Wednesday, November 14, 2018

New York Magazine joins secession chorus--the time for political dissolution draws near

Political dissolution is an idea whose time has come. Advocating it a decade ago was met with mockery even from many of those on the dissident right. No longer. A few years ago, Pat Buchanan began talking about it. Now it's entering mainstream discourse. From New York Magazine (via IHTG):

Let’s just admit that this arranged marriage isn’t really working anymore, is it? The partisan dynamic in Washington may have changed, but our dysfunctional, codependent relationship is still the same.
There is no longer any racial, religious, moral, cultural, political, linguistic, or ethnic unity in the US as it is currently defined. The last remaining bond holding the thing together, beyond inertia, is economic expediency. It's why talk of dissolution will begin in interest once the impending economic downturn hits. The Federal Reserve, with rates already under three percent, will be unable to stave it off.

It is as a nationalist that I support political dissolution. A nation requires a shared sense of the aforementioned characteristics. As currently constituted, the United States shares none of these things. It is not a nation. It is an empire comprised of several disparate nations inside of it. The empire must fall for those nations to flourish.

When the US dollar loses its status as the world's reserve currency, it will become obvious that not only are the federal government's debts unpayable--which just about everyone already assumes to be the case--but that they are no longer even serviceable. Running away from the Imperial Capital's obligations will start to sound appealing. Gubernatorial campaigns will put secession at the center of the platform and the breakup will begin.

The NYMag article takes a fairly predictable stab at what dissolution might look like, at least initially, but it would be excessively audacious to pretend to know precisely how it will play out. It may be municipalities that get the ball rolling, it may be a single state, a compact of states, an entire region, or it may manifest in some other way.

However it begins, once it has it will not take long for the cascade to occur. Imagine a Texit that includes Oklahoma and Arkansas. Rather than prevent the exit, leftists will be cheering--Congress, the presidency, and the making of the Supreme Court will forever be under Democrat control. Remaining red state America will presented with a stark choice--effectively forfeit all political power indefinitely, or bail. Many other states will follow Texas' lead and choose the latter.

Initially, the emergent states will be based on preexisting political and geographical arrangements but over time the realignment will take on distinct racial and ethnic characteristics. Savvy red states will drastically slash welfare benefits while encouraging, even aiding, low-income residents (read blacks) in relocating to Blue America where benefits are more generous. SWPLs won't stop migrants from truly foreign lands moving in now, so they're certainly not going to stop former American blacks and browns from moving in tomorrow.

The conjecture on what potentially follows dissolution is just that. Political dissolution sounds scarier than it should. That there will be any support for militarily stopping a state or compact of states from seceding is highly unlikely. The federal government could hardly get away with snuffing out the Branch Davidian complex a generation ago. In the Current Year there is no stomach for scaling that up by a factor of ten thousand. The Soviet Union's disintegration was not bloody and neither will that of the United States.

As for the concern that an emergent smaller new country or countries will be susceptible to invasion, there is no invasion of Mexico, Canada, or Cuba on the table today and those countries don't even have nukes. Let Montana purchase a few nuclear warheads and its risk of invasion will be nil.

When the topic comes up in conversation and people ask what will change from the way things are now, I answer that the money withheld from their paychecks each week for federal income taxes will no longer be withheld and whatever services the federal government provides them--if they can think of any, because I can't!--will no longer be provided to them.

The reason we're whipped into a frenzy each time a putative federal government shutdown looms ahead of a debt ceiling 'crisis' is because the Cloud People don't want the Dirt People to realize how superfluous said Cloud People are. Furlough a couple million federal government employees and nothing happens? Why didn't we scrub these parasites off sooner?

Last Spring I put together a couple of posts based on a Reuters-Ipsos poll from 2014 asking respondents whether or not they supported "the idea of your state peacefully withdrawing from the USA and the federal government". Unbeknownst to me at the time but subsequently brought to my attention by a pro-secession Faceborg group, R-I picked the poll back up a couple of years later, running it through Trump's inauguration in January of 2017.

As a consequence, we now have a sample size of 37,465 to work with--more than twice as large as the one initially used. The following graph shows the percentages of people, by selected demographics, who support peaceful secession. "Don't know" responses, constituting one-fifth of all responses, are excluded:

That the military is a bastion of pro-secessionist sentiment doesn't bode particularly well for the idea that the federal government will successfully instruct the army to turn its guns on states or compacts electing to leave the union.

Political dissolution is most strongly supported by the young and by non-whites. Boomers are strongly opposed, but from Xers on down it's hardly a radical idea. In other words, it is the country's future.

Political dissolution is a decidedly non-partisan issue. More than one-quarter of Republicans and of Democrats, and nearly one-third of independents are supportive of the idea. As support grows across the political spectrum, the possibility of a relatively amicable breakup will grow with it. Acrimony--let alone bloodshed--will be unnecessary and should be avoided. A soft landing is preferable to crashing into the mountainside for all on board.

Monday, November 12, 2018

2018 midterms continued

A few more observations from the 2018 midterms:

- We hear a lot about the educational divide. Democrats are increasingly winning the college-educated while Republicans are increasingly winning those without college degrees.

That's descriptive when it comes to whites (including Jews). It's not so with non-whites, though:

- While higher educational attainment is inversely correlated with voting Republican among whites, higher income remains positively correlated with it.

Today's archetypal Republican is the master plumber who owns twenty work trucks. The archetypal Democrat is the barista at Starbucks with a PhD in women's studies. The master plumber's doctor and the his employees fall somewhere in between.

- Sixteen nations, under no god, divisible, with liberty and justice for none. These disUnited States of moribund America:

Ignore the crazy talk about political dissolution on the horizon. What do you mean people living in America don't agree on anything? They agree on this, that the country is becoming more and more divided by the day! Really, nothing to worry about. Just fifty million more Africans, fifty million more Latin Americans, fifty million more Asians, fifty million more Muslims and everything will be perfectly fine!

- Relatedly, the decline of the moderate (full exit polling data was unavailable for 2002 and appears to be incomplete for 2010 as well):

Saturday, November 10, 2018

Saboteurs, by accident or by intention

VDare carried the previous post containing some reactions to the 2018 congressional midterms, highlighting the finding that the vast majority of Democrats think it important that fewer whites and fewer men be elected to public office:

An NPC, putatively sympathetic to VDare's mission, immediately and publicly cried foul:

He was of course blatantly incorrect. The exit poll contains the question. Rather than apologize and exit stage left with his tail between his legs after being corrected on his sloppy ignorance, he spouted more ignorance:

The exit poll shows party vote distribution by answer to the question. I simply flipped this to show the answer distribution by party vote. To get the 75.1% figure, the first blue column in the chart, I took .41*.87*18778, finding 6,698 respondents to have been Democrat voters who say whites are favored over minorities in the US. Then I took .19*.12*18778 to get 428 Democrat voters who say minorities are favored and .33*.29*18778 to get 1,797 Democrat voters saying neither are favored. Finally, I divided 6,698 by the total Democrat voter exit poll sample, 6698+428+1797, to get .751 or 75.1%.

Having settled this, another ostensible ally revealed himself to be a charlatan by continuing with the public concern troll sabotaging. Though he did so in a series of tweets, he subsequently turned it into a convenient little post of his own, gathering it into one place to be refuted:
1. The chart has no source.

2. The author falsely claimed that he always gives sources. Actually he had to be asked the source on Twitter because he hadn't given it. The source is these CNN exit polls.

3. To get the chart, the author did math on the CNN exit poll data. He did not show his work.

4. I checked what math he did by asking him on Twitter, since he didn't document it. His math was wrong. Where he got 75.1%, the correct answer was 75%. He added an extra significant figure to exaggerate how good his data was. He admitted I was right, but thought the matter deserved the comment "lol" rather than saying e.g. "My mistake, I will fix it."
1. and 2.: It's provided in the body of the post. In the interest of readers' time, I don't link to the same source multiple times in the course of a single post since I know there are some readers who click on all the hyperlinks provided. I've been doing this for awhile and have a well-deserved reputation for being meticulous with my source data. The color commentary may be crap, but the presentation of the data is not.

3. Vanishingly few people want to see the presented results worked out step-by-step from the raw source data. It's a blog post, not a formal paper being submitted for academic publication (though most people who read such papers skip over the parts where authors show their work, too!).

4. Edison captures responses. CNN presents them as rounded percentages for ease of consumption. Probable absolute numbers are not difficult to work out.

Sticking to the first blue bar in the graph, the 75.1% figure, the number of Democrat voters who said whites are favored is more likely 6,698 people, as my percentages indicate, than the 6,698.1126 people he'd prefer I imply. Having worked backwards to obtain actual number of respondents, I then created a graph where the absolute numbers of responses are rounded to the nearest tenth of a percentage.

Technically we may be off a response or two with a sample size in the tens of thousands. But I find 10.4%, the first red bar presented for example, which would more precisely represented as something like 10.3%-10.5%, to generally be more useful than simply 10%. The 10% implies it could be as low as 9.5% when we can get closer to the actual figure than that. I could start putting error bars on the percentages--that'd make it really fun to read!

I laughed because of how characteristically spergy this self-proclaimed fan of Ayn Rand is. To make a big deal over 75.1% being presented instead of the 75% he'd prefer is risible. Validating stereotypes!

Intentional saboteurs won't care about any of this. But if they're generally on our side--and I suspect both of them are--there's a takeaway from this extended exchange that sullied VDare's twatter account: Good faith questions about the data should first be attempted privately. Both people could've easily DMed me or VDare to be forwarded to me.

There are organizations like the $PLC and the ADL who like nothing more than useful idiots like this who blow a bunch of smoke for them. They use it to create the vague perception that VDare and other dissident sites like them cannot be trusted when they in fact can be.

Wednesday, November 07, 2018

93% of Democrats think it's important that fewer whites be elected

Some reactions to the blue splash:

- I'm quite pleased with the congressional predictions we made. Richard and I put the House at Ds 225, Rs 210. There are a handful as of yet undeclared but it looks like the final result is going to be Ds 229, Rs 206. In the Senate, we nailed every incumbent party hold and got all three of our predicted flips correct but failed to predict two additional flips, one in Florida (understandable) and one in Indiana (inexplicable). The latter isn't a missed free throw, it's a missed layup.

- The Kemp, DeSantis, and King contests were three of the night's four most important. Cheers to and for all of them.

Kris Kobach's defeat stings more than any other could, though. I spent several hours canvassing for him and know well several people who did far, far more than I did.

As has been recounted here before, I first met Kris when I was in college as he debated the late Richard Nadler over the topic of immigration at a dinner club hosted by journalist Jack Cashill in 2005 (or maybe 2006). Since then I've watched him fight almost single-handedly to make National Question issues like in-state tuition and sanctuary cities top political concerns in Kansas. As expected, he's regularly been stabbed in the back by corporatist cucks and in the front by criminal organizations like the ACLU, but he refuses to be deterred. The man is indefatigable.

