We hear success stories because they tell us only part of the story. We are instructed in how the big cities are wonderful, full of wealth and power, but in actuality, the only way they got to that state was by promising what they could not deliver and cutting corners, just like any other business that is faking its way to the top.
Chicago and New York rank at the bottom of a new analysis of fiscal strength based primarily on data from 2015 financial reports issued by the cities themselves.
…For example, the city’s Municipal Employees’ Annuity and Benefit Fund (MEABF) reported $4.7 billion in assets and $14.7 billion of actuarially accrued liabilities at the end of 2015, representing a funded ratio of just 33 percent. The actuarial calculations rely on a controversial practice of discounting future benefits at a rate of 7.5 percent, which is the assumed return on the fund’s portfolio return. If a more conservative assumption was employed, MEABF’s liabilities would be higher and its funded ratio lower.
…New York City’s position — just one step above — was unexpected…At the end of its 2015 fiscal year, the city’s general fund reserves amounted to just 0.67 percent of expenditures — well below the Government Finance Officers Association recommendation of 16.67 percent (equivalent to two months of spending).
In other words, these cities simply deferred necessary expenses and allowed the books to reflect lower costs, which made them seem attractive to business and citizens alike. They passed on the debt to the future by making fraudulent assumptions about their income and obligations. If a company did this, investors would shy away, but under the aegis of government, it is accepted.
We now must wonder how many other entities operate under this type of accounting. Amazon invests profit into the future and ignores debt; the USA does the same. Perhaps the entire modern world is a scam, designed to seem wealthy by hiding its actual obligations and re-investing that money so that others then buy into the plan, not knowing that they are being sold a hollow investment.
A silence fell over the West today: the silence of not noticing a great event which has been building for some time. Like the fall of the Soviet Union, it has grown first in darkness, then in offhand casual remarks, and finally as a strong will expressed through uncompromising language. And now, a wall has fallen and for the first time, we can see the world beyond the managed environment which is the politically correct West.
In Aurora, Colorado, the unthinkable occurred — an anti-white hate crime was accepted as such from the initial investigation:
Police in Aurora are investigating a sexual assault that may have been a racially-motivated crime.
…Early Friday morning, two African-American men sexually assaulted the woman outside the shopping center. Police say the victim, who is white, didn’t know the attackers. During the assault, the men yelled racial slurs at the woman before fleeing the scene.
Aurora police would not comment on whether the case is being classified as a bias-related attack.
The wall has fallen, and those who were presumed to be the enemy are recognized as human again. Much as the world wanted to punish the Germans for WWII and then, in 1989, realized that the Berlin Wall was a great injustice, and then realized in 2016 that however wrong his methods were that Hitler was right about the incompatibility of different ethnic groups, and the suicidal insanity of even microscopic amounts of Leftism, we now realize that white people are human, too, and have a right to self-interest.
Even more than that, we are seeing a recognition that equality has failed. To implement equality, one must raise the lower or demote the higher; since the lower would have risen if they could have, this means in reality that equality always indicates a need to penalize the more successful to subsidize the less successful.
This anti-moral, anti-Darwnian approach is universally popular because people, especially smarter ones, view themselves as failures and see a need to be protected against the judgment by results that is the nature of reality. People want human intent, a cross between solipsism and social approval, to regulate who is acceptable, instead of results, because often results turn out badly, frequently by chance alone. Our fear leads to an addictive and compulsive illusion through the notion of “equality,” which means “equal inclusion” in reality, or forced social acceptance.
With the backlash against egalitarianism, which is such a mentally addictive concept that it becomes an all-consuming Moby-Dick or Lord of The Rings style obsession, the West is reversing the past centuries of decline. Egalitarianism is the root of ideology, or the notion that what humans intend is more important than what has worked in reality in the past; as egalitarianism falls, it will be replaced by realism, or the study of reality.
The struggle of our time has become clear: realists, who want civilization, stand against ideologues, who want to rationalize the decline by directing our attention with the false metric of “progress,” which is essentially virtue signaling for social status.
Realists face a series of tough realizations. The first is how much recent politics was bungled; after that, the time scale and scope expands. Soon it becomes clear that our society has been afflicted with deep rot for many centuries.
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of all this is realizing that the decay runs deeper than politics. It has infested all aspects of life, including the “lifestyle” and daily experience of people, leading to existential misery. Worst of all of these realizations is the knowledge that modern society is a giant waste of time.
Most of what we do is completely unnecessary except that it allows individuals to claim they are important. Most products fail, but their launches allow ambitious little sociopaths to claim they are wizards, at least for long enough to get hired somewhere else. Most tasks at jobs are there to demonstrate the importance of the manager. Most red tape events involve bureaucrats asserting their power over you. Most social events are jockeying for positions in a hierarchy, and art, culture, literature and even friendship get used as means to that end.
In short, competition has created an infinite demand for ways to compete. As has been observed many times, every thing creates more of itself, and so when we make competition in specific areas part of our society, that takes over everything else. That we do it with money makes it mandatory that everyone join in and waste their time.
The average job could be done in a few hours a week, if we subtract out the activities done to demonstrate the importance of managers and employees, the red tape which solves no problems but creates work for everyone, the waiting around for people who are merely posing at being busy elsewhere, the pro forma meetings and emails. Jobs are mental spam for the most part, and they obscure the tasks which actually need doing.
Add to that the other great waste-of-time activities in modernity: returning the constant defective products, researching products to see which of the options are not corner cutting scams designed to get some idiot promoted to management somewhere, spending days or weeks filing paperwork which no one will see, arguing with self-important customer service representatives and waiting in line — endlessly — while someone in front struggles with understanding the simple nuances of the obvious solution to their avoidable problem.
Modern society is a trap. It will kill us off the same way every advanced civilization dies: it tolerates the stupid, who then gang up on the rest, take over and make a society designed for idiots. This exhausts the intelligent, who promptly die out, leaving the stupid in charge for a glorious generation or two before their corruption accrues and society plunges (slowly) into third-world status.
The intelligent are forced into a role by civilization that they feel obligates them to the rest. What this means in reality is that the smarter parts of our civilization are forced to babysit the rest. That group, essentially reckless proles hungry for power and wealth, is the most destructive force in any society, like a stomach that thinks it is a brain.
This exhausts the intelligent, and makes it easier for the proles to take over.
While this happens, those of mental ability are forced to either (1) stand against the ongoing decay and become marginalized, dying childless in small cabins in the woods or (2) rationalize the decline as good, make the right virtue signals and “succeed” despite it wasting all of their time and energy in the process of babysitting the insane and stupid herd.
Rationalization of a clearly sick and moribund society makes them crazy, and from these tormented souls we get our intellectuals and social elites. They tend to be corrupt because their minds are scrambled by having to accept the destruction of their civilization as a good thing, and to assuage their guilt, they tend to endorse ideas like “progress” and Utopia in order to avoid talking about the actual problem, the collapse of civilization, because it is hard to solve where Utopian plans are trivially easy.
The dying civilization of the West has tormented its intelligent people and driven them insane as they try to adapt to a world created for the crass tastes of the herd. They were aliens in their own society long before diversity, and now they are simply ghosts wandering among the others, with everyone waiting for them to die out so the prole party can kick into high gear.
As we come to grips with how utterly insane and corrupt our leaders have been for the past eight years, it is time to reflect on the fact that these acts did not occur in isolation. We The People voted for these idiots; we are the bigger idiots. But who is “we”? Our society has been hijacked by a mob which wants to destroy civilization and replace it with an endless carnival.
Until we start talking about that problem, we are merely putting band-aids on a sucking chest wound. Our civilization is dying. It has been dying for a long time, and its death will be a slow descend into third world chaos, crime, and corruption. The only way to fix it is to take power away from the proles, and restore it to the responsible people, which recent elections have indicated is a popular (enough) idea.
The dominant story throughout human history is that people specialize in illusions, and when they get together in groups, they create an echo chamber which reinforces those illusions, and then they force those on others.
Then “intellectuals” get famous for inventing alternate stories about how it was not human group stupidity arising from our individual selfishness that did us in, but something else… something external to whatever group we perceive ourselves as part of.
Hence the mania, these days, to blame any group of elites: the Left blames the Rich™ and the Whites,™ and the Right blames the Globalist Elites.™ (And everyone seems to blame The Jews,™ which is causing many Jews to identify as right-wing in order to point out that Jewish Leftists are just as crazy as regular Leftists, but non-Leftist Jews are not part of that craziness and wish to avoid mass graves in the coming physical removal of Leftists — smart of them).
This is how intellectuals distract: they invent a positive story about our shiny future, identify a scapegoat that threatens it, and then push us toward an ineffectual but emotionally satisfying method of achieving that future, usually some variant on the universal sensations that make a room buzz: we are all one, peace on earth, love/accept/tolerate everyone, we are all equal, trust Jesus, etc.
All of those solutions amount to exactly the same thing: accept everyone, ignore goals, and do nothing. This is why they are popular: they are social tokens that signal happiness and success, but require absolutely nothing from the people involved except making the right noises and participating in a few symbolic activities.
In fact, the universal path to human social success is the same as the path to civilization doom: conjure up social pacifism by telling everyone that they are OK, and distracting from the real problem to focus on appearance, so that no one has to change themselves to adapt to reality, making them feel like they have finally escaped from the burden of Darwinism and common sense.
Once you get equality in place, however, you can no longer recognize that some people are born to rule by the fact that they have greater ability in this area. Your best neurosurgeon, computer programmer or car mechanic does not necessarily make a good leader, just like the guy sweeping the floor at the coffee shop probably makes a bad neurosurgeon (and most likely is already a bad programmer).
The reason you recognize right to rule by birth is that it keeps people from having to clobber each other to get ahead, and also, gives everyone who is comfortable with a reg’lar job a chance to succeed unless they are outrageously incompetent. When each person starts at zero, we will all be ranked by how far we get, and so life will become constant struggle to “get ahead” which involves holding others back.
Our modern time exploded into stupidity, cruelty and avarice when we abandoned the caste system. It seemed unfair to the proles, you see, and they are always their own worst enemy because what they choose inevitably empowers those who are cruel at the expense of those who are not. If you feel you are living on planet nitwit and most of your species are idiots, this is the reason why: the herd makes bad decisions.
If you want to know why so many psychotic laws and decisions were made, look to this competition. It enforces xenophilia, for example, because if you get ahead and want others not to, the best way to keep them down is to destroy them with cheap imported labor. With competition, no one can enjoy what they already have; every other person in society is most likely trying to seize it away from them. That is why people act to smash down the others while trying to climb up themselves.
Blame can be cast ultimately at the feet of poorer Caucasians in the cities. Our media likes to blame rural poor Caucasians, which as you know if you have been paying attention so far, is a scapegoat/distraction pair. They are doing this because they want to excuse the poor whites in cities who for years eagerly approved of big government, unions, diversity and other parasitic programs out of a desire to screw the rich. It backfired, because this just gave those in power a way to raise costs on the urban white poor and therefore, deactivate them as any kind of political force — they are too busy working and being driven neurotic by the insanity of the city to do anything. Proles self-defeat again.
Toxic elites spring up in these kinds of situations. They are chosen by nitwits through democracy, which means that appearance is more important than reality and whatever happens after the vote is forgotten; they must keep their position, so they give to the thronging masses what that herd demands, which turns out to be exactly what will destroy it. And so, with everyone miserable, the toxic elites have both lots of problems to claim to solve, and many methods of keeping the round-headed in their place.
A sensible society ends this competition caused by equality, and instead segregates its natural elites and gets them out of the job market by giving them wealth and power. At that point, they have nothing to prove, but are put into a role from which they cannot escape in exchange, and so become the smarter people who organize their local societies, to the benefit of all.
Humanity is consistent in one thing: most people are degenerate liars, and in groups, people give in to the lowest common denominator, which is degenerate lying.
We have one real industry, which is the production of excuses, justifications, rationalizations and scapegoats to help us avoid the obvious conclusion that all human problems are caused by the dishonesty of individuals and the panicked impulse control problems of the herd.
People will flock to any explanation other than what is real simply because they do not want to face the really difficult question in human society, which is how we deal with the fact that most of us are essentially “talking monkeys with car keys” who lack impulse control.
This is why we have spent centuries chasing after the perfect political System, through endless war and millions of miles of ink spilled on laws and regulations. We have whole industries trying to explain away our failings. They all use the same mechanism:
“It’s not you, it’s your circumstances.”
In their view, it is not individual humans making bad decisions that causes our problems, but a long list of excuses: we have the wrong System; we need more laws; the Russians did it; the Rich did it; we do not have enough wealth; we were victims of something, so whatever we do is its fault. All of these amount to clever monkeys thinking up excuses that they can use as pretexts for bad behavior.
We citizens of a modern democracy claim to believe in equality, but our sense of equality is not even close that of hunter-gatherers. The hunter-gatherer version of equality meant that each person was equally entitled to food, regardless of his or her ability to find or capture it; so food was shared. It meant that nobody had more wealth than anyone else; so all material goods were shared. It meant that nobody had the right to tell others what to do; so each person made his or her own decisions. It meant that even parents didn’t have the right to order their children around; hence the non-directive childrearing methods that I have discussed in previous posts. It meant that group decisions had to be made by consensus; hence no boss, “big man,” or chief.
If just one anthropologist had reported all this, we might assume that he or she was a starry-eyed romantic who was seeing things that weren’t really there, or was a liar. But many anthropologists, of all political stripes, regarding many different hunter-gatherer cultures, have told the same general story. There are some variations from culture to culture, of course, and not all of the cultures are quite as peaceful and fully egalitarian as others, but the generalities are the same. One anthropologist after another has been amazed by the degree of equality, individual autonomy, indulgent treatment of children, cooperation, and sharing in the hunter-gatherer culture that he or she studied. When you read about “warlike primitive tribes,” or about indigenous people who held slaves, or about tribal cultures with gross inequalities between men and women, you are not reading about band hunter-gatherers.
If you were born yesterday, or merely in the mid-1990s, the above might sound convincing. The rest of us have heard this claptrap from the legacy academia since the 1970s. It translates to this:
“The problem is not that you are all lying nitwits, but that you are in a system that is unequal.”
You can note the lies inherent in the above quoted article by a few angles that are so obvious that they are boldly concealed:
Archaeology. From many digs and fossils, we find that most of the specimens have evidence of wounding. Since we do not have evidence of agriculture at the same time, these were by definition hunter-gatherer societies.
Contemporary evidence. Hunter-gatherer societies were more violent than even the State societies in recent memory.
Human consistency. Humans have always been violent and usually for reasons of territory, culture, and suppression of nearby people who act like idiots. Much of this is emotional. The notion that “egalitarian” societies make people peaceful is a fantasy.
Marxist bias. Academia is biased toward Leftism/Marxism and most of its research is fake, usually for reasons of political bias, which are in fact reasons of capitalism; that which has an audience gets paid for, and that which does not starves.
Genetic evidence. Peaceful, egalitarian societies would result in populations that accepted members from a wide range of competing tribes and had little internal hierarchy. Instead we see the exact opposite.
The primitivist argument, advanced most convincingly by John Zerzan, is popular because it blames something other than humanity for the problems of humanity. Like blaming The Rich, The Jews, The Elites, etc. it transfers culpability from the everyday behavior of people to a symbolic object and assumes that by banishing that, we are left with only “the good” in ourselves.
In reality, the exact opposite is true. Bad rich people are created by thoughtless idiots buying scammy products. The problem of Judaism is created by proles disabling kings so that immigration could occur. The Elites are formed of our thoughtless voting, buying and social notions as a group.
People have been fooled by this because it allows us to blame external problems for our collapse, which makes it seem that collapse will be external, which is a lot faster and easier to deal with than civilizational collapse, which occurs through cultural, political and genetic forces and is extremely difficult to counteract through any method that can be communicated by convincing others.
As always, politics dooms us. People want easy answers, and reject hard solutions. This means that they race after Marxist daydreams or totalitarian wet-dreams (or both) and miss the point: we are an unpunished herd, and we need our best people with absolute power, cracking the whip, while setting up a social order based on caste so every decision is made by personally-accountable, publicly-shameable intelligent people instead of an anonymous mob of people with zero responsibility or accountability.
This is why Amerika advocates the four pillars. Until we have those, we do not have civilization, and will be ruled by a succession of incompetent demagogues, religious fanatics, profiteer-parasites, lunatic New Agers and racial scapegoat-mongers of various stripes.
Leftism itself may be seen as a rationalization of decline in order to avoid pointing the finger at the failure of Systems, or rules designed to make the mob behave, because of the inherent attributes of a mob. We either have kings and social roles, or a mob, and the last five hundred years of history have shown us conclusively that mob rule does not work.
So, let us look at reality. Hunter-gatherers live miserable lives. Efficiency is found when you have big estates ruled by noble families in which all the people under 130 IQ points are told what to do, and no one cares about what they think outside of their specific domains. That model works and we know it does because it provided many centuries of positive living, and build the basis of our technology and advanced culture and institutions.
Nothing we have done since has been anywhere near as good, but our pretense will not allow us to admit that, because to admit that is to recognize that we, as individuals, are not kings, and that we need to be managed because we are barely in control of ourselves. Jordan Peterson points this out in a telling passage in a recent interview:
Skeptical neutrality is ‘you’re a bucket of snakes, just like me. However, if you’re willing to abide by your word, and I’m willing to abide by my word, then we’re able to engage in mutually beneficial interactions, so that’s what we’re going to do’. The reason I said courageous trust is to distinguish it from naiveté. Naive people think that everybody’s good. That’s false, everybody’s not good. But acting in a manner that’s hostile and sceptical and anti-social is completely counter-productive. So what you do if you’re a mature person is you say ‘well, yeah, you’ve got a dark side, so do I. That doesn’t mean we can’t engage in productive interactions’. We do that by sticking to our damned word. Honesty simplifies us to the point where we can engage in mutually beneficial interactions.
We need to acknowledge the dark side of humanity which is that most people not only do not have “free will” but they are in fact unstable egos trying to ride herd on a bag of raging impulses, many of which are animalistic and primitive in the sense of entirely driven by raw urges. The dark side is not a good thing; it is the reversion of evolution, and yet most people will favor tolerating it because they want socially-derived “freedom” from the risk of being rejected because their dark side traits are out of control.
Primitivism is nonsense because inherent within it is the idea that our human problem is our circumstances and not our behavior. That is scapegoating and the oldest form of rationalization which says that, instead of putting our best in charge and suppressing the insanity in all of us by that mechanism, we should accept the insanity (remember: Leftism means Good = Bad) and celebrate it.
Like all other forms of human nonsense, this one will always be the most popular, especially among middle-intelligence people (120-129) who find it comforting because it assuages their egos, which are both fragile because they are aware of more limitations to knowledge, and arrogant because they move among a herd of people without their intellectual advantages. But like all nonsense, accurately known as reality denial, it is a path to death.
Senator Barbara Boxer has long represented The Great State of California in the United States Senate. She is belligerently partisan, hyper-unintelligent and has a time preference so high that you couldn’t get over it without a hook-and-ladder truck from the local fire station.
In other words, she represents the current Zeitgeist of California to perfection.
She exhibits its defects so zealously that the republic (and her constituents) would have been far better served had she chosen to sell insurance rather than enter the arena of competitive politics.
But Barbara Boxer has now truly met her moment in history and gets to be the archetype of her own ideological stupidity. Donald Trump scored an electoral college victory over Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Presidential Election of 2016. Hillary Rodham Clinton won the popular vote. She won it overwhelmingly in California.
This marks the 2nd time in 20 years this has happened to a nominee of the Democratic party. Sentor Boxer never wants to see it happen again. She therefore seeks to amend the US Constitution so that the popular vote is determinate as to who gets the presidency. The electoral college would be abolished.
This would be chicken soup to the Liberal soul that doesn’t exactly miss “Dubya” yet. It would, however, also consign the United States of America to a state of “Hunger Games” Democracy.
“How so?” Asks the Straw-man Blogpost Contrarian. “Doesn’t Democracy require complete acquiescence to the will of the people? I mean look what happened!”
While Donald Trump resoundingly won the electoral college — the state-based “point system” we’ve used in presidential elections for more than two centuries — Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by about 780,000 as of a week out of the election. In other words, more Americans wanted Clinton to win, reason enough to revisit the wisdom of using the electoral college to determine elections. But a larger, more important argument is often overlooked in this ongoing debate.
Well, it’s like this. Direct Democracy is a system where if 50% +1 voter voted in the Burn The Witch Party, we’d have a Program Office to set up in order to procure the wood, lighter fluid and bags of marshmallows to toast over her smoking remains. The United States of America was deliberately set up to avoid direct democracy. “It’s a Republic,” James Madison said. “If you can keep it.”
A Republic works on checks and balances. You check The President (even after you issue him pens and a cell phone), you check The Congress, you check The Supreme Court and you especially check the people. The fundamental idea behind checks and balances is a primal, eternal truth: people and institutions are not inherently decent, but inherently self-serving at the expense of all through externalized cost. They must be kept on a leash.
Our original constitution was far more diligent in this regard. In fact, Senators were not chosen by direct election until the adoption of the 17th Amendment in 1913. But hasn’t the wisdom of crowds improved the quality of our senators?
Sure, show ’em what they win, Dom Pardo…
Theodore Gilmore Bilbo (D-Mississippi) – Klu Klux Klan’s and people’s choice.
Jon S. Corzine (D-New Jersey) – Goldman Sachs and people’s choice.
Bob Menendez (D-New Jersey) – Dominican pimps’ and people’s choice.
Al D’Amato (R-New York) – Corrupt Earmark seekers’ and people’s choice.
Chuck Robb (D-Virginia) – Cocaine-snorting Playboy Centerfolds’ and people’s choice.
Edward Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) – Chappaquiddick Swim Team Captain and people’s choice.
Larry Craig (R-Idaho) – Terror of the airport toilets and people’s choice.
Hillary Clinton (D-New York) – Namer of bridges and public buildings and people’s choice.
Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts) – Playgirl Centerfold and people’s choice.
Lieawatha Liz (D-Massachusetts) – Fake Indian, real US Senator.
So how has direct democracy improved the quality of the US Senate? Oh wait….
America could improve greatly if we were less near the infectious bane of direct democracy. We need to counter the Boxer Rebellion with an initiative to restore fidelity to our original constitutional principles.
All of this is assuming that we believe that we have “magic dirt” which enables us to follow the same path that destroyed ancient Athens without having the same results. That is, in itself, a big if, and as classically-educated men, the Founding Fathers were very aware of that which is why they limited mob rule — err, “democracy” — in the first place. We are a democracy, but a sub-type of democracy known as a republic that tries to limit the Simian insanity that lurks within every human being.
End the direct election of senators or at least drop the proposal to so endeavor on the same day Senator Boxer drops hers. Maybe she’ll do her constituents and the rest of America a favor and follow some of her celebrity endorsers up North to Canada.
As Malcolm Pollack reports, Leftists are using state laws in blue states to try to force the de facto dissolution of the electoral college. They are attempting to replace the republican nature of the American system with mob rule so that the most populous states can dominate the rest:
The Electoral College is all that gives the smaller states a voice at all in the selection of Presidents, and if it is abolished those states with large minority, urban, and elite populations — the ones that reliably go blue on Election Day — will effectively control the Executive branch forever (or at least until the dissolution of the Republic itself, which would likely follow shortly thereafter).
This is typical of the Left, whose unifying statement might be summarized as “social quantity over Darwinian quality.”
Good enough is the enemy of good, goes an old saying, and for the Alt Right, the risk of this has never been higher.
There is no doubt that having Donald Trump elected as President of the United States is a good thing. This victory spanks down the globalists and their Leftist masters, rejects political correctness and unlimited immigration, and will have ripple effects across Europe as other countries fire their big government, pro-Leftist regimes.
Even more than in practical terms, the Trump Revolution™ is a symbolic victory: Americans, like Britons before them, pushed back against the idea that we cannot have self-interest. For years, we indulged political correctness because we thought it was right, but now we see it is one-sided, and take our side instead.
As such, it is an excellent first step, like Brexit: a political event used to jump-start a cultural revolution.
This cultural revolution takes the form of the founding groups of European nations asserting their right to self-interest. Where previously it was seen as “politically correct” to demonize these groups so that other groups could participate, the new wisdom is that diversity does not work; balkanization is the future, and each group must be expected to act in self-interest.
This lets us see the world through the lens of tribes. Each tribe acts in its own self-interest, and these never completely overlap although they experience temporary and partial overlap on certain issues. Instead of having an obligation to every other tribe, we have obligation only to our own tribe.
In other words, the great Leftist dream of equality, diversity and unity has died. There are borders for a reason. Social class exists for a reason. People separate and spend time with people like themselves. They are not interested in being part of other groups, or feeling guilty for the misfortunes or failures of those groups.
If we could designate a second Declaration of Independence, the election of Donald Trump would be it. “I owe nothing to anyone but my own tribe,” it said. Gone is the guilt for whatever condition other groups find themselves in. Gone is the moral guilt sensation that urges us to support them. Instead, we act independently, for ourselves.
The Trump victory is a revolution against Control, which is the habit of making people into atomized (“equal”) units so universal ideological rules can be applied to them all, essentially “herding” them so they support the agenda of those that control them.
Control resembles a broken family unit. If the other members have needs that are inconvenient to those of the parents, they are ignored and explained away as non-important. Those in power remain there, independent of the realistic demands on the family.
If Control has a motto, it is “Don’t Inconvenience My Ego,” which is the motto of tyrants everywhere. They want what they want, and any exceptions are to be struck down so that the intent of those in control can continue to express itself. Control is basically reality-denial, where humans feel that power in human affairs is more important than reality.
You can see this in the small in everyday life. People fear insignificance, death, error, risk and isolation so they create some position of importance for themselves and go into a little mental world where they are a supreme being. They do this with business, social status, ideology and religion. It is life-denial through death-denial.
The West has fallen into the hands of Control because we are not unified by culture, values and religion. That occurred when we first encountered diversity and stopped believing that we could have social standards in common. Alienation spread; problems remain. Class warfare and Leftism arose from this event.
Until we fix this problem, the West will not rise again. We need unity and it can only occur through sharing the same purpose, which we work toward in unequal roles, but all benefit from what it provides, which is mental stability, a joy in life itself, and a belief in life being worth living — even with death in the wings.
This is why, despite our jubilation at the results of this election, we must keep a focus on the core issue, which is ending modernity, which starts with egalitarianism and extends to democracy, sexual liberation, diversity and moral relativism. As one analysis of the Trump win tells us:
This election has at best delayed the agenda of the far-left, if that. Some day they will come back and use the institution of democracy to further that agenda.
Hence we find our real enemy. The institution of democracy is what will be used to continue the dispossession of productive whites and traditional families. If not today, then in four years, or eight, or twelve. It doesn’t really matter exactly when, because the clock is ticking and it is only a matter of time. When, not if. There is going to come a point where European stock all over the world will have to accept that the number of warm bodies at the ballot box is an insufficient justification for rule. Otherwise, we will be destroyed by vindictive incompetents. We will have to stand up and yell: “I don’t care how many billions you number your horde, I will not be ruled by you and yours under any circumstance. I will not allow you to have any say over myself, my family, my people or my nation. Get out.”
Leftism is insanity or evil. There is no compromise or “bipartisanship” with it because it destroys individuals and civilizations in its deranged quest for total ideological control. Ordinary people go along with it because the ideas of equality and pacifism make them feel warm fuzzies and get weak.
The point is that we either end Leftism, or it ends us: our civilization, and our exceptional individuals.
The Right usually fail to understand Leftism. They look at it as a logical argument, when in fact it is an emotional impulse that is then justified with theory. Leftists do not think, in an analytical sense; they act out impulses and then later invent reasons for them.
There is no way to coexist with the Left. They exist in an entirely different reality; where the Right aims to adapt to Reality, the Left aims to deny it. The result is that the two groups talk past one another without realizing it, but the advantage goes to the Left, as they get taken seriously instead of being (rightly) written off as neurotics.
The Left supports Control. They want to set up one rule and make everyone obey it. The Right is a revolution against this control because our preference is to use results in reality instead of human judgments as a measure of what is correct. Trump was Rightist in that he was a revolution against the narrative advanced by the social group that is the Left, which asserts this narrative is more important than reality.
Crowds favor the Left however. Its message of individualism, where every individual is accepted despite failings, and of pacifism, resonates with the fear in all human beings. Like good salesmen, the Left manipulate feelings and channel them toward purchase of Leftism as the singular solution to human problems.
For this reason, democracy always swings Leftward. Both democracy and Leftism are based in the idea of individualism and, with it, equality. Democracy has led us astray for many years, accelerating after WWII and the fall of the Soviet Union because it had eliminated its ideological competition.
If anything, the phenomena of Brexit and Trump are a revolution against democracy as usual. They upend what is popular, and replace it with what is real, not because it is a democratic event but because this is a revolt against democracy following the standard pattern into ideological insanity.
Democracy favors ideas that sound good and offer simplistic pleasant illusions instead of nuanced truth. When left unchecked, this process veers toward the type of doctrinaire ideological fanaticism that we see in both Hillary Clinton supporters and the Soviet Union.
Trump and Brexit were a backlash against this dysfunction. They were not democracy as usual, but a frantic attempt to correct the delusions into which democracy had drifted. In the future, salvation will be found by skipping the middleman and abolishing democracy in favor of sensible, realistic leaders who deny the Crowd consensus.
One of the — many — problems with democracy is that it produces a consensus based on what is socially popular, and this denies reality. As even Leftist rag The New Republic notes, this consensus is both inaccurate and designed to belittle those who reject the narrative in favor of a more detailed view of reality:
Americans outside the big cities may not identify with conservatives, but they identified with their neighbors, both physically and culturally. And they heard the popular culture laughing at them.
Popular culture is like the popular kids in high school. It flatters those who are in a group of cool kids because they support the illusions that each member needs, and derives its power from excluding others.
Groups like this form because it gives their members power. Like a street gang or union, they attack in groups and withhold approval from any who do not agree to help them in achieving their agenda. The anonymity of the group makes them bold, and the fear that someone might see through the illusions of the group drives them to cruelty.
They created a shield to defend their doctrinaire opinions called political correctness. At first it was assumed to be a moral improvement through language, but over time it became clear that political correctness served only to silence those who disagreed with the narrative. At that point, people turned against it.
Trump won because of a cultural issue that flies under the radar and remains stubbornly difficult to define, but is nevertheless hugely important to a great number of Americans: political correctness.
More specifically, Trump won because he convinced a great number of Americans that he would destroy political correctness.
Trump has destroyed political correctness. He marched forth, said all the things that the “smart” people in the elites of our media, academia and government said were wrong, and then triumphed. Political correctness thrived by forcing people to apologize for noticing non-narrative facts, and then destroying their lives.
With Trump, this ended. They could not destroy him. When their attempts failed, the Left were revealed for their true form: fanatics who are essentially cowards. They attack in groups to force others to agree with them especially when reality conflicts with their ideas, and for them, dissent equals enmity.
No society can live under this, and so as with Brexit, the rise of Trump signaled a desire for even the mentally sedentary electorate to break free from the moribund path that liberalism promises. Ideology in conflict with reality can only accelerate because to do otherwise is to lose its perceived legitimacy.
This problem is inherent to democracy. By proclaiming all people equal, we in fact declare that bad is equal to good and therefore, that good is a disadvantage and bad is more efficient. This creates a proliferation of bad. Democracies all follow this path, leaving behind ruined societies ruled by tyrants.
If we seek a solution, it is found by extending the symbolic success of Trump into reality, and recognizing that there is no such thing as equality, and that people need to be placed into hierarchies where the sane once again rule over the rest, who tend toward insanity.
This requires us to realize the contrary truth to the democratic lie, which is that Darwin was right and nature is right. We must, instead of trying to preserve all people as equals, choose the ones that are useful and give them power, while deporting those who are destructive. Nature provides a powerful metaphor:
Shaken by the knowledge that some plants produce and others merely target productive plants, Danny realized he had to judge plants by their actions rather than treating them all as identical. This was at odds with what his Marxists professors had told him, and contrary to the instruction from the news readers on the screen who filled time between commercials for unhealthy products.
Eventually, he gave in to traditional gardening techniques, ruthlessly killing weeds, ripping thorns away, and having no mercy for poison and stranglers. He wanted the good plants to have a chance to grow unhindered and no longer tolerated senseless doctrine and phony morality from fools trying to teach false nature.
People are not all good; in fact, most are varying degrees of bad, and if given power, will behave as the Left do. In fact, the Left is composed of such people. They are not good people, but those who will destroy anything given them and make the rest of us pay for their insanity.
As the Trump administration progresses, the Alt Right will serve an important role: it will carry on this symbolic power by denying the comfortable and convenient illusions of democracy. This shows the power of the Brexit/Trump backlash: we have finally split with years of illusion, and are ready to assert realism again.
The election of Donald J. Trump reaches to areas beyond politics. It shows a cultural shift against globalism and the farther-Left-than-moderate neoliberalism which drives it. It also shows a population adapting to the diversity agenda of post-WWII by formally adopting identity politics, decoupling self-interest from altruism.
First it makes sense to clarify what the election was not. It was not the election of a radical conservative ideologue. Nor was it a vote of confidence in the conservative parties who first opposed the nomination of Mr. Trump in favor of more moderate, neoconservative candidates. This was a man seizing an opportunity that was undervalued:
But Trump’s win was no fluke. He has been talking about running for president since at least 1988, but never pulled the trigger. This time around, he saw the opportunity and went for it. A shrewd entrepreneur, he saw a vast sea of unhappy voters who wanted fundamental change to the status quo—particularly on trade, immigration, and interminable foreign wars, and he was able to disrupt politics by re-segmenting the political market to serve it.
Over the past thirty years, conservatives have been unwilling to attack the core of Leftism as expressed in its class warfare and diversity programs. Leftists want to create an egalitarian Utopia, and to do this requires mobilizing every person by ideology.
That in turn requires eliminating any competing values systems such as the family, religion, heritage, culture, class and national identity. They are fanatical on this point because Leftism is fundamentally unstable, and so any competing — even non-hostile — belief must be subverted and dominated. Leftism pursues power fanatically because the more Leftism penetrates, the less it can hide the failure of its policies, and needs an army of ideological zombie useful idiots and authoritarian leaders to enforce itself.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, Leftism took a new turn: it decentralized and hid its power so that to an observer, it seemed as if society were sliding inevitably Leftward as a result of Leftist ideas working when in fact they were failing. When Barack Obama said that Angela Merkel was “on the right side of history,” this is the myth he was exploiting.
This Leftward shift occurred invisibly because of the rise of neoliberalism, or the use of market forces to force implementation of Leftist ideas:
Neoliberalism is a kind of statecraft. It means organizing state policies by making them appear as if they are the consequences of depoliticized financial markets. It involves moving power from public institutions to private institutions, and allowing governance to happen through concentrated financial power. Actual open markets for goods and services tend to disappear in neoliberal societies. Financial markets flourish, real markets morph into mass distribution middlemen like Walmart or Amazon.
This definition is my paraphrase of Greta Krippner’s “Capitalizing on Crisis”, a pretty good book about what happened from the 1960s to the 1980s in terms of financial politics. Her thesis is that the liberal democratic system was dismantled because it was too explicit about who was making choices. People would get mad at politicians when they didn’t have, say, mortgage credit, or when the price of milk went up too high. The answer came to be neoliberalism, or creating a veil of financial markets to make all those decisions seem apolitical.
Conservatives were caught unaware by neoliberalism because it seemed as if market forces and social change were driving what were actually changes initiative by government, its NGOs and corporate friends, and supported by the news-entertainment media and its cadre of celebrities who never fail to get out there and echo the narrative.
Neoliberalism began to collapse because of the weakening of media caused by the internet, not so much through greater competition but the loss of revenues from advertising and the tendency for readers to get their news directly through statements from the people involved in an event, posted to social media for the world to see.
This happened simultaneously with a backlash that had been steadily gaining steam since WWII against the erasure of our national cultures by diversity and globalism. As NWO propaganda organ The New York Times tells us, the Trump win was a backlash against multiculturalism and globalization:
The triumph for Mr. Trump, 70, a real estate developer-turned-reality television star with no government experience, was a powerful rejection of the establishment forces that had assembled against him, from the world of business to government, and the consensus they had forged on everything from trade to immigration. The results amounted to a repudiation, not only of Mrs. Clinton, but of President Obama, whose legacy is suddenly imperiled. And it was a decisive demonstration of power by a largely overlooked coalition of mostly blue-collar white and working-class voters who felt that the promise of the United States had slipped their grasp amid decades of globalization and multiculturalism.
Even from this source which is hostile to conservatives, the truth emerges: the Establishment was forcing an agenda of globalization and multiculturalism which was not only not working, but also destroying the lives of ordinary people. Our new elites, who are ideological elites like the Communists, used the markets to deplete the populations of the nations they infested, and used that wealth to put themselves into positions of power.
Mr. Trump did not present an alternative plan to this threat. Instead, he simply proposed that he treat it like any other business question and eliminate that which was not working and replace it with things more likely to work. This provoked an outcry that veered quickly into the absurd and histrionic.
The outcry misses the point: Mr. Trump is not a radical. Even more, he has suggested nothing extreme. What he has said is simply that we should stop stumbling down the path to doom, and his method of doing that is to go back to the type of thinking that a moderate or independent would have found appealing in the 1980s.
People protesting in the streets or wailing about how Trump is “misogynistic,” “racist,” “homophobic” or otherwise evil have missed the point. He is none of these things, but the protesters are so far gone into radical Leftism that they cannot recognize a normal, middle-of-the-road viewpoint when they see it.
This permanently divides our country. On one hand, with have the Historic American Nation (HAN) which generally takes a Trump-style moderate position; on the other, the new Red Guards composed of angry students, alienated single women, ethnic minorities, unsubtle Leftist homosexuals, and other people who totally oppose anything like a normal lifestyle based around the nuclear family, tradition and morality as was the group that built this nation from nothing.
We see the same thing in Europe. Neurotic Leftists and non-natives gather to oppose national culture, religion, identity, history, culture and language. They want to turn every place into the same thing that happens everywhere else: an open air bazaar with no heritage, culture and identity uniting it.
In other words, these are the people of decline. They exist only to further decline. They are incompatible with the natives not because we are bad, or even extreme at all, but because we are not going along with the decline agenda, which is to destroy all normalcy and goodness so that only ideology remains.
The psychology of these people — which, since it occurs without regard for the results it achieves, should instead be called a pathology — is fascinating. They do not feel good about life, and only induce themselves toward feeling good through the sense of power and righteous anger they find in ideology. This is how they bond with one another, all they have in common, and how they feel better about their lives, which are empty not so much through lack of success as lack of any permanent purpose, or bond to life itself. These are rootless, alienated, isolated, lonely, unhappy and ragingly angry people.
When someone pursues power for its own sake, independent of what is right or sensible, and is motivated by an impulse to destroy, this reflects a deep detachment from life. They hate the order of nature and any hierarchy which conflicts with their own desires. This makes them agents of destruction, and by doing so, they serve evil.
Bruce Charlton offers more on the conflict behind the conflict, in which we are battling not just another party but the growth of evil within our civilization:
By this, Trump will be just another mainstream secular Leftist politician – better than his evil, incompetent, warmongering and dementing opponent; but not a positive good.
However, the unleashed forces that brought Trump to power… well they do fill me with both hope and also a dash of optimism!
But think of how things are from the perspective of a typical elite Westerner:
You personally regard the universe as a meaningless collection of random events; you regard your own life as a brief interlude between an emergence from chaos and a descent into oblivion.
…How they have rejected marriage and family, how even their best human relationships are little more than temporary and expedient mutual exploitation; how their goals are limited and only possible with self-blinding – how the whole charade is kept going by holidays, treats, drink, drugs, medications, sexual fantasies (and how the reality of these things never remotely matches-up).
How for them life is only about hopes of pleasure and money, fame and status – and an awareness that these never last, and are never enough…And how there is nothing else: this stuff is the whole of life; and the expectation is even worse (unless death and presumed oblivion comes quickly).
