Wednesday, July 31, 2019

Hello Money, My Old Friend

There is a very old saying "Those who can't do, teach". Like many old sayings, it is mostly true and it is true nowhere more so than the economics faculty at most colleges and universities.

Economics is a fascinating and misunderstood subject. There is the sort of economics you learn in college, heavy on esoteric theories and statistics, the sort of economics that prepared Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for a rewarding career as a tavern wench. I took several econ classes in college and they were almost universally useless. The professors had little real world experience and are a lot like meteorologists because they can be wrong 100% of the time and not have it impact their employment. People who had never run a business, made a payroll, talked to an irate customer or worked overtime in their lives were explaining to us why they were the experts on an arcane field of study that had no bearing on reality. They are kind of like Mel Kiper, Jr., the NFL draft prognosticator. Mel spends the whole year predicting which players will be drafted by which teams in which round. He is often wrong but he smoothly gives commentary on whoever gets picked without missing a beat. That is his job and he makes gobs of money doing it. Even if he is correct about who gets picked where, a bunch of those guys turn out to be flops. He has been doing this since 1984. The guy is 59 years old and has spent the last 35 years analyzing an event that takes a couple of hours over the course of a few days once a year. Pretty nice work if you can get it (in fairness, Mel is pretty accurate in the first round but after that all bets are off).


Economists, especially academics, are like Mel Kiper Jr. but without the nice suits and fantastic hair. They talk about stuff in the abstract, completely divorced from actual economic activity. It is a world of charts and arcane knowledge and theories and top heavy Latino girls aspiring to be the dumbest elected official in American history.

Then there is economics in the real world. This is where economics is actually happening, not in theories or charts but in real life.

A big reason why academic economics is so terribly wrong most of the time is the basic assumption. Academics seem to assume that economics is a science, predictable because humans are predictable. If you do this, then people will do that, every time, without fail. In the real world inhabited by real people, economics cannot be thought of as a science because humans are not predictable and we are driven by all sorts of irrational and ever-changing motivations. People going through a divorce will spend $25,000 on a lawyer so they can stick it to their ex-spouse for $1000. It makes no economic sense but people do it anyway.

Our view of money reflects this. Money is supposed to be this very objective thing. An item costs X number of dollars. If you need it you are prepared to pay that many dollars to obtain it. Yet we still tolerate the degrading experience of buying a car where the exact same car at the same dealership can be sold for a price that is thousands of dollars different from one buyer to the next. Buying a car is not a science, it is an emotional decision. I like this color, I want this feature. This car costs more than that car but I am willing to pay the extra because it is cooler even though it does the same thing. Car dealers knows this and exploit people's emotional reactions. The same is true with houses. People will pay more for a house based on things like the color of the house. Who cares if a house is beige or light blue? It doesn't affect the function of the house but emotional preferences are powerful. Spend a little bit to spruce up the landscaping and you can exponentially increase the value of your house even though having a nice arrangement of flowering shrubs instead of a row of evergreens makes no real difference in a house.

We have an almost magical or perhaps even religious view of money. The faith of people in the monetary system is actually quite interesting. We conduct business, perform labor, exchange goods and services, all based on something we never see. Someone can make $100,000 in a year and never have any physical contact with it, not even writing an actual check. John Wilder has a great post up on this topic, one you should check out: Big Swedish Coins, Italian Women Pole Vaulters, and the Future of Money, Part I. People don't think about money, what it means and what it does, other than how much they have and how much their bills are, and because of that we get people clamoring for a $15 minimum wage who have never given a moment of thought to the question of what the ramifications of rapidly and arbitrarily inflating the wages of the lowest skilled workers will have on the rest of the workforce. More money good, me want more money!

I saw the weird relationship we have as a people with our money when I was a bank manager. I remember once when an elderly man came into the branch early in the morning. His wife of many decades had just died. That morning, a few hours earlier. He wanted to get his account switched over into just his name. Her body was literally not even cold yet and his thoughts were on his money. People tell their banker all sorts of stuff. I knew people were heading for divorce long before their spouse or family when they came in to open a new account without their spouse on it and would try to subtly ask about having their statements sent to a P.O. box instead of their home address. Being the one overseeing their money put you in the same company as their therapist or clergy.

On the one hand you have customers obsessing over their bank accounts, and on the other you have employees of the bank who saw money as a hassle, something you had to deal with each day. Can't have too much in your drawer but can't have too little. Is the ATM full enough for the weekend? It all has to be facing the right way and you have to have exactly the right amount all the time. I once saw a bundle of cash being prepared to be shipped out that was a little over one million dollars in cash. What I remember was how disappointing it was, not impressive at all. Most banks would love to stop having to deal with cash entirely, it is expensive and a huge hassle.


Money is simply a tool. It is easier to exchange for goods and services using a commonly accepted monetary system instead of trying to barter. "How many chickens for a plow?" is a tough way to do business. We often barter with the Amish for rides or other things they can't do for themselves and it can be kind of messy and often involves baked goods and boxes from Amazon.

The other thing about money is that using it is like throwing a pebble into a pond. It causes ripples. When someone pays you and you in turn spend that money, all sorts of things happen. Multiply that by 330 million people and you get an economy. Something as mundane as getting gas does this. When you pump gas and swipe your card, you put profit in the pocket of the owner of the station. You promote the employment of the Pakistani guy working inside. And the vendors who bring beef jerky and pop, the guy who does maintenance on the hot dog roller, the trucker who brings more gas, the people who install gas pumps, the bank that issues your debit card, the employees at the refinery the gas came from, the people who drill and extract the oil. Those people in turn buy homes and cars, shop at Wal-Mart, and countless other activities. In a tiny way your $50 in gas ricochets around the economy and that is what makes the whole thing work.

Most people don't understand this. They see money as an isolated transaction, one dollar equals one sausage McMuffin. Money is thought of in terms of how much I get this month from my job and how much I spend on bills. They don't give any thought to what happens when the government tinkers with wages or takes money from some people and gives it to others, or when the government borrows money that doesn't exist to spend on stuff. Few people wonder what would happen if the government magically "forgave" trillions in student loans that represent money borrowed and spent. They don't consider what taking away price pressure on health care would do to prices in a "Medicare for all" scheme. Forget asking them about what importing millions of people who are willing to work for cheap and live in conditions Americans won't will do to our economy and standard of living.

Our monetary system is a very fragile thing. It works because we all agree to it. Our currency even states "this note is legal tender for all debts, public and private" but that is true only so long as we agree that it does and the only reason we agree that it does is because it always has thanks to the relative stability of our government. If our government ever suffered from a significant crisis of confidence, and I think that is both likely and imminent, it is not unlikely that cash currency will suddenly not be the universal medium of exchange. At the same time I am leery of precious metals as a hedge against a currency issue. In a SHTF/TEOTWAWKI situation, what use is gold going to have? I am a big believer in having set aside stuff you can barter for other stuff. More on that idea in a later post.

When thinking about money, it is worth recalling the words penned by Rudyard Kipling many years ago in his poem Cold Iron. The full context is a little different but the opening lines are pretty sound:

Gold is for the mistress -- silver for the maid --
Copper for the craftsman cunning at his trade."
"Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall,
"But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all."


A lesson the globohomo banksters and corporate oligarchs should remember. All of that money that they think they possess and gives them power, represented by nothing more than numbers on a computer screen, aren't going to matter much when cold iron instead of cash is king.

Sunday, July 28, 2019

From Acceptance To Worship

It wasn't that long ago that various sexually degenerate minority groups claimed that they just wanted to be left alone and accepted. My, how that changed in the blink of an eye....



7 Mile and Van Dyke is an intersection in Detroit that is surrounded by liquor stores, industrial sites, dollar stores, hair and nail salons catering to black women and fast food joints. Looking at the Google maps street level view shows overgrown lots, burned buildings, trash and litter. The streets are crumbling and one shot on the street view, right at a gas station at 7 Mile and Van Dyke, shows a police stop.



Clearly the most pressing issue for people who live around 7 Mile and Van Dyke in Detroit is the sacredness of "trans people", not dodging gunfire.

