Did Universal Education Destroy The West?

universal_education

In the midst of a standard Leftist rant about how education is failing because the people who were not all geniuses before education are still not all geniuses, The New York Review of Books goes full greebo with a wishful thinking history of American public education:

Death may be the great equalizer, but Americans have long believed that during this life “the spread of education would do more than all things else to obliterate factitious distinctions in society.” These words come from Horace Mann, whose goal was to establish primary schooling for all children—no small ambition when he announced it in 1848. Others had already raised their sights higher. As early as 1791, exulting in the egalitarian mood of the new republic, one writer declared it “a scandal to civilized society that part only of the citizens should be sent to colleges and universities.”

How that part has grown is a stirring story. It begins in the colonial period with church-funded scholarships for the sons of poor families. It continued after the Revolution with the founding of public universities such as those of North Carolina and Virginia. In the midst of the Civil War, it was advanced by the Morrill Act, by which Congress set aside federal land for establishing “land-grant” colleges, many of which became institutions of great distinction. By the later nineteenth century, when most colleges still admitted only white men, the cause was advanced again by the creation of new colleges for women and African-Americans.

Hillary Clinton may have recently shocked people by referring to Bernie Sanders fans as “basement dwellers,” but in the quarter of the population that is above 115 IQ points — this is a terrible sign, by the way, when only one in four people in your nation can halfway make sense of even moderate complexity problems — it is not exactly a secret that most people are basement dwellers, greebos, geeks, or otherwise dummies. In fact, it is openly mentioned all the time.

The reason is that while the Dunning-Kruger effect limits what we can understand, and makes smart people cowed as a result, it also allows us to see what those dumber than us cannot, which is that their idiocratic solutions are laughable and insane. Society is a cascade, with the upper levels looking down on the lower and laughing, not out of malice but sheer absurdism. When you are not an idiot, what idiots do is usually slapstick because of the wide gulf between anticipation and reality.

Most of us bumble our way through life, stumbling onto working combinations more by accident than anything else. This is even more prevalent at lower intelligence levels, which is why those groups are even more rigidly conformist so that they can take advantage of what has worked for others in similar situations. The bizarre conventions of the ghetto or inbred isolated community seem odd to us, until we realize that in those groups, signaling normalcy is more important than trying to distinguish oneself, no matter how ludicrous the results (sagging pants, “No Fear” stickers, etc).

And so we have the Bell Curve — the standard mathematical distribution of intelligence that occurs in all populations, of the same shape but varying according to the mean on which it is centered — appearing yet again. To the people on the far-right side of the curve, the left side is inscrutable and vice-versa. To the people in the middle, the far-left is nonsense, but what the far-right goes on about is equally weird. Translation: most people oppose intelligence.

How to deal with this? The principle of equality is that we cannot agree on a direction, so we should pacify individuals by offering equal inclusions in society, ignoring the differences in capabilities and the bad decisions made by others. In order to keep that mythos of illusion alive, the new religion of education springs up: we will educate them, and then, everyone will be equal, or at least roughly so.

Modern citizens cling to symbols and education is one of them, along with book fetishism. External appearance is more important than reality as always. Are they capable of making intelligent decisions? What is the content of those books? These questions of actual importance are denied so that the illusion can keep functioning, and so we insist that educating the three-quarters of the Bell Curve who cannot be educated will mysteriously, magically solve the inner inequality of individuals.

This results in a large number of people memorizing what they do not understand, and applying it rigidly because in the absence of understanding, they have conclusions given to them by others which become assumptions that take on a religious role. One cannot question the orthodoxy because the orthodoxy is what allows most people to feel good about themselves, and like heroin addicts, they prize feeling good over being realistic.

In essence, education legitimates a lie. Those who can learn generally will do so on their own, by reading books, experimenting and thinking. Many if not most of history’s greatest contributors were autodidacts. But for the pretense of keeping the group together, this cannot be, and so education falls prey to control, or standardization in order to limit the role of each individual to a universal, abstract and pre-determined form.

As with all utilitarian systems, in order that education be universal, it is dumbed-down or reduced to the lowest common denominator. This means that in addiction to people parroting conclusions that they do not understand as if they were universal law, they are getting these with a removal of all nuance. They have no idea how to correlate details to a larger argument, so they memorize assumptions and interpret every detail according to those, which results in mastery of detail and utter obliviousness to any larger point, as if those could be understood.

One reason for this is that in Europe and America, the wise choices of our ancestors led to an overflowing of the lower castes who breed at higher rates than the upper castes. This means that we are awash in fools, and under democracy, they must be made to feel equal too or there will be unpopularity. As Vice observes about the composition of the American population and in turn, the excesses of its originating population:

Although your textbooks are silent about it, most historians agree that two-thirds of ALL whites came to the colonies in some form of bondage. Legal papers on both sides of the ocean referred to them as “slaves.”

We are taught early in life that education is essential to democracy. In fact, it is the reverse: democracy is what produces education, which is designed to remove intelligence from the process and replace it with factory-made assumption-spouting robots who cannot analyze anything for which they do not have a template. If you wonder why our leaders and functionaries are shockingly but blithely incompetent, the reason is found in that saint of liberal democracy, “education.”

The Sacrifice

interior_of_an_abandoned_church

Donald Paulson looked out over the football field. The goalposts were draped in flags and a stage was set up in the endzone. A warm breeze, with hints of summer to come, wafted over the field. And then the figures in long robes took to the stage.

He could remember just a few years before when his daughter Marianne had been a toddler with cute, giant eyes. Don saw her each morning before work, and in the evenings, although he had to admit that between being tired and the four light beers he gulped down to reset his brain after work, the memories were hazier there. Now she was graduating high school.

The principal made a speech. She compared the future to a path across the ocean for the first Native Americans to reach the new world. Don got another beer; luckily, the concessions stand was still alive for this event, just as it was for football games. When he returned, a teacher was speaking.

She spoke of the importance of being moral citizens, and how her own time and effort — more than on simply teaching the material — had been spent in illustrating this sphere, which she saw as the true world her students would someday live in. She compared it to Plato’s cave and ended with a quotation from Martin Luther King Jr.

Don waved at his neighbor, Ron Lehman, who had shown up late. Wishing he had known of that option, he returned to listening. The class valedictorian was now speaking. She started by comparing the mind to an investment portfolio, and the need to have balance and diversity in investments. But, she added, all of this only added up to real value if when it was cashed out, the money went to making the world a better place.

It took Don’s breath away. The speech was perfect. She knew all of the right symbols and clicés and the order to put them in, which made them seem not like clichés, but newly discovered wisdom as if transmitted from the heavens. He found himself clapping at the end, and then straining to see the figures marching across the stage. He got a good picture of Marianne as she accepted the paper, and a blurry one of her teary face.

He found himself in the car, alone, staring straight ahead as he waiting for the throng of traffic — slowed by the need to wave to people, fiddle with cell phones and chat in the car — to exit the parking lot so he could follow. He felt tears, but not in his eyes; in his chest. Like all realizations, this one surged from within: his child was now lost to him.

She would go out into the world, find a job and a husband or wife, and then she would need nothing from him. He then had no handle of control on her, no way to compel her to pay attention to him, because her needs would be met elsewhere. It reminded him of losing his first college girlfriend to a drug dealer named Hog. Cocaine and a Camaro were more important than whatever he had to offer her, which he reflected, happened only a year after his own graduation.

***

As he parked his car back at the house, Don looked up toward the two-bedroom slanted roof house he had purchased after the divorce came through. Where the other house felt like it had personality, this reminded him of an apartment. He had covered it in his stuff, nostalgia and diplomas, but it still felt like a temporary space, maybe a conference room with beds.

“Hey, Don,” came a voice. Ron was hailing him from the middle of the street. Don waved back and waited for his neighbor to make his way up the walk to the front door. “Quite a day, isn’t it? I am so proud of our Jayden, as you must be proud of Marianne. They’re heading out into the big world now, to try to do better than we did.”

With an exhalation, Don recalled why he almost never talked to Ron: the man was a religious fanatic, and he was always injecting these moments of meaning into ordinary conversation. Those inevitably pointed toward Ron’s extended thesis that the country was going to hell, and could only save itself if everyone turned to Jesus.

Don did not hate Jesus. He liked to say he thought of Jesus as obsolete, but really, he was disgusted by him. The church for him implied pickup trucks and domestic beer, unthinking patriotism, and other coping behaviors he had no use for. He opted to split the difference.

“Exciting times, for all of us,” he said. “Those kids are heading out into a world with a lot more opportunity than we had. All the technology, and all the great jobs that come with it, and buying a house has never been easier. Not like the bad old days we had to fight through.”

“True, but what will they do with it?” Ron answered. “Most of the world still lives in poverty, or are stuffed into that awful Section 8 housing with bad air conditioning. There are now nearly fifty nuclear enabled nations, and tensions in five regions of the world. Women still have not cracked the grass ceiling, really, nor have we come really far in equality for the obese. If only there were some way to wake them up, spiritually, our kids would face a better world.”

Ron had experienced a religious moment once, Don recalled. After too many watery beers at one tailgate party, he had told them about it. “The truck flipped seven times,” he had said. “Like the seven trumpets. And then I was lying there, feeling my body grow cold, as the paramedics worked on me. And then I saw it, a light in the sky. And I knew that I had to come back to living, and spread the word of God, because it is the only thing that will save us from the animal in ourselves.”

Don toed some rocks back into place on the decorative drive. “For me, the hope is that they have compassion,” he said. “Things like politics, economics, even religion, they all separate us from the human dimension. That we are here to care for each other. If we care, we can change. If we can change, we can set everything right, and then we will have a society that all others can look up to.” It was like winning yard-of-the-month, he thought.

“In my experience,” Ron said, “the only path to compassion is through Christ. Without Him, we have only pity for ourselves that we use to relate to others. That makes us feel better, but it does not show us the real light. When people come to Christ, the light spreads from the sky to their souls, and they become enlightened about what we should be doing down here. That’s how I see it anyway.”

Don thought he should ask a question, so he intoned, “But what practical value can it have?”

“Oh, many,” said Ron. “But because we are simple little humans, and not able to see the secrets of God, we won’t know about them until we go looking for them. We need to have a spiritual heart, and then we can see not just what is true, but where we are needed. Christianity is more like a compass than a place and time, if you know what I mean.”

“I guess that is the role compassion serves for me. If you don’t mind a bit of a challenge, what does religion do that is different from compassion? Compassion is the soul of humanity: we treat each other well, by understanding the feelings and needs of other people. Without compassion, we are just business transactions.”

“That’s a good question, Don. I would follow up by asking you this. When you start a project at work, do you know exactly what you are building — you’re an industrial engineer, as I understand — entirely, and how it will look at the end?”

“Yes,” said Don. “Well, and no. We have a spec sheet, we know what it has to do, and we know how other units like it have been designed in the past. There are always environmental influences however. These just crop out. This is probably the most frustrating part of my job. On this last job, we had an actuator that stopped working because the machine next to it generated steam, and the metal hulls trapped it, so the humidity was too high…” he trailed off, finding himself becoming animated, but Ron nodded.

“…for it to operate. So yes, I know what I am doing, but I do not know exactly what it will look like in the end, but it will still be the same basic design. Like compassion: compassion is the design, and the specific circumstance is the person, but you can apply compassion to that person and everything turns out just fine. In fact, better than fine, because you have a single design that you can apply everywhere and understand everything. Getting closer to God.”

“That certainly sounds challenging. The thing is, you never know exactly what it will look like. That is a lot like life. What we want is often not what we need. When Suzanne and I started looking for a house, in a neighborhood, we wanted a colonial in closer to the city. But then we came out here, and it met all of our needs, so we bought a house we never thought we would want.”

Don laughed. “For me, that kills the joy in life. The essence of compassion is passion. A passion for living, an intense emotion, that gives meaning to our lives. If I want a certain type of house, I can chase my passion and get it. That way, I feel fulfilled not by what the world hands me, but what I have done to it. How I have changed its design.”

They both looked up at his current house, obviously no one’s idea of great design, and laugh. “This is my post-divorce house,” said Don. “I don’t think I care much about houses anymore. But the point is, you know, that I need to know what I want and specifically intend it, so that my passion is fulfilled. Compassion allows us to do that for others, and see where their passion needs addressing, so we can understand them and, I dunno, get along with them. Then we all get our dreams.”

Ron looked at the house. “It’s a nice house, I think. It does what you need. In my experience, most of what we think we need is just what we want, and we came up with that because we saw it in an ad, or a friend did it, or it was on a favorite TV show. When we have spiritual purpose, it is more like knowing where we want to end up, but realizing that it will not take the form we want. We look for where we can do God’s work instead.”

Don found himself feeling a bit tired and irritable. “Without compassion, however, we have nothing. No connection to our fellow human beings, no purpose in life, not even any basis for truth or morality. Without compassion, we are nothing more than animals. Compassion lifts us above this world, brings us closer to the heavens, and shows us what is right not based on principles, or results, but on the human soul. It is a human order.”

“In fact,” Don went on, “Life without compassion is empty. With no connections to others, we will never reach out again, and we are just isolated, like living on our own personal islands. When I discovered compassion, it changed my life. No longer was I just some dude living in the suburbs. Now I was part of something bigger, like a spirit, that is better than this ruined world and shows me the way.”

Ron thought for a moment, chewing on his inner lip slightly. “What if someone does not want compassion, or disagrees with you that it is the most important thing?”

“Then that person is evil. Compassion is beyond thought, mathematics, money, logic, physics, and religion, which is really a form of politics. Compassion is a pure sensation through which we understand the core of the universe and all the beauty of life, all in one instant. Those who have not experienced it will not understand it, and in that state they are evil.”

“Well, now I feel evil,” said Ron. They both laughed. “Do you think Christ was compassionate?”

“He was a politician,” said Don. “He wanted them to do what he told them to, first, and only later be compassionate. That ruined his message for me.”

***

That night, Don slept in his king-sized bed which adjusted to his posture and made the mattress firmer in different parts, cushioning him. It connected to his cell phone through bluetooth, and he could lie in bed and adjust the frame, hearing the motors whirring above and feeling as if he were in a spaceship, sailing over the world, in command of his destiny.

As the moon rose and faded, he passed into dream. Some call this lucid dreaming, because the dreamer is able to influence the dream, but Don had no time for that mumbo-jumbo. His dreams were always of Africa, where he arrived dressed in white and brought water, medicine and hope to remote villages of starving people. In his dreams, he fought off bad guys — usually Chinese, sometimes Arab — with spears and guns, taking many wounds and slaying many men, to deliver his people from suffering. Above it all the sun shined with a warm compassion for life itself.

But tonight, he found himself in a dark forest clearing. Columns of fire leaped up into the trees but did not burn them. At the back of the clearing was an altar, and around it were people in dark robes, their eyes covered in sunglasses. Reflected in those lenses he could see the blaze and the red eyes of the hooded figure seated on a throne behind the altar.

Hail, Master! Praise Him!
Invisible one, lord of light!
Most beautiful angel
Son of power, giver of control
Praise Lucifer, Master of this world!

As the people chanted, dark creatures — as tall as a wall, with heads of boars and bodies of giant crickets — hacked away vegetation and led in the sacrifice. Ron swallowed his gasp, aware that others would notice. The children in their graduation gowns filed past, marched to the altar. As each reached the front, the beast lowered his scepter.

Each person in the audience held up a cell phone. Don did the same. On his phone, he saw scenes from the life of the child: the first four failed loves, the job which felt like a jail sentence, the marriage that burned out, the children that blurted out just how much they hated their parents on their first acid trip — a rite of passage, following the 60s model Don had adored — and moved as far away from home as possible, the rising salary and decreasing involvement with the outside world, finally a retirement to endless television, then a slow death from some disease that ate them from within.

As he watched these lives, Don saw that the crowd was excited. These were good jobs, and normal lives. He felt compassion for the sacrifices. This was their purpose, just as his was to be a watcher. He saw the procession of misery, emptiness, self-hatred, doubt, coldness and detachment and found himself smiling. And then Marianne was next. The crowd turned to him. Don forced himself to smile, and they turned away.

He watched her life scroll past as it progressed from hopeful innocence to a certainty of nothingness. He felt compassion in that moment, and it made him feel good. And when the sacrifice was over, he joined the chant:

Hail, Moloch! Lord of the Eye!
Praise the Master of all Death
He who brings suffering on which to feast
We delight in the pain
We join thee, Destroyer
In you, we are complete
We are power
Hail to the Master of Masters,
Lord of Death and Decreptiude
Hail Moloch, Hail!

Sour Grapes

confrontation_between_nihilism_and_religion

We are always looking for a word for what ails us.

This world works by cause and effect. Each effect has exactly one cause; however, it is not true that because an effect has a cause, that cause is the only source of that effect. This means that for every ill of our modern time, there is a cause in the past.

It is no longer controversial that democracy is in decline worldwide. Everywhere it is tried, the fundamental bigotry of the human mind toward illusion and against reality comes out. And, as anyone who has ever sat through a decision by a committee knows, groups make terrible choices because they are fundamentally indecisive, timorous and influenced by social pressure more than knowledge of what worked in the past.

But somehow we got to this current phase, which is the result of a previous phase, and a long line of bad — or at least mediocre — decisions stretch back over decades, centuries, millennia.

Where did we go wrong?

We can identify individualism, or the eternal human temptation to make the ego more important than reality, as the mechanism of our decline. Many Rightists point to what they call “nihilism,” but might more properly be called pessimism, defeatism or fatalism, as the cause of that.

What they call nihilism is in fact something simpler: sour grapes. You may remember the old fairy tale. A fox wants some grapes, and cannot leap high enough to get them, so he declares that he never wanted them. They are sour, he says, and so he is better off not having them. This type of rationalization is the root of human error.

For starters, it makes us think backward. Instead of looking toward goals, and then making events happen in order to achieve those, we content ourselves with what is convenient, and then backward-justify or “rationalize” it as good. Good is redefined to be convenient; this means more than physically convenient, mentally convenient.

Individualism and rationalization have a symbiotic relationship. When we assume the individual is the source of all good, we rationalize every act as necessary based on the desires of the individual. When we think clearly, we see the individual as a means to an end, which is the experience of life and moral rightness, which is (believe it or not) needed for a good experience of life.

What the right calls nihilism is in fact fatalism, which is in fact “sour grapes.” In humans, it takes on a virulent form: if people cannot have reality in the way they desire, they seek to destroy what is there for having insulted them and oppressed them by depriving them of the belief in their own cleverness and goodness. It inspires rage, a consumptive and destructive rage.

This is why many Rightists are taking The Black Pill. We deny the importance of self, the ability to communicate with others, and the presence of universal value systems. Instead, we see only reality, and the esoteric prospect that it is perceived unequally on a biological level, therefore we need people like us around us and we need a hierarchy which puts the best perceivers at the top.

Even more, nihilism tells us exactly how venal and short-sighted most people are, because it explains how they are trapped in the self and unable to connect to the world beyond. Whether they become materialists or religious fanatics, they embrace the same dysfunction, which is idealizing the mental model of reality more than the quest to refine that model.

In so doing, they make themselves agents of the anti-real. Instead of a study of life, we have a study of the self, but only on the surface, because to look deep within — at the level of existential, moral, spiritual and intellectual growth — is to discover the necessity of reality. To avoid that, they fetishize the trivial as a means of aggrandizing the personal, and the result is a steady flow of mental spam and social demands.

