Saturday, February 10, 2018

Not tired

Speculating on Trumpian tactics is tough. Assuming he has handed over strategic considerations to trusted senior policy adviser Stephen Miller--heaven preserve him--makes things a little easier. Having done so has allowed me to remain--in stark contrast to many titans of the dissident right--consistently optimistic about the administration's handling of DACA specifically, and immigration more generally, over the last several of months.

Steve Sailer explains:
The longer the Democrats talk about immigration, disclosing ever more accurately what’s really on their minds, the better Trump will do with the electorate. Maybe Trump could arrange for some elderly Democratic leader to give, say, an eight-hour speech about Dreamers? Who knows what rationalizations the old Democrat might dredge up?
From that post, a shot of a truly risible NYT editorial: does not include "illegal" in the definition of "criminal" nor "criminal" in the definition of "illegal" because doing so would mean using a term to describe itself--the two are synonyms!

If we dispense with the NYT's elegant variation, then, we are able to end the sentence in one of two ways. Either:
... smearing those who come criminally to the US as criminals.
... smearing those who come illegally to the US as illegals.
This is supposed to be an illustration of how awful the president is!

Give Nancy Pelosi as much rope as possible--eight hours is ample time.

Yes, emphasizing the illegal aspect of immigration just scratches at the surface of what's important, but that's all most people do most of the time when it comes to national affairs. Politics is the art of the possible.

DACA expires in less than a month. At that point 800,000 'dreamers' lose the veneer of legal residency. They become illegal aliens and can be dealt with as such.

In addition to winning on DACA, Trump has also gone a long way to framing the Democrats as the party of non-Americans and--despite their best efforts at self-sabotage--the Republicans as the party of Americans.

On top of that, these last couple months have been quite good for the GOP's mid-term prospects At the beginning of November, Reuters Ipsos polling began mid-term generic congressional ballot tracking. Among registered voters, the Democrat advantage over the four months the poll has been conducted (N = 29,823):

R-I's last poll, two days before the presidential election, put Clinton at +5, 3 points better than her actual performance. Given that "likely voter" polls favor Republicans more than "registered voter" polls do, and that Republicans tend to do better in mid-terms than in general elections, we're being presented with a template of how to win both politically and electorally, while Trump continues to show the way on how to win culturally.

A lot could change the next eight months--particularly if the economy takes a nose dive--but this progress on the National Question is worth celebrating.


Joshua Sinistar said...

Ryan, McConnell and the Stupid Party are already meeting to legalize 40 Million Freeloaders and throw the election. The Lincoln Party dies right there. Democracy usually dies in a fire. Dictator or God Emperor on deck.

This voting thing is SO OVER.

Temples and Ashes said...

As far as the criminality question is concerned:

"Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both."

8 U.S. Code § 1325(a)

DissidentRight said...

Good analysis.

Sid said...

Throughout 2017, the institutional GOP remained deeply ambivalent about Trump. They appreciated Gorsuch but were unwilling to really go to bat for Trump.

With John Kelly as Chief of Staff, the Trump White House has run a much tighter ship, and this has induced confidence in the GOP. But most importantly, the tax bill absolutely thrilled the GOP.

The Nunes memo demonstrated that, yes, the GOP will now actively seek ways to help Trump, instead of giving him a half-hearted defense when he's under assault. Having the Republican Party as an institution hitting hard against the DOJ-FBI clique will help greatly over time.

And right, Trump has shown Republicans how to finally fight. In an alternate timeline, a dark world, the Dems are denouncing President Jeb as racist for an amnesty package that would cover everyone EXCEPT criminals, and is meekly taking it with dignity.

"A lot could change the next eight months--particularly if the economy takes a nose dive..."

No one really knows if the stock market turbulence we're seeing as of late foretells a hard correction or if it's just turbulence. I'm interested in hearing what people think, but with the tax cut and the increased spending in the budget, the economy may well be overheating. Inflation may finally become a real issue again, but it sounds like investors are still antsy about talk of the Fed hiking up rates. It's anyone's guess as to how these factors will settle together.

