What Are Liberals So Afraid Of?

The local public radio classical music station has excellent programming and good hosts, as they call their DJs. They had a fundraising drive recently. Yes, I kept the station on because the banter was engaging, and doing so learned that Erik Satie’s Trois Gymnopedies were revolutionary despite their simplicity because there is no progression in those pieces.

Then something made me raise an eyebrow — a caller pledges a generous sum and compliments the station’s hosts for keeping the listeners’ spirits high “through the frightening times we now live in.” The hostess concurred with the obvious reference to The God Emperor. She added that they strive to be an oasis of peace for their listeners, recalling how the station continued playing great classical music through the shock of 9/11. Yes, she compared that calamity to Trump’s presidency.

To flip perspectives yes, I would consider a Hillary Clinton presidency a bigger disaster than 9/11. But I can also explain why, in simple words: her administration would put the globalists in a position from which they are free to destroy us through mass immigration and free trade. They would level mankind down to its most stupid, blank-eyed third world common denominator and acid-bathe everything I value of all that’s good and beautiful.

So, can a liberal similarly explain why the presidency of Donald Trump is more frightening than a terrorist attack? Are liberals afraid of the same thing I am — globalism — except that they are working with different premises than I am, in ascribing its destructiveness to the spirit of nationalism? Or to ask this question differently, why would a patrician custodian of high culture be afraid of the regeneration of Western nations that the past four administrations had made a dire necessity of and that Trump’s presidency promises to deliver? This isn’t about one radio host at this point, but an entire class of liberal Whites.

Let’s look at twelve possible reasons for their fear of Donald Trump.

One: liberals, regardless of their class or intelligence, are herd animals. Imagine antelopes taunting a lion (to take a bit of liberty with this metaphor). They can’t help it, it’s what they do. In the wake of the Trumpenslide, it is dawning on them that the big, fleshy beast they’ve been biting and prodding all that time is now awake and is about shred them to pieces.

“The Dems have a look of rabbits that are discovering they aren’t free, independent agents…they are food.” — commenter at Vox Popoli

Two: worries about funding cuts. The liberal’s worldview is a mirror image of mine, in that we both divide the world into the light of civilization and the darkness of barbarism, but we point to different sources of barbarism. To contrast our perspectives: I believe that our civilization, my descendants’ secure place in it and their identity, as well as our nations’ cultural output, relies on the integrity of organic social pyramids with our own criminal, labor, middle, and upper classes. But while my view is expansive, accommodating of both chaos and order, populist above all (the rose needs a robust, healthy soil to bloom) the liberal’s vision is elitist and claustrophobic.

His world is a perpetual night, with light-bearing government standing as sentry between security and savagery — while to me, the savage sleeps in each of us. And more on-point in the present day, the savage arrives from the global south by land, air and sea. Look at Paris.

Drawn to their own conception of light, liberals seek out others like themselves who are elect, and recognize them by their specific markers of status, such as a proper type of education or cultural signalling. That is how liberals confirm that the person in question has a soul. They are repulsed by what they regard as their lesser compatriots, whom they consider subhuman and depressing. And for modern American liberals, the federal government and its power to hold its boot on the subhumans’ necks is the vehicle through which they — the elect — are safe. So what I am getting at, is that the liberal considers any talk of defunding federal programs an attack on the government itself and as such, an attack on the very light of civilization.

Three: all change is scary. Four: Jewish paranoia. I don’t think that the radio station’s hosts are Jews but liberals have appropriated their prejudices. (This post is about White liberals, exclusive of Jews). Five: they aren’t really afraid; they are playing to the anxieties of their donor base, which takes us back to the original question: what are their supporters so fearful of? Six: they believe all that bullshit about leftists being the nice underdogs.

Seven: like everyone in the West, they feel that something is very wrong. But unlike those of us who want to confront the problem, liberals are appeasement-oriented. Whomever they seek to appease at any given moment — placate any individuals or entities that comprise the patron-client matrix of neoliberalism — they look with horror upon Trump and the Alt-Right’s aggressive challenge to these seemingly omnipotent forces. Liberals would rather let the wolves pace about so long as we don’t give them a reason to bite, even as the animals grow bolder and meaner with each passing year.

Eight: fear of chaos, even as they play that game with us. This is another one that merits a fuller explanation. Do you believe that a race has its destiny? If so, then ours is to build and destroy, at turns. Trainspotter explains this in a long comment that I featured in my earlier post about our love of freedom:

The European soul craves more; it needs more. If necessary, it will upend and destroy the world to get that “more.” It will even destroy itself.

We’ve near-destroyed our whole world. And this brings us to an enigmatic vision of our great race. At some level liberals intuit the slow swing of the eros-thanatos pendulum because for the past seventy years, they’ve done the wrecking. The immediate reason for their fear is that for them, the big questions had been settled and the pendulum may now rest. Racism is bad, women are more equal, religion is best castrated unless it’s Islam, and White men are beasts of burden. I can appreciate the satisfaction that the liberal feels at this point, after almost a century of winning. He has imposed the victor’s non-negotiable terms, dictating a tyranny of his ideals. But there is stasis in tyranny, and that is what the liberal dreads. Which brings me to something MGE recently wrote:

trump is a chaos agent and I love it. […] white people need a bit of chaos to thrive. our allergy to stasis compels us to kick over the apple cart every now and then

Especially when we are harnessed to the apple cart from which everyone but us is grabbing the fruits.

To continue with this lengthy look at #8, allow me a tangent in which I will encapsulate the apex liberal ideal in one anecdote. A while back, a young self-described feminist is hanging out nearby. In earshot, a pleasant older woman is having a conversation with someone else about her work as an engineer. Overhearing them, the young feminist is beaming, vicariously absorbing the rays of her ideal incarnate. Me being me, I start thinking: What is so great about female engineers? I don’t mean this in a contrarian or spiteful sense; what I’m asking is, where does a world in which women are engineers lead and why would someone support that aspiration? The utilitarian calculation is clear enough to me: allowing due acceptance of peoples’ individual choices, women engineers are a negative at both micro- and macro-levels of society. They are not going to make any innovations in their fields because women don’t do that. Their intelligence could have been better passed on to their children and the bigger families that they could have had instead. A man supporting a family could have had her job and being an extra unit of labor supply, she’s depressing wages for all male engineers. But the young feminist likes a world in which women walk on air. The question remains: why?

Now, I certainly understand that we all like a lot of things for their intrinsic value, whether or not their first-causes are socially constructive. For example, some of us have slept with girls our age in our early twenties, making them worse for the men who ended up marrying them. Stealing is liberation, freedom’s depraved sister.

Not having been a saint, I am aware of my own corruption. But the liberal (a feminist in this case but this extends to all of them) does not understand net-loss. The liberal does not understand the violence against the West she supports by promoting female careerism, however passively, because she wants to bask in the gratification of a woman defying nature’s and history’s iron laws concerning the role of the female. Rebelling against laws feels like liberation, and feminism is one of the ways in which the liberal has been kicking over the apple cart.

Liberals want to keep the world in which female engineers exist as an end in itself. Even if the gorging on our social capital continues until the grain stores run empty. And this refusal to let go of liberalism is not limited to feminist advocacy. They want the world and they want it now. The liberated women, the intoxication of throwing everything away — our best of everything, our temperate lands, our beautiful genes — the orgy and the rape.

And late into the night on November 8th, chill wind hit their faces just as consummation was in reach: a recognition that we, the long-suffering and now wide-awake men of the West, have hated every single fucking moment of their joy, of having been their slaves. White man lives free or dies, and it’s dawned on us that we want to live. Liberals are terrified of our awakening because now it’s our turn.

Nine, and this is related to the previous: no more free stuff, which is strip-mined from the social capital of others. Liberalism is like nuclear fission in that its application releases and harnesses potential energy by breaking the structural integrity of an existing system, leaving behind radioactive waste. This works on global levels such as when George Soros destabilizes countries and profits on their downfall, as well as on street levels when protected-class aliens make themselves at home in our public space. The free stuff model has so many incarnations. Fat girls used to be few and they had to work on their personalities. Now they are everywhere and are bombarded with male attention, all of that to the detriment of healthy male-female dynamics. So in essence, what liberals across the spectrum might be afraid of, as the gods of copybook headings return, is the end of the feast.

Ten: they are afraid that their beliefs have been false all along. That they believed in the fantasy that man can transcend his material limits and not have to come back down.

Eleven: deportations, cleansing, bloodshed. A successful reconquista would objectively be good for Whites across the ideological spectrum for obvious reasons. (If those reasons are not obvious to some: the sole alternative to White supremacy in our own countries is White genocide, and with it, no more classical music). But the imagery of reclaiming our lands is scary because where wood is chopped, there fly splinters. And more than one liberal may be called to account for his role in race-replacement.

And twelve: the fight to the death. Members of the striver class pick up on the anxieties of the principal actors of globalism who know that if they regain power, they’ll have to break us. And they know that we know that they know. The globalist and the nationalist, two killers wrestling over one gun. Only one of us will see the next day. And having captured the presidency of the United States and the cultural momentum, we may yet win. Our ideas are the ones whose time has come, theirs are exhausted. Scores will be settled over all that they’ve ruined if we are clear-headed enough to reestablish a future for our posterity.

Advertisements

168 thoughts on “What Are Liberals So Afraid Of?

  1. Let’s look at twelve possible reasons for their fear of Donald Trump.

    lol “twelve reasons” yes I think you hit the nail on the head.

  2. #13. Effeminates/martriachals/passives just always need to have something to bitch about or their day isn’t complete.

  3. “through the frightening times we now live in.”

    It’s interesting that my wife and I just had a conversation about this sort of thing. We were recently visiting relatives, whom we really like, but they are cardboard-cutout libs who literally made remarks almost identically-verbatim to the above, about the Trump administration being “scary stuff”.

    On the drive home my wife and I were trying to figure out WHY people say things like this. I suggested that a motivator of people like my relatives is *weakness*. A dominant characteristic of these people is a lack of resolve to stand up for what’s right, invariably framed by themselves as “tolerance” or “compassion”.

    I further argued that to the extent that the Trump admin is “scary”, what’s scary are the circumstances that led to Trumpism in the first place.

  4. #1 – One: liberals, regardless of their class or intelligence, are herd animals.

    A good portion of the liberal psyche is just not wanting to say “no” to anyone, or anything. That makes you a meanie.

  5. ” The globalist and the nationalist, two killers wrestling over one gun. Only one of us will see the next day. And having captured the presidency of the United States and the cultural momentum, we may yet win. Our ideas are the ones whose time has come, theirs are exhausted. Scores will be settled over all that they’ve ruined if we are clear-headed enough to reestablish a future for our posterity.”

    I liked the gist of your entire essay; FWIW, i thought it was among your finest yet.

    But I disagree or, better, would make slight amendment with your above denouement near the end of your essay.

    The ideological standoff you describe above is where I think the ideas and intermittent utterances of Bannon come in; he has hinted at the coming ‘amalgamation’ I’ve suggested in previous comments. So, no, I don’t fully sign on to “our ideas are the one whose time has come, theirs are exhausted’ in a literal sense. Perhaps since much of your personal passion comes from being a deeply intense incarnate (rather than a perceptually unique outlier) you can’t clearly or presciently see synthesis in the making. But the dispassionate visionaries on each side do. So perhaps it’s wise to pay particular attention to Bannon; his boss surely believes he’s worthy of a especially vaunted and privileged perch.

  6. Liberals are nice as long as they get their way. I don’t see it as weakness, they want to dominate us.

  7. The impression I get, is that liberals see themselves as the ruling class and the rest of us better fall in line.

  8. One of the liberal women I know is very quick to classify people. Not surprisingly, all the people she likes are liberals. I tend to not distinguish as much between people. Most people are just okay with me. It might be a quick and easy way for her to determine who she is going to get along with better.

  9. Pingback: What Are Liberals So Afraid Of? | Reaction Times

  10. I generally like liberals. They are often intelligent and interested in the same things I am. I just don’t always get the impression they like me.

  11. One of the liberal women I know is very quick to classify people. Not surprisingly, all the people she likes are liberals.

    From the days of Genesis it’s always been the case that there’s great power in being able to name things or people, thus liberals love to label. But liberals are the ones obsessed with race and ethnic divisions now, not Trump.

  12. edit: in my above comment directed at PA, in which I said “deeply intense incarnate “, I meant to say “deeply intense PARTISAN incarnate.”

    Left as is, it sort of comes off as an insult. That was not my intention.

  13. I further argued that to the extent that the Trump admin is “scary”, what’s scary are the circumstances that led to Trumpism in the first place.

    That take on it sounds right to me.

    These are scary times. That is way that things feel.

    In the suburbs around here, so many have retreated into their own private space that when you go out to the parks and wherever, it can be desolate, and scary.

    And quite frankly it is. Being out (alone) in the parkland woods, it is only a matter of time until “gangs” gangs start making those suburban woodland parks their territory.

    If things continue to progress along current trends, namely more population density and more of a mixed population, it is inevitable those quite peaceful woodland parks will be habituated by non-white teenagers. Who are the definition of scary.

    It was a stand-by joke, used mercilessly to mock senior citizens and their fear of teenagers. Grampa Simpson, neglected old man at the nursing home, was afraid of teenagers.

    But the joke is on us, if we mock those fears, because look how it has turned out. Oh the irony.

    Not that it needs to be pointed out, but Grampa Simpsons fears may have been unreasonable, because white teenagers might at worst give him a hard time. But the shit that goes on these day, joggers and babies in carriages get shot in the face by black schizos and monkey-brain teenagers.

  14. Liberals would rather let the wolves to pace about, so long as we don’t give them a reason to bite, even as the animals grow bolder and meaner with each passing year.

    That is the r and K selection thing, which some have criticized by being over-utilized as an explanation.

    But it goes a long way in explaining people’s, and in this context, liberals’ mentality and behavior.

    It is the old fight versus flight dichotomy. Except the option of fleeing is modified into a sort of submission.

  15. And twelve: the fight to the death. Members of the striver class pick up on the anxieties of the principal actors of globalism who know that if they regain power, they’ll have to break us. And they know that we know that they know. The globalist and the nationalist, two killers wrestling over one gun.

    This is the most contentious part, that a lot of people, including most liberals and cuckservatives, will not want to accept: that it is a fight for which there is no compromise.

    The reason that no compromise exists, is that we are forced to share the same living space.

    I would ask liberals and those who are opposed to explicit White interests and representation, to put forth what would be their idea of a compromise.

    I imagine it would be simply a sort of civic nationalism … but maybe someone wants to come up with something else.

  16. Civic nationalism cannot work, if there are any race groups within its polity, who would assert their own interests primarily.

    I think that in libertarian lala land, it might could work, if absolutely everyone were to forego completely their racial and ethnic interests.

    But that forbearance would have to extend down to family networks, or else those family networks would be the new clans and then the new tribes, etc.

    Civic nationalism in its current form ala the Trump speech to Congress the other day, is a charade. So the blacks and the jews are special, but otherwise we are all Americans?

    Well us whitey Americans don’t have a special status. That is not fair, and we are at a disadvantage.

    Their comeback is that the other eleven months of the year belong to us.

    Feels like we have been over this before …

  17. Civic nationalism cannot work,

    No type of nationalism can work with those who are genetic tribals at their core.

  18. This is a great post I’m going to digest more later, but as a sort of flash-forward let me offer a data point I just discovered in the past hour or so: mainstream media outlets are starting to run with a “Seth Rich WAS murdered” narrative–“BY THE RUSSIANS!” lolzoz

    It looks like things are getting VERY close. For what it’s worth, I dispatched a cheery missive to the girls at the WH emailroom in support of Jeff Sessions and expressing my readiness for Hillary’s prosecution.

  19. If you know your death is not the end then how you fight makes all the difference in the after-world.

    If you know your death to be a total annihilation then your inclination to fight is always and never, simultaneously.

  20. The globalists are radical autonomists who use “liberal” ideology against liberals and nationalists alike.

    The nationalists will not recognize the GIVEN nature of “nationalism” at some degree or another everywhere and throughout recorded time.

    The triangulating war is amongst white Supremacists, every degree of “liberal” (from anti-nationalist to nationalist) and a global “default elite” of radical autonomists.

    The critical difference being that wS does not need and will not acquire “puppets” and so the question of Mastery takes on a whole other interpretation.

  21. Point 5 is so important. The (((elite))) are small in number so rely on weak-willed and malleable shabbos goy. It’s never said, still less written, what the correct views are burt I’m sure Pelosi and Porky Pickles know whose shekels they are jumping thru hoops for. Great post

  22. “Dailymail reporting that Valerie Jarrett has moved in with the Obamas”

    So she’s MOVING IN with them. Nothing weird about that…

  23. Liberals would rather let the wolves to pace about, so long as we don’t give them a reason to bite, even as the animals grow bolder and meaner with each passing year.

    I missed this the first time. It’s essentially a more eloquent phrasing of what I was saying, and describes my relatives to a “T”. The latest thing going on with my relatives is their acceptance and awkward endorsement of their niece’s recent transgender “transition” to the opposite sex. You can tell they’re not quite comfortable with it but they’re too weak to stand up against it. They lack any frame of reference to suggest they should be anything other than meekly accepting of these wolves.

  24. If those reasons are not obvious to some: the sole alternative to White supremacy in our own countries is White genocide, and with it, no more classical music

    Some? At most, 1% of white people are aware of that reality.

    For example, some of us have slept with girls our age in our early twenties, making them worse for the men who ended up marrying them.

    Would have been great if you gave us readers the reasons of those women’s… worsening.

    The paragraph on female engineers brings us back to the 18th century. That is, among other things, when a lot of the best music written in the history of the world was composed. It is also when words like “depraved” and “corrupted” where used, in connection with sexual attitudes at least.

    Feminism is an ideology. As such, it is hypocritical, dogmatic, relies heavily on doublethink, has will-for-dominance as its main motor, and genuinely improving anything, including the lives of any of its devotees, isn’t among its actual goals.
    The pathetic aspect of feminism is, it wants many more female engineers than there would be naturally and based on actual abilities.
    I can attest to the negative effect women have on many high-culture environments and fields (from university courses to research departments to much else).

    That’s because those women shouldn’t be there: others with proper skills, probably men, should be there.
    That’s not because women shouldn’t be there. It’s two totally different things. I’ll endorse the first every day, but the second is obscurantist and anti-civilization.

    I agree that there’s no third way between white self-rule and white submission, but it can’t be agreed that there is no third way between bullying and yoking women.

    Why oppose feminism with manism, instead of advocating for a meritocratic, gender-wise unbiased society? It can be achieved. Women privilege is the problem, not women dignity.

    1, maybe 2 out of ten women who are lecturers in university, scientists, CEOs and board members of multinational, magazine editors, book writers, should keep being where they are. It’s what they are born for. Their being where they are would be one of the many tokens of our beautiful (to borrow your word) civilization and genetic legacy.
    The other 8 or 9 should be made to handle tasks and jobs right for their abilities and features (they should stop degrading university, to begin with).

    Meanwhile, every human being should be free to eat bananas however it does come natural to them. There’s nothing to “correct” there; or is it?!
    But homosexuals adopting and raising children? No way. Even this being an object of debate is a sign of cultural hard decay; actually, as we know, it’s being legalised all over the West.

    Why counter extremism with extremism?
    It’s oddness advertised and inculcated as normality and coolness what wrecks the ship.
    The fact that partially deviant, original people (your “defectives”) exist and live as their nature drives them to, that can be no harm to anybody: they’re, or we are, numerically light; a niche.
    Many geniuses and creatives are found among them; many who composed our matchless music, many of our matchless writers… you’d have willed to “correct” them for sure, but an important element that brought the West above all else was its tolerance of particularity and weirdness.

    Won’t be a random fact that other peoples, even of higher average IQ, but far more conformist, have invented and created nothing in comparison.

    I agree with you about the problems, but not about their origin and the right remedies.

    This kind of attitude

    “The Dems have a look of rabbits that are discovering they aren’t free, independent agents…they are food.” — commenter at Vox Popoli

    will keep consistently alienating a fair 90% of the smarter people from the political and cultural right, and solve no problem.

    And you would never see anything like that on a Jewish blog/forum (let alone any “gamma disparaging/ridiculing”).
    Brains are the new guns. I’ve seen too many white youth proud of their ignorance of late, but I’ve never seen a Jew proud of not knowing something I knew. In fact, the next time we’ll meet, I’ll clearly see that after our chat they researched the topic they didn’t know this or that detail about last time we talked.
    Time to start learning from them, I guess?

    Although I have been touching here in a most superficial way on what are no more than tertiary sexual characters, I wish to point out an application of my conclusions to pedagogy. I am convinced that the more these views are understood the more certainly will they lead to an individual treatment in education. At the present time shoemakers, who make shoes to measure, deal more rationally with individuals than our teachers and schoolmasters in their application of moral principles. At present the sexually intermediate forms of individuals (especially on the female side) are treated exactly as if they were good examples of the ideal male or female types. There is wanted an “orthopaedic” treatment of the soul instead of the torture caused by the application of ready-made conventional shapes. The present system stamps out much that is original, uproots much that is truly natural, and distorts much into artificial and unnatural forms. From time immemorial there have been only two systems of education; one for those who come into the world designated by one set of characters as males, and another for those who are similarly assumed to be females. Almost at once the “boys” and the “girls” are dressed differently, learn to play different games, go through different courses of instruction, the girls being put to stitching and so forth. {58} The intermediate individuals are placed at a great disadvantage. And yet the instincts natural to their condition reveal themselves quickly enough, often even before puberty. There are boys who like to play with dolls, who learn to knit and sew with their sisters, and who are pleased to be given girls’ names. There are girls who delight in the noisier sports of their brothers, and who make chums and playmates of them. After puberty, there is a still stronger display of the innate differences. Manlike women wear their hair short, affect manly dress, study, drink, smoke, are fond of mountaineering, or devote themselves passionately to sport. Womanish men grow their hair long, wear corsets, are experts in the toilet devices of women, and show the greatest readiness to become friendly and intimate with them, preferring their society to that of men.

  25. I wonder if Juan’s crazy ex girlfriend is Jewish.

    We don’t even know that she’s “crazy” at all, she probably just dumped him.

  26. PA, I think #10 is the biggest one of all. It touches on what CH wrote awhile back, that their entire life existence and what they believed is proving to be one giant lie that they all held so close to their hearts. That’s hard to come to terms with and a reason why they’re so angry. They feel like a scorned lover, who took to heart the sweet nothings of their global lotharios.

  27. Until one recognizes “liberal-ism” as a perpetuating self-annihilation then one cannot perfectly assess the “liberal,” i.e., he who desires total annihilation.

    Furthermore, there is no “nationalism” — socialist, ethnic, civic, white — which is sufficiently adequate to answer the call in a psychological war against absolute white (S)upremacy. The organic underpinning to any possible nation is within its (S)upremacists. MRKA, circa 2017, is a place of anti-white (S)upremacists… A literal anti-white nation. Now rework the equation of what nationalism in America REALLY MEMES.

    “It” is white Supremacy… And the very thing ALL THE RADICAL “liberals” TELL US that they fear, loathe and hate with murderous intent.

    And jew no who says it about “it” the most?

    The psychoptic war is so incredibly primitive. It’s a startling epiphany.

  28. There is no “greater freedom” than a will towards Total Annihilation EXACTLY because such concept is so self-evidently false… UNLESS… There is no self. Final Liberation is self-annihilation.

    High IQ “jewhites” ENFORCE this prophetizing Narrative…

    Why, you ask?

    And so answer your question, high IQ “white” male?

  29. Five: they aren’t really afraid; they are playing to the anxieties of their donor base, which takes us back to the original question: what are their supporters so fearful of?

    –Has anybody thought of doing a write-in campaign against, say, the SPLC? Like flood them with half a million “f**k yes I hate you, you criminal Jew supremacist” type of stuff.

    I mean we DO hate that little golem: and all they serve is to “identify” everyone they don’t like as a “hater”. It’s an absolutely ridiculous racket. I can remember in college being utterly befuddled as to what the SPLC even WAS. How did some private organization get to “say” what was an objectionable group? It wasn’t like they were Johns Hopkins talking about new viruses or something.

    Anyway it would be fun, but moreover I really thing Jews deserve to “eat it” when it comes to all the anti-ism they fret about. Let Chuck Schumer’s mailbox groan with the righteous rage of all those who will ship him off to hog the camera as a kibbutzim superintendent in the Zionist People’s Republic.

  30. nikcrit,

    Żywiec, Okocim, and Tyskie are the Bud, Coors, & Miller of Polish beer. Overall they are fine examples of the Euro Pale Lager style.

    However, there are many more Polish breweries and beer styles. Polish Baltic Porter is one that is held in especially high regard.

    I hope to spend a portion of 2018 in Poland. During that time, I plan to sample many of the local beers and I will certainly report back!

  31. “Polish Baltic Porter”

    I’ll try to track this down; thanks LOTHP. I find that as long as you fast diligently from time to time and follow through with the workout regimen(s) uniquely appropriate to you, one can enjoy the best foods/beers/etc unapologetically — they’ll probably actually improve your health if you’re doing things right. And this, in my candid estimation, is especially the case when it comes to parsing the plethora of fire-water that the earth’s components miraculously churn out for our enjoyment. Enjoy the weekend, men.

  32. — yes I think you hit the nail on the head. (Laguna Beach Fogey)

    Thanks!

    — A dominant characteristic of these people is a lack of resolve to stand up for what’s right, invariably framed by themselves as “tolerance” or “compassion”. (SJ, Esquire)

    Its bizarre how “tolerance” has become pushed as a virtue.

    — I liked the gist of your entire essay; FWIW, i thought it was among your finest yet. (nikcrit)

    A sincere thank you.

    — Liberals are nice as long as they get their way. I don’t see it as weakness, they want to dominate us. (Lara)

    Some of them are also shit-testing us. Either way, for them it’s about power rather than truth, which is why they are so comfortable with the lies and internal contradictions.

    — That is the r and K selection thing, which some have criticized by being over-utilized as an explanation. // But it goes a long way in explaining people’s, and in this context, liberals’ mentality and behavior. (Suburban_elk)

    One can’t dismiss Anonymous Conservative’s model.

    — So the blacks and the jews are special, but otherwise we are all Americans? (Elk)

    I got angry reading that. Civic nationalism is a transitional attitude. Unsustainable.

    — If you know your death is not the end then how you fight makes all the difference in the after-world. (Thordaddy)

    One has to either agree or disagree with the belief behind this statement. There is no middle ground. Thanks for an important reminder, TD. You are right in one big way: everything matters.

    — PA, I think #10 is the biggest one of all. (mendo)

    One would think that for a significant number of people, there’d be release in “truth shall set you free.” And yet…

    — Great post (Sir Charles Pipkins)

    Thank you sir!

    — At some point the alt right needs to be more critical of Bush for his 1990 immigration act. (Camlost)

    GHWB’s term has gotten relegated to a footnote in popular perception, but that is exactly when globalism became powerful. There is no doubt that Bush Sr. is sitting on some mindblowing secrets.

    — [long comment] (Your Favourite Gamma)

    I’ll come back to your comment later. A lot there to think over.

    — This was an excellent read. I enjoyed it a lot. Please keep up the good work! (Wynn Lloyd)

    Thank you!

    — MGE, Camlost: LOL about the tweets

    — Lucius Somesuch, Peterike: that haircut story… barforama. Sad!

    — Nikcrit, Lothar, Each Pond Gone: here are Beer Advocate reviews of Żywiec Baltic Porter. At least one store in my area sells it but I haven’t had it yet. It has 9.5% ABV.

    https://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/623/1901/

  33. Re: 9.5% ABV

    That must be the home country mix and tally because my cans say 5.9% alcohol.

    Boo!

    But it tastes great; love those clear but strong pilsners. American beers are a fukin’ embarrassment!

  34. Oh, my bad. You were talking about some other brew. ..,…(cue Jerry Lee Lewis’ ” What Made Milwaukee Famous Has Made a Fool Out of Me.”…Belch!

  35. Zywiec Baltic Porter was available, before it would get bought out, in half-liter bottles for 3 bux apiece at the local high-end.

    At 9.5 per cent,

    One 500 mL bottle is 16.9 ounces * .095 = 1.6 oz of alcohol

    Per convention, one drink is 0.6 ounces of alcohol, so one of those bottles contains 2-and-2/3 drinks.

    Two of those bottles contains 5-and-1/3 drinks, three would contain 8 …

    By way of contest, a standard Coors is 5% so one 12 oz can is exactly one drink.

  36. Jerry Lee Lewis had the “effortless” musicianship that mere mortals can only look upon and sigh. Plus the giant voice.

    Back when celebrities were pulled from a pool of real people. The good old days.

  37. I have a comment on shit-lib faces and the nature of such as an AR meme:

    A strong jaw does NOT a non-shitlib face, make. For example,

    Massive jaw + lifetime of Cringe = Mitt Romney

    Does that make the point, or does it need elaboration?

    In the AR and the manosphere, there is a fixation on T-levels, and it takes a borderline personality to take issue with that, but the point is, T-levels and their value and utility have to be considered within the framework of group level competitive fitness aka multi-level evolution, as Eddie Boy Wilson calls it.

    In other words, the advantage of higher T-levels is evaluated independently for its utility within the group, as compared for its contribution toward the group’s overall fitness.

    Everyone having higher T-levels can be a disadvantage for the group as a whole.

    It is an idea that is simple and complex at the same time, and I am may not be conveying it with perfect accuracy, but you get the picture.

  38. Somewhat docile personalities and restrained behavior have been selected for in White populations, but now in the multi-race environment, they seem not be favored, at least on the Street and at the Club.

    I think that is a good avenue along which to consider and evaluate the reality of race competition.

    T-levels and the corresponding behavior: how they do for the race group in question, versus how they do for the individual in a multi-race environment.

    Eddy Boy Wilson seems to have shied away from evaluating the implications of all his science, on the questions that we now have to face. I don’t know. Maybe someone can speak on that.

  39. The confidence-testosterone feedback loop. It’s reported that fans of losing football teams experience a drop in T on Monday. When remembering the elementary school playground in Warsaw or early-teen shitlording on our dirtbikes in 1983 here, I recall confident faces. There is always a hierarchy where there are free men, and one’s place in it is determined by an alchemy of testosterone, intelligence, character, and charisma.

    Everyone has his place in the hierarchy, everyone can be at least a Delta. Even low deltas in a pack draw from (and contribute to) the collective T.

    Political correctness, anti-racism, and atomization decouple the individual from his fount of confidence, and that is reflected in an artificial ceiling imposed over men’s testosterone.

  40. Mitt Romney is far more confident and dominant than most men. He isn’t in Trump’s league in that regard, but very few are.

  41. Elk…

    How much better and more focused have you become. It’s a regenerative transformation worthy of a truly provoked149 IQ.

    Yet… There is just your willful desire.

    For what?

  42. “Liberals” are afraid of genuine white Supremacy rite down to the last alt-writer…

    The psychological war that is a “liberal’s” impressed cognitive dissonance, deathly fear intertwined with his supreme mockery for all things “white supremacy,” is in literal display everywhere one looks as I have been pointing out since at least the days of OneSTDV and GLPiggy.

    Yet…

    The psychosis is that no real white Supremacists exist in order to justify and rationalize this global mob mentality of anti-white Supremacy.

  43. Whatever social contract had been holding this country together – it is now in abeyance.

    Entertainment/TV/Movies shape the foundation of morality for most Americans. It was something we were all supposed to agree upon – until enough of us stopped agreeing anymore.

  44. There is an article in the NY Times about biracial people. It sounds like it could have been written by Nikcrit.

  45. “Everyone has his place in the hierarchy”

    The notion of hierarchy used to be a big topic in the paleo-con circles some decades back. In fact, it’s one of those “there are two types of people” questions to separate Libs from Cons (old school cons). That is, there are those people who believe hierarchies are natural, inevitable and good, and those that believe hierarchies are unnatural, man-made (i.e. imposed), and evil. This is somewhat of the “Enlightenment” line of thinking coming out of crackpot Frenchman Rousseau.

    The Jews took the Enlightenment anti-hierarchical Christian impulse toward social leveling and weaponized it, essentially using it as a flame-thrower to burn down Gentile civilizations by eliminating all notions of human “place” in the populace. Men equal to women. Gay equal to straight. Colored equal to white. Now in more recent times, having won the brainwashing battle of “equality,” they’ve gone to the next level of reverse-hierarchy: women better than men; gay better than straight; colored better than white. Needless to say, Jews are always at the top of the hierarchy no matter what, and once in a while you’ll catch them admitting it.

    Long story short, civilizations need hierarchies, and they will have them one way or another because nature wins and there is no such thing as equality in the human condition. But the “natural” hierarchy can be flipped upside-down through brainwashing, Frankfurt school, etc. Part of what drives Libs crazy about Trump is how he — and his wife and children — are so clearly at the apex of the natural hierarchy, and they can’t stand it. Which gets us into envy as a topic, but that’s a whole other story.

  46. KunstlerCast 276 — That Conversation About Race We Were Supposed to Have

    http://kunstler.com/podcast/kunstlercast-276-conversation-race-supposed/

    The conversation is between respected author and somewhat white presenting jew Kunstler, and former local commenter thw-what’s-his-name fka James Blonde.

    That is the conversation about race, we are supposed to have?

    Who represents Whites?

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

    Am i being gossipy for doxxing what’s-his-name? No, he doxxed himself in order to boost his internet cred, after he couldn’t cut it in the AR he went over to an audience of mostly aging and sappy white boomers who ooh and ahh him for being black.

  47. That is the conversation about race, we are supposed to have?

    Who represents Whites?

    Well, in the mainstream media whenever someone calls for a “conversation on race” what they have in mind is going to be a one-sided exercise in finger pointing – at the white folks of course.

  48. Peterike: as Paglia put it 26 years ago, if you sweep away one hierarchy, another will spontaneously take its place. Hierarchies make people uncomfortable in concept because people are weary of ones that are arbitrary and exploitative, and Frankfurt School Jews indeed weaponized that prudence against us.

    A legitimate hierarchy is mutually beneficial. As I put it, a low Delta both draws from and contributes to the collective capital. Gammas subvert legitimate hierarchies because they want unmerited rank.

    Elk: thwack complained about me at Kunstler’s last week, sending some traffic my way.

    Camlost: once I saw the light on W around 2004, it became a mystery to me why they hated him so much. He was one of them in every way. Maybe there was a factional war among them, fronted by the Kennedy and the Bush crime families.

  49. A legitimate hierarchy is mutually beneficial.

    The dysfunctional cat herding exercise that is the Democratic Party of 2017 shows why hierarchy is important.

  50. Never Trumpers hate that lower status people, such as myself, are not envious of him and his family.

  51. Bush is putting himself out there. I recently saw him on Jimmy Kimmmel. He was relaxed, funny and likable. Apparently, Michelle Obama loves him.

  52. “Apparently, Michelle Obama loves him.”

    Any why not?

    Bush — globalist shill and front-man getting rich off the system of oppression, looting and anti-white genocide he facilitated for eight years.

    Michelle Obama — globalist shill and front-woman getting rich off the system of oppression, looting and anti-white genocide she facilitated for eight years.

    Two peas in the globalist pod. Sure, the Dem rank and file hated Booosh (“stop this endless war! oh wait, Obama won? nevermind”), but the power players understand that Blue Team vs Red Team is all a game to fool the rubes. How do you get the plebs riled up? You give them someone to hate. That was poor, hapless Bush, the fake opposition. Now that the Progs, for the first time in a hundred years maybe, have REAL opposition, the hate gets pushed to 11 and they are all losing their minds.

  53. “once I saw the light on W around 2004, it became a mystery to me why they hated him so much. He was one of them in every way.”

    Indeed. But it usually works that way. How many Progressive milestones (or was it millstones?) did Nixon achieve, yet the Left despised him (kids, this hate hate hate thing from the Left isn’t new; it’s been going on for centuries). It only takes a few status-marking tags to enrage the Left, which is why there is so much focus on trivial social issues. NOTHING Bush did would matter because once he may have uttered a pro-life word. And he sounded like a prole doofus. And wars are always easy to be against (unless you’re Obama when they are ignored). The thing is, the Left was correct about the stupidity of Bush’s war, but for the wrong reasons (“those poor Muslims!” rather than “this is a war for globo-zionism that is shedding American blood and treasure for the sake of Israel”).

    And at bottom, American politics is who/whom, my team vs. your team, and Bush was DEFINITELY not on the “correct” team, even though, in reality, he was. It’s just image.

    Here’s a simple test of how much someone understands the American system. Ask them, if there was no Trump, would it have made any difference if Jeb Bush won vs. Hillary? If they say yes, of course, for either side, they have no idea how things work.

  54. “Part of what drives Libs crazy about Trump is how he — and his wife and children — are so clearly at the apex of the natural hierarchy, and they can’t stand it. Which gets us into envy as a topic, but that’s a whole other story.”

    Yikes!
    What’s scary to me is how much I can agree with peterike on certain subjects; but how much he can sound like an alien terrrestiral from another planet to me in his above comment —– yet he’s one and the same being spouting to me the above absolute nonsense.

    “So clearly at the apex of the natural hierarchy?” Trump? Really?

    BTW: what do you make of him accusing Obama of wiretapping him? Truth? Lies? Tactical, umm, ‘tactic?’

    By my lights, while I like his three most practical planks of his campaign, he’s acting and performing pretty much like I expected: a loose cannon whose narcissism and egomania are at time so acute that he can’t even maintain a compensatory defense (or ‘act, if you will) for the sake of public consumption and assessment.

    And of course, political capitol is finite.

  55. “Here’s a simple test of how much someone understands the American system. Ask them, if there was no Trump, would it have made any difference if Jeb Bush won vs. Hillary? If they say yes, of course, for either side, they have no idea how things work.”

    I’ve been open to persuasion and I can say that I’ve learned some things in recent years about such a disposition as what’s implied above.

    But I also say that there still exist some considerable holes in the globalist critique —– not so much in its decrying its lack of worth but in asserting its ultimate intentions, as I still say that anti-racism-vs-racism is not so germane in determining if a system can be globalist or more sovereign in terms of its culture and economic system.

  56. peterike…

    The Perfect (white) Man versus “universal equality.”

    Hierarchy versus anti-Hierarchy…

    INTERNECINE…

    White versus “white…”

    Self-annihilation.

    white Supremacist vs. “white” self-annihilator.

  57. “political capitol is finite.”

    You don’t understand. The country is in a state of civil war. His political capital increases with every “outrage” as long as it’s an act on our behalf. It decreases with any concession he makes to the other side.

  58. We’re in “A state of Civil War?”
    Really?

    Oh, yeah —— we are, but I just don’t realize it, because, these soldiers are so deferential to my ‘talented tenth’ status, that I just don’t know; after all, I’m the proverbial ‘hot chick’ who just can’t believe people can be so lewd and base in their actions, based upon their level and degree of disgust, right?

    No, YOU and yours occupy a contemporary fringe; your clandestine status says and mode of communications says as much. I’d like to lessen that evident truth of that polarity —– but I know that goal isn’t widely shared by you and your fellow infidels? 🙂

  59. Nikcrit…

    (C)apital is truly intangible.

    Political capit(a)l may be finite, but only because “it” is mostly just “political.”

  60. No, YOU and yours occupy a contemporary fringe

    Along with the other 150 million Trump supporters.

    but I just don’t realize it, because, these soldiers are so deferential to my ‘talented tenth’ status, that I just don’t know; after all, I’m the proverbial ‘hot chick’ who just can’t believe people can be so lewd and base in their actions, based upon their level and degree of disgust, right?

    Sounds like you live in a bubble.

  61. “Sounds like you live in a bubble.”

    No, I contended PA’s assessment of me at the time —-sometime last spring or so; I’d say that was about the most casual insult of me to date, as I’m nowhere near that cloistered and naive a man.

    Wish I was or could be at times.

    I’m correct in what I predicted about Trump’s ability as an political executive.

    And you know it.

    Question: Do you think Obama ordered a wiretap of Trump?

  62. “There is an article in the NY Times about biracial people. It sounds like it could have been written by Nikcrit.”

    When? Today’s nytimes? I couldn’t find it.

  63. Question: Do you think Obama ordered a wiretap of Trump?

    Yes, I do. I’m not sure Trump should’ve stated that publicly as of yet but I do think the administration would try to get a FISA court order for wiretap and then go beyond the scope.

    The NYT was reporting on this way back in June.

    “There is an article in the NY Times about biracial people. It sounds like it could have been written by Nikcrit.”

    When? Today’s nytimes? I couldn’t find it.

    Lara is right, that article is you in word form.

    NYT: Biracial Supremacy

    What Biracial People Know
    Moises Velasquez-Manoff

  64. I’m correct in what I predicted about Trump’s ability as an political executive.

    I would agree that you have been correct in that his ‘personality issues’ are front and center and not going away, and play upon his effectiveness.

    But his ability as an executive is larger than that. And his effectiveness as an executive of the United States is (obviously) a work in progress.

  65. Regarding Moises Velasquez-Manoff, the NYT Biracial Supremacist, on the thread at Unz multiple commenters including Sailer are saying that he looks like a Nazi camp guard, but to my eyes he looks like an albino freak.

    If I saw that guy on the street, I would instantly recognize his black blood.

    He is not handsome, in any case. And in fact he has written about his health problems, so it is ironic that he is making the case for biracials:

    What President Trump doesn’t seem to have considered is that diversity doesn’t just sound nice, it has tangible value. Social scientists find that homogeneous groups like his cabinet can be less creative and insightful than diverse ones. They are more prone to groupthink and less likely to question faulty assumptions.

    What’s true of groups is also true for individuals. A small but growing body of research suggests that multiracial people are more open-minded and creative.

    They are still selling that hokum.

    The last quoted sentence in particular is strictly argument by assertion. When they call something “small but growing” that is a dead give-away.

  66. There is a philosophical issue that is at once profound and obvious, but which can be pointed out to useful effect in these our diversity celebrating times.

    When diverse people such as Velazquez-Manoff claim that they have access to a more “creative” and “insightful” perspective, the thing about that perspective, is that it is insight and creativity into their own experience (of diversity).

    And yes of course they have a unique perspective, and more insight into that reality.

    But the value of such perspective, is only taken for granted in a society that is valuing diversity uber alles.

    Why should that perspective have more value than a that of a white bread corn fed kid from Nebraska?

    Of course it doesn’t, except that it is assumed that diversity is a good thing and therefore we need the unique perspective that “diverse” people bring.

  67. nikcrit: ” Question: Do you think Obama ordered a wiretap of Trump?”

    “Yes, I do. I’m not sure Trump should’ve stated that publicly as of yet but I do think the administration would try to get a FISA court order for wiretap and then go beyond the scope.”

    Bullshit. Would you bet on that? You know that is a fukin’ lie! LMAO…

    You see Trump’s real genius, though? He can say the most outrageous things because everybody knows and has known all along that he’s overgrown kid, replete with such a subject’s temperament and reflexive moral constitution; IOW: in part, the love for him is because he is our collective kid-adult who gets a pass on contemporary p.c. pieties and other formalities; I would argue that he’s already garnered more gentle treatment, from the press and formal judicial or political censure, precisely because everyone knows deep-down that he doesn’t really know what he’s talking about,

    He and his more bumbling intimates and other inner-sanctum cabinet members are a sort-of theater we, the public, incarnated and gave resident stock to in order to free us from the death-grip of our mutual p.c. follies —— perhaps what Thor describes are self-annihilating symbiotic regression.

    Trump is the p.c. shaman for the early 21st-century; that is necessary and nobl;e —- but the sobering news for the extreme of each political ‘side’ coast-to-coast is that he’s neither going to be the great unifier of the working and middle-class, as Dem populists would wish for, nor the white-nationalist racialist that you paleocon-populist tarts could hope for.

    Just remind your guy that, umm, capital is finite —– or have I mentioned that already?

