Eighties Movies

I’m on a kick of re-watching 1980s films that I had not seen since I was in my teens during that decade. It’s a wild time-capsule experience due to the passing of time and my own age-related change in perspective.

Ten films are reviewed in this post, possibly in thematic order. There are spoilers, but there is a time limit on spoiler-warning courtesy.


1. “Top Gun” – Saw it in a movie theater upon its release in 1986, never since. It’s next on my list because one of the best episodes of “Murdoch Murdoch” borrows its aesthetics.

2. “Animal House” – This 1970s comedy is a forerunner to Eighties’ sex comedies. I watched it for the first time about seven years ago. The story culminates on the collapse of the town dignitaries’ parade bleachers. The red, white and blue streamers falling with the collapsing structure is so obvious a disclosure of how they feel about America, her traditional institutions, authority figures, patriotic iconography. It was also weirdly evocative of the collapse of the World Trade Center towers 23 years later.

I was disgusted with the whole thing. All those years, having never had seen it but having cheered on to “food fight!” and “to-ga! to-ga!” with the bros… It wasn’t the humor. It was the – how to put it. Honor should always be in the backdrop of things, even in ribald comedies. Antagonists in fiction shouldn’t be humiliated and then destroyed unless they objectively deserve it the way some people deserve capital punishment. In other words, being a strict authority figure and a bit of a dick, or being tall, blond and rich aren’t good cause for total personal destruction. If you’re not a sociopath or a Gamma Personality, you will agree with me on this.

This is why Eighties teen- or sex-comedies tended to make me feel like I need a shower. Of course I loved the nudity and the dirty humor. But the question always bugged me: was it really necessary to so completely destroy the bad guy? Below my threshold of consciousness, an alternate script was writing itself, in which the enemies shake hands and say “Honest misunderstanding. I see your point of view.”

Back to “Animal House.” What’s even more special, is the movie’s coda, the end-credits notes on what everyone’s been up to since graduation. The special houseguest’s id on full display:

  • All-American Fraternity Brother No. 1: He goes to prison and gets raped! (hahahaahahah!)
  • All-American Fraternity Brother No. 2: He goes to Vietnam and gets fragged by his own men! (hahahahaah!!! – catch my breath – hahaha! hahahaaah!!!!!)


3. “Forrest Gump” – A ’90s movie and a hurrah for civic nationalism. (I hate that term because it’s neither civic nor nationalism and it dignifies cuckservatism). To recapitulate my take on civic nationalism:

It was a moment in time, the American political order of the 1980s, which was a detente in the wake of 1960s disruptions. Official color-blindness, Whites run and own everything, minorities enjoy the benefits of White rule along with autonomy in exchange for knowing their place; Whites, in turn, keep the peace by not talking negatively about minorities.

An unstable peace because it was in essence a papered-over capitulation. They won the ’60s, so they weren’t going to be satisfied with White surrender terms of the ’80s, which weren’t all that bad for us. The flaw of that peace: it dictated that we must continue to cede ground, they get to continue encroaching.

“Forrest Gump” healed the national wounds of the Sixties by reconciling the political conflicts of that time. Doing so, it codified civic nationalism: violent radical leftism of the Sixties is condemned, drug-use and sexual promiscuity are shown as harmful. It’s okay to be pious and from a small town. That’s why the movie was called “conservative.” On the other hand:

  • Single motherhood is glorified through the characters of Forrest’s mom and then Jenny.
  • Fatherhood is personified in Jenny’s molester dad and Forrest’s involuntary absence during his son’s childhood.
  • A dirt-poor black family becomes rich and gets a White woman servant.
  • An American line of warriors ends on Lieutenant Dan’s childless interracial marriage.


4. “Stand By Me” – One of the great boyhood coming-of-age stories. If you have a preteen son, nephew, or grandson, watch it together. The dynamic among the four boys, the freedom and exploration, and the majestic Oregon landscapes are unforgettable.

Racial diversity diminishes everything it stains, including conversation. Yet here we are, and I have to friggin’ talk about it because… that’s the war they brought to us. This is why, from today’s perspective, “Stand by Me” is so nice to see. Everything in that movie is in visual harmony with human expectations of storytelling. Taken for granted then, consciously cherished now: no diversity in that film. Not one nonwhite character.

Tokenism kills the friendship vibes in such stories today, like adding an element that knocks down the story’s chemistry back to exactly the sum of its parts, while in its racially-coherent form you get the magic of friendship and discovery. (More about that when you get to “The Breakfast Club.”)


5. “Lucas” – The title character is a gamma male, repellent to Maggie when he leans to kiss her. She’s a gorgeous blonde Lucas befriended over the summer, before high school hierarchy reasserted itself in line with the laws of nature. Charlie Sheen’s alpha male quarterback is a sympathetic character, even though he is Lucas’ antagonist. That’s because the conflict here isn’t man vs. man, even as the quarterback “stole” Maggie and the other football players pick on Lucas. The conflict is man vs. himself. To earn respect, Lucas has to overcome the web of lies he had woven around himself and let go of his unearned entitlement to social status.

To achieve that, he joins the football team as a wide receiver. Due to his small size and lack of physical talent, he warms the bench for an entire season. And then — clutch moment. Final seconds of the game and his team is down by only a few points. Time for one play to get the come-from-behind win. The play call: go deep. Do or die. With one of the starters hurt, the coach puts Lucas on the field. The ball is snapped, all the receivers go deep. The quarterback (Charlie Sheen) scrambles away from pressure but can’t find an open man.

Except Lucas, who is all alone in the end zone. The opposing defense either doesn’t bother to cover him or they don’t notice him because he’s so small. The quarterback also ignores Lucas, who is wildly waving “I’m open!” Finally, in desperation, he throws a deep bomb to Lucas. A perfect throw. Lucas catc– drops – the pass! He’s instantly piled-on by the defenders, seriously injured, and taken to a hospital. His team loses the game.

Lucas eventually returns to school. Everyone’s eyes are upon him as he walks toward his locker. He knows that he had let them all down. The movie ends on a wonderful scene.


6. “Vision Quest” – My favorite ’80s movie in the teen genre. On the personal level, I related to the main character, played by Matthew Modine. Even my hair was similar to his. The story is about a high school wrestler’s quest.

An interest I indulge in on occasion is to take a decades-old image of a landscape and compare it to that same place today on Google Streetview. The older image might come from a personal photo, my recollection of being somewhere during childhood, or a scene from an older film.

Journey’s Only the Young is on the “Vision Quest” soundtrack. The video opens with Modine’s character running along a city bridge with a compelling mountain background. I learned that the movie was set and filmed in Spokane, WA. Within minutes, I located the bridge in Streetview. If anyone is curious, it’s North Monroe Street, looking west. The view hasn’t changed that much in 33 years.


Google image capture: Sep. 2018


7. “An Officer and a Gentleman” – This is one of three films on this list that was shot in the Pacific Northwest and features the landscape in all of its beauty. Of the big themes in this excellent film, one stands out as anachronistic: the earlier generations’ dream of upward class mobility. That’s where Boomers and those who followed them fail to communicate with each other. We’re in a much bigger game than social striving: it’s now about survival.

To be triumphantly carried out of her factory job and become a Naval officer’s wife? Here is that final scene. We don’t have factories, we don’t have working-class jobs, except for mongoloid aliens. I haven’t seen that film since 1983. That factory floor… nobody is fat. God, it stings.


8. “The Breakfast Club” – P.J. O’Rourke wrote an article in memory of John Hughes four years ago. There is a lot going on there. I’ll just excerpt the part in which he focuses on the ethnic integrity of the five main characters, the high school students serving their Saturday detention:

Imagine, painfully, a 2015 remake of The Breakfast Club. Latino-American, African-American, […] John kept his characters alike as possible, within the spectrum of high school anthropology, in order to make them as different as possible, within the spectrum of individuals. All five members of the Breakfast Club have Anglo-Saxon last names. All are attractive.

Imperial force-mixing of nations corrupts any fruit of human aspirations. And not just art, but even a study in human nature. Any higher endeavor degenerates to exactly the sum of its dissonant parts.

The world changed more dramatically between 1990 – 2020 than it did between 1500 – 1990. For us GenX’ers, those changes hit us just as we were entering adulthood, so our young sense of survival was attuned to the coming cataclysm. We felt it in our bones the way a wild animal feels the distant, silent advance of a storm. By that same time, Boomers’ animal instincts had been dulled with age and material satisfaction.

That disparity in perception of existential danger is why generations don’t see eye-to-eye. Understanding that dynamic makes it easier to have a more charitable perspective on the Baby Boomer generation over what we see as their callousness toward their grandchildren but which they see as something that they had rightfully earned:



9. “Witness” – The story arc involves the growing sexual chemistry between the young Amish widow and Harrison Ford’s character. She has a nine-year-old son. Ford plays an honest cop who is being sheltered from crooked cops by the Amish, living as one of them until he recovers from his gunshot wound. The widow and the cop develop an attraction to each other, which over time they can barely control. A village elder warns her that people are noticing her subtle indiscretions and she risks shunning. But like a lioness in heat, she won’t have any of that and talks back to the elder with proud words of feminist defiance.

The film’s message is not feminist. To honor her people, to live among them with her little boy and to enjoy the comfort and protection of her folk, she had to not only be chaste, but also refrain from creating any appearance of fornication. As Ford’s character told her on the morning after she enticed him to spy on her bathing: “If we’d made love last night I’d have to stay. Or you’d have to leave.”

The film shows the classic conflict of Individual vs. Society. The judgment of “Witness” is cast in favor of society: woman’s feminine instincts may not be let unbound.

Amish men don’t get a free ride, either. They too must contain their masculine instincts. For one, they are not free to lay a beating on a bunch of local yahoos who regularly harass them. “It’s not our way,” an Amish elder tells the cop. In this powerful scene, these strong, prime young Amish men swallow their pride and force themselves to turn the other cheek, also for the good of their people.


10. “Heathers” – Three decades later, Veronica née Sawyer still wakes up in the middle of the night with a racing heart and racing thoughts: “There is no statute of limitations on murder.”

The Death Of Hamlet

It’s my translation of Zbigniew Herbert’s “Elegy of Fortinbras” (1961). Fortinbras is William Shakespeare’s fictional Norwegian prince and conqueror of Denmark. He appears in the final scene of “Hamlet.” The themes that are of interest to us now:

  • The finality of the death of the old regime
  • The imposition of martial order over a cucked country (Mister President?)
  • The unbridgeable gap between Romanticism and Realism
  • Matter and spirit

Here is the musical interpretation. It is perfect. Below is the original and translated text, with my brief commentary in bold type leading off each verse.

Verse 1. – Fortinbras confesses of his fondness for the lifeless enemy. 

Teraz kiedy zostaliśmy sami możemy porozmawiać książę jak mężczyzna z mężczyzną
chociaż leżysz na schodach i widzisz tyle co martwa mrówka 

to znaczy czarne słońce o złamanych promieniach 

Now that we’re alone we can talk Prince man to man
though you lie on the stairs and see no more than a dead ant
nothing but a black sun with broken rays

Nigdy nie mogłem myśleć o twoich dłoniach bez uśmiechu 
i teraz kiedy leżą na kamieniu jak strącone gniazda 
są tak samo bezbronne jak przedtem To jest właśnie koniec 
Ręce leżą osobno Szpada leży osobno Osobno głowa 
I nogi rycerza w miękkich pantoflach

I could never think of your hands without smiling
and now that they lie on the stone like fallen nests
they are as defenseless as before The end is exactly this 
The hands lie apart The sword lies separate The head separate
and the knight’s feet in soft slippers

Verse 2. (1:35) – His eulogy shifts to from private to public matters. 

