Good Video From Ramzpaul

I just finished watching the latest video from Ramzpaul, one of the more prominent alt right vloggers and personalities. Check it out below:

I don’t agree with all of his points. For one, while the average BLM adherent probably doesn’t think twice about whites who get killed by the police, I wouldn’t go so far as to say that blacks are secretly “happy” whenever whites die in such a manner (exceptions notwithstanding). I also don’t think that advocating immigration in and of itself is an “evil” act. While most people who promote open borders do so in bad faith – mainly business lobbyists, their shills in the media, affluent people who seek cheap servants, and non-white tribalists who want to augment their numbers and political power – one can embrace immigration in good faith. That person would be wrong, but that doesn’t necessarily make him “evil.”

Putting that aside, I agree with Ramzpaul’s main argument: Caring about your own people more than others is perfectly natural. I have likewise asserted that expecting other people to value outsiders’ as much as their own group is sheer folly. This doesn’t mean that we hate other groups and bear them ill will; it doesn’t mean that we enjoy watching them suffer. It does mean, however, that should the interests of another group clash with the interests of my group, I’m going to side with my group. Nothing personal, just business.

If only more people heeded Ramzpaul’s simple common sense.

Posted in Blacks, Cultural Marxism, Economics, Immigration, Race, Racism, Tribalism, White nationalism, Wimpy Whites | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

2016 Wackiness and Analysis Paralysis

Hey there, faithful readers! I know that I’ve been rather neglectful of the blog lately, for which I apologize. There’s just been so many crazy stories, imbroglios, upheavals, and brutal (but sadly not surprising) acts of violence that I’ve been plagued by analysis paralysis.

Suffice it to say, it’s becoming more arduous to keep up with all the wackiness and turmoil – for better and worse – that’s increasingly characterizing 2016. To start off on a lighter note, I’m going to talk about sports, one of my less discussed passions. Those who share my passion already know that just over a month ago, the NBA concluded one of its most exciting seasons in recent memory. The 1996 regular season record of 72-10 set by the legendary Michael Jordan and his Chicago Bulls was eclipsed – by the Bay Area based Golden State Warriors, no less. The Warriors set additional records for the best start (24-0) and road wins (34-7).

But unfortunately, ignominious postseason endings tend to overshadow regular season glories; blowing a 3-1 NBA finals series lead to the Cleveland Cavaliers earned the Warriors a more dubious distinction as the first team to squander that kind of advantage. On the flip side, the Cavaliers made history in their own right by bringing the long-suffering city of Cleveland their first sports championship since the year of the Civil Rights Act. That burning river must now seem like ancient history.

Speaking of Cleveland, Donald Trump was recently anointed the Republican nominee at the Republican National Convention; and despite all the handwringing about the fascist hatred engendered by Trump’s speech, the Donald has only improved his chances of winning the White House.

If you had predicted just one year ago that Cleveland would bring home a championship and hand Donald Trump the Republican nomination in 2016, most people would have thought you were nuts. Yet here we are.

Of course, the world doesn’t revolve around Cleveland. This article from Der Spiegel does a pretty good job (even though I don’t agree with their ideological spin) of summing up the general sense of global instability and unpredictability that has characterized the past couple of years:

The biggest geopolitical stories of our time are the destabilization in the Middle East, the European security order and the European Union. In addition, there has been a societal shift in many Western countries: Many citizens are angry at the elites, because they see themselves as victims of globalization, free trade and migration. This anger has enabled the rise of political movements from the fringe to the mainstream in only a few years: Donald Trump, the Brexit movement, Front National and the Alternative for Germany, or AfD. The classic political camps are dissolving as the battle between the political left and the right is replaced by one between Isolationists and Internationalists.

In so many words, the force is out of balance. As much as liberals and conservatives might have disdained one another in the past, their bickering over pet causes like abortion and gay marriage has given way to something much more serious: the intractable divide between multicultural globalists and populist nationalists. Like Harry Potter and Voldemort, neither can live while the other survives, rendering compromise close to impossible.

Here’s my response to this great unraveling: bring it on! The reason why I continue to harbor some measure of optimism is because I know that the rotten status quo is coming undone. Even if the ice queen Hillary Clinton ultimately gets her crown – due to a high turnout of non-whites and progressives biting the bullet and voting for her out of fear of Trump – there will be few illusions about who or what she is. The Democrats won’t continue to get away with peddling identity politics while kissing Wall Street’s ass.

