Friday, April 07, 2017

Neoconned in Syria

Trump's facebook posts on Serbia Iraq Libya Syria:

The like/love-to-angry/sad reaction ratios are 27-to-1 (216k to 8k) and 24.5-to-1 (208k to 8.5k), respectively.

This is discouraging, to put it mildly. Trump's not a deep thinker, but he learns from his mistakes. He's floated trial balloons several times in the last couple of years, most famously going soft on immigration in one of the primary debates, before promptly correcting course in the wake of the angry response he received from his base.

As ominous as the airstrikes were, they're not catastrophic on their own. The damage comes from what they likely portend. That might be averted on account of an uprising from the base but it's not going to happen if the base doesn't rise up.

I remember in 2012, when the tea party movement was at its height, lots of people celebrating this putative embrace of the Ron Paul revolution. It sounded good to me at first blush, but the exit polling data showed that desirable narrative to be a false one. Self-identified tea party members were the least likely to vote for Ron Paul and the most likely to vote for Newt Gingrich. In other words, they were uber-conservative Republicans in the popular political conception of the term, not revolutionaries in any meaningful sense.

I'm getting this sinking feeling that a lot of Trump's most devoted supporters are the same types of people. If the Alt Right is the new anti-CultMarx vanguard, our absolute numbers correspond to that position in a military formation, at least for now.

As such, expectations need to be calibrated to the reality of Trump as a transitional figure. He's the first progression of steps towards a resurgent West favoring its own, an Occident unapologetically putting the interests of ourselves and our posterity ahead of the interests of sub-Saharans and Sunnis. If he comes up short on a lot of fronts--even if he misses the mark on all of them--his electoral victory is not a Pyrrhic one. He's laid the rhetorical, polemical, and issue-based groundwork for other aspiring 'outsiders' to imitate. Before Caesar there was Marius and before Marius there were the Gracchi brothers.

The indefatigable Deplorable Primate has changed his handle to #ImpeachTrump.

His sentiment is entirely understandable but I'm not there. Trump's remained relatively strong on immigration, and the "invite" part of the invade the world, invite the world, be indebted to the world is the most damaging part of the treasonous trinity.

Wreaking havoc (and blowback) in the globe's garbage cans and putting everything we purchase from China on credit is akin to taking out a second mortgage on the house and, well, maxing out the credit card. It sucks climbing out of a self-dug hole, but it can be done. Replacing our native stock with Mexicans and Somalis, however, is akin to being fired and lighting the master's degree on fire--there's no coming back from it.


pithom said...

Yeah; I've gone #NeverTrump, as well. As Trump himself said "Saddam Hussein throws a little gas, everyone goes crazy, 'oh he's using gas!'". Where's this sentiment from him now? He might as well appoint Hillary as Secretary of State at this point; nothing would shock me.

Of course, he's not Clinton, but that's a really low bar. He just blindly listens to the generals and has no principles. Am absolutely disgusted by his dishonesty.

I'm not expecting DACA repeal, Obamacare repeal, or even tax cuts any time soon.

Giovanni Dannato said...

How many of these upvoters would love to see President Trump fail? Their screaming having failed, now turning to the cajoling tones of sirens attempting to lure him onto the rocks.

Also, it's a sappy sentimental post. People eat that up like they do photos of kittens. They hate the idea of little kids choking to death on poison gas and they feel good about high talk of doing something about it that requires no actual action. Doesn't mean they really want another pointless Middle East war, though.

Or it could just be another argument against universal suffrage.

Sid said...

I would say that the bulk of paleoconservatives, libertarians, and alt-righter subscribe to the reverse of "Invade the World, Invite the World." Under this system, the U.S. avoids foreign entanglements while barring outsiders from immigrating.

For most Republicans, and likely a notable majority of Trump supporters, America First doesn't just mean putting American interests over Latin American or Sunni interests: it means America being the preeminent country in the world, with the largest economy, strongest military, and more pervasive cultural influence.

As such, for the average Republican, there's no contradiction between the U.S. beating its opponents in military struggles while keeping Mexicans out of the country. The Romans, for example, were happy to conquer Gaul after preventing the Teutons and Cimbri from reaching their capital city.

In evolutionary terms, a strong tribe of chimpanzees can infringe on the territory of rival tribes, while barring them from reaching its own. Human beings aren't different.

Is this good or bad? Nature is what it is, but just because our desires are natural doesn't mean we shouldn't keep them in check. To be frank, I was worried last night that the cruise missile strike would be the start of a Libyan-style regime change. It presently doesn't appear we'll be landing troops in Syria, but I hope Trump and his team can navigate these treacherous waters effectively.

pithom said...

"They hate the idea of little kids choking to death on poison gas and they feel good about high talk of doing something about it that requires no actual action. Doesn't mean they really want another pointless Middle East war, though."


And, as I pointed out above, Trump didn't care about that at all during the campaign; just the opposite.

Though the actions did not result in any real crippling of the Syrian Army's capabilities, I am totally disgusted by this unprecedented deep-state-backed U.S. aggression against the Syrian government.

Jeff said...

The best case scenario here is we are not doing regime change, we keep fighting ISIS, it neutralizes the Russian puppet meme domestically while Trump patches things up with Putin long term, and the situation for Syria doesn't change much at all (the strikes seem purposely less effective than they could have been).

And the purpose of all that? To play head games with China. Trump clinking glasses and calmly chewing steak while President Xi gets word that he just blew some shit up. And oh by the way, lets talk North Korea.

Trump may just want China to think unilateral action against North Korea is a credible threat. That next time they "test" a weapon, we will act against them. And suddenly those weapons will disappear. Unilateral military action against North Korea is retarded, but having China thinking you're willing to do it is not.

I came up a principled non-interventionist in the Ron Paul mold like many of you. I didn't like this too much. But I do see it. This was not bloody. It was not regime change. It effects the situation in Syria almost nil, while putting Trump in better strategic position on many fronts.

IHTG said...

The alt-right's insane over-the-top reaction to this conclusively proves that it's not a movement worth taking seriously. Ex-libertarian manchildren.

Anonymous said...

@IHTG When will you react then? We already had Nikki Haley, Mattis, Kelly, Goldman Sachs, Pudzer, Obamacare Lite, no DACA repeal, no refugee slowdown,no Kobach...

Sam said...

"He's laid the rhetorical, polemical, and issue-based groundwork for other aspiring 'outsiders' to imitate. Before Caesar there was Marius and before Marius there were the Gracchi brothers."

This is brilliant and absolutely true and too often ignored or underappreciated. That is why I was for a Trump victory even if he did nothing he proposed because it would change the political culture and open up space for others to walk into. Hopefully second generation Trumpism is more refined and thought out.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

In my opinion, it's the first real blunder he's made since he's been President. If this was just a show of force and that is it, then I'm not happy but not too concerned. If this escalates and we have yet another "conflict" with tens of thousands of boots on the ground, then yeah, throw me in the #NeverTrump group as well. I think it is too early to ascertain what Trump's endgame is.

The sad truth is Trump is really the best solution we have. The purging of paleocons has been going on for the past several decades, completed when Pat Buchanan's 1992 speech got roundly denounced by the GOP. The current GOP is full of neocons, christcucks, chamber of commerce mouthpieces, and leftists who feel that the solution to keep the GOP viable is to run as hard to the left as possible. Not too many people who are sympathetic to the alt right cause or even the degenerate libertarians. That is why it is up to us to start electing shitlords for the 2018 elections. A group of people who will hold Trump accountable and force Trump to move forward on domestic issues.

That way these people can eventually ascend to leadership positions within the GOP so they can be called to be in high ranking positions instead of yet another neocon who spent all election countersignalling Trump but ends up nabbing powerful positions of influence. It's time for us to do our part.

akarlin said...

Come on, man, Facebook is boomercuck central of the Internet.

The reaction to this has been far worse on Twitter and /pol/. The past couple of days were Night of the Long Knives on /r/The_Donald.

Anyhow, I'm more pessimistic, if Trump goes full globalist: The boomers aren't getting any younger; America isn't getting any whiter; he'll lose the young nationalists, while the millenial SJWs will be energized like never before.

Après Trump, le déluge.

Anonymous said...

He'll learn.
The Hard way to a certain extent.

As to the Alt-Right: We cover the Flanks. This was our undeniable effect in 2016.
We took the Battle to the Left Flank of the enemy Progressives and Social Justice Warriors/SJW's. We also attacked the Squishy captive opposition of the GOPe and the ever wavering center right. Remember #NROrevolt. Remember Bill Mitchell and all the others we smacked into line. Remember Rick Wilson, for that matter Seth Mandel.

Alt-Right covers and advances the flanks. Our numbers tell nothing it is our effect.

Trump at some level realizes this as did Hillary which is why Pepe is famous.
Numbers don't tell Effects tell. The above effects happened.

Also our numbers are growing and far larger than anyone publicly claims or admits - which is wise. It's idiotic to expose fighters true strength. That our true numbers are concealed is wise for all of us but also tells again and again in strife.

A caution about Foco and Leninist Vanguard: overrated. Che Guervara found that out in Africa and then Bolivia. Lenin was a genius who both adopted Jacobin methodology but far more important he offered the Russian Soldiers PEACE and in doing so was able to win the support of the Soldiers SOVIETS which just means Councils. They didn't go Red they found a party with the sense to make peace.
That was the key to Lenin's success SOLIDERS.

Power will always be force. Not ideas, not ideology, not pens. That's Priest Power and you can always get new Priests.

The way forward now is to do what everyone is doing and support Trump/MAGA while reaming the shit out of him and Kushner/ Cohn [note please Cohn can be fired Kushner can't] and letting Trump know we're incensed.

"If the entire world surrenders but you lose Wilkes-Barre you've lost it all."


Feryl said...

Hate to say it, but.....We didn't expect everything to change that fast, did we?

Boomer Jews have done more damage to us, via idiotic foreign policy, than just about anyone else. And via ethnic favoritism, plenty of Gen X Jews have been inculcated with interventionist delusions. Since Jews have been allowed greater and greater clout subsequent to WW2, they've succeeded in imprinting pogrom paranoia among gentile elites. Not to mention the horrors of the holocaust and subsequent campaign to rehabilitate the image of Jews, both of which made it impossible for at least 3-4 generations (G.I.s/Silents/Boomers/X-ers) to remove sentiment and liberal shaming from foreign policy decisions. "How dare you let another atrocity pass, we've got to do more to help out the oppressed".

The fiasco of 'Nam kept us on a pretty good path in the late 70's and 80's, but under Bush and Clinton there was some definite slippage, albeit nothing too out of hand. Then 9/11 happened, and we had an excuse to become more aggressively involved in other countries affairs.

If we removed Jews from the picture (and the U.S. has one of the highest populations of Jews in the world), just how much better would we be doing? Our reckless aggression and Israel ties gives Arabs countless reasons to despise us. The elites of 3 generations (GIs, Silents, and Boomers) have been blundering around the world for 70 years, typically under the guise of ostensible humanitarian goals. While it may be tempting to put this down to corruption and greed, I do think we've got to keep in mind several generation's attitude towards foreign policy was forged in the idealistic mid-century. Of course plenty of them are crooks, but plenty of others are earnest fools.

It shoulda been a red flag, Trump's rampant associations with Jews and Israel pandering. Before he got elected, I don't think he had too much contact with the usual neo-con suspects. After attaining office, he got the full-press on spreading the "American" (Jewish) way, much of it delivered by gentile military leaders (remember, Trump's greatest affinity is for guys who get to the top, why else did he stud his cabinet with super rich people?). Trump's prior skepticism about adventuring slowly melted away in the face of constant badgering about the US losing it's influence and clout by letting too many bad guys "get away" with stuff.

Some of the worst neo-cons associated with Bush don't seem to be too involved, which I'd expect as Trump probably thinks they're losers who shouldn't get another chance. But these are mostly intellectuals/foreign policy wonks, not military personnel. Our military, regrettably is still infected to a large degree by misguided "heroism". Instead of thinking about the long-term effects and practical impossibility (as in, you go broke and demoralize your citizens while alienating foreigners) of interventionist hubris, instead it's sentimental utopian garbage about cleaning up messes that have nothing to do with us.

My fear (terror?) is that Trump is less concerned with the effects of interventionism per se, and is more concerned with finding "the right way" to impose our ambitions on others. In other words, trying arrogantly to refine our tactics ("I'm gonna beat the bushes at their own game") instead of doing a strategic about-face.

Anonymous said...

But while we must make our anger known we shouldn't let it rule us. Trump ran a risk but only used Tomahawks. Now he and not enemies news.

The news before was all about RUSSIA and our enemies were moving inexorably towards impeachment or at least crippling Trump with investigations and hauling in his entire cabinet and circle down to no doubt his receptionist. Any of them that didn't get immunity were going to be hauled up on process charges ala Martha Stewart. They'd be fools to answer their name without Immunity.

But now it's all GONE. It will not return except at faint echo.

And those echoes will if anything damn Democrats and "The Deep State."

Now a word about the Deep State: Those are the Green Zone kids grown fat and even more venal and best complacent and GREEDY as they hit middle age.
They cut their teeth with Venal College Spring Break Pool Parties in Baghdad Green Zone and left with $$$ and now have McMansions in Maclean VA. NO KGB THEY AIN'T.

Today and since Thursday night all the Contractors [that's the fucking Deep State, Watch War Dogs ] are masturbating to all they money they think they're gonna make and the NeoCons think they have America marching as their Golem Army again.

So Trump runs again the Media Table as usual [this being his main business since 2000s and The Apprentice] and his enemies that were closing in have BEEN DISTRACTED BY LOOTING AND GREED.

It being a long known defect of Tribal Armies that they lose discipline when any opportunity for GREED and LOOT appears. (((TRIBAL))))


Feryl said...

Interestingly, I found this on Wiki:

"Kirkpatrick concluded that while the United States should encourage liberalization and democracy in autocratic countries, it should not do so when the government risks violent overthrow, and should expect gradual change rather than immediate transformation.[49] She wrote: "No idea holds greater sway in the mind of educated Americans than the belief that it is possible to democratize governments, anytime and anywhere, under any circumstances... Decades, if not centuries, are normally required for people to acquire the necessary disciplines and habits. In Britain, the road [to democratic government] took seven centuries to traverse. ... The speed with which armies collapse, bureaucracies abdicate, and social structures dissolve once the autocrat is removed frequently surprises American policymakers."[50]"

Exceptions to this are very unusual (like Japan quickly adopting American approved policies and even culture/business practices in the wake of nuke dropping, but other countries aren't blessed with Japanese people and it's not like nukes are going to be dropped on any other country any time soon.) Typically, making a culture very different quickly requires demographic and political changes like elevating a certain group of people there while driving opposing ethnic groups out of power and sometimes out of the area altogether. In the wake of Vietnam, which drew massive opposition (BTW, more so from Silents and G.I.s than hot-head young Boomers, though of course older people don't protest so it's easy to overlook just why older generations made draft dodging so easy), we became a lot more cautious about intervening. Sadly, the passage of time fades memories and lessons bitterly learned. Many of the people who opposed Vietnam or who, regardless of their feelings, just didn't participate (including women such as Jeanne Kirkpatrick who of course were forbidden from most military duties in the 60's/70's), have since been earnestly invested in efforts to push for greater warfare. During G.W. Bush's years, lists of Silent/Boomer politician draft dodgers were created. BTW, the GOP had more draft dodgers in the 90's/2000's than the Dems did.

Feryl said...

It's worth noting that since 1992, very few movies have been made about Vietnam. The most heart rending, gut-wrenching, "controversial" thing we went through in the 60's and early 70's resounded in our mood and decisions from the late 60's-1980's. Even in the lambasted (out of utter ignorance) Rambo movies in the 80's made sure to remind viewers that "getting involved" is an decision not to be taken lightly. In the first movie, we get a picture of what war can do to someone (especially if that war is divisive and confusing), as Rambo is a drifter vet whose pushed too far by a callous world. In the 2nd movie, he only gets involved in a rescue mission because it gets him out of prison and out of personal/national loyalty. Even as late as the 80's, people felt very cautious about initiating warfare and interventions.

Agnostic once said that Boomers seem fixated by WW2 and also have become increasingly bent on "proving" their patriotism with greater belligerence. It seems like many of them feel embarrassed about American performance in Vietnam, and would rather just forget the whole thing happened. When cocooning was low in the 70's and 80's, Boomers were more comfortable examining the tender parts of their psyches in public/pop culture. When cocooning really began to grip us again circa 1992, we no longer could even discuss Vietnam (and increasingly, the accompanying issues of why we intervene, how we intervene, and the appropriate public response). It's funny, liberals in particular think of the 80's as being a rah-rah brain dead period of patriotism, yet look at the pop culture. Kyle Reese and John Rambo are not glamorous; their barely human after being subjected to the ongoing trauma inflicted by war against an implacable, alien, and clever enemy.

In Aliens, the troops initially are cocky and certain. But after getting involved, they struggle to understand the strange environment inhabited by an enemy that doesn't play fair and seems to be everywhere and nowhere at the same time. Subsequent to 1992 (Universal Soldier, Tour of Duty), we mostly get war films that are about WW2 (almost always about the US/Germans, occasionally about the Japs, never about the Russians) in which moral ambiguity is non-existent and we don't ask Boomers to do any emotional heavy lifting (they weren't even born yet).

We ought to see a revival in Vietnam movies in the 2020's-2040's,, when cocooning diminishes. Also suspect that we'll finally get some good movies pertaining to post 9/11 mid-East adventures.

IHTG said...

Anonymous: If Tom Cotton's RAISE Act for reducing legal immigration (or some variant of it ) doesn't reach Congress during the Trump administration, I will consider his presidency to have been a disappointment.

akarlin: Facebook is far larger than Twitter.

Feryl said...

"But while we must make our anger known we shouldn't let it rule us. Trump ran a risk but only used Tomahawks. Now he and not enemies news.

The news before was all about RUSSIA and our enemies were moving inexorably towards impeachment or at least crippling Trump with investigations and hauling in his entire cabinet and circle down to no doubt his receptionist. Any of them that didn't get immunity were going to be hauled up on process charges ala Martha Stewart. They'd be fools to answer their name without Immunity.

But now it's all GONE. It will not return except at faint echo."

Trump's stance I believe is sincere. Why? He didn't back down from the opposition for two years. Why would he suddenly sell-out gutlessly to get the bastards off his backs? Trump, lamentably, appears to be not so much opposed to the goal of the Deep State's excesses as he is in refining how we go about being the world's cop.

Trump, at any point, could've easily gone along with the establishment on any number of issues to placate them in return for better coverage and treatment. He refused to do that for a very long time. Ultimately, though, he seems to have found the establishment's preferred foreign policy approach of belligerence and Western Values must be exported to his liking.

It would appear too that any president can basically do as they wish with impunity as long as the foreign policy establishment is pleased. While cultural elites may continue to hate him for cracking down on strivers via immigration reduction, he's bought some immunity by threatening to initiate greater war.

If his foreign policy is a cynical stance taken for protection, than what took him so long to take that stance and why hasn't he changed his stance on other issues? I really do think that Trump has naive spot regarding trusting the military, as I hinted at in the above posts about Boomers over-correcting on the angst that Vietnam inflicted on them. The military leadership is largely committed to the concept of imposing America on the rest of the whole damn world. They threw M. Flynn under the bus out of suspicion that he wasn't conforming to the post-WW2 order. Remember that "they" in this instance included Trump and at least some of Trump's clique, who didn't have to treat Flynn like a drunk being tossed out of a dive bar. I remember some people being very nervous about how quickly Flynn was jettisoned, and it looks they were right.

Lastly, what does this portend for investigation into Deep State skullduggery (including how messrs Clinton and Obama behaved). Unless Trump has it in him to appease the Deep Staters for a while, get them to feel relaxed, and then, Boom!, he appoints a spec. prosecutor to draft charges against the crooks, are we really going to see any accountability?

As bad as it would be to not get the wall, to get more wars, etc., the most damning legacy of all would be to not at least try to nail the many dirtbags in the D.C. hive. How do you sell that for the next election? "Now this time, I swear I'll get 'em. Just you wait and see." Really? After the lock her up chants during your original campaign.

Anonymous said...

"Unless Trump has it in him to appease the Deep Staters for a while, get them to feel relaxed, and then, Boom!, "

The Boom is baked in. It's called resumption of Civil War and probably inevitably escalation when Right gets fed up and stops shooting back.

