Friday, March 31, 2017

White Privilege vs. White Death - Steve Sailer

Nobel-winning economist Angus Deaton and his wife, Anne Case, have released a new study, “Mortality and Morbidity in the 21st Century,” enumerating how many unprivileged whites have died from despair while privileged whites prattled about the curse of white privilege.
Judging from mortality statistics, something very bad has happened to working-class white Americans in this century.
The downturn in life expectancy has occurred despite continued advances in medical technology that are steadily boosting life spans in other countries. In 2015, life expectancy fell for Americans overall, stemming in part to a sudden spike in black male death rates, perhaps due to the Ferguson Effect of blacks shooting blacks in increasing numbers following the rise of Black Lives Matter in 2014.
But mostly the decline was caused by continued increases in death rates for young and middle-aged whites. The White Death hasn’t gotten as bad yet as the horrifying drop in Russian male life expectancies during the Yeltsin years. Yet it’s reminiscent of the tendency of Russians to react to the slow moral decay of Communism and to the sharp shock of defeat in the Cold War by drinking themselves to death.
Nonetheless, until just 18 months ago, barely anybody in positions of authority or influence in America had noticed it, so pervasive is our system’s animosity toward whites of humble backgrounds. (Matt Stoller here lists homicidal comments about working-class whites left on the Huffington Post.)
In fact, it’s possible that the only reason the White Death is talked about today is a coincidence in the fall of 2015.
Please share this article:

Wednesday, March 29, 2017

What Chinese College Students Think About Race

It’s not what you might expect.
As an English teacher at a Chinese university, I spend a lot of time with young people. As a result of friendships I’ve developed, I have learned a lot about what they think about race and ethnicity.
I’m particularly well positioned because my university has an especially large number of students from Pakistan and sub-Saharan Africa. As one of the few white people in my province, I am able to witness interactions between these diverse racial groups who have rarely, if ever, come into contact before they went to college. Some of my students have told me I’m the first white person they’ve ever seen, and almost all say the African students are their first blacks.
Most identitarians believe the Chinese are traditional and realistic in their attitudes towards race. For now, this is true, but the Western mentality is rapidly infiltrating Chinese society and corrupting the minds of young people. The old ethnonationalism that protected Chinese identity is evaporating under the pervasive forces of globalization and liberalism.
I have around 200 students every semester, and about 90 percent are girls. This has something to do with the way the system approves students for certain areas of study, and a lot more girls than boys end up in my English classes. In a class of 30, it’s not uncommon to have no male students. As a result, I am far more familiar with the girls’ perspectives than with the boys’.  The average age of these girls is 19-21, so they are fresh enough not to have fixed views about race, but old enough to want to explore the question.
When I ask my students what they think of black people, they express mixed results depending on sex. The girls often react with disgust, revulsion, or pity. They use terms such as “ugly,” “black skin,” “weird hair,” “smelly,” “loud,” and “flat nose.” Part of this has to do with Chinese standards of beauty, which value a prominent or “high nose,” “three dimensional face,” “light skin,” and “double eyelids” (a skin crease above the eyes like that of whites). The Chinese perception of beauty is almost the exact opposite of the way blacks look.
The girls’ disgust is often combined with fear, and they associate blacks with crime. This gut attitude from Chinese girls can be perplexing because it arises from those who have often never met a black person, or have seen them only in passing. It seems to me this association of black people with danger and violence is almost innate for Chinese people, especially women. I’ve also noticed that black African young men have absolutely no luck trying to date Chinese girls, who see them as weird, ugly, and aggressive.
This contrasts sharply with Chinese girls’ typical reaction to whites. From my own observation, and from what I hear from others, they practically throw themselves at white guys. In our class introductions at the beginning of the semester, I usually have at least four or five ask if I will date them—they flirt with me right in front of the class. Many more make advances privately.
Read More:

