Tag: history

No More Gatekeepers

Much to their surprise, conservatives are discovering that they are increasingly the ones being disavowed by the Right now, as in this recent open letter to my old editor at the Dallas Morning News, Rod Dreher.

You are not going to gate-keep the right wing.

You aren’t going to veto the discussion of reality by pearl-clutching and making appeals to being “reasonable”, you aren’t going to restore the risk-averse conservativism of National Review by telling century-old horror stories about the ascendency of Adolf Hitler. You aren’t going to shut out critical conversations because you think their conclusions are distasteful.

The time when mainstream conservatism held this kind of power is over. And you will never have it ever again. Which is why you, and other conservatives, need to abandon the pretension and stop trying to pursue this futile task, for your good and the good of others that come after you.

Is it possible for conservatives to finally break from the form that has defined their own failure? Might you all stop quixotically raging against the sky and try to adopt a more practical approach?

I know that many of you are fond of that one saying by William F Buckley that “A conservative is someone who stands athwart the tracks of history, yelling Stop.” No doubt many conservatives find a certain nobility in these futile gestures, especially as America’s political reality grows much darker.

However, that train you now see coming down the tracks isn’t the crisis of modernity; nor is it some specific bad actor like Nick Fuentes, or even some popular mass delusion. The train is just a reality. It is the inevitable consequence of the politics promoted over the last three decades by those weak men too cowed to face hard truths head-on.

And no one can stop this train from coming, because all the opportunities to slow it down have been sabotaged, more often than not, by the very conservatives who were busy lamenting the sorry state of their predicament.

But lament your predicament or not, the train is still approaching. You are all going to have to make an adjustment to how you approach politics, or the juggernaut will run you down where you stand, not because you stood on some principle, but because you didn’t acknowledge the machine hurling towards you, just in front of your nose.

But perhaps this is history’s well-known sense of irony. Because, in the wake of this tragedy, everyone will naturally look back at your careers and wonder.

How?

How, after everything, after all of the articles, after all of the books, after all of the histrionic predictions of collapse and societal decline repeated over and over again, how could you still be so unprepared to face the world that you saw coming decades ago?

It is an eternal mystery. It is the story of how conservatism died.

Like everything that inevitably falls apart on its own, conservatism is dying under the weight of its own inconsistencies and incoherencies. Proclaiming “America First” while putting Israel first, waxing eloquent about the Constitution while never doing anything to defend the American Posterity, posturing about nonexistent principles, celebrating a capitalism that is built on a foundation of usury and fraud, and appealing to false histories and fake historical narratives, there is no reason to ever take conservatives and their gatekeeping seriously anymore.

They defend self-proclaimed democracy that violates the will of the people, enact injustice in the name of justice, proclaim an equality that has never existed anywhere, and in the process, conserve nothing. They are worse than worthless even by their own chosen measure.

And the train doesn’t care.

DISCUSS ON SG

Jump to India Confirmed

In 2004, the Learned Elders of Wye announced their plan to jump to China once the USA collapsed in the 2030s. However, those plans were cancelled by Xi Jinping in 2015, thereby prioritizing the jump to Ukraine for which the groundwork was laid in the Orange Revolution of 2014. Those plans for Ukraine would appear to have been cancelled by the Russian Special Military Operation launched in 2022, although it’s also possible that the repopulation of a neo-Ukranian rump state could involve a recolonization there; it’s too soon to tell.

But regardless, it’s apparent that the recent jeetification of Canada and the USA is a consequence of what would appear to be the new plan of a jump to India, as evidenced by the recent comments of Rosanne Barr. The point is not that Ms Barr is a particularly well-informed elite, but rather, that she is not; apparently this is such common knowledge that even she knows what’s in progress.

“America deserves what’s going to happen to them for it. Israel will just move on to India and America will fall.”

Such are “the blessings of Israel” that so concern the Zionist Boomers who didn’t hesitate to sacrifice the future of their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren in order to secure the dubious and short-term blessings of the god of this world. The lessons of history are brutal, but they are certainly consistent.

Unless and until you comprehend that the “judeo-christianity” sold by the likes of Ben Shapiro and Dennis Prager and adopted by Churchians is not even remotely synonymous with “Christianity” in absolutely any sense of the term, be it historical, theological, spiritual, or moral, you cannot even begin to understand anything about the geopolitics of the last 80 years, let alone the history of the last two millennia. Remember, America is “the New Rome” and Israel has been at war with Rome since before Jesus Christ was born. In fact, if historian Barry Strauss and the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are to be taken at face value, Israel is still at war with Rome.

For those inclined to see this predicted fall of America as some sort of apocalyptic black pill, it’s probably worth keeping in mind that the post-1492 collapse of Spain was also described as Spain’s “Golden Age”. And even the Western Roman empire survived nearly another four centuries post-Vespasian, while the Eastern Roman Empire prospered for a thousand years.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Truth About Shakespeare

Dennis McCarthy provides a useful summary about the facts concerning the true authorship of the plays supposedly written by the actor William Shakespeare, but were actually written by Thomas North.

Here’s a brief summary of the North/Shakespeare Story:

  • Thomas North (1535- ~1604?), 29 years older than Shakespeare, wrote plays for decades for Leicester’s Men (from late 1550s to 1588). These plays were performed in front of small, noble audiences and were never published. But sometimes these early Shakespearean plays (like a Romeo and Juliet in 1562, before Shakespeare was born) were recorded by the original spectators or in records of payments for plays at court—though the author remained unnamed.
  • In the 1590s and 1600s, Shakespeare published his own adaptations of older plays in quarto form: These include briefer, swifter, inferior staged renditions of Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, and Henry V (all originally written by Thomas North for Leicester’s Men). Shakespeare also wrote the “good quartos” of The Merchant of Venice, Much Ado About Nothing, Love’s Labour’s Lost, 1 and 2 Henry IV—plays he adapted but are deemed “good” only because North’s originals were never published and have now been lost. Shakespeare also produced other mediocre, differently-styled plays like A Yorkshire Tragedy, The London Prodigal, and Locrine that Shakespeare had written with (or adapted from) other playwrights. For example, orthodox scholars have concluded that Thomas Middleton is a very likely coauthor or originator of A Yorkshire Tragedy, while they attach Robert Greene to Locrine. The bad quartos, apocrypha, and makeshift “good quartos” compose the true Stratford canon.
  • When the publishing syndicate of Edward Blount, William Jaggard, William Aspley, and John Smethwick decided to produce a collection of Shakespeare plays now known as the First Folio (1623), they got into squabbles with the publishers who owned the rights to the Shakespeare plays that had already been published. So in many cases, they printed North’s original versions—as they did with Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, Henry V, 2 Henry VI, 3 Henry VI, etc., which were still in the possession of Shakespeare’s theater troupe. Indeed, the First Folio even advertised that the plays had been “Truely set forth, according to their first ORIGINALL,” and the printers added special emphasis to the word “ORIGINALL,” putting it in all caps and a kind of italics. Still, many of the plays in the First Folio, especially the comedies, are indeed Shakespeare’s adaptations of North’s originals.
  • For centuries, scholars had studied and praised the plays of Shakespeare’s First Folio, leading them to associate him with the masterpieces therein. It was not until the 19th century that researchers began rediscovering the “bad quartos.” For example, Shakespeare’s rewritten, staged version of Hamlet, published in 1603, did not come to the attention of researchers until 1823, long after faith in Shakespeare’s genius had become traditional, universal, and unyielding. Researchers faced with such lesser renditions “by William Shakespeare” found it less onerous to try to explain them away one at a time—rather than abandon their view of Shakespeare. Editors and academics never stopped to assess all the evidence as a whole, looking at all the documents “by William Shakespeare” to determine what he had really written. Conventional scholars also shrugged off the clear statements from contemporaries that derided Shakespeare for getting too much credit for other people’s plays, as we find in comments about Shakespeare in Groatsworth of Wit, Jonson’s On Poet Ape, etc.

In summary, if you still believe that William Shakespeare wrote the versions of Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet traditionally attributed to him, you might as well believe in the theory of evolution by natural selection and that Neil Armstrong landed on the Moon, walked on it, and then returned to Earth.

The historical evidence against it is, quite simply, overwhelming.

But if you want to know why I, personally, am convinced of the truth of Mr. McCarthy’s claims, it is because I am an editor. I know exactly how recognizable any writer’s writing is. And the AI analyses of the various works make it very, very clear which author’s work is the original of the high-quality plays that we still revere today.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Failure of Holocaustianity

As I pointed out in a public debate with Louise Mensch in 2018, the Holocaust, such as it is, is over. In 2025, it is as emotionally relevant to the average individual on the planet as the Boxer Rebellion, the Sacking of Carthage, and the Battle of Manzikart, which is to say, no one alive today actually cares about it in the least. Surviving Boomers aside, it’s now a dead rhetorical letter.

Which, of course, is why those who are still trying to play that card are discovering, much to their surprise, the various ways doing so tends to backfire on them.

  • Former Obama speechwriter Sarah Hurwitz laments to Jewish Federation that people are finding content from “Al Jazeera and Nick Fuentes” on social media and seeing videos of “the carnage in Gaza.” Holocaust education has backfired in part as people see Palestinians as Jews’ victims, she adds. “They think the lesson of the Holocaust is…you fight the big powerful people hurting the weak people.” The lesson they were supposed to get is that it gives Israel the right to commit genocide in perpetuity.
  • The Holocaust Museum of Los Angeles on Saturday took down an Instagram post that said, “‘Never Again’ can’t only mean never again for Jews.” The Jewish group lamented that the post was misinterpreted by some as a “political statement” reflecting the “ongoing situation” in “the Middle East” but “that was not our intent.”

The Gazacaust appears to have been a serious blunder by the Netanyahu regime, although it may simply be the same logic that applies to the current anti-semitism push and the anti-Iran campaigns by AIPAC, which is that time is running out on both a) Zionist influence and b) the power over which that influence is held, so however suboptimal the strategy might be, they’ve got to make use of that power before it ceases to be useful.

Either way, the Holocaust dies with the Boomers, and although a few people have been jailed or otherwise punished for their failure to believe that exactly six million people of a very specific ethnicity were killed by eagles, bears, medical experiments, and flaming roller coasters of death during a four-year period in the 1940s, no amount of propaganda and rhetorical appeals are going to convince anyone that being a fourth- or fifth-generation descendent of a survivor of those heinous historical acts grants one a lifetime license to subject other people to ethnic cleansing and genocide just because one’s great-great-grandfather’s relatives were subjected to it.

And for those who claim that it does, perhaps it would be well to keep in mind that we American Indians would obviously possess a much better claim on any such license than the descendants of survivors of much smaller, much shorter, much less comprehensive genocides.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Deadly Moon Hoax

I don’t believe that Man ever went to the Moon. I don’t believe the Apollo landings were real; it’s beyond obvious at this point that they were faked in a studio. But for those who still cling to the idea that the Moon landings of the 1960s couldn’t have been faked, understand just how seriously the US government protected its hoax at the time.

I interviewed the widow of the man who was going to be the first man to walk on the moon, Virgil Grissom. He was the most beloved of all the astronauts. I interviewed his widow for four hours.

It’s her opinion, not mine, with 100% certainty that he was murdered by the CIA for not cooperating with fraud in the Apollo program. She told me so. She said on January 26, 1967, he came home from work and said this, Han, for some strange reason, the CIA is all over the launch pad today inspecting the equipment.

I’ve been here three years, he said. They’ve never been here before. Why did they show up today? The very next day, he’s dead from faulty equipment.

Because a few days before this, he held a press conference without permission when he took a bunch of reporters up to the top of the rocket and affixed a lemon the size of a grapefruit to the top of the Apollo rocket, calling it a piece of junk. He was preparing reports, according to his widow, to give to Congress and the Senate that the CIA confiscated from his house the day he died before they even informed his widow that he had died. He knew they were 10 years or more away from going to the moon.

He would not participate in the fraud and they killed him. So this is why the two of the three astronauts, you know, act kind of bizarre and don’t like giving interviews. This is why at their first and only press conference, they look like they’re at the funeral of their mother instead of the winning locker room of the Super Bowl.

At this point, if you still believe in the Moon landings, you’re pretty much left in the company of those who genuinely believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman responsible for killing JFK and that Drew Pearson didn’t commit offensive pass interference in the 1975 NFC playoffs.

DISCUSS ON SG

Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc

Devon Eriksen implies that Christianity caused the fall of Rome. It’s not a view that’s original to him, but it’s obviously false.

Rome didn’t fall because the Romans were decadent and had orgies. They were the most decadent, and had the wildest orgies, at the height of their power. Rome fell after they became Christian.

No, Devon, Rome fell due to mass foreign immigration. No historian takes Edward Gibbon’s thesis put forth in his great The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire seriously anymore. The idea that Christianity caused the fall of the Roman Empire is obviously false because both Christianity and the Eastern Roman Empire continued for centuries.

DISCUSS ON SG

10 Different Versions

That’s absurd, of course, There are, at most, four Donald Trumps:

As someone who first voted for him in 2016, I can say it has been an endless cycle of “We’re so back” and “It’s so over.” There have even been single days where we cycle between the two multiple times a day.

He will make a statement saying “No more fatties on visas” and follow it up with “600k potential Chinese spies and 50 year mortgages are what MAGA wants.” An absolute rollercoaster of emotions. Some days, it seems like we have 10 different versions of him.

This is where logical heuristics like Ockham’s Razor shine. If it seems as if there are multiple versions of the man, that is because there are multiple body doubles being utilized by different political factions.

Consider the possibilities explaining the various inconsistencies and anomalies observed:

  • Donald Trump is crazy
  • Donald Trump is pretending to be crazy
  • Donald Trump tells different audiences different things in public.
  • Donald Trump is being controlled by Benjamin Netanyahu/Xi Jinping/Vladimir Putin
  • The warring political factions in the USA are utilizing different political decoys.

Now, if one considers that the use of body doubles goes back to the time of The Iliad, when Patroclus rallied the Greeks by wearing the armor of Achilles, combined with the fact that Josef Stalin and British general Bernard Montgomery are both confirmed to have utilized body doubles in the 1940s, what is the most reasonable answer to the questions concerning President Trump’s incessant inconsistencies?

DISCUSS ON SG

WWII Wasn’t Worth It

A British WWII veteran issues a scathing verdict on the state of Britain today and his regrets about having defended what is now a collapsing, demoralized, half-occupied nation:

A 100-year-old veteran shocked the hosts of Good Morning Britain today by declaring that winning World War II ‘wasn’t worth it’ due to the state of the UK.

Alec Penstone told Adil Ray and Kate Garraway how he quit his factory job to sign up for the Royal Navy and fight for his country as soon as he came of age. The war hero recalled serving alongside close friends, many of whom lost their lives, and called himself ‘just a lucky one’ for having survived. Asked by Ms Garraway what Remembrance Sunday meant to him, the veteran said he felt that winning the war was ‘not worth’ how the country had turned out today.

‘My message is, I can see in my mind’s eye those rows and rows of white stones and all the hundreds of my friends who gave their lives, for what? The country of today? No, I’m sorry – but the sacrifice wasn’t worth the result of what it is now.’

When he was asked to clarify what he meant by Mr Ray, he continued: ‘What we fought for was our freedom, but now it’s a darn sight worse than when I fought for it.’

What was the point of defending Britain against the potential threat posed by 3 million Germans in order to turn around and meekly submit to the subsequent invasion of 3 million Indians, 2 million Pakistanis,
2.5 million Africans, and 500,000 Chinese?

