No enemies to the right

No enemies to the left has been working great for the left, and no enemies to the right has been working great for us.

If you declare someone to your right your enemy, you wind up dancing to a tune called by leftists.

Supreme Dark Lord Vox Day recently criticized Spencer and the Nazis as fake right – criticized them not for being too far right, but for being too far left, for being socialist. He did not criticize from the left, but from the right. He is correctly maintaining a position of no enemies to the right. You can argue that his criticism was too harsh, that he was cutting off communication, but his action was not an example of enemies to the right. Socialism is leftist, and Nazis are leftists who have been left behind by the rest of the left as the rest have continued to move further left.

People who want to smash or steal stuff belonging to Jews are mistaken. That never makes us rich, it makes us poor.

Non Jews should be removed from state and quasi state power in Israel, and Jews should be removed from state and quasi state power in the US. But if you go smashing up a Jewish pawnshop or a Jewish distillery, you are allowing covetousness and envy to distract you and make you do stupid things. Taking or smashing other people’s stuff is a bad idea. Land and women can be usefully and effectively stolen, but the trouble with socialism is that more complicated forms of wealth tend to get messed up in the transition. Jews in exile tend to specialize in precisely those forms of wealth that are not usefully confiscatable.

Tags:

173 Responses to “No enemies to the right”

  1. […] No enemies to the right […]

    • Corvinus says:

      “Nazis are leftists who have been left behind by the rest of the left as the rest have continued to move further left.”

      Fake News, Jim.

      Romantic nationalism, devout religious beliefs, and anti-Semitism in rural Germany, along with acute financial difficulties, made the peasant-farmer class the perfect targets for Nazi propaganda. Playing upon an existing proclivity toward völkisch nationalism, the Nazis emphasized that this group was the “true nobility” considering they were the racial backbone of the nation as the purest form of the Volk. The Nazis claimed that Marxists and Jews controlled the government and were threatening the peasant-farmers’ economic vitality. The Nazis advocated for agrarian reforms, the elimination of indebtedness, and tax relief. In towns and hamlets, the Nazis demonstrated they were traditional German rightists. addressing middle-class issues by exploiting their fears and prejudices as propagandists saturated the towns with posters and leaflets. The drive to attract middle-class individuals was in part due to Hitler’s desire to staff the party organization with intelligent bureaucrats. The ultimate purpose? Preserve tradition. The Nationalist Socialists were conservative–they opposed race mixing, they adhered to patriarchy, they loathed popular culture, they opposed immigration, and they sought to preserve their culture.

      It was a party was born out of a conservative reaction to the Weimar Era, with its policies focusing on the primary goal of restoring Germany to its traditional values. Anti-Semitism existed prior to this political group: it was a prejudice they amplified by appealing to the traditional factions of German society in their nationalistic desire to MGGA (Make Germany Great Again). Healthcare, education, and worker employment measures were developed to unify the German identity, just like the traditional policies used to facilitate economic efficiency. The National Socialists, through the lens of social conservatism, proclaimed the power of the people first before subjugating them as cogs in a military machine, i.e. blood and soil. Moreover, the National Socialists awarded women the Mother’s Cross in accordance to the number of children each German female produced. We know that the Catholic Church in its opposition to contraception and abortion encourages its adherents to have large families. Hence, the Nationalist Socialists drew from religious tradition as another important part of their conservative agenda.

      Take the 1932 elections as a guide. The majority of Germans opposed the continuation of the Weimar Republic. Right-wingers of all persuasions felt it was necessary to support and strengthen (“conserve”) things like the family, the Army, and the Church, which they saw as the foundations of the country, and to be under threat. Most believed violent political change (“revolution”) would be necessary to stop and reverse the process of disintegration they saw taking place. The Nazis were prepared to work with the military, at least in the short term, and they largely left the Church as an institution alone. They strongly supported the family because of the need to breed lots of soldiers. Conserving German strength, unity and racial purity required revolutionary means. It also demanded the end of divisive party politics; a new political system with a visionary leader would overcome differences of left and right by creating an organic national community.

      In other words, the Nationalist socialists were conservative revolutionaries.

  2. dirkdiggler says:

    Smashing shops is a form of organization fairly robust against state control. It emerges in response to conditions having sufficiently decayed and serves as a useful signal.

    Even under trump the armed forces will not fight for us. The best we can hope for is patchwork. Smashing shops and getting away with it is the first seed of territorial sovereignty in a dying nation.

    • dirkdiggler says:

      The smashing of judges and police involved in, say, Rotheram should meet your moral criteria. Regard this as an intermediary step.

  3. Paul Rain says:

    Shit. When has Vox ever called for the removal of the money power? When has Vox ever called for the removal of the Jew? He is a softcock leftist.

    • pdimov says:

      Vox is not a leftist, he’s just on his own side.

    • dirkdiggler says:

      Vox probably sees himself as strategically positioned to draw in and educate moderates and idiots. Iirc he has a larger outreach than everyone else combined, so that would almost necessitate that his audience be significantly less right wing.

      I never found his stuff insightful or interesting but recently he has been dropping strong hints about the JQ

      • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

        frankly I find him much more militant than nrx and wrote the book on anti leftism and the manifesto on altright. his niche is more age it seems and and a particularly channish channel into the older generations

  4. The trouble with this argument that Vox is “punching left” and therefore it’s OK is that White Nationalism 1.0 liked to purity spiral and punch anyone less pure than pure. It just got them isolated. To build a worthwhile coalition, you have to bring in a range of people with key shared interests.
    It’s also a false premise. I would classify Vox as an alt-lite figure because of his emphasis on brand and marketing. The more idealistically motivated alt-rightists are in my estimation more radical than he is. So in calling them “fake right”, he is trying to disguise the true nature of his attacks. The trouble is, plenty of people aren’t fooled. He’s been getting some considerable negative feedback, so it’s reasonably likely he’ll drop it soon so he can keep selling books.
    Most of the alt-lite got back on track within a few days after Charlottesville. For whatever reason, the Cernovich-connected faction kept pushing this “Spencer is a fed plant” and “fake right” meme.

    • jim says:

      If you attack nazis for racism, you are punching right.

      If you attack nazis for socialism or for pan whitism, you are punching left.

      Punching right results in you being cucked and owned by leftists.

      • Issac says:

        I don’t think you’ll be able to get around pan-white politics in America. Your individual ethnic groups aren’t large enough to constitute a serious political bloc with which to oppose the established left. The idea that being concerned with “white,” America is diminishing Scot-Irish or German heritage is absurd anyhow. A “POC,” never gives up their individual African or Mestizo heritage by pressing the attack for “diversity.”

        The “we’re not white, we’re Irish,” crowd is probably your best example of what attacking pan-white’ism gets you: fissioning identity groups eager to join the “POC,” in destroying the remaining constituents of the white majority.

        • Cavalier says:

          >The idea that being concerned with “white,” America is diminishing Scot-Irish or German heritage is absurd anyhow.
          >diminishing Scots-Irish or German heritage
          >Scots-Irish or German

          “Till the stock of the Puritans die.”

          • Your Wife's Son says:

            Funny how the same people who lambaste Nazi German treatment of Slavs as “wrong for the white race” are the first to proclaim Anglo-Puritan superiority to the Germans.

            Not saying you’re one of these people, Cavalier. Noteworthy phenomenon, though.

          • Your Wife's Son says:

            I expect some consistency, folks. If it were wrong for Nazis to lord it over the Eastern Europeans, it is just as wrong for Anglos to lord it over Germans.

            That’s pan-whitism in a nutshell. No enemies to the WHITE.

            Conversely, if the Puritan stock is the best stock and Germans should GTFO, then national socialist Germanization of the potatozone wasn’t such an atrocity.

            To be pro-Anglo versus Germans because Germans are deemed inferior, but also anti-German versus Slavs because “evil nazis”, strikes me as a perfect example of “one rule for me, one rule for thee” on the part of the Eternal Anglo, applied against the dread Kraut.

            Vox Day, and MPC, and all those who agree with them, are hypocrites.

          • Your Wife's Son says:

            Don’t get me wrong. For Germans or Nazi-sympathizers to say “Anglos should accept Germans” while supporting the cleansing of Slavs is equally hypocritical. But Germans are aware of that, aren’t they?

            Nazis themselves were consistent: Germans are superior, Anglos are part of the Germanic family, let’s rule the world together and defeat Judeo-Bolshevism.

            All that stuff is irrelevant anyway. Facing the onslaught of coloreds, insisting on Anglo supremacy, German supremacy, or Nordicism is petty. Madison Grant said that Nordics from Albion and Nordics from Deutschland are genetically compatible.

            Slavs may not be compatible, they may be low-trust, but it’s not the right time to shit on them. They too are being displaced, though some are resistant. Russia itself is only 80% Russian, and the demography of young people is dramatically worse than that. The Soviet Union fell after it had lost control of Central Asia, and now Moscow, the “capital of Russia”, looks like Dushanbe!

            Latvians and Estonians, and to a lesser degree Lithuanians, have managed to stave off the immivasion. “You don’t get excessive welfare because we’re a poor country” they tell their niggers. The niggers are largely gone. But Soros’ minions are lurking in the dark, biding their time.

  5. recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

    Since I seem to have become one of the more vocal proponents of jew scepticism around here I suppose i should chime in.
    First I want to clarify something. I do not want neoreaction to merge with WN/nazism. In fact this week I have been pushing for WN/nazism and the alt right to mutually agree to disavow each other. By which I mean do their best to mitigate the jew medias attempt to conflate the clearly distinct two.I could suggest ways they might make the case but since I am not really of either group Ill shut up. My concern is winning, and I have noted each subtle variation of the right seems to appeal more to one person than another and often other variations trigger them. from fully woke this may seem strange but its how it is. It serves the left to make us all nazis because that triggers most the altright has done yeoman’s work neutralizing muh holocaust, kudos. Of course that makes their work of nuancing themselves more difficult but they are bright lads they will manage. This might be a good place to put in my usual plug for ecumeniscism we could all use more red pills we all have blind spots and confusion otherwise we would all agree, the left has no enemies to the left because they essentially agree more than we do, yeah they’re stupider so its easier but we got to work this out.

