

    Good catch. Steve should put that in the OP.

    Shor's analysis was probably right then and is probably right now. Unfortunately for Shor and for America, the Dems now have stitched together a nationwide ballot fixing system such that they never have to worry about losing a national election again, so they no longer need to pay attention to people like Shor or, you know, actual voters.

    Replies: @Servant of Gla'aki

    the Dems now have stitched together a nationwide ballot fixing system such that they never have to worry about losing a national election again

    You’ve correctly identified the most important feature of the political landscape at this time, but I think it would be more accurate to say that it very much remains to be seen whether the Democrats can replicate what they did in 2020, outside the context of the twin hysterias (pandemic, TDS).

    • Replies: @steinbergfeldwitzcohen
    @Servant of Gla'aki

    We are now in uncharted territory and all bets are off.
    No one knows except the Masters of Disaster, ie. The RottenFilth Clan and select Servants, Satan-Ba'al-Moloch and Ishtar.
    It will be sad to see so many die from the 'Vaccines' but it may wake the living out of their stupour.
    I am truly coming around to the conclusion that this period is unprecedented. Nothing like this has occurred in any history I've read.
    We could have depopulation to the tune of 500 million people within the next 2 years.

    That is an unpreceeented blood sacrifice. Of course, I truly hope that this doesnt happen but it is possible it will.

    , @J.Ross
    @Servant of Gla'aki

    Looking for the "hope" button.

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Servant of Gla'aki


    whether the Democrats can replicate what they did in 2020, outside the context of the twin hysterias (pandemic, TDS).
     
    Have you noticed the Dems are not letting go of either hysteria? With covid, it's "new strain, new strain!!!1!!1!" . And now with Trump suggesting he'll run again in 2024, it'll be four more years of, "but we need to stop Orange Hitler!!!!1!1!1!"

    If those peter out they've got global warming waiting in the wings. They're already suggesting they need to extend lockdown to save the world from global warming. They will never let this stuff go.

    And just in case, they're already hard at work legalizing everything they did in the 2020 election under HR1. The only thing that stands in its way is a gentlemen's agreement in the Senate. Do you think there are 41 gentlemen in the Senate?

    2020-style elections are new normal, not a one-off aberration. Sadly, even the end of American democracy is the least of our worries now.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Servant of Gla'aki

  69. @Achmed E. Newman
    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this, and, therefore, this is boring and pointless stuff. As the nice young lady who just couldn't seem to cheat herself over the top said "At this point, what difference does it make?"

    Shades of Pat Buchanan here... "one of these bright new conservatives should be able to get a position on the Ways and Means Committee, and now that we have a favorable appellate court that can rule on the ... zzzzzz.... zizzer, zazzer, zuzzzzzzz.

    Replies: @Michael S, @Desiderius, @Travis, @Jim Don Bob, @PhysicistDave

    You are probably correct at this point. It may be too late to change the path we are on now. But it is hard to predict the future, few envisioned Trump winning the 2016 presidential election back in 2014. Few even predicted he would run for President. The Biden administration may prove as bad as the Bush regime and result a significant revival of the American first doctrine with a man who can actually achieve some goals on immigration.

    • Replies: @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco
    @Travis

    Yes, few predicted Trump’s victory in 2016 and fewer predicted the Chinese would release a virus which targeted the obese and elderly. Fewer would have predicted the government would shutter all schools and colleges to protect the obese and elderly. The next virus released by China could target a different demographic and be far more deadly than the flu. If CV had a fatality rate of 2% we would have lost over 2 million Americans.

    Replies: @Ron Unz, @AndrewR

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Travis

    I've got one word about your future, Ben, errr, Travis: Demographics

    I don't want to be flippant about it, but even during the 4 years of the Trump Administration, as he DID make a number of good (but unfortunately easily and completely reversible) moves on immigration, the number of leftist and anti-white voters grew as the conservative and pro-white numbers declined. That was due to immigration and age demographics.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Travis

  70. There were really big declines in Vietnamese areas, for example.

    They didn’t come here to vote for Joe Chi Minh.

    Do you have any sense what was behind the large rightward shift among Hispanic voters?

    [A?] One important thing to know about the decline in Hispanic support for Democrats is that it was pretty broad. …

    The unasked but very much heard question in the election was, “Are you overpaid? Do we need to bring in more to undercut you?”

    The Colombian and Venezuelan shifts were huge.

    They’ve had problems with arrogant white socialists in the past.

    There’s a narrative on the left that the Democrats’ growing reliance on college-educated whites is pulling the party to the right… But I think that’s wrong.

    They want to cut Pedro Jr’s wee-wee off. Pedro Sr objects. ¡Sorpresa!

    So Donald Trump is unpopular. And he does pay a penalty for that relative to a generic Republican.

    Such as Presidents McCain and Romney.

    I think the reason why we saw less education-based voting in 2018 is that Trump was a smaller part of the media environment than he had been in 2016 or would be in 2020.

    Trump, or presidential elections in general? Turnout is always lower in these atrociously-named “midterm” elections.

    blue collar Mexican Van Nuys, CA

    How do they pronounce this? The Mexicans, that is?

    Not sure which country this is, but here is evidence the Latin upper-crust may understand blue-collar thought better than our own does:

    [MORE]

    • Troll: RichardTaylor
    • Replies: @Abolish_public_education
    @Reg Cæsar

    .. do we bring in more to undercut you?”

    Cheap immigrant labor (extra supply) can undercut commodity labor prices. In a less crazy world, that phenomenon would work to the advantage of the larger economy (in the form of lower prices in sectors where labor costs had fallen).

    But due to government policies, e.g spending programs (like schools) and monetarism, prices aren’t allowed to fall as much, nor as quickly, as a competitive economy can achieve.

    Low-skilled, private sector workers who would like to save something for a rainy day find it difficult to do so.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Polistra

    , @Lot
    @Reg Cæsar

    English: Van-ize
    Mexican: Vahn-ice

    Other odd dominant English pronunciation of Spanish:

    San Pedro - San Peedro
    Don Juan (Byron) - Juwan
    Coronado - Coranado

  71. NIH Stands Against Structural Racism in Biomedical Research

    https://nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2021/03/01/nih-stands-against-structural-racism-in-biomedical-research/

    “… We cannot underestimate the challenges before us. Identifying and dismantling racist components of a system that has been hundreds of years in the making is no easy task. This is just the beginning of an effort that has a concrete goal of achieving racial equity but has no scheduled end point. …”

    Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D.
    Director, National Institutes of Health

    “Stand against” isn’t the appropriate injunction.

    “Kneel before” is more fitting, … as in kneel before the altar of the new, state-mandated religion. Or else.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Voltarde


    I am proud to join my NIH colleagues suck up to my management today in reaffirming our commitment to fostering a diverse biomedical research workforce and ending structural racism at NIH.....
     
    First of all, anybody who wears a mask in a portrait photo is a submissive virtue-signalling douche. The purpose of such a photo is to show your face. Deliberately obscuring it with your magic science-mask is assinine.

    Secondly, these people should be point-blank asked: "What do you mean by 'structural racism'? Define that. Hey, YOU are part of the structure. How are YOU being racist? Tell us. Since you are admitting to being racist in so far as you are a willing participant in a 'structurally racist' institution, why should you be allowed to keep your job? Shouldn't you be cancelled? Why are you still here, racist!?"
  72. @RichardTaylor
    Nobody, including Steve, ever expects non-Whites to be outraged by anti-White hatred. That's the interesting thing.

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians ... in fact, every group on the planet. But none of those groups speak out on behalf of Whites (or any other group). And everyone just accepts that as normal.

    This is the routine way everyone thinks Whites are different from other humans. It would never occur to anyone to wonder why Asians are silent about some White person being mistreated. And Blacks really get a pass on basic morality.

    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don't consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PhysicistDave, @AndrewR, @Bernie, @Massimo Heitor, @Reg Cæsar, @JohnnyWalker123

    And Blacks really get a pass on basic morality.

    Property usually does. We didn’t spank the cat today because he broke some of our favorite cups.

    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?

    Another Dad has reduced the answer to two words.

  73. @Achmed E. Newman
    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this, and, therefore, this is boring and pointless stuff. As the nice young lady who just couldn't seem to cheat herself over the top said "At this point, what difference does it make?"

    Shades of Pat Buchanan here... "one of these bright new conservatives should be able to get a position on the Ways and Means Committee, and now that we have a favorable appellate court that can rule on the ... zzzzzz.... zizzer, zazzer, zuzzzzzzz.

    Replies: @Michael S, @Desiderius, @Travis, @Jim Don Bob, @PhysicistDave

    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this,…

    If HR 1 becomes law, as it probably will, then the shenanigans fraud we saw last November is just a taste of things to come.

    • Agree: TWS
    • Replies: @Ben tillman
    @Jim Don Bob

    HR 1 is unconstitutional.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @G. Poulin, @Jim Don Bob

  74. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor asked:


    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    There's no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.
     
    It's all fake -- mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left's material and political interests.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @RichardTaylor, @ic1000, @Bardon Kaldian, @Desiderius, @Almost Missouri, @Luzzatto, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnnyWalker123, @James J O'Meara

    Trump doesn’t care about ordinary Blacks or see them as fellow Americans. In general, he has a very dim view of them as a race.

    However, Trump has an extreme obsession with hanging out with celebrities, many of whom are Black. So he’ll make exceptions for famous Blacks, like Kanye West, Asap Rocky, and Herschel Walker.

    Most Americans are cowardly. For whatever reason, this especially applies to liberals. So they can easily be pressured into agreeing with almost anything by the media, celebrities, HR people at Big Corp, and politicians.

    Americans are effete, having been weakened by generations of easy living. They’ve gone soft. So it’s easy to push them around.

    Also, most Americans are very socially isolated from neighbors, relatives, coethnics, etc. So they figure there’s no way to fight back against the system, so they go along to get along.

    In contrast, 100 years ago, most Americans lived in harsh circumstances. So they grew up to be tough and ornery people. Most Americans had strong social ties with others back then too, so they had one another’s back. Perhaps not surprisingly, Americans of that era got in lots of race and labor riots.

    Your typical modern White urbanite is very soft and very socially isolated. So he can be pushed around easily. He’s a cog in a globo-homo machine. No autonomy.

    Those same “liberal” Whites can easily be coaxed into worshipping the US military and never speaking up about wars overseas. When was the last time anyone (conservative or liberal) spoke up about the millions of people who the US murdered in the post-911 “War on Terror.”

    • Agree: El Dato
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @JohnnyWalker123


    When was the last time anyone (conservative or liberal) spoke up about the millions of people who the US murdered in the post-911 “War on Terror.”
     
    Maybe that's because there aren't "millions of people who the US murdered" in the "War on Terror".

    I'm at the front of the line in shutting down the adventurism and "bring the boys home" (the lesbians can stay over there), and deploying them to the southern border. But your "millions murdered" nonsense is still ... nonsense.

    Even in Iraq the US killed maybe 20-30K people. And the war killed 100-200K with most of the ones killed, killed by insurgents. (Whatever joke study you'll trot out is just that--a joke study.) Iraq had a population of 25m-ish in 2003 and has continuously increased to 40m people now.

    Afghanistan has more actual battle deaths--maybe 150k now (half on each side). 50-100k more civilians. Afghanistan's population stagnated and actually declined during parts of the Soviet war, but has increased from maybe 22m in 2001 to 38m today.

    Obama can write up whatever the heck he was doing--stupid--in Syria and Libya. Similar dumb policy, but probably fewer people actually killed by the US. (The Syrian destabilization does seem pretty bad. If the US had stayed out ... how much better???)

    In contrast, in World War II the US, Soviets, British killed off probably 6-8 million Germans. The German population--despite a high birthrate, was millions lower in 1946. Japan lost 2m soldiers and the US killed another 800k Japanese civilians by bombing. On either March 10th--the firebombing raid on Tokyo--or August 6th--Hiroshima--the US probably killed as many people in one day as the US military has killed during the entire "war on terror"--and mostly innocent civilians, not islamic insurgent nutters/combatants.


    But your dubious numbers aside ... sure. Why anyone would think this in the interest of Americans is beyond me. There's a trivial way to deal with the muzzie problem for America--don't let them in!

    Replies: @John Up North

  75. @RichardTaylor
    Nobody, including Steve, ever expects non-Whites to be outraged by anti-White hatred. That's the interesting thing.

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians ... in fact, every group on the planet. But none of those groups speak out on behalf of Whites (or any other group). And everyone just accepts that as normal.

    This is the routine way everyone thinks Whites are different from other humans. It would never occur to anyone to wonder why Asians are silent about some White person being mistreated. And Blacks really get a pass on basic morality.

    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don't consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PhysicistDave, @AndrewR, @Bernie, @Massimo Heitor, @Reg Cæsar, @JohnnyWalker123

    Most immigrants are amoral grifters. Here to take advantage of the country as much as they can.
    They don’t give a damn about America or Whites or fairness or whatever.

    They just want to line their pockets and enrich their families. Everything else in this world is irrelevant.

    That may sound harsh, but it’s true for the most part. Though there are some exceptions.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Your ancestors and their progeny are clear examples of those "amoral grifters".

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

  76. @Travis
    @Achmed E. Newman

    You are probably correct at this point. It may be too late to change the path we are on now. But it is hard to predict the future, few envisioned Trump winning the 2016 presidential election back in 2014. Few even predicted he would run for President. The Biden administration may prove as bad as the Bush regime and result a significant revival of the American first doctrine with a man who can actually achieve some goals on immigration.

    Replies: @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco, @Achmed E. Newman

    Yes, few predicted Trump’s victory in 2016 and fewer predicted the Chinese would release a virus which targeted the obese and elderly. Fewer would have predicted the government would shutter all schools and colleges to protect the obese and elderly. The next virus released by China could target a different demographic and be far more deadly than the flu. If CV had a fatality rate of 2% we would have lost over 2 million Americans.

    • Troll: AndrewR
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco


    Yes, few predicted Trump’s victory in 2016 and fewer predicted the Chinese would release a virus which targeted the obese and elderly...The next virus released by China could target a different demographic and be far more deadly than the flu. If CV had a fatality rate of 2% we would have lost over 2 million Americans.
     
    You're just a total FoxNews 'tard. Anyone who's carefully looked into the matter knows there's strong, perhaps even overwhelming evidence that Covid-19 outbreak was the result of an American biowarfare attack against China (and Iran), presumably by the Deep State Neocons that Trump moronically appointed to run our national security apparatus:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-our-coronavirus-catastrophe-as-biowarfare-blowback/

    If you accept the WSJ analysis of CDC data, we've probably already had something like 800,000 "excess deaths," twice our WWII casualties. So you need to add that to Trump's list of "significant liabilities."
    , @AndrewR
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco

    You should say "the ChiComs" instead of "China" in order to go full cuckservatard

  77. Shor is astute, unfortunately for the good guys.

  78. Don’t think Manchin will allow filibuster to end:
    First ,he really is a moderate
    Second, WV really very Republican-he may be only statewide Dem there
    Thirdly, it seems his Dem status is a cultural or generational thing
    Lastly, and most importantly, it is a super shrewd move on his part
    If filibuster is gone, he is just another Dem
    Now, he may be most powerful man in America

  79. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor asked:


    So, how do you plan to build a working political system with people whom, by your own standards, you don’t consider to be moral agents in the same way Whites are?
     
    There's no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know.

    And you are way too kind to white liberals when you say:

    Whites have spoken out about the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans, Asians … in fact, every group on the planet.
     
    It's all fake -- mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.

    In fact, their policies hurt blacks very badly: if we defund the cops, affluent whites will hire rent-a-cops for their neighborhoods. But innocent black folks, including very young children, will end up dead.

    Trump told the truth when he said he cares more about blacks then the Woke Left. He thinks of them as people, as fellow Americans. The Left thinks of them as resources, basically as cannon fodder, to be used to advance the Left's material and political interests.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @RichardTaylor, @ic1000, @Bardon Kaldian, @Desiderius, @Almost Missouri, @Luzzatto, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @JohnnyWalker123, @James J O'Meara

    “It’s all fake — mere virtue signalling. They do not give a damn about blacks, Amerindians, or any other group except for themselves.”

    And animals. Don’t forget the animals.

    “That’s the thing you gotta remember about WASPs – they love animals, they can’t stand people.” — Gordon Gekko, Wall Street

    • LOL: PhysicistDave
  80. Meanwhile: Is it over? Democratism triumphs triumphantly.

    ‘For The People Act’ confirms it: Our Democracy has officially replaced the American Republic

    If there were any doubts that a civil war had in fact been waged in the US, and that the side that “fortified” the 2020 election and redefined the republic as “Our Democracy” triumphed, HR1 should dispel the last vestiges of them.

    The bill, also named “For The People Act” of 2021, passed in the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives in a 220-210 vote on Wednesday. Only one Democrat was opposed.

    The 800-page bill basically codifies all the problematic practices of the 2020 election into law. There’s an expansion of mail-in ballots and extended deadlines to count them, but also automatic voter registration, a waiver for voter IDs, and nationwide ballot-harvesting, California-style. It also shifts the authority to draw congressional districts from states, criminalizes broadly defined “interference” in elections, and so much more.

    Whatever one may think of the Heritage Foundation, its analysis of the bill is factually accurate. Don’t take my word for it, though, read it and compare it to the actual text.


    Bonus round: Capitol of Panem stays greenzoned for a indefinitely more.

    US Capitol Police call for National Guard to be deployed for another TWO MONTHS, citing threats – media

    While “none of [Congress] like looking at the fencing, the gates, the uniformed presence around the Capitol,” according to Slotkin, the Capitol Police seem to have embraced the prison-camp look the building has taken on. The police urged congressional leaders to leave the razor-wire fencing surrounding the building in place for “several more months” – possibly until September due to “online chatter” by supposed extremists. Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security called for a heightened threat of domestic terrorism through April, anticipating “ideologically-motivated violent extremists” upset over Biden’s presidency might“continue to mobilize to incite or commit violence.”

    • Thanks: Nicholas Stix
    • Replies: @danand
    @El Dato

    “US Capitol Police call for National Guard to be deployed for another TWO MONTHS...”

    El Dato, my thought is they want them around for that moment when Xiden turns over the keys to Harris. With any luck those Guardsmen will make it home for Easter.

    , @James J O'Meara
    @El Dato

    "The 800-page bill basically codifies all the problematic practices of the 2020 election into law."

    Yeah, that's their answer to everything. Illegal immigration a problem? Make it legal! Election fraud a problem? Make it legal! Illegal drug use out of control? Make it legal! Cops are a killjoy? Defund the police (make everything legal!). Dilemma over, problem solved, everyone happy!

  81. @Jim Don Bob
    @Achmed E. Newman


    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this,...
     
    If HR 1 becomes law, as it probably will, then the shenanigans fraud we saw last November is just a taste of things to come.

    Replies: @Ben tillman

    HR 1 is unconstitutional.

    • LOL: El Dato
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Ben tillman

    So is most Federal law since 1913, but what of it?

    Replies: @ben tillman

    , @G. Poulin
    @Ben tillman

    Of course it is. But since we don't actually have the rule of law, what difference does it make?

    , @Jim Don Bob
    @Ben tillman


    HR 1 is unconstitutional.
     
    I am sure SCOTUS is busy even now thinking of ways not to have to deal with it. Standing, or something.

    Replies: @anon

  82. @Bugg
    Getting merely trounced rather annihilated among Latinos still hurts the GOP. While the Trump campaign touted how they did better with Latinos, they aren't winning anywhere close to a majority of Latinos. As the Latino share of electorate grows due to immigration, the GOP will continue to fall behind. Simply any Republican nominee will still get his ass kicked if at slightly better rates. If you get say, 9% of Latinos in a 330+ million 2020 electorate (population rather than total votes) where they represent , getting 10% of Latinos as they grow as percentage of a 345+ million electorate in 2024 is still numerically falling behind. The Roves and Luntzes apparently wish to celebrate getting kicked in the ass rather than the balls.

    Replies: @S. Anonyia

    They get way higher than 9-10 percent among Latinos, though. It ranges between 30-43, depending on the candidate. 9-10 percent is what Republicans get among blacks.

  83. @anonymous
    @Bardon Kaldian

    California and Texas are majority non-white. The big cities are grubby but the states have top 5 and top 15 economies respectively. Far better than Brazil. America as a whole could take on another 100 million non-whites and still be in decent enough shape to be 2-3 rungs above Brazil.

    Replies: @James J O'Meara

    “America as a whole could take on another 100 million non-whites and still be in decent enough shape to be 2-3 rungs above Brazil.”

    So, this is the bar now?

    • Replies: @anonymous
    @James J O'Meara

    2 rungs above Brazil is Portugal. 3 rungs is Italy. That's not such a bad future. People are expecting a collapse in 2050. It's not so bad in comparison.

    Replies: @James J O'Meara

  84. @Michael S
    @Achmed E. Newman

    It boggles the mind that anyone outside of mainline conservatism would even be able to pretend, with a straight face, that elections still matter.

    2020 was the last real election. Or, depending upon your point of view, 2016 was. From now on, if "Republicans" "win", it is because they put forward an inoffensive milksop who won't try to rock the boat. If Republicans voters try to push a reformer, even an incredibly mild reformer who pines for the social norms of the stuffy old 2000s rather than the horrible everything-ist 50s or god forbid the dark ages of the 20s, he will simply be "managed out", and Democrats and Republicans and supposedly non-partisan judges will all cooperate to make it happen.

    It simply cannot be denied anymore. Not after we've actually seen them do it, out in the open, deniability be damned. The socialist wing of the Democrats may still talk about this nonsense because they themselves have a stunted view of government, but there is nothing they have to say that is worth listening to.

    Replies: @James J O'Meara

    “2020 was the last real election. Or, depending upon your point of view, 2016 was”

    1960 was. Prove me wrong, Pollyanna.

  85. @PhysicistDave
    David Shor said:

    In the summer, following the emergence of “defund the police” as a nationally salient issue, support for Biden among Hispanic voters declined....

    I don’t think I can answer that comprehensively. But if you look at the concrete questions, white liberals are to the left of Hispanic Democrats, but also of Black Democrats, on defunding the police and those ideological questions about the source of racial inequity.
     
    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?

    Funny how a guy like Dave Shor, who is obviously quite bright, cannot see the obvious. I think the technical term is that he is "denying agency" to non-whites.

    Replies: @IHTG, @Ron Unz, @Paperback Writer

    Shor can see the obvious but if he says the obvious he’ll be blacklisted Blacklisted.

  86. @Ron Unz
    @PhysicistDave


    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?
     
    That's certainly part of the reason, but you may be over-thinking the situation, and it's ridiculous to mix together blacks and Hispanics. Despite massive Republican propaganda, both pre- and post-election, the former showed virtually no swing to the Trump, while the latter showed a huge swing.

    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.

    We saw many, many months of violent mobs rioting, looting, and burning major parts of 200 American cities. The response of the Democrats was "Let's Defund the Police!!!"

    Since so many whites are so totally brainwashed by the MSM, many of them thought that sounded pretty reasonable, or at least acceptable, and still voted for Biden/Harris. But since Hispanics are more like "normal" people, many of them didn't agree, and they swung in the other direction.

    Putting my cards on the table, I think you could make a pretty good case that Trump was the worst president America has ever had. But I also think you could also make a pretty good case that the other choice was even worse...

    Replies: @Anon, @JMcG, @AndrewR, @Desiderius, @Undocumented Shopper, @Paperback Writer, @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @Corvinus

    Maybe you’re overthinking it. When your own neighborhood is being burned down by BLM rioters, you don’t like them. When your job depends on kissing woke ass, you’ll kiss woke ass.

  87. @Gary in Gramercy
    @Harry Baldwin

    I agree entirely with your second excellent paragraph. I note only that "literally the most popular figure in [the Democratic] party whose last name is not Obama" was Bernie Sanders. So, of course, the DNC and other establishment Democrats did all they could to deny him the nomination, by means fair and (mostly) foul.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin

    And the feckless wimp bent over and took it again, just as he did in 2016, while saying, “Please, sir (or madam as the case may be), may I have another?”

    If Sanders had been a Bolshevik in 1917, I don’t think Lenin would have regarded him as worthy of anything beyond fetching coffee or shining shoes.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Harry Baldwin

    There was a guy the early Bolsheviks thought of like that. He wasn't as highly educated or as intellectually fluid in conversation as any of them so they stuck him in the accountant's chair and had him do the figures. That would be Stalin.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin

  88. @Brian Reilly
    The Presidential election was not important, except in terms of entertaining obfuscation. The same people impelling policy and essential enforcement terms while Trump sat in the chair are calling the shots now that Mr. Biden has the privilege. Mr. Shor is no more than one of those parasitical animals (tick bird?) that lives exclusively in the exhaust of the powerful animals, which he surely is not.

    IT should be clear to everyone that voting for the national office and legislature has not mattered in some time. We get the same thing no matter what.

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind

    So, the Keystone Pipeline is chopped liver?

  89. @Travis
    @Achmed E. Newman

    You are probably correct at this point. It may be too late to change the path we are on now. But it is hard to predict the future, few envisioned Trump winning the 2016 presidential election back in 2014. Few even predicted he would run for President. The Biden administration may prove as bad as the Bush regime and result a significant revival of the American first doctrine with a man who can actually achieve some goals on immigration.

    Replies: @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco, @Achmed E. Newman

    I’ve got one word about your future, Ben, errr, Travis: Demographics

    I don’t want to be flippant about it, but even during the 4 years of the Trump Administration, as he DID make a number of good (but unfortunately easily and completely reversible) moves on immigration, the number of leftist and anti-white voters grew as the conservative and pro-white numbers declined. That was due to immigration and age demographics.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Achmed E. Newman

    This. Realizing there is a problem and failing to truly solve it means you are exacerbating it.

    , @Travis
    @Achmed E. Newman

    True, the demographics demonstrate that the future of America will have very few whites. Due to our low fertility and massive immigration of non-whites.

    1945-1970 - 82 million whites born
    1970-1995- 60 million whites born
    1995-2020- 51 million whites born


    US population under the age of 40
    census- White –Black - other non-whites
    -1990 – 122 M - 13 M - 18 M
    -2020 – 90 M – 25 M - 52 M

     

    The white population < the age of 40 has fallen over 25% in 30 years. It is difficult to see how whites will find a political solution as we quickly become a minority in America. The white population of the US is declining. There are less whites living in America in 2020 than 2010. This is the first decade in which the white population has declined, but it appears this is the new trend. Never again will the white population of America reach 195 million. By 2030 the number of whites will be below 190 million as the US population grows to 345 million. Every year since 2015 more whites have died than were born. This trend is accelerating.
  90. @ic1000
    @PhysicistDave

    Shor concludes,


    ...when I look at the 2020 election, I see that ...we only narrowly won the Electoral College. If Biden had done 0.3% worse, then Donald Trump would have won reelection with just 48% of the two-party vote... we can add states, we can ban partisan redistricting, and we can elevate issues that appeal to both college-educated liberals and a lot of working-class “conservatives.” If we don’t, things could get very bleak, very fast.
     
    Team Establishment isn't interested in Shor's ideas, they have a better plan. Here's Vox's infomercial-journalism report on HR1, just passed by the House. The bill's provisions include:

    * Increase participation by low-information and low-interest citizens via opt-out registration (you have to ask to not be registered to vote).

    * Facilitate fraud by mandating the vote-by-mail option.

    * Make it difficult or impossible for state officials to remove deceased and other disqualified people from voter rolls (assuming they want to do so).

    * Mandatory enfranchisement of non-imprisoned felons and ex-felons.

    So things are far from bleak. As Dr. Horrible would say, It's a brand new day.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Jack D, @AnotherDad

    As the crisis has gathered over the last decade or so, i’ve found myself fantasizing–i.e. kicking around some ideas–to do the inverse–creating a republican voting system for sustaining a nation.

    My thoughts:

    * voting only for productive net taxpaying families
    Those on the dole don’t vote.

    * voting as a family block by the head of household
    I.e. wives don’t vote against husbands. Couples can sit down and hash it out … then cast a household vote that counts husband, wife, kids. Note, specifically including kids–ex. i’d be casting five votes until my kids have their own families/votes.

    * singles don’t vote;
    Perhaps some criteria– for single men to prove themselves “vote worthy”; sufficient age and economic productivity, service in combat, etc. But basically for voting “take a wife” and knock her up.

    * government employees don’t vote
    Get independent employment if you want to vote.

    * criminals don’t vote
    You violate the society’s critical norms–you’re out of having a say. There would be far fewer criminals in my nation, because most would be executed or expelled. But any readmitted–no vote.

    * immigrants and un-integrated descendants only of immigrants don’t vote
    Again, there wouldn’t be many immigrants in my society. Immigration is unnatural. But there might be a few excellent pickups–i know several top quality folks myself. But the idea would be immigrants should marry into the nation’s population. Then they vote or their kids vote. (I’d sneak in for America due to my 1/4 founding stock background.) No power for separate minority “communities”. Part of the nation or not.

    * weirdos, perverts, LGBQWERTY, other mentally ill–don’t vote

    Basically voting is for normal productive heterosexual married-with-children people who sustain the nation.

    The basic thrust of this–republicanism–is what the founders had in mind, when the voting requirement was property holder. Those more footloose, unsettled, disorganized, could not. But obviously this is wild dreaming on my part. We’ve moved far, far away from this and are heading further away every moment. That said …

    I think a system something like this is the evolutionary optimum for governing a nation in a sustainable manner–preserving the nation/civilization. So in the long run someone should end up with a system like this … and they’ll be able to sustain their civilization and win. Akin to eugenics–someone is eventually going to do it, and they will win.

    Yep, dreaming. But the minoritarians are spouting their ludicrous rainbow hued utopian dreams, so i’m going to offer my much more grounded republican utopian dreams.

    • Thanks: El Dato
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @AnotherDad

    AnotherDad's first speech after his revolution:


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

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy

    , @J.Ross
    @AnotherDad

    Of you have voting you'll eventually have some shmo seek to expand voting to give himself an advantage. The real answer is the crypteia.

    , @Corvinus
    @AnotherDad

    Exactly, you're dreaming. And so much precious digital ink spilled.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

  91. @JMcG
    @Ron Unz

    I wonder how much of the disconnect over Hispanics is due to exposure to east coast Puerto Ricans as opposed to west coast Mexicans. In my experience, they are chalk and cheese. I can be sold on Mexicans, but not on Puerto Ricans.

    Replies: @Luzzatto

    Mexicans are a lost cause. California has the largest Mexican population in the country and California is the Wokest out of all the 50 states. California invented Cancel Culture!

    • Agree: Alden
  92. @JohnnyWalker123
    https://twitter.com/AlexanderSpinn/status/1367496070113148932

    Replies: @Luzzatto, @El Dato

    People who are 65 and over are overwhelmingly White. This is why Whites are getting the Coronavirus vaccine at a higher per capita rate than Blacks. It has nothing to do with Muh White Supremacy, Muh Institutional Racism, and Muh Systemic Racism!

  93. Here’s a crackpot theory: maybe it was the 99.9999999% peaceful protests, rather than any love for Trump’s personality, that drove his relative overperformance among non-Whites.

  94. @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Ron Unz


    Either way, the decline of black support for the Democratic ticket was pretty negligible. But losing nearly 10 points of Hispanic support in one election is a very big deal, especially since Trump directed nearly all of his effort to winning black votes and almost no effort to winning Hispanic ones.
     
    I think some of the calculus surrounding the black vote arises from the fact that each of the upper Midwest "Big Ten" Swing States have large cities with significant or majority black populations, whereas the locus of Hispanic populations generally lies either in lost causes like California or secure R States (at least for now) like Texas - with Florida being the large, electoral vote rich exception. The Democrats have historically relied upon lopsided vote premiums to take statewide races in these States which would otherwise be solidly Republican. So getting a small increase in the share of the black vote in Philadelphia/Pittsburgh/Detroit/Milwaukee/Cleveland is a much more worthwhile squeeze of the electoral lemon than being seen to be chasing the Hispanic vote which is sequestered in States which are already fairly solidly red or blue. Additionally, since blacks vote at between 90-95% for Democrats, each vote won from the Democrats has a greater impact on marginal races than the still lopsided (but much less so) Hispanic vote.

    That said, we've seen the Hispanicization of the U.S. move Colorado and Nevada into fairly solid blue States, and make Arizona into a swing state. Texas, as they say, is the new prize.

    My surmise is that the dynamic in Florida is an outlier, in that Republicans are able to leverage an existing Cuban dominated political machine in South Florida to recruit Venezuelan exiles due to their Anti-Communist politics, and to make a decent play for persuadable Puerto Ricans and the like. This machine is peculiar to Florida, however, so I think the gains among Hispanics in Texas and the Southwest are probably owed to second generation and subsequent Hispanics entering the respectable middle class and crediting that ascent to conservative middle class cultural and economic values. The archetypical, patriarchal "HispaniDad" of memes is likely who was swayed rightward by Trump. Altogether, the immigration status quo is disastrous to Republicans and the prospect of any right wing politics in the U.S. with any prospect of electoral success, so the GOP's current strategy "we lose money on each unit sold but make it up in volume" has got to be jettisoned. You can't create nearly enough HispaniDads fast enough to cancel the gross numbers of newly arrived third worlders each year deposited into our toxic culture of anti-white identity politics. In any event, winning elections increasingly requires shifting the political center to the left in large part as a consequence of our suicidal immigration policy.

    Replies: @Luzzatto, @Ron Unz

    From a political ideology standpoint I doubt a single Hispanic in those cartel funded caravans is going to be a future Julio Rosas who is the Hispanic version of Andy Ngo. Every single Hispanic in those cartel funded caravans is a future Ana Navarro!

  95. More news about Althea Bernstein:

  96. @JohnnyWalker123
    @PhysicistDave

    Trump doesn't care about ordinary Blacks or see them as fellow Americans. In general, he has a very dim view of them as a race.

    However, Trump has an extreme obsession with hanging out with celebrities, many of whom are Black. So he'll make exceptions for famous Blacks, like Kanye West, Asap Rocky, and Herschel Walker.

    Most Americans are cowardly. For whatever reason, this especially applies to liberals. So they can easily be pressured into agreeing with almost anything by the media, celebrities, HR people at Big Corp, and politicians.

    Americans are effete, having been weakened by generations of easy living. They've gone soft. So it's easy to push them around.

    Also, most Americans are very socially isolated from neighbors, relatives, coethnics, etc. So they figure there's no way to fight back against the system, so they go along to get along.

    In contrast, 100 years ago, most Americans lived in harsh circumstances. So they grew up to be tough and ornery people. Most Americans had strong social ties with others back then too, so they had one another's back. Perhaps not surprisingly, Americans of that era got in lots of race and labor riots.

    Your typical modern White urbanite is very soft and very socially isolated. So he can be pushed around easily. He's a cog in a globo-homo machine. No autonomy.

    Those same "liberal" Whites can easily be coaxed into worshipping the US military and never speaking up about wars overseas. When was the last time anyone (conservative or liberal) spoke up about the millions of people who the US murdered in the post-911 "War on Terror."

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    When was the last time anyone (conservative or liberal) spoke up about the millions of people who the US murdered in the post-911 “War on Terror.”

    Maybe that’s because there aren’t “millions of people who the US murdered” in the “War on Terror”.

    I’m at the front of the line in shutting down the adventurism and “bring the boys home” (the lesbians can stay over there), and deploying them to the southern border. But your “millions murdered” nonsense is still … nonsense.

    Even in Iraq the US killed maybe 20-30K people. And the war killed 100-200K with most of the ones killed, killed by insurgents. (Whatever joke study you’ll trot out is just that–a joke study.) Iraq had a population of 25m-ish in 2003 and has continuously increased to 40m people now.

    Afghanistan has more actual battle deaths–maybe 150k now (half on each side). 50-100k more civilians. Afghanistan’s population stagnated and actually declined during parts of the Soviet war, but has increased from maybe 22m in 2001 to 38m today.

    Obama can write up whatever the heck he was doing–stupid–in Syria and Libya. Similar dumb policy, but probably fewer people actually killed by the US. (The Syrian destabilization does seem pretty bad. If the US had stayed out … how much better???)

    In contrast, in World War II the US, Soviets, British killed off probably 6-8 million Germans. The German population–despite a high birthrate, was millions lower in 1946. Japan lost 2m soldiers and the US killed another 800k Japanese civilians by bombing. On either March 10th–the firebombing raid on Tokyo–or August 6th–Hiroshima–the US probably killed as many people in one day as the US military has killed during the entire “war on terror”–and mostly innocent civilians, not islamic insurgent nutters/combatants.

    But your dubious numbers aside … sure. Why anyone would think this in the interest of Americans is beyond me. There’s a trivial way to deal with the muzzie problem for America–don’t let them in!

    • Agree: Bugg, Redneck farmer
    • Replies: @John Up North
    @AnotherDad

    During WW2 when the RAF and the US Army Air Force bombed a large German city, the death toll of women and children in that bombed city would often times far exceed the battle deaths of the servicemen from that same city.

  97. @AnotherDad
    @ic1000

    As the crisis has gathered over the last decade or so, i've found myself fantasizing--i.e. kicking around some ideas--to do the inverse--creating a republican voting system for sustaining a nation.

    My thoughts:

    * voting only for productive net taxpaying families
    Those on the dole don't vote.

    * voting as a family block by the head of household
    I.e. wives don't vote against husbands. Couples can sit down and hash it out ... then cast a household vote that counts husband, wife, kids. Note, specifically including kids--ex. i'd be casting five votes until my kids have their own families/votes.

    * singles don't vote;
    Perhaps some criteria-- for single men to prove themselves "vote worthy"; sufficient age and economic productivity, service in combat, etc. But basically for voting "take a wife" and knock her up.

    * government employees don't vote
    Get independent employment if you want to vote.

    * criminals don't vote
    You violate the society's critical norms--you're out of having a say. There would be far fewer criminals in my nation, because most would be executed or expelled. But any readmitted--no vote.

    * immigrants and un-integrated descendants only of immigrants don't vote
    Again, there wouldn't be many immigrants in my society. Immigration is unnatural. But there might be a few excellent pickups--i know several top quality folks myself. But the idea would be immigrants should marry into the nation's population. Then they vote or their kids vote. (I'd sneak in for America due to my 1/4 founding stock background.) No power for separate minority "communities". Part of the nation or not.

    * weirdos, perverts, LGBQWERTY, other mentally ill--don't vote

    Basically voting is for normal productive heterosexual married-with-children people who sustain the nation.

    The basic thrust of this--republicanism--is what the founders had in mind, when the voting requirement was property holder. Those more footloose, unsettled, disorganized, could not. But obviously this is wild dreaming on my part. We've moved far, far away from this and are heading further away every moment. That said ...

    I think a system something like this is the evolutionary optimum for governing a nation in a sustainable manner--preserving the nation/civilization. So in the long run someone should end up with a system like this ... and they'll be able to sustain their civilization and win. Akin to eugenics--someone is eventually going to do it, and they will win.

    Yep, dreaming. But the minoritarians are spouting their ludicrous rainbow hued utopian dreams, so i'm going to offer my much more grounded republican utopian dreams.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @Corvinus

    AnotherDad’s first speech after his revolution:

    • Replies: @Gary in Gramercy
    @Buzz Mohawk

    "All elections have been suspended until such time as the Revolutionary Council shall have extirpated all minoritarian tendencies among the populace..."

  98. @Voltarde
    NIH Stands Against Structural Racism in Biomedical Research

    https://nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2021/03/01/nih-stands-against-structural-racism-in-biomedical-research/

    "... We cannot underestimate the challenges before us. Identifying and dismantling racist components of a system that has been hundreds of years in the making is no easy task. This is just the beginning of an effort that has a concrete goal of achieving racial equity but has no scheduled end point. ..."

    Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D.
    Director, National Institutes of Health
     
    "Stand against" isn't the appropriate injunction.

    "Kneel before" is more fitting, ... as in kneel before the altar of the new, state-mandated religion. Or else.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    I am proud to join my NIH colleagues suck up to my management today in reaffirming our commitment to fostering a diverse biomedical research workforce and ending structural racism at NIH…..

    First of all, anybody who wears a mask in a portrait photo is a submissive virtue-signalling douche. The purpose of such a photo is to show your face. Deliberately obscuring it with your magic science-mask is assinine.

    Secondly, these people should be point-blank asked: “What do you mean by ‘structural racism’? Define that. Hey, YOU are part of the structure. How are YOU being racist? Tell us. Since you are admitting to being racist in so far as you are a willing participant in a ‘structurally racist’ institution, why should you be allowed to keep your job? Shouldn’t you be cancelled? Why are you still here, racist!?”

  99. anonymous[156] • Disclaimer says:

    Shor is trying to trick American voters into pandering to Hispanics, rather than focusing on their best interests and demanding candidates and representatives advance those interests.

  100. @Ron Unz
    @PhysicistDave


    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?
     
    That's certainly part of the reason, but you may be over-thinking the situation, and it's ridiculous to mix together blacks and Hispanics. Despite massive Republican propaganda, both pre- and post-election, the former showed virtually no swing to the Trump, while the latter showed a huge swing.

    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.

    We saw many, many months of violent mobs rioting, looting, and burning major parts of 200 American cities. The response of the Democrats was "Let's Defund the Police!!!"

    Since so many whites are so totally brainwashed by the MSM, many of them thought that sounded pretty reasonable, or at least acceptable, and still voted for Biden/Harris. But since Hispanics are more like "normal" people, many of them didn't agree, and they swung in the other direction.

    Putting my cards on the table, I think you could make a pretty good case that Trump was the worst president America has ever had. But I also think you could also make a pretty good case that the other choice was even worse...

    Replies: @Anon, @JMcG, @AndrewR, @Desiderius, @Undocumented Shopper, @Paperback Writer, @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @Corvinus

    Claiming that Trump is the worst Prez in history is complete nonsense. There is a list.

    Wilson snuck in a massive betrayal to the American people: the IRS, the Income Tax and the Fed. He created the Infrastructure of Tyranny and Perpetual War that helped destroy a once proud and promising nation.
    FDR told Americans he wanted no war while plotting to give it to his Jewish ‘Advisors’. His betrayal of the American people is beyond compare. His time in office destroyed the fragment left of the Republic and ushered in Imperial America-the Jewish Attack Dog.
    These two Vermidents are currently in Hell laughing with abandon at your naivete while Lincoln chuckles and LBJ smirks. Eisenhower is still asking himself how he ever came to agree to starve 1 million German POW’s AFTER the War had ended.

    When we consider the blood Trump refused to spill in the Middle East, EVEN I can give him credit.
    You sir, have lost any sense of proportion if you cannot see my point and retract your absurd claim.
    Fact: I dislike the man annd consider him a Shabbos.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    @steinbergfeldwitzcohen


    Claiming that Trump is the worst Prez in history is complete nonsense. There is a list.
     
    Well, you're certainly listing some other contenders. But here's another comment of mine to consider:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/shor-us-white-democrats-could-easily-alienate-nonwhite-democrats-with-our-crazy-level-of-racial-resentment-on-their-behalf/#comment-4506122

    Anyway, I've never understood endless denunciations of Wilson for the Federal Reserve. Doesn't just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax? If everyone has a central bank and an income tax, isn't it ridiculous that if not for Wilson, we wouldn't? Anyway, wasn't the Income Tax ratified before Wilson was inaugurated?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Reg Cæsar, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @anon

  101. @AnotherDad
    @ic1000

    As the crisis has gathered over the last decade or so, i've found myself fantasizing--i.e. kicking around some ideas--to do the inverse--creating a republican voting system for sustaining a nation.

    My thoughts:

    * voting only for productive net taxpaying families
    Those on the dole don't vote.

    * voting as a family block by the head of household
    I.e. wives don't vote against husbands. Couples can sit down and hash it out ... then cast a household vote that counts husband, wife, kids. Note, specifically including kids--ex. i'd be casting five votes until my kids have their own families/votes.

    * singles don't vote;
    Perhaps some criteria-- for single men to prove themselves "vote worthy"; sufficient age and economic productivity, service in combat, etc. But basically for voting "take a wife" and knock her up.

    * government employees don't vote
    Get independent employment if you want to vote.

    * criminals don't vote
    You violate the society's critical norms--you're out of having a say. There would be far fewer criminals in my nation, because most would be executed or expelled. But any readmitted--no vote.

    * immigrants and un-integrated descendants only of immigrants don't vote
    Again, there wouldn't be many immigrants in my society. Immigration is unnatural. But there might be a few excellent pickups--i know several top quality folks myself. But the idea would be immigrants should marry into the nation's population. Then they vote or their kids vote. (I'd sneak in for America due to my 1/4 founding stock background.) No power for separate minority "communities". Part of the nation or not.

    * weirdos, perverts, LGBQWERTY, other mentally ill--don't vote

    Basically voting is for normal productive heterosexual married-with-children people who sustain the nation.

    The basic thrust of this--republicanism--is what the founders had in mind, when the voting requirement was property holder. Those more footloose, unsettled, disorganized, could not. But obviously this is wild dreaming on my part. We've moved far, far away from this and are heading further away every moment. That said ...

    I think a system something like this is the evolutionary optimum for governing a nation in a sustainable manner--preserving the nation/civilization. So in the long run someone should end up with a system like this ... and they'll be able to sustain their civilization and win. Akin to eugenics--someone is eventually going to do it, and they will win.

    Yep, dreaming. But the minoritarians are spouting their ludicrous rainbow hued utopian dreams, so i'm going to offer my much more grounded republican utopian dreams.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @Corvinus

    Of you have voting you’ll eventually have some shmo seek to expand voting to give himself an advantage. The real answer is the crypteia.

  102. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Travis

    I've got one word about your future, Ben, errr, Travis: Demographics

    I don't want to be flippant about it, but even during the 4 years of the Trump Administration, as he DID make a number of good (but unfortunately easily and completely reversible) moves on immigration, the number of leftist and anti-white voters grew as the conservative and pro-white numbers declined. That was due to immigration and age demographics.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Travis

    This. Realizing there is a problem and failing to truly solve it means you are exacerbating it.

  103. @Harry Baldwin
    @Gary in Gramercy

    And the feckless wimp bent over and took it again, just as he did in 2016, while saying, "Please, sir (or madam as the case may be), may I have another?"

    If Sanders had been a Bolshevik in 1917, I don't think Lenin would have regarded him as worthy of anything beyond fetching coffee or shining shoes.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    There was a guy the early Bolsheviks thought of like that. He wasn’t as highly educated or as intellectually fluid in conversation as any of them so they stuck him in the accountant’s chair and had him do the figures. That would be Stalin.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @J.Ross

    Felix Dzerzhinsky responds, "Sir, I served with Joe Stalin. I knew Joe Stalin. Joe Stalin was a friend of mine. Senator Sanders, you're no Joe Stalin."

  104. @Reg Cæsar

    There were really big declines in Vietnamese areas, for example.
     
    They didn't come here to vote for Joe Chi Minh.

    Do you have any sense what was behind the large rightward shift among Hispanic voters?

    [A?] One important thing to know about the decline in Hispanic support for Democrats is that it was pretty broad. …

     

    The unasked but very much heard question in the election was, "Are you overpaid? Do we need to bring in more to undercut you?"

    The Colombian and Venezuelan shifts were huge.
     
    They've had problems with arrogant white socialists in the past.

    There’s a narrative on the left that the Democrats’ growing reliance on college-educated whites is pulling the party to the right... But I think that’s wrong.
     
    They want to cut Pedro Jr's wee-wee off. Pedro Sr objects. ¡Sorpresa!

    So Donald Trump is unpopular. And he does pay a penalty for that relative to a generic Republican.

     

    Such as Presidents McCain and Romney.

    I think the reason why we saw less education-based voting in 2018 is that Trump was a smaller part of the media environment than he had been in 2016 or would be in 2020.

     

    Trump, or presidential elections in general? Turnout is always lower in these atrociously-named "midterm" elections.

    blue collar Mexican Van Nuys, CA
     
    How do they pronounce this? The Mexicans, that is?

    Not sure which country this is, but here is evidence the Latin upper-crust may understand blue-collar thought better than our own does:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QnPNleGIgE&list=RDCrpdQngwk2g&index=4

    Replies: @Abolish_public_education, @Lot

    .. do we bring in more to undercut you?”

    Cheap immigrant labor (extra supply) can undercut commodity labor prices. In a less crazy world, that phenomenon would work to the advantage of the larger economy (in the form of lower prices in sectors where labor costs had fallen).

    But due to government policies, e.g spending programs (like schools) and monetarism, prices aren’t allowed to fall as much, nor as quickly, as a competitive economy can achieve.

    Low-skilled, private sector workers who would like to save something for a rainy day find it difficult to do so.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Abolish_public_education


    Cheap immigrant labor (extra supply) can undercut commodity labor prices.
     
    Or commodities, period. Fifty years ago, skeletons for medical schools had been getting pricy, and were slowly being replaced by plastic models.

    Until real skeletons started coming in from India.
    , @Polistra
    @Abolish_public_education


    In a less crazy world, that phenomenon would work to the advantage of the larger economy (in the form of lower prices in sectors where labor costs had fallen).
     
    That's actually a useful insight. In a genuinely free market, various prices would be falling often--sometimes precipitously. Doesn't seem to happen in ours, does it.
  105. @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Almost Missouri


    the Dems now have stitched together a nationwide ballot fixing system such that they never have to worry about losing a national election again
     
    You've correctly identified the most important feature of the political landscape at this time, but I think it would be more accurate to say that it very much remains to be seen whether the Democrats can replicate what they did in 2020, outside the context of the twin hysterias (pandemic, TDS).

    Replies: @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @J.Ross, @Almost Missouri

    We are now in uncharted territory and all bets are off.
    No one knows except the Masters of Disaster, ie. The RottenFilth Clan and select Servants, Satan-Ba’al-Moloch and Ishtar.
    It will be sad to see so many die from the ‘Vaccines’ but it may wake the living out of their stupour.
    I am truly coming around to the conclusion that this period is unprecedented. Nothing like this has occurred in any history I’ve read.
    We could have depopulation to the tune of 500 million people within the next 2 years.

    That is an unpreceeented blood sacrifice. Of course, I truly hope that this doesnt happen but it is possible it will.

  106. @obwandiyag
    As I have been at pains to say, manifold times, blacks (and hispanics) are not liberal, except on issues of civil rights. This ought to be a tocsin for you people. But you'd rather shoot yourselves in your own foot.

    Replies: @AceDeuce, @joe_mama

    “….blacks (and hispanics) are not liberal, except on issues of civil rights.”

    LOL. Funniest thing I’ve read all year.

  107. Anon[254] • Disclaimer says:
    @Almost Missouri
    @PhysicistDave


    It’s all fake — mere virtue signalling.
     
    I mostly agree, and yet ...

    I may have mentioned that my extended family and their friends are mostly liberals of various stripes, which has allowed me to observe these pathologies at close range over long periods of time. With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as "just virtue signalling again, zzzzz", but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers. The only thing they do in their limited spare time is watch Black movies. They seem to believe earnestly in Hidden Figures, Henrietta Lacks as a holy icon, BLM nonsense, etc. They organize "anti-racism" (i.e. anti-white) conferences. They donate religiously to the SPLC. They're like a parody out of the iSteve comments section. I could probably write a couple of sitcom screenplays with their antics. Yes, they still live in a 99% white neighborhood, but they bought that house two decades ago when they still had kids, and they haven't had cause to move yet. So I guess until they move somewhere other than a whitopia, or she leaves him to go coalburning (though they're getting kinda old for that), or some other Rubicon event, I can't say for sure, but my point is that somewhere along the line, the difference between virtue signalling and true belief ceases to exist or at least to matter. After all, that money they give to the SPLC will end up harming real people somewhere somehow, as will the antiwhite animus they whip up in antiracism rallies. Dismissing this as "mere virtue signalling" is ultimately somewhere between naive and disingenuous. Mere virtue signalling can kill.

    Replies: @Ripple Earthdevil, @Anon, @SimpleSong, @The Last Real Calvinist, @PhysicistDave, @Harry Baldwin

    I agree with you. My crazy liberal relatives have lost all sense of proportion, and you can’t talk them into sense anymore about anything or make them see a point. They’re too far gone. They’re like brain-dead zombies when it comes to politics. They’ve been propagandized like North Koreans, but unlike the Norks, they’ve always had a door they can escape through. They live in a free society where they can chose what they listen to and read for news.

    But they’ve chosen to ignore the door. That is entirely their own fault.

  108. Anon[223] • Disclaimer says:

    Steve,
    This might be offtopic, but have you ever done research on what sort of policies reduce crime the most in America?
    Crime is probably been the most important long run issue in this country, yet no one has seemed to figure out how to completely solve it.
    NYC has done some stuff, but that might be because of the lots of money the city has in doing broken window policing.
    Is there good research on this topic?

    • Replies: @anon
    @Anon


    Crime is probably been the most important long run issue in this country, yet no one has seemed to figure out how to completely solve it.
     
    Are you for real? The migratory invasion and the creeping genocide against American Whites are by far the most important long run issues in the country.
    , @Nicholas Stix
    @Anon

    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2019/02/everyone-knows-that-crime-went-down-for.html

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  109. @anon
    Schor

    I look at the 2020 election, I see that we ran against the most unpopular Republican ever to run for president — and we ran literally the most popular figure in our party whose last name is not Obama —
     
    Seems to me that if "the most popular figure in our party whose last name is not Obama" is a 78 year old career apparatchik with some form of dementia there is a larger issue that Schor is not addressing. The American gerontocracy is not a pretty sight, and it gets a bit less pretty every week.

    Say, when do we start playing "Name the real President"? That is, who is actually running the earpiece that Joe Biden must always listen to?

    Is it Kamala Harris?
    Is it Susan Rice?

    Is it Barack Obama? Are we really in Obama's third term?

    Replies: @Guest29048, @joe_mama

    I thought Harris would be the boss by now, but she has not openly asserted herself.
    So, Obama, via Rice?

    But whoever wants to get Biden’s signature on their pet executive order has to go through Ron Klain, Biden’s chief of staff.

    So, Klain’s fingerprints would be on everything “Biden” does.

    https://www.influencewatch.org/person/ronald-klain/

    https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individuals/ronald-klain/

  110. @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Almost Missouri


    the Dems now have stitched together a nationwide ballot fixing system such that they never have to worry about losing a national election again
     
    You've correctly identified the most important feature of the political landscape at this time, but I think it would be more accurate to say that it very much remains to be seen whether the Democrats can replicate what they did in 2020, outside the context of the twin hysterias (pandemic, TDS).

    Replies: @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @J.Ross, @Almost Missouri

    Looking for the “hope” button.

  111. @Buzz Mohawk
    @AnotherDad

    AnotherDad's first speech after his revolution:


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

    Replies: @Gary in Gramercy

    “All elections have been suspended until such time as the Revolutionary Council shall have extirpated all minoritarian tendencies among the populace…”

  112. anon[477] • Disclaimer says:

    Feds dropping cases in Portland against Antifa thugs. Assault on a Federal officer? Eh, dismissed with prejudice. I think we know who the US Attorney out there really works for.

    https://www.kgw.com/article/news/investigations/portland-protest-cases-dismissed-feds/283-002f01d2-3217-4b12-8725-3fda2cad119f

    Rigged elections have consequences.

  113. @Reg Cæsar

    There were really big declines in Vietnamese areas, for example.
     
    They didn't come here to vote for Joe Chi Minh.

    Do you have any sense what was behind the large rightward shift among Hispanic voters?

    [A?] One important thing to know about the decline in Hispanic support for Democrats is that it was pretty broad. …

     

    The unasked but very much heard question in the election was, "Are you overpaid? Do we need to bring in more to undercut you?"

    The Colombian and Venezuelan shifts were huge.
     
    They've had problems with arrogant white socialists in the past.

    There’s a narrative on the left that the Democrats’ growing reliance on college-educated whites is pulling the party to the right... But I think that’s wrong.
     
    They want to cut Pedro Jr's wee-wee off. Pedro Sr objects. ¡Sorpresa!

    So Donald Trump is unpopular. And he does pay a penalty for that relative to a generic Republican.

     

    Such as Presidents McCain and Romney.

    I think the reason why we saw less education-based voting in 2018 is that Trump was a smaller part of the media environment than he had been in 2016 or would be in 2020.

     

    Trump, or presidential elections in general? Turnout is always lower in these atrociously-named "midterm" elections.

    blue collar Mexican Van Nuys, CA
     
    How do they pronounce this? The Mexicans, that is?

    Not sure which country this is, but here is evidence the Latin upper-crust may understand blue-collar thought better than our own does:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QnPNleGIgE&list=RDCrpdQngwk2g&index=4

    Replies: @Abolish_public_education, @Lot

    English: Van-ize
    Mexican: Vahn-ice

    Other odd dominant English pronunciation of Spanish:

    San Pedro – San Peedro
    Don Juan (Byron) – Juwan
    Coronado – Coranado

  114. @Almost Missouri
    @PhysicistDave


    It’s all fake — mere virtue signalling.
     
    I mostly agree, and yet ...

    I may have mentioned that my extended family and their friends are mostly liberals of various stripes, which has allowed me to observe these pathologies at close range over long periods of time. With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as "just virtue signalling again, zzzzz", but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers. The only thing they do in their limited spare time is watch Black movies. They seem to believe earnestly in Hidden Figures, Henrietta Lacks as a holy icon, BLM nonsense, etc. They organize "anti-racism" (i.e. anti-white) conferences. They donate religiously to the SPLC. They're like a parody out of the iSteve comments section. I could probably write a couple of sitcom screenplays with their antics. Yes, they still live in a 99% white neighborhood, but they bought that house two decades ago when they still had kids, and they haven't had cause to move yet. So I guess until they move somewhere other than a whitopia, or she leaves him to go coalburning (though they're getting kinda old for that), or some other Rubicon event, I can't say for sure, but my point is that somewhere along the line, the difference between virtue signalling and true belief ceases to exist or at least to matter. After all, that money they give to the SPLC will end up harming real people somewhere somehow, as will the antiwhite animus they whip up in antiracism rallies. Dismissing this as "mere virtue signalling" is ultimately somewhere between naive and disingenuous. Mere virtue signalling can kill.

    Replies: @Ripple Earthdevil, @Anon, @SimpleSong, @The Last Real Calvinist, @PhysicistDave, @Harry Baldwin

    Indeed, we are what we repeatedly do.

    Some people can consciously say one thing and believe the exact opposite, and never let the mask slip, but most people will mold themselves to believe what they say, until they say what they believe.

  115. @Bardon Kaldian
    @PhysicistDave

    The future of US blacks is something like this...

    https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2014/11/09/362356878/in-brazil-race-is-a-matter-of-life-and-violent-death


    On June 11 — one day before the World Cup started — two policemen picked up three black teenagers in Rio de Janeiro. The three hadn't committed any crime — but they did have a history of petty offenses.

    The officers drove them up to the wooded hills above the city. One was shot in the head and killed. One was shot in the leg and the back and left for dead. Another escaped.

    We know what happened that day because the police officers left their patrol car cameras on, and the videos surfaced on Brazil's Globo TV.

    "We haven't even started beating you yet and you are already crying?" one cop says. "Stop crying! You are crying too much! Be a man!"

    But the three boys weren't men — they were about 14 years old.

    Then the cops are heard saying "gotta kill the three of them."

    And finally: "Two less. If we do this every week, we can reduce their number. We can reach the goal."

    The goal they reportedly were referring to was a crime-reduction target ahead of the World Cup.

    Brazil is one of the most violent countries in the world. In 2012, 56,337 people were murdered. Compare that to the U.S., where fewer than 15,000 people died violently the same year in a country with 60 percent more people.

    But those statistics hide a color-coded truth: Brazil actually has gotten a lot safer for white people. In the past decade, homicides among whites have decreased 24 percent. But among the black population they have increased 40 percent.
    ...........................................
    The two policemen who killed Matteos are standing trial. The boy who survived is in juvenile detention; he was caught trying to steal a bicycle. His lawyer has tried to get him into a witness protection program because he fears for the teenager's life, but was told the state has no resources to provide protection.

    Nilson Bruno Filho — the only Afro-Brazilian head of a state public defender's office — recently instituted a program to combat racism in Rio de Janeiro. He explains why the case of the murdered kids, now largely forgotten, didn't get much sustained attention.

    "There is a saying that 'black meat is cheaper.' People don't get shocked to see a dead black person, because the person in their minds can be linked to crime," he says. "And, in Brazil, if a person is linked to a crime, then he can be killed."
     

    Replies: @Nico

    The other point to consider is that the black TFR in America stood at 1.89 children per women in 2018 and the black illegitimacy rate around 70 to 75 percent. Before long the COVID-19 pressure is going to vastly accelerate the ongoing reduction of the value of the state subsidies denominated in dollars that fund the care and feeding of bastard children from the cradle to prison – I mean, grave – , either by spending cuts or by inflation. Imagine if we still denied public subvention to children born out of wedlock: the black TFR would fall to perhaps the most blessedly low levels in mammalian history.

  116. @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Ron Unz


    Either way, the decline of black support for the Democratic ticket was pretty negligible. But losing nearly 10 points of Hispanic support in one election is a very big deal, especially since Trump directed nearly all of his effort to winning black votes and almost no effort to winning Hispanic ones.
     
    I think some of the calculus surrounding the black vote arises from the fact that each of the upper Midwest "Big Ten" Swing States have large cities with significant or majority black populations, whereas the locus of Hispanic populations generally lies either in lost causes like California or secure R States (at least for now) like Texas - with Florida being the large, electoral vote rich exception. The Democrats have historically relied upon lopsided vote premiums to take statewide races in these States which would otherwise be solidly Republican. So getting a small increase in the share of the black vote in Philadelphia/Pittsburgh/Detroit/Milwaukee/Cleveland is a much more worthwhile squeeze of the electoral lemon than being seen to be chasing the Hispanic vote which is sequestered in States which are already fairly solidly red or blue. Additionally, since blacks vote at between 90-95% for Democrats, each vote won from the Democrats has a greater impact on marginal races than the still lopsided (but much less so) Hispanic vote.

    That said, we've seen the Hispanicization of the U.S. move Colorado and Nevada into fairly solid blue States, and make Arizona into a swing state. Texas, as they say, is the new prize.

    My surmise is that the dynamic in Florida is an outlier, in that Republicans are able to leverage an existing Cuban dominated political machine in South Florida to recruit Venezuelan exiles due to their Anti-Communist politics, and to make a decent play for persuadable Puerto Ricans and the like. This machine is peculiar to Florida, however, so I think the gains among Hispanics in Texas and the Southwest are probably owed to second generation and subsequent Hispanics entering the respectable middle class and crediting that ascent to conservative middle class cultural and economic values. The archetypical, patriarchal "HispaniDad" of memes is likely who was swayed rightward by Trump. Altogether, the immigration status quo is disastrous to Republicans and the prospect of any right wing politics in the U.S. with any prospect of electoral success, so the GOP's current strategy "we lose money on each unit sold but make it up in volume" has got to be jettisoned. You can't create nearly enough HispaniDads fast enough to cancel the gross numbers of newly arrived third worlders each year deposited into our toxic culture of anti-white identity politics. In any event, winning elections increasingly requires shifting the political center to the left in large part as a consequence of our suicidal immigration policy.

    Replies: @Luzzatto, @Ron Unz

    I think some of the calculus surrounding the black vote arises from the fact that each of the upper Midwest “Big Ten” Swing States have large cities with significant or majority black populations, whereas the locus of Hispanic populations generally lies either in lost causes like California or secure R States (at least for now) like Texas…So getting a small increase in the share of the black vote in Philadelphia/Pittsburgh/Detroit/Milwaukee/Cleveland is a much more worthwhile squeeze of the electoral lemon than being seen to be chasing the Hispanic vote which is sequestered in States which are already fairly solidly red or blue.

    While there’s some truth in that, I think sheer Republican stupidity and incompetence, plus donor-driven PC-sentiments, are a much stronger explanation. I’ve spent over 25 years arguing this issue with Republican candidates and (more importantly) their consultants and strategists, and they’ve been taking that position the whole time, especially in my own state of California, which has a rather small and unimportant black population.

    For about fifty years, Republicans have been trying to increase their share of the black vote with absolutely ZERO success. Didn’t Trump offer blacks a half-trillion(!) dollars in financial reparations in his “Platinum Plan”? Plus letting black criminals out of prison with “criminal justice reform”? And moving heaven-and-earth to get rapper-criminals sprung from jails overseas? He probably would have done just about as well with zero dollars and effort, and perhaps might have picked up another couple points from disgruntled whites, getting himself reelected.

    Forty or fifty years ago, Republicans usually used to get between one-third and one-half of the Hispanic and Asian vote, but by their noisy attacks against immigrants and Hispanics, drove those numbers far down even while that electorate tripled or quadrupled.

    As for your state analysis, it’s not quite that simple. If the Republicans lose Texas, they’re permanently destroyed as a national party, and TX is very heavily Hispanic. If Trump had done better with Hispanics he might have won heavily/substantially Hispanic Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada, and been reelected. But if he’d done worse with Hispanics, he would lost Florida, and been blown out of the race.

