Category: multiculturalism

Inherent Racism of Multiculturalism

More Salter analysis.

I am going to quote, and comment on, several excerpts, not to critique the entirety of the whole piece, but rather to illuminate certain points important to this blog and to the interests of Whites in general. In all cases, emphasis added.

This article follows from my review for Quadrant of the SBS documentary Is Australia Racist? which was hosted by Ray Martin, funded by Screen Australia (and therefore the taxpayer) and aired on Sunday, 26 February 2017.1 The program was grossly inaccurate and biased against Anglo Australians. In other words, it was typical of the wide-borders multicultural propaganda awash in the mainstream media over the last half century. 

Here, I look behind the program’s glossy façade to examine another long term feature of multiculturalism: its academic enablers. I look more closely at the program’s four academic experts, their on-screen claims and previous writings. It is important to look behind the smooth opinions of laymen such Ray Martin if we are to discover whether the linked policies of massive immigration and minority privilege have any basis in reason and scholarship.

That’s what Salter’s essay is about.  Let’s look at certain important excerpts.

Prof. Dunn’s publication list is a window into academic multiculturalism. His research is funded by the academic and multicultural establishments. He researches racism and ethnic discrimination but, it seems, only when committed by mainstream Australians. He is not interested in Anglos being victimised, only in their transgressions against others, which includes denials of racism and privilege. These, together with immigrant victimhood, are treated as axiomatic. For example, he states that the “new racism” is a distinctly Anglo view of the nation as assimilationist, ethnocultural, or egalitarian. He argues that it is racist to assert the equality of all Australians, because this (supposedly) denies white privilege…Jakubowicz argues that multiculturalism is a fraud because it benefits the (allegedly) dominant Anglo population. British and Australian governments have claimed that their societies have been tolerant of diversity, reflecting genuine expressions of Anglo-liberalism. In fact these governments “disguise systematic structures of racialised inequality masked by surface egalitarian discourses.” 

This account resembles Dunn’s view that egalitarianism is a form of Anglo racism.

This is astonishing, and reflects the extreme radical drift of the Left on racial issues.  The old bywords of equality and egalitarianism, once a bulwark of the leftist worldview, are now considered forms of “Anglo” (i.e., White) racism!  Multiculturalism, which oppresses the White majority while empowering non-White minorities, is a “fraud” because it “benefits” the very group it viciously oppresses.  The very things leading to White demographic displacement – let us be frank, White Genocide – mass migration, assimilation, multiculturalism – are now considered by the Left to be manifestations of “White racism” and “White Privilege.”

The Left has drifted so far into the fever swamps of revolutionary madness that slow White genocide is not only insufficient but akin to White Supremacy – not only must the pace of displacement be increased, but Whites must be constantly humiliated, disempowered, subjugated, slandered, and tormented, all the while being gaslighted by being told they are privileged racists living in a White supremacist society.  In truly Orwellian fashion – nay, even to extremes Orwell could not imagine – a majority group being systematically dispossessed and destroyed is told that the System destroying them is a pro-majority fraud working for majority benefit and reflecting the majority’s selfish racism!  By analogy, Auschwitz was a bastion of Jewish Supremacy, and the Holomodor an example of Ukrainian Privilege.

By any objective, rational standards, the Left is stark, raving mad.  But, perhaps it is not madness bit just pure, crystalline, rock-hard hatred.  The fundamental basis of the modern Left is an unquenchable racial hatred of Whites, and the need to humiliate Whites while destroying them.  Destroying Whites alone is not enough; Whites must be made into a subaltern, despised caste, while all the time being told they are “privileged.”

To summarize: The Right can no longer assume that their opponents are merely sincere but deluded egalitarians who foolishly, but goodheartedly want equality for all peoples.  No, the opponents are revolutionary extremists so consumed by hate that the complete eradication of the hated White enemy is not good enough; Whites must be ritually humiliated as they are being eradicated.

Jakubowicz also shares Dunn’s assumption that Anglos dominate Australia’s racial hierarchy. “In most Western societies Christian values or Christian social institutions dominate public debate and public practice.

Case in point.  By some mysterious circumstance beyond our comprehension, the dominant group is being demographically and culturally displaced, while being castigated by the likes of Jakubowicz.  That’s some strange dominance, I’ll tell you that for nothing.

In Jakubowicz’s view Anglo Australians have no legitimate ethnic interests. Their only ethical option is complete acquiescence to minority demands, which do represent legitimate group interests. His call for Chinese-Australian inclusion makes no reference to numbers. Like other mainstream multiculturalists, he treats the displacement of Western populations as not worth mentioning. Note also his cavalier attitude towards Australian security despite acknowledging the growth of Han nationalism and its linkage to Chinese economic and military power. These potential threats can only be exacerbated by the growing Chinese presence in Australian politics and business, which Jakubowicz sees as an encouraging trend.

Pure hatred of Whites as Whites.

It is relevant that Beijing is already utilising Chinese-Australian individuals and organisations as agents of influence in this country, a development that is alarming security analysts. Chinese voters have been swayed by ethnic interests for many years, an example being Prime Minister John Howard’s loss of the seat of Bennelong in 2007. Sam Dastyari, a Labor powerbroker, was forced to resign from parliament after he allowed improper influence by local Chinese businessmen; his foreign policy pronouncements were slavishly pro-Beijing. Chinese community leaders helped defeat the Abbott government’s attempt to reform the draconian section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. It is true that apart from the important matters of identity and security, Chinese have been in the main high quality immigrants with stable families, an admirable work ethic, low crime rates, and strong educational outcomes. 

That last part: Oh, no; just…NO.  Maybe Salter has a reason to be moderate here and praise Chinese qualities, akin to the slavish obsessions of HBDers.  But these positive qualities – even if we were to assume they are all true – are not the point.  Even the loyalty issue is not the point.  The point IS Salter’s own paradigm of ethnic genetic interests; Chinese are a biologically (and culturally) alien intrusive subspecies in the Australian human ecology and for that reason – and that reason alone should be sufficient regardless of other considerations – Chinese immigration must be prevented.

But the Chinese population has risen from close to zero to about five percent of the population since the 1970s, concentrated mainly in capital cities. This success largely invalidates attempts to portray them as victims. Instead the issue of greatest import to Australia concerns their loyalty. If Markus and other academics had asked the obvious questions the political class would be informed on Chinese ethnicity and business cohesion, matters of national security at a time when China has become the world’s second largest economy and is increasingly activated by nationalism. Decades ago they would have realised that many Chinese Australians feel, or will come to feel, allegiance to their ancient homeland. Some would have come to respect Australia’s founding leaders for sparing the country a large Chinese minority. They would have been right to ask what madness led governments to squander this social capital by introducing a potential fifth column into the country?

True, but how about squandering the genetic capital?  One can debate the presence, and place, of non-Anglo Whites in Australia; that’s one issue – but as regard non-Whites the situation should be unambiguous and not even a required topic for debate: they do not belong.

Some factor is missing from the picture. Why the bias against Anglos?

The most overtly Marxist of the four, Kevin Dunn and Andrew Jakubowicz, may have replaced the bogey of the capitalist exploiter with the bogey of an ethnic exploiter, Anglo Australia. 

And what did the old time Marxists want to do with the “capitalist exploiters?”” What did they do once coming to power?  That’s what the Racial Marxists of today are planning for Whites.

Professors Markus and Paradies have different theories but arrive at a similar conclusion, that white racism is the main risk to the joys of permanent open borders and multiculturalism…One thing we do know is that Dunn, Markus and Jakubowicz were willing to work with Martin and Paradies, self-declared ethnic loyalists, in making a documentary that dealt in part with the latter’s identity group. It is not obvious how individuals motivated by leftist ideals could cooperate to make a program that furthered an ethnic agenda. Jakubowicz has called for Chinese Australians to establish an ethnic lobby.

An ethnic lobby for “Chinese Australians” would no doubt be welcomed by the “HBD race realists.”

Andrew Markus is Professor of Jewish Civilisation at Monash University, a chair funded by the late Richard Pratt, a generous philanthropist for Jewish causes in Australia, Israel and elsewhere. As the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu noted on Pratt’s death, many of his philanthropic gifts went to Israel’s universities, the integration of new immigrants (all of whom are Jewish due to Israel’s strict immigration laws) and disadvantaged Israelis. That shows love for his people, a noble sentiment. But what is Markus, supposedly a radical cosmopolitan, doing accepting funds from an ethnic nationalist? Would not a cosmopolitan shy away from a vertically integrated ethnic enterprise in which a Jewish academic is paid by a Jewish donor to study Jewish affairs? Markus has spent his professional life criticising Australia and other Western countries for immigration policies that were mildly discriminatory compared to Israel’s. Yet it seems he has never criticised Richard Pratt or the Israeli leadership, all dedicated ethnic loyalists. Indeed, he has co-authored a paper praising Israel’s discriminatory immigration policy.2

Jewish dual morality; the enemy revealed.  But some on the “Far Right” tell us that Jews are “White Men of the West.”  Do you, dear reader, really believe that?