Audacious Epigone said...


You may be right. On the other hand, these chiefs have fewer indians than they'd like to think they do. Paul Ryan is nearing lame duck status as speaker. He's allegedly giving it up soon. No (R) is going to fall on his sword for the Wisconsin cuck.

Temples and Ashes,

How's that possible?! Emma Lazarus said NOTHING like that!

Dissident Right,



W was blathering on the other day about how Russia wants to "regain Soviet hegemony" in the context of interfering in the US election. No matter what he ends up doing, Trump deserves praise from now until eternity for destroying both the Bush and Clinton dynasties.

Wrt the stock market, this level of volatility has presaged crashes several times in the past. My presumption since about 2010 is that another one is coming. I was a little... premature. The absurd spike in cryptocurrencies is what really pinged my radar, though.

On the other hand, does this translate into any particular sector of the economy getting hit? If not, does the S&P index alone move the political needle much?

Joshua Sinistar said...

W's career is over anyway. He may had killed the political ambitions of his Grand-daddy Prescott's whole shrubbery clan. Prescott was one of the Original Rockefeller Republicans now called RINOs.
He is in the orbit of the neocons still. Karl Roverrated brought this fake Texan from Maine into Texas to groom him for AIPAC. These neocons were talking about this being "The American Century". When Yeltsin was in there, Russia was broke as a joke and the place looked more Weimar than the Weimar Republic. Putin cannot go wrong now.
Putin had Obama in his pocket. For 8 years he ran the table while Obama stood aside. The American Century died right there, but neocons will not give it up. They look like they are pushing into bad territory now. Trump has the make work Obama Military. White guys aren't signing up anymore. They want to draft Mestizos now to make up the numbers. This is gonna be Marcus Aurelius in "The Fall of The Roman Empire" bad.

Random Dude on the Internet said...


I agree with everything you're saying and I think there are a couple more factors as to why the GOP seems to be taking Trump and Trumpism/paleoconservatism more seriously:

- Everyone in the GOPe thought that Trump would be dealing with impeachment proceedings now. How many Republicans assumed that Trump was nothing more than a flash in the pan and once the Mueller investigation was underway that it would sink him? Very few Republicans likely considered the scenario that is playing out now, which is that the investigation is kind of a joke and people are tired of it.

- Any Republican up for election or re-election who goes against or is ambivalent about Trump or immigration is going to lose. We saw that play out in Virginia and Alabama. So as much as the GOP wants to return to being full time lobbyists for the Chamber of Commerce, they know that doing so means they won't get re-elected. So they either have to be or at least do a good job of pretending to be in line with Trump's talking points.

The good news is that because this is the case, you will get some Republicans to convert to Trump and it's likely that many of the new Republican politicians who get elected in 2018 will be much friendlier to Trump's agenda. So this means that theoretically, Trump might have an easier time getting his agenda passed in 2019-2020 than he did 2017-2018. Probably wishful thinking on my part but maybe not.

Bottom line is that Trump is finally getting taken seriously and better late than never but we should never forget that anyone who flirted with the #NeverTrump losers should be jettisoned from Washington whenever the opportunity arises because they will do it again. No exceptions.

Feryl said...

From Jan. 1980:

WASHINGTON, Jan. 24 (AP)--Senator Alan Cranston, Democrat of California, has introduced a bill to repeal a ban on admission of suspected homosexual aliens into the United States.


We've come a long way, alright.

Anonymous said...

Trump needs to run the midterms at presidential year turnout. The Dem intensity is still quite high, and that overrides the generic ballot polls IMO. The GOP has lost otherwise easy special elections at the state level.

The PA-18 special coming up has a Dem candidate straight out of central casting, and the GOP is ignoring it.

Theresa May thought she was going to coast to an easy victory, and she badly underestimated the Anti-Brexit youthquake that could have made Corbyn PM if not for NI sectarianism.

Audacious Epigone said...


