Posts Tagged ‘immigration’

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.

The Climate Change Resulting From Mass Immigration

Monday, May 22nd, 2017

The biggest problem with Modern American Democracy is that it puts power, resources and opportunity in the hands of vast numbers of people who have nothing to lose if these valuables are wasted and are generally immune from many of the negative externalities. This is taken to an extreme mathematical limit with the status of illegal immigrants in so-called sanctuary cities. Ann Coulter gets things about 75% right in her explanation of the problem below.

Mass Third World immigration is a triple whammy for the environment because:

1.Millions more people are tromping through our country;
2.The new people do not share Americans’ love of nature and cleanliness; and
3.We’re not allowed to criticize them.

All three of these statements by Ms. Coulter are factually accurate. Problem 1 would probably be survivable and two could be rapidly changed. The real nut of the problem here is point number three. You are never allowed to criticize these non-white people without being called ¡RACIST! The video below shows what Ann is discussing.

So the evidence is right Governor Jerry Brown’s face every day. There are too many people in California with no ties or loyalty to the place and therefore, they predictably trash the places they rent or squat in. The state is an ongoing environmental disaster. Yet the people trashing it also vote him into office so he has to fight environmental degradation in a way that leaves them blameless and that pins the tail on a different culprit. All bad things are caused by Global Warming which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Evil Republican Party.

The L A Times interviewed California Governor Brown about the states climate campaign with the results presented in an April 15, 2017 article entitled “I’m not giving up hope” which revealed his frustrations, concerns and views about lack of support among other states regarding California’s climate change program.

Reputable scientists with decades in the field don’t buy the politically expedient Climate Scientology.*

Governor Brown’s claim that higher temperatures are being caused by man made CO2 emissions is far from certain as addressed by climate scientist Dr. Judith Curry who documented flaws and failures of climate models claiming that man made CO2 emissions are driving global temperatures. Her study found that: “The climate model simulation results for the 21st century reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) do not include key elements of climate variability, and hence are not useful as projections for how the 21st century will actually evolve.”

And yet Gerry Brown’s eyes are not lying anywhere near as much as he is. The environment is being torn to pieces – by the very immigrants Gerry Brown finds it politically expedient to restock the population of his state with.

Writing in an environmental journal at New York University, Rosa P. Oakes described the “reprehensible” damage being done to “towering cactus, Joshua trees, flowering cactus varieties, colorful wildflowers and rock formations” by illegals. With accompanying photos, she noted that the immigrants’ litter included “abandoned vehicles … used needles, drug paraphernalia, plastic grocery bags, paper products, empty water containers, blankets, clothing, used disposable diapers, among other things.”

Maybe Ann Coulter is about 98% correct instead. We can have a low-skilled immigrant nation that is environmentally toxic or a well-bonded nation of common culture that loves the ground they stand on. People who are committed to a nation love its natural beauty and husband its natural resources with diligent responsibility. People who YOLO it over the border, send the money back home and then leave when they feel the welfare system isn’t being generous enough have no reason to care whether or not they crap on the streets.

Mass human migrations and the cultural disintegrations that predictably come with them are gargantuan anthropogenic environmental disasters. It would take an eruption of the Yellowstone Caldera, to pollute the environment of The American West more than large masses of humanity with no skin in the game and no concern for the communities they are just passing through. “Give a hoot! Don’t Pollute!” was more accurate than the old cartoon owl in the commercials ever realized.


* — Even if they, like Dr. Curry, believe the planet is currently warming somewhat regardless of the fraudulent government temperature records.

Salary Surveys Reveal Truth Of H-1B Racket

Wednesday, May 17th, 2017

Despite the tech industry insisting that we need H-1B visas in order to “compete,” the data reveals that in fact, the program is designed to lower wages:

If you work at Apple’s One Infinite Loop headquarters in Cupertino as a computer programmer on an H-1B visa, you can can be paid as little as $52,229. That’s peanuts in Silicon Valley. Average wages for a programmer in Santa Clara County are more than $93,000 a year, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. However, the U.S. government will approve visa applications for Silicon Valley programmers at $52,229 — and, in fact, did so for hundreds of potential visa holders at Apple alone.

Control has two sides: a pretext and a result, which is the concentration of power in the hands of those who use it for the sake of more power alone. In this way, it represents a monopoly, meaning that method has been disconnected from any goal, and has become a goal in itself, sort of like drug addiction, overeating or gambling.

In this case, Silicon Valley knows that as time goes on, its products will become more commonplace and less valuable, and therefore that it needs to bump up its margins another way. Its method is to produce an army of programmers in which most people end up losing, and a few become superstars, transferring profit to Silicon Valley while externalizing costs to society at large.

When we look at immigration, from nurses in the UK NHS to manual laborers in construction in North America, this pattern repeats every time. Foreign labor is not needed except to act as a market force driving down wages and making jobs less secure, which benefits those in power by concentrating wealth at the expense of those who contribute.

Western Europeans Want To Clean House

Wednesday, May 17th, 2017


by Neil Jetter

Sunday afternoons are the hardest time of the week to know what to do with oneself. The big activity of the weekend is over, pretty much everyone is either napping or watching old movies on Netflix, and so one finds oneself casting around for a book, and willing to take some chances on what is chosen.

For such reasons, I found myself nose-deep in The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up: The Japanese Art of Decluttering and Organizing by Marie Kondo. This book was trendy some time ago and someone bought a copy that ended up near my desk in a heap of stuff no one knows that to do with.

Tidying Up is one of those books that takes a simple idea and spins it into many more words than it needs, but does so with such personality that the pages seem to read themselves. The basic thesis is that people are miserable in part because their homes are cluttered with stuff that has no actual utility, which both gets underfoot and creates a sense of confused mission in life.

Kondo offers simple advice through a series of principles about how to know what to remove and how to value what you keep. As I read, my mind kept returning to three major problems in the West that all of us wish would clean themselves up:

  1. Immigration. “Diversity is our strength” is the modern Wests’s equivalent of “the Party is always right.” Unless race riots, crime, social distrust, political marginalization of the majority and constant low-level ethnic conflict are strength, diversity has been a failure, just like it is everywhere else it is tried. Immigration — both legal and illegal — is swelling the West with third world peoples who are biologically different and so cannot integrate, seem to want to conquer us, and are not bringing us any greater joys than ethnic restaurants. And yet, no one seems to know what to do.
  2. Sociopaths. Another intractable problem is the presence of sociopaths among us. These occur both at the low level, with constant petty and violent crime, and at the high level, where we are ruled by people like John McCain and Nancy Pelosi. If the organized crime style tactics of the Clintons and Obamas did not appall you, there is the nation left in debt while all of its policies failed. Somehow, we have become cattle, and the sociopaths instinctively know how to manipulate and outwit us, so we live in an upside-down world where stupidity, insanity and cowardice always win, and anything sensible or wise is burned at the stake.
  3. Mental viruses. In the midst of the tropes, memes and fads it is clear that our society has no center or purpose and therefore succumbs to whatever plausible-sounding ideas come along, and along the group soon moves on to something else, these ideas have taken up residence and we cannot get rid of them. There are so many taboos, assumptions and precedents now that are both illogical and carved in stone that every new idea is crippled by its need to be backward-compatible with them.

Kondo presents what she calls the KonMari method of “tidying,” or removing junk and putting everything else in a place that is both accessible and useful. This makes the house have an inner flow that is comforting to people, ends distractions and allows them to keep their focus on their goals and day-to-day purpose in existing.

Her statements doubly apply to the three major problem areas in the West. For example:

In essence, tidying ought to be the act of restoring balance among people their possessions and the house they live in.

Replace “house” with country. We have too many possessions; we are drowning in stuff just as we are in information overload. More importantly, we need balance. Every part has to has its place, and we need only what is necessary. The result should be pleasing to the eye and easy to use, not ugly and awkward like… well, like it is now.

Get rid of those people that no longer spark joy. Make your parting a ceremony to launch them on a new journey. Celebrate this occasion with them. I truly believe that our possessions are even happier and more vibrant when we let them go than when we first get them.

In this hilarious spin on intentionality, she imparts agency and emotions to our possessions. Why not extend that to people? Those among us who do not belong — sociopaths, Leftists and other ethnic groups — need to go home. They have a place, but it is not here. They will be happier when we let them go and they can pursue their actual destiny instead of trying to share ours.

I, however, am very conscious of the important role the house plays because whenever I visit a client’s home I can feel how much it cherishes its inhabitants. It is always there, waiting for my clients to return and standing ready to shelter and protect them. No matter how exhausted they are after a long day’s work, it is there to refresh and heal them.

Our nations are houses. They are there to shelter and protect us. They refresh and heal us as we go through life. If we do not tidy them up, they cannot serve this function, and we will not feel like cherished inhabitants but alienated outsiders. People who do not feel at home tend to act out against whatever is sheltering them, furthering social decay.

You won’t die if your house isn’t tidy and there are many people who really don’t care if they can’t put their house in order. Such people, however, would never pick up this book.

Some groups need more order and balance than others. Western Europeans are one such group: we care very much about tidiness, both intellectually and in daily life, but because not everyone shares this vision, we are afraid to do it for ourselves. When we overcome egalitarianism, however, we realize that our path requires we do this, and others are incompatible with it.

The true purpose of tidying is, I believe, to live in the most natural state possible. Don’t you think it is unnatural for us to possess things that don’t bring us joy or things that we don’t really need? I believe that owning only what we love and what we need is the most natural condition.

“Natural” foods and products have been a mania in our society for decades. Maybe what we need is not natural objects, but a natural order to life? We can only own what we love, which is our people and culture, and everything else must be relocated. That includes the merely incompatible like other races, and the outright harmful like sociopaths and Leftists.

By putting our house in order, we can live in our natural state. We choose those things that bring us joy and cherish what is truly precious in our lives. Nothing can bring greater happiness than to be able to do something as simple and natural as this. If this is good fortune, then I am convinced that putting our house in order is the best way to achieve it.

Our only power in life is choice. We can choose the life that gives us joy, but to do this, we must exclude everything else. We will not have a sense of existential well-being until we put our housesnations in order, and to do that, we must “tidy up” and remove the things that do not belong and send them to their destinies elsewhere.

If you are going to put your house in order, do it now.

There is no better time than the present, since the alternative is misery, and we will not know how miserable we were until we experience the alternative. So perhaps, we should be promoting the idea of tidying our countries. Who would have thought that a nice Japanese lady could drop so many red pills?

We can remove those bad ideas from our thinking because they are untidy. They do not reflect balance and a peace of mind, or a house designed for its inhabitants. We can send the sociopaths away. Why keep them, even in prison? They belong else. Similarly, those of other tribes need to arrive at their home countries full of new ideas to help their own peoples.

It just goes to show you that those who have examined/accept reality closely often share similar insights, and that metaphors are often more real than trying to tackle problems literally. Our house is a mess and we are uncomfortable as a result, and because of that, we view life through a negative lens. Let us cheerfully accept what we must do, and tidy up the West.

Birthright Citizenship

Tuesday, May 16th, 2017

The cowbird has a unique survival strategy of both passive and active parasitism. The female cowbird finds nests from other species such as robins and lays her eggs in them, then returns later to make small punctures in the robin eggs, ensuring that the legitimate offspring die and that the interlopers are raised by the victim bird.

Sometimes, robins catch on, and deal with the situation appropriately:

This bird has realized that diversity entails having foreign populations use you as a host. In the case of humans, we are paralyzed by our insistence on the doctrine of equality, which we insist upon for ourselves so we can have a “me first above all else” mentality. That is accelerated by having a failing society that we all secretly hate and want to contribute as little as possible to.

That creates a cycle of death where each person demands from society while sabotaging it, and leaves a small minority of addled people who make themselves slaves to the collective need of the group. They exhaust themselves and fail to reproduce, leaving behind a large void as the newcomers fail to achieve what the founding group could.

Birthright citizenship is the human equivalent of a cowbird. The foreign group, noticing that we are made oblivious, comes in and deposits its offspring for us to raise. We do so at the expense of our own. No one wins in the end, as a once-thriving society declines to third world rates of subsistence living and social disorder.

Diversity creates and accelerates decay. Without a standard in common, there is no behavioral level required of all people. More social breakdown follows from that, and people retreat into apathy because without a common standard, there is no guarantee that their behavior will be rewarded, and it will more likely be attacked. In this apathy, social breakdown can act freely.

To take your mind from this unpleasant imagery, experience the robin nest cam:

Asia Resists The Western Egalitarian Wave, Heads Toward Libertarianism Following Singapore’s Example

Sunday, May 14th, 2017

Asia contains societies that are the most individualistic on earth. People do not look up, or forward, but focus on their needs and concerns in the present. This is paired with an admirable recognition that larger events will influence them regardless of what the individual desires and an impassive acceptance of this fact, although lack of will to intervene.

The Western tendency for the individual to intervene was helpful while individuals worked toward a purpose and associated principles, but became toxic when with The Enlightenment™ the focus shifted from civilizational purpose to individual purpose, with the individual being considered “the measure of all things.”

Being more practical, and having come later to the surge that took over the West in 1789, Asia has snapped out of the sleepwalking state of believing in equality. Owing to its individualism, however, Asia seems headed toward the compromise position of Libertarianism — economic individualism, in lieu of actual social order — as a first step.

For example, Japan remains committed to being Japanese instead of following the media panic and replacing its citizens with foreigners, but has not yet articulated this as anything but an economic decision:

According to the figures, Japan received a total of 8,193 applications from refugees during 2016, meaning that it rejected 99 per cent of claims.

In 2015, it accepted only 27 refugees.

Officials have defended the low number, saying applicants are mainly from Asian countries wanting access to Japan only for economic reasons.

In other words, they reject poor people arriving to take advantage of a wealthier system, but have not outright articulated a need to keep Japan Japanese on an ethnic level. This both allows them to survive the influx and to avoid triggering the war machine of Western liberal democracy, which views dissent as enmity because competing ideologies will un-do its assumption of universal truthfulness.

This follows the lead of Singapore, which has created a hybrid system of Libertarianism with Bismarckian social benefits, enforced by a government interested in building trade. This works for wealthy societies in the short term, but still has not fully broken from the mental disease of egalitarianism.

China has shown a popular wave of similar sentiment which approves of Trump-style economic nationalism and anti-immigration policies, but stops short of affirming nationalism:

The question has received more than 400 answers from Zhihu users, which include some of the most representative perceptions of the ‘white left’. Although the emphasis varies, baizuo is used generally to describe those who “only care about topics such as immigration, minorities, LGBT and the environment” and “have no sense of real problems in the real world”; they are hypocritical humanitarians who advocate for peace and equality only to “satisfy their own feeling of moral superiority”; they are “obsessed with political correctness” to the extent that they “tolerate backwards Islamic values for the sake of multiculturalism”; they believe in the welfare state that “benefits only the idle and the free riders”; they are the “ignorant and arrogant westerners” who “pity the rest of the world and think they are saviours”.

Like the anti-Leftist cultural backlash in the West, the Chinese criticism focuses mainly on savaging the illusions of the Left, and not in finding a competing philosophy. However, it shows a world waking up to the disaster that the West is sleepwalking into with its pursuit of pyrrhic victory through liberal democracy, equality and political individualism.

How Trump Can #BuildTheWall Without Laying A Brick

Saturday, May 13th, 2017

People in the ruins of the West are starting to realize that diversity does not work.

On the surface, they see it through increased behavior of the type one finds in the rest of the world outside of the West. Most of the world languishes in third world status because of its refusal to adopt the founding principle of Western societies, which is the need for social order, including behavioral standards like honesty, integrity and a need to be productive.

Beneath that, they realize on some level that it means their nations have become shopping malls where citizenship is for sale in exchange for votes or paying taxes. No healthy society runs on this principle, so at a gut level they know their society is falling around them. This provokes some fear and trembling, but as long as the jobs are OK and they can afford reasonably comfortable lifestyles, they sleep.

At the most profound level, that of inner thought, some are starting to realize that diversity means a lack of direction. Diversity is the committee principle extended to ethnicity. And so there is no longer a standard like “the way we do things around here” or any principles in common except those of liberal democracy, tolerance, basic law and order, and that the money must flow.

Diversity creates apathy. The most diverse American city is also one that is famed for its apathy. When there are no social standards because every group has its own, people hunker down and ignore the world outside of their homes, jobs and grocery stores.

As usual, responses to this vary with how the individual thinks. Conservatives, who are realists who aspire to transcendentals like goodness and beauty, realize that the basic questions of life are qualitative. The methods are long known but the degree of their application determines how well results turn out, and how long they will endure.

Leftists, on the other hand, are motivated by egalitarianism alone. It is their one theory from which all of their rhetoric springs. In their view, the loss of social standards is a good thing because it empowers the individual. They favor apathetic, third world style civilizations because the individual has the least restrictions on its whims.

For this reason, the issue remains at an impasse. Conservatives are focused on improvement of what exists, and Leftists actively desire diversity. But this has changed with the observations above. Add to that the ongoing collapse of the American economy brought on by Leftist tax-regulate-and-spend coupled with a constant flow of new workers, driving down wages.

As a result, President Trump was elected in a large part based on his promise to Build That Wall. For most Americans, this was not a statement of racism, only a recognition that diversity is not just failing at its own goals, but damaging the country. The biggest social change of the last two decades has been the re-segregation of America in response to diversity, a prelude to Balkanization and eventually ethnic separation. Diversity has failed.

So far, however, we see no wall. There are political reasons for this, and practical ones, but even more, it may be that the wall is best interpreted at metaphor. What if we could, without laying a single brick, end diversity and immigration, or at least third world immigration (and bring the battered South Africans over instead)?

The answer lies in a simple question: why do they come here? Why give up their culture, way of life and homeland just to join the great shopping mall that is the post-collapse West?

The answer is equally simple, because the human organism never changes: for the free stuff and better money.

If you really want to build a wall, you will do so by making the free stuff go away and ending the guaranteed better money because of forced hiring. This means targeting our social welfare programs, including free medical care at emergency rooms, and ending the host of civil rights policies that follow the “disparate impact” theory behind Affirmative Action.

As American law is currently interpreted, if a white person and a minority person walk into a job interview, a rental office, a real estate office or a store, and the minority person does not get hired, rented to, sold a house or served first, legal liability is created. The business owner can be sued and the high legal costs could easily deprive him of his business.

These laws guarantee that if third world people come here, they can have whatever jobs, housing and service they want. This slipstreams into the psychology of immigrants, which is to want to convert whatever place they occupy into something like their homeland. They must either admit their homelands were not as nice as the new place, or invent a cognitive dissonance response that claims the new place is not nice at all, but will be so once the newcomers take it over and make it in their image. This, too, is eternal human behavior.

If Mr. Trump wants to build a wall, the fastest way to do this would be to change the interpretation of American law from “disparate impact” to no presumption of racial guilt if results turn out unequally for white people and non-whites. This would remove minorities from the legally-enforced front of the line, and allow the re-segregation to continue even faster.

In doing so, he would not be changing history but acknowledging it. The postwar experiment in diversity has failed, and since it is taboo to say so in public, people are simply segregating themselves. All races are doing this, as we see in places like Houston, which is in a pre-Balkanization state of each race isolating itself in its own neighborhoods.

A physical wall would be impressive, certainly. But the only sure way to stop the flood is to stop the handouts. Without guaranteed jobs and housing, and with no social benefits like welfare and healthcare to tempt them, the third world would stay home and do the right thing, which is to work toward the improvement of its own nations instead of deferring the solution by coming here.

Diversity Crushes Souls

Tuesday, May 2nd, 2017

On this blog, it has long been argued that the problem is not immigrants or specific ethnic groups but diversity itself, which removes the ability for a society to share a culture and introduces internal division. It also makes people uncertain of what standards are, so they tend to retreat from it and give up on their society.

For this reason, diversity has been for centuries the favorite of tyrants as it breaks the culture of a society and allows it to be replaced with the dogma of the tyrant. In addition, it causes resentment, mainly because of the asymmetric conditions imposed on natives and immigrants by diversity:

My students have come with their families from all over the world and have empathy and insight, but for the most part, they have lived privileged lives. For the last semester, I’ve forced them to read nothing but “outsider fiction”. Stories by immigrants and people of colour. Stories about poverty. Stories about being made to sit on the periphery. Most are loving it, but some are frustrated. “I’ve already learned the race stuff,” one said, after our third story with a protagonist of colour. More than one parent advised me that Bharati Mukherjee and James Baldwin are not important when these kids have yet to read “classic writers” such as Harper Lee (because how could they develop their literary taste if they hadn’t first grounded themselves in the point of view of the impossibly saintly white family?).

…But what America did was a basic human obligation. It is the obligation of every person born in a safer room to open the door when someone in danger knocks. It is your duty to answer us, even if we don’t give you sugary success stories.

…The refugee has to be less capable than the native, needier; he must stay in his place. That’s the only way gratitude will be accepted. Once he escapes control, he confirms his identity as the devil.

Under diversity, natives are displaced because people coming from poorer countries are willing to work cheaper jobs, which means that people of higher status are taking lower jobs and displacing the people in them. In addition, each group wants its own culture and standards, and diversity obliterates that, not least through defense of the minority which translates to marginalization of the majority.

Refugees cannot have gratitude toward us. They are here to displace us. They may not mean to do that, but it is their only winning strategy. Majorities accept immigrants living alongside them with the idea that each group will stay in its own space. But to the diverse groups, the need for having their own power and culture drives them into conflict with the majority.

This is one of the many reasons that diversity can never work, no matter how smart and nice the newcomers are. It also causes genocide through the gradual outbreeding and thus genetic replacement of the majority, destroying the civilization that was there. Majorities view immigration as a kind of guest status, but to immigrants, the only strategy is to take over and destroy.

Chasing Sunk Costs Will Kill You

Monday, May 1st, 2017

There are good things in life. Baseball and humor rank amongst them. Combine them both; and you are on to something. Watch below.

The reason that humor makes us laugh is that it reveals truth. Some things are just gone, daddy gone. Poof, dunzo. See ya’ but I wouldn’t wanna beeya! And that brings us to the topic of sunk costs.

Sunk costs in economics are the investments you’ve made in the past that are no longer recoverable. Once you’ve paid to buy gear or build a building, at least some portion of that investment is unrecoverable. Like the $2,000 drop in value you get when you buy a car and drive it off the lot, that money is gone forever.

So what do? Win, lose or draw; you write that sucker off and move on down the line. Conservatives, Neo-Reactionary Conservatives in particular, have a weakness here. Let the past inspire you. Don’t live there. The Reagan Presidency was a nice break from the blight. Bush_Clinton_Bush_Obama did for Amerika what the Barracks Emperors did for The Roman Empire. President Trump needs to break the Globalist trend. That said, Trump isn’t and can’t be The Zombie Reagan.

For one thing, the current year isn’t 1981. We are now a different society. We are further on the track to globalist demotism. Demographics increasingly chart our destiny. We see our nation’s IQ drop fractional points every year. The new Amerikans are not traditional stock Americans. Our influx of immigration has been dysgenic, not eugenic. This has forced Donald Trump to pursue a 180-degree apositional policy on immigration from Ronald Reagan.

We have a vastly different economy in Amerika than we had in 1981 America. Our industrial base and major urban areas have declined precipitously after the Bush_Clinton_Bush_Obama reign of deliberate and not-so-condign neglect. Hence, Donald Trump takes a 180-degree apositional position on big foreign trade agreements. Our tax code is a horrendous gallimauphry of exceptions, lies and gimmedats. Donald Trump therefore told his SecTres to figure the blasted tax code out and simplify it before it can even be cut. The last time any legitimately helpful work was done on Federal taxation was the 1986 Tax Reform Act. Clinton and Bush II have both badly adulterated* it since.

We can make the comparisons all day. This not just aimed at tearing down Ronald Reagan. Donald Trump couldn’t be Grover Cleveland either. He has to play the cards in front of them. Opposing Donald Trump, particularly from the right; for not being Eisenhower, Reagan, Coolidge or any other prior GOP President, is self-defeating.

In closing, Neo-Reactionaries can either own the past or be owned by it. One way to differentiate between the two states is to see how they handle sunk costs. If we expect a nominally conservative president to behave like Zombie Reagan, we are chasing investments that Reagan made in policy based on the state of the world nearly forty years ago. We chase sunk costs. In so ding, the right will sink along with them. The past is a guide; not a suicide pact.


* — As if Bill Clinton would do otherwise…

Hoping For A Government Shutdown

Tuesday, April 25th, 2017

Currently the American government is headed toward shutdown. The Left insists that Trump fund their social programs, yet will not extend funding to building the border wall or increased immigration enforcement, and (predictably) passive-aggressively blame him for the inbound shutdown.

In the meantime, Trump has learned that to fix this mess, he will have to start from the bottom up, so while he makes gestures of conformity, in the background he is hiring immigration judges, issuing executive orders, firing Establishment flunkies and undermining arrogant agencies.

Many of us are hoping for a government shutdown. The dirty secret of these is that the Left loses each time they happen, because government shutdowns weaken Leftist social programs by backlogging them, and shatter the idea that government is needed.

Without welfare being paid out and constant government intervention, life gets better. People relax. They learn to do things for themselves. They see how the people they are funding contribute nothing, and how government does little but interfere with good people and advance bad people.

In fact, some would say that with each shutdown, more anarchists and monarchists are minted. Both of these groups oppose government. Monarchists want to replace cradle-to-grave government with actual leaders and leave social issues to culture and local charities. This worked better than government in the past.

Our government is dysfunctional and parasitic; why not shut it down? We can have a few months without any Ruby Ridges, red tape, welfare scams, or posturing about drowning migrants in the Mediterranean. Every moment that government is asleep, culture and people grow stronger. Let’s do it.