The practice of forcing people to believe and affirm as noble what they know is a lie and revolting is a significant part of the mental warfare conducted by the globohomo Left. It is mind control carried out by the mentally ill. While it certainly has political benefits, it seems the biggest benefit to the Left is that it brings them perverse pleasure to make normal people affirm what should rightly be considered degeneracy. My opinion on this has always been, and is stronger each passing day, that people who engage in homosexual behavior, cross-dressing, gender confusion and the like instinctively find their own behavior revolting. They try to make normal people affirm their behavior as a means of abating their own self-loathing, but the abatement is only temporary and the need for another fix is like a drug in that they need more and more each time to replicate the temporary high. You can never let yourself forget that you are dealing with people deeply trapped in a mental illness, a delusional world of self-degradation.

Saturday, July 27, 2019

The Lying Liars In The Media Lying

This tweet was making the rounds yesterday, posted late in the evening on Thursday.


Why that cold-hearted bastard, trying to keep this mother out of the U.S.! Clearly another fascist white supremacist American soldier, a tool for perpetuating white privilege and the patriarchy!

Oh wait a second...


Oh, it is a Mexican soldier. Not doing anything to stop her at all. No mention of the fact that the soldier is Mexican in the headline, although the story does tell you that he is part of the Mexican National Guard. The photo was taken by "Reuters photographer Jose Luis Gonzalez". I am sure that Jose is a completely unbiased photographer who is not racially sympathetic to the Guatemalan and is not also in favor of massive immigration of his own people into the U.S.. Likewise I am sure this photo is not staged even though it looks pretty obviously staged with the kid instructed to look "defiant" and the mother collapsed in anguish. It almost looks like another staged photo....


Oh yeah, that's right. She is so distraught that they fenced in those poor innocents cars. JUST LIKE THE NAZIS!

Something I also noticed. Look closer at the mother and son in the picture....


Their shoes look brand-new. They are wearing what appears to be brand new, clean clothing. Weird, I wonder where they got such nice clothing since they are desperate refugees? The boy is clean and has a decent and recent haircut. Maybe somebody provided them nice clothing, almost like it is for a photo shoot instead of an off-the-cuff action photo.

This has all the hallmarks of a staged photo, it looks for all the world like someone setting the mother and son in place to exhibit maximum anguish. "No, no, no, you need to look more distraught! Come on, no money unless you look super sad!". The whole tweet is at best clickbait but at worst, and more likely, is intentionally deceptive. Numbnut liberal women see this picture and it hurts them right in the feelz and they get full of righteous indignation, and of course don't ask any inconvenient questions or think at all.

The media isn't even putting forth an effort to pretend to not be intentionally lying to us. For all of their self-righteous bleating about being the guardians of truth, they are in fact nothing more than propaganda agents of the globohomo establishment. Your average "reporter" is about as honest in their reporting as a Pravda talking head repeating pre-written party lines. More people than ever have realized this and don't put any trust in "journalists" but too many people that are at best marginally engaged still think the media is just reporting facts.

Don't trust anything you hear from the media but do remember their names and faces.

Friday, July 26, 2019

A Tale Of Two Sentences

Here is a fun little experiment.

A local Fort Wayne man by the name of Marcus Dansby was sentenced yesterday. Mr. Dansby received a sentence of 300 years in prison for murdering four people and attempting to murder another, a 14 year old girl. One of the people killed was a full-term baby that was Dansby's own child. The mother of the child, Dajahiona Arrington, and Dansby were in a "relationship" but split up because she was pregnant and thought it was another guy's baby, but it turns out it was Dansby's child. Oops! Side note, it is best to avoid "relationships" with women that are such whores that they don't even know which guy knocked them up. At his sentencing, Dansby reportedly said to the families of those that he murdered: “I don’t care how you guys feel. You guys can feel how you want to feel.”. Clearly a deeply remorseful man. The pregnant mother of his child, Dajahiona Arrington, was 18 at the time of the murder. Since she is described as being "full term" with his unborn child named A.J., it is quite likely she was underage when he impregnated her.

Then there is James Fields. Mr. Fields was in attendance at the infamous Charlottesville rally almost 2 years ago in August 2017. There is no event in recent American history that is more distorted and lied about than Charlottesville and Mr. Fields is the central villain of the story. Mr. Fields drove his car into a group of people at the end of the chaotic day where police essentially stood aside and allowed far left "protesters" to attack the lawfully assembled "Unite The Right" rally attendees. Whatever you think about Unite The Right, they had every legal right to assemble and the police had an obligation to maintain order. They did not. Anyway, Mr. Fields drove his car into a group of people. One of the people involved, Heather Heyer, died on the scene from an apparent heart attack. Because Mr. Fields had a Hitler fetish and was on the "wrong" side of Charlottesville, he was given a life sentence for  29 Federal "hate crimes". But that wasn't enough. The state of Virginia also went after him and he again pleaded guilty and was sentenced to another term of life in prison plus 419 years.

There is a significant amount of evidence that would suggest that a competent lawyer could have possibly gotten the charges against Fields reduced or eliminated but calling his "defense" lackluster is a serious understatement. There is no credible evidence that Fields went to Virginia with the intent to kill anyone, unlike Dansby who showed up with a gun and a knife to murder four people.

Sure, both men are in their early 20s and will spend the rest of their lives in prison, but the sentencing disparity is pretty stark. Dansby murders four people in cold blood and tried to murder a 5th person. Fields drove his car into a crowd for whatever reason and one person died as a result. Fields gets a much stiffer sentence at both the federal and state levels.

The reason for the disparity is obvious. Marcus Dansby is just another black criminal who killed a house full of black people. That isn't very interesting and it is also all too common as 75% of mass shootings are committed by blacks, usually with other blacks as the victims. No one is going to care in a month other than the families impacted. All of the press conferences and yammering about the scourge of gun violence don't ever amount to anything because the black community needs to get to a place where someone mad about something doesn't decide to gun down five people.

Fields is a political prisoner. In any other circumstance he would have been given a lighter sentence of vehicular manslaughter or something but it was decreed that he was going to be made an example of. I am not saying he shouldn't spend time in jail, although I wonder what would have happened if he had competent legal counsel, but multiple sentences of life in prison plus 419 years? That is so wildly disproportionate and obviously only serves one purpose: as a chilling effect to anyone on the Right from exercising their First Amendment right to free assembly. A number of "counter-protesters" engaged in violence and got off without jail time but anyone defending themselves had the book thrown at them.

James Fields will spend the rest of his natural life in prison to be an example, a warning to others to keep their thoughts to themselves. Marcus Dansby will also spend the rest of his life in prison because we have nothing else to do with him. One man was basically in a car accident that resulted in a death, one man went to a home with a gun and an intent to kill but in the eyes of the "law", James Field committed a much worse crime because he was motivated by "hate".

Don't make the mistake of thinking the law is applied equally. When Trump leaves office and is replaced by a Democrat, the full force of the Federal government is going to be turned loose on anyone who dares speak up for white people. Plan now for being not just a hated dissident but also quite possibly a criminal.

Thursday, July 25, 2019

The Bigotry And Sexism Of Low Expectations

The Crtitical Drinker is one of my new favorite Youtube channels. I love his commentary and that he has no patience for social justice nonsense and the forced diversity in films. He is pretty smart although he tries to hide that under his drunken Scottish guy image, so I was pretty excited to see him speaking about scrawny middle-aged girl Natalie Portman taking on the mantle of Thor. I wasn't disappointed.





One of his most important points, subtly delivered, was something that I have been talking about for a long time. Doesn't it seem kind of insulting that women and people-of-color are endlessly appropriating white male characters to make women and PoC more marketable? I am sure you would get a response from Hollywood types about "representation" and "de-colonizing film" and crap about undermining white male patriarchy or some other nonsense but really it just seems lazy and insulting. The Ocean's 11 franchise was fun and successful, let's remake it with an all female cast and churn out a poorly regarded mediocre and forgettable film. Ghostbusters one of the most iconic films of all time, let's do it over with a female cast and see just how many downvotes a single trailer can get on Youtube! Of course once they remake a beloved film and replace the white male characters with clumsy imitations and audiences reject it, they can fall back on blaming da patriarchy and da racism instead of da crappy film-making.

