Poles Apart: Nationalists and SJWs in Poland

The pun in the title of this post is obligatory with any article about opposing views internal to Poland. Nonetheless, I use the cliché because it works.

An “SJW,” for the sake of readers unfamiliar with the term, is an abbreviation for “social justice warrior,” itself a pejorative for anti-racist (read: anti-White) globalists. Last year Vox Day wrote a best selling book about them, which I bought and I highly recommended. This post takes a look at Polish nationalists and anti-racists.

The Nationalists

The March 4, 2016 edition of the International Business Times (IBT) posted an article titled “Polish far-right groups extending influence across Europe, warns expert” about the cooperation between Polish nationalists abroad and their counterparts in Western European countries.

PL_act

Nationalists in Warsaw, 2013 (Getty)

Expressions of solidarity among modern European nationalists are not a new thing, but active cooperation probably is. The IBT article writes about the phenomenon disapprovingly, relying on statements by Rafał Pankowski, whom it describes as a leading expert on Polish nationalism:

… branches of far-right groups had been set up in Polish immigrant communities throughout Europe, where they are forming alliances with native anti-immigrant groups, and engaging in racist attacks.

…Last week Polish far-right activists joined UK extremists the North-West Infidels at a rally in Liverpool, where they clashed with anti-racism demonstrators.

The occasion has provided an ideal opportunity for Polish extremists to build alliances across the continent.

… In Sweden, Polish far right groups have formed ties with members of the Nordisk Ungdom (Nordic Youth) fascist group, while in neighbouring Hungary Polish extremists have built alliances with far-right group Jobbik, which is notorious for its fiercely anti-Semitic rhetoric and for organising attacks against Roma.

Five things are missing from the original article: (1) context for what is implied to be unprovoked hostility toward immigrants; (2) acknowledgment of the sheer size of the migrant influx since last year and its deleterious impact on Western Europeans; (3) any indication of an awareness that European nationalism may be a natural fight-or-flight response to a state-engineered displacement of Europeans in their own countries; (4) any nod to the arguments that mass immigration of more than one million unaccompanied military-aged men is considered to be an invasion, rather than humanitarian policy, by the immigrants themselves and by opponents of immigration; (5) and any reference to the widely known predatory behavior of immigrants themselves — intimidation, shitting in public, rape, and murder — that motivates nationalists to either retaliate or to simply show up to deter further violence. But neither Pankowski’s statements, nor IBT’s own editorial discretion, provide any such elements of a more complete picture.

Nevertheless, in reading that article, I was heartened by the international spirit of “we’re in this together” among Polish, English, and Swedish nationalists. And that type of solidarity isn’t without precedent: the Polish-Hungarian friendship has been legendary for centuries.

The irony that nobody seems to have picked up on, is that working-class Poles abroad are objectively going abroad to take the working class jobs of native Western Europeans, yet as such, they still actively support their hosts’ nativist cause. It’s genuinely the case of workers of the world (or at least of Europe) uniting, but not in the way that Communists had envisioned.

A Point About the Immigrant’s Obligation

This is a sidebar item but it needs addressing. Pankowski was also quoted as follows:

After Poland became part of the EU, millions of young Poles took advantage of the union’s freedom of movement policy to escape economic stagnation at home and find employment in prosperous northern European countries. Pankowski acknowledges the ‘paradox’ that those who are themselves immigrants should show support for such violently anti-immigrant groups.

“They don’t seem to realise they are actually attacking other migrants who may be in a similar situation apart from they have a different skin colour,” he said.

That is a commonly used argument and it’s illogical. I once veered into politics with an Eastern European-born woman who said that she supports open immigration to the United States because, as she said (her nose shot up into the air), “I am an immigrant too.”

“So am I, you idiot girl” was my response. I then explained that the immigrant’s obligation of loyalty is to the people who took him in, not to the party-crashers that follow him. On the practical level, an immigrant has no interest in seeing the country that he tied his fortunes to degrade via low-value immigration, just as a homebuyer has no interest in seeing his neighborhood turn into a slum.

The Professional Anti-Racist

After having read that IBT article, I became interested in a private dialogue with Pankowski, should his email address be posted on his organization’s site. I imagined a serious-looking man, about a decade older than me, whom I can persuade to reconsider some of his opinions. But cursory web search took me to his eponymously-named web site and after a quick look, I dropped the idea.

Pankowski’s web site describes him as a sociologist and political scientist, Doctor of Humanities, Professor of Collegium Civitas in Warsaw, deputy editor of the magazine Never Again, and:

He is coordinator of the Monitoring Centre on Racism in Eastern Europe, a board member of the network UNITED for Intercultural Action (based in Amsterdam) and Football Against Racism in Europe (based in London). He was employed, among others, as an expert-consultant in the Department of Tolerance and Non-discrimination of the OSCE, he took up their cooperation with Chatham House, Policy Network and the Institute for Strategic Dialogue.

Additionally, he has authored four books on racism and other such subjects. In other words, he is a professional leftist and experience has taught me that engaging them on a dialectical level with the goal of convincing them of anything is futile. I am also unfamiliar with the magazine or the organizations he’s affiliated with, but it is reasonable to start with an assumption that any anti-racist outfit in Eastern Europe is either a George Soros- or otherwise an American-funded subversion. And then, there is his appearance, per the photo below from his web site:

RP

The face of an anti-racist. Nobody is mistaking him for Pudzian. Granted, practitioners of clerical occupations get a pass on having a less-than-working-class physiognomy but there is such a thing as an SJW look, and he’s got it. This is purely intuitive on my part, but one should trust his intuition and talking with an SJW is even more futile than with a mere professional anti-racist.

Final word on Pankowski: while he and I are ideological adversaries, I don’t rule out a possibility that I may be wrong in my personal reservations about him and he may in fact be a thoughtful writer who is willing to discuss nationalism from outside of the anti-racist perspective. He may also be a very nice and charming person. Either way, without knowing more about him, the tone of this post remains duly respectful toward him because despite my disgust with the ideas that he promotes, he has given me no reasons to adopt any other kind of attitude.

What Makes a Polish Anti-Racist?

Here are factors that contributes to the formation of a Polish (and more broadly, an Eastern European) anti-racist or SJW mentality. Some of the following qualities are universal, while others are particular to Eastern Europe:

Being Jewish. Let’s get that out of the way first. Polish and Jewish perspectives on Poland’s history and her national question differ. Historian Jan Tomasz Gross, who has made a career out of tarring Poles as murderous savages, is an example of a professional anti-Polonist Jew — a less buffoonish version of what Tim Wise is to U.S. Whites. You can also plumb the depths of Jewish animus in Art Spiegelman’s Holocaust-themed “Maus,” in which Poles are, literally, swine.

Ego. The human ego is the most powerful force in the universe. When personally invested in identifying with a political orientation, a lot of people will double-down on their positions rather than reconsider them when faced with facts or insights that contradict their views.

Mid-wit intelligence. Such a person has an above-average but by no means exceptional IQ, along with little capacity for original thought. He also lacks the discipline for rigorous dialectic. Mid-wits are intellectually at home operating within manichean, state-sanctioned ideological templates.

Career. Academic careers are rarely renumerative, except when you get into a Western-affiliated globalism-promoting NGO network. Then like any good employee, you enthusiastically support your employer’s mission.

Pathological snobbishness. The upper-middle-class contempt for members of the working class is a human universal.

