Tag: media

It took them long enough

National Review finally comes around on Trump, in the form of a lengthy VDH article:

Something has gone terribly wrong with the Republican party, and it has nothing to do with the flaws of Donald Trump. Something like his tone and message would have to be invented if he did not exist. None of the other 16 primary candidates — the great majority of whom had far greater political expertise, more even temperaments, and more knowledge of issues than did Trump — shared Trump’s sense of outrage — or his ability to convey it — over what was wrong: The lives and concerns of the Republican establishment in the media and government no longer resembled those of half their supporters.

The Beltway establishment grew more concerned about their sinecures in government and the media than about showing urgency in stopping Obamaism. When the Voz de Aztlan and the Wall Street Journal often share the same position on illegal immigration, or when Republicans of the Gang of Eight are as likely as their left-wing associates to disparage those who want federal immigration law enforced, the proverbial conservative masses feel they have lost their representation. How, under a supposedly obstructive, conservative-controlled House and Senate, did we reach $20 trillion in debt, institutionalize sanctuary cities, and put ourselves on track to a Navy of World War I size? Compared with all that, “making Mexico pay” for the wall does not seem all that radical. Under a Trump presidency the owner of Univision would not be stealthily writing, as he did to Team Clinton, to press harder for open borders — and thus the continuance of a permanent and profitable viewership of non-English speakers.

Trump’s outrageousness was not really new; it was more a 360-degree mirror of an already outrageous politics as usual. One does not need lectures about conservatism from Edmund Burke when, at the neighborhood school, English becomes a second language, or when one is rammed by a hit-and-run driver illegally in the United States who flees the scene of the accident. Do our elites ever enter their offices to find their opinion-journalism jobs outsourced at half the cost to writers in India?

It sounds to me as if the conservative media is beginning to worry that they went too far and are beginning to understand that they have lost a significant portion of their audience. They preened and postured, and now, if Hillary wins, they will be tied to her like an anchor forever.

I can’t speak for anyone else, but as for me, they simply have no credibility as political observers. Their position never made one single iota of sense.

How the system is rigged

Pat Buchanan explains how the media is the driving force for globalism:

In what sense is the system rigged?

Consider Big Media – the elite columnists and commentators, the dominant national press, and the national and cable networks, save Fox. Not in this writer’s lifetime has there been such blanket hatred and hostility of a presidential candidate of a major party.

“So what?” They reply. “We have a free press!”

But in this election, Big Media have burst out of the closet as an adjunct of the regime and the attack arm of the Clinton campaign, aiming to bring Trump down.

Half a century ago, Theodore White wrote of the power and bias of the “adversary press” that sought to bring down Richard Nixon.

“The power of the press in America,” wrote Teddy, “is a primordial one. It sets the agenda of public discussion; and this sweeping power is unrestrained by any law. It determines what people will talk about and think about – an authority that in other nations is reserved for tyrants, priests, parties and mandarins.”

On ABC’s “This Week,” Newt Gingrich volunteered on Sunday that, “without the unending one-sided assault of the news media, Trump would be beating Hillary by 15 points.”

On this one, Newt is right.

With all due respect, as adversaries, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are not terribly formidable. Big Media is the power that sustains the forces of globalism against those of Americanism.

I just finished editing Mike Cernovich’s MAGA Mindset, which Castalia House will be publishing soon. It is even better than Gorilla Mindset and it could not be more timely, because he not only reaches the same conclusion as Buchanan, but spells out how Trump used social media to fight the power of the Big Media. More importantly, he also explains the way Trump was able to develop his unique ability to use it so effectively.

You all know that Identity > Culture > Politics. But that is a strategic description. The tactical one, in this context, is Mindset > Media > Culture.

That is why the current cultural battle for the West is focused on social media. That is why Twitter and Facebook and Goodreads and Wikipedia are relentlessly policing their users. And that is why there is literally nothing more important, tactically, politically and culturally, that you can do than support AltTech organizations such as Gab and Brave and Infogalactic.

Strategically, of course, there are three very different priorities: Live a Christian life. Marry. Have white children.

Big money and the media power of the establishment elites and the transnationals may well prevail.

And if they do, Middle America – those who cling to their Bibles, bigotries and guns in Barack Obama’s depiction, those “deplorables” who are “racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic,” who are “not America” and are “irredeemable” in Hillary Clinton’s depiction – will have to accept the new regime.

But that does not mean they must love it, like it or respect it.

And losing the political battle, even permanently, does not mean losing the West. It merely means that the Age of Democracy is at an end. The West existed before democracy and it will survive the demise of democracy.

None can tell the difference

John Derbyshire awakes to the reality of the bifactional ruling party:

 I don’t know whether people nowadays still read George Orwell’s novel Animal Farm. It’s a bit of a Cold War piece. The Cold War did happen, though. And, as I’ve remarked elsewhere, it was a very big deal. It has lessons to teach; and Orwell was one of our best teachers.

The story of the novel is that the farm animals, under the leadership of the pigs, stage a revolution against the human owners of the farm. They drive out the owners and take the place over, again under the pigs’ leadership.

In the last chapter, though, an odd thing happens. The pigs start behaving like humans. One day, as the other animals are hard at work weeding the turnip field, the pigs invite a delegation of neighboring farmers—all humans, of course—to inspect the pig-owned farm. Then the pigs and their human guests have a party in the farmhouse.

The other animals hear laughter and singing from the farmhouse. They sneak up to look in through the windows at what’s going on. They see the pigs and the humans in happy concord, making flattering speeches and toasting each other. Last line of the novel:


The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which.

Watching the GOP’s response to this media-manufactured outrage, I’ve feeling a bit like one of those farm animals. Do we really have two political parties, each representing a broad interest? Or is the current party system just a hoax on the rest of us by an Establishment who all fundamentally believe the same things?

The latter. Next question?

In the meantime, the Establishment has spoken. Voting is unnecessary. Hillary has already won the pre-election. Please to take your now-demoralized populism home and refrain from voting for the Literally Hitler Donald Trump on November 8th.

Actions have consequences

Jewish commentators are aghast that no one on the Left or the Right gives a damn about what they think or want anymore.

In a 2011 article published by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, politically conservative Jewish radio host Benyamin Korn reflected upon the scores of Jews populating conservative new media, concluding:


Certainly there is another reason why Jews, per se, have attracted so little notice in the conservative new media: the change in American conservatism itself. Ethnically diverse and intellectually formidable, today’s conservatism is reliably pro-Israel, comfortably Judeo-Christian and for the most part promotes a nuanced social conservatism. In a movement that is credible and hospitable to American Jews, and from which the ethno-centrism of yore is largely absent, Jewish journalists will flourish.

At least until the rise of the alt-Right. Fast-forward five years and it would appear that conservative new media has turned on its own, with sites like Breitbart (whose former executive chairman now runs the Trump campaign) being used to weed out Jewish Republicans unwilling to toe the party line. Weird anti-Semitic memes like Pepe the Frog have trended among Trump supporters and an army of faceless anti-Semites has taken to Twitter and other social media outlets on Trump’s behalf. The anti-Semitism on the Right is so overwhelming in fact that many Jews have left the Republican Party altogether, receiving farewells that boil down to, Don’t let the door hit you in the tuchus on the way out.

Is the Alt-Right Borrowing Jihadist Propaganda Techniques? The Alt-Right and BLM are One and the Same

So, what of the political future of American Jewry? The one thing that 2016 has made clear is this: Jewish Americans are not welcome among the political elite on the Left or the Right. For the first time in my lifetime, Jewish Americans who make no bones about identifying as Jews, whether they are Orthodox in practice or Zionist in outlook, are being given the cold shoulder by the political establishment at large.

What is fascinating here is the total inability to connect the action with the consequence. The Alt-Right has risen to replace the conservative media because the scores of entryist Jews who filled it after William F. Buckley’s purge of the Birchers transformed the conservative media into something that is close to the polar opposite of what it once was. And, of course, because so many of those (((conservatives))) are prone to writing propagandistic fiction, as (((Susan Goldberg))) repeatedly demonstrates in this short piece.

  1. The Alt-Right is not the same as Black Lives Matter. That’s an insanely stupid lie.
  2. Pepe the Frog is not an anti-Semitic meme. Putting a swastika on Bugs Bunny doesn’t make Bugs Bunny an anti-Semitic meme. The medium is not the message.
  3. 78 percent of Jews voted for Obama in 2012. There weren’t “many Jews” in the Republican Party in the first place.
  4. The anti-Semitism on the Right is not overwhelming by any measure. If Goldberg thinks it’s overwhelming now, just wait until the next financial crash. If Jews were really as smart as they like to advertise, they would never have allowed Jane Yellen to be appointed Fed chairman, but would have insisted on the former head of the Chinese central bank taking the job, and the eventual fall. And they would have kept very, very far away from non-Jewish crooks like John Corzine

A conservatism that is pro-Israel instead of pro-American, “Judeo-Christian” instead of Christian, and “promotes a nuanced social conservatism” instead of promoting a staunch pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-child, pro-Western-civilization conservatism is of zero interest to pretty much everyone who isn’t named (((Goldberg))) or (((Shapiro))). Neither immigrants nor natives have any use for it.

Jews are no longer welcome among the political elite on the Left or the Right because both sides now realize that their primary motivation, “is it good for the Jews?”, is no longer of any benefit to the objectives of  either the Left or the Right. Perhaps more importantly in the long term, the transformation from ideology politics to identity politics means there is no longer any more place for Jews in the Christian American tribe than there is for Christian Americans in the Jewish tribe.

Judeo-Christianity was never anything more than propaganda, but even if you can’t understand that, you should be able to grasp that it is not a coherent political identity, being both anti-Semitic and anti-Christian.

However, it wasn’t until reading Fukuyama’s The Origins of Political Order that the fundamental problem of Jews in the West became clear to me. (This was a little ironic in that the book has not, in the first 300 pages, even discussed the Jews.) What happened is that the West abandoned the kinship rules that govern the rest of the world as a result of the Catholic Church’s actions in the early middle ages. But not being Christian, the Jews were unaffected by this transformation away from the extended family towards the nuclear family and the individual, and therefore they continued to play by the same kinship rules that the rest of the world has always played by.

These different rules, individual vs extended family, created an inevitable stress between the kinship and the non-kinship populations, which periodically flared up in the historical conflicts we all know. It may also explain the post-1965 attack on the nuclear family. So, the real problem now facing Jews in the West now is not anti-Semitism, the huge invasion of rival tribes that play by the same kinship rules, or even the way in which the non-kinship Westerners are beginning to abandon their traditional rules in favor of a synthetic kinship.

No, the real challenge for the Jews is going to be accepting the fact that their historical success primarily stems from playing the game on the easy coop level when everyone else with whom they were competing was going it more or less alone. In other words, what worked so effectively when the rivals were non-kinship Westerners is not going to work anywhere else in the world, and it is not going to work in a post-Christian West.

I’m not the first to figure this out, of course. The Learned Elders of Wye worked it out 10 years ago. And there is absolutely nothing anyone can do to fix this state of affairs or return things to how they were perceived to be. Once the percentage of the kinship share of the population rose beyond a certain level, it created an absolute necessity for everyone to begin playing by the same kinship rules whether they want to do so or not.

An interview with the BBC

I decided to violate my usual no-interviews policy today because the interview requested didn’t concern me, but rather, Donald Trump. BBC World was looking for Americans outside the USA who support Donald Trump, and a producer discovered my debate with Louise Mensch on Heat Street concerning the subject.

I don’t expect the interview to air, because if there is one thing the media does not want to hear right now, it is that a few remarks about women, however unpalatable, aren’t going to change any rational individual’s mind about Donald Trump. At worst, they indicate that Trump would be a president in the mode of Bill Clinton and Jack Kennedy rather than Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter.

And while it may be true that having a President who is prone to bawdy banter would be bad for women, do you know what is really bad for women? Being raped by immigrants. And do you know what is even worse for women? Being nuked by Russian missiles.

As I told the host, there are only two issues that matter in this presidential election:

  • Immigration
  • War with Russia

On both issues, Donald Trump is the much, much better candidate than Hillary Clinton, who as Secretary of State laid the groundwork for the current war-by-proxy the US military is waging against Russia in Syria and Ukraine.

As I told him, if you are a European, if you are British, regardless of what you think of the man personally, you should not be hoping that Donald Trump is the next U.S. President, you should be praying that he is. Because neither immigration nor war with Russia will be to your benefit either.

So, yeah, I tend to doubt it will ever see air.

On a tangentially-related note, someone mentioned on Monday that a comprehensive list of anti-Trump Republicans would be useful going forward. Lo and behold, there is now a comprehensive list of anti-Trump Republicans available on Infogalactic.

The best of Gab

What you’re missing by not being on Gab:

Hephaestus@Jaciii
Overheard…… 


Wife to Daughter, “What’s Gab?” 


“It’s Twitter for the bad kids.” 


#dreadilk #VFM #gabfam

Speaking of Gab, I’m pleased to be able to say that @a will be a panelist at tomorrow night’s Brainstorm to discuss Alt-Tech and The Disconvergence, including Project Big Fork. If you’d like to join us online at 7 PM Eastern tomorrow, you can register for it here.

British TV finally discovers a problem with diversity

Because the luvvies are now being affected by it:

The BBC was at the centre of a damaging diversity row last night after one of its top radio stars was sacked for being ‘white and male’. Bafta award-winning comedian Jon Holmes was axed from The Now Show – the hit Radio 4 programme he has appeared on for 18 years – when bosses told him ‘we’re recasting it with more women and diversity’.

Last night, leading figures from the world of entertainment and across the political spectrum reacted with fury to the BBC instigating a policy in which it was now choosing performers based on their gender or skin colour, instead of their talent.

Mr Holmes revealed that since his sacking he has heard from other stars who have been rejected by broadcasting bosses because of ‘positive discrimination’. He told how one woman presenter was given a job only later to be told ‘we can’t have you, because you are too white and middle class’. Another performer was considered ‘perfect’ for a role but could not be employed because bosses had been told to cast someone Asian, he said.

Holmes’s axing follows the BBC’s April announcement of new diversity targets to ensure that women will make up half of its staff by 2020, including on screen, on air and in leadership roles. The Corporation is also aiming to increase the proportion of its workforce from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds to 15 per cent by the same date, while lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender people should by then make up eight per cent of the staff.

That’s clearly not enough. I think the BBC should mandate that everyone who appears on air must be gay black women. I can’t think of a better way to defang their incessant propaganda.

I don’t read books or watch movies with diversity anymore. It is a reliable indicator of propaganda, ideological preaching, and moral posturing in the place of entertainment. Diversity is remaking The Wizard of Oz as The Wiz with angry blacks who can’t sing or dance, with political lectures in the place of songs.

There is a reason why historical dramas are increasingly popular in England. It’s the only form of television available anymore without any bloody diversity.

Why I no longer link to Steve Sailer

Or quote him, or quote the Saker, or link to any other writer on the Unz Review. I received this notice from Blogger yesterday:


We have received a DMCA complaint for your blog, Vox Popoli. An e-mail with the details of the complaint was sent to you on Sep 30, 2016, and we reset the post status to “Draft”; you can edit it here. You may republish the post with the offending content and/or link(s) removed. If you believe you have the rights to post this content, you can file a counter-claim with us. For more on our DMCA policy, please click here. Thank you for your prompt attention.

The complaint was related to a post entitled Cold War II, in which I extensively quoted The Saker and provided a link to The Saker’s article on the Unz Review from which I quoted. There are three problems here.

  1. It is obnoxious to file a DMCA complaint instead of directly contacting the writer with a request to take down or modify his post. My words get quoted, repeated, copied, and even plagiarized every day, and I have never filed a DMCA complaint about anyone. This is only the second DMCA complaint I have received; the first was from SFWA when they wanted to hide their embarrassing report about me from the public.
  2. I have an email from the Saker giving me permission to utilize all of his work; we’re even planning to release a collection of his excellent work on the Russian invasion of Syria in an ebook one day.
  3. The Saker told me that the rights to his work have been released to the public under one form of GPL or another; I’ll have to look it up to determine precisely which license it is.

So, until I a) hear from someone at the Unz Review, b) the DMCA complaint is either withdrawn at their own request or Blogger is informed that it is illegitimate and was filed by someone without the rights to do so, and c) I am assured that no DMCA complaints will be made against VP or AG in the future by anyone in their organization, I will neither cite nor link to anything on the Unz Review.

Caveat: if I go to the trouble of successfully counter-claiming and proving that I have the rights to quote the Saker as I see fit, I will continue to read and quote and link to him.

Lest anyone doubt that I am serious about this, I should mention that there was a strategy-related service that used to send me emails, unrequested, every day. One day, after I posted a quote from one of their emails and linked to their site as I had previously done from time to time, they sent me an email demanding that I stop posting quotes from their emails. So, I promptly unsubscribed, and after a few months went by and they realized they had lost an amount of regular traffic, they asked me to resubscribe and start linking to their posts again. I declined to do so, having found superior alternatives in the meantime, and spamfiled them. That was years ago. I haven’t visited their site or read a single email from them since. I don’t even know if they’re still around.

If any site doesn’t want a writer with monthly traffic of ~3 million pageviews providing them with links and traffic, that’s fine. I am too busy to waste time working with fools, the obnoxious, or the obtuse, and I have a surfeit of prospective sources from which to draw. I already feel that I don’t read half the material or address one-quarter the subjects I should. Regardless, as you can see, I have removed Steve Sailer from the list of Day Trips on the sidebar so as not to risk any future violations.

And just to be clear, I’m not blaming Ron Unz, Steve Sailer, or The Saker for this. I tend to doubt any of them even knew about it.

UPDATE: This appears to be an SJW attack on the Unz Review. He said the following in the comments:

Someone mentioned this situation to me. As might be guessed, this was the first I’d heard of it, and I assume it’s some sort of hoax intended as petty harassment by some random activist on the Internet. Anyway, I’m not too familiar with either these DMCA complaints or how Blogger works, but if you’ll drop me a note explaining whom I should email to explain that it’s fraudulent, I’ll be glad to do so.

Regards,
Ron Unz, Publisher

I have, of course, restored the link to Steve Sailer at the Unz Review and I will be contacting Blogger accordingly.

UPDATE: I have filed a counter-complaint with Blogger, citing Mr. Unz’s statement as proof that the complainant did not have the right to the content. That should suffice to resolve the issue.

The petty evil of William F. Buckley

Anonymous Conservative exposes the thought policeman of the conservative establishment to have been a malignant narcissist:

Jonah Goldberg recently said it was time to John Birch the Alt-right. Good luck with that, numbnuts, as an economic apocalypse approaches and the nation finds itself overrun with your Establishment-approved, religion-of-peace amigos. You’ll be lucky to one day escape the mob that is coming yourself. I look on this piece as my get out of jail free card, should I ever have the misfortune to be captured in Jonah’s vicinity.

So I am free to discuss things like this openly now. If the Cuckservative Establishment wants to attack the Alt-right, lets take a look at their saintly standard bearer through the lens of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Our source material will be the piece written by his son in the New York Times. At the time I read it, I was repulsed by what appears to be a case of pretty severe Malignant Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Here I will explain why, after quotes from the article.

First is the picture of him. Notice how despite his youth, you can still see the glassy, disconnected eyes. And the sneer of contempt, almost to the point of a growl with an upcurled lip, which is manifest on the left side of his face, and masked on the right side. That facial asymmetry always seems to hold when I see something aberrant. Faces are handed, and the left side almost never hides the demons within as well as the right.

Now the article.

Pup’s self-medicating was, I’d venture, a chemical extension of the control he asserted over every other aspect of his life. The term “control freak” is pejorative. Put it this way: Few great men — and I use the term precisely, for Pup was a great man — do not assert total control over their domains…


He was invariably the sunniest and most pleasant creature in the room. The moods of those in attendance upon him — Mum’s, mainly — did not always match his.


A TV remote control in the hands of an autocrat of the entertainment room becomes a “Star Trek” phaser set on stun. He and Mum might be watching “Murder on the Orient Express” with a half-dozen guests when, just as a key plot point was being introduced, suddenly the screen would fill with a documentary on Che Guevara or the Tuareg nomads of the Sahara…


There, the three of us would eat one of Julian the cook’s delicious meals on trays and watch a movie. I say “a movie,” but “movies” would be more accurate, since several minutes in, without bothering to say, “Let’s watch something else,” he’d simply change the channel. One day, when I was out of town and called to check in, Danny reported, with a somewhat-strained chuckle, “We watched parts of five movies last night…”


Once or twice during the convalescence, I became so splutteringly frustrated after the fourth or fifth channel change that I silently stormed out of the room.

I know what Buckley was doing because I have seen this mind in action. That storming out was what Buckley wanted. Think about it. He was watching those shows. Was he not drawn into them? Was his interest alone not piqued to see the climactic resolution unfold? Was his boredom climaxing at the exact moment everyone else’s interest was maximally invested?

The satisfaction he felt when everyone else was enraged at that critical moment was more pleasurable to him than seeing the plot twists revealed…. Buckley was not a great man. He was, like all narcissists, an insecure, mentally damaged coward, elevated to his position by an establishment that saw him as a useful idiot who would happily suppress the most fierce advocates for freedom, from John Birch to Ayn Rand.

I never, ever liked Buckley’s writing. There was always something that was distinctly off about it to me. There was never any depth or substance to it; there is more meat to a single chapter of Sam Huntington than there is in Buckley’s entire oeuvre. His columns never seemed to hit the target, and his novels were meandering and pointless. Yes, he was intelligent and influential, but always in the most shallow and superficial manner. It is not even remotely surprising to me that the establishment he constructed and policed has not long survived his death. In a different situation, he would have been a dictator, and probably have met with much the same fate as a Mussolini.

Read the whole thing. The incident with the boat at Christmas makes it very clear that there was definitely something seriously psychologically wrong with the man. He was basically the real-life version of Ricky Bobby’s father in Talladega Nights, if the father had punched out the waitress and burned down the Applebee’s instead of just mouthing off to her and being thrown out.

AC explains the driving motivation of the intelligent malignant narcissist:  This is the cerebral narcissist’s dream – tangible proof which they can handle in their brain, that everyone else is an idiot, and they are the smart one. It relieves the great insecurity which drives them unrelentingly to try and one-up everyone else.

This is why I don’t worry about to those who can admit that they have failed, admit that they are wrong, and don’t feel the need to inappropriately flaunt their intelligence at all times, but keep a very wary eye on those who are never wrong, always win, and claim even the most abject defeat to be a victory in disguise. They’re not all malignant narcissists, they may only be garden-variety Gamma secret kings, but in no circumstances can any of them be trusted in any way.

Notice how often Christopher Buckley tried to reason with his father, to absolutely no avail. That’s an unwinnable scenario with malignant narcissists, it is the Kobayashi Maru. Don’t argue with them, don’t try to correct them, don’t try to fix things for them, don’t enable them in any way, just keep your distance, keep them out of your life, and leave them to their delusional hellholes.

Best of Gab

Stickwick gets my vote today for this response to a Nature request:

“Are you a working scientist who plans to vote for Donald Trump? We want to talk to you.”

About what, fast-tracking the fiery death of your career? If Nature is surprised by a lack of response, they should read Scott Adams.