Category Archives: Culture

We Have No Choice – We Must Support the Democratic Party

Latias: Look at the comment section in this thread.

It really shows how anti-imperialist the Mainstream Left is. Look at the hostility the author gets.

From the author:

[There was a reference to Putin dining with Jill Stein]

Based on death toll, better to dine with Putin than 3 presidents in my lifetime — [W?] Bush, Reagan or Nixon. I prefer cooperation to confrontation. We don’t need a new Cold War. The world’s greatest human rights violator abroad (that’s the USA in case you don’t now) is in no position to throw stones from its glass house. The candidate you mention is not without flaws – she has some unscientific views and that’s practically inexcusable from a physician. But Putin’s crimes abroad pale in comparison to those of every single US president of my lifetime, present administration included.

Yes, that is true about Putin.

First of all, that’s not really the Mainstream Left in the US. That’s the Democratic Party, and calling the Democratic Party Left is some sort of a sick joke. Daily Kos is the site of the left wing of the Democratic Party (the base), but those people are what we might call liberal Democrats, and in my opinion, there are hardly any Americans more awful than these liberal Democrats, mostly because there is almost nothing liberal about them. Liberal Democrats in the US are basically rightwingers in most of the rest of the planet.

The problem is that both parties are utterly committed to horrific US imperialism. The US is the imperialist pig enemy of all of mankind, but both parties are just fine with that and the majority of the American people think it’s great too. So the imperialism is probably going to be one of the last things to go. Trump ran as isolationist, but he is now governing as a wildly crazed typical American imperialist pig. Recall how horrifically imperialist even Bernie Sanders was. This murderous imperialist pig crap is nearly woven into the very genes of Americans. It will be very hard to root out.

We have to support the Democratic Party though. We have no choice. They sort of suck, but the Republicans are 50X worse. And the Democrats do do quite a few good things. The problem is more that there is progressive agenda simply yields incremental change. I can live with Democrats. I can’t live with Republicans. The Republican Party is one of the most extreme rightwing parties on the whole planet.

Look, let’s get real here. The United States itself is one of the most extreme rightwing countries on the planet. That’s the people of the US. The people – Americans – are basically fanatically ultra-rightwing freaks. They are out of step with nearly the entire planet. There are hardly any nations on Earth as rightwing as the US.

The only country more rightwing than the US I can think of is Colombia. Show me any other country anywhere on Earth where majorities regularly elect parties that are as radical right as the US Republican Party. Show me one country, one.

Well I will say that the new British government is trying to copy the Republican Party. But I do not think even the horrific Tories are as bad as the Republican Party. But the Tories are probably one of the only countries on Earth that actually ape the US Republicans. US Republican Party conservatism is pretty much rejected across the board in most every country on Earth.

Just a question. How rightwing are the governments of the Baltics and the Czech Republic nowadays? I do not think they are as rightwing as the US Republican Party. Estonia and Latvia are horrible countries, and all of the Baltic countries are Nazi countries with Nazi populations. Ukraine is run by out and out Nazis and maybe half the population are out and out Nazis, but even they do not practice US Republican Party conservatism.

And the present government does not even have the support of the majority. The only reason they are in power is because they outlawed the main opposition party, murdered some of its lawmakers and quite a few of its activists, and tried to set the house of its presidential candidate on fire. They failed in the last one, setting his neighbor’s house on fire. Oh by the way, the Ukrainians had the full support of the US in all of us. The US supported them as they outlawed the opposition party, murdered opposition lawmakers and many activists and tried to burn the opposition presidential candidate to death. After all, this murderous Nazi party was put in by the US government in a US-sponsored coup.

4 Comments

Filed under American, Britain, Colombia, Conservatism, Culture, Democrats, Eurasia, Europe, Fascism, Geopolitics, Government, Imperialism, Left, Nazism, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Republicans, Russia, South America, Ukraine, US Politics

The Alt-Right, The Other Alt-Right, And The Rise Of The Alt-Left

Here.

There Are Two Alt-Rights, Not One, and the Alt-Left Is Poised to Defeat Both in the Next Decade

I don’t know who the  Hell he is talking about, but it sure ain’t us.

Leave a comment

Filed under Anti-Racism, Conservatism, Fascism, Left, National Socialism, Neo-Nazism, Philosophy, Political Science, Politics, Pop Culture, Racism, Republicans, US Politics, White Racism

Rioting at Trump Rallies, 2015

Here.

Put together by Trump supporters. Most footage from Fox News and local channels. It is said to be a compendium of video of the violence that Trumpsters have been “suffering” for about a year now.

That’s fake news right there.

Most of the video appears to be from a large Trump rally in San Jose that took place last year, I believe in the Spring. There was some pretty serious rioting at the rally from anti-Trumpsters.

Black bloc antifa are present but only in very low numbers.

Instead the rioters are regular Californians, mostly young people. Most of the rioters and protesters are Hispanics, and I would gather that almost all of them are Mexican-Americans. Chicanos in other words. I can assure you that there were few to no illegal aliens at that rally. I know how illegals look and act, and further, the language of the protesters is all or almost all perfect unaccented English. The only accent you can here is “Barrio English,” which is just a dialect of English adopted by Chicanos, almost all of whom have English as a first language. The dialect is an affectation and is not the result of interference from Spanish.

There are broadly two types of Chicanos, where Chicanos refers to mostly 2nd and 3rd generation Mexican Americans especially in California. These people have traditionally been ~70% White and ~30% Indian. The more Indian types have come in large numbers only in recent years.

These Chicanos are all native English speakers, and by the third generation, most no longer have fluent Spanish skills. So the language is going out in the 3rd generation, which is typical for any assimilating US immigrant group. These Chicanos are assimilated Americans in that they for the most part have given up Mexican culture for American culture. They retain somewhat more conservative values as far as sexual activity (favoring monogamy, especially for the females), sex roles (traditional roles are preferred), family ties (the family structure is usually very strong), and respect for elders (still strong, especially for parents).

