Shall we pretend to be surprised?

Another mass shooting, this time in El Paso:

KTSM can confirm that 18 people were shot inside the Walmart. The extent of their injuries is unknown at this time. El Paso Police and multiple other law enforcement agencies are responding to a shooting at the Walmart an active shooter situation.

I wonder how many people from Las Vegas and Gilroy will just happen to be there to be interviewed by the media? I'd put the over/under on three.

Update: A fake white nationalist manifesto has already made the rounds and been debunked.

Update: The Associated Press quotes three witnesses who report seeing four gunmen:

A family of three was among a dozen people waiting outside a bus station. They were trying to return to their car that was in a blocked-off Walmart parking lot. “I heard the shots but I thought they were hits, like roof construction,” said Adriana Quezada, 39, who was in the women’s clothing section of Walmart with her two children. Quezada said she saw four men, dressed in black, moving together firing guns indiscriminately. Police confirmed only one gunman.

And yet, the only shooter in custody is a young drug-addled man. Again. I understand that eyewitness reports in stressful situations are intrinsically unreliable, but "four men dressed in black" are considerably more likely to be confused with "three men dressed in dark brown" or "six men dressed in blue" than zero men. 

The problem with US nationalism

As Alan Mendenhall notes, it simply doesn't exist, because it has never existed:

What is this national conservatism all about?

The succinct answer is the marriage of nationalism to conservatism. The conference organizers defined nationalism as “a commitment to a world of independent nations.” They presented national conservatism as “an intellectually serious alternative to the excesses of purist libertarianism, and in stark opposition to theories grounded in race.” Their stated aim was “to solidify and energize national conservatives, offering them a much-needed institutional base, substantial ideas in the areas of public policy, political theory, and economics, and an extensive support network across the country.”

Sounds interesting. However, neither national conservatism nor nationalism — whatever the distinctions between them — can take hold in the United States.

The Difference Between a Country and a Nation

Why? Because the United States is not, and has never been, a nation. The founding generation referred to the United States as a plural noun (i.e., “these United States”) because several sovereigns fell under that designation. St. George Tucker called the United States a “federal compact” consisting of “several sovereign and independent states.” If his view seems unrecognizable today, it is because nationalism within the United States is dying or dead—and the United States killed it.

The United States of America in the singular is a country, not a nation. It contains nations within it, but does not itself constitute a nation. Nations involve solidarity among people who share a common culture, language, customs, mores, ethnicity, and history. A country, by contrast, involves political arrangements and governmental territories and boundaries.

From its inception, the United States has been characterized by faction and sectionalism, cultural clashes, and competing narratives — between Indian tribes in what is now Florida and California, Wyoming and Maine, Georgia and Michigan; between the British and French and Spanish and Dutch; between Protestants and Catholics and English Dissenters and nonconformists and splintering denominations; between the Calvinism of Cotton Mather and the Enlightenment rationalism that influenced Franklin and Jefferson. The United States has experienced, as well, numerous separatist movements, including, most notably, the secession of the states that made up the Confederate States of America.

The United States is not a nation.

The United States is not a nation, it is an empire. But the formerly dominant American nation that it contains is, despite its self-disbelief, nevertheless still a nation. And its national self-interest is naturally opposed to the self-styled "nationalist conservatives" who are neither nationalists nor conservatives, but rather, neoclown imperialists in nationalist clothing.

Mendenhall observes: "The national conservatism they envision for the United States can lead only to the suppression of actual nationalism." And that, of course, is precisely the point.

The opportunity embiggens

It's going to be interesting to see Rebel go up against the likes of SJW Black Widow and Captain Marvel:

Schaeffer, who also contributed to Captain Marvel and will be showrunning the upcoming WandaVision series on Disney+ added, “I wasn’t a huge superhero movie fan before starting to work [at Marvel], but now that I’m doing it, there’s just so much opportunity to make big, positive statements.” She continued, “Especially something like Captain Marvel and Black Widow, to have these female-centered stories — I just can’t not be involved in that.”

Schaeffer would go into detail about her ongoing experience with WandaVision and what it’s like to be showrunning a TV series without previous TV writing credits. Schaeffer states, “It’s highly unusual. It’s kind of ridiculous.” However, she adds that showrunning is “the most satisfying role that I’ve had. It combines almost everything. While I think I will get back to directing at some point, right now running a show – I feel like the luckiest person in the world. It’s a really phenomenal gig.”

She goes on to discuss the makeup of the writing room for WandaVision indicating there are four women on a staff of eight writes. Schaeffe states the writer’s room’s makeup is “incredibly intentional, and it was very much supported by Marvel.” She adds, “I felt incredibly strongly that we needed women and people of color and people of all backgrounds and perspectives in the room. I believe — I think it is fact — that stories are better the more perspectives you have.”

Schaeffer also called for superhero films to stop “glamorizing guns and weaponry.”

SJWs with an agenda and no experience. What could go wrong? And let's just say Rebel doesn't have any issues with glamorous weaponry. After all, her AR-15 is pink.

No safe space for the wicked

Not even Playboy can escape the ravages of the SJW.

Playboy has hired a team of millennials to transform it into a socially conscious publication as it struggles to find its voice in the modern era. It relaunched earlier this year as an ad-free quarterly under the editorial leadership of a gay man and two women who are all under the age of 32.

On the plus side, this is going to make Zoe Quinn's forays into games and comics look like mega-successes by comparison. Lest you think I exaggerate, feast your eyes on one of Playboy's new models.

Woke is the new hot!

Welcome to BoardGameGate

As previously noted, there is no white male space that SJWs will not seek to destroy:

In the continuing explosion of tabletop board gaming, there are numerous World War II games in which players get to be Nazis. There are American Civil War games in which players take the role of the Confederacy. Some of these games confront the victims of the Holocaust and enslaved people head on; most don’t, though of course they’re right there if players choose to look.

But even poorly designed games with war themes often get the benefit of the doubt. They are generally created and played by people deeply interested in history. They prize accuracy over fun. Most games in this genre are accompanied by extensive reading lists and explanations; players often treat them as a way to learn that is more engaging than just reading a book.

Scramble for Africa was a new strategy game — what is called a “eurogame,” to contrast the genre with war games and more confrontational luck-based American board games. In it, the player would “take the role of one of six European powers with an eye toward exploring the unknown interior of Africa, discovering land and natural resources,” as the game’s description put it.

And with that, Scramble for Africa became board gaming’s entree into the very particular, sometimes confusing and very of-the-moment culture wars of 2019....

Gene Billingsley, the owner of GMT Games, the game’s publisher, responded to the criticism by pulling the game, two months after its announcement. “It’s clear to me that the game is out of step with what most eurogame players want from us, in terms of both topic and treatment,” he wrote in an email to GMT customers....

The board game hobby — especially in the United States — is overwhelmingly white and male, though, anecdotally, that seems to be changing. Mr. Wehrle and Mr. Reuss said they see more women and people of color playing games and attending board game conventions.

It's as if they are writing these pieces by rote from a very simple script. The moderately amusing thing is that the author of the article clearly doesn't realize that there have been no less than four Scramble for Africa games published since 1973, and that doesn't count games

Self-destruction is the aim

In the midst of an epic discussion of the SJW murder of Marvel's god of thunder, John C. Wright pens an appropriately thunderous anathema:

If self destruction were not the aim, it is certainly an odd coincidence that the Left just so happens to destroy everything and create nothing.

They promote sexual perversion, they promote male athletes pretending to be female compeating in women's sports, human feces heaped on the sidewalks in San Francisco while (at the same time) claiming it is racist to use hoses to clean the sidewalks, on the grounds that hoses were used against black protesters during the Civil Rigths march.

They side with terrrorists over the Jews, jihadists over homosexuals, and with the CIA and big business when and only when those organizations are acting in a corrupt and illegal fashion, but not when they fuction as designed.

When Russia was soviet, they all rushed to defend it. Not that is it not, they denounce it as the greatest of threats.

They are against nuclear energy but also against fossil fuels.

They favor infanticide, divorse, contraception, and euthanasia, but they hate the traditional family.

The hang toilets in modern art museums, cans of human feces, and paintings of the Virgin covered in dung.

They favor Newspeak over English, or, in other words, they are against language except when it is corrupt.

They adore and laud pervert pride parades, but then scream with bugeyed hysteria at a Fourth of July parade.

They hate cops.

And the list goes on and on and on. In not a single case is their any evidence of them building up anything after destroying what came before.

There is no new form of family, no new form of modern art, no new form of gender-free English, no new form of law enforcement, no new form of government, and no new rules of courtesy and politeness. There is nothing but continued condemnation of the old forms as unjust.

Imagine a man who aims and misses the mark but hits his rich uncle through a distant bedroom window over and over and over again. The claim that his true goal is to hit the mark cannot be believed after the hundredth shaft shot unerringly into the old man's corpse.

Deliberate? Uncle Screwtape's deceit of them might be deliberate. I am not sure if the word deliberate has any meaning when dealing with minds unable and unwilling to deliberate anything.

Self-destruction is always and ever the aim of Satandom. This is because the god of this world hates humanity, and he hates all that is Good, that is Beautiful, and that is True. Whether you prefer to call his servitors the Left, SJWs, the Chantry Guild, or the Synagogue of Satan, the single most important thing to understand is that their actions are never coincidental or ironic or mistaken, they are always purposeful.

Their entire purpose, their only objective, is to destroy. That is why no amount of appeals to reason, to capitalism, or to profit motive will ever prevail. That is why creators and builders must always remain awake and on guard against their blandishments, their appeals, and their offers.

The correct Brexit deal

Prime Minister Boris Johnson may be a historian, but I'm confident he can do the math dictated by the recent by-election that cut his parliamentary majority to one.

The Liberal Democrats' Jane Dodds gave the Prime Minister a political headache as she overcame an 8,000-vote Conservative majority to take the Welsh seat for the Remainer party.

Disgraced expenses cheat Tory Chris Davies, whose conviction and expulsion via a recall petition forced the summer vote, held on to second with a better than expected showing despite the presence of the Brexit Party.... Ms Dodds, 55, secured a majority of 1,425 after a 'Remain alliance' with Plaid and the Greens, and Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson signalled this morning that she wants to extend the tie-up to a swathe of other winnable seats.

• Jane Dodds (Lib Dem): 13,826  
• Chris Davies (Conservatives: 12,401
• Des Parkinson (Brexit Party) 3,331 
• Tom Davies (Labour ) 1,680 
• Lady Lily The Pink (Monster Raving Loony) 334 
• Liz Phillips (Ukip) 242 

A Leave alliance with the Brexit Party means the Conservatives will easily win the next general election, which looks increasingly likely for any of a variety of possible reasons. But it also means that the Conservatives have to stop faffing around with idiotic "increase legal immigration" talk and other nonsense that literally no one actually cares about. Of course, given the fact that they were foolish enough to try to convince the Brecon electorate to accept a convicted criminal who had been recalled by petition as their MP, they may not be capable of accepting the obvious political logic here.

The other interesting fact is the way in which Labour got absolutely destroyed. Its position as a weak Remain party appears to be untenable in the current circumstances.

Rhetoric works

Especially when it comes from the Bully Pulpit:

Somalia President Mohamed Abdullahi Farmajo voluntarily renounced his U.S. citizenship, a country where he lived, received education and worked.

“This follows the completion of the required legal and immigration processes that had been initiated after the president’s election,” his office said Thursday in an emailed statement.

The renunciation comes about two weeks after President Donald Trump attacked four minority freshmen congresswomen including Somali-born Ilhan Omar, whom he asked to return to the Horn of Africa nation.

It's a start, anyhow.

Medieval History 101 Episode VI

What if you were told that without the Rule of St. Benedict for monks there would be no Western civilization? Hint: It isn’t because monks were not supposed to laugh. For Unauthorized subscribers.

Episode 6: Getting Medieval on the Rule of St. Benedict

Episode Guide

Tinder, meet the sparks

Michael Snyder notes three very dangerous developments that have the potential to lead to significant large-scale conflict on Zerohedge.

• Israel has been striking Iranian military targets inside Syria for months, but now the rules of engagement have apparently changed, because in recent days the IDF has started conducting airstrikes against Iranian targets inside Iraq. The reason this is being called “an unprecedented move” is because this is the very first time since 1981 that we have seen Israeli airstrikes inside Iraq. Needless to say, these latest airstrikes have absolutely enraged the Iranians.  It looks like the Israeli government has determined that any Iranian military targets outside of Iran itself are fair game, and it is probably only a matter of time before Iran strikes back in a major way.
• The political protests that have made global headlines in Hong Kong in recent weeks have greatly angered the Chinese government.  They were probably hoping that the protests would quickly subside and soon be forgotten, but that hasn’t happened. So now China is faced with a decision.  If such protests were happening elsewhere in China, they would be brutally crushed, but Hong Kong is a special case. If the Chinese are too harsh with the protesters in Hong Kong, that could turn world opinion against them, but if they do nothing that could encourage protests to start happening in other area of the country. In the end, the Chinese will probably do what they always do, and that means crushing the opposition.
• North Korea just fired two more missiles into the ocean. The North Koreans are greatly alarmed by the joint military drills that the U.S. and South Korea will soon be conducting, and whenever they get greatly upset about something they seem to express that displeasure by firing off more missiles.

Of the three, I think the Hong Kong situation is the most delicate and the North Korean one the most trivial. North Korea has carried out more than 80 strategic missile tests since Kim Jong-On became Supreme Leader in 2011, so what do two more signify? However, there is also a fourth major development that is probably as dangerous as all three of those situations combined, but is little noted in the USA as yet because it doesn't involve Israel or China or nukes.

Turkey has threatened to re-open the floodgates of mass migration to Europe unless Turkish nationals are granted visa-free travel to the European Union. The EU agreed to visa liberalization in a March 2016 EU-Turkey migrant deal in which Ankara pledged to stem the flow of migrants to Europe. In an interview with Turkish television channel TGRT Haber on July 22, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Çavuşoğlu said that Turkey was backing out of the migrant deal because the EU had failed to honor its pledge to grant Turkish passport holders visa-free access to 26 European countries.

"We have suspended the readmission agreement," he said. "We will not wait at the EU's door."

A day earlier, Turkish Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu accused European countries of leaving Turkey alone to deal with the migration issue. In comments published by the state news agency Anadolu Agency, he warned:

"We are facing the biggest wave of migration in history. If we open the floodgates, no European government will be able to survive for more than six months. We advise them not to try our patience."

The migration deal, which entered into force on June 1, 2016, was hastily negotiated by European leaders desperate to gain control over a crisis in which more than one million migrants poured into Europe in 2015.

Under the agreement, the EU pledged to pay Turkey €6 billion, grant visa-free travel to Europe for Turkey's 82 million citizens, and restart accession talks for Turkey to join the EU. In exchange, Turkey agreed to stop the flow of migrants to Europe as well as to take back all migrants and refugees who illegally reach Greece from Turkey.

Turkey currently hosts an estimated 3.5 million migrants and refugees — mainly Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans. Many of these people presumably would migrate to Europe if given the opportunity to do so....If the EU approves the visa waiver, tens of millions of Turks will gain immediate and unimpeded access to Europe's passport-free zone. Critics of visa liberalization fear that millions of Turkish nationals may end up migrating to Europe. The Austrian newsmagazine, Wochenblick, reported that 11 million Turks are living in poverty and "many of them are dreaming of moving to central Europe."

Not every European government will fall if the migration spigot is turned on again - those countries already fortunate enough to have solid anti-migration parties in government will see the strength of those parties skyrocket - but the German and French governments will most certainly fall and the collapse of the Berlin-Paris axis would suffice to account for the European Union as well.

Disavowing Reagan

It will be interesting to see which direction Republicans will choose to go in light of the latest Republicans R the Real Racists scandal. Will they stand by their icon Ronald Reagan or will they stand by their professed belief in racial equality.

The day after the United Nations voted to recognize the People’s Republic of China, then–California Governor Ronald Reagan phoned President Richard Nixon at the White House and vented his frustration at the delegates who had sided against the United States. “Last night, I tell you, to watch that thing on television as I did,” Reagan said. “Yeah,” Nixon interjected. Reagan forged ahead with his complaint: “To see those, those monkeys from those African countries—damn them, they’re still uncomfortable wearing shoes!” Nixon gave a huge laugh.

The past month has brought presidential racism back into the headlines. This October 1971 exchange between current and future presidents is a reminder that other presidents have subscribed to the racist belief that Africans or African Americans are somehow inferior.

Since most Republicans are, by nature, cowards, and since literally nothing terrifies them more than the possibility that someone, somewhere, will accuse them of being racist, I assume that they will not hesitate to obediently jettison Reagan from the Republican pantheon, as well as Lincoln, Jefferson, and Washington. At this point, there really isn't any more room for anyone but Harriet Tubman, Martin Luther King, the Melting Pot, and, of course, the Holocaust.

I assume they'll turn against the Constitution too, once they finally grasp that its very purpose is disinclusivitating.

REBEL'S RUN update

This post brought to you by Viral Films Media and its legal advisers.

The REBEL'S RUN campaign is progressing swimmingly.  Chuck and Vox have been hard at work on the script, and the Viral Films Media team is busy on various work streams to keep the project moving forward on schedule.

If you are still interested in supporting the REBEL'S RUN campaign, there is still room and time to do so.

And if you are already a supporter of the campaign, please check your email and make sure that you are following all the necessary steps to follow through and fund your pledge.  Both the Viral Films Media team and the campaign site are more than happy to answer any questions you might have and assist you in completing the process.

So, about that Thor idea

We may have to get a move on:

A new report suggests Marvel Studios will cast a transgender female character in one of their upcoming Phase 4 projects.

The report comes from Geeks World Wide, who indicate the character is currently using the codename “Jessica.” They go on to indicate that they are looking for a “transwoman actress of any ethnicity in her 20s to 30s.”

Geeks World Wide speculates that the character will appear in Thor: Love and Thunder as they state “the casting breakdown calls for ‘transgender actresses only.'” They go on to indicate the character will be Sera.

Sera first appeared in Angela: Asgard’s Assassin #1 back in 2015. Sera was created by Kieron Gillen, Marguerite Bennett, and Phil Jimenez. Sera was a member of a group of wingless male Angels from Heven called Anchorites that were being held by the Hierophants.

The Devil Mouse really does seem hell-bent on tearing down Stan Lee's legacy as rapidly as possible.

Sophistry over time

NATIONALITY

1828 Webster's Dictionary
National character; also, the quality of being national, or strongly attached to ones own nation.

1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica
A somewhat vague term, used strictly in international law (see International Law, Private) for the status of membership in a nation or state (for the conditions of which see State, Allegiance, Naturalization, Alien), and in a more extended sense in political discussion to denote an aggregation of persons claiming to represent a racial, territorial or some other bond of unity, though not necessarily recognized as an independent political entity. In this latter sense the word has often been applied to such people as the Irish, the Armenians and the Czechs. A "nationality" in this connexion represents a common feeling and an organized claim rather than distinct attributes which can be comprised in a strict definition.

2019 Wikipedia
Nationality is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state. Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.

You cannot hide

If you are a white male, it doesn't matter what your hobby is. Diversity is coming to destroy it.

Does craft beer have a diversity problem? Of course it does....

Given that big beer makers for decades courted male consumers with sexist TV ads featuring women in bikinis, it perhaps surprises no one that the craft beer business has become a haven for white males — most of whom happen to be hipsters. Sadly, what counts as diversity in this industry is the clean-shaven minority mixing with the bearded majority....

While Boston Beer may be mum about what more could be done on diversity, the Brewers Association, the trade group for small and independent American brewers, is not. Since 2016, the association has been on a mission to figure out how the industry can be more welcoming to everyone, whether as a consumer or a brewer.

Measures include updating advertising standards to ban sexually explicit, lewd, and demeaning language, graphics, and images; forming a diversity committee; hiring a “diversity ambassador;” and giving out grants to encourage brewers to promote diversity and inclusion.

Unlike big beer companies, which rely on expensive TV ad campaigns, craft brewers depend on word-of-mouth and grass-roots marketing to build their brands. Through its diversity grants, the Brewers Association is supporting Fresh Fest 2019 in August in Pittsburgh — the nation’s first black brew fest, featuring 28 black-owned breweries, and Beers With(out Beards), an event series in Brooklyn, N.Y., that promotes women in the craft beer industry and women-owned breweries.

Whether you obediently cuck or whether you try to hide in your basement and brew your beer in solitude, Diversity will hunt you down and try to inclusivate you. So, you'd better learn how to stand up and fight for your interests before they are demolished through diversification.

A Democrat disaster in the making

Matt Taibbi's article on the Democratic presidential candidates is pretty much all you need to know about the 2020 sacrificial lambs:

Four years ago, the rank inadequacy of the Lindsey Grahams and Scott Walkers and Jeb Bushes who tumbled into the pastures of Iowa made great sport for snickering campaign journalists, myself included. We dubbed the field of governors, senators, and congressgoons who couldn’t beat a game-show host the “Clown Car,” and laughed at what many of us thought was the long-overdue collapse of the Republican Party. The joke turned out to be on us.

The GOP error was epic in scale. The Republicans sent twice the usual number of suspects into the buzz saw of a Throw the Bums Out movement they never understood, creating the comic pretext for the Clown Car: twice the canned quips, twice the empty promises, double the rage, frustration, and eye rolls.

Nobody will want to hear this, but Democrats are repeating the error....

Williamson is a small, almost ethereal figure with silver-streaked hair and intense eyes that 19th-century authors would have described as being “like coals.” Her superficial eccentricities and occasional incautious statements (she once said “there’s a skepticism which is actually healthy” on the issue of vaccines) have caused reporters to chortle at her run.

But her speech is not a lifeless collection of policy positions. It’s an interesting, tightly written diagnosis of the American problem. Precisely because socioeconomic stresses have pushed them into heightened awareness, she says, the American public sees what she calls “a transition from democracy to aristocracy,” and the corporate sector’s “insatiable appetite” for money that dominates American life.

Williamson is not a traditional orator, with a voice that fills the room. You can barely hear her without a microphone. But she grabs crowds. Nobody is checking sports scores or Twitter. They’re in.

Williamson goes on to say that most Americans are aware that their government is now little more than a handmaiden to sociopathic forces. She describes a two-party system that, at its worst, operates in perfect harmony with the darkest impulses of corporate capitalism, and at best — presumably she refers more to Democrats here — sounds like institutionalized beggary.

“ ‘Pretty please, can I maybe have a hundred-thousand-dollar grant here?’ ” she says. “ ‘Pretty please, can we maybe have a million dollars in the budget for all this?’ ”

Heads are nodding all over the place.

“They say, ‘I can get you a cookie.’ ”

This elicits a few yeahs from the crowd.

Christ, I think. This woman is going to win the nomination.

Ironically, a lunatic candidate like Williamson is probably the only one with a legitimate chance of beating President Trump in the general election. Because she's the only one speaking even a modicum of the truth; the US government really is little more than a handmaiden to sociopathic forces.

Aquinas on nation vs state

Yet another proof, if another one was required, to prove that the nation is not and can never be the state. Contemplate Summa Theologica Question 95. Human Law Article 4.

Article 4. Whether Isidore's division of human laws is appropriate?

Objection 1. It would seem that Isidore wrongly divided human statutes or human law (Etym. v, 4, seqq.). For under this law he includes the "law of nations," so called, because, as he says, "nearly all nations use it." But as he says, "natural law is that which is common to all nations." Therefore the law of nations is not contained under positive human law, but rather under natural law.

Objection 2. Further, those laws which have the same force, seem to differ not formally but only materially. But "statutes, decrees of the commonalty, senatorial decrees," and the like which he mentions (Etym. v, 9), all have the same force. Therefore they do not differ, except materially. But art takes no notice of such a distinction: since it may go on to infinity. Therefore this division of human laws is not appropriate.

Objection 3. Further, just as, in the state, there are princes, priests and soldiers, so are there other human offices. Therefore it seems that, as this division includes "military law," and "public law," referring to priests and magistrates; so also it should include other laws pertaining to other offices of the state.

Objection 4. Further, those things that are accidental should be passed over. But it is accidental to law that it be framed by this or that man. Therefore it is unreasonable to divide laws according to the names of lawgivers, so that one be called the "Cornelian" law, another the "Falcidian" law, etc.

On the contrary, The authority of Isidore (Objection 1) suffices.

I answer that, A thing can of itself be divided in respect of something contained in the notion of that thing. Thus a soul either rational or irrational is contained in the notion of animal: and therefore animal is divided properly and of itself in respect of its being rational or irrational; but not in the point of its being white or black, which are entirely beside the notion of animal. Now, in the notion of human law, many things are contained, in respect of any of which human law can be divided properly and of itself. For in the first place it belongs to the notion of human law, to be derived from the law of nature, as explained above (Article 2). In this respect positive law is divided into the "law of nations" and "civil law", according to the two ways in which something may be derived from the law of nature, as stated above (Article 2). Because, to the law of nations belong those things which are derived from the law of nature, as conclusions from premises, e.g. just buyings and sellings, and the like, without which men cannot live together, which is a point of the law of nature, since man is by nature a social animal, as is proved in Polit. i, 2. But those things which are derived from the law of nature by way of particular determination, belong to the civil law, according as each state decides on what is best for itself.

Secondly, it belongs to the notion of human law, to be ordained to the common good of the state. In this respect human law may be divided according to the different kinds of men who work in a special way for the common good: e.g. priests, by praying to God for the people; princes, by governing the people; soldiers, by fighting for the safety of the people. Wherefore certain special kinds of law are adapted to these men.

Thirdly, it belongs to the notion of human law, to be framed by that one who governs the community of the state, as shown above (I-II:90:3). In this respect, there are various humanlaws according to the various forms of government. Of these, according to the Philosopher (Polit. iii, 10) one is "monarchy," i.e. when the state is governed by one; and then we have "Royal Ordinances." Another form is "aristocracy," i.e. government by the best men or men of highest rank; and then we have the "Authoritative legal opinions" [Responsa Prudentum] and "Decrees of the Senate" [Senatus consulta]. Another form is "oligarchy," i.e. government by a few rich and powerful men; and then we have "Praetorian," also called "Honorary," law. Another form of government is that of the people, which is called "democracy," and there we have "Decrees of the commonalty" [Plebiscita]. There is also tyrannical government, which is altogether corrupt, which, therefore, has no corresponding law. Finally, there is a form of government made up of all these, and which is the best: and in this respect we have lawsanctioned by the "Lords and Commons," as stated by Isidore (Etym. v, 4, seqq.).

Fourthly, it belongs to the notion of human law to direct human actions. In this respect, according to the various matters of which the law treats, there are various kinds of laws, which are sometimes named after their authors: thus we have the "Lex Julia" about adultery, the "Lex Cornelia" concerning assassins, and so on, differentiated in this way, not on account of the authors, but on account of the matters to which they refer.

Reply to Objection 1. The law of nations is indeed, in some way, natural to man, in so far as he is a reasonable being, because it is derived from the natural law by way of a conclusion that is not very remote from its premises. Wherefore men easily agreed thereto. Nevertheless it is distinct from the natural law, especially it is distinct from the natural law which is common to all animals.

The Replies to the other Objections are evident from what has been said.

Since the law of nations cannot be contained under human civil law, the national should never be confused with the citizen. There can be overlap, but the two identities are clearly distinct. The false conflation of national with citizen is profoundly dishonest and philosophically false, indeed, it is a prime example of the sophistic technique that Aristotle calls "amphiboly", which is "a fallacy of relevance that relies on an ambiguous word or grammatical structure to confuse or mislead an audience."

Consider this: if the nation was the state, there would be no need for the construction "nation-state" to ever have been created. Furthermore, there would have been no need for economists to make the change from "Gross National Product", which sums the economic activity of an entire nation regardless of the geographic location of the nationals, to "Gross Domestic Product", which sums the economic activity of all the people within a specified geographic location.

My kind of Catholic

ZhukovG perfectly expresses my perspective:

Here we are, Satan's hosts arrayed against us and we spend more time shooting at one another than at the enemy.

If any man confess that Jesus is Lord; he is my brother, my comrade. I don't care how he prays or the manner of his worship.

I only ask that he hold his place in the line of battle against the Powers and Principalities that have come against us.

Amen and a-fucking-men. Evil is aggressively attempting to erect the Tower of Babel 2.0, the Synagogue of Satan is shamelessly attempting to subvert language, nations, religions, and history itself, and yet various retards from every church and denomination prefer to engage in theological disputation rather than stand united against the god of this world under the banner of Jesus Christ.

Shut up and get thee to the battlefront.

Shaking the Deep State

That's the basic idea, gentlemen and traitors:

US President Donald Trump’s nomination of an inexperienced but loyal partisan to become the director of national intelligence (DNI) is an attempt to “neutralise” US spy agencies as an independent and objective voice on global affairs, former intelligence officials warned. It follows the announcement that Dan Coats, one of the most senior national security officials willing to contradict Trump, is to leave the post next month after disagreements with him over policy and intelligence, including on Russian interference in the US election and on North Korean nuclear capabilities.

Step by step, the Storm approaches. C(oates) before D(eclas). US spy agencies aren't supposed to be independent and objective and self-serving. They're supposed to be loyal to the US President and dedicated to the national interests of Americans.

Has Darwinism really failed?

Yes. Next question.... I've demonstrated the mathematical impossibility of evolution by natural selection and others are now hitting it increasingly hard from a variety of other angles:

Has Darwinism really failed? Peter Robinson discusses it with David Berlinski, David Gelernter, and Stephen Meyer, who have raised doubts about Darwin’s theory in their two books and essay, respectively The Deniable Darwin, Darwin’s Doubt, and “Giving Up Darwin” (published in the Claremont Review of Books).

Robinson asks them to convince him that the term “species” has not been defined by the authors to Darwin’s disadvantage. Gelernter replies to this and explains, as he expressed in his essay, that he sees Darwin’s theory as beautiful (which made it difficult for him to give it up): “Beauty is often a telltale sign of truth. Beauty is our guide to the intellectual universe—walking beside us through the uncharted wilderness, pointing us in the right direction, keeping us on track—most of the time.” Gelernter notes that there’s no reason to doubt that Darwin successfully explained the small adjustments by which an organism adapts to local circumstances: changes to fur density or wing style or beak shape. Yet there are many reasons to doubt whether Darwin can answer the hard questions and explain the big picture—not the fine-tuning of existing species but the emergence of new ones. Meyer explains Darwinism as a comprehensive synthesis, which gained popularity for its appeal. Meyer also mentions that one cannot disregard that Darwin’s book was based on the facts present in the 19th century.

Robinson then asks the panel whether Darwin’s theory of gradual evolution is contradicted by the explosion of fossil records in the Cambrian period, when there was a sudden occurrence of many species over the span of approximately seventy million years (Meyer’s noted that the date range for the Cambrian period is actually narrowing). Meyer replies that even population genetics, the mathematical branch of Darwinian theory, has not been able to support the explosion of fossil records during the Cambrian period, biologically or geologically.

Robinson than asks about Darwin’s main problem, molecular biology, to which Meyer explains, comparing it to digital world, that building a new biological function is similar to building a new code, which Darwin could not understand in his era. Berlinski does not second this and states that the cell represents very complex machinery, with complexities increasing over time, which is difficult to explain by a theory. Gelernter throws light on this by giving an example of a necklace on which the positioning of different beads can lead to different permutations and combinations; it is really tough to choose the best possible combination, more difficult than finding a needle in a haystack. He seconds Meyer’s statement that it was impossible for Darwin to understand that in his era, since the math is easy but he did not have the facts. Meyer further explains how difficult it is to know what a protein can do to a cell, the vast combinations it can produce, and how rare is the possibility of finding a functional protein. He then talks about the formation of brand-new organisms, for which mutation must affect genes early in the life form’s development in order to control the expression of other genes as the organism grows.

Perhaps the most important thing to keep in mind is that TENS is not even remotely scientific. It's never been more than an unfalsifiable hypothesis. All of the science related to it is circular. Darwinism is not merely outdated and incorrect, it is completely useless for biological engineering and wildly misleading when it is utilized to help interpret the past. (See: evolutionary psychology)

Do you want Nazi 2.0?

Because this is how you get Nazi 2.0:

A chilling incident in which a young boy and his mother were pushed in front of a high-speed train by an Eritrean man has sent shock waves across Germany and seemingly rekindled anti-migrant sentiment.

The tragedy took place on one of the platforms of the central railway terminal in the German city of Frankfurt – the nation’s second busiest railway hub. An eight-year-old boy and his mother were waiting for a train when they were suddenly attacked by a 40-year-old Eritrean. The assailant grabbed the woman and the child and threw them on the rail tracks right as the high-speed intercity express (ICE) was pulling into the station.

The 40-year-old woman managed to escape near-certain death as she made it to the pathway between two tracks. She tried to reach out to her son when the train ran over him, a witness told German media. The boy died at the scene.

The terrible scene left everyone at the station shaken. The ambulances that arrived shortly had to hospitalize some who were suffering from shock. The boy’s mother was also hospitalized, though there has been no information on her condition.

The perpetrator also tried to force another person onto the railway tracks but his third would-be victim escaped. The attacker then attempted to flee the scene but was pursued by a group of passengers and eventually detained by police outside the terminal.

I won't blame the Germans in the slightest when they start attacking both their own traitorous politicians as well as the migrants welcomed by them. And that's definitely "when", not "if". Nor will I fault that mother if she goes after every single CDU politician with a woodchipper. Their idiotic virtue-signaling has led directly to unthinkable horrors for the German nation.

Multiculturalism will never, ever, work. Diversity is a curse and a prelude to war. English and Spanish settlers never became American Indians. After centuries of "integration" African-Americans remain a nation apart. After 120 years of immigration to the Middle East, Jews have not become Arabs.

There is no Magic Dirt anywhere to be found on the planet.

Churchians against Christian nationalism

It's very clear what the next rhetorical battle will be:

A group formed by Christian leaders is warning against the rise of "Christian nationalism," saying the merging of Christian and American identities poses a threat to U.S. democracy and religious communities.

“As Christians, we are bound to Christ, not by citizenship, but by faith,” Christians Against Christian Nationalism’s statement reads.

“Whether we worship at a church, mosque, synagogue, or temple, America has no second-class faiths. All are equal under the U.S. Constitution.”

The statement is endorsed by at least 17 Christian leaders from various churches and organizations, according to the group’s website.

It won't be even remotely surprising to discover that their funding is coming from distinctly not-Christian sources, most likely the same people who fund the (((Edmund Burke Institute))) Nationalism is under attack by the globalist gatekeepers and Christian nationalism will be targeted by the Churchians.

Well and good. We have the truth, the Bible, history, science, and Jesus Christ on our side. They have lies, usury, and elite pedos on theirs. I like our odds.

Notice how they can't even bear to state the name of Jesus Christ. That's because they serve a very different god.

Pizzagate, reconsidered

Ron Unz reconsiders the plausibility of Pizzagate in light of the Epstein and McCain revelations:

Given my awareness of this remarkable track-record of major media cover-ups, I’m ashamed to admit that I had paid almost no attention to the Jeffrey Epstein case until it exploded across our national headlines earlier this month, suddenly becoming one of the biggest news stories in our country.

For many years, reports about Epstein and his illegal sex-ring had regularly circulated on the fringes of the Internet, with agitated commenters citing the case as proof of the dark and malevolent forces that secretly controlled our corrupted political system. But I almost entirely ignored these discussions, and I’m not sure that I ever once clicked on a single link.

Probably one reason I paid so little attention to the topic was the exceptionally lurid nature of the claims being made. Epstein was supposedly an enormously wealthy Wall Street financier of rather mysterious personal background and source of funds, who owned a private island and an immense New York City mansion, both regularly stocked with harems of underage girls provided for sexual purposes. He allegedly hobnobbed on a regular basis with Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, Harvard’s Alan Dershowitz, and numerous other figures in the international elite, as well as a gaggle of ordinary billionaires, frequently transporting those individuals on his personal jet known as “the Lolita Express” for the role it played in facilitating illegal secret orgies with young girls. When right-wing bloggers on obscure websites claimed that former President Clinton and the British Royals were being sexually serviced by the underage girls of a James Bond super-villain brought to life, I just assumed those accusations were the wildest sort of Internet exaggeration....

Around the same time that I first became familiar with the details of the Pizzagate controversy, the topic also started reaching the pages of my morning newspapers, but in an rather strange manner. Political stories began giving a sentence or two to the “Pizzagate hoax,” describing it as a ridiculous right-wing “conspiracy theory” but excluding all relevant details. I had an eery feeling that some unseen hand had suddenly flipped a switch caused the entire mainstream media to begin displaying identical signs reading “Pizzagate Is False—Nothing To See There!” in brightly flashing neon. I couldn’t recall any previous example of such a strange media reaction to some obscure controversy on the Internet.

Articles in the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times also suddenly appeared denouncing the entirety of the alternative media—Left, Right, and Libertarian—as “fake news” websites promoting Russian propaganda, while urging that their content be blocked by all patriotic Internet giants such as Facebook, Twitter, and Google. Prior to that moment, I’d never even heard the term “fake news” but suddenly it was ubiquitous across the media, once again almost as if some unseen hand had suddenly flipped a switch.

I naturally began to wonder whether the timing of these two strange developments was entirely coincidental. Perhaps Pizzagate was indeed true and struck so deeply at the core of our hugely corrupted political system that the media efforts to suppress it were approaching the point of hysteria.

Not long afterward, Tara McCarthy’s fine Pizzagate videos were purged from YouTube. This was among the very first instances of video content being banned despite fully conforming to all existing YouTube guidelines, another deeply suspicious development.

I also noticed that mere mention of Pizzagate had become politically lethal. Donald Trump had selected Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, as his National Security Advisor, and Flynn’s son served as the latter’s chief of staff. The younger Flynn happened to Tweet out a couple of links to Pizzagate stories, pointing out that the accusations hadn’t yet been actually investigated let alone disproven, and very soon afterward, he was purged from the Trump transition team, foreshadowing his father’s fall a few weeks later. It seemed astonishing to me that a few simple Tweets about an Internet controversy could have such huge real-life impact near the top of our government.

The media continued its uniform drumbeat of “Pizzagate Has Been Disproven!” but we were never explained how or by whom, and I was not the only individual to notice the hollowness of such denunciations. An award-winning investigative journalist named Ben Swann at a CBS station in Atlanta broadcast a short television segment summarizing the Pizzagate controversy and noting that contrary to widespread media claims, Pizzagate had neither been investigated nor debunked.

Here is my prediction: Pizzagate will, sooner or later, be largely confirmed to be true, most likely sans a few of the more lurid and cartoonish elements, and, as with the Epstein case, will turn out to be more sinister and of larger scale than even the conspiracy theorists initially believed.

As always, you can trust the lies and illogic to guide you toward the truth. Which is to say, once you know someone is lying, once you see that someone is presenting an obviously false syllogism, you know there is a specific truth that they are desperately trying to hide. The fact that the oft-repeated claim that Pizzagate has been "debunked" without any of the so-called debunkings being at all logically coherent, let alone conclusive, is sufficient to indicate that there are specific truths being hidden underneath the denials.

Imagine if we were to utilize this debunking logic in other scenarios.

• Major Premise: Conspiracy theorists claim Donald Trump is the President of the United States.
• Minor Premise: A crazy man tried to attack Donald Trump at a rally in Vandalia, Ohio.
• Conclusion: Therefore, the claim that Donald Trump is President of the United States is debunked!

Precisely how low does your IQ have to be to find that syllogism to be not only compelling, but conclusive?

The false dawn

SJWs can be excused if they erroneously believe all is well with the Devil Mouse:

Hear Disney roar.

On Sunday, Hollywood's alpha studio announced its films have collected a record-shattering $7.67 billion at the 2019 global box office — and it's not even August.

The previous industry record of $7.61 billion was set by Disney in 2016.

The $7.67 billion figure includes $5.09 billion amassed overseas. It's the first time any Hollywood studio has surpassed the $5 billion threshold internationally.

Already this year, three Disney titles have crossed $1 billion worldwide, not to mention that Marvel Studios' Avengers: Endgame ($2.79 billion) has surpassed Avatar to become the top-grossing film of all time. Fellow Marvel pic Captain Marvel finished its run with $1.23 billion.

Disney's live-action Aladdin rode its magic carpet past the $1 billion mark last week, while The Lion King is on the verge of achieving the milestone after finishing Sunday with a worldwide total of $962.7 million after just two weeks in release.

And don't forget Disney/Pixar's Toy Story 4, which is likely to top $1 billion in the coming weeks. If so, Disney will set a new high-water mark for the number of $1 billion-plus films released in a given year (it set the current record in 2016 with four).

Disney accounts for as much as 45 percent of the $16 billion-plus collected worldwide so far this year by movies released on more than 1,000 screens, including revenue from titles inherited following the Disney-Fox merger. In stark contrast, the next closest studio, Warner Bros., has taken in just shy of $2 billion.

The devil, so to speak, is in the details. Devil Mouse movies are doing very well on a superficial level, but the Great Rat is rapidly devouring its seed corn and riding on the inertia of its past successes. It probably has one more good year in it before the numbers begin to turn south and the rapid decline begins.

Look, a shooting!

Looks like the wind-up toys are being activated in a futile attempt to distract the American public:

A shooting at the famed Gilroy Garlic Festival on Sunday evening left at least three dead and 15 injured, sending hundreds of terrified visitors running for their lives.

The popular food festival at the “Garlic Capital of the World” in Santa Clara County was about to close around 5:30 p.m. when at least one gunman opened fire. Authorities said police officers fatally shot the assailant, but they were continuing to investigate whether he had an accomplice.

Gilroy Police Chief Scot Smithee said witnesses reported that a second man was somehow involved, but police were still searching for him. He said the gunman was able to circumvent the festival’s security by entering from a creek area and cutting through a fence.

It's reported that the shooter did it because he was "really angry." Right. I'm only surprised it wasn't reported that he did it because he was angry that Democrats were talking about impeaching the God-Emperor Trump and to Make America Great Again. Notice that Anonymous Conservative saw these attempted distractions coming one week ago.

I assume whatever the plan, they need some unseen foundation eroded, such as media control, before you move into the exposure phase and take them down. I view it like Hillary still walking around free, or perhaps more accurately, Epstein still walking around free a month ago. You know under Trump that cannot continue, but for the time being it is an apparently necessary reality. Something we don’t understand just has to happen first. Clearly with Epstein, no matter how free he was, his time was coming, and now he looks set to take down a massive chunk of Cabal’s leadership in one fell swoop. Hillary is the same, as is anybody who has been helping to create and deploy these little MK Ultra wind-up toys. 

Mailvox: the parrot whisperer

A Darkstream viewer shares a rather strange experience:

I have two parrots that live in my living room. Usually by around 7 they are still being a bit raucous and noisy. However, I have been playing your podcast at that time and I’ve noticed something strange.

The birds are mesmerized by the sound of your voice. Both birds get very calm, and remain well behaved and quiet. It’s really freaking weird!!!!! This is highly out of character for both of them at that time of the day.

My caique - who is a VERY high energy bird - sat quietly on my chest tonight, listening to your voice with her eyes half-open. My brown head parrot also sat quietly through an entire podcast, and into the second one. 

The Darkstream. It's like a sea of tranquility.

Pedo-economics

Readers here are well familiar with my rejection of Keynes and his General Theory, which unlike most economists, I have actually read. Twice. And the fact that it is a piece of Freudian lunacy applied to economics means that it is less than astonishing to be told that the lunatic economist was, as the English put it, a paedophile:

Students of economics know Keynes as arguably the most influential economist of the 20th century. His prescriptions for stimulus spending and active government intervention in economic affairs have become go-to-strategies for governments across the world.

However, one lesser known aspect about his life was his pedophiliac activity. Economist Saifedean Ammous’ book, The Bitcoin Standard, details some interesting factoids about Keynes’ life.

Ammous started off by detailing how the family unit is destroyed by government largesse:

Substituting the family with government largesse has arguably been a losing trade for individuals who have partaken in it. Several studies show that life satisfaction depends to a large degree on establishing intimate long-term familial bonds with a partner and children. Many studies also show that rates of depression and psychological diseases are rising over time as the family breaks down, particularly for women. Cases of depression and psychological disorders very frequently have family breakdown as a leading cause.

The economist then transitioned his analysis into Keynes’ life, which revealed his pedophiliac tendencies:

It is no coincidence that the breakdown of the family has come about through the implementation of the economic teachings of a man who never had any interest in the long term. A son of a rich family that had accumulated significant capital over generations, Keynes was a libertine hedonist who wasted most his adult life engaging in sexual relationships with children, including traveling around the Mediterranean to visit children’s brothels.

Keynes was one of the important architects in the construction of Satandom. His work was integral to the inversion required to create the modern financial system that is built on a foundation of usury.

Deal or no deal

Brexit is taking place on 31 October no matter how much the EU blusters:

Newly appointed PM Boris Johnson has set up a 'war cabinet' to push through Brexit 'by any means necessary' by October 31.

In a move similar to Tony Blair's 'sofa government', Mr Johnson will make all key decisions over Brexit with a team of just six senior ministers - all of whom are Brexiteers. Michael Gove, Chancellor Sajid Javid, Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab, Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay, and the Attorney General Geoffrey Cox will be the core group of advisors to plot the UK's exit from the EU.

Cabinet attendee and Mr Johnson's former rival Michael Gove has also warned that there is 'now a very real prospect' of no deal. Michael Gove, who has been tasked by new British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to boost preparations for a no-deal Brexit, has said that the government is 'working on the assumption' that the European Union will not strike a new agreement.

'We will exit the EU on October 31. No ifs. No buts. No more delay. Brexit is happening,' said Gove in the Sunday Times.

Boris Johnson is a political animal, not a man of principle. But he is also a historian and an admirer of Churchill. This means that he understands that the British people favor Brexit and that British history will smile on the Prime Minister who keeps Britain out of the continent's clutches.

Rule by the EU is no better than rule by Guthrum, Philip II, Napoleon, or Hitler. And the leaders of England who are considered great are invariably those who kept England free of control by continental masters.

Boris has always believed he is a man of destiny, and here, at last, is a challenge worthy of his self-belief. The Remain Parliament's fundamental weakness is that the new Prime Minister can destroy it at any time by calling a general election and replacing a good number of the current parliament's Remain Tories and Labourites with Leave Tories and Brexit Party MPs. Boris is also demonstrating that he understands the art of the deal. The EU is only going to cave and be reasonable if its Commissioners believe that a No Deal Brexit is actually going to take place... or has already taken place. Until now, they clearly did not believe it, as evidenced by their panic-stricken response to the new Prime Minister's muscular rhetoric.

Meanwhile, the treasonous Remainers are buying the pro-Remain media's BS and placing their trust in a spectacularly weird fish-faced freak to stop Britain regaining its independence.

Philip Hammond, who resigned as chancellor ahead of Mr Johnson's appointment, has been drumming up support for the campaign to block the Prime Minister's No Deal Brexit plans. He wants Mr Stewart, the unlikely star of the Tory leadership contest, to lead the charge.

This is why you should never get high off your own supply. The "unlikely star" came in fifth, and only did that well because he was the only Remain candidate left after the second round. The only people likely to rally around that Lovecraftian creature hail from Innsmouth.