The silence, as they say, is deafening—the relative silence of the GOP, that is, which, with some exceptions, has hardly distinguished itself as the Trump administration contests the stolen election.
The Deplorables want to fight. They do not want Trump to concede, and they believe that Biden’s “win” was the result of fraud. It will be an uphill battle, an extremely difficult, but not impossible, fight to win, if the party rallies behind Trump, with all GOP hands on deck in support of the president. It’s a fight worth having, in any case. Do we want the Swamp to get away with the mother of all election steals, without putting up a fight?
The battle will require fortitude and resolve. Unfortunately, fortitude and resolve have not been hallmarks of the GOP.
The late Sam Francis is often quoted describing the GOP as the Stupid Party. But it has occurred to lots of us out here in flyover country that the GOP is not as stupid as it appears. I doubt, for instance, that Dr. Francis really believed that the national party’s favored policies of corporate tax cuts, perpetual war, mass immigration, and shipping American jobs overseas—policies that alienated the heartland—were mostly the result of stupidity, or even of willful ignorance. Assuming that stupidity and ignorance were the sources of those policies meant assuming that we could correct the situation by instructing the rather dim bulbs of the Grand Old Party about the means of achieving victory as well.
The chief assumption was that that the GOP really wanted to win.
As far as Dr. Francis’s actual view of the GOP, we should recall that he also dubbed the Republicans a bunch of “beautiful losers,” who were quite prepared to accept a place as a toothless opposition, and who lacked the will or the desire to wield power on behalf of their base when the opportunity arose.
Trump isn’t getting much, if any, help from the national party in the post-election struggle just now. The usual suspects want Trump to call it a day and have congratulated Biden on his alleged election victory. It’s up to Republicans at the state level to put up a fight—and the signals coming from the state level have so far been mixed (See here and here; This item, though not related to the election, is encouraging).
Here’s hoping that the Deplorables in the contested states exert strong pressure on their legislators to fight—and that they listen.
The recent rhubarb in the Democratic Party between “progressives” and “moderates” over a sub-par performance in Congressional elections highlighted one of the major divisions within the “coalition of the fringes,” the division between hard left socialists and managerial neo-liberals. The post-Americans who want to rule over us apparently can’t get along.
The hard leftists, led by the seemingly ubiquitous Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, known to one and all as “AOC,” don’t like some of the talk they hear from the neo-liberal/globalist “moderates.” The neo-liberals blame the hard left’s “defund the police” campaign for the Democrats’ lost seats in the House. As the managerial wing of the party sees it, the much anticipated “blue wave” they had hoped for broke up on the shoals of utopian radical positions pushed by the hard left.
Representative Abigail Spanberger (D-Va), for instance, bluntly told AOC and her fellow “squad” members that, “No one should say ‘defund the police” ever again.” AOC and company were having none of that. Squadette Rashida Tlaib (D-Mi) fired back, telling Politico that dropping such anti-police rhetoric would amount to her and her constituents being “silenced.” And AOC herself didn’t want to hear anything but tough talk from her party. She opined that the Dems should “take off our gloves” in dealing with the Republicans.
Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders promised to introduce a leftist agenda for Biden’s first 100 days in office into the Senate, as leftists mobilized to push their own lists of candidates for cabinet positions.
A clash between “progressives” and “moderates” has been a long time coming.
The globalist/managerial class that the “moderate” Democrats represent has managed to effectively make use of the hard left. The media wing of the globalist establishment conjured up a picture of the deplorables as a nest of Nazi stormtroopers, with the “literally Hitler” Trump cast as Fuehrer, and pushed a fantastic storyline about “black bodies” being exterminated by fascist police officers. The MSM’s propaganda encouraged the Bolshevik wannabes of AntiFa and the fanatics of BLM to enact their own revolutionary dream by taking to the streets in a violent orgy of destruction, including brazenly attacking Trump supporters.
The neo-liberals did their part by ritually donning masks—COVID-19 itself has been deemed racist, a weapon in a persistent attack on “people of color”—wrapping themselves in Kente cloths, and taking a knee.
It was quite a spectacle, something that some observers have had difficulty wrapping their heads around—the Starbucks Moderates united with racial socialists in a reign of terror, all in the service of billionaire oligarchs from the Davos politburo.
Just what is the actual nature of the relationship between the fiery leftist wizards and that man behind the curtain, who looks a lot like George Soros?
While the hard left’s goals include racial socialism and smashing “white privilege,” the Davos politburo and its managerial neo-liberal supporters have viewed the militant left as an instrument to an end, not as an end in itself. The Davos crowd has no interest in an anarchic mob garbed in Castro fatigues trying to run the country, much less the globe. Yet, along with proper media exploitation of the COVID-19 panic, the hard left’s shock troops have helped break down resistance to the globalists’ vision of a “Great Reset” of political and economic management. The globalists want real power in managerial, neo-liberal hands.
For all their differences, however, both are united by utopian ideals, one bureaucratic in execution, the other essentially anarchic and nihilistic. These apparently strange bedfellows actually share much in common.
Apart from their shared commitment to “blank slate” egalitarianism, both are committed to a program of virtually unlimited mass immigration. On the one hand, mass immigration, especially non-white immigration, is favored by the far left as a means of destroying the “white patriarchy” once and for all. On the other, the globalist oligarchs see the erasure of borders and unlimited movement of peoples as a matter of economic expediency.
Recall that Hillary Clinton actually said that in a speech made to bankers in Brazil.
And both have deep ideological roots going back to radical movements of the past.
Your humble servant, for instance, once reviewed David Priestland’s magisterial history of communism, The Red Flag. From today’s perspective, the most striking thing about the book was Priestland’s description of the struggle within the international communist movement, a struggle that sheds some light on the relationship between the neo-liberal globalists and the hard left of our own time.
From my review in Chronicles:
“Much of the book is devoted to the struggles within the communist movement between what Priestland calls ‘modernist’/ ‘technocratic’ Marxism and a ‘romantic’ current, revealing a tension between the desire for material abundance (Viewed by the modernist school as achievable only by industrialization, centralization, and bureaucratization) and a utopian vision of society unencumbered by hierarchy and distinctions between individuals, with the ‘vanguard party’ leading the way to perfect equality and, revealing communism’s bohemian intellectual current, self-realization.
Thus, the tensions between the Stalinists and Maoists, the cult of the Leader of official Communist party propaganda and the t-shirted would-be Che Guevaras’ of 1968. But the two strains co-existed to one degree or another, even in Stalin’s USSR, where the ‘Man of Steel,’ like Mao and Pol Pot in other periods, portrayed the transformation of society and the USSR’s modernization as chiefly an act of will. That romantic view, together with the conspiratorial origins of the party in Russia (a model followed across the globe), fueled the hunt for ‘enemies of the people,’ ‘self-criticism’ and re-education efforts in Mao’s ‘Great Leap Forward’ and ‘Cultural Revolution,’ as well as Pol Pot’s anti-industrialization in the killing fields of Cambodia. Transforming society and human nature required mass terror and social upheaval, whether the goal was modernization or communist anarchy.”
The managerial globalists are thus reminiscent of the technocratic strain in international communism, and its goal of worldwide bureaucratic rule under the auspices of the party. The globalists would also install a worldwide regime, but one based on international organizations like the WTO and WHO, as well as multi-national corporations. The Antifa/BLM mob represents the anarchic, romantic current on the left. Which group is actually the “vanguard” of the global revolution is a matter of one’s perspective, yet their respective goals are very much like the those of, on the one hand, technocratic communism and, on the other, of the romantic, anarchic leftists of the past.
Priestland also detected a utopian messianic impulse among both neo-liberals and neo-conservatives, and connected the historical dots, identifying neo-conservatism as originating on the left.
That, however, is a story for another time.
The hard left and the neo-liberals are relatives, yet the divide between “moderates” and “progressives” in the Democratic Party is real, and there is a potential for their further estrangement, especially if the managerial elites’ efforts to steal the presidential election should fail.
