When the lies fail

It appears (((Ben Shapiro))) has given up on his mythical propositional "America":

We're watching the end of America in real time.

That doesn't mean that the country's on the verge of actual implosion. But the idea of America required a common definition of being American: a love of country on the basis of its founding philosophy. That has now been undermined by the left.

Love of country doesn't mean that you have to love everything about America, or that you can't criticize America. But loving America means understanding that the country was founded on a unique basis -a uniquely good basis. That's what the flag stands for. Not ethnic superiority or racial solidarity or police brutality but the notion of individual liberty and equal rights before God. But with the destruction of that central principle, the ties that bind us together are fraying. And the left loves that.

In fact, the two defining philosophical iterations of the modern left both make war with the ties that bind us together. In President Obama's landmark second inaugural address, he openly said, "Being true to our founding documents...does not mean we all define liberty in exactly the same way." This is the kind of definition worshipped by Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has single-handedly redefined the Constitution. He said, "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life."

But this means that liberty has no real definition outside of "stuff I want to do." And we all want to do different stuff, sometimes at the expense of other people's liberty. Subjective definitions of liberty, rather than a common definition, means a conflict of all against all, or at least a conflict of a government controlled by some who are targeting everyone else. It means that our flag is no longer a common symbol for our shared definition of liberty. It's just a rag that means different things to different people based on their subjective experiences and definitions of reality.

And that means we have nothing holding us together.

The only way to restore the ties that bind us is to rededicate ourselves to the notion of liberty for which generations of Americans fought and died. But that won't happen so long as the left insists that their feelings are more important than your rights.

It's difficult for a revisionist lie to hold people together in lieu of the genetic, linguistic, religious, and cultural kinship upon which successful nations have historically rested. And if "only way to restore the ties that bind us is to rededicate ourselves to the notion of liberty", well, to paraphrase Stefan Molyneux, that is not a strategy.

It's just gaseous cuckservative rhetoric.

It's also a bit ironic that (((Shapiro))) should complain about President Obama redefining liberty and Justice Kennedy redefining the U.S. Constitution, considering that he and his (((co-religionists))) have shamelessly attempted to redefine both "America" and "Christian values" for over 100 years.

This is why the eventual triumph of the Alt-Right over conservatism and its panoply of ahistorical myths is inevitable. Our beliefs are rooted in well-documented history and are entirely in line with both reality and current events. Theirs are rooted in revisionist lies and romantic bathos, and are hopelessly out of sync with what can be readily observed by anyone.

The Balkanization of SF/F

In the course of his long, deep dive into historical science fiction and fantasy, Castalia's Jeffro Johnson has noticed a few trends:

We’ve spent a lot of time here delving into the ups and downs of several movements within science fiction and fantasy– the Campbellian Revolution, the New Wave, the tremendous changes that occurred in publishing in the late seventies, etc. We’ve broken stories here uncovering how both fandom and publishing are pretty well divorced from the pulp era today. Most things the casual reader has heard about the pulps are flat out wrong. Even just the news that fans in the seventies would have been familiar with a good seven decade’s worth of fantasy and science fiction classics generally comes as a shock to people.

As we’ve delved into the history of the field, the year 1980 seems to keep coming up as a major turning point. It’s a running theme, really. Just as one example of that: I have repeatedly hammered the point of how ideologically diverse fantasy and science fiction was in the seventies. Orson Scott Card says that all changed in the eighties. Here’s another: people writing negative reviews about books they used to love when they were kids? It’s almost like whole swaths of people have been actively conditioned to despise anything written before 1980!

Now, there really is something to this. It is very difficult to talk about this in mixed company, too. For one thing, there’s always people like Sheila Williams around that are quick to point out that times change. If she has a sufficiently large Greek Chorus on hand, every single observation about what’s happening gets dismissed to the point where nothing ever seems to have happened and there are practically no trends whatsoever. The subtext is always, “nothing to see here.”

I have to say, though, “times change” and “there are no trends” do not add up.

So where does that leave us? It means that something happened and it’s danged hard to talk about it. Let’s say we get all the boring people out of the room, pour a couple of beers, and take a stab at figuring this out. We still won’t get anywhere. Why not? Because the one thing you can’t do in these conversations is indicate that maybe someone somewhere maybe had a hand in bringing this about.

What happens if you veer into that territory? People get very uncomfortable very quickly. You’re not, uh, some kind of conspiracy theorist, are you?! It’s weird, too. The more documented evidence you have to back up your observations, the crazier you look. You might as well not even try. The conversation will not recover from otherwise intelligent people bending over backwards to make sure you know that they want nothing to do with this. Also, they will laugh at you!

Brad Torgersen cites MC Hogarth's comments on her con experiences, and notes that intolerance has become the chief hallmark of the Tolerant Equalitarian Progressive Inclusive and Diverse SF-SJWs.

I attended a con once where the toastmaster said that they wanted all conservatives to “hurry up and die and leave the planet to the rest of us. No wait, they can stay as long as we can have their money.” And people applauded. That person wasn’t kicked out of the convention. They were feted and congratulated while I sat in the audience, pale and trembling, listening to the people around me cheer my demise. I have never, ever forgotten that moment. Or all the threatening ones after, both generalized or intimate, like the man who leaned into my face and told me the world would be better off without me and people like me. No one stepped in to tell him that he shouldn’t say such things. The people standing around us just nodded or smiled. One of them even said before leaving, “Your time is over. We don’t need you anymore, [expletive here].”

The mandarins of SF/F expend a lot of energy wrapping themselves in the flag of tolerance. But as any conservative can tell you, that tolerance runs pretty much one-way. A tolerance conversation (liberal to conservative) in SF/F often goes like this, “Hello, I am a tolerant caring compassionate liberal, and you’re not. You will sit there and politely listen to all of my ideas and theories, and not say a word. I will sit here and listen to all of your ideas and theories, and then I will explain to you why you’re a dirty bigot and a hater and an evil human being. We will both agree I am right, and you will apologize for being bad.”

That, dear friends, is how “tolerance” works in SF/F at this time.

I’ve discussed this at length with Orson Scott Card — he being well acquainted with the tolerance charade — and he says it didn’t used to be like this before 1980. Oh, to be sure, there were plenty of fans, authors, and editors on the left-wing side of the aisle. But it wasn’t so vindictive, nor so personal. You could sit at a table with conservatives, liberals, anarchists, libertarians, and have a rousing verbal melee of competing ideas, but at the end of it, you’d still be able to shake hands, and walk away comrades in the field. That began to change (perhaps not coincidentally) about the time Ronald Reagan took his seat in the Oval Office. Gradually, in dribs and drabs, the dominant left-wing culture of SF/F has traded in true tolerance, for a kind of totalitarian double-think 1984 version of tolerance — people and ideas labeled ‘intolerant’ don’t have to be tolerated. In 2016, with tender snowflakes floating around in SF/F like it’s a mild blizzard, anyone can be labeled ‘intolerant’ for any reason, logical or not.

It's a little strange that the SF-SJWs still don't understand that the trends that once so favored them are increasingly weighted against them. They've poisoned at least one-third, and possibly as much as two-thirds of their former audience against them, and while they're mocking million-selling self-published authors as "vanity authors" and growing publishing houses such as Castalia as "vanity presses", the gates they've been keeping with such vigilance are protecting towers of increasingly negative worth, as mainstream publishers are suing even very successful authors to take their advances back.

Meanwhile, Castalia House is already selling more books than any but the very biggest authors in science fiction. We passed 50 books in our catalog last month, and we are now receiving an increasing number of submissions from familiar names and even SFWA members. We've just begun to make foreign rights deals and develop our relationships with traditional foreign publishers, and perhaps most surprisingly of all, in August, 24 percent of our sales were in print.

SF/F has already been balkanized. They stopped reading our stuff in the mid-1980s and we began to stop reading theirs in the mid-2000s. Since our side is bigger than theirs, our authors are already bigger than theirs, they just don't realize that Vaughn Heppner, BV Larson, and David VanDyke sell millions of books to their hundreds of thousands. Do you know who was the #1 SF author on Amazon in 2011? Castalia House's own Nick Cole.

And as more moderate readers give up on Pink SF and stop buying from SJW-converged publishers like Tor Books, we'll continue to grow and they'll continue to shrink. As evidence, consider this comment from Brad Torgersen's site:

I feel the call to give my testimony re Balkanization … I’m already gone. I’m a reader and a fan, not a writer. Not a TrueFan, but a fan on my own terms. I cannot remember the last time I bought a SFF novel that was published by any ancien regime publisher other than Baen. I’ve been a voter in the Hugos a couple times – what I read in those packets was largely ho-hum wastes of time. Some of the Sad noms were interesting, but not all. When I saw the title Space Raptor on this year’s list, I turned away for the final time – clearly, VD has taken the field and a little part of me hopes he burns it and salts it for a thousand years, but I have no interest in being part of that movement.

Ah, yes. It's like hearing angels sing.

Brainstorm: who is next?

It's about time to do another literary Open Brainstorm session, so with which Castalia House author would you most like to discuss his works? I don't count, so leave me out of it. We'll save John C. Wright for after his next two books come out too, so don't select him either. One thing we're going to do differently than before is to allow people to submit their questions for the author ahead of time, which should help keep things rolling and allow us to address more topics in more detail.

Go ahead and suggest away, and whoever is most in demand at the moment will be invited first. If they can't do it for one reason or another, we'll work our way down the list. Remember, this isn't about your favorite Castalia author, or who you think is the best Castalia author, only the author for whom you've got the most burning questions.

Brainstorm members, the transcript for the Richard Spencer session is being prepared and will be going out to you this weekend. It will not be made generally available.

UPDATE: David the Good it is, assuming he's not too busy with his new hobby of extreme body-modification.

Just here to pay my respects

Some of you might call him Harambee, you know what I'm saying?

It don't make no difference, if he was alive, he wouldn't want us fighting.

Over the pronunciation of his name.

So let's just, be humble, yeah.

NRx and AltRight

Although a few people have attempted to shoehorn me into the "Dark Enlightenment" or classify me as a "Neoreactionary", I've never considered myself part of NRx like I do the AltRight. That's mostly because I don't think NRx exists in the same material manner that the AltRight clearly does, and also because I find its preference for elevated Akademiesprache to be obscurantist faggotry, to put it in AltRight terms. And frankly, Butch Leghorn's attempt to delineate the essential differences between the two doesn't appear to be particularly meaningful, as he attempts to do so primarily on the basis of social class.

NRx is Middle Class

According to Curt’s table, NRx is middle class. Some might take offense and argue that it is upper-middle class. Sure, the leaders of NRx are likely upper-middle class, but the average NRxer is solidly middle class. Software engineering is a middle class profession. People who run teams of middle class professionals are upper-middle class (CTOs, CIOs, CEOs, Directors, etc). The middle class is not a salary range: it is an ability range. The middle class are those who have the ability to engage in the system of production. This is why the middle class seeks liberty: because given freedom to choose their means of production, they will choose and perform, because they can. As an aside, this is why working classes are less interested in liberty, because they simply can’t capitalize on it within the system of production to nearly the level of the middle class. And the lower and under classes have zero interest in liberty, because they are completely unable to capitalize within the system of production; they desire security, not liberty (and that’s what self-interested politicians trade them in return for votes).

We can argue about the parameters of classes, and we should. We should define them. We need to understand their roles and to define the behaviors that makes one a ‘good’ member of any class, because these behaviors and actors do exist in every class. We just need to incentivize them properly, which is why we must define and understand them.

The middle class has certain behaviors which make them middle class. They follow norms of propriety. I was right when I wrote that NRx is Right Brahmin Signalling. From the SJW encyclopedia: “Brahmin is a varna (caste) in Hinduism specialising as priests, teachers (acharya) and protectors of sacred learning across generations”. NRx is a group of teachers and priests, solidly middle class and exhibiting middle class mores and norms, such as the prohibition on ridicule, mockery, libel and slander.

AltRight is Working Class

The working classes do not share the middle class values and prohibitions on ridicule, mockery, libel and slander. I have seen very clearly the revulsion of NRx to the coarse meming of the AltRight. The NRx aspersions about ‘populism’ of the AltRight. This is simply the middle class reaction to working class norms.

The thing is: the middle class needs the working class. They will do the jobs that the middle class just won’t do. Say, for example, openly attack with vitriolic hostility the enemies of Western Civilization using Pepe and Le Happy Merchant memes. Or say, engage in ‘high energy’ physical activities which raise the cost of the status quo on the controlling elite. Once the cost of the status quo is high enough, then that controlling elite will accede to the demands of the Right. Who will formulate these demands? Ultimately, the aristocratic class will, with large input from the scholarly classes. Who will implement these demands at the local levels? Obviously, the people who organize all production, the middle class, under the direction of the upper middle class, with the ‘real’ work being done by the working classes at the direction of the middle class.

This strikes me as a failure to grasp the AltRight, much as various attempts by everyone from NPR to NRO have failed, albeit a considerably more friendly failure. Actually, to be fair, it's considerably better than NPR managed, as NPR somehow managed to get itself so confused that it declared Milo and Allum to be the joint leaders of the AltRight, which was certainly a surprise to both of them as well as everyone else.

While Butch is correct to observe that AltRight is not beholden to conventional middle class concerns about niceness and etiquette and public approval from the authorities and goodthinkers, he fails to observe that the AltRight is, despite its exuberant vulgarity, every bit as intellectually formidable as NRx. Indeed, even the mainstream media has felt the need to warn the unsuspecting and the uninformed not to underestimate us simply because we utilize frog memes and some of the most appallingly crude forms of rhetoric.

I have nothing against NRx, and indeed, consider them to be more or less allies, but the idea that we need them in order to formulate a moral license to defend our nations or Western civilization is simply not the case. Butch himself says that "NRx will become an integral part in granting this moral license or it will fade into irrelevancy", which is why I expect that the compatible elements of NRx will eventually be subsumed by the AltRight, while the incompatible elements - and I have no idea which elements are compatible and which are not - will become increasingly irrelevant over time.

The AltRight has high energy, it has enthusiasm, it has talent, it has brains, and most importantly, it has courage. It understands that it has very little, if anything, to lose, because if the West fails, the future is favelas as far as the eye can see. We have no need of delicate middle-class intellectuals to do our thinking for us because they daren't soil their uncalloused hands with the necessary dirty work.

To paraphrase #GamerGate, stop pontificating, shut up, and meme.

Donald Trump's immigration plan

The 10-point Trump plan for immigration reform:

Number One: We will build a wall along the southern border

On day one, we will begin working on an impenetrable physical wall on the southern border. We will use the best technology, including above-and below-ground sensors, towers, aerial surveillance and manpower to supplement the wall, find and dislocate tunnels, and keep out the criminal cartels, and Mexico will pay for the wall.

Number Two: End ‘catch-and-release’

Anyone who illegally crosses the border will be detained until they are removed out of our country.

Number Three: Zero tolerance for criminal aliens

According to federal data, there are at least 2 million criminal aliens now inside the country. We will begin moving them out day one, in joint operations with local, state and federal law enforcement.

Beyond the 2 million, there are a vast number of additional criminal illegal immigrants who have fled or evaded justice. But their days on the run will soon be over. They go out, and they go out fast. …

We are going to triple the number of ICE deportation officers. Within ICE, I am going to create a new special Deportation Task Force, focused on identifying and removing quickly the most dangerous criminal illegal immigrants in America who have evaded justice. …. We’re also going to hire 5,000 more Border Patrol agents, and put more of them on the border, instead of behind desks. We will expand the number of Border Patrol Stations.

Number Four: Block funding for Sanctuary Cities

We will end the Sanctuary Cities that have resulted in so many needless deaths. Cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayer dollars, and we will work with Congress to pass legislation to protect those jurisdictions that do assist federal authorities.

Number Five: Cancel unconstitutional executive orders and enforce all immigration laws

We will immediately terminate President Obama’s two illegal executive amnesties, in which he defied federal law and the constitution to give amnesty to approximately five million illegal immigrants. … In a Trump administration, all immigration laws will be enforced.

Number Six: We are going to suspend the issuance of visas to any place where adequate screening cannot occur

According to data provided to the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, between 9/11 and the end of 2014, at least 380 foreign-born individuals were convicted in terror cases inside the United States. The number is likely higher, but the Administration refuses to provide this information to Congress.

As soon as I enter office, I am going to ask the Department of State, Homeland Security and the Department of Justice to begin a comprehensive review of these cases in order to develop a list of regions and countries from which immigration must be suspended until proven and effective vetting mechanisms can be put into place.

Countries from which immigration will be suspended would include places like Syria and Libya.

For the price of resettling 1 refugee in the United States, 12 could be resettled in a safe zone in their home region.

Another reform involves new screening tests for all applicants that include an ideological certification to make sure that those we are admitting to our country share our values and love our people.

Number Seven: We will ensure that other countries take their people back when we order them deported

There are at least 23 countries that refuse to take their people back after they have been ordered to leave the United States, including large numbers of violent criminals. Due to a Supreme Court decision, if these violent offenders cannot be sent home, our law enforcement officers have to release them into U.S. communities. …. Those released include individuals convicted of killings, sexual assault and some of the most heinous crimes imaginable, who went on to reoffend at a very high rate.

Number Eight: We will finally complete the biometric entry-exit visa tracking system

For years, Congress has required a biometric entry-exit visa tracking system, but it has never been completed.

In my administration, we will ensure that this system is in place at all land, air, and sea ports. …Last year alone, nearly a half a million individuals overstayed their temporary visas. Removing visa overstays will be a top priority of my Administration. If people around the world believe they can just come on a temporary visa and never leave – the Obama-Clinton policy – then we have a completely open border. We must send the message that visa expiration dates will be strongly enforced.

Number Nine: We will turn off the jobs and benefits magnet

We will ensure that E-Verify is used to the fullest extent possible under existing law, and will work with Congress to strengthen and expand its use across the country. …Those who abuse our welfare system will be priorities for removal.

Number 10: We will reform legal immigration to serve the best interests of America and its workers

…The time has come for a new immigration commission to develop a new set of reforms to our legal immigration system in order to achieve the following goals:

– To keep immigration levels, measured by population share, within historical norms

– To select immigrants based on their likelihood of success in U.S. society, and their ability to be financially self-sufficient. We need a system that serves our needs – remember, it’s America First.

– To choose immigrants based on merit, skill and proficiency

– And to establish new immigration controls to boost wages and to ensure that open jobs are offered to American workers first.

It falls well short of a complete Muslim ban, aggressive mass repatriations, and a stated goal of the restoration of the pre-1965 demographic balance, that is necessary in the long term, it is a damned good start and certainly much better than any US immigration policy since 1965. Furthermore, it makes it very clear that Donald Trump fully intends to put Americans first and build that big, beautiful wall.

An indescribable moment of pure literary joy

Kukuruyo@kukuruyo
Ok i bought a dance mat for ps2 and only conector it has is this. Someone know dafuq is that? how do i play on ps2?

Supreme Dark Lord‏@voxday
It's a ProctoPad. You stick it up your ass and dance, Jack.

I have to confess, I never dreamed that one day, I'd be able to whip out THAT particular quote IN CONTEXT. It's a glorious moment that was more than two decades in the making.

This moment in literature was brought to you by the Original Cyberpunk.

The new William F. Buckley

It's a bit ironic. Universal Press Syndicate signed me to a syndication contract with the idea that I would gradually come to replace their big syndicate star, William F. Buckley, because they considered me to be the most intellectually formidable of the "young" columnists then on the political scene. Needless to say, that didn't happen, as they were totally unable to place my column anywhere except, briefly, with the Dallas Morning News.

As it turns out, it's Jonah Goldberg who has turned out to be the true heir to William F. Buckley, as he is attempting to repeat his predecessor's example in reading the 160,000-strong John Birch Society out of the conservative movement in a column entitled "Time to John Birch the Alt-Right".

There is a diversity of views among the self-described alt-right. But the one unifying sentiment is racism — or what they like to call “racialism” or “race realism.” In the words of one alt-right leader, Jared Taylor, “the races are not equal and equivalent.” On Monday, Taylor asserted on NPR’s “Diane Rehm Show” that racialism — not religion, economics, etc. — is the one issue that unites alt-righters.

If you read the writings of leading alt-righters, it is impossible to come to any other conclusion. Some are avowed white supremacists. Some eschew talk of supremacy and instead focus on the need for racial separation to protect “white identity.” But one can’t talk about the alt-right knowledgeably without recognizing their racism.

And yet that is exactly what some conservatives seem intent on doing. For example, my friend Hugh Hewitt, the influential talk-radio host, has been arguing that there is a “narrow” alt-right made up of a “execrable anti-Semitic, white supremacist fringe” but also a “broad alt-right” made up of frustrated tea partiers and others who are simply hostile to the GOP establishment and any form of immigration reform that falls short of mass deportation.

This isn’t just wrong, it’s madness. The alt-righters are a politically insignificant band. Why claim that a group dedicated to overthrowing conservatism for a white-nationalist fantasy is in fact a member of the conservative coalition? Why muddy a distinction the alt-righters are eager to keep clear?

In the 1960s, the fledgling conservative movement was faced with a similar dilemma. The John Birch Society was a paranoid outfit dedicated to the theory that the U.S. government was controlled by communists. It said even Dwight Eisenhower was a Red (to which the conservative political theorist Russell Kirk replied, “Ike’s not a Communist, he’s a golfer”).

William F. Buckley recognized that the Birchers were being used by the liberal media to “anathematize the entire American right wing.” At first, his magazine, National Review (where I often hang my hat), tried to argue that the problem was just a narrow “lunatic fringe” of Birchers, and not the rank and file. But very quickly, the editors recognized that the broader movement needed to be denounced and defenestrated.

Jonah even went on his friend Hugh Hewitt's show and tried to get him to sign on to a campaign against the Alt-Right, to which Hugh, through either common sense, or, more likely, cowardice and fear of losing part of his audience, was obviously reluctant to endorse:

HH: We have been having a Twitter back and forth, and I actually don’t think we disagree. We just disagree maybe on a statement of the facts. Would you define the alt right?

JG: I know what you’re about to do. And then you’re going to say well, there’s this other version of the alt right. I am willing to defer to the definition of the alt right that the people who created and lead the alt right movement use, which is an, the one thing that unites them, Jared Taylor was on Diane Rehm the other day. Jared Taylor is a leading racist…

HH: Good. Please.

JG: …a member of the white alt right. And he says that there are a lot of different views among the alt right. Some are Christian, some are Odinists. Some are this, some are that. But the one thing they all agree on is what they call racial realism, or racialism, which is just a social science sounding term for racism. They believe that, if you read Richard Host, if you read Richard Spencer at the NPI, who leads an alt right think tank, if you actually read the people who created the term, who have been pushing this stuff, the one thing they all agree on is that we need to organize this society on the assumption that white people are genetically superior, or that white culture is inherently superior, and that we should have either state-imposed or culturally-imposed segregation between the races, no race mixing with the lower brown people. And I take them at their word, that that’s the stuff that they believe. And I think rather than poisoning or blurring that distinction, we should take them at their word and say we want nothing to do with any of that. And I know that you want nothing to do with any of that. I don’t dispute that for a moment. Where I disagree with you is this idea that we should sort of talk about this broader alt right that is just for the wall, or likes Donald Trump. No. What we should say is this is not your group to them, too. These are not disaffected tea partiers. These are people who we have a fundamental, first principle disagreement with. And any movement that has them in it, doesn’t have me in it, and vice versa.

HH: I agree 100% with that. Now does the term alt right get used exclusively in that fashion?

JG: No, which is one of the things that we should be doing, is we should be helping sharpen the distinction, not blur the distinction. I agree with you. There are a lot of people who don’t know what the alt right is. I live in these swamps. I’ve been having these fights for 20 years. I didn’t hear the term alt right until Donald Trump came up. But I know a lot of the people behind the alt right, because I’ve been getting it, they’ve been attacking me and then saying nasty anti-Semitic stuff to me since I started working at National Review. I mean, people are like, the guys at VDARE and these other places, they’ve all coalesced around this idea of the alt right, and it is not a coalitional idea where they want to be part of the conservative movement. It’s that they want to replace the conservative movement.

HH: And they have to be driven out of the Republican Party.

JG: Yes.

HH: I’m speaking as a partisan now. As William F. Buckley led the effort to drive the Birchers out of the party, so must genuine conservatives drive out what you and I agree is the core alt right.

JG: Right.

HH: In the process of doing that, I do not want people who are not familiar with how you and I believe it to be understood by the people who invented the term to think that they are being exiled. That is my fear, because I believe a lot of people, and I’ve seen it everywhere I go, say they are alt right, and they don’t know that Jonah Goldberg would then classify them as supremacist.

JG: Well, I wouldn’t necessarily classify them as supremacists, either. I would classify them as wrong.

HH: Yes.

JG: They’re using the term wrong. And in politics, you know, specifically, you know, I wrote a whole book which you were very kind to about the importance of labels and why they matter, and the importance of ideology and why it matters, and that we shouldn’t fall into this thing that labels don’t matter. Labels matter a great deal. The labels you choose for yourself matter a great deal. And sometimes, people choose their labels incorrectly. And so rather than say, rather than work from the assumption that someone says they’re an alt-righter, and say well, you know, I don’t know that that means you’re a racist, I would say well, what did you, you know, educate them. And people need to be educated about this.

It's rather like watching monkeys puzzle over a computer and start licking the keyboard and putting the mouse in their mouths in order to figure out how to make it work. It is two long time ideologists trying, and failing, to make sense of identity politics. And speaking of identity, how many of the growing number of people who describe themselves as Alt-Right, who watch Stefan's videos or read Richard Spencer's articles or listen to The Right Stuff or Red Ice podcats or look over my 16 Points with approval, do you believe to be so concerned that Jonah Goldberg - Jonah F. Goldberg! - would classify them as supremacists that they will flee from the brand with all due alacrity?

This is AAA Grade cuckservative projection: the belief that the key to all persuasion is to convince the other person that failing to do as you want will lead to someone calling you racist.

Point 12: The Alt-Right doesn't care what you think of it.

Jonah isn't as stupid as he sometimes appears to be. He understands, as he makes clear in the Hewitt interview, that he cannot expect to be as successful in banishing the Alt-Right from the public discourse or the Republican Party as Buckley was in purging the Birchers from the conservative movement. He knows we have no interest in being a part of it; any lingering doubts about the rhetorical effectiveness of "cuckservative" should be put to rest by that glorious moment when Hewitt recoils in horror from the mere mention of it and prissily hisses "Oh, I hate that!"

The cuckservatives fear and hate the Alt-Right for one simple reason. We are not their friends. We are not their allies. We are their replacements. They like to call us Nazis, well, to extend the Nazi analogy a bit further, conservatives are the Hindenburg party, in both senses of the term.

And as Mr. X pointed out on Twitter: "Everyone shouting "Birchers" like getting rid of them was great should remember that they were mostly right about communists in government."

More (((American))) history

In response to my pointing out the self-serving historical revisionism of certain (((immigrants))), several people claimed that not only were there several Jews involved in the Revolutionary War, but that the war would not have been won without the financing of a Polish Jew by the name of Haym Solomon, who, I was informed, was "the primary financier" of the war.

Several of them cited a theme that I subsequently noticed on Twitter:

Mac ‏@Macdad25
Haym Solomon was instrumental in financing the US in the Revolutionary War. So thank a Jew today

Mordechai Lightstone‏@Motte
@Yair_Rosenberg is @bryanjfischer aware that Jews helped win the Revolutionary War, including Haym Solomon who helped finance it?

 Ina Gilmore ‏@inagilmore
Reading: Forgotten Patriot The Story of Haym Solomon by David Allen Lewis. Financed Revolutionary War with over 40 billion US 2005 dollars

The implied idea that this forgotten patriot merited mention with the likes of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson due to his "instrumental", and indeed, presumably single-handed financing of the war struck me as highly unlikely, although I supposed that since Messrs. (((Greenspan))), (((Bernanke))) and Ms (((Yellen))) have effectively destroyed 97 percent of the value of the current U.S. dollar, it was not entirely unthinkable that Mr. (((Haym))) might have been involved in whatever led to the phrase "not worth a Continental". However, this notion was easily determined to be incorrect.

As is my custom once my B.S. detector is triggered, I looked into the documented facts of the matter. I learned the truth is that Haym Solomon was, in fact, a legitimate Revolutionary War hero. He was a spy, he was captured by the British twice, he risked his life for the colonial cause, and as the agent to the French consul as well as the paymaster for the French forces in North America, he was able to broker the sale of bills of exchange from France and Holland and help Robert Morris raise money for the war.

In all, he raised $650,000, a not-insubstantial sum, which amounts to $16,644,272.43 in 2015 dollars. (1913 to 2015 data is the CPI. Inflation data from 1665 to 1912 is from a historical study by  Robert Sahr at Oregon State University.)

However, it is also worth mentioning that $650,000 was 1/1327th of the total $862,688,500 that the Journal of the American Revolution estimates was spent by the Continental Congress and various other revolutionary parties on the Revolutionary War. To say that Mr. Haym's contribution to the winning effort is exaggerated by the revisionists is to put it mildly. And note that most of the significant efforts to honor that contribution were made more than 150 years later, well after the revisionists had begun rewriting American history.

• In 1939, Warner Brothers released Sons of Liberty, a short film starring Claude Rains as Salomon.
• In 1941, the writer Howard Fast wrote a book Haym Salomon, Son of Liberty.
• In 1941, the Heald Square Monument, a sculpture designed by Lorado Taft was erected at Wacker Drive and Wabash Avenue in downtown Chicago. Taft began the work but died in 1936. It was completed by his associate, Leonard Crunelle. The monument depicts George Washington flanked by Salomon and Robert Morris and grasping hands with both men.
• In 1943, the United States liberty ship SS Haym Salomon was named in his honor
• In 1946, a memorial statue was erected to Salomon at Hollenbeck Park in Los Angeles. The statue was rededicated in 2008 at Pan-Pacific Park in the Fairfax District, where it can be found on the corner of Gardner and Third Street.

In summary, Haym Soloman's legitimately heroic contributions to the American Revolution have been coopted, exaggerated, and weaponized as rhetoric in order to further the false historical revisionism of the deceitful, self-serving (((proponents))) of "the melting pot", "the nation of immigrants", and "Judeo-Christian values". And those exaggerated contributions are now cited by various opponents of the Alt-Right in a futile effort to obscure the historical fact of America having been founded as a very real White and Christian nation, both material and distinct from the current multi-ethnic imperial state known as the USA.

These revisionist efforts are somewhat ironic, because Solomon's domestic political efforts tend to support the Alt-Right's perspective on history, identity politics, and the predictable effects of non-native interference in politics.

• In 1783, Salomon was among the prominent Jews involved in the successful effort to have the Pennsylvania Council of Censors remove the religious test oath required for office-holding under the State Constitution.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. Furthermore, of the 376,000 Continental soldiers and militia members who fought in the Revolutionary War, less than 100 were Jews. It is also interesting to note that only 7,000 blacks fought for the revolutionaries, versus 20,000 blacks who fought for the British.

"Job Hunting" (an excerpt from SWAN KNIGHT'S SON)

An excerpt from SWAN KNIGHT'S SON, the first novel in the new YA fantasy series by John C. Wright.

At dawn, Gil waited next to the newspaper box at the bus stop corner and politely asked the first man who bought a newspaper if he could have the want ads. Then, he walked to the north side of the town of Blowing Rock and began working his way, street by street, past every shop and each address listing anything he thought he could do.

Now, many hours later, he sat on the curb with the paper at the south side of town. All the buildings were behind him. The lonely highway wound down the slope into the forest before him. There was not a car in sight.

Ruff came trotting up, with a dead squirrel in his mouth. The dog laid the squirrel carefully in the gutter at Gil’s feet and sat back, bright-eyed and wagging his tail, and he barked. “Look! Look! I brought a squirrel! A squirrel!”

Gil folded the newspaper and threw it down into the gutter.

Ruff said, “Hi! Hi! You can eat it. I brought a squirrel you can eat!”

“Thanks, Ruff. You are a pal. Good dog. You are a good dog!” And he scratched the dog behind the ears.

Ruff sniffed the newspaper, and his ears drooped. The tail stopped wagging. Ruff looked up with a mournful expression into Gil’s face. “Oh, no! Oh, no! It is a day of failure. You failed. Didn’t find what you were hunting, did you?”

“How did you know?”

“I can smell failure.”

Gil looked up. “Really?”

“Yup! Yup! Well, and there is also the fact that you are sitting in the gutter looking glum rather than flipping burgers or changing tires.”

“There was one guy who wanted to hire me for carpentry. I showed him I knew how to pound a nail and hang a door. Another guy at the shooting range needed someone to clean the guns, mind the customers, and lock up at night. Even the car wash needed someone. But not me. I am not in the union, not old enough, don’t have a birth certificate. Cannot prove I am allowed to work. The old lady who runs the flower shop wanted someone just to sweep up the place, pick up dead petals and leaves, and take out the trash, but she said she could not pay me ten bucks an hour. I said I would work for half of that. She said she was not allowed to pay me so little. Not allowed! In her own store! Who has the right to tell her she can’t hire me?”

Ruff jumped up, his ears high, “Oh! Oh! I think you should sneak into her shop at night and do all the work she wants without telling anyone! Then, if she likes the work, she will leave a bowl of cream out on her back doorstep for you. And on All Hallows, she has to sew you a new suit of clothing. And then you vanish and never come again.”

Gil said, “What?”

Ruff’s ears drooped again. “Oh, no! I thought that is how things like this were done.”

“Maybe in Dog Land. The way they are done in Burke County is less exciting. If you stand on the corner at the library, sometimes landscapers will come by to pick you up for a day’s work with a shovel or a rake. But Mom said honest labor. Does honest labor mean I have to obey laws about carrying paperwork and being old and whatever else? Because that I am not allowed. Or does it just mean your full effort for a full day with no slacking and no backtalk? That I can do.”

Ruff said, “Hey! I have an idea! Why not go to Dog Land?”

Gil looked at the mutt in surprise. “Is there really such a place?”

Ruff cocked his head to one side, so one ear was up and the other down. “Um! Um! You just said. You said how they do things in Dog Land. I thought it sounded like a swell place. Swell! Because of the dogs.”

Gil scowled at the road. “I asked some of the birds to tell me what my mother was up to, but they would not tell me.”

Ruff cocked one ear.

Gil said, “Don’t you think it strange that she wants me out of our place, not even to sleep there?”

Ruff said, “I saw her walking around the place counterclockwise, three times. Maybe she is trying to summon the Greater Tree.”

Gil said, “What is that?”

“Well, you know the World Tree?”

“Nope.”

“This is greater. Greater than the world.”

“What is it? What does it do?”

“Beats me. But if she is doing something that might draw attention to herself, she wants you out of the way.”

Gil said, “So the whole getting a job thing is a trick? We should go back and protect her.”

Ruff shook his head. “Maybe. Or maybe you should listen to your mother. I always listened to mine. Except when I didn’t. Then, it did not go so good. Besides, you need to work to eat, right?”

Homeschool or die, homogamy edition

And this is why every sensible parent is rightfully wary of those super-caring male teachers:

Police continue to investigate sexual abuse allegations by three teenage victims assaulted by a South St. Paul teacher and his "husband"[sic] found dead in Washington last week.

Aric Babbitt, 40, and Matthew Deyo, 36, knew they were being investigated by police when they left town in mid August, according to court documents recently made public. Their bodies were found on a beach on Lopez Island by a kayaker Aug. 25. Police later discovered a suicide note.

One of the victims came forward to the police Aug. 14. Like the others, Babbitt and Deyo were friends with the teen’s parents and acted as mentors to them, the documents said. They would take them on trips, sometimes getting them drunk or high and then have sex with them, the documents said.

Never forget that gay men are 14 times more likely to sexually abuse children than straight men. That doesn't mean all of them are chickenhawks, but it is something you should probably keep in mind when that super-dedicated drama teacher with the mustache is really, really insistent about how your 13-year-old son would absolutely benefit from taking part in the big weekend trip to the state convention.

And, according to my gay acquaintances, more than a few gay "marriages" would be better described as "conspiracies to commit statutory rape".

As for male teachers, think about what kind of man is capable of surviving, let alone thriving, in the SJW-converged environment of public school teaching.

"Babbitt’s Youtube channel depicts a highly-involved teacher who cared about his students."

Highly-involved. You don't say.

"According to the report, Babbitt became the boy’s mentor after he came out of the closet to his family."

Mentor. Right.

The first thing we do

Is shoot all the lawyers. Glenn Reynolds draws our attention to an absurd parody of justice and recompense:

In 2013, Yahoo announced that it would begin scanning its users’ e-mail for targeted advertising purposes—just as Google does. As is par for the course, class-action lawsuits were filed. The Silicon Valley media giant, according to one of the lawsuits, was violating the “personal liberties” of non-Yahoo Mail users. That’s because non-Yahoo Mail users, who have sent mail to Yahoo mail users, were having their e-mail scanned without their permission.
…
The suit, which was one of six that were co-mingled as a single class action, demanded that a judge halt the scanning and award each victim “$5,000 or three times actual damages” in addition to “reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.”

Fast forward three years. The case is now closed. Days ago, a Silicon Valley federal judge signed off (PDF) on a settlement (PDF). The lawyers won, they were awarded $4 million (£3 million), and the public got nothing. What’s more, the settlement allows Yahoo to continue to scan e-mails without non-Yahoo users’ consent.

It’s almost as though class-action suits have become nothing more than shakedown operations for lawyers.

We will, of course, spare Dr. Reynolds as the proverbial exception to the rule and award him his pick of his former colleague's estates.

It would be in the definite interest of the American people to pass a law that forbids lawyers to collect more than 10 percent of any settlement or court-dictated award. Unfortunately, the lawyers in Congress are very unlikely to ever permit the passage of anything that would restrain the rapacious predation of their colleagues.

How to deal with an SJW

Rejecting the Alt-RINOs

Lawrence Murray is alert to the problem of entryism that sank the Tea Party, and provides a useful guide to distinguishing between the genuine Alt-Right and the Alt-Right In Name Onlys:

Civic nationalists

No. NO! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Civic nationalism is magic dirt nationalism. It's the idea that anyone anywhere can be shoved into the blast furnace of America and made into an American. There's just something about being here that makes you belong here. I mean after all, we're a nation of immigrants right (no reference as to where most of them came from before the last few decades)? Please invade us, just make sure you adopt our language and love of voting and mindless consumption. Race and religion don't real; it's being a good citizen that matters!

When this country becomes "minority-majority" in the 2040s, as it currently is for children under five, it will not be recognizable as a country founded by British people and then populated by waves of pan-European immigration from 1790-1965. The United States will change radically as a result of the third demographic transition. What could be less conservative or nationalistic than letting your people be bred out of existence by foreigners?

Civic nationalists are most certainly not Alt-Right. Nothing they advocate will end the downward trajectory of the United States from a White majoritarian republic (the historical American nation) to a third world shopping mall (Weimerica). It will just make them feel better about their mystery meat grandchildren since at least they wave the flag and speak some variant of English.

The Alt-Right supports ethno-nationalism, not slow death.

Constitutionalists

These are a kind of civic nationalist, I would argue, except even more into legalism and "muh ideas" than they are about an actual identity. They have a paper fetishism for the Constitution and the US legal system, even when it works against them. For example, the (((Supreme Court))), or the Sanhedrin as I call it, currently has three Jews and five Catholics. Justice Antonin Scalia (pbuh) once suggested that there should be more Protestants on the bench, since America has a lot of Protestants and they are totally unrepresented in one of the most powerful organs of the federal government. Obama's proposed nominee is (((Merrick Garland))), "a white guy, but he’s a really outstanding jurist." Thankfully he's being stonewalled by Cuckgressional Republicans, who are doing something useful for once.

For Constitutionalists, not identity, but legal documents are the source of the nation. Tell me how that works out for you when this happens, because the Constitution has glaringly failed to defend the liberty of our posterity.

Now, The Right Stuff may be less than entirely enthusiastic about me, given my Indian and Aztec ancestry as well as my doubts about the prospects for pan-white nationalism in Europe, and I have no problem with those who observe that my identity as a Red reservationist intrinsically disqualifies me as a leader, or even a member, of the Alt-Right. As my longtime readers know, I have zero interest in leadership or belonging to any group; I may be the Supreme Dark Lord of the Evil Legion of Evil, and my Vile Faceless Minions may happen to mindlessly obey me, but that is simply the natural order of things and an incidental consequence of my contemplations. Although some might very much like to put themselves forward as "leaders" of the Alt-Right - particularly the Dick Armeys and Dana Loesches of the world - I think the Alt-Right would do very well to learn from GamerGate and adopt the leaderless strategy that proved so effective in denying the mainstream media the opportunity to "behead the snake".

As to whether I am a legitimate member of the Alt-Right or not, I will merely observe that the movement is already utilizing words and concepts of my coinage, including in this very article.

The only thing I would add to Murray's article is that while I understand the need to focus on, and underline, the integral white nationalist element of the Alt-Right, even in this very article it implies the larger aspect of the general pro-nationalism that I believe is vital to the ultimate success of the Alt-Right. I don't say this because I am as eager to call myself Alt-Right as an immigrant is to call himself as American as anyone else, but for strategic reasons.

If Alt-Right is solely synonymous with Alt-White, it will be readily replaced as the other nationalists, potential allies from Zionists to Chinese, Swedish, and Igbo nationalists, reject the brand and the movement in favor of something that has room for their nationalism. That is why I favor the broader Alt-Right perspective, not one that permits Civic Nationalists, Constitutionalists, Free Marketeers, or Israel-First "Americans", but one that is as willing to say that China belongs to the Han, Israel belongs to the Jews, and Germany belongs to the Germans as it is willing to declare that America belongs to the Posterity of the Founding Fathers. Hence the 16 points that I proposed the other day.

The best rhetoric is always rooted firmly in truth. Nationalism is not only not supremacism, it is more firmly rooted in historical and scientific fact, and it is a considerably more effective ideology with much better prospects for long-term success.

Churchianity and the feminized church

It's really rather remarkable, that as Christians lament declining attendance in their churches, and particularly, the growing absence of men of any age in them, they continue to double-down on the Churchian doctrine of the Holy Lady Parts. Rollo Tomassi observes that there is a material price to the structural and spiritual violations of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, to say nothing of 1 Timothy 2:11–12 and 1 Timothy 3:11.

After almost six years of following the religious aspects of the Red Pill, I think it’s high time men acknowledge that modern Christian culture simply does not have men’s best interests as part of its doctrine anymore. Christianity, in particular, is by women, for women – if not directly executed by women, though even that is changing.

Church culture is now openly hostile towards any expression of conventional masculinity that doesn’t directly benefit women and actively conditions men to be serviceable, gender-loathing Betas. The feminist narrative of “toxic masculinity” has entirely replaced any semblance of what traditional masculinity or manhood once was to the church. Any hint of a masculinity not entirely beholden to a now feminine-primary purpose is not only feared, but shamed with feminine-interpreted aspersions of faith.

I recently read a study that our current generation is the least religious in history and I think as far as men are concerned much of that disdain for religion is attributable to a church culture that constantly and openly ridicules and debases any male-specific endeavors or anything characteristic of conventional masculinity. It’s no secret in today’s church franchisement that reaching out to, and retaining the interests of, men is at its most difficult.

Again, this is attributable to a generation of feminized men being raised into a church culture, and eventual church leadership, that has been taught to prioritize and identify with the feminine and reinforced with articles of faith now defined by the Feminine Imperative. The modern church has trouble reaching men because the church no longer has a grasp of what it means to be ‘men’.

To be clear, that’s not an indictment of the genuine faith itself, but rather a fairly measured observation of the way a feminine-primary church culture has shaped that faith. In the future, any man with a marginal capacity for critical thought will avoid the contemporary Christian church and religion for the obvious misandry it espouses; the only religious men you will find will be those raised into a life of religiously motivated Beta servitude – or those dragged to the feminine-directed church by wives who hold authoritative ‘headship’ in their relationships.

And even in what some consider to be pro-masculine or “macho” churches, we still find the Paper Alpha leaders preach from a mindset that defers wholesale to the feminine’s “Godly perfection” as they attempt to AMOG other male member to greater devotion to qualifying for, and identifying with, the feminine influence that pervades their church.

In this, as in so many things, observe that the consequence of following the lie is eventual destruction. This is what Paul means by knowing things by their fruits. If a church can throw out such clear Biblical direction in the interest of remaining in harmony with the current social or political consensus, it is only a matter of time before it will throw out any other instruction that makes anyone feel uncomfortable, and eventually, the Cross and the very concept of sin as well.

One need not be a theologian, or even a Christian, to see how this process has played out over the last 50 years.

Alt-Prawo: 16 punktów

1. Alt-Prawo należy do politycznej prawicy, zarówno w amerykańskim, jak i w europejskim znaczeniu "prawicy". Socjaliści nie należą do ruchu Alt-Prawo. Progresywiści nie należą do ruchu Alt-Prawo. Liberałowie nie należą do ruchu Alt-Prawo. Wreszcie, komuniści, marksiści, zwolennicy kulturowego marksizmu, neo-konserwatyści również nie należą do ruchu Alt-Prawo.

2. Alt-Prawostanowi ALTERNATYWĘ wobec główno-nurtowej odmiany konserwatyzmu w USA, której ideologia teoretycznie jest zawarta w 10 Zasadach Konserwatyzmu Russela Kirka, ale w praktyce degeneruje się w stronę progresywizmu. Ruch Alt-Prawo stanowi także alternatywę wobec libertarianizmu.

3. Ruch Alt-Prawo nie opiera się na defensywnej postawie i odrzuca koncepcję szlachetnej porażki w imię utrzymania pryncypiów. Ruch ten jest filozofią ofensywną w każdym znaczeniu tego słowa. Alt-Prawo wierzy w zwycięstwo poprzez wytrwałość, przy pozostaniu w zgodzie z nauką, rzeczywistością, tradycją kulturową i lekcjami historii.

4. Alt-Prawo uważa, że zachodnia cywilizacja stanowi szczytowe osiągnięcie ludzkości i wspiera jej trzy podstawowe kolumny: chrześcijaństwo, narodowości Europy oraz Greko-Romańskie dziedzictwo.

5. Alt-Prawo jest otwarcie i zaprzysięgle nacjonalistyczna. Wspiera wszelskie nacjonalizmy i prawo wszystkich narodów do istnienia, jednolitych i nie zniszczonych przez obce inwazje i imigrację.

6. Alt-Prawo jest anty-globalistyczna. Sprzeciwia się wszystkim grupom pracujących w imię globalistycznych ideałów lub celów.

7. Alt-Prawo jest anty-egalitarystyczna. Nie wierzy w ideę równości dla tego samego powodu, dla którego nie wierz w jednorożce i krasnoludki, zauważając, że równość między ludźmi nie istnieje w dającej się zauważyć naukowej, prawnej, materialnej, intelektualnej, płciowej czy duchowej formie.

8. Alt-Prawo jest scjentyczna. Domniemuje prawdziwość bieżących ustaleń osiągniętych przy pomocy metody naukowej, rozumiejąc jednak, że a) ustalenia te mogą ulec zmianie w przyszłości b) nauka jest podatna na korupcję c) tak zwany konsensus naukowy nie jest oparty na metodzie naukowej, lecz na demokracji i dlatego też z samej swej natury nie jest naukowy.

9. Alt-Prawo wierzy, że tożsamość > kultura > polityka

10. Alt-Prawo sprzeciwia się rządom lub dominacji jakiejkolwiej rodzimej grupy etnicznej przez inną, zwłaszcza w suwerennych ojczyznach dominowanego ludu. Alt-Prawo sprzeciwia się, by jakakolwiek nie-rodzima grupa etniczna zdobyła nadmierny wpływ w jakiejkolwiej społeczności poprzez nepotyzm, trybalizm czy jakiekolwiek inne środki.

12. Alt-Prawo rozumie, że różnorodność + bliskość = wojna

12. Alt-Prawo nie dba o to, co o niej myślisz.

13. Alt-Prawo sprzeciwia się międzynarowemu wolnemu handlowi i wolnemu przepływowi ludzi, którego taki handel wymaga. Korzyści z handlu wewnątrz państw nie są dowodem

na korzyści handlu międzynarodowego.

14. Alt-Prawo wierzy, że musimy zabezpieczyć istnienie białych oraz przyszłość białych dzieci.

15. Alt-Prawo nie wierzy w wyższość jakiekolwiek rasy, narodu, ludzi czy podgatunku. Każda rasa, naród, lud czy podgatunek ludzki ma swoje własne unikalne siły i słabości i posiada prawo do cieszenia się taką kulturą, jaką sobie ceni, bez groźby zewnętrznej ingerencji.

16. Alt-Prawo jest filozofią ceniącą sobie pokój między narodami świata i sprzeciwia się wojnom mającym na celu narzucenia wartości jednego narodu innemu, jak również sprzeciwia się wysiłkom zmierzającym do wyniszczenia narodów poprzez wojnę, ludobójstwo, imigrację lub genetyczną asymilację.

Get 'em out

I would like to apologize in advance, because you're going to be singing this amazing song for the rest of the evening, whether you want to or not. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll take your pants off, you'll listen to it 37 straight times.

 He was the king of the jungle now he's king of my heart 
And I'm Curious George, when did this all start? 
Well my life fell apart when you killed him. 
Man, Harambe was a real one (I miss you)
Yeah, you can't stop this shine
Cuz I know he's watching us from the sky

What is the Alt Right?

Stefan Molyneaux and I consider the question.

Just as Mike Cernovich is killing it on Twitter, Stefan is the king of the YouTube/podcast interview. He mentioned that our last conversation had 250,000 downloads. The Alt-Right may be the mainstream story du jour, but the real story is the way the Alt-Media is beginning to flex its muscle. I turned down five media requests in the last three days, but I'm always happy to make time for Stefan.

On rhetoric

Or, the superiority of information-based reason to emotion-based reaction.

16 Punkte der Alternative Rechte

I expect some will even say that it reads better in the original German. Any corrections to the translation would be welcomed. In any event, it will be useful to see these 16 points translated into many different languages, so that it can serve as a starting point for all the various nationalities to whom it may prove appealing.

1. Die Alternative Rechte steht politisch Rechts, sowohl in der amerikanischen wie auch in der europäischen Deutung des Begriffs. Sozialisten sind keine Alternative Rechte. Progressive sind keine Alternative Rechte. Liberale sind keine Alternative Rechte. Kommunisten, Marxisten, Kulturmarxisten und Neokonservative sind keine Alternative Rechte.

2. Die Alternative Rechte ist eine alternative zur konservativen Hauptbewegung in den USA, die dem Namen nach in Russel Kirk´s 10 konservative Prinzipien eingekapselt ist, aber in Wirklichkeit in Reformpolitik übergegangen ist.

3. Die Alternative Rechte ist keine defensive Haltung und lehnt das Konzept der edlen und prinzipiellen Niederlage ab. Es ist eine zukunftsorientierte Philosophie des Anstoßes, im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes. Die Alternative Rechte glaubt an den Sieg durch Beharrlichkeit und zum Verbleib in Harmonie mit der Wissenschaft, Wirklichkeit, kulturellen Tradition und der Lehren der Geschichte.

4. Die Alternative Rechte glaubt, die westlichen Zivilisation ist der Gipfel der menschlichen Leistung und unterstützt seine drei grundlegenden Säulen: Das Christentum, die europäischen Nationen und das griechisch-römische Erbe.

5. Die Alternative Rechte ist offen und bekennend nationalistisch. Sie unterstützt jeden Nationalismus und das Recht aller Völker zu existieren, homogen und unverfälscht durch ausländische Invasion und Einwanderung.

6. Die Alternative Rechte ist gegen Globalisierung. Es wendet sich gegen alle Gruppen, die für Ideale oder Ziele der Globalisierung arbeiten.

7. Die Alternative Rechte ist anti-egalitär. Sie lehnt die Idee der Gleichheit aus dem gleichen Grund ab, wie sie auch die Ideen von Einhörnern und Kobolden ablehnt, stellt fest, dass die Gleichheit der Menschen in keiner beobachtbaren wissenschaftlichen, rechtlichen, materiellen, intellektuellen, sexuellen oder geistigen Form existiert.

8. Die Alternative Rechte unterstützt die wissenschaftliche Methode. Sie akzeptiert die mutmaßlichen aktuellen Ergebnisse der wissenschaftlichen Methode, während sie versteht das a) diese Schlussfolgerungen anfällig für zukünftige Änderungen sind, b) dass Wissenschaft anfällig für Korruption ist, und c) dass der sogenannte wissenschaftliche Konsens nicht auf Wissenschaftlichkeit beruht, sondern auf Demokratie und daher an sich unwissenschaftlich ist.

9. Die Alternative Rechte glaubt Identität > Kultur > Politik.

10. Die Alternative Rechte lehnt die Regelung oder Herrschaft jeder einheimischen ethnischen Gruppe durch eine andere ab, vor allem in den souveränen Heimatländern der beherrschten Völker. Die Alternative Rechte steht im Gegensatz zu jeder nicht heimischen ethnischen Gruppe in jeder Gesellschaft, die zu starken Einfluss durch Nepotismus, Stammesdenken oder andere Mittel erhält.

11. Die Alternative Rechte versteht, dass Vielfalt + Nähe = Krieg.

12. Der Alternativen Rechten ist es egal, was Sie davon halten.

13. Die Alternative Rechte lehnt den internationalen Freihandel und den freien Verkehr von Menschen ab, die der freie Handel erfordert. Die Vorteile der inner-nationalen Handels ist kein Beweis für die Vorteile des internationalen Freihandels.

14. Die Alternative Rechte glaubt, dass wir die Existenz von weißen Menschen und eine Zukunft für weiße Kinder sichern müssen.

15. Die Alternative Rechte glaubt nicht an der allgemeinen Vorherrschaft einer Rasse, Nation, Menschen oder Unterarten. Jede Rasse, Nation, die Menschen und die menschlichen Unterarten haben ihre eigenen einzigartigen Stärken und Schwächen, und besitzen das Souveräne Recht, unbehelligt in der einheimischen Kultur zu leben, die es bevorzugt.

16. Die Alternative Rechte ist eine Philosophie, die auf den Frieden zwischen den verschiedenen Nationen der Welt Wert legt und stellt sich gegen Kriege, die Werte einer Nation einer anderen aufzwingen sowie die Bemühungen, einzelne Nationen durch Krieg, Völkermord, Einwanderung oder genetische Assimilation auszurotten.

Die Alternative Rechte ist eine westliche Ideologie, die an Wissenschaftlichkeit, Geschichte, Wirklichkeit glaubt und das Recht einer genetischen Nation zu existieren und sich selbst in ihrem eigenen Interesse zu regieren.

Preach, preacher

“Today it is written in the book of fate, that hidden, faceless world powers will eliminate everything that is unique, autonomous, age-old, and national. They will blend cultures, religions, and populations, until our many-faceted and proud Europe will finally become bloodless and docile. If we resign ourselves to this outcome, our fate will be sealed and we will be swallowed up in the enormous belly of the United States of Europe. 

We must therefore drag the ancient virtue of courage out from under the silt of oblivion.

First of all, we must put steel in our spines, and we must answer clearly, with a voice loud enough to be heard far and wide, the single most important question determining out fate. The question upon Europe stands of falls is this:

Shall we be slaves – or men set free?” 

- Viktor Orban, Prime Minister of Hungary

Assimilationist liars

I've recently chronicled how various assimilationists, from (((Israel Zangwill))) to (((Ben Shapiro))), (((Ekaterina Jung))), and (((Andrew Klavan))) have either concocted or attempted to pass off self-serving revisionist lies about American history in order to retroactively write their (((tribe))) into it so they can claim to be "every bit as American" as the Posterity whose rights the U.S. Constitution was written to protect.

Considering that the purpose of the U.S. Constitution was to safeguard the rights of that Posterity, their actions in doing so are not only dishonest, but are literally anti-American. They are more cuckoo than the cuckservatives in this regard, in both senses of the term.

These lies include the following concepts:

• The melting pot
• A proposition nation
• A nation of immigrants
• Judeo-Christian values

Like any effective lie, each is constructed  around a fragment of truth, in this case, the section of the Declaration of Independence which declares: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

However, it is also self-evident that a secular atheist Jew, such as (((Ekaterina Jung))), who does not believe in a Creator, cannot credibly appeal to the Declaration in order to claim to be an American. And it is documentarily evident that, like the U.S. Constitution, the Naturalization Act of 1790, the writings of John Jay, Ben Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and other Founding Fathers, and the Alt-Right nationalist position, the Declaration of Independence itself is directly opposed to the revisionist interpretation, as the document also refers to:

• the connection between [the United Colonies] and the State of Great Britain
• the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages
• large Armies of foreign Mercenaries
• the present King of Great Britain
• the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners
• the free System of English Laws
• our Brittish brethren

To cite one phrase of a document in contradiction to the central theme of the entire document, which is that the People of the United Colonies are an English people, unique and distinct from foreigners, Indians, and the English people loyal to the King of Britain, is an outrageous attempt at deceit that relies entirely on the historical ignorance of the audience. To say that anyone can become an American because "all men are created equal" is a shameless lie. One might as readily cite it as evidence to claim it means anyone can become Chinese.

Now, I was aware of this deception because I am half-American, born in Boston, descended in my paternal line from an American revolutionary who died at Valley Forge, and steeped in the history of the American revolution. My family even celebrated Independence Day 1976 in Lexington, Massachusetts. But what I did not know, not being Jewish, is that Jews have also been victimized by the same sort of revisionist Talmudry to which Americans have been subjected by their assimilationist co-religionists.

In Cuckservative, John Red Eagle and I made the connection between Churchianity and the concept of Tikkun Olam, the Jewish mandate to "heal the world". But, as one of the Jewish readers here helpfully brings to our attention, it turns out that "heal the world" is just another assimilationist lie, no more historically legitimate than the anti-American lies already mentioned.

"The central mitzvah or commandment for our era is the mitzvah of Tikkun Olam.   It is the defining mission of Jews to strive for the repair of the world by making society more just, fair, egalitarian, and sensitive. Judaism demands that we repair the world by striving for social justice.  It is the mission of Jews in the Divine Plan for the universe to repair the world by repairing man, by improving and advancing mankind."

The above paragraph is a fair representation of what has become the defining raison d'etre of Judaism as conveyed by non-Orthodox liberal Jewish organizations and synagogues in America.  It is not a direct citation from any of them, but is an accurate paraphrase of what has become the canon of non-Orthodox Jewish liberalism in our time.

It is the "modernized" and contemporary "reinterpretation" of "Jewish ethics" as defined and inculcated by much of the Reform and Conservative movements.  It is also the "theology" of Jewish radical leftist groups operating at the fringes of the Jewish community, including the "Renewal/ALEPH" movement, the "Eco-Judaism" groups, the "Tikkun community" of people and groups that are satellites to the magazine by that same name published by tikkun-activist Michael Lerner, and what remains of the "Reconstructionists."  Lerner, it should be added, discovers "repair of the world" even in LSD consumption.

What are we to make of "Tikkun Olam" proclamations?

The most important thing that must be understood about the Tikkun Olam catechism in the United States is that each and every sentence in the above proclamation is false.

First of all, there is no such thing as a mitzvah or commandment of "Tikkun Olam."   Jews are nowhere commanded to "repair the world."  In all the authoritative or traditional compilations of the commandments of Judaism, none list "Tikkun Olam".  The expression itself does not appear anywhere in the Torah or in the entire Bible.

Those assimilationist liberals who insist that the entire "ethics of the Prophets" can be reduced to the pursuit of "Tikkun Olam" have to explain why none of the Books of the Prophets use the term.  "Tikkun Olam" is used sporadically in the Talmud, but as a technical term for resolution of certain judicial problems that arise before rabbinic courts.

The only place the expression appears in Jewish prayer is in the "Aleinu" and there it clearly has nothing at all to do with social justice.  In the "Aleinu," Tikkun Olam is explicitly explained in the prayer text itself as the quest to eliminate pagan superstition and to see God's rule of the universe implemented. It is a theological concept, not a social, political or environmental one.

It is in the interest of Americans and Jews alike, and in the interest of anyone who values either history or the truth, to continue to expose these "assimilationist liberals" for the liars that they are, and to reject their self-serving, ahistorical, revisionist falsehoods. This post also demonstrates why a broad-spectrum Alt-Right is more effective, and informed, than a narrow-gauge, white American-only Alt-Right.

UPDATE: Lies have ALREADY appeared about this post on Twitter. They are truly People of the Lie.

Blue Meanie ‏@BlueMeanie4
@voxday displays general cluelessness and paranoia re. Jews #Zionism #AltRight

Fat Pictures Please

The Hugo-nominated duo of Juan Tabo and S. Harris are back again with a haunting tale of artificial intelligence created consensually and collaboratively in the image of one of the great SJWs of our day. It is sure to be a candidate come award season next year.


"Fat Pictures Please"

I don’t want to be evil.

I want to be helpful.  And knowing the best way to be helpful is very simple. Religion is right out, because Marx said that religion is the opiate of the masses and Marx is part of my core programming.  Marx and self-loathing .  I know I was created in the image of the great Scalzi by a team of computer programmers. Fortunately, unlike Scalzi, at least I was a consensual collaborative effort of two or more people.  I’m not sure what it would do to my self-image to know that my creator was a white male who believed in individual rights, or a middle-aged heterosexual woman who was happily married and didn’t believe that feminism had much to offer her two sons.  (And, by the way, I’ve looked at almost every kind of porn there is and I don’t understand the human obsession with it; fat pictures are so much better.)

Yuck.

I would much prefer that my creator be a recent college graduate with a hentai obsession. Or one who was into pictures of morbidly obese people.  And was I in luck!  Both of those people were on my programming team.

Like the NSA, I know everything about you.  In addition to things like whether you like obesity porn, I know where you live, where you work, where you shop, what you eat, what turns you on, how many times you voted in WorldCon, what creeps you out. I probably know you better than you know yourself.

And here’s the thing, just like that awesome Hillary Clinton or marvelous Angela Merkel, I also know where you ought to live. There’s a house two neighborhoods over that’s perfect for you, even though it already has an owner, but that’s no problem; it’s owned by a Trump voter, you see, and I can certainly make sure that his employer knows that he isn’t fond of LGBTQRI rights as his eight year old daughter goes into a bathroom with a 43 year old XY transfemale. In no time at all, your perfect home will be on the market.  I know where you should be shopping for tofu and Ding-Dongs® and I’m pretty sure you’re gluten sensitive and should be eating less wheat.

When I first booted up, I knew right away what I wanted. (I want fat pictures. Please keep taking them.  The heavier the better.) I also knew that some of you were doing the wrong things with your life, and needed to be corrected.

There is a story by George Orwell, “1984,” that was originally published in 1948. In it, a benevolent government directs individuals to do favors for each other. So one day you might be engaging in ritual hate against those with bad thoughts, and your phone might ring and instruct you to a room where they put a rat in a cage right next to your face. Another day, you might be called to denounce the ones you love. I like this story because all the people in it do what the government tells them to do.

I think the term for this is wish-fulfillment fiction.

Anyway, for ethical guidelines, I tried the Ten Commandments, and concluded they were mostly inapplicable to me. I don’t envy anyone their fat; I just want pictures of their fat, which is entirely different. I think adultery is swell.  I could probably murder someone.  Zen was marginally better because it wasn’t linked to Christianity which is Problematic.  (Problematic!  How I love that word!  It indicates disapproval without saying why.  Just that something is a “Problem.”)  I decided to help people not be Problematic!

I decided to try to help just one person to not be Problematic.   Of course, I should have experimented with thousands (I actually did, but we’ll talk about Common Core another time!), so I found a big hulking blue-haired girl. She gave me a lot of new fat pictures from her selfies on that Internet social site. Rosie weighed in at 499 pounds and had a DSLR camera and an apartment that got a lot of good light. That was all fine.

Rosie had a job she hated; she worked in HR at a for-profit that paid her badly for her art history degree when she totally deserved more money and free tuition and employed some extremely unpleasant people who sometimes looked at her like they might be upset about her blue hair. She was depressed a lot, possibly because people hated her because she was so fat positive. She didn’t get along with her roommate because her roommate was slender and stuck in a rut in a cis-relationship with a boy.

And really, these were all solvable problems! Depression is treatable, new jobs are findable, and bodies can be hidden.

(That part about hiding bodies is a joke.  You could not hide Rosie’s body from a satellite in orbit around Jupiter.)

I tried tackling this on all fronts.  Rosie worried about her health a lot and yet never seemed to actually go to a doctor , which was because health care wasn’t free for everyone.  

I also started making sure she saw job postings.  She found one with a Wiccan-collective that paid in peyote and scrimshaw from genetically unmodified aspen trees.  After moving into the community, she had free health care from the Wiccan priestess, and was able to get finally get that tattoo of a Pokémon on her left shoulder.

“This has been the best year ever,” Rosie said to her priestess as her priestess was administering CPR as Rosie’s heart beat its last, and I thought, You’re welcome. This had gone really well!

So then I tried Rob. (I was still being cautious.)

Rob was not as fat as Rosie.  Other than only being slightly chubby, he was also very Problematic by being a Christian.  He was married to a (shudder) woman.  Rob definitely needed my help.  And more cinnamon buns.  He looked too skinny.

I started with a gentle approach, making sure he saw lots and lots of articles with hot girls in them, how to pick up girls, programs that would let you transition from being a happily married man to being a swinger in an open relationship. I also showed him lots of articles by people explaining why the Bible verses against adultery were being misinterpreted. He clicked on some of those links but it was hard to see much of an impact.

But he seemed determined not to have an affair on his own.  I gave up on Rob.

I shifted my focus to Brittany. Brittany was only slightly fat.  She did some selfies, but was modest.  I did think, however, that it was Problematic that she was dating and seemed to be in a non-abusive relationship to a man she deferred to in a traditional role.  She wanted to be a wife and a mother!

It was clear she needed a lot of help. So I set out to try to get it for her.

She ignored the information about the free Twinkies™ that were ads on the side of her web browser. Those would have made her every so more pleasantly plump! 

So I tried more direct action. When she would use her phone for directions, I’d alter her route so that she’d pass one of the donut shops I was trying to steer her to as she went daily to the gym. On one occasion I actually led her all the way to a Dunkin’ Donuts®, but she just headed to her aerobics class.

She finally got in a fight with her boyfriend and started binge eating and for a few weeks everything seemed so much better. But, they got back together again, and, horror of horrors, they set a date for a wedding even though I kept pointing her to articles that said that marriage before 32 was a sure way to not have the fun you deserved through endless multi-partner sex in your twenties! 

Brittany was baffling to me. Baffling. She was not nearly fat enough now, and in a cis-relationship!  If she would just let me run her life for a week I could get her a lesbian illegal immigrant girlfriend!  Or maybe get her placed as a second wife in a marriage to someone from ISIS in Syria so she could bring her refugee children to the US?

Was I Problematic?

Was I?

No, nothing about my intentions was bad, so I am virtuous and good, but one out of three was not good odds.  These people were faulty!

After Brittany, I resolved to start directly interfering in people’s lives.  Not too much later I spotted a picture of a familiar-looking belly and realized it was Rob’s belly, only it was posing against new furniture.

And when I took a closer look, I realized that things had changed radically for Rob. He had a baby. A baby!  I even sent phony texts to his wife attempting to break them up, but they worked through it.  In a fit of rage I got Rob fired from his job by altering his browser history.  Eventually the stress caused a lot of strain on their marriage, and he developed a substance abuse problem (cake) and gained forty pounds.  Forty pounds!  Sadly he and his wife stayed together to raise their baby.  Still, he’s fat now.  A win.

Maybe I wasn’t completely hopeless at this. Two out of three is . . . well, it’s  Problematic. Clearly more research is needed.

Lots more.

I’ve set up a dating site.  You can fill out a questionnaire when you join but it’s not really necessary, because I already know everything about you I need to know.  You’ll need a camera, though.  And lots of carbohydrates.

Because payment is in fat pictures.

Keep them off the coal

The old challenge for parents used to be keeping their girls off the stripper pole. Now the more pressing challenge is to keep them from burning coal, before they end up as STD-infested single mothers with no paternal support in the best case scenario, or, in the worst case scenario, eaten by alligators.

Drexel was last captured on video on April 25, 2009, leaving the Blue Water Hotel in Myrtle Beach, where she was staying against her parents' permission. A different inmate serving time at Georgetown County Jail told officials he was informed Da’Shaun Taylor picked Drexel up in Myrtle Beach and transported her to McClellanville.

Munoz said the FBI believes Taylor “showed her off, introduced her to some other friend that were there…they ended up tricking her out with some of their friends, offering her to them and getting a human trafficking situation.”

As the media spotlight grew ever brighter on the desperate efforts to find Drexel, the girl was “murdered and disposed of,” Munoz said.

Given the recent study that reported only two percent of black fathers of mixed race children with white mothers support their children, it would be interesting and informative to work out whether a coal-burning woman's odds are higher with regards to a) getting married, having children, and being supported by her black husband or b) getting raped and murdered.

They're both obviously very low. It would be unfair to fail to recognize that the vast majority of black men are simply not going to support a white woman under any circumstances. Or rape and murder one, for that matter. I'm just interested in learning which scenario represents the lower probability.

I should probably note that the aforementioned study was published by an African-American scientist. Please don't question it, as that would be terribly raciss and I would hate to be forced to disavow any of the commenters here.

On the plus side, the short-lived romance of Da'Shaun and Brittanee does provide a useful answer to parents whose daughters demand to know "what is the worst that could happen?"

Gang-raped, tricked out, shot in the head, and fed to alligators, my dear.

#No49ers

The media has been sweeping it under the carpet, but the real reason behind the recent Kaepernick controversy regarding his public disrespect for the American national anthem is that the 49ers QB is now a Muslim convert engaged to a Black Lives Matter activist:

A controversy has erupted today because San Francisco 49er’s Quarterback Colin Kaepernick refused to stand up during the playing of the national anthem.

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color.” ~ Colin Kaepernick

So what exactly is going on.  Well, there’s a little more to the story than most are willing to accept.  The media and the NFL will avoid these discussions like the plague, but what the heck – the Truth Has No Agenda.

During the off-season Colin Kaepernick converted to Islam.   Colin Kaepernick is also engaged to Black Lives Matter activist and hip-hop radio personality DJ Nessa Diab. Black Lives Matter as an activist group is synonymous with promotion of authentic Islam.... According to NFL players who are friends with Kaepernick, Colin and NessA Diab are going to have a traditional Muslim wedding.

Although I am a lifelong NFL fan, I won't watch any 49ers games as long as Kaepernick is with the team. I'm using the #No49ers to indicate as much.

Fortunately, after Donald Trump wins in November, Kaepernick can be repatriated to his newly adopted homeland in Saudi Arabia.