Why Trump Is a Disaster: Principled Liberals, Progressives and Leftists Never Vote for the Right, Period, for any Reason, Ever

Zamfir: I’m surprised you have a strong preference for Democrats over Republicans. To me it seems like a hopeless choice. If you vote Republican you’re voting for one set of evil elite interests, but not explicitly against your biology and cultural heritage; if you vote Republican you’re voting for another set of evil elite interests, and explicitly against your biology and cultural heritage.

Hard to pick between those two! What is the real advantage in voting Democrat in your opinion? (I guess I’d vote for Bernie, but then again I’d vote for Trump for similar reasons… Not that I expect either one would ever do much on anything I care about.)

I am a man of the Left. I always have been and always will be. I never vote conservative or reactionary ever for any reason. I am practically a Marxist. I would rather eat a bullet than vote for the Right. They are my class enemies. I vote my class interests. I vote populist. I vote for the people, for the workers. The rich can go walk off a cliff. The corporations are the enemy, and they need to drop dead.

The Democrats are incredibly better on most of these things.

I don’t care about my cultural heritage and my biology. Why is muh cultural heritage important? It’s silly and it means nothing. Why is muh biology important? That’s nonsense too.

See, this support for Trump is all flowing from race or maybe racism stuff. I said earlier than everyone who gets on this race train will vote Republican for the rest of their lives.

11 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Democrats, Labor, Left, Marxism, Political Science, Politics, Racism, Republicans, US Politics, White Racism

11 responses to “Why Trump Is a Disaster: Principled Liberals, Progressives and Leftists Never Vote for the Right, Period, for any Reason, Ever

  1. Jason Y

    I don’t care about my cultural heritage and my biology. Why is muh cultural heritage important? It’s silly and it means nothing. Why is muh biology important? That’s nonsense too.

    ??

    See, this support for Trump is all flowing from race or maybe racism stuff. I said earlier than everyone who gets on this race train will vote Republican for the rest of their lives.

    I don’t like it but Mexicans due to their manipulation by NWO drove it and also Indians. Well, Indians would be the ones pissing off the South Park/4 Chan College types.

    it’s because these immigrant groups are racist, aside from occasionally hiring white staff to please locals, and this drives up white racism.

  2. Jason Y

    I mean

    I don’t care about my cultural heritage and my biology. Why is muh cultural heritage important? It’s silly and it means nothing. Why is muh biology important? That’s nonsense too.

    A seeming contradiction of what you’ve said before.

    • I am living in a 67% Mexican town. What race? What culture? What biology? What heritage. There’s nothing left anyway. Zamfir does not understand that California is already deracinated. There’s nothing left to save.

      • First of all, California is a Mexican territory by nature, invaded only of late by Anglo-Saxons and Jews. It is Mexican not only because of its original inhabitants which were more or less the same kind of Amerindians that are still peopling the neighbouring regions of Mexico, though mixed with Spaniards, but also because of these very Spaniards and other Latin people who are most akin to over-sunny, mediterranean climates such as is California’s exactly like Southern Spain’s. Anglo-Saxons are no more at home in California than they are in Gibraltar, their presence in such a climate cannot but look most unnatural. The only Jews that should be there are the Sephardic ones, those who are historically accustomed to be among Latin or other Southern European people, those of Ashkenazi origin have their place in New York or Chicago but not in California. All North American land has been stolen for sure but at least the plains were settled by people coming from more or less the same soils and climates in Germany, central Europe and Russia, in the same way New England can be described as a greener version of England with a longer hot growing season. But conquering California was the ultimate sin of hubris for Anglo-Saxons and Ashkenazi Jews, like conquering a paradisiac promised land before being allowed into it in reward for their virtues : these people are not created to inhabit a mediterranean climate, they ruin it and they also ruin themselves in the process : California was meant to be inhabited by people less intent on transforming the land through technology and far more so through an evolved artistic culture. The so-called Conservative Revolution that ended up transforming America into another bigger Latin American hellhole by making a cardinal sin of being concerned by social justice instead of being more aware of oneself started in California.

        Second point : Whiteness, even though based on some biological facts, is a social construct more than a biological reality. Latin and other Southern European people never mixed well historically with Nordic people, mixing with Semitic people or even with not so White North Africans was always easier for them. The real problematic racial divide is about the vale of Loire in France and about the vale of Po in Italy, not about the Atlas, despite the fact that the Berbers of Atlas are most often of clearer skin than Englishmen of old stock.