For me, I would like to think that there are women out there capable of writing compelling female characters that you could make into a movie that people would like to see, characters written to be female rather than male characters mutilated into female characters.

Likewise I would like to think that there are black writers out there that are also capable of writing compelling stories about black characters with their own stories to tell, rather than simply appropriating white characters as a way to strike back at white privilege or some other crap. A great example of this is the 1991 film Boyz n the Hood. The story of three black boys who grow up together and take very different paths through life, Boyz was a very compelling film with only a smattering of ham-fisted political commentary but most importantly it was a film featuring black actors who were written as black.

Truth be told, the main problem with women writing female characters or blacks writing about black characters is that their writing is still mostly about white men and how we have somehow done them wrong and are the source of all of their ills. The wildly overrated Black Panther is supposed to be about the king of the mythical African nation of Wakanda but they couldn't resist clumsily talking about "colonizers" and how the challenger to the throne, Killmonger, was going to use vibranium to kick off a race war as retribution for all the naughty stuff white people have done to Africans (the Critical Drinker had something to say about this film: Black Panther is the Most Overrated MCU Movie Ever. Yep.).

In an interesting twist, we are often told that white people are guilty of "cultural appropriation" because some white girls wear hoop earrings but no one says the same when James Bond is turned into a black woman or the Norse god Heimdall is played by a black man. It is part of the repeated tactic of the Left accusing others of doing the exact thing they are up to.

Rewriting white male characters into women and PoCs is not "decolonizing film", it is lazy and even worse it is insulting, not to white men (imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, etc.), but to women and PoCs who are basically being told that they have nothing interesting to say as they exist and can only be successful by imitating white men. If women and PoCs are so much more interesting than boring old white men as we are repeatedly told, then have them tell their own stories and if they really are interesting, people will go watch their films. After all, white men are only around 30% of the U.S. population so stories appealing to non-white men should have a huge audience. The alternative explanation is that when it comes to story telling, world building, character development, white men have an inherent knack for that sort of writing. No one will entertain that notion because to do so would undermine the notion that race is nothing by variations in skin tone and once you stop believing that, you start to ask all sorts of naughty questions.

Wednesday, July 24, 2019

This Isn't A Damn Debate Club Don

President Trump's son Donald Trump Jr. is a very active advocate for his father's administration on social media, especially Twitter. He can be pretty funny at times and usually doesn't pull punches. But like many in the halls of power, what he thinks is happening and what he imagines is important usually is not.

Don Jr. penned an op-ed for Fox News where he took the obligatory shots at "The Squad" of far left foreign Congresswomen that Trump Sr. has been targeting of late.

Donald Trump, Jr.: Dems are losing immigration debate because of their radical ideology (not bad 'messaging')

Here is what I think of the notion that the side that is supposed to support immigration enforcement and national sovereignity is "winning" anything.


Seriously, they think they are are winning some "debate". Hey geniuses, the "debate" ended a long time ago when both parties sold out on mass immigration. It has worked out great for the party big wigs. Democrats get new low IQ, low income reliable voters in the permanent dependent class and Republican's Chamber of Commerce donors get cheap labor and reliable consumers of crappy products made overseas. Win-win for everyone, everyone except the American people. There is no debate. Republicans could control 100% of the seats in both houses of Congress and nothing would get done because they don't want anything to get done as that would upset their donors and even worse open them to charges of "racism". Even Rand Paul wants to increase the number of legal immigrants to fill tech jobs even though that prices Americans out of those same jobs and those legal Asian migrants are reliable liberal voters. Why would Democrats want to do anything but accelerate mass immigration when every one of those people vote Democrat when they turn 18?

We aren't in a debate, we are in a fight for survival. The debate is over and we lost. No one is arguing for our people in D.C., not even Trump. Sure he blusters and threatens and "monitors the situation" but he never actually does anything. ICE finally carried out the much ballyhooed raids on illegal aliens and it was a huge bust:

Only 35 Out of 2K Illegal Aliens Arrested by ICE in Publicized Raids

Wow, a whole 35 illegals? I am sure more illegals than that crossed the border in the time it took me to type the number 35. I wonder how much was spent for each one of the 35 that was apprehended, and will probably be released by some leftist judge anyway?

ICE shouldn't carry out periodic raids announced well in advance. They should be rounding up illegals 24-7-365. That should be all they are doing, and that is all they should have been doing since Trump took office. Instead of blustering at Iran at the demand of our Israeli "allies", Trump should be laser focused on one issue each and every day: keeping new illegals out of our country and getting the existing ones out. He isn't. Most days he barely seems aware of the signature issue that got him elected. He worries about black unemployment and making gay butt sex legal in Africa and tax cuts for the corporations that fight him tooth and nail and of course Israel, Israel, and for good measure Israel.

We aren't going to debate our way out of this. The only way out is preparing to come through the inevitable firestorm alive and prepared to rebuild.

Tuesday, July 23, 2019

Because We're Here

This is one of the great quotes from a movie full of great quotes, the 1964 film Zulu.



I feel like that young British soldier a lot of the time. Why is it us? Why me? Why couldn't I have been born 30 years earlier when life was better and we weren't facing a crisis? Why do we have to be the ones to stand in the gap now and fight a desperate battle for our people? Sergeant Borurne's words hold true:

"Because we're here lad. Nobody else. Just us."

There is a common saying on our side of the great divide: nobody is coming to save us.

There isn't a deus ex machina out there, waiting in the wings to swoop in at the last second to rescue civilization. There is just us. We are outnumbered, we don't have any of the media or government on our side. The popular culture is firmly against us. Social media hates us and seeks to silence us. Our opponents can attack people in the streets and get away with it but a guy like James Fields gets close to 1000 years in prison for allegedly causing the death of Heather Heyer, while at the same time "conservatives" like Jack Posobiec are raising funds for her family. Or I think he still is....


It is up to us, those of us who are here and awake. There is nobody else. No one is coming to save us. We win or we die and the world collapses into darkness. That is not hyperbole, that is just reality.

Stiff upper lip and all that lads. The Zulus are coming over the horizon.

Monday, July 22, 2019

Bond. Laquisha Bond.

James Bond has been a cultural icon for my entire life. The dashingly handsome, arrogant, masculine British secret agent with a license to kill, is what most people my age think of when they think of spies. In real life I doubt spies are driving rare sports cars and gambling with government money at the high rollers table, but I could be wrong. A series of white men have played Bond, from Sean Connery to Roger Moore, to Timothy Dalton and Daniel Craig, which makes sense since he was written as a white guy. Since this is 2019, we simply can't have a confident white male character that exudes toxic masculinity. So the decision has apparently been made to simply replace Bond.

A while back there was rumor that Idrissa Akuna Elba, better known as Idris Elba, was going to be the new Bond replacing Daniel Craig's brooding version of the secret agent. Idris is not British, he was born in London to a father from Sierra Leone and a mother from Ghana, but he at least was male and had the accent. He is also a little long in the tooth for playing James Bond. When I wondered why this would not be cultural appropriation as James Bond is clearly a white British secret agent, based on the original book character (I have read many of the Fleming novels) as well as the movie characters, I was roundly condemned for being racist because Bond being white is not central to his character. Perhaps not but that is what he was written to be. Anyway, we have moved on from Elba and now Bond is not being replaced with a new actor, Bond himself is being replaced in his own universe with (cue your shocked face) a black woman who will push Bond aside to become the new 007.

Lashana Lynch will play 007 in new James Bond movie: report

The response has been less than positive but often funny:





Based on the report from the NY Post, the story-line includes the idea that the actress playing 007 is supposed to be a stunning, desirable woman that rejects the advances of Daniel Craig, who is "of course" smitten by her. From the New York Post story (emphasis in red mine):

Bond himself will still be played by Daniel Craig — and will still adhere to his old-fashioned macho characteristics, an insider told the UK paper.

“Bond, of course, is sexually attracted to the new female 007 and tries his usual seduction tricks, but is baffled when they don’t work on a brilliant, young black woman who basically rolls her eyes at him and has no interest in jumping into his bed,” a source told the Mail.

The insider called it a “pivotal scene” when Bond is called back from retirement and introduced to Lynch as the new 007.

“It’s a popcorn-dropping moment. Bond is still Bond but he’s been replaced as 007 by this stunning woman,” the source told the Mail.

Who is this stunning, sexually irresistible woman named Lashana Lynch? Here is the picture from the same article:


Uh.....

Not to be offensive but at best she is plain and in this photo is downright unattractive. But we are supposed to believe that James Bond, a character who has bedded some of the most beautiful women in the world during the preceding 24 movies, is irresistibly drawn to her? Even when I was at my least discerning as a horndog teenager, I would give her a hard pass. Maybe she is nice but she doesn't do anything for me and I assume I am in the vast majority on that opinion. The core demographic for James Bond movies are men who want to see a masculine, cocky secret agent that fights the bad guys, drives awesome cars, has the coolest gadgets and beds the hottest women. Is that demographic going to show up to see a mannish black woman emasculate Daniel Craig and then engage in some ridiculous action scenes where she will no doubt beat up men twice her size? I kind of doubt it. I know I won't even spend the time to watch the movie outside of the normal channels.

So why even do this? Why make this move that literally no Bond fan is asking for? Are there no male British actors who could take on this part? What about Tom Hardy? He is British, is a pretty good actor and has a lengthy record of being an action hero. He could pull it off. I am sure there are tons of others. But no, we get a homely black woman to replace James Bond as 007.

I know the answer and so does everyone that is honest. James Bond is an iconic figure of white, European masculinity. He fights bad guys, seduces women, drives awesome cars. He is the polar opposite of the clueless, bumbling, scared of his own shadow, cowering before women, often harboring violent racism/misogyny, image of white men that dominates popular culture. The character of Bond was written in the mid-20th century when European men were still men. So he has to go.

Popular culture has a profound impact on the way people view themselves and the world around them. For many years now we have been fed a steady and relentless diet of hatred toward whites via the media pushing a variety of narratives. Homosexuals are far more common in movies and TV than they really are and are often portrayed as being just better people than heterosexuals. The best example of this is the horribly depressing 1999 film American Beauty, which is even more creepy now that we know that Kevin Spacey is a fag with the typical homosexual penchant for young boys. Spacey plays Lester Burnham, the epitome of the frustrated and cucked suburban white husband and father. He lusts after his daughters seductive teen-aged friend (foreshadowing!) and he really only is happy after quitting his job and going to work at a fast food joint. His wife finds him revolting and ends up cheating on him. Their neighbor next door has a creepy son who videotapes Burnham's daughter, played by Thora Birch, undressing and being filmed topless when she was only 16 in real life. Worse, the creepy boy next door has a domineering white male father, Colonel Frank Fitts, who is apparently ex-military, mean and violent to his family, a closeted homosexual who is "homophobic" and (shocker!) has Nazi memorabilia. The whole thing portrays white suburban life as this seething cauldron of repressed sexuality, violence and hopelessness. The only normal couple are "The Jims", a gay couple who are happy and friendly. Very subtle. Straight white men are bad people, and probably closeted homosexuals, wannabe pedophiles, violent and submissive at the same time and more than likely have a Nazi fetish.

This theme repeats itself in TV shows and movies one after the other. Bumbling fools Al Bundy and Homer Simpson replace Jim Anderson of Father Knows Best and Ward Cleaver of Leave It To Beaver, mature white male husbands and fathers who are wise and kind without being pushovers. Suburban life is portrayed as empty and soul-crushing. You are hard pressed to find many examples in modern "entertainment" of a white man with a regular job in a stable marriage. The one example that comes to mind is Tim Allen in Last Man Standing and that show got cancelled in spite of great ratings on ABC, only to be resurrected on Fox. It is not a coincidence that a show featuring a more traditional white man with three kids and in a stable marriage, a man who is openly pretty conservative, got cancelled. The only surprise was that it was given the green-light in the first place.

You can find noble single mothers, tons of homosexuals, non-white characters a-plenty but you won't find many Ward and June Cleavers. Just as homosexuals are wildly over-represented, so too are mixed-race couples both in shows and in commercials. I don't watch much TV but when I see a TV show out in public or an ad in a magazine, it is startling to see how many black man-white woman couples are portrayed. In fact you rarely see a normal white family in any sort of media, entertainment or advertising even though whites are still the overwhelming majority in America and mixed-race married couples are relatively rare. Sure there are plenty of mixed-race children out there but those children are unfortunately rarely in stable married families.

From replacing the Norse God Heimdall with a black man and the recent announcement that a tiny Jewish girl, Neta-Lee Hershlag, aka "Natalie Portman", will be the new Thor, to the supplanting of the boring old white male James Bond with a new, "stunning" wammen of color 007, to the rewriting of the children's classic A Wrinkle In Time to transform the main character Meg from a white girl to a black girl, the forces of "progress" are working overtime to write whites, and especially white men, out of their own stories in the same way that white men are being systematically expunged from the history of the United States, itself a creation of white men.

This seems a little strange, as we are supposed to believe that white people have no culture, that only vibrantly diverse non-whites have real culture. That is a real thing, lots of people make that claim online. Shakespeare, ballet, libraries, Bach, museums, Tolkien, architecture, Rembrandt, Wagner. Apparently none of that is "real" culture but Donald Glover pretending to shoot a church choir is the epitome of high culture.

For a people with no culture of our own, non-whites seem awfully eager to appropriate our stuff instead of creating their own. If you want to have a black, female super-spy, why not create a character that fits the bill instead of shoehorning one into an existing character? Why use black actors to play clearly white roles like Norse gods instead of writing their own stories featuring black characters? If white culture is just a pale imitation of the cultures of people of color, shouldn't their stories be more compelling anyway?

In truth, it is always easier to appropriate something someone else built than it is to build something yourself. Mestizos in Central America could stay home and try to create civilized societies of their own but it is just a lot easier to pay someone to smuggle you into the existing society of the U.S. where you can benefit from structures you didn't have to do anything to build. Lots of people buy existing houses every year, not very many people will build a new house from the ground up with their own hands.

It is almost certain that the new Bond movie with the "stunning" black wammen 007 will be a box office flop. Critics will fawn over the movie regardless of the merits (ex. Black Panther) and when it flops, the elites will blame racism and sexism. The main goal of the film will still be accomplished and yet another cultural marker of white men will be destroyed. If you care about the future, you should have the same policy that I adhere to: not one penny of my money goes to subsidizing the people who hate me. No movie tickets, no purchasing music, no attending sporting events or buying their merchandise, no cable/satellite TV. The people who insist on remaking Ghostbusters with a female cast and think it is an awesome idea to replace 007 with a mannish black woman do so because they know most of us will dutifully buy our movie tickets anyway and keep on subsidizing our enemies. Stop it. Just stop. If you want to watch movies, find a way to do so that isn't directly funneling money into Hollywood. The same with TV shows. Listen to music on Youtube with an ad blocker. Just slowly starve the beast or at least quit helping it destroy our culture. If you give money to people trying to drive you into extinction, you really only have yourself to blame.

The Purpose Of College

From Joe Sobran, recalled by Jared Taylor:

"The purpose of a college education is to give you the correct view of minorities, and the means to live as far away from them as possible."

That captures the reality of America's white liberal elites who love to praise the minority but in practice want to live separate from them. Diversity for thee, but not for me.

Sunday, July 21, 2019

Quit Chasing The Stick

Styxhexenhammer666 is a pretty entertaining and often very informative Youtuber. For a guy who often appears on camera wearing a hideous Hawaiian shirt or worse no shirt at all under a leather jacket, with really long hair, who ends all of his videos with the cringe "Peace out" as a troll, he still has some pretty decent insights. Yesterday he put out an unusually long 17 minute video refuting the claims that Trump is a "racist"



He gets an A for effort, but an F for being efficient with his time.

There is nothing more counterproductive, nothing that is a bigger time suck than people on the right defending themselves against bogus charges of racism.