How did his defeat happen? Laura Kelly effectively portrayed Kobach as the second coming of the deeply unpopular Sam Brownback. Kobach could have easily refuted this by pointing out that he had defeated Brownback's lieutenant governor and then replacement, Jeff Colyer, in the primaries and that Kobach and Brownback could hardly be any further apart on immigration than they are. Instead, he opted to try and win on the state's nearly 2-to-1 Republican party affiliation advantage by not saying a bad word about anyone with an (R) next to his name. It wasn't enough.

Then there is Johnson County, home to the Kansas City metro area's most affluent towns and suburbs. Over one-quarter of the state's votes came from the county, and Kelly won it by a devastating 55%-38%. Outside of Johnson the two virtually tied, 50.2%-49.8%. In Brownback's 4-point 2014 reelection win, the former governor took Johnson, 49%-48%.

Kobach underperformed Brownback by 3 points in every county combined except for Johnson. In Johnson, however, Kobach underperformed Brownback by a staggering 18 points. Had Kobach been able to mirror Brownback's 2014 performance in the county, he'd have won the election.

Johnson has a lot of transplants from other states and also, in no small part thanks to Kevin Yoder, lots of H-1B serfs working for tech companies such as Sprint, Garmin, and Cerner who have a large presence here. It's a county whose population has grown much faster than the rest of the state's over the last couple of decades. So have its median incomes and housing prices, the latter more rapidly than the former. It's becoming the kind of place Paul Ryan dreams about, and as a consequence it is becoming a place that Republicans increasingly cannot win. Conservative nationalist Kobach and Chamber of Commerce puppet Yoder both lost the county on Tuesday.

I'm not sure what's next for Kobach, but his story is not finished. If Trump appoints Kobach as Jeff Sessions' successor, the AG gets a major upgrade. If Trump appoints anyone other than Kobach as successor, it gets a serious downgrade. When Trump campaigned for Kobach last month, he joked about bringing Kris into the White House if he lost the governor's race. Time to make good on that!

- Next door, Missouri had three initiatives up for vote--one on raising the state's minimum wage, one on "ethics reform", and one on increasing the gasoline tax. The first two passed, the third failed.

That's what democracy inevitably leads to--people voting in favor of things that benefit them without requiring any sacrifice on their part, voting in favor of virtue-signaling that similarly doesn't require them to do anything, and voting against anything that requires them to incur real costs to themselves.

- The Russia Hoax has run its course. Some 54% of respondents say it is politically motivated while just 41% think it is justified. The partisan split is predictable. That means independents realize it is fake. It's unlikely Democrats will squander electoral goodwill by continuing to pursue it.

- Civic Nationalists remain a majority of GOP voters, but alt-right ideas continue to percolate through the electorate, with more than one-third of Republicans now realizing that the society their ancestors built systematically discriminates against them in favor of non-whites. Only one-in-ten Republicans buy into the 'white privilege' nonsense.

- In addition to overwhelmingly agreeing with Kinky Kamala about the nature of the country, a staggering 95% of Democrats say it is either "important" or "very important" to elect more women to public office and a similar 93% that it is either "important" or "very important" to elect more racial and ethnic minorities to public office.

Stated in another way, some 95% of Democrats say it is important or really important to elect fewer men and 93% say it is important or really important to elect fewer whites. But don't worry, Joe Biden is sure to get the 2020 Democrat nomination. Harris doesn't stand a chance!

- I will respond to the great thread in the previous post soon, specifically to Passer by who is not getting a beer from me on account of the outcome (but who will certainly enjoy a beer on me if he, or any other regular reader, drops me a line when passing through the KC area).

Monday, November 05, 2018

Predictions for 2018 midterms

Richard Spencer's outfit, the National Policy Institute, has a series of posts I contributed to. The literary portions are, for the most part, not mine. I'm an Austrian economically so the institute's description isn't the one I'd give, for example, but there is not in my mind anything implausible included.

I've followed Spencer for a long time, when he maintained a webiste called Alternative Right several years before the shorthand became a household phrase, back in the early Vanguard days (the podcast of radical traditionalism!). But I hadn't ever talked to him in any detail until this. It was a pleasure. He's a real human person with real feelings and real vulnerabilities.

He offered both to pay and give attribution but as is my MO both were politely declined. Regarding the former, our side of the great divide isn't flush with cash like our tormentors are. Donations and payments are a zero-sum game. I'd rather them find their way to others. Regarding the latter, this post is sufficient.

He's a strategic visionary, I'm a tactical incrementalist; he's high-brow, I'm distinctly middle-brow. As a consequence, I'm not always on the same wavelength as he is but as the duration suggests, I've always found him engaging and very often intellectually novel. He's the first to admit he's had some missteps, but he's been bleeding and sweating in an arena where for most of his adult life. He's fearless.

Anyway, the prediction I twisted his arm into publishing is Ds 225, Rs 210 in the House and Ds 48, Rs 52 in the Senate. The former is based on having tracked reported enthusiasm for several months and on the two-way split in R-I's congressional mid-term poll with the shakeout presumed to mirror the popular vote, handicapped 3 points net to account for Reuters-Ispos's leftward bias. The latter sees Missouri and North Dakota flipping to the GOP and Nevada back to the Democrats.

If you'll indulge me, offer yours in the comments. Virtual reputational skin in the game!

Friday, November 02, 2018

Gen Z loves Steve King!

Via reader HBS, another encouraging sign that Zs are going to be a cut or ten above Millennials (quite possibly the worst generation in American history):
CEDAR RAPIDS — If kids could vote, they would elect Republicans up and down the Iowa ballot, according to the Iowa Youth Straw Poll conducted Tuesday.

Almost 40,000 K-12 students in more than 300 schools participated in the unscientific straw poll, which was sponsored by Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate.
It gets better. The mock election included the state's four congressional districts and the governorship. Which Republican performed best of all, the only person in the poll who garnered an outright majority, you ask? Hint: We can't restore our civilization with somebody else's babies.

From the article (the fourth district is Steve King's):

Middle America's striplings are waking up, taking stock, and making decisions that should have the POC ascendancy and their (((enablers))) worried.

Parenthetically, the parentheses denote secular, leftist non-practicing ethnic Jews in America, not our hard-white kindred spirits in Israel! (Acceptable, Gabriel?)

Thursday, November 01, 2018

Kinky Kamala, Harridan Harris

When a vinegar-drinking scold tries to turn on the charm, this is the result:

God in heaven.

In contrast, here's a sample of what comes naturally for her:

That many heterosexual white men recoil at the prospect of a president Harris will be a feature of her appeal during the Democratic primary process. In an address to the Human Rights Campaign in 2017, Harris revealed the rhetorical foundation of her 2020 campaign: “Racism in this country is real. Sexism, anti-Semitism are real in this country. Homophobia and transphobia are real in this country. And we must speak that truth so that we can deal with it.”

Sharing a debate stage with Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren, it will be obvious to Democratic primary voters who is best able to speak said truth. For her white opponents to deny her assertions will be to relegate themselves to less than 1% support in the polls. For them to assent, as all will assuredly do, will be to cede all moral authority to Harris.

The alleged sex tapes of her with former San Francisco mayor Willie Brown will not derail her candidacy. To the contrary, she will be able to use their revelation to point out the political glass ceiling that forces qualified women of color like herself to debase themselves just for the opportunity to assume the positions of prominence they deserve and would have full access to in a fair society. Fortunately, having overcome these oppressive racist and misogynist obstacles firsthand, she will be uniquely situated to ensure their systematic removal!

Sunday, October 28, 2018

Gab goes

Z-Man suspects the hammer is about to drop:
On Saturday, a lunatic went on a shooting spree at a synagogue. I posted on Gab that the result will be a hellish backlash by our rulers against dissidents and dissident web sites like Gab. Most likely, Gab would be de-platformed and some heretics would be hurled into the void. Part of it is just rage, as much of what keeps our rulers in place is the rage they stoke among the anti-whites. The more important role of pogroms like we are about to endure is they send a message. The idea is to scare those sympathetic to the dissidents.
I think the damage may actually be contained to Gab, which is currently absorbing a coordinated deracination that will see it shuttered by tomorrow morning.

Yes, our rulers will use whatever they are able to as a pretense, but silencing the unbelievers and hurling them into the void is easier when the pretense generates a lot of organic outrage, particularly if it works blacks into a frenzy. But for blacks to get worked into a frenzy, the putative victims need to be black--ie Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, or the Dylann Roof shooting.

The last of those is of course the most comparable to what happened here. It was the excuse used to purge the country of publicly displayed confederate images of all kinds like the flag, statues, and gravestones. But those victims were all black.

While the victims in yesterday's massacre look distinctly Jewish to those with an eye for it, to the POC ascendancy, they are just whites. The story is one of a Trump-hating white prole shooting up a place full of rich whites.

Just a year before Roof, another white prole shot up a Jewish center less than five minutes from my house, killing three. Though then-president Obama offered the expected lamentations, nothing came of it. A week later, it was forgotten. I suspect most readers don't remember it. Had it not been so close to home, I likely wouldn't have, either.

If the story isn't already gone by next week, the election will flush it away.

Saturday, October 27, 2018

Marriage gap largest among the young, more modest among oldsters

The marriage gap is not merely a disguised age gap. To the contrary, the younger the cohort, the more pronounced the marriage gap. Married people of all ages vote quite similarly:

The increasing aversion to marriage--some of it a consequence of generational neoteny, with millennials refusing to grow up, and some of it a consequence of divorce courts slanted heavily in favor of women--is another force pushing society to the left.

In addition to the graph above, a few screenshots sent to me from an employee who is getting his master's at State U will be useful for the historians of the future who write The Decline and Fall of Western Civilization:

Ugly on the outside usually means ugly on the inside, and this is no exception.

I guess there is a silver lining in the images inflicted on us the other day--as ugly as this creature is, she isn't quite the permanent soul-stain they are.

This one is more tragic:

She's wearing that stupid hat because white men are pussies. When she walks past day laborers in the Home Depot parking lot, they're catcalling and otherwise debasing her in Spanish.

When she walks through the ghetto--okay, she won't, but if she did--many a dindu would think about raping her. More than a few would start the process. Stupid becky walking through here, who does she think she is? I'll show her.

If she was in a post-industrialized British city like Rotherham, she'd have spent the better part of the last decade as a piece of halal meat passed around by dirty Saracens.

But white men put her on a pedestal. They indulge her vapidity. They try to impress her by talking about how great she looks in the hat, how brave she is, how racist they aren't, and how orange man bad.

