Posts Tagged ‘leftism’

Becoming A Shithole Country

Friday, January 12th, 2018

Donald Trump again demonstrates why he is the master of the media: even with a simple leaked comment, he has characterized the issue in a way that is both practical and iconic, infecting our minds with the idea. Seemingly minutes after he shrugged in approval of a lazy deal on DACA, then killed it, he has created the “covfefe” meme of human differences that subtly shifts our thinking.

According to those who are willing to leak information, Trump said something that was not politically correct regarding immigration:

The lawmakers were describing how certain immigration programs operate, including one to give safe haven in the United States to people from countries suffering from natural disasters or civil strife.

One of the sources who was briefed on the conversation said that Trump said, “Why do we want all these people from Africa here? They’re shithole countries … We should have more people from Norway.”

The second source familiar with the conversation, said Trump, who has vowed to clamp down on illegal immigration, also questioned the need for Haitians in the United States.

If we dig into our inner selves, where we can be honest before we clamp down with the fear of social disapproval, all of us will recognize the truth of what he has said: the countries in Africa tend to be impoverished, disorganized, corrupt, chaotic, violent, and filled with people who want to emigrate to the West to take advantage of the wealth there, instead of producing it at home.

Some claim his comments were “racist,” which is nonsense of the first order not only because racial preference is part of “freedom” and something every human has, but also because he did not actually speak of the ethnic groups involved. He simply pointed out that destitute and dysfunctional third world countries are less preferable than taking in people from, say, Norway.

For us to even claim that his comments were “racist,” we would need to sit him down with a list of every country on Earth and have him rank them on a binary scale of hole/not-hole, and then ask him why all the non-white countries were holes, if he ranked them so. If then he said, “It’s because they are full of hole people,” and tied that to their race, then it might be “racist.”

In the context of our thought on his comments, however, the racial angle does not matter so much as the practical angle: why is America the sponge of the world, absorbing anyone who has experienced a tragedy, instead of thinking of our interests in who we take in?

Our politicians posture by giving “safe haven” to people from around the world, but this is an act merely intended to make the politicians look good and feel good about themselves. No one has thought about the consequences of such an act, which makes it a sociopathic act, not a victory for empathy, charity and the human soul. It is the opposite of how it is sold.

The bigger accidental truth involving immigration came from the Left, actually, and takes the form of a leaked memo that in turn leaks the real reason for Leftist support of third world (hole) immigration, which is that it enables them to buy votes and permanent smash the healthy, normal, Western European family-oriented people who tend to vote conservative, even though that group is the source of American success:

A leaked memo from the left-wing organization, the Center for American Progress Action Fund, admits that passing an amnesty for the nearly 800,000 illegal aliens shielded from deportation by the President Obama-created Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program is “a critical component of the Democratic Party’s future electoral success.”

…The leaked memo comes as the Trump administration has endorsed a DACA amnesty plan that trades legalizing the nearly 800,000 illegal aliens in exchange for mandatory E-Verify, which bars employers from hiring illegal aliens, ending chain migration, where newly naturalized citizens can bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the U.S. with them, ending the Diversity Visa Lottery program, which randomly imports 50,000 foreign nationals a year, and authorizing the construction of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Pew Research Center found in 2012 that a plurality of Hispanic illegal aliens are Democrats, while only 4 percent said they identified with the Republican Party.

In other words, Leftists are deliberately importing people from impoverished and dysfunctional (“shithole”) countries so that these people vote against the people who made this country not a third world wasteland, which it easily could have been like Mexico to the south or in fact, most of the Americas.

As Plato noted, tyrants import foreigners as a means of establishing their power, which the Democrats have confirmed with the memo above. People who are in a country only because one person or party is in power will support that entity not out of gratitude, but fear of being sent away.

Over time, this effectively obliterates the original population through outbreeding, and guarantees a permanent majority for the symbol of one party over all else. However, that symbol presides over a wasteland, and so has lost its value and meaning, which is something that apparently the original tyrants never think about.

We can see this happen throughout history. Great empires form and then, just as they hit their peak, they become absorbed by whatever imported labor they were using. Centuries later, all that remains are the mixed descendants of the original group, and these are unable to achieve their former greatness. Egypt, Mexico, Iraq, India, Russia, Cambodia, Peru, Greece, and Italy all show us this pattern.

That tells us that the people make the country, and not the other way around. It does not matter if they carry forth the symbols, laws, language, and other “outer culture” of the original population; when the founding genetic group is gone, the civilization is gone, and what replaces it is an approximation of the original just like fast food vaguely resembles real food.

People are not equal, by class, race, ethnic group, sex, and caste. Only when an ethnic group stands on its own, and has a hierarchy both of leadership and of social rank, is it able to function. All of Leftism is a revolution against that social rank, which affirms that some do, indeed, know more than others and are better than those at leadership.

Leftists follow a mental process of scapegoating: irate at their own lack of power, and not realizing that this is because they will abuse it if given it, they prove that point by becoming abusive in their quest for power, perhaps raging at a primal angst of not being immortal gods instead of mortal peasants and merchants. They blame the leaders for the dysfunction of the Leftists themselves.

Scapegoating however is mentally addictive. Once the scapegoat is in place, it explains away all of the personal failings and fears of the people, so they chase that symbol like addicts in a religion dedicated to heroin. Eventually it destroys them, and everything around them, but they do not care because they had those moments of “if it feels good, do it.”

They use the importation of foreigners as a means to this end. It crushes the native population, who are made to feel guilty and inferior. It creates a permanent power base for the Leftists. Then, they invert the society. Good becomes bad so that bad can become good; the lesser become the elites, so that the actual natural elites cannot stop the looting of a once-great society.

We can see the effectiveness of this policy in the unity through hatred of the Left and minority groups who now openly admit that they wish to erase the founding population of America and Europe and replace them:

“As long as people can be judged by the color of their skin, the problem is not solved,” she said, adding,“There are still generations of people, older people, who were born and bred and marinated in it – in that prejudice and racism – and they just have to die.”

Diversity is white genocide. Leftists want white genocide. Even some groups of whites — the “near whites” from Ireland, Southern Europe, the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe — want genocide, but they want to destroy the genetic group necessary for Western Civilization, the Western Europeans. Everyone wants to be on top.

Clearly this policy of diversity, both ethnic and racial, is not functional. That is why the Left loves it: they plunge the nation into chaos, and thrive in the center of it, since they no longer lose social rank for being incompetent, venal, or dysfunctional. The rest of us need to realize that we are their target and they aim to eliminate us and erect a shithole nation in our place.

Leftism Is Advertising

Friday, January 12th, 2018

Another day, and people are moving as if in a dream underwater. In line, they are slow. The woman in front of me drops her coffee, twice. She staggers off to whatever office she must attend in order to pay her mortgage, five types of insurance, health care, car note, credit cards, professional licensing, property tax, automobile inspection and permit, 401k, college loans, office attire bills, and upkeep of all the gadgetry that keeps glitching, flaking, and breaking around her. No wonder she loves her job; she hates her job.

