The Fundamental Question

We’re a hodgepodge of nations that’s at each other’s throats over six gorillion differences, all of which fall on one or the other side of the political divide between nationalists and globalists. Those divisions run through families and between friends. Talking with liberals is a waste of time for two reasons.

One, appeals to higher values and self-interest are foreign language to libs. There is no communication because we live in different worlds, like black-square and white-square bishops on the chessboard: proximate but never connecting. Namely, the Right follows Truth, the Left follows Power.

Two, it’s bad Game to try to woo them back to sanity. All it does is stroke their ego, validating liberals’ schema that they have the power, ergo moral and intellectual high ground. It’s better to freeze them out and be curt even in nonpolitical contact to flip the abuse-supplication script that they’ve become too comfortable with over the past decades of cuckservatism.

But if someone who’s on the fence approaches you in good faith, know that our differences can be worked out as long as we agree on the fundamental question. Which is:

Do you believe that immigration to this country should be increased, or reversed?

There is no splitting the difference, no middle ground. The arrow of destiny can only go in one or the other direction.



or ours:



42 thoughts on “The Fundamental Question

  1. Pingback: The Fundamental Question – Notwende

  2. Pingback: The Fundamental Question | Reaction Times

  3. Ours man! By the way, I am an Indian immigrant (naturalized citizen), grateful for this great land of opportunity. Its weird how all the legal immigrants (at least the thinking ones) end up conservatives….The left/libs/dems are killing this great country/idea/constitution. Like was said by one of the founding fathers, “Its a republic, IF you can keep it.”

  4. Your point about higher values and self interest is pretty genius.

    They get you coming and going. If you’re a normal human being you have some higher values which they disregard. You also have a healthy self interest which is then disregarded.

  5. They even disregard their own self-interest, including paternal instincts. I had an illuminating and slightly unsettling conversation with liberals last winter. The summary version:

    Lib: (knows that I participate in AltRight blogging, disapproves of my restrictive attitude on immigration, insists that Central Americans are hard workers)

    Me: (I successfully convince him that Aztecs in America hate his children. I even make a dramatic sweep of hand in the direction of a group of kids, including his own, noisily running around.)

    Lib: (concedes that yeah, its race war.)

    Me: (thinking I made a break-thru and made him reevaluate liberalism for the sake of the next generation. I was wrong.)

    Lib: “You and that fuck Richard Spencer, I hold you personally responsible for the death of that girl in Charlottesville.”

    Me: (having had enough of the inanity) “Good riddance, fat pig.”

    Lib: (that blindsided him. A gleam of new respect in his eyes. No response. Subject changed.)

  6. Pingback: The Fundamental Question | Western Rifle Shooters Association

  7. Pingback: The Fundamental Question « Los Diablos Tejano

  8. The fundamental question is one of Identity, not Belief or Ideology. That non-White Madonna figure is utterly damning. They’re slowing transforming Rosie the Riveteer into a Hispanic, ditto the Butter Girl. Next is James Bond, though sans the slow transformation.

  9. They all go back to where they came from, or other methods will rely, and no more come in. To all those that say they can’t all be sent back, I say, “They GOT HERE some how, didn’t they?” And besides, if gentleness and coaxing do not work, sterner methods must be used.

  10. If one bro is for more immigrants and minorities, he is the Enemy and not of the Body. He must be cast out with them.

  11. Pingback: A time for choosing – Cold Fury

  12. — Consider the following…” (Michelangelo’s Pieta)

    It’s a sublime work of art. In fact some years ago a comment of mine inspired an artist to create a stunning image of Vicki Weaver.


    Michelangelo’s Pieta is not the right photo to represent our future with here. The insect-vigor of a Somalian bitch gibs-grabber is better countered with a strong vengeful White woman’s face, not with a representation of mourning.

  13. “They even disregard their own self-interest, including paternal instincts.”

    Would you “reason” with an animal ‘rescue-hoarder,’ who despite standing amidst 150 cats, fifteen of them dead, the rest emaciated and covered in excrement, demands she be enabled to “rescue” more cats?

    Altruism generates the same dopamine cocktail in the altruists’ minds as does cocaine or sex. Some people are clearly addicted, in every sense of the word, to this endogenous reward-center cocktail. Their rationalizations for why they LUUUV others and MUUUUST help them (no matter the cost to themselves, their neighbors or the foreigners themselves) are identical to the rationalizations employed by those addicted to gambling, sex, pornography or any drug you can name.

    No one “talks” another person out of his or her addiction.

  14. The puzzle still is libs who arent by any measure altruistic. They in fact make little effort to hide their disdain for diversity, except for mouthing empty slogans in favor of it. Examples of such non-altruists can be an Irish-American lifelong Democrat who thinks that Dems are “for the little guy.” Or a fading-looks woman who makes herself feel better by calling average middle class Whites “low class retards” even though she’s not necessarily brighter or wealthier, or even better-credentialed than those people.

