Milo discusses the “Alt-Right”

There are a few who are viewing this appearance as Milo’s attempt to redefine the Alt-Right. They are completely missing the point. This is a masterclass on how to work the mainstream media. Never forget that dealing with the media is an intrinsically rhetorical exercise, NOT a dialectic one. One does not define anything, much less a broad-spectrum political perspective, in a few minutes on live television.

There is a time and place for precision and dialectic. Appearing in front of a three-man discredit-and-disqualify panel on CNBC is not one of them.



Harambe

@Harambe followed you

Never used to tweet, now I tweet for Harambe
I was really shallow now I’m deep for Harambe.


Let’s just be humble.

Speaking of Twitter, if you ever want to know why I married Spacebunny, this should suffice to explain it.


Space Bunnyopoulos ‏@Spacebunnyday

Feminists should worry less about being triggered and more about being harpooned.


Gondor’s choice

John C. Wright laments what he sees as internecine warfare on the Right in the place of a unified effort against the Left:

The Dems are merely the political arm of the darkness.

It was the Reds who invented the idea of Critical Theory, that is, accuse Christendom of each and every imperfection imaginable, especially in areas, such as race relations or the equality of sexes, where the criticism cannot exist outside Christendom. It was done to weaken confidence in Western institutions, especially the Church, the family, the marketplace, the townhall, the entertainment industry, the courts, the academy, and the press.

Over the decades, the press was captured partly and then fully, then the academy (which is now merely a seminary for Leftism), then the courts of law (which began systematically to undermine rule of law), and Hollywood (Sen McCarthy was right, and the Hollywood ten were commies) and then townhall (which was taken over by a donor caste of Leftwing millionaires, with whom Trump broke ranks and turned against).

Wall Street was basically bought and broken to the whip after the sabotage by the government of the housing market, the student loan industry, the motor car industry, and health care practice. The marketplace is firmly under Leftist control, which is ironic, since the millionaires learned that by funding politicians who denounce them, the millionaires can maintain their wealth and power and suppress free market competition.

The family was successfully smashed to bits among the inner city blacks, American Indians living on reservations, and poor whites. No fault divorce is to blame, and the normalization and celebration of sodomy is the victory lap.

The Anglican and Episcopalian denominations have spat in the face of Christ and embraced Caesar, and kneel to give oral sexual favors to the homosex lobby, so these congregations had declared their fealty to antichrist. The Roman Catholic Church, a fair and strong fortress, still holds out, but the press has decided on a policy of pretending Pope Francis is one of them, and many an unwary reader, including Catholics who should know better, are deceived.

The darkness is on the brink of absolute victory. The last few lamps are fluttering and guttering and the oil is scarce.

And there is still no organized opposition to any of this.

For a time, I had some hope in the voters electrified by Trump, but, like the Tea Party, both the mainstream conservatives and the newer movements and the treasonous establishment GOP have decided to fritter away their energy attacking and provoking attacks from each other. Instead of riding to the aid of Gondor, the Riders of Rohan decided this was the best moment to loot Minas Tirith.

What I think the estimable Mr. Wright has failed to observe is that the ideological Right has turned out to have considerably less intellectual integrity than most of us previously believed it to possess. Who would have imagined even one year ago that relatively high-profile conservatives such as Mark Levin, Bill Kristol, Ross Douthat, Russell Moore, and George Will would openly turn against the Republican candidate for President? (I know, Levin has since done a 180, but still.) Who would have thought that media conservatives such as (((Jonah Goldberg))), (((Cathy Young))), (((Jeff Goldstein))) and (((Ben Shapiro))) would take orders from Hillary Clinton, follow the lead of the Washington Post, NPR, the Atlantic, and the New Yorker, and launch a concerted assault on the ideological Right?

I suggest Mr. Wright has the analogy wrong. Gondor is under siege and divided, and in his despair, Denethor has thrown in with Mordor and Isengard and sent half his army to march with the orcs, the Uruk-Hai, and the Haradrim against Rohan and the remnants of the West.

The transition from ideological politics to identity politics is difficult to understand for many and even more difficult to accept for some, particularly those whose identities are complicated and whose connections are mixed. But that doesn’t change the reality that the transition is upon us, is in increasing effect, and cannot be stopped or denied.

In fact, the only reason Hillary Clinton and the Left are still even in the game today is due to the 60-million strong invasion of the West by the orcs and the Haradrim. Two-thirds of whites support Trump. If the men of Gondor want to survive, if they want to defeat the armies of Mordor, they have to a) stop expecting Rohan to accept their outmoded and self-destructive lead, b) stop attacking Rohan for focusing on the primary issues rather than their preferred targets, c) focus on fighting the actual enemy.

Here is the essential strategic point. Even if you prefer ideological politics, the historical statistics, the polls, and the politics of the countries from which the immigrants have come all make it very clear that the only way to win ideologically is to get on board with identity politics.

I’ve been reading Charles Oman’s incredible History of the Peninsular War. It’s an incredibly detailed history; I’m still in the middle of Volume I of VII. One of the things that struck me most in my reading so far is that the most important French advantage over the Spanish was their artillery, as several of their sieges of Spanish towns failed for want of enough guns. It was also hard for all three armies, French, Spanish, and British, to come by enough horses and mules to transport the artillery; occasionally guns on both sides were left behind due to insufficient animals. However, despite the courage of the Spanish irregulars, who did not hesitate to try to defend mountain passes and river crossings against much larger French forces, I saw no sign that they ever focused their attacks on the horses pulling the guns in order to neutralize the element that posed the most significant danger to them.

In case the historical analogy is not sufficiently clear, immigration and diversity are the big guns of the Left. Without them, they cannot win.

In light of that, conservatives and independents must now choose for what and with whom they will stand: a diverse USA, globalism, and the Left, or a white America, nationalism, and the Alt-Right. There are no other meaningful options.


An Alt-Right Reagan?

If Ronald Reagan were alive today, I wonder if he would still be a conservative.

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”


Ronald Reagan
address to the annual meeting of the Phoenix Chamber of Commerce
Mar. 30, 1967

We’re already at that point. At this point, our children already don’t know what it is like to live in a white country, and our grandchildren are likely to learn what it is like to have to fight a civil war.

That being said, Ronald Reagan is one of the individuals responsible for the USA’s current predicament due to a) signing the California no-fault divorce law and b) the 1986 Immigration Amnesty. As conservatives are wont to do, he stood up to the external enemy and surrendered to the internal enemy. As internal enemies are always more dangerous, he failed to fight when it counted most.

So, yes, upon further reflection, he probably would still be a conservative, attacking the Alt-Right for seeking to do what he wouldn’t.


Convergence at AirBnB

What a pity the stock is not public, because it’s time to short AirBNB. They are no longer in the business of providing connecting people who need places to stay with people who have places to rent, they are now converged and in the business of social justice:

Airbnb has been under fire lately for instances of racism and discrimination exhibited by some hosts on the home-sharing platform. In order to combat that, Airbnb is making several positive changes to the platform and its company policies, Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky sent in an email to hosts and guests this morning.

This includes guaranteeing short-term bookings for people who have been discriminated against, deemphasizing the use of user photos, blocking out availability if a host claims a space is taken when it really isn’t and working to increase the number of Instant Book listings, which don’t require hosts to approve specific guests, to one million by the beginning of 2017.

“Discrimination is the opposite of belonging, and its existence on our platform jeopardizes this core mission,” Chesky wrote. “Bias and discrimination have no place on Airbnb, and we have zero tolerance for them. Unfortunately, we have been slow to address these problems, and for this I am sorry. I take responsibility for any pain or frustration this has caused members of our community. We will not only make this right; we will work to set an example that other companies can follow.”

Airbnb’s issues with racism date back to at least late last year, when a Harvard study showed that renters with black-sounding names were less likely to receive a booking through the site. Then, in June, an Airbnb host in North Carolina canceled a booking on a black person and sent her a slew of racist insults. Shortly after that incident, Chesky said that racism is not allowed on the platform and Airbnb permanently banned the host.

Later that month, the Congressional Black Caucus urged Airbnb to take further action in addressing the issues of racism and discrimination on the company’s platform, citing how Title II of 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination in places like hotels and motels on the basis of race, color, religion or national origin.

Today, Laura Murphy, former head of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Washington D.C. office, laid out Airbnb’s game plan for tackling instances of racism and discrimination on the platform. Airbnb has been working with Murphy since June to ensure that the company is doing everything it can to fight racism.

“Even as the institutions have been invaded and coopted in the interests of social justice, they have been rendered unable to fulfill their primary functions. This is the great internal contradiction that the SJWs will never be able to positively resolve, just as the Soviet communists were never able to resolve the contradiction of socialist calculation that brought down their economy and their empire 69 years after Ludwig von Mises first pointed it out. One might call it the Impossibility of Social Justice Convergence; no man can serve two masters, and no institution can effectively serve two different functions. The more an institution converges towards the highest abstract standard of social and distributive justice, the less it is able to perform its primary function.”
– from SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police


These guys are killing it

I have to admit, I would ABSOLUTELY vote for Rodrigo Duterte. I mean, while I personally prefer legalization, if you’re going to fight a war on drugs, simply shooting the drug users and drug dealers does strike me as considerably more effective than forcing your entire population to move to credit cards and arresting their property any time they have more cash on hand than you dictate.

Between Duterte, Putin, and Trump, we would appear to be entering the age of the Alpha President.


Correcting the Churchians

One of Jerry Pournelle’s readers points out that there are considerably more lessons from the Bible that can be applied to the question of immigration than are generally applied by Churchians who carefully cherry-pick a single element from a verse they otherwise ignore:

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

“St. Paul may have been an optimist.” – Jerry Pournelle

Or Galatians 3:28 is being grotesquely and disingenuously wrenched out of context to attempt to justify secular social and political goals and ideas it never had the slightest connection with.  Coincidentally enough this verse and a few others before and after were the Epistle reading a few Sundays ago at our church.  Since you appear to be using the Berean Literal Bible I’ll continue with it:

Galatians 3:26 teaches, “For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.”

Galatians 3:27 continues, “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”

And Galatians 3:29 followed up with, “Now if you are of Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, heirs according to the promise.”

Taken together this very clearly refers to a fellowship of all Christian believers.   It certainly can never be used under any circumstances to justify an unlimited influx of non-Christians into any Christian land.  And it can’t even be used at all unless a theocracy is set up.

Alternately we could go ahead and add numerical references to each word in the Bible, or even each letter.  This will make it still easier for people to indulge that favorite pass time of using the Bible to justify their personal positions.  As the late Sam Francis observed on the occasion of the Southern Baptist Convention’s apology for slavery, the Bible endorses human slavery and does not prohibit it.  Even John the Baptist and the Apostle Paul advised slaves to be content in their situations.

But this being Sunday, I’ll quote one another applicable Bible teaching, this one on the question of the extremely wealthy welcoming strangers while imposing all the costs of their hospitality involuntarily on their poor neighbors:

2 Samuel 12:1-6

The Lord sent Nathan to David. When he came to him, he said, “There were two men in a certain town, one rich and the other poor. The rich man had a very large number of sheep and cattle, but the poor man had nothing except one little ewe lamb he had bought. He raised it, and it grew up with him and his children. It shared his food, drank from his cup and even slept in his arms. It was like a daughter to him. 


“Now a traveler came to the rich man, but the rich man refrained from taking one of his own sheep or cattle to prepare a meal for the traveler who had come to him. Instead, he took the ewe lamb that belonged to the poor man and prepared it for the one who had come to him.”


David burned with anger against the man and said to Nathan, “As surely as the Lord lives, the man who did this must die!  He must pay for that lamb four times over, because he did such a thing and had no pity.”

This seems appropriate for the many persons who enjoy the large profits of low cost immigrant labor – frequently illegals – while involuntarily imposing all the social costs onto the broader community.  Mark Zuckerberg and his H1B programmers come to mind here.