Gamma male. This refers to a psychological profile conceptualized by Vox Day and elaborated-on in my post titled “Assessing Your Place on the Hierarchy.” A Gamma male passive-aggressively acts out on his resentment of men who are higher than him on the socio-sexual hierarchy. If he gets involved in politics, he sublimates that resentment into a left-wing ideology.

Eastern European inferiority complex. Decades of material backwardness behind the Iron Curtain and the subsequent collapse of their states in 1989 has had a psychological impact on many Eastern Europeans. Some of them overcompensate by identifying with the European Union’s ruling class values.

National pride. This kind of a left-winger is fond of his country but is embarrassed by what he considers low-class attitudes among his compatriots, which reflect badly on Poland and on him. Pankowski’s comment in that article suggests that this may be part of what drives him:

With Poland among the least multicultural societies in Europe, moving to a country with a sizeable ethnic minority population can trigger an identity crisis for some young Polish immigrants, he said. “I think many are quite confused about their identity, and being Polish abroad means understanding what multicultural society looks like, but for others it brings out dormant prejudice, and reinforces some prejudices they are prone to.”

What he’s saying is patronizing as hell and naive, but I can see how he’s trying to do what in his mind is damage-control on behalf of Poland’s image.

Morbid fear of chaos and violence. This type of a leftist prefers to suppress short-term limited and justifiable violence such as border protection, even as suppressing it makes extreme and continent-scale violence inevitable in the long run.

There is a lesson here for makers of national policy: if you don’t like skinheads, then stop creating conditions that make skinheads necessary. Personally, I empathize with all street-level nationalists because they are stepping up where the state has either failed to protect, or has outright betrayed, its own people.

Brotherhood of man. That ideal appeals to me as well, yet am not a leftist. Nationalism and universalism, in fact, are more compatible with each other than anti-racism is with universalism. As I recently wrote:

Men generally enjoy meeting men from other nations and races. There is a lot that is interesting, even fraternal, in the crossing of cultures—so long as these three conditions are met: both parties are coming from positions of equal relative status, each man has a home of his own, and each man knows who he is. Even Pashtun tribesmen are famed for their hospitality toward strangers whom they do not perceive as invaders. But multiculturalism, by imposing strangers on another’s home and codifying this intrusion with the Marxist duality of oppressor and oppressed, precludes any such fraternity.

Or as the American poet Robert Frost put it much more simply: “Good fences make good neighbors.” The humanist who becomes an anti-racist denies man two of his most essential dignities: identity and community.

“It’s Complicated” — Collaborating with the Empire

Being from a smaller country that occasionally finds itself under the power of stronger neighbors or subsumed into an empire comes with dilemmas. Sometimes one has to weigh the pros and cons of cooperating with the occupant for the larger good of his people or for personal benefit.

At its low points, Polish history featured men, sometimes tragic figures, who had stood at such crossroads and made an unpopular but principled decision based on what they thought would be best for their nation. Two such historic figures come to mind: Margrave Aleksander Wielopolski (1803 – 1877) and General Wojciech Jaruzelski (1923 – 2014).

My first example is Margrave Wielopolski, who ran Poland’s civil administration within the Russian Empire and he feared that the Polish independence movement was escalating toward bloodshed. To forestall that, he ordered 20-year-term conscriptions of Polish activists into the Tsar’s army. That decision ignited the January 1863 Uprising, the very outcome Wielopolski wanted to avoid.

The second example is Gen. Jaruzelski, who was appointed Communist Poland’s head of state in 1981. Several months later he crushed the growing Solidarity movement, imprisoned its leaders, and imposed the infamous Martial Law that lasted through July 1983. He is a reviled figure in Poland but his defenders argue that he imposed those measures to prevent a Soviet invasion.

And there is another, very obscure but memorable to me example of collaborating with a foreign power. There was a World War II memoir I read, written by a woman who had survived the notorious Pawiak prison in German-occupied Warsaw where captured resistance fighters were taken for interrogation. As a doctor, she worked in the prison’s infirmary, which put her directly in contact with inmates just coming off their torture-interrogation sessions. She related a story about a prisoner who escaped but was later tracked down and arrested by a Polish collaborator policeman who (as described by the author) beamed with pride as he turned the “bandit” over to the Germans. The policeman was rewarded with a dinner in the German staff dining hall, but as he later listened to the screams of the recaptured escapee coming from the interrogation room, pride had drained from his face.

The Polish anti-racist should make a humbling effort to better understand the refugee influx and the state-enabled Islamic invasion of Europe. He should then extrapolate Europe’s — as well as Poland’s own — fate under the trajectory of those events. Then, as a collaborator with the Brussels-based empire, ask himself: Czy jestem dumny z tego, co robię?

Advertisements

58 thoughts on “Poles Apart: Nationalists and SJWs in Poland

  1. To describe the nationalist Poles in England working with the nativists there as a “paradox” is simplistic, but at the same time it does contain a point.

    European nationalists of whatever stripe have something in common, wherever they are and especially in Europe. They want Europe to remain Europe.

    At the same time the European nationalists in question are immigrants, whether temporary or not.

    Those two facts however are not a paradox. The various nationalists have some interests in common namely Europe; and they have some that are divergent: their own nations. And their nations have interests in common.

    The situation might considered a paradox if immigration amongst nations is evaluated totally as a yes or no question. And for it to be a paradox would also require denying differences between races.

    The question of where do nationalists in Europe belong, is a fair question, but it does not qualify as a paradox for the simple reason that it is a question of real world politics, not one of philosophy or abstract logic.

    Pankowski is a professional anti-racist and thus a defacto scumbag and he’s got the face to go with it. And as is pointed out in the original post, it is not his physiognomy that damns him but its expression.

  2. There are still so many wounds from when we were a warrior race and our only enemies were one another.

    My ideological predecessors were wrong. It saddened me when reading Mein Kampf there’s no mistaking Hitler playing on the growing resentment of the German people towards a couple of decades of Slavic displacement in their nation, and there’s no denying the injustice and tragedy in how it played out for the Poles. Because I believe NS values are what we need now, I wish I could explain away what our brothers did to one another but I can’t.

    Europids were warriors; killing, oppressing, and dominating one another is what all of us did when we had the upper hand, and we had no relevant rivals but each other.

    As recently as a lifetime ago we went much too far against our kindred, that we nearly destroyed one another. So White men suppressed our aggression and discarded our glory in shame. And in response, our sisters and the aliens smelled weakness, and have usurped and fed on us in our cowardice. And we failed to raise our hand to them, believing our attackers weaker than us and ourselves deserving of punishment for the missteps of our power.
    We turned the other cheek.

    To our grandfathers, White men didn’t fight for our own interests against feminists and anti-racists acting on behalf of women and browns, for the same reason it’s too embarrassing for a normal man to fight back seriously if he’s being attacked by a cripple or a child.

    Like, what do you do if a retarded 9 year old brown kid starts attacking you with a baseball bat like he’s seriously trying to kill you and won’t stop, and other people are watching but won’t intervene? Laughing because they think it’s funny and encouraging the little shit?

    We are learning the hard way that will not be forgiven, that our mercy is perceived as naught but vulnerability. That our only allies are each other. That our women and our enemies respect only our warrior selves. And that vicious little brat is now a “youth” who has almost finished growing into an enemy that can answer to our payback as a grown-up.

    Sweet times ahead, brofags.

  3. Pingback: Poles Apart: Nationalists and SJWs in Poland | Reaction Times

  4. Is Pankowski not Jewish himself? He certainly looks it. Not so much in the picture you posted but in others.

    And he writes incessantly on anti-Semitism in Poland and he co-founded a group called “Never Again,” because there was SUCH a threat of a new Shoa in Poland, no doubt!

    Basically, he is a vicious anti-white, which is hardly a surprise these days as there are hordes of them. If he’s not Jewish, he’s an adept at finding a niche where he could be wildly successful: self-hating anti-racist pro-Jewish Catholic Pole! Somebody has to do it.

    Me, I find him a contemptible worm. The lowest of the low.

  5. Superb essay, PA. As a German, I would be proud to stand with my Polish Nationalist comrades in the coming war.

  6. Peterike: I wondered that too. By name, he’s definitely not. By photos, not sure but leaning No.

    As to your and Elk’s strong judgment on him, I agree. His CV alone screams ‘scum.’ However, I took a different than normal rhetorical tack with this post, in that I want to reach any potential or borderline SJWs (Polish or any other nationality) and pull them away from evil. Maybe even Pankowski himself, should he web-search his name and find this post. This is why I used a reasonable and even gentle tone without giving an inch on principle itself.

    What I wanted to avoid is saying something like “look at that traitor faggot!” (which he may well be) and be dismissed as just some right wing asshole (which I am).

    LBF: thanks a lot. I got that IBT article off your twitter feed, FYI.

  7. “My ideological predecessors were wrong. It saddened me when reading Mein Kampf there’s no mistaking Hitler playing on the growing resentment of the German people towards a couple of decades of Slavic displacement in their nation, and there’s no denying the injustice and tragedy in how it played out for the Poles. Because I believe NS values are what we need now, I wish I could explain away what our brothers did to one another but I can’t.

    Europids were warriors; killing, oppressing, and dominating one another is what all of us did when we had the upper hand, and we had no relevant rivals but each other.

    As recently as a lifetime ago we went much too far against our kindred, that we nearly destroyed one another.”

    I’ll second that —– while remaining amazed at how little such thought prevails in the Alt-right.

    Having said that, I don’t agree with the rest Heretic Phi’s denouement; newsflash: species survival at a evolutionary level and span requires a bit of everything discussed here, things both dreaded and over-hyped: segregation, miscegenation, colonization and empire: there exist evolutionary scale maladies that can come about due to excess in any of those aforementioned practices and conditions.

  8. “What I wanted to avoid is saying something like “look at that traitor faggot!” (which he may well be) and be dismissed as just some right wing asshole (which I am).”

    yeah, that’s a nice, tidy way to broach a subject with levity that, in fact, is quite a serious dilemma: you take pains to be diplomatic and civil in your essay —- -but then, to maintain camaraderie in the comments section, the vitriol is unleashed as serves as a bonding gel.

    That’s all understandable. But in some shape or form, it’ll wind up serving to defeat the larger purpose……FWIW, IMO the alt-right needs to examine more thoroughly what Heretic Phi touches upon: the pscyhological dimensions of the underlying impulses of WWII.

  9. Nikcrit:
    “IMO the alt-right needs to examine more thoroughly what Heretic Phi touches upon: the pscyhological dimensions of the underlying impulses of WWII.”

    If I may ask, to what end do you suppose this is necessary? WWII has been a whip used to psychologically beat us out of defending our nations long enough. I don’t really know how to work through this.

    I can only speak on my own behalf that just because I am NS doesn’t mean I a) deny or b) excuse the suffering of the Polish nation as it occurred under Germany.

    What confuses me, is how then do I claim to be smarter than Commie turds who claim that Communism is a good idea but all those Djooze who slaughtered a hundred million people “weren’t real communists” or other such dreck? I know myself to be true and them to be full of crap, so what’s the fundamental difference? Many will argue there is none, and though I know they’re wrong I don’t know the answer.

    “yeah, that’s a nice, tidy way to broach a subject with levity that, in fact, is quite a serious dilemma: you take pains to be diplomatic and civil in your essay —- -but then, to maintain camaraderie in the comments section, the vitriol is unleashed as serves as a bonding gel.”

    To be honest, I don’t get this. This younger incarnation of Abe Foxman with DSL has clearly outed himself as an enemy of our people. Is he going to be civil to Nationalists if he has his way? It’s not like he’s someone who “means well, but doesn’t see the big picture”. He’s collabo and he knows what he’s doing.

    But, I guess it makes sense depending on the audience you’re targeting. Still, even if you’re speaking to sheeple, you have an indisputably strong case for the traitorous faggotry of your subject.

  10. first, let me disavow one of your references; i almost posted a link yesterday in which Foxman put forth the meme that Trump was doing the nazi salute in his ‘raise your hand you’re going to vote for me’ schtick, and i thought it ridiculous….not where i’m coming from at all; i’m sorta post-modern in that i’m looking to drop the p.c. witchhunt b.s. and try to develop some new detentes…… more later; but trust that i have no delusions; i just want to first break free of the current unreal standards of discourse…… more later, perhaps.

  11. Nikcrit:
    ” i almost posted a link yesterday in which Foxman put forth the meme that Trump was doing the nazi salute in his ‘raise your hand you’re going to vote for me’ schtick, and i thought it ridiculous…”
    I saw this picture on the front page of The Shitlord Hub the other day, and I thought it was hilarious.

    I got a real chuckle out of it and it put me in a good mood. As I, like anyone capable of reading without moving their lips, would know, Trump is obviously not doing a Nazi salute. His whole family married into Djoorie. The wiser of us are hopeful, but still wary of this man in spite of his words.

    Nationalists put up this picture as a joke to say to Political Correctards: “We mock your frumpity taboos and pour barbecue sauce on your sacred cows. Portraying our favored political candidate as if he was doing a Nazi salute is funny because its the kind of thing that will make you so upset you will pee your wussy panties over nothing. Boo! Scamper away from the big scary Trump monster, you puny intellectual weaklings, because it is amusing to us. We are laughing at your fragile sensibilities.”

    Now if Anti-Whites are seriously putting up this pictures of Trump supporters with their hands up as an anti-racist meme, that makes the whole thing much funnier.
    “Look! That big scary Trumpenstud is brainwashing Americans to become mindless Nahtzee drones! AHHH! They’re gonna goosestep all over the Djooze and make us crap our diapers with how upset we are! NOOOOO!”

    It goes to show that the intellectual chasm of sophistication that divides Shitlords and Shitlibs grows deeper and wider with every passing month into an abyss. Our stance is already poised to make them look silly before they even act, because we know exactly what goes on in their weak and obedient minds.
    Wrong side of history, cucks.

  12. Caught the first hour of the Republican Primary Date last night, between Trump Cruz Rubio and Kasich.

    First of all the format of it was not so Ding Dong and distracted as it was on Fox.

    Second i thought Trump did well though occasionally he looked tired. This election is already aging him, and mad respects to the man for his sacrifice.

    My other comment though is on the nature of these debates, and how their set-up plays into the pretense that our political process is such that the president’s stated “positions” are the thing that matters. As if someone looking into the policy of this or that complex social problem can be managed by better policy. Case in point was Rubio’s response to the issue of problems at the VA hospitals: he said that unresponsive bureaucrats would be fired. Of course he is simply pandering with easy soundbites; but the surface level thinking that such an offered solution demonstrates, is laughable. The problems of veterans and their health are going to be addressed by firing inefficient administrators at the VA? That such thinking is even offered as an approach is a joke.

