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.


Jim Bowery said...

"And the 2%? Maybe they should've thought twice about destroying the nation that was the greatest thing that ever happened to them."

"Do not expect to see animals always behaving in such a way as to maximize their own inclusive fitness. Losers in an arms race may behave in some very odd ways indeed. If they appear disoriented and unsure of their footing, this may be only the beginning."

-- Richard Dawkins in "The Extended Phenotype" chapter "Host Phenotypes of Parasite Genes"


CJ said...

The 1950 census counted a U.S. population of 151 million; that was the situation boomers grew up in. Otherwise you seem entirely right. There won’t be any secession while large numbers of boomers are still voting, but it will come soon afterward. One desirable thing that is posssible now is to break up the giant states into smaller units. I’m surprised this hasn’t happened already.In 1800 the entire country had five million people, too few for even a middling state today.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

If you look at demographic trends on a county by county basis, you could slice no more than 5% of the US land mass and end up fixing most of the demographic issues in the country instantly. We'd have to build a pretty nice border wall to keep them all out of course.

We saw rumblings of secession within the last decade: first with Texas and now with California. The only thing of course is that once secession becomes a reality, that it could set off a cascade of secessions. I think the United States is held together by the idea that they're supposed to be united for some reason. As we see with many landlocked countries in Europe, you don't always need a port on an ocean to do trade and be wealthy. Besides, I'm going to guess that the Republic of California is going to be desperate to broker a deal with the White States of America when it becomes clear that they can't afford to have a country with 50 million people but only 5 million of them are taxpayers looking for a way out.

Personally I think it is going to be a long time until anything like that happens although as you point out, it is no longer as taboo of an idea as it used to be. Since many of us are millennials and xillennials, we could definitely see it play out in our lifetimes. Anyone older than 45 right now might miss out though, we'll see.

Dan said...

I am in favor of dissolution because smaller units generally represent their populations much better and this way at least some states might resemble heritage America. But there are at least a couple of big challenges:

(1) Isn't the divide somewhat a rural / urban divide? How would that work? Even my state of Maryland is a red state in the panhandle and Eastern Shore.

(2) Dissolution probably isn't GDP-maximizing and GDP is front and center for the powers that be (and also for the regular public to the extent that electorates have little patience for hardship or recession).

(3) See how our deep state tries to destroy the duly elected Trump who was elected normally and then consider what they would do to someone leading a the movement of secession. Secession, which I favor, actually IS treason from the POV of FedGov. They wouldn't have to even act conspiratorially. They could simply arrest the leaders of a secession movement using the laws on our books. Catalonia voted independence in 2017 and then Spain simply arrested all the leaders. Trump got only 4% in DC -- they protect the status quo here.

What would have to happen first is for a fiscal calamity to break DC, but I don't know how likely that is. We've gradually devalued our debts in the past.

I think there is at least hope for future Republican victories because I expect future economic decline and then people will want to change parties.

Jig Bohnson said...

What about the situation where currently blue states are net donors and red states are net takers? Random Dude mentions a succeeded California containing only 5 million tax payers and 35 million takers, but as it is California sends way more money to DC than it gets back. In the immediate aftermath of a breakup, it is red America that will be worse off financially than blue will. That definitely might reverse given time as businesses and individuals leave mismanaged, ethnic nepotistic Malaysia-like blue areas for red ones, but at the beginning it will be tougher going for the Republic of West Virginia than the California Republic.

Tad said...

I would expect "active military" to include many people who also fall into the categories "non whites under 30" and "whites under 30". The average percent of these two categories of young people is 48%, which is very close to the 47.4% of active military. Perhaps it is the youth who tend to expect (hope for?) dissolution, and the categories with higher percentages are reflective of the young people who also fall into that category. Just trying to make sense of this.

Tad said...

Oops, should have checked my writing. The average of the two was 47.5%; I mistakenly used the number for Hispanics instead of young whites.

sykes.1 said...

I am 74 and not a boomer. Nonetheless, I support breaking up the US into numerous smaller countries. Czechia is about the right size. The Clinton archepelago is a good starting point.

We need to do this to get rid of the Deep State/Cabal and their endless colonial wars and wars of aggression. The only way to stop them is to eliminate their seat of power and the obscene US military.

However, there will have to be some large scale population transfers, not all of them voluntary, to make it work.

Jim Bowery said...

There is a way of avoiding secession but it requires what many would mistakenly denounce as Boomer-posting about "Da Consteetushun" aka "Civic Nationalism".

I may be the only "Boomer" who recognizes not only that the 10th Amendment reserves to the States the power to control who resides in their territories, but that this is an essential power to support the First Amendment's freedom of religion via assortative migration (previously established by the Peace of Westphalian doctrine of Cuius regio, eius religio). The 10th also reserves to the States power over social policy -- which is inseparable from "faith".

Moreover, you can only deal with problems of this nature if you properly deploy the military.

Vicente Fox exemplifies the problem, not just in Mexico, but among "leaders" in the "developing world" in general: He's been a major proponent of US open borders while lording it over a society that drives people to emigrate. Then, he supports voter registration in the US via embassies in the US. This is warfare against the US driven by oppression of his own people.

The solution: Rather than spending military trillions in the middle east to elicit hatred of the US and creating armies of "refugees" comprising military aged males that immigrate to the West, the US should use the military to take territory from these "leaders" in proportion to the "refugee" population fleeing them. Then, enforce the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution. The 10th allows States to control who resides in a State's territory -- including exiling existing residents. Consistent with the Commerce Clause, States control who enters even as a visitor. Then, make the new territories into States so that the invaders of States like California can be humanely repatriated -- or killed if they resist. The fact that they can vote in Federal elections is neither here nor there so long as the Federal Government is limited to its enumerated powers.

Now, having said all that, I totally get the skepticism that this can be achieved without bloodshed.

However, I've yet to see any of the "anti-boomer" ethno-nationalists propose a more workable solution.

All I see from them is A Culture of Critique -- absolutely refusing to stick their head above the parapet.

They're they fifth column of white nationalism, not guys like me.

Stodgy White Guy said...

Pan-secessionism, of the sort advocated by Ryan Faulk of The Alternative Hypothesis, does have a unique advantage over all other proposed solutions to the problem of American identity, in that it can theoretically marshal the support of groups that would normally side with the political center to oppose a White Nationalist or even milquetoast civic nationalist movement.

Stodgy White Guy said...

Additionally, I think nonwhite youth (and possibly White youth, though the stigma of “racism” may work against it) would be even more supportive of a hypothetical breakup along racial lines. A mestizo in Texas or a black in Alabama may not want their state to secede, since they might, rightly or wrongly, fear being stuck in a state run by “racist” Whites.

Anonymous said...


I don't think the younger generation cares very much for "Civic Nationalism," the Constitution, or even the enlightenment ideals they are founded on. We want a healthy tribe. Our culture, our people are so sick, so lost that we can't defend ourselves from conquering tribes. The Constitution only has meaning if the tribe living under it is healthy and self-aware enough to defend it. Muh Constitutional Republic won't, by itself, fix the opiate epidemic, the obesity epidemic, the loneliness epidemic or the gender wars.

Audacious Epigone said...


Outside of Israel, their future is precarious. Win all the battles and still lose the war...

I'm a big supporter of the 10th amendment center. Seems a pipe dream to think it or the ninth will ever be taken seriously again, though.


Thanks. I threw that out as a ballpark estimate when I was putting the post together and failed to notice it during the proofread to check its accuracy. Fixed now.