People who vote for Trump already know the facts and that he isn't "racist" in any rational use of the word. They don't need any additional evidence. People who hate Trump are convinced he is a "racist" and that everything he says or does is evidence of him being "racist". They don't examine what he does and ask if it is "racist", they assume something is "racist" just because he did it. No amount of evidence is going to change their minds. So videos like this are just a waste of time. Who is going to be convinced?

For decades, quite literally, conservatives and libertarians have been in an endless cycle of trying to defend themselves against charges of racism and signaling non-stop how non-racist they are. It has all been to no avail. I was the same way. I instinctively knew that things were not what we were told, that all whites were not evil oppressors and all non-whites were not noble oppressed people but still I tried to keep naughty thoughts out of my head because there was literally nothing worse than being a "racist". But after year after year of seeing that no matter what I did, I was going to be labelled a "racist" anyway, I stopped caring.

The Zman calls this "chasing the stick" and it is something you shouldn't be doing. Here is his show from last December, I have the video starting at the appropriate spot but you should listen to the whole thing.



Like I said, listen to the whole thing. Great stuff.

The leaders of the Left don't care about "racism". It is simply a tool to distract their political opponents. Oops, that guy on the Right is gaining to much influence. Time for an accusation of racism that will have him chasing his own tail for six months! Why wouldn't they do this when it has so far worked about 100% of the time? It is another way that we let the Left make the rules that we are required to play by and that they cheerfully ignore. That is how the game is supposed to be played, they make the rules and we play by those rules that are designed to guarantee we lose.

Don't play their game by their rules. Someone accusing me of being racist might as well be saying "Flim-flam, jimmy-jam, skattle-de-do!" because it has about the same level of relevance to my life. I call things as I see 'em, and if that upsets people, then too bad. Spending decades tip-toeing around the topic of race has only increased racial strife and with the date fast approaching when whites will be a minority in their own country, racial tensions are only going to get worse.

Every racial and ethnic group advocates for their own people. Blacks do it, mestizos do it, Asians do it, and the Jews have of course turned this practice of advocating for their own ethnicity while demanding others not be allowed to do the same into a near art-form. So why can't we do it? Because we have been told that a practice that has existed for all of human history, showing preference for your own people and tribe over others, is now "racist"? There are about 7 and 1/2 billion people in the world, and white people (depending on how you define that) make up about 1.25 billion people. That means that around 17% of the world's population is white or looking at it from a different direction about 83% of the world's population is non-white. Given explosive population growth in Africa and elsewhere and white birth rates being below replacement virtually everywhere in the world, that means the percentage of whites in the world is going to keep shrinking at an accelerating rate.

So if whites are already a small minority of the world's population and soon will be a minority in what was once the world's largest white nation, don't we deserve to advocate for our own best interests? Our near-suicidal altruism when it comes to the issue of race is going to be disastrous for us, so perhaps now it is time to start to start thinking racially like every other group already does.

I don't "hate" people of other races, but I refuse to pretend to not see patterns, especially violent criminal behavior that disproportionately impacts my own people. Sure I choose to live among and associate with people of my own race for the most part, but so does every other group. When evangelical churches are overwhelmingly white and vote Republican, that is "problematic" and we need to "have a conversation" about it but when black churches are overwhelmingly black and vote almost unanimously for Democrats, that is just "power to the people" and something to praise. When blacks demand special treatment at the expense of other races in the form of "affirmative action", when black students have their own racially specific Greek system, graduations, student unions and student organizations, that is supposed to be empowering but woe to any white student proposing a "whites only" student union.

Racism is not a neutral concept. The Left doesn't even pretend that it is. We are endlessly told that only whites can be racist, which leads to most conservatives and libertarians sputtering in outrage over how unfair that is. Well of course it is unfair, it is designed to be! The Left is shameless and they are not even slightly embarrassed at the rank hypocrisy of praising non-white people for behavior they condemn as "racist" from a white person. Cheaters and con-men don't rig the system to make it equitable, they game the system to ensure that they win and so far they have been awfully successful at doing so. There is a common saying that in Vegas the house always wins, because that is how it is designed. In the world of politics, the Left is the house and the Right are the marks that show up thinking that they are going to beat the odds while playing by rules designed to make sure they don't win. Like degenerate gamblers, the conservatives and libertarians get cleaned out like suckers and go home with a lighter wallet vowing to get 'em the next time. Hey idiots, you will never win when you play a game by the rules set by your opponents to ensure you never win.


That is the real power of dissident right politics. It is not in meme warfare and Pepe the frog and trolling with the OK hand gesture. It is that finally we are refusing to play by their rules and refusing to chase the stick.

Friday, July 19, 2019

Thinking Is Dangerous

From the inimitable H.L. Mencken


The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.

Good thing we have very few of these truly dangerous people left in America.



The Nostalgia Distraction

We live in strange times. The release of a new trailer for a movie, the trailer not the movie itself, can be a significant cultural event. Of course, so can the release of a trailer for a video game. People went crazy about the trailer for the upcoming Cyberpunk 2077 game which features Keanu Reeves. When he walked onto the stage after the initial viewing of the trailer, people went nuts.

Yesterday a new trailer hit for the very long awaited sequel to Top Gun, titled Top Gun: Maverick.



On Youtube for 17 hours and it already 8.9 million views.

In spite of being a pretty jaded person, that initial tone took me right back to the 80s when Top Gun first came out and kind of gave me a chill. The rest of the trailer included some cool flying but also a lot of shots of Tom Cruise looking like his face is completely re-manufactured via plastic surgery, plus a quick shot of the required wammen of colour fighter pilot:

Includes the obligatory "I look angry and super serious" face
One of the nice things about Top Gun in the 80s was that it was all about men. Sure we had Meg Ryan as the wife of Goose and Kelly McGillis as Maverick's love interest, but even though her character was a defense expert, she was a civilian contractor, not a fighter pilot.

"She has a Ph.D. in astrophysics and she's also a civilian contractor, so you do not salute her."

Her character was not added in for gender equality, she was added in to give Tom Cruise a love interest that would have a legitimate reason to be in close proximity to what otherwise was an all male environment. Her character wasn't a butch, angry, androgynous lesbian, she was incredibly feminine and oozed female sexuality. When she was introduced to the pilots, we got a long shot of her legs, walking in high heels and stockings between the rows of pilots before we even saw her face.

No one needs to ask her preferred gender pronoun
In Top Gun, all of the pilots are male, all of them are arrogant and chock full of "toxic masculinity". Their instructors are all men. It was a boys clubs and the boys were boys, partying hard, playing hard and chasing skirts like the world was ending the next day, and pretty much no one thought that was an issue. The women were either supporting love interests or nameless background. That is OK, it was a movie targeted at a male demographic. Women don't love Top Gun like men do, women don't say "Talk to me Goose" in the course of a normal conversation.

The original Top Gun was released in 1986. I was 14 years old and suddenly we all wanted to become jet fighter pilots. The theme song from Kenny Loggins, "Danger Zone", was one of those pulse pounding movie songs that still gets me fired up (see also: Eye of the Tiger from Rocky III and Lunatic Fringe from Vision Quest). Can you think of a movie score from the last decade that anyone can remember?

So why release the sequel of Top Gun now, over three decades later in 2019? Part of it is the trend in Hollywood to only produce remakes (with as many white male characters eliminated as possible, more on this to come. Hint: 007), do endless sequels and movies about increasingly obscure comic book characters. However, I think a lot of it is not just being safe and making a ton of easy money. It is the power of nostalgia.

Nostalgia can be a great distraction in an era when things are changing rapidly and not for the better. You look fondly back at the past when things were better than they are now. Think about how many radio stations still play classic rock and music from the 80s. Again, do you think people will still be singing along to Taylor Swift songs in a few decades?

Top Gun was a Generation X movie. We were kids and young adults when it came out. Life was simpler. America was still around 80% white. Reagan was President and people were more optimistic about the future. We had the Russians as convenient bad-guys for a few more years. We understood who we were as a people, we knew our place in the world and things made more sense. We didn't have to pretend men could be women and vice versa, we didn't buy water in the store, kids played with other kids outside and without headsets and homosexuals still had the decency to keep their degeneracy behind closed doors.

