Saturday, May 19, 2018

Support for secession by state

The following map and subsequent table show percentages by state who, according to a 2014 Reuters-Ipsos poll, support "the idea of your state peacefully withdrawing from the USA and the federal government" ("don't know" responses are excluded; N = 12,734):


StateSecede
1) Alaska58.3%
2) New Mexico45.2%
3) Texas40.4%
4) Illinois38.9%
5) District of Columbia38.1%
6) Alabama38.0%
7) Utah37.6%
8) Louisiana37.5%
9) Montana37.2%
10) Rhode Island36.9%
11) Nebraska36.2%
12) Delaware36.1%
13) West Virginia35.4%
14) Georgia35.3%
15) Vermont35.1%
16) Wyoming34.8%
17) Oregon33.9%
18) Virginia33.8%
19) Kentucky33.0%
20) South Carolina32.7%
21) Idaho32.5%
22) Florida32.2%
23) Colorado32.2%
24) New York32.1%
25) Arkansas32.0%
26) Oklahoma31.6%
27) North Dakota31.6%
28) Mississippi31.5%
29) California30.0%
30) Maine29.8%
31) Kansas29.8%
32) Nevada29.7%
33) Tennessee29.7%
34) Arizona29.0%
35) New Hampshire28.8%
36) South Dakota28.4%
37) Maryland27.9%
38) Washington27.5%
39) Ohio27.3%
40) Hawaii27.2%
41) Michigan26.9%
42) Pennsylvania26.0%
43) Missouri25.9%
44) North Carolina25.7%
45) Iowa24.5%
46) Indiana24.3%
47) New Jersey23.4%
48) Wisconsin22.3%
49) Massachusetts21.2%
50) Minnesota20.6%
51) Connecticut19.2%

Just under 13,000 people across 51 states and the Imperial Capital comes to 250 people per, some with fewer and some with more, so bear in mind the limited sample sizes.

Speaking of the Imperial Capital, the 38% figure strains credulity more than any other result does. The sample is the poll's smallest, though, at just 70, so take it with a grain of salt.

The mountain states, the Southwest, and the Deep South show the greatest support for secession. The Upper Midwest shows the least appetite for it, though Illinois--a financially dysfunctional Midwestern state held captive by ultra leftist Chicago--is a notable exception.

It's not particularly surprising that Alaska, with its petroleum dividend, libertarian streak, and minimal association with the rest of the country in terms of culture and politics, shows the greatest support for breaking away. It is the only state where a majority of respondents favor secession.

One thing I inexplicably failed to bring attention to in the previous post is the political split among whites:


White Democrats express a lot more opposition to secession than white Republicans and independents do. But non-whites, who of course vote overwhelmingly Democrat, are more supportive than white Republicans are. There's a gaping chasm between white Democrats and their non-white political allies when it comes to political self-determination. And the non-white enthusiasm for political dissolution expressed in this poll was captured during Obama's more explicitly anti-white second term.

R-I should run the poll again today. I suspect non-white support for breakup now exceeds 50%. Sure, political dissolution will threaten the gibs, but identity is more powerful than economic well-being. That reality is something WEIRDOs have a lot of difficulty understanding. Everyone else takes it for granted and acts accordingly.

Tuesday, May 15, 2018

US political dissolution a question of when and how, not if

Revisiting a poll from a few years ago reinforces my belief that the US is headed for political dissolution within the lifetimes of most people reading this. In the latter part of 2014, Reuters-Ipsos asked a huge number of respondents (N = 16,668) if they supported or opposed "your state peacefully withdrawing from the USA and the federal government".

The following graph shows the percentages, by selected demographic characteristics, who supported the idea. "Don't know" answers, which constituted 23.5% of all responses, are excluded in the graph which presents the results dichotomously:


At 87, the Muslim sample size is small, so don't read it conclusively. Instead, take it suggestively--suggestive of exactly what you assumed to be the case. And the 2%? Maybe they should've thought twice about destroying the nation that was the greatest thing that ever happened to them.

This poll was conducted during Obama's presidency, nearly a year before Donald Trump shocked the world by announcing his candidacy. Even during the Obama administration large numbers of non-whites--especially "new Americans"--liked the idea of getting out. Imagine what those figures would look like in 2018.

The warning that secession will lead to civil war has always struck me as highly unlikely. That  nearly half of the country's armed forces support political dissolution further confirms it.

If Texas goes, blue states cheer because the presidency indefinitely becomes theirs while red states begin planning on how to follow Texas' lead. If California goes, red states cheer because the presidency indefinitely becomes theirs while blue states begin planning on how to follow California's lead.

One reason secession strikes many as practically unthinkable at first blush is because the political zeitgeist is still overwhelmingly shaped and controlled by boomers. The generational divide is actually starker than the racial divide is. When the boomers exit the stage, the possibility will suddenly seem all too real.

To people who grew up in a country of 150 million that was 90% white with a minority that had been here from the beginning, the thing made sense. To people trying to survive inside an empire of over 330 million people who are religiously, ethnically, financially, linguistically, racially, politically, and culturally divided--bitterly divided--it makes no sense. About the only thing keeping the it together now is a mix of inertia and economic expediency.

Political dissolution is an idea whose time has come. Support for it exists all over the dissident right--Heartiste, Z-Man, Vox Day, Julian Langness, Jared Taylor. Our favorite septuagenarian is even thinking it over. It's not just gaining traction out here on the political frontier, though. The Federalist recently carried a column in support of the idea. Even the NYT is dipping a toe in the water.

Sunday, May 13, 2018

Stefan Molyneux on the GSS and free speech absolutism



Regular readers who watch this presentation will recognize that it is strikingly similar to this post. It also draws from this one.

This is not on account of Molyneux being a plagiarist. He contacted me and I subsequently worked with his producer, Michael, who had seen the post and found the topic fascinating. Over the course of several e-mail exchanges, I helped Michael understand how to navigate the GSS in general and how to replicate the results from that post specifically.

Michael was extremely cordial and complimentary. He offered to compensate me for my time. I refused and made it clear that no attribution was necessary. There are posts on this blog that delve into things Molyneux understandably doesn't need to get tangled up in. While I know the data presented are always reliably and precisely pulled from primary sources, it's easy to imagine a large portion of his audience questioning the validity of his presentation upon seeing the blog as the source. Pointing to the GSS directly is a better way to go.

Oh, and now we have a guy with nearly one million subscribers giving a detailed presentation based on the GSS, one of the most underutilized data sources in the world of social science. Three cheers!