The problem is not that Chicanos are not assimilating. It is that they are assimilating to something lousy. A lot of them assimilate to Barrio Culture. This is a subculture that is heavily gang-involved and is present in a lot of the poorer Chicano neighborhoods. However, many other Chicanos, even those who live right next to the barrios, are assimilating more or less to regular American culture, and they act little different from you, me or any other White person, which the exception of some the conservatism you see above.

This crowd is clearly a mix of Barrio types and more assimilated Chicanos. The Barrio types are mixed between overtly gang-involved types and others who are simply barrio dwellers who are not gang-involved.

Believe it or not, not everyone in a barrio is a gang member. Gangsters are only a small group, mostly young men, and most of them stay in the game for only a few years, often on the fringes, before they marry at age 18-23+, move in with a woman with kids or have kids or their own, and retire, usually completely, from gang life. Most so-called gang members are just wannabes who form their own fake sets by claiming a legitimate gang and try to say that they control some neighborhood. They are considered poseurs by the true gang members who might beat them up if the poseurs tried to claim the gang because all true sets have to be approved by the official gang in the area.

Even among the wannabes, most are not even members of the fake set. Instead they are hangers-on or so-called gang associates, who much outnumber gang members. Most of these types see almost no inter-gang warfare, do not spray much graffiti and do not victimize neighbors. They’re just trying to look hard by claiming Nortenos or whatever.

There are also quite a few of the more assimilated Chicanos mixed in with the Barrio types. Barrio Chicanos are pretty hard and tough, and you do not want to mess with them. Many have street gang experience. Beatings, knifings and shootings are quite common and Barrio Chicanos kill an awful lot of people, mostly rival gang members. Police often call these crimes as “NHI” or “No Humans Involved.” They are also referred to as “Public Service Killings.” It’s just one scumbag killing some other scumbag and doing society a favor in the process.

Most of the violence here seems to be coming from the Barrio types. These people have few inhibitions and low self-controls. They get riled up very easily. If these Barrio Chicanos ever start rioting over Trump, it is not going to be pretty. These guys don’t mess around.

There are also some militant young people there, often young White women. But these are in the minority. These are more or less university-aged SJW’s.

I was very surprised to see ordinary White SJW’s, Barrio Chicanos and Assimilated Chicanos burning US flags. I’m not sure if I have ever seen them do that before. That’s not a good sign, as a lot of these folks are pretty assimilated. When a lot of your assimilated, relatively nonpolitical citizens start burning your flag, that’s a bad sign for your country.

Some of the video also shows what looks like anti-Trumpsters blocking a highway in Arizona to try to stop a Trump rally there. This happened over the summer.

Bottom line is this is not the Left or liberals or even Democratic Party people. These rioters young people are on the fringes of active politics, if they even vote at all, and many of them don’t even bother to do that. This is more of an out and out ethnic riot between two ethnic groups, Chicanos and their White supporters versus mostly White Trumpsters. Sort of a Chicanos vs. Whites street battle if you wish. On the other hand, more or less openly ethnic riots pitching mostly one ethnic group against another is not a good sign at all. That is called ethnic strife, and it can lead to some pretty bad things, like Yugoslavia.

178 Comments

Filed under California, Crime, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Hispanics, Law enforcement, Left, Mexicans, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Republicans, US Politics, USA, West, Whites

Is Part of Bannon’s Project “Make America White Again”?

Subir: I don’t think people here appreciate the driving force behind the Bannon-sponsored immigration orders.

Bannon wants to reverse the demographic changes that have occurred in this country after the 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act was passed. This is about making America White Again. Very literally. Secondarily it is about Making America Christian Again.

That’s why the white-supremacists love Bannon and Trump. They want a separation of races and religions.

I will have to do a diary about this because people keep assuming this is about illegal immigration or employers or some other shit like that. It’s not. It’s about racial purity, plain and simple.

Ellid: We rarely agree, but I think you have a point on this. Bannon and the other racists do not at all like the idea of America becoming browner, even though demographically it’s inevitable.

These superb comments were taken from Daily Kos. I actually had never before thought of Bannon’s project in this way, but this may indeed explain his goals in part, and it also explains why he is such a hero to the Alt Right.

Some feel that Trump’s right-hand man Bannon has a “make America White again” agenda of reversing the White demographic decline after the 1965 Immigration Act and years of illegal immigration. There does not seem to be any sense to all of these anti-immigrant decrees except to attack immigrants solely on the basis that they are largely non-European. If immigrants were mostly Swedes and Italians, these anti=immigrant projects would not be underway.

Even the illegal immigration project is mostly about race and culture. If we had 11 million Norwegians and Portuguese illegal aliens living here, no one would care. In fact, there would be a clamor to legalize them.

This is why the White Supremacists on the Alt Right are so ecstatic about Bannon. These people also want to halt White demographic decline and even reverse it if possible. This is actual one of the Alt Right’s Number top projects, if not the top project. It is only in looking the demographic changes flowing from Bannon’s anti-immigrant decrees that these executive orders start to make sense. I believe that Bannon may indeed be on board with the White Supremacist project to halt White demographic decline and even reverse it if possible.

38 Comments

Filed under American, Christianity, Conservatism, Culture, Illegal, Immigration, Law, Legal, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Religion, Republicans, Sociology, US Politics, White Racism, Whites

Are Jews More Likely to Be Rude Loudmouths?

Here’s my token “anti-Semitic” post for the day. Enjoy.

I am running into the phenomenon lately of running into Jews, all males, who all fit the stereotype of obnoxious, rude, combative, know-it-all who know nothing, arrogant, cocky, condescending, belligerent loudmouths. I am talking about the sort of person who when they talk to you, seem to be asking for a punch in the face. It’s that style of verbal engagement.

Now obviously a lot of Gentiles, especially Gentile men, act this way too. We run into them all the time. But I can’t help notice Jew after Jew after Jew after Jew after loudmouthed Jew.

Obviously, both Jews and Gentiles (especially males) engage in this behavior. But I am wondering if Jews are more likely to act this way than Gentiles, statistically?

Am I hallucinating  here or am I onto something?

Footnote: I have actually been noting this most of my life, but earlier I was such a Judeophile that I blew it off.

Here are some remarkable recent comments from a Jewish commenter, Aaron, which seem to be saying that I am indeed onto something here and I am not hallucinating.

I would like to thank Aaron for these remarkable comments which are incidentally also very well written. Aaron is one of the best writers and especially thinkers on this site and we are honored to have him.

Aaron: The dirty little secret is that people who dislike Jews do so because they’ve had too many bad experiences with Jews, and for that you can’t be White trash in flyover country where there are almost no Jews. People who have never interacted extensively with Jews tend to have an idealistic attitude towards them.

I’m Jewish, and I have to admit that most of the antisemitic tropes about Jews are correct, broadly speaking. Jews tend to be extremely envious, competitive, full of anger, hatred and contempt towards others, and obsessed with money over all spiritual or aesthetic values. They are backstabbing and unreliable, even among friends.

Living among Jews is like living in Renaissance Italy – which is an early training for gaining and keeping power. Whats more, you begin to realize the Jewish reputation for genius is just self-promotion. Jews tend to be mildly intelligent mediocrities who are obsessed with success and money and achieve it using dishonest means and through obsessive self-promotion and marketing, which in a democracy, naive people don’t realize how effective it can be. As Wittgenstein, himself a Jew, said – at best Jews can have talent, but are never geniuses. All honest Jews eventually realize this.

Growing up Jewish, I thought our behavior was normal and everyone acted like this. It was only by leaving the community and traveling extensively did I realize that we Jews are actually very different and are actually in fact insane. When I tried to tell my Jewish friends that most people don’t act as bad as our community does, they insisted it’s just human nature and other people are the same or worse.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think its “genetic.” It’s a product of a very pathological Jewish culture, and Jews are themselves the first victims of all this. We grow up incapable of feeling happiness or love and with a burning obsession with success and money as if our very lives depended on it. Which, in a sense, is true, as our egos are so fragile we feel we will collapse and die if we don’t achieve “success”.

Is it any wonder that the Jewish country, Israel, has a reputation for coarse rudeness and a pathologically aggressive interpersonal style? And I’m not talking against Arabs but against fellow Jews. Israeli bosses are notorious for withholding pay – you have to fight them for your money. Yet this is exactly what Gentiles have been complaining about Jews since forever! Tell me, why isn’t Sweden or Norway renowned for bosses who withhold pay and for a crazy confrontational style?

If you look into the biography of antisemites, starting with Voltaire, you will find that they’ve been cheated again and again by Jews, and at a certain point couldn’t avoid pattern-recognition.

I say all this not to spread hate against Jews – Jews are as much victims here. The problem is the pathological, materialistic, neurotic obsessed culture Jews grow up in that produces psychopathic behavior inevitably. This culture needs to be addressed within the Jewish community itself, or we will continue getting into trouble and wondering why everyone hates us. But I don’t see much hope of that happening – we prefer to blame others.

Right, WN’s are taking a page from the Jews. Often they are quite honest about doing so – Jews are not that smart, but over the centuries they’ve developed amoral and ruthless strategies that help them gain and keep power. If your goal is simply power and nothing else – not creativity, not art, not philosophy, not civilization – you can go to no better school than the Jews. Of course, these tactics are parasitic, and if everyone does them society collapses, but I don’t think WN’s figured that out yet.

And you’re right about NE Asians too – the “new” Jews. Pathological ambition also infects this group.

Renaiissance Italy did not, after all, flourish for very long. These kinds of behaviors undermine societies.

Donald Trump was mentored by Roy Cohn, a Jew of course, and Trump’s behavior is obviously Jewish in tone and affect to anyone who grew up in NYC. Trump is simply a symptom of Jewish tactics making their way into the Gentile world – and this was inevitable, but it’s tragic all the same.

But if you read Alt-Right and WN websites like Occidental Dissent they are quite explicit about using Jewish tactics. Kevin MacDonald writes extensively about Jewish tactics and how whites should adopt them.

Well, they are, and it’s just going to get worse.

Corporate Jews and “intellectual” academic Jews have a strong thuggish element to them – read some bios of these types. It comes from the upbringing – the way it woks is, an unbelievably intense pressure is created for you to “succeed” so that failure seems like a fate worse than death. This generates the psychic energy that fuels an insane amount of anger and an insanely tenacious clinging to whatever it is your doing. Your life – your psychic life – is literally on the line for every small victory, and the waves of sheer panic and self-hatred that begin to emerge at the prospect of even the tiniest defeat is huge motivation.

It’s a terrible way to live for everyone involved.

Cooperation and altruism can be very effective survival strategy. Psychopathy is very self-undermining – I’ve been stabbed in the back out of sheer envy when I could have been a useful ally. But the psychopath cannot handle it if anyone else has anything good. There is nothing adaptive about this.

And in the long run, this kind of behavior rebounds on you. Look at what happened to the Jews in Germany. Yet it didn’t have to go down like that. The Germans were insane, yes, but if the Jews didn’t do their usual thing do you imagine it would have went down quite like that?

And look at how Jews are busy undermining their own position in America by supporting Muslim immigration out of hatred for Christians.

Psychopathy has its own set of motivations and imperatives that have very little to do with maximizing success and fitness and a lot to do with satisfying pathological emotions that undermine you in the long run.

