Posts Tagged ‘donald j. trump’

Caucasians Awaken To The Threat Of Modernity

Thursday, July 20th, 2017

The Obama years represented a high-water point for Leftism in the West because people realized that Leftism has put us on a path to suicide, and that the only way out is to roll back our conversion to Leftism and find something that works instead.

Interestingly, this began happening when the people who had been most fooled by Leftism began to apply the management theory they used at work to the future of the West, and came up with a giant gaping void. They realized that what seemed good was in fact bad, resulting in civilization collapse conditions:

According to Murray, the migrant crisis perfectly encapsulates this exhaustion. In some ways, it’s a case of competing virtues: the desire to be virtuous to the rest of the world is competing against justice for the people of Europe. Increasingly, virtue is winning out over justice because a misguided commitment to hollow notions of “respect,” “tolerance,” and “diversity” has supplanted the deep roots of European civilization. The problem, argues Murray, is that European values have “become so wide as to become meaninglessly shallow.”

Our modern time is guided by a religion of the ego known as individualism. In this religion, “virtue” is a matter of how one appears to others, so anything egalitarian is good because it is always popular with large groups. In turn, that promotes the individual who makes fawning speeches about “equality,” so it is seen as a high degree of personal morality in the bourgeois middle-class filter which praises success and ignores long-term consequences to civilization, because the only question is the Self and its level of comfort and wealth.

The groups awakening are not who one might expect. In America, the group that created the Tea Party re-grouped around Donald Trump and made him president. But they are not the working poor as reported by some media outlets, but instead, the affluent and “educated”:

Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public, and are no more or less afraid of falling into a lower socioeconomic class, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

The 18 percent of Americans who identify themselves as Tea Party supporters tend to be Republican, white, male, married and older than 45.

They hold more conservative views on a range of issues than Republicans generally. They are also more likely to describe themselves as “very conservative” and President Obama as “very liberal.”

Not surprisingly, these results were borne out when the same group rallied behind Donald J. Trump in his run for President:

The median household income of a Trump voter so far in the primaries is about $72,000, based on estimates derived from exit polls and Census Bureau data. That’s lower than the $91,000 median for Kasich voters. But it’s well above the national median household income of about $56,000. It’s also higher than the median income for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters, which is around $61,000 for both.

…Trump voters’ median income exceeded the overall statewide median in all 23 states, sometimes narrowly (as in New Hampshire or Missouri) but sometimes substantially.

…However, while Republican turnout has considerably increased overall from four years ago, there’s no sign of a particularly heavy turnout among “working-class” or lower-income Republicans. On average in states where exit polls were conducted both this year and in the Republican campaign four years ago, 29 percent of GOP voters have had household incomes below $50,000 this year, compared with 31 percent in 2012.

When we look across the sea, we see the same pattern true of Brexit voters:

In fact, most leave voters were in the south: the south-east, south-west – indeed the entire south apart from London voted leave.

…Furthermore, most leave voters are middle class, or at least were of the generation whose housing and pension windfalls put them squarely in the category of wealth.

…The more enlightening figures are those that plot voting against housing; yes, social and council tenants voted leave, but so did those who owned their houses outright, the people we might describe as society’s winners. By housing type, the only groups where remain prevailed were private renters and people with mortgages.

Calling these political events “populism” may be incorrect, as more accurately they are a revolution of the managerial class, who because they handle business and human psychology at their jobs, are more capable and informed regarding how to run human organizations. They looked into the abyss and did not like what they saw, and now they are pushing back.

The enduring question remains how to appeal to these people. They will buy “green” products, support charities and vote for what they think is best for the nation because they realize their fates are contingent upon the value of the economy, which to a large degree reflects the stability of the nation. These are good places to start.

Each time they see a Rotherham, a G20 riot, an Antifa attack on Berkeley, a $20 trillion debt, an Evergreen college, a Benghazi, or any other massive failures that go unnoticed by most people and the media, they get the sinking feeling that their society is becoming Brazil. To them, that means a loss of wealth, power and opportunity for their kids.

Convincing them of identity politics alone will not work, but showing them that identity plus a non-tyrannical yet non-democratic leadership structure will make greater stability and thus greater opportunity will appeal to them. They like the idea of fairness in opportunity, whether “equal” or not, so that their offspring have a chance to rise as well.

In the past, they were liberal because they saw only the upside, which was fewer restrictions on commerce and therefore, more growth. Now they are seeing that growth results in a reduction in quality, and that in turn causes a reduction in value and increase in social instability, and they want to return the poor-quality product (Leftism) to the store and find something better.

How Trump Will Crush His Opposition, And The Democrats, Too

Tuesday, July 18th, 2017

Right now, the news is hive mind buzzing about the failure to repeal and replace Obamacare. This is as much nonsense as their narrative about how Russia somehow subverted the American election even more than the voters did.

Trump is operating according to a simple stratagem: give them rope to hang themselves. The reason that he is doing this is that his actual opposition is the Republican party, not the Democrats. The Democrats have roped themselves to an anvil, namely their support of the type of government that has made America miserable, and they have nowhere left to maneuver.

Let us revisit the wreckage left behind by globalism over the past two decades:

Since 1999, suicide rates have risen in every age group except the elderly, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Among women 45 to 64 it jumped an astounding 63 percent. For men that age, it was up 43 percent.

In their report on rising death rates among middle-aged white Americans, Princeton economists Anne Case and Angus Deaton referred to “deaths of despair” — early deaths caused by drugs and alcohol, as well as by suicide. They cited deteriorating job prospects and a decline in stable relationships as possible factors.

Economic stress certainly plays a part. America’s suicide rate of 13 per 100,000 in 2014 was the highest since 1986. But that was much lower than during the Great Depression, when the suicide rate hit 22 per 100,000.

People see no future. This is not just economic, but the fact that their country has been ceded to invaders, has no working plans, is so deeply in debt that it is farcical, and has collapsed inward in every area of normal life. People are alienated from their communities, distrust each other because diversity destroys social trust, no longer trust police and officials not to be corrupt, believe the country is on a direction to destruction, and realize that globalism and immigration mean that their society has decided to replace them. No wonder they are drinking themselves to death.

The Left is hopelessly yoked to this policy because they are the party of civil rights, and civil rights has been interpreted to mean unlimited third world immigration, which is a major factor in the failure of America. In addition, Democrats are longstanding supporters of the United Nations, climate change laws, and other attempts to subvert American sovereignty which are seen (rightly) as part of globalism.

All Trump has to do about the Democrats is what he is doing about media: goad them into self-destructing.

