GIVE TIL IT HURTS!

A New (York) low

It’s as if they actually WANT to burn in the fires of Hell for ten thousand years.

‘Offensive’ musical starring a pansexual Anne Frank could save Broadway
A show has turned the tragedy of Anne Frank into an ‘inclusive’ commentary on wokeness. And New York City audiences can’t get enough.

I recently saw the most brilliant new musical in New York City. It’s not on Broadway. It’s not even in a traditional theatre.

It’s at a bar and performance space called AsylumNYC. And it lives up to the name of its venue.

Slam Frank, whose developmental run opened on September 17 and closes on October 26, is a reimagining of the story of Anne Frank that asks: What if her diary were inclusive? What if we addressed the lack of queer representation in that attic? What if we finally told the story of the Holocaust in a way that honours all people, not just the white people it has always centred on?

In other words: what if someone produced a musical about Anne Frank fit for the 2020s?

The result has been a hit. With mostly word-of-mouth buzz, driven by a monthly publicity budget of less than $60, Slam Frank has so far sold out 28 of its 34 performances, the show’s press agent told me.

Clearly, these pustules have neither shame, conscience. nor decency, not even in undetectable trace amounts. Then again, if they did have, they wouldn’t be Left/liberals in the first place, I suppose. COMING SOON TO A CINEPLEX NEAR YOU: Traci Lords stars as Mother Teresa, with Ron Jeremy as Dondi and Christy Canyon as Sister Bhuvika, in Disney’s’ Taj Mahal Gang-Bang Nuns!

Just in case any of you were wondering if there truly was nothing at all they wouldn’t gleefully shit on from a great height, you have your answer.

“Are Democrats Trying To Start A Civil War?”

A: Well, maybe, maybe not; can’t say I really know, although all recent evidence strongly suggests that they are. Whatever the case may be, the one thing I know for sure and certain is that, should Civil War v2.0 break out in this country before too very much longer, they won’t be too terribly disquieted by it.

Whenever you delve into the modern history of internal national conflict you’re bound to come across post-crisis accounts from people who said “We never saw it coming…” or “The violence hit us from nowhere…” Generally speaking, these were the people who weren’t paying attention and they just happened to survive by sheer luck.

I think of this dynamic a lot these days. I see a large contingent of American society (perhaps 25% of the population) which has been radicalized or brainwashed beyond all reason or repair. These people (leftists) operate deep within a protective bubble of propaganda and zealotry; they function within a hive mind that does not deviate from the demands of their gatekeepers. They cannot be reasoned with, nor can they be satiated. They lust for power and the suffering of anyone who opposes them.

he question is, can communist subversion be defeated without using “authoritarian” measures? Is a constitutional republic equipped to deal with this kind of threat? When someone wages war on your society internally, is there a way to fight them while being civic minded? Probably not.

What we are witnessing in the US and Europe today is, in every way, a Marxist/Communist insurgency. It’s difficult to determine what stage we are at in this war. We have moved well beyond the stage of propaganda and mob influence into the realm of political violence, with multiple assassination attempts and terror attacks against civilian targets.

The gatekeepers for the woke communist movement are obviously Democrat politicians and media influencers. They have been consistently and actively encouraging mass hysteria and violence. They have used media spin to protect activist groups like Antifa, pretending that such organizations don’t exist. Whenever activists cause harm or death, the media and political leaders immediately move to defend that action as if it was justified.

They have gone so far over the top in their behavior, I have to ask: Are they doing this on purpose to trigger a civil war, or an authoritarian response? Do they really believe they will be able to use national instability as a weapon to get what they want?

This is what Democrat leaders are doing with the mentally ill rabble they have accumulated. They are aiming the naive and unhinged horde at the guts of the country and they are hoping to create enough mayhem that Trump, conservatives, nationalists, all of us get blamed for the uncompromising response that follows.

It’s hard to say what the end result will be, but I’m finding it difficult to see an outcome that doesn’t include considerable conflict and, unfortunately, bloodshed. And, to be frank, most of it is likely to befall the leftist side. For the sake of their own self preservation, I hope they realize they’re only being used to further an agenda, and their gatekeepers don’t actually care what happens to them in the end.

Nope, not in the slightest they don’t. As I keep telling ya, for those blackguards it all comes down to one thing, and one thing alone: POWER.

Now dig this…

For anyone who still retains even the most tatterdemalion shred of affection for the Greatest City On Earth, the city that never sleeps, so nice they had to name it twice, New York Fookin’ NOO YAWK—which, Lord help me, I do; I still consider my years in a succession of tiny, too-expensive mouse-holes on the good old LES* to be the absolute best years of my life, and no matter how terribly the shitlibs who run the place damage it, there will always be some part of me that loves the Big Rotten Apple—this video of 1960s NYC is really gonna grab ya, but good.

Via Ace; helluva find, buddy!

* Excepting my last apartment way down on East Broadway betwixt Clinton and Montgomery: stashed just east of Chinatown smack dab in the middle of the Williamsburg and Brooklyn bridges; convenient to absolutely nothing and/or nowhere at all; completely impossible to find a cab any time of the day or night; who even knows how many hundreds, perhaps even millions, of blocks’ walk from the closest F train (ie, Orange Line) subway station; perched atop an ultra-Orthodox shul and synagogue, providing daily opportunities for low ethnic humor to us non-payessed, goyische shmendricks; 3 bedroom/1 bath/full kitchen/spacious LR, two BRs on the front of the building with street -facing windows, 3rd BR with French doors, parquet floors, and a big window looking down on a street-level garden alcove; a three-floor walkup building in a quiet, calm, safe working-class neighborhood w/ mostly Puerto-Rican residents—that pad was incredibly roomy by NYC standards, quite affordably priced to boot; admittedly, our place was located well away from anything remotely resembling The Action (a/k/a The Scene, The Lifestyle, The Haps) but after a short while that started to look to us more and more like a benefit, rather than a drawback

Update! Dunno why it never occurred to me to check before, but a quick Luxxle search yielded this:

Yep, there she is all right: 241 E BWay, home sweet home.

Second helping

Moar Mark Steyn, men!

Because they made the mistake of sabotaging his escalator and then his prompter, the President of the United States opened up a supersized can of geopolitical whup-ass on the UN General Assembly this week, pithily summarised by many headline-writers thus:

Trump’s middle finger to the UN: ‘Your countries are going to hell’

In fairness, this insight was mainly directed at America’s “allies” in Europe. The particular hell they are going to will not be news to those who’ve swung by this shingle over the last twenty-three years, but I thought it might be worth doing a brisk tour d’horizon of where we’re at:

Follows, a tour de farce of some of the more farcical nation-states currently blighting this beleaguered blue marble, such as…oh, go on, take a wild guess…

*AFRICA

In 1900 the population of Africa was 140 million. That’s why it was possible for one continent to be entirely owned by another – Europe – and why a mere five dozen British civil servants could until 1956 govern the whole of the Sudan, reasonably well and better than any time since.

Today the population of African is one-and-a-half billion. In fact, the continent now adds the equivalent of its total 1900 population – 140 million – every four years. In 2020 Africa had 1.38 billion people; in 2025 1.55 billion people. By 2050 the UN projects another billion Africans. By 2070 – or Thatcher/Reagan to now – the world will have five billion (and falling) Asians, over three billion (and rising) Africans, and Europe and the Americas will be a bit of loose pocket change rattling around between those very round numbers.

It is possible, of course, that those numbers will not come to pass. A significant percentage of those three billion might decide to head to almost any Libyan port delivered by Obama, Cameron and Hollande into the hands of the jihad boys and procure passage on a northbound ship to be ushered by a German or Scandinavian “refugee” “charity” into an Italian port.

As with all things, we did this to ourselves: Western medicine eliminated childhood mortality in the most dysfunctional and corrupt countries on earth, thereby incentivisng millions (billions?) to head for a four-star country-house hotel in England. But, as it is, almost all population growth across the planet right now is coming from sub-Saharan Africa and the wackier Islamic redoubts. Would you stay in Chad when your cellphone is full of EU politicians insisting that “Diversity is our strength”?

To put it at its mildest, when do the citizens of countries “going to hell” at least rouse themselves to boo the cobwebbed clichés?

What more might one say about the Dark Continent, really? Leaving that insuperable mess aside, we’ll just avert our eyes as we shuffle on off to another Earthly garden spot, namely:

*THE MIDDLE EAST

I don’t write much about “Palestine” mainly because I haven’t had a new thought on the subject in a quarter-century. But forget, for a moment, the Jews: I understand many people find Jews all a bit Jewy and agree with that Brit Wanker Copper that it’s unacceptably provocative to have Jews strolling the streets looking “openly Jewish”. So set aside your antipathy to the Chosen; it is not in your interest to have another Islamic krappistan to add to the dozens out there.

There are fifty-seven members of the Organisation of Islamic Co-Operation; and, unlike the Commonwealth, at the UN they all vote as a bloc. So far Europe’s only member is Albania, but, given that over ten per cent of Albanian males are now resident in England it can only be a matter of time before the UK applies for “associate membership”. As it is, J D Vance has already suggested that His Majesty’s Dominions and the Continental powers are recognising “Palestine” only for domestic demographic reasons. Why would that surprise anyone? It’s in America Alone, for cryin’ out loud – although admittedly I wrote that when JD was in junior high.

Was “President” Mahmoud Abbas, now in the twenty-first year of his five-year presidential term, grateful for “recognition” by every Ukrainian rent-boy’s favourite bottom? No. He immediately demanded Sir Keir pay him two trillion dollars in reparations for Britain’s administration of its UN mandate for Palestine. The UK is broke but I suppose it could find the money if it, say, downgraded its Albanian sex-traffickers to three-star hotels.

But all “President” Abbas would do is sluice it to his sons, who, after a lifetime’s devotion to “Palestinian” public service are now among the richest men on the planet, thanks to USAid and its Euro-equivalents.

Abbas and the sewer he presides over are the problem not the solution. If conjuring into being such a “state” – with embassies in London, Paris and beyond – is the best we can do at this stage in the Great Game, our civilisation deserves to die.

Can’t quite make out how, for all his perception and analytical skills, Mark nonetheless managed to let the Tribe primarily responsible for the woes of the ME evade his notice here; probably another ((((****JooJooJJooJOOOOO!!!****)))) plot, I suppose.

Next, Steyn takes a quick, hard swipe at China before getting around to the main event.

*THE UNITED STATES

America’s 1950 moment is drawing to a close. If it ends with every US “ally” going off the cliff and the BRICS crowd collapsing the dollar, its three-quarter-century dominance is unlikely to be regarded by posterity as a grand success. Both scenarios are quite likely: for everyone accept the US and its client states, the inauguration of the post-dollar world is simply a matter of agreeing the timing. As for going off the cliff, whether one can remain a First World society of 400 or 500 million is an interesting question, but you’re severely worsening the odds with all the diversity wankerama.

To be sure, Donald Trump has spent the last nine months demonstrating an energy in the executive unimaginable in France or Germany, Canada or Australia. However, he is stymied at every turn by the industrial-scale hollowing out of every institution from your local kindergarten to the Pentagon. A third-rate politicised judiciary – with an extraordinary number of foreign-born judges whose English comprehension does not apparently extend to the separation of powers – is confident it can stall the President’s drive and determination until the next election.

Furthermore, the United States is the fons et origo of every madness afflicting the core west, starting with mass trannification. Millions of apparently sane people, including your children’s teachers and your hospital management (and, in Minnesota, your governor), purport to believe that this is as much of a woman as the late Claudia Cardinale.

Lots more yet to come, folks. This being Mark Steyn, you won’t want to miss a single word of it, I’m sure.

Update! In the excerpt above, Steyn casually flays those who “purport to believe that this is etc etc,” with a link appended to “this” which I didn’t transcribe, as per usual. I just went and checked out said link, and great Googly Moogly! I figgered I knew what I’d find there, but as it turns out it was even worse than I dared imagine.

OOF! Also, ICK! And for good measure, YIKES!!!

Imagine, if you will, being a pretty teenage girl intent on zipping into the Ladies’’ for a quick, much-needed wee before dashing off to Principles Of Marxism class, only to descry that fucking gargoyle leering at you from the doorway of one of the stalls, just before he slams you bodily to the floor, tears off all your clothes, and rapes you.

Imagine, if you will, this creep’s rancid BO; the dank, greasy feel of that filthy t-shirt; his revolting cigarette-cheap-beer-and-Cool-Ranch-Doritos breath; the nose hair-singing piss/shit/jizz/scrote-sweat reek wafting up from his grayish-yellow tighty-whiteys as he slithers out of his raggedy Chinese Levis knockoffs; his rough, encrusted tongue crawling lIzard-like over your neck, face, and tightly-clamped lips.

Meanwhile, you thrash your head furiously from side to side, eyelids squeezed shut as if not seeing might offer some protection from feeling.. Your mind wails over and over that NO, NO, NO, THIS ISN’T REALLY HAPPENING TO ME, THIS CANT BE HAPPENING!!! Just when you notice one of the brute’s hands is insinuating itself into your clean, thick, curly hair, the other one is pinching your now-exposed left nipple roughly, painfully.

I say again: YIKES!!!

Always remember, it’s sickos like the scrofulous weirdo depicted above that shitlibs will defend to their dying breath as perfectly normal, in fact admirable and praiseworthy. Moreover, such creatures should be given full and unfettered access to your young sons and daughters to abuse, terrorize, and harm them in whatever fashion they deem fit.

If you haven’t figured it out already, there’s no time like the present: the REAL problem here isn’t so much the predatory perverts themselves but the vile and soulless shitlibs backing them. Do away with the latter and the former will soon subside back into the shadows of obscurity, oblivion, and disapprobation which had been their lot until fairly recently.

Starving these freaks of the instant celebrity, the exaltation, the manufactured glamor, and the societal and cultural breathing room provided them by the Conniving Left will do the trick right enough. After all, such things are to officially-designated Victim Class crumbums as nutrient-rich soil, water, and proper sunshine are to green plants.

The Left’s Model Of History

     Long, long ago, in a suburb not too far away, I had a teacher for American history who started the year with a striking proposition: specifically, that American history education has been forced into a “good guys versus bad guys” model. (Henceforward, the Model.) He could have named names, but he didn’t. Instead, he presented the Model to us and asked us whether it accurately summarized the way we’d been taught to view American history in our earlier school years.

     It did. It does. It continues to dominate the teaching of American history to this day. It will come as no surprise to my readers that the Model proposes that the “good guys” are on the big-government / international-interventionist left.

     Now, that teacher had a screw or two loose. He thought compound interest on mortgages (especially his) was “unfair.” He felt it was entirely acceptable to belittle those of us who sought careers in science and technology. And he was an ardent, evangelistic political conservative, one of the very few I encountered in my school years. I shan’t describe his idiosyncrasies any further than that. But he did capture the prevailing Model of American history accurately. (Needless to say, he taught from the opposite perspective.)

     One of the implications of the Model is, of course, that those administrations opposed to big government and international meddling are therefore bad. A teacher presenting American history to his students under the Model faces certain challenges. For example, he must reconcile the admiration of the administrations of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, and Grover Cleveland – three Democrat presidents – with the Left’s disapproval of limited government / noninterventionist sentiments. Preserving the Democrat label from association with limited government and noninterventionism can be a chore, especially when the first genuinely “progressive” president, in the contemporary sense, was Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican.

     To that end, American history before the Wilson Administration is glossed over rather than treated as a serious subject worthy of detailed attention. When the teacher presents details for study, they’re the ones that run counter to the sentiments that prevailed in those years: Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase; Jackson’s support for slavery; Cleveland’s intervention in the Pullman strike. The rest is wrapped in murk, lest the young mind be drawn to the limited government / noninterventionist way of thought.

     The Model can follow the young person into his adult life, and often does. It can warp his perception of social and political developments. It can predispose him against public figures identified with the small-government / America-First ideology. That the big-government / globalist model is antithetical to the principles on which the country was founded doesn’t get his attention, much less serious study.

     This comes to mind this morning for reasons disconnected from most current events. However, it does explain the Left’s sanctification of Democrat administrations starting with Woodrow Wilson, America’s first openly globalist president. It also explains the Left’s vilification of the administrations that have run counter to the big-government / globalist pattern. If the former is Good, the latter must be Evil, regardless of any other considerations.

     A little while ago, I encountered a poster on X / Twitter who claimed, quite barefacedly, that it’s been Republican administrations that have been responsible for America’s involvement in foreign wars. I couldn’t quite believe my eyes, as that poster has said many intelligent and observant things. But she had not paid attention to the details of history since 1900:

  • World War I: entered by Woodrow Wilson.
  • World War II: entered by Franklin D. Roosevelt.
  • Korean War: entered by Harry S. Truman, concluded by Dwight Eisenhower.
  • Vietnam War: entered by John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, concluded by Richard Nixon.

     Only the grip of the Model can explain that degree of historical ignorance in an otherwise intelligent, generally erudite person.

     If you’re the parent of a young American in high school today, watch for the effects of the Model. Chat with Junior about what he’s being taught about the history of his country. If you sense the Model in operation, do what you can – gently, of course – to correct its influence. Introducing your child to the facts, and to other historical perspectives, is critical. In this regard I heartily recommend the late Clarence Carson’s six-book series A Basic History of the United States, which is suitable for teenaged readers.

     Historical literacy is among the things the Left fears most. Consider only the effects of the Model on contemporary left-inclined Americans. How many fewer would there be, were it not for the tendentiousness of juvenile education in American history?

2

The end of the beginning

Francis closes his characteristically brilliant piece below with this penultimate ‘graph:

There’s no predicting the outcome. The Right has been too determinedly civil. We’ve never accepted the absoluteness of the contest. We’ve proceeded as if the contest could and would be settled by argument alone. But our adversaries will not accept defeat by that standard. They won’t stop short of anything but total power over all of us: the power of life and death and everything in between. Why should they not go to guns when the national discourse and the electoral contests turn against them?

Why indeed—especially when all we’ve ever done about it each and very time they’ve either heckled, threatened, Doxxed, savagely beaten, jailed, killed or tried to kill another of us is to bluster and yawp about how they’d better knock this shit off because “we have all the guns.” To hear the Blowhard Right tell it, Leftards are all just sissy-mary “transgender” fluffernutters who, unlike their manly selves, would faint dead away at the mere rumor of violence headed in their general direction. When it finally comes down to clobberin’ time for reals, Our Side will surely go through Their Side like shit through the proverbial goose, and they’ll be mighty damned sorry they ever thought it was a good idea to fuck with us. Right? RIIIIIGHT?!?

And then, of course…crickets. Even after the first (of three, so far) attempt on Trump’s life, the consensus among the MAGA sector was that this time the Left had REALLY gone too far, that their long-overdue day of reckoning was at hand for sure. Hell, we all thought it, had ourselves a grand old time snickering to each other about how seriously damned lucky the Leftards were that Trump WASN’T killed that day in PA, that if he HAD been, those shitheels would’ve been well and truly fucked. A veritable tsunami of Normal rage would’ve inundated the hapless shitlibs and sucked those rat-bastards down, down, down inrto the briny depths forever, and good riddance to them.

Nope, the world-famous photo of Our Prezmodent shaking his fist in angry defiance, Old Glory seconding his defiance behind him, the side of his face and neck covered with the blood the bullet had left in its path, why, of COURSE they’d gone too far! No true American would ever dream of taking something this over the top, this extreme, passively, an entire nation of sofa-surfers muttering the same vows to finally do something, to make the sumbitches pay this time, to teach them what happens to those who go to far and cross that bright red line.

And then, sing it with me one more time, y’all…crickets. Second verse, same as the first.

So now it’s Charlie Kirk’s turn to assume the entirely ceremonial role of Final Fucking Straw which will unclip the leash which holds us back from scrambling off to dish up some man-size portions of richly-deserved retribution that always seems like it’s right around the next bend but somehow never actually hoves into sight, tootling him melodiously all the way.

Yes, many of us are angry—incandescently angry, in fact, absolutely fucking FURIOUS over this baroque, needless pissing-away of a human life, and rightly so too. Not just any old human life either; Kirk’s was especially productive—a more-productive-than-most life spent trying his best to be a good Daddy, a loving and faithful spouse, and a decent Christian. The value of this singular life was raised continually from the open-hearted generosity with which Charlie lavished his affection, his charity, his energy, and his attention on everyone around him. His students speak of his kindness, the selfless, laid-back way he’d spend hour after hour nudging them just this much closer to truly understanding some stubborn little something which had seemed just too big a leap for his balky mind to make only minutes ago.

Too generous for his own good; a Christian man who, rather than putting on a mask to present others with a misleading portrait of his sincerity and devotion, instead didn’t seem to care one way or another what anyone else might think of him, labored mightily, honestly, and above all humbly to live up to the tenets of his Christianity. According to those who knew him well, Charlie was modest, courtesy, responsible, judicious. He was never boastful or vain, never arrogant or selfish or coarse.  Charlie Kirk just simply…WAS, that’s all.

Those noble qualities and others are why Nornals admire Kirk. Ironically, those same qualities are exactlty what made Leftards hate him so vehemently, so viciously. I also imagine those qualities had a great deal to do with why the miserable oxygen thief who killed him decided it needed doing, and he was the perfect choice for the job.

This week’s one-two knockout combination leads with a flurry of set-ups, beginning with A) the D卐M☭CRAT-crafted butchery of poor Iryna Zarutska (yes, this one is 110% on them; don’t even TRY to tell me it ain’t) which went down just up the road a piece in the shithole of Charlotte, NC—a story which spent the last 2+ weeks being rigidly locked down by the D卐M☭CRAT-friendly local media establishment at the unscrupulous behest of idiot Mayor Vi Lyle but which managed to dig its way out of Information Prison nevertheless;the set-up jabs will be followed closely by a sleep-inducing right cross like B) yesterday’s wanton gunning down of a good, decent, and altogether admirable man for purely political purposes together have gotten a lot of folks positively seething, just waiting with bated breath for someone to point them at a worthwhile target and turn ‘em loose to wreak havoc on the shitlib malefactors behind this perfect storm of horror, calamity, and bilious evil we, our former country, and indeed the entire world has been struggling to navigate for all these years.

It’d be nice to think these fiends might for once be at real risk of a long-postponed settling of accounts, definitely. Sorry and all, but try as I might I just can’t see it happening. It’d be fair to say that the cumulative effect of the enormities which, figuratively speaking, were stuffed into a paper bag, put on the porch by the front door, and set afire by those match-wielding D卐M☭CRAT firebugs was to spark within fed-up Normal hearts a feeble light of hope that at last, the karmic flame might be about to catch, spread, and burn some dick-with-ears who badly needed burning.

But alas, that would require Real Americans to do something beyond bitching and moaning about the not-fairness of a life beset by a plague of Leftists, which they just will not do. So count on it: in another cpl-three weeks, this too shall pass and be forgotten. The speculation about the seemingly improving chances that the citizenry most harmed by Leftard bullshit might finally step up to the plate and have a few mighty swings at bringing shitlib brigandry to a halt once and for all will carry on as before, bringing with it the same result it always has, namely none whatsoever. Eventually, the spark gutters out, the bleak darkness settles back in again, the hope comes to naught. And as per usual, nothing changes.

Much as I do dread such grim awfulness coming to pass in my own time, let alone in my daughter’s, the least of what OUGHT to come of all this horror and grief is the welcome arrival of a few new, improved rules. To wit:

  • They kill one (1) of ours, we kill three (3) of theirs IMMEDIATELY, without reference to Theirs being of roughly equivalent social/cultural/financial stature, political relevance, or importance with Ours, just…one of Ours, three of Theirs, every time without fail, without exception, period fucking DOT
  • They can no longer so much as leave their own homes without being hounded, harassed, and terrorized by a phalanx of armed-to-the-eyeteeth Real Americans continuously shouting specific, detailed statements threatening grievous bodily injury soon to be visited upon said Leftists, their families, and all their like-minded cohorts every step of the way to wherever it is they’re trying to go
  • The reprisals will continue until Leftists are so cowed they blanch and literally quake with fear any time they are in the vicinity of non-Leftists; When that stage is attained, then and only then can the mission-accomplished standard be hoisted on flagpoles across the land
  • All unofficial leaders must prioritize their efforts to inspire, motivate, and set an example for uncertain Normals who are dubious at best about manning up and involving themselves in this sudden surge of anti-Leftist activism; personal attention, lavish praise, and enthusiastic encouragement must be showered liberally upon every gun-shy Normal who decides he wants to get past his anxiety, cast his inhibitions to the wind, shove his inner wuss aside, leave his worries behind, and take the plunge
  • No more big talk, no more handwringing, no more shilly-shallying around; just shut up and DO IT already

Same-same with after-action gossip and/or swapping of sea-stories amongst fellow pipehitters—none of that stupid shit, please, you’ll have the Fibbies kicking in your door toot fucking sweet; in sum, a little less talk and a lot more action, as a great old tune by some good friends of mine from out Denver way put it.

