Tag: decline and fall

Not paying for phone > honor-killing

It’s rather telling that whites get more upset about a white father cutting off his daughter in response to her decision to attend prom with a black man than they ever do about Muslim fathers honor-killing their daughters. If Daddy had only had the foresight to first declare his newfound Muslim faith, he could have buried her in the front lawn and news of his arrest would never have made the national news, much less the international news.

Anna said that though Phillip is just a friend, he’s also ‘really funny’ and ‘super cute’, so she snatched him up as her prom date.  Unfortunately, Anna’s dad — whom she says has always been vocally racist — saw the snaps online and wasted no time sharing his disappointment with her in an incredibly abusive manner.

Anna explained to BuzzFeed that she and her dad have had a strained relationship for years. Her parents are divorced, and though she lived with him briefly as a child, she’s been in her mom’s house since her early teens.  His tirade, however, seems to have gone beyond any uncomfortable words they’d shared in the past.

Responding to his initial texts, Anna wrote: ‘I went to prom with a black guy so that’s a problem … racist much.’

‘Yes I am,’ her dad wrote back unabashedly before continuing with the grammatically incorrect pronouncement: ‘Your dead to me. Don’t ever contact me again we are through,’ he added. ‘Go ahead be a F***IN wh*** leave me out of it.

He also told her that he was cancelling her cell phone and her car insurance, to which she replied, ‘I didn’t do anything wrong.’ ‘Shut the f*** up you have no right to talk to me anymore. Go live with the F***IN n*****s. Your pictures are already off my walls. You can go to hell. What the f*** is wrong with you? … You want to mingle with Subhumans I’ll treat you accordingly.’

Anna knew of her father’s opinions, though she still found it ‘incredibly sad’ when he reacted so vitriolically. ‘He has told me that if I ever dated a black guy that I will and would be dead to him,’ she told BuzzFeed. ‘I stood my ground for what I believe in.’

It’s really admirable that Anna is so willing to stand her ground for what she believes in. And it’s a sign of character that she is so willing to pay for her own phone, car insurance, and college education.

Of course, the father was foolish to actually put his feelings in writing, or to imagine that the young woman wouldn’t immediately rush to social media to virtue-signal to the world at his expense.

But regardless of what you think of Angry Racist Daddy, and whether you agree with his decision to cut off his daughter or not, freedom of association is a fundamental human right. Exercising that right has its consequences, of course, but it remains a basic human right nevertheless.

The sad thing isn’t that Daddy isn’t going to pay for his little mudshark-to-be’s higher education; given her observably poor judgment she’ll probably be better off if she doesn’t put herself in debt for a useless degree. The sad thing is that even if this young woman is eventually beaten to death by one of her future paramours, no one will ever learn anything from the entire debacle.

We are living in an age where everything just happens for no reason at all, and to even notice patterns and connections is considered immoral and the sign of a deplorable character.

The practical problem here is that ethnocentrism doesn’t merely exist for a reason, it is increasingly apparent that it is an important hallmark of a strong, confident, healthy, and growing society. If you examine the arc of civilizational rises and declines, one thing that is readily apparent is that the more strongly homogeneous a society is, the earlier in the arc of the societal life cycle it is. This, of course, is completely contrary to the equalitarian idea that a decline in ethnic self-preference is indicative of social progress, but then, equalitarians are wrong about almost everything, so it should come as no surprise that they have this completely backward as well.

The multicultural trend was also manifested in a variety of legislation that followed the civil rights acts of the 1960s, and in the 1990s the Clinton administration made the encouragement of diversity one of its major goals. The contrast with the past is striking. The Founding Fathers saw diversity as a reality and as a problem: hence the national motto, e pluribus unum, chosen by a committee of the Continental Congress consisting of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams. Later political leaders who also were fearful of the dangers of racial, sectional, ethnic, economic, and cultural diversity (which, indeed, produced the largest war of the century between 1815 and 1914), responded to the call of “bring us together,” and made the promotion of national unity their central responsibility. “The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing as a nation at all,” warned Theodore Roosevelt, “would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities.” In the 1990s, however, the leaders of the United States have not only permitted that but assiduously promoted the diversity rather than the unity of the people they govern.


The leaders of other countries have, as we have seen, at times attempted to disavow their cultural heritage and shift the identity of their country from one civilization to another. In no case to date have they succeeded and they have instead created schizophrenic torn countries. The American multiculturalists similarly reject their country’s cultural heritage. Instead of attempting to identify the United States with another civilization, however, they wish to create a country of many civilizations, which is to say a country not belonging to any civilization and lacking a cultural core. History shows that no country so constituted can long endure as a coherent society.
– Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations, 1998

Not really a problem

Apparently we’re all supposed to be terrified by “de-policing”, or in other words, the police actually showing restraint rather than immediately shooting everything and everyone in the vicinity because someone made them feel a little nervous:

Such factors have “had the effect of ‘de-policing’ in law enforcement agencies across the country, which assailants have exploited.”

The report cited an example in which an officer was slammed to the ground and beaten but refused to shoot the assailant “for fear of community backlash.”

“The officer informed the superintendent that the officer chose not to shoot because the officer didn’t want his/her ‘family or department to have to go through the scrutiny the next day on the national news,’ ” the study said.

Once you understand that the police are neither there to stop crime nor protect you, your reaction to de-policing is pretty much the exact opposite of the one the media wants you to have.

It really isn’t anyone’s problem if a few more gang members shoot each other than they would have or not. The police are never going to solve that problem. It’s like worry about whether someone else puts a band-aid on a gaping wound. Put the band-aid on or not, it’s simply not going to make any difference in the end.

Crime or no crime, who is going into diversity city anyhow?

Mailvox: A church, converged

This is what it looks like. Step by step, the world reels in one congregation after another, simply because the members would not abide by the Scripture.

The church that I grew up in was a place that I loved. My family spent a lot of time volunteering at various functions to help the place run right: setting up for lunch after the service, helping pass out food at funeral services, spending time getting it set up for vacation bible school, etc. A lot of good memories were made in that place that are still cherished to this day. Then came time to go away to college and I spent less time at that church, simply stopping in when I came home.

Looking back and thinking about the things that Vox has brought up, I realize all the signs of a growing convergence were there that we didn’t see. It started with the little things that we went along with because, how much could it hurt right? We no longer sang just the old hymns, and moved onto a mix of contemporary worship songs. Then there were no more hymns. Heaven forbid if the sound system crashed as the congregation would just have to stand there in shock and silence now. Then came the eradication of the clauses in the Bylaws about prohibiting members of the Masons to be elders, because that was simply “an old, archaic thing that didn’t matter anymore”. Then came the church vote on installing women deacons and elders, as both of them had “just done so much for the church”. Then came the hiring of a “new, dynamic pastor” who was certainly going to revitalize the numbers of people that were for some odd reason starting to drift to other churches. He certainly wasn’t Reformed, but that really didn’t matter did it? During the meeting with him before the vote, he was amazed that there was this document called the Heidelberg Catechism and had never heard of it, but promised to go read it when he was able. And finally there came the raiding of the saving account that the giving of the faithful had stored up over a hundred and twenty five years. Now it was all needed to build a “community outreach center” for the “vibrant growth of the unchurched” that would be our new church building and revitalize the area to new heights for God.

Now, I drive through the streets of my hometown out towards the crossroads of the highway to look at that God-forsaken temple to man’s arrogance. It is a grand, new building designed by some snooty architectural firm that is pretty much a mirror image of a movie theater the next town over. No real identifying marks on it, unless you drive around back and stumble upon where there is a cross. Or I guess if you can decode the “Faith Center” or whatever it is called now, and recognize it as a church. I have snuck in once or twice to see the new reality, just to sate my curiosity. After the light show and the semi-professional band is done playing, there is a fifteen minute self-help service that tells us how good we are and cherished we are. People are encouraged to bring their own Bibles, though I can’t see why, as there is no mention of God’s Holy Writ during the service. Must be for show. Or maybe something to rest your gourmet coffee on so as not to stain the new carpet.

Antifa and the unamenable authority

Antifa is upset about the fact that the Alt-Right is both a) law-abiding and b) working closely with the police to disrupt their criminal and terrorist activities.

Recently, Denver’s antifascists kicked off what will hopefully be an aggressive campaign against alt-right infiltration of their community. During a demonstration against Turning Point USA and their guest speaker, Ivan Throne, five antifascists were arrested, at least three of whom spent the night in jail. Independent media group Unicorn Riot was there to capture the unfolding events.

