Category: movement’s ethnic affirmative action program

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.

Rotten Orange News: 5/15/17

Trump the useless.


As so often nowadays, the sad thing about this story is the spinelessness of the Trump administration in refusing to stand up for their nominee.

Trump was right about China, which makes his current pathetic cucking to China even more weak, treasonous, and absolutely pathetic.

And so of course the Chinese are warming up to Trump, as his pro-Jewish ties leads him naturally to a pro-Asian position. Remember: pro-Jewish and pro-Asian are two sides of the same anti-White coin.

Even Mudshark Annie is getting tired of Trump’s omega male uselessness. That leaves only Homoerotic Roissy as the last stand for Trump fanboy obsessiveness.

Of course, when Annie was pontificating about “In Trump We Trust” some of us were warning you all that Trump as a vulgar, ignorant buffoon and a beta race cuck who could not be trusted.  Also, when Annie was dating a South Asian, others were involved in pro-White racial activism.  But no worries!   Annie is a double quota case – ethnicity and sex – so despite all her obvious failings, thirsty betas will still give her a “pass.”

How does this square with Roissy’s assertion that alpha males lift?

The Asinine Alt Right, 5/13/17

More stupidity from the Alt Right.

Trump has always been a one-way man-crush for the Alternative Right. 

That’s true enough.  But only Trump?  Can we forget Reagan?  No, Ron Paul, no, I mean Rand Paul, no, really I mean Trad Vlad playing his “deep chess game” by rallying the world against “neo-Nazism.”  Now it’s Trump. This pathetic fanboy obsession, this Man on White Horse Syndrome, is a sign of weak-minded individuals who cannot stand harsh reality and who have to find comfort in a Big Daddy to save them (Hint: The origin of religion. Fear of death, fear of life, fear of struggle, fear of overcoming…Big Daddy and his son Jaysus will save you).

Like a beta orbiter fuming in his bedroom that a girl who is only dimly aware of him has “betrayed” him by acting on her own initiative and taking someone else to the prom, the “Honeymoon is definitely over” (Mike Enoch’s phrase) is only of the Alt Right’s volition. The Honeymoon is only over insofar as the Alt Right has read motivations into Trump’s Syria strike that are purely speculative and likely do not exist. The Alt Right can only remain TrumpTrain passengers, able to pile on weight to increase momentum, but not much else. So why bail now, so early into his Presidency?

Those of us who identified Trump from the very beginning as a vulgar ignorant buffoon with no philosophical foundation, a Negro-loving beta race cuck with strong Jewish family connections, those of us who are not quota queens and who have something called “judgment” – we do not have to “bail” since we were never on board the pitiful “TrumpTrain” to begin with. The ONLY thing useful about Trump was the perception of him by the masses, and the right-wing populism he ignited among his supporters, which is why I rejoiced over his victory – it showed that some White Americans would support a candidate labeled as a “racist fascist.”Trump himself: a moron. Trump: a two scoops-of-ice-cream-eating fat bastard who doesn’t have an ounce of sense in his orange-hued head.  And Der Movement’s obsession with this buffoon should permanently disbar Der Movement from any serious consideration as a vehicle for White racial interests.

The one-way, ideologically blinkered rationale that Trump has bent the knee to the “kikes” is an allegation born of circumstance. However, Trump cannot afford ideology. He is the President of the United States, and Richard Spencer is an otherwise unemployed activist. 

In the end, Spencer is likely to end up promoting White racial interests more than Trump ever will.  And this Spencer-bashing is getting old and reeks of envy. If you are going to critique Spencer, do so for legitimate reasons: the Alt Right itself is a disaster and not worthy of his time, the switch from Radix to AltRight.com was a terrible mistake, and he should never have fraternized with the Alt Lite/Alt Wrong to begin with.

Trump has responsibilities that are formalized by holding office, and the figures of the Alt Right are able to freewheel and dispense speculation and ideology as they please. Trump was elected to MAGA, not to immediately force through an isolationist agenda because it suits the Alt Right’s prejudices and one-track thinking. 

You can’t MAGA by doing everything and anything in opposition to what is necessary to MAGA.  It’s not like Touchback Trump simply bombed Syria and did nothing else wrong. He’s been reneging on virtually all his campaign promises, he is absolutely wasting his political capital on Neoconservatism, he’s cucking big time, and he’s behaving like a juvenile jackass on top of it. MAGA?  Really?

Trump, according to TRS, Spencer, and Counter-Currents (I don’t keep up with the Stormer) has betrayed his loyal fans and acquiesced to Israeli influence. I don’t believe he has done any such thing, and now that the last debris of the last Hebrew Hammers has been swept away, I think it is clear that the Alt Right’s hysterics have been totally premature and unjustified.

The only hysterics come from Trump fanboys whose fervor belies some deep psychosexual disturbances.

Let us consider some geopolitical realities. The United States is a maritime power whose strength is primarily projected through its allies. 

Complete retardation.  America’s allies don’t do “jack shit,” they depend on us, not the other way around. They project nothing.  They’re passive.   America’s strength is based on its military, and whatever remnants of international prestige and economic power it retains.

The only reason it can rack up trillions of dollars in debt is because of the strength of the petrodollar, which BRICS and those in their spheres of influence have been gradually building the infrastructure and alliances to circumvent. The dollar and the stability of NATO and North America as an economic whole is constantly under direct threat of being knocked off the perch of world leadership by a multipolar alliance.

More Neocon-economic blather.

The Alternative Right is also blinkered to the point of idiocy if it believes that the subsequent economic stagnation and eventual collapse would be to its benefit. 

No, we should instead embrace the genocidal status quo, as long as it makes everyone real comfy and all.

Should the West’s standing on the world stage diminish to the point of dollar and euro irrelevance – two currencies wedded on a multi-tier cake of military adventurism, arms sales, and technical innovation – the Alt Right would likely succumb to retrograde paramilitary, revolutionary fanatics, and get utterly smashed in a failed stab against “ZOG.” 

Let’s prop up the System, because if it collapses, we may actually have to do something to finish it off, and we certainly can’t have that.  On the one hand, this author dismisses the current Alt Right has unemployed misfits fuming in their bedrooms over their lost Trump love; on the other hand, being “revolutionary fanatics” is no good either.  Just sit down, shut up, consume, watch sports on the “telly” and be a good cog in the System machine. That’ll show ‘em!

For those that read the Saker, who rail against “AngloZionists,” the good news is that we are the AngloZionists. 

That’s true no doubt, literally true.

The only reason a few of us are able to support ourselves through Web readership and Alt Right pursuits is because military dominance keeps the lights on.

Therefore, in order to destroy the System, we must support that System completely, and make sure the System survives and prospers and continues onward, so the lights can stay on, so we can destroy the System…no wait….

My friends, this is affirmative action in action.  Ever experience an incompetent affirmative action Negro rambling incoherently?  How are Der Movement’s quota queens any different?

Yes, no doubt, our biggest concern must be the future of Iran.  The Alt Right is the biggest pile of “movement” horseshit imaginable.  Can we pull the plug on this train wreck, please?

George Smiley, Ted Sallis, and Der Movement

Sallis as Smiley.

If one was too look at some of Le Carre’s George Smiley works, and here I am talking about the books and BBC miniseries (which can be found at YouTube) of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (TTSS) and Smiley’s People (SP) – let’s forget about the TTSS movie – there are of course many interesting themes there.

To my mind the one major theme, and the one that has the most relevance to my work at this blog, is this: that of all the major players who are sincerely on the side of British Intelligence, Smiley is the only one who behaves in a rational, far-sighted, clear, and realistic manner, unafraid to face harsh facts whatever their implications and where they may lead him.

The other major players on the pro-British side all have similar flaws: self-deception, irrationality, wrong assumptions based on ignorance or wishful thinking, an inability to face harsh truths – to summarize: all these people engage in the moralistic fallacy.  That is, if “X” would have negative implications then “X” must be false, and if “X” would have positive implications, then “X” must be true; this is fact-free wishful thinking and self-deception to an exponential power.

Thus, in TTSS, the idea that there is a real mole in the Circus (British Intelligence) is initially dismissed by Lacon and the Minister, and continuously dismissed by the top Circus agents, because the implications of that – including that their own advancement based on fraudulent “Witchcraft” intelligence would be rendered meaningless – would be so negative, so unthinkable, that they refuse to accept the possibility.  Indeed, they let Karla invert the entire situation so the Circus bigwigs actually believe that the idea of a mole is an invention of theirs to service what they think is a Russian they’ve recruited, while that Russian is actually a Karla agent servicing the real mole.

Only Smiley – and before him Control (who is already dead by the time Smiley goes mole hunting) – is unafraid to follow the rabbit hole to its ultimate destination.

In SP, Smiley is the only major British player who takes the assassination of the old Estonian (ex-Soviet and recruited Circus agent) General Vladimir seriously, and believes it can lead him to his old foe Karla.  The Circus bigwigs dismiss the whole thing, mock the General and Smiley himself, and discourage Smiley to do anything more than “tidy things up” and put all the trouble behind them.  Pursuing this lead, and following through its implications, would be too bothersome, cause too many bureaucratic headaches – because the fact of the importance of the situation would cause what they perceive as negative complications they jump to the conclusion that the situation itself is nothing important. Again, self-deception and the moralistic fallacy at work.  Only Smiley looks at the situation with clear eyes, understands all of its implications, and is willing to pursue the facts to their ultimate conclusion.

Hopefully, the similarity of the underlying theme between TTSS and SP is abundantly clear.

We can look at those situations from the perspective of False Positive (Type I) and False Negative (Type II) errors.  Assume Smiley was wrong – let’s say there was no mole and that General Vladimir’s murder was just simply a mugging gone bad – but nonetheless he was believed and efforts were made to follow through on his error.  There would of course have been some negative consequences – the Circus would have “chased its own tail” looking for a non-existent mole and wasted time and resources pursuing non-existent intelligence links to Vladimir’s murder.  That would have been bad, no doubt, but not an existential danger to the Circus.

On the other hand, consider a Type II False Negative error here.  Smiley was right – but let us assume he was continuously ignored by everyone. In this case, the mole is never uncovered, Bill Haydon continues to do untold damage to British (and American) interests around the globe, and, if under those circumstances, the events of SP still occur, then Vladimir’s murder never results in Karla’s forced defection to the West, and he continues damaging Western interests (including running the still existing Haydon mole connection). That would be an existential danger to the Circus and a whole set of Western interests, possibly changing the direction of the Cold War.

Similarly, a False Positive cancer diagnosis can be devastating and extremely damaging, but consider the ramifications of a False Negative – someone has a cancer that is never diagnosed until it kills them.  From the “better safe than sorry” standpoint, False Negatives – Type II errors – are worse than Type I False Positives.

Let’s consider all of that from the perspective of my ongoing critique of the “movement.”

Consider that the optimal (from my point of view) realistic scenario is that some – definitely not all and not most, after all I’m not the approved type of messenger – White racial activists follow my lead and break with the Old Movement to create something new.  So, we are talking about a fraction of the total.

Now, I’m either right about Der Movement or I am wrong (even if I am only partially right, that’s sufficient to delegitimize business as usual and thus can be part of the “right” category).

Let’s assume I’m wrong. Then the worst case scenario – a False Positive Type I error – is that a fraction of activists are misled by my error and go away from the correct path of Der Movement’s glory.  That would slow down Der Movement’s march to victory, but certainly not enough to derail victory. After all, if Der Movement is correct and I’m wrong, they’ll go from strength to strength and everyone, including me, will see I’m wrong and jump back on board.

But what if I am right about Der Movement and no one listens?  This is a False Negative Type II error. What if “business as usual” continues, and more decades of “movement” failure are excused, year after year wasted, as the happy penguins and men on the mountaintop leach off money, time, and resources from racial activists, yielding no return?  If that happens, then we are all finished, since activists are proved time and time again that no degree or continuity of “movement” failure will persuade them from following the dead-end path.  If I’m right and am ignored – as I am now – the outcome will be infinitely worse than the reverse.  

Having some activists listening to me if I am wrong will inconvenience Der Movement but would not likely be any existential threat.  On the other hand, if I am correct, and Der Movement is useless as a vehicle for attaining real long-term White racial interests, then ignoring my warnings is an existential threat – if no one is building an alternative, then the totality of White racial activism will be wasted with no contingency plan in place to save the race and the “movement” fails and fails again.

I state three premises:

1. The “movement” has failed for decades, a complete and catastrophic failure.

2. Continuing the same approaches that have failed for so long will just perpetuate this failure, eventually leading to dire and irreversible negative racial consequences.

3. I identify key reasons for these failures. To turn things around, a New Movement is required that eschews the errors of the Old.

I would say that anyone denying premise 1 is delusional; how is the failure not obvious?  Where, pray tell, are all the glorious successes?

Premise 2 is slightly more ambiguous, but only slightly.  Someone could argue that applying the same failed approaches will eventually yield success, particularly if conditions change, but is this a prudent way of doing things?  Shouldn’t at least some people try something different rather than repeating decades of error and failure?

Premise 3 would be the most questionable and ambiguous, since even if people agree with premises 1 and 2 they may disagree with my diagnosis of the problems.  My answer here is that if the failure has been so complete, so continuous and comprehensive, that the errors are likely fundamental, getting to the core of “movement” dogma and the core of how the “movement” approaches tactics and strategy. If we trace these core memes and strategies to their foundation, then that foundation is what needs to be changed.

But, hey, why listen to me?  It’s all good!  Swallow those” white pills!”  Hail Pepe!  Hail Kek!

Der Movement, 5/10/17

“Movement” activists: you’re being hoodwinked.

Pete Penguin:

Peter is considering seasonal haircut depending on finances.

Translation: The happy penguins of VDARE need a few more million dollars of donations and then maybe Pete will trim the mop.

Roissy:

PS Anyone remember that Syrian air strike? Yeah, that’s what I thought. Big to-do about nothing. Go choke on your black pills, Trump turncoats.

Anyone remember deporting the “dreamers?”  Anyone remember protectionist economics? Anyone remember a pro-Russian and anti-Chinese foreign policy?  Anyone remember that Trump and Sessions could end Antifa antics in America tomorrow if they wanted to? Anyone remember “draining the swamp” as opposed to CEOcracy and corrupt “Skypes” selling American residency to wealthy Chinamen? Yeah, that’s what I thought…choke on your white pills, homoerotic Trump fanboys.

Who Has Been Right?

Who’s been mostly right?

Let’s get one thing out of the way: Der Movement was right about Trump’s chances of winning and I was wrong.  Now that we got that one aberrant item out of the way, let’s get to the “meat” of the issue.

Der Movement invested an enormous amount of intellectual and moral capital in Donald Trump the man, labeled “the last chance of White America” aka the “God Emperor” who is going to save us from demographic displacement. Someone else – who might that be? – clearly asserted that Trump is a vulgar, ignorant buffoon, a pro-Jewish and pro-Negro cuck, who is not worthy of the breathless onanistic support of racial activists.  Unlike Der Movement and its slavish hero worship and Man on White Horse Syndrome obsessions, I made a clear distinction between Trump the man – a disaster – and Trump the campaign, Trump the movement, Trump the right-wing populist.  I made clear that the only real reason to support Touchback Trump was the perception – not reality, but perception – that Trump is a “racist fascist” thus inducing racial chaos and balkanization in America.

The outcome?  Trump has been constantly cucking, betraying his base, but, because of leftist hysteria and perceptions, political violence and chaos has skyrocketed.  Sallis right, Der Movement wrong.

I also made the point that Trump’s supporters were more important than Trump himself – and, yes, we see Trump’s supporters battling leftist thugs in the streets while Trump himself wimps out on a constant basis.  Sallis correct once again.

I have been warning about Silk Road White nationalism and the trend of Asians pimping out their women to pathetic beta activists in order to further Asian racial agendas.  Lo and behold we have Chinese “maidens” and Japanese “shady ladies” infiltrating and subverting White nationalist blogs. Surprise!

[We can ask how these “shady ladies” find the time to not only run their own Asian supremacist blog, but also leave long and rambling posts in the AltRightosphere.  Do they have a (White) sugar daddy supporting them? Spoiled rich kid living off daddy’s money? Or, perhaps, just like the Russian government is said to pay Internet trolls, China does the same?]

I warned against the Alt Lite/Alt Wrong, and was very sharp toward the Alt Right because of the Alt Right’s “big tent” embrace of the aforementioned elements. Then we saw the Alt Lite/Alt Wrong throw Spencer under the bus, re: Hailgate and chuckle with the Jewish friends, giving consolation to Jews that “Spencer is likely to get shot.”  Absolutely disgusting – Brimelow and Derbyshire leading the list of speakers.  Do you need any more indication on why the Alt Wrong is wrong?

Back online in the very early 2000s, I was critical of the clownshow of the National Alliance even before Pierce died, and we see the utter collapse of the organization since then.

I was sharply critical of Marine Le Pen and mainstreaming and we saw Le Pen go down to a catastrophic loss, and mainstreaming also lost in The Netherlands, Austria, and Australia. Der Movement, on the other hand, exhibited delusions about Le Pen and are still pontificating about “how well” Le Pen actually did, even after her shocking “blow out loss.” Sallis right, Der Movement wrong.

This is a question of judgement.  Who, dear reader, do you trust? Should you trust? Will you trust?

Mainstreaming R.I.P.

It is time to move on from mainstreaming.  It is time to move on from a failed “movement.”

Her Majesty, the Imperial Milady Marine of Mainstreaming, has fallen.  Will we see any honest analysis of this disaster?  Doubtful, other than here at EGI Notes.

If mainstreaming worked, we would still have to debate whether the compromises and moderation is all worth it.  But here’s the point: It doesn’t work. Once again, to be clear: Mainstreaming does not work.

Moderating Marine has achieved nothing more, electorally speaking, than her more radical father (who she denounced) did.  So, what’s the point?  Look at Austria, look at the Netherlands, look at Australia, there’s no payoff. “Where’s the beef,” so to speak?  Where’s the advantage?  Golden Dawn is not in power in Greece; the Front National is not in power in France.  They are equally not in power.  Perhaps both models need revision?

If mainstreamers justify their strategy by the possibility of electoral success, and if mainstreamers continuously fail, then why is mainstreaming still considered legitimate? Why? Yes, I can see that it may make theoretical sense, at least to those amenable to (at least temporary) compromise.  But political theory must be judged, ultimately, in how it is actualized in the laboratory of real world experience.  One forms a hypothesis and tests it. According to Popper, if the data show the hypothesis to be wrong, it should be abandoned. Perhaps the situation is more akin to Kuhn and paradigm shifts.  Activists with an intellectual and emotional investment in mainstreaming will continue to create ad hoc explanations for its failures, and resist rejection of their theory/hypothesis.  Eventually though, the sheer volume of contradictory data, combined with the rise of new activists unencumbered by adherence to failed ideas, will shift the worldview, and a realization of the emptiness of mainstreaming will occur, and a new paradigm, more hard and radical, will take its place.

Perhaps that will happen.  But the time!  The time!  Can we waste so much time with people ignoring the facts right in front of their face?

I have previously written about the phenomenon of faux-sophistication, and we may be seeing some of that with the adherents of mainstreaming.  

A clear example of this psychological flaw is seen in sports.  Sportswriters and other so-called “experts” endlessly pontificate about the values and virtue of “defense” – so as to contrast their “sophisticated expertise” and “refined tastes” from the “crude” casual fans who, presumably, enjoy lots of offense, action, and scoring.  Thus, the “expert” sniffs: “[fill in name of sport] is 90% defense.” Well, from a logical standpoint, that’s nonsense – games are won by the team that scores the most points, goals, runs, etc.; therefore, scoring and preventing scoring are of equal value and hence any team sport is going to be, in general, 50% offense and 50% defense.  But let’s not let logic and common sense get in the way of preening expertise!

The same applies to politics.  Hillary Clinton’s campaign foundered in part because of snarky millennials and their “data” and “expert” advice to concentrate on “turning out the base” –in sharp contrast to Bill Clinton’s ignored advice to throw a bone or two at the Rust Belt White working class.  

Meanwhile, on the Far Right, the “experts” sniff with disdain at radicals who insist on such outdated concepts as non-negotiable fundamental principles, and instead these heroic “experts” extol the virtue of compromise and moderation.  And they keep on losing, over and over and over again. But they know better you see.  And by taking positions that contrast to all those knuckle-dragging radical extremists, these “experts” seem like real smart and professional and polished and all.  They keep on losing, but they lose with style!

Some would argue that I’m being “premature” and we need to be patient and give mainstreaming more time to succeed.  At what point does this patience move from prudent circumspection to blind adherence to a failed hypothesis? Marine Le Pen was the clearest test of mainstreaming so far, and the test was failed like all that preceded it.  I’m not sure repeating the same over and over again is going to yield significantly different results. That she did better than her father with respect to percentages, but still failed – is this progress? Perhaps the assertion that the Front National has attracted more youthful supporters than before will be accredited to mainstreaming.  But, putting aside that Le Pen still failed, we can ask – are youth really attracted by mainstreaming and moderation? That’s doubtful.  Yes, they may want more “liberal” social mores, but the key issues of race and immigration, and sovereignty, are what motivates most Front National supporters, and with respect to those key issues I’m doubtful that high-spirited and energetic youth, some of whom are involved in the Identitiarian movement, are really looking for mainstreaming and moderation.  In the end, despite whatever the youth wants, the bottom line is, again, that Le Pen failed. Mainstreaming failed (again), big time.

“Farstreaming” has in fact been more successful.  Sometimes politicians can be more successful being more radical.  That may be context-dependent, but it is clear that “moving to the center” simply hasn’t worked.

If we can agree on that, then we can start the process of formulating alternatives.  Activists need to stop listening to memes that sound good in theory but consistently fail in practice.

A counter-argument will be that radicalism hasn’t worked either.  But what kind of radicalism?  Yes, Nutzi stupidities haven’t worked, I agree.  Historical Nazism brought back in the post-war period hasn’t worked, warmed-over Guntherism (i.e., 99% of “movement” dogma) hasn’t worked, esoteric silliness about “Kali Yuga” and “the men who can’t tell time” hasn’t worked,” and breathless navel-gazing over cephalic indices and fractional admixture percentages hasn’t worked either.

But has anyone tried to formulate EGI/universal nationalism into practical politics?  No.  Has anyone tried to combine radical policy positions with rational and professional rhetoric and a polished presentation?  No.  It’s either been mainstreaming compromise or foaming-at-the-mouth Nutzism.  

The mainstreamers can run but they can’t hide. The French election was not only a catastrophic defeat for nationalism, but it should completely undermine confidence in the mainstreaming fraud. Let’s all sit back and watch the show, the mainstreamers spinning their endless stream of defeats, rewriting history (“We always said Le Pen had no chance of winning!” or “We never were in any way invested in a Le Pen victory!”  or whatever other lie), the mainstreamers moving on to the next election including the next French election (“Hey! We never said that 2017 was the last chance to save France and Europe through the electoral process!”), Der Movement giving the mainstreamers a “free pass” and forgetting their endless stream of bad advice, poor judgment, and catastrophic defeats.

Or will a miracle occur and the mainstreamers admit they are wrong and gracefully bow out and make way for others who don’t pretend they know everything and who want to take an empirical approach to determine, and then utilize, what actually works?

It is up to you, dear reader, to demand change and leave a failed “movement” in the dustbin of history, where it belongs.  I take it endless failure doesn’t appeal to you?