    So on to the jew question and its tendency to divide us. Hmmm think about that for a second.OK i gotta start with JIM where has anyone any where including storm front and niggermania ever once suggested stealing the jews liquor stores and dry cleaners? (its worth adding i rarely note any actual socialist tendencies in the so called nazis)so JIM this post is ostensibly about unity but you base it on this meme you have been fomenting repeatedly that jew criticism is about stealing their shit- I call bullshit on that!

    This would be a good place to clarify what mt jew criticism is meant to convey. Not that we as “neo reactionaries” whatever that means, become rabid anti semites after all we are half jewish. But since we are the party of HBD reality and uncomfortable truth. We face the FACT that jews are in fact not us and in fact half amassed half the wealth and power and use it largely to dispossess us through leftism.As Macdonald posits they may not be the sole perpetrators of morbid leftism but they were at the very least a necessary precondition, (and the organizing force, and intellectual handmaiden). we dont have to hate them or purge them certainly not rob them. But we have to admit this and we have to have any of them who wish to be in the new right admit this as one of the fundamental tenets. And I think they themselves should be tasked with the solution. The other point I have made is jew power is leading to whats going to be worse though more easily identified east asian power. If you look at who scoring into our universities asians are crushing us.If you cant bring yourself to say NO white nations are for white people and Jews have refused to become white people therefore it is simply unacceptable that they be allowed to effectively rule us.Then you will not be able to say no to the east asian s who are so much more numerous they will swamp us no time. and we are setting up for a trap, affirmative action at this point disfavors asians vs whites particularly if anyone would bother holding jews from whites which no one I’ve seen has. This means if you can not embrace “white nationalism ” you’re in a trap.

    We all know nazism and white supremacism is a loser thus far which is why I preface this with an internal agreement to work separately while privately wishing each other the best. problem is we are not privately cheering WN we deride it constantly. No one seems to be clear about the implication which is multiculturalism and white dispossession. The overbearing state needed to hold the empire together and well you might as well pack up and go home. could this be because neoreaction was sort of founded by a jew and so many among us are jews? well we ought to figure it out.

    The argument s that seem most marshaled from withing us against serious consideration of WN are too clever by half, its frankly scary that so called rationalists are so easily taken in by them. The first is the one JIM JUST USED that its a bunch of commie rednecks wanting to steal the poor jews hardware stores. The other is a variation on this that sort of stresses the redneckedness over the redness. In this version its more the stupid vulgar demotist tendencies we are to fear and loath. I’ve already pointed out I see very little real socialist interest from them (which is not to say they along with others including trump have some valid criticism of capitalism from the right which I will get to) So concerning the demotism and vulgarity.Making spenser or Anglin king is not suggested no one denies those most identified with WN/nazism are dumbasses so are most trump voters and quite a few of us. That’s beside the point of whether we want ethno patches, whether ethno patches are the most sustainable stable efficient and politically feasible patches. Or if you think not so feasible then are they the ideal if they were feasible because God knows we waste a hell of a lot of time on more outlandish ideas than the normal human social organization known as a ethno nation.In short deriding actual WN/nazis is not an swe to WN as a concept, WN need have nothing to do with nazis socialism hate etc in fact it shouldn’t include any.

    Can jews be white? This to me might be the final solution> I think theoretically they could. However at this point in history particularly since the jewish crimes of the past 100 years they must be subject to extreme vetting. I would say they would have to disavow there jewish identity and prove that by working twice as hard as any white for white nationalism, they themselves should in order to be allowed to live with us in a post left world use their power and wealth as they now do for anti white interests even more forcefully for white interests. they should voluntarily divest themselves once this is accomplished of the levers of power media finance academics etc go back to most mercantil medical etc they can participate as employees in the academy law finance but not as owners operators and not at all in social criticism. they must not marry other jews and must accept a cultural enshrinement of their past aggressions. Hey its better than a gas chamber and if its too much then you can go to Israel, this idea that asking others to live among themselves rather than among us is some form of inhuman torture is beneath contempt for reactionaries.

    Capitalism generally has to be critiqued from the right its actually a much bigger cause of the breakdown of the west than socialism, in fact capitalism is a precondition and reaction to socialism. This in no way is anti cap pro soc simply we need to understand the mechanisms and I think stop worshipping capitalism for its own sake remember its been traditionally an anti right force and is better thought of as a necessary tool in service to us and therefore subordinate to culture.

    regarding looting the jews. The relationship between fiat debt and leftism and the financial globalist who commoditize and profit from the sacking of the west is well pretty fucking jewish from one end of the pipeline to the other. some jews organize various nigger types tell them what to demand and recommend other jews as lawyers who make inside deals with other jew civil servants who get other jew donors and media and jew academics to pressure politicians to hand over the money we dont have, at which point jew financiers and jew reserve banks make money and debt out of thin air then saddle whites with it while earning trillions in commissions. AND YOU JIM HAVE THE TEMERITY TO CLUTCH YOUR PEARLS OVER THE JEWS BAGELSHOP BEING SEIZED_ SERIOUSLY

    • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

      In case this was occluded by the case building I dont want nrx to merge but i do wnt us privately to admit the full extent of the problem and take it seriously particularly being cognizant that we are largely jewish and Ill add if we cant then we should be honest we are not what we have been purporting but more like a neocon neoreaction essentially a jew directed and cuked project.

      • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

        and all that said it is worth trying to educate the WN?nazis about political reality. About socialism about fascism inclination as desperate attempt to sustain democracy, about pan europeanism vs exit. But lets be both cognizant of their legitimate concerns like being screwed by jew globalism and also give them the respect they deserve as our white brothers by being honest of what they can expect when we assume power (if we ever become worthy which i’ve frankly despaired of) That “Ireland will be free one day but you’ll still break stone” as yeats put it

    • Dissident factions can disavow each other all they want. They’ll still be lumped together as “nazis” by the establishment. Alt-lite can maintain a strategic distance without sending out counter-signals that will be ignored anyway.

      • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

        the left will try for sure but the cats out of the bag kids are on the interwebz they get the nuances of lord of the flies culture, there are things that can be done like not using altright interchangeably not teaming up for neo confederate rallies. ann coulter manages to stay on television and the newyork times best seller list despite the lefts best efforts and her paleo conservatism constantly pushing into alt right territories.sure theres some on each side wanting clicks by coat tailing.

    • Garr says:

      There’s a really awesome, huge old gnarled tree with twisting, overlapping, and sometimes fusing limbs in the Brooklyn Botanical Garden. I call it “the Monster Tree”. I can’t remember what species it is. But it costs $15 to get in and see it! Oh well … there are some very impressive trees in Prospect Park too. Maybe I’ll walk there today.

    • jim says:

      some jews organize various nigger types tell them what to demand and recommend other jews as lawyers who make inside deals with other jew civil servants who get other jew donors and media and jew academics to pressure politicians to hand over the money we dont have, at which point jew financiers and jew reserve banks make money and debt out of thin air then saddle whites with it while earning trillions in commissions. AND YOU JIM HAVE THE TEMERITY TO CLUTCH YOUR PEARLS OVER THE JEWS BAGELSHOP BEING SEIZED_ SERIOUSLY

      The great majority of Jews do in fact do stuff like operating bagel shops.

      You correctly point out that Jews in state or quasi state power are not loyal to the state or the society it rules, and have no real interest in its continuing existence. This is an argument for removing Jews from state power, for removing people who profile as likely to be disloyal from state power, for removing fake Americans from American state power (and non Jews from Israeli state power). It is not an argument for removing Jews.

      • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

        http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/04/the-most-and-least-educated-u-s-religious-groups/

        so the vast majority of these bagel shop owners felt they needed a college degree to open a bagel shop? who the fuck do you think youre kiddie jim im born and raised in NYC

        • Cavalier says:

          If “Jews” are a biological group originating in Eastern European shtetls, then no, Jews don’t rule.

          If “Jews” are a group of people (irrespective of their ancestral history!) which conform to certain characteristics ideal to fitting in a certain economic niche or niches, namely that occupied by bankers, lawyers, and related, and perceive themselves as having shared interests and thus loyalties and thus find themselves in alliance, then, well….

          • jim says:

            So Susan Bolton and Angelo Mozilo are Jewish now?

            News to them.

            • Cavalier says:

              We’re all Jews now.

              • Oliver Cromwell says:

                Not all of us, though dissident right is noticeably composed almost exclusively of white Jews (rootless cosmopolitans). The conventional right of the settled still believes in Christianity.

                • Cavalier says:

                  Suburbanites count, too. Only the Mormons and the Amish/Mennonites/Anabaptists practice meaningful Christianity. Everyone else is a joke, including the “conventional right” and the “settled”.

                  I’ve heard rumors that there’s still a fairly prosperous Southern aristo-ish class rather segregrated from the mainstream, but I don’t have any insight into that.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  Dissident rightists explicitly disavow Christianity, while the others agree they are Christians and argue about definitions.

                  My guess is the typical commenter here has lived in multiple countries. At the very least it is not unusual. Moving from a suburb in one city to a university in another to a suburb in yet another, in one country, is not quite the same.

                  It’s increasingly the future of Whites. And indeed Whites will probably become a 115 IQ race like the Ashkenazi, as there will be no safe area of settlement for unadmixed Whites with IQs too low to jet around the world chasing favourable political and economic conditions.

                • pdimov says:

                  Ordinarily I’d reply that this can’t happen because who will make it not safe? Only other whites can do that. So the effect is self-limiting.

                  But who knows.

                • jim says:

                  In Cambodia, everyone of above average intelligence was killed, for the most part tortured to death. In Szechuan province, everyone was killed, for the most part tortured to death. The effect was not self limiting.

                • pdimov says:

                  What I had in mind was that when most white males are killed or tortured to death in the US, the US would no longer be able to make Poland unsafe for white males.

                • jim says:

                  Might work for Poland, but consider England and France.

                • pdimov says:

                  If the empire subsides, I’ve a feeling that England will be fine. France… not so much.

                • Cavalier says:

                  No number of Mohammedans can defeat any white power without the aid of the Invisible Thumb.

                • jim says:

                  The British army has approximately two hundred generals, but can only put about two hundred fighting men on active patrol on a regular basis. It has approximately one general per actual fighting soldier available to actually shoot at the enemy.

                  Pretty sure the entire British army, navy, and airforce has been repeatedly, decisively, and humiliatingly defeated by quite small numbers of poorly equipped Muslims in regular standard conventional warfare battles.

                  Pretty sure that any military that actively recruits women and affirmatively actions them into warrior roles is going to be defeated by absurdly tiny groups.

                  It is not just the invisible thumb commanding soldiers to act like heavily armed nursemaids, it is also a serious shortage of actual soldiers. They theoretically have 200 000 or so soldiers, but it seems that at any given time 199 800 of them are attending seminars on diversity, cisgendersim, racism, and sexism.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  I don’t see any evidence for that, though you seem to have a peculiar contempt for the British. I guess this is typical Aussie.

                  In all recent conflicts it seems to me that where British servicemen have not been overly constricted by political requirements they have performed extremely well. What is so different about the British army of 2006 and the British Army of 1991 or 1982? I suggest the key difference is that in 1991 and 1982, the wars were just such that it was allowed to fight them.

                  Having lived in both countries, my impression is that the culture wars are actually far more advanced in the US than in the UK. The UK gets a diluted and diminished version; like idolatrous Christianity, the US has the fanatics and the UK has the bored congregation of habit. There just aren’t a whole lot of foot soldiers for SJ in the UK. At the higher level, of course, it’s far more cucked, since the UK is a comparatively weak country subject to American influence.

                • jim says:

                  Humiliating defeat in Basra. Rescued by Americans.

                  Humiliating defeat in the Persian gulf. Shameful and cowardly surrender

                  Humiliating defeat in Helmand province. Rescued by Canadians.

                  Where is it that British servicemen have performed well? Dunkirk?

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  In Basra the British were ordered not to fight. In the Persian Gulf, I do not think there were specific orders, but it was clear the political leadership would not have supported fighting. In Helmand, it does not seem that the USMC (what Canadians?) had a very easy time retaking control with 10x as many troops, though indeed they did succeed with 10x as many troops.

                  There is a big problem with the political leadership. There might be a problem at the ground level, but I see no positive evidence.

                • jim says:

                  See “Losing Small Wars: British Military Failure in Iraq and Afghanistan”

                  Again, I ask, where have British soldiers performed well?

                  In Helmand province the British had no problem blowing up women and children, and yet were still defeated. They fought for real, and lost for real, in large part because while two hundred British soldiers were blowing up schoolgirls, the other 199 800 British soldiers were attending diversity seminars and building playgrounds for schoolgirls.

                  I think you may have been listening too much to the BBC, which has developed a reputation for mendacity and deranged detachment from reality similar to that of Baghdad Bob.

                  It is entirely possible, indeed probable, that all two hundred of the British soldiers who actually fought, fought quite well, while the other 199 800 were learning to despise cisgenderism.

                • jim says:

                  (what Canadians?)

                  Surrounded and besieged British forces in Sangin were about to be taken by the Taliban, and Canadian tanks arrived to rescue them.

                  Asymmetric warfare means that one side is clearly weaker, but the weak side is protected by the State Department, which refuses to allow the stronger side to wipe them out. But the British were not defeated in asymmetric warfare, but in straightforward conventional symmetric war.

                • jim says:

                  It does not seem that the USMC (what Canadians?) had a very easy time retaking control with 10x as many troops, though indeed they did succeed with 10x as many troops.

                  Britain versus the Helmund Taliban: Britain’s entire peacetime military capability humiliatingly defeated in conventional symmetric warfare. If the US also had a hard time, this makes the US look weak. It does not make the British look strong.

                  If the British can be defeated in Helmand, why not in London, where there is far more loot to be seized, women to be enslaved, and infidels to be slaughtered?

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  The point is becoming a little confused. It’s right that the British leadership was never particularly interested in winning. In Basra especially, it seems that the officers were ordered not to take casualties, and also to win, with the knowledge that taking casualties would get you real punishments. So they retreated inside fortresses and tried to dodge the shells.

                  But you also seemed to be saying that the 200 men were not as good as other Western countries’ 200 men. Might be true, but I don’t see much evidence of that.

                • jim says:

                  If your entire military, with two hundred generals, can only put two hundred men on the actual battlefield, with the rest engaged in logistics, affirmative action, diversity training, cisgenderism seminars, and so on and forth, you have a problem. Particularly if you are facing an enemy that can and does put a good deal more than two hundred men on the battlefield.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  How well 200 men do is meaningless on the macro scale. It is the “I have a black friend” of warfare. The willingness of a nation to fight and win a war is in question, not the individual martial skill and bravery of the best that nation has to offer.

                  The Shadowed Knight

                • pdimov says:

                  “The British army…”

                  Just lift the invisible thumb from the football fans, no need to get the army involved.

                • pdimov says:

                  Interethnic civil war has nothing, literally nothing, to do with the performance of 200 British soldiers on the other side of the world.

                • jim says:

                  VD correctly informs us that Anglin’s policy of blaming Jews for everything, including the innate and natural misconduct of women, is tactical, intended to make people feel the enemy is something that can be easily gassed.

                  Hitler’s position on women was better than the leftist position on women. Anglin’s position on women is better than Hitler’s. But blaming female misconduct on the Jews is just the blue pill.

                • pdimov says:

                  The interesting question is why did VD all of a sudden decide to attack LarpSoc at this specific time. Anglin’s policies or positions aren’t recent.

                • Your Wife's Son says:

                  Positioning himself for official leadership of the alt-right by attacking Johnson, Spencer, and now Anglin.

  6. vxxc2014 says:

    As far as enemies stuff HALAL.
    Wonderful Muslim concept: “That which you can take.”
    Enemies.
    Not their co-ethnics.
    Names not groups.
    Aim at groups we’ll miss dangerous names.
    Again.

  7. Your Wife's Son says:

    Debating Greg Johnson, Vox claimed that Nazis had considered Slavs to be untermeschen.

    This popular misconception has been disproved by Guillaume Durocher:

    https://www.counter-currents.com/2016/03/hitler-vs-the-untermenschen-myth-reality/

    Vox should’ve done his homework.

  8. Samuel Skinner says:

    Vox is weird (I suspect his Christianity has a lot to do with it). His 16 points:

    “5.The Alt Right is openly and avowedly nationalist. It supports all nationalisms and the right of all nations to exist, homogeneous and unadulterated by foreign invasion and immigration.”

    This has been tried. Turns out to be a horrible idea.

    “10.The Alt Right is opposed to the rule or domination of any native ethnic group by another, particularly in the sovereign homelands of the dominated peoples. The Alt Right is opposed to any non-native ethnic group obtaining excessive influence in any society through nepotism, tribalism, or any other means.”

    Yeah, he means the Jews. Amusingly ‘any other means’ implies gaining excessive influence through hard work or having higher intelligence is also bad.

    “13.The Alt Right rejects international free trade and the free movement of peoples that free trade requires. The benefits of intranational free trade is not evidence for the benefits of international free trade.”

    Not clear what he means. I know what free trade means, but it doesn’t say what he wants to replace it with.


    As for the complaint about Spencer, he is attacking Spencer for being a white pan-nationalist (not being against Jews). This is ironic since Spencer is trying to unite what amounts to Medieval Christendom. I have no idea where this fits on the left-right spectrum.

    • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

      first lets specify that one says what ones intentions are may not really be one intentions.
      If in the current year you are working for white nationalism its wise to make like you are working towards everyones national safe space, and yeah hint to the pushiest of the multiculturalists that you notice israel’s immigration policies are not consistent with jews policies for the rest of us and maybe theyde like to cut a deal.
      just like if you want to get rid of the brown people its best to say you want to enforce immigration laws.Its also been noticed by quite a few on the right that this invade the world thing is not so much in our interest.

      yes it is unacceptable for the jews to gain power and influence of white nations when they do not consider themselves white and use said wealth and power to destroy whites. that they earned the money is irrelevant they gained admittance to our market by false pretence.do you not fucking get this basic principle that you don’t owe your enemy the means to destroy you or are you just a fucking kike?

      This free trade thing is likely referring to a sort of trumps nationalist economics. free trade is not we give countries that buy from us 1/100 of what we buy from them the same terms as countries that have no trade deficits. free trade is not allowing nations to steal your technology then sell it back to you or others. free trade is not triangulation third world misery against first world standards of living, or demanding the free movement of labour and that the dispossessed native worker pay 30k each for every nigger relative imported with the so called free market laborer who too is supplemented with the welfare state that quadrupled his so called competitive free wage. free markets are not allowing multinational corporations to pay no taxes while using trillions of dollars worth of infrastructure built over centuries, from our educated labor pool govt subsidized R and D our military protection courts roads communications fuck you amazon apple and co.what he means is the USA ought to be run for the benefit of the white men who built it.

