ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

How the system is rigged

Pat Buchanan explains how the media is the driving force for globalism:
In what sense is the system rigged?

Consider Big Media – the elite columnists and commentators, the dominant national press, and the national and cable networks, save Fox. Not in this writer’s lifetime has there been such blanket hatred and hostility of a presidential candidate of a major party.

“So what?” They reply. “We have a free press!”

But in this election, Big Media have burst out of the closet as an adjunct of the regime and the attack arm of the Clinton campaign, aiming to bring Trump down.

Half a century ago, Theodore White wrote of the power and bias of the “adversary press” that sought to bring down Richard Nixon.

“The power of the press in America,” wrote Teddy, “is a primordial one. It sets the agenda of public discussion; and this sweeping power is unrestrained by any law. It determines what people will talk about and think about – an authority that in other nations is reserved for tyrants, priests, parties and mandarins.”

On ABC’s “This Week,” Newt Gingrich volunteered on Sunday that, “without the unending one-sided assault of the news media, Trump would be beating Hillary by 15 points.”

On this one, Newt is right.

With all due respect, as adversaries, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are not terribly formidable. Big Media is the power that sustains the forces of globalism against those of Americanism.
I just finished editing Mike Cernovich's MAGA Mindset, which Castalia House will be publishing soon. It is even better than Gorilla Mindset and it could not be more timely, because he not only reaches the same conclusion as Buchanan, but spells out how Trump used social media to fight the power of the Big Media. More importantly, he also explains the way Trump was able to develop his unique ability to use it so effectively.

You all know that Identity > Culture > Politics. But that is a strategic description. The tactical one, in this context, is Mindset > Media > Culture.

That is why the current cultural battle for the West is focused on social media. That is why Twitter and Facebook and Goodreads and Wikipedia are relentlessly policing their users. And that is why there is literally nothing more important, tactically, politically and culturally, that you can do than support AltTech organizations such as Gab and Brave and Infogalactic.

Strategically, of course, there are three very different priorities: Live a Christian life. Marry. Have white children.
Big money and the media power of the establishment elites and the transnationals may well prevail.

And if they do, Middle America – those who cling to their Bibles, bigotries and guns in Barack Obama’s depiction, those “deplorables” who are “racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic,” who are “not America” and are “irredeemable” in Hillary Clinton’s depiction – will have to accept the new regime.

But that does not mean they must love it, like it or respect it.
And losing the political battle, even permanently, does not mean losing the West. It merely means that the Age of Democracy is at an end. The West existed before democracy and it will survive the demise of democracy.

Labels: , ,

77 Comments:

Anonymous Bobby Farr October 18, 2016 4:21 AM  

Is Pat right to list Fox as an exception to the media hate mob? I don't watch but was under the impression that it was largely anti-Trump aside from Hannity and a few other commentators.

Blogger David Power October 18, 2016 4:28 AM  

"Pat Buchanan explains how the media is the driving force for globalism"

The MSM has been globalised or more accurately - Goebbelised!

Blogger Kona Commuter October 18, 2016 4:32 AM  

Hmm - I tried to post using Brave / Google account to no avail

Blogger Al From Bay Shore October 18, 2016 4:32 AM  

@1 I thought that too. If I had to describe Fox, I'd call it a right leaning news outlet suffering the effects of the GOP's co-option. I don't watch it as often as I once did; tuning in only to watch, say, Hannity and Napolitano. I wonder if Buchannan reads sites such as Zerohedge, Gateway, and Conservative Treehouse?

Blogger Jazz The Boxer October 18, 2016 4:42 AM  

test

Blogger VD October 18, 2016 4:47 AM  

Hmm - I tried to post using Brave / Google account to no avail

Known issue. Shields. Cookies.

Blogger VD October 18, 2016 4:48 AM  

Is Pat right to list Fox as an exception to the media hate mob?

Partially. It's selling globalism to nationalists rather than trying to force it on them.

Anonymous Man of the Atom October 18, 2016 4:49 AM  

From Gab:
@DaddyWarpig
Re: Wikileaks.

Holy crap. It really WAS all about Ethics In Journalism, wasn't it?

"Gamergate Election"

Blogger weka October 18, 2016 4:56 AM  

Strategically, of course, there are three very different priorities: Live a Christian life. Marry. Have white children.

Strategy wins wars, Tactics battles. BGKB and Milo, you know what to do. I would add that as a parent you have to avoid or subvert the educationalists, so they do not, like elves, leave changelings in our homes.

Blogger Phillip George October 18, 2016 5:00 AM  

Losing Julian Assange doesn't mean we've lost ........leaks.
Once upon a not too distant past Monasteries were intellectual economic power houses - substantial bits of the economy. Walled cities anyone? Walled nations?

They all started with walled ideas. Ideas bigger than this current Ceausescu Family's - the bloody red Barons for globalism. Ideas matter. Facts and historical details matter. Bury relativism with six feet of fresh earth and piss on their marker.

We started with a resurrection and a following of two. Again, two is all it takes.

A few years ago I heard Chuck Missler candidly declare that Barack Hussein Obama - ?Barry Soetoro was not "his" president. As in he doesn't lead "my" nation.

Putting 'we' back together again is all this was ever about.

Blogger Robert What? October 18, 2016 5:02 AM  

It merely means that the Age of Democracy is at an end

And the last vestiges of a constitutional republic as envisioned by the Founders will be gone.