114 Comments

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Conservatism, Culture, Israel, Jews, Middle East, Political Science, Politics, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Republicans, US Politics, White Nationalism

Yes, “Soft” Bad Boys Exist in the US

Jose: Here this kind of androgyne or quasi androgyne “bad boys” maybe exist in some little circles, like between goths or something like these. Because there is no place for them being seen as “bad boys” if are quite feminine. Real “bad boys” will kick their asses. A punk, skater, hip hopper, etc., can be accepted as bad boys (according to their behavior obviously). But not effeminate men. They will be mocked, and common “quiet” men will not take them as “bad”.

If a quite effeminate men have wild behavior, at some point, they moment will have to change their feminine side or hide it because he will have problems every day if he deals with “bad boys”. He will be mocked and attacked.

For being a thug you have to act like if you were in jail or something like this. Dress is not so important, as long as you don’t dress effeminate (this can carry many problems).

In other Latin American countries probably this goes much deeper. Something dressed like Marylin Manson or David Bowie pretending being bad (even if is bad) can’t walk quiet in the street with that attitude. It have to “accept” the mocking and be taken as a “faggot”. I think in Paraguay or even little cities of my region of Argentina if someone is like this, people will not be quiet even in a normal neighborhood. Normal people will mock someone like this, not only “bad boys”. Not to mention in working-class places or some towns that are quasi-rural and people that live there are entirely from working-class and lower-class.

In big cities it’s different because people are accustomed to see “rare” persons like that.

Effeminate and feminine are not the same thing. Effeminate means acting like a woman. Here in the US, mostly only homosexual men act truly effeminate. This is the sort of “faggoty” behavior seen in ~75% of gay men. But effeminate straight men are quite rare. I would be surprised in 1% of straight men are effeminate.

These guys were not really feminine at all, but they do have a soft side. The guys I knew were pretty bad. They were juvenile delinquents, drug dealers, surfers and they stole things like ten speeds and marijuana plants. They were almost like gang or street kids. But they were masculine enough that no one would ever want to fight them. It’s just that you could see a feminine side going in a lot of them. In the US we have quite a few men who have a very strong masculine side and then they have a pretty strong feminine side going too. As long as they have that good strong masculine side going, no will fight them or even mess with them. I knew some guys like this who were criminals! One guy was a huge drug dealer in San Fransisco. He kept his cocaine in one house, lived in another house, and I forget what the 3rd house was for.

You are confusing effeminate and feminine. Effeminate means acting like a woman. Feminine is just a soft sort of guy. But a lot of White men have hard and soft going at the same time because you can do that in our culture. As long as people can see that masculine side, no one cares about the soft stuff. It sort of becomes invisible. Plus if you have a strong enough masculine side going, most men just leave you alone, don’t challenge you, don’t mock you or make fun of you, and don’t start fights with you.

I live in what is almost a ghetto. It’s a barrio. But no one ever starts one single thing with me here. No one bugs me, starts fights with me, or even insults me. But I have a strong masculine side, and I get into it in this hood, and a lot of people have told me I look scary. One advantage to looking scary is that most people pretty much leave you alone and don’t fuck with you.

This why I doubt Trash’s comments that a White man will get his ass kicked or robbed for sure in this type of neighborhood.

But in US White society, you do not have to be macho or hypermasculine like in Latin American society. Here in the US a soft man can be a bad boy or even a criminal. For instance, I get called bad boy quite a bit. People see me in a store or something, and they start laughing and say, “Hey there, bad boy!” Or I will be talking to a woman and I give her one of my million dollar smiles and she starts laughing and says, “Ohhhh, you’re a bad boy!” And I am a pretty damn soft guy. But somehow I give off a bad boy vibe somehow.

Here in US White society, a bad boy is any sort of rebel who looks like he doesn’t play by the rules and has a sort of devilish air about him. Macho or hypermasculine behavior is not necessary anymore.

I used to wear men’s kimonos! I wore these things called short kimonos. It is actually Japanese men’s wear. You wear it over a shirt and pants. A lot of guys did hate it when I wore that. I would see guys who looked like they wanted to beat me up when they saw me wear that. But nothing ever happened. Plus women loved it when I wore that kimono. They went nuts over that thing, while the guys acted like I was wearing a dress and they wanted to beat me up.

But at that time, I was also a punk rocker with a permanent scowl who wore lots of leather and spikes. A lot of people acted like they were afraid of me, and usually nobody started anything.

20 Comments

Filed under Argentina, Culture, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Latin America, Man World, North America, Paraguay, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Sex, South America, USA, Whites

The AltLeft “Tea Party,” by Rabbit

The AltLeft “Tea Party”

Very nice new article about the Alt Left from Rabbit. I actually still like Rabbit. He is apparently not happy at with Trump. He described most of Trump’s Cabinet picks as “cringey” which is at the very least how I feel about them. Actually to me they are more like “”homicidal rage-inducing” but at this point, that’s a bit of a quibble. Rabbit is on the same page with all the rest of the Left on Trumpism except on the broad race, immigration and possibly trade policy stuff. But he already seems to be selling out the trade stuff horrendously. He’s selling out the immigration stuff too. Too bad the Mexicans aren’t going to pay for the wall. You and me are! Out of our pockets into the mitts of one of one of Trump’s billionaire pals via a rigged no-bid contract. Reverse Robin Hood again, but Reverse Robin Hood is all Trumpism is about anyway. Think about it. Real hard now.

and I don’t see how he could be given Rabbit’s base political beliefs. A lot of the rest of the left wing of the Alt Right has gone over to Trumpism, and to me, that’s all I need to sever ties with them once and for all.

The thing about Rabbit is the same thing that everyone gets wrong about the Alt Left. Rabbit is a Leftist, dammit. He really is a leftwinger. He’s a man of the Left. So many people just cannot wrap their heads around that. If you look at his views across the board, Rabbit is leftwing on just about everything but race and the Cultural Left, and even on the Cultural Left, he is with them on a lot more things than I am. Rabbit holds traditional leftwing notions on sexual orientation, gender identity, feminism, etc. He’s not a social conservative at all. In fact, he is to the left of me on a lot of that stuff. On the other hand, he seems personally red-pilled and he spent a lot of time in the Manosphere and the MGTOW movement before he drifted into the Alt Left.

If he’s leftwing on about everything but race and PC Culture, how the hell is he a rightwinger? I don’t see how missing one check box on the leftwing list of beliefs throws you out of the Left. Suppose we say Rabbit cannot be on the Left due to his views on race (a common notion). In fact, we say, his racial views make him a rightwinger no matter what else gets thrown into the mix. Ok, fine, cast him out.

He’s back over on the Right now. Rabbit gets handed the rightwing checklist. Whereas with the Left he failed to check one box, with the Right he fails to check 95% of the boxes. And somehow he’s rightwing? Forget it. Getting beyond left and right is said to be a well known trope of fascism, but so what? Maybe we do need to get beyond left and right and maybe we don’t have to be fascists to do that. In fact, the Alt Left is precisely all about getting beyond Left and Right to some extent, although we are still mostly on the Left. There’s nothing inherently wrong with heterogeneous politics, and this represents your average person’s views anyway. Homogeneous politics is synonymous with ideologues, and who needs them. Give me a sui generis heterogeneous political mix versus any sort of ideologue any day of the week.

Whatever you think of his stand on race, I believe that Rabbit is a very important thinker in our movement, and besides, let’s get real, race is only part of the package Rabbit is selling. You can still buy a custom package minus the race part. Furthermore, he is a superior chronicler and opinion-maker in our movement as a whole, and Rabbit doesn’t care if you don’t agree

It’s not often discussed, but I also like his media criticism, most of which centers around movie reviews. He has a quirky sense there too, focusing on films from the 1970’s. His architectural musings are also quite good, though I don’t know much about the subject. And there’s something about a guy who unironically lionizes Charles Manson

I also very much like his prose and also a lot of his quirky worldview. I am trained as an editor and Rabbit’s prose is what we call “clean copy.” You needn’t mark it up at all, and he’s saying it better than you the editor could anyway. The rules of English punctuation are quite arcane, and 95% of Americans screw them up. Rabbit’s pretty much got them down. You would think he was a J-major.

But as far as a writer goes, he is one of the finest writers in our movement. He’s a great writer! He should be published, and in fact, I believe he is just now as he deserves to be. As a writer, most of what I read is not really great writing. Only maybe 10% of the time do you read prose on the Net that truly sings right off the page. I don’t know if he’s better than I am, but it’s awful close. It’s at least a tossup, and that’s a compliment, as I dislike most other writers.

As long as he keeps away from racial slurs, his prose is worth it for the political theory and just for the pure aesthetic pleasure of it.

A lot of people want to throw Rabbit out of the movement. Funny because he just about co-founded it. Thing is, Rabbit ain’t going anywhere, nor should he. He’s staying right where he is whether we like it or not. Rabbit is stuck with the Alt Left, and we are stuck with him. We are stuck onto each other like damned remoras. And perhaps after all that is just as it should be.
teapartyalice

I know what you’re thinking, but no, I don’t mean “Tea Party” in the sense of the happy meal conservative movement that emerged in the early part of the Obama administration. Nor am I referring to anything relating to the Boston Tea Party or the American revolution.

I’m talking about the AltLeft and how for me it has come to resemble the tea party in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (1972 version of course!) This film was always on HBO in the mid 1980s, even though it came out in the early 70s. I believe the reason they began to re-air it in the 80s was because the star, Fiona Fullerton, had grown up and re-emerged as a Bond girl in “A View to a Kill,” which came out in 1985.

Anyway, when I first got involved with the AltLeft about a year and a half ago, in my mind it was always meant to augment the AltRight, not outright oppose it. It was a way to view and examine the affects of multiculturalism and political correctness from a cultural and economically left lens as well as from a secular and futurist perspective rather than the radical traditionalist, socially conservative one that dominates rightwing circles. In other words, recognizing the implicit Whiteness that underpins the identities of progressive cities like Seattle or Portland, and asserting that it must become explicit to some degree in order for those places to maintain their culture, aesthetic and quality of life.

It was to put forth the idea that someone can be pro-White without the albatross of traditionally conservative culture, pre-modern aesthetics, capitalist economics, or widely accepted Republican historical dogma (“the 60s were bad,” “Vietnam draft dodgers were traitors,” “McCarthy was right,” “I hate modern architecture,” etc.)

If you hang around rightwing groups for any period of time, you’ll find they have an assumed historical narrative that informs many of their beliefs. I say “assumed,” because they just take it for granted that everyone who agrees with them one issue such as race also accepts their historical framing of a wide range of other issues such as economic systems, religious beliefs, or aesthetic preferences (just as someone on the “Left” might assume that anyone who supports trans rights and raising the minimum wage automatically accepts the idea that racial diversity is always a good thing.) Not everyone buys the package deal.

manson

Unfortunately, the AltLeft has instead attracted a wide range of bizarre characters, each with their own zany ideas about what the AltLeft should represent. Many of them never read any of the original manifestos that I or Robert Lindsay or anyone else wrote or bothered to do any research. They just started using the term like they’d started a new band without checking to see if some other band was already using the name. That would be understandable if this were the pre-Internet days, but it seriously only takes like two seconds to Google. Others actually did thoroughly read this site and somehow managed to come to the conclusion their peculiar ideology was compatible with mine, despite it being a complete mystery to me what exactly was the point of agreement.

The AltLeft has come to attract all kinds of eccentric personalities, each one adhering to their own pet belief system. Worse than that, many have joined the AltLeft for the purpose of militantly opposing the AltRight, which is something I never intended to do (hence the reason I still use the tagline “the left wing of the AltRight.”) Though I disagree with him on a few ideological points…I happen to support Richard Spencer, and I have defended him numerous times when certain squeamish (and often prudish) factions as well as a few prominent figures of the AltRight unsuccessfully tried to throw him under the bus.

So when I interact with other people in the incoherent “movement” known as the AltLeft, it feels a lot like the sitting down at the tea party in Alice in Wonderland. It’s a group of outlandish castouts, contrarians, and vagabonds that have little in creatural commonality other than their politically idiosyncratic tendencies and behavioral eccentricities. Part of me finds this demoralizing, wondering why I ever bothered going down this rabbit hole and whether I can just climb out and forget the whole adventure. Yet the other part of me just embraces the gathering of this zany cast of characters for the sheer chaos that they have unleashed as we bounce off-the-wall ideas past each other and revel at the sight confounded normies that stumble into our world.

5 Comments

Filed under Cinema, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Democrats, Economics, Fascism, Feminism, Gender Studies, Left, Liberalism, Man World, Obama, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Republicans, Sane Pro-White, US Politics, Vanity, Writing

Romantic Orientation: An Unknown Factor in Sexual Orientation

100-0: Maximum heterosexual, minimum homosexual
90-10: Maximum heterosexual, incidental homosexual
80-20: Maximum heterosexual, significant homosexual
70-30: Maximum heterosexual, strong homosexual
60-40: Maximum heterosexual, very strong strong homosexual
50-50: Maximum heterosexual, maximal homosexual
40-60: Maximum homosexual, very strong heterosexual
30-70: Maximum homosexual, strong heterosexual
20-80: Maximum homosexual, significant heterosexual
10-90: Maximum homosexual, incidental heterosexual
0-100: Maximum homosexual, minimal heterosexual

That is my very own sexual orientation scale. I use it a lot in my counseling practice. What is odd is that everyone seems to like it a lot, and almost everyone gives me an almost immediate answer to where they are on the chart. This implies that most people know their sexual orientation at least deep down inside and few people are legitimately going round and round about their sexual orientation.

In my practice the only people I met who were going round and round about their sexual orientation were mentally ill. It doesn’t seem to be something normal people do. I think most adults know their orientation very well, but quite a few simply cannot admit it to themselves. Hence you see formerly married men “discovering they are gay” at age 45. They are not discovering a damn thing. They’ve known all along. The only  thing that changed was they stopped lying to themselves.

I like this better than the Kinsey Scale.

We really need another scale for romantic orientation.

I have known some lesbians who identified as 25-75 but identified as lesbian because they said that while men might be fun for sex, they could only fall in love with a woman. So it looks like self-labeling for sexual orientation can be based as much on romantic attraction as sexual attraction.

I have known women who had sex with both men and women but identified as straight as they only had relationships with men. They told me that relationships with women were straight up insanity time.

In fact, a number of bisexual women have confided in me that they did not like relationships with women because they were too nutty, which is something we men have been saying forever now. They told me that relationships with men were much more stable.

Woman = chaos + drama is how the equation works. All men have woman troubles. If you have a woman, you have woman troubles, period. Maybe you don’t if she’s mute, but even then she probably is capable of murderously dirty looks. Mute women have the advantage of knowing when to shut up and plus they can never give you the silent treatment. I think more men should look into relationships with mute women. It sounds like a neglected demographic. Generally the man is a stabilizing influence to the drama + chaos and women from partriarchal cultures are encultured or even terrorized into acting sane and decent most of the time.

Now you have two humans. One is drama + chaos and the other is drama + chaos. Ok, what do you think the result of that is? A Type 3 emotional hurricane I would say.

3 Comments

Filed under Culture, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sex, Women

The Old “Arab Israelis Have It So Good” Argument

Malla: Well, I did some research on this and it seems the Mizrahi had a more realistic opinion about Arabs and non Whites in general, while the Ashkenazim (and maybe Sephardics), especially during the early days of Israel, had a more idealistic opinion of the Third World. But the Mizrahi themselves are non-Whites. If Arabs and non-Whites then so are Mizrahis because Mizrahis are just Arabs. Besides, many Ashkenazis came with socialistic ideas of kibbutz farming and hippieness, while the Mizrahi were more realistic.

Check this interesting video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f80NnYflDU8

Check out the Ashkenazi/Mizrahi couple at 6:52. So it seems more Mizrahi (Middle Eastern Jews) are more right wing and support predatory violent behavior towards Arabs and Palestinians, while the Ashkenazis (Euro Jews) vote more left and are friendlier to Arabs (idealistic mindset). I do not know how the Sephardics and Ethiopians Jews vote.

Besides, Israel has a massive poverty rate, one of the highest in OECD countries. No wonder they get pissed by migrants from Africa taking way their jobs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SSd0rgTc1E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPuQwFX2J2A

But Israel has an overall high standard of living. Arabs in Israel, in spite of whatever racism they face, have a higher standard of living and social freedoms than most other Arab countries. Only Tunisia and Christian-dominated Lebanon come close in social freedom, and the Gulf states are the only ones who have more income among Arabs.

This is similar to the case in Rhodesia and South Africa where the Blacks had a higher standard of living than Blacks in the rest of the African continent. Or Singapore, where the Indians and Malays have a higher standard of living than Malaysia and definitely (much, much, much) higher standard of living than India thanks to the huge Chinese population. Singapore’s quality of life is comparable to other Chinese majority developed places like Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan. One may ask that if Anglo-Celts and other Northern Euros never came to Australia would such an Australia (Australia full of only aborigines) be so developed as it is today or it would be more like Papua New Guinea.

It’s pretty bad to compare the surrounding Arabs with New Guineans and Aborigines. The whole Arab World is built up to Hell. They’re all modern countries over there. I have seen photos of Libya before the war, and it looks like Miami. I saw a recent photo of Casablanca, and it looked like LA. I have seen photos of the rest of the region, even war-torn Syria and Iraq, and they look like regular modern countries. There’s not a lot of difference between in the ordinary street scene between Amman, Beirut, Damascus or even Cairo and Tel Aviv. It all looks the same, like any modern built-up country.

There is none of the horrible poverty you see in India, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Latin America or Black Africa.

Arabs will not tolerate that sort of abject shantytown type poverty. They are basically socialist people who don’t care about money too much and believe that everyone should be well taken care of. Social safety nets are ordinary things in every Arab country. There’s no debate about this sort of thing. They are not individualists. They are collectivists. And they don’t think rich people are better than poor people. They are not particularly greedy, and they have a “We are all part of one village” mindset wherever they live.

Semi-feudalism came late to the Arab World via the Ottomans, and it never worked well. There were landed gentry and fellahin, or landless peasants. Nasser was the man who confiscated the land from the land barons and gave it to the landless peasants. If you went around the whole Arab World back then, even in say Yemen, there was a portrait of Nasser on every wall. Now in Western or Latin American culture, doing that is called Communism, and everyone hates it. But the Arabs love this sort of thing.

Baath nationalist parties came in in Syria and Iraq around 1960, a revolutionary socialist state arose in Libya in 1969, and another one was birthed in Algeria in 1964. Land was confiscated from feudal latifundiaists in all of these place and distributed to the peasants. The governments were all officially socialist, secularization was enforced even at gunpoint if it took that, huge safety nets were set up, and the state even got involved in quite a few of the larger industries and became a major employer. All of this was wildly popular all over the region.

US style radical individualism and Libertarian free market capitalism is totally anathema to all of those societies. For one thing, it goes against Islam, as Islam is a socialist religion. In feudal times, large Arab landowners enlisted the help of the local imams in interpreting parts of the Koran where it said, “Some are rich, and some are poor, and that’s all just fine” or something to that effect, but it never worked well. It ended up turning the local imams into hated figures like the priests of Catholic Church in the West and Latin America who always sided with the rich against the people.

So this whole idea that the Israeli Arabs have it good for having some extra money falls flat on Arab and even Arab Israeli ears. Standard of living is not number one on their list of the most important things in life.

If the Arabs are all so jealous of Israel, why are the non-oil Arabs are not jealous of the oil Arabs? Typical Jews to reduce everything down to money. Arabs don’t care that much about money. They don’t revolve their whole lives around money or sit around hating Jews for having more skyscrapers. That’s not important to your average Arab.

I have never in my life heard one Arab tell me they were jealous of Israel.

In Palestine, White European racist fascists invaded the region, started wars with everyone around them, and, being high IQ, produced a developed economy. So what? These jerks get brownie points because they are rich? I’m supposed to love them because they’re rich and hate those Arabs because they’re poor?

The commenter is an Indian, that’s why he thinks that way. We are socialists here; we don’t think like this. Actually I think the more money someone has, the worse of a person he tends to be, but that’s just me.

All of these arguments were used by the South Africans who practiced a very similar White settler-colonial project far after this stuff went out of style.

Arabs in Israel are not happy people. They’re angry, and they have no loyalty to the state at all. The Jewish fascists say the Arabs are traitors, and the Jews are actually correct on that score. Indeed they have no loyalty to the state and do not even see themselves as Israelis.

The similarities between Israel and apartheid South Africa are striking. It’s notable that Israel was long one of South Africa’s strongest allies, and towards the end, it was one of their only allies. Arab Israelis are are institutionally treated as second class citizens in exactly the same way the Blacks were under apartheid. 

Were those Blacks happier on their South African Nigger Plantation because they had a higher standard of living? They were not, but this was the argument that was used to show that they were happy Negroes toiling away cheerfully in the sun for their beloved White slavemasters. Similarly, South Africa moved into the neighborhood and in a matter of time, like Israel, it was soon also embroiled in wars with most if not all of its neighbors. Similarly, South Africa, like Israel, had zero friends in the region.

Blacks in South Africa and Arabs in Israel don’t want money and stuff. White Gentiles and Jews only care about money, and they don’t care about humans, so they think everyone else feels that way too. But they don’t. People want to be free, even if being free means not having as much stuff. Stuff doesn’t make people happy. You can keep giving your slave the latest gadgetry in his slave quarters, but he’s still not a free man.

Same with South Africa. Hey look, these White European racist fascists came in here and built up the region and made a big economy because they have higher IQ’s! So what. I am supposed to like them more because they are rich and hate those Africans because they are poor? I realize this is Indian thinking, but we socialists do not think that way.

Arabs have more political rights in all of the Arab World. In the Arab World, they are not systematically discriminated against due to their religion or ethnicity.

I would argue that those Arabs in Israel do not want all of those social freedoms. Freedom to do what?

And what social freedoms do they have there that they do not have in the rest of the region? How are the social freedoms of Arab Israeli Christians better than those of Arab Christians in Lebanon or Syria? Someone needs to clue me.

429 Comments

Filed under Aborigines, Africa, Algeria, Arab Nationalism, Arabs, Asia, Asians, Australia, Blacks, Chinese (Ethnic), Christianity, Colonialism, Culture, East Indians, Economics, Egypt, Europeans, Fascism, Government, History, India, Iraq, Islam, Israel, Jewish Racism, Jews, Lebanon, Libya, Malays, Malaysia, Middle East, Middle Eastern, Modern, Morocco, Nationalism, North Africa, Pacific, Palestine, Papua New Guinea, Political Science, Politics, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, SE Asia, SE Asians, Settler-Colonialism, Singapore, Social Problems, Socialism, Sociology, South Africa, South Asia, South Asians, Syria, Taiwan, Tunisia, Whites

More on Israel and Its Neighbors, or How Christians Invented Suicide Bombing

Jason Y: So do you think Israel is more hated by its neighbors and people it oppresses than by the neighbors of Apartheid South Africa and the people it oppressed? Possibly the settler colonies run by Europeans had a mix of NAM’s who either liked them or didn’t. Perhaps Israel is unable to win any friends at all among NAM’s.

It’s because of how they act! South Africa, same thing. Look at how they acted.

First of all, about half of Israeli Jews are affectively NAM’s themselves! 50% of the Jewish population of Israel are Mizrachi Jews. These are the Jews of the Arab World. They are pretty much just Arabs who happen to be Jewish. Their culture is Judeo-Islamic as the Ashkenazi culture is Judeo-Christian. They lived around Muslims so long that they become rather Islamicized culturally.

Most of them have become some of the most fanatical Israelis of them all, but that’s another story, and they’re not all like that. They are caught between two worlds. They really are just Arabs who practice a different religion like Arab Christians. They have  IQ’s to match. Their IQ’s are ~90. Apparently they never went through the brutal selection for intelligence that occurred under Talmudic Ashkenazi Jews from 1000-1800. High Jewish IQ is the result of a direct selection for intelligence. However, now most of them ferociously deny being Arabs to the point where if you call a Mizrachi Jew an Arab, you might get punched.

There are not many non-Jews over there who liked Israel. There are practically no Arabs who like them. No Iranians like them. Even Turks and Greeks hate them, and they are not even in the neighborhood.

The Israelis are bullies. Have you ever noticed what happens when bullies bully lots of victims for long periods of time leaving the victims with no way whatsoever to fight back? The amount of absolutely insane and frequently homicidal rage that builds up in victims that are not allowed to fight back is terrifying. This is what is going on with the Arabs and Israel.

There some Israeli Druze who fight in the Israeli Army. Why the Israeli Druze support Israel, I have no idea because the Syrian, Lebanese and Golan Druze hate them with insane fervor. And Druze are so weird that if you ask me, they’re not even Muslims. That religion is completely outside of Islam for all intents and purposes, and Druze are very secular people.

Many Israeli Bedouins have sided with Israel for some crazy reason even though the Israelis treat them horrifically.

The Maronites in Lebanon have long been Israeli allies for complex reasons. For one, they hate Arabs with a passion, especially Muslim Arabs, and they insist that they are not Arabs, even though they are. They say they are “Phoenicians.” It’s bull.

The Gamalist Maronites are the people who first brought fascism to Lebanon. I mean the real deal. The ancestors of the present day leaders were open Nazi sympathizers. One had Nazi flags in his locker at school. I suppose they hate Arabs and Muslims and Israelis do too, so there’s your alliance. For many years, they served as a proxy army for Israel in Israeli-occupied South Lebanon. Many of them went to Israel after the occupation ended because they were afraid they would be killed as traitors in their own country. Incidentally, this Occupation is what created Hezbollah. That’s right. Hezbollah is Israel’s baby.

Now since then, this group of Maronites still hates Hezbollah, but things have calmed down. In the 1996 Israel-Lebanon War, the Maronites were officially neutral. Mostly they set up checkpoints outside their neighborhoods. They said they were defending them against Hezbollah. After that war had gone on for a while, even the neutral and formerly pro-Israel Gamalist Maronites started getting mad, and they said if they wear did not stop soon, they would take up arms against Israel themselves. They said they would not fight with Hezbollah but instead would fight separately.

A separate group of Maronites, the Aounists, are in an alliance with Hezbollah for some years now. So about half of even the Maronites in Lebanon are allied with Hezbollah!

During that war, the Israeli army went into a Christian village in South Lebanon in the middle of the night. They got about halfway into the village. The Lebanese Army was in the village and knew the Israelis were there but refused to come out and fight. That’s because the Lebanese Army is pretty useless.

The village appeared to be deserted. Every light in town went off when the Israelis came in and the whole place went dead silent. It was rather eerie. The Israelis got halfway inside the village, when out of nowhere the whole village opened fire on them with automatic weapons out of complete darkness. The Israelis rapidly retreated from this village. This village is 100% Greek Orthodox Christians.

There is a party with its own army called SSNP which is pretty much the party and army of the Greek Orthodox Christians in the region. It was SSNP who opened up on the Israelis. The SSNP are some of the most crazed and fanatical Israel-haters of them all, and they’re all Christians! During the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, we saw mass suicide bombings for the first time. For some time, almost all of these suicide bombings were the work of SSNP fighters, often women. So you see that the suicide bombing phenomenon was largely started by Christians! If you want to know why the SSNP hate Israel so much, it’s because they are some of the craziest Arab nationalists of them all.

Israeli officers work alongside Turkish, US, British, Saudi, and Qatari officers inside Syria alongside Saudi, Qatari, US, British and Jordanian officers in Jordan to help the Syrian rebels. One of the main groups that those officers are helping in Jordan and Syria is Al Qaeda.

That’s one of the reasons Arabs on the street often hate the Saudi, Qatari, and Jordanian governments – they work with the Israeli military.

The Israelis and the Saudi Royal Family have long had some crazy alliance. I have no idea what it’s all about.

The Israelis and Jordan have some sort of an alliance.

Egyptian and Israeli officers work together in the Sinai at the Gaza border. That’s one reason a lot of people hate Sisi. His army works with the Israeli military.

53 Comments

Filed under Africa, Arab Nationalism, Arabs, Bedouins, Christianity, Culture, Druze, Egypt, Israel, Israel-Palestine Conflict, Jews, Jordan, Judaism, Lebanon, Middle East, Nationalism, North Africa, Orthodox, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Religion, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Terrorism, War