If my self from years ago encountered me as I am now, he would be baffled and afraid. This persona talks about how we live in a neo-Communist Regime which controls thought by rewarding only compliant activity. That sounds so much like a conspiracy theory, so paranoid, and so willing to see other human beings as a negative force… and yet, we know things like this happen, because empires have fallen in the past and no one saw it coming. Their minds were controlled, probably with their own assent, because they followed the rewards given by those regimes instead of looking to the obvious effects of reality. You can tell that we live in a neo-Communist Regime because thought is heavily controlled. It is taboo to the point of panic to mention for example that different ethnic groups are genetically different, that this translates to IQ and behavioral differences, and that those differentials account for varying outcomes in terms of historical achievement, power, and wealth. It is taboo to mention that our society has castes which are genetically different, where some are born of higher intelligence than others and therefore we benefit from their rule, not just in political leadership but in things like who manages your pharmacy, who determines what products go on the shelf in the grocery, and who chooses which clothes go on sale at the local department store. We cannot point out that democracy is mob rule, either, or that diversity destroys culture by forcing acceptance of so many differing elements that our only standards are negative. We cannot say that diversity is failing, that our societies are doomed because they have been bankrupted because our governments bought votes with free stuff, or that taxation may or may not be theft but that taking from the productive to subsidize the unproductive makes us go out in failure just like the Soviets. There is so much we cannot say, and yet we are “free.” Something has to give.
“Hybrid war” of this nature comes from an old Soviet policy: to conquer nearby nations, first send in lots of ethnic Russians, then invest heavily in that society so that you develop a Russian culture within it, and then gradually take it over. This strategy appeals heavily to the third world, especially Mongols/Asiatics, who have seen it work with white societies before. Once you send in enough of your people — perhaps 20% of the population, maybe less — then the population sees you as essential and will not exclude you, at which point you can change it to be more like you in terms of values and behaviors, at which point the takeover is less obvious and lots of people desire it. Some say that Leftism is merely an Asiatic incursion into the West… after all, an individualistic society which is then consequently dependent on strong leadership and mass human wave style mobilization follows the Genghis Khan model more than the Charlemagne model. We see the same thing at work in the West, where Mexicans and Africans attempt to overwhelm their new host societies, forcing those societies to reconfigure themselves around the new immigrants, or in Israel, where Palestinians hope to out-breed their Jewish hosts (who are the original owners of this land, displaced by the Romans) and therefore, capture the democratic vote and turn Israel into yet another Islamic theocracy. When we recognize hybrid war, we see immigration as what it is, an invasion, and diversity as what it is, a tool of the enemy.
IBM used to run an advertisement which made fun of the fact that there is no such thing as an “average customer”; people are people, and they vary, with averages becoming a fiction when applied outside of mathematics. Society, however, loves averages, because it allows it to target a category by its average and thus claim in utilitarian logic that it is serving the people in that category, even though this causes decay because the average always skews to the lower and not the higher. From this averaging comes our idea of egalitarianism, which means that everyone is equal or should be equal, and inevitably changes meritocracy to subsidy because results will be unequal and thus invalidate egalitarianism unless we take from the higher to give to the lower. Public schools do this by dumbing down everything, and this resulted in an assignment to make a parody Christmas carol about the Reconstruction era. These kids came up with a funny KKK rhyme that was designed to be criticism of the KKK and related philosophies. Someone posted it to YouTube, and the armchair bourgeois voters out there panicked and used it as an excuse to “be important” for their fifteen seconds of fame, drumming up outrage as the herd raised itself up in self-righteous fury. Now we have a teacher on leave, students upset, and no one asking important questions like “Has diversity ever worked?” and “How can a society survive taboos on truth?”
Years of Leftist government have multiplied the underclasses and working classes, or the proles (workers, peasants, plebs, helots, serfs, drones) that the Left counts as its primary audience and constituency. These are angry and blame others for their problems, mainly because they are Dunning-Kruger’d and have no idea that they are the cause of their own problems because their understanding of reality is poor, which is why they are poor. Since we are a democracy, and votes count, no one is willing to publicly talk about this fact, and so we ignore it, except that every now and then one of them freaks out and does something which shows just how divided we are as a society. We will not last.
Across the West, people are realizing that the government apparat — the bureaucrats, experts, lawyers, police, journalists, professors, and entertainers — are entirely irrelevant and in fact parasitic. These people make their money out of grouping us into a mass, compelling us toward an ideology, and then getting themselves hired as administrators of this social engineering project to fundamentally transform our societies. Even more, we are realizing that these people have created all of our problems new to the last two centuries, and that they will not do anything to stop those problems, so self-reliance is our only solution. We need guns, farms, and strongholds, and we are building these in the background as society prepares to crash.
Diversity has many problems, and one appears through the conflict between diverse groups. Since diversity like egalitarianism is based in victimhood, or who is less successful and therefore is owed a subsidy by the rest, when two people have a conflict, we always look to whoever is from the group with a greater claim to victimhood. For example, when a poor black dude gets run over by a rich white guy, we assume — culturally, politically, journalistically — that the latter is guilty and the former is innocent and pure as driven snow. If that turns out not to be true, we quickly sweep the matter under the rug because it works against our philosophy of egalitarianism and is not a teachable moment talking point for affirming our ideology and thus making us all feel as if we are on the right course instead of being part of a dying civilization heading downward fast because of its reliance on the Utopian ideology of equality. Here we see a clash between a sex-tribe, LGBT++, and a racial/ethnic tribe, namely those of the African minority who are rapidly being replaced by Hispanics and other Asians in America. Who wins? In this case, the African faces enforcement, but apparently the same is not true when an African faces a group that is exclusively “white” according to the media definition, or even when a brown minority offends black minorities and SJWs themselves. Diversity adds needless complexity and internal conflict to any society, causing its downfall through loss of social order. Diversity delenda est!
Good. Take money from the useless and give it to the productive people. Athletes produce income, but nothing of value, since they are fundamentally entertainers and entertainment takes away from productivity and makes people weaker at the same time, because instead of finding value in life itself, they seek to be entertained and forget all about life and meaning together.
Leftists send woman into Trump business with fake papers, which she presents, and not wanting to get sued for discrimination, business accepts. Now the Left is trying to hype this into an issue, where the real headline should be, “Criminal accuses Trump of not catching her fast enough.”
Snopes, like Wikipedia and Politifact, has been fake news for years because it is fundamentally a propaganda organ. Anything which allows the lower-echelon people to state what is “official truth” instead of relying on natural experts represents a form of Leftist propaganda, especially if it vociferously denies that this is the case while publishing a non-stop stream of Leftist opinions interrupted only be a few symbolic “see, we represent both sides!” inconsequential articles.
Carlson, Coulter, Ingraham, and other conservative pundits serve a vital role in criticizing Trump: they make a public show of putting pressure on him, which justifies him being more extreme, because he can say with honesty that he is losing his constituency. They love him, but he needs them to hate him, at least in public.
Immigrants know this: when Trump raises the risk/reward ratio for coming to the USA, they will stop coming. For many years, they have had to pay a coyote several thousand dollars to get here, then could find jobs and apartments easily, and use social services to subsidize themselves while sending most of their money back home. That in turn allowed their families to use the greater buying power of that money in the third world to enrich themselves, so that when the immigrants returned home, they could retire in relative luxury. The problem arose when many of them decided that they liked social order, law enforcement, functional institutions, and flush toilets more than what Mexico has to offer, so they stayed, and have since been busily converting America into Mexico.
She plays the ditz, then says what Leftists are thinking in a form simple enough for their various groups — dipsomaniac single women, low testosterone white guys, criminals, minorities, and religious fanatics — to join together in agreement. The scary fact is that she’s right in describing the Leftist plan: use climate change as a justification for both wealth transfer from the first world to the third, uniting humanity in global government, and seizing power in the name of staving off imminent disaster. The Left no longer wants the USSR; they want the worldwide union of mixed-race cultureless civil rights based neo-Communist regimes, created by the need to avoid certain doom, propelled by enslaving the productive to the unproductive, and therefore, they think (as they always do, because they are delusional and not very bright) ruling in perpetuity.
The first five paragraphs are brilliant, and point out that demographic change is racial subjugation of whites, although he does not point out that an earlier demographic change was ethnic subjugation of WASPs by Southern/Eastern European groups like Irish, Jews, Greeks, Italians, Spaniards, Puerto Ricans, and Poles, leading to the events of 1968 in which the former WASP majority was deposed as a result of its own generous policies (egalitarianism is a brain virus). Then we get to the crazy in the article: “If you loosen the definition of ‘white’ and start including people who are, say, half white, and may identify as white (whatever that means), the proportion of America’s whites is going up.” If we change white to mean Hispanic, we get the same result. We changed the definition of white in the past to include those Southern/Eastern Europeans, and it was a disaster. He wants to roll the dice again with even less of a chance of success. They should have cut off the article after those first five paragraphs.
The insight that Amerika offers is that humans in large groups fall into the same pathology whether it is state-sponsored or not; the herd invents the state, not the other way around, although the state certainly increases the herd. Silicon Valley represents not just a few billionaires, but all of the people who work for them or indirectly profit from them, including an army of consultants, lawyers, smaller companies, and bureaucrats. That entire group wants to create a permanent audience for itself, and it realizes that among the intellectually vulnerable, it can create a huge herd of people who like media that confirms their own desires as true, namely that all people can live in harmony if we just forcibly share the wealth. This herd — generally children, drunken single women, the elderly Boomers, religious fanatics, minorities, criminals, and people with mental health problems — spends more time on the internet, television, and newspapers than any other group. For this reason, Silicon Valley likes to create “safe spaces” for its audience, and intends to filter out everyone else.
How to tell that this is a Communist-style show trial: “I’m not sure what else his intent could have been,” Charlottesville Circuit Court Judge Richard Moore said. “His explanation that he felt threatened is contrary to the evidence of the case.”
The New York Times knows how to play the college essay game: if you can prove that something that you want is good for “the poor,” or that you did something good “the poor,” then you make all those upper middle class women and low testosterone narrow-focus professional males squirt dopamine and feel good, and so they let you into their university so that you can all feel good together. Ultimately, Leftism boils down to people who feel bad, and have super-specialized themselves into roles that punish wider understanding, coming together to mainline some dopamine by doing things that make them feel good, which for these bourgeois armchair shopkeeper types, means anything that eliminates risk by creating safety, and primarily does that through pacifism, or spreading around the wealth and erasing social boundaries so that everyone feels equally included and thus (in primitive human social reasoning) has no reason to attack anyone else, which to the narcissist mind that assumes others are identical to oneself, makes sense. In reality, people who are trying to make it through life have zero use for the permapoor, which is how we might refer to the underclass of incompetents, criminals, neurotics, schizoids, and low IQ people that prosperous societies accumulate. These people are permanently poor because they make terrible decisions and do so consistently over their lives. They have children out of wedlock, fail to attend their jobs, spend their money on Air Jordans and lottery tickets, and otherwise act in contrary ways to what is evidently sensible. They persist in this folly because they never receive any real negative feedback; society takes care of them, out of fear that they will revolt, forgetting that most revolts are enabled by wealthy neurotics who earned their position by selling toxic junk to morons, and therefore want to organize those morons to make even more wealth by seizing control of society. Every time “the workers” seize the means of production, there is someone there to profit from them. In the meantime, societies such as Sweden are heading toward the cashless economy because those who are functional are trying to find ways to exist away from those who are dysfunctional. Somehow this natural selection offends Leftists, who secretly surmise that in a state of nature, they would not exist for very long.
First they tore down Confederate statues, and now they are eliminating mention of Soviet purge victims. The Left is erasing history, as usual, so that it cannot view the plain truth that its policies do not work and bring about horrible results instead.
Neo-Communism operates by a capitalist principle: instead of directly punishing disobedience, simply reward the obedience while simultaneously making government so powerful that to lack government reward is to be out of business. When government gives free money to political groups, it sets the new minimum baseline for participation, and when it withholds that money, it drives disobedient groups under the threshold. That enables it to censor without censoring, and to further
As reported here, China tried a trade war, and has since backed down because Trump held the line against their bullying tactics. This means that American products finally get open markets, instead of the one-sided Asiatic gambit of selling their stuff cheaply here while making our stuff expensive there, which is inherently anti-competitive and especially insane given their lower costs of labor. Ironically, what Trump has done will most likely be more beneficial than all of the “climate change” activity: by increasing the power of American products, he has created an incentive for us to be self-sufficient, eliminating much of the carbon-intensive international shipping and business travel required to support offshoring.
The USA has destroyed itself with diversity, possibly at the behest of those who accepted Chinese bribes in America back in the 1960s. This means that a new superpower will take over from the dying empire, and several candidates — India, the EUSSR, Russia, and China — have stepped up to the plate. Possibly a South American union or a South Asian protectorate might arise to compete as well. The Chinese, who have made empire many times and then decayed because of the inherent instability of the radical individualism of Asiatic societies, are simultaneously buying up properties, bribing politicians, spying on industry, and launching a media blitz to keep us all pacified. Trump has taken the most intelligent approach, which is to reduce the source of their vast wealth and therefore, to make them see the actual bill for empire and back down because it will cause them social suicide to undertake this. The EU, being less realistic than China and also more drugged with the religion-substitute of egalitarianism, will most likely surge ahead without ever becoming self-aware enough to realize that it is following the USSR on a path to suicide by over-extension abroad and simultaneous depletion of value at home through its policy of spreading wealth and power, therefore penalizing talent and rewarding mediocrity.