Anonymous GurpGork October 18, 2016 5:30 AM  

"And if they do, Middle America will have to accept the new regime."

No they don't.

PS how do I put stuff in bold on this blog?

Anonymous Dyskord October 18, 2016 5:31 AM  

"The West existed before democracy and it will survive the demise of democracy."

The Elites and banksters and Globalists fail to understand this very point. democracy is our current system it is not our identity. If it fails, we do not.
The merchant class and bankers did well to destroy the previous warrior culture, but they failed to grasp that we people will not be led by Merchants and bankers counting money and selling people for their profits. Democracy is how they thrived, without it we will seek to be led by men of action, men of substance, men who's strength lies not in their wealth but in their person.
The Elite think that when democracy falls they will be enshrined as the new aristocracy or at least shielded by their wealth. But we the people determine what is wealth and what is its value. And a home can easily become a prison. They sow a wind...

Anonymous Man of the Atom October 18, 2016 5:36 AM  

GurpGork wrote:

PS how do I put stuff in bold on this blog?


Use b, /b HTML tags

Anonymous MawBTS October 18, 2016 6:07 AM  

I don't think it makes sense to call the media a conspiracy. For one thing, traditional media is dying as a business model (NY Times daily circulation in 1993? 1.1m 2014? 640k.) and nobody in it is loyal to anything except their jobs. Everyone hates each other, and everyone's waiting for the axe to fall.

Journalists are more liberal than the population at large, and you'd expect coverage to skew left, but that's not a conspiracy, it's a selection effect.

Honestly, media coverage is like money. For all people ominously mutter that it rules politics, it's damned hard to predict how well a candidate will do based on how much they're spending. Hillary was outspending Donald by about 6x a few months ago. Didn't help - when she collapsed, Donald bounced massively.

Blogger Stilicho October 18, 2016 6:12 AM  

Accept the new regime? Accept the fact that it is there, yes. Acquiesce to its rule, no. Resist in every way you can, large or small. No surrender. Ever.

Blogger VD October 18, 2016 6:12 AM  

And the last vestiges of a constitutional republic as envisioned by the Founders will be gone.

It already is. Deal with it.

I don't think it makes sense to call the media a conspiracy.

That's ridiculous. Yes, it's a "selection effect". And a very, very small number of people are doing the selecting.

Anonymous Icicle October 18, 2016 6:27 AM  

And that is why there is literally nothing more important, tactically, politically and culturally, that you can do than support AltTech organizations such as Gab and Brave and Infogalactic.

Vox is in Italy styling himself as a new Tech-Medici for the New Age.

Blogger FSL October 18, 2016 6:36 AM  

Are you still in favor of techno democracy, Vox? If so when might it's time come?

Blogger Stilicho October 18, 2016 6:54 AM  

Democracy only works if the people hang a few politicians from time to time. Pour encourager Les autres.

The conservative argument for marijuana legalization: we need the hemp for rope...

Anonymous Man of the Atom October 18, 2016 6:56 AM  

Stilicho wrote:Democracy only works if the people hang a few politicians from time to time. Pour encourager Les autres.

The conservative argument for marijuana legalization: we need the hemp for rope...


+1

Blogger Mr.MantraMan October 18, 2016 7:06 AM  

Media is in auto-delegitimazation mode, its a mistake, don't get in their way, help them on their way if you can.

Maybe like the Hugos boost the more ridiculous ones to the top, since now the pink scifi has degenerated to hair weaves and straighter product in zero gravity.

Blogger James Dixon October 18, 2016 7:11 AM  

> those “deplorables” ... will have to accept the new regime.

Oh, I'm not so sure about that. Especially if Hillary takes the actions I expect her to.

OpenID basementhomebrewer October 18, 2016 7:11 AM  

I don't think it makes sense to call the media a conspiracy. For one thing, traditional media is dying as a business model (NY Times daily circulation in 1993? 1.1m 2014? 640k.) and nobody in it is loyal to anything except their jobs. Everyone hates each other, and everyone's waiting for the axe to fall.

Just because they are failing doesn't mean they aren't slanting the news. Sure, they hate each other but they all conveniently have the same politics. They all also conveniently seem to be married/related to members of the Democrat elite.

Journalists are more liberal than the population at large, and you'd expect coverage to skew left, but that's not a conspiracy, it's a selection effect. Why are more journalists more liberal? Could it be because the industry and J-schools are setup to weed out people with views differing from theirs? If they manage to get a job how many editors will let them write pieces critical of globalism and leftists? How come the media will do everything they can to ignore damaging stories even when they are viral on the internet?

Honestly, media coverage is like money. For all people ominously mutter that it rules politics, it's damned hard to predict how well a candidate will do based on how much they're spending. Hillary was outspending Donald by about 6x a few months ago. Didn't help - when she collapsed, Donald bounced massively. You are conflating paid political ads and free coverage by the media. Trump is successful because he worked around the media and used social media. Journalists are heavily pressuring social media to delegitimize opposing voices. They also are pressuring the government to expand regulations on the internet.

Hillary's collapse would have never been covered by the press if an independent person didn't tape it and put it on the internet. Now did BillyBusgate help Hillary? Was the timing of that story convenient for Hillary? How much play has that gotten vs how much play any of the rape accusers against Clinton or the tape of Hillary bragging about getting a pedophile off gotten? How much play have the damning Wikileaks emails gotten in the press? You really think that doesn't make a difference?

Anonymous Icicle October 18, 2016 7:14 AM  

Let's make Western civilization great again!

But let us not forget the other compass directions. Let us take the best from them and make them even better.

Blogger James Dixon October 18, 2016 7:15 AM  

> And the last vestiges of a constitutional republic as envisioned by the Founders will be gone.

The republic envisioned by our founders died in the 1860's.

Blogger Ransom Smith October 18, 2016 7:22 AM  

I'm fine with this. Let the media show themselves for what they are.

It's not like media have truly ever been impartial. Back all the way through Charles Foster Kane...I mean William Hurst, they've always done what was in their interests not ours.

Let them reveal their true form. That way we can better destory them.

Blogger Cataline Sergius October 18, 2016 7:30 AM  

And losing the political battle, even permanently, does not mean losing the West. It merely means that the Age of Democracy is at an end. The West existed before democracy and it will survive the demise of democracy.

True. Quite true in fact.

However, Trump isn't quite dead yet.

Polls are always off in a wave year. "Dewey Defeats Truman" "Britain Votes to Remain"

And this one smells like a Presidential wave year. There is a reason the press has gone so far off the deep-end and GOP HQs are getting firebombed. They are scared.

Polls are always based on the previous election.  There are adjustments made to be sure and these adjustments always sound very scientific and there is always a number of very good reason why they are off by X amount.  As well as equally excellent reasons (that they keep in reserve) for why their predictions were drastically off.

It's the later that concerns us.

RCPs aggregation (as of this writing) has Hillary up by 6.4 in a two way race.  That number sounds formidable but is it?

The polls were correct for Romeny/Obama '12 and McCain/Obama '08 but both of those elections had couple of things going for them that the current election does not.

1.  Political stability.  Both of those periods took place in times of political stability.  That is absolutely, definitely, definitively and in all ways not the case this year.  We are in a state of potential rebellion and if you read this blog you know that isn't hyperbole.

 2. Right Wing Political Apathy.  That was very much in play in '08 and even more in play in '12.  Romney could have tried to stoke the middle class uprising known as the Tea Party but he was fundamentally repelled by it.  His attitude was clearly one of, if they vote for me fine but our relationship ends there.

The Right Wing is not apathetic at all this year.

The left wouldn't be this fucking scared if we were.

Blogger Minecraft Chuck October 18, 2016 7:30 AM  

No, let's take the best from them to make US even better.

Blogger Lazarus October 18, 2016 7:41 AM  

MawBTS wrote:Journalists are more liberal than the population at large, and you'd expect coverage to skew left, but that's not a conspiracy, it's a selection effect.



You need to get an education:

"Liars For Hire" - Confessions Of A Former Journalist From The Media Establishment

Blogger Idunna-Practicallyperfect October 18, 2016 7:41 AM  

So Vox, I have a question for you.
When are you going to start your conferences? Faith is not meant to be practiced alone and babies can not be born in cyber space. With out coming together and forming real communities this is all for naught.

Blogger Lovekraft October 18, 2016 7:44 AM  

I would demand every public school curriculum include lessons in skepticism, instead of force-feeding kids empty terms like multiculturalism and diversity.

But good luck, as an alt-righter, getting any traction there. Their institutions are insulated, not to mention the neighbours and co-workers who would sell you out in an instant.

Blogger Dirtnapninja October 18, 2016 7:50 AM  

Win or lose, Trump has served his purpose. The window has been shifted. The Deplorables are becoming alienated and angry. The mask has fallen off the elites.

If hillary wins, the elites and thier imported tribal janissaries will exact their revenge, and nothing will hammer home the truth to middle america like seeing those soulless eyes on their TV glaring with at them with hate and contempt.

Blogger Basil Makedon October 18, 2016 7:50 AM  

The most powerful weapon that the media has at its disposal is the ability NOT to cover a story. That's what made Trump such as unique candidate, he is such a show, such a ratings draw that they really couldn't ignore him.

There is no question that a generic GOP candidate needs to purchase hundreds of millions of dollars worth of media, which is much less effective than organic coverage. This is also counterproductive because the media uses those profits to fund the rest of its counter-West programming.

Cable news is sadly the most influential, I suppose because the other "opinion leaders" consume cable news. Yet, cracks are breaking in this even as they've managed to converge FoxNews. Stefan Molyneaux -- just as one example -- regularly gets 100k to 150k views and sometimes more than 500k views. This is perilously close to the views that Rachel Maddow gets 277k.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan October 18, 2016 8:00 AM  

#32 you just basically described Conservatism 1.0, we be ejucatin the peeple. FAIL

First step is to delegitimize the establishment then educate.

Blogger Lazarus October 18, 2016 8:04 AM  

Dirtnapninja wrote:If hillary wins, the elites and thier imported tribal janissaries will exact their revenge,

If H-Rod wins, after the traditional honeymoon,the press will start reporting on some of the shenanigans of the dems again, to appear objective. "See? We are not biased!"

One big dog and pony show

Anonymous prepper October 18, 2016 8:06 AM  

Vox and others interested in SHTF mindset check this out...