As part of their coverage and analysis, UR mentioned a convoluted tangle of associations between the police and the conference attendees, which vaguely hints at underlying conflicts of interest for law enforcement officials who defend pro-Trump individuals and organizations.

The Denver Police Department appears to, at the very least, have a vested interest in pushing the agenda of the Trump administration, and therefore its supporters. But this is no dimly-lit conspiracy orchestrated behind closed doors; this is the expected, natural course of events during times of proletarian insurgency and fascist uprising, demonstrated throughout the 20th century. To understand this dynamic, the following essay will vivisect what will be referred to hereafter as “essential collusion,” a repressive form of symbiosis between the state, a far-right entity, and the public supporters of both.

It might seem a bit ironic that the state-worshippers of the Left are attempting to complain about the state actually fulfilling its primary role of maintaining public order, but then, if they were intellectually coherent, they wouldn’t be antifa. And nothing upsets leftists and SJWs like the knowledge that the authorities aren’t running cover for them.

They’re particularly concerned about Ivan Throne and Violent Solutions, because they know that they can’t operate effectively if they are systematically unmasked and identified.

Most recently, Ivan has unveiled a project entitled “Violent Solutions,” which at first analysis appears to merely be a database through which antifascists will be identified and reported to the FBI. Although mostly empty bluster (like everything Ivan does), this eventuality presents a unique threat to Antifa in Trump’s America: this is a concrete example of essential collusion between the state and the far-right. Communication between America’s police, military, and intelligence community is at an all-time high, with various state organs sharing information even with completely unrelated sister forces. Arrests are made public, with the suspect’s full name handed out to multiple agencies and, most importantly, to the alt-right, whose main weapon continues to be the threat of doxxing. 

It’s cute that they think “the threat of doxxing” is our main weapon. Sure, doxxing is probably sufficient to get Mommy and Daddy to cut them off, or for their university to terminate their part-time teaching contract, but that’s mostly projection on their part. It’s also amusing that they can’t resist their urge to minimize and discredit even while trying to paint the subject as a dire and pressing threat.

No doubt the police will be interested to know that antifa has concluded that, like Black Lives Matter, they have no option but to wage war against the police.

There is no plausible route forward that does not include, not just resisting, but actively opposing the efforts of the police. Not only are they vocally supported by the regime, but the very authority with which they simultaneously abet the alt-right while restraining social movements is granted by the state itself. Their monopoly on violence, their access to military equipment, their communication with intelligence agencies, and their carte blanche regarding brutality are symptomatic of their ultimate function: maintaining the status quo.

Most “science” is fake science

Yet another incident demonstrating why it is so amusing when people argue that religion is false and the supernatural does not exist because science:

The journal Tumor Biology is retracting 107 research papers after discovering that the authors faked the peer review process. This isn’t the journal’s first rodeo. Late last year, 58 papers were retracted from seven different journals— 25 came from Tumor Biology for the same reason.

It’s possible to fake peer review because authors are often asked to suggest potential reviewers for their own papers. This is done because research subjects are often blindingly niche; a researcher working in a sub-sub-field may be more aware than the journal editor of who is best-placed to assess the work.

But some journals go further and request, or allow, authors to submit the contact details of these potential reviewers. If the editor isn’t aware of the potential for a scam, they then merrily send the requests for review out to fake e-mail addresses, often using the names of actual researchers. And at the other end of the fake e-mail address is someone who’s in on the game and happy to send in a friendly review.

Fake peer reviewers often “know what a review looks like and know enough to make it look plausible,” said Elizabeth Wager, editor of the journal Research Integrity & Peer Review. But they aren’t always good at faking less obvious quirks of academia: “When a lot of the fake peer reviews first came up, one of the reasons the editors spotted them was that the reviewers responded on time,” Wager told Ars. Reviewers almost always have to be chased, so “this was the red flag. And in a few cases, both the reviews would pop up within a few minutes of each other.”

All of the arguments about the presumed reliability of science are ridiculous and easily shown to be false. Science is no more “self-correcting” than accounting. Peer review is more commonly known as “proofreading” by the rest of the publishing industry and is not even theoretically a means of ensuring accuracy or correctness. And scientists are observably less trustworthy than nearly anyone except lawyers, politicians, and used car salesmen; at least prostitutes are honest about their pursuit of “grants” and “funding”.