    The irony is that I almost exactly predicted this political trajectory in my big article published a decade ago. A few key paragraphs:

    Now consider the likely political future of a state such as Arizona, ground zero of the most recent national anti-immigrant backlash by nervous whites. A severe recession and rapidly changing demographics had alarmed Arizona voters, many of them elderly retirees from elsewhere, leaving them vulnerable to wild rumors of a huge immigrant crime wave, including beheadings and kidnappings, almost all of which was complete nonsense. As a result, harsh anti-immigrant measures were passed into law, and their mostly Republican supporters won sweeping victories among an electorate that is today roughly 80 percent white.

    But buried near the bottom of a single one of the innumerable New York Times articles analyzing Arizona politics was the seemingly minor and irrelevant fact that almost half of all Arizona schoolchildren are now Hispanic. Meanwhile, according to Census data, over 80 percent of Arizonans aged 65 or older are white. A decade or more from now it seems likely that Arizona whites and Hispanics will enjoy perfectly good relations, and the former will have long since forgotten their current “immigrant scare.” But the latter will still remember it, and the once mighty Arizona Republican Party will be set on the road to oblivion.

    Even in a rock-solid Deep South Republican state like Georgia, Hispanics have now grown into a remarkable 10 percent of the population, up from almost nothing in the early 1990s, and represent an even larger share of younger Georgians. So unless the local Republican Party can somehow greatly enhance its appeal to the 30 percent of Georgians who are black, the current wave of anti-immigrant legislation may prove highly problematical ten or 20 years down the road.

    https://www.unz.com/runz/immigration-republicans-and-the-end-of-white-america-singlepage/

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Ron Unz


    For about fifty years, Republicans have been trying to increase their share of the black vote with absolutely ZERO success. Didn’t Trump offer blacks a half-trillion(!) dollars in financial reparations in his “Platinum Plan”? Plus letting black criminals out of prison with “criminal justice reform”? And moving heaven-and-earth to get rapper-criminals sprung from jails overseas? He probably would have done just about as well with zero dollars and effort, and perhaps might have picked up another couple points from disgruntled whites, getting himself reelected.
     
    This was an interesting phenomenon which I think was driven as much by Trump's long term personal relationships with famous blacks like Don King, Mike Tyson, Jim Brown, Kanye West, Herschel Walker and so forth as it was by the existing failure-bound GOP strategy. Perhaps these two forces met and complimented one another to yield the policy that resulted.

    Some, however, claim that the GOP's play for the black vote is a feint, and the real purpose is to create a permission structure for nice white ladies in suburbs to vote for the GOP. In this view, the blacks are the "MacGuffin" object - said to be of great value but inevitably just a prop to move the plot along where the resolution of the story arc is enough nice white ladies not feeling like filthy racists when voting for Republican candidates. Of course, what credits this theory is Democrats insistent inflammatory racial politics - the object of the exercise is probably more about creating social pressure aimed at the much more numerous nice white ladies rather than marginally increasing their 90%+ share of the black vote (or increasing turnout).

    Forty or fifty years ago, Republicans usually used to get between one-third and one-half of the Hispanic and Asian vote, but by their noisy attacks against immigrants and Hispanics, drove those numbers far down even while that electorate tripled or quadrupled.

     

    Forty or fifty years ago the wholesale demographic change of the United States was not yet in full swing. Evidently the story of Trump's marginal increase with Hispanics was the popularity of his messages of Law and Order (however undermined by "criminal justice reform") and the assertion of national sovereignty by control of an out of control immigration policy. A proposed policy of stricter immigration enforcement made the Republican candidate more popular with the Hispanic electorate than prior Republican candidates viewed as much more lenient on enforcement (i.e., Bush the Lesser).

    As for your state analysis, it’s not quite that simple. If the Republicans lose Texas, they’re permanently destroyed as a national party, and TX is very heavily Hispanic. If Trump had done better with Hispanics he might have won heavily/substantially Hispanic Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada, and been reelected. But if he’d done worse with Hispanics, he would lost Florida, and been blown out of the race.
     
    If the Republicans lose Texas, the party will spend years in the wilderness as a national political party but will eventually reemerge and become competitive again. It's just that when that time comes, the platforms of both parties will be ratcheted several degrees to the left.

    Some have made the point that Texan Hispanics are different in worldview than Californian Hispanics, and the former are much more amenable to voting for conservative candidates than the latter. The problem is that wholesale uncontrolled immigration from Latin America has changed the makeup of Texan Hispanics, and the new arrivals resemble Californian Hispanics much more than the Texan Hispanics when they set up shop in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, etc.

    Replies: @Ron Unz

  117. @Abolish_public_education
    @Reg Cæsar

    .. do we bring in more to undercut you?”

    Cheap immigrant labor (extra supply) can undercut commodity labor prices. In a less crazy world, that phenomenon would work to the advantage of the larger economy (in the form of lower prices in sectors where labor costs had fallen).

    But due to government policies, e.g spending programs (like schools) and monetarism, prices aren’t allowed to fall as much, nor as quickly, as a competitive economy can achieve.

    Low-skilled, private sector workers who would like to save something for a rainy day find it difficult to do so.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Polistra

    Cheap immigrant labor (extra supply) can undercut commodity labor prices.

    Or commodities, period. Fifty years ago, skeletons for medical schools had been getting pricy, and were slowly being replaced by plastic models.

    Until real skeletons started coming in from India.

  118. @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco
    @Travis

    Yes, few predicted Trump’s victory in 2016 and fewer predicted the Chinese would release a virus which targeted the obese and elderly. Fewer would have predicted the government would shutter all schools and colleges to protect the obese and elderly. The next virus released by China could target a different demographic and be far more deadly than the flu. If CV had a fatality rate of 2% we would have lost over 2 million Americans.

    Replies: @Ron Unz, @AndrewR

    Yes, few predicted Trump’s victory in 2016 and fewer predicted the Chinese would release a virus which targeted the obese and elderly…The next virus released by China could target a different demographic and be far more deadly than the flu. If CV had a fatality rate of 2% we would have lost over 2 million Americans.

    You’re just a total FoxNews ‘tard. Anyone who’s carefully looked into the matter knows there’s strong, perhaps even overwhelming evidence that Covid-19 outbreak was the result of an American biowarfare attack against China (and Iran), presumably by the Deep State Neocons that Trump moronically appointed to run our national security apparatus:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-our-coronavirus-catastrophe-as-biowarfare-blowback/

    If you accept the WSJ analysis of CDC data, we’ve probably already had something like 800,000 “excess deaths,” twice our WWII casualties. So you need to add that to Trump’s list of “significant liabilities.”

  119. @steinbergfeldwitzcohen
    @Ron Unz

    Claiming that Trump is the worst Prez in history is complete nonsense. There is a list.

    Wilson snuck in a massive betrayal to the American people: the IRS, the Income Tax and the Fed. He created the Infrastructure of Tyranny and Perpetual War that helped destroy a once proud and promising nation.
    FDR told Americans he wanted no war while plotting to give it to his Jewish 'Advisors'. His betrayal of the American people is beyond compare. His time in office destroyed the fragment left of the Republic and ushered in Imperial America-the Jewish Attack Dog.
    These two Vermidents are currently in Hell laughing with abandon at your naivete while Lincoln chuckles and LBJ smirks. Eisenhower is still asking himself how he ever came to agree to starve 1 million German POW's AFTER the War had ended.

    When we consider the blood Trump refused to spill in the Middle East, EVEN I can give him credit.
    You sir, have lost any sense of proportion if you cannot see my point and retract your absurd claim.
    Fact: I dislike the man annd consider him a Shabbos.

    Replies: @Ron Unz

    Claiming that Trump is the worst Prez in history is complete nonsense. There is a list.

    Well, you’re certainly listing some other contenders. But here’s another comment of mine to consider:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/shor-us-white-democrats-could-easily-alienate-nonwhite-democrats-with-our-crazy-level-of-racial-resentment-on-their-behalf/#comment-4506122

    Anyway, I’ve never understood endless denunciations of Wilson for the Federal Reserve. Doesn’t just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax? If everyone has a central bank and an income tax, isn’t it ridiculous that if not for Wilson, we wouldn’t? Anyway, wasn’t the Income Tax ratified before Wilson was inaugurated?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Ron Unz


    Anyway, wasn’t the Income Tax ratified before Wilson was inaugurated?
     
    About halfway between his election and inauguration.

    Presidents have no formal role in Constitutional amendments. It's up to Congress (usually) and the states.

    The Sixteenth was wildly popular in Dixie, eight Southern states ratifying it in little over a year. Three New England states only did so after it was already in force, and Connecticut and Rhode Island told the other states to shove it altogether, as they did later with the Eighteenth. They deserve a toast on April 15th and December 5th.
    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Ron Unz

    https://www.investopedia.com/thmb/o74rcMQab7DbED1Lg6E4NWelu2M=/742x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/100000-59f61a67685fbe0011391eae.jpg

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Ron Unz


    Doesn’t just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax?
     
    That's a good point that isn't often made, but ...

    1) A lot of central banks simply peg their currency to the US dollar, effectively making themselves franchises of the Federal Reserve on their single most importation responsibility.

    2) Even the central banks that are nominally sovereign (Europe, UK, Japan) "coordinate" monetary policy with the Federal Reserve ("coordinate" = if the Fed says "jump", ...).

    3) The Fed is the only central bank issuing the global reserve currency, so its power, and scope for abuse of that power (which is the reason governments have central banks in the first place) is an order of magnitude more than it would be otherwise.

    I know your comment was about whether Wilson was responsible for this (I agree he wasn't particularly) rather than whether it was a good thing, but still, I didn't want anyone to come away from your comment with the impression that central banks are a natural and necessary part of government, like a legislature or judiciary.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    , @anon
    @Ron Unz

    Doesn’t just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax?

    "Everyone else is doing it" is not a logical argument. It's emotional herd-following.


    “Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.”

    ― Charles MacKay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds
     

    , @anon
    @Ron Unz

    Since you consider Trump to be a pretty good contender for the worst president in America,
    who do you consider a good President?

    I think you have said that Obama and Bush were horrible(I think it was in the John McCain article), and I don't think you have a too high opinion of Clinton.

    Maybe you like Reagan, but he started this neoliberal revolution that led to the above presidents.

    Personally, I think that Harry Truman did a pretty good job domestically. Post WWII America was really doing very well economically then.

  120. Our Crazy Level of Racial Resentment

    Speaking of which, is everybody ready for tomorrow? It’s already the Fifth in Newquay and Truro.

  121. @JohnnyWalker123
    @RichardTaylor

    Most immigrants are amoral grifters. Here to take advantage of the country as much as they can.
    They don't give a damn about America or Whites or fairness or whatever.

    They just want to line their pockets and enrich their families. Everything else in this world is irrelevant.

    That may sound harsh, but it's true for the most part. Though there are some exceptions.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    Your ancestors and their progeny are clear examples of those “amoral grifters”.

    • Replies: @RichardTaylor
    @Corvinus


    Your ancestors and their progeny are clear examples of those “amoral grifters”.
     
    Please consider new material and fresh thoughts. Not fantasy land libertarianism circa 1975.
  122. @Ron Unz
    @steinbergfeldwitzcohen


    Claiming that Trump is the worst Prez in history is complete nonsense. There is a list.
     
    Well, you're certainly listing some other contenders. But here's another comment of mine to consider:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/shor-us-white-democrats-could-easily-alienate-nonwhite-democrats-with-our-crazy-level-of-racial-resentment-on-their-behalf/#comment-4506122

    Anyway, I've never understood endless denunciations of Wilson for the Federal Reserve. Doesn't just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax? If everyone has a central bank and an income tax, isn't it ridiculous that if not for Wilson, we wouldn't? Anyway, wasn't the Income Tax ratified before Wilson was inaugurated?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Reg Cæsar, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @anon

    Anyway, wasn’t the Income Tax ratified before Wilson was inaugurated?

    About halfway between his election and inauguration.

    Presidents have no formal role in Constitutional amendments. It’s up to Congress (usually) and the states.

    The Sixteenth was wildly popular in Dixie, eight Southern states ratifying it in little over a year. Three New England states only did so after it was already in force, and Connecticut and Rhode Island told the other states to shove it altogether, as they did later with the Eighteenth. They deserve a toast on April 15th and December 5th.

  123. @Ron Unz
    @PhysicistDave


    Just maybe because most well-educated whites live in pretty safe areas (in my neighborhood, we hardly ever see a cop car, but the area is still pretty safe) whereas a lot of blacks and Hispanics know that they may end up dead if the cops are defunded?
     
    That's certainly part of the reason, but you may be over-thinking the situation, and it's ridiculous to mix together blacks and Hispanics. Despite massive Republican propaganda, both pre- and post-election, the former showed virtually no swing to the Trump, while the latter showed a huge swing.

    The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.

    We saw many, many months of violent mobs rioting, looting, and burning major parts of 200 American cities. The response of the Democrats was "Let's Defund the Police!!!"

    Since so many whites are so totally brainwashed by the MSM, many of them thought that sounded pretty reasonable, or at least acceptable, and still voted for Biden/Harris. But since Hispanics are more like "normal" people, many of them didn't agree, and they swung in the other direction.

    Putting my cards on the table, I think you could make a pretty good case that Trump was the worst president America has ever had. But I also think you could also make a pretty good case that the other choice was even worse...

    Replies: @Anon, @JMcG, @AndrewR, @Desiderius, @Undocumented Shopper, @Paperback Writer, @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @Corvinus

    “The key issue is that whites, especially more affluent whites, are far more brainwashed than anyone else, certainly including Hispanics, who are more working-class and down-to-earth.”

    LOL, no, Mr. Unz, we whites are merely taking YOUR advice to heart when making their own decisions when it comes to race, culture, politics, sportsball, etc. Oddly, you (and others) characterize it as being “brainwashed”.

    I apply the same historical methods I did in my academic journal articles back in the 1980s. You analyze the likely reliability of the raw information presented, look for confirming or refuting evidence, and then draw your own plausible conclusions…On a more serious note, many of my articles very heavily cite various MSM sources, so why would I do that if I believed they were always lying?”

    Besides, I thought whites in general have high IQ’s and high time preferences, which would mean they have natural built-in defenses against being “duped”.

    “Anyone who’s carefully looked into the matter knows there’s strong, perhaps even overwhelming evidence that Covid-19 outbreak was the result of an American biowarfare attack against China (and Iran), presumably by the Deep State Neocons that Trump moronically appointed to run our national security apparatus”

    Speculation and hearsay, with a dab of confirmation bias.

  124. @AnotherDad
    @ic1000

    As the crisis has gathered over the last decade or so, i've found myself fantasizing--i.e. kicking around some ideas--to do the inverse--creating a republican voting system for sustaining a nation.

    My thoughts:

    * voting only for productive net taxpaying families
    Those on the dole don't vote.

    * voting as a family block by the head of household
    I.e. wives don't vote against husbands. Couples can sit down and hash it out ... then cast a household vote that counts husband, wife, kids. Note, specifically including kids--ex. i'd be casting five votes until my kids have their own families/votes.

    * singles don't vote;
    Perhaps some criteria-- for single men to prove themselves "vote worthy"; sufficient age and economic productivity, service in combat, etc. But basically for voting "take a wife" and knock her up.

    * government employees don't vote
    Get independent employment if you want to vote.

    * criminals don't vote
    You violate the society's critical norms--you're out of having a say. There would be far fewer criminals in my nation, because most would be executed or expelled. But any readmitted--no vote.

    * immigrants and un-integrated descendants only of immigrants don't vote
    Again, there wouldn't be many immigrants in my society. Immigration is unnatural. But there might be a few excellent pickups--i know several top quality folks myself. But the idea would be immigrants should marry into the nation's population. Then they vote or their kids vote. (I'd sneak in for America due to my 1/4 founding stock background.) No power for separate minority "communities". Part of the nation or not.

    * weirdos, perverts, LGBQWERTY, other mentally ill--don't vote

    Basically voting is for normal productive heterosexual married-with-children people who sustain the nation.

    The basic thrust of this--republicanism--is what the founders had in mind, when the voting requirement was property holder. Those more footloose, unsettled, disorganized, could not. But obviously this is wild dreaming on my part. We've moved far, far away from this and are heading further away every moment. That said ...

    I think a system something like this is the evolutionary optimum for governing a nation in a sustainable manner--preserving the nation/civilization. So in the long run someone should end up with a system like this ... and they'll be able to sustain their civilization and win. Akin to eugenics--someone is eventually going to do it, and they will win.

    Yep, dreaming. But the minoritarians are spouting their ludicrous rainbow hued utopian dreams, so i'm going to offer my much more grounded republican utopian dreams.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @Corvinus

    Exactly, you’re dreaming. And so much precious digital ink spilled.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Corvinus


    Exactly, you’re dreaming. And so much precious digital ink spilled.
     
    Yep, dreaming. (It's nice to imagine a saner world. Brightens my day.)

    But there are these things called "logic" and "math".

    Hence i know that:
    * some civilized nation will control its borders
    * some civilized nation will have culture/policies that get replacement fertility with modernity
    * some civilized nation will have culture/polices to create eugenic fertility
    * some civilized nation will have stable governing system that creates the above policies.

    I know this because ... those things win. Nations/civilizations that do them will win--survive and beat out nations that do not do them.

    Now the government of such a nation may not be the republican patriarchy i outlined--government by productive families with soy-free fathers. It could be something like the chicoms? Or even some muzzie autocracy. But those seem less stable and less flexible--for the well understood reasons of criticism and feedback. So i expect in the long run, the winner nations will be republics.

    Of course, there's nothing to say that there will be a winner nation from the West. Or even any winner nation among current civilizations. The world could collapse into a black "dark age" and civilized people will have to slowly re-evolve to rebuild civilization ... again. Or heck, the machines could take over. Or the sun go super-nova. But i don't think those are likely.

    Rather at some point, some nation, some AnotherDads somewhere will get it right ... and win.

    Because logic and math can not be beaten. So in the end, some AnotherDad wins.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  125. @AndrewR
    @RichardTaylor

    You apparently have been living in a cave recently.

    No one is asking "non-Whites" to go to bat against anti-white hatred.

    But one major theme of the last year has been not so much "whites bad" but "non-Blacks bad, or at least expendable."

    Asians, Hispanics and other groups previously deemed non-white have been relegated to the "white" bin.

    Just like no one would describe the KKK as simply an "anti-black group," BLM is much better described as an explicitly black supremacist group than as an anti-white group. And, unsurprisingly, a lot of non-black non-"whites" don't want to be demoted to second class citizenship

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

    You apparently have been living in a cave recently.

    No one is asking “non-Whites” to go to bat against anti-white hatred.

    I think you’re missing the point. It’s not about asking non-Whites for compassion. It’s the fact that it would never occur to anyone to ever ask a non-White for compassion.

    But it will always occur to everyone that Whites should have compassion for Brown people. This has been true for centuries.

    The point is, the moral status, or lack of it, that everyone assigns to non-Whites. Even the most liberal of Whites would never elevate them to full human moral agency.

    Asians, Hispanics and other groups previously deemed non-white have been relegated to the “white” bin.

    No they haven’t. And all over Latin America, there is a clear divide between White Hispanics and vast majority of Brown Hispanics.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @RichardTaylor

    In Latin America, they don't have the weird racial hang-ups that Americans do, although American imperialism is trying hard to change that.

    Again, I think you're missing the explicitly black supremacist message of the last year. Yellows and browns, fall in line!

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

  126. @Desiderius
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Put down the iPalantir, Denethor.

    We were close last time. It'll take a lot more than voting but it surely won't take less unless you're ready to lose everything.

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666, @ben tillman, @The Last Real Calvinist

    We were close last time. It’ll take a lot more than voting but it surely won’t take less unless you’re ready to lose everything.

    This true. You can’t let the bastards win simply by demoralizing you.

    I think the main epiphany of the last four years is that, besides voting, we need a strategy for fighting back against the elite leftist control over the commanding heights of cultural and institutions.

    Maybe Wokeness just needs to be contained, like the Soviet Union, until it dies of its own contradictions.

    Federalism and decentralization should be major goals. In a fair competition, most normal people will chose free institutions over woke authoritarianism. So we don’t need to destroy the left, but merely carve out some space for the alternative. You can already see how freer, more conservative states (Texas, Florida, Arizona) have become far more attractive than lefty states (New York, Illinois, California).

    • Replies: @anon
    @Hypnotoad666

    Have you read HR-1? It essentially institutionalizes the vote rigging of 2020.

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666

    , @ben tillman
    @Hypnotoad666


    This true. You can’t let the bastards win simply by demoralizing you.
     
    I could not agree more. I am under no illusions, but I also know that a lot of surprising things have happened since I "tuned in" in 1998. You have to keep pushing and fighting electorally and otherwise.
    , @AndrewR
    @Hypnotoad666

    Lmao lauding Texas for its "freedom" right now is beyond tone-deaf. Is that you, Rick Perry?

  127. @Hypnotoad666
    @Desiderius


    We were close last time. It’ll take a lot more than voting but it surely won’t take less unless you’re ready to lose everything.
     
    This true. You can't let the bastards win simply by demoralizing you.

    I think the main epiphany of the last four years is that, besides voting, we need a strategy for fighting back against the elite leftist control over the commanding heights of cultural and institutions.

    Maybe Wokeness just needs to be contained, like the Soviet Union, until it dies of its own contradictions.

    Federalism and decentralization should be major goals. In a fair competition, most normal people will chose free institutions over woke authoritarianism. So we don't need to destroy the left, but merely carve out some space for the alternative. You can already see how freer, more conservative states (Texas, Florida, Arizona) have become far more attractive than lefty states (New York, Illinois, California).

    Replies: @anon, @ben tillman, @AndrewR

    Have you read HR-1? It essentially institutionalizes the vote rigging of 2020.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
    @anon


    Have you read HR-1? It essentially institutionalizes the vote rigging of 2020.
     
    Yep. It's a total partisan power grab. And a total violation of state sovereignty. I think it will just get filibustered though.

    Replies: @Jack D

  128. contained, like the Soviet Union

    [Bitter Eastern European laughter intensifies]

  129. You can already see how freer, more conservative states () have become far more attractive than lefty states (New York, Illinois, California).

    For Mexicans, too. And their shorter, darker brethren.

    Texas, Florida, Arizona

    My son just joked today that Mexico has more Californias than the US. Not for long– add your three to the list.

  130. In my conversations with real people, my observations are white liberals in general are true believers. Immune to truth and logic. A friend of mine is still adamant that the KKK lead the riots and white supremacists are responsible for all the violence. They are absolutely true believers. I stung her with facts and logic regarding the the riots and she was just immune to it. Absolutely believed it. She even believed that the KKK were in the street wearing white hoods in a 100 percent black neighborhood because one delusional women said the KKK was outside her house. Most blacks I talk to aren’t like this, they will level with you about what actually caused the violence. White liberals are truly a modern-day version of a cult. Unfortunately every corporation, school, and all media just reinforce their views.

    After the Kyle Rittenhouse shooting, I showed a woman multiple videos that anyone not brainwashed would consider self-defense. She watched the videos in with great attention, I was losing my temper with rage and my mind was about to explode, she just wouldn’t agree that it was self-defense. She came back with things like “He was a kid and it’s illegal for kids to have guns.” “He shot those unarmed people for no reason.” “He shouldn’t have been there anyway.” “He’s a white supremacist.” “They were peaceful protesters.” “They didn’t have guns.” I literally showed her videos of Kyle running away from his attackers. Here is one of the videos I showed her

    It was almost like she was watching the videos but regardless of how many facts and truth of actual live video footage displayed that negated the narrative, she would never recant from the narrative. It was was completely mind-boggling. It was my first experience with someone I would label a cultist.

    • Replies: @Nicholas Stix
    @Flubber82

    It's all about loyalty and enmity (see Carl Schmitt's "friend-enemy-relationship"). These people are loyal to evil blacks, communists, reconquistas, etc. I have many such relatives. We go 20-30 years at a time without speaking.

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Flubber82

    Thank you for this anecdote, Flubber. From just the one picture showing, I would guess the video was going to show Kyle as a normal guy, and perhaps that's why the video is "unavailable". Either way, I'm now curious - could you tell me what this was about, or, even better, link to something similar if it's available?

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Flubber82


    I showed a woman multiple videos that anyone not brainwashed would consider self-defense.
     
    Dude, you won't get a dispassionate appraisal of combat ethics from 99% of women. She already knows who's supposed to be the bad guy and seeing the antifa idiot get his bicep shot out is just bias confirmation for her.

    If you want to persuade her, you can't play defense. Start reminding her of her white (or Asian or whatever) privilege and her TERF supremacism. Tell her she's showing signs of gender dysphoria and Karen fragility or whatever. Then—maybe—she'll start putting two and two together in terms of what the wokocracy adds up to for her.
  131. @Hypnotoad666
    @Desiderius


    We were close last time. It’ll take a lot more than voting but it surely won’t take less unless you’re ready to lose everything.
     
    This true. You can't let the bastards win simply by demoralizing you.

    I think the main epiphany of the last four years is that, besides voting, we need a strategy for fighting back against the elite leftist control over the commanding heights of cultural and institutions.

    Maybe Wokeness just needs to be contained, like the Soviet Union, until it dies of its own contradictions.

    Federalism and decentralization should be major goals. In a fair competition, most normal people will chose free institutions over woke authoritarianism. So we don't need to destroy the left, but merely carve out some space for the alternative. You can already see how freer, more conservative states (Texas, Florida, Arizona) have become far more attractive than lefty states (New York, Illinois, California).

    Replies: @anon, @ben tillman, @AndrewR

    This true. You can’t let the bastards win simply by demoralizing you.

    I could not agree more. I am under no illusions, but I also know that a lot of surprising things have happened since I “tuned in” in 1998. You have to keep pushing and fighting electorally and otherwise.

  132. @Desiderius
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Put down the iPalantir, Denethor.

    We were close last time. It'll take a lot more than voting but it surely won't take less unless you're ready to lose everything.

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666, @ben tillman, @The Last Real Calvinist

    I’m with you 100%. Take 15 minutes and vote. And do everything else you can think of. It’s not either-or.

  133. @Lot
    @Chris Renner

    He was also in the news for getting cancelled from his previous job over a Twitter fight because he said BLM rioting and violence was bad politics.

    His initial statement was expressed in the most servile cucky way, and he still retracted and apologized for it. But blasphemy about BLM is never tolerated, and there can be no forgiveness or keeping a job after that.

    Shor has wanted to be a Dem political guy his whole life and his specialty seems to be providing friendly advice to Dems to restrain the wokeness in that same groveling offputting style.

    Replies: @ben tillman

    He was also in the news for getting cancelled from his previous job over a Twitter fight because he said BLM rioting and violence was bad politics.

    He was right, and he’s rehashing his opinion in this piece. BLM drives away Mexicans and Asians.

  134. @Ron Unz
    @steinbergfeldwitzcohen


    Claiming that Trump is the worst Prez in history is complete nonsense. There is a list.
     
    Well, you're certainly listing some other contenders. But here's another comment of mine to consider:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/shor-us-white-democrats-could-easily-alienate-nonwhite-democrats-with-our-crazy-level-of-racial-resentment-on-their-behalf/#comment-4506122

    Anyway, I've never understood endless denunciations of Wilson for the Federal Reserve. Doesn't just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax? If everyone has a central bank and an income tax, isn't it ridiculous that if not for Wilson, we wouldn't? Anyway, wasn't the Income Tax ratified before Wilson was inaugurated?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Reg Cæsar, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @anon

  135. @anon
    Schor

    I look at the 2020 election, I see that we ran against the most unpopular Republican ever to run for president — and we ran literally the most popular figure in our party whose last name is not Obama —
     
    Seems to me that if "the most popular figure in our party whose last name is not Obama" is a 78 year old career apparatchik with some form of dementia there is a larger issue that Schor is not addressing. The American gerontocracy is not a pretty sight, and it gets a bit less pretty every week.

    Say, when do we start playing "Name the real President"? That is, who is actually running the earpiece that Joe Biden must always listen to?

    Is it Kamala Harris?
    Is it Susan Rice?

    Is it Barack Obama? Are we really in Obama's third term?

    Replies: @Guest29048, @joe_mama

    To be fair I doubt Obama ran the show when he was in office. There’s a reason his early nickname was “Empty Suit”.

    The same folks that ran the show under Obama, are running the show now.

  136. @AndrewR
    @PhysicistDave

    "black folks are not going to leave this country"

    Well, first of all, some already have left for the blacker pastures of Africa. Of course, some of these people have returned to Amerikkka after realizing that, shockingly, the descendants of the people who sold American blacks' ancestors into slavery aren't all rolling out the red carpet for American blacks.

    On a broader scale, who can say what the future holds? People respond to incentives. I don't think it's at all insane to think that, in the next century or so, carrots and sticks could be developed to empty the US of most of it's blacks. Personally, I have no problem sharing a country with blacks who broadly share "white values" and who like white people. As for the rest of them, there's no reason to think we will have to live with them forever.

    But I do agree that the Dems "are the real racists." Then again, we don't see a whole lot of pushback from black people who oppose BLM. The exact reasons for this are debateable.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    AndrewR wrote to me:

    Well, first of all, some already have left for the blacker pastures of Africa. Of course, some of these people have returned to Amerikkka after realizing that, shockingly, the descendants of the people who sold American blacks’ ancestors into slavery aren’t all rolling out the red carpet for American blacks.

    Well, yeah. For all its faults, no sane person really doubts that America is better than what Trump called “sh*thole countries.”

    Andrew also wrote:

    Personally, I have no problem sharing a country with blacks who broadly share “white values” and who like white people. As for the rest of them, there’s no reason to think we will have to live with them forever.

    Except, of course, what you call “white values” are just the human values needed for any advanced, industrial country to survive.

    Lots of blacks do have those values. Unfortunately, our policies — both political and, more broadly, cultural — during the last half century have encouraged lower-class blacks along with far too many whites to reject those values.

    And that is going to destroy our country.

    Let’s lay out the values that we are talking about: honesty, perseverance, future orientation, respect for others, hard work, education (which is not the same as number of years in school!), and dedication to maintaining intact two-parent families. American history shows that whites and blacks who energetically exemplify such values do okay.

    But our current elite is afraid to say so: look at what the response was to Amy Wax when she pointed out the obvious. Many whites still pick up on those values by osmosis or genetics. But people of any race who do not acquire such values end up living disastrous lives, both for themselves and others.

    I think we more or less agree: “bourgeois values” work. Other “values” lead to misery, poverty, and oppression.

    Perhaps the real cure is that decent people need to withdraw their assent from institutions — whether the news media or schools or churches or politicians — who will not endorse that central point.

  137. @AnotherDad
    @JohnnyWalker123


    When was the last time anyone (conservative or liberal) spoke up about the millions of people who the US murdered in the post-911 “War on Terror.”
     
    Maybe that's because there aren't "millions of people who the US murdered" in the "War on Terror".

    I'm at the front of the line in shutting down the adventurism and "bring the boys home" (the lesbians can stay over there), and deploying them to the southern border. But your "millions murdered" nonsense is still ... nonsense.

    Even in Iraq the US killed maybe 20-30K people. And the war killed 100-200K with most of the ones killed, killed by insurgents. (Whatever joke study you'll trot out is just that--a joke study.) Iraq had a population of 25m-ish in 2003 and has continuously increased to 40m people now.

    Afghanistan has more actual battle deaths--maybe 150k now (half on each side). 50-100k more civilians. Afghanistan's population stagnated and actually declined during parts of the Soviet war, but has increased from maybe 22m in 2001 to 38m today.

    Obama can write up whatever the heck he was doing--stupid--in Syria and Libya. Similar dumb policy, but probably fewer people actually killed by the US. (The Syrian destabilization does seem pretty bad. If the US had stayed out ... how much better???)

    In contrast, in World War II the US, Soviets, British killed off probably 6-8 million Germans. The German population--despite a high birthrate, was millions lower in 1946. Japan lost 2m soldiers and the US killed another 800k Japanese civilians by bombing. On either March 10th--the firebombing raid on Tokyo--or August 6th--Hiroshima--the US probably killed as many people in one day as the US military has killed during the entire "war on terror"--and mostly innocent civilians, not islamic insurgent nutters/combatants.


    But your dubious numbers aside ... sure. Why anyone would think this in the interest of Americans is beyond me. There's a trivial way to deal with the muzzie problem for America--don't let them in!

    Replies: @John Up North

    During WW2 when the RAF and the US Army Air Force bombed a large German city, the death toll of women and children in that bombed city would often times far exceed the battle deaths of the servicemen from that same city.