Contemporary white men are pussies and white women know it.

So they're doing what women throughout history have done. When the barbarians are at the gate and their own men won't take charge--to check their hysteria and to repel the invaders--they open the gate, fall on their backs, and make the best of what's around. It's a survival mechanism baked into the biological cake.

This girl will survive. Her brothers may not.

Friday, October 26, 2018

Race, gender, and marital support for 2018 congressional mid-terms

Expounding on the marriage and gender (forgiveness please, vok3) gaps, it's pair-bonded huwhite men and women against the world, with unmarried white men on the fence:

The male-female gaps, by race:

White gentiles exhibiting the greatest amount of gender parity--who woulda thunk it?!

Parenthetically is why the gender gap is played up relentlessly in the media while the marriage gap goes nearly unremarked upon. No, I'm not parenthetically asking a question, I'm making an assertion.

The married-unmarried female gaps, by race:

Ring or no ring, I's a strongly-worded, dependent black woman!

Wednesday, October 24, 2018

Gender doesn't matter, marriage does

Steve Sailer's perspicacity is like a fine wine, starting off good and getting even better over time.

In a Reuters-Ipsos two-way generic 2018 mid-term congressional ballot (N = 61,712), Republicans garner 53.9% of the married vote compared to only 34.3% of the unmarried vote.

Republicans get 47.3% of the vote among men of any marital status compared to 42.6% among women of any marital status.

The marital gap is 19.6 points. The gender gap is just 4.7 points.

Okay, the post's title is hyperbolic. Gender matters some, but matrimony matters a lot more--over four times as much.

Tearing down borders and tearing down marriages are both quite good for the left's electoral prospects.

Sunday, October 21, 2018

Color doesn't matter, ideology does

So says Shapiro, anyway.

A Reuters-Ipsos poll of tens of thousands of registered, self-described conservatives who intend to vote in the mid-terms suggests that, at least when it comes to political outcomes, Benny Passports is incorrect. The following graph shows the percentages of conservatives who plan on voting for the congressional Democrat candidate in a two-way race next month (the residuals not shown are the percentages of each who plan on voting Republican):

For more than 4-in-5 conservative blacks, whatever the conservative party is selling isn't enough to overcome the attractiveness of supporting the de facto liberal non-white party just to vote for the de facto conservative white party. The same is true for approaching half of conservative Asians and Hispanics, and for 1-in-3 conservative Jews.

Wednesday, October 17, 2018

Georgia's racial gubernatorial race

A SurveyUSA poll on the upcoming gubernatorial election in Georgia asked respondents about who they planned on voting for and also about their opinions on eight policy questions.

What jumps out immediately from the results is how much wider the racial disparity is on the question of who to vote for than it is on any of the specific policy questions, even the one on guns--one of the most racially polarizing 'hot button' issues in the country.

While Georgia is a state in which non-Hispanic whites will be a minority by the 2020 presidential election and is currently 15% Hispanic and Asian, the survey only broke respondents down into two racial categories, non-Hispanic white and black. The 9% of registered respondents who are other than white or black are excluded here.

The following graph shows the net absolute differences between whites and blacks on the candidate they intend to vote for and on each of the eight policy questions. That is, the higher the value, the greater the racial disparity (N = 971):

Ben Shapiro wept, Lee Kuan Yew's ghost laughed. Ideology doesn't really seem to matter all that much. When it comes to actually determining who gets power, identity matters more than ideology does.

We see the same thing when we look at how non-white "conservatives"--who opposed abortion, opposed welfare, supported gun rights, etc--voted in the 2012 presidential election. While they described themselves as politically more closely aligned with Romney, they voted overwhelmingly for Obama anyway.

Monday, October 15, 2018

The merciless savagette

American Indian? Big deal. I'm an M-effing knuckle-dragging Neanderthal, bitches:

Where's my POC zombie ascendancy status? And I'm an Injun, too, just like Vox Day:

Black Americans are on average far more white than Elizabeth Warren is American Indian:

Demographic compositions of Clinton and Trump voters in 2016

If the Republican party is to remain politically viable at the national level, the country must remain majority-white.

At what point will a Republican in an official capacity at the national level admit the obvious? What's the over-under on it happening before the country becomes majority-minority? Sure, it'll happen at sometime after the demographic flip, when acknowledging it no longer matters, but that's unremarkable.

Paralleling the fundamental question of our time, the fundamental political question of America in the next several Current Years is whether or not the Republican party has the will to survive.

Sunday, October 14, 2018

Is Twatter bad for your mental health?

The following graph shows the percentages of GSS respondents who have experienced poor mental health ("stress, depression, and problems with emotions") in the last thirty days by sex and by whether or not they use Twitter (N = 800):

Steve Sailer, we have your answer if you'll allow us to modify your question a bit.

Women are not psychologically equipped to handle social media. It amplifies and perpetuates their neuroses. Not good.

GSS variables used: SEX, TWITTER, MNTLHLTH(0)(1-30)

Friday, October 12, 2018

Judaism is the whitest religion in America

From the GSS, the percentages of adherents by religious identification who are non-Hispanic white (N = 21,581):

Using Reuters-Ipsos, a previous post looked at the same, albeit further broken down by Christian denomination. It was subsequently noted there that the Jewish n-H white figure (87.4%) seemed too low and the Hindu figure too high (7.1%). These GSS figures come from the period 2000-2016, while the R-I numbers are exclusively from 2018.

