The UK election

A big Conservative win is projected by the exit polls.

368 Conservatives
191 Labour
55 Scottish National Party
13 Liberal Democrats

The projected majority of 86 would be the biggest Tory majority since 1983 and 191 seats would be the worst Labour performance since 1935. The Brexit Party is not projected to win any seats and the Greens are only projected to win one.

These results are very good news, as they indicate that the multigenerational trend towards nationalism about which I’ve been writing for the last few years not only continues apace, but is in the process of entering another expansionary phase.


White flight continues

And, of course, the media comes up with a ludicrously false narrative to explain it:

Forget Seattle, Denver and San Francisco. Boise, Idaho, is poised to be the hottest housing market at the start of the next decade.

A new report from Realtor.com identified the housing markets that are expected to see the most notable home sales and price growth in 2020. Boise ranked No. 1, a marked increase from No. 8 a year ago.

Driving Boise’s climb up the Realtor.com ranking is the massive influx of new residents from pricier parts of the country — in particular, California. Many of these out-of-state buyers are drawn by the city’s mild climate, outdoor lifestyle, strong schools and its major employers, including HP and Micron Technologies MU.

One of the biggest changes is the shift away from the coasts. All but one of the cities projected to be among the 10 hottest housing markets in 2020 are located inland — Charleston, S.C., being the outlier.

Right, that’s why whites fleeing the diversity paradise of California are retreating to Boise. Because Hewlett-Packard – which was founded in Palo Alto, California – is there. That sounds convincing.

The truth is that white Americans are trying to escape diversity and are retreating to areas that are still heavily white. But they can’t run away from it because the diversity is going to follow them wherever they go, and they would still rather die than risk being called racist.


A letter to Nick Fuentes

I sent Nick Fuentes the following email this morning.

Dear Nick,

I have been informed that you are willing to debate me so long as the subject is not related to the Holocaust. Very well. I propose a written debate concerning your following assertion:

Americans have to live with multiracialism.

I suggest we limit our entries to 2,500 words each, with no more than three entries apiece. As you will be arguing in the affirmative, I am willing to let you have the first word. I also suggest that we agree either party is permitted to publish the entire debate verbatim.

Please email me your first entry at your earliest convenience. I will post it at my blog without modification or comment.

Regards,

Vox


UPDATE: There are indications that Nick has already run away a second time, despite his professed willingness to debate. Since I cannot attest to the veracity of the report from one of the comments here, we’ll wait and see.

A few superchatters asked Nick about your new debate request last night… he responded that your audience is too small to be worth debating.

If he actually said that – and we don’t know that he did – it doesn’t speak well for his time preferences or his ability to think strategically.

UPDATE: It’s confirmed. Little Nicky runned away. Again.

Save Western Civilization Now says Vox Day wants to challenge you to a written debate on whether a multiracial society is inevitable. Do you think you’re going to accept a written debate with Vox Day?

“No, I don’t think I’m interested in that. I only debate people that are relevant.”

So he considers Ben Shapiru, of all people, to be relevant? I was initially willing to reserve judgement, but now it’s clear that Owen was right about him. What a pathetic little snake. It’s going to be amusing to see young nationalists turn on him with a vengeance once they begin to see through his act.

And let’s not forget his previous comments.

“I don’t want to debate him because it’s too boring, dude, it’s too boring. Everybody would think that would be exciting, but, I can tell you for a fact that there would be no entertainment value in debating somebody as boring and as slow as Vox Day. So the guy’s boring, and he’s irrelevant, you know, who’s watching the Darkstream? If he can pull more than 2000 viewers concurrent watching the Darkstream, maybe I’d consider him worth my time, but, I mean the guy’s a has-been, you could say he never was. You know, this is somebody who’s been floating around on the scene like writing books? And, what does he have to show for it? Infogalactic? A gay comic book? You know, all these like just stupid projects that don’t go anywhere.”

I find it tremendously informative to observe that this little moron actually considers Amazon bestsellers and multiplatinumum-selling games to be less relevant than 2,000 concurrent YouTube viewers. He’s never paid a bill in his life. To say that he’s not ready for prime time is a gargantuan understatement.


The clumsy hand

A former CIA operations officer with thirty years of experience in the conduct of intelligence operations in the Middle East, South Asia and Europe reviews the recent IG report:

As I read through the recently released IG report for the second time, as someone with a great deal of experience in military and intelligence matters, I see that hand everywhere.

Per the IG report, a single report is delivered to the FBI in the summer of 2016.  It concerns a meeting between a cooperative contact of a foreign intelligence service and a junior level employee of the Trump campaign, George Papadopoulos.  The report relates what are frankly very amorphous comments by Papadopoulos concerning the Russian government and its alleged possession of information on Hillary Clinton.

On any other day this report would command no attention whatsoever.  The source in question has no track record of any kind with the FBI. Papadopoulos has been employed by the Trump campaign for perhaps 90 days at this point, and there is no reason to believe he has contacts of significance in the Kremlin.

Not on this occasion.  This one report from a foreign intelligence service goes directly to the top of the FBI.  The Director himself, James Comey is briefed.  A full investigation is launched.  Multiple confidential human sources are tasked.  Wiretaps are ordered.  A task force is organized. Crossfire Hurricane is born.

There is a problem, though.  This hand, perhaps because it is controlled by individuals who have made their bones riding desks in Washington, DC and not in the field running actual operations, is clumsy.  The information regarding Papadopoulos provided the needed pretext to start an investigation, but most of the people who will now form the investigative team are not in on the plot.  They will have to be led to the pre-ordained conclusion, so that it appears that they did so without outside interference.

And these investigators have a pesky habit of actually doing their jobs.

Read the whole thing. This is very, very far from over.


A choice of method

I was asked to provide the quote from TS Eliot’s introduction to Blaise Pascal’s Pensées, to which referred in a recent Darkstream. I thought was intriguing in light of how perfectly it foreshadowed my own approach to The Irrational Atheist as well as the arguments presented by the New Atheists themselves.

To understand the method which Pascal employs, the reader must be prepared to follow the process of the mind of the intelligent believer. The Christian thinker—and I mean the man who is trying consciously and conscientiously to explain to himself the sequence which culminated in faith, rather than the public apologist—proceeds by rejection and elimination. He finds the world to be so and so; he finds its character inexplicable by any non-religious theory; among religions he finds Christianity, and Catholic Christianity, to account most satisfactorily for the world and especially for the moral world within; and thus, by what Newman calls “powerful and concurrent” reasons, he finds himself inexorably committed to the dogma of the Incarnation.

To the unbeliever, this method seems disingenuous and perverse; for the unbeliever is, as a rule, not so greatly troubled to explain the world to himself, nor so greatly distressed by its disorder; nor is he generally concerned (in modern terms) to “preserve values.” He does not consider that if certain emotional states, certain developments of character, and what in the highest sense can be called “saintliness” are inherently and by inspection known to be good, then the satisfactory explanation of the world must be an explanation which will admit the “reality” of these values. Nor does he consider such reasoning admissible; he would, so to speak, trim his values according to his cloth, because to him such values are of no great value. The unbeliever starts from the other end, and as likely as not with the question: Is a case of human parthenogenesis credible? and this he would call going straight to the heart of the matter.

Now Pascal’s method is, on the whole, the method natural and right for the Christian; and the opposite method is that taken by Voltaire. It is worthwhile to remember that Voltaire, in his attempt to refute Pascal, has given once and for all the type of such refutation; and that later opponents of Pascal’s Apology for the Christian Faith have contributed little beyond psychological irrelevancies. For Voltaire has presented, better than any one since, what is the unbelieving point of view; and in the end we must all choose for ourselves between one point of view and another.


Ever more nebulous fake rules

This is what those worried about a YouTube purge should be worrying about rather than the new terms of service:

YouTube will no longer allow videos that “maliciously insult someone” based on “protected attributes” such as race, gender identity or sexuality. The video-sharing platform will also ban “implied threats of violence” as part of its new harassment policy.

A row erupted in June after a prominent video-maker said he had been the target of abuse by another YouTube star. At the time, YouTube said its rules had not been broken. But it has now deleted many of the videos in question.

“Even if a single video doesn’t cross the line, with our new harassment policy we can take a pattern of behaviour into account for enforcement,” Neal Mohan, chief product officer at YouTube, told the BBC.

Then again, it doesn’t really matter because there are no actual rules to which anyone, much less a banned creator, can hold YouTube accountable or any authority to which one can appeal. This means that YouTube will do whatever it wants right up until the moment that it finds suddenly itself paying out tens of millions of dollars in the inevitable class action lawsuit.

We’re not dealing with great legal minds here. Notice how everything is veiled in subjectives; they can’t simply ban insults because doing so would be relatively easy to objectively observe. Is it an insult, Y/N? So, in order to allow selective enforcement, they ban “malicious” insults depending upon whatever motivation their mindreaders determine applies. Or difficult-to-define things such as implications and patterns of behavior.


I told you he’s not that smart

One of the things that separates the intelligent from the average is the ability to learn from the experience of others. Nick Fuentes obviously falls in the latter category, as he not only talked to the mainstream media upon request, he actually invited them into his mother’s house. For an entire week. Needless to say, it didn’t turn out well.

In February 2018, a production company called “Karga7” reached out and said they were interested in filming an episode of MTV True Life about me and my show. They spent a full week filming at my house but never released any of the footage until tonight, almost two years later.

Almost two years after a shoot for an episode of True Life, MTV has repackaged the footage into a mini-doc about “White Supremacy” which attempts to portray me as a spiritual successor to this low IQ skinhead buffoon, conveniently right after Groyper Wars!

At the time of this shoot I was 19 years old and had only been doing my show for a year. I initially declined to do the show because I knew “Jason Wolfe” and the media would not be kind to me but I never imagined a farce like this. Obviously I made a big mistake.

Ah, but he was only 19 years old, as opposed to the wise old culture war veteran of 21 that he is now. If only someone had told poor, naive, little Nicky not to talk to the media before February 2018! If only someone more experienced, someone more familiar with the media, someone considerably more intelligent, had reminded the innocent young lad not to talk to the media, this easily avoidable debacle might have been easily avoided.

Why didn’t anyone warn this impressionable young master of optics about how the media actually works before February 2018? Why didn’t anyone tell him what was bound to happen if he talked to the mainstream media?

I didn’t listen to @voxday. I gave an interview to unfriendly media. They trashed the shit out of me. Listen to Vox.
– Jon Del Arroz, August 4, 2017

Never have any sympathy for anyone who falls for the usual bait-and-switch, especially when it was offered by the mainstream media. Because it requires a certain amount of ignorance, arrogance, and narcissism to imagine that you can beat the media at its own game.

UPDATE: The amusing thing is that before this even posted as scheduled, I received an interview request for my views on certain subjects. I sent the would-be interviewer my standard response to those who are not obviously running the conventional discredit and disqualify routine.

Thank you for your request. I am afraid I must decline, as I no longer give interviews to anyone for any reason. If you are interested in my views on matters related to [REDACTED], I suggest you read my books [REDACTED], or review the 21,855 posts on my blog.

If I am feeling less kind and gentle, I simply turn the prospective interviewer over to my official PR representative, Pax Dickenson, to set up the interview.

UPDATE: As Nick Fuentes has indicated that he is willing to debate me so long as the topic does not concern certain events that took place in the middle of the 20th century, I have proposed a written debate to him concerning his assertion that we have to live with multiracialism. I not only disagree with his contention, I assert, to the contrary, that multiracialism is intrinsically incompatible with societal survival.


At long last

The question of whether Jews are a nation or a religion has been definitively and officially settled, at least for the people of the United States:

President Trump will sign an executive order defining Judaism as a nationality, not just a religion, thus bolstering the Education Department’s efforts to stamp out “Boycott Israel” movements on college campuses.

RamZPaul reaches the obvious conclusion:

I guess this means that the United States government’s position is that Jews are not Russians, Germans, Swedes or Americans, but they are a separate nation and a separate people.

Which, of course, has always been the case, despite the various self-serving attempts by immigrants to redefine Americans as some sort of walking, talking manifestations of an ideological Platonic ideation. And, of course, it tends to raise the question of where in the Constitution the executive branch is empowered to create an “Education Department”, much less play economic and speech police for the institutions of higher education across the country.

Anyhow, it is nice to have this age-old debate resolved once and for all.


Final UK election predictions

It would appear the British media’s recent campaign to anoint Jeremy Corbyn as the New Hitler and paint the Labour Party as the Nazi Party 2.0 has backfired with a vengeance:

Boris Johnson is on course to win the general election with a majority of 28, but his lead over Labour has more than halved in the final weeks of the campaign, according to the polling analysis which correctly predicted a hung parliament in 2017.

YouGov’s final MRP model predicts that the Conservatives will win 339 seats, with Jeremy Corbyn’s party on 231 and the Liberal Democrats on 15.

The seat-by-seat model, which is based on thousands of interviews, puts the Tories on 43 per cent of the vote and Labour on 34 per cent. The forecast suggests the race has tightened since the previous MRP results on November 27 showed the Tories on course for a majority of 68.

There are other possible explanations, of course. One is that the UK media stopped talking about Brexit for the last three weeks, and short memories have convinced Labour’s Leave voters to stand by their traditional party identification. Another is that the pollsters are doing their usual job of pro-Labour puffery, although this would tend to be contradicted by the non-stop anti-semitism campaign of the last month.

And then there is always the perfectly reasonable suggestion that the media simply has no idea what it is talking about. We’ll find out soon enough. Regardless, it is worth noting that a majority of 28 is not at all a bad outcome for the Conservative Party, as buried deep in the body of the article is this little fact.

A majority of 28 would be the Conservatives’ best result since Margaret Thatcher’s third election victory in 1987. 


The Zammy book

MEET ZAMMY’S NEW FRIENDS

This book, MEET ZAMMY’S NEW FRIENDS, has already been written and illustrated. This 3-week campaign commencing on Thanksgiving Day is to secure the $5,000 in support needed to fund the print production for a paperback, hard cover and an eBook for the 2019 holidays. This campaign is for backers passionate about Zammy, the joy he spreads and the positive daily impact he makes worldwide.

Castalia House has agreed to publish the family-friendly children’s books written and illustrated about the adventures of Zammy the Giant Sheepadoodle. And you can get an ebook, a paperback, or a hardcover by supporting Zammy’s Indiegogo campaign.

Zammy is already one-third of half two-thirds of the way there. Let’s push him over the line!