  138. @obwandiyag
    As I have been at pains to say, manifold times, blacks (and hispanics) are not liberal, except on issues of civil rights. This ought to be a tocsin for you people. But you'd rather shoot yourselves in your own foot.

    Replies: @AceDeuce, @joe_mama

    This may be true, but they’ll still vote Democrat.

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
    @joe_mama

    Implying, I guess, that you think that voting Republican is better.

    You think dumb.

  139. @Corvinus
    @AnotherDad

    Exactly, you're dreaming. And so much precious digital ink spilled.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    Exactly, you’re dreaming. And so much precious digital ink spilled.

    Yep, dreaming. (It’s nice to imagine a saner world. Brightens my day.)

    But there are these things called “logic” and “math”.

    Hence i know that:
    * some civilized nation will control its borders
    * some civilized nation will have culture/policies that get replacement fertility with modernity
    * some civilized nation will have culture/polices to create eugenic fertility
    * some civilized nation will have stable governing system that creates the above policies.

    I know this because … those things win. Nations/civilizations that do them will win–survive and beat out nations that do not do them.

    Now the government of such a nation may not be the republican patriarchy i outlined–government by productive families with soy-free fathers. It could be something like the chicoms? Or even some muzzie autocracy. But those seem less stable and less flexible–for the well understood reasons of criticism and feedback. So i expect in the long run, the winner nations will be republics.

    Of course, there’s nothing to say that there will be a winner nation from the West. Or even any winner nation among current civilizations. The world could collapse into a black “dark age” and civilized people will have to slowly re-evolve to rebuild civilization … again. Or heck, the machines could take over. Or the sun go super-nova. But i don’t think those are likely.

    Rather at some point, some nation, some AnotherDads somewhere will get it right … and win.

    Because logic and math can not be beaten. So in the end, some AnotherDad wins.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @AnotherDad

    Today's nations are civilized. What you are doing here is saying there is only **one** way for a nation to be civilized. Certainly, replacement fertility is one of several metrics. You just happen to be of the opinion that it is of the utmost importance for whites, but it's really vital for our species as a whole.

    "Now the government of such a nation may not be the republican patriarchy i outlined–government by productive families with soy-free fathers."

    Actually we do have productive families with soy-free fathers who help to stabilize our country, although admittedly the fissures are becoming larger in scope.

    "It could be something like the chicoms?"

    No, thanks.

    "Or even some muzzie autocracy".

    LOL, in America? No.

    "Rather at some point, some nation, some AnotherDads somewhere will get it right … and win."

    It will be more likely the AnotherDads will be pitted against the OtherDads. Which group gets on top, that remains to be seen.

    "Because logic and math can not be beaten."

    Which you have neither.

  140. @RichardTaylor
    @PhysicistDave


    There’s no choice, Richard: black folks are not going to leave this country, you know
     
    I should be more exact. Sure, some kind of political system can be built. But not the one we've had. And it's not just Blacks. A country that is minority White (which we will be) is going to be radically different than what we were before.

    The Yuppy liberal stuff is pure virtue signaling. But I do think many Whites have sincere concern for Blacks, Native Americans, etc, whether they are liberal or conservative.

    But you'd be hard-pressed to find non-Whites who care about White people. And that implies that everyone thinks of White people as on another moral plane.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    RichardTaylor wrote:

    The Yuppy liberal stuff is pure virtue signaling. But I do think many Whites have sincere concern for Blacks, Native Americans, etc, whether they are liberal or conservative.

    Sure. I’m sickened when I see some black toddler killed in cross-fire between gang-bangers. Any decent person is.

    Richard also wrote:

    But you’d be hard-pressed to find non-Whites who care about White people. And that implies that everyone thinks of White people as on another moral plane.

    Well, I and my family and friends have known black folks who spoke up on behalf of whites simply because it was the right thing to do. And, you know, it was black witnesses in Ferguson who told the truth about the Michael Brown incident.

    But I’ll acknowledge that what you are pointing to is a tribalism that will destroy a republic, an attitude of “Is it good for my group?” instead of “Is it right and just?”

    The Founders were very fond of saying that a republic rests on the “virtue of the people.” A despotism controlled by halfway decent (or even competent) despots can survive even if ordinary people have no sense of civic virtue at all.

    But not a republic.

    I think mid-twentieth-century so-called “interest group liberalism” bears a lot of the blame for this. It was a crack-pot poli-sci theory, ultimately absorbed by the news media and the culture, that pretended that a war-of-all-against-all among different contending interest groups will lead to an optimal equilibrium in the same way that market competition does.

    They ignored the fact that market competition is a positive-sum game: both sides gain in a normal market exchange. But robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul is at best a zero-sum game: in practice, it is a negative-sum game because people devote their energies to predation rather than production.

    If you’re lucky you just end up with what Perón did to Argentina. If you’re not lucky, you end up with Norther Ireland during the Troubles.

    Or worse.

    Our liberal-progressive elites have a lot to answer for, going back a long time, for what they have done to this country.

    • Agree: Hibernian
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @PhysicistDave


    Our liberal-progressive elites have a lot to answer for, going back a long time, for what they have done to this country.
     
    Fortunately, we still have sufficient lampposts.
    , @RichardTaylor
    @PhysicistDave

    The point isn't that an occasional Black person speaks up for the occasional White person.

    The point is, nobody expects non-Whites to exhibit the same routine moral conscience Whites do. And you know that if you'd quit playing games and be honest.


    But I’ll acknowledge that what you are pointing to is a tribalism
     
    All politics is tribal. All politics is identity politics, it always has been, everywhere, at all times. Because humans are social animals of a tribal nature. Unless, the person in question is a sociopath.
  141. The Republicans just need to push the Dems into a corner on this tranny shit – really get them to double down on the crazy. Almost no one but the leftiest of Whites is down with it. Landslide wins in 2022 and 2024.

  142. Joltin’ Joe is back.

    President Biden on Thursday made one of his most head-turning comments since being sworn in when he told an Indian-American aerospace engineer that immigrants from the subcontinent are “taking over” the US.

    “It’s amazing. Indian-descent Americans are taking over the country — you, my vice president, my speechwriter,” Biden told Swati Mohan, NASA’s guidance and controls operations lead for the Mars Perseverance rover landing.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @MEH 0910

    Man, I miss Bill Clinton. It was nice having a president with an IQ over 110.

  143. @Ron Unz

    Is Shor talking about a 1 or 2% decline or 1 or 2 percentage points?
     
    Either way, the decline of black support for the Democratic ticket was pretty negligible. But losing nearly 10 points of Hispanic support in one election is a very big deal, especially since Trump directed nearly all of his effort to winning black votes and almost no effort to winning Hispanic ones.

    Put another way, if Trump had chosen his words more carefully and actually tried to win Hispanic support, he might very well have gotten a higher share of the Hispanic vote than any Republican candidate in American history. I wonder how the Trump-hating media would have spun that...

    All the post-election points Shor is making are pretty obvious, and similar to things I have writing myself for almost three decades now, going back to the early 1990s. Here are links to downloadable eBooks of my collected articles on the subject from 1994 to 2001 in ePub and Mobi/Kindle formats:

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/NewAmericanMeltingPot.epub

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/NewAmericanMeltingPot.mobi

    Plus my big 2011 article:

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/ImmigrationRepublicans.epub

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/ImmigrationRepublicans.mobi

    And my 2016 "Grand Bargain" article proposing a politically workable solution to our endless immigration conflicts (shortly available as an eBook):

    https://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @AnotherDad, @anon

    And my 2016 “Grand Bargain” article proposing a politically workable solution to our endless immigration conflicts (shortly available as an eBook):

    I don’t have any big issue with raising the minimum wage as part of some “Grand Bargain”.

    But the core solution is sanity: immigration must stop. Sure we can pick up the odd really smartguy who’s working on thorium cycle or something. But the US never needed and immigration hasn’t made any sense for the core national project since the frontier closed in the 1880s.

    And closing immigration down is very easy to explain and sell to every ethnic group (well maybe bar one) and immigrants as well as natives.

    American jobs, at American wages, for American kids.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @AnotherDad


    But the core solution is sanity: immigration must stop. Sure we can pick up the odd really smartguy who’s working on thorium cycle or something. But the US never needed and immigration hasn’t made any sense for the core national project since the frontier closed in the 1880s.
     
    Tucker Carlson has done a good job of popularizing the fact that the ruling class talks about immigration both legal and illegal almost entirely in terms of the welfare of non-Americans - as a form of telescopic philanthropy. The benefit to Americans is an insulting afterthought such as "all the ethnic restaurants." Of course this is cover for "keeping wages low and creating clients for the Democratic party."

    A change in the perspective of how we talk about immigration would do much to change the focus from four year olds with big brown eyes (how the Press reports on the issue) to the welfare of working Americans.

    Replies: @Anon

  144. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor wrote:


    The Yuppy liberal stuff is pure virtue signaling. But I do think many Whites have sincere concern for Blacks, Native Americans, etc, whether they are liberal or conservative.
     
    Sure. I'm sickened when I see some black toddler killed in cross-fire between gang-bangers. Any decent person is.

    Richard also wrote:

    But you’d be hard-pressed to find non-Whites who care about White people. And that implies that everyone thinks of White people as on another moral plane.
     
    Well, I and my family and friends have known black folks who spoke up on behalf of whites simply because it was the right thing to do. And, you know, it was black witnesses in Ferguson who told the truth about the Michael Brown incident.

    But I'll acknowledge that what you are pointing to is a tribalism that will destroy a republic, an attitude of "Is it good for my group?" instead of "Is it right and just?"

    The Founders were very fond of saying that a republic rests on the "virtue of the people." A despotism controlled by halfway decent (or even competent) despots can survive even if ordinary people have no sense of civic virtue at all.

    But not a republic.

    I think mid-twentieth-century so-called "interest group liberalism" bears a lot of the blame for this. It was a crack-pot poli-sci theory, ultimately absorbed by the news media and the culture, that pretended that a war-of-all-against-all among different contending interest groups will lead to an optimal equilibrium in the same way that market competition does.

    They ignored the fact that market competition is a positive-sum game: both sides gain in a normal market exchange. But robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul is at best a zero-sum game: in practice, it is a negative-sum game because people devote their energies to predation rather than production.

    If you're lucky you just end up with what Perón did to Argentina. If you're not lucky, you end up with Norther Ireland during the Troubles.

    Or worse.

    Our liberal-progressive elites have a lot to answer for, going back a long time, for what they have done to this country.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @RichardTaylor

    Our liberal-progressive elites have a lot to answer for, going back a long time, for what they have done to this country.

    Fortunately, we still have sufficient lampposts.

    • LOL: PhysicistDave
  145. anonymous[192] • Disclaimer says:
    @James J O'Meara
    @anonymous

    "America as a whole could take on another 100 million non-whites and still be in decent enough shape to be 2-3 rungs above Brazil."

    So, this is the bar now?

    https://youtu.be/0napnfxd-dU

    Replies: @anonymous

    2 rungs above Brazil is Portugal. 3 rungs is Italy. That’s not such a bad future. People are expecting a collapse in 2050. It’s not so bad in comparison.

    • Disagree: Luzzatto
    • Replies: @James J O'Meara
    @anonymous

    Portugal, Italy? Sunny, cheap, laid back, White. OK, I'd go for that.

    You want religion? Catholicism but no one cares, perfect; not like those Protestant busybodies who have mutated into the SJWs.

    "I prefer to live in Catholic societies, there is no trace of Christianity to bother one." -- Character in Gore Vidal's Burr (or 1876).

    Interesting that despite a rep for laissez faire ( I mean, like "manana" not libertarianism) both had successful fascist governments. My kinda people.

    Replies: @Muggles

  146. @Almost Missouri
    @PhysicistDave


    It’s all fake — mere virtue signalling.
     
    I mostly agree, and yet ...

    I may have mentioned that my extended family and their friends are mostly liberals of various stripes, which has allowed me to observe these pathologies at close range over long periods of time. With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as "just virtue signalling again, zzzzz", but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers. The only thing they do in their limited spare time is watch Black movies. They seem to believe earnestly in Hidden Figures, Henrietta Lacks as a holy icon, BLM nonsense, etc. They organize "anti-racism" (i.e. anti-white) conferences. They donate religiously to the SPLC. They're like a parody out of the iSteve comments section. I could probably write a couple of sitcom screenplays with their antics. Yes, they still live in a 99% white neighborhood, but they bought that house two decades ago when they still had kids, and they haven't had cause to move yet. So I guess until they move somewhere other than a whitopia, or she leaves him to go coalburning (though they're getting kinda old for that), or some other Rubicon event, I can't say for sure, but my point is that somewhere along the line, the difference between virtue signalling and true belief ceases to exist or at least to matter. After all, that money they give to the SPLC will end up harming real people somewhere somehow, as will the antiwhite animus they whip up in antiracism rallies. Dismissing this as "mere virtue signalling" is ultimately somewhere between naive and disingenuous. Mere virtue signalling can kill.

    Replies: @Ripple Earthdevil, @Anon, @SimpleSong, @The Last Real Calvinist, @PhysicistDave, @Harry Baldwin

    With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as “just virtue signalling again, zzzzz”, but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers.

    This is the question I’ve been raising over and over in the past few years as I see many of my peers and relatives get woke.

    I was out for beers with some friends last week. One of them, a middle-aged, Ivy-educated white American, was talking about how he and his family need to move back to the USA, but he’s really worried about what it’s going to be like for his Chinese wife and mixed daughter there.

    Before I could ask him if it was the crime rates or the crap schools that were sure to be the biggest problem, he start explaining very earnestly how his wife just could not understand what kind of impact racism was going to have on her life in the USA. He invoked January 6 (which is now a shorthand term like 9/11 for the Woke), and recounted stories he’d heard about white supremecists marauding around in pick-up trucks, waving the Confederate flag, right in the city they were planning to move to. So I asked him what state was it, exactly, to which they were headed. The answer? New Hampshire.

    I like this guy; he’s generally sensible on most other topics; but something has changed. I don’t doubt anymore that he really believes in the narrative.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    @The Last Real Calvinist


    recounted stories he’d heard about white supremecists marauding around in pick-up trucks, waving the Confederate flag, right in the city they were planning to move to
     
    But where exactly does this stuff come from?

    I have no TV and do not partake in "popular culture" anymore, soo I have two possibilities:

    - CNN infinite loop on the latest story about some black guy being shot while there is a pickup truck in the image
    - The tsunami of crime/apocalypse/alternate-history/nazi movies, comics games and serials being pushed by Netflix/Amazon/Whatever with the obligatory scene of pick-up trucks and supremacists actually implanting false memories

    I'm sure there are whole teams of psych, marketing types, lobbyists and influencers working on "outcomes" in "research institutes".

    , @AndrewR
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    Where do you live?

    Some northerners without any (close) south(east)ern ties do like to rep that flag. Perhaps it represents simple "rebellion" to many of them.

    In any case, I can understand why a Chinese person might be hesitant to move into a lily-hhhhwhite town. Having said that, they'd be much safer there than any white (let alone a Chinese) person would be in an area with a significant number of blacks. If our media weren't so maliciously dishonest then everyone would know that.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    , @Almost Missouri
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    When he says these things, you could mention to him something like, "You know whoever is telling you that is lying to you, right?" in an offhand but confident and jocular way. Nine out of ten times, it does nothing, and they just go back to drinking the koolaid to which they're addicted. But sometimes it can sow just enough doubt. It may have never occurred to them to question the authority of their "source". That someone they know confidently asserts "it's just BS" may let a little light in, though you may never see the result yourself.

    If you're on solid footing with him, you could even try stronger medicine: "You are far more likely to be persecuted in modern Amerikkka than your waifu." And stronger: "They're gonna tell your kid she's got the wrong gender and put her on hormone treatments. Also that you are oppressing her by being a white male, and that your marriage is colonialism. You're right, you probably shouldn't go back. The crazies are in charge now. Bad things could happen."

    I've used both these approaches. The second gets better results than the first, but you need a stronger pre-existing relationship. They're not mutually exclusive. If I get any traction on the second approach, I intermittently circle back with offhand wokisms: "Did you just assume that person's gender?", "You're only saying that because of your white privilege.", blah blah systemic racism blah blah white fragility blah, etc. Give 'em a foretaste of the wokocracy they've been perhaps unwittingly inflicting on everyone else. When they start realizing they might be on the receiving end, suddenly it's not fun'n'games anymore, even though you're treating it like it is.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    , @anon
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    I like this guy; he’s generally sensible on most other topics; but something has changed. I don’t doubt anymore that he really believes in the narrative.

    Let me take a guess: they are on Facebook all the time. All the time, plus they have Twitter feeds. So their "news" is just the same NYT / CNN sludge reflected over and over again. Oh, yeah, maybe she has a few friends on Instagram. Same thing, though, each is immersed in the Narrative. If they view Hong Kong news sources, they will get the same thing again, right?

    The totally curated worldview with zero dissent or alternative. That's what I believe your friends are soaking in. Jack Dorsey and Jeff Zuckerberg tell them what to think.

    https://mk0uploadvrcom4bcwhj.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/zuckerberg-rows.jpg

    , @Jack D
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    Always look at revealed preferences - talk is cheap. Chances are that if the guy has some good reason to move back to the States, he will.

    He is just reciting the current Narrative about how terrible the racism against Asians is in order to signal that he is a Goodwhite and has the opinions suitable for a Goodwhite. Having these opinions is just one more way to signal your group membership like wearing the right brand of shoes or driving the right kind of car. Reciting these beliefs has nothing to do with his actions. It's like putting a BLM sign in your yard. Just because you have one doesn't mean that you are willing to send your kids to a 90% black school. It's just a safe and meaningless virtue signalling gesture.

    Does he really understand that most of the attacks on Asians are coming from blacks? Possibly not. He doesn't want to allow his brain to stray into such forbidden territory. Orwell spoke about "Protective Stupidity". Even if he does understand on some level, he is not about to repeat his thoughts in public and cast himself out of his hard earned status as a Goodwhite. But the fact that he wants to move to NH and not to Mississippi might be a clue.

    Part of what separates Goodwhites from Badwhites is that to a Goodwhite, Badwhites are crude, uneducated, uncouth people whose brains are connected directly to their mouths. A Goodwhite might THINK the exact same things but he has the education and refinement NEVER to blurt out the N-word or let you know their true thoughts about blacks. Never, under any circumstances. I mean that some thug could pistol whip him to within an inch of his life and he STILL wouldn't have anything bad to say about blacks - that's a true test of character. Of course most Goodwhites try to construct their lives to avoid such challenges, but if they are unlucky and are people of good character, they will withstand them.

    The Papa John's guy outed himself as a Badwhite, the NY Times guy too, by saying the N-word, even in reference to something someone else said. A fun, profitable game you can play as a Goodwhite is to poke at other people to find out if they are fellow Goodwhites or not. You can bait them and try to trick them into saying the N-word or otherwise vocalizing disapproval of bad behavior by blacks. If they take the bait, then they have shown that they are Badwhites and it's OK to destroy them. If they pass the test then they are your fellow Goodwhites and you can befriend them. Badwhites aren't even aware that this game even exists and so they often fall for it and then they don't know what hit them.

    On the recent TV series The Crown they depicted a similar game that the royals would (supposedly - it's probably mostly fictional) play with commoners such as Margaret Thatcher who were visitors to their royal haunts. Not only did the commoners not know how to play the game, they didn't even know they were IN a game and so would show up completely unprepared for these little upper class shit tests. So then they would of course flunk them and the royals would snigger behind their backs at the uncouth commoners.

  147. @JohnnyWalker123
    https://twitter.com/AlexanderSpinn/status/1367496070113148932

    Replies: @Luzzatto, @El Dato

    Incessant Moaning by Blacks and their White Helpers is like you are really camping in a cowherd.

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
    @El Dato

    I think in the long term, it'll be used as an excuse for higher Black Covid mortality. They'll say Blacks weren't allocated enough vaccines in a timely fashion because wealthy Whites hogged all the vaccines. Then they'll expect something in return.

  148. @Desiderius
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Put down the iPalantir, Denethor.

    We were close last time. It'll take a lot more than voting but it surely won't take less unless you're ready to lose everything.

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666, @ben tillman, @The Last Real Calvinist

    I’m not sure I agree with you on this one, Desiderius, but I LOLed at the iPalantir line.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    I didn't get that at all. Sorry, Desiderius, and that's why I didn't write back - confusion. How about one of you two explain it?

    Anyway, yeah, I vote, but all that does is delay the inevitable by a little upon the occasional wins. I guess we can do all this strategic planning on how to get a few more years of delay, or we can be preppers. Prepping is more up my alley.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

  149. anon[350] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    Steve,
    This might be offtopic, but have you ever done research on what sort of policies reduce crime the most in America?
    Crime is probably been the most important long run issue in this country, yet no one has seemed to figure out how to completely solve it.
    NYC has done some stuff, but that might be because of the lots of money the city has in doing broken window policing.
    Is there good research on this topic?

    Replies: @anon, @Nicholas Stix

    Crime is probably been the most important long run issue in this country, yet no one has seemed to figure out how to completely solve it.

    Are you for real? The migratory invasion and the creeping genocide against American Whites are by far the most important long run issues in the country.

    • Agree: AnotherDad
  150. @Hypnotoad666
    @Desiderius


    We were close last time. It’ll take a lot more than voting but it surely won’t take less unless you’re ready to lose everything.
     
    This true. You can't let the bastards win simply by demoralizing you.

    I think the main epiphany of the last four years is that, besides voting, we need a strategy for fighting back against the elite leftist control over the commanding heights of cultural and institutions.

    Maybe Wokeness just needs to be contained, like the Soviet Union, until it dies of its own contradictions.

    Federalism and decentralization should be major goals. In a fair competition, most normal people will chose free institutions over woke authoritarianism. So we don't need to destroy the left, but merely carve out some space for the alternative. You can already see how freer, more conservative states (Texas, Florida, Arizona) have become far more attractive than lefty states (New York, Illinois, California).

    Replies: @anon, @ben tillman, @AndrewR

    Lmao lauding Texas for its “freedom” right now is beyond tone-deaf. Is that you, Rick Perry?

  151. @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco
    @Travis

    Yes, few predicted Trump’s victory in 2016 and fewer predicted the Chinese would release a virus which targeted the obese and elderly. Fewer would have predicted the government would shutter all schools and colleges to protect the obese and elderly. The next virus released by China could target a different demographic and be far more deadly than the flu. If CV had a fatality rate of 2% we would have lost over 2 million Americans.

    Replies: @Ron Unz, @AndrewR

    You should say “the ChiComs” instead of “China” in order to go full cuckservatard

  152. @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1367619798620901379

    Joltin’ Joe is back.

    President Biden on Thursday made one of his most head-turning comments since being sworn in when he told an Indian-American aerospace engineer that immigrants from the subcontinent are “taking over” the US.

    “It’s amazing. Indian-descent Americans are taking over the country — you, my vice president, my speechwriter,” Biden told Swati Mohan, NASA’s guidance and controls operations lead for the Mars Perseverance rover landing.
     

    Replies: @AndrewR

    Man, I miss Bill Clinton. It was nice having a president with an IQ over 110.

    • LOL: PhysicistDave
  153. @El Dato
    Meanwhile: Is it over? Democratism triumphs triumphantly.

    ‘For The People Act’ confirms it: Our Democracy has officially replaced the American Republic


    If there were any doubts that a civil war had in fact been waged in the US, and that the side that “fortified” the 2020 election and redefined the republic as “Our Democracy” triumphed, HR1 should dispel the last vestiges of them.

    The bill, also named “For The People Act” of 2021, passed in the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives in a 220-210 vote on Wednesday. Only one Democrat was opposed.

    The 800-page bill basically codifies all the problematic practices of the 2020 election into law. There’s an expansion of mail-in ballots and extended deadlines to count them, but also automatic voter registration, a waiver for voter IDs, and nationwide ballot-harvesting, California-style. It also shifts the authority to draw congressional districts from states, criminalizes broadly defined “interference” in elections, and so much more.

    Whatever one may think of the Heritage Foundation, its analysis of the bill is factually accurate. Don’t take my word for it, though, read it and compare it to the actual text.
     

    https://i.postimg.cc/wvh00qPp/democracy-clippy.jpg

    Bonus round: Capitol of Panem stays greenzoned for a indefinitely more.

    US Capitol Police call for National Guard to be deployed for another TWO MONTHS, citing threats – media


    While “none of [Congress] like looking at the fencing, the gates, the uniformed presence around the Capitol,” according to Slotkin, the Capitol Police seem to have embraced the prison-camp look the building has taken on. The police urged congressional leaders to leave the razor-wire fencing surrounding the building in place for “several more months” – possibly until September due to “online chatter” by supposed extremists. Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security called for a heightened threat of domestic terrorism through April, anticipating “ideologically-motivated violent extremists” upset over Biden’s presidency might“continue to mobilize to incite or commit violence.”
     

    Replies: @danand, @James J O'Meara

    “US Capitol Police call for National Guard to be deployed for another TWO MONTHS…”

    El Dato, my thought is they want them around for that moment when Xiden turns over the keys to Harris. With any luck those Guardsmen will make it home for Easter.

  154. @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Almost Missouri


    With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as “just virtue signalling again, zzzzz”, but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers.

     

    This is the question I've been raising over and over in the past few years as I see many of my peers and relatives get woke.

    I was out for beers with some friends last week. One of them, a middle-aged, Ivy-educated white American, was talking about how he and his family need to move back to the USA, but he's really worried about what it's going to be like for his Chinese wife and mixed daughter there.

    Before I could ask him if it was the crime rates or the crap schools that were sure to be the biggest problem, he start explaining very earnestly how his wife just could not understand what kind of impact racism was going to have on her life in the USA. He invoked January 6 (which is now a shorthand term like 9/11 for the Woke), and recounted stories he'd heard about white supremecists marauding around in pick-up trucks, waving the Confederate flag, right in the city they were planning to move to. So I asked him what state was it, exactly, to which they were headed. The answer? New Hampshire.

    I like this guy; he's generally sensible on most other topics; but something has changed. I don't doubt anymore that he really believes in the narrative.

    Replies: @El Dato, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @Jack D

    recounted stories he’d heard about white supremecists marauding around in pick-up trucks, waving the Confederate flag, right in the city they were planning to move to

    But where exactly does this stuff come from?

    I have no TV and do not partake in “popular culture” anymore, soo I have two possibilities:

    – CNN infinite loop on the latest story about some black guy being shot while there is a pickup truck in the image
    – The tsunami of crime/apocalypse/alternate-history/nazi movies, comics games and serials being pushed by Netflix/Amazon/Whatever with the obligatory scene of pick-up trucks and supremacists actually implanting false memories

    I’m sure there are whole teams of psych, marketing types, lobbyists and influencers working on “outcomes” in “research institutes”.

  155. @Flubber82
    In my conversations with real people, my observations are white liberals in general are true believers. Immune to truth and logic. A friend of mine is still adamant that the KKK lead the riots and white supremacists are responsible for all the violence. They are absolutely true believers. I stung her with facts and logic regarding the the riots and she was just immune to it. Absolutely believed it. She even believed that the KKK were in the street wearing white hoods in a 100 percent black neighborhood because one delusional women said the KKK was outside her house. Most blacks I talk to aren't like this, they will level with you about what actually caused the violence. White liberals are truly a modern-day version of a cult. Unfortunately every corporation, school, and all media just reinforce their views.

    After the Kyle Rittenhouse shooting, I showed a woman multiple videos that anyone not brainwashed would consider self-defense. She watched the videos in with great attention, I was losing my temper with rage and my mind was about to explode, she just wouldn't agree that it was self-defense. She came back with things like "He was a kid and it's illegal for kids to have guns." "He shot those unarmed people for no reason." "He shouldn't have been there anyway." "He's a white supremacist." "They were peaceful protesters." "They didn't have guns." I literally showed her videos of Kyle running away from his attackers. Here is one of the videos I showed her https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bfTNURZJN8

    It was almost like she was watching the videos but regardless of how many facts and truth of actual live video footage displayed that negated the narrative, she would never recant from the narrative. It was was completely mind-boggling. It was my first experience with someone I would label a cultist.

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix, @Achmed E. Newman, @Almost Missouri

    It’s all about loyalty and enmity (see Carl Schmitt’s “friend-enemy-relationship”). These people are loyal to evil blacks, communists, reconquistas, etc. I have many such relatives. We go 20-30 years at a time without speaking.

  156. @Anon
    Steve,
    This might be offtopic, but have you ever done research on what sort of policies reduce crime the most in America?
    Crime is probably been the most important long run issue in this country, yet no one has seemed to figure out how to completely solve it.
    NYC has done some stuff, but that might be because of the lots of money the city has in doing broken window policing.
    Is there good research on this topic?

    Replies: @anon, @Nicholas Stix

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Nicholas Stix

    Mr. Stix:

    I plowed partway through the reading list you linked. I had already known that police departments were underreporting violent crimes in various ways, but I had always assumed well, they can't fiddle homicide. But you show a bunch of instances where they did just that! And these weren't obscure murders of homeless people no one would ever inquire about but publicly witnessed and even notorious murders that have a wikipedia page!

    If I may request the indulgence of your time, I have two questions:

    1) Is there any way to "audit" the homicide statistics other than calling the police department and asking individually about each murder, as you did in several of your articles?

    2) How much do you think the police under-report homicide? Is there any way to quantify it? Presumably the underreporting is worse in big cities than elsewhere. Is anyone besides you covering this?

    Thanks for you attention!

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix

  157. @El Dato
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Incessant Moaning by Blacks and their White Helpers is like you are really camping in a cowherd.

    Replies: @JohnnyWalker123

    I think in the long term, it’ll be used as an excuse for higher Black Covid mortality. They’ll say Blacks weren’t allocated enough vaccines in a timely fashion because wealthy Whites hogged all the vaccines. Then they’ll expect something in return.

  158. David Shor and his chum Eric Levitz
    Got s**tfaced on grape Manischewitz;
    Both fellows agreed
    What Republicans need
    Are more senators like Jacob Javits.

    • Thanks: black sea
    • LOL: Harry Baldwin
  159. @Almost Missouri
    @PhysicistDave


    It’s all fake — mere virtue signalling.
     
    I mostly agree, and yet ...

    I may have mentioned that my extended family and their friends are mostly liberals of various stripes, which has allowed me to observe these pathologies at close range over long periods of time. With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as "just virtue signalling again, zzzzz", but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers. The only thing they do in their limited spare time is watch Black movies. They seem to believe earnestly in Hidden Figures, Henrietta Lacks as a holy icon, BLM nonsense, etc. They organize "anti-racism" (i.e. anti-white) conferences. They donate religiously to the SPLC. They're like a parody out of the iSteve comments section. I could probably write a couple of sitcom screenplays with their antics. Yes, they still live in a 99% white neighborhood, but they bought that house two decades ago when they still had kids, and they haven't had cause to move yet. So I guess until they move somewhere other than a whitopia, or she leaves him to go coalburning (though they're getting kinda old for that), or some other Rubicon event, I can't say for sure, but my point is that somewhere along the line, the difference between virtue signalling and true belief ceases to exist or at least to matter. After all, that money they give to the SPLC will end up harming real people somewhere somehow, as will the antiwhite animus they whip up in antiracism rallies. Dismissing this as "mere virtue signalling" is ultimately somewhere between naive and disingenuous. Mere virtue signalling can kill.

    Replies: @Ripple Earthdevil, @Anon, @SimpleSong, @The Last Real Calvinist, @PhysicistDave, @Harry Baldwin

    Almost Missouri wrote to me:

    I can’t say for sure, but my point is that somewhere along the line, the difference between virtue signalling and true belief ceases to exist or at least to matter.

    Sure. Most people find it easier to lie if they convince themselves of their own lies.

    And as someone suggested above, if a person just tries really hard to not think about a subject, he may not even realize that the falsehoods he spouts are lies.

    But, as you imply, it does seem to start with virtue signalling.

    AM also wrote:

    Dismissing this as “mere virtue signalling” is ultimately somewhere between naive and disingenuous. Mere virtue signalling can kill.

    Indeed. They harm everyone except some of the members of the ruling elite.

    Obviously, decent but poor blacks are harmed. And while whites can often escape the worst of it, they are sometimes victims.

    Bizarrely, even the thugs would be better off if they had been raised in a society that discouraged them from becoming thugs: after all, a number of them end up dead at the hands of their peers.

    One moral, I suppose, is that people should just shut the hell up about their plans for saving the world unless they have really thought things through carefully (at least the effort that most of us put in if we are considering buying a new house) and unless they are willing to “walk the walk” — e.g., actually move into a black ghetto.

    But I do not think the Woke Whites want to hear that.

    • Replies: @Nico
    @PhysicistDave


    One moral, I suppose, is that people should just shut the hell up about their plans for saving the world unless they have really thought things through carefully (at least the effort that most of us put in if we are considering buying a new house) and unless they are willing to “walk the walk” — e.g., actually move into a black ghetto.
     
    I used to think that way, that woke intersectionalist liberal who were ready to "walk the walk" had the right to talk. Now my thought is, I can respect them but only from the opposite side of the firing line and certainly can't talk to them. I've met several who did things like live in Romani colonies and they're the absolute worst. More whimsically and closer to home is a former high school friend. Despite never being able to provide for herself and her son on her own resources, not listening to her father when he told her not to marry her first husband who turned out to be a slug and not listening to me when I told her not to marry her second who turned out to be gay and borderline, she's a hardcore feminist and moves with a curious brand of nightclub queers, blue-haired bisexual chicks and ghetto mammas. She's also become a thoroughly unpleasant person. (I think her son's going to become a Nazi when he grows up in reaction.)
  160. Thanks to Mr Shor we have a new euphemism for ‘patronise’ or ‘prejudice’ -‘essentialize’! “So I think liberals really essentialize Hispanic voters and project views about immigration onto them that the data just doesn’t support.”

  161. @Achmed E. Newman
    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this, and, therefore, this is boring and pointless stuff. As the nice young lady who just couldn't seem to cheat herself over the top said "At this point, what difference does it make?"

    Shades of Pat Buchanan here... "one of these bright new conservatives should be able to get a position on the Ways and Means Committee, and now that we have a favorable appellate court that can rule on the ... zzzzzz.... zizzer, zazzer, zuzzzzzzz.

    Replies: @Michael S, @Desiderius, @Travis, @Jim Don Bob, @PhysicistDave

    Achmed E. Newman wrote:

    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this, and, therefore, this is boring and pointless stuff.

    No: as Travis said, history is unpredictable.

    Trump’s one big accomplishment was to tear the veil off the people who run this country. Quite unintentionally of course, Trump caused the Deep State and the Elite Media to show their hands. Something like a quarter of the country now know that the elites that run the country really, truly hate and despise most of their fellow citizens of all races: the ruling elite may manipulate non-Asian minorities to shore up their power, but they probably despise those groups even more than they despise working-class whites. (Remember when Biden said, ““poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids”?)

    The current American regime is unstable: federal fiscal policies are unsustainable; our monetary system is rickety; we are prepping our military for anything except actually fighting a war; our schools are jokes; the American people are really not happy.

    Feels to me like France circa 1785, imperial Russia in 1914, or the Soviets circa 1980.

    As Herb Stein said, if something cannot go on forever, it won’t.

    No one can foretell if the break will come in 2024 or 2030 or whatever, just as even Lenin did not foresee the 1917 revolution. But the break will come.

    The question is what direction things will take after the collapse.

    John Adams write in 1818:

    What do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people. . . . This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.

    Ultimately, ideas rule the world. When the fighting actually starts, it is too late.

    Conservatism Inc. had no ideas, except “Let’s slow things down a bit.”

    The Founders had ideas.

    And they were good ones.

    If proclaimed clearly and widely enough, those ideas just might be good enough to mobilize enough people against the Left to win.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @PhysicistDave

    I agree with almost your whole comment here, Physicist, though I would not use the word "rickety" for our financial system. (I would use something about an abyss.) The only word in your comment here I disagree with is "No", because I see no disagreement in here with what I wrote - do you think we will be voting our way out of this?

    They system(s) will fail. As your wrote, and Instapundit before you, and Herb Stein before him, "if something can't go on, it won't go on"*.

    I agree. Before the system(s) fail, it would be great if more people would be turned onto the words/video/homeschool curriculum of Ron Paul. It'd be great if they could all be against the warfare State. It'd be great if more Americans understood the evil of Socialism, and why it's incentives for dysgenics have ruined the country. It'd be great if more Americans understood why a nation must have borders. It'd be great if more people understood the US Constitution.

    One word for you too, Dave: Demographics. Do you think that the 50 million or more newcomers/offspring-of-same of the last 50 years are Ron Paul supporters? Are they the types that would give a rat's ass about the US Constitution, much less know who John Adams was? How about the 40 million black people, in general?

    So what rebuild happens after the big SHTF moment coming will need to involve a separation of some kind.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    , @3g4me
    @PhysicistDave

    @161 Physicist Dave: I'm sure the founders would have embraced your hapa children as prototypical 'Murricans. Would we could all be as clever as Physicist Dave.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

  162. @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Almost Missouri


    With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as “just virtue signalling again, zzzzz”, but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers.

     

    This is the question I've been raising over and over in the past few years as I see many of my peers and relatives get woke.

    I was out for beers with some friends last week. One of them, a middle-aged, Ivy-educated white American, was talking about how he and his family need to move back to the USA, but he's really worried about what it's going to be like for his Chinese wife and mixed daughter there.

    Before I could ask him if it was the crime rates or the crap schools that were sure to be the biggest problem, he start explaining very earnestly how his wife just could not understand what kind of impact racism was going to have on her life in the USA. He invoked January 6 (which is now a shorthand term like 9/11 for the Woke), and recounted stories he'd heard about white supremecists marauding around in pick-up trucks, waving the Confederate flag, right in the city they were planning to move to. So I asked him what state was it, exactly, to which they were headed. The answer? New Hampshire.

    I like this guy; he's generally sensible on most other topics; but something has changed. I don't doubt anymore that he really believes in the narrative.

    Replies: @El Dato, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @Jack D

    Where do you live?

    Some northerners without any (close) south(east)ern ties do like to rep that flag. Perhaps it represents simple “rebellion” to many of them.

    In any case, I can understand why a Chinese person might be hesitant to move into a lily-hhhhwhite town. Having said that, they’d be much safer there than any white (let alone a Chinese) person would be in an area with a significant number of blacks. If our media weren’t so maliciously dishonest then everyone would know that.

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    @AndrewR

    I live in Hong Kong.

    I think he may actually have been referring to a 'Live Free or Die' flag, which makes a lot more sense in NH, and which he may have been assuming was a Confederate slogan.

    Replies: @anon

  163. @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Almost Missouri


    With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as “just virtue signalling again, zzzzz”, but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers.

     

    This is the question I've been raising over and over in the past few years as I see many of my peers and relatives get woke.

    I was out for beers with some friends last week. One of them, a middle-aged, Ivy-educated white American, was talking about how he and his family need to move back to the USA, but he's really worried about what it's going to be like for his Chinese wife and mixed daughter there.

    Before I could ask him if it was the crime rates or the crap schools that were sure to be the biggest problem, he start explaining very earnestly how his wife just could not understand what kind of impact racism was going to have on her life in the USA. He invoked January 6 (which is now a shorthand term like 9/11 for the Woke), and recounted stories he'd heard about white supremecists marauding around in pick-up trucks, waving the Confederate flag, right in the city they were planning to move to. So I asked him what state was it, exactly, to which they were headed. The answer? New Hampshire.

    I like this guy; he's generally sensible on most other topics; but something has changed. I don't doubt anymore that he really believes in the narrative.

    Replies: @El Dato, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @Jack D

    When he says these things, you could mention to him something like, “You know whoever is telling you that is lying to you, right?” in an offhand but confident and jocular way. Nine out of ten times, it does nothing, and they just go back to drinking the koolaid to which they’re addicted. But sometimes it can sow just enough doubt. It may have never occurred to them to question the authority of their “source”. That someone they know confidently asserts “it’s just BS” may let a little light in, though you may never see the result yourself.

    If you’re on solid footing with him, you could even try stronger medicine: “You are far more likely to be persecuted in modern Amerikkka than your waifu.” And stronger: “They’re gonna tell your kid she’s got the wrong gender and put her on hormone treatments. Also that you are oppressing her by being a white male, and that your marriage is colonialism. You’re right, you probably shouldn’t go back. The crazies are in charge now. Bad things could happen.”

    I’ve used both these approaches. The second gets better results than the first, but you need a stronger pre-existing relationship. They’re not mutually exclusive. If I get any traction on the second approach, I intermittently circle back with offhand wokisms: “Did you just assume that person’s gender?”, “You’re only saying that because of your white privilege.”, blah blah systemic racism blah blah white fragility blah, etc. Give ’em a foretaste of the wokocracy they’ve been perhaps unwittingly inflicting on everyone else. When they start realizing they might be on the receiving end, suddenly it’s not fun’n’games anymore, even though you’re treating it like it is.

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Almost Missouri

    Thanks for this, AM; they're good ideas.

    That evening I responded by saying something like 'Your wife and daughter have spent their whole lives in Hong Kong, which is one of the safest cities around. Aren't you more worried about how they're going to deal with the crime in USA?'

    He's a New Yorker, so he went into a 'you just show you're street smart, and everybody will leave you alone' schtick.

    I then asked him if he truly believed his wife and school-aged daughter could pull this off.

    By this point -- he's far from stupid -- he knew what we were really talking about. He just gave me a look, and changed the subject.

    Replies: @anon, @Almost Missouri

  164. @Ron Unz
    @steinbergfeldwitzcohen


    Claiming that Trump is the worst Prez in history is complete nonsense. There is a list.
     
    Well, you're certainly listing some other contenders. But here's another comment of mine to consider:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/shor-us-white-democrats-could-easily-alienate-nonwhite-democrats-with-our-crazy-level-of-racial-resentment-on-their-behalf/#comment-4506122

    Anyway, I've never understood endless denunciations of Wilson for the Federal Reserve. Doesn't just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax? If everyone has a central bank and an income tax, isn't it ridiculous that if not for Wilson, we wouldn't? Anyway, wasn't the Income Tax ratified before Wilson was inaugurated?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Reg Cæsar, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @anon

    Doesn’t just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax?

    That’s a good point that isn’t often made, but …

    1) A lot of central banks simply peg their currency to the US dollar, effectively making themselves franchises of the Federal Reserve on their single most importation responsibility.

    2) Even the central banks that are nominally sovereign (Europe, UK, Japan) “coordinate” monetary policy with the Federal Reserve (“coordinate” = if the Fed says “jump”, …).

    3) The Fed is the only central bank issuing the global reserve currency, so its power, and scope for abuse of that power (which is the reason governments have central banks in the first place) is an order of magnitude more than it would be otherwise.

    I know your comment was about whether Wilson was responsible for this (I agree he wasn’t particularly) rather than whether it was a good thing, but still, I didn’t want anyone to come away from your comment with the impression that central banks are a natural and necessary part of government, like a legislature or judiciary.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Almost Missouri

    Thank you, A.M., and Reg, too. I will add here that just because every other developed country (or not) has a Central Bank, doesn't mean it was the right thing to do to create one. I assume almost everyone here's Mom and Dad warned them about peer pressure: "Just because the rest of the golf team smokes the pot by the woods near the 7th green doesn't mean you have to!"*

    America did not have a central bank for a majority of its history, and that was one more thing that made the economy and the country exceptional.

    "Exceptional economy ya' got there. Shame if somethin' were to happen to it.

    - Tony Soprano Creature from Jekyll Island

    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/post_761A.jpg

    .

    * In fact that peer pressure on a nation-level scale was EXACTLY what I used to hear in the 1980s. "All the developed nations of the free world are doing THIS, so America should do this too!" "THIS" could be "free" college, or more lenient sentencing, or whatever.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  165. @Ben tillman
    @Jim Don Bob

    HR 1 is unconstitutional.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @G. Poulin, @Jim Don Bob

    So is most Federal law since 1913, but what of it?

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @Almost Missouri

    You're right, of course, but you never know what the courts will do. A little forum shopping effectively guarantees a preliminary injunction, at least.

  166. @PhysicistDave
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Achmed E. Newman wrote:


    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this, and, therefore, this is boring and pointless stuff.
     
    No: as Travis said, history is unpredictable.

    Trump's one big accomplishment was to tear the veil off the people who run this country. Quite unintentionally of course, Trump caused the Deep State and the Elite Media to show their hands. Something like a quarter of the country now know that the elites that run the country really, truly hate and despise most of their fellow citizens of all races: the ruling elite may manipulate non-Asian minorities to shore up their power, but they probably despise those groups even more than they despise working-class whites. (Remember when Biden said, "“poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids"?)

    The current American regime is unstable: federal fiscal policies are unsustainable; our monetary system is rickety; we are prepping our military for anything except actually fighting a war; our schools are jokes; the American people are really not happy.

    Feels to me like France circa 1785, imperial Russia in 1914, or the Soviets circa 1980.

    As Herb Stein said, if something cannot go on forever, it won't.

    No one can foretell if the break will come in 2024 or 2030 or whatever, just as even Lenin did not foresee the 1917 revolution. But the break will come.

    The question is what direction things will take after the collapse.

    John Adams write in 1818:

    What do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people. . . . This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.
     
    Ultimately, ideas rule the world. When the fighting actually starts, it is too late.

    Conservatism Inc. had no ideas, except "Let's slow things down a bit."

    The Founders had ideas.

    And they were good ones.

    If proclaimed clearly and widely enough, those ideas just might be good enough to mobilize enough people against the Left to win.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @3g4me

    I agree with almost your whole comment here, Physicist, though I would not use the word “rickety” for our financial system. (I would use something about an abyss.) The only word in your comment here I disagree with is “No”, because I see no disagreement in here with what I wrote – do you think we will be voting our way out of this?

    They system(s) will fail. As your wrote, and Instapundit before you, and Herb Stein before him, “if something can’t go on, it won’t go on”*.

    I agree. Before the system(s) fail, it would be great if more people would be turned onto the words/video/homeschool curriculum of Ron Paul. It’d be great if they could all be against the warfare State. It’d be great if more Americans understood the evil of Socialism, and why it’s incentives for dysgenics have ruined the country. It’d be great if more Americans understood why a nation must have borders. It’d be great if more people understood the US Constitution.

    One word for you too, Dave: Demographics. Do you think that the 50 million or more newcomers/offspring-of-same of the last 50 years are Ron Paul supporters? Are they the types that would give a rat’s ass about the US Constitution, much less know who John Adams was? How about the 40 million black people, in general?

    So what rebuild happens after the big SHTF moment coming will need to involve a separation of some kind.

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Achmed E. Newman asked me:


    do you think we will be voting our way out of this?
     
    Well... I'm not optimistic. But you know the old saying:

    "God has a special providence for fools, drunkards, and the United States of America."
     
    Our wealth, our geographic position, the legal framework we inherited from the Founders and from our English heritage -- no country has been as blessed as America. We just might pull through.

    AEN also wrote:

    Before the system(s) fail, it would be great if more people would be turned onto the words/video/homeschool curriculum of Ron Paul. It’d be great if they could all be against the warfare State. It’d be great if more Americans understood the evil of Socialism, and why it’s incentives for dysgenics have ruined the country. It’d be great if more Americans understood why a nation must have borders. It’d be great if more people understood the US Constitution.
     
    Yeah, there is always a day after the deluge. The question is who picks up the pieces.

    AEN also wrote:

    One word for you too, Dave: Demographics. Do you think that the 50 million or more newcomers/offspring-of-same of the last 50 years are Ron Paul supporters? Are they the types that would give a rat’s ass about the US Constitution, much less know who John Adams was? How about the 40 million black people, in general?
     
    Well, "electing a new people" does not usually work out well! On the other hand, some of the most fervent defenders of this country are descendants of Irish and Italians who are not exactly from the founding stock. It is, after all, Hispanics out here in California who voted down the attempt to restore Affirmative Action.

    AEN also wrote:

    So what rebuild happens after the big SHTF moment coming will need to involve a separation of some kind.
     
    I don't think that is possible.

    Yes, I am really worried. Maybe the next America will be in Hungary or Russia or East Asia.

    But, as AnotherDad wrote above:

    Rather at some point, some nation, some AnotherDads somewhere will get it right … and win.

    Because logic and math can not be beaten. So in the end, some AnotherDad wins.
     
    The ideas of the American Founders are right, in the most simple and pragamtic sense. Ultimately they will previal.

    Of course, I would really like them to prevail in the country that my (yet unborn) grandkids will inhabit. And, of that I am not so sure.
  167. @Flubber82
    In my conversations with real people, my observations are white liberals in general are true believers. Immune to truth and logic. A friend of mine is still adamant that the KKK lead the riots and white supremacists are responsible for all the violence. They are absolutely true believers. I stung her with facts and logic regarding the the riots and she was just immune to it. Absolutely believed it. She even believed that the KKK were in the street wearing white hoods in a 100 percent black neighborhood because one delusional women said the KKK was outside her house. Most blacks I talk to aren't like this, they will level with you about what actually caused the violence. White liberals are truly a modern-day version of a cult. Unfortunately every corporation, school, and all media just reinforce their views.

    After the Kyle Rittenhouse shooting, I showed a woman multiple videos that anyone not brainwashed would consider self-defense. She watched the videos in with great attention, I was losing my temper with rage and my mind was about to explode, she just wouldn't agree that it was self-defense. She came back with things like "He was a kid and it's illegal for kids to have guns." "He shot those unarmed people for no reason." "He shouldn't have been there anyway." "He's a white supremacist." "They were peaceful protesters." "They didn't have guns." I literally showed her videos of Kyle running away from his attackers. Here is one of the videos I showed her https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bfTNURZJN8

    It was almost like she was watching the videos but regardless of how many facts and truth of actual live video footage displayed that negated the narrative, she would never recant from the narrative. It was was completely mind-boggling. It was my first experience with someone I would label a cultist.

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix, @Achmed E. Newman, @Almost Missouri

    Thank you for this anecdote, Flubber. From just the one picture showing, I would guess the video was going to show Kyle as a normal guy, and perhaps that’s why the video is “unavailable”. Either way, I’m now curious – could you tell me what this was about, or, even better, link to something similar if it’s available?

  168. @Almost Missouri

    Is Shor talking about a 1 or 2% decline or 1 or 2 percentage points?
     
    Yeah, that's a confusion that modern journalists more often than not make. Even ordinary arithmetic errors are pretty common with journalists now too. And then even if the math is correct and the labels are correct, the underlying data source often doesn't actually support the figures the journalist is advancing. It's gotten so bad that I now just assume that any numerical figure a journalist publishes (present company excepted) is wrong unless I have personally verified it.


    So we’re now somewhere between 2004 and 2008 in terms of racial polarization.
     

     
    Or put another way, Trump undid in one term the racial polarization that Obama ("The Lightworker") built up over two terms. Not holding my breath for David Shor to explain it that way though.


    So if Democrats elevate issues or theories that a large minority of nonwhite voters reject, it’s going to be hard to keep those margins. Because these issues are strongly correlated with ideology. And Black conservatives and Hispanic conservatives don’t actually buy into a lot of these intellectual theories
     

     
    Here Shor stumbles into, but doesn't mention, why Biden was inadvertently a good candidate for Democrats. The Democrat platform is alienating and hostile (when it's not actually insane), but since Biden hardly did any campaigning on the Dem platform or any other, and on the rare occasions he did say something, no one could understand what he meant, if anything, so the Democrats could just coast on electoral inertia rather than drawing any undue attention to the Democrat plan to destroy America. Vegetative senescence FTW!

    Replies: @Captain Tripps

    Yeah, essentially the Democrat campaign theme was “He’s not Trump!”, which was just enough to squeak him over the finish line, barely (even with a relentless 4-year, 24/7 state-run media campaign of “Trump is EEEVILLLL!”). Sort of the reverse of 2016, where Trump basically ran as “I’m not Crooked Hillary!”, and he was just able to finish ahead of Clinton electorally, barely.

  169. @Almost Missouri
    @Ron Unz


    Doesn’t just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax?
     
    That's a good point that isn't often made, but ...

    1) A lot of central banks simply peg their currency to the US dollar, effectively making themselves franchises of the Federal Reserve on their single most importation responsibility.

    2) Even the central banks that are nominally sovereign (Europe, UK, Japan) "coordinate" monetary policy with the Federal Reserve ("coordinate" = if the Fed says "jump", ...).

    3) The Fed is the only central bank issuing the global reserve currency, so its power, and scope for abuse of that power (which is the reason governments have central banks in the first place) is an order of magnitude more than it would be otherwise.

    I know your comment was about whether Wilson was responsible for this (I agree he wasn't particularly) rather than whether it was a good thing, but still, I didn't want anyone to come away from your comment with the impression that central banks are a natural and necessary part of government, like a legislature or judiciary.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    Thank you, A.M., and Reg, too. I will add here that just because every other developed country (or not) has a Central Bank, doesn’t mean it was the right thing to do to create one. I assume almost everyone here’s Mom and Dad warned them about peer pressure: “Just because the rest of the golf team smokes the pot by the woods near the 7th green doesn’t mean you have to!”*

    America did not have a central bank for a majority of its history, and that was one more thing that made the economy and the country exceptional.

    “Exceptional economy ya’ got there. Shame if somethin’ were to happen to it.

    Tony Soprano Creature from Jekyll Island

    .

    * In fact that peer pressure on a nation-level scale was EXACTLY what I used to hear in the 1980s. “All the developed nations of the free world are doing THIS, so America should do this too!” “THIS” could be “free” college, or more lenient sentencing, or whatever.

    • Agree: El Dato
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Hey Achmed, where's you get that great graph?

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

  170. @Ben tillman
    @Jim Don Bob

    HR 1 is unconstitutional.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @G. Poulin, @Jim Don Bob

    Of course it is. But since we don’t actually have the rule of law, what difference does it make?

  171. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Travis

    I've got one word about your future, Ben, errr, Travis: Demographics

    I don't want to be flippant about it, but even during the 4 years of the Trump Administration, as he DID make a number of good (but unfortunately easily and completely reversible) moves on immigration, the number of leftist and anti-white voters grew as the conservative and pro-white numbers declined. That was due to immigration and age demographics.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Travis

    True, the demographics demonstrate that the future of America will have very few whites. Due to our low fertility and massive immigration of non-whites.

    1945-1970 – 82 million whites born
    1970-1995- 60 million whites born
    1995-2020- 51 million whites born

    US population under the age of 40
    census- White –Black – other non-whites
    -1990 – 122 M – 13 M – 18 M
    -2020 – 90 M – 25 M – 52 M

    The white population < the age of 40 has fallen over 25% in 30 years. It is difficult to see how whites will find a political solution as we quickly become a minority in America. The white population of the US is declining. There are less whites living in America in 2020 than 2010. This is the first decade in which the white population has declined, but it appears this is the new trend. Never again will the white population of America reach 195 million. By 2030 the number of whites will be below 190 million as the US population grows to 345 million. Every year since 2015 more whites have died than were born. This trend is accelerating.

  172. @Almost Missouri
    @Ben tillman

    So is most Federal law since 1913, but what of it?

    Replies: @ben tillman

    You’re right, of course, but you never know what the courts will do. A little forum shopping effectively guarantees a preliminary injunction, at least.

  173. anon[394] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Almost Missouri


    With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as “just virtue signalling again, zzzzz”, but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers.

     

    This is the question I've been raising over and over in the past few years as I see many of my peers and relatives get woke.

    I was out for beers with some friends last week. One of them, a middle-aged, Ivy-educated white American, was talking about how he and his family need to move back to the USA, but he's really worried about what it's going to be like for his Chinese wife and mixed daughter there.

    Before I could ask him if it was the crime rates or the crap schools that were sure to be the biggest problem, he start explaining very earnestly how his wife just could not understand what kind of impact racism was going to have on her life in the USA. He invoked January 6 (which is now a shorthand term like 9/11 for the Woke), and recounted stories he'd heard about white supremecists marauding around in pick-up trucks, waving the Confederate flag, right in the city they were planning to move to. So I asked him what state was it, exactly, to which they were headed. The answer? New Hampshire.

    I like this guy; he's generally sensible on most other topics; but something has changed. I don't doubt anymore that he really believes in the narrative.

    Replies: @El Dato, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @Jack D

    I like this guy; he’s generally sensible on most other topics; but something has changed. I don’t doubt anymore that he really believes in the narrative.

    Let me take a guess: they are on Facebook all the time. All the time, plus they have Twitter feeds. So their “news” is just the same NYT / CNN sludge reflected over and over again. Oh, yeah, maybe she has a few friends on Instagram. Same thing, though, each is immersed in the Narrative. If they view Hong Kong news sources, they will get the same thing again, right?

    The totally curated worldview with zero dissent or alternative. That’s what I believe your friends are soaking in. Jack Dorsey and Jeff Zuckerberg tell them what to think.

  174. @Ron Unz
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)


    I think some of the calculus surrounding the black vote arises from the fact that each of the upper Midwest “Big Ten” Swing States have large cities with significant or majority black populations, whereas the locus of Hispanic populations generally lies either in lost causes like California or secure R States (at least for now) like Texas...So getting a small increase in the share of the black vote in Philadelphia/Pittsburgh/Detroit/Milwaukee/Cleveland is a much more worthwhile squeeze of the electoral lemon than being seen to be chasing the Hispanic vote which is sequestered in States which are already fairly solidly red or blue.
     
    While there's some truth in that, I think sheer Republican stupidity and incompetence, plus donor-driven PC-sentiments, are a much stronger explanation. I've spent over 25 years arguing this issue with Republican candidates and (more importantly) their consultants and strategists, and they've been taking that position the whole time, especially in my own state of California, which has a rather small and unimportant black population.

    For about fifty years, Republicans have been trying to increase their share of the black vote with absolutely ZERO success. Didn't Trump offer blacks a half-trillion(!) dollars in financial reparations in his "Platinum Plan"? Plus letting black criminals out of prison with "criminal justice reform"? And moving heaven-and-earth to get rapper-criminals sprung from jails overseas? He probably would have done just about as well with zero dollars and effort, and perhaps might have picked up another couple points from disgruntled whites, getting himself reelected.

    Forty or fifty years ago, Republicans usually used to get between one-third and one-half of the Hispanic and Asian vote, but by their noisy attacks against immigrants and Hispanics, drove those numbers far down even while that electorate tripled or quadrupled.

    As for your state analysis, it's not quite that simple. If the Republicans lose Texas, they're permanently destroyed as a national party, and TX is very heavily Hispanic. If Trump had done better with Hispanics he might have won heavily/substantially Hispanic Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada, and been reelected. But if he'd done worse with Hispanics, he would lost Florida, and been blown out of the race.

    The irony is that I almost exactly predicted this political trajectory in my big article published a decade ago. A few key paragraphs:

    Now consider the likely political future of a state such as Arizona, ground zero of the most recent national anti-immigrant backlash by nervous whites. A severe recession and rapidly changing demographics had alarmed Arizona voters, many of them elderly retirees from elsewhere, leaving them vulnerable to wild rumors of a huge immigrant crime wave, including beheadings and kidnappings, almost all of which was complete nonsense. As a result, harsh anti-immigrant measures were passed into law, and their mostly Republican supporters won sweeping victories among an electorate that is today roughly 80 percent white.

    But buried near the bottom of a single one of the innumerable New York Times articles analyzing Arizona politics was the seemingly minor and irrelevant fact that almost half of all Arizona schoolchildren are now Hispanic. Meanwhile, according to Census data, over 80 percent of Arizonans aged 65 or older are white. A decade or more from now it seems likely that Arizona whites and Hispanics will enjoy perfectly good relations, and the former will have long since forgotten their current “immigrant scare.” But the latter will still remember it, and the once mighty Arizona Republican Party will be set on the road to oblivion.

    Even in a rock-solid Deep South Republican state like Georgia, Hispanics have now grown into a remarkable 10 percent of the population, up from almost nothing in the early 1990s, and represent an even larger share of younger Georgians. So unless the local Republican Party can somehow greatly enhance its appeal to the 30 percent of Georgians who are black, the current wave of anti-immigrant legislation may prove highly problematical ten or 20 years down the road.
     
    https://www.unz.com/runz/immigration-republicans-and-the-end-of-white-america-singlepage/

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    For about fifty years, Republicans have been trying to increase their share of the black vote with absolutely ZERO success. Didn’t Trump offer blacks a half-trillion(!) dollars in financial reparations in his “Platinum Plan”? Plus letting black criminals out of prison with “criminal justice reform”? And moving heaven-and-earth to get rapper-criminals sprung from jails overseas? He probably would have done just about as well with zero dollars and effort, and perhaps might have picked up another couple points from disgruntled whites, getting himself reelected.

    This was an interesting phenomenon which I think was driven as much by Trump’s long term personal relationships with famous blacks like Don King, Mike Tyson, Jim Brown, Kanye West, Herschel Walker and so forth as it was by the existing failure-bound GOP strategy. Perhaps these two forces met and complimented one another to yield the policy that resulted.

    Some, however, claim that the GOP’s play for the black vote is a feint, and the real purpose is to create a permission structure for nice white ladies in suburbs to vote for the GOP. In this view, the blacks are the “MacGuffin” object – said to be of great value but inevitably just a prop to move the plot along where the resolution of the story arc is enough nice white ladies not feeling like filthy racists when voting for Republican candidates. Of course, what credits this theory is Democrats insistent inflammatory racial politics – the object of the exercise is probably more about creating social pressure aimed at the much more numerous nice white ladies rather than marginally increasing their 90%+ share of the black vote (or increasing turnout).

    Forty or fifty years ago, Republicans usually used to get between one-third and one-half of the Hispanic and Asian vote, but by their noisy attacks against immigrants and Hispanics, drove those numbers far down even while that electorate tripled or quadrupled.

    Forty or fifty years ago the wholesale demographic change of the United States was not yet in full swing. Evidently the story of Trump’s marginal increase with Hispanics was the popularity of his messages of Law and Order (however undermined by “criminal justice reform”) and the assertion of national sovereignty by control of an out of control immigration policy. A proposed policy of stricter immigration enforcement made the Republican candidate more popular with the Hispanic electorate than prior Republican candidates viewed as much more lenient on enforcement (i.e., Bush the Lesser).

    As for your state analysis, it’s not quite that simple. If the Republicans lose Texas, they’re permanently destroyed as a national party, and TX is very heavily Hispanic. If Trump had done better with Hispanics he might have won heavily/substantially Hispanic Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada, and been reelected. But if he’d done worse with Hispanics, he would lost Florida, and been blown out of the race.

    If the Republicans lose Texas, the party will spend years in the wilderness as a national political party but will eventually reemerge and become competitive again. It’s just that when that time comes, the platforms of both parties will be ratcheted several degrees to the left.

    Some have made the point that Texan Hispanics are different in worldview than Californian Hispanics, and the former are much more amenable to voting for conservative candidates than the latter. The problem is that wholesale uncontrolled immigration from Latin America has changed the makeup of Texan Hispanics, and the new arrivals resemble Californian Hispanics much more than the Texan Hispanics when they set up shop in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, etc.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)


    Some, however, claim that the GOP’s play for the black vote is a feint, and the real purpose is to create a permission structure for nice white ladies in suburbs to vote for the GOP.
     
    Well, GOP-types have been quietly making that argument for decades, and I don't see any evidence it's ever worked. Just consider the total collapse in the affluent female suburban vote for the Republicans over that period.

    And in Trump's case it was especially ridiculous since all his crude and vulgar remarks on everything, greatly amplified by the hostile media, wiped him out in that group.

    Some have made the point that Texan Hispanics are different in worldview than Californian Hispanics, and the former are much more amenable to voting for conservative candidates than the latter.
     
    I've been closely following and writing on this issue since the early 1990s, and I'd say that argument is mostly nonsense. California Hispanics had regularly been voting 35% to 45+% Republican at the beginning of that period, but after the Republicans foolishly began attacking and scapegoating them, that support unsurprisingly plummeted. For example, Pete Wilson had gotten 47% of the Hispanic vote by running against "quotas" when he was elected governor against Dianne Feinstein in 1990, but within a few years GOP support had totally disappeared.

    Hispanics have traditionally been "blue-collar Reagan Democrats" much like various other ethnic groups, and only the sheer stupidity of the Republicans drove them away for a generation or so.

    https://www.unz.com/page/audio-files-podcasts/#race-ethnicity-and-social-policy

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

  175. anon[394] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz
    @steinbergfeldwitzcohen


    Claiming that Trump is the worst Prez in history is complete nonsense. There is a list.
     
    Well, you're certainly listing some other contenders. But here's another comment of mine to consider:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/shor-us-white-democrats-could-easily-alienate-nonwhite-democrats-with-our-crazy-level-of-racial-resentment-on-their-behalf/#comment-4506122

    Anyway, I've never understood endless denunciations of Wilson for the Federal Reserve. Doesn't just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax? If everyone has a central bank and an income tax, isn't it ridiculous that if not for Wilson, we wouldn't? Anyway, wasn't the Income Tax ratified before Wilson was inaugurated?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Reg Cæsar, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @anon

    Doesn’t just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax?