On the road, people are also slow, driving twenty miles an hour, forgetting to turn at lights, and seemingly unaware of their surroundings. In the grocery store they are milling aimlessly through the aisles, parking in the center of each and staring at products as if seeking enlightenment. At the gym people keep walking in circles.

They are afraid. Their individual bubbles, the social groups and experts that they read, are fragile because the world around them is both fragile and unknown. They know this, and so when the Chinese threaten to withdraw their purchases of American debt, or government hovers near a shutdown, crippling panic fills their minds with a cacophony of background noise formed of vague, limitless fears.

In this way, we can see that they do not believe the supposed truths they consume every day through media. They do not believe in the future of their world. They assume that the truth is the opposite of what they are told. But for now, all they want to do is make it through to the weekend, and have some wine or take on a lover, or escape to some faraway place. Distract and survive.

Future historians will gauge societies by their degree of future sight. Dying civilizations can see two weeks into the future; healthy ones are thinking about two thousand years in the future or longer. Those who are thriving are aware of death, but not afraid of it, while those who are failing see only death in with all the other fears.

What killed our future sight was individualism. It came out of nowhere because it was always inside of us; then, people sought to legitimize it, because it is an easier way of thinking about life — it temporarily allays the fears of the background hum — and did so by forming groups to insist that others believe the same thing.

In one of the great ironies of history, no one intended for it to turn out that way.

Individualism-through-group-action, which we now generally call Leftism, was always a sales job. It was marketing, or advertising, or just conversation. It was a way for people to make bonds with one another and feel better about their lives. The only problem was that people took it seriously, and the people following them emulated that attitude in turn.

It probably began simply as conversation. A group of people, huddled together, had nothing really to talk about. Everything around them was kind of obvious — this is a good thing, when you think about it — and they saw no need to look within. So instead, they started complaining. About the weather, or the root vegetable crop, or their neighbors. This is how insecure people socialize.

Someone took it to the next level. “You know,” he said, “The king really sucks. We could do a lot better. I know what I would do; what would you do?” In the moribund twenty-first century, we might call that a writing prompt, but really it was just a smart way to stimulate conversation and let people dream.

What followed was a social revolution. People now always had something to talk about that made them feel better for a little while. It infected the field laborers and those of a related group, the merchants, who realized quickly that this new trend, like fortified wine, could make money from the many instead of the few.

The two groups became friendly. The merchants sold the image; the people bought it and felt better. It was cheaper than therapy, anyway. This created a feedback loop, where the merchants invented new versions of the idea, and then people incorporated it into their social activities.

Competition defined these activities. If the first guy says that the king sucks, you have to either come up with a stunt — painting “the king sux” on the bridge to the kingdom — or some new idea based on the notion that the king sucks, like that the king sucks because he is insane, obese, religious, not religious, not obese, too sane, or any variation therefore.

Whoever came up with the newest, freshest, wildest, and most outlandish version of the idea won. They got even farther if they could use that idea to show that instead, they wanted a Heaven on Earth (H.O.E.) where there was no war, poverty, or a social hierarchy that kept grubby simple people out of the coolest places in town. This fantasy made the crowd swoon.

They ran into trouble when people took it seriously. First they challenged the power of the king, which created a divided power structure, and this always means that most of the energy will go toward infighting instead of solutions and future thinking. That gave them more to complain about, so they followed it up with class warfare, diversity, feminism, and other infighting.

Now we see the result: a world ruled by the lowest common denominator, where anyone speaking two words of sense together is demonized, in which the worst decisions are always made through the utilitarian method of asking a group what they want and choosing whatever the largest number of people want, which always seems to be the stupidest and least realistic solution.

People love fantasy. Leftism was merely a fantasy, advertising for another product, namely the Leftists themselves. The merchants wanted to sell more trinkets, and the people — of “We The People” fame — wanted a way to stand out in their social group, look witty and smart at the bar, attract mates despite being weaker and slower than others, and they got it.

As generations went by, each one took this idea more seriously until soon, it had become a quasi-religion. To succeed in this society, you need to be popular, and talking about how the king sux works in any age. Except now our society is nothing but infighting, with plenty of people in power to complain about.

This sort of thing is a “first world problem.” It only happens to societies which are successful enough that they can avoid worrying about day-to-day concerns of survival. Instead, they become large social groups, and whoever creates the marketing that most people can participate in, wins. Even if with this victory, they reduce everything good to ashes and rot.

Against Anti-Semitism (As A Vile Ad Hominem Smear)

Tuesday, December 12th, 2017

If you ever do anything to stop logically debunk Leftism then you will be attacked ad hominum. One of the most favored ad hominem is to call you anti-Semitic. I mean only a Holocaust Denier could also deny the overwhelming ¡TRUTH! of Global Warming, Systemic American Racism, Unrestrained Abortion Rights, Open Borders, et alia.

To logically oppose the Left on anything is to favor the Gawdallmiddy (((JewBBQ))) that resulted in the death of Six Gorillion Jews. Who knew that Judge Roy Moore was secretly reading The Protocols of The Elders of Zion?

Moore said that Soros’ agenda is “not American culture” and that he “comes from another world that I don’t identify with,” adding that “no matter how much money he’s got, he’s still going to the same place that people who don’t recognize God and morality and accept his salvation are going.”

The Reagan Battalion, a conservative news source, tweeted Moore’s comments, calling them “straight up antisemitism.”

Ah yes, The Reagan Battalion. About as aptly named as Manuel Noriega’s Dignity Battalions. Why must loathsome, straight-up cucks take the name of Ronaldus Magnus in vain? What ever happened to The Great Man’s 11th Commandment? Anti-Semitism is a handy crutch when cucking because it allows you to make common cause with the Left while still attempting to lie and deny you actually agree with them on major points of their socialistic ideology.

Anti-Semitism is the ultimate Othering weapon. You don’t have to have any intelligent ideas. You don’t have to be worth a monkey’s buttwipe. You don’t have to be anything more than a wasted schmeg-shot. But you still get to be better than an anti-Semite. It’s the self-esteem boost for unrestricted losers. The Crack Cocaine of the walking human rectal crack. If you can’t beat ’em; claim they tie their shoes in cute little swastikas like real ¡NAZIS!

This, of course, is detestable sophistry. It helps enforce degenerate equality by branding anyone with a double-digit IQ and a divergent opinion as unacceptably evil. This hypocrisy is particularly loathsome in its saccharine treacle when it is used to smear opponents of Former Hungarian SS-Collaborator, George Soros. It’s totally anti-semitic to take offense to having a political opponent who gladly accepts the bankroll of a former Nazi. An actual, real-world former Nazi. Someone that cooperated with the SS personally. Someone who punched his fellow citizens’ tickets on The Treblinka Train. Only a vile, (((Jewsturbating))) Gauleiter, tinkering around with the good old gas chamber, could have any sort of problem with that.

Which is why damaged, morally defective Leftists always whip out the old Jew-Hater smear when they probably all laugh when a devout follower of Shia-Islam wonders aloud whether (((Jews))) hold those cute little skull-caps on with ten-penny nails. I don’t kid. I’ve been there and watched it happen. SJWs truly project. The Leftist cries out as he strikes you. And this is why you need to oppose anti-Semitism.

Oppose anti-semitism as a detestable, dishonest, anti-intellectual smear. If the devil quotes scripture, it’s your job to intelligently rebuke Old Scratch. If a dirtbag properly explains why E=mc2 is a lower parameter of an object’s energy, give the dirtbag an A in his Physics Class. Whether that dirt-bag believes all Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, Jews or Chinese People should die has no bearing on whether that individual knows any Physics.

It’s even more loathsome if the person accused of being a dirtbag isn’t really that bad and is only being impugned because he gets better grades in Physics than some jealous and envious non-dirtbag. This is typically the tactic of the SJW losers who refer to any conservatives who disagree with them as “anti-Semitic.” This why anti-Semitism (particularly when it is chucked around as a disingenuous false-accusation of moral turpitude) must be removed from whatever remains of civilized American discourse.

Escaping Our Fascination With Nazism

Tuesday, December 5th, 2017

Hitler will always fascinate the West because his Reich was the last vestige of what most of us think of as the old order, where society had structure, there was a right and wrong, and a nation was defined by one ethnic group instead of being a nation-state of whoever showed up and paid taxes. His fall was the announcement that the West had given up.

At the same time, we should remember that in bad times, even good things are tainted with doubt, and so what Hitler thought was right was divergent from what was. His regime was not particularly traditional, not fully nationalist, and modern to the degree that it corrupted whatever message or principle he was hoping to establish.

Future historians may summarize the Nazis as dualistic; they both attempted to re-create an older social order, and chose to do so by using the modern method of finding a message that would motivate the masses toward a singular purpose. If Nazism had a thesis, it would be that we can use mass culture as a means of undoing mass culture, and not surprisingly, this paradoxical attempt failed.

The Left says Hitler was a Right-winger and in fact as far Right as we should dare imagine; the Right says that he was a Leftist. The Right is more correct: Hitler, while he incorporated some goals of the Right in his plan, chose to implement it through Leftist methods and a desire to create an egalitarian society, just one based on race and not citizenship.

In particular, he borrowed a great deal from the Communists:

Adolf Hitler, who admired Stalin for his ruthlessness and called him a “genius,” was also heavily influenced by Marx. “I have learned a great deal from Marxism,” Hitler said, “as I do not hesitate to admit.” Throughout his youth, Hitler “never shunned the company of Marxists” and believed that while the “petit bourgeois Social Democrat … will never make a National Socialist … the Communist always will.”

Hitler’s “differences with the communists”, argued Watson, “were less ideological than tactical”. Hitler embraced German nationalism so as not to “compete with Marxism on its own ground”, but explicitly acknowledged that “‘the whole of national socialism’ was based on Marx”. It is, therefore, unsurprising that Nazi Germany, with its concentration camps and omnipresent secret police, came so closely to resemble the Soviet Union.

How much did the Nazis learn from the Soviets?

In his 1947 memoir Commandant of Auschwitz: The Autobiography of Rudolf Hoess, Hoess recalled that the Germans knew of the Soviet program of extermination of the enemies of the state through forced labour as early as 1939. “If, for example, in building a canal, the inmates of a [Soviet] camp were used up, thousands of fresh kulaks or other unreliable elements were called in who, in their turn, would be used up.” The Nazis would use the same tactic on the Jewish slave laborers in, for example, munition factories.

Following their invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941, wrote Watson, the Germans collected information on the immense scale of the Soviet camp system and were impressed by the “Soviet readiness to destroy whole categories of people through forced labor”.

As some have noted, the tactics of the French Revolution were applied in Nazi Germany, just more efficiently than neurotic French Leftists could imagine. Where the French marched whole families to the guillotine, the Nazis attempted to deport them, then used them as slave labor, and finally when that failed, began to liquidate them.

National Socialism, as an idea, combined the need for nationalism — rising in Europe as nation-states became unstable and fragmented — with the dominant strain of European government at the time, which was increasingly socialist, and incorporated some aspects of the capitalist-driven fascist corporate State.

It did not swing to the far Right, which has always been those who hope to conserve l’ancien régime which is a society with caste, aristocracy, elite culture, hierarchy, customs, and a code of honor motivated by virtue. No modern government can emulate that because the basic idea of modernity, mass motivation, requires an equal herd clamoring for some trend or another.

The Nazis chose to make their message one that would motivate a group and, in doing so, reduced its meaning to what fit the expectations of the crowd, instead of what was needed. Having done that, the Nazis could no longer control public expectation, and got carried away with their rhetoric, making them both arrogant and cruel.

People imagine that Hitler was a successful totalitarian, but in fact, he was ruled by his people as much as he ruled them. They rebuked him on his attempt to ban smoking, and enjoyed a more comfortable standard of living even during the war than people did in the rest of the West. The Crowd shared in the dictatorship.

Not surprisingly, the Nazis showed signs of crowd infiltration even in their political statements, as we can see with these excerpts from The 25 Points of The Programme of the NSDAP:

7. We demand that the State shall make it its primary duty to provide a livelihood for its citizens. If it should prove impossible to feed the entire population, foreign nationals (non-citizens) must be deported from the Reich.

9. All citizens shall have equal rights and duties.

10. It must be the first duty of every citizen to perform physical or mental work. The activities of the individual must not clash with the general interest, but must proceed within the framework of the community and be for the general good.

13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).

14. We demand profit-sharing in large industrial enterprises.

15. We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a cheap rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all small traders in the placing of State and municipal orders.

17. We demand a land reform suitable to our national requirements, the passing of a law for the expropriation of land for communal purposes without compensation; the abolition of ground rent, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

25. To put the whole of this programme into effect, we demand the creation of a strong central state power for the Reich; the unconditional authority of the political central Parliament over the entire Reich and its organizations; and the formation of Corporations based on estate and occupation for the purpose of carrying out the general legislation passed by the Reich in the various German states.

If we look at these through the wide-angle lens of history, they do not appear that much distinct from either those of the French Revolution or the Soviet Union: in the name of equality, a State is being formed to re-distribute wealth, and it requires total power to do so. The total power is not being taken from We The People, but from its natural hierarchy (aristocracy).

The West remains obsessed by Hitler mostly because the Left has used him as a convenient symbol for all things that they fear, which means all of the things that would un-do our current time, which not coincidentally are things that many of us crave because we detest the current time. But following their lead is to assign them power over us.

Perhaps the Left fixates on Hitler in order to distract us from the actual far-Right ideas out there like Traditionalism and Futurism, because if we get our hands on those, there is no way we will ever be satisfied with the managerial nanny state ever again. From a perspective that far to the Right, Hitler would appear as a slightly less Leftist version of our present time.