Gen X is a pretty quiet generation. We are middle-aged now, from our early 50s to the very end of our 30s. We are not the much larger and entitled Baby Boomer generation nor are we the whiny slackers of the Millennial generation. Even though we are quiet, there are a lot of us. There are around 65 million Gen Xers and that is nothing to sneeze at. We are also slowly coming to understand what has happened and it is pissing us off. Nostalgia along with a sense of general helplessness and a carefully cultivated self-loathing helps keep that anger in check. Perhaps if we are busy being nostalgic about a by-gone era we won't be so inclined to get violently angry about what has been done to our people in the last three decades.

That sounds a little tinfoil-hat but at this point is there anything that is too loony to consider? Short of lizard people, I don't dismiss anything out of hand. Hollywood is one of the most political institutions in America. Giving Gen Xers like me some red meat nostalgia , for example Maverick flying a fighter, is just the sort of distraction that can buy a little time, keep the lid on the pot for just a little longer. I assume the film will be full of social justice nonsense, wammen and pilots of color, probably even some of the gheys for good measure but many of us will still show up because dammit, when Maverick and Goose were flying things just made more sense and perhaps for a couple of hours I can forget about the demographic and socialist sword of Damocles hanging over our heads. I can forget that after a quarter of a century in the workforce, paying into Social Security since I was in high school, I am never going to see a dime of that coming back. I can forget about millions of people who screwed up their own countries irreparably now coming to my country to do the same thing. I can forget about the 22 trillion in debt, I can forget about perverts and freaks dressed up like demons grooming young children while their mom smiles approvingly. I can forget about people who want to see me and my children dead, who fantasize about prison camps, who think they are going to disarm us and muzzle our free speech. Sure, when the movie is over and we walk back out into the bright sunlight, all of that crap will still be there but the warm glow of nostalgia will linger long enough for the 2020 football season to kick off.

Pete Mitchell's country needs him once more, not to fire us up but to keep us distracted, and once more Pete "Maverick" Mitchell is answering his nation's call.

Wednesday, July 17, 2019

Social Media Is The Propaganda Arm Of Contemporary Bolshevism

The Twitter saga continues....

I finally heard back on my appeal, and no surprise they are not going to lift the suspension. Ever. My 9 year old account gets nuked for an intemperate reply. Here is their email:

Nothing I wrote in the tweet I was suspended for was an incitement of violence. It did not promote violence. It wasn't a threat. It was rude for sure but that is the whole point of Twitter. Anyway, whatever. It isn't like there aren't ways to get around a permanent suspension. Making  new accounts is just a fact of life when you are posting on social media.


Meanwhile, fake black man and racial grifter Shaun King, aka Talcum X, is lionizing a man who tried to burn down an ICE detention center with "refugees" (aka illegal aliens) inside the building. He deleted some of his tweets, or perhaps was even forced to by Twitter, but people took screenshots:







Willem Van Spronsen is what you get when you have a low IQ demagogue like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez using inflammatory language about a period in history she has no understanding of, speaking to legions of fanbois who also lack basic historical literacy and any ability to use critical thinking skills. Whether or not you uncritically accept the accounts of World War II era concentration camps, it is beyond the bounds of common sense to equate a detention center where illegal aliens who were encouraged to illegally enter the U.S. and upon arriving are provided with food, shelter and medical care while awaiting their bogus "asylum" hearing with the narrative of the Nazi concentration camps.

So this Willem Van Spronsen doofus thought he was "liberating a concentration camp" as if he were fighting actual Nazis holding Jews in camps as opposed to American law enforcement agents detaining in more than humane conditions people who willingly came to this country illegally. This guy brags in his manifesto about having a "ghost gun" and "six magazines" but apparently didn't manage to use his firepower to shoot back. He was just gunned down like an imbecile making a futile and silly gesture. Good job! 

King using the language of "by any means necessary" is the epitome of the "dog whistle". By any means necessary, especially when coupled with language about not waiting until 2020 with the hope of defeating Trump expresses two important ideas:

- First, many on the Left are deathly afraid of Trump being re-elected. I have serious doubts but they are scared that Trump will win in 2020 and they are already setting the stage to operate outside of the system if he wins again.

- Second, there is an understanding on the Left that a Trump win in 2020 will signal the need for a violent response. Having failed to defeat Trump and by proxy his white voting base in 2016, having failed to magic up some "collusion" evidence, having failed to advance an "impeachment" agenda in spite of winning the House, the Left is out of patience. The thought-leaders on the Left having been whipping up their jihadi to a fever pitch non-stop for three years and they can't hold the lid on much longer.

If Trump wins re-election in 2020, regardless of the margin of victory or the "popular vote", the Left will not accept the results. They can't. People like AOC and much of the media have been using language that invokes movie-based images of cartoonish villains like Amon Goeth to people that only know World War II from Schindler's List.



To these people, Trump being elected President in America is like Hitler being elected chancellor in Germany and ushering in the Third Reich. It is absurd of course but they don't understand that.

These are the sort of linguistic games politicians have played for a long time. The difference now is that people are too dumb to know they are games. Nancy Pelosi seems to understand that her younglings are getting out of control and threatening to spook the electorate into re-electing Trump. Nancy and Chuck Schumer aren't dumb. Evil, yes, but not dumb. They use this sort of language carefully and purposefully, like a mechanic choosing the right wrench. AOC is like a crazed homeless person taking that wrench and attacking random passerbys.

Shaun King isn't going to storm some ICE detention facility. He is a grifter and more to the point he is a pussy. He just says this sort of stuff for social media clout and doesn't care that it inspires his low IQ, unhinged followers into taking action. All he cares about is keeping his hustle going pretending to be a militant black radical instead of a manipulative white guy avoiding real work.

As an aside, it is pretty smart for the Left to demonize, dox and attack rank-and-file law enforcement when they are going to count on rank-and-file law enforcement to carry out their gun confiscation schemes. I am sure that cops are going to cheerfully and enthusiastically charge through doors to take guns away from heavily armed civilians at the demand of people who have been slandering them as racists and jack-booted thugs for decades. Right....

So Shaun King lionizes a terrorist, says he was a "martyr" and was "murdered", and encourages Lefties to arms themselves and sends his followers to LARP as soldiers "liberating concentration camps". His account is in good standing, he still has his blue checkmark. I use the word "sodomite" and get banned forever. Nothing about this is surprising or even very upsetting. Twitter and most of social media is enemy territory that we operate in on the rhetorical battlefield knowing that we are all in danger of being shut down at any moment, for any reason, and as such we should all be planning accordingly. Social media is the single most significant opinion mover in the West right now and it is openly hostile to heritage Americans. Facebook recently updated their "community standards" in a way that allowed for threats of violence against "dangerous individuals", and although they modified what they said, the intent is still the same: you can use twitter and Facebook to agitate for violence against people on the Right as long as you are careful about it.

Twitter, Instagram, Facebook along with Google and most other tech companies are your sworn enemy. Keep that in mind when using their platforms and never let your guard down.

Monday, July 15, 2019

Paw, Are We Slaves?

Hat tip Western Rifle Shooters.


Civilization Didn't Spring Forth From Under A Rock

Black Pigeon Speaks posted a very interesting video the other day I thought I should share, that examines the difference between the Japanese approach to addressing plunging birthrates and the rise of automation and AI versus the path followed by the West:

Japan REJECTS Western Style Open Borders | Going Their Own Way



My theory for the intermediate to long term global situation is that it is likely that we will see a massive shift, one where the influence centers are based away from Europe and the United States and more toward Russia, China and Japan. Rather than a world economically and militarily dominated by the powerhouses bracketing the Atlantic Ocean, instead the world will be dominated (although to a lesser extent) by the Pacific bordering powers in East Asia.