    “Everyone else is doing it” is not a logical argument. It’s emotional herd-following.

    “Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.”

    ― Charles MacKay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds

  176. @AnotherDad
    @Ron Unz


    And my 2016 “Grand Bargain” article proposing a politically workable solution to our endless immigration conflicts (shortly available as an eBook):
     
    I don't have any big issue with raising the minimum wage as part of some "Grand Bargain".

    But the core solution is sanity: immigration must stop. Sure we can pick up the odd really smartguy who's working on thorium cycle or something. But the US never needed and immigration hasn't made any sense for the core national project since the frontier closed in the 1880s.

    And closing immigration down is very easy to explain and sell to every ethnic group (well maybe bar one) and immigrants as well as natives.

    American jobs, at American wages, for American kids.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    But the core solution is sanity: immigration must stop. Sure we can pick up the odd really smartguy who’s working on thorium cycle or something. But the US never needed and immigration hasn’t made any sense for the core national project since the frontier closed in the 1880s.

    Tucker Carlson has done a good job of popularizing the fact that the ruling class talks about immigration both legal and illegal almost entirely in terms of the welfare of non-Americans – as a form of telescopic philanthropy. The benefit to Americans is an insulting afterthought such as “all the ethnic restaurants.” Of course this is cover for “keeping wages low and creating clients for the Democratic party.”

    A change in the perspective of how we talk about immigration would do much to change the focus from four year olds with big brown eyes (how the Press reports on the issue) to the welfare of working Americans.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)


    Of course this is cover for “keeping wages low and creating clients for the Democratic party.”
     
    No. It is cover for the destruction of America’s Whites. It is cover for tribal warfare against them.
  177. @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Almost Missouri


    the Dems now have stitched together a nationwide ballot fixing system such that they never have to worry about losing a national election again
     
    You've correctly identified the most important feature of the political landscape at this time, but I think it would be more accurate to say that it very much remains to be seen whether the Democrats can replicate what they did in 2020, outside the context of the twin hysterias (pandemic, TDS).

    Replies: @steinbergfeldwitzcohen, @J.Ross, @Almost Missouri

    whether the Democrats can replicate what they did in 2020, outside the context of the twin hysterias (pandemic, TDS).

    Have you noticed the Dems are not letting go of either hysteria? With covid, it’s “new strain, new strain!!!1!!1!” . And now with Trump suggesting he’ll run again in 2024, it’ll be four more years of, “but we need to stop Orange Hitler!!!!1!1!1!”

    If those peter out they’ve got global warming waiting in the wings. They’re already suggesting they need to extend lockdown to save the world from global warming. They will never let this stuff go.

    And just in case, they’re already hard at work legalizing everything they did in the 2020 election under HR1. The only thing that stands in its way is a gentlemen’s agreement in the Senate. Do you think there are 41 gentlemen in the Senate?

    2020-style elections are new normal, not a one-off aberration. Sadly, even the end of American democracy is the least of our worries now.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Almost Missouri


    The only thing that stands in its way is a gentlemen’s agreement in the Senate. Do you think there are 41 gentlemen in the Senate?
     
    No, but I think there is a majority who like their high offices and seek to keep them for self-serving reasons.

    I'm as concerned as anyone about the Democrats having a 50+1 majority for legislation, but I think the filibuster does a lot for Senators in close States who can avoid having to take bad votes. Manchin and Sinema may be representing a half dozen others who want the progressive bona fides of being for nuking the filibuster but also don't want to actually take the votes that are avoided via the filibuster.

    Replies: @Servant of Gla'aki

    , @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Almost Missouri


    Have you noticed the Dems are not letting go of either hysteria? With covid, it’s “new strain, new strain!!!1!!1!” . And now with Trump suggesting he’ll run again in 2024, it’ll be four more years of, “but we need to stop Orange Hitler!!!!1!1!1!”
     
    That does seem to be their plan in the first week of March, six weeks after Biden's (fake & gay) Inaugural. We'll see how long that plan seems viable, I guess. I think it's already kinda obviously falling apart for them, and will be an albatross around the neck of every Democratic candidate in next year's elections. But I suppose perceptions vary.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  178. @Almost Missouri
    @Servant of Gla'aki


    whether the Democrats can replicate what they did in 2020, outside the context of the twin hysterias (pandemic, TDS).
     
    Have you noticed the Dems are not letting go of either hysteria? With covid, it's "new strain, new strain!!!1!!1!" . And now with Trump suggesting he'll run again in 2024, it'll be four more years of, "but we need to stop Orange Hitler!!!!1!1!1!"

    If those peter out they've got global warming waiting in the wings. They're already suggesting they need to extend lockdown to save the world from global warming. They will never let this stuff go.

    And just in case, they're already hard at work legalizing everything they did in the 2020 election under HR1. The only thing that stands in its way is a gentlemen's agreement in the Senate. Do you think there are 41 gentlemen in the Senate?

    2020-style elections are new normal, not a one-off aberration. Sadly, even the end of American democracy is the least of our worries now.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Servant of Gla'aki

    The only thing that stands in its way is a gentlemen’s agreement in the Senate. Do you think there are 41 gentlemen in the Senate?

    No, but I think there is a majority who like their high offices and seek to keep them for self-serving reasons.

    I’m as concerned as anyone about the Democrats having a 50+1 majority for legislation, but I think the filibuster does a lot for Senators in close States who can avoid having to take bad votes. Manchin and Sinema may be representing a half dozen others who want the progressive bona fides of being for nuking the filibuster but also don’t want to actually take the votes that are avoided via the filibuster.

    • Replies: @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)


    Manchin and Sinema may be representing a half dozen others who want the progressive bona fides of being for nuking the filibuster but also don’t want to actually take the votes that are avoided via the filibuster.
     
    That is almost certainly correct. To that end, Dianne Feinstein said she was opposed to ending the legislative filibuster. Because she's senile, everyone just assumes the party leaders would whip her back into line if need be, but maybe not. And she likely speaks for others whom you might not obviously expect.
  179. @Flubber82
    In my conversations with real people, my observations are white liberals in general are true believers. Immune to truth and logic. A friend of mine is still adamant that the KKK lead the riots and white supremacists are responsible for all the violence. They are absolutely true believers. I stung her with facts and logic regarding the the riots and she was just immune to it. Absolutely believed it. She even believed that the KKK were in the street wearing white hoods in a 100 percent black neighborhood because one delusional women said the KKK was outside her house. Most blacks I talk to aren't like this, they will level with you about what actually caused the violence. White liberals are truly a modern-day version of a cult. Unfortunately every corporation, school, and all media just reinforce their views.

    After the Kyle Rittenhouse shooting, I showed a woman multiple videos that anyone not brainwashed would consider self-defense. She watched the videos in with great attention, I was losing my temper with rage and my mind was about to explode, she just wouldn't agree that it was self-defense. She came back with things like "He was a kid and it's illegal for kids to have guns." "He shot those unarmed people for no reason." "He shouldn't have been there anyway." "He's a white supremacist." "They were peaceful protesters." "They didn't have guns." I literally showed her videos of Kyle running away from his attackers. Here is one of the videos I showed her https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bfTNURZJN8

    It was almost like she was watching the videos but regardless of how many facts and truth of actual live video footage displayed that negated the narrative, she would never recant from the narrative. It was was completely mind-boggling. It was my first experience with someone I would label a cultist.

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix, @Achmed E. Newman, @Almost Missouri

    I showed a woman multiple videos that anyone not brainwashed would consider self-defense.

    Dude, you won’t get a dispassionate appraisal of combat ethics from 99% of women. She already knows who’s supposed to be the bad guy and seeing the antifa idiot get his bicep shot out is just bias confirmation for her.

    If you want to persuade her, you can’t play defense. Start reminding her of her white (or Asian or whatever) privilege and her TERF supremacism. Tell her she’s showing signs of gender dysphoria and Karen fragility or whatever. Then—maybe—she’ll start putting two and two together in terms of what the wokocracy adds up to for her.

  180. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Almost Missouri

    Thank you, A.M., and Reg, too. I will add here that just because every other developed country (or not) has a Central Bank, doesn't mean it was the right thing to do to create one. I assume almost everyone here's Mom and Dad warned them about peer pressure: "Just because the rest of the golf team smokes the pot by the woods near the 7th green doesn't mean you have to!"*

    America did not have a central bank for a majority of its history, and that was one more thing that made the economy and the country exceptional.

    "Exceptional economy ya' got there. Shame if somethin' were to happen to it.

    - Tony Soprano Creature from Jekyll Island

    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/post_761A.jpg

    .

    * In fact that peer pressure on a nation-level scale was EXACTLY what I used to hear in the 1980s. "All the developed nations of the free world are doing THIS, so America should do this too!" "THIS" could be "free" college, or more lenient sentencing, or whatever.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Hey Achmed, where’s you get that great graph?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Almost Missouri

    Peak Stupidity, of course...

    ... but where did we get it? It's been a while. OK, I just went to bing image search and found it again with the caption*. It's from the BLS, 2009 compiled by Reinhart and Rogoff - see here.

    .

    * It wasn't like I had to knock off the caption, but I try to make my images not so tall, so I'd cropped it.

  181. @Nicholas Stix
    @Anon

    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2019/02/everyone-knows-that-crime-went-down-for.html

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Mr. Stix:

    I plowed partway through the reading list you linked. I had already known that police departments were underreporting violent crimes in various ways, but I had always assumed well, they can’t fiddle homicide. But you show a bunch of instances where they did just that! And these weren’t obscure murders of homeless people no one would ever inquire about but publicly witnessed and even notorious murders that have a wikipedia page!

    If I may request the indulgence of your time, I have two questions:

    1) Is there any way to “audit” the homicide statistics other than calling the police department and asking individually about each murder, as you did in several of your articles?

    2) How much do you think the police under-report homicide? Is there any way to quantify it? Presumably the underreporting is worse in big cities than elsewhere. Is anyone besides you covering this?

    Thanks for you attention!

    • Replies: @Nicholas Stix
    @Almost Missouri

    AM,

    Always great to hear from you.

    1. Not that I know of. However, every now and then, someone will blow the whistle on an individual murder that the cops “disappeared,” and find a sympathetic reporter.
    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2016/05/a-letter-from-relative-of-19-month-old.html?m=1
    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2015/04/remembering-christopher-marchiselli-one.html
    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2012/09/gloria-cadet-case-nypd-gets-caught.html

    2. It depends on the jurisdiction. The only media organization I know of that investigated “disappearing” murders was Chicago Magazine, which several years ago determined that in one year, the Chicago PD “disappeared” 18 out of 432 murders (4.17%). A longtime editor of mine feigned interest in such research, but revealed himself to be a tease. Who knows, maybe he’ll assign someone else to write my report; it wouldn’t be the first time.

    I used to think of the cops and the media as enemies, but now I see them as sleeping together, often literally. (Bill Bratton’s last two wives have been fake news reporters.)
    https://vdare.com/articles/stix-vindicated-academics-magazine-confirm-big-city-police-are-disappearing-crime

  182. @El Dato
    Meanwhile: Is it over? Democratism triumphs triumphantly.

    ‘For The People Act’ confirms it: Our Democracy has officially replaced the American Republic


    If there were any doubts that a civil war had in fact been waged in the US, and that the side that “fortified” the 2020 election and redefined the republic as “Our Democracy” triumphed, HR1 should dispel the last vestiges of them.

    The bill, also named “For The People Act” of 2021, passed in the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives in a 220-210 vote on Wednesday. Only one Democrat was opposed.

    The 800-page bill basically codifies all the problematic practices of the 2020 election into law. There’s an expansion of mail-in ballots and extended deadlines to count them, but also automatic voter registration, a waiver for voter IDs, and nationwide ballot-harvesting, California-style. It also shifts the authority to draw congressional districts from states, criminalizes broadly defined “interference” in elections, and so much more.

    Whatever one may think of the Heritage Foundation, its analysis of the bill is factually accurate. Don’t take my word for it, though, read it and compare it to the actual text.
     

    https://i.postimg.cc/wvh00qPp/democracy-clippy.jpg

    Bonus round: Capitol of Panem stays greenzoned for a indefinitely more.

    US Capitol Police call for National Guard to be deployed for another TWO MONTHS, citing threats – media


    While “none of [Congress] like looking at the fencing, the gates, the uniformed presence around the Capitol,” according to Slotkin, the Capitol Police seem to have embraced the prison-camp look the building has taken on. The police urged congressional leaders to leave the razor-wire fencing surrounding the building in place for “several more months” – possibly until September due to “online chatter” by supposed extremists. Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security called for a heightened threat of domestic terrorism through April, anticipating “ideologically-motivated violent extremists” upset over Biden’s presidency might“continue to mobilize to incite or commit violence.”
     

    Replies: @danand, @James J O'Meara

    “The 800-page bill basically codifies all the problematic practices of the 2020 election into law.”

    Yeah, that’s their answer to everything. Illegal immigration a problem? Make it legal! Election fraud a problem? Make it legal! Illegal drug use out of control? Make it legal! Cops are a killjoy? Defund the police (make everything legal!). Dilemma over, problem solved, everyone happy!

  183. @anonymous
    @James J O'Meara

    2 rungs above Brazil is Portugal. 3 rungs is Italy. That's not such a bad future. People are expecting a collapse in 2050. It's not so bad in comparison.

    Replies: @James J O'Meara

    Portugal, Italy? Sunny, cheap, laid back, White. OK, I’d go for that.

    You want religion? Catholicism but no one cares, perfect; not like those Protestant busybodies who have mutated into the SJWs.

    “I prefer to live in Catholic societies, there is no trace of Christianity to bother one.” — Character in Gore Vidal’s Burr (or 1876).

    Interesting that despite a rep for laissez faire ( I mean, like “manana” not libertarianism) both had successful fascist governments. My kinda people.

    • Disagree: Luzzatto
    • Replies: @Muggles
    @James J O'Meara


    Interesting that despite a rep for laissez faire ( I mean, like “manana” not libertarianism) both had successful fascist governments. My kinda people.
     
    Since you mentioned Italy and Portugal, I assume you are referring to the regimes of Mussolini and Salazar.

    I would hardly call either of those "successful." Not if you were to ask their own citizens.

    Mussolini was far worse in every way. Imperialist, thuggish, fascist (as you noted) in the true sense though lacking in the anti Antisemitism mostly. Both places became poorer as a result and the Italians finally kicked out the fascists.

    Salazar stultified Portugal for decades and tried to hold on to their "empire" unsuccessfully. Unlike Mussolini he was not shot in the street and hung from a lamppost. He is not beloved in Portugal but as not nearly as hated as Franco in Spain.

    "Your kind of people"?

    Replies: @CCG

  184. @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Almost Missouri


    With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as “just virtue signalling again, zzzzz”, but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers.

     

    This is the question I've been raising over and over in the past few years as I see many of my peers and relatives get woke.

    I was out for beers with some friends last week. One of them, a middle-aged, Ivy-educated white American, was talking about how he and his family need to move back to the USA, but he's really worried about what it's going to be like for his Chinese wife and mixed daughter there.

    Before I could ask him if it was the crime rates or the crap schools that were sure to be the biggest problem, he start explaining very earnestly how his wife just could not understand what kind of impact racism was going to have on her life in the USA. He invoked January 6 (which is now a shorthand term like 9/11 for the Woke), and recounted stories he'd heard about white supremecists marauding around in pick-up trucks, waving the Confederate flag, right in the city they were planning to move to. So I asked him what state was it, exactly, to which they were headed. The answer? New Hampshire.

    I like this guy; he's generally sensible on most other topics; but something has changed. I don't doubt anymore that he really believes in the narrative.

    Replies: @El Dato, @AndrewR, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @Jack D

    Always look at revealed preferences – talk is cheap. Chances are that if the guy has some good reason to move back to the States, he will.

    He is just reciting the current Narrative about how terrible the racism against Asians is in order to signal that he is a Goodwhite and has the opinions suitable for a Goodwhite. Having these opinions is just one more way to signal your group membership like wearing the right brand of shoes or driving the right kind of car. Reciting these beliefs has nothing to do with his actions. It’s like putting a BLM sign in your yard. Just because you have one doesn’t mean that you are willing to send your kids to a 90% black school. It’s just a safe and meaningless virtue signalling gesture.

    Does he really understand that most of the attacks on Asians are coming from blacks? Possibly not. He doesn’t want to allow his brain to stray into such forbidden territory. Orwell spoke about “Protective Stupidity”. Even if he does understand on some level, he is not about to repeat his thoughts in public and cast himself out of his hard earned status as a Goodwhite. But the fact that he wants to move to NH and not to Mississippi might be a clue.

    Part of what separates Goodwhites from Badwhites is that to a Goodwhite, Badwhites are crude, uneducated, uncouth people whose brains are connected directly to their mouths. A Goodwhite might THINK the exact same things but he has the education and refinement NEVER to blurt out the N-word or let you know their true thoughts about blacks. Never, under any circumstances. I mean that some thug could pistol whip him to within an inch of his life and he STILL wouldn’t have anything bad to say about blacks – that’s a true test of character. Of course most Goodwhites try to construct their lives to avoid such challenges, but if they are unlucky and are people of good character, they will withstand them.

    The Papa John’s guy outed himself as a Badwhite, the NY Times guy too, by saying the N-word, even in reference to something someone else said. A fun, profitable game you can play as a Goodwhite is to poke at other people to find out if they are fellow Goodwhites or not. You can bait them and try to trick them into saying the N-word or otherwise vocalizing disapproval of bad behavior by blacks. If they take the bait, then they have shown that they are Badwhites and it’s OK to destroy them. If they pass the test then they are your fellow Goodwhites and you can befriend them. Badwhites aren’t even aware that this game even exists and so they often fall for it and then they don’t know what hit them.

    On the recent TV series The Crown they depicted a similar game that the royals would (supposedly – it’s probably mostly fictional) play with commoners such as Margaret Thatcher who were visitors to their royal haunts. Not only did the commoners not know how to play the game, they didn’t even know they were IN a game and so would show up completely unprepared for these little upper class shit tests. So then they would of course flunk them and the royals would snigger behind their backs at the uncouth commoners.

  185. It’s almost as if the Democrats encouraging blacks (excuse me, Blacks) to riot didn’t play well with Latinos (excuse me, Latinx).

    Was it the rioting that turned hispanics off or the veneration and coffer-filling by corporations? Don’t forget everyone turning their profile photos black and numerous statements of support by what seemed like every corporation in the country during the month of June. Nearly every tv commercial, so much so that I took to muting them, statements before sporting events – it went on and on. It was infuriating to watch. Criminal after criminal, not an innocent in the bunch, gets killed basically as a result of their own actions and an entire demographic is not only appeased but rewarded for it.

  186. @Anon
    @Ron Unz

    Ron,
    I think you are correct here and I think the Hispanic surge for Trump was hardly surprising, and probably not going to go away anytime soon.

    Though I would add that most of the swing occurred in the border and rural areas, which don't have lots of Blacks, while the surge in the cities was actually smaller for Hispanics, where there are lots of Blacks.

    My guess is that Spanish Media probably was more honest over who was committing the crimes, and urban more English media did not, which is why the swing there was less so. Ironically Univision may have helped Trump in this regard by showing much more honest video of the riots and the forces involved.

    Anyways, the issue of crime may be the most irritating in America, since we have had like a million homicides in the last 70 years. What sort of ideal policies would you think would reduce crime. You have given recommendations on immigration, but I think the first person who solves our \crime problem would become a national hero overnight...

    Replies: @Supply and Demand

    Ban firearms, give police real extrajudicial power, make said police racially and ethnically match the bantustans they patrol. Simple — Chinese, in fact.

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @Supply and Demand


    Ban firearms, give police real extrajudicial power, make said police racially and ethnically match the bantustans they patrol. Simple — Chinese, in fact.
     
    This is your magic solution to crime?

    Ask the Uyghurs about about those "ethnically matched" police they face each day. Or other non Han Chinese residents.

    China has plenty of crime, you just don't see much reported in the West or even in China. Their censorship is top notch.

    I take it you're not actually posting from crime-free CCP China.

    Replies: @anon, @Supply and Demand

  187. @Almost Missouri
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Hey Achmed, where's you get that great graph?

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    Peak Stupidity, of course…

    … but where did we get it? It’s been a while. OK, I just went to bing image search and found it again with the caption*. It’s from the BLS, 2009 compiled by Reinhart and Rogoff – see here.

    .

    * It wasn’t like I had to knock off the caption, but I try to make my images not so tall, so I’d cropped it.

    • Thanks: Almost Missouri
  188. @anon
    @Hypnotoad666

    Have you read HR-1? It essentially institutionalizes the vote rigging of 2020.

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666

    Have you read HR-1? It essentially institutionalizes the vote rigging of 2020.

    Yep. It’s a total partisan power grab. And a total violation of state sovereignty. I think it will just get filibustered though.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Hypnotoad666

    That's the whole point - BECAUSE it has no chance of passage, they made the bill into a Democrat wish list. No need to worry about actually getting 60 votes in the Senate or getting it past the Supreme Court. Just load it up with your fantasy plan for permanent Democrat domination. Felons vote, dead people vote, people with no ID vote - EVERYBODY votes (Democrat).

    However, it does tell you what Democrats wish for America, which is to turn America into a one party state. This is a sort of paradox if you think about it - what is the point of having a democratic system of elections if the same party wins every election? In that case, we can just skip having the elections now. But in fact if you look at Dem controlled cities like Chicago and Detroit, that's exactly how it works and how it has worked for the past 70 or 80 or more years. Never mind that cities controlled by Democrats are all corrupt shitholes because one party states are always corrupt shitholes. Maybe they are shitholes but the people in charge are doing well.

    Replies: @anon, @nebulafox

  189. @Hypnotoad666
    @anon


    Have you read HR-1? It essentially institutionalizes the vote rigging of 2020.
     
    Yep. It's a total partisan power grab. And a total violation of state sovereignty. I think it will just get filibustered though.

    Replies: @Jack D

    That’s the whole point – BECAUSE it has no chance of passage, they made the bill into a Democrat wish list. No need to worry about actually getting 60 votes in the Senate or getting it past the Supreme Court. Just load it up with your fantasy plan for permanent Democrat domination. Felons vote, dead people vote, people with no ID vote – EVERYBODY votes (Democrat).

    However, it does tell you what Democrats wish for America, which is to turn America into a one party state. This is a sort of paradox if you think about it – what is the point of having a democratic system of elections if the same party wins every election? In that case, we can just skip having the elections now. But in fact if you look at Dem controlled cities like Chicago and Detroit, that’s exactly how it works and how it has worked for the past 70 or 80 or more years. Never mind that cities controlled by Democrats are all corrupt shitholes because one party states are always corrupt shitholes. Maybe they are shitholes but the people in charge are doing well.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Jack D

    However, it does tell you what Democrats wish for America, which is to turn America into a one party state.

    https://i.redd.it/c4b8z1rc15o21.jpg

    Replies: @nebulafox

    , @nebulafox
    @Jack D

    You give them too much credit. I'm not sure there's much of a coherent plan beyond exercising their psychological complexes on the American public ad infinitum, if ACO's group therapy sessions behind barbed wire are any indicator.

    Everybody in China who I talked to about American politics always assumed there was some kind of grand plan that people in DC were pursuing: they'd disagree on what it was, but nobody ever stopped to consider what might be a truly scarier reality.

    >Maybe they are shitholes but the people in charge are doing well.

    Mobutu lived like the chieftain/condottiere hybrid he was, while still having enough time to prove that no matter how bad things are, you can somehow make them worse.

  190. @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @AnotherDad


    But the core solution is sanity: immigration must stop. Sure we can pick up the odd really smartguy who’s working on thorium cycle or something. But the US never needed and immigration hasn’t made any sense for the core national project since the frontier closed in the 1880s.
     
    Tucker Carlson has done a good job of popularizing the fact that the ruling class talks about immigration both legal and illegal almost entirely in terms of the welfare of non-Americans - as a form of telescopic philanthropy. The benefit to Americans is an insulting afterthought such as "all the ethnic restaurants." Of course this is cover for "keeping wages low and creating clients for the Democratic party."

    A change in the perspective of how we talk about immigration would do much to change the focus from four year olds with big brown eyes (how the Press reports on the issue) to the welfare of working Americans.

    Replies: @Anon

    Of course this is cover for “keeping wages low and creating clients for the Democratic party.”

    No. It is cover for the destruction of America’s Whites. It is cover for tribal warfare against them.

  191. @Chris Renner
    I thought I'd heard the name "David Shor" in the news for another reason not long ago. Sure enough: https://reason.com/2020/08/27/protests-violence-david-shor-kenosha-biden-trump/

    Replies: @Anon, @Almost Missouri, @Lot, @Getaclue

    No “statistic” about voting in the 2020 Election means anything — there was massive voter fraud to steal the Election so all these commentaries are just total bs.

    • Agree: Nicholas Stix
    • Troll: Corvinus
  192. @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Desiderius

    I'm not sure I agree with you on this one, Desiderius, but I LOLed at the iPalantir line.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    I didn’t get that at all. Sorry, Desiderius, and that’s why I didn’t write back – confusion. How about one of you two explain it?

    Anyway, yeah, I vote, but all that does is delay the inevitable by a little upon the occasional wins. I guess we can do all this strategic planning on how to get a few more years of delay, or we can be preppers. Prepping is more up my alley.

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Achmed E. Newman


    I didn’t get that at all. Sorry, Desiderius, and that’s why I didn’t write back – confusion. How about one of you two explain it?

     

    Achmed, you've got to be a Tolkien fan for this one to make sense. In The Lord of the Rings, Denethor is the de facto ruler of Gondor, the country of the good guys, but his mind has been corrupted and he's become despondent because he secretly looks into a kind of crystal ball called a palantir, which shows events happening far away, and even affords glimpses into the future. The problem is, what Denethor is seeing in his palantir is manipulated by the great evil enemy Sauron, so Denethor is essentially being gaslighted by fake news. Gondor's real situation is dire, but not as hopeless as Denethor has been led to believe.
  193. @Jack D
    @Hypnotoad666

    That's the whole point - BECAUSE it has no chance of passage, they made the bill into a Democrat wish list. No need to worry about actually getting 60 votes in the Senate or getting it past the Supreme Court. Just load it up with your fantasy plan for permanent Democrat domination. Felons vote, dead people vote, people with no ID vote - EVERYBODY votes (Democrat).

    However, it does tell you what Democrats wish for America, which is to turn America into a one party state. This is a sort of paradox if you think about it - what is the point of having a democratic system of elections if the same party wins every election? In that case, we can just skip having the elections now. But in fact if you look at Dem controlled cities like Chicago and Detroit, that's exactly how it works and how it has worked for the past 70 or 80 or more years. Never mind that cities controlled by Democrats are all corrupt shitholes because one party states are always corrupt shitholes. Maybe they are shitholes but the people in charge are doing well.

    Replies: @anon, @nebulafox

    However, it does tell you what Democrats wish for America, which is to turn America into a one party state.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @anon

    https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1367887090634080262

    We all knew this was coming. Age of the schoolmarms, gentlemen. Don't forfeit your desire to seek virtue, knowledge, and excellence.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  194. @RichardTaylor
    @AndrewR


    You apparently have been living in a cave recently.

    No one is asking “non-Whites” to go to bat against anti-white hatred.
     
    I think you're missing the point. It's not about asking non-Whites for compassion. It's the fact that it would never occur to anyone to ever ask a non-White for compassion.

    But it will always occur to everyone that Whites should have compassion for Brown people. This has been true for centuries.

    The point is, the moral status, or lack of it, that everyone assigns to non-Whites. Even the most liberal of Whites would never elevate them to full human moral agency.

    Asians, Hispanics and other groups previously deemed non-white have been relegated to the “white” bin.
     
    No they haven't. And all over Latin America, there is a clear divide between White Hispanics and vast majority of Brown Hispanics.

    Replies: @AndrewR

    In Latin America, they don’t have the weird racial hang-ups that Americans do, although American imperialism is trying hard to change that.

    Again, I think you’re missing the explicitly black supremacist message of the last year. Yellows and browns, fall in line!

    • Replies: @RichardTaylor
    @AndrewR


    In Latin America, they don’t have the weird racial hang-ups that Americans do
     
    Yes, and the tragic hellhole of Latin America is the proof. Which is why they're all trying to get into a White country.

    Replies: @Hibernian

  195. anon[310] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Is Shor talking about a 1 or 2% decline or 1 or 2 percentage points?
     
    Either way, the decline of black support for the Democratic ticket was pretty negligible. But losing nearly 10 points of Hispanic support in one election is a very big deal, especially since Trump directed nearly all of his effort to winning black votes and almost no effort to winning Hispanic ones.

    Put another way, if Trump had chosen his words more carefully and actually tried to win Hispanic support, he might very well have gotten a higher share of the Hispanic vote than any Republican candidate in American history. I wonder how the Trump-hating media would have spun that...

    All the post-election points Shor is making are pretty obvious, and similar to things I have writing myself for almost three decades now, going back to the early 1990s. Here are links to downloadable eBooks of my collected articles on the subject from 1994 to 2001 in ePub and Mobi/Kindle formats:

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/NewAmericanMeltingPot.epub

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/NewAmericanMeltingPot.mobi

    Plus my big 2011 article:

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/ImmigrationRepublicans.epub

    https://www.unz.com/CONTENTS/EBOOK/ImmigrationRepublicans.mobi

    And my 2016 "Grand Bargain" article proposing a politically workable solution to our endless immigration conflicts (shortly available as an eBook):

    https://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @AnotherDad, @anon

    I wonder how the Trump-hating media would have spun that…

    In the aftermath of the 2020 election, the black identitarians of the NYT started claiming Florida Cubans could be considered White, apparently as a dog whistle to open the floodgates of abuse on them for their supposed betrayal. I’ve also heard occasional talk of “confronting Whiteness” among … non-Whites. My suspicion is that our political class isn’t so bright. They might overreact and start persecuting Hispanics just as they were doing during the BLM riots; several were arrested on various trumped-up charges and for defacing BLM graffiti cities had scrawled along highways.

    For the GOP to get appreciable Hispanic support, it must do several things. Here are 8 Simple Rules:

    1. Stop letting the democrats out-flank them on economic policies. In other words, no more talk of destroying the minimum wage and rejecting $2000 checks because they are “manna from heaven.” The GOP should pursue economic policies that directly attack wealthy democrat donor constituencies, thereby forcing the Democrats to reject them and making the GOP look good in the process.

    Ex: Support unionizing Amazon and Google. Both have discriminated against conservatives, so unleash the dogs of war upon them. Sure, corporate profits will fall, but that doesn’t hurt conservatives one bit.

    There are many other things they could do. They could enforce anti-monopoly regulations, for instance, with the stated purpose of making small businesses more profitable — healthy small businesses means healthy communities with a vested interested in keeping things nice and happy.

    They could support a gradual increase in the minimum wage, or even a differential minimum wage based on industry or corporate tax paid (pay your workers more or pay more in taxes, employ more or pay more in taxes).

    Healthcare is another biggie. If a Republican congress could ever get through an affordable Medicare for All program, perhaps paid for by taxing the democrats and their donors, then they’d win elections forever. Corporate donors already heavily favor democrats, so what’s really the argument favoring their interests? Promise to let private insurers exist while also offering an affordable alternative at low cost. There will be some waiting times for poor people, but consider the alternative for those without insurance: an infinite waiting time because they can’t afford to see a doctor.

    Stop letting the democrats paint you as the bad guys and the party of “no.” Do something popular for once!

    2. The GOP need not scale back rhetoric against immigration. Polls show Hispanics don’t care unless they are personally affected and the issue energizes republican voters. The GOP might do an amnesty without citizenship while enacting immigration reductions on the grounds of protecting worker salaries against competition and protecting the environment, which would give cucky whites a convenient excuse to support it.

    3. Purge deficit hawk performance artists like Sen. Ron Johnson from the party. His rhetoric is “manna from heaven” for the democrats. I’ve heard Sen. Mitch McConnell is considering retirement. The party base is quickly moving away from Reaganism and towards Bryan populism. A few retirements at the top could quicken that trend.

    4. Purge neocons like Liz Cheney. Encourage them to go the democrats and poison their image with their unpopular foreign policy and economic agendas.

    5. Dog whistle against offensive black racial identity. Hispanics hate it. 44% of Hispanic Biden voters disapprove of BLM. More Americans now approve of the police. There will be a backlash against black crime soon, moreso when the the left tries passing racial equity bills preventing the police from arresting too many blacks.

