i noticed that Irving really loved his expensive car

some of his values are a little warped though i admire his courage for standing up to the jews

A friend of mine is Jewish father and gentile mother, he is perhaps an even bigger Jewish chauvinist than others despite the fact they wouldn’t allow him in to Israel.

The proposed desecration of Victoria Tower Gardens with a holocaust memorial is deeply offensive and depressing. I looked at the campaign opposing it and it seems to be Jewish run so figured it was a faux campaign.

Irving made a lot of dumb moves, like renting a flat he couldn’t afford, suing Lipstadt or visiting Austria when they had an arrest warrant out for him.

Yes though the holocaust is on increasingly shaky ground due to the Internet.

omnipresent

Fascinating paper from the U.N. web site. The stated goal is to use the Holocaust as a weapon to demand multiculturalism and globalism.

Again, this is NOT a conspiracy theory from a neo-nazi web site. This is from the U.N. Let that sink in.https://t.co/eXAactEJbs

— RAMZPAUL (@ramzpaul) December 2, 2018

I should say that I like, admire, and sympathize with Irving (especially the Irving of that time; he is somewhat different now) — I have read most of his books and listened to a great many of his talks (which are available on Youtube) — I hope one day he will be vindicated/rehabilitated (along with all of the other ‘deniers’ who’ve been jailed or ruined, eg Leuchter) — but the Jews and their allies are powerful, and the ‘Holocaust’ is still omnipresent — eg they will soon build yet another ‘Holocaust’ memorial, this one right in the middle of London (link) — so it will take more time.

Yep, being deplatformed, dispossessed and having your memory erased: A Great Honor!

Or maybe it was just A Great Crushing by the Powers That Be? Who knows, really?

Sure bud, whatever you say — but going with the market metaphor used here, if at the time you had ‘shorted’ Jews, and ‘gone long’ David Irving, you would have ended up penniless — more or less like Irving.

Holocaust denier made bankrupt

Irving’s home is repossessed as libel debts mount

Irving’s girlfriend is left homeless and bitter

“Please clap.”

Donald Trump Is Bad for Israel via @NYTimes. Hopefully our President will reverse his decision to abandon Syria. https://t.co/nrZbhpV5Zj

— Jeb Bush (@JebBush) December 27, 2018

there is also high outmarriage rates among Jews in the US. How many mischlings ID as Jewish vs Christian/none? Beats me. Traditionally it’s traced maternally but I’m not sure how that actually plays out in contemporary America.

One way I suspect it plays out is that there are quite a few people with Jewish-sounding surnames which get (((tagged))) when commenters on sites like this talk about them, but who don’t self-identify as Jewish, care nothing about Israel, and are not part of the 2%.

Needless to say, Irving wildly underestimated the power of Jews and their allies, people who went on to basically destroy his career — later lowlights were his arrest and imprisonment in Austria, and the libel trial against Deborah Lipstadt — when he passes, all of his dedicated research and writing will barely get a mention — he will be smeared as a ‘Holocaust denier’ even in death — watch and see.

all of this is a great honor

There is a narrative, bordering on a trope, in our movements that in the absence of white conservatives that the intersectional coalition will rip itself apart. I’m quite fond of it. The Jews are the classic “middleman minority” or “market dominant minority”. But the leftist coalition is increasingly running out of Jews, so it is stuck with people with slight Jewish ancestry to the point where Sephardic ancestors centuries past is now qualifying. What it is not running out of is Jewish donors, whose foundations can afford to put large numbers of otherwise hostile and competent PeeOhCee on the payroll.

Heartiste/Roissy’s phrase “Diversity+Proximity=War” has a lot of stock here, but should be rewritten as “Empire > War=Proximity+Diversity”. The vague outlines of the Jewish-left strategy is to break down white ethno-religious consciousness, and replace it with progressivism. In that visage, “Wokeness” will substitute what they see as “whiteness”. There’s a reason you don’t see any subversion of black/hispanic/asian churches, while people like Russel Moore are propped up. Will this function as a worthy imperial ideology, I have my doubts. But this is the direction that Conservatism Inc donors want to push the base towards. And if “Woke Conservatism” becomes a thing in the 2020s, things are not looking good for us.

Interestingly, blacks have not entirely behaved as some of us expected with the end of the Obama years. Younger blacks did appear to tilt a bit towards Trump in ’16 than their elders, off of a lower turnout as well. But this seems extinguished with Trump’s cringe-worthy Boomer attacks on the sportsballers. Some of us predicted that blacks would try to sell their influence to the highest bidder, given that 9-1 margins for the Dems didn’t deliver. In contrast, blacks, particularly women appear even more devoted to the Democrats than ever before. Whether this will sustain their position within the intersectional hierarchy remains to be seen.

Unlike some here, I don’t put much value in “ethnostate” ideas, and even support for partition while desirable might still be a pipe dream. I am most partial to a Singapore PAP-style government that uses an implicit white identity alongside mega-pandering to non-whites via “parachuted candidates”. I think we are better off creating a cultural “Eurocentrism” that encourages Hispanics and hapas to identify with Western heritage. I value organizing all of the anti-Poz factions into a single party, over the cringing Islamophobia of the earlier generations. Immigration restrictions are most viable on labor/environmental grounds, cultural grounds less so. The more important policy is a “demographic reset” that favors fertility by high-income graduates, while suppressing it among the underclass via cultural conservatism.

The “civil war” and “ethnostate” ideas should not be taken seriously, they are less viable than “Back to Europe”, “Eurosiberia”, “Eurozionism” and even “EuroMars”.

This reminds me of speeches by David Irving in the late 1980s and early 1990s, ie the time just after the Zündel trial (rather an embarrassment for the ‘exterminationists’, particularly Raul Hilberg, who refused to take part in the second Zündel trial, although the verdict went against Zündel), Leuchter Report, and later the David Cole video, etc — in some of his talks you can hear Irving confidently and matter-of-factly telling his audience how he privately advises Jewish friends that ‘the game is up’ — all the stories about soap made from the fat of murdered Jews, shrunken heads of Jews, lampshades made from the skin of Jews, etc have been either shown to be or are now widely accepted as false — so it is just a matter of time before the entire ‘Holocaust’ gas chamber story is exposed.

Needless to say, Irving wildly underestimated the power of Jews and their allies, people who went on to basically destroy his career — later lowlights were his arrest and imprisonment in Austria, and the libel trial against Deborah Lipstadt — when he passes, all of his dedicated research and writing will barely get a mention — he will be smeared as a ‘Holocaust denier’ even in death — watch and see.

I wonder to what degree this current PC tumult foisted upon society is the result of the 2% trying to maintain their authority in a diversifying country, one that is no longer showing the same acquiescence to their leadership as they used to.

To illustrate, check out the recent saga of David Pakman. He’s a Jewish male YouTuber who merely pointed out to one of these ascendant majority-types that automatically excluding white males like Bernie Sanders from the 2020 primary might be the wrong approach … and racist. She publicly attacked the guy and then called his employer and tried to get him fired, ostensibly for hate speech or mansplaining.

Consider the following trends and events and ask yourself if there might not be some kind of overarching theme:

1. Continual attacks on Pewdiepie, a gentile, by the mainstream media (WSJ, WaPo, Vice). Felix (Pewdiepie) is a popular YouTuber who is becoming something of a folk hero to the gentile youth. Importantly, he doesn’t seem to be overly responsive to the media’s personal attacks, as he often brushes them off or pokes the bear back in response. Neither does his audience seem to care, which I’m sure the 2% find alarming.

The geneses of these attacks came from an incident years ago where he dressed as a Nazi – obviously intended as a joke. Of course, the 2% came down on him and tried to convince his young audience that he is anti-Semitic. This is disingenuous, though. Dressing like an SS officer to make jokes is common in Asian manga and was once common in the United States as well. Here’s a funny clip from the Carol Burnett show where a character dresses as a Nazi to interrogate a WW2 allied prisoner: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5eAjYpcYeg

Video Link

Obviously, Felix didn’t do anything others haven’t done before and the intention was to be humorous, not offensive or bigoted. The mainstream media launched a ferocious attack on him in response, getting one of his YouTube programs canceled in the process. However, his audience came to his defense and now he’s more popular than ever. There are people subscribed to him just to show their support, even if they hate his content. This must scare the hell out of the Ruling Class.

2. Sarah Silverman’s antics. Once edgy (back when the democrats were in charge and they were firmly in the hands of the 2%), she’s now an advocate for censoring jokes and towing the line. Why? Well, she’s very openly Jewish and ethnocentric, so it is reasonable to assume this may be influencing her. Consider…

She publicly polices jokes so she and tribe can be seen as being on side of the emerging non-2% majority. She extols the virtues of not telling any edgy jokes that might offend said majority. She has a bizarre woke television program where she sort of attempts to make nice with conservative whites (the youth of which are now questioning their rulers all over the internet). She’s urged fellow Jews in the past to vote against Republicans in Florida based purely on ethnic interests and affiliation. She has made a recent claim that republicans are NOT more oppressed than gays* (a powerful group in the media and finance world) – an attempt to put the 2% back on the top of the regressive stack by showing loyalty to those with power.

*Obviously wrong. Are gays being ruined because they aren’t baking cakes for religious extremists? Are gays fired for donating to the wrong political causes they way that Mozilla board member was? Did Jimmy Kimmel have to apologize for calling Trump voters meth heads or did Brad Pitt have to apologize on behalf of his mother who said something gays didn’t like? Are gays barred from hosting the Oscars for making a joke about straits/cis-genders a decade or so ago – and even after they apologized? It’s true in the last incident that Kevin Hart isn’t a republican, but that doesn’t make it any better. It makes it worse. These people can even destroy a funny, popular black guy when they need to. Who exactly is “oppressed� here?

3. The ADL’s participation in YouTube’s trusted flagger program, an occurrence that started just few years ago around the time of Trump’s election. This is doubly bad when you stop to consider that the ADL’s mission involves the protection of a foreign country – Israel (and Jews broadly). Why is this organization allowed to police the free speech of Americans? Well, they shouldn’t be, but it’s apparent why they do anyway: they want to serve as gatekeepers for acceptable conversation; presumably, they want to prohibit or limit speech that might run counter to their tribe’s interests.

4. The Israel lobby’s efforts to pass unconstitutional anti-Israel boycott laws in congress and in state legislatures. Once established, these laws could set a precedent that allows for wider criminal and civil punishments aimed at Americans who challenge the 2% domestically or members of their ruling coalition. Christians, whites, … even black comedians or sports stars who step out line as we’ve seen with Kevin Hart.

5. Support for unlimited immigration. It’s a way for the American 2% to advertise their worth and loyalty to the new emerging majority, the logic being that their control and immense wealth and privilege will go unnoticed and uncorrected as this majority attacks the former majority.

6. The use of antifa front groups to doxx 2% critics and get them fired, deplatformed from social media, polite society, and payment processors like PayPal and Patreon.

7. BLM. The 2%’s NY-LA-DC media axis engaged in probably the worst racial animus stoking campaign I’ve heard of since the original Birth of a Nation. One might interpret this as an attempt to rally minorities of the ascendant majority to the banner of the 2% against the gentiles who were trying to take back their country in 2016. The consequences were devastating: mass deplatforming, media censorship, a climate of fear and hate, and a massive 23% increase in the murder rate in black cities.

This should scare any gentile American. This 2% have shown they will escalate to a tremendous degree to maintain their ruling privileges. What else will they do in the future? They are already busy placing limitations on free speech through anti-BDS laws.

8. Deference to the Holocaust narrative seems to be waning. Thus, we get Hollywood celebs attacking members of various women’s marches for innocuous comments on Israel.

9. Several Muslims have now been elected to congress. They support BDS. There seems to be growing support for BDS overall and that may be represented in future congressional elections. I imagine some people are getting nervous about now.

Taken together, one might interpret recent changes in the culture and political climate as an alien elite desperately trying to maintain control, even if they have to employ immoral or blatantly unAmerican means to do it.

If the figure is based on self-identified religious affiliation, it surely understates the number of people who are ethnically (or racially, if you consider Jews as non-white) Jewish. There are many who are completely non-religious and would check the “None” box.

As America becomes less European, it makes sense that an historical European event would be googled less over time.

Salient point. It also illustrates how little the Jews know about the negroes (and mesoamericans). With the nation in full blown negro worship, we will see ascendency of the negro conviction that Jews are simply superwhites. The negro is not one for subtle nuance, if it looks white it is white, so the Jews’ ability to control the narrative will only backfire as most Jewish schemes ultimately do – “who dese crackas tink dey foolin? Dey’s da wust crackas of all. Deys be habbin all dat money.â€� Look no further than Farrakhan or the new imbroglio with Lebron James for proof.

Maybe it’s the worship of a punitive YHWH, but Jews seem the only group more suicidal than their Yeshuan offshoots. Their entire history is one of inviting (and receiving) punishment that was completely avoidable.

The women’s march crystallizes the theory that when left wing groups march, it’s meant to be a victory lap than to achieve tangible goals.

It also bolsters the argument that negro rioting is an expression of power and not an act of despair.

horripilating

Awesome!

Instead of waiting for our Bolsonaro, I wish we could find a Pinochet..

This is why the Jews not only hold the megaphone, but also own the megaphone. It’s their narrative, they’re just not self-aware enough to realize that the only story they know how to write is a farcical tragedy.

Once Republicans are no longer able to win national elections thanks to demographics

Cf: White politicians in the South African legislature circa 2018. It ain’t pretty.

That’s what I was envisioning. A right wing strongman like Bolsonaro to emerge from the rubble of white conservatism to take advantage of the infighting between the various minority and interest groups when hating whites is no longer enough. It’s going to take a couple of decades of pain to wake the white normies out of their slumber. Then the American Bolsonaro is able to cobble together enough hispanics and asians who realize America was better when it was a white country instead of a multicultural paradise.

About the time I expect Jair Bolosonaro like character to emerge here. Shame we have to go through this cycle of hell. Well I will not be fighting this pilgrims, will be heading back to COB on one way ticket.

How they tap dance around Louis Farrakhan is going to be their playbook for when other non-white groups and leaders who are against the tribe speak out.

It has long impressed me that the largest reservoir of anti-Semitism in the United States can be found in the black community. Not only is there Farrakhan, but also Jesse Jackson (of “Hymietown” notoriety), and Al Sharpton, who played a key role in the Crown Heights riots, the closest thing this country has experienced to a pogrom (in that case the “Black Hundreds” were actually black!). These black leaders have significant followings. Despite this, the ADL has mostly turned a blind eye to them.

Any white politician of comparable prominence who said or did anything approaching what they have would be driven from public life, his name brought up only for the purposes of horripilating liberals and tarring the right by association.

Regarding the title of this post, I’ve long wondered about that 2% estimate (of Jewish population in the US). Is it supposed to represent the number who practice Judaism, or who are of Jewish descent? (There are a lot more of the latter than the former.) Either way, how was it arrived at?

It is notable that the US Congress passed the “Days of Remembrance ” bill garbage back in 1979 . Marks the time where the “Holocau$t” started being pushed in the media and when the dogma started infecting the academic field of actual history, to the now current extermination of all other history except to say evil white people in history, which is the same thing.

The women’s march crystallizes the theory that when left wing groups march, it’s meant to be a victory lap than to achieve tangible goals. They initially organized thinking that Hillary was going to be the winner and unsurprisingly it falls apart when the wrong person gets elected.

Although how it managed to fall apart is a sign of what a one-party America is going to look like: Jews on top and everyone else on the bottom. However with minorities being empowered by the tribe, they’re fully expecting to share in the spoils of defeating whitey. Little do they know that their role is just for optics and accept the few crumbs that get kicked over to them.

Once Republicans are no longer able to win national elections thanks to demographics, the cracks are going to show and then burst. 2020s and 2030s may be hell for conservatives but 2040s and on could see a revival of white people in politics for that reason.

As America becomes less European, it makes sense that an historical European event would be googled less over time.

The Womens March would have much more power if they’d put a few True Conservative(tm) tokens in visible positions. Leftists generally haven’ t needed to utilize tokenism, so they left money on the table here.

The above would violate the tenents of intersectionality, that needs to have the cis het white Christian patriarch as the demon. That exposes the long-term (decades, century) weakness of intersectionality, its need to have people like us be the enemy to unite against. This will be interesting when California elections end up being Dem vs Dem in nearly every district. The best thing GOP voters can do in that state is to emigrate, and the best thing the CA GOP can do for its national counterpart is to dissolve.

The lack of staying power by either BLM, the Womens March or David Hogg is not of much long term significance. The power is not in these organizations, as much as it is in the hands of the university and media gatekeepers. Where one movement fails, another is quickly constructed. By contrast, DSA actually intends to operate as a real movement with regular meetings by dues-paying members in local chapters. That could be a real threat to the Dem donor class, as slacktivist groups like the Womens March can’t self-sustain.

216

How they tap dance around Louis Farrakhan is going to be their playbook

This is already a fracture line in the women’s march, where the Jews are explicitly trying to tell the WoC that their role is optics not policy, and the WoC are having none of it and demanding real power.� Their refusal to disavow Farrakhan has already come up.� Sounds like it could be exploited by putting the right memes in someone’s ear, gnomesayin?

Women’s march without (((donor))) money = flop.

Women’s march without WoC = failure for feminism.

No downside.

Case in point:

Feminist Tries To Get Progressive Podcaster Fired For Defending White Men

Feminist says “white men” shouldn’t be considered for the democratic 2020 primary; that pretty much eliminates Jews like Bernie Sanders. White male Jewish podcaster asks if that’s not discriminatory. Gets denounced. Spited female calls his employer. Tattles on him for wrongthink.

Video Link

Making blacks, orientals, and mestizos feel guilty about the sacred six and 6 zeros is going to be a daunting task once whitey is gone.

Is there a place in Bolivia, Mongolia, or Chad where a few fenced in camps, with just enough electricity to plug in a bar code scanner, could be put up on the down low? Mild climate would be preferable.

I’m going to guess that the response will be that they need to increase the persecution of right wing groups because it must be their fault why the noble person of color feels the way they do about the tribe. How they tap dance around Louis Farrakhan is going to be their playbook for when other non-white groups and leaders who are against the tribe speak out.

On the millionaire chart. If only 5% of all goyim are millionaires, and Jews 14%, who the hell makes up for the other 81%?

"My family is white, completely white. Its white-owned farms in South Africa today, 401(k)s in the US tomorrow."

How do you explain this to the idealistic Bernie-ites? FDR's New Deal took place at a time when 95% of POC were ensconsed in the Deep South, Indian reservations, and urban areas which whites (esp. Anglo-Teutons) were escaping in successive waves, end result being that something like 70+% of white Boomers grew up in the suburbs and small towns, a trend that has held true with each subsequent cohort of whites, with white Gen X-ers and Millennials in particular being perhaps the most suburban generation of kids ever (for Millennials, many grew up in exurbs which sprouted up due to 1st and even 2nd ring suburbs being colonized by POC in the 1990's). Point being, it was (relatively) painless to "get cute" about the diversity problem in past decades when the general population was much whiter.

Besides, the real catalyst for (relative) racial calm in the 1940's and 50's was whites moving out of the urban US. Agnostic has tried to claim that whites were comfortable with gibmedats as means to keeping the racial and civic peace. That may have been true to some degree, but racial tensions are best avoided by……Simply staying out of each other's physical space. The Battle of the Eyes. Oh, and sure enough Oakland CA has been about 30% white since the 1980's. So how has the black pop. declined since then? Millennial blacks aren't as menacing as Gen X blacks, and Mexicans and Asians (who've not been socialized to kowtow to blacks) have been able to raise their presence from around 10% in 1990 to 30% in 2010.

And Agnostic said that POC have no power whatsoever in America. Are you kidding me? The Asian and Mexican pop. is exponentially larger compared to what it was in the 1970's. Territory and manpower is, well, power. Who's gaining more of it, and who's losing? Blacks have declined in much of the Western US, and a decent chunk of the Northeast. Their Southern and Midwestern base is still quite strong, but even then, whose to say what the culture and demographics of say, Atlanta, will be like in 30 years? At the end of the day, this tiring frozen-in-1980 mindset about American race relations, which inflicts both Rightists and Leftists alike, is useless and dying.

We may have reservations about Mexicans and Asians in America, but the silver lining is that they already have, and will continue to have, a newfound and large impact on race relations and group dynamics in America. Sailer and Derbyshire have both noticed that shitlord Asians in CA are doing more to raise the alarm about dangerous sun people than the area's legacy inhabitants. And for those who are skeptical, ask yourself this: Do "anglos" fire bomb black housing? Of course not, the CultMarx government, media, and global capitalist class is so quick to denounce whites who stand up for themselves that whites on the whole, in effect, have been abandoned. Of course rich whites (who tend to be the most liberal about race) couldn't care less about displacement and even abuse of whites, as long as the former get to be in comfy places. Since the 1970's, incidents of whites being aggressive towards POC have been so unusual that the rare exceptions tend to get their own Wikipedia articles (such as the Italian teenage mob that pursued and heavily beat a black hoodlum in late 80's NYC, Bernie Goetz going vigilante also in the 80's, Dylan Roof more recently, and last that comes to mind was a late 80's Ethiopian immigrant getting ambushed by a neo-Nazi in Portand OR). Naturally Midwestern whites are a total no-show against the Forces of Diversity (coming from stoic farmer stock that's a thousand years in the making doesn't make you effective against invaders). And the Midwest has had by far the most damage done to it's cities since the 1960's.

They're be, if not civil war, a major, major, crises, perhaps economic collapse and/or secession of some states, California perhaps, before the United States of America puts a moratorium on immigration, Jesus Christ.

216…

No, I have much more insightful comments than that Jew Shapiro.

Anonymous…

White Americans in absolute terms are involved in interracial marriages more than any other racial group due to their demographic majority. And this social shaming angle only works if, wait for it, people give a damn about the social shaming.
With rates of intermarriages among newlyweds nearly tripling from 1980 (6.7%) to 15.1% in 2010, repeatedly saying "race mixing is bad" has fallen on deaf ears.

"Most white women know exactly how unmarketable having a brown baby makes them to white men…"

And I would suspect that these women would remain on the dark side, eh. Not really our concern.

"women of every racial group (except asians, but I believe this is more due to numbers than group disloyalty) being more against race mixing than men"

Competition. Aint' life a bitch.

Passer By…

Hypergamy exists as far as men and women being similarly selective in prospective mates.

"but males, whether rich or poor have no problem marrying all types of women, including poorer women."

No, they generally take issue with women who are less financially well than them, considering the high rates of divorce (rape).

AE…

"There is a lot less social shaming of miscegenation now than in the past and consequently we have a lot more miscegenation now than we did in the past."

OK, so? How does it directly and personally impact you and your family?

"Everyone has known the health risks associated with cigarette smoking for generations now, but the hard reductions in smoker rates have come about over that same period of time because of the social stigmatization associated with smoking, not primarily for health reasons."

Red herring on your part. Race mixing…a benefit? [GASP]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3146070/Mixed-race-relationships-making-taller-smarter-Children-born-genetically-diverse-parents-intelligent-ancestors.html

she voted for trump because she was married european woman with european kids. those are the only women who vote republican in numbers. you probably didn't convince her of anything and nothing you talked to her about likely made any difference.

if she was single, she's have voted for clinton. if she was divorced with no kids, she would have voted for clinton. if she was divorced, with a european kid, she would have voted for clinton. if she was divorced with a vibrant kid, she would have voted for clinton.

if she voted at all, of course. not everybody even votes.

the most important thing to understand is that european women who have kids with a vibrant man become permanent democrats. in fact, this action produces 3 new permanent democrats:

1) the father, who usually doesn't even stick around, is a vibrant who votes democrat
2) the mother, now likely a single mother, will vote democrat
3) the kid, a vibrant, obviously grows up to vote democrat

vibrant men getting european women pregnant is a disaster for western technological society, from a political perspective.

serious studies of this topic have found that african men in particular who have kids with european women, leave them at a rate over 90%. over 90%! all it takes to make 3 new permanent democrats is a year or two of sex with some woman he plans on leaving.

hard to believe how stacked against technological and societal progress the entire system is now.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/survey-shows-spike-in-opposition-to-higher-immigration-in-canada-but-too-soon-to-call-it-a-trend

Uncuck the Canuck?

Men apparently really want economic competition, women are more interested in their beta husband's economic prospects than they themselves are?

Not surprising that women have the highest favorability the importation of "refugees".

AE- Does blogger allow putting certain commentators on ignore, along with those replies? It gets exhausting seeing the arguments against Crow's bad-faith statements. There's no there, there.

The concept of the POC shield makes a lot of sense, but the long-term effects are going to be horrifying. Except for the 2-3% where dad stays around during the entire childhood, the mixed generation of neurotic Obama-esque wrecks will be coming a-cropper right when the electorate goes majority-minority. Who will help them, the members of r/happa?

@Corvinus: Heartiste's "Game" is no more anti-woman than diamonds or regular bathing.

@Corvinus

"More manospherist nonsense."

Actually in is not manospherist non-sense, hypergamy in humans does exist and it leads to females being more selective than males, thus fewer males (compared to females) reproduce. In nature as well, females are generally more selective and males are more expendable.

Thus there is no perfect "fairness" or "perfect equality" in nature.

In the case of humans, females favour resource provisioning abilities in males, which is why women seek to marry men richer than themselves, but males, whether rich or poor have no problem marrying all types of women, including poorer women.

As is legal, I have been claiming Hispanic heritage for more than 25 years, because my mother is Spanish Criollo from Louisiana (which means Spaniards born on the mainland, akin to early Tejanos). I also got the DNA test (although not necessary) which showed, as I expected, about 1/3 Iberian ancestry.

Aud – I got me a blog now, finally, @ https://denofinquiry2.blogspot.com/

It's going to be mostly GSS stuff (usually limited to Race1 and Sex1 unless otherwise noted, so people don't just give boring replies that it's the Jews or blacks.

Corvinus,

Whites have the least amount of interracial marriages per capita than any other group, and these numbers have remained fairly static.

Not sure why you think anyone here would care about non-whites mixing with non-whites. This doesn't seem like the right site for that sort of concern. Perhaps try the black forum lipstickalley?

Social shaming does work and has always worked. I suspect the number of non-white offspring to white women would be vastly higher if everyone didn't subtly look down on them for it.

Despite what the media tells you, most white women know exactly how unmarketable having a brown baby makes them to white men – and with women of every racial group (except asians, but I believe this is more due to numbers than group disloyalty) being more against race mixing than men, white men are in very high demand indeed. Everyone else knows it too.

Corvinus,

All you do is repeat the same slop that Ben Shapiro does, but no one even pays you to do it. You aren't "edgy" at all by promoting establishment orthodoxy in anti-establishment communities. Sexual neoliberalism is displaying its failures alongside all the other neoliberal pieties. The fruits of your worldview is r/hapa directing rage at white males.

Feryl…

"It's not schtick, it's based in research. Remember, I practice what I preach; I don't care about ideology or emotion, I want the facts."

Right, "facts" that you twist and turn to blame Baby Boomers for everything bad in this world. It's a schtick.

Dealg…

Cool story, bro.

AE…

"Heartiste has a gift he's sharing with the world, for free."

His "gift" are outright falsehoods and displaced anger.

"If he doesn't have kids but gives countless men the figurative cajones to have them, he's waging war on the side of the angels."

He wages war on marriage and siring offspring. I get though, no punching to the right. That's why you have to defend him.

"Do you not think the zeitgeist has an influence on mating decisions?"

What has had an influence on the increase in race mixing is that it was falsely labeled a social taboo. And obviously social pressure and shaming does not work, as more women (and men) are exercising their own liberty to choose mates rather than succumb to the Alt Right's virtue signaling.

Passer by…

"Hypergamy means that this is not the case, as far as gender relations are concerned."

More manospherist nonsense. In our modern society, for both genders, it is a combination of innate instinct forged by behavior and reproductive strategy through forces of evolution (sexual selection) and social pressures, priming them to seek the best traits a prospective mate is able to offer and provide. In this process, they may be engage in strict selectiveness or may be causal in how that selection.

Hi, everyone, I'm here to share my testimony all around the globe in respect to the help that Doctor Zakuza did for me. I was devastated and confused when I got divorced by my husband 2 years ago because he wanted to go back to his mistress. I searched for help from those that i knew but all was to no avail not until i was directed to Doctor Zakuza the spell caster. I contacted Doctor Zakuza and told him everything that I've been going through and he gave me full assurance that he will help me. I did everything he told me to do and I put my trust and hope on him. Could you believe that my husband came back to me pleading within 12 to 16 hours just as Doctor Zakuza told me after i contacted him and now, my husband is back home and we are living together again. I will recommend anyone in need of help to reach him now for he's also specialized in money spells, lottery spells, pregnancy spells, sickness spells E.T.C. Email: [email�protected] & Whats-app, call/text him on +1 (845) 400-7115.

This comment has been removed by the author.

Heartiste has a gift he's sharing with the world, for free. If he doesn't have kids…

I recall him mentioning at least one conquest who bore his child.  I may be wrong.

"A black lesbian from an upper class family who has had the skids greased her entire life who becomes a federal judge or a CEO is celebrated as overcoming all the systemic -isms in the US to make it to the top (no matter that she started there). A white kid from a broken, dysfunctional, poor family in West Virginia who does the same is suspect because after all he only got there because of all his white privilege."

It's stunning to contemplate, but back in the 1940's-1980's there was a diminished sense of regional and class differences. With the result being that the chattering classes were less likely to view Middle Americans as this exotic and endangered species. I recall that the 1990's is when a lot of class snobbery started to develop, and many companies high tailed it to trendy coastal cities. The upper classes like minority "success" stories because of PC and the whole "role model" thing (remember when Tiger was supposed to usher in black golfers, but in fact blacks are less likely to get involved in golf because per Sailer blacks since the 1970's have considered it to be "demeaning" to caddy for whites?) Meanwhile, prole whites are asked to just please roll over and die already.

as far as college being a predictor of female fertility, or lack thereof – maybe it means taking it to the logical conclusion and put dummies in college. <a title=”"https://archive.org/details/youtube-klKrXpoPu_Qâ€�>Morrakiu</a>&#8221; href="https://archive.org/details/youtube-klKrXpoPu_Qâ€�>Morrakiu</a&gt; mentioned something similar.

@Feryl: Yeah, Boomers suck. They watched a lot of TV. They resonated with Kramer vs Kramer. The lack of self-awareness in the white upper-middle class, who has a black friend, cheers cuck-ball, and gives to the ACLU; well, they are the real Deplorables.

@Dealg: I really think if we stop forcibly integrating schools, whites will have more babies. It is that simple, as it will start a virtuous circle. Lower-middle class whites have at times in history had large families with low infant mortality. And though they felt poor, they had riches in community support that we could have again if our communities and families are not constantly torn apart by school integration. Very quickly, rich whites would realize they are over-paying for their empty far-suburban McMansions, and start having kids too.

Delag,

Trends are not fixed. Mussolini was of the perception that America would be black majority by 2000, Malan was of the perception that South Africa would be whiter in 2000 than it was in 1950. Many of our large cities were considered irreversibly lost circa 1990. There's a place for the blackpill, but also a place for the Faustian man.

However ruinous it has been, Merkel's refugee invaders brought back previously forbidden ideas in German politics. The public cheers on bans of the burqa, and could be quickly followed by bans on non-adult circumcision and ritual slaughter. Perhaps there will even come a chance where the military leadership decides to remove a civilian government, or even China/India decides to save some of our nations from their own stupidity. Remember that it took two economic crises to bring down Weimar, and it still would have survived if not for French reluctance to put Germany under military occupation again.

What is helping the globalists is the incremental nature of their strategy, or as Cyril Ramaphosa says the "boiling frog". But some of their people are impatient, and that's where the opportunity for us lies. The Muslim Brotherhood also had an incrementalist strategy, but they are no more after only a brief period in the sun. Relatively small amounts of Muslim terrorism and BLM rioting drove Trump into the White House, and those events have mysteriously stopped. We have a chance of turning the corner if we acquire our own media platforms.

To sum up: the solution is a steady supply White Vitamin "D"

With Europe likely torn in civil wars between muslim enclaves and other ethnics, with whites declining and eventually leaving the picture, Russia a degenerate country of elderly drunks, and America resembling Brazil, it will be China and to a lesser extent India which will take over the world.

The "global liberal order" will likely fall, and be replaced by efficiently run Chinese puppet states and semi-independent dictatorships unburdened by Christian "slave morality" and by utopian "socialist" failures, and instead inspired by China's authoritarian grip over society.

The age of white people as the global source of laws, orders and customs will likely be over. Christianity will be a Latino/Black affair, while Muslims will establish small and big theocracies wherever they can. But islam will retain its backward irrationality that will lead to cultural stagnation and constant tribal fighting.

Blacks in Africa and elsewhere will likely be even more poor, violent and chaotic than today, due to highly dysgenic trends. Africa will be overpopulated, ravaged by famines, droughts, wars and diseases, even more so than today, due to overpopulation, dysgenics and lack of "western" aid.

The Chinese will control the local puppet regimes and get the most of them in terms of resources while they will manage aid to support their own interests, especially because no "yellow guilt" will inform actions the way "white guilt" has.

Israel will have to fend off the Arabs on its own. In the long the demographic Arab bomb will go off, and I don't see this ending well for Israeli Jews. The Samson option might become a reality.

The "end of whiteness" is inevitable. The Marxists and the blacks will rejoice for a while, before they'll mess everything up on their own, and will be left to deal with problems they won't be able to solve.

The only possible solutions to white decline would be so draconian that no white-majority nations will ever be able to implement them. Maybe the Chinese will manage to set up the Final Solution of the Uygur question. But the West is doomed.

There's no way to invert the process of falling fertility rates among white people, because it's not created by "propaganda", the "propaganda" is simply a reflection of the process itself. The truth is that white western people have been genetically selected to delay pregnancy (HOW is not entirely clear, one interesting hypothesis is Hdbchick's suggestion of bipartite manoralism), and that in today's post-industrial world there are plenty of economic benefits for delaying pregnancy, and plenty of disincentives to have a child when you're young.

Fertility rates are dropping all over the world, they're just dropping MORE among the groups which are more susceptible to delaying pregnancy, and in the social environments that reward later pregnancies more.

The "browning of America" is inevitable, just like the decline of America is also inevitable. An increasing number of Hispanics will mean an increasing support for government entitlements, lower rates of entrepreneurship and of STEM graduates, lower average IQ in general, higher corruption, more social tensions and a gradual loss of power and relevance.

In 60, maybe 80 years the US will be a second-rate failing power, similar to Brazil, with strikingly high income inequality, favelas, massive corruption, socialist parties trying to appeal to the "damned of the earth", and no-go areas infested by crime and chronic poverty.

WRT Boomers, it's evident that the Clinton Power Couple are the most corrupt and narcissistic figures to ever gain any prominence in our politics. There's literally lists on the internet devoted to the dozens of people who have died "unexpectedly" after running afoul of the Clintons.

The failure to eject the Clintons, to not throw them behind bars, is an indictment of the privilege dynamics and corruption you see with Boomers. It's bad enough that these scumbags did what they did, what's worse is the total absence of accountability. Also pertinent to the gender topic, Hilary is a greater sociopath than Bill. On the '16 campaign trail, Bill tried desperately, in vain, to convince Hilary that it wasn't acceptable to be so callous towards large segments of the country. Hilary was so vainglorious, so convinced of her chances, that she treated the campaign itself like a coronation as she hung out with one status insecure Boomer dipshit after another (thanks Bon Jovi and Springsteen for taking a massive dump on your artistic legacy by throwing in with the neo-liberals).

The Boomers have now produced 4 president, each of whom had reputations for egomania, corruption, and/or incompetence. The Clinton presidency happened close enough to a more wholesome time that in some respects it wasn't THAT bad, but Bush and beyond have been a clown show.

" With the odd exception of a top-10-percenter here and there, forced integration of schools has been an unmitigated disaster."

Yes, in the days of segregation the more qualified black students and teachers kept the dregs in line. With integration, not only did majority black schools go to hell, but the integrated majority white schools also were prevented from giving better care to the lower grade white students (the higher grade ones will be fine no matter what). Furthermore, a lot of prole white students often ended up getting caught in schools that were rapidly becoming less white, with obviously dire consequences.

Joe, WRT "good schools" and so forth, that's about liberal minded and usually more affluent whites compartmentalizing various spheres of "reality". At heart we all wish to be among like minded (and like-skinned) people for our own peace of mind, but SWPLs can hang out with talented 10th POC at college/work, or bestow gratitude towards compliant immigrant (usually Mexican and Asian) labor in one particular sphere as they ignore or explain away the unpleasant sphere of majority-dark underclass areas. This fairly comfortable arrangement will only change in the face of two things: a major reassertion of tribalism by any or all ethnic groups, probably sparked by resource conflict, or failing that, a popular surge towards an underclass champion who aims to be more forceful to upper class people (usually white). Back in the 1930's throughout the West more and more elites favored giving more breaks to the underclass, and agreeing not to tamper in too Leftist a way with our demographic and cultural make-up (so that means lowered immigration, the government doing little to nothing to upset the communal and demographic norms of each town and city so that things like covenants could remain in place. In the case of Hitler and Mussolinni, they vowed to fight in fascist way the "modern" forces of decadence so that traditional culture could be restored; FDR, Churchill et al felt somewhat similarly but shied away from overly radical measures, leaving it up to The People to proceed as they wished, with the obvious exception of treating German and Japanese Americas with a great deal of hostility and fear during WW2. Western elites in the 1930's felt obligated to do more to defend trad. native stock, because they feared that they'd be the victims of popular rage if they didn't shape up their act.

It's interesting that modern elites appear to be largely clueless as to the dangers of ignoring the economic plight of the working class, while also being actively hostile towards cultural and demographic history throughout the West. This I blame on the Boomer-fication feel-good society, where "hard work" and individual wealth are to be celebrated as markers of moral value, while lower class people are said to "cling" to the past in the face of unwelcome changes. The message is clear: good successful people transcend soil and tribe, white the "losers" cling to the remnants of traditional society as a security blanket. That an ever increasing number of ethnic and generational groups don't believe in neo-liberal individualism doesn't seem to matter; nor does the plummeting level of trust in the system among even middle class people seem to matter.

I really don't like this whole idea of convincing someone of a political view. It kind of sounds patronizing. I mean obviously if asked, I'd mention my views. But I'd like to think they could come to the views with just a suggestion, not by force. I don't know why, but I sort of find myself becoming a petty dick like pleasureman on mpc.

"But at least your Boomer schtick makes me smile, even though it is cringeworthy. Like a train wreck."

It's not schtick, it's based in research. Remember, I practice what I preach; I don't care about ideology or emotion, I want the facts. And the facts indicate, via studies, that Boomers have exhibited elevated levels of narcissism and greed. Also, studies indicate that Boomers tended to have strained relationships with their fathers, who were often accused of lacking emotional depth and warmth.

Boomers hate empiricism and logic, precisely because it exposes how worthless they are. What else do you expect from a generation which still (still!) blames older generations for the world's problems. Ya know, perhaps you could've spent your blessings on doing more to actually be good leaders and caretakers, and spent less resources on status striving and ruthless punishment of the less fortunate (mass incarceration, gutting welfare, gutting entry level wages and worker benefits, open borders etc.)

@Corvinus: You are confusing what people SAY with what they DO. If given the choice, whites send their kids to overwhelmingly white schools. They live in white neighborhoods. Property values go down when POC invade a neighborhood and rise when whites "gentrify." With the odd exception of a top-10-percenter here and there, forced integration of schools has been an unmitigated disaster.

White families often send the wife out to earn money so that the family home's garage can hold the 2-3 cars required to drive past the old run-down neighborhood to get to the semi-nice toddler day-care… all to uphold the cognitive dissonance of nice neighborhoods and desegregated schools. It is a terror tactic to make us pay this never-ending penalty for not being coffee-colored. It causes divorce, child abuse, and massive confusion about gender-roles. It is just about the literal source of all our problems – and you would tell us that if we simply surrender to it, everything will be fine.

@ Corvinus

"Men and women, sir, men and women"

Hypergamy means that this is not the case, as far as gender relations are concerned. Women seek to marry men richer than themselves, but this is not the case with men, thus rich men have no problem marrying poorer women.

Not surprisingly the richest men have higher marriage rates and reproduce better than poorer men, but this is not the case for women.

Feryl…

Narcissism is what defines individuals, whether it be a man or a woman, who exhibits consistently this trait. You are not even on the same plane as Erik Erikson, so your "stage of development" comment is over the top rhetoric not even grounded in reality. Furthermore, our sick and corrupt culture is the result of an abusive society, from politicians to the media to everyday people like you and I. But at least your Boomer schtick makes me smile, even though it is cringeworthy. Like a train wreck.

Sid,

"So the question is: How can we turn unmarried white women who voted for Obama and Hillary into white mothers who will vote for people like Trump and Kobach? This is perhaps the most daunting question we have to answer!"

1) Massive propaganda campaigns. It's about ideology, not identity.
2) You and your fellow posters actually taking the message to the streets. Grass roots! Commenting on blogs simply does not cut it. And if people do not have the stomach for getting "outed" and/or "doxxed" because they are frightened about telling the truth about "race realism" and "white nationalism", then the movement is just not that important. Personal sacrifices will have to be made. It's not enough just for white people to have white children or white people to build white communities.
3) Preparation for a civil war, IF that ever occurs, one that will be bloody. And the only way for the Alt Right to "take back their nation" is to purge their opponents, and that means death to men, women, and children. Peaceful secession is not really going to be an option. Why on earth would a white "shit lib" who lives in Alabama be forced to leave their domicile along with their white and darkie neighbors merely because they were told by some group that "this land is ours, leave"?

"Female nature adapts to the circumstances it finds itself in, and it is drawn to the men who command status, hoard wealth, and wield power."

That is a great slogan…about 100 years ago. But while there is truth to what you say, it really depends upon what is your interpretation on how men ought to command status, hoard wealth, and wield power.

Anony 3:59…

"But it is really hard to reach people when they are dropped off at age 5 at the local public school and left there for most of their waking hours for the next 13 years. And when they are not directly institutionalized in a coercive context they are tuned into the equally destructive seductive virtual media environment. Let's just say it is not peer pressure because it is not their peers who are doing this purposely, it is the authorities."

There is no "coercive context" or children being "directly institutionalized" or our people being "seduced" by the "media". Rather, such things are created willingly by our citizens, who embrace certain ideals and principles, and implement them in their own lives as how they see fit.

Passer By…

"Unmarried women vote left and as the number of umarried women increases and marriage declines this will lead to serious consequences for whites and even more leftist politics."

You mean serious consequences for those whites who are aligned to the ideology you espouse.

"Women are programmed to seek ways to extract resources from someone."

Men and women, sir, men and women. It is a symbiotic relationship. Biology 101. Capitalism 101.

216…

"Ending the War on Drugs could be a way of reversing this. While the typical "drug dealer" never acquires a lot, the "supplier" can make a substantial living that boosts SMV. And let's not forget that prison sentences boost SMV unless its for sexual deviancy."

I see you are an acolyte to the cult referred to as the sexual-social hierarchy. Why on earth would men in particular be told that they are a "gamma" by other men who do not even know them, or that they lack "sexual market value"? It is completely subjective in nature.

https://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/02/identifying-gamma-males.html

Everyone here needs a heavy dose of reality.

AE…

For starters, Heartiste DEFINES what is a weak man. He has hit the wall in his 40's, remains single, and has little to no desire to raise a family. He had to reboot his brand given the fact he is on borrowed time, so he went all Alt Right.

When it comes to race mixing, American and European men and women will make their own decisions on this matter. There is no turning back, despite Alt Right pleas that such action is "dysgenic". Besides, their freedom of association absolutely has no impact on your own life or your family's life.

And for you Christians out there –> Regarding the Christian view toward interracial marriage, the wife of Moses wife was of another race. In Numbers 12:1-15, Aaron and Miriam were punished for criticizing this interracial marriage. The book of Ruth also details how a foreigner became part of the lineage of Christ. Rehab the harlot, also of another nation, is included in the lineage of Christ as recorded in Matthew 1. Colossians 3:11 makes it clear that from God's perspective all are one in Christ.

Refer to Exodus…“take heed to yourself, lest you make a covenant with the people of the land where you go (the Promised Land the Israelites were to inherit), lest it be for a snare . . . 14. For you shall worship no other god . . . 15. Lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go whoring after their gods . . . 16. And lest you take from their daughters for your sons (marriages), and their daughters go whoring after THEIR gods and make your sons go whoring after THEIR gods (Exodus 34:12, 14-16)

To whom is God giving the above warning? To all those who he led out of Egypt, a great mass descended not only from Jacob (Israel) but also from other peoples and nations (Exodus 12:37). What does the warning concern? It concerns marriages between those who will enter the Promised Land with those already living in the area. Why is the warning given? Notice that "interracial" relationships for their own sake are the focus of the passage. The warning is given to keep those who worship the true God from being led astray to worship FALSE deities by their pagan mates. God is not forbidding interRACIAL dating and marriage in the effort keep people racially pure, He warned against interRELIGIOUS matrimony, meaning marriages between those who follow Him with those who do not follow Him.

"The one-drop rule gives a white parent a way to free her child of the cursed whiteness that would otherwise hang like a millstone around his neck throughout the course of his life."

While there are white people out there who are upset that their race is being denigrated or decapitated or deracinated, or whatever term suits your fancy, the fact remains that white people generally do not find their themselves being "cursed for being white" by their non-white family members or friends. And, no, they are not "brainwashed" by public schools, the media, and the elites, or they are not unconsciously "hating" their own race. Rather, they are firm believers on their own behalf regarding racial and ethnic immersion in our society. That is the simple truth of the matter.

ymous 8/19/18, 8:54 AM

When talking about women as a whole, one looks at the average woman (and those are billions of women), not at your aunt.

Who cares about your aunt, which is only one individual out of many? Are you 12 year old? Because you sound like one. I'm talking about statistics and averages and he/she says "but my aunt". This is primitive, solipsistic thinking. You should not talk to adults before you leave primary school.

As far as extraction of resources goes, women (taken as a whole) extract resources from men (and from the government as well, which again means men, as men pay most taxes) both for their children and for themselves. An important reason why women marry men is precisely to get more resources for their children. In primitive societies, this was not the case (see J. D. Unwin), women took care of children mostly by themselves, fatherhood was weak, but later marriage and monogamy replaced the primitive tribes where men did not care about children and did not invest resources in them or their mothers.

So marriage is a societal institution that exists to get men to share their resources with their women and their children.

Extraction of resources takes many forms – also during divorce, via alimony, child support payments, government support for mothers, even larger government support for single mothers, maternity paid leave, special quotas for hiring women, better loan conditions for female run businesses, special contracts for women's businesses, special grants for women, special support for mothers in colleges, special scholarships for women in Universities, and so on.

Many of those resources go to the mother and then she decides on what to spend the money – whether on herself or on her children. Then within families, plenty of studies exist showing that women control purchasing decisions and spending, thus money goes from men to women, and then from women to children or to themselves.

Even the infrastructure and the public services women use for free are mostly paid by men (most taxpayers).

Not surprisingly, a study found that taken as a whole, women take more from the government than they pay in taxes.

Even in the case of the very few rich women (women are 11% of the few people who earn more than one million $), gender based extraction of resources from society (and therefore from the mostly male tax payers) or directly from men can still exist, and this is the case in many western societies. For example there are special quotas for women in corporation's boards of directors, special government support for women run businesses, and so on, and there are plenty of divorces where relatively rich women get stuff from their husbands.

Unlike the Boomer propaganda mill of women being wise stewards and pure of heart, in reality it's women who in a corrupt period are allowed free rein to pursue their princess dream. It's really men who, on average, just want a fair shake and a roof over their heads, and that's that. Recall that all women are essentially the same, while men are more accepting of hierarchies. Most prole men aren't narcissistic enough to think that they should be big shot yuppie professional types. Whereas all women, no matter how stupid, mentally unstable, or unattractive they may be, feel entitled to be the princess.

To me this also fits with the modesty hypothesis, that's it's really a handful of men and most women who succumb to the worst kinds of arrogance and greed in a period of growing corruption. Men reasserting control over women, and their own competitive male tendencies, will help usher in a new age of newfound modesty and common sense choices.

It can't be emphasized enough that the comfy 1950's were about everyone, rich, poor, male, female, rural, urban etc. being grateful for what they had and respecting each other's dignity. This was not a time of bullying, rudeness, selfishness, jealousy, etc. And that's precisely why the Me Gen will not lead us to the promise land. They defiantly cast out modesty, patience, kindness, etc. as they drove us into an era of people being moronically over-competitive and thin-skinned.

Passer by:

Don't feed the troles. The whole point of life is to develop a resource backstop; when things are wholesome, everyone agrees to rein in excess so that resources are spread more equitably. When things are corrupt, venal and misguided people encourage narcissistic acquisition and hoarding of resources and status.

Women abusing their menfolk and Uncle Sam to feed their narcissism is an obvious sign of a sick and corrupt culture. Which is further enabled by men being hyper-competitive and ego-fragile. Women who sponge rather than feel shame, and men who destroy rather than build. E.g. Baby Boomers.

Most of the current non-sense attacking "Beckies" and so forth is easy understand once you grasp the resources element of things. Women and "POC", esp. the ones already elite (such as the ones permitted to write in the NYTimes), are viciously covetous of that which they don't have or want more of. There's no greater sign of a corrupt culture than already rich and privileged people wanting more, BAMN, and often at the expense of others. The NYTimes and so forth aren't bursting with accounts of working class people being taken advantage of by robber barons, which is what the media permitted in the 1920's and 1930's when the culture was becoming more wholesome (to the point that incidence of infectious pathogens like E Coli declined heavily in the 1940's and 50's, then got noticeably worse after 1980 when the Me Generation fully committed to greater status seeking).

Dan-

The growing dominance of female mores I would attribute to generational factors and corruption cycles. The original feminists of the late 19th century arose out of an era of growing corruption, not unlike how the man-jawed careerist harpie arose out of the 70's and 80's.

The Boomers are the most women-ish generation ever (no other generation hated their fathers so much and invested so much in attacking the rational basis for Western Civ.) Constantly downgrading stoicism and wholesome modesty, in favor of hysterical outbursts of anger and sadness. As the Boomers began to make up important element of leadership in 70's and esp. 80's/90's, they rewarded women-ish complexes of insecurity, jealousy, and mood swings. Narcissism, basically, which is what defines women and children who don't go through the last stage of development that adult males go through, in which the team supercedes the individual's needs and goals.

Criticizing women has been increasingly off-limits in recent decades, never mind how warranted it may be. For example, the whole point of women "looking good" is obviously to manipulate men into both impregnating them and then sticking around for at least a little while, hopefully. Although with divorce easy (thank to the 1970's feminist revolution) and Uncle Sam generous, many women these days flat out give up on staying attractive soon after marriage/kids.

WRT immigration, it's obvious that status conscious male sociopaths are taking advantage of the breakdown in public order that's grown over the past 50 years. Dumping in exploitable cheap labor and more "consumers" has been both a cause and effect of the current crisis level situation. Paging Heartiste, women (who are no longer kept in line) superficially are motivated by compassion for immigrants, when in reality they get their jollies from increasing male competition, which is boosted by immigration. In an era of common sense reforms (which peaked in the 1920's-1950's, the got more warped as the 60's and 70's went on), we don't buy into emotion driven drivel about "helping people". No, we let objective understanding of resources inform our decisions (for example, building excessively large houses is an obvious irrational waste of resources, since families don't need them to survive; once women were fully accepted as equal partners to men in the 1980's, houses starting getting bigger, not unlike how literal mansions became increasingly fashionable after about 1880.

@Passer

Again, you're talking about proles. Rich women and men inherit wealth from their parents, grandparents, and childless aunts and uncles. The average woman earns less money than the average man IN HER SOCIAL CLASS. That being said, my aunt still earns more than 99% of men in society.

Also, when you mention children, you do realize that kids are separate individuals from their parents, right? If a child is using up resources from his father or from the government, the resources are going TO THE CHILD, not the mother. Last time I checked, the average adult woman cannot fit into clothes made for children age 0-12. Your accounting reeks of poor arithmetic.

"Rachel Dolezal and Shaun King don't have counterparts running from non-white to the putative privilege whiteness carries with it."

Not entirely true. There have been those of black, hispanic, and other ancestry that have tried "to pass" for White. It is less prevalent than it used to be, but there are those of other races that recognize the inherent superiority of White culture and would prefer not to be associated with the failures of their other genetic components. There are also those, like Meghan Markle, Janet Jackson, or Beyonce to appear as White as possible. And there has been a conflict between the high yellows, redbones, and dark Africans due to the cultural hierarchy of lighter skinned to darker.

ymous 8/18/18, 7:34 PM

Oh, they do extract resources wherever they live, they are programmed by nature to do that. Its quite simple why is that – they are less productive on average plus they need resources for their children.

Not surprisingly rich men repruduce better than poor men, and have higher marriage rate, as women put emphasis on resources in men, and thus the hypergamy that exists (women seeking men who earn more than themselves)

In the West all types of data shows that women are more supportive of a big government and a welfare state and cause a growth in government.

Men pay 70 % of taxes (in western societies, in other societies could be more). Thus a New Zealand study found that women take more from the government than they pay in taxes.

One of the reasons marriage exists and is prevalent everywhere is precisely that. No matter the country, women earn less than men, have lower employment rates, in most non-western countries significantly less than men.

So they do need to extract resources because they are in more disatvantaged position:
1. Less likely to be employed.
2. Earn less on average even if employed.
3. They need to take care of children and those children need money.

So marriage in needed in order for women to be able to properly take care of kids, as they will have significantly more resources with a man than without a man.

A chinese woman earns twice less than a chinese man – 500 $. If she becomes a single mother with 2 kids the family will have 500 $ per month, not to mention that she will have to stop working or work less when she needs to give birth or take care of the young children. If she marries someone she will have 1500 $ per month total and a free bodygard for her and the children.

In case 1 you get 166 $ per family member. In case 2 you get 375 $ per family member. This example shows the evolutionary dominance of the family unit, as a child with a present father will benefit from more resources, attention and more protection than a child without a father, thus a tribe with fathers will probably outcompete and replace a tribe with single mothers due to the higher quality offspring and probably higher birth rate as well, as more resources will allow for more children per woman.

In most nonwestern societies the family unit is stronger than in western societies precisely due to the lack of welfare state. You either get resources from the husband or the government. If there is no proper government this will force women to rely more on marriage and thus the generally stronger family units in non-western socieites.

In the West specifically, the decline of the family unit caused a growth in the welfare system, and one study shows it caused women to become more left wing.

Thus women will either extract resources via marriage or via the government. If there are no husbands, they will make the government the husband, thus the more left wing attitudes of women in modern western societies.

@Random Dude on the Internet

Yes, good job noticing that. Voting patterns do not show the whole picture. One of the problems with women in the right is that they are on average more left ing than the men. For example female republicans are more left wing than male republicans (as studies found), also more supportive of immigration, thus pushing the party to the left from within.

So this is definitely a problem.

@Passer

Lololol. If you think that many women seek to extract resources from the gov't you must be a prole.

Where I come from, most women don't need to seek to extract resources from anyone. Women and men inherit wealth from their parents. Women and men use their intellect, education, and social connections to amass wealth via employment. No marriage or welfare is necessary.

AE,

I think that 10% might be a bit inflated, even after you account for non-white + other type of non-white couplings.

Like someone else pointed out, it's incredibly easy for whites to claim 'american indian' heritage, at which point their 99.9% (or more likely, 100%) white baby is officially a mixed race baby. Those couplings account for '50%' of "mixed people."

As I've always said, racial mixing isn't a threat to whites. We simply don't do it that much. Many white women and men will 'talk the talk' but they won't 'walk the walk.' Too many single moms with black babies for all to see for that to ever happen.

We face only two existential threats. One is mass immigration, the other is our low birthrates. The latter is far more damaging than the former, but is mitigated when you remember that the 'right whites' are still having above replacement level fertility. Liberals cutting off 25% of their population with every generation is what's killing our numbers right now.

Still. Instead of an average of ~2.6 TFR, I'd feel a lot better if 'extreme' white conservatives had 4+ kids.

AE,

I don't mean to be crass or unkind as I don't know you or your wife. However, what you describe is really only going to happen among attractive white women as I assume your wife is. Ugly white women will continue apace. It is widely said that feminists are ugly, and while not universally true, there may be some truth to it. So, how do people move the unattractive and less attractive white women?

Also, I think Sailer posted that the most common racial mix is white and Asian. White guy and Asian woman. Asian surely carries no privilege in the current year. While Asians might not be directly attacked by the media for being privileged, all the hubbub about the segregated public schools in NYC is obviously about Asians as well as the current lawsuit against Harvard.

I am not disagreeing with you one bit. But it is really hard to reach people when they are dropped off at age 5 at the local public school and left there for most of their waking hours for the next 13 years. And when they are not directly institutionalized in a coercive context they are tuned into the equally destructive seductive virtual media environment. Let's just say it is not peer pressure because it is not their peers who are doing this purposely, it is the authorities.

Appealing to white women is tricky because non-white feminists have been going after white women hard these last few years and the response has generally been for them to virtue signal harder. Ever notice how many white girls in their teens and twenties talk like sassy black women? In between them talking about how woke they are for liking Beyonce and how out of touch those white people are, am I right?

I almost think the better strategy is to appeal to the men: get men to want to accept being a father instead of trying to put it off. Most men with options understandably try to play the field as long as they can but if they start wanting to make white babies at age 23 instead of 28, that will get more white women to follow along.

I think appealing to women the wrong way can backfire. There are no shortage of Republican cat ladies out there like Liz Mair and Meghan McCain who claim to be conservative and think the best strategy for Republicans is to be further to the left than the Democrats. It is a mistake to try to overtly appeal to women because the first instinct would be to try to appeal to women on feminist terms, which won't be very effective and will just end up importing childless women who will join the GOP because they want lower taxes so they can spend more money on Manolos and an apartment overlooking Central Park.

Similar topic here. I wonder how many of the problems our society faces due to the idea that women must pursue careers or they’ll be failures?

So many (white) women are spending the most fertile years of their lives in college and in the working world. Most of the older women I know without kids are batshit crazy (I suppose that could be a chicken-egg type of deal; are they crazy because they don’t have families? Or did no man want them because they’re crazy?). I strongly believe that most women’s greatest strength in life is the ability to nurture. Men just can’t do it as well. It almost seems like it’s their duty in life. By ignoring it, they’re ultimately harming themselves most.

The Genetic Omnidominance Hypothesis broached some of this nearly 20 years ago. Although I relied perhaps too much on the Y-Chromosome's influence on extended genetic expression, the general idea is applicable to most of what Heartiste has written about Game.

part 2 continued from above:

Nothing we can do about it. All we have is the electoral college. That is our only advantage. And that is only good for the presidency. The gop senate hides behind the majority leader and the filibuster rule, thus enabling them to get paid by their corporate masters for not passing the populist legislation they promised and instead fighting against whatever populist president the whites can elect using the electoral college. The House does much the same thing. Hide behind a treasonous House speaker. Of course the media is not going to point this out.

Sure, trump will be reelected. And maybe even another populist president will be delivered by the electoral college in 2024. So what? The congress will not help him. And of course the federal courts are filled by judges who are by and large good little boys and girls who completely internalized the dogma of the elite as young students….they are by definition creatures of the elite, good slaves to elite dogma, creatures of the upper class who are filled with white guilt…

So, no exit. No happy ending. But can we take revenge? yes! First, subvert the racial preference system of the elite. Claim hispanic heritage. It's not against the law to suddenly claim hispanic heritage. Nothing stopping you. Most of the land area of america was owned by Spain at one. Thus most white americans have ancestors who lived on land owned by spain at some point. So you can claim hispanic heritage.

Also, never buy anything you don't have to. All the elites care about is the economy. Hurt the economy is any way you can. If there is any chance for whites, it is to breakup the USA. And the only way to do that is via an economic collapse. Pray for such a collapse, and help it along any way you can.

Another way for the USA to breakup is if the elites start a war against a nation that might fight back via destroying washington dc…it would not be that hard to do….north korea could do it…our affirmative action military is poorly trained because management fears bias complaints.

another way to collapse the ponzi economy is by creating anti-immigrant propaganda, such as fake news articles telling of how immigrants are being mistreated in america. Nothing illegal about that, and if these articles are translated and disseminated into third world nations, it might slow immigration and collapse the ponzi economy.

Face it, we lost. The judges, congress and all the major societal institutions are against us. And there is a vast reservoir of white guilt out there that exists and is very hard to erase or reverse.

But we can still damage our treasonous elites.

maybe it's time for white men to wake and realize that we already lost…it's over…and we need to realize that…

first, about women…for almost all of the history of our species the tribes have raided other tribes and taken females as breeders…therefore females have evolved to adapt to new tribes…and females are not rebels..they are evolved to follow tribal leaders…they internalize the dogma of the tribal leaders…men are the rebels…

so the female of the species has no skin in the game…if a new tribe raids into the camp and kills all the men, the females taken captive just have sex with the raiders and go on with their lives as before…

that scenario has already taken place in the West…our own leaders turned against us because immigration and nonwhites increase the population and prop up the ponzi economy via increasing consumer demand, which is 70% of the economy…

another thing–white females are liberal until they have children, at which point pheromones or some other (unknown) biological mechanism acts on their brains to make them staunch, near-maniacal defenders of children, at which point they become conservatives, and go with the GOP–because the GOP is anti-abortion. Generally speaking the only white females who vote GOP are those who have had children and have therefore had their brains altered thereby, leading them to vote gop…and white females are having fewer children and having them later…

So, to summarize–the establishment is anti-white male, pro-immigrant, pro-immigration…the reason is because that is how they increase population and increase consumer demand to prop up the ponzi economy…yeah, sure, you can say that all these anti-white libs actually do hate whites and love nonwhites and that this is not about money…ok fine…but if you say that then it shows you have little understanding of this species mankind…humans are evolved to be manipulated by the ideas of the tribal leaders…and our treasonous tribal leaders are flooding the tv shows, movies and most importantly the textbooks with anti-white multiculti propaganda–because that makes the rich richer by increasing consumer demand and propping up the ponzi economy….

here is the causal chain: 1) plutocratic greed creates propaganda (example: step 1) globalist CEO that buys tv ads tells tv network management to speak well of immigrants and denigrate those whites who reject white guilt…why? Because that ideology manufactures consent for more mass immigration; 2) tv network follows through because said globalist corporations is the hand that feeds their mouth; 3) this multiculti propaganda generated by the media then shapes and molds young white minds, generating white guilt, which is hard to overcome…some of us are too old to have been subjected to much of it, and are therefore free…other whites (primarily males) for one reason or another reject the multiculti propaganda…they are the exception, however…most whites accept the seed of white guilt planted in their minds by the elites, and that crop of white guilt is harvested in the voting booth for decades…

the question is whether we white dissidents can overcome the white guilt planted in the minds of our fellow whites? No, we cannot. For one, we are numerically insufficient. It's too late. Our time is past. Our numbers are too small. And the elite are fighting back with a blitzkrieg form of immigration warfare…they are desperately working to induce more thirdworlders to come to the West as fast as possible…soon the elites will enable foreign voters, even illegals.

end part 1–see part 2 below

I have won over my wife, stepdaughters and parent-in-law. My mother-in-law has been on the receiving end of her first PC hate attack. It made her see what the other side is really like.

My ex-partner is from a northern English city riddled with Islamic child prostitution rings. As far as I know, she is still PC, and if she didn't know what was going on, it is because she chose not to. There in no reaching out to her.

I tried to have kids, but we were too old – two miscarriages.

Sid,

Consider that whites are probably the most committed to feminism, even among lower class whites. By contrast, despite having a higher rate of single parents, Blacks/Hispanics are still in a culture of male chauvinism where there less expectation for men to be beta. Ending the War on Drugs could be a way of reversing this. While the typical "drug dealer" never acquires a lot, the "supplier" can make a substantial living that boosts SMV. And let's not forget that prison sentences boost SMV unless its for sexual deviancy.

An alternative credentialing system would be an economic revolution, alongside a single payer system backed up with sumptuary laws.

Bringing white women onto our platform is perhaps the greatest challenge of our branch of the right.

Simply put, we need more white babies and you don't get them without white women.

Furthermore, we need the GOP to become the white party, and for the GOP to stay competitive in the coming decades, it will need a larger percentage of the white vote. White men and married white women voted for Trump to a similar degree – it's unmarried white women who were with Her!

Finally, there's a great deal of personal dissatisfaction among young white men today, and winning white women is key in helping resolve that.

In short, white men marrying white women and then having a number of white babies together is fundamental to our entire programme. There is literally nothing more important than that.

This isn't to say that men who produce no children (like Pat Buchanan) and men who marry women of other races (like the Derb) can't play huge roles in what we're doing, but ultimately if there aren't enough white babies being born, then all the ink in the world won't amount to much.

So the question is: How can we turn unmarried white women who voted for Obama and Hillary into white mothers who will vote for people like Trump and Kobach? This is perhaps the most daunting question we have to answer!

Female nature adapts to the circumstances it finds itself in, and it is drawn to the men who command status, hoard wealth, and wield power.

In order to draw white women in, we'll need to win political, cultural, and economic battles. It's not enough for the movements associated with the alt-right and the manosphere to be an army of disaffected white men: we need also to win.

In short, I think that unmarried white women will be less inclined to shitlibbery if we push ahead and win the battles.

The best thing the left can do for is to keep the attacks on "Becky" rolling. White women are directly appealed to by the left. Obama cooked up the "War on Women" narrative to win reelection in 2012. White women getting kicked out of the Coalition of the Fringes can't happen quickly enough.

The 10% figure doesn't seem right. It says that about half of nonhispanic biracial adults are Amerindian/White mixes. Given that Amerindians have low birth rates, this is impossible. It is just whites claiming Amerindian heritage in polls.

Doesn't the data indicate one-fifth of marriages being mixed, but only one-tenth of births are. Is this a lagging indicator, or an indication that there are increased number of out of wedlock births?

Hard to say if the conditions that allow for the high Jewish TFR in Israel can be replicated.
-Garrison state, conscription
-Increasing, rather than decreasing religious observance
-State financed fertility treatment
-A Jewish/Muslim (even secular) marriage must be performed in Cyprus
-Dominant Zionist ideology that has even overridden some Haredi that used to be anti-state
-Outright territorial expansionism

What is interesting to me is whether Jeremy Corbyn survives the attacks from the UK Jewish community. There was a lot of chatter among French Jews that they were going to bail for Israel given terrorism/LePen, but the Jupiterian has held it off for now. One has to wonder if Corbyn became PM if they would leave. I can imagine the donor spigot would be uncorked for the Conservatives if Corbyn is still Labour leader at the next election. What I think is likelier is that Sadiq Khan challenges Corbyn for the Labour Party leadership.