I base that hypothesis both on the self-destructive suicide cult embraced by Western elites as well as the biological reality that as the West is swamped by mass migration, replacing relatively high IQ populations with people with radically lower IQs (both through dysgenic breeding and migration), it will be incapable of sustaining the civilization built by heritage Americans and Europeans. Nations that do not embrace mass migration from the Third World, do not offer "birthright citizenship", etc. are better poised to continue to build on what has been built. Russia, Estonia, Ukraine, Poland, China, South Korea, Japan will all have populations with at or above average IQs and that is a competitive advantage that you can't overcome with sheer numbers (short of warfare).

It was a pretty solid video, as always from BPS. One image early on in the video jumped out at me, and it is from a Guardian news story that I have referenced before, published in 2000: The last days of a white world. Here is a screenshot of the article with the critical phrase highlighted by me....


The implication is that there is a distinction between the developed world and white people. That implication is false.

The "developed world" is not a naturally occurring phenomenon. Europeans didn't stumble across a pre-existing modern civilization, perhaps abandoned by some ancient species of mankind, and just take over the already extant "developed world". The developed world as we know it, with all the attendant features like modern medicine, technology, communications, civil society, individual liberties, functioning economies, etc, are the result of centuries of struggle by people of European descent. In other words, white people. Yes, there were ancient civilizations like Egypt and China but the thing about ancient civilizations is that they existed in ancient times. Hence the qualifier "ancient". For the last thousand years and especially the last several hundred years essentially all significant developments in humanity have originated from Europe and America. From math and science to literature and government, everything we take for granted today is the result of innovation from white people.

In other words, no white people = no developed world. 

The future suggested by the Guardian in 2000 of a developed world mostly devoid of white people is a fantasy. When we go, the developed world goes with us. Certainly the existing structures will carry on via inertia for some time but eventually they will break and no one will be around to fix them. I am pretty intelligent by any measurement or comparison but there are tons of stuff I take for granted that I can't fix if they break. Imagine that but with far more complex systems and far less intelligent people. My rule of thumb is that people incapable of creating a system are likewise incapable of sustaining that system.

The trend lines are disastrous. From the Guardian article:

The global centre of gravity is changing. In 1900 Europe had a quarter of the world's population, and three times that of Africa; by 2050 Europe is predicted to have just 7 per cent of the world population, and a third that of Africa. 

Steve Sailer has spoken often about this and dubbed this trend "The World's Most Important Graph"



Africans are good at a lot of things but things like inventing and creating stable nations? Not so much. The same is true of the mestizo populations of Central and South America. Right now both of those regions are to some extent dependent on the generosity of the West. Take away American manufacturers, tourism and remittances from the U.S. and the already barely functional Central American economy collapses. Both regions also are highly dependent on the altruism of the West that is driven by the culturally Christian nature of Europe and America. The Chinese don't share that altruism and will cheerfully loot Africa for her material wealth and not give two craps about the African people. I expect that at some point when the West collapses, and food and medical aid with it, that the red population line in the graph above will drop off the cliff as famine and disease ravage unchecked across the African continent.

This all may sound a tad self-serving and it is. I am a white man married to a white woman. We have eight white children. Our parents, our siblings, our uncles and aunts and cousins are all white. As every group of people in human history has done, my affinity is for my own people and my family, and that extends out to other Europeans, especially people of Irish, Polish and German descent. This is natural and healthy. Blacks find common cause in their shared experience, real and imagined. So do Chinese and Koreans. It is not "white supremacist" for people who are white to have a specific and special affinity for other white people and no one questions it when other racial and ethnic groups exhibit the same behavior and attitude. We even have a large class of people we euphemistically call "civil rights activists" but everyone knows that they are really only interested in advocating for black people. However, having white people around in significant numbers  is not just good for white people.

A vibrant European and American white population is a net good for all people. Everyone in the world benefits from improved medicine, technology and agriculture that almost exclusively comes from sources in America and Europe. When disaster strikes, who shows up to help? In Ebola outbreaks it is Doctors Without Borders (Médecins Sans Frontières). Here is a photo from their website of their founders:

A pretty mono-chromatically  hued group

Other groups that show up to aid when Africans, Asians and South Americans are in need are the Red Cross, founded by a group of white men, and Samaritans Purse, founded by a white Christian named Bob Pierce and currently headed by a white Christian Franklin Graham. When Haiti has another disaster and needs help yet again, who helps? I went to Haiti one year after the earthquake and the plane was packed. Two men were black and obviously Haitian. The rest of the plane was full of white people, Christians on mission to try to help Haiti. When Africans are starving, it is white American who contribute generously to try to aid people they will never meet. Whenever disaster strikes in the world, people of European descent are the first to show up to help.

It is not a stretch to say that by any measure, non-white people by and large benefit far more from the presence of white people than the converse.

I very much want to see a thriving and healthy Africa full of Africans maintaining their own unique and vibrant culture. I hope for the same for Asians and South Americans. It is not too much to ask that the people who have given the world so much should be afforded the same dreams for their own posterity.

Thursday, July 11, 2019

Even More From The Ingratitude Files: Tucker Mostly Gets It

Ingratitude is one of my very least favorite things. I am a big proponent of basic niceties like saying thank you, even to service industry workers who are just doing their jobs. It only takes a second and I hope it adds even a tiny bit to our general level of civility in this country.

Unfortunately my little gestures of appreciation are generally swamped by the ingratitude of more famous people. Megan Rapinoe, an unattractive and mouthy little boy that apparently plays soccer, has been holding a public temper tantrum for weeks now and I still can't figure out why anyone listens to him. Or Colin Kaepernick, a low talent imbecile that made millions playing a kids game and now spends his time taking a crap on the people who made him rich. I wrote in the past about Therese Patricia Okoumou, the homely woman from the Congo, a land teeming with rape and Ebola, given shelter in my country that climbed on the base of the statue of Liberty last year to protest "racism" or some other crap: The Gratitude Is Heartwarming. Also there is anti-white racist and hack Sarah Jeong, a Korean living in my country who doesn't seem to like the people who welcomed her and her family to America, the same people who died in the Korean War to protect her from spending her life in a gulag: Why The Sarah Jeong Hire By The New York Times Matters. There was Charlotte Alter, a spoiled Jewish girl from an incredibly wealthy family, who complained that she has never known prosperity, when in fact she has never known anything BUT prosperity thanks to people like me, The Ingratitude Files, Fruit Roll-Up Edition. Then there is the repugnant "Congresswoman" from Minnesota, Ilhan Omar, the brother-marrying, low IQ ingrate, who hates the country and especially the people that gave her shelter from her fellow Muslims and Somalians, More From The Ingratitude Files. As I wrote in that post last December:

To put it another way. They fled from their homes of Somalia and the Congo because those nations are full of Somalians and Congolese people. They fled to my nation because it is full of people of European descent and not full of Somalians and Congolese. My country took them in and gave them a home and now they show no sign of ever going back to their countries. They live in a nation that is better in every possible way than where they came from but instead of showing some level of gratitude, they seem hyper-critical and determined to undo everything that makes this nation unlike the nations that they came from. It sort of reminds me of people in places like Massachusetts moving to New Hampshire to get away from Massachusetts or moving from California to Colorado to get away from California and then promptly doing their very best to transfer the states they moved to into replicas of the states they moved from.

Our freedom of expression and speech of course extends to naturalized citizens, so they can crab and complain about the country that took them in, gave them shelter and a new home. It would just be nice if they could, every now and then, show some gratitude for their incredibly better situation that was created by the same people they constantly criticize.

I don't think Ilhan Omar possesses the mental capacity to understand just how hypocritical and ungrateful her endless kvetching is. It is also a weird coincidence that the people who seem so publicly ungrateful are all non-white women. I am sure that is just a coincidence.

Then along comes Tucker Carlson, who really is the only sensible person on TV right now, saying what I have been saying for a long time.



A lengthy quote from Tucker's monologue if you don't want to watch it (you should):

No country can survive being ruled by people who hate it. We deserve better. For all of our country’s flaws, this is still the best place in the world. Most immigrants know that and that is why they come here. It's also why we've always been glad to have them here.

But now, there are signs that some people who move here from abroad don't like this country at all. As we told you last night, one of those people now serves in our Congress.

Think about that for a minute. Our country rescued Ilhan Omar from the single poorest place on Earth. We didn't do it for the money, we did it because we are kind people. How did she respond to the remarkable gift we gave her?

She scolded us, called us names, showered us with contempt. It's infuriating. More than that, it is also ominous. The United States admits more immigrants more than any other country on Earth, more than a million every year. The Democratic Party demand we increase that by and admit far more. OK, Americans like immigrants, but immigrants have got to like us back.

Our immigration system should only serve a single purpose: benefiting the people of the United States. Cheap labor to boost the profits of globohomo corporations is not benefiting the people of the United States. Quite the opposite. When you build a economic and social system based on certain assumptions and pricing and then dump a bunch of low skill workers who will work for nothing compared to Americans because living 16 to an apartment in America is better than whatever shithole they came from, that is a problem.

Tucker misses a few points, but the big thing he misses is this: people like Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez don't want to "rule" this country or even govern it. They want to transform this country away from what made it the most envied and coveted nation on Earth and transform it into something new, in their own image, into a mirror reflection of the very sorts of places that they and other migrants have fled from in the first place. They don't see a fundamentally sound and admirable system that needs some tweaks, they see a thoroughly corrupt, "racist", "misogynistic" culture that needs to be torn down and replaced wholesale with the same sort of culture and people they were forced to flee from in the first place.

As I have said, the problem with Somalia is that it is full of Somalians. If you replace heritage Americans with Somalians, you don't get darker hued patriots, explorers and inventors. You get Somalia. You get warlords, you get starvation used as a weapon, you get stone age religious fundamentalism, you get female genital mutilation. That sort of crap is incompatible with American values and that is why people from those cultures that largely refuse to assimilate are incompatible with America. Of course they hate us, but we are supposed to pretend we welcome them here when in reality we know they are tearing apart the very fabric of this nation.

I would love to talk to Tucker privately, off camera. You can be sure that he thinks more in line with dissident politics than he lets on when in front of the camera.

Wednesday, July 10, 2019

Diversity Is Our Greatest Strength And Other Lies We Are Required To Believe

If there is a defining characteristic of American culture in 2019, it is that we live in a society of lies. They are lies everyone knows are lies but we still act like they are true. We are supposed to believe that homosexuality, a deviant practice everyone has known is unnatural and perverse forever, is just as normal as heterosexuality. Even though everyone knows that apart from a few biological abnormalities, every human being is born male or female and that sex and gender are the same thing, we are fed the lie that gender is fluid, malleable and subject to being redefined at a whim. Thanks to the women's soccer world cup, the specter of the "gender wage gap" has resurfaced, even though it has been debunked many, many times but if you ask people on the street they will swear up and down that women are paid less than men for the same work. For the past two and a half years we have been endlessly screeched at about the "Russian collusion" that has never been proven, and talk of impeachment has faded away and only repeated by the insane or the dumb. We believe that 110 pound women can beat up 250 pound men because that is what we see on TV and in the theaters. We are to believe that known pervert Bill Clinton flew two and a half dozen times on Epstein's "Lolita Express" but nothing naughty ever happened. Bill is known for his restraint and self-control after all.

Much of what we are required to believe and affirm is a lie and much of what we know to be true is considered a thought-crime if uttered. When a small cabal of people with homogeneous political beliefs and cultural background are the sole arbiters of what is "true", then the very concept of Truth is meaningless. "Truth" is what they say it is and only what they say it is. So it isn't really surprising that people today are incredibly cynical about everything. Institutions that once were trusted without question, from religion to government to civic groups, all are held in suspicion or contempt.

Perhaps no lie is more widespread today than the idea that "diversity is our greatest strength", where "diversity" = fewer white people, along with the related belief that America is a "nation of immigrants", where 19th century immigrants from Europe are indistinguishable from mestizo and African immigrants in the 21st century. In 2019 a poem on Ellis Island holds more authority than the Constitution or the laws passed by the government.

A normal person understands deep down that this is bullcrap. More diversity leads to conflict. Younger people don't remember this, even I barely do as a Gen Xer, but there used to be a lot of bad blood between different ethnic groups in America, Polish and Italian and Irish, and of course between Protestants and Catholics back when they knew enough rudimentary theology to understand the difference. That conflict was between different groups of Europeans with a common religious heritage. When you start to mix in people from completely different racial and cultural backgrounds, the conflict is inevitably worse. The old dissident right formula is completely true: D+P=C  (diversity plus proximity equals conflict).

That doesn't stop people from asserting the opposite as if it is an indisputable fact. Look at this tweet and my response.


It makes no rational sense to assume that people who have proven over the course of thousands of years to be incapable of forming stable societies are suddenly going to be able to not only sustain but improve existing stable societies that they didn't build. The answer is always the same, "muh colonialism!", but you could leave the Somalians alone for 100 years and if they didn't all starve to death or kill each other, in 100 years Somalia would still be a shithole. Haiti overthrew the French in 1803 and more than 200 years of Haitian history is an unbroken string of corruption and incompetence. Their half of Hispaniola is largely deforested, has no functioning government or economic system and the people mostly dwell in subsistence level squalor. The only time Haiti is relatively stable is when a Western nation is occupying the country.

The reason places like Somalia, Sudan and Haiti are shitholes is that they are full of Somalis, Sudanese and Haitians. Simply moving them from the Bad Dirt nations to the Magic Dirt nations doesn't change their nature. If you could somehow transplant all of the people in Africa to Europe and all of the actual European people from Europe to Africa, in 50 years Africa would be the most prosperous continent in the world and Europe would be a desolate wasteland. In spite of the less-than-subtle addition of the stethoscope on the Iraqi in the cartoon above, we aren't getting doctors and engineers and scientists. We are getting low IQ, low skill laborers, service industry employees and cheap code monkeys.

The European immigrants from the 19th century and early 20th century are not the same as the mestizo and African migrants of the 21st century, and America is not the same nation. In 1900 there were 76 million people in America. Today we are well over 300 million people and tens of millions of those are here illegally, don't speak English very well if at all and are not only not assimilated but have no interest in assimilation. They don't want to be Americans, they just want to live in America, and there is an enormous difference. America in 2019 is a nation on the brink of fiscal calamity and even outright civil war and adding in millions of immigrants is only accelerating the collapse.

The Zman wrote about this same topic this morning: A Darker Shade Of Pale and I thought this was especially good:

This vision of the future is no doubt a driving force behind the race radicalism of people like Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar. It assumes things about people that are not true. The old gag about Magic Dirt Theory is a joke among dissidents, but people like Rashida Tlaib think it is real. She thinks if her people move here, displacing the heritage stock, nothing changes but the complexion. Her people will suddenly stop acting like her people and take on the habits of our people, but with more color.

This is nonsense, of course, because much of what we think of as American society exists because heritage Americans support it. The people who created this society would have done so wherever they landed. We know this because it has happened in places like Australia and even Africa. Despite it all, countries like Rhodesia and South Africa were able to create first world societies. In the game of dirt, no place has more tragic dirt than the Dark Continent. Yet Rhodesia existed. South Africa existed.

People talk about colonialism and apartheid without any understanding of the topic but as white control over Rhodesia and now South Africa recede, those nations that were once the best Africa had to offer are rapidly sliding back toward the prototype of African nations: economically mismanaged, corrupt government, violence.

Our overlords are replacing us, thinking they will have an easier time ruling over a new, browner class of "Americans". Having failed to convince white Americans to get on board with their neo-Bolshevik program, they are simply importing a new "American" electorate while simultaneously suppressing heritage American reproduction financially, medically and culturally. What they are going to find out is that ruling people who have proven incapable of being governed for centuries is going to be impossible. Having a captive non-white voting bloc that is 20% of the population is one thing but when the imported new "Americans" are 60% of the population, concentrated in urban areas and have come to expect a certain level of gibs, keeping them happy on a diminishing stream of tax revenue from heritage Americans isn't going to work.

When expectations run headlong into reality, the fireworks will start. Be smart and don't be in the blast radius because you won't have time to bug-out when it blows up.