We hear variations on "if JFK were alive today, he'd be a Republican!", etc etc. Things are moving faster than that now, though.


VA wasn't surprising at all, but the point is well taken.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

VA's failures were due to Trump's base not turning out. As I mentioned above, whether the GOPe likes it or not, Trump's agenda is popular with the base and the further a GOP candidate moves away from it, the more likely they are to lose. Every Republican better be an immigration restrictionist or else they're out.

Even with all the voter fraud and weeks of non-stop media coverage (read: screeching), Roy Moore ran as a Christian Zionist which would have went gangbusters in the 90s and early 2000s but means nothing in an era where people want the wall to be built and for illegal immigrants to go home. Christian Zionism is about as popular as neoconservatism these days. The SBC who has been spending the last couple of years countersignalling nationalism is going to deeply regret it.

Audacious Epigone said...

Random Dude,


Sid said...


I hadn't forgotten how terrible Dubya's policies were, but his latest speech reminded me of just how stupid and annoying his rhetoric was. After enough time had passed, I figured the phrases, "Hispanics are natural conservatives," and, "Immigrants do the jobs Americans just won't do," were parodies of what Open Borders Republicans believe. But no, those are things Bush actually says!

I'm still not sure if the volatility we're seeing is a sign of something ominous, or one of those odd hiccups you see. In 1987 the stock market plunged hard, and I don't know if anyone has fingered the exact reason with complete confidence. The Reagan administration said they'd take no action, and that helped stabilize the stock market and the broader economy.

imo, the current big bubble is higher education and student loans, but I don't think we're at the point that it's popping, and I don't know if even a hard contraction of higher ed would necessarily whack the rest of the economy.

Random Dude,

I appreciate your kind words!

I think the DOJ-FBI clique (which includes Mueller) figured that Trump was at least as corrupt as the Clintons and Obama. Once they established some sort of pretext for spying on Trump, they'd find all sorts of slush funds, pay-for-play deals, money laundering, favors for old cronies in Atlantic City, etc. What's more is that I think the greater Beltway believed that as well.

They've been investigating for over a year now, both in the dark and with MSM cheerleading, but they haven't found jack. They've established Manafort and Flynn did some slimy things, but the charges haven't stuck to Trump.

The GOPe would often support cultural conservative populist issues, but I agree that's no longer enough to win elections. Roy Moore ran on that stuff and he lost what should have been a shoo-in race. The problem is,

1. Only a certain percentage of whites are Evangelical Christians who vote Republican. These issues don't win over Rust Belt whites up north, which was and remains the demographic the GOP absolutely needs to stay competitive in presidential elections.

2. Blacks and Hispanics are often religiously conservative, but that rarely means they will vote Republican. When black churches go into politics, it's to demand the gibs. Hispanic churches aren't so openly parasitical, but the way Christianity exists in Hispanic culture is very different from how it exists in Anglo culture. Hispanics rarely go to church and then feel a burning need to vote against abortion and gay marriage.

3. Christianity has far less cultural cache now than it did a decade ago. In 2008, Hillary and Obama were going out of their way to denounce gay marriage, talk about their relationship with God, etc. In 2016 Trump demonstrated almost no familiarity with Christian doctrine, and hardly anyone out of the Cruz Cuck Belt cared.

Anonymous said...


The GOP also has to consider what it takes to become competitive in New England and WA/OR. These states are willing to vote GOP for Governor, but are imperialist when it comes to social liberalism.

Canada's Conservative Party was blown out in Quebec and the Atlantic provinces.

Joshua Sinistar said...