    There is an element of aspiration to the liberal elite. That’s rational self-intetest, not identity or addiction. So youd think you could rationally talk them out of it, as you would, for example, if the subject were investment advice and not politics. And yet, there is that faux-identitarian fanaticism attached to their anti-White leftism.

    And their manic hatred of Trump (more accurately, hatred of Trump voters).

    One reason for that with Millennials and some GenXers is the mindfuck of GWB, whose duplicitous presidency poisoned traditional things such as masculinity, Christianity, and patriotism for a generation.

  15. It is a puzzle.
    For me (a naturalist through-and-through) it begs the question:
    Is self-aggrandizement through hating on one’s own tribe a product of normal genetic tendencies turned “on” in a condition of plenitude, or do we watch the result of such suicidal tendencies propagate generation-by-generation because such tendencies are not (as would normally be the case) culled from the populace by hardship.

    In the end, I guess I don’t care. When this period of putting Prosperity on Plastic (MasterCard) ends, I guess I won’t struggle too hard to know on whom to put the front sight.

  16. I wonder if it’s simple aggrandizement or something like dividing people (one’s own, not across racial or identitarian lines) into the Elect vs Sheeple. I called that “No. 2 liberal” here:


    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.

  17. It’s been said that all the freedoms are meaningless without a truly blank spot on the map. Currently, reversing the increasingly streamlined immigration complex is a sure way of getting back that crucial blank on the map, even if it’s initially simply the psychic map. Genuine understanding behind truly functional borders, allowing for those primordial “growths until the harvest,” lays the necessary foundation (a bâtonnage of the virtues) for unconstrained problem-solving and shrewd specification in the more explorative crafts and quests.

  18. Just curious —— do you have a title or more information on that hideous ghetto goblin statue? I’m assuming it’s a statue and not one of those street “performer” pests that demand money from passersby. It’s truly repulsive; I’d be tempted to knock it over if it was in my city.

  19. It’s so hideous you’d think it’s a street troll-job. Maybe it is? That statue is in Göteborg, Sweden.

    The sculpture of the beautiful woman is by French-born U.S. sculptor Philippe Faraut.

  20. Currently, reversing the increasingly streamlined immigration complex is a sure way of getting back that crucial blank on the map, even if it’s initially simply the psychic map. — EPG

    Mass immigration just is “radical autonomy” and the self-annihilation of a host nation. And that “blank” on our “psychic map” is The Land of white (S)upremacy.

  21. On the serious, this is a good point, a meta-point if you will:

    Two, it’s bad Game to try to woo them back to sanity. All it does is stroke their ego, validating liberals’ schema that they have the power, ergo moral and intellectual high ground. It’s better to freeze them out and be curt even in nonpolitical contact to flip the abuse-supplication script that they’ve become too comfortable with over the past decades of cuckservatism.

  22. At this point it’s not rocket science. I don’t know that it ever was, but at this point it’s not.

    Ffs we have the Dalai Lama saying that Europe is for Europeans.

    What’s even the argument anymore?

    America may likely have to be partitioned, since it looks like the global satan plan isn’t going to work.

    Porter has a current post about his successful Twitter comment that got picked up by Ann Coulter. He called diversity a steaming pile of shit on a silver platter, that everyone has to pretend to be love the beautiful sight of, or in the alternative face consequences.

    And he counters some of the “arguments” that he received.

    But how can people of bad faith be argued with?

    Diversity is a totem word. It’s not being used in any precise sense. It means non-whites having access to White living space. But beneath and within that meaning it can be used a thousand different ways.

    It’s a big concept word like “balance”, which is about the closest like-concept for the semantic niche that diversity occupies, that I could come up with.

    “Balance. It’s the key to life.”

    What, you want to argue against Balance? Everyone needs Balance, you can’t have too much of it. Balance is required for good food and a good environment. In fact our life depends on it. Therefore if you oppose Balance you are stupid and oppose life itself.

  23. A site I’ve not heard of picked up this post. At a glance it’s a popular mainstream GOP aggregator/forum. A forum member graciously linked to this post, quoting part of it.

    Another person alerted site moderators to the nature of this blog: “Read the article…the comments there caused me to poke around that site some more. Then saw the OP has 30 posts here. Not so sure you want this here”

    Site moderator wrote: “An examination of the blog site reveals a decided racist bent. Locking this thread.”

    It’s not liberals or SJWs, it’s Republicans. Are they afraid of SJW disapproval? They use handles and not real names, so no excuse on that front. Boomers? Paul Ryan Booster Club? They wish to shelter any black conservatives in their midst from thought-provoking material?

    It was strange to cause someone to shield his eyes from the brightness of the mirror I’m holding up.

    “But how can people of bad faith be argued with?” — asks Elk.

    They can’t. How can ostriches be argued with?

  24. I checked out Porter’s article. Excellent.

    He makes a good taxonomy of pro-Diversity rhetoric. “Hybrid Vigor” gets great treatment:

    I always appreciate expressions of honest concern from those who want me dead. So it is with leftists who wring their hands over the health of Western genetic stocks in the absence of wholesome African transfusions. Truly there is no more good faith expression than those who look about the bloody and acidic landscape of modern London and worry that its white citizens might be prone to hemophilia and the Hapsburg jaw.

  25. PA, I read your copied comment as this:
    Leftists consider themselves “the Elect.”
    The Elect are defined as those who labor to make Earth and its people better off, using John Lennon’s “Imagine” as template (no war, no hunger, no greed…all living as brothers in harmony.)

    To the Elect, there are three and only three categories of human:
    1. Other Elect.
    2. Objects of their affections.
    3. Obstacles to be exterminated.

    If you’re not standing shoulder-to-shoulder with them in adulation of (their conception of) the weak/victims or if you do not belong to a class of people deemed weak or victim by their dogma, then you are evil incarnate, an obstacle to be crushed by any means necessary. Notice that this framework deifies all those in the Elect, while dehumanizing both their objects and obstacles. The former are simply chess pieces harboring no agency, to be moved at will by the Elect, and the latter are, well, that’s obvious.

    This does help me frame things properly.

  26. To the Elect, there are three and only three categories of human

    Yes. That’s downstream of the psychological illustration in No. 2 Liberal. The way they categorize people is how those inchoate personal fears and impulses get translated into coherent ideological expressions.

    It’s important to stress that individually, many liberals do not subscribe to “Objects of their affections” designation for blacks/browns. Some Millennial liberals openly despise them (witnesd those young libs drunk among their own). But to remain in good standing with Power, those same libs grasp for examples of minos who are “nice” or “smart” or something, for an opportunity to properly affirm nonWhites without too much cognitive dissinance.

    Also, that’s why they jumped so furiously on the Transsexual Rights bandwagon: a new victim group. Hopefully one that’s not as abhorrent as minos.

    Ultimately, conceptualizing themselves as Elect over the Sheeple comes from weak-male, or gamma male, character. They yearn to be identified as superior in a world populated by many men who are stronger, more intelligent, luckier, wealthier, and more attractive than they are.

    3. Obstacles to be exterminated.

    Leftists do think that of us. Good judgment is required to tell the difference between a “Bernie Bro” who has liberal inclinations but ultimately heads toward MAGA on a different path, vs those who have truly stepped over to the dark side of Leftism.

    The latter, if they are people you personally know and cant always avoid contact with, have to be treated coldly. The way youd deal with a shitbag relative who embezzled money from his friend. As people of low character.

    It’s very important to stop trying to reach out to them. They have to feel your contempt, even if you’re subtle about it.

  27. — she’s all gushing about how my kids will have a new cousin soon

    You cant go soft here out of pity or decorum. Even if you have to be passive about it, make no gestures of acceptance whatsoever.

    “Not my circus, not my monkeys” as goes the saying, if they push you to be inclusive. You are not responsible for your relative’s own-goal.

  28. Less than useless.
    Putting a weak link intentionally into the chain you use to bar the door from demons is an obvious error. As you allude, it gets complicated if there’s a familial connection. I can think of few things worse than to count on someone to guard the door and discover they were too stupid or delusional to avoid opening it to those bent on rape and slaughter.

  29. The reality is is that each and everyone of us wants our little bit of “radical autonomy” such that the “best” argument we have against the “extremist” is that he wants more (self-annihilation). And that’s weak ass “game.”

    So what’s the alt-turn-additive?


    The ENEMY TELLS YOU EXACTLY that this memes:

    “white (s)upremacy.”

    Cuck cuck!!!

    Buttjew don’t OWN “it.”

    Buttjew won’t OWN “it.”

    And jew will not know “it” as white (S)upremacy…

    Wake up, white boy… Wake up, son.

    The deformed stoopers are coming.

  30. PA:

    But if someone who’s on the fence approaches you in good faith, know that our differences can be worked out as long as we agree on the fundamental question. Which is:

    Do you believe that immigration to this country should be increased, or reversed?

    Horus the Avenger (Bob Whittaker spin-off, still podcasts on TRS but his earlier “Follow the White Rabbit” stuff was golden) has something he calls, “The Iron Question.”

    It’s, “Are you Pro-White, or are you Anti-White?”

    I like the “Iron Question” better. It’s more fundamental and encompassing. Totally not dissing you, this is a great post.

Comments are closed.