As is ALWAYS the case every time the Churchian case is examined, it turns out to not only have destructive and diabolical consequences, but it is obviously theologically incorrect, and all too often, directly anti-Biblical. In fact, as far as immigration goes, this is merely scratching the surface of the total historical falsity of the Churchian pro-immigration case.

Churchianity is a series of lies stacked upon other lies. I will not go so far as to say it is the religion of the Antichrist, although it carries a distinctly deceitful odor that is in line with various prophecies of that abomination. But there is no doubt whatsoever that it is anti-Biblical and anti-Christian.

UPDATE: I forgot to answer a question posed by Jerry:

We’ll assume it is possible for the sake of discussion, but can we all agree that it will be very difficult and expensive to deport them all, and the benefits of deporting all 11 million are likely to be lower than the costs?

No. It may be difficult and expensive, but it will definitely be worth the cost. And then we can start on however many are necessary to restore the promised pre-1965 demographic levels.


Second Law of SJW in action

SJWs always double down.

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
Oh and apparently, yesterday, according to leading racists, I called for the genocide of white folks! Sorry, whites. We had a good run.

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
LOOK PEOPLE I JUST FOUND OUT I CALLED FOR WHITE GENOCIDE I DIDN’T KNOW I WOULD HAVE TO PLAN THE WHOLE THING TOO


John Scalzi ‏@scalzi 
I mean, this is my schedule today:


7am-9: Novel writing
10am: Post big idea
12pm: Phone meeting
1pm: WHITE GENOCIDE
2pm: Nap



It’s packed!

But this was definitely my favorite.

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
Just read a hilarious thread on Facebook, of people slagging an imaginary version of me. I “liked” the original post, of course.

Of course. See, when you “like” people insulting you, and when you pretend to laugh at their contempt, that totally negates it. SECRET KING WINS AGAIN! If you want to know why it’s so easy to predict the behavior of SJWs like McRapey, read SJWAL.

Someone made a few alterations. I tweeted it to #BlackLivesMatter. This promises to be amusing.

UPDATE: In a comment on his own post which consists of a series of tweets concerning his humorous approach to genocide, John Scalzi would like to set a few things straight.

Since inevitably some poor humorless racist schmuck still won’t understand:

1. Hey! I’m not for genocide of any sort!

2. As such, no argument for genocide, “white” or otherwise, is an acceptable one.

3. If one were to make an argument for the genocide of white people, pointing at the existence of horrible white racist schmucks and all the horrible white racist schmucky things they do would likely be the best possible grounding for that argument.

4. However, “best” does not mean “good,”; it would still not be an acceptable argument for the genocide of white people.

5. Nor would I personally make it.

6. You dim horrible racist fucks.

And if these horrible racist schmucks are still unconvinced after that point, fuck ’em, it’s not my fault their heads are full of misfiring neurons.

With that out of the way:

a) Mallet is out and I will err on the side of Malleting.

b) If you’re planning to make this a Very Serious Thread about genocide, white or otherwise, you’re probably not going to have a good time. Likewise if you demand other people do your Racism 101 for you. May I suggest that the topics for this thread are, one, the eminently mockable concept of white genocide as thought upon by racist schmucks, two, my ineptness at it, three, pointing and laughing at racists. If you try to make it about something else you are probably not going to have a good time, and I will likely mock and/or Mallet you for it.

c) If the thread becomes tiresome early — as it might! — I may just simply close it down because I have other things to do today.

Okay, there you go. Have fun.

I don’t know about you, but I can only conclude that he’s racist. And a little bit rapey.


Sneaky, Mr. Media Guy

“On body language, the two diverged as well. Mrs. Clinton was far more likely to… nod along.”

I’ll bet. It’s called “Parkinson’s Disease”. The New York Times reports on the Presidential Forum at the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum.

“I did exactly what I should have done. Always have, and always will,” said Hillary Clinton, nodding vigorously. “Now, can someone tell me whatever the Hell it was I did?”

All right, I may have edited that last bit. Anyhow, it is interesting to see that Hillary managed to stay on her feet without collapsing and provide answers that were at least tangentially relevant to the questions.