McConnell is about to introduce Amnesty. They are running out the clock and Schumer and Pelosi are gonna grandstand big time with sob stories about po' wittle minority babies needing their famblies, I expect. They will do a full media package to milk the crap out of it. They have til March so they have probably got a full propaganda package with media help to LIE til the last minute.
Ryan and McCuck will not doubt play along and then at the last minute in March will put everything on the table and I think they will go full Amnesty this time. Go for broke I'm expecting. This will ENSURE CIVIL WAR II.
These losers will probably crack down HARD on Whites if they protest. So War should happen as blowback when this Sad Sack Uncle Sham sees his tin badges start falling down.
This Stock Market is about to crash. This roller coaster is corporations trying to keep their flaccid stock up. The Federal Reserve CANNOT print openly. Hyperinflation and petrodollar selloffs will kill 'em.
The media is keeping a lid on the story, but China and Russia just put the Rothschild Gang in the crosshairs. The Renminbi is now monetized in OIL. That's right, Bippy. The petrodollar has its FIRST REAL COMPETITOR.
Uncle Sham looks like a tired old man picking fights to prove his manhood. He looks like a broke dick dog to me though. Can you keep it up, Uncle Sham? I don't think you can old man...

Sid said...


There are other cases of the Clintonistas projecting their crimes onto Trump. Oxfam, which involved in the Rape of Haiti as the Clinton Global Initiative was, accused Trump of purposefully neglecting Puerto Rico:

Feryl said...

n 1987 the stock market plunged hard, and I don't know if anyone has fingered the exact reason with complete confidence. The Reagan administration said they'd take no action, and that helped stabilize the stock market and the broader economy."

Actually, several Wall Street figures were prosecuted in the late 80's. I wouldn't expect you to know since the MSM talks so much shit about the 80's and Reagan. There were many worrying trends in the late 70's-early 90's, but at least elites hadn't completely sold out. That would happen in the late 90's/early 2000's.

The Left leaning NY/London financial axis then crashed the economy under Bush 1. The Leftist super elites, in hindsight, didn't mind making out very well in the 80's, but they got weary of the GOP by the time Bush was in office. There's a sense of "we want our turn", too; Ok guys, you had 12 years to inflate military spending and attack all kinds of regulations and unions, but now we want a crack at leadership.

Under Clinton we assumed most of the economic/cultural policies that have become standard, albeit military excess was much more restrained in the 90's then it would be in subsequent decades. Probably the biggest betrayal of old-school Left ideology that's happened under Obama (and would've continued under Hilary) is not keeping the Pentagon in check. Nixon did more to rein in the Pentagon than Obama ever did.

Feryl said...

"There are other cases of the Clintonistas projecting their crimes onto Trump. Oxfam, which involved in the Rape of Haiti as the Clinton Global Initiative was, accused Trump of purposefully neglecting Puerto Rico"

By the later 70's, a lot people (certainly Leftists) were beginning to think that elites were developing an....elastic relationship with the truth. It seemed to get worse under Reagan, why are there so many homeless people during a "recovery"? Are "welfare queens" really our main problem?. But at least many elites still played relatively fair in the 80's. Then in the 90's, the sociopath Clintons (and their equally slimy accomplices) perfected the tactic of deflecting criticism by making bold (often boldly false) accusations against their opponents. While the GOP elite has for 40 years supported often horrendous policies, at least they tried to adhere to some kind of morality or principle. Meanwhile, the DLC elite acts basically like gangsters, ling their pockets as they bully and manipulate the opposition.

Dan said...

Being successful, as America has been, is also a curse.

It is frustrating that so many who are unworthy have sought to come here. But as a consolation, it is a consequence of America doing too much darn winning over time. It's not as pathetic as simply being crushed by stronger rivals.

Eastern Europe and Russia ironically haven't kept their identities by winning, but by losing, relatively speaking.

Our great rival across the 20th century was Russia. Stupid Democrats and neocons still think that's the case, but our GDP is now $19 trillion while theirs is $1.2 trillion.

There is no stampede into Russia or Poland or Ukraine. The per capita GDP of Ukraine is $2000 which does not compare well to our $57,000.

The massive hajnal line gap is interesting. It does seem like the inate human capital on the eastern side is much much lower. (Or is the hangover from Communism that much lower? Maybe its circular. The slavs were dumb enough to fall for Communism in the first place.)

Joshua Sinistar said...