The West entered death because of its own success. Its lower orders revolted after its leaders could not stop several unstoppable tragedies whose root really lay in the sudden growth of the West since its superior social order allowed those to survive who otherwise would be unable to.
As in the movie Idiocracy, we see that we get more of what we tolerate. Since we tolerated excessive peasants and fools, we got more of those, and they quickly overwhelmed common sense. In doing so, they created a society which was evil at its core and has been eliminating the good and promoting the bad since.
Events like Viktor Orban in Hungary, Brexit and the election of Donald J. Trump show a gut-level revolt against the steady encroachment of hopelessness in our society. The Crowd is always wrong, and the Crowd desires evil camouflaged in millions of different ways, all aiming at the same result.
This will surprise no one who has spent time among humans. We are self-destructive creatures, prone to spin out of control when our emotions conspire with our tunnel vision oriented perceptions caused by the greater strength of mental impulses about ourselves than knowledge of the world around us. We become solipsistic easily.
Mr. Trump has kicked loose a landslide, as he has created a symbolic barrier to the advancement of the people of destruction, aided by parasitic faux elites who merely want personal profit before they leave to find another place to attack. He represents the West finally working up the courage to confront this evil.
For those of us on the Alt Right, the time has come to refocus. The backlash has become, but most reactions like this peter out when they accept a substitute for total victory. For us, total victory must be achieved, or this evil will eliminate us forever.
With that in mind, the Alt Right needs to look to its roots. Our beliefs are a collection of negations of the building blocks of modernity — equality, sexual liberation, diversity, democracy — but we have never given them the synopsis they truly deserve.
The Alt Right stands against modernity itself.
Modernity is not our technology, which was inevitable since we began making fire, and required only social organization to take hold. Nor is modernity a $current_year range. It is a mentality, and it begins with egalitarianism or the notion of universal inclusion, or that society should be forced to accept the good people along with the bad so that the average individual does not feel threatened by having to live up to a value system, goal, purpose or other restraint on that individual’s whims.
All that we recognize as threats, such as diversity and democracy, are a natural outgrowth of the idea of equality. Equality is the method that evil uses to force acceptance of itself upon our society, and then to take over. Diversity aids equality by abolishing culture, values and standards so that evil is more accepted.
While breaking out the Scotch and cigars over the Trump victory is in order, what we must do now is redouble our efforts and push harder for the end of modernity as a pathology. Our enemies will not rest, so neither can we. Most of humanity wants to tear down what we have built and replace it with disorder, and our only salvation lies in beating them back and then reversing the evil that rots our core.
Below: typical American street scene after Trump election.
Imagine a spacecraft whose captain has succumbed to space madness being drawn ever faster towards its doom at the center of a collapsed dead star, a black hole. Upon any of the crew who express concern at their impending fate, the captain inveighs condemnations, declaring them hateful and divisive.
It does not matter how she rationalizes her mad quest to join the gravitational singularity; what matters is that if the few remaining crew who retain their sanity fail to stop the captain and then make immediate course corrections, they will all end up dead and compacted into a neat burial in the universe’s deepest grave.
Action is necessary, but the choice to live is binary. After a successful mutiny the range of directions the spacecraft will take is wide, and a small change in velocity before the near miss with the singularity will have a huge effect on which direction they end up speeding off afterwards, due to the gravitational slingshot effect the huge mass of the black hole provides. After the rendezvous, the high momentum will make changes in direction require more energy. As such, the mutineers must give thought to where they’d like to end up now, while they’re escorting the captain to the airlock (“Airlock her out! Airlock her out!”).
The gravity of this election provides us a similar opportunity.
The news media have exchanged their valuable but ephemeral capital of public trust for election influence, and while this will cost them in the future as their audience turns elsewhere, for the moment it has bought them what they wanted. A recent poll shows that “most voters say they think Hillary Clinton broke the law by using a private email address on a personal server while she was secretary of state”, but that these concerns may have been blunted by unproven “allegations about Donald Trump’s behavior toward women.” The frenzied lies and bias of the media have contributed to the current state where most people do not care about government corruption, in part because their minds are distracted by non-issues.
What they really care about is their side winning. If a guy on your team sneaks in an illegal hit against the other team, you cheer, but if a guy on the other team does it, you shout and clamor until the ref does something about it. You tell yourself when your guy hits, it’s OK, it’s good, because your teams needs to win — winning is more important than the rules of the game, or even the purpose of the game.
At this point in the election, the gloves have long come off and all the players are just brawling. Conservatives want to resist this, because they have an aversion to cheating and a desire for everyone to play by the rules, particularly themselves. We need to remember that we are not playing a game; we are deciding our future, including whether or not we survive. This transcends party politics, and so it makes no sense to hold ourselves to standards that the other side has long abandoned — we instead have our own standards to which we hold ourselves.
Stephan Molyneux, a man who strongly adheres to the ideals of rationality, skepticism, and a scientific results-oriented view of the world, has not only taken a side in this election, but describes our current predicament with passionate conviction: “The future of everything you treasure, everything you hold dear, everything your ancestors built is right now hanging by a thread.”
Everything’s looser now, more chaotic. People still go about their daily lives as usual, the truckers still deliver goods, the janitors still clean, and the engineers keep the electricity and oil flowing. But in their minds are doubts about the current reigning order. Most dislike the way we’re governed, but know no alternatives, and a hidden anxiety grows rampant. The heat is on, the whole system is more energized now so that pathways that were previously barred due to high activation energies now appear within reach. This whole election has been a catalyst for an until-now slowly growing reaction.
The next few years will require a consistent, strong fight. Possibly this will take the form of putting into action America’s massive civilian arsenal, but hopefully we will be able to simply maintain pressure on President Trump to not veer from his mandate. In such a chaotic environment where opposing forces escalate to unknown ceilings, we may not now see the specific paths that will open up. What will serve us best at this moment before the plunge is a clear vision of where we want to go, of what we want to build when we emerge on the other side.