Bitch to Dumbass - https://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_1856653591&feature=iv&src_vid=gcgdZCJByJ8&v=xAyRADKhZ0s

Anonymous GurpGork October 18, 2016 8:13 AM  

[b]Thanks[/b], It didn't show up in the preview so I was hesitant to use them :-)

Anonymous GurpGork October 18, 2016 8:15 AM  

and now I know why, because I'm an idiot!,

Blogger dc.sunsets October 18, 2016 8:15 AM  

Democracy as a widely-embraced matrix of organization had to die for the West to survive anyway.

Democracy was always The God That Failed, but worse than that, once the matrix of Christianity no longer consoled those born without talent, all we have now is rage against the "injustice" of the distribution of wealth and power.

"He ain't no better than me" is the rallying cry of the proletarians now. It is what animated Pol Pot's Killing Fields, where the "downtrodden" revenged themselves on those who were successful (because their success was an injustice, an INSULT to those who wallowed in incapability.)

Who among us doubts that if it were on the ballot, the hundred million people in America now on some form of welfare would vote to strip those they envy of every dime, of every possession, because "he ain't no better 'n me?"

Democracy of the proletariat, just like Marx said.

Alt-Right (or just "Right") is the opposite of the Left. The Left is democracy, parliament, little scuttling bugs of banking, deal-makers in smoke-filled rooms, and the power of Eminent Domain to simply rob one man in favor of another under color of law, a system sustained for the benefit of the robber barons of banking, corporatism and politics by throwing the rabble a few crusts of bread and the continuous circus on five ESPN channels.

The Right is aristocracy. Regardless of how its specific rulers are chosen, what they are not is "rabble." They are not "proletarians." No, Virginia, not just anyone can be "president." For when "anyone" can be president, then the real power will always be hidden behind a figurehead and the system will be rigged to reward con artistry and viciousness.

Under democracy, the scum rises to the top. Today's Uniparty system in the USA is glaring evidence of this. Under aristocracy, rule is by the best. It may not always work that way, but that's the mistake libertarians make: there is no set-and-forget system that continuously and forever produces a just, orderly system of governance. We are humans, humans are flawed, and there's only so much we can do. The most we could ever hope for is to reduce the AMPLITUDE of the boom/bust cycle in all human endeavors. Eliminating it is tantamount to saying we will eliminate the humanity in humans.

Blogger Ransom Smith October 18, 2016 8:19 AM  

If H-Rod wins, after the traditional honeymoon,the press will start reporting on some of the shenanigans of the dems again, to appear objective. "See? We are not biased!"

I'm not so sure anymore. I think the media has pretty much given up trying to be objective. In fact, just look at how they've worshiped the ground Obama has walked on. Never holding him accountable for: Syria, Yemen, Fast and Furious, Immigration, etc.

Hill, or rather Tim Kaine (that little goblin), will get all the cover from the media they need.

I think the only democrat they'd hold accountable would be Bernie. And he's a Dem in name only.

Blogger dc.sunsets October 18, 2016 8:27 AM  

OT-ish
I recently read about the Teapot Dome Scandal in the early 1920's. It was a "big deal" then.

Compared to today's corruption it redefines "tempest in a teapot." Today no one even bats an eye at politicians (or their spouses!) getting paid millions of dollars for "speaking engagements." No one bats an eye at public officials telling lies so obvious that SNL couldn't effectively satirize them.

We have Clinton Foundations and Friends-of-Bill, we have revolving doors between public offices and Goldman-Sachs, Department of Justice lawyers and dominant New York City law firms who manage literally trillions of dollars in commerce with Uncle Sam, Pentagon officials and firms selling billions of dollars of weapons to their old colleagues & proteges, the list goes on and on and on.

In short, what was unconscionable a century ago, and what got a president hounded from office 42 years ago were tiny little things compared to what is effectively normal now in the political system governing the USA.

This is a sign of such utter rot, of stinking putrefaction, that we must surely approach the point where dissolution occurs. The gulf between how children are taught the system is structured and how it actually operates is now too large to bridge. Cognitive dissonance surely has its limits.

Blogger dc.sunsets October 18, 2016 8:39 AM  

@36 @41 I think the way it works is that here at the apogee of a very, very long boom no one wants to stop partying because deep down inside they know the hangover, when it arrives, will truly be a hellacious bitch...so like crack addicts they keep hitting the pipe.

This is why "the press" defends the old trend, even at the cost of sacrificing what little credibility they still enjoyed. What is "the press" without credibility? NOTHING. ZERO. NADA. Yet they're squandering credibility and even the pretense of objectivity to keep the party rolling.

"Pass me the pipe before my buzz wanes!"

Once the bust is well and truly underway, the smarter of people in "the press" will switch gears and join what is now the bleeding edge of New Press. They will begin to mine the richest-ever vein of public corruption and gangrenous malfeasance for all they're worth, turning it into a seemingly endless pipe of sewage.

This will be so, because busts occur because people become distrusting and pessimistic. Distrusting, pessimistic people want their biases confirmed (just like today's pathologically optimistic people want their Pollyanna-ish fantasies confirmed, hence the "pro-immivasion" Narrative) so they'll have an insatiable appetite for more news of scandals unearthed.

I think eventually they'll be negative enough to literally cheer public executions of the people on whom today's public corruption can be hung. I doubt HillBilly will survive long enough, but there are plenty of people around the Clintons (and the Uniparty today) who actuaries may predict will make it to whatever gallows arise.

Wasn't it Sun Tzu who said if a man is patient enough by the river, eventually the bodies of his enemies will float by?

Blogger Nate October 18, 2016 8:49 AM  

" Live a Christian life. Marry. Have white children."

Roll Damn Tide

Blogger Innostran October 18, 2016 8:49 AM  

@42 See North Korea, the Soviet Union, or Venezuela for how far cognitive dissonance can stretch. Even with mass starvation and shortages of basic goods and services, many people can be brainwashed to believe that they are prosperous thanks to their socialist/communist leaders. Only a minority of thinking people can really understand on some significant level what is going on in society and what needs to be done for change. If you want it to happen, dissolution has to be active, not passive

Blogger Cerdic Ricing October 18, 2016 8:50 AM  

The Republic is dead. I was decades late to the party, as far as saving the Republic goes. It died half a century ago, at least. My ancestors would say it died 150 years ago. I would agree with them (regional bias).

Some friends and I are already tossing out ideas for replacement and refining them. I figure I have plenty of years yet to see them through. It's almost exciting, waiting for it all to start falling apart. What's gone is gone, time to move on. Let it finish dying.

As for democracy, it's somewhat on the line of vote Trump, but don't expect it to change anything. Assume democracy is dead, and if it gives us a few pleasant surprises before it is gone, then we're just a little bit better off than before. Otherwise, continue forward with any plans.

Blogger Durandel Almiras October 18, 2016 8:52 AM  

I'm not sure why so many love democracy other than it is what they grew up with. Moral people will have moral government, immoral will have immoral government, regardless of the arrangement. Granted, in a democracy, the people need to maintain their morality and in a monarchy, the aristocracy needs to maintain.

I don't think Westerners generally have the moral fortitude for democracy anymore. We need to depose the elites and start with a new, moral elite who want to see all of their people improve not just materially, but physically, spiritually and mentally.

Anonymous dynamikal October 18, 2016 9:02 AM  

@40 "Under aristocracy, rule is by the best."

All nations have ruling classes, although the criteria for admittance and retention vary greatly. I like to describe our ruling class as being part of an internationalist aristocracy, much like that which ruled the Roman Empire morphed into. Criteria for retention include the willingness to enforce Imperial extraction of wealth from the labor of those who should have been one's people. (contemporary: open immigration, rent-seeking financialization of economy, etc) Place is guaranteed by threat (historically, repeatedly applied) of overwhelming military force against insufficiently compliant subject populations.

The latter is the one element missing today, which imo globalist architects had thought would be mostly unnecessary with modern media control. Too many believed their own propaganda (a sure sign of degeneracy in any institution) about diversity being a strength, etc. They WILL attempt the Roman way when the Edward Bernays way fails. They will double down then triple down. One of my concerns for the long term is the disposition of Western nuclear weapons, the fundamental loyalty of those in actual physical possession. I hope patriots in the service are ensuring that foreigners with papers and the more mercenary-inclined are kept at arms length. We need enough to ensure they are not used against us.

Anonymous Elipe October 18, 2016 9:04 AM  

Any of you deriding the "media conspiracy" needs to read the Clinton emails coming out of Wikileaks. The media IS colluding with Clinton's campaign. She tells them what or what not to write about her.

This "all conspiracy theories are the fringe ravings of lunatics" line of thinking needs to go away. Read about how the CIA invented the term to discredit such conspiracy theories.

Sure, some of them are actually ravings of a lunatic, but don't let that distract you from the ones that are happening right in plain sight.

Anonymous Broken Arrow October 18, 2016 9:12 AM  

Perhaps I missed the second half of the message, but it needs to be "despite the fraud and rigged system we can and will win". Without this part just saying the system is rigged could backfire and suppress voter turnout for Trump due to despair.

Anonymous Kevin October 18, 2016 9:15 AM  

Slightly unrelated - I think Trump will lose, but win or lose if he does not at least match Romney/McCain I think his ability to work over the media is limited. During the primaries the media was fascinated with him and he appeared to be running things. But since the general he has mot appeared very media savvy or politically savvy. The media took Romney- about the most inoffensive man in history - and turned him into a man who liked to murder cancer patients. He did not handle it well. But he still made a good showing. Trump has not handled things in the general much better. He has not been able to effectively nueter the media very often. I don't know the best metric for assessing this, but I think it's worth assessing at some point for future learning. Trump has been Trump and occasionally that results in brilliance that defies the media but on the whole I think he would not get high marks in the general in his media savvy. Like McCain he appears to still be struggling with the fact they turned on him.

He did nothing to the debates and tolerated the same old liberal bias that always exists without questioning it. He did not change the status quo of the debates at all.

Blogger Jack Ward October 18, 2016 9:27 AM  

If that clinton wins it may well trigger a civil war. We've been on the edge of one for some time now.
She would not be my president by a long shot. How that might play out will have to wait.
As for MSM. I wonder if Infogalactic lends itself to pages listing all the advertisers on the various MSM's? If so, perhaps some interested souls could start keeping track of those advertisers and add them until they feel the pinch. Be some work and one or two people probably would not have the time. At its basic, it would have to be at least one person per msm channel just to get it started. Hard to watch tv that closely on more than one channel at a time. Would require some coordination; add the advertisers; also remove them from the shit list as they get the message an pull their ads. Goes without saying that the effort would also require emailing these advertisers letting them know whats happening to them and why.

Anonymous ZhukovG October 18, 2016 9:45 AM  

To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, 'It's 1788 in America'. Madame Defarge is selecting her yarn.

Anonymous Ironsides October 18, 2016 9:45 AM  

The problem isn't that we don't have an aristocracy. The problem is that we have one.

All these people LARPing about how having a bunch of arrogant nobles telling us what to do would fix everything are missing the point. The people themselves have not wanted mass immigration for a long time -- basically since it started. But the elites, who know better than us unwashed plebs, decide what's best for us anyway. Because we're just so unsuited to ruling, and all that.

Do you honestly think that someone who calls normal, straight, patriotic people who want to keep their nation "Deplorables" doesn't think of themselves as a superior breed set apart by wisdom and excellence of birth?

The problem isn't the lack of aristocracy. The problem is that aristocracy managed to skulk back in after we kicked it out at gunpoint. White men tend to gravitate naturally towards republics; look at the Greeks, the Romans, the Swiss, the north with their "althing," etc., etc.

The White man tends to think of himself as a free warrior, not a submissive serf. That's why people in the U.S. "cling bitterly" to their guns so much. Being armed imparts the status of a warrior and a Free Man of the West. Once disarmed, we would be reduced even more to the status of an anonymous, cringing, sheep-like herd of subjects. We have at least retained the right to protest and insult our enemies; in Europe, you can end up in jail for 9 months for daring to speak out against the Lords or the invaders whom the Lords have decreed to be under their protection regardless of what the contemptible hoi polloi want.

Just look at the Brexit situation for examples. The New Aristocrats were complaining at how Brexit occurred because there was still too much democracy, and the ignorant coarse stupid plebs don't really know what's good for them and need to be restrained by the people of quality, in effect.

Looking for new painted foreheads to bow down to is absurd. It's what got us into this situation in the first place.

Now if you say that you're against universal democracy, then I agree with you. But the cure for that isn't surrendering our future to a class of tyrants; we've already got them. The Bushes and Clintons and Kennedies are today's Plantagenets and Habsburgs and Percies and Julii.

What's needed is a limited franchise again. Only free white men can vote; only free white men can hold office. It's my belief that if women hadn't been given the vote, we would not even be having this discussion; the U.S. would still have a white supermajority, all this fag/tranny stuff would never have come up, and the republic would be rolling on as it did through the 1950s, just at a higher tech level.

1. Women are unsuited to voting because their brains are not wired for defense of the tribe. They're wired for "be friends with everyone," which is great in the family, and utterly destructive in the public arena.

2. Non-whites are unsuited to voting (or living) in a White nation because their cognition is biologically different, and many of them are also less intelligent and will inevitably push the average cultural and social level downwards towards their beastly, murder-ridden kraals, while destroying the high accomplishments of White culture.

I suppose you could say that my "white male electorate" represents a very broad-based aristocracy, which is true. But as for knocking head in front of a bunch of warmongering ruling houses who have power of life and death over us? Fuck that. It's what we've got currently, and it sucks.

Blogger John Wright October 18, 2016 10:16 AM  

I'm glad so eminent a public figure finally reached my position. The Press is the enemy.

Blogger Wanda Sherratt October 18, 2016 10:47 AM  

@47 - "Moral people will have moral government, immoral will have immoral government, regardless of the arrangement."

I've always believed that if George Washington had decided to accept the kingship of the United States, the US would have been a great nation under a great king. It was never the Constitution that made America great; it became great because its people were great. Now that the people are corrupt, we can see that the marvelous Constitution never had any special power at all.

Blogger praetorian October 18, 2016 10:48 AM  

> tfw you are the 56th comment and no one has said it yet...

(((Big Media)))

Blogger dc.sunsets October 18, 2016 10:55 AM  

@54 I agree that we have an elite, but they are not aristocrats. The pathy by which they rose to power is not via open contest and accomplishment. The system by which people are now in the 0.01% (and their hired lackey-politicians) favored con artistry and gaming the faux financial system engineered since 1964.

That said, there is no system that insures an Aristocracy produces good rulers, either. The king can be (and often is) a fink. I just believe aristocracy is a more open system to establish who is entitled to issue orders. It doesn't necessarily mean the orders will be just.

Durandel nailed it. An immoral citizenry will have immoral rule. We not only get the 'government' we consent to, we also (paraphrasing Mencken) get the government we deserve, and today we deserve to get it good and hard.

Blogger dc.sunsets October 18, 2016 10:58 AM  

@56 Now that the people are corrupt, we can see that the marvelous Constitution never had any special power at all.

So true. The USSR also had a constitution, and it guaranteed all manner of rights to citizens...I suppose even those who watched their loved ones executed by the NKVD or who watched their toes freeze off while sentenced to a Siberian labor camp in the Gulag Archipelago.

Blogger Wanda Sherratt October 18, 2016 11:04 AM  

I think Chesterton had a good sense of the virtues of an aristocracy, since he lived in a country that still had a real one. No doubt it had all started centuries earlier under rather murky circumstances, but after 6 or 7 centuries, the English aristocracy was very firmly tied to the land. The noble families had generations of history in their particular locales, and this had produced a sense of responsibility to the land and to the people living on it.

Of course many failed to keep up their responsibilities, but the system lasted as long as it did because it had genuine value to the people living under it, not just the rich who benefited from it. There would be bad lords, but there would also be good ones.

Our current aristocracy is as far removed from that homely ideal as possible. The current elites regard the people occupying the land as mere livestock to be exploited.