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

Nationalist dystopia in Ukraine by Manuel Ochsenreiter & Dr. Nina Kouprianova

Ukraine's key “nationalist” forces signed the so-called National Manifesto — a solid plan to demolish what’s left of failed Ukrainian statehood, which has been barely keeping its head above water since EuroMaidan.
Oleh Tiahnybok of Ukraine’s Svoboda Party loves this grand gesture. For him, the new National Manifesto he signed together with Andriy Biletsky (National Corps), Andriy Tarasenko (Right Sector), Stepan Bratsiun (Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists), Bohdan Chervak (Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists), and Serhiy Mazur (organization C14) is nothing less than a “fateful moment.”
This Manifesto is a potpourri of 20 points highlighting the common goals of Ukraine’s “nationalists.” But in reality, this is a program of total destruction of the remains of Ukrainian statehood. It is a mix of nonsense, megalomania, and staggering ignorance of political and economic realities.
Indeed, this text is yet another testament to Ukraine’s inability to forge an authentic national identity after obtaining its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991 as a somewhat artificial state. Historically, Ukraine is mentioned as a landmass on the “outskirts,” literally, of the Russian Empire. There are no references to Ukrainians in 19th-early-20th-century censuses, despite the presence of numerous other ethnicities in these documents, including Poles, Finns, Armenians, Jews, Greeks, Lithuanians, Bulgarians, Germans, Tatars, and others. (At times, there are references to Malorosy (“little Russians” as a subcategory of Russians) populating what today is central Ukraine.) As a nascent Soviet Republic, Ukraine underwent the policy of korenizatsiia—“indigenization”—producing Communist cadres in the Soviet regions through boosting, and, at times, creating, local ethnic cultures loyal to the new revolutionary government. By the mid-Soviet period, Ukraine had already gained land — and millions of people — that was historically Russian in the south and the east and historically Austro-Hungarian, including parts of partitioned Poland, in the west. Thus, by the time of the Soviet collapse, this new country inherited a patchwork of conflicting identities and regions facing different directions culturally, historically, and even geopolitically. Yet instead of pursuing a policy of consolidated statehood and forging a cohesive national idea that could have potentially paid off decades ahead, the Ukrainian government leaned further and further toward ethnic fundamentalism of a Western Ukrainian minority. First and foremost, this meant progressively reducing the usage of the Russian language spoken by a large segment of that country’s population. It is, in fact, this policy that ultimately contributed to the post-Maidan rebellion in Donbass.
Read More:

The African Threat to Civilization

Blacks are very dangerous, the biggest enemy of the white race and civilization. 

Why? Blacks are both destructive and seductive. They are both pitiable and pitiless. 

Because blacks are such dunderheads when it comes to creating and maintaining civilization, white folks look upon them with pity. "Oh, look at those pitiful Negroes." They seem so helpless, childlike, weak, and pitiable. They play on your heartstrings. They seem like po' desperate folks yelling, 'Hep me, hep me, pleeeze'. White folks look at the poverty in Africa and see helpless Negroes. White folks once watched movies like SOUNDER and saw helpless and hapless Negroes. And Negroes know this altruistic side of white folks. They know it exists even among white bigots who suddenly swell with compassion when they sees a Negro in need of HEP. Some Negroes exploit this side of whitey:

White folks may be smarter than Negroes but they are more earnest than the slickity-slack Negroes, and that can make whites emotionally pretty dim and fall for all sorts of mental Negrobatics. This is why Northern European and East Asian types are the biggest suckers for PC in the West. They have decent IQ's but earnest emotions. This is why Italian-Americans are generally savvier. Smart or not, they don't trust nobody and don't believe in all the 'pledge of allegiance' crap.

Anyway, because blacks are collectively useless at maintaining civilization, they live in squalor and poverty. And whites see them as a Weak and Powerless people. 
As a collective, blacks are among the weakest people on Earth. Put some blacks in some part of the world, and it will be stinkpot-ville and people will live in dire poverty, like in Haiti. It will be a pitiful nation in terms of economics and political power. 