        • Zamfir

          About your second point: Let’s grant all this for the sake of argument, how does it support your claim that whiteness is more social than biological? I think you’re saying that certain white sub-groups prefer to mix with certain non-white sub-groups instead of certain other white sub-groups.

          That seems roughly true, but its consistent with the idea that the white race is a purely biological entity.

          Of course, if the “mixing” includes lots of sex between white and non-white sub-groups over generations, you’ll end up with mixed white/non-white groups. Definitely southern Italians and lots of Spaniards are examples of this.

          But in that case we can say that (i) real biological whiteness is a spectrum concept, with a bit of vagueness like most concepts in biology, and (ii) some people and groups that are sometimes classified as ‘white’ are really only sort-of-white or part-white. I think that’s about right.

          If we say whites are basically people derived from indigenous European populations, or the Euro branch of the Caucasian race, then lots of southern Italians are borderline cases. Same for many Jews, possibly Berbers, etc.

          Then what is “socially constructed” is not whiteness itself but instead the folk concept of whiteness that has developed in the last few centuries. But there’s no reason we can’t just refine this folk concept a little and end up with a perfectly respectable biological category.

          And a question: When you say Latins and Nordics never mixed well, isn’t that false? What about the Roman Empire, or early ‘dark age’ France and Spain? Wasn’t this the mixing of Latin and Nordic (and Celtic) peoples? I’d argue that the majority indigenous population of France today has lots of Latin-Nordic mixes. (Pretty sure I am one myself…?)

  3. Jason Y

    Note Christians are useful idiots in this paradigm. The Alt Right like Spencer and the like hates Christians but just use them cause they some things in common like homophobia.

  4. Zamfir

    “See, this support for Trump is all flowing from race or maybe racism stuff.”

    I don’t understand why caring about my own ethnic group or culture is “racism” or similar to “racism”. It seems like a perfectly normal universal human concern. (And I assume that “racism” is meant to be something really bad.) Koreans like being Korean.

    They feel comfortable in a place where they are the majority, where people speak Korean and understand Korean customs and care about Korean heritage and history. Black Americans tend to like Black American culture (or some things about it anyway).


    They feel comfortable with their own people, and they have a special concern for the interests and well being of their own people. This is “nonsense” to you? (Or is it only nonsense when white people have exactly these same kinds of concerns?)”

    But in any case, I didn’t appeal to anything like that in the post you’re discussing. I didn’t say that white Americans should vote for one party or the other because they care about the white race or Euro-American culture.

    “Instead, I said it seems crazy to vote for Democrats because they are explicitly against whites as a group and white-Euro culture as a culture. So my point was not “Vote for a party that represents your racial interests” but rather “Don’t vote for a party that singles out your race for irrational blame and hate”.”

    “And that is what the mainstream of the Democrats tend to do. Think of the hysteria over Trayvon Martin or Michael Brown, for example. They very aggressively attack whites and white America, every chance they get; they love to demonize whites and blame them for the problems of blacks and other non-whites, even when there’s no rational basis for such charges.

    You’ve often said you can’t support man-hating feminism because you are a man, and you’re not going to support people who are against men. Fair enough. But isn’t the same point valid here? If you’re white you have good reason to (at least) not support people whose main hobby is whipping up irrational non-white hatred of whites.”

    But in any case, since the Democrat establishment obviously doesn’t care at all about American workers, and is not in any real sense a Leftist party, there’s no reason for you to prefer them as a Man of the Left.

    • Well maybe you are not a racist, but 99% of the people who have this philosophy you do are racist. They don’t just love their own. They hate the others too. Almost all of them do. They deny it but hang around with them long enough and eventually it comes out in all of them.

      No humans have ever cared much about people called “Whites” before anyway. They were split into many tribes many of whom hated each other and many separate culture. They didn’t see themselves as one group and they still do not. And no one cared much about their biology before either. People just mixed racially and no one cared much.

      Koreans are some of the most racist people on Earth. Bad example. Anyway, immigrants can assimilate to Korean culture and speak Korean. It’s not a problem. The newcomers will just become new Koreans the same way the Black guy become a Breton.

      Blacks don’t care about biology and many Blacks hate Black culture or certainly some Black cultures for obvious reasons: they are inferior cultures. Many Blacks act pretty White now. Blacks marry out at pretty high rates. They are already mixed race people anyway and no one seems to care if they get mulattized.

      I care about the interests and well-being of myself, not “Whites.” How does voting pro-White benefit me?

      Yes but if you go into the voting booth and pull the lever on White race, you will end up voting Republican and reactionary forever. It’s no secret why everyone like this is a Republican. This is why you considered voting Trump even though you oppose what he is mostly about – rightwing economics and an oligarchic ruling class economic project.

      “Don’t vote for a party that singles out your race for irrational blame and hate”.

      The Democrats don’t do that. You are confusing Democrats with SJW fools and BLM types. Most Democrats are not like that, and idiots like that are not common in the party.

      I used to hang out on Daily Kos all the time. That is the base of the Democratic Party – the left wing of the Democratic Party. On that site you rarely hear anyone say anything anti-White. There are some idiot radical Blacks on there who inveigh against Whites on their own diaries, but the White Democrats don’t read that. Most commenters are White. In a typical thread you never hear anything against Whites because posters are mostly White anyway.

      This is a caricature of the party. You are talking about out and out Leftists, not Democrats. The Democrats are a Centrist party.

      When I vote Democrat, I don’t feel like I am voting anti-White. None of the candidates I vote for ever say anything anti-White and the Democrats around here are pretty conservative anyway.

      The Trayvon and Michael Brown bullshit is understandable, but that BLM crap is not a big part of the party. There’s so much more to the party than BLM garbage, which is nonsense anyway. Cops are not singling out Blacks to kill them in a racist manner. Cops are just pigs. They abuse most arrested suspects pretty badly.

      “They very aggressively attack whites and white America, every chance they get;”

      You never hear this on Daily Kos or on Alternet, the Atlantic, Slate or other liberal sites I read. Most writers and commenters are White on those sites anyway. Why would the White readers and commenters attack Whites. You are talking about a small group of Leftists and Black idiots who no one cares about or reads anyway.

      “they love to demonize whites and blame them for the problems of blacks and other non-whites, even when there’s no rational basis for such charges.”

      You don’t hear much about this on Daily Kos and the other sites above. Anyway this Blacks are their own worst enemies and the cause of most of their own problems is a non-starter.

      To the extent that actual racism still exists, those publications talk about it and for good reason. Right now we have our hands full with out and out obvious and blatant racism in Trump’s party that we don’t have much time to spend demonizing Whites. That’s way down on the list of concerns anyway. Mostly those sites have their hands full attacking obvious and blatant Jim Crow racism in the Republican Party now anyway.

      “You’ve often said you can’t support man-hating feminism because you are a man, and you’re not going to support people who are against men.”

      Yes but I support equity feminism, and I support women.

      “If you’re white you have good reason to (at least) not support people whose main hobby is whipping up irrational non-white hatred of whites.”

      Most Democrats don’t hate and demonize Whites the same way feminists do. Feminists are actually pushing laws now to get us fired from our jobs, ruin our careers, put us in jail or prison, in short, these bitches are trying to kill us. They have declared war on us.

      There’s nothing remotely like that going on against Whites. Some BLM is like that but no one listens to them. Some radical Blacks are like that like the New Black Panthers and Nation of Islam but even most Blacks can’t stand those people. The Black Panthers have come out strongly against the NBP. Blacks have not declared war on Whites. If they did Alpha would not be my co-blogger here. She would never have gotten an invite. Anyway, my co-blogger is married to a White man so she doesn’t hate us anyway.

      Also you cannot refer to the Democratic Party as the Democrat Party on here. That’s Republican propoganda and I ban on that.

      The Democrats are a Hell of a lot more for workers, ordinary people and folks like me and mine than Republicans are. And the Democrats are getting more leftwing on economics and starting to support workers more and more. The Sanders wing of the party is very pro-worker. The Hillary wing just wants an incremental and slow progressive project.

      You are thinking of the DNC wing. Of course they are crap, but there is a Civil War in the party now between DNC types and more progressive Sanders types. Even the DNC types are so much better than Republicans though. They don’t help us much but they do not declare war on us like Republicans do.

      Everyone on the Left either votes Democrat or if they are far Left, probably don’t vote or vote third party. No one on the Left votes for the Right for Chrissake!

      • Zamfir

        This seems partly true but partly false:

        “No humans have ever cared much about people called “Whites” before anyway. They were split into many tribes many of whom hated each other and many separate culture. They didn’t see themselves as one group and they still do not. And no one cared much about their biology before either. People just mixed racially and no one cared much.”

        I agree that people in the past were not often especially concerned about whites as a race. (Though sometimes they were. Look at the US Naturalization Act of 1790.)

        But that’s probably just because most people were already living in highly homogeneous communities. They didn’t need to worry about racial identity because it was taken for granted. They weren’t living in places where millions on millions of racial others were streaming in.

        So yes, if you lived in medieval France you were more concerned about your regional culture and identity than your race. Just like most people now are more concerned about their national or cultural identity than the mere fact of being human.

        But that would probably change if all of a sudden we had millions of non-human space aliens colonizing the earth! Pretty sure in that case you’d begin to see ‘human identity politics’. And it would make sense, most likely…

        On the other hand, if you agree that different kinds of whites tended to see each other as aliens or even enemies–which is true–that suggests that they would have seen non-white groups as equally or more alien.

        I mean, if you presented a medieval Breton with a Zulu or a Samurai or something, I very much doubt he wouldn’t care about the differences. He’d most likely think this guy is even more alien than the Spaniards or Irish or whatever.

        This part seems definitely false to me:

        “Anyway, immigrants can assimilate to Korean culture and speak Korean. It’s not a problem. The newcomers will just become new Koreans the same way the Black guy become a Breton.”

        Both these examples are really implausible. Are you saying that if Korea admitted 50 million Africans, for example, Korean culture would survive by being transmitted to these new people–just because they might learn Korean? Only if you define the culture so vaguely or superficially that almost anything could count as the same culture. If that were to happen, it would basically be the extinction of any recognizable form of Korean culture.

        The newcomers already have their own very different ways and attitudes and beliefs and values. Those are partly rooted in biology and partly in a very different cultural system. It’s very unlikely that these people could really become “Korean” in any deep sense, or that their kids would preserve the culture.

        Elsewhere you said that California is already gone, has no particular culture or identity, etc. Right! There are now so many non-whites and Latin Americans that the state has lost the Euro-white culture it once had. These people came and learned English, mostly. They have jobs, mostly.

        Still, they have permanently changed the whole culture; they did not just assimilate and become Euro-Americans. And these are people whose racial-cultural background is not that different from that of the white majority.

        I don’t see how you can admit this is what’s happened in California while denying that white Americans stand to lose their culture if they keep getting swamped with millions of third world people, Muslims, Chinese, etc…?

        Of course, it could be that one black guy can “become Breton” in some sense. Maybe. Even then, it’s kind of weird. His biological otherness would be so obvious to him and everyone else that he’d never really fit in fully. Maybe if he married a Breton woman then in a few generations his descendants would be indistinguishable.

        But anyway: if we are talking about millions of black people moving to France and “becoming Breton” that’s just absurd. As a huge mass, there is no way that they can adopt the heritage and culture and behaviors of such an alien population.

        Would you say the same to the natives? For example, a million Frenchmen could come to the new world and just “become Sioux” or “become Mayans” by learning the local language?

        “I used to hang out on Daily Kos all the time. That is the base of the Democratic Party – the left wing of the Democratic Party. On that site you rarely hear anyone say anything anti-White.”

        I know there are some normal white people who vote Democrat. But I’m talking about the policies and actions the mainstream and leadership of the party. Obama was President and immediately took the side of Trayvon on national TV without knowing any facts.

        And it turned out he was totally wrong but no one cared, and no Democrat ever corrected him as far as I know. That’s not an anti-white action?

        Hilary had illegal immigrants and BLM people speaking at her rallies, etc. The Democrats are aggressively in favor of affirmative action, mass non-white immigration, etc. These are objectively anti-white policies.

        Obama repeatedly said the bullshit about ‘racial profiling’ and ‘structural racism’ in policing that BLM types say. The fact that many ordinary Democrats are not anti-white doesn’t change the fact that the orientation of the party itself–the leadership, the people who set the tone–is openly anti-white. At least there’s evidence for this view.

        • Jason Y

          Voting Trump in, even if to some degree the government, culture – had it coming, has no defense. It’s utterly despicable!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s