As for this “no place for political violence in America” bushwa, sorry pal, but the Founding Fathers of this country would like a word. Yes, the mere prospect of what I’ve for years referred to as Civil War v2.0 is indeed terrible; the reality of such a thing would be so nightmarish as to be beyond human imagining. But is it really the worst of all possible things? John Stuart Mill put paid to that one a good-ish while back.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse. When a people are used as mere human instruments for firing cannon or thrusting bayonets, in the service and for the selfish purposes of a master, such war degrades a people. A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice; a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their free choice, — is often the means of their regeneration. A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. As long as justice and injustice have not terminated their ever-renewing fight for ascendancy in the affairs of mankind, human beings must be willing, when need is, to do battle for the one against the other.

And there you have it. Much as I do dread the idea of a CW2, and believe me I do, the pathetic mewling of those who misrepresent themselves as staunch, stalwart American devoted to liberty, the Constitution, and the Republic bequeathed to them by far better men than they’ll ever be is so dreadful it sickens me to my core. It’s embarrassing to hear such sunshine patriots as they prattle on and on these days about the urgently vitally critical urgency that we “fight” this “war” using non-violent means exclusively—a war, mind, against an Enemy who, meanwhile, is not just talking about his intention to subjugate whatever few of us he doesn’t just kill outright but is actually doing precisely that, has been for years now.

WE’RE IN A WAR! WE’RE IN A WAR! LET’S HAVE NO FIGHTING, GENTLEMEN!!!

The more I hear these feebs natter on almost rhapsodically about how oh MAN, we’re really gonna “fighty-fight-fight-fight-FIGHT” those bastiges now, you betcher!! the more I marvel at their historical illiteracy, their apparent belief in the risible notion that a successful defense of the principles, institutions, and charters of our Founding against the rapacious Left can be achieved with mere words alone, perhaps a nice civilized chat over tea and crumpets when it’s all done.

The mulish refusal of these oh-so-delicate types to accept just how deadly serious the Leftist Enemy truly is about his aspirations, his Divine Right to rule, the power, perks, and position to which he is so clearly entitled. The Sunshine Patriot’s prissy abhorrence for mussing his hair and ruining his spotless, impeccably-pressed Brooks Brothers duds by stepping daintily down from the High Road to partake in *shudder* a vulgar brawl with Leftist swine is positively Marquess of Queensberry-esque.

The murder of Charlie Kirk, whatever else it may or may not be, contains a harsh, bitter lesson for us all. Here was a man entirely devoted to the proposition that Americans might somehow resolve differences which are in truth irreconcilable, do so peaceably, then live more or less amicably together afterwards. Against all odds, Kirk was having notable success in winning young people over to his point of view—so successful had he been, in fact, that he had to be assassinated before his last-ditch Hail Mary project to rescue America That Was without bloodshed had gone too far.

The word-warrior Sunshine Patriots spectacularly beclown themselves with everything they say. They would do well to study the lesson thrust upon us by Charlie Kirk’s unjust martyrdom until a bit of cold, hard reality has seeped into those cinderblock skulls of theirs at last. Meanwhile, they really ought to keep well out of the way of any Real Americans who might now be fed up enough to actually start fighting back for a change, and who don’t shy like a wild mustang beside a backfiring automobile from the idea of defending themselves, their beliefs, and their country using the same methods by which it originally became a country in the first place.

NOTE: All of the preceding assumes that Kirk was assassinated by Leftist(s), either a lone random nutjob or the work of some malevolent Leftard cabal nobody ever heard of. There are other possibilities, of course, some believable, others not so much. There’s the one which posits that Kirk’s murder harks back to some kind of Deep State skullduggery, another more specific, better-developed possibility which suggests that it could have been an offshoot of a larger FBI black-bag job whose original purpose was to smoke out some American ReichWing Extremists and/or insurrectionists so’s the Fibbies could have more toys to play with. Or, perhaps, the atrocity was/is something entirely Else.

One of the more moronic of these hypotheses which flatly insists, with no discernible evidence either good or bad, upon some sort of Mossad involvement with the Kirk hit is not to be taken seriously, I don’t think, or not by any serious person, at any rate. Essentially, that one’s just weirdness purely for weirdness’s sake, put forth by the usual obsessive dolts who descry a hidden Hebrew hand behind absolutely everydamnedthing. Such jejune suspicions are usually child’s play to dispense with, and this one is no different.

To begin with, why in the ever-lovin’ blue-eyed world would Mossad even want to kill Kirk in the first place, much less chance bringing down the everlasting fury of a substantial chunk of the Earth’s population on their heads should some clandestine Mossad/IDF/Israel connection to the Kirk job ever be exhumed? Realistically, what exactly could Mossad hope to gain by such a dastardly atrocity—for its service, its nation, its fellow Jews? I imagine that Mossad, Israel’s government, the Israeli military, Shin Bet, Yamam, the Knesset, and the Israeli people have quite enough on their plate at the moment to be bothering themselves overmuch about the more granular details about the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

On the other hand though, let’s not elide, overlook, or try to minimize what’s REALLY going on here either, aiiight? Below the surface of this shady business are wheels within wheels within wheels, turning around and around unseen by anyone. Why do they turn? Nobody really knows. Remember, if you will, the One Big Secret none but the bravest, most perceptive, most well-informed handful of us will ever be privy to, which of course could only be…

****((((JOOOJOOOJOOOJOOOOOOOOOOO!!!))))****

Update! My old friend over at StreamFortySeven explains what it looks like from where he sits.

In the summer of 2020, in my home town, there was the threat that Antifa would go into residential neighborhoods to cause havoc and destruction, as they had done in the suburbs of a major city 60 miles to the east. Word was got out, by various means, to them that this would not be tolerated, they might walk in, but they would not walk out. They did rip up some stores in the downtown area – part of the mob there was led by two ex-convicts on parole from the state prison, and they smashed and robbed a local jewelry store – but they did not enter any neighborhoods, because they did not dare to, police or not. A strong citizen-led defense prevented havoc and destruction, when the police were told to stand down. This did not happen in Minneapolis or Kenosha, Wisconsin or Portland, Oregon or Seattle, Washington; it did occur in a town in Idaho, where Antifa were brought in by bus, but were met with armed citizens, and ended up leaving town.

It is the duty of citizens to acquire arms and become well-practiced in their use, and band together for their own mutual protection. Lawless people are not stupid, they pick their targets, and prefer weak victims to those who are strong and prepared, the same as any other sort of criminals do. And in the wake of the assassination today, there have been many calls to go out and “hunt down Democrats” – but this temptation must be resisted, lawlessness is not defeated or prevented by more lawlessness. And it may be to the benefit of certain foreign countries, especially those under Communist or despotic rule, to have the social fabric of the United States torn apart, and the people divided and set upon each other. Self-defense and defense of community and family is one thing, generalized lawlessness and revenge is quite another, and we should keep this firmly in mind, in the 250th year of our independence.

All fine and well, but how does this self-restraint in the face off extraordinary provocation square with Jefferson’s exhortation that “God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion“? What, too, are we to make of his well-known argument from a little further along in the Smith letter:

And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.

Do we think so highly of our sophistication, our prodigious intellects, that we now think ourselves superior to Jefferson, Madison, Adams, Henry, the others? If we sit idly by while our best and brightest are slaughtered like livestock by D卐M☭CRATs whose intentions—towards us and this nation alike—are in no sense honorable, decent, wholesome, or benificent, but more closely approximate those of the spider in the fat corner of his web for the unwary fly? That being so, can we be proud of the brutal tyranny which will be the inevitable consequence of our lassitude? When said tyranny has been established while we remained idle, will we retain a right to complain about our lot? One last Jeffersonian incitement to violence before I shut the heck up.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

With the D卐M☭CRATs now so emboldened, so certain of the inevitability of victory, that they feel perfectly free to murder the leaders of their opposition in broad daylight before the very eyes of a large audience (which included the victim’s horror-stricken wife), without fear of repercussion, recrimination, or reprimand, are we to think this a good thing? To be happy about it? To quietly accede to an intolerable state of affairs without demur? To comply, to capitulate, to yield ourselves up with an indifferent shrug and a soft sigh of resignation?

Is the duty spoken of in that last quoted passage no longer applicable to Americans? Has it expired? Been repealed? Revoked? Are such arcane concepts as “rights,” “freedom,” and “duties” no more than outmoded philosophical artifacts which at some point we all grow out of, like the shirts, jeans, jackets, sneakers, &c which fit perfectly back when you were a kid but are way too small for you to squeeze into now that you’re a man grown?

Whichever way the whole mishegas shakes out, it makes me very sad that my country should have been brought to such a sorry pass.

Time for some truth

EXCELLENT rundown of a few historical realities that are sure to stick in certain craws.

So here’s the truth.

The Jews are not foreigners in Israel. They are the world’s oldest continuous nation in the land, with a history there stretching back nearly four millennia. Insofar as their ancient ancestors thoroughly intermarried with their Canaanite predecessors, the history in the land of the descendants of those unions goes back even further: they are literally the original owners of the land. The Jews built kingdoms in that land before Rome — not just the empire but the city itself —existed, they worshiped in Jerusalem millennia before Muhammad, and those in exile prayed for return unceasingly, reassuring one another throughout: “Next year in Jerusalem”.

Israel is not a colony. It’s a restoration.

Nor is the modern State of Israel some Zionist invention, or an exercise of British imperial fiat. In 1947, the United Nations voted overwhelmingly to establish Israel, partitioning the remaining 20% of the Palestine Mandate into two states: one Jewish, one Arab. The Jews accepted. The Arabs declared a war of annihilation, just three years after the Holocaust, a war the Jews won.

Why do those two facts alone not settle this once and for all?

Oh, and that other 80%? Already given to the Palestinian Arabs in 1922, the modern Kingdom of Jordan. In 1947, the UN sought to give half the remainder — the 20% set aside for a Jewish homeland — to the Arabs as well. That’s 90% for the Arabs, just 10% for the indigenous Jews.

If those Palestinians who refuse to live in peace in Israel (which they may do), and refuse to live peacefully beside the Jews in the so-called “territories” (which they may also do), wish to live peacefully somewhere, what is wrong with the 80% of Palestine on the East Bank of the Jordan? Do these colonizers really need 100%? And why would anyone agree to such an absurdity?

The Jews did not ask for 100%, or even 50%. The Jews accepted the UN’s terms in peace. The Arabs responded with an attempted genocide, not just by the Palestinian Arabs themselves but also the surrounding Arab states. The Israeli victory is nothing short of a miracle. Nor did the Arabs stop there: they expelled vast Jewish communities from their countries, minorities who had lived continuously in those lands for as much as 2,700 years.

Israel is not a “settler colony.” The State of Israel was founded by and through international law. Virtually the entire world agreed that there must be a Jewish state, just as there must be an Indian state, and a Kenyan state, and a Polish state, and a French state. Israel’s existence rests not on imperial decree but on the consensus of the nations, and on the same principle of self-determination that birthed nearly every nation in the modern world.

By contrast, the Arabs now calling themselves “Palestinians” are not indigenous. Their presence begins with the Muslim conquest, millennia after the Jews. Jews still lived in the land, then and always, even after Rome had expelled many of them. And most of the ancestors of today’s Palestinians are recent arrivals as well, settling in the wasteland the area had become under the Turks only after the Jews began to develop it, “making the desert bloom”. They came to benefit from Jewish enterprise. Now they want to steal what the Jews built.

The irony is glaring: those who arrived by imperial sword now claim the mantle of the native, while the true indigenous people are smeared as colonizers.

But…but…but…butbutbut…THEY HAVE BIG, HOOKED NOSES! AND THEY’RE GREEDY, JUST OBSESSED WITH MONEY!! AND THEY STICK TO THEIR OWN KIND, LIKE SOME KIND OF CLAN OR TRIBE OR SOMETHING!!! AND THEY CONTROL ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING!!! AND…AND…AND…

((((****JOOOOOOOOOO!!!****))))

3

Forget, hell!

Unreconstructed Southron Baron Bodissey reports—with pitchers—on the ceremony commemorating the anniversary of the Appomattox tragedy/disaster.

Appomattox: Lest We Forget
This afternoon I attended a ceremony marking the 160th anniversary of the surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia (which I often sardonically refer to as “the Confederate Nakba”). It was organized by the Appomattox chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, and took place at the Confederate Cemetery in the Appomattox Court House National Historical Park. The cemetery itself is on a plot of land that isn’t part of the historical park, and is owned by the UDC rather than the federal government. As a result, at that location we unreconstructed Confederates can engage in our customary activities without being busted for hate speech or otherwise interfered with.

The occasion began with a prayer. We then pledged allegiance to all three flags: the US flag, the Virginia flag, and the Confederate battle flag. Yes, I know some of those pledges are mutually exclusive, but nobody seems to care.

Speak for yourself on that one, young feller. Anyhoo. Onwards.

Following that there were a few brief speeches, several songs, and some reading of poetry. UDC members in widow’s weeds placed a rose by each grave, and two little girls set up battle flags next to each headstone. There are nineteen soldiers buried in the cemetery, all but seven of them unknown, including a solitary Union soldier (who got the Stars and Stripes next to his headstone).

Fuckin’ bluebellied Yankee sumbitch. Anyhoo. Onwards.

Then a number of wreaths were presented and placed next to the memorial stone by representatives of the groups that donated them, mostly chapters of the UDC or camps of the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV). Not all of the groups were local: one of the SCV camps that presented a wreath was based in Honolulu, Hawaii.

All in all, it was an excellent occasion. It was a reminder — at least for me — that the Confederate battle flag is not about slavery or tariffs or even states’ rights, but rather a symbol of resistance to tyranny, and a reminder that Virginia was invaded and devastated by an alien army.

Deo Vindice!

That penultimate paragraph pretty much says it all, far as I’m concerned.

A brief history of American protectionism, tariffs, “free trade,” et al

PRO TIP: It was nothing like what you probably think it was.

Protectionism in the United States is protectionist economic policy that erects tariffs and other barriers on imported goods. This policy was most prevalent in the 19th century. At that time, it was mainly used to protect Northern industries and was opposed by Southern states that wanted free trade to expand cotton and other agricultural exports. Protectionist measures included tariffs and quotas on imported goods, along with subsidies and other means, to restrain the free movement of imported goods, thus encouraging local industry.

There was a general lessening of protectionist measures from the 1930s onwards, culminating in the free trade period that followed the Second World War. After the war, the United States promoted the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), to liberalize trade among all capitalist countries. In 1995, GATT became the World Trade Organization (WTO), and with the collapse of Communism its open markets/low tariff ideology became dominant worldwide. Protectionism has increased in popularity since the election of Donald Trump in 2016.

Britain was the first country to successfully use a large-scale infant industry promotion strategy. However, its most ardent user was the U.S. Economic historian Paul Bairoch once called it “the homeland and bastion of modern protectionism” (Economics and World History: Myths and Paradoxes, Bairoch).

Britain initially did not want to industrialize the American colonies, and implemented policies to that effect. For example, banning high value-added manufacturing activities. Thus, the American Revolution was, to some extent, a war against this policy, in which the commercial elite of the colonies rebelled against being forced to play a lesser role in the emerging Atlantic economy. This explains why, after independence, the Tariff Act of 1789 was the second bill of the Republic signed by President Washington allowing Congress to impose a fixed tariff of 5% on all imports, with a few exceptions.

Most American intellectuals and politicians during the country’s catching-up period felt that the free trade theory advocated by British classical economists was not suited to their country. The US went against the advice of economists like Adam Smith, Ricardo and Jean Baptiste Say and tried to protect its industries. Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury of the United States (1789–1795) and economist Daniel Raymond were the first theorists to present the argument of the emerging industry, not the German economist Friedrich List. List started out as a free trade advocate and only converted to the infant industry argument following his exile in the U.S (1825–1830).

Hamilton feared that Britain’s policy towards the colonies would condemn the United States to be only producers of agricultural products and raw materials. Washington and Hamilton believed that political independence was predicated upon economic independence. Increasing the domestic supply of manufactured goods, particularly war materials, was seen as an issue of national security. In his Reports, Hamilton argued that the competition from abroad and the “forces of habit” would mean that new industries that could soon become internationally competitive (“infant industries”) would not be started in the United States, unless the initial losses were guaranteed by government aid.

According to him, this aid could take the form of import duties or, in rare cases, prohibition of imports. He called for customs barriers to allow American industrial development and to help protect infant industries, including bounties (subsidies) derived in part from those tariffs. He also believed that duties on raw materials should be generally low. Hamilton explained that despite an initial “increase of price” caused by regulations that control foreign competition, once a “domestic manufacture has attained to perfection … it invariably becomes cheaper”.

In 1789, Congress passed a tariff act , imposing a 5% flat rate tariff on all imports. Between 1792 and the war with Britain in 1812, the average tariff level remained around 12.5%. In 1812, all tariffs were doubled to an average of 25%, in order to cope with the increase in public expenditure due to the war.

In 1816, a new law was introduced to keep the tariff level close to the wartime level—especially protected were cotton, woolen, and iron goods. The American industrial interests that had blossomed because of the tariff lobbied to keep it, and had it raised to 35 percent in 1816. The public approved, and by 1820, America’s average tariff was up to 40 percent.

According to Michael Lind, protectionism was America’s de facto policy from the passage of the Tariff of 1816 to World War II, “switching to free trade only in 1945”.

Somewhat surprising, no? What first got me to thinking about these weighty matters was Bayou Peter’s post on them, expounding Jeff Childers’s post on same. To wit:

It would be easy to dismiss yesterday’s announcement as dry, economic arcana — tariffs, trade deficits, bilateral agreements, country-by-country charts, and economic reports. But don’t be fooled by all the paperwork. What Trump did wasn’t just a historic across-the-board trade action.

It was a once-in-a-century power shift.

To understand how truly historic it was, look back to Bretton Woods, 1944 — the postwar deal where America agreed to carry the world’s economic burdens in exchange for geopolitical dominance.

After the devastation of WWII, the United States promised to help rebuild Europe and Japan, by opening our previously protected markets to foreign goods, keeping our tariffs low to nonexistent, providing the world’s reserve currency, and underwriting global security with American military power.

In return, other countries were supposed to gradually liberalize their economies, buy American goods, and play by the rules. But they never did.

Instead, they took our postwar deal —designed to help them— and ran with it. They piled up tariffs, non-tariff barriers, VAT taxes, and trade cheats while the U.S. kept its markets wide open.

For decades, the American working class footed the bill while foreign economies fattened themselves, and American elites made billions facilitating and perpetuating the grift. That was globalism. It’s not an ideology— it is a business model. And Trump just crushed the model.

I’ve always insisted that Trump is a helluva lot smarter than most people want to give him credit for. The obvious fact that he fully understands what his tariff moves are at bottom all about ought to establish his intelligence to all but the most reflexively stubborn Trump hater’s satisfaction.

Lots more yet to the above-linked posts, natch; dry and deadly dull as the subject matter may seem at first blush, you really, really want to read all three in their entirety.

Update! You gotta love it, you truly, truly do.

Tariff Liberation Day Has Arrived
Cue the mass hysteria. Donald Trump’s Liberation Day has arrived, as the decades of foreign nations tariffing our goods without reciprocal tariffs ends.

The tariff war between the United States and dozens of other nations just took a major escalation, as the president imposed reciprocal tariffs on a number of goods from a lengthy list of countries. (The tariffs are reciprocal in that if a nation tariffs 10% on U.S. goods, so will we on that nation’s products.) The president aims to bring manufacturing back to America and to cow hostile nations. While many economists and media figures are prophesying economic disaster, it is worth noting that tariffs during both Ronald Reagan’s presidency and Donald Trump’s first term boosted economic growth and wage increases here in America.

Trump declared in an executive order that he finds “underlying conditions, including a lack of reciprocity in our bilateral trade relationships, disparate tariff rates and non-tariff barriers, and U.S. trading partners’ economic policies that suppress domestic wages and consumption, as indicated by large and persistent annual U.S. goods trade deficits, constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States.“

While other countries have been allowed to impose extortionate tariffs on American goods for decades, America has often not imposed reciprocal tariffs, leading to a very unbalanced and unfair system that often drives manufacturing and jobs out of the U.S. It remains to be seen if Trump’s new tariffs can successfully bring home jobs and boost our economy.

Let the shitlibs whinge and complain as loud and as long as they like, Mr President, sir. They’re going to anyway, no matter what you do or don’t do, which we all know full well by now. So let the sound of their rage, frustration, and bitter despair be as music to every ReichWingNaziDeathBeast© ear, sayeth I. Just more for decent, right-thinking Americans to point and laugh at, and that’s a thing of goodness.

An outcome assured ere the first shot was fired

A little AmRev 101 from our friend and fellow Carolinian Herschel Smith.

What If Britain Had Won The Revolutionary War?
This is a short video that asks a false hypothetical. There is almost no need to respond, but I’ll do it anyway just in case another stupid “historian” is tempted to raise the same question.

England had no chance of winning the American war of independence. Washington had fought Clinton’s troops to a standstill in the North. The only strategy the English saw forward was to send Cornwallis South to the port of Charleston, take S.C. (where they were told that there were loyalists), co-opt the support of the loyalists, retain the South, and then eventually encircle Washington.

It had no chance at all of working. The battle of Kings Mountain proved that. It was a battle of loyalists versus patriots (the over mountain men). The over mountain men had stupidly been told (by the British) that the British were coming for them. The men were harvesting crops at the time and couldn’t go to meet the British (or loyalist forces), so they sent their sons into battle. The women stood on the sides of the streets and sang hymns as their sons went off to battle. They travelled mostly at night, but virtually continuously. The average age of the fighters sent by the families to fight the loyalists was 14 years old.

They lost very few fighters, but the loyalist forces were dealt a staggering defeat. Thus ended Cornwallis’s plan to use the loyalists. His position in S.C. was no more secure. He couldn’t maintain logistics to far flung outposts because fighters using insurgent tactics were harassing them. A number of battles occurred, but eventually it all came to a head at the battle of Cowpens, where Cornwallis lost a third of his army.

Another third was in the infirmary, sick with heat exhaustion, diseases borne by mosquitos, and wounds inflicted by insurgent fighters. Cornwallis took the remaining healthy third of his army to transport the ailing third from the infirmary and headed into N.C., targeting Yorktown for resupply and reinforcements. His forces were harassed all through N.C. on the way to Yorktown, with fighters shooting from behind trees and then melting into the bush, never to be seen again (until the next skirmish, of course).

The French were there waiting at Yorktown to bombard them from the sea, but they may not have been. In the end it wouldn’t have changed the outcome of the war, just prolonged it.

Plenty more to this one yet, of which you simply must read the all.

In all my long years of intently studying American history, both inside the classroom and out of it, I can’t recall ever running across anything like Herschel’s unique take on these epochal, world-altering events, and can find no room to quibble with or contradict his sure-footed reasoning. I CAN attest to the complete veracity of his assessment of South Cackalacky, where I’ve lived the last 4-5 years or so, as “a foreboding place,” particularly the various reasons why that’s the case: dangerous critters from insects to snakes to mountain lions to bears to God only knows what; pestilence-rife swamps, bogs, and/or marshes pretty much everyplace you look; miserable, nigh unbearable summertime heat, and savage humidity the whole year ‘round.

Kinda makes one feel sorry for poor doomed Cornwallis, when you think on it.

Intro to history

Just clearing an old open tab here, no big thang. I promise you, though, you’re almost certainly gonna enjoy it.


OUCH! I felt that stinging slap from all the way over here.

1

On moving forward, looking back, and standing still

Any article that opens with Cromwell’s most well-remembered quote is bound to catch my eye, and this too-brief piece is some seriously heady stuff.

“Is it therefore infallibly agreeable to the Word of God, all that you say? I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.”–Oliver Cromwell, letter to the general assembly of the Church of Scotland (3 August 1650)

Five years ago, I wrote a book about evolution and human cognition. This was a stretch for me, as I am a three-time English major, so I did a lot of research. It was fascinating research, which taught me a lot of important things about knowledge, human nature, cognition, and storytelling. It also taught me the single most depressing thing that I know, which is this: human reason did not evolve to help us find the truth; it evolved to help us defend positions arrived at in largely unreasonable ways.

The reasons for this lie deep in the reptilian corners of our brains. Natural selection selects for what is useful, which may or may not be what is true. Decisiveness is useful. Appearing confident is useful. Defending one’s turf is useful. And winning fights is always useful. But knowing the truth about abstract universal propositions involving beauty, truth, and God? Not so much. It turns out that appearing to know the truth about these things is much more valuable, evolutionarily speaking, than actually being right.

Culture reinforces these evolutionary dynamics in different ways. Mormon culture, for example, places an enormous premium on appearing to know the truth, especially in religious matters. Few people ever stand up in testimony meeting to proclaim that they think the Church is true, or even that they hope or believe the Church is true. From the time we can talk, we announce from the pulpit that we know the Church is true. We know it from the bottom of our hearts, with every fiber of our beings, absolutely, certainly, completely, just like Moroni promised.

But here’s the deal: you are wrong about stuff. I am wrong about stuff. We are all wrong about stuff. This is just math. Given the number of things that all of us believe (or do not believe) to be facts, the number of things that we consider (or do not consider) valuable, and the number of policies that we think (or do not think) will work, there is no possible way that we are going to be right about everything. We understand this retroactively. We can all remember times that we were wrong in the past. But such is the nature of human cognition that we can barely even fathom what we might be wrong about today.

And this is why Cromwell’s challenge–“I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you might be mistaken”–is so important to us (and yes, I do realize how ironic it is to quote Oliver Cromwell on the possibility of being wrong). Another word for this is “humility.” This is important because it actually is part of our religion, and because it makes us people that other people can stand to be around. But it is also important because, as a matter of near-mathematical certainty, we actually are wrong about some religious things–and probably quite a few.

Yeah, well, with so many Leftards all around us nowadays, humility has necessarily become a quite scarce commodity.

There’ll always be an England?

Perhaps. Then again, perhaps not.

BrokenBritain 1.

BrokenBritain 2.

Lest any of us get to feeling smug from the cozy “couldn’t happen here” cope, may I remind you that, for the last five-six decades at least, the FUSA has tended to lag no more than five to ten years behind the Mother Country in such matters. As Bracken says, this is but the force-assembly phase of a thousand-year campaign of civilizational conquest and subjugation the decadent West can’t be arsed to concern itself about nowadays, much less prevent, still less reverse.

In the course of re-skimming through some of my favorite speculative-fiction works over lo, the past year or thereabouts—Peter Hamilton in particular, although there are others—I’ve noticed a thing that amuses me greatly. Namely, the unfounded assumption that Once-Great Britain will somehow project the cultural dominance it enjoyed several hundred years ago across the spacefaring worlds of the 30th-31st-32nd Century and beyond. Offhand references to obscure London neighborhoods, linguistic tics, architectural styles, even such prosaic artifacts as steak and kidney pie, bangers & mash, and baked beans for breakfast (?!?) get tossed around liberally, betraying the quaint, vanity-inspired notion that anybody in the far-distant future will even know what those things are…or, y’know, were.

For the matter of it, many of them are barely even remembered in present-day Londonistan, let alone Proxima Centauri in 3426; already, they are no longer traditions to be cherished and preserved, but irrelevant antiquities to be discarded. Will cookies still be known far and wide as “biscuits”? Will a yobbo still be a yobbo, a wog still a wog, a Frenchman still a Frog?

More to the point: will a Moslem-overrun England be capable of engineering and developing a wormhole drive, FTL communications, colony arkships, artificial-gravity generators? Will the Abdul-Abdel-Abdullahs, Saddiqs, and Achmeds in charge of the New British Caliphate be at all interested in undertaking such ambitious, multi-generational projects?

Not bloody likely, mate.

Not to beat up too much on Hamilton and his confreres, mind. Hey, nobody gets everything right every time; foresighted as he was, even Heinlein never saw touch screens coming, and his futuristic computer gizmos printed their output on actual paper, ferchrissakes—a long, laborious process which usually took not just hours but days. Also, Heinlein’s transtellar-flight helmsmen operated their ships’ version of “warp drive” via clunky levers, knobs, and pushbuttons; his navigators (astrogators?) plotted their course not with a holographic projection or main-viewscreen star chart, but boring old No 2 pencil and paper.

No energy weapons; no personal force-fields; no magnetized grav-boots for use in micro-gee environments or EVA. No antimatter propulsion; no mass-to-energy converters; no inertial dampeners; no starships capable of atmospheric flight and/or landing. No malmetal, glassteel, or plascrete. Heinlein and his fellow visionaries came up with lots of cool stuff in their day, sure, but their vision didn’t extend quite that far.

Rule of thumb which ought to be remembered but is too often forgotten: just because even our finest minds can’t see it on the horizon doesn’t mean it ain’t coming all the same.

(Via WRSA)

2024 in review

Hell with that shitlib Dave Barry and his snarky swipes at anyone to the right of Josef Stalin, David Thompson dishes out the real deal.

The Year Reheated
In which we marvel at the mental contortions of our self-imagined betters.

The year began with a male Guardian columnist, Mr Phineas Harper, announcing his plan to heroically advance “gender equality” via the medium of self-absorption and by wearing a pleated skirt. Guardian readers were invited to believe that the sight of Mr Harper “dancing in skirts” and feeling “buoyed up” by compliments regarding his ensemble would, in ways never quite pinned down, liberate British women from their grim, downtrodden existence.

We also paid a visit to the pages of Scientific American, where assistant professor Juan P Madrid indulged his urges to police other people’s speech, while wasting the time and energy of those more obviously productive. “The language of astronomy,” we were told, “is needlessly violent,” with the word collision being singled out as particularly brutal and masculine. An astronomer carelessly referring to a planet being stripped of its ozone layer by a gamma-ray burst, would, according to Dr Madrid, be using “misogynistic language” and should therefore be subject to the sternest of hands-on-hips chiding and an official reprimand.

And we concluded a trilogy of posts on the subject of crime and punishment – and the status-chasing contortions of progressives, for whom, pretentious leniency is a kind of social jewellery with which to impress one’s peers. And according to whom, the wellbeing of habitual burglars is much more important than the wellbeing of their numerous victims, whose homes have just been violated, especially if the burglar is a “young black person.”

In February, we learned, via a Canadian socialist podcaster named Nora Loreto, that habitual car theft is a “victimless” crime, a trivial thing. Even a third conviction for thieving someone else’s car should not result in incarceration or any physical impediment, because the victims of car theft – who do not exist, apparently – “get new cars though.” “I write books and I know things,” announced Nora, who lives in Quebec, where, in the last year, the rate of car theft has practically doubled.

Other topics included an educational effort in San Francisco, in which elementary school children were expected to “disrupt whiteness,” and to have – or at least regurgitate – strong opinions on the Israeli military. Needless to say, this focus on political indoctrination and imagining “a world without police, money, or landlords,” came at the expense of more mundane subjects, with English and maths scores hitting record lows, and with less than 4% of students considered numerate. All in the name of “removing barriers to learning.”

And we pondered the weirdly woke marketing of retailer John Lewis, whose customers were doubtless inspired to shop harder and more often thanks to photographs of store employees accompanied by details of their mental health problems and niche sexual leanings. Among them, Mr Marc Geoffrey Albert Whitcombe, now known as Ruby, who was thrilled by “the chance to express my true inner self,” and who was photographed in an enormous rose-adorned wig and while clutching a cat o’ nine tails. Customers intrigued by this in-store display soon discovered Mr Whitcombe’s social media presence, which consists of hundreds of selfies in which he attempts erotic poses, complete with ladies’ lingerie and while gripping sex toys in his mouth.

As if all the above wasn’t nauseating enough already, David carries on in like emetic vein from there.

1
1

Kaczynski Vs Luigi Babe: a comparison

An intriguing idea, one I hadn’t ever thought of myself before. From the NYT, of all unlikely places.

The Unabomber’s Influence Is Deeper and More Dangerous Than We Know
I published a novel about the Unabomber this year, and during a book tour stop in Seattle, a high school teacher raised his hand and asked me what he could tell his students about Ted Kaczynski, because he was a hero to so many of them. The question stopped me cold, reminding me that Mr. Kaczynski’s influence is deeper and more widespread than most people realize.

The same feeling of cold unease returned this week when I read news reports that Luigi Mangione, the suspect charged in the killing of UnitedHealthcare’s chief executive, Brian Thompson, had posted a favorable review of the Unabomber’s manifesto online. The similarities didn’t end there. The meticulous planning and use of symbolism in the crime reminded me of Mr. Kaczynski, who spent years choosing his targets, designing disguises (even gluing false soles to the bottoms of his shoes) and leaving messages for investigators. The words “deny,” “defend” and “depose” written on the bullet casings found by Mr. Thompson’s body were an eerie echo of the “FC” for Freedom Club that Mr. Kaczynski carved into his bombs. The fact that Mr. Mangione allegedly made his own gun and carried a copy of his own manifesto reinforced the similarities.

There is, of course, still much we don’t know about Mr. Mangione: a full picture of who he is, and what factors shaped him and motivated him. But the teacher’s suggestion that the Unabomber was a hero to some of his students pointed to a larger truth. To many young people living in a system of extreme economic disparity, in a world they believe is on the verge of ecological collapse, the Unabomber represents a dark, growing ideological desperation. To them, his ruthlessly intellectualized turn to violence can seem justified.

At some point before much more time has passed, Our Side will have to get over its girlish squeamishness regarding this purported “ruthlessly intellectualized turn to violence” being utterly unthinkable, amoral, and completely out of bounds, I’m afraid. That’s owing to one very simple reason which ought to be obvious: if we don’t rise to the challenge and match the Leftist enemy blow for blow and then some, then we must inevitably lose to them. And as all of us should know full well by now, losing to the Left means losing absolutely everything.

You definitely want to read all of this one, it’s quite good. Never thought I’d hear myself say that about a NYT article, but there you are. Strange days indeed, sure to get stranger still as time marches ever on.

Oh yeah, almost forgot: the “Luigi Babe” reference in the post title hails from my own voluminous memory archive—just another of my ceaseless attempts to amuse myself which constitute one of the primary reasons this h’yar blog exists in the first place. Hey, even if none of y’all get a laugh out of it, I do. As is said of the Hokey Pokey, that’s what it’s all about.

See, Luigi Babe (as he insisted everyone call him) was this irritatingly ubiquitious show promoter, self-styled raconteur, and all-around hipster douchebag back in my NYC days. He was unfailingly chatty, touchy-feely, faux friendly, cloying, and utterly oblivious as to how vanishingly few, if any, of his fellow scenesters actually liked him even just a little bit.

When I was host/DJ/barman of a popular weekly rockabilly night* at what was bona fide Downtown scene-maker Deb Parker’s arguably least-successful venture, Babyland, Luigi Babe would show up every Thursday night, to everyone else’s profound chagrin.

If I’m lying, I’m flying: the minute Luigi Babe made his Grande Entrance into Babyland (or anyplace else, really)—clad in his trademark vintage gabardine suit with matching fedora and ascot, an immaculately-drawn pencil-thin moustache adorning his upper lip, flourishing his affected cigarette-holder in one hand like a scepter, carrying himself as if he were the dashing reincarnation of Clark Gable and/or Errol Flynn, the fleshly exemplar of what people mean by the word smarm—you’d see ten or twenty other regulars get up from their booths and beat feet for the exit with alacrity, often as not abandoning a table-full of overly pricy cocktails untouched in the urgency of making good their post-haste escape. Jackets, handsome cardigan sweaters, gloves, purses, you name it, who cares? These were but material objects, no more; unlike the precious time lost enduring the dread Luigi Babe’s presence, they could be replaced.

No shit, the dust cloud those fleeing bar patrons left in their wake would’ve shamed even the Roadrunner speeding away from Wile E Coyote. MEEP MEEP!

* Yclept the Chicken Shack, which moniker would go on to earn me a subtly cheeky nod from no less august a personage than the great Max Weinberg, at a Conan O’Brien show taping—yet another of those incredible stories I really gotta tell y’all sometime

CF Archives

Categories

Comments policy

NOTE: In order to comment, you must be registered and approved as a CF user. Since so many user-registrations are attempted by spam-bots for their own nefarious purposes, YOUR REGISTRATION MAY BE ERRONEOUSLY DENIED.

If you are in fact a legit hooman bean desirous of registering yourself a CF user name so as to be able to comment only to find yourself caught up as collateral damage in one of my irregularly (un)scheduled sweeps for hinky registration attempts, please shoot me a kite at the email addy over in the right sidebar and let me know so’s I can get ya fixed up manually.

ALSO NOTE: You MUST use a valid, legit email address in order to successfully register, the new anti-spam software I installed last night requires it. My thanks to Barry for all his help sorting this mess out last night.

Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site and may be deleted, ridiculed, maliciously edited for purposes of mockery, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. The CF comments section is pretty free-form and rough and tumble; tolerance level for rowdiness and misbehavior is fairly high here, but is NOT without limit.

Management is under no obligation whatever to allow the comments section to be taken over and ruined by trolls, Leftists, and/or other oxygen thieves, and will take any measures deemed necessary to prevent such. Conduct yourself with the merest modicum of decorum, courtesy, and respect and you'll be fine. Pick pointless squabbles with other commenters, fling provocative personal insults, issue threats, or annoy the host (me) and...you won't.

Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar.

Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

CF Glossary

ProPol: Professional Politician

Vichy GOPe: Putative "Republicans" who talk a great game but never can seem to find a hill they consider worth dying on; Quislings, Petains, Benedicts, backstabbers, fake phony frauds

Fake Phony Fraud(s), S'faccim: two excellent descriptors coined by the late great WABC host Bob Grant which are interchangeable, both meaning as they do pretty much the same thing

Mordor On The Potomac: Washington, DC

The Enemy: shitlibs, Progtards, Leftards, Swamp critters, et al ad nauseum

Burn, Loot, Murder: what the misleading acronym BLM really stands for

pAntiFa: an alternative spelling of "fascist scum"

"Mike Hendrix is, without a doubt, the greatest one-legged blogger in the world." ‐Henry Chinaski

Subscribe to CF!

Support options

Shameless begging

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:

Correspondence

Email addy: mike-at-this-url dot etc

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless specified as private by the sender

Allied territory

Alternatives to shitlib social media: A few people worth following on Gab:

Fuck you

Kill one for mommy today! Click to embiggen

Notable Quotes

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

Claire's Cabal—The Freedom Forums

FREEDOM!!!

"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
Daniel Webster

“When I was young I was depressed all the time. But suicide no longer seemed a possibility in my life. At my age there was very little left to kill.”
Charles Bukowski

“A slave is one who waits for someone to come and free him.”
Ezra Pound

“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”
Frank Zappa

“The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.”
John Adams

"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves."
Bertrand de Jouvenel

"It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged."
GK Chesterton

"I predict that the Bush administration will be seen by freedom-wishing Americans a generation or two hence as the hinge on the cell door locking up our freedom. When my children are my age, they will not be free in any recognizably traditional American meaning of the word. I’d tell them to emigrate, but there’s nowhere left to go. I am left with nauseating near-conviction that I am a member of the last generation in the history of the world that is minimally truly free."
Donald Sensing

"The only way to live free is to live unobserved."
Etienne de la Boiete

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid."
Dwight D. Eisenhower

"To put it simply, the Left is the stupid and the insane, led by the evil. You can’t persuade the stupid or the insane and you had damn well better fight the evil."
Skeptic

"There is no better way to stamp your power on people than through the dead hand of bureaucracy. You cannot reason with paperwork."
David Black, from Turn Left For Gibraltar

"If the laws of God and men, are therefore of no effect, when the magistracy is left at liberty to break them; and if the lusts of those who are too strong for the tribunals of justice, cannot be otherwise restrained than by sedition, tumults and war, those seditions, tumults and wars, are justified by the laws of God and man."
John Adams

"The limits of tyranny are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."
Frederick Douglass

"Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine."
Joseph Goebbels

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.”
Ronald Reagan

"Ain't no misunderstanding this war. They want to rule us and aim to do it. We aim not to allow it. All there is to it."
NC Reed, from Parno's Peril

"I just want a government that fits in the box it originally came in."
Bill Whittle

Best of the best

Finest hosting service

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS feed

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

Copyright © 2025