Category: behold the female

Der News: Rotten Orange, Silk Road, and Der Movement

Der Movement marches on.

Here is affirmative action in action – both sex and ethnic.

What choice did we have?” she asked. “I don’t apologize. … He said all the right things and nobody else would even say it.”

OK, fair enough, Mudshark Annie. Making a strategic decision to support Trump given his rhetoric during the campaign – one could understand that. But, here, my dear curry muncher, is the problem:

Coulter help drum up big support for Trump during the presidential campaign and wrote the book “In Trump We Trust,” in which she said she “worshiped” him with “blind loyalty.”

“I have no regrets for ferociously supporting him.”

How about – I don’t know – prudently supporting Trump without declaring your “blind loyalty” and how you “worship” him?

And, no, this is not “20-20 hindsight.”  I’ve been criticizing the “God Emperor” all along – as well as being exasperated with the “blind…worship” of him. Here are five posts which I made just in a period of several weeks in August 2016, representative of my skepticism:

It was always obvious what Trump was.  The disappointment of idiots like Coulter simply reflects their bad judgment (you know, bad judgement like dating Dinesh).  But Annie is a “wimmin” and “one of the gals” (the vaginized version of “one of the boys”) so she’ll get a free pass, while those who actually did know better long ago are castigated as “bitter” and “insane.”  It’s all a mystery!

More on the Jew-Chinese-Trump axis of Silk Road anti-Whitism.  To borrow the language (in a more dignified fashion) of a certain love-struck Silker blogger, one can say that the Silkers are “fellating Jewish phallus.”

This what you get when you worship “dem wimmin” in De Movement.  Is Jef going to make Pettibone breakfast?  Affirmative action cuts all ways, doesn’t it?

“Just ask…straight out.”  First, as if that’s the way to get to the truth, and second, who cares if an airhead has an affair with a Derb-wanna-be?  Oh, that’s right, Roissy cares. What I care about is racial activism, and how vagina-worship from thirsty betas introduces stupidity – well, more stupidity than is normally present.

Why the West Should Shun the Alt Right

Alt Right = moronic stupidity.

So basically the whole thing is a retarded mashup of Arthur Kemp and Jared Taylor, with millennial juvenile jackass “lulzing” trolling mixed in, spiced up with a few “Hail Keks!” and pictures of Pepe.  Yeah, the West really needs that.

I do like this comment:

machiaevil • 11 minutes ago

Nobody needs the alt-lite (which is what you now are). You have been used and now you are being disposed. You are kosher cuckservatives and retards who have never kissed a girl drooling over Jew friendly shills like Lauren Southern, Birtanny Pettinbone, Lana Lokteff, there’s reason you can’t find a photo of them without makeup.

Lol at moron Spencer ditching the awesome and intellectually elitist Radix, for the shitty aggregator site altright.com aimed at idiots who watch (((Rebel Media))) and Stefan Molyfag videos and learned of the altright from Hillary Clinton.

That’s correct.  The breathless excitement over female Alt Right/Alt Lite specimens is absolutely thirsty beta-ism, since listening to podcasts involving such people, or reading what they write, exposes their intellectual vacuity and shallow “understanding” of the issues at stake.

And I’ve already written here that leaving Radix for AltRight.com was a terrible mistake.

Delenda est Alt Right.

Spencer, Abortion, and Sallis

Thoughts on a video.

Some notes on this:

First, I believe Spencer has a bright future as a spokesman and representative of the Far-Right and, perhaps one day, can ride the tide of right-wing populism to elected office of some type.  But, he is eventually going to need to cut ties with the failed stupidity of Alt Right, Inc. – both the Alt Right “movement” as well as the AltRight.com flotsam and jetsam. Perhaps as he gets older, and reflects back on recent events (including being “thrown under the bus” over “Hailgate” by Alt Right ad Alt Wrong figures), he’ll see the folly in his current path.  A natural evolution of his position would be a pan-European materialist futurism, but articulated in a down-to-earth and Americanized fashion.

I agree with his points about abortion and contraception, some of which overlaps with material on Counter-Currents (by Le Brun I believe).  Is abortion the killing of human beings (or at least of hominids)?  Yes it is.  But so what?  So is capital punishment, so is warfare, so is policing.  So? Huge numbers of high-quality Germans were killed in WWII Allied bombing raids, and I’m supposed to get all worked up over future gangbangers and carjackers being aborted?  I think not.

I think Spencer is going to be disappointed by Lahren, but we’ll see.

While I agree with Spencer on abortion, I do not support Lahren’s feminist “it are the women’s bodies” argument.  Yes, it is the woman’s womb, but the fetus is a shared resource, genetically half the father’s (and not even getting into extended family and ethnic interests).  I’m talking here purely objectively – from a subjective racial standpoint, yes, let’s abort more Blacks and Hispanics and if feminist arguments get that job done, fine, but from a purely objective argument (and one which subjectively can help inform the broader issue of White men’s rights), there is a problem here.

If the father is going to be on the hook for child support if the infant is born, then he sure as hell has the right to participate, as an equal partner, in decisions of abortion (or contraception for that matter). The fetus is not the woman’s to decide what to do with as her estrogenic whims lead her.  Now, some would say – “What if the father wants the child and the mother wants to abort.  Will she be forced to carry it to term?”

To which I say – she should be given a choice.  Either have the child and give it to the father, or have the abortion and pay reparations to the father, a regular payment equal to whatever the father’s child support would have been otherwise.  If the father was to be on the hook for $X per month, then that’s what the woman would have to pay the man in the scenario described above.  Cue the feminist shrieks of outrage.

Spencer is right about the “Deep Cuck” commitment to policing the conservative movement and enforcing conservative (cuckservative) dogma. What I would like to see next is Spencer – or someone else other than me – speak out against the racialist “movement” and its own fossilized dogma and its tendency to police itself (*).

* Don’t kid yourself that the ignoring/opposition to this blog is all about my “crazy, erratic behavior” or “excessive negativism” and that’s for two reasons.  The lesser reason is that the “craziness” is/was not only obviously tongue-in-cheek but I’m on record of openly stating as such.  The more fundamental reason – and this gets to the heart of the “negativism” – is that it puts the cart before the horse, it reverses cause and effect.  It’s not that the “movement” is hostile to my message because my message has always been “negative,” but rather that the message has become increasingly negative because the “movement” – or at least important precincts thereof – have always been hostile to both the message and the messenger. I’ve been involved in this activity in one form or another for over 20 years. Those who remember the early 2000s can remember my work with Legion Europa, Amren, TOQ, etc.  And then with later with MR (when it was more sane). Was that work – presented sans “craziness” and “negativism” – generally well received?  No it was not.  Did it have any lasting impact?  No it did not. Was anyone really paying attention?  No, not that I could see. Then, to say the current opposition is a reasonable response to my “grumpiness” is disingenuous.  

Behold the Female, 2/25/17

Some truths indeed.

Two comments from a Yahoo article about some Balkanoid athlete being berated by his wife:

Babe Truth

5 minutes ago

Females all think they have the right to berate and control men who took them from nothing to the good life. These controlling females over value their real worth just because they have breasts and a #$%$ and think men must be their whopping posts. It is no wonder men leave these monsters for peace and quiet.

Bill

8 minutes ago

No matter how hot a woman might be…somewhere she is making some dudes life miserable.

By the way, “Babe Truth” is a hilarious moniker.  The actual Ruth was an extreme alpha male by the way.

Female sluttiness. The real sexual harassment is women prostituting themselves for promotions and pay raises.  The imaginary sexual harassment is men doing anything.  It’s all female hysterical projection.

And by the way, it doesn’t have to be all actual sex.  I’ve seen women, if they are attractive enough, get their promotions, etc. merely by flirting with older male bosses.  Now, this happens more in academia and biotech, where the older male bosses tend to be more “beta” and nerdish than in the business world where the more alpha bosses expect actual sex in exchange for the promotions and pay raises (yes, biotech can be business but let’s consider the smaller sale, more science-oriented ones here).  A few blouses with the top buttons left open, a few hair tosses and fake giggling, and watch those careers get turbo-boosted!

Race and Culture News, 2/8/17

Several items.

Here is an excellent podcast about David Lynch, whose body of work I also appreciate.

Here are two videos that well represent the Lynchian approach:

The defeated Democrat Presidential candidate unburdens herself, also discussed here. I have previously observed that the Left is unable to learn from the Trump election, and here we see it on display.  It hasn’t occurred to these folks – or more likely they do not care – that their anti-White-man identity politics was a major driver of Trump’s surprise victory.  Keep on bashing the White men and those men – and many White women married to White men – will become more and more bloc voters for the populist Right. The Left will not learn because they cannot learn, and do not wish to do so. Breezy Steve Sailer is correct: the Left is held together by their hatred of White men and so they cannot and will not accept the idea that they need to alter their approach and worldview to become more palatable to White men. So the much-needed division and balkanization will continue.

And another piece of evidence for the Left’s cluelessness: the idea of a “women’s strike.” Err…”ladies” – men do not want to be around hysterical SJW fatties and varied assorted blue-haired freaks and dumpy menopausal hags.  So, a “strike” is something that’s going to backfire, big time.

Speaking of Breezy Steve, one of his few good ideas is using the RICO laws against organized leftist thuggery.  Now’s the time, is it not?  With “God Emperor Trump” as President, and Sessions on track to become Attorney General, why can’t that be done? Why can’t the leftist thugs be declared a terrorist organization, as one online petition calls for? How about actually cutting Berkeley funds? Can Trump do something else than tweet in his bathrobe?

Race and Sex in the News, 11/15/16

Several items.

Entitlement and assumptions (emphasis added):

Not only is the POC attitude of entitlement and aggrievement ridiculous, it is also presumptuous. Trump haters assume that whomever they happen to be speaking to at that moment shares their hatred for Trump and all that he represents — the liberal bubble that we see over and over again in big cities and universities.  Many of us who do not go about their day in a MAGA hat, and appear to be otherwise in step with the mainstream of American society, will often be confused with one who has accepted the anti-Trump bias of pop-culture, which is what all “educated” people after all must believe.  They seem to take for granted that as a White person, your chief goal is to champion their causes, what they believe to be important.  I’m afraid that no longer interests us, and we have instead decided to look to our own welfare.

That’s correct. POC have a huge sense of entitlement.  Further – and this applies to liberal Whites even more so – is the assumption that any and all educated folks are liberal anti-Trump Clinton supporters.  Or, as I’ve suggested in previous posts just after the election, these White leftists are fishing for information.  From what I’ve heard, there was, at least in some locales and institutions, post-election an effort to identify Trump supporters based on their reactions to comments and questions.  So, I think that before the election it was, as the quote above suggests, an assumption of sharing the same attitudes prevalent in “big cities and universities.”  After the election, it may be a more McCarthyite “witch hunt” to uncover those dastardly Trump voters amongst us.

Women’s rights and fertility.  Something to think about, whether or not you’d take things as far as the commentator in the video.

Gwen Ifill, Negress whose debate question revealed Sander’s anti-White hatred for all the world to see, has died.  Well, she was no good, but for that one moment was the avatar of truthfulness. If only some interviewer would call out Levantine Bernie about that the next time he does his disingenuous song-and-dance about “the White working class.”  

So, Obama gave advice to Trump in their White House meeting that Trump needs to “reach out to minorities and women, etc. who feel threatened by Trump and his rhetoric.”  Another example of POC/leftist lack of self-awareness and hypocrisy.  Did Obama reach out to those White folks – particularly White men – who were threatened by the Obama regime?  Of course not; instead, he doubled down on his anti-White attitudes and polices. “Reaching out” only goes in one direction, you see.  This continues to give me hope: the Left is not, and likely cannot, learn any lessons from this election.  The lessons would go against their core beliefs and their “programming” and hence any thoughts leading to truth become short-circuited and re-routed back to their deception and self-deception.  Indeed, if Obama had followed in own advice, who knows, maybe Trump would not have been elected.  But the intellectually deficient navel-gazing mulatto is unable to see that.  It’s all someone else’s fault.

HBD, HBD, where are thou?

Free 2016 Debating Advice for Donald Trump

Pay attention, “God Emperor.”

Don’t flip flop.  Backpedaling makes you look weak and indecisive; keep in mind your popularity is due to plain speaking on important issues.  Now, of course, you can polish your delivery of the material, sound more presidential and knowledgeable, but that is presentation.  The actual content, the fundamentals, should not be compromised.  You need to learn how to use political ju–jitsu to turn the tables on her arguments, so as to continue to appeal to your base while also not turning off all of the cucks.  As an example: the charge that you are being cruel to immigrants and refugees who want a better life – deporting families, breaking up families.  Here, you should take a page from Edward Ross and argue that open borders are cruel to Americans and their posterity, that the Democrats are more interested in the rights and interests of immigrants, particularly illegals, than they are of American citizens (lay on that civic nationalism real thick, appeal to the cucks).  Paraphrase Ross, in that future generations of Americans beseech us with their interests, needs, and desires just as much as do the migrant hordes.  Also, that we can’t take in all who want to come – open borders will destroy us without really helping the overcrowded others, whose problems can only be solved in their own nations.  You’ll need to know the facts though (see below), to answer the lies about how Immigration “benefits” natives. You should also be prepared to not only answer the usual economic arguments, but to state, clearly and forthrightly, that there are issues at stake here that go beyond economics, dollars and cents – the posterity of American citizens, their rights to their own country, their culture and their identity (“identity” is as close as you can get to race, unfortunately).

A devastating riposte to all the talk about “compassion” is to openly ask your opponent: “Why do you seem to care more about illegal aliens and potential terrorists than you do about actual American citizens?”  You can point out that charity begins at home, and that there are plenty of problems right here in America that require our attention, without importing other people’s problems from overseas. If you really want to win over the cucks and women, ask about Jamiel Shaw: “Why does Hillary care more about illegal gangbangers than she does about African-American student athletes?”  (The cucks and “college-educated women” will eat that right up, I’ll tell you that for nothing).  Note to Trump: More commercials featuring Jamiel Shaw Sr. – that’ll get those cuck loins stirring.

And don’t be apologetic about foreign policy, including Putin and Russia. Russia is an important nation, a nuclear-armed nation, and Putin is a powerful and popular leader.  It is in the interests of the American people that we have reasonably good relations with Russia. You can point out that we had a chance for a cooperative relationship with Russia after the end of the Cold War, and that was ruined by the Neocons (whose foreign policy Hillary supports) and their pathological hatred of the Russian nation.

In summary, do not backtrack.  Forcefully state that you represent the American people, the people out there watching the debate, not the special interests and outsiders supporting Clinton in her contempt toward, and hostility against, Middle America.

Don’t be too abusive.  Unfortunately, you cannot be too abusive to Hillary, and I say unfortunately because I would really like to see you subject her to a withering attack of abuse and humiliation. However, that will alienate all the white-knighting moderate GOP cucks, and turn off the “college-educated women” and other flotsam and jetsam whose votes you need.  Be relentless, but not abusive.

Push her hard.  Hillary Clinton is a sick “woman” – sick both physically and mentally.  While I have no doubt she will be well propped up medically – perhaps through the use of drug stimulants – that can only go so far, and medical interventions for someone as sick as she comes with its own set of debilitating side effects. You, Donald, are by far the healthier, more energetic, more robust of the two of you.  You need to push, challenge, keep up a fast pace (to the extent possible within the debate format), stress her (without being overtly abusive as noted above).  If she has suspect stamina and depleted natural energy, do all you can to exhaust, frustrate, and tire her. The details can be worked out with your campaign staff, who know more about the details of the debate format than I.  But, details aide, the objective is clear: your opponent is not well and you must, if possible, push her past her limits of endurance and of patience. Imagine if she collapses on stage. Or merely looks exhausted, even with artificial aids.  Or looks confused, or needs “bathroom breaks,” or loses her cool in a moment of heated debate. The possibilities to make her look bad by leveraging her bad heath and nasty temperament are all there for you to take full advantage of.

Know your material.  As part of preparation, you need to know facts, you need to have plans behind your proposals.  You can’t answer questions about the nuclear triad with “the devastation is very important to me” (while I find that amusing, your typical BMI-enriched soccer mom will think you’re a lunatic) and you can’t keep on bloviating about “a big beautiful wall” that “Mexico will pay for.”  And you need to get things straight about deportation. Why not dust off self-deportation?  It’s a reasonable plan.  Let’s be honest: you have a pretty low threshold to reach here – the impression is that you are an ignorant buffoon.  If you can at least give the impression of being reasonably well-informed, it’ll shock – in a positive sense – the audience. Expectations are low here, so you can easily exceed them with some work.

Don’t be baited. Did you learn your lesson from the Brown Star Family fiasco?  Democrats in general, and Hillary and crew in particular, despise the military; therefore, the only reason for the brownsters was to bait you into making a hostile response, so as to alienate all the GOP cuckservatives and chicken hawks who worship the military (just as long as it’s someone else providing the service and the sacrifices). You fell for it. Don’t let it happen again.

The whole racism and Alt-Right issue will come up. most likely. Don’t be baited, and do NOT throw your own supporters under the bus.  Turn it around and make the issue one of the “basket of deplorables” comment with which “Hillary has smeared millions of hard-working American citizens” (of all races! – cuckadoodledoo!), she is “spewing hate” (use the Left’s own language against them), all “right-thinking people” will reject “her message of division and hate.”  Stress how your own policies are moderate and reasonable, and that you cannot control who supports you, but that you are not going to denounce concerned Americans who want what is best for their country, even if “some may not always express themselves as eloquently as one would hope.”

If Duke is mentioned?  You can state truthfully that you have disavowed him – and you can ask Hillary when she will disavow some of her own questionable supporters (get names from your campaign staff – there should be no shortage there).  

Why do these “radical” people support you?  Look, the American people have been ignored by the elites so long that folks get frustrated and some “may go too far,” but the mass of your supporters are decent, hard-working, law-abiding American citizens (like Jamiel Shaw Sr. – cue the cuck heavy breathing) who should not be smeared by Hillary’s spewing hate. If she is so stupid as to mention Pepe, or anything similar?  Shake your head sadly and mock her for wasting time with something so silly.  Then counter-punch and cite her own inflammatory remarks and questionable supporters. You get the picture.

Prepare!  For godssakes, don’t be a jackass and think you can “wing it” without ample preparation. Sure, you don’t want to appear robotic or over-rehearsed, but you nevertheless need to be as prepared for this as for anything you’ve ever done before.  Practice debates with someone standing in for Hillary are essential, and your mock opponent should be instructed to try to rile you, bait you, and anger you.  You must be immune to provocations, and be ready for a devastating counter-attack. Solid preparation avoids mistakes and builds confidence. Your mock interview opponent should viciously attack you; you must anticipate everything, and prepare for anything.