Category: Uncategorized

New American reviews Cuckservative

The title of the magazine is a little ironic in light of the views expressed in Cuckservative, but it’s a good, substantial, and relatively positive review of the book nevertheless:

Cuckservative is co-written by Vox Day and John Red Eagle. Vox Day is the pseu­donym of a video game designer who has amassed quite a following in the online world with his often-controversial views. Day’s high IQ and technical approach to problem solving is felt throughout Cuckservative. Much effort is given to making the book’s main argument that immigration is the most important issue of our day and that “cuckservatives” are on the wrong side. “Thanks to their cuckservative ideology, America’s self-styled conservatives have literally betrayed the entire purpose of the Constitution of the United States, and in doing so, they have put the very survival of the nation at risk,” the authors charge….

The chapter “Christianity and Cuckservatism” went into depth on the strange decline into far-left racial politics that we’ve witnessed in modern Christianity. As churches across the country lecture their members on the lessons of “white privilege” and “institutional racism,” Cuckservative points out the blatant hypocrisy: “It never seems to occur to these white guilt-trippers that holding today’s white Christians responsible for the sins of their 18th-century or 1960s counterparts is no different than blaming today’s Jews for crucifying Christ.” Christians, both Left and Right, who have bought into the egalitarian premises of the Left and support open-border policies are described as “Churchians” who have nothing in common with traditional Christianity. “The false fruit of Churchian multiculturalism can be recognized by what is happening to Christian churches everywhere from Europe to the American Midwest. So-called Christians are not only actively welcoming those who do not worship Jesus Christ to invade their nations, they are also watering down Christian theology and in some cases, literally tearing down the symbols of Christian worship.”

Overall, the book provides a sound explanation of what’s wrong with the conservative movement, as well as why open immigration policies will spell certain political doom for our side. As an eBook, it’s very affordable and well worth the price. It’s a good book for anyone not familiar with the type of issues regularly covered by The New American, especially for
younger readers who are looking for a primer on the main issues facing us today. Readers with a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) background should appreciate the book the most, owing to its technical and analytical dissection of the issue.

The Amazon reviews remain very positive too:

A Must-Read Book!

This book pulls back the covers from the greatest lie of modern politics, the imaginary “benefits” of mass immigration and multiculturalism. Using historical examples, economic evidence, and plain logic, the authors show that our current globalist outlook is nothing more or less than a recipe for conflict and decline throughout western civilization.

I very much enjoyed the section dealing with dishonest “christian” arguments regarding immigration. I am not personally religious, but I am a product of a largely Christian society, and not entirely biblically unlearned. It has been frustrating to me to see so many self-proclaimed “Christians” argue that we must betray our own society, our own children, and hand our entire civilization over to whoever demands it, in order to be good Christians. This section gives a biblical and common-sense answer to such feeble and self-righteous do-gooderism.

If I have any complaint, it is that the authors could have spent a little more time illustrating the economic effects of mass immigration, both the harm done to citizens, and the almost unimaginable greed it takes to sell out one’s own people for cheap labor. Billions of dollars are being made by a tiny number of people, at the expense of an increasingly poor and insecure public. Those profiteering from globalist nation-wrecking are traitors in the strongest sense of the word, and deserve to be treated as such. Whether a globalist capitalist profiteer, a sincere leftist seeking an imaginary multicultural “utopia”, or a false christian peddling white guilt to feel righteous, these deluded people are dangerous to civilization itself.

Interesting that even the non-Christians are capable of seeing the problem with societally destructive Churchianity. And the reviewer is right, the economics chapter is generally abstract and heavily technical, so the impact is perhaps less powerful than if we’d taken Red Eagle’s more storytelling-oriented approach. Mea culpa.

Don’t forget, Cuckservative is now out in audiobook as well.

They made him inevitable

Finally, a conservative who gets it. Does Donald Trump scare you? Good, he should. And if the GOPe manages to stop him, you’re going to like who comes next even less.

This election is the Republican Altamont, where conservatives got knifed by the Hell’s Angels. It’s our own fault too – the GOP teased its base, looked down upon it, lied to it, and when it turned out it wasn’t playing games and pulled a blade the establishment wasn’t ready.

I spent the last few days at CPAC, surrounded by conservatives, and there was a clear preference for focusing on the symptom – Donald Trump and his myriad failings – rather than the disease. Our problem is not this digitally-challenged, bizarrely phallocentric clown; it’s our failure to represent the people left behind as we got ahead.

Donald Trump is the fault of the GOP elite, including movement conservatives, who failed to listen, who failed to follow through, who thought we were meant to lead the benighted past their narrow self-interests and unseemly prejudices to a wonderful new world reflecting our benevolent self-interests and elite prejudices. Funny how the conservative, globalized utopia we sought to impose always worked out really well for us. Except those left behind aren’t laughing.

Trumpism isn’t merely about unfocused anger – it would be super-convenient to write this off as a temper tantrum that will soon blow over and allow us to get back to the business as usual of ignoring the pleas (which are now demands) to stop the immigration disaster, to address the fallout of free trade, and to stop the useless sacrifice of our sons and daughters in wars we’re too damn gutless to win. But it isn’t. Again and again Republicans promised to solve these problems and yet every single time they’ve lied. Rubio got elected in Florida promising to oppose amnesty then not only fails to do so but stands up with the Democrats and did the exact opposite. And we’re surprised a candidate comes along and points that out?

These folks have been asking us for help, and what was our response?
Shut up, stupid racists. Well, they finally found someone who is taking
their side. His name is Donald Trump, and we made him possible. Hell, we
made him inevitable.

Admitting the problem is the first step towards solving it. Of course, cuckservatives and neocons and conservatives being what they are, they’ll probably just call him a racist Nazi Trumpkin and refuse to listen to anything he has to say.

“Five generations deep”

If only he’d been fortunate enough to be born American in Portugal, he’d have assimilated five generations ago.

Speaking outside a Donald Trump rally in Fort Worth, Texas on Friday, a Hispanic demonstrator warned the GOP candidate’s white supporters that there would be consequences if Trump manages to make it all the way to the White House.

“If these people get what they want, Trump in there, I guarantee you — you think the Mexicans are going to lay down that easily? We don’t ever say nothing,” Ronald Gonzales, of Dallas, said.

After explaining that he isn’t an advocate for open borders, he argued that many of the illegal immigrants living in the U.S. “already got families and kids that are here” — and they wouldn’t allow a Trump administration to break up their families.

“It ain’t gonna happen,” Gonzales said. “You really want the Mexicans to really, really stir, really get mad? Y’all don’t understand — we aren’t the minority anymore. We own Texas. Texas is Mexican-made. I’m five generations deep right here.”

And that, right there, is why Jerry Pournelle correctly predicted that “There Will Be War”. And by war, I mean war on the North American continent of the sort that hasn’t been seen in 150 years.

Once the flow of government money stops, and once there is nowhere else to run for the white people that every Mexican, South American, African, Asian, Arab, and Jew is chasing in order to improve his life, the ethnic wars will begin. Who, then, will be the real American?

Presumably the survivors. Homogeneous nations are born from heterogeneous countries.

It occurs to me that the American Indians are about the only people in American history who don’t insist on living in white neighborhoods. Every other race and ethnic group vociferously protests how those racist whites discriminate against them and want to keep them at a distance and out of their country clubs, while we fought to keep them off our lands and out of our reservations.

That which goes unlinked

I found this guest poster’s response, to a commenter on a blog which may or may not be this one, to be interesting in its dedication to a) detail and b) avoiding the central issue at hand:

This is an interesting mix of “truthiness” and bigotry. Sarah is American by belief and choice, accused of being a “traitor” by people who think their ancestry and presence on the landmass of the US since birth make them guardians of the US nation-state. Aside from the incoherence (how can she be a traitor if she is not a member of the tribe?), the commenter attempts to other her by lumping her in with the virtue-signalling SJWs.

This commenter is sadly unAmerican in his resort to racist and sexist issue framing, completely misapplied to Sarah Hoyt. It’s unfortunate that the loud outpourings of these people, few in number but egging each other on in the fever swamps of sites like this blog-which-shall-go-unlinked, can so easily be used by progressive scribblers elsewhere to tar all dissenters from the Progressive program of thought control as racists, misogynists, and neo-Nazis (or worse!)

Which brings up a valid point these people have made: if Americanism is a bundle of individualist beliefs and attitudes, what about those with deep roots in the US, born and raised for generations there, who don’t accept those beliefs? If tolerance of difference is a watchword, then should those who don’t tolerate differences be suppressed or removed?

Our answer starts with looking at how we got to this point, where government has expanded and encroached on the private sphere of business and social organizations to the point where private action is viewed with suspicion, and a significant percentage of the population believes democracy means subjecting every action of business to the political process and regulation.

Americans were formerly known for their commitment to private charity and self-help organizations; the America of Alexis de Tocqueville in 1835 teemed with churches and private social organizations and lacked the inherited privilege and concentrations of unearned wealth and power seen in Europe. But he worried that “… a despotism under a democracy could see ‘a multitude of men’, uniformly alike, equal, ‘constantly circling for petty pleasures’, unaware of fellow citizens, and subject to the will of a powerful state which exerted an ‘immense protective power’. Tocqueville compared a potentially despotic democratic government to a protective parent who wants to keep its citizens (children) as ‘perpetual children’, and which doesn’t break men’s wills but rather guides it, and presides over people in the same way as a shepherd looking after a ‘flock of timid animals’. He also wrote that “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.”

He was prescient. We have arrived at that state.

First, everyone would do well to settle down. Sarah Hoyt didn’t threaten to punch anyone. One of her white knights threatened to punch me if he ever encountered me, presumably due to my crimethink. As we see, their dedication to the propositions they profess doesn’t run terribly deep. But this is an intellectual dispute, and there is no need for anyone to get their panties in a bunch, or for fisticuffs.

Second, and more importantly, the post is mistitled. The situation is not “Sons of Liberty vs National Front” because in this particular case the Sons of Liberty are the National Front. Liberty and the Rights of Englishmen, are concepts that belong solely to the posterity of the American Founding Fathers, a posterity that excludes, among many, many other U.S. citizens, Sarah Hoyt.

Needless to say, they will try to redefine “posterity” just as they have redefined “American” and “democracy” and “liberal”. But if your position requires historical falsehoods, retrofittings, and redefinitions, your position is inherently flawed.

But the post does serve to nicely illustrate the intrinsically dishonest, pernicious, and untenable nature of the concept of the proposition nation, which anyone can join “by belief and choice”. Such a nation requires, absolutely requires, thought policing of the most stringent and ruthless variety, and is intrinsically totalitarian in a way that the most authoritarian “blood and soil” regime could never be.

It is no surprise that as a result of immigration and the necessary redefinition of what it is to be American, the country has become considerably less free despite the influx of these “belief and choice” citizens. The Know-Nothings were, more or less, correct. Indeed, the present situation is a direct consequence of the inability of 19th century immigrants to fully grasp the Rights of Englishmen, because they were never English and they will never be what might be described as Americans version 1.0. More recent arrivals are observably even less able to do so.

It’s rather ironic to observe that just as my maternal ancestors were robbed of their land and their heritage by one wave of colonists, my paternal ancesters are now being robbed of their birthright, their heritage, and even their name by succeeding waves of invaders.

The astonishing thing is that these advocates of the absurdity known as “the proposition nation” believe, genuinely believe, that they are the good guys. But they have confused rhetoric for reality, which is why their arguments inevitably end in either incoherence or untruths.

A Swedish reader comments: “The only mystery is why Swedish politicians have got it in their heads that everyone who sets foot on Swedish soil will immediately embrace our values, our view of women and our traditions.”

And so we see, the pernicious lie of the proposition nation spreads.

A few good apples

Even the police are sickened by what “law enforcement” has become. M-Zed shares an email he received recently from a policeman.

You’ve mentioned cops shooting dogs, and there are a lot of videos about it. My department’s response team has specific instructions about that.

It is likely for a dog to be a threat, especially on a drug raid. They like keeping pit bulls and others, sometimes several of them, to use against cops as both attackers, alarms, and decoys.

If there’s a dog on those raids, our guys will shoot it on sight, because it might be violent, and will probably get in the way.

Even if it’s not a violent encounter, dogs don’t comprehend what people are doing, or instructions, and get in the way or turn defensive.

The lead officer also said basically that dogs are legally property, and it’s better to shoot a dog than a person. If you shoot the dog right off the bat, it makes it clear you’re willing to use force, and will have to less often. You create a psychological position of strength.

I don’t know what to suggest other than to not have a dog, and be very compliant in any encounter with law enforcement. As they said at the Academy, “If you want people to always be happy to see you, be a firefighter.”

Most guys here like intimidation, and like the master/serf relationship.They joke about the women they make cry and the men who get very meek. Especially vets. If they can intimidate a guy with a USMC plate, it’s like Christmas.

I haven’t shot a dog and won’t unless I have to because the dog attacks me and I can’t beat it off with a baton.

I used to love this job. Now, I’m looking forward to retirement and doing something else.

The US police are increasingly made up of cowards and bullies who don’t have the brains or the steel to succeed in the military. They love dressing up like soldiers and pretending they are soldiers, but they turn into the biggest cowards in the world the moment that a dog barks at them. There is a reason that historical wargames assign to police units the lowest level of morale.

They hide behind their badges and strut and swagger, but their true nature is revealed the moment that anyone dares to shoot back at them. Then, they’re suddenly aware of the fact that they are completely outnumbered and their very existence depends upon the goodwill of the public they despise.

The thing is, most of them know they are inferior. That’s why they get off on trying to humiliate and lord it over their betters. Self-appointed defense attorneys for the police always like to claim that police crimes are only committed by “a few bad apples”, but it increasingly sounds as if the problem is now inherent to the occupation, and that there are fewer and fewer “good apples” these days.

As for dogs, police should never shoot them except in the case of extreme emergency. They cannot reasonably claim they are in fear for their lives. And if they are going to claim the license to shoot the public’s dogs at will, the public should have the legal right to freely kill police dogs whenever they encounter them without penalty.

Just to create a psychological position of strength, you understand.

That’s one way to shut him down

Apparently Marco Rubio didn’t know when to quit, so the GOPe decided to call time on his campaign in order to clear the way for Ted Cruz in Florida:

U.S. Senator Marco Rubio has carried on at least two extramarital affairs since he entered politics.

GotNews.com can confirm through lobbyist sources in DC and Tallahassee that at least one DC-based lobbyist has had an extramarital affair with the first-term U.S. Senator. Still another Florida-based lobbyist has been IDed as carrying on an affair.

The first woman was Amber Stoner, a 36-year-old woman who worked for Rubio when he was head of the Florida Republican Party…. The second woman is Dana Hudson, a blonde lobbyist based in the Beltway.

If there are similar revelations about John Kasich, or if he quits the race before Friday, that should suffice to confirm that the GOPe has been doing the math and they know they have to stop Trump in Florida and Ohio or they’re done.

Assuming this is indeed her, doesn’t Miss Hudson look rather like the taller half of Garfunkel and Oates?

Let that be a lesson to all you young would-be politicians out there. When the elders of the party take you out for dinner, and suggest that maybe it is time for you to consider getting out of the race for the good of the party, that’s just their way of being polite. What they really mean is that it is time to get out of the race… if you’re smart enough know what is good for you.

Seriously, does no one watch The Godfather anymore?

Peyton Manning hangs it up

Peyton Manning is officially retired. The Broncos announced this morning that Manning has informed the team he’s calling it a career. A ceremony in Denver is scheduled for Monday.

He’s making the right call by going out on top. I can’t say I was a fan; I never liked him even a little bit. But you had to respect him. He was, without question, an excellent quarterback and one who will not be quickly forgotten. Was he the best quarterback of all time? No, I don’t think so. But he was, almost certainly, the best-prepared quarterback of all time and one of the top ten to play the game.

I think he was, not-so-secretly, somewhat of a choker because he put so much pressure on himself and on his teammates. He was almost the exact opposite of Joe Montana; he never seemed to understand that in the moments of highest pressure, you need to let the game and the moment come to you, you cannot force them. Peyton Manning did not feel the force, he relied upon his talent and his extensive preparation instead.

But in some ways, that actually makes me respect him more, because unlike so many other talented chokers, he managed to surmount that weakness through persistence and the sheer force of will. And it did not escape my attention that after an entire career of being a prima donna with the weight of the team on his shoulders, he managed to step back, be a role player, and allow the team to carry him.

For me, the signature Peyton Manning moment will always be when he chewed
out his running back, Donald Brown, for making a mistake while the play was still in
progress. “Godammit, Donald!” That, for me, summed up both his strengths and his weaknesses in a nutshell. Then again, you have to appreciate a man who can laugh at himself.

A five-state race

All right, let’s break down the Republican math, since the mainstream media appears determined to avoid analyzing the numbers in any manner that is even remotely relevant to future events. I’m using a corrected and updated version of the spreadsheet created by a reader here, Frank B. Luke. According to the latest reports on CNN, Trump has 385 delegates and Cruz has 298.

There are the following delegates up for grabs in the next 10 days. The next seven “states” are proportional:

23 PR
19 HI
32 ID
59 MI
40 MS
69 IL
19 DC

271 total

Let’s be conservative and give both Trump and Cruz a minimum of 40 percent of the delegates apiece, or 108. (On Saturday, the day of his big “loss” to Cruz, Cruz took 57 percent and Trump took 44 percent). Now the score is: Trump 493 and Cruz 406. Next comes the big showdown on March 15, winner-takes-all for three states and one territory.

52 MO
99 FL
66 OH
09 (Northern Marianas)

If Trump takes all four, which is currently more likely than not, thhis minimum expected delegate count to 719. Trump will then only need 518 more, 193 of which he can expect to get in a worst-case proportional distribution. (Remember, he can reasonably anticipate more than 108 we assigned him from the 271 available proportional-state delegates; based on the polls, 162 would be a more reasonable estimate.) So, that means to clinch the nomination, he will need somewhere between 271 and 325 delegates from the 606 that remain in the winner-takes-all states, 172 of which are in California.

TL;DR: If Trump wins Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and California, plus one state from the following list (Arizona, Missouri, Indiana, Wisconsin), he wins the nomination. Period. Nothing else matters.

This is why Cruz should spend the week telling his supporters to vote for Rubio in Florida and Kasich in Ohio. But he won’t, because his so-called strategists are far more concerned with what they call optics than they are about actual tactics.

It should be amusing to see how many pundits and analysts suddenly start talking about the significance of the difference between winner-takes-all and proportional states without ever mentioning the source. Because despite all of their endless opining, none of them have bothered to work any of this out.

Perception vs perspective

The anti-Trumpkins are strutting around the Internet and bellowing about how Ted Cruz blew away Donald Trump in the two states he won and narrowly lost to Trump in the two states Trump won. And that’s true, if you’re dumb enough to look only at the reported percentages rather than the actual numbers involved.

In Kansas and Maine, Cruz beat Trump by 18,145 and 2,480 votes, respectively. In Kentucky and Louisiana, Trump beat Cruz by 10,866 and 9,781 votes. So, Cruz actually lost to Trump on the overall vote count by a grand total of 22 votes, which is a) a dead heat and b) as irrelevant as who won what state.

On the delegate side, Cruz took 64 delegates to Trump’s 49. This, too, changed nothing, because Trump’s ability to reach the required number of delegates before the convention is going to be solely determined by the 391 delegates awarded by the winner-takes-all states so long as he can take 30 percent or more of the distribute-delegate states. Since he took 49 of the 112 delegates allocated yesterday, or 44 percent, Trump remains ahead of the game; the only real significance of Saturday was the implosion of Rubio.

Now, don’t get me wrong, it was a great night for Cruz, but it was a great night because it showed he is the only alternative to Trump, not because it demonstrated that his popularity had exploded or that he could actually beat Trump. The key result for him on Saturday was Rubio’s demise, who really should drop out of the race on Monday, and presumably, endorse Cruz before getting humiliated in his home state, virtually ensuring Trump’s nomination, and becoming entirely irrelevant.

Since Florida (99) and Ohio (66) account for nearly half of the remaining winner-takes-all delegates, Cruz has to prevent Trump from winning at least one of those states on March 15th. If Trump wins both, it will be extremely difficult to prevent him from collecting the additional 694 delegates he needs even if Cruz wins all of the proportional-distribution states.

The dilemma for Cruz is that if Rubio and Kasich drop out, it increases his slim chance of beating Trump in one of the two critical states. But if they stay in, they will continue to reduce the amount of proportional delegates that Trump collects. Cruz already knows he isn’t likely to get enough delegates himself, so his winning strategy is to try to stop Trump, not to try to win himself.

Game theory says that Cruz needs to get Rubio and Kasich out of the race and get their endorsements right now so they can campaign for him and help him poach either Florida or Ohio. Whether they are in or out, Trump is going to surpass the 30 percent threshold in the proportional states. Since Cruz was at 21 percent in Ohio and 12 percent in Florida, the key to the nomination is Kasich, not Rubio. And presumably, Kasich knows this, which is why he has stayed in the race up until now.

If I’m Trump, I’m making a deal with Kasich to get his endorsement and strike for the kill. Anything short of VP should be on the table. If I’m Kasich, I’m getting out of the race before Wednesday and cashing in at my peak value. And if I’m Cruz, I’m arranging for a quiet telephone call with Trump to see if what he’s willing to offer in exchange for an endorsement. There is a three-way Prisoner’s Dilemma here, as the first candidate to endorse Trump is the one who is the most valuable to him. Alternatively, Cruz should tell his supporters to vote Rubio in Florida and Kasich in Ohio.

On a side note, it’s interesting how this campaign has been largely consistent with the socio-sexual interpretation of the candidates from the start. It’s down to Sigma against Alpha, and the outcome will largely depend upon whom can do a better job of assembling popular support versus working the system. The situation appears to strongly favor the Alpha, but it is always dangerous to expect a Sigma to do the obvious or to count him out.

I am nagged by one serious doubt concerning what I’ve been told about Ted Cruz, and it’s not related to the obvious one concerning the extent to which he is the Goldman Sachs-preferred, CFR-approved candidate. If, as we are told, the establishment hates him so much more than Trump, why has Cruz been overperforming so dramatically in the states where the GOPe has more influence in the process.

I expect that we will soon learn whether Cruz fans have been telling the truth about whether the Republican establishment prefers him to Trump or not. If Fox and various GOP figures immediately begin fawning all over Cruz once Rubio withdraws, we will know they were, at the very least, incorrect.

Combined Arms, Take Two, turn three

While the battle to the east is fast, brutal, and direct, with the big-gunned tanks blowing holes in each other at an alarming rate, the 1st Panzer Division has recovered from its initial setbacks and is beginning to make some headway by outflanking the Soviet’s western defenses. This is the situation after the end of Turn 3. The second turn.

The most important action was the armor battle in the east (top). My Tiger first took out the T-34 at the crossroads it had already acquired, then, with a nearly 500-meter side shot, killed the Stalin that had traversed the big northeastern hill and took out my Panther guarding the northern road. Three kills in three turns for the crew, but in doing so, the Tiger left its much weaker side armor exposed to the AT gun in the village. Fortunately the 57L gun missed its first shot and although the second shot hit, it didn’t penetrate the Tiger’s armor.

The combination of the second Tiger, the Panther, and the infantry all pounding away at the Guards platoon defending the eastern approach to the village killed the leader and two of the three squads, but the Soviet commander somehow managed to extricate the surviving squad safely, thereby preventing me from rapidly exploiting my chosen schwerpunkt. That squad fell back and reclaimed the first building I’d taken, but soon found itself surrounded on three sides as the troops I’d sent around the southern side of the village moved in and took possession two of the buildings there. They kept the well-led Soviet platoon that was established in the village occupied while the German officer leading the assault headed north to try to take out the anti-tank gun before it could kill the Tiger with a third shot.

In the west, the key development was the immediate rallying of my surviving infantry platoon combined with the two Panthers taking out the T-34 on the north side of the building. Also, the assault engineers who rushed the building in the center were able to break the two Soviet squads that had been holding the nearby hill, catching them out in the open as they tried to fall back to the village. And to the southwest, lacking any infantry support, the one T-34 proved unable to stop the dispersed platoon that was seeking to link up with the panzergrenadiers attacking the village from the southeast.

All in all, it was a very favorable series of three half-turns for the attacking Germans, and although the battle isn’t over, I feel quite confident that I’ll be able to secure the necessary nine buildings well before Turn 7. I was able to crack the village in the east while simultaneously flanking his massed firepower in the west to the north and south, which was exactly what I intended.