And other news.
Johnson writes this, so….
Was Italy unified? It’s still racially, and thus IQ-wise, and thus everything else wise, split in 2 as it ever was.Southerners who emigrate to the North still frequent each other, and there’s very little mixing between the two real Italies even at the “acquaintance” level. Then of course everyone in the “classes that matter” pretends to things being other, and it makes all quite happy. (Including the beneficiaries of the billions spent to “bridge the gap”, along the same lines of USA’s gap-bridging, and with equal outcome).
The Bossi family testifies to the lack of mixing between the two. Hail Padania!
The northern Italians have a saying, which translated into English is that Garibaldi didn’t unite Italy so much as he divided Africa.
You have none of those Africans in leadership positions in Der Movement. Thus, you must be enjoying unprecedented success. Hail Victory!
I couldn’t get past the first half hour of this film, probably due to its tedious pace and attention to the extreme decadence of the Italian Aristocracy. If you’re going to glorify aristocracy, I’ll accept the British, but the Italians can’t figure out how to practice self-control.
As long as you don’t bend over to pick up the soap in a shower stall at Oxford or Cambridge.
S Italy was a mess under the Bourbons. It got much worse after Italy was unified. It got so bad that by 1880 the S Italians fled to America and brought their mafia government here. Wretched refuse indeed.
Indeed! What we need instead are more Aryan Barbarians dancing around cemeteries in swastika-soled boots. Hail Victory!
Sallis’ Law confirmed once again. It’s a law of nature more definitive than that of, say, gravity or electro-magnetism. As well, my open call for White ethnics to abandon Der Movement is also further legitimized. Just leave it to the swastika-soled boots, drunken podcasts, Pepe, homosexual flirting at meetings, etc. crowd and sit back and watch it fail, as it has for the last 50-100 years.
The following is perhaps not unrelated to the preceding – Zman:
Another reason co-called conservatives were happy to call Koch a right-winger is the Left was happy to call him a right-winger. The best maneuver in the Progressive playbook is to select the leaders of their opponents. They focus their attention on one soft target, making that person the symbol of their cause. That person then becomes the easily mocked and ridiculed leader of the opposition. For example, they turned the alt-right into a joke by cultivating Richard Spencer as the face of the movement.
Yes, he’s right about Spencer, but Zman’s buddy, Gaslighting Greg, is no better. And ALL the rest of them. Blaming Spencer alone – or even predominantly – for the collapse of the Alt Right is ludicrously naive or dishonest to the point of breathtaking mendacity. I for one was denouncing the Alt Right, and predicting (and hoping for) its downfall, even at its peak in 2016 and early 2017. The only thing that surprised me is how quickly it collapsed; even I couldn’t predict the astonishing levels of stupidity and ineptness coming from that distortion of racial activism.
The racially superior hero expresses himself. Yes, at which point they’ll just ban you anyway, and invent ever more narrow speech codes to justify it. Anyone with an ounce of sense understands that the free speech issue is discrete not continuous. You either have it or you do not. Trying to parse different levels of censorship means that you’ll always be at the mercy of the censor and their changing standards. Why does Spencer believe that any “defined” YouTube policy will last a second longer than the start of SPLC/ADL screeching about “White supremacists taking advantage of loopholes” and Huffpost/Guardian articles asking (i.e., ordering) YouTube to “do something about it?”
It is one thing to recognize the reality of censorship and try to do something about it, both short term (adjusting to the reality) and long term (fighting for pure free speech rights). Yes, it is one thing to deal with the reality while vigorously denouncing it, making arguments against it, and, perhaps, getting involved in the political process to deal with it. It is another thing entirely to be so naive and simple-minded that you actually believe that Internet/social media entities would establish a definitive and permanent set of rules and guidelines. They are not playing by a set of idealistic rules; their rules and guidelines are, and will remain, purely utilitarian. If it shuts down Far Right speech, then that’s the rule. If it doesn’t, then the rule will be changed until it does. You do not embrace speech codes and call for a “clearer statement” of them. While dealing with the reality, you oppose the reality, and, realistically point out what I’m saying here – that there can be no compromises on free speech, because once the precedent is set, the “line” dividing acceptable from non-acceptable will always be redrawn for political purposes. And as I’ve written about before, let no one believe that the over-rated “successes” in Europe (with their own speech codes) in any way argues against this. Those “successes” are for the most part small wins in minor skirmishes, confined within narrow guidelines of acceptability, and whenever any leader or spokesmen steps out of line, it’s prison or fines for them. Why should Americans so blithely give up on free speech, then? And I don’t want to hear about “free speech is the government, and private entities can do what they want.” First, these social media giants are essentially utilities and borderline monopolies and should be regulated as such. Second, it is NOT TRUE that private entities can “do what they want” with their property. Let’s see a White homeowner publicly advertise selling or renting only to Whites, let them state that, for example, they refuse to sell or rent to Blacks, Hispanics, or Muslims (of any race). You’ll see then how quickly “private property rights” evaporate.
In summary, again, Zman has a point. Spencer is so shallow that he makes a piece of tissue sliced by a microtome look as deep as the Grand Canyon by comparison.
Speaking of shallow: “The devastation is the most important thing,” after all. A man of genuine greatness!
I laugh at how articles about “super commuting” completely ignore a major reason – perhaps the major reason – for such commuting, and for long commutes in general – RACE. That is, White workers cannot, or will not, live in or around those urban areas that have the jobs because those same urban areas and their surroundings are infested with “vibrant” Color.
Granted, long commutes in more rural regions have other causes, some alluded to in the article, but the fact is that long commutes are still overwhelmingly a blue state coastal and Rust Belt phenomenon. It is something found wherever you have large numbers of Blacks and Hispanics and the flight of Whites away from them. It is another symptom of White Flight, and another indication that the Contamination of Color is metastasizing away from the urban cores into surrounding suburbs, and into smaller cities as well. Whites need to keep on moving farther and farther away to escape the rising tide of Color, but the jobs stay where they are. Hence, the long commutes.