Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)

Identity politics as diversion of attention from social inequality

News Class Struggle In The USA Recommended Links Identity politics as divide and conquer Bait and Switch  Divide and conquer strategy
Hillary Clinton faux feminism Bill Clinton, the founder of "Vichy left" Divide and conquer strategy Predator state  Deception as an art form Neoliberal Propaganda: Journalism In the Service of the
Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair The Deep State The Iron Law of Oligarchy Elite Theory Leo Strauss and the Neocons  
Obama: a yet another Neocon Mayberry Machiavellians John Dilulio letter Pope Francis on danger of neoliberalism "F*ck the EU": State Department neocons show EU its real place Fifth Column of Neoliberal Globalization
Neoliberalism as a New form of Corporatism The ability and willingness to employ savage methods Neocolonialism as Financial Imperialism Color revolutions   IMF as the key institution for neoliberal debt enslavement Powerful Few
American Exceptionalism Corporatism Hillary "Warmonger" Clinton      
Ethno-linguistic and "Cultural" Nationalism as a reaction to Neoliberalism induced decline of standards of living  From EuroMaidan to EuroAnschluss Big Uncle is Watching You   Politically Incorrect Humor Etc

The term "neoliberal identity politics"   can also be used in a neutral, non-pejorative sense to encompass ‘feminism, black liberation, gay rights, minorities right, nationalism, etc …’

Neolib DemoRats given up "class warfare" for "identity politics". A Blairite would say: "we wanted to be a party of power" => money. Identity politics led to "unilateral representation of ethnic minorities", that is a politic decision based on race.

Identity politics has been co-opted by the neoliberal technocracy to divert attention from wealth inequalities, the operation of big corporations in politics and the general lack of democratic accountability in governance.

This is why African Americans voters which have been just as let down by neoliberal politics by Bill Clinton and Obama  voted overwhelmingly for Bill Clinton, Obama and Hillary Clinton. Such a nice politico-technological trick did them in.

This election identity politics did not work. Neocon Hillary  Clinton with all her identity politics tricks have failed not just in policy terms, but electorally. She is over. She is gone.

Minorityreported
For the last thirty years, there has been no left or right wing governments - not economically or fiscally. Third way centrism (liberal progressiveness) embraced the primacy of unfettered market capitalism and corporate globalism, and focused exclusively on using political power as a tool to win the culture war instead. That's fine if you've done materially very well out of unfettered market capitalism and corporate globalism, and all that therefore matters to you is social justice issues. But if you were once in a secure job with a decent income and decent prospects for your children, and all of that has been ripped away from you by unfettered market capitalism and corporate globalism, and the people responsible for preventing that - or at least fixing it when it happens - are more concerned with policing the language you use to express your fears and pain, and demonstrating their compassion by trying to improve the life chances of people on other continents, then social justice issues become a source of burning resentment, not enlightenment. There has been a crushing rejection of globalism and corporate plutocracy by Western electorates. The Western progressive left will only survive if it has the courage to recognise that, and prioritises the fight for economic and fiscal policies that promote the interests and prospects of its own poor and middle class, over and above the cultural issues that have defined it for a quarter of a century. We should always remain vigilant, but the truth is that the culture war is won. It would be tragic beyond words if that victory was reversed by an explosion of resentment caused by the left's determination to guard old battle fields, while ignoring the reality that its thinkers and activists are needed to right new injustices. Trump's success doesn't represent the victory of hate over hope, it just represents the loss of hope. The left has to see that or its finished.
confluence50,
The left pandered to the margins. It is more important for them to impose a transsexual using a rest room with my daughter in school than it is to just keep the boys with boys and girls with girls.

One example, but my point is that this kind of policy alienates and offends more people than it seeks to serve. The dems let us down by pandering to the margins of our society along with prioritizing all sorts of things that simply just don't matter to the rank and file American.

dusktildawn,

I agree. I think looking at this through the prism of race and gender is a massive red herring. Race and gender bias are symptoms of insecurity, not causes of it. The insecurity in this case is the feeling that the country - economically, politically and culturally - has been stolen by elites who care naught about ordinary, less privileged folk.

On another thread I also mentioned another issue which is how fractured society has become in the West, how disconnected its different parts, a process which technology has fuelled. You can get through your life today without dealing in any significant way with anyone who disagrees with you, which is actually very, very dangerous.

Potyka Kalman,
They given up "class warfare" for "identity politics". A Blairite would say: "we wanted to be a party of power" => money.

Identity politics led to "unilateral representation of ethnic minorities", that is a politic decision based on race.

Yeah, Democrats has a lot to account for. They are guilty.

lotusblue,
The working classes have been stripped of their dignity, whole communities have become wastelands and virtual ghettos. The working class don't trust the left to sort things out for them and that is why and how a figure like Trump can come along and say 'I will save you all' and become President.

Meanwhile, the socialist left sit around scratching their heads, unable to work out what has happened and squabble about the spirit of socialism and ideology that in all honesty, most working class people don't give a toss about. They just want jobs that pay a decent wage, a nice house to own, nice food on the table, two cars and nice holidays. They want to be middle class in other words.

marjane52 lotusblue, 
But democrats are not left. They right wing too. If Americans think that Democrats are left, they don´t know what left is at all. And what socialist goverment has USA had. I see Americans saying tthat Democrats are socialists, really?.Hillary left and socialist?. Trump and Hillary are both right wing, only that Trump is more extreme.
muttley79,  
Guardian columnists such as Hadley Freeman, Lucia Graves, Wolff, Abramson, Freedland and company should be forced to read this article. These columnists very rarely if ever talk about the Gilded Age style inequality levels in the West, and the USA in particular. Instead it is all about identity politics for them. Can these individuals start writing about the disastrous chasm between the very rich and the rest please?

hexotic -> muttley79,

Definitely. Identity politics has been coopted by the neoliberal technocracy to divert attention from wealth inequalities, the operation of big corporations in politics and the general lack of democratic accountability in governance.


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Jun 05, 2018] The importance of identity wedge in two party voting

Jun 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

anon [317] Disclaimer , June 5, 2018 at 5:44 pm GMT

@Rational

responding to PG's comments and the comments of Rational Zionist, among them, being many NY Intellectuals, invented mugged reality (Neoconism), but party slithering is a another name for divide and conquer.

Fudmier's example as to how to control the vote:

You present an idea to 6 people (there are seven votes including yours, you are the one); virtually everyone is indifferent or against your idea. Before the vote, how can you make the outcome favorable to your side? Divide the opinions on a related subject so that the people must vote for your idea if they take a side on the related subject. I am always either a Democrat or a Republican, cannot vote for anything the other party presents, no matter how good it is. So make the idea Republican or Democratic.

Here is a simple example:

no division     1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total votes 7. Voted for me 1 (myself only)                   I lose
divide by party D R D R D R R Total votes 7. Voted for me (3 republican votes and myself) 4 I win

As the simple analysis suggests: it is easy to win a vote when the idea is Glued to the two AAs (glue, attached, or associated). The unpopular idea Glued and attached or associated with the political party issue splits the vote (such activity divides and weakens the political power inherent in the voting power of the masses). For example, if we make the vote to turn off all of the drinking water. the only vote will be mine, but if we say turn off the drinking water to all but those who are green, we divide the vote. and control the outcome.

This brings us to the democratic dilemma: should the non green people be included in vote on that issue? In fact, it is exactly this problem that those who wrote the constitution intended to establish.

The aggressive foreign policies and national security positions mentioned by PG have been attached to the standard Jewish line; in other words the duty of a Jew to recognize him/herself as a Jew and to vote as a member of the clan has been glued to the AAs. It is nearly impossible to vote for Jewish interest and not vote to demolish Palestinian homes.

I am hoping this list can develop ways to analyze current events into a set of fair play rules, reading, learning and analyzing books, journals and events and writing about them is not enough; some kind of action is needed to bring into reality the findings of these readings, learning and analysis produce. The best way to offset misleading, false or invented propaganda is to force it to into a rule based debunking process. Simple rules that everyone can learn, understand and adopt.

Capitalist Russia and its resources represent a major competitor to the resources and schemes of the capitalist neocon led West. Hating Russia is like being a democrat or a republican, it keeps the pharaoh options open.

[Apr 29, 2018] Immigration and identity politics

Apr 29, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

cynical_bystander -> StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 05:41

If you are saying that their expertise lies elsewhere, that is surely self-evident?
Crazymoomin , 24 Apr 2018 05:37

Working-class white people may claim to be against identity politics, but they actually crave identity politics.

I think they probably see it more of a "if you can't beat them, join them" scenario. They see the way the wind is blowing and decide if they want representation, they have to play the game, even if they don't really like the rules.

Ron Jackson -> CharlesBradlaugh , 24 Apr 2018 05:30
No sloth will make you live in poverty, unless you are actually the animal the sloth.
StevoT -> cynical_bystander , 24 Apr 2018 05:28
The detail. They don't know the detail. They don't have the expertise. Which is what this article is about.

They don't know what they're talking about, even if they do know what they want.

cynical_bystander -> StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 05:22
.... but see my previous post.

They know enough about the EU to know that it isn't one of their patrons and sponsors. They also know that Westminster have been systematically misrepresenting the EU for their own purposes for decades, and they can use the same approach.

What more is required?

CharlesBradlaugh -> Ron Jackson , 24 Apr 2018 05:15
are we supposed to be impressed by your middle income? Poverty is not caused by sloth.
CharlesBradlaugh -> Ron Jackson , 24 Apr 2018 05:12
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards . Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs .
Ron Jackson -> CharlesBradlaugh , 24 Apr 2018 05:08
Not a fool and I don't hate anyone at 55 I have 1.2M in investments, I make 165k a year and pay 40k+ a year in taxes. I to come across people who live off of we everyday and expect to free load. I am not a blowhard just an engineer who pays for sloth.
KeyboardChimp , 24 Apr 2018 05:07
Non expert berating non experts. The Michael Massing paradox.
CharlesBradlaugh -> Ron Jackson , 24 Apr 2018 04:57
I've met many fools like you in my over 50 years on the planet, blowhards parading their ignorance as a badge of pride, thinking that their hatred of anyone not exactly like them is normal, mistaking what some cretin says on the far right radio for fact.

You people would be comical if not for the toxicity that your stupidity engenders.

Monkeybiz -> SteveofCaley , 24 Apr 2018 04:51
It's a play on the motto "One country under God". Rather clever, I thought.
Monkeybiz -> Andrew Nichols , 24 Apr 2018 04:50
Yes, there is a deep lack of context and hence dilution of meaning as a result
Monkeybiz -> Navarth , 24 Apr 2018 04:48
Al Jazeera tries to do a better job, at least providing a spectrum of opinion and a lot of depth in quite a few issues, something most other networks fail to do these days.
StevoT -> cynical_bystander , 24 Apr 2018 04:48
Don't think I am confusing anything.

My point was about expertise. Brexiteers have goals about which I agree with you.

My point is that they don't know about the subject, the EU, which they are using to achieve their goals.

Monkeybiz -> breitling1884 , 24 Apr 2018 04:47
Really? Were they repeated?
cynical_bystander -> StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 04:37
Don't fall into the associated trap either, of the false equation between STATED and ACTUAL goals.

Fox and Hunt are fully aware that to actually admit their actual goal, would be (probably) just about the only thing which would provoke an electoral backlash which would sweep the Conservatives from office. The NHS is proverbially "the nearest thing the English have, to a religion" and is a profoundly dangerous subject for debate.

Fox and Hunt may be weaving an incomprehensible web of sophistry and misdirection, but no part of it is accidental.

StevoT -> cynical_bystander , 24 Apr 2018 04:31
Don't disagree with this. Doesn't mean they know what they are talking about.
cynical_bystander -> StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 04:12
Please, please don't make the unfounded assumption that people like Fox, Johnson, Cameron et al are as stupid as they sometimes appear.

Fox and Hunt, in particular, know exactly what they are engaged in - a hard-right coup designed to destroy government control over the NHS and route its enormous cash flows into the pockets of their private, mostly American sponsors. It isn't necessary to look far, to discover their connections and patronage from this source.

Johnson is consumed by ambition, as was Cameron before him; like Cameron, he makes much of his self-presumed fitness for the role, whilst producing no supporting evidence of any description.

Brexit, as defined by its advocates, CANNOT be discussed precisely because no rational debate exists. It hinges upon the Conservative Party's only fear, that of disunity leading to Opposition. They see that Labour are 50-odd seats short of a majority, and that's ALL they see.

cynical_bystander -> aurelian , 24 Apr 2018 04:06
What in God's green world are you talking about? Did you read that before pressing "Post"? It's obvious that you have no knowledge whatsoever of the subject.

The "race riots" of the 1940s and 1950s were essentially about employment protection (the first, regarding the importation of Yemeni seamen into the North-East of England). The mostly Pakistani influx into the North-West of England was an attempt to cut labour costs and prop up a dying, obsolete industry, mortally wounded by the loss of its business model in the aftermath of Empire; an industry whose very bricks and mortar are long since gone, but the imported labour and their descendants remain... the influx of Caribbean labour into London and the South-East was focussed around the railways and Underground, to bolster the local labour force which had little interest in dead-end shift-work jobs in the last days of steam traction and the increasingly run-down Underground.

Labour, in those days, was strongly anti-immigration precisely because it saw no value in it, to their unionised, heavy-industry voter base.

Regarding the ideological, anti-British, anti-democratic nature of Labour's conversion to mass immigration, you need only read the writings and speeches of prominent figures of the day such as Roy Hattersley and Harriet Harman, who say exactly this, quite clearly and in considerable detail. Their ideological heirs, figures like Diane Abbot (who is stridently anti-white and anti-British), Andrew Neather and Hazel Blears, can speak for themselves.

sgwnmr -> SteveofCaley , 24 Apr 2018 03:50
I guess you're of the "when I'm doubt talk gibberish" school of argument capitulation.
StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 03:17
I was recently struck by this part of the Guardian obituary of Lady Farrington of Ribbleton:

' she possessed the important defining characteristic that, above others, wins admiration across all the red leather benches in the House of Lords: she knew what she was talking about'

Too often these days we are governed by people who don't know what they are talking about. Never has this been truer than the likes of Fox, Davis, Johnson, and other Brexiteers.

But this doesn't seem to matter much anymore. At times it seems that anyone can make generised assertions about something, without having to back them up with evidence, and then wave away questions about their veracity.

Opinion now trumps evidence regularly, even on the BBC where Brexit ideology is often now given a free pass. The problem for those of us who value expertise is that with the likes of Trump, and some EU Leavers, we are up against a bigotry which is evangelical in nature. A gospel that cannot be questioned, a creed that allows no other thinking.

SteveofCaley -> sgwnmr , 24 Apr 2018 02:37
The best you can do is complain about "this?" This WHAT? Try a noun. You're being an embarrassment to troglodytes everywhere. Don't just point and leap up and down. Your forefathers died in bringing you a language. Be an expressive hominid and name the thing that hurts.
gilstra , 24 Apr 2018 02:29
It seems at the moment the Guardian also suffers from a glut of experts without expertise. Not a day goes by that my jaw doesn't drop at some inane claim made by what seems to be a retinue of contributors who have neither good writing skills nor a particularly wide look on things. An example today: "Unlike Hillary Clinton, I never wanted to be someone's wife". How extraordinary. Who says she ever 'wanted to be someone's wife'? Maybe she fell in love with someone all those years ago and they decided to get married? Who knows. But sweeping statements like that do not endear you to quite a few of your once very loyal readers. It's annoying.
aurelian -> cynical_bystander , 24 Apr 2018 02:03
I think this posits an overriding explanation for people's actions that doesn't exist. Even the idea that immigration is a new liberal plot. Take the wind rush generation of immigrants while there was a Tory government at the time I think the idea this was an attempt to undermine white working class gains is provably nonsensical
cynical_bystander , 24 Apr 2018 01:21
The problem with this article, and the numerous other similar pieces which appear in the various editions of the Guardian on a "regular-and-often" basis, is that it completely avoids a very basic point, because it has no answer to it.

It is this.

The white British (and by extension, Western) populations never wanted mass immigration because they knew from the outset, that its purpose was to undermine the social and political gains they had wrested from the political and financial elite after 1945. They cared not at all for the fratricidal conflicts between alien religions and cultures, of which they knew little and regarded what they did know as unacceptable.

The US achieved a huge economic boom without it. Australia and New Zealand, Canada and the USA were popular destinations for the British population whose goal and mantra was "no return to the thirties" and who emigrated in large numbers.

White semi-skilled and unskilled (and increasingly, lower middle class) populations everywhere reject, and have always rejected third world mass immigration (and more recently, in some areas, mass emigration from the former Soviet Union) for the simple, and sufficient reason that they have no possible reason or incentive to support or embrace it. It offers them nothing, and its impact on their lives is wholly negative in practical terms - which is how a social group which lives with limited or no margins between income and outgoings, necessarily
perceives life.

Identity politics has no roots amongst them, because they correctly perceive that whatever answer it might produce, there is no possible outcome in which the preferred answer will be a semi-skilled, white family man. They inevitably pick up a certain level of the constant blare of "racist bigot, homophobe, Islsmophobia" from its sheer inescapability, but they aren't COMPLETELY stupid.

RalphDemming , 24 Apr 2018 01:00
Dumb and dumber writers...

[Apr 24, 2018] Class and how they use words to hide reality

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... For example, when a Republican talks about "freedom" they don't mean "freedom from want". They mean "freedom from government oppression", but only government oppression. ..."
"... Democrats act the same way about different things. When a Democrat says "diversity", they only mean diversity of race, gender, or sexual orientation. Diversity of ideas? Diversity of class? Not so much. When a Democrat says "privilege" it refers to "white" and "male". Privilege of wealth? (i.e. like the dictionary definition) That generally gets forgotten. ..."
"... -- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW) ..."
"... @thanatokephaloides ..."
"... -- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW) ..."
"... @longtalldrink ..."
"... @longtalldrink ..."
"... @Lily O Lady ..."
"... @Lily O Lady ..."
"... @longtalldrink ..."
"... @lizzyh7 ..."
"... @dkmich ..."
Apr 24, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

gjohnsit on Wed, 04/18/2018 - 11:45pm

I've come to realize that there's a lot of confusion out there due to people using words with very specific definitions.

For example, when a Republican talks about "freedom" they don't mean "freedom from want". They mean "freedom from government oppression", but only government oppression.

Private oppression? Republicans will either deny it exists, or justify it. When a Republican is "pro-life" it only refers to birth. Because those very same pro-life people are generally pro-war and pro-death penalty.

Democrats act the same way about different things. When a Democrat says "diversity", they only mean diversity of race, gender, or sexual orientation. Diversity of ideas? Diversity of class? Not so much. When a Democrat says "privilege" it refers to "white" and "male". Privilege of wealth? (i.e. like the dictionary definition) That generally gets forgotten.

And then there is the bipartisan misuse of words, which revolves around war and wealth.
When they say "humanitarian war" they mean, um, some contradictory concepts that are meaningless, but are designed to make you feel a certain way.
When they say "socialism" they really mean "state oppression" regardless of the economic system.
As for the many version of socialism with minimal or non-existent central governments? Or when socialist programs work? No one talks about them.

Let's not forget substituting or mixing up "middle class" for "working class".
"Working class" now equals "poor", which isn't right.
They use "working class" as a smear too.
When you say "working class" some people automatically insert certain words in front of it, as if it's generally understood.

When many hear discussion of outreach to "working class" voters, they silently add the words "white" and "male" and all too often imagine them working on a factory floor or in construction. They shouldn't. According to another analysis by CAP from late last year, just under 6 in 10 members of the working class are white, and the group is almost half female (46 percent).

The topic of the needs and interests of the working class is usually race and gender neutral. Only the dishonest or indoctrinated can't wrap their minds around that fact.This is important because working class values don't require a race or gender lens.

a new report released today by the Center for American Progress makes a convincing argument, using extensive polling data, that this divide does not need to exist. As it turns out, in many cases, voters -- both college educated and working class, and of all races -- are in favor of an economic agenda that would offer them broader protections whether it comes to work, sickness or retirement.
"The polling shows that workers across race support similar views on economic policy issues," said David Madland, the co-author of the report, entitled "The Working-Class Push for Progressive Economic Policies." "They support a higher minimum wage, higher taxes on the wealthy, and more spending on healthcare and retirement. There is broad support among workers for progressive economic policy."

This shows that it's possible to make economic issues front and center in a campaign platform in a way that doesn't just talk to working class whites and dismisses the concerns of female and minority voters. It also shows that the oft-discussed dilemma among Democrats -- whether to prioritize college educated voters or working class ones -- may be a false choice.

Propaganda is all about false choices. To accomplish this, the media has created a world in which the working class exist only in the margins .

With the working class largely unrepresented in the media, or represented only in supporting roles, is it any wonder that people begin to identify in ways other than their class? Which is exactly what the ruling class wants .

I can't believe I used to fall for this nonsense! It takes a stupendous level of cognitive dissonance to simultaneously celebrate the fortunes of someone from a specific identity while looking past the vast sea of people from said identity who are stuck in gut-wrenching poverty. We pop champagnes for the neo-gentry while disregarding our own tribulations. It's the most stunning form of logical jujitsu establishment shills have successfully conditioned us to accept; instead of gauging the health of the economy and the vitality of our nation based on the collective whole, we have been hoodwinked to accept the elevation of a few as success for us all.
Diversity has become a scam and nothing more than a corporate bamboozle and a federated scheme that is used to hide the true nature of crony capitalism. We have become a Potemkin society where tokens are put on the stage to represent equality while the vast majority of Americans are enslaved by diminishing wages or kneecapped into dependency. The whole of our politics has been turned into an identity-driven hustle. On both sides of the aisle and at every corner of the social divide are grievance whisperers and demagogues who keep spewing fuel on the fire of tribalism. They use our pains and suffering to make millions only to turn their backs on us the minute they attain riches and status.

It's only when you see an article written by the ruling elite, or one that identifies with the ruling elite, that you realize just how out-of-touch they can be. The rich really are different - they are sociopaths. They've totally and completely bought into their own righteousness, merit and virtue .

Class ascendance led me to become what Susan Jacoby classifies in her recent New York Times Op-Ed "Stop Apologizing for Being Elite" as an "elite": a vague description of a group of people who have received advanced degrees. Jacoby urges elites to reject the shame that they have supposedly recently developed, a shame that somehow stems from failing to stop the working class from embracing Trumpism. Jacoby laments that, following the 2016 election, these elites no longer take pride in their wealth, their education, their social status, and posits that if only elites embraced their upward mobility, the working class would have something to aspire to and thus discard their fondness for Trump and his promises to save them.

That level of condescension just blows my mind. It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil, or Russia, than I do with the wealthy elite in my own country. Don't think that the wealthy haven't figured that out too.

Pricknick on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:03am
Condescension.

That is the only word you need pay attention to.
I am inferior therefore expendable.
How the lofty will fail. They will succumb to those who are lessor in their minds.
Nice post gjohn.

Wink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 4:11pm
And posted as a pod,

sort of, at... Patreon.com/C99
@Pricknick

That is the only word you need pay attention to.
I am inferior therefore expendable.
How the lofty will fail. They will succumb to those who are lessor in their minds.
Nice post gjohn.

thanatokephaloides on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:13am
the working class and the employing class have nothing in common

It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil, or Russia, than a do with the wealthy elite in my own country.
Don't think that the wealthy haven't figured that out too.

The working class and the employing class have nothing in common.
There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among
millions of the working people and the few, who make up the employing
class, have all the good things of life.

-- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW)
source

QMS on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 8:17pm
over generalized

@thanatokephaloides I have been a worker and an employer for most of my career. I associate with many of the same ilk. None of us working / employer types can afford to hire the millions of under employed. Maybe a few here and there. We are not wealthy, nor are we taking advantage of the poor. Try to put this lofty idealism into perspective.

It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil, or Russia, than a do with the wealthy elite in my own country.
Don't think that the wealthy haven't figured that out too.

The working class and the employing class have nothing in common.
There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among
millions of the working people and the few, who make up the employing
class, have all the good things of life.

-- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW)
source

earthling1 on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:18am
Their heads will look real fine

on a pike.

Meteor Man on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:30am
The Working-Class Push for Progressive Economic Policies

Somebody at CAP may be out of a job. I tried to find the report and came up empty. Can you provide the link? Thx.

The Aspie Corner on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 7:56am
But 'Murica is a classless society..../s

My ass. Class was a huge factor in 2016 (And still is) and working class issues were utterly ignored.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/-jjrSWCgJus?modestbranding=0&html5=1&rel=0&autoplay=0&wmode=opaque&loop=0&controls=1&autohide=0&showinfo=0&theme=dark&color=red&enablejsapi=0

longtalldrink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:25pm
And let us not forget Occupy Wallstreet

was the continuation of the Poor People's Campaign. We are all still in dire straights.

Lily O Lady on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 11:09am
I up-voted you but

@longtalldrink @longtalldrink
that's " dire ." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

was the continuation of the Poor People's Campaign. We are all still in dire straights.

thanatokephaloides on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 1:33pm
dyer

@Lily O Lady

I up-voted you but that's "dire." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

A "dyer" is one who applies dyes.

"Dire" is a synonym for desperate. And it applies to our situation.

#6 #6
that's " dire ." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

longtalldrink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:21pm
Ugh

@Lily O Lady I saw that after I posted it and knew the grammar police would get me...yikes.

#6 #6
that's " dire ." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

lizzyh7 on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 5:40pm
I just assumed it was

@longtalldrink a play on Dyer Straights...!

#6.1 I saw that after I posted it and knew the grammar police would get me...yikes.

longtalldrink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 8:36pm
Actually

@lizzyh7 they were one of my favorite groups...so maybe subconsciously, this is what I was doing?

#6.1.2 a play on Dyer Straights...!

dkmich on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:37pm
So pay more taxes if you make more than 250K, BUT

pay $125K per kid for college if you earn more than 125K. That makes zero sense. A parent has no legal obligation to a child after age 18, but the 18 year old must include parental income if they apply for PELL. If they are included in their parents family, then the family must be legally obligated to pay for college. 18 can legally die, go to war, be incarcerated, and contractually bound, but they can't have a drink or be legally entitled to the same rights and benefits as everyone else.

Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you pay for yours." It is no wonder there is so much resentment at all levels and an economic coalition can't be formed. Somebody is always measuring who mom loves best. At no time did Bernie say a word about means testing a GD thing. It is why he was able to transcend labels.

thanatokephaloides on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 1:42pm
paid for

@dkmich

Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you pay for yours."

Especially when one considers the chances of that being true are really quite small.

Contrary to the Randian beLIEf, they didn't build what they have all by themselves. Society carried quite a bit of the freight here.

pay $125K per kid for college if you earn more than 125K. That makes zero sense. A parent has no legal obligation to a child after age 18, but the 18 year old must include parental income if they apply for PELL. If they are included in their parents family, then the family must be legally obligated to pay for college. 18 can legally die, go to war, be incarcerated, and contractually bound, but they can't have a drink or be legally entitled to the same rights and benefits as everyone else.

Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you pay for yours." It is no wonder there is so much resentment at all levels and an economic coalition can't be formed. Somebody is always measuring who mom loves best. At no time did Bernie say a word about means testing a GD thing. It is why he was able to transcend labels.

Snode on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:01pm
Thomas Edsall has an article

That starts out on disparities in housing, but rounds abouts to the "Elite Class" and the urban gentrification by corporatist democrats. It points out how the democratic party caters to this elite wing, and how the NIMBY-ism of the elites blocks affordable housing laws. It ends up with some observations:

"Taking it a step further, a Democratic Party based on urban cosmopolitan business liberalism runs the risk not only of leading to the continued marginalization of the minority poor, but also -- as the policies of the Trump administration demonstrate -- to the continued neglect of the white working-class electorate that put Trump in the White House."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/19/opinion/democrats-gentrification-citi...

Lenzabi on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:48pm
We Can't

We really can't afford the wealthy parasite class anymore nor should we suffer their think tanks that make folks worship them and their lifestyles of indulgence and greed!

[Apr 22, 2018] The American ruling class loves Identity Politics, because Identity Politics divides the people into hostile groups and prevents any resistance to the ruling elite

Highly recommended!
The quotes are from A Conversation on Race, by Paul Craig Roberts - The Unz Review
Notable quotes:
"... The American ruling class loves Identity Politics, because Identity Politics divides the people into hostile groups and prevents any resistance to the ruling elite. With blacks screaming at whites, women screaming at men, and homosexuals screaming at heterosexuals, there is no one left to scream at the rulers. ..."
"... Consequently, the ruling elite have funded "black history," "women's studies," and "transgender dialogues," in universities as a way to institutionalize the divisiveness that protects them. These "studies" have replaced real history with fake history. ..."
Apr 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

Steve Gittelson , April 19, 2018 at 2:43 am GMT

PCR's latest is really good. I love it when he gets to ripping, and doesn't stop for 2000+ words or so. It reads a lot better than Toynbee, fersher.

The working class, designated by Hillary Clinton as "the Trump deplorables," is now the victimizer, not the victim. Marxism has been stood on its head.

The American ruling class loves Identity Politics, because Identity Politics divides the people into hostile groups and prevents any resistance to the ruling elite. With blacks screaming at whites, women screaming at men, and homosexuals screaming at heterosexuals, there is no one left to scream at the rulers.

The ruling elite favors a "conversation on race," because the ruling elite know it can only result in accusations that will further divide society. Consequently, the ruling elite have funded "black history," "women's studies," and "transgender dialogues," in universities as a way to institutionalize the divisiveness that protects them. These "studies" have replaced real history with fake history.

Steve Gittelson , April 19, 2018 at 3:59 pm GMT

Just a bit more real truth from PCR. Carry on

All of America, indeed of the entire West, lives in The Matrix, a concocted [and false] reality. Western peoples are so propagandized, so brainwashed, that they have no understanding that their disunity was created in order to make them impotent in the face of a rapacious ruling class, a class whose arrogance and hubris has the world on the brink of nuclear Armageddon.

History as it actually happened is disappearing as those who tell the truth are dismissed as misogynists, racists, homophobes, Putin agents, terrorist sympathizers, anti-Semites, and conspiracy theorists. Liberals who complained mightily of McCarthyism now practice it ten-fold.

The United States with its brainwashed and incompetent population -- indeed, the entirety of the Western populations are incompetent -- and with its absence of intelligent leadership has no chance against Russia and China, two massive countries arising from their overthrow of police states as the West descends into a gestapo state. The West is over and done with. Nothing remains of the West but the lies used to control the people. All hope is elsewhere.

[Mar 29, 2018] Cultural Marxism and identity politics

Mar 29, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Raoul Duke -> milgram , 28 Mar 2018 08:47

It has nothing to do with marxism. I think "cultural marxism" is used in the same context.

It's basically just a label used by right-wingers to describe all the identity politics etc that faux lefties like the neoliberal democrats engage in to distract their voters from looking at actual leftist economic policies. So instead of trying to narrow the gaps between economic classes it's focuses on giving all identities, cultures and subcultures equal worth.

If that makes sense.. My vocabulary kind of lacked the words I was looking for to try to give a good description just now.. (English being my 2nd language an all)

[Mar 27, 2018] The New York Times procures salacious details of "gray-zone sex" by Eric London

Notable quotes:
"... Business Insider ..."
Mar 01, 2018 | www.wsws.org

On February 21, the New York Times published a notice calling on college students to describe and document any sexual encounter "that may not be viewed as sexual assault but which constitutes something murkier than a bad date." The notice incldues a submission form where students can accuse individuals of having engaged in something the Times calls "gray-zone sex." The Times asks its young tipsters to include names, email addresses, phone numbers and colleges, plus text message records and photographs documenting the encounters.

The Times ' announcement, written by gender editor Jessica Bennett and Daniel Jones, reads in its entirety:

As stories of sexual misconduct continue to dominate the news, a debate has erupted over a particular kind of encounter, one that may not be viewed as sexual assault but which constitutes something murkier than a bad date.

We've seen it play out on a public stage, from the Aziz Ansari incident to The New Yorker's "Cat Person" story. So-called "gray-zone sex" has prompted impassioned conversations about -- and personal reflection on -- what constitutes consent and how we signal our desire or apprehension in the moment. This debate is especially vibrant on college campuses, where for years students and administrators have grappled with the issue.

We want to hear how you handle consent for sexual intimacy in relationships and encounters. Do you have a particular experience you find yourself thinking back to? What was said, texted or hinted at, through words or physical cues, that moved the encounter forward -- or stopped it? How did it make you feel at the time, and how do you think about it now?

The February 21 solicitation links to an article Bennett wrote on December 16, 2017 titled, "When Saying 'Yes' Is Easier Than Saying 'No,'" which sheds further light on what the Times means when it asks "what constitutes consent?" The two articles together show the provocative and witch-hunting character of the Times ' efforts to compile a database of sexual harassment allegations on college campuses across the country.

"For years," Bennett begins in the December article, "my female friends and I have spoken, with knowing nods, about a sexual interaction we call 'the place of no return.' It's a kind of sexual nuance that most women instinctively understand: the situation you thought you wanted, or maybe you actually never wanted, but somehow here you are and it's happening and you desperately want out, but you know that at this point exiting the situation would be more difficult than simply lying there and waiting for it to be over. In other words, saying yes when we really mean no."

Bennett provides two examples, one from her personal life and another from a short story published late last year in the New Yorker titled "Cat person." In both cases, the woman is interested in the man, they court one another, and they both agree to have sex. In the New Yorker story, which is also linked in the February 21 announcement, the protagonist is physically unsatisfied by her partner, who she complains is "heavy" and "bad in bed." Later, the protagonist tells all her friends a version of this encounter, "though," the author explains, "not quite the true one."

Bennett says "there are other names for this kind of sex: gray-zone sex, in reference to that murky gray area of consent; begrudgingly consensual sex, because, you know, you don't really want to do it but it's probably easier to just get it over with; lukewarm sex, because you're kind of 'meh' about it; and, of course, bad sex, where the 'bad' refers not to the perceived pleasure of it, but to the way you feel in the aftermath Sometimes 'yes' means 'no,' simply because it is easier to go through with it than explain our way out of a situation."

"Consent" is a legal term that marks the line between noncriminal and criminal conduct. Sex without consent can, and should, lead to the filing of a complaint followed by the initiation of a criminal investigation, prosecution and, if a jury is persuaded by the evidence, conviction. It is a basic legal tenet that the accused cannot be punished by the state for acts that are not proscribed by law, and in the American system, conduct that falls in a "gray zone" by its very nature does not meet the threshold for conviction: guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt."

But the Times 's call for young people to submit reports of "gray-zone sex" is aimed at creating a parallel system, outside the framework of the law, in which the accused have no right to privacy or to due process. As law professor Catharine MacKinnon wrote in a Times column on February 4, "#MeToo has done what the law could not."

Playing the role of prosecutors in the court of public opinion, the gender editor and her cohorts at the New York Times are creating a massive database that it can dig through to ruin the careers and lives of students and professors based on unproved accusations of sexual conduct that, in any event, is not illegal.

The aim of this reactionary campaign is both political and pecuniary.

First, the Times hopes to create a political and cultural climate in which a broad array of consensual conduct is deemed punishable, even if it does not violate any legal statute.

The Times 's appeal for accusations comes after a number of spreadsheets have surfaced where students and faculty can anonymously submit accusations of harassment or "creepy behavior" on the part of male collegues or teachers. The submissions will involve a massive invasion of privacy. Individuals, without their knowledge or consent, may be placed in a situation where their most intimate behavior is being secretly documented and forwarded to the New York Times . Texts and even photographs will be examined and leered over by the gender editor and her colleagues. It is not difficult to imagine the abuses of privacy that will flow from the Times 's efforts to procure salacious material.

There are countless legal issues involved. There are many states that outlaw the transmission of sexually explicit and lewd material over the Internet. Will the individuals who foolishly transmit the material requested by the Times be opening themselves up to prosecution? If the Times 's editors discover that one or another submission describes sexual behavior that occurred between minors, will they inform the police that they have evidence of a violation of age-of-consent laws?

If the Times receives a submission that describes a consensual sexual encounter between a student and an older faculty member or administrator, will it decide that it must inform the institution of a possible violation of institutional regulations? And what happens if and when prosecutors, having initiated investigations into "gray-zone sex," obtain supboenas, demanding that the Times turn over its files? Who can doubt that the Times will comply with court orders, regardless of the consequences for those who are caught up in the escalating witch hunt?

Second, the call for "gray-zone sex" stories is a shameless effort to make money. In early February, the Times announced a 46 percent increase in digital subscriptions over the past year, and its stock price has increased 40 percent since October, the month it published the allegations against Harvey Weinstein. Reuters wrote, "Subscriptions in the quarter also got a boost from the newspaper's coverage of Harvey Weinstein's sexual harassment story, helping the company post the highest-ever annual subscription revenue of $1 billion." It was also in October 2017 that the Times announced the position of "gender editor," at which point Bennett declared that gender "needs to exist throughout every section of the paper."

However, the newspaper has had trouble attracting younger readers who are more likely to turn to social media and independent websites for news. In 2017, the Times launched its own Discover section on Snapchat "with the aim of capturing younger demographics," Business Insider wrote. The Times 's campaign to broaden the #MeToo campaign to include "gray-zone sex" stories, with a focus on college campuses, is a part of its filthy business strategy.

[Mar 02, 2018] Neocon schumer plays identity politics

Mar 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

renfro , March 2, 2018 at 2:59 am GMT

Don't worry about republicans ..democrats are ruining themselves all alone .every time the deplorables see something like this they will double down on anything but a Dem.
Regardless of one's view on blacks or whites this is a major Stupid for a politician.

Chuck Schumer votes against South Carolina federal judge nominee because he's white

https://www.postandcourier.com/politics/chuck-schumer-votes-against-s-c-judicial-nominee-because-he/article_8b9f1890-1d6b-11e8-8533-0f7cc33319a9.html

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer rejected President Donald Trump's nominee for a long-vacant South Carolina federal judgeship not because of his qualifications but because of his race.
The decision drew the quick ire of South Carolina's two U.S. senators and U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-Spartanburg, a former federal prosecutor.

Schumer, a New York Democrat, said in a Senate floor speech Wednesday he would not support Greenville attorney Marvin Quattlebaum for a vacancy on the U.S. District Court in South Carolina

Voting for Quattlebaum, he said, would result in having a white man replace two African-American nominees from the state put forth by former President Barack Obama.

Schumer said he would not be a part of the Trump administration's pattern of nominating white men.

"The nomination of Marvin Quattlebaum speaks to the overall lack of diversity in President Trump's selections for the federal judiciary," Schumer said.

"It's long past time that the judiciary starts looking a lot more like the America it represents," he continued. "Having a diversity of views and experience on the federal bench is necessary for the equal administration of justice."

South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, the Senate's sole black Republican, pushed back on Schumer's rationale and urged other Senate Democrats to instead address diversity issues by starting with their offices.

"Perhaps Senate Democrats should be more worried about the lack of diversity on their own staffs than attacking an extremely well-qualified judicial nominee from the great state of South Carolina," Scott tweeted Thursday morning.

[Jan 13, 2018] And by voting against its own interests, the white working class isn t just making itself poorer, it s literally killing itself

Notable quotes:
"... The central fact of US political economy, the source of our exceptionalism, is that lower-income whites vote for politicians who redistribute income upward and weaken the safety net because they think the welfare state is for nonwhites. ..."
"... And by voting against its own interests, the white working class isn't just making itself poorer, it's literally killing itself. ..."
"... With some slight variations, Krugman was essentially re-stating the thesis of my 2004 book, What's the Matter With Kansas?, in which I declared on the very first page that working people "getting their fundamental interests wrong" by voting for conservatives was "the bedrock of our civic order; it is the foundation on which all else rests". ..."
Jan 13, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

On New Year's Day, the economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman issued a series of tweets in which he proclaimed as follows:

The central fact of US political economy, the source of our exceptionalism, is that lower-income whites vote for politicians who redistribute income upward and weaken the safety net because they think the welfare state is for nonwhites.

and then, a few minutes later:

And by voting against its own interests, the white working class isn't just making itself poorer, it's literally killing itself.

Was I psyched to see this! With some slight variations, Krugman was essentially re-stating the thesis of my 2004 book, What's the Matter With Kansas?, in which I declared on the very first page that working people "getting their fundamental interests wrong" by voting for conservatives was "the bedrock of our civic order; it is the foundation on which all else rests".

... ... ...

Let me be more explicit. We have just come through an election in which underestimating working-class conservatism in northern states proved catastrophic for Democrats. Did the pundits' repeated insistence that white working-class voters in the north were reliable Democrats play any part in this underestimation? Did the message Krugman and his colleagues hammered home for years help to distract their followers from the basic strategy of Trump_vs_deep_state?

I ask because getting that point wrong was kind of a big deal in 2016. It was a blunder from which it will take the Democratic party years to recover. And we need to get to the bottom of it.

Thomas Frank is a Guardian columnist

[Dec 22, 2017] Beyond Cynicism America Fumbles Towards Kafka s Castle by James Howard Kunstler

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... With the election of 2016, symptoms of the long emergency seeped into the political system. Disinformation rules. There is no coherent consensus about what is happening and no coherent proposals to do anything about it. The two parties are mired in paralysis and dysfunction and the public's trust in them is at epic lows. Donald Trump is viewed as a sort of pirate president, a freebooting freak elected by accident, "a disrupter" of the status quo at best and at worst a dangerous incompetent playing with nuclear fire. A state of war exists between the White House, the permanent D.C. bureaucracy, and the traditional news media. Authentic leadership is otherwise AWOL. Institutions falter. The FBI and the CIA behave like enemies of the people. ..."
"... They chatter about electric driverless car fleets, home delivery drone services, and as-yet-undeveloped modes of energy production to replace problematic fossil fuels, while ignoring the self-evident resource and capital constraints now upon us and even the laws of physics -- especially entropy , the second law of thermodynamics. Their main mental block is their belief in infinite industrial growth on a finite planet, an idea so powerfully foolish that it obviates their standing as technocrats. ..."
"... The universities beget a class of what Nassim Taleb prankishly called "intellectuals-yet-idiots," hierophants trafficking in fads and falsehoods, conveyed in esoteric jargon larded with psychobabble in support of a therapeutic crypto-gnostic crusade bent on transforming human nature to fit the wished-for utopian template of a world where anything goes. In fact, they have only produced a new intellectual despotism worthy of Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Pol Pot. ..."
"... Until fairly recently, the Democratic Party did not roll that way. It was right-wing Republicans who tried to ban books, censor pop music, and stifle free expression. If anything, Democrats strenuously defended the First Amendment, including the principle that unpopular and discomforting ideas had to be tolerated in order to protect all speech. Back in in 1977 the ACLU defended the right of neo-Nazis to march for their cause (National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43). ..."
"... This is the recipe for what we call identity politics, the main thrust of which these days, the quest for "social justice," is to present a suit against white male privilege and, shall we say, the horse it rode in on: western civ. A peculiar feature of the social justice agenda is the wish to erect strict boundaries around racial identities while erasing behavioral boundaries, sexual boundaries, and ethical boundaries. Since so much of this thought-monster is actually promulgated by white college professors and administrators, and white political activists, against people like themselves, the motives in this concerted campaign might appear puzzling to the casual observer. ..."
"... The evolving matrix of rackets that prompted the 2008 debacle has only grown more elaborate and craven as the old economy of stuff dies and is replaced by a financialized economy of swindles and frauds . Almost nothing in America's financial life is on the level anymore, from the mendacious "guidance" statements of the Federal Reserve, to the official economic statistics of the federal agencies, to the manipulation of all markets, to the shenanigans on the fiscal side, to the pervasive accounting fraud that underlies it all. Ironically, the systematic chiseling of the foundering middle class is most visible in the rackets that medicine and education have become -- two activities that were formerly dedicated to doing no harm and seeking the truth ! ..."
"... Um, forgotten by Kunstler is the fact that 1965 was also the year when the USA reopened its doors to low-skilled immigrants from the Third World – who very quickly became competitors with black Americans. And then the Boom ended, and corporate American, influenced by thinking such as that displayed in Lewis Powell's (in)famous 1971 memorandum, decided to claw back the gains made by the working and middle classes in the previous 3 decades. ..."
"... "Wow – is there ever negative!" ..."
"... You also misrepresent reality to your readers. No, the black underclass is not larger, more dysfunctional, and more alienated now than in the 1960's, when cities across the country burned and machine guns were stationed on the Capitol steps. The "racial divide" is not "starker now than ever"; that's just preposterous to anyone who was alive then. And nobody I've ever known felt "shame" over the "outcome of the civil rights campaign". I know nobody who seeks to "punish and humiliate" the 'privileged'. ..."
"... My impression is that what Kunstler is doing here is diagnosing the long crisis of a decadent liberal post-modernity, and his stance is not that of either of the warring sides within our divorced-from-reality political establishment, neither that of the 'right' or 'left.' Which is why, logically, he published it here. National Review would never have accepted this piece ..."
"... "Globalization has acted, meanwhile, as a great leveler. It destroyed what was left of the working class -- the lower-middle class -- which included a great many white Americans who used to be able to support a family with simple labor." ..."
"... Young black people are told by their elders how lucky they are to grow up today because things are much better than when grandpa was our age and we all know this history.\ ..."
"... It's clear that this part of the article was written from absolute ignorance of the actual black experience with no interest in even looking up some facts. Hell, Obama even gave a speech at Howard telling graduates how lucky they were to be young and black Today compared to even when he was their age in the 80's! ..."
"... E.g. Germany. Germany is anything but perfect and its recent government has screwed up with its immigration policies. But Germany has a high standard of living, an educated work force (including unions and skilled crafts-people), a more rational distribution of wealth and high quality universal health care that costs 47% less per capita than in the U.S. and with no intrinsic need to maraud around the planet wasting gobs of taxpayer money playing Global Cop. ..."
"... The larger subtext is that the U.S. house of cards was planned out and constructed as deliberately as the German model was. Only the objective was not to maximize the health and happiness of the citizenry, but to line the pockets of the parasitic Elites. (E.g., note that Mitch McConnell has been a government employee for 50 years but somehow acquired a net worth of over $10 Million.) ..."
Dec 12, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

On America's 'long emergency' of recession, globalization, and identity politics.

Can a people recover from an excursion into unreality? The USA's sojourn into an alternative universe of the mind accelerated sharply after Wall Street nearly detonated the global financial system in 2008. That debacle was only one manifestation of an array of accumulating threats to the postmodern order, which include the burdens of empire, onerous debt, population overshoot, fracturing globalism, worries about energy, disruptive technologies, ecological havoc, and the specter of climate change.

A sense of gathering crisis, which I call the long emergency , persists. It is systemic and existential. It calls into question our ability to carry on "normal" life much farther into this century, and all the anxiety that attends it is hard for the public to process. It manifested itself first in finance because that was the most abstract and fragile of all the major activities we depend on for daily life, and therefore the one most easily tampered with and shoved into criticality by a cadre of irresponsible opportunists on Wall Street. Indeed, a lot of households were permanently wrecked after the so-called Great Financial Crisis of 2008, despite official trumpet blasts heralding "recovery" and the dishonestly engineered pump-up of capital markets since then.

With the election of 2016, symptoms of the long emergency seeped into the political system. Disinformation rules. There is no coherent consensus about what is happening and no coherent proposals to do anything about it. The two parties are mired in paralysis and dysfunction and the public's trust in them is at epic lows. Donald Trump is viewed as a sort of pirate president, a freebooting freak elected by accident, "a disrupter" of the status quo at best and at worst a dangerous incompetent playing with nuclear fire. A state of war exists between the White House, the permanent D.C. bureaucracy, and the traditional news media. Authentic leadership is otherwise AWOL. Institutions falter. The FBI and the CIA behave like enemies of the people.

Bad ideas flourish in this nutrient medium of unresolved crisis. Lately, they actually dominate the scene on every side. A species of wishful thinking that resembles a primitive cargo cult grips the technocratic class, awaiting magical rescue remedies that promise to extend the regime of Happy Motoring, consumerism, and suburbia that makes up the armature of "normal" life in the USA. They chatter about electric driverless car fleets, home delivery drone services, and as-yet-undeveloped modes of energy production to replace problematic fossil fuels, while ignoring the self-evident resource and capital constraints now upon us and even the laws of physics -- especially entropy , the second law of thermodynamics. Their main mental block is their belief in infinite industrial growth on a finite planet, an idea so powerfully foolish that it obviates their standing as technocrats.

The non-technocratic cohort of the thinking class squanders its waking hours on a quixotic campaign to destroy the remnant of an American common culture and, by extension, a reviled Western civilization they blame for the failure in our time to establish a utopia on earth. By the logic of the day, "inclusion" and "diversity" are achieved by forbidding the transmission of ideas, shutting down debate, and creating new racially segregated college dorms. Sexuality is declared to not be biologically determined, yet so-called cis-gendered persons (whose gender identity corresponds with their sex as detected at birth) are vilified by dint of not being "other-gendered" -- thereby thwarting the pursuit of happiness of persons self-identified as other-gendered. Casuistry anyone?

The universities beget a class of what Nassim Taleb prankishly called "intellectuals-yet-idiots," hierophants trafficking in fads and falsehoods, conveyed in esoteric jargon larded with psychobabble in support of a therapeutic crypto-gnostic crusade bent on transforming human nature to fit the wished-for utopian template of a world where anything goes. In fact, they have only produced a new intellectual despotism worthy of Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Pol Pot.

In case you haven't been paying attention to the hijinks on campus -- the attacks on reason, fairness, and common decency, the kangaroo courts, diversity tribunals, assaults on public speech and speakers themselves -- here is the key take-away: it's not about ideas or ideologies anymore; it's purely about the pleasures of coercion, of pushing other people around. Coercion is fun and exciting! In fact, it's intoxicating, and rewarded with brownie points and career advancement. It's rather perverse that this passion for tyranny is suddenly so popular on the liberal left.

Until fairly recently, the Democratic Party did not roll that way. It was right-wing Republicans who tried to ban books, censor pop music, and stifle free expression. If anything, Democrats strenuously defended the First Amendment, including the principle that unpopular and discomforting ideas had to be tolerated in order to protect all speech. Back in in 1977 the ACLU defended the right of neo-Nazis to march for their cause (National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43).

The new and false idea that something labeled "hate speech" -- labeled by whom? -- is equivalent to violence floated out of the graduate schools on a toxic cloud of intellectual hysteria concocted in the laboratory of so-called "post-structuralist" philosophy, where sundry body parts of Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Judith Butler, and Gilles Deleuze were sewn onto a brain comprised of one-third each Thomas Hobbes, Saul Alinsky, and Tupac Shakur to create a perfect Frankenstein monster of thought. It all boiled down to the proposition that the will to power negated all other human drives and values, in particular the search for truth. Under this scheme, all human relations were reduced to a dramatis personae of the oppressed and their oppressors, the former generally "people of color" and women, all subjugated by whites, mostly males. Tactical moves in politics among these self-described "oppressed" and "marginalized" are based on the credo that the ends justify the means (the Alinsky model).

This is the recipe for what we call identity politics, the main thrust of which these days, the quest for "social justice," is to present a suit against white male privilege and, shall we say, the horse it rode in on: western civ. A peculiar feature of the social justice agenda is the wish to erect strict boundaries around racial identities while erasing behavioral boundaries, sexual boundaries, and ethical boundaries. Since so much of this thought-monster is actually promulgated by white college professors and administrators, and white political activists, against people like themselves, the motives in this concerted campaign might appear puzzling to the casual observer.

I would account for it as the psychological displacement among this political cohort of their shame, disappointment, and despair over the outcome of the civil rights campaign that started in the 1960s and formed the core of progressive ideology. It did not bring about the hoped-for utopia. The racial divide in America is starker now than ever, even after two terms of a black president. Today, there is more grievance and resentment, and less hope for a better future, than when Martin Luther King made the case for progress on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963. The recent flash points of racial conflict -- Ferguson, the Dallas police ambush, the Charleston church massacre, et cetera -- don't have to be rehearsed in detail here to make the point that there is a great deal of ill feeling throughout the land, and quite a bit of acting out on both sides.

The black underclass is larger, more dysfunctional, and more alienated than it was in the 1960s. My theory, for what it's worth, is that the civil rights legislation of 1964 and '65, which removed legal barriers to full participation in national life, induced considerable anxiety among black citizens over the new disposition of things, for one reason or another. And that is exactly why a black separatism movement arose as an alternative at the time, led initially by such charismatic figures as Malcolm X and Stokely Carmichael. Some of that was arguably a product of the same youthful energy that drove the rest of the Sixties counterculture: adolescent rebellion. But the residue of the "Black Power" movement is still present in the widespread ambivalence about making covenant with a common culture, and it has only been exacerbated by a now long-running "multiculturalism and diversity" crusade that effectively nullifies the concept of a national common culture.

What follows from these dynamics is the deflection of all ideas that don't feed a narrative of power relations between oppressors and victims, with the self-identified victims ever more eager to exercise their power to coerce, punish, and humiliate their self-identified oppressors, the "privileged," who condescend to be abused to a shockingly masochistic degree. Nobody stands up to this organized ceremonial nonsense. The punishments are too severe, including the loss of livelihood, status, and reputation, especially in the university. Once branded a "racist," you're done. And venturing to join the oft-called-for "honest conversation about race" is certain to invite that fate.

Globalization has acted, meanwhile, as a great leveler. It destroyed what was left of the working class -- the lower-middle class -- which included a great many white Americans who used to be able to support a family with simple labor. Hung out to dry economically, this class of whites fell into many of the same behaviors as the poor blacks before them: absent fathers, out-of-wedlock births, drug abuse. Then the Great Financial Crisis of 2008 wiped up the floor with the middle-middle class above them, foreclosing on their homes and futures, and in their desperation many of these people became Trump voters -- though I doubt that Trump himself truly understood how this all worked exactly. However, he did see that the white middle class had come to identify as yet another victim group, allowing him to pose as their champion.

The evolving matrix of rackets that prompted the 2008 debacle has only grown more elaborate and craven as the old economy of stuff dies and is replaced by a financialized economy of swindles and frauds . Almost nothing in America's financial life is on the level anymore, from the mendacious "guidance" statements of the Federal Reserve, to the official economic statistics of the federal agencies, to the manipulation of all markets, to the shenanigans on the fiscal side, to the pervasive accounting fraud that underlies it all. Ironically, the systematic chiseling of the foundering middle class is most visible in the rackets that medicine and education have become -- two activities that were formerly dedicated to doing no harm and seeking the truth !

Life in this milieu of immersive dishonesty drives citizens beyond cynicism to an even more desperate state of mind. The suffering public ends up having no idea what is really going on, what is actually happening. The toolkit of the Enlightenment -- reason, empiricism -- doesn't work very well in this socioeconomic hall of mirrors, so all that baggage is discarded for the idea that reality is just a social construct, just whatever story you feel like telling about it. On the right, Karl Rove expressed this point of view some years ago when he bragged, of the Bush II White House, that "we make our own reality." The left says nearly the same thing in the post-structuralist malarkey of academia: "you make your own reality." In the end, both sides are left with a lot of bad feelings and the belief that only raw power has meaning.

Erasing psychological boundaries is a dangerous thing. When the rackets finally come to grief -- as they must because their operations don't add up -- and the reckoning with true price discovery commences at the macro scale, the American people will find themselves in even more distress than they've endured so far. This will be the moment when either nobody has any money, or there is plenty of worthless money for everyone. Either way, the functional bankruptcy of the nation will be complete, and nothing will work anymore, including getting enough to eat. That is exactly the moment when Americans on all sides will beg someone to step up and push them around to get their world working again. And even that may not avail.

James Howard Kunstler's many books include The Geography of Nowhere, The Long Emergency, Too Much Magic: Wishful Thinking, Technology, and the Fate of the Nation , and the World Made by Hand novel series. He blogs on Mondays and Fridays at Kunstler.com .

Whine Merchant December 20, 2017 at 10:49 pm

Wow – is there ever negative!
Celery , says: December 20, 2017 at 11:33 pm
I think I need to go listen to an old-fashioned Christmas song now.

The ability to be financially, or at least resource, sustaining is the goal of many I know since we share a lack of confidence in any of our institutions. We can only hope that God might look down with compassion on us, but He's not in the practical plan of how to feed and sustain ourselves when things play out to their inevitable end. Having come from a better time, we joke about our dystopian preparations, self-conscious about our "overreaction," but preparing all the same.

Merry Christmas!

Fran Macadam , says: December 20, 2017 at 11:55 pm
Look at it this way: Germany had to be leveled and its citizens reduced to abject penury, before Volkswagen could become the world's biggest car company, and autobahns built throughout the world. It will be darkest before the dawn, and hopefully, that light that comes after, won't be the miniature sunrise of a nuclear conflagration.
KD , says: December 21, 2017 at 6:02 am
Eat, Drink, and be Merry, you can charge it on your credit card!
Rock Stehdy , says: December 21, 2017 at 6:38 am
Hard words, but true. Kunstler is always worth reading for his common-sense wisdom.
Helmut , says: December 21, 2017 at 7:04 am
An excellent summary and bleak reminder of what our so-called civilization has become. How do we extricate ourselves from this strange death spiral?
I have long suspected that we humans are creatures of our own personal/group/tribal/national/global fables and mythologies. We are compelled by our genes, marrow, and blood to tell ourselves stories of our purpose and who we are. It is time for new mythologies and stories of "who we are". This bizarre hyper-techno all-for-profit world needs a new story.
Liam , says: December 21, 2017 at 7:38 am
"The black underclass is larger, more dysfunctional, and more alienated than it was in the 1960s. My theory, for what it's worth, is that the civil rights legislation of 1964 and '65, which removed legal barriers to full participation in national life, induced considerable anxiety among black citizens over the new disposition of things, for one reason or another."

Um, forgotten by Kunstler is the fact that 1965 was also the year when the USA reopened its doors to low-skilled immigrants from the Third World – who very quickly became competitors with black Americans. And then the Boom ended, and corporate American, influenced by thinking such as that displayed in Lewis Powell's (in)famous 1971 memorandum, decided to claw back the gains made by the working and middle classes in the previous 3 decades.

Peter , says: December 21, 2017 at 8:34 am
I have some faith that the American people can recover from an excursion into unreality. I base it on my own survival to the end of this silly rant.
SteveM , says: December 21, 2017 at 9:08 am
Re: Whine Merchant, "Wow – is there ever negative!"

Can't argue with the facts

P.S. Merry Christmas.

Dave Wright , says: December 21, 2017 at 9:22 am
Hey Jim, I know you love to blame Wall Street and the Republicans for the GFC. I remember back in '08 you were urging Democrats to blame it all on Republicans to help Obama win. But I have news for you. It wasn't Wall Street that caused the GFC. The crisis actually had its roots in the Clinton Administration's use of the Community Reinvestment Act to pressure banks to relax mortgage underwriting standards. This was done at the behest of left wing activists who claimed (without evidence, of course) that the standards discriminated against minorities. The result was an effective repeal of all underwriting standards and an explosion of real estate speculation with borrowed money. Speculation with borrowed money never ends well.

I have to laugh, too, when you say that it's perverse that the passion for tyranny is popular on the left. Have you ever heard of the French Revolution? How about the USSR? Communist China? North Korea? Et cetera.

Leftism is leftism. Call it Marxism, Communism, socialism, liberalism, progressivism, or what have you. The ideology is the same. Only the tactics and methods change. Destroy the evil institutions of marriage, family, and religion, and Man's innate goodness will shine forth, and the glorious Godless utopia will naturally result.

Of course, the father of lies is ultimately behind it all. "He was a liar and a murderer from the beginning."

When man turns his back on God, nothing good happens. That's the most fundamental problem in Western society today. Not to say that there aren't other issues, but until we return to God, there's not much hope for improvement.

NoahK , says: December 21, 2017 at 10:15 am
It's like somebody just got a bunch of right-wing talking points and mashed them together into one incohesive whole. This is just lazy.
Andrew Imlay , says: December 21, 2017 at 10:36 am
Hmm. I just wandered over here by accident. Being a construction contractor, I don't know enough about globalization, academia, or finance to evaluate your assertions about those realms. But being in a biracial family, and having lived, worked, and worshiped equally in white and black communities, I can evaluate your statements about social justice, race, and civil rights. Long story short, you pick out fringe liberal ideas, misrepresent them as mainstream among liberals, and shoot them down. Casuistry, anyone?

You also misrepresent reality to your readers. No, the black underclass is not larger, more dysfunctional, and more alienated now than in the 1960's, when cities across the country burned and machine guns were stationed on the Capitol steps. The "racial divide" is not "starker now than ever"; that's just preposterous to anyone who was alive then. And nobody I've ever known felt "shame" over the "outcome of the civil rights campaign". I know nobody who seeks to "punish and humiliate" the 'privileged'.

I get that this column is a quick toss-off before the holiday, and that your strength is supposed to be in your presentation, not your ideas. For me, it's a helpful way to rehearse debunking common tropes that I'll encounter elsewhere.

But, really, your readers deserve better, and so do the people you misrepresent. We need bad liberal ideas to be critiqued while they're still on the fringe. But by calling fringe ideas mainstream, you discredit yourself, misinform your readers, and contribute to stereotypes both of liberals and of conservatives. I'm looking for serious conservative critiques that help me take a second look at familiar ideas. I won't be back.

peter in boston , says: December 21, 2017 at 10:48 am
Love Kunstler -- and love reading him here -- but he needs a strong editor to get him to turn a formless harangue into clear essay.
Someone in the crowd , says: December 21, 2017 at 11:07 am
I disagree, NoahK, that the whole is incohesive, and I also disagree that these are right-wing talking points.

The theme of this piece is the long crisis in the US, its nature and causes. At no point does this essay, despite it stream of consciousness style, veer away from that theme. Hence it is cohesive.

As for the right wing charge, though it is true, to be sure, that Kunstler's position is in many respects classically conservative -- he believes for example that there should be a national consensus on certain fundamentals, such as whether or not there are two sexes (for the most part), or, instead, an infinite variety of sexes chosen day by day at whim -- you must have noticed that he condemned both the voluntarism of Karl Rove AND the voluntarism of the post-structuralist crowd.

My impression is that what Kunstler is doing here is diagnosing the long crisis of a decadent liberal post-modernity, and his stance is not that of either of the warring sides within our divorced-from-reality political establishment, neither that of the 'right' or 'left.' Which is why, logically, he published it here. National Review would never have accepted this piece. QED.

Jon , says: December 21, 2017 at 11:10 am
This malaise is rooted in human consciousness that when reflecting on itself celebrating its capacity for apperception suffers from the tension that such an inquiry, such an inward glance produces. In a word, the capacity for the human being to be aware of his or herself as an intelligent being capable of reflecting on aspects of reality through the artful manipulation of symbols engenders this tension, this angst.

Some will attempt to extinguish this inner tension through intoxication while others through the thrill of war, and it has been played out since the dawn of man and well documented when the written word emerged.

The malaise which Mr. Kunstler addresses as the problem of our times is rooted in our existence from time immemorial. But the problem is not only existential but ontological. It is rooted in our being as self-aware creatures. Thus no solution avails itself as humanity in and of itself is the problem. Each side (both right and left) seeks its own anodyne whether through profligacy or intolerance, and each side mans the barricades to clash experiencing the adrenaline rush that arises from the perpetual call to arms.

Joe the Plutocrat , says: December 21, 2017 at 11:27 am
"Globalization has acted, meanwhile, as a great leveler. It destroyed what was left of the working class -- the lower-middle class -- which included a great many white Americans who used to be able to support a family with simple labor."

And to whom do we hand the tab for this? Globalization is a word. It is a concept, a talking point. Globalization is oligarchy by another name. Unfortunately, under-educated, deplorable, Americans; regardless of party affiliation/ideology have embraced. And the most ironic part?

Russia and China (the eventual surviving oligarchies) will eventually have to duke it out to decide which superpower gets to make the USA it's b*tch (excuse prison reference, but that's where we're headed folks).

And one more irony. Only in American, could Christianity, which was grew from concepts like compassion, generosity, humility, and benevolence; be re-branded and 'weaponized' to further greed, bigotry, misogyny, intolerance, and violence/war. Americans fiddled (over same sex marriage, abortion, who has to bake wedding cakes, and who gets to use which public restroom), while the oligarchs burned the last resources (natural, financial, and even legal).

The scientist 880 , says: December 21, 2017 at 11:48 am
"Today, there is more grievance and resentment, and less hope for a better future, than when Martin Luther King made the case for progress on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963."

Spoken like a white guy who has zero contact with black people. I mean, even a little bit of research and familiarity would give lie to the idea that blacks are more pessimistic about life today than in the 1960's.

Black millenials are the most optimistic group of Americans about the future. Anyone who has spent any significant time around older black people will notice that you don't hear the rose colored memories of the past. Black people don't miss the 1980's, much less the 1950's. Young black people are told by their elders how lucky they are to grow up today because things are much better than when grandpa was our age and we all know this history.\

It's clear that this part of the article was written from absolute ignorance of the actual black experience with no interest in even looking up some facts. Hell, Obama even gave a speech at Howard telling graduates how lucky they were to be young and black Today compared to even when he was their age in the 80's!

Here is the direct quote;

"In my inaugural address, I remarked that just 60 years earlier, my father might not have been served in a D.C. restaurant -- at least not certain of them. There were no black CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. Very few black judges. Shoot, as Larry Wilmore pointed out last week, a lot of folks didn't even think blacks had the tools to be a quarterback. Today, former Bull Michael Jordan isn't just the greatest basketball player of all time -- he owns the team. (Laughter.) When I was graduating, the main black hero on TV was Mr. T. (Laughter.) Rap and hip hop were counterculture, underground. Now, Shonda Rhimes owns Thursday night, and Beyoncé runs the world. (Laughter.) We're no longer only entertainers, we're producers, studio executives. No longer small business owners -- we're CEOs, we're mayors, representatives, Presidents of the United States. (Applause.)

I am not saying gaps do not persist. Obviously, they do. Racism persists. Inequality persists. Don't worry -- I'm going to get to that. But I wanted to start, Class of 2016, by opening your eyes to the moment that you are in. If you had to choose one moment in history in which you could be born, and you didn't know ahead of time who you were going to be -- what nationality, what gender, what race, whether you'd be rich or poor, gay or straight, what faith you'd be born into -- you wouldn't choose 100 years ago. You wouldn't choose the fifties, or the sixties, or the seventies. You'd choose right now. If you had to choose a time to be, in the words of Lorraine Hansberry, "young, gifted, and black" in America, you would choose right now. (Applause.)"

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/obamas-howard-commencement-transcript-222931

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58cf1d9ae4b0ec9d29dcf283/amp

Adam , says: December 21, 2017 at 11:57 am
I love reading about how the Community Reinvestment Act was the catalyst of all that is wrong in the world. As someone in the industry the issue was actually twofold. The Commodities Futures Modernization Act turned the mortgage securities market into a casino with the underlying actual debt instruments multiplied through the use of additional debt instruments tied to the performance but with no actual underlying value. These securities were then sold around the world essentially infecting the entire market. In order that feed the beast, these NON GOVERNMENT loans had their underwriting standards lowered to rediculous levels. If you run out of qualified customers, just lower the qualifications. Government loans such as FHA, VA, and USDA were avoided because it was easier to qualify people with the new stuff. And get paid. The short version is all of the incentives that were in place at the time, starting with the Futures Act, directly led to the actions that culminated in the Crash. So yes, it was the government, just a different piece of legislation.
SteveM , says: December 21, 2017 at 12:29 pm
Kunstler itemizing the social and economic pathologies in the United States is not enough. Because there are other models that demonstrate it didn't have to be this way.

E.g. Germany. Germany is anything but perfect and its recent government has screwed up with its immigration policies. But Germany has a high standard of living, an educated work force (including unions and skilled crafts-people), a more rational distribution of wealth and high quality universal health care that costs 47% less per capita than in the U.S. and with no intrinsic need to maraud around the planet wasting gobs of taxpayer money playing Global Cop.

The larger subtext is that the U.S. house of cards was planned out and constructed as deliberately as the German model was. Only the objective was not to maximize the health and happiness of the citizenry, but to line the pockets of the parasitic Elites. (E.g., note that Mitch McConnell has been a government employee for 50 years but somehow acquired a net worth of over $10 Million.)

P.S. About the notionally high U.S. GDP. Factor out the TRILLIONS inexplicably hoovered up by the pathological health care system, the metastasized and sanctified National Security State (with its Global Cop shenanigans) and the cronied-up Ponzi scheme of electron-churn financialization ginned up by Goldman Sachs and the rest of the Banksters, and then see how much GDP that reflects the actual wealth of the middle class is left over.

One Guy , says: December 21, 2017 at 1:10 pm
Right-Wing Dittoheads and Fox Watchers love to blame the Community Reinvestment Act. It allows them to blame both poor black people AND the government. The truth is that many parties were to blame.
LouB , says: December 21, 2017 at 1:14 pm
One of the things I love about this rag is that almost all of the comments are included. You may be sure that similar commenting privilege doesn't exist most anywhere else.

Any disfavor regarding the supposed bleakness with the weak hearted souls aside, Mr K's broadside seems pretty spot on to me.

tzx4 , says: December 21, 2017 at 1:57 pm
I think the author overlooks the fact that government over the past 30 to 40 years has been tilting the playing field ever more towards the uppermost classes and against the middle class. The evisceration of the middle class is plain to see.

If the the common man had more money and security, lots of our current intrasocial conflicts would be far less intense.

Jeeves , says: December 21, 2017 at 2:09 pm
Andrew Imlay: You provide a thoughtful corrective to one of Kunstler's more hyperbolic claims. And you should know that his jeremiad doesn't represent usual fare at TAC. So do come back.

Whether or not every one of Kunstler's assertions can withstand a rigorous fact-check, he is a formidable rhetorician. A generous serving of Weltschmerz is just what the season calls for.

Wezz , says: December 21, 2017 at 2:44 pm
America is stupefied from propaganda on steroids for, largely from the right wing, 25? years of Limbaugh, Fox, etc etc etc Clinton hate x 10, "weapons of mass destruction", "they hate us because we are free", birtherism, death panels, Jade Helm, pedophile pizza, and more Clinton hate porn.

Americans have been taught to worship the wealthy regardless of how they got there. Americans have been taught they are "Exceptional" (better, smarter, more godly than every one else) in spite of outward appearances. Americans are under educated and encouraged to make decisions based on emotion from constant barrage of extra loud advertising from birth selling illusion.

Americans brain chemistry is most likely as messed up as the rest of their bodies from junk or molested food. Are they even capable of normal thought?

Donald Trump has convinced at least a third of Americans that only he, Fox, Breitbart and one or two other sources are telling the Truth, every one else is lying and that he is their friend.

Is it possible we are just plane doomed and there's no way out?

John Blade Wiederspan , says: December 21, 2017 at 4:26 pm
I loathe the cotton candy clown and his Quislings; however, I must admit, his presence as President of the United States has forced everyone (left, right, religious, non-religious) to look behind the curtain. He has done more to dis-spell the idealism of both liberal and conservative, Democrat and Republican, rich and poor, than any other elected official in history. The sheer amount of mind-numbing absurdity resulting from a publicity stunt that got out of control ..I am 70 and I have seen a lot. This is beyond anything I could ever imagine. America is not going to improve or even remain the same. It is in a 4 year march into worse, three years to go.
EarlyBird , says: December 21, 2017 at 5:23 pm
Sheesh. Should I shoot myself now, or wait until I get home?
dvxprime , says: December 21, 2017 at 5:46 pm
Mr. Kuntzler has an honest and fairly accurate assessment of the situation. And as usual, the liberal audience that TAC is trying so hard to reach, is tossing out their usual talking points whilst being in denial of the situation.

The Holy Bible teaches us that repentance is the first crucial step on the path towards salvation. Until the progressives, from their alleged "elite" down the rank and file at Kos, HuffPo, whatever, take a good, long, hard look at the current national dumpster fire and start claiming some responsibility, America has no chance of solving problems or fixing anything.

Slooch , says: December 21, 2017 at 7:03 pm
Kunstler must have had a good time writing this, and I had a good time reading it. Skewed perspective, wild overstatement, and obsessive cherry-picking of the rare checkable facts are mixed with a little eye of newt and toe of frog and smothered in a oar and roll of rhetoric that was thrilling to be immersed in. Good work!
jp , says: December 21, 2017 at 8:09 pm
aah, same old Kunstler, slightly retailored for the Trump years.

for those of you familiar with him, remember his "peak oil" mania from the late 00s and early 2010s? every blog post was about it. every new year was going to be IT: the long emergency would start, people would be Mad Maxing over oil supplies cos prices at the pump would be $10 a gallon or somesuch.

in this new rant, i did a control-F for "peak oil" and hey, not a mention. I guess even cranks like Kunstler know when to give a tired horse a rest.

c.meyer , says: December 21, 2017 at 8:30 pm
So what else is new. Too 'clever', overwritten, no new ideas. Can't anyone move beyond clichés?
Active investor , says: December 22, 2017 at 12:35 am
Kunstler once again waxes eloquent on the American body politic. Every word rings true, except when it doesn't. At times poetic, at other times paranoid, Kunstler does us a great service by pointing a finger at the deepest pain points in America, any one of which could be the geyser that brings on catastrophic failure.

However, as has been pointed out, he definitely does not hang out with black people. For example, the statement:

But the residue of the "Black Power" movement is still present in the widespread ambivalence about making covenant with a common culture, and it has only been exacerbated by a now long-running "multiculturalism and diversity" crusade that effectively nullifies the concept of a national common culture.

The notion of a 'national common culture' is interesting but pretty much a fantasy that never existed, save colonial times.

Yet Kunstler's voice is one that must be heard, even if he is mostly tuning in to the widespread radicalism on both ends of the spectrum, albeit in relatively small numbers. Let's face it, people are in the streets marching, yelling, and hating and mass murders keep happening, with the regularity of Old Faithful. And he makes a good point about academia loosing touch with reality much of the time. He's spot on about the false expectations of what technology can do for the economy, which is inflated with fiat currency and God knows how many charlatans and hucksters. And yes, the white working class is feeling increasingly like a 'victim group.'

While Kunstler may be more a poet than a lawyer, more songwriter than historian, my gut feeling is that America had better take notice of him, as The American ship of state is being swept by a ferocious tide and the helmsman is high on Fentanyl (made in China).

JonF , says: December 22, 2017 at 9:52 am
Re: The crisis actually had its roots in the Clinton Administration's use of the Community Reinvestment Act

Here we go again with this rotting zombie which rises from its grave no matter how many times it has been debunked by statisticians and reputable economists (and no, not just those on the left– the ranks include Bruce Bartlett for example, a solid Reaganist). To reiterate again : the CRA played no role in the mortgage boom and bust. Among other facts in the way of that hypothesis is the fact that riskiest loans were being made by non-bank lenders (Countrywide) who were not covered by the CRA which only applied to actual banks– and the banks did not really get into the game full tilt, lowering their lending standards, until late in the game, c. 2005, in response to their loss of business to the non-bank lenders. Ditto for the GSEs, which did not lower their standards until 2005 and even then relied on wall Street to vet the subprime loans they were buying.

To be sure, blaming Wall Street for everything is also wrong-headed, though wall Street certainly did some stupid, greedy and shady things (No, I am not letting them off the hook!) But the cast of miscreants is numbered in the millions and it stretches around the planet. Everyone (for example) who got into the get-rich-quick Ponzi scheme of house flipping, especially if they lied about their income to do so. And everyone who took out a HELOC (Home Equity Line of Credit) and foolishly charged it up on a consumption binge. And shall we talk about the mortgage brokers who coached people into lying, the loan officers who steered customers into the riskiest (and highest earning) loans they could, the sellers who asked palace-prices for crackerbox hovels, the appraisers who rubber-stamped such prices, the regulators who turned a blind eye to all the fraud and malfeasance, the ratings agencies who handed out AAA ratings to securities full of junk, the politicians who rejoiced over the apparent "Bush Boom" well, I could continue, but you get the picture.

We have met the enemy and he was us.

kevin on the left , says: December 22, 2017 at 10:49 am
"The Holy Bible teaches us that repentance is the first crucial step on the path towards salvation. Until the progressives, from their alleged "elite" down the rank and file at Kos, HuffPo, whatever, take a good, long, hard look at the current national dumpster fire and start claiming some responsibility, America has no chance of solving problems or fixing anything."

Pretty sure that calling other people to repent of their sin of disagreeing with you is not quite what the Holy Bible intended.

[Dec 17, 2017] Identity politic is and attempt to swipe under the carpet contradictions based on money and economics power issues and replace them with something else like race, gender, age, etc.

Dec 17, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

JBird , December 16, 2017 at 5:14 pm

Yes, it can be used for that , but often the goal is to channel, and contain the thinking from or to whatever, not degrade. Using modern neoliberal economics as an example. The older 19th and early 20th century mainstream political economy were deeper, more comprehensive, and often better at explaining economics. It was also called political economy, and not just economics for that reason.

There was a real financed campaign to narrow the focus on what we call economics today. Part of that effort was to label people very narrowly as just economic beings, which is what libertarianism is, and to label economic thought outside of it as socialism/communism, which is Stalinism, which is the gulag, which is bad thought. The economists studying this were just as intelligent, thoughtful, and incisive, but the idea, the worm of people=money=economics created a thought stop, or an an un-acknowledgment of anything else, the inability to even see anything else.

I sometimes think some are against the masses getting any higher education because one is exposed to other ways of thinking, and believing. A student might never change their beliefs, but the mind is expanded for considering the possibilities and at looking at where others are coming from. Those mindworms are also more obvious, and less useful.

So you could be ninety year blockhead, but if you are willing to listen, to think on what you are exposed to in college, your mind is expanded and strengthen. Which is perhaps the main goal of a liberal arts education. Even a very hard college education will still have some of the same effect.

Plenue , December 16, 2017 at 6:45 pm

"The economists studying this were just as intelligent, thoughtful, and incisive, but the idea, the worm of people=money=economics created a thought stop, or an an un-acknowledgment of anything else, the inability to even see anything else."

So would you say identity politics is the same thing in reverse? Intelligent people looking at issues from every perspective but that of money and economics?

JBird , December 16, 2017 at 7:41 pm

Yes, as it is used now. It can be very important, but what I have against identity politics as it is done today is that it is the first and last answer to everything. Many people can see, they just think one's identity is paramount. MLK said it best when he talked about being judged for the content of their character rather than the color of their skin.

Please keep in mind that the identity being used could anything. Your sex, gender, orientation, age, class, religion, anything.

Today it's skin color, tomorrow?

[Dec 03, 2017] Another Democratic party betrayal of their former voters. but what you can expect from the party of Bill Clinton?

Highly recommended!
Dec 03, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

SpringTexan , December 2, 2017 at 12:08 pm

And I feel like the Democrats get so distracted. They have been talking about sexual harassment and stuff instead of the TAX BILL. It is so damn easy to get them to take their eyes off the ball! and get played again and again. . . and TRAGIC given the consequences . . .

Big River Bandido , December 2, 2017 at 3:10 pm

It's the perfect "distraction". Allows them to engage in virtue-signaling and "fighting for average Americans". It's all phony, they always "lose" in the end getting exactly what they wanted in the first place, while not actually having to cast a vote for it.

Kabuki theater in every respect.

jrs , December 2, 2017 at 3:18 pm

It's all related, less safety net and more inequality means more desperation to take a job, *ANY* job, means more women putting up with sexual harassment (and workplace bullying and horrible and illegal workplace conditions etc.) as the price of a paycheck.

Allegorio , December 2, 2017 at 11:07 pm

Horrible Toomey's re-election was a parallel to the Clinton/Trump fiasco. The Democrats put up a corporate shill, Katie McGinty that no-one trusted.

"Former lobbyist Katie McGinty has spent three decades in politics getting rich off the companies she regulated and subsidized. Now this master of the revolving-door wants Pennsylvania voters to give her another perch in government: U.S. Senator." Washington Examiner.

She was a Clintonite through and through, that everyone, much like $Hillary, could see through.

Expat , December 2, 2017 at 8:01 am

To paraphrase the Beatles, you say you want a revolution but you don't really mean it. You want more of the same because it makes you feel good to keep voting for your Senator or your Congressman. The others are corrupt and evil, but your guys are good. If only the others were like your guys. News flash: they are all your guys.

America is doomed. And so much the better. Despite all America has done for the world, it has also been a brutal despot. America created consumerism, super-sizing and the Kardashians. These are all unforgivable sins. America is probably the most persistently violent country in the world both domestically and internationally. No other country has invaded or occupied so much of the world, unless you count the known world in which case Macedonia wins.

This tax plan is what Americans want because they are pretty ignorant and stupid. They are incapable of understanding basic math so they can't work out the details. They believe that any tax cut is inherently good and all government is bad so that is also all that matters. They honestly think they or their kids will one day be rich so they don't want to hurt rich people. They also believe that millionaires got their money honestly and through hard work because that is what they learned from their parents.

Just send a blank check to Goldman Sachs. Keep a bit to buy a gun which you can use to either shoot up a McDonalds or blow your own brains out.

And some people still ask me why I left and don't want to come back. LOL

tony , December 2, 2017 at 9:30 am

Macedonia of today is not the same are that conquered the world. They stole the name from Greeks.

That being said, the US is ripe for a change. Every policy the current rulers enact seems to make things better. However, I suspect a revolution would kill majority of the population since it would disrupt the all important supply chains, so it does not seem viable.

However, a military takeover could be viable. If they are willing to wipe out the most predatory portions of the ruling class, they could fix the healthcare system, install a high-employment policy and take out the banks and even the military contractors. Which could make them very popular.

False Solace , December 2, 2017 at 5:18 pm

> a military takeover could be viable

Yeah, right. Have you seen our generals? They're just more of the same leeches we have everywhere else in the 0.01%. Have you seen any of the other military dictatorships around the world, like actually existing ones? They're all brilliantly corrupt and total failures when it comes to running any sort of economy. Not to mention the total loss of civil rights. Americans have this idiotic love of their military thanks to decades of effective propaganda and think the rule of pampered generals would somehow be better than the right to vote. Bleh.

Allegorio , December 2, 2017 at 11:20 pm

This is a military dictatorship. The fourth and sixth amendments have been de facto repealed. Trump cared about one thing and one thing only, namely to repeal the estate tax. He is the ultimate con man and this was his biggest con. It is truly amazing how he accomplished this. He has saved his family a billion $$$. He will now turn over governing to the generals and Goldman Sachs. He may even retire. Truly amazing. One has to admire the sheer perversity of it all. When will the American electorate get tired of being conned? The fact is they have nothing but admiration for Trump. We live in a criminal culture, winner take all. America loves its winners.

John Wright , December 2, 2017 at 10:45 am

There is an old 2003 David Brooks column in which he mentions that

"The Democrats couldn't even persuade people to oppose the repeal of the estate tax, which is explicitly for the mega-upper class. Al Gore, who ran a populist campaign, couldn't even win the votes of white males who didn't go to college, whose incomes have stagnated over the past decades and who were the explicit targets of his campaign. Why don't more Americans want to distribute more wealth down to people like themselves?"

Then Brooks goes on to explain

"The most telling polling result from the 2000 election was from a Time magazine survey that asked people if they are in the top 1 percent of earners. Nineteen percent of Americans say they are in the richest 1 percent and a further 20 percent expect to be someday. So right away you have 39 percent of Americans who thought that when Mr. Gore savaged a plan that favored the top 1 percent, he was taking a direct shot at them."

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/opinion/the-triumph-of-hope-over-self-interest.html

The Republicans have conditioned people to believe government services (except for defense/military) are run poorly and need to be "run like a business" for a profit.

The problem is that not all government services CAN be profitable (homeless care, mental health care for the poor, EPA enforcement, OSHA enforcement). And when attempts are made to privatize some government operations such as incarceration, the result is that the private company tries to maximize profits by pushing for laws to incarcerate ever more people.

The history of the USA as viewed by outsiders, maybe 50 years hence, will be that of a resource consuming nation that spent a vast fortune on military hardware and military adventures when it had little to fear due to geography, a nation that touted an independent press that was anything but, a nation that created a large media/entertainment industry which helped to keep citizens in line, a nation that fostered an overly large (by 2 or 3 times per Paul Whooley) parasitical financial industry that did not perform its prime capital allocation task competently as it veered from bubble to bubble and a nation that managed to spend great sums on medical care without covering all citizens.

But the USA does have a lot of guns and a lot of frustrated people.

Maybe Kevlar vests will be the fashion of the future?

Steve , December 2, 2017 at 2:45 pm

Thanks for the great link on how sadly uninformed average Americans are! I've been looking for it for a while and great comment!

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , December 2, 2017 at 4:08 pm

The provision to do away with the estate tax, if not immediately, in the current versions (House and Senate) is great news for the 1%, and bad for the rest of us.

And if more people are not against that (thanks for quoting the NYTImes article), it's the failure of the rest of the media for not focusing more on it, but wasting time and energy on fashion, sports, entertainment, etc.

Vatch , December 2, 2017 at 7:24 pm

he provision to do away with the estate tax . . . is great news for the 1%

I think it's even a little more extreme than that. The data is a few years old, but it is only the top 0.6% who are affected by estate taxes in the United States. See the data at these web sites:

https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-historical-table-17

https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-estate-tax-statistics-year-of-death-table-1

Sydney Conner , December 2, 2017 at 5:06 pm

Thanks for the succinct, accurate eloquent description of our nightmare reality.

DHG , December 2, 2017 at 8:13 pm

https://www.rawstory.com/2016/11/the-dark-rigidity-of-fundamentalist-rural-america-a-view-from-the-inside/

JTMcPhee , December 2, 2017 at 10:34 pm

The military adventures were largely in support of what Smedley Butler so accurately called the Great "Racket" of Monroe Doctrine colonialism and rapacious extractive "capitalism" aka "looting."

For those who haven't encountered Maj. Gen. Butler's take on his 33 years of serving the Oligokleptocracy, here's a link: https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

A smart and honest fellow, who even declined as a "war hero" to serve as the oligarchs' figurehead in an earlier and clumsier plot to get rid of the trappings and regulation of "democracy:" The Business Plot, https://jtoddring.wordpress.com/2008/01/19/smedley-butler-and-the-business-plot/

It took longer and costed the rich a bit more to buy up all the bits of government, but the way they've done will likely be more compendious and lasting. Barring some "intervening event(s)".

Jonathan Holland Becnel , December 2, 2017 at 11:51 am

Doomed?

Project Much?

While Republicans show their true colors, im out there seeing a resurgence of civil society. And im starting to reach Hard core Tea Party types. Jobs, Manufacturing, Actual Policy.

IOW The Revolution Is Nigh.

2018 will be a Fn watershed.

[Oct 20, 2017] Harvey Sweinstein and Hollywood's Hos

Notable quotes:
"... Liberalism and libertinism are intertwined. The more liberal a woman, the more libertine she'll be -- and the more she'll liberate herself to be coarse, immodest, vulgar and plain repulsive. Think of the menopausal Ashley Judd rapping lewdly about her (alleged) menstrual fluids at an anti-Trump rally. Think of all those liberal, liberated grannies adorning pussy dunce-caps on the same occasion. ..."
"... By nature, the human woman is a peacock. We like to be noticed. The conservative among us prefer the allure of modesty. The sluts among us don't. On social media, women outstrip men in the narcissistic and exhibitionist departments. In TV ads, American women, fat, thin, young and old, are grinding their bottoms, spreading their legs, showing the contours of their crotches, and dancing as though possessed (or like primates on heat), abandoning any semblance of femininity and gentility, all the while laughing like hyenas and hollering hokum like, "I Own It." ..."
"... men are punished when they react normally to women behaving badly ..."
"... So endemic is distaff degeneracy these days that "protesters" routinely disrobe or perform lewd acts with objects in public. Vladimir Putin is a great man if only for arresting a demented band of performance artists, Pussy Riot, for desecrating a Russian church. ..."
"... If men flashed for freedom; they'd be arrested, jailed and placed on the National Sex Offender Registry. ..."
"... haute couture, ..."
"... Feminism promises women empowerment. However, there is a pornographic side to the promise. There are legions of women trying to give the world a hard-on for attention, money, status, etc. When the world reacts, as in the story, they say, "Don't touch me what do you think I am?" ..."
"... What's the big difference between Weinstein and former president Bill Clinton except that one was the frickin president of the US? Clinton used his various positions throughout the years to intimidate women, from the days of using Arkansas state troopers to act as procurers for him to later using federal agencies to harass them into shutting up. His wife Hillary, the almost-president, ran interference for him in muzzling the various women who might have spilled the beans. The Clintons postured themselves as champions of women's rights even as the reality of this sleazy couple was really tawdry. Weinstein was just a studio boss with money and film roles to dispense to a never-ending line of wannabe actresses. He fits right in with the Clintons as part of the Hollywood celebrity and glitz crowd and Hillary would never have called him a "deplorable". Yet even now there's many people who are Clinton fans and supporters even as they hypocritically play this game of 'get the fat guy'. The Clintons are a hundred times worse. ..."
"... You do not need philosophy to explain a love for money. Whether the profiteering Kardashians or the profiteering Madonna (and a legion of her imitators), these women did the indecent, lewd, into-your-face pornographic performances for financial gains. They have been denigrating themselves (and other women, by association) for money. They wanted the money. By any means. ..."
"... That the US government has extolled the deeply amoral Pussy Riot scum tells a lot about the moral crisis in the US, including the unending and very expensive wars of aggression run by the country that has no money for a single-payer medical system. ..."
"... Yes, the culture today is far, far more crass and degenerate than say, in the 50s, when Leave it to Beaver played on America's TVs, and Norman Rockwell and all that. But what has happened to our culture? Has the race into the sewer been a consequence of loose women of America (England, etc..) driving the decline? Or, are the causes a more a top down affair? IOW resulting from the big-money producers and all those men who run Hollywood? ..."
"... women, as indeed many men, are given to fashions and peer pressure. If the prevailing culture is one of modesty and self-respect, the women's behavior will reflect that. The American women of the 1950s were of more or less the same stock of women as the gutter skanks Ilana rightfully laments today, but did women drive this downward trend, or did (a few) men? ..."
"... One thing that has been noticed, are the striking similarities between American culture today and that of Weimar, Germany. Weimar was notoriously corrupt, with sexual degeneracy and prostitution rampant. Berlin was described as a giant brothel, where the desperate German youth were exploited and debased. ..."
"... the relentless, drum-beating agenda to destroy Western values. To eviscerate the culture of 1950s America (with virtues like honor and temperance) once and for all, and replace it with a septic tank value system, where self-respect is replaced with self-loathing. Where dignity and femininity is replace with twerking with your tongue out. Where Hollywood starlets howl about how "nasty" they are, as if being a skank is a moral badge of feminine honor. ..."
"... I am nearly 60 years old. And jokes and stories about "hollywood casting couches" and how pretty young women got roles in productions have been around longer than I have. To me, this whole story is just filed under more "fake news". No, I don't doubt the stories. I don't doubt that harvey was not a good man. But, its all basically propaganda. Harvey supported a political opponent of the people now attacking him 24.7 all over the right-wing media, so now these stories that are older than I am are suddenly headline news and the big lead on right-wing sites all over the internet. ..."
Oct 20, 2017 | www.unz.com

I'd like to better understand the conservative media's orgy over Harvey Weinstein, the disgraced and disgraceful Hollywood film producer and studio executive who used his power over decades to have his way with starlets.

To listen to conservative talkers, the women affronted or assaulted by Weinstein were all Shakespearean talent in the making -- female clones of Richard Burton (he had no match among women) -- who made the pilgrimage to Sodom and Gomorrah in the Hollywood Hills, for the purpose of realizing their talent, never knowing it was a meat market. Watching the women who make up the dual-perspective panels "discussing" the Weinstein saga, it's hard to tell conservative from liberal.

"Conservative" women now complain as bitterly as their liberal counterparts about "objectification."

However, the female form has always been revered; been the object of sexual longing, clothed and nude. The reason the female figure is so crudely objectified nowadays has a great deal to do with women themselves. By virtue of their conduct, women no longer inspire reverence as the fairer sex, and as epitomes of loveliness. For they are crasser, vainer, more eager to expose all voluntarily than any male. Except for Anthony Weiner, the name of an engorged organism indigenous to D.C., who was is in the habit of exposing himself as often as the Kardashians do.

The latter clan is a bevy of catty exhibitionists, controlled by a mercenary, ball-busting matriarch called Kris Kardashian. Kris is madam to America's First Family of Celebrity Pornographers. (To launch a career with a highly stylized, self-directed sex tape is no longer even condemned.) Lots of little girls, with parental approval, look up to the Kardashians.

From Kim, distaff America learns to couch a preoccupation with pornographic selfies in the therapeutic idiom. Kardashian flaunts her ass elephantiasis with pure self-love. Yet millions of her admirers depict her obscene posturing online as an attempt to come to terms with her body. "Be a little easier on myself," counsels Kim as she directs her camera to the nether reaches of her carefully posed, deformed derriere. While acting dirty and self-adoring, Kardashian delivers as close to a social jeremiad on self-esteem as her kind can muster. Genius!

Liberalism and libertinism are intertwined. The more liberal a woman, the more libertine she'll be -- and the more she'll liberate herself to be coarse, immodest, vulgar and plain repulsive. Think of the menopausal Ashley Judd rapping lewdly about her (alleged) menstrual fluids at an anti-Trump rally. Think of all those liberal, liberated grannies adorning pussy dunce-caps on the same occasion.

By nature, the human woman is a peacock. We like to be noticed. The conservative among us prefer the allure of modesty. The sluts among us don't. On social media, women outstrip men in the narcissistic and exhibitionist departments. In TV ads, American women, fat, thin, young and old, are grinding their bottoms, spreading their legs, showing the contours of their crotches, and dancing as though possessed (or like primates on heat), abandoning any semblance of femininity and gentility, all the while laughing like hyenas and hollering hokum like, "I Own It."

The phrase a "bum's rush" means "throw the bum out!" When it comes to Allison Williams, daughter of NBC icon Brian Williams, a bum's rush takes on new meaning. Thanks in no small measure to her famous father, the young woman has become a sitcom star. And Ms. Williams has worked extra-hard to hone all aspects of an actress's instrument (the body). Alison has carried forth enthusiastically about a groundbreaking scene dedicated to exploring "ass motorboating" or "booty-eating ," on HBO's "Girls."

The lewder, more pornographic, and less talented at their craft popular icons become -- the louder the Left lauds their artistically dodgy output. (The "Right" just keeps moving Left.) "Singer" Miley Cyrus was mocked before she began twerking tush, thrusting pelvis and twirling tongue. Only then had she arrived as an artist, in the eyes of "critics" on the Left. The power of the average pop artist and her products, Miley's included, lies in the pornography that is her "art," in her hackneyed political posturing, and in the fantastic technology that is Auto-Tune (without which all the sound you'd hear these "singers" emit would be a bedroom whisper).

Liberal women, the majority, go about seriously and studiously cultivating their degeneracy. If "Raising Skirts to Celebrate the Diversity of Vaginas" sounds foul, wait for the accompanying images. These show feral creatures (women, presumably), skirts hoisted, gobs agape, some squatting like farmhands in an outhouse, all yelling about their orifices.

Do you know of a comparable man's movement? If anything, men are punished when they react normally to women behaving badly .

Female soldiers got naked and uploaded explicit images of themselves to an online portal. The normals -- male soldiers -- shared the images and were promptly punished for so doing. And the conservative side of that ubiquitous, dueling-perspectives political panel approved of the punishment meted to the men.

So endemic is distaff degeneracy these days that "protesters" routinely disrobe or perform lewd acts with objects in public. Vladimir Putin is a great man if only for arresting a demented band of performance artists, Pussy Riot, for desecrating a Russian church.

If men flashed for freedom; they'd be arrested, jailed and placed on the National Sex Offender Registry.

Talk about the empress being in the buff, I almost forgot to attach an image of this celebrity, bare-bottomed on the red-carpet. Rose McGowan is hardly unique. Many a star will arrive at these events barely clothed. (Here are 38 more near-naked Red-Carpet appearances .)

Expect a feminist lecture about a woman's right to pretend her bare bottom is haute couture, rather than ho couture, and expecting the Harveys of the world to behave like choir boys around her. Fine.

Being British, BBC News anchors are not nearly as dour about the Harvey hysteria as the American anchors. A female presenter began a Sweinstein segment by saying men claim the coverage of the scandal is excessive; women say the opposite. "That's why we're covering it," quipped her witty male sidekick. She roared with laughter. That's my girl!

Look, Harvey is a lowlife. But Hollywood hos are not as the sanctimonious Sean Hannity portrays them: "naive, innocent young things," dreams shattered.

Ilana Mercer has been writing a weekly paleolibertarian column since 1999, and is the author of The Trump Revolution: The Donald's Creative Destruction Deconstructed (June, 2016) & Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011). Follow her on Twitter: https://twitter.com/IlanaMercer .

whorefinder , Website October 20, 2017 at 12:22 am GMT

Agreed; most of those women are feigning shock at what happened. They're piling on now to prevent being called out as the prostitutes they are.
TheJester , October 20, 2017 at 3:57 am GMT
Thank you, Ilana, for pointing out the hypocrisy of women behaving like sluts who object to men reacting to them signaling the world that they are sluts. Is the real issue that actresses in Hollywood will only take off their clothes for hard cash and Harvey was not offering hard cash but only nebulous hints at future roles in his productions? This is important when surveying the careers of many of the actresses jumping on the bandwagon to destroy Harvey Weinstein. We know they have and will take off their clothes for the right price.

This is captured in the story of a man offering a woman a million dollars to go to bed with him. She agrees. Then, he changes the offer to one dollar. The woman objects! "What do you think I am a prostitute." The man answers, "We know what you are. We're negotiating the price."

Feminism promises women empowerment. However, there is a pornographic side to the promise. There are legions of women trying to give the world a hard-on for attention, money, status, etc. When the world reacts, as in the story, they say, "Don't touch me what do you think I am?"

So, it's about power and control, something dear to the hearts of feminists. "You can want me but you can't have me (until you meet my price)." Men have a word for these women. We call them "prick teasers". It is a dispute over price, and it makes men very, very angry to react to the signals and then be ridiculed for reacting to the signals.

Rurik , October 20, 2017 at 4:12 am GMT

who used his power over decades to have his way with starlets.

shiksas

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=shiksas&form=HDRSC2&first=1&cw=1263&ch=907

Kirt , October 20, 2017 at 4:15 am GMT
Your best column ever, Ilana! An instant Unz Review classic.
utu , October 20, 2017 at 5:23 am GMT
Chief deputy US Marshal 'had sex with multiple women in his office in exchange for prime parking spots outside his office'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4986958/Chief-deputy-Marshal-offered-parking-spots-sex.html#ixzz4w1TgYMes

If they do it for parking spots should anybody be surprised they do it for a movie career?

Thomm , October 20, 2017 at 5:26 am GMT
Cuckservatives are hardcore woman-worshipping feminists first and foremost. They will put aside any other objective when the prospect of groveling to women presents itself.
Dave Pinsen , Website October 20, 2017 at 5:40 am GMT
Ilana,

Miley Cyrus may have been an exhibitionist earlier in her career, but no scare quotes belong around "singer" when describing her. She can sing. See below.

unpc downunder , October 20, 2017 at 6:41 am GMT
Must as I hate a lot of liberal ideology, I would disagree with the argument that left-liberal woman are more libertine than mainstream conservative women. Social class, personality and intelligence have a much bigger bearing on female (and male) sexual behaviour than political ideology. And there is no evidence than liberal women tend to be more sexually explicit in their appearance than non-liberal women. The make up is thicker, the women are louder, and the skirts are shorter on Fox News rather than CNN.

Liberal women like Ashley Judd making vulgar comments to annoy religious conservatives doesn't really count. Playing up for the camera isn't necessarily an indication of real life behaviour.

Dan Hayes , October 20, 2017 at 6:49 am GMT
Ilana,

Thank you for saying what you said about more equitably apportioning the blame among males and females. Fortunately or unfortunately only a woman such as you can say such things in our PC world. In our unfair world this is the best that is possible and for this you deserve our thanks.

Wally , Website October 20, 2017 at 6:58 am GMT
Clueless 'feminists' ignore Muslim treatment of women while they protest for women's dignity, yet they say that Miley Cyrus is advancing women's dignity.

Women are legally stoned in Muslim countries and gays & lesbians are legally executed for being gay / lesbian in Muslim countries. And HILLARY took millions in 'donations' from those countries.

The Clearest Problem With Modern Feminism
Muslim Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), where are the 'feminists'?

http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/16/why-are-feminists-silent-after-revelations-of-female-genital-mutilation-in-the-us/

Something is deeply wrong when people show solidarity with Muslims who believe that women should be forced have their clitorises cut off.

Not Republican, but Muslim

https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/462fa7ccc93ca6d52fda01faf34bd2e32010a23bad6541a8a3d971a959ae67a2.jpg?w=800&h=480

Seraphim , October 20, 2017 at 7:15 am GMT
In the grand times of Hollywood, before the War, an open secret was that all aspiring starlets had to pass through the couch of a personage known by the nickname of Ben Cinema or Kalkeinstein, (described as "horrible and more! ugly, old and dirty, lumbering and stupid, a real piece of garbage, in his person and in his surroundings a real vomiting forth from the ghetto").
History repeats itself
Simon in London , October 20, 2017 at 7:38 am GMT
Well I think there's a causality issue here. Weinstein & co pick on them when they're mostly very young; they become degenerate later. There is an element of truth, but the really obscene behaviour is a feature of established veterans.
The Alarmist , October 20, 2017 at 8:41 am GMT

"To listen to conservative talkers ."

There's your problem. Reminds me of an old joke:

Patient: Doctor, it hurts my head when I bang it against the wall!

Doctor: Have you tried not banging your head against the wall?

animalogic , October 20, 2017 at 9:42 am GMT
Great article. Also funny: "ho couture" well, I liked it.
Couple points:
Worth remembering that often Weinstein selected women with NO power/influence; ie those way beneath Kardashians etc. This is not to contest Illana's points about female celebrities exploiting their sexuality, merely to note that Weinstein really was a slithering predator.

Also worth noting that, although dreckification of female (actually, all) sexuality goes beyond simple commerce, there has been a rough parallel between unleashed Capitalism (neoliberalism) & unleashed sexuality. Of course, it's "old hat" that "sex sells" however, now increasing degrees of pornography are accepted, indeed celebrated as "liberated", artistic etc.

Illana is completly correct when she refers to the rank hypocracy re: male female sexuality. definitely "not equal" (unless male sexuality is considered under the heading of "gay" etc)

Greg Bacon , Website October 20, 2017 at 9:51 am GMT
How can Hollywood proclaim to always be for women and their rights, shouting they are at the front of protecting women when the movie factories in that town have portrayed many a lead actress as a prostitute?

This isn't something recent, women as prostitutes in films goes back decades. How can degrading women by showing them as money-craving whores be in any way defending women?

Renoman , October 20, 2017 at 10:03 am GMT
For thousands of years the terms Prostitute and Actress were interchangeable. Sure Harve is a douche bag but he's far from the only one. They knew what they were in for and were duly compensated.
Lara , October 20, 2017 at 12:53 pm GMT
It's not that hard to deflect unwanted male attention or to downplay your looks. When I hear a woman complain of sexual harassment, I suspect she is most likely a trouble maker and desperate for attention. There are likely exceptions, but this tends to be my first reaction. It's rarely the prettiest women who complain of sexual harassment.

I know plenty of liberal women who are not crude nor overtly sexual. I guess they just ignore that facet of the left.

UKUSA-1 , October 20, 2017 at 12:55 pm GMT
Weinstein has always defended and represented the Western Values .
imbroglio , October 20, 2017 at 1:04 pm GMT
When I was in grad school, there were some women grad students who exchanged sexual favors for the possibility of career advancement. Sometimes the women initiated the swap. Sometimes the more well-connected male (or female) faculty member or administrator initiated the swap. Some women (and possibly men) who were propositioned declined.

Query: If you said yes and got your payoff and if those who said no didn't get an equivalent payoff and if, by virtue of the payoff, you succeeded while those who declined the exchange didn't succeed, do you owe them anything? Morally.

Many who are posting #metoo on social media seem to feel that their membership in the victim class entitles them to receive benefits in exchange for sexual favors and then to recover, in attitudes of righteousness, the consideration they paid for those benefits: shaming, intimidating and threatening, under potential penalty of false or ambiguoous accusation, those who might seek to call them on their hypocrisy.

And let's not turn a blind eye to the feminized male enablers who seek women's approval by lauding this instance of having one's cake and eating it too.

Lest I be susceptible to laches (the legal term for clean hands that do the dirty work,) I was never tempted and, perhaps for that reason, recall the lady who died and sought admission to the pearly gates.

"May I have some evidence of your virtue," Saint Peter said as he riffled through her dossier.
"Indeed. I never succumbed to temptation," the lady proudly asserted.
"But were you ever tempted?"
"No," she said, fearing to lie to Saint Peter.
"Well, madam, if you've never been tempted, you get no credit for not having succumbed to it."

Anonymous , Disclaimer October 20, 2017 at 1:17 pm GMT
Excellent article, Ms. Mercer. And thanks for the puncture holes delivered to Conservative Inc. (Hannity etal). As to the, er, "ladies" who prowl about Hollywood and are now crying wolf, "what goes around comes around."
anonymous , Disclaimer October 20, 2017 at 1:28 pm GMT
What's the big difference between Weinstein and former president Bill Clinton except that one was the frickin president of the US? Clinton used his various positions throughout the years to intimidate women, from the days of using Arkansas state troopers to act as procurers for him to later using federal agencies to harass them into shutting up. His wife Hillary, the almost-president, ran interference for him in muzzling the various women who might have spilled the beans. The Clintons postured themselves as champions of women's rights even as the reality of this sleazy couple was really tawdry. Weinstein was just a studio boss with money and film roles to dispense to a never-ending line of wannabe actresses. He fits right in with the Clintons as part of the Hollywood celebrity and glitz crowd and Hillary would never have called him a "deplorable". Yet even now there's many people who are Clinton fans and supporters even as they hypocritically play this game of 'get the fat guy'. The Clintons are a hundred times worse.
Sergey Krieger , October 20, 2017 at 1:35 pm GMT
This is how feminine looks like. Note the class, the behavior and the voice of course. :

https://youtu.be/KzJgTb2sRxQ

Anon , Disclaimer October 20, 2017 at 1:45 pm GMT
@Malla

You do not need philosophy to explain a love for money. Whether the profiteering Kardashians or the profiteering Madonna (and a legion of her imitators), these women did the indecent, lewd, into-your-face pornographic performances for financial gains. They have been denigrating themselves (and other women, by association) for money. They wanted the money. By any means.

That the US government has extolled the deeply amoral Pussy Riot scum tells a lot about the moral crisis in the US, including the unending and very expensive wars of aggression run by the country that has no money for a single-payer medical system.

The pink pussies that demonstrated against Donald and for Hilary, used to be offended when reminded about Libyan tragedy ("we came, we saw, he died, ha, ha, ha ") and about the hundreds of thousands of human beings (including thousands and thousands children) slaughtered there on the Obama/Clinton watch. Did we have the pink pussies demonstrating against Obama's seven wars? – No. The pink pussies needed some brainwashing before suddenly going into a public activism phase with silly hats on their empty heads. Are pussy hats demonstrating against the impending wars of the US with Iran and Korea? – No. Nobody gave an order for and provided money for organizing the parades. These "progressive" female activists are ridiculous.

By the way, is Dershowitz cleared re his visits to Lolita Island where real underage victims were held for the pleasure of powerful sex predators?

ken satifka , October 20, 2017 at 2:21 pm GMT
I love reading Ilana Mercer's politically incorrect take on events and her brilliant use of language.. Seeing how far US society has descended since I was growing up in the 1960′s, I'm glad to be a married, monogamous senior citizen. We certainly had our problems then, with the Vietnam War at the top of the list, but at least the women were not covered in disgusting tattoos and man-hating feminism was still in its infancy.
c matt , October 20, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMT
I still don't get all the fuss about this. The wannabe starlets knew the price of fame and fortune (or if not, found out quickly), and were willing to pay it. It is just straight up prostitution. Seems to me the only ones with a claim are the ones who paid the price and didn't get the part.
Andrei Martyanov , Website October 20, 2017 at 2:36 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

Sergey, you posted here an example of femininity of Senchina – a value long destroyed by feminism in the West–as opposed to sexuality, which is the fad. It is the same as comparing real love and real intimacy to raw sex, or porn. For former one needs a real woman, for the latter a slut will suffice.

gwynedd1 , October 20, 2017 at 2:43 pm GMT
The scandal, as I have portrayed it, was the leftist hypocrisy in their political attacks against Trump. All Trump did was describe a woman's nature around powerful men. They volunteer themselves. Weinstein was far more coercive and they said nothing all these years. Women were victimized by this , but not the ones we know. It was the women who didn't advance their careers by any means who were victims. Perhaps that is one reason why women do not draw so much at the box office. We do not get to enjoy the talent that got them there.
Rurik , October 20, 2017 at 2:48 pm GMT
Yes, the culture today is far, far more crass and degenerate than say, in the 50s, when Leave it to Beaver played on America's TVs, and Norman Rockwell and all that. But what has happened to our culture? Has the race into the sewer been a consequence of loose women of America (England, etc..) driving the decline? Or, are the causes a more a top down affair? IOW resulting from the big-money producers and all those men who run Hollywood?

women, as indeed many men, are given to fashions and peer pressure. If the prevailing culture is one of modesty and self-respect, the women's behavior will reflect that. The American women of the 1950s were of more or less the same stock of women as the gutter skanks Ilana rightfully laments today, but did women drive this downward trend, or did (a few) men?

One thing that has been noticed, are the striking similarities between American culture today and that of Weimar, Germany. Weimar was notoriously corrupt, with sexual degeneracy and prostitution rampant. Berlin was described as a giant brothel, where the desperate German youth were exploited and debased.

Perhaps it was the fault of those young Germans who, while likely starving from the wrath and rapine of the allies, (who deliberately looted the German economy dry). Or perhaps it was more the fault of the wealthy and powerful non-German men, who preyed on these young, often desperate women (and girls and boys). But the parallels are unmistakable.

which is why people are posting propaganda cartoons from back then, because the images are eerily familiar to what seems to be going on today, no?

https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-01c658fd480082cc2e02392133d69190-c?convert_to_webp=true

how can you not think of Harvey Weinstein when you see those cartoons?

Perhaps Ilana is right, and the blame starts and ends with the women. But then I think of all those Mickey Mouse Club girls who turned into skanks,

[I won't post the pictures, but you can find them..]

and I notice that they were raised in Hollywood, like Miley Cyrus, who seemed to be groomed specifically as an all American type of innocent Hanna Montana who then morphs straight into the gutter skank we all wince at- for all those preteen American girls to emulate. Just like Madonna was a generation before.

I confess it seems to me that the skankification of America's young women is part of a deliberate agenda coming straight out of Hollywood. No?

Mark Presco , Website October 20, 2017 at 2:53 pm GMT
Women have been sexually exploiting Men for a living for 5 million years. Women's price for sex has always been that men provision them. There is nothing wrong with this. It helped shaped both human physical and cultural evolution and we might have gone extinct without it.

The thing that interests me is, why now. The casting couch has been a stereotype all of my life. Why the piling on at this time?

Andrei Martyanov , Website October 20, 2017 at 2:55 pm GMT
@c matt

I still don't get all the fuss about this.

The fuss is about glamour Hollywood whores trying to teach others non-stop what is good and right. Obviously they do all this form the supposition that prostitution is good and liberating. You know, lowest common denominator? Most of them are also dumb as fvcks and this goes not only to wo..sluts there, to the so called men too. Look at Clooneys and other Damons of that cabal. They should concentrate on doing what they allegedly do best–pretend to be other people. Most of them have no serious analytical skills to start with. Hey, at least Brad Pitt is in this just for fvcking chicks at the height of their hotness–at least it is honest.

Joe Hide , October 20, 2017 at 3:00 pm GMT
I first began to totally ignore the MSM's comments on Putin when he had the degeneracy of the "Pussy Riot" in a Russian Church forcefully stopped. It was great to see the Cossacks beat the beejebans out of those morally offensive hooligans trying to illegally impose George Soro's world view on others.
Ludwig Watzal , Website October 20, 2017 at 3:15 pm GMT
Every woman could have said No to Mr. "Sweinstein". Bros before hos are the name of the game not only in Hollywood. The hypocrites should not lament. It takes two to tango!
Wally , Website October 20, 2017 at 3:37 pm GMT
@Rurik

"I confess it seems to me that the skankification of America's young women is part of a deliberate agenda coming straight out of Hollywood. No?"

Here you go. From: 'The Spirit Of Militarism', by Nahum Goldmann. Goldmann was the founder & president of the World Jewish Congress:

"The historical mission of our world revolution is to rearrange a new culture of humanity to replace the previous social system. This conversion and re-organization of global society requires two essential steps: firstly, the destruction of the old established order, secondly, design and imposition of the new order. The first stage requires elimination of all frontier borders, nationhood and culture, public policy ethical barriers and social definitions, only then can the destroyed old system elements be replaced by the imposed system elements of our new order.

The first task of our world revolution is Destruction. All social strata and social formations created by traditional society must be annihilated, individual men and women must be uprooted from their ancestral environment, torn out of their native milieus, no tradition of any type shall be permitted to remain as sacrosanct, traditional social norms must only be viewed as a disease to be eradicated, the ruling dictum of the new order is; nothing is good so everything must be criticized and abolished, everything that was, must be gone."

Rurik , October 20, 2017 at 4:00 pm GMT
@Mark Presco

The casting couch has been a stereotype all of my life. Why the piling on at this time?

perhaps because of The Trumpening

perhaps now that Trump is in DC, there are forces at work that have bristled under the excruciatingly dishonest levels of hypocrisy coming out of the leftisphere.

accusing Trump of being disrespectful to women, as they rape women and girls wholesale, and the entire leftist power structure always looks the other way, so long as the rapist is a leftist himself, and will use his power for the leftist agenda.

so these serial predators like Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein all get a pass from the feminists and liberal, progressives, so long as they assist with The Agenda to destroy Western Civilization, (and the people who created it ; ).
As long as Bill Clinton hails the day when whites will be a minority in this country, (to the cheers of liberal college students), he can rape women all day long. He can sexually harass, as the most powerful man in the world, powerless girls in the White House, and all to a thunderous silence from the entire leftist, progressive (hypocritical / hatred-consumed) power structure. Because he works towards their agenda. [the same agenda, BTW - that destroyed S. Africa and Rhodesia]

But for a man like Trump, who seems to have raised daughters who respect themselves, and seem to conduct themselves with a certain dignity- that isn't what's important. What's important is what is always important

THE AGENDA

the relentless, drum-beating agenda to destroy Western values. To eviscerate the culture of 1950s America (with virtues like honor and temperance) once and for all, and replace it with a septic tank value system, where self-respect is replaced with self-loathing. Where dignity and femininity is replace with twerking with your tongue out. Where Hollywood starlets howl about how "nasty" they are, as if being a skank is a moral badge of feminine honor.

That's what's going on here. We're in the trenches of the cold culture war, turned hot culture war.

They wanted to destroy Trump and the deplorables with shrieking about how Trump was disrespectful to women. But now the cover of the giant septic tank known as Hollywood has been lifted off, for all the world to gasp at the slithering creatures and whiff the terrible stench.

I wonder if it's a kind of payback time for Hillary and her army of morally preening orcs, feasting on the flesh of young women, and smacking their liver lips with anticipation of the next young shiksa to walk though that hotel room door.

I only hope we get an investigation into Pizzagate next, with perhaps a nice expose' of Jeffrey Epstein's Child Rape Island, and all those liberal, progressive morally preening men who take so many trips there.

this might just be all a sign of the great Trumpening

unit472 , October 20, 2017 at 4:16 pm GMT
Let's be fair here. Women strut their 'stuff' same as men but in a different way. A man will buy a very expensive car or some other display of wealth or power to attract a female and females respond to these displays by highlighting their sexual desirability and availability. We are animals seeking mates after all and males have to demonstrate their dominance in nature before the female will mate with the male. Thus a Harvey Weinstein could no more have sex with an Ashley Judd than a derelict laying on the sidewalk absent some display of power and wealth that interested Judd.

The other side of this coin is that a woman cannot compel a man to have sex with her no matter how much money or power she has. Men do not sexually respond to a physically repulsive female and he cannot 'fake' an orgasm. This is why I do not believe in criminally prosecuting, e.g., a female school teacher for having sex with a 16 year old student. Fire her for improper conduct but jail her? Come on the boy was willing if he had sex with her!

mp , October 20, 2017 at 4:41 pm GMT
It's like the old joke: Will you have sex with me for a million dollars? OK. What about one dollar? What kind of girl do you think I am? We've already established what kind of girl you are. We're just negotiating.
Chicot le Fou , October 20, 2017 at 5:20 pm GMT
Excellent piece, showcasing your good sense as always. I yield to no man in my hyper enthusiasm for the undraped female form but to cynically "launch a career with a highly stylized, self-directed sex tape" incites my scorn, not lust. I have been fed up for years when perusing the morning headlines seeing articles about the latest, most egregious examples of Hollyweird bimbos showing up at events more or less naked. I've long since ceased looking or caring; they just annoy me.

Putting all one's assets on constant public display destroys the allure and mystery that is woman and does not empower them, it makes them the "pieces of meat" that they've been screaming about for close on a century, especially for the last 50 odd years. Women have made quite the cottage industry of whining that guys don't understand them, "don't get it" but refuse to acknowledge the obverse. By tripping the lights fantastic with their fun bits exposed they appear to the primal great white shark which is the male sex drive as easily gotten chum; and like the Assyrian of old, we fall upon and devour them, in a manner of speaking. A rather old adage said "If it ain't for sale, don't advertise it". As for Harvey, the fascination of the hogs at the slop trough is that the revolting pig~man didn't just want to have sex with these women, but to have them observe his disgusting degeneracy. The Cities of the Pains had nothing on us.

Eric the Manager , October 20, 2017 at 5:54 pm GMT
I am nearly 60 years old. And jokes and stories about "hollywood casting couches" and how pretty young women got roles in productions have been around longer than I have. To me, this whole story is just filed under more "fake news". No, I don't doubt the stories. I don't doubt that harvey was not a good man. But, its all basically propaganda. Harvey supported a political opponent of the people now attacking him 24.7 all over the right-wing media, so now these stories that are older than I am are suddenly headline news and the big lead on right-wing sites all over the internet.

These stories have even bumped the stories about which NFL players should be lined up in front of a firing squad and shot for not maintain the proper posture during the sacred National Anthem here in the Land of the Free.

So, to me, this just more Fake News. Its propaganda and political attack using weaponized 'news'. And I don't care. If I had a daughter going to Hollywood, I'd give her the same warnings about scum-bags in the movie business and the casting couch that have been given out for a century now. Nothing new here.

Art , October 20, 2017 at 6:37 pm GMT
Strange -- it seems that Harvey had the only casting couch in Tinsel Town. Hollywood is wall to wall Jews – yet NO new Jew names are being exposed by all those brave women. Only Gentile names.

Hmm??? What could be going on? Stonewalling maybe – total fear absolutely! Say it isn't so.

p.s. Maybe Weinstein, Woody Allen, Polansky, and Weiner are the only sex obsessed Jews?

Anon , Disclaimer October 20, 2017 at 7:10 pm GMT
@druid

Hold your horses. Bill Clinton is Jewish?

Sean , October 20, 2017 at 7:57 pm GMT
@Art

As I understand it, movies is a very high stakes business, and you cannot get cast in a role by being alone with an obviously-horny-as-a-jackrabbit producer and submitting to sex acts or harassment. It doesn't guarantee anything, and they all knew it.

Casting happens though getting an agent, who sends you to an audition, where there are other people around and the acts performed are of an acting nature. The only professional film actor I know cited Ellen Barkin's acting as superlative. Barkin studied acting for ten years before landing her first audition.

Markus Aurelius Tarkus , October 20, 2017 at 8:10 pm GMT
I try to restrict devoting any of the precious time I have left on Earth to such matters. I made an exception for the Mercer column, which is spot on. 99% of the time, I merely see the unavoidable headlines and continue surfing for something worth the time to read or watch.

My one take-away from l'affaire Weinstein is this: I am enormously enjoying the internecine, riotous and indiscriminate feeding frenzy it has generated. Like Heinlein's Igli, the Left is consuming itself.

in the middle , October 20, 2017 at 8:30 pm GMT
@whorefinder

Their existence is only to provide sexual pleasure to these perverts, and they like it; however, when something goes wrong, they howl and cry, 'he raped me!" Reminds me when I was at a military base, and a friend of mine found his girlfriend screwing another guy, she claimed, well, rape! How appropriate. the poor guy was court martial-ed, and done with!

njguy73 , October 20, 2017 at 8:34 pm GMT
@wow

I am 1000X more attractive and in far better shape that Harvey Fatstein. Yet he has tapped far better poon than I can ever hope to tap.

You should have gone into show biz. If you're what you claim to be, you've have tapped more poon than Justin Timberlake and John Mayer combined. And it would have all been consensual, so no worry about lawsuits.

Anon , Disclaimer October 20, 2017 at 9:00 pm GMT
@Anon-og

Alden's response to you is perfectly correct. But you'd have a good point if you talked about MGM.

Ms. Mercer is not defending Weinstein but attacking the women who allowed this to go on for decades. I declare a half-hearted "boycott" against Hollywood every time something like this happens; alas, this is rendered without force by the fact that I refuse to pay modern ticket prices for what is likely utter trash anyway.

Beefcake the Mighty , October 20, 2017 at 10:17 pm GMT
I tend to assume by default that Hollywood producers (Jewish or otherwise) pressure actresses to have sex, so even if Weinstein was particularly egregious, I wonder what he really did to ignite this shit-storm. He obviously pissed off the wrong person(s).
ThreeCranes , October 20, 2017 at 10:52 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

Sergey, realistically, most women–especially the lumbering, low skill, know-nothing women of America–cannot possibly match the woman you put before us in the video above.

They can't measure up and they know it. So instead of dieting, exercising, taking voice lessons or even mastering humble talents like cooking and sewing they take the cowards way out and denigrate her. They will revile her as an unliberated woman who depends on male affirmation for her self esteem, an unwitting tool of the Patriarchy.

While they, themselves? They don't need to charm no stinking men. They themselves depend on their cohort of disagreeable feminists for their "self esteem".

gp , October 21, 2017 at 12:53 am GMT
"The conservative among us prefer the allure of modesty." I'm a fan of 1970s-1980s Bollywood, with its casts of heart-stoppingly beautiful women, like Hema Malini and Sridevi, who performed in modest attire, and were all the more lovely for it. I can't bear to watch today's Bollywood product, featuring writhing undressed wenches indistinguishable from western gangsta ho's. Decades ago, Indian film assimilation from western pop culture often yielded bizarre but charmingly cute mash-ups, but now they've mimicked the very worst of what we have. Or maybe now we have only cultural garbage left for them to adapt.

[Oct 11, 2017] The corporate state embraced identity politics

Notable quotes:
"... There is a big difference between shills for corporate capitalism and imperialism, like Corey Booker and Van Jones, and true radicals like Glen Ford and Ajamu Baraka. The corporate state carefully selects and promotes women, or people of color, to be masks for its cruelty and exploitation. ..."
"... The feminist movement is a perfect example of this. The old feminism, which I admire, the Andrea Dworkin kind of feminism, was about empowering oppressed women. This form of feminism did not try to justify prostitution as sex work. It knew that it is just as wrong to abuse a woman in a sweatshop as it is in the sex trade. The new form of feminism is an example of the poison of neoliberalism. It is about having a woman CEO or woman president, who will, like Hillary Clinton, serve the systems of oppression. It posits that prostitution is about choice. What woman, given a stable income and security, would choose to be raped for a living? Identity politics is anti-politics. ..."
Oct 11, 2017 | www.unz.com

DN: What about the impact that you've seen of identity politics in America?

CH: Well, identity politics defines the immaturity of the left. The corporate state embraced identity politics. We saw where identity politics got us with Barack Obama, which is worse than nowhere. He was, as Cornel West said, a black mascot for Wall Street, and now he is going around to collect his fees for selling us out.

My favorite kind of anecdotal story about identity politics: Cornel West and I, along with others, led a march of homeless people on the Democratic National Convention session in Philadelphia. There was an event that night. It was packed with hundreds of people, mostly angry Bernie Sanders supporters. I had been asked to come speak. And in the back room, there was a group of younger activists, one who said, "We're not letting the white guy go first." Then he got up and gave a speech about how everybody now had to vote for Hillary Clinton. That's kind of where identity politics gets you. There is a big difference between shills for corporate capitalism and imperialism, like Corey Booker and Van Jones, and true radicals like Glen Ford and Ajamu Baraka. The corporate state carefully selects and promotes women, or people of color, to be masks for its cruelty and exploitation.

It is extremely important, obviously, that those voices are heard, but not those voices that have sold out to the power elite. The feminist movement is a perfect example of this. The old feminism, which I admire, the Andrea Dworkin kind of feminism, was about empowering oppressed women. This form of feminism did not try to justify prostitution as sex work. It knew that it is just as wrong to abuse a woman in a sweatshop as it is in the sex trade. The new form of feminism is an example of the poison of neoliberalism. It is about having a woman CEO or woman president, who will, like Hillary Clinton, serve the systems of oppression. It posits that prostitution is about choice. What woman, given a stable income and security, would choose to be raped for a living? Identity politics is anti-politics.

[Sep 17, 2017] The best technique of obtaining soundbytes and posturing for neoliberal elite is based on so-called wedge issues by Piotr Berman

Notable quotes:
"... Donald Trump used alt-right messaging to get into the White House, but he and his third-rate staff haven't the slightest clue of what gave rise to the deplorables in the first place and how to address the root despair of the western working class ..."
"... And all authorities suggest to exploit the despair with soundbites and posturing. Granted, this is a platitude, but how to obtain compelling soundbites and posturing? I think that the best technique is based on so-called wedge issues. ..."
"... A good wedge issue should raise passions on "both sides" but not so much in the "center", mostly clueless undecided voters. ..."
"... Calibrate your position so it is a good scrap of meat for your "base" while it drives the adversaries to conniptions, the conniptions provide talking points and together, drive the clueless in your direction. Wash, repeat. ..."
www.moonofalabama.org
Piotr Berman | May 18, 2017 10:04:50 PM | 77
"Donald Trump used alt-right messaging to get into the White House, but he and his third-rate staff haven't the slightest clue of what gave rise to the deplorables in the first place and how to address the root despair of the western working class." VietnamVet

I do not know how highly rated the staff was, but it was sufficiently high. If the opponent has fourth-rate staff, it would be wasteful to use anything better than third-rate. Figuring what gave rise to the deplorable is a wasted effort, sociologist differ, and in politics the "root causes" matter only a little.

And all authorities suggest to exploit the despair with soundbites and posturing. Granted, this is a platitude, but how to obtain compelling soundbites and posturing? I think that the best technique is based on so-called wedge issues.

A good wedge issue should raise passions on "both sides" but not so much in the "center", mostly clueless undecided voters.

Calibrate your position so it is a good scrap of meat for your "base" while it drives the adversaries to conniptions, the conniptions provide talking points and together, drive the clueless in your direction. Wash, repeat.

[Sep 17, 2017] Joy Reids Politics of Tribalism and Punching Sideways

Sep 13, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

(Never mind that if Thomas Frank is correct, and the Democrats are the party of the professional classes, the Democrats cannot possibly be the party of "marginalized" people.) Being the sort of person I am, my first thought was to ask myself what the heck Reid could mean by "tribe," and how a "tribe" can act as a political entity.[1] Naturally, I looked to the Internet and did a cursory search; and it turns out that, at least at the scholarly level, the very notion of "tribe" is both contested and a product of colonialism. David Wiley, Department of Sociology and African Studies, Michigan State University, 2013

Tribe, a concept that has endeared itself to Western scholars, journalists, and the public for a century, is primarily a means to reduce for readers the complexity of the non-Western societies of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the American plains. It is no accident that the contemporary uses of the term tribe were developed during the 19th-century rise of evolutionary and racist theories to designate alien non-white peoples as inferior or less civilized and as having not yet evolved from a simpler, primal state. The uses and definitions of 'tribe' in the sociological and anthropological literature are varied and conflicting. Some authors appear to define tribe as common language, others as common culture, some as ancestral lineages, and others as common government or rulers. As anthropologist Michael Olen notes, "The term tribe has never satisfied anthropologists, because of its many uses and connotations. Societies that are classified as tribal seem to be very diverse in their organization, having little in common." Morton H. Fried and this author contend that "the term is so ambiguous and confusing that it should be abandoned by social scientists."

Even more striking is the invention of ethnic (labeled tribal) identities and their varied and plastic salience across the African continent. In some cases, "tribal identifies" have been invented in order to unite colonial and post-colonial clerical workers or other occupational and social groups to serve the interests of the members even though they were not bound together by language or lineage.

In the United States, where similar derogatory language of tribe has been used to characterize and stereotype Native American or First Nations peoples, the identity has been reified in federal legislation that requires "tribes," formerly under the Bureau of Indian Affairs, to accept that formal tribal identification in order to access the hunting, fishing, farming, and casino rights of reservations. Almost humorously, the Menominee peoples of Wisconsin decided to decline that nomenclature because many members lived in Milwaukee and other non-reservation sites; however, they then learned they must reverse that vote and re-declare themselves as "a tribe" in order to regain their reservation rights.

So, from the 30,000 foot level, it seems unlikely that what scholars mean (or do not mean) by "tribe" is the same as what Reid means, simply because there is no coherent meaning to be had.[2] My second thought was to try to fit "tribe" into the framework of identity politics, where tribes would be identities, or possibly bundles of allied[3] identities. Here's a handy chart showing the various ways that identity can be conceptualized, from Jessica A. Clarke*, "Identity and Form," California Law Review , 2015:

(Clarke gives definitions of ascriptive, elective, and formal identity -- for Adolph Reed on ascriptive identity, see here -- but I think the definitions are clear enough for our purposes from the examples in the table.) However, if we look back to Reid's quote, we see that she conflates ascriptive identity ("black or brown") with elective identity ("the sort of Pabst Blue Ribbon voter, the kind of Coors Lite-drinking voter")[4], and also conflates both of those with formal identity (if one's ethnicity be defined by one's own citizenship papers, or those of one's parents, or a changed surname; one thinks of Asian cultures putting the family name last in American culture, for example). So there is no coherence to be found here, either.

Let's return then to Reid's words, and look to her operational definition:

which party goes out and find more people who are like them

It's not clear to me whether Reid conceptualize parties as tribes, or as meta-tribes of tribes bundled together; I'm guessing the latter. Here is an example of Reid's conceptualizations ("like" each other) in action. From Teen Vogue , "Amandla Stenberg and Janelle Monáe Open Up About Racism and Where They Were During the Election" (2017). Somewhat too much of this, but the build-up is important:

AMANDLA STENBERG: Janelle frigging Monáe!?

JANELLE MONÁE: Hi, sweetie. You know I love, love, love you. First: pronouns! I want to make sure that I'm being respectful of how I'm referring to you. I know that the way we view ourselves and how we want to be addressed can change depending on where we are in life.

AS: I love that you asked me! Thank you. I have felt at times that she/her pronouns weren't entirely fitting, but I've never felt uncomfortable with them. It's more important for me to open up that conversation around pronouns and how gender itself is a construct that doesn't make much sense in our society.

JM: Got it. I remember seeing you for the first time in Colombiana, and then, like many people, I was drawn to your character in The Hunger Games as Rue. I'm a huge sci-fi nerd, so just seeing this little black girl in a dystopian world being a hero for an oppressed community, I was intrigued! The way you embodied this character felt like you were mature enough to understand how important she was to the movie but also how important the Rues all over the world are to our society.

AS: That's one of the best compliments that I've received! I remember we saw each other at the Tyler, the Creator show; we took a picture with Solange. You were wearing a jacket that said "black girl magic" on it, and I flipped out.

JM: Me, too! I was like, I am right between you and Solange, two people who are the epitome of black girl magic! I saw you later on, and you had just shot Everything, Everything, which, by the way, you are incredible in. The original story was written by a black woman [NicolaYoon], and your director [Stella Meghie] is also a black woman. What was going through your mind as you were considering the role?

AS: I kind of wrote it off initially because I figured it was one of those instances where I was receiving a script for a YA romance project that was intended for a white actress. I thought maybe they'd float the idea of casting it in a more diverse manner but that ultimately it wouldn't end up going that direction, because that's happened to me a lot. Then I realized that this project was based on a book written by a black woman and that the casting was intentionally diverse. I'd never seen a story like this made for an interracial couple. I'm not someone who generally has a pop or mainstream sensibility, but I see the incredible power of infiltrating these larger movies that show a lot of people who we are and how diverse and beautiful our community is. I thought it would be really powerful to see a black girl [lead] character like Maddy who is joyous and creative and dimensional specifically marketed to teenagers and young adults. We don't always get to see black women carrying that energy. That's one of the reasons why I respect and love you so much!because I feel like you perpetuate such whimsy and joy!

JM: Aw! Well, whenever I see you doing your thing, I feel like we're from the same tribe because I take a similar approach when I'm choosing projects. With the roles of Teresa in Moonlight and Ms. Mary Jackson in Hidden Figures , they're two women of color from totally different backgrounds and eras!from the hood to NASA, these black women were the backbones of their communities. I thought it was so important to let the rest of the world know that we're not monolithic. And with Hidden Figures in particular, I was so proud to be a part of exposing that if it were not for these women, we would not have gone to space. That's American history! Black history is part of American history, and it should be treated as such.

(Note in passing that I loathe the phrase "open up," which I define as "carefully engineered for a celebrity by public relations professionals." ) Of course, both actors are -- and rightly -- proud of their work, but note the carefully calibrated ways they establish that they are (as Joy Reid says) "like" each other. Oh, and do note the caption: "Miu Miu dress, price upon request." Class snuck in there, didn't it? In fact, we might go so far as to formalize Reid's definition of "tribe" as follows:

Tribes are people who are "like" each other when class is not taken into account

With that, let's take an alternative approach to conceptualizing tribes and tribalism, one that incorporates class. From former Arab Spring activist Iyad El-Baghdadi , I present the following charts, taken from the Twittter . (I'll present each chart, then comment briefly on it.) There are five:

Figure 1: Tribal Divisions

Comment: I'm taking El-Baghdadi's "ethnic affiliation," as a proxy for Reid's "tribe"; the verticality is clearly the same.)

Figure 2: Class Divisions

Comment: El-Baghdadi's representation of class divisions is fine as a visual shorthand, but I don't think it's an accurate representation. I picture the class structure of the United States not as a "normal distribution" with a fat "middle class" (I don't even accept "middle class" as a category) but as a power curve with a very few people at the head of the curve ( the "1%," more like the 0.01% ), followed by a steep shoulder of the 10% (white collar professionals, from Thomas Frank's Listen, Liberal ), and trailed by a long tail of wage workers (and unwaged workers, as I suppose we might call the disemployed, unpaid caregivers, System D people like loosie-selling Eric Garner, and so on). If you want to find who hasn't had a raise in forty years, look to the long tail, which I would call l "working class," rather than "lower class."

Figure 3: Privilege Divisions

Comment: Taking once again El-Baghdadi's "ethnic affiliation," as a proxy for Reid's "tribe," and conceptualizing WASPs as a tribe, it's clear to me, if I look at my own history, that I'm more likely ti have good luck than some other tribes. I'm more likely to have intergenerational wealth in the form of a house, or even financial assets, more likely to be highly educated, more likely to have the markers and locutions that enable me to interact successfully with bureaucratic functionaries, etc. I didn't earn any of those advantages; I would have had to have chosen to be born to different parents to avoid them. I think we can agree that if we were looking for an operational definition of justice, this wouldn't be it.

Figure 4: Punching Sideways

Comment: Classically, we have owners following Gould's maxim by bringing in (mostly black) scabs to break the Homestead Strike in 1892, with a resulting "tribal" conflict -- although those scabs might protest -- and rightly -- that (a) they were only trying to provide for their families and (b) that the Jim Crow system had denied them the "good jobs" that in justice would have given them (leaving aside the question of who implemented Jim Crow, and for what material benefits). In modern times we have "tribes" (white, black, Asian, at the least) battling on the field of "affirmative action" having weaponized their ascriptive identities. Here again, representatives of some "tribes" would protest -- and rightly -- that systems like "legacy admissions" give some "tribes" unjust advantage over others, but the hidden assumption is one of resource constraint; given a pie of fixed size, if Tribe A is to have more, Tribe B must have less. Note that programs like "tuition-free college" tend to eliminate the resource constraint, but are "politically feasible" only if Tribes A and B solve their collective action problem, which is unlikely to be done based on tribalism.

Figure 5: Punching Up

Comment: This diagram implies that the only "legitimate" form of seeking justice is vertical, "punching up." This eliminates clear cases where justice is needed within and not between classes, like auto collisions, for example, or the household division of labor. More centrally, the nice thing about thinking vertically is that it eliminates obvious absurdities like "Justice for black people means making the CEO of a major bank black (ignoring the injustices perpetrated using class-based tools disproportionately against black people in, say, the foreclosure crisis, where a generation's-worth of black household wealth was wiped out under America's first black President). Or obvious absurdities where justice is conceived of as a woman, instead of a man, using the power of office to kill thousands of black and brown people, many of them women, to further America's imperial mission.

* * *

Concluding a discussion on politics and power that has barely begun -- and is of great importance if you believe, as I do, that we're on the midst of and ongoing and highly volatile legitimacy crisis that involves the break-up and/or realignment of both major parties -- it seems to me that El-Baghdadi visual representation, which fits tribalism into a class-driven framework, is both analytically coherent (as Reid's usage of "tribe" is not) and points to a way forward from our current political arrangements (as Reid's strategy of bundling "punching sideways" tribes into parties while ignoring class does not). More to come .

NOTES

[Sep 05, 2017] Iconoclasm And Violence by Rod Dreher

Notable quotes:
"... Houston Chronicle ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... Who Are We? The Challenges To America's National Identity. ..."
"... The New White Nationalism In America ..."
"... ABC News/Washington Post ..."
"... But it is plain that most Republicans do not believe Trump violated that taboo. ..."
Aug 22, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

On Sunday night, Social Justice Warriors in Baltimore filmed themselves desecrating and damaging a 225-year-old monument to Christopher Columbus -- this, in the name of racial and economic justice:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/iFSW0id36FA?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

Late last week, someone desecrated a statue of St. Junipero Serra in Mission Hills, Calif. The Franciscan priest is hated by Social Justice Warriors for his work in establishing mission churches in the 18th century.

In New Orleans earlier this summer, vandals spray-painted 'TEAR IT DOWN' on a statue of St. Joan of Arc standing in Jackson Square. Take 'Em Down NOLA is the name of the activist group that successfully brought down four of the city's statues of Confederate figures. The organization said that those opposed to taking down the statues was "the racist white capitalist establishment in New Orleans, seeking to preserve white supremacy". Now they've expanded their mission:

The group is seeking the removal of 13 statues in the city, including the equestrian monument to Andrew Jackson in Jackson Square. That monument, which commemorates Jackson's victory at the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812, has been a particular target of the group because Jackson owned slaves and, as president, was responsible for violently forcing Native Americans off their land in what came to be known as the Trail of Tears.

The group also wants the city to rename dozens of streets, buildings and institutions. In all, there are more than 100 symbols it wants removed or renamed.

In Houston late last week, someone vandalized a Christopher Columbus statue . On Monday in Houston, police arrested a man on charges that he tried to plant a bomb next to a Confederate statue. Reports the Houston Chronicle :

Andrew Schneck, 25, who was released from probation early last year after being convicted in 2015 of storing explosives, was charged in a criminal complaint filed in federal court, Acting U.S. Attorney Abe Martinez said in a statement Monday.

Schneck was arrested Saturday night after a Houston park ranger spotted him kneeling in bushes in front of the Dowling monument in the park, Martinez said.

When confronted Saturday night in the park, he tried to drink some of the liquid explosives but spit it out, officials said.

The ranger then asked if he planned to harm the statue, and he said he did because he did not "like that guy," according to a sworn statement submitted in federal court by an FBI agent investigating the case.

More NFL players are taking a knee instead of standing for the National Anthem, because racism. At USC, some black students and woke fellow, um, travelers are damning the name of the school's mascot, a white horse named Traveler, because it shares a name as Gen. Robert E. Lee's mount. For that matter, according to an op-ed contributor for The New York Times, enjoying college football at all is probably racist:

This attachment is less surprising when we consider that sports fans typically use their fandom as a means of telling themselves who they are. Sports fandom has become, to borrow a term from the philosopher Michel Foucault, a practice of subjectivization -- a phenomenon in which individuals subject themselves to a set of behavioral regulations, and by doing so, acquire a sense of their own identities.

Just as a practicing Christian may create and obtain new forms of self-knowledge through confession, prayer and the observance of Lent, a sports fan can come to understand himself as a particular sort of person -- a Southerner, for example, or a "real man" -- by adhering to certain rituals, like reading the sports page and watching ESPN every day to gather more and more knowledge about his team, by talking with other fans about that team in the right ways (and proving that he knows more than them), by learning and participating in the songs, chants, dress, tailgate rituals, game-day traditions and home décor choices of its fans.

The extraordinary reach of football into fans' lives makes perfect sense when we see it for what it is: the most popular mechanism in contemporary America for cultivating a sense of self that is rooted in a community. In a world of uncertainty, fragmentation and isolation, sports fandom offers us clear winners and losers, connection to family and community -- and at its best, the assurance that we are really No. 1.

Yet this "we" of fandom ought to give us pause -- perhaps just as much as the scandals, the violence and the exploitation that surround the game.

And our disease is spreading to England. The Guardian -- of course -- published someone calling for Nelson's Column to come down from Trafalgar Square , because he was a defender of slavery.

Lord Nelson, one of England's greatest heroes. My God.

Whether or not any or most of these people will succeed in their goal is not my concern here. Rather, I'm interested in what this new period of iconoclasm tells us about where we are as a society, and where we may be going.

Iconoclasm often accompanies radical, even violent, change in a society. The word comes from the Greek meaning "image-smashers," and was first used to describe a turbulent period in the Byzantine empire in which the Emperor attempted to ban the use of religious icons as idolatrous. He failed, as you can see by visiting an Orthodox church today. But the word stuck because it was useful.

Whether religious or political (e.g., French revolutionaries, militants in China's Cultural Revolution), real iconoclasts are violent. The damage Reformation-era iconoclasm did to religious art in Europe was incalculable. For example, in England:

Even now there is denial about the scale of the erasing of our medieval past. The Tate estimates we lost 90% of our religious art. It was probably even more than that. The destruction was on a scale that far outstrips the modern efforts of Islamist extremists. And it was not only art we lost, but also books and music.

We think of Henry VIII and the destruction of the monasteries, but that was not the end of the destruction, it marked the beginning. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, hailed the reign of his son, the boy king Edward VI, as that of a new Josiah, destroyer of idols. After his coronation an orgy of iconoclasm was launched. In churches rood screens, tombs with their prayers for the dead, and stain glass windows, were smashed. The Elizabethan antiquarian John Stow complained, some of this Christian Taliban "judged every image to be an idol", so that not only religious art, but even the secular thirteenth century carvings of kings in Ludgate were broken.

And:

The civil war, and the further destruction it brought, took place two generations after England had gone through what has been described as a "cultural revolution designed to obliterate England's memory of who and what she had been". There was not much of that past left. In our cultural history the Reformation is nearly always depicted as a force that opened up England from a closed minded past. But it was our knowledge of that past that was closed and if one future opened to us, we will never know what might have been, not least in art.

That's often what iconoclasm tries to do: erase cultural memory. The zealotry with which iconoclasts go after their targets has to do with their conviction that the image, and what it stands for, is so offensive that it cannot be tolerated, nor can its defenders be reasoned with. They can only be conquered by force.

In the case of our present iconoclasts, what they are attacking are aspects of what leftist academic critics "whiteness" . It is understandable why black Americans and others would object to monuments commemorating Confederate figures (though it is worth asking why all of a sudden removing these objects became an urgent imperative at this particular time). But those statues are the low-hanging fruit. As the New Orleans protesters signal, any American figure who had anything to do with slavery is on the hit list. Donald Trump was not wrong to wonder if George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are going to be next. Both men were compromised by slaveholding.

The argument in favor of eliminating Confederate statues but not those of the slaveholding Founders is that we honor the latter in spite of their owning slaves, but the former have monuments built to them because they fought to preserve slavery. That's a reasonable position to take, but it assumes that reason is driving this iconoclasm. Why is Columbus under siege, both in his monuments and in his holiday (e.g., the Oberlin, Ohio, city council just voted to replace Columbus Day with Indigenous People's Day)? Why are vandals going after St. Junipero Serra and St. Joan of Arc?

Because they represent European culture and civilization, which entails Christianity. Because, in the minds of the iconoclasts, they represent whiteness.

This morning I picked up a book from my shelves that I haven't looked at since it came out in 2004: the late political scientist Samuel Huntington's Who Are We? The Challenges To America's National Identity. It was startling to read Huntington in light of recent events, including most of all the Trump election. It was even more startling -- and deeply dismaying -- to read Huntington and consider that the odious white nationalists might have a clearer understanding of what's going on now than respectable people. Let me explain.

Huntington, who taught at Harvard, writes that the country has been losing a sense of coherent identity for some time now. It's not that Americans were a homogeneous people, but rather that its Anglo-Protestant founding culture was able to assimilate immigrants. This has partly to do with strong belief in the "American Creed," a commonly held set of assumptions about what the nation stood for: liberty, equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result), individualism, populism, limited government, and free-market economics. These ideas, Huntington said, came out of Protestant England and its reception of the Enlightenment.

On assimilation, the glaring exception, of course, were the descendants of the unwilling immigrants among us: those of African slaves, for whom the American Creed did not apply. Nevertheless:

American national identity peaked politically with the rallying of Americans to their country and its cause in World War II. It peaked symbolically with President Kennedy's 1961 summons: 'Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country.'

Starting in the 1960s, writes Huntington, "deconstructionists" of national identity encouraged "individuals were defined by their group membership, not common nationality." Pushing identity politics was a time-tested strategy for colonialist regimes, for the sake of dividing and conquering subject peoples. But the governments of nation-states instead focused on uniting their disparate peoples. (Indeed, the Civil Rights Movement was about compelling the white majority to extend the promises of the Constitution and the Creed to black Americans -- in other words, to fully unite them to the whole.)

Huntington says that this did not start from below, but was imposed from the top, by American political, legal, and cultural elites. He writes, "These efforts by a nation's leaders to deconstruct the nation they governed were, quite possibly, without precedent in human history."

By 1992, the liberal historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. warned that all this had become "a cult, and today it treatens to become a counter-revolution against the original theory of American as 'one people,' a common culture, a single nation." Huntington continues, talking about how the promises of the Civil Rights movement were turned on their head by racial preferences:

This replacement of individual rights by group rights and of color-blind law by color-conscious law was never approved by the American people and received only intermittent, passive, and partial acceptance by American legislators. "What is extraordinary about this change," the distinguished sociologist Daniel Bell commented, "is that, without public debate, an entirely new principle of rights has been introduced into the polity." "Group rights and equality of condition," Belz agrees, "were introduced into public opinion as a new public philosophy that distinguishes among individuals on racial and ethnic grounds and that ultimately denies the existence of a common good."

The implications of this view were cogently stated by the Thernstroms: "Racial classifications deliver the message that skin color matters -- profoundly. They suggest that whites and blacks are not the same, that race and ethnicity are the qualities that really matter. They imply that individuals are defined by blood -- not by character, social class, religious sentiments, age, or education. But categories appropriate to a caste system are a poor basis on which to build that community of equal citizens upon which democratic government depends."

If you want to talk about racializing American society, it didn't start with Richard Spencer and his crew. Led by elites, America has been balkanizing along racial and ethnic lines since the late 1960s. Multiculturalism, that 1990s buzzword, led to colleges emphasizing ethnic studies and non-Western courses, and devaluing those in Western civilization. Huntington, quoting Schlesinger Jr:

"The mood is one of divesting Americans of the sinful European inheritance and seeking redemptive infusions from non-Western cultures." At the turn of the century, none of fifty top American colleges and universities required a course in American history.

He who controls a culture's memory controls the culture. Huntington says that if a nation "is a remembered as well as an imagined community, people who are losing that memory are becoming something less than a nation."

One of the most remarkable things about Huntington's narrative is how this disuniting of America was led by elites, despite resistance from the population. Look, from the vantage point of a nation led by President Donald Trump, at this passage from Huntington's 2004 book. The political scientist is talking about the simple demographic and political fact that whites, especially white males, are losing power and place in US society:

It should not be difficult to see that "rebellion" and the reasons for it. It would, indeed, be extraordinary and possibly unprecedented in human history if the profound demographic changes occurring in America did not generate reactions of various sorts. one very plausible reaction would be the emergence of exclusivist sociopolitical movements composed largely but not only of white males, primarily working-class and middle-class, protesting and attempting to stop or reverse these changes and what they believe, accurately or not, to be the diminution of their social and economic status, their loss of jobs to immigrants and foreign countries, the perversion of their culture, the displacement of their language, and the erosion or even evaporation of the historical identity of their country. Such movements would be both racially and culturally inspired and could be anti-Hispanic, anti-black, and anti-immigration. They would be the heir to the many comparable exclusivist racial and anti-foreign movements that helped define American identity in the past.

Huntington points out that should they emerge, "the new white nationalists" (the term is political scientist Carol Swain's) will not be like the fringe extremists. They don't advocate white supremacy, but rather "racial self-determination and self-preservation." They will reject national identity, and locate culture in race. They don't want white culture replaced by black or brown culture.

Furthermore, whites attracted to these ideas will be those sick and tired of preferential treatment policies that violate the American Creed and disadvantage them. They will, Huntington predicts (remember, he wrote this in 2004), be stirred up by the loss of jobs and widening income inequality due to globalization. And they will hate the media for using what they consider to be bias against them. Finally, immigration may make them feel that they have their backs against the wall.

Because of several sociological factors, Huntington says that middle class and lower middle class whites have come to see themselves as victims. He quotes another political scientist who says these whites feel that they have no real culture or identity, so they are embracing victimization.

Whites, in sum, will start to act like any other ethnic or racial group in America. I have to confess that reading Huntington makes me question the (yes, liberal) media narrative on this new battlefront in the culture wars. Broadly speaking, the media construe the conflict as racist whites reacting to minority progress. No doubt there's truth to that, but that is not the whole truth, or even most of the truth. What we're seeing might be thought of as the entirely predictable and normal reaction of a particular group within a pluralistic society, when members of that group come to believe that they are losing ground. In this sense, when white grievance and protest is presented by the media as solely a manifestation of racism, it allows others to justify dismissing those grievances and consider themselves morally responsible for doing so.

Huntington again, citing Swain's 2004 book The New White Nationalism In America :

The makings of serious white nativist movements and of intensified racial conflict exist in America. Carol Swain probably overdramatizes the possibility, but her eloquent warning deserves serious though. We are witnessing, she says, "the simultaneous convergence of a host of powerful social forces." These include "changing demographics, the continued existence of racial preference policies, the rising expectations of ethnic minorities, the continued existence of liberal immigration policies, growing concerns about job losses associated with globalization, the demands for multiculturalism, and the Internet's ability to enable like-minded individuals to identify with each other and to share mutual concerns and strategies for impacting the political system." These factors can only serve "to nourish white racial consciousness and white nationalism, the next logical stage for identity politics in America. As a result, America is "increasingly at risk of large-scale racial conflict unprecedented in our nation's history."

Well, that's cheerful.

It is remarkable how much Huntington focuses on the wide disparity between elites and the public on these issues, stretching over 50 years. I couldn't help but think of the recent Marist poll showing that the broader public is far more supportive of leaving Confederate statues alone than the news reporting would have us believe.

Huntington also talks about the bottoming out of public trust in government and institutions. It's been declining since 1960s. Today, only the military, police, and small business are the only institutions in whom trust has been stable or grown. Think about what that means. Aside from small business people, by far the most trusted institutions in society are those armed and charged with defending it from foreign enemies and maintaining internal order. If that doesn't tell you something about how our society is coming undone, you are ineducable.

Huntington puts a troubling question to his readers:

Because of the Creed, "many Americans came to believe that America could be multiracial, multiethnic, and lack any cultural core, and yet still be a coherent nation with its identity defined solely by the Creed. Is this, however, really the case? Can a nation be defined only by a political ideology? Several considerations suggest the answer is no. A creed alone does not a nation make."

He says that historically, American identity has involved four key components: Race, Ethnicity, Culture (especially language and religion), and Ideology. Race and ethnicity as a defining core of nation is long gone. Culture is "under siege" (even more so today than when Huntington wrote his book). All that's left is ideology -- that is, the Creed. Writes Huntington: "For the Creed to become the sole source of national identity would be a sharp break from the past."

He points out that the only other examples we have of creedal nations are the communist countries. This is not an encouraging thought. After the ideology failed and the coercive power of the state collapsed, those countries more or less came apart along ethnic lines. China is the great exception, but it held together, he says, because of the widely shared Han Chinese identity.

Huntington concludes that because the American Creed emerged from Anglo-Protestant culture, it probably won't survive its demise.

Finally, the Harvard political scientist predicted that the rise in US religious consciousness in the 1980s and 1990s would would increase. He was quite wrong about that, as we now know. At end of book, Huntington cites research showing that globally, "those countries that are more religious tend to be more nationalist." I suppose this would help explain white Evangelical support for Donald Trump. As regular readers know, I am averse to nationalism mixing with the Christian religion, because it can easily lead to Christians making an idol of the state. That said, the data Huntington cites would lead one to predict that the decline of Christianity in the US will also hasten the unraveling of the social and cultural fabric.

If Christianity, with its universalist values, is declining, then something will take its place. Something will fill the vacuum it leaves. We should not at all be surprised if this turns out to be a heightened, even militant, racial consciousness. This is the logical outcome of identity politics.

This is what I mean by constantly saying that Social Justice Warriors of the Left have no idea what kind of demons they are summoning from the Right. And American elites of all kinds have no idea what they are doing by pushing the "diversity is our strength" lie. We are seeing from this side of the Atlantic how the resolute refusal of the European political and cultural establishments to take the radical challenge from mass immigration seriously is opening up a big space for the radical right to flourish. It's going to happen here too, for somewhat different reasons, ones I've explored in this blog post.

The other day in The Atlantic , Jonathan Haidt wrote a perceptive essay about how Trump's reaction to Charlottesville violated a powerful American taboo . It begins like this:

Taboo and sacredness are among the most important words needed to understand Charlottesville and its aftermath. Taboo refers to things that are forbidden for religious or supernatural reasons. All traditional societies have such prohibitions -- things you must not do, touch, or eat, not because they are bad for you directly, but because doing so is an abomination, which may bring divine retribution. But every society also makes some things sacred, rallying around a few deeply revered values, people, or places, which bind all members together and make them willing to sacrifice for the common good. The past week brought violent conflict over symbols and values held sacred -- and saw President Trump commit an act of sacrilege by violating one of our society's strongest taboos.

More:

That torchlight march, and the main rally the next day, gave the country the shocking spectacle of fellow Americans chanting "Jews will not replace us" while making Nazi salutes and anti-black slurs. It was a rejection -- a desecration -- of the story shared by most Americans in which we are not a nation based on "blood and soil," we are a nation of immigrants who accepted the American creed. That creed includes the idea that "all men are created equal." Americans know that we do not yet live up to our aspirations, but publicly accepting the premises of the nation's founding documents is a requirement for political leadership in America. To deny those premises is blasphemy, and so white supremacism, the KKK, and neo-Nazis are by definition blasphemous.

By the way he handled the Charlottesville violence (appearing to equivocate):

In that moment, Trump committed the gravest act of sacrilege of his presidency. In that moment, the president rendered himself untouchable by all who share the belief that Nazis and the KKK are not just bad -- they are taboo.

I'm not so sure about that. The new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows broad disapproval of the way Trump handled Charlottesville, but strong approval of it among Republicans. If you go deep into the poll , you'll see that 83 percent of Americans believe it is unacceptable to hold white supremacist views. That would appear to validate Haidt's thesis. Happily, white supremacy remains a taboo.

But it is plain that most Republicans do not believe Trump violated that taboo. That is no small number of Americans. Whether you believe they are right or wrong in that assessment is not the point. The point is that on an issue of intense feeling -- a feeling that Haidt correctly likens to religious conviction -- there is no broad agreement on what constitutes violating that taboo. My sense is that among elites -- including Republican elites -- there is shared conviction that Trump touched the third rail. But that sense is not shared by the broad mass of GOP voters any more than the Republican elite's 2016 disgust by candidate Donald Trump was.

Along those lines, I would love to see polling on the extent to which whites (Southern and otherwise) see attacks on Confederate monuments as an attack on white supremacy, and the extent to which they see these attacks as assaults on them . Again, notice the ABC/Post poll, which shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans reject white supremacy. The PBS/Marist poll from last week showed that only 27 percent of all Americans believe that Confederate monuments should be taken down. The racial breakdown is: whites 25%; blacks 40%; Latinos 24%.

It is reasonable to assume that a nation in which over 80 percent of the people believe white supremacy is unacceptable, but only 27 percent believe the Confederate statues should come down, is not a nation that sees those statues as symbols of white supremacy. So what do they symbolize? And who do they symbolize? The answer is important.

In light of Samuel Huntington's book, it seems to me that the culture war has shifted into a dangerous phase, accelerated by both Donald Trump and progressive militants, who feed off each other. Our unity is fragile -- more fragile than people think. This is not the time to be iconoclastic towards cultural symbols. The fact that we are seeing iconoclasm emerge, and that it is not only unchallenged, but actually encouraged by liberal elites, is a bad sign for the future. Remember how we started this post: with a recognition that iconoclasm usually accompanies or precedes actual violence.

The disassembling of the American Creed has been a 50-year project of American elites, but we are all going to reap the whirlwind. You cannot destroy symbols of people's identity without calling forth rage.

[Sep 04, 2017] The Summer of Monumental Madness by Robert Weissberg

Notable quotes:
"... All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis: the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial equality. ..."
"... Think of the Monumental Madness as social engineering quackery -- it probably will accomplish little if anything but it feels better than doing nothing. What encourages this desperate quest for today's "miracle" is that so many past solutions, at least according to all the learned experts, were "guaranteed" to perform as advertised and all failed. ..."
"... A similar guaranteed cure was political empowerment, that is, the Department of Justice would ensure that blacks would live in cities run by black elected officials and self-government would cure everything from crime to joblessness. The upshot, of course, have been urban disasters like Detroit and Selma, AL. And let's not forget tough anti-discrimination laws that would ban employers from using racist job descriptions, and affirmative action programs that would temporarily give a leg up to those who began the race a few steps behind. ..."
"... All and all, genuine successes are rare, typically only cosmetic, and if there were a Museum of Failed Cures for America's Racial Problems, it would be the size of Washington's Smithsonian. ..."
"... What has permitted this quackery to explode is that Confederate statutes and similar hateful objects are everywhere and the cost of exorcizing the evil spirits is trivial vis-a-vis past solutions. Just compare the difficulties of purging racism from a police department with scrutinizing at a city map to find streets named after slave-owners and demanding that they be re-named. The especially good news is that this quest can be life-time employment. In 2016 the Southern Poverty Law Center estimates that there were some 700 Confederate statutes and monuments on public property and who knows how many schools, streets and cemetery markers similarly radiate hate ( Wall Street Journal, August 22, 2017, A3). Further add 10 Army bases names after Confederate generals. So much hate, so little time. ..."
"... The cost of this hysteria far exceeds upsetting those who cherish the Confederate legacy. Yet again the public debate will carefully dodge that Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name: racial equality is impossible, and its quest can only generate yet more Noble Lies and, worst of all, increasingly totalitarian measures that accomplish nothing other than needlessly expand government power. But then again, perhaps this is what today's madness is all about -- far easier to rave and rant about Robert E. Lee than confront a very unpleasant reality. By that standard, tearing down statutes and re-naming schools is a great investment for those intent on keeping the racial peace. ..."
"... Occam's Razor suggests a simpler explanation: After the election of a black President, and the election of a white President, who is doing nothing to roll back racial favoritism for blacks, blacks now feel that they can move to a highly visible form of white dispossession. They feel they're on top and they want to rub whitey's nose in it. ..."
"... Racial equality is off topic here. Racial hatred worldwide and at home is caused by competition between groups having gone deeply personal. The onset of this malaise is, more often than not, heritage from a Colonial past. Very stubborn to address because of it personal aspect, it still can be lessened by reducing ongoing factors which inflame it. ..."
"... "...this quest can be life-time employment." This quote explains much of this ..."
"... All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis: the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial equality. ..."
"... I think this is exactly it. It's like when a married couple gets into a big argument over some little thing around the house – it's always really about something else. And it's never an isolated incident – it's always an accumulation of resentment, not feeling appreciated, etc. ..."
Sep 04, 2017 | www.unz.com

Decades from now experts will surly debate today's Summer of Monumental Hysteria. After all, by all objective criteria -- assuming, of course, that anything can be objective if it involves race -- it should not have happened. How many Americans really can correctly identify Robert E. Lee, let along Roger B. Taney? (According to one recent survey , half the American public did not know when the Civil War happened.) Do racially sensitive African Americans even notice the names on these statutes or plaques when they encountered them? Why now since most of these offense-giving inanimate objects have existed for decades?

Most critically, is there any evidence to suggest that the very existence of a park or a school horning a Confederate dignitary has adversely affected anybody, regardless of race in the slightest way? Do black children enrolled in J.E.B. Stewart Middle School under-perform academically compared to those attending the Malcolm X Academy ? Does the Jefferson Memorial emit a dangerous racial version of Radon ? Can visitors be "protected" by having a warning: Be advised that Jefferson once owned slaves so proceed at one's own risk." Tellingly, nobody is even interested in an evidence-based argument regarding this toxicity. "Everybody knows" that anything about the Confederacy is hateful and all hatefulness has to be exorcised from American life since hate, like asbestos and tobacco, is bad. At least leftish professors don't have to invent "studies" to make this point.

Some explanations for this sudden and unexpected hysteria immediately come to mind. There are countless organizations skilled at turning almost any event into a fund-raiser while those obsessed with bashing President Trump will find any excuse to condemn him. And let's not forget all those who enjoy cheap moral highs by marching against hate and bigotry even if the source of the "hate" is a coffee mug decorated with the stars and bars.

All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis: the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial equality. In a nutshell, for at least a half-century, perhaps longer, America has struggled with its "race problem" and while proposed solutions exceed dozens, and expenditures in the trillions, progress has been scant. In fact, on at least some indicators, for example, illegitimacy and crime, race-related matters where better off in the 1950s. Not even electing a black President has cured America's race strife despite all the assurances that Obama would be a "post-racial" President that would, once and for all, bring everybody together. What we have gotten for all our efforts is Black Lives Matter and yet even more black condemnation of whites.

This accumulated frustration can be likened to a situation where a patient with a grim prognosis grows ever more desperate as one standard treatment after the next fails to reverse the illness. These frantic patients often gravitate to quacks despite the low odds of a cure. Nevertheless, the very act of visiting a faith healer or drinking a magical herbal concoction outshines passivity. And who knows, the world abounds with testimonials to quack cures and "doing something" calms the despair.

Think of the Monumental Madness as social engineering quackery -- it probably will accomplish little if anything but it feels better than doing nothing. What encourages this desperate quest for today's "miracle" is that so many past solutions, at least according to all the learned experts, were "guaranteed" to perform as advertised and all failed. Recall when the surefire cure was improved education -- ending segregation, equalizing school expenditures, hiring more black teachers and administrators, altering textbooks to make it more relevant to black youngsters, intensive pre-school (Head Start, Sesame Street) and, more recently, eradicating unconscious teacher bias and no longer disproportionately disciplining blacks. We've had Bush's No Child Left Behind and Obama's Race to the Top and countless other expensive remedies.

A similar guaranteed cure was political empowerment, that is, the Department of Justice would ensure that blacks would live in cities run by black elected officials and self-government would cure everything from crime to joblessness. The upshot, of course, have been urban disasters like Detroit and Selma, AL. And let's not forget tough anti-discrimination laws that would ban employers from using racist job descriptions, and affirmative action programs that would temporarily give a leg up to those who began the race a few steps behind.

All and all, genuine successes are rare, typically only cosmetic, and if there were a Museum of Failed Cures for America's Racial Problems, it would be the size of Washington's Smithsonian.

In other words, by the summer of 2017, the frustration over repeated failures plus the lack of any more "guaranteed" solutions on the agenda had created a perfect setting for quackery. Now, as with all serious but likely intractable problems, the marketplace supplies something to meet these needs, and to continue our parallel with those suffering from incurable cancer, taking down statutes of Confederate soldiers or re-naming buildings is the equivalent of using Laetrile among countless other bogus cures . Yes, there is no scientific evidence that past crusade against "hate" has even helped African Americans, but given the sorry record of past efforts, why not give it a try? Hard to resist anything that feels so good.

What has permitted this quackery to explode is that Confederate statutes and similar hateful objects are everywhere and the cost of exorcizing the evil spirits is trivial vis-a-vis past solutions. Just compare the difficulties of purging racism from a police department with scrutinizing at a city map to find streets named after slave-owners and demanding that they be re-named. The especially good news is that this quest can be life-time employment. In 2016 the Southern Poverty Law Center estimates that there were some 700 Confederate statutes and monuments on public property and who knows how many schools, streets and cemetery markers similarly radiate hate ( Wall Street Journal, August 22, 2017, A3). Further add 10 Army bases names after Confederate generals. So much hate, so little time.

This is vigilante justice and everyone, regardless of training or brains, can anoint themselves as soldiers to overcome racial inequality and win a Participation Trophy. Be a hero; just find a statute of Stonewall Jackson hidden in storage room.

The cost of this hysteria far exceeds upsetting those who cherish the Confederate legacy. Yet again the public debate will carefully dodge that Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name: racial equality is impossible, and its quest can only generate yet more Noble Lies and, worst of all, increasingly totalitarian measures that accomplish nothing other than needlessly expand government power. But then again, perhaps this is what today's madness is all about -- far easier to rave and rant about Robert E. Lee than confront a very unpleasant reality. By that standard, tearing down statutes and re-naming schools is a great investment for those intent on keeping the racial peace.

Carlton Meyer > , Website September 4, 2017 at 4:56 am GMT

When will BLM and other radicals demand a statue to honor John Brown? Of all the characters in our history, he should be their hero, but he was white! The US Navy even named a ship after the battle where US Marines (led by Robert E. Lee) crushed his violent attempt to end slavery, and executed Brown.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Harpers_Ferry_(LSD-49)

Since most black American have never heard of him, they should read this link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist)

Slavery existed for thousands of years and did not end because blacks rebelled. It ended because good whites ended it.

Diversity Heretic > , September 4, 2017 at 5:05 am GMT

Occam's Razor suggests a simpler explanation: After the election of a black President, and the election of a white President, who is doing nothing to roll back racial favoritism for blacks, blacks now feel that they can move to a highly visible form of white dispossession. They feel they're on top and they want to rub whitey's nose in it.

Next step will be explicit white-to-black transfers under the guise of "reparations for slavery."

Robert Magill > , September 4, 2017 at 9:44 am GMT

Yet again the public debate will carefully dodge that Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name: racial equality is impossible, and its quest can only generate yet more Noble Lies and, worst

Racial equality is off topic here. Racial hatred worldwide and at home is caused by competition between groups having gone deeply personal. The onset of this malaise is, more often than not, heritage from a Colonial past. Very stubborn to address because of it personal aspect, it still can be lessened by reducing ongoing factors which inflame it.

http://robertmagill.wordpress.com

LiveFreeOrDie > , September 4, 2017 at 10:47 am GMT

>>>"...this quest can be life-time employment." This quote explains much of this

Loveofknowledge > , September 4, 2017 at 1:36 pm GMT

All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis: the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial equality.

I think this is exactly it. It's like when a married couple gets into a big argument over some little thing around the house – it's always really about something else. And it's never an isolated incident – it's always an accumulation of resentment, not feeling appreciated, etc.

Blacks wouldn't feel so slighted by a Confederate monument if they weren't already feeling so disrespected, that they are seen as inferior, they have all the menial jobs and live in the worst neighborhoods, that white people don't want to be around them, etc.

But white people working ever harder to be extra nice to blacks won't work either, and the niceness will just be seen as condescending and patronizing, because it is. The problem is that white people end up being humiliating to blacks just be existing. The races are different, and the contrast is plain to see everywhere all the time.

Granted it's primarily white liberals more than blacks who are the instigators of tearing down these monuments. But that's just because white liberals feel bad for blacks given the realities, and also enjoy seeing themselves in the role of the heroes.

The problem is that everyone has bought into the mid-20th-century Franz Boas anthropology hoax that there are no genetic differences between the races. The truth is getting out though, I think it's happening right now – this might really be it. The establishment is obviously scared, hence the increasing attempts at censorship.

Acknowledgement of this truth actually provides a way to understand and be more sympathetic to the Confederates and the segregationists and other white people throughout history. They weren't evil – they thought the races were different, and they were right, and they were struggling with what to do about it.

This doesn't mean we need to agree with their conclusions – let's not bring back slavery. But I think we all need to start thinking seriously about what comes next once the truth is acknowledged and how to treat blacks as fairly as possible.

I'm hopeful that the solution will be just to stick to equality of individual opportunity and accept the unequal group outcomes, while trying to make society better for people on the low end of the IQ bell curve regardless of race. And if I'm feeling extra optimistic, maybe acknowledging the truth will actually dial down the hostility, because we won't have to be thrashing around looking for scapegoats all the time to blame for the differences.

[Sep 01, 2017] South Koreas Greatest Fear (and It Isnt a North Korean Invasion)

Sep 01, 2017 | nationalinterest.org
spending nearly $13.7 billion. Just two years ago, it seemed that Seoul and Beijing were embarking on a honeymoon phase when President Park Geun-hye attended a military parade in Tiananmen Square commemorating the end of World War II!the only U.S. ally to do so.

Then THAAD happened.

In July 2016, Seoul and Washington announced their decision to deploy the anti-missile system. China opposed the deployment, saying it undermined China's security and would destabilize the region because its radars could be used by the United States to track China's missile activities.

China wanted to "teach South Korea a lesson" for the effrontery of the THAAD deployment. Shortly after the announcement, Beijing banned the airing of Korean TV shows, films, and K-pop acts in China. After it was revealed that Lotte Group!a South Korean conglomerate operating 112 stores in mainland China!once owned the land THAAD would be based on, Chinese state media called for a nationwide boycott of the company. By March 2017, nearly half of Lotte's stores on the mainland were shutdown , due to vague "safety violations." That same month, Beijing banned its travel agencies from selling trips to Korea, resulting in a 66 percent decrease in Chinese visitors from last year. Shortly after President Moon Jae-in was elected to the Blue House in May 2017, he announced the suspension of further THAAD deployments until further review.

Many South Koreans told me they expected blowback from the decision to deploy THAAD, but the swiftness and intensity of Beijing's retaliation caught them off guard. Beijing's response to THAAD, they said, "opened our [South Korean] eyes to China's true colors ." Simply put, they believed Beijing could not be relied on to consider South Korea's interests if China's interests were on the line. This disillusionment is fanning mistrust and has damaged China's image in South Korea. A March 2017 Asan Institute poll found that, for the first time ever , Koreans had a more favorable view of Japan than of China. This was a shocking finding; Japan has consistently been South Koreans' least favorite country after North Korea.

In spite of growing mistrust, South Koreans recognize the crucial role Beijing plays in reining in Pyongyang. Many interlocutors said they believed, in spite of THAAD, that Chinese officials wanted to maintain good relations with South Korea!albeit on China's terms.

[Sep 01, 2017] The purpose of identity politics is to avoid owners of capital economic issues due to working class resistance by switching the anger at some social group and using "divide and conqure" policy trying to pit one group against the other

Notable quotes:
"... Yes, identity politics are a distraction, it's the political equivalent of sugar, it gets you high but eventually ruins you. ..."
Sep 01, 2017 | www.unz.com

jorge videla > , August 31, 2017 at 6:53 am GMT

the purpose of identity politics is to avoid economic issues when they are more pressing than at any time since ww ii. the brainwashing of americans against socialism has continued for those born after 12/26/1991. as long as the alt-right is dominated by the brainwashed it will fail.

It needs to stop calling itself conservative and right.

What the majority of the electorate wants is bernie sanders, a wall, e-verify and the subsequent self-deportations, more environmental regulations, the end of affirmative action, etc..

Rod1963 > , August 31, 2017 at 7:25 pm GMT

@jorge videla

the purpose of identity politics is to avoid economic issues when they are more pressing than at any time since ww ii. the brainwashing of americans against socialism has continued for those born after 12/26/1991. as long as the alt-right is dominated by the brainwashed it will fail. it needs to stop calling itself conservative and right. what the majority of the electorate wants is bernie sanders, a wall, e-verify and the subsequent self-deportations, more environmental regulations, the end of affirmative action, etc..

Yes, identity politics are a distraction, it's the political equivalent of sugar, it gets you high but eventually ruins you.

It also answers the question why is Silicon Valley, Wall Street and the bankers all of a sudden are supporting identity politics? Because it's a counter to populism and economic awareness.

This keeps people from noticing their politicians are all owned by wealthy special interests who don't give a shit about the people and it fact plan to reduce most to serfs in the name of profit. No one ever talks about why Wall Street gets a multitrillion dollar bail out for what amounted to was a scam concocted by the bankers and real-estate moguls and bond ratings agencies. Yet no one ever went to jail over this.

It distracts the young why they can't file for bankruptcy after graduating with a worthless college degree that they paid $150k for.

[Sep 01, 2017] Raghuram Rajan: Populist Nationalism Is the First Step Toward Crony Capitalism

Sep 01, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

Asher Schechter at ProMarket discusses Raghuram Rajan's views on the rise of populist nationalism:

Raghuram Rajan: Populist Nationalism Is "the First Step Toward Crony Capitalism" : The wave of populist nationalism that has been sweeping through Western democracies in the past two years is "a cry for help from communities who have seen growth bypass them."
So said Raghuram Rajan, the former governor of the Reserve Bank of India, during a keynote address he gave at the Stigler Center's conference on the political economy of finance that took place in June.
Rajan, a professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, spoke about the "concentrated and devastating" impact of technology and trade on blue-collar communities in areas like the Midwest, the anger toward "totally discredited" elites following the 2008 financial crisis, and the subsequent rise of populist nationalism, seen as a way to restore a sense of community via exclusion.
In his talk, Rajan focused on three questions related to current populist discontent: 1. Why is anger focused on trade? 2. Why now? 3. Why do so many voters turn to far-right nationalist movements?
"Pointing fingers at these communities and telling them they don't understand is not the right answer," he warned. "In many ways, the kind of angst that we see in industrial countries today is similar to the bleak times [of] the 1920s and 1930s. Most people in industrial countries used to believe that their children would have a better future than their already pleasant present. Today this is no longer true." ...

There's quite a bit more. I don't agree with everything he (Raghuram) says, but thought it might provoke discussion.

DrDick , August 31, 2017 at 11:03 AM

Frankly, "crony capitalism" has always been the primary one, as even Adam Smith noted.
Paine , August 31, 2017 at 11:54 AM
The understanding of exploitation
Of wage earning production workers
Is a better base then the 18 th century liberal ideal of equality

Exploitation and oppression are obviously not the same
even if they make synergistic team mates oftener then not
So long as " them " are blatantly oppressed
It's easy to Forget you are exploited
Unlike oppression
Exploitation can be so stealthy
So not part of the common description of the surface of daily life

Calls for equality must include a careful answer to the question
" equal with who ? "

Unearned equality is not seen as fair to those who wanna believe they earned their status
Add in the obvious :
To be part of a successful movement aimed at Exclusion of some " thems " or other
Is narcotic
Just as fighting exclusion can be a narcotic too for " thems "

But fighting against exclusion coming from among a privileged rank among
The community of would be excluders
That is a bummer
A thankless act of sanctimony
Unless you spiritually join the " thems"

Now what have we got ?

Jim Crow thrived for decades it only ended
When black arms and hands in the field at noon ...by the tens of millions
were no longer necessary to Dixie

Christopher H. , August 31, 2017 at 11:54 AM
"Pointing fingers at these communities and telling them they don't understand is not the right answer," he warned. "In many ways, the kind of angst that we see in industrial countries today is similar to the bleak times [of] the 1920s and 1930s. Most people in industrial countries used to believe that their children would have a better future than their already pleasant present. Today this is no longer true." ...

I thought this sort of thinking was widely accepted only in 2016 we were told by the center left that no it's not true.

"Rajan, a professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, spoke about the "concentrated and devastating" impact of technology and trade on blue-collar communities in areas like the Midwest, the anger toward "totally discredited" elites following the 2008 financial crisis, and the subsequent rise of populist nationalism, seen as a way to restore a sense of community via exclusion."

Instead the center left is arguing that workers have nothing to complain about and besides they're racist/sexist.

gregory byshenk , September 01, 2017 at 08:54 AM
'"These communities have become disempowered partly for economic reasons but partly also because decision-making has increasingly been centralized toward state governments, national governments, and multilateral [agreements]," said Rajan. In the European Union, he noted, the concentration of decision-making in Brussels has led to a lot of discontent.'

I'd suggest that this part is not true. Communities have become politically disempowered in large part because they have become economically disempowered. A shrinking economy means a shrinking tax base and less funds to do things locally. Even if the local government attempts to rebuild by recruiting other employers, they end up in a race to the bottom with other communities in a similar situation.

I'd also suggest that the largest part of the "discontent" in the EU is not because of any "concentration of decision-making", but because local (and regional, and national) politicians have used the EU as a convenient scapegoat for any required, but unpopular action.

[Aug 28, 2017] ECONOMIST grinding a boot heel into the face of James Damore, the programmer fired by Google on August 7th for his internal company memo on sex differentials in suitability for software work.

Notable quotes:
"... four full pages ..."
"... The Economist's ..."
"... Many of the memo's assertions were risible, such as the idea that women are not coders because they are less intrigued by "things" than men are. ..."
"... Assertions in that category are not "risible" unless you have a strong ideological determination to find them so. The claim that men have one less rib than women could fairly be called "risible" since it is so easily disproved. Damore's claim, as stated, is of a different kind. ..."
"... To the best of my knowledge, it has not been disproved: but even if it has been, it's still not "risible," as the disproving would have involved painstaking research and lengthy debates in scholarly journals. To persons not current with all that specialized research, it is a thing that might be true . ..."
"... Google is 80% male in its most technical departments. This hiring "anomaly" cannot be blamed on the young Damore, as I doubt he has any say in hiring matters. Brin, Page and Schmidt built up the company in its present form. ..."
"... Should Larry Page be so foolish as to write the sneering epistle suggested by the Economist, he would then have a hard time explaining Google's demographic makeup as he would have thrown away many of his best arguments. ..."
Aug 28, 2017 | www.unz.com

If all this sneering and gloating were not sufficiently emetic, this issue gives over four full pages to grinding a boot heel into the face of James Damore, the programmer fired by Google on August 7th for his internal company memo on sex differentials in suitability for software work.

This was actually The Economist's second attempt to break this particular butterfly on the wheel. Their previous edition (August 12th-18th) had run a 600-word editorial and a 1,000-word article in the Business Section both arguing that Google should not have fired Damore but that his arguments about women and men displaying different interests were wrong, wrong, wrong .

From the editorial:

An unbiased eye would light on social factors rather than innate differences as the reason why only a fifth of computer engineers are women It would have been better for Larry Page, Google's co-founder and the boss of Alphabet, its holding company, to write a ringing, detailed rebuttal of Mr Damore's argument.

From the article:

Many of the memo's assertions were risible, such as the idea that women are not coders because they are less intrigued by "things" than men are.

This is just ideological enforcement. Why is it more "unbiased" to presume social factors than to presume innate differences? It's not more unbiased; it's just more CultMarx-compliant.

And why is that latter assertion " risible " ("causing or capable of causing laughter; laughable; ludicrous ")? It's not preposterous; it's in the category of things that might or might not be true. Whether it is true or not can be determined by careful empirical enquiry.

Assertions in that category are not "risible" unless you have a strong ideological determination to find them so. The claim that men have one less rib than women could fairly be called "risible" since it is so easily disproved. Damore's claim, as stated, is of a different kind.

To the best of my knowledge, it has not been disproved: but even if it has been, it's still not "risible," as the disproving would have involved painstaking research and lengthy debates in scholarly journals. To persons not current with all that specialized research, it is a thing that might be true .

Well, the four-page heel-grinding in this current issue is an attempt to write the "ringing, detailed rebuttal of Mr Damore's argument" that The Economist recommended to Larry Page in last week's editorial. It is a jeering, sneering specimen of equalist triumphalism.

Your interpretation is wrong. Your memo was a great example of what's called "motivated reasoning"!seeking out only the information that supports what you already believe.

Uh: pot, kettle?

It was derogatory to women in our industry and elsewhere. Despite your stated support for diversity and fairness, it demonstrated profound prejudice.

You should be free of ideological prejudices, pure of heart , as we are!

Your chain of reasoning had so many missing links that it hardly mattered what your argument was based on. We try to hire people who are willing to follow where the facts lead, whatever their preconceptions. In your case we clearly made a mistake.

So then wouldn't it be right to fire him?

You don't seem to understand what makes a great software engineer You clearly don't understand our company, and so fail to understand what we are trying to do when we hire.

See previous.

I shouldn't have had to write this: I'm busy and a little effort on your part would have made it unnecessary. But I know I have it easy. Women in our industry have to cope with this sort of nonsense all the time.

Yours,

Larry

My impression is that Damore put considerable effort into his memo. And again, while some of his assertions could be wrong, they are not missing-rib-level "nonsense."

But then, who's this James Damore pest, anyway? How many billion is he worth? Feugh!

Hugh > , August 25, 2017 at 4:18 pm GMT

Google is 80% male in its most technical departments. This hiring "anomaly" cannot be blamed on the young Damore, as I doubt he has any say in hiring matters. Brin, Page and Schmidt built up the company in its present form.

Should Larry Page be so foolish as to write the sneering epistle suggested by the Economist, he would then have a hard time explaining Google's demographic makeup as he would have thrown away many of his best arguments.

I share Joe Levantine's sorrow over the demise of this once great weekly. What a shame.

[Aug 28, 2017] Krauthammer Shows True Colors Over Charlottesville

Aug 23, 2017 | www.unz.com

John Derbyshire August 23, 2017 300 Words 4 Comments Reply

One of the side-effects of these periodic moral panics that sweep through American society -- Trayvon , Ferguson , Charlottesville -- is that they unmask people -- bring out their inner nature.

Well, two weeks ago on the podcast I said some kind words , or at least not un -kind words, about TV talking head Charles Krauthammer. I said that while I'd written him off for years as a, quote, "cucky neocon Israel-first GOP establishment front man," more recently I've been warming to him because of the mostly sensible things he's said on Tucker Carlson's show.

Well, I'm biting my tongue. Last Tuesday on Fox News Krauthammer reverted to cucky type, acting scandalized that Trump dared suggest there is anything wrong with masked anarchists throwing rocks at citizens lawfully demonstrating.

Fortunately Laura Ingraham was there to counter him. I have, as I have often noted , a very soft spot for Ms. Ingraham. Not to be shy about it, I would walk over hot coals for her, leap the ice floes of a swollen river for her, wrestle alligators for her.

Art Deco > , August 25, 2017 at 1:51 pm GMT

So OK, I yield. I got Krauthammer right the first time: cucky neocon shill.

"Shill"? A shill is a bogus competitor employed by a casino to promote interest in the blackjack tables. Krauthammer isn't a shill.

He's had a certain political trajectory over the years: from mainline Democrat to dissenting Democrat to mainline Republican (a trajectory traversed over the period running from about 1979 to 1995). There is no indication he's ever advocated anything but what he thinks or that he favors the party he's not formally affiliated with; his antagonism to Trump is an indicator of the crevasse which separates starboard opinion journalists from starboard voters.

A real shill would be someone employed by the media to play a Republican. The WaPoo hired David Weigel to do this, but the act wasn't credible after his private correspondence was published in the Journ-O-List scandal.

Tyler Cowen, whose public writings suggest he's consumed with anxiety about status considerations in faculty settings, might be seen as a manifestation of libertarian pseudo-opposition on the George Mason payroll (since he never critiques any progtrasn sacred cows). Bruce Bartlett, the Republican whose signature is attacking other Republicans, might be considered a shill or a poseur depending on who is paying his bills.

And, of course, 'neocon' is a nonsense term.

Krauthammer is a Canadian-reared scion of a very prosperous family. He's lived pretty much all his life in New York, Montreal, Boston, and Washington. His brother spent his adult life in Los Angeles. His son lives in the Bay Area, his niece and her husband in Washington.

Between them, his parents lived in a half-dozen countries during the course of their lives before landing in Quebec. He does not have any natural affinity for the Trump constituency.

The best he can do is to attempt to appreciate it, and at that he is very hit-and-miss.

[Aug 27, 2017] Manipulated minorities represent a major danger for democratic states>

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire ..."
"... To distill it to an aphorism, "A million guys with one buck, are no match for one guy with a million bucks." ..."
"... Another point: The poorer people are, the more vulnerable they are to identity politics. ..."
"... What do all races, genders, nationalities and creeds have in common? An overwhelming majority of them are working class. That's why I am white and Nationalist but not a White Nationalist. The working class wants work and wages. The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats. ..."
"... Some minorities are more equal than others. The Deep State, for example. ..."
"... It's impossible to have a functional political system when the political parties themselves are allowed to decide what issues voters get to vote on, and can racially divide the electorate by providing policy packages which play to voter weaknesses. This results in absurd results like blacks in the US voting for mass unskilled immigration via the Democrats, and poor American whites voting for increased defense spending and financial liberalisation via the Republicans. ..."
Aug 27, 2017 | www.unz.com

My thesis is very simple: the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire . That's all there is to it.

I think that minorities often, but not always, act and perceive things in a way very different from the way majority groups do. Here is what I have observed:

Let's first look at minorities inside the US:

They are typically far more aware of their minority identity/status than the majority. That is to say that if the majority is of skin color A and the minority of skin color B, the minority will be much more acutely aware of its skin color. They are typically much more driven and active then the majority. This is probably due to their more acute perception of being a minority. They are only concerned with single-issue politics , that single-issue being, of course, their minority status. Since minorities are often unhappy with their minority-status, they are also often resentful of the majority . Since minorities are mostly preoccupied by their minority-status linked issue, they rarely pay attention to the 'bigger picture' and that, in turn, means that the political agenda of the minorities typically does not threaten the powers that be . Minorities often have a deep-seated inferiority complex towards the putatively more successful majority. Minorities often seek to identify other minorities with which they can ally themselves against the majority.

To this list of characteristics, I would add one which is unique to foreign minorities, minorities outside the US: since they have no/very little prospects of prevailing against the majority, these minorities are very willing to ally themselves with the AngloZionist Empire and that, in turn, often makes them depended on the AngloZionist Empire, often even for their physical survival.

The above are, of course, very general characterizations. Not all minorities display all of these characteristics and many display only a few of them. But regardless of the degree to which any single minority fits this list of characteristics, what is obvious is that minorities are extremely easy to manipulate and that they present no credible (full-spectrum) threat to the Empire.

The US Democratic Party is the perfect example of a party which heavily relies on minority manipulation to maximize its power. While the Republican Party is by and large the party of the White, Anglo, Christian and wealthy voters, the Democrats try to cater to Blacks, women, Leftists, homosexuals, immigrants, retirees, and all others who feel like they are not getting their fair share of the proverbial pie. Needless to say, in reality there is only one party in the US, you can call the the Uniparty, the Republicracts or the Demolicans, but in reality both wings of the Big Money party stand for exactly the same things. What I am looking at here is not at some supposed real differences, but the way the parties present themselves. It is the combined action of these two fundamentally identical parties which guarantees the status quo in US politics which I like to sum up as "more of the same, only worse".

I would like to mention an important corollary of my thesis that minorities are typically more driven than the majority. If we accept that minorities are typically much more driven than most of the population, then we also immediately can see why their influence over society is often out of proportion with the numerical demographical "weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities being more intelligent or more creative and everything to do with them willing to being spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most people.

So we have easy to manipulate, small groups, whose agenda does not threaten the 1% (really, much less!), who like to gang up with other similar minorities against the majority. Getting scared yet? It gets worse.

Western 'democracies' are mostly democracies only in name. In most of them instead of "one man one vote" we see "one dollar one vote" meaning that big money decides, not "the people". Those in real power have immense financial resources which they cynically use to boost the already totally disproportional power of the various minorities. Now this is really scary:

Easy to manipulate, small groups, highly driven, whose agenda does not threaten the ruling plutocracy, who like to gang up with other similar minorities against the majority and whose influence is vastly increased by immense sums of money invested in them by the plutocracy. How is that for a threat to real people power, to the ideals of democracy?!

The frightening truth is that the combination of minorities and big money can easily hijack a supposedly 'democratic' country and subjugate the majority of its population to the "rule of the few over the many".

Once we look this reality in the face we should also become aware of a very rarely mentioned fact: while we are taught that democracies should uphold the right of the minorities, the opposite is true: real democracies should strive to protect majorities against the abuse of power from minorities!

I know, I have just committed a long list of grievous thoughtcrimes!

At those who might be angry at me, I will reply with a single sentence: please name me a western country where the views of the majority of its people are truly represented in the policies of their governments? And if you fail to come up with a good example, then I need to ask you if the majority is clearly not in power, then who is?

I submit that the plutocratic elites which govern the West have played a very simple trick on us all: they managed to focus our attention on the many cases in history when minorities were oppressed by majorities but completely obfuscated the numerous cases whereminorities oppressed majorities.

Speaking of oppression: minorities are far more likely to benefit and, therefore, use violence than the majority simply because their worldview often centers on deeply-held resentments. To put it differently, minorities are much more prone to settling scores for past wrongs (whether real or imagined) than a majority which typically does not even think in minority versus majority categories .

Not that majorities are always benign or kind towards minorities, not at all, humans being pretty much the same everywhere, but by the fact that they are less driven, less resentful and, I would argue, even less aware of their "majority status" they are less likely to act on such categories.

Foreign minorities play a crucial role in US foreign policy. Since time immemorial rulers have been acutely aware of the " divide et impera " rule, there is nothing new here. But the US has become the uncontested leader in the art of using national minorities to create strife and overthrow a disobedient regime. The AngloZionist war against the Serbian nation is the perfect example of how this is done: the US supported any minority against the Serbs, even groups that the US classified as terrorists, as long as this was against the Serbs. And, besides being Orthodox Slavs and traditional allies of Russia, what was the real 'crime' of the Serbs? Being the majority of course! The Serbs had no need of the AngloZionists to prevail against the various ethnic (Croats) and religious (Muslims) minorities they lived with. That made the Serbs useless to the Empire. But now that the US has created a fiction of an independent Kosovo, the Kosovo Albanians put up a statue of Bill Clinton in Prishtina and, more relevantly, allowed the Empire to build the Camp Bondsteel mega-base in the middle of their nasty little statelet, right on the land of the Serbian population that was ethnically cleansed during the Kosovo war. US democracy building at its best indeed

The same goes for Russia (and, the Soviet Union) where the US went as far as to support the right of self-determination for non-existing "captive nations" such as "Idel-Ural" and "Cossakia" . I would even argue that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo (What in the world is a "Belarussian"?!).

I am fully aware that in the typical TV watching westerner any discussion of minorities focusing on their negative potential immediately elicits visions of hammers and sickles, smoking crematoria chimneys, chain gangs, lynchmobs, etc. This is basic and primitive conditioning. Carefully engineered events such as the recent riots in Charlottesville only further reinforce this type of mass conditioning. This is very deliberate and, I would add, very effective. As a result, any criticism, even just perceived criticism, of a minority immediately triggers outraged protests and frantic virtue-signaling (not me! look how good I am!!).

Of course, carefully using minorities is just one of the tactics used by the ruling plutocracy. Another of their favorite tricks is to created conflicts out of nothing or ridiculously bloat the visibility of an altogether minor topic (example: homo-marriages). The main rule remains the same though: create tensions, conflicts, chaos, subvert the current order (whatever that specific order might be), basically have the serfs fight each other while we rule .

In Switzerland an often used expression to describe "the people" is "the sovereign". This is a very accurate description of the status of the people in a real democracy: they are "sovereign" in the sense that nobody rules over them. In that sense, the issue in the United States is one of sovereignty: as of today, the real sovereign of the US are the corporations, the deep state, the Neocons, the plutocracy, the financiers, the Israel Lobby – you name it, anybody BUT the people.

In that system of oppression, minorities play a crucial role, even if they are totally unaware of this and even if, at the end of the day, they don't benefit from it. Their perception or their lack of achievements in no way diminishes the role that they play in the western pseudo-democracies.

How do with deal with this threat?

I think that the solution lies with the minorities themselves: they need to be educated about the techniques which are used to manipulate them, and they need to be convinced that their minority status does not, in reality, oppose them to the majority and that both the majority and the minorities have a common interest in together standing against those who seek to rule over them all. Striving to remain faithful to my "Putin fanboy" reputation, I will say that I believe that Russia under Putin is doing exactly the right thing by giving the numerous Russian minorities a stake in the future of the Russian state and by convincing the minorities that their interests and the interest of the majority of the people are fundamentally the same: being a minority does not have to mean being in opposition to the majority. It is a truism that minorities need to be fully integrated into the fabric of society and yet this is rarely practiced in the real world. This is certainly not what I observe today in Europe or the US.

The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant motto to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement "Equality and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only political movement in France which does not want to favor one group at the expense of the other. Everybody else either wants to oppress the "français de souche" (the native, mostly White and Roman-Catholic majority) on behalf of the "français de branche" (immigrants, naturalized citizens, minorities), or oppress the "français de branche" on behalf of the "français de souche". Needless to say, the only ones who benefit from this clash is the ruling Zionist elite (best represented by the infamous CRIF , which makes the US AIPAC look comparatively honorable and weak). As for Soral, he is vilified by the official French media with no less hate than Trump is vilified in the US by the US Ziomedia.

Still, equality and reconciliation are the two things which the majorities absolutely must offer the minorities if they want to prevent the latter to fall prey to the manipulation techniques used by those forces who want to turn everybody into obedient and clueless serfs. Those majorities who delude themselves and believe that they can simply solve the "minority problem" by expelling or otherwise making these minorities disappear are only kidding themselves. To 'simply' solve the "minority problem' by cracking down on these minorities inevitably

Grandpa Charlie > , August 26, 2017 at 6:29 am GMT

"While we all typically [have] several co-existing identities inside us (say, German, retired, college-educated, female, Buddhist, vegetarian, exile, resident of Brazil, etc. as opposed to just "White"), in manipulated minorities one such identity (skin color, religion, etc.) becomes over-bloated and trumps all the others." -- The Saker

That's a great critique of "identity politics" and one reason why identity politics is self-limiting, maybe even self-destructive (as well as destructive of democracy).

Fran Macadam > , Website August 26, 2017 at 6:56 am GMT

To distill it to an aphorism, "A million guys with one buck, are no match for one guy with a million bucks."

Grandpa Charlie > , August 26, 2017 at 7:13 am GMT

Another point: The poorer people are, the more vulnerable they are to identity politics.

It's like an Indian movie I once saw that was constructed as a family history. When the family experienced many setbacks, one after another, until they were all disheartened, the patriarch of the family spoke up, saying, "Remember, we are Bengali!" That was the turning point in the film: after that things began to improve for the family so that the film could have a happy Bolliwood ending.

That was like saying, "Remember, we have a proud history!"

There was also a Yiddish joke that someone told me, like this: There was a young Jewish man in some place like Minsk, somewhere in Eastern Europe, and he saw an advertisement by none other than a great member of the Rothschild banking family. The ad said "Wanted: young Jewish man for difficult and physically challenging assignment." So the hero (or anti-hero?) of this story set out immediately for Paris. Unfortunately, our hero experienced many tragedies, even losing an arm and a leg. But he was determined and he persevered, with the help of a crutch. Finally, he had to camp out in front of the gate of the Rothschild mansion outside of Paris.

Eventually, the great Rothschild had his carriage stop and spoke to the man, saying, "You know, I've seen you standing here day after day what is it that you want?"

Our hero brought out the advertisement that he had carried with him through all his misadventures. The great Rothschild read the advertisement and exclaimed, "What's the matter with you? Did you not read that the job was physically challenging?" To which our hero responded, "Yes, but, Mr. Rothschild, the ad says "young Jewish man."

Being myself a gentile, I did not at first get the joke, but eventually I got a chuckle out of it.

WorkingClass > , August 26, 2017 at 9:24 am GMT

What do all races, genders, nationalities and creeds have in common? An overwhelming majority of them are working class. That's why I am white and Nationalist but not a White Nationalist. The working class wants work and wages. The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats.

Mao Cheng Ji > , August 26, 2017 at 11:17 am GMT

Here's a similar sentiment, by Nassim Taleb: https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

Anonymous > , Disclaimer August 26, 2017 at 4:24 pm GMT

I also lived for 5 years in Washington, DC, which was something like 70% Black and, at the time, openly and often rudely hostile to Whites (I never thought of myself as a color before, but I sure felt like one during those 5 years). And now I am a "legal alien" living in the US. Anyway, while I am "White" (what a nonsensical category!)

Nonsensical? Really? Both the DC blacks and their DC (((paymasters))) hate your "category" but you're still confused and want to hold hands and educate them ? Do you have children?

The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant motto to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement "Equality and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only political movement in France which does not want to favor one group at the expense of the other.

Demographically speaking, the native French group ( white category FYI) is already doomed to lose their homeland unless they reverse the invasion and punish the plotters. Reconciling with their invaders would be assisted suicide, surely. Almost as bad as the forced miscegenation idea proposed by Nicolas "Jew Midget" Sarkozy a few years back.

You need to wake up and check for any vitamin/mineral deficiencies you might have, Saker. Our ancestors butchered countless invaders to give us the land we're standing on – they didn't reconcile it away.

Bartolo > , August 26, 2017 at 6:55 pm GMT

Excellent diagnosis, ridiculous therapy.

One single question shows how profoundly silly The Saker's his "solution" is:

Why would it be easier to convince resentful, envious minorities to just get along with the majority than to convince the elites to act better, according to the noblesse oblige principle?

Elites will always misuse their power. Minorities/majorities will always quarrel and resent each other.

Give us (back) ethnically homogeneous states instead. No panacea, but the besf we can hope for.

Cyrano > , August 26, 2017 at 7:52 pm GMT

The ruling elites of US (both democrats and republicans) can be divided into 2 categories:
1. The ones who think that they are better because of their race.
2. The ones who think that they are better because they were able to overcome the feeling of being better because of their race. In other words – the morally superior ubermensch instead of racially superior ubermensch.

In reality, category 2 doesn't exist (at least not among the ruling elites) – they are all liars. They haven't been able to overcome any feeling of superiority, they just added another one – the one of moral superiority. Actually, the ruling elites for the most part are still category 1, only pretending to be category 2. Not only do they feel they are superior to other races, they feel they are superior to their own race – the poorer members of it.

The ruling elites are manipulating the population of US into declaring that they belong in either one of these 2 camps. Result: Charlottesville riots.

RDM10005 > , August 26, 2017 at 8:46 pm GMT

I already wrote about that here http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2016/08/29/deep-state-plutocrat-elite-use-protected-classes-to-do-their-dirty-work/ 2 years ago and published last year. This is old hat and old news.

Issac > , August 26, 2017 at 8:54 pm GMT

This post would sound eminently reasonable if the white identitarians had any kind of state blessing, but they are a de facto criminal element being suppressed. Not for the sake of democracy, but for the sake of the elite who are Jewish, not Zionist, and not very Anglo.

White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white leadership were transparently in control over the state. The wellspring of their support comes from the fact that what whites do exist in the power structure are absolutely and transparently subservient to other interests.

Ricard > , August 27, 2017 at 4:50 am GMT

While we all typically several co-existing identities inside us

Spot the missing verb.

Alden > , August 27, 2017 at 4:57 am GMT

@Fran Macadam Here is the mantra of political fund raisers. " it's easier to get one donor to give $1,000 than to get 20 donors to give $50 apiece."

jocose > , August 27, 2017 at 5:02 am GMT

One of the problems is that the US was (and still is) a republic-with a small r. The republican form of government assumes that the voters are too stupid or ignorant to pass laws, so they have to hire professional political types to write their governing laws for them. The politicos are easy targets for the powers that be to manipulate, evidently.

Beckow > , August 27, 2017 at 6:33 am GMT

The problem is – as always – with the numbers. The large influx of migrants is changing the demographics and that changes the goals and behaviour of each group. The minority groups can see the promised land in the future when they will take over. The majority knows that they cannot stop it by "equality and reconciliation" (whatever that would mean in practise, maybe endless workshops to whine about each other?).

The numbers game has gone too far and there is no easy way to restore stability. E.g. the labor markets in the West cannot be fixed without drastic restrictions on supply of new labor from the Third World. The article has some valuable insights, but the lame 'solution' it suggests is useless.

Another issue not addressed is that many minorities are a majority in their regions leading to a geographic instability by putting borders in question. That separation actually makes sense in many cases.

What we have had for some time are the elites behaving badly, they have stopped being responsible and thoughtful. The best solution I can see would be for the elites to sober up and start taking their role seriously again. Short of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos. Those are the wages of the baby boomer idiocy.

jilles dykstra > , August 27, 2017 at 6:48 am GMT

Manipulated majorities are an even greater danger. At the last French elections the political elite did anything possible to prevent Front National getting legal political power. With fifteen % of the votes, of those who bothered to vote, some 44%, Macron got an absolute majority in French parliament, some 360 seats. FN six or so. Yet, alas, anyone knows he won the elections, but not the streets.

As his popularity goes down, Sun King habits, the strikes announced for 11 and 12 September will show who really is in power in France.

bliss_porsena > , August 27, 2017 at 6:59 am GMT

Some minorities are more equal than others. The Deep State, for example.

unpc downunder > , August 27, 2017 at 7:11 am GMT

If you want to lesson the influence of minorities in western democracies, then its essential to provide a more a la carte form of democracy that is less open to elite manipulation. Options include getting rid of political parties and voting directly for heads of government departments, or allowing voters to vote on which party gets to run each of the key government departments.

It's impossible to have a functional political system when the political parties themselves are allowed to decide what issues voters get to vote on, and can racially divide the electorate by providing policy packages which play to voter weaknesses. This results in absurd results like blacks in the US voting for mass unskilled immigration via the Democrats, and poor American whites voting for increased defense spending and financial liberalisation via the Republicans.

There is no way around this problem without radically changing the political system.

Jason Liu > , August 27, 2017 at 8:01 am GMT

Easier said than done. Most minorities would support anti-majority politics even IF they knew they were being manipulated. You severely underestimate the human attraction to tribalism.

A more plausible plan would be to turn minorities against so-called 'AngloZionist' values, which is already partially complete, since minorities are rarely Anglos and therefore don't subscribe to their values as much. Have a look at any SJW gathering. Always disproportionately white, even in very diverse cities. It's much easier to convince even longtime resident minorities like blacks that things like transgenderism is bullshit, than it is to convince emotionally committed whites.

This would result in a country that allows multiple competing tribalisms, but none of which would be very useful as pawns by the elites. Not as good as homogeneity, but better than the current situation.

"Everybody gang up against the WEIRDs" is a nice thought and I would love to see it, but it's just not very likely.

peterAUS > , August 27, 2017 at 8:12 am GMT

There is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:

Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being manipulated
Offer the minorities a future based on equality and reconciliation
Put the spotlight on those who fan the flames of conflict and try to turn minorities and majorities against each other

Surprisingly weak and naive.

A simple question:
What's wrong with Serb approach in Kosovo before Western intervention?
Spare me "virtue signalling" .. if you can.

I think it would've worked if West hadn't stepped up with overwhelming FORCE.
It worked in "Operation Storm". Serbs as victims but that's precisely the point.
Perfect example how it CAN work.

So .following the same logic ..if IF .West used the same approach why it wouldn't work?
Say .French government does exactly the same as Croats did with Serbs in Croatia or Serbs with Albanians/whatever in Kosovo.

Just curious.

Anyone?

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:44 am GMT

Excellent piece.

There is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:

Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being manipulated

While those ideas have merit, I predict they'll be impossible to implement. Education is an active process and one cannot "be" educated in the passive sense. People, like other creatures, can be schooled and trained, but that's not the same as acquiring an education.

There are several reasons why the majority will never acquire any meaningful education. Most people simply do not possess the requisite curiosity to begin any sort of educational process and would rather make decisions based on immediate emotions. A true education requires active questioning of the standing myths and myths are evidently too comfortable for most to discard or even doubt. Most folks appear too lazy and or too timid to face the hard truths and would rather follow the dictates of some slick Peruna peddler.

A shocking percentage of people apparently love the feeling of "superiority" of "knowing" something even if their belief is utter, easily discardable, hogwash and actively reject any challenges to it. For example, the mindless charge of "conspiracy theorist" is used to dismiss, without thinking, anything but the spoon fed drivel they see on teevee.

I could go on, but this is already too long and is mostly preaching to the choir.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 12:15 pm GMT

@WorkingClass

The working class wants work and wages.

Which is a key reason that things are not likely to improve for at least a few more millennia. Accepting wages is a form of slavery, and most folks simply cannot see beyond that trap. The system has evolved so that people readily accept the idea of wages as a necessity (along with the extortion and theft known as taxes). There's a huge difference between making (earning) a living and holding a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince anyone of that.

Tolstoy wrote about the concept of wage slavery over a century ago and it makes good reading to this day.

"But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of [chattel] slavery was only the abolition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become unnecessary, and the substitution for it of a firmer form of slavery and one that holds a greater number of people in bondage."

- Leo Tolstoy

A few typos, but otherwise a fine summary: Tolstoy, Slavery of Our Times, Chap 8, 11 July, 1900 http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/WorldeBookLibrary.com/slaverytol.htm#1_0_7

The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats.

All true, except the part about solidarity, which would definitely be a huge step in the right direction for us proles and peasants, but is probably as unobtainable as true education of the masses.

As I see it, the best an individual can do is to toss a monkey wrench into the system whenever we can get away with it, but that requires an understanding of who are enemies are and that seems nearly impossible to achieve. Thus it's effective only in theory. In practice, it's probably as ephemeral as a gas emission in a tornado.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 12:31 pm GMT

@Beckow

Short of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos.

Chaos is on the march.

It appears the minority has magically organized itself and planned a 10-day march from Charlottesville to DC, there to demand the impeachment/removal of Donald Trump, and to carry on a non-violent occupation (irony alert).

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/348136-ten-day-march-from-charlottesville-to-dc-to-start-monday

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMT

@unpc downunder

then its essential to provide a more a la carte form of democracy that is less open to elite manipulation.

you mean something like state's sovereignty, which is what Robert E Lee stood for?

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMT

@jilles dykstra

Manipulated majorities are an even greater danger.

An even bigger threat is the manipulat ing minorities aka certain (most?) elements of the money bag crowd.

This problem has been recognized for millennia and was discussed in detail by many early Americans who nevertheless argued in favor of a constitution and a centralized bureaucracy that favored the rich.

Virtue cannot dwell with wealth either in a city or in a house.

-Diogenes of Sinope, quoted by Stobaeus, iv. 31c. 88

But if you will take note of the mode of proceedings of men, you will see that all those who come to great riches and great power have obtained them either by fraud or by force; and afterwards, to hide the ugliness of acquisition, they make it decent by applying the false title of earnings to things they have usurped by deceit or by violence.

- Niccolo Machiavelli , HISTORY OF FLORENCE AND OF THE AFFAIRS OF ITALY, Book 3 chap 3Para 8

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2464/2464-h/2464-h.htm#link2H_4_0022

" wealth is no proof of moral character; nor poverty of the want of it. On the contrary, wealth is often the presumptive evidence of dishonesty; and poverty the negative evidence of innocence."

THOMAS PAINE, DISSERTATION ON FIRST-PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT, 1795

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/004809392.0001.000/1:2?rgn=div1;view=fulltext

Robert Magill > , August 27, 2017 at 1:26 pm GMT

AfroAmericans who are descended from slaves should take into account the fact that their ancestors were protected because they had value. As a result they now number some 42 million and produced the last President. Comparison with the indigenous natives who after centuries of genocide number about 2 million and are mostly on reservations should give pause.

https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2017/08/26/issues-seen-and-not-seen/

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:27 pm GMT

Dear Saker

Nonwhites within the borders of the US are not innocent bystanders They are enthusiastically voting The Historic Native Born White American Majority into a violently persecuted racial minority within the borders of America..

If you have a greater identification with Muslim "Americans" and Hindu "Americans" than European American Natives then just go back to Russia..and take the Hindus and Muslims with you.

It wasn't very nice of you not to let my comment go through yesterday in response to commenter Eric .on The Vineyard of the Saker

You are waging demographic warfare against my Racial Tribe .

Intelligent Dasein > , Website August 27, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMT

@Robert Magill Barack Obama was not the descendant of any African slaves, you idiot.

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:38 pm GMT

@WorkingClass The Chinese in California are Chinese Race Nationalist The Hindus in California are Hindu Race Nationalists You are a Civic Nationalist Cuck.

Michael Kenny > , August 27, 2017 at 2:42 pm GMT

Using minorities as an excuse to oppress majorities is a classic colonial technique. The British set themselves up as the "protectors" of the Muslims in India, the Turks in Cyprus and the Protestants in Ireland, for example. Putin justifies his actions in Ukraine by claiming that he is "protecting" the ethnic Russian minority from the dastardly ethnic Ukrainian majority. Ditto for the various cyber-attacks on Estonia. One assumes that the same treatment would be meted out to the Belarusians if they dared to assert their national sovereignty. The US captive nations legislation the author refers to includes Belarus (designated "White Ruthenia"), Ukraine and the three Baltic republics. I am unaware of any alliance ever having existed, or existing today, between Serbia and Russia. Like "Eurasia", that "alliance" seems to have been invented by US neocons when they were trying to use Putin as an "asset".

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:45 pm GMT

Saker

Is it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted The Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into a racial minority?

Anon > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 2:49 pm GMT

"Manipulated minorities represent a major danger to democratic states."

Well, yes. But the manipulation of minorities to change legal frameworks or disassemble governments has been ongoing since the French Revolution. 'They' first foster a sense of oppression, more or less justified, then move to grant the new rights. Monarchies suffered the strategy. Europe should know the drill, witness the received oral tradition "Czechoslovaquia is another spelling for Rothschild."

Breaking up the US along racial lines is exactly what 'they' want. They want the fighting "whites" to come out, give the reason for changes in law. The Trump impeachment is deliberate provocation.

There has never been a 'white nation', it is a silly, ahistorical idea. Nations are built around culture. Fight for the culture. Use the damn high IQ.

Intelligent Dasein > , Website August 27, 2017 at 3:03 pm GMT

@Michael Kenny

I am unaware of any alliance ever having existed, or existing today, between Serbia and Russia.

There was a little tiff called World War One. It was in a couple of papers.

Arithtoddle > , August 27, 2017 at 3:09 pm GMT

@Issac "White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white leadership were transparently in control over the state."

Nope, but thanks for playing. White nationalism would have zero credibility if the leadership actually promoted American–WASP–interests. There is no escaping the Posterity clause, period. There is no magic dirt, no civic nationalism, no immersion in American culture, that can replace descendants of the English colonists that understand the importance of the Rights of Englishmen. The US was never intended to be the world's largest rest stop for every poor downtrodden person on Earth. Minorities now all undocumented immigrants since 1965 (Hart-Cellar).

Homogeneous nation's are born from Heterogeneous nation's. We are witnesses to the birth pains. The length of the labor depends on how long the majority will tolerate the minorities. Reconciliation isn't just impossible–its not even on the table, unless you reverse time. They. Have. To. Go. Back.

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 3:21 pm GMT

@Anon Well..you are wrong about that..America since it's inception has always been a White Nation If you don't believe me..just ask Professor Noel Ignatieve-the Father of White Studies. Where I differ from Professor Noel Ignatieve:I think it's GREAT that America has historically been a White Nation as did Socialist Labor Leader Samuel Gompers.

As far as your last two sentences go:Bring back the 1888 Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act!!!!

Saker

The highly racialized Nonwhite Democratic Party Voting Bloc is the Voting Bloc for War on Christian Russia not Trump's Whitey Racist Voting Bloc..

Wally > , August 27, 2017 at 3:25 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Well stated.

And of course, what 'education' would these minorities be given?

Take a look at what is given them now in our systems.
Absolute lies about, and hatred of, white gentiles.

Then there is the simple fact of minorities low IQs.
What, we think we're going to train dumb Africans to be engineers?

By and large these people are unemployable in a modern society.

The entire matter of somehow 'educating' these people in the true sense of the word is laughable.
Just look at the countries they come from.

Francis G. > , August 27, 2017 at 5:07 pm GMT

@Intelligent Dasein Damned right. If anything, he is the descendant of African slave traders . But his skin is sort of black and he's got a funky name, so he can pass as one of the "oppressed" minorities.

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 5:08 pm GMT

@jacques sheete 1 Timothy 5:18 ESV /
For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain," and, "The laborer deserves his wages."

Wages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable. But with what will you replace them?

There's a huge difference between making (earning) a living and holding a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince anyone of that.

Try me.

I was a union man back in the day when private sector unions were active and had support in Washington. We had a contractual relationship with employers that was qualitatively different from serfdom or chattel slavery and a huge improvement over the wage slavery that prevailed before the American labor movement.

As ideologies go the Anarchists have the best of it. But even they are Utopians. Capitalism sux. There will never be a free market utopia. But neither will there be a workers paradise. Human beings are limited in what they can accomplish by human nature. That's the law. I'm only interested in what works in the real world, however imperfectly.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 5:13 pm GMT

Who said this:

Nature does not know political frontiers. She first puts the living beings on this globe and watches the free game of energies. He who is strongest in courage and industry receives, as her favorite child, the right to be the master of existence.

If a people limits itself to domestic colonization, at a time when other races cling to greater and greater surfaces of the earth's soil, it will be forced to exercise self-restriction even while other nations will continue to increase.

For some day this case will occur, and it will arrive the earlier the smaller the living space is that a people has at its disposal. As, unfortunately only too frequently, the best nations, or, better still, the really unique cultured races, the pillars of all human progress, in their pacifistic blindness decide to renounce the acquisition of new soil in order to content themselves with 'domestic* colonization, while
inferior nations know full well how to secure enormous areas on this earth for themselves, this would lead to the following result:

The culturally superior, but less ruthless, races would have to limit, in consequence of their limited soil, their increase even at a time when the culturally inferior, but more brutal and more natural, people, in consequence of their greater living areas, would be able to increase themselves without limit.

In other words: the world will, therefore, some day come into the hands of a mankind that is
inferior in culture but superior in energy and activity.

For then there will be only two possibilities in the no matter how distant future: either the world will be ruled according to the ideas of our modern democracy, and then the stress of every decision falls on the races which are stronger in numbers, or the world will be dominated according to the law of the natural order of energy, and then the people of brute strength will be victorious, and again, therefore, not the nations of self-restriction.

But one may well believe that this world will still be subject to the fiercest fights for the existence of mankind.
In the end, only the urge for self-preservation will eternally succeed. Under its pressure so-called 'humanity,' as the expression of a mixture of stupidity, cowardice, and an imaginary superior intelligence, will melt like snow under the March sun. Mankind has grown strong in eternal
struggles and it will only perish through eternal peace.

Hint: today in an appearance on an internationally broadcast program, a minion from Foundation for Defense of Democracy (FDD) dismissed as "conspiracy theory" the suggestion that the USA/(Trump admin) is involved in Afghanistan "because Afghanistan has vast lithium resources, which US needs for new technologies" [see this 2010 report, Read More

Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
yeah > , August 27, 2017 at 5:18 pm GMT

Minorities are nothing but trouble, even though political correctness demands that we not see that or dare to say so. History offers not a single – NOT ONE SINGLE – example of harmony and mutual love between the minorities and the majority in any community/country/nation. Prove me wrong, cite one significant exception.

Don't cite Italian-Americans and Polish-Americans in the American melting pot. They came with full intent to be melted, they came white, Christian, and western in outlook and culture. They came pre-cooked for the melting pot. Can't say the same for the Muslims streaming in today. Nor for the Hindus and the Orientals coming in today. Leaving aside the Muslims (not even worth discussing in any talk of assimilation), the Hindus and Orientals today stand aside and apart, both groups highly conscious of their groups' share in the American pie. The Hispanics will make Spanish the lingua Franca – already largely done in California. So what exactly can the melting of Spanish and English languages produce? Spanglish? No, it will be one or the other, depending on which group acquires demographic majority and sufficient political clout. Who will melt whom?

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 5:40 pm GMT

@Fran Macadam Unless a million guys are organized.

Cloak And Dagger > , August 27, 2017 at 6:00 pm GMT

@War for Blair Mountain

Is it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted The Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into a racial minority?

Please elaborate on what you mean. I definitely do not see myself as a racial minority in California.

Art > , August 27, 2017 at 6:43 pm GMT

Manipulated Minorities Represent a Major Danger for Democratic States

The solution is an easy one – we must abandon the Jew Matrix of identity politics and return to the Christian Matrix of neighborliness.

Jew thought is about biological identity, and all the fear and hate associated with it – the Christian philosophical mindset is an intellectual entreaty to "love your neighbor as you love yourself." Hmm – one favors gonad driven actions – the other using our brains to overcome our biology, and make peace and abundance.

The differences are stark and profound – we can see what the Jew way has brought us – Jew tribalism is killing America and the West.

If we want a just kind world we cannot abandon philosophical Christianity.

Philosophical Christianity is not about "the virgin birth" and "the ascension into heaven" – it is about a practical way to peaceably live with each other and build an abundance for all.

Think Peace -- Art

nsa > , August 27, 2017 at 6:43 pm GMT

@Cloak And Dagger Non-Hispanic white is now down to 37.7% of the California population as of 2016 according to the U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts ..probably less if you include all the uncounted illegals.

Ivy > , August 27, 2017 at 7:22 pm GMT

@nsa Will the increased supply of labor result in lower gardening bills? Or take-out food bills?

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:29 pm GMT

"I would even argue that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo (What in the world is a "Belarussian"?!)."

Hey, us Anglo-Zionists didn't create Belarus. That was an indigenous or possibly German puppet state created (sort of) in early 1918. It was then conquered by the Bolsheviks and reborn as the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, a constituent republic of the USSR till it fell apart, at which point it became (sort of) independent.

The Anglo-Zionists had nothing to do with any of this, with probable exception of the collapse of the USSR.

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:33 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Since you consider "working for wages" as not "making a living," I'm curious what you would consider to constitute "making a living."

Yeoman farmer?

Small businessman?

Bank robber?

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:37 pm GMT

@Intelligent Dasein Actually, if we go back a dozen or two generations, it's probable most people on the planet are descended from both slaveowners and slaves. Especially if you're a little loose with the definition of slave.

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:44 pm GMT

@Bragadocious If we had ever made a serious consistent effort to kill all the Indians, they'd be gone. But there seem to be quite a few of them still around. About 5M, in fact, considerably more than lived in the boundaries of the USA in 1491.

Argentina had similar Indian problems during the same time period (late 19th century) we were fighting our final Indian wars. But they had a different approach: extermination.

Quite successful at it, too. Very few Indians left in Argentina. And they didn't import any other minorities, which means Argentina is now upwards of 90% "white." Much more so than USA, in fact.

Miro23 > , August 27, 2017 at 8:27 pm GMT

If we accept that minorities are typically much more driven than most of the population, then we also immediately can see why their influence over society is often out of proportion with the numerical demographical "weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities being more intelligent or more creative and everything to do with them willing to being spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most people.

It's true that there is greater activism, but the key ingredient is probably ethnic patronage.

A.H. gave an (approving) explanation of how it works:

"In the old Austria, nothing could be done without patronage. That's partly explained by the fact that nine million Germans were in fact rulers, in virtue of an unwritten law, of fifty million non-Germans. This German ruling class took strict care that places should always be found for Germans. For them this was the only method of maintaining themselves in this privileged situation. The Balts of German origin behaved in the same way towards the Slav population."

Hitler's Table Talk. Conversation Nº 109, 15th-16th January 1942

American Jewry has been following the same policy since the early 1900′s, pushing for Jewish candidates in key placings, who if successful, are expected to return the favour. On a "level playing field" this has a ratchet effect whereby corporate management and key media, finance and government positions can be gradually taken over with Anglos squeezed out in a rather unobvious way ("He wasn't the right candidate for reasons A,B,C X,Y,Z").

prusmc > , August 27, 2017 at 8:34 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Jacquez:

Educate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years. I believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education. How has it worked? What does the US Census data show for the indicator median education level persons over 25 years of age in 1960 demonstrate when compared to 2010? Compare for both white and black. Wow! we all are much smarter. Okay, as Rodney King so aptly stated it "why can' t everbody just get along?"

Tradecraft46 > , August 27, 2017 at 8:40 pm GMT

Better still, they are making more enemies than they can put to any good use.

In that world, enemies validate, in the real world, it invites total destruction.

None of them, being religious and all, never count the costs, which Jesus suggested.

Lawrence Fitton > , August 27, 2017 at 8:52 pm GMT

@Wally okay wally, i'm only going to say this once, so please pay attention. the gas chambers were but one method by which jews were killed. starvation, disease, forced labor, firing squads, killed legions. what if it was only 4 million jews who perished in the camps? or 3? does that make it better.
one last thing: elie wiesel is not the wonderful man he is purported to be.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 8:59 pm GMT

@WorkingClass

Wages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable. But with what will you replace them?

Dear Sir, as I've often stated, I like what you have to say and agree with 99% of it. I also respect the fact that your reply to me was obviously respectful and sincere.

My usual answer to your question is to replace them with nothing. For example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it; I'd rather do without. Instead of wages and a time clock, I advocate finding other (hopefully respectable) sources of income.

I realize that in this environment, it's nearly impossible to do without wages, but that shows how much our system sux, hence my objection to them and the system. I pretty much became disgusted with the concept after working at a few jobs that were really akin to slavery or some other unsavory paid profession, so I worked to make a living without punching time clock. That's not to say that I did not receive money for my services, but I managed to do without a direct boss during my earning days. Several other rather cantankerous members of my family manged to do the same, and some still do. I'm not saying that to brag, but to point out that it can be done.

I do admit that it now seems nearly impossible to do that sort of thing, but a close neighbor, in his thirty's, manages to do that and does quite well. He does have the advantage of both a good work ethic and access to a family business though.

The bottom line for me is that it's too bad that we have to submit to bosses for the most part to earn a living. From that we seem to learn to submit to other forms of "authority" with little or no questioning, and it seems to be a downhill slide from there. Also, the more power the bosses get, they more they control, and the less chance there is for people to become independent. that's no way to live.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 9:09 pm GMT

@Logan

Since you consider "working for wages" as not "making a living,"

That is a false statement. It is both illogical and unreasonable based on what I actually said.

Working for wages in one of several ways of earning a living. It just happens to be, in my way of thinking, one of the least desirable for many reasons.

I'm curious what you would consider to constitute "making a living."

Yeoman farmer?

Small businessman?

Bank robber?

All of the above, and many more.

Skeptikal > , August 27, 2017 at 9:12 pm GMT

@Logan Belorusian.
One r.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 9:14 pm GMT

@prusmc

Educate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years. I believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education.

Most folks are entirely ineducable and seem to like it that way. Of course, it's a fine sounding pretext for mass brainwashing and it's attendant bureaucracy and source of profits.

How has it worked?

It's probably worked just as intended but not at all as advertised!

See John Taylor Gatto and Upton Sinclair's "The Goslings" and the Goosestep" which basically describe schooling in America as a tool for corporations.

Tim Howells > , August 27, 2017 at 9:23 pm GMT

@Lawrence Fitton

what if it was only 4 million jews who perished in the camps? or 3? does that make it better?

Well, in several countries you can go to jail, and many have, for saying it was less than 6, so go figure. Norman Finkelstein was destroyed by the "Holocaust Industry" for showing in the simplest terms that if you add up the numbers of supposed "victims" and "survivors", the official figures are patently absurd. The more you dig, the more absurd it gets.

attilathehen > , August 27, 2017 at 9:59 pm GMT

The Saker: You are not a "minority." You are a Caucasian, the European branch, ethnically Russian. You are Christian, specifically Orthodox. You are one of the interesting groups that make up the Caucasian peoples. You have nothing in common with blacks/Asians.

The Democratic party is the party of nonwhites, non-Christians, sexual degenerates. Manipulation has nothing to do with this. Minorities know they are inferiors. What they are doing is because they realize they can never accomplish what Caucasians/Europeans/ Christians/neopagans have accomplished. This means it is time for separation/deportation/repatriation.

This is coming. An RCC priest "confessed" to having been in the KKK when he was a teenager. The US Conference of Bishops has established an ad hoc committee to address racism. This is the final nail in the coffin of the RCC. Homosexuals have taken over the priesthood. Priests do not preach about hell, sin, repentance. Now that this KKK priest has been exposed, from now on sermons will only cover "racism," the worst sin.

Caucasian Christans/pagans have to deal with the reality that world history can be summed up in two words: IQ, which is tied to race. The past 2000 years of Western civilization united under the RCC are gone. There has to be a new paradigm shift to deal with the future and what needs to be done.

Delinquent Snail > , August 27, 2017 at 10:13 pm GMT

@anonymous I hope they act like they have at every event they have been a part of and the president acts accordingly. Trump needs to hire people to record the whole thing and put it all up on a new website thats created just to host the event. Dozens of live feeds from dozens of angles. All put up on this new website just so there will be no confusion. Once the left riots, because they will riot, National guard needs to be called and these domestic terrorists need to be put down. He then needs to put out an executive order to shut down all propaganda news agencies that are spinning this, and if people want to see what happened, view the live feeds from dozens of angles on the newly created website. And if people bitch about how its wrong to have this up, fuck them. Its time to take off the kiddy gloves.

Mulegino1 > , August 27, 2017 at 10:24 pm GMT

@Tim Howells It was more like around 300,000 in all of the German camps since their inception back in the mid-1930′s, according to the International Red Cross. And that refers to all camp inmates of all ethnic backgrounds.

It is entirely possible that many Jews may have been killed on the Eastern Front or in the Soviet Union, but that can hardly be blamed solely upon the Germans, who were not known to be savagely cruel or vengeful- even though the anti-partisan actions may have led to some excesses.

In any case, there is zero evidence for "millions of Jews" killed by the Germans. There are no mass graves commensurate with such figures, nor is there any documentary evidence of a deliberate plan of "extermination."

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 10:25 pm GMT

@jacques sheete I understand you quite well I think. I have worked on commission. I have been self employed. For a time I was a soldier. I have worked for wages for mom and pop business and for large corporations and held both union and non union jobs. I did a few years working for a not for profit homeless shelter. I am a Jack of all trades and (unfortunately) master of none.

On union jobs (IBEW and Teamsters) I had the great benefit of having a contract with my employer that spelled out the duties and privileges of both the worker and the company. This meant that both labor and management worked from the same set of rules. The path to promotion was defined as was the possible cause for termination. Personalities had nothing to do with anything. The boss and I followed the same rules. It was nothing like being subject to the whims and prejudices of one man.

" For example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it; I'd rather do without."

Having a "job" can be worse than the gleet.
Unfortunately a mans gotta eat.

Thanks for coming back.

nsa > , August 27, 2017 at 10:29 pm GMT

@Ivy The white trash (as of 2016, down to 37.7% of California's population) has simply been replaced by brown trash in California. The only question remaining is which ethnic elite will run the state ..the jooies or the chinkies or the hindus. Or will the ethnics simply rule via a de facto coalition? Whitey's demise in CA is an accomplished fact ..with AZ and TX soon to follow and eventually OR, WA, ID, and CO. The efforts of James K. Polk are soon to be fully reversed. And yes, Ivy, you will have employment ..every Chinese has been promised a white house boy and white concubine by 2050.

Ivy > , August 27, 2017 at 10:49 pm GMT

@nsa I'll be long dead by 2050 but will miss those Chinese masseuses.

Cloak And Dagger > , August 27, 2017 at 10:51 pm GMT

@Lawrence Fitton

the gas chambers were but one method by which jews were killed

There is much contention as to whether even a single jew was killed in a gas chamber. Asserting that statement can land you in jail in much of Europe.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 11:15 pm GMT

@Logan Chaim Weizmann, who obtained the Balfour Declaration from the British, and went on to become first president of Israel, hailed from Belarus.

hunor > , August 27, 2017 at 11:22 pm GMT

the same tolerant technology has been applied five thousand years ago in the Sumerian civilization
what was a non semitic composed society. Few hundred years prior to the destruction of that culture
semitic tribes were allowed to settle in, first in smaller numbers , then in the name of tolerance larger migrating groups were allowed , and enjoyed benefits of education, comfortable, cultured living. The original majority of the population were builders and workers , the migrants for the most part were users, who's interest were to find an easy way to become the more. The complete opposite of mentality. In time the semitic migrants were able to build up a fifth column , moved in to powerful positions such as religion and astrology , and from then on destruction has begun. The original populous were pushed out, part of them were forcefully crossbred , the rest of them flee and
build new countries in Europa . The migrants of that time gained written culture , tailored clothing ,
the benefit of toilet so not to go to the bushes to relieve themselves . This time around there is no place left to flee.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:25 pm GMT

@WorkingClass I, too, think I understand from whence you come.

I agree with the concept of labor unions but recognize that they too can be turned against the interests of the workers, and unfortunately, have been.

I do applaud you for your success working within the system and I have no doubt that you did it as a sincere, able and good man. I also respect your views and thank you for sharing them.

As for bosses, I loathe them so much that I myself never hired employees because I didn't want to be a boss any more than I wanted to answer to one. I almost get physically sick when I see that the window of opportunity for youngsters to follow a independent lifestyle is next to nil and getting tougher all the time.

I do still counsel my younger relatives to acquire as much experience as they can so that they are in a position to have some control over their own lives. I'm also actively involved in fortifying my grandkids with both defiance and the attitudes and skills to back it up.

Is that attitude Utopian? No doubt to some degree it is, but so is the attitude of submission, i.e., the wish for everything to be taken care of so long as one submits.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:34 pm GMT

@Cloak And Dagger

There is much contention as to whether even a single jew was killed in a gas chamber.

Not only is there much contention, but there is no credible evidence that it really happened. Besides, the numbers are farcical.

Where do they get 6 million?

"Allowing for a maximum of 100,000 who succeeded in emigrating from Europe, this would bring the total number of Jews under the direct rule of Nazi Germany to about 3,200,000."

Distribution of the Jewish Population of Europe 1933-. 1940," prepared by Mr. Moses Moskowitz
AMERICAN JEWISH YEAR BOOK 1941-1942, page 662

http://www.ajcarchives.org/AJC_DATA/Files/1941_1942_9_Statistics.pdf

I haven't checked in a while, but I wonder if the link is still active

Jake > , August 27, 2017 at 11:43 pm GMT

"I submit that the real truth is totally different. My thesis is very simple: the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire. That's all there is to it."

That is pretty much it, save for the origins. WASP culture's Germanic basis began by hating the native British Isles. That set the pattern:WASPs most hate those from whom they steal or otherwise wrong gravely. The Reformation provided the perfect theological and philosophical justifications for that pattern to become something much greater.

The Anglo-Saxon Puritans were Judaizing heretics. You cannot over-emphasize that point. WASAP culture from the moment it was crystalized, truly formed, was one that saw the world through Jewish-influenced, Jewish-fawning, eyes. Naturally and inevitably, once the true WASPs gained total control of the government, with the Puritan Revolution, their fearless leader, Oliver Cromwell, allied with Jews. He took Jewish money to wage war, to exterminate cultures and make at least virtual serfs of whole populations.

White Christian populations.

WASP culture began with an alliance with Jews, allowing Jews back into England, with special rights and privileges that the vast majority of British Isles native Christians did not have, that allowed the WASPs to continue waging war to exterminate white Christian cultures.

When WASPs encountered non-whites, they began to grasp the value of using them – non-whites and non-Christians – as tools and weapons with which to batter the white Christians they wished to destroy.

That is the reason the 'Anglo-Zionist Empire' uses minorities as it does.

You cannot separate the Jewish Problem from the WASP Problem. You cannot solve the Jewish Problem without solving the 'WASP Problem.

[Aug 27, 2017] Manipulated minorities represent a major danger for democratic states

Aug 27, 2017 | www.unz.com

My thesis is very simple: the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire . That's all there is to it.

I think that minorities often, but not always, act and perceive things in a way very different from the way majority groups do. Here is what I have observed:

Let's first look at minorities inside the US:

They are typically far more aware of their minority identity/status than the majority. That is to say that if the majority is of skin color A and the minority of skin color B, the minority will be much more acutely aware of its skin color. They are typically much more driven and active then the majority. This is probably due to their more acute perception of being a minority. They are only concerned with single-issue politics , that single-issue being, of course, their minority status. Since minorities are often unhappy with their minority-status, they are also often resentful of the majority . Since minorities are mostly preoccupied by their minority-status linked issue, they rarely pay attention to the 'bigger picture' and that, in turn, means that the political agenda of the minorities typically does not threaten the powers that be . Minorities often have a deep-seated inferiority complex towards the putatively more successful majority. Minorities often seek to identify other minorities with which they can ally themselves against the majority.

To this list of characteristics, I would add one which is unique to foreign minorities, minorities outside the US: since they have no/very little prospects of prevailing against the majority, these minorities are very willing to ally themselves with the AngloZionist Empire and that, in turn, often makes them depended on the AngloZionist Empire, often even for their physical survival.

The above are, of course, very general characterizations. Not all minorities display all of these characteristics and many display only a few of them. But regardless of the degree to which any single minority fits this list of characteristics, what is obvious is that minorities are extremely easy to manipulate and that they present no credible (full-spectrum) threat to the Empire.

The US Democratic Party is the perfect example of a party which heavily relies on minority manipulation to maximize its power. While the Republican Party is by and large the party of the White, Anglo, Christian and wealthy voters, the Democrats try to cater to Blacks, women, Leftists, homosexuals, immigrants, retirees, and all others who feel like they are not getting their fair share of the proverbial pie. Needless to say, in reality there is only one party in the US, you can call the the Uniparty, the Republicracts or the Demolicans, but in reality both wings of the Big Money party stand for exactly the same things. What I am looking at here is not at some supposed real differences, but the way the parties present themselves. It is the combined action of these two fundamentally identical parties which guarantees the status quo in US politics which I like to sum up as "more of the same, only worse".

I would like to mention an important corollary of my thesis that minorities are typically more driven than the majority. If we accept that minorities are typically much more driven than most of the population, then we also immediately can see why their influence over society is often out of proportion with the numerical demographical "weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities being more intelligent or more creative and everything to do with them willing to being spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most people.

So we have easy to manipulate, small groups, whose agenda does not threaten the 1% (really, much less!), who like to gang up with other similar minorities against the majority. Getting scared yet? It gets worse.

Western 'democracies' are mostly democracies only in name. In most of them instead of "one man one vote" we see "one dollar one vote" meaning that big money decides, not "the people". Those in real power have immense financial resources which they cynically use to boost the already totally disproportional power of the various minorities. Now this is really scary:

Easy to manipulate, small groups, highly driven, whose agenda does not threaten the ruling plutocracy, who like to gang up with other similar minorities against the majority and whose influence is vastly increased by immense sums of money invested in them by the plutocracy. How is that for a threat to real people power, to the ideals of democracy?!

The frightening truth is that the combination of minorities and big money can easily hijack a supposedly 'democratic' country and subjugate the majority of its population to the "rule of the few over the many".

Once we look this reality in the face we should also become aware of a very rarely mentioned fact: while we are taught that democracies should uphold the right of the minorities, the opposite is true: real democracies should strive to protect majorities against the abuse of power from minorities!

I know, I have just committed a long list of grievous thoughtcrimes!

At those who might be angry at me, I will reply with a single sentence: please name me a western country where the views of the majority of its people are truly represented in the policies of their governments? And if you fail to come up with a good example, then I need to ask you if the majority is clearly not in power, then who is?

I submit that the plutocratic elites which govern the West have played a very simple trick on us all: they managed to focus our attention on the many cases in history when minorities were oppressed by majorities but completely obfuscated the numerous cases whereminorities oppressed majorities.

Speaking of oppression: minorities are far more likely to benefit and, therefore, use violence than the majority simply because their worldview often centers on deeply-held resentments. To put it differently, minorities are much more prone to settling scores for past wrongs (whether real or imagined) than a majority which typically does not even think in minority versus majority categories .

Not that majorities are always benign or kind towards minorities, not at all, humans being pretty much the same everywhere, but by the fact that they are less driven, less resentful and, I would argue, even less aware of their "majority status" they are less likely to act on such categories.

Foreign minorities play a crucial role in US foreign policy. Since time immemorial rulers have been acutely aware of the " divide et impera " rule, there is nothing new here. But the US has become the uncontested leader in the art of using national minorities to create strife and overthrow a disobedient regime. The AngloZionist war against the Serbian nation is the perfect example of how this is done: the US supported any minority against the Serbs, even groups that the US classified as terrorists, as long as this was against the Serbs. And, besides being Orthodox Slavs and traditional allies of Russia, what was the real 'crime' of the Serbs? Being the majority of course! The Serbs had no need of the AngloZionists to prevail against the various ethnic (Croats) and religious (Muslims) minorities they lived with. That made the Serbs useless to the Empire. But now that the US has created a fiction of an independent Kosovo, the Kosovo Albanians put up a statue of Bill Clinton in Prishtina and, more relevantly, allowed the Empire to build the Camp Bondsteel mega-base in the middle of their nasty little statelet, right on the land of the Serbian population that was ethnically cleansed during the Kosovo war. US democracy building at its best indeed

The same goes for Russia (and, the Soviet Union) where the US went as far as to support the right of self-determination for non-existing "captive nations" such as "Idel-Ural" and "Cossakia" . I would even argue that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo (What in the world is a "Belarussian"?!).

I am fully aware that in the typical TV watching westerner any discussion of minorities focusing on their negative potential immediately elicits visions of hammers and sickles, smoking crematoria chimneys, chain gangs, lynchmobs, etc. This is basic and primitive conditioning. Carefully engineered events such as the recent riots in Charlottesville only further reinforce this type of mass conditioning. This is very deliberate and, I would add, very effective. As a result, any criticism, even just perceived criticism, of a minority immediately triggers outraged protests and frantic virtue-signaling (not me! look how good I am!!).

Of course, carefully using minorities is just one of the tactics used by the ruling plutocracy. Another of their favorite tricks is to created conflicts out of nothing or ridiculously bloat the visibility of an altogether minor topic (example: homo-marriages). The main rule remains the same though: create tensions, conflicts, chaos, subvert the current order (whatever that specific order might be), basically have the serfs fight each other while we rule .

In Switzerland an often used expression to describe "the people" is "the sovereign". This is a very accurate description of the status of the people in a real democracy: they are "sovereign" in the sense that nobody rules over them. In that sense, the issue in the United States is one of sovereignty: as of today, the real sovereign of the US are the corporations, the deep state, the Neocons, the plutocracy, the financiers, the Israel Lobby – you name it, anybody BUT the people.

In that system of oppression, minorities play a crucial role, even if they are totally unaware of this and even if, at the end of the day, they don't benefit from it. Their perception or their lack of achievements in no way diminishes the role that they play in the western pseudo-democracies.

How do with deal with this threat?

I think that the solution lies with the minorities themselves: they need to be educated about the techniques which are used to manipulate them, and they need to be convinced that their minority status does not, in reality, oppose them to the majority and that both the majority and the minorities have a common interest in together standing against those who seek to rule over them all. Striving to remain faithful to my "Putin fanboy" reputation, I will say that I believe that Russia under Putin is doing exactly the right thing by giving the numerous Russian minorities a stake in the future of the Russian state and by convincing the minorities that their interests and the interest of the majority of the people are fundamentally the same: being a minority does not have to mean being in opposition to the majority. It is a truism that minorities need to be fully integrated into the fabric of society and yet this is rarely practiced in the real world. This is certainly not what I observe today in Europe or the US.

The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant motto to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement "Equality and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only political movement in France which does not want to favor one group at the expense of the other. Everybody else either wants to oppress the "français de souche" (the native, mostly White and Roman-Catholic majority) on behalf of the "français de branche" (immigrants, naturalized citizens, minorities), or oppress the "français de branche" on behalf of the "français de souche". Needless to say, the only ones who benefit from this clash is the ruling Zionist elite (best represented by the infamous CRIF , which makes the US AIPAC look comparatively honorable and weak). As for Soral, he is vilified by the official French media with no less hate than Trump is vilified in the US by the US Ziomedia.

Still, equality and reconciliation are the two things which the majorities absolutely must offer the minorities if they want to prevent the latter to fall prey to the manipulation techniques used by those forces who want to turn everybody into obedient and clueless serfs. Those majorities who delude themselves and believe that they can simply solve the "minority problem" by expelling or otherwise making these minorities disappear are only kidding themselves. To 'simply' solve the "minority problem' by cracking down on these minorities inevitably

Grandpa Charlie > , August 26, 2017 at 6:29 am GMT

"While we all typically [have] several co-existing identities inside us (say, German, retired, college-educated, female, Buddhist, vegetarian, exile, resident of Brazil, etc. as opposed to just "White"), in manipulated minorities one such identity (skin color, religion, etc.) becomes over-bloated and trumps all the others." -- The Saker

That's a great critique of "identity politics" and one reason why identity politics is self-limiting, maybe even self-destructive (as well as destructive of democracy).

Fran Macadam > , Website August 26, 2017 at 6:56 am GMT

To distill it to an aphorism, "A million guys with one buck, are no match for one guy with a million bucks."

Grandpa Charlie > , August 26, 2017 at 7:13 am GMT

Another point:

The poorer people are, the more vulnerable they are to identity politics.

It's like an Indian movie I once saw that was constructed as a family history. When the family experienced many setbacks, one after another, until they were all disheartened, the patriarch of the family spoke up, saying, "Remember, we are Bengali!" That was the turning point in the film: after that things began to improve for the family so that the film could have a happy Bolliwood ending.

That was like saying, "Remember, we have a proud history!"

There was also a Yiddish joke that someone told me, like this: There was a young Jewish man in some place like Minsk, somewhere in Eastern Europe, and he saw an advertisement by none other than a great member of the Rothschild banking family. The ad said "Wanted: young Jewish man for difficult and physically challenging assignment." So the hero (or anti-hero?) of this story set out immediately for Paris. Unfortunately, our hero experienced many tragedies, even losing an arm and a leg. But he was determined and he persevered, with the help of a crutch. Finally, he had to camp out in front of the gate of the Rothschild mansion outside of Paris. Eventually, the great Rothschild had his carriage stop and spoke to the man, saying, "You know, I've seen you standing here day after day what is it that you want?" Our hero brought out the advertisement that he had carried with him through all his misadventures. The great Rothschild read the advertisement and exclaimed, "What's the matter with you? Did you not read that the job was physically challenging?" To which our hero responded, "Yes, but, Mr. Rothschild, the ad says "young Jewish man."

Being myself a gentile, I did not at first get the joke, but eventually I got a chuckle out of it.

WorkingClass > , August 26, 2017 at 9:24 am GMT

What do all races, genders, nationalities and creeds have in common? An overwhelming majority of them are working class. That's why I am white and Nationalist but not a White Nationalist. The working class wants work and wages. The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats.

Mao Cheng Ji > , August 26, 2017 at 11:17 am GMT

Here's a similar sentiment, by Nassim Taleb:

https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

Bragadocious > , August 26, 2017 at 1:28 pm GMT

Could it be out of a deep sense of guilt of having committed the only "pan-genocide" in human history

I guess Saker's never heard of the Ukranian Holodomor, perpetrated by his beloved Russia. And what were Spain, Portugal and Britain up to in the New World? This guy's a left-wing Euro clown.

Anonymous > , Disclaimer August 26, 2017 at 4:24 pm GMT

I also lived for 5 years in Washington, DC, which was something like 70% Black and, at the time, openly and often rudely hostile to Whites (I never thought of myself as a color before, but I sure felt like one during those 5 years). And now I am a "legal alien" living in the US. Anyway, while I am "White" (what a nonsensical category!)

Nonsensical? Really? Both the DC blacks and their DC (((paymasters))) hate your "category" but you're still confused and want to hold hands and educate them ? Do you have children?

The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant motto to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement "Equality and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only political movement in France which does not want to favor one group at the expense of the other.

Demographically speaking, the native French group ( white category FYI) is already doomed to lose their homeland unless they reverse the invasion and punish the plotters. Reconciling with their invaders would be assisted suicide, surely. Almost as bad as the forced miscegenation idea proposed by Nicolas "Jew Midget" Sarkozy a few years back.

You need to wake up and check for any vitamin/mineral deficiencies you might have, Saker. Our ancestors butchered countless invaders to give us the land we're standing on – they didn't reconcile it away.

Bartolo > , August 26, 2017 at 6:55 pm GMT

Excellent diagnosis, ridiculous therapy.

One single question shows how profoundly silly The Saker's his "solution" is:

Why would it be easier to convince resentful, envious minorities to just get along with the majority than to convince the elites to act better, according to the noblesse oblige principle?

Elites will always misuse their power. Minorities/majorities will always quarrel and resent each other.

Give us (back) ethnically homogeneous states instead. No panacea, but the besf we can hope for.

Cyrano > , August 26, 2017 at 7:52 pm GMT

The ruling elites of US (both democrats and republicans) can be divided into 2 categories:
1. The ones who think that they are better because of their race.
2. The ones who think that they are better because they were able to overcome the feeling of being better because of their race. In other words – the morally superior ubermensch instead of racially superior ubermensch.

In reality, category 2 doesn't exist (at least not among the ruling elites) – they are all liars. They haven't been able to overcome any feeling of superiority, they just added another one – the one of moral superiority. Actually, the ruling elites for the most part are still category 1, only pretending to be category 2. Not only do they feel they are superior to other races, they feel they are superior to their own race – the poorer members of it.

The ruling elites are manipulating the population of US into declaring that they belong in either one of these 2 camps. Result: Charlottesville riots.

RDM10005 > , August 26, 2017 at 8:46 pm GMT

I already wrote about that here http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2016/08/29/deep-state-plutocrat-elite-use-protected-classes-to-do-their-dirty-work/ 2 years ago and published last year. This is old hat and old news.

Issac > , August 26, 2017 at 8:54 pm GMT

This post would sound eminently reasonable if the white identitarians had any kind of state blessing, but they are a de facto criminal element being suppressed. Not for the sake of democracy, but for the sake of the elite who are Jewish, not Zionist, and not very Anglo.

White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white leadership were transparently in control over the state. The wellspring of their support comes from the fact that what whites do exist in the power structure are absolutely and transparently subservient to other interests.

Ricard > , August 27, 2017 at 4:50 am GMT

While we all typically several co-existing identities inside us

Spot the missing verb.

Alden > , August 27, 2017 at 4:57 am GMT

@Fran Macadam Here is the mantra of political fund raisers. " it's easier to get one donor to give $1,000 than to get 20 donors to give $50 apiece."

jocose > , August 27, 2017 at 5:02 am GMT

One of the problems is that the US was (and still is) a republic-with a small r. The republican form of government assumes that the voters are too stupid or ignorant to pass laws, so they have to hire professional political types to write their governing laws for them. The politicos are easy targets for the powers that be to manipulate, evidently.

ogunsiron > , August 27, 2017 at 5:08 am GMT

Soral is well meaning but i don't think his "réconciliation nationale" is possible. It's just not realistic.

The maghrebians/arabs who ally themselves with Soral are mostly preoccuppied with the "sionisme" question. They happen to agree with the traditional french right wing that the ((())) are a really big problem. A certain number of arabs/maghrebians are willing to rub shoulders with french extreme rightists to collaborate on fighting zion, but when Soral addresses legitimate grievances of the White French majority, I notice that the arabs/maghrebians are less interested.

There are a few, very few maghrebians who truly care about the White French people and who can see things from their perspective. A guy like Aldo Sterone is a good example of an arab who basically takes the White European side by default.

There are even fewer Black people who are able to get past their deep, deep resentment of Whites. Soral's reconciliation is already a very hard undertaking when it comes to arabs. It's pretty much a waste of time when it comes to Black Africans. Kemi Seba is a rare, very rare example of a black nationalist who has done a lot of work with White French nationalists. The rest of the black population in France can't be convinced to let go of their resentment, imho.

Wally > , Website August 27, 2017 at 5:51 am GMT

Saker tellingly left out direct mention of the usual enemies of free speech.

The facts are that Jews support Israeli immigration laws which specify JEWS ONLY, while they demand massive 3rd world immigration into the US & Europe?

He did say something which deserves praise:

"I am fully aware that in the typical TV watching westerner any discussion of minorities focusing on their negative potential immediately elicits visions of hammers and sickles, smoking crematoria chimneys , chain gangs, lynchmobs, etc. This is basic and primitive conditioning. Carefully engineered events such as the recent riots in Charlottesville only further reinforce this type of mass conditioning."

Mass conditioning indeed.

The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here:

http://codoh.com

No name calling, level playing field debate here:

http://forum.codoh.com

"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."

"Some stories are true that never happened."
- Elie Wiesel

Beckow > , August 27, 2017 at 6:33 am GMT

The problem is – as always – with the numbers. The large influx of migrants is changing the demographics and that changes the goals and behaviour of each group. The minority groups can see the promised land in the future when they will take over. The majority knows that they cannot stop it by "equality and reconciliation" (whatever that would mean in practise, maybe endless workshops to whine about each other?).

The numbers game has gone too far and there is no easy way to restore stability. E.g. the labor markets in the West cannot be fixed without drastic restrictions on supply of new labor from the Third World. The article has some valuable insights, but the lame 'solution' it suggests is useless.

Another issue not addressed is that many minorities are a majority in their regions leading to a geographic instability by putting borders in question. That separation actually makes sense in many cases.

What we have had for some time are the elites behaving badly, they have stopped being responsible and thoughtful. The best solution I can see would be for the elites to sober up and start taking their role seriously again. Short of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos. Those are the wages of the baby boomer idiocy.

jilles dykstra > , August 27, 2017 at 6:48 am GMT

Manipulated majorities are an even greater danger.
At the last French elections the political elite did anything possible to prevent Front National getting legal political power.
With fifteen % of the votes, of those who bothered to vote, some 44%, Macron got an absolute majority in French parliament, some 360 seats.
FN six or so.
Yet, alas, anyone knows he won the elections, but not the streets.
As his popularity goes down, Sun King habits, the strikes announced for 11 and 12 September will show who really is in power in France.

bliss_porsena > , August 27, 2017 at 6:59 am GMT

Some minorities are more equal than others. The Deep State, for example.

unpc downunder > , August 27, 2017 at 7:11 am GMT

If you want to lesson the influence of minorities in western democracies, then its essential to provide a more a la carte form of democracy that is less open to elite manipulation. Options include getting rid of political parties and voting directly for heads of government departments, or allowing voters to vote on which party gets to run each of the key government departments.

It's impossible to have a functional political system when the political parties themselves are allowed to decide what issues voters get to vote on, and can racially divide the electorate by providing policy packages which play to voter weaknesses. This results in absurd results like blacks in the US voting for mass unskilled immigration via the Democrats, and poor American whites voting for increased defense spending and financial liberalisation via the Republicans.

There is no way around this problem without radically changing the political system.

Jason Liu > , August 27, 2017 at 8:01 am GMT

Easier said than done. Most minorities would support anti-majority politics even IF they knew they were being manipulated. You severely underestimate the human attraction to tribalism.

A more plausible plan would be to turn minorities against so-called 'AngloZionist' values, which is already partially complete, since minorities are rarely Anglos and therefore don't subscribe to their values as much. Have a look at any SJW gathering. Always disproportionately white, even in very diverse cities. It's much easier to convince even longtime resident minorities like blacks that things like transgenderism is bullshit, than it is to convince emotionally committed whites.

This would result in a country that allows multiple competing tribalisms, but none of which would be very useful as pawns by the elites. Not as good as homogeneity, but better than the current situation.

"Everybody gang up against the WEIRDs" is a nice thought and I would love to see it, but it's just not very likely.

peterAUS > , August 27, 2017 at 8:12 am GMT

There is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:

Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being manipulated
Offer the minorities a future based on equality and reconciliation
Put the spotlight on those who fan the flames of conflict and try to turn minorities and majorities against each other

Surprisingly weak and naive.

A simple question:
What's wrong with Serb approach in Kosovo before Western intervention?
Spare me "virtue signalling" .. if you can.

I think it would've worked if West hadn't stepped up with overwhelming FORCE.
It worked in "Operation Storm". Serbs as victims but that's precisely the point.
Perfect example how it CAN work.

So .following the same logic ..if IF .West used the same approach why it wouldn't work?
Say .French government does exactly the same as Croats did with Serbs in Croatia or Serbs with Albanians/whatever in Kosovo.

Just curious.

Anyone?

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:44 am GMT

Excellent piece.

There is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:

Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being manipulated

While those ideas have merit, I predict they'll be impossible to implement. Education is an active process and one cannot "be" educated in the passive sense. People, like other creatures, can be schooled and trained, but that's not the same as acquiring an education.

There are several reasons why the majority will never acquire any meaningful education. Most people simply do not possess the requisite curiosity to begin any sort of educational process and would rather make decisions based on immediate emotions. A true education requires active questioning of the standing myths and myths are evidently too comfortable for most to discard or even doubt. Most folks appear too lazy and or too timid to face the hard truths and would rather follow the dictates of some slick Peruna peddler.

A shocking percentage of people apparently love the feeling of "superiority" of "knowing" something even if their belief is utter, easily discardable, hogwash and actively reject any challenges to it. For example, the mindless charge of "conspiracy theorist" is used to dismiss, without thinking, anything but the spoon fed drivel they see on teevee.

I could go on, but this is already too long and is mostly preaching to the choir.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 12:15 pm GMT

@WorkingClass

The working class wants work and wages.

Which is a key reason that things are not likely to improve for at least a few more millennia. Accepting wages is a form of slavery, and most folks simply cannot see beyond that trap. The system has evolved so that people readily accept the idea of wages as a necessity (along with the extortion and theft known as taxes). There's a huge difference between making (earning) a living and holding a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince anyone of that.

Tolstoy wrote about the concept of wage slavery over a century ago and it makes good reading to this day.

"But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of [chattel] slavery was only the abolition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become unnecessary, and the substitution for it of a firmer form of slavery and one that holds a greater number of people in bondage."

- Leo Tolstoy

A few typos, but otherwise a fine summary: Tolstoy, Slavery of Our Times, Chap 8, 11 July, 1900 http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/WorldeBookLibrary.com/slaverytol.htm#1_0_7

The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats.

All true, except the part about solidarity, which would definitely be a huge step in the right direction for us proles and peasants, but is probably as unobtainable as true education of the masses.

As I see it, the best an individual can do is to toss a monkey wrench into the system whenever we can get away with it, but that requires an understanding of who are enemies are and that seems nearly impossible to achieve. Thus it's effective only in theory. In practice, it's probably as ephemeral as a gas emission in a tornado.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 12:31 pm GMT

@Beckow

Short of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos.

Chaos is on the march.

It appears the minority has magically organized itself and planned a 10-day march from Charlottesville to DC, there to demand the impeachment/removal of Donald Trump, and to carry on a non-violent occupation (irony alert).

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/348136-ten-day-march-from-charlottesville-to-dc-to-start-monday

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMT

@unpc downunder

then its essential to provide a more a la carte form of democracy that is less open to elite manipulation.

you mean something like state's sovereignty, which is what Robert E Lee stood for?

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMT

@jilles dykstra

Manipulated majorities are an even greater danger.

An even bigger threat is the manipulat ing minorities aka certain (most?) elements of the money bag crowd.

This problem has been recognized for millennia and was discussed in detail by many early Americans who nevertheless argued in favor of a constitution and a centralized bureaucracy that favored the rich.

Virtue cannot dwell with wealth either in a city or in a house.

-Diogenes of Sinope, quoted by Stobaeus, iv. 31c. 88

But if you will take note of the mode of proceedings of men, you will see that all those who come to great riches and great power have obtained them either by fraud or by force; and afterwards, to hide the ugliness of acquisition, they make it decent by applying the false title of earnings to things they have usurped by deceit or by violence.

- Niccolo Machiavelli , HISTORY OF FLORENCE AND OF THE AFFAIRS OF ITALY, Book 3 chap 3Para 8

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2464/2464-h/2464-h.htm#link2H_4_0022

" wealth is no proof of moral character; nor poverty of the want of it. On the contrary, wealth is often the presumptive evidence of dishonesty; and poverty the negative evidence of innocence."

THOMAS PAINE, DISSERTATION ON FIRST-PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT, 1795

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/004809392.0001.000/1:2?rgn=div1;view=fulltext

Robert Magill > , August 27, 2017 at 1:26 pm GMT

AfroAmericans who are descended from slaves should take into account the fact that their ancestors were protected because they had value. As a result they now number some 42 million and produced the last President. Comparison with the indigenous natives who after centuries of genocide number about 2 million and are mostly on reservations should give pause.

https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2017/08/26/issues-seen-and-not-seen/

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:27 pm GMT

Dear Saker

Nonwhites within the borders of the US are not innocent bystanders They are enthusiastically voting The Historic Native Born White American Majority into a violently persecuted racial minority within the borders of America..

If you have a greater identification with Muslim "Americans" and Hindu "Americans" than European American Natives then just go back to Russia..and take the Hindus and Muslims with you.

It wasn't very nice of you not to let my comment go through yesterday in response to commenter Eric .on The Vineyard of the Saker

You are waging demographic warfare against my Racial Tribe .

Intelligent Dasein > , Website August 27, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMT

@Robert Magill Barack Obama was not the descendant of any African slaves, you idiot.

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:38 pm GMT

@WorkingClass The Chinese in California are Chinese Race Nationalist The Hindus in California are Hindu Race Nationalists You are a Civic Nationalist Cuck.

Michael Kenny > , August 27, 2017 at 2:42 pm GMT

Using minorities as an excuse to oppress majorities is a classic colonial technique. The British set themselves up as the "protectors" of the Muslims in India, the Turks in Cyprus and the Protestants in Ireland, for example. Putin justifies his actions in Ukraine by claiming that he is "protecting" the ethnic Russian minority from the dastardly ethnic Ukrainian majority. Ditto for the various cyber-attacks on Estonia. One assumes that the same treatment would be meted out to the Belarusians if they dared to assert their national sovereignty. The US captive nations legislation the author refers to includes Belarus (designated "White Ruthenia"), Ukraine and the three Baltic republics. I am unaware of any alliance ever having existed, or existing today, between Serbia and Russia. Like "Eurasia", that "alliance" seems to have been invented by US neocons when they were trying to use Putin as an "asset".

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:45 pm GMT

Saker

Is it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted The Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into a racial minority?

Anon > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 2:49 pm GMT

"Manipulated minorities represent a major danger to democratic states."

Well, yes. But the manipulation of minorities to change legal frameworks or disassemble governments has been ongoing since the French Revolution. 'They' first foster a sense of oppression, more or less justified, then move to grant the new rights. Monarchies suffered the strategy. Europe should know the drill, witness the received oral tradition "Czechoslovaquia is another spelling for Rothschild."

Breaking up the US along racial lines is exactly what 'they' want. They want the fighting "whites" to come out, give the reason for changes in law. The Trump impeachment is deliberate provocation.

There has never been a 'white nation', it is a silly, ahistorical idea. Nations are built around culture. Fight for the culture. Use the damn high IQ.

Intelligent Dasein > , Website August 27, 2017 at 3:03 pm GMT

@Michael Kenny

I am unaware of any alliance ever having existed, or existing today, between Serbia and Russia.

There was a little tiff called World War One. It was in a couple of papers.

Arithtoddle > , August 27, 2017 at 3:09 pm GMT

@Issac "White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white leadership were transparently in control over the state."

Nope, but thanks for playing. White nationalism would have zero credibility if the leadership actually promoted American–WASP–interests. There is no escaping the Posterity clause, period. There is no magic dirt, no civic nationalism, no immersion in American culture, that can replace descendants of the English colonists that understand the importance of the Rights of Englishmen. The US was never intended to be the world's largest rest stop for every poor downtrodden person on Earth. Minorities now all undocumented immigrants since 1965 (Hart-Cellar).

Homogeneous nation's are born from Heterogeneous nation's. We are witnesses to the birth pains. The length of the labor depends on how long the majority will tolerate the minorities. Reconciliation isn't just impossible–its not even on the table, unless you reverse time. They. Have. To. Go. Back.

War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 3:21 pm GMT

@Anon Well..you are wrong about that..America since it's inception has always been a White Nation If you don't believe me..just ask Professor Noel Ignatieve-the Father of White Studies. Where I differ from Professor Noel Ignatieve:I think it's GREAT that America has historically been a White Nation as did Socialist Labor Leader Samuel Gompers.

As far as your last two sentences go:Bring back the 1888 Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act!!!!

Saker

The highly racialized Nonwhite Democratic Party Voting Bloc is the Voting Bloc for War on Christian Russia not Trump's Whitey Racist Voting Bloc..

Wally > , August 27, 2017 at 3:25 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Well stated.

And of course, what 'education' would these minorities be given?

Take a look at what is given them now in our systems.
Absolute lies about, and hatred of, white gentiles.

Then there is the simple fact of minorities low IQs.
What, we think we're going to train dumb Africans to be engineers?

By and large these people are unemployable in a modern society.

The entire matter of somehow 'educating' these people in the true sense of the word is laughable.
Just look at the countries they come from.

Francis G. > , August 27, 2017 at 5:07 pm GMT

@Intelligent Dasein Damned right. If anything, he is the descendant of African slave traders . But his skin is sort of black and he's got a funky name, so he can pass as one of the "oppressed" minorities.

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 5:08 pm GMT

@jacques sheete 1 Timothy 5:18 ESV /
For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain," and, "The laborer deserves his wages."

Wages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable. But with what will you replace them?

There's a huge difference between making (earning) a living and holding a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince anyone of that.

Try me.

I was a union man back in the day when private sector unions were active and had support in Washington. We had a contractual relationship with employers that was qualitatively different from serfdom or chattel slavery and a huge improvement over the wage slavery that prevailed before the American labor movement.

As ideologies go the Anarchists have the best of it. But even they are Utopians. Capitalism sux. There will never be a free market utopia. But neither will there be a workers paradise. Human beings are limited in what they can accomplish by human nature. That's the law. I'm only interested in what works in the real world, however imperfectly.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 5:13 pm GMT

Who said this:

Nature does not know political frontiers. She first puts the living beings on this globe and watches the free game of energies. He who is strongest in courage and industry receives, as her favorite child, the right to be the master of existence.

If a people limits itself to domestic colonization, at a time when other races cling to greater and greater surfaces of the earth's soil, it will be forced to exercise self-restriction even while other nations will continue to increase.

For some day this case will occur, and it will arrive the earlier the smaller the living space is that a people has at its disposal. As, unfortunately only too frequently, the best nations, or, better still, the really unique cultured races, the pillars of all human progress, in their pacifistic blindness decide to renounce the acquisition of new soil in order to content themselves with 'domestic* colonization, while
inferior nations know full well how to secure enormous areas on this earth for themselves, this would lead to the following result:

The culturally superior, but less ruthless, races would have to limit, in consequence of their limited soil, their increase even at a time when the culturally inferior, but more brutal and more natural, people, in consequence of their greater living areas, would be able to increase themselves without limit.

In other words: the world will, therefore, some day come into the hands of a mankind that is
inferior in culture but superior in energy and activity.

For then there will be only two possibilities in the no matter how distant future: either the world will be ruled according to the ideas of our modern democracy, and then the stress of every decision falls on the races which are stronger in numbers, or the world will be dominated according to the law of the natural order of energy, and then the people of brute strength will be victorious, and again, therefore, not the nations of self-restriction.

But one may well believe that this world will still be subject to the fiercest fights for the existence of mankind.
In the end, only the urge for self-preservation will eternally succeed. Under its pressure so-called 'humanity,' as the expression of a mixture of stupidity, cowardice, and an imaginary superior intelligence, will melt like snow under the March sun. Mankind has grown strong in eternal
struggles and it will only perish through eternal peace.

Hint: today in an appearance on an internationally broadcast program, a minion from Foundation for Defense of Democracy (FDD) dismissed as "conspiracy theory" the suggestion that the USA/(Trump admin) is involved in Afghanistan "because Afghanistan has vast lithium resources, which US needs for new technologies" [see this 2010 report, Read More

Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
yeah > , August 27, 2017 at 5:18 pm GMT

Minorities are nothing but trouble, even though political correctness demands that we not see that or dare to say so. History offers not a single – NOT ONE SINGLE – example of harmony and mutual love between the minorities and the majority in any community/country/nation. Prove me wrong, cite one significant exception.

Don't cite Italian-Americans and Polish-Americans in the American melting pot. They came with full intent to be melted, they came white, Christian, and western in outlook and culture. They came pre-cooked for the melting pot. Can't say the same for the Muslims streaming in today. Nor for the Hindus and the Orientals coming in today. Leaving aside the Muslims (not even worth discussing in any talk of assimilation), the Hindus and Orientals today stand aside and apart, both groups highly conscious of their groups' share in the American pie. The Hispanics will make Spanish the lingua Franca – already largely done in California. So what exactly can the melting of Spanish and English languages produce? Spanglish? No, it will be one or the other, depending on which group acquires demographic majority and sufficient political clout. Who will melt whom?

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 5:40 pm GMT

@Fran Macadam Unless a million guys are organized.

Cloak And Dagger > , August 27, 2017 at 6:00 pm GMT

@War for Blair Mountain

Is it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted The Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into a racial minority?

Please elaborate on what you mean. I definitely do not see myself as a racial minority in California.

Art > , August 27, 2017 at 6:43 pm GMT

Manipulated Minorities Represent a Major Danger for Democratic States

The solution is an easy one – we must abandon the Jew Matrix of identity politics and return to the Christian Matrix of neighborliness.

Jew thought is about biological identity, and all the fear and hate associated with it – the Christian philosophical mindset is an intellectual entreaty to "love your neighbor as you love yourself." Hmm – one favors gonad driven actions – the other using our brains to overcome our biology, and make peace and abundance.

The differences are stark and profound – we can see what the Jew way has brought us – Jew tribalism is killing America and the West.

If we want a just kind world we cannot abandon philosophical Christianity.

Philosophical Christianity is not about "the virgin birth" and "the ascension into heaven" – it is about a practical way to peaceably live with each other and build an abundance for all.

Think Peace -- Art

nsa > , August 27, 2017 at 6:43 pm GMT

@Cloak And Dagger Non-Hispanic white is now down to 37.7% of the California population as of 2016 according to the U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts ..probably less if you include all the uncounted illegals.

Ivy > , August 27, 2017 at 7:22 pm GMT

@nsa Will the increased supply of labor result in lower gardening bills? Or take-out food bills?

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:29 pm GMT

"I would even argue that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo (What in the world is a "Belarussian"?!)."

Hey, us Anglo-Zionists didn't create Belarus. That was an indigenous or possibly German puppet state created (sort of) in early 1918. It was then conquered by the Bolsheviks and reborn as the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, a constituent republic of the USSR till it fell apart, at which point it became (sort of) independent.

The Anglo-Zionists had nothing to do with any of this, with probable exception of the collapse of the USSR.

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:33 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Since you consider "working for wages" as not "making a living," I'm curious what you would consider to constitute "making a living."

Yeoman farmer?

Small businessman?

Bank robber?

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:37 pm GMT

@Intelligent Dasein Actually, if we go back a dozen or two generations, it's probable most people on the planet are descended from both slaveowners and slaves. Especially if you're a little loose with the definition of slave.

Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:44 pm GMT

@Bragadocious If we had ever made a serious consistent effort to kill all the Indians, they'd be gone. But there seem to be quite a few of them still around. About 5M, in fact, considerably more than lived in the boundaries of the USA in 1491.

Argentina had similar Indian problems during the same time period (late 19th century) we were fighting our final Indian wars. But they had a different approach: extermination.

Quite successful at it, too. Very few Indians left in Argentina. And they didn't import any other minorities, which means Argentina is now upwards of 90% "white." Much more so than USA, in fact.

Miro23 > , August 27, 2017 at 8:27 pm GMT

If we accept that minorities are typically much more driven than most of the population, then we also immediately can see why their influence over society is often out of proportion with the numerical demographical "weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities being more intelligent or more creative and everything to do with them willing to being spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most people.

It's true that there is greater activism, but the key ingredient is probably ethnic patronage.

A.H. gave an (approving) explanation of how it works:

"In the old Austria, nothing could be done without patronage. That's partly explained by the fact that nine million Germans were in fact rulers, in virtue of an unwritten law, of fifty million non-Germans. This German ruling class took strict care that places should always be found for Germans. For them this was the only method of maintaining themselves in this privileged situation. The Balts of German origin behaved in the same way towards the Slav population."

Hitler's Table Talk. Conversation Nº 109, 15th-16th January 1942

American Jewry has been following the same policy since the early 1900′s, pushing for Jewish candidates in key placings, who if successful, are expected to return the favour. On a "level playing field" this has a ratchet effect whereby corporate management and key media, finance and government positions can be gradually taken over with Anglos squeezed out in a rather unobvious way ("He wasn't the right candidate for reasons A,B,C X,Y,Z").

prusmc > , August 27, 2017 at 8:34 pm GMT

@jacques sheete Jacquez:

Educate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years. I believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education. How has it worked? What does the US Census data show for the indicator median education level persons over 25 years of age in 1960 demonstrate when compared to 2010? Compare for both white and black. Wow! we all are much smarter. Okay, as Rodney King so aptly stated it "why can' t everbody just get along?"

Tradecraft46 > , August 27, 2017 at 8:40 pm GMT

Better still, they are making more enemies than they can put to any good use.

In that world, enemies validate, in the real world, it invites total destruction.

None of them, being religious and all, never count the costs, which Jesus suggested.

Lawrence Fitton > , August 27, 2017 at 8:52 pm GMT

@Wally okay wally, i'm only going to say this once, so please pay attention. the gas chambers were but one method by which jews were killed. starvation, disease, forced labor, firing squads, killed legions. what if it was only 4 million jews who perished in the camps? or 3? does that make it better.
one last thing: elie wiesel is not the wonderful man he is purported to be.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 8:59 pm GMT

@WorkingClass

Wages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable. But with what will you replace them?

Dear Sir, as I've often stated, I like what you have to say and agree with 99% of it. I also respect the fact that your reply to me was obviously respectful and sincere.

My usual answer to your question is to replace them with nothing. For example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it; I'd rather do without. Instead of wages and a time clock, I advocate finding other (hopefully respectable) sources of income.

I realize that in this environment, it's nearly impossible to do without wages, but that shows how much our system sux, hence my objection to them and the system. I pretty much became disgusted with the concept after working at a few jobs that were really akin to slavery or some other unsavory paid profession, so I worked to make a living without punching time clock. That's not to say that I did not receive money for my services, but I managed to do without a direct boss during my earning days. Several other rather cantankerous members of my family manged to do the same, and some still do. I'm not saying that to brag, but to point out that it can be done.

I do admit that it now seems nearly impossible to do that sort of thing, but a close neighbor, in his thirty's, manages to do that and does quite well. He does have the advantage of both a good work ethic and access to a family business though.

The bottom line for me is that it's too bad that we have to submit to bosses for the most part to earn a living. From that we seem to learn to submit to other forms of "authority" with little or no questioning, and it seems to be a downhill slide from there. Also, the more power the bosses get, they more they control, and the less chance there is for people to become independent. that's no way to live.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 9:09 pm GMT

@Logan

Since you consider "working for wages" as not "making a living,"

That is a false statement. It is both illogical and unreasonable based on what I actually said.

Working for wages in one of several ways of earning a living. It just happens to be, in my way of thinking, one of the least desirable for many reasons.

I'm curious what you would consider to constitute "making a living."

Yeoman farmer?

Small businessman?

Bank robber?

All of the above, and many more.

Skeptikal > , August 27, 2017 at 9:12 pm GMT

@Logan Belorusian.
One r.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 9:14 pm GMT

@prusmc

Educate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years. I believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education.

Most folks are entirely ineducable and seem to like it that way. Of course, it's a fine sounding pretext for mass brainwashing and it's attendant bureaucracy and source of profits.

How has it worked?

It's probably worked just as intended but not at all as advertised!

See John Taylor Gatto and Upton Sinclair's "The Goslings" and the Goosestep" which basically describe schooling in America as a tool for corporations.

Tim Howells > , August 27, 2017 at 9:23 pm GMT

@Lawrence Fitton

what if it was only 4 million jews who perished in the camps? or 3? does that make it better?

Well, in several countries you can go to jail, and many have, for saying it was less than 6, so go figure. Norman Finkelstein was destroyed by the "Holocaust Industry" for showing in the simplest terms that if you add up the numbers of supposed "victims" and "survivors", the official figures are patently absurd. The more you dig, the more absurd it gets.

attilathehen > , August 27, 2017 at 9:59 pm GMT

The Saker: You are not a "minority." You are a Caucasian, the European branch, ethnically Russian. You are Christian, specifically Orthodox. You are one of the interesting groups that make up the Caucasian peoples. You have nothing in common with blacks/Asians.

The Democratic party is the party of nonwhites, non-Christians, sexual degenerates. Manipulation has nothing to do with this. Minorities know they are inferiors. What they are doing is because they realize they can never accomplish what Caucasians/Europeans/ Christians/neopagans have accomplished. This means it is time for separation/deportation/repatriation.

This is coming. An RCC priest "confessed" to having been in the KKK when he was a teenager. The US Conference of Bishops has established an ad hoc committee to address racism. This is the final nail in the coffin of the RCC. Homosexuals have taken over the priesthood. Priests do not preach about hell, sin, repentance. Now that this KKK priest has been exposed, from now on sermons will only cover "racism," the worst sin.

Caucasian Christans/pagans have to deal with the reality that world history can be summed up in two words: IQ, which is tied to race. The past 2000 years of Western civilization united under the RCC are gone. There has to be a new paradigm shift to deal with the future and what needs to be done.

Delinquent Snail > , August 27, 2017 at 10:13 pm GMT

@anonymous I hope they act like they have at every event they have been a part of and the president acts accordingly. Trump needs to hire people to record the whole thing and put it all up on a new website thats created just to host the event. Dozens of live feeds from dozens of angles. All put up on this new website just so there will be no confusion. Once the left riots, because they will riot, National guard needs to be called and these domestic terrorists need to be put down. He then needs to put out an executive order to shut down all propaganda news agencies that are spinning this, and if people want to see what happened, view the live feeds from dozens of angles on the newly created website. And if people bitch about how its wrong to have this up, fuck them. Its time to take off the kiddy gloves.

Mulegino1 > , August 27, 2017 at 10:24 pm GMT

@Tim Howells It was more like around 300,000 in all of the German camps since their inception back in the mid-1930′s, according to the International Red Cross. And that refers to all camp inmates of all ethnic backgrounds.

It is entirely possible that many Jews may have been killed on the Eastern Front or in the Soviet Union, but that can hardly be blamed solely upon the Germans, who were not known to be savagely cruel or vengeful- even though the anti-partisan actions may have led to some excesses.

In any case, there is zero evidence for "millions of Jews" killed by the Germans. There are no mass graves commensurate with such figures, nor is there any documentary evidence of a deliberate plan of "extermination."

WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 10:25 pm GMT

@jacques sheete I understand you quite well I think. I have worked on commission. I have been self employed. For a time I was a soldier. I have worked for wages for mom and pop business and for large corporations and held both union and non union jobs. I did a few years working for a not for profit homeless shelter. I am a Jack of all trades and (unfortunately) master of none.

On union jobs (IBEW and Teamsters) I had the great benefit of having a contract with my employer that spelled out the duties and privileges of both the worker and the company. This meant that both labor and management worked from the same set of rules. The path to promotion was defined as was the possible cause for termination. Personalities had nothing to do with anything. The boss and I followed the same rules. It was nothing like being subject to the whims and prejudices of one man.

" For example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it; I'd rather do without."

Having a "job" can be worse than the gleet.
Unfortunately a mans gotta eat.

Thanks for coming back.

nsa > , August 27, 2017 at 10:29 pm GMT

@Ivy The white trash (as of 2016, down to 37.7% of California's population) has simply been replaced by brown trash in California. The only question remaining is which ethnic elite will run the state ..the jooies or the chinkies or the hindus. Or will the ethnics simply rule via a de facto coalition? Whitey's demise in CA is an accomplished fact ..with AZ and TX soon to follow and eventually OR, WA, ID, and CO. The efforts of James K. Polk are soon to be fully reversed. And yes, Ivy, you will have employment ..every Chinese has been promised a white house boy and white concubine by 2050.

Ivy > , August 27, 2017 at 10:49 pm GMT

@nsa I'll be long dead by 2050 but will miss those Chinese masseuses.

Cloak And Dagger > , August 27, 2017 at 10:51 pm GMT

@Lawrence Fitton

the gas chambers were but one method by which jews were killed

There is much contention as to whether even a single jew was killed in a gas chamber. Asserting that statement can land you in jail in much of Europe.

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 11:15 pm GMT

@Logan Chaim Weizmann, who obtained the Balfour Declaration from the British, and went on to become first president of Israel, hailed from Belarus.

hunor > , August 27, 2017 at 11:22 pm GMT

the same tolerant technology has been applied five thousand years ago in the Sumerian civilization
what was a non semitic composed society. Few hundred years prior to the destruction of that culture
semitic tribes were allowed to settle in, first in smaller numbers , then in the name of tolerance larger migrating groups were allowed , and enjoyed benefits of education, comfortable, cultured living. The original majority of the population were builders and workers , the migrants for the most part were users, who's interest were to find an easy way to become the more. The complete opposite of mentality. In time the semitic migrants were able to build up a fifth column , moved in to powerful positions such as religion and astrology , and from then on destruction has begun. The original populous were pushed out, part of them were forcefully crossbred , the rest of them flee and
build new countries in Europa . The migrants of that time gained written culture , tailored clothing ,
the benefit of toilet so not to go to the bushes to relieve themselves . This time around there is no place left to flee.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:25 pm GMT

@WorkingClass I, too, think I understand from whence you come.

I agree with the concept of labor unions but recognize that they too can be turned against the interests of the workers, and unfortunately, have been.

I do applaud you for your success working within the system and I have no doubt that you did it as a sincere, able and good man. I also respect your views and thank you for sharing them.

As for bosses, I loathe them so much that I myself never hired employees because I didn't want to be a boss any more than I wanted to answer to one. I almost get physically sick when I see that the window of opportunity for youngsters to follow a independent lifestyle is next to nil and getting tougher all the time.

I do still counsel my younger relatives to acquire as much experience as they can so that they are in a position to have some control over their own lives. I'm also actively involved in fortifying my grandkids with both defiance and the attitudes and skills to back it up.

Is that attitude Utopian? No doubt to some degree it is, but so is the attitude of submission, i.e., the wish for everything to be taken care of so long as one submits.

jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:34 pm GMT

@Cloak And Dagger

There is much contention as to whether even a single jew was killed in a gas chamber.

Not only is there much contention, but there is no credible evidence that it really happened. Besides, the numbers are farcical.

Where do they get 6 million?

"Allowing for a maximum of 100,000 who succeeded in emigrating from Europe, this would bring the total number of Jews under the direct rule of Nazi Germany to about 3,200,000."

Distribution of the Jewish Population of Europe 1933-. 1940," prepared by Mr. Moses Moskowitz
AMERICAN JEWISH YEAR BOOK 1941-1942, page 662

http://www.ajcarchives.org/AJC_DATA/Files/1941_1942_9_Statistics.pdf

I haven't checked in a while, but I wonder if the link is still active

Jake > , August 27, 2017 at 11:43 pm GMT

"I submit that the real truth is totally different. My thesis is very simple: the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire. That's all there is to it."

That is pretty much it, save for the origins. WASP culture's Germanic basis began by hating the native British Isles. That set the pattern:WASPs most hate those from whom they steal or otherwise wrong gravely. The Reformation provided the perfect theological and philosophical justifications for that pattern to become something much greater.

The Anglo-Saxon Puritans were Judaizing heretics. You cannot over-emphasize that point. WASAP culture from the moment it was crystalized, truly formed, was one that saw the world through Jewish-influenced, Jewish-fawning, eyes. Naturally and inevitably, once the true WASPs gained total control of the government, with the Puritan Revolution, their fearless leader, Oliver Cromwell, allied with Jews. He took Jewish money to wage war, to exterminate cultures and make at least virtual serfs of whole populations.

White Christian populations.

WASP culture began with an alliance with Jews, allowing Jews back into England, with special rights and privileges that the vast majority of British Isles native Christians did not have, that allowed the WASPs to continue waging war to exterminate white Christian cultures.

When WASPs encountered non-whites, they began to grasp the value of using them – non-whites and non-Christians – as tools and weapons with which to batter the white Christians they wished to destroy.

That is the reason the 'Anglo-Zionist Empire' uses minorities as it does.

You cannot separate the Jewish Problem from the WASP Problem. You cannot solve the Jewish Problem without solving the 'WASP Problem.

[Aug 27, 2017] Berkeley Cops Surrender Park To Antifa by Rod Dreher

Aug 27, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
At the planned rightist march in Berkeley today, very few conservatives or alt-righters showed up, but antifa did. From the LA Times :

Some anti-facists protesters, known as antifa, pounced when Joey Gibson, founder of the right-wing group Patriot Prayer, showed up with his crew. The protesters beat one man with a shield and another person wearing an American flag.

Some of the antifa protesters also threatened to break the cameras of anyone who filmed them, including journalists. One reporter tweeted that he had been pepper sprayed in one scuffle.

Moderate counter protesters were upset with the violence. "We need to get antifa out of here," said Jack Harris, who helped break up a fight.

Andrew Noruk, who was wearing a T-shirt denouncing both the Republican and Democratic parties when two young women came up to him and started yelling at him.

"You're a Nazi," they shouted, leaving Noruk, who said he came out to protest Trump supporters, confused.

Noruk denounced the fights breaking out near the park, claiming antifa and black bloc anarchists have given Trump's supporters exactly what they wanted: footage of violence perpetrated against the presidents supporters in a historically liberal city.

"We can't keep producing this audio visual propaganda," he said. "It is recruiting for the right."

Damn right it is. Why do the police allow this? Why are they not arresting antifa and throwing the book at them? This is outrageous, the way the Berkeley police behaved. From the Sacramento Bee :

Black-clad anarchists on Sunday stormed into what had been a largely peaceful Berkeley protest against hate and attacked at least five people, including the leader of a politically conservative group who canceled an event a day earlier in San Francisco amid fears of violence.

The group of more than 100 hooded protesters, with shields emblazoned with the words "no hate" and waving a flag identifying themselves as anarchists, busted through police lines, avoiding security checks by officers to take away possible weapons. Then the anarchists blended with a crowd of 2,000 largely peaceful protesters who turned up to demonstrate in a "Rally Against Hate" opposed to a much smaller gathering of right-wing protesters.

Berkeley police chief Andrew Greenwood defended how police handled the protest, saying they made a strategic decision to let the anarchists enter to avoid more violence.

Greenwood said "the potential use of force became very problematic" given the thousands of peaceful protesters in the park. Once anarchists arrived, it was clear there would not be dueling protests between left and right so he ordered his officers out of the park and allowed the anarchists to march in.

More:

Police pulled one supporter of President Donald Trump out of the park over a wall by his shirt as a crowd of about two dozen counter-demonstrators surrounded him and chanted "Nazi go home" and pushed him toward the edge of the park. At least two people were detained by officers for wearing bandannas covering their faces.

Anti-rally protesters chanted slogans "No Trump. No KKK. No fascist USA" and carried signs that said: "Berkeley Stands United Against Hate."

So an American man cannot peacefully state his support for the President of the United States without a mob of bullies surrounding him and physically coercing him?

Berkeley does not stand united against hate. Berkeley hates. Keep it up, leftists. You are doing the work of your enemies. Here's a short clip showing an antifa mob attacking a teenage boy Trump supporter and his father in Berkeley today, plus a short interview with them after the event. Warning: there's an f-bomb in the first few seconds of the crowd footage:

[Aug 26, 2017] What Still Unites Us by Patrick J. Buchanan

Buchanan lost it. he does not understand what neoliberalism is about and that dooms all his attempts to analyse the current political situation in the USA. Rephrasing Clinton, we can say: This is the crisis of neoliberalism stupid...
And it was President Reagan who presided of neoliberal coup detat that install neoliberal regime in the USA which promply started dismanteing the New Deal (althouth the process of neoliberalization started in full force under Carter administration)
Aug 26, 2017 | www.unz.com

Decades ago, a debate over what kind of nation America is roiled the conservative movement.

Neocons claimed America was an "ideological nation" a "creedal nation," dedicated to the proposition that "all men are created equal."

Expropriating the biblical mandate, "Go forth and teach all nations!" they divinized democracy and made the conversion of mankind to the democratic faith their mission here on earth.

With his global crusade for democracy, George W. Bush bought into all this. Result: Ashes in our mouths and a series of foreign policy disasters, beginning with Afghanistan and Iraq.

Behind the Trumpian slogan "America First" lay a conviction that, with the Cold War over and the real ideological nation, the USSR, shattered into pieces along ethnic lines, it was time for America to come home.

Contra the neocons, traditionalists argued that, while America was uniquely great, the nation was united by faith, culture, language, history, heroes, holidays, mores, manners, customs and traditions. A common feature of Americans, black and white, was pride in belonging to a people that had achieved so much.

The insight attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville -- "America is great because she is good, and if America ceases to be good, she will cease to be great" -- was a belief shared by almost all.

What makes our future appear problematic is that what once united us now divides us. While Presidents Wilson and Truman declared us to be a "Christian nation," Christianity has been purged from our public life and sheds believers every decade. Atheism and agnosticism are growing rapidly, especially among the young.

Traditional morality, grounded in Christianity, is being discarded. Half of all marriages end in divorce. Four-in-10 children are born out of wedlock. Unrestricted abortion and same-sex marriage -- once regarded as marks of decadence and decline -- are now seen as human rights and the hallmarks of social progress.

Tens of millions of us do not speak English. Where most of our music used to be classic, popular, country and western, and jazz, much of it now contains rutting lyrics that used to be unprintable.

Where we used to have three national networks, we have three 24-hour cable news channels and a thousand websites that reinforce our clashing beliefs on morality, culture, politics and race.

... ... ...

To another slice of America, much of the celebrated social and moral "progress" of recent decades induces a sense of nausea, summarized in the lament, "This isn't the country we grew up in."

Hillary Clinton famously described this segment of America as a "basket of deplorables racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic bigots," and altogether "irredeemable."

So, what still unites us? What holds us together into the indefinite future? What makes us one nation and one people? What do we offer mankind, as nations seem to recoil from what we are becoming, and are instead eager to build their futures on the basis of ethnonationalism and fundamentalist faith?

If advanced democracy has produced the disintegration of a nation that we see around us, what is the compelling case for it?

A sixth of the way through the 21st century, what is there to make us believe this will be the Second American Century?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever."

WorkingClass > , August 25, 2017 at 6:02 pm GMT

With his global crusade for democracy, George W. Bush bought into all this.

The GWOT was never about exporting democracy. It has always been about war profiteering and imperial hegemony.

We have a democratic facade but we do not have government by consent of the governed Pat. Our political and financial institutions are absolutely corrupt. Imperial Washington is determined to rule the Earth by force of arms. Legions of Maoists want to turn white people into untouchables. It's over for our republic. Our Constitution is stone cold dead. The empire itself is in steep decline.

After the collapse the U.S. will be just another big country in the Americas. Survivors of the crash will have an opportunity to build something new.

CaperAsh > , August 26, 2017 at 2:30 am GMT

This is a HUGE topic, hard to cover in a short article.
First, I echo Pat's sorrow at the negativity evidenced viz. our past.
However, the fact is that, much like the present, most of our history comprises lies covering up huge crimes, mainly massive deception on the part of those in charge. Only in the past two decades has any idea of the scale of decimation of the indigenous populations in North and South America emerged. When I was a boy I was told there were only a couple of million of Indians in America, whereas more recent estimations have it at 50 million plus. And Central America had larger cities than any in Europe at the time with close to 200 million perhaps, 90% of whom died in a matter of decades, an appalling price to be paid for our arrival. That most of this was due to lack of resistance to our imported microbes does not excuse that our history fails to tell this. What an appalling and inhuman lack of respect and decency. We are not as superior and tolerant as we pretend to be.

Similarly: the slavery story: Slavery is a nasty business, but life back then was extremely hard, and furthermore blacks weren't the only ones in slavery – for a while white slaves far outnumbered them. In the late 1800′s children were sent down to the mines in England, many of them dying young. If you were an able-bodied male, even one as young as 12, and out at night in the wrong place and time, a press gang was legally allowed to knock you out and drag you into a life of service on the high seas.And if you tried to escape, it was the noose for you. It is both hard for us and wrong to judge people in the past based on our own more delicate sensibilities.

Indeed, it is thanks to their great work, sacrifice and yes, crimes, that we have progressed to the point that we can look back at many of their practices with disapproval. Unfortunately we seem unwilling to merge that with understanding, largely because of an inadequate educational institutions and a sensation-driven public press.

In order for us to unite, we have to dig much deeper, reject the storm und drang of outrageously polemic, Deep-State-managed press and many other institutions, and tap into our fundamental humanity along with learning what the constitution is and why it is the way it is. The attempt is to create a genuinely uplifted, and also flexible, society. But it can be hijacked by determined powers and become a plutocracy, which is what has happened.

What will unite us, truly, is when we realise the degree to which all normal people, both 'left' and 'right', 'black' and 'white' have been and are being manipulated so that they don't come together. We should unite to throw off the yoke of oppression placed and used by the Elites who have infested and bloated all major social institutions, private and public.

It is time to throw off that yoke.

[Aug 26, 2017] The Alt-Right Is Not Who You Think They Are by George Hawley

Rejection of globalization by alt-right is very important. that's why make them economic nationalists. And that's why they are hated neocon and those forces of neoliberalism which are behind Neocon/Neolib Cultural Revolution -- promotion of LGBT, uni-gender bathrooms, transsexuals, etc, identity wedge in politics demonstrated by Hillary, etc. (modeled on Mao's cultural revolution, which also what launched when Mao started to lose his grip on political power).
Aug 26, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
In my experience with the alt-right, I encountered a surprisingly common narrative: Alt-right supporters did not, for the most part, come from overtly racist families. Alt-right media platforms have actually been pushing this meme aggressively in recent months. Far from defending the ideas and institutions they inherited, the alt-right!which is overwhelmingly a movement of white millennials!forcefully condemns their parents' generation. They do so because they do not believe their parents are racist enough

In an inverse of the left-wing protest movements of the 1960s, the youthful alt-right bitterly lambast the "boomers" for their lack of explicit ethnocentrism, their rejection of patriarchy, and their failure to maintain America's old demographic characteristics and racial hierarchy. In the alt-right's vision, even older conservatives are useless "cucks" who focus on tax policies and forcefully deny that they are driven by racial animus.

... ... ...

To complicate matters further, many people in the alt-right were radicalized while in college. Not only that, but the efforts to inoculate the next generation of America's social and economic leaders against racism were, in some cases, a catalyst for racist radicalization. Although academic seminars that explain the reality of white privilege may reduce feelings of prejudice among most young whites exposed to them, they have the opposite effect on other young whites. At this point we do not know what percentage of white college students react in such a way, but the number is high enough to warrant additional study.

A final problem with contemporary discussions about racism is that they often remain rooted in outdated stereotypes. Our popular culture tends to define the racist as a toothless illiterate Klansman in rural Appalachia, or a bitter, angry urban skinhead reacting to limited social prospects. Thus, when a white nationalist movement arises that exhibits neither of these characteristics, people are taken by surprise.

George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) is an assistant professor of political science at the University of Alabama. His books include Right-Wing Critics of American Conservatism , White Voters in 21st Century America , and Making Sense of the Alt-Right (forthcoming).

Nate J , says: August 24, 2017 at 10:35 pm

It boggles my mind that the left, who were so effective at dominating the culture wars basically from the late 60s, cannot see the type of counter-culture they are creating. Your point about alt-righters opposing their parents drives this home.

People have been left to drift in a sea of postmodernism without an anchor for far too long now, and they are grasping onto whatever seems sturdy. The alt-right, for its many faults, provides something compelling and firm to grab.

The left's big failure when all the dust settles will be seen as its inability to provide a coherent view of human nature and a positive, constructive, unifying message. They are now the side against everything – against reason, against tradition, against truth, against shared institutions and heritage and nationalism It's no wonder people are looking to be for something these days. People are sick of being atomized into smaller and smaller units, fostered by the left's new and now permanent quest to find new victim groups.

DonChi , says: August 25, 2017 at 5:17 am
I'm disappointed to read an article at The American Conservative that fails to address the reality behind these numbers. Liberal identity politics creates an inherently adversarial arena, wherein white people are depicted as the enemy. That young whites should respond by gravitating toward identity politics themselves in not surprising, and it's a bit offensive to attribute this trend to the eternal mysteries of inexplicable "racist" hate.

The young can see through the fake dynamic being depicted in the mainstream media, and unless The American Conservative wants to completely lose relevance, a light should be shone on the elephant in the room. For young white kids, The Culture Wars often present an existential threat, as Colin Flaherty shows in Don't Make the Black Kids Angry–endorsed and heralded as a troubling and important work by Thomas Sowell.

Nicholas , says: August 25, 2017 at 7:44 am
From the 16 Points of the Alt-Right:
5. The Alt Right is openly and avowedly nationalist. It supports all nationalisms and the right of all nations to exist, homogeneous and unadulterated by foreign invasion and immigration.
6. The Alt Right is anti-globalist. It opposes all groups who work for globalist ideals or globalist objectives.

It is important to remember that nations are people, not geography. The current American Union, enforced by imperial conquest, is a Multi-National empire. It has been held together by force and more recently by common, though not equal, material prosperity.

With the imposition of Globalism's exotic perversions and eroding economic prospects the American Union is heading for the same fate as all Multi-National empires before it.

Nation(Identity) > Culture > Politics.

KD , says: August 25, 2017 at 9:15 am
Mysteriously absent from the scholarly discussion seems to be the pioneer of sociology, Ludwig Gumplowicz. Incredibly so, as the same factors that led to the destruction of the Austro-Hungarian Empire abound in contemporary America.
Steve , says: August 25, 2017 at 9:25 am
I have two teenage sons – we live in Canada – and they tell that, no matter what they say, who they hang out with, what music they listen to, no matter how many times they demonstrate they are not racist, they are repeatedly called racist. They are automatically guilty because they are white. They are beaten over the head with this message in school and in the press and are sick and tired of it.
Todd Pierce , says: August 25, 2017 at 10:48 am
What might also be considered is the cultural effect upon a generation which has now matured through what the government calls "perpetual war," with the concomitant constant celebration of "warriors," hyper-patriotism as demanded of all public events such as shown in the fanaticism of baseball players engaged in "National Anthem standouts," such as were popular a couple years ago in MLB, the constant references in political campaigns to the "enemy," to include Russia as well now, and the "stab in the back" legend created to accuse anyone opposed to more war and occupation of "treason." We've "radicalized" our own youth, with Trump coming along with his links to Israel's ultra militarist, Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli "Right," and created a cultural condition much like this: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/04/conservative-revolutionaries-fascism/
Doc Broom , says: August 25, 2017 at 10:49 am
Odd, you write "How did the youngest white Americans respond to the most racially polarizing election in recent memory?" In reality it was less racially polarized than 2012, when 93 % of African Americans and 71% of Hispanics voted for Obama while in 2016 88% of Blacks and 65% of Hispanics voted from Hillary. So Trump won a higher percentage of African American votes and Hispanic votes than Mitt Romney. In 2008 Obama won 95% of Blacks and 67% of Hispanics, in 2004 the numbers were 88 and 53 for Kerry so the three elections between 2004 and and 2016 were all more polarizing than the 2016 race.
Eric Mader , says: August 25, 2017 at 10:55 am
Yes, you make many important points, Mr. Hawley, but that you feel the need to join the chorus of those who see our president's reaction to Charlottesville as somehow inappropriate or even itself racist–that is sad. I don't see what else you may be implying in your opening paragraphs, since you move directly from the number of "likes" Obama's bromide received to this: "[Obama's reaction] also offered a stark contrast to that of President Trump."

In spite of many liberals' frantic desire to read whatever they want into President Trump's words, he very clearly condemned the neo-Nazis and the evil of Heather Heyer's murderer. That he also condemned the violence coming from Antifa ranks does not lessen his condemnation of that coming from the alt right side. Rather, condemning the rising illiberalism on both sides of this growing conflict was both commendable and necessary.

Many Americans see these recent events in a context stretching back years. Myself, at fifty, having watched especially the steady empowerment of a demagogic left on our campuses, I'm not much surprised that a racist "white nationalist" movement should burst into flame at just this point. The kindling is right there in the anti-white, misandrous virulence of our SJW left.

Sane conservatives have strongly condemned the new alt-right racism. The problem is that we are not seeing anything similar from the left. Our left seems incapable of condemning, let alone even seeing , its own racist excesses. Which are everywhere in its discourse, especially in our humanities departments.

I would say that in the recent decades the American left has grown much more deeply invested in identity politics than the right has ever been during my lifetime. In my view, our left has grown more enamored of identity issues precisely because it has abandoned the bread and butter issues that really matter to most Americans.

I have many left-liberal friends and regularly read the left press. Surveying the reactions to Charlottesville and the rising conflict between alt-right extremists and a radicalized Antifa left, I see nowhere a step toward acknowledging the obvious: our rabid identity politics is by no means just a problem of the right.

Racial identity politics is a curse. Sadly, it seems we've been cursed by it well and and good. The poison's reaching down to the bone. Unless both smart moderates and people on the left start to recognize just how badly poisoned our left has been by this curse, no progress will be made. Identity politics needs to be condemned on both sides of this growing national street brawl, and it should start NOW.

But I'm afraid it's not going to happen. I see my friends on the left, and they're nowhere near acknowledging the problem. And I'm sad to see our president's attempt to call out both sides has gotten such negative reactions. I'm afraid this isn't going to end well.

Todd Pierce , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:21 am
Should read: "National Anthem standoffs," not "standouts."
Siarlys Jenkins , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:29 am
Liberal identity politics creates an inherently adversarial arena, wherein white people are depicted as the enemy. That young whites should respond by gravitating toward identity politics themselves in not surprising

One of many good reasons for rejecting "identity" politics generally.

CampNouidiote , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:34 am
A white friend attended a Cal State graduate program for counseling a couple of years ago; he left very bitter after all his classes told him that white men were the proximate cause of the world's misery. Then a mutual Latina friend from church invited him to coffee and told him that he was the white devil, the cause of her oppression. You can conclude how he felt.

The liberal universities' curricula has caused a storm of madness; they have unleashed their own form of oppressive thought on a significant portion on American society:white men. There is now an adverse reaction. Of course, even more opprobrium will be heaped upon on men who might question the illogicality of feminism and the left. How can all of this end well if the humanity of white men is denied in universities, public schools and universities?

G. K. , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:39 am
The Alt Right simply believes that Western nations have a right to preserve their culture and heritage. Every normal man in these United States agreed with that premise prior to the Marxist takeover of our institutions in the 1960's. And you know it's true.
Cornel Lencar , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:41 am
Maybe at the bottom of it is not racism as in they are the wrong colour, but about cultural traits and patterns of behaviour that are stirring resentment. Plus maybe the inclusion towards more social benefits not available before (Obamacare?).

The current rap music, as opposed to the initial one, that emphasized social injustice is such that one feels emptying his own stomach like sharks do.

The macho culture that black gangs, latin american gangs manifest is a bit antagonistic to white supremacists gangs and attitudes towards women. After all, vikings going raiding used to have shield maidens joining, and Celtic culture is full of women warriors. Northern European culture, harking back to pre-Christian times was more kinder to women than what women from southern Europe (Greece, Rome) experienced (total ownership by husbands, the veil, etc., all imported from the Middle East: but one must not judge too harshly, the book "Debt, the first 5000 years" could be an eye opener of the root causes of such attitudes).

Also, the lack of respect for human life expressed in these cultures is not that palatable, even for white supremacists (while one can point to Nazi Germany as an outlier – but there it was the state that promoted such attitudes, while in Japan the foreigner that is persecuted and ostracized could be the refugee from another village around Fukushima – see the Economist on that).

So I think there are many avenues to explore in identifying the rise in Alt right and white supremacists in the U.S. But colour is definitely not it.

Joe Beavers , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:50 am
Come now. There were the same types around me years ago at school, work, society. They just did not march around like Nazis in public, probably because the Greatest Generation would have kicked their butts.

Now, with the miracle of modern technology, a few hundred of them can get together and raise hell in one place. Plus they now get lots of encouraging internet press (and some discouraging).

A better article on this is:

http://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/keillor-my-advice-be-genial-dont-take-lunacy-too-seriously/

Jack V , says: August 25, 2017 at 12:17 pm
This article says virtually nothing.
The author fails to define his terms, beginning with Alt-Right.
And he seems to operate from a dislike of Trump underneath it all. This dislike is common among pundits, left and right, who consider themselves to be refined and cultured. So it was that the NYT's early condemnation of Trump led with complaints about his bearing and manners – "vulgar" was the word often used if memory serves.
This gets us nowhere. Many in the US are disturbed by the decline in their prospects with a decrease in share of wages in the national income ongoing since the 1970's – before Reagan who is blamed for it all. Add to that the 16 years of wars which have taken the lives of Trump supporters disproportionately and you have a real basis for grievances.
Racism seems to be a side show as does AntiFa.
KD , says: August 25, 2017 at 12:24 pm
Richard McEvoy writes:

"The accusation of being racist because you are white is a misunderstanding of structural racism."

I agree, but I notice that Jews have the same misunderstanding when you mention structural "Zionist Occupied Government" or "Jewish Privilege".

Perhaps because they are both conspiracy theories rooted in hatred and ignorance, which is where we descend when the concept of a statistical distribution or empirical data become "controversial", or "feelings" overtake "facts".

Alex (the one that likes Ike) , says: August 25, 2017 at 12:36 pm
And progressives still refer to KKK when they seek an example of a white supremacist group. Amazing. They are too lazy even to learn that the Klan lost its relevance long ago, and the most powerful white supremacist organization of today consists of entirely different people, who are very far from being illiterate.

***

Todd Pierce,

Israel's ultra militarist, Benjamin Netanyahu

I won't deny that Bibi is a controversial figure, but calling him an ultra militarist is quite a bit of a stretch.

haderondah , says: August 25, 2017 at 1:35 pm
Elite sports. After reading this article and it's underlying thesis, it occurs to me that the way sports have evolved in this country is very likely to be the experience that millennial whites have had that fosters their "out group" belief systems. It is very common, using soccer as my frame of reference, for wealthy suburban families to spend a fortune getting their children all the best training and access to all the best clubs. Their children are usually the best players in their community of origin and usually the top players all the way through the preadolescent years only to find all of that money and prestige gone to waste once their kids get to around sixteen at which point their children are invariably replaced on the roster by a recent immigrant -- mainly from Africa or south of our border and usually at a cut rate compared to the one they are bleeding the suburban families with. I'm assuming this is becoming more common across all sports as they move toward a pay to play corporate model. In soccer, the white kids are, seriously, the paying customers who fill out the roster that supports the truly talented kids (from countries who know how to develop soccer talent.)
sedric , says: August 25, 2017 at 8:20 pm
The thing is when blacks begin to feel power and a secure place in America then their true colors show-at least among many. Left unchecked they would become the biggest racists of all. You can see that now. So what it comes down to are white people going to give away their country? Until blacks become cooperative and productive things need to stay as they are. Sad maybe but that's just the way it has to be.
vato_loco_frisco , says: August 25, 2017 at 8:18 pm
There have always been fringe, rightwing groups in the US. Nothing new there. But the so-called alt-right, comprised of Nazi wannabes and assorted peckerwoods, is truly the spawn of the looney left, whose obsession with race has created the toxic environment we find ourselves in.

[Aug 24, 2017] Iconoclasm And Violence

Notable quotes:
"... I once worked with someone who always had to be Winning™, and as soon as you managed to meet one set of demands a new set popped up – just for the sake of having something to win. Because *having won* didn't matter, it was the act of winning that mattered. I think the activist left is in the hands of this sort of person, and it's going to work out about as well as you'd expect. ..."
"... "It's always struck me as strange that no one reflects that the desire of the Left, to create a true multi-ethnic, multi-cultural democratic society, has never been done before." ..."
"... The problem is the falseness of the American Creed. For minorities and there empathizers it should be discarded. For conservative whites, it creates a terrible cognitive dissonance. Why have they done all the right things: got an education, worked hard, married and still ended up in a precarious situation? ..."
"... In the meantime, the globalist, rich libertarians embedded its false ideology of "equality of opportunity" in working class whites, while simultaneously moving there factories and money outside of the country as quickly as possible. ..."
"... Sure. I prefer the Leninist term, "infantile disorder." ..."
"... Thing is, Mr. grumpy realist, the Confederate statues didn't lie us into the Iraq War, bail out the Wall Street banksters, fail to stop millions of illegals from coming here, or outsource American jobs to Indians and Chinese. ..."
"... I oppose vandalism of statues. Full stop. If we are going to waste time on more culture war nonsense it should be conducted legally. But since everyone loves arguing about this crap -- The Wikipedia article on Serra seems fair and balanced, to coin a phrase. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jun%C3%ADpero_Serra ..."
"... The Confedercy killed more Americans than any foreign enemy the Republic has ever faced, and yet public statues and monuments to this vile treason, most of which were raised nearly 50 years after the war ended to commerate the (temporary) triumph of the Confederate ideology of White Supremacy, are somehow different and more noble than statues of Dzhersinsky and Lenin? Who committed crimes of the same vulgar type as the Confederate leaders (why is Longstreet not marked by statue or Beauregard? It's because Longstreet fought to defend black rights after the war, and Beauregard was creole). Now, like Communists, some good people fought for the Confederacy for good reasons (home and family in the case of your Confederate ancestor, bread and freedom in the Russian revolution. Read about some of the brutality from the Whites in the Russian Civil War. It will make your skin crawl.) So let the common soldiers be commenrated, but tear down the statues of the traitors who led them. Just as they tore down the statues of Dzhrsinsky, Lenin, and Marx after 1991. ..."
"... "Huntington's book sounds helpful but the work that continues to be even more prescient is Christopher Lasch's "The Revolt of the Elites," describing a ruling class that has severed its ties to its own cultural order as well as to the less powerful and privileged members of it. The result is incomprehension of reaction they provoke and chaos. In the short run, this may increase their illusion of control and power but the long run spells doom and replacement by more cohesive cultures." ..."
"... That's exactly the book I was thinking of in this post. He also talks about how when the "Managerial Elites" replaced the "Wasps" as the ruling class they replaced the sense of responsibility and Noblesse Oblige the Wasps had for the country w/ disregard, selfishness and greed by the managerial meritocracy. Gone is the manufacturing economy replaced by the ephemeral finance and information economy. ..."
"... Interesting interview with Andrew Young on NPR this morning ("Civil Rights Activist Argues to Keep Confederate Monuments"): "A minority cannot be provoking a racist majority that is still underemployed, undereducated, and dying faster than we are. The issue is life and death, not some stupid monument." ..."
"... I still can't get over it. Joan of Arc?!!! ..."
"... Maybe we can make a decision based on artistic merit? I mean, a lot of these statues are mass-produced pieces of sentimental kitch that make me remember the excesses of oratory during the 1890s. Is it really all that terrible if we turn them into something else? Or should we just say: "if it's a statue of some guy on a horse and has moss on it, we'll leave it alone" and impose a statuary equivalent to the legal doctrine of laches? ..."
"... If the sum total of all indicators within the context of group, racial identity and the possible demise of an anglo/protestant cultural heritage is true, then violent conflict looms on the horizon and possibly in the near foreseeable future. Yes, it will not be a fight for racial(i.e. white)supremacy but an at-all-costs battle to avoid extinction. ..."
Aug 24, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

collin , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:31 am

But it is plain that most Republicans do not believe Trump violated that taboo.

That is because Hugh Hewitt stated that Trump has the right enemies. And for conservatives they have standing behind Trump since he pursued Birtherism against the enemy.

Justin Gregory , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:32 am
I was reflecting on this last night and had an epiphany regarding Trump's "good people on both sides" statement last week.

For over a week now I've been baffled by the president's remark. What "good" person thinks, "Hey, the KKK and the Nazis are having a rally this weekend. Sounds like my kind of party!"? But now I'm glad he said it.

What I mean is this: if you watch the videos, you'll notice a large percentage of the participants in the Charlottesville rally were young white men, probably in their early 20's. At this age, people are spending a lot of time trying on identities and figuring out what they believe. This means occasionally doing foolish and embarrassing things.

Trump has basically given these guys an escape path. "Hey, I'm not really a Nazi or a Klukker. I'm a good person who's concerned about the danger of erasing our collective history, of throwing the baby out with the racist bathwater."

I know some will snark at that, but consider the alternative, more or less embraced by everybody else. Howling, "racist" and throwing stones, both rhetorical and literal, only serves to further radicalize these guys, driving them into the welcoming arms of the national socialists. (Note the similarities between the profiles for a young white supremacist and a domestic Islamic terrorist!) "They will hate me no matter what I do at this point," is not where we want people to be.

I have no idea whether this was the president's intention or even on his radar at the time, but if you back people into a corner without a path of escape, they will get desperate, which is to say, radical and violent. "Good people," as distinct from "racist Nazis", is an opportunity to step back from the abyss.

Aaron C. , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:33 am
I am 35 years old, and I believe the country will tear itself apart in my lifetime. The forces separating us are stronger than those keeping us together, and they are not likely to be tamed with the weapons currently in our culture's arsenal (i.e., rote recitation of "Diversity is Strength").

As another commenter wryly noted, I happen to possess every quality despised by the SJWs (white, heterosexual, Christian, happily married, with four children and a dog), and their actions/words are increasingly convincing me and my family that they'd prefer not to share the same country as me.

That's fine; I'm happy to expend what little time and talent I have devising a way to peacefully (again, I repeat, PEACEFULLY) separate from those who think my very existence (aka "whiteness") is somehow a threat to their lives. At an earlier, more naïve point in my life, I thought that we, as a country, would get through this and start regarding each other according to the content of our character rather than the color of our skin. Alas, it seems that there is no interest in that type of social arrangement any longer, so I'm happy to help broker a two-state solution.

what is to come , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:33 am
"They wouldn't stop. To them, it's a possibility to destroy things they hate and feel self righteous at the same time. Or, and to get media cheering. Why would they miss a chance like this?"

It's a chance to use violence to force visible, lasting change in our shared space. To force their will on us, by violence or the threat of violence. A piece of the world that the rest of us loved or accepted or at least tolerated is smashed or removed because that's what they want. The rest of us are supposed to shut up and accept what they have done.

This won't last long. When it swings back in the other direction, as it inevitably will, many of those now watching in silent rage will cheer for the thugs who come to smash their faces in.

Pat , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:47 am

I once worked with someone who always had to be Winning™, and as soon as you managed to meet one set of demands a new set popped up – just for the sake of having something to win. Because *having won* didn't matter, it was the act of winning that mattered. I think the activist left is in the hands of this sort of person, and it's going to work out about as well as you'd expect.

dave , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:51 am
Charles Featherstone, this:

"It's always struck me as strange that no one reflects that the desire of the Left, to create a true multi-ethnic, multi-cultural democratic society, has never been done before."

That society will function is taken as a given, it seems to me. And it does, if one has enough money. But if not, there's a breakdown. And that's something I often see – some of the work I do involves economic and community development in poor communities. There isn't much to work with, and the language of the Left isn't particularly conducive to strengthening communities. Generally it is about freedoms from and rights, and rarely if ever – can't think of a recent example, actually – is it about obligation and responsibilities other than those for one's own expression and fulfillment.

I'd like to say the Right has stepped into the void, but for the most part they have not, they are just as insistent on freedoms from and a kind of a moral adjudication by the market, where struggling communities deserve to die. Dreher and a few others often write about the importance of community and the unappreciated difficulty of maintaining a civil society, but as a general rule what they write is misunderstood as an appeal to nostalgia or racism or both. Which is to say that reflecting on what makes a "multi-ethnic, multi-cultural democratic society" work is so far off the radar screen for most people that they are unable to identify a discussion about it.

Which is to say it strikes me as strange also. And then generally, Mr. Dreher, the problem I have with Huntington is that his keen perceptiveness easily clothes itself with an aura of prophesy. I don't attribute that to him, it's a thing I do on my own. But it's something I have to avoid in order to do the work I do. I can imagine numerous futures, and a part of the struggle for me is maintaining the facility of imagining one that inspires. So I repeat to myself – It need not be this way.

collin , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:55 am
What we're seeing might be thought of as the entirely predictable and normal reaction of a particular group within a pluralistic society, when members of that group come to believe that they are losing ground.
  1. In terms of history, I wish historians would state the Post WW2 Boom (1948 – 1973) was the historical oddity where we saw high increase in working class wages. And any reading of US history especially before WW1, the white race definition did not include the latest European immigrants. (Irish, German, East European and Jewish.) In many ways modern US is closer to American history than post war years.
  2. Although Civil Rights was primarily led by African-Americans, there were a significant other minorities that benefited in the long run.
  3. In terms of minority economic gains, the area of the economy where the minority gains have been the most is Tech and we have seen a huge conservative dislike of tech the last 3 – 5 years.
  4. In terms of economy, over the last 15 years the primarily hit more rural WWC towns. So it must be something and Trump ran on the Clintons free trade agreement and anti-immigrants to win the election. (I found it strange that it was not Koch Brothers or Apple fault but did not understand it until after the election.)
  5. Again it is hard to predict the future as there still things vastly better today than a generation ago. Literally nobody in 1992 stated that the US was on a verge of a historic drop in crime.
Potato , says: August 23, 2017 at 9:04 am
But there is room for all of us white people to extol what is great, and there was a LOT of great in our ancestors, while strictly denying and removing anything which seems to highlight profound injustices in the eyes of non-whites. I am now on-board. It's the christian thing to do. Let's retain all that is Christian about our ancestors, and let go all of the cultural blindness, willful or not, that resulted in slavery.

I often disagree with Seven sleepers, but this is right on.

I am also noticing that not only do we not hear from black Americans on this board, we very seldom are moved to take any account of their opinions on this matter. That's OK I guess, I think we're all white or Asian here (not African American, I mean) but I am struck by our very consistent blindness on this topic.

Let us suppose for a minute that your Southern, Confederate ancestor was not riding about on a horse. Let us suppose that he was a field hand in the slave quarters, that he had been regularly beaten (this practice has been attested to by numerous documents from the old South), his wife had been taken by the son of the plantation owner, one of "his" children was suspiciously light of skin, and several of his children had been sold away from him. These things were not rare and unusual. This was the order of the day.

So now how do you feel about this "Heritage"?

Oh well, that's OK, right? The people who have good reason to feel this way are a minority. We need not trouble ourselves too much about them. And our Christian obligation to take care of our brothers and sisters, to love them in fact, to consider their feelings as well as our own .what happened to that?

Rob G , says: August 23, 2017 at 9:09 am
"So, putting together ideas from the Clarence Thomas blog and some of Huntington and Swain's ideas here, I posit: Liberals believe in legal/economic collectivism and cultural individualism, while conservatives believe in legal/economic individualism and cultural collectivism. I'm sure somebody on this blog can demolish that hypothesis."

No, it's generally correct but it needs tweaking. The conservatives you describe are not really conservatives, they're right-liberals. Patrick Deneen is the guy to read on this.

Also, I'm not sure these "conservatives" want cultural collectivism as much as they want the freedom to reject the tyranny of left's cultural individualism. As J.W. Corrington put it (regarding a different issue), submitting to the unalterable vicissitudes of history is one thing. Being expected to genuflect to them is quite another. (paraphrase from memory).

Or to paraphase Fitzjames Stephen, you may not be able to resist being carried away by the flood, but that doesn't mean you have to sing 'Hallelujah' to the river god while being swept along.

grumpy realist , says: August 23, 2017 at 9:17 am
Huh. Iconoclasts on the left, and on the right we've got the people who want to tear down the entire political system and who are loudly applauding Trump because he "sticks it to the conventional Republicans and the Democrats."

Is there really that much difference? We certainly have enough of the latter group on these threads.

(And Joan of Arc? Really? Makes me think we've just got a plain anarchist who wants to tear down all statues, period. He'll probably go after the lions at the entrance of the NYC Public library next.)

Jon S , says: August 23, 2017 at 9:19 am
Re: the American Creed:

"equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result),"

I am able to recognize that those two things are lies. No African-American is going to think they are equal under the law when the police are killing them. And no thinking American believes they have had the same equality of opportunity as Donald Trump.

The problem is the falseness of the American Creed. For minorities and there empathizers it should be discarded. For conservative whites, it creates a terrible cognitive dissonance. Why have they done all the right things: got an education, worked hard, married and still ended up in a precarious situation?

If we wanted to be a great nation, we should have adopted policies to create lots of working class jobs and filled them with Black men, so that they could support homes and families. But we didn't, instead we gave tepid support to stupidities like affirmative action. Something the white majority never supported.

In the meantime, the globalist, rich libertarians embedded its false ideology of "equality of opportunity" in working class whites, while simultaneously moving there factories and money outside of the country as quickly as possible.

And none of this is too late to fix. The country just needs the right leadership. And it won't come from Trump, the GOP, or the Democrats.

Matt , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:16 am
FYI SJWs,

The Indians who marched on the Trail of Tears took their African American Slaves with them to Oklahoma.

VikingLS , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:18 am
"Let's just put it more plainly: Trump violated another important taboo pretty much every week of his campaign. Yet Republicans still elected him. They should be ashamed of themselves."

Honestly at this point the only Republican response to statements like this is "we tried thousands of times to get the "lesser of two evils in a two party system" point across to you. NOT necessarily lesser to you with whatever values you may have, but lesser to US. If you STILL are going to try this idiotic attempt at shaming, you can go f**** yourself."

Sorry Rod but that's about the thousandth time that's come up here with these people.

Siarlys Jenkins , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:37 am
Take 'Em Down NOLA movement is demanding, among *many* other things, that Tulane University change its name because Paul Tulane, whose land donation made the university possible, owned slaves.

OK. Let's parse that one. One alt-right response to taking down statues of confederate generals was "Where is it going to stop? Shall we take down statues of Washington and Jefferson too?" And then, like many poorly-conceived self-fulfilling prophecies, infantile disordered voices came out saying, yes, indeed we must.

In between a rational voice from a man who supported taking down confederate monuments affirmed "There is a huge difference between celebrating a flawed man, and celebrating a man's flaws."

Mr. Tulane has a university named after him because he donated the land for the university, not because he owned slaves. Braxton Bragg has statues put up because he fought against the United States of American in defense of slavery. Obvious difference. I think it might be worthwhile to discuss renaming Fort Bragg -- its an outrage that soldiers in the army that defeated the confederacy receive basic training at a post named after one of the generals they defeated. I'm sure my great-great-grandfather who served in the 11th Tennessee Cavalry, United States Army, would agree.

Can we dispense with Social "Justice" Warrior? Just as a matter of accurate labeling/description?

Sure. I prefer the Leninist term, "infantile disorder."

By Jove, Melbourne was right–Cicero, Plato, Aristotle and all those gentlemen were 'pro-slavery'.

Well, that aside, I think they're all greatly over-rated. Surely someone in antiquity said things more agreeable to my seldom humble self, but his writings had not the random good fortune to be preserved for late European antiquarians to pore over.

dd: Did you miss the ellipses at the end of my sentence?

And yes, Seven Sleepers is right on target today. There is nobody so crass I can't agree with him now and then. Even Clarence Thomas gets a few things right. If Seven Sleepers is Italian, he is also correct that originally his ancestors were not accepted as "white" at all.

VikingLS , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:40 am
"I am also noticing that not only do we not hear from black Americans on this board, we very seldom are moved to take any account of their opinions on this matter."

From what I recall Baptiste and Eliminist (I think I spelled that wrong) are black. Dancer Girl is black, and all of them have weighed in on this.

TR , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:49 am
From a footnote about a statue Joyce mentions in "The Dead": In 1701 an equestrian statue [of William III] was erected in front of Trinity College. From then on, it was systematically defaced, daubed, smeared, wrecked, rebuilt, protected, and finally, in 1929 blown up, as an emblem of oppression." Irish Pat Buchanan would probably be proud of his ancestors!

I'm from Memphis, as was Nathan Bedford Forrest. I admire Forrest as a military iconoclast, but I must say I had to laugh at the picture of the statue of Forrest mounted on horse with some prankster's KKK hood draped on his head.

Truth Dough , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:55 am
Q. "So what do they symbolize? And who do they symbolize? The answer is important."

A. Whatever I say.

Art is cathartic; hopefully, it begets catharsis, if the artist or sculptor did their job. In the eye of the beholder it may appear as a "ministering angel" or a "demon" or may be "just some bloke riding horseback I didn't notice nor did I even care and could care less now because I have no connection to history or interest in it."

Imagine we had an educated collective of sovereign individuals who participated in government and kept a watchful eye we'd be in great shape with or without religion or deism. But, we don't. And because of this, the "American Creed" as you callit, is lost; none of those items or those you left out exists, none of it exists, absolutely zero.

Carl Bernstein recently said in an interview that obstructing free press is the first step toward tyranny. The Union can thank Lincoln (the tyrant) and Sherman (the tyrant's bloody hand).

Sherman to his Adjutant:
"For my part, I believe that this war is the result of false political doctrine, for which we are all as a people responsible, viz., that any and every people have a right to self-government; and I would give all a chance to reflect, and, when in error, to recant."

And

"I am willing to bear in patience that political nonsense of slave rights, State rights, freedom of conscience, freedom of press, and such other trash, as have deluded the Southern people into war, anarchy, bloodshed, and the foulest crimes that have disgraced any time or any people."

Did you get that?

Freedom of the press is trash!

M_Young , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:57 am
"Monuments referring to "Savage" Indians defending their homeland are pretty damn offensive, when you think about it."

====

"He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."

Tho. Jefferson.

Ain't Benedict , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:00 am
The right committed an act of vandalism against America that infinitely dwarfs any vandalism against old statuary. In a rejection of everything good and decent in America, they selected and then elected Donald Trump. The insult and tragedy of this act only worsens with each passing day.

And, even as Trump is actively desecrating and dismantling America's binding ideals with the eager support of most of the right, I'm supposed to fret about how the left is provoking them?!? That's so absurd it borders on obscene.

It's like a giant bully has me pinned on my back and is punching me relentlessly in the face (pausing occasionally to spit in it) and Rod is watching all this from among the gathered crowd and hollering that I just need to stop fighting back. What I need is the good people among the crowd to get this guy off of me before it's too late!

Trump's ongoing possession of power that he is terrifyingly unfit to wield and responsibility he is tragically unable to comprehend is a relentless and unbearable provocation and we all know who did it and who continues to support it. The left has almost infinitely more cause to feel aggrieved and nobody should be surprised that they latch onto whatever avenues of protest they stumble upon.

I say none of this to justify anybody's extreme actions, only to illustrate that the blame game cuts both ways and it cuts deeper when deployed against the right. People could knock down every last statue in America and it wouldn't do as much deep and lasting harm to our nation as Trump has already done and nobody knows how much worse it will get or how far the right will enable the unfolding catastrophe that they chose.

apples and worms , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:07 am
"Huh. Iconoclasts on the left, and on the right we've got the people who want to tear down the entire political system and who are loudly applauding Trump because he "sticks it to the conventional Republicans and the Democrats." "

Thing is, Mr. grumpy realist, the Confederate statues didn't lie us into the Iraq War, bail out the Wall Street banksters, fail to stop millions of illegals from coming here, or outsource American jobs to Indians and Chinese.

If the Confederate statues had done those things you might have a point. But they just sat there as they always have, not doing too much of anything, really, mostly just looking grand or sorrowful or heroic or dignified or such like.

Unlike the political establishment, which has been painting a giant DayGlo target on its capacious and diseased hind quarters for a long time.

M_Young , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:08 am
In other Baltimore news, 9 shot on a Monday! http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-park-circle-shooting-20170821-story.html
Donald ( the left leaning one) , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:16 am
I oppose vandalism of statues. Full stop. If we are going to waste time on more culture war nonsense it should be conducted legally. But since everyone loves arguing about this crap -- The Wikipedia article on Serra seems fair and balanced, to coin a phrase. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jun%C3%ADpero_Serra

And it is tendentious in the extreme to say people oppose Serra because he erected missions, unless you explain why the critics think that was a bad thing. They think it was bad for a couple of reasons. First, they oppose the spread of Christianity by force. There was coercion involved and massiv cruelty. Serra seems to have fallen somewhere in the middle, endorsing some violence but opposing the more extreme versions of it.

Modern secular lefties also oppose the spread of Christianity because they see it as inherently wrong or oppressive for Westerners to try to convert native people. In practice it usually was coercive and monstrous in the way it was done and it is hard to separate the actual practice of missionary activity back then from the religion which inspired the coercion. As a Christian I think it is right to try to convert people, but if it is done via coercion than how is it any different from the more coercive versions of Islam?

This was nearly 300 years ago. Do we really have to have another culture war about religiously inspired conquest and violence that happened 300 years ago?

Q , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:29 am
Don't know if it's the nature of the moment or the nature of this blog, but it's almost always the whitey righty types that predict an imminent apocalypse, never those the occupy the space between the center and, say, BadReligion. The Paranoid Style, i'd say, unless they're all right.
"Sure, I'm paranoid but am I paranoid ENOUGH?"
Donald ( the left leaning one) , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:34 am
Rod -- " I agree that I'm in a squishy place, being against taking down monuments in principle, but also agreeing that it's very hard to defend them successfully as 'heritage not hate,' which is the point of Ryan Booth's that I was agreeing with. I must agree, though, that the iconoclastic post-Charlottesville reaction of the Left has hardened my opinion against taking down the statues."

Please don't go down that road. This happens to be one of those issues where there really is some reasonable middle ground that people of good will can occupy without necessarily being in complete agreement. For instance, you can make a good case for taking down Lee and leaving up Jefferson or you could leave Lee up but include plaques detailing his flaws or explaining the historical circumstances in which the statues were erected. There are other reasonable positions one could argue for on the merits.

But don't start down the path of saying that you want to side with one bunch of extremists because there is another bunch of extremists over there that won't like you no matter what you do. This is how we allow extremists dictate our politics. In the worst case scenario, it is how we have civil wars.

I don't usually use the word extremist in this derogatory way because on some issues one extreme is correct. But this isn't one of those issues. The extremists on both sides are wrong and we shouldn't let ourselves be manipulated by them.

fire sale , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:43 am
"He'll probably go after the lions at the entrance of the NYC Public library next.)"

Well, given that the NY Public Library lions symbolize the Lion of Judah, they will indeed have to go. They are an obvious, obnoxious allusion to the Jewish role in the trans-Atlantic slave trade and of course to Judah Benjamin, the Confederacy's slave-owning Jewish Secretary of State.

Hound of Ulster , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:55 am
By this formulation Rod, the tearing down of statues dedicated to the heroes of Communism in Eastern Europe and Russia was iconoclasm as well. I sense that it is iconoclasm of which you approve though

The Confedercy killed more Americans than any foreign enemy the Republic has ever faced, and yet public statues and monuments to this vile treason, most of which were raised nearly 50 years after the war ended to commerate the (temporary) triumph of the Confederate ideology of White Supremacy, are somehow different and more noble than statues of Dzhersinsky and Lenin? Who committed crimes of the same vulgar type as the Confederate leaders (why is Longstreet not marked by statue or Beauregard? It's because Longstreet fought to defend black rights after the war, and Beauregard was creole). Now, like Communists, some good people fought for the Confederacy for good reasons (home and family in the case of your Confederate ancestor, bread and freedom in the Russian revolution. Read about some of the brutality from the Whites in the Russian Civil War. It will make your skin crawl.) So let the common soldiers be commenrated, but tear down the statues of the traitors who led them. Just as they tore down the statues of Dzhrsinsky, Lenin, and Marx after 1991.

The difference between Nelson's Column and the statues of Lee et al, was that Nelson fought to save Britain from foreign conquest. Lee and co. fought to defend white supremacy and slavery. Just read what they wrote about it themselves. Anybody who can't see that is a dope.

Ben H , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:58 am
The taboo that was broken has less to do with not denouncing Nazis or political violence (things that were denounced), it's not doing it in the precise way demanded by the media. It's a denial that the media has the moral status that it claims to define the narrative and to elicit specific responses that support the narrative.

They don't get as mad when Trump subverts the narrative with a lie as when he does so with something that approaches the truth.

Anne , says: August 23, 2017 at 12:45 pm
Tearing down statues that symbolize what you don't believe in is usually a crime of vandalism punishable by law, so normally that takes care of that. But of course symbols make handy targets during disputes and rivalries, even though, to maintain the peace, the law has to hold.

Confederate statues are a separate matter, not because tearing them down unlawfully is OK !

You can still be prosecuted for vandalism if you do that -- but because their very existence threatens what we as a nation hold in common. Most were, in fact, put up as a symbol of dissent from our national creed, specifically the part that holds "all men are created equal." For most Americans, the Confederacy itself symbolizes that position of dissent, but the vast majority of these statues aren't mere leftovers from that bygone historical era;most were actually erected in the late 19th or early 20th century as symbols of the Jim Crow era when the Ku Klux Klan was at its peak and its basic philosophy of re-asserting white supremacy was riding high. Some others went up in the 1960s when they symbolized the South's opposition to the black civil rights movement. It's certainly easy for me to see why state legislatures and city councils are being asked to remove them now when white supremacists are rallying in public yet again.

Nicholas , says: August 23, 2017 at 1:03 pm
The Statues represent reconciliation. When one town can have a statue of a Union hero and another town can have a statue of a Confederate hero while still acknowledging that both towns are American, you have reconciliation.

That is what is being destroyed. The nation's wounds that took so long to bind are being ripped open.

I wonder how many Belfasts and Beruits we can endure, because it's coming.

KD , says: August 23, 2017 at 1:17 pm
Nothing good will come from removing monuments, anymore than anything good came from removing Mosques from Bosnia.

There is no line here. The Founders all owned slaves, the Constitution based on a division of powers and federalism was written by evil slave-owning white men to pursue their economic interests, and the Bill of Rights was written by Jefferson the slave owner. Everything is up for grabs.

The Left is turning into the Westboro Baptist Church, but targeting monuments not funerals (yet).

KD , says: August 23, 2017 at 1:19 pm
God hates Confederates and Antebellum American Presidents.
JonF , says: August 23, 2017 at 1:34 pm
Re: No, the progressive assault on Confederate statues is an assault on history, memory, and myth

History lives on in books, museums, and national monuments and parks of a historical sort. We are not assaulting any of those. And indeed where statues have been removed by the legal actions of civil magistrates the intent is to move them to sorts of places where history is explicitly remembered. So if this is "an assault on history" it's an utterly incompetent one.

As for myths, well, there are good myths and bad myths. No one, I hope, would suggest we keep alive the wicked old calumnies (myths in their own day) of Jews poisoning wells or sacrificing Christian children. The myth of white supremacy is of a similar sort, and it needs to be buried at a crossroads with a stake through its heart.
The Southern states meanwhile have a 400 year old history, reckoning from Jamestown (longer of course if we take Native Americans into account). There's much in that to celebrate. Why obsess about the least felicitous few years out of that history?

M_Young , says: August 23, 2017 at 1:54 pm
"why is Longstreet not marked by statue or Beauregard? " You know, Hound of Ulster, when you get your talking points from CNN you ought to independently check them. Here's a Longstreet memorial, Gainsville.(bad orientation) https://www.pinterest.com/pin/368028600772640099
Stay Put , says: August 23, 2017 at 2:16 pm
"God hates Confederates and Antebellum American Presidents."

He must hate intelligent Confederate statue smashers too, because he didn't create any.

ludo , says: August 23, 2017 at 2:50 pm
Historical iconoclasm is actually a wondrous thing, highly advanced, anticipating by millennia the universe of problems associated with present-day, technologically mediated, iconophilia, including the transcendent, generation-defining problem of Internet pornography and related dynamic image-induced mesmerizations, where the possessed image ends up gradually possessing the unguarded possessor and entrapping him/her in the "prison house" whose very walls are the projections of unguarded sight.

The phantasmata channeled by the fathomless 'mirror', volatilized and dynamized by an incomprehensible and untrustworthy demiurge, are anticipated by the hyper-real "demon-possessed" anthropomorphic statues of antiquity, not to mention the actually existing automata of that age: combining the dual extraneous potential (i.e. enchantments) of representation-enhancing technologies and the primitive, unreflective, libidinal human urge. As Plato wrote: "This entire allegory, I said, you may now append, dear Glaucon, to the previous argument; the prison-house is the world of sight, the light of the fire is the sun, and you will not misapprehend me if you interpret the journey upwards to be the ascent of the soul into the intellectual world according to my poor belief, which, at your desire, I have expressed whether rightly or wrongly God knows. But, whether true or false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and is seen only with an effort; and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this visible world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in the intellectual; and that this is the power upon which he who would act rationally, either in public or private life must have his eye fixed.

I agree, he said, as far as I am able to understand you. Moreover, I said, you must not wonder that those who attain to this beatific vision are unwilling to descend to human affairs; for their souls are ever hastening into the upper world where they desire to dwell; which desire of theirs is very natural, if our allegory may be trusted.

Yes, very natural.
And is there anything surprising in one who passes from divine contemplations to the evil state of man, misbehaving himself in a ridiculous manner; if, while his eyes are blinking and before he has become accustomed to the surrounding darkness, he is compelled to fight in courts of law, or in other places, about the images or the shadows of images of justice, and is endeavouring to meet the conceptions of those who have never yet seen absolute justice?

Anything but surprising, he replied.
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments of the eyes are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye; and he who remembers this when he sees any one whose vision is perplexed and weak, will not be too ready to laugh; he will first ask whether that soul of man has come out of the brighter light, and is unable to see because unaccustomed to the dark, or having turned from darkness to the day is dazzled by excess of light. And he will count the one happy in his condition and state of being, and he will pity the other; or, if he have a mind to laugh at the soul which comes from below into the light, there will be more reason in this than in the laugh which greets him who returns from above out of the light into the den."

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.8.vii.html

Mackayla , says: August 23, 2017 at 3:05 pm
"Huntington's book sounds helpful but the work that continues to be even more prescient is Christopher Lasch's "The Revolt of the Elites," describing a ruling class that has severed its ties to its own cultural order as well as to the less powerful and privileged members of it. The result is incomprehension of reaction they provoke and chaos. In the short run, this may increase their illusion of control and power but the long run spells doom and replacement by more cohesive cultures."

That's exactly the book I was thinking of in this post. He also talks about how when the "Managerial Elites" replaced the "Wasps" as the ruling class they replaced the sense of responsibility and Noblesse Oblige the Wasps had for the country w/ disregard, selfishness and greed by the managerial meritocracy. Gone is the manufacturing economy replaced by the ephemeral finance and information economy.

Waz , says: August 23, 2017 at 3:06 pm
"liberty, equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result), individualism, populism, limited government, and free-market economics. These ideas, Huntington said, came out of Protestant England and its reception of the Enlightenment"

Bull. Neither England, nor Enlightment. Voltaire and his "enlighted" ilk were sycophants of the absolute monarchies of the Prussian militarist Frederic II,forerunner of the modern totalitarian state and imperialist Catherine II, whom they idealized. Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth destroyed primarily by Prussia, resorting even to counterfeiting of the Polish currency, was the font of the values Huntington finds foundational, far ahead of England.

Statutes of Cienia enacted around the time of Magna Carta, and of essentially the same nature, were actually implemented whereas MC for a very long time remained a dead letter. Neminem Captivabimus preceded Habeas Corpus by 143 years. Citizens with full political rights were 5-6 times more numerous in Poland than in England of France.

Religious freedom was unparalleled, people flocked to Poland from all over the continent running from persecutions. It was known as the country without stakes. Free markets were on the par with England. Government was by far more limited in Poland than in any other country. No objective historian can claim that English freedoms could come close to that.

The English have been veritable the masters of Imperial propaganda down to the current cult of the Queen. Historical record of English tyranny, persecution and exploitation is glaring. It would serve Americans, especially conservatives, well, to be more discerning when it comes to their ideological heritage as formed by Protestant England. The Puritans running from English persecution were persecutors themselves. Poland and Venice are worthy of conservative reflection searching for inspiration.

Siarlys Jenkins , says: August 23, 2017 at 3:42 pm
The Statues represent reconciliation.

Unfortunately, they do not. They were mostly erected by "Redeemers" or later incarnations of triumphalist white supremacists (the real thing, not some unfortunate soul who gets tagged in a 21st century virtual replay), at a time when the northern and western elites didn't care any more, and anyone of African descent was being brutally disfranchised.

Many schools were REnamed for confederate generals as part of "massive resistance" to the final push against Jim Crow.

That is what those statues, by and large, represent. That is why a fair number of people want them to come down.

God hates Confederates and Antebellum American Presidents.

God has not given me any personal revelation on the subject, but from all the Christian education I've had, God is merciful to sinners and seeks to bring all into reconciliation with Him. He does, however, hate slavery and efforts to make war to perpetuate it. He may not have looked kindly on the annexation of Mexican territory either, but Santa Ana was no saint.

So let the common soldiers be commenrated, but tear down the statues of the traitors who led them.

That would be reasonable, but it may be a little late to do it right. We need more attention to novels like Cold Mountain, and of course to the Jones County Scouts.

Well, given that the NY Public Library lions symbolize the Lion of Judah, they will indeed have to go. They are an obvious, obnoxious allusion to the Jewish role in the trans-Atlantic slave trade and of course to Judah Benjamin, the Confederacy's slave-owning Jewish Secretary of State.

Explain that to all the black churches dedicated to the Lion of Judah, considered, rightly or wrongly, to be a reference to Jesus Christ. (Separately, I note that Lion of Judah was one of the titles of the kings of Ethiopia).

Daniel (not Larrison) , says: August 23, 2017 at 3:51 pm
M_Young @ 10:57 am:

I am well aware that the Sacred Declaration says "Savage" in reference to Indians.

Just because it's in a key founding document doesn't make it less offensive.

Nor does it mean we have to rip it up.

We don't have to accept or reject everything in a document (or anything, for that matter) to find value. A thing, or a person, can have overwhellming good, but also some ugly stains.

I think it would be the height of folly to reject the Declaration because it wasn't inerrant and also folly to dogmatically accept it all as unvarnished good merely because Jefferson wrote it.

It's like when the Constitutiin was read in toto in Congress a few years back. Some Republicans didn't want the (now defunct) parts about slaves read; others wanted it read, warts and all to do otherwise they would consider "whitewashing".

And no, none of them suggested burning the Constitution, or saying we must have slavery because the original Constitution provided for it.

JonF , says: August 23, 2017 at 4:31 pm
Re: There is no line here.

The line is public opinion. Large numbers of people are on board with ditching the Rebs and race baiters. Large numbers of people are not on board with dumping the Founders. The recent failure of the ACA repeal-and-replace effort should be an object lesson of how public opinion really can prevent unpopular public actions from occurring, even when pushed by powerful and wealthy people– and in this case only a fringe gang of radicals would be pushing for what you fear.

Re: The Founders all owned slaves

All of them? Every last signer of the Declaration* and Constitution? Every officer with rank or colonel or better in the Continental Army?
Please document this!

LLLurker , says: August 23, 2017 at 4:32 pm
"The Statues represent reconciliation. When one town can have a statue of a Union hero and another town can have a statue of a Confederate hero while still acknowledging that both towns are American, you have reconciliation."

Remarkable. It's as if reaching reconciliation requires pretending that neither town contains folks who are not white. Yes we are, in a sense, finally trying to begin to deal with reconciling some old history. News flash though, it ain't about blue and gray uniforms

J Riley , says: August 23, 2017 at 4:35 pm
Interesting interview with Andrew Young on NPR this morning ("Civil Rights Activist Argues to Keep Confederate Monuments"): "A minority cannot be provoking a racist majority that is still underemployed, undereducated, and dying faster than we are. The issue is life and death, not some stupid monument." http://www.npr.org/2017/08/23/545435024/civil-rights-activist-argues-to-keep-confederate-monuments
Ten Percenter , says: August 23, 2017 at 4:42 pm
A bit of an aside, but since ya'll are more knowledgeable than me Do you know if there are any statues in the South to white southerners who opposed slavery?
Craig , says: August 23, 2017 at 5:30 pm
Slavery is something like original sin, as it pertains to the founding of this country. It is a blot that stains all the good things that came out of the revolution. Clearly, the ideals that the Founders promoted were not practiced very well in the beginning. And for too long, their failure to live up to the ideals they espoused was white washed away (pun intended) by the way the white majority looked at history. Granted, the Founders were handicapped by growing up in a different world, one that was less enlightened on matters involving race and sex than the one we live in today. Progress does not happen as one instantaneous cultural step change, but rather as a more fitful series of stops and starts. Of course, that isn't adequate as an excuse for those who were on the receiving end of injustices.

Obviously, some people think that one of the outcomes of the Civil war, the freeing of slaves, which occurred at a rather high cost of lives and treasure, would have gone a long way to atoning for that original sin. But the follow through was clearly lacking, with racial resentments and overt discrimination lingering on until now. Despite our long history as a Christian nation, not enough of the mostly Christian and white majority was able to grasp that all men, not just white men, were presumably created in God's image.

So what shall we do about this?

Right now, those on the left seem to be indulging themselves emotionally by engaging in a frenzied purification of history, via the attack on historical personages and statues. In some ways, this strikes me as lazy, as it isn't clear that any of this will improve lives in struggling black communities, or solve the gang violence problems in Chicago, and other urban areas, or enable damaged young black men to have any kind of meaningful lives, regardless of who is to blame for the damage that they have suffered. In the same way, I don't see that white identity politics, the adoption by whites of the same aggrieved victim mentality, will help them advance in any meaningful way. Trump's promises to return things to the way they were are just tempting fantasies. There are no do overs in history. All sides need to check themselves and then focus on moving forward in the best way possible. That, unfortunately, seems to go against human nature. Vendetta is much more attractive in the short run.

grumpy realist , says: August 23, 2017 at 5:34 pm
I still can't get over it. Joan of Arc?!!!

Maybe we can make a decision based on artistic merit? I mean, a lot of these statues are mass-produced pieces of sentimental kitch that make me remember the excesses of oratory during the 1890s. Is it really all that terrible if we turn them into something else? Or should we just say: "if it's a statue of some guy on a horse and has moss on it, we'll leave it alone" and impose a statuary equivalent to the legal doctrine of laches?

Actually, I think getting to the point of being totally indifferent to the statues would be the most appropriate of all. After all, they are nothing more than huge hunks of metal that pigeons like to sit on.

Alex Brown , says: August 23, 2017 at 5:44 pm
Aaron C. I am 35 years old, and I believe the country will tear itself apart in my lifetime.

Trouble with separatist scenarios in the US is that they're basically unworkable, if you think at the practical level. Most people have multiple identities, and they will start resisting when purists like SJWs try to enforce their will. Besides, in the real-world identities are fluid, not fixed. Neo-Marxists are focusing on race because it's one of the most stable component of human identity. They already failed with class war, where workers decided that they have other identities. And in the real world, most people in the US may already be non-white by the old 1/16th rule, and their numbers are going up daily. As for the Left and Right divide, people are moving from one side to the next, sometimes several times in a lifetime. Should they be forced to move *physically* too, to reach an ideologically pure state? And how to even think about dividing the country economically? Militarily? It would be a complete disaster, worse than any Yugoslavia.

I think it is much, much more likely that we will remain a single country. But what is really scary is deterioration of the public discourse, the endless 'f . you!!' as a sole argument in the debates. The outbursts of physical violence. The pretense that there are *good* SOBs because they are on *our* side – looking at you, liberal media!

We may end up as, I hate to say, spiders in the can, destroying each other instead of improving our country. Think about it: where do we want to be in 30 or 50 years? There is a tremendous *potential* for science and technology for improving our lives, eliminating hard and tedious work, reducing human pain and suffering, cleaning the environment. But instead of looking forward and thinking how to improve, we're focused on zero-sum game of endless reopening of the old wounds.

Will we ever learn?

Noah172 , says: August 23, 2017 at 5:47 pm
JonF wrote:

Large numbers of people are on board with ditching the Rebs and race baiters

Recent surveys show that removing Confederate statues is a minority view.

and in this case only a fringe gang of radicals would be pushing for what you fear

You of all people should know that redefining marriage was once a fringe idea.

Law of Merited Impossibility, yet again.

Siarlys Jenkins , says: August 23, 2017 at 7:19 pm
Re: The Founders all owned slaves

John Adams is on record saying with pride "I have never owned a Negro or any other slave." McCullough's biography records that a young enslaved woman was once given to the family as a gift, but was promptly emancipated -- which is probably a better deal for her than refusing the gift and leaving her enslaved.

JRP , says: August 23, 2017 at 7:29 pm
If the sum total of all indicators within the context of group, racial identity and the possible demise of an anglo/protestant cultural heritage is true, then violent conflict looms on the horizon and possibly in the near foreseeable future. Yes, it will not be a fight for racial(i.e. white)supremacy but an at-all-costs battle to avoid extinction.
TR , says: August 23, 2017 at 7:53 pm
In Tampa, the Confederate monument now being challenged was erected c. 1912. Sure enough, someone checked the newspaper for that day and the dedication was by a white politician vowing that the South would never submit to being ruled by an "inferior" race.

Battle lost! So much for "reconciliation."

[Aug 24, 2017] Lee Camp I Witnessed the Charlottesville Terror Attack, Here's the Video

Notable quotes:
"... There seems to be an attempt by an elite cabal to destroy this country through division and vilification of the Founding Fathers. Shame!!! ..."
"... "The past is never dead. It's not even past." ..."
"... From this point of view ..."
"... All of the deaths and serious injuries were suffered by members of the leftist side and none by the white supremacists, even though they were much smaller in number. ..."
"... relative to this baseline ..."
"... But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security ..."
Aug 24, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

He also raises the question of what can we do to make a positive difference in our lives? And this may sound terribly mundane, but for those of you who have time and money for the fees: get emergency training. IMHO, everyone should know how do to the Heimlich maneuver, but I only know the idea of how to do it. Ditto with CPR, and that bothers me. If I had been at the scene with all the horrible injuries, the only principles I know are "Don't move the injured since they may have a spinal break and you could increase the damage to nerves" and "If they are bleeding, put pressure on the wound". But is that OK if all you have is not clean cloth? I assume yes if they are bleeding profusely, but still

I assume there must be what amounts to first responder training (as in what to do before the medics get there). If readers can indicate what this type of training is usually called and where to go to find it, please pipe up in comments.

Separately, I've kept out of the discussions of Charlottesville in comments. I'm perplexed and disappointed on the fetishization of statues by both sides in this debate. I'm not enough of an anthropologist to get to the bottom of it, but the desire of some Southerners to preserve and elevate figures like Robert E. Lee isn't just about the Civil War. It has to do with the fact that the South was late to industrialize and remained poor relative to the rest of the US and is not part of the power structure at the Federal level (to my knowledge, there are no tracks from Southern universities to important positions in the Acela corridor. That isn't to say that people from the South don't get there, but it's not a well-greased path). And of course, people from the rest of the country tend to forget that Southerners are regarded as hicks and regularly treated as such in movies and on TV (remember My Cousin Vinny, for one of many examples?). Having a Southern accent = minus 10 attributed IQ points outside the South, with the possible exception being Texans. I had a Virginia client who used the "Southerns aren't so sharp" prejudice brilliantly to their advantage in negotiations, but I am sure on another level the perception still bothered them.

Mind you, I'm not defending the Southern position. If I were to believe family lore, I have a Hungarian ancestor whose statue in Budapest was torn down by the Soviets. Do I care?

But my guess is that while for some Southerners, Civil War iconography is meant to intimidate blacks, for many others, the storied Civil War generals are the only local boys held up as having historical importance. LBJ and Jimmy Carter weren't seen as great presidents. There must be important Southern scientists and inventors, but oddly I can't think of any, which means they aren't generally depicted as such.

By contrast, it's easier to present the point of view of blacks and reformers: that losers in war pretty much never get to have memorials, so that on its face, having so many images touting loserdom is perverse, and not justified because it separately holds up aggressive defenders of slavery as role models.

And I know I've probably touched on too many disparate threads in this short post, but the other part about Charlottesville that has been mentioned, but cannot be said enough is that this was a huge policing fail, and the passivity was no accident. As Lambert and others have said, if you'd had black protestors show up similarly attired and armed, you can bet you'd have seen mass head-breaking and arrests. The Charlottesville police knew this was coming and appear not to have sought advice from police forces with lots of experience in crowd control (Washington DC and New York City), nor did they get reinforcements (state troopers). It's one thing if they had tried to cordon off or break up the two sides and lost control of the situation. But there's no evidence they attempted to intervene.

In addition to watching the Lee Camp video, I strongly urge you to read the article from The Root that goes with this photo (Lambert flagged it yesterday):

Perhaps most important, this fight over symbols is diverting energy from tackling the many areas where African Americans have been promised equal protection under the law but don't get it. Let's start with the War on Drugs, which Richard Nixon envisaged as a way to disenfranchise blacks. Consider this comment from Governing (hat tip UserFriendly):

[Richmond's] Mayor Levar Stoney, who has rejected the idea of removing statues, spoke to reporters Monday about the controversy after a groundbreaking ceremony for the American Civil War Museum. He said he wanted the city to acknowledge "the complete truth" about its history as the Confederate capital.

"At the end of the day, those statues are offensive to me, very offensive to me," said Stoney, who is black. "But you know what I'm going to focus my time on? Destroying vestiges of Jim Crow where they live in our city -- public housing, public education, you name it."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/eh8UUUMHAWY

JTMcPhee , August 16, 2017 at 3:35 am

Here's a significant Southern figure who has statues to honor him, a self-made scientist and inventor to whom today's kids and sandwich eaters owe so much: George Washington Carver. http://www.notablebiographies.com/Ca-Ch/Carver-George-Washington.html He was even a person of color, and born in Kansas, a violent battleground "border state" in the "time of Troubles."

Carver and Carter, the Peanut Twins

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 3:43 am

Thanks for that!

RickM , August 16, 2017 at 8:15 am

Yes, as a Southerner, I was hoping someone would mention Carver early on. But the larger point is valid. IIRC the first Southerner to win a Nobel Prize, Medicine/Physiology, was Earl Sutherland at Vanderbilt in about 1971.

There have been a few since, I think. The reasons are historical, well covered by C. Vann Woodward (Johns Hopkins and Yale) in his Origins of the New South. Regarding E.O. Wilson, who is mentioned below, yes, he is a great scientist who knows more about ants than any other human being. And being of a certain age and a biologist-in-preparation when Sociobiology was published in 1975, I was well aware of him from that beginning.

That book was a great synthetic triumph, until the last pages. Then came On Human Nature and the unfortunate collaboration with Lumsden.

Still, Yves' friend is correct about the anti-Southern "feelings" directed at Wilson. He was not alone. Even inconsequential scientists like yours truly felt it. I spent nearly 5 years at the best medical school in the United States in the late 1990s, a famous place in sight of Fort McHenry.

Because I was from the South, more than one New England Yankee assumed that I had a Klan hood in my closet, mostly because of how we do things "down there," the latter being a direct quote.

You get used to it, but having a president from the South like Clinton LLC doesn't help, much. As far as the statues go, my compatriots don't believe me when I tell them most of these monuments appeared starting in the late-19th century, during the flourishing of the "Moonlight and Magnolias" glorification of the "Lost Cause" that accompanied the hardening of Jim Crow.

Just a bunch of Bourbons jerking working class chains, but damn, it worked well. And continues to work with money largely from elsewhere.

John Wright , August 16, 2017 at 9:39 am

Probably in the 1980's I had the task of demonstrating some expensive electronic equipment at a Bell Labs facility in New Jersey.

The local sales engineer advised our visiting California group to be wary of Bell Labs people with southern accents as they were teased by the northern Bell-Labs people about their accents and education and the Southerners had reacted to this when dealing with outside visitors/vendors..

As I remember, the advice was to be aware that a Bell-Labs Southerner might start with some basic questions and progressively ask more and more difficult questions simply to back the visitor into a corner.

Strange advice to receive, considering that at this time, Bell-Labs was one of the top industrial research/development facilities in the world.

I did not observe this behavior at all, but still remember the caution.

Carolinian , August 16, 2017 at 9:57 am

Thanks to Yves for the thoughtful intro.

And I think southerners aren't obsessed with the Civil War the way they used to be. When I was a kid the local radio station would sign off with a lovely choral version of Dixie rather than the national anthem. If Gone With the Wind played downtown the line would be around the block. Numerous houses in my town have the columned portico meant to evoke the exterior set for Tara.

Now increasingly cosmopolitan cities are more likely to feature blocky post modern architecture and people are more into their smartphones than what happened at Chancellorsville.

Black and white children can be seen walking home together from school and my town has had a black mayor and the state currently a black (albeit Republican) senator. These days it could be the north that is clinging to the past.

As for scientists: Charles Townes, Nobel prize winner, inventor of the laser, fellow Carolinian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_H._Townes

nowhere , August 16, 2017 at 1:03 pm

I grew up in Columbia (a largely mixed demographic area – though often very sharply racially divided), and while it is true that much of the veneer has changed, it is the seething beneath that doesn't seem to have changed much since I left. This seems especially true once you get a few miles outside of those more cosmopolitan cities.

On kids playing together – it has been one of my strangest experiences to go from elementary school where everyone was friends and played together, regardless of race. And then, after 3 months of summer, moving to middle school and the racial hell that ensued. But, maybe things have changed for the better since when I lived there.

Another SC role model – Ronald McNair.

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 3:57 pm

I've seen a small data point supporting your theory of the Civil War being less important to most Southerners than it once was. When I first started visiting Alabama, every book store had a pretty significant section devoted to Civil War books. Even thought there aren't anywhere near as many bookstores these days, the few I've visited don't have proportionately as much space devoted to the Civil War, and some just have it as part of the History section.

clinical wasteman , August 22, 2017 at 5:01 pm

Thanks Rick, especially for the perfect concluding summation, but also from the first-hand account and historical contextualization of this persistent sort of niche bigotry. From another continent it was hard to guess how prevalent that phenomenon still might still be, although harder to imagine that it could have disappeared altogether. It constantly disgusts me when the same sort of thing is extended to Americans at large by anglo/European bigots insufferably assured that their tiny colonist cultures are "superior".

As a long-term/tedious polemicist against sociobiology -- mostly as casual normative framework today, but the academic origins do matter too (see: [ http://www.theharrier.net/essays/kriminalaffe-sultan-at-the-dole-office-written-with-matthew-hyland/ ]; (I'm the other one, not JB/The Harrier)) -- I'm aghast at the thought that any critic of E.O. Wilson would stoop to invoking his geographical/cultural background, especially when discussing the racist applications of the body of theory. Really, if they can't do better than that they're missing huge swathes of the obvious, mimicking the worst of their opponents and ultimately doing latter-day neo-socio-bio presumptions an unwarranted favour.

Also, complete agreement with you, Yves, about the way excessive concern with statues and symbols generally can skew everything. Not that those things are meaningless, but the whole present-day world also bears witness to the past in the form of raging injustice -- much but not all of it involving the malign invention of "race" -- everywhere. Nohow is this a "bipartisan"/"everyone calm down"-type statement: I side unequivocally with the "grassroots" BLM, the direct-action anti-fascists and especially the IWW members, and would be delighted never to see one of those monuments (or its anglo/Euro equivalents) again, but if it had to be one or the other, I'd rather the statues were left standing while Lee, Sir Arthur 'Bomber' Harris, Christopher Columbus and friends were made to spin in their graves by the abolition of racist "criminal justice", housing and immigration policy and racialized top-down class warfare/imperial admin in general, if the alternative is just to take the statues down while leaving the policies in place and the Generals smirking in hell.

Charley , August 16, 2017 at 9:30 am

Kary Mullis went to the high school a few blocks from my home.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kary_Mullis

dcsos , August 16, 2017 at 4:02 am

What about an alternative method to these history rewrites. Every time A legislative body decides to remove one of these ancient tributes–instead of removing the offensive statue–the erection of a new and at least equal in size monument that points out the failure of the earlier tribute.

That is, the new monument would be larger, more noticeable, and will be to point out the error of the earlier structure. In this way history is preserved–and a much more educational site is created – pointing out the reasons for the new interpretation of the site. Thus a site without a physical monument, for example, would be treated in the following manner. Jefferson Davis Boulevard would become Former Jefferson Davis Bvd, or Ex-Jefferson Boulvard or such. What do you think?

Lee , August 16, 2017 at 6:54 am

Add adjacent statues of John Brown, Nat Turner, Sally Hemmings, southerners who fought for the union etc.

JTMcPhee , August 16, 2017 at 9:13 am

And add effigies of J. Edgar Hoover (let us debate whether he should appear "dressed" or not), and Strom Thurmond, and Jesse Helms, and Al Sharpton, etc. to improve the contextual mapping

Synoia , August 16, 2017 at 12:27 pm

Jesse Helms.

Ah that brigs back a memory. I lived in Raleigh, NC when Jessie was in the Senate, and my children went to a local Episcopal School.

The head of the Schools was Jessie Helms' daughter, and I was asked, and an outside of my opinion in from of his daughter. My response is "He is very interesting," was acceptable.

Advice I was given when moving to the south was "Never say anything bad about one Southerner to another. They are all related."

The animus then, and possibly now, was strong, so much so that my view was "War of Independence, forgotten. Civil war, not at tall."

I was also told, by another Southern lady, that the difference between English Table Manners and the US', was devised because the ladies never wanted to entertain the English in the homes again after the War of Independence.

I'd also point out there is a significant difference between Spanish and English table manners. In some cases under the English rules you can eat with your fingers (chicken on the bone or unpeeled fruit, for example)t. Under the Spanish none I know of, its knives and forks for everything.

cocomaan , August 16, 2017 at 9:36 am

There seemed to be a consensus a few years ago after that kid shot up the black church that confederate flags would not be sold and that any debate about it was over. Looks like that didn't take.

Point being that one part of the nation can't make another part of the nation erect certain statues or not carry certain colored pieces of cloth.

I've always been a bit of an iconoclast, but maybe we should get out of symbolic thinking and communication through pieces of political artwork and try communicating directly instead. Battling over art and architecture seems wrongheaded. The fundamental message here should be "What are the ideas we are debating?" not "These people over here are animals, what should we do about it?"

But as Yves said, this event really went down because of a failure of the local police. It was amateur hour over there.

And shame on the media for making this event into some kind of referendum on America. How many people died in Chicago over the weekend? Baltimore? Nationwide? How is that any different or less political in nature?

andyb , August 16, 2017 at 1:24 pm

The problem is that the statues and flags represent a part of American history, whether good or bad. I find it reprehensible that history must be rewritten, and the lessons learned discarded. What's next? Book burning, the destruction of Monticello or the Jefferson Monument? There seems to be an attempt by an elite cabal to destroy this country through division and vilification of the Founding Fathers. Shame!!!

anonymouse , August 16, 2017 at 9:14 pm

I liked this response on Twitter:

THERE ARE NO MONUMENTS TO HITLER IN GERMANY, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S PART OF THEIR HISTORY. THERE ARE MEMORIALS FOR VICTIMS. THIS IS NOT HARD.

Fiery Hunt , August 17, 2017 at 12:51 am

Hitler was the leader of, and policy director, of a genocidal government. Southern Civil War generals were not. They were leaders of armies, of men not policy makers of slavery.

Subtle, I know. But DIFFERENT.

Elizabeth Burton , August 17, 2017 at 6:46 pm

And the policy they were leading those men to fight for was the "peculiar institution." Forget Hitler. Are there statues of, say, Rommel in Germany? Yet he, too, a leader of an army.

It's doubly ironic that all this furor over removal of statues of R. E. Lee, which seem to be the ones the media likes to focus on, likely because Lee is the only Southern general that bulk of the under-educated population can recognize, never mentions what the man himself said about commemorating the war:

"I think it wiser not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered." -- Robert E. Lee

PlutoniumKun , August 16, 2017 at 4:17 am

E.O. Wilson is one of the greatest scientists alive, he's from Alabama and Duke University.

Incidentally, I'd be wary of teaching anyone without a medical background the Heimlich Manoeuvre – it may work in some situations, but there have been severe criticisms of its use – Hemlich himself seems to have been better at self promotion than medicine.

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 6:50 am

What is really funny is that he was teaching the intro biology course at Harvard when I was there. I didn't take it but one of my good friends did.

She said that she was a hick from California (actually she'd gone to a very good school) but the point was she didn't know that Stephen Jay Gould was the "hot" professor at the time, and that Wilson's "Sociobiology" view was considered to be retrograde, as unduly deterministic. So she got into Wilson's course when most people were pulling strings to make sure they got Gould, not him.

I saw her recently and asked about the Wilson course. She volunteered that another reason she thought he got a bad rap at Harvard was that he was Southern.

PlutoniumKun , August 16, 2017 at 8:47 am

I'm deeply envious of anyone having the chance to attend classes from either Wilson or Gould. Both have their detractors (to put it mildly), but the are/were both wonderful writers, I think I've read pretty much everything both of them have written.

The 'Darwin Wars' between the determinists and the Gouldites was my introduction to just how deep epistemological divisions can be in science, even between those who essentially agree on 99% of the data. Wilson, despite his association with Sociobiology, seems to have kept a wary distance from the Dawkins disciples, quite wisely IMO.

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 3:58 pm

I have the impression she very much liked the Wilson class. Had I been at all clued in, I would have taken that class, but I oddly wasn't into star professors.

clinical wasteman , August 22, 2017 at 5:06 pm

We may actually be talking about different E.O. Wilsons then -- entirely my mistake, and nothing to do with 'greatness' or otherwise, but surely the one who invented sociobiology, or at least coined the term, isn't still alive? Quite possibly another mistake on my part there though.

Vatch , August 22, 2017 at 5:30 pm

E.O. Wilson, entomologist, author of "Sociobiology", "Biophilia", and co-author of "The Theory of Island Biogeography", was born in 1929 and is still alive.

PlutoniumKun , August 16, 2017 at 4:27 am

Its just past the 50th Anniversary here in Ireland of one of the most spectacular examples of removing old outdated symbols, the blowing up of Nelsons Column in Dublin. Despite its origin as an overtly Unionist attempt to mark the Battle of the Nile, it was popular with Dubliners because you could climb to the top for a good view.

In Ireland numerous monuments to Imperialism were removed over the years – some by public authorities, some by way of gelignite planted at night. But most people still accept the remains as part of history – there are still numerous 'Victoria Roads' around Ireland, plenty of old post boxes with crowns on them, as well as huge monuments to the the likes of the Duke of Wellington (who was Irish, although as O'Connell put it, 'just because you are born in a stable doesn't make you a horse'.) Hardly anyone notices that the beautiful arch in Stephens Green is a detailed monument to the Boer Wars and all that entailed.

I think monuments that give active offence should be removed, but in most cases its better to accept that time changes and alters the meaning of all public symbols. Eventually, some sort of equilibrium comes about and people accept with a shrug.

JTMcPhee , August 16, 2017 at 7:21 am

Not all people, including quite a few Irish– but of course they nurse their grievances better than they nurse their drink albeit with a lot of good historical basis, and with current hope of getting their own back, or at least some revenge. For some reason(s), some subset of every polity just won't let bygones be bygone

Enquiring Mind , August 16, 2017 at 10:35 am

Faulkner had much to say about the past. Will the Charlottesville events spark some resurgence on interest in his works? His quote "The past is never dead. It's not even past." from Requiem for a Nun seems to be at once forgotten or disavowed by many in this modern world.

Synoia , August 20, 2017 at 11:31 pm

When I went to South Africa, I was in a community of young ex-pats, from may parts of Great Britain and its far flung parts.

One person was from Belfast, and one night after a few beers, and his round was next, he looked at me and rattled off a series of "efforts" the English had tried in Ireland, most of them bloody.

And accused in a strong Irish accent "You English!" Not wishing for a fight, especially before his round I considered his litany on English misdeeds, and said "You're right!" He looked utterly surprised, probably because he excreted a denial, and I wanted no fight, and it was his round.

The I added, "and I personally did none of them." Which after a thought he considered accurate, and bought his round.

We were friends for years, but time and distance have severed that bond.

Wade Riddick , August 16, 2017 at 4:38 am

The South captured and dominated the federal government for much of the antebellum period thanks to special gimmicks like the 3/5ths rule. In many ways, Southern interests directed federal power to advance their economy. The flood of free-thinking Germans and the election of Lincoln shocked the South, leading to panic and, ultimately, a bitter resentment in defeat. In this sense, the 1970's Southern strategy of harping on deficits while promoting tax cuts was just part of a long counterattack against federal power. The entire Republican policy edifice for a generation has been built around a segregationist backlash and you're watching it all unravel – Obamacare, tax cuts, deficit-hawkery – even the war on pot. Even Republican Secretaries of State have refused to cooperation with the voter suppression commission. It's not a coincidence they can't get anything passed and impotent rage erupts in the street.

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 7:00 am

I think you need to read up on the origins of the groups that worked to move the county to the right. It was a very well funded, loosely coordinated corporate effort. The core group came out of the John Birch Society, which is based in Belmont, Mass and had people like William J. Buckley of Yale as prominent members. The Adolph Coors family out of Colorado were also big players. Fred Koch, the father of the Koch Brothers, was a founding member of the John Birch Society and a big early funder. The University of Chicago, and in particular Milton Friedman, played a huge role in promoting neoliberal ideology.

As we flagged in a post yesterday, the reason the country moved to the right wasn't due just to the Republicans. There were plenty of Democrats who were on board, starting in the 1970s.

And although I don't have data to support it, my perception is that Southerners have long been underrepresented in high profile Administration positions, like Cabinet members and as Supreme Court justices. I'd be curious as to whether any lawyers have a sense as to their participation levels on the Federal bench.

skippy , August 16, 2017 at 8:07 am

FEE

PH , August 16, 2017 at 9:02 am

Southern committee chairmen dominated Congress for decades last century. Of course, not sure many people remember.

I do not think that Southern sense of victimhood is particularly special. More another example of a more general phenomena, often seen in many times and places.

People are driven quite often by a sense of dignity or no dignity ( humiliation/rage). That is the emotional force behind many different sorts of notions of glory.

I find it ironic that you are arguing the "identity" angle here, while I feel little sympathy for it. During election discussions, I argued the emotional angles, and I felt that you focused more on objective conditions. Today, I feel your approach was better.

Anyway, in the end it is about finding a way forward that is fair to everyone. As you would probably agree, we have not seen much leadership from any group in that direction.

Vatch , August 16, 2017 at 10:20 am

Southern committee chairmen dominated Congress for decades last century

Quite true. The Congressional seniority system worked very well for the "Solid South".

Wade Riddick , August 16, 2017 at 9:34 am

You're talking about the party funders – largely mining, fossil fuels, agribusiness and banking/insurance/real estate (mostly interests dominant in the South). I'm talking about the voters. They had real anger at the federal government over desegregation in the '70s and the oligarchs channeled that into a deregulatory agenda which is now falling apart. Witness Trump's pandering to regulate drug prices. He may be pushing deregulation but many popular parts of his agenda were reregulatory in some aspect – like giving everybody great health insurance – and he's reneging on them. In this sense, he's what Skowronek would call a Jimmy Carter – a bridge figure in a disintegrating political order.

Second, the South maintained immense influence throughout the New Deal era and deep into the '90s thanks to Democratic Party dominance in the region, seniority and the congressional committee system. No other region could match the clout of the John Stennises or Earl Longs. Of course, with the South flipping and the committee structure rearranged around fundraising instead of seniority, all that changed.

But I look at the current Republicans in Congress and I recognize all the major leadership positions as belonging to the segregationists, regardless of their geographic origin. They nurse deep racial grievances. They speak Dixiecrat, sputtering about state sovereignty, states rights and nullification (quite shrilly during the Obamacare debate). They block black voting. They gerrymander. They race-bait (birtherism/Dred Scott-ism). They attack programs if black people get it too (Obamacare). They like privatized police, prisons (slave labor) and civil forfeiture. They love those gun rights (regulators/slave catchers). They all want to pass laws legalizing private discrimination – which was a pet cause of the defeated segregationists at the tale end of the '60s. This agenda's contradictions are going down in flames.

I would also remind you that the Nuremberg laws were inspired by Southern anti-miscegenation legislation. Nazis came to Southern law schools to study them (though they weren't limited to the South). Fascism is the idea that private business should own and operate the government for private profit. That's where the party funders and the street racists come together.

Though the formal racist state institutions and ideology were never limited to the South, they did reach their fullest, most overt expression here. You're talking about a group that has supported the Articles of Confederation for going on two centuries after they fell apart. It's what the Koch brothers hope to bring back by negating congressional commerce regulation with a constitutional amendment.

Consider what props this up and you'll understand why their coalition is coming apart at the seems. New energy sources are slowly eviscerating the petrodollar complex and the money it pours into politics.

Yves Smith Post author , August 17, 2017 at 4:39 am

No, I've studied this in depth and you haven't. I have an entire chapter in ECONNED on this, with extensive footnotes, from contemporaneous sources. All you have is your opinion and on this it is incorrect.

The "free market" messaging was all about corporate and business interests. It had nothing to do with narrowcasting on identity politics issues. That came later with the rise of Karl Rove as a Republican party strategist.

And I'm sorry, Susan Collins just blocked Obamacare repeal and she's not a racist. I don't like sweeping inaccurate generalizations. We care about accuracy of information and argumentation. We make that explicit in our written site Policies. If you are not prepared to comment in line with our Policies, your comments will not be approved.

Mrs Smith , August 16, 2017 at 4:39 am

As someone who used to be a group fitness instructor, I had to take both CPR (adult and child) and First Aid training to retain my ability to teach. Both are generally available in the US with the Red Cross (and others), and once you are certified, you can renew the certificates every 1 or 2 years with a quick multiple choice test and demonstration of CPR and AED techniques on the test dummy.

CPR standard practices have changed over the years, so it is important to keep up the certifications if you want to be genuinely prepared to assist. The First Aid cert is mostly common sense, but some of it seems counter-intuitive, until you know why it's done that way. The most important thing to know is to make sure someone calls for EMTs/Ambulance if there's any doubt about the severity of the injury/illness/unconsciousness of a victim. Don't wait.

Also: I LOVE George Washington Carver. I did my first stand-up school presentation on his amazing work with peanuts when I was in elementary school, and I've never forgotten what an impressive person he was.

a different chris , August 16, 2017 at 9:04 am

>The most important thing to know is to make sure someone calls for EMTs/Ambulance if there's any doubt about the severity of the injury/illness/unconsciousness of a victim. Don't wait.

Of course here in America you've probably kicked off a series of bills just starting at $800 for said ambulance making the victim feel like a victim twice over.

UserFriendly , August 16, 2017 at 4:27 pm

As someone who teaches CPR/AED first aid, O2 administration, and lifeguarding for red cross, yes call them as soon as there is anything serious. If the person is conscious they can refuse care and not pay anything.

As basic first response; care for severe bleeding by applying constant pressure with gauze (any cloth will do).

If someone is unconscious check for a pulse and breathing, if they have either they don't need CPR. If they do need cpr two hands interlocking at the center of the chest push straight down, hard, and fast (you might break ribs) to the beat of Another One Bites the Dust or Stayin Alive . Just keep going with that till EMS comes.

That is basic community level training. 1. level up and I'd teach more about giving rescue breaths but that should do in most cases.

HotFlash , August 16, 2017 at 9:38 pm

I live in Canada, that horrible bastion of socialized medicine, and if you have to call 911 for an ambulance here, you will never, ever see a bill. No-one will. B/c there isn't one.

Note to USA: socialized medicine, you can do this!

Conrad , August 16, 2017 at 9:40 pm

I view my limited First Aid Training as hopefully making me slightly less likely to be totally useless in an emergency situation. I think I'm less likely to just freeze or flap my arms in panic when confronted by a serious injury than I was before training.

russell1200 , August 16, 2017 at 5:48 am

The mainstream Republican have gotten the racist tag thrown at them so much that it doesn't seem to carry much weight anymore. That this is giving truly virulent racist groups a pass is a huge problem. Calling everyone a Nazi seems to be working in an unintended fashion.

The Social Darwinian ideology is a very powerful one, and a natural one for the groups vilified by identity politics to make. You are empowered because you were mean and took things from other people, your empowered because you are the sociological group that acts and thinks the right (Western) way. Your dominance is justified.

Of course given that same dominance, I can sympathize with folks who choose to push back physically against the storm troopers. But as it stands today, both sides start dressing themselves up in passive victimhood rather than as fallen warriors. Horst Wessel would be turning in his grave.

JBird , August 17, 2017 at 12:38 am

"Social Darwin Ideology"

It seems to me that the ideas of a meritocracy and racism, rather than the circumstances they put in, to explain why some groups/individuals do great and others do not are very similar. Yet, somehow the neoliberal democrats use the former for poor people especially whites and the republicans use the latter for poor blacks. Although in the past few years they have been blending the ideas together into a modern version of Social Darwinism.

TheCatSaid , August 16, 2017 at 6:08 am

See also the Fabius Maximus article about this incident here .
He addresses the propaganda elements and other aspects not addressed here.

Livius Drusus , August 16, 2017 at 7:33 am

That was a good piece, thank you. I think the author hit on the main issue which is that people now make up their owns facts and often live in their own ideological worlds. It started with talk radio and cable news but the Internet has made the situation much worse.

How would the Civil Rights movement get ahead in today's climate? Would the murders of Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner be declared false flag attacks orchestrated by George Soros and the Deep State? How about the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing, would that also be a false flag attack?

It is not just the Right that engages in this sort of thinking but some people on the Left too. How can you successfully promote reform when you cannot even get people to agree on basic facts or to engage in rational debate? Perhaps the most dangerous outcome of this state of affairs will be that the political and business elites will decide that the population is too feral for democratic, constitutional governance and decide to increase the assault on civil liberties. Many Americans, frightened by more incidents like Charlottesville, will agree to go along with such a project.

kurtismayfield , August 16, 2017 at 8:23 am

Plus Livius, there is an incredible lack of trust in this country. I don't trust many public figures nor do I trust that certain public servants will do the right thing. In an emergency I do think that strangers will help a person in need, but if it isn't considered an emergency good luck (see opiid crisis, the reactions of many that I thought to be decent human beings has been ghastly).

Jonny Canuck , August 16, 2017 at 11:56 am

I agree. I think the Internet has altered news for the worse. Real factual news is hard work and expensive to produce. Opinion on the other hand is cheap and plentiful. And the more outrageous the opinion, the more clicks. So now opinion is the news.

Politics has gone the same route. I worry about societal problems like opioid addiction, a rise in alcoholism, and affordable healthcare. Dealing with these issues would require hard work and hard choices. It is a lot easier to shout and insult. So now insults have displaced policy.

I see no answer.

Art Eclectic , August 16, 2017 at 12:39 pm

There is no rational debate possible with people who believe that one human being enslaving another is a right and just thing. There is also no rational debate possible with people who believe in any form of racial superiority.

Tribalism is one thing, belief in racial superiority leads to dehumanization of others and that ends in genocide, slavery, and host of other vile behaviors that decent people have moved beyond. My support for free speech ends at dehumanizing others.

witters , August 16, 2017 at 6:41 pm

"There is no rational debate possible with people who believe that one human being enslaving another is a right and just thing. "

Here's the 13th Amendment: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted , shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

So there's no rational debate with anyone who swears alllegiance to the US Constitution; and, it follows, no possibility of rational debate between such adherents.

Seems about right.

Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 8:57 pm

Boy, you are really really reaching to claim that the point of the 13th Amendment you quoted was to permit slavery. Think what one may about the punitive nature of our criminal justice system (a completely different topic), this language was explicitly aimed at permitting that system to continue. Not chattel slavery.

sierra7 , August 16, 2017 at 11:05 pm

How much authoritarianism will middle Americans tolerate for a continuance of their materialistic lives????

jrs , August 21, 2017 at 10:32 am

Well most of them go to work in highly authoritarian cultures called corporations so they actually tolerate a great deal of authoritarianism for that paycheck.

But regardless their materialistic lives are merely their lives, or at any rate the number of people that can actually share in much materialism is ever shrinking (yea I know they have smart phones or some such horror but by and large). While rampant materialism may have been at least a temptation to many baby boomers at one time, wages just haven't kept up. But with no carrot there are always sticks, if not one's physical life or anything, everything else one needs (needs not wants).

Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 9:02 am

The Catsaid,

Thanks for the pointer to my article! Note that it is intended at as first cut look at what happened, putting together the news stories of the first 24 hours to forms a coherent picture of the event.

It got 10,000+ hits in the first day, which is a lot for us – without any mention in a major website (the usual way a post goes viral). I assume that results from people who want to know what happened, and are dissatisfied with the major media's coverage -- which has been, imo, high school journalism level.

Two aspects are covered. First, the amazing -- even delusional -- statements by civilian and police officials about the policing of the event. Let's hope we get some accountability for the incompetent policing (e.g., not taking standard simple measures).

Second, how each side lies. "OUR side were innocent angels attacked by THOSE devils." That such nonsense is taken seriously by the tribes of Left and Right is very Weimar. Large numbers on both sides came armed and eager to fight, and they did fight.

The post linked to by Yves in The Root is typical. These are lies. Doesn't that bother you?

Reform of America is impossible so long as we prefer lies to truth.

Vatch , August 16, 2017 at 10:38 am

The post linked to by Yves in The Root is typical. These are lies.

Could you please identify the specific lies?

Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 4:03 pm

Vatch,

Good request! How is The Root article an example of "how each side lies. "OUR side were innocent angels attacked by THOSE devils.'" The article is exactly about that theme: good vs. evil, innocent vs. aggressors. Let's rewind the opening vignette:

"At first it was peaceful protest," Long said softly as he spoke. "Until someone pointed a gun at my head. Then the same person pointed it at my foot and shot the ground." Long said the only weapon he had was a can of spray paint that a white supremacist threw at him earlier, so he took a lighter to the spray paint and turned it into a flame thrower. And a photographer snapped the photo.

But inside every photograph is an untold story. If you look closely at Long's picture, there's an elderly white man standing in between Long and his friend. The unknown man was part of the counterprotests, too, but was afraid, and Long and his friends were trying to protect him. Even though, Long says, those who were paid to protect the residents of Charlottesville were doing just the opposite. "The cops were protecting the Nazis, instead of the people who live in the city," Long said. "The cops basically just stood in their line and looked at the chaos. The cops were not protecting the people of Charlottesville. They were protecting the outsiders."

This makes two assertions. First, that the alt-Right were the aggressors, the Left the victims. Videos and eyewitness accounts show otherwise. They show two sides, elements on both of which show up armed to fight, and do fight. See this in yesterday's LAT .

Second, it says that the police preferentially sided with the alt-Right. Not only is there no evidence of that, the alt-right believe the police deliberately flushed them out of their safe space in the park into the left's mob. See Rob Sterling's detailed account .

That does appear to be roughly what happened. The police cancelled the permit and forced the alt-right protesters out of the park. That decision led the the widespread fighting because the police had also not set up the standard transit routes for each group to their designated protest area -- along streets both patrolled and blocked off from vehicular traffic.

Now we can only guess at why the police did this. Panic, or incompetence, or a confused chain of command with so many officials present? Only after intensive analysis of the witnesses testimony and the videos (esp the Guard's video from the rooftop) can we say more.

Outis Philalithopoulos , August 16, 2017 at 5:29 pm

E. of the F. M. w. s., I feel like you can make a straightforward case that the Root article presents a picture of how one side was "innocent" and was attacked by bad "others." That isn't the same as saying that the first person testimony it provides is "lies." You can argue that an overall narrative is misleading and partial, and that a particular first person account plays into that misleading or partial narrative. But moving from this to calling the account itself a lie is also an oversimplified narrative, of the sort that you often zero in on for criticism. So I would suggest – given in particular that you set as your objective to try to avoid slipping into mass-produced narratives that are imperfectly grounded in evidence but easily propagated – that you choose your characterizations with a little more precision.

It's extremely common for eyewitness testimony to reflect a narrative that one side was the good guys and the others attacked them without provocation. This is true – on both sides – even when subsequent evidence shows substantial asymmetry in how tensions flared. It doesn't make those individual accounts baseless, or consciously lying (although of course out and out lying does sometimes occur in eyewitness accounts). It does mean that it can be quite difficult, in particular cases, to evaluate and synthesize eyewitness testimony into a big picture account that is fair and accurate.

Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 5:56 pm

Outis,

(A) "That isn't the same as saying that the first person testimony it provides is "lies."

That's a valid point of wordsmithing. It would be a powerful rebuttal if

(1) I could point to no material factual error. But there is little or no evidence for the Root's claim about police aiding the Right.

(2) I just said it was "a lie" and did not explain in what sense I meant that -- leaving ambiguity in my description. But my sentence was explicit in its description:

Second, how each side lies. "OUR side were innocent angels attacked by THOSE devils." That such nonsense is taken seriously by

(B) "It's extremely common for eyewitness testimony to reflect a narrative "

It's common for people to throw down hot butts and start forest fires. But it's a bad thing. DItto for writing a one-sided article that throws kerosene on a burning conflict.

(C) "It doesn't make those individual accounts baseless, or consciously lying"

Here we have different perspectives. I understand what you are saying, and have no basis to say you are wrong. But I see the situation differently.
* I believe the Founders were right about factionalism as one of the great dangers to the Republic.
* I believe these Weimerica-like street battles between extremists, cheered by masses on Left and Right, make us weak. They make rule by the 1% stronger.
* I believe our love for propaganda makes us weak.

(D) " It does mean that it can be quite difficult, in particular cases, to evaluate and synthesize eyewitness testimony into a big picture account that is fair and accurate."

That is exactly the basis of my dislike for the Root article. It does not even try for accuracy, just tribal cheering. It is just propaganda.

Outis Philalithopoulos , August 16, 2017 at 6:34 pm

Editor of the F. M. w. s.,

On (1), I think my explanation on this point still holds. The Root itself (i.e. the article when it is not quoting Long) does not say the police was aiding the "Unite the Right" people – only Long does. It's true that Long's statement, if propagated without context, would spread the idea that the police was literally intervening on behalf of the white nationalists. I argued in one of my responses to your comments that this is clearly not what Long meant. Long actually states clearly that the police did not get involved. However, Long believed the police should have intervened against the white nationalists, and in fact should not have even allowed them to march. From this point of view , he says that the police "were protecting the Nazis."

This is the sort of way of talking that is very easy to imagine in a participant or a bystander. For example, imagine if someone were mugged in broad daylight right in front of the police. Since in this case, we all expect the police to intervene on behalf of the victims, we might say the police were "obviously protecting the muggers." That doesn't mean the police were actually helping to beat anyone up, and it's an imprecise form of speech. But it's an understandable one.

(2) I'm willing to grant that you didn't say in what sense it was a lie and have since clarified the matter. By a strict standard of the sort we mentioned above, what you said was potentially misleading (i.e. it was easy to interpret it in another way). The same might be said of Long's statement about the police protecting the Nazis. In neither case is it impossible to understand, just a reason to try to be more careful.

(B) True, it would be better if eyewitnesses could strive to be very precise in how they report what they see. In practice, eyewitnesses come from all walks of life and involve all sorts of people. We are better off banking on their accounts being partial for the foreseeable future. I think the onus for completeness and fairness is considerably greater on journalists, analysts, and others whose putative role is to provide reliable summaries.

(C) I don't disagree with any of this, except that for "factionalism" I would say "tribalism" – but maybe we mostly mean the same thing.

(D) I think it's fair to criticize news outlets that only provide eyewitness testimony that fits with one particular frame. It doesn't mean that an outlet should never publish an article centered around one person's account – but if it does, it should presumably balance it elsewhere with other information giving a more complete picture.

(E) [not from your reply, but I was curious] As Yves says, the news has mentioned several cases of serious injuries suffered by counterprotesters (not to mention the deaths), and if there were serious injuries suffered by the "Unite the Right" side, I at least haven't run into any reliable accounts of such. Do you know of any?

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 3:31 pm

It passed fact checking by the New Yorker, which reported basically the same information. And you would have had to have sources who saw that incident, which seems awfully unlikely given how few there were in that photo (as in it seems to have taken place away from the main crowds).

The other part is I disagree with the equivalence. The antifa types (and this occurred with the Black Bloc in Occupy) weren't "our side" in that most of the people who came who were against the white supremacist types aren't pro violence. By contrast, it appears that the smaller group of "Unite the Right" types were heavily armed and they consciously and deliberately used symbols of violence against black people and minorities from the very outset.

So it would be possible for people in the anti-bigotry group to have marched and not seen what the anitfa types were up to, while I don't think you can credibly say anyone on the white supremacist side didn't see all of the intimidating weaponry and violent encounters.

TheCatSaid , August 16, 2017 at 3:59 pm

"It passed fact checking by the New Yorker" is indeed tempting, isn't it?!
However in addition to Fabius Maximus I've come across additional reports with first-person accounts describing how both sides came prepared to do battle. At this point I'm of the opinion that there was not one "bad side" and other "poor victim" side. I have come across lots of info linking the Neo-Nazi side having connections to the Ukranian "revolutionaries" (funded by CIA among others, thank you very much) and of left-side groups having links to Soros-funded groups. It looks like the whole situation was a confrontation that was set up. I'm not suggesting all participants were part of this, but nonetheless there is enough evidence strewn around that at the minimum one should think twice before accepting any major media spin on the event.

Jason Goodman and Crowdsource the Truth on YouTube had lots of videos documenting the neo-Nazi links to Ukrainian groups ("Blood and Soil"), flags in evidence, starting the night before the "big event". IIRC Lee Stranahan had info documenting the links to Soros-controlled organizations.

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 4:30 pm

I disagree with your contention:

1. That violent antifa types were representative of most of the marchers on the left side. You are implying that both sides were raring for a fight. The white supremacists were. Only a minority of the marchers on the left were, and I further question how many would have approved of their tactics. I know from Occupy that pretty much everyone were not at all happy about Black Bloc tactics and regarded them as anarchist interlopers trying to take advantage of Occupy without having the consent of Occupy (Occupy was big on super-democratic processes). Black Lives Matter has consistently rejected violent tactics. I know Lee Camp would reject the antifa types as being part of "our side" or representing his values.

More generally, left-wing protests, particularly anti-globalization protests, have agitators show up who had nothing to do with the organizers of the protest. They are plants to make the protestors look bad. Here, I am sure the antifa types were genuinely motivated. But the bigger point is peaceful leftist marchers often have a violent minority show up that does not represent the approach of the majority. Hence it is not correct at all to say that they are representative of that side.

2. #1 above means it is possible for eyewitnesses on the left side not to have seen antifa provocations and to be truthful in saying and believing that that the fights were instigated by both sides.

3. The police THEMSELVES said the reason they didn't intervene was that the right wing protestors were heavily armed! Who are you kidding here?

4. You are ignoring the message that the white supremacists were sending. They made heavy and deliberate use of symbols of violence against blacks and minorities. The only thing that was missing was KKK robes. They were visibly carrying guns and bludgeons. Bludgeons are illegal in NYC because they are more effective in close combat than a gun. They were not signaling an intent to have a peaceful rally. They were signaling an intent to have a fight and the antifa types were all too happy to pick one.

And please explain the black schoolteacher who was nearly beaten to death? Pray tell how does that fit your theory?

All of the deaths and serious injuries were suffered by members of the leftist side and none by the white supremacists, even though they were much smaller in number. That's because the antifa types weren't using anything that would do more than bruise someone or make them filthy. All I have read is that they threw cans, bottles with urine in them, and I saw one account saying feces. So the implements used by each side were not remotely equivalent, contrary to what you imply.

TheCatSaid , August 16, 2017 at 5:53 pm

I'm not sure you understood my contention. I didn't say all left-wing side people were out for a fight, but there is evidence that some were and yes these may have been infiltrators as you suggest. Numerous protests are infiltrated by troublemakers.

The fact that one side may indeed have felt more pain than another doesn't affect the point I'm making. What I'm suggesting is to pay attention to the entire "conflict" set up. It's predictable. There's a degree of scripting. It serves many functions–to make people insecure, feel convinced that others are out to get them (on either side), to feel that conflict is inevitable, to want the police/military to take a more active role.

It's not that any of these points necessarily lack merit on their own (e.g., in some situations law enforcement should play a constructive role), but rather that this is one tiny event within a larger picture of social engineering that has been taking place over an extended period of time (decades). Foment conflict artificially (e.g. CIA-funded insurrections such as Ukraine and many countries in South/Central America and currently Venezuela; create or increase a feeling of insecurity; get the people to give up rights in order to have "security" and "protection"; increase military/law enforcement budgets and sales to interested parties.

Focusing only on a single situation (xxx group was hurt "more" in yyy situation/event) can lead one to overlook the larger societal pattern, by not recognizing that there was manipulation occurring that affects both sides.

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 7:12 pm

This is the first time I have had the software do this. I was replying to the editor of Fabius Maximus' comment and it wound up misplaced. It might be that it didn't go through the first time and what I did on the retry wound up relocating it.

As to the bigger issue, you are ignoring my contention that the two "sides" were equally cohesive. If you go to a soccer game, and hooligans who favor your team beat up on fans of the other side, are you responsible for their actions merely by virtue of having gone to the game to cheer on your team? That seems to be the basis of your and the editor of FM's comment. In fact, Black Lives Matter, which is opposed to violence, was represented there and I am highly confident other marchers opposed to the white supremacists were unarmed and has not interest in perpetrating or participating in violence.

By contrast, the organizers of Unite the Right called on the participants to come armed and not only did they come "armed," they brought implements that are designed to maim and kill. If their aims were defensive, to preserve their right to make a public statement, pepper spray would have sufficed. How can you depict that as equivalent?

TheCatSaid , August 17, 2017 at 1:38 am

I didn't say anything at all about blaming one side or another. To the contrary, I suggested it was more important to look at the overall pattern of such conflicts and the overall societal impact (division! fear! giving up rights! agreeing to surveillance! increased law enforcement/military power and spending!).

Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 9:04 pm

Boy, that Soros dude sure gets around. He is responsible for more mischief than the Kochs, Russian oligarchs, and Peter Thiel put together.

I apologize, but when people start talking about Soros, I sort of put them in the same category as UFO abductees and Antivaxers.

Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 4:11 pm

Yves,

First, the assertion about the police favoring the Alt-Right appears baseless. Both sides report -- supported by videos -- that the police watched everybody fighting. Where are the accounts of the police intervening on just one side? The New Yorker fact checkers missed that.

Second, let's rewind to see what I said -- The Root article an example of "how each side lies. 'OUR side were innocent angels attacked by THOSE devils.'" The Root's article clearly paints that kind of incorrect picture due to its misrepresentations and omissions. See my reply to Vatch above for details.

Outis Philalithopoulos , August 16, 2017 at 5:16 pm

The Root article is at all times reporting the perspective of a single person, the 23-year-old Corey Long. Even when the article is not directly quoting Long, it is plainly summarizing his testimony.

In my opinion, you overstated your case by terming the Root article "lies." As you know, it's very common for eyewitness testimony to diverge dramatically. In the midst of big, chaotic situations, each particular person sees only a part of what is going on. They can be entirely sincere and the picture that they paint might still be a partial one.

Similarly, if you read what Long actually said, he agrees that the police "basically stood in their line and looked at the chaos." Long felt that the police should have intervened actively against "the Nazis," and relative to this baseline , interprets the police of having favored the white nationalists. He makes this quite clear when he says that a rapper was earlier not allowed to march and so why were white supremacists allowed to?

I don't see any evidence for Long lying in the article. When the article, near the end, says "we are in a Trump presidency, this is the world we live in," this is editorializing – maybe something Long said at one point, maybe something the article put in his mouth. But it still isn't distorted testimony about the events on the ground.

It might muddy the waters less if you stick to criticizing MSM accounts that are straightforwardly presenting themselves as unbiased general accounts of what happened.

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 7:20 pm

You have shifted the grounds of your argument. You made a sweeping attack against The Roots article: "These are lies."

Despite Outis having patiently picked apart your argument, you in fact have not engaged with him but are broken recording. Your "let's rewind" is effectively an admission that you are not about to acknowledge what Outis described, that The Root article is a first person account, and you have not provided one iota of evidence to suggest that Long misrepresented what he saw. You are therefore unable to support your original claim and are thus trying to shout Outis down.

This is a violation of our site's written Policies. We don't make exceptions for anyone. You either need to engage with him in a good faith manner or stand down.

Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 7:28 pm

Yves,

OK. I should not have said "lies" and just said the remaining text. Consider this an apology.

I did not claim that the root misreported what he saw, but that the article misrepresented what happened at the article. If anyone believed that is what I said, then I apologize for that too.

It's been an interesting discussion. I'm don't believe anyone has engaged with what I said -- but everybody has their own perspective on these things.

I'm signing off. Good-bye.

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 7:51 pm

Thank you for that. I was of two minds about posting the Lee Camp video because this horrible affair has gotten people very upset, we only have pieces of what happened, and many people are drawing inferences that go beyond the information. I think we all agree strongly with one of your big points, that this was a massive failure on the part of the police.

Moocao , August 16, 2017 at 6:20 am

I recommend the BLS class from the American Heart Association. It is the class that most nurses and doctors use for their training.

m , August 20, 2017 at 2:43 am

cause AHA certification lasts for 2 yrs not 1yr.

Sound of the Suburbs , August 16, 2017 at 8:00 am

The history of the neo-liberal revolution is starting to come clear.

James Buchanan first became motivated by the US Government insisting that segregation between white and black children should end. He saw private schools as a way of maintaining this segregation outside the control of Government.

He started in Virginia, near Charlottesville, where racism festered not far below the surface and they still resented the Northern Government telling them what to do; removing the freedom of the wealthy to do what they liked and taxing them to look after others.

The Government shouldn't have the power to end school segregation in Virginia.

The beginnings of neo-liberalism / economic liberalism.

It is ironic the new liberals should now be so aghast at the goings on in a region where their own beliefs first started to take shape.

"Democracy in Chains" Nancy Maclean

How a right wing ideology was developed in the US to roll back the "New Deal" and give economic freedom back to the wealthy to do pretty much as they pleased.

Charles Yaker , August 16, 2017 at 8:14 am

America Red Cross has it all

http://www.redcross.org/take-a-class/cpr?gclid=CKHk0c7c29UCFdNWDQodY_8PEw

Damson , August 16, 2017 at 8:23 am

Fields was a diagnosed schizophrenic, who had been discharged from military training) :unsuitable ' – the standard euphemism for psychiatric).

He had been on anti – psychotics, though whether still on them at time of attack is unknown.

The car he was driving had been hit by someone with a bat, just before he drove into the woman blocking the street, and subsequently the crowd.

So it looks like a type of 'Road rage' episode, made worse due to driver's mental instability, violent context, aggravating factors.

To characterise it as a 'terror attack' is in my view misleading.

'Terrifying' for sure, but 'terror' implies a premeditation and tactical goals.

Words matter – never more so than in this Orwellian era.

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 8:37 am

Our Brian C and Sluggeaux, a former state prosecutor, disagree. He disabled the airbag. An airbag deploying 1. could have injured him and 2. would have made it impossible to drive the car, as in exit. This is a strong tell that he planned to use the car as a weapon and was primed to find an excuse.

Both the way he drove into the crowd (hands steady on the wheel and well positioned when he started( and his impressive exit weren't consistent with road rage.

Damson , August 16, 2017 at 9:10 am

He was mentally unstable, a diagnosed schizophrenic.

His intention to kill is therefore problematic – insanity has always been a defence against intent.

He could have flipped anytime, anywhere.
Hence the 'Road rage' comparison.

Not to diminish the victims experience, just pointing out the dangers of imputing political /ideological rationales to people with mental illness.

Michael Fiorillo , August 16, 2017 at 10:18 am

You fail to mention his disabling of the airbag; was that also part of his "insanity?"

Damson , August 16, 2017 at 10:39 am

I wouldn't know.

Perhaps his psychiatrist could answer your very specific question?

If you think this is evidence of a planned attack, you could be right.

But mentally unstable people are perfectly capable of a greater or lesser degree of 'planning' a murder – even if it means only a walk to the woodshed to pick up an axe.

Arguably, only the 'crime passionel' is free from any prior decision – making.

So I still maintain my original point – that the question of culpability is complex when the perpetrator is known to be mentally unstable, and, in this case, professionally diagnosed.

As is the issue of motivation.

That means you cannot characterise his crime as a 'terror attack', as that assumes he was fully compos mentis, using the car in the same way as, for example, the takfiri attack in Cannes earlier this year.

nowhere , August 16, 2017 at 1:50 pm

Why?

Since this seems to be conjecture, what if the driver of the attack was not fully compos mentis and he was used and manipulated by a group of disaffected radicals?

Why do white men seem to get the pass (with Dylan Roof, also) that they are mentally unstable and therefore not guilty of acts of terror? Maybe if the jihadists had access to psychological screening we would find that they are unstable, possibly due to decades of war and economic privation.

Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 2:55 pm

You seem to be quibbling over irrelevancies here. How many members of many terrorist groups might be diagnosed by the (questionable) standards of the brain babblers? We are all "insane" according to one section or other. So maybe nobody is to "blame' for anything?

To claim he was not motivated by politics seems insane in itself, given his history of interest in far right politics and racist ideologies.

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 3:36 pm

There is a specific legal definition of insanity in murder cases, which is not understanding the difference between right and wrong. The fact that he disabled the airbag to facilitate a speedy exit and attempted to make one says he knew full well.

David , August 16, 2017 at 10:22 am

There is more here than merely a guy who was "disturbed".

Driving in reverse – totally straight for extended period under duress is quite a feat. This guy was not an amateur. He was a Pro! Ask any of the posters here, if they can do that – no one I have asked said they could.

The Cops management of the event was deliberate. This was a permitted event so the authorities knew what the response would be, there should be no doubt about it. Yet they put the two groups together on a narrow street.

The typical establishment mime is to say the cops made a mistake and the guy was crazy. Always giving the benefit of the doubt to the committed narrative. Makes no sense.

New narrative play book to substitute for the dying Russia, Russia, Russia?

Enquiring Mind , August 16, 2017 at 10:40 am

establishment mime

an interesting observation!

Damson , August 16, 2017 at 10:45 am

You can verify the claim yourself online.

He was diagnosed with schizophrenia and hadbeen discharged from military training – that doesn't sound like 'whitewash 'to me.

True, it could be' fake news ', so it's a question of personal choice to accept it or not.

SubjectivObject , August 16, 2017 at 12:26 pm

It is relevant whether he had occasion in the past to back up at speed. If so, he would quickly learn how sensitive steering with the now rear wheels is. The trick is to brace one arm on the door (or door-leg-arm) and make the finest of steering adjustments using the braced fingers; start relative slow, establish direction, and then speed up. Young bodies with coordination talent can easily do this.

HotFlash , August 16, 2017 at 8:39 pm

Driving backwards is common in Demolition Derby s, very popular in Ohio and throughout the midwest at country fairs and such.

David , August 16, 2017 at 8:51 pm

so its is easy is your promote – at high speed on a narrow street with people chasing you – any young guy can do that – nerves of steel for any amateur who is emotionally diagnosed with ??? Baloney

it gets worse:

"the discovery of a craigslist ad posted last Monday, almost a full week before the Charlottesville protests, is raising new questions over whether paid protesters were sourced by a Los Angeles based "public relations firm specializing in innovative events" to serve as agitators in counterprotests.

The ad was posted by a company called "Crowds on Demand" and offered $25 per hour to "actors and photographers" to participate in events in the "Charlotte, NC area." While the ad didn't explicitly define a role to be filled by its crowd of "actors and photographers" it did ask applicants to comment on whether they were "ok with participating in peaceful protests." Here is the text from the ad:

Actors and Photographers Wanted in Charlotte
Crowds on Demand, a Los Angeles-based Public Relations firm specializing in innovative events, is looking for enthusiastic actors and photographers in the Charlotte, NC area to participate in our events. Our events include everything from rallies to protests to corporate PR stunts to celebrity scenes. The biggest qualification is enthusiasm, a "can-do" spirit. Pay will vary by event but typically is $25+ per hour plus reimbursements for gas/parking/Uber/public transit."

Lambert Strether , August 17, 2017 at 12:04 am

Oh, a CraigsList ad. Dear Lord.

relstprof , August 17, 2017 at 12:48 am

What a magnanimous public relations firm, offering gas reimbursements for hires to drive 5 hours from Charlotte, NC to Charlottesville, VA.

Uber prices, no less!

flora , August 16, 2017 at 5:13 pm

aside:
"New narrative play book to substitute for the dying Russia, Russia, Russia?"

This morning's NYTimes throws a curveball. This morning they report that a here-to-for unknown "witness" to the "hacking" has been found. Someone from Ukraine. (Ignores technical issues about the data download time-stamps and document meta-data).
" a fearful man who the Ukrainian police said turned himself in early this year, and has now become a witness for the F.B.I."

David , August 16, 2017 at 8:48 pm

check out Binney and the other former CIA / NSA employees analysis – they can prove not a hack with time stamps and ESP's

Miracle , August 16, 2017 at 8:25 am

Considering the amount of armament the nazi militia brought plus Charlottesville's knowledge of caches of more weapons hidden – it's a miracle 3 souls were lost & not dozens.

There was over 1,000 law enforcement members there.

I fear, as I'm sure others do as well, the odds of of dozens dead happening Somewhere USA are high thanks to the ignorant facilitator in chief.

David , August 16, 2017 at 10:17 am

The helicopter crash is Trump's fault as well? How so?

Eureka Springs , August 16, 2017 at 10:43 am

I for one am thankful police didn't get into the fray sooner. Police always make things worse. Although I'm curious about reports saying they were waiting on orders to do so which never happened. Waiting on orders from whom? Who decided to hold back our police state, which so rarely happens?

And never ever underestimate the possibility of agents provocateurs being all or part of this.

Isn't it funny how protests with armed citizens cause police to stay out of it.

Damson , August 16, 2017 at 10:51 am

There were provocateurs in action there – on both 'sides'. Pepper spray being the preferred weapon.

Not for the first time I get the impression of theatre.

And somewhere, the backers of both 'sides' are sharing a mutually – congratulatory drink.

Adar , August 16, 2017 at 3:07 pm

According to an article in The Guardian, the armed militia members present (from NY and PA) intended to help keep the protesters separated, asked the police for permission to attend, and vociferously deny being Nazis in any way. Seems they are just garden variety survivalists preparing for the day society collapses. That they seemed better armed than the authorities is a different matter.

Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 7:20 pm

Adar,

Thank you for mentioning that. Here's the article: " Militia leaders who descended on Charlottesville condemn 'rightwing lunatics '" in The Guardian, 15 August. The money paragraph:

"The men in charge of the 32 militia members who came to Charlottesville from six states to form a unit with the mission of "defending free speech" were Christian Yingling, the commanding officer of the Pennsylvania Light Foot Militia

"We spoke to the Charlottesville police department beforehand and offered to come down there and help with security," Yingling told the Guardian. "They said: 'We cannot invite you in an official capacity, but you are welcome to attend,' and they gave us an escort into the event," he added.

Yingling said he had been asked to bring a team to Charlottesville by a local militia, the Virginia Minutemen Militia, to reinforce their numbers, and to be in charge on the day.

But Yingling said the original request for a militia force to attend the event had come from the organizers of the white nationalist rally, who wanted them to act as security.
The militiamen had said: "No, we will not come and defend just you," Yingling recalled. "It's important for us to say we were there in a neutral stance."

mk , August 16, 2017 at 8:27 am

Great place for training for people in Los Angeles area:
http://www.cert-la.com/
What is CERT?

If a major earthquake (or any disaster) hits, do you

have enough supplies for a minimum of 72 hours up to an entire month for all family members, including pets?
know how to turn off the gas?
know how to safely turn off the power?
know how to apply first aid?
have enough water for all of your family and your pets?
have provisions for living outside your home for a length of time if the structure is compromised?
It is important to know, if a major disaster occurs, the LAFD, paramedics, police WILL NOT COME! They will be deployed FIRST to major incidents such as collapsed buildings. That is why you constantly hear You MUST be prepared to take care of yourself. In the CERT course they say "The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number of People." When you are trained, you are far more equipped to deal with your circumstances without needing aid from outside sources.

CERT members are trained in basic disaster response skills such as fire safety, light search and rescue, team organization and disaster medical operations. You will learn how to prepare for emergencies, what supplies you should NOW have in your house, how much food, how much water but most importantly, how to protect your family in an emergency!

Sign-up for the FREE Training

link to list of training events:
https://www.eventbrite.com/o/lafd-cert-program-7803155391

Arizona Slim , August 16, 2017 at 8:50 am

Thanks for the CERT shout out. I have taken that training.

craazyman , August 16, 2017 at 8:29 am

How could you call the guys in "Deliverance" hicks? Especially the banjo player and the dude pumping gas in overalls. The white collar guy with the glasses was no match for the banjo player on the porch. He was befuddled and he fumbled like an amateur. I guess they can't put up a statue of William Faulkner since not too many people have read his books. Maybe a statue of Janis Joplin who was from Texas and maybe Buddy Holly. I think Buddy Holly actually has a statue someplace. And Mississpi Muddy Waters too. And the guitar player to end all guitar players, the famous Robert Johnson from Mississippi. I'm not sure if he has a statue. He might! I'm not sure. But these could be southerners you could make statues of. How about Ted Turner?? We'd have to think about that one. As long as he's alive he's his own statue. That's the way a man should be.

No real southern hick would go to one of these race rallies -- it takes waaay to much effort, they have to work the Wal-Mart shift, they're too overweight, and it gets in the way of fishing. All those white guys are northerners, probably from the mid-west even.

That pic says it all. Jousting as a form of self-expressionary theater. Look at the laid back lazy gestures by both actors. What truly amazes me is this -- if it hadn't been for a mentally ill psycho behind the wheel of a car and a helicopter accident almost nobody would have been seriously hurt. That really is incredible, given all the guns and presumably ammo. I'm not sure if the armed individuals there just carried guns and no ammo but I doubt it. I find that really really amazing -- and that photo captures the underlying energetic structure of the whole phenomenon quite aptly.

This is a form of theater of the kind suggested by the great wacko himself -- Antonin Artaud. Who was a French guy. I suspect it will stay that way (I could be wrong, but I don't think so.) To grasp and grapple with the phenomenon at hand requires a conceptual vocabulary that I have yet to see in the media coverage and "I was there" narratives.

Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 2:58 pm

All those guns cost money. Trips to the protest cost money.

Just like the false meme that Trump was elected by the working class. Nope. It was the gated community suburban megachurch religious nuts who elected him. Affluent small town and suburban nabobs

Arizona Slim , August 16, 2017 at 3:39 pm

High-quality guns and good ammo cost serious money. This, in a nutshell, is why Yours Truly had to give up the shooting sports. I could no longer afford the cost of participation.

David Miller , August 16, 2017 at 9:00 am

Leaving aside all other issues I always thought: Confederate memorials/statues commemorate actual treason and people who tried to dismember the country. Solely for the purpose of keeping other human beings as slaves. Thus zero sympathy from me to the "Heritage not Hate" crowd.

I am, however, unsympathetic to "applies 21st century standards of PC virtue-signalling to centuries-old figures" types, as they will inevitably be the authoritarian leftists that are as distasteful to me as the Confederafluffers.

Pretty well impossible to deal with the imbeciles who immediately jump to "George Washington owned slaves so 100% of everything about him must be rubbished." Unproductive on every level and outright destructive on most of them.

rc , August 16, 2017 at 10:27 am

Historically, those officers were taught that it was constitutional to secede from the Union. Constitutional law classes at West Point taught constitutional secession so when many of the southern states seceded those officers thought that these States were being denied what was their constitutional right. They lost the war so they were wrong. Most of these men's primary reason for fighting was for honor. Sadly, they were defending slavery as an institution.

Vatch , August 16, 2017 at 10:46 am

Which article and section of the US Constitution provides justification for secession or the proper procedure for seceding?

DJG , August 16, 2017 at 1:09 pm

Thanks, Vatch. Sheesh.

River , August 16, 2017 at 5:42 pm

Not the US Constitution but from the Declaration " But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security ."

Good enough if you want a Casus belli bad enough.

Vatch , August 16, 2017 at 11:36 pm

I think the Declaration of Independence seems more like a justification for slave revolts than for the secessions of 1861. The slaves experienced absolute despotism.

Fiery Hunt , August 17, 2017 at 12:40 am

Careful, Vatch.
Justifying one interpretation and denying the other smacks of bias.

My problem is it's just so damned difficult to find my own response to being a hypothetical Southern farmer in 1860, without slaves, but facing a Northern pressure that puts my family and living at risk. I'm a let's say..Virginian. Neighbors (State) over strangers (Nation)? Practical over principle? What principle?

I guess my point is the Declaration of Independence isn't so much about economic models (although THAT is there) as it is about the ideals of freedom from political domination.

And in that interpretation, both slave revolts and the War for Succession are totally valid.

todde , August 17, 2017 at 8:10 pm

Well, the Northern states violated the Constitution when they (rightfully so) didn't return fugitive slaves back to the South.

Article 4, Section 2: No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

We have the fugitive slave law passed by congress, the dread scott decision passed by the Supreme Court and a slew of other federal policies that (irony) the Northern states nullified.

I wonder when we Americanized the word Labor?

So if the North was in violation of the Constitution, at what point do you have the right to succeed? I don't know to be honest.

Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 3:01 pm

I think this is being far too kind. Most officers were from the landowning class, and the rationale for the secession was very clearly to preserve slavery. Saint Lee was not a kind master, he did little to stop the lynching and capturing or Northern freemen when his army invaded the north, nor did he actively oppose the rise of the neo-confederate terror groups during the postwar era.

Sometimes both siderism is wrong.

justanotherprogressive , August 17, 2017 at 12:22 am

I'd like to see a link or something that states (or even implies) that instructors at a facility for training officers for the US Military would ever say that it was "constitutional to secede" .sounds a bit treasonous to me ..

davidly , August 16, 2017 at 9:16 am

Re. statues: My first reaction is that it is easy to predict the mindset of someone quick to defend Confederate symbolism. On the other hand it seems wrongfooted to spend energy trying to expunge all of it from our public spaces. I nevertheless cannot help but find the en masse demonstration in favor of the statue to be super predominantly white supremacist in nature. I do not come to this uninformed. As a middle American born white male, I have been privy in my life to the kinds of things white people say to other white people, who they either assume are like them, or simply don't care. As a one-term military enlistee, I found a similar saturation of racial bigotry in those ranks. It had already been abundantly clear to me from my upbringing that those who tend toward the police force likewise harbor racial animosity and wilful ignorance of the history that would inform the reasons behind some of the superficial observations made by those who don't bother to get to know black or brown people if they can avoid it.

In short, the military and police forces have a white supremacy problem, so institutionalized, it would explain how it is that even minority officers engage in brutal tactics against "their own". I hasten to add to your bit about Nixon's war on drugs the fact that someone in the Reagan/Bush realm also knowingly created the crack epidemic in South Central Los Angeles, something we now know is fact, thanks to the late Gary Webb. The culture that grew out of that era is paradigm shifting.

So whenever we are tempted to say that law enforcement failed in such situations, we should quickly reassess and remind ourselves of the proverbial "feature not a flaw". The authoritarian impulse in America has its own dynamic, but even here in Berlin, where there are plenty of ultra-right demonstrations, none of which exist without a counter demo that includes an antifa presence, the police don't fail as demonstrably, but it's pretty clear where their sympathies lie. The first such demo I attended was where I first heard the taunt out of the ranks of the right: "Sie schützen uns! Sie schützen uns!" (They [the police] 're protecting us! They're protecting us!") And they were in no way implying this meant they needed protection from the counter demonstrators; it was a taunt that clearly meant that the cops were on their side

davidly , August 16, 2017 at 9:24 am

One more thing: Trump has shown an ability to selectively and tactically tell truths otherwise unspoken in the political sphere. His comment on Washington and Jefferson memorials is totally legit. But it's couched in the rest of his rhetoric, which is utterly bullsh**.

The Rev Kev , August 16, 2017 at 9:34 am

I fear that I may have to make issue with Yves's characterization of statues as fetishism. Do statues contain an element of ancestor-worship? Maybe likely. Are most of them poorly designed and thought out? Definitely. In any case in our culture, it is usually the leaders that get the statues, not the engineers and scientists who actually got it all done. But remember that they are actually symbols and people live by symbols and incorporate them into their lives. The pert Manhatten woman who totes a Gucci handbag and the San Fransisco hipster who takes pride in his artisanal cheese may look dissimilar but they are both using symbology to establish their identities. To threaten people's symbols is to threaten their identity and people will resist that to the hilt. That is why the resistance to the removal of those statues.
I think that we are going to have to go back to the old stick-and-stones attitude. That is, if you come to me and say that you see a statue in another state that causes bad feelings in you and makes you feel angry or that you find it wrong that the candidate that you voted for did not win, I would say build a bridge and get over it. But if you come to me and say that people are trying to restrict your voting rights, the courts charge you constantly so that that can fill their coffers with your fines, your churches are burnt and so on then brother, that is something that is actually worth fighting against. This is real damage versus emotional damage and I think may be the only workable way to go.
One last thing that came to mind. There were all sorts of rat-bag groups in Charlottesville and I am wondering just where the hell they came from. But then a disturbing thought occurred to me. Could it be that the identity politics that has been used for the past couple of decades in America for political gain has led to the unintentional formation of these sub-groupings? The politicians may have played it too clever by half in their angling for power and this may be the result. Movements like this from the left and the right do not come about spontaneously but must have a lineage somewhere. The only one that I recognize that has a lineage is the KKK but they just look ridiculous.

Lynne , August 16, 2017 at 12:06 pm

What makes you think the sub-groupings are unintentional? It's a classic divide and conquer strategy. Without it, after all, the great unwashed might have noticed that tea party and occupy sympathizer had more in common with each other than with the establishment, and started talking to each other instead of heaping ridicule on the other.

PKMKII , August 16, 2017 at 9:38 am

I know we're not big on smartphones around here, and it should be treated as a supplement rather than a replacement for training, but there is a Resucitate! app that gives a guide to assisting someone in a CPR, AED, or choking situation.

Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 10:31 pm

No, just because I don't use them is completely independent of what is useful advice for the overwhelming majority of readers who do. Thanks a lot!

EoH , August 16, 2017 at 9:53 am

Josh Marshall, a historian by training, has a nice piece about this over at TPM. In brief, the elevation of the generals from the South after the War of Northern Aggression was one of the pacts that formed the post-reconstruction South. It whitewashed, hrm, their personal treason and allowed the South to rewrite its history, exonerating its leadership. It gave the planter class icons around which to form a revised culture, one that reconstituted slavery in all but name. Jim Crow lasted a hundred years; the culture that built it survives its demise.

Jim Crow kept a reconstituted planter class and its courtiers in power, It built on earlier culture and characterized former slaves as an extravagant threat, sexually, economically, politically. A variation on the British empire's divide and conquer. African Americans became the focus of poor whites angst rather than the southern elite. That, too, survives Jim Crow. It's part of the white supremacy that informs Trump.

The Charlottesville driver/killer, for example, is a minimum wage 20 year-old outcast, rejected by the US Army, and apparently with untreated mental health problems. (Not that he – or anyone similarly situated – would have had access to health care.) He's a textbook example of one personality type for whom white supremacy and the victimhood and promises of neonazism hold the most attraction.

Carolinian , August 16, 2017 at 10:30 am

Without a doubt the southern aristocracy fought the war over slavery but what doesn't get mentioned as often is that the north, by and large, fought the war over union, not slavery. As for "treason," this was not a term that got bandied about so much back when people were closer to a Revolutionary War that was also called treason. Gore Vidal for one said that the south had a right to secede and perhaps the US would have been better off if they had done so. The premise of Vidal's book Lincoln was that Lincoln suffered under the great moral weight of almost single handedly keeping the Union together at the cost of 500,000 lives.

Of course few southerners now (certainly speaking for myself!) think the south would have been better off if they had won. An enduring south is the be the premise of an upcoming HBO series by the Game of Thrones creators–a very bad idea, especially in light of recent events.

Arizona Slim , August 16, 2017 at 3:44 pm

He sounds a lot like Jared Lee Loughner, who was the killer of six people at then-Representative Gabrielle Giffords' Congress on Your Corner event. The guy needed help, didn't get it, and the rest, they say, is history.

marym , August 16, 2017 at 10:09 am

Apologies if this has been posted before, but here's a graph of when monuments were built.

https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/whoseheritage-timeline150_years_of_iconography.jpg

Thank you for this post and for all the links and commentary today and yesterday.

The Rev Kev , August 16, 2017 at 10:54 am

Interesting graph that. Only comment is that that second blimp in the 1960s was only marked down as the era of the civil rights movement. What should be noted is that it was also the centennial of the civil war so you would expect more memorials to be dedicated then.

rc , August 16, 2017 at 10:14 am

This was murder not 'terrorism'.

By propagating this word you are playing into the hands of the security establishment who want to turn the tools of war against the American people. Terrorism is a tactic used by smaller, less powerful groups to effect a response in what is generally a war.

By falling into the trap of misusing this word people are setting trap for themselves when law enforcement is given blanket authority to violate civil liberties.

davidly , August 16, 2017 at 2:10 pm

I agree. And it's good you post that and it bears repeating, perhaps ad naseum. I doubt most people clamoring for equal inclusion in the terminology have given it any consideration.

Damson , August 16, 2017 at 5:47 pm

Ditto.

Terror is a violent political tactic conducted in full awareness and as part of the terrorists arsenal to reach specific goals.

State-sponsored terror is the real scourge of our times. Where's the outrage? Or is the killing of countless Brown people only 'racist' on US soil?

As Fields only known political affiliation was his registration as a Republican, we would have the to logically designate that party a terrorist organisation, if he is categorised as a terrorist.

While many would agree with that (Iraq) it is hardly practical, given the Democratic Party's equal enthusiasm for state – sponsored terror (just look at who is supplying arms to the numerous takfiris in Syria,or the destruction of Libya.)

So branding Fields a terrorist instead of a mentally disturbed killer opens up a real can of worms.

Are we to also allege 'religious motivation' for the 'God/Satan – told – me – to – kill' contingent too?

hemeantwell , August 16, 2017 at 10:55 am

if you'd had black protestors show up similarly attired and armed, you can bet you'd have seen mass head-breaking and arrests

If the question of fascism is at all relevant here, it's not in the mouthing of phrases and the medieval accoutrements of the neo-fascists. It's in the inaction of the police. Mcauliffe's recourse to saying the cops were outgunned to explain why the police didn't stop the neo-fascists, his hesitation to say this was a profound screwup, is a replay of the history of fascism in Germany and Italy. Tolerance and support from the cops were essential in its success. Demonstrators should be going after Mcauliffe, not Robert E Lee. The next move on the part of the neos, if they're smart, will be to see how much state support they can get if they more tightly focus on the left. Support/tolerance on the part of the state should be attacked in whatever form it takes, from Trump on down.

Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 3:04 pm

Excellent points!

JTFaraday , August 16, 2017 at 4:49 pm

Agree. The inaction of the police, the "both sider-ism" of Trump and the Trumpertantrums which normalizes white supremacist extremism on all of the right, and in its use by libertarians and neoliberals to advance the cause of the rich because that's the way to oppose the liberals, the left, and socialist antifa.

I can't pull a link right now but recommend the Vice documentary on Charlottesville. Bit chilling.

JTFaraday , August 16, 2017 at 5:00 pm

Also, in the way that young men are being radicalized & recruited on the web.

JTFaraday , August 16, 2017 at 5:08 pm

And honestly, it's not just the excluded who are being radicalized, as the MRA phenomenon shows, the openly superior attitudes of silicon valley tech bros, etc.

Brian , August 16, 2017 at 11:01 am

Yves, the point you make about the perceived lack of greased tracks from Southern universities to the Acela corridor's hall's of power got me thinking about C. Wright Mills and where else the power elite create leverage points

NOTE: This is a reprint of a journal article with the following citation:
Domhoff, G. William. 2006. "Mills's The Power Elite 50 Years Later." Contemporary Sociology 35:547-550.

[ ]

Outis Philalithopoulos , August 16, 2017 at 11:05 am

Brian, can you post a link rather than pasting in the text of the article?

Brian , August 16, 2017 at 11:09 am

Apologies, from the professor's website here: http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/theory/mills_review_2006.html

Jeremy Grimm , August 16, 2017 at 5:11 pm

Thank you for pointing to Domhoff's site. I too find his books and writings insightful.

Regarding C. Wright Mills -- the crafting of his demise is a scary reminder of the ways our state can undo those who speak against it.

EoH , August 16, 2017 at 6:09 pm

Mills's career (and that of Sloane Coffin at Yale) certainly engendered a response of "Never again" among the Ivy League and its patrons. The likes of Alfred McCoy at Wisconsin and G. William Domhoff at UCSC were confined to the state ivies. Later nonconformist critics of the establishment were lucky to be hired at mid-rank state schools. It was essential to deprive them of formal inclusion among the nation's intellectual elite. Stanford, under its longtime patron, arch-conservative Herbert Hoover was especially vigilant in excluding nonconformists. UC San Diego spent a long time in purgatory for hiring Herbert Marcuse.

Among many other achievements, Mills made a mockery of the McCarthy era demand for conformity and bland acceptance of the status quo.

Rhondda , August 16, 2017 at 12:04 pm

I found Mark Lilla's criticism of identity politics to be very worthwhile.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/mark-lilla-vs-identity-politics/

It saddens me that the shrill media echo chamber (including that ridiculous Jacobin article) has me -- a lifelong 'liberal' -- reading TAC.

I reject identity politics. I am an American citizen. But I have no political home. I had hopes for the DSA, but now I see they were a proud part and parcel of the thuggery in Charlottesville.

Yes, I have a very tight tinfoil hat but I smell the fire and brimstone of Soros, provocations and color revolutions. "Heightening the differences" is I believe what this violent street theater was intended to do.

Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 3:05 pm

TAC is my go to source for foreign policy analysis. Daniel Larison is amazing, no matter what your purported left or right status.

Rhondda , August 16, 2017 at 3:10 pm

Yes, they do have really good foreign policy analysis. Reality-based. But you have to wade through quite a bit of Christian-values-under-attack and Culture War yaya to get there. IMHO.

Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 3:36 pm

I only have Daniel bookmarked, and my browser takes me right to his exposes of the Peace Prize President's support of the horrors in Yemen, the bipartisan war crime disaster which is Syria, and the insanities of Trump's ignorant babbles. :)

Damson , August 16, 2017 at 10:49 pm

Actually, the fire and brimstone could be coming from more institutional direction :

https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2017/08/13/charlottesville-attack-brennan-gilmore-and-the-stop-kony-2012-pysop-what/

The video of Fields attack broadcast on corporate media was mainly the one filmed by one Brennan Gilmore.

The only description I found in an MSM report said he was a Charlotte resident, involved in start – ups, and had been present with friends at the scene.

He had tweeted extensively, characterising the incident as a :terrorist attack ' by' Nazis '.

He also claims that Nazis are running the White House.

Definitely not a' neutral' observer.

Now turns out he is a former State Dept employee, whose work smacks not a little of CIA regime – changing.

This is definitely looking more and more like a psyops.

But what's the goal?

TheCatSaid , August 17, 2017 at 1:53 am

"This is definitely looking more and more like a psyops.

But what's the goal?"

I think the goals are clear. (Just look at the effects.)

What's less clear to me is what people/groups are orchestrating this. The aftermath–creating division and opinion regarding even the facts of what happened–is part of the goal. Look at this website and the data being generated by commenters. Who defends themself? Who attacks? Who retreats? What is the nature of the language used?

Quinn Michaels has analyzed that stirring things up in this way provides opportunities for Smart AI to create more data regarding how individuals and groups respond emotionally, thus further enabling future manipulation of society with even greater precision. Michaels' extensive analysis of advanced bot networks is chilling. But even so he sees beneficial opportunities. It's pretty intriguing, these games and deliberate disruption. His YouTube discussions (many of which include extensive screenshots to document what he has observed) are interesting stuff.

Damson , August 17, 2017 at 5:28 am

Thanks for the info – I can well believe that is a motive for some.

But I am focusing more on the political aims of what is looking more and more like an orchestrated event.

Trump's condemnation of both 'sides' was greeted with predictable outrage from much of the MSM.

Yet having watched an hour long video filmed by a non – partisan, who positioned himself between the :warring parties, it is clear he is correct : the police were ordered to stand down while both sides – one of which did not have a permit for a rally – went at it hammer and tongs.

That casualties were greater for one 'side'(though I take such reports with a large dose of salt given media disdain for facts, including' WMD: NYT) does not reduce culpability.

Interesting that Richard Spencer (the humanities graduate from an upper middle class background who supposedly represents the grievances of much of the Deplorable class – really?) was in Hungary months ago. Meeting with the 'far right' there. He sure gets around.
With no visible means of support, I can only assume he's being bankrolled by some very shy folk .

Hungary also happens to be run by Soros nemesis, Victor Orban.

A little digging might turn some 'unexpected' connections.

'Unexpected 'to those who are unfamiliar with events in the Ukraine that is.

Estragon77 , August 16, 2017 at 1:29 pm

Wilderness First Responder (WFR) training is great you get everything you would in the above-mentioned Red Cross courses but with a wilderness overlay, the upshot being there is a focus on helping injured people for a longer period of time than just waiting for an ambulance. So longer term patient stabilization, splint making, assessment, etc. Strikes me as useful in a situation where professional medical help is not going to be immediately available for whatever reason. The Wilderness Medical Institute (WMI) runs courses all across the country but there are other outfits that teach the course as well.

Robert E. Lee , August 16, 2017 at 1:37 pm

I have a unique perspective of sorts on this as I used to be "Robert E. Lee" on the Radio. Other than being kidded about the name, I never, ever saw any push back or any negativity from anyone. And my show was top-rated. Of course this was back in the 70's and things change. But seems to me some of these people protesting over confederate statues are missing the point and should read a book on the Civil war, which was mostly about oppression from the Northern states and really not that much about slavery.

nowhere , August 16, 2017 at 2:06 pm

There are plenty of books that completely invalidate "the Civil war, which was mostly about oppression from the Northern states and really not that much about slavery." Not that any post here is going to change your mind.

Jeremy Grimm , August 16, 2017 at 4:41 pm

What about the theory that the economic interests of the North in opposition to those of the South motivated the Civil War? The North wanted to compel the South to sell its cotton to Northern Mills at a lower price than the South could sell its cotton to English Mills. I thought I read about that in a Post here at NakedCapitalism -- ? I have trouble believing the Civil War was about slavery. If slavery were the driver then why did Lincoln wait until 1863 to make his emancipation proclamation? After the Civil War why did the North do so little to help the slaves they emancipated and protect their freedom? It took 100 years and considerable political and social pressure to compel the North to enforce even the most basic civil rights in the South.

Elizabeth Burton , August 17, 2017 at 7:26 pm

Every single version of the secession articles issued by the Southern states says they were doing so to preserve their "peculiar institution." It's not about "belief." It's about demonstrable facts. That the North didn't really give a [family blog] about the actual slaves, and that anti-black racism was as bad north of the Mason-Dixon is irrelevant to this discussion.

Likewise, the reason why none of the freed slaves got their "40 acres and a mule" is available in any number of reliable historical sources, and just as has always been the case is the result of a combination of rich people and politics.

todde , August 17, 2017 at 7:46 pm

I would read them all again, Virginia's didn't mention preserving slavery.

philnc , August 16, 2017 at 2:17 pm

Read some diaries by Northerners who fought in that war. Whether they liked it or not, they knew the war was about ending slavery. An awful lot of them volunteered based on that understanding (except the mobs in NYC that attacked an orphanage for black children). In his memoirs Grant, writing much later in a time when the myth of "it was only about union" by then had a firm hold, was clear about the role abolitionism played. Those in the South at the time didn't pretend otherwise either.

Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 3:37 pm

But Lee's slaves all WUVVVEDDDD him, we are told.

Jeremy Grimm , August 16, 2017 at 5:05 pm

Many of those fighting in the Civil War were motivated by their feelings about slavery. However I am extremely skeptical that either a strong desire to abolish slavery or a commitment to maintain the union motivated the Elite of the North to war with the South. Their concern for the human condition didn't extend very far in time or space. Emancipated slaves were left to suffer under Jim Crow. Northern Mills and factories operated in conditions not greatly different than outright slavery.

HotFlash , August 16, 2017 at 9:03 pm

Disclaimer: I am totally not a historian. Evidence *wholly* anecdotal, *wholly* oral and simply a family story. My father had two great-uncles who died in Andersonville Prison, I have seen the letters and the little carved Bibles send back to their family in Ohio/ Pennsylvania but not otherwise verified anything. The story in the family is that they went for the substitute money, $100 (a whole lot of money back then). The draft was only for landowners, ie voters, but they could and very often did pay to have non-landowners, such as my greatuncles, take their duty for them. Irony: the family was awarded land, in Michigan.

Harry Cording , August 16, 2017 at 3:27 pm

Yves, CERT or Community Emergency Response Training is what you might want to check out for basic emergency training/preparedness. CERT operates on both a national and local level. Out here in earthquake country the local chapter is pretty active.

Local SF Bay Area CERT link:
http://readymarin.org/cer

National CERT link with overview:
http://ready.gov/community-emergency-response-team

dimmsdale , August 16, 2017 at 5:23 pm

Yves, here in NYC, I took a good basic first aid course at the American Red Cross (it included CPR, dealing with burns, broken bones, seizures, etc.); someone upthread mentioned the American Heart Association and their offerings look intriguing too. And NYC does indeed have an active CERT chapter; which fields teams of trained volunteer first-responders for all sorts of disasters. (I had looked into all this stuff just post-9/11; picked up a good manual on disaster prep from the ARC and still carry their first-aid kit and a pair of construction gloves in my backpack, just in case.)

Jeremy Grimm , August 16, 2017 at 4:27 pm

I'm not sure what to make of the events in Charlottesville. They hold a dark foreboding I can't decipher.

Lee Camp's portrayal of how fleetingly brief is our moment of life and consciousness and his admonition to use that moment is what most moved me in his brief video.

RRH , August 16, 2017 at 4:51 pm

While Red Cross and other organization offer courses, you might try to find a good edition of the Boy Scout's First Aid Merit Badge booklet. It has probably been updated over the years, but was a good read and taught me enough to help several injured people since earning my Eagle rank. Not sure I could revive the dead, but I've kept a heart attack victim alive until help arrived, as well as many bleeding people.

anonymous , August 16, 2017 at 5:10 pm

The South has long dominated key sectors of the US power structure, if not the ones where Yves has spent her time/ drawn her acquaintances.

Just look at those who have had prominent roles in Congressional leadership and committee chairmanships over the last century. What about Mitch McConnell? Jeff Sessions (before he became AG)? Russell Long? Jamie Whitten? Herman Talmadge? George Smathers? Lindsay Graham? John McCain (Mississippian by birth)? Strom Thurmond? Theodore Bilbo? Just to name a few.

Southerners are also over-represented in the military. http://www.ozy.com/acumen/why-the-us-military-is-so-southern/72100 NB, as Yves has mentioned, the retired general and flag officers often end up running defense contractors when they leave active duty– so Southern influence is also strong there.

The South continues to dominate our political life and our military industrial complex. Guilt tripping non Southerners about anti Southern prejudice continues to enforce such dominance. While that prejudice certainly exists, it's no reason to give the white South a pass, or the affirmative action program Trump wants to grant by re-orienting DoJ's Civil Rights Division.

Matthew Kopka , August 17, 2017 at 9:24 am

McCain was born in Panama, there was a birther issue with his candidacy. I see nothing in his bio about MS, though he moved a great deal as a military brat.

The fact that southern pols attain such positions does not necessarily reflect dominance. And while Yves's' characterization elides some issues, it has the virtue of pointing up the obvious: there is prejudice toward white southerners and, like most prejudice, tends to prevent us from seeing the region clearly.

anonymous , August 17, 2017 at 1:49 pm

On his mother's side McCain comes from very wealthy Mississippi plantation owners with large slave holdings. http://www.salon.com/2000/02/15/mccain_90/ And while he has played this down (his bio being one example), he certainly knew of it. http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/news/2008/sep/23/john-mccains-mississippi-roots/

Furthermore, McCain makes no bones about his Southern heritage. He has also, among other things, defended the Confederate flag and spoken highly of his treasonous ancestors who fought for the Confederacy (as noted in Salon link above).

Regarding your disputation of Southern dominance on Capitol Hill -- I worked at CBO and got to see it first hand back in the 70s. With all due respect, your statement about the prevalence of southern pols in high positions on the Hill not "necessarily" reflecting dominance, is clueless. It may be a little different now but given the continued power of Southern Republicans on the Hill I tend to doubt that.

Of course there's prejudice towards just about everyone who isn't in one's own group. Unfortunately, that is the way humans are. The real issue is, has that group been victimized? Not all that much in the case of white Southerners, who run a great deal of the country.

I would also say: the prejudice against Southerners actually works in many ways to their advantage. Both in terms of outsiders underestimating them, and in terms of outsiders' being clueless about how powerful the South really is.

Matthew Kopka , August 20, 2017 at 9:20 pm

Simply saying that Southerners dominate the America power structure doesn't make it the case. Put that case together and I am interested. Calling me "clueless" looks to me like a sign that you are either operating out of your own prejudice rather than solid fact or just disputatious. I would gladly accept that Southerners are a disproportionate part of the power structure; that they dominate? Pony up.

Wellstone's Ghost , August 17, 2017 at 3:10 am

Out here in Seattle we seem to be more and more segregated. The city is basically cut in half, with the north side of downtown/ship canal being primarily white and the south side of downtown being the last vestige of minority home ownership in the city. Gentrification is alive and well in the Pacific Northwest. We call it the "San Francisco-zation" of Seattle. Everyone is being priced out and the City of Seattle Government seems perfectly ok with it. Perhaps the era of the City-State is here?

Matthew Kopka , August 17, 2017 at 9:21 am

Yes, policing fail. But there were some reasons for that. This "From a member of UVA staff," which appeared on a trusted friend's FB page, which has a ring of authenticity:

'A few specifics that I learned from a very somber staff meeting with our Dean of Libraries just now. Some of these details may have been available in news reports but they were new to me. (1) Apparently on Friday night there was a 'very low level' request for permission for a group of 20 people to read a speech at the Rotunda. This overture to the University was then bait-and-switched to the march with torches that circled Central Grounds. (2) During the white nationalists' intimidating march around Grounds, many UVA police officers were actually located downtown, where they had been seconded to support Charlottesville City police. (3) On Saturday, there were "several deliberate attempts to spread police thin" through tactics such as fake bomb scares in parts of town away from the main action. (4) By UVA policy, students and employees are prohibited from carrying firearms on Grounds, but by state law, because this is a public property, people with no University affiliation are allowed open carry without a permit and concealed carry with a permit. UVA can make policy enforceable on its own students and employees but not on the general public .
"I am sharing all of this because I think there were several specific, calculated tactics by the white nationalists to leverage our laws and policies against us and to maximize the terrorizing effect of their activities in Charlottesville over the weekend. I believe the white nationalists are not done with us here in Charlottesville and I believe they will target other universities, university towns, and communities with progressive political reputations for similar attacks. I hope that forewarned is forearmed and that by disseminating information about the white nationalists' tactics we can be better prepared in the future.' (thanks to Gregory N Blevins)"

K , August 17, 2017 at 10:24 pm

Nature. Skilled Labor. Community Bank credit creation. Shorting nature into a battery with debt expertise always ends the same way, a black hole of symptoms chasing their own tail, until all the financial and operational leverage is stranded.

An elevator eliminates the arbitrary clock in the compiler, allowing an increasing diversity of events to time themselves.

relstprof , August 20, 2017 at 3:38 am

We are many. They are few.

[Aug 24, 2017] Sacrificing Smart Asians to Keep the Racial Peace - The Unz Review

Notable quotes:
"... This peace-keeping aspect of affirmative action understood, perhaps we ought to view those smart Asians unfairly rejected from Ivy League schools as sacrificial lambs. ..."
Aug 24, 2017 | www.unz.com

The argument is that admitting academically unqualified blacks to elite schools is, at core, a policy to protect the racial peace and, as such, has nothing to do with racial justice, the putative benefits of diversity or any other standard justification. It is this peace- keeping function that explains why the entire establishment, from mega corporations to the military, endorses constitutionally iffy racial discrimination and why questioning diversity's benefits is the most grievous of all PC sins. Stated in cost-benefit terms, denying a few hundred (even a few thousand) high-SAT scoring Asians an Ivy League diploma and instead forcing them attend Penn State is a cheap price to pay for social peace.

This argument rests on an indisputable reality that nearly all societies contain distinct ethnic or religious groups who must be managed for the sake of collective peace. They typically lack the ability to economically compete, may embrace values that contravene the dominant ethos, or otherwise just refuse to assimilate. What makes management imperative is the possibility of violence either at an individual level, for example, randomly stabbing total strangers, or on a larger scale, riots and insurrections. Thus, in the grand scheme of modern America's potentially explosive race relations, academically accomplished Asians, most of whom are politically quiescent, are expendable, collateral damage in the battle to sustain a shaky status quo.

Examples of such to-be-managed groups abound. Recall our own tribulations with violent Indian tribes well into the 19 th century or what several European nations currently face with Muslims or today's civil war in Burma with the Karen People. Then there's Turkey's enduring conflict with the Kurds and long before the threat of Islamic terrorism, there were Basque separatists (the ETA ), and the Irish Republican Army . In the past 45 years, there have been more than 16,000 terror attacks in Western Europe according to the Global Terrorism Database . At a lower levels add the persistently criminal Gypsies who for 500 years have resisted all efforts to assimilate them. This listing is, of course, only a tiny sampling of distinct indigestible violence-prone groups.

The repertoire of remedies, successful and failed, is also extensive. Our native-American problem has, sad to say, been largely solved by the use of apartheid-like reservations and incapacitating a once war-like people with drugs and alcohol. Elsewhere generous self-rule has done the trick, for example, the Basques in Spain. A particularly effective traditional solution is to promote passivity by encouraging religious acceptance of one's lowly state.

Now to the question at hand: what is to be done regarding American blacks, a group notable for its penchant for violence whose economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs.

To appreciate the value of affirmative action recall the urban riots of the 1960s. They have almost been forgotten but their sheer number during that decade would shock those grown accustomed to today's relative tranquility. A sampling of cities with major riots includes Rochester, NY, New York City, Philadelphia, PA, Los Angeles, CA, Cleveland, OH, Newark, NJ, Detroit, MI, Chicago, IL, Washington, DC and several smaller cities.

The damage from these riots! "uprisings" or "rebellions" according to some!was immense. For example, the Detroit riot of 1967 lasted five days and quelling it required the intervention of the Michigan Army National Guard and both the 82 nd and 101 st Airborne divisions. When it finally ended, the death toll was 43, some 7200 were arrested and more than 2000 buildings destroyed. Alas, much of this devastation remains visible today and should be a reminder of what could happen absent a policy of cooling out black anger.

To correctly understand how racial preferences at elite colleges serves as a cost-effective solution to potential domestic violence, recall the quip by comedian Henny Youngman when asked "How's your wife?" He responded with, "Compared to what?" This logic reflects a hard truth: when confronting a sizable, potentially disruptive population unable or unwilling to assimilate, a perfect solution is beyond reach. Choices are only among the lesser of evils and, to repeat, under current conditions, race-driven affirmative action is conceivably the best of the worst. A hard-headed realist would draw a parallel with how big city merchants survive by paying off the police, building and food inspectors, and the Mafia. Racial preferences are just one more item on the cost-of-doing business list–the Danegeld .

In effect, racial preferences in elite higher education (and beneficiaries includes students, professors and the diversity-managing administrators) separates the top 10% measured in cognitive ability from their more violent down market racial compatriots. While this manufactured caste-like arrangement hardly guarantees racial peace (as the black-on-white crime rate, demonstrates) but it pretty much dampens the possibility of more collective, well-organized related upheavals, the types of disturbances that truly terrify the white establishment. Better to have the handsomely paid Cornel West pontificating about white racism at Princeton where he is a full professor than fulminating at some Ghetto street corner. This status driven divide just reflects human nature. Why would a black Yalie on Wall Street socialize with the bro's left behind in the Hood? This is the strategy of preventing a large-scale, organized rebellion by decapitating its potential leadership. Violence is now just Chicago or Baltimore-style gang-banger intra-racial mayhem or various lone-wolf criminal attacks on whites.

Co-optation is a staple in the political management repertoire. The Soviet Union adsorbed what they called the "leading edge" into the Party (anyone exceptionally accomplished, from chess grandmasters or world-class athletes) to widen the divide the dominant elite, i.e., the Party, and hoi polloi. Election systems can be organized to guarantee a modicum of power to a handful of potential disruptors and with this position comes ample material benefits (think Maxine Waters). Monarchies have similarly managed potential strife by bestowing honors and titles on commoners. It is no accident that many radicals are routinely accused of "selling out" by their former colleagues in arms. In most instances the accusation is true, and this is by design.

To appreciate the advantages of the racial preferences in higher education consider Henny's "compared to what"? part of his quip. Certainly what successfully worked for quelling potential Native American violence, e.g., forced assimilation in "Indian Schools" or confinement in pathology-breeding reservations, is now totally beyond the pale though, to be sure, some inner-cities dominated by public housing are increasingly coming to resemble pathology-inducing Indian reservations. Even less feasible is some legally mandated homeland of the types advocated by Black Muslims.

I haven't done the math but I would guess that the entire educational racial spoils system is far more cost effective than creating a garrison state or a DDR-like police state where thousands of black trouble-makers were quickly incarcerated. Perhaps affirmative action in general should be viewed as akin to a nuisance tax, probably less than 5% of our GDP.

To be sure, affirmative action at elite universities is only one of today's nostrums to quell potential large scale race-related violence. Other tactics include guaranteeing blacks elected offices, even if this requires turning a blind eye toward election fraud, and quickly surrendering to blacks who demand awards and honors on the basis of skin color. Perhaps a generous welfare system could be added to this keep-the-peace list. Nevertheless, when all added up, the costs would be far lowers than dealing with widespread 1960s style urban violence.

This peace-keeping aspect of affirmative action understood, perhaps we ought to view those smart Asians unfairly rejected from Ivy League schools as sacrificial lambs. Now, given all the billions that have been saved, maybe a totally free ride at lesser schools would be a small price to pay for their dissatisfaction (and they would also be academic stars at such schools). Of course this "Asian only" compensatory scholarship might be illegal under the color blind requirements of 1964 Civil Right Act, but fear not, devious admission officers will figure out a way around the law.

Carlton Meyer > , Website August 16, 2017 at 4:21 am GMT

This 18 second video clip is a great real world summary:

Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 4:56 am GMT

Interesting take. But risky because :

1) Asians will grow in power, and either force more fairness towards themselves, or return to Asia.
2) WN idiots happy about Asians returning to Asia fail to see that Asians will return only when they control enough of America to manage large parts of it from afar (like the tech industry).
3) 2-3 million top caliber white male Western Expats might just move to Asia, since they may like Asian women more, and want to be free of SJW idiocy. This is all it takes to fill the alleged gap Asia has in creativity, marketing, and sales expertise. Asia effectively decapitates the white West by taking in their best young men and giving them a great life in Asia.
4) America becomes like Brazil with all economic value colonized by Asians and the white expats in Asia with mixed-race children. White trashionalists left behind are swiftly exterminated by blacks, and white women mix with the blacks. America becomes a Brazil minus the fun culture, good weather, and attractive women.

Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 5:03 am GMT

@Carlton Meyer At first, I was surprised that they listened to him.

After a while, I realized that many negros are stupid enough to think that Hispanics and Asians would like to be in some anti-white alliance with blacks as a senior partner. In reality, they have an even lower opinion of blacks than whites do. US blacks have zero knowledge of the world outside America, so this reality just doesn't register with them.

Diversity Heretic > , August 16, 2017 at 5:12 am GMT

John Derbyshire has made similar arguments–racial preferences are the price for social peace. But, as Steve Sailer has pointed out, we're running out of white and Asian children to buffer black dysfunction and Asians are going to get less and less willing to be "sacrificial lambs" for a black underclass that they did nothing to create and that they despise.

There are other ways to control the black underclass. You can force the talented ones to remain in their community and provide what leadership they can. Black violence can be met with instant retributive counter-violence. (Prior to the 1960s most race riots were white on black.) Whites can enforce white norms on the black community, who will sort-of conform to them as best they are able.

Finally, Rudyard Kipling had a commentary on Danegeld. It applies to paying off dysfunctional domestic minorities just as much to invading enemies.

"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that pays it is lost!"

War for Blair Mountain > , August 16, 2017 at 5:26 am GMT

Robert Weissberg

Could care less about your smart Asians The smart Asians are enthusiastivally voting Whitey into a racial minority on Nov 3 2020 They don't belong on Native Born White American Living and Breeding Space

jim jones > , August 16, 2017 at 5:30 am GMT

@Carlton Meyer This 18 second video clip is a great real world summary:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHhy2Gk_xik You can just hears someone shouting at the end "Go back to Beijing"

Wally > , August 16, 2017 at 5:32 am GMT

Once you give in, they will keep demanding more & more.

There's always a manufactured excuse.

It's time to say no.

Bro Methylene > , August 16, 2017 at 5:34 am GMT

Please stop trying to confuse Orientals with Indians and other subcontinentals. They are quite distinct.

This reminds me of the sinister (but largely successful) campaign to conflate San Francisco with "Silicon Valley." The two are separate in every way.

Priss Factor > , Website August 16, 2017 at 5:55 am GMT

Hell with those 'smart Asians'. They are among the biggest Proglob a-holes.

Asians have servile genes that seek approval from the power. They are status-freaks.

They make perfect collaborators with the Glob.

Under communism, they made the most conformist commies.

Under Japanese militarism, they made the most mindless military goons who did Nanking.

Under Khmer Rouge, they were biggest looney killers.

Under PC, they make such goody good PC dogs.

If the prevailing culture of US was patriotic and conservatives, Asians would try to conform to that, and that wouldn't be so bad.

But since the prevailing culture is PC, these yellow dogs are among the biggest homomaniacal PC tards.

Hell with them. Yellow dogs voted for Obama and Hillary in high numbers. They despise, hate, and feel contempt for white masses and working class. They are servitors of the empire as Darrell Hamamoto said. He's one of the few good guys.

Just look at that Francis Fukuyama, that slavish dog of Soros. He's so disgusting. And then, you got that brown Asian tard Fareed Zakaria. What a vile lowlife. And that fat Jeer Heet who ran from dirty browns shi ** ing all over the place outdoors to live with white people but bitches about 'white supremacy'. Well, the fact that he ran from his own kind to live with whites must mean his own choice prefers white folks. His immigration choice was 'white supremacism'. After all, he could have moved to black Africa. Why didn't he?

PS. The best way of Affirmative Action is to limit it only to American Indians and Blacks of slave ancestry. That's it.

Also, institutions should OPENLY ADMIT that they do indeed discriminate to better represent the broader population. Fair or not, honesty is a virtue. What is most galling about AA is the lies that says 'we are colorblind and meritocratic but ' No more buts. Yes, there is discrimination but to represent larger population. Okay, just be honest.

Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 6:21 am GMT

@Bro Methylene

Please stop trying to confuse Orientals with Indians and other subcontinentals. They are quite distinct.

In their original countries they are, but in America they are almost identical in all ways except appearance and diet.

Plus, since SE Asia has always had influence from both, there is a smooth continuum in the US across all of these groups by the time the 2nd generation rolls around.

Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 6:28 am GMT

@War for Blair Mountain

They don't belong on Native Born White American Living and Breeding Space

Three things wrong with this sentence.

1) I don't think you know that Native Americans (i.e. Siberians) were here first.
2) I will bet anything that all 128 of your GGGGG-GPs are not English settlers who were here in 1776. You are probably some 2nd gen Polack or something who still worries that WASPs look down on you.
3) There is very high variance among whites, and white trashionalists are SOOOO far below the quality threshold of any moderately successful white that they can't claim to speak for all whites. White Trashionalists represent the waste matter that nature wants to purge (which is the process that enables exceptional whites to emerge on the other end of the scale). That is why white women are absolutely doing what nature wants, which is to cut off the White Trashionalists from reproduction. If you care about the white race, you should be glad that white women want nothing to do with you and allow you to complete you wastebasket role.

There.

helena > , August 16, 2017 at 6:33 am GMT

@Carlton Meyer That's hilarious. Anti-ma should replace their flags with placards saying, "Hey, Hey, this is Library!" at all counter-anti-fa demos.

Priss Factor > , Website August 16, 2017 at 6:36 am GMT

Will this really keep the peace?

Obama was one of the beneficiaries of AA along with his wife and their kids. Did that prevent Baltimore and Chicago and etc from blowing up?

In a way, AA and Civil Rights made black communities more volatile. When blacks were more stringently segregated, even smart and sensible blacks lived among blacks and played some kind of 'role model'. They ran businesses and kept in close contact with black folks.

It's like white communities in small towns used to be much better when the George Baileys stayed in them or returned to them and ran things.

But as more and more George Bailies left for the big cities, small towns had fewer top notch role models and leaders and enterprisers. Also, the filth of pop culture and youth degeneracy via TV corrupted the dummies. And then, when globalism took away the industries, there were just people on opioids. At least old timers grew up with family and church. The new generation grew up on Idiocracy.

Anyway, AA will just taken more black talent from black community and mix them with whites, Asians, and etc. Will some of these blacks use their power and privilege to incite black mobs to violence? Some do go radical. But most will just get their goodies and forget the underclass except in some symbolic way. It's like Obama didn't do crap as 'community organizer'. He just stuck close to rich Jews in Hyde Park, and as president, he was serving globo-wars, Wall Street, and homos.
When he finally threw a bone at the blacks in his second term, it lit cities on fire.

Did the black underclass change for the better because they saw Obama as president? No. If anything, it just made them bolder as flashmobs. The way blacks saw it, a bunch of fa ** ogty wussy white people voted for a black guy created by a black man sexually conquering a white woman. They felt contempt for cucky whites, especially as rap culture and sports feature blacks as master race lording over whites. To most underclass blacks, the only culture they know is sports and rap and junk they see on TV. And they are told blacks are magical, sacred, badass, and cool. And whites are either 'evil' if they have any pride or cucky-wucky wussy if they are PC.

The Murrayian Coming-Apart of whites took place already with blacks before. And more AA that takes in smarter blacks will NOT make things better for black underclass. And MORE blacks in elite colleges will just lead to MORE anger issues, esp as they cannot keep up with other students.

Even so, I can understand the logic of trying to win over black cream of crop. Maybe if they are treated nice and feel 'included', they won't become rabble-rousers like Al Sharpton and act more like Obama. Obama's race-baiting with Ferguson was bad but could have been worse with someone like Sharpton.

The Power can try to control a people in two ways. Crush everyone OR give carrots to comprador elites so that sticks can be used on masses. Clinton did this. He brought over black elites, and they worked with him to lock up record number of Negroes to make cities safer. As Clinton was surrounded by Negroes and was called 'first black president' by Toni Morrison, many blacks didn't realize that he was really working to lock up lots of black thugs and restore order.

Smart overlords play divide-and-conquer by offering carrots to collaborator elites and using sticks on masses.
British Imperialists did that. Gandhi would likely have collaborated with Brits if not for the fact that he was called a 'wog' in South Africa and kicked off a train. Suddenly, he found himself as ONE with the poor and powerless 'wogs' in the station. He was made equal with his own kind.

Consider Jews in the 30s and even during WWII. Many Western European Jews became rich and privileged and felt special and put on airs. Many felt closer to gentile elites and felt contempt and disdain for many 'dirty' and 'low' Eastern European Jews. If Hitler had been cleverer and offered carrots to rich Jews, there's a good chance that many of them would have collaborated and worked with the Power to suppress or control lower Jews, esp. of Eastern European background.

But Hitler didn't class-discriminate among Jews. He went after ALL of them. Richest Jew, poorest Jew, it didn't matter. So, even many rich Jews were left destitute if not dead after WWII. And this wakened them up. They once had so much, but they found themselves with NOTHING. And as they made their way to Palestine with poor Eastern European Jewish survivors, they felt a strong sense of ethnic identity. Oppression and Tragedy were the great equalizer. Having lost everything, they found what it really means to be Jewish. WWII and Holocaust had a great traumatic equalizing effect on Jews, something they never forgot since the war, which is why very rich Jews try to do much for even poor Jews in Israel and which is why secular Jews feel a bond with funny-dressed Jewish of religious sects.

For this reason, it would be great for white identity if the New Power were to attack ALL whites and dispossess all of them. Suppose globalism went after not only Deplorables but Clintons, Bushes, Kaineses, Kerrys, Kennedys, and etc. Suppose all of them were dispossessed and humiliated and called 'honkers'. Then, like Gandhi at the train station, they would regain their white identity and identify with white hoi polloi who've lost so much to globalism. They would become leaders of white folks.
But as long as carrots are offered to the white elites, they go with Glob and dump on whites. They join with the GLOB to use sticks on white folks like in Charlottesville where sticks were literally used against patriots who were also demeaned as 'neo-nazis' when most of them weren't.

So, I'm wishing Ivy Leagues will have total NO WHITEY POLICY. It is when the whites elites feel rejected and humiliated by the Glob that they will return to the masses.

Consider current Vietnam. Because Glob offers them bribes and goodies, these Viet-cuck elites are selling their nation to the Glob and even allowing homo 'pride' parades.

White Genocide that attacks ALL whites will have a unifying effect on white elites and white masses. It is when gentiles targeted ALL Jews that all Jews, rich and poor, felt as one.

But the Glob is sneaky. Instead of going for White Genocide that targets top, middle, and bottom, it goes for White Democide while forgoing white aristocide. So, white elites or neo-aristocrats are rewarded with lots of goodies IF they go along like the Romneys, Clintons, Kaines, Bidens, and all those quisling weasels.

jilles dykstra > , August 16, 2017 at 7:00 am GMT

" Now to the question at hand: what is to be done regarding American blacks, a group notable for its penchant for violence whose economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs. "

I read an article, making a learned impression, that on average USA blacks have a lower IQ.
I do suppose that IQ has a cultural component, nevertheless, those in western cultures with a lower IQ can be expected to have less economic success.
A black woman who did seem to understand all this was quoted in the article as that 'blacks should be compensated for this lower IQ'.
One can discuss this morally endless, but even if the principle was accepted, how is it executed, and where is the end ?
For example, people with less than average length are also less successful, are we going to compensate them too ?

Simon in London > , August 16, 2017 at 7:18 am GMT

"economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs"

It only stalled when the Great Society and the uplift programs started. According to The Bell Curve there was basically an instant collapse when LBJ started to wreaking his havoc. Go back to pre-1964 norms and no late-60s riots.

Kyle McKenna > , August 16, 2017 at 7:45 am GMT

We have sacrificed smart white students for three generations to keep the hebraic component around 30% at our highest-ranked colleges and universities, and no one (except the jewish Ron Unz himself) made so much as a peep. And as he copiously documented, whites have suffered far more discrimination than asians have. The difference is, whites are more brainwashed into accepting it.

I hope this doesn't need linking here, but wth

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

Realist > , August 16, 2017 at 8:04 am GMT

"Sacrificing Smart Asians to Keep the Racial Peace"

It is the sacrificing of smart white students that is the problem. Of all the races whites, on average are more innovative and ambitious.

Tom Welsh > , August 16, 2017 at 9:11 am GMT

"The argument is that admitting academically unqualified blacks to elite schools is, at core, a policy to protect the racial peace "

In simpler language, appeasement.

Tom Welsh > , August 16, 2017 at 9:16 am GMT

@War for Blair Mountain "They don't belong on Native Born White American Living and Breeding Space "

Your statement would be perfectly correct if it read, "White people of European origin don't belong on Native American Living and Breeding Space "

Yet there they are, in immense, pullulating numbers. And now they have the gall to complain that other people – some of whom resemble the few surviving Native Americans far more closely than Whites do – are coming to "their" continent.

Honestly, what is the world coming to when you spend centuries and millions of bullets, bottles of whisky and plague-ridden blankets getting rid of tens of millions of people so you can steal their land – and then more people like you come along and want to settle peaceably alongside you? That's downright un-American.

Maybe you'd be more comfortable if the Asian immigrants behaved more like the European settlers – with fire, sword, malnutrition and pestilence.

Tom Welsh > , August 16, 2017 at 9:24 am GMT

@Diversity Heretic The Kipling quote is stirring and thought-provoking (like most Kipling quotes). But it is not entirely correct.

Consider the kings of France in the 10th century, who were confronted by the apparently insoluble problem of periodic attacks by bands of vicious, warlike, and apparently irresistible Vikings. One king had the bright idea of buying the Northmen off by granting them a very large piece of land in the West of France – right where the invading ships used to start up the Seine towards Paris.

The Northmen settled there, became known as Normans, and held Normandy for the rest of the Middle Ages – in the process absolutely preventing any further attacks eastward towards Paris. The dukes of Normandy held it as a fief from the king, and thus did homage to him as his feudal subordinates.

They did conquer England, Sicily, and a few other places subsequently – but the key fact is that they left the tiny, feeble kingdom of France alone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normans#Settling_of_Normandy

Wizard of Oz > , August 16, 2017 at 9:27 am GMT

Ratioal cost benefit arguments could be applied much more widely to the benefit of America and other First World countries. If otherwise illegal drugs were legalised, whether to be prescribed by doctors or not, it would save enormous amounts of money on law enforcement and, subject to what I proffer next, incarceration.

What is the downside? The advocates of Prohibition weren't wrong about the connection of alcohol and lower productivity. That was then. If, say, 10 per cent of the population were now disqualified from the workforce what would it matter. The potential STEM wizards amongst them (not many) would mostly be nurtured so that it was only the underclass which life in a daze. And a law which made it an offence, effectively one for which the penalty was to be locked up or otherwise deprived of freedom to be a nuisance, to render oneself unfit to perform the expected duties of citizenship would have collateral benefits in locking up the right underclass males.

Logan > , August 16, 2017 at 9:45 am GMT

@Bro Methylene "Orientals," east Asians, or just Asians in American parlance are indeed quite different from south Asians, called "Asians" in the UK,. These are quite different groups.

But the groups of east and south Asians include widely differing peoples. A Korean doesn't have much in common with a Malay, nor a Pathan with a Tamil. Probably not much more than either has in common with the other group or with white Americans.

That they "all look alike" to use does not really mean the do, it just means we aren't used to them.

Was recently watching an interesting Chinese movie and had enormous difficulty keeping the characters straight, because they did indeed all look alike to me. I wonder if Chinese people in China have similar trouble watching old American movies.

Colleen Pater > , August 16, 2017 at 10:19 am GMT

@Carlton Meyer yeah and hispanics are natural conservatives. dont be a cuck once that slant is here long enough he will tumble to the game and get on the anti white bandwagon. and sure asians will eventually out jew the jews just what we need another overlord, only this one a huge percentage or world pop. .

Colleen Pater > , August 16, 2017 at 10:28 am GMT

You know weisberg youre not fooling anyone here peddle that cuck crap elsewhere affirmative action leads to nothing but more affirmative action at this point everyone but white males gets it, and you my jew friend know this so selling it to sucker cucks as the cost of doing business is just more jew shenanigans. There is a much better solution to the problem peoples deport them back where they belong israel africa asia central america.

joeshittheragman > , Website August 16, 2017 at 11:12 am GMT

This is all about nothing now. The only thing White people have to learn anymore is controlled breathing, good position, taking up trigger slack, letting the round go at exactly the right moment – one round, one hit.

Jake > , August 16, 2017 at 11:47 am GMT

When your child tosses a tantrum and tears up his bedroom, and you tell him his mean-spirited, selfish cousins caused it and then you reward him with a trip to Disneyland and extra allowance: then you guarantee more and worse tantrums.

That is what America and America's Liberals, the Elites, have done with blacks and violence.

Astuteobservor II > , August 16, 2017 at 11:58 am GMT

ha, there is another group that is preying on the asian group and it is omitted.

TG > , August 16, 2017 at 12:18 pm GMT

A very interesting post. Really a unique perspective – who cares if it's not fair, if it is necessary to keep the peace?

I do however disagree with one of your points. " whose economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs."

I think you have missed the main event. Over the last half-century the elites of this nation have waged ruthless economic warfare AGAINST poor blacks in this country, to an extent that far dwarfs the benefits of affirmative action (for a typically small number of already privileged blacks).

Up through the 1960′s, blacks were starting to do not so bad. Yes they were in a lot of menial jobs, but many of these were unionized and the pay was pretty good. I mean, if nobody else wants to sweep your floors, and the only guy willing to do it i s black, well, he can ask for a decent deal.

Then our elites fired black workers en masse, replacing them with Mexican immigrants and outsourcing to low-wage countries. Blacks have had their legs cut off with a chainsaw, and the benefits of affirmative action (which nowadays mostly go to Mexicans etc.!) little more than a bandaid.

And before we are too hard on blacks, let me note that whites are also being swept up in the poverty of neoliberal globalization, and they too are starting to show social pathology.

Because in terms of keeping the social peace, there is one fundamental truth more important than all others: there must be some measure of broadly shared prosperity. Without it, even ethnically homogeneous and smart and hard working people like the Japanese or Chinese will tear themselves apart.

Anonymouse > , August 16, 2017 at 12:58 pm GMT

Not New York. Wife & I were living there then and Mayor Lindsay went to Harlem and NYC negroes did not riot after MLK Jr was assassinated.

Jake > , August 16, 2017 at 1:00 pm GMT

Note that there is not a word in this article about what this does to the white working class and how it can be given something in return for allowing Elites to bribe blacks with trillions and trillions of dollars in goodies. Nor is there is there any indication that this process eventually will explode, with too many blacks demanding so much it cannot be paid.

George Weinbaum > , August 16, 2017 at 1:04 pm GMT

Was this written tongue in cheek?
Affirmative action will never end. The bribes will never end. The US made a mistake in the 1960s. We should have contained the riots then let the people in those areas sleep in the burned out rubble. Instead through poverty programs we rewarded bad black behavior.
By filling the Ivy League with blacks we create a new class of Cornell West's for white people to listen to. We enhance the "ethos" of these people.
Eventually, certainly in no more than 40 years, we will run out of sacrifices. What then when whites constitute only 40% of the American population? Look at South Africa today.
We have black college graduates with IQs in the 80s! They want to be listened to. After all, they're college graduates.
I do not believe you have found "a cost-effective solution to potential domestic violence".
You mix in this "top 10%" and they get greater acceptance by whites who are turned left in college.

dearieme > , August 16, 2017 at 1:05 pm GMT

"The argument is that admitting academically unqualified blacks to elite schools is, at core, a policy to protect the racial peace "

IT IS always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
To call upon a neighbour and to say: –
"We invaded you last night – we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless you pay us cash to go away."

And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
And the people who ask it explain
That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld
And then you'll get rid of the Dane!

It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say: –
"Though we know we should defeat you,
we have not the time to meet you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away."

And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we've proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.

It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say: –

"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that plays it is lost!"

anonymous > , Disclaimer August 16, 2017 at 1:19 pm GMT

whose economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs.

The reality of this is become a huge stumbling block. In fact this group has actually been mostly regressing into violence and stupidity, going their own separate way as exemplified by their anti-social music which celebrates values repugnant to the majority. Look at the absurd level of shootings in cities like Chicago. That's not changing anytime soon. They're by far overrepresented in Special Ed, juvenile delinquency, prisons and all other indicators of dysfunction. Their talented tenth isn't very impressive as compared to whites or Asians. Their entire middle class is mostly an artificial creation of affirmative action. The point is that they can only be promoted so far based on their capability. The cost of the subsidy gets greater every year and at some point it'll become too heavy a burden and then it'll be crunch time. After the insanity of the Cultural Revolution the Chinese had to come to their senses. It's time to curtail our own version of it.

Truth > , August 16, 2017 at 1:54 pm GMT

It really is terrible and unfair that an Asian needs to score so much higher than you white oppressors to get into the Ivy league

A Princeton study found that students who identify as Asian need to score 140 points higher on the SAT than whites to have the same chance of admission to private colleges, a difference some have called "the Asian tax."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/us/affirmative-action-battle-has-a-new-focus-asian-americans.html

You All Look Like Ants > , August 16, 2017 at 1:57 pm GMT

I think this is brilliant satire.
It is actually an argument that is logically sound. Doesn't mean that it's good or sensible or even workable over the long run.
It's just logically sound. It holds together if one accepts the not-crazy parts its made out of.
I don't believe it's meant to be taken literally, because both the beneficiaries and those who get screwed will grow in their resentment and the system would melt down.
New fields with the word "studies' in them would get added and everyone would know – deep down – why that is so, and Asians would continue to dominate the hard sciences, math and engineering.
Still, as satire, it's so close to the bone that it works beautifully.

helena > , August 16, 2017 at 2:05 pm GMT

@Tom Welsh "Yet there they are, in immense, pullulating numbers. And now they have the gall to complain that other people – some of whom resemble the few surviving Native Americans far more closely than Whites do – are coming to "their" continent."

Agree. The country should be returned to pre-1700 conditions and given over to anyone who wants it.

Rich > , August 16, 2017 at 2:08 pm GMT

@Anonymouse I guess one man's riot is another man's peaceful night. There was a bit of rioting in Brooklyn that night, businesses burned and looted, and a handful of businesses were looted in Harlem. There was a very heavy police presence with Mayor Lindsey that night and blacks were still very segregated in 1968, so I'd guess it was more that show of force that prevented the kind of riots we'd seen earlier and in other cities at that time. Still, there was looting and burning, so New York's blacks don't get off the hook. As a personal note. my older brother and his friends were attacked by a roving band of blacks that night in Queens, but managed to chase them out of our neighborhood.

Thorfinnsson > , August 16, 2017 at 2:12 pm GMT

The costs of BRA may be lower than the costs of 1960s urban riots, though an accurate accounting would be difficult as many costs are not easily tabulated.

Consider, for instance, the costs of excluding higher performing whites and Asians from elite universities. Does this result in permanently lower salaries from them as a result of greater difficulty in joining an elite career track?

What costs do affirmative action impose upon corporations, especially those with offices in metropolitan areas with a lot of blacks? FedEx is famously centralized in Memphis. What's the cost to me as a shipper in having to deal with sluggish black customer service personnel?

The blacks are 15% of the population, so I doubt "garrison state" costs would be terribly high. I am certain that segregation was cheaper than BRA is. The costs of segregation were overlooking some black talent (negligible) and duplication of certain facilities (I suspect this cost is lower than the cost of white flight).

War for Blair Mountain > , August 16, 2017 at 2:18 pm GMT

How did America ever manage to survive when there hardly any Chinese Hindus..Sihks .Koreans in OUR America?

Answer:Very well thank you!!!! ..America 1969=90 percent Native Born White American .places two Alpha Native Born White American Males on the Moon 10 more after this Who the F would be opposed to this?

Answer:Chinese "Americans" Korean "Americans" Hindu "Americans" .Sihk "Americans" .Pakistani "Americans"

Jason Liu > , August 16, 2017 at 2:28 pm GMT

There would still be racial peace if affirmative action was abolished. They'll bitch for a while, but they'll get used it and the dust will settle.

Side note: Affirmation action also disproportionately helps white women into college, and they're the largest group fueling radical leftist identity politics/feminism on campus. In other words, affirmative action is a large contributor to SJWism, the media-academia complex, and the resulting current political climate.

anarchyst > , August 16, 2017 at 3:01 pm GMT

@jilles dykstra The statement "blacks should be compensated for this lower IQ" is no different than the descendents of the so-called jewish "holocaust ™" being compensated in perpetuity by the German government. Now, there are calls by the jewish "holocaust ™" lobby to extend the financial compensation to children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of these so-called "holocaust ™ survivors, stating the fake concept of "holocaust ™" transference" just another "holocaust ™" scam
Same thing.

bjondo > , August 16, 2017 at 3:15 pm GMT

Smart means what?

More Monsanto, DuPont cancers and degraded foods.
New diseases from medical, biological, genetic research
More spying and censorship and stealing by Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Stanford, high IQ thieves.
All jobs overseas, domestic unemployment, endless wars, by the best and brightest.
Toxic pollution, mental pollution that dwarfs the back yard pollution of tires and old refrigs by "low IQ deplorables (white and black and brown".
Degraded, degrading entertainment and fake news to match fake histories by Phds.
Tech devices that are "wonderful" but life is actually better more meaningful without.

Poupon Marx > , August 16, 2017 at 3:20 pm GMT

[Blacks] "whose economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs." No, Professor, it is Trillions spend over the last 50 years and millions before that. Countless Whites and other non-Negroid people have had to step aside in education, military, government, private industry, to let the lesser person advance and leap frog the accepted virtue-merit path to advancement. AND IT STILL IS NOT ENOUGN FOR BLECKS.

The obvious solution is to separate into uni-racial/ethnic states. For Whites, this would include a separate autocephalous, independent state of Caucasians, Asians, and Hindu. This is the Proto-IndoEuropean Family, related by genes and languages.

jim jones > , August 16, 2017 at 3:28 pm GMT

@Logan I have the same trouble with Korean movies, all the women look the same:

Rdm > , August 16, 2017 at 3:44 pm GMT

@Thomm Interesting take. But risky because :

1) Asians will grow in power, and either force more fairness towards themselves, or return to Asia.
2) WN idiots happy about Asians returning to Asia fail to see that Asians will return only when they control enough of America to manage large parts of it from afar (like the tech industry).
3) 2-3 million top caliber white male Western Expats might just move to Asia, since they may like Asian women more, and want to be free of SJW idiocy. This is all it takes to fill the alleged gap Asia has in creativity, marketing, and sales expertise. Asia effectively decapitates the white West by taking in their best young men and giving them a great life in Asia.
4) America becomes like Brazil...with all economic value colonized by Asians and the white expats in Asia with mixed-race children. White trashionalists left behind are swiftly exterminated by blacks, and white women mix with the blacks. America becomes a Brazil minus the fun culture, good weather, and attractive women. Could agree 1 and 2.

2-3 millions Top caliber White males moving to Asia?

haha, Top caliber White males (American) will stay in America, screw the rest WN, devour all the resources available, not only in America, but from the rest of the world.

This is a real White so-called Top caliber White males enjoying in Philippines.

You can see the typical features of White in Asia

1. Bald
2. Obese
3. Lanky
4. Gold watch
5. Cargo pants
6. Flip flop

You can't get away those Top caliber White males features in Asia.

Greg Bacon > , Website August 16, 2017 at 3:52 pm GMT

I'm guessing the author would be screaming at the top of his lungs if it was Jewish students being told to go to some state university–instead of Harvard–since we have to make room for blacks.

BTW, your comment "..Recall our own tribulations with violent Indian tribes" needs clarification. Maybe the tribes got violent because of the 400 treaties Uncle Sam made with the various tribes, he honored NONE

Abelard Lindsey > , August 16, 2017 at 3:58 pm GMT

I would call it the Diversity Tax.

üeljang > , August 16, 2017 at 4:12 pm GMT

@jim jones A great part of that is because, well, let's say that the place where those actresses have got their work done is the same.

Whites have much greater natural variations in hair and eye color, but skin color among East Asian individuals is more naturally variable (especially when the effect of tanning is considered), and their facial features and somatotypes are also more diverse in my opinion. For example, East Asian populations contain some individuals who have what the Japanese call futae mabuta "double eyelids" and some individuals who have what they call hitoe mabuta "single eyelids," whereas White populations contain only individuals who have "double eyelids." Whether such increased physical variability is positive or negative probably depends on one's viewpoint; in the case of that eyelid polymorphism, the variant that is found in Asians but not in Whites is generally considered neutral or even positive when it occurs in male individuals, but negative when it occurs in female individuals, so plastic surgeons must be overflowing with gratitude for the single eyelid gene.

Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 4:14 pm GMT

@Thorfinnsson The separate school facilities meant a major saving in the costs of school police and security guards, resource teachers, counselors buses and bus drivers, and layers and layers of administrators trying to administer the mess.

Separate schools were a lot cheaper in that the black teachers kept the lid on the violence with physical punishment and the White teachers and students had a civilized environment.

The old sunshine laws kept blacks out of White neighborhoods after dark which greatly reduced black on White crime. In the north, informal neighborhood watches kept black on White crime to a minimum until block by block the blacks conquered the cities.

George Wallace said segregation now, segregation forever. I say sterilization now, problem solved in 80 years.

Asians??? I went to college with the White WASP American young men who were recruited and went to work in Mountain View and Cupertino and the rest of Santa Clara county and invented Silicon Valley.

Not one was Asian or even Jewish. And they invented it and their sons couldn't even get into Stanford because their sons are White American men.

I think the worst thing about affirmative action is that government jobs are about the only well paid secure jobs that still stick to the 40 hour work week. Government is the largest employer in the country. And those jobs are "no Whites need apply".

BTW I read the Protocols years before the Internet. I had to make an appointment to go into a locked section of a research library. I had to show ID. It was brought to me and I had to sit where I could be seen to read it. I had to sign an agreement that I would not copy anything from the protocols.

And there it was, the fourth protocol.
"We shall see to it brothers, that we shall see to it that they appoint only the incompetent and unfit to their government positions. And thus we shall conquer them from within"

Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 4:31 pm GMT

@Thomm Actually, Europeans arrived 20, to 30,000 years ago from Europe and were wiped out by the later arriving Asians.

Beckow > , August 16, 2017 at 4:44 pm GMT

@Thomm Only 4) is remotely possible. And Brazilian women are not that attractive, they are nice looking on postcards, but quite dumpy and weird-looking in person. But that is a matter of personal taste.

The reason 1,2,3 are nonsensical is that geography and resources matter. Asia simply doesn't have them, it is not anywhere as attractive to live in as North America or Europe and never will be. It goes beyond geographic resources, everything from architecture, infrastructure, culture is simply worse in Asia and it would take hundreds of years to change that.

So why the constant 'go to Asia' or 'Asia is the future'? It might be a temporary escape for many desperate, self-hating, white Westerners, a place to safely worship as they give up on it all. Or it could be the endless family links with the Asian women. But that misreads that most of the Asian families are way to clear-headed to exchange what the are trying to escape for the nihilistic dreams of their white partners. They are the least likely to go to Asia, they know it instinctively, they know what they have been trying to escape.

It is possible that the West is on its last legs, and many places are probably gone for good. But Asia is not going to step up and replace it. It is actually much worse that that – we are heading for a dramatic downturn and a loss of comfort and civilization. Thank you Baby Boomers – you are the true end-of-liners of history.

nickels > , August 16, 2017 at 4:52 pm GMT

Except that, of course, as with all forms of appeasement, it isn't working .

Alec Leamas (hard at work) > , August 16, 2017 at 5:04 pm GMT

Bright and talented white kids from non-elite families stuck between the Scylla and Charybdis of Cram-Schooled Study-Asians with no seeming limit to their tolerance for tedium and 90 IQ entitled blacks is 2017 in a nutshell.

Realist > , August 16, 2017 at 5:07 pm GMT

Weissberg is a nutless quisling. The proper way to handle blackmail is to stop it in it's tracks.

Peaceful demonstrations are fine, property destroying riots should be stopped by any means necessary. Blacks would soon stop their dumb shit actions

Liberty Mike > , August 16, 2017 at 5:08 pm GMT

@George Weinbaum That there Cornell West is a learned fellow. I bet his vocabulary is bigger than that of GWB and DJT – combined.

Liberty Mike > , August 16, 2017 at 5:11 pm GMT

@Truth That study was slanted.

Jeff77450 > , August 16, 2017 at 5:17 pm GMT

Said in all seriousness: I genuinely feel sorry for blacks but not because of slavery & Jim Crow. Those were great evils but every group has gone through that. No, I feel sorry for them because their average IQ of 85–yes, it is–combined with their crass thug culture, which emphasizes & rewards all the wrong things, is going to keep them mired in dysfunction for decades to come. Men like Thomas Sowell & Walter Williams have all the information that blacks need to turn themselves around but they won't listen, I guess because the message is take responsibility for yourselves and your families and refuse to accept charity in all its different forms to include AA.

"Thomas Sowell vs Affirmative Action's failures" (~13 minutes): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agkye3vlG0Q

MEFOBILLS > , Website August 16, 2017 at 5:34 pm GMT

From the author:

some legally mandated homeland of the types advocated by Black Muslims.

Why not pay people to leave? A law change would convert the money supply from bank money to sovereign money.

AMI's HR2990 would convert the money supply overnight, and nobody would be the wiser.

At that point, new public money could be channeled into funding people to leave. Blacks that don't like it in the U.S. would be given X amount of dollars to settle in an African country of their choice. This public money can be formed as debt free, and could also be directed such that it can only buy American goods. In other words, it can be forced to channel, to then stimulate the American economy.

In this way, the future works, to then get rid of disruptive future elements.

It always boils down to the money system. There is plenty of economic surplus to then fund the removal of indigestible elements.

People automatically assume that the money supply must be private bank credit, as that is the way it always has been. NO IT HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN THAT WAY.

http://www.sovereignmoney.eu

Astuteobservor II > , August 16, 2017 at 5:41 pm GMT

@Alden source please, that I would like to read. something new.

Rdm > , August 16, 2017 at 5:48 pm GMT

@helena If Whites leave America and go back to their origin, no one, I repeat, NO ONE would complain about that. They'd be singing "God Riddance" song all along.

No one wants to migrate to Ukraine, a white country.
No one wants to migrate to Hungary, a white country.
No one wants to migrate to Austria, a white country.

Everyone wants to migrate to the place where there's an over-bloated sense of job availability. In this case, America offers an ample amount of opportunity.

Let's wait and see how universities in CA populated with merit-based Asian Americans overrule all universities in the US anytime soon.

Name any state in the US that produces more than two universities (in the Top 50 list) in the world.

No state can compete against CA. You wonder why?

segundo > , August 16, 2017 at 6:34 pm GMT

Are you utterly oblivious to the fact that well over 95% of the blacks getting AAed into universities are then being trained/indoctrinated into being future disruptive activists? Activists with credentials, more money and connections. Entirely counterproductive and much of it on the taxpayers' dime. If there is a solution, AA isn't it.

Diversity Heretic > , August 16, 2017 at 7:01 pm GMT

@Rdm Can I count you in on the Calexit movement–followed by the purge of whites? Freed from the burden of those miserable European-origin Americans, the Asian-Negro-Mestizo marvel will be a shining light to the rest of the world!

David > , August 16, 2017 at 7:05 pm GMT

I waited to make this comment until the serious thinkers had been here. Did anyone notice the dame in the picture is giving us the finger? I did a little experiment to see if my hand could assume that position inadvertently and it couldn't. It aptly illustrates the article, either way.

Alec Leamas (hard at work) > , August 16, 2017 at 7:20 pm GMT

@Rdm

Name any state in the US that produces more than two universities (in the Top 50 list) in the world.

No state can compete against CA. You wonder why?

If you took the land mass of CA and imposed it on the U.S. East Coast between Boston and South Carolina, I don't think it'd be a problem to surpass California in any Top 50 University competition.

I'm not sure what your point is here.

The Realist > , Website August 16, 2017 at 8:18 pm GMT

Here's a simpler and more effective solution-KILL ALL NIGGERS NOW. See, not so difficult, was it? Consider it a Phoenix Program for the American Problem. Actually, here's another idea-KILL ALL LIBERALS NOW. That way, good conservative people of different races, sexes, etc., can be saved from the otherwise necessary carnage. Remember, gun control is being able to hit your target.

Mis(ter)Anthrope > , August 16, 2017 at 8:23 pm GMT

The affirmative action game may well serve the interests of the cognitive elite whites, but it has been a disaster for the rest of white America. I have a better solution.

Give the feral negroes what they have been asking for. Pull all law enforcement out of negro hellholes like Detroit and South Chicago and let nature take its course.

Send all Asians and other foreigners who not already citizens back to their homelands. End all immigration except very special cases like the whites being slaughtered in South Africa or the spouse of a white American male citizen.

Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 8:23 pm GMT

@Rdm I am not referring to guys like in the picture.

I am referring to the very topmost career stars, moving to Asia for the expat life. Some of that is happening, and it could accelerate. Only 2-3 million are needed.

Wally > , Website August 16, 2017 at 8:31 pm GMT

@Kyle McKenna " And as he copiously documented, whites have suffered far more discrimination than asians have. The difference is, whites are more brainwashed into accepting it. "

And that's the function of the fraudulent, impossible '6M Jews, 5M others, gas chambers'.

[MORE]

"The historical mission of our world revolution is to rearrange a new culture of humanity to replace the previous social system. This conversion and re-organization of global society requires two essential steps: firstly, the destruction of the old established order, secondly, design and imposition of the new order. The first stage requires elimination of all frontier borders, nationhood and culture, public policy ethical barriers and social definitions, only then can the destroyed old system elements be replaced by the imposed system elements of our new order.

The first task of our world revolution is Destruction. All social strata and social formations created by traditional society must be annihilated, individual men and women must be uprooted from their ancestral environment, torn out of their native milieus, no tradition of any type shall be permitted to remain as sacrosanct, traditional social norms must only be viewed as a disease to be eradicated, the ruling dictum of the new order is; nothing is good so everything must be criticized and abolished, everything that was, must be gone."

from: 'The Spirit Of Militarism', by Nahum Goldmann
Goldmann was the founder & president of the World Jewish Congress

see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here:

http://codoh.com

No name calling, level playing field debate here:

http://forum.codoh.com

Liberty Mike > , August 16, 2017 at 8:31 pm GMT

@Rdm Almost all white people would rather migrate to Austria, Hungary, and the Ukraine than the following citadels of civilization:

Angola
Botswana
Burundi
Cameroon
Central African Republic
Djibouti
Ethiopia
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Gabon
Ghana
Kenya
Niger
Nigeria
South Africa
Sudan
Swaziland
Tanzania
Uganda
Zambia

You know what? I bet most blacks would as well.

Mis(ter)Anthrope > , August 16, 2017 at 8:32 pm GMT

@Liberty Mike I don't know if anyone else got it, but that is pretty damn funny.

Wally > , August 16, 2017 at 8:40 pm GMT

@Rdm - 45% of California is Federal land.

- Without US taxpayers money CA would be a 3rd world country completely filled with unemployable & dumb illegal immigrants.

- Think about this brief list made possible by the US taxpayers / federal government, money CA would not get and then tens of thousands of CA people would lose their jobs (= lost CA tax revenues):

aerospace contracts, defense contracts, fed gov, software contracts, fed gov airplane orders, bases, ports, money for illegal aliens costs, federal monies for universities, 'affirmative action monies, section 8 housing money, monies for highways, monies for 'mass transportation', monies to fight crime, monies from the EPA for streams & lakes, monies from the Nat. Park Service, monies for healthcare, monies for freeloading welfare recipients, and all this is just the tip of the iceberg

- Not to mention the counties in CA which will not want to be part of the laughable 'Peoples Republic of California'.

- And imagine the 'Peoples Republic of California Army', hilarious.

CA wouldn't last a week without other peoples money.

Calexit? Please, pretty please.

Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 8:57 pm GMT

@War for Blair Mountain You just want intra-white socialism so you can mooch off of productive whites.

Macumazahn > , August 16, 2017 at 8:58 pm GMT

It's particularly unfortunate that Asians, who can hardly be blamed for the plight of America's Blacks, are the ones from whom the "affirmative action" #groidgeld is extracted.

Rdm > , August 16, 2017 at 9:18 pm GMT

@Diversity Heretic My impression and overall experience from interacting with White Americans is good in general. I have a very distinct view on both White Americans and Europeans. I'd come back later.

I don't recommend purging of Whites in America. Neither do I prohibit immigration of all people. But I do wish "legal" immigration from all parts of the world to this land. But I also understand why people are fed up with White America.

There is a clear distinction between Europeans and White Americans. White Americans born and bred here are usually an admixture of many European origins. They usually hide their Eastern European origin and fervently claim German, French, English whenever possible -- basically those countries that used to be colonial masters in the past.

White Americans are generally daring, optimistic and very open-minded. Usually when you bump into any White Americans born and bred here, you can sense their genuine hospitality.
Europeans, usually fresh White immigrants in this land, tend to carry over their old mentality with a bit of self-righteous attitude to patronize and condescend Americans on the ground that this is a young country.

My former boss was Swiss origin, born in England, and migrated to America. If there's an opportunity cost, he'd regale his English origin. If there's a Swiss opportunity, he'd talk about his ancestry. He'd bash loud, crazy Americans while extoling his European majesty. He became a naturalized American last year for tax purposes so that his American wife can inherit if he kicks the bucket.

Bottom line is, every immigrant to the US, in my honest opinion, is very innocent and genuinely hard working. They have a clear idea of how they like to achieve their dreams here and would like to work hard. It seems after staying here for a while, they all change their true selves to fit into the existing societal structure, i.e., Chris Hemsworth, an Australian purposely trained to speak American English in Red Dawn, can yell "This is our home" while 4th generation Asian Americans will be forced to speak broken English. This is how dreams are shaped in America.

Coming back to purge of Whites, I only wish those self-righteous obese, bald, bottom of the barrel, living on the alms Whites, proclaiming their White skin, will go back to their origin and do something about a coming flood of Muslim in their ancestral country if they're so worried about their heritage.

Rdm > , August 16, 2017 at 9:19 pm GMT

@Alec Leamas (hard at work) My point is, universities in CA are doing well commensurate with hard working students without AA action.

Saxon > , August 16, 2017 at 9:26 pm GMT

@Thomm No, he just wants the street-defecating hangers-on like you to go back and show how awesome you claim you are in your own country by making a success of it rather than milking all of the entitlements and affirmative action and other programs of literal racial advantage given to you by virtue of setting foot in someone else's country.

Rdm > , August 16, 2017 at 9:30 pm GMT

@Wally - 45% of California is Federal land.

- Without US taxpayers money CA would be a 3rd world country completely filled with unemployable & dumb illegal immigrants.

- Think about this brief list made possible by the US taxpayers / federal government, money CA would not get and then tens of thousands of CA people would lose their jobs (= lost CA tax revenues):

aerospace contracts, defense contracts, fed gov, software contracts, fed gov airplane orders, bases, ports, money for illegal aliens costs, federal monies for universities, 'affirmative action monies, section 8 housing money, monies for highways, monies for 'mass transportation', monies to fight crime, monies from the EPA for streams & lakes, monies from the Nat. Park Service, monies for healthcare, monies for freeloading welfare recipients, and all this is just the tip of the iceberg

- Not to mention the counties in CA which will not want to be part of the laughable 'Peoples Republic of California'.

- And imagine the 'Peoples Republic of California Army', hilarious.

CA wouldn't last a week without other peoples money.

Calexit? Please, pretty please. So you're talking about Calexit in AA action?

Let us play along.

If CA is existing solely due to Fed Alms, I can agree it's the tip of the iceberg. But we're talking about Universities, their performance and how AA is affecting well qualified students.

Following on your arguments,

UC Berkeley receives $373 Millions (Federal Sponsorship) in 2016.
Harvard University, on the other hand, receives $656 millions (Federal sponsorship) in 2012.

I'm talking about how Universities climb up in World ranking, based upon their innovations, productivity, research output, etc etc etc. Which to me, is reflective of what kind of students are admitted into the programs. That's my point.

If you want to talk about Calexit, you'd better go and refresh your reading comprehension ability.

Stan d Mute > , August 16, 2017 at 9:36 pm GMT

The thing that is forgotten is that white Americans DO NOT need the Africans in any way whatsoever. There is NOTHING in Detroit that we want – we abandoned it deliberately and have no interest in ever returning.

On the other hand, what do the Africans need from us?

Food. We own and operate all food production.
Medicine. Ditto.
Clean water. Look at Flint.
Sanitation services. Look at anywhere in Africa.
Order.

To put a stop to African behavior from Africans is an idiot's dream. They will never stop being what they are. They simply cannot. So if we cannot expel them, we must control them. When they act up, we cut off their food, medicine, water, and sewer services. Build fences around Detroit and Flint. Siege. After a month or two of the Ethiopian Diet, the Africans in Detroit will be much more compliant.

War for Blair Mountain > , August 16, 2017 at 9:36 pm GMT

@Thomm You just want intra-white socialism so you can mooch off of productive whites. Thomm=the girly boy blatherings of a White Libertarian Cuck

The benefit to the Historic Native Born White American Working Class of being voted into a White Racial Minority in California by Chinese "Americans" Korean "Americans" .Hindu "Americans" Sihk "Americans" and Iranian "Americans"?

Answer:0 . Bring back the Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act!!!

Two Great pro-White Socialist Labor Leaders:Denis Kearney and Samuel Gompers go read Denis Kearney's Rebel Rousing speeches google Samuel Gompers' Congressional Testimony in favor of the passage of The Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act

The peril of appeasement > , August 16, 2017 at 9:40 pm GMT

As some have pointed out, the trouble with appeasement is, it never ends. Those who are used to the handouts will always want more. There's the saying parents tend to strengthen the strong and weaken the weak, that's what paternalistic policies like affirmative action and welfare do to a society. It creates a cycle of dependency.

Those who think multiculturalism coupled with identity politics is a good idea need to take a good look at Malaysia, arguably the most multicultural country outside the US. The country is in Southeast Asia, with roughly 30m people, roughly 60% ethnic Malay(100% muslim), 23% Chinese(mostly buddhist or christian), brought in by the British in the 1800s to work the rubber plantations and tin mines, and 7% Indian(mostly Hindu), brought in by the British to work the plantations and civil service.

In 1957 the Brits left and left the power in the hands of the ethnic Malays. The Chinese soon became the most successful and prosperous group and dominated commerce and the professional ranks. In 1969 a major race riot broke out, the largely rural and poor Malays decided to "take back what's theirs", burnt, looted and slaughtered many ethnic Chinese. After the riot the government decided the only way to prevent more riots is to raise the standard of living for the Malays. And they began a massive wealth transfer program through affirmative action that heavily favors ethnic Malays. First, all civil service jobs were given to only ethnic Malays, including the police and military. Then AA was instituted in all local universities where Malays with Cs and Ds in math and science were given preference over Chinese with all A's to all the engineering, medicine and law majors. Today no one in their right mind, not even the rich Malays, want to be treated by a Malay doctor. I know people who were maimed by one of these affirmative actioned Malay "neurosurgeons" who botched a simple routine procedure, and there was no recourse, no one is allowed to sue.

Thanks to their pandering to the Malay majority and outright voting fraud, the ruling party UMNO has never lost an election and is today the longest serving ruling party in modern history. Any dissent was stifled through the sedition act where dissidents are thrown in jail, roughed up, tossed down 14th story buildings before they even go to trial. All media is strictly controlled and censored by the government, who also controls the military, and 100% of the country's oil production, with a large portion of the profit of Petronas going to the coffers of the corrupt Malay government elites, whatever's left is given to hoi polloi Malays in the form of fluff job positions created in civil service, poorly run quasi-government Malay owned companies like Petronas, full scholarships to study abroad for only ethnic Malays, tax free importation of luxury cars for ethnic Malays, and when the government decided to "privatize" any government function like the postal service or telcom, they gave it in the form of a monopoly to a Malay owned company. All government contracts e.g. for infrastructure are only given to Malay owned companies, even as they have zero expertise for the job. The clever Chinese quickly figured out they could just use a Malay partner in name only to get all government contracts.

As opposed to the US where affirmative action favors the minority, in Malaysia AA favors the majority. You know it can't last. The minority can only prop up the majority for so long. Growth today is largely propped up by oil income, and the oil reserve is dwindling. Even Mahathir the former prime minister who started the most blatant racial discrimination policy against the Chinese started chastising the Malays of late, saying they've become too lazy and dependent on government largess.

Yet despite the heavy discrimination, the Chinese continued to thrive thanks to their industriousness and ingenuity, while many rural Malays not connected with the governing elite remain poor -- classic case of strengthening the strong and weakening the weak. According to Forbes, of the top 10 richest men in Malaysia today, 9 are ethnic Chinese, only 1 is an ethnic Malay who was given everything he had. Green with envy, the ethnic Malays demanded more to keep the government in power. So a new law was made – all Chinese owned businesses have to give 30% ownership to an ethnic Malay, just like that.

Needless to say all this racial discrimination resulted in a massive brain drain for the country. many middle class Indians joined the Chinese and emigrated en masse to Australia, NZ, US, Canada, Europe, Singapore, HK, Taiwan, Japan. The ones left are often destitute and poor, heavily discriminated against due to their darker skin, and became criminals. Al Jazeera recently reported that the 7% ethnic Indians in Malaysia commit 70% of the crime.

To see how much this has cost Malaysia -- Singapore split off from Malaysia 2 years after their joint independence from Britain and was left in destitute as they have no natural resources. But Lee Kuan Yew with the help of many Malaysian Chinese who emigrated to Singapore turned it into one of the richest countries in the world in one generation with a nominal per capita GDP of $53k, while Malaysia is firmly stuck at $9.4k, despite being endowed with natural resources from oil to tin and beautiful beaches. The combination of heavy emigration among the Chinese and high birthrate among the muslim Malays encouraged by racialist Mahathir, the Chinese went from 40% of the population in 1957 to 23% today. The Indians went from 11% to 7%.

I fear that I'm seeing the same kind of problem in the US. It's supremely stupid for the whites to want to give up their majority status through open borders. Most Asians like me who immigrated here decades ago did it to get away from the corrupt, dishonest, dog-eat-dog, misogynistic culture of Asia. But when so many are now here, it defeats the purpose. The larger the immigrant group, the longer it takes to assimilate them. Multiculturalism is a failed concept, especially when coupled with identity politics. Affirmative Action does not work, it only creates a toxic cycle of dependency. The US is playing with fire. We need a 20 year moratorium on immigration and assimilate all those already here. Otherwise, I fear the US will turn into another basketcase like Malaysia.

Truth > , August 16, 2017 at 9:42 pm GMT

@Liberty Mike https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RrWfNonLDQ

Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 9:43 pm GMT

@Tom Welsh There were only about one million Indians living in what is the United States in 1500. There are now 3 million living in much better conditions than in 1500.

I would be willing to accept non White immigration if the non White immigrants and our government would end affirmative action for non Whites.

Asians are discriminated against in college admissions. But in the job market they have affirmative action aristocratic status over Whites.

Truth > , August 16, 2017 at 9:43 pm GMT

@Liberty Mike The sno percentage is much higher an Ukraine, Hungary and Austria than here.

Joe Wong > , August 16, 2017 at 9:45 pm GMT

@Diversity Heretic John Derbyshire has made similar arguments--racial preferences are the price for social peace. But, as Steve Sailer has pointed out, we're running out of white and Asian children to buffer black dysfunction and Asians are going to get less and less willing to be "sacrificial lambs" for a black underclass that they did nothing to create and that they despise.

There are other ways to control the black underclass. You can force the talented ones to remain in their community and provide what leadership they can. Black violence can be met with instant retributive counter-violence. (Prior to the 1960s most race riots were white on black.) Whites can enforce white norms on the black community, who will sort-of conform to them as best they are able.

Finally, Rudyard Kipling had a commentary on Danegeld. It applies to paying off dysfunctional domestic minorities just as much to invading enemies.

"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that pays it is lost!"

admitting academically unqualified blacks to elite schools is, at core, a policy to protect the racial peace and, as such, has nothing to do with racial justice,

The Black are protesting relentlessly and loudly verbally and thru assertive actions about the racial discrimination they have been facing. I have never seen those academically unqualified blacks admitted to the elite schools have stood up using themselves as shiny examples to refute the discrimination allegations the Black made against the White.

While the policy to protect the racial peace by admitting academically unqualified blacks to elite schools failed miserably, the restricting the smart and qualified Asians to elite schools is blatantly racial injustice practice exercised in broad day light with a straight face lie. The strategy is to cause resentment between the minorities so that the White can admitting their academically unqualified ones to elite schools without arousing scrutiny.

Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 9:50 pm GMT

@Saxon I'm white, you stupid faggot.

I am extremely committed that you White Trashionalists fulfill your duty as wastebaskets of genetic matter.

Excellent whites exist only because the waste produced gets removed in the form of WN wiggers.

Like I said, there is a huge variance within whites. Therefore, you have no business speaking for respectable whites.

Worst of all, you Nationalist-Leftists are un-American.

Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 10:04 pm GMT

@Astuteobservor II Just google solutrean theory Europeans arrived in America 20,000 years ago. Many articles come up including from smithsonian.

The east coast Canadian Indians always had the founding myth they came over the ocean.

There's a book, Across The Atlantic Ice by Dennis Stanford on kindle, Amazon and many book stores.

Priss Factor > , Website August 16, 2017 at 10:05 pm GMT

Here is one 'smart Asian' who is not a Self-Righteous Addict of Proglobalism, but what a clown.

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

Dineshisms are always funny as hell.

Because KKK were Southern Democrats, Democratic Party is forever the KKK party. Never mind Democrats represented a broad swatch of people.
And Dinesh finds some parallels between Old Democrats and Nazi ideology, therefore Democrats are responsible for Nazism. I mean

Doesn't he know that parties change? Democratic Party once used to be working class party. Aint no more.
GOP used to be Party of Lincoln. It is southern party now, and most loyal GOP-ers are Southerns with respect for Confederacy. GOP now wants Southern Neo-Confed votes but don't want Confed memorials. LOL.
Things change.

Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond came over to the GOP for a reason.

Dinesh seems to be stuck in 'caste' mentality. Because Dems once had KKK on its side, Democratic Party is forever cast or 'casted' as KKK. And now, 'Democrats are real Nazis'.

Actually, the real supremacism in America at the moment seems to be AIPAC-related.

Anyway, there were leftist elements in National Socialism, but its was more right than left.

Why? Because in the hierarchy of ideological priorities, the most important core value was the 'Aryan' Tribe. Socialized medicine was NOT the highest value among Nazis. Core conviction was the ideology of racial identity and unity. Thus, it was more right than left.

Just because National Socialism had some leftist elements doesn't make it a 'leftist' ideology.

Same is true of Soviet Communism. Stalin brought back high culture and classical music. He favored traditionalist aesthetics to experimental or avant-garde ones. And Soviets promoted some degree of Russian nationalism. And even though communists eradicated certain aspects of the past, they also restored respect for classic literature and culture. So, does that mean USSR was 'conservative' or 'rightist'? No, it had some rightist elements but its core ideology was about class egalitarianism, therefore, it was essentially leftist.

Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 10:20 pm GMT

@Joe Wong All the Whites and Asians who are admitted to the top 25 schools are superbly qualified. There are so many applicants every White and Asian is superbly qualified.

The entire point of affirmative action is that Asians and Whites are discriminated against in favor of blacks and Hispanics. Harvard proudly proclaims that is now majority non White.

Don't worry, the Jews decided long ago that you