With the Republicans, he has his real opposition. Their game plan is to thwart him, then blame him for failure. They misread him as a blowhard. Instead, he came out by doing exactly what they told him he should do, shocking his constituents. But then, it became clear — to everyone but the Republicans — what he was doing: he was letting the Republicans kill their own ideas.

Obamacare will fail. Its death spiral has been evident since its construction, which Democrats designed so that they could argue that single-payer healthcare, like the failing UK NHS which is propped up entirely by cheap third world hospital staffs, would be cheaper. What comedy! What insanity! And yet, Trump is content to let it fail.

He stands to gain greatly from Obamacare’s imminent implosion. First, he is insulated; he proposed a replacement, and his own party beat him back. Now, trying to fix it is a budget fight, and he has the figures on his side there, with a debtor nation $20 trillion in debt wanting to take on more cost. Next, his voters will be supportive of him because of the failure of the plan he tried to repeal. The rage is going to be directed at Republicans, who apparently have not seen how the Left and Trump have both played them.

Even more importantly, this sets the stage for the rest of his first term: the midterms are coming up, and those who let Obamacare fail are going to find themselves in trouble. The voters will be ready for a Trump-oriented candidate to replace their incumbent Republicans. This means that Trump may find himself with two years of either friendly faces in both houses, or a group of Republicans too scared to oppose him. The word out on him now is that those who defy him get destroyed.

Next, we should look at what he has done instead of waste too many hours coming up with a perfect health care plan. He has been steadily undoing the damage in the layers of bureaucracy far below the presidency, mainly by delegated people to clean up those agencies by forcing them to perform. He is squeezing out the government lifers who will always act for the Left because that pays them salary increases.

In addition, he is going abroad and rallying people around a generic Left-Right hybrid — in the JFK, Reagan and Clinton styles — that will fix the economy. An army marches on its stomach, and citizens vote on theirs. This gains him a powerful mandate in the next election but more importantly, a rising wave of libertarian-Right political action across the US, EU and possibly Asia.

This means that even after his two terms, he can influence politics worldwide through ideas, which puts him in an even more powerful position. In addition, he knows that those who go libertarian quickly realize that the Left will always hold them back because the Left is addicted to enforcing equality through government-mandated class warfare and wealth transfer. That means the next generation will find itself solidly anti-Leftist, and at that point, a right-wing wave of the Reagan style can begin.

Remember what Reagan said about socialized medicine:

The story is the same with Medicare. An eloquent conservative actor named Ronald Reagan warned in 1961 that if the plan passed, “behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country.”

Reagan saw only darkness ahead if Americans did not rise up against this scheme. “One of these days, you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children, and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free.”

The Gipper also offered this: “It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.”

Entitlements in general suffer from this problem: most people are reluctant to oppose any program that seems to give money to those who cannot otherwise afford it. However, now we have proof-of-concept for the Reagan notion that any entitlements would lead to an overly powerful government which would swing steadily Leftward.

Trump knows that the economy is going to crash as it always does after a prole holiday binge of demand-side currency and government spending, funding the circular Ponzi scheme of consumerism. He wants the Republicans to inherit this as well as the Democrats so that he can say, “Well, nothing else we have on the table is working, so why don’t we try it My Way?”

If the Republicans had any brains, they would be quaking in fear of this moment. Already there are signs that they are getting it as a civil war breaks out among GOP ranks, but they have not yet seen exactly how bad it is going to get. Trump campaigned on the idea that both parties were unified by being vested in the Establishment, and that this makes them corrupt. They are about to prove it to American voters, at the same time Team Trump will have cleaned out their zampolit infrastructure and prepared new plans that involve dropping the entitlements as much as possible.

Be not fooled by the noises that occur until then. Trump may support a Bismarck-style national fund that purchases health insurance in bulk and re-sells it to citizens, and that is not a terrible thing. He is too savvy not to know that the real driver of cost is all the compliance paperwork, illegal alien abuse of our healthcare system, and massive number of professionally sick people on disability eating up costs. He also knows that Baby Boomer end of life will be catastrophically expensive, and that no solution for that exists except to get out of the market.

He also knows that if the entitlements and social welfare programs go away, so will the massive immigration that up until now has taken Americans out of the economy. His crackdown is already paying dividends:

Foreign workers have become even more crucial as labor markets have tightened amid near record low unemployment in many states. Unemployment is a mere 2.3% in Colorado, 2.7% in Hawaii and 3.2% in Maine. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 755,000 job openings in food services and accommodations in May, up 12% from a year ago.

Trump is using basic economics here: by lowering the supply of labor, he is both making salaries more expensive and thus, by forcing employers to think harder about who they hire, putting pressure on society-wrecking programs like affirmative action. His end goal is to smash the methods by which Leftists gain power, namely by offering cheap money and cheap loans instead of productivity.

His vision, which he will pitch to Americans thirsty for it, is equal parts economic revitalization and rebirth of pride in the nation. Here he is more like Stalin or Roosevelt, in that he will make Americans feel good about themselves again, but on the basis of productivity not “compassionate” thinly-disguised socialist programs.

His opponents, bumbling their way through an irrational desire to hold on to “business as usual,” are about to hand him the mandate he needs to shove this one home. Well played, Mr. Trump.

Searching For An Audience, The Alt Right Repeats The Mistakes of White Nationalism

Sunday, July 16th, 2017

In my experience, the Alt Right came about when several threads of non-mainstream thought converged, and it has never really solidified into a single thing because of the tension between these parts.

Its elements include: traditionalism, or the idea that there is an eternal order to human living; human biodiversity, recognizing that behavior is genetic and not specified by education or “culture,” which usually means television; libertarianism, or the realization that government is a self-interested corporation that quickly becomes parasitic; the New Right, which figured out that we need a cultural wave and not the underground political movements which had failed in the postwar period; black metal, a musical movement that emphasized Nietzschean/Machiavellian love for natural selection and xenophobic aggression; the writings of Michel Houellebecq, who pointed out that the West was dying because modern society is existentially enervating; and of course, the remnants of the Old Right and nationalism.

Through the Alt Right, those who favor the idea of restoring Western Civilization — roughly what nationalism, traditionalism and the other anti-modern ideas listed above are getting at — were able to escape the bad old days of “white nationalism”:

I’ve seen the term “White Nationalism 1.0” bandied about for years. I have always associated it with the White Nationalist movement in the 2000s.

…Well, it would be more accurate to say it was a branch of White Nationalism. Although I didn’t know them at the time, there was another group of men who were active in those years. They built institutions which advanced the White Movement movement and have left a positive legacy.

…The Alt-Right has brought a new generation of Millennials into the White Nationalist movement…Years ago, the public face of the movement used to be equal parts stupid, vicious, crazy and ugly.

This is some great insight from Hunter Wallace buried in an article about an unfortunate tiff on the Right. In my view, both Wallace and Roper are fantastic writers and thinkers, and the Unite The Right rally is going to be absolutely killer, but these tiffs often bring about evolution on the Right, so perhaps it is not terrible that these guys are hashing out their differences like gentlemen.

For broader relevance, the article makes a great point: white nationalism did not succeed, and has been replaced in the social media age with the Alt Right. In part, this is because white nationalism no longer had a monopoly on non-mainstream, pro-nationalist thought. When the internet was young, there were only a few places to find people speaking about such things, and this elevated some crazy to power.

Now, people are speaking more openly, and so there is competition within the pro-nationalist marketplace, which has led to some evolution, although we are still a few steps away from the steps we will have to take before victory. Maybe the tiffs and struggles within the movement are serving a Darwinian role that we cannot ignore.

In my mind, white nationalism failed for the following reasons: since the mainstream would not accept a race-based view of history and a civilization-based view of survival, anyone who knew the wisdom that was common a century ago was driven underground. This gave weight to those who were willing to be public figures instead of anonymous supporters, and many of those were mental cases.

White nationalism also struggled because it was a partial answer. We all know that our disease in the West runs deeper than diversity. In fact, diversity is a symptom of our existential despair and moral emptiness, and looks to us like the act of a group that has given up on fixing itself and just wants to die. Any future movement needs a plan to make life healthy and sane again.

But more broadly, white nationalism 1.0 got nowhere because it made the fatal mistake of playing to its audience instead of expanding that audience by addressing the broad spectrum of problems which our society faces. Extreme ideas gain an audience of “true believers” who are very active on the internet, but are not powerful or relevant in real life. When a movement caters to this audience, it excludes those who are not already alienated, and in doing so finds itself unable to get support from groups like the upper half of the middle class who elected Donald Trump:

The median household income of a Trump voter so far in the primaries is about $72,000, based on estimates derived from exit polls and Census Bureau data. That’s lower than the $91,000 median for Kasich voters. But it’s well above the national median household income of about $56,000. It’s also higher than the median income for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters, which is around $61,000 for both.

…The differences are usually larger in states with substantial non-white populations, as black and Hispanic voters are overwhelmingly Democratic and tend to have lower incomes. In South Carolina, for example, the median Trump supporter had a household income of $72,000, while the median for Clinton supporters was $39,000.

…Many of the differences reflect that Republican voters are wealthier overall than Democratic ones, and also that wealthier Americans are more likely to turn out to vote, especially in the primaries. However, while Republican turnout has considerably increased overall from four years ago, there’s no sign of a particularly heavy turnout among “working-class” or lower-income Republicans.

Trump was elected by the same people who supported the Tea Party and were enthusiastic about Ron Paul. They are more successful than average, and therefore probably have a higher level of competence, and they are concerned about the direction our nation and its enclosing civilization, Western Civilization, are taking.

The true believers of white nationalism, while they are faithful, obstruct that middle class audience because the true believers are drawn to the extremism more than an ultimate goal. And what is the goal of a nationalist, traditionalist and realist movement like the Alt Right? Most likely it is to un-do the mental virus of The Enlightenment™ which manifests in individualism:

So I’ve decided to try and include at least one article per day reminding everyone here about the joys of equality, freedom, and lack of personal responsibility – constant prodding has been scientifically proven to be the best type of propaganda for the masses.

Equality, freedom, lack of personal responsibility, collectivism and individualism are one and the same. Individuals want society to accept them despite their lack of contribution, or even bad behavior. The individual wants to be #1. So he forms a gang with others, and they create a mob, which is defined by the fact that each person in it is selfish and does not want to be identified as such, so relies on “safety in numbers” to obscure the selfish motivations of each person in the mob.

The mob defines the modern time. It is the basic unit of our politics and consumer society. It is how people think, believing that if one person in a group has certain attributes, then everyone in that group has them. This is why people go to rock concerts; they see themselves as being just as important as the guy on stage. This is why people adored multiculturalism in the first place; to them, each person is equal and so if you move them to the right place, they all become ideal citizens, despite genetics.

Mobs arise in the presence of solipsism, or the tendency to view the world as existing for the individual or within the individual. It is a cousin of paranoia. Solipsism is the mental condition created by individualism. This individualism occurs at every income level, and has nothing to do with losers-versus-winners, but reflects how we approach life and what values we apply to it.

Another source explains this well in the context of women attempting to escape individualism:

The female mind already leans toward solipsism, which while part of the way things were designed to work, it can be too much if not balanced with an awareness of others.

Consider women in your life who are living the “Put yourself first” motto to the extreme, not good, right? Such women are often a neurotic, self-absorbed, hot mess who thinks only of herself. Such women are also often very unhappy and constantly seeking more of “something.”

…But rather than that path leading to balance, harmony, and happiness, women today seem less “centered” than ever.

Solipsism demands equality because the solipsistic individual wants to remove any chance that he can be found to be wrong in action or lesser in ability. He wants no one and no thing to be able to tell him he cannot do whatever he desires. The only way to achieve this is to force society to accept him despite his lack of contributions, or bad stuff he has done. This is how individualists arrive at the mob mentality.

This is what we fight, and most of the functional parts of America actually agree with us. They see society as selfish on every level from the welfare parasites to the dot-com billionaires. They dislike cosmopolitanism and the city, and favor chastity, hard work, learning, intelligence, culture and faith. They see the individualism and solipsism of our modern world and are retreating from it, but they see no option, no group they can support or political change they can demand which will fix it.

If you ask them why they rely on these “old-fashioned” values, they will tell you simply that having such a value system just works. It keeps life in balance. It makes people stable, loving and kind, but also able to do the hard things in life. These methods are what enable them to be stable, productive and successful.

Our goal on the Alt Right is not to become a new form of the Left by claiming that individualism means an unequal hierarchy. In fact, we want an unequal hierarchy, because that places the most competent in positions of power, and we all benefit from that.

Individualism is a mindset that says “me first” and naturally deprecates heritage, values and any purpose shared between people. The poorest among us have it as well as the richest. It is a mental virus turned into a disease afflicting civilization itself. Individualism is the removal of culture, heritage, faith and values so that only the individual remains.

If the Alt Right follows the White Nationalist playbook of pandering to the true believers instead of the broader upper half of middle class, it will slide into irrelevance like the seven decades of white nationalism before it. Our true believers are race-awake but still drugged on the Leftist idea of equality, and secretly want a classless society where twenty-somethings working entry level jobs are “equal” to those who have achieved more, and in order to support them, we are dumbing down our message.

To avoid this, we need a whole message that is entirely distinct from the Leftism that has ruled the West for the past two centuries. Leftism has one idea, equality, and anything infected with that idea always reverts to being Leftism. Anything which argues for equality is in fact hidden Leftism, and will subvert us from within.

We need to have a vision of a whole society. We are not a mass movement. We are those who dominate the masses, and instead create a civilization with hierarchy, culture, values and purpose. This requires admitting a type of social order known as caste. This separates people into broad bands by ability, and gives more social power to those higher in the hierarchy.

Caste reflects the intelligence, moral character and behavior of people. The different castes use different reproductive strategies, and the lower castes are biologically unable to understand the actions of higher castes. Lower caste revolt is what destroys all great civilizations.

Humanity cycles between sanity and insanity, and those who triumph — contrary to Nietzschean visions of combat and supremacy — are those who find sanity. When we achieve sanity, we are able to do great things. Sanity means accepting the world as it is, including the differences between people, and shooting for a social order that works for everyone, only without equality.

White nationalism got absorbed by Leftism and as a result was never able to formulate a plan except a vague thought for the extreme removal of certain non-white groups. We can do better than this.

It makes sense to be nationalist because nationalism — which allows culture and not government to shape a society — is a prerequisite for a healthy nation. But we need more than just that; we also need a society that brings our people existential joy, so they begin reproducing at replacement rates or higher again. We need purpose and something to live for so that we can have virtue again. And we need an interpretation of nationalism that is not mere bigotry, but a theory of society as a functional organic entity, like a family on a larger scale.

The Alt Right is attempting to offer these things, but they do not appeal to the true believers who want an egalitarian white society. Some even endorse socialism and other Leftist ideas. While these will get us votes and new converts in the short term, they will not reach out to the upper half of middle class audience that makes change happen. We will pigeonhole ourselves and self-isolate like white nationalism did.

In this light, we cannot see the Alt Right “as” white nationalism. It is an entirely new entity, a political movement designed to replace modern society with something much better. It hopes to bring joy to our people again, and to provide us the type of future in which we can thrive and mature into the greatness of the ancients. It will only get there if its audience does not hold it back.

Nationalism, Not Economics, Elected Donald Trump

Thursday, June 15th, 2017

The Public Religion Research Institute, in coordination with The Atlantic, conducted a survey that revealed some surprising information about Trump voters among the white working class. In particular, it shattered the myth that economic hardships alone motivated voters to choose him.

Here are some highlights of the survey, which interviewed 3,043 adults by telephone after choosing their numbers at random from a pool of existing numbers. It selected for the working class by choosing those who are “white, non-Hispanic Americans without a four-year college degree who hold non-salaried jobs.” While this, like almost all surveys, is not definitive, it presents some striking conclusions:

1. Trump voters are more affluent than previously thought.

The media narrative told us that Trump voters were the poor and dispossessed who, being broke, resented those who were not. The reality turns out to be that among the working class, the voters who favored Trump were more financially secure:

Notably, while only marginally significant at conventional levels (P<0.1), being in fair or poor financial shape actually predicted support for Hillary Clinton among white working-class Americans, rather than support for Donald Trump. Those who reported being in fair or poor financial shape were 1.7 times more likely to support Clinton, compared to those who were in better financial shape.

In other words, these people are not at the edge of desperation, but are looking ahead and seeing only darkness. This coincides with their concerns being more social than economic across the board.

2. Trump voters are most concerned with loss of national identity and culture.

For example, Trump voters were those more likely to see a vanishing America being replaced by an immigrant America in which college-educated elites administer Leftism as a replacement for the original American culture. A clear pattern of concerns emerges:

  • Nearly two-thirds (65%) of white working-class Americans believe American culture and way of life has deteriorated since the 1950s.
  • Nearly half (48%) of white working-class Americans say, “things have changed so much that I often feel like a stranger in my own country.”
  • Nearly seven in ten (68%) white working-class Americans believe the American way of life needs to be protected from foreign influence. In contrast, fewer than half (44%) of white college-educated Americans express this view.
  • Nearly seven in ten (68%) white working-class Americans—along with a majority (55%) of the public overall—believe the U.S. is in danger of losing its culture and identity.
  • More than six in ten (62%) white working-class Americans believe the growing number of newcomers from other countries threatens American culture, while three in ten (30%) say these newcomers strengthen society.

Taken together, these different data points show distrust of foreign influence, immigration, and the Leftist agenda which has accelerated in the postwar period. Instead, we see that they are concerned with culture, way of life, and identity specifically.

3. Trump voters realize that college is a scam

One of the biggest stories of the last few years has been the growing power of Leftist opinions on college campuses and their tendency to eliminate other viewpoints and discriminate against white men. This has led to strong suspicion of college itself.

  • White working-class voters who said that college education is a gamble were almost twice as likely to express a preference for Trump as those who said it was an important investment in the future.

This is explained by the following:

  • More than half (52%) of white working-class Americans believe discrimination against whites has become as big a problem as discrimination against blacks and other minorities, while 70% of white college-educated Americans disagree.

A values split, based on the realizations above, has caused Americans to realize that colleges are indoctrination camps that churn out people who bleat the Leftist party line, and therefore, this group sees decreased utility in college. They realize that between affirmative action and campus Leftism, white men especially will not get anything good out of college.

4. Trump voters are liberated from union propaganda.

Better even at brainwashing than colleges, unions raised the cost of America and then essentially died as labor was outsourced wherever a union was present. The reason for this was the cost in addition to the raised wages of workers: lawsuits, shutdowns, riots, sabotage and bad press.

Companies realized they could not operate factories that could be shut down at any minute, and so they opted for labor outside of the union worker pool. In so doing, they ejected most of the white working and middle class from union affiliation, at which point these groups reversed their Leftist direction and instead shifted to the Right.

Despite the white working class’ historical connection to labor unions, relatively few members of the white working class today have a union member in their household. Only 14% of white working-class Americans report living in a household with someone who is a member of a labor union.

Perhaps the voters have wised up to the scam: the union comes in, wages rise, quality goes down as jobs become specific “by the book” and non-competitive, and then all the jobs go away. In the meantime, the unions — who always seem allied with organized crime and the Democrat party — skip out of town with huge sums of money raised from companies and workers alike.

White working-class Democrats are almost twice as likely as white working-class Republicans to live in a union household (21% vs. 12%, respectively).

Burned once, the working class is less likely to support “systems” like college and unions, and more likely to rely on open markets and cultural links, such as those provided in a strong nationalistic culture. In other words, some learning about the past may have come about.

5. The young are swinging to the Right.

Much like their parents, who have come out of the union stupor and learned to distrust people who get vested in the system through college, young people appear to be moving in the direction of recognizing Leftism itself as a scam:

A majority (57%) of white working-class young adults identify as Republican or lean towards the GOP, compared to only 29% who identify as or lean Democratic—a gap of 28 percentage points.

Contrary to some biases in the media, this wave does not appear to emerge out of religion:

Nearly half (47%) of white working-class young adults are religiously unaffiliated, compared to 36% of young adults overall.


Twenty-eight percent of white working-class Americans say they attend services at least once a week, 30% say they attend occasionally (once or twice a month or a few times a year), while more than four in ten (42%) say they seldom or never attend religious services.

Where atheism and Leftism have been linked in the past, what is coming now appears to be a general agnostic wave paired with a desire for socially conservative values.

6. There is a divide between those vested in the system and those who are not.

The system rewards two things: being part of a minority group, or being an obedient white person who adopts the de rigueur Leftism and goes to college, gets a job in a big city, and then reaps the rewards.

Notably, about four in ten white working-class Americans report that they grew up in “middle-class” (29%) or “upper-class” (11%) households. In contrast, only about four in ten white college-educated Americans report that their family’s financial standing when they were growing up was “working class” (35%) or “lower class” (6%). Additionally, white college-educated Americans are more likely than the white working class to be raised in middle-class (42%) or upper-class households (16%).

In other words, these are the people the system selected against, not life failures. 40% of them have middle class or above backgrounds but remain in the “working class” (often indiscernible from the lower middle class) because they did not follow the path to success. From my experience, this means people who threw in the towel on the system and went their own way, accepting lower reward in exchange for independence from the mental compliance requirements of middle class jobs.

7. Healthcare was not a huge personal risk.

While Obamacare was not popular among Trump voters, it is not because they lost health insurance:

In contrast, nearly one in five (19%) white working-class Americans under the age of 65 say they do not currently have health insurance, including one-quarter (25%) of white working-class Americans under 30.

8. They have experiences that prove Robert Putnam was right.

Robert Putnam wrote that the presence of diversity decreases social trust in a community. This includes trust within each ethnic group. Further research confirms that diversity creates distrust in local communities and creates atomized, rootless individuals.

The survey includes quotations from participants, one of which exhibits exactly what Putnam talked about:

“And when I talk about values, I don’t mean necessarily my spiritual or religious values but family, community. Could you really go across the street and ask that neighbor, ‘Can I borrow a cup of milk?’ Which, in my neighborhood, we can, but it’s pretty rare. I don’t know most of my neighbors. Have lived there for quite a long time. When I walk down the street with my dog or over to the pound with my dog, there’s no eye contact.” —Man

Trump voters express a basic sense of unease: they feel their culture has been eroded, and what they see are the post-1950 changes through social and political Leftism in the country, coupled with the rise in diversity.

8. They support a “fash wave.”

These voters desire both a more authoritarian candidate, and one who is willing to break the rules, which in a highly democratic time means violating the principles and protections that democracy has erected so that he can get something done.

Fifty-eight percent of white working-class men, compared to more than seven in ten (71%) white working-class women, have authoritarian sympathies.

This is closely tied to a suspicion of immigration and diversity:

More than seven in ten (71%) white working-class Americans who believe immigrants are a burden on American society have an authoritarian orientation. In contrast, fewer than half (49%) of those who believe immigrants strengthen American society have an authoritarian disposition.

They are deliberately going against the attitudes of the elites, much as they rejected college:

Six in ten (60%) white working-class Americans, compared to only 32% of white college-educated Americans say we need such a strong leader; two-thirds (67%) of white college-educated Americans disagree.

Interestingly, this does not correlate to economic distress.

White working-class Americans who say they are in good or excellent financial shape express as much support for a leader who is willing to break the rules as those in only fair or poor shape (58% vs. 60%, respectively).

In other words, this is concern for the future and not the present, in which they think “the rules” are impeding what needs to be done.

9. They are born identitarians.

If any warning to Washington emerges from this survey, it is that voters want a strong culture and identity and have correctly identified diversity as an impediment and threat to that.

More than two-thirds (68%) of white working-class Americans—along with a majority (55%) of the public overall—believe the U.S. is in danger of losing its culture and identity.

They target diversity:

More than six in ten (62%) white working-class Americans believe the growing number of newcomers from other countries threatens American culture, while fewer than one-third (30%) disagree.

And recognize anti-discrimination law as a huge problem:

More than half (52%) of white working-class Americans believe discrimination against whites is as big a problem as discrimination against blacks and other minorities.

In addition, the survey also revealed that 40% of white working class Americans agree that “efforts to increase diversity almost always come at the expense of whites.” In other words, society is a zero-sum game, and anything we add to it — immigration and diversity — requires taking something from the native population.

10. They have realized that diversity means removal of white people.

Although they have mixed views on diversity itself, voters at least refuse its advancement. They see it as having fundamentally changed America for the worse, and favor removing immigrants as a partial solution:

  • Similarly, white working-class voters who expressed anxieties about cultural change—a composite variable that combined a belief that the U.S. needs to be protected from foreign influence and feelings of being “a stranger in my own country”—expressed a much stronger preference for Trump than those who did not (79% vs. 43%, respectively).
  • White working-class voters who advocated deporting immigrants living in the country illegally overwhelmingly favored Trump, while those who favored alternative policies expressed far less support (87% vs. 49%, respectively).

Coupled with their strong identitarian tendencies above, it seems that the core issue of this election was diversity, and that they perceive it as the driver behind change in America that has left them feeling alienated.

As Samuel Huntington predicted, the 21st century has brought us the end of liberal democracy, which has faded out in unrealized promises like racial harmony, prosperity and peace, and brought us tribalism instead. In every area of real-world effect, liberal democracy brought the opposite of what it promised, whereas organic culture — as distinct from managerial “systems” — shows us promise in that it is more flexible and nurtures intangibles like culture and identity.

The rise of Donald Trump, like Brexit, was not based on the economic woes of the lower echelons of American society. This survey suggests instead that it shows a large group of normal people pulling back from the college-educated, city-living and liberal elites out of distrust for the changes that have occurred to our societies so far in the postwar period. This is values-based realistic opposition, not desperation.

Expect the mainstream media and entrenched elites in Washington to deny this and continue accelerating this separation by using language like Barack Obama’s “clinging to their guns and religion” or Hillary Clinton’s “basket of deplorables,” both of which are dogwhistles for the classic accusations of the Left, which is that Right-wingers are ignorant, stupid and impoverished religious fanatics who are resentful over their lack of position above minority groups in this society.

The data shows us that the opposite is true: white people are content living among their own society, and are not doing economically badly, but are dismayed at how social engineering has wrecked a once great place, to the point where they have rejected Leftism, unions and our elites. Balkanization is well and fully upon us.

Trump Exits The Paris Agreement On Climate Change

Thursday, June 1st, 2017

The usual nutcases and droolers are neurosing wildly over Donald Trump’s withdrawal of the United States from the Paris climate accord:

Citing a litany of statistics disputed by environmentalists, Trump argued Thursday that the pact would hurt domestic manufacturing and other industries and would put the United States at a “permanent disadvantage” with China, India and other rising powers. Staying in the accord, he said, would cost the United States as many as 2.7 million jobs by 2025 and as much as $3 trillion in lost gross domestic product.

…“The rest of the world applauded when we signed the Paris agreement,” Trump said. “They went wild. They were so happy. For the simple reason that it put our country, the United States of America, which we all love, at a very, very big economic disadvantage.”

Remember how Europeans cheered when America elected Obama, and were complimenting us on how “progressive” we were? When your competition encourages you to do something, it is usually a bad idea, and Europe is still irked by American power and the necessity of European dependence on it if they do not want to be speaking Russian or Chinese.

Perhaps we should consider the words of George Washington in his “Farewell Address” to the nation:

If we remain one people under an efficient government, the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

Washington warned us against what are now referred to as “entangling alliances,” or treaties which bind us to action when other nations encounter certain situations. The classic example would be a treaty to go to war against any nation that attacks an ally; however, agreements to follow climate standards specified by foreign scientists and governments would also qualify.

In this sense, a nationalist sense, every nation must find its own path and through that independence, will determine its own future. That becomes difficult when we consider that human impact on the environment concerns resources that are shared worldwide. Then again, when a superpower acts, others will follow, without a treaty being required.

The world is denial of the cause of its environmental problems; “climate change” is a Leftist invention designed to disguise the real problem, which is population growth which is almost exclusively occurring in the third world. The Leftist “solution” is to transfer wealth from the first world to the third, which will then cause a further population boom.

A more sensible policy would be to end immigration, deport those foreign to the founding group in all nations, and then stop giving aid and economic trade to the third world. Let us take care of our own needs, and then world population will not explode on a boom created by Western economies, Western medicine, Western political stability and Western goodwill.

When we take care of ourselves first, each nation realizes that it must solve its own problems, and then has to ask itself what type of life fits its people. For many in the world, subsistence farming and tribal warlord social order provides the best sustainable option. With the withdrawal of Western companies, these societies could define their own future.

It also makes sense to ask why the West is so active in the third world. The simple answer is that unions raised the costs of our labor to insane levels, and they were protected by government, so our manufacturers relocated their production offshore. There, they do not face affirmative action lawsuits, strikes and shutdowns, endless regulations and the high cost of hiring flaky underclasses.

As with most first world problems, our error consists of projecting ourselves outward instead of solving our problems within. Unions have always been parasites, but it is taboo to say this, although as union power falls — but not dues and ties to organized crime and the Democrat party — that taboo is eroding at the edges. Trump is withdrawing the US from where it is causing problems worldwide.

Kathy Griffin Gives The Left A Hard Choice

Wednesday, May 31st, 2017

At least Kathy Griffin is honest. In so doing, she just put the challenge to most Amerikan Leftists. Do they lie and act shocked and horrified by the clip below?

Or do they do what Senator Franken just did and ride or die with who they truly are as dispicable, depraved excuses for humanity.

Whether you believe Ms. Griffin is an artist is an aesthetic debate. It takes place along the lines of whether the “Piss Christ” has artistic merit or whether the parody ad in Hustler Magazine about Jerry Falwell was truly “coarse but acceptable parody.” Kathy Griffin is not chess player. I can tell, because she forgot the first rule.

So now the lefties who all laughed their asses off when she was waving around the Trump Head now have two choices. It seems Baron Trump, the President’s son, is an impressionable youngster who initially thought his his father’s decapitation wasn’t a skit. They can Rosie O’Donnell the situation and criticize Baron by calling him stupid.

Or, they can CNN the situation and cauterize the walking wound that is Kathy Griffin.

CNN’s decision comes one day after photos were released of Griffin that showed the comedian holding up a bloody head resembling that of President Donald Trump. “CNN has terminated our agreement with Kathy Griffin to appear on our New Year’s Eve program,” the network said in a statement.

And what of the rest of Leftist-Caping Media? What of MSCCCP? They’ll cover this the way they cover that that whacky new Venezuelan Diet.

Indeed, out of the 50,000 total evening news stories on the three networks, just 25 covered Venezuela, and only seven mentioned “socialism.” In addition, NBC Nightly News only broadcast 13 stories spanning 16 minutes and 54 seconds, ABC’s World News only covered 8 minutes and 34 seconds over seven stories, and CBS Evening News only offered 3 minutes and 11 seconds over five stories.

You see, to the Left, the news is The Narrative. The Narrative is designed to advance the interests of the Cathedral. Beheading Donald Trump as a “just kidding” sort of a thing is a great way to subliminally push assassination as more acceptable. Having a traumatized 11-Year Old freak out and having to explain how hilariously funny the whole thing was to the young man’s mom brings it home on a gut level. Then it doesn’t help The Narrative so much so we can’t have that get any coverage.

This is why the Left excoriates its own for honestly expressing what they sincerely believe would be acceptable and good. What the Left believes to be acceptable and good is sick, immoral and genuinely despicable. It has no place in any civilized society. But then again, no decently civilized society would tolerate what the Left wants to be common accepted practice. The Left just doesn’t want you to figure that out until it’s too late.

Q: What Is The Goal Of Politics? A: The Organic Nation

Tuesday, May 23rd, 2017

Politics fools us because it erects a false target within the political system itself. That way, instead of trying to do what is right, we do what the system allows.

That includes the voters, who require every topic to be distilled to a simplistic level and converted into an emotional contest. They like anger, but they also love a soft-hearted story. And so, soon all ideas converge on the same few concepts that voters like and politicians can implement within the system.

One of the ways politics fools us is by having us direct our attention toward government instead of nation, and then confuses the concept of nation to mean the nation-state — the institutional entity joined by economic and political systems — instead of the intersection of founding heritage, culture and values that created the nation.

We can find our way around this question by looking into the related query of what “we” should possess as the object of our purpose:

From Donald Trump’s inauguration address:

At the center of this movement is a crucial conviction: that a nation exists to serve its citizens.

I wonder how many politicians in the political class believe anything at all like that? Hardly any, I imagine.

For most of them, as far as I can see, government is just a gravy train for their own enrichment. And that was what Trump was accusing most of the people standing behind him on the Capitol of having done: enrich themselves.

And if any of those people actually had any deep political convictions, it’s quite likely that they would have been almost exactly the opposite of Trump’s: that the citizens exist to serve the nation, that the citizens must be bent to serve the national will.

By “nation,” Trump means government and citizens united, which means that citizens compromise their interests with those of government. That leads to the question of what their interests are.

Most people think in exclusively short-term bursts, and so they define their interests as a retirement plan, a solid job, lower taxes and more benefits (a paradoxical combination) and a nebulous sense of having “good feelings” about the direction the nation is taking. That last need runs contrary to all the ones previous to it.

A nation does not find itself on a positive direction through the acts of government. It also will not find itself moving in a positive way through paying attention to what “most people” claim to “want.” These things are at odds just like lower taxes and higher benefits. No group of voters has ever seen their way out of this paradox.

The above is correct in its assessment of politicians: they are paid actors who deliver warm fuzzy feelings to voters in exchange for access to nearly limitless wealth. Even if they do not personally own the wealth directly, they can create lucrative consulting firms, build up portfolios through those, and, once out of office, pay themselves massive salaries for life.

But this leads us back to the question of what we should be acting toward, and whether it is a false target or a realistic goal.

There are three basic options:

  1. Self. In nature, all things are self-interested. In the human world, we depend on civilization. Thus self-interest is bound up with civilization, much as it is with our neighbors and intangibles, like life being good, beautiful and true. However, many live only for the self, and choose as their goals those things which reward them at the expense of others, the organic nation, government, society, nature, history, heritage, future…
  2. Group. We can live for the group, meaning that we sacrifice ourselves for the benefit of others. However, the group is bound with an intangible thing which is the order and organization that holds the group together and keeps nurturing it toward health. By nature, all things decay. Something must counteract that, and this is usually a mélange of culture, laws and leadership.
  3. Organic. In any list, one thing is the hardest to define, and this is it. The organic nation is the intersection of past, present and future in which the individual and group both work toward the perpetuation of an idea through its physical counterpart, namely “a people” and the order and organization that holds them together and nurtures them toward health.

Modern society is very happy if you choose options one or two. These present no challenge to authority; the selfish person is easily manipulated, and those who give themselves to the group effectively neutralize themselves, presenting no challenge to power and no brakes on the decline.

The organic nation on the other hand requires us to think of a goal higher than self, government or group; it implicitly requires us to think of the long term view, maybe in the range of ten thousand years, and to view civilization through a qualitatively filter, namely asking ourselves how good, beautiful and true everything is.

Those who are born to the Right instinctively think of the organic whole for which they sacrifice, realizing that they are holding back the decay of time and yet, by doing so, find themselves in a state of mind more eternal than temporal, and in this they find great meaning.

Trump And Dazzle Camouflage

Monday, May 22nd, 2017

Dazzle camouflage was one of the more important inventions of the early twentieth century. At that time, boats were spotted using binoculars instead of radar. Inventors experimented with ways to make boats less visible.

In a seemingly great irony, one of the best ways to hide a boat from human eyes turns out to be not making it fade away, but making it noisy. Like the coloration of a calico cat, dazzle camouflage works by obscuring patterns behind distracting shapes. The eye cannot identify an object but sees the type of visual noise that resembles a complex background, so it fades into the background.

Donald Trump uses a dazzle camouflage method of obscuring his actions. He speaks to the talking points addressed by the Left, then makes them larger than life, and so what he says fades into the background. Simultaneously, he distracts them with some other outrage — even a misspelling in a Tweet — that keeps them looking in the wrong area.

For example, here is Trump baffling the opposition on the question of immigration:

The interviewer pressed him again on the scale of legal immigration, asking “[are you] not looking to reduce the numbers?”

“No, no, no, no, we want people coming in legally. No, very strongly,” Trump replied, as two of his economic advisors sat beside him — top economic staffer Gary Cohn, and Steve Mnuchin, the Secretary of the Treasury.

Trump also backed proposals to keep importing temporary contract workers for the agricultural sector, even though the cheap labor will retard farmers’ emerging interest in buying new machinery, such as robot apple-pickers and robot cow-milkers.”

The dazzle is Trump talking enthusiastically about immigration, which seizes the headlines, but then he qualifies his statements by making it clear that he is talking about temporary workers:

We also want farm workers to be able to come in. You know, we’re going to have work visas for the farm workers. If you look, you know we have a lot of people coming through the border, they’re great people and they work on the farms and then they go back home.

In other words, instead of immigration we have a guest-worker program. He also has distracted from the underlying issue, which Leftist journalists who cannot balance checkbooks will not understand, which is that economic forces drive immigration through a push-pull scenario.

The push comes from their home countries, where too high of a population causes them to want to escape low wages; the pull occurs in the first world, where we offer free welfare, healthcare, housing and guaranteed jobs through affirmative action. No one can discriminate against the newcomers, so they get to be first in line everywhere. What a bargain! — for them only.

Trump instead seeks to recontextualize the issue. This is not about immigration, but having people come here temporarily to work, which leads to us identifying these people and setting up programs specifically for them, which opts them out of affirmative action and normal welfare benefits. At least, this is the direction in which he seems to be going.

Will he succeed? It is hard to tell because Team Trump operates behind two layers one one-way glass. The first is that they know the press is both hostile and entirely illiterate regarding the actual issues, so the hound-dogs of the media must be distracted and deflected. The second is that the voters know nothing of how things get done, so they must be baffled.

In addition, Team Trump is avoiding transparency because Team Obama left behind a group of hostile staffers who leak anything that is said to more than one person. As a result, Trump and his staff are doing their best to signal nothing in advance, which is freaking out the D.C. political establishment because now all decisions seem arbitrary and sudden.

Democracy sets up a situation where the voters become tyrants. They want appearance, not reality, which means that any realistic program will provoke their ire but they do not mind being lied to and deceived. Under those circumstances, the only way to win is to misdirect with dazzle camouflage while quietly changing the structure of American government in the background.

