A complete abandonment of common sense

The Scandicucks in Minnesota have always been as clueless as they are nice, but they’re taking the former to new heights with their hijab-wearing Mayor of Minneapolis and their inability to bring themselves to ban the mutilation of young girls by Somalis:

In Minnesota, the state’s Democratic leaders are perplexed by whether to advance a bill banning the barbaric, Third-World practice of female genital mutilation. After first passing the bill unanimously in the state House last week, lawmakers are now having “second thoughts” about whether to continue pushing the bill through to the governor’s desk, according to a report in the Star-Tribune.

The bill’s GOP sponsor said her colleagues in the Senate have gone wishy-washy on the bill due to pushback from certain segments of the refugee-resettlement industry, which is very powerful in Minnesota, getting paid millions in federal dollars annually to distribute Somali refugees throughout the state.

The bill would crack down on parents who submit their daughters to the grisly procedure in which doctors remove all or part of a girl’s clitoris. If passed, the bill would revoke parental custody and set a prison term of five to 20 years for any parent found guilty of having their daughter mutilated.

Or, perhaps they could all just be sent back. Then they would be free to engage in whatever barbaric practices they wish. At this rate, in another 10 years, mutilation will be obligatory in Dinkytown.

America’s Indian heritage

A commenter at Steve Sailer’s explains why Americans tend to feel differently about Indians than Central and South Americans, or Canadians, do:

In America, the Indians fought back with everything they had not for years, not for decades, not for generations, but for centuries.

And the resistance began at the beginning, so to speak, as they were whipping the Spanish at least as early as 1513, when the Timucua drove Ponce de Leon off near present-day St. Augustine, Fla., and later that year the Calusa drove him out of San Carlos Bay, Fla. Four years later Hernando de Cordoba’s fleet, returning from a campaign against the Maya, dropped anchor in San Carlos bay to replenish water and supplies, but their landing party was driven off by the Calusa, who were described as “very big men with very long bows and good arrows.”

Ponce de Leon and Cordoba returned to San Carlos Bay in 1521 with 200 soldiers, settlers and supplies to establish a colony. The Calusa again defeated and drove them off, killing both de Leon and Cordoba.

Then there was the disastrous Navaraez expedition into northern Florida in 1527 with 600 soldiers, where the Spanish crossbows were no match for the Indians 7-foot long bows, as thick as a man’s arm, that could penetrate six inches of wood at 200 yards. Only four Spaniards survived the catastrophe.

In 1539, Hernando de Soto, who had been Francisco Pizarro’s chief military adviser and among the 168 who conquered the Inca empire, and a veteran of 15 years of warring against south-of-the Rio Grande Indians, landed in Tampa Bay with 330 infantry and 270 cavalry, most veterans of the Spanish conquests in the south. They had given up European armor and adopted Aztec quilted cotton armor covered with leather as more effective protection.

They marched north reaching the Choctaw town of Mabila on the present site of Selma, Ala., which they assaulted and took after prolonged fighting, estimated having killed 2,500 inhabitants. But no Indian surrender ensued. Instead, they forced the Spaniards to retreat and harried them, the Chickasaw attacking and burning de Soto’s winter camp, inflicting severe losses. Ultimately, only about half of de Soto’s force survived the expedition — not including him.

And so it went for hundreds of years, into the 20th century, if we count the 1911 Shoshone uprising, which was not called a “war” but a “riot,” as nomenclature was changed after Wounded Knee.

It is remarkable that some 350 years after the Calusa crushed Ponce de Leon and Cordoba, the Sioux defeated Crook and annihilated Custer.

So the American Indian earned respect and a place in our history that he does not have in Latin America or Canada. That’s even reflected in our language. Only the American armed forces to this day speak of going into Indian Country, and mean it ominously. Only American paratroopers legendarily shout “Geronimo!” as they leap from airplanes. Only a famous American general was named after an Indian. We speak of being off the reservation, and on the warpath. We Indian wrestle and walk Indian file. Indians are a part of, in today’s parlance, who we are in a way they are not in Canada or Latin America.

I find it fascinating that Indian ancestry is so respected that some whites will even attempt to deny that those they don’t like could possible have any. In any event, the Indian experience is one more factor that tends to separate the American colonist/settler from the later US immigrants.

And yet still curiouser

DC surgery resident on call the night of Seth Rich’s death says Rich’s gunshot wounds were non-fatal, access to him by the doctors was blocked by DC police, and no code was called when he died.

That’s not fishy, right?

The insanity of the imperial USA

This is a solid analysis of the lunacy of US imperialism and its intrinsic weakness:

When the leader of some imperial territory or vassal acts against U.S. interests, or even just gets strong enough that they might, U.S. assets stir up “popular movements”, “moderate rebels”, and “refugee” crises, or subvert their internal operation with NGOs, diplomats, and “grassroots” activism. Or, if that isn’t working, in case we have all forgotten 2003, the U.S. military directly invades in the name of “human rights” and “democracy”, neither of which need to ever materialize for this to work. One way or another, the leader in question ends up deposed.

The occasional genocide, mass rape, persecution of Christians and actual moderate minorities, enormous expense, damage to civilization, loss of historic sites, damage to our reputation, loss of the cultural and material produce that order would bring, destabilization of regions and populations that later need to be bailed out at our own material and demographic expense, and hostile mass-migration into the lands of our own people, which are the byproducts of this indirect form of rule, are overlooked as necessary collateral damage, unfortunate random happenstance, or, when the victim is of our own white race, even celebrated.

Why does this happen? Why are we, good people most of us, caught up in an evil empire? It’s easy enough to blame traitors and Jews and the devil, but the problem goes deeper.

The root of the problem is the principles by which the empire is administered. To start with, we don’t call it an empire, we call it “the international community”, composed not of vassals, provinces, states, territories, colonies, and protectorates, but of “sovereign” “democratic” “nations”.

In other words, we don’t even have language to talk coherently about the empire, which means it’s hard to think about it; we can’t issue orders to our “sovereign” subordinates, have no widely understood imperial authority, and can’t extract straightforward imperial tax, but still have to administer an empire. So, American foreign policy grabs the next-best mechanisms available to it: rebel groups, NGOs, subversion, “human rights” and associated leverage and inconsistencies, petrodollar shenanigans, exports of easily subverted democracy, weaponized mass-migration, and so on.

The worldview attempting to govern the empire and build coherent sub-states fails, because it doesn’t dare recognize what it is actually doing, and doesn’t dare use the “enemy” methods of effective statecraft that actually work. Instead of clear rights and duties of imperial provinces, states governed by clear chains of command and authority, and open negotiation for tribute and protection, we are forced to use destructive, clandestine methods to govern our empire, which in turn create the evilness of the empire.

Obviously, the people in charge of it are the bearers and purveyors of this destructive ideology, but they are not senselessly evil; there is a twisted logic to it all that is generated from the deep structure of modern political thought. Replacing the elite would be insufficient to fix our problems without a new imperial and political ideology. Any replacement elites, though they might go in with the best of intentions, would have the same incentives and would develop the same characteristics and ideology, if the formal structure of the thing stayed the same.

If we had a different imperial ideology, it would be possible to allow the components of the empire a much greater degree of peace and leeway to do what is right, while simultaneously exerting more efficient and fine-grained control over those aspects for which it is in our interest to do so. And we would no longer have to bear the negative by-products of a destructive and evil imperial operating system.

Don’t deceive yourself. The US is an empire that is held together by force and has been since 1865. The lack of a formal emperor doesn’t mean that it’s not an empire nor does its false veil of “democracy”; the US is observably less democratic than the Athenian and British Empires were. And the complete inability of the electorate to even acknowledge what the empire is means that it’s not even possible to discuss what it should, and should not, be doing.

Moreover, the empire is divided and schizophrenic. As the author notes, this has not escaped the attention of the other two global powers, China and Russia. There is absolutely no chance either of them, or a number of the lesser powers, are going to be inclined to follow the imperial USA’s lead, as it is inevitably leading to decline, collapse, and war. Indeed, if they are smart, they will gently assist the empire as it moves even deeper into self-destructive madness, in self-defense if nothing else.

Mailvox: the next Literally Hitler

Is apparently not from the Middle East at all. The news from Austria is encouraging, and not entirely unexpected.

In Austria the coalition of the center-left and center-right party broke up and there will be a new election in October 2017. Currently, the center-right and right-wing party have nearly half the seats in the parliament already. The green party is expected to loose voters, while the left-liberal and right-liberal partie (Neos and Team Stronach) will maybe and surely drop out of the parliament, respectively. The center-left party is not expected to make gains. The big winners will be, and must be, the right leaning parties.

Usually I would not put much faith into the conservative cucks, but now Sebastian Kurz has taken over leadership. Despite being 30 years old, he has already done a much greater service to Europe and Austria than most conservatives do in their whole life. Being Austria’s foreign minister since age 27, he was the single most important political figure responsible for closing the Balkan route, thus keeping hundreds of thousands if not millions of invaders out. He is in the process of closing the Italian route and already has publicly called out NGOs for cooperating and actively assisting the human traffickers bringing the Africans over. From an Austrian point of view his most bally move was to politically break with the Germans, thereby doing what no other Austrian politician dared to do in many many decades. His recent immigration laws aim towards removing islam from public life.

The left leaning Austrian media and all of Germany’s media are already writing their hit pieces on him. Apparently, he is the first Austrian politician since Haider deserving the title literally Hitler, which these days appears to be a compliment.

Our next government will likely be strongly right leaning. It seems as if you were right, and the times are really changing. Note also that according to polls, if there was a vote right now in Vienna, around 40% would vote for the right wing party, giving them a vast edge over the social democrats coming second at around 25%. The same social democrats that have won every single Viennese election since 1919.

The tide has turned. The EU is dying. The forces that will propel Reconquista 2.0 onward and restore a revived Christendom are beginning to grow and gather.

This is the time for courage and confidence, not cowardice and cuckery. Within eight years, we will see NGOs being banned and the surviving architects of the invasion being put on trial for treason in multiple countries.

As the young Sweden Democrats say, Europe belongs to us.

Old advisors, outdated strategy

Mike Cernovich explains why the Trump team is having such a difficult time with the media.

When WaPo or NY Times drops a “devastating” story on Trump, do you know who reads these stories — liberals!

Thus one can see the problem with Trump’s media team. They are spending all of their time, energy, and focus responding to news that most Trump supporters won’t even see, and if we see it, won’t believe it.

Trump was right (for the wrong reasons) when he jokingly claimed he could shoot someone on Fifth Ave. Most of his supporters would never see the story, and absent a clear video, wouldn’t believe the story if they saw it.

Want to know how out “out of touch” Trump supporters are with what liberal media is saying? I don’t even notice most of the media hit pieces on me, and even with a massive online following, people rarely ask me about anything nasty the media is saying about me. My readers, like me, aren’t reading liberal propaganda outlets.

Trump’s media team is playing defense, running around responding to stories that most of Trump’s base will never read, and if they read, would never believe.

He’s absolutely right. When the battleground is disadvantageous, refuse to play on it. Force the enemy to meet you on your chosen ground. This isn’t new, it’s literally ancient strategy.

All men can see the tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved. 

New heights of cuckery

I have no doubt that someone will manage it eventually, but it’s going to be hard to top this virtue-signaling lunacy. And Sweet Saint Darwin, but is physignomy real or what? You could not design a more flawless case of cuck-face if you held a competition of award-winning portrait artists.

Even though the year is 2017, racism and prejudice continue to pollute our world. Many people retain narrow-minded and over-simplistic views on what a family should “look like”.

Aaron and Rachel Halbert have experienced such prejudices up close – despite that they deserve loads of love and respect for several courageous decisions they took.

The Halberts first adopted two children – and then chose to take things a step further – after learning about embryo adoption.

The parents were determined to offer a home to more children who would otherwise not have a family – and decided not to forget those frozen embryos who seem to be forgotten.

Love and respect? They don’t deserve love and respect for hating their own people and helping to destroy their community, their society, and their nation. There is a reason that people instinctively feel contempt and disgust for their literally anti-social actions; condemn it if you like, but it exists for a very good reason. And it’s not a coincidence that the husband has cuckface and the woman has seriously crazy eyes. Their decisions weren’t courageous, they were crazy.

These are without doubt the Crazy Years. They will be followed by the Rivers of Blood Years. There is nothing new under the sun, and humanity violates history’s time-hallowed patterns at its peril.

The ugliness of reality

And the logical gibberish of the anti-intelligent:

“No reasonable person would be offended by the observation that African people have curlier hair than the Chinese, notwithstanding the possibility of some future environment in which it is no longer true. But we can recognize a contention that Chinese people are genetically predisposed to be better table tennis players than Africans as silly, and the contention that they are smarter than Africans as ugly, because it is a matter of ethical principle that individual and cultural accomplishment is not tied to the genes in the same way as the appearance of our hair.”

And they wonder why they’re so reliably wrong. You can certainly fight science, reason, and observation with “ethical principle” if you like, but it’s not going to work very well. Nor is it going to convince anyone with the intellectual ability to penetrate your rhetoric and understand the irrelevance of your ethical principles.

The idea that Chinese people are not smarter on average than Africans because the idea is ugly is like a programmer insisting that his code works correctly, despite the constant crashing of the program, because it is more elegantly written than the code that actually functions. Sometimes, indeed, very often, reality is ugly, or at least falls well short of what our aesthetic preferences would wish it to be.