Nonetheless, Hitler still seduces us, mainly because he stands for the return of leadership that actually cares about civilization instead of using civilization as its own meal ticket. Democracy stands for nothing except hollow promises about free speech, free association, and use of your own property that turn out to be lies, as it goes in search of (endless) new forms of funding.

First it was taxes, then it was immigrants, and in the future, they will probably charge you directly to be part of their society, and then tax you. Sales taxes, property taxes, state taxes, licensing fees, income taxes, tariffs which the consumer ultimately pays for, mandatory inspections, and payroll deductions: they kill you with the death of a thousand cuts and it is not about money. It is about power.

Right now, we summarize WW2 by saying that Hitler was evil and the Allies were mostly good. In the near future, we will recognize that the Allies were not mostly good, mainly because they fought a war of attrition against Europe in the name of what became fully Communist Leftism. In the distant future, people will see the Allies as the bad guys, and Hitler as an unfortunate but predictable response. Years after that, they will see the Holocaust as predictable and avoidable too.

At some point, we will dig out Theodor Herzl and realize that he was one of the first — after Plato, Aristotle, Nietzsche, and others — anti-diversity philosophers. His point was not that the French were bad, but that the Dreyfuss Affair was predictable, because when you stand out from the rest, you will get scapegoated in times of crisis.

This originates in practical reasoning. If the group is basically in agreement, and they are all doing the same roughly right thing, then if something goes wrong either “right was wrong” or there was a sabotage, and suspicion is naturally cast on those who are not doing the right thing like everyone else because they are different. It does not matter how they are different, or who they are, but just the fact of being different alone qualifies them to be a threat or scapegoat.

Jews have been booted out of 109 nations not because Jews are bad, but because being Other is bad. Diversity never works. Jewish groups also have a history of going into nations and taking things out of context, like “work hard, get ahead.” Among a native population, this is understood as part of a social process; to an outsider, it is a singular task that eclipses all others, and is more easily undertaken, because they have no need to participate in that culture and its intricate sorting rules that choose people above others.

Jews, like Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese in the current USA, throw everything normal out the window and go for the throat of education and business. This alone makes them a target, but perceived or actual nepotism — probably a mix of both — and a tendency to lean toward politics and behaviors that emphasize their Otherness also make them a perpetually resented force. This is why the Holocaust was predictable, and in more honest times in the future, we will say that, without approving of the Holocaust at all, because mass murder of families is a Leftist thing and Leftism is a form of brain disorder.

When the future looks back on the twentieth century, it will see that we created all of our own problems through theories that focused on what the audience wanted — equality, diversity, feminism, socialism — instead of what our best people knew must be done to make civilization as an organic whole thrive. As time goes on, Hitler loses his sting, but we still see him as the only force that stood up to the perpetual encroachment of herd behavior, which always focuses on what the audience wants.

The most terrifying taboo out there now is not Nazism; it is the idea that people want to restore Western Civilization, which in turn would make the Left obsolete and forgotten. It would also bypass the intermediate stage that Hitler tried to turn into a future, and avoid the fate he encountered by his own hand.

Robert Mugabe, Leftist Success Story

Monday, December 4th, 2017

Former US President James Earl Carter had a reputation for being a bumbler. When he famously told Playboy Magazine about the lust in his heart, a significant plurality of the electorate probably questioned whether he had any in his pants.

The Iranian Revolutionaries under The Ayotollah Khommeni certainly experienced a sadistic joy in treating him as a eunuch. He barely beat the unelected place-holder who pardoned Richard M. Nixon in 1976 and was both subsequently and emphatically vanquished from making important decisions in the Election of 1980. He did, however, accomplish a thing or two before he went on to build houses and lecture people on Leftist Morality.

One rather regrettable accomplishment Carter and Andrew Young had an evil hand in was the rise of Zimbabwian Socialist Dictator and Scourge Robert Mugabe.

Messrs. Carter and Young would only countenance a settlement in which Mr. Mugabe, a Marxist who had repeatedly made clear his intention to turn Zimbabwe into a one-party state, played a leading role. Mr. Young, displaying the willful naiveté that came to characterize Mr. Carter’s mindset, told the London Times that Mr. Mugabe was a “very gentle man” whom he “can’t imagine … ever pulling the trigger on a gun to kill anyone.” Mr. Mugabe already had pulled the trigger on many innocent people, though. And not long after taking power in 1980, he killed about 25,000 people belonging to a minority tribe, the Ndebele. In spite of this, in 1989, Mr. Carter launched his “Project Africa” in Zimbabwe, a program aimed at helping African countries maintain food sustainability.

So how well did “Project Africa” do? After twenty years of gentle leadership, President For Life Mugabe resorted to white genocide when nobody in the Zimbabweian electorate with a brain would provide him with a fig leaf of legitimacy.

In 2000 Mugabe organized a referendum on a new Zimbabwean constitution that would expand the powers of the presidency and allow the government to seize white-owned land. Groups opposed to the constitution formed the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), which successfully campaigned for a “no” vote in the referendum. That same year, groups of individuals calling themselves “war veterans”—though many were not old enough to have been part of Zimbabwe’s independence struggle—began invading white-owned farms. Violence caused many of Zimbabwe’s whites to flee the country. Zimbabwe’s commercial farming collapsed, triggering years of hyperinflation and food shortages that created a nation of impoverished billionaires.

And just how well did Mr. Mugabe support Mr. Carter’s dedication to world democracy? Mugabe reminds me of Hillary Clinton in 2016. Elections are sancrosanct until a leftist actually fails to win one.

Before the 2008 elections, he said: “If you lose an election and are rejected by the people, it is time to leave politics.” But after coming second to Morgan Tsvangirai, Mr Mugabe displayed more characteristic defiance, swearing that “only God” could remove him from office.

And what impact did that have on the lives of his people? About what you’d expect from a guy who hired the North Koreans to train an internal repression force.

Mr Mugabe once famously said that a country could never go bankrupt – with the world’s fastest-shrinking economy and annual inflation of 231 million per cent in July 2008, it seemed as though he was determined to test his theory to the limit. Professor Tony Hawkins of the University of Zimbabwe once observed that with Zimbabwe’s former leader: “Whenever economics gets in the way of politics, politics wins every time.”

Ultimately Robert Mugabe accomplished what every Leftist who seeks power dreams of. He achieved equality. He destroyed the economy, the currency, the food production system and the entire old White Aristocracy represented by Ian Smith. Robert Mugabe did all of this while living in a $7 Million palatial estate. As befits a poor and dying nation; it serves as a Poor Man’s Versailles.

He often said he would only step down when his “revolution” was complete. He was referring to the redistribution of white-owned land but he also wanted to hand-pick his successor, who would of course have had to come from the ranks of his Zanu-PF party. Didymus Mutasa, once one of Mr Mugabe’s closest associates but who has since fallen out with him, once told the BBC that in Zimbabwean culture, kings were only replaced when they die “and Mugabe is our king”.

And now Mugabe reaches his twilight. He is a nonagenarian dotard clinging to consciousness as he simultaneously loses his grip on power. His purported successor is a former crony dubbed not-so-affectionately “The Crocodile”. The Crocodile will only devour the bloated corpse of a forlorn Land of Mordor laid to waste by a Leftist unfettered.

Even The Atlantic is forced to acknowledge the awful truth of unrestrained Socialism. Here they list the ten ways Robert Mugabe murdered Rhodesia.

  1. Destroy the engine of productivity – His genocide against White Farmers.
  2. Bury the truth – His control over media that makes MSNBC green with envy.
  3. Crush dissent – His ability to kill critics that makes ANTIFA green with envy.
  4. Legislate the impossible – His bevy of stupid scoialistic legislation that makes Obamacare look workable.
  5. Teach hate – His training an entire generation to hate his political enemies.
  6. Scare off foreigners – See steps 1 – 5.
  7. Invade a neighbor – His attempt to placate his military Kakistocracy by seizing Congolese diamond mines.
  8. Ignore a deadly enemy – Socialized medicine has worked about as well as you would expect it to against the African AIDS epidemic.
  9. Commit genocide – Both against white farmers and against other native Zimbabwian tribes.
  10. Blame the imperialists – You know, like Great Britain and Amerika who intervened to make sure he got into power back in 1980.

Now the Leftists try to run from Mugabe they way they are running from the Leftist Legacy of Charles Manson here in Amerika.

In June 2007 Mugabe became the first international figure to be stripped of an honorary degree by a British university when Edinburgh withdrew one it had awarded to him in 1984. The following year the University of Massachusetts revoked a law degree it had awarded in 1986 and the year after that, in September 2008, Michigan State University cancelled a law degree it had granted to Mugabe in 1990.

It is too late. The Left made Mugabe. The Left empowered Mugabe. The Left forever owns Mugabe. Who better achieved the goals every Leftist worshiper of The Zero holds near and dear to the heart? Certainly not Jimmy Carter who labors endlessly to build a habitat for a humanity that his leftist protegees like Yassir Arafat and Robert Mugabe labor manfully to exterminate or render forever equal in utter and complete immiseration.


Saturday, December 2nd, 2017

Leftism destroys societies. It starts out by claiming that it defends individual rights and is “moderate,” but once it becomes more powerful, it attempts to eliminate any competing non-Leftist voices from the dialog through its “no platform” agenda. Finally, when it seizes complete control, it takes on aspects of tyranny, like a parasite host using a civilization as a means to enforcing an ideology.

Realizing this tells us that all Leftists are the same because they share the same ideology and it is an absolutist and universal ideology, so can be applied in degrees, but the goal does not vary by degree. “Moderate” Leftists are simply those who are willing to temporarily hold back on radical enforcement. When given power, these moderates become radicals.

If you burrow into Leftist ideas, you will find that “equality” is the root and core of every one of them. Their basic concept consists of making the parasite equal to the host, so that the parasite — which has fewer obligations — can take over with its lazy, narrowly-focused drive toward control.

The Leftist parasite, which is an idea as well as a social movement by individualists who want a guaranteed share of the pie, first protects its host, helping it succeed; then, once the hook is in, it induces the host to suicide, so that it loses any sense of self. Then the Left entirely takes over its brain.

Biological metaphors for Leftism have appeared in the past with Toxoplasma gondii and Ophiocordyceps unilateralis sensu lato, both of which follow the pattern of first protecting and then destroying the host.

Now, we have a new metaphor with Diplostomum pseudospathaceum, an eye fluke that keeps its host safe until it is time to breed, then sacrifices the host by making it commit suicide by predator:

The eye fluke Diplostomum pseudospathaceum has a life cycle that takes place in three different types of animal. First, parasites mate in a bird’s digestive tract, shedding their eggs in its faeces. The eggs hatch in the water into larvae that seek out freshwater snails to infect. They grow and multiply inside the snails before being released into the water, ready to track down their next host, fish. The parasites then penetrate the skin of fish, and travel to the lens of the eye to hide out and grow. The fish then get eaten by a bird – and the cycle starts again.

…[F]ish infected with immature fluke larvae swam less actively than usual – making themselves less visible to predators – and were harder to catch with a net than uninfected controls…The team found that [rainbow trout harbouring mature eye flukes] swam more actively than uninfected controls and stayed closer to the water’s surface.

…Immature parasites “are too young and innocent to infect a next host”, he says, so their goal is to protect the fish they are living in. Mature parasites, however, are ready to reproduce – and to do so they need to get inside a bird’s gut…This fits a pattern of young parasites decreasing their host’s likelihood of being preyed on, while older parasites increase it, says Nina Hafer, a parasitologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology in Plön, Germany.

This points to an interesting relationship between parasite and predator: the parasite weakens the host, and then the predator kills and consumes it, creating a feedback loop of codependency between parasite and predator. Both have one thing in common, which is that they wish to use the host as a means to their own ends.

Any species which wishes to survive must throw off the parasites and predators. In the struggle for survival, there is no absolute and universal truth, only many different threads of life struggling for survival and then supremacy. Leftism reverses this, parasitizing civilization so that individuals can life off it without being obligated to support it.

A Leftist System Rewards Leftist Activists For Politically-Oriented Vandalism

Friday, November 10th, 2017

Apparently, despite abundant video evidence, our Leftist system, powered by the “deep state” of fellow travelers known as “the Cathedral,” has elected not to prosecute vandals for their politically-motivated acts which were convenient for the Left:

Charges for three people who are accused of toppling a Confederate monument in downtown Durham have been dropped, according to their defense attorney.

According to defense attorney Scott Holmes, charges were dropped against Aaron Alexander Caldwell, Myles Spigner and Taylor Cook, citing that probable cause exists, but there was not enough evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

On Aug. 14, a group of protesters tore the statue of a Confederate soldier down after a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Va., ended with one woman dead and almost two dozen injured.

If you want confirmation that you live in a neo-Communist regime, you can find it here. Instead of being concentrated in the state, the unruly mob of revolutionaries has distributed itself among state and private industry, and now enforces its dogma with winks and handshakes instead of official paper instruments.

As many have noticed, this regime includes the captive opposition of the Republican party, who pared off anything resembling actual conservatism to go libertarian sometime in the 1960s, and by doing so, have made only token protests toward conservative values in the years since, with only a few wildcard exceptions like Reagan and Trump.

This reminds us of the wisdom of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, who argued for “physical removal” of Leftists in his book Democracy: The God That Failed (2001):

In a covenant…among proprietor and community tenants for the purpose of protecting their private property, no such thing as a right to free (unlimited) speech exists, not even to unlimited speech on one’s own tenant-property. One may say innumerable things and promote almost any idea under the sun, but naturally no one is permitted to advocate ideas contrary to the very covenant of preserving and protecting private property, such as democracy and communism. There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and removed from society.

Unlike most libertarians, he is willing to admit that Leftism is a spectrum stretching from anarchism through totalitarianism, with democracy being its mid-point. Leftists, if not physically removed, will begin agitating for Communism from this mid-point or any other point on the spectrum, and the only solution is Darwinistic style removal from the society.

If we cannot enforce basic laws against vandalism, this means the State is complicit with the vandals, and the two have an ideology in common. Until these people are driven from power and then driven from among us, there will be no sanity or future for Western Civilization.

Harmless Non-Hateful Comment Triggers Panicked, Hateful Response

Thursday, November 2nd, 2017

Leftism fooled everyone with the idea of equality. To most of us, that meant that everyone got treated according to the standard. But because that does not result in equality, it inevitably means that the more successful must be penalized in order to subsidize the less-successful.

Based in this form of wealth transfer and dissolution of power, all modern politics follows this model: entitlements, the welfare state, socialized medicine/single-payer healthcare, affirmative action, progressive taxes, feminism, diversity, pluralism. Each involves savagely taking from the majority in order to give to ethnic, racial, religious, political and sexual minorities.

Our refusal to see ourselves as part of the same natural world of animals and plants that thrives around us blinds us to the obvious: we have been beset by parasites. In the human world, they prey on our sense of self-pity and social good feelings, and use guilt to induce us to subsidize them.

We are familiar with natural parasites: AIDS, mosquitoes, the black plague, Ebola, leeches, ticks, lampreys, fleas, rats, lice and bedbugs. Parasites are one of the most successful categories of species on Earth, from the vines that choke out trees to the viruses which live in us for the duration of our lifetimes.

So indoctrinated are we that when someone speaks up for the majority in a positive way, even that triggers a faux horror and dramatized panic by the parasites, who declare it to be “hate” to desire an end to the parasitism:

There’s a manhunt on – or womanhunt, if that’s your gender preference – for “racists” in Massachusetts, Ohio, Louisiana, Washington, Alabama and Canada who had the audacity to terrorize by posting signs and stickers that read, “It’s OK to be white.”

It all started out as an idea on the 4chan and endchan online forums to troll the left, universities and the media and demonstrate a double standard when the issue of discrimination is involved.

…Police were called out to Boston’s Cambridge Common and Harvard Square Wednesday morning to investigate approximately 20 stickers with the “racist” message stuck to light poles and electrical boxes. The Department of Public Works was tasked with removing them with putty knives, reported the Boston Globe.

To recap: someone posted fliers that said it is just fine to be a member of an ethnic group. The media, police and academia lost their minds.

In the view of the parasites and those who rationalize the decay of civilization by supporting them, white is bad. The victim must be made to hate itself, and to feel guilt, so that it not only fails to rise to power again, but keeps handing over those payments.

Lawsuit winnings. Welfare. Affirmative action. Free housing. Free medicine. This does not just go to ethnic or racial minorities, but to any group which can argue it is a minority group, therefore not thriving as well as the majority, and therefore, presumably since everyone is “equal,” the only explanation can be that this group is victimized.

For that reason, they claim they deserve wealth transfer for their benefit, even though a mosquito or Epstein-Barr virus — if they could talk — would say the same thing.

The assumption runs so deep, mainly because succeed socially by taking on a pose of being benevolent and strong, that even a neutral mention of white people provokes a hysterical reaction:

Irfan said instigators create these posters to highlight what they see as a double standard around who is affected by discrimination.

“[They think that] if it happens to white people it doesn’t really count, that’s the underlying theme that some of these groups are trying to highlight,” he said.

The issue with this? The lack of historical context, he says.

He said it’s important to acknowledge that inequality still exists between racial groups in Canada, often based on historical reasons.

In other words, if other groups are not succeeding, we must scapegoat whites. This is the backward reasoning of equality-think: we proclaim that all people are equal, but then notice that results do not bear this out, so we take on the mantle of righteous moral superiority and whip out our social engineering to “fix” the problem, with plenty of parasite-bucks for all.

In fact, this innocuous message of anti-discrimination is styled as vicious ethnic hatred:

In a statement posted to the university website Tuesday afternoon, President David Turpin said “the university is aware of several incidents of racism that have occurred on north campus in recent days.”

For those who are new to this game, you are now seeing the nature of “equality”: if we are not all equal, someone must be made to pay and to feel horrible about themselves, essentially draining them of life so the parasite can grow.

Our solution should begin with ending the parasitism. Get rid of any program that takes wealth from the many and gives to the few. End the progressive taxes; make everyone pay a flat tax. Throw out welfare and affirmative action. Cut out all of the government freebies and the easy grades, fame and promotions to anyone who bleats out the equality mantra in public.

Instead we should hit them with what we might call the post-ideology mantra:

Your article proves something that most people don’t want to face: diversity doesn’t work.

We are all tribal people who want what’s best for our people. There is nothing wrong with that. I’ve tired of being expected to put another group of people ahead of my own. You don’t want to do it and neither do I, which is why diversity will always fail, just as it has done for millennia.

For equality to work, those who are thriving must put another group of people ahead of their own, and essentially die on the cross in order to feed this group and attempt against nature to make them successful. Like the Soviet Union, this penalizes the productive in order to subsidize the unproductive.

This parasite has its hooks into us because it uses guilt. We must detach ourselves from the guilt. Most of humanity has always been starving, ignorant, violent, diseased, primitive and savage. This is not our fault. We owe nothing to any of them, and everything to ourselves so that we can rise above the rest and give the others an example to follow.

It’s OK to be white, indeed.

America Splits In Two Over Politics

Monday, October 23rd, 2017

Guess the Civil War really did not resolve the fracture of this nation. It is divided into two groups: Leftists who want atomized equality and city living, and Rightists who want traditional living in suburb and country, marked by social order instead of the alienation and self-centeredness of the modern era.

For many years, during which the Left got ahead, the Right believed that it could maintain that way of life for itself by compromising with the Left and giving them some of what they want. The last few decades have showed us that Leftism is like an infection, and it grows to eventually take over all areas of government and society.

As a result, Americans are polarizing and abandoning the great neoconservative dream of bipartisanship and compromise:

In political values ranging from views of government and the social safety net to opinions about immigrants, race and homosexuality, Americans are less likely than in the past to hold a mix of conservative and liberal views. At the same time, ideological consistency – the shares of Americans holding liberal or conservative views across a wider range of issues – is increasingly associated with partisanship, a recent Pew Research Center study shows. This reflects a continuation of trends documented in the Center’s 2014 study of political polarization in the American public.

We saw what the Left would do since, once given power in the 1990s, they acted out their ideals and instead of pacifying the situation, they intensified the demands of Leftists. We went from JFK-style Leftists who wanted a social safety net but also fought Communists to the contemporary version, different only in that they have greater power, who want a neo-Communist regime.

When the children indoctrinated during the 1990s voted Barack Obama into power, it made it clear that conservatives and liberals desire vastly different societies. In particular, Leftists hate white people and anyone else perceived to have been historically successful, and want to embrace all behaviors as legitimate, where conservatives want social standards and social order.

Given enough power, Leftists reveal the brain-altering nature of the mental virus of equality, which is that since it is open-ended and has no qualifiers, it expands to fill all space and change everything into a human image. This image portrays a mob formed of selfish individuals, each demanding that nothing he does be used to lower his social standing, especially when he is unrealistic and makes a disaster.

This “tolerance,” as they call it, quickly balloons into absurdism:

One needn’t be a genius to see where Michaeli’s logic leads. If we heed her quest to “break apart” the nuclear family so that marriage is broken apart from parenthood and parenthood broken apart from childbirth, we can actually assemble a new default option, an ideal one that bypasses the structural problems of the older default. We’ll then discover that the best way to combat the inherent inequality – one that favors men and that Michaeli identifies as part and parcel of the institution of marriage – is to replace the default option with same-sex marriage, which lacks the inequality that derives from the differences between men and women.

In an ideal egalitarian society men will fraternize with men and women with women. And what about children? “The person who takes responsibility for the child – and someone must take responsibility for the child – needs to be obligated for certain criteria that the state should actually decide on.” The state? “No! What do you mean the state? It’s us coming together in a democracy, we all decide what it means to be a good parent,” explained Michaeli.

Subsequently, in the name of progress, perhaps the primitive practice which served our forefathers will also come to an end. Babies will be born under ideal laboratory conditions, and only under state approval. The “biological advantage” of heterosexuals, namely their ability to reproduce, will be considered a violation of the equality principle of homosexuals. After all, how will the state be able to determine whether men or women meet the required standards for becoming parents as long as they are free to become pregnant without a license?

The human ego — this is the hubris of the lower classes and mercantile elites that propels the Left — wants to remake the world in its image. That means the human individual, and its social group, because in a social group one is already accepted and cannot lose status for screwing up, with only a few exceptions. Through this a cult-like mob forms and forces others to obey its vision of the world.

On the Right, we like what has worked since the dawn of time because it is eternally true as a way of adapting to our world not just at a minimum, but as the best possible option for a life where we live in sanity, mental clarity and have a sense of purpose. That is incompatible with the Leftist view and always has been, but now it is visible, and so we are coming apart.

Your Future Under Leftist Rule

Monday, October 23rd, 2017

The best scams are those that take just long enough to detect for you to escape into the sunset with the money. Ideally, you have a set of duplicate papers sitting in a vault in Switzerland, and you can then take possession of your French Riviera condominium and live out your days anonymously, feasting on a pile of stolen wealth.

Of course, we all want to blame the victims, because they are painfully stupid, and it is true they are worthy of blame. However, we know that humans vary in capabilities, and so it is unreasonable to expect any of them to do more than they can understand. This is why we shield most people from scams: they are not as smart as the scammers, nor as evil.

Leftism represents a perfect scam because it is gradual. About the only modern comparison is cable TV: you buy a basic package, then every few years figure out that “everyone at school|work” is watching a channel you do not have, so you call up and… well, you have to buy another package. And another. And an upgrade for the internet. And voice-over-IP.

If you are like most people, you say OK into the phone a half-dozen times, then keep paying the bills until one month you notice that things are a bit tight, and you finally look into the cable bill. Holy heck, it’s a car payment now! So you call up and the people they hire to explain things slowly list off the packages to you as you realize you have been paying this for a decade.

When a society first goes egalitarian, as in the Renaissance,™ it seems like a new big thing. Instead of these complex social orders, we have everybody-do-whatever-they-want, which means that artists and intellectuals can drift off and do their thing. There’s plenty of money to go around, since long ago agriculture was improved to the point that just about everyone eats, so why not waste a little.

Then one group of human monkeys figures out that it can go even further and thus be the new big thing for this decade. So they go full Enlightenment,™ and put a religious value on raising up the poor or emphasizing the universality of the soul. Then another group decides to subsidize the poor and create institutions for “progress.” And on and on, until one day you look at the cable bill.

Your eyes bug out. That is what has happened to the West during the last few years. The ongoing race riots in Ferguson and Islamic terror in Europe made people shock themselves awake and ask, “Who exactly is running the show here?” The bug-eyed faces of Merkel, Cameron, Obama and Sarkozy stared back at them, and people balked.

Now they are doing what they should have done long ago, which is making connections. If you have liberalism, you will have equality. If you have equality, you will have diversity. If you have diversity, you will have globalism. If you have globalism, you will work the rest of your life at a pointless job to earn monopoly money to pay benefits for the people who are coming in to replace you.

Even more, we are realizing that the whole world was just riding a wealth boom that came through warfare, technology and colonialism. As this wealth boom fades, we are seeing that our future under Leftism is pretty bleak, because it follows the same pattern — the Napoleonic Arc — set up by the French Revolution and echoed in the Soviet Union:

  1. Agitation. The mob is whipped into a frenzy against someone who is perceived to impede their Utopia by being unequal.
  2. Revolution. Eventually the mob gains enough momentum to rage against the target, which usually does not kill it out of misplaced pity and a desire to avoid streets awash in blood.
  3. Purges. The purges begin! First, the hated target is executed, whole families at a time. Then those who oppose the new way. Finally, those who simply fail to agree enough are killed. A purity spiral results in heaps of bodies all the time. A surveillance state springs up.
  4. Ineptitude. At this point, the revolutionaries have driven anyone competent out of power. Even more, the degree of control they exert is resented, so people do mediocre work in small amounts. Crumbling occurs.
  5. War, Forever. The society realizes that it was more effective when mobilized for a revolution, so its leaders invental perpetual war as a way of keeping unity and motivation. It now attempts to conquer the world for its ideology, leaving behind heaps of bodies.
  6. Poverty. Nothing works, and war is expensive, so everyone else has to subsist on a beet and a rat per day to keep healthy. They must work more than ever before, but none of it is effective. Life becomes bleak.

Refrain: heaps of bodies, surveillance state, no food in stores.

We can see this in progress in Venezuela, where years of disastrous Leftist rule have been followed up by… more Leftist rule:

The economy is in freefall, there are acute shortages of medicine and food, inflation is almost 1,000 per cent and homicide rates have soared. Before Sunday’s vote the government — steward of this mess — had at best a 30 per cent approval rating. Improbably, though, the ruling socialist party won 17 of 23 governorships up for grabs. “Fraud” cried the opposition.

“Another victory!” Mr Maduro proclaimed. Whatever the case, the vote’s lasting results will be pernicious: greater polarisation; radicalisation; more international isolation; an even weaker economy; and, as the country’s problems fester, a greater risk of civil war.

There is a still a way out of this mess. Venezuela is not Syria or North Korea. It does not suffer from sectarian violence; nor does it have nuclear arms. Rather, the regime in Caracas is more akin to a group of mafia mobsters that has run out of options. The amounts they have looted are breathtaking: as much as $300bn, according to disaffected former ministers.

