Archive for the ‘politics’ Category

Clinton’s Booby Trap

Friday, August 26th, 2016

Hillary wants the alt right to take over the right, to become the Republican party.

Which means that the alt right gets all the lovely beltway gravy that the Republicans are getting today – and like the Republicans, gets no power. Like the Republicans, becomes the outer party.

The Republican party then becomes the white male party because white males are about to permanently outvoted and rendered politically irrelevant.

It is an improvement on the current plan of the Republican leadership, which is that elections from 2020 out consist of the Republicans saying “White males are hateful, evil and deserve to suffer”, and the Democrats saying “White males are really horribly hateful and evil and we are going to make them suffer even worse”. And the beltway gravy will be nice.

But remember. Demotic politics is never where the power is, it is just theater to manufacture legitimacy for rulers, never a source of power. It can, however, be a source of beltway gravy, which is not nothing.

The booby trap is that we will rationalize pursuit of the lovely beltway gravy by coming to believe, or at least pretend to believe, that demotic politics is where power comes from. The alt-right taking over the Republican party is not the booby trap. The alt right being exposed to the same incentives as the Republican party is the booby trap.

Natsocs are center left

Thursday, August 25th, 2016

Socialism is left. If Natsocs are not socialist, need a new name.

One might argue that socialism is only left if demotic. Socialism on der Führerprinzip is the way every well run corporation works internally. But every well run corporation, as for example Apple under Steve Jobs, works by delegating everything except its core competence to the market place, and it then operates its core competence on der Führerprinzip. Steve Jobs decided what sort of glass the Iphone, and thus all smart phones, would have, but he then sourced the glass he wanted in the marketplace – where not only Iphones, but also every android phone now uses glass made to the specifications originally issued by Steve Jobs.

The sovereign has to grant property rights to his subjects in themselves and in their stuff, or he gets overwhelmed, as depicted in every critique of socialism, I Pencil, Atlas Shrugged by Rand, Ayn (1999) Paperback, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis, and The Road to Serfdom, and winds up being puppeteered by ministers and bureaucrats, as depicted in “Yes Minister” and “Atlas Shrugged”, leading to anarcho tyranny.

The Soviet Union wound up depending on criminals, because the criminals, who like the sovereign had primary property rights established by their own violence, were alone able to be productive.

When natsocs propose Kristallnacht, they succumb to the secret stash theory of economics, that smashing up Jewish pawnshops and vodka stills will make non Jews rich. Similarly Venezuela cannot develop its gold mines because thugs from the government keep coming around expecting to find a pile of gold. Jews are a problem, but Jewish professors of social studies and the Hollywood Jews who produced “The Kingdom of Heaven” are a problem. Jewish pawnshops are not a problem. And implying that they are is pandering to the kind of short time preference people who borrow from pawnshops, who think if usury is forbidden they will be able to borrow for free, who think that if they smash up the pawnshop, they will be as well off as the people who run the pawnshop. It has been said that antisemitism is the socialism of the stupid – implying that the peopile running Venezuela are very smart when they smash up every pawnshop instead of only Jewish pawnshops.

Nah. Socialism is stupid, and it becomes less stupid when it fused with racism because the result is less socialist. Antisemitism is the socialism of the marginally less stupid. Obama’s socialism, as for example Obamacare and Obamaphones, the socialism of the supposedly terribly clever people, that is stupid.

Natsocs are right about nationalism. And their socialism, socialism on das Führerprinzip, does not suck nearly as badly as demotic socialism. Notice that it murdered far fewer people than demotic socialism. Not only did the Nazis only murder a handful of Nazis, while the communists murdered enormous numbers of communists, the nazis murdered fewer communists than the communists murdered communists. If you are a communist, the sensible thing to do would have been to vote nazi, vote for people promising to kill you and against the people promising to put you in power. Commmies, such as Obama’s biological parents and mentor, are enormously more evil than nazis.

Hillary’s condition

Tuesday, August 9th, 2016

Hillary has been photographed being stabilized by two assistants as she climbs the stairs. This used to be Hollywood’s way of depicting someone as drunk – that he needed assistance to climb stairs without falling over and falling down.