Blogger Nick S October 18, 2016 11:21 AM  

@33

I wouldn't be especially optimistic about Trumps chances at this point except that he is at this point via a string of minor miracles. It's clearly not Hillary's time...well...

Satan, a.k.a. Abaddon, Old Scratch, Apollyon, Beelzebub, Lucifer, Prince of Darkness, Prince of the power of the air, Angel of the bottomless pit, etc., etc., also currently d.b.a. Hillary Clinton, should take the hint and reel it in before this current vessel has to be put down forealz to make way for the Donald.

Blogger tweell October 18, 2016 11:50 AM  

It looks like the margin of fraud will also be greater than ever.

The high trust society of the US is based on the rule of law being applied more or less evenly. Our elites are now openly contemptuous of those laws. This could be the tipping point for major societal change - why should we obey laws, given that our VIP's ignore them? I fear for my children and grandchildren.

Blogger Sam Lively October 18, 2016 11:53 AM  

"Have white children."

I married a half-Chinese, half-Mexican girl so I feel like I'm doing my part by assimilating the two big new post 1965 demographic influxes. She's voting for Trump too.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 18, 2016 11:57 AM  

Icicle wrote:Let's make Western civilization great again!

But let us not forget the other compass directions. Let us take the best from them and make them even better.

No, let's let them keep their degenerate and totalitarian ways and we'll renew Western Civilization on the foundation built by our ancestors.

Seriously, that kind of bullshit is how we got here in the first place.

Anonymous BigGayKoranBurner October 18, 2016 12:09 PM  

an authority that in other nations is reserved for tyrants, priests, parties and mandarins.”

But in the US its Carlos Slims and 5 jews.

I thought that too. If I had to describe Fox, NEOCOheN news.

Hmm - I tried to post using Brave / Google account to no avail Riker was offered his own ship the Glock.

BGKB and Milo, you know what to do. Seriously given how many STR8 men can't find good women what possible chance would we have.

Democracy is how they thrived, without it we will seek to be led by men of action, men of substance

Like women most gays can't understand a judge waving his mallet is an act of force, and lays precedent for force to be used by the other side. There are no leftists willing to fight and die to preserve their power and policies. In contrast, there are an awful lot of people willing to fight and die for their religion and our Constitution. The coastal (((elites))) are uniquely unsuited to a world where force rules instead of law.

I don't think it makes sense to call the media a conspiracy.

Did you not see the WikiLeaks of Donna Brazil sending questions for undecided town hall people to ask or journalists sending stories to the DNC for approval. Even better was the revelation that the PUSSYGATE video was being edited to remove problems for Billy Bush, but the raw video got leaked, TRUMP may have leaked the raw video himself to take a Bush with him, & have it not look as bad.

The most powerful weapon that the media has at its disposal is the ability NOT to cover a story.

During the week of Cecil the lion coverage a Mexican was caught on security video tossing the body of 8yo white girl Maddie Middleton into a dumpster after he raped her to death Local San Fran story. Also check out the Christian Newson murder/rape/torture. https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/08/01/15-year-old-hispanic-rapes-and-murders-8-year-old-white-girl-wanted-to-know-how-people-would-react/

Vox and others interested in SHTF mindset check this out...Bitch to Dumbass

I have bad news for you, the bitches and assholes are the ones most likely to survive. They have fruit/nut trees planted under swales, greenhouses, guns, and they know their poisonous plants including a STR8 RN woman prepper who purposely grows hemlock. With doctors the assholes that make female employees cry, do so by expecting high standards of them, if I needed surgery and the only thing I knew about the possible choices of surgeons was that one was an A-hole and the other one nice I would chose the a-hole. When the Nigapocalypse happens it will be A-holes that printed the recipe for penicillin ahead of time, for when their "fish" meds run out.

let us not forget the other compass directions. Let us take the best from them and make them even better.

I already have the recipes for tacos and general tso's chicken.

Blogger praetorian October 18, 2016 12:25 PM  

But let us not forget the other compass directions. Let us take the best from them and make them even better.

You have to go back.

I'm sorry, but you have to go back.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 18, 2016 12:38 PM  

Wanda Sherratt wrote:Of course many failed to keep up their responsibilities, but the system lasted as long as it did because it had genuine value to the people living under it, not just the rich who benefited from it. There would be bad lords, but there would also be good ones.

By Chesterton's time that was completely gone. The Inclosure Acts had literally stolen the land of the peasants for the benefit of the rich. The typical rich man in London, by 1800 was rich from trade, transport, or manufacturing. Even where his wealth was based in land and farming, had no knowledge of his land, of his peasants, of his tenant farmers or the state of the countryside. Think Bertie Wooster as Landlord. Granted the greatest families had (and still have) their wealth in land that they actively manage. They were by 1800, long before Chesterton, a quite small minority in both numbers and wealth, and consequently power.

Anonymous David Zincavage October 18, 2016 3:01 PM  

Buchanan a liar or a lot younger than he's supposed to be. I can remember what they did to Barry Goldwater. It was lot worse than what they've done to Trump, and there is the notable difference that when they abused Barry, they were lying.

Anonymous Icicle speaking in the language of the Spergatron 9000 October 18, 2016 3:21 PM  

No, let's take the best from them to make US even better.

Think that is rather obvious from the first sentence posted.