But just because blacks are collectively helpless, whites tend to think blacks are also individually helpless. So, a European nation takes in all these HEPLESS and pitiable Negroes from weak poor nations. It figures blacks will be pitiable in Europe too and be grateful for the guidance of White Folks who show them good will. 
But on the individual level, the black man has immense power over the white man. He is more muscular, more aggressive, tougher, meaner, nastier, and thuggish. 

So, what looks like a collective bunch of weak Negroes from afar suddenly turns into powerful Negro thugs close up. But because whites have this frozen image of the Weak Helpless Negro(sanctified further by 'white guilt' that says blacks suffer cuz of white imperialism), they have difficulty processing the Negro close-up. If the Negro is a weak, pitiable, noble, and suffering creature in need of compassion and mercy, why would he be such a nasty gross thug up close? 


Read More:

His Name is Jamie Urton: White Man Dragged from Car, Shot to Death by Three Blacks In Cincinnati

Something terrible just happened in Cincinnati.

A white man, Jamie Urton, struck a 4-year-old child with his vehicle (who appeared to have walked in front of his car carelessly). 

What happens next is a reminder of the type of world only Africans in America can create. [Police ID man fatally shot after striking 4-year-old with car,, 3-26-17]:

Police have identified a man fatally shot moments after he struck a 4-year-old child with his car. 
Jamie Urton, 44, was shot and killed Friday afternoon. 
Cincinnati police said a 4-year-old boy was hit by a car on Kenton Street when he wandered into the path of Urton’s vehicle. 
Police say an altercation then took place when three people ran to the car and started assaulting Urton and the passenger. 
Urton was shot multiple times and died on the way to a hospital. 
Police say they were either dragged from the car or attacked outside the car after they exited. The passenger was not shot but suffered minor injuries related to the fight. 
Dorron Hunter is a community-outreach advocate for the Cincinnati Human Relations Commission. He said, “We're out here again, something awful has happened, but we're not going to stop. We’re going to tell them to stop the shooting, stop the killing, stop the violence.”
Jamie Urton was dragged out of his car, or attacked in his vehicle by three black people (who have yet to be identified and are still at large), beaten and shot to death. 

Urton, a white male, was only trying to help the young black child who wandered out in front of his car and was hit, when he was attacked in his car or dragged out of his car by three unidentified black males on the streets of Cincinnati. 

Read More:

Monday, March 27, 2017

Tyler Cowen’s Unexpected Neoreactionary Manifesto

Tyler Cowen is not outwardly neoreactionary. His sympathy to neoreaction has been strictly limited the few times he has written about it; in fact, he prefers to ignore it in favor of a broader “neo-reaction” of his own definition. It is a puzzle, then, how he has written such a precise, inspiring manifesto for it in his recently published book, The Complacent Class.
On a first read, the book may not seem to offer so much. It initially reads like a series of Vox articles about the lazy foibles of several particular sorts of white American that it’s currently fashionable to hector. There are plenty of questionably designed statistics and politically correct thinkpiece citations scattered throughout like so much gauche op-ed bling. However, the end grows more and more daring until we hit a triplet of stunning lines in the final six pages, the sole bolded sentences in the book of 200 pages:
When it comes to ordinary, everyday American life, how quickly will matters turn chaotic or disorderly again, and what forms will the implosion take? (p. 199)
The biggest story of the last fifteen years, both nationally and globally, is the growing likelihood that a cyclical model of history will be a better predictor than a model of ongoing progress. (p. 200)
All of this can happen even if you think the majority response will be a greater and greater love of peace. (p. 202)
The specific thinkers cited for ‘cyclical models of history’ are VicoSpengler, and Toynbee, in that order.
With that triple-burst trigger pull, the race to a second, Straussian reading begins.
Taking a cue from those statements, consider that the book itself might be a cycle. Read forwards, it is a series of slightly overcooked thinkpieces that ends on a surprisingly bold note. Read backwards, one finds it hides a thrilling call to arms.
This is a contrarian reading; one I make no claim should actually be attributed to Cowen himself. Nonetheless, the coherences pile up too neatly to simply be ignored once seen.

US Presence in Korea Drives Instability


US and European interests continue to portray the government and nation of North Korea as a perpetual security threat to both Asia and the world. Allegations regarding the nation’s nuclear weapon and ballistic missile programs are continuously used as justification for not only a continuous US military presence on the Korean Peninsula, but as justification for a wider continued presence across all of Asia-Pacific.
In reality, what is portrayed as an irrational and provocative posture by the North Korean government, is in fact driven by a very overt, and genuinely provocative posture by the United States and its allies within the South Korean government.
During this year’s Foal Eagle joint US-South Korean military exercises, US-European and South Korean media sources intentionally made mention of  preparations for a “decapitation” strike on North Korea. Such an operation would be intended to quickly eliminate North Korean military and civilian leadership to utterly paralyze the state and any possible response to what would most certainly be the subsequent invasion, occupation and subjugation of North Korea.
The Business Insider in an article titled, “SEAL Team 6 is reportedly training for a decapitation strike against North Korea’s Kim regime,” would report:
The annual Foal Eagle military drills between the US and South Korea will include some heavy hitters this year — the Navy SEAL team that took out Osama bin Laden, Army Special Forces, and F-35s — South Korea’s Joon Gang Daily reports. 

South Korean news outlets report that the SEALs, who will join the exercise for the first time, will simulate a “decapitation attack,” or a strike to remove North Korea’s leadership.
To introduce an element of plausible deniability to South Korean reports, the article would continue by stating:
Pentagon spokesman Cmdr. Gary Ross later told Business Insider that the US military “does not train for decapitation missions” of any kind. 
Yet this is a categorically false statement. Throughout the entirety of the Cold War, US policymakers, military planners and operational preparations focused almost solely on devising methods of “decapitating” the Soviet Union’s political and military leadership.
In more recent years, policy papers and the wars inspired by them have lead to documented instances of attempted “decapitation” operations, including the 2011 US-NATO assault on Libya in which the government of Muammar Qaddafi was targeted by airstrikes aimed at crippling the Libyan state and assassinating both members of the Qaddafi family as well as members of the then ruling government.
Similar operations were aimed at Iraq earlier during the 2003 invasion and occupation by US-led forces.

The Russian Deflection - Jim Goad

From where I’m sitting—and if you want to get technical, it’s on a cushioned chair in front of a computer on a farm in Georgia—the only way that Russia could possibly have “undermined American democracy” during the last election would be if they’d hacked the voting booths. Regarding hard evidence of Russia doing this, I have seen nada, zilch, goose eggs, and a huge black gaping empty intergalactic rectal tunnel of nothingness.
Still, a poll in late December found that 52% of Democrats believed that Russia directly “tampered with the vote tallies.” Mind you, even Barack Obama said that didn’t happen.
You remember the Democrats, don’t you? They were the party who for decades would gaslight anyone concerned about Soviet communism as being some paranoid dupe of propaganda, sneering at them coastal-elite-style as some low-info true believer in the “Red Scare.” Mind you, this was when Russians actually were infiltrating US government and media. It’s also when they were slaughtering millions of their own citizens and injecting psychiatric medication into anyone whose brain even dared to burp up the mildest “reactionary” thought.
Please share this article:

Sunday, March 26, 2017

Jews and Immigration: Time for Change by Marcus Alethia, Ph.D.

Our country and its Jewish intelligentsia are currently torn by a debate about immigration. On one side the Trump administration is trying to pass executive orders limiting immigration from particular, though certainly not all, Muslim-majority countries while also deporting people — largely from Mexico or Central America — who are in the US illegally.
On the other side are activist judges shutting down these executive orders and what seems like the entire constellation of journalists, pundits and activists in the country decrying these moves. From looking at the writers of many op-ed pieces or from looking through Jewish publications such as Forward, it is clear that Jews are disproportionately lobbying in favor of immigration and against deportation or immigration restrictions. Jewish organizations ostensibly formed to lobby for Jewish interests are on the side of resettling more Muslim refugees. Some voices on this side go so far as to call for “open borders” as in a recent piece in Salon. Most of the left has long decried the idea of White interests or White rights as being inherently racist in a way that Black rights or Latino interests aren’t. See for instance David Aaronovitch’s recent op-ed “Defending ‘white interests’ can never be right” in the Financial Times.
I think Jews are on the wrong side of this debate, and have been for decades. Countries are not arbitrary designations ona map; and borders are not imaginary lines. Countries are defined by their people, and borders generally demarcate necessary walls between peoples. Good fences make good neighbors, as the saying goes. Globalization and mass immigration result in what amounts to demographic invasion. It is natural for host populations to resist this being forced upon them.
The Jewish support for so-called “immigrant rights” is supposed to be rooted in the Jewish experience of diaspora and constant movement. Being exiled from our home in ancient times, we should feel sympathy with others who need to leave their homes in modern times. Jews have prospered in America because it is a multicultural society with such a rainbow of peoples that no true majority exists, or will soon, if current demographic trends continue.
I think Jews should be looking at this in another way.

Saturday, March 25, 2017

The Terrifying Story of Elisabeth Faye Cannon of Macon: What Happens When the White Working Class Gets Left Behind

Almost every white person in America works, consciously and unconsciously, to insulate their families from the consequences of diversity. To earn a living to move far away from diversity, even if one publicly praises diversity and its obviously spurious benefits, is proof of a desire to sustain implicit whiteness. 

But happens when diversity comes to you and you aren't capable of escaping in time? 

Your property value, appreciating yearly when the community was all-white, immediately starts to depreciate to the black mean. What should be a safe investment in your future (the equity in your home being one of your primary assets) becomes an impossible liability to unload and a reminder the Visible Black Hand of Economics is all too real a phenomenon. 

Case in point, Elisabeth Faye Cannon of Macon. Black teenagers had been harassing her family by throwing rocks at Cannon's house, so she did the only sensible thing imaginable and shot at them. She was arrested and this past Tuesday indicted.

But it's when you read the story of Cannon's family, forced to live in the horrifying, stupefying blackness of Macon, Georgia, you'll understand why white Americans without college degrees are dying younger: they can't escape the consequences of diversity by momentarily moving to a safe, thriving all-white enclave (inevitably to have the fate of being overwhelmed by the rising tide of color). 

This is the unspoken tragedy of Elisabeth Faye Cannon of Macon. She and her family were left behind as the unforgiving blackness of Africans in America stamped out what remained of western civilization in her community. [Rock-throwing teens ‘terrorized’ her, woman charged with shooting 15-year-old says, Macon Telegraph, January 18, 2017]:

Read more here:

A woman charged with shooting a teenage boy in the head Monday night said Wednesday that she and her husband had been terrorized at home by a group of rock-throwing teens for a week and “felt really unsafe and extremely threatened.” 
Elisabeth Cannon, 47, faces two counts of aggravated assault in the shooting of 15-year-old Vernon Marcus Jr., who remains in critical condition at a Macon hospital. She was booked in the Bibb County jail Monday night and released Tuesday evening, records show. 

Read More:

The Bass Pro Shop In Memphis: A Hilarious Reminder White Civilization Dies in Majority Black City

What happens when you open a fishing/hunting superstore in a 65 percent black city? This... [Former Bass Pro employee: Bullets, BB guns are stolen from store on daily basis,, 2-17-17]:

Keith Thole said he started working in the towering pyramid when it opened in April of 2015. His gig as a supervisor at Bass Pro was one he loved, but the shoplifters -- not so much. 
"How many times do you think you’d personally see or hear of people shoplifting?" WREG's Bridget Chapman asked Thole. 
"On a daily basis," he said. 
Every day, he said he’d notice young adults walk in with a mission: their eyes on the hunting section where ammo and BB guns aren’t secured. 
But even if employees noticed a shoplifter, Thole said they weren’t allowed to stop them. That’s the policy with many companies. 
“For us to even make contact with the suspected shoplifter, we have to get permission from the manager on duty.” 
Read More:

Notes From a White Country, Part I

Being Polish is more than just a passport.
If diversity is a strength, one expat lives in one of the weakest places on earth.
I have called Poland my home for almost two decades. In that time, I have come to learn what it’s like to live among people who enjoy the bonds of a common culture and a shared ethnic heritage. Poles have a distinct collective identity and it is expressed in every aspect of what is effectively an ethno-state. In percentage terms, Poland is as Polish as Japan is Japanese.
Being Polish isn’t an abstraction the way being American or Canadian or Australian has become. It means something.
Poland is a monoracial, monocultural society, without a single statistically significant ethnic or religious minority. If there was a silver lining to the awful cloud of Communism, it was that the Iron Curtain shielded this part of Europe from the waves of immigration that hit Western Europe. The lag in general economic prosperity that resulted from nearly 50 years of central planning means that Poland is still not a prime immigrant destination even 30 years after Soviet troops pulled out. Migrants and “refugees,” whether legitimately looking for jobs or shopping for generous welfare policies, go to Germany, Britain, or Scandinavia. It literally doesn’t pay to stop in Poland after coming all the way from North Africa, the Middle East or elsewhere.
The biggest non-white ethnic group in Poland are the Vietnamese—mostly a legacy of past ties and student exchanges during the Communist era—who number around 40,000. In a country of 40 million, that makes Poland’s biggest non-European minority one tenth of one percent of the population. Ukrainians are the biggest foreign ethnic group in Poland and they are as culturally and linguistically close to Poles as anyone can be. This “minority,” such as it is, blends in perfectly, with only their accents giving them away, like Austrians in Germany or Irish in England. Every non-white face in all of Poland combined might add up to one-half of one percent of the population. This is a white country.

My Mild 1970s Anti-Racism - David Cole

Comedian Louis C.K. does a routine about growing up in the 1970s, a decade he describes as “very racist.” C.K. claims that anyone who grew up during that period is by definition racist to some extent, and the best that one can hope for is to have only “mild racism.”
I’m not sure which 1970s Mr. C.K. is talking about. He and I are separated in age by only one year. I too grew up in the ’70s, and my memories are of a time that, at least to a child, seemed truly “post-racial.” The evils and excesses of the days of segregation and lynchings had been countered by the social movements of the late ’60s and early ’70s—the “black power” and “black is beautiful” years, the “Chicano movement” years—and now we were “even,” and we could just hug it out and get on with life in the beautiful rainbow pudding pop that is this great nation.
During my elementary school years in the L.A. Unified School District, textbooks were riddled with gentle “anti-prejudice” messages…stuff about how Cindy made friends with Latrelle and Ernesto, and the three of them put their fears and biases aside and had a great day at play. Cindy might come from a home with manicured lawns, Latrelle might come from “the wrong side of the tracks,” and Ernesto might hail from the land of beans and burros, but deep down, we’re all the same! The L.A. school board learned a hard lesson in 1979 about just how far you could, or couldn’t, push white parents, when its lunatic mandatory school busing and “racial reassignment” plan was shut down at the ballot box after voters passed a state constitutional amendment that ended such idiotic schemes for good (in Cali, at least).
Please share this article:

Thursday, March 23, 2017

Islam and the Intercultural Enrichment of London

The FBI’s Conspiracy Theory of a Trump/Putin Collusion Has No Clothes — Paul Craig Roberts

Unable to provide an ounce of evidence that a Trump/Putin conspiracy stole the presidential election from Hillary Clinton, the corrupt US “intelligence” agencies are shifting their focus to social media and to Internet sites such as Alex Jones and Breitbart. Little doubt the FBI investigation will trickle down to Glenn Greenwald at The Intercept, Zero Hedge, the Ron Paul Institute, Nomi Prins, Naked Capitalism, Lew Rockwell, Global Research,, and to others on the PropOrNot, Harvard Library, and Le Monde lists, such as top Reagan administration officials David Stockman and myself. It is extraordinary that the FBI is so desperate to protect the budget of the military/security complex that it brings such embarrassment to itself. Who in the future will believe any FBI report or anything a FBI official says?

Those behind this “investigation” understand that it is so ridiculous that they must give it gravity and credibility. They selected two reporters, Peter Stone and Greg Gordon, in the McClatchy News Washington Bureau, who fit Udo Ulfkotte’s definition of “bought journalists.” Hiding behind anonymous sources—“two people familiar with the inquiry” and “sources who spoke on condition of anonymity”—the presstitutes fell in with the attack on independent media, reporting that one former US intelligence official said: “This may be one of the most highly impactful information operations in the history of intelligence.”

Wow! A totally ridiculous “investigation” is one of the most important in history. The implication is that the Russians are operating through scores or hundreds of independent media sites to control how Americans vote.

There was once a time in America when people were skeptical of anonymous sources. It was widely understood that anyone could tell a reporter anything and that a reporter could claim an anonymous source whether or not the source existed. Perhaps it was the Watergate “investigation” by the Washington Post that gave anonymity credibility. The Post’s reports made it sound like any sources ratting on Nixon’s perfidy was at risk of their lives, and the subtle emphasis on risk gave anonymity credibility.

The real story under our noses is not a Trump/Putin/independent media conspiracy to steal the presidential election. The real story is the totally obvious collusion between the Hillary forces, the US print and TV media (with the partial exception of Fox News), and the CIA and FBI to steal the Democratic nomination from Bernie Sanders, the presidential election from Donald Trump, and to delegitimize Trump’s election.

Read More:

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

Trump and the Globalist Convergence of the Left and Right Against Nationalism by Ricardo Duchesne

Talk about Donald Trump by Ricardo Duchesne

What is Globalism?

Globalism is the dominant ideology of our times and it unites the Left and the Right. Globalism should not be confused with globalization. Globalists purposely encourage this confusion, but globalization is factual account about the accelerating interactions of nations since the discovery of the New World and the creation of international markets, shipping and railway communications networks, in the sixteenth century through the nineteenth century. Globalism, on the other hand, is an ideology about how our current elites, on the Right and the Left, would like things to be politically. 

Globalism is an ideology that advocates open borders, mass immigration, and the liquidation of (Western) national identities. It advocates, under the guise of diversity, the obliteration of "indigenous" European cultures, and the creation of a generic culture dedicated to consumerism and universal human rights. Globalization is not an ideology but a factual state of affairs about the growth of communications and trade in the modern era. 

Both the leftist and the corporate right establishment are globalists, and both portray globalism as if it were an inevitable fact intimately associated with the growth of trade and communications. But globalism, as Robert Locke points out, is a deliberate political choice, no more inevitable than the establishment of feminism, transsexualism or communism. Mass immigration is not inevitable, it could be stopped tomorrow. The European Union, which seeks to diminish the political independence of European nations, could be abolished, and this would not bring an end to globalization, any more than Japan's decision not to diversify itself through mass immigration has limited its ability to become a global economic power. 

Read More:

NSA DOCUMENTS PROVE SURVEILLANCE OF DONALD TRUMP & HIS FAMILY Bombshell discovery shows targets of NSA's "Project Dragnet"

WASHINGTON, D.C. – have obtained credible information from law enforcement sources regarding individual records of U.S. citizens under National Security Agency (NSA) electronic surveillance in the years 2004 through 2010 – a database that suggests both Donald J. Trump and Alex Jones were under illegal, unauthorized government monitoring during those years.
Michael Zullo, formerly the commander and chief investigator of the Cold Case Posse (CCP), a special investigative group created in 2006 in the office of Joseph M. Arpaio, formerly the sheriff in Maricopa County, an Arizona State Certified Law Enforcement Agency, headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona, provided sections of the database to
The electronic surveillance database, provided to Zullo by a whistleblower in 2013, was apparently created by the NSA as part of the NSA’s illegal and unconstitutional Project Dragnet electronic surveillance of U.S. citizens, first revealed by news reports published in 2005, as further documented by the revelations of whistleblower Edward Snowden in 2013.
Sheriff Arpaio and Chief Investigator Zullo have identified dozens of entries at various addresses, including both Trump Tower in New York City and Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, under which Donald Trump was apparently under NSA electronic surveillance from 2004, during President George W. Bush’s term of office, through 2009, the first year of President Obama’s presidency.
Read More:

Origins Of The Alt Right

Among the usual media bloviation, the libertarians attempt to find the origins of the Alt Right, and fail:
Here is a prehistory of what we call the alt-right today, which is probably better described as a 21st-century incarnation of what in the 19th century would have been called right-Hegelianism. I’m skipping over many political movements (in Spain, France, and Italy), and clownish leaders like George Lincoln Rockwell, Oswald Mosley, and Fr. Coughlin, to get right to the core ideas that form something like a school of thought which developed over a century.
As with most material-over-pattern style thinking, they get it exactly wrong. The Alt Right did not arise from these thoughts, but discovered them late in the game, which is why the Alt Right is ideologically unformed instead of repeating the dogma of the past. In fact, what defines the Alt Right is that it wanted to escape the far right and mainstream right both.
How do I know?
For starters, myself and several others produced a series ofproto-AltRight sites before the Alt Right existed. The American Nihilist Underground Society was a 1990s version of the Alt Right, while the followup CORRUPT was a 2000s version which showcased the mixture of influences that made the Alt Right: libertarianism, pan-nationalism, human biodiversity, anti-egalitarianism and transcendentalism.

Read More:

Yes, Obama Did Investigate Trump by GEORGE NEUMAYR

Straining at the tweet and swallowing the camel has become Washington’s favorite pursuit, and it was on tiresome display at Monday’s Congressional hearing with Jim Comey. Out of it came two clashing headlines: “Comey Denies Obama Ordered Wiretapping on Trump,” “The FBI is Investigating Trump’s Links to Russia.”
In other words, the core claim underlying Trump’s tweets is true: people acting on the authority of Obama opened an investigation into Trump’s campaign, then criminally leaked mention of it to friendly news outlets in an attempt to derail his election. When is Obama going to apologize for that?
Were the Republicans less feckless and docile to the media-determined parameters of any discussion, they would have kept the focus on the outrageousness of Obama investigating an opposing party’s candidate at the height of an election campaign. But their first instinct is always to distance themselves from Trump, not defend him.
So unlike Adam Schiff, who prosecuted the case for the Dems ruthlessly, the Republicans dithered, striking Comey with the flat of the blade. Instead of probing his vague answers, they complacently accepted them before trailing off into the next series of unilluminating questions.
“I have no information that supports those tweets,” Comey replied to one of Schiff’s leading questions. Why didn’t Republicans ask him to elaborate? Was he saying that the FBI didn’t investigate the computer server connected to Trump Tower (as reported by Circa News)? Was he saying that his investigation hasn’t intercepted a single one of Trump’s communications? He would have declined to answer these questions, but that refusal to answer would have cast doubt on the authority of his categorical denial. After all, if he can’t describe his investigation into the Trump campaign, how can anybody be sure that it excludes Trump’s communications?
Congressman Devin Nunes, the chairman of the committee, couldn’t match Schiff in partisan zeal and rigor, as evident in his giving Schiff fifteen minutes of opening remarks while restricting himself to five minutes of them. In his sheepish remarks, he defensively treated the media’s outrage at Trump’s tweet as if it were the first and most important matter that he needed to address. Why let the hearing become a referendum on Trump’s tweeting? Why place the emphasis on that and not on the one suggestive remark Nunes did make, which he didn’t pursue very effectively and asserted more weakly than necessary, that “it’s still possible that other surveillance activities were used against President Trump and his associates”? Still possible? Given that any investigation involves surveillance of some kind, it is not possible but certain that FBI agents have engaged in those activities.

Read More: