Featured Articles

UFC Fighter Bryce Mitchell’s Pro-National Socialist Remarks Show the JQ Can No Longer Be Fully Censored

/5 Comments/in , /by

Earlier this month fans of mixed martial arts got a much-needed dose of revisionist history, when UFC featherweight fighter Bryce Mitchell made positive remarks about National Socialist Germany.

During an appearance on the ArkanSanity Podcast, Mitchell made everybody lose their minds when he initially defended Adolf Hitler’s leadership of the German National Socialist state.

“I honestly think that Hitler was a good guy based on my own research, not my public education indoctrination. I do really think before Hitler got on meth, he was a guy to go fishing with,” the American fighter said.

“He fought for his country. He wanted to purify it by kicking the greedy Jews out that were destroying his country and turning them all into gays,” he continued. Mitchell noted that the preceding Weimar regime and the degeneracy it presided over created the conditions for the rise of the NSDAP.

“They were gaying out the kids. They were queering out the women. They were queering out the dudes. Do you know where the first tranny surgery ever was? Happened to be in Germany before Hitler took over, “ the UFC fighter observed. (See also Andrew Joyce on Magnus Hirschfeld: e.g., “Hitler referred to Hirschfeld as ‘the most dangerous Jew in Germany.’” See also Joyce on Hirschfeld’s Racism.)

Like clockwork, Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt criticized Mitchell for his comments on the ArkanSanity Podcast. “I’m aghast at this podcast interview. There are simply no words,” Greenblatt said to BBC. “In the span of just a few minutes Mitchell manages to express antisemitic, homophobic, and transphobic sentiments. We hope the UFC will take immediate action to make clear that these ideas are noxious and have no place in the sport,” the ADL CEO added.

UFC President Dana White instantly pounced on Mitchell’s remarks, declaring, “Hitler is one of the most disgusting and evil human beings to ever walk the face of the Earth and anyone that even tries to take an opposition position is a moron.”

“That’s the problem with the internet and social media. You provide a platform to a lot of dumb and ignorant people,” White continued.

Surprisingly, Dana White did not cancel Mitchell much less cut him from the MMA promotion like the shrillest voices of organized Jewry wanted him to. Instead, White defended Mitchell’s right to free speech despite taking the “Boomer Truth” line about Hitler and World War II.   “It’s free speech. That’s the beautiful thing about this business, for all of you who hate Bryce Mitchell, you get to see him hopefully get his ass whooped on global television,” White conceded.

“I know a lot of people died in the Holocaust, and that’s a fact,” Mitchell conceded in an image he posted on X. “Hitler did a lot of evil things, I think we can all agree on that. I’m definitely not a nazi, and definitely do not condone any of the evil things Hitler did.” In a caption he added to this post, Mitchell said, “In the future I will b[e] much more considerate [when] talking about the suffering of all peoples.”

What likely prompted White to decry Mitchell’s statement and the featherweight fighter’s eventual apology was pressure from Ari Emanuel, the CEO of Endeavor and the CEO and executive chairman of TKO Group holdings, the parent company of the UFC and WWE.

Ari Emanuel is the brother of infamous former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who gained infamy for proclaiming in 2011, “Never let a good crisis go to waste when it’s an opportunity to do things you had never considered or you didn’t think were possible.”

Shifty political behavior courses through the veins of the Emanuel family, which is of Jewish extraction. The two brothers’ father is Benjamin M. Emanuel was a pediatrician who moonlighted as a member of the Irgun — a Zionist terrorist organization active in the 1930s and 1940s carrying out attacks against Palestinian civilians and British troops. Similarly, their mother Marsha Smulevitz was heavily involved in the Civil Rights movement and served as the chair of the Chicago North Side chapter of the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) for four years in the early 1960s.

Ari Emanuel is plugged into Democratic Party politics and has held multiple fundraisers for the party. He also contributed $2,700 to Hillary Clinton during the 2016 United States presidential election. Despite his Democratic Party affiliation, Emanuel has maintained close ties with President Donald Trump

Emanuel was Trump’s agent for several years, representing him during certain points of Trump’s career in the entertainment scene. In 2016, Ari Emanuel, as co-CEO of WME-IMG (now part of Endeavor), spearheaded the purchase of the UFC for $4 billion from the Fertitta brothers — Lorenzo and Frank.

Like most of his kinfolk, Emanuel does not like it when Gentiles start speaking their minds about Jewish influence in American society. In October 2022, Emanuel pushed for multiple companies to cut off all business ties with rapper Kanye West, currently known as Ye, for his antisemitic remarks. (Ye hasn’t stopped.)

Curiously, the UFC has positioned itself as an anti-woke sports promotion, with Dana White being the most vocal pro-Donald Trump sports executive in the country, going as far as to speak at the Republican National Convention on multiple occasions, in support of Trump. Sean Strickland, a former UFC champion, has made numerous comments poking fun of homosexuals and other protected groups without facing significant consequences from the organization.

Mitchell is an outspoken fighter who has not shied away from expressing right-wing views outside of the Octagon. During a media event in 2022, Mitchell sharply criticized the Federal Reserve, calling it a “corrupt institution.” The featherweight contender is no fan of the current education system either. In 2024, Mitchell announced he would homeschool his son to prevent him from worshipping Satan or turning into a homosexual.

While Mitchell’s reversal is lame, there is still a silver lining. The cat is out of the bag as far as Judeo-skepticism and the reassessment of National Socialism’s legacy is concerned. His latest outburst demonstrates that for the under-40 demographic, Judeo-skeptic beliefs are so strong to the point that gatekeepers in the Jewish-controlled media, political class, and broader culture can no longer contain such sentiments. No matter what side of the political spectrum young Americans find themselves on, they harbor some form of antisemitism.

Anti-Defamation League (ADL) Director Jonathan Greenblatt views it this way. Barely a month after the Oct. 7, 2023 attacks against Israel, a leaked phone call between Greenblatt and an unknown Zionist compatriot achieved virality all over social media. In the audio, Greenblatt was distraught about Generation Z’s weak support for Israel. Further, the ADL director blamed video sharing application Tiktok for platforming anti-Israeli sentiment.

“We have a major, major, major generational problem,” Greenblatt proclaimed. “All the polling I’ve seen: the ADL’s polling, ICC’s polling, independent polling, suggests that this is not a left, right gap folks. The issue of the United States’ support of Israel is not left and right. It is young and old.”

White should be given credit for not reflexively canceling Mitchell and leaving him on the unemployment line. This shows that certain segments of American culture are no longer as keen to be private enforcers of politically correct standard.

That said, as long as Ari Emanuel is slithering around the halls of UFC headquarters, there’s a hard limit to what politically incorrect statements fighters under the UFC banner can make. More Bryce Mitchells, especially those who don’t back down, will have to step up not only in the UFC but across all corners of American culture for the Jewish Question to become fully normalized in political discourse.

Countless people will take proverbial blows from corporations, legacy media, and even the government throughout this process. But this is the cost of doing business in the grueling Reconquista campaign that must be waged to take back our nation from organized Jewry.

No one said this fight was going to be a walk in the park.

José Niño is a Hispanic dissident who is well aware of the realities of race from his experience living throughout Latin America and in the States.

As a native of lands conquered by brave Spaniards but later subverted by centuries of multiracial trickery and despotic governance, José offers clear warnings to Americans about the perils of multiracialism.

His Substack is at: https://josbcf.substack.com/. Definitely worth supporting.

Hate-Bacon Holocaust: Where Jews Lead, Muslims Follow

/20 Comments/in , , , /by

In Britain today, it takes a heart of stone to read about the suffering of Jewish students without laughing. The Jewish Chronicle has just published “Exclusive research” showing a “shocking volume of assaults, abuse and threats” suffered by Jews at British universities. Among the incidents that the Chronicle deems worthy of note are that “A student at Swansea University found bacon taped to her door in university halls in 2022” and that “At Cambridge University, a student said during one dinner, a peer ‘asked me to turn to the side so that he could gauge the size of my nose’.”

Senior Sacred Minority

I’m cherry-picking the hate-bacon and nose-gauging, of course, but nowhere does the article mention murder, rape or serious injury. Jewish students are not suffering a fraction of what White children have suffered in places like Glasgow, Southport and Rotherham. Nor does the article admit that Jews have engineered their own misfortune. Jewish students in Britain are being hate-baconed and nose-gauged by non-Whites and their allies because of Israel’s oppression of non-White Palestinians. And who was responsible for non-White immigration from the Third World, which the White majority always opposed and never voted for? It was Jews, of course. Who created minority worship, which was intended to demonize the White majority and sacralize minorities? It was Jews, of course, wanting to install themselves as Senior Sacred Minority.

How to end anti-Semitism for ever

Alas for Jews, the non-Whites whom they fondly regarded as “natural allies” haven’t accepted their Jew-assigned role. As I pointed out at the Occidental Observer in 2019, Muslims and other non-Whites regard Jews as “Hyper-Whites with Hyper-Privilege” and not as a fellow persecuted minority. On the contrary, they regard Jews as arch persecutors. Given the amount of high explosive recently rained by Israel on the Gaza Strip, it’s easy to see their point. I don’t myself agree with those who accuse Israel of committing genocide against the Palestinians, whom I’d rank with Pakistanis as societal pathogens. But I again find it amusing that Jews are wailing about the accusation. Who was it first used noisy accusations of genocide to gain political advantage and claim moral superiority? It was the Jews again. Their solipsism and arrogance blinded them to the obvious possibility that their own self-serving tactics would be taken up and used against them. That possibility has been realized: Muslims and other non-Whites have turned out not to be “natural allies” of Jews but natural enemies. One insightful — and honest — Jew wouldn’t have been surprised by this. The late Jonathan Sacks, once Britain’s Chief Rabbi, admitted in 2007 that Jews were the inventors of “identity politics” and founders of the Victimhood Olympics:

Sacks: Multiculturalism threatens democracy

Multiculturalism promotes segregation, stifles free speech and threatens liberal democracy, Britain’s top Jewish official warned in extracts from [a recently published] book … Jonathan Sacks, Britain’s chief rabbi, defined multiculturalism as an attempt to affirm Britain’s diverse communities and make ethnic and religious minorities more appreciated and respected. But in his book, The Home We Build Together: Recreating Society, he said the movement had run its course. “Multiculturalism has led not to integration but to segregation,” Sacks wrote in his book, an extract of which was published in the Times of London.

“Liberal democracy is in danger,” Sacks said, adding later: “The politics of freedom risks descending into the politics of fear.” Sacks said Britain’s politics had been poisoned by the rise of identity politics, as minorities and aggrieved groups jockeyed first for rights, then for special treatment. The process, he said, began with Jews, before being taken up by blacks, women and gays. He said the effect had been “inexorably divisive.” “A culture of victimhood sets group against group, each claiming that its pain, injury, oppression, humiliation is greater than that of others,” he said. In an interview with the Times, Sacks said he wanted his book to be “politically incorrect in the highest order.” (Sacks: Multiculturalism threatens democracy, The Jerusalem Post, 20th October 2007; emphasis added)

“We’re disloyal to real, pure, white America”

That’s why I have no sympathy for Jewish students enduring hate-bacon attacks at Swansea and nose-gauging requests at Cambridge. Jews are not suffering a fraction of what Whites have suffered for decades at the hands of Muslims, Blacks and other non-Whites imported by our treacherous elite under Jewish orders and with full Jewish approval. The minor Jewish suffering bewailed by the Jewish Chronicle is entirely their own fault. So is the minor Jewish suffering bewailed in America. As the Horus Substack notes, the Jewish writer Bari Weiss has openly admitted the central role of Jews in the war on Whites and the West: “The far right says we are the greatest trick the devil has ever played. We appear to be white people. We look like we’re in the majority, we’re incredibly successful, but in fact … we’re disloyal to real, pure, white America. And in fact, we’re loyal to Black people and brown people and Muslims and immigrants.”

Semitic synergy: how Jews use and abuse Muslims to benefit themselves

But somehow killer quotes like that always escape the notice of the Semito-sycophants who rush to the defence of Jews after their non-White pets turn on them. The same Semito-sycophants ignore the central role of Jews in the war on free speech. For example, mainstream conservatives and libertarians in Britain have recently condemned Labour’s plans to impose an official government definition of “Islamophobia.” The conservative political scientist Matt Goodwin has said that “Labour’s crackdown on ‘Islamophobia’ is yet another crackdown on free speech.” He’s right. The Trotskyist libertarians at Spiked Online have warned that “New rules on ‘Islamophobia’ would chill discussion about anything even tangentially related to Islam.” They’re right too. And both Goodwin and Spiked describe how the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on British Muslims first proposed the definition in 2019. But neither Goodwin nor Spiked mention a killer quote by the homosexual Labour MP Wes Streeting, who co-chaired the APPG on British Muslims. Streeting proclaimed that the APPG’s definition of Islamophobia was “presented within a framework resembling the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism.”

Parallel pathologies

You can trust Streeting on that, because he was also co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group against Antisemitism. I described Streeting’s labours for Jews and their natural allies in my article “Free Speech Must Die!,” where I explored the way Jews have guided Muslims in their joint campaign to censor and silence Whites. After all, it’s very easy to find proof of that. But Britain’s noisy mainstream defenders of free speech have always been silent about who guides Muslims. In other words, those staunch opponents of censorship have censored themselves. So let’s look more closely at what they refuse to discuss, namely, the leading Jewish role in the war on free speech. The University of Bradford has very helpfully put “Definitions of Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia” on the same page at its website, drawn respectively from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Anti-Semitism and the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) Working Definition of Islamophobia. Even the most myopic mainstream conservatives and libertarians will see how the deplorably vague and elastic definition of Islamophobia, which they loudly condemn, was directly modelled on the deplorably vague and elastic definition of anti-Semitism, which they either support or keep quiet about. To make the parallels even more clearer, I’ve inter-woven examples of the hate-speak and hate-think that Jews and Muslims say the government must crush:

  • Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
  • Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Muslims as such, or of Muslims as a collective group, such as, especially but not exclusively, conspiracies about Muslim entryism in politics, government or other societal institutions; the myth of Muslim identity having a unique propensity for terrorism, and claims of a demographic ‘threat’ posed by Muslims or of a ‘Muslim takeover’.
  • Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
  • Accusing Muslims as a group of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Muslim person or group of Muslim individuals, or even for acts committed by non-Muslims.
  • Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
  • Accusing Muslims as a group, or Muslim majority states, of inventing or exaggerating Islamophobia, ethnic cleansing or genocide perpetrated against Muslims.
  • Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
  • Accusing Muslim citizens of being more loyal to the ‘Ummah’ (transnational Muslim community) or to their countries of origin, or to the alleged priorities of Muslims worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
  • Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.
  • Denying Muslim populations the right to self-determination e.g., by claiming that the existence of an independent Palestine or Kashmir is a terrorist endeavour.
  • Applying double standards by requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
  • Applying double standards by requiring of Muslims behaviours that are not expected or demanded of any other groups in society, e.g. loyalty tests.
  • Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
  • Using the symbols and images associated with classic Islamophobia (e.g. Muhammed being a paedophile, claims of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword or subjugating minority groups under their rule) to characterize Muslims as being ‘sex groomers’, inherently violent or incapable of living harmoniously in plural societies.
  • Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
  • Holding Muslims collectively responsible for the actions of any Muslim majority state, whether secular or constitutionally Islamic. (“Definitions of Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia” at Bradford University)

But Bradford University doesn’t mention two inconvenient facts: that Jews in Britain support Israel’s military massacre-machine; and that Muslims are now the chief anti-Semites in Britain. Like the rest of our current political and academic elite, the university wants to pretend that Jews and Muslims are united in powerless victimhood, both groups suffering from the cruel and irrational hate of the White majority. The current elite are very anxious to stop thought-crime against Jews and Muslims, but have no concern whatsoever about stopping flesh-crime against Whites.

Bradford University supplies another perfect example of that, because it does nothing to address horrific misogyny and patriarchy on its own doorstep. Like the town of Rotherham, the city of Bradford is in Yorkshire. The Muslim rape-gangs that made Rotherham infamous around the world have done much worse in Bradford. After all, Bradford is a much bigger place and has many more Muslims. The Labour party has controlled both Bradford and Rotherham for decades, collaborating with the rape-gangs and betraying the White working-class whom the party was founded to defend.

The great David Irving speaks the truth about World War Two

Now Labour want to expand their betrayal by imposing a definition of Islamophobia that will further censor discussion of Muslim pathologies. But no conservatives and libertarians in the mainstream will admit the obvious: that Jews are responsible for the presence of Muslims in Britain, the proliferation of Muslim pathologies, and the free-speech-chilling definition of Islamophobia.

Nor will those conservatives and libertarians admit that Jews have led the way for Muslims in another front of the war on Whites and the West.

The rape and sexual enslavement of White women by Muslims were long preceded by the White Slave Trade, which Jews created before the Second World War, and by the pornography industry, which Jews created after the Second World War for the same reason: to turn shiksas into shekels. Jews and Muslims are homies in hate. But while they both claim to suffer hate from Whites, they’re both lying. What really unites them is that they both direct hate at Whites. That’s why neither Jews nor their Muslim bio-weapons belong in the West. As a wise man once said: the world is divided into those who know who opened the gates of Toledo and those who don’t.

Contemporary Italian Dissident Thought: The Importance of Masculinity and Heroism

/6 Comments/in , /by

Adriano Scianca, Carlomanno Adinolfi, Francesco Boco, Andrea Anselmo, Guido Taietti, Alberto Brandi
Polemos Editrice, 2024

Despite the rise of computer translation technology, language remains a significant barrier to the sharing of important ideas. Italy is home to an active identitarian scene with its own print and web publications, but most sympathetic English speakers’ acquaintance with it is limited to having heard a bit about Casa Pound—an important component of the Italian dissident right, but not the whole. Recognizing the desirability of broadcasting their message beyond the borders of Italy, five prominent activists arranged for publication of a small anthology of their writings in English last October under the title Italian Vanguard: Ideas for Future Predators.

Important influences on the Italian identitarian movement include Nietzsche, Marinetti, Evola and the French nouvelle droite, especially Guillaume Faye. They reject liberal capitalism and the monotheistic tradition, and much that goes under the label “conservative” in the English-speaking world. Many find inspiration in the myth of Prometheus, the Titan who stole fire from Olympus. Accordingly, they are critical of any tendency to set limits to technological advance—an attitude they consider un-European. (This is not, of course, equivalent to denying that technology can and has been put to harmful uses.)

By way of introduction, we shall look at the essay “Stay Superhuman” by Carlomanno Adinolfi. Signore Adinolfi is an electrical engineer who has written three novels in the fantasy genre and contributed to the nationalist website Il Primato Nazionale (www.ilprimatonazionale.it) since 2005.

Today’s dominant ideology is fond of appeals to “humanity,” a concept useful to egalitarians since it tends to strip actual persons of all that distinguishes them. But a closer look reveals the ease with which these supposed humanitarians can deny the human status of all who oppose them. During Italy’s “years of lead,” a time of political turmoil which lasted from the late 1960s to the late 1980s, leftist terrorist groups proclaimed the slogan “killing a fascist is not a crime,” always with a tacit reservation of the left to decide for themselves who was a fascist. The attitude persists: in February 2023, an Italian “anti-fascist” was arrested for participating in an armed assault on Hungarian citizens taking part in a demonstration. Sympathizers back home got her elected MEP, whereby she acquired parliamentary immunity for her past actions! A license for violence appears the natural result of the cult of humanity. Americans will remember the “punch a Nazi” kerfuffle of a few years ago as an expression of the same mentality.

During the First World War, Italian soldiers adopted the motto “it is better to live one day as a lion than a hundred years as a sheep.” But not everyone agrees with this sentiment, of course. Lions can be scary. Adinolfi sees the dominant ideology of the West as

a great attempt to repress all the “fierce” qualities of the human being. A man who is too masculine is a “toxic male chauvinist;” a child who stands up to the bully by beating him up instead of reporting him to the teacher is punished more severely than the bully himself; a street fight, especially if it happens for political reasons and one dares to have “certain ideas,” is likely to be punished with a disproportionate number of years in prison. This is the path followed, if only unconsciously, by all the crazy vegans and environmentalists who blame hunting, horse racing, [and] bullfighting. The standard bearers of “do-gooder” egalitarianism fear and viscerally hate those ancestral instincts that since the dawn of Man have always elevated the aristoi above the masses.

It is true, of course, that civilization requires channeling and placing limits upon violent human instincts. But it is an illusion to believe they can be made permanently unnecessary and done away with. Life will always remain a struggle, and the heroic virtues will never become obsolete. Adinolfi cites an illustration from Italian history: Garibaldi’s “expedition of the thousand.” His men were denounced as pirates, but they freed and unified Italy when negotiation was failing.

Masculinity, as Jack Donovan has written, derives from the tasks men had to perform in our primary environment of evolutionary adaptation, the hunter-gatherer band: defending territory and overcoming threats from other groups, resource scarcity, and environmental stresses. But modern man has become a victim of his own success, providing so much security and so many resources that the experiences of danger and want have been forgotten. As a result, the masculine virtues that made civilization possible are no longer valued, and they atrophy: “When man no longer has to deal with risk, when from a wolf he turns into a house dog, he is destined to decline.”

Adriano Scianca, another contributor to Italian Vanguard, writes with sensitivity of how primitive masculinity is subsumed and elevated but not eliminated within a flourishing civilization:

Man loves more to found civilizations that to abide by their laws. If subjected too long to given order, he withers. This is why the tendency to gather in a Männerbund, a manly community—gangs, militias, fraternities—manifests itself so often in history. Of course, the gang clashes with another symbolic form of men’s power: fatherhood, i.e., the laws of the city. The band of brothers thrives where the father is missing, no longer there or not there yet, thus at the beginning or end of civilization. When the father is there and performs his function, the brothers feel like sons first and foremost, the bond with the father prevails over that with each other. In order not to wither, civilization must hold the two dimensions together. If the gang prevails, it is anarchy; if the father dominates, it is an oppressive power that stifles individuality. The gang must be organically integrated into the Law.

Adinolfi himself writes of the need to maintain a balance between the dynamic force of the conquering gang and the static force of civilization which must rein in barbaric impetuosity so that it does not overreach and civilization degenerate into anarchy.

He finds a disturbing precedent for today’s human self-domestication in an event of late antiquity:

In the 4th century, Emperor Constantine canceled military service from the political cursus honorum. To become a magistrate, governor, senator, one no longer had to go serve in the legions. As a result, a resident army of barbarians was formed, which was no longer bound to the fortunes of Rome.

Simultaneously, the empire came to be ruled by a class of soft and fearful bureaucrats, and Rome’s end was not far off. Mussolini knew better; he was fond of saying: “One can go from the tent to the palace provided one is prepared to go from the palace to the tent.”

A careful study of today’s ruling humanitarian and egalitarian ideology reveals a firm determination to destroy every attachment presupposed by what Jack Donovan has called the way of men: family, clan, nation, borders, identity. Our task is to safeguard these essential human goods. Adinolfi does not believe “conservatism” can provide a useful model:

Complex dynamic systems, whether biological or mechanical, in attempting to regulate themselves “dampen” certain behaviors so that their output does not become unstable, so that the system always remains controlled. While the progressive is the sworn enemy who wants to kill the noble predator, the conservative is the control valve that seeks to tame and depower it.

Egalitarianism has not simply been ‘taken too far’; it is fundamentally false and pernicious, and we must seek its total overcoming.

Other essays in Italian Vanguard offer meditations on the work of Ernst Jünger, space as the frontier for future human endeavor, and a challenging philosophical meditation on potentiality (“Dynamis: A Philosophy of Force”).

Guido Taietti is perhaps the contributor best known in the English-speaking world due to his appearance at 2023’s Scandza Forum and 2024’s American Renaissance Conference. I have reviewed his book Political Witchcraft here.

In the present volume he offers some thoughts on the concept of heroism in Western thinking. He points out that in a vast, thinly populated country such as Russia, retreat can serve to stretch an enemy’s supply lines and thus contribute to victory, as it did against Napoleon in 1812. In the West, however, a retreat of even 25 miles may involve the loss of an entire city with its population. Hence the ideal of the sacrificial hero on the model of Sparta’s Leonidas.

Today, however, the West is dominated by liberal capitalism, an inherently antiheroic way of thinking based on rational decision making with a view to individual utility. From liberalism’s point of view,

nothing is more absurd than dying for a cause, losing the material good par excellence, the one which makes possible the enjoyment of all others for the sake of something that does not even potentially offer a material benefit (a ‘cause’). Of course, the need for heroes can be considered a rational choice from the point of view of society if one postulates the existence of a mechanism that reasons in collective terms.

Heroism thus presupposes the reality of the collective. It is an aspect of the sacred, anti-economistic dimension of life. The struggle against liberal economism is thus the sacred and heroic struggle par excellence.

When the Kalergi plan reached number 3 in the pop chart

/14 Comments/in /by

Demographic replacement of the White Christian West has advanced so rapidly that for anyone in middle age upwards their younger lives seem to have been spent in a different country. In the entire roll of my high school in the late Seventies and early Eighties there was one Black boy and a few Asian offspring from Indian and Chinese restaurant owners. Now White British children are the minority in many towns and cities.

Our indigenous folk have learned to either pretend that rapid ethnic change is not happening, or (if they want to pursue a career or be seen as a good person) to embrace multiculturalism.  The mantra ‘diversity is strength’ is repeated ad nauseum, despite the reality of a broken society, bereft of shared social norms, traditions and belonging.

This was all planned long ago. The alleged architect of this ethnic mixing was Austrian aristocrat Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, whose book Practical Idealism (1925) envisaged a future Europe of a unified and borderless continent, with racial differences dissolved through interbreeding with Africans and Asians.  Coudenhove-Kalergi described White Europeans as intelligent but cold (befitting their climate), Africans as less smart but warmer, and the Jews and Chinese having the ideal character and intellect. The latter traits, he implied, would lead to a new nobility.

Fleeing to the USA when Austria was annexed by Nazi Germany, Coudenhove-Kalergi’s work on American policy for post-war Europe was seminal to the European federalist project. Yet he is rarely mentioned in official narratives on the European Union.  I suspect that the authorities don’t want ordinary European people to know too much about the man and his radical demographic design.

Conspiracy theorists believe that the ‘Kalergi Plan’ has been enacted through mass immigration, which has rocketed since the elevation of the European Economic Community to European Union superstate, and consequent dismantling of sovereignty and border control. Alongside the unprecedented influx is the ubiquitous depiction of biracial couples and blended families in advertising, with White heterosexual males only cast as fools or bigots. Whose agenda does this serve?

Kalergi is not someone that you can discuss openly, as anyone referring to his projected mongrel race risks accusation of anti-Semitism for associating with the scurrilous notion of a Zionist plot against Christianity. However, I found myself discussing him in the café a few days ago. A friend who is both a critic of uncontrolled immigration and an encyclopaedic fount of knowledge on popular music brought to my attention a group from before my time. ‘Have you heard of Blue Mink?’  No, I hadn’t.

Back in 1969 this band of six, comprising five White men and Black singer Madeline Black, released a song promoting racial harmony. You probably haven’t heard ‘The Melting Pot’, for reasons that become clear from the lyrics.

Take a pinch of White man, Wrap him up in Black skin,
Add a touch of blue blood, And a little bitty bit of Red Indian boy.
Oh, curly Latin kinkies, Mixed with yellow Chinkees,
If you lump it all together
And you got a recipe for a get along scene;
Oh what a beautiful dream
If it could only come true, you know, you know.
What we need is a great big melting pot,
Big enough to take the world and all it’s got
And keep it stirring for a hundred years or more and turn out coffee-coloured people by the score
Rabbis and the friars
Vishnus and the gurus
We got the Beatles or the Sun God
Well it really doesn’t matter what religion you choose
And be thankful little Mrs. Graceful
You know that livin’ could be tasteful
We should all get together in a lovin machine
I think I’ll call up the queen
It’s only fair that she knows, you know, you know.
What we need is a great big melting pot
Big to take the world and all its got and keep it stirring for a hundred years or more
And turn out coffee-coloured people by the score.

Politically incorrect terms such as ‘Chinkee’ are verboten nowadays, whatever the context. The song had a rare airing in the BBC comedy series The Alan Partridge Show, which depicted a radio DJ in a rural backwater, and playing ‘The Melting Pot’ was a typical gaffe. Recently it was played on the retro pop radio station Gold, and a single complaint to the broadcast regulator Ofcom led to the corporate owner Global banning the song from playlists.

But I was more interested in the message, rather than contrived offence. The last line suggests this song as an advertisement for the ‘Kalergi Plan’: the melting pot culminating in a ‘coffee-coloured people’.  Had the group’s song writer Roger Cook heard of Kalergi? It seems quite a coincidence if he hadn’t.

The song reached number three in the British pop chart, an outstanding success, as well as number 10 in Australia, and also reached number 11 in Ireland. “Melting Pot” reached number 2 in New Zealand. The Blue Mink probably thought that they’d follow in The Beatles’ tracks and go big in America. But the lyrics were perceived as too controversial. Instead, a cover version titled ‘People are Together’ was released in the USA, but this got little air play due to radio stations’ fears about listeners’ reaction.

Was ‘The Melting Pot’ an example of Predictive priming? According to DJ and music analyst Mark Devlin, the massive impressionable audience makes pop music an ideal medium for the powers-that-be to prime youth for radical social engineering, a cloak of anti-establishment rebelliousness masking the authoritarian motives.

The song could have become an anthem for today’s ‘refugees welcome’ virtue-signallers. But it’s too blatant. The Georgia Guidestones were destroyed three years ago, probably because of growing awareness of the globalists’ depopulation agenda (one of the secular ten commandments was to reduce the world population to 500 million). Dystopian designers do not want Kalergi and his coffee-coloured race in public discourse. They prefer to work in silent stealth.

Perhaps we should relax, and accept the happy theme of ‘The Melting Pot’, but I suspect the song was used for subtle messaging of what was planned for Western society. The intent is not harmony, but demoralisation — which makes us easier to control.

Why a Second Trump Term May Turn Out to be a Dud: DC is still a swamp of corruption and stagnation

/in /by

Editor’s note: Posted on Substack on January 27, 2025. I am more of an optimist about Trump 2.0. However, it’s clear that if Trump 2.o is to succeed, he will have to keep control over his top officials enmeshed as they are in Conservatism Inc. that they have used to catapult themselves into prominence in the GOP. As Niño notes, “At this juncture, a strong dose of political imagination is required for America First nationalists to break out of the ossified strictures of American politics.”

Donald Trump‘s historic presidential comeback on November 5, 2024 has many political observers waiting anxiously for his inauguration on January 20, 2025. Trump’s victories in 2016 and 2024 were symbolic rejections of the prevailing neoconservative/neoliberal order in Washington. In both instances, Trump campaigned on the taboo subjects of immigration restriction, foreign policy restraint, and economic nationalism. In doing so, Trump challenged the sacraments of the liberal international order.

For individuals who were intimately involved in the anti-establishment campaigns of presidential candidates such as Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul, there was initially a degree of cautious optimism about Trump. While not ideologically perfect, Trump’s platform at least challenged the neoconservative foreign policy consensus and represented an incremental step towards retrenchment.

The first Trump administration ended up being a mixed bag due to his focus on passing conventional conservative reforms such as nominating conservative Supreme Court justices and tax cuts. The former at least yielded decent reforms such as the repeal of Roe v. Wade, the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision that liberalized gun rights nationwide, and the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College that ended affirmative action in college admissions.

That said, on the key issues of restricting mass migration and rolling back the perpetual warfare state, Trump left a lot to be desired. No genuine immigration legislation was passed — abolishing birthright citizenship, implementing an immigration moratorium, passing E-Verify, and/or scrapping chain migration — and the United States’ foreign policy apparatus and agenda stayed intact, albeit without a new war breaking out.

In effect, Trump’s first administration was a generic Republican presidency. Now, the million-dollar question is: Will Trump’s second administration be a repeat of the first? From the looks of Trump’s cabinet appointments, we’re in store for a generic Republican administration. Let’s take a peep:

1. Marco Rubio, Secretary of State

Marco Rubio is a consummate GOP establishment hack. The Florida Senator is a wily politician who knows how to deftly ride political waves. Elected at the height of the Tea Party era in 2010, Rubio initially marketed himself as a Tea Party conservative who would work to lower the size of the government. But once in office, Rubio became another generic hawkish Republican who pushed for regime change in Libya and Syria, while also calling for conflicts against emerging regional powers such as China, Iran, and Russia.

During his failed presidential run in the 2015 Republican primaries, Rubio received the support of the late-casino magnate  and pro-Israel fanatic Sheldon Adelson. Even after getting bested by Donald Trump in a humiliating manner during the 2016 election cycle, Rubio continued his regime change advocacy in the US Senate, most noteworthy, his efforts to realize regime change in countries such as Iran and Venezuela. With Rubio receiving a promotion to the Secretary of State position, he will faithfully continue the ruling class’s interventionist agenda

Like most neoconservatives and other leaders adjacent to those circles, Rubio has previously been a booster for mass migration, and was an integral part of the so-called Gang of Eight bipartisan group of Senators trying to pass amnesty during the Obama era.

Rest assured, as Secretary of State, Rubio will likely continue the Judeo-American empire’s policy of policing the globe and destabilizing countries who dare challenge “our greatest ally” in Israel.

2. Pete Hegseth, Defense Secretary

Former Fox News commentator Pete Hegseth’s nomination to serve as Defense Secretary will give the Pentagon a much more youthful and virile look, at least superficially. Donning a Deus Vult tattoo and not afraid to give woke leftists verbal lashings, Hegseth’s goal is to inject new energy into a Defense Department beleaguered by falling recruitment numbers in all branches of the US military.

Hegseth is a vocal opponent of the military’s woke turn and has been highly critical of putting women in combat roles and wants the military to be prepared for the era of Great Power competition.

However, underneath Hegseth’s bombastic exterior is just another generic Republican. Like many Republicans in the Trump era, Hegseth talks a big game about avoiding never-ending wars, but sounds and moves like a typical hawk on foreign policy issues concerning Iran and China.

It’s often forgotten that at the height of the Iraq War, Hegseth thanked Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) for his support of the United States’ ill-fated regime change venture. Moreover, during a speech at the Heritage Foundation, Hegseth called on the United States to remain the “world’s sheriff.”

Following the first Trump administration’s assassination of Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani at the start of 2020, Hegseth called for Trump to follow up with a vicious bombing campaign against Iran’s energy infrastructure, nuclear installations, and ports. His blood lust towards Iran did not end there. From his Fox News armchair, Hegseth encouraged Trump to bomb Iranian hospitals, mosques, and schools should circumstances necessitate it.

Like most of his Evangelical Christian cohort, Hegseth is a fanatic pro-Israel proponent. “This is not some mystical land that can be dismissed. It’s the story of God’s chosen people. That story didn’t end in 1776 or in 1948 or with the founding of the UN. All of these things still resonate and matter today,” Hegseth said when he was interviewed by the Jewish Press in 2016.

Hegeth’s unhinged Zionism was on full display during his Senate confirmation hearing on Jan. 14, 2025, when he was grilled about what Israel has to do to end the Gaza conflict. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) asked Hegseth if he views himself as a Christian Zionist, to which Hegseth responded:

I’m a Christian, and I robustly support the State of Israel and its existential defense, and the way America comes alongside them as their great ally. I support Israel destroying and killing every last member of Hamas.

The soon to be Defense Secretary has also caught the anti-China virus contaminating the halls of the DC Swamp. Hegseth maintains that China is “building an army specifically dedicated to defeating the United States of America.” Hegseth added that China has “a full spectrum, long-term view of not just regional, but global domination,” and has designs to “corner the market completely on the technological future.”

Hegseth is clearly towing the national security state line of pursuing a great power conflict with China. With Hegseth as defense chief, do not expect the United States to fully retrench from global affairs like many American voters fed up with the foreign policy status quo want to.

3. Pam Bondi, Attorney General

Trump’s nomination of Pam Bondi to serve as United States Attorney General should worry both First Amendment and Second Amendment supporters. For one, Bondi has already pushed for the revocation of visas of students protesting Israel’s ethnic cleansing campaign in Gaza.

“The thing that’s really the most troubling to me [are] these students in universities in our country, whether they’re here as Americans or if they’re here on student visas, and they’re out there saying ‘I support Hamas,'” she said in an interview with Newsmax in 2023. “Frankly they need to be taken out of our country or the FBI needs to be interviewing them right away,” Bondi added.

On gun rights, Bondi has a suspect track record. When she served as Florida Attorney General, Bondi went public about her support for red flag gun confiscation orders. Red flag orders allow law enforcement to confiscate firearms from individuals who are suspected of posing a threat to themselves or other people — all without any form of due process

At a press conference on the heels of the Parkland mass shooting of 2018, Bondi was sitting next to then-President Donald Trump where she revealed “We’re going to bring in something called the gun violence restraining order” that will allow “law enforcement [to] come in and take the guns.”

In time, then-Gov. Rick Scott (R-FL) signed SB 7026, a bill which established a bump stock ban, raised the age individuals for individuals to be able to buy a gun, and codified red flag gun confiscation orders as law in Florida. Bondi threw her support behind this blatantly unconstitutional legislation, declaring “This bill is not perfect … it’s simply the right thing to do.”

4. Kristi Noem, Secretary of Homeland Security

Kristi Noem, Trump’s nominee to head the Department of Homeland Security, can be counted on to play ball for team Israel. Back in March, Noem signed a bill into law that lumps some critiques of the state of Israel with antisemitism. Noem’s signing of this anti-free speech bill has made the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism the standard for all investigations of unfair or discriminatory practices dealing with Jewish individuals or organizations taking place in South Dakota.

Noem rationalized her signing of this bill on the premise that it would allegedly guarantee the “security of God’s chosen people.”

Like most of her Republican counterparts, Noem is allergic to using state power to combat cultural degeneracy. When Tucker Carlson was a primetime host on Fox News, he grilled Noem on her decision to partially veto a bill that would prohibit transgender athletes who were born male from participating in women’s sports, accisomg Noem of caving to the NCAA.

Noem is very much wedded to serving corporate actors under the pretext of abiding by “limited government” principles. In a similar vein, Noem resettled so-called “refugees” in South Dakota throughout 2020.

As the head of DHS, Noem can be counted on to go after so-called extremists — i.e., pro-Palestinian activists and other enemies of organized Jewry. In fairness, some deportations will occur under her watch, especially those of violent criminals. However, like most Republican programs implemented in Empire Judaica, they merely place a handbrake on trends that have already been in motion for multiple decades.

The best-case scenario we’ll see here are slight reductions in the amount of foreigners entering the country both legally and illegally. America’s demographic replacement will continue albeit at a slightly slower rate.

So much for upholding the security of the homeland.

5. Lori Chavez-DeRemer, Secretary of Labor

Trump’s Secretary of Labor nominee Lori Chavez-DeRemer was one of the few Republicans willing to work with Democrats to pass amnesty in Congress. For example, Chavez-DeRemer backed a visa worker giveaway that was snuck into a 493-page bill. This legislation would increase the number of foreign migrants being brought into displace Americans in white-collar professions.

On top of that, this legislation would reward green cards to visa workers who have been employed in American jobs or studying in the United States for 10 years. In effect, this bill would have created a system of indentured servitude that would grant countless businesses the ability to pay visa holders with green cards — as opposed to paying them a regular wage — provided they work for 10 years in the United States.

Moreover, when the Biden regime issued an executive amnesty in June 2024 that allowed roughly 550,000 illegal alien spouses and children of American citizens to obtain green cards and an eventual pathway to American citizenship, Chavez-DeRemer voted with 14 House Republicans and 202 House Democrats to pass this measure.

Although Chavez-DeRemer has made positive gestures towards Big Labor organizations like the Teamsters, any form of pro-worker advocacy would go to waste should her pro-mass migration track record continue to guide her policymaking as the head of the Labor Department. After all, mass migration is the mortal enemy of blue-collar workers due to its proven tendency of depressing worker wages.

6. Mike Waltz, National Security Adviser

Mike Waltz is another hawk with questionable views on a host of geopolitical issues. Waltz has been an enthusiastic support of increased defense spending. In 2021, Waltz told the Jerusalem Insider in 2021 that the United States can’t afford to slash defense spending because it would negatively impact the United States’ ability to “deter and compete with China, Russia, Iran, North Korea and global terrorism.”

In an op-ed he published in 2023, Waltz cranked up the fearmongering with respect to Russia declaring that if Russia defeated Ukraine on the battlefield, it would then proceed to attack NATO member nations and kick off World War III.

Waltz is not a principled non-interventionist on Russia. For one, he believes that further US aid should be “contingent on European burden sharing and equal European assistance going forward.” The national security adviser’s approach is all about conditions. If Russia refuses to negotiate with Ukraine, Waltz believes the United States is justified in sending more weapons to Ukraine.

While Waltz’s views about the United States’ funding of Ukraine have changed over the course of the Russo-Ukrainian war, Waltz said during a Fox News interview that he had a productive meeting with the previous National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan. He bragged that the Trump transition team has been working “hand in glove” with the Biden regime.

“For our adversaries out there that think this is a time of opportunity that they can play one administration off the other, they’re wrong, and we are — we are hand in glove. We are — we are one team with the United States in this transition,” Waltz emphasized.

As for the Middle East, Waltz is a fervent Zionist who wants Israel to achieve hegemony in the region. Prior to the latest flare up in Gaza, Waltz said to the Jewish Insider that the United States needed to take more proactive measures to deter Iran and its proxies, while also economically strangling it. He cited the assassination of Major Gen. Qassem Soleimani as an example of establishing deterrence.

When Israel was involved in tit-for-tat missile attacks with Iran last year, Waltz suggested that Israel should have attacked Kharg Island, Iran’s principal oil terminal, and its nuclear installations at Natanz. With Waltz in the mix, foreign policy conflicts will always be one deck during a Second administration.

7. Elise Stefanik, Ambassador to the United Nations

 

While she was the representative of New York’s 21st congressional district from 2015 to the present., soon-to-be United Nations ambassador Elise Stefanik had a typical pro-Zionist conservative track record and funding base.

Stefanik received over $700,000 from pro-Israel groups in the 2023-2024 congressional cycle. Interestingly, Stefanik received close to $30,000 in funding from Apollo Global Management, an asset management firm founded by Jewish investors Leon Black, Josh Harris, and Marc Rowan. Rowan, in particular, has been vocal about crushing university protests against the Jewish state’s ethnic cleansing campaign in Gaza.

Stefanik’s Israel First advocacy in the aftermath of the October 7 attacks, from her grilling of university presidents to calls to clamp down on student protests, won her many friends in the pro-Zionist set of organized Jewry. The corporate media has referred to Stefanik as a “gift to Netanyahu” and the “battering ram of Trump’s ‘Israel First’ policy.”

To add insult to injury, Stefanik is a mass migration booster. In 2021, Stefanik voted for the “Farm Workforce Modernization Act.” It would have granted amnesty to illegal alien farmworkers and streamline the federal H-2A visa program for new agricultural workers entering the country. According to NumbersUSA, one of the leading immigration restriction organizations in the United States, Stefanik has a sub-par 47% career rating in terms of how she has voted on immigration related issues.

 

8. Mike Huckabee, United States Ambassador to Israel

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) and current United States Ambassador to Israel makes no bones about his support for the State of Israel. He has described himself as an “unapologetic, unreformed Zionist.”

On the issue of Palestinian territories, he has referred to the West Bank as “Judea and Samaria” — a clear move to appeal to the religious zealot factions of the Israeli Right — and has even denied the very existence of a Palestinian identity. He added, “The idea that they have a long history, dating back hundreds or thousands of years, is not true.”

Israel can count on Huckabee to fully support its Old Testament fantasies of creating a Greater Israel and look the other way when it engages in geopolitical perfidy abroad.

9. Brooke Rollins, Secretary of Agriculture

Brooke Rollins is a seasoned veteran of the conservative think tank complex, From 2003 to 2018, Rollins served as president and CEO of the Texas Public Policy Foundation. In 2018, Rollins was brought onto the Trump administration to serve as Trump’s assistant for governmental and technology initiatives in addition to becoming a member of the Office of American innovation.

As a seasoned functionary of Conservatism Inc, economic reductionism became part of her M.O. In other words, all social maladies ranging from rampant crime to mass migration could be simply solved by implementing tax cuts, deregulating the economy, and importing more “skilled migrants.”

Rollins played a key role in pushing for Trump to sign the First Step Act in 2018, a veritable jailbreak bill that allowed for an alarming number of violent criminals to go back to the streets and wreak havoc. What’s more, at the height of the George Floyd unrest when the nation was being ripped apart by leftist militants and all manner of criminals, she spouted politically correct platitudes about how the nation was “in mourning for the senseless death of George Floyd and the senseless loss of livelihood all over this country” instead of calling for heavy-handed measures to quell the NGO-backed saturnalia of the Summer of Floyd.

To boot, Rollins is a mass migration zealot who is on record stating she doesn’t “know of anyone who is against” significantly “expanding the number of visas for highly skilled workers.” In the capacity of Secretary of Agriculture, Rollins would likely look for underhanded ways to expand legal immigration in the farm sector at working-class Americans’ expense.

Brace Yourselves for Disappointment

Donald Trump vowed to end the NATO-funded proxy war in Ukraine in 24 hours. However, after threatening to further sanction Russia if it did not enter a negotiated settlement with Ukraine, Trump appears to be fine with continuing to escalate tensions with Russia. As I’ve previously documented, Trump’s track record on Russia is quite hawkish, contrary to media depictions of him as a Russian puppet. All things considered, Russo-American relations will likely remain tense.

With respect to the Middle East, Trump remains committed to defending Israel. Despite a ceasefire reached between the Israelis and Hamas, Trump has already given the green light to sending Israel thousands of 2,000-pound bombs and has apparently been in talks with Israel to resettle Palestinians into other countries such as Egypt and Jordan — ethnic cleansing by another name.

Trump’s team has also been in talks to expand the Abraham Accords, with a particular focus on normalizing relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Seeing through the rosy talk about heightened cooperation and moving towards a bright future, the Abraham Accords are merely a scheme to build an anti-Iran balancing coalition. Though Israel’s live-streamed genocide of the Palestinians since October 7 has horrified the Arab Street, thus making Gulf Arab leaders leery of deepening ties with the Jewish State. Nevertheless, the gaggle of neocons and Israel Firsters surrounding Trump makes a potential conflict with Iran a not-so far-fetched prospect in the next few years.

On immigration, Trump has been a mixed bag. On Day 1 he issued an executive order to get rid of birthright citizenship. Unfortunately, this measure will be tied up in the courts as a federal judge in Washington state recently blocked Trump’s order. This issue will be litigated in the courts for some time before the Supreme Court finally rules on the matter.

More concerning is Trump’s stance on H-1B visas. These visas let “skilled” foreigners employed in specialty occupations enter the country on a temporary basis. This is a godsend for Big Business, which is always craving new sources of cheap labor. Trump, himself, is also partial to H-1Bs. In correspondence with The New York Post, Trump said, “I’ve always liked the visas, I have always been in favor of the visas. That’s why we have them.”

“I have many H-1B visas on my properties. I’ve been a believer in H-1B. I have used it many times. It’s a great program,” he added.

One can only guess how a Trump second term will pan out. But if the long history of Republican presidential administrations disappointing their constituents is a guide, it’s no stretch to believe that Trump 2.0 will end up being a complete dud.

At this juncture, a strong dose of political imagination is required for America First nationalists to break out of the ossified strictures of American politics.

José Niño is a Hispanic dissident who is well aware of the realities of race from his experience living throughout Latin America and in the States.

As a native of lands conquered by brave Spaniards but later subverted by centuries of multiracial trickery and despotic governance, José offers clear warnings to Americans about the perils of multiracialism.

His Substack is at: https://josbcf.substack.com/. Definitely worth supporting.

Saint Lorne

/1 Comment/in /by

Prominent on the front page of the February 14th New York Times is a feature story—“14 MIN READ” it said (most articles are two to six minutes), nine pictures, billed as “The Great Read”– by Times’ opinion columnist Maureen Dowd called “Live From New York, It’s Lorne Michaels: The man who made ‘Saturday Night Live’ reflects on its legacy.”

As many people know, Lorne Michaels has been the producer of NBC’s popular once-a-week late-night sketch comedy and contemporary music show from its beginning in 1975 through all but five years of its remarkable 50-year run.  By the way, I watched the first show in ‘75, hosted by comedian George Carlin, my interest piqued because my nephew’s roommate at Harvard, Alan Franken—we didn’t know him as Al—had gotten a job writing on the show.

Lorne Michaels in 1979.

Lorne Michaels now.

These quotes give the flavor of the Dowd piece.  Needless to say, she holds her subject in very high regard:

At 80, Michaels is a unique, towering figure who has shaped comedy for half a century, turning the Art Deco tower at 30 Rockefeller Plaza into a portal for comedy stars on prime-time TV, in the movies, and on late-night shows.  It’s hard to think of someone in comedy who hasn’t been touched by Michaels’s magic wand.

“Without any hyperbole here, I honestly think that Lorne is the most important and influential person in the history of television, including Johnny Carson and Ed Sullivan,” said Ted Sarandos, the Netflix chief executive, who is a comedy buff and loves to catch “S.N.L shows in person.

Since the 50th season premiered last fall, the anniversary of “S.N.L.,” one of a fragmented America’s few remaining communal cultural events, has inspired a steady stream of tributes to the show and its creator.  There was a Jason Reitman origin-story movie called “Saturday Night,” as well as hundreds of feature stories and listicles in the press.  Last month there was a four-part docuseries on the show and another documentary on just the music.  Friday night brings an “S.N.L” concert at Radio City Music Hall, livestreaming on Peacock.  A 600-plus page biography of Michaels titled “Lorne” by Susan Morrison, an editor at The New Yorker, comes out next week.  It all culminates on Sunday with a live three-hour prime-time special looking back on “S.N.L.” and its singular legacy.

And so on.

By the end of the “14 min. read,” I agreed with Maureen Dowd that Lorne Michael Lipowitz (birth name), Canadian, came to the U.S. at 23, sure has done well by himself since he got here.

At the end of the article was a comments section.

The Times needs your voice. We welcome your on-topic commentary, criticism and expertise.  Comments are moderated for civility.

I’m not as big a fan of Lorne Michaels as Ms. Dowd is, so I thought to balance things off I’d offer a comment that is a little critical of his contribution to the world and sent this in:

As I thought about SNL prompted by the article and read through the list of Lorne Michaels’ outside productions—Jimmy Fallon’s “Tonight Show,” Seth Meyers’ “Late Night,” “30 Rock,” “Mean Girls,” “Wayne’s World,” “Tommy Boy,” “Portlandia,” and “Kenan”—the terms “successful mass entertainment” and “liberal sell” came to mind but “quality” and “cultural uplift” didn’t.

The Times, these days a journal of establishment-left opinion, printed the comment; I was wondering if it would.  A total of 132 comments including mine, though mine didn’t make a splash at all, at least judging by reader replies.  My comment got just two favorable replies.  A scant few of the 132 commenters were down there in number with me.  This one got 122 favorable replies:

Lorne was born and raised and educated in our great city of Toronto in the great independent country of Canada.  Home also of the global icon Drake. His quiet confidence and sublime sense of humour makes the world laugh.  For fifty years he has made us laugh and gotten us through some tough times. Think 9/11. Hopefully he will help us laugh our way through the Trump reign and beyond. Thank you, Mr. Michaels.

and this one got 127:

I enjoy the show from time to time, but I will never forgive them for allowing Trump and Musk to host, thereby giving them a platform to make them seem normal and not like the sociopaths they actually are. A stained legacy to be sure.

I guess my type doesn’t go over big with Times readers, which is their right. At least I got my comment out there. Now I’m wondering who my two favorable repliers were.

The Trump tide hits Ireland

/in /by

Two refugee charities are about to collapse after USAID funding cut, according to internet rumour. Jin O’Callaghan, our new Justice Minister, is talking deportations and urging fake refugees “Don’t come here!” US companies in Ireland are hauling down their Pride flags. Top Irish journalists are signaling they are prepared to bend the knee to the new reality of Emperor Trump, mass deportations and Trad Wives.

The MSM is still running 80% with Crazy Nazi Trump storylines. But they are allowing 20% Messiah Trump storylines. The problem they have is that lots of what Trump and RFK Jr. say is popular, often majority opinion. Refugees are polling 80% disapproval and the takeup for the latest vaccines is very low. It’s open season on transpeople. Legendary screenwriter Graham Linehan is boasting — nervously — that he is going to the States to work with some Jewish guy on a top secret TV series making fun of LGBTQI people and other minorities. If Graham does not have a fatal accident and the series does get made, it will no doubt be very funny. They are keeping it secret until the last minute, to avoid protests and pressure. (His book Tough Crowd details his tangle with crazy trans activists).

Bad Trump storylines: Lawfare!

We’ll stop him with a thousand injunctions.
Congress will block him.
Decent Republicans won’t stand for this.
Hahaha! He’s hurting his own base by making them pay more for Chinese tech.
He’s a bluffer. Those deals with Mexico and Canada were already on the table. And anyway, the deals will make no difference. He’s a fascist!. Elon’s salute is used as proof, though some journos are ready to follow the ADL and Netanyahu and defend Elon’s heartfelt gesture.

He signed the anti-trans decree while surrounded by blonde little girls. This was labelled propaganda and reminded some sensitive metrosexual journos of Germany in the 1930s. He’s in the pocket of the Tech Bros, who are evil, power-crazy weirdos who want to take over the world and control every move we make.
He’s in the pocket of the Zionists.

The only groups actually mentioned as suffering from Trump are:

  1. Hundreds of millions of foreigners who will now have to pay for their own ”lifesaving” AIDS medication. Apparently Uncle Sam was paying for it till now!
  2. About 80 US trans women will no longer be able to compete in their sports. For some reason there are no sob stories about people being deported from the US.

Trump the Messiah storylines: The Israelis have reduced the massacres in Gaza since he came in. At least for now, he has stopped the war. … And he might stop the war in Ukraine. Maybe.

“He is doing what he said he would do.” In utter contrast to most politicians.

Trump is deal maker. What kind of deal can we offer him? Michael Martin is already saying we will buy lots of fracked gas from the US, as a way to equalise the trade balance. And slow down the passage of the Occupied Territories Bill, so as not to upset Trump’s Jewish backers.

Some female and homosexual journos seem to be in a bit of a tizzy, when talking abouit Trump. Direct quotes:

Your head will be spinning…
I feel so weak…
Have they been affected by the increased levels of testosterone wafting across the Atlantic?

Brendan O’Connor is one of the top paid stars of Irish journalism. On his RTÉ radio this weekend, he signalled that he is prepared to bend the knee and abandon his GloboHomo worldview. While introducing a piece about RFK Jr., he used a joking insult about him. But the insult was so mild, that it was effectively praise. The menu of insults Irish MSM has for RFK Jr. includes: predator, junkie, cruel, thief, liar, killer layabout, unqualified and even Zionist.

But the insult Brendan used about him was: He enjoys raw milk. Raw milk is hard to get in the shops. But it has a good reputation for taste and quality amongst young and old, both in the city and the country. Brendan did not insult him by saying he likes raw milk: he praised him. His guest is an enthusiastic young Ciaran O”Connor, from the notorious British-linked Institute for Strategic Dialogue. Ciaran actually sniggers as he mentions “child sex trafficking” theories. (An unfortunate moment to snigger. They say nothing shows a man’s character more clearly than what he finds amusing.) Ciaran notes with concern that many more women believe in conspiracy theories these days. Has the feminist network backfired on its creators? They mention the Trad Wife phenomenon, and Brendan is very careful not to insult them: “They believe there is empowerment there.”

Then Brendan puts the devastating question to his guest: “Does this mean that this kind of conspiratoriality will now become mainstream?” When asking the question, Brendan’s voice is relaxed, amused. He is purring like the cat that got the cream. If, and only if, it becomes mainstream to deport millions of darkies, bring back trad wives and make raw milk compulsory, then Brendan is clearly on board. Brendan concludes with advice for normies on how to deal with their friends and relations who have gone down the rabbit hole.“Maintain some communications on neutral subjects. Don’t keep attacking their reality all the time.”

Sounds like surrender…