On the flip side, even if Donald Trump loses, Trumpism will not be repudiated; the GOP won’t get away with reverting to the usual hackneyed platitudes about the “Constitution,” “limited government,” and freeing the “job creators.” Republican elites will have to contend with an incipient white nationalism, even if they kick and scream all the while.

And of course, on an international level, fewer people are buying what the globalists are selling. Our globalized elites still wield incredible power, and their predatory influence won’t abate anytime soon. Nevertheless, they can no longer hide; more people are now onto them. Consequently, this bizarre zeitgeist that combines cultural leftism, neocon imperialism, and pro-1% economics increasingly lacks legitimacy

We can only hope that the turbulence of 2016 further chips away at our untenable system. After all, if Cleveland can win an improbable sports championship, then there’s no reason other interesting things can’t also happen. Stay tuned.

Posted in American Pathologies, Europe, Immigration, Middle East, Politics, Sports, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 10 Comments

The Left And Racial Tensions – What Globalists Gain From Racial Chaos

When Palestinians are lectured on the horrors of the Holocaust, they react with a great deal of outrage. It isn’t for the reasons you think – they are outraged because they are expected to feel sympathy for the very same people that are currently subjecting them to ethnic cleansing. Similarly, when attacks like the latest incident in Nice transpire, Westerners react with outrage. Again, it isn’t for the reasons you think. Their primary source of outrage stems from being told to sympathize with the multiculturalism and diversity status quo in the face of horrific Islamist atrocities. We can expect to see a lot more of the following: terrorist/Micah Johnson attacks followed by the media rousing up public outrage against the atrocities which is responded to by a feckless call to continue respecting Multiculturalism and diversity.

There is a two prong strategy at work here. When a society is under attack, people expect their leaders take up a strong stand against the perpetrators if only to save face. One reason why India’s Narendra Modi is so popular is because of his perceived hard-line stance on Pakistan. This is not the man (according to public opinion) that adopts a conciliatory approach in the face of attack; he fights back. If he failed to do this, he would lose face (disastrous in Asia) and the public’s opinion regarding Pakistan would be further inflamed. Similarly, Westerners expect their leaders to take a stand when their societies are under attack; especially when the media rouses up passions with graphic content. When leaders (deliberately) fail to assuage the trauma of the public, the latter’s passions are further inflamed against what they perceive are troublesome minorities.  Blacks and Muslims for their part are also incensed at (what they perceive) is a media war against them. It would seem that the majority and certain minorities are being pitted against each other. What could our globalist elites possibly gain from such a scenario? I believe that North America is being molded along the paradigm of Pakistan. Let’s examine this thesis.

The dilemma of diversity

The rationale behind the creation of Pakistan was to provide South Asia’s Muslims with a safe haven. It must be stated that a large number of Indian Muslims cannot relate to Pakistan due to cultural and linguistic differences. I have yet to meet a single Tamil or Keralite Pakistani. The Tamil and Keralite Muslims of south India predictably feel closer bonds of kinship to their Hindu neighbours who share their language, cuisine, and culture. What the architects of Pakistan failed to account for were the cultural and language differences that separate the various ethnic groups in western India. Due to irreconcilable cultural differences, the Bengalis in the east separated from Pakistan and formed Bangladesh in 1971. Memories of the genocide they endured in the early 70s are still alive and fresh today. Pakistan has failed to address the underlying issues of national identity and racial solidarity that led to the Bangladesh crisis. Even today, street skirmishes between rival ethnic groups like the Pasthuns and Muhajirs are common in cities like Karachi. The Sindhis despise the Punjabis and the Balochis want out of Pakistan altogether.

The only force keeping this disunited and dysfunctional “country” together is the Pakistani army. It was the Pakistani army (with Iran’s help) that suppressed the Balochi uprising in the 1950s and continues to militarily dominate Baluchistan. India (also blessed with diversity) faces similar problems. The Indian army (in conjunction with a brutal police force) ruthlessly quashes any signs of uprising in places like Kashmir and Assam. The truly stable societies in Asia are ethnically homogeneous – Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore.

Keeping diversity functioning in environments with scarce resources (like most third world nations) requires a strong state with totalitarian proclivities. Diversity is the very anti-thesis for anti-nationalism. As I’ve written previously, globalists have a strong aversion to traditionalist forces like nationalism, family, culture and religion because they hinder the free flow of capital. Diversity eats away nationalism like Sulfuric acids eats away human skin. It’s no coincidence then that the Chinese have been sending in a steady flow of han immigrants into Tibet. Nationalism dies when a nationalist’s aspirations are rejected by his neighbours.

Turning our attention back to North America, let’s examine the following chart.


The data clearly indicates that advanced police militarization is observed in Florida and NY on the East Coast, the U.S south, and finally California on the West coast. What do these regions have in common? The relatively homogeneous Midwest seems to host the least amount of police militarization. One of the horrors of the Micah Johnson shooting was that he was taken out with a robot rigged with explosives. The implications of this are enormous, yet few can rise above the sewer that is the culture war and see the writing on the wall.

As the West slowly but surely marches towards economic collapse, we can expect ethnic tensions to flare up as various groups skirmish with each other in a competition for scarce resources. The left (the mouthpiece of Globalist ideology) will continue to fan the flames of war with race agitation like BLM. The only thing that will keep the U.S. functioning as a country in such a scenario would be a militarized force backed by a State with totalitarian proclivities. Welcome to Pakistan.






Posted in Asia, China, Cultural Marxism, Race | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

New Article on Alternative Right

As most of you already know, along with managing this blog, I’m also a contributing editor over at Alternative Right, where my latest article for them – where I critique Donald Trump and those in the alt right who uncritically embrace him – was recently uploaded.

A few reproachful comments aside, the reception to the article was pretty measured.

Posted in conservative values, Economics, Hispanics, Immigration, Politics, Race, White nationalism | Tagged , , , | 10 Comments

Desi Wisdom and Disjointed Thoughts on Brexit

Courtesy of commenter Raja Hindustani, I watched a very edifying video concerning Brexit from an Indian news channel. Check it out below:

Given what we already know about non-white realism and nationalism, it held few surprises. What I found telling is that the Desi woman based in London was the most anti-Brexit, whereas Indians in India itself seemed to get where the Brexiters were coming from – even if they didn’t fully endorse their views. The latter is especially true of the host Arnab Goswami, who voiced sentiments that are anathema to mainstream Western sensibilities. His candid discussion of immigration and demographic change (skip to the 14:15 mark) would be almost unheard of here in the West, especially North America. In fact, if he weren’t foreign and brown, the usual suspects would brand him a vile racist.

From Goswami’s standpoint, such “vile” sentiments are simple common sense, and he understands that feeling queasy about immigration is perfectly reasonable. He recognizes that pushing back against demographic changes and displacement – during a time when resources are increasingly scarce – is a natural impulse, which is why he’s incredulous when leftist neoliberals express shock or grief over Brexit. It’s as if he respects that native white Brits are a legitimate group with legitimate group interests.

Such group interests were also acknowledged by Pavan Varma (36:30 mark), who rightly asserts that one cannot discuss immigration from a purely economic standpoint; the cultural impact is just as important. There’s also the vital question of national sovereignty.

Ultimately, the fatal weakness of neoliberals is that they too often ignore these vital issues, and fail to realize that most people don’t give a rat’s ass about economism – especially those who are already fucked. After all, why should a bunch of destitute white people in depressed, ex-industrial rural areas care about the stock market or the financial implications of Brexit? They’re already broke! That’s why, as Colin Liddell persuasively argues in his article that predicted Brexit’s success, such soporific appeals to economism and technocratic globalism don’t inspire much passion or loyalty:

Another advantage that BREXIT has is that it is also more emotionally potent than BREMAIN. Those who are against the EU tend to actually loathe it, being driven by an intense hatred and existential dread, as well as by a passionate love of Britain. Those who support the EU, by contrast, rely on more lukewarm emotions – mild fear of some economic disruption, vague attraction towards the idea of a European Union (often with misgivings), mild distaste for aspects of their own country, etc.

Just to be clear, I place a very high premium on economics and economic justice. However, the economism I’m talking about is the fluff promoted by the filthy rich to justify any and all policies that further fill their coffers. Thanks to such economism, the standard of living for the average white person has significantly declined over the past few decades. Then, to add insult to injury, immigration and multiculturalism are tossed into the stew. Consequently, as I pointed out in my article about Rodrigo Duterte, today’s globalist liberals have nothing to offer regular white people, economically or socially.

Therefore, we really shouldn’t be surprised when angry whites with little to lose repudiate globalism’s main tenets.

But of course, there were people – SJWs, mainstream liberals, the aforementioned neoliberal economists – who were indeed horrified by the results; and somehow, I don’t think that concern over Britain’s economic health is high on their list of priorities. Their real fear is that the multicultural globalist project is coming undone, and every Brexit style success drives another nail into the coffin.

Unfortunately for liberals, they’re just too damn smug to realize that screaming “racist,” “xenophobe,” and “think of the stock market!” only further heightens opposition to their agenda. As Matt Taibbi wrote in Rolling Stone, the reactions to Brexit are precisely why so many pissed off people want to stick it to liberals:

Imagine having pundits and professors suggest you should have your voting rights curtailed because you voted Leave. Now imagine these same people are calling voters like you “children,” and castigating you for being insufficiently appreciative of, say, the joys of submitting to a European Supreme Court that claims primacy over the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights.

The overall message in every case is the same: Let us handle things.

But whatever, let’s assume that the Brexit voters, like Trump voters, are wrong, ignorant, dangerous and unjustified.

I will concede that many of those who voted for Brexit or Trump – just like those who voted for Hillary, or Bernie, or any other politician – are ignorant. While I’m sympathetic to the white working classes, I recognize that they’re not exactly erudite angels. However, they’re not as stupid as smug liberals seem to think; they know that they’re being screwed over, and they instinctively recognize that liberal elites hold them in contempt.

That contempt is now being returned tenfold. We can only hope that Brexit inspires similar measures throughout the Western world.

Posted in Cultural Marxism, Economics, Europe, Immigration, Politics, Race, Racism, Subversion, Tribalism, White nationalism, Wimpy Whites | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Immigrants, Hooligans, and the Right Reasons to Oppose Immigration

As I have argued before, leftists have one cardinal rule: “marginalized” groups are beyond reproach; unless, of course, their bad behavior can somehow be blamed on oppressor groups. That’s why, regardless of non-whites’ penchant for organized tribalism, leftists will always absolve any given non-white group of collective responsibility whenever members of their tribe transgress. For example, following the wave of sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, the usual suspects did everything they could to divorce the assailants’ Middle Eastern/North African backgrounds from their deeds. Instead, the crimes of non-white men were conveniently blamed on “men” – a safe, “privileged” target – as a whole. Pretty neat trick!

Another neat trick that absolves non-whites of responsibility is to harp on native born white crime. This article I stumbled upon from the Middle East Eye, which attacks European soccer hooliganism, is part of the overall leftist attempt to whitewash (pun intended) immigrant crime. Don’t you see? It’s those white ruffians who are the real problem! As the author explains (emphasis mine):

From the dozens of videos that have emerged this week of football hooligans wreaking havoc in France during Euro 2016, how many “immigrants” did you notice? From my limited observations of these videos, I did not identify a single one.

The hooligans currently causing chaos happen to be white Europeans – arguably the indigenous “born” sons of this continent. Now of course, it would be grossly incorrect to generalise an entire nation or race for the actions of a minority, especially as a Muslim who experiences this “guilt by association” on a regular basis.

However, we currently have a situation where hundreds if not thousands of white European men, who probably have a lot more in common with each other in terms of religion and political ideology, have been engaged in brutal street brawls involving glass bottles, chairs, and in some cases knives. Businesses have been wrecked, members of the public have been hurt in the crossfire, and dozens of arrests have been made.

Lefties who highlight white peoples’ bad behavior seem to genuinely believe that wayward whites somehow delegitimize opposition to mass immigration. In fairness to them, their claim that white Europeans commit the large majority of crimes in their own countries isn’t wrong. But guess what? None of that matters in the context of the immigration debate.

I know that white people are hardly immaculate beings, and I’m aware that we have our fair share of pathologies. However, contrary to leftist delusions, shining the light on white misbehavior in European countries where whites comprise at least over 80% of the population isn’t a “gotcha” moment. In fact, such “logic” looks downright absurd when applied to a non-Western context.

Take the US military presence in South Korea, where rapes and other violent attacks perpetrated by American servicemen five years ago rightly engendered outrage. Just imagine how local Koreans would react if Americans – or their apologists – tried to absolve American servicemen by pointing to native Korean crime, such as the systematic sexual abuse of deaf schoolchildren. Koreans certainly don’t deny or excuse horrific acts perpetrated by their own people, as evidenced by their furious reactions to the aforementioned abuse of deaf children. But the existence of Korean criminals doesn’t let violent American soldiers off the hook.

I’m sure many would insist that there’s a difference between raging against occupying soldiers and demonizing vulnerable immigrants. You know, the usual “punching up” and “punching down” tripe. But putting context aside, the point I’m trying to make is that outsiders’ affronts will always arouse more anger than domestic disturbances – in the same way that a host’s bratty kid gets sent to his room, while a belligerent dinner guest is shown the door. One simply cannot compare local crime to alien crime.

In conclusion, white people frowning due to the West’s browning need to oppose immigration for the right reasons – and in doing so change the terms of debate. As of now, the left has easy retorts to the usual feeble objections to mass immigration. Whether one wants to denounce immigration from an economic or law-and-order standpoint, the left has those bases covered. Sure, leftists are wrong on both fronts, but we don’t do ourselves any favors by turning an existential issue such as demographic displacement into discussions about immigration’s effect on the GDP.

White people are a group, and have legitimate group interests; one of those interests includes preserving white majorities in Western nations. That’s all the justification for opposing immigration one needs. Whether or not growing numbers of whites come to recognize this simple logic remains to be seen.

Posted in Cultural Marxism, Europe, Immigration, Race, Racism, Subversion, Tribalism, Western Values, White nationalism | Tagged , , , , , , | 15 Comments

The Liberal As The Outsider

One of my favorite stories from ancient India is the tale of the Owls and the Crows as narrated by pundit Vishnu Sharma in the Panchatantra. According to the common narration, the owls and crows were at war with one another where the owls had the upper hand. The crows, fearing defeat, decided to employ one final gambit before surrendering to the inevitable. One of their members would undermine the owls by acting as a defector. This crow eventually succeeded in gaining the trust of the owls, who yielded access to their stronghold to the outsider. One of the owls did not trust this supposed defector and insisted that he be killed as soon as possible. He was ignored, and eventually rallied a few followers before wisely departing. When the owls were asleep, the crow gathered up his associates and set the cave on fire thereby killing all the owls within.

Like many tales from ancient India, this one also contains a primary and secondary moral. The primary moral is that guile trumps brute strength every-time. This is a recurring theme in the Panchatantra. The secondary moral of this story is of interest to us. The ‘defector’ was amazed at the stupidity of the owls in trusting him and exclaimed:

“Someone who has left the service of the enemy, and come over to the other side, should never be trusted”

In other words, how can you trust someone who has betrayed their own? It is worthwhile noting that in most parts of the non-western world, liberals are perceived as traitors since they are accused of working against the interests of their respective groups. This label is tossed at them even if all they are doing is seeking justice for other groups. Hindus that seek justice for the Muslim victims of Hindutva violence are accused of treachery. The same goes for Jewish Israelis that seek justice for displaced Palestinians. It is a testament to the magnanimity of western people that they insist on seeking justice for ‘the other.’

Sadly, that is not enough for Western Liberals. These individuals insist on the ethnic displacement of white people. While people like Gideon Levy insist that they are merely seeking justice for others and that their actions are motivated by patriotism, Anglosphere liberals profess no such love for their nations. Liberals outwardly condemn corporations yet happily accept their financial patronage under the table. They then cheer these corporations as they clamp down on free speech. Feminists, as we know, are openly hostile to the idea of patriotism.

Why they betray their people

Part of the reason why our side has such a difficult time mounting a resistance is because the average North American doesn’t really know who rules them. We think that the politicians we vote for rule over us, but it’s seldom that simple. North American elites differ from the old aristocracies of Europe because this new class of elites were borne of capital. As such, they have no loyalty to their nations, heritage, culture, and religion.

Where we see nations, they see markets. Where we see citizens, they see labour pools. The old aristocracies were the stewards of civilization and a patron of the arts. Where they commissioned great works of art and music, our current elites fund degenerate leftist causes. The key reason our globalist elites despise nationalism is because the latter hinders the flow of global capital. Consider the fiasco that transpired between the Jewish owned Elliot Associates and the Korean Samsung group.

“The Korean story has its origins in the efforts of Samsung’s holding company, Cheil Industries, to buy SamSung C&T, the engineering and construction arm of the wider Samsung family of businesses. The move can be seen as part of an effort to reinforce control of the conglomerate by the founding Lee family and its heir apparent, Lee Jae-Jong. Trouble emerged when Singer’s company, which  holds a 7.12% stake in SamSung C&T and is itself attempting to expand its influence and control of Far East tech companies, objected to the move. The story is fairly typical of Jewish difficulties in penetrating business cultures in the Far East where impenetrable family monopolies, known in Korea as chaebols, are common.”

How did this end?

“In the end, the Lee strategy, based on drawing attention to the alien and exploitative nature of Elliot Associates, was overwhelmingly effective. Before a crucial shareholder vote on the Lee’s planned merger, Samsung Securities CEO Yoon Yong-am, said: “We should score a victory by a big margin in the first battle in order take the upper hand in a looming war against Elliott, and keep other speculative hedge funds from taking short-term gains in the domestic market.” When the vote finally took place a few days ago, a conclusive 69.5% of Samsung shareholders voted in favor of the Lee proposal, leaving Elliot licking its wounds and complaining about the ‘patriotic marketing’ of those behind the merger.”

The reason I highlighted ‘patriotic marketing’ is because had the Koreans possessed the same diluted cultural identity as their North American counterparts, the merger surely would have been thwarted. Had the Koreans been as susceptible to liberal guilt mongering along the lines of “racism”, they would surely have lost this battle. This globalist parasite class relies on traitors and sellouts to consolidate their financial power (and by extension political power) across the world. In the globalist paradise, there can be no nations and citizens; merely money and worker droens. There can be no religion, only consumerism.

This is why globalist puppets like Marxists and Feminists sabotage their own nations by assaulting racial identity, culture, and religion. It is about time that we in the West joined the rest of humanity in declaring liberals traitors that walk among us.


Posted in art, Asia, Christianity, conservative values, Cultural Marxism, Economics, Europe, Feminism, Hinduism, India, Jewry, Organized Jewry, Racism, Subversion | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Surly in San Francisco

As I’ve argued on many occasions, San Francisco is a clusterfuck of contradictions. On the one hand, SF can proudly boast of its tech wealth, environmental beauty, and the Giants. At the same time, the city’s reputation is tarnished by certain dubious distinctions – chief among them a level of economic inequality that puts many banana republics to shame. Unsurprisingly, this toxic mix of inequality and liberal deviancy has rendered SF the 8th angriest city in the nation (emphasis mine):

Thrillist recently published a ranking of the 11 angriest American cities and San Francisco came in as the 8th.

The article blames the anger on rising housing prices, the recent influx of wealthy tech workers and traffic.

This may surprise most people as the Bay Area is known for being so “chill.” The article says the anger of residents isn’t “face punching anger,” it’s more like “your chill friend from college’s worst day, every day.”

Don’t know what that lady is smoking, because I’m certainly not shocked; if anything, I’m wondering why SF isn’t higher on the list. Going off of pure empiricism, I can confidently say that the Bay Area is not renowned for its easygoing vibe. Just about ever person I’ve spoken to on the matter – whether a native, transplant, or visitor – agrees that many people in the Bay Area are prickly assholes. One of my former coworkers, a middle-aged half white/half-Filipino guy who grew up around Old Money in the Deep South, told me that nobody back in the South ever exhibited the kind of truculent entitlement that he’s witnessed in the Bay. It’s worth noting that he too was somewhat shocked, as he previously labored under the delusion that the Bay Area is this “nice, liberal place.”

However, my contention is that the Bay Area is infested with self-important assholes precisely because, not in spite of, its liberal ethos. In fact, just take a gander at the list of angriest cities, and you’ll see that they all have one thing in common: they’re all Democratic strongholds. As much as liberals profess to love humanity, for some strange reason they can’t seem to stomach actual people.

Of course, as I’m fond of saying, correlation doesn’t equal causation. Regardless of ideology, expensive, hectic, and racially diverse cities are bound to be fractious to some degree. That being said, throwing a bizarre, globally deviant ideology into the mix compounds these problems. Shit, it’s hard enough making rent and finding decent parking; it’s even worse when you have to be politically correct on top of it all.

Liberalism is simply an unnatural ideology, which is why it’s instinctively rejected by most of the world’s people. Therefore, it takes a certain aggressive self-righteousness to earnestly espouse loony liberal beliefs, unless it’s in one’s best interests. That’s why, just to be clear, I do not think that black, Latino, Asian, or other “diverse” liberals are insane – quite the opposite, actually.

But for white people in big cities such as Portland and SF to collectively embrace liberal views suggests a certain affliction. No wonder so many of them are surly and insufferable.

Posted in American Pathologies, Economics, Politics, Race, Subversion, Tribalism, Wimpy Whites | Tagged , , , , , | 5 Comments

The Dalai Lama Versus Leftist Lunacy

As a white kid blessed with a liberal education, I was enriched by a multicultural middle school curriculum. Besides coming to grips with my inherent white male wickedness, I was taught to appreciate the wisdom of non-Christian religions. Along with organizing a visit to a black Muslim mosque, my middle school also invited a middle-aged white female bodyguard of the Dalai Lama (yes, you read that right!) to speak in front of the entire student body. In case Buddhism’s noble qualities weren’t made apparent, the film Little Buddha was shown in class for good measure.

Of course, I never became a Buddhist, but during my younger days I still couldn’t help but admire Buddhism. After all, it has everything a good white liberal likes: a belief in nonviolence, a condemnation of materialism, and most importantly, the moderation of the Middle Way. In fact, as far as major religions/spiritualities go, I believe Buddhism gets the best press in the West – the occasional report on butchered Rohingya notwithstanding. Hinduism also gets off pretty easy, though it’s harder to take Hindus as seriously given goofy sitcom characters like Apu from The Simpsons. So Buddhism it is!

However, it turns out that beneath all the lofty rhetoric about compassion and “oneness,” the typical non-white realism resides in the Buddhist brain. At the bare minimum, no less than the Dalai Lama seems to look at open borders and Western multiculturalism askance; why else would he claim that there are too many refugees in Germany? This passage says it all (emphasis mine):

“Europe, for example Germany, cannot become an Arab country,” he said with a laugh, according to AFP, which quoted from an interview the spiritual leader gave to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, a German newspaper. “Germany is Germany. There are so many [refugees] that in practice it becomes difficult.”

Obviously, this harrowed the usual suspects. Al Jazeera‘s Mehdi Hasan lamented the Dalai Lama’s endorsement of “far right” talking points, while The Independent decried his “casual xenophobia.” Just like that, it appears everyone’s favorite Buddhist has now morphed into an enabler of nasty nationalism.

Despite Mehdi Hasan’s claims, there is nothing nasty or uniquely “far right” about opposing the rapid influx of radically different peoples. Unless the Dalai Lama is a fascist in disguise, he alone demonstrates that white nationalists aren’t the only ones who view multiculturalism with a critical eye; and he’s just the tip of the iceberg. One of this blog’s recurring arguments – which I will continue to hammer home – is that Alternative Right beliefs deemed “extreme” by liberal Western standards are just simple common sense for most of the planet’s “people of color.” While they strategically espouse liberal views in Western countries where they’re minorities, non-whites are instinctively conservative and reject Anglosphere style liberalism.

Now, just to be clear, this isn’t to say that non-whites are heartless reptiles. However, their notions of tolerance differ from the fruity beliefs of white liberals. As Dota told me during a recent conversation, most non-whites believe in benevolence while eschewing gratuitous compassion. In other words, while many non-white societies grant minorities religious and cultural rights, there’s still no question that the majority group is in charge. Minorities are often tolerated and left in peace, but must be mindful of their place. There’s certainly no quixotic belief that all cultures are equal.

That’s why, despite all the puzzlement and handwringing, I don’t think there’s any real contradiction between the Dalai Lama’s compassion and his belief that Europe should regulate its borders. Just because we are all human doesn’t mean that all humans are interchangeable, or that disparate groups of people will peacefully share the same space. Anyone not blinded by liberal idiocy – that is, most people in the world – would have predicted that welcoming over a million Arabs into a white European country such as Germany was (is) bound to yield disastrous results.

But it didn’t have to be this way. Despite feeling the refugees’ pain, the Dalai Lama rightly argues that the best solution is to rebuild their countries of origin. Ultimately, that will be a win-win for everyone; refugees/migrants won’t have to contend with hostility and cultural alienation in a strange land, and native Europeans won’t be alienated by the presence of aliens – many of whom flagrantly disrespect their host countries.

While there is always room for kindness, most people in the world don’t let untrammeled compassion compel them to swing an axe at their own feet. If the Dalai Lama of all people can recognize this, then wimpy whites have no excuse for failing to see the obvious. That’s why, believe it or not, I intend to take white liberals at their word when they insist that they’re the most informed and enlightened people on the planet. To paraphrase Marco Roboto Rubio, we need to stop pretending that white liberals are simply misguided weenies who don’t know what they’re doing. They know exactly what they’re doing!

There’s a word for people who consciously sabotage their own group: traitors. It’s time to start calling a spade a spade.

Posted in American Pathologies, Asia, Cultural Marxism, Immigration, Subversion, Tribalism, Wimpy Whites | Tagged , , , | 10 Comments

The Importance Of Never Backing Down

If there is one story in the Bible that should inspire Alt-righters to take a stand against leftist lunacy, it is the tale of the mighty Sampson who slew a thousand Philistines with the jawbone of a donkey. It might be easy to trade insults over the internet but it becomes substantially harder to mount a defense of your position in the real world; especially when those positions have been deemed ‘politically incorrect’ by a society castrated by liberal idiocy. Common sense hurts feelings while human nature is so inconvenient that it must be swept under the rug.

Bay Area Guy has shared numerous personal anecdotes with me regarding his refusal to back down when confronted with liberal opposition in his day to day life. Far from being loathed, he has won the respect of many non-whites for standing his ground. Perhaps he may share some of those anecdotes with you in a later post. I wish I possessed his diplomatic skill in gaining converts, but I tend to be as abrasive in the real world as I am online. It was established long ago that BAG is the likable one whereas I am the handsome one. Be that as it may, here is an example of unapologetic posturing that borders on the shameless:


Zakir Naik’s popularity rests primarily among the Muslims of South Asia who belong to a culture that prizes rote learning over intellectual curiosity. A glorified parrot, Naik’s understanding of world religions is as shallow as the intellectual capacity of the triumphalist dunces that comprise his audience. I am not here to discuss the reality that many cultures express palatable liberal views in English while revealing their true colours in their tribal languages. The English media in India, Pakistan, and Israel are all very liberal and ‘tolerant’ whereas the Hindi/Urdu and Hebrew presses reveal the true pulse of their nations.

The point I would like to discuss is how unapologetic Naik is when he proclaims the superiority of Islam over other religions. Many in the Alternative Right are more than familiar with the tribal nature of Jews who promote civil rights and multiculturalism in the West while fastidiously practicing ethno-facism in Israel. What most in the Alt-Right sometimes forget is that ALL non-Western cultures are like this. As this article in Tehelka points out:

Where Hindutva in India menacingly brandishes its muscle to elicit fearful compliance from the minorities, in the US it uses the subdued vocabulary of plurality, multiculturalism and “hurt feelings” to plead for incorporation into the mainstream

Most non-Western people intuitively understand that when you are in the minority, you supplicate to the majority; whereas when you become the majority, you lord it over the minorities. Whites seem to back down even when they are the majority in domains they have controlled for centuries. It is little wonder that minorities in the West are becoming increasingly more petulant as they perceive white wimpiness a sign of weakness. Nobody can deny that Naik’s logic in the video above is ridiculous; it is impossible to empirically prove that Islam is the only “true faith” in the same way as it can be empirically demonstrated that 2+2 = 4. Yet the man’s confident belief that Muslims should lord it over non-Muslims in Islamic domains is not that uncommon as similar sentiments are shared by all non-Western peoples.

I’m certainly not advocating fascism in the West, but what’s wrong with moderate and healthy majoritarianism? If non-Western peoples can confidently stand their ground in defense of cultural systems that are clearly backward and barbaric, what do you whites have to be ashamed of when your civilization invented the modern world?


Posted in Hinduism, India, Islam, Israel, Jewry, Tribalism, Western Values, Wimpy Whites | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments