Category: Uncategorized

Mailvox: why he must vote for Donald Trump

Someone with the propitious name of “Del Cid” sent me this today:

I am voting for Donald Trump this November 48, 2016.

Whether any of the innumerable slings and arrows directed at Trump’s person and politics recently have any basis in fact or not, in the end it matters quite little to me.  This election, I am not so much voting for the individual as I am voting for what he inherently represents.

As so many wrongly assume, just because I vote for Trump does not necessarily require that I admire every aspect of him personally.  Nor does it mean I condone every action he has committed, decision he has made, policy he has endorsed, or word he has spoken.  As common sense as this may sound to some, it has tripped up enough people I have spoken to lately that sadly I feel I must make this clarification.

So why am I voting for Donald Trump?

In part I am voting for Trump because the only viable alternative, Hillary Clinton, is far worse than Trump on almost every conceivable level. At the very least, I will vote strategically for Trump in order to deny Hillary the Presidency and to prevent the catastrophe that such a result would undoubtedly bring upon our nation and possibly even the rest of the world.

However, ultimately I will vote for Trump because no matter the specifics of what actions he may take or what stances he may adopt as President, the one thing he is guaranteed to do is shake the Establishment currently embedded in our nation’s government to its very core.  Given his track record so far as only just a Presidential nominee, one has to admit this to be true, just as one must equally admit that our government has fallen into a dangerous rut and must be shaken out of it.

Hillary could never do that, she is too much a part of said Establishment to bring any meaningful, productive change no matter how flowery and polished her scripts and talking points are.  Best case scenario, Hillary as President would only carry on the current status quo and our government, and nation, will continue to devolve into chaos and eventual self-destruction.

In contrast, Trump as President will likely result in one of two situations:

  1. He breaks the mold adhered to by almost every newly made President for the last several generations and actually acts on his campaign promises; thus making some much needed positive changes to our government and our national/international policies.  True, no one is perfect and he may and probably will make some bad decisions or changes to be sure.  But overall, his Presidency will be a net positive and with his help our nation will thrive and flourish and begin to find its way back to the right track. 
  2. He makes some truly terrible changes, declares himself God-Emperor of America, and drives us all to hell in a handcart.  If this is the path his presidency takes, then he will undoubtedly gather so much hatred and opposition from enough of us true blooded Americans that We the People will finally be galvanized into performing our full civic duty and actually do something ourselves to fix our nation and “Make America Great Again.”

Obviously possibility 1 is best case scenario, and 2 is worst case scenario.  Call me a flaming optimist, but I feel that possibility 1” is the most likely outcome.  As with all relatively sane individuals, I generally prefer orderly, intellectual revolutions to chaotic, violent ones.  However, history has repeatedly and unfailingly demonstrated that if the former is so continuously and brutally repressed, the latter will occur eventually.

Either way, change must happen.  Change will happen.  Real and fundamental change.

Which of our two candidates this election season are more suited to acting as a catalyst for positive change, short or long term?  The old bureaucrat so highly experienced in the game of political corruption that even her scandals have scandals?  The woman so inextricably tied to the rot at the core of our political machinery that she is the veritable posterchild (postergranny?) of all things wrong with our government today?  Or the loud, brash, polarizing man who drives the chattel of PC media elites, SJW thought police, cuckservatives, et all before him like so many helpless leaves before the hurricane?  The one candidate who has already begun the breaking of the Present World Order without even yet having stepped foot in the White House?

I look at it all like this:  It is a cold, hard fact that you will never in your life be given the choice of a Presidential candidate who will completely satisfy all of your moral and political standards.  Yet at the same time neither you nor your nation can afford for you to stand by, shun your civic duty, and remove yourself from the decision for the purpose of virtue signaling your moral superiority.  Other than arguably making you look good, what real good does this accomplish for the world?  You must choose the best you can out of what options you have been given, and make the most you can out of the reality with which you are faced.

I have studied my options carefully this election season.  Given the choices reality has set out before me, I can only conscientiously fulfill my civic duty as an American citizen by choosing Donald Trump for my next President.

Massive Russian civil defense drill

Russia is apparently taking the banging of the war drums seriously:

As relations between Russia and the US disintegrate as a result of the escalating proxy war in Syria, which today culminated with Putin halting a Plutonium cleanup effort with the US, shortly before the US State Department announced it would end negotiations with Russia over Syria, tomorrow an unprecedented 40 million Russian citizens, as well as 200,000 specialists from “emergency rescue divisions” and 50,000 units of equipment are set to take part in a four day-long civil defense, emergency evacuation and disaster preparedness drill, the Russian Ministry for Civil Defense reported on its website.

According to the ministry, an all-Russian civil defense drill involving federal and regional executive authorities and local governments dubbed “Organization of civil defense during large natural and man-caused disasters in the Russian Federation” will start tomorrow morning in all constituent territories of Russia and last until October 7. While the ministry does not specify what kind of “man-caused disaster” it envisions, it would have to be a substantial one for 40 million Russians to take part in the emergency preparedness drill. Furthermore, be reading the guidelines of the drill, we can get a rather good idea of just what it is that Russia is “preparing” for.

The website adds that “the main goal of the drill is to practice organization of management during civil defense events and emergency and fire management, to check preparedness of management bodies and forces of civil defense on all levels to respond to natural and man-made disasters and to take civil defense measures.” Oleg Manuilov, director of the Civil Defence Ministry explained that the exercise will be a test of how the population would respond to a “disaster” under an “emergency” situation.

Americans, meanwhile, are fretting over whether or not Kim Kardashian is going to need therapy or not after her recent trip to Paris.

This should go well.

The price of badthink

Scott Adams said that he used to be scheduled to do at least two speaking engagements per month. Since he’s been talking about Trump, he has not received one request. And one scheduled for next year, was canceled as “they are going in a different direction”.

It’s no wonder the Left has been winning the cultural war. The Left is very good about supporting its cultural leaders. Castalia readers aside – they have been reliably great in this regard – far too much of the Right would rather back a Left-approved winner than support any of its own. Of course, I’m guessing that very little of that speaking engagement money came from anyone who was spending his own money, and most of it came from SJWs who managed to put themselves in position to spend someone else’s.

If you were at the Big Fork meeting last night, please note that this is the right time to get involved and start supporting it. You’ve got the Paypal address already; we’ll get a button on the relevant page by Monday. We will continue to do it on a shoestring; we’re comfortable with that. But the more people who start using it, the more server resources we’ll require.

And for those ready to start making some noise next Monday, there is more than one way to do that. (These are not the OG shirts, they’re being prepared, so hold off on those as you’ll all be emailed about them. And it’s not the only Crypto-Fashion now available.

Interview with an economic hit man

John Perkins is interviewed by Sarah van Gelder:

Sarah van Gelder: What’s changed in our world since you wrote the first Confessions of an Economic Hit Man?

John Perkins: Things have just gotten so much worse in the last 12 years since the first Confessions was written. Economic hit men and jackals have expanded tremendously, including the United States and Europe.

Back in my day we were pretty much limited to what we called the third world, or economically developing countries, but now it’s everywhere.

And in fact, the cancer of the corporate empire has metastasized into what I would call a failed global death economy. This is an economy that’s based on destroying the very resources upon which it depends, and upon the military. It’s become totally global, and it’s a failure.

van Gelder: So how has this switched from us being the beneficiaries of this hit-man economy, perhaps in the past, to us now being more of the victims of it?

Perkins: It’s been interesting because, in the past, the economic hit man economy was being propagated in order to make America wealthier and presumably to make people here better off, but as this whole process has expanded in the U.S. and Europe, what we’ve seen is a tremendous growth in the very wealthy at the expense of everybody else.

On a global basis we now know that 62 individuals have as many assets as half the world’s population.

We of course in the U.S. have seen how our government is frozen, it’s just not working. It’s controlled by the big corporations and they’ve really taken over. They’ve understood that the new market, the new resource, is the U.S. and Europe, and the incredibly awful things that have happened to Greece and Ireland and Iceland, are now happening here in the U.S.

We’re seeing this situation where we can have what statistically shows economic growth, and at the same time increased foreclosures on homes and unemployment.

van Gelder: Is this the same kind of dynamic about debt that leads to emergency managers who then turn over the reins of the economy to private enterprises? The same thing that you are seeing in third-world countries?

Perkins: Yes, when I was an economic hit man, one of the things that we did, we raised these huge loans for these countries, but the money never actually went to the countries, it went to our own corporations to build infrastructure in those countries. And when the countries could not pay off their debt, we insisted that they privatize their water systems, their sewage systems, their electric systems.

Now we’re seeing that same thing happen in the United States. Flint, Michigan, is a very good example of that. This is not a U.S. empire, it’s a corporate empire protected and supported by the U.S. military and the CIA. But it is not an American empire, it’s not helping Americans. It’s exploiting us in the same way that we used to exploit all these other countries around the world.

It’s all about the debt. And debt that can’t be repaid has to be written off, somehow.

Nationalists continue to rise

  • THE French presidential race has been rocked after a opinion poll showed leader of the National Front party, Marine Le Pen, is by far the most popular political figure among right-wing supporters, and also gaining ground among left-wing circles. According to the poll carried out by Odoxa for French television station France 2, 74 per cent of those who consider themselves ‘conservative’ and who claim to support right-wing politics want the head of the country’s leading anti-immigrant party to play a more influential role in French politics, both now and in the future.
  • Hungary referendum: 98 per cent of voters say ‘no’ to EU migrant quotas. Hungary has voted emphatically against accepting EU migrant quotas, exit polls suggest, in a cry of defiance against Brussels that is likely to cement the country’s status as the leader of a “counter-revolution” against the bloc’s central powers.
Yes, the referendum was declared invalid because only 45 percent of the electorate voted, and the two major French parties will again conspire to try to keep the Front National out of power. But these are stopgap measures. They will fail, sooner rather than later.
The pendulum always swings back, no matter how much the powers-that-be want to keep it moving in the same direction. There is simply nothing the global elite has to offer the people of the West that is as important and valuable to them as reclaiming their nations and repatriating the invaders.

Brave leads The Disconvergence

An article about Brendan Eich and Brave:

The former CEO of Mozilla has released a new Internet browser called Brave. Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript, continues to lead the technological revolution with Brave, an innovative concept in Internet browsers.

After blowing away the competition (read: Microsoft’s Internet Explorer) with the Internet browser Firefox, Eich has come up with Brave, a nearly ad-free, lightning-fast browser that eliminates intrusive ads as well as common but unwanted tracking tack-ons.

A tech legend for his JavaScript and Firefox contributions, Eich was betrayed by his contemporaries and forced out of business as CEO of Mozilla, the company behind Firefox, because he supported natural marriage.

When it was revealed in 2014 that Eich donated $1,000 to California’s Proposition 8 ballot proposal, which defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman, he was blackballed, even though Proposition 8 was supported by the majority of Californians and easily passed in 2008.

Eich was publicly shamed because he believed in natural marriage and family. He was openly called a racist, Nazi, and inhumane.

But the tenacious techie didn’t give up. Without apology, Eich continued to innovate and ultimately came up with a whole new concept in web browsers: the ad-free, tracking-free, fast internet browser Brave.

In November 2015, Eich raised $2.5 million to create an advanced super-technical team.  By August 2016, the company had raised $4.5 million in seed money to launch the browser.

Brave is called an entirely new way to browse the web without being intrusively tracked, and without time-consuming download ads.

If you’re tired of your every online move being overseen and policed by the SJWs in social media, you should seriously consider joining The Disconvergence. Brendan Eich and Brave have led the way, but they’re not alone.

I’ve been on Brave since July and I use it every day. It’s very nearly my sole browser; I only have to use Pale Moon for a few minor tasks here and there. It’s still pre-release, so it’s very much a work-in-progress, but it’s already faster and less annoying than either Firebird or Chrome and it has far fewer pauses and crashes than Mozilla Thunderbird.

(A Thunderbird replacement would be my personal vote for the next Alt-Tech target, although I’m sure there are more pressing needs out there.)

So, if you’re not on Brave yet, give it a try on your desktop. I don’t think the mobile version is quite ready for prime time yet, so I’m still using Pale Moon on Android.

Kim Kardashian robbed in Paris!

Yeah, right.

To return to matters of actual interest to me, it’s interesting to see how, despite authoring two volumes of a significant new book, Francis Fukuyama’s public relations efforts appears to have been sidelined into an ongoing defense of the indefensible, which are his collective attempts to defend and retroactively redefine his increasingly ludicrous End of History thesis:

In the summer of 1989, the American magazine the National Interest published an essay with the strikingly bold title “The End of History?”. Its author, the political scientist Francis Fukuyama, announced that the great ideological battles between east and west were over, and that western liberal democracy had triumphed. With anti-communist protests sweeping across the former Soviet Union, the essay seemed right on the money. Fukuyama became an unlikely star of political science, dubbed the “court philosopher of global capitalism” by John Gray. When his book The End of History and the Last Man appeared three years later, the qualifying question mark was gone.

The “end of history” thesis has been repeated enough to acquire the ring of truth – though it has also, of course, been challenged. Some critics have cited 9/11 as a major counterexample. Others have pointed to the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and the Arab spring as proof that ideological contests remain.

But Fukuyama was careful to stress that he was not saying that nothing significant would happen any more, or that there would be no countries left in the world that did not conform to the liberal democratic model. “At the end of history,” he wrote, “it is not necessary that all societies become successful liberal societies, merely that they end their ideological pretensions of representing different and higher forms of human society.”

Fukuyama was talking about ideas rather than events. He believed that western liberal democracy, with its elegant balance of liberty and equality, could not be bettered; that its attainment would lead to a general calming in world affairs; and that in the long run it would be the only credible game in town. “What we are witnessing,” he wrote, “is not just the end of the cold war, or a passing of a particular period of postwar history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalisation of western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.”

Fukuyama drew on the philosophy of Hegel, who defined history as a linear procession of epochs. Technological progress and the cumulative resolution of conflict allowed humans to advance from tribal to feudal to industrial society. For Marx, the journey ended with communism; Fukuyama was announcing a new destination.

For a long time his argument proved oddly resilient to challenges from the left. Neoliberalism has been pretty hegemonic. Over the last three years, however, in a belated reaction to the 2008 bank bailouts, cracks have started to appear. Global Occupy protests and demonstrations against austerity have led many commentators on the left – including the French philosopher Alain Badiou in The Rebirth of History and Seumas Milne in his collection of essays The Revenge of History – to wonder whether history is on the march once again. “What is going on?” asks Badiou. “The continuation, at all costs, of a weary world? A salutary crisis of that world, racked by its victorious expansion? The end of that world? The advent of a different world?” He tentatively regards the uprisings of 2011 as game-changing, with the potential to usher in a new political order. For Milne, likewise, developments such as the failure of the US to “democratise” Iraq and Afghanistan, the financial crash and the flowering of socialism in Latin America demonstrate the “passing of the unipolar moment”.

What remains an open question is whether these developments – dramatic as they are – will actually result in anything.

Frankly, the whole thing is somewhat of a disappointment to me. To discover that Jesus Jones’s conception of “watching the world wake up from History” is both more sophisticated and accurate than Fukuyama’s is devastating to anyone who would fancy himself an intellectual.

Fukuyama’s mistake was to apply History’s end to liberal democracy rather than to Marxism, where it belonged.

Anyhow, both Fukuyama and Marx were wrong. They went full-Hegel. Never go full-Hegel. And you can’t bring back ideology in multicultural societies where identity politics are destined to rule until they are homogenous again.

The mantra of inclusiveness

The fact that this church even feels the need to hold a hearing on this matter is an indication of how hopelessly converged it is. And in answer to the question posed by the headline, no, an atheist cannot lead a Christian church:

The Rev. Gretta Vosper is a dynamic, activist minister with a loyal following at her Protestant congregation in suburban Toronto. She is also an outspoken atheist.

“We don’t talk about God,” Vosper said in an interview, describing services at her West Hill United Church, adding that it’s time the church gave up on “the idolatry of a theistic god.”

Vosper’s decision to reject God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit and to turn her church into a haven for nonbelievers “looking for a community that will help them create meaningful lives without God” has become too much even for the liberal-minded United Church of Canada.

The United Church, the country’s largest Protestant denomination, has begun an extraordinary process that could end up stripping Vosper of her rights to continue as a minister. Last week, a special committee of the Toronto Conference of the United Church requested that a formal hearing be convened by the General Council of the United Church to determine her fate as a minister. That followed a review of  Vosper’s actions by a separate committee.

“In our opinion, she is not suitable to continue in ordained ministry because she does not believe in God, Jesus Christ or the Holy Spirit. Ms. Vosper does not recognize the primacy of scripture, she will not conduct the sacraments, and she is no longer in essential agreement with the statement of doctrine of The United Church of Canada,” the committee said in a report released recently….

Like other mainstream denominations, the United Church of Canada, founded in 1925 as a merger of several denominations, has seen its numbers fall sharply in recent years. It reported having 436,292 members at the end of 2014, less than half the 1,063,951 it had at its peak in 1964. But a spokeswoman notes that the Canadian census of 2011, which has a broader definition, counted more than 2 million “adherents” of the United Church.

“It’s become a question of the church’s public integrity,” the Rev. Don Schweitzer, a professor of theology at St. Andrew’s College in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, and editor of a history of the United Church, said of the dispute with Vosper. “It’s tough on the United Church because we’ve created this mantra of inclusiveness and now it’s been tested. It goes against the grain to tell somebody that you have to leave.”

Inclusivity and tolerance are NOT Christian principles. They are quite literally the opposite of Christian principles. They are social justice principles, which is to say, they are among the many principles acceptable to Hell.

The Devil is most inclusive and extraordinarily tolerant. You can do whatever you want, whenever you want, to whomever you want. And all it will cost you is your soul.

Obamacare in action

Minnesota may not have any insurance companies soon:

Minnesota’s top health insurance regulator says the state’s individual market is in “an emergency situation” amid big rate increases for next year.

Department of Commerce Commissioner Mike Rothman said Friday that the five companies offering plans through the state’s exchange or directly to consumers were prepared to leave the market for 2017. He said big rate increases were the tradeoff to convince all but one company to remain for now.

Rate increases finalized this week range from a 50 percent average hike for HealthPartners plans to a 67 percent jump on average on UCare.

But Rothman called it a temporary fix and called on lawmakers to make reforms before the market collapses.

It’s rather fascinating to see how one institution after another is collapsing like dominoes while everyone wanders aimlessly around wringing their hands and wondering how this could have happened.

It tends to remind me a little of when a girl in my class and a boy the class below me died in separate, but similarly stupid, easily avoidable accidents. I kept my mouth shut out of respect for everyone else’s feelings, of course, but it was occasionally difficult when a plaintive “why?” would be uttered in conversation.

Now, there are certainly times when one genuinely wonders why something bad came to pass, believe me, it’s a question I have found myself asking from time to time. But there are also times when the answer is completely obvious and totally undeniable. I mean, if you absolutely must point an apparently gun at yourself and pull the trigger to impress your friends, maybe, just maybe, you might want to check the chamber as well as eject the magazine.

The USA is collapsing because it is not the United States of America anymore. Its human and military capital have been considerably drawn down. The people who are the posterity of the Founders have been invaded and overrun, the various propositions and creeds that made their culture exceptional have been rejected by nationals, citizens, and invaders alike, and the remnants of their religion is a watered-down, treasonous, pharisaical Judeo-Churchianity that is a pale shadow of the unadulterated Christianity that once fearlessly proclaimed “No King but Jesus” to the English Crown.

Now they are afraid to call abomination and adultery sin. Instead, they preach against masculinity and nationalism.

So, what else would you expect? I mean, seriously, what other outcome could there possibly be?

Do you not see that the pace of the financial rapine has increased as well? That’s the elite, desperately attempting to make hay while the setting sun still shines.