Category: Duke

He’s Fallen Off His White Horse

The Trump administration is playing “4-D chess” indeed!  The problem is they are playing against White Americans, against their own base.

Cuckadoodledoo!

As disgusted as I am with Trump (but not surprised), I am far more disgusted with the “movement” and I am not going to shut up about, it, regardless of how much they wish I would.

How many people that I am aware of (there may be more, but I’m talking about myself and the major figures I follow, many key players) were warning against Trump – Trump the man as opposed to Trump’s populism and its supporters – from the very beginning?  There’s me, and there’s Strom, and maybe Duke, although Duke seemed to equivocate a bit closer to the election. That’s it – contra all the revisionist history being peddled now, by people who try to convince us that a few brief words in passing (saying once: “Trump may not work out like we wish”) are equivalent to consistent strong words of warning.  Sorry, it won’t wash.  

And how many people clearly identified the “movement’s” Trump worship with the continued repeated disappointments of the Man on White Horse Syndrome?  Insofar as I am aware, only me.  Strom, after all, had been previously caught up with Putin worship, and I am not aware if Duke made these connections. 

Repeating the same mistake over and over and over again, and then lambasting those few who have the foresight to warn you – that’s not a good sign of leadership, my friends.  That’s poor judgment.  All the quota queens with their breathless excitement, their “Trump is the last chance for White America” or “In Trump We Trust” or “Trump will make a real impact on America’s demographics” or, to a more extreme extent, Roissy’s homoerotic fanboy fanaticism, these are not the types you want leading you into battle. These are not the types you want making decisions that will determine the course of “movement” success (or, as is more likely, failure).  These are the affirmative action types who’ve run the “movement” into the ground, but the “movement” rank-and-file will continue to give them a “pass” because, well, you know…they’re “one of the boys.”

It’s going to be a bumpy ride.  I wonder who the next Man on White Horse hero will be. Right now, we’ll have to wait out the current heavy breathing over the new Joan of Arc, Marine Le Pen.  The stupidity never stops, it’s baked so deep into the “movement” that it’ll likely take decades to remove the stench of failure and futility.

Cue the chants of “Pepe!” and “Hail Kek” and asinine comments about Trump’s “deep chess game.”

Lulz, indeed.

Advertisements

Race In Der News

More depressing stupidities.

Meet Trump’s senior advisor. By the way, Der Touchback has no problem tweeting about Arnie’s Celebrity Apprentice ratings or about hatchet-faced harridan Streep’s inappropriate anti-Trump SJW remarks, but he hasn’t motivated himself to comment on the Chicago hate crime case in which his favorite Negro pets tortured a White man while making anti-Trump remarks. Has his son-in-law been advising him lately?  Or are we going to be borrowing language from Trad Vlad’s excuses by Der Movement and say that Trump is “playing a deep chess game?”  Question is: who are the pawns?  The White American electorate?

Derbyshire talks truth about Puerto Ricans here. Let us not forget that the “Feller plan” for White American separatism, at one point (1984, I believe) championed by “gamblin’ man” Duke, and later promoted by a certain troll who shall go nameless lest he get his panties in a bunch down under, included a state of “Minoria” in which some Euro-American White ethnics would be herded together with feral, non-White, triracial Puerto Ricans.  Der Movement – gotta love it!

Which reminds me – as a youth, I had a significant number of Jewish friends.  I remember the mother of one of them saying that she thought that “Puerto Ricans are dumber than Blacks” – although, if I recall correctly, it was phrased in more colorful language.  All Hail The Feller Plan!

A certain weasel-faced gamester recently commented negatively about Russians, about the “dab of Mongol” in them apparent in their physical appearance.  Yeah, that’s opposed to, say, David Bromstad and Bjork, whose physical appearances reflect and exemplify the purest of the pure Aryan stocks!

Der Movement, Der Movement, Der Movement marches on.

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.

Danger From the Alt-Right

Co-option and loss of ideological diversity.

There has been concern in the Alt-Right about being co-opted by more mainstream, conservative, lukewarm, non-racialist elements.  I myself have been expressing concern that the WN Alt-Right faction can become co-opted by the anti-WN pro-Jewish and pro-Asian HBD Alt-Wrong faction.

But I see an even larger, more fundamental concern: that White racial nationalism in general will become subsumed (co-opted?) by the Alt-Right, that the diversity (if I may use that word) of racial nationalist thought will become homogenized by Pepe the Frog, Trump as God Emperor, “game,” HBD race realism, juvenile snark, undercuts, and all the other memes characteristic of the broad Alt-Right.  The wider range of WN thought and ideology will become buried under the pop-culture Alt-Right, and those who do not “join the fun” will find themselves marginalized.

I for one am not of the Alt-Right, and although I cannot speak for anyone else, I do not see, for example, someone like Strom fitting in, nor Duke. If Pierce and Carto were still alive, I doubt they’d consider themselves part of the Alt-Right as well.

Some may say: so what?  After all, it is natural selection and competition at work; if the Alt-Right is more successful, if it takes up the “far-Right” niche space, then that is quite proper. Stop complaining!

The problem is that – besides the obvious concern of “not putting all your eggs in one basket” – being successful is not enough.  One needs to be successful and also right.  And it is not clear that the Alt-Right approach – regardless of the attention (briefly) showered upon them by Hillary’s malevolence, Trump’s “coattails,” and the enthusiasm the millennial social media crowd seem to have with Pepe and flip snark – is the right approach. It is not clear whether Alt-Right attitudes, ideologies, strategies, and tactics are, in the long term, correct.

Being popular does not make one right – doesn’t the position of WN in today’s degenerate culture illustrate that well enough?  If the popularity of racial liberalism in the broader society does not make such liberalism right, then the popularity – based as it is more on superficial style than on deep ideology – of the Alt-Right in Der Movement does not make the Alt-Right approach right either.

Then we have the problem of what I would call “double co-option.”  That is: if Der Movement is co-opted and subsumed by the Alt-Right, and if the Alt-Right itself is co-opted by the HBD Alt-Wrong, then White Nationalism becomes effectively replaced by a cult worshiping Jewish and Asian IQ. This need not be immediately overt and obvious, a shallow facade of cardboard racialism could be put up as a front, with the ironclad edifice of Jewish/Asian supremacy setting the agenda just behind that facade and manipulating all the “latrine flies” against their own racial interests.  That is not far-fetched if you consider that the described scenario represents what is already going on in certain precincts of the “movement.”

All of this bears close watching, close monitoring.  I would advise a double strategy: on the narrower, intra-Alt Right level, the WN Alt-Right needs to fully and definitively separate from the HBD Alt-Wrong.  On the broader “movement”-scale level, there needs to be a critical mass of quality activists who remain separate from the Alt-Right (although there may of course be cooperation between these activists and the hardcore WN Alt-Right action).

If that doesn’t happen, I fear that all the eggs in that basket of deplorables will end up being clones of Humpty Dumpty.  And we’re all headed for a great fall.

In the News, 3/5/16

Odds and ends from a world (and “movement”) gone mad.

I agree with Sanders’ supporters in this regard.  Will Bill and Hillary have matching orange jumpsuits in prison?


And certainly not many of the Chinese and Indians I have met who bad-mouth the US in favor of their own countries and who have come only to make money. And if any of these immigrants vote, over 70% vote for socialist big government and not in favor of the freedom which has always been a big reason to want to be American.


Of course.  After all, the existential meaning of Asians is hatred of Whites, and didn’t Derbyshire himself (in the “measured groveling” essay) tell us about Rosie’s extreme ethnocentrism and anger toward Americans (while living in America of course) over that plane incident that occurred more than 15 years ago?

And then we have the dedicated anti-White activist Durocher who pontificates:

At least until the entire rotten structure of lies and hypocrisy is brought tumbling down and the European peoples, and in particular European-Americans, are, again, free to determine their own destiny.


Here he is blogging about Jews on Counter-Currents.  Why “in particular European-Americans?”  After all, when he posts at TOO, he’s always talking about Jews in Europe, particularly France.  But that, you see, is one of the keys to understanding Durocher, and one reason his writing irritates me so much.  Like another well-known anti-White Internet Troll (remember that Yukon Cornelius song to know who I’m talking about here), Durocher is always exhibiting a chameleon-like ability to change his worldview to suit his audience, marketing himself (why? to gain trust?) rather than promoting a specific worldview.

So, on TOO, he is all about Jews, Jews, Jews, mostly in Europe, when he’s not fawning over Viktor Orban, promoting the discredited idea of mainstreaming.  At Counter-Currents, addressing an audience mostly European-American, he emphasizes Euro-American interests while warning us not to be too obsessive about Jews.  At Counter-Currents, a more radical site, he tends to dispense with the mainstreaming, and praises Hitler, and also peddles Nordicism.  His essays are rambling displays of incoherence, with no other seeming purpose than to ingratiate himself with the target audience and win their trust, before spewing forth more memetic poison.

And he continues:

There are dangers in becoming obsessive. Every topic must be given the just measure of attention. The work must go on.

Which means what?  How does the work go on?  How do we know what is obsessive and what is just measure?  What Durocher tells us it is?

And then we have Roissy, trying to excuse Trump’s pitiful flip-flopping on immigration,. Roissy refers to the Rightists that omega race cuck Trump continuously disavows:

some internet backwater weirdo 


Who is that?  James Edwards I presume?  It could be David Duke also, since Der Touchback disavowed Duke as well.  (Question: Has Trump disavowed his Jewish son-in-law or his Jewish convert daughter or his Jewish grandchildren?  No, as Tony the Tiger would say, Trump thinks they’re GREEEAATTTT!).

Who the hell is this turd Roissy calling someone else “some internet backwater weirdo.” Guess what asshole: the Left would consider “Chateau Heartiste” to be backwater weirdness as well.  You think you are better than Edwards and Duke?  Are you joking?  Or are you  just emulating your cuck-god Short-Fingered Vulgarian Touchback in attacking those to your right?

Whining Whites

No one to blame but themselves.
Well, that’s real tough and all, and I feel the same way. But who is to blame?  Who voted in all the politicians who opened the borders and pandered to coloreds?  Who refused to vote for Pat Buchanan – a moderate mainstream Republican who nevertheless was and is sound on immigration and national identity – and instead cheered “Civil Rights Republican” Dole when stiff-arm Bob invited all ‘dem dere bigots and haters to leave the convention hall?  Who continued to support Ronnie Raygun after the 1980s amnesty?  Who laughed off Duke’s Presidential candidacy? Who supported John McAmnesty and “strap the dog to the roof of the car” liberal Republican Romney?  Whose votes can be taken for granted, an automatic given, by the White-hating GOP Establishment?  Who, even now, is afraid that “Touchback Trump” is a “fascist” and that we must have Jeb or Marco instead?
Hey, Whitey!  Feel alienated?  Blame yourself.

In the News, 11/6/15

Three news stories.

One: Leucosa watch: what can you say about a race of people so pitifully cowardly that they can’t even openly state their support for a mainstream political candidate?  We are talking about Donald Trump, for heaven’s sake, not David Duke. Donald Trump – celebrity millionaire, reality TV show star, a person slated to host “Saturday Night Live” (regardless of whether or not that’s cancelled, he was still invited – would Duke be?).  Newsflash to all those “Der Tag” “movement” types, who think a White uprising is just around the corner: if Whites are afraid to tell a pollster “I support Trump,” do you really think those same marshmallows are going to “take to the hills” and “smash the System?”  

Two: One benefit of Salter that it allows a quantitative (or at least semi-quantitative) discussion of the real costs of mass migration.   For example, see this “back-of-the-envelope” analysis of the costs of the mestizo invasion of America. That puts the contrast between ethnic interests and “economic gain” right to the forefront. You can not only put a cost in “child equivalents” on any scenario, but also invoke “dollars and cents” to put it into starkly economic terms. Only Salterism allows for ultimate interests to be duly recognized and discussed in this fashion.

Three: One Jew supports the work of another Jew, said work being just another permutation of multiracial separatism. Well, they are going to do what comes naturally to them. The bigger problem is with their Gentile enablers, who help give them a platform within the “movement.”