At this point, the country has entered into a death spiral. It has little money, and whatever it does have goes out in social benefits and theft by its Leftist leaders. Any reformer will be shouted down because the first thing to do is balance the budget which means the death of benefits programs, which are sort of like infinite blank checks because demand always expands at the same time currency becomes less valuable because it is being handed out like candy.

The Venezuelan people are voting for their interests — free stuff — which ultimately means they are voting against their interests, in that by choosing an illusion, they guarantee bankruptcy and corruption forever. We should not pick on them too much because voters in America and Europe have for the past seventy years done the exact same thing, only now its failure has become apparent.

America and Europe have begun to move toward populism, which is equal parts fiscal conservatism and the notion that the West should, you know, be the best again, and sort of recover from those world wars and civil wars. We are trying to un-do two hundred plus years of history and get back a notion of what it is to be ourselves, starting with identity politics which says that Us is a genetic category first and a cultural one second, and not at all an ideological or creedal one. We are who we are inside, and we want to become better at being who we are.

The fiscal conservatism arises from a desire to starve the Leftist government which expends 60% of our budget on entitlements and to instead go toward saner economics, in which only that which is productive is rewarded, which means all of us have to work less.

This ties in with the desire to stop supporting people who seem to hate us, and definitely have an interest in conquering us and taking whatever we have. Even more, it acknowledges that most are afraid to say: the coffers are empty, and we are headed for default on a wave of debt both public and private, which means we never could afford those socialist welfare state programs.

In other words, our flirtation with Leftism looks like a centuries-long orgy of looting the West by parasites who somehow sneaked themselves in the front door, promised us the world and delivered chaos, then headed to Switzerland with big bulging carpet bags of purloined wealth.

The Obama years expanded this social welfare spending to the point where we now face an economic crisis if we do not begin cutting government off from the flow of easy money:

The simple act of lowering America’s absurdly high corporate tax rate — currently at 35 percent — to around 20 percent, which puts us in line with the rest of the world, plus lowering a host of other business and individual taxes, has increasingly become a make-or-break moment for investors.

More important: The market has been able to handle the continued delay in promised tax cuts just fine, but if tax reform bellyflops the way ObamaCare repeal did, many smart analysts are coming to the conclusion that the market will turn sour.

Without tax cuts, one Wall Street executive told me, “the markets will drop like a rock.”

When your local wino asks you for a handout in order to get a job, the first question you ask is whether he is still drinking. As long as the West is drinking Leftism, our fortunes will not recover. Amusingly, this resembles the situation in Venezuela: we elected our Maduro in Obama, who enriched himself and impoverished the nation by handing out crazy benefits all over the place (remember the car buyback? the Obamaphone?).

It is not hard to figure out a formula for prosperity because history shows us what works and what does not:

The tax cuts during the Reagan administration somewhat increased the resources of the taxpayers, while at the same time, repeal of some regulations gave them more freedom to take advantage of opportunities for gain through exchange. The result was a large increase in production and employment. Increasing wealth did not “trickle” to anyone, but the climate of freer markets enabled many Americans to earn more. Some who had previously been poor found jobs that paid well, saved money so they’d have investment capital, and then began their own businesses. Their increased incomes were a gusher, not a trickle, and it was earned.

Obama and his minions ought to have to write on the blackboard 100 times, “Free markets and smaller government means greater opportunity for everyone.”

That is a universal lesson, not just an American one. Think about the difference between Hong Kong and China. In Hong Kong, government was minimal, absorbing little of the resources available and not interfering in the people’s affairs. Lots of people risked death to leave the security of the communist state to enjoy the insecurity of Hong Kong with its unbounded opportunities for personal advancement.

However, this offends the egalitarian dream. It is Darwinistic, rewarding some more than others for performance in relation to reality, and not simply obedience of rules and dogma. It also does not offer guarantees, only possibilities.

Leftism would have us go the opposite direction: higher taxes, more regulations, and more of government-as-an-industry, where new laws create positions that need to be filled by legions of bureaucrats, effectively becoming a huge employer despite never turning a profit. Once you enter into that cycle, there is no escape.

Not only that, but as we see in our cities and states, it drives formerly thriving places to bankruptcy.

When played out in the third world, it seems unreal, but the same could easily happen here, because we are using the same policies. Once you create a welfare state, you go bankrupt, and so do all the people who depended upon it. Witness the slow collapse of modern Brazil:

Between 2004 and 2014, tens of millions of Brazilians emerged from poverty and the country was often cited as an example for the world. High prices for the country’s raw materials and newly developed oil resources helped finance social welfare programs that put money into the pockets of the poorest.

But that trend has been reversed over the last two years due to the deepest recession in Brazil’s history and cuts to the subsidy programs, raising the specter that this continent-sized nation has lost its way in addressing wide inequalities that go back to colonial times.

…A year after hosting the 2016 Summer Olympics, Rio is so broke that thousands of public workers are not being paid, or are being paid late in installments. Many budget items, from garbage collection to a community policing program, have been sharply reduced.

To the modernist mind, it seems like the solution is to bring back those social welfare programs, when in fact it is those same programs that are impoverishing the nation. Just as globalism destroys a sense of national identity, socialism destroys any social order, and creates huge masses of drones who know nothing but their hunger.

By the same token, we know that diversity programs have failed because we have more racial violence than ever before. We know that our foreign policy of non-intervention has failed as nuclear weapons proliferate. Our people are miserable and suffering health effects because we have made life a horrible experience of mindless jobs, endless red tape and broken, rotting cities. The American dream is over:

A key measure is whether people have trouble with an “activity of daily living,” or ADL, such as walking across a room, dressing and bathing themselves, eating, or getting in or out of bed. The study showed the number of middle-age Americans with ADL limitations has jumped: 12.5 percent of Americans at the current retirement age of 66 had an ADL limitation in their late 50s, up from 8.8 percent for people with a retirement age of 65.

At the current retirement age of 66, a quarter of Americans age 58 to 60 rated themselves in “poor” or “fair” health. That’s up 2.6 points from the group who could retire with full benefits at 65, the Michigan researchers found.

Cognitive skills have also declined over time. For those with a retirement age of 66, 11 percent already had some kind of dementia or other cognitive decline at age 58 to 60, according to the study. That’s up from 9.5 percent of Americans just a few years older, with a retirement age between 65 and 66.

Much of this involves middle-aged white Americans, who gave their lives to careers and watched the money be drained from them for the purpose of paying off our non-white underclass.

Again and again, Leftist social programs and bad financial sense are linked because to the Left, ideology is all that matters. This means that common sense and reality are far away, and those are sacrificed to give us the ideological purity we seek. We chase that chimera over the cliff and to our own doom.

For the West, the decision looms: do we finally rid ourselves of the parasite of Leftism, and go instead toward the methods that have made timeless greatness out of every civilization that has adopted them? Or do we, cowed by peer pressure, choose instead to follow the path to certain doom like Venezuela and Brazil?

Recommended Reading