Tag: decline and fall

The incoherence of conservatism

I don’t know who “Publius Decius Mus” is, except in the Samnite War sense, but this is the best article I have ever read at the Claremont Institute. It very clearly makes the case for the need for the Alt-Right, if not for the Alt-Right per se. And in doing so, it also underlines the petty narcissism of the dwindling #NeverTrump crowd:

If conservatives are right about the importance of virtue, morality, religious faith, stability, character and so on in the individual; if they are right about sexual morality or what came to be termed “family values”; if they are right about the importance of education to inculcate good character and to teach the fundamentals that have defined knowledge in the West for millennia; if they are right about societal norms and public order; if they are right about the centrality of initiative, enterprise, industry, and thrift to a sound economy and a healthy society; if they are right about the soul-sapping effects of paternalistic Big Government and its cannibalization of civil society and religious institutions; if they are right about the necessity of a strong defense and prudent statesmanship in the international sphere—if they are right about the importance of all this to national health and even survival, then they must believe—mustn’t they?—that we are headed off a cliff.

But it’s quite obvious that conservatives don’t believe any such thing, that they feel no such sense of urgency, of an immediate necessity to change course and avoid the cliff. A recent article by Matthew Continetti may be taken as representative—indeed, almost written for the purpose of illustrating the point. Continetti inquires into the “condition of America” and finds it wanting. What does Continetti propose to do about it? The usual litany of “conservative” “solutions,” with the obligatory references to decentralization, federalization, “civic renewal,” and—of course!—Burke. Which is to say, conservatism’s typical combination of the useless and inapt with the utopian and unrealizable. Decentralization and federalism are all well and good, and as a conservative, I endorse them both without reservation. But how are they going to save, or even meaningfully improve, the America that Continetti describes? What can they do against a tidal wave of dysfunction, immorality, and corruption? “Civic renewal” would do a lot of course, but that’s like saying health will save a cancer patient. A step has been skipped in there somewhere. How are we going to achieve “civic renewal”? Wishing for a tautology to enact itself is not a strategy.

Continetti trips over a more promising approach when he writes of “stress[ing] the ‘national interest abroad and national solidarity at home’ through foreign-policy retrenchment, ‘support to workers buffeted by globalization,’ and setting ‘tax rates and immigration levels’ to foster social cohesion.” That sounds a lot like Trumpism. But the phrases that Continetti quotes are taken from Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam, both of whom, like Continetti, are vociferously—one might even say fanatically—anti-Trump. At least they, unlike Kesler, give Trump credit for having identified the right stance on today’s most salient issues. Yet, paradoxically, they won’t vote for Trump whereas Kesler hints that he will. It’s reasonable, then, to read into Kesler’s esoteric endorsement of Trump an implicit acknowledgment that the crisis is, indeed, pretty dire. I expect a Claremont scholar to be wiser than most other conservative intellectuals, and I am relieved not to be disappointed in this instance.

Yet we may also reasonably ask: What explains the Pollyanna-ish declinism of so many others? That is, the stance that Things-Are-Really-Bad—But-Not-So-Bad-that-We-Have-to-Consider-Anything-Really-Different! The obvious answer is that they don’t really believe the first half of that formulation. If so, like Chicken Little, they should stick a sock in it. Pecuniary reasons also suggest themselves, but let us foreswear recourse to this explanation until we have disproved all the others.

Whatever the reason for the contradiction, there can be no doubt that there is a contradiction. To simultaneously hold conservative cultural, economic, and political beliefs—to insist that our liberal-left present reality and future direction is incompatible with human nature and must undermine society—and yet also believe that things can go on more or less the way they are going, ideally but not necessarily with some conservative tinkering here and there, is logically impossible.

Let’s be very blunt here: if you genuinely think things can go on with no fundamental change needed, then you have implicitly admitted that conservatism is wrong. Wrong philosophically, wrong on human nature, wrong on the nature of politics, and wrong in its policy prescriptions. Because, first, few of those prescriptions are in force today. Second, of the ones that are, the left is busy undoing them, often with conservative assistance. And, third, the whole trend of the West is ever-leftward, ever further away from what we all understand as conservatism.

One thing that I expect has become clear to most readers here, whether of the Alt-Right or the conservative persuasion, is that conservatism is utterly unequipped to deal with the current situation. Even if conservatism were a coherent ideology – it isn’t, read Cuckservative – or if it were not partially culpable for the current situation – and it is – conservatives are both intellectually unarmed and emotionally unprepared to deal with the ongoing transition from ideology politics to identity politics.

A favorite phrase of mine is, “let reason be silent when experience gainsays its conclusions.” Conservatives correctly point out the ways in which American liberalism, Leftism, and progressivism all fail the test of experience. However, conservatives completely fail to recognize their own pie-in-the-sky thinking when they appeal to Magic Dirt, Magic Words, and the Zeroth Amendment. They do not understand the significance of the Supreme Court’s version of the US Constitution not being the same as the original written version of the Constitution, they are unaware that most immigrants, children of immigrants, and grandchildren of immigrants neither know nor care what any version of “the Constitution” is, says, or represents, and they ignore the very purpose of the Constitution as laid out in the Preamble.

Most importantly, they elevate a single phrase from the Declaration of Independence, a meaninglessly utopian piece of rhetoric which is not only contradicted by the Preamble, the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, and the acts of the First Congress, but by subsequent phrases in the Declaration itself, and proclaim it to be the foundational core of both state and nation. To conservatives, “all men are created equal” is a Magic Spell of unlimited potency that is not only, contra literally ALL the evidence, historically definitional, but can even be invoked to instantly transform any individual, tribe, people, or nation into Americans.

However, neither the Magic Spell nor the Magic Words prevented the Civil War, or if you prefer, the Second War for Independence. And the Magic Words will not prevent Round Two, or if you prefer, the Third War for Independence, or what is considerably more likely to be the free-for-all that follows the general collapse of the US central state. Very few saw the Soviet collapse coming, and I expect even fewer genuinely see the US collapse coming, despite the profiteering of opportunistic media doomsayers who have never seen an Apocalypse, a Ragnarok, or a Rapture they didn’t like.

Where conservatism has proven intrinsically fragile and self-contradictory, the Alt-Right is anti-fragile and intellectually consistent. A nation has considerably more ruin in it than a state; the state cannot survive long without a single dominant nation but as the Jews, the Kurds, and many other peoples have proved, a nation can survive indefinitely without a state. The architects of 4GW theory and the globalists alike have chronicled the way in which we are coming to the end of the Westphalian period where the state held a monopoly on violence. Therefore, it should surprise no one that as the international state system is in the process of coming to an end, the ideology politics that arose within it and subsequently dominated it should also be in decline.

So, conservatism is not merely incoherent, it is now as entirely irrelevant as a biplane during the Battle of Britain. Neither a Balanced Budget Amendment nor pledging undying loyalty to AIPAC nor deciding to “rededicate ourselves to the notion of liberty for which generations of Americans fought and died” are going to even begin to address the implications of the post-Westphalian shift to identity politics, much less prevent the collapse of the USA.

The prophecy of Silverberg

The media-politico complex is deeply, deeply concerned about people being provided any reason to trust their own eyes regarding Hillary Clinton’s health, which is why Dr. Drew appears to have some concerns about his own:

Dr. Drew Pinsky is so afraid of Hillary Clinton and her supporters, he won’t blame them for the cancellation of his show on HLN, the sister channel of CNN.

“No, no, no. I just want them to go away!” he told one friend.

“Dr. Drew” was canceled eight days after Pinsky discussed Clinton’s health on a radio show, saying he was “gravely concerned not just about her health, but her health care.”

“CNN is so supportive of Clinton, network honchos acted like the Mafia when confronting Drew,” a source told me. “First, they demanded he retract his comments, but he wouldn’t.”

What followed was a series of nasty phone calls and e-mails. “It was downright scary and creepy,” a source close to Pinsky said.

The Clinton campaign increasingly reminds me of Robert Silverberg’s Majipoor Chronicles, in which it is revealed that the ruler of the massive planet, the Pontifex, is a comatose elderly man whose life is being artificially sustained by technology, while the Coronal, ostensibly his vice-executive, rules publicly in his place.

Seriously, though, what are they going to do for the next four years if Hillary somehow avoids the coming Trumpslide and actually wins the election? They can barely wheel her out in public once every few weeks as it is.

The first thing we do

Is shoot all the lawyers. Glenn Reynolds draws our attention to an absurd parody of justice and recompense:

In 2013, Yahoo announced that it would begin scanning its users’ e-mail for targeted advertising purposes—just as Google does. As is par for the course, class-action lawsuits were filed. The Silicon Valley media giant, according to one of the lawsuits, was violating the “personal liberties” of non-Yahoo Mail users. That’s because non-Yahoo Mail users, who have sent mail to Yahoo mail users, were having their e-mail scanned without their permission.
…
The suit, which was one of six that were co-mingled as a single class action, demanded that a judge halt the scanning and award each victim “$5,000 or three times actual damages” in addition to “reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.”


Fast forward three years. The case is now closed. Days ago, a Silicon Valley federal judge signed off (PDF) on a settlement (PDF). The lawyers won, they were awarded $4 million (£3 million), and the public got nothing. What’s more, the settlement allows Yahoo to continue to scan e-mails without non-Yahoo users’ consent.

It’s almost as though class-action suits have become nothing more than shakedown operations for lawyers.

We will, of course, spare Dr. Reynolds as the proverbial exception to the rule and award him his pick of his former colleague’s estates.

It would be in the definite interest of the American people to pass a law that forbids lawyers to collect more than 10 percent of any settlement or court-dictated award. Unfortunately, the lawyers in Congress are very unlikely to ever permit the passage of anything that would restrain the rapacious predation of their colleagues.

Never go full cuck

Andrew Klavan raises the Churchian flag and waves it proudly in defense of globalism:

Fantastic and irrational too is the philosophy of the alt-right with their smarmy pseudo-intellectual white isolationism (it’s their make-believe belief that white people aren’t necessarily better than other people, but only have an equal right to protect their “white” culture and territory). The alt-right website Vox Populi roundly declares “The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Graeco-Roman legacy.” What blithering silliness.

Should we leave aside the fact that these nationalist anti-semites revel in the worship of a globalist Jew? Nah, let’s pause here to mock them for it. And these European nations that form one of their “pillars:” since those nations have been at war with one another for the last two thousand years, it seems important to ask which one they mean? The industrious Germans or the delightfully carefree Italians? The Spanish with their part-Muslim inheritance or the English with their pagan Viking mix? And while we’re at it, which one of each of these people is representative? Is Hitler more Aryan than Thomas Mann who detested him? Is John Keats or John Christie the more exemplary Englishman?

The best reason to judge people, actions and belief systems individually is to keep from talking crap. I too believe that Western culture from around 1500 to 1915 was one of the pinnacles of human achievement. Part of its genius — I would say the core of it — lay in the loving universalism of its religion which ultimately led its free nations to welcome all people willing to participate in the secular version of that creed.

The genius of the West is not, and has never been, “the loving universalism of its religion”. Klavan’s grasp of the West doesn’t even rise to the level of Wikipedia.

Western culture, sometimes equated with Western civilization, Western world, Western society or European civilization is a term used very broadly to refer to a heritage of social norms, ethical values, traditional customs, belief systems, political systems, and specific artifacts and technologies that have some origin or association with Europe. The term is applied to European countries and countries whose history is strongly marked by European immigration, colonisation, and influence, such as the continents of the Americas and Australasia, whose current demographic majority is of European ethnicity, and is not restricted to the continent of Europe.


Ancient Greece is considered the birthplace of Western culture, with the world’s first democratic system of government and major advances in philosophy, science and mathematics. Greece was followed by Rome, which made key contributions in law, government and engineering. Western culture continued to develop with the Christianisation of Europe during the Middle Ages, the reform and modernization triggered by the Renaissance, and with globalization by successive European empires, that spread European ways of life and European educational methods around the world between the 16th and 20th centuries.


Christianity. The European nations. The Graeco-Roman legacy. Such “blithering silliness”. Anyhow, it’s clear that the cuckservatives and their (((friends))) are running with “the West is universal” theme in order to sell their globalist anti-nationalism.

And as for his notion of Jesus Christ as “a globalist Jew”, it sounds to this Christian as if Mr. Klavan is more than ready to bow down and worship Antichrist, should he appear and dangle the prospects of world peace in front of everyone.

A prescription for Africa

Peter Grant provides his thoughts on aiding Africa:

Based on my extensive experience of Africa, I suggest there are two – and only two – ways in which Western aid should be focused in the short term.  The first is education.  Teach people the basics of how to think, how to use their brains – and do so in a way that is tailored to their current levels of intelligence.  Don’t expect a teenager with an IQ of 70 to function at the same level as someone with an IQ of 100.  He must be taught things he can do – and at which he can succeed – that are commensurate with where he’s at right now.  That way, he won’t get discouraged and abandon his studies.  He can be set tasks that grow progressively more complex and more difficult, but not at a level he can’t master.  His children will go further, and his children’s children further still . . . but he won’t.  He can’t.  That’s the brutal reality of the situation.

The second way in which aid can be useful is in providing basic infrastructure that is operable, and maintainable, and sustainable, by people in the IQ range we’ve discussed.  Examples:

  • It’s pointless giving them a complex engine-powered pump to bring up water from a well if they aren’t capable of maintaining it.  Rather give them a hand-operated pump, one they can understand, and which they can repair themselves if it breaks down.  It’s more and harder work to use it, but it’s also more practicable for them.  When it comes to health care, providing mosquito nets and clean water and hygiene education is far more important than providing anti-AIDS drug cocktails.  Sure, without the latter, people will die;  but without the former, many more people will die. Invest limited resources where they’ll do the most good for the greatest number.  Yes, that means some people will be condemned to die.  That’s economic and cultural reality in Africa.  Live with it.
  • I’ve seen several entrepreneurs in Africa take discarded Western high technology, ‘dumb it down’, and use it with great success.  Example:  pedal-powered washing machines (which we’ve discussed here before).  Old, broken-down automatic washing machines are connected to good old-fashioned bicycles mounted on frames, using drive belts made from locally-produced leather or cloth.  Result;  the pedalers earn a living, local women can wash their clothes much faster and more conveniently than taking them down to the local river (where they’re frequently preyed on by crocodiles), and the entrepreneur who put the whole idea together becomes a Big Man in the local economy – and is able to use his profits for other useful economic ideas.  Moral of the story:  find individuals with that sort of entrepreneurial drive, and help them.  That aid will ‘trickle down’ into the local community and benefit everyone.
  • The corollary to the above is that aid must not – repeat, must not – be given to government officials and bureaucrats who’ll siphon it off into their own pockets.  Corruption, nepotism and dishonesty are not just rife in Africa – they’re a way of life.  Tragically, too many agencies and large aid organizations (all of which should know better) are willing to let dishonest governments and bureaucrats handle aid money, so as not to offend local sensibilities or be seen as ‘neo-colonial’ in their attitudes.  Worse, some of them openly bribe governments and bureaucrats, figuring that it’s better to do that in order to ensure that at least some of the aid they provide reaches those for whom it’s intended.  Often that proportion is ten per cent or less – the rest lines venal pockets further up the food chain.
  • Finally, aid must be distributed in a way that is accountable.  Money and supplies must be accounted for when they arrive, while being sent to their final destination, and upon delivery.  The way they’re used must be monitored, and any discrepancy must result in disciplinary action – i.e. the withholding of further aid from the miscreant(s) involved.  There can be no blind acceptance of someone’s bona fides unless their actions match their words.  There can be no resigned, shoulder-shrugging acceptance of ‘shrinkage’ without a major effort to minimize losses.  If that isn’t done, the venality of Africa will soon ensure that most (if not all) of the aid sent is diverted into fat-cat pockets.  (How do you think Mobutu Sese Seko, President of Zaire, managed to embezzle between $4 billion and $15 billion during his time in power?  It sure wasn’t his salary!)

There is a third way in which aid might be profitably spent – but it’ll never fly, because it’s 100% politically incorrect.  That way would be to hire mercenaries – probably former servicemen from Western armies and their allies – to pacify an area, ensuring that aid workers can operate safely and without coercion.  They can raise and train a local militia if responsible individuals can be found, but that’s unlikely at first.  It’ll be more important for them to proactively attack local thugs and gangs.  That’ll be an object lesson to everybody – “Get with the program, or get dead!”  In an environment where life is so cheap, and atrocities are everyday occurrences, that’s probably the only way in which this could work.  However, the reaction to that by liberals and progressives would be so outraged that, as I said, this idea will never fly.

While I agree with Peter’s diagnosis, I don’t agree with his prescription. Education will not change one single damn thing in Africa because it cannot. The intelligence gap between Europe and Africa is genetic and only several centuries of ruthless eugenics will raise the average intelligence of the latter continent. In fact, despite more people being more educated than ever before, the dysgenic social structure of both the European nations and the USA has already reduced their average intelligence levels; the gap is being reduced, but by lowering the average intelligence levels in Europe and the USA.

That is why we are seeing the Western countries gradually start resembling the better third-world countries. Over time, they will start to resemble Africa, and similar behavioral patterns will begin to exert themselves. The only good news, if it can be described as that, is that the Western warlords of the future will likely be considerably smarter than their African counterparts, so perhaps there will be the occasional Singapore that can serve as the core of a new high-IQ civilization.

And since  the current population explosion in Africa is almost certainly dysgenic, I expect that the average intelligence will actually decline in Africa and the situation will get even worse there, with widespread cannibalism and other practices even more depraved and demonic than mutu beginning to appear.

The more I look at the global situation, the more I am convinced that those in the 1980s who thought Japan and China would dominate the world were correct, they were simply about 100 years early. The fall of the Soviet Union was not the triumph of Western liberal democracy, it was its last chance, but instead of taking that chance, the liberal democracies slashed their own throats. Yes, Japan and China are both economic disasters, but they are still smart, homogeneous nations and they will bounce right back from the next economic crash. Most of the nations of the West are not, and therefore they will not be able to do so.

That, I think, is why China is biding its time. It has no need to defeat the USA. It need only wait and let the USA finish destroying itself.

Debunking Snopes

A number of people have referred to the Snopes “debunking” of the Hiroshima-Detroit comparison, failing to realize that a) it doesn’t address blacks at all, and, b) I wrote my post in the first place because the supposed debunking was so feeble.

Here is an accurate summary of the Snopes argument.

1. The picture is not of modern-day Hiroshima.


the next image in the set supposedly depicts modern-day Hiroshima — except that it doesn’t. It’s actually a snapshot taken from the Landmark Tower Sky Garden in Yokohama, Japan

That’s true of the pictures to which Snopes was referring. It’s not true of the pictures I used, which one can see is clearly of past and present Hiroshima. Furthermore, Hiroshima is in very good shape today, as Snopes itself admits. One down.


2. The picture of modern Detroit is only of one building.

the thing to note about the use of this image to portray Detroit as a locus of Hiroshima-like devastation is that all we actually see is one long-abandoned, crumbling building. It doesn’t make the case.

That one picture doesn’t conclusively prove the case, but it correctly demonstrates the actual case intended. Detroit’s population is now 36.7 percent of its 1950s peak and is now 83 percent black. 95 percent of the whites who resided there in 1950 have left. The city filed for bankruptcy in 2013. “aerial photos reveal the tiny urban island that is left – a clutter of high-rises surrounded by empty housing plots now covered in grass.” Two down.

3. The picture of Navin Field is from the 1930s, not the 1940s.

Lastly, we’re shown a photo supposedly depicting Detroit in its mid-1940s heyday — except that it was taken in the mid-1930s

So what? That only makes it that much more clear how advanced Detroit was, and how far Detroit has fallen since. This is petty pedantry, as the relevant point is still demonstrated. Three down.

4. It was the Democrats fault, but it wasn’t only their fault.

Did Democrats and Democratic policies play some role in the fall of Detroit? Surely they did. Every Detroit mayor since 1962 has been a Democrat, after all. But Republicans held the seat for the 12 years prior to that, from 1950 through 1961. The Packard plant whose hollowed-out remains were displayed above closed its doors during that time. Whatever blame is to be allotted to politicians must be shared by both Democrats and Republicans on the national level, as well.


Here is a tip: when you admit that the case being made is correct, even in part, it is not a debunking. Four down. There is not one single effective point that was made in this so-called “debunking”.

The ironic thing about those responding to my modified Detroit-Hiroshima comparison with “Snopes says” is that I rebutted the cuckservative “Democrat policies” explanation for the difference between the two cities more effectively than Snopes did by pointing out that if Democrats are responsible for the decline of Detroit, Hiroshima should be even worse, because it was ruled by Socialists for most of the latter half of the 20th century.

Are there other factors that have contributed to the decline of Detroit beyond the fact that 478,112 blacks moved into the city between 1900 and 1960? Certainly. But that doesn’t change the fact that if a city has a choice between being hit by an atomic bomb or acquiring 774,485 new black residents, the available evidence strongly indicates that the former will prove vastly preferable to the latter in the long term.

Are blacks worse than atomic bombs?

I was drawn to look into this for myself after Snopes tried to dismiss a meme that was going around comparing Hiroshima to Detroit on the basis of some rather spurious grounds, so I thought I’d have a look at the evidence myself.

Now, some have argued that because Detroit’s core downtown is still intact, this proves that the decay of the city surrounding it is irrelevant. But a city is more than its downtown, as the comparative population figures demonstrate the same contrast that the pictures do.

Detroit population 
1950: 1.8 million
2016: 680,000


Hiroshima population
1945: 260,000
2015: 1.2 million

Note that this is the most favorable possible comparison for Detroit, as the 1945 Hiroshima population is post-bombing and is based upon the smallest reported casualty count. Moreover, Detroit filed for bankruptcy in 2013, which was the largest municipal bankruptcy filing in US history.

The claim that the pictures are misleading is a dishonest and knowingly deceitful response. The fact that the downtown still exists merely indicates the destructive process is not yet entirely complete, as that downtown is now “a tiny urban island” in a grass-covered, depopulated sea.

In 1950, Detroit was America’s fifth largest city and one of the most prosperous on the back of its booming motor industry. It prompted the construction of skyscrapers on the banks of the river and the development of vast suburban housing projects in the surrounding areas.

But almost 55 years on, a dwindling motor industry and a dramatic fall in blue collar jobs has caused people to leave the Michigan city, abandoning their homes and businesses. These aerial photos reveal the tiny urban island that is left – a clutter of high-rises surrounded by empty housing plots now covered in grass. There are vast areas of open spaces dotted with crumbling industrial buildings and barely-standing Victorian homes until you reach the upmarket suburbs.

The fact that these facts may be uncomfortable or make you feel bad is irrelevant. The evidence is very clear that a black population in excess of an as-yet-undetermined percentage of the overall population renders the continuation of Western civilization impossible. This has been observed everywhere from Capetown to Detroit, and the comparison with Hiroshima only underlines the cultural, economic, and physical devastation that an excessively black population is likely to wreak on a society.

The cuckservative response is that it is Democrat rule, or socialist governing principles, not blacks, who are responsible. This omits two important facts. One, blacks vote for Democrats more solidly than any other group. Two, for most of the post-war years for which I’ve been able to find the relevant data, Hiroshima has been governed by members of the Japan Social Democratic Party, “a political party that advocates the establishment of a socialist Japan.”

What should be done about it? I don’t know. But since my people were forcibly put on reservations, I’m not terribly inclined to pay much attention to any appeals to equality or the rhetorical hysterics of dyscivilizationists protesting that nothing can, or should, be done to avert the collapse of civilization throughout the West.

Mailvox: the reluctant revolutionary

From a reader deep in the belly of the Beast:

I am a teacher at a public school in [REDACTED].  During our first professional day this year our faculty was introduced to a new administrative mandate from the state bureaucracy.  At the conclusion of the presentation we were permitted to comment.  I asked the presenter if she thought the educational bureaucracy was insane, evil, or both.  My comment elicited a few chuckles from my colleagues.  She responded that she thought the new procedures would make her a more accountable teacher.  I rejoined that it would make of me a revolutionary.  Once again my colleagues chuckled.  Teachers are some of the worst sheeple on the planet.

I later approached a colleague who is a close ideological ally.  “Well, [REDACTED], which is it?”  As is frequently the case with him, he was quick to hit the mark.  “If they’re insane, it makes logical sense to accommodate them.  If they are evil, then we are morally obliged to fight them.”  Spot on.  He is good like that.

I tried to suppress my thoughts for the rest of the week, but the realization wouldn’t let go.  I had become a reluctant revolutionary.  Or rather, to be more accurate, the state had made me a revolutionary.  The idea sickens me.  I didn’t ask for this.  I have never aspired to this sort of vocation or anything like it.  It’s one of the last things I would ever wish upon myself.  But here I stand.

The comment you posted this morning from the German president about something being wrong with the people brought to me another sudden realization. Leaders as a class have never studied the antecedents of revolution.  If they had, they would keep on their desks a handy checklist and refer to it often.  But they truly are clueless. Revolutions are not a form of spontaneous combustion.  I am reminded of the final words of Madame Ceausescu as she was put up against the wall:  “You can’t do this; I treated you like my children.”  Clueless to the bitter end.

Or, as Aristotle put it, some people cannot be convinced by information. Never forget that. They genuinely believe they are our masters. I expect events will eventually convince them otherwise.

The decline of white America

Is the decline of America because America is, by definition, white:

Surveys by the Public Religion Research institute show that nearly 40 percent of Americans say that newcomers from other countries threaten traditional American customs and values. Thirty one percent of white people say that “the idea of America where most people are not white bothers me.”

This discomfort with growing diversity is generally most evident among Americans who are older and more conservative. To understand it, it helps to understand where they’re coming from. The census data show that roughly half of white Americans lived in a county where 9 out of 10 people were white in 1980. Today, just over a quarter do. Raising our threshold to 98 percent white, as in the maps above, shows that 15 percent of white Americans lived in these near-exclusively white areas in 1980, while less than one percent do today.

Of course, these thresholds are somewhat arbitrary. A county that goes from 98.1 percent white in 1980 to 97.6 percent white in 2010 is not necessarily experiencing a demographic revolution. But the sharp drop in the aggregate number of these nearly all-white counties makes for a useful marker of demographic change.

This 30-year timespan is within living memory for many of the people expressing unease with racial changes. They can look back on a time when literally everyone around them looked like them, and compare it to the present day, where people are becoming more and more different from each other — at least at the level of skin color.

What is so brutally dishonest about this coverage by the mainstream media is that it completely ignores all the other reasons Americans might not be enthusiastic about seeing their country invaded and their nation destroyed, for one or more of the following reasons:

  • Reduced average intelligence
  • Fewer jobs
  • Lower wages
  • Less political representation
  • Reduced political influence
  • Less community engagement
  • Increased pollution and environmental damage
  • More expensive housing
  • More crowded roads
  • Uglier people
  • Differing standards of home and yard maintenance
  • Increased difficulty in communicating
  • More support for government intervention in their lives
  • The increased likelihood of war and ethnic cleansing
To boil all that down to racism and a desire to see people who look like you is not merely disingenuous, it is completely dishonest.
Never forget that homogeneous nations come out of heterogeneous empires.

The end of Jewish rule

Identity politics finally catches up to a 44-year practitioner of it.

A Somali activist has unseated one of the Minnesota Legislature’s longest-serving members in a Democratic primary.

Ilhan Omar defeated 22-term Rep. Phyllis Kahn in Tuesday’s DFL nominating contest. Omar’s victory in the heavily Democratic Minneapolis district makes it likely she’ll be the first Somali-American lawmaker in the nation after the November election.

The district spans the University of Minnesota and is home to a large population of immigrants from Somalia and other East African countries. Omar argued the district needs a fresher face that better represents the diversity and needs of the area.

Omar is a political activist and former aide to the Minneapolis City Council.

Kahn has spent 44 years in the Legislature.

This is a microcosm of what is gradually taking shape in the United States. It’s also why the Learned Elders of Wye have been actively trying to figure out where to jump ship next, as their ability to influence US politics rapidly wanes. Apparently Jewish strategists never thought through the obvious long-term consequences of their 60’s-era “diversity is good for the Jews” strategy in the United States, most likely because it was originally formulated in highly altruistic, highly homogeneous Europe, where it was an effective strategy right up until it really wasn’t.

However, now that low-altruism minorities are approaching 50 percent of the US electorate, identity politics are permanently replacing ideological politics, and a Jew like Khan is never going to be elected in any district where Somalis, or Arabs, or Indians, or Chinese are the majority. And they’re also increasingly unlikely to be elected in black-, white-, or Hispanic-dominated districts.

Further complicating matters is the fact that the rise of Donald Trump and American nationalism means the “hello, fellow white people” schtick is not to work much longer, particularly now that the inordinately Jewish “conservative media” has unmasked itself as globalist rather than pro-American, and viciously opposed to any America First nationalist ideology.

So, setting up Pedro, Peng, Pasha and Prodosh to fight Paul for the benefit of Peter has, over time, put Peter in a no-win situation. If Pedro and company win, Peter is permanently excluded from power and may even be actively persecuted by the rainbow coalition he helped build. And if a newly self-interested Paul wins, he’s no longer likely to listen to Peter or pay any attention to Peter’s interests.

This leaves Peter with three options. Try to shut down democracy, accept the gradual decline of power, wealth, and influence, or leave.

This isn’t a matter for debate, nor will crying Holocaust or engaging in philo-semitic virtue-signaling make any difference here here. It’s simple demographic math combined with an observation of historical group voting patterns. US whites are willing to vote outside their identity. US non-whites strongly prefer to do as the Jews do and vote their identity.

It’s interesting, is it not, that the vaunted Askenazi IQ advantage appears to be failing them even as the average US IQ declines significantly. It tends to strongly suggest that whatever the historical basis of Jewish success in the United States was, it was not superior average intelligence.

To return to the Minnesota district, it would be fascinating if Omar unexpectedly loses the election, as a defeat would indicate that even hard-core liberal whites are starting to prefer identity politics to ideology.

UPDATE: Further evidence that identity politics are on the rise; the Asians are beginning to flex their political muscle.

24-year-old Fue Lee, who was born in a refugee camp in Thailand and currently works in the office of Secretary of State Steve Simon. He defeated 10-term incumbent Rep. Joe Mullery, DFL-Minneapolis. Both upsets came in heavily DFL districts, which means they are virtually assured of victory in November. Their victories illustrated the ascendance of minority populations in the DFL, as new immigrants and African-Americans demand a higher profile and a seat at the table of the party they call home.

As I’ve said before, Republicans must become the White Party – or if you prefer, the American Party – if they are to survive. White Democrats and Jews are all but finished, outside of the places where they are the majority.