What was the threat, that they might end up speaking the same language as their royal family, the Saxe-Coburg and Gothas, all spoke originally?

What a historical disaster. The sacrifice of all those young Englishmen absolutely wasn’t worth it. But perhaps the old English veteran can find some solace in the fact that even the Viking and Roman invaders were eventually sent home.

DISCUSS ON SG

Mayor Mamdani

Actions have consequences. History does not repeat, but it rhymes. Insanity consists of doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

New Yorkers elected their first socialist mayor Tuesday, handing far-left Democrat Zohran Mamdani a historic victory — as he claimed a mandate for his potentially budget-busting progressive agenda and all but declared war on President Trump. The Associated Press and NY1 called the race for the 34-year-old Mamdani about 40 minutes after polls closed at 9 p.m., eliciting cheers from his supporters at his campaign’s Brooklyn watch party.

Mamdani, the Democratic nominee, carried 50.4% of votes to independent candidate Andrew Cuomo’s 42% at midnight, with nearly 98% of precincts reporting, the city Board of Elections said. GOP nominee Curtis Sliwa came in third with a rock-bottom 7.1%. The Uganda-born Mamdani will be the Big Apple’s first Muslim, first South Asian and first socialist mayor, as well as one of the youngest.

In the spring of 711, a Muslim army invaded Iberia led by Tariq ibn Ziyad, serving the Arab governor Musa ibn Nusayr, at Guadalete they swiftly defeated Roderick the Visigoth King and then marched northward to the Visigoth capital of Toledo. Both Latin and Arabic chroniclers record that the Jews of the city “opened the gates of Toledo” to Tariq, who conquered the city.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. In 1965, Emanuel Celler finally achieved his lifelong goal of opening America’s gates with the passage of the Immigration and Naturalization Act that ended 44 years of a restrictive immigration policy that made the USA the greatest and most powerful country in the world. And now, as a direct result, both the Big Apple and the Mini-Apple are governed by foreign Muslim mayors whose interests are absolutely antithetical to the American “Posterity” for whom the Constitution was written and whose rights it was intended to defend.

“New York will remain a city of immigrants, a city built by immigrants, powered by immigrants. And as of tonight, led by an immigrant.”
— New York City Mayor-Elect Zohran Mamdani

Translation: It will remain a foreign enclave run by foreigners for the benefit of foreigners.

The handwringing by conservatives and by liberal Jews alike about the loss of New York City is as pointless as it is ironic. New York City and every other urban center in the United States long ago ceased to be American. Now they’re just distribution centers for foreign tax farmers redistributing everything that can be skimmed off, stolen, or scammed from the productive to the interest groups presently in demographic power.

None of this is a secret or a surprise to anyone with even a modest grasp of history. Mass immigration marks the end of every society and every empire, even on those occasions when it doesn’t directly cause it. I certainly welcome the new regimes in New York City and Minneapolis, and will watch with interest, if not amusement, to see how they take advantage of the wretched retards who actively encouraged these foreigners to come and rule over them.

I only hope the beleaguered residents of New York City and Minneapolis and other cities blessed with vibrant rule will remember that all the bad things they are complaining about, all the terrible things that they will be complaining about in the future, are things that they were warned about, but dismissed as impossible because they decided those who warned them were bad people.

25 years ago I compared riding the subway in New York City to riding a train in Beirut. Tonight, the city, in great disgrace, elected a muslim socialist to be the next mayor. NEW YORK HAS OFFICIALLY FALLEN.
— John Rocker

DISCUSS ON SG

5GW: The Extension of the Battlefield

As I previously wrote in The Fifth Generation of Modern War: Drones, Attrition, and the Collapse of the Logistics Sanctuary, the advent of drone warfare, combined with the digital elements that make it uniquely lethal, genuinely represents a new generation of modern war. It is clear that the Russians understand this much more clearly, and are able to describe it and articulate the issues much better than Western military historians and strategists, because they are actively engaged in it.

Simplicius quotes the retired General Yuri Baluyevsky, Russia’s Chief of General Staff from 2004-2008, from his recent article on the current revolution in military affairs, as well as a Russian source working in logistics on the Pokrovsk front, that explain and underline how this really is a new generation of war, the chief aspect of which is the massive extension of the battlespace well beyond the traditional battlefield.

The piece urges for Russia to adapt to this ‘new reality’ as soon as possible. The urgency stems from the stated thesis that drone tech capabilities will increase faster than the effective means of countering them:

It is unlikely that there will be an expert who denies the revolutionary changes in military affairs – the “unmanned revolution” or the “drone war revolution.” Perhaps, in a broader sense, it could be called the “digital war.” There is every reason to believe that this process will continue to expand and deepen, as the potential for increasing the “drone war” exceeds the ability to effectively counter this type of weapon.

The authors go on to elaborate that drones are getting progressively cheaper and smaller while increasing their range. In the near future, they note, the tactical rear will become a total “zone of extermination”—which it has essentially already become according to many frontline reports.

The tactical battlefield and the rear, tens of kilometers away from the line of contact, will essentially become a “zone of extermination.” Naturally, countering these threats will be a top priority. As a result, the armed struggle will primarily focus on gaining “drone supremacy” in the air. Consequently, the organization of military forces must align with the goals and objectives of achieving such supremacy in the air and space.

In light of the above, here is an interesting breakdown from a Russian channel on the Pokrovsk direction, describing just how the situation has evolved in terms of logistics and putting units in positions.

We continue our difficult work to supply our assault units in the Pokrovsk direction. This month, the main focus was on the assault units and their communication and survival on the battlefield.

First, we need to explain what the line of contact looks like in this direction, and in general, in general, now-on the entire front. First, military personnel assembled and ready to perform their combat tasks are brought to the assembly point 20-25 km from the front line. Then they wait for the command. They are loaded at the beginning of the next segment and dropped off at a point approximately 10-13 km from the LBS (line of contact), where they can stay for some time – from several hours to several days. This is a nearby evacuation point from which you can almost guarantee to escape and survive.

Then there is the next drop-off at a point 5-7 km from the LBS – it is not possible to drive any further. All drops-offs and movements across the terrain among minefields and open areas are carried out by guides.
Then, on foot, they reach the point from which the assault may begin. From there, they approach the positions. As a rule, only half of them reach the positions, while the rest are injured or killed by drone strikes.

A pair of stormtroopers who have reached the ruins of a house usually travel in pairs, hiding in the ruins and basements. They do not venture outside unnecessarily. From there, they must maintain communication with their commander to stay informed about what is happening outside, coordinate their actions with their neighbors, provide assistance, and engage in assaults. They may spend a week, a month, or two in the ruins.

If the weather is bad: fog, rain, snowfall, then losses are sharply reduced. FPV drones almost do not fly in the rain – droplets stick to the camera. The water curtain strongly jams the signal at 5.8 Ghz. However, the enemy artillery begins to work more actively.

The wiring of any armored group is usually noticed by the enemy 10-15 km before the LBS. By the time it reaches the initial positions for the attack, there are already dozens of enemy FPV drones in the sky and dozens more ready to launch. All of this then falls on the armored group and the paratroopers. Yes, it’s difficult for our troops, and there are casualties, but we are still able to drop paratroopers and advance. Our main losses are in the form of wounded soldiers.

As per the description above, the 25km-from-LoC zone has already become extremely dicey, where dispersion is necessary for survival. Then from 5-7km onward, it essentially becomes the ‘death zone’, to borrow mountaineering terminology.

Baluyevsky and his co-author state that the chief development of the modern battlefield is the total doing-away with the ‘fog of war’, initiating an era of complete battlefield transparency.

War has fundamentally changed and these changes don’t just change and expand the tactical battlefield, it indicates tremendous changes to the logistical art, the operational art, the strategic art, and even the geostrategic balance of power.

DISCUSS ON SG