Anyone who believe it was "better" in the past, and only lately has it gotten bad, are being naive and gullible. It was always corrupt. You are seeing it through the lens you call your life. When life gets harder, you pay more attention. The Media may as well be Pravda now, but THEY WERE ALWAYS THIS WAY. Walter Cronkite and Walter Duranty were part of the Conspiracy. Both card carriers of The nWo globalists. It NEVER WAS DIFFERENT BEFORE.
You are NOTICING IT NOW. It ALWAYS WAS THIS WAY. When your lives were better and you were feeling good about things, you didn't WANT TO KNOW. Most of you STILL DO NOT WANT TO KNOW. YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH.
I can understand that. It makes you uneasy. It demoralizes you. It makes you not sleep at night. The Truth is HARD TO HANDLE.
In the 1980s, you could AFFORD to be NAIVE. Now its TOO EXPENSIVE.

Sid said...


The Republicans in the late 80s certainly did take Wall Street to task over the junk bonds scam. In 1987 there was a call for Reagan administration to intervene and help keep the stock market up. They declined to intervene, and that probably helped set the markets straight.

I agree that the Republicans generally operate according to some principles. Heck, even the most craven cuck will say "muh principles," and while we make fun of that, there is something to it.

In contrast, the Democrats, particularly since Bill Clinton, have a very "ends justify the means" mentality. It's ok to take money from Wall Street and not prosecute them for tanking the economy, because once we're in power we'll fight racism, sexism, and homophobia!

They're obsessed with "equality of outcome." Again, ends over means and processes.

After a certain point, however, they're happy to keep and stoke up racial and gender grievances, because taking the money from Wall Street and Saudi Arabia, you know, is actually not all that much of a burden!

The DNC and Podesta emails betrayed a wholly cynical mindset. There's a quote in 1984 to the effect of, You don't create a dictatorship to secure a revolution, you start a revolution to get a dictatorship. Similarly, you don't make compromises and play power politics so that you can address race and gender grievances. No, you exacerbate the race and gender grievances so you can have fun stamping out your enemies and get rich while doing so.

Audacious Epigone said...


That's my best guess, too, although I have to confess I've not followed the mortgage market closely in years, and that's still where the most private debt is (about 4x as much as student debt IIRC). Our neighbors just sold their house yesterday for 25% more than we bought it for at the end of 2013.

Their house is comparable to ours and we live along the longest nature trail in the metro area so there hasn't been any significant development in the area over that period of time. IOW, I see no justification for that sort of increase in price over less than 5 year period.

I think the DOJ-FBI clique (which includes Mueller) figured that Trump was at least as corrupt as the Clintons and Obama. Once they established some sort of pretext for spying on Trump, they'd find all sorts of slush funds, pay-for-play deals, money laundering, favors for old cronies in Atlantic City, etc. What's more is that I think the greater Beltway believed that as well.

That sounds perfectly plausible to me. He's a vain loose cannon who is all about squeezing every last penny he can out of people--surely the surveillance state can come up with something! ... or so they thought.

Wrt Haiti and Puerto Rico, as Vox Day says, SJWs always project.


I don't think so. Or, more precisely, those cucks all might but it won't be enough to pull a majority in the House. Vanishingly few (R)s in the house, even the immigration squishes, are going to vote for an amnesty months before reelection.


Maybe, though maybe not. I'm especially skeptical of any appeal to the west coast. I'd write it off to work on the old industrialized areas (including the Northeast).


Yeah, the two big questions are 1) Why are things so much 'better' inside the Hajnal Line? and 2) Do the attributes of the populations inside the Hajnal Line that make them better also render those populations unable to stop the invasion?

Joshua Sinistar said...

The Lincoln Party doesn't like "winning". Having the votes makes them out as traitors. As the wishy washy minority party, they can promise blue sky and just say,"We don't have the votes." Now that they have 51 votes in the Senate, they say they need 60. The Dems didn't need 60 for OBAMACARE.
Pop goes these weasels. Adelson wants amnesty. They go and beg on their knees to that Israeli's Mansion in Vegas. He took over after the Lansky's lost their lease. The Giancanas aren't running around anymore.

China just monetized their Renminbi in OIL. BRICs is now a REAL COMPETITOR to The Federal Reserve's petrodollar. The Real Estate is being sold briskly. I think maybe China is dumping their huge petrodollar reserves into Real Estate. A shitload of ghetto properties are suddenly being sold to Shell Companies. The Chinese seem to be dumping the petrodollar discretely, in my opinion.

Feryl said...

"I think the DOJ-FBI clique (which includes Mueller) figured that Trump was at least as corrupt as the Clintons and Obama. Once they established some sort of pretext for spying on Trump, they'd find all sorts of slush funds, pay-for-play deals, money laundering, favors for old cronies in Atlantic City, etc. What's more is that I think the greater Beltway believed that as well."

Perception is reality; Nixon was perceived as a crook overnight, after it became clear how much he'd bungled the watergate scandal. That meant that not only did the establishment of each party quickly abandon him, but so too did virtually all of each party's rank and file (keep in mind that there was less stupid partisanship in the early 70's so voters were more tolerant of interparty camaraderie). He was toast.

The "problem" with Trump is that at least 40% of the population believes in him though they don't necessarily agree with everything he says or does. They often attribute blame for bad events on the forces surrounding Trump which are generally considered to be beyond most of Trump's control. Such forces include the GOP elite and a decent chunk of the lower GOP bench.

What's infuriating to the anti-Trumpers is that nothing is sticking to Trump. Not accusations of treason, or accusations of tax improprieties, or accusations of mental instability. Note that all of these things and more have been tried, and MS polling and esp. insider polling reveals that many Trump voters aren't ready to kick Trump to the curb. Until the elites can somehow swing Trump's base against him, impeachment is not going to happen. Impeachment would require the cooperation of the GOP, who would be toast if they went along with it. The crowd that insists on Trump's inevitable impeachment keeps forgetting these key details. It doesn't matter how enraged anti-Trumpers are, or how embarrassed most elites ( the less "poorly educated") are by Trump.

Impeachment requires bi-partisan disdain for the president among most political elites as well as each party's base being alienated from the president. Without both things occuring, impeachment can't happen. Bush was too close to GOP elites to be unloaded, and Trump is too popular with his base to be unloaded.

BTW, elites moved heaven and earth in 2016 to find something that would kill Trump. The harassment stuff would've sunk him if it was the 90's and Trump was a holier than thou douche. But Trump's not the type, and it's a different era these days. They didn't really have much else, aside from some contractor and employee related spats that are to be expected from someone who has run several businesses for over 40 years. And ironically, this stuff might have reinforced the fact that here is a guy who's done far more over the last 40-50 years than a typical lawyer/activist/ideologue type, who carefully manicures their behavior and statements to never get caught saying or doing anything "controversial", or reckless, or embarrassing. It humanizes Trump and makes him seem more authentic than yet another careerist lawyer/activist/lobbyist/academic type, which we don't need in a time of urgent action.

Audacious Epigone said...


Until the elites can somehow swing Trump's base against him

This is why the calls were so vociferous among quisling cucks and leftists that Trump stop tweeting after he was elected president ("beneath the dignity of the office", "commander in chief, not twitterer in chief", etc)--as long as he has the 50m person pipeline that is twitter, his base will not abandon him, short of hard evidence that he did something extremely bad. Given that they've been looking for that extremely bad thing for years now and have nothing to show for it reveals that there is nothing to be found. Ergo, Trump will not be impeached.

Feryl said...

“Radical anti-progressives” recognize that many institutions — the academy, media, entertainment and the courts — have been co-opted and corrupted by the left. And as these institutions are not what they once were, they no longer deserve the respect they once had."

This if from an article about MS conservatives who shy away from conflict with the establishment. I think this stems from, hat tip to Agn., the inability of conservatives to look at things on a group/collective basis. They get stuck in individual terms and as such, they'd prefer not to make judgements on large swaths of the population. They also get stuck in "just world" thinking, where rich people, winners, smart people, etc. get the accolades and the good breaks. Thus, why do we need to get carried away, why unite and swarm the opposition? Some cosmic force will smite the traitors, idiots, etc. Enjoy what you earn, let other people enjoy what they earn, and let's just leave each other alone.

The Left makes total judgement on groups of people deemed to be corrupt, backward, etc. They're lumped in together and dehumanized. Each person represents a kind of humanity gone wrong, gnarled up. Better to snuff them out en masse instead of letting them spread their poisonous ideas to even more people. It's interesting that even Hitler had his "good jews", and loyal and talented homosexuals were welcome in the upper ranks of the Nazis (why do you suppose the Nazis dressed so well?). This indicates that at least before he went totally nuts, even a a very far Rightist took people on a case by case basis, rather than immediately swear vengeance against anyone associated with a movement or idea (or ethnic group or lifestyle) considered to be undesirable.

Feryl said...

One thing that's surreal about the last couple years is that X-ers and Millennials on the Right have embraced Milo Yiannopoulos. But the Left is incapable of tolerating ideas that were considered perfectly mainstream as recently as 2006. Indeed, as that 1980 NY times article showed there are things once promoted by Democrats that would now be grounds for a severe beating by "woke" Millennials.

When the Left senses that they're losing ground on whatever their latest cause celebre is, they become hysterical and ferociously confrontational. The Right prefers to listen and consider, even WRT people who superficially don't belong on the Right, while the Left is incredibly territorial and once a certain line is crossed, you are a marked man. With the influence of judgemental Boomers waning, these tendencies are more likely to be revealed. Without Boomers, the Right is less obnoxious, but the Left's inherent obnoxiousness and vindictiveness never really goes away. It only diminishes somewhat with the aging of a preachy cohort (those born in the 40's, those born in the late 80's/early 90's), who become more muted as they age.

Feryl said...

The Right's traditional association with "racism" and "nativism" are probably more driven by a desire to stave off high density living than they are by sweeping and judgemental thinking. Conservatives don't want their back yards filled in; they want peace and quiet. When you see large numbers of people swarming into your country, it's threatening; they had their own turf, why did they abandon it so they could walk on mine?

It's not so much that they're foreign; it's not really who they are per se, it's more what they're doing. Again, going off of Agn., conservatives want open space and stability. They don't want anyone, much less loquacious blacks or indred MENA's, descending on conservative communities en masse. Conservatives always and without much regret forfeit cities to liberals and rootless people, and keep their fingers crossed that the riff raff stays in line and stays away from homogeneous less populated areas. The folly of this kind of thinking is that eventually development reaches a certain level and density loving liberals restrict further development. That's why Western Europe is the most liberal place in the world. Amongst Europeans, high density and difficult development/AFF are closely associated with liberalism. As it also is with blacks and Hispanics, seemingly. Asians are the one exception; Asians are still quite traditionalist in outlook, no matter where they live. Even Japan is no where near embracing, say, feminism, to the degree that it's embraced in Western Europe. Compare British and Japanese attitudes towards immigration. Hell, Celts and Anglos have had their issues, but those issues pale in comparison to the ethnic chauvinism that. fuels ongoing hostility between Asian ethnic groups.

Joshua Sinistar said...

These dark skinned invaders are uncivilized. They cannot assimilate. The dumping of the melting pot was not political at all. Its an admission that these invaders are too uncivilized and stupid to meet even the MINIMUM STANDARDS of behavior. The blacks could bitch about "slavery", the Mexicans have no historical claims here really. California was part of The Spanish Empire. It was all about White Supremacy with the Conquistadores.
The Brazilification is not simply a minor quality of life issue. Its about crime, noise, fecal matter everywhere and the Shitholistan people DO NOT WANT. The Environmental Movement has hitched their wagon to the OPPOSITE of what they said they wanted.

There are no more stories that can be told. No more tears for the dark skinned invaders. WAR IS INEVITABLE NOW.