    Coalitions are always “us against them.” The GOP coalition should be working class whites, Hispanics, and ambitious new immigrants like Indians and Asians who wish to overthrow the current white woke and Jewish ruling class. I’ve noticed a nascent trend of these groups trying to appeal to Whites, almost like they are trying to build a new coalition base. It could happen because they are pretty much excluded from power by the current regime. Asians are racially discriminated against by Ivy League school admissions departments by design.

    Trying to get black support through hollow, cringe appeals dilutes the GOP’s attempt to attract other groups in opposition to black grievance politics. It also makes them look weak. They should stop. This means no more invitations to cringe black conspiracy theorists and rappers to attend CPAC. Support polices that directly target groups like BLM and black crime. Support policies aimed at removing CRT from colleges and government training. Hispanics will rightfully interpret that as a dig against woke whites and unpopular black grievance politics.

    6. Full-throated attack on political correctness with the promise of using the government — legislation and regulation — to protect victims. Talented White professionals (and some minorities, see the Anziz Ansari witch hunt) are the primary victims, so they might be receptive. The GOP is at an extreme talent disadvantage. They need to attract smart people capable of promoting their message in the popular culture, and this is one way they could do it. One reason why Trump did better than expected is due to the fact that some White professionals lied to pollsters about their support. Steve Sailer has also noted Trump’s surprising strength in Beverly Hills. I wonder why?

    Hollywood Doesn’t Want WHITE DUDES Anymore, Say Movie Execs.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8513727/Actors-writers-producers-warn-reverse-racism-film-industry.html

    7. Make a new deal with religious conservatives: promise protection over influence. Religious conservatives might spoil this coalition, but they are needed anyway. Promise to protect them from abuse without giving them the spotlight to promote unpopular religious polices like banning video games for nudity and foul language. They won’t have to bake any cakes, but they also won’t make the party platform about ending gay marriage, something that is widely accepted now — even among republicans.

    8. Find a replacement for Donald Trump. He’s a terrible leader who lacks conviction and the ability to govern. Until a replacement is found, he’ll stick around sucking the oxygen out of the room while continually demoralizing supporters and energizing detractors.

    Extra: Also, find a populist minority (maybe Hispanic) republican to win a major election somewhere. His campaign should be economic and against political correctness & cancel culture. Supportive of small business + anti-corporate monopolies + anti-woke. Being supportive of workers and increasing the minimum wage to a reasonable level might also help, among other issues.

    Governor Chavez, R-CA, sounds a lot better than Senator Scott, R-Token. Follow that up by recruiting locals on the ground, and between election cycles. They need to get more people involved in the party apparatus itself, which would give people cause to spread their influence among friends and neighbors.

    • Agree: JMcG, Jonathan Mason
  196. @Abolish_public_education
    @Reg Cæsar

    .. do we bring in more to undercut you?”

    Cheap immigrant labor (extra supply) can undercut commodity labor prices. In a less crazy world, that phenomenon would work to the advantage of the larger economy (in the form of lower prices in sectors where labor costs had fallen).

    But due to government policies, e.g spending programs (like schools) and monetarism, prices aren’t allowed to fall as much, nor as quickly, as a competitive economy can achieve.

    Low-skilled, private sector workers who would like to save something for a rainy day find it difficult to do so.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Polistra

    In a less crazy world, that phenomenon would work to the advantage of the larger economy (in the form of lower prices in sectors where labor costs had fallen).

    That’s actually a useful insight. In a genuinely free market, various prices would be falling often–sometimes precipitously. Doesn’t seem to happen in ours, does it.

  197. @Jack D
    @Hypnotoad666

    That's the whole point - BECAUSE it has no chance of passage, they made the bill into a Democrat wish list. No need to worry about actually getting 60 votes in the Senate or getting it past the Supreme Court. Just load it up with your fantasy plan for permanent Democrat domination. Felons vote, dead people vote, people with no ID vote - EVERYBODY votes (Democrat).

    However, it does tell you what Democrats wish for America, which is to turn America into a one party state. This is a sort of paradox if you think about it - what is the point of having a democratic system of elections if the same party wins every election? In that case, we can just skip having the elections now. But in fact if you look at Dem controlled cities like Chicago and Detroit, that's exactly how it works and how it has worked for the past 70 or 80 or more years. Never mind that cities controlled by Democrats are all corrupt shitholes because one party states are always corrupt shitholes. Maybe they are shitholes but the people in charge are doing well.

    Replies: @anon, @nebulafox

    You give them too much credit. I’m not sure there’s much of a coherent plan beyond exercising their psychological complexes on the American public ad infinitum, if ACO’s group therapy sessions behind barbed wire are any indicator.

    Everybody in China who I talked to about American politics always assumed there was some kind of grand plan that people in DC were pursuing: they’d disagree on what it was, but nobody ever stopped to consider what might be a truly scarier reality.

    >Maybe they are shitholes but the people in charge are doing well.

    Mobutu lived like the chieftain/condottiere hybrid he was, while still having enough time to prove that no matter how bad things are, you can somehow make them worse.

  198. @anon
    @Jack D

    However, it does tell you what Democrats wish for America, which is to turn America into a one party state.

    https://i.redd.it/c4b8z1rc15o21.jpg

    Replies: @nebulafox

    We all knew this was coming. Age of the schoolmarms, gentlemen. Don’t forfeit your desire to seek virtue, knowledge, and excellence.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @nebulafox

    Indeed, I think we all knew it was already here. The only surprise is that Google is now so confident wokism trumps reality that they now publicly admit that their products tell lies.

  199. @PhysicistDave
    @Almost Missouri

    Almost Missouri wrote to me:


    I can’t say for sure, but my point is that somewhere along the line, the difference between virtue signalling and true belief ceases to exist or at least to matter.
     
    Sure. Most people find it easier to lie if they convince themselves of their own lies.

    And as someone suggested above, if a person just tries really hard to not think about a subject, he may not even realize that the falsehoods he spouts are lies.

    But, as you imply, it does seem to start with virtue signalling.

    AM also wrote:

    Dismissing this as “mere virtue signalling” is ultimately somewhere between naive and disingenuous. Mere virtue signalling can kill.
     
    Indeed. They harm everyone except some of the members of the ruling elite.

    Obviously, decent but poor blacks are harmed. And while whites can often escape the worst of it, they are sometimes victims.

    Bizarrely, even the thugs would be better off if they had been raised in a society that discouraged them from becoming thugs: after all, a number of them end up dead at the hands of their peers.

    One moral, I suppose, is that people should just shut the hell up about their plans for saving the world unless they have really thought things through carefully (at least the effort that most of us put in if we are considering buying a new house) and unless they are willing to "walk the walk" -- e.g., actually move into a black ghetto.

    But I do not think the Woke Whites want to hear that.

    Replies: @Nico

    One moral, I suppose, is that people should just shut the hell up about their plans for saving the world unless they have really thought things through carefully (at least the effort that most of us put in if we are considering buying a new house) and unless they are willing to “walk the walk” — e.g., actually move into a black ghetto.

    I used to think that way, that woke intersectionalist liberal who were ready to “walk the walk” had the right to talk. Now my thought is, I can respect them but only from the opposite side of the firing line and certainly can’t talk to them. I’ve met several who did things like live in Romani colonies and they’re the absolute worst. More whimsically and closer to home is a former high school friend. Despite never being able to provide for herself and her son on her own resources, not listening to her father when he told her not to marry her first husband who turned out to be a slug and not listening to me when I told her not to marry her second who turned out to be gay and borderline, she’s a hardcore feminist and moves with a curious brand of nightclub queers, blue-haired bisexual chicks and ghetto mammas. She’s also become a thoroughly unpleasant person. (I think her son’s going to become a Nazi when he grows up in reaction.)

  200. @Almost Missouri
    @Servant of Gla'aki


    whether the Democrats can replicate what they did in 2020, outside the context of the twin hysterias (pandemic, TDS).
     
    Have you noticed the Dems are not letting go of either hysteria? With covid, it's "new strain, new strain!!!1!!1!" . And now with Trump suggesting he'll run again in 2024, it'll be four more years of, "but we need to stop Orange Hitler!!!!1!1!1!"

    If those peter out they've got global warming waiting in the wings. They're already suggesting they need to extend lockdown to save the world from global warming. They will never let this stuff go.

    And just in case, they're already hard at work legalizing everything they did in the 2020 election under HR1. The only thing that stands in its way is a gentlemen's agreement in the Senate. Do you think there are 41 gentlemen in the Senate?

    2020-style elections are new normal, not a one-off aberration. Sadly, even the end of American democracy is the least of our worries now.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Servant of Gla'aki

    Have you noticed the Dems are not letting go of either hysteria? With covid, it’s “new strain, new strain!!!1!!1!” . And now with Trump suggesting he’ll run again in 2024, it’ll be four more years of, “but we need to stop Orange Hitler!!!!1!1!1!”

    That does seem to be their plan in the first week of March, six weeks after Biden’s (fake & gay) Inaugural. We’ll see how long that plan seems viable, I guess. I think it’s already kinda obviously falling apart for them, and will be an albatross around the neck of every Democratic candidate in next year’s elections. But I suppose perceptions vary.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Servant of Gla'aki

    Elections? We don't need no steenkin' elections!

    https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-28LXW1oGq8Q/Uts5ub3o8II/AAAAAAAAAE0/Mn2DYuuo82o/s1600/the-treasure-of-the-sierra-madre-stinking-badges.jpg

    Seems to me the Dems can just dial in whatever number of votes they want at this point.

    But just in case, the Fake News Machine is working overtime producing true believers. There are millions of voters who really believe the new strain/orange hitler/climate change stuff.

  201. @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Almost Missouri


    The only thing that stands in its way is a gentlemen’s agreement in the Senate. Do you think there are 41 gentlemen in the Senate?
     
    No, but I think there is a majority who like their high offices and seek to keep them for self-serving reasons.

    I'm as concerned as anyone about the Democrats having a 50+1 majority for legislation, but I think the filibuster does a lot for Senators in close States who can avoid having to take bad votes. Manchin and Sinema may be representing a half dozen others who want the progressive bona fides of being for nuking the filibuster but also don't want to actually take the votes that are avoided via the filibuster.

    Replies: @Servant of Gla'aki

    Manchin and Sinema may be representing a half dozen others who want the progressive bona fides of being for nuking the filibuster but also don’t want to actually take the votes that are avoided via the filibuster.

    That is almost certainly correct. To that end, Dianne Feinstein said she was opposed to ending the legislative filibuster. Because she’s senile, everyone just assumes the party leaders would whip her back into line if need be, but maybe not. And she likely speaks for others whom you might not obviously expect.

  202. @Almost Missouri
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    When he says these things, you could mention to him something like, "You know whoever is telling you that is lying to you, right?" in an offhand but confident and jocular way. Nine out of ten times, it does nothing, and they just go back to drinking the koolaid to which they're addicted. But sometimes it can sow just enough doubt. It may have never occurred to them to question the authority of their "source". That someone they know confidently asserts "it's just BS" may let a little light in, though you may never see the result yourself.

    If you're on solid footing with him, you could even try stronger medicine: "You are far more likely to be persecuted in modern Amerikkka than your waifu." And stronger: "They're gonna tell your kid she's got the wrong gender and put her on hormone treatments. Also that you are oppressing her by being a white male, and that your marriage is colonialism. You're right, you probably shouldn't go back. The crazies are in charge now. Bad things could happen."

    I've used both these approaches. The second gets better results than the first, but you need a stronger pre-existing relationship. They're not mutually exclusive. If I get any traction on the second approach, I intermittently circle back with offhand wokisms: "Did you just assume that person's gender?", "You're only saying that because of your white privilege.", blah blah systemic racism blah blah white fragility blah, etc. Give 'em a foretaste of the wokocracy they've been perhaps unwittingly inflicting on everyone else. When they start realizing they might be on the receiving end, suddenly it's not fun'n'games anymore, even though you're treating it like it is.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    Thanks for this, AM; they’re good ideas.

    That evening I responded by saying something like ‘Your wife and daughter have spent their whole lives in Hong Kong, which is one of the safest cities around. Aren’t you more worried about how they’re going to deal with the crime in USA?’

    He’s a New Yorker, so he went into a ‘you just show you’re street smart, and everybody will leave you alone’ schtick.

    I then asked him if he truly believed his wife and school-aged daughter could pull this off.

    By this point — he’s far from stupid — he knew what we were really talking about. He just gave me a look, and changed the subject.

    • Replies: @anon
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    He’s a New Yorker, so he went into a ‘you just show you’re street smart, and everybody will leave you alone’ schtick.

    Yeah, when was the last time he was on the streets of NY? How many years out of country?

    I then asked him if he truly believed his wife and school-aged daughter could pull this off.

    Nice.

    , @Almost Missouri
    @The Last Real Calvinist


    Aren’t you more worried about how they’re going to deal with the crime in USA?
     
    Good answer.

    It occurred to me after I wrote the previous comment to you that your friend is probably responding to the media reports of "hate crimes against Asians" that media have been running lately. Steve covered this several times, but I didn't realize how hard, and how mendaciously, the Fake News Machine was pushing this.

    I generally don't watch TV (I get lied to enough without seeking out extra dishonesty from the tube), but recently visited a family member who was watching exactly this news report on TV. I asked her if she knew who was committing these crimes. She gave a deer-in-headlights look and said, "White Supremacists?"

    Seriously. It was like a meme in real life.

    This is someone who grew up in an urban area, who knows perfectly well who commits crime. But there she was in her covid cocoon being drip-fed lies by the MSM and she takes them at face value. (This is another reason the Left loves the lockdowns: isolated citizens totally dependent on them for [mis]information.) Keep in mind there are videos of these "hate crimes" taking place, and it ain't "white supremacists" doing them. But the MSM mind control is so strong that they can literally tell their viewers/victims to ignore factual information and believe the lies, and the viewers willingly do it! Even in Hong Kong, apparently. As much as I detest the situation, I have to pause to marvel at the vampiric power of the Lords of Lies.

    So this is probably the locus of your friend's "worry" about his Asian wife and daughter coming to the USA: the lies the MSM are spreading about "anti-Asian hate crimes". You can tell him from me that if his worry is sincere, the solution is simple: just avoid les blaques. Also, stop listening to people who are lying to him.

    Still, I don't understand why any expatriate would repatriate right now. The domestic situation is bad and there is no path to improvement that doesn't run through much worse. If you're an expat, you're living the golden ticket: the benefit of the former USA without the liability of the present reality. It looks insane to me to give that up. If I were still an expat, I would be making long-term plans to stay that way.

  203. @Achmed E. Newman
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    I didn't get that at all. Sorry, Desiderius, and that's why I didn't write back - confusion. How about one of you two explain it?

    Anyway, yeah, I vote, but all that does is delay the inevitable by a little upon the occasional wins. I guess we can do all this strategic planning on how to get a few more years of delay, or we can be preppers. Prepping is more up my alley.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    I didn’t get that at all. Sorry, Desiderius, and that’s why I didn’t write back – confusion. How about one of you two explain it?

    Achmed, you’ve got to be a Tolkien fan for this one to make sense. In The Lord of the Rings, Denethor is the de facto ruler of Gondor, the country of the good guys, but his mind has been corrupted and he’s become despondent because he secretly looks into a kind of crystal ball called a palantir, which shows events happening far away, and even affords glimpses into the future. The problem is, what Denethor is seeing in his palantir is manipulated by the great evil enemy Sauron, so Denethor is essentially being gaslighted by fake news. Gondor’s real situation is dire, but not as hopeless as Denethor has been led to believe.

  204. @AndrewR
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    Where do you live?

    Some northerners without any (close) south(east)ern ties do like to rep that flag. Perhaps it represents simple "rebellion" to many of them.

    In any case, I can understand why a Chinese person might be hesitant to move into a lily-hhhhwhite town. Having said that, they'd be much safer there than any white (let alone a Chinese) person would be in an area with a significant number of blacks. If our media weren't so maliciously dishonest then everyone would know that.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    I live in Hong Kong.

    I think he may actually have been referring to a ‘Live Free or Die’ flag, which makes a lot more sense in NH, and which he may have been assuming was a Confederate slogan.

    • Replies: @anon
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    I think he may actually have been referring to a ‘Live Free or Die’ flag, which makes a lot more sense in NH, and which he may have been assuming was a Confederate slogan.

    Oh, well, he's just another know-it-all moron from Noo Yawk.

  205. @AnotherDad
    @Corvinus


    Exactly, you’re dreaming. And so much precious digital ink spilled.
     
    Yep, dreaming. (It's nice to imagine a saner world. Brightens my day.)

    But there are these things called "logic" and "math".

    Hence i know that:
    * some civilized nation will control its borders
    * some civilized nation will have culture/policies that get replacement fertility with modernity
    * some civilized nation will have culture/polices to create eugenic fertility
    * some civilized nation will have stable governing system that creates the above policies.

    I know this because ... those things win. Nations/civilizations that do them will win--survive and beat out nations that do not do them.

    Now the government of such a nation may not be the republican patriarchy i outlined--government by productive families with soy-free fathers. It could be something like the chicoms? Or even some muzzie autocracy. But those seem less stable and less flexible--for the well understood reasons of criticism and feedback. So i expect in the long run, the winner nations will be republics.

    Of course, there's nothing to say that there will be a winner nation from the West. Or even any winner nation among current civilizations. The world could collapse into a black "dark age" and civilized people will have to slowly re-evolve to rebuild civilization ... again. Or heck, the machines could take over. Or the sun go super-nova. But i don't think those are likely.

    Rather at some point, some nation, some AnotherDads somewhere will get it right ... and win.

    Because logic and math can not be beaten. So in the end, some AnotherDad wins.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    Today’s nations are civilized. What you are doing here is saying there is only **one** way for a nation to be civilized. Certainly, replacement fertility is one of several metrics. You just happen to be of the opinion that it is of the utmost importance for whites, but it’s really vital for our species as a whole.

    “Now the government of such a nation may not be the republican patriarchy i outlined–government by productive families with soy-free fathers.”

    Actually we do have productive families with soy-free fathers who help to stabilize our country, although admittedly the fissures are becoming larger in scope.

    “It could be something like the chicoms?”

    No, thanks.

    “Or even some muzzie autocracy”.

    LOL, in America? No.

    “Rather at some point, some nation, some AnotherDads somewhere will get it right … and win.”

    It will be more likely the AnotherDads will be pitted against the OtherDads. Which group gets on top, that remains to be seen.

    “Because logic and math can not be beaten.”

    Which you have neither.

  206. @Ben tillman
    @Jim Don Bob

    HR 1 is unconstitutional.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @G. Poulin, @Jim Don Bob

    HR 1 is unconstitutional.

    I am sure SCOTUS is busy even now thinking of ways not to have to deal with it. Standing, or something.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Jim Don Bob

    Standing, or something.

    That and laches. Gotta be some way to bring laches into the game.

    Replies: @ben tillman

  207. anon[394] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Almost Missouri

    Thanks for this, AM; they're good ideas.

    That evening I responded by saying something like 'Your wife and daughter have spent their whole lives in Hong Kong, which is one of the safest cities around. Aren't you more worried about how they're going to deal with the crime in USA?'

    He's a New Yorker, so he went into a 'you just show you're street smart, and everybody will leave you alone' schtick.

    I then asked him if he truly believed his wife and school-aged daughter could pull this off.

    By this point -- he's far from stupid -- he knew what we were really talking about. He just gave me a look, and changed the subject.

    Replies: @anon, @Almost Missouri

    He’s a New Yorker, so he went into a ‘you just show you’re street smart, and everybody will leave you alone’ schtick.

    Yeah, when was the last time he was on the streets of NY? How many years out of country?

    I then asked him if he truly believed his wife and school-aged daughter could pull this off.

    Nice.

  208. @The Last Real Calvinist
    @AndrewR

    I live in Hong Kong.

    I think he may actually have been referring to a 'Live Free or Die' flag, which makes a lot more sense in NH, and which he may have been assuming was a Confederate slogan.

    Replies: @anon

    I think he may actually have been referring to a ‘Live Free or Die’ flag, which makes a lot more sense in NH, and which he may have been assuming was a Confederate slogan.

    Oh, well, he’s just another know-it-all moron from Noo Yawk.

  209. @Almost Missouri
    @Nicholas Stix

    Mr. Stix:

    I plowed partway through the reading list you linked. I had already known that police departments were underreporting violent crimes in various ways, but I had always assumed well, they can't fiddle homicide. But you show a bunch of instances where they did just that! And these weren't obscure murders of homeless people no one would ever inquire about but publicly witnessed and even notorious murders that have a wikipedia page!

    If I may request the indulgence of your time, I have two questions:

    1) Is there any way to "audit" the homicide statistics other than calling the police department and asking individually about each murder, as you did in several of your articles?

    2) How much do you think the police under-report homicide? Is there any way to quantify it? Presumably the underreporting is worse in big cities than elsewhere. Is anyone besides you covering this?

    Thanks for you attention!

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix

    AM,

    Always great to hear from you.

    1. Not that I know of. However, every now and then, someone will blow the whistle on an individual murder that the cops “disappeared,” and find a sympathetic reporter.
    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2016/05/a-letter-from-relative-of-19-month-old.html?m=1
    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2015/04/remembering-christopher-marchiselli-one.html
    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2012/09/gloria-cadet-case-nypd-gets-caught.html

    2. It depends on the jurisdiction. The only media organization I know of that investigated “disappearing” murders was Chicago Magazine, which several years ago determined that in one year, the Chicago PD “disappeared” 18 out of 432 murders (4.17%). A longtime editor of mine feigned interest in such research, but revealed himself to be a tease. Who knows, maybe he’ll assign someone else to write my report; it wouldn’t be the first time.

    I used to think of the cops and the media as enemies, but now I see them as sleeping together, often literally. (Bill Bratton’s last two wives have been fake news reporters.)
    https://vdare.com/articles/stix-vindicated-academics-magazine-confirm-big-city-police-are-disappearing-crime

  210. @Jim Don Bob
    @Ben tillman


    HR 1 is unconstitutional.
     
    I am sure SCOTUS is busy even now thinking of ways not to have to deal with it. Standing, or something.

    Replies: @anon

    Standing, or something.

    That and laches. Gotta be some way to bring laches into the game.

    • LOL: ben tillman
    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @anon

    Don't forget mootness.

  211. @joe_mama
    @obwandiyag

    This may be true, but they'll still vote Democrat.

    Replies: @obwandiyag

    Implying, I guess, that you think that voting Republican is better.

    You think dumb.

  212. @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Almost Missouri


    Have you noticed the Dems are not letting go of either hysteria? With covid, it’s “new strain, new strain!!!1!!1!” . And now with Trump suggesting he’ll run again in 2024, it’ll be four more years of, “but we need to stop Orange Hitler!!!!1!1!1!”
     
    That does seem to be their plan in the first week of March, six weeks after Biden's (fake & gay) Inaugural. We'll see how long that plan seems viable, I guess. I think it's already kinda obviously falling apart for them, and will be an albatross around the neck of every Democratic candidate in next year's elections. But I suppose perceptions vary.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Elections? We don’t need no steenkin’ elections!

    Seems to me the Dems can just dial in whatever number of votes they want at this point.

    But just in case, the Fake News Machine is working overtime producing true believers. There are millions of voters who really believe the new strain/orange hitler/climate change stuff.

  213. @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Almost Missouri

    Thanks for this, AM; they're good ideas.

    That evening I responded by saying something like 'Your wife and daughter have spent their whole lives in Hong Kong, which is one of the safest cities around. Aren't you more worried about how they're going to deal with the crime in USA?'

    He's a New Yorker, so he went into a 'you just show you're street smart, and everybody will leave you alone' schtick.

    I then asked him if he truly believed his wife and school-aged daughter could pull this off.

    By this point -- he's far from stupid -- he knew what we were really talking about. He just gave me a look, and changed the subject.

    Replies: @anon, @Almost Missouri

    Aren’t you more worried about how they’re going to deal with the crime in USA?

    Good answer.

    It occurred to me after I wrote the previous comment to you that your friend is probably responding to the media reports of “hate crimes against Asians” that media have been running lately. Steve covered this several times, but I didn’t realize how hard, and how mendaciously, the Fake News Machine was pushing this.

    I generally don’t watch TV (I get lied to enough without seeking out extra dishonesty from the tube), but recently visited a family member who was watching exactly this news report on TV. I asked her if she knew who was committing these crimes. She gave a deer-in-headlights look and said, “White Supremacists?”

    Seriously. It was like a meme in real life.

    This is someone who grew up in an urban area, who knows perfectly well who commits crime. But there she was in her covid cocoon being drip-fed lies by the MSM and she takes them at face value. (This is another reason the Left loves the lockdowns: isolated citizens totally dependent on them for [mis]information.) Keep in mind there are videos of these “hate crimes” taking place, and it ain’t “white supremacists” doing them. But the MSM mind control is so strong that they can literally tell their viewers/victims to ignore factual information and believe the lies, and the viewers willingly do it! Even in Hong Kong, apparently. As much as I detest the situation, I have to pause to marvel at the vampiric power of the Lords of Lies.

    So this is probably the locus of your friend’s “worry” about his Asian wife and daughter coming to the USA: the lies the MSM are spreading about “anti-Asian hate crimes”. You can tell him from me that if his worry is sincere, the solution is simple: just avoid les blaques. Also, stop listening to people who are lying to him.

    Still, I don’t understand why any expatriate would repatriate right now. The domestic situation is bad and there is no path to improvement that doesn’t run through much worse. If you’re an expat, you’re living the golden ticket: the benefit of the former USA without the liability of the present reality. It looks insane to me to give that up. If I were still an expat, I would be making long-term plans to stay that way.

  214. @nebulafox
    @anon

    https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1367887090634080262

    We all knew this was coming. Age of the schoolmarms, gentlemen. Don't forfeit your desire to seek virtue, knowledge, and excellence.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Indeed, I think we all knew it was already here. The only surprise is that Google is now so confident wokism trumps reality that they now publicly admit that their products tell lies.

  215. @Corvinus
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Your ancestors and their progeny are clear examples of those "amoral grifters".

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

    Your ancestors and their progeny are clear examples of those “amoral grifters”.

    Please consider new material and fresh thoughts. Not fantasy land libertarianism circa 1975.

    • Troll: Corvinus
  216. @AndrewR
    @RichardTaylor

    In Latin America, they don't have the weird racial hang-ups that Americans do, although American imperialism is trying hard to change that.

    Again, I think you're missing the explicitly black supremacist message of the last year. Yellows and browns, fall in line!

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

    In Latin America, they don’t have the weird racial hang-ups that Americans do

    Yes, and the tragic hellhole of Latin America is the proof. Which is why they’re all trying to get into a White country.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @RichardTaylor

    Latin America is not indifferent to race; however they have fewer hang ups about race. Race in Latin America is like class in the United States. At least until recently, race in the US has been like class in the UK.

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

  217. @Almost Missouri
    @PhysicistDave


    It’s all fake — mere virtue signalling.
     
    I mostly agree, and yet ...

    I may have mentioned that my extended family and their friends are mostly liberals of various stripes, which has allowed me to observe these pathologies at close range over long periods of time. With one established middle class couple among them, for instance, they have always espoused some bespoke version of the latest leftist inanity, which I have always written off as "just virtue signalling again, zzzzz", but lately I have begun to wonder if they are not finally shading into true believers. The only thing they do in their limited spare time is watch Black movies. They seem to believe earnestly in Hidden Figures, Henrietta Lacks as a holy icon, BLM nonsense, etc. They organize "anti-racism" (i.e. anti-white) conferences. They donate religiously to the SPLC. They're like a parody out of the iSteve comments section. I could probably write a couple of sitcom screenplays with their antics. Yes, they still live in a 99% white neighborhood, but they bought that house two decades ago when they still had kids, and they haven't had cause to move yet. So I guess until they move somewhere other than a whitopia, or she leaves him to go coalburning (though they're getting kinda old for that), or some other Rubicon event, I can't say for sure, but my point is that somewhere along the line, the difference between virtue signalling and true belief ceases to exist or at least to matter. After all, that money they give to the SPLC will end up harming real people somewhere somehow, as will the antiwhite animus they whip up in antiracism rallies. Dismissing this as "mere virtue signalling" is ultimately somewhere between naive and disingenuous. Mere virtue signalling can kill.

    Replies: @Ripple Earthdevil, @Anon, @SimpleSong, @The Last Real Calvinist, @PhysicistDave, @Harry Baldwin

    Great post. I know people like this. One old friend, a widower my age, late 60s, had his new equally progressive out-of-town girlfriend staying with him for a weekend. He proudly told me they saw two movies that weekend: “Notorious RBG” and “Black Klansman.” Current reading? First volume of Obama’s autobiography. Faithfully refers to the riot at the Capitol as the “armed insurrection.”

  218. @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor wrote:


    The Yuppy liberal stuff is pure virtue signaling. But I do think many Whites have sincere concern for Blacks, Native Americans, etc, whether they are liberal or conservative.
     
    Sure. I'm sickened when I see some black toddler killed in cross-fire between gang-bangers. Any decent person is.

    Richard also wrote:

    But you’d be hard-pressed to find non-Whites who care about White people. And that implies that everyone thinks of White people as on another moral plane.
     
    Well, I and my family and friends have known black folks who spoke up on behalf of whites simply because it was the right thing to do. And, you know, it was black witnesses in Ferguson who told the truth about the Michael Brown incident.

    But I'll acknowledge that what you are pointing to is a tribalism that will destroy a republic, an attitude of "Is it good for my group?" instead of "Is it right and just?"

    The Founders were very fond of saying that a republic rests on the "virtue of the people." A despotism controlled by halfway decent (or even competent) despots can survive even if ordinary people have no sense of civic virtue at all.

    But not a republic.

    I think mid-twentieth-century so-called "interest group liberalism" bears a lot of the blame for this. It was a crack-pot poli-sci theory, ultimately absorbed by the news media and the culture, that pretended that a war-of-all-against-all among different contending interest groups will lead to an optimal equilibrium in the same way that market competition does.

    They ignored the fact that market competition is a positive-sum game: both sides gain in a normal market exchange. But robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul is at best a zero-sum game: in practice, it is a negative-sum game because people devote their energies to predation rather than production.

    If you're lucky you just end up with what Perón did to Argentina. If you're not lucky, you end up with Norther Ireland during the Troubles.

    Or worse.

    Our liberal-progressive elites have a lot to answer for, going back a long time, for what they have done to this country.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @RichardTaylor

    The point isn’t that an occasional Black person speaks up for the occasional White person.

    The point is, nobody expects non-Whites to exhibit the same routine moral conscience Whites do. And you know that if you’d quit playing games and be honest.

    But I’ll acknowledge that what you are pointing to is a tribalism

    All politics is tribal. All politics is identity politics, it always has been, everywhere, at all times. Because humans are social animals of a tribal nature. Unless, the person in question is a sociopath.

  219. @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Ron Unz


    For about fifty years, Republicans have been trying to increase their share of the black vote with absolutely ZERO success. Didn’t Trump offer blacks a half-trillion(!) dollars in financial reparations in his “Platinum Plan”? Plus letting black criminals out of prison with “criminal justice reform”? And moving heaven-and-earth to get rapper-criminals sprung from jails overseas? He probably would have done just about as well with zero dollars and effort, and perhaps might have picked up another couple points from disgruntled whites, getting himself reelected.
     
    This was an interesting phenomenon which I think was driven as much by Trump's long term personal relationships with famous blacks like Don King, Mike Tyson, Jim Brown, Kanye West, Herschel Walker and so forth as it was by the existing failure-bound GOP strategy. Perhaps these two forces met and complimented one another to yield the policy that resulted.

    Some, however, claim that the GOP's play for the black vote is a feint, and the real purpose is to create a permission structure for nice white ladies in suburbs to vote for the GOP. In this view, the blacks are the "MacGuffin" object - said to be of great value but inevitably just a prop to move the plot along where the resolution of the story arc is enough nice white ladies not feeling like filthy racists when voting for Republican candidates. Of course, what credits this theory is Democrats insistent inflammatory racial politics - the object of the exercise is probably more about creating social pressure aimed at the much more numerous nice white ladies rather than marginally increasing their 90%+ share of the black vote (or increasing turnout).

    Forty or fifty years ago, Republicans usually used to get between one-third and one-half of the Hispanic and Asian vote, but by their noisy attacks against immigrants and Hispanics, drove those numbers far down even while that electorate tripled or quadrupled.

     

    Forty or fifty years ago the wholesale demographic change of the United States was not yet in full swing. Evidently the story of Trump's marginal increase with Hispanics was the popularity of his messages of Law and Order (however undermined by "criminal justice reform") and the assertion of national sovereignty by control of an out of control immigration policy. A proposed policy of stricter immigration enforcement made the Republican candidate more popular with the Hispanic electorate than prior Republican candidates viewed as much more lenient on enforcement (i.e., Bush the Lesser).