    —————————————————————————————————————–

    I’m going to have to read that Times article a few here have mentioned; at first, I thought lara and cam were referring to the Brent Staples piece, even though it wasn’t about biracial-ness; i was flattered at the thought of being compared to nytimes editor and former book section critic and section editor, because, if there was a dream journalism job i would fantasize about, imaginingm myself in the role of, Walter Mitty like, it would be as a regular NY Times book critic and columnist, a la Anatole Broyard.

  68. When diverse people such as Velazquez-Manoff claim that they have access to a more “creative” and “insightful” perspective, the thing about that perspective, is that it is insight and creativity into their own experience (of diversity).

    Not unlike Michelle Obama’s awful thesis… on the topic of being a black woman at Princeton.

  69. My previous comment might could use some elaboration, but the point itself cannot be emphasized enough.

    What kind of preposterousness is it to assume that the perspective of a multi-race person is more insightful into anything other than the experience of diversity?

    And even that experience, the particular experience of diversity — everyone gets his slice of that experience pie. How can someone claim to have more than one life’s worth of experience?

  70. Bullshit. Would you bet on that? You know that is a fukin’ lie! LMAO…

    Hmmmm. If the administration had obtained an actual court order through FISA any surveillance they would’ve done would have been legal. Why is that so hard to believe? Even the NYT reported that the administration applied for a warrant to wiretap during its investigation of Paul Manafort.

  71. Trump is the p.c. shaman for the early 21st-century; that is necessary and nobl;e —- but the sobering news for the extreme of each political ‘side’ coast-to-coast is that he’s neither going to be the great unifier of the working and middle-class, as Dem populists would wish for, nor the white-nationalist racialist that you paleocon-populist tarts could hope for.

    I wondered how long it would take for your chicken little alarmism on Trump to return.

    Yes, Trump sucks as a politician.

    But he’s done his basic job of saving the Supreme Court, tearing the mask off the media and re-introducing protectionism and a concern for our decaying industrial base.

    Trump’s ideas are more important than him individually. Even if he doesn’t make a 2nd term there will be others who take up his ideas and continue. And all of the daily political conflict is going to wake a whole lot of formerly apolitical white Americans who haven’t been voting much but will lean strongly conservative once they realize that this isn’t their country anymore.

    Sobering statistic for you – Hillary only got 31% of the white male vote.

  72. I just did a solid once-over of that Times piece. want a lawyer! That guy stole two of my favorit blog commentary terms: “Mono-racialist” and “essentialism.”

    He also deploys a similar form or style of sociological breakdown and interpretation except for our biggest difference is that I, unlike him, apply a HBD sheen and filter to my reads and observations while he doesn’t.

    I’d guess he doesn’t because he’d view HBD reality as degrading or a stamp of ‘inferiority,’ while my personal humanistic read of HBD, coupled with my form of Christianity applied to race accepts HBD free of any hierarchical sociology (Gotta love those primitives as much as those industrialized “modernes”).

    That was still an interesting piece; thank you all here for recommending it to me—– even though this is who still comes to my mind when i think of someone who claims to be half-Jewish and half-Puerto Rican:

  73. “I wondered how long it would take for your chicken little alarmism on Trump to return.”

    (Deep sigh); that was a misguided reply to my Trump interpretation. Update your set-piece replies to comments every now and then to make sure they stay relevant. What I said was actually complimentary of your man! 🙂

  74. elk: “Why should that perspective have more value than a that of a white bread corn fed kid from Nebraska?”

    I agree with this critique; i might even go further and say that such a critique isn’t that exclusive an ability to the multi-ethnic one with said perspective, but nowadays is something that can be shared and authored via using plain ‘ol empathy. IOW: it’s no longer such a big deal, but the preciousness is still overly trumped up around it.

    perhaps this is the prevailing contemporary piety that the ‘multicultural’ writer and artiste has to get over?

    Ya hear that, half-breed boy?

  75. Speaking of ethnically mish-mashed politics, culture and bedfellows, this here essay, done by yet one more east-coast ‘Elite-U’ professor, contend that what many here routinely claim, isn’t true: that there is NOT a plethora of interracial relationships on t.v., the big-screen and throughout the pop-culture writ large——- that the real-life number of such unions are short-changed when it comes time to get repped by the pop-culture.

  76. “That photo is nauseating.”

    I thought you might feel as much. I actually was hesitant to post the link when I saw the accompanying photo because i fretted you’d think i was going for some cheap and easy frisson, though in fact I was following up on some protracted back-n-forth about that very movie, initially mentioned by Cam.

    But that said, honest and stark discourse of said ‘frisson’ is what we oft do here. And despite our occasional lapses and indiscretions due to established familiarity, I think you know that I’m not trying to kick over anyone’s apple cart for the mere and SOLE sake of doing as much.

    That movie was the number-one box office winner of its opening week and it’s still performing strong and has clearly crossed from cult-to-mainstream audience appeal. FWIW, I think it’s sort-of sad that it’s rather crude thematic is that zeitgeist in its appeal, or better, ‘public interest.’ I had hoped that the crude shock appeal and over-the-top racial politics and polemics be an intrigue of the past. Actually, the movie was big with older high-school kids, who seemed to really connect with the flick; i was at one of the ‘better’ more-black-than-Hispanic schools the other today and Friday and got some anecdotal opinion from a few black girls who said they liked the movie and liked the fact that it conveyed a sense of educating middle-brow white america about the adverse reaction young black males can arise out of mainstream white America. I did seek to know if the thematics caused outright rage with the black girl viewers, but i didn’t pick that up; rather, they seem to think of the slightly whiggerish white girl as a ‘sister,’ but one who was hopelessly naive about the wiles, ways and extremes of their white male kin.

    Personally? I don’t know; I think there were ‘better’ young-appealing racially charged relationship movies out there in the era even preceding my high-school days; the b-w rub in “Superfly” in many ways was more sophisticated in what we get in “Get Out.”

    And yes, PA, that there in the photo is what you might call a ‘real’ miscegenation scene —— no cafe-au-lait black man paired with his alabaster conquest; rather some no-holds-barred black-on-white with the cameras needing extra light-meter voltage to illuminate that coal-black male lede!

  77. “Actually, the movie was big with older high-school kids, who seemed to really connect with the flick; i was at one of the ‘better’ more-black-than-Hispanic schools the other today and Friday and got some anecdotal opinion from a few black girls who said they liked the movie and liked the fact that it conveyed a sense of educating middle-brow white america about the adverse reaction young black males can arise out of mainstream white America. I did seek to know if the thematics caused outright rage with the black girl viewers, but i didn’t pick that up; rather, they seem to think of the slightly whiggerish white girl as a ‘sister,’ but one who was hopelessly naive about the wiles, ways and extremes of their white male kin.”

    Did they offer to bring over one of their alabaster sisters in the struggle and do sum cornrows in shez head yo while you pawlish yoz knob?

    Because I’z sensin’ this scenario get an arise out cho lamestream au lait seff.

  78. The overwhelming lack of these stories onscreen reveals a tacit cinematic apartheid that insists upon racial separation. The absence of these accounts wordlessly validates the impossibility of integration at the most intimate, personal level. It is the duty of film and art to fill these narrative voids. Kevin Noble Maillard

    This is what “radical autonomy” does to a person’s brain. One is only talking to himself. One is telling himself that he is not free until everyone is forced to SEE him free. The gutter conceit is a death wish.

  79. Nickrit…

    Your critique of Trump is a total failure for several reasons. First, it is not a critique rooted in Trump’s deviation from white Supremacy. Secondly, YOUR SIDE possesses no actual political standard. Lastly, narcissism and pettiness are VALUED traits amongst the global “default elite” with your side’s critique of Trump’s narcissism and pettiness merely a matter of envy and jealousy due his setting of a “higher standard” per his greater narcissism and more disciplined pettiness.

  80. “Because I’z sensin’ this scenario get an arise out cho lamestream au lait seff.”

    Lucius, take a cold shower and settle down —— and while you’re at it, put away those K-pop band shots of all those pubescent pop queens with their pouting epicanthic eyelids, ok?

    Besides, I ain’t alls that au-lait-ish, being a rather dusky hybrid.

    (Given the deeply contrasting tones and dispositions to your comments here, I can’t help but think on nights like tonight, you down several too many gin-n-tonics or bottles of Riesling or whatever and turn into the drunken erotic K-pop man or something; how else to explain your wildly discursive tangents that invariably reveal some drunken strand of lust?)

    It is weird and somehow distressing to me that “Get Out” is the breakaway no.1 film in the country.

    Now go check out that Nikki Minaj/will.i.am K-pop rave up of “Check It Out,” the revamping of “Video Killed the Radio Star,” because there’s a new “Pet Sounds”-caliber chorus in the air as you read this!

  81. “your side’s critique of Trump’s narcissism and pettiness merely a matter of envy and jealousy due his setting of a “higher standard” per his greater narcissism and more disciplined pettiness. “

    You’re blowing smoke, T-diddy; good night.

    Actually, my casual prediction of Trump’s first year as president is on the mark but hardly all that amazing or prescient, given the signs and reads he’s provided for years up to this date.

    It’s merely a case of the Postman-esque prediction that commerce, entertainment and politics would finally fully merge into a holy mediated trifecta of opportunism; IOW: It’s been long expected and now it’s all come together. It’s amazing while it’s prediction at that late date was not at all remarkable.

  82. “Lucius, take a cold shower and settle down —— and while you’re at it, put away those K-pop band shots of all those pubescent pop queens with their pouting epicanthic eyelids, ok?”

    We all have our preferred hominid groupings, nikcrit, and since you’re in a trolling humor I’m not unkeen to remind you your heritage doesn’t hail from one of mine. Leaving aside the fact of the absence of the merely “pubescent” from my canon, my blog is my blog, and this one is PA’s, and I think you know rather well that you’re humoring your own whims at the hazard of our host’s charity. Your hammy “mm hmm dat dere be some real old fashioned MUHSEJENASHUN RITE DHAR YO” pandering, screenshot in tow– rail smoove, brutha. Whut cho got in yo grade drank 2nite?

    In response to your implication that advertising misunderestimates the blessed couplings that brought you into the world, I will cite for the faithful Vox Day counting in a half-hour of British programming eight bmwm pairings to five wmww. Is this a lag behind the “reality” you profess to intuit? What would the “reality” be then: thirteen out of twelve white women noggin it up?

    You’re the one making sociological hay out of deep convos with teenyboppers over torture porn horror flicks (these jeune filles, we might further hint, probably don’t think too keenly of huwite womyn poaching– though really that isn’t the phrase–deyz men).

    And whatever the hell on this earth that whore Nicki who and down-low.i.am are up to, it ain’t “K-pop”. Spare me your blasphemies. Your illustrious pop music rag gigs notwithstanding, this isn’t an evening to restrain from reminding you that your writing is bountiful evidence to suspect that One Drop of black blood is as fatal to the ability to master a Roget’s as lead poisoning.

    And besides, since that Judeo-Rican was already covered in full at isteve, you could at least be so obliging as to pick a number from the OP and attempt rational discourse, rather than digging your skull into the navel lint hoping for signs of that fabled heterosis.

    Oy. Soros padding out your rent this month, homie?