    Veterans and their health problem are a good … test or whatever … of the social capital within a society.

    Ideally the solution would be less veterans and less health problems. Is that realistic?

    Somehow the problems of this society are not even being addressed on a realistic level. Health care needs to be restructured entirely.

    I tend to agree it is a problem of scale; but now that we don’t live in villages, now what?

    We’re just fucked and that is all there is to it. Don’t get sick. Hopefully no one you know will ever come down with serious health problems.

    But more on the general point, about the quality of the candidates. Anyone who cannot immediately pick up on the difference in the quality of the character and personality, of the men on the stage, is a lost cause.

    Donald Trump is a man, whereas the other three are spinning tops and this pattern has been set into motion by our out-of-scale politics and they do a stupid little political dance which is meant to be cute to their moms. But it’s not to me because i see through it but apparently not everyone does because Trump only has 35 per cent or so.

    But just looking at the posture of Cruz and Rubio, and to a lesser extent Kasich, when they speak, they go through these motions of this meant-to-be-cute and satisfying-to-their-moms dance and phrases.

    That anyone doesn’t see this, causes me to despise Americans, of whatever stripe but i am particularly thinking of Evangelicals and Mormoms, and Minnesotans and Iowans and Kansans and Oklahomans and Alaskans.

    Let me repeat that point though, which point gets to our whole predicament, of how we as a country lost our way, in how politicians posture on what’s-no-longer-a-stump, as if their moms might give em a “good boy”. Cruz and Rubio are good little boys and it’s right on their faces. Kasich is too but is almost halfway human.

    I despise eminent domain and casinos, and the whole ethos of “the business of America is business” and Trump is the personification of all that, and in sane times i would not support his platform of commerce and development. However he is a man and not a marionette that is run along these play acting dance lines that are gay and circumcised.

  13. I am just repeating now, and i can’t make the point any better, but just how Rubio especially, does his cute little speech, and he is all “wound up” to give this approval seeking performance. And that it has worked for him so far! all the way to senator of Florida.

    Somehow i can’t get to the essence of it, but when he and Cruz go into their bit, how it is so clearly a performance-seeking-approval.

    Contrast to the Don, who “maintains frame” but fuck that manosphere cliche (though i agree that it is right and true) – he maintains frame by not going into a gay dance, but by keeping his own conception of himself in the picture – and here is the key, i finally got it – and knowing that out there listening to him are hard men and real. That is the difference. Fucking respect.

    Knowing that listening to him, and evaluating him, are real men. Cruz and Rubio are not used (and conditioned) to being evaluated, by those men. They are used to being evaluated by their gay paymasters and their moms.

    ************

    It’s a man’s world

    The Don made reference several times to tough jews and Israelis, when that topic came up, and it is interesting though, and really gets to the point, that THAT cultural referent resonates. We know what he is talking about: tough Israeli jews, and their counterparts in New York, and the Don has cut his teeth with them and we respect him for it and he can throw that out and no one can argue.

    But where is white America’s corresponding referent. Tough Midwestern cornpeople. The tough ethanol men of Iowa.

    America of course does have cultural tradition about tough men. America folk history, and real history – is actually all about that. See Cormac, see your 70s childhood.

    But Trump isn’t referencing that.

  14. But no one up there on stage, including Trump, is talking about reevaluating our Prime Directive, which apparently remains as, to exploit the earth and its resources to the bitter end.

    Thoreau had some thoughts on that, but that is another book i haven’t read.

    But realistically it is all this assumption that we need to “get ahead” and Make American Great Again.

    That dilemma is very much at the center of the Human Condition and its tragedy in time. That in order to be great, we have to get ahead. Or as i like to put it: he who takes advantage, has advantage.

    Yeah competition drives evolution, but is it it too much to ask that we as humans might put some perspective into things. As in do we have tear down the mountain to get the coal. Do we have to regard environmentalism as gay?

    And this point is not my little pet topic, it is right at the center of the ontological crisis of white identity.

    White people don’t give a shit about themselves because look at the shithole habitat they made for themselves to live in.

    Are you happy in the cities and the suburbs, as they have become? Can you walk around five miles with your dog, on these streets, and not be stressed out by the hundreds of two-ton metal machines zooming by going nowhere.

    This is not a healthy living arrangement, and people are not willing to live and die for it, and why should they.

  15. “I despise eminent domain and casinos, and the whole ethos of “the business of America is business” and Trump is the personification of all that, and in sane times i would not support his platform of commerce and development. However he is a man and not a marionette that is run along these play acting dance lines that are gay and circumcised.”

    I can appreciate this “he’s RELATIVELY aw-right as a candidate” approach, because it’s not so much him but his impoverished competitors that elevates his political stature. I think many of his supporters feel the same way..fwiw, based in whatever contextual opinion i’ve garnered of you (sub_elk) from this blog and the things you’ve said about Trump, i can’t help but feel that you’re trying to convince yourself that you really like Trump rather than your being a reflexive alcolyte.

    Who knows, and to be clear, I don’t put any value on amateur mind-reading; but i get the feeling that such mixed-emotions are behind a lot of his supporters.

  16. Trump is obviously not doing a Nazi salute. His whole family married into Djoorie. The wiser of us are hopeful, but still wary of this man in spite of his words.

    The underlying issue is that the Democratic Party is shifting way left as a whole. There’s no one in the center of the party (i.e. no more white “blue dog” Democrats) to squelch and silence their crazier ideas and keep their lunatic fringe (like Morris Dees or #BLM) grounded in reality. So, hysterical, nonsensical leftist screeching like this will continue, and will keep driving more and more whites away.

    It’s a dangerous identity politics game that the Dem Party played to get Obama elected. Now that their Party has groveled and kowtowed its way to becoming little more than a giant megaphone for the airing out of black complaints we will also see if more whites are driven away by the Democratic Party’s upcoming and inevitable backlash against running white male candidates (you already see this in the troubles Bernie Sanders is having with minority voters).

  17. O.T.@PA:
    just fyi, you have some sorta link glitch in your ‘list of posts” file; when you try to click on the
    “O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!” post, it connects to some sort-of WordPress credential protocol page rather than to the post and its comments….. (i discovered this while looking for a comment that posted a link to a book I want but couldn’t remember the name of).

    [Thank you Nikcrit. I just fixed it. -PA]

  18. Mixed feelings aside, the point that i was getting at, and about which mixed feelings? no, is the qualitative difference in character between Trump and the others.

    Both sets of characters are the inevitable representatives of the environments from which they rise. Trump from the business scene and real estate in New York, and the others from the post-modern political process in America.

    About the first environment and its paragon representative i have criticisms; about the latter set there are no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

    I can repeat that point ad nauseam, but there it is.

    The second point, and the one that is enervating, is how other people and voters are failing to make that clear distinction, in spite of how Trump himself has pointed it out 100 times: that he is self-funded and not beholden to donors.

    All this shit is very obvious, to us smart people. Or i would like to think so, but apparently it is not. I am repeatedly amazed and disappointed in other people and how they perceive things. They complain all the time about politics; and NOW that they have an option they would rather not. Truly they are the denizens of darkness about whom Plato wrote his founding document allegory about the cave people who will not come into the light.

    Other people make the same observation. Robert Pirsig joked about enlightenment seekers looking everywhere and then the Buddha knocks on the door and they say go away.

    Donald Trump is not the Buddha, except that he is the closest that we can get under the circumstances.

    The political process requires a negotiator. It requires money. It requires vanity selfishness and a vainglorious ego.

    ***********

    I support Trump one hundred percent. He has big hands, a big dick, and he loves us. To ask for anything more is ludicrous.

    The reservations i have about the political process are in the same box of chocolates as war and death and life and women and sex. The nature of all these things is that you don’t get them but by losing them.

    That is not a contradiction, though it might be considered a paradox. You have to lose in order to have. You have to give away yourself in order to find yourself. It is only in the giving. That wisdom is in Tolkien, it is in AA too.

    We have to kill so that we may live. That would be another play on the same theme. The eternal return. It is only when we begin to die that we can appreciate life. Your mileage may vary. My life has been a struggle. It is a struggle today and there is no escape. That is the existential quandary of consciousness. Where’s the booze bitches and whores.

  19. fwiw, based in whatever contextual opinion i’ve garnered of you (sub_elk) from this blog and the things you’ve said about Trump, i can’t help but feel that you’re trying to convince yourself that you really like Trump rather than your being a reflexive alcolyte.

    Nik, Nik, Nik. Didn’t we already talk about his?

    We don’t need Trump to have a hand-tailored, “alt-right approved” platform in any way, shape or form. Even if he was right here commenting on PA’s page I’d ask him to just continue focusing on the two planks of immigration and modifying some Intl trade policy to maybe bring some manufacturing back to the USA. The rest of our alt-right political aspirations will be DOA anyway if Trump can’t get these ideas into the mainstream and activate the remaining life impulse of the sidelined prole Whites who sat out the last two elections.

    I dunno, I think maybe you’re the one projecting on this sometimes, assuming that our needs from Trump automatically must match the wide-sweeping, messianic undertones seen in liberalism’s all-encompassing hopes pinned to Obama. They’re not analogous. More than anything, he’s tearing the mask off the GOPe and showing core Americans how stupidly misguided, treacherous, petty and deluded they are – and this will endure even if he loses the general election.

    But I do appreciate you giving us the constant reminders not to get our Trump hopes too high, it’s almost as if you really do genuinely care about us and don’t want us to have a letdown and get our feelings hurt. lol

  20. Trump is currently refreshing to some because he’s oblivious to political pieties that Western electorates are currently sick of to the point of nausea; e.g., his disposition is well-timed on the current zeitgeist.
    But he is as beholden as any other John Q. Schlub pol, currently embodied by one Marco Rubio, who occupies the antithesis of the zeitgeist enomarate; (e.g., does anyone embody the tired, market-tested, over-scripted stump drone better than Rubio?) Trump benefits greatly from and has openly championed illegal labor, outsourcing, Caribbean tax shelters, and a host of other scion-ism rages that have turned the country upside down during the last 40 years.

    People are just so desperate for authenticity that they’ve settled for the next best thing: an antithesis to p.c. protocol, with ramped-up superciliousness to boot.

  21. “But I do appreciate you giving us the constant reminders not to get our Trump hopes too high, it’s almost as if you really do genuinely care about us and don’t want us to have a letdown and get our feelings hurt. lol”

    No, I don’t have the schadenfreunde; and I don’t have a b-w dichotomy I’m always carefully tending. I just don’t.

  22. They’re not analogous. More than anything, he’s tearing the mask off the GOP and showing core Americans how stupidly misguided, treacherous, petty and deluded they are – and this will endure even if he loses the general election.

    Well, you’ve been more sober in your Trump attributions. But some of your Dark Enlightenment compatriots here are more fantastical in their dreaming…lol!!….

    FWIW, of the three white-righters here that i routinely converse with, this is how the halfrican sees it: You know black people the best, and are enjoying the Trump for his symbolic p.c.-antithesis-isms; PA, is a bit more deluded about him as a political leader

    [dude… seriously… give it a rest -PA]

    but as a principled man who considers human character matters often, he has some personal doubts re. Trump—– but PA also likes to slum intellecutually a bit (e.g., he’d enjoy being able to easily analyze trumps poltical triumphs and follies —– similar to the way he could easily deconstruct Obsidian’s arguments).

    Meanwhile, Sub_elk is the poorest fit among you three to get on the Trump bandwagon; in my mind, he’s the one who, over the decades, has traveled the most ideologically—– from hardcore leftie to proto-racist alt-righter, with nothing ever fully form-fitting.
    He’s too unique.

  23. Nikcrit, you give an impression of being out of your depth when you counsel us about Trump. Let it go, dude.

    Think of Trump’s candidacy as two things: (1) him being an instrument of destroying the illusion of a two-party system, which opens the way forward with or without Trump, and (2) his very being and behavior validating certain White masculine virtues that had been devalued for decades: masculine charm, assertiveness, dominance, truth-telling, forthrightness, fighting spirit, and loyalty — to his friends, and to us.

    On that last item, loyalty, here is a snapshot you will appreciate. A few debates back, the emcees/hosts/whatever screwed up on the protocol of having the candidates walk up to their podiums, resulting in Carson standing alone and confused because he wasn’t sure what he was supposed to be doing. Carson was the only other honest man in that bunch (besides Trump) and Trump, knowing that, showed that he will stand by him. Which is what he did literally, until he and Carson finally walked together to the stage after all of the other candidates.

  24. “Think of Trump’s candidacy as two things: (1) him being an instrument of destroying the illusion of a two-party system, which opens the way forward with or without Trump, and (2) his very being and behavior validating certain White masculine virtues that had been devalued for decades: masculine charm, assertiveness, dominance, truth-telling, forthrightness, fighting spirit, and loyalty — to his friends, and to us.”

    Yes, I know that is true. I said on another blog that Trump is destroying the GOP as we knew it and that the new path he’s forging is going to become America’s version of Le Pen’s National Front….fAnd just to be clear: I’m trying to mix humor with provocation in my above remarks.

  25. his very being and behavior validating certain White masculine virtues that had been devalued for decades: masculine charm, assertiveness, dominance, truth-telling, forthrightness, fighting spirit, and loyalty — to his friends, and to us.

    This is very true about Trump, as well.

    But Nik, I think you see us giving these sorts of compliments to Trump and you assume that we are deeming him to be some “super-candidate” but in reality all of these qualities ought to be found in national political candidates, there’s nothing special about them. The situation is that our leaders on the right have been very distracted for some time and not only have they completely forgotten how they should behave or govern, but they’ve also let the MSM control too much of our public vision on how politicians should think, feel and act. Core White Americans have become disillusioned with “McPoliticians.” When Mitt Romney himself is on TV wagging his finger at Trump on the alleged recent Duke/KKK issue it just shows how detached and comically submissive GOPe politicians have become when they’re literally falling over themselves to appear “anti-racist” – and on an issue drummed up out of thin air, to boot.

    So Trump steps with an IDGAF attitude, but he’s really just employing common sense using a brain free of the GOPe mind conditioning that causes their candidates to appear so effete and deneutered. And all of this coincides with the growing gulf between the left and the right with the Democratic party failing to hold together the fragile Obama coalition as the Dem party progresses to goes fully femininized matriarchy – high hysteria, emotion and screechiness and complete loss of objectivity (who/whom).

    Yes, I know that is true. I said on another blog that Trump is destroying the GOP as we knew

    Well, even Lou Dobbs and a bunch of Fox Commentators have been saying similar things for weeks. He’s been saying that the GOP as we know it will split into 2-3 groups immediately and permanently if a faction of high-profile GOPe cucks like Romney does indeed continue with the mass movement to vote for Hillary over Trump or if the GOP tries to do the brokered route to cheat Trump out of a nomination.

    I don’t know how much I believe that, but if even Fox is giving it airtime…

  26. Trump is currently refreshing to some because he’s oblivious to political pieties that Western electorates are currently sick of to the point of nausea; e.g., his disposition is well-timed on the current zeitgeist.

    And to be honest, Nik, I sense great unrest in you concerning Trump and his relationship with the alt-right. Your sentiment betrays something visceral and emotive down in the ether of your soul. You’re reacting more sharply to this issue than you would to 12 new commenters coming here and throwing around the N-word ad infinitum.

    Oh well, I guess we’ll know never what your deal is since PA said for us all to stop talking about it…

  27. Camlost, talk away if it’s about Das Trumpfenkreig. I said “give it a rest” in response to Nikcrit saying I am deluded or something like that.

  28. And to be honest, Nik, I sense great unrest in you concerning Trump and his relationship with the alt-right.

    Well, the sorta ‘cat that ate the canary’ grin and look on my face is based in this conceit i have that, based in my past as a chronicler and scriber of the grandiosely feted and celebrated, I see an off-the-charts level of egomania and political oblivion when I see Trump that his more desperate believers either can’t or won’t….. But I know you (Camlost) has disavowed me of my arrogant under-estimating presumptuousness… 🙂

  29. The Gold Standard for apocalyptp race porn is Civil War 2 by Chittum.

    Without doing wiki or anything, the guy was sort of the Jack Kerouac of the neo racist reactionary right. Drunk tragic … and visionary.

    A line in that book – perhaps the line, when all is said and done – goes something like,

    It’s something to see, a people come into existence.

    Frank Herbert had a similar line, and was a similar character in how he was messed around with vision and big dreams. At the conclusion of Dune, not the final scene, but in the battle leading up to it, when the Fremen’s weaker city-dwelling brethren, go up against the Emperor’s legions and take terrible casualties but they no longer care because they realize that they are a people.

    Of course this is what Trump is about. It’s not about Trump it’s about White America.

    The genie can not be put back into the bottle. There is too much history and too much hate and too much blood and too much fate.

    These are real events, we are being taken over by History.

    History did not stop. Five hundred years from now this will be the distant past and something will have happened, to the people here now.

    Everything that you and i can conceive, exists outside of us and is accessible to everyone else. Including a vision of history that works out to our advantage.

  30. I don’t mean to speak in such grandiose and dramatic terms – but truly the topic matter requires it.

    In what other terms can ethnogenesis be considered?

    As i have said before: No one is as qualified to consider this question, as is you or i. (If you are white.)

    It is also worth bringing up, as part of the topic, the taboo on the topic itself. How and why is it that white people are reluctant to discuss who they are, these days.

    It has always been a big topic, but a healthy people love to discuss who they are (as a people).

    But now for us it is not a happy conversation. It’s a shameful one.

    The jews talk about who they are all the time. The jews talk about who we are all the time! except they don’t “talk” about it so much as lecture (us) about it.

    So obviously that is a LITTLE bit out of whack.

    But consider the bold statements in this comment, and evaluate how true they are, and next figure out what they mean and imply.

    We have a RESPONSIBILITY to these questions.

  31. White people’s self-regard and their self-conception, and their history and future, cannot be contained within an election cycle.

    Those days are done.

    Have you heard the good news? BLM protestors are getting beat up.

    There is a youtube video of a 70 year old white man cold clocking a black, at a stadium rally, and saying next time we might have to kill him. (He was arrested; it’s all on youtube.)

    That’s how white people feel, right now. This shit is gonna go.

  32. Any halfway intelligent non-white should be very concerned, about all this.

    It would seem that they would like for all this to be contained and constrained within a particular political movement, and a particular political campaign.

    But it’s not (so constrained). There is too much young blood.

    How much, Youngblood?

    Remember the old-time aphorism, they used to say,

    Blood will out

  33. nikcrit would like to make this conversation (the broader conversation and this particular one as part of it) personal because in a personal context it can make more palatable sense.

    But the facts is that the topic of the conversation is, finally, not about us, but about Us.

    And in that larger equation, there is not much of any reconciliation to be had.

    nikcrit as a character is impelled to make this personal. He is like a jew (no offense intended) in that he cannot help but assert his ethnic interests by whatever means.

    I don’t find fault with doing that. And realistically i think it is a good strategy, even to the point where it would be well advised to work with well meaning White Advocates to come up with something.

    We absolutely have an imperative responsibility to be as reasonable as possible, for as long as possible.

    Black Americans ought to be supporting White Americans, in their struggle. It would be a grand gesture and not forgotten. The symbolism and the Poetic Justice of it, would be pretty sweet. It is an opportunity like for realz and shit.

  34. “Black Americans ought to be supporting White Americans, in their struggle. It would be a grand gesture and not forgotten. The symbolism and the Poetic Justice of it, would be pretty sweet. It is an opportunity like for realz and shit.”

    I agree. Wholeheartedly.
    But sometimes, even me,
    feels left out —- from all the bluster
    and self-demon-ol-ogy…

    Where does the halfrican go
    when the polemics are so======
    black? —- or —– white?
    or, elliptically so?

    Anyhyow, i really think you’re right about that ‘it would be a grand gesture’ or so. But you know what? My prole-black nine-to-five, quite honestly tells me that that isn’t going to happen. the prole black aggregate is way, waaay too self-absorbed and nihilistic to extend that much consideration and empathy to an ‘other’ —- spontaneously or tactically.

    In fact, the seeming impossiblity of it that i’m feeling now makes me wonder if you were joking in your quote above.

    I wish that were so, but it ain’t happening anytime soon.

  35. Where does the halfrican go

    You don’t think that the last sentence of the “Mulatto Superman” post gets as close to the answer as possible?

  36. You don’t think that the last sentence of the “Mulatto Superman” post gets as close to the answer as possible?

    No, because it seems you’re hinting at a existential “No-man’s land” that is PERMANENT AND ABSOLUTE.

    OTOH, I admit that is a halfrican disposition AT TIMES and that which can create a certain, detached and original POV, but is not some eternally homeless exile—–because I often interact with a micro-and-macro mixed community much of my typical days and nights, e.g, racially mixed individuals AND groups.

    I just want that to be acknowledged while not being seen as dogma or social prescription foisted onto others, especially people like you, who don’t want as much.

    But unfortunately we live during a time in which such a position is reflexively presumed to be a covert activist stance.

  37. Of course this is what Trump is about. It’s not about Trump it’s about White America.

    The genie can not be put back into the bottle. There is too much history and too much hate and too much blood and too much fate.

    These are real events, we are being taken over by History.

    So Trump is the savior of the White Race? Even if just emblematically so? I think that’s giving him way too much credit. Or too much trouble to get into.