That, and/or an effort by the neo-liberals to rein in the hard left, may precipitate a split that could offer our side more room for maneuver. We must know our enemy to fully exploit such an opportunity, or even understand when one presents itself. And knowing that enemy means understanding the seemingly paradoxical relationship between personalities and organizations as variegated as Nancy Pelosi and AOC, the DNC and BLM.
Despite securing more votes from minorities than any Republican since Richard Nixon in 1960, Donald Trump suffered setbacks among white working-class voters, which cost him victories in the Rust Belt. Had he maintained his level of support from 2016 with this demographic he would be plotting the contours of a second term rather than a legal strategy.
If Republicans hope to win future national elections, the first step is a proper post-mortem that examines this failure and understands the reasons for it. Scot Olmstead offers that analysis.
The GOP must stop ignoring the “Deplorables” and forge a new coalition that unites the American Remnant with sympathetic minorities and, hopefully, a rising elite that can provide cultural power and sustenance.
Economic nationalism will glue that coalition together. As Olmstead writes, economic nationalism is “the formula that can express the material interests and cultural values of Middle America and create solidarity among otherwise disparate groups. It is the path forward.”
The time has come for a more radically populist and nationalist critique of the Ruling Class—a Trumpism without Trump.
The redoubtable Ann Coulter’s theme of her latest series of campus tours has been “Trumpism without Trump.” Miss Coulter told an audience at The University of Texas-Austin, for example, that she was happy Trump had lost a narrow election, as a second Trump term “would have killed us.” Trumpism—the America First platform Trump ran on in 2016—hasn’t actually been tried, said Miss Coulter, but she believes that we could get Trumpism without the erratic, inarticulate man himself, whose term in office was not only stymied by the Deep State and the MSM’s relentless attacks, but by the people he foolishly chose as advisors. People, after all, are policy.
She mentioned Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis as a 2024 candidate who would fit the bill as a “Trumpism without Trump” leader.
I’ll venture a guess that Coulter’s views are similar to those of a lot of Trump’s critics, including myself, who have seen him as a transitional figure, someone who opened the door for a genuine patriotic movement. He is not, however, the leader we need to take it from here. From that point of view, it’s better if Biden wins—so challenging the election results would be counterproductive.
I sympathize, but we need to consider a few problems with that idea.
First, this was hardly a free and fair election, a point I made earlier. Do we really want the anarcho-tyrants to get away with brazen fraud? Miss Coulter has also seemed to question the election results and mocked the Dems for their reluctance to concede past elections (here and here).
Second, why should we believe that the next election will be any freer or fairer than this one? Does anyone believe that the anarcho-tyrants will suddenly get religion, and having walked all over us, decide to play by the rules next time? Challenging the election results is simply a matter of defending what is right and just. We can’t walk away from this fight.
Third, after years of hearing our people described as a mass of demoralized couch potatoes, a real Middle American resistance is beginning to take shape. Last weekend, the Deplorables were out in large numbers at “Stop the Steal” rallies across the country, and there was a massive turnout for the “Million-MAGA March” in Washington, DC. Our people are mobilized and want to fight what may be the biggest political theft in history. They do not want Trump to concede.
It’s a mistake to think that all those who have protested the stolen election are defending Trump as a personality. As a commentor wrote here, “We are not just or mainly fighting for him. We are fighting for ourselves, our families, friends and what remains of this once great nation against this whole rotten establishment. This is not one we can give up on.” If we back down now when it really counts, as Conservatism, Inc. has done time and again, we could lose the Deplorables once and for all.
Fourth, if we can defeat this attempted coup, it might disrupt, even fracture, enemy lines, and undermine their morale, giving our side room for maneuver. We can build our movement from a position of strength, not attempt to rise from the ashes of defeat.
We should have no illusions about what is ahead of us. Win or lose, we are in for a serious fight. Now is the time to organize and prepare for the struggle to come. If we walk away from this fight, we may lose more than a political battle. We may lose a golden opportunity to begin forging a genuine patriotic mass movement.
That movement, whatever we call it, will be Trumpism without Trump.
As the deplorable nation went to bed on election night, it appeared that Donald Trump was about to pull it off—the Orange Man seemed to be on his way to a surprise victory. The slanted polls were wildly wrong once again. There was no “blue wave” in sight, and Sleepy Joe had barely left his basement during the campaign.
The next morning, we began hearing about a number of apparent “glitches” in the vote count, and, as foreseen in this space, those mail-in ballots began ever so slowly turning up in “batches” that in some cases reportedly favored Biden by 100%. We were supposed to believe that the lackluster Biden, whose rallies couldn’t fill a phone booth (yes, I’m showing my age), was making an electoral haul that was in some areas reminiscent of those seen in third-world dictatorships and Stalinist “people’s democracies.”
“Flyover country” has every reason to believe this election is being stolen.
If there was anything the last four years have taught us, it is that the powers-that-be would not let any old fashioned notions about fair play and the integrity of “the political process” stop them from having their way, no matter what the actual election results. In fact, the managerial system that I’ve dubbed “the Blob” had effectively stolen the last election by stonewalling the Donald through its minions in the bureaucracy, censoring its opponents, de-platforming them, denying them financial and other services, and conniving with the “beautiful losers” in Trump’s own party to undermine the president.
Trump was also seriously distracted by the bogus “Russia gate” scandal, the most scandalous aspect of which was the security and intelligence agencies mounting a silent coup against a duly elected president of the United States. Yes, his enemies failed in the end to remove Trump, but they were largely successful in crippling his presidency. Trump’s foolish and even naïve personnel appointments, among other things, didn’t help matters, but that’s another question.
It was no surprise, then, that the 2020 presidential election was not by any means a free and fair one, even without the dubious vote count in those disputed swing states. The media, including Fox when it really counted, were all in against the president, and the de-platforming, censorship, and disinformation (about “white supremacists” being responsible for the BLM/Antifa riots, for example) intensified. Indeed, the riots themselves constituted a part of the anti-Trump campaign as a means of blackmail and intimidation—vote for Biden-Harris, or else!
What we have been witnessing, gentle reader, is the next stage in what yours truly has called “the end of politics,” the end of the system of civilized political struggle in this once great republic that was based on a broad consensus regarding fair play and political competition. Those days are gone, and Middle America is waking up to that fact.
What’s more, how can representative democracy function when there are no shared assumptions about the most fundamental issues? We live in a topsy turvy world in which there is no agreement on who, or what, is “American,” or what “marriage” means, one that has displaced biological sex with “gender identity.”
Those are not issues that can be settled in a committee hearing, and, indeed, with the demographic ring closing in on us, our enemies have no intention of holding discussions about anything once they have their one-party state.
The mask is, indeed, off. Yet the true nature of the managerial system has been steadily revealing itself for some time, as each deeper and more sinister level of its collective being was steadily uncovered like a group of Russian nesting dolls, each one hidden beneath another.
Your humble servant shares the view that we need a political “divorce,” but, as I explained earlier, should such a “divorce” come about, it may take time for it to be finalized.
Meanwhile, the emerging Middle American resistance may manifest itself in a backlash against the electoral machinations of our managerial elite. We can no longer trust the system to more-or-less function as advertised. The radicalization of Middle America may, indeed, be the silver lining in this particularly dark cloud.
We must resist at every opportunity.
There are “Stop the Steal” rallies planned for tomorrow, November 14, in state capitals across the country. The rallies in the critical swing states where the election is being disputed are especially important. We still have the “nuclear option” available to us to thwart the Blob’s design, if need be.
Before Jeffrey Toobin was caught enjoying himself on Zoom, he molested a woman and tried to forced his mistress to have an abortion. Then he offered to pay for a sperm donor to replace the baby he wanted the woman to murder.
But Doubleday published the adulterer’s anti-Trump hate book.
Even before Joe Biden and his backers prematurely declared victory in last week’s election, the radical left let loose its inner-totalitarian.
“Is anyone archiving these Trump sycophants for when they try to downplay or deny their complicity in the future?” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez tweeted. “I foresee decent probability of many deleted Tweets, writings, photos in the future.”
His supporters, and his collaborators, and the Mike Lees and the William Barrs, and Sean Hannitys, and the Mike Pences, and the Rudy Gullianis and the Kyle Rittenhouses and the Amy Coney Barretts must be prosecuted and convicted and removed from our society while we try to rebuild it and to rebuild the world Trump has destroyed by turning it over to a virus
In a since-deleted tweet, Olbermann called for the arrest of Fox News’s Tucker Carlson
Watch this from Olbermann. He’s nuts.
An individual you’ve never heard of called Nils Gilman, another of the ubiquitous leftist foundation elites, thinks conservative writer Michael Anton should be executed.
It’s clear from this domestic abuse they mean to kill us if they get the chance. How that will work in practice given that 72 million people voted for Trump and millions of them own guns is another question. But let’s take them at their word, and offer the obvious solution.
It’s time for Americans to discuss what would have been unthinkable in 1960: separating the country to permit the two major political factions to live apart.
The anti-human, anti-Christian coalition that voted for Biden, and the largely Christian coalition that voted for Trump, just can’t get along.
The Bidenites hate us. They’ve said and shown it time and again. And now they’re making lists of those to punish. Let’s admit the truth and file divorce papers before the good china flies.
They won’t let go easily, of course, and might even fight to the death trying to keep the country together. But putting that aside momentarily, the obvious question is how we arrived at this unfortunate pass, where the elites who represent one half of the population have decided they wish to punish and even kill those who disagree with them.
It was inevitable. And we can blame three remarkable political developments. Beginning in the mid 1960s, the advocates of sexual license evolved from being a collection of oddballs and freaks obsessed with sodomy and little boys into an unstoppable political movement that pursued a war against decency and the family with the ferocity of 18th-century Jacobins. Our political, financial, and managerial elites encouraged and financed the leftist attack on the Christian social order. And Third World immigrants flooded the country to become citizens and vote for what was, 50 years ago, beginning to become an anti-American political party that supported the sexual revolution.
Why We Can’t Get Along 2 — Sexual Revolution and the Collapse of the Christian Social Order We should have seen it coming.
The complete story of the sexual revolution is too long to tell. It suffices to say that revolution, which progressed from no-fault divorce and legal abortion in the 1960s and 1970s to homosexual nuptials in 2015, has erased what Christians had believed for 2,000 years: that sexual activity is reserved for married couples, meaning one man and one woman.
It wasn’t long before the left adopted sexual license as the sine qua non of equality and a truly just and fair society. They turned sex perverts and child molesters into heroes and martyrs for “tolerance” and “free speech.” The license included the “rights” to commit adultery, make dirty movies, abortion-on-demand, taxpayer-subsidized birth control and abortion, and most recently, something called “gay marriage,” which is neither gay nor marriage, and then something else called “transgender” people. The Democrats no longer say “live and let live.” They are demonically obsessed with sexual license. They are equally obsessed with forcing us to accept it. It’s the reason they hiss, fume, and spit with anger when a Republican president nominates even a moderate conservative to the U.S. Supreme Court. A justice might vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. She might vote the wrong way on “gay adoption.”
Unsurprisingly, as the leftist mainstream media, Hollywood, and corporate America promoted those evils, at first shyly but then openly, the culture changed. Television went from Leave It To Beaver to Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. The Episcopal Church, if that is what one should call it, not only conducts “gay marriages” but ordains lesbian priestesses. Now, even some conservative Christians these days can’t explain to their children why homosexual behavior is objectively disordered, so brainwashed are they to believe that one mustn’t be “judgmental,” and that sexual behavior between “consenting adults” is nobody’s business. Get with the times, they tell us. Even some Catholic bishops believe as much. The incessant, unpunished heresies from gaydar-triggering Jesuit James Martin suggest that a homosexual Mafia runs the “Catholic” Church in this country. That’s how bad things are.
With so many marriages ending in divorce, millions of kids alienated from fathers, 60 million abortions since Roe, and American corporations not only promoting homosexual behavior but also punishing employees who oppose it, it’s safe to say the Christian social order in this country has collapsed. Some people call the United States “post-Christian.” In fact, it is anti-Christian. Consider what Sen. Sen. Dianne Feinstein told Amy Coney Barrett when President Trump picked her to sit on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017. “The dogma lives loudly within you,” Feinstein said. The implication was obvious: The Catholic Barrett’s “dogma” is unacceptable.
What Feinstein’s or the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s “dogmas” are we are not permitted to ask, of course, but anyway, a half-century past Woodstock and Roe, and just a short lustrum after the objectively evil Obergefell decision, Americans who oppose unfettered sexual license are called, by turn, sexists, haters, breeders, homophobes, and, of course, guilty of waging “war on women.” If they even question the practical wisdom of inter-racial dating or marriage — yet another issue involving sex — they are branded racists.
The people hurling those epithets, almost to a man — or woman — are hard-left Biden voters and the political and business elites, including Republicans, who agree with them.
Make no mistake, they hate us. Well more than simply promising to leave the country if a white Republican they hate is elected president — a promise they never keep, by the way — they even say they want to kill us.
Before the lunatic Olbermann and the woman also known as Occasional Cortex suggested rounding up the usual suspects, a left-wing Korean psychiatrist suggested that white American Trump voters must be carpet bombed, like the Germans in Dresden in 1945. Nothing less will put the country right. In September, an obese professor at Marshall University told her students that all Trump voters should die of the Chinese Virus before Election day. Other academics are openly anti-white.
None of this rhetoric is new. Nutocrats who worked for Sen. Bernie Sanders’ failed campaign admitted they were planning gulags and the mass murder of moderates, liberals, and conservatives if he had won.
And of course, for four years, the only words we’ve heard from the left about Trump are “racist,” a “sexist,” and “scum.” If Trump had cured cancer, the left would have wailed that he put oncologists in the unemployment line.
These are not the words and actions of people with whom we can reason.
We cannot reason with those who believe that jamming a scissors into an infant’s skull as it emerges from the birth canal is morally acceptable. We cannot reason with people who wage war on nuns because they refuse to subsidize abortion and contraception, or those who fly into uncontrolled rage because a grown woman, attending a $50,000-a-year Catholic law school, can’t get free birth control pills. We cannot reason with people who deny the biological reality of sex.
On no other matter is the left so obsessed. Not Social Security. Not human trafficking. Not the minimum wage. Not inhumane conditions in jails and prisons. The reason why, for now, is unimportant.
Where the left was once obsessed with class war, it is now obsessed principally with sex and race, although even its obsession with race is not as deranged as its obsession with sex. Such is that obsession that its elites believe obvious molesters dressed in drag must be permitted to share bathrooms with little girls. Of course, they don’t believe in boys and girls any more anyway. “Gender,” as they wrongly call sex, “is a social construct.” They support Drag Queen Story Hours at taxpayer-subsidized libraries. Oppose that insanity, and you’re a “transphobe.”
Of course, not all Democrat voters think that way. Most probably don’t. Not all of them would kill us, or jam a scissors into a baby’s fontanelle, or want perverts in the ladies’ room. But they vote for those who do, and the elites they elect will make public policy. On November 3, half the country voted for the candidate who will appoint those who hate us to run his administration.
But again, the key point is this. We cannot reason with these deranged, obsessed people. Those who believe infanticide is acceptable, that two men can be married, and that boys should use the girls’ room have an irreconcilably different view of human nature — of what it means to be a human being — than those who believe the opposite. They have a new religion, free of objective truth, that is unalterably and cosmically at odds with ours. This isn’t a matter of to-may-to vs. to-mah-to. It’s a matter of their seeing an orange where we see an apple.
We can no more live in peace with them than devout Muslims can live in peace with devout Christians. The two sides are incompatible.
Why We Can’t Get Along 2: Mass Immigration Clearly, we cannot approve or even accept the public policies they will make, just as we should never have accepted or approved the one public policy passed into law long before the insuperable divide we now face, and that was indeed, its concomitant cause. Democrat Rep. Emanuel Cellar’s’Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 enabled the radical left to cement the political power it now wields at the ballot box.
The act wrecked U.S. immigration policy, which had always, and correctly, favored Europeans. With one law and the stroke of President Lyndon Johnson’s pen, backed by Clan Kennedy, that changed. Of course, the bill’s backers swore the act would not alter the demographic make-up of the country, something they knew they had to say to pass the bill. They lied.
And so for the past nearly 60 years, millions of Third World refugees and immigrants flooded the country. Illegal aliens from Mexico and Central America swarmed into American cities. Border agents apprehended almost 1 million illegals in fiscal 2019, and another nearly 500,000 in 2020, but the latest arrivals, whom a President Biden will reward with citizenship, are a drop in the bucket compared to what began washing ashore when the Beatles were still on top. Immigration since the 1960s has turned once solidly red states a deep shade of blue blue.
Despite being “natural conservatives” and “pro-family” voters, as the Bush Republicans describe them, immigrants vote overwhelmingly for Democrats. Despite being “hard workers” and “entrepreneurs,” which many certainly are, immigrants want free stuff. That’s why they vote for Democrats. Whatever their “family values,” whatever they think of abortion, they want free stuff.
Beyond that, some of them hate the country that took them in. Rep. Ilhan Omar has said as much by lecturing us on the putative sins of our ancestors and attacking the U.S. soldiers killed and wounded in the Battle of Mogadishu in 1993, more commonly known as the Black Hawk Down Incident. Yet U.S. taxpayers pulled the ingrate out of the squalor of a country controlled by mass-murdering warlords. Other ingrates are immigrant Rep. Pramilla Jayapal, an Indian who helps illegal aliens file what are likely false asylum claims, and immigrant Sen. Maize Hirono, who is Japanese and hates Catholics and the Knights of Columbus. After two black supremacist thugs murdered a cop, then were killed in a gun battle with police, Rep. Rashida Tlaib denounced “white supremacy.” Putative Vice President Kamala Harris has compared immigration authorities to the Ku Klux Klan. Tlaib and Harris are the children of immigrants.
Another daughter of immigrants, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, pushed to remove the Confederate battle flag from statehouse grounds. Haley is a Republican, so at least the desire to erase this nation’s past among immigrants and their children is bipartisan.
With respect to immigration and returning to the fact that we can’t get along, left-wing political scientist Robert Putnam famously found that diversity is not our strength, as the Bush-Obama-Biden Axis of Evil tells us. It is a weakness. He found that the more diverse a society is, the less trust it has. The residents of “diverse” cities don’t trust anything: the mayor, their neighbors, the newspaper, the hospital, the schools … nothing.
If the most diverse communities, as Putnam learned, show the greatest loss of trust, then a “multicultural” America is good neither for the diverse communities in which trust is absent, nor for the monolithic communities the diverse communities resent because they have the things — like trust — the diverse communities don’t.
The experience of Yugoslavia after the iron hand of Communism loosed its grip offers a lesson on the futility of trying to force “diversity” on people of different races, religions, and cultures.
Why Americans were stupid enough to import millions of people who cannot get along with us or each other, who refuse to assimilate, and who, again, hate us, is a question for another day. One might say “Americans” didn’t import them, that the politicians did because they wanted to elect a new people. True, but who elected the politicians in 1965 who passed the nation-busting immigration bill?
Time To Divorce That rhetorical question aside, as a practical political matter, a self-governing republic of 350 million people is too large to be a real self-governing republic, particularly when it has become, as Teddy Roosevelt warned, “a tangle of squabbling nationalities.” And we needn’t read the work of “them Greek homos,” as renowned historian of the ancients Al Sharpton called them, to know that.
As this election season has shown, as the non-stop hate-Trump media coverage of the last four years has shown, as the irrational riots after black men stupid enough to confront police have shown, and as the rioting Bidenites will show if their candidate is not inaugurated, the old America is gone.
In 1964, John Wayne warmly congratulated LBJ on winning the presidency. The patriotic actor stressed his loyalty even though he opposed the president politically.
In 1976, Duke congratulated President Jimmy Carter on defeating Gerald Ford, and spoke at Carter’s inauguration.
I’m pleased to be present and accounted for in this capital of freedom to witness history as it happens — to watch a common man accept the uncommon responsibility he won fair and square by stating his case to the American people, not by bloodshed, beheadings and riots at the palace gates.
That America is gone.
Over are the days when The Gipper and Tip O’Neill fought over Social Security by day, then supposedly went back to the White House for a dram of Bushmill’s and Irish jokes at night.
That America is gone.
Presidential elections are intended to be a vigorously-debated, fairly-fought, yet reasonable quadrennial reassessments of the country’s political direction. They are not meant to be a fight to the death over disputed votes, with one side rioting in the streets and attacking voters if it does not win.
Confirming a Supreme Court justice should be pro-forma. But it isn’t because the court has become a super legislature that is deciding matters it has no business deciding, and conjuring, out of an invisible Constitution, “rights” unknown to Christian civilization for 2,000 years. That, of course, is why the left explodes like a nuclear device when a Republican president nominates a federal judge suspicious of the jurisprudence underlying Roe or any other decision that manufactures another form of sexual license.
As for that real Constitution, it’s a dead letter. When a Democrat Speaker of the House dismisses a question about the constitutionality of a major federal initiative with no precedent in law or history, one may safely say her party is no longer interested in the Constitution, except as a means to further entrench their political and cultural power.
But that’s a subject for another day.
The radical left, including some Democrat politicians who’ve been around for a long time, and establishment NeverTrumpers who identify as Republicans, declared war on Donald Trump, his voters, and real Americans on November 9, 2016. Before then, they waged guerrilla war, mouthing patriotic platitudes as they managed the globalist Deep State. But when Trump was elected, they escalated to open warfare.
The Bidenites and their GOP ruling-class enablers have had four years to prove my point, and they’ve proven it in spades. And now they propose to punish us.
Oppose them politically — question abortion, free birth control pills, affirmative action, “free trade,” Islamic immigration, illegal immigration, that non-thing called “gay marriage,” “transgender” ideology, or anti-white discrimination called affirmative action — and they call you, again, names: a sexist, hater, racist, homophobe, Islamophobe. They get you fired and kicked off Twitter.
And if they don’t win this time, if the courts find election fraud on Biden’s part, we will see what we saw in 2016. Their shock troops in the streets. The helmeted black-bloc goons of Antifa and Black Lives Matter, will riot. They will burn. They will loot. They will murder. They will destroy.
Indeed, the Biden’s apparent victory last week, Antifa and BLM goons have attacked white Biden voters and even Democrat headquarters in Portland, Oregon. They attacked a Catholic church.
One final example of what 72 million Trump voters now face: “I hate Donald trump and if you like him: I hate you too,” rapper Iggy Azalea says. “Now what.”
Yeah. Now what?
After four years of a never-ending Two Minutes Hate, of 24-7-365 vilification, of a sudden, they want “unity.” No thank you.
There’s no living with people like that. They hate us. They want to kill us. They say so. We should believe them.
And so it is time for a divorce. No renewed vows with the Rev. Biden presiding. No second honeymoon. We just can’t get along. They go their way. We go ours. No blame. No recriminations. They erect their gun-free, oil-free, green Neverland, blissfully uncontaminated by “hate” and all the isms. And we do pretty much what we’re doing now … blissfully removed from their schoolmarmish harping about everything they find wrong with us. And anyway, if we’re as bad as they say, why continue living with us?
And when the leftist whites try to flee their multiracial, multicultural, nonsectarian, gay-friendly, trans-loving abortion-on-demand, socialist totalitarian paradise — just as they flee California and other Blue S**tholes for Red Country now — they will have nowhere to go.
Because we shall build a big beautiful wall.
How to divide the country is open to question. The only imperative is that we separate into two or more parts before the war starts. They get their country. We get ours.
If not, there will be blood.
R. Cort Kirkwood writes for American Remnant. His articles have appeared in Crisis, National Review, The New American, Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture, and elsewhere.