  83. Get Out looks like the stupidest movie. I’m not going to blame Allison Williams for trying to make a living, but she really sunk low with this role.

  84. The author of the Jew York Times piece lamenting the lack of inter-race couples on screen is parodied here,

    http://companyb-ny.com/our-work/expert-storytelling/

    Kevin Noble Maillard
    Goal: Establish credibility; raise awareness, spark conversations and, ultimately, change perceptions.

    Kevin Nobile Maillard, author and family law expert, wanted to plant his expert flag into the non-traditional marriage debate.

    Approach: Insert Kevin into the news cycle with a steady stream of by-lines and commentary on breaking news.

    Results: Frequent guest on MSNBC. Regular writing assignments from The New York Times, Essence, & MSNBC: The Grio. Guest-editor spot at The New York Times online Op-Ed section. Featured guest on NPR. Quoted in USA Today, Time Out, New York and The Atlantic.

    Oh wait it is not a parody, but his stated purpose and career is to advance his ethnic interests by virtue of … wait for it … being himself. (how quaint and cute — how can we help? asks the sympathetic white woman)

    The link is worth checking out for a look at his picture, if you are into that sort of thing.

  85. Kevin Noble Mallaird, what a name.

    It is a French derived surname, and with his hair he must be from “that part” of the Islands.

    Without reading the Jews’ featured article but going by the title and his stated career goals:

    His entire life’s purpose, and his celebrated media personality presence, is ceaselessly devoted to the promotion of more people like him and that by whatever means necessary.

    Hey, has anyone recently complained about the lack of inter-race couples lately? How about another article …

    It is all so junior high. But to the noble-named Mallard Drake duck, it the mostest highest activism most noblest on the face of the planet ever!

    To us plain yogurt people, it is all so very dull. Ethnic activism is a sort of junior high school level exercise in self-actualization that we would rather have left behind in junior high.

    But these guys get to make careers out of it, that feature jet airplanes and gummy blowjobs from NPR hostesses.

  86. Is it unfair criticism, to characterize authors such as Maillard and Semite-Hernandez, as juvenile? for that their writing is entirely about expressing and fulfilling and advancing their ethnic cause, and further that their exercise of such is, courtesy of the jews, fully built into the platform and the narrative to begin with?

    So the narrative values their existence to begin with, and then they come up on it as exemplars and say look at me, and that is all they say, and then the narrative heaps praise on them for their accomplishments?

    Whether or not they realize the role they are playing, which is male models, it is adolescent.

  87. Building your personal brand on the media, whatever combination of old and new, is simply the way it goes in these our atomized times, but when the basis of that brand is entirely:

    Look at me, I am mixed race!

    then the value of that brand takes for granted — requires — the value of those mixed race.

    But if we are going to live in Adult World, let us recognize that that is the very point of dispute.

    The very point of dispute is the value of race in this competitive world. And someone can argue this way or that, but in Adult World it is not taken as a given that mixed race is of value.

    Taking as a given the value of mixed race is junior high, where special people have special feelings and get special treatment.

    tldr: also and ever the jews

  88. “And whatever the hell on this earth that whore Nicki who and down-low.i.am are up to, it ain’t “K-pop”. “

    That’s what my semi-informed and generally indifferent opinion say, but i’ve seen that vid referenced as such numerous times.

    “Your illustrious pop music rag gigs notwithstanding, this isn’t an evening to restrain from reminding you that your writing is bountiful evidence to suspect that One Drop of black blood is as fatal to the ability to master a Roget’s as lead poisoning. “

    Rantings from a frustrated (and never published) classics major?
    Settle down Lucious; resentment is poor fuel for the muse, y’know!

  89. — Is it unfair criticism, to characterize authors such as Maillard and Semite-Hernandez, as juvenile?

    This came up in college, when we were fed a stream of “identity” literature in a class. There was a small group of us who argued with the professor about the material and at one point I called it “navel-gazing.” We didn’t have a vocabulary to object to anti-White indoctrination, so we argued on proxy-grounds of literary merit. It was in many cases a serviceable work-around, because we’re talking low-middle brow end of the School of Resentment reading.

    All people want and need to belong and there is no way around it, your blood is your community. Not just in the “chips are down” scenarios, but simply in being able to relate to and relax around others, and have a meaningful life be it in conformity or loyal opposition to your cultural norms. And once family-formation comes into play, then you have the patriarchal instinct to secure a territory in which your descendants have a tradition and aspirational examples, all of that being dependent on a coherent social and racial context. Many Whites have taken those things for granted in recent times but now, well, we don’t.

    We understand the judeo-ricans of the world and others also want to have an identity and a culture, but too bad that they vomit out their angst in the form of aggression against us. The roots of that aggression are not revanchist, though. They are vampiric in that they promote the organ-harvesting of European wombs. That’s an apt metaphor I came cross recently, don’t recall where. Our interest in surviving dictates a no-tolerance attitude toward that.

  90. “Building your personal brand on the media, whatever combination of old and new, is simply the way it goes in these our atomized times, but when the basis of that brand is entirely:

    Look at me, I am mixed race!”

    I thought that resume or whatever was a joke at first; that summoned some bad memories, mainly of the pop-entertainment dept. aspect of daily newspaper journalism; that kind of shallowness becomes its own rote industry at times and is overwhelming; it’s like a slow undertoe that pulls you in and before you know it, you’re saying the dumbest shite, as you’ve become part of its commerce force.

  91. “Anybody remember “White Man’s Burden” or “Obsessed”?:”

    White Man’s Burden was actally somewhat interesting; it had some real academic aims and whims going on, stuff that clearly was antithetical to Hollywood-demo logic, which almost always prevails…. The races and their respective stereotypes are simply inverted wholly in WMB; Belafonte plays what we nornally think of as a condescendingly racist white corporate patriarch. Travolta is the white ghettoite; his dialogue and patois is a mix of Amon-n-Andy and Eminen. Not pretty.

  92. In the poster for White Man’s Burden, Travolta still looks good.

    Bill Burr did that bit about his face getting huge, along with Baldwin’s.

    Speaking of Bill Burr, he has a new routine (2017) up on netflix. His previous one was really bad.

    Obviously Bill himself has been featured in the AR, as a case study. Ten years ago whenever, he was lauded for being more-than-halfway red-pilled, but he pulled out.

    Literally pulled out, in his case. Some have suggested that his wife is clear proof that Bill suffers from some form of homosexuality the developmental disorder associated with homosex.

  93. To my knowledge, Suburban_elk might would get credit for first describing homosexuality specifically as a developmental disorder. At least here in this section of the internet. The professionals can say what they will, but the popular vocabulary and consensus is if anything more important, on a topic such as that.

    For whatever exactly that means, and whatever it is worth.

    But that whole nexus of behavior seems better described as a developmental disorder, rather than a disease.

  94. I don’t fault Nikcrit for using his mixed race genetics to his advantage. Most everyone would do the same.

  95. PA has taken advantage of his connections to Poland. It’s the same thing.

    This is why women are not philosophers.

    A correct statement, in contrast to Lara’s not-true statement, might read:

    PA has taken advantage of his connections to Poland. It is similar in some ways.

  96. Wow. Just wow. So that nitwit writing in the Times is actually saying there aren’t ENOUGH movies that show inter-racial couples? I would recommend him to turn on his television and find me one show that DOESN’T have precisely this going on. It’s much, much easier to find shows that show inter-racial romance than shows that don’t. As for movies, I don’t see that many but it sure seems to show up every which way you look. In addition to “Loving” and “Get Out” as the “rare exceptions,” there is also “A United Kingdom,” which is about a black African and a white British woman who marry. So that’s three movies just playing right now. And let’s not forget the burgeoning romance happening in Star Wars.

    But I guess that’s a standard Prog trick of doubling-down. Oh what, you see inter-racial sex and romance EVERYWHERE you look? Clearly that’s not enough. We need to show more.

  97. “But that whole nexus of behavior seems better described as a developmental disorder, rather than a disease.”

    Here, I thought it was PA who first proffered that view; either way, it’s certainly not uncommon in the larger universe of speculative academic.opinion; I’m sure such provenance preceded our cozy string of blog history here; i.e., PAWORLDANDTIMES, 28SHERMAN, GLPIGGY AND ONESTDV.
    I’m of the common opinion that one’s sexuality is a multi-sourced destination; surely both quantitative destiny and qualitatative experiences abound in making for that destiny.

    l mean, how could that not be true?

  98. “It’s much, much easier to find shows that show inter-racial romance than shows that don’t.”

    Yeah, I recall peterike and I discussing this at 28sherman, in which we used some examples from 70s television, like the Brady Bunch, as well as then-current stuff, like “Downtown Abbey,” to make some points re. interracial relationships being spontaneous or forced into programming.

    I guess the real question, though perhaps impossible to implement is this: what amounts of miscegenation would occur if the practice was neither encouraged or discouraged by media and culture—- which, of course, is an impossibility in its proposal.

    I do think there’s an inherent biological imperative or instinct or whatever the most appropriate term to both mix and to preserve heritages and heritage, etc. IDK; we’ve discussed this often and always seem to reach a sort-of inconclusive standoff.

  99. I watched the movie. It wasn’t a “horror” flick. And the total lack of realism cannot be understated. At best, the movie provided a glimpse into the mind of the creepiest “progressives.”

  100. Here, I thought it was PA who first proffered that view; either way, it’s certainly not uncommon in the larger universe of speculative academic.opinion; I’m sure such provenance preceded our cozy string of blog history here; i.e., PAWORLDANDTIMES, 28SHERMAN, GLPIGGY AND ONESTDV.

    With due respect to other commenters in the Sphere, i would bet against 2 to 1 that my handle would be the first associated with that exact phrase, developmental disorder, to describe homosexuality. I used it at Sailer’s blog particularly.

    I noticed it used subsequently by the vaunted blogger Pleasureman, and so thought to give myself due credit.

    The larger universe of speculative opinion, is of course buried under group-think and PC, and homosex is considered neither a developmental disorder nor a disease, but rather a lifestyle.

    But prior to such non-sense, yes it generally probably was considered a developmental disorder. The common sense notion of it, would not have been rendered in such 20th century psych jargon. It would have been simply thought of as something like men behaving badly and ramming vulnerable people with their rods.

  101. Julia Styles has done so many movies on interracial romance that she could have her own top 10.

  102. I’m of the common opinion that one’s sexuality is a multi-sourced destination; surely both quantitative destiny and qualitatative experiences abound in making for that destiny.

    l mean, how could that not be true?

    I agree with this, and that is (fairly) well put.

    And I further agree with your implied criticism that is unwarranted to seek or take credit for common-sense notions, that are well understood but obscured by our modern bullshit mentality of crimethink.

    When I see other bloggers and commenters such as CH, and PA too, try and take credit for certain thoughts and trends, I think that they are mistaken in doing so. Particularly CH. The idea that game is some sort of newsflash discovery that any one person should get credit for? is comical.

    I guess I would like some more respect though, in general. I certainly don’t get it here.

  103. I can’t think of any instance of my claiming credit for someone else’s idea. I’m conscientious about giving credit unless it’s become common usage.