    As for your state analysis, it’s not quite that simple. If the Republicans lose Texas, they’re permanently destroyed as a national party, and TX is very heavily Hispanic. If Trump had done better with Hispanics he might have won heavily/substantially Hispanic Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada, and been reelected. But if he’d done worse with Hispanics, he would lost Florida, and been blown out of the race.
     
    If the Republicans lose Texas, the party will spend years in the wilderness as a national political party but will eventually reemerge and become competitive again. It's just that when that time comes, the platforms of both parties will be ratcheted several degrees to the left.

    Some have made the point that Texan Hispanics are different in worldview than Californian Hispanics, and the former are much more amenable to voting for conservative candidates than the latter. The problem is that wholesale uncontrolled immigration from Latin America has changed the makeup of Texan Hispanics, and the new arrivals resemble Californian Hispanics much more than the Texan Hispanics when they set up shop in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, etc.

    Replies: @Ron Unz

    Some, however, claim that the GOP’s play for the black vote is a feint, and the real purpose is to create a permission structure for nice white ladies in suburbs to vote for the GOP.

    Well, GOP-types have been quietly making that argument for decades, and I don’t see any evidence it’s ever worked. Just consider the total collapse in the affluent female suburban vote for the Republicans over that period.

    And in Trump’s case it was especially ridiculous since all his crude and vulgar remarks on everything, greatly amplified by the hostile media, wiped him out in that group.

    Some have made the point that Texan Hispanics are different in worldview than Californian Hispanics, and the former are much more amenable to voting for conservative candidates than the latter.

    I’ve been closely following and writing on this issue since the early 1990s, and I’d say that argument is mostly nonsense. California Hispanics had regularly been voting 35% to 45+% Republican at the beginning of that period, but after the Republicans foolishly began attacking and scapegoating them, that support unsurprisingly plummeted. For example, Pete Wilson had gotten 47% of the Hispanic vote by running against “quotas” when he was elected governor against Dianne Feinstein in 1990, but within a few years GOP support had totally disappeared.

    Hispanics have traditionally been “blue-collar Reagan Democrats” much like various other ethnic groups, and only the sheer stupidity of the Republicans drove them away for a generation or so.

    https://www.unz.com/page/audio-files-podcasts/#race-ethnicity-and-social-policy

    • Replies: @RichardTaylor
    @Ron Unz


    since all his crude and vulgar remarks
     
    How is a remark both crude and vulgar? Isn't a crude remark vulgar by definition? And vice versa?

    But I get it: the silly crowd doesn't like blunt talk that actually names things so we can move forward.


    California Hispanics had regularly been voting 35% to 45+% Republican at the beginning of that period, but after the Republicans foolishly began attacking and scapegoating them, that support unsurprisingly plummeted.
     
    Oh stop it. That false claim again. Mestizos are not White people. Have you notice that Latin America ain't the same as North America or Europe, son?

    Replies: @Corvinus

  220. @PhysicistDave
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Achmed E. Newman wrote:


    This stuff would be less boring to me if I thought that with the right strategy and tactics, by getting the right coalition together, we would be able to vote our way off the road to destruction. As it is, no, we are not voting our way out of this, and, therefore, this is boring and pointless stuff.
     
    No: as Travis said, history is unpredictable.

    Trump's one big accomplishment was to tear the veil off the people who run this country. Quite unintentionally of course, Trump caused the Deep State and the Elite Media to show their hands. Something like a quarter of the country now know that the elites that run the country really, truly hate and despise most of their fellow citizens of all races: the ruling elite may manipulate non-Asian minorities to shore up their power, but they probably despise those groups even more than they despise working-class whites. (Remember when Biden said, "“poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids"?)

    The current American regime is unstable: federal fiscal policies are unsustainable; our monetary system is rickety; we are prepping our military for anything except actually fighting a war; our schools are jokes; the American people are really not happy.

    Feels to me like France circa 1785, imperial Russia in 1914, or the Soviets circa 1980.

    As Herb Stein said, if something cannot go on forever, it won't.

    No one can foretell if the break will come in 2024 or 2030 or whatever, just as even Lenin did not foresee the 1917 revolution. But the break will come.

    The question is what direction things will take after the collapse.

    John Adams write in 1818:

    What do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people. . . . This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.
     
    Ultimately, ideas rule the world. When the fighting actually starts, it is too late.

    Conservatism Inc. had no ideas, except "Let's slow things down a bit."

    The Founders had ideas.

    And they were good ones.

    If proclaimed clearly and widely enough, those ideas just might be good enough to mobilize enough people against the Left to win.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @3g4me

    @161 Physicist Dave: I’m sure the founders would have embraced your hapa children as prototypical ‘Murricans. Would we could all be as clever as Physicist Dave.

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @3g4me

    3g4me wrote to me: I


    ’m sure the founders would have embraced your hapa children as prototypical ‘Murricans.
     
    Yeah, they would have. They were men of the Enlightenment.

    Glad you grasp that.

    Now, maybe your kids can survive if they learn how to say, "Would you like soy sauce with that?" in Mandarin.

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

  221. @James J O'Meara
    @anonymous

    Portugal, Italy? Sunny, cheap, laid back, White. OK, I'd go for that.

    You want religion? Catholicism but no one cares, perfect; not like those Protestant busybodies who have mutated into the SJWs.

    "I prefer to live in Catholic societies, there is no trace of Christianity to bother one." -- Character in Gore Vidal's Burr (or 1876).

    Interesting that despite a rep for laissez faire ( I mean, like "manana" not libertarianism) both had successful fascist governments. My kinda people.

    Replies: @Muggles

    Interesting that despite a rep for laissez faire ( I mean, like “manana” not libertarianism) both had successful fascist governments. My kinda people.

    Since you mentioned Italy and Portugal, I assume you are referring to the regimes of Mussolini and Salazar.

    I would hardly call either of those “successful.” Not if you were to ask their own citizens.

    Mussolini was far worse in every way. Imperialist, thuggish, fascist (as you noted) in the true sense though lacking in the anti Antisemitism mostly. Both places became poorer as a result and the Italians finally kicked out the fascists.

    Salazar stultified Portugal for decades and tried to hold on to their “empire” unsuccessfully. Unlike Mussolini he was not shot in the street and hung from a lamppost. He is not beloved in Portugal but as not nearly as hated as Franco in Spain.

    “Your kind of people”?

    • Replies: @CCG
    @Muggles

    The more I learn about Salazar from the Goan perspective, the more he appears to be some kind of Controlled Opposition. There was a serious problem of illegal immigrants flooding from British India into Portuguese India territories from the start of the Portuguese Republic, but he never bothered to expel these illegal immigrants and secure Goa's borders. Demographics is Destiny. These non-Goans would prove to be a Fifth Column against native Goans, even trying to get Goa merged with Maharashtra after 1961.

  222. @Supply and Demand
    @Anon

    Ban firearms, give police real extrajudicial power, make said police racially and ethnically match the bantustans they patrol. Simple — Chinese, in fact.

    Replies: @Muggles

    Ban firearms, give police real extrajudicial power, make said police racially and ethnically match the bantustans they patrol. Simple — Chinese, in fact.

    This is your magic solution to crime?

    Ask the Uyghurs about about those “ethnically matched” police they face each day. Or other non Han Chinese residents.

    China has plenty of crime, you just don’t see much reported in the West or even in China. Their censorship is top notch.

    I take it you’re not actually posting from crime-free CCP China.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Muggles

    I take it you’re not actually posting from crime-free CCP China.

    It's a troll account, much like John Plywood.

    , @Supply and Demand
    @Muggles

    I never said there wasn’t crime. But it certainly does not resemble America, because crimes have consequences here that often involve family.

    As far as the Uighurs are concerned, the Han don’t have the ability to camp radicals without a large degree of cooperation from local elites and rival faith communities. Wahhabism displaced several schools of Islam here of a more ancient and mystic variety, and those people along with the petit boug party apparatus (CCP member Uighurs from the war years) were eagerly recruited to haul radicals off because they were fingers on the community pulse. Sonderkommando/Kapos, if you will.

    You sound salty about the Uighurs presumably because the white working class will be Uighur’d in America. They deserve it.

    Replies: @Muggles

  223. @J.Ross
    @Harry Baldwin

    There was a guy the early Bolsheviks thought of like that. He wasn't as highly educated or as intellectually fluid in conversation as any of them so they stuck him in the accountant's chair and had him do the figures. That would be Stalin.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin

    Felix Dzerzhinsky responds, “Sir, I served with Joe Stalin. I knew Joe Stalin. Joe Stalin was a friend of mine. Senator Sanders, you’re no Joe Stalin.”

    • LOL: Ron Unz
  224. @Muggles
    @Supply and Demand


    Ban firearms, give police real extrajudicial power, make said police racially and ethnically match the bantustans they patrol. Simple — Chinese, in fact.
     
    This is your magic solution to crime?

    Ask the Uyghurs about about those "ethnically matched" police they face each day. Or other non Han Chinese residents.

    China has plenty of crime, you just don't see much reported in the West or even in China. Their censorship is top notch.

    I take it you're not actually posting from crime-free CCP China.

    Replies: @anon, @Supply and Demand

    I take it you’re not actually posting from crime-free CCP China.

    It’s a troll account, much like John Plywood.

  225. @Ron Unz
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)


    Some, however, claim that the GOP’s play for the black vote is a feint, and the real purpose is to create a permission structure for nice white ladies in suburbs to vote for the GOP.
     
    Well, GOP-types have been quietly making that argument for decades, and I don't see any evidence it's ever worked. Just consider the total collapse in the affluent female suburban vote for the Republicans over that period.

    And in Trump's case it was especially ridiculous since all his crude and vulgar remarks on everything, greatly amplified by the hostile media, wiped him out in that group.

    Some have made the point that Texan Hispanics are different in worldview than Californian Hispanics, and the former are much more amenable to voting for conservative candidates than the latter.
     
    I've been closely following and writing on this issue since the early 1990s, and I'd say that argument is mostly nonsense. California Hispanics had regularly been voting 35% to 45+% Republican at the beginning of that period, but after the Republicans foolishly began attacking and scapegoating them, that support unsurprisingly plummeted. For example, Pete Wilson had gotten 47% of the Hispanic vote by running against "quotas" when he was elected governor against Dianne Feinstein in 1990, but within a few years GOP support had totally disappeared.

    Hispanics have traditionally been "blue-collar Reagan Democrats" much like various other ethnic groups, and only the sheer stupidity of the Republicans drove them away for a generation or so.

    https://www.unz.com/page/audio-files-podcasts/#race-ethnicity-and-social-policy

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

    since all his crude and vulgar remarks

    How is a remark both crude and vulgar? Isn’t a crude remark vulgar by definition? And vice versa?

    But I get it: the silly crowd doesn’t like blunt talk that actually names things so we can move forward.

    California Hispanics had regularly been voting 35% to 45+% Republican at the beginning of that period, but after the Republicans foolishly began attacking and scapegoating them, that support unsurprisingly plummeted.

    Oh stop it. That false claim again. Mestizos are not White people. Have you notice that Latin America ain’t the same as North America or Europe, son?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @RichardTaylor

    You do realize that not all white people were considered "white", right?

    Source –> https://www.dartmouth.edu/~hist32/History/White.htm


    Between 1880 and WWI, the United States experienced large waves of European immigration. These “new immigrants” however did not come from northern Europe and represented a frightening diversity to many. The difference perceived in these immigrants was frequently described as a racial difference in which Europeans were represented as, not one, but many races identified by region (Alpine, Mediterranean, Slavic and Nordic) or by alleged head shape (roundheads, slopeheads). Madison Grant, a biologist and curator for the American Museum of Natural History in New York explained in his book The Passing of the Great Race that White Americans, the great race, were losing out to hordes of inferior European immigrants. Grant’s book was so popular it experienced 7 reprints before WWII. According to Grant, “These new immigrants were no longer exclusively members of the Nordic race as were the earlier ones…The transportation lines advertised America as a land flowing with milk and honey and the European governments took the opportunity to unload upon careless, wealthy and hospitable America the sweepings of their jails and asylums…Our jails, insane asylums and almshouses are filled with this human flotsam and the whole tone of american life, social, moral and political has been lowered and vulgarized by them.

     

    So much for white unity!

    From an HBD standpoint, what data do we have from the late 1800's that compared the IQ's of Western/Northern Europeans and Eastern/Southern Europeans? Consider that Alabama congressman John L. Burnett, chairman of the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, reintroduced the literacy component of the immigration bill multiple times before it eventually passed in 1917. He also was a member of the Dillingham Commission, which concluded immigrants from southern and eastern Europe posed a serious threat to American society in large part due to their illiteracy. “To admit the unchangeable differentiation of race in its modern scientific meaning is to admit inevitably the existence of superiority in one race and of inferiority in another,” Madison Grant further wrote. “The Anglo-Saxon branch of the Nordic race is again showing itself to be that upon which the nation must chiefly depend for leadership, for courage, for loyalty, for unity and harmony of action.” Furthermore, according to nativists, there were marked physical differences between the ethnic groups of Europe, which though intermarriage, would significantly dilute the superior intellect and strength of character of the Anglo-Saxon.

    So much for white unity!

    Replies: @Anonymous 1

  226. @Muggles
    @Supply and Demand


    Ban firearms, give police real extrajudicial power, make said police racially and ethnically match the bantustans they patrol. Simple — Chinese, in fact.
     
    This is your magic solution to crime?

    Ask the Uyghurs about about those "ethnically matched" police they face each day. Or other non Han Chinese residents.

    China has plenty of crime, you just don't see much reported in the West or even in China. Their censorship is top notch.

    I take it you're not actually posting from crime-free CCP China.

    Replies: @anon, @Supply and Demand

    I never said there wasn’t crime. But it certainly does not resemble America, because crimes have consequences here that often involve family.

    As far as the Uighurs are concerned, the Han don’t have the ability to camp radicals without a large degree of cooperation from local elites and rival faith communities. Wahhabism displaced several schools of Islam here of a more ancient and mystic variety, and those people along with the petit boug party apparatus (CCP member Uighurs from the war years) were eagerly recruited to haul radicals off because they were fingers on the community pulse. Sonderkommando/Kapos, if you will.

    You sound salty about the Uighurs presumably because the white working class will be Uighur’d in America. They deserve it.

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @Supply and Demand


    I never said there wasn’t crime. But it certainly does not resemble America, because crimes have consequences here that often involve family.
     
    By "here" I assume you mean China. So you are posting from China. Okay.

    But crime has consequences for family in the US too, though usually indirect. We don't punish family members in the US for crimes unless they are directly involved. Public (govt) housing may exclude known criminals. "Social report cards" aren't used here to "reform" criminals though.

    I'm sure the CCP government gets a lot of cooperation from Uyghurs though every repressive government uses incentives and punishments. I'm not a fan of Islamic extremism or cultural repression either.

    I don't know if you are a CCP online "worker" or not. Your final comment about the "white working class" seems deranged. No one "deserves" State repression for being a member of a group.

    Replies: @anon

  227. @RichardTaylor
    @Ron Unz


    since all his crude and vulgar remarks
     
    How is a remark both crude and vulgar? Isn't a crude remark vulgar by definition? And vice versa?

    But I get it: the silly crowd doesn't like blunt talk that actually names things so we can move forward.


    California Hispanics had regularly been voting 35% to 45+% Republican at the beginning of that period, but after the Republicans foolishly began attacking and scapegoating them, that support unsurprisingly plummeted.
     
    Oh stop it. That false claim again. Mestizos are not White people. Have you notice that Latin America ain't the same as North America or Europe, son?

    Replies: @Corvinus

    You do realize that not all white people were considered “white”, right?

    Source –> https://www.dartmouth.edu/~hist32/History/White.htm

    Between 1880 and WWI, the United States experienced large waves of European immigration. These “new immigrants” however did not come from northern Europe and represented a frightening diversity to many. The difference perceived in these immigrants was frequently described as a racial difference in which Europeans were represented as, not one, but many races identified by region (Alpine, Mediterranean, Slavic and Nordic) or by alleged head shape (roundheads, slopeheads). Madison Grant, a biologist and curator for the American Museum of Natural History in New York explained in his book The Passing of the Great Race that White Americans, the great race, were losing out to hordes of inferior European immigrants. Grant’s book was so popular it experienced 7 reprints before WWII. According to Grant, “These new immigrants were no longer exclusively members of the Nordic race as were the earlier ones…The transportation lines advertised America as a land flowing with milk and honey and the European governments took the opportunity to unload upon careless, wealthy and hospitable America the sweepings of their jails and asylums…Our jails, insane asylums and almshouses are filled with this human flotsam and the whole tone of american life, social, moral and political has been lowered and vulgarized by them.

    So much for white unity!

    From an HBD standpoint, what data do we have from the late 1800’s that compared the IQ’s of Western/Northern Europeans and Eastern/Southern Europeans? Consider that Alabama congressman John L. Burnett, chairman of the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, reintroduced the literacy component of the immigration bill multiple times before it eventually passed in 1917. He also was a member of the Dillingham Commission, which concluded immigrants from southern and eastern Europe posed a serious threat to American society in large part due to their illiteracy. “To admit the unchangeable differentiation of race in its modern scientific meaning is to admit inevitably the existence of superiority in one race and of inferiority in another,” Madison Grant further wrote. “The Anglo-Saxon branch of the Nordic race is again showing itself to be that upon which the nation must chiefly depend for leadership, for courage, for loyalty, for unity and harmony of action.” Furthermore, according to nativists, there were marked physical differences between the ethnic groups of Europe, which though intermarriage, would significantly dilute the superior intellect and strength of character of the Anglo-Saxon.

    So much for white unity!

    • Troll: RichardTaylor
    • Replies: @Anonymous 1
    @Corvinus

    That old fake claim? You guys can’t update your anti-White attacks?

    Meanwhile, back on planet earthcar the first law on citizenship in the USA restricted to to white people. And they knew exactly what they were talking about.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  228. Where is his data coming from? From the same pollsters who had Susan Collins trailing in every survey undertaken for months? Why does anyone take opinion researchers seriously?

  229. @Supply and Demand
    @Muggles

    I never said there wasn’t crime. But it certainly does not resemble America, because crimes have consequences here that often involve family.

    As far as the Uighurs are concerned, the Han don’t have the ability to camp radicals without a large degree of cooperation from local elites and rival faith communities. Wahhabism displaced several schools of Islam here of a more ancient and mystic variety, and those people along with the petit boug party apparatus (CCP member Uighurs from the war years) were eagerly recruited to haul radicals off because they were fingers on the community pulse. Sonderkommando/Kapos, if you will.

    You sound salty about the Uighurs presumably because the white working class will be Uighur’d in America. They deserve it.

    Replies: @Muggles

    I never said there wasn’t crime. But it certainly does not resemble America, because crimes have consequences here that often involve family.

    By “here” I assume you mean China. So you are posting from China. Okay.

    But crime has consequences for family in the US too, though usually indirect. We don’t punish family members in the US for crimes unless they are directly involved. Public (govt) housing may exclude known criminals. “Social report cards” aren’t used here to “reform” criminals though.

    I’m sure the CCP government gets a lot of cooperation from Uyghurs though every repressive government uses incentives and punishments. I’m not a fan of Islamic extremism or cultural repression either.

    I don’t know if you are a CCP online “worker” or not. Your final comment about the “white working class” seems deranged. No one “deserves” State repression for being a member of a group.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Muggles

    Dude, it's just another one of the many troll accounts that have popped up in the last year or so.

  230. @Muggles
    @Supply and Demand


    I never said there wasn’t crime. But it certainly does not resemble America, because crimes have consequences here that often involve family.
     
    By "here" I assume you mean China. So you are posting from China. Okay.

    But crime has consequences for family in the US too, though usually indirect. We don't punish family members in the US for crimes unless they are directly involved. Public (govt) housing may exclude known criminals. "Social report cards" aren't used here to "reform" criminals though.

    I'm sure the CCP government gets a lot of cooperation from Uyghurs though every repressive government uses incentives and punishments. I'm not a fan of Islamic extremism or cultural repression either.

    I don't know if you are a CCP online "worker" or not. Your final comment about the "white working class" seems deranged. No one "deserves" State repression for being a member of a group.

    Replies: @anon

    Dude, it’s just another one of the many troll accounts that have popped up in the last year or so.

  231. @3g4me
    @PhysicistDave

    @161 Physicist Dave: I'm sure the founders would have embraced your hapa children as prototypical 'Murricans. Would we could all be as clever as Physicist Dave.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    3g4me wrote to me: I

    ’m sure the founders would have embraced your hapa children as prototypical ‘Murricans.

    Yeah, they would have. They were men of the Enlightenment.

    Glad you grasp that.

    Now, maybe your kids can survive if they learn how to say, “Would you like soy sauce with that?” in Mandarin.

    • Replies: @RichardTaylor
    @PhysicistDave

    The founders were totally opposed to creating mixed race children? Are you serious?

    Read what Thomas Jefferson had to say about Blacks.

    Have you ever read an actual history book or biography from the period?

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

  232. @Achmed E. Newman
    @PhysicistDave

    I agree with almost your whole comment here, Physicist, though I would not use the word "rickety" for our financial system. (I would use something about an abyss.) The only word in your comment here I disagree with is "No", because I see no disagreement in here with what I wrote - do you think we will be voting our way out of this?

    They system(s) will fail. As your wrote, and Instapundit before you, and Herb Stein before him, "if something can't go on, it won't go on"*.

    I agree. Before the system(s) fail, it would be great if more people would be turned onto the words/video/homeschool curriculum of Ron Paul. It'd be great if they could all be against the warfare State. It'd be great if more Americans understood the evil of Socialism, and why it's incentives for dysgenics have ruined the country. It'd be great if more Americans understood why a nation must have borders. It'd be great if more people understood the US Constitution.

    One word for you too, Dave: Demographics. Do you think that the 50 million or more newcomers/offspring-of-same of the last 50 years are Ron Paul supporters? Are they the types that would give a rat's ass about the US Constitution, much less know who John Adams was? How about the 40 million black people, in general?

    So what rebuild happens after the big SHTF moment coming will need to involve a separation of some kind.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    Achmed E. Newman asked me:

    do you think we will be voting our way out of this?

    Well… I’m not optimistic. But you know the old saying:

    “God has a special providence for fools, drunkards, and the United States of America.”

    Our wealth, our geographic position, the legal framework we inherited from the Founders and from our English heritage — no country has been as blessed as America. We just might pull through.

    AEN also wrote:

    Before the system(s) fail, it would be great if more people would be turned onto the words/video/homeschool curriculum of Ron Paul. It’d be great if they could all be against the warfare State. It’d be great if more Americans understood the evil of Socialism, and why it’s incentives for dysgenics have ruined the country. It’d be great if more Americans understood why a nation must have borders. It’d be great if more people understood the US Constitution.

    Yeah, there is always a day after the deluge. The question is who picks up the pieces.

    AEN also wrote:

    One word for you too, Dave: Demographics. Do you think that the 50 million or more newcomers/offspring-of-same of the last 50 years are Ron Paul supporters? Are they the types that would give a rat’s ass about the US Constitution, much less know who John Adams was? How about the 40 million black people, in general?

    Well, “electing a new people” does not usually work out well! On the other hand, some of the most fervent defenders of this country are descendants of Irish and Italians who are not exactly from the founding stock. It is, after all, Hispanics out here in California who voted down the attempt to restore Affirmative Action.

    AEN also wrote:

    So what rebuild happens after the big SHTF moment coming will need to involve a separation of some kind.

    I don’t think that is possible.

    Yes, I am really worried. Maybe the next America will be in Hungary or Russia or East Asia.

    But, as AnotherDad wrote above:

    Rather at some point, some nation, some AnotherDads somewhere will get it right … and win.

    Because logic and math can not be beaten. So in the end, some AnotherDad wins.

    The ideas of the American Founders are right, in the most simple and pragamtic sense. Ultimately they will previal.

    Of course, I would really like them to prevail in the country that my (yet unborn) grandkids will inhabit. And, of that I am not so sure.

  233. @Corvinus
    @RichardTaylor

    You do realize that not all white people were considered "white", right?

    Source –> https://www.dartmouth.edu/~hist32/History/White.htm


    Between 1880 and WWI, the United States experienced large waves of European immigration. These “new immigrants” however did not come from northern Europe and represented a frightening diversity to many. The difference perceived in these immigrants was frequently described as a racial difference in which Europeans were represented as, not one, but many races identified by region (Alpine, Mediterranean, Slavic and Nordic) or by alleged head shape (roundheads, slopeheads). Madison Grant, a biologist and curator for the American Museum of Natural History in New York explained in his book The Passing of the Great Race that White Americans, the great race, were losing out to hordes of inferior European immigrants. Grant’s book was so popular it experienced 7 reprints before WWII. According to Grant, “These new immigrants were no longer exclusively members of the Nordic race as were the earlier ones…The transportation lines advertised America as a land flowing with milk and honey and the European governments took the opportunity to unload upon careless, wealthy and hospitable America the sweepings of their jails and asylums…Our jails, insane asylums and almshouses are filled with this human flotsam and the whole tone of american life, social, moral and political has been lowered and vulgarized by them.

     

    So much for white unity!

    From an HBD standpoint, what data do we have from the late 1800's that compared the IQ's of Western/Northern Europeans and Eastern/Southern Europeans? Consider that Alabama congressman John L. Burnett, chairman of the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, reintroduced the literacy component of the immigration bill multiple times before it eventually passed in 1917. He also was a member of the Dillingham Commission, which concluded immigrants from southern and eastern Europe posed a serious threat to American society in large part due to their illiteracy. “To admit the unchangeable differentiation of race in its modern scientific meaning is to admit inevitably the existence of superiority in one race and of inferiority in another,” Madison Grant further wrote. “The Anglo-Saxon branch of the Nordic race is again showing itself to be that upon which the nation must chiefly depend for leadership, for courage, for loyalty, for unity and harmony of action.” Furthermore, according to nativists, there were marked physical differences between the ethnic groups of Europe, which though intermarriage, would significantly dilute the superior intellect and strength of character of the Anglo-Saxon.

    So much for white unity!

    Replies: @Anonymous 1

    That old fake claim? You guys can’t update your anti-White attacks?

    Meanwhile, back on planet earthcar the first law on citizenship in the USA restricted to to white people. And they knew exactly what they were talking about.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Anonymous 1

    "That old fake claim? You guys can’t update your anti-White attacks?"

    I can see why you only have 5 comments on this fine opinion webzine, ma'am. So, for your adoring fans, please offer a specific argument how and why the historical record is referred to as that "old fake claim".

    "Meanwhile, back on planet earthcar the first law on citizenship in the USA restricted to to white people. And they knew exactly what they were talking about."

    LOL, no, that was called the product of the times, with our posterity, i.e. future generations, being able to be flexible.

  234. @RichardTaylor
    @AndrewR


    In Latin America, they don’t have the weird racial hang-ups that Americans do
     
    Yes, and the tragic hellhole of Latin America is the proof. Which is why they're all trying to get into a White country.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    Latin America is not indifferent to race; however they have fewer hang ups about race. Race in Latin America is like class in the United States. At least until recently, race in the US has been like class in the UK.

    • Replies: @RichardTaylor
    @Hibernian

    Being racially realistic and loyal to your own people is not a "hang up". It's a virtue.

    Again, look at the results. Get out of theoretical fantasyland.

  235. @PhysicistDave
    @3g4me

    3g4me wrote to me: I


    ’m sure the founders would have embraced your hapa children as prototypical ‘Murricans.
     
    Yeah, they would have. They were men of the Enlightenment.

    Glad you grasp that.

    Now, maybe your kids can survive if they learn how to say, "Would you like soy sauce with that?" in Mandarin.

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

    The founders were totally opposed to creating mixed race children? Are you serious?

    Read what Thomas Jefferson had to say about Blacks.

    Have you ever read an actual history book or biography from the period?

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @RichardTaylor

    RichardTaylor wrote to me:


    The founders were totally opposed to creating mixed race children? Are you serious?

    Read what Thomas Jefferson had to say about Blacks.
     
    My kids are half-Caucasian, half-East Asian. Hybrid vigor, you know. Better than you Whiteys who marry your own cousins.

    Hope you are teaching your kids to say, "Would you like soy sauce with that?" In Mandarin.

    They're gonna need it.
  236. @Hibernian
    @RichardTaylor

    Latin America is not indifferent to race; however they have fewer hang ups about race. Race in Latin America is like class in the United States. At least until recently, race in the US has been like class in the UK.

    Replies: @RichardTaylor

    Being racially realistic and loyal to your own people is not a “hang up”. It’s a virtue.

    Again, look at the results. Get out of theoretical fantasyland.

  237. @Anonymous 1
    @Corvinus

    That old fake claim? You guys can’t update your anti-White attacks?

    Meanwhile, back on planet earthcar the first law on citizenship in the USA restricted to to white people. And they knew exactly what they were talking about.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “That old fake claim? You guys can’t update your anti-White attacks?”

    I can see why you only have 5 comments on this fine opinion webzine, ma’am. So, for your adoring fans, please offer a specific argument how and why the historical record is referred to as that “old fake claim”.

    “Meanwhile, back on planet earthcar the first law on citizenship in the USA restricted to to white people. And they knew exactly what they were talking about.”

    LOL, no, that was called the product of the times, with our posterity, i.e. future generations, being able to be flexible.

  238. @RichardTaylor
    @PhysicistDave

    The founders were totally opposed to creating mixed race children? Are you serious?

    Read what Thomas Jefferson had to say about Blacks.

    Have you ever read an actual history book or biography from the period?

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    RichardTaylor wrote to me:

    The founders were totally opposed to creating mixed race children? Are you serious?

    Read what Thomas Jefferson had to say about Blacks.

    My kids are half-Caucasian, half-East Asian. Hybrid vigor, you know. Better than you Whiteys who marry your own cousins.

    Hope you are teaching your kids to say, “Would you like soy sauce with that?” In Mandarin.

    They’re gonna need it.

    • Troll: RichardTaylor
  239. anon[223] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz
    @steinbergfeldwitzcohen


    Claiming that Trump is the worst Prez in history is complete nonsense. There is a list.
     
    Well, you're certainly listing some other contenders. But here's another comment of mine to consider:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/shor-us-white-democrats-could-easily-alienate-nonwhite-democrats-with-our-crazy-level-of-racial-resentment-on-their-behalf/#comment-4506122

    Anyway, I've never understood endless denunciations of Wilson for the Federal Reserve. Doesn't just about every developed country in the world have a central bank and an income tax? If everyone has a central bank and an income tax, isn't it ridiculous that if not for Wilson, we wouldn't? Anyway, wasn't the Income Tax ratified before Wilson was inaugurated?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Reg Cæsar, @Almost Missouri, @anon, @anon

    Since you consider Trump to be a pretty good contender for the worst president in America,
    who do you consider a good President?

    I think you have said that Obama and Bush were horrible(I think it was in the John McCain article), and I don’t think you have a too high opinion of Clinton.

    Maybe you like Reagan, but he started this neoliberal revolution that led to the above presidents.

    Personally, I think that Harry Truman did a pretty good job domestically. Post WWII America was really doing very well economically then.

  240. @anon
    @Jim Don Bob

    Standing, or something.

    That and laches. Gotta be some way to bring laches into the game.

    Replies: @ben tillman

    Don’t forget mootness.

  241. @Muggles
    @James J O'Meara


    Interesting that despite a rep for laissez faire ( I mean, like “manana” not libertarianism) both had successful fascist governments. My kinda people.
     
    Since you mentioned Italy and Portugal, I assume you are referring to the regimes of Mussolini and Salazar.

    I would hardly call either of those "successful." Not if you were to ask their own citizens.

    Mussolini was far worse in every way. Imperialist, thuggish, fascist (as you noted) in the true sense though lacking in the anti Antisemitism mostly. Both places became poorer as a result and the Italians finally kicked out the fascists.

    Salazar stultified Portugal for decades and tried to hold on to their "empire" unsuccessfully. Unlike Mussolini he was not shot in the street and hung from a lamppost. He is not beloved in Portugal but as not nearly as hated as Franco in Spain.

    "Your kind of people"?

    Replies: @CCG

    The more I learn about Salazar from the Goan perspective, the more he appears to be some kind of Controlled Opposition. There was a serious problem of illegal immigrants flooding from British India into Portuguese India territories from the start of the Portuguese Republic, but he never bothered to expel these illegal immigrants and secure Goa’s borders. Demographics is Destiny. These non-Goans would prove to be a Fifth Column against native Goans, even trying to get Goa merged with Maharashtra after 1961.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Becker update V1.3.2
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement