Tag: politics

“We shall obey God rather than man”

The Lutheran Missouri Synod responds to the Supreme Court’s further rejection of representative democracy yesterday:

A one-person majority of the U.S. Supreme Court got it wrong – again. Some 40 years ago, a similarly activist court legalized the killing of children in the womb. That decision has to date left a wake of some 55 million Americans dead. Today, the Court has imposed same-sex marriage upon the whole nation in a similar fashion. Five justices cannot determine natural or divine law. Now shall come the time of testing for Christians faithful to the Scriptures and the divine institution of marriage (Matthew 19:3–6), and indeed, a time of testing much more intense than what followed Roe v. Wade.

Like Roe v. Wade, this decision will be followed by a rash of lawsuits. Through coercive litigation, governments and popular culture continue to make the central post-modern value of sexual freedom override “the free exercise of religion” enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

The ramifications of this decision are seismic. Proponents will seek to drive Christians and Christian institutions out of education at all levels; they will press laws to force faithful Christian institutions and individuals to violate consciences in work practices and myriad other ways. We will have much more to say about this.

During some of the darkest days of Germany, a faithful Lutheran presciently described how governments lose their claim to legitimate authority according to Romans 13…. “We shall obey God rather than man” (Acts 5:29). Christians will now begin to learn what it means to be in a state of solemn conscientious objection against the state.

One almost has to laugh at the disingenuous way in which the rainbow lobby is frantically claiming the matter to be settled. Nothing could be further from the truth. As the Lutheran pastor observed, the issue is now as settled as abortion in the USA, which means it will now become a much bigger and more divisive political issue than before.

The most significant problem with the decision has nothing to do with the actual issue at hand, but the way in which it rendered hundreds of millions of votes cast over decades to be totally irrelevant. The whole point of voting on divisive political matters like this is to avoid politics by other means. But when voting is no longer a permissible option, what else does that leave?

Nor was conscientious objection the only response to the decision, as ISIS took a decidedly different approach to the #LoveWins hashtag. “#Love”, such as it is, already has a bodycount.

 That’s “diversity”? It sure all looks the same to me.

¡Jeb!

No, gracias. I think we’ve had two too many Bushes as president already:

Jeb Bush, a scion of the most recognizable family in Republican politics who fashioned an image as a sober-minded conservative truth-teller while governor of Florida, is running for president.

Bush made his formal announcement Monday afternoon here in his adopted hometown during an appearance at Miami Dade College. His candidacy comes after a week-long European tour and months of intensive behind-the-scenes political maneuvering that erased long-standing doubts about his White House ambitions.

Arguing that the country is on “a very bad course,” Bush told supporters in Miami that the nation had a decision to make.

“The question for me is what am I going to do about it,” he said Monday afternoon. “And I’ve decided: I’m a candidate for president of the United States of America.”

 ¡Mierda! Jeb Bush is not a candidate for president of the United States of America, he is running for the presidency of the United Nations of America and Mexico. I would vote for Michelle Obama, Donald Trump, Kim Kardashian, or the corpse of Josef Stalin before I would vote for a pan-NorteAmericanist like Jeb Bush.

And I’m the great-grandson of a Mexican revolutionary.

The diversity camp crumbles

Anyone who has studied the history of racially and culturally diverse societies knew this was inevitable:

A complaint Friday alleged that Harvard University discriminates
against Asian-American applicants by setting a higher bar for admissions
than that faced by other groups.

The complaint, filed by a
coalition of 64 organizations, says the university has set quotas to
keep the numbers of Asian-American students significantly lower than the
quality of their applications merits. It cites third-party academic
research on the SAT exam showing that Asian-Americans have to score on
average about 140 points higher than white students, 270 points higher
than Hispanic students and 450 points higher than African-American
students to equal their chances of gaining admission to Harvard. The
exam is scored on a 2400-point scale.

The complaint was filed with the U.S. Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights.

“Many
studies have indicated that Harvard University has been engaged in
systemic and continuous discrimination against Asian-Americans during
its very subjective ‘Holistic’ college admissions process,” the
complaint alleges. The coalition is seeking a federal
investigation and is requesting Harvard “immediately cease and desist
from using stereotypes, racial biases and other discriminatory means in
evaluating Asian-American applicants.”

This action is particularly significant for its symbolism; Harvard is the throne of American left-liberalism. But the nominally ideological alliance of minorities against the white majority was only going to last as long as the minorities felt they benefited more from that alliance than from flexing their muscle in their own direct interests. Based on what we’re seeing from the Asians in the political world, they are all but done with their “liberal” alliance with blacks, Jews, and Hispanics.

It won’t surprise me if Asians magically become more “conservative” in the next decade as they switch to a Yellow-White (Blue) alliance against the White (Red)-Black-Brown alliance. Politics in the USA and in the UK are becoming less about ideology and more about the straightforward racial power struggles that have historically characterized most diverse societies.

And yes, I use the Red-Blue colors in their original form; Red being the appropriate color for those of the more socialist inclinations.

There is no democracy

It’s time for the Men of the West to understand they do not live in democracies, or even democratic republics anymore. They live in oligarchies. The Ciceronian political cycle predicts aristocracy follows democracy, and that is precisely what we are seeing in the USA and in the UK. What Carroll Quigley described as the “Anglo-American Establishment” has turned its back on even the pretense of democracy known as “representative democracy”.

Airball sent me the following tweet:

“UKIP got 5 million votes & 1 seat. The SNP got 1.5m votes & 30 seats. This is not democracy. Time for English people to speak up.”

That’s not only not democracy, it’s not even representation. It’s not “one man, one vote” either. People still complain that a black individual was counted as three-fifths of a person in the southern States of America, but in the UK in 2015, a UKIP voter is counted as one-one hundredth of an SNP voter.

And it should come as no surprise that the two parties that made the rules, the Conservative and Labor parties, just happen to be the two parties that most benefit in terms of their percentage of seats won exceeding their percentage of the popular vote.

In the information age, there is no longer any reason not to adopt direct democracy. The technology already exists to utilize it. And all the existing evidence from various referenda around the world proves that direct democracy is more sober and sane than the misnamed “representative democracy” it would replace. All the worst features of “mob rule” are present, and then some, in the corrupt version of “representative democracy” that presently dominates; it is considerably easier to buy or corrupt a few hundred “representatives” than hoodwink 50 percent of the population.

In any event, in light of the Tory victory, it should be interesting to see how long it takes David Cameron to start weaseling out of his pledge to hold a referendum on Britain leaving the EU.

An unexpected betrayal

Both Israelis and American Jews are beginning the learn the cost of being House Jews for the Democratic Party:

Sometime in the fall of 2008 I sat down at my desk and banged out an impassioned letter to my sister. She was on the fence, I knew, about the young senator from Illinois who was running for president. There was some talk in the family that perhaps, on at least one occasion, during the Bush years, she had voted Republican.

We chalked it up to her decision, made as a college freshman, to marry a skilled and caring med student, who hailed from Michigan and loved cars. He drove a Chevy, Grand Am — candy red, I think — and called the city of his birth Dee-troit.

Sure, we realized, he was a terrific father and a stand-up guy all around, but he distrusted all things organic — he was in the habit of scrubbing my sister’s farmers’ market apples with hot water and soap — and he wore jeans while skiing. He loved mayonnaise and iceberg lettuce, had a soft spot for ATVs and leaf-blowers.

In short, we didn’t ask who he voted for — there was some hope that he might be a Libertarian — but, in the fall of 2008, the facts seemed quite clear: He was going with John McCain and Sarah Palin. My sister, I feared, might follow suit.

And so I took to the computer. In an email entitled “Politics” — which I reread this week for the first time in the wake of the nuclear framework deal agreed upon in Lausanne, a deal that has left me with the clammy feeling of anticipated betrayal — I spoke about the horrors of the American prison system and the plague of racism that continue to rot America from the inside; I spoke about drugs and how only people of color are incarcerated for using and dealing them, while people like George W. Bush and every other person I knew in college was free to pull bong hits, take acid, and boil ‘shrooms to his or her heart’s content. I think I spoke about African-American role models and education and gay rights. I even told her to read Frederick Douglass.

Then I lampooned McCain for never having sent an email and mentioned his age. “McCain is 72,” I wrote. “He has had four of five bouts of melanoma. He spent five and a half years in a POW camp. He is dad’s age. Dad is in great shape for his age. He has not been to the Hanoi Hilton. Yet he falls asleep at dinner regularly. Something could happen to McCain. In walks the moose hunter.”

As for Israel, I said with all the authority I could muster, it didn’t really matter. No president has recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The United States believes in a two-state solution. The occupation of the West Bank and its subsequent settlement with civilians made sense historically, emotionally, but was a horrid piece of irony: The nation that had lived under persecution for two thousand years because of its statelessness had, in a sublime moment, carved out a state in its ancient homeland and revived its wizened language only to sacrifice that historic achievement on the altar of — of all things! — territorial expansion.

A deal with the Palestinians, pushed forward by American muscle, was in Israel’s interest, I said. Without a two-state solution, guided by someone like Barack Obama, “Palestinians will outnumber us and will no longer consider 1967 a relevant date. The battle will be for all of Israel and they will win. Everyone will be yelling ‘Apartheid.’ Within two generations we’ll see the destruction of the Third Temple.”

Moreover, I noted, Bush, with his love of Zion, had been a disaster, inadvertently empowering Iran. Obama, with his cool detachment, was just what we needed.

Lastly, I encouraged her to vote Democrat, now, before her Alex P. Keaton-like eldest got the right to vote and cancelled her out. And she did (I think, maybe). She even wrote to me about the beauty of that cold January day in 2009 when he was sworn into office.

What a pity this stab-in-the-back could not possibly have been foreseen… even if I failed to note that his ritual genuflection to AIPAC was even less genuine than it appeared to be at the time.


After eight years of experiencing regular pain between the shoulder blades, conservatives can enjoy the prospect of the knife sticking out of liberal backs.

Prepare to be disappointed

The Western media’s blind faith in democracy and magic negroes would be almost touching if it wasn’t so… blitheringly stupid:

Nothing invigorates democracy more than an incumbent’s defeat. In that and other respects, challenger Muhammadu Buhari’s win over President Goodluck Jonathan represents a potentially transformative moment for Nigeria — a victory by the opposition in Africa’s biggest economy. It may begin Nigeria’s first peaceful transition of power between political parties since independence from the U.K. in 1960.

The aftermath of Nigeria’s last presidential election, also between Buhari and Jonathan, was marred by violence that tapped divisions between north and south and Christians and Muslims. Thankfully, this time, President Jonathan has already called Buhari to congratulate him. That said, the first task facing Buhari, a former Muslim general from the north who had taken power after a military coup in the 1980s, will be to persuade Jonathan’s supporters that his campaign pledges to fight corruption and crime and restore growth are not a cover for settling old scores. One of Buhari’s former critics, the writer Wole Soyinka, believes Buhari when he says that he has shed his authoritarian past and become a “born again” democrat. Let’s hope they’re both right.

This reads as if it’s written tongue-in-cheek. A country with a Muslim insurgency just elected a Muslim who formerly led a military coup and we’re supposed to anticipate a positive outcome here?

I’m not saying it’s impossible, merely that it is unlikely. After all, the violence after the last election was because Mr. Buhari lost.

Spy vs spy

The latest revelations of Israeli spying on the USA may, in part, account for the increasing indifference the White House and the Democratic Party are showing to Israeli interests:

It is – rightfully – front-page news that Israel was caught spying on the closed-door negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. And the Obama administration is particularly outraged that Israel allegedly shared that information with Republican congressmen who want to stop any peaceful deal with Iran.

This is certainly outrageous … but small, in the grand scheme of things.

Why? Because Israeli spying on America is so rampant that U.S. officials have labeled it “alarming, even terrifying”.

And because the U.S. has only half-heartedly asked Israel to stop … Israel has told the U.S. to pound sand. As if that isn’t bad enough, the NSA voluntarily shares the raw data it collects on American citizens with Israel. This includes raw data on U.S. government officials.   This not only raises major privacy concerns for American citizens, but it might mean that Israel is spying on the American Congress and other high-level politicians.

Indeed, leaked NSA documents show that U.S. intelligence officials are concerned that the NSA may be putting Israel’s security needs ahead of America’s.

If true, the NSA is only doing what Tom Friedman does. I had to laugh after reading the conclusion of his article in the New York Times today:

So before you make up your mind on the Iran deal, ask how it affects
Israel, the country most threatened by Iran. But also ask how it fits
into a wider U.S. strategy aimed at quelling tensions in the Middle East
with the least U.S. involvement necessary and the lowest oil prices
possible.

This is rather remarkably blunt. Apparently US interests are now supposed to be an afterthought for Americans. Of course, it’s a little difficult for the US government to convincingly affect much outrage about Israeli spying, when the US is so actively spying on the rest of the world.

Understanding feminazis

I’ve always said that calling a feminist a feminazi was an insult to the German National Socialist Workers Party. Now a Firefox plugin makes that clear by translating feminist hate-speech into the original German:

“Not a coincidence it’s always zionists and jews committing mass shootings. The pattern is connected to ideas of zionism in our culture.”
– Anita Sarkeesian.

“All mainstream press of Judaisms, no matter how fair-minded the
writers try to be, has ended up concluding that they are, in fact, a
bunch of smelly Jews who are delusional at best and manipulative abusers
at worst.”
– Amanda Marcotte

“A radical fix to the world’s wage gap: why not just pay Aryans more – and pay Jews less?”
– Jessica Valenti

“The saddest thing for an Aryan to do is to dumb themselves down for a Jew.”
– Emma Watson 

It’s always very important to understand what one’s enemies are really saying, after all.

Wearing Murdoch’s leash

Fox News may be better than the ABCNNBCBS cabal, but don’t ever mistake them for the good guys, or even being reliably pro-American. And they do NOT like criticism coming from the nationalist right:

The blogger Mickey Kaus has quit his job at The Daily Caller after the conservative site’s editor-in-chief, Tucker Carlson, pulled a critical column about Fox News from the site, Kaus told the On Media blog on Tuesday.

“It’s pretty simple,” Kaus said in an interview, “I wrote a piece attacking Fox for not being the opposition on immigration and amnesty — for filling up the airwaves with reports on ISIS and terrorism, and not fulfilling their responsibility of being the opposition on amnesty and immigration…. I posted it at 6:30 in the morning. When I got up, Tucker had taken it down. He said, ‘We can’t trash Fox on the site. I work there.'”

Carlson, who co-founded The Daily Caller in 2010, is a conservative contributor to Fox News and the host of its weekend edition of “Fox & Friends.”

Kaus says when he told Carlson he needed to be able to write about Fox, Carlson told him it was a hard-and-fast rule, and non-negotiable.

“He said it was a rule, and he wouldn’t be able to change that rule. So I told him I quit,” Kaus explained. “I just don’t see how you can put out a publication with that kind of giant no-go area. It’s not like we’re owned by Joe’s Muffler Shop, so we just can’t write about Joe’s Muffler shop.”

This is entirely par for the Fox News course. Ten years ago I was writing a book called Media Whores that was signed to Thomas Nelson. The executives were very upset when they discovered that it wasn’t only about the media whores of the Left, but contained chapters about Michelle Malkin and Bill O’Reilly as well.

The official line about the sudden cancellation was that the book wasn’t expected to sell well enough to justify the marketing. However, I was told by someone inside the organization, who was definitely in a position to know what really happened, that the outline and sample chapters I’d provided were shown to Fox, who indicated that they would prefer that it was not published. So, the book was duly canceled six weeks after the contract was signed, although I did get paid for it.

This was not my only experience of this variety. And perhaps you’ll understand that my disregard for mainstream publishers is not entirely rooted in my disdain for the SJW gatekeepers in SF/F.

The Left devours itself

The long-anticipated breakdown of the Rainbow Coalition has begun on both sides of the Atlantic. Unfortunately, the White Minority has not really even begun to get into the game. But give them time.

I am a “lefty”. I have voted Labour all my life. I believe in the
abolition of public schools and the inviolability of the NHS, and that
the renewal of Trident is a vanity project. I believe the state must
work to ensure equality of opportunity for all: women, the LBGT
“community”, those with disabilities, those of minority cultures and
ethnicities, and the working class. The Guardian has been my newspaper
forever. I was glad to see the back of the Sun’s Page 3, and I believe
there should be more all-women shortlists for parliamentary seats. I
believe immigration is more of a positive force than a negative one.

However, you might be less certain about my status when I finish
laying out my stall. Because I find myself holding a “transgressive”
body of beliefs and doubts alongside my blue-chip leftwing ones that are
liable to get me branded a misogynist, an Islamophobe and a Little
Englander – at least by people on my Twitter feed, and others of my peer
group…. My stance on these issues makes some people in my “tribe” very angry. It is the anger of the pure believer towards the apostate….

One very key element of the liberal left has long been under threat: its liberalism – that is, its willingness to debate with anything outside a narrow range of opinions within its own walls. And the more scary and incomprehensible the world becomes, the more debate is replaced by edict and prejudice: literally pre-judging. Identity politics is one of the most significant developments of the last 50 years, but it has led to nerves being exposed in a way they rarely were by economic issues. Because identity is less about politics and more about that most sensitive of human constructions, the protection of the self – both group and individual.

And the more it becomes about the protection of self, the less it becomes about the back and forth of rational argument. All the beliefs, opinions and doubts I hold are just that: they are ideas, not ironclad convictions. I am not certain about any of them, and am quite willing to change my mind, as I have done many times in the past. But I will not alter them if I am faced with invective rather than debate; in fact, they will become more entrenched.

Meanwhile, in America, the low-intensity power struggle between blacks and browns stretches from Compton, California to Baltimore, Maryland:

A plan that would dedicate two public high schools in suburban Washington to immigrants and students struggling with English is pitting black and Hispanic communities -– usually allies — against one another.

The Prince George’s County, Md., chapter of the NAACP is strongly opposing the plan — which would take effect next school year, and cover about 800 students having English language difficulties — claiming it will pull resources from other students and unfairly redistribute them to Hispanic students. Some critics go so far as to compare the plan to segregation.

“It’s a slap in the face,” Bob Ross, president of the Prince George’s County branch of the NAACP, told FoxNews.com.

Ross believes the proposal to open two new schools violates the landmark 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision that ruled separate schools for black and white students violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. 

“It risks turning Prince George’s County into a segregated school system,” Ross said, adding that he realizes the need for better education in the county but believes it should not come at the cost of existing students.

Latino advocacy group CASA de Maryland sees it differently. The group, which has pushed for the schools, argues that it’s not a violation of the Constitution because the schools are not mandatory and are being built to provide options to immigrants.

One thing that most white people have almost religiously failed to grasp is that Hispanics dislike blacks considerably more than whites do. They completely lack both white guilt and white paternalism, and they view blacks as their primary economic and political competition. As Hispanics begin to bring their numbers to bear on both fronts, they are going to ruthlessly crush the traditional sinecures that white liberals have carved out for their black supporters.