No, let's let them keep their degenerate and totalitarian ways and we'll renew Western Civilization on the foundation built by our ancestors.

Doing the opposite would hardly be "taking the best from them."

Seriously, that kind of bullshit is how we got here in the first place.

Which is probably why I did not recommend that.

You have to go back.

I'm sorry, but you have to go back.


We clearly didn't take the best people. But who says "the best" is people (from the sentence I posted)? It could be art, philosophy, engineering techniques, hidden untranslated tomes, anything.

It was all quiet. Suddenly, a figure appeared on the horizon. They called him... the Sperg Whisperer.

Blogger Wanda Sherratt October 18, 2016 3:22 PM  

Snidely Whiplash @67 - It could not have been entirely gone, because Chesterton illustrates the point with an anecdote from his own life. In his autobiography, he describes in his usual humorous way the great debate in his own village over erecting some memorial to WWI. "The Practical Party" wanted to build an ex-serviceman's club, and Chesterton's impractical party wanted to raise a memorial in the shape of a crucifix at the crossroads. They even went the democratic route of voting on it.

"Lastly, the most significant part of this social episode was the end of it. If anyone fails to realise how lasting, or lingering, in spite of everything, are the old social forms of England and its structure as an ancient aristocratic state, he could not do better than consider the last quiet and ironic ending of the great battle of the Beaconsfield War Memorial. There was a huge paper plebiscite in which hardly anybody knew what he was voting for, but which turned up somehow with a narrow numerical majority for the building of the Club. The Club, for which the practical majority had voted was never built. The Cross, for which the more mystical minority had largely forgotten to vote, was built. When the whole fuss of papers and public meetings was over, and everybody was thinking about other things, the rector of the parish raised a quiet subscription of his own among his own co-religionists and sympathisers; got enough money to put up a Cross and put it up. Meanwhile Lord Burnham, the chief landlord of the neighbourhood, equally casually informed the Ex-Service Men and their sympathisers that they could use a hall, which was his property, for their Club, if they liked. They appeared to be perfectly contented: and so far from demanding any other Club, seemed to have become fairly indifferent about the use of this one. So did the Great War pass over Beaconsfield, making the world safe for Democracy and the holding of any number of public meetings full of the revolutionary hopes of the Modern World; and so in the end the whole matter was decided at the private discretion of the Squire and Parson, as it was in the days of old."

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 18, 2016 3:33 PM  

(((David Zincavage))) wrote:Buchanan a liar or a lot younger than he's supposed to be. I can remember what they did to Barry Goldwater. It was lot worse than what they've done to Trump, and there is the notable difference that when they abused Barry, they were lying.

No, what they did to Goldwater was easy compared to what they've done to Trump. Where were Goldwater's rape accusers? Where were Goldwater's pedophilia accusers? Where were Goldwater's fraud accusers? Where were Goldwater's gay porn photoshops? Where were Goldwater's purloined tax returns?

And for all the irrational hatred and insanity they whipped up about Goldwater, he had actually said we should use nuclear weapons in Vietnam, so it was at least based in reality.

And don't you EVER call Pat Buchanan a liar again.

Blogger cluster October 18, 2016 4:34 PM  

Sorry, probable dumb question but what is the precise meaning being assigned the the > symbol in
Identity > Culture > Politics.

Anonymous Sperg Icicle October 18, 2016 4:56 PM  

I think it means Pac-Man is eating or something. Vox is a gamer.

Anonymous Galactic Starfleets of Deplorable Spartacus October 18, 2016 5:04 PM  

cluster wrote:what is the precise meaning being assigned the the > symbol in
Identity > Culture > Politics.


">" means "greater than" in this context. It's used in math like an equal sign:

3 = 3
3 > 2
3 > 2 > 1

Blogger RavingDave October 18, 2016 11:34 PM  

. Basil Makedon wrote:

"The most powerful weapon that the media has at its disposal is the ability NOT to cover a story."


I keep saying this. They do more damage by refusing to cover corruption scandals than they do by making up stories about Republicans.

Blogger Cynthia October 24, 2016 5:09 PM  


Hello ,
Am Mrs Cynthia corvin . Am a lady with a great testimony I live in USA and i am a happy woman today? and i told my self that any lender that rescue my family from our poor situation, i will refer any person that is looking for loan to him, he gave happiness to me and my family, i was in need of a loan of $360,000.00 to start my life all over as i am a mother with 2 kids I met this honest and GOD fearing man loan lender that help me with a loan of $360,000.0.Dollar, he is a GOD fearing man, if you are in need of loan and you will pay back the loan please contact him tell him that is Mrs cynthia corvin, that refer you to him. contact Mr.Aarifah Nur,via email:- singaporeall66@gmail.com

Blogger Cynthia October 24, 2016 5:09 PM  


Hello ,
Am Mrs Cynthia corvin . Am a lady with a great testimony I live in USA and i am a happy woman today? and i told my self that any lender that rescue my family from our poor situation, i will refer any person that is looking for loan to him, he gave happiness to me and my family, i was in need of a loan of $360,000.00 to start my life all over as i am a mother with 2 kids I met this honest and GOD fearing man loan lender that help me with a loan of $360,000.0.Dollar, he is a GOD fearing man, if you are in need of loan and you will pay back the loan please contact him tell him that is Mrs cynthia corvin, that refer you to him. contact Mr.Aarifah Nur,via email:- singaporeall66@gmail.com

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts