The left’s recipe for a happy, harmonious society has been simple: tribalism and greed are compulsory for all groups except Whites in general and White men in particular. Minorities must be worshiped, majorities demonized. This recipe has now blown up in their faces with the election of Donald J. Trump as forty-fifth president of the United States. American Whites have begun to recognize themselves as a tribe and vote accordingly.
Spoil and victory
“But Trump is a beast!” the left are wailing. Well, yes: you could say he’s Nietzsche’s schweifende blonde Bestie — the roaming blond beast, “avidly rampant for spoil and victory,” who strikes fear into the hearts of the civilized and effete. The Marxists and Frankfurt-Schoolers who wrote the left’s recipe for society certainly seem to have made a close study of Nietzsche. They’ve then done the opposite of what he recommended, elevating the inferior over the superior, the diseased over the healthy, the parasitic over the productive.
To see the difference between a parasite and a producer, compare Barack Obama with Donald Trump. Obama has coasted on affirmative action throughout his entire life. He won the presidency because he had very powerful forces on his side. Trump won despite having the same powerful forces against him—indeed, the forces against Trump were more formidable as the White percentage of the electorate continues to decline. Trump has built things and succeeded in the tough world of business; Obama has been a part-time lawyer, a part-time “community organizer,” and a full-time narcissist. Trump is narcissistic too, but it’s quite justified.
Eradicating the Irredeemable
A comparison of their wives tells about which man has healthier instincts and tastes. Melania Trump is intelligent, beautiful and happy. Michelle Obama is intellectually mediocre and full of resentment against White America (Feb. 18, 2008: “For the first time I am proud of America”). As for the fascinating Hillary Clinton: she reminds me of a Dalek, one of the power-crazed robotic salt-shakers in the children’s TV series Dr Who. She has the same megalomaniac psychology and the same rasping voice. The Daleks are famous for their battle-cry of “Exterminate! Exterminate!” I think extermination was the logical subtext of these comments by Hillary:
You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people — now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks — they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America.
If these hate-filled folk are “irredeemable,” it follows logically that something must be done to stop them from poisoning the America to which they do not belong. I think that’s why Hillary made that odd choice of words: “basket of deplorables.” A basket is where you put things to have control over them. For example, a gardener can put uprooted weeds in a basket before throwing them on a compost heap or burning them. That’s why Hillary’s comments remind me of Grigory Zinoviev‘s forthright condemnation of the irredeemable: “We must carry along with us ninety million out of the 100 million of Soviet Russia’s inhabitants. As for the rest, we have nothing to say to them. They must be annihilated.”
For the left, the trauma of that victory has been immense, not just in America, but right around the world. Hillary proclaimed that “Love Trumps Hate” and found out that a lot of people weren’t inspired. Eve Ensler, author of the Vagina Monologues, also attempted to rally the troops with high-flown idealism:
Rise, sisters, rise. Defeat Donald Trump
Dear women of America and men who love women,
All week I have received emails, texts and calls from my sisters around the world. They were as diverse as you get — sisters in Congo fighting an epidemic of rape and brutality, and sisters in Iceland striking across the country protesting pay inequity. Sisters in Kenya fighting against genital cutting, and sisters in Iraq building safe houses as fast as women are being taken and enslaved. Again and again there was one panicked question: is it possible that Donald Trump could become president of the United States? …
… This election will determine whether we stand against blatant misogyny, or whether we reward it. It is an election which has unleashed the subculture of sexual violence in America — and that could be our breakthrough, or our breakdown. …
If we send Trump back to his gross phallic tower, we will be saying we want these horrifying woman-hating days to be over forever. Defeating him will give us ground to fight the last dirty gasp of the patriarchy which is built on a conviction that subordinated people must stay in their assigned place. (Rise, sisters, rise. Defeat Donald Trump, The Guardian, 5th November 2016)
It’s interesting that although the left worship diversity, it appears that women aren’t diverse at all. According to Ensler, they’re a monolithic bloc all suffering under the lash of the patriarchy, whether they’re being raped in the Congo, genitally mutilated in Kenya or paid less in Iceland or by the Clinton Foundation. White women have much more in common with Black and Brown women than they do with White men.
Shocking election results
Or so Ensler wants White women to think (and it’s probably not irrelevant that she is Jewish, since her message fits well with the general thrust of activism by the organized Jewish community where White women are supposed to be part of the Rainbow Coalition of the left). Alas, her message failed: the sisterhood didn’t rise in sufficient numbers to defeat Trump, proving once again that other interests trump the sisterhood as a voting bloc. In fact, 53% of them voted for him, prompting howls of anger and disbelief from the left. “Dear Fellow White Women: We F**ked This Up,” raged Sarah Ruiz-Grossman at the Huffington Post. “White women sold out the sisterhood and the world by voting for Trump!” wailed L.V. Anderson at Slate. She went on:
The shocking results of the election prove that most white women don’t consider themselves part of the coalition of nonwhite, nonstraight, nonmale voters who were supposed to carry Clinton to a comfortable victory. Most white women still identify more with white men than they do with black women, Latina women, Muslim women, transwomen, and every other woman who will have good reason to fear for her physical safety under a Trump regime. And while it’s nonwhite and queer women who have the most to lose under Trump, white women will have to live with the consequences of their own actions in a country without a right to abortion, without access to health insurance, without an adequate family leave policy, and with a head of state who values them only insofar as he wants to fuck them. (“White women sold out the sisterhood and the world by voting for Trump,”Slate, 9th November 2016)
Writing like that seems to justify the appallingly sexist origin of the word ‘hysteria’, which comes from the Greek hysteron, meaning “womb.” Despite L.V. Anderson’s wailing, there are very good reasons for White women to “identify more with white men than with black women, Latina women, Muslim women, [and] transwomen.” White men and White women have all kinds of shared interests: genetic, cultural and social. White men are far more likely to protect White women than to harm them. Although the left are constantly talking about “rape culture,” they identify it in entirely the wrong places: among White men and in White institutions. The most recent (and risible) example has been at the magazine Rolling Stone, where the Jewish journalist Sabrina Rubin Erdley promoted a goyophobic hoax about gang-rape on broken glass at the University of Virginia.
But rape-culture certainly flourishes among Blacks, Muslims and Hispanics. Donald Trump was correct to say that Mexico exports rapists to the United States. That’s why he was condemned so hard for saying it. The left are not interested in reality, but in feeding their own narcissism. Their politics do not start with an attempt to understand how the world is, but with the settled conviction that their own hearts are pure and their motives noble. As C.S. Lewis pointed out, those who believe that virtue is on their side are capable of enormous cruelty and selfishness. The Clintons are notorious for seeking revenge on their enemies, even as they pursue money with all the decorum and ethical restraint of hungry piranhas. They’re criminals who think of themselves as saints.
So are Tony Blair and many others in the British Labour party. The Labour council that covered up the Rotherham horrors was convinced of its own virtue. But the virtuous left don’t have to be actively criminal to do great harm and encourage great foolishness. When the Labour M.P. Jo Cox was murdered before the EU Referendum, the Guardian issued this hagiography:
Jo Cox, however, was not just any MP doing her duty. She was also an MP who was driven by an ideal. … “Our communities have been deeply enhanced by immigration,” she insisted, “be it of Irish Catholics across the constituency or of Muslims from Gujarat in India or from Pakistan, principally from Kashmir. While we celebrate our diversity, what surprises me time and time again as I travel around the constituency is that we are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us.”
What nobler vision can there be than that of a society where people can be comfortable in their difference? (The Guardian view on Jo Cox: an attack on humanity, idealism and democracy, The Guardian, 16th June 2016)
The Labour party has subsequently tried to apply Jo’s Principle — “We have far more in common with each other than things that divide us” — to the feuding between the Corbynistas and the Blairites. Guess what? It hasn’t worked, even among the liberals. Jo’s Principle is in fact fatuous posturing devised by someone who preferred warm feelings to cold realism.
White Tribe Rising
And it didn’t work. The verbal venom that has served Jews and their left-wing allies so well for so long is losing its efficacy. After encouraging tribalism in non-Whites for decades, they’ve now triggered it among Whites. As the New York Times Paul Krugman phrased it (with a great deal of exaggeration), Trump voters were motivated by “blood and soil, patriarchy, and racial hierarchy.” From the standpoint of the left, Trump’s victory represents the triumph of hate when it’s really a triumph of White people beginning to stand up for their interests. In a way Hillary was right when she said that the basket of Trump-supporting deplorables “are not America.” If they were Jewish, they’d feel right at home in Israel — a country that puts its own people first and builds massive walls to keep predatory Blacks and Muslims out.
Is that hate? No, it’s rational self-interest. Israel would be harmed by the mass immigration of Blacks and Muslims, so it doesn’t permit it. Meanwhile, Jewish Zionists like Barbara Lerner Spectre promote the same kind of immigration into White nations. That is hate: Spectre is not doing it because she thinks Whites will benefit.
We can be sure that Ms Spectre didn’t like the election of Donald Trump. It demonstrates that Whites are beginning to think and act in their own interests, rather than against them. For Jews, that’s hate. For Whites, it’s rational self-interest.
First came Brexit, then the Blond Beast. The White Tribe is rising.