Hillary is known to have injured her head by falling down.

Hillary has seizures. Seizures are typical of repeated severe alcohol withdrawal. Diazepam is used to control seizures and to treat alcohol withdrawal, and Hillary is accompanied everywhere by a man with a Diazepam injection pen.

Hillary is frequently unavailable for lengthy periods, while Trump is always on and ever ready to speak off the top of his head.

Hillary was famously unavailable for a considerable time during the Benghazi incident.

Why Trump is Hitler

Tuesday, August 2nd, 2016

You have doubtless seen lots of people arguing that Trump is Hitler. Often “Trump is literally Hitler!”

Of course people who read my blog know what “literally” means, and though Trump is obviously not literally Hitler, there is in fact a good argument that Trump is Hitler.

But for some strange reason, Democrats never make the argument out loud in plain words. I wonder why.

The argument, said outright in plain words, is:

Hillary’s nomination speech was in large part urging black people to murder white people, and promising to use the justice department to prevent police from enforcing law on black people. If police, for some mysterious inexplicable reason, wind up arresting and killing a disproportionate number of black people – well that is disparate impact, which illegal. You don’t have to prove racist motivation. Disparate impact is racist. Treating people according to the content of their character is racist regardless of motivation if the outcome is bad for non asian minorities.

This has been the law and practice for a very long time, and failure to apply this law to school discipline and law enforcement is an unprincipled exception. Unprincipled exceptions always go away sooner or later, and Hillary, truthfully or untruthfully, is promising to remove this unprincipled exception for policing and school discipline. I hope she is being untruthful, but sooner or later it will be the truth. Unprincipled exceptions are always removed sooner or later.

Hillary also promised to take away the guns of law abiding people (law abiding gun owners being almost entirely white Republicans) so that colored criminals can kill them (Criminal gun owners being mostly black Democrat voters. In other words, she promises to take away the guns of white Republicans so that black Democrats can kill them once she has appointed enough anti gun supreme court judges.

Hillary also promised to keep the borders open, and in particular open to poor suffering Muslim refugees, who are generally brown or black, male, military age, and always vote Democrat. Every few weeks we read of some outrage where black male military age Muslims murder large numbers of people, usually large numbers of white people. It is unclear how many black male military age Muslims we will get under this policy, but there are several hundred million such in the world, and they would all be much better off coming to America to live on crime, welfare, and voting Democrat. So there is a good chance that Hillary will bring in a few hundred million black male military age Muslims screaming for infidel blood and white pussy, to permanently change the electoral landscape so that whites are permanently outvoted, and we end up with a brown republican party competing with a slightly darker brown Democrat party over who will burn the most white shops, murder the most whites and rape the most white women.

Trump’s nomination speech was law and order, and he proceeded do demonstrate his capacity to maintain law and order in a wide area around the convention center. Among his various law and order measures was that he was going to stop illegal immigration and Muslim immigration.

We all know that lawlessness and disorder is in very substantial part, non white criminals preying on whites, for example Kristallnacht in Ferguson, so this means Trump is the pro white candidate and Hillary is the anti white candidate.

And, of course, Hitler was the pro white candidate, therefore Trump is Hitler.

And I now raise another glass of moonshine, this time to 27. Februar 1933.

Fertility and corporal punishment

Sunday, July 31st, 2016

To 1933, wives in movies are never spanked by their husbands.

From 1933 to 1945, wives in movies are sometimes spanked, but it is shocking, unexpected and unusual.

From 1945 to 1963, wives in movies and on television are sometimes spanked and it is routine, respectable, and usual. For example in “I love Lucy” we are never shown a spanking on screen, but Lucy is regularly very afraid of receiving a well deserved spanking for her many amusing misdeeds.

In the Western “McLintock” the authority figure, representing virtue, middle class respectability, and normality, unambiguously endorses the husband beating the wife severely for gross misbehavior, with a small coal shovel.

From 1945 to 1963, appropriate and proportionate corporal punishment of wives is depicted as normal, proper, appropriate, expected, and respectable. As in McLintock, it is what respectable middle class husbands do ensure that their wives and families behave in a respectably middle class manner – since women, unless restrained, have a not at all middle class preference for drama.

This had a dramatic effect on marriage and fertility in the US, almost as spectacular as the disastrous fall in fertility that ensued when McArthur emancipated Japanese women. Marriage went up, fertility went up.

USA fertility and corporal punishment of wives


USA fertility and corporal punishment of wives

We see a significant rise in fertility when spanking starts being depicted, and massive rise in fertility when it starts being depicted as normal. When spanking stops being depicted as normal, stops being depicted at all, soon followed by a massive demonization of men who rule their families and a hate fest against them, which is to say, against marriage and husbands, as marriage was traditionally understood, fertility drops like a stone, as spectacularly as when women were emancipated in Japan.

The high high fertility period was the gap between first wave feminism (Amelia Earhart getting a ticker tape parade for being transported across the Atlantic by a man like a sack of potatoes) and second wave feminism.

During that period it once again became socially acceptable to refuse to hire women for jobs for which they are inherently unfit, and once again became socially acceptable to spank one’s wife (McLintock). During that period women were once again expected to aspire to becoming wives and mothers, rather than despise that role.

Before 1933, no corporal punishment of wives depicted in Hollywood. 1933 to 1945 portrayed as shocking and unexpected, though not necessarily wrong. It is often justified in the context of the movie, but it is also depicted as the act of an outlaw – illegal but romantic.

We first see corporal discipline of one’s wife (spanking) portrayed in the media as normal, legal, proper, and socially acceptable in 1945, and fertility abruptly rises, and this depiction continues to 1963. whereupon it abruptly, suddenly, and totally stops – and fertility starts falling.

As the MRAs argue, feminism has artificially raised female status above male status. When a man and a woman walk in opposite directions down the corridor, the man gives way and the woman walks right down the middle of the corridor. Women continually interrupt men with impunity. (Perhaps the reason I am not totally unsuccessful with women despite being old, fat, and bald is that I am competing with the likes of Scott Alexander.)

But the MRA demand, actual equality, feminism done right, is obviously absurd and unworkable, because of the obvious inferiority of women in the male sphere. (Obviously women are superior in the female sphere, such as babies, home, housework, and finding my car keys.)

Thus, for example, no one really expects women to bear the costs of their own decisions, because women really should not be making those kind of decisions unsupervised. Thus “equality” in practice means women make decisions and men pay the costs of those decisions.

So what we have to sell is the principle of patriarchy – that women should be ruled by fathers or husbands, that men really are superior, that women should give way and should not interrupt. All women should be deferential to all men, but should obey those men and only those men who are committed to care for them.

And we have to reject and dismiss consent culture. Consent does not make sex right, nor lack of consent make sex wrong. Moment to moment consent is bad for everyone, and particularly bad for women. Women lack agency in sexual matters, making “rape” ill defined. The concept maps poorly to real life situations. “Rape” used to mean dating a woman without the consent of parent or guardian, irrespective of how she felt about it, or whether you physically had sex with her. We did not really have a word or concept for what we are now calling rape until the late eighteenth century or so.

The very concept of rape and consent attributes unrealistic agency to women. As in the old testament, we should give female consent as little moral and legal weight as possible, because the word is difficult to fit to real life events.

I don’t think women have agency in sexual matters, since between menarche and menopause their sexual actions are driven by volcanic forces of which they are scarcely aware. They do not want what they want, and they do want what they do not want. Nor do female children get “talked into sex”. If you have good preselection from adult women, female children with no breasts who have not yet experienced menarche will sexually harass you. The problem of adult men having sex with female children is primarily a problem of badly behaved female children, not badly behaved adult men. With women who have boobs, men pursue, and women choose, for sperm is cheap and eggs are dear. Pre boobs, and pre menarche, which is to say pre eggs, the shoe is apt to be on the other foot.

Thus, for example, Scott Alexander’s girlfriend consented to sex with lots of people, not including Scott Alexander, felt bad about it, felt that a gay man could do what she did without feeling bad about it or making Scott feel bad about it, so proceeded to surgically disfigure herself and declare herself to be a gay man. Clearly she would be much better off had she received a few severe spankings followed by some nonconsensual sex from Scott Alexander.

The population collapse is nothing to do with automation etc, since emancipated women in poverty stricken third world countries reproduce even less.

It simply a matter of whether or not men and women can enforceably contract with each other to durably form patriarchal families. If they can, total fertility per woman is around six or seven. If they cannot, total fertility per woman substantially less than replacement. If something in between (as for example the fifties when marriage as traditionally understood was illegal, but was nonetheless depicted on television as normal, normative, and respectable) then the fertility rate is something in between. The economy makes scarcely any difference, short of outright famine and hard Malthusian limits.

Timor Leste proves that if men have the opportunity to be patriarchs, they will not let poverty stop them. They will do whatever it takes.

Back in the fifties, when spanking was respectable, employers tended to advertise for married men, because they expected married men to be more highly motivated.

So we set up society so that prosocial behavior, reasonable competence, upholding order, and a bit of hard work pretty much guarantees a man will become a patriarch, and lo and behold, we will get prosocial behavior, order, hard work, and lots of well brought up children.

If, however you deny men the opportunity to become patriarchs, they hang out in their mother’s basements and watch cartoon porn, regardless of whether their society is rich or poor.

If patriarchy is the law of the land and I have a legal path to be a patriarch but no job, I can find a job, or create one, or scrape up a living somehow. If patriarchy is outlawed and I am legally prohibited from being a patriarch, I will be receptive to the life of the outlaw, the life of the bum, the vagrant, or hanging out in my mother’s basement. Jobs are not the problem. The lack of a reason to get a job is the problem.

If you look at high fertility and low fertility times and places, the factor that massively outweighs absolutely everything else by far, is whether or not a man and a woman can make a deal to form one household and have babies and expect their partner to be forced to stick to it. Patriarchy is necessary for this, since one household must have one captain, but patriarchy is in itself insufficient – the woman also needs protection that her children will neither be torn away from her, nor will she and they be abandoned by their father. The deal has to guarantee both the authority of the husband over his wife and children and the economic and emotional security of the wife and children, has to guarantee the father and husband obedience and respect, and the wife and children that they will be protected and looked after.

Reality is that wherever and whenever men have the option to be a patriarch, the overwhelming majority of men gladly make whatever sacrifice necessary to attain that role, even if extremely poor.

Hookers are only a marginal improvement over masturbation. What progressives offer men is just not what most men want, as revealed by men’s actions.

Yes, a harem is better than just one wife, but a changing rotation of whores is not a harem. The point of having more than one woman is having more than one woman. If I sleep with several women that is really great. If one of them sleeps with another man that is really bad and I will certainly dump her, probably beat her, and might well kill her. I will be very angry and sad for a very long time.

Look at the typical male polyamorist. He is psychologically scarred and mentally crippled for life. Having a bunch of whores rather than owning a woman, or better, owning two women, just really sucks brutally. Those guys are traumatized and damaged.

It unmans men, as if every day a bully beat them up, and they could do nothing about the daily humiliation but suck it up. Just look at what it does to men. It would be kinder to cut their balls off, which is pretty much what progressives are planning to do to us.

The typical male polyamorist looks as if a fat blue haired feminist has been beating him up every day – indeed, he would probably love it if a fat blue haired feminist beat him up every day.

Whores are a marginal improvement on beating off to anime. When men are reduced to such desperate straights, it totally crashes their testosterone and they buy an anime cuddle pillow and weep bitter tears upon it.

The criminalization of patriarchy was the criminalization of the deepest and most powerful need of white men.

Now four sovereign nations

Tuesday, July 19th, 2016

Reactionaries are fond of saying there are three independent nations on the earth: America, Russia, and China. Everyone else is under the boot of the Cathedral, except for a few small protectorates of Russia and China. Each sovereign nation has its own Twitter equivalent, which enforces the values of its own state religion.

It looks like Turkey may be added to the list, probably leading the Cathedral to re-evaluate Islam.

Since the Cathedral does not realize it is a state religion like any other, but regards itself as simple truth and decency, it believes it can crush Islam without overt violence and naked repression, in the same way it has crushed Christianity without overt violence and naked repression. Supposedly Islam rightly understood, like Christianity rightly understood, is indistinguishable from progressivism. Mohammed the community organizer like Jesus the community organizer. Progressivism thinks itself scientific, as Marxists used to think they were scientific.

Which is what Turkish Universities used to preach. I am not sure that they will still be preaching that now that Erdogan has purged every single university dean and most of the judiciary.

Erdogan is purging Gulenism. Gulenism is interfaith, arguing that Islam, Christianity, and Judaism are all basically the same. Well, if they are all the same, then they are all the progressivism of progressive Jews.

But, I hear you ask, how can Turkey achieve sovereignty without nukes? Won’t America murder them all in some horrifically gruesome fashion after the fashion of the Boers and the Tutsi?

Turkey has nukes. American nukes. Supposedly they cannot detonate without US command codes, but the US has been industriously affirmative actioning “moderate” muslims into its security apparatus, so I would not bet on that.

Progressive “Jews” act like conversos. “Progressive” Muslims do not act like conversos. I think the Cathedral has been suckered by Muslim taqiyya.

Putin has adopted Orthodox Christianity as his state religion in place of progressivism, which is fundamentally western, and which celebrates the western values, culture and tradition that the Cathedral seeks to destroy and erase from history. Orthodox Christianity is our friend. Islam is the enemy of our enemy, but is not our friend.

If it turns out that Turkey is defecting from the Cathedral, it is possible that the Cathedral may come to doubt that importing three hundred million black male military age Muslims screaming for infidel blood and white pussy and giving them affirmative action mortgages to move into green leafy suburbs will turn them into tax payers and mortgage payers to replace the missing grandchildren.

But more likely they will just double down on madness, deciding that the way to defeat Erdogan is to turn these guys into middle class mortgage payers and tax payers even faster.

Defense of capitalism:

Friday, July 15th, 2016

Reactionary future criticizes capitalism from the right.

Capitalists have power independent of the state. They are apt to use that power politically. Example George Soros. By and large, capitalists overwhelming back the left.

But, if they back the left, they are sucking up to power, or like the NGOs, serving the state when the state wants a smidgen of deniabity. For example you cannot see daylight between George Soros in the Ukraine, Harvard in the Ukraine, and the State Department in the Ukraine. In the Ukraine, it is perfectly clear that George Soros it taking orders from the State Department.

Charles the second said that science and the scientific method was high status, and rich people all over the place proceeded to apply the scientific method and sponsor science. Harvard says that equality is high status, and all the rich people attempt to tap the untapped potential of women and nigerians.

The State Church keeps capitalism in line with no problems.

Separation of Church and State has failed catastrophically.

Sunday, July 10th, 2016

Same problem as anarcho capitalism. The vacuum is apt to be filled. And today it is filled with an official government belief system that daily becomes more extreme, and is enforced more coercively.

In retrospect it is clear that in England the demand to disestablish the Anglican Church came from a competing religion, then called Evangelism, descended from Puritanism, which was already most of the way to becoming the state religion of England though it continually changed its name in the process.

The history of official religion in the US is more complex. When the United States was many separate states with a common defense and a common foreign policy, back when people said “The United States are” rather than “The United States is” there was absolutely no separation of Church and State, for each state had its own state religion, and the seminary of the state religion of Massachusetts, charged with promoting and enforcing the state religion, was Harvard.

After the English restoration the religion of New England became aggressive, political, this worldly, and bent on conquest and domination. They forever resented the English restoration which had disempowered them and purged them from lucrative positions in the Church of England and in the English government. Whig history began as their plan for reconquering England and the world.

The state Church of Massachusetts was state church of New England, and New England set up its Rome, its Papacy, in Massachussetts. The civil war and the Mormon war was New England conquering America – and then, following the civil war, denied it was a religious institution and proceeded to apply the doctrine of “separation of Church and state” as a very thin coat of white wash over the state religion of Massachusetts being enforced on everyone in America. And after World War II, everyone in the world, except those protected by nuclear weapons, Russia and China. There is a direct correlation between one’s alma mater’s proximity to the Boston-NYC-DC corridor and the height of one’s position in the government and ruling class of one’s country. Outside of Russia and China the only substantial resistance comes from Muslims. If you are Muslim a tranny nonetheless wins your song contest, your universities are run from Harvard, two thirds of the youngsters attending university are women due to affirmative action for women, and shortly after they attend university they find themselves covered in semen from head to foot and are told that they are liberated. Approximately half of all Muslims are moderate Muslims, and if you are a moderate Muslim you support the gay parades, you have only one wife in the event you have a wife, and if you do get married you will probably marry a women nearing the end of her fertile years, and are failing to reproduce. Immoderate Muslims, most of whom support Islamic state or some faction equally violent, are getting laid, marrying young women in their most fertile years, and having numerous children.

Ann Coulter famously said “Kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity”. Predictably, the US government adopted a policy of killing their leaders and converting them to progressivism, which policy is not entirely failing, but is having considerably less success and more serious problems than admitted. Conversion to progressivism is not keeping up with rate at which real Muslims, the ones that make women submit to their husbands, breed.

By and large, I tend to focus on power at the bottom – that women interrupt their boss tells me that they are hired for reasons other than their contribution to profit, that businesses are forced or morally pressured to hire women, and then stuff them into parts of the business where they cannot do too much immediate damage. Blacks walk down the street like aristocrats, taking up lots of space, while white males walk like serfs.

I also write a lot about female sexual preferences. Sexual selection, female choice, results in a positive feedback cycle, hence the peacock’s tail. I expect my readers, unlike Harvard alumni and Word Bank economists, to know the difference between positive feedback and negative feedback, to, unlike the typical Harvard alumunus, understand why the peacock’s tail is a really bad thing for peacocks, and to know that positive feedback is apt to have extremely bad consequences, and almost always needs to be broken and disconnected in the most direct way possible.

But this post is about power at the top. It is, however, also about my favorite topic: Positive feedback loops. And if you did not get that the peacocks tail is a manifestation of a positive feedback loop and that the peacock’s tail shows that women should never have been emancipated, do some homework before commenting. Seems that these days all they teach in university is how to hate white males, even if your degree is nominally in computer science. If your degree is in computer science, you damn well should know what a positive feedback loop is and why it is a bad thing.

During the reign of Charles the First of England, there was a remarkable outbreak of holiness. By and large, the holiest people tended to get the preaching jobs in the Church of England, and, since there was not a whole lot of entertainment and social events other than going to church, they persuaded other people to be holy.

To some extent this holiness was genuine and sincere. On the other hand, since Church of England jobs had good pay and status, it was to some extent pharisaical, and became increasingly pharisaical. And this pharisaical holiness started to increasingly resemble nineteenth century leftism, alarming the King, so Charles the First set to appointing Bishops that opposed and suppressed left wing pharisaism – or perhaps Bishops that, like Charles himself, enjoyed a good time and were not particularly holy. And this led to civil war, which the exceedingly holy won.

And pretty soon each candidate for office was even holier than each of the other candidates.

And pretty soon pharisaical holiness developed a striking resemblance to twentieth century leftism, the twentieth century labor movement and the hippies, Which alarmed Oliver Cromwell, who, like Stalin, found himself outflanked on his left, so he cracked down on it, a good deal more vigorously and more successfully than Charles the first did. Cromwell is both a villain to reactionaries, for executing a great King, and a hero to reactionaries, for putting a stop to leftism, and for equipping General Monck with a praetorian guard, the Coldstream guards.

Cromwell’s leftism did not go all the way to twenty first century leftism and celebrate sodomy, but the wind was blowing that way, as men ever more holy had to denounce yesterday’s holiness. The war on Christmas and the war on Marriage began under Cromwell, foreshadowing the twenty first century celebration of sodomy.

After Cromwell died, General Monck staged a coup, and to this day the Coldstream Guards, who were originally his praetorians, guard parliament. General Monck restored the monarchy, and the monarchy, Charles the Second, purged puritans from state institutions, including the Church of England.

This pissed off the puritans no end. Charles attempted to purge New England’s ruling institutions, but whereas puritans were unpopular in England, pretty much everyone in New England was a puritan, and the puritans eventually regained power in New England by a revolt that England let slide, and eventually legalized.

And having regained power, they proceeded to get holier and holier, until they were holier than Jesus (abolitionism and prohibition). And here we are.

How to give effect to Brexit

Wednesday, June 29th, 2016

Supposedly, if the British voted for exit, the government would immediately invoke article 50 – would give notice that Britain was resigning from the EU. That is what the prime Minister told them.

Well, the British voted for exit, and surprise, surprise, the government is not invoking article 50. The prime minister lied.

What a surprise. Are you surprised?

And every day, the most appalling scum, mostly black Muslims from darkest Africa, continue to pour through Calais to live on crime, welfare, and voting left. Theoretically England has a legal immigration policy that only lets in the better kind of migrant, but this has collapsed, as was always intended from the beginning, and now it is mostly violent black young male criminals, cannibals and terrorists. The supposed policy was collapsing from the beginning, and lately has collapsed faster and faster. If it had worked as officially intended, Britain would now be getting lots of high IQ Chinese, mostly wealthy Chinese businessmen. Instead it got a few, very few, low IQ Chinese, mostly poor Chinese waiters and welfare bums, and lately, rapidly increasing numbers of violent very low IQ black males. The supposed immigration policy was always dead in the water, and the real policy is now pouring over the border.

But look at Australia. Illegal immigration was abruptly ended totally and completely overnight with the stroke of a pen – well – with the stroke of a pen that authorized Australian Marines to shoot up boats and set them on fire anywhere on the high seas.

Legal immigration remained out of control in Australia, and has been getting steadily more out of control, but as the next Australian election comes very close, the Australian government has suddenly launched a crackdown to enforce the official policy, the official policy being “skills based”: that the rich, the pretty, and the clever are legally allowed in, and the rest not, while the actual unofficial policy was increasingly that the scum of the earth were legally allowed in to live on crime, welfare, and voting left. That unofficial policy has now, about a week before election time, been declared to be corruption, rather than high moral virtue. It is implied that the bureaucrats and judges that gave effect to the unofficial policy, gave effect to the actual policy, were, rather than acting according to the highest moral principles, bribed by migration agents. And by sheer coincidence this shocking and extremely surprising corruption was uncovered just before the election.

The official Australian story being that until a week or so before the elections, the government was too busy cracking down on illegal immigration to notice that legal immigration was a shambles. And until a week or so before the election supposedly no one had noticed. Or at least no one respectable had noticed and if anyone disrespectable noticed they probably got prosecuted for hate speech.

But now, they really are cracking down on both legal and illegal immigration. So if Australia can do it, so can Britain. The Australian government abruptly and totally stopped illegal immigration overnight, and it looks like they are now abruptly and totally stopping the scum of the earth from legally migrating. They got instant one hundred percent compliance last time, and I think they are going to get instant one hundred percent compliance this time. It is like lightning and thunder. Bam. Sudden radical change in policy immediately followed by sudden radical change in compliance. They had to shoot up a few boats, whereupon the rest fell into line, and I expect they will have to charge a few bureaucrats who thought themselves fireproof, whereupon the rest will fall into line. Sir Humphrey Appleby suddenly notices his minister talking quietly to a couple of large security guys about corruption. Swift and total implementation gives the enemy no time for counter measures. While leftist policies are introduced little bit by little bit so that the frog does not notice he is being boiled, rightist policies have to be introduced suddenly and totally, like a military offensive, like a coup.

The longer Brexit remains unimplemented, the harder it will be to implement.

In Britain, you theoretically have a sudden radical change in policy that is not being followed by compliance. Indeed, if anything, looks like they are getting in as many scum of the earth as fast as possible in fear that the compliance might be coming down the road. Slowly and eventually down the road.

So what are you going to do? As a reactionary, I say voting does not work, but voting worked in Australia. Eventually worked. Albeit after quite a while.

Vote for someone with the balls to give effect to policy decisively and suddenly. And if that does not work, because you have too many nonwhites voting against whiteness, and too many single women voting for rape by men of those races who are allowed to be alpha, well, then, there is always the reactionary solution.

The military and the spy agencies look perfectly loyal to the government, but so did the Chilean military, which had a long tradition of staying out of politics. The Chilean junior officers plotted and rehearsed the coup without anyone actually speaking the fatal words out loud until a few hours before the actual coup. The Thai coup is going smoothly, and in the Philippines, looks like a self coup is underway or has already happened. Obviously if you are in the military, you don’t go 1488 out loud, but if Brexit just does not happen, this discredits democracy.

When Napoleon entered the Council of Ancients with a squad of Grenadiers, they heckled him. One deputy called out, “And the Constitution?”

Napoleon replied “The Constitution! You yourselves have destroyed it. You violated it on 18 Fructidor; you violated it on 22 Floreal; you violated it on 30 Prairial. It no longer has the respect of anyone.”

And so it should be if Brexit has no effect. Our next Napoleon should tell parliament about Brexit.

George Soros on Brexit

Sunday, June 26th, 2016

Mixed in amongst the usual lies, were some truths.

The “Leave” campaign exploited the deteriorating refugee situation – symbolized by frightening images of thousands of asylum-seekers concentrating in Calais, desperate to enter Britain by any means necessary – to stoke fear of “uncontrolled” immigration from other EU member states.

Why the quote marks around “uncontrolled” Soros? Was not that the plan all along – to bring in five hundred million males over the next few years from Africa and the middle east to permanently outvote the white population while living on crime and welfare?

… scenes of chaos like the one in Calais.

… A sudden influx of asylum-seekers disrupted people in their everyday lives across the EU.

The lack of adequate controls, moreover, created panic, affecting everyone: the local population, the authorities in charge of public safety, and the refugees themselves. It has also paved the way for the rapid rise of xenophobic anti-European parties – such as the UK Independence Party, which spearheaded the Leave campaign – as national governments and European institutions seem incapable of handling the crisis. …

Xenophobic? Is it not entirely rational to be alarmed by scenes of chaos like the one in Calais. If people found their everyday lives disrupted, maybe they have a right to act collectively and individually to protect their everyday lives against this disruption engineered by their ruling elites.

… making the disintegration of the EU practically irreversible.

If we are sufficiently lucky and virtuous.

Brexit will open the floodgates for other anti-European forces within the Union. Indeed, no sooner was the referendum’s outcome announced than France’s National Front issued a call for “Frexit,” while Dutch populist Geert Wilders promoted “Nexit.”

How about that.

…Tensions among member states have reached a breaking point, not only over refugees, but also as a result of exceptional strains between creditor and debtor countries within the eurozone. At the same time, weakened leaders in France and Germany are now squarely focused on domestic problems. In Italy, a 10% fall in the stock market following the Brexit vote clearly signals the country’s vulnerability to a full-blown banking crisis – which could well bring the populist Five Star Movement, which has just won the mayoralty in Rome, to power as early as next year.

🙂

The five star movement is a non cathedral leftist movement. Much like Bernie Sanders. Their economic program is, like that of Bernie Sanders, pure self destructive evil madness, akin to the flagellant movement that flogged each other to show how holy they were, but, like Bernie Sanders, they are outflanking the Cathedral on the left and, like Bernie Sanders, trying to produce a leftism that is not held together by hating white heterosexual males, the destruction of the white race, and the physical destruction of white civilization. Instead, they hate the economic system that produces stuff, and propose to replace it by a program of not producing stuff, since actually producing stuff is low status and insufficiently holy. I suppose everyone will earn their living by doing socially conscious puppetry and artisanal basket weaving.

The bottom line is that switching to fast boiling the frog, declaring that there was no such thing as an illegal immigrant, that everyone in the world had the right to live and vote in white countries, rob their citizens, rape their women, and receive welfare, gave the game away. Too many people can now see what is coming down the road.

That said, I don’t think we can stop this by democratic means. Women will vote for rape by alpha cock, and white males are beta by law. But quite substantial and rapidly growing numbers of people realize we have to put a stop to this.