This is one of the strangest things I’ve ever heard. But I have no doubt that it is true and that her suspicions about the intentions of the Feds contacting her are entirely correct:
Sarah Hoyt posted to X, “You know what’s REALLY creepy? In the run-up to Jan 6th, we had a lot of “first time commenters” drop by my blog trying to convince me to attend. At the time we were PROFOUNDLY broke and some of them even offered to pay my way. Out of the blue.”
She continued, “I didn’t accept because I didn’t see any purpose to the gathering. I still don’t. (Yes, I understand Trump might have thought he could shame the House into doing the right thing. That level of naivite shocks me, still.) BUT—”
“Well in the aftermath I wondered. I still do. None of those IDs commented on my blog again, funnily enough. It’s probably nothing, but it does make one think,” she concluded.
I was similarly approached prior to the fake Unite The Right rally in 2017. That was the event that was staged in Charlottesville, Virginia and designed to entrap nationalists and tar them as “white supremacists”. I was contacted by Richard Spencer and asked to be a speaker at the event, which, of course, I declined, being neither a white supremacist nor a political activist despite what the fantasists of Wikipedia might erroneously claim.
However, I think it was more than just Mrs. Hoyt being a contributor to Instapundit that caused her to be targeted. GamerGate left a lasting impression on the government-media complex, the entire literary world is still butthurt about Sad Puppies, and her being the head of the Sad Puppies rebellion almost certainly put her on the top of their list of problematic badthinkers to be discredited.
It’s amusing, of course, since Sarah is a die-hard civic nationalist, a self-styled “American born in Portugal,” who deplores genuine nationalism nearly as wholeheartedly as the average globalist. But those who think in symbols rather than in coherent syllogisms are seldom concerned with the logic of their actions or what is truly in the hearts of their intended victims.
Of course, Richard Spencer was a fraud, which I realized soon after interviewing him and seeing how shallow his claimed beliefs were. He’s just an actor playing the role of a villain.
One of the United States’ foremost white supremacists, Richard Spencer, has called for followers to vote for Kamala Harris in the upcoming elections.
As this lengthy article in Foreign Affairs suggests, some of the smarter clowns realize that BRICS isn’t going away, and that as long as Clown World continues to rule in such a shamelessly hypocritical and unbalanced manner, most of the unaligned nations of the global East and South will choose BRICS over subjugation to Clown World.
The technology competition between China and the United States may lead to the erection of a digital iron curtain and the emergence of two separate and incompatible technological spheres, which would make fence-sitting more challenging. Finding a common denominator in the grouping will become more difficult, particularly on sensitive geopolitical issues such as the war in Ukraine. Those differences might make the bloc less influential on the international stage, even as its efforts to advance alternative currencies to the U.S. dollar gather strength.
For the United States and other Western powers, the dynamics inside BRICS underline the necessity of taking the grouping—and the underlying dissatisfaction with the current order—seriously. It is entirely reasonable for rising powers such as Brazil to search for hedging options and to feel dissatisfied with how the United States has steered the existing system. Western powers should focus on not making things worse by, for example, trying to scare middle powers away from joining BRICS, which smacks of paternalism and quasi-colonial interference. In the same way, Western attempts to warn middle powers in the global South about being too dependent on China have proved ineffective.
Western countries can do more to not alienate those middle powers seeking greater space for maneuver and to ensure that BRICS does not become an anti-Western bloc. They should spell out more clearly how certain sanctions relate to violations of international law, and try to be consistent in applying those sanctions against all violators—not just against geopolitical adversaries. Countries in the global South want to escape the hegemony of the dollar when they see Western countries, for instance, freezing Russian central bank reserves in 2022 as a response to the invasion of Ukraine but receiving no punishment for similarly unlawful military interventions in the Middle East and Africa. Wealthy countries can also be better problem solvers for poorer countries, including by sharing technology and assisting with the green transition. And the West should make more genuine efforts to democratize the global order, such as by doing away with the anachronistic tradition that only Europeans head the IMF and only U.S. citizens lead the World Bank.
Such actions would build trust and undermine Chinese and Russian attempts to enlist the global South to an anti-Western cause. Rather than bemoaning the emergence of the BRICS, the West should court those member states that have a stake in making sure that the grouping does not become an overtly anti-Western outfit intent on undermining the global order.
It’s somewhat amusing that after admitting how all of the previous predictions of the inevitable failure of BRICS for the last 18 years have been wrong, the Foreign Affairs analysts point to the material signs of its success – more than 40 countries asking for permission to join BRICS – as evidence the expansion of the group’s membership and influence will somehow damage the international bloc by reducing the cohesiveness between the neutral faction (Brazil and India) and the anti-Clown faction (China, Iran, and Russia). This, of course, completely misses the point, which is that neither faction has any intention of submitting to, or obeying, the hypocritical and self-serving dictates of the so-called “neoliberal rules-based global order” that we call Clown World.
And the solution recommended is impossible at the present. By any and every standard of so-called “international law”, Israel should be as heavily sanctioned by the “rules-based world order” as Russia is. Israel is observably bombing civilians in Lebanon and engaging in ethnic cleansing in Palestine, while Russia is fighting a war to defend Russians living in historically Russian territory who were under attack for more than a decade by the foreign, Clown World-installed, Kiev regime. Every sanction that has been applied to Russia should, under any sane, rational, or fair standard, have also been applied to Israel. Even more egregiously, many of those anti-Russian sanctions have also been applied to Belarus, which hasn’t done anything at all to any of its neighbors.
Simplicius notes: Israel continues to pummel Lebanon, proving itself to be the only country in the world that can literally bomb and invade all of its neighbors at will without serious international consequences. Note I said consequences, not ‘condemnation’. There’s plenty of the latter to go around, but it doesn’t lead to anything tangible because all global institutions are co-opted, captured, and compromised by the Hydra, and as such only pay lip service to tragedies perpetrated by their clients and masters alike. Isn’t it interesting how—just to take one small example of many—the Chess world’s FIDE organization has banned not only Russia but even Belarus merely as offhand accomplice, yet Israel, for an actual holocaust it’s committing on its neighbors, has not been banned. The same goes for the Olympics, EuroVision, and other contests; it’s quite incredible when you think about it.
It’s not as if anyone doesn’t notice this. Regardless of how far you think Israel’s right to defend itself should extend, everyone around the world has seen that the rules of the “rules-based world order” are unjust and are applied unevenly, which is why they quite naturally no longer want any part of it. Because, obviously, if major powers like China and Russia can be sanctioned, how much more easily can smaller nations be subjected to the same treatment if they don’t submit slavishly to Clown World’s unending demands?
The rulers of Clown World have simply never understood that the king is not above the law, he is more strictly bound by the law than any of his subjects. And when he refuses to be bound by the law, he ceases to be legitimate and thereby loses the Mandate of Heaven.
Unless Clown World ceases to be what it is, the rest of the world will prefer the alternative, any alternative, that promises not to punish them for doing no more than pursuing their reasonable national interests. Which is why, I suspect, more than a few nations that are presently under the domination of Clown World will seek to free themselves from it, beginning with Turkiye, and followed soon after, one would expect, by Hungary and Switzerland.
According to the US Department of State, the PRC Ministry of Civil Affairs has notified the American government that since August 28, civil affairs departments across China will no longer carry out foreign adoption work. Could you confirm the stop? And if so, could you elaborate on it?
Mao Ning: The Chinese government has adjusted its cross-border adoption policy. Henceafter, apart from the adoption of a child or stepchild from one’s collateral relatives by blood of the same generation and up to the third degree of kinship by foreigners coming to China, China will not send children abroad for adoption. This is also in line with the spirit of relevant international covenants. We express our appreciation to those foreign governments and families, who wish to adopt Chinese children, for their good intention and the love and kindness they have shown.
This is a strong statement of Chinese nationalism. It’s a rejection of the concept that an individual’s “nation” is whatever a piece of paper says it is and that one’s identity is chiefly determined by geography rather than blood. This is an important step in combatting the concept of economy uber alles, the globalist philosophy which regards human beings as nothing more than interchangeable cogs in the global finance machine.
I doubt it’s an accident that the rise of Russia coincides with the Russian ban on US adoptions in 2012.
The arrest of the “French” citizen Pavel Durov is a harbinger of the end of globalization and the transnational corpocracy:
Durov, a committed cosmopolitan liberal, is a typical representative of the ‘global society’. He has had tensions with all the countries he has worked in, starting with his homeland and continuing throughout his more recent travels. Of course, as a big businessman in a sensitive industry, he has been in dialectical interaction with the governments and intelligence services of different countries, which has required maneuvering and compromise. But the attitude of avoiding any national entrenchment persisted. Having passports for all occasions seemed to widen his scope for action and increase his confidence. At least for as long as this very global society lived and breathed, calling itself the liberal world order. But it’s now coming to an end. And this time the possession of French nationality, along with a number of other things, promises to exacerbate rather than alleviate the predicament of the accused.
The ‘transnational’ entities will increasingly be required to ‘ground’ themselves – to identify with a particular state. If they do not want to, they will be affixed to the ground by force, by being recognized as agents not of the global world but of specific hostile powers. This is what is happening now with Telegram, but it’s not the first and it will not be the last such instance.
The struggle to subjugate the various actors in this sphere, thus fragmenting a previously unified field, is likely to be a key component of the next global political phase.
What’s particularly remarkable about this arrest is that it wasn’t one of the nationalist countries that arrested Durov, but one of the Clown World countries. This marks the end of Clown World’s ability to criticize the nationalist countries from defending their own national interests against the corpocracy.
BRICS—originally made up of just Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—is going to need a new name. After not adding any new members for 13 years, the non-Western international group welcomed Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates last August. The floodgates have since been opened: In February, South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor claimed that over 30 nations now want to join the international group.
Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has been vocal about wanting to join the bloc, lobbying Russian, Chinese, and just this week, Indian officials about Malaysia’s application. Thailand also submitted a formal application to join the bloc last June, and officials hope that the Southeast Asian country will be able to join the BRICS summit in Russia this October.
BRICS, which traces its name to a Goldman Sachs report in 2001, has long struggled to find an economic or geopolitical purpose, as its member countries have little in common besides being large and non-Western. But in recent years, the bloc is increasingly trying to position itself as the voice of the so-called Global South, a term used to describe postcolonial developing economies. It’s an argument that’s picked up steam since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, which brought geopolitics back to the fore and highlighted the power of the U.S. in the global economic system.
“For some countries, BRICS can be a counterweight against U.S. economic hegemony,” Rahman Yaacob, a research fellow in the Southeast Asia program at the Lowy Institute, says. Joining the bloc could also be a way to hedge politically, as the intensifying rivalry between Washington and Beijing risks splitting the world into two opposing groups.
Think about how awful the neo-liberal world order has obviously become, that dozens of nations around the globe are finding mutual purpose in helping each other resist its influence and control. The promises of “freedom” and “democracy” and “open societies” have turned out to be shamelessly satanic lies.
If you’re a government official seeking to police the political opinions of others, you should lose your job, just as this Argentine minister lost his after attempting to speech police the Argentine national soccer team:
Julio Garro — Argentina’s former undersecretary of sport — lost his job on Thursday after he publicly called for Messi to apologize after the Argentinian national team sang a racially insensitive song after winning the Copa America.
Following a 1-0 win over Colombia in the final, midfielder Enzo Fernandez livestreamed himself and teammates singing the song, which makes fun of Black players on the French national team.
Listen, spread the word / They play in France, but they’re all from Angola / How lovely, they will run / They are trans lovers like that f*ck Mbappe / Your mom is Nigerian, your dad is Cameroonian / But on your ID, it says French nationality.
Garro said that by chanting the derogatory lyrics, the team put Argentina in a bad light. Fernandez has already apologized publicly for sharing the footage via social media, but Messi hasn’t addressed it.
“I think the captain of the national team and the AFA president should come out and apologize for this case,” Garro told Argentinian radio Urbano Play. “It is fitting. It leaves us in a bad light with so much glory.”
Argentina president Javier Milei has since issued a statement via social media and confirmed that Garro is no longer in the position. “The president’s office reports that no government can tell what to comment, what to think or what to do to the Argentina national team, world champion and two-time American champion, or to any other citizen,” it read. “For this reason, Julio Garro ceases to be undersecretary of sports of the nation.”
I’m not a fan of free speech. But I’m even less a fan of subjective and ex post facto public thought policing on the basis of Clown World values. Milei did well to immediately can the guy.
Also, the Argentine players are entirely correct. Far too many players on the European “national” teams are foreign nationals. They are called “national” teams, not “paper citizenship” or even “legal resident” teams, after all.
I’m trying to figure out what sort of retard in the US State Department thinks that anyone in a position of leadership in Russia or North Korea, or anywhere else for that matter, gives a fragment of a flying rodent’s posterior about the USA’s diplomatic concerns about North Korea.
The recent rapprochement between Russia and North Korea could embolden Pyongyang to take a more risky approach in the global arena, a senior US diplomat has warned. Deputy Assistant Secretary Jung Pak, who serves as the State Department’s senior official for North Korea, told Bloomberg on Monday that Moscow’s “complete embrace” of North Korea could mean that the country would be more inclined to threaten its southern neighbor, export weapons abroad, and defy Washington’s calls to return to denuclearization talks.
Just as the Swiss government doesn’t seem to grasp that it can’t play neutral anymore now that it has taken sides against Russia, the USA no longer has any influence whatsoever with Russia, Iran, Yemen, Syria, China, or any of the countries that it has either a) sanctioned or b) bombed.
The world is no longer monopolar. And anyone you have treated as an enemy not only has no reason to pay attention to your opinion, he has a powerful incentive to actively pursue those things that threaten you.
Andrei Martyanov is correct. The USA and its European satrapies are not only agreement-incapable, they are so delusional that they can’t even do basic diplomacy anymore.
The Ukrainian opposition is speaking out against what the foreign Clown World regime has done to its people ever since it gained independence:
One of the most important reasons why states collapse is the degradation of their elites. Historians argue that the Roman Empire fell not so much from the onslaught of barbarians, but rather that it rotted away from the inside. If we take our own history, roughly the same thing happened with ancient Kiev. For centuries, Kiev was the capital of the Russian early feudal state, but lost its significance as a result of civil strife caused by the princely elite.
Political clown President Zelensky has irreparably damaged the foundations of Ukraine’s statehood and may very well end up being the country’s last president. Every Ukrainian president, having received power from the hands of the people, tried to sell it, and each time was more and more successful. At the moment, Ukraine has already been sold in a global political auction, and when it is finally used up, will be thrown into a landfill.
Does this suggest that the people of Ukraine are flawed? No, it suggests that a flawed elite has formed which cannot and does not want to govern the people.
Today, Western propagandists work to convince Ukrainians that they will not succeed without their own statehood, but in reality this statehood was sold to international corporations a long time ago. In its present form, such statehood does not correspond to the national interests of Ukrainians. Today, Ukraine’s elite has not only sold the interests of the country, but sold its people into becoming cannon fodder for other, more powerful countries’ geopolitical ambitions.
The process of the country’s collapse has already begun, and is at the terminal stage.
The same thing has happened to Americans too, but most of them don’t realize it yet. The main reason no foreign elite should ever be permitted anywhere near the center of national power and influence, regardless of the system of government, is because they will inevitably utilize it against the interests of the the nation itself.
This is why we see the same process playing out again and again regardless of whether the national government is organized in the form of a monarchy, an aristocracy, or a democracy. The nominal form of the governmental structure doesn’t actually matter very much when the interests of the elite are fundamentally at odds with the interests of the people.
IN THE 1980s Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher built a new conservatism around markets and freedom. Today Donald Trump, Viktor Orban and a motley crew of Western politicians have demolished that orthodoxy, constructing in its place a statist, “anti-woke” conservatism that puts national sovereignty before the individual. These national conservatives are increasingly part of a global movement with its own networks of thinkers and leaders bound by a common ideology. They sense that they own conservatism now—and they may be right.
Despite its name, national conservatism could not be more different from the ideas of Reagan and Thatcher. Rather than being sceptical of big government, national conservatives think ordinary people are beset by impersonal global forces and that the state is their saviour. Unlike Reagan and Thatcher, they hate pooling sovereignty in multilateral organisations, they suspect free markets of being rigged by the elites and they are hostile to migration. They despise pluralism, especially the multicultural sort. National conservatives are obsessed with dismantling institutions they think are tainted by wokeness and globalism.
Instead of a sunny belief in progress, national conservatives are seized by declinism. William Buckley, a thinker of the old school, once quipped that “A conservative is someone who stands athwart history, yelling stop.” By comparison, national conservatives are revolutionaries. They do not see the West as the shining city on the hill, but as Rome before the fall—decadent, depraved and about to collapse amid a barbarian invasion. Not content with resisting progress, they also want to destroy classical liberalism.
Some people expect all this to blow over. National conservatives are too incoherent to pose a threat, they say. Giorgia Meloni, Italy’s prime minister, supports Ukraine; Mr Orban has a soft spot for Russia. The Polish Law and Justice party (PiS) is anti-gay; in France Marine Le Pen is permissive. Besides, the obsession with national sovereignty would make people worse off, as trade collapses, economic growth stalls and civil rights are curtailed. Voters would surely choose to restore the world liberalism made.
That view is unforgivably complacent. National conservatism is the politics of grievance: if policies lead to bad outcomes, its leaders will shift the blame onto globalists and immigrants and claim this only proves how much is wrong with the world. For all their contradictions, national conservatives have been able to unite around their hostility towards common enemies, including migrants (especially Muslims), globalists and all their supposed abettors.
The growing peril of national conservatism, THE ECONOMIST, 15 February 2024
Let Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher burn in Hell, along with all the other conservatives who signed off, however reluctantly, on the surrender of the white Christian West to a satanic, pedophile, globalist elite that wanted to impose The Empire That Never Ended on a world that was intoxicated with what it erroneously believed was the triumph of human liberty and the so-called End of History.
There is no “national conservativism” because we’re not fucking conservatives. We want Clown World and all its cursed clowns back in Hell where they belong. We’re nationalists, period. Let Russians rule Russia. Let Americans rule America. Let the Germans rule Germany. Let the Chinese rule China. And let everyone stay in their own nations, and live according to their cultures and traditions instead of trying to impose their ways on everyone else around the world.
The neoliberals know they’re wrong. They absolutely know it, they just can’t bring themselves to completely abandon their false ideals, fake principles, and their elite positions that their satanic masters have granted them.
The citizens of many Western countries see illegal migration as a source of disorder and a drain on the public purse. They worry that their children will grow up to be poorer than they are. They are anxious about losing their jobs to new technology. They believe that institutions such as universities and the press have been captured by hostile, illiberal, left-leaning elites. They see the globalists who have thrived in recent decades as members of a self-serving, arrogant caste who like to believe that they rose to the top in a meritocracy when, in reality, their success was inherited. These complaints have their merits, and sneering at them only confirms how out of touch elites have become.
The world liberalism made is a stinking, dsyfunctional hellhole where nothing works anymore and an evil imperial elites live off the credit-blood of the nations. Let liberalism, neoliberalism, conservatism, and neoconservatism die, as they deserve, because all of them were based on lies from the very start. And only retards and the thrice-boosted still believe those lies, including “immigration is good for the economy.”
“If Congress passes a new bill restricting the admission of new migrants at the border, do you think this would be good or bad for the United States?” Sixty-nine percent of the Americans responded that it would be “good,” while only 14 percent predicted “bad.”
They can call us Alt-Right, or Nationalist Right, or Christian Nationalists, or whatever label they deem sufficiently scary for the purposes of their rhetoric. But no matter what they call us, we are The Inevitable.
Because, as the great historian Sir Charles Oman noted, the great lesson of history is that the world-mind works by action and reaction, and a swing of the pendulum in one direction will ultimately be followed by a swing in the other.
The satanic globalists have had it all their way for at least the last 79 years. They promised Heaven and they delivered Hell on Earth. But the pendulum is already swinging back, and it is going to swing back hard with a holy vengeance.
“Change is coming that hasn’t happened in 100 years.” –Xi Xinping
A US Congresswoman who purports to represent Minnesota explains that she does not represent Minnesotans or even her fellow US citizens, but rather Somalians first, Muslims second.
We are an organized society, brothers and sisters, people of the same blood. People who know they are Somalians first, Muslims second, who protect one another come to each other’s aid and to the aid of other Muslims too. Couple of days ago, we heard some people who call themselves Somalis or claim to be Somalis have signed an MoU [Memorandum of Agreement] with Ethiopia on access to the sea.
Many Somalians have personally called me to encourage me to speak to the U.S. government and help Somalia. They wanted to know what the U.S. government could do for Somalia to ensure the MoU never turns into a full bilateral agreement. My answer to Somalians was that the U.S. government will only do what Somalians in the U.S. tell them to do. They will do what we want and nothing else. They must follow our orders and that is how we will safeguard the interest of Somalia. We Somalians must have that confidence in ourselves that we call for the shots in the U.S.
We live in the U.S., pay taxes in the U.S., and have a real voice. The U.S. is a country where one of your daughters is in Congress to represent your interests.
For as long as I am in the U.S. Congress, Somalia will never be in danger, its waters will not be stolen by Ethiopia or others. The U.S. would not dare to support anyone against Somalia to steal our land or oceans. Sleep in comfort, knowing I am here to protect the interests of Somalia from inside the U.S. system. The woman you sent to Congress is working day and night to protect your interests. She knows your plight and that of Somalia. I am as concerned about Somalia as you guys are. Together we will protect the interests of Somalia.
And it’s not just the Somalis (US Paper edition) that put their own people first. The same is true of every single wave of hyphenated-American immigrants. The same is true of every single wave of human migration everywhere throughout the course of history, all of whom have histories and beliefs and objectives and traditions that are distinctly different than the American posterity whose rights the Constitution was written to protect.
The only reason the USA is on the verge of war with Iran, is funding a losing proxy war with Russia, and is even banning college protests is because of Jewish immigrants who live in the US, pay taxes in the US, and have a real voice. They have a voice and that’s what they’re choosing to do with it, the American national interest be damned. This is tragic, but should never have been a surprise to anyone; it certainly would not have surprised the greatest political mind of the 20th Century, Lee Kuan Yew.
