Category: Ted Cruz

Donald Trump and Greg Johnson

A tale of two hypocrites.

Ted Cruz is an infinitely better man that the walking pile of feces Antifa Don Trump.

Since literally the first day of President Trump’s term, the federal government has done very little to prevent leftist political violence. Now, there are attacks on law enforcement officials, cheered on by a nationwide network. What did the DOJ think would happen after years of tolerating lawlessness?

A government is the monopoly of force within a territory. If President Trump’s DOJ refuses at least to investigate antifa in the wake of Van Spronson’s attack, it has ceded that monopoly. Already, President Trump has proven himself unable or unwilling to enforce America’s immigration laws. Now, he seems indifferent to attacks on public servants. Rather than tweeting, he should act. Tolerate political violence and it will escalate. This attack is surely a harbinger of more. If President Trump won’t defend immigration law enforcement officials, they won’t defend America.

The Trump administration has not installed a single mile of new wall in a previously fenceless part of the U.S.-Mexico border in the 30 months since President Trump assumed office, despite his campaign promise to construct a “big beautiful wall.”

Roissy is back online.  Is he going to be man enough to admit how majestically wrong he’s been about Fat Donnie?

This here may be one of the most hypocritical and dishonest things Johnson has ever written. Yes, principles are more important than people, so even though HBDers themselves expose Rushton as a fraud and a hypocrite, Johnson defends him because he was his “friend.”

Now let’s apply this analysis to the question of how White Nationalists should approach the Trump question. Consider, for instance, Trump’s tweets inviting an America-hating Muslim, Somali-born Representative Ilhan Omar, to go back to her home country.

The broad-minded approach is to use this controversy to talk about ideas. 

I agree. I talk about the idea that Der Movement is an utter failure, as exemplified by its repeated Man on White Horse humiliations, and Trump is an excellent example to use to illustrate this point to the rank-and file.

The small-minded approach is to use this controversy to talk about people. For instance, Richard Spencer appeared briefly on CNN. Instead of talking about the issues raised by this debate…

And so Johnson hypocritically uses the CNN controversy to once again personally bash Spencer.  Calm down Greg and think about someone else for a moment.

The basic Spencer code is to denigrate his natural base while preening as big-brained…

Unlike Johnson, of course.

 …and grandstanding to the Left. A comic genius described it as glitter bombing. Sadly, it doesn’t leave much time to talk about ideas.

Such as the idea of endlessly obsessing over Richard Spencer.

It does not occur to them that nobody need support Trump the man—in part or in toto—to use him as an occasion to defend good ideas and attack bad ones.

Attacking bad ideas – like the Man on White Horse Syndrome or Der Movement’s ethnic affirmative action policy, both of which are relevant to the author of the piece I am now critiquing.

And if Trump is only an occasion to enter the battle of ideas, then it does not matter if he means what he says, or whether he will follow through with his proposals. Obviously, we’d like Trump to be a sincere and effective advocate for pro-white policies. 

But if that is our constituency, then our movement has no future.

It doesn’t have a future.

Those who are playing a long game…

Snug in their hobbit hole.

…recognize that the nearly 60 million white Americans who voted for Donald Trump are the natural constituency for National Populism in America. The most important thing is to uphold the right principles and communicate them to the National Populist electorate that Trump has created and is increasingly disappointing and frustrating. When Trump is gone, it is our job to lead them. 

These guys can’t even lead a tiny “movement” but they will lead “nearly 60 million white Americans” to victory.

But we cannot lead them if we do not connect with them. And we cannot connect with them if we go out of our way to alienate them.

Yes, you will connect with them, and not alienate them, by running hyper-Nordicist screeds by the likes of Ash Donaldson, combined with other esoteric content of Counter-Currents. I thought Counter-Currents was aimed at the “high-IQ crowd” and not to “the nearly 60 million white Americans who voted for Donald Trump?”  

As far as White Nationalists were concerned, this was never just about Trump. It was always about advancing our ideas. 

Trump was always just an occasion for White Nationalists to enter the political debate. 

And they didn’t do it. Instead, they engaged in MAGA Pepe Kek hysteria, did Unite the Right, engaged in catty feuds, panhandled for “D’Nations,” and did navel-gazing podcasts.

He smashed the Republican gentleman’s agreement never to talk about whether global trade and non-white immigration are good for America. It was truly magnificent.

Yes, talk about “big hands” combined with total ignorance during debates was truly magnificent.

Trump asked the right questions…

Such as “where is the nearest MacDonald’s?”

…but at best, his answers were half-measures, and half-implemented half-measures are not the solutions Americans need. They are not what his electorate is increasingly clamoring for. But that too is an opportunity for us.

An opportunity to endorse Andy Eggroll. No, wait, Princess Tulsi Coconut, no wait….

I think some of the spoiled child reactions to Trump’s failures and betrayals come from people who somehow convinced themselves that Trump really was going to save America. 

” people who somehow convinced themselves that Trump really was going to save America” – like Greg Johnson, Richard Spencer, Richard McCulloch, Jared Taylor, Kevin MacDonald, and Roissy.

But that was never realistic. He was one man, advocating confused civic nationalist half-measures against the whole media and political establishment. Trump was never going to save America. 

And, again, the post linked here contains some of Johnson’s hysterical Man on White Horse Syndrome comments about Trump two-to-three years ago. 

That was always our job. It still is.

Pure delusion. 

Trump is not the last chance for National Populism in America. 

Tell that to Amren and The Occidental Observer.

He is just the beginning. He was not the last chance for white America. 

Why didn’t Johnson tell that to Taylor and MacDonald back in 2016?  20-20 hindsight three years too late?

He was the system’s last chance to preserve itself in the face of massive demographic change. When Trump is no longer President, our mantra must be “Trumpism has not failed. Trumpism has never been tried.” 

Boy, that’s inspiring!

Only then we will start calling it National Populism, and if we play the long game, we will have created a whole new political movement to secure its triumph.

These guys can’t even hold a small meeting without it being infiltrated but they’re going to build the grand political movement that will secure for us our – inevitable of course! – triumph.  National Populism –  brought to you by preening elitists who sniff about “Kali Yuga” and Guenon.

The bad news is that Trump turned out to be better at campaigning than governing. The good news is that he will soon go back on the campaign trail, and if “Send her back” is any indication, it’s going to be another magnificent opportunity to move the national mind in our direction. 

Like the grand success of 2016, which has led America to be farther to the left, and more anti-WN, than ever before.

When that time comes, I hope our best propagandists will not sit it out, sulking in their tents like Achilles.

Or sulking like male meeting attendees who failed in their flirting with Pilleater.

If we are going to effectively advance our ideas, we cannot get distracted by the politics of personality…

Including hatred of Spencer?

…including our own personal issues. 

Projection?

We must never lose sight of our ultimate aim, which is a homeland for whites in North America.

A snug hobbit hole for every White American!  A caliper for every skull!

Johnson’s essay is one part hypocrisy and two parts dishonesty.

Hypocrisy: We must concentrate on ideas, not people – except of course when we defend the likes of Rushton out of friendship and constantly attack Richard Spencer out of some obsessive animus. Never mind that when someone too sharply criticizes his own ideas at his blog, the response is “this will be your last comment here.”

Dishonesty: First, by ignoring the fact that Johnson and his buddies were indeed engaging in God Emperor Pepe MAGA Kek hysteria about Trump and, more importantly, second, that pointed criticism of Trump as a fraud does not have to be a “small-minded” interest in “people not ideas,” but rather a principled argument against the endlessly repeated Man on White Horse Syndrome error, and also an argument that the same “movement” that makes that (obvious) mistake over and over again is unfit to be a vehicle for White preservationism.

Other news:

1969: America lands men on the moon

2019: We have this.  Racial harmony!

See this. While I have some degree of skepticism toward such tests (can they detect psychopaths? Can someone be trained to defeat them?) And while they are not 100% accurate, something is better than nothing, and perhaps such tests can be one component (not the whole thing!) of a real “extreme vetting” program, at least for more important positions. One wonders also if “random screening” should be done even after acceptance, since people who may originally be sincere, can “turn” later.  Also, in the case of a real infiltrator, if they somehow bypassed the test on the first go around, where they may have been prepared for it, on a second, unexpected, random screening, they may be caught.  The screening itself needs to be done by different people and double-checked – what if the screener is an infiltrator as well?

Advertisements

Countering the Rancid Current

Some truths.

The worst writer in the history of Counter-Currents strikes again.

Where does Johnson find these people?

…any decision-making under conditions of uncertainty is likely to be the opposite of scientific conclusions: allergic to Type 2 errors and tolerant of Type 1 errors.

Tell that to Johnson and Steadman and their “extreme vetting” of meetings.  

If you don’t have the right staff you don’t get the right policies. Indeed. Meet Der Movement.

Ted Cruz shameful? In the convention, maybe. Today, no – Cruz at least speaks up against Antifa violence and the Portland mayor, unlike the fraud Don Trump.

Johnson doesn’t believe Trump was a fraud from the beginning; after all, that would prove Sallis right and Johnson wrong, and we can’t have that. Johnson promotes the lie that Trump could have “cloned Jeb Bush’s platform” and still have won because of his “personality”- can you believe this? In reality, Trump’s campaign took off only after he started talking about Mexican rapists and started attacking the Bush family and their policies.  

What’s laughable is that right after Johnson makes his gaslighting comment, they all admit that people voted for Trump precisely because of his strong talk about immigration (these guys can’t get their stories straight from minute to minute.) – yes, that’s the point.  It was NOT Trump’s personality, which was actually a turn-off for many people who voted for him.  Does anyone believe that Republican voters, including evangelicals, would support a twice-divorced and thrice-married vulgar New York real estate tycoon and reality TV star who talks about his “big hands” and “grabbing pussies” IF this buffoon was merely a neoconservative clone of Jeb Bush?  Does any sane person believe that the enthusiasm that carried Trump to the nomination and then to the Presidency was based on his obnoxious jackass personality, independent of a hardline position on immigration and his America First domestic and foreign policy positions that were articulated during the campaign?

The problem is that these affirmative action “movement leaders” are unable to ever admit that they are wrong. I’m surprised that these types even admit that Hermansson was an infiltrator (although the “leaders” will not take full responsibility for the infiltration) – instead, they could have claimed that Hermansson is actually a double agent burrowing deep into the bowels (no pun intended) of HopeNotHate.

Let’s consider Trump. Let me preface this by saying that we must be careful not to be too Manichean in our view of human nature. It’s not always an orthogonal choice between being a true believer and being a fraud.  Some people are a combination of both.  Was Hitler a rabid anti-Semite or did he use anti-Semitism as a path to power?  Probably both.  Did Stalin truly believe in Marxism or did he use Marxism to achieve power. Probably both. Does Trump have any healthy instincts or is he just a political grifter?  Probably both, again.

It is entirely possible that Trump has some very vague civic nationalist and populist beliefs. But they are likely not important to him, not crucial to his worldview; he is not serious or sincere about any of it in any hardcore, authentic fashion.  He does in fact embody, as Ted Cruz suggested, New York values. He has Jewish family connections, a deep attachment to Israel, and a fondness for Negroes. He is a self-centered narcissist and if he truly cares about anyone other than himself then it likely is his elder daughter Ivanka and no one else. He certainly doesn’t care about his base.  If Trump was (and is) sincere, then why does he ignore his base (e.g., Antifa attacks, State of the Union address), lie to his base (e.g., “the Wall is being built!”) and constantly betray his base (e.g., hiring Neocons, shilling for increased legal immigration, an aggressive foreign policy, pro-Negro “criminal justice reform”)?  The man cares more about pardoning Jack Johnson than he does about his own supporters being physically attacked in the streets and sent to the hospital. His own DOJ persecutes his followers when they defend themselves and ignores the leftist domestic terrorists running wild in the streets.  For Trump to be sincere and commit all his crimes of omission and commission against his base means that the man must be a psychotic retard. However, while he may be vulgar and ignorant, and may be a psychopath, he is not psychotic and he is not retarded.  

Trump wanted to run for President for some reason.  Ego?  To build a rightist media empire after the electoral loss he thought would occur (and very likely desired)? His dislike of Obama and anger at being mocked by Obama?  Whatever the reason, he looked at the Republican field, read Coulter, and had enough sense to realize he needed to give the GOP base some “red meat” to distinguish himself from the Neocons and from Ted Cruz. The more he pushed the envelope, the better he did. It worked better than even he imagined. But if he were sincere, he’s had 2.5 years to give some demonstration of it, and he has done the exact opposite.  He’s not sincere.  He’s a fraud and Johnson was wrong and Sallis was right.

Thus Spoke Costello: Tin Cup Panhandling.  Nietzsche weeps.

Hey, fools, send in those “D’Nations” – these guys need their $100,000.  It will be put to good use, no doubt!

The Triracial-HBD View of Cruzian Dishonor

Triracial Jamaican Jayman asserts about Cruz dishonoring his pledge:

Jayman

This was the studliest thing Cruz has done, ever.
You got it twisted. Cruz was courageous to perform a bait-and-switch and to foil his competitor. What subhuman omega sperg would have endorsed the man who attacked his wife? Trump went to great effort to extract that betrayal, and then he was surprised?
Cruz earns a B+ for late-stage damage control.
Trump earns a D for assessing Cruz’s loyalty after smearing him for so long.
C_H earns an A+ for favoring Trump over Cruz.
C_H earns a D for identifying “courage” and honor. Ain’t no honor for Cruz endorsing Trump after everything that’s gone down.
Check yourself.

Keep in mind that this thing is Derbyshire’s HBD superhero, praised to the skies by child porn apologist Derbyshire at every opportunity
Getting wise to the anti-White political movement known as HBD yet, White man?

Different Kinds of Security Risks from Chinese Immigration

Various types of security risks.

This ostensibly reasonable post by Derbyshire poses some problems.

I suppose that my suggestion to bar persons with China connections from sensitive national-security work will seem outrageously shocking to many; perhaps doubly so as I myself have such connections. Should I be barred from access to sensitive data? 

Yes, I think I should. I have publicly expressed fondness for my Chinese relatives. It would be reasonable for an investigator, on learning that, to suppose that threats to my relatives in China might be effective in “turning” me.

That’s great. Let’s take it further. Having someone with such “connections” is a security risk in Der Movement and associated precincts, such as the anti-White HBD cult and “immigration patriotism.” Why only talk about risks to The System? What’s the difference? One can argue that the immigration of “Rosie” to the West is a security risk because it affects Derbyshire’s influence over racialist discourse, with all the damage that does to interests of value to “latrine flies.” Speaking of interests, note that The Derb only talks about narrow proximate concerns, and not about the damage done by Chinese immigration to White American ethnic genetic interests, nor about the damage done to the cultural/civilizational organic solidarity of the nation and its identity.


Also note the picture accompanying the article. Was The Derb only “teaching English” to Chinese females?


HBD, HBD, HBD marches on.

Sidenote: This is exactly one of the reasons some of us find Derbyshire so annoying – his hypocrisy. Except for the one time he should have mentioned it but did not (the essay attacking MacDonald), Derbyshire is always, constantly talking about his “Chinese connections” and his mixed marriage. It is seemingly his favorite topic, particularly if one includes not only his work at VDARE, but his writings elsewhere, as well as his personal website. He seems to derive satisfaction “tweaking the noses” of the “race purists” by making his private life a public spectacle. But, on the other hand, he acted as the outraged family man on VDARE, concerning emails allegedly received from skinhead types critical of his family. How dare they! And then Derbyshire “invites” them to come to his home, so he can “greet them in the appropriate manner.” Derbyshire himself makes an issue over his “Chinese connections” and then in that VDARE post exuded SJW rage because others mentioned it. That is like Ted Cruz’ plastic anger over people like Trump and cartoonists mocking the Cruz family that Ted himself intentionally uses as props in his campaign (note to Brimelow: using your children as VDARE props is not fair to them). Or, it is like the White women who demand that White society smile benignly on, and fawn over, their inter-racial relationships and mulatto children. If you choose to make the private public, then you have to acknowledge that not everyone is obligated to approve of your private choices. If you cannot acknowledge that, then keep the private private.