You see it's getting warmer. In Afghanistan they call this Fighting Season.
In America we call it BLM and shooting cops.

They can't turn this off if the Left wanted to..and when they realize he just finessed them and is running the media table again they won't want to, it's the only card they have at present [Impeachment over Russia collusion just vanished] and the card in play is controlled by none.


Anonymous said...


Starts shooting back.

"The Boom is baked in. It's called resumption of Civil War and probably inevitably escalation when Right gets fed up and *Starts* shooting back."


Anonymous said...

"Lastly, what does this portend for investigation into Deep State skullduggery (including how messrs Clinton and Obama behaved). "


The Law is gone. This concludes the Investigation. The Law has been leaving for decades and we owe Clintons/Obama/Dems a debt for being it's murderer. We need only bury it.

That world is gone. Investigations LOLZ. Please just deal with it, it's DEAD.

So is the precious Constitution and again we are not the murderers just the undertakers.

Joshua Sinistar said...

Ah man, are you even paying attention? The CIA is bad at this. Most of Trump support now is ghosts in the computer. Like Soros, the Feds have trolls posting 24/7. Every time I drop a bomb of Truth on the net, one of these cockweasels comes out with snark. Sad. The CIA sucks. These losers at the Feds couldn't find their own ass with a telescope. Trump's support evaporated. He dropped his mask. Damage control and fake trolling by cockweasels who have a hundred accounts is all Trump has now.
Prepare for War. Trump is trying to Gin up a War to save the parasites. He sold his daughter to them for his "career". Donald Cuck is too amateurish to pull this off. His "son-in-law" is a dumb parasite that's making the same mistakes. That War they try to make in Syria, Iran or North Korea, should be enough to start the Second Civil War here.
Get set. Its gonna go HOT.

James said...

I think the stats you posted are fairly accurate, at least from what I'm seeing on the internet. I think that Trump supporters are becoming just as committed to Trump the messiah as leftoid SJW's are to the black's-are-oppressed-and-they-need-a-few-more-centuries-before-they-can-stand-on-their-own-two-feet narrative. The left has become so deranged that facts and commonsense are lost on them. What they feel, they believe. It can have no basis in reality, but that's not what's important. What's important is that you hold on to your philosophy regardless of how absurd it is and how many times it fails. Which is one of the definitions of insanity. Trump supporters are not quite the lunatics the left/pro-Hillary morons are, but their explanations for Trump's behavior over the last few weeks is based upon the most intricate and super human explanation of Trump's actions. For instance, he is Hari Seldon, strategizing a millennia in advance, always several steps ahead of his opponents, the greatest tactician the world has ever seen. He went ahead and attacked Syria with missiles because:

1. He no longer looks like a Russian tool to those that will hate him irregardless of what he does.
2. Will show China that he doesn’t take crap off anyone, and scare North Korea, Iran, and Islam.
3. Will install the SDF, which has been kicking ISIS’s butt, in place of Assad and control them.
4. Will sneak through domestic actions while everyone else is paying attention to Syria.
5. Will stabilize the Middle East so that they no longer emigrate to Europe and America.
6. Makes the females of the world feel tingles because he won't tolerate nasty chemical weapons, especially when used on children.

What a genius! The guy can do no wrong, according to his followers. His followers remind be of a cat that jumps on to something but misses the landing. Then he struts around with a look on his face like, "I meant to do that". I think that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and sometimes a wealthy New York real estate mogul with a bad comb over is not the second coming of Christ.

bdoran said...

Yes I was only worried that he'd lose his base.
He isn't.

I'm focused on Civil War 2. That's why having our own POTUS is critical.

"If the entire world surrenders but you lose Wilkes-Barre you've lost it all."

I don't care if they gas 1 million Syrians or 6 million Israelis, it's not our problem.


Audacious Epigone said...


I haven't thrown in the towel yet, but wouldn't be that surprised if you're right.


The likes are similar to those for other Trump posts. I habitually go through and click likes to boost perception of popular support when said posts are pointing in the generally right direction, so while it'd be nice if that was the case, I think these are rah rah Republican types.


Great observation. America First is targeted at the first menagerie you mentioned, intentionally provocative given its historical 'baggage'. But Make America Great Again is broad enough to encapsulate everything from military might that is respected and feared by the world's evil actors to cutting tax rates to deporting illegal aliens. The regular campaign talk about destroying ISIS didn't bother me--trying to articulate why we should have a moratorium on Muslim immigration while simultaneously pledging disengage from ISIS would create too much confusion to have populist resonation.


For the best case scenario, we thank you.


I've been 'at this' for a long time. The last two years has seen more space open up than the previous ten did, by a long shot. Trump didn't need any of this. Not everyone can be everything. Even if he turns into a more entertaining version of Jabe, the last two years aren't undone. That cat's out of the bag.


/pol/, and to a lesser extent, Twitter, is where the vanguard operates. Twitter has ~15% public penetration. Facebook has 80+%.


Right. He's shown that he can learn from his mistakes and he doesn't forget betrayals. We double down on our efforts to influence.


His "you won't support me because I don't want your money" in front of a Jewish group and his persistent pointing to Israel's wall were breaths of fresh air, but they may have been illustrations of his familiarity and easiness around elite Jews rather than any sort of disregard for (((them))).

Forest Gump is the only formative Hollywood depiction of Vietnam I was exposed to growing up. I guess that was a couple of years past your cutoff, but the war wasn't the subject so maybe that doesn't count.

It would be about as odd as Assad actually ordering/allowing a chemical attack at this juncture for Trump to capitulate on this. Regime change or lack thereof will be the real test. If the US pressures/manipulates Russia into letting Assad fall, the shit has hit the fan.


I use my personal Facebook as a way to gauge "normy" sentiment and I've not noticed any decrease in support for Trump among those who were publicly cheering him on before. This is a fairly accurate representation of public sentiment. If that means anything substantive is a separate question, I'll grant you.


The XD chess stuff is wishful thinking. It's not inconceivable, though, that Trump is using this as an opportunity to show that those who test him will not get away with it. History is full of these sorts of tests. I was reading today about the Parthians testing Aurelius and Lucius Verus after Antoninus Pius died. If that was the purpose, Trump took action in such a way that escalation is easily avoidable. The airstrikes didn't kill anyone or blow up any Russian equipment and Putin was allegedly given a heads-up before the bombs were dropped.

Audacious Epigone said...


Interest over principles.

Audacious Epigone said...


Fair. As far as his presidency goes--evaluated separately from the campaign and its ramifications--immigration is the primary metric I'll evaluate on.

Feryl said...

Conspiracy theory time: what if Trump/Sessions are sitting on indictments for countless deep state minions and careerists? But they are biding their time, to deal with the building of their administration first (we still haven't gotten several cabinet votes yet) and also to sort out our foreign policy (Trump's tweets slowed down big time after the Syria attack). But the biggest reason may be that they suspect that Bush/Clinton/Obama inc. are going to be throwing their weight at him come 2020. I don't believe Trump is going to be taken out via impeachment. Rather, the octopus has accepted that 4 years of Trump is doable especially if the military has Trump's ear. That doesn't mean they'll ease off him in the months leading up to the '20 election, though.

Come the last few months before the 2020 vote, Team Trump is gonna blindside the globalists with indictments and various orders restricting the involvement of Soros types. It's gonna be a lot harder for them to play offense in 2019/2020 if they're fending off this kind of attack. BTW, as we saw with Obama, presidents with ambitious/controversial ideas will try to temper their goals for their 1st term. I think Trump knows better than to get too carried away early on.

The Susan Rice types have obviously made no secret of their treasonous contempt for nationalist reformers. Eventually we've got to see accountability for at least the lower class of criminal traitors, criminal prosecution of the biggest fish probably isn't worth the risk and creates the possibility of wrenching division and bad faith/broken trust that can't be repaired for generations to come. Besides, nobody would respect Trump's side. Opponents would immediately discredit the charges as baseless and politically motivated.

We're a long, long way from the days when the justice system was respected (like, go back to the 40's-70's). We've got to find a way to keep the worst bad guys out of the loop that doesn't involve court prosecutions that validate the idea that Trump is a dictator. Many late Boomers and the majority of X-ers and Millennials think the system is crooked. And plenty of people in this partisan and cynical era don't believe it should be fair game to imprison your opponents, however corrupt they may be. This isn't the idealistic and trusting period that Silents and early Boomers grew up, where everybody felt that crossing certain lines (like, oh, money laundering for foreign gangsters) should be met with swift retribution, where no-one is entitled to break rules and laws because of privilege or because of selfish/cynical expediency.

Hell, even in the late 80's Reagan prosecuted several Wall-Street crooks because he felt that to not do so would further erode trust in the system. By the time of "I did not have sex with that women", the media and much of the public were making a joke out of a serious crime (perjury), with some Boomers claiming that it wasn't our business (Boomers are the most entitled and hedonistic generation) and younger generations had their already strong sense of distrust/cynicism escalated by the side show. The guy who does the Daily Howler blog (which has become unreadable after Trump's election) once said that it was around 1992 that he noticed the media becoming obviously unprofessional and personal. This fits into the idea that, as JH Kunstler is fond of saying, "anything goes and nothing matters". The 90's is also when post-modern memes took off (like, what is "truth", what is right or wrong? etc.). Warping the basic definition of knowledge and morals is a big part of ignoring and excusing corruption.

Feryl said...

Another potential: what if Trump senses that his base isn't big enough to win the next election, so he figures," why not take down as many people as possible on the way out?"

Say whatever you will, but the next election is gonna be entertaining, even if a win is unlikely absent major voting corruption crackdowns and the ejection of foreign ringers (Minnesota woulda been a Trump win if Somali's hadn't stolen it away from us)

Audacious Epigone said...


The next election is, barring the severe market downturn that is coming happening in 2019 or 2020, winnable simply on account of there being no serious competition. We've talked about how there are not viable white candidates any of us are aware of. Corey Booker's appeal is a shadow of Obama's. Hillary was widely repulsive, but she had the Democrat machine bought and sold, which is something. Who beats Trump? Someone has to, after all.

Feryl said...

It's tough to gauge right now, and I think it's impossible to discern the big picture from what we experience in the outside world. We know that much of the West and Northeast is out of reach, and especially Out West I can hear the angst in people's voices when I listen to the radio/podcasts from these areas.

The Rust-belt/Upper Midwest, for our sake, need both economic populism and greater voter vetting. Trump's Goldmanfied cabinet is gonna be used to bludgeon him relentlessly next election. The Scots-Irish belt through the south/central of this country doesn't care (they consider Trump to be an ass-kicker, and that's all that counts). It's not the same in the Northern reaches. We might see whites in ME, PA, MI, and MN respect Trump's movements against globalism, but at the same time, Trump has made himself vulnerable in certain areas that could've been handled with a lot more discretion. If the Dems aren't retarded, they'll nominate a (presumed) man who can excite both commie youngsters and Northern populists by making the slightest gestures against big corporations.

It's gonna take some real big balls to go after voter fraud/illegal ringers. The MI recount fiasco said it all. How much can they defy the cultural Marxists here, who'll shout "racist" at every attempt to reform the process? We basically have to declare war on Detroit, Minn./St. Paul, and Philly. The rotten heart of the shameless urban Dem machine that takes advantage of Puritan/Teutonic/Nordic naivete and generosity. The wimpy whites in these areas don't feel enough animosity towards the Dems black/immigrant party status, so they let the Dems get away with electoral murder.

Audacious Epigone said...

And here comes this Hassett character to give us the Job test.


If the Dems aren't retarded, they'll nominate a (presumed) man who can excite both commie youngsters and Northern populists by making the slightest gestures against big corporations.

Easier said that done, I suspect.

Tjaden said...

Trump's so-called cuckery is a consequence of winning. The right is comprised of various ideological factions with competing interests--neocons vs. nationalists; libertarians vs. social conservatives. For these competing ideologies to caucus, everyone has to make concessions. If we aren't willing to make occasional concessions to war hawks and wall street conservatives they won't be willing to caucus with us and a win in 2020 will become unlikely.

Although Trump probably agrees with us on most foreign policy issues, he has no choice but to appease the red meat warhawk proles and neocons. Thus, we will not be getting everything promised during the campaign.