  104. I hear ya PA.

    It is not so much a particular criticism as an abundant human foible, especially around here.

    And the thing is. We DO deserve some credit though (which we don’t get).

    For instance, Sailer is always going on about how David Brooks is basing his columns on Sailer’s. And he is no doubt correct in that.

    Very few people are in Sailer’s league of course, but the same pattern holds. I have seen my comments used fairly obviously by more influential commenters and bloggers, and almost never receive credit.

    Here is an example. I made a comment that I was going to write my memoirs about participating here and call it Confessions of a Reluctant Racist.

    And then Greg Johnson’s book comes out, Confessions of a Reluctant Hater. Is it self-aggrandizing delusion on my part? very very possibly. In this example it is a common phrase, but on the other hand, my book title would have been perfect, but now someone else has used it.

    It is hard to be an anonymous genius.

  105. PA has taken credit for reviving the term talented tenth. I believe Frederick Douglas coined it. CH introduced a few concepts to me such as hypergamy. He didn’t invent the concept or term, but it was from him I first heard of it.

  106. — PA has taken credit for reviving the term talented tenth. I believe Frederick Douglas coined it.

    Yes, I take credit for that one, but its originator was WEB Dubois. Rightly or not I also take credit for “lampposts,” which I started using at CH when things were just starting to get political c. early 2008. To my knowledge, the usage has not been common in English, but I heard it all the time in Poland as a kid in reference to Communists. It’s satisfying to see one’s own comments on a number of subjects filter through the sphere with or without attribution. I always considered my comments on other blogs as kind of my contribution to the evolving AltRight consciousness and never felt proprietary about them, in part because it was a give-and-take process of thinking out loud with people I respect, where one can as often be right as wrong. Also because commenting is 97% fun, 3% work. It’s spontaneous, impulsive, and usually effortless for experienced commenters when the impulse to spit out some thought hits. Original blog posts though, I feel more ownership over (hence the copyright notice) because they’re a lot more in terms of work.

  107. That howling female is hilarious. The Left today sucks on optics. Nothing but repellent females and skinny snark-fags. LMAO at their pathetic try at “swole left.” Still, there is something extremely provocative about their mix of patheticness and self-righteousness. Even just watching those videos, I feel a desire to [redacted] them.

    Think back to the French or the Bolshevik Revolution, when those exact same gamma pieces of excrement had power and enforcer-muscle, and full license to murder entire households of innocent people.

  108. “Julia Styles has done so many movies on interracial romance that she could have her own top 10.”

    Lol!! Yeah, I used to wonder about that, umm, recurring motif of her films myself. She was a pretty good actress though among that era’s bunch of young up-n-comers; I recall that movie where she wasn’t in a mixed relationship though, was one of her best performances: —– the one in which she was a sort-of corporate understudy of one Stockard Channing, who happened to be among my favorite actresses of the time (I prefer many ‘film actors’ who were primarily stage-theater performers, as was Channing).

    Styles’ best b-w-relationship movie was that modernized rendtion of Othello in which she attends a preppy upscale suburban high-school and dates Mikel Phifer’s (sp?) character, whose a b-ball star and bussed into the university.

    Trivia quiz@Cam, et.al: What was the title of the Channing film in which the actress herself has a “mudsharking’ one-night stand?

    FWIW, i may sound like i’ve cultivated a whole subset categoricalliy of films that ‘feature’ miscegenation, but the truth of the matter is I prefer to not even discuss that aspect of a discussion, whatever the context, be it something personal or some public event like a national movie: I’d just say person-A is married to person-B and the respective race of those individuals is an incidental entity that others may or may not specificalliy point to.

    I’ll leave it to the likes of, say, Lucius and our blog host to, fetishize it and vilify it, respectively. 🙂

  109. “Nothing but repellent females and skinny snark-fags.”

    Isn’t that a bit overly tidy? I mean, in my center-left circumstance and upbringing, a character like the one in your vid would be laughed it without restraint. There’s an upper-Midwest center-left contingent that I don’t think you’re aware of out there on the beltway, but a type, say, elk and I are likely both very familar with: semi-rural urban or agricultural; church-going, likely Catholic or Lutheran, pro-life democratic, pro-union, decent if slightly naive common-cause Democrats; sacrificial but not suicidal in terms of partitioning what and what NOT to give up for that ever-proverbial ‘greater good.’ When summoing such types, I think of family relations and other close figures I’ve known from, say, Northfileld, Minnesota area; the kind of folk that go to obscure regional elite schools like St. Olaf’s and Carelton.

  110. Most liberals I know are normal people. These losers liberals are so dangerous because when you are that big of a loser you hate anyone who is better than you. That includes a lot of people.

  111. “Credit where credit is due” is the self-evidently regenerating perpetuation of (C)apitalism.

    Homosexuality* = perpetuating SELF-annihilation = “liberal” ideology…

    Is the “developmental disorder” violently demanding that “credit go where credit is not due” as the means to “universal equality.”

    *Homo = same
    Same = exact same
    Exact same = SELF

  112. Yeah, Thor, via his elaborations of Richardson’s meditations on liberalism and homosexuality are quite meta and academically thorough. If any theoretical provenance is to be assigned, Thor Dog gets it IMO. From there, let the dissent begin, as it’s crowded world out there in the commnunicative ether!

  113. I repeat my claim to primary credit for the summary description of homosex as a developmental disorder.

    Here, I thought it was PA who first proffered that view; either way, it’s certainly not uncommon in the larger universe of speculative academic.opinion; I’m sure such provenance preceded our cozy string of blog history here; i.e., PAWORLDANDTIMES, 28SHERMAN, GLPIGGY AND ONESTDV. — nikcrit

    If PA has described homosex in those terms here, i don’t recall, and anyways I was describing it as such at Sailer’s maybe 3 or 4 years ago and prior to that at GLP which is now not publicly available online.

    And if we are agree such description — mine — is the most accurate summary of that nexus of behaviors, then why is that elegant and simple description not more commonly used?

    Is there a better way to sum it up and write it off, than those two words?

    So perhaps it doesn’t matter who gets credit for summing it up. Or perhaps it does matter. Either way, I challenge anyone to describe it any better than that.

    The problem is partially that we want an explanation that is more complicated and more allowing for human problems. When the reality is that it’s not that complicated.

    So either come up with a better description for homosex behavior, than developmental disorder; or attribute that description to someone other than Suburban_elk; or give credit where it is due.

  114. Yeah, Thor, via his elaborations of Richardson’s meditations on liberalism and homosexuality are quite meta and academically thorough. If any theoretical provenance is to be assigned, Thor Dog gets it IMO. From there, let the dissent begin, as it’s crowded world out there in the commnunicative ether!

    That is the height of irony, nikcrit, that you are citing thordaddy as an example of clarity on this topic.

    Considering that almost always otherwise your criticize him for his obscurity.

    In any case, my simple explanation with 20th century psych jargon is much clearer than thordaddy’s esotericism, and that should be obvious enough.

  115. If any theoretical provenance is to be assigned, Thor Dog gets it IMO.

    That syntax is ambiguous and in a crucial regard.

    Is the provenance theoretical in the sense that we don’t know how gets credit for something?

    Or is it the provenance of a particular theory that is in question?

    Or is it both?

    And in all honesty, it is a confusing construction, nikcrit. And i don’t say that to hang you up.

    thordaddy’s explanation and mine are different, so they would have difference provenances.

  116. “thordaddy’s explanation and mine are different, so they would have difference provenances.”

    thordaddy’s metaphysics roam in and out of accessibility.

    My explanation would appeal to common sense.

    Our respective explanations for homosex are not the same, and would have each their own provenance.

    And I have to insist on credit for my two-word summary description of developmental disorder, until proven otherwise.

    Again, not that it matters, but since it does seem to matter somewhat a little bit at least …

  117. It is revealing that Trickin would give Thordaddy credit for a better summary explanation of homosex, than to yours truly, when almost always otherwise he is criticizing Thor for his obscurity, and what he credits him for in this case is typical of that obscurity.

    He says upthread of my description that it is “not uncommon” (to consider it in those terms) and agrees that nature and nurture must both be part of the deal, “how could that not be true?” and so would seem to lean toward my summary.

    But when it comes to pass judgment, his faculties are mixed and clouded by personal feelings.

    He scolds Lucius Somesuch,

    Settle down Lucious; resentment is poor fuel for the muse, y’know!

    I would say to trickin to heed his own advice.

    He likes to butt heads with the big boys, but then they hit back his approach reverts to a plea.

    It is tough for him to see that the talent has shifted out of his demographic.

  118. Pingback: This Week in Reaction (2017/03/05) - Social Matter

  119. Apologies for going all egomaniacal. Looking over those posts, I am glad to see that they do not cross the line into personal insults toward nikcrit.

    But on that topic of claiming credit, it is funny to see that at Unz this morning, Sailer leads off one of his popular articles,

    ‘The term “deep state” has become more common in America since I started using it in 2009 when I got back from Turkey. I then wrote:

    Nonetheless, the notion of a deep state, although perhaps better conceptualized less as a top-down conspiracy than as an emergent phenomenon among insiders with overlapping interests, might prove useful to Americans in overcoming our native bias toward boyish naïveté about the ways of the world.

    So Sailer wants some credit for his influence, and who can blame him? It is a very human thing to be frustrated when one feels one’s efforts are looked over and worse, others getting credit and status for them.

    The AR and the talent herein, is ceaselessly mined. Those who are not constrained with anonymity have a license to steal.

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

    Back on the topic of the description of homosex as a developmental disorder, you watch: now that phrase will come into broader usage. It will seep up from this very thread into the broader real-talking community. Not because of some goofy magical thinking, but because it is the right and correct way to describe that nexus of behaviors.

  120. As for claiming credit, I don’t know about the rest of ya’ll, but there’s no way I remember who said what even so much as a week later, to say nothing of years later. Some bit of word play — like, say, “developmental disorder” — could very well stick in my head, but odds are extremely slim that I will have any recollection of who said it. In fact, I barely even register the names of people who post when I read comments, and I’m always amazed that somebody will say “well Sub_elk, since you’re from Whozawatzit, Nebraska…” And I think, how do they keep track of all that? (See, I have NO IDEA where suburban_elk lives, or if he ever mentioned it.)

    Maybe it’s my old man brain too stuffed full of life’s nonsense, or the fact that I tend to read this stuff in short bursts during work or, most likely, I’m just a forgetful bastard (always have been). But if I “steal” someone’s thought or phrase in future without attribution, I’m pretty sure it’s because I have no idea anymore, so apologies in advance, and feel free to call me out on it if I do it!

  121. Exactly, if you wish to remain anonymous, you can’t complain about not being given credit. Steve Sailer puts himself out there. He seems to try and give credit, but he probably sometimes does not. He has so many comments to read.

  122. “So either come up with a better description for homosex behavior, than developmental disorder; or attribute that description to someone other than Suburban_elk; or give credit where it is due.”

    OK, but insult-via-omission was not my intention at all; I just think your thought is not entirely new, which is fine. What sense is the term ‘developmental’ used here? : cognitive and/or physical going askew at the most formative early-childhood level? Or something else?I’m’ sure that’s right and other sources are right too —- which you seem to agree with: a measured contrast of cultural orientation igniting dormant genetic inclinations.

    All you got to do is watch television for ten minutes during primetime nowadays to see how the pop-cult zeitgeist has become incredibly homoerotic; Thor’s really onto something IMO when he speaks of this contemporary cultural twinning of homosexuality and personal narcississm; it’s over-the-top nowadays.

  123. “It is tough for him to see that the talent has shifted out of his demographic.”

    Help me with this; i take it as you saying something along the lines of “the current zeitgeist has gone from the banal and at-this-point tired ‘multi-culti’ biracialism to a paleoconic renaissance of white conquest,” or something along those lines?

    Is that right? Or were you implying something else?

    Don’t get too sensitive; and don’t do Lucius’ bidding. He’s ok, he just can’t handle any sass from a negro; he feels he’s above all that. I like his writing voice, even though there’s the issue i mentioned of that long-ass piece of snot up his snoot.

  124. I’m guessing theories about what causes homosexuality have been around for as long as homosexuality has been around. It is only in recent years that PC constraints have made some theories morally wrong. I can understand lesbians to some degree. I don’t even try to understand gay men. I really have no idea how they think. I’ll leave that to others.

  125. “For instance, Sailer is always going on about how David Brooks is basing his columns on Sailer’s.”

    That is unfortunate; i’ve seen him make that accusation toward other writers too. Unless he privately has had some exchange in which confession and acknowledgement took place, he should really stop that; that is a real tell-tale sign of amateur-hour punditry.

    You may think i’m out of line saying as much but that is very weak.

  126. You may think i’m out of line saying as much but that is very weak.

    But I think Sailer’s point is not so much self-congratulating as it is him pointing out that he’s persona non grata and an “untouchable” with the rest of the MSM due to his HBD stance. He’s saying that other more “palatable” writers wish they could attribute/give credit to him and would gladly do so if they could.

  127. John Derbyshire was at a conference with David Brooks and David Brooks totally ignored him. David Brooks’ ex-wife changed her first name to a Jewish one in order to marry him. I don’t get the impression David Brooks is a particularly nice person. He seems to have quite an ego. My guess is unless you fawn over him he has no time for you.

  128. John Derbyshire was at a conference with David Brooks and David Brooks totally ignored him.

    Not a surprise at all.

    That recent article that Brooks wrote about “why don’t flyover whites want to cram into NYC or Houston” is simply hilarious. (almost as hilarious as the general idea that Brooks is a “conservative”). Big city/coastal elites/pundits/journos simply don’t understand the rest of white America, even Brooks, who has spent a lot of his life around powerful establishment Republicans and right-leaning theorists.

    But Brooks did write a decent article on Trumpism:

    Someone more head-over-heels for Trump (like most of us) couldn’t have written a convincing article that neutrally explanatory yet still slightly positive on Trump.

  129. “But Brooks did write a decent article on Trumpism:”

    He’s not a naive or some closet liberal idealogue; that article he wrote about Trump and Bannon and populism shows he’s mindful of every, single thought that was ever uttered here and at similar blogs…… incidentally, columnists like Brooks and his likes probably adore Trump and all the elevated journalist platform that Trump brings back to the house. Brooks is not some globalist shill for the sake of his livelihood; Trump much more reifies his livelihood.I guarantee you couldn’t find anyone more satisfied with Trump as POTUS as Brooks, Kristoff, Friedman and Dowd; the other day on MSNBC, Chuck Todd was talking about how Trump has created a political-journalism renaissance! lol..

  130. “I guarantee you couldn’t find anyone more satisfied with Trump as POTUS as Brooks, Kristoff, Friedman and Dowd”

    Mmmm, maybe for now. But not if Trump wins, and the Mandarin class is tossed where they belong, into the gutter. They still think they’re impregnable. And probably they are… but maybe they aren’t.

  131. True,. Trump has done a lot more for the careers of Brooks, Maher, Colbert and Oliver than he has done for mine.

  132. He’s not a naive or some closet liberal idealogue; that article he wrote about Trump and Bannon and populism shows he’s mindful of every, single thought that was ever uttered here and at similar blog

    Well, he’s supposed to be a “conservative”, right? But you think that anyone who could write the following really has much in common with the alt right?

    “For the life of me, I can’t figure out why so many Republicans prefer a dying white America to a place like, say, Houston.” – Brooks

    By this he means, why won’t those stubborn damn deplorable whiteys in flyover country forsake their ancestral lands and values and cram into crowded multicultural paradises where we can all unite and sing “kumbaya” under the banner of globalism and mass immigration?

    http://harpers.org/archive/2017/03/texas-is-the-future/

  133. “Mmmm, maybe for now. But not if Trump wins, and the Mandarin class is tossed where they belong, into the gutter.”

    Well, IDK. Sometimes I feel like you guys are still enjoying fumes from the victory party on election night, but what-in-the-world makes you think that Trump is not part of the Mandarin class? He is much, much closer to the behind-the-scenes world of celebrity than his is partisan wonk politico life.

    Somebody in that administration has got to step up and take charge; if you want those three stumps of Trump’s campaign to ever have a chance of happening, he’s got to shut up and close ranks and get the shit done.

    Trump is pretty damn close to being outright in a state ambulatory psychosis; go look up on youtube what Howard Stern, a close friend of trump’s, said about what would happen if trump became president and how he, Howard, recommended strongly against it. The gist of it was: once he’s in a position where everybody doesn’t approve of him or celebrate his existence, he’s going to take it real hard.

    To that I say “To wit: the last 45 days.”

  134. Trump is pretty damn close to being outright in a state ambulatory psychosis; go look up on youtube what Howard Stern, a close friend of trump’s, said about what would happen if trump became president and how he, Howard, recommended strongly against it.

    OMG, Howard Stern said that? why didn’t you say so before? I would’ve switched my allegiance away from Trump immediately.

    So what if he’s cantankerous, stubborn, spoiled and difficult. Someone who got along with people better probably would’ve developed more mainstream, compromised politics than Trump along the way.

    Anyone with his platform was bound to get skewered by the media. It was unavoidable.

    Well, IDK. Sometimes I feel like you guys are still enjoying fumes from the victory party on election night, but what-in-the-world makes you think that Trump is not part of the Mandarin class?

    Trickin, maybe you consume so much media that I think you sometimes forget what a President does, what powers he has and what powers oppose him.

    If Trump’s closing the border he’s not a globalist, plain and simple. That’s the #1 thing he can do for the future white America and its historic way of living.

  135. Cam, man: your replies and critiques rarely reflect the point i’m making and that you’re redressing: I know he’s not a globalist; i said I want him TO GET HIS THREE MAJOR CAMPAIGN PLANKS PUSHED THROUGH, and then i spoke of his flaws as an political executive given his narcississm, etc., blah-blah….. My point is he won’t get to do anything beside become mediated folderol if he doesn’t change course……. actually, the talk is right about how Trump is reviving cable-news punditry; gotta admit: Msnbc’s Lawrence O’Brien has been hilarious lately, topped by his sartorial deconstrution of how Bannon was turning his prole-ish wardrobe choices into a subverted power-play via style. fukin’ hilarious stuff….you can tell O’Brien is a mercenary who truly knows what all this shite is worth….You guys probably think of him as some sorta lib globalist, while i think of those guys as entertainers and felllow millionaires to the folk they write about.

  136. My point is he won’t get to do anything beside become mediated folderol if he doesn’t change course……. actually, the talk is right about how Trump is reviving cable-news punditry;

    Well, he’s been a blessing for news media of every type. Our new 24&7 news cycle has only now come of age fully under Trump, under Obama there was so much agreement and admiration from the MSM that it became boring. The WaPo, NYT etc. have been seeing an uptick in subscriptions since the fall.

    And part of the lure of the MSM running anti-Trump or slightly anti-Trump headlines is that it means ratings.

  137. Don’t get too sensitive; and don’t do Lucius’ bidding.

    Your advice is fair enough. Lucius is a young gun and can handle himself. I was going to chime in in your defense when he suggested you were working for Schlomo, but figured that was un-necessary.

  138. “Well, he’s supposed to be a “conservative”, right? But you think that anyone who could write the following really has much in common with the alt right?”

    I think there’s a common problem that is often in play. It’s the same problem that compels PA’s disgust and epithet in his last comment, and ‘it’ is this: problem is, these national media figures are no longer singled out voices of the people, but rather more or less in the socio-economic demo as the people they write about, which is to say, folk who make on average anywhere from 150k to 500k a year; and that could include everyone from columnists at the Washpost and nytimes to any national political rag (when not farmed out assignments to interns) and this is uniform and pervasive enough to form a class-consciousness.

    Now Brooks is probably at the upper end of that wage estimate i offered; and of course, charming bits of Anglo-Saxon base and lasting folklore aside some new spice and flavor from Latin America very easily could be charming when you’re quite protected and free of financial burden or unthreatened from migrants who can turn your working-class family wage into an hourly sinkhole. They get very clueless and insulting. Still, I don’t think Brooks is a genuine hater of ‘Dying White America”; in fact, I think he said it in the sense that ‘it,’ the decreasing white population, was a fact that existed outside his choice, i.e., it was more a demo-trending acknowledgement than it was a personal with, but who knows.

    I still think that white Anglo-Saxon culture and aesthetic is so meta and pervasive in this country that it’s folly and, in fact, unimaginable to imagine a disappearance of ‘white culture.’

    Perhaps more urgency is conveyed if people would take a good, hard look at just what core premise and foundation a white Judeao-Christian culture does provide and make possible, versus what a NAM-majority demographic makes possible and IMpossible. Therein lies the tonic to wake America up.

    It’s ironic and unasked-for so far, but I for one am a NAM who would reflexively and proudly stand up for the necessity as well as purely cultural reward of a renewed, blessed and acknowledged white American demographic and culture.

    The time has come for ‘the other’ to acknowledge as much; that old ‘banana’/’oreo’/’uncle tom onus is no longer necessary or called for.

    White man, I say it again: stand the fuk up and take a rightful bow!!

  139. Elk…

    You have things inverted somewhat. Your principled point was that white man must operate by a “credit where credit is due” ethos or his is into the dustbin of history. Yet, you do not tie this ethos to (C)apitalism in stark contrast to (c)apitalism?

    Now, whether homosexuality is a “developmental disorder” is neither here nor there GIVEN an agreed upon existential crisis? In other words, if “white” self-annihilators are the “developmental disorder” that you speak of then the origin of their self-destructive desire is no longer in need of explanation. It simply IS…

    Homosexuality IS a perpetuating self-annihilation…

    A self-evident, “developing” disorder.

    Do you aim to be prophetable?

  140. Eleven: deportations, cleansing, bloodshed. A successful reconquista would objectively be good for Whites across the ideological spectrum for obvious reasons. (If those reasons are not obvious to some: the sole alternative to White supremacy in our own countries is White genocide, and with it, no more classical music). But the imagery of reclaiming our lands is scary because where wood is chopped, there fly splinters. And more than one liberal may be called to account for his role in race-replacement.

    I personally believe that The Wrath Of The Awakened Saxon is wrong in its first sentence. And an argument could be made that the poem as a whole agrees.

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