I’m not sure what I think about this?
Look, if a bunch of leftists can’t appease Third-World activists, no one can, as this mini-riot among Minnesota Democrats proves:
Party caucuses are going on tonight in precincts across Minnesota. Caucuses are an old-fashioned civic tradition, more noted for boredom and long nights than anything else, but tonight there was some excitement at a DFL [Democrat-Farmer-Labor] caucus in Minneapolis. A fight broke out:
A very tense night at a caucus site in Minneapolis where DFLer Mohamud Noor is challenging longtime DFL state Rep. Phyllis Kahn. The heat in one Minneapolis location resulted in police being called out. With 300 people at the Byan [sic] Coyle Center, a fight broke out and people rushed the stage. After the melee, the Minneapolis police shut down the caucus.
Napoleon and his blood-soaked reign followed the world’s first leftist movement. Communists saw themselves as the heirs of the French Revolution, and their initial success led to the bankruptcy and breakup of the once-mighty Soviet Empire.
Leftists always self-destruct. With the blinders of ideology firmly strapped to their pointy heads, they have no frame of reference other than their airy theories about how people OUGHT to behave. When reality makes its unavoidable return, something’s gonna hit the fan, and hard.
“Equality incurs tolerance, and tolerance has become but another word for nihilism. It’s easy to be tolerant, if you don’t believe in anything. A civilization practicing high standards must perforce be highly intolerant, becoming more and more intolerant as it becomes better and better.” Tito Perdue, in his talk to the H.L. Mencken Club.
The above is just one of numerous sizzlers in an insightful, no-holds-barred speech. You owe it to yourself to read the whole thing.
“Rowdy” Roddy Piper wants to fight Hulk Hogan at WrestleMania! Make it happen Vince!
Roddy Piper was the #1 trending on Yahoo, so you know the people want this.
When Phil Robertson was placed “on hiatus” from “Duck Dynasty” for condemning homosexuality, the pink gestapo gloated in triumph:
“What’s clear is that such hateful anti-gay comments are unacceptable to fans, viewers, and networks alike,” said GLAAD spokesperson Wilson Cruz. “By taking quick action and removing Robertson from future filming, A&E has sent a strong message that discrimination is neither a Christian nor an American value.”
“Discrimination,” of course, means any decision not based on Cultural Marxism. The homosexual advocacy group GLAAD has a long history of silencing dissent. So they’d won again. Or so it seemed.
Turns out the views about homosexuality that got Phil Robertson in trouble with A&E struck a chord with a whole lotta folks. They were outraged that Robertson was punished for expressing opinions shared by the majority. GLAAD offices were flooded with angry calls, emails, and Tweets, in what a GLAAD spokespoofter described as “record levels of backlash.”
It got so bad that A&E reversed its decision. That made GLAAD cry:
“Phil Robertson should look African American and gay people in the eyes and hear about the hurtful impact of praising Jim Crow laws and comparing gay people to terrorists,” the organization said in a statement. “If dialogue with Phil is not part of next steps then A&E has chosen profits over African American and gay people – especially its employees and viewers.”
Oh, c’mon, fellas! “Praising Jim Crow”? Robertson did no such thing — but when little boys don’t get what they want, they have to lash out. That’s not GLAAD — that’s SAD.
It looks like A & E and the gay Gestapo just got punked. A & E is hiring Phil Robertson back. It looks like they picked the low news cycle of Friday evening to announce it. I predict the first episode of the new season will be HUGE. I’m going to watch it, and I probably would not have before.
Same-sex marriage? That’s SOOO last year. Polygamy is now on the horizon, thanks to a ruling by a federal judge (naturally!)
Now if I’m reading Volokh’s analysis correctly, polygamy has NOT been declared a right, like abortion or health care; the judge has only ruled that one particular State prohibition against polygamy is unconstitutional. But the ruling in Brown v. Buhman does seem to make it inevitable. After all, Western attitudes against polygamy are based on disdain for its practice in Africa — therefore, it’s “racist,” and therefore, it must be wrong.
Looks like Nelson Mandela’s heir, Jacob Zuma, with his four wives, will indeed be a model for us all. We have seen the future.
Here’s yet another example of how totalitarian this country has become. In Colorado, a judge has ORDERED a Christian baker to make a wedding cake for a “same-sex” couple. Further, the baker has been warned that he must serve future homosexual couples, too — or else:
A baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex ceremony must serve gay couples despite his religious beliefs or face fines, a judge said Friday.
The order from administrative law judge Robert N. Spencer said Masterpiece Cakeshop in suburban Denver discriminated against a couple “because of their sexual orientation by refusing to sell them a wedding cake for their same-sex marriage.”
The order says the cake-maker must “cease and desist from discriminating” against gay couples. Although the judge did not impose fines in this case, the business will face penalties if it continues to turn away gay couples who want to buy cakes.
Now we could dismiss this outrage as just another liberal activist judge throwing his weight around. But it’s worse than that — this case was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. What does the ACLU stand for? From the ACLU web site:
The ACLU is our nation’s guardian of liberty, working daily in courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country.
These rights include:
•Your First Amendment rights – freedom of speech, association and assembly; freedom of the press, and freedom of religion.
Were the Christian baker’s freedom of speech and association protected here? Do heterosexuals and Christians have individual liberties in multicultural America?
The answer is “No” — at least not when we have to depend on the ACLU to safeguard individual liberty.
What do you do when you want to preserve your culture within a conformist, multicultural empire? There’s only one thing you can do: Resist. But if you do, you’ll be called many things, including “racist” and “zealot.”
One such resistance movement made it clear it wanted nothing to do with “diversity,” and instead preferred to revive the traditions of its own people. These rebels were forced to oppose some of their own who had sold out to the occupiers. In a way, it’s understandable so many let themselves be coopted into supporting the empire. It paid to do so. The sell-outs were more wealthy than the extremists who rejected multiculturalism.
Eventually, the extremists had to fight their own people who had sided with the empire. In the end, the extremists won, though the struggle was frequently grim and dirty. But because they succeeded in rescuing their heritage, those extremists — or “Zealots” — are now celebrated as heroes.
And that’s the real story of Hanukkah.
Alright now, this does it! First Hollywood had the audacity to remake The Karate Kid, the closest to perfect movie this world has ever known. Then they remade Footloose, the movie that introduced us all to Kevin Bacon who inspired a generation of tousled hair and unstructured blazers and whithout whom we would never have had the six degrees game. Then they remade Red Dawn with the North Koreans as the villians. I don’t even have to explain why that was such a travesty. Now comes word that they are remaking Road House. What is Hollywood thinking? Have they no shame? LEAVE THE CLASSICS ALONE! And especially, LEAVE THE SWAYZE FILMOGRAPHY ALONE. As if Red Dawn wasn’t bad enough. If there is any justice in this world, the actor who plays the Swazye role will be struck deaf and dumb on day one of filming. What’s next? Are they going to remake Donnie Darko? I’m seriously contemplating getting out the pitchfork.
Imagine a deluded soul who claims to despise the Mafia, but gets teary-eyed about the bravery of its gunmen. That’s pretty much what housebroken conservatives do when they rage about DC’s assaults on our liberty but insist true patriots support the regime’s wars and armed forces.
This story should open some eyes about what those armed forces are armed to enforce:
A controversial 600-plus page manual used by the military to train its Equal Opportunity officers teaches that “healthy, white, heterosexual, Christian” men hold an unfair advantage over other races, and warns in great detail about a so-called “White Male Club.”
“Simply put, a healthy, white, heterosexual, Christian male receives many unearned advantages of social privilege, whereas a black, homosexual, atheist female in poor health receives many unearned disadvantages of social privilege,” reads a statement in the manual created by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI).
The military document advises personnel to “assume racism is everywhere, every day” and “notice code words for race.” They are also instructed to “understand and learn from the history of whiteness and racism.”
“Assume racism is everywhere, everyday,” read a statement in a section titled, ‘How to be a strong ‘white ally.’”
“One of the privileges of being white is not having to see or deal with racism all the time,” the manual states. “We have to learn to see the effect that racism has.”
DC has pursued an egalitarian agenda since it squared off with the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Our handlers decided that the best way to counter Soviet ideology was to emulate it. Thus was born the Civil Rights Revolution, which birthed open borders, the homosexual rights movement, and a domestic army of race hustlers.
Check out who authored the diktats from the Pentagon’s new manual:
I obtained a copy of the manual from an Equal Opportunity officer who was disturbed by the course content and furious over the DEOMI’s reliance on the Southern Poverty Law Center for information on “extremist” groups.
In other words, another leaker who couldn’t stomach what his government was doing made the courageous decision to expose what was going on—much like Edward Snowden. And just as in the Snowden affair, the heel-clickers will howl that only unpatriotic, hating extremists oppose what “our” armed forces are doing. That’s because the post 9/11 definition of a patriot is a person who supports all of the Pentagon’s urges, no matter how totalitarian and self-destructive they are.
Finally, click on the following story if you aren’t convinced the US military, like every other tentacle of the DC Empire, is a force of evil:
Are you mad enough yet?
[T]he curious disappearance of satire from our literature is an instance of the fierce things fading for want of any principle to be fierce about. Nietzsche had some natural talent for sarcasm: he could sneer, though he could not laugh; but there is always something bodiless and without weight in his satire, simply because it has not any mass of common morality behind it. He is himself more preposterous than anything he denounces. But, indeed, Nietzsche will stand very well as the type of the whole of this failure of abstract violence. The softening of the brain which ultimately overtook him was not a physical accident. If Nietzsche had not ended in imbecility, Nietzscheism would end in imbecility. Thinking in isolation and with pride ends in being an idiot. Every man who will not have softening of the heart must at last have softening of the brain.
This last attempt to evade intellectualism ends in intellectualism, and therefore in death. The sortie has failed. The wild worship of lawlessness and the materialist worship of law end in the same void. Nietzsche scales staggering mountains, but he turns up ultimately in Tibet. He sits down beside Tolstoy in the land of nothing and Nirvana. They are both helpless — one because he must not grasp anything, and the other because he must not let go of anything. The Tolstoyan’s will is frozen by a Buddhist instinct that all special actions are evil. But the Nietzscheite’s will is quite equally frozen by his view that all special actions are good; for if all special actions are good, none of them are special. They stand at the crossroads, and one hates all the roads and the other likes all the roads. The result is — well, some things are not hard to calculate. They stand at the cross-roads.
Source: GK Chesterton. Orthodoxy. Year: 1908.
There might be some Nietzscheite defence since Nietzsche did write “the spirited triumph over the strong” (their defence is often “Nietzsche is misunderstood”), but Chesterton’s slash appears to me to have connected with Nietzsche’s neck, resulting in a clean decapitation, Chesterton perhaps proving himself Nietzsche’s sought after Übermensch.
Note: I’m leaving the Nietzsche quote uncited for now.
Another worthy slash at Nietzsche comes from Inazo Nitobe (Bushido: The Soul of Japan, also from 1908 and a classic):
The profit and loss philosophy of Utilitarians and Materialists finds favor among logic-choppers with half a soul. The only other ethical system which is powerful enough to cope with Utilitarianism and Materialism is Christianity, in comparison with which Bushido, it must be confessed, is like “a dimly burning wick” which the Messiah was proclaimed not to quench but to fan into a flame. Like His Hebrew precursors, the prophets—notably Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos and Habakkuk—Bushido laid particular stress on the moral conduct of rulers and public men and of nations, whereas the Ethics of Christ, which deal almost solely with individuals and His personal followers, will find more and more practical application as individualism, in its capacity of a moral factor, grows in potency. The domineering, self-assertive, so-called master-morality of Nietzsche, itself akin in some respects to Bushido, is, if I am not greatly mistaken, a passing phase or temporary reaction against what he terms, by morbid distortion, the humble, self-denying slave-morality of the Nazarene.
The Nuge wrote this op-ed for World Net Daily. He repeatedly uses the word phony because he is riffing off of the President’s recent mention of “phony scandals” (Benghazi, IRS, etc.). Here is the money quote re. birtherism:
And let’s all be honest here; more of us believe in the American hero Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s thorough investigation into your phony birth certificate and phony history than the phony media’s smoke and mirrors.
What killed the Soviet Union? Communism: The regime’s central ideology condemned its people to poverty and mediocrity. One day, they’d had enough.
What’s killing the DC Empire? Its other-worldly fixation on equality. Here’s the latest update on our own slow-motion suicide:
Senior military personnel are considering new giving women different military training than men, The Washington Times reports.
The effort was proposed by Massachusetts Democrat Rep. Niki Tsongas at a recent House Armed Services Committee hearing because so far, she says training systems do not “maximize the success of women.”
Though the armed services have promised that combat standards will be the same regardless of gender, senior officers are considering initially separate training systems.
That second paragraph is a killer: Tsongas couldn’t come right out and say that women couldn’t compete with men as soldiers — instead, Political Correctness® dictated that the problem be expressed in terms of the training failing to “maximize the success of women.” Got that? After all, the whole point of military training is validating equality, rather than creating a fighting force that can defend the nation.
Every day the bucket goes down to the well. One day the bottom will drop out.
After a number of recent court decisions mandating same-sex “marriage,” many conservatives predicted it was just a matter of time until we’d hear demands for the recognition of group marriage (polyamory).
But there’s a cause more pressing than the “right” of three or more to consider themselves married. That cause is neatly summarized in the following headline and linked story:
Not only does this crisis pertain to the ongoing and escalating War against the Family, but also reveals the great cultural divide that’s only going to escalate, as articles such as this illustrate. In Mexico, you see, the age of consent is 12, rather than 18, as required by those stuffy old Anglos. And laws that enforce the values of white culture are inherently racist, as any tenured radical will kindly explain to you. (Hint: It’s called “white privilege.”)
That’s why I predict lowering the age of consent to 12 will be the next battle in the never-ending Civil Rights crusade. It would strike a double blow against white culture, on both traditional sex roles as well as on traditional cultural norms. It’s a win-win for multiculturalism.
That’s a good question, Rachel. And thank you for providing part of the answer.
We have a pretty good idea of what would’ve happened if Trayvon had been white, and had been shot by an Hispanic who claimed self-defense.
For one thing, the media would’ve told the truth about George Zimmerman’s ethnic background. They would have portrayed Zimmerman as an innocent Hispanic who was jumped by a young Southern redneck looking for trouble. The nation’s “ugly debate” about creating a “path to citizenship” for immigrants would’ve been invoked as a key factor in white Trayvon’s “obvious hatred” toward Hispanics.
We would also have heard the truth about Trayvon’s troubled past. The media would’ve stressed how this young man had been suspended from school twice, once for vandalism, and again for being caught with stolen jewelry and burglary tools. His marijuana use would’ve been cited as further evidence of his delinquency.
Then we’d hear about the hypocrisy of Southern culture, which presents an ideal of tight-knit families, though Trayvon’s parents had divorced when he was only four. We would have heard a great deal of condemnation of Trayvon’s mother for having kicked the boy out because he was impossible to discipline. And, over and over, the talking heads would have reminded us that white Trayvon was not a resident of Sanford, but only visiting the home of his father’s current girl friend.
You know how unstable Southern families are.
But one fact the media would’ve hammered over and over was white Trayvon’s “homophobia,” yet another affliction brought about by his Southern upbringing. In her interview with Piers Morgan, Jeantel revealed Trayvon’s simmering hatred of homosexuals, a hatred he projected onto George Zimmerman:
“People need to understand, he didn’t want that creepy ass cracka going to his father or girlfriend’s house to go get — mind you, his little brother is there. Mind you I told you, I told Trayvon, [Zimmerman] might have been a rapist.”
Only a raving homophobe would see Zimmerman — who was not only the son of a Peruvian immigrant, but an aspiring officer of the law — as someone who might rape him or his little brother. Typical Southern bias.
But oddly, the things that black Trayvon said and did are interpreted very differently if our imaginary white Trayvon had said and done the same things. Interesting, eh?
Spoiler Alert: If you haven’t seen White House Down and intend to, then you may not want to read further. You have been warned.
I haven’t seen White House Down and don’t intend to. I never intended to because I just wasn’t that thrilled by the concept and the trailers, but if I had intended to I wouldn’t now. It turns out that White House Down is blatant obnoxious left-wing propaganda (as opposed to the slightly less blatant left-wing propaganda Hollywood usually turn out.) The newly elected President is a Black man (Obama by another name) played by Jamie Foxx. Turns out the people trying to kill him are conservatives who are want to install the Republican Speaker of the House (John Boehner by another name) as President.
First of all, the idea that John “Crybaby” Boehner would have the balls to orchestrate a coup against the President is laughable. Second, how delusional and out of touch do Hollywood screen writers, producers, etc. have to be to think that this is a credible plot that movie audiences would flock to see? You wonder if they just said “Screw it, we’re going to make a propaganda piece that demonizes Republicans and damn the consequences,” or if they really were so insulated and deluded that they thought this was an idea that was credible and would sell.
Fortunately, the movie tanked. (Note: I think this link might change every week.) I don’t think it tanked just because of the political angle, which was largely unknown before the movie was released. It tanked partially because it’s concept was so similar to Olympus has Fallen which was released earlier this year and over performed at the box office. (BTW, Gerard Butler is also a more credible leading man than Channing Tatum who suffers the curse of the pretty boy.) But word of mouth has been horrible, and it has divided people politically if the IMDB message board is any indication.
Note to Hollywood writers, producers etc. The people who go see action movies are disproportionally Reds. You might want to consider not shoving your Blue sensibilities down their throats if you actually want them to see your movie.
I thought it would be interesting to compare these two maps. The first, from Atlantic Magazine, shows the States where same-sex marriage is now legal. The second shows the 1861 stand-off between the CSA and the USA during the War Between the States.
Funny how those differences have persisted. It’s almost like they’re still two different countries.
Who here watches Mad Men on AMC? Last night was the season finale. Here is a synopsis of last night’s episode and this season, but be warned, it contains significant spoilers so don’t click on the link unless you have seen last night’s episode.
As broadly as possible, the theme of this season and last night’s episode is the main character, Don Draper’s, inability to change. Don is a man of tremendous talents and tremendous flaws. When his talents are at work, his flaws are overlooked. But eventually his flaws overtake his talents, and people are no longer willing to look the other way.
This theme is communicated in many ways, but one I have paid particular attention to is wardrobe selection. The show began in the 50′s and has now progressed to the late 60′s. As all the other characters’ wardrobes have been changing to reflect the late 60′s, even three piece suit Rodger has updated, Don is still wearing the same 50′s look suit, pocket square and fedora that he started the show with. But one does not get the impression that Don is doing this as a conscious conservative statement. He appears simply oblivious. He is stuck in his heyday, so to speak. He is like the star highschool athlete who peaked at 18.
So what’s the point? When I wrote the post below on Fred Perry as the choice of French Nationalists, I thought one of three things would happen - I would be flamed for bringing it up, it would be met with silence, or it would generate a useful discussion. I think it did the latter.
I think it is important that we explore this intersection between politics and culture, and I hope to do so with future posts. The point here is that wardrobe makes a powerful statement. Our paleo activists need to be aware of this, but consciously, not obliviously like poor Don. I doubt there are many more powerful ways to communicate your “counter-cultural” conservatism than through your choice of attire. This is important when we present ourselves as activists, and in our everyday lives.
This is terrible news! What a shot in the gut. Was there ever a better TV character than Tony Soprano or an actor that came to embody a character more that James Gandolfini did Tony Soprano? In fact, Gandolfini was cursed by how well he played the Soprano role. People couldn’t disassociate him from his character after The Sopranos ended. I know I couldn’t. He couldn’t appear in anything after The Sopranos where I didn’t think, “It’s Tony Soprano.”
May he Rest in Peace.