    I’ve said it before, but perhaps i’m not empathetic because I don’t think of whites as being degraded and having fallen from grace; rather, i think they’re so meta to anything redeeming to humanity, period, that talk that even hints otherwise is beyond the pale and nothing to take seriously. Perhaps their perceived loss of collective identity is because they’re so meta and instigative of human culture and distinction, period.

  38. Evidently no one thinks my remark about “Younger Abe Foxman with DSL” is funny.
    I think it’s funny, so I’ll amuse myself.


    +

    =

    OK, maybe it’s a stretch.

  39. So Trump is the savior of the White Race? Even if just emblematically so? I think that’s giving him way too much credit. Or too much trouble to get into.

    nikcrit, to put it bluntly, your reading comprehension is very weak.

    What i said in the quoted selection is that it is NOT about Trump, it is about white America. The genie is white identity.

    If you are not going to read my posts with attention, then do not quote them. That is common courtesy.

    You have this idea in your head, and everything you read you fit into that idea. What i said could not have been more clear, by the way.

    It is YOUR failure to understand the point. Your reading comprehension sucks.

    Contrast that with my response to your gobbledygook on the following thread, where i take the time to decipher your obscure language.

    Basically i am extending a courtesy to you – taking the time to read your posts, which are often obscure and sloppy – and you are not taking the time to read mine.

    Seriously. And then you would more frequently than any other poster, have the first and last word. You are let to get away with murder, here. I am not going to get into personal insults again, but your style invites them.

  40. So Trump is the savior of the White Race? Even if just emblematically so? I think that’s giving him way too much credit. Or too much trouble to get into.

    What i said was the exact opposite of this.

    It is unreasonable to expect anyone to read posts upthread – we are moving forward damnit! – but to have your point misrepresented entirely?

    I don’t think it’s that nikcrit is consciously operating in bad faith. He however can not read things clearly because the ideas in his head make too much noise.

    His participation here demonstrates that white and black can NOT communicate.

    My comments are direct and to-the-point, and there is little ambiguity in them. I hardly ever use sarcasm or irony, but nikcrit quotes them and takes the exact opposite meaning.

    Bad faith or just a thick skull. Those are the ONLY two explanations.

    Sorry trickin, you failed. This is the adults table. Well that may not be the case but let’s pretend that it is.

  41. This last exchange, between Suburban_elk and nikcrit, demonstrates that nikcrit is essentially a jew.

    Upthread i said he was “like a jew” and then sure enough, nikcrit follows up with the perfect demonstration of jew tactics.

    Basically misrepresenting an argument entirely and proceeding as if that makes his point.

    Funny how (my) intuition can be so sharp. Kudos to me.

    trickin, the the halfjew halfrican. He has no idea who he is, but his whole theme on this thread is gonna be about meta white identity, that white identity is blank and meta.

    So basically he is Abe Foxman, telling us that we have no identity. And all the while he is neither white nor black nor jew. Is that ironic or is it perfectly fitting.

  42. trickin don’t get to misrepresent what other people say, and then have the last word on it. Here is the quote that was misunderstood and or misrepresented:

    It’s something to see, a people come into existence.

    Frank Herbert had a similar line, and was a similar character in how he was messed around with vision and big dreams. At the conclusion of Dune, not the final scene, but in the battle leading up to it, when the Fremen’s weaker city-dwelling brethren, go up against the Emperor’s legions and take terrible casualties but they no longer care because they realize that they are a people.

    Of course this is what Trump is about. It’s not about Trump it’s about White America.

    The genie can not be put back into the bottle. There is too much history and too much hate and too much blood and too much fate.

    These are real events, we are being taken over by History.

  43. “Of course this is what Trump is about. It’s not about Trump it’s about White America.”

    That is the sentence that threw trickin off.

    Without going into a breakdown of the grammar, it is logically a little bit complex:

    What Trump is about: is that it is NOT about him, it is about white America.

    But that idea is presented straightforward and clear, but it does require a little bit of logic reasoning: what something is about, is what it is not about.

    Trump is a focal point of something else. To take from that sentence, that he is the “savior of the White Race” is the exact opposite meaning.

    Calling Trump the savior though, does beg the question of what is a savior. And perhaps trickin wants to suggest something along those lines. In which case i might would concede something, IF that point were to be made.

    As it stands however, the meaning of savior in contemporary comprehension is as an active force, as opposed to the expression of something collective.

  44. @elk
    Right. That sentence DID throw me off…. However, the rest of your criticism is a gross overreaction. It’s true that I am errant at times in reading the comments closely before responding. But that is true for other commenters here, too, and your comments are often excessively abstract; not as clear and concise as you like to contend.

    You can be very, very pretentious at times; the comment of mine in which you accuse me of the same was somewhat parodic and intentional. But your overwrought instances are not. And I also think it’s hilarious that you feel you’re in the position to freely and wildly criticize someone who’s written over 2500 newspaper articles and dozens of national magazine stories, while you often read like a spoiled dilletante running wild in your parents’ basement office.

    IN your last few comments above this one, you seem to be conceding as much, at least a little bit. Perhaps I was presumptuous, but I didn’t misrep your point to the extend you’re claiming.

  45. You can be very, very pretentious at times; the comment of mine in which you accuse me of the same was somewhat parodic and intentional. But your overwrought instances are not. And I also think it’s hilarious that you feel you’re in the position to freely and wildly criticize someone who’s written over 2500 newspaper articles and dozens of national magazine stories, while you often read like a spoiled dilletante running wild in your parents’ basement office.

    nikcrit, i put my writing up against yours anytime.

    If you want to put up something from your real world resume, go ahead – otherwise it is irrelevant.

    It is all about writing for the audience, and sometimes i write for myself, and so your criticism along that line is accepted.

    Due to the nature of this conversation being online and not in person, and that the feedback becomes removed and tenuous, the players tend to have too much fun in amusing themselves – i know i do.

    I am not writing my posts for nikcrit, though. I am writing for white people who are trying to figure out who they are.

    THEIR criticisms of my points would be more concerning. nikcrit i EXPECT that you will not understand.

    That sounds like a cheap shot, because there is no reply to it – but it is true. I am not writing for nikcrit.

    Often enough he does motivate, and i have acknowledged that before.

    I am writing for those who get my point. My efforts to communicate with black people are not worth it (for the most part). And this conversation with nikcrit is another example of that.

    However, it is not for me to decide who has a relevant voice.

  46. You can be very, very pretentious at times

    I don’t think that it is pretentious, nikcrit.

    Perhaps nikcrit is unable to appreciate the perspective of a white man.

    He often seems unsympathetic to his struggles.

    However, talk about pretentious – how in the world does he allot to himself the empathetic capacity to grasp the perspective of another race?

    nikcrit repeatedly characterizes the white perspective as meta and blank, and while there is something to that – what he is essentially describing is HIS grasp of the white perspective.

    The whole point of this blog (sorry to presume, PA, but allow me to make my point here) is to get something going on and beyond that blank meta perspective. To build something substantial: an Intentional Superstructure.

    What is pretentious is for nikcrit to think that he is qualified to participate.

  47. Ok. fine. I’m not interested in personal criticisms either. And quite honestly, i enjoy a lot of your commenting and feel genuinely compelled to respond. But every now and then some point of contention arises that brings out some core disagreement between us. I accept that. No need for an extended personally reactive argument instigated from either side.