These days, the scientific process is mainly honored in the breach by professsional, credentialed scientists. And we have a word for testable, reliable science. That word is “engineering”.

Ce ne sont pas l’économie

The global elite will fall in the end. The global elite can claim that l’économie est nous all they want, but it isn’t and it never has been.

The world is run by an international elite that lives in a rarified world of seemingly boundless power and luxury. Though the members of this elite consider their own power and luxury to be completely legitimate, it is not. It is the product of a system that’s rigged to benefit them while everybody else languishes in declining small cities and provincial towns, eking out a dreary existence, toiling away their lives in menial service-sector jobs or scraping by on disability checks while seeking out a modicum of fleeting joy in the dumbstruck haze of a painkiller high.

Unless something fundamental changes, the gap separating these worlds will only increase, economically, culturally, and psychologically. Republicans show every sign of continuing to pursue policies that actively make the economic problems worse. Centrist Democrats, meanwhile, appear to be both unwilling to propose a sweeping critique of the outlook and policies that got us to this point in the first place and inclined to dismiss the populist anger building all around us as an expression of atavistic prejudice.

This cannot last. At this rate, make no mistake: The global elite will fall.

Their parasite economy of finance-based ownership of real world property and produce rests entirely upon the false claims it generates upon the real economy. And all it takes to destroy the parasite economy is the mass refusal to recognize its claims, many of which are already known to be completely fictitious. See: the mortgage title scandal of 2008 onwards.

The parasite economy is already killing its host. It is like a drunken vampire who is too intoxicated to stop draining his victim. And once the host collapses, its component parts will turn on the parasites with a vengeance.

This isn’t a failure of capitalism, this is a tripartite failure of usury, fraud, and fundamental morality. The Alt-Right Revolution cometh.

Oh, those knuckleheads

It’s just a pity that a few knuckleheads have to play the fool and ruin it for everybody:

A recent string of robberies on BART trains took a frightening turn when dozens of juveniles swarmed an Oakland station over the weekend and commandeered a train car, forcing passengers to hand over bags and cell phones and leaving at least two with head injuries, witnesses told the transit agency.

The incident — the first of its kind in recent memory — occurred around 9:30 p.m. Saturday at Coliseum Station.

According to a police officials, witnesses said 40 to 60 juveniles flooded the station, jumped the fare gates and rushed to the second-story train platform. Some of the robbers apparently held open the doors of a Dublin-bound train car while others streamed inside, confronting and robbing and in some cases beating riders.

The juveniles “committed multiple strong-arm robberies of bags and cell phones,” said a police summary prepared after the incident. “At least two victims suffered head/facial injuries requiring medical attention.”

Remember, diversity is our strength. It’s very, very important not to stop telling yourself that. Also, slavery.

They should have sunk the ships

Not only would fewer people have drowned, but slavery would not have been reinstituted in northern Africa:

It is widely known that the U.S.-led NATO intervention to topple Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 resulted in a power vacuum that has allowed terror groups like ISIS to gain a foothold in the country.

Despite the destructive consequences of the 2011 invasion, the West is currently taking a similar trajectory with regard to Syria. Just as the Obama administration excoriated Gaddafi in 2011, highlighting his human rights abuses and insisting he must be removed from power to protect the Libyan people, the Trump administration is now pointing to the repressive policies of Bashar al-Assad in Syria and warning his regime will soon come to an end — all in the name of protecting Syrian civilians.

But as the U.S. and its allies fail to produce legal grounds for their recent air strike – let alone provide concrete evidence to back up their claims Assad was responsible for a deadly chemical attack last week – more hazards of invading foreign countries and removing their heads of state are emerging.

This week, new findings revealed another unintended consequence of “humanitarian intervention”: the growth of the human slave trade.

The Guardian reports that while “violence, extortion and slave labor” have been a reality for people trafficked through Libya in the past, the slave trade has recently expanded. Today, people are selling other human beings out in the open.


“The latest reports of ‘slave markets’ for migrants can be added to a long list of outrages [in Libya],” said Mohammed Abdiker, head of operation and emergencies for the International Office of Migration, an intergovernmental organization that promotes “humane and orderly migration for the benefit of all,” according to its website. “The situation is dire. The more IOM engages inside Libya, the more we learn that it is a vale of tears for all too many migrants.”

The Law of Unintended Consequences is always going to haunt the foolish and those unable to grasp that actions always have consequences. And the do-gooders and humanitarians need to be held accountable for the unintended consequences of their actions, particularly those that are predictable.

Those who proudly welcomed refugees are absolutely responsible for slavery now. They are not good and virtuous people, they are stupid and evil people and they need to be regarded as such. And it’s a bit ironic that it was America’s first black president who is chiefly responsible for spreading slavery around the world.

When the migrant flotilla began, I immediately said that the boats and ships carrying migrants should be sunk as soon as they enter international waters. For this, I was decried by more than a few, even on the Right, as a monster. Just remember, then, that all of you who took the “moral” position of not sinking the ships bear at least some responsibility for both the invasion of Europe and the reinstitution of slavery. Preventing the use of lethal violence in defense of national borders is akin to trying to stop doctors from cutting into human bodies with knives and lasers. Never mind that they’re only doing so to remove cancerous tumors that will kill the patient.

Restoring the deconstructed West

The American Interest chronicles the sudden, and unexpected, decline of the West:

The problem confronting the West today stems not from a shortage of power, but rather from the inability to build consensus on the shared goals and interests in whose name that power ought to be applied. The growing instability in the international system is not, as some argue, due to the rise of China as an aspiring global power, the resurgence of Russia as a systemic spoiler, the aspirations of Iran for regional hegemony, or the rogue despotism of a nuclear-armed North Korea; the rise and relative decline of states is nothing new, and it doesn’t necessarily entail instability. The West’s problem today is also not mainly the result of the economic decline of the United States or the European Union, for while both have had to deal with serious economic issues since the 2008 meltdown, they remain the two largest economies in the world, whose combined wealth and technological prowess are unmatched. Nor is the increasing global instability due to a surge in Islamic jihadism across the globe, for despite the horrors the jihadists have wrought upon the peoples of the Middle East and North Africa, and the attendant anxiety now pervading Europe and America, they have nowhere near the capabilities needed to confront great powers.

The problem, rather, is the West’s growing inability to agree on how it should be defined as a civilization. At the core of the deepening dysfunction in the West is the self-induced deconstruction of Western culture and, with it, the glue that for two centuries kept Europe and the United States at the center of the international system. The nation-state has been arguably the most enduring and successful idea that Western culture has produced. It offers a recipe to achieve security, economic growth, and individual freedom at levels unmatched in human history. This concept of a historically anchored and territorially defined national homeland, having absorbed the principles of liberal democracy, the right to private property and liberty bound by the rule of law, has been the core building block of the West’s global success and of whatever “order” has ever existed in the so-called international order. Since 1945 it has been the most successful Western “export” across the globe, with the surge of decolonization driven by the quintessentially American precept of the right to self-determination of peoples, a testimony to its enduring appeal. Though challenged by fascism, Nazism, and communism, the West emerged victorious, for when confronted with existential danger, it defaulted to shared, deeply held values and the fervent belief that what its culture and heritage represented were worth fighting, and if necessary even dying, to preserve. The West prevailed then because it was confident that on balance it offered the best set of ideas, values, and principles for others to emulate.

Today, in the wake of decades of group identity politics and the attendant deconstruction of our heritage through academia, the media, and popular culture, this conviction in the uniqueness of the West is only a pale shadow of what it was a mere half century ago. It has been replaced by elite narratives substituting shame for pride and indifference to one’s own heritage for patriotism.

Western civilization is a consequence of three things: The European nations, Christianity, and the Graeco-Roman legacy of philosophy and law. To restore it, anything and everything that stands in the way of those three things has to go.

The elite narratives that are designed to subvert and undermine the three pillars of the West must be rejected. These include “civil rights”, “civic nationalism”, “social justice”, “equality”, and “Judeo-Christianity”, “feminism”, and “racism”.

One of the challenges is that many people who generally support Western civilization nevertheless support one or more of these elite narratives in the misguided opinion that it benefits their identity in the long term. This is why women pursue higher education that leaves them barren because it is “good for women”, blacks pursue expansions of the welfare system because it is “good for blacks”, Mexicans fight English-only laws because it is “good for Spanish-speakers”, Italians and Irish pursue religious pluralism because it is “good for Catholics” and why Jews attempt to change national population demographics because it is “good for the Jews”.

In each case, the group’s perception of what benefits them is short-sighted, and in the long term, wrong. And, if their objectives stand in the way of what strengthens the European nations, Christianity, and the Graeco-Roman legacy, they have to be defeated, and if necessary, expelled from the West. This is what the Alt-Right ultimately stands for: the survival and restoration of the West. This is what logic, truth, science, and history all dictate. And upon this, everything from Netflix and smartphones and freedom of conscience and the rule of law to the ability to flush toilets in your house ultimately depends.

This is why I don’t blink or back down when people call me racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-semitic, or anything else. Because doing so necessarily makes them anti-West, anti-Christian, and anti-White, and I will choose the historical reality of the white Christian West over whatever bizarre, dysfunctional dystopia they imagine will take its place every single time.

Where is the God-Emperor?

James Kirkpatrick wonders where the so-called leadership of the mainstream Right is in the struggle against the violent Left:

Saturday, however, was different. Antifa has been quite open about their desire to “shut down” the rally [Why The Bay Area Must Shut Down the Alt-Right Rally on April 15th, IndyBay, April 5, 2017]. So nationalists came prepared for violence, knowing the police would not protect them. And that’s precisely what happened—it just didn’t end the way antifa thought it would.

In short, Leftists started it, Rightists finished it.

What is really happening here: the American Right is finally learning to fight back, both ideologically and physically. They are breaking the taboos of the past. And powered by the freewheeling internet culture that spawned the new nationalism, the Trump supporters who rolled out to defend conservative speakers were dressed in colorful, often humorous costumes, as opposed to the grim, blackclad antifa, the staid enforcers of the status quo….

What’s truly incredible: even now, the American Right is still fighting with one hand behind its back, receiving no support from its supposed political leaders, including Donald Trump.

Though President Trump has gone out of his way to praise his non-white supporters, he has not once specifically praised the European-Americans who were at the core of his winning coalition. Even worse, he has not once defended his supporters who are being attacked on the streets and fighting in his name.

Trump may be President of the United States, but it is still very dangerous to wear a MAGA hat or Trump shirt in some cities.

Now, I’m not a leader of anything except the ELoE, but someone asked me, in my capacity as a known Alt-Right figure, if I would feel bad, or guilty, if blood were to be shed as a consequence of the Alt-Right’s refusal to submit to the threat of violence from Black Bloc, antifa, and the post-American Left.

The answer, quite simply, is no. Not even a little bit. The course is set. The consequences are inevitable. The socionomic verdict is clear and the time of positive social mood, economic expansion, and peace is over. What we’re seeing now are merely the first little steps towards the large-scale uncivil war that will be a significant part of the inevitable decline and collapse of the United States. Men have a responsibility to defend their families, their people, their nation, and their civilization, and I am very glad to see that there are still Americans, and Russians, and English, and nationalists of every civilized nation, who are willing to stand up and do so before it is too late.

The USA cannot be saved as a single entity because the American nation no longer controls the US state and has not done so for decades. Most of the European nation-states can still be saved, although the fate of a few, such as Sweden, may be in doubt. But that is because they are, despite being adulterated, still actual nations, whereas the USA is multiethnic empire held together by force, societal inertia, and deceit.

And now the lies are failing even as the centripetal societal forces gather momentum. Roosh sees four options:

There are four outcomes that can proceed from the juncture of which we stand. The first is a globalist resurgence at the polls thanks to demographic changes that push the vote far to the left, starting in 2024. If this happens, we will have a president that is more authoritarian than Hillary Clinton. The boot will come down on all facets of American life, especially speech, and we will essentially be living in an open-air prison.

The second outcome is a hot war where we win. The country will be ravaged and millions will die, but at least most of the deaths will be leftists.

The third option is a hot war where we lose because of foreign involvement. Not only are we much more likely to die in this engagement, but the globalist boot will come down with such a viciousness that those on the right who survive may hope that they had died in the war.

And the fourth option is the long divorce, one that we will easily win if the recommendations I made above are taken. Very few people die and life can proceed with high stability and prosperity for the majority of the country.

My expectation is a fifth one. I think uncivil war and partition coming on the heels of economic collapse is the most likely outcome. Warlords, corporate armies, and 4GW forces will arise. Some polities will be ethnically cleansed, others will be mixed, either by choice or by defeat. Remember, homogeneous societies tend to arise from larger heterogeneous forebears.