Molyneux is doing civilizational-saving work. So far as I'm aware no one else is doing as much to spread realism about race and IQ as he is. Charles Murray gave the relationship salience with The Bell Curve, and other psychometricians and evolutionary psychologists have conducted research on it, but no one with a platform approaching the size of Molyneux's has weaved it into discussions of every topic it applies to (which is just about every topic there is).

Understanding IQ differences as an abstract concept is one thing. Actively applying it to everything aspect of existence is another. The latter is what will change the zeitgeist, and no one is doing as much to realize that change as Molyneux.

Parenthetically, Molyneux (or Michael) didn't apply the BORN filter when tracking free speech absolutism by intelligence (the relevant portion of the presentation takes place around the 31 minute mark). Since intelligence in this context is estimated based on the English vocabulary of respondents, it's an imprecise proxy if people who are not native English speakers are included. Consequently, my figures--which exclude respondents born outside the US--are modestly higher at all ranges of intelligence.

Saturday, May 12, 2018

Trump's 2016 white vote share by state

Reuters-Ipsos' interactive polling explorer site has just added state filters back into the mix after pulling them a couple of years ago. This finally allows a look at non-Hispanic white vote share by state for the 2016 US presidential election. The sample size is huge, with 84,210 whites who either voted for Trump or Clinton included. The following map and subsequent table shows Trump's white voter share by state in a two-way race:


StateT'sWht%
1) Mississippi81.5
2) Alabama77.2
3) Louisiana74.4
4) Wyoming71.4
5) Arkansas71.4
6) South Carolina70.8
7) Georgia 70.4
8) South Dakota70.3
9) Tennessee70.2
10) West Virginia68.7
11) Alaska67.6
12) Texas66.5
13) Idaho65.9
14) Oklahoma65.5
15) North Dakota64.7
16) Missouri62.3
17) North Carolina62.2
18) Montana61.6
19) Utah60.7
20) Indiana60.5
21) Kentucky60.4
22) Florida60.1
23) Nebraska60.0
24) Arizona60.0
25) Kansas59.6
26) Virginia57.9
27) New Mexico56.5
28) Pennsylvania56.1
29) Nevada55.2
30) Ohio54.4
31) Colorado53.4
32) Michigan52.8
33) Maryland51.9
34) Delaware51.3
35) Wisconsin50.8
36) New Jersey50.4
37) Iowa50.2
38) Maine49.9
39) Minnesota49.1
40) New York48.9
41) Illinois48.1
42) Connecticut48.0
43) Washington47.8
44) California46.7
45) New Hampshire44.9
46) Oregon43.4
47) Rhode Island43.1
48) Massachusetts40.8
49) Vermont39.4
50) Hawaii36.8
51) District of Columbia36.3

Reuters has a pretty consistent left-leaning bias in its polling. Nationally, it shows Trump getting 56.8% of the two-way white vote compared to the 61.0% reported by the officially commissioned exit poll on election night. Add a compensating four points to Trump's state shares and he picks up Maine, Minnesota, New York, Illinois, Connecticut, Washington, and California. Just an extra 137 electoral votes--no big deal!

The exact hypothetical margin of victory in the 2016 ethnoUnited States presidential election isn't as important as the fact that the Republican victory would be overwhelming both in the popular vote and in the electoral college.

Keep in mind that McMuffin's presence in Utah filches a lot of Trump's margin of white victory from him and that in this rendering McMuffin probably also steals Minnesota from Trump to give to Clinton.

The white vote in the Imperial Capital seems too pro-Trump. The two-way white sample size is only 391 there so make of it what you will.

If the vote were restricted to white men (forgive my not taking the time to shade accordingly--this is purely winner-take-all fantasy fun):

Thursday, May 10, 2018

Oy vey, the edge slips away

A recurring observation in the discussion based on IQ estimates for American Jews (among others) in the GSS was that the chosen ones, to quote Sid "come across as above average in intelligence today, but not terrifyingly brilliant the way they did 100 years ago".

The commenters here are invaluable. The following graph shows the IQ advantage Jews enjoy over non-Hispanic white gentiles by decade when the surveys were conducted. To avoid language confounding, responses are restricted to those born in the US. IQ estimates are based on Wordsum scores with a mean white gentile of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 (N = 9,599):


The most obvious reason for this move towards convergence is out-marriage. The overall intermarriage rate for Jews in the US is 58%. It's an astounding 71% among non-Orthodox Jews. With fertility below replacement, most Jews marrying non-Jews, and little Jewish immigration into the US, the 2% is on its way to becoming the 1% is on its way to becoming the 0.X%.

Here are the converted IQ estimates for Jews and white gentiles that were used to construct the preceding table:

DecadeJewIQWhiteIQ
1980s110.199.1
1990s108.199.9
2000s107.6100.9
2010s107.2100.3

GSS variables used: WORDSUM, BORN(1), ETHNIC(2,6-11,13-15,18,19,21,23-27,36), RELIG(1-2,4-13)(3), YEAR(1980-1989)(1990-1999)(2000-2009)(2010-2016)

Tuesday, May 08, 2018

Thus spoke Vox Popoli

Vox Day, in the context of an interview about sexual promiscuity and the damage it does to children:
Once God is removed from the picture, so are the limits of the moral structure He has imposed on Man. And then, "do what thou wilt" becomes the whole of the law.
The following graph shows the percentages of people who have ever cheated on a spouse while married, by their belief (or lack thereof) in God. Responses are from 2000 onward and are restricted to non-Hispanic whites (N = 6,271):


The next graph shows the percentages who say having sex under the age of seventeen is "always wrong"(N = 6,402):


The last graph shows the percentages who say homosexual acts are "always wrong" (N = 6,128):


Cause, effect, and the potential noisy confounds and confounding noise aside, Vox Day's assertion has a powerful plausibility to it.

Stefan Molyneux, himself an atheist, regularly points out how devastating it has been for the West not to have killed God, but to have failed to replace Him with anything worthy of reverence.

GSS variables used: EVSTRAY(1-2), TEENSEX(1)(2-4), HOMOSEX(1)(2-4), RACECEN1(1), HISPANIC(1), YEAR(2000-2016), GOD(1)(2)(3-5)(6)

Sunday, May 06, 2018

Jew IQ

Vox Day recently disputed the notion that ZOG is a result of high Jewish IQ. In so doing, he's drawing swords with the likes of Gregory Cochran, Charles Murray, and Stephen Pinker. To atrociously mix metaphors, that prices me way out of the cognitive market, so I won't comment on the merits or demerits of Vox's assertion.

What I will do is take a look at what light the GSS can shed on the question. The following graph shows mean IQ estimates by selected demographics computed by converting the mean wordsum score among native-born non-Hispanic whites to 100 and assuming a standard deviation of 15 (N = 8,896):


To avoid language fluency issues, results are restricted to respondents who were born in the US. For contemporary relevance, all data is from the year 2000 onward.

One big issue with using wordsum as an IQ proxy--the two positively correlate at .71--is that because the vocabulary quiz only contains 10 questions, there is a converted IQ ceiling of 130, exactly two standard deviations above the white mean. Respondents who ace it all get recorded as having IQs of 130. While 4.2% of gentile whites score 10 out of 10, 12.1% of Jews do. In statistical terms, the first Pearson coefficient of skewness for gentile whites is -.20. For Jews it is -.66.

This artificially pulls the mean of high scoring group down. If the artificial ceiling was removed, the Jewish mean would likely increase by a couple of points.

The problem theoretically exists on the left side of the distribution, too, but it's of far lesser consequence because a wordsum score of zero converts to an IQ of 46.2. The number of respondents with IQs under 50 who are administered the survey must be negligible. It's unlikely they'd even be capable of completing it.

Another big issue is that estimating IQ in this way focuses entirely on verbal IQ at the expense of visuo-spatial IQ. Asians in the US tend to have modestly higher IQs than whites on account of a small visuo-spatial advantage over whites while whites enjoy a smaller advantage over Asians on verbal measures of IQ. Hispanics and American Indians also do better on visuo-spatial side of IQ tests than on the verbal side. Blacks and Jews, in contrast, do better on verbal than on the visuo-spatial.

Consequently, this method presumably modestly overstates black and Jewish IQ while modestly understating Asian, Hispanic, and American Indian IQ.

The GSS doesn't inquire about whether or not Jews are Ashkenazi, but it does ask about race. Among Jews who self-identify racially as white and so who are presumably Ashkenazi, mean IQ is 108.9. Among non-white Jews, mean IQ is 96.5.

Finally, Jewishness is inquired about in a religious rather than an ethnic context in the GSS. Some portion of ethnic Jews identify as having no religion and thus are not included in the Jewish results but are instead included in the Gentile white results. The Jewish-Gentile gap reported here is thus likely modestly understated as a result.

Parenthetically, here are the ten wordsum items. If you're reading this blog there's a good chance you'd score a perfect 10 out of 10. Forget the 2% being the cognitive elite--we outperform the vast majority of (((them))). We are the true cognitive elite!

GSS variables used: WORDSUM, BORN(1), RELIG(1-2,4-13)(3), RACECEN1(1)(2)(3)(4-10), HISPANIC(1)(2-50), PARTYID(0-1)(2-4)(5-6)(7), CLASS, YEAR(2000-2016)

Friday, May 04, 2018

Links in a great chain

As someone with high hopes for Nicholas Fuentes, this discussion does not disappoint. Richard Spencer, whose career I've followed for a decade now, is in top form.

Except for when he offers up this canard, that is:



This assertion was initially reported by the US Census in May of 2012 based on population estimates from 2011. Fortunately, the CDC releases actual birth data for the previous year based on all recorded births across the entire country each June. A month after the Census' sensational estimate, the actual figures came out and undercut the incorrect estimate. And that incorrect estimate has continued to be incorrect in each subsequent year.

The following table shows the actual percentage of total births in the US that were to non-Hispanic white mothers by year going back to 2011 (sources for 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016):

YearWhite births
201154.4%
201254.0%
201354.1%
201453.9%
201553.5%
201652.1%

Some of these white women are of course giving birth to multiracial babies. For obvious reasons, tracking the mother's race is easier than tracking the father's. By a strictly one-drop rule, the percentage of births to whites is surely below 50%, probably well below it, since baby Elizabeth Warren and Nick Fuentes would be included in the non-white tally by this accounting. It would also dictate we describe the US on the order of 1% or 2% black, since the majority of blacks in America have some European ancestry.

Parenthetically, Spencer's example of Alabama is way off the mark. As of 2016, the latest year for which data is available, 60% of babies born in the state were non-Hispanic white (at the link are pie charts showing the racial distribution of births for all 50 states and the Imperial Capital).

The thrust of what Spencer says doesn't suffer a loss of relevance just because it's exaggerated, but precision is important. So is avoiding unnecessarily ingesting black pills. We're not licked yet.

A primary purpose of the alt right (or dissident right, or identitarian movement, or whatever the preferred phrase) is to change the culture. Celebrating procreation--our procreation--needs to be part of that change.

In his AmRen conference remarks last year and during his speech this year, Jared Taylor expressed regret for not having had more children, noting specifically that the reason for it is that he assumed he wouldn't like fatherhood and nobody ever told him how wonderful it would be--he ended up discovering it later in life.

I understand this rubs a lot of people the wrong way. Hell, it probably rubs most people the wrong way since most white people are below replacement!

It's an issue that gets me fired up not only because it's literally of existential importance but also because I held off, Idiocracy-style, through my twenties. I've never liked caring for pets. What were the chances I'd enjoy parenthood? With the benefit of hindsight, 100% as it turns out. I've now experienced a range of emotions I could not have experienced without having become a father. Unconditional love is reserved for our children, no one else.

Don't read this blog for emotional safeguarding, please. There is no point in fighting for an abstract idea of our posterity if we don't create any actual posterity to fight for.

We talk about the need for self-improvement. To get off the couch and into the gym. To stop drinking from the pop culture sewer and start distilling a salubrious culture of our own. To stop being supine and start standing up for ourselves. The shame we feel when we pass on the potential to grow the tribe is the same sort of shame we come up short on these other endeavors. Pressure to power. Stress to strength. Remember, others have done more with less.

This isn't a blanket call for MOAR WHITE BABIES (though that'd be fine with me). I know my audience. All human behavioral traits are heritable. The personality characteristics that make you a race realist grateful for your ancestors and guided by a concern for your descendents are personality characteristics your children will tend to share. If we don't do it (heh), we'll be relying on the Mennonites and the Mormons to win the future for us.

Wednesday, May 02, 2018

Concluding thoughts on the Hater's Ball

Before returning to form by hewing to the data, permit me a few thoughts to wrap up reactions to the AmRen conference.

Z-Man astutely noted there were a fair number of women in attendance, on the order of 10%. That's a good sign. It indicates a move towards social normalization. So does the genuinely friendly reactions and responses our side seemingly uniformly received from law enforcement agents tasked with protecting the event.

The generational divide is another indication that identitarianism will become more socially acceptable in the US in the future. The young guys, especially the numerous Identity Evuropa contingent were affable, enthusiastic, and inquisitive. These were the merry warriors who waged the meme wars of 2015 and 2016. Now they're moving out of the virtual world and into the real one, one that is their oyster.

Parenthetically, I met the people behind hategraphs on twatter and garth volbeck on Gab, both of whom fit this general description very well. Think Paul Kersey, who reminds suburbanites like yours truly as the most popular kid on the block growing up.

In stark contrast, the older attendees were dour and abrasive. For many of them, the event is a despair porn climax. That's not meant to disparage--we are here because they were there long before, and some of this disparity is a consequence of youthful exuberance contrasting with grizzled realism. 

From a commenter:
The Sailer strat of pidgeonholing the Democrats into the party of black grievance and third world immigration is the last chance for USG to come back to regular historical nationhood by the stairs instead of the window.
Seems to me there are three broad potential strategic approaches to take with regards to politics and demographics:

- Old America (legacy whites and blacks) vs New America (Hispanics, Asians, and other recent settlers) -- This is the civic nationalist approach long advocated by Steve Sailer (a position he may have since become less hopeful for, having pivoted somewhat since then towards painting the Democrats as the Black Party). Civic nationalism manifested politically in the form of the Trump presidential effort. During the campaign (and through most of his presidency), Trump has made it a point to frame everything as Americans vs the world. Obama never did that.

One glaring problem with this is that most blacks, who've been in the US from the beginning, don't think of themselves as Americans.

- Ice People (whites, including Jews, and Asians) vs Sun People (blacks and browns) -- This is the meritocracy approach. It probably most closely approximates my own natural sentiments of the three. It is also probably the least workable in practice. For it to be viable, either political dissolution will have to occur or democracy will have to go.

- White identitarianism -- AmRen, Identity Evropa, secessionism, and most of what is considered Alt Right. Ourselves and our posterity.

Ultimately, the first two options work against the third. The third is the most 'extreme', but it may also be the only viable one. If so, then pursuing either of the first two--ie celebrating the Kanye development--is little more than a distraction that wastes precious time getting to the third approach.

How to split the difference to give civic nationalism a chance by putting the interests of current citizens far ahead of those of non-citizens? Three things:

1) A moratorium on immigration lasting at least one full generation
2) The repatriation of all non-citizens to their countries of origin
3) A restoration of native fertility to replacement (at minimum)

Tuesday, May 01, 2018

Black Pilled

Heartiste on Kanye West running off the plantation:
I predict a coming black sex gap, in which black men will vote less D while black women continue voting D with near-unanimity. The reason?

TRUMP.
Kanye has a huge following. Whether it presages a lasting shift in the sentiments of black men or is just a momentary blip, the initial movement is hard to ignore.

For the week ending April 22nd, Trump's Reuters-Ipsos polling approval (with "mixed feelings" discounted) among black men came in at 11.2%. Kanye's crush made headlines a couple of days later and by the end of the following week, April 29th, Trump's approval among black men had rocketed to 23.7%, the highest mark the 45th president has ever achieved among black men.

The corresponding figures for black women were 6.7% approval week ending April 22nd and 9.9% approval week ending April 29th, the latter of which falls four points short of Trump's high-water mark among black women.

The sample sizes are in the low hundreds so it could just be a noisy coincidence, but it would be quite a coincidence if that's the case. Results for the current week will be in next Monday. We'll be able to pronounce with more confidence then.

Paul Kersey:


That resonates well enough. But there are ramifications for whites from this, too. This line of apology for his new Trump love will be particularly effective against SWPLs:


Christian Lander didn't subtitle Stuff White People Like "the definitive guide to the unique taste of millions" just for kicks. Nothing is more important to them than their own idea of who they are. This could get fun fast.

Parenthetically, here we have another example of an observation I was first made aware of by Steve Sailer several years ago--the blackest blacks are the ones who tend to break rank. Curtis Jackson had nice things to say about the bumbling butcher. Herman Cain captured the hearts of cuckservatives for awhile. Diamond and Silk are darker than anyone in the Congressional Black Caucus. Steve Harvey doesn't have to prove his blackety blackety blackety black bona fides to anyone. John Legend vs Kanye West:


The Reuters-Ipsos presidential approval poll has been administered continuously since the beginning of 2018. It has accumulated a staggering sample size of 44,798 respondents. The following graph shows Trump's approval by selected demographic characteristics, again with "mixed feelings" responses excluded:

Sunday, April 29, 2018

Hater's Ball Day 3

The political dissolution of the US is a question of when, not if. Ideally, the separation is an amicable one based on a mutual recognition of irreconcilable differences. Amicability may be a pipe dream, but a separation characterized by non-violence is not. Secession is an idea whose time has come. It is happening all over the world and it will happen here, too.

That confidence in the possibility of a bloodless separation was fortified by the weekend's experience. State security was out in force. As I headed to my car to leave the hotel at the state park today, I walked past a meeting of about 30 police being addressed by a commanding officer. He was praising the group for how smoothly the weekend had gone and how well they had comported themselves. Hearing it, I gave a "thanks for the great work this weekend!" as I past. In response came, so far as I could tell, appreciative acknowledgement from just about every one of them. 

These guys are sympathetic. If the Cloud People in the Imperial Capital are relying on the salt of the earth in flyover country to turn their guns on their fellow Dirt People, they're in for a rude awakening.  

Henry Wolf, Jared Taylor's right hand man, took some ingeniously unconventional measures to protect the privacy of the attendees. I obviously won't go into the specifics, but it's reassuring to see that level of competence in AmRen's administration. 

Another impressive operation is Identity Evropa. The group's methodical screening process, organizational structure, and tactical celerity makes it well placed for not just viability but continual growth in the future. For those interested in activism beyond the virtual world, they are the best game in town

Simon Roche of the Suidlanders viscerally communicated what is ultimately at stake for Europeans all over the world. The writing is on the wall. Why don't the Afrikaners get the hell out while they still can? Because at some point we have to stop running. Asked whether they would rather emigrate to Australia or pay the ultimate price defending the land their grandfather's grandfather's grandfather tamed, Roche emphatically answered with the latter. Blood and soil.

It's worth ruminating on that conviction. A life in which nothing is worth dying for is hardly a life worth living. No one lives forever. Achilles understood this. So should we.

I'm a family man and a homebody, but as I parted ways with Z-Man at the conference's closing, I was overcome with a sense of anticipation for the VDare event planned for this August. Spending a weekend conversing non-stop and without reservation about topics that matter with smart, thoughtful people is an intellectual experience unparalleled in The Current Year. It's a taste of what life could be like if we were able to hurl the stifling curse of political correctness into the abyss.

Saturday, April 28, 2018

The Hater's Ball Day 2

The Derb is in good spirits. He seems to have just now discovered twitter despite having had an account for years. It's fun to watch.

As Z-Man noted, Richard Spencer is notably absent and a lot of (figurative) knives seem to be coming out for him. Just like the optimal approach to the JQ, I'm agnostic on Spencer's current status. A recurring theme that is hard to miss this year is that it's time to revisit the putative sagacity of the idea that dissidents should never punch to the right. When you're being stabbed in the back by the guy  on your right flank, sometimes the need to deliver a haymaker becomes unavoidable.

Speaking of the JQ, the results of the field study, at least up to this point, have been... inconclusive. There does exist a sizable contingent of Alt Jews out there, but they're skittish. On good information I've gathered their collective sense is that breaking ranks is as socially injurious to them as stepping off the leftist plantation is for blacks. Being an Uncle Isaac isn't easy.

Nicholas Fuentes delivered a masterful speech, and not just because he cited the Hispanic Heritage Survey's bottle of white pills. If our Occidental Renaissance is to occur, Gen Z is going to have to lead it. If we are fortunate, Fuentes will play a major part in that.

Fuentes was born in 1998. He's all of 20 years old. He left a strong impression of precocity today, especially the way he handled thinly-veiled mini homilies that were couched as questions during the question and answer session following his speech.

The boomers who tore into him spectacularly misread the situation on the ground. Jordan Peterson has one of the best-selling books in the world because he understands the challenges young men face. Fuentes does, too, and he has the added bonus of being part of that very cohort. People who are able to resonate with these young men are worth their weight in gold.

We need a Ron Paul of our own, someone who can do for identitarianism what the good doctor did for libertarianism. Fuentes has the capacity to be that person. It's indisputable after watching him today. I suspect he's smart enough to calibrate his presentation as time goes on. It's something he'll need to do. Making the transition from virtual personality to real world leader requires it.

In a moving presentation, Jared Taylor stated the obvious--we need to have more children. That alone is not sufficient, but it is necessary. He expressed regret at having only had two of his own, noting that while the transition from egalitarian to race realist was a transformative one, it paled in comparison to the transformation he experienced by becoming a father.

He also expressed regret in having not been told how wonderful it is to bring into the world people you love and people who love you. I could not agree more.

Friday, April 27, 2018

The Hater's Ball

Antifa vowed to shut the conference down and ensure it never returns to the great state of Tennessee. Said great state responded with an impressive show of force. We were greeted by a combined deployment of state police and TBI agents that likely numbered over fifty. The stencil-necked androgynes, in contrast, so far remain unseen. 

The conference is being held at a state park. There's a hard lesson in this for libertarian-leaning types. That lesson is that the private sector is not a guarantor of free speech. To the contrary, it's where the energy to shut down the free exchange of ideas emanates from. VDare has repeatedly tried--and failed--to hold conferences at private venues (here's to this August being different!). Without the constitutional obligation to protect freedom of expression, the private sector won't protect it--at least not if it's viewed to be unprofitable to do so.

There are some other hard lessons identitarians need to learn. I watched Z-Man forcefully communicate them to some people at the top of alt right organizations tonight. Those fourteen words become a lot more attainable if they heed his advice and his admonitions.

In The Way of Men, Jack Donovan opens with the assertion that the way of men is the way of the gang. There's a lot of truth in that. 

People in leadership positions are vetted, often formally and always informally. Trust is earned, not merely given because a person seems to have the right combination of carelessness and charisma. If a guy was a Rothbardian yesterday morning and was crying on Vice last night, he can't be put in charge of anything today. If a guy supported Hillary Clinton in the general election more enthusiastically than Bernie Sanders did, he shouldn't be organizing an event putatively intended to "unite the right" in Charlottesville. If he does organize it, don't show up.

I've been in the dissident right for a long time. After a decade of spinning wheels, things suddenly started to move in 2015 and 2016. The Trump Train tore out of the station. It finally felt like we were getting somewhere. But that train doesn't have enough steam to get us to our ultimate destination. 

We're trekking on foot again. It's the people who've demonstrated indefatigable competence and dedication over years--and in the case of great men like Jared Taylor and John Derbyshire, decades--who serve as examples that the next generation must look up to and emulate. Time has tested them and they have passed with flying colors. 

I'm happy to report that "the JQ" is a big topic this year. So is South Africa. Simon Roche's presentation is the one I'm most looking forward to tomorrow. More then. 

Wednesday, April 25, 2018

White Republicans marginally more scientifically literate than white Democrats

The implicit condescension in the "I f*cking love science!" society wide virtue signal is grating. When it comes to biological differences between human populations and between men and women, they're as anti-science as it gets.

It is in this vein I've periodically tapped the GSS to show that Republicans are more scientifically literate than Democrats, the only major exception being on the question of evolution (but not, as noted earlier, the implications of evolutionary pressures on human populations over the last 10,000 years).

The intention is not to imply that it is actually Rs who f*cking love science!, it's to empirically counter the elevated sense of scientific enlightenment particularly obnoxious (white) leftists pretend to enjoy. And to do it with a fun biological shiv twist, by pointing out the obvious reason Republicans are more scientifically literate than Democrats is because most blacks and a plurality of Hispanics are Democrats, while Republicans are the de facto white party.

That inevitably leads to the question of whether, among (non-Hispanic) whites, Republicans or Democrats are more scientifically literate. The approximate answer I've offered in the past is that they're about the same, but until now I hadn't formally presented it.

The following table shows the percentages, by partisan affiliation, who correctly answered each of the 14 science module questions the survey has included in every iteration since 2006. Bolded red figures indicate greater knowledge among Republicans; bolded blue figures indicate greater knowledge among Democrats:

Scientific literacy among non-Hispanic whites by partisan affiliationRep%Dem%
Astrology is not scientific74.469.5
Father, not mother, determines a child's sex77.275.2
Continental drift has and continues to occur86.993.1
The earth revolves around the sun81.582.0
Electrons are smaller than atoms71.375.4
Humans evolved from other animals38.967.0
Understands the need for control groups in testing83.084.7
The earth's core is very hot95.995.0
Lasers are not made by condensing sound waves74.869.5
Demonstrates a basic understanding of probability94.093.2
Demonstrates a modestly more advanced understanding of probability81.582.8
Not all radioactivity is man-made89.587.6
It takes the earth one year to rotate around the sun78.377.8
Antibiotics do not kill viruses67.766.2

As expected, little to see here. Republicans do better on eight items, Democrats better on six. Among whites, there isn't much difference in intelligence by partisan affiliation--the bigger difference is between those who have a partisan affiliation and those who don't, with the former tending to be markedly more intelligent than the latter.

Jig Bohnson (heh) suggests controlling for SES. The following four tables show the same as above but separated by self-identified social class:

Scientific literacy among lower-class n-H whites by partisan affiliationRep%Dem%
Astrology is not scientific59.852.9
Father, not mother, determines a child's sex71.373.0
Continental drift has and continues to occur87.892.5
The earth revolves around the sun71.674.4
Electrons are smaller than atoms57.077.9
Humans evolved from other animals38.158.9
Understands the need for control groups in testing83.382.7
The earth's core is very hot95.096.6
Lasers are not made by condensing sound waves59.250.0
Demonstrates a basic understanding of probability91.092.3
Demonstrates a modestly more advanced understanding of probability68.882.7
Not all radioactivity is man-made77.772.3
It takes the earth one year to rotate around the sun80.077.0
Antibiotics do not kill viruses32.140.4

Scientific literacy among working-class n-H whites by partisan affiliationRep%Dem%
Astrology is not scientific65.564.8
Father, not mother, determines a child's sex77.370.1
Continental drift has and continues to occur85.193.2
The earth revolves around the sun81.677.9
Electrons are smaller than atoms69.772.0
Humans evolved from other animals31.157.5
Understands the need for control groups in testing81.682.3
The earth's core is very hot96.294.1
Lasers are not made by condensing sound waves71.867.3
Demonstrates a basic understanding of probability94.392.3
Demonstrates a modestly more advanced understanding of probability82.482.1
Not all radioactivity is man-made88.085.0
It takes the earth one year to rotate around the sun74.674.2
Antibiotics do not kill viruses61.656.1

Scientific literacy among middle-class n-H whites by partisan affiliationRep%Dem%
Astrology is not scientific80.374.2
Father, not mother, determines a child's sex77.679.7
Continental drift has and continues to occur87.292.8
The earth revolves around the sun82.285.1
Electrons are smaller than atoms72.977.7
Humans evolved from other animals42.373.2
Understands the need for control groups in testing84.086.4
The earth's core is very hot95.895.1
Lasers are not made by condensing sound waves76.971.8
Demonstrates a basic understanding of probability93.993.6
Demonstrates a modestly more advanced understanding of probability82.083.2
Not all radioactivity is man-made90.890.5
It takes the earth one year to rotate around the sun80.680.2
Antibiotics do not kill viruses72.675.2

Scientific literacy among upper-class n-H whites by partisan affiliationRep%Dem%
Astrology is not scientific80.579.7
Father, not mother, determines a child's sex76.474.0
Continental drift has and continues to occur96.894.1
The earth revolves around the sun81.087.9
Electrons are smaller than atoms74.173.4
Humans evolved from other animals59.391.4
Understands the need for control groups in testing78.990.4
The earth's core is very hot96.2100.0
Lasers are not made by condensing sound waves81.079.3
Demonstrates a basic understanding of probability96.897.0
Demonstrates a modestly more advanced understanding of probability83.584.9
Not all radioactivity is man-made92.896.0
It takes the earth one year to rotate around the sun79.178.1
Antibiotics do not kill viruses83.686.9

Again, not much here. Democrats look marginally better when attempts to adjust for class are made, but with the exception of the question of evolution, all the differences remain modest and are largely attributable to sampling noise.

GSS variables used: ASTROSCI, BOYORGRL, CONDRIFT, EARTHSUN, ELECTRON, EVOLVED, EXPDESGN, HOTCORE, LASERS, ODDS1, ODDS2, RADIOACT, SOLARREV, VIRUSES, RACECEN1(1), HISPANIC(1), PARTYID(0-1)(5-6), CLASS

Monday, April 23, 2018

Zuck's with Her

Ted Cruz has a sharp mind and a quick wit, and he knows how to find his way to a polemical jugular:



He's probably also aware that he doesn't have a single sympathizer among Zuck's legions of soylent staff.

The following graph shows individual donations made by Facebook employees to presidential candidates during the 2016 campaign season:


Want to know what a male Hillary Clinton supporter--a nĂ¼male--looks like? Find a Facebook employee.

That's right, crooked Hillary received more than 85% of all campaign contributions made by Facebook employees during the course of the 2016 presidential campaign. Democrats took 93.1% of the total; Republicans 5.8%, and third-party candidates 1.1%.

Politically, Facebook and the Imperial Capital have a lot in common.

Sunday, April 22, 2018

Support for wealth redistribution via taxation

The following graph shows mean redistributionist scores by selected demographic characteristics. Since the late seventies the GSS has asked a question about how much redistributive action the government should take through taxation to reduce income inequality. For ease of understanding, the scores are inverted from how they are reported in the survey. The question is on a seven-point scale. The higher the score, the stronger the support for forced redistribution. For contemporary relevance, all responses shown are from the year 2000 onward (N = 11,478):


No big surprises, with the possible exception of Jews, who are less supportive of redistributive taxation than their political orientation and partisan affiliation would otherwise suggest.

There seem to be two major poles of thought with regards to Ashkenazism on the alt right. One, expressed regularly here by IHTG, sees them as uber SWPLs--urban-dwelling, high-IQ professional liberals. The other the Kevin MacDonald Culture of Critique view.

One major strike against the Jews-as-super-SWPLs is that Jews are ethnocentric while gentile SWPLs are about the least ethnocentric group of people on the planet. The CoC view accounts for this.

Wealth redistribution as measured in the GSS is another example of Jews arguably looking out for themselves. This is in sharp contrast to SWPLs. As the graph above shows, despite not benefitting from it, white liberals are even more supportive of wealth redistribution than blacks are.

One question that arises from this is whether or not Jews can be convinced that it is in their interest to join us. To even raise the prospect will be seen by some white identitarians as courting disaster.

On the other hand, Jews have a record of success. "If you can't beat them, join them" is an aphorism that may increasingly be simultaneously relevant to Jews and white identitarians with regards to one another.

A majority of Jews who marry in the US are now marrying non-Jews. When Orthodox Jews, who have less power and influence in society than the irreligious 'ethnic' Jews that run large portions of the country, are taken out of the equation, Jewish fertility is well below replacement.

Is Jewish dilution coupled with a drop from the 2% towards the 1% enough for them to realize that to everyone else, they're just rich white oppressors, no different from the coal miner in Appalachia--except they have more money!

GSS variables used: EQWLTH, RACECEN1(1)(2)(4-10), HISPANIC(1)(2-50), RELIG(3), POLVIEWS(1-2)(5-6), PARTYID(0-1)(2-4)(5-6)

Friday, April 20, 2018

The Rainbow Nation goes dark

Racial population distributions in South Africa, by age cohort:





This data is from 2011. Farm murders have stepped up since then. So has black immigration into South Africa from other sub-Saharan African countries. White emigration from South Africa has increased, too. The demographic situation is thus even bleaker than the above graphs indicate.

The last civilizational light flickering on the southern end of the Dark Continent will be extinguished--the question is "when?", not "if?". Not long after that, the continent's young, exploding population will stampede north. Or, in what will be an ironic historical twist, sail west in tightly-packed ships as the trans-Atlantic 'refugee' invade commences.

China isn't going to stop it. The Han will manage the exodus--manage it away from the Orient and towards the Occident. Either the beleaguered remnants of heritage America forcefully reject the impending invasion or the Afrikaners' fate becomes our descendants' fate:


Monday, April 16, 2018

Nobody does Russophobia like Jews do

Z-Man goes off the deep end, claiming that neoconservatism--"an ethnocentric death cult"--is a movement possessed by and obsessed with an ancestral hatred of Russia:
Their singular focus is Russia. Even their opposition to Trump is based on his unwillingness to talk about Putin as you know who. If you list all of the neocon wars and wish-for wars, Russia is the common theme. The defining characteristic of the neocon is a hatred for Russia, viewing it as the Mordor in the great battle between the righteous and the wicked.
Granted, as has been shown here, there may have been some truth to that in the past, when the Ashkenazim in question had just escaped Soviet persecution and their adopted homeland--or the homeland that adopted them, at any rate--was locked in a global struggle with the evil empire.

But that was then. This is now. To carry on about an alleged hatred driving so much of contemporary domestic and international politics today, though, is, well, shamefully anti-semitic!

There, I said it. Whew, that was cathartic. Virtue-signalling is hard work...

Oh, what's this? It's a Reuters-Ipsos poll from the previous Current Year. The following graph shows the percentages of respondents, by selected demographics, who say Russia poses either an "imminent" or a "serious" threat to the United States (N = 3,246):


Can't let this little doozy get out.

Anyway, the Jewish sample is small, at 63, so take it as merely suggestive if you have the turpitude to take it at all! And then take Bill Kristol, John Podhoretz, Max Boot, David Frum, Laura Rosenberger--aw hell, just about anyone with a tribal (((surname)))--as merely suggestive, too, you anti-semite!

Saturday, April 14, 2018

Impending 2018 mid-term muff

Drawing from a large Reuters-Ipsos polling sample (N = 24,487), the following graphs show, first, the percentages of Trump voters who say they will vote Democrat in the 2018 congressional mid-terms, and second, the percentages of Clinton voters who say they will vote Republican in the 2018 congressional mid-terms (both in a two-way race with those not intending to vote or to vote third-party are excluded):


A majority of Democrats who took a chance on Trump in 2016 are reclinating back home in 2018. A sizable number of independents are leaving, too, as are 1-in-8 young MAGAmen. In contrast, the Democrat line looks like it will hold:

For those who've long been accustomed to Republican chicanery, the Trump glass is XX% full--no new pointless and profligate wars (yet), some tough talk regarding sanctuary cities, Stephen Miller--heaven preserve him--!, the good riddance of a number of swamp creatures like Jeff Flake and Paul Ryan, etc.

But for the crossovers and the restless revolutionaries, the glass is XX[X?]% empty. We're bombing Syria again, the wall remains 0% complete, Hillary Clinton walks free, nearly everyone who rode the Trump Train into the Imperial City has been run out on a rail (except for Stephen Miller--heaven preserve him), the budget deficit is growing faster than it did under Obama, the tough talk on trade remains little more than tough talk, on and on.

What do they have to celebrate? A tax cut for corporations, another infinity-billion dollars for the military-industrial complex, and a resurrection of the bloodthirsty John Bolton.

Trump lost the popular vote by a couple of points and these results suggest the gap will double in size to four points in November without accounting for the motivational edge Democrats, as the party 'out of power', historically tend to benefit from. Virginia in 2016 and then in 2017 is a pretty good blueprint for what 2018 will look like.

When the GOP took control of congress in 2010, capturing a 49-seat majority in the House, the party won the popular vote by eight points. A four point margin translates into about a 15-seat majority for Democrats next January.

If that comes to pass, Trump effectively becomes a lame duck. He's reduced to rule by executive order, with every EO hopelessly tied up in the courts. As we approach the 2020 presidential election the MAGA agenda remains stillborn and that's the end of the god-emperor.

As Z-Man articulates brilliantly--this ten-minute segment is stellar even by Power Hour standards--it's time for Trump to flip over the tables. The president's instincts were to do this when the omnibus spending bill was put on his desk, but he balked.

No more. Trump needs to go back to being Trump. If he doesn't make a big course correction, and soon, it's not hard to see how this plays out.

Whatever happens in the next few months, Trump goes down as a pathfinder, a man who, at great personal cost, blew the Overton Window wide open and fatally harpooned the Republican elephant. The elephant hasn't collapsed yet, but it will. There will be a lot of bleeding out in November. President Trump may have peaked, but Trumpism has not. Its ascent is just beginning.

Friday, April 13, 2018

Stay out of Syria

Via Reuters-Ipsos, we're reduced to celebrating that at least we probably won't get another Iraq (N = 10,390):


And that young MAGAmen are not eager to go in search for monsters to destroy--we have plenty in need of destroying right here at home.

And that Max Boot, Bill Kristol, and John Podhoretz are in the minority even among the most bloodthirsty group of all. No, anti-semite, I'm talking about Republicans who voted for Clinton! Oh wait...

Wednesday, April 11, 2018

Prole patrol

Steve Sailer draws attention to the BBC complaining that the Gun Control Movement (which is Good) is too white (which is Bad) and too rich (which is Bad insofar as it proxies for whiteness). Setting aside the parenthetical connotations of white and rich, it is worth pointing out that white proles want to keep their guns while white burghers are more keen on taking them away. A similar pattern, shifted to the left, is apparent among non-whites (N = 3,887):


The BBC's opening sentence reads:
Is the new movement against gun violence that is sweeping America too white and too rich?
A humbly offered addendum, so that it will more accurately read:
Is the long-running movement against gun ownership that is riding the carcasses of American high school shooting victims too rich, too (((white))), and too non-white?
Opinions will vary.

Outside the realm of opinion is a recognition of gun rights as an American thing. More immigration means less support for the right to bear arms. The percentage of US-born American residents who oppose laws requiring would-be gun buyers to obtain permits before purchasing their firearms, 24.5%, is nearly twice that among foreign-born residents, at 13.9% (N = 32,971).

GSS variables used: GUNLAW, BORN

Monday, April 09, 2018

Oh no, no, no, we don't Apu of that!

One of the humorless, vinegar-drinking scolds dripping with supercilious contempt--the people has done what contemporary comedians spend so much time doing. He has looked at something genuinely funny and proclaimed 'that is NOT okay':
normies refer to as "comedians"--
In a truTV documentary The Problem With Apu, comedian Hari Kondabolu argues that the portrayal of Apu, voiced by Hank Azaria, created stereotypes of South Asians that were then picked up and mocked by non-South Asians in wider society.
No, Apu was created based on existing stereotypes of South Asians. These stereotypes exist because they tend to more often be associated with South Asians than with non-South Asians. Heuristics are helpful.
"I don't hate The Simpsons," Kondabolu explained in the documentary. "In fact, I have always loved The Simpsons. It's one of the main reasons that I knew you could be smart and funny and political at the same time... I know Apu is one of the smartest characters on The Simpsons, granted that the bar isn't set very high, but that's not why people liked him. They just liked his accent.

"I never heard anyone say they liked Apu because he exposed the idiocy and bigotry of Americans and the struggles of the average immigrant. No, it was just 'I love Apu. That voice is hilarious.'"
It's almost as if the South Asian Kondabolu enjoys The Simpsons because its marquee South Asian is one of the shows most exemplary characters, just as Kondabolu imagines himself to be. But he also despises the show because that exemplary South Asian character, Apu, does not share Kondabolu's hatred of and disdain for middle Americans. The cognitive dissonance is painful. Can Apu really be a stand-up guy if he doesn't hate whitey? What other indication of morality is there anymore?

In the occasional episodes I've seen over the last few years, it appears that the running gag about Smithers unrequited gay love for Mr. Burns has been long since retired.

In the basement I have one of the series' most famous posters, one people familiar with the series will instantly recognize. During its golden age, the show wonderfully lampooned 1990s suburban America. I'm always struck by how white and male the cast is.

Even a generation ago, that was the only way to do it. Want to have people do a lot of irrational, superstitious, stupid stuff? Better make the vast majority of them white men if you don't want to face excommunication by the cultMarx clerisy.

This is why the left will lose the new culture war. Comedy is integral to culture and SJWs are incapable of it. An especially salient illustration of as much followed Trump's alleged "shithole countries" quip. It was the remark that melted a million mudflakes:



The late night lineup of CultMarx-approved comedians do not push boundaries, they patrol them. For now.

Saturday, April 07, 2018

Gun nuts are not nutty

The percentages of people, by selected demographic characteristics, experiencing poor mental health defined as issues with "stress, depression, and problems with emotions" in the past month, by whether or not they own at least one gun. Red bars show the percentage of gun owners among the demographic group who experience poor mental health. Blue bars show the percentage of non-owners among the same demographic group who experience poor mental health (N = 5,290):


The differences in mental health are modest but since I ran the numbers they may as well be shared here.

Differences are generally larger across demographic groups than they are within demographic groups by gun ownership. The one exception, Jews, have a sample size of only 83 and just 12 of those 83 are gun owners. Given Jewish antipathy towards gun ownership in general and of the NRA in particular, though, the contrast is interesting.

Blacks and political independents who own guns have marginally worse mental health than blacks and political independents without them. Since armed blacks scare SWPLs more than anyone else, their opposition to gun rights is not surprising. For all other groups--and for society on the whole--gun owners tend to have better mental health than do those who don't own guns.

With the small Jewish exception, gun-owning Republicans are the most mentally healthy group of people in the country.

GSS variables used: OWNGUN, RACECEN1(1)(2)(4-10), HISPANIC(1)(2-50), RELIG(3), SEXORNT(1-2), MNTLHLTH, PARTYID(0-1)(2-4)(5-6)

Friday, April 06, 2018

Most whites know Diversity! is inherently anti-white (and substantial numbers of non-whites do, too)

From an extensive YouGov poll conducted earlier this week comes the following gem:


Fewer than one-in-five (18%) of respondents answered "not sure". Those responses are excluded above.

A few other comments:

- Some 89% of Trump voters view Israel as either an "ally" or "friendly" to the US. Just 5% view it as an "enemy" or "unfriendly". The optimal rhetorical approach for our side to take is one of emulating Israel, not of despising it.

- Due to the vast racial differences in the under 30 and over 65 generational cohorts, these surveys would really benefit from breaking age groups down by race. The under 30 cohort is barely half (non-Hispanic) white, while the over 65 cohort is upwards of 90% white. This renders generational comparisons tough to gauge.

- From a list of 15 issues, "immigration" and "the economy" tied for first among Trump voters (20% each). Immigration came in way ahead of the standard GOPe platform issues of yesterday like abortion, taxes, and foreign policy. Among the total population, immigration came in fourth (10%), behind social security (15%), health care (15%), and the economy (11%).

Thursday, April 05, 2018

John McShame

John McCain is more popular among Democrats than he is among Republicans (contemporary binary poll, N = 12,644):


They came, they saw, Europe died
The 800-pound black pill in the graph is that these figures are above 50% across the board. McCain, like Hillary Clinton, combines the worst aspects of left-wing progressivism and right-wing progressivism together into a (hopefully moribund) bituminous stew of civilizational decay--and most people smile and nod in agreement with these anti-white butchers.

On the other hand, it's increasingly clear the Republican party is going to have to be burned to the ground and a new shiv nationalism arise from the ashes if it will ever be the political vehicle for an American renaissance. Contemporary Republicans don't much like McCain (58.6% two-way), but they do like Trump (81.3% two-way). They like Trump more than Mitch McConnell, too.

We wanted the change yesterday. We may have to settle for tomorrow. The battle will be a long one, so prepare for the long game. The future will be here before we know it: