Free trade kills

As if the costs of free trade weren’t already high enough, some researchers have determined that free trade, specifically with China, is literally killing more white working-class Americans than guns and traffic combined.

Increasing competition with China for trade has been blamed for soaring death rates among white, middle aged Americans. A silent ‘epidemic’ of deaths from suicides, drug and alcohol poisoning within that faction was first highlighted last year. But scientists were baffled as to why white, middle aged Americans were bucking the national trend of decreasing death rates. Now two economists believe they have found the answer.

Justin Pierce and Peter Schott believe they can trace back the uptick in suicides, drug overdoses, and alcohol-related deaths to 2000, when President Bill Clinton decided to relax the rules on major imports.

Between 1978 and 1998, the study reveals the mortality rate for US whites aged 45 to 54 fell by an average of two per cent each year. This was reflected in other rich countries, including France, Germany, the UK, Canada, Australia, and Sweden. After 1998, these nations saw mortality rates for this group steadily continue to fall, by two per cent every year.

But, in the US, mortality rates rose by half a per cent a year. The authors wrote: ‘No other rich country saw a similar turnaround.’ They estimate that had the white mortality in the US rate held at its 1998 value, 96,000 lives would have been saved between 1998 and 2013. And had it continued to fall as it had between 1978 and 1998, 488,500 deaths would have been avoided from 1999 to 2013.

This figure is comparable to the number of deaths caused by the Aids epidemic in the US.

While death rates related to drugs, alcohol and suicides have risen for middle-aged whites across the board, the largest surge are seen among those with the least education. A shock rise in mortality rates for middle-aged, white Americans has been driven by a rise in suicides, drug and alcohol poisonings and liver disease. In 2011, poisonings overtook lung cancer as a leading cause of death in this group and suicides is poised to do so, Princeton researchers said For those with a high school degree or less, deaths caused by drug and alcohol poisoning rose four fold, suicides increased by 81 per cent, and deaths caused by liver disease and cirrhosis jumped 50 per cent.

All-cause mortality rose by 22 per cent for this least-educated group. Among those with some college education, researchers noted little change in overall death rates. While among those people who achieved a bachelor’s degree or higher, death rates fell.

Free trade was already dead from an economic and nationalist perspective. This should make it clear that there is no longer a moral case for free trade. It is both deeply inequitable and deplorably immoral; it is simply another form of the historical predation of the elite upon the peasantry. And it is, therefore, a significant and growing factor in the cliodynamical stresses that are leading towards the ultimate dissolution of the United States.


Alt-Right: what it is

I was helpfully provided with a translation of the 16 Points for the fat middle of the Bell Curve. I trust this will clarify the more complicated and challenging points that were troubling some English speakers.

1. Alt Right is right-wing. No lefties!
2. Alt Right edge, not lame. Cucks and cons so lame.
3. Alt Right gonna win. Not gonna lose.
4. Europe good, church good, white people good. History good too.
5. Freedom for everybody!
6. Stay home and don’t touch the foreign poop.
7. Equality bad, equality isn’t even.
8. Science good. Made-up shit bad.
9. Everybody votes they boys.
10. Small crew can’t tell big crowd what to do. Not for long, anyhow.
11. MS-13 gonna kill Crips. Bloods gonna kill Latin Kings. Split them up!
12. Alt Right got no fucks to give.
13. Free trade bad. No jobs, no money, no good.
14. White people good.
15. Stay home and leave them Red, Yellow, Brown, and Black people alone.
16. War bad, genocide bad too.

TL;DR: Everyone should be left by they own damn selves

I’m informed that a midwit translation is in the works, but unfortunately, with all the caveats, definitions, and pedantic clarifications, it is already 1,600 pages long. Translators are also working on the sperg edition of the translation, which comes with 800 more footnotes and a 200-page appendix of additional definitions.


You may not be interested in identity politics

But identity politics is your new reality, whether you are a Republican (White party), a Democrat (Not-White party), or an Independent (White or non-White who votes White but doesn’t want to admit it).

Symone Sanders, former spokeswoman for the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, appeared on CNN Wednesday afternoon to weigh in on the future of the DNC and the Democratic party. Sanders dismissed the idea of Howard Dean returning as DNC chairman commenting, “we don’t need white people leading the Democratic party right now.”

“Howard Dean is also on record maligning young people and millennials. Telling those Bernie folks they just need to get in line and maligning Bernie Sanders. And that is not what we need,” Sanders said about the former party chairman.

“In my opinion we don’t need white people leading the Democratic party right now,” Sanders said. “The Democratic party is diverse, and it should be reflected as so in leadership and throughout the staff, at the highest levels. From the vice chairs to the secretaries all the way down to the people working in the offices at the DNC.”

That’s not quite honest of Ms Sanders.What she actually means is “we won’t accept white people leading the Democrat party ever again.” And by “white people”, she actually means “white people and Jews”.

TL;DR: Jews just developed a newfound interest in small government, a newfound respect for Donald Trump, and have decided they are White again.

Next year in Beijing!

My take: A Black candidate in 2020 who loses to the God-Emperor is the last hurrah for the traditional Democratic identity groups, followed by an Asian-Hispanic ticket in 2024.


An interview with Mike Cernovich

EveryJoe interviews the bestselling author of MAGA MINDSET:

EveryJoe: In your book, MAGA Mindset: Making YOU and America Great Again, you claim that America’s motto might as well be “You can’t say that!” due to oppressive political correctness. How can individuals reclaim their free speech and fight back against outrage culture?

Mike Cernovich: Free speech in America is in a strange place. On the one hand, people are self-censoring due to fear of negative feedback. Americans are speaking out less than ever in history. Online hate mobs have ruined lives.

On the other side, there has never been more opportunity for free speech. Social media allows us to bypass fake news media gatekeepers, to share our message directly with the people. You can write a blog, start a podcast, create a YouTube channel, and even using social media platforms (although the future of these are less certain) like Twitter and Facebook to spread your message to the entire world.

People can support free speech by speaking truth to power, perhaps anonymously as a commentator. You can also share links to articles and video you find compelling. Those who aren’t in a position to speak publicly, due to the real risk of backlash, can also support those who share a positive and high impact message by providing resources to truth tellers.

EJ: You wrote and published MAGA Mindset weeks before Trump won the election. At the time, nearly every poll had Hillary Clinton winning by a comfortable margin, but the book hinges on a Trump victory. Was that kind of bold move an example of the MAGA mindset in action?

MC: Yes! That was a meta-move of mine. How can I expect people to trust my writing if I don’t live it?

I went all in on my beliefs. Had Trump lost, my own credibility would have been destroyed. In MAGA Mindset, readers learn how to think big and make bold moves. The first lesson was taught in real-time by my choice to release MAGA Mindset before the election.

Publishing a book explaining why Trump won when the “experts” said he would lose is an example of the MAGA Mindset in action.

EJ: At EveryJoe, we recently published an article that explained how Gamergate elected Donald Trump. Do you think Gamergate played a role in the election?

MC: Gamergate was the first pushback against the thought police. Before Gamergate, people who supported free speech felt isolated and alone. Gamergate showed that millions of people support free speech.

Moreover, Gamergate exposed unethical journalism of all types. People began trusting the media less than ever before. While I wouldn’t say Gamergate got Trump elected, it was a powerful force for free speech.

Read the whole thing there.


Альтернативные правые: 16 тезисов

С
целью заложить основы альтернативной
правой философии, на котором смогут
строить другие.
  1. Альтернативные
    правые являются правым политическим
    течением и в американском, и в европейском
    значении термина «правые». Социалисты
    не могут быть альтернативными правыми.
    Прогрессивисты не могут быть
    альтернативными правыми. Либералы не
    могут быть альтернативно правыми.
    Коммунисты, марксисты, культурные
    марксисты и неоконсерваторы не могут
    быть альтернативно правыми.
  2. Альтернативные
    правые – это альтернатива магистральному
    направлению американского консерватизма,
    выраженному в «10 консервативных
    принципах» Рассела Кирка, которое
    выродилось в сторону прогрессивизма.
    Также это альтернатива либертарианству.
  3. Альтернативные
    правые не оборонительное мировоззрение
    и отвергают понятие благородного
    поражения. Это передовая философия
    наступления, во всех смыслах этого
    слова. Альтернативные правые верят в
    победу через настойчивость и согласие
    с наукой, реальностью, культурными
    традициями и уроками истории.
  4. Альтернативные
    правые считают Западную цивилизацию
    венцом человеческого развития и
    поддерживают три столпа этой цивилизации:
    христианство, европейские народы и
    греко-римское наследие.
  5. Альтернативные
    правые не скрывают своего национализма.
    Они поддерживают все национализмы, а
    также право нации на существование в
    родной среде, незамутненное вторжениями
    или миграциями иностранцев.
  6. Альтернативные
    правые противостоят глобализму. Мы
    противостоим всем, кто выступает за
    идеалы и цели глобализма.
  7. Альтернативные
    правые противостоят эгалитаризму. Мы
    отвергаем идею «равенства» так же, как
    мы отвергаем веру в леших и домовых,
    отмечая, что равенство между людьми не
    существует с научной, юридической,
    материальной, интеллектуальной, половой
    или духовной точек зрения.
  8. Альтернативные
    правые научно ориентированы. Мы признаем
    современные научные достижения, с
    оговорками: что а) в будущем эти положения
    могут быть пересмотрены, б) что научное
    общество также подвержено коррупции,
    и в) так называемый научный консенсус
    основан не на научности, а на демократии,
    следовательно его выводы ненаучны.
  9. Альтернативные
    правые убеждены, что идентичность >
    культура > политика.
  10. Альтернативные
    правые противостоят угнетению любого
    народа на своей родной земле другим
    народом, особенно в случае угнетения
    большинства на своей собственной
    родине. Альтернативные правые противостоят
    попыткам любых инородцев добиться
    исключительного влияния на принимающее
    общество через своячество, клановость
    и любые другие пути.
  11. Альтернативные
    правые понимают, что инородность +
    близость = война.
  12. Альтернативным
    правым безразлично, что вы о них думаете.
  13. Альтернативные
    правые отвергают международную свободную
    торговлю и отвергают свободную миграцию,
    подразумеваемую свободной торговлей.
    Достоинства внутринародной торговли
    никак не подразумевают достоинства
    свободной международной торговли.
  14. Альтернативые
    правые верят, что мы должны обеспечить
    существование белых народов и будущее
    белых детей.
  15. Альтернативные
    правые не признают идею общего
    превосходства какой-либо расы,
    государства, народа или подвида на
    другими. У каждой расы, государства,
    народа и подвида человечества есть
    свои особенные достоинства и недостатки,
    и у всех есть суверенное право на
    спокойную жизнь в рамках своей родной
    культуры.
  16. Философия
    альтернативных правых ценит мир между
    разными нациями в мире и противостоит
    войнами, цель которых навязать ценности
    одного народа другому, а также всем
    попыткам истребить отдельные народы
    через войны, геноцид, миграцию или
    генетическую ассимиляцию.
Кратко:
альтернативные правые есть западная
идеология, согласующаяся с наукой,
историей, реальностью и признающее
право кровных наций на существование
и самоуправление в их собственных
интересах. 

The fortress of solitude

It’s not such a bad place to be. In fact, it’s rather comfortable, if not energizing.

While it’s widely accepted that socialising makes us happier, this might not be strictly true if you’re highly intelligent. Evolutionary psychologists from Singapore Management University and the London School of Economics and Political Science found exactly this when they studied more than 15,000 young adults.

They concluded that, while people generally feel happier when they spend time with others, very smart people are an exception to this rule.

The study said this could be because of evolution.

Smarter people can more easily adapt to their surroundings in the modern world, so they don’t need close relationships to help them with food and shelter, like our ancestors did. Or, in the modern equivalent, the Wi-Fi password and a spare phone charger.

Their other theory is that smarter people are more aspirational, and want to spend more time working towards their goals, rather than socialising.

The study found that more intelligent people actually had lower life satisfaction the more frequently they socialised with friends – spending time with friends actually made them unhappy.

Here is an example of why I prefer solitude. Imagine going through some form of this every single day, in almost every single conversation with almost everyone you encounter outside the home. After I posted a link to the 16 Points of the Alt-Right on Gab, no less than THREE (3) people decided that they had spotted a contradiction and promptly popped up to demand clarifications.

So are we the best of humanity objectively speaking, or merely our best selves when under nationalist administration? If you are speaking in terms of who wields power over who in point 15 rather than objective cultural/racial traits, that needs to be clarified.

It doesn’t need anything of the sort. Stop sperging.

Can you explain why #14 and #15 aren’t a contradiction?

Existence is not supremacy. Did you really need help understanding that? Learn to read what is there, don’t just latch onto one word in the sentence.

Wow, dude. Why so nasty? There are some racial nuances of the #AltRight I’m trying to understand…Much of what I’m hearing in practice sounds contrictory…but I see you have no interest in any questions.

I don’t have any interest in questions from people who can’t distinguish “race” from “civilization” or “supremacy” from “existence”. Seriously, how do I talk to you if you can’t even handle that? Sign language? Charades?

If you’re going to draw up what’s essentially a summative constitutional/base document, get it fucking 100% unambiguous.

I don’t write for relative retards. There are many translations of it. Feel free to translate it for those with normal-range IQs if you like. I’d genuinely be curious to see what that would look like.

Yes you’re quite right. Guess there’s no point communicating. You’re way too busy being pissed off to bother.

Do you know why people have to be paid to teach? Because no one wants to put up with idiots struggling with the obvious. I really don’t want to have to repetitively explain to people that 2 is not 37 and purple is not yellow every single time I open my mouth. It’s worse than aggravating, it is exhausting.

If you want to be more accommodating to the highly intelligent people in your life, there is one thing that you can do that will make you considerably less annoying than the average person: DO NOT CORRECT THEM. If you don’t understand something, or if you think something they have said is wrong, just let it go.

This is desirable because 75 percent of the time someone “corrects” a highly intelligent person, they are demonstrably and provably wrong. Another 20 percent of the time, the correction is trivial and totally irrelevant to the topic at hand. This percentage rises to 99 percent when the “correction” is based on something pedantic. I’m not saying that highly intelligent people are always right, I’m just saying that the odds are not in your favor.



Adios, Asimov’s

I dropped my subscription 15 years ago. And apparently, the magazine has only gotten worse over time. It’s not even a science fiction magazine anymore:

The quality and type of fiction is a magazine is largely dependent on the main editor. If you find a magazine whose editor has tastes that align with your own it’s a guarantee that you will enjoy at least some of the stories included.

Sadly, Sheila Williams and Asimov’s do not align with my tastes at all. Actually I would like to know who her tastes align with because based on the stories in the last few issues I’m beginning to think she doesn’t actually like Science Fiction or Fantasy.

I have a digital subscription. Correction, had because I’m way over waiting for an actual SFF story from this magazine. The latest issue was the last I will ever read. Not one of the stories was an actual SFF piece. The only SF was background window dressing or downright stupid. The crowning achievement of the magazine was an idiotic novella about a gay waiter who traveled to Colonial times pretending to be an angel and getting the locals addicted to meth so he can take back Paul Revere’s silver spoons. A premise so stupid and insulting I wanted to toss my Kindle.

On the other hand, maybe we’ve misjudged these SF SJWs. Maybe they’re all just variant on the Chuck Tingle theme. Let’s face it, time-travelling gay waiters selling meth in colonial America is a pretty funny concept.

And then there is that moment when you realize that a) they’re serious, and, b) they genuinely think it is good. At this rate, Chuck Tingle is going to win a Hugo without requiring any Puppy assistance.


Great Man vs cliodynamics

A plethora of opinions are being expressed about the future of the Alt-Right in light of the God-Emperor-Ascendant’s disavowal. The Left has been emboldened; sensing a chink in the armor, the hasbaresque trolls are already out in force, doing what they always do, proclaiming inevitable victory and the imminent arrival of the worker’s paradise rainbow unitopia while attempting to demoralize their enemies by making absurd statements that push the current media Narrative.

But nothing has changed. Richard Spencer didn’t create the Alt-Right, he merely provided a nickname for an alternative right that has been around since William F. Buckley purged the John Birch Society. Hillary Clinton didn’t speak it into existence. Donald Trump won’t speak it out of existence.

Nothing has changed. Conservatism still hasn’t conserved anything. The wall still has not been built. The melting pot is still a self-serving immigrant myth. The United States is still a white nation founded by and for whites, as even Slate admitted yesterday. The Alt-Right will remain a potent and rising force throughout the West because the ebb and flow of historical patterns, patterns that scientists and historians developing Structural Dynamic Theory have traced back as far as ancient China and Rome, are still observably playing out through events today.

Consider what Yuji Aida wrote in the Chicago Tribune:

Americans are proud of their melting-pot heritage. But as blacks, Hispanics and Asians gradually come to outnumber whites, that ideal will fade. Like the Soviet Union today, the United States will have to deal with contentious ethnic groups demanding greater autonomy and even political independence. That could prove to be industrial America`s undoing. Many Americans, however, feign ignorance of the problem, partly because of the official ideology. The United States sees itself as a pluralistic, multi-ethnic society with a single national identity based on the principles of freedom and democracy. In fact, discrimination is rampant, but the illusion of equality is vital to maintain a sense of unity. Nonetheless, it is only a matter of time before U.S. minority groups espouse self-determination in some form. When that happens, the country may become ungovernable.

That was written not long after I returned from Japan, in 1991. The failure of the official ideology, the fictional nature of a “national identity” based on principles and propositions rather than genetics and language, was already obvious 25 years ago. As for the irrelevance of the individual actors, consider an article that I wrote back in 2004 about Tolstoy, Prechter, and socionomics:

It is easy to mistake Leo Tolstoy’s massive book, “War and Peace,” for a novel. It is not. Instead, it would better be considered the world’s longest satirical polemic, in the vein of Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal.” From beginning to end, Tolstoy’s classic work is intended to illustrate the arrogant incompetence of human understanding and the inability of human reason to explain even the simplest of social phenomena.

With unrelenting precision and distinct overtones of mockery, Tolstoy dissects the notion that men dictate events. In one specific example, he examines, with minute detail, the four specific orders Napoleon gave to his army prior to the battle of Borodino:

These dispositions, which are very obscure and confused if one allows oneself to regard the arrangements without religious awe of his genius, related to Napoleon’s orders to deal with four points – four different orders. Not one of these was, or could be, carried out …

And it was not Napoleon who directed the course of the battle, for none of his orders were executed and during the battle he did not know what was going on before him. So the way in which these people killed one another was not decided by Napoleon’s will but occurred independently of him, in accord with the will of hundreds of thousands of people who took part in the common action. It only seemed to Napoleon that it all took place by his will.

In the second epilogue, Tolstoy goes on to brutally abuse both specific and universal historians, demonstrating how their explanations of various historical events is not only inevitably contradictory, but often constructed on base premises that do not withstand a moment’s reflection. Tolstoy further underlines his case by the choice of the two heroes of the novel within the polemic, Pierre and Kutozov, both of whom achieve their respective dream of inner peace and Russian victory only by submitting their will to the great forces moving around them.

This is not, as one skeptic rather amusingly put it, “a reliance upon the inevitable forces of history and the methods of material production”. (That did make me laugh; though.) Marxism is the groundless and unquantifiable application of incorrect economic theory to the future. Cliodynamics is observing what has already happened and is happening today, then drawing rational conclusions about how the various patterns and cycles observed will play out next. At the moment, I’m reading Ultrasociety, by Peter Turchin. It is an excellent book, and although its primary subject matter is largely tangential to these patterns of history, a passage I read yesterday struck me as entirely apt.

There is a pattern that we see recurring throughout history, when a successful empire expands its borders so far that it becomes the biggest kid on the block. When survival is no longer at stake, selfish elites and other special interest groups capture the political agenda. The spirit that “we are all in the same boat” disappears and is replaced by a “winner take all” mentality. As the elites enrich themselves, the rest of the population is increasingly impoverished. Rampant inequality of wealth further corrodes cooperation. Beyond a certain point a formerly great empire becomes so dysfunctional that smaller, more cohesive neighbors begin tearing it apart. Eventually the capacity for cooperation declines to such a low level that barbarians can strike at the very heart of the empire without encountering significant resistance. But barbarians at the gate are not the real cause of imperial collapse. They are a consequence of the failure to sustain social cooperation.

There is more, considerably more, than this restatement of what John Glubb and Edward Gibbon and Polybius, and other historians have noted would appear to indicate. But the point is, the eventual significance of these events will be determined by how well they flow with the historical patterns, not the opinion of any one individual, not even the God-Emperor Ascendant himself. The fate of the Alt Right does not depend upon one of its media-christened figureheads, but upon its willingness to align itself with the observable patterns of history as they play out.

Because, as we know, our enemies are in the apocryphal position of King Canute, desperately attempting to hold back the waves with their false narratives and outdated theories about the way the world works. But everywhere, their narratives are failing. I just received translations of the 16 Points of the Alt-Right into Mandarin and Romanian last night; the Romanian translator added:

I recently got in contact with the ideas of alt-right. The logic behind it is clear since I am from Romania and I myself seen what happened to my country, even after it entered the European Union. It lost all its industries, even the strategic ones. Also, we lost much of the workforce to other countries. As alt-right correctly points “free trade” requires completely destroying the country. 

Being correct, and providing an operative, accurate predictive model upon which people can rely, will trump monkeys dancing in front of the media every single time.


Media discipline

Andrew Torba of Gab has it.

CNN reached out and was incredibly rude and unprofessional.

We simply let them know that it is our policy to record all phone interviews.

They then backed out and claimed they had to speak with the editor about it, skipped a 2nd call to discuss, and acted very unprofessionally.

As does Tila Tequila :

Msm keeps on contacting me for interviews about my Roman salute. I should tell them all to suck my nuts, faggots!

They are not your friend. They do not want to let you tell their story. They want you to play the part of the sacrificial victim of their pre-established narrative.

Figure out a policy that works for you. Then stick with it. Mine is straightforward enough:

  1. I only do TV/video with Stefan Molyneux. Otherwise, no TV/video.
  2. I only do radio shows with friendly hosts. As a general rule, no podcasts except as the occasional favor to someone on our side.
  3. Written interviews only. No telephone calls or in-person interviews.
Yes, I’ve done other things in the past. I learned what worked and what didn’t work. That’s how I developed this policy. The best way to reach people is to build your own platform, slowly and steadily. Then help others build theirs.

UPDATE: From Twitter: We now have the endgame of that media manipulation @Cernovich was mentioning. Thanks Spencer

President-elect Donald Trump disavowed an alt-right conference in Washington, D.C. over the weekend led by Richard Spencer that celebrated the election of Donald Trump.
Asked directly about the event that was widely covered by the mainstream media, Trump replied, “I condemn them. I disavow, and I condemn.”

Trump denied that he had energized the alt-right, but again disavowed the movement.

“I don’t want to energize the group, and I disavow the group,” Trump said. “It’s not a group I want to energize. And if they are energized I want to look into it and find out why.”

Optics matter. As I said, Richard is on a path to become the next David Duke, trotted out every time the media wants to discredit a Republican.

It makes no difference at all in the grand scheme of things, of course. The reason the Alt-Right is on the rise is not due to approval by maverick politicians, or because corrupt establishment figures denounce it, but as a result of the historical trends identified by Structural Demographic Theory, which is to say, elite overproduction, popular immiseration, immigration, and the fiscal crisis of the state. Both the God-Emperor’s ascendancy and the Alt-Right are what appear to be inevitable consequences of these things; his approval or disapproval of us is as irrelevant as our approval or disapproval of him.

UPDATE: In fairness to Richard, he’s already claimed a Politico scalp:

National editor at Politico Michael Hirsh resigned after publishing the home addresses of alt-right figurehead Richard Spencer Tuesday morning and advocating for serious violence.

Hey, maybe we should adopt a new slogan. How about… Democrats are the REAL Nazis. That should totally work.