Random Dude,

It's hard to predict how the dissolution will play out exactly. A lot of the political calculations change. Most notably, foreign policy becomes much less important. Or more precisely it gets oriented towards the new neighbors who were formerly part of the US. All for the better, I think.


My guess is the dissolution has at its primary impetus a financial crash of the magnitude someone like Peter Schiff is predicting. There is nothing left in the central banks' toolkits (I don't take negative interest rates seriously). This is fundamentally different than 2008 and the demographics are far worse than in the 30s or even the 70s and 80s.

Wrt Trump, when he leaves office in 2020 or 2024 and virtually none of the MAGA agenda has happened, a lot of people will come to the justifiable conclusion that there is no national political solution for Heritage America. They'll start thinking in less narrow ways of how to go from there. Secession will continue to become more attractive.


This mostly (maybe entirely) comes from military spending and agricultural subsidies. We'll be fine.

Also, red states are a lot blacker than blue states are. Without the central bank, the welfare state becomes immediately impossible for the breakaway states to maintain. A lot of the bottom will leave those states as a result.


Yes, that's probably a lot of it, though results for active duty don't filter more narrowly than for those under 50. Sample sizes aren't large enough for those under 30, for example.


Many people think dissolution is impossible because of the Deep State. I suspect the system as we recognize it will collapse under the many unsustainable weights that have been placed up on it and then the thing to do will be to run away so as not to get stuck holding the bag.

Stodgy White Guy,

Simplifying massively, half the country hates the idea of president Trump. Half hates the idea of president Clinton. There's a way for both halves to avoid getting stuck with what they hate.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

Have we ever considered just giving away these territories or kicking them out? Imagine telling Puerto Rico that we're leaving by the end of the next year. Besides the massive flood of migrants (even though we are supposedly one of the most racist places in the world), what could be done about it? It's a poor, oppressed brown population now having their chance at their own destiny!

What if we decided to offer Mexico the first row of counties along the border? No wars, not asking Mexico to even pay for it but just take the first row of counties. Now we're 5-10 million Hispanics fewer. Do we really even need El Paso anymore? Would Arizona really lose out on much? It will probably end up being the most prosperous part of Mexico, at least for a few years until they drive it into the ground like they do every other place.

Look at the county by county demographics. You can slice enough of the Southwest and send it back to Mexico. Build a yuge and bigly wall at the new border. Arizona, New Mexico, California, and Texas still keep a vast majority of their states but it's the shitty brown parts that we can do away with. Mexico gains a propaganda victory and we enjoy a much whiter country. It won't be perfect because the Brown Menace is encroaching well into Colorado and Nevada but it won't be perfect. No secession plan is going to work cleanly. Going back to 1985 demographics is imperfect but still vastly preferable to what we have now.

Jim Bowery said...

I'm a big supporter of the 10th amendment center. Seems a pipe dream to think it or the ninth will ever be taken seriously again, though

It won't be so long as people misunderstand the evolutionary psychology of the Constitution hence its deep relevance to white identity.

There are an infinite number of ways to make a travesty of white culture and every one of them is energetically promoted from Jew-defined socialism to Jew-defined libertarianism precisely so that white culture can never be recognized as anything but something with shit smeared all over it. Then whites are _encouraged_ to attack these travesties rather than cleaning off the shit to see what their ancestors were trying to evolve.

Jonathan Centauri said...

I don't think so AE. Hate to burst your pacifism bubble, but its not gonna happen. Whites have tried for over a Century to dump the trash and escape. These freeloaders will make a big dramatic show of how "necessary" and "important" they are and that you are lucky to have them leeching off of you, but who are you kidding here? Every time a White family tries to escape these leeches, they say its "racism". The "racism" of White Flight. However, if you came back and wanted to restore some semblance of the Western World, then its "racism" again. You're an "invader" in your own country, "gentrifying" the ghetto trash.

War is always going to happen. There is no such thing as "peace". Peaceful coexistence is UNKNOWN in brown turd "communities". There is NO RULE OF LAW. There is NO SOCIAL TRUST. IQ is an important element. Dark creatures across Nature are far more aggressive. Dark appearance is a Marker of Aggression. Take the black cat. Its not a different species from other housecats. Its not superstition that makes people avoid them. THEY ARE NATURALLY MORE AGGRESSIVE. They get into more trouble and scratch up just about everything.
Politics is merely War in disguise. Obama changed everything. No more "go along to get along". The blacks are amazing stupid with almost no math skills. They live a lot in all black communities. Its not safe for man and beast around these dark monsters. Even grass cannot grow around them. The media has been "including" blacks into all their programs. They DO NOT BELIEVE that anyone but they would vote for Obama. These idiots now BELIEVE they are a numerical majority. The instant they saw Obama elected, they thought this was now the "New South Afreaka". Their genocidal intentions came right out, didn't it?

There is NO SHARE in Living Space. Geography is a Zero Sum Game. These idiots CANNOT LIVE WITH YOU, BUT CANNOT LIVE WITHOUT YOU.
You saw it for yourselves. The Genocidal Hate came right out.
US or them. You or the locust.

I find that an easy choice to make, MYSELF. ADMIT IT.

CIVIL WAR II has ALREADY BEGUN. Its about to Go Hot.
Hot, hot, hot.

216 said...

America Irredentia!

California is our Alsace-Lorraine.

216 said...

On a serious note, the higher support for self-determination among the young is counterweighed by the "muh retirement" sentiment of the old. This phenomenon appeared in the Scottish fake independence referendum. It also appeared in French and German recent elections. Older generations also had a higher percentage of veterans, and thus greater loyalty to the American Empire.

The term "secession" is forever doomed by its links to the Civil War Confederacy. The term "self-determination" should be preferred.


Karlin's post here is a good example of "generational eclipse", marijuana polling is a another example. If we don't get decisive action in the 2020s, I fear that our youth who are already a minority will passively accept dissolution.

216 said...


The stock market boom has been to the great benefit of Boomers and early Xers. It has meant little to the Millenials wracked with student debt, high bicoastal rents and avocado toast. Mass deporations and a shutdown of legal immigration would certainly boost wages, but this hasn't happened in the numbers needed to spike YT fertility to Israeli levels.

Jim Bowery said...

"self-determination" is precisely what the enemy cannot permit whites, which is why it can only come to blood.

Unlike others, who are in a continual state of war -- hot or not -- whites need a declaration of war that they see as moral. Once whites obtain that declaration the war will go hot hot hot and around 100 million will die, concentrated in the urban areas. Those are the, highly vulnerable, hives harboring the insects that know war primarily as an unconscious method of fraudulent cohesion -- not as hot violence.

216 said...


Non-whites and white liberals resent "privileged" conservative whites engaging in Flight. The former from envy, the latter for disunity.

The key is that we can't appear to be privileged, that's how China escapes criticism from white liberals. Non-whites critical of the CPC are either bought off, silenced or safely ignored.

The Afrikaners need to avoid any display of wealth, the Swart Maandag protest backfired when envious blacks noticed that the Boers had pickup trucks. In the US, the Charlottesville protest was outside agitators invading a liberal safe space. Jason Kessler had marginal support within the city and the UVA campus itself. How many non-white DSA supporters have hundreds of dollars of disposable income/free time to go protest in another state?

Audacious Epigone said...

Random Dude,

That's a better version of the benefits of Calexit. I was listening to Pat Buchanan the other day on a podcast and he rather matter-of-factly asserted that the Southwest is likely lost to the US. It is already effectively part of Latin America and it will continue to become more brown and less white.

Let's use their high time preference against them to ensure a smooth transition. Make a big onetime transfer payment to Puerto Rico for independence. Do the same to Mexico with the garbage counties along the southern border. The ROI is incalculable--and unquestionably worth every penny.


You may be right. Whatever the chance for peaceful separation is, though, it declines with each passing day. The sooner it's tried, the better.


With regards to the terminology, that may be giving the general public too much credit. On the one hand, vanishingly few know secession was first pushed in Massachusetts. But on the other I'm not sure how many people realize the American "civil war" was of course not a civil war at all but a secessionist movement. I get the impression many (most?) people think it was a war between the North and the South over whether or not slavery would be legal in the country as a whole.


This is exactly what the Zuitlanders in South Africa are preparing for.

Jonathan Centauri said...

AE, the blacks and browns NEED White taxpayers just to eat. You cannot separate "peacefully" from a leech. These ibeciles say they want their "own" separate nation, but THEY NEED WHITE TAXPAYERS TO FEED THEM AND MAINTAIN ANYTHING. This cannot be done peacefully.
Mexico seems to be a mystery to all of you. They HATE El Norte, but not necessarily White Men. The Father of Mexico is Hernando Cortez, not Montezuma. These pathetic Mestizo peons may be all about "Aztecs" when they want the Free Cheese, but in Mexico, these Indios are a HATED minority. The Real Aztecs DO NOT EVEN HAVE A RESERVATION. These "worldly" globalist jet setter buffoons DO NOT KNOW SHIT ABOUT MEXICO.

Jimbo, there is no legalism in survival. I'm not about to wait for Donald Duck to "declare" anything. He's too busy with his banker wars and shilling for his creditors.

216 said...


The problem with territorial concessions is that Hispanic populations are on the increase nationwide, not just in border regions. Mexico doesn't want a Reconquista of the Southwest, they want a North American Union. There is nil support for PR independence, living standards are better as a colony than the neighboring DR. We'd be looking at a century of alimony payments to be rid of them. On the plus side, LatAm fertility is in decline, only Guatemala/Honduras are well above 2.1 tfr.

We have to find some way of subsidizing the fertility of the responsible middle class, while ending all subsidies for lower class fertility. That, and only that, will get us a favorable demographic majority. And unlike Israel, we have to do it without direct state support, and generous support from a wealthy diaspora and a guilt-ridden superpower.

White Flight to Belarus?

Sid said...

At this point I see a lot of discontent and ever falling "social capital." But for a genuine secession movement to arise, there must be a rise in regional loyalty and association - asabiyah if you will - as well as a decline in national loyalty.

Honestly, I don't see a rise in regional loyalty. The big divisions in the US are between different races, as well as goodwhites vs badwhites. SWPLs in NYC, Boston, San Francisco, and Seattle largely see each other as being part of a larger team. Good luck forming a cohesive country out of the Clinton Archipelago.

The problem also applies to red states. If the South were to break away and form a Neo-Confederacy, well, good luck to them finding a way to build an ethno-state with their substantial black population!

In short, the problem with secession would be that relatively few people would finally be free of the other people they dislike. It's not so much that the US is an artificial empire consisting of various pre-existing countries that dislike each other. Our problem is that we consist of races and a split majority race population which don't like each other, but are scattered and dispersed across a continent.

Imagine if Ashkenazi Jews declared they wanted secession from Europe in the 19th century. Yes, they would have enjoyed their constellation of ghettos - and that's roughly similar to the situation we're in.

Jonathan Centauri said...

Yugoslavia was a lot like that too. However when Tito toppled and fell, that "diversity" went back to Balkanization right quick. This "diversity" is forced and fed. When the EBT Card doesn't get refilled, and the jackboots don't enforce the shibboleths, the real opinions will become obvious. Without the Feds to FORCE TOGETHER Oil and Water, it will Naturally separate. Violence is built into human nature you will find. There is a great deal of anger built into this. This is straining even now, like a spring wound way too tight. Without the feds to keep it from flying apart, and feeding the leeches, this is a Giant Powderkeg READY TO BLOW UP IN EVERYONE'S FACES.
This will be FAR WORSE than Yugoslavia. The Balkans had a built in history to fall back on. Most of the hostile aliens will either have to leave or be wiped out. The blacks will not make it probably. You can see from Hurricane Katrina, these imbeciles NEED Uncle Sugar to Feed and Care for their dumb ass.

Feryl said...

"Honestly, I don't see a rise in regional loyalty. The big divisions in the US are between different races, as well as goodwhites vs badwhites. SWPLs in NYC, Boston, San Francisco, and Seattle largely see each other as being part of a larger team. Good luck forming a cohesive country out of the Clinton Archipelago."

But this largely a repeat of the situation we had in the early 20th century, when high levels of immigration from 1870-1920 led to something like 30-40% of the population being foreign born (and that's not even taking into account their 1st generation American descendants). Actually, we're in better shape now*, as foreign born people are still at a much lower percent of the pop. than they were a hundred years ago. Furthermore, birth rates were probably higher before the Great Depression hit than they've been in the 1970's, early 1980's, and most of Obama's presidency.

*We certainly are getting a greater variety of immigrants now more than ever before, but you also have to realize that before 1870 most white Americans were Brit-Celtic-Teutonic Protestants, so getting so many Italians/Poles/Czechs/Jews/Irish-Catholic immigrants, was almost as much of a game-changer as what we're going through now, vis-a-vis large alterations of ethnic identity in America. Most whites aren't as woke as Ann Coulter, who considers Americanness to be descended from Mayflower Brits and who more or less openly is a Protestant Anglophile, with concentric rings of Americanness based on:

1)When you arrived here
2) Your religion and ethnicity's closeness to Ango-Protestants

Feryl said...

On a serious note, the higher support for self-determination among the young is counterweighed by the "muh retirement" sentiment of the old. This phenomenon appeared in the Scottish fake independence referendum. It also appeared in French and German recent elections. Older generations also had a higher percentage of veterans, and thus greater loyalty to the American Empire."

Stefen Molyneux likes to make the point that the now retiring generation in Britain and France thinks that the younger generations, be they white or non-white, are going to be enthusiastically supporting them for the rest of their days, even as:

1)The older generation largely failed to adequately reproduce in Europe
2) The culture on their watch turned hedonistic/nihilistic/atheist
3) The neo-liberal gang rape of 1st world economies and third world stability
4) The neo-liberal/multi-culturalist empire maintained by most Boomer elites continues to be arrogantly pushed in the face of widespread discontent.

I predict that throughout much of the West, a class of populists will emerge who are anti-military and anti-captialism, There's way too much to be electorally had in the coming election cycles, when the ginormous Boom generation begins to fade in the election booth, and just as importantly, their elites who set the policy agenda finally get some opposition from Gen X-ers and esp. Millennials who are tired of the modern West being the play-pen of airhead Boomers.

As capitalist greed is nipped in the bud, and military excesses are pared back, the incentive to swamp the 1st world with immigrants will decline.

Jim Bowery said...

"there must be a rise in regional loyalty and association"

That evinces ignorance of modern forms of warfare. Pay attention when I talk about the urban rural division. Characterizing the enemy as insect hives called "cities" is more than a Heinlein science fiction metaphor. It's an organic and physical reality. These metaorganisms exist and are at a very low level of evolutionary fitness, hence are highly vulnerable. They achieve internal cohesion among their "individual" insects through a combination of pheromones (verbal/memetic sophistry) and evolved/unconscious genetic interests. Pay attention, otherwise you'll be fighting not just the last war but the war before the war before the last war.

Perhaps Audacious should run the urban vs rural voting tally for Trump as exoteric outreach.

Jim Bowery said...

On a serious note, the higher support for self-determination among the young is counterweighed by the "muh retirement" sentiment of the old.

You'd be surprised at how many old men would like nothing better than to go out fighting for their nation if only they had the leadership. Living through the decades of domestic degradation while "national security leaders" offered only foreign wars has left a huge population of old men that are arming themselves under the Second Amendment.

And they do have something to bring to the fight: Knowledge of the infrastructure they built that is now occupied by the enemy and material resources.

Look at the voting patterns by age.

On the other hand, you can continue to mock "Muh Constitution" and throw away this resource, since obviously considering it possible you may be wrong about The Constitution's Original Intent is more important to you than is the white race.

Corvinus said...

Put in succinct terms, it is virtually a lock that there will be no Second Civil War in the United States and no partitioning or breakup, whether it be peaceful dissolution or a violent overthrow of the entire system. Besides, I highly doubt any of the posters here are ready to don jackboots and scalp their enemies should it come to a full-fledged war. More likely that people will carve out their small redoubts. It's really an Alt Right fantasy.

Audacious Epigone said...


Political dissolution comes first and then from there we organically move towards de facto ethnostates. Jonathan's right--without the coercive power of the state, segregation happens naturally.


The foreign-born population percentage today is near historical highs for the country. The lowest levels were in the 1950s and 1960s. And of course in absolute terms our numbers are the highest ever.

Audacious Epigone said...


Unfortunately R-I doesn't ask about community type. It would be interesting to see the urban/suburban/rural divide.

Jim Bowery said...

Corvinus: Put in succinct terms, your ignorance is exceeded only by your cowardice.

Jim Bowery said...

U.S. Has Spent $2.8 Trillion on Terrorism Fight, Study Finds
Figure includes spending on wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria

Put in succinct terms, the US national security apparatus has been hijacked for decades during which national security has been increasingly undermined by immigration from cultures hostile to the Constitution. In reality, the US has no military. The US has no intelligence community. The US has no national security apparatus. That's why The People are arming themselves and why those hostile to the Constitution's original intent are in a panic about Trump's rhetoric about immigration. Immigration by anti-Constitution cultures whose people take a fraudulent "citizenship" oath (to "uphold and defend the Constitution"), is their primary strategy. The "alt-right fantasy" is that shitting on the Constitution's original intent just because Jews have already used it for toilet paper, is a winning strategy. Very well, the alt-right can join the party late and be accorded less influence. Such is the fate of extended phenotypes of Jews, parasitically castrated and left to attack their own vital essence.

The enemy has succeeded only in creating eusocial insect hives called "cities" -- the organic and physical realities of which are that of very poorly adapted metaorganisms, highly vulnerable to attack.

This is going to get very ugly.

Black Death said...

Political dissolution or secession may sound good in theory but would be difficult to institute in practice. If you do it state by state, there will be huge problems. California and New York, large blue states, have millions of conservative folks living mostly in small towns and rural areas. Are they all going to have to move? Ditto for liberals living in deeply red states - do they have to go too? What about closely divided states such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wisconsin? They went (barely) red in the last election. No matter which way they would decide to go, almost half of their populations will be unhappy.

I am sympathetic to the feelings for dissolution as a way to get us out of our current mess, but, in practice, it doesn't seem too likely. The problems are just too great.

216 said...

Black Death,

A slow motion population exchange is how it would happen. California and New York conservatives could simply move over the border to Oregon and Pennsylvania, respectively. That would tip the balance, and possibly encourage the leftist natives to move out. We could even imagine an app that allows people to swap residences with a political opponent. Dissolution is one prospect, insurrection and autonomy are other possibilities.

There are enough Afrikaners to become an outright majority in the Northern Cape province. There are enough SA whites to outright purchase Namibia in exchange for their suburban houses in Cape Town and Johannesburg. Willpower is what is needed, the Zionists had it and we need to find it. Too many otherwise conservative people won't give up an upper-middle class metropolitan lifestyle. French Jews apparently prefer Montreal over a West Bank trailer park.

Sid said...


I think everyone but a handful of extreme psychopaths care about their family and their friends. I also think that most people, in varying degrees, are hardwired to care about their "tribal identity." In the Paleolithic, your tribal identity consisted of the people you were surrounded by on a daily basis.

Today, it's more abstract, more arbitrary. I get and respect the guys who declare we should adhere to a Pan-European loyalty, but the 19th century nativists would be shaking our heads at our accepting Irish Catholics and Sicilians into our ranks as "good enough."


I'm trying to think of a good comment to your reply, but what you wrote to me reads like it's peripheral to what I was writing.

Is your argument that people from rural areas make for better soldiers than people from urban areas? Yes, I've heard that a life of hunting and tracking in the woods means you will be much more situationally aware on the battlefield.

Modern warfare, however, largely relies on using advanced weapons as quickly and ruthlessly as possible. 10 fat guys with rifles could easily murder 150 Neanderthals in perfect physical shape.

In the event of political dissolution and subsequent waves of ethnic cleansing, the guys who get the advanced weapons win. It's anyone's guess on who will get what when.


Thank you, that clarifies a lingering question I had about what political dissolution would entail.

I suppose I support dissolution as a last resort. If we get Kamala Harris in 2020 and she promises to Invade the World, Invite the World with abandon until the whole thing comes crashing down, then it may very well make sense for whites to "fall back and regroup" somewhere over the 2020s.

That said, I think the cost of political dissolution without clear political boundaries established would be about as painful as it gets. Unfortunately, "organically moving" to ethnostates when you've had ethnic groups scattered and dispersed over a wide area looks a lot like the Balkans in the 90s and Syria today.

Corvinus said...


All your lies are belong to us.

The Alt Right and those who are adamant about secession are just hoping for the shoe to drop, for the last domino to fall. And then, magically, the leaders of the Alt Right, with armed with guns in one hand and with ideologies in another hand, will somehow emerge from the smoke and say “Here is your salvation” to the general population. However, as Black Death clearly alluded to, there are tens of millions of people who are not excited by the prospect of being demanded to move to a designated region that reflects their racial/ethnic identity and/or political ideology. Where they live is their home and community. In this vein, dissolution and partition, especially through peaceful means, is a pipe dream.

The question still remains—will YOU be there with you rifle ready to aim and fire on those deemed “the enemy”? That requires the killing of young people—teenagers, toddlers, and infants—to prevent them from bearing future leftists and cucks. Besides, the Jews and banksters and elites have a “in case of emergency, break glass” contingency plan already in place. Do you think they will give up their stranglehold on power without a fight?


“I also think that most people, in varying degrees, are hardwired to care about their "tribal identity.”

And for most American whites, his or her “tribal identity” being an American, NOT an Anglo or white European. Ultimately, it is their personal decision. Certainly increasing numbers of white people may be compelled to refer to themselves as an Anglo or white European, but that would take extraordinary and monumental shifts in ideology over a long period of time for them to "come around" to the "proper way of thinking".

“but the 19th century nativists would be shaking our heads at our accepting Irish Catholics and Sicilians into our ranks as "good enough.”"

Exactly why this notion of white Americans eventually becoming unified behind the cause of their own racial identity is farcical and fanciful.

“Unfortunately, "organically moving" to ethnostates when you've had ethnic groups scattered and dispersed over a wide area looks a lot like the Balkans in the 90s and Syria today.”

America does not have the type of history like the Balkans and Syria to fall back upon. Perpetual discord between groups of people that inevitably leads to widespread violence is a feature there.

216 said...


Scottish fake indpendence and Brexit had inverse voting patterns by age. English pensioners apparently believe they can bootstrap the UK back into cultural conservatism by the means of one vote. Most Brexit supporters indicated they don't care if there is "significant economic damage".

Sanders/Corbyn NuLeft populism appears to be an Anglosphere phenomenon rooted in spiraling university tuition fees. Nothing like it has appeared in Continental Europe. Germany universities are tuition-free, but have restrictive admissions and no real Ivy/Oxbridge couterpart. Germany youth prefer the suicidal Greens over the AfD 2-1. Germany spends little on its military, only the UK, France, Poland and the Baltics hit the 2% GDP requirement. The EU countries have labor laws that I can't imagine passing here without a seismic shift leftward, no US state has ever copied California's slightly worker-friendly laws.

I don't see any sparks of a prospective Iranian-style Revolution emerging in the West, though we sorely need it.

216 said...


Half of the Roman lands are in Islamic hands. Only Spain was taken back. Pan-European is a red herring, Pax Romana is something worth striving for.

Jim Bowery said...

Is your argument that people from rural areas make for better soldiers than people from urban areas?

No. My argument is, to a first order approximation, that the enemy is not people but meta-organisms that incorporate people as components via the same kind of mechanisms that eusocial insect hives incorporate individual insects as reproductively specialized components of a meta-organism: parasitic castration to produce sterile worker casts nowadays known as "bugmen" or the low fertility rate white population in general supporting reproduction of invading hives. These meta-organisms are the enemy -- not their components. Seeing their components as individuals is hallucinatory. While there is no strict equivalence to a Queen bug or Brain bug (to use a Heinlein metaphor), hives have highly centralized metabolic pathways that can be easily disrupted by modern modes of warfare.

This disruption causes those organisms pain. In the throes of agony the components tend to wake up from their zombie conditioning and may be dealt with more as humans with whom communication is remotely possible. It is at that point The Declaration of War provides the conditions of surrender. That is one of 2 reasons a Declaration of War is key. The other is that whites, being congenitally individualistic, need formalization of the condition under which they will give up their freedom and of the condition under which they will be released to freedom. If you fucking idiots keep ragging on "individualism" as it has been defined by Jewish libertarians you'll never recognize the strength individual integrity brings to a war machine bound by oath.

Jim Bowery said...

the Jews and banksters and elites have a “in case of emergency, break glass” contingency plan already in place. Do you think they will give up their stranglehold on power without a fight?

Jews and banksters and elites have a "in case of emergency, break glass" the same way a child living in your household can hold his breath until he turns blue.

We built the civilization on which they biologically depend. We can take it down more easily and efficiently than they can because we know its structure intimately and know how to rebuild it from NOTHING. They'll die first and on the way they'll Come To Jesus.

Feryl said...

"The foreign-born population percentage today is near historical highs for the country. The lowest levels were in the 1950s and 1960s. And of course in absolute terms our numbers are the highest ever. "

I guess I was thinking back to S&Howe saying that the Lost Generation was like over 30% foreign born.

But yeah, if anything the current official % is probably not capturing the full extent of the real demographics, much like how I seriously doubt the veracity of California's official listed demographics beginning in the 80's and 90's, and nowadays almost every part of the country has seen surging numbers of immigrants to the point that it becomes difficult to tally exactly what the numbers are. When even my neck of the woods now has quite a few people from Asia, Africa, and the Middle East....Then.....We've got a situation.

BTW, 50's and 60's.....It was a middle class paradise for a reason. But it had to be destroyed, because, why exactly? Vietnam? Watergate? Cheeseball 50's pop culture not being "cool"?

Feryl said...

"Political dissolution comes first and then from there we organically move towards de facto ethnostates. Jonathan's right--without the coercive power of the state, segregation happens naturally. "

It's dawned on me that the US didn't find it necessary to annex more territory, because.....We annexed foreign people, not foreign lands.

Every empire becomes multi-ethnic by default, as it expands into lands occupied by other tribes. However, what makes the US unique is that it did, in effect, nothing to preserve the ethnic make-up of the empire's seat. Typically an empire chauvinistically believes itself to be the creation of a talented and skilled race who are entitled to expand across the world so as to feed the growth and power of a particular race.

The Soviets were an exception to this, as they had a Marxist utopian view of humanity (though that didn't, for whatever reason, materialize into Eastern Europe accepting hordes of Asians). The Western countries in the 19th and early 20th century were all to varying degrees believers in racial supremacist ideologies, as we see with pre-WW2 immigration policies that highly favored NW Euro whites in the US. But the horrors of Nazism sparked all Western countries into a fit of racial self-loathing which has expressed itself in countries like England accepting more non-whites in the space of 50 years than they did in like, the previous 2000 years.

It is interesting that "primitive" notions of empire, conquest, and "total" war (such as training massive numbers of warriors to hate and destroy "enemy" tribes) appear to have fallen progressively further into discredit among Europeans over the last several hundred years (The US could've, but didn't, exterminate the feather Indians, choosing instead to exile them to less desirable land while waging war, off and on for a while, against uncooperative chieftans, while the British left relatively little genetic imprint in say, India), with NW Europe being the leaders against "the old ways". The conquistadors were quite brutal, I suppose, but nowadays Spain is shockingly deferential to neo-liberals and globalists. It would seem that these "enlightened" trends about man's duty to aspire to something beyond ethnic warfare really began in England and France, and have since spread elsewhere in Europe. Indeed white Western countries now habitually shame themselves for anything smacking of ethnic nationalism, when in reality these same countries have leapt further "beyond" EN than any other countries in history.

It sometimes is said that whites lost there balls in WW1 and WW2, when many skilled and high-T men perished. But that doesn't explain ultimate cucks like John Brown (who came from his era's Boomer generation, btw) wallowing in racial self-abasement long before any World War. And the US sustained relatively few casualties in either war (compared to Europe), yet we became ahorrendous influence upon the West, largely setting in motion most noxious "modern" trends however much Europe later equaled or exceeded America's decadence.

It just may be that America developed the most cuck form of empire imaginable; we seldom do that much physical and immediate damage to other countries, preferring instead to develop global reach via financial and immigration arrangements that clearly are harmful to most of America's native born whites while being highly beneficial to foreigners and a small slice of the native elite.

Dan Hess said...

I think the Gordian knot is too tight and complicated to simply untie. We will need to cut through it a different way.

Genetic selection and genius sperm banks widely available?

Mental power and brain -- boosting drugs and treatments?

Breakup could occur in the very long run, but for that to happen, there needs to very bad times first. The Soviet Union broke up after it went bankrupt. Israel permitted to shoot invaders like no other country because there was the Holocaust.

Trump is paddling upstream at the moment because GDP is highest in history, unemployment is lowest in history, the first lady and the first daughter are the prettiest of each America has ever had, and smartphones are as smart as they have ever been. Call it the curse of too much winning. As the Derb has taught, conservatism is built on doomism, which isn't selling as well right now.

All that said, Trump is setting a really high bar for GDP, per capital GDP, crime rate and many other things. Good luck to Democrats who want to sustain that.

As I have said before, the reign of Trump could go down as the high point in the history of everything. America was already tottering at nosebleed heights and Trump pushes up it a smidgen more.

Declining global IQs due the collapse of fertility among global smarts which began 50 years ago while global dims have been extremely fertile is the biggest event of the last millennium or more.

Like Fermat scribbled his theorem in the margins, here I scribble in the margins my unproven theorem that Trump sits at the apex (GDP, technological development, global life expectancy) of the total timeline of world history. Its a bold call but there is my flag.

If civilization itself reverses then many aspects of conservatism have a very bright future.

I think I should make this a book to grant myself something like immortality. I will call it, The Top of World History.

Don't investors get glory when they call tops?

Dan Hess said...

To memorialize the above comment, I am faithfully Daniel Anton Hess of Rockville, MD.

Feryl said...

According to https://historyunfolding.blogspot.com/, Western Boomers became hateful towards Western Civ. because they held it responsible for racism, colonialism, and senseless war. That every country and time period in history had seen such things didn't matter; a young and powerful generation simply hated their forbears and everything they ever stood for, and the only way we would avoid wrenching youth-driven changes, that would resound as said youth aged, is if "the older generation" (as the Boomers always scoffed) handled everything perfectly in the 60's and 70's. But that's not what happened, what with Vietnam and Bull Conner being an embarrassment that all generations were quick to denounce. With "the older generation" itself freely admitting to to dropping the ball, it only served to heighten the Boomer's sense of arrogant wisdom beyond it's years.

With "the establishment" itself self-declaring it's failure, it's no wonder that Boomers rejected every piece of tradition and authority that they possibly could, thus explaining why crime and drug use would hit record levels in the late 70's, as every negative behavioral trend of the 60's got progressively worse as we neared the 80's, before age and sheer exhaustion finally got Boomers to calm down in the 80's.

Feryl said...

"Declining global IQs due the collapse of fertility among global smarts which began 50 years ago while global dims have been extremely fertile is the biggest event of the last millennium or more. "

This is a problem that will correct itself; as we see with Ashkenazi Jews, there are drawbacks to being a nerd who can't throw a strong punch.

Westerners have increasingly come to look down on violence, manual labor, and tribalism. But since most tribes are selected to embrace such brutish aspects of life, it creates an inevitable clash between tribes.....Esp. when the trad. tribes sense weakness, and pounce on the nerdy and decadent cultures.

Ash. Jews should be less concerned about white gentile benefiting pogroms (at a time when most whites abhor the Alt-Right), and more concerned that the white gentiles themselves are in effect being genocided off the face of the Earth.

The other obvious "self-correction" is that nature stands in judgement of those who are too stupid and weak to.....Reproduce adequately. Western blue state values are specifically designed to punish reproduction, which is why urban and coastal birth rates among the smarty set are so abysmal.

The fact that Western white Boomers voluntarily chose to not propagate their genes to the degree that previous generations did is all you need to know. There's really no excuse for not having more kids in the late 60's-1990's, when the Boomer generation certainly did not face very daunting economic reasons for not having kids, and to the extent that there were economic difficulties it was due heavily to the very culture that the Boomers created, where couples/families strove to be the biggest and best at everything, while programs and measures designed to keep things comfortable and affordable were attacked by Boomers. Private affluence (for hedonistic Boomers who often had one or no children), public squalor (which Millennials abhor and have had to deal with their whole life, against their wishes).

At this point there are legit economic reasons for many Gen X-ers and Millennials not having kids; as usual, Silents and Boomers did things out of choice, newer generations did them out of necessity*

*to wit, those born from 1920-1950 have had it made unless we're talking about the biggest idiots of that cohort, 1951-1972 have been moderately fortunate, and post-1972 births have been an unmitigated disaster WRT to economic prospects. Not coincidentally those born after 1972 appear to be the most hostile towards the GOP, who were the initial champions of neo-liberal whoredom in the 70's and 80's, and the GOP will also foot the bill for militarism which to younger eyes was first seen under Reagan and reached stupefying heights in the Bush era, which Trump hasn't come down from.

Jim Bowery said...

The correlation between county population density and Clinton's margin over Trump is 47%.

Here's the scatterplot.

Jim Bowery said...

Western Boomers became hateful towards Western Civ. because they held it responsible for racism, colonialism, and senseless war.

Boomers came to hate prior generations and their very blood hence future generations because that's what Jews indoctrinated them to do.

It happened over a thousand years ago with JudeoChristianization too -- just not as virulently.

First the Bible, then Hollywood.

Get over your boomer thing already.

Audacious Epigone said...

Black Death,

All the problems are reduced in scale and the options to get away from them increased by dissolution. This is already a problem for middle American whites in California which is why they are leaving now. I think it's one of those things that seems unfathomable until suddenly it doesn't.


Exactly. The only thing whites are held back by is our will. It's why Trump's Poland speech was so good and why it sent the anti-whites into such apoplectic hysteria.


A few things we have going for us that the Balkans didn't and Syria doesn't is that Americans of all races are not particularly tied to any area of the country let alone any specific plot of land. That rootlessness combined with a huge amount of open land means dissolution could end up looking like a more explicit form of white flight. It doesn't have to be violent.


The idea that political dissolution necessitates some sort of apocalyptic struggle is a straw man. I was talking to a person the other day about secession and she started asking all kinds of questions about how things would work. Just like things work now, except instead of sending 25% of your paycheck to the federal government, you'd keep it and whatever it is the federal government does for you--basically nothing--) it will stop doing it for you.

A more subdued version of this the-world-will-come-crashing-down scare tactic was deployed with regards to Brexit. Nothing of the sort happened, and if Brexit actually gets carried out, nothing will.


Re: the 1950s and 1960s, it's a tad late now but I wish I would've responded to the "when was America great?" question with "when things in America were made in America--including the people".

I recall Heartiste pointing out that the modern US is the first global empire in history that exists almost entirely within its own borders.

the horrors of Nazism sparked all Western countries into a fit of racial self-loathing which has expressed itself in countries like England accepting more non-whites in the space of 50 years than they did in like, the previous 2000 years.

Steve Sailer calls this "Hitler's revenge".

At this point there are legit economic reasons for many Gen X-ers and Millennials not having kids

You're right, but we have to overcome them. Others have done more with less.


Our trade deficits keep getting worse. The increase in oil prices and the increase in domestic consumption we've engineered over the last decade is the only reason the trade deficits don't look totally catastrophic, but they're still getting worse. GDP is based on consumption, not production. The reason it is at record highs is because we're borrowing more than ever before to consume things we don't make.

You've boldly staked out a claim, one that at the very least will exist in the virtual archives (and on my hard drive) forever.

Jonathan Centauri said...

This constant invasion is an instant Apocalypse Kit. Small towns of like indeed folks bathed in traditions are being wiped out overnight by "diversity bombs". Hostile aliens fed by tax dollars and making previously safe communities into Mogadishu Overnight. There is NOTHING SUBTLE about this. Corvy is an enemy agent spreading disinfo. He was expecting El Trumpo to be Reagan 2.0 and his sad sack broken record sounds like the 1980s top 40 enemy hit parade. He's not this dumb, his community is full of his folks and he's reluctant to leave his nest. He watches the Lugenpresse and buys the Lies Wholesale.
Out in "flyover country" that BS smells to High Heaven. That's not even close to the facts on the ground out here. Our alien parasites are getting desperate. Those GDP numbers are Enron Accounting. El Trumpo looks like some cheap Brooklyn Con Man at this point. He went FULL BUSH LEAGUE within the First 100 days. He's not pulling pussy, he's pushing it now. Wall Street Mitty just said he would have done EXACTLY what Trump did his first year. That praise from Taxachusetts Romenycare is like a Nucular Winter for old man Trump.

eddie said...

ISTM the most likely way this happens is that

1) The Democrats continue to be increasingly dominated by their progressive wing, leading to
2) The GOP continuing to hold outsize power in Washington, owing to their built-in advantage in the senate and the electoral college, leading to
3) Progressives suddenly discovering the value of states rights, leading to
4) More of what we're already seeing from California, ending in succession.

The crucial question for succession is "who goes first." There aren't perfectly-clear regional blocs along the lines of the CSA, and it's simply not plausible for, say Oklahoma or Connecticut to secede all on their own. California fits the bill of having a strong state identity, their own coastline, and being big enough (and rich enough) both to make a viable nation on it's own, and to make militarily subduing said populace something nobody wants to see on TV.

There won't be large pitched battles; there will be terrorism, assassinations and the like, and heritage America will say "let 'em go." And after the first one goes, the rest of the divisions will follow. The real violence, IMO, will be intra-state -- when Seattle wants to join in the California Republic and Spokane says hell no, or when Jacksonville and Pensacola want to identify with the Dixie Coalition, but Miami wants to be a Latino ethnostate, and they go to war over who gets Orlando. etc.

Dan said...

I may be too pessimistic about things like future GDP for the simple reason that technology is amazing.

I was at the post office today. The USPS sorts all its mail automatically. The human capital requirement is low because machines can read literally every kind of horrible handwriting and sort everything rapidly and automatically.

I asked, do people read the ones with bad handwriting? No, machines figure out everything. This frees up a huge amount of human capital.

Technology is continuing its march and machines continue to be able to do more and more of every job.

The thing about technology is that it builds on itself. If a worker at an Amazon warehouse is replaced by a robot, that robot keeps churning out GDP at a tremendous rate along with all the other robots.

Peak GDP would assume that the workers are declining but when the workers are robots, that isn't the case.

Jonathan Centauri said...

Dan, robots don't pay taxes. They don't consume products. A monetized debt needs to be serviced. A shrinking tax base with accelerated unemployment will crash the debt clock. There is nowhere down to go with interest rates. The Feds just pay the interest now. They are approaching parity where all they borrow will go out to service the debts. There is a lot of debt not counted in the $21 Trillion. Its disguised as trust funds, offset costs, and pension liabilities. They can defer some, but not all. When they have no more surplus of borrowing to debt, its the parity point.

Anonymous said...

Dan Hess, I live near by, we should get together. Nobody ever does that any more.

Anonymous said...

Jim Bowery,

In your civil war scenario with 100 million deaths, which would be more deaths than there were during World War II, wouldn't such a conflict invite in foreign intervention? Why wouldn't NATO, Russia, China, etc intervene and split the country among themselves? Geopolitically, they'd be stupid not to. It would be the once in a lifetime chance to put the US out of commission forever as a geopolitical entity and actor.

A Friendly Individual said...

For an opposing perspective see:

Remember when Yugoslavia balkinised, were way way more internally ethnically coherent than basically every US state the only exception was Bosnia. If the US runs into internal disorder it'll be more like Lebanon than Yugoslavia, Ukraine, etc.

Dan said...

Based Victor Orban is very based, responding to accusations of anti-Semitism toward George Soros:


Read the letter where he clearly explains how he must defend against the anti-Semitism George Soros brings to Europe even though he gets to no thanks. He signs it, 'with diminishing hope, Victor Orban'

George Soros, destroyer of Jews. Victor Orban as Oscar Schindler. That is a powerful red pill, aimed at the heart of the Cathedral, because it actually has truth.

In Austria, Sebastian Kurz responds similarly.

The accusation of anti-Semitism is a powerful gun used to destroy people. Let it be correctly aimed at the insane open-borders cabal who are the ones genuinely making Europe unsafe for the Jews.

The retarded Nazi larpers could never engage in this kind of Jujitsu. In fact they do the opposite, bringing the establishment power down on their heads even though they pose zero threat to Jews.

lineman said...

I agree so best be in a position of greatest success when it all goes South...

lineman said...

If we can't do it here in the US what makes you think we could do it there?

lineman said...

Until people look at the situation as "how do you win a War" instead of how can I be free then we will be stuck in limbo and the left will keep advancing...Sad That...

lineman said...

Yep and they keep sawing away at the branch they are sitting on or another metaphor would be slowly strangling the goose...

lineman said...

I agree with you on the old men arming themselves because I've had a bunch come to me on advice on building or buying ARs and Handguns... Problem with old men being led by anyone that is a generation younger is like teaching old dogs new tricks...It is nigh impossible...I think it has to do with not wanting your whole life and thought process to be invalidated and the need to stubbornly cling to your beliefs so you won't feel lost and empty...When I say you I don't mean you personally because I'm pretty sure you get it...

lineman said...

It all depends I guess on where your perceptions originate from Circinus...From mine it looks entirely possible...

lineman said...

Damn spell check...Corvinus...

lineman said...

Your right on the money with that comment... Willpower though won't come until the pain comes though sadly enough... Would love to spend some time Brainstorming with you though because it could be done...

lineman said...

"because we know its structure intimately"
Oh yes we do quite well...We know the life blood of a city and how to stop it flowing...

lineman said...

So question for you "When is it easiest to build or create something" Is it when your fighting for survival or when you have plenty? Should be an obvious answer but so many fail to grasp it... Even the "heads" of the Alt right fail in that respect... Instead of Building Communities they go to Conferences and then scatter back out to their homes across the US...

Audacious Epigone said...


Yeah, California is the obvious left-led leaver. New York and Illinois are too financially interwoven and broke, respectively, to pull it off. On the right, Texas has the history and possibly the political will. The problem is the state is split now between whites and Hispanics with a dose of black. As is, whites outvote Hispanics by a large margin and whites in Texas vote as Republican as Hispanics in Texas vote Democrat.

Could be a lack of imagination on my part in how it plays out, but CA and TX are the two most likely to lead, I think.


Indeed it is.

That kind of technology, though, puts double-digit IQ people out of work and makes shipping cheaper. It allows for more total leisure time but it doesn't do much for GDP. If those double-digit IQ people who are put out of work were able to go create value somewhere else, it would help more. But that's increasingly no longer the case. The 'record low unemployment' is the same shell game we're used to. The labor participation rate is still astronomical.


Yes, you should. We need to take these virtual networks into the real world.

A Friendly Individual,

Brexit happened without the UK being anywhere near as Balkanized as Yugoslavia. Same with Catalonia. What is keeping both from breaking away is centralized power. If that breaks down, what keeps everything together? The American Southwest is lost to the Anglosphere.


Dems are the real anti-Semites! But it's hard to point to anything more encouraging in the West than those two.


Identity Evropa is building something like that. They're not self-sufficient communities, but they are laying the groundwork for them. The group does more than just flash mob for aesthetic impact (thought that's great, too).

Corvinus said...


"The idea that political dissolution necessitates some sort of apocalyptic struggle is a straw man."

That "strawman" is actually an argument made by some on the Alt Right. In their minds, tens of millions of Americans will be compelled to not pay their taxes, to protest en masse in the streets demanding partition, to engage in open paramilitary activity against the American armed forces...due of an epic event or a series of events in a short amount of time leads to rebellion. The circumstances leading up to the American Revolution and the Civil War were one after another game changers, and viewed by both sides as an "apocalyptic struggle".

Perhaps even more important is the current pulse of the nation. The majority of our nation is not interested in partition. It's not on their radar screen. They will have to be convinced, given our history for our citizens to remain steadfast to ensuring our country overcomes adversity despite monumental issues and differences. That would seem to be the unifying front.

Perhaps the Alt Right can write a primer and hand deliver it to white people door to door that their future is in peril, and the only viable solution is breaking apart our country. Much work to do to guarantee that Vox Day's magical year of 2033 as the final nail in the coffin for the United States to exist as we know it today?

James Bowery...

"We built the civilization on which they biologically depend."

You didn't build anything.

"We can take it down more easily and efficiently than they can because we know its structure intimately and know how to rebuild it from NOTHING."

So, are you willing to be on the front lines when this glorious Civil War emerges? Or will you sit on the sidelines? It's really a simple question to answer.

Feryl said...

"I recall Heartiste pointing out that the modern US is the first global empire in history that exists almost entirely within its own borders. "

I think that America would've gone down the old-school road if we still had old school weapons and armies. But we don't. Long range missiles and big bombs have made it impossible for one great power to attempt to invade and enslave another power. We saw what happened in WW1 (new weapons, old tactics) and WW2 (Hiroshima), and it was so horrifying that in the subsequent decades every leader of every power has never come that close to attempting an invasion, submission, and conquest of another power.

These powers have certainly had smaller scale military operations in recent decades, but post-WW2 "wars" and occupations have been trivial in their damage and scale compared to what was basically accepted as "the norm" before 1946, when large armies were built to invade, destroy, pillage, rape, enslave, etc. for the explicit purpose of one nation "winning" by humiliating and dominating the losing nation.

As it turns out, the downside to "modernity" for imperialist powers is that we must invite foreigners to the seat of the imperial empire. These foreigners in turn commit (not that one can blame them) atrocities against the host. Before 1946, it usually was the other way around to varying degrees, with the imperialists abusing foreigners in the foreigner's land (this still does happen, but again the scale of what we did to Vietnam, Iraq etc. pales in comparison to what large national armies did to foreign nations in the pre-1946 era.

I think that WEIRDOs were coming close to allowing this state of affairs culturally and intellectually in the 18th and 19th century, long before the technology changes of the 20th century made the current climate seemingly mandatory. You see Leftists habitually paranoid that Reagan, or Trump, etc. would be dumb enough to push "the button" and nuke Russia or China, but I'm not sure we will ever see the large scale use of nuclear weapons ever again. The ruling classes of every power country would never allow someone that crazy to be in a position authorize nuke strikes. A nutcase like Nero did not have the tech. means to annihilate the Earth. After we nuked Japan, it's been made clear to the ruling classes that it's not acceptable to have an insanely belligerent idiot leading any country with an arsenal of nukes. Of course, fear that a nuke country would retaliate with nukes is precisely what has made every country so cautious about being too aggressive in international affairs to begin with.

For the record, the Pentagon would've probably assassinated Trump or seen to it that he be impeached over corruption if there was good reason to suspect that Trump could not be trusted with our nukes. The Left has been a tizzy since the 80's that the War Party (the GOP) would eventually be stupid enough to entrust power to a president who would annihilate the Earth. Hasn't happened and likely never will. The Left ought to be more concerned that the WEIRDO dominated modern West is allowing barbarians to emigrate in great numbers to countries that created and furthered the Enlightenment. Meanwhile, in the more clannish and traditionalist (when not run by total commies) East, Russia and China are playing their cards really well via moderate foreign policy that neither commits too much to aggression against foreigners nor commits too much to neo-liberal globalism that leads to too much immigration and too much power given to soulless multi-nationals.

Jonathan Centauri said...

Oh, blackbird. Making fun of other's courage? It is to laugh. You might feel somewhat comfortable in that gated community of yours, but the invaders want to murder and steal from YOU not US. That self-absorbed "world" of yours is a bubble of unreality, Corvus. You can crow all you want to, but now you have nothing but paycheck mercs and a REAL WORLD full of enemies that see YOU as the target. Some see you as a menace. Others see you as a Free Lunch. Either way, no loyalty exists in your fool's paradise. Only ignorance keeps you all from hiding and crying in terror. Keep making fun. You are living on borrowed time. We ALL have an interest in getting you to pay up now.
Feryl, this is not a question of arms. This is Machiavelli for Dummies. Its not difficult to defend borders. With the technological edge of the West, we could EASILY wipe out these opponents. We do not choose our policies or "strategery". Its a perpetual menace. A hate-filled loon. A peripatetic pipsqueak with delusions of grandeur. This attempt at Balkanization is what the Soviets tried. It didn't really work out. The Balkans cannot ever be stable. The Soviet Union was living on fumes and supported by Wall Street. Everything was Made in the USA. This crap will not work out. These idiots are allergic to work. Hubris, ridiculous crackpot theories, theft and LIES. Monopoly money and blackmail, they know. Everything else is a retarded sloth bloviating about the sociological psychoanalytic concerns of sexual hangups and the fake charity of Gibsmedat.

Feryl said...

Nobody in their right minds doubts the certainty that in the absence of nukes, we would've invaded Russia (our bete noire since the 1950's, with a slight cooling off period in the 90's and 2000's) and gone to full scale war/conquest against the armies of Russia, likely with other nations along for the ride. World War 3, in other words, whose purpose was to settle once and for all the matter of whose values were superior: The individualist enlightened West, or the inscrutable East.

It's telling that even with traditionalist Muslims actively trying to rid much of the world of "decadent" culture, the West still largely can't conceive of allying with Russia, on at least some of Russia's terms. It's a matter of pride; we can't accept that a historical rival's culture and people might have value, as we are so committed to the idea of amplifying liberal WEIRDO culture at the expense of BadWhites that it would be beneath us to give Russia the time of day.

I think that generationally speaking, the eternal war between Good whites and Bad whites, largely a product of Western GIs, Silents, and Boomers, will wane with future generations. Eastern whites tend to think of war between whites, Asiatics, and Semites. Whereas older generation's of Western whites dwell on Hitler and Stalin, while downplaying and explaining away the flaws of non-whites.

You see frustration among the belligerent Western whites (the Boomers in particular) that beginning with Vietnam, we've never been "allowed" to win. And I suspect that WRT Russia, many Anglo whites born from 1940-1970 have a deep well of animosity towards Eastern whites that arises from the Cold war era mindset of paranoia toward Russia with no satisfying sense of action that would come from a full blown war against the Russkies. We got to beat Hitler, so dammit we need to beat Russia, too. The Soviets dissolving wasn't good enough; they didn't get their skull caved in like they deserved, and whaddaya know, Putin seems to have restored the Evil Empire, probably 'cuz we didn't smash up Moscow like it deserved to be. I mean, Russia ought to be as ugly as the German cities that got destroyed and rebuilt with crappy modern architecture. No wonder Westerners embrace ugliness and nihilism these days; how many beautiful buildings have been built here since 1946?

Jonathan Centauri said...

Are you sure, Feryl? Stalin was with the allies in WWII. Did that really change? Wall Street FUNDED the Bolsheviks. Lets say "hypothetically" that this isn't a game like a sport, unless its like Professional Wrestling. If you want to have control and KEEP IT, you have to stop OPPOSITION. Even the Most Powerful Organization cannot fight ALL THEIR COMPETITORS. Due to innovation and the fickle character of "popular will" that often seems to follow fads and have no discernible pattern, it might be IMPOSSIBLE to keep control NO MATTER HOW RICH OR POWERFUL YOU ARE. If it was ME, I would set up a bifurcated structure. One side would always get what they wanted, and the other would somehow always be the underdog that lost but gave FALSE HOPE to anyone OPPOSING WHAT I WANTED.
If the World had a Free Market or Free Press, that would be IMPOSSIBLE TO DO WITHOUT PEOPLE FINDING OUT. However, if the World was ACTUALLY RUN LIKE AN EXCLUSIVE CLUB, that might not EVER HAPPEN. If ALL the Rich and Powerful People were Members of an Exclusive Club, you could do this for a LONG TIME. Maybe as long as 1776 is from about the 1980s, say. Just for the SAKE OF ARGUMENT, OF COURSE.