Multiculturalism was always a regime imposed on a reluctant majority by a triumphant left-minority alliance. 

How did that alliance become triumphant?  One cannot exempt Whites themselves from blame; indeed one must place significant blame on this race of cowardly lemmings.  The failure of the “movement and its inept “leadership” must also be held accountable.

…Anglos and whites in general are rapidly being reduced to minority status due to bipartisan immigration policies imposed by the major parties and the cultural establishment. If Anglos are dominant and racist, as Dunn insists, why have they been cowed and silenced by political correctness? There is no doubt that Anglo-Australians are the prime target of the human rights apparatus. As observed by Stephen Chavura, a political scientist at Macquarie University, “Multicultural discourse is about silencing any who would dare to criticise the way immigration and integration have been conducted since mass immigration shifted from Europe to Asia and the Middle East in the mid to late 1970s.”14 Anglo-Australians look very much like a subaltern ethnic group, leaderless and prevented from complaining even while losing their country.

And yet they are “dominant” and “privileged.”  

IV

Conclusion and Policy Implications

One lesson of this review is that Australians should not be intimidated by academic titles and media fame. Individuals with high positions and the title of “professor” can peddle transparent falsehoods, as can the university courses they teach. Policy makers should be looking for ways to circumvent the leftist censorship in the social sciences and public broadcasting and re-establish a robust market of ideas.

But how?  We need concrete proposals.

The deep state has been dragging Australia down with suicidal ethnic policies for half a century…The vanguard of the new morality are the elites. Indeed, capture of the elites has been a triumph for the broad and disparate progressive tide. In Australia, like the US, elites in government, business, the public service, and civic organisations are embracing progressive ideas […] The sheer size of the professional class now dealing with the new morality is immense.27

And while this professional class was being assembled, the mainstream Right was babbling about “tax cuts” and “economic growth” while Der Movement was pontificating about Kali Yuga, subfractional admixture percentages, the racial provenance of Leonidas, the “men who can’t tell time,” cephalic indices, Pyramids of Atlantis and Ultima Thule, and “being snug in your hobbit hole.”  Plenty of blame to go around, no?

The leftist professional class described by Kelly consists of several mutually-supporting components. The main sources of personnel are university departments of humanities and social science. Left-dominated universities develop doctrine and train professionals to man the many positions in the media, bureaucracies, unions, political parties, and schools used to suppress Anglo resistance under the cover of human rights. The mainstream media play a vital role in instructing the public and intimidating majority activists. An important arm of the infrastructure is equal opportunity and affirmative action offices employed by universities, corporations and unions, who develop and manage multicultural programs at state and federal levels.

How to dismantle this?  How to build Rightist equivalents?  And, also, we need an analysis on how self-serving affirmative action “infrastructures” were built within the “movement.”

Again, it is not surprising that multicultural ideologues fear the rise of parties that could begin to build an ethnic infrastructure for the majority. The greatest danger to them is not temporary defunding of particular projects, but the creation of a professional class of national activists able to work in and with government agencies to neutralise and then replace the system of minority-left supremacy. 

A danger they seem they will not have to worry about for some time.

There have been many attempts to explain the nature and cause of the intolerant Left’s dominance of the universities…These accounts fail to explain why cosmopolitan, anti-Western ideology has prospered. A satisfactory explanation remains elusive. The academic literature on the subject agrees that the left’s takeover of elite culture began early in the twentieth century. Sociologist Eric Kaufmann has traced the starting point back that far in the United States. The process lasted for two or three generations, ending in the 1950s to 1960s when the takeover of elite universities was completed.31

And all doing this time the Right did nothing.  In my lifetime the two periods in which the Left has grown by leaps and bounds (after the 1964-1974 leftist political explosion) was during the Reagan and Trump Presidencies (the latter we see unfolding on a daily basis).  Does that tell you anything? The Right declares victory and then sits around and does nothing while allowing the Left to roll up one real victory after another.  The Right is not serious.  After all, look at the stupidities that Der Movement concerns itself with.

As already noted, there is some doubt that multiculturalism is unambiguously leftist. The SBS program’s attack on Anglo-Australians reveals that, despite its rhetoric, it can be seen as coming not only from the Left but also from individuals well to the right of One Nation. Multiculturalists mobilise ethnic constituents, their tribes, by warning them of threats from another tribe, Anglo Australia, which they vilify with accusations of racism.

But what to do about it?  We all know this is true.  What now?

It will be difficult to correct the social sciences and humanities while respecting the autonomy of scholars and the universities that employ them. Another hurdle is the fact that Australian academe is connected to international disciplines that are themselves politicised. If a way could be found, governments would be justified to defund intellectually corrupt courses and academics. The funding instrument might also be used to establish centres of excellence that champion science and disinterested scholarship over ideology. These centres would offer students real alternatives, and society real experts. Such reform will not be possible while governments of both sides of politics remain under the thumb of the powerful multicultural lobby. A parallel approach might work to reform public broadcasting.

But how exactly to get started?  We can never “get over the hump” from proposing these obviously beneficial ideas to even the slightest beginning of any real progress.  We require fresh ideas and careful planning, followed by competent implementation.

Screen Australia should be abolished or, preferably, reformed to defend traditional values. It should be feasible to reduce the high level of inaccuracy evident on ethnic and cultural themes in public broadcasting. Programs such as Ray Martin’s should not progress beyond the proposal stage. Their poor scholarship and ethnic bigotry should have ruled them out. The media and academic elites examined in this review give first loyalty to political values ahead of curiosity and intellectual openness. They and their enablers need to be exposed before Australia can begin to rebuild its national identity and social cohesion.

You can expose them, but to oppose them you will need your own competing infrastructure. I do not see anyone on the Right capable of building such.  Given the current inept “leadership” any budding infrastructure would be infiltrated by the first Swede or movie critic who walks in the door.

However, as philosopher Michael Walzer has noted, it is not feasible or desirable to abolish ethnocentrism in an open society. Instead, the multiple ethnic loyalties found in Australian society must be balanced. Decades of impotent criticism of the ABC show that balance can only be achieved among channels, not within individual channels. And that can only be achieved by establishing a counterweight, a network that take the side of Anglo Australia.

Another good analysis by Salter.  Imagine if all the money that has been wasted on the Happy Penguins had gone instead to fund Salter, so as to allow him to commit full time to ethnological/nationalist analysis and also to advising political activists worldwide.  If you want to contribute to Salter’s work, do so as described here.  Give generously.

Advertisements

The Alt Wrong’s Final Exam

What is their priority?


UPDATE: Israel is now saying it is suspending the agreement, not because of the damage that would be done to the West, but because of internal “right-wing” pressure about allowing half the Africans to remain in Israel.  I will still run the post I have written, because it is relevant given the underlying Israeli/Jewish attitudes.  For example, get this:

Netanyahu named Germany, Italy and Canada as examples of countries that would accept the migrants, though German and Italian officials said they had no knowledge of any such agreement.

Original post:

Readers may be familiar with this news story.

The Far Right has long accused Jews of hypocrisy: while the Tribe pushes for diversity and alien immigration into Western nations, nations, nations thus headed for minority status for the current White majority, Israel is a Jewish national state, with a resistance to the same mass migration of aliens that Jews foist on Whites throughout the globe

Israel’s determination to deport African migrants back to Africa, where they belong, fits into this paradigm.  However, under pressure from the “United Nations” (United Coloreds would be more accurate). Israel’s “right-wing” government has blinked.  However, they are not keeping all their poor, persecuted Africans.  No, sir, only half.  The other half will be dumped on “Western nations” – I’ve read that Canada, Germany, and Italy are possible destinations.

This is quite remarkable.  If Israel does not have the moral courage to take the steps to safeguard their demographic stability, then that is THEIR problem, and one richly deserved given the predominant role Jews have played in undermining Western demographics.  But, no, even in their hour of defeat the Jews strike out at their eternal enemies, the European peoples, using Black Africans as a biological weapon to undermine the racial and cultural basis of the West, while relieving themselves of half their problem.

Could the opposite be done?  Maybe the USA can send half of its “Dreamers” to Israel?  Turnabout is fair play.  But, no, things don’t quite work out that way, do they?

Now, I will give Amren credit for no longer censoring the comments threads of any criticism of Jews, so some commentators there are venting their well-justified rage over this outrage.  But what about those who run that site?  What about its stable of writers, including “Gregory Hood,” heretofore never afraid to express his opinions on controversial matters?

I would think if some other nation would have connived to dump over 16,000 African migrants into Western nations, the Alt Wrongers would be screaming about it for days.  Will they do so about Israel, and do so in a manner that properly expresses the outrage of the whole situation, put into the context of endless Jewish promotion of Western multiracialism and multiculturalism?  Commentaries?  Podcasts?  A statement of principles?  An acknowledgement that this is an act of demographic warfare, consistent with all that has gone before?  Will they finally speak up on this issue?  To clearly demonstrate that their priority is for Europeans and not Jews, for the West and not for Israel?  Will they do this?

Think of it as a final exam.  Not final as in FINAL, but akin to a final exam in a particular class.  There will be other final exams, on other issues, but, today, the question of Jewish hypocrisy on race presents to the Alt Wrong a final exam on that specific issue.

Stay tuned.

Revisiting Putnam

No White racial solidarity.

Let’s again consider Putnam’s oft-discussed findings about diversity eroding societal trust and repressing social engagement and investment in public goods (similar to findings by others and a topic often brought up by Salter).

Putnam not only found that diversity decreased trust between groups but within groups as well. That latter finding is somewhat counter intuitive, since one could reasonably assume that increased diversity, and the consequent increased distrust between groups, would strengthen a tribal “us against them” mentality and therefore increase trust within groups. But the opposite occurred, at least with those examples Putnam studied. 

How can we interpret the counter intuitive finding that diversity erodes trust and societal cohesion within groups as well as between groups?  This depends on whether this “within group” problem applies to all groups, or only to Whites.  Perhaps those more familiar with the nuances of Putnam’s work – which I read some time ago and have no interest in revisiting as Putnam is a disgusting excuse for an academic who hid his findings for years and only published it with an accompanying screed promoting social engineering to grease the wheels of White dispossession (*) and my hypothesis here will require more data in any case for a fair evaluation – know more of this.

My hypothesis is as follows. 

If within group trust is eroded by diversity for all groups, then this phenomenon reflects a general human (or should I say “hominid”) trend to withdraw and “hunker down” when faced with diversity,

If the effect is restricted to Whites (which I believe will be the case if a careful quantitative study is done), then this is a strictly White mental phenomenon.  And how does this happen?  The hypothesis suggest the following.

One could speculate various mechanisms if this was the case, but consider – a la Ignatiev’s “Race Traitor” paradigm – that Whites are the only group in which large numbers of the group – including a majority of influential elites – act overtly against group interests.  Thus, there is no racial solidarity among Whites, no one you can racially trust unless you really know them – hence, when faced with diversity, Whites will mistrust other Whites because  – given the omega cuckiness of many Whites – one can never be sure whether a given White is “on our side” or “on their side.”  In a homogeneous White community this isn’t so much of a problem (of course political disagreements – including whether or not to import diversity – can precipitate such mistrust, but even so, in a homogeneous community such conflicts would be muted).  However, in the presence of diversity, Whites must tread carefully.  Is your White coworker someone you can trust to share your disgust over multiculturalism, or will they “report you to HR” because of your “bigotry?”

On the other hand, non-Whites (including Jews) can reliably depend on their co-ethnics showing ethic/racial solidarity, and siding with them against “the other” (and particularly against Whites). For Whites, a given fellow White is just as likely to be a Universalist cuck as they are to be someone sharing your beliefs.  

Thus, diversity erodes within group trust among Whites (and likely only among Whites) because Whites are ideologically split on this race-diversity issue, and many Whites are SJW “altruistic punishers, so that in diverse environments fellow Whites may pose a threat since they would identify with “the other side.”

Ignatiev would be proud.

*Salter rightly claimed in On Genetic Interests that for a majority being replaced, the only thing worse than a multiculturalism that does not work is one that does work, since the workable multiculturalism will make race replacement more agreeable to those being replaced, while the pain of a failed multiculturalism may wake the majority up to prevent their dispossession.  Putnam is clearly on the side of those who want multiculturalism to succeed.

Propitious Times For The Sallis Strategy

The Sallis Strategy: Promote balkanization and chaos so as to make multiculturalism untenable, weakening the System, and making White survival more possible.

Why the Sallis Strategy is becoming more possible; excerpts, emphasis added:

To the surprise of no one who understands human nature, many whites didn’t appreciate being told that they had to die off for “progress” to be achieved. They didn’t like being derided by their betters as “bitter clingers” with their guns and Bibles, and they especially didn’t like being termed “deplorables” unworthy of compassion or consideration. In the last days of Hillary’s doomed campaign, its contempt for a huge chunk of the American population had become so blatant that one of her top celebrity surrogates publicly hailed the “extinction” of straight white men as a step in the right direction. 

Trump is no political genius. He made an appeal to working-class whites, who correctly felt that the Democrats viewed them with undisguised contempt and didn’t want their vote. 

Ethno-racial nationalism is an enormously potent political force; wise politicians know this and employ it cautiously. Nationalism arouses genuine passion and is a political motivator like no other, which it explains why a majority of white women voted for Trump, to the bitter consternation of outraged feminists. 

Moreover, once nationalism becomes the main political factor, there’s no putting that troublesome genie back in the bottle. Politics become tribal, ethnic conflicts waged at the ballot box rather than on the battlefield. Having done most of my scholarly work on multiethnic societies like the Habsburg Empire and Yugoslavia, I can attest that the fires of nationalism, once stoked, are only put out with great difficulty—and that ethnically diverse societies that play games with nationalism are living dangerously. 

“However verboten discussion of White Nationalism is at present among polite Americans, it is unavoidable that this will become an issue in the future, with potentially explosive consequences.” 

Trump’s winning our presidential election heralds a new era in American politics. The Democrats decided to bet everything on their emerging “new” America, and lost big. Obama’s two terms have overseen the destruction of the Democrats as a national party: they control nothing in Washington now and their performance at the state level is nothing short of dismal. Democrats dominate our big cities, California, and the Northeast—and little else. Barack Obama’s real legacy is putting Donald Trump in the White House. 

Buckle up, it looks to be a bumpy ride ahead in the emerging era of competing American ethno-nationalisms.

Despite all the negatives of Trump the man, his election expands the range of possibilities; the times have never been more propitious to implement the Sallis Strategy.  Again: I agree with Salter – the only thing worse, from the perspective of a majority being replaced, than a multiculturalism that does not work is one that does work.  What must be avoided at all costs is a “successful” multiculturalism that enables the peaceful and orderly race replacement of the majority population. Instead, what you want is for the process to be as messy and painful as possible, so that the majority realizes their peril and resists.  In other words: multiculturalism must be made NOT to work.

The new America must be defined by competing “ethno-nationalisms – polite talk for competing racial nationalisms – it must become a living hell of division, despair, bitterness, rage, balkanization, hatred, distrust, and unending boiling anger and frustration.  Group must be against group; the idea that “we are all Americans” must be thrown into the dustbin of history.  “Americans” of European, Asian, African, Jewish, Hispanic, etc. origins must hate and distrust each other, making a “coming together” impossible, making the multicultural consensus untenable.

Powerful forces will attempt to smooth over these difference to delay the collapse of multiculturalism sufficiently to ensure that Whites are a powerless minority.  We must oppose this; thus, Trump’s election and its meaning, and the short-sighted Left reaction to it (if they really wanted to save their multiculturalism, they’d support Trump’s civic nationalism,) provides real hope for the Sallis Strategy.   

We need to do everything to highlight the contradictions, encourage distrust and division, stoke anger, promote rage, open up the fissures to full-fledged balkanization, catalyze chaos, tear open the wounds of America and pour salt into those wounds and rub them raw and bleeding.

From the perspective of White racial interests, multiculturalism is hell on Earth; therefore, this needs to be actualized in everyday life for everyone to see.

MAKE AMERICA HATE AGAIN!

Sallis Strategy: The Center Does Not Hold

Chaos and division.

I must admit to being naive.  I believed the polls and was wrong about Der Touchback’s chances of winning (unlike Der Movement, I have no problem admitting when I am wrong), and now I am surprised about the rapid and ferocious Left reaction to Trump’s victory.  Yes, I am naive indeed.

The last few days have been eye-opening.  Not content to wait (like I had stupidly thought) for President Trump to actually do something (e.g,, an immigration crackdown) before acting like a bunch of jackasses, the SJWs took to the streets (and Twitter) in an eruption of stupidity, violence, and chaos-inducing tantrum protesting.  And it is continuing.  All those folks who voted for Trump are watching no doubt, and they cannot be pleased.

I on the other hand am pleased, as it fits in with the Sallis Strategy.  While wrong about the details, at least I was right (as were others) that a Trump victory would unleash forces of chaos, division,and balkanization in America. And the Left’s rage that “we will never accept this” and “never normalize this” holds out hope that this disunity will continue.  The specifically anti-White aspect of the protests, the vandalism, and the violence is also being noted by White Trump supporters.

Excellent.  Excellent.  What was that Putnam wrote on diversity eroding public trust and societal solidarity?  You’re seeing it action folks.  That “America is two nations” is not idle talk.  While unfortunately not true literally, it is increasingly true demographically, culturally, politically,and spiritually.

Now, I’ve been describing the “bottom-up” reaction of the Left.  But the “top-down” reaction is just as promising.  The elites have (so far at least) learned nothing from Trump’s surprising victory.  Instead of reflecting on White anger and resentment, they instead double down on their anti-White attitudes (as I’ve written many times – Hatred of Trump is a proxy for hatred of Whites), and spew forth venom (e.g., media, Reid, celebrities, various pundits) and excuses (it was Comey, not the fact that Democrats are overtly anti-White,* which led to Clinton’s historic defeat).

These folks have learned nothing, and I doubt that they are capable of learning anything. Their racial animus toward Whites is so ingrained that any serious thought about the facts of the case becomes short-circuited – the idea that Whites have legitimate grievances are taboo.  They just can’t go there.  Instead talk about “White Privilege” and “White racism” (we wish!) and other nonsense.  In other words, the System is behaving in exactly the same manner that alienated White folks to begin with, the Left bemoans Trump’s victory and then they continue to do the same exact things which led to that victory in the first place.

And then we have the mendacious Sanders, who does utter the phrase “White working class,” but who forgets his own contemptuous dismissal of those folks during the election. Further, any economics-based “outreach” to White middle class and working class Americans is going to fail, since their alienation is not based solely, or even mainly, on economics – even those few leftists who take the election results seriously do not understand this. This is ultimately about Identity, about race and culture – White folks are not going to forget the Democratic Party’s hatred for, and abandonment of, Whites just because a few economic bones are belatedly thrown in their direction,  It’s far too late for that.

So, what we have is an unprecedented opportunity.  Der Movement, if it is any good, should be leveraging these events to promote division, chaos, despair, hatred, rage, bitterness, and balkanization throughout the land, fanning the flames of the fires started by leftist hysteria over Trump’s victory. A fraction of Trump’s supporters are ripe for recruitment – albeit recruitment by a real movement, one that is sane and that does not reject half of Trump’s White base.  The time is propitious for that, and equally propitious for other right-wing populist candidates to “strike while the iron is hot” and get into politics at the congressional, state, and local levels.  And also propitious for ordinary Whites to practise Salter’s democratic multiculturalism, which would unravel the multicultural consensus from the inside out.

The center does not hold.  It all falls apart for the System, but it will be too slow and possibly not enough in the time left if this “falling apart” is not helped along.  This will be a test for Der Movement.  This is the real “last chance for White America.”  

We’ll see if the caliper crowd is up to the challenge.

*Republican cucks are not much better (although they usually try and hide it), but in this election, the candidate was less of a cuck than normal.

VOTE TRUMP!

At the very least, if he loses, make it close.

Yes, Trump is a vulgar ignorant buffoon, a Negro-loving beta race cuck civic nationalist with a Jewified family, an overweight imbecile, a lazy and ill-prepared debater, an embarrassment of a political candidate, a blustering clown, and a crass jackass. Nevertheless, as SJW America perceives Trump as being a “racist fascist bigot,” a Trump electoral victory will do a fine job of destabilizing the multicultural consensus, balkanizing society, enraging the Coloreds and the Left, creating chaos, and weakening the System.  

Thus: VOTE TRUMP

EGI Notes Endorses Donald J Trump

Chaos, balkanization, division, mistrust, and despair.

It is already clear to the (few) readers of this blog that I support Donald Trump for President, even though I have an extremely low opinion of the man. However, I’d like to formally endorse Trump (who I intend to vote for – and I usually do not vote, for obvious reasons), and summarize my thoughts on the matter.

I support Trump solely because of the wonderful effect his campaign has had on the sociopolitical discourse in this country. Trump’s politically incorrect right-wing populism, coupled to the public perception of him as the candidate of “White racism,” has done more to impede America’s multicultural consensus that any other political phenomenon in my lifetime. Trump has unleashed forces that I am sure he – in his hazy and lazy dimwittedness – does not understand. Trump has been subjected to a withering abuse, more so than any other public figure in, again, my lifetime, but, unlike what the egotistical, navel-gazing Trump may think, that abuse is not really directed at him. Hatred of Trump is a proxy for hatred of Whites; piling on Trump is merely a more socially acceptable way for the anti-Whites to spew forth the venomous hatred of White people, White culture, and the very idea of White existence. Trump has stripped the mask off these people and exposed this anti-White hatred for all who have eyes – real eyes – to see. Trump has shifted the discourse in a more rightist and pro-White direction; even though I believe the Alt Right is delusional to think that they have “arrived,” it is still true that it was Trump – and Trump alone (not the Alt Right themselves) – that brought the Alt Right and its ideas to public attention (for good or ill – I think the Alt Right could be a net negative, but that’s another story). Trump’s rallies have been the occasion of organized political violence against his White supporters, adding to the instability and lawlessness of a decaying “diverse” American state. In summary, Trump’s campaign has encouraged: division, despair, chaos, balkanization, race hatred (mostly against Whites), cultural incompatibilities exposed, and mistrust across racio-cultural lines. Trump’s campaign also had the unintended side effect (of course ignored by Der Movement) of confirming the Lind “America’s Tribes” thesis, clearly identifying exactly which groups of White Americans are expected to support or oppose pro-White right-wing populism.

To summarize further: Salter says that for a majority being replaced, the only thing worse than a multiculturalism that does not work is one that does work. Hence, making sure that multiculturalism does not work is imperative. Trump’s campaign has mightily contributed to a failing American multiculturalism and for that we must be thankful. Trump as President, regardless of what he may or may not do, would be a focal point for more anti-White hatred and this weaken the System’s multicultural consensus even more. Regardless of whether he wins, the more support he gets the more the deep racial and cultural divisions in America are emphasized. The point is not to “make America great again” but to “smash the System.” Trump is, inadvertently, doing a fine job at such smashing. But we need more.

For these reasons, I endorse Trump, even though I personally believe he is lazy and ignorant buffoon, an idiot with Jewish family connections, unread and unprepared, not very bright, hysterically undisciplined, a race cuck to the Negro – it is not Trump’s supporters who are the “basket of deplorables,” it is instead Trump’s myriad personal flaws that instead constitute the basket. But remember what Yockey said about de Gaulle: Europe may be saved by an idiot. Similarly, America may be put on a better path – a path of despair, division, misery, hatred, and multicultural untenability – by the idiot Trump.

My endorsement is made more difficult by the pitiful homoerotic pro-Trump hysteria in Der Movement. “Activists” – always eager for a “man on White horse” savior quick fix – have gravitated toward Trump (having abandoned Putin for the time being), and, also, the quota queens see in Trump a reflection of themselves.

Roissy writes:

Trump is the emblem of the shiv-right revolution, a reification of genuine hope and change. But the man himself is more than a talisman or mystical avatar to propel and strengthen the resolve of a righteous rebel alliance against the anti-White Empire. He is truly a great man, who rightfully belongs among the pantheon of Great American Men.

One could almost imagine an onanistic Roissy’s heavy breathing when he wrote that.

A typical comment from that blog:

And no one is forcing you to buy in to the Jewish-Marxist Media interpretation that his supporters are “deluding” themselves into thinking he is winning solidly.

Nobody thought he was “unprepared” or that he came close to losing until the Jewish-Marxist media set about with their usual unabashed hackery in the days after. See the instant polls on the night of, which at very least demonstrated tremendous universal enthusiasm among his supporters for his performance.

Only now that the satanic narrators have whispered for a straight week uninterrupted to Lew, “Give in to your fears,” it seems easier for the weak-willed like him to relent.

Sure! Anyone who faces the reality that the “God Emperor” gave one of the worst Presidential debate performances in history is simply a weak-minded puppet of Jewish “satanic narrators” – or maybe Jews themselves! Yeah, yeah – that’s the ticket! I mean, these guys are tragicomically delusional.

All these guys – including the outrageous hysterical idiots claiming that “Donald Trump is the last chance for White America – had really better hope Trump wins in that “Trumpslide” they’re always talking about, or, at long last, someone (me) will hold Der Movement accountable for all their feckless stupidity this electoral season.