    Perhaps ’emblematic’ of a ‘white savior’ didn’t do your position justice at all —- but I sincerely wasn’t trying to be all-knowing and all-encompassing there; IMO, you’re position on the matter is not sullened by my fleeting-but-errant description. Not to make light of our differences, but i don’t see the deep racial divide between us that you speak of, though I’ll try to be more mindful of that in the future.

    In any case, i’m intrigued by all the ‘morning-after’ spin and deconstruction of the canceled Trump rally in Chicago yesterday; some media folk i know said things were more hectic than was depicted based on metrics like how many disorderly contact ordinance violations were handed out, etc…… it seems this one event has turned the discussion to another corner and it doesn’t seeem to have hurt Trump at all.

    I think on a psychological level, his candidacy is creating a venting of a lot of pent-up race emotion; that is a good thing; he is creating a third-party block, a sort-of American-ized National Front.

  48. “Due to the nature of this conversation being online and not in person, and that the feedback becomes removed and tenuous, the players tend to have too much fun in amusing themselves – i know i do.”

    Yes. Thank you. I wholeheartedly agree…..Look, before this gets too deathly serious and absurd, I’ll concede. It’s just a moment of pent-up frustration…. I’m also embarrassed over the fact that i impulsively tried to pull rank a few comments up —— as if the fruits of my shacking up with Soul Asylum at The Drake in my late 20s has any relevance to what i’m saying and contending now. Lolzz….

    In any case, elk: i believe in what i said: i get annoyed by you but i also genuinely ‘like’ or ‘am compelled to respond to’ your comments often-times.

    I’m just-a-gonna proceed and let the chips fall where they may..

  49. his very being and behavior validating certain White masculine virtues that had been devalued for decades: masculine charm, assertiveness, dominance, truth-telling, forthrightness, fighting spirit, and loyalty — to his friends, and to us.

    Masculine virtues like insulting a war hero whilst being a draft dodger? Ridiculing a disabled man? Crude references to Megan Kelly’s menstrual cycles?

    Look, this guy is the PT Barnum of presidential candidates and he has you suckered. Truth telling? Haha! He doesn’t even know what he’s saying half the time. He just repeats the same slogans over and over. “We are gonna make some great deals! We are gonna make jobs like you won’t believe. Millions and millions and millions of jobs. And we are gonna build a wall… ect..’
    This is a guy who has made his living ripping people off so he knows the game, from Casinos, to Trump University to New York real estate.
    And most most frighteningly of all, this is a man who could potentially have his hands on the worlds largest nuclear arsenal and could destroy the world 7 times over. Could you imagine? I mean he seems to me like the type of guy who would drop a nuke on Putin for making fun of his hair. (Speaking of his hair— is that not the combover to end all combovers? How does he get it to look like that? I’ve spent an inordinate amount of time studying the topography of his hair on google image searches. I still haven’t quite figured it out but it is a very complex structure to be sure. I can only conclude that it requires a 24/7 team of stylists to maintain.)

    By this time you have labeled me a “cuckservative” which is fine because I am actually in favor of a lot of the establishment policies. I did support Kasich monetarily and with my vote in Michigan but it looks like will be diverting my support towards Rubio… I’m with him on student loans and entitlement reform, which are the 2 major issues affecting me.

  50. This is a guy who has made his living ripping people off so he knows the game, from Casinos, to Trump University to New York real estate.

    Is it “ripping people off” when they are two adults willingly entering into a contract?

    Megyn Kelly and John McCain? – fuck em.

    Megyn Kelly got her comeuppance. Referencing her menstrual was crude, but so what jokes usually are. Someone might say such a tone is unbefitting the office, but hey it’s just the campaign trail, and this is America, and the audience loves it. A candidate has to play to the crowd. Someone like John Kerry (now there is a head of hair) looked and acted the part of the serious man, but was out of his depth.

    McCain was in Viet Nam and got caught. That is the simple summation. Viet Nam was pretty divisive. I think it was crazy to send kids over there to “go and kill the Yellow man.”

    Those are all simply different takes on things; but this is in error,

    he seems to me like the type of guy who would drop a nuke on Putin for making fun of his hair.

    Trump is the one candidate who was been most reasonable regarding Putin. That has been a well known factor in the campaign. In one of the previous debates the OTHER candidates were saying stupid things about antagonizing Russia and Putin; Trump has consistently been the voice of sanity on that. So where are you getting your information?

  51. Truth telling? Haha! He doesn’t even know what he’s saying half the time. He just repeats the same slogans over and over. “We are gonna make some great deals! We are gonna make jobs like you won’t believe. Millions and millions and millions of jobs. And we are gonna build a wall… ect..’

    Those general statements are Trump’s executive style: they are broad proclamations rather than policy details.

    And frankly, such style and proclamations are more appropriate to the executive office than policy details, which SHOULD be the domain of underlings and wonks.

    It is a mark against our political process that the candidates have developed the habit of acting the policy wonk to impress … the voters? Well it turns out the voters are not impressed with such wonkery anyways, and so engaging in it is not only inappropriate (for an aspiring leader) it is also tone deaf to what people want – and NEED.

    The fact that candidates such as especially Rubio think that reciting a ten-point-plan is the way to impress anyone is just weird. That is NOT how an executive rolls.

    Somewhat relatedly was the meme six or eight years ago, before everyone knew better, that Obama was used to being the “smartest guy in the room” and that was a big part of his leadership strategy, and it was somehow causing some difficulties. The notion that the president is or ought to be the “smartest guy in the room” indicates a critical misunderstanding of the nature of society and its problems.

    There are not really rational solutions to our social problem; but more to the point – to the extent that there are (rational solutions), they are beyond the capacity of even the very smartest person to solve. The best approaches to our complex social problems, require a TEAM and that team needs leadership and guidance. That is the role of the executive, and not to be the smartest guy in the room, but to be the best leader.

  52. All that said, i would agree that making money on casinos is reprehensible, and a mark against anyone. On the other hand, it is a competitive world and we don’t necessarily have a choice.

    The entire structure of the economy is based upon extracting and deploying the resources of the earth. Everyone who gets dollars, is involved in that.

    Part of the same Paradox of Success, that might be used against Trump on an appeal to the ethical feelings of reasonable and peaceful people, would be his use of eminent domain to kick people out of their houses.

    The case can be made for eminent domain but the case for it was made and then expanded to make way for casinos?

    Eminent domain would have its place in a sane society, but in this society it is abused and anyone taking advantage of it ought to be questioned. But it gets back to those paradoxical game theory problems of progress: SOMEONE IS going to profit. He who takes advantage, has advantage.

  53. “And frankly, such style and proclamations are more appropriate to the executive office than policy details, which SHOULD be the domain of underlings and wonks.

    It is a mark against our political process that the candidates have developed the habit of acting the policy wonk to impress “

    I agreee and have always felt it was absurd the way candidates would cite policy minutiae to validate themselves. No, it’s how well and savvy you delegate that makes for presidential timber.
    My questions with Trump have nothing to do with his lack of expertise or his general vulgarities; i actually like those aspects of him. it’s his vainglory that causes concern. He can’t control it; you see instances of it being threatened and he becomes a hysterical six-year-old, which actually sabotages all those p.c.-indifferent alpha-isms of his that many alt-righters are refreshed by.

  54. Pingback: The Anti-Racist Clown Show in Warsaw – PA

  55. Pingback: 100th Post – PA

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s