Pogrzeb mieć będziesz żołnierski chociaż nie byłeś żołnierzem
jest to jedyny rytuał na jakim trochę się znam 

You will have a soldier’s funeral though you weren’t a soldier 
it is the only ritual I am somewhat acquainted with

Nie będzie gromnic i śpiewu będą lonty i huk
kir wleczony po bruku hełmy podkute buty konie artyleryjskie 

werbel werbel wiem nic pięknego  

There will be no candles no singing there’ll be cannon fuses and salvos 
Crape dragged on cobblestones helmets studded boots artillery horses  
drumming drumming I know it’s nothing exquisite

to będą moje manewry przed objęciem władzy
trzeba wziąć miasto za gardło i wstrząsnąć nim trochę

those will be my maneuvers as I assume control
one has to take the city by the throat and shake it a bit

Verse 3. (2:46) – On Hamlet’s errors.

Tak czy owak musiałeś zginąć Hamlecie nie byłeś do życia
wierzyłeś w kryształowe pojęcia a nie glinę ludzką
żyłeś ciągłymi skurczami jak we śnie łowiłeś chimery
łapczywie gryzłeś powietrze i natychmiast wymiotowałeś 

Anyhow you had to perish Hamlet you were not for life
you believed in crystal notions not in human clay
always twitching as if asleep you hunted chimeras
wolfishly you bit at the air only to vomit

nie umiałeś żadnej ludzkiej rzeczy
nawet oddychać nie umiałeś

you couldn’t do a single human thing
you did not even know how to breathe

Verse 4. (3:35) – Candor, judgment, a touch of envy.

Teraz masz spokój Hamlecie zrobiłeś co do ciebie należało
i masz spokój Reszta nie jest milczeniem ale należy do mnie 

wybrałeś część łatwiejszą efektywny sztych 

Now you have peace Hamlet you accomplished what you had to
and you have peace The rest is not silence but it belongs to me
you chose the easier part an elegant thrust

lecz czymże jest śmierć bohaterska wobec wiecznego czuwania 
z zimnym jabłkiem w dłoni na wysokim krześle 

z widokiem na mrowisko i tarczę zegara 

but what is heroic death compared to eternal vigilance
with a cold apple in one’s hand on a raised chair
with a view on the anthill and on the clock’s dial

Verse 5. (4:23) – The two worlds part ways.

Żegnaj książę czeka na mnie projekt kanalizacji
i dekret w sprawie prostytutek i żebraków 

muszę także obmyślić lepszy system więzień 

gdyż jak zauważyłeś słusznie Dania jest więzieniem 

Adieu Prince I have tasks a sewer project
and a decree on prostitutes and beggars
I must also elaborate a better system of prisons
since as you justly said Denmark is a prison

Odchodzę do moich spraw Dziś w nocy urodzi się  
Gwiazda Hamlet Nigdy się nie spotkamy

To co po mnie zostanie nie będzie przedmiotem tragedii

I go to my affairs This night is born
a star named Hamlet We shall never meet
what I shall leave will not be the subject of a tragedy

Coda. (5:12) – The coffin is lowered but some things are immortal.

Ani nam witać się ani żegnać żyjemy na archipelagach
A ta woda te słowa cóż mogą cóż mogą książę

It is not for us to greet each other or bid farewell we live on archipelagos
and that water these words what can they do what can they do Prince

(open thread)

Military Leadership And Diversity

For those who are unfamiliar with the basics of the military, there are two main tiers of rank structure: enlisted soldier and commissioned officer.

In the Army, the enlisted man starts out as a Private, typically a 17-year-old high school graduate and advances through several ranks of sergeant, also known as non-commissioned officer (NCO). The enlisted ranks top off with senior NCOs such as Sergeant Major and up.

Army’s commissioned officers start out as Lieutenants, who had just graduated from their university’s ROTC program or from a service academy such as the one at West Point, NY. Lieutenants are promoted to Captain, Major, Colonel, and ultimately to the Generals who command their country’s armed forces.

