Among other peaks of this phenomenon, California shows us a white suicide rate four times that of Hispanics. How can this be? ask the over-educated, under-qualified, and ideologically-compliant bureaucrats, scientists, lawyers, engineers, and politicians. It’s simple: you are taking from whites to subsidize Hispanics, while telling whites that the future is non-white, all while making society a hamster wheel of compliance to soulless jobs, endless paperwork, keeping up with the Joneses, and eternal war. This bothers white people, whose fragile but deep souls are afflicted by emptiness and meaninglessness, but not Hispanics, who like all third worlders simply assume that the world is without meaning and focus only on themselves. For this reason, democratic industrial society (does that really acronymize to Dis?) wants to replace Western European people, who are complex and demand meaning, with simpler races like the Irish, Italians, Slavs, Asians including Hispanics, mixed-race middle easterners, mulattos, metis and Negroes. Not surprisingly, white people are aware of this, and the existential misery of their lives, the damage caused by wealth transfer, and the awareness of their own genocide makes them willing to die out. Soon society will have killed the goose that laid the golden eggs, and we will get another third world society in which a few rich idiots rule over the rest of the idiots, a massive tribute to human cleverness!
Democrats are outraged to find some of their own support removing “net neutrality.” This group — mostly Irish, Italian, and Hispanic from the looks of it — apparently took money from ISPs. Why do ISPs want net neutrality dead? If 90% of your traffic goes to Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Reddit, Twitter, Spotify, Netflix, and Wikipedia, shouldn’t those sites pay more or at least be slowed down so that everyone else has a chance? The internet’s decentralized model of “routing around obstructions” fails when the herd shows up and they all want to do the same stuff all the time. The opposite of this situation would be the old internet, where there were no centralizing authorities like Google and Facebook, and instead we used distributed protocols like IRC and USENET.
The last several centuries have shown humanity exploring the concept that instead of having a single person responsible for decisions, we could spread it among many to divide power, and spread the cost among many more to subsidize externalized costs so that no one bore the brunt of any decision. In other words, we could create a world where no one was responsible for decision-making and everyone was insulated against the impact of those decisions, like insurance or unions do for their members. It seemed brilliant! Then we found the downside: the constant infighting that it requires causes people to shut off their minds and stop paying attention. If you believe Hegel (do not) history consists of swings of a pendulum between two opposites, finding an eventual compromise; if you believe a more sensible theory, then history consists of humans trying the same dumb stuff again and again, eventually running out of options and going back to what actually works instead of what our big brains tell us should work. People are tired of the internal conflict, so they are going to strong power, because at least that way, someone is responsible and accountable if things go wrong, instead of a parliament shrugging and blaming “the system,” voters shrugging and blaming “the vote,” and society as a whole shrugging and blaming “politics.” Someone is to blame, always, but we have designed our soft power systems to hide who that is and make the rest of us pay, every time, and we knew that eventually we would run out of extra money to use to absorb externalized costs, and so now that we have reached that point, people are more comfortable with single leaders having a lot of power.
French yellow vest protesters that government fix problems, so it did what republican governments do, which is to raise taxes and then throw money at the problems. This has raised France’s national debt ceiling to the point where it is past EU rules. That causes problems because Italy, who is being persecuted by the EU for daring to leave the warm water pool of mainstream Leftism, has been penalized for raising its own debt. The Italians now demand that the same rules that apply to the French apply to Italy, and hope to achieve that without the overhead of several weeks of violent rioting.
After six decades of American politicians ignoring this problem, Trump has turned our focus to the Chinese and their constant incursions and Asiatic meddling in our country and the West as a whole. This has upset the Left, who we will likely find in the future were heavily paid off by the Chinese, probably even before the Clintons. The Asian mind is exclusively individualistic, and likes to think that it has out-maneuvered everyone else in advance, which we might call a “chess-playing” mentality. This does not work so well in reality which is not bounded into a narrow scope of possibilities as chess is, and explains why Asian empires produced great potential and little payoff time and again through history. China will not hear of this, because individualists are inherently narcissistic, and wants to believe that it has planned for the future and gamed everyone else. In reality, China will succeed only because of the incompetence of the West in adopting the egalitarianism that has divided it — perhaps with the help of Chinese bribes to ensure that diversity and pluralism got mainstreamed — which will then eat up what is left of the West. Then China will take over, and then it will fail again as it has failed in the past, leaving behind a mixed-race population in the West from which no greatness will ever come.
Great, let California fund it. If they are the ones who determine how their forests are managed, then they are the ones who must pay for whatever outcome of that management occurs. Even more, it makes no sense for this heavily Leftist state to sit around bragging about how powerful its economy is when so much of its expenses are paid for by the rest of the nation. We hear so much about how the blue states pay into our economy while the red states are the biggest recipients of welfare, and yet we never hear about how many infrastructure and maintenance costs are thrust onto the rest of us by the blue states, who being the most populous have massive needs like stadiums, bridges, and, of course, cleaning up from the fires they created with their reality-denying hippie view of forest conservation.
As an example of truths that our society makes taboo: the wealthier are healthier because they are genetically healthier. People with greater genetic health are smarter, taller, thinner, and live longer. They also tend to succeed more in school and careers, mainly because they have greater mental abilities. This is the result of genetics. People are not equal. Throughout history, the health gap between the rich and poor has always been wide because the rich are designs for human beings that are more effective, while the poor are designs for human beings that are less effective. Think of it as BMWs crowding Fiats off of a highway. No matter how many expert artisans you have assemble a Fiat, it is a less effective design, and so it will always be stuck in the shop (“Fix It Again, Tony!”). The BMW will be faster, last longer, and more fun to drive, even if some of us are personally not BMW fans. If the Fiat factory made BMWs, they would still run longer and better than Fiats made at the BMW factory. It’s the same way with human beings. Some of them have better genetics than others, and those with better genetics tend to live longer and require less health care, which in turn means that their health outcomes are better, since they live into their 80s or 90s without major medical interference. The poor, on the other hand, often die relatively young from a collection of maladies like diabetes which are driven both by bad genetics and bad lifestyle choices resulting from those genetics. The Left knows this, but they want more money for government so that it can hire more parasites like them, so they are always wailing about the fact that the wealthy live well and the poor live… poorly.
Look at this from a practical position: the best women out there will not be the kind of tools who think a career is a life in itself. They will want it all, including family. This means that at some point in their 20s or early 30s, they will be departing their career for two decades in order to raise a family of two to four children. This means that if you educate the best women, you end up with students who do not go very far. However, the worst women will do well in your program, go on to have a career instead of a whole life, and be successful in the bureaucracy but not in achieving real-world results like the best will. If you educate women, you ensure that you dedicate half of your class to promoting the worst, and you exclude men who could instead go out there and work for fifty years, thus returning more endowment, fame, and knowledge to the university. It simply does not make financial sense to educate women, nor does it work for society, since we are getting the career-as-life types who are good at school but blockheads in real life. Cases in point: Angela Merkel, Theresa May.
The Left always demands “accountability, accountability” so surely they cannot oppose this. If we find out that 90% of Google are Leftists, it will become clear that bias is a fact of life at that company. The Left will not see it this way, and cry “McCarthyism!” but we know now that McCarthy was correct: there were Communists in the American government, and since the stated goal of Communism was to destroy sovereign national entities and replace them with a worldwide government by the workers, it was not unreasonable to see Communists as a threat. The same is true of regular Leftists; they differ in degree based on how confident they are of power. All of Leftism is a spectrum from anarchist through Communist, and to make a Democrat into Stalin, you just give him or her enough power to believe that no consequences will arise. Imagine a peasant as king; sure of not being punished for his actions, he indulges his basest fears, but starts with achieving total control so that he will not be accountable. The same is true not just of the modern Left, but the Left in every age, and anything that thinks like them.
We told you that it was stupid to elect a counterweight to Trump. You, the voters, decided you knew better and that since “absolute power corrupts absolutely,” the best thing to do was to elect Democrats. Oh, how witty and clever are the proles! After all, our political system is based on divided power, not just on a Constitutional level but democracy itself. In reality, however, divided power translates to “constant infighting” and as a result, an inability to achieve anything. The voters will complain about that as they go to the polls next time, angry and jauntily determined to vote in the opposite party, not realizing that the problem is of their own creation. Democracy is suicide.
Can we admit that public television, like public radio, is Leftist propaganda, yet?
Before Trump, China demanded that any European company wanting to do business in China had to hand over its technology so that Chinese companies could compete. They depended on the egalitarian notion that whoever is successful owes to the unsuccessful a duty to lift them up, since if we are all equal it is merely chance and oppression that caused some to be less successful than others! After Trump, Europe finally grew a pair and is telling China that it does not get to be a free rider on European technology.
More diversity crime/terrorism. In America, we have school shootings because diversity — the need to have a standard that includes everyone despite fundamental dissimilarity — has made our schools such prisons that students would rather die than keep attending. In Europe, there are constant Allahu Ackbar events. When do we admit that diversity just does not work? It offends us to say that because, as egalitarians, we are committed unto death to the idea that everyone is equal or at least should be made equal by government, and pointing out that different groups are different strikes us as unfair and destabilizing to the careful mental edifice we have built on the foundation of the Big Lie of equality.
Conservatives fail for the same reason that societies fail: majorities are not united by one single idea like their challengers. The Left has equality; jihadis have conquest; Africans have conquest; Arabic Semites have profit. What does the majority have? Well… you see… it’s sort of this nebulous idea of continuing what we have been doing, and something something about culture, and maybe “muh values,” and we like our television and shopping and, well, no one really knows, when you get right down to it. The same is true of conservatives. The “big tent” has no idea what unites it other than “gosh, those Leftists sure are nucking futs, aren’t they?” Leftism = egalitarianism; conservatism = conserve the best of the past. The latter will never be as simple and focused like the former, which like a laser can cut through anything but does a far poorer job of reassembling the pieces. For conservatives to win anything, the dummies — who are generally lazy armchair individualists who will read things and decide they are true but someone else had better implement that because there’s profit to be made elsewhere — need to unite on a vision. We do not, actually, need “a plan” as all of the dummies will wail about. A plan is a substitute for a vision. We need to know what kind of society we want, and we need to state it plainly, although leave the details off as we will figure those out in time. Richard Spencer’s “wheat fields and spaceships” is more compelling than anything that the Right has cooked up for years, and Farage’s hints about what Brexit might bring unite the constituents of the Right, while these bickering queens will induce any conservative voter to stay home.
More blockheads on the Right. Kavanaugh abandoned abortion because the right way to fix this is through a federal law, not the courts, where any effort is doomed to fail because of the heavy Leftist slant of the courts for the last century and a half. Abortion is a loser for conservatives, who trade off every victory for token symbolic victories on abortion, only to have those erased by the Left in the next cycle because the Left focused on the real goal, which was gaining power. Trump showed the Right that it must simply gain power, and then it can work out the details like abortion, but all the wide-eyed morons out there respond to symbols and not reality and so they will gladly trade “muh borts” for winning, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Kavanaugh did right.
No one wants diversity. The herd, however, adjusts to itself, and so votes for diversity. This means that people have a “diversity is fine, but not here” mentality as a compromise. Naturally, this leads to frequent outbursts of silliness like the above. If people just put their energy into saying DIVERSITY DOES NOT WORK as frequently as possible, it would be more effective than trying to keep Africans out of your local pool.
Any time there is discontent, government has a solution: more free stuff! This then backfires and causes more discontent. Repeat until bankruptcy.
Modernity could well be described as the age of the sophomore, or “wise fool.” Theresa May knows how to work the system, which means obeying every rule and getting buy-in by all parties. Women naturally excel at this, which is why failed societies are usually matriarchal; power was handed to women before the collapse. However, being good at the system — compromise, the committee, the letter of the law, the symbol, the process, and what is popular — seems to be the opposite of perceiving what is necessary in the real world. As a result, May has won at the game but lost at the goal.
Tell yourself again how you do not live in a neo-Soviet society. Apparently, this comedian was warned about a “no tolerance policy” on topics including racism, sexism and transphobia. Naturally, he refused to sign; this means he could not perform. Instead of throwing people in gulags, now, we simply shadowban them from our society so that we can continue pretending that everything is working fine when in fact the things protected by our bans on racism, sexism, and transphobia — respectively: diversity, working women, and sexual obsession — are all failing violently around us every day. Most citizens just want to keep the ball in the air long enough to retire and die. Their kids are doomed but oh well, democracy is all about the individual.
There is no way that we can avoid a recession, because after a period of demand-side economics, there is always a recession. The same happened after Clinton. Demand-based economics, the economic philosophy of the Left, creates high demand for our currency but fails to back it up with anything tangible, so it works like an advertising arc: first people buy a whole lot of the product, and then the trend fades, and at that point, the Beanie Babies or bread-making machines are worthless since the herd has moved on. Trump has brought us back to supply-side economics, or backing up our value by producing things, which does not result in the quick but illusory growth that demand-based economics does, and therefore is less popular, but also less prone to catastrophic recessions. Since the 1930s, we have pursued the demand-side economics chimera, and it has given us great booms but equally profound busts. Trump is racing against time to steal back US industry from China and allow us to produce again, so that we can ride out this recession quickly. A Democrat Congress will impede him so that they can blame him and then revert us to their Socialist-style demand-based economics, setting the groundwork for the next recession at just about the time that a conservative next takes office. And so the cycle continues, round and round, until we finally go bankrupt and just explode.
People have become pathologically afraid of the fact that things as they were failed, and now we are going in a new direction. People fear change. People depend on government and the continuing illusion of equality. They cannot visualize anything but this, and so they react like monkeys, flinging fruit at the symbol of their fear.
Somehow, they forgot to include Nordic-Germanic people, mainly because in a group of people, you can never protect the strong, only the weak, which is why former empires are comprised entirely of weak people.
People do not want integration. They want places for their own people. Only those in the grips of moronic egalitarianism think otherwise, mainly because their personal pretense requires that everyone be the same so that they personally do not feel threatened that someone else is ahead of them in some way. This is the mentality of losers, not winners. Winners seek to find some area where they can get ahead. For minorities, this means minority spaces; for white people, it means reclaiming America; for Western Europeans, it means reclaiming America and sending everyone else — including non-Western Europeans — back.
Someone finally says the blunt truth: taxpayers are maxed out caring for our poor, so we do not need any others. Once people accept that, maybe they will look at our $22 trillion debt that reflects a budget of which more than 60% goes to entitlement programs, and figure out that “we” cannot care for “our” poor first at either. In fact, we cannot afford entitlement programs, period, and we never could. The whole thing was a Leftist con. Then we have to decide whether we want to give up and die rather than do what is unsociable, or be bravely unsociable and abolish the entire entitlements system, realizing that this means that government will shrink and the civil rights agenda will die, returning us to America before 1865 and also, ensuring that we might have a future.