Legality

The American government has over several decades passed sterner and sterner laws to prevent illegals from entering and to deport illegals when they do enter, and then proceeded to ignore those laws.

On day one, Trump will start enforcing those laws – and then the Judges will legislate open borders from the bench. They will find in the emanation of the penumbra of the constitution a universal human right for every person in the world to vote in the United States, to predate on white people by welfare and crime, and to vote for more welfare, less law enforcement against criminals, and more law enforcement against the middle class, after the fashion of Venezuela, which exemplifies anarcho tyranny in that everything is illegal, except crime, which is legal.

America’s anti discrimination laws work rather like Venezuela’s price control laws. The government legislates reality away. America makes unequal groups equal by law, Venezuela makes everyone prosperous by law. When reality continues to be real anyway, the law is being broken, therefore the government can punish anyone they please for breaking it. In America they don’t punish crimethinkers directly, but they do punish businesses that employ crimethinkers thus indirectly punishing crimethinkers. The same is partly true in Venezuela, except that in Venezuela they have shut down so many businesses that there is very little left, resulting in chaos and famine.

We on the alt-right are largely ex Brahmins, or in revolt against Brahmin culture in which we are deeply immersed, so we tend to think there is not much that Trump can do against the judges. When the judges rule deporting immigrants illegal, and being racist illegal, and that being white makes you racist, people within Brahmin culture think that will be that.

But that is not in fact how Joe Sixpack, the guy with the remote in one hand and a can of beer in the other, thinks about legality. Nor, more importantly, is it what the armed man wearing a uniform thinks about legality.

He thinks that legality is a man wearing a uniform and a gun enforcing explicit formal officially stated rules in obedience to his chain of command. And the neater the uniform and the shinier the gun, the more legal those rules are. In this, Joe sixpack is wiser than we are. Because the neatness of the uniform and the shininess of the gun is an indicator of discipline, and discipline is an indication that the rules are going to be enforced as intended, and thus an indication that the man with the gun is no threat to Joe sixpack

So what Trump needs to do is send out people in sharp looking uniforms with nice looking weapons to enforce those laws whether the judges like it or not, and imprison or deport people who break those laws without bothering with judges.

When Trump does this, the left will suffer total meltdown.

One percent of the people will say “Oh it is terrible that Trump has abandoned due process”.

One percent of the people will say “Oh it is terrible that Judges are legislating from the bench”.

Ninety eight percent of the people will say “The open borders people are being boring, change the channel to the sports news.”

The vast majority of people just do not care about due process, in part because judges have been abusing it so grossly for so long.

17 Responses to “Legality”

  1. Cavalier says:

    As a Brahmin born and bred, I’ve forever seen the military as Henry Kissinger’s dumb, stupid animals. Even now when I hear of someone in the military my only thought is, “suckerrrrrr”.

    Real soldiers led by real leadership with real balls, in shiny uniforms with gleaming guns kicking down spic doors and pistol-whipping judges… that’s appealing.

    But just the illegals isn’t enough. Legality is an insufficient threshold. Magic soil Americans are legally my equals, citizens just the same as me, me the Puritan-descended inheritor of a spend and spoiled country overrun by 100 million foreigners, whose Founding “free white person of good moral character” Fathers are spinning in their graves like tops.

    In short, the uniforms will have to be very fashy indeed.

  2. Alan J. Perrick says:

    That sounds like populism, not formalism…

    A.J.P.

  3. Alistair Hermann says:

    Trump could do worse than to look at how the boats were turned back.

    Serious People in uniform citing ‘Operational matters.’

    But… I tend to doubt that is his style.

    A.J.Prrick – Formalism is recognition of power as it stands. Populism is currently a source of power.

    • jim says:

      Whenever the Australian press wanted to argue that the Australian government’s actions in halting illegal immigration were an illegal or immoral use of force, they found themselves stone walled by a man in uniform. People trust a man in uniform who is defending his country and upholding the law. They don’t trust a bunch of press scum.

      They trust the man in uniform to use violence only as a appropriate and necessary, and do not believe he needs a bunch of lawyers and judges breathing down his neck.

      • Alfred says:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TqJFp4y4zo

        The Milgram experiment is upheld by the psychology department of the cathedral as a scary warning against authoritarianism precisely because it proves the effectiveness of a man in uniform.

      • Eli says:

        It’s an open question whether this will work in the U.S., which isn’t Australia, and where the Cathedral is much more deeply embedded.
        In Israel, for instance, the following can happen:

        “The court has even gone so far as to intervene in wartime combat decisions while fighting is still in progress. Friedmann cites several cases of petitions challenging the army’s handling of humanitarian issues in Gaza, with the surreal result that the very officers tasked with resolving such issues were instead spending their time writing affidavits or explaining the situation by phone to their lawyers in Jerusalem.”

        (From http://mosaicmagazine.com/essay/2016/12/disorder-in-the-court/)

        • jim says:

          Jews are naturally priests by their nature, so are exceptionally vulnerable to this sort of attack.

          And even so I expect that the great majority of Israelis think the military should tell the courts to just butt out and would be quite comfortable if the military stonewalled all such court inquiries with “Operational Matter”.

          Whenever a bunch of supposedly non religious Jews get together, they come up with a belief system that looks suspiciously like a religion – a cracked religion at best and demon possessed religion at worst. “The culture of critique” presents this propensity as a Jewish plot against non Jews, but it is far more a self destructive and self hating tendency among Jews. For example Jews were among the greatest victims of Bolshevism and of the 1906 Russian revolution. The American Brahmin class is also priestly by selection, hence the over representation of Jews in that class. But I am pretty sure that most regular Americans just are not like that, and will react to warrior law presented by the man in uniform pretty much the way Australians did.

      • Alrenous says:

        True, naturally.
        But left unstated: this is a highly reliable heuristic. See how exceptionally snazzy Nazi uniforms were.

  4. lalit says:

    You lot should really have enslaved William Wilberforce and sent him to work the Sugar Plantations in Jamaica. The man was a calamity for us Pagans as well.

  5. CanSpeccy says:

    Rule of law is a good principle that should not be discarded. Instead of illegally detaining or deporting people, why not treat those crossing the border as invaders and shoot them. After the first few dozen the flood would become a very wary trickle.

    Not sure of the constitutionality of this, but could not illegal entry be dealt with under the War Power provision? When illegals arrive by the tens of millions, it amounts to a hostile take over (especially when they parade around under a banner saying “Make America Mexico Again”). Such people could thus surely be considered as engaged in a collective act of war.

    • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

      Not only is it an act of war, its the only kind of war that matters most in the end.

      Population migrations are the true invasions throughout history.

      ‘Occupations’ on the other hand are merely political theater; games between princes. See for example the ephemerality of the Alexandrian empire, or Americas episodes in the same region.

  6. Tom says:

    The Brahmin attitude to legality you’ve described here is rooted in a susceptibility to sophistry that I’ve come to wonder about. Is it truly a matter of Brahmin culture, or simply a pitfall inherent to a certain section on the right side of the intellectual bell-curve? That the way we define our words does not affect their referents is a truth that dissolves close to half of all open questions in philosophy once apprehended, yet every year thousands of cognitively high-performing students genuinely grapple with and are disturbed by Descartes’ ontological argument as if it weren’t dismissable with the observation that redrawing the lines on a map does not alter the indexed terrain.

    • peppermint says:

      Why? The intellectual legacy of cuckstainty. Soul theory is radical individualism, and more radical individualism is that kind of solipsistic magical thinking. In addition, since ((Yahweh)) (parentheses to imprison him while we slaughter his devotees) is the most important thing ever, but we only know it though revelation and logic, syllogisms about that Jew demon and its bastard are the most important type of knowledge. And to be honest, previous heretics and atheists only got a following if they preached communism, so retaining theologians to confuse everyone debating them to a standstill was pro-social.

      As we slowly purge ourselves of magical thinking, we can discover our true place in the cosmos and rediscover the meme magic of Kek.

      Shadilay!

    • peppermint says:

      As Upton Sinclair pointed out, it’s easy for a man not to understand something if his family depends on that failure. By now everyone knows that philosophy is crap but it pays well and lets philosophers compare themselves to Socrates, who demonstrated that democracy sucks. Plato’s forms were reified by cuckstain ideology, which blinded cuckstained Europe from the natural world for over a thousand years.

      Catholicism talks about the difference between Augustin’s Platonism and Aquinas’ Aristotelianism as if dualistic and hyelomorphic souls aren’t totally inconsequential to the actual functioning of the religion, and at any rate Heaven must be a physical place because ((Jesus)) and ((Mary)) are physically there, bodies and all.

      In reality, the form of justice exists in the minds of Aryans. It evolved due to the reproductive success it imparted. Everyone more or less knows this by now.

    • peppermint says:

      Plato asks, what is the nature of the good, which to a cuckstain means what is the nature of the best being which exists because it would be better for it to exist, which presumably thus means our God-Emperor. In practical terms, however, what is the nature of the good means what ought we do.

      The late cuckstain JS Mill in the last gasp of cuckstain philosophy replied
      》This is the highest abstract standard of social and distributive justice; towards which all institutions, and the efforts of all virtuous citizens, should be made in the utmost possible degree to converge.

      Hitler definitely answered in 88 words in chapter 8 of Mein Kampf:
      》What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the purity of our blood, the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the creator of the universe. Every thought and every idea, every doctrine and all knowledge, must serve this purpose. And everything must be examined from this point of view and used or rejected according to its utility.

      (In the original German it was 99 words. The repeating digits are a sign from Kek that it’s important. Kek allowed the nonsense about mission from a creator to get the digits, otherwise it would have nebulously said destiny, however, the stronger language does suggest that the victory of the Aryan race is righteous and inevitable, which, of course, it is)

  7. […] Jim kicks of the Week Down Under with some nuance on the question of Legality. […]

Leave a Reply