Saturday, 25 February 2017

His truth is marching on

There are times when a man needs to have his faith in his Creator affirmed from time to time, so that he may be reminded that, though Man appears to be in an awfully big hurry to forget God, He is certainly in no great hurry to forget us.

Such affirmation was given to us just a few days ago in the sands of Kurdistan:
A group of Christians has erected a massive cross outside the city of Mosul on land recently liberated from domination by the Islamic State terror group. 
Last weekend, the Chaldean Catholic Patriarch of Baghdad, Louis Raphael Sako, visited the site and blessed the new cross in the village of Telekuf-Tesqopa, 17 miles from Mosul. 
A large group of Christian faithful accompanied the archbishop to a hill on the outskirts of the city where he blessed the enormous cross as the people set off fireworks and cheered, “Victory! Victory! Victory! For those who chose the faith and those who return!” 
This cross will announce to the world “that this is our land, we were born here and we will die here,” Archbishop Sako said. “Our ancestors were buried in this pure land and we are going to remain to preserve them with all our might and for future generations.” 
“It is a sincere and great call to return and rebuild. We are joined to our land, to our future on the land of our ancestors. Here we can be proud of our history and here we can be granted all our rights,” Sako said. 
The placement of crosses has become a recurring gesture since the Iraqi Army began the offensive to retake the city of Mosul, the stronghold of the Islamic State in Iraq. As villages have been liberated across the Nineveh Plain, Christians have made wooden crosses and placed them on the roofs of churches and homes.
It is rare indeed that we see good news these days with respect to the 14-century-old war between Islam and Christianity. For too long the realm of Christ has been forced to retreat- which is to be expected, after all, if Christians insist on turning their backs upon the Saviour that gave them their very name and identity.

It is certainly to be expected when the nominally Christian West embarks on incredibly foolish misadventures in the Middle East with no plan of victory, no explicit goal to recapture the lost treasures of Christendom, and no actual aim to convert people from Islam (itself a heresy of Christianity) back to the True Faith.

A secular attempt to attack, occupy, and conquer lands steeped in faith is, in the end, going to fail one way or another- because faith, by definition, is itself rooted in things that the secular mind will struggle to comprehend.

It is easy for Churchians to argue that faith and fidelity to the Word do not matter, and yet still cloak themselves in the mantle of their chosen religion, when there is little cost associated with such rank hypocrisy. To most Western Christians, the prospect of war is a distant one, for the lands of the West have known peace for a very long time.

But Christians in the Levant- which was, about 1500 years ago, very Christian indeed- have not known peace for the last 15 years. They have instead known little more than persecution, war, slaughter, and death.

Perhaps I am something of an optimist to argue that the Ascension of the God-Emperor (PBUH) represents a fundamental change in the way that the West thinks and operates. It remains to be seen whether the monumentally stupid American tendency to go adventuring in foreign lands will be curbed and American foreign policy will return to a more sensible and restrained approach.

But the initial signs are almost entirely positive. It is clear to me that, if nothing else, the Christian West is finally beginning to bestir itself after a long and terrible period of retreat.

Perhaps it is too little, and too late. Perhaps Christian civilisation and all of the great good that has come with it will fall into the abyss created by its own weakness, its own internal divisions and heresies. Perhaps the Cross of victory over Mosul was raised prematurely.

And yet, I cannot shake the feeling that our Creator has, at long last, decided that enough is enough.

I see signs of hope all around us- signs that sense and reason have at last begun to return to a world long since gone completely mad.

Time will tell whether I am right. But it is difficult to remain sceptical and pessimistic when one sees the Holy Cross being raised over a rooftop in Mosul- hardcore Muslim territory for a very long time.

As the IRON FIRE burns

Martin Steene and Kirk Bacharach aren't exactly household names, even among metalheads, but over the last year or so I have come to greatly appreciate their work in a Danish band called IRON FIRE. The lineup is really a revolving door of musicians with an alumnus list that rivals that of MEGADETH (which is a pretty impressive, if dubious, achievement).

From about 2003 to 2010, they released a string of truly brilliant albums, starting with Revenge in 2006 and culminating with Metalmorphosized. The latter is one of my favourite power metal albums ever made; it starts off a bit slow and silly, but by the time you get to "The Phantom Symphony", you know you've been listening to something truly special.

They then came out with the sci-fi concept album Voyage of the Damned in 2012 and... more or less disappeared for four years. It was as if the constantly changing lineup had worn down both their creativity and their will to carry on creating music, because while the album was very good, it wasn't as consistent as its predecessors and didn't have anywhere near the same impact.

Happily, though, they seem to have gotten themselves sorted and have now made quite the return to form with 2016's Among the Dead. This has to be the hardest, fiercest IRON FIRE album that I've heard since Metalmorphosized, and it is quite something to listen to.

Friday, 24 February 2017

Friday T&A: Y'all hold my beer and watch this!!! Edition

There was a news item a few days back about a Russian, er, "model" (about whom nobody outside of Instagram has ever heard anything) who decided to pull a bit of a crazy stunt on the side of the world's tallest building.

Now, obviously, the whole point of that stupid stunt of hers was to get attention. But, I wonder, why exactly did she need to hang off the side of a building to do that?

After all, it turns out that she doesn't really need terribly much assistance in that department.

Oh, and in case you're wondering- yeah, she is almost surely sponsored. (Longtime readers will know exactly what that means. N00bs are advised to check this link out to figure out I'm on about.) There's a picture in her Instagram feed showing her getting off what looks like a private jet into Dubai, and you know what that means, lads- pump, dump, and get checked for hummus stains afterwards.

Happy Friday, y'all. And now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to go get a beer and check out this young and very stupid (but undeniably very very very hot) girl.

Thursday, 23 February 2017

They may not have thought this all the way through

Various Democrat Congresscritters appear to be looking into the possibility of impeaching the God-Emperor as a way to salve the extreme pain being caused by their still-gaping anal fissures:
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Democratic lawmakers are openly questioning President Donald Trump’s mental health, and a growing number of them are invoking the 25th Amendment as a springboard to introduce legislation that would allow former presidents and vice presidents to determine if Trump is mentally unfit for office. 
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), and Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) are among several of these Democrats, according to The Hill. Franken reportedly said “a few” Republican colleagues have expressed concerns to him about Trump’s mental health, and Lieu plans to introduce legislation that would require the presence of a psychiatrist or psychologist in the White House. 
Breitbart News previously reported that Rep. Karen Bass (D-CA) had launched an online petition to force the Republican Party to submit then-presidential nominee Trump to a psychiatric evaluation. 
Last week, Rep. Blumenauer used baseless allegations about Trump’s mental health as a springboard to invoke the 25th Amendment in a floor speech. And in an interview with CNN this weekend, Rep. Jackie Spier (D-CA) said Trump “has got to get a grip. The 25th Amendment is there if the president becomes incapacitated.” 
The 25th Amendment was ratified in 1967 following President John F. Kennedy’s 1963 assassination. It allows the Vice President to become President in the event the president resigns or is removed from office by his cabinet for being “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”

Look, I don't pretend to be any kind of scholar of the Constitution- although, based on the results of this ridiculous excuse for a "US Citizenship Test" that I just passed with a score of 94% while barely even trying, I might just be descended from Thomas Jefferson himself. But even a foreigner like me has the ability to read and understand the actual wording of the 25th Amendment.

Here is what the 25th Amendment actually says. I've highlighted the bits that the various libtards are getting all hot and bothered about:
Section 1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President. 
Section 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress. 
Section 3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President. 
Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President. 
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
Wow. Talk about an own goal.

So let's think this through from the point of view of a rabbit that actually wants the God-Emperor (PBUH) to be impeached.

First, Vice President Pence and a majority of either the full Executive branch, including the Cabinet that President Trump himself drew up and nominated, or of a specially designed body appointed by Congress, where Republicans now control both houses, need to be convinced by... um... somebody that the God-Emperor is a raving lunatic and needs to be removed from power for his own good.

Second, an actual letter has to be sent to the POTUS and then to the Speaker of the House and the President pro tem of the Senate. And that has to be done within 4 days of the above having taken place.

And then Congress gets 21 days to deliberate the issue- and if Congress isn't in session at the time, well, tough titties.

Already, you can see how quickly the odds of this happening go from pathetic to begin with, to femtoscopically small.

And then there is the best part.

Let us say that, against all odds, these monumental idiots somehow succeed in proving that Donaldus Triumphus is not fit for office and must be removed For The Good Of The Country. (Remember, most progressives can only think in capital letters.)

Guess who becomes head of the Executive Branch after that?

But let’s play along – say it all works out exactly as their opium dreams foretell. THEN YOU GET PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE, YOU INBRED NEO-HIPPIES.
Good luck.
Yeah. That Mike Pence, who as Governor of Indiana wrote into law the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which a major freakout on the Left because it supposedly allowed businesses to discriminate against LGBTQWTFISTHISBS people in the name of religious freedom. (It actually did nothing of the sort, but, again, facts and reasoning are not strengths of the progressive mind.)

If anything, freed of the more moderate tendencies of his current boss, President Pence would almost certainly be willing to take a far harder line on social issues. While he definitely does not strike me as being half the Alpha male that Donald Trump is, I've no doubt that he would make a competent, if bland, conservative administrator of the Federal government.

He wouldn't necessarily be any good as President- the country appears too far gone for any member of the establishment to have any hope of actually saving it, never mind preserving what is good about it. But he would likely be an even bigger nightmare for progressives than President Trump has proven to be (and that's just in his first 2 months in office).

Look, shitlibtards, I know you don't like President Trump very much, but then, we didn't like President Odumbass at all. And we put up with him for eight long and terrible years without collectively freaking out, rioting, melting down, and getting fired from our jobs for being either giant crybabies or emotionally stunted jackasses suffering from severe rectal-cranial inversion.

One would think that the party that loves to tell the rest of us how enlightened, mature, and civilised they are, could actually, y'know, act like it.

Wednesday, 22 February 2017

Lilith's mask slips

It would appear that an odd moment or two of honesty does actually prevail from time to time, even when one is deep within Satan's bowels:

Welcome, my friends, to the way a progressive actually thinks.

They truly do believe, deep down, that they are smarter than you. That they know more than you do about how to run your own life. That they, and not you, should decide what to think and when to think it.

Ms. Brzezinski's sentiment would be terrifying enough on its own. But then you watch the rest of the clip and you realise something even more scary.

Look at the very interesting reaction- or lack thereof- from everyone in that studio. Not one person there, including the supposedly "conservative" (actual: cuckservative) Joe Scarborough, raised an objection to what former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski's daughter just said.

Nobody in there thought that what she said was completely batshit insane. Nobody objected to her assertion that thought control is right and just, as long as the mainstream media does it.

Given just how epic the failure of MSNBC's talking head population was to predict the repeated "surprises" of 2016- which surprised them, but not us- one would be forgiven for laughing hysterically at what she said, if she had made that comment as an actress appearing in a bad comedy sketch.

That little faux pas of hers is instructive because she has now shown us the true face of our enemy- not that we didn't know it before, but rarely if ever has the Great Enemy been so candid with us about its motivations and its tactics.

And now, thanks again to Ms. Brzezinski, we know exactly how to defeat our enemy too.

The only reason why someone like her would make a comment like that is because she knows, and can see, that her kind is losing the war for our hearts and minds. She can see that the God-Emperor's strategy of taking his message directly to the people is working- and it terrifies her.

The people increasingly loathe and reject everything that the mainstream media stands for. They see how badly the media constantly lies to them, distorts the truth, misrepresents simple facts, selectively edits evidence, and- when all else fails- simply makes shit up.

That is why the American people now trust Donald Trump over the legacy media. Depending on which demographic you look at, the ratio of trust in the God-Emperor over trust in the Worshippers of Chaos is on the order of 2:1.

Looking at the evidence, and judging by the reactions of people like one Ms. Brzezinski, one cannot help but feel that it is a good thing indeed that the entire media establishment is against Donald Trump- it wouldn't be a fair fight otherwise.

Best of all, though, is the fact that, as I stated above, you and I can see perfectly well how to destroy these people. Note- not "defeat", DESTROY.

These networks lie to us. They force cultural Marxism down our throats via the idiot boxes in our living rooms and studies and bedrooms. They treat us like retarded children, pretending that they know what is best for us. They exploit our goodwill and our desire to be told great stories by twisting the founding ideals and myths of the American Republic into social justice experiments that force us to pretend that logic and biology are figments of our imagination.

Their crimes are many and great. For that, they must be extirpated from existence.

Start today by cutting off your cable subscription. Refuse to give them your advertising dollars. Switch to content that you control. Watch what interests you. Move away from the mainstream media's TV shows- for those of you who are of a literary bent, spend your evenings reading and writing instead of sitting in front of the boob tube getting dumber and fatter.

(The sole exceptions to this would be watching episodes of TOP GEAR, before Series 23, and THE GRAND TOUR, since these shows were and are made by men, for men, about manly things. And it turns out that you don't need a cable subscription to enjoy these things either- not anymore.)

These people hold us in utter contempt. It is well past time that we do the same for them.

Tuesday, 21 February 2017

Let it be war, then

Stand your ground. Don't fire unless fired upon- but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.
-- Attributed to Captain John Parker at Lexington Green, 1775
It would appear that everybody's favourite Dangerous Faggot, Milo Yiannopoulos, has landed himself in a spot of hot water after supposedly making comments that supported paedophilia:
The head of the American Conservative Union is defending his decision to invite controversial speaker Milo Yiannopoulos to the annual CPAC conference – even though he withdrew the invitation after videos containing 'out of bounds' comments emerged. 
Matt Schlapp, who heads the ACU, told MSNBC's 'Morning Joe,' indicated he was aware of anti-Semitic statements by Yiannopoulos, but decided to invite him to highlight campus free speech issues. 
'I think when it comes to what he does on campus … You have a right to be heard in America and you have a right to be heard on campus. And it’s not fair on campus that just voices that emanate from the left seem to be cherished and not voices from the right,' Shlapp said. 
But he took back the invitation after videos came out where Yiannopoulis described the benefits of 'coming of age relationships' – though the outspoken conservative said he was not defending pedophilia.
I stress the "supposedly" part because there is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that Milo is now the subject of a sustained campaign to destroy him publicly. His status, his celebrity aura, and his following have all reached the point where the regressive Left can no longer tolerate his existence- because he reveals their hypocrisy, their bigotry, their closed-mindedness, and their extreme paranoia to the entire world to see.

Interestingly, none of the media stories that I have seen so far- from both the Left and the Right in the media- actually show or provide the clips that have caused this uproar. This means that, if you and I didn't know better, we would have to rely on the lying legacy media to tell us what to think.

But we do know better. And this is 2017. So it isn't all that difficult for people who are actually interested in the Truth to go and find it.

To whit- here is a compilation of the clips that supposedly show that Milo Yiannopoulos supports or at least does not outright condemn paedophilia.

Watch the whole thing, and then make up your own mind as to whether Milo is a flaming (literally) hypocrite:

Once removed from the filter of the lying media, it becomes perfectly clear that Milo's only crime was to be highly imprecise with his language and very sloppy with his definitions.

Since we cannot trust the media to tell us the truth about what Milo actually intended to say, and whether he was in fact sloppy with his definitions and his language, we must therefore turn to what the man himself said:

Therefore, once we step away from the media's lies, we are left with several inescapable conclusions.

Milo does not support or condone or in any way paper over abuse of minors. Milo was imprecise in his language and probably a bit foolish in his choice of topic. Milo did not make adequately clear the line between humourous and serious conversation.

But Milo did not, in any way, do or say anything to deserve the treatment he has received thus far from his erstwhile publisher, his supposed "friends" among the cuckservatives, and from CPAC.

Now here is where, inevitably, unfortunately, and quite annoyingly, I have to state where I stand in order that people don't misinterpret what I am saying.

First: Paedophilia is among the worst crimes that any human can commit. Sexual abuse of children- note, not young men or young women, CHILDREN- is abomination. Burning at the stake, crucifixion, impalement, and drowning are too lenient as punishments for paedophiles.

At no point does Milo disagree with any of this. At every point, he states clearly that he finds paedophiles disgusting and abominable. As he has stated himself, he has worked hard to out paedophiles in his professional life.

Second: grown adults having sexual relations with teenagers below the established age of consent is illegal, and with good reason. There is a specific age above which it is assumed that a young man or woman is wise enough, and sexually mature enough, to be considered an adult. You can argue and quibble and prevaricate all you like about where that line should be, but the fact remains that it exists and must exist in any law-abiding society.

Milo Yiannopoulos explicitly stated that he agrees entirely with the concept of an age of consent. His failure lies in refusing to elaborate or define exactly what he considers to be the age of consent.

Third: I strongly disagree with Milo's specific comments related to teenage boys having sexual relationships with their older teachers (regardless of gender). If you agree with the concept of an age of consent- and I do, as Milo does- then sexual relationships between someone below the age of consent, and someone above it, is statutory rape.

That is the line of the law. It may be arbitrary and there are surely individual exceptions where people under the age of consent may well actually be capable of giving consent. But the law says what it says in black and white.

Fourth: I disagree with and loathe Milo's personal predilections and lifestyle. I find homosexuality abhorrent and unnatural. I have so stated in a number of my posts and I state it again here for the record. I do not condone or endorse a homosexual lifestyle in any way. I certainly do not endorse a male homosexual lifestyle at all.

I also state, clearly and for the record, that I stand with Milo today.

This might seem to some to be a highly contradictory position. It is nothing of the sort. One can support an ally even when one disagrees personally with his lifestyle, his decisions, and his point of view.

Milo is an ally in our war for our culture. He has proven to be frighteningly effective at debating leftists- because he ticks off so many of their class-warfare boxes, and yet he argues on the basis of devastating rhetoric rooted in dialectic, fact, reason, and evidence.

Allies like that need and deserve our support.

Milo is not of the alt-Right. He has said so himself repeatedly. But without Milo Yiannopoulos, the alt-Right would not be nearly as formidable and powerful as it is today. We owe him.

We can disagree with him. We can condemn his lifestyle. We can get annoyed by his swishing faggotry. But we must not turn our backs on a friend who has gone to war on our behalf, and exposed himself repeatedly to terrible risks in the process, when he needs us the most.

So I state now that I stand with Milo in this war. I will buy a copy of his book, no matter where it ends up being published. If he requires funds to cover legal fees against the lawsuits that are sure to come, I will donate, under my real name and with my own money, to him directly.

His war is our war, and it is well past time that the fight was taken straight to the legacy media. Their lies, their faithlessness, and their betrayal of the very people who once trusted them, must be held over their heads as the Sword of Damocles. They must be weighed, judged, and found wanting.

And now, they must be destroyed. That is their fate, and they deserve it.

Monday, 20 February 2017

Confronting an uncomfortable truth

I recently finished reading through Gregory Hood's Waking Up from the American Dream, which is basically a white nationalist's perspective on the current state of politics in the United States of America. The author might be known to you as one of the contributors over at Counter-Currents Publishing- no, not the Leftist whacktivists who are completely cuckoo-for-Cocoa-Puffs about your usual left-wing causes celebre, these guys.

The book makes for some decidedly uncomfortable reading if you are of the rainbows-and-unicorns persuasion with respect to race and culture in America, and especially if you subscribe to the standard conservative view of America as being an exceptional proposition nation built upon the immortal words of the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness...
Methodically and ruthlessly, the author takes a sledgehammer to every last one of the propositions that make up the American Dream: that it is indeed possible for immigrants to simply come on over and become Americans; that any and all races can peaceably coexist with the white majority that built this country; and that white people themselves are anything other than targets for systematic elimination and degradation by their own government.

And he is absolutely merciless in his savage treatment of the mainstream "conservative" movement, as he tears it to shreds for not having "conserved" a damn thing. This is a recurring theme throughout the collection of articles presented in this book, wherein Mr. Hood is unsparing and withering in his criticism of the National Review conservatives who insist on going along to get along, and who have as a result inevitably and categorically failed to "[stand] athwart history, yelling 'STOP!'".

The book is well worth reading for many reasons, including the fact that it forces even alt-Right types like us, who accept many of the things that he is talking about as axiomatic, to face very uncomfortable ideas. In my specific case I particularly disliked his assertion that American Christianity basically has nothing to offer anymore, and that the disastrous state of modern American culture is in fact the logical outcome of the universalist nature of the Christian creed.

It almost seems as if Mr. Hood is arguing in favour of secularism and atheism, when any halfway reasonably informed member of the alt-Right will immediately recognise and articulate the fact that, wherever secularism has taken root, disaster and tragedy has inevitably followed in its wake.

But the main point to note is that the catastrophe that is America's contemporary culture is a direct and entirely logical result of a severe misinterpretation of the Founding itself. And it is that misinterpretation that I intend to expand upon here.

A Founding Betrayed by its Descendants

The first thing to note is that America, whether you like it or not, is a nation built by white people.

You could argue until you are blue in the face that America was built on the backs of slaves. You'd be wrong, of course, given that both black and white slaves existed in the American colonies up until the barbaric practice was outlawed, and given that many of the thousands upon thousands of slaves sent to the colonies were in fact white Scotsmen.

And then there is the fact that, while roughly 388,000 black slaves were sent specifically to North America- I'm not talking about the rest of the New World, just the territories that eventually became the United States of America and Canada- over one million white slaves were sold by Barbary Coast slavers to Muslim nations over a roughly similar period as the one in which the American slave trade took place.

Kind of puts that whole "slavery" thing into perspective, doesn't it? Indeed, such a thing almost makes you wonder why February is named "Black History Month" in the US, given that the sheer number of white slaves historically sold to both Islamic caliphates and European colonies far exceeds the number of black slaves sold to the United States of America.

(If anything, Islamic nations should be held accountable for the tens of millions of black Africans that they have sold into slavery over the past 14 centuries. Slavery was, and still is, very much a trait of Islamic government.)

Having summarily dealt with the contentious but extremely badly informed arguments about black contributions to America, whether voluntary or otherwise, let us accept the fact that without white people, America would not be what it is today.

The plain truth is that just about everything that is good and great about modern America exists because of whites.

The entire reason why everyone and his cousin in India, China, Mexico, Brazil, and pretty much everywhere else wants to come to America and live and work here and seek the American Dream is because white people made it possible to do so.

It doesn't really matter where you start in American history. The same conclusion stares you in the face.

The Declaration of Independence was written by men who considered themselves to be free-born white Englishmen, and who were outraged at what they perceived to be the tyrannical actions of their sovereign.

The Constitution was written and ratified to secure the same rights of free-born Englishmen, and was informed by the rich legacy of the British Constitution, itself a product of over a thousand years of thought and action.

The first waves of immigrants that came through were almost entirely white Europeans. Whether they were Danes, Swedes, Germans, Scots, Italians, or Spaniards, they were originally Europeans and they mostly came from a shared cultural heritage that stretched all the way back to the Roman Republic- and in some cases, earlier than that.

That was true of the first great wave of American immigration, comprised as it was of English and Dutch Protestants. It was just about equally true of the second great wave, made up as it was of continental Europeans.

But it has not been true of the third great wave, which has taken place since the passage of the 1965 Immigration and Naturalization [sic] Act. That wave has been made up primarily of immigrants from Central and South America, Asia, and the Middle East.

These cultures are not European. They do not share the same values as the immigrants who came over and settled here. They are not white.

The Latin American imports, in particular, are among the fastest-growing segments of the "American" population. In the process, they are making a nation created, built, and maintained by whites, into a nation that is non-white.

And if you insist on making America non-white, by logical extension, you are insisting on making America not-America.

You don't have to be a neo-Nazi reading the Daily Stormer every day and screaming white-power slogans at skinhead rallies to know these things. You don't even have to like these truths very much. You simply have to accept them- and if you can't do that, then you're really not going to like what follows next.

The Breaking

Now at this point the usual mainstream cuckservative or liberal retort- usually also expressed in tones bordering on the hysterical- is that America is a nation of immigrants, founded by settlers from England who came over and established colonies, and then later expanded upon by European immigrants who came over and enriched America's cultural heritage. And of course, those immigrants came over and assimilated and became Americans.

Therefore, anybody can come over and become an American, as long as he or she adheres to the American creed of hard work, obedience to the law, and fidelity to the Constitution.

This assertion is usually followed by accusations of bigotry and racism directed toward anyone who might dare to disagree with such eminently sensible ideas.

Problem is, of course, that these things simply are not true. The "proposition nation" never was. It doesn't work- if it did, one could just as easily let everyone in South America, China, India, and Africa come over to settle in America and expect that the American system and way of life would simply carry on without issues.

But it does not. We know this after seeing more than 59 million immigrants come into the US since the passage of the Hart-Celler Act referenced above. Anyone with eyes can tell that entire areas of the country that have seen large numbers of immigrants come in, have experienced significant changes to their quality of life and surroundings as a result.

I've seen this myself- and remember, I am writing this as a non-white, non-European, legal resident alien worker in the United States. I can see it in the part of the country that I live in with my own two eyes.

All you have to do is go about three miles west of where I live, and you'll run into an area that is heavily Black and Hispanic. Unsurprisingly, it is a very different vibe out there than it is in the quiet, mostly white and Asian, area where I am.

The same is true in other parts of America too. One of the most extreme contrasts can be found by taking a trip out to Arizona.

Apparently, in the town of Nogales, Arizona, you can drink the tap water- or at least, you used to be able to, back before the wells surrounding the area became contaminated. But in the town of Nogales, Sonora, under Mexican control and literally right next door, you can't.

Or take black-run America, and contrast it with white-run America. Hands up if you've ever visited any of these cities: Detroit, MI; Newark, NJ; Trenton, NJ; Camden, NJ; New Brunswick, NJ; The Bronx, NY; Philadelphia, PA; Atlanta, GA; Chicago, IL; Baltimore, MD; Washington, D.C.

Every one of these cities has a substantial or even a majority black population. And every single one of them has some serious issues with crime, pollution, and civic disorder. Chicago is nowadays known as "Chiraq" simply because it is so dangerous. Washington, D.C., is actually pretty safe and orderly as long as you're in the "top half" of the diamond formed by the Beltway, but the moment you're in the southern half of the city, you're taking some serious risks with your safety.

And then contrast these places with white-run America. The best examples that I have seen during my time here thus far are in Vermont and Pennsylvania.

No matter where you go in America, you will find that even in the poorest parts of the country, white America is mostly law-abiding, safe, clean, civic-minded, and unprepossessing. White Americans can be loud, obnoxious, and closed-minded- and yet they are also far more capable of building and maintaining civilisation than their little brown and black brothers from foreign lands, even those who have been in America for generations.

It doesn't take a genius-level intellect to work out that if you insist on demonising and destroying the people who built America- mostly white, mostly European, mostly with a shared cultural heritage- then America itself will be destroyed. And that is precisely what we are seeing today.

Actually, while we're on the subject of intellect...

The IQ Elephant

One of the unspoken realities about race relations in the United States of America is that there are some serious issues posed by the considerable gaps in IQ between various racial groups in this country.

Here are a few graphs that illustrate the sheer scale of the gap:

The graphs clearly prove out what anecdotal evidence already tells us to be true: not all races are equally smart.

By extension, not all races are equally well suited to building civilised societies.

That this has civilisational consequences should be immediately obvious simply by looking at the states of the civilisations built by each of the racial groups noted above.

Starting at the highest possible level, we note that Africans have the lowest average IQ and the most densely clustered distribution out of the low-IQ groups. One only has to observe the visible differences between sub-Saharan Africa's current state and, say, Estonia's, to note that even imperial rapine and plunder cannot possibly explain away the vast differences in outcomes.

Parenthetically, it is often extremely difficult for white Americans and Europeans to accept the fact- well established through a number of studies- that Black Africans have an average IQ that would be considered to be the point of mental retardation in the West. Whites observe that the black folk of their acquaintance are affable, charming, and outgoing, thus they discount the idea that blacks have sub-normal intelligence as preposterous. Turns out, though, that these two character traits are not mutex.

We see also that East Asians have significantly higher IQ distributions than South Asians and Southeast Asians. Again, this is not surprising for anyone who has spent significant amounts of time in, say, India and Indonesia (which, by the way, I have).

And we see that Europeans are the next highest ranked group in terms of IQ. Once again, this has consequences for the quality and durability of the civilisations that this group builds. One only need visit majority-white American and European cities- or even Moscow and St. Petersburg in Russia- to understand just how well European civilisation has worked out over the past four thousand years of its existence, in various permutations and combinations.

Finally, we note that the gap between white and black America isn't merely an anthropological oddity; it is in fact a vast, yawning chasm of achievement and intellect.

I say again, you do not have to be a racist or a neo-Nazi to make these connections. I am not white. I am not European. I am not even Western by birth, even though I've lived in Western nations for better than half of my life. These things simply are what they are, and no amount of dissimulation and lying will change them.

Monocultural Nations from Multicultural Empires

So where do these observations, however painful and uncomfortable, leave us now?

It should be plainly obvious to any reasonably honest mind that white America is under siege. From all sides- including, appallingly, the voices of supposed "mainstream conservatism"- there are now calls for whites to be exterminated, for their communities to be destroyed, and for their way of life to be annihilated.

This is madness.

If America insists on attempting to rid itself of white people, it will cease to be America- that much should be obvious. But if America means order, stability, peace, fidelity to the law, and all of the other myriad blessings of civilisation, then it is the height of lunacy to argue that white people should be marginalised and even destroyed, and then argue in the very same breath that those who replace white Americans will then be able to maintain and even enhance the civilisation that white America has created.

The conclusion is stark and inescapable: America as we know it, as we dream of it, as we want it to be, is not a multi-ethnic society with many cultures sitting together and singing kumbaya. The America that everyone wants to work and live in is largely white- and if we get rid of whites, as so many politicians and immigration advocates are arguing, then by definition, we get rid of America too.

What will be left over will not be a country worth living in- because it won't be a country. It will simply be pockets of rapidly decaying civilisation surrounded by vast stretches of wilderness and even outright savagery.

Given the state of things today, I wager that if the Founders could see what their descendants have done to the nation that they fought so hard to build, they would quite likely have abandoned the entire idea of secession. King George III may have been somewhat mad and more than a bit stupid, but he was never this batshit insane.

Sunday, 19 February 2017

So here's a crazy thought...

Not to blow my own trumpet or anything, but it strikes me as something of an achievement that I've been able to write and post consistently for going on five years now. Most blogs don't last even six months, never mind four years (and counting). Fewer still, at least those maintained by single individuals, can claim to post with consistent regularity.

And if you were to go through my blog's archives, you will find quite a lot of good material and associated wisdom compiled over the years.

Not everything I write is of particularly high quality, obviously. Some of my work has been pretty poor due to muddled thinking, inexperience with writing, stylistic issues, and so on and so forth. But I think you would be hard-pressed to argue that there has been no evolution whatsoever in terms of output, quality, consistency, and literary style over the years. Indeed, I think that any fair-minded observer who went back and read what I wrote in 2012 2013 (ye cats, I'm getting old- my memory's going already!), when this blog came into existence, would be pleasantly surprised at how the style, fluency, content of my writing has improved.

Of course, my blog does not fall into easy categorisation. It isn't really a Manosphere blog, even though there is a core focus on masculinity and men's self-improvement.

It isn't really a politics blog, even though I spend quite a lot of time writing on the subject.

It isn't really a video game blog- even though its very title was inspired by my beloved HALO franchise, and my online persona, though an accurate and relatively unfiltered reflection of who I actually am, is also partly inspired by the personality of the IsoDidact.

It isn't really a philosophy blog either, despite the vast amount of writing that I have done on fairly esoteric philosophical and religious subjects.

It isn't really an alt-Right blog, an economics blog, or a single-issue nerdistry blog- and it sure as hell isn't a PUA blog.

It is all of these things, except the PUA stuff. It is none of these things.

In that respect it's pretty unusual among most Manosphere/alt-Right blogs, in that I don't concentrate on one cause du jour and harp endlessly about.

One could argue that this makes my output unfocused and scattershot. That is a fair criticism. And yet, people keep coming back to read what I write- because, similar to other (far superior) bloggers like Vox Day, I maintain a diverse range of interests and then try to reason my way through them into a coherent set of views and arguments.

Which brings me to an idea that I've been chewing over for a few weeks.

As a reader and friend pointed out before, it might be useful to actually put some of this writing, in some edited form, into an e-book of some kind, and put it out there for wider distribution.

Now obviously my output is not comparable to that of, say, Vox Day or Quintus Curtius. But there is clearly a point of view articulated here that my readers find valuable and useful, and it might not be a bad thing to put together some of that experience and wisdom in distilled, focused form and distribute it out to whoever is interested.

I do not pretend that such a venture would be a runaway success, but if the output was of sufficient quality, clarity, and wisdom, it might just help convert a few more Millennials over to the Truth. And that, in and of itself, is a worthy enough goal.

So- what do you think? Is this a useful venture? Or am I just barking mad? Stick your ideas in the comments below.

The swift vengeance of the God-Emperor

President Donald Trump- dear Lord Almighty, I don't think I'm ever going to get tired of saying those words- held a press conference on Thursday which was... quite the performance.

Actually, a correction is in order there. The event was billed as a press conference, but it actually ended up being a savage verbal beatdown of much of the White House press corps. And it was EPIC:

The odd thing about the God-Emperor's reign thus far is that, depending on who you listen to for news about what he's done, either he is the most incompetent, foolish, loudmouthed, narcissistic buffoon ever to have occupied the Oval Office (if you listen to the failing legacy media), or he is a competent, skilled, forceful administrator who gives his subordinates considerable freedom and trust but swiftly and ruthlessly punishes them if they prove unworthy (if you listen to the alt-Right).

Given how frequently and predictably and lamentably the lamestream media has gotten things completely and totally wrong over the past year, I'm rather inclined to go with what the alt-Right has to say about the God-Emperor.

Make no mistake, there are many things that President Trump could improve upon in his interactions with the press. He is not a natural rhetorician, at least not in the sense that he can deliver a carefully constructed and articulated message in the way that a Cicero, a Caesar, or a Reagan could. He rambles, sometimes incoherently. He jumps from topic to topic with seemingly little connecting those random changes in tack. He frequently gets facts and figures wrong, misinterprets or misplaces basic information, and sometimes takes quotes and ideas way out of context.

And yet he is a fearsome opponent for the mainstream media- the toughest that they have ever seen.

Why is that?

Well, as the Chateau put it a couple of days ago, the God-Emperor is not a rhetorician- he is a RETORTICIAN.

He does a superb job of taking the MSM's hypocrisy, blatant bias, and astonishing lack of foresight and vision, and turning it right back at them. His quips, put-downs, and outright slams of various reporters are delivered with the deft touch and supreme skill of a man used to taking on his enemies face-to-face.

Even when he gets things glaringly wrong- as he did with that assertion that he made about his victory being the biggest electoral college win since that of Ronald Reagan- he doesn't necessarily back down. He dissembles and dodges and changes the subject, but he doesn't apologise and he doesn't show weakness.

He displays classic, characteristic aggressive Alpha-male behaviour in his dealings with both the press and his enemies in the Senate and the House. He tolerates and even encourages honest and fair reporting- but he shows no hesitation in crushing his opponents when he needs to.

His critics in the press have no idea how to handle him- other than by displaying classic Gamma fighting-retreat tactics. Here is a perfect example from The Daily Mail- which, unusually for a big media outlet, actually does try to report things honestly from time to time:
During a campaign-style rally on Saturday, Donald Trump used a quote from one of the nation's Founding Fathers out of context to vindicate his war against the media. 
At the 'Make America Great Again' rally in Melbourne, Florida which mirrored the rhetoric throughout his campaign tour, Trump said he hoped to speak 'without the filter of fake news' - whom he declared the 'enemy of America' this week. 
The President then referenced previous American leaders who combated the media during their time in the White House. 
He said: 'Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, and Abraham Lincoln: many of our greatest Presidents fought with the media, and called them out, often-times, on their lies. 
'In fact, Thomas Jefferson said: 'Nothing can be believed which is seen in a newspaper'.'  
The clipped excerpt comes from a personal letter Jefferson wrote in June 1807 to John Norvell in regard to the First Amendment - which legally protects the rights for free speech and free press. 
The actual quote says: 'It is a melancholy truth, that a suppression of the press could not more compleatly [sic] deprive the nation of it's benefits, than is done by it's abandoned prostitution to falsehood. Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle.' 
The document goes on to describe possible ways to construct newspapers to distinguish areas of undeniable fact from conjecture - much in the way we structure newspapers today, differentiating news and crime from opinion and feature pieces. 
Several years earlier, Jefferson defended the necessity of the media, saying: 'were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.'
The tone-deafness and lack of comprehension displayed by even this, one of the more competent media outlets, is amazing.

They simply do not realise that the rest of us cottoned on to their game a long time ago. Their much-ballyhooed separation of editorial and sports pieces from their headline news was long ago thrown right out the window. We of the news-consuming public know full well nowadays that fake-news peddlers like The Carlos Slim Blog, The Jeff Bezos Blog, The Puffington Host, the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation, and the Clinton News Network, are not in the slightest bit interested in merely "presenting the facts". They have a clear agenda and that permeates their reporting to the very core.

We know full well that even once-respectable outlets like The Daily Telegraph in Britain have long since become SJW-converged. They report what they want to report, not what is actually happening.

After all, is it not written in the Imperial Creed that "The Emperor Protects"?

And even then, people still don't get it. I've seen posts by liberal Jewish friends of mine on my (pretty much inactive) personal Facebook account arguing that The Donald is an anti-Semite and has a great deal of trouble answering questions about his own inherent hostility toward the Jewish people.

Such an assertion is surely the product of an unhinged mind.

First, the God-Emperor has already clearly demonstrated his affection and regard for the nation of Israel and the Jewish people. He hosted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House recently, and showed clearly that he is far more interested in fostering close good relations with Israel than his buffoon of a predecessor.

Second, his son-in-law is Jewish. His own daughter converted to her husband's faith. His grandchildren are Jewish. The idea that Donald Trump is an anti-Semite is so ridiculous that even the reporter who pressed President Trump about anti-Semitism stated bluntly that he agreed with the God-Emperor about his outrage at the charge of anti-Semitism.

Turning to the "scandal", if it is that, which prompted this brutal, wanton (and quite delightful) beating of the unwanted stepchildren of the press, I also suspect that The Donald pays attention to the mindset writings of men like Mike Cernovich, even if he doesn't say so and even if he did disavow the alt-Right. (Technically he was repudiating the white-supremacist elements of it, but not necessarily the alt-Right's core philosophy of mounting a vigourous physical and moral defence of Western civilisation.)

When the whole NSA issue broke, Mike argued that it was a serious strategic defeat for the new Administration (which, realistically, it was), that other targets were being lined up by the Deep State and the lying media (which is absolutely true), and that The Donald needed to make a major mindset change and go right back on the offensive.

Evidently, the God-Emperor thinks exactly the same way.

This is not exactly surprising if you know anything about Alpha-male behaviour. Alphas have monumental egos (I write this as someone with a large and somewhat prickly ego myself, though I don't claim to be any sort of Alpha male), and do not take slights against their person or their "tribe" well at all. The natural response of an Alpha male to truly personal and dangerous attacks is to crush the opposition as brutally and ruthlessly as possible.

And of course, that is exactly what Gustavus Donaldus went and did.

My reservations about the God-Emperor remain. I have yet to be fully convinced that he can push through his legislative agenda through the House and Senate. He can issue all of the Executive Orders that he likes, but until and unless he actually signs into binding law some of the items he has talked about, it is going to be difficult to argue that he has actually accomplished all that much.

And his civic nationalism is, while highly refreshing and a vastly preferable alternative to the cucked and hopelessly inept bumbling of the conservative establishment, still not sufficient. Civic nationalism is all well and good in a largely homogeneous population with common racial memory and attitudes; it is nowhere near enough in a heterogeneous empire made up of disparate minority groups which seek to use government power and force to trample upon the rights of the white majority that actually built the empire itself.

Sooner or later, the direct, culture-based nationalism of the Alt-Right is going to make its presence felt. It's simply a matter of time- because we acknowledge Truth for what it is, however harsh and terrible, not what we want it to be.

Nonetheless, I remain optimistic that, based on his latest performance, the God-Emperor is likely to prove the single most effective leader of American nationalism that the world has seen since President Reagan. He may even eclipse the Gipper himself one day, and be held in the same regard as President Andrew Jackson- an American nationalist par excellence.

Even President Trump would be hard-pressed to do better than that, really. But he just might.

So I ask you, lads, once again- ARE YOU TIRED OF WINNING YET?!?