Nihilism acts like a paint stripper, removing the false external and the herdist social control instinct, replacing it with a raw emptiness which will devour the personality unless a purpose related to reality intervenes:

The passage evokes a kind of impersonal awe, a cold rationalism, a null-state. In the late 1940s, the Japanese philosopher Keiji Nishitani would summarize Nietzsche’s fable in different terms. “The anthropomorphic view of the world,” he writes, “according to which the intention or will of someone lies behind events in the external world, has been totally refuted by science. Nietzsche wanted to erase the last vestiges of this anthropomorphism by applying the critique to the inner world as well.”

Both Nietzsche and Nishitani point to the horizon of nihilism – the granularity of the human.

Most people do not act except with a social target, which in turn flatters the ego because other minds like their own seem like extensions of their own minds at that point. The goal of the individual in this case is not to make the most of life, but to control what is convenient for them, so they can continue to think backward via rationalism.

In this sense, modern people are like Ahab in Moby-Dick: obsessed by the need to control that which refuses to bend to their will. This process is addiction like masochism or heroin, and it gradually destroys them, much as it eats up a society when it is weaponized in collectivized individualism, or Crowdism.

We can see two alternatives to this that do not work. The first is the raw unselfconscious impulsive behavior of third world societies; the other, the impassive solipsism of the Oriental religions. The former removes all function of the conscious mind in order to avoid the possibility of error, and the latter craftily confuses the mind with the world in the name of doing the opposite.

The Asiatic method renders the quest for reality as an entirely personal endeavor, at which point it takes on the aspects of backward rationalization: instead of pushing the individual to accept more of reality, it selects those parts of reality which are convenient, creating a “cherry-picking” effect. This is similar to Western dualism, which erects a false secondary “world” of theological symbolism that is designed to placate the individual.

The Black Pill is the only alternative. It removes the various crutches — material, ego, emotion — used by the individual, and renders the individual as a means to the end of perceiving reality and doing right by it. This de-emphasizes the individual and moves thought forward once again.

Africa To Exceed America By 2050

african_sunset

South Africa and $current_year America have many parallels; in particular, the latter is following a path to becoming the former, and will then rediscover what people there found when a Leftist diversity-oriented regime replaces a thriving society, making it into a wasteland.

Understanding South Africa requires seeing its in an African context, which is different in many ways from the West. Where the West is a first world society degenerating to third world levels, Africa is mostly a third-world society which has moments of first world interaction.

The Global Competitiveness Index puts America and various African countries on a single index, whereas it actually requires two indexes. Western peoples think that they can use the same yardstick as they would use for themselves to engage Africans, but this has led to inexplicable historic outcomes. (Imagine a “knighted” Mugabe for instance.)

Instead, whatever happens in Africa should therefore be categorized by:

  1. What external forces “exercise” in Africa.
  2. What internal forces are “living” by.

For example, external forces wanted Mandela to rule the southernmost country in Africa, while internal forces just wanted money (and running a country is not part of “money” though, because, what are borders again?).

A general characterization of African “rule” is that it is strategically focused on power. In the Western sphere we know that power corrupts, even that power is tragic as described in the biography of Tony Blair. A tragedy currently re-enacted by Hillary Clinton while it is no different in dark Africa (think about the “Big Men” in Africa).

When you notice a few protests in America, think that Africa is beset with thousands of protests such as here and here where the reasoning in all cases are flawed. All protests actually relate to some powered conflict also visible in political assassinations.

The longest South African mining worker strike in its history happened ten years after Mandela came to power and as it happens, the newly emerging labor union AMCU causing it, was supported by a newly emerging “political” entity called the EFF both of which were supported by George Soros and the British Monarchy.

The background provided above demonstrates that although Western NWO elites “put” Mandela in the Presidential seat, it now transpires that his governmental progress has failed “donor” expectations, resulting in financially stimulated protests, strikes and even a new political opposition.

External forces

The current state of Western exercises in Africa relates to various trade agreements with the EU and US such as the AGOA. However, trade agreements are also applicable to BRICS countries in a South-South Agreement.

The US has an Africa strategy described by the Bureau of African Affairs  also providing information on AGOA and “travel warnings”. The US Embassies (like other embassies), provide Trade Consuls advertising American products to local distributors.

Since western countries financially supported “democratization” of various African countries, they generally demanded payback in terms of Governmental procurement contracts. In the Mandela case, America received a nice gold stash; Britain received a large defense equipment procurement contract while France still waits to provide heavy airlift military aircraft. In the near future Russia will be rewarded with the procurement of nuclear power stations.

In terms of the vast mineral resources of South Africa, it is well known that the large contingent of mining labor affects the country’s well-being.  The Chamber of Mines consisting of multi-national Corporations, controls (by definition) life in Africa to a large extent. The person referred to in the article as “Trevor Manual” is a Rothschild representative in Africa.

The further connection is that the Reserve Bank also belongs to Rothschild. The way they exert pressure on the Mandela government is through rating agencies such as Moody’s. The international implication of having this “influence” is that South Africa’s inflation rate never drops below 4%. This gives American institutional investors a “piggy bank” to always do better than any Western savings account, by investing in the local stock exchange. In the short term it is good for local shares, but in the long-term it destroys the middle class because inflation is always more than 4%.

It is clear that Africa has to suffer two strong and one mild external influence. The strong Western influence is a coordinated effort between the US and Rothschild while the other equally strong Marxist influence emanates from Russia and China. The mild influence is a cucked Europe trying to appease the “noble” black man with donations in exchange for tourist “safaris.”

China has been an interesting competitor for external exercises. Their intention is not to influence via corruptive enterprise as such, but their apparent objective is to find place and space for their own people. For example, their criminals are “given” to Chinese construction companies in Africa with the promise that they can “stay” afterwards. They will also carefully evaluate a country and extract any novel capability back to China. In South Africa they extracted entire gene pools of African goat and ostrich because those animals are very “efficient” animals. Chinese not only scour the country side, but look also for technology, patents and markets, where they have forcefully entered the cellphone and cement markets. 

They also coordinate within one of their own overpopulated regions, instructing hundreds of thousands to enter a local country via different routes with instructions to disperse across the entire country selling clothes and sushi. Under the Leftist regime, Chinese are classed as “black” and therefore receive affirmative action rates. The takeaway from the Chinese is that they are not interested in taking over a country, because it’s not effective and too much trouble anyway. The implied geopolitical effect however, by “activating” a future diaspora, does not go unnoticed.

Russian Marxist ideology has been influencing the “comrades” fostering “revolutions” and leading to a culture of protests mostly stimulated by labor unions. In Africa labor unions sit on the same side of the table as political parties. The other side of the table is generally reserved for whites (or business donors). This Marxism is different to what Russians do because the local Communist party thinks they are doing it “better.”

The latest external exercise affecting daily life in South Africa is George Soros’ Open Society Foundation.

It is clear from above that external effects are not just influence, but actual “instructions” affecting the very lives of local people in a liberal-democratic ideological framework. In a two speed world, South Africa and Africa are supposed to be running at the higher emerging economic speed, but for some yet inexplicable reason it does not, therefore the 1st world donors (globalists) are not happy.

Internal forces

The important parameter in South Africa and Africa as a whole is perhaps demographics and languages. South Africa on its own has 10 “official” “tribal” languages but the Law is written in English. The cultural aspect that emerged is that voting patterns follow a racial divide. In other words not a tribal divide, but is race-based.

It is therefore not unexpected to observe an increase in the race narrative in conjunction with feverish attempts by the main political opposition to find ways assuaging this. The political parties in South Africa are numerous, but with the Mandela party (ANC) colluding with the biggest Labour Federation (Cosatu), the next biggest party is the minority Democratic Alliance (DA) representing most of the white “race.”

The interesting aspect of regulated life in South Africa is that western originated minority law such as affirmative action is routinely applied to the majority, as well as to the Chinese. That means whites in general must work harder to overcome their privilege. Since all donors support the black party, white party politics has become very difficult causing whites in general to “resign” or go dark as a defensive measure to combat politics-of-fear.

The exclusionary politics continued by classification of race in Mandela’s land, with the interesting difference; each person “must” decide himself what race he is. It’s just difficult for babies to do, but anyway.

The new South Africa has achieved a much touted objective: It created a black middle class. But the country has not lived up to its economic growth objectives and many say that the black middle class was merely a recycling of Government replacing white with black employees.

One private institution embracing affirmative action was Standard Bank. It apparently reduced job descriptions thereby reducing the risk of individual failure on the Bank as a whole, while allowing for an increased appointment of black employees. The CEO position was also split into two positions allowing for a black and white dual CEO appointment.  The Bank has positioned itself admirably by allowing Chinese shareholding too.

It was said that the South African economy is driven by five major corporations and by “playing along” with the new politicians they have driven the country into a progressive alcoholic party type simulacrum. As long as we can have an alcoholic party, everything will be all right. Those who want to make things work receives answers like “seriously?” while foreign visitors comment on the atmosphere of “mañana” which means “we’ll do it tomorrow.” Being a country of sunshine, beaches, wine and sports does not help to inhibit the party spirit. However, tourists and citizens still find the country enjoyable despite taking “necessary” precautions which do cost a premium of approximately 40%.

Meanwhile nothing (in society) gets done properly. This is noticeable in the return on tax invested where New Zealanders get a 71% return and South African taxpayers a measly 17% return.

Where the economy once performed well (above 6% growth per year), the current state is that it’s performing poorly (<2%), with sports following in lockstep too. Lucrative international bond funded infrastructural projects such as road tolling systems aimed at the “honey-pot” of citizenry, has become nightmarish resulting in unheard-of bond losses. Most State-Owned-Enterprises have to be subsidized by Treasury and 80% of municipalities are bankrupt. Link here for independent information on municipal performance and “hotspots” and here for a description of bad SOE performance while globalists expect the African continent to do better than ¡Amerika! by 2050. (Think about that)

Protests have become regular loot driven parties, something to look forward to, share and share alike by criminals and the general populace. All are equal in a dysfunctional society that everyone thought was due to Apartheid, but are now inexplicably promoted by Hollywood actresses.

The latest newspaper insight is that the “last frontier” is the IEC (Independent Electoral Commission) that is in charge of this year’s elections (in South Africa). In Australia the “frontline” is border patrol/customs, In America the frontline is soldiers fighting some war but in South Africa it is the Electoral Commission.

Meanwhile… most people lock themselves up at night, send their kids overseas and prepare for the worst retirement scenario. But even so, we still binge regularly just to forget for a few hours, because tomorrow the sun inexplicably shines again.

Donald Trump Reveals Just How Far America Has Drifted Leftward

donald_john_trump

From goofball Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek, a partial insight into the Donald J. Trump phenomenon:

“Read Trump closely – it is difficult to do, I know – and if you extract his total racist and sexist stupidities, you will see that here and there, where he makes a complete proposal, they’re usually not so bad,” said Žižek. “He said he will not totally dismantle universal healthcare, raise the minimum wage, and so on.”

“Trump is a paradox: he is really a centrist liberal, and maybe even in his economic policies closer to the Democrats, and he desperately tries to mask this. So the function of all of these dirty jokes and stupidities is to cover up that he is really a pretty ordinary, centrist politician.”

The point of the Donald J. Trump campaign is not to assert the far right, but to rebut the Leftward slide of the West, and in doing so, to open the door to the Right if its policies cure the immediate loss and point us in a more positive direction for the long-term future. This is his Alt Right: he wants to restore greatness with baby steps at first.

Much of his success comes from the fact that, despite advocating relatively moderate plans and insisting on commonsense goals like enforcing immigration law, Trump is demonized by The Establishment/Cathedral which fears any deviation from the ongoing Leftist slide toward full Socialism in the West.

The battle the American people wanted in this election was an out-of-the-closet Socialist (Bernie Sanders) versus a libertarian moderate (Donald J. Trump). Instead they get the choice of two very similar candidates, but Hillary Clinton endorses more of the Obama years wealth transfer, race guilt, demographic replacement and big government.

Trump does not ask that we make an ultimate decision, as Sanders and Hillary — who will ensure a third world demographic majority, and these groups always vote Leftist over time — thrust upon us. He is a canary in a coal mine warning that we have chosen a path that leads to ultimate destruction, and by offering moderate solutions, he puts brakes on it without requesting radicalism.

The Divine Right Of Kings

queen_elizabeth_ii_with_machine_gun

Modernity specializes in replacing past knowledge. This occurs because modernity is entirely a product of the egalitarian ideology, which always seeks to remove any competing ideas, even if they are not hostile.

One of the idea we have lost is the real nature of the “divine right of kings,” which is an explanation for the reason the aristocracy were given power. In the modern vision, it was a religious fanaticism that allowed people to believe some other people were selected by God to have power.

In actuality, the divine right of kings is a restatement of esotericism. That term itself is not widely known, but a dictionary search reveals the following for esoteric:

understood by or meant for only the select few who have special knowledge or interest; recondite:

Esotericism refers to the nature of knowledge as both (1) cumulative and (2) dependent on the ability of those who seek it. It is inherently inegalitarian, but its opposite, exotericism, is profoundly egalitarian: in an exoteric system, truth is distilled to symbols, which are then used to educate equal people who are then presumed to be equally competent at the discipline.

No one really believes in esotericism of course. All those doctors went through medical school, but there are some you trust more than others. Even in car mechanics, all of whom are certified, we trust some more than others and believe some are more talented than others.

Those two areas of choice — talent and trust — reflect the reasoning for an understanding of the divine right of kings as esotericism. Some people are more competent than others, and some more morally good; those who are the best in those areas should be in power not because of moral obligation, but practicality. It is a realistic adaptation to our world and the needs of civilization.

When it is said that the kings have descended from the divine, it means that they are the continuation of the best in our people, which is closest to the divine because such people have the best understanding of reality, the highest moral standards, and will advance civilization by not merely reacting to conditions but by imposing a creative focus to their leadership by which they not only do what is practical, but improve the quality of what exists so that it rises above what we previously thought was possible.

To hominids gathering beetles, roots and bush meat it must have been inconceivable that something like imperial Rome or pre-democracy Athens might exist. In the same way, to modern people it seems impossible that life can be anything more than gathering jobs, consumer products and triplicate forms. But it is possible to rise above and then keep on rising.

For that reason, traditional societies saw their aristocrats as a gift from God. These were people blessed with not just intellectual power, but moral goodness, and within that, the aesthetic preference for beauty, truth, sanity and excellence. These people alone can make a great society.

As we have slowly shifted to the exoteric, starting long before the Peasant’s Revolt but gaining speed with those lower-class rebellions and the fetishizing of them by intellectuals during The Enlightenment,™ we have seen our civilization slowly decay as it has stopped aiming for excellence and has contented itself with mere pragmatic reaction.

Aristocrats are like antennas that receive more of the signal from God, consisting of understanding the order of nature at a level deeper than appearance, where the rest of us get a lesser part of the signal. For that reason, they are chosen by God, and have the divine right to rule, as it will produce the best — closest to God, who is infinite perfection — results.

Nationalism Is Continuity

A small amount of irony emerged when former Jobbik leader Csanad Szegedi recognized his Jewish heritage, and shifted his Nationalism toward the Jewish people:

Csanad Szegedi had been a rising star in the anti-immigration party Jobbik, which had been accused of anti-Semitism, when he admitted his grandmother was a Holocaust survivor in 2012.

Following the discovery of his family’s tragic history, the 34-year-old renounced all ties to the party and converted to Judaism.

Now he told Hebrew language newspaper Ma’ariv he is waiting to become an Israeli citizen so he contribute to the fight against anti-Semitism.

On the surface, according to the Modern Moron™ mindset, he has reversed his position. He went from “racism” to being a defender of Judaism.

But looking beneath the surface, as any competent member of society should be able to, he kept his principles intact: he is a Nationalist. When he learned that he was of a different people than he knew, he kept his Nationalism intact and put it to work for that other group.

Nationalism — unlike universalism — can transfer between groups. If we are all working toward Nationalism, we mean that each of our tribes exist entirely separate from the others, and therefore, that our only conflicts are territorial. The constant low-grade enmity of diversity vanishes.

Csanad Szegedi took his strong European Nationalist feelings and applied them toward Jewish Nationalism (Zionism) instead when he encountered new information about who he was. This is the type of honest and forthright belief that is possible under Nationalism, but not under democracy.

The Alt Right: Revolution Against Egalitarianism

trigger_warning

From a recent article by flaming Leftists, an insight into the Alt Right that has been provided by Amerika for some time:

In Jared Taylor’s most recent video attempting to define the Alt Right in response to the giant wave of traffic his websites had garnered, he said that while it was a range of perspectives, “They all agree about one thing: equality is a dangerous myth.”

This focus on inequality is the broadest agreed upon position in the Alt Right, where the say that egalitarian thinking is a war on the “distinction” between peoples. People are unequal as individuals within racial groups, and racial groups themselves are unequal when compared to each other. This comes down to one of the key political precepts of the movement, agreed upon no matter if they identify as Nazis, neo-monarchists, or neoreactionaries. A society is healthier when it has strict hierarchies, castes, and stratifications.

Leftism is egalitarianism. The Alt Right wants to overthrow not just Leftism but its precursor state. This requires unearthing and destroying the state that caused Leftism, and in so doing rooting out egalitarianism and its parent philosophy individualism wherever they can be found.

In the Alt Right view, genetics, not laws, determine social outcomes. For this reason, the “proposition nation” where people are unified by political and economic interests is a failure, and our desire is to achieve a nation created on the basis of genetic similarity, with internal hierarchy based on individual differences not in test-scoring but in innate ability. This opposes the entire idea of modernity, and with it, politics.

With the downfall of egalitarianism, the possibly of moving beyond the modern time becomes available. We will no longer be constrained by mass politics and the necessity of dumbing down every idea so that a herd can approve of it. We can aspire to greatness, instead of pandering to the fears and lusts of a crowd composed of individuals who know nothing higher than their own immediate sensations.

Civilization Is A Trap

civilization_is_a_trap

Civilization is a disease which is almost invariably fatal.1

The rich are different than you and me. In particular, they are better at making money, which requires having the pulse of trends and being able to see to some degree where they are going. From a story about bunkers/panic rooms for the wealthy comes this tasty tidbit:

Adds Mike Peters, owner of Utah-based Ultimate Bunker, which builds high-end versions in California, Texas and Minnesota: “People are going for luxury [to] live underground because they see the future is going to be rough. Everyone I’ve talked to thinks we are doomed, no matter who is elected.”

What do they know that the rest of us do not? They have probably noticed the downfall of the Obama years — the declining currency, increasing corruption, decreasing competence — and view the current presidential contest as a disaster, perhaps because of Hillary Clinton’s ability to evade prosecution for obvious lawbreaking and the tendency of media to act as her propaganda organ. These are third world events, not first one ones.

We are now at a point of what Guillaume Faye calls a “convergence of catastrophes.” This refers to what happens when 227 years of bad politics and seventy years of extremely bad Leftist rule drive a civilization, like Western Civilization, to the point of collapse. Ecopocalypse hovers on the horizon, either from environmental crash or the rising amount of environmental pollution that will eventually render the planet inhospitable. The economy is not just crashing, but leaves behind record debt and devastated industries destroyed by globalism. Political instability is at an all-time high. Leftism will leave us in a cloud of shame, again, as the destroyer of all that is good, based on an idea — equality — that was really popular because it sounded good. Appearance is not reality.

In addition, modern life is hell. Cities are designed around retreat to the home and blocking out of life around us. Jobs are tedious and pointless, usually achieving nothing but make-work and titles to peacock around with. The consummate ugliness of our architecture, graffiti, urban decay and product-oriented lifestyle is repellent. Social groups are warzones between races, ethnic groups, social classes and political factions. We are surrounded by “null culture,” or music, art and literature advertising fatalism and self-indulgence without any glimpse of what is real, beautiful or accurate.

People are asking how we got to this point. The answer is that we got conned, but as every good con man knows, the person who is conned is a collaborator in the deception because of his desires and fears. In our case, the desire to be important and to have our intent — not our will, because that would be unequal — render unto reality has made us egomaniacs, and our fear of being not equal enough has made us into nasty, squabbling people who treat everything like a negotiation at a bazaar.

How did it all come down to this?

The answer is that civilization is a deviation from the balance of nature, and unless that is compensated for, civilization quickly self destructs. The most intelligent civilizations seem to rise the fastest and fall the hardest. This points toward a disparity between what humans think they should do, and what they actually should do. The problem lies in human intent.

Intent defines our lives. We seek to adapt to our world and put plans in motion toward that end. Those plans are based on what we know of the world, plus a hypothesis about what will achieve the results we intend. The question arises then whether those results are actually the results we need. Our brains like nice, orderly, equality-based structures where each part is divisible and replaceable, where nature prefers complex tiered orders of inter-related balances based on inequality, with each part serving a different role in the organic method.

In designing human society, this leads us toward the idea of the one-step solution. If there are too many people, put them in apartments in big cities for convenience. If people are displeased, make them equal. If the group fragments, implement an ideology to keep the team together. If some do not fit in, beat them down until they do; if some fall behind, subsidize them. If it is too large to know who is good, implement proxies — tests, certifications, schools, laws, middle management — to choose the ones who can implement the goal.

The root of this failure is control. Control occurs when humans micromanage by deciding that instead of having unequal people working in parallel toward a goal, they want to specify that goal and force it to be applied exactly as they intend. It is a mark of bad leadership, and also of a situation where there are too many fools to be trusted with their own work. There is a path to power in organizing all of the fools together and telling them exactly what to do like equal interchangeable cogs, and this is the order that overwhelms all civilizations.

At the right level of zoom, humans and yeast become nearly indistinguishable in this regard. They encounter an opportunity, multiply beyond carrying capacity, and then die out. The civilization of the future is the one that solves this problem.

Amerika is a blog for hard truths, which is why it is not as popular as the blogs from the easy answers crowd, which takes infinite forms and so can come from any orientation, outlook, ideology, discipline or perspective. As such, the texts on Amerika appear to be absurdly effete, stating plain observations without the usual emotional agitation and calls for extreme action; then again, the blogs that succumb to those tendencies are either from the easy answers crowd or inevitably assimilated by it as the blog owners attempt to remain relevant and popular.

We now have a mandate for extreme change. Most people have no idea how big the screw-up is. Leftism, and its final stage globalism, have left a ruin of the first world and made its citizens so existentially miserable that they are refusing to reproduce and in many cases, refusing to leave the house. Globalism has collapsed just like the previous Leftist scheme, world Communism, has. Like the Soviet Union, it has fallen apart in a shambles of the failure of its own policies. It has no one to blame, and people are struggling out of their democratic stupor to reach this realization.

That leaves humanity with a long trail of failed Systems. National Socialism failed, Communism failed, and now it seems like liberal democracy and its socialistic understructure has failed, leaving us wondering what could possibly come next. This gives us a hint: not a System.

Systems rely on the modern notion of the mass. A mass is formed of equal people who have no hierarchy but are ruled by government. They act in self-interest disconnected from its effects on civilization or nature, a condition called individualism around here.

This mass motion acts according to human social rules, meaning that it is based on appearance and including all others in order to keep the group together. This is the basis of the universalist values that since the Enlightenment™ have formed the basis of Western political thinking. This is not unique to the modern West; universalist values arise any time a society has lost purpose, and instead of finding one, chooses control as a means to keep itself together.

Whenever people are grouped together in a mass, or group without internal hierarchy, and herded through mass motion, a System results. This contrasts the hierarchical and tiered orders of nature in which each type of thing has a role and fulfills that activity alone, relying on the combined actions of all parts in balance to produce the stability of the order.

In order for a System to work, it must create a consensual hallucination of an objective space in which symbols are actuality. We reference this space any time we say “science proves it” or “it is recognized that” in reference to an idea. The space of ideas, in a universalist system, is assumed to be shared equally among all people and therefore, people react to ideas as if they were programming distributed through a computer network.

From this come the pitfalls of civilization: the cities where people are anonymous, the accumulation of broken people and deleterious mutations, the loss of any culture or idea which cannot be spread universally, which requires it to be very simple and based on the archetype of the idea of universalism itself. These ideas flow from the basic assumption of egalitarianism which arises when a civilization becomes prosperous enough to lose its implicit goal of establishing itself against the restrictions of nature and lack of knowledge of the world, and become the toxin that destroys it.

Civilization is a trap. We go in expecting to make things better, but by improving our lot, we create a path to fatality. When civilization goes, all that we have contributed is lost. In the process, civilization forms its own sort of Darwinism that selects not for the smartest and strongest, but for the least offensive. It turns Vikings into pajama boys. It takes a thriving people, and leaves behind a stupider, more docile version, as if they were domesticated animals.

What can be done? This task seems hopeless. And yet, as the good book says, our suffering is what makes us know who we are; it is a gift from God (this is not of much comfort during the suffering, however). This is a challenge which demands our best of intellect and heart, and charges us to rise above the malaise and sloth into which we have fallen.

Instead of relying on Systems, we can move toward a traditional civilization. This will include, in addition to the “big theory” four pillars, the following methods:

  • Anti-Formalism. Instead of rules and laws, depend on people. That is: put your best people in power, and let them learn what life is, organically. This means a lack of uniformity, which offends our minds and pretense, but a breeding ground for people of more complex understanding.

  • Localism. Big, anonymous cities are death. Small cities and towns provide places where each person knows everyone else. This encourages decisions based not in the moment, but upon what someone has done with their life. Anonymity destroys trust.

  • Anti-Control. Control seeks to rule details from a centralized place of abstraction; traditional societies allow a cascade of authorities, from the highest to lowest, with each one managing only its domain.

  • Hierarchy. This has two parts: first, we elevate our best people — morally, intellectually, by character — to positions of authority, so that they may oppress the rest, as a binary option to the inverse, where the rest oppress the best. Second, we allow Darwinistic competition, including in free markets, to fill in where authority is not needed.

  • Incompleteness. The societies that thrive are those which preserve an internal dialogue and combat between extremes. This reinforces the reasons why for positions, instead of merely repeating thing, and strengthens them by testing.

  • Darwinism. In every society, some will arise who are either chronically negative or without any direction. Natural selection demands these be exiled, along with any defectives, for the greater strength of those who remain. Nature is cruel; so must we be.

Civilization creates proxies, or intermediates which can be gamed by the unscrupulous, wherever it is afraid to directly confront the question of hierarchy. It works best when administered by culture, not government, and kept focused on ongoing and unattainable goals like excellence. These things seem contrary to the very idea of civilization itself in appearance, and so they are rejected universally, despite being salvation.

As we approach the doom of this particular instance of civilization, it will cheer us to know that many civilizations have died before. This one is no different. We chose a wrong path, and now it is time to find a better one. As we discover it, we can let go of the past like memories of a fever, and instead aspire to the greatness to come.


1 — William Ralph Inge, “The Idea of Progress”, Romanes Lecture (27 May 1920), reprinted in Outspoken Essays: Second Series (1922).

In Defense Of Milo Yiannopoulos

milo_yiannopoulos

Oi Vei!, the Alt Right struggles with self-definition yet again. Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos is befuddling the Left:

Following Out magazine’s recent profile of Breitbart Senior Editor, Milo Yiannopoulos, leftists have trotted out one of their favorite buzzwords: “white supremacist.”

Lucas Grindley of The Advocate, who can be seen in this piece’s header image, wrote an article reporting on an open letter signed by over forty LGBT reporters and media professionals condemning Out for their profile of Milo.

And the anime/neo-Nazi wing of the Right:

I have previously viewed Breitbart as a type of ally, as they are the only mainstream site which is presenting a relatively far-right narrative. It matters to me that they stood up against the likes of Shapiro and Michelle Fields. It matters to me that they give honest coverage of the migrant crisis, as well as Black Lives Matter. Their support for Trump is important to me.

However, any positives this site has are completely negated by the damage that Milo is doing.

Milo is the number one enemy of our movement. He is attempting to destroy us, and Breitbart is enabling him.

Let us consider this situation in realistic terms:

Yiannopoulos is a provocateur who delights in offending everyone as a means of subverting the culture of offense, or the idea that any speech which disturbs someone or anyone is bad and should be banned. He is the manifestation of the old ANUS motto “Say FVCK for FREEDOM” which was symbolic more than literal: whatever the herd fears must be spoken, loudly, to prevent the herd from demonizing it fully and banishing it from discussion.

He is granted this privilege by the fact that he is immune from attack. As a part-Jewish flamboyant gay man, he comes from two protected minority groups and can speak his mind without someone accusing him of being a privileged white male. He has minority privilege instead, which counts for a lot: Thomas Sowell wrote many things that a white man could not have written without ending his career. Yiannopoulos is bullet-proof and he uses that to divide the Left.

He does not claim to be Alt Right; he claims to be a cultural libertarian or some variation of the above, and yet he introduces gateway ideas that lead people to the Alt Right with every one of his speeches or writings. Some of these are quite advanced and combine conservative and libertarian thought. Often, he expresses a spectrum of Social Conservative through Traditionalist and Reactionary thought.

In other words, he does not attempt to speak for any group, but serves as a wedge splitting apart the Leftist lock on public discourse, and then kicks the Alt Right through that gap. He is a sapper, an advance vanguard, and on the whole, he has helped the Alt Right far more than he has hurt it.

As Out wrote:

A professional mischief maker and provocateur, he loves a grand entrance. Wherever Yiannopoulos goes, the Loki from London swoops in with rapid-fire talking points delivered in a playfulness so foreign—and intoxicating—to most journalists and Americans that they are left standing in the rubble, dumbfounded.

Is there a risk of entryism? Entryism is best measured in terms of ideas, not individuals, because individuals can camouflage themselves as extremists like the Hollywood White Nationalists who were 50% paid informers for the FBI. On the far right, the greatest threats come from people who are wearing Nazi uniforms and spouting extremist doctrine, but then use that to backdoor Leftist concepts as normal. Entryism through doorway-opening is not likely, although some who are clueless may use the doorway concepts as a defense to going further; this is where most of the resentment of Yiannopoulos comes from.

The Alt Right benefits from internal argument, dissent and disagreement not because these things are valuable in themselves, as the Left alleges, but because they reinforce the reasons for positions instead of — as uniformity can do — rewarding repetition of those positions as dogma. A healthy community will revisit its core ideas frequently to assess them again, and will find its conclusions were accurate, modifying details but not the substance as is necessary.

This dispenses with criticism of Yiannopoulos as a political figure.

His personal life also attracts criticism. He is indeed part Jewish, as this image from the BBC shows:

milo_yiannopoulos_-_bbc_image

And if we take his carefully cultivated image at something approaching face value, he is also a flaming homosexual who enjoys the company of African-American males. If the symbolism of this caricature Otherness does not induce a smile, there may be no hope for you, really. Do we need more nagging nannies and uptight aunts on the Right? We all know how well that worked in the 1980s with the jihad against heavy metal and pornography. Most Rightists dislike those things, but find state-sponsored action against them to be the wrong solution, both for its calcified rigidity and its potential for abuse.

Homosexuals contribute to the Right, as do Jews, Asians, African-Americans and others. We have to ask at one point whether uniformity is more important, or whether having voices that understand and promote our ideas is more vital. The latter makes more sense, since these voices are not advocating for personal inclusion, but for the establishment of Alt Right ideas in the political discourse. They often do so from their own nations, where they are working for Rightist sanity against the overwhelming tide of Leftist lunacy, and are not attempting to subvert us.

As far as homosexuality goes, it has long been the position here that it should be tolerated in segregated gay communities. Pogroms against gays turn us into monsters and force gay men to go into the closet, at which point they attempt to have normal families, causing collateral and genetic damage. Acceptance of homosexuality as a norm or ideal is similarly unwise as it affects only about 2% of the population. A sensible middle path is to accept it where it belongs, in the gay neighborhoods and oyster bars of the world, so that gays have somewhere to go and the rest of us are separated from that activity.

In an ideal Alt Right state of the world, Yiannopoulos might end up in Israel living in a pink neighborhood in a port town. This is not a concern at this time, as that day is too far removed for thinking about it to be fruitful (no pun intended). However, right now we need allies, and any who can comprehend what we are on about and make a good case for it are good allies, and we should embrace them and relish the havoc they are wreaking upon the lunatics of the Left.