By doctrine, officers are leaders of the enlisted. And by doctrine and in practice, the experienced enlisted, specifically NCOs or sergeants, are known as the backbone of the Army. The officer is always the senior, so a 50-year-old Sergeant Major will salute the 21-year-old West Point graduate and call him Sir (or ma’am). That’s how it’s always been… but. The young Lieutenant better know who he is: a fresh-face who needs to know when to take charge and when to listen and gain experience as an officer. The sergeant will give him every proper courtesy, but woe to the Second Lieutenant who disrespects a good NCO and their commanding officer hears of this.

I glossed over a lot above, but that’s to give an idea of what that, which follows is about. West Point graduates are newly-commissioned Army officers. The photo is from Time magazine. The article begins with:

The class of cadets preparing to jubilantly toss their caps in the air at the U.S. Military Academy’s graduation ceremony Saturday includes 34 black women, a record number that’s a sign of concerted efforts to diversify West Point’s Long Gray Line.

Black Female Cadets

I don’t know if anyone still reads Time but the article does say that there is still a lot to be done:

West Point remains mostly white and mostly male. The 34 women comprise a thin slice of the roughly 1,000 cadets in the Class of 2019. Sometimes, they’re the only women of color in a classroom. Still, cadets said they’re proud to be part of a milestone at the historic academy after four years of testing their limits.

Help me here. The US military is an asset of globalists (Smedley Butler’s “War is a Racket” speech). There are enemies of central banking to be crushed, Russia to get into a grind with. So why degrade your asset by phasing out the world’s most talented warrior pool, Anglo-Germanic men, instead of keeping them loyal? If that’s because globohomo wants military leaders who will obey an order to run a napalm sortie on White deplorables — they’re putting their chips on the martial prowess of women?

Diversity among military officers makes a right wing coup more, not less, likely because ethnic and racial friction will polarize the upper ranks.

Maybe I’m overthinking, there is no master plan. Maybe the 34 token cadets are the cost of running the multiethnic American empire. Or those of the ruling class are saps: they feel bad when they see natural inequality and discharge that discomfort by celebrating diversity.

People of different identities can work together effectively. Until things become stressful, and then tribalism reasserts itself. In corporate hierarchical structures, cordial relationships among diverse employees of similar intelligence is the norm. The military, even in peacetime, is where stress spikes into the red.

So there is no military cohesion if there is no ethnic cohesion. There are few things enlisted soldiers resent more than officers of an alien culture. Officers of an alien culture, in turn, don’t have much in the way of regard for their enlisted subordinates. A poster on Gab shares this anecdote:

I can assure you, having been an instructor at one of the nation’s academies… nine out of ten of the darker students do not belong, and the white students know it and speak about and admit it in hushed tones when among good company.

It’s driving a rift in the military. When I was a young NCO, I had a dipfuck black junior officer give me an order that would have resulted in damage to gear had I passed that word on to my men. Any good NCO knows that junior officers sometimes need time to gain experience and will rise to their station with guidance. Being mindful of this, I asked the lieutenant for a word where I politely explained to him what would happen to the gear if we did as he instructed, and what actually needed doing.

Cocksucker locked horns with me, and threatened to NJP [administrative punishment] my ass. I told him that he had been advised by technically proficient subordinate with the authority of my billet superseding his rank on the matter that his order would result in mission gear damage and I would not pass down that order. Trap set. He doubled down, and hauled me off to charge me. I responded to my SNCO [senior NCO] with a request for mast. Not only was the gear damaged, I got my apology in front of the CO [commanding officer] and SgtMaj.

There were multitudes of times I corrected or advised junior officers with the respect owed to them and in private. White officers, as with most white men, displayed some humility and appreciative attitude for being shown the ropes.

Among the most satisfying relationships a man can have is that between a junior and a senior-ranking man where there is mutual trust and competence. That’s part of esprit de corps. The salute is the traditional acknowledgment of that relationship. Racial diversity and the presence of women zap that spirit.

This crossed my mind as I first read the above anecdote: his commanding officer and others in the chain of command were traditional American military men. He doesn’t say that they were White but it’s reasonable to imagine a different situation, one in which that authority looks like the photo at the top of this post.

A Prediction For England

The late Lawrence Auster, an anglophile, used to call the UK “the dead isle.” But he stressed that his metaphor allows for a rebirth. Author Francis Meyrick summarizes his own seven predictions thusly:

In “The Coming European Civil War(s)”, we continue to steadily predict:

1) the inevitable -quiet- rise of armed paramilitary ‘neighborhood defense’ patriot-Nationalist forces, organised under a common ideological umbrella, but carefully dispersed in anti-infiltration local cell structures. We suggest that an organisation numbering in the mere hundreds, can fundamentally change the course of History.

2) The possibility of a [N.Z.] type mosque attack is growing, and won’t really surprise anybody.

3) the likelihood of vicious, depraved, MUSLIM (not ‘Asian’) child rape gang members (not ‘grooming gang misguided gentlemen’) getting summarily shot on British streets – much to the hysterical dismay of meckering so-called ‘Liberal’ (ha!) do-gooders.

4) the accelerating procurement of conventional weaponry from Eastern Europe, especially the Balkans

5) the likelihood that CNC computer-mill weapon manufacturing will become a more and more potent factor. We are not talking one-shot plastic death traps, but aluminum & polymer battle ready fire arms. For academic research reasons, I have built several myself, and hurled hundreds of rounds down range. The technology works, and potentially may contribute to the rearmament of Europe.

6) British Intelligence services will ramp up their already feverish surveillance of Social Media, and Patriots just as quickly will VPN their way around that.

7) Christians will increasingly split into two broad groupings. The first will be passive, abhor violence, and will be followers of what we may term “Jesus-meek-and-mild”. The second group of Christians however will be grimly realistic, based, and much more in favor of the exhortation found in Nehemiah 6:16

“Join your section, and pick up your trowel and sword.”

Which Historic Parallel With President Trump?

“And we are here as on a darkling plain.” I swing between the black pill and the white pill. Western countries are under genocidal alien rule. Poz chokes the civilized world. It’s not natural but that’s the reality of the early 21st century.

What’s Trump’s analogue in east-central European history? Let’s assume that to be a helpful question, one that shines a light on perhaps some parallel between one occupied nation then, and unfree nations now.

Americans are ruled by malicious transnational interests, as are Canadians, New Zealanders, English, Swedes, etc. Poland was under foreign occupation for from 1772 to 1918, an era knows as the Partitions during which her people were stateless under the rule of Russian, Prussian, and Austro-Hungarian empires and endured campaigns of forced russification and germanization under their respective occupant. Commonly, historic judgment blames the decadence of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth at the height of its power in the latter half of the 18th century for the Partitions, along with the treason of nobles who sold out to the three partitioning empires. A parallel with present circumstances.

Is Trump our man? Great things happened over the past two years. Hungary’s bold national project is thriving. There is the Gilets Jaunes uprising in France and Matteo Salvini in Italy. At the very least, Trump can be given credit for this apparent US non-interference with Europe’s nationalist awakening. There are also signs that elements of the globalist cabal are losing their cool. And lest we forget, Trump withdrew the United States from the Paris Accord, averting the planned demographic collapse of Republican-majority regions of the country.

Yet immigration is unprecedented in volume, in direct opposition to Trump’s promises during his Presidential campaign. Jarvanka, MIGA, SOTU, WTF. Who is Trump’s historic parallel?

The man who seized destiny…

I was once convinced that Józef Piłsudski (1867 – 1935) is an analogue for Donald Trump. He was a man of extraordinary personal magnetism. A dreamer of the multi-ethnic Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth’s past imperial glories with a resolve to revive that past. From the hostile perspective of the nationalist Right of his time, Piłsudski was an imperialist. From the hostile perspective of the revolutionary Left, he was a mere socialist and unacceptable due to his loathing of Soviet Communism. Yet he captured the hearts of his nation for an eternity. My grandmother told me that she remembers seeing people crying in the streets when news broke that he had died.

Piłsudski’s pivotal moment took place during the waning years of WWI. He commanded 25,000 Polish legionnaires under allegiance to Austria, under whose flag they scored key victories against Russia on the eastern front. Piłsudski was asked to transfer his allegiance from Austria to her ally Germany. This is from historian Norman Davies’ 1981 edition of God’s Playground:

The extent of the German success, and the imminent collapse of Russia, undermined Piłsudski’s original motives. He no more wanted a complete German victory than a Russian one. So on 21 July 1917 he refused to transfer his allegiance from Austria to Germany. Piłsudski’s interview with [Hans Hartwig] von Besseler, the German Governor of Warsaw, was entirely uncompromising:

PIŁSUDSKI: Your Excellency, do you imagine for one moment that you will win the nation’s confidence by hanging Polish insignia on each of the fingers of the hand which is throttling Poland? The Poles know the Prussian stranglehold for what it is.

VON BESSELER: Herr von Piłsudski, you know that in these stirring times Poland needs a leader of vision, and you are the only one whom I have been able to find. If you go along with us, we will give you everything — power, fame, money…

PIŁSUDSKI: Your Excellency does not understand me, and does not wish to understand. If I were to go along with you, Germany would gain one man, whilst I would lose a nation.

(If you just skimmed over the above, re-read von Besseler’s offer and Piłsudski’s reply. Idle thought: did globalists make Donald Trump a similar offer?)

Piłsudski was arrested and imprisoned in Germany for the remainder of WWI. But with the Central Powers’ collapse in 1918, Piłsudski stepped into the power-vacuum created by the chaotic departure of German garrisons from Warsaw and became the head of the newly independent Poland. Two years later, he routed the Soviet Union in a battle that became known as “The Miracle on the Vistula,” strangling Vladimir Lenin’s dream of marching his armies on to Berlin to ignite a Bolshevik Revolution in continental Europe. 

Piłsudski’s physiognomy: soldier, leader, visionary.


… or the man who wanted to work with the system?

But what if instead of that story of deliverance and destiny, Trump’s historic parallel is a different figure? Namely, margrave Aleksander Wielopolski (1803 – 1877). Margrave is a hereditary title of the Holy Roman Empire’s legacy. Wielopolski ran Poland’s civil administration within the Russian Empire. To forestall the bloodshed that would result from Poland’s growing independence movement, he ordered a conscription of Polish nationalists into twenty-year enlistments in the Tsar’s army. That decision sparked the January 1863 Uprising that lasted almost a year and a half, the very outcome Wielopolski wanted to avoid.

Wielopolski’s physiognomy: diplomat, thinker, conservative.


When following along with this song about the ill-fated 1863 Uprising, my translation below, replace “Margrave Wielopolski” with “President Trump” and “Tsar” with (((globalists))). Does the analogy work? It’s too soon to tell.

Margrave Wielopolski

Through Saxon square, Circassian hundreds gallop
And by the palace, a hundred campfires burn
How do you do it, Your Excellency
That you’re despised on every side?

Lord Margrave, you don’t think in lockstep
So with the Tsar you’re already suspect
Neither Petersburg nor Moscow will trust
A Pole who has his own plans

Lord Margrave still walks the tightrope
It’s dangerous to walk so high
After all, disaster won’t spare him
Because bad luck has he, who is born here

Your contempt, no one will forgive
We’re superstitious, fervent and teary
And you’re proud, you won’t deign wallow
In the national borscht with us

Why splash logic in our faces?
We did not read Hegel, sire
For us it’s Chopin, peas and cabbage
And from time to time an uprising

Lord Margrave still walks the tightrope
Abyss on the left, abyss on the right
If he avoids death at countryman’s hand
He’ll leave office in disgrace

All that work, Lord Margrave, and for nothing
In vain, the forced conscription
Things will be as they must – business as usual
To battle unarmed, backbreak and welts

Lord Margrave, you won’t change a nation
Here, being reasonable is seldom heard of
And the one thing we do truly well
Is lose most beautifully in the world

Lord Margrave still walks the tightrope
Awkwardly and with a wild boar’s posture
And when he falls, he’ll merely earn
A traitor’s shame instead of a monument

That you fell, that’s normal Polish fate
In the end, everyone falls off that rope
Only why did you forget, Wielopolski,
That the fall must look pretty?

Lyrics: Jerzy Czech; music/performance: Przemysław Gintrowski (c. 1980)

Back to Donald Trump and America

Trump’s physiognomy. Is it “businessman, playboy, neophyte” or is it “chess-player, wolf, king”?

America doesn’t get the Romantic spirit of beautiful loss, of futile sacrifice… right? Except for the death-scene of Sergeant Elias in Platoon. I’m not bringing this up flippantly. The Vietnam war was a beautiful loss. Civil Rights, in contrast, was a hideous loss and so has been every setback since then, from the negrification of Detroit through drag queen storytime at America’s public libraries. A national tragedy, once felt and understood as such, can cleanse the collective psyche of its hubris and forge a people’s fanatical will to never perish.


Immigration Debate

Two comments on immigration I posted on Gab:

A radical proposal: no immigrants. Why is this a bickering over ‘what kjnd’ in the first place.

The countries with the “best” potential immigrants are in no position to send their surplus talent abroad because low tfr = no surplus. Radical proposal: “That America not be a vampire on the civilized world.”

Immigration Debate, the Home Version

Boomer Dad: “Let’s stuff some beaner babies into Junior’s room. I’ll make ’em do chores.”

Cuckian Mom: “Those underprivileged black keeyeeds, bring them all in they need hugs!”

Gay Brother: “Can Chong and Pajeet move in? They have high IQs.”

Slutty Sister: “Syrians please? Turks are nice too. Oh and Arabs! Can-we can-we pleeeease?”

Creepy Houseguest: [rubbing hands]

Junior: [humming The Doors]

“The killer awoke before dawn
He put his boots on
He took a face from the ancient gallery
And he walked on down the hall
He went into the room where…”

Open thread.

A Perspective on Chateau Heartiste

Heretic Phi wrote this excellent analysis:

A few years ago I heard Roosh giving a speech about the history of Game theory. The first phase were the PUA, iconized by Mystery, which was the purpose-driven gathering of practical data for real-world personal use (what works, what doesn’t).

Roosh calls the second phase the “Roissy-sphere,” where the empirical knowledge provided by Game flowered our understanding of female sexual psychology, and evolutionary psychology in general. (Paraphrasing from memory here.) This is where the average dude with some book smarts can actually come to understand why what worked for his dad and his grandpa is worthless for him.

That led to great advancements in our social knowledge of what is wrong with our society, that is forcing us to mate under unnatural conditions that we did not evolve to survive and reproduce under. We now can see many defects in the outdated “Social Science” theories under which our institutions are run. Heartiste is described in his early years as the core of a massive intellectual development from the PUA side of the Manosphere, which at that time had nothing to do with WN. The way he describes it, Roosh himself sprung from the “Roissy-sphere”.

Roosh then pushes Neomasculinity (which would naturally center around himself) as the third phase, about transforming our forbidden knowledge of hypergamy back into personal self-improvement and a gentle anti-feminist political agenda.

But what Heartiste did for our side was even better. For he gave this knowledge to… dissidents. We now know things about the human animal that our seemly almighty enemies in their pride and vanity, have little comprehension of. The risk that they will suddenly figure it out before their ignorance destroys them is very small, for their hearts are too weak to question their faith. And in 2016 we saw what a Natural can do with that knowledge.

… his legacy is all around you and will never go away. If he retires tomorrow, he is still here. Every single one of us thinks, understands, and sees the world differently in part because of Heartiste.

It really should have been almost time for him to take a break anyhow. Twelve years is a big chunk of your life to be able to come up with material of that volume, of that quality, with that consistency. He needs to cocoon up for a while so he can evolve into a higher form.