Both sources broadly agree on the figures for the Hindus, Muslims, Protestants, and the irreligious but not for Catholics or Jews. Are Jews beginning to racially identify as "other" in anticipation of the scotched MENA category becoming available, or as a consequence of the flight from white more generally?

I've been saying that whatever white privilege is, Jewish privilege is it on steroids. Well, American Judaism has a diversity problem. Or maybe it has so much privilege because it doesn't have any internal diversity problems to deal with!

Whatever. Let's emulate Israel on walls and illegal infiltrators and emulate the North American diaspora on race.

We don't hate you. We want to be like you. But if you do everything you can to keep us from becoming like you, then you will leave us with no other choice but to hate you. And as you know, it's better that the Saxon not be made to hate.

GSS variables used: RACECEN1(1), HISPANIC(1), RELIG(1)(2)(3)(4)(6)(7)(9)(10)

Wednesday, October 10, 2018

The children's cultural crusade

It's said the culture wars are primarily fought boomer elites on team red and team blue. When the boomers die off, politics will get back to bread and butter issues again. Trump and Sanders, not Cruz and Clinton. One of our most appreciated regular commenters frequently argues as much.

I've long been incredulous. Clinton beat Sanders, even without the rigging, and she was about as bad a candidate as could be imagined. Trump wasn't the electoral repudiation of cultural concerns, he just came with a lot of other attributes Republican and many independent voters had desired for years.

Reuters-Ipsos polling seems to back me up. The following graph shows the percentages of registered respondents who identify "social issues like abortion and same-sex marriage" as the issue most important to them out of 17 possible mutually-exclusive choices (N = 45,135):

The cultural contentiousness isn't going to cool down when the boomers pass on--their incinerated cadavers are going to really get things cooking!

The ultimate culture warrior is a single white Democrat woman under the age of 30, with some 34.1% of them putting social issues at the very top of the list. Because a representative bar would've dwarfed the rest of the demographic groups, it is not shown above. Bill O'Reilly hangs his head in shame.

Monday, October 08, 2018

Support for affirmative action by race

It's not all chew the Jew, heap scorn on the chosen few. No, no, that's not my view, but it is my cue to share the following with you. Whew.

From the GSS, percentages by selected demographics who support affirmative action, specifically preferential treatment for blacks in hiring and promotions (for contemporary relevance, all responses are from 2000 onward; N = 11,008):

When it comes to support for racial preferences, the modal Jew is to the left of the liberal white gentile, but not by that much, and only modestly more favorable towards them than Hispanics and Asians are. And conservative Jews are about on par with the middle-of-the-road white gentile.

Parenthetically, this question has no possible neutral response. Survey participants either support or oppose affirmative action. Even most blacks oppose--or at least say they oppose--it. Opposition to racial preferences is not just a populist position, it's a very popular one. That's why the Cloud People don't ever say anything about it, and silence the Dirt People who do.

Orthogonally, among non-Hispanic whites--including Levantine-Americans, the vast majority of whom racially self-identify as being white--it is, on average, expected that one in every X will be Jewish, by political orientation:

Very conservative -- 1 in 98
Moderately conservative -- 1 in 62
Lean conservative -- 1 in 49
Lean liberal -- 1 in 27
Moderately liberal -- 1 in 22
Very liberal -- 1 in 23

These are among those who religiously self-identify as Jewish in addition to racially self-identifying as white. Some indeterminate number of secular ethnic Jews who elect "none" instead of "Jewish" for their religion will not be included here. These ghosts presumably skew even more left than the at least nominally religious Jews do.

Finally, a little shit poasting. Judaism is the second whitest religious tradition in the United States, whiter than all but one (major) denomination within Christianity. The following table shows the contemporary percentages of self-identified non-Hispanic whites among all adherents, by religion (N = 81,236):

Other Protestant78.0
Other religions65.1

Just a few more years of refugee-racketeering by Lutheran 'charitable' agencies in the upper midwest and enough of the newly-minted Americans will exclaim sola fide to give the dubious honor of being the whitest of the white to the Jews! Or perhaps not.

These figures exclude people under the age of 18, which is why everything looks a whiter--and Catholicism a lot whiter--than a decennial census count that inquired about religious affiliation would look.

GSS variables used: AFFRMACT(1-2)(3-4), RACECEN1(1)(2)(4-10), HISPANIC(1)(2-50), RELIG(1,2,4-13)(3), POLVIEWS(1-3)(5-7)

Thursday, October 04, 2018

The privileged two (percent)

From the refreshingly candid Forward, months before the fraudulent accusations were brought against Kavanaugh, we got The Jewish Case Against Brett Kavanaugh:
Putting Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court means losing a crucial check on the power of a president who has made white nationalism a central tenet of his worldview and policy agenda. Anyone in the Jewish community making the mistake of embracing, or even tolerating, a white nationalist administration, is making a devil’s bargain, and the price is either our safety or our conscience.

A Supreme Court majority shaped by Donald Trump means that the most vulnerable among us — immigrants, women, Muslim Americans, people of color, LGBTQ Americans, and yes, Jews too — will be at even greater risk of harm from Trump’s agenda, untethered from true oversight by either of the other branches of government.
Jews as the most vulnerable among us? Ha! It's not 1939, shylocks. We're approaching a point where the sense of Jews as victims has fallen completely out of living memory. Whatever white privilege is, Jewish privilege is it on steroids.

Immigrants don't like Jews. Muslims don't like Jews. People of color don't like Jews. As the Democrat party becomes less white, the knives will start to come out for the most privileged of the remaining whites. Who are the most privileged residual whites? The (((whites))), of course--like Schumer and Feinstein.

Meanwhile, through outmarriage and below-replacement fertility, the 2% is on its way to becoming the 1% is on its way to becoming the 0.X%.

The differences between American Jews and Israelis are becoming ever more pronounced. The cucked right is beginning to wake up to the idea that Israel is an admirable nation-state and that "Jew" is not synonymous with "Israeli".

Walls, the ethnostate, the importance of native fertility and repelling the infiltrators--so, so much to admire about Israel.

And then there are American Jews, reacting to a frat goy like Kavanaugh like a dog on a walk reacts to a cat in the bushes.

Once the cucked right stops revering Jews and attacking "anti-Semitism" in the West, the ability for the self-interested, privileged few to attach themselves onto the train of officially oppressed groups will go away.

What's one way forward for Levantine-Americans?

Become white Americans, not just culturally but also biologically. As mentioned above, it's already happening. When a small numerical minority intermarries at high rates in the broader population and has below-replacement fertility, the days of that small numerical minority existing as a distinct group are numbered. The orthodox population that emerges from this soft population bottleneck a century down the line isn't going to look or sound like Jon Stewart [Leibowitz].

For this to happen, Jews must lose their designation as an oppressed class. They will have to be thought of in the same way Episcopalians currently are, albeit with even more privilege and an even greater head start in life.

This is imperative. If they won't relinquish the designation, it's going to be torn from them anyway. Listen Eli, it's easier for both of us if this is consensual.

It has been noted as the calumnies against Kavanaugh proceeded, his Catholicism has afforded him no protection at all. He may as well be a WASP. In America, where European muttery is the norm, white is white.

The POC ascendancy doesn't distinguish between white Americans of English descent and white Americans of German descent. Right now, they have to be regularly reminded to distinguish between white Americans of English descent and (((white))) Americans of Russian descent, but that distinction is on the way out.

Tuesday, October 02, 2018

The differences are more than dollar-deep

Among those who express either support or opposition to Kavanaugh's confirmation by income for whites and for Jews:

"Poor" corresponds to those with incomes under $50k per year, "Middle income" to those ranging from $50k-$150k, and "Affluent" to those earning over $150k annually.

Jews are not just gentiles with a lot of money.

Yes, we already knew that--well, most of us anyway, though as my twitter and gab feeds can attest, not all of us. Validating stereotypes is the raison d'etre, remember.

Send the white knights to the border

DemsRRealRapists will be about as rhetorically and polemically effective as DemsRRealRacists has been--not very.

Half the population views Bill Clinton and Keith Ellison as good guys. Calling them the real Kavanaughs just hardens things along partisan lines. It's off-putting to a lot of people in the squishy middle. So is this:

No wedding ring--shocker!

Instead of clown world antics, how about fusing the Kavanaugh confirmation with the issue Americans increasingly care more about than any other, immigration:


Sunday, September 30, 2018

Support for Kavanaugh's confirmation by race and sex

Like many on our side who are incorrigible noticers, I noticed a lot of the most vile, acerbic attacks on Brett Kavanaugh were coming from blue-checkmarked members of the 2%:

Yes, I know Wise is only partially Jewish--that's increasingly the case for all of the non-Orthodox due to high outmarriage rates--but it's not as though we're spoiled for choice with reactions like these that are filled with figurative allusions to violence. If I were an anti-Semite, I'd say something about poop in the punch bowl and the Jew coming through, but I'm not so I won't.

Here's a sample of the yenta's piece:
As a woman, as a loving parent myself, I am angry. I’m beyond angry. As the spectacle of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination unfolds, I find myself caught in the undertow of bad memories, stuck in a simmer of rage. My hands furl into fists. My jaw clenches. My teeth grind in the night. I send my daughters out into the world each day, with a wave and a smile, and then I come inside and want to cry out of fury and frustration, because the world has not changed fast enough. It’s one thing to say #MeToo, but if I find out it’s them, too, I can picture myself hunting down the man who hurt them and dismembering him with my fingernails and burning the whole world down.
(((They))) really, really hate Kavanaugh's Christian, heterosexual, frat goy persona. Good at sports. Loves his parents. Can be around women without trying to pervertedly pry them for sex. Is named "Brett" and a wife with named "Ashley". Are there any other Gen-Xer names more gentile-white-upper-middle class than Brett and Ashley?

It makes me want to burn the whole world and all six gorillion people living in it down, too!

Then there is this iconic photo from the hearings, hearings that came about because of information leaked from Feinstein's office:

No khaki-shorts or sockless loafer-loungers present.

The most salient are not necessarily the most representative, though. Among those who express either support or opposition, future president Kamala Harris is more archetypal:

The rates of "don't know" responses vary by race and sex, though. Asian women are the most likely group of all to express it while Jewish women are the least likely to do so (are you still wondering why 'white' male/Asian female is relatively common among the middle and upper classes while Asian male/'white' female is not?). An absolute majority of Jewish women oppose Kavanaugh's nomination:

So hey, that's what I was noticing. Now that we've quantified the noticing, we can feel assured that both the Harris' and the Feinsteins' of the country have it out for us in roughly equal measure. In the latter case, the per capita presence of hate is higher but in the latter case when it is there it is even more intense.

Friday, September 28, 2018

Blue state bums

The canine crusader pointed to a website maintained by the US Interagency Council on Homelessness--now I can't say I don't get some utility out of federal government agencies!--that tracks homelessness by state. The site itself inexplicably does not include per capita filters for graphical representations, which makes the map outputs so misleading that they're not worth viewing.

But the data is interesting so here's a map of the country showing rates of homelessness by state:


The strongest correlation I've found, at .56, is with the percentage of a state's population that is foreign-born. The higher the immigrant and alien share of a state's population, the higher the share of said state's population that is homeless.

The correlation between Trump's share of the 2016 presidential vote and the rate of homelessness is only marginally weaker, an inverse .55. The more Trump voters, the fewer drifters and vagabonds. Blue states have more billionaires and more people who own nothing but the clothes on their backs than red states do. It's the top and the bottom versus the middle.

A couple other notable correlations are with the self-reported importance of religion, an inverse .46, and the percentage of the population that is non-Hispanic white, an inverse .37.

Hawaii has the highest homelessness rate of any state in the union. If I had to be homeless somewhere, I'd pick Hawaii, so that's not particularly surprising. But New York has the second highest rate and Massachusetts, Alaska, Maine, Vermont, and Colorado are all in the top ten highest in homelessness, so a desirable climate isn't much of an explanation.

Tuesday, September 25, 2018

Harrying harpy Harris

Imagine supporting the civil rights movement and all its ructions, affirmative action at the expense of your own posterity, an ever-expanding welfare state transferring an ever-increasing amount of resources from you and your posterity to them and theirs, the cultural poz, miscegenation in every other media ad, the stifling intellectual oppression of political correctness, the treating with reverence the vigilant sentinels who scan every thought, word and deed for signs of 'hate', a lower material standard of living, the retardation of technological progress, the reintroduction of atavistic diseases into first-world nations that had eradicated them, the drop in social capital as people everywhere in society hunker down--and for all your trouble, having this in the Oval Office as a nurse from Nigeria giggles as she watches you die:

Thanks, boomers.

Kamala Harris will be the Democrat nominee in 2020. How do Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders respond to this when it comes from her? If they challenge it--LOL!--they lose explicitly with primary voters. When they refuse to challenge it, opting instead to nod along and agree, they lose implicitly with those same voters. She's a POC ascendancy champion. They, like Capuano and Crowley, are anachronisms--and they're in the way. Sure, they should vote for someone like her, but they shouldn't be sitting in the the seats of power that bend towards social justice!

It's all identity now:
Americans' concern about the state of the U.S. economy is at its lowest level on record, according to a new survey that's been tracking the issue for decades.

Gallup research this month found just 12 percent of Americans said an issue related to the economy is the most important problem facing the country.
Wrong Kamala
The various factions in the Coalition of the Fringes know that before fighting for supremacy amongst themselves they must first vanquish the enemy that unites them--straight white men and their allies, their wives--and as the clip above illustrates, no one on the national stage is better positioned to do this than Harris is.

The sex tapes won't derail her. MeToo is about punishing putative perpetrators of sexual abuse and deifying the victims of it. Victim Harris doing what a powerful, older man tells her to do because he has the ability to take her career out at the knees if she refuses? Nope. Hell, they may even help her.

The Treasury has made several changes to US currency over the last couple of decades to make US dollar bills difficult to counterfeit. That's well and good as far as it goes, but the old bills are still in circulation. Those are the ones to counterfeit.

Well, the fuggernaught has stumbled onto a successful method of counterfeiting accusations against demographic enemies in the Roy Moore and Brett Kavanaugh cases. Fabricated sexual misconduct allegations that are recent as susceptible to all kinds of new technological innovations that make them disprovable (ie the Duke Lacrosse lie, the UVA rape hoax, etc). But old ones existing before the age of ubiquitous digital time stamps? Those are easy to lie about and almost impossible to positively refute.

Guilty until proven innocent, with no repercussions to the accuser even if the thing is mendacious slander from top to bottom.

Congressional Republicans should've laughed at the absurdity of this charge from the get-go, told the lady to take it up with the local police department of whatever city she finally decided it occurred in, and refused to waste anymore of the august body's time with such tawdry gossip.

Instead, even if the Stupid Party wins this battle and Kavanaugh is confirmed, it's a Pyrrhic victory of sorts, the only kind of victory cuckservatives ever win. The fuggernaught is the real winner here. It used the tactic with Roy Moore and it worked, they're using it with Kavanaugh and it's almost done the trick, and they'll use it again and again in the future with varying degrees of success and no drawbacks.

They also win with it in the same way they're winning with the never-ending Fake Russia Story. Yeah, the whole thing is laughably false, but it is having the effect of scaring people away from working for the Trump administration, and this new accuse-from-the-hip will scare people on the right more generally from wanting to do anything in an official capacity.

Parenthetically, the putative war on women is really a war on marriage. One of Steve Sailer's many great insights over the years has been noting how the much talked about gender gap is reliably dwarfed by the much larger marriage gap.

So it is with the Kavanaugh calumny. The following graphs show firstly the percentages of respondents, by sex and marital status, who support Kavanaugh's nomination with "don't know" responses excluded, and secondly the gap in support by sex and then the gaps in support between married and never-married members of the same sex (N = 19,561):

The gap in support for Kavanaugh between married and never-married members of the same sex is more than twice as large as it is between men and women in general.

The imposition of same-sex marriage wasn't just gratuitous leftism, it had a very precise and very predictable political purpose.