      • vxxc2014 says:

        Basically agree with everything Viking says above.

        He’s right.

        and BTW I’m not adverse to cutting REAL deals with the others either, as long as they understand we’re moving from underdog to Top Dog again and if they don’t like it they can fly to Tel Aviv.

        The rest of them? Cut it out. They miss ORDER and PROSPERITY and frankly will tell us to man up, won’t bless “White Supremacy” or Jim Crow but hell WHY make it blatant/in their faces anyway? < That's INCOMPETENCE by our Southern White Brethren -Stupid.

        If you wield power wield it with GRACE and Politeness, restraint.
        The Velvet Glove.

        Jim Crow was stupid degradation by STUPID MEN who had no idea of POWER to be wielded wisely requires GRACE and poise, being a Gentleman.

        • vxxc2014 says:

          Juan Manuel de Rosas the first real national leader of Argentina made it a point to always address common people and workers with the gravest dignity -giving them a sense of worth. His riding with, leading and treating his guachos [cowboys on steroids] with said respect bought him to power.
          Those were his victorious soldiers.

          Let’s compare that to what we have now…
          and compare it frankly to people who want to restore Jim Crow.
          If you have the power you don’t need to use it to degrade…unless there’s something wrong with you.

          There was something lacking in the people who set up Jim Crow.
          Something wrong.
          And when the openly degraded minorities got into power in the 60s they have been making it a point to treat us as white niggers since…and it’s time for people without grace being in power to end.

          And I’d never admit this to the enemy but I’m tired of being punished for the graceless incompetence in rule – the real sin – of other whites.

          Let’s get power back. Someone has to be in charge and the others have proven they can’t handle it. Once in power rule justly and with grace – or just don’t accept or seek power.

          • jim says:

            The proposition that minorities were “openly degraded” is just nuts.

            The “open degradation” that you refer to is propensity of black people to trash the facilities white people provide for them.

            Even during slavery, blacks were treated with dignity.

            • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

              I thought you just told me all these black oppression projects worked great. jesus jim nothing works with black nothing from full free everything to chattel slavery they are fucking apes and need to be put back in the jungle

          • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

            Id quibble that Jim crow was just abuse I think it was a legitimate response to black violence and whites in a majority black area not wanting to become intimate with blacks cant hold that against them looking at the alternative.and lets remember only a few percent of whites owned slaves so cant blame all whites for blacks being there in first place.

            But the bigger point is jim crow didnt work apartheid didnt work slavery didnt work colonialism didnt work and todays appeasement doesn’t work. there is no sustainable living with blacks.the disproportionate discipline they require causes a cycle of resentment violence and further oppression until youre back to total oppression anything less than increasing discipline and they run the cycle the other way until you are supporting every last jack of them in some way and they are still destroying trillion dollar cities industries and rioting and raping.
            a lot of reactionaries who obviously have little experience with blacks or history seem to imagine when they win they can simply ignore the blacks to sink or swim. well they will surely sink and then riot constantly and ambush you when they can not one in a thousand is really worth the wages it takes to live in the usa, are we really as reactionaries intending to keep up the make work jobs tolerate the lawsuits they file the crime they live on. other who think they will enforce order on them should go back and see how thats always worked and remember they cant feed themselves even n today’s world let alone the world coming. they have to go.

            • jim says:

              Jim Crow worked, segregation worked, and colonialism worked great in Rhodesia. And all those things not only made whites better off. They made blacks better off, and gave them more dignity than they have now. Everyone in the Congo and Rhodesia is nostalgic for white rule.

              • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

                when things cant be sustained and when they are enforced at gunpoint and when they are essentially oppressive I dont consider them to be working but rather mistakes that havnt been recognized yet. we could as well say by your standard slavery worked best of all.
                Maybe I have to go a little deeper. whites have consistently demonstrated a very low tolerance of suffering particularly human suffering even inequality of outcome seems intolerable when its the degree to which blacks and hispanics arabs etc naturally fall when attempting to compete in our game. blacks also are intolerant of these unequal outcomes There simply is no way the browns can sustainably live here without being supported by us, and even if NRX is willing to do that rather than be racist we cant afford it and they are intolerable to be around even when provided for.
                Har NRX become NRO while i was away last month?

                • jim says:

                  when things cant be sustained and when they are enforced at gunpoint and when they are essentially oppressive I dont consider them to be working but rather mistakes that havnt been recognized yet. we could as well say by your standard slavery worked best of all.

                  Absolutely: Slavery was the biggest favor whites did for blacks.

                • Cavalier says:

                  >Absolutely: Slavery was the biggest favor whites did for blacks.

                  It wasn’t an act of charity, it was a ruthless exploitation of profit. That one wants one’s property kept in good working order is rather incidental to the central plot of the thing. Plus, freedom really is important, and slavery really is dehumanizing; it’s unenviable to be but a number in a spreadsheet.

                • jim says:

                  Ruthless exploitation for profit would not have been buying slaves from black slave owners. It would have been taking the land of black slave owners and enslaving them as well.

                  If you buy slaves at fair market value, you are not being ruthless. You are, if you are competent, making a fair and appropriate profit. Most of the slaves had been enslaved for vagrancy or petty crime – therefore in large part people who are unwilling to be productive enough to feed themselves honestly unless someone is standing over them with a whip. As their descendants in large part still are.

                  And when whites actually did engage in ruthless exploitation for profit, they still made their blacks better off.

                • Cavalier says:

                  >And when whites actually did engage in ruthless exploitation for profit, they still made their blacks better off.

                  When whites actually did engage in ruthless exploitation for profit, they imported other whites and hired them to work in their companies.

                  The Southern aristocrats were running an obsolete system.

          • Cavalier says:

            >And when the openly degraded minorities got into power in the 60s they have been making it a point to treat us as white niggers since…and it’s time for people without grace being in power to end.

            I’ve got some bad news for you.

            That Monday night, 50 leaders of the African-American community gathered to discuss actions to respond to Parks’ arrest. Edgar Nixon, the president of the NAACP, said, “My God, look what segregation has put in my hands!”[45] [emphasis added] Parks was considered the ideal plaintiff for a test case against city and state segregation laws, as she was seen as a responsible, mature woman with a good reputation. She was securely married and employed, was regarded as possessing a quiet and dignified demeanor, and was politically savvy. King said that Parks was regarded as “one of the finest citizens of Montgomery—not one of the finest Negro citizens, but one of the finest citizens of Montgomery.”[9]

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks#The_boycott

            via

            • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

              Parks was a plant the entire bus scam was set up, what are you suggesting that niggers can be lived with if only we were not so mean to them?

              • Cavalier says:

                The opposite of love it not hate, but indifference.

              • Cavalier says:

                Hey Jim, instead of deleting the good one, why not simply edit it from:

                “The opposite of love it not hate, but indifference.”

                To:

                “The opposite of love is not hate, but indifference.”

                And then delete this comment.

      • Samuel Skinner says:

        “do you not fucking get this basic principle that you don’t owe your enemy the means to destroy you or are you just a fucking kike?”

        Half, but I highlighted it because of the amount of dissembling and someone up comment mention curiosity at Vox’s position on the JQ. The dissembling is important; it means people can read into the points what they wish. Good for a political movement, but terrible for actual implementation.

        “what he means is the USA ought to be run for the benefit of the white men who built it.”

        That is easy to say, hard to craft a policy or position to do. Historically American trade policy has been high tariffs; this is because the North’s industry couldn’t compete with England and let them benefit at the expense of the South and West.

        https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/imports-by-country

        As you can see 22% and 13% for China and Mexico respectively. There are other 3rd world nations we trade with but in comparison they are minor (next biggest is India at 2.2%).

        Now, it is possible to change that, but I’m pretty sure you can’t do that without destroying the economy (since China buys and holds American debt).

        To be blunt, Vox’s ideals require the total collapse of the United States and a new blank slate in order to enact them. They are more difficult then turning the United States into a monarchy.

        • Oliver Cromwell says:

          Vox doesn’t make a lot of sense to me because he seems to think the US has to be a British ethnostate (hey I’m not complaining!) but that would exclude pretty much everyone from its citizenship including himself.

          • Samuel Skinner says:

            That is his position on history; US was a British ethnostate (which as soon as it achieved independence started importing Non-British individuals for votes).

            His stated belief is that he thinks the US is going to inevitably break up into separate ethnostates. No, he hasn’t elaborated what he thinks the cleavages are. He switches between historical inevitability and political idealism in such a way it makes it impossible to offer elaborations on his positions. This is doubly amusing since Dixie and New England are the most commonly proposed cleavages and they are both British.

            • coyote says:

              Dixie and New England are both British- from opposite sides of THEIR civil war.

            • Oliver Cromwell says:

              He tries to talk about America like it’s a European country, where you can just exclude the alien influence and get back to something that was there before.

              But there really was nothing there before. There is no really logical argument you can make that the British deserve to own North America more than the Germans and Italians and so forth. There is no political argument you can make to a population which contains essentially no unadmixed British people.

              Vox doesn’t want to make some argument like “America is the land of high achievers who speak English of all races” because that means Jews and Brahmins, but he hasn’t given a plausible alternative.

  9. Dirtnapninja says:

    The strategic problem with the Nazis is that they are full of informants, fanatics and marginal personalities. This makes them unreliable and downright counterproductive.

    I don’t recommend countersignalling them so much as simply walling them off and not having anything to do with them.

    • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

      I agree but because alt right used nazi memes humorously and people like spencer sort of crossed over its a mess. Im just saying do what can be done to as you say wall them off, I didnt say counter signal i said mutually agree to work different turfs. But you and others are correct they are almost impossible to work with

    • pdimov says:

      Nazis don’t exist. Anglin had a good article about that, I can’t be bothered to find it now though. In short, national socialism was never a coherent ideology, it was whatever Hitler thought at the time. It never existed before him, died with him, and will never reappear.

      • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

        no nazism died but there are those who larp the regalia which admittedly is pretty cool . but mainly why theyre called nazis i think is their HBD is driven more by hate than reason

  10. Issac says:

    One could plausibly argue removing any Jews from anything would make the west materially poorer. But if that wealth comes at the cost of your continued slide into ethnic oblivion, I don’t see why it’s a relevant factor.

    Smashing != Building is obvious, but nobody promotes either exclusively and suggesting one obviates or precludes the other is being disingenuous.

    • Issac says:

      Also, Vox makes good point about the nature of national socialism, but ultimately he’s being pedantic in order to entertain his neocon friends. Alt-right doesn’t care what Vox thinks and Alt-lite (neocon) thinks Vox is racist.

  11. Ironsides says:

    Without actually having to go Nazi, it’s worth thinking about this:

    In the Russian Revolution, the Commies offered the populace land; the Nationalists offered them serfdom. The Commies won.

    In the Chinese Revolution, the Commies offered the populace land; the Nationalists offered them serfdom. The Commies won.

    In the German Revolution, the Commies offered the populace ownership of the factories, and the Nationalists offered them a prosperous society with an economy that served national, German interests. The Nationalists won.

    The Nationalists won in the case where they went economically “left” enough to enlist the sympathies of the yeomanry, without going so far economically “left” to the point of international globalism. Where the Nationalists offered the yeomanry nothing but dominance by some cynical fat cats, plus a pat on the head, they got beaten like a red-headed stepchild by a bunch of smarmy commie liars who nevertheless knew how to get people to support them.

    You’ve got to get the average guy on your side somehow. Scratching his back in some way means that he will view you as being FOR him, and he is then free to follow his natural patriotism and ethnocentrism to the Nationalist cause.

    Nazi Germany still had private ownership of businesses, allowed people to benefit from enterprise and individual initiative, etc. But they also had laws to ensure that German workers were well paid, that rewarded women leaving the work force and having children, etc., and made sure that things operated nationally rather than getting international ownership and influence.

    Again, it’s not necessary to be a Nazi to see that the Nationalists in Germany WON and produced a fanatically loyal generation who in many cases fought to the death for them precisely by offering the ordinary yeoman a decent life if he worked. And that the Nationalists elsewhere failed horribly due to having nothing to offer the yeomanry.

    It’s not even so much the material reward (otherwise the mercenary Nationalist armies in China and Russia would have won). It’s telling Joe Average that YOU HAVE HIS BACK, even just a little.

    Nationalists should remember that. “I have your back” generates a lot more loyalty and energy on your side than “thanks for the help, now you’re on your own, bub.”

    • Mackus says:

      *yawn*

    • vxxc2014 says:

      Amen to Ironsides.

      Let’s get power back. Someone has to be in charge and the others have proven they can’t handle it. Once in power rule justly and with grace – or just don’t accept or seek power. Having the back of the average man is part of ruling with grace.

      Being a redneck peasant who forces people to publicly degrade themselves by using colored drinking fountains and bathrooms is graceless incompetence.

      I’ve heard the defense. Don’t bother. You fucked it up. Twice.
      No – niggers and kikes can’t be in charge.

      But we now have proven neither can you.

      • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

        I dont understand what makes you think niggers and kikes will tolerate not being in charge it would be more humane to fly them home with ten grand each than do to them what it will take to keep them down.

      • Cavalier says:

        >let’s get power back

        Do you fly steerage, first class, or charter?

        “Yesterday I was clever, so I wanted to change the world. Today I am wise, so I am changing myself.” — Rumi

    • jim says:

      Socialism is popular because envy and covetousness are popular. But envy and covetousness is self destructive and does not work. That socialism is popular is an argument against demotism and democracy, not an argument for socialism.

      • Ironsides says:

        Not wanting to starve, live in rags, or be treated like garbage isn’t “envy and covetousness.”

        Do you have a better explanation for why the Germans enthusiastically backed the Nazis (unwisely, as it turned out) than that they produced an economic boom for a while that the yeomanry was allowed to share in?

        This is why the Right loses. Because they’re too stupid to understand that the average guy WANTS to be a patriotic nationalist. But if one side offers death in a gutter for him and his children, and the other side offers some kind of life beyond being the slave of some internationalist jackass, then enough of the yeomanry will side with the latter to kick the asses of the former.

        And how is it “socialism” to prevent a few predators from chewing the faces off the people? The Left at the moment is INDISTINGUISHABLE from big international business. They are the same people. Our society and culture are being torn down by leftist internationalist capitalism, which, as it turns out, is pretty much communism — after all, Communism is just one giant international corporation that wants to conglomerate all ownership into one huge, murderous corporation under a board of directors (Politboro).

        Eh, whatever. Continue to lose like idiots because you’re so hooked on “muh libertarianizm” that you can’t see that LOYALTY TO YOUR COUNTRYMEN, including taking a few basic steps to ensure they aren’t miserable slaves of a bunch of over-monied scum, is the basis of getting your countrymen to be loyal to you.

        • Mackus says:

          You’re shouting at your hallucinations.
          Jim criticized libertarianism plenty, among other things on the grounds it fails to account for nationalism.

          Are you an FBI agent? Nazis that are FBI plants are the most obnoxious ones.

        • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

          Jim will be proposing to cut the capital gains tax next

          • jim says:

            Capital gains tax is a good example of a strictly envy based tax. Cutting it or abolishing it invariably increases government revenues.

            If you want to maximize revenue, follow the tax policies that His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum applies against non citizens.

            Similarly if you want good cheap universal healthcare that actually takes care of people’s health, follow the healthcare policies of Singapore. If you want high fertility in a Christian country, adopt the family law of Timor Leste. (Which has marked similarity to eighteenth century English family law)

            • Cavalier says:

              Robots don’t pay income tax. Nor, for that matter, do little 100-line computer programs that deprecate industries piece by piece.

              • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

                this is like lands larp. someone has to be making a profit to invest in the machines they pay tax.wtf are you two getting at the rich pay no taxes and the poor just starve to death and fight it out with niggers thats what we have now.if youre going to disrupt a nations you have to have a plan better than let them eat cake or they fucking kill you

                • Cavalier says:

                  Labor is finished. The writing is on the wall. The future will be all capitalist aristocrat all the time. However, with respect to the non-elect, there are three possibilities:

                  1. UBI. When a man cannot make himself useful even by his own industry, he’ll still need an income. If you want to be a sadistic bastard, don’t distribute the money to the men, but the women. That’s basically what’s going on now.

                  2. Return to the soil. People return to an Amish style of life, more or less. Farming, most likely before oil. The peasantry can support itself without resort to UBI. Lower carrying capacity than UBI, though.

                  3. Mass die-off. Everybody who doesn’t own capital sufficient to live on the return lies down in a ditch somewhere and dies.

                  And I guess a 4th possibility, which is: a few scattered remnants of people turned hunter-gatherers living off the land.

                  With drones, nukes, planes, bombs, napalm, capable robots, tanks, and so on, however, I doubt there will be any “cake or fucking killing”.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  What the fuck is with intelligent people who think “robots” are going to make everyone unemployed? Have you noticed that fucking everything is produced by robots and has been for 200 years.

                • Cavalier says:

                  “What the fuck is with intelligent people who think “robots” are going to make everyone unemployed? Have you noticed that fucking everything is produced by robots and has been for 200 years.”

                  “Robots” is shorthand for “non-human labor”. Self-driving cars of one variety or another, self-flying airplanes, self-checkout stations at the store, Apple’s incredible voice customer service software, etc. and so forth. There are actual 3D-printed house prototypes now, you know — in China, of course.

                  It is a gross oversimplification to say that everything has been produced by robots for 200 years. Even the simple negro cotton-picker was not deprecated until the 1910s.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  Fucking everything is produced by non-human labour.

                  If something is produced by human labour this is plastered all over the packaging because stuff that wasn’t made by robots is a positional good.

                  http://s.hswstatic.com/gif/power-drill-1.jpg

                  Behold, the amazing self-turning handle.

                • peppermint says:

                  It’s time for the 115 IQ retards to shut the fuck up about automation. You will always have to work and the government will never give you free stuff for no reason. If it wasn’t illegal, nigger slaves, or even nigger employees, would have a decent actual value other than regulatory compliance.

                • Dave says:

                  Robots do not compete with people for food, clothing, housing, education, or health care, so the prices of these goods will always reflect human ability to pay for them. In the natural world, similar life forms (e.g. lions vs. hyenas) fight over the same inputs, while very different life forms (e.g. animals vs. plants) settle into symbiotic relationships where one’s input is the other’s output.

                  No economic system can grow indefinitely with or without robots, so at some point inferior people will have to be killed or forcibly sterilized, lest they collapse the system with their sheer numbers.

                • Cavalier says:

                  >Fucking everything is produced by non-human labour.

                  Yes. And endlessly “managed” by humans, the only reason that unemployment is not already an epidemic. Consider fedgov and its endless hordes of useless paper-pushing bureaucrats: what would they do if all fired tomorrow? Seriously. Homestead? Their skills are simply not needed in the modern economy. Their abilities, repurposed, are simply not needed. Even if they all decide to do useful things, the world only needs so many plumbers, welders, and truck drivers, and the wages of those occupations suggest that that need is already well-satiated.

                  You’re going to have to come to terms with the fact that there is a vast cruft of useless people throughout the economy, and that these people, once fired, are no longer employable at any task at any price, and that this is in large part due to the fact that software really is eating the world.

                  How many entry-level lawyer-jobs did OCR deprecate? This is not merely rhetorical.

                  There is no law, physical or legal, that guarantees that a new technology must create a new job for every old job it destroys.

                • Cavalier says:

                  >You will always have to work and the government will never give you free stuff for no reason.

                  You may always have to work. That is entirely possible. But if you must work, and you cannot find work in the modern economy, you will have to work the soil, possibly with plow and oxen. Even family farming, when it is still family, is now dependent on government subsidy, and in my travels through the back of beyond I’ve talked to these very men who, if not old and gray, as a general rule, are also leveraged to the hilt.

                  >If it wasn’t illegal, nigger slaves, or even nigger employees, would have a decent actual value other than regulatory compliance.

                  Doing what? Cotton picking is now done by a machine that no mere man can compete with. What can the negro do? Seriously, what? I’m drawing a blank.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  If you believe we already *need* fake jobs so that people aren’t involuntarily unemployed, you have to believe peoples’ wants are already completely satisfied. My wants are certainly not completely satisfied. I want an Aston Martin that I can drive around inside my fifty floor house. I can’t have that because I can’t afford to pay enough people to build and maintain all that which is impossible.

                  We do have fake jobs to transfer wealth from productive people to political clients.

                • Cavalier says:

                  >Robots do not compete with people for food, clothing, housing, education, or health care, so the prices of these goods will always reflect human ability to pay for them. In the natural world, similar life forms (e.g. lions vs. hyenas) fight over the same inputs, while very different life forms (e.g. animals vs. plants) settle into symbiotic relationships where one’s input is the other’s output.

                  Robots do not need to compete with people for those goods in order to have an impact. When a robot makes a man unemployable at any task at any price, at least in the modern infoindustrial economy, that man is effectively “kicked out”, and so, being cut off from the flow of dollars, is no longer a potential customer for any profit-seeking enterprise, and can thus no longer access any (or at most very few) of the modern goods and services enjoyed by the rest of us in our gated communities and cafes, still being nodes in the modern infoindustrial economy.

                  Now, you can argue, as Jim sometimes does, that a man could get by on 10c an hour if only there were no minimum wage and all sorts of other minimum-bar-standard friction-generating regulation. And it is true that Africans can get by on 3$ or whatever per day, as they are 99% cut off from the modern infoindustrial economy. But you simply cannot purchase goods and services from profit-seeking enterprises if you have no dollars to spend, and profit-seeking (modern infoindustrial) enterprises have absolutely no incentive to service people with no dollars.

                  I suspect there is a stable equilibrium at some lower level of technology. The Amish, for example, have a mostly independent economy, and make “mainstream” money by producing human-intensive goods “mainstream economy” people really want to buy, like quality furniture and awesome food, but that’s not at all the technofuture utopia you want, is it?

                  If you want the technofuture utopia, you have to have human abilities continually outpacing the machines (unlikely), or UBI, or basic income with conditions (perhaps an augmented farming arrangement, back to the soil, lebensraum, etc.), or outright cull everyone who falls behind (inhumane), or Butlerian Jihad, or something else in this general vein.

                  Or perhaps we can somehow make The Theory of the Leisure Class real — for everyone.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  Now let’s suppose this whole mythos is true and all IQ120+ can produce infinitely many and varied things themselves for zero cost. What would be the actual effect of this on less intelligent people?

                  Nothing! The aristocrats would just stop trading with less intelligent people leaving the normie economy unaffected. The only way normies could be put out of business would be if the aristocrats started raining down free stuff on them out of generosity which doesn’t hurt normies in the slightest, it’s the UBI without a government.

                • Cavalier says:

                  >I can’t have that because I can’t afford to pay enough people to build and maintain all that which is impossible.

                  You can’t have that because you are insufficiently rich compared to the laborers you would need to employ to make that happen.

                  And even if you were rich enough to make it happen, they would not be rich enough to make a similar thing happen for themselves.

                  In fact, this scenario, assuming an ideal system in which there is enough material and capable labor to make it happen, it basically zero-sum; if you paid each person half as much, you could hire twice as many, and so on, until they’re eating bread and water and sleeping in rags under ramshackle mud huts.

                  Perhaps we can generalize this: “robots” (an umbrella term encompassing non-human capital) are effectively unlimited in their augmentary powers, whereas humans are zero-sum. If this is true, then the solution to the standard of living problem is to get people out of the economy completely, or as completely as possible (which is pretty close), and simply scale up the robot-slaves to ludicrous numbers. Of course, you need nuclear. And if you go too far, you get Solaria, an undesirable end indeed.

                • Cavalier says:

                  >leaving the normie economy unaffected

                  You just don’t get it. The “normie” economy would look like the Amish, like a preindustrial yeoman farmer economy.

                  No software. No electronics. No cars. Nothing, or almost nothing, powered by fossil fuels. Log cabins. Did you know that the Amish don’t use zippers? The zipper is too advanced a technology for them to feel comfortable with, comfortable growing to depend upon — and they’re right!

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  “What the fuck is with intelligent people who think “robots” are going to make everyone unemployed? Have you noticed that fucking everything is produced by robots and has been for 200 years.”

                  It gives progs who nonetheless are capable of noticing the long term collapse a way to avoid having to think about the long term. “Don’t worry, in the near future, Jesus will return friendly AI will bless us with heaven on Earth – no need to worry about all that scary stuff those reactionaries are going on about.

                • pdimov says:

                  “When a robot makes a man unemployable at any task at any price, at least in the modern infoindustrial economy, that man is effectively “kicked out”, and so, being cut off from the flow of dollars, is no longer a potential customer for any profit-seeking enterprise, and can thus no longer access any (or at most very few) of the modern goods and services enjoyed by the rest of us in our gated communities and cafes, still being nodes in the modern infoindustrial economy.”

                  This is total nonsense. It’s not that it doesn’t make sense, it just has nothing to do with reality.

                  But even if we posit that as true, it would be self-correcting. If profit-seeking enterprises no longer have incentive to produce, robots will disappear.

        • Your Wife's Son says:

          Your priorities are wholly misplaced.

          Competent socialism requires very extreme eugenics as a preliminary condition. Until we have very extreme eugenics, any talk of “socialism” is outright suicidal ideation.

          If and when western civilization secures for itself eugenic demographics, then we could talk about the merits and the demerits of socialism vis-a-vis an unregulated market.

          Right now, you’re just an enemy of western civilization.

          • Cavalier says:

            >Right now, you’re just an enemy of western civilization.

            Western civilization: apple pie, democracy, feminism, McDonald’s, Hollywood, and Africans in the Ruhr.

            • Your Wife's Son says:

              Facetious much? Western civilization is the white race.

              • Cavalier says:

                Which white race?

                • Your Wife's Son says:

                  The European one, in its entirety. Excluding Chechens and Albanians, though I’m sure that’s not what you had in mind.

                  That some white ethnicities have contributed disproportionately to western culture, doesn’t mean the others are not part of the western world also. A proponent of dysgenic socialism, as opposed to (theoretical) eugenic socialism, is an enemy of European-descended peoples and their common culture, or “multiple cultures” if you insist.

                  This is not egalitarianism, just factual accuracy: traditional (meaning: actual) western culture is the product of whites; and of the things you mentioned, only “apple pie” is authentic white culture – incidentally, the only non-pozzed item on your list. All the others are modernism in action, and modernism is ……

                  “I worry that Caplan is eliding the important summoner/demon distinction. This is an easy distinction to miss, since demons often kill their summoners and wear their skin. But in this case, he’s become hopelessly confused without it.

                  I am pretty sure there was, at one point, such a thing as western civilization. I think it involved things like dancing around maypoles and copying Latin manuscripts. At some point Thor might have been involved. That civilization is dead. It summoned an alien entity from beyond the void which devoured its summoner and is proceeding to eat the rest of the world.”

                  (The kike is correct)

                  Which is part do you find disagreeable?

                • Cavalier says:

                  >The European one, in its entirety.
                  >doesn’t mean the others are not part of the western world also
                  >This is not egalitarianism

                  In short, you have no standards.

        • jim says:

          Not wanting to starve, live in rags, or be treated like garbage isn’t “envy and covetousness.”

          If you respond to starvation and being dressed in rags by attacking those have food and clothes, rather than by producing value, producing food and clothes, yes it is envy and covetousness.

          Hitler did produce a boom for a while. Socialism is usually a big success until socialists run out of other people’s money. At the time he attacked his ally Greece (also run by a National Socialist government) he was already running short of food.

          If, like Venezuela, you are running out of food, your enemies can crush you.

          • Cavalier says:

            Germany was an enormous food importer before Hitler was a twinkle in the Reichskanzler’s eye.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Germany

            “It is considered one of the key elements in the eventual Allied victory in the war.”

            Right from the horse’s mouth.

            • TheBigH says:

              If you read Eric Von Luck’s book on the second world war he talked about black market food in passing. German farmers were under producing basic staples because of rationing only buying at a set price while putting most of their efforts into lucrative luxury foods they sold on the black market. This made a nation already at a disadvantage in food production worse off.

              By this point Germany had France and other food producing areas that should have been able to meet their needs, but instead of buying the foods they stole it, which of course results in a much smaller harvest next year and farmers trying to hide food. Socialism always ends in starvation.

        • Samuel Skinner says:

          “Do you have a better explanation for why the Germans enthusiastically backed the Nazis”

          The mainstream parties focused on the urban population while the Nazis spent significant amount of time and effort drumming up votes from rural people. In addition Germans had fought against communists in 1918-1919 and so had seen what happened when they were in charge so when the Social Democrats and Communists started collaborating this didn’t leave them with much choice.

          “they produced an economic boom for a while that the yeomanry was allowed to share in? ”

          Read Wages of Destruction. The Nazis didn’t produce an economic boom. They engaged in massive deficit spending to increase military output.

      • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

        why does a sentence i wrote a few days ago appear in bold at the top of every comment i now make have I been made to wear the scarlet letter J

        • jim says:

          WordPress thinks that is your (remarkably verbose) name. Change your name back by relogging in.

          • R7 Rocket says:

            Hey, Jim, I wonder what you think about The God-Emperor’s pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the Guardian article’s reaction to it?

            • jim says:

              Imprisoning your opponents over their past political decisions and political policies is trampling the constitution. Refusing to allow your allies to be imprisoned is respecting it.

              When we have the whip hand, going to imprison them.

    • Cavalier says:

      >You’ve got to get the average guy on your side somehow.

      Democratic politics works in an age when the “average guy” — which, nowadays, let’s face it, is pretty pathetic — is a useful soldier in a fairly short period of time, given a rifle and a bit of training.

      Do we live in such an age?

      • viking says:

        of course we do despite generations of propaganda white men are still quite capable

        • Cavalier says:

          Think of it: half, or nearly half, of “eligible” recruits aged 18 to 24(?) are overweight or obese.

          Of the ones who aren’t, they probably spent most of their childhood on computers, TVs, video games, or — if they were very fortunate — books.

          Did you know that in order for an adult to have strong bones, joints, and ligaments, tendons, muscles, and suchlike, he has to experience recurring low-grade stress in his youth? Strong bones, for example, are rather weak unless one repeatedly, in doing strenuous things, creates micro-fractures which then heal stronger than the original.

          This isn’t even considering that half of them have double-digit IQs.

          The vast majority of your “white men” are not 6’4″ 130 IQ Nordic gods, or whatever. Hell, I’m not 6’4″, though no one would ever mistake me for being a living representative of the most northern phenotype in existence.

        • Cavalier says:

          * though no one would ever mistake me for being anything but a

    • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

      “In the Chinese Revolution, the Commies offered the populace land; the Nationalists offered them serfdom”

      Stop cucking for the left. The commies won because whitey (both Americans and Russians) loved communists and gave them weapons while putting an arms embargo on the Nationalists. Serfdom hadn’t existed in China for hundreds of years before the war to crush the bandits.

      Russia is even more lopsided since the nationalists never had any chance of winning, they were an insurgency rebelling against a ruthless government getting American food aid.

  12. recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

    actually I think the communists stole the farmers properties and murdered those that hid a bit of seed.

    the serfs were freed before communism

  13. recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

    I agree american whites in my lifetime have lost their hyphenated identities, or at least so many have whiteness is the only thing broad enough to appeal. This is becoming truer throughout the anglosphere and thats fine it works. spencer i imagine is worried about whites in europe murdering each other again and hopes he can forge some kind of supra identity. As long as hes also encouraging the micro identities I dont see a problem the basques and catalans cornish and flemish etc should all be encouraged to seek and be allowed autonomy and do what they can to restore their individual cultures all whites should be encouraged to shoot their computers and rebuild their cultures to whatever degree we can restore what we had back into our memories while composing new riffs.

    • Cavalier says:

      Most “whites” are worthless.

      • recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

        well thats the (((elites ))) for doing a poor job training them for the world ((( they ))) built. whites are what they were told to be. most whites have been resisting whats been done to them but its next to impossible in the world (((they))) built. Most whites if simply left alone would do a lot better.
        and even if you were 100% right then we better fix them because we cant survive without them

        • Cavalier says:

          No it isn’t. There is an already sizable, and ever-growing, slice of the population which is not employable at any task at any price, down to and including slavery. If the Southern aristocrats had had today’s farming technology, they would not have imported a single African. Think of it: the entire southern half of these United States, populated by nothing but a few thousand great manor lords gaily living lives of leisure on their carefully cultivated plantations, with their personal servants, their innumerable bastard children, and the incomparably privileged mechanics responsible for maintaining their GPS-navigated cotton-picking megatractorthings.

          Have an icy-fresh blast from the past:

          From The World’s Work: A History of Our Time (Volume XXI, November 1910 to April 1911):

          Title: A Cotton-Harvester At Last
          Subtitle: A Machine That Will Emancipate Cotton from Low-Grade Labor — a Revolution in the South’s Fundamental Crop and the Chief Export of the Nation

          “The mechanical cotton-picker, the impossible machine that will discriminate between ripe and unripe cotton-bolls, finger over the delicate plant, get the lint and leave the rest unharmed — this contrivance of almost human intelligence has at last been made.

          “The cotton-gin made cotton king, and made the king’s standing army of blacks a permanent drawback to half the nation. And the South considered this standing so necessary to cotton production that it was willing to fight to preserve it. A gin did all this. The picking-machine has signed the order to disband the black army of cotton-pickers that have kept King Cotton from being an enlightened ruler. A South without the yearly demoralization of cotton-picking time, when men, women, and children from the mills, kitchen, schools, and everywhere else desert their normal vocations for the cotton patch — that would be a new South indeed.”

          “In spite of these discouragements, and a ridicule; for the average cotton-grower believes as firmly in the eternal supremacy of the Negro cotton-picker as he does in the infallibility of the Democratic party [lol], and he will adhere to the one through as many vicissitudes as to the other.”

          “‘Why, that cotton ain’t clean enough for a dog to lie on,’ [lol] was the kindly comment of one uninvited guest, as he looked at the results of one of his [prototype] machines’ work.”

          “‘After having seen the machine in operation, after having seen the actual results accomplished by this particular cotton-picker, and after carefully and thoughtfully studying the entire matter, . . . I am convinced the machine must, and will, rank in the future with such inventions as the gin, the sewing-machine, or the drawing and spinning frame.

          “‘The rapidity, the ease, and the self-evident perfection with which the machine does the work was to me a revelation, and must, in my judgment, prove to be a revolution in cotton-picking.’”

          “The average ‘field-hand’ can pick between 200 and 250 pounds of seed cotton a day, although fast pickers often get as much as 400 or 500 pounds. The machine can cover eight or ten acres a day. In a good field it would pick 8,000 or 10,000 pounds, and in a poorer field between 4,000 and 5,000 pounds. It will enable the same man who plants and ploughs the cotton to pick it — and to have a little time to spare as well. A man could go over a forty-acre farm twice in ten days, and picking-time would be the least busy time of the year. The farmers will no longer need to haul Negro cotton-pickers to the fields on Monday morning, and back to the town on Friday night. There will be no more tents, shacks, and cooking outfits to provide. The cooks will stay in the kitchens, the children in school, and labor can follow its customary channels. The death-knell of the annual upheaval in the South has been sounded. It will not come instantaneously. In some localities it will come much more quickly than in others, but the progress of the cotton-picker is as inevitable as the combined harvester, or the steam-plow.”

          “Almost all the farmers who came to see the machine work came in a purely skeptical frame of mind. Even after they had seen it, they felt as the old woman on first seeing a hippopotamus. She walked around it several times, viewing it carefully, and finally remarked decisively:

          “‘There ain’t no such thing.’

          “Others resigned their long-cherished belief in the finger monopoly more passively. As one white picker remarked:

          “‘Well, anyway, it can’t take a drink or vote the Democratic ticket. There’s something left for a man to do.’”

          https://books.google.com/books?id=Zm0AAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA13748

          Indeed; further comment would be perfunctory.

      • viking says:

        FUCKING RUBBISH i SPEND HALF MY LIFE IN A PART OF THE COUNTRY WESTERN MOUNTAINS THAT IS 99% WHITE IT FUNCTIONS LIKE A WELL OILED MACHINE ITS PLEASANT ITS CRIME FREE ITS CLEAN EFFICIENT FRIENDLY INVENTIVE ITS LIKE LIVING IN 1950.
        ITS ALSO JEW FREE NIGGER FREE SPIC FREE ARAB FREE, AND YOU HAVE PREVIOUSLY CLAIMED ITS BEEN STRIPPED OF ITS BEST AND BRIGHTEST BY THE PULL OF UNIVERSITY AND CITY LIFE, YET I FIND IT ON AVERAGE TO BE MORE SMART THAN CITY WHITES. i DONT KNOW WHAT PERVERTED SELF HATING SHIT YOURE INTO CAVALIER BUT ITS UTTER BULLSHIT MOST WHITES ARE WORTH TEN BROWNS MAYBE TWENTY. AND IF YOU FEEL YOURE SO STUPID YOU NEED TO BE RULED BY JEWS MOVE TO FUCKING ISRAEL THE REST OF US WILL DO FINE WITHOUT YOU AND YOUR JEWS AND TAKE YOUR NIGGERS WITH YOU YOU CARE SO MUCH ABOUT AND ILL KEEP THE AVERAGE WHITES YOU SO HATE ASSHOLE

        • Cavalier says:

          The average white is worth a thousand muds, or more

          The Icelanders, for example, if every other country on Earth disappeared, could cut a swath through Africa without breaking a sweat.

          Trouble is, you’re not up against muds.

  14. R7 Rocket says:

    By pardoning Sheriff Joe Arpaio, God-Emperor Trump is signaling to the Praetorians that he will protect them.

  15. recognizing the plain truth that a foreign 2% of our population has 50% of the wealth and power which is largely used to viking says:

    IK I think I got it nrx position is minorities are great jews should continue to rule niggers should be cared for in dignity regardless the cost and what ails us is whites are the worst. Hey it took ten years but Im glad we got that worked out now we can get rid of HBD and go back to reading NRO

  16. Your Wife's Son says:

    There are different shades of right-wing, only the cucks should be counter-signaled and nazis aren’t cucks.

    Are people who are vehemently anti-abortion “to the right”?

    Are people who are vehemently anti-divorce “to the right”?

    You may disagree with them, but it doesn’t matter. They are right-wingers and as such, one can argue with them, but should not disavow them. Same thing with nazis. Argue, don’t disavow.

    Vox disavowed, hence the backlash.

    • jim says:

      I criticize nazis without disavowing them.

      Calling them fake right is disavowing them. I say they are rightists only because leftism has moven on, which is not what Vox says, but is getting kind of close to it.

      • Steve Johnson says:

        They’re leftists because their memeplex is selected for popularity with the masses and not for producing good governance.

        They’re rightists because their memeplex appeals to the eternal enemy of leftists – men who are better at doing than talking.

  17. viking says:

    white nations worked pretty well for the days technology until jews created civil rights. jew leftism is todays mess, wasp leftism is the constitution as plainly written and practiced until jews.every single problem we have can be traced back to leftist jews remaking us past 150 years. unwind that get rid of the other non whites lifes tolerable again

    • viking says:

      so then i really dont see why you guys whine about the cathedral its doing exactly what you want allowing jews to destroy whites while explaining why whites deserve to be destroyed, just get jobs with the cathedral you cucks will ft right in

      • viking says:

        I guess i will go about explaining to whites how nrx is simply another jew scheme for their further destruction and not to be fooled by its seemingly right rhetoric its not right its another utopian jew scheme that will further dehumanize degrade dispossess whites and destroy western civilization along the lines of some dystopian scifi jew run elysium where some machine assisted jews extract from whites who are trapped below battling with the niggers the jews imported. sounds great Im sure lots of people will be on board for this plan

        • Garr says:

          There are some really awesome trees in Prospect Park! I wonder how old the biggest ones are. I remember riding the Greyhound back east from my disastrous time in Arizona and being consoled for the loss of big jagged western desert rock-outcroppings by the gain of huge, complicated eastern trees.

  18. viking says:

    we dont have recruits draft ended 73, places like idaho produce nordic gods like a nazi baby factory, you obviously spend a lot of time in he worst places, places run by jews and full of minorities.

    Half whites IQ are below 100? and? so are half the worlds people most much lower, its the human condition whites are smarter than all but east asians.get over yourself snowflake.

    I will say again it IS the noblesse oblige of those who presume to rule, to rule for all. meaning if you are going to destroy how the world worked for 5000 years you have to have a plan, you cant wreck family farms then say stupid fucking farmers cant code.because a reasonable person would conclude you’re a stupid fucking ruler.this post humanist elitism of nrx that thinks it can survive alone with the plus 150 IQs on elysium is the product of minds that spend all day playing computer games.I have come to realize nrx wont get specific because it knows damn well if it did it would be abandoned as stupid.

    cathedral controlled type places do degrade white culture to a point of computer addiction obesity and cuck thinking. This should be a grave concern to rulers. But to blame white kids? or even their parents?

    Its really impossible to escape the cathedrals indoctrination, intimidation and anarcho tyranny. despite that 60% of whites do resist. even their most affected millennials are 80% trump supporters.53% of white women voted trump, lets keep in mind trump began a campaign by calling hispanics criminal rapists and hasn’t let up since, he also gives plenty of reasons to suspect he might be crazy or an idiot, so supporting him is a huge act of defiance. and this isnt new whites have consistently voting against leftism but leftism cheats, it ignores laws ignores elections, uses radical judges to interpret, and of course has built an enormous cathedral of extra legal/legislative power that does as it want. so (((moldbug)))) blaming protestants and voters is pretty clever. One has no choice but to live in this cathedral there is no exit and until enough are ready to go to war suicide by cop is the only way out. I also firmly believe the majority of white leftists genuinely believe the lies the cathedral feeds them and so seemingly reasonably conclude leftly.I think if we had real money and no govt debt and facts were known leftism would die instantly.

    contra (((moldbug))) the problem isnt dumb whites its smart jews. smart jews walked into a perfect setup. sure we can make clever arguments about slavery but the real truth is its just fucking wrong on so many levels. and ending it without full repatriation was the biggest blunder since allowing the slaves in. early feminism was probably not the jews scheme either but it was probably inevitable for whites.we have always had higher female status higher standards of living higher trust and higher focus on knowledge. also the rise of printing in a scripture oriented world and christianity’s fundamental principles all conspired to conclude women ought to be educated if they want along with the status and all it begins to seem odd that they cant vote. like slavery we can make all sort of clever bombast in hindsight but everything else we did that worked well also contributed to women voting. even this wasnt going to be a problem though it should never have been allowed. because women really are different they didnt really want more than just being recognized as being at least equal to a nigger.and in my book they tower above niggers.
    And thats where jews walk into the situation coming I might add from the wreckage they created in europe and the fun begins.

    and then just as its becoming clear as day everything they managed was a lie and existential threat to whites and that it was they who did it, who shows up to head that conclusion off at the pass (((moldbug))) and just like previous generations he targets the too clever by half whites appealing again to their vanity and lust for power, that the jews are laughing at behind your backs.

    whites will do fine once we are no longer ruled by those who hate us and when we no longer have to earn enough to support a brown for every white, and when we can again treat out nations like private property not the town pump

    • viking says:

      and with that Im resigning from the nrx team I guess i really misunderstood this was mostly an anti white thing, the whole HBD aspect the name reactionary made me think it was about white restoration boy was I wrong see you on the ramparts well not actually cause none of you will fight so see you when we drag you out of you cuck beds, jim Im sure we will find Podesta and a ten year old in yours and youll tell us she was begging for it.

      • jim says:

        The problem simply is not Jews. Not even predominantly Jews, though Jews are a substantial part of it. The banker who pissed away the largest part of the money on brown people mortgages, Angelo Mozilo, identified as hispanic.

        The problem is not even fake Americans, Americans whose primary identity is not American, though they are the largest part of the problem. Susan Bolton is biologically as American as anyone, but she seeks to destroy America and Americans, just as you are as Jewish as anyone, and seek to destroy Jews. Angela Merkel is a German as anyone, and viscerally reacts to the German flag like a vampire to the cross. Childless women notoriously fail to identify with and hate their own people, but it is not so much that they identify with Jews, it is more that they identify with cats. Because they have no future, they do not want anyone else to have a future either.

        Getting rid of Jews simply would not make a big difference, would bugger the economy by undermining property rights and unleashing dangerous amounts of covetousness and envy, and would hurt a lot of perfectly OK people running bagel shops, pawnshops, and suchlike. Not all Jews are international bankers.

        Now if we got rid of fake americans and cat ladies, that would make a difference, but no one is willing to send cat ladies to the gas chambers. We just think they should not be running the country. And the same is true of fake Americans. People who are not loyal to the future of the state, society, and people that they rule should not be in state power. But that does not mean they should not be running bagel shops, let alone gassed.

        • Alrenous says:

          A society that allows a woman to go childless is defecting on that woman. It’s foolish to expect her to cooperate with it.

          • Corvinus says:

            It’s called individual liberty. A man or woman can choose to have children or have no children.

            You have to go back.

            • jim says:

              Bullshit.

              Takes two produce and raise children. An individual man or a woman cannot choose. Rather, they have to agree to choose once and for all for both of them forever. It used to be called marriage, and it is now illegal. Religious communities that attempt to socially enforce it get raided.

              • Corvinus says:

                Of course individual men and women choose. They decide on whether to date someone who desires to have children, like themselves. Then, if both agree, they reproduce.

                “It used to be called marriage, and it is now illegal.”

                Of course marriage is legal. What are you even babbling about?

                • Dave says:

                  Then individual women decide whether to divorce their husbands, strip them of assets, and alienate them from their children, and individual men decide whether to play along with this or dirt-nap their wives and lawyer up, cf. Hans Reiser, O.J. Simpson.

                  Individual liberty means that no one can make any agreement that they can’t back out of later. Whether or not this is good for the children is left as an exercise for the reader.

                • jim says:

                  Marriage is a man and a woman making an irrevocable commitment to live together as one. Illegal. Constitutes domestic violence, and is considered the same sort of thing, and is legally treated in the same way, as smacking her in the face with a baseball bat. This makes it quite difficult to reproduce. Amish seem to get away with flying under the radar, but this is an unprincipled exception. The salami slicer has sliced most of the way through Mormons, is already starting on orthodox Jews, and when it is done with Jews, will go for the Amish.

                • Alrenous says:

                  Individual liberty means that no one can make any agreement that they can’t back out of later.

                  On the contrary, individual liberty exactly means being able to choose to make a contract as binding as one likes. Outlawing strong contracts is a strict reduction in liberty.

                • Dave says:

                  Should have said, “Corvinus’ concept of individual liberty”.

  19. Jack Highlands says:

    First retarded thing I’ve seen you write, Jim. Vox shit his pants over Charlottesville because of one Leftist infiltrator with a Nazi flag, just like little girls RamzPaul, Buttplug Gavin, Pajamas Watson and Farage. Meanwhile, two women with MSM access, Katie Hopkins and Ann Coulter, were tough as nails.

    You’re working from an outdated playbook, written by Jews, with this RS3, ‘anti-Semites are the for-certain Socialists’, nonsense.

    The real divide is racial and there are only two races at the top, one originator and one parasite-mimic. Jew parasites use our own sense of fairness to convince our useful idiots racial egalitarianism is true, while the actions of Jews show us they don’t believe a jot of it.

  20. […] Brown Scare continues. Jim Donald tells us that Vox Day is correct to punch Nazis, because he is punching left. Brett Stevens informs us that “Neo-Nazism, white nationalism, […]

Leave a Reply