Establishment Faux Elites Attempt To Bully Trump Into Resigning

Thursday, May 18th, 2017

We all remember bullies from our time in school. These were people, canny more than intelligent, who enjoyed dominating others for reasons other than being right. They are based in tactics alone.

Their favorite tactic is to mob you, which is why they always move in groups. The bully says something mean, and then his cohorts laugh at it. Or they “gaslight” you, with all of them repeating that something as if it were true. Or each one comes up with a new reason why you are bad and no good and they take turns mocking you.

The human monkey never changes. There is only one way to feel good about oneself, and that is to be good. That means to demonstrate through acts that one understands the difference between what is convenient and what improves each situation to be the best it can be. Bullies are underconfident about their ability to be good, so they act powerful and try to cow you into acting as if they are powerful.

Right now, the Establishment (entrenched government employees, media attention whores, industry lobbyists, ideological shills) are gunning for Donald J. Trump, who has found that he must work from the bottom up to “drain the swamp,” because the rot was pervasive even before Obama implanted ideological true believers at every level of the system, and then they did the same, hiring only lackeys straight down to the floor level. Even the janitors in Washington are socialists now.

They have a number of balls in the air. First, they continue trying to find mysterious links between Trump and the Russian government. On top of that, they are trying to cast doubt about his competence. Finally, they found what they think is a smoking gun: Trump’s statements to James Comey about Michael Flynn:

The conversation between Trump and Comey in the Oval Office in February—whose details the F.B.I. director circulated in a memo at the time, and which became public this week after a source close to Comey read it to Michael S. Schmidt, of the Times—was an extraordinary one. The two men were discussing Michael Flynn, who had briefly been Trump’s national-security adviser before being forced to resign over his failure to disclose pre-Inauguration contact with the Russian government, and was now a focus of F.B.I. investigators. “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,” Trump told Comey. This declaration, in which the President seemed to lean on the F.B.I. director to cut short an investigation into an associate, was the part that, by Tuesday night, had Senator John McCain comparing the current situation to Watergate “in size and scale.” But the rest of the exchange was interesting, too, in the clues it offered about how the President saw his own relationship to Comey. Trump said of Flynn, “He’s a good guy.”

Naturally this is a non-story. Trump did not give an order, and he has no hesitation in doing that. He did not threaten consequences. He offered up a hope and nothing more.

The Russia story is also a non-starter. Maybe Flynn did have contacts in Russia; but, were they with its government? This becomes difficult because business in Russia is heavily entrenched with government to the point that it is hard not to find a government connection, and the media will be in full conspiracy thinking mode, with Leftist politicians echoing that as fact.

For those who have doubts about Trump, the fact is that behind the scenes, he is quietly dismantling the ground-level functionaries and rules that allow the Leftist empire to continue importing enough third world people to ensure a permanent Leftist majority. This allows their ideology to rule at the minor cost of the replacement of the American people and the nation becoming Brazil II.

In the meantime, the press and its Establishment have given a pass to the many crimes of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The Left works together because for them, there is no truth or reality, only the need to be in power through advancing the magic idea of equality. A good salesman knows a trick that will never quit.

As usual in a dying civilization, the situation has been inverted in its telling. In reality, the conspiracy is a tacit one among ideological fanatics who use the popularity of that ideology to steal wealth and power; in the media, minor Trump events become a conspiracy that threatens all of us.

For those of us out here who have watched American government slide downward and Leftward over the decades, Trump is a breath of fresh air. He knows crusty old rules and pointless nepotistic hierarchies when he sees them, and he is clearing them out. As always, the less government we have, the better off we are.

As he does that, the cultural wave known as the Alt Right is spreading the idea that equality is a myth and we need a traditional society, including strong nationalism, in order to both survive and restore the West. The actions of the Establishment and media merely strengthen that belief as we see how deceptive, manipulative and soulless our opposition really are.

Leftists Attempt To Summon Crowd To Depose Trump With Secret FISA Indictment

Sunday, May 14th, 2017

Leftists realize they are losing dominance of the narrative through the combined assault of media, government and academia. In each of these industries, people have made careers by enforcing the dominant ideology of Leftism, and without it, they will be forced to compete on the basis of delivering results, something they seem less capable of doing.

These industries work as de facto monopolies, using not a single company or institution to control the market, but a broad and tacit conspiracy to only mention, promote and hire those who are “good thinkers,” namely those who advance Leftism in its post-Soviet form of consumerism (replacing capitalism) and social welfare states, justified by civil rights concerns.

Concerned about the rising wave of “populism,” or resistance to the Establishment they have created to enforce this monopoly, the Leftist industries are launching a new attack on Donald J. Trump through a sealed indictment based on FISA data:

Separate sources with links to the intelligence and justice communities have stated that a sealed indictment has been granted against Donald Trump.

While it is understood that the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution means that, until Mr. Trump is impeached, he cannot be prosecuted, sources say that the indictment is intended by the FBI and prosecutors in the Justice Department to form the basis of Mr. Trump’s impeachment. The indictment is, perhaps uniquely, not intended or expected to be used for prosecution, sources say, because of the constitutional position of the President.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) allows, among other things, collection of electronic signals data from foreign powers. The American government will not wish to reveal the extend of this data, which makes sealed indictments a plausible possibility, but this creates a loophole: the secret investigation can be used as a weapon.

If a secret indictment reveals cause for further investigation, it creates a dilemma for the president. He must either unseal the sources so he can defend himself, which will open him to accusations of weakening the nation, or deny the witch hunt on the basis of secrecy itself, making him look guilty.

The Left is fully aware that it does not have data to support its accusations, and is hoping to convict by implication, using the media to whip up the Leftist constituency into a frenzy. It may not even intend to actually impeach Trump, only to give itself more talking points which will fascinate the conspiratorial mind and drive the crowd into a polarized mass movement against the presidency.

By using the “court of public opinion,” the Leftist industrial Establishment (L.I.E.) hopes to shatter the power of the Trump presidency and recapture the 2020 election before Trump can further dismantle the methods that the Establishment uses to control its herd, who most of all fear instability that could threaten their livelihoods and so can be counted on for a “panic vote” against actual change.

Undoubtedly this new sealed indictment is based on the same dubious data that was purported to show Russia hacking the election, the comedic Steele file filled with cocktail party chatter, and other attributes of the general Leftist meme that Trump is somehow colluding with the newly-Hitlerized anti-LGBT Russians.

Recommended Reading