Search Results for: Allensworth

SI Makes History: The Norming of “Trans” Mania

By Wayne Allensworth

A creature who goes by the name “Leyna Bloom” is now, as Us magazine reports, “gracing the pages” of the 2021 Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue. “Leyna” and SI are “making history,” we are told, since “she” is “the first transgender woman of color” to be featured in the magazine. SI had already established its “woke” credentials last year, when the once popular swimsuit issue featured its first “transgender” model. SI‘s editors were fully aware, no doubt, that more history was there to be made by featuring a “person of color” of the “trans” persuasion in its glossy pages.

SI‘s recent bout of lunacy makes one nostalgic for the good old days of Christie Brinkley and Kathy Ireland. The unstated assumption of the powers-that-be is that if “Leyna” doesn’t make the boys drool, they are all a bunch of “transphobes,” as the latest addition to the argot goes. We have been duly directed to find “her” desirable–“she’s” a victim, you understand, of patriarchal norms. In the benighted past, “Leyna” claims, “she” was told “she” was a “woman,” black (Us capitalizes “Black,” of course), and “trans,” and that “she” was, therefore, “at the bottom of the food chain.” But not now–bottom rail on top! And you had better at least pretend to like it. Capiche?

What’s going on here? 

First, sports journalism is competing for its place in the sun. Sports writers are no longer crusty fellows chomping on cheap cigars in cramped press boxes as they pound out copy for the unwashed. Perpetually rehashing the Jackie Robinson story just doesn’t hack it anymore. What better way to become “relevant” than turning the swimsuit issue inside out, so to speak?

Second, Big Brother is constantly on the lookout for thought crimes. The globalist Blob is a total system. It intends to encompass everything in our lives. Nothing can be allowed to exist outside it, as that would threaten the long-term prospects for permanently transforming the proles (especially whites) into a mass of UBI-collecting, cubicle dwelling, obedient drones. Testing the collective gag reflex of American males is great fun, and highly informative for the Blob’s Minions. Who will dare express repulsion at the charms of “Leyna?” Who will perform the requisite act of obedience and proclaim “her” desirable?   

Third, the demonic transvaluation of all values continues. The object of the nihilists, who hate the natural order, God, and anything associated with civilized society, is to invert all social norms, to proclaim the perverse and disgusting as beautiful and call Evil, Good, and Good, Evil. That which is beautiful must be subverted. Thus, the proliferation of people who mutilate and disfigure themselves.

Normalizing “trans” mania by trying to force “Leyna” on us is part of the program.   

And fourth, the left delights in destroying anything normal men–especially normal white men– enjoy. Whether it’s “trans” swimsuit models or rubbing their noses in the “Black National Anthem” at sporting events, the monsters must be made to squirm.

This sort of thing is not going to go away anytime soon. For decades, mainstream conservatives mocked “PC,” while not really taking it seriously. It was no joke, however. The woke crazies mean what they say, and there is nowhere left to retreat to that is beyond their reach.

Wayne Allensworth is a Corresponding Editor for Chronicles Magazine. He is the author of The Russian Question: Nationalism, Modernization, and Post-Communist Russia, and a novel Field of Blood   

The Texas Power Grid Disaster: Only the Beginning?

By Wayne Allensworth

The sun is shining now, and the snow and ice are melting.  I managed to take a walk around my neighborhood this weekend, something I haven’t been able to do for a while as a result of the “polar vortex” that wreaked havoc in my native state.

The power grid broke down under the strain, homes were left without electricity, pipes burst, and water treatment plants stopped functioning in some areas.  Millions were left without power, heat, and water. 

Why did this happen? has posted the best thing I’ve read about this mess, a piece entitled  “Texas’s Power Grid Disaster is Only the Beginning.”  According to Revolver, there are lots of reasons for the system breaking down under the “black swan” event of the polar vortex cold snap, as  temperatures dipped below zero in a number of places in Texas.

Yes, growing reliance on solar and wind turbine power played an important role in the disaster. Conservative news sources took advantage of the opportunity to take a shot at “green energy,” gleefully highlighting photos of frozen wind turbines, but that apparently was not the only problem.  The Texas power system collapsed partly because of a lack of preparation—instruments froze up at nuclear power stations that had not been “winterized,” as well as at natural gas and coal facilities across the state.  Revolver compared the collapse of the Texas power grid to recent blackouts in California, but also noted that the USA’s power grid is dramatically less reliable than those of other developed countries. Revolver reported that aging infrastructure had not been updated or replaced.

Why hasn’t it been updated or replaced?  Because maintaining infrastructure is one of the “least sexy” budget items, and is one of the first things to be cut back during a “budget crunch.”  In the eyes of our esteemed legislators, there are far more “sexy” budget items to focus on.  As a result, according to the information presented by Revolver, infrastructure spending has been steadily declining.

It’s only going to get worse.

Revolver summed up our predicament like this:

“The mess with the Texas power grid is only the beginning. In the years to come, American infrastructure will fail more and more often, as America becomes less capable of maintaining the core elements of a First World country.

Why would America become less First World? That’s a simple question to answer: Because America is making itself less First World.” 

America is becoming more like an undeveloped country because major enterprises and government have institutionalized hiring employees and contractors based on their “diversity” points rather than competence.  Revolver highlighted the Washington DC metro system as an example of that practice and its results.  On top of that, Revolver noted that the globalists who run this country are making America more “third world” by importing vast numbers of low skilled (and, I would add, low IQ) immigrants from less developed countries, countries that are plagued by staggering corruption and incompetence.  Thus, “There are other reasons to be worried about America’s future supply of builders, technicians, and repairmen.” Yes, there are—we are talking about the country’s future stock of “human capital.”  

As for self-styled “conservatives,” the bulk of them have never been interested in conserving anything, not even the American ethnos. They have been wedded to “growth” as the holiest tenet of their ideology, espousing a bogus conservatism that recognizes no limits.  No wonder mainstream conservatism has been reluctant to embrace sensible limits on immigration.  The “mainstream” view is that one warm body is interchangeable with another, and the more warm bodies, the better.  It stands to reason that as more people have flooded the country, our aging infrastructure has been strained to the breaking point.

Blackouts and other infrastructure disasters are likely to become more common.  Get used to it.

Wayne Allensworth is the author of The Russian Question: Nationalism, Modernization, and Post-Communist Russia, and a novel Field of Blood

Middle American Resistance, Nullification, and the Purge of the Military

By Wayne Allensworth

In earlier pieces on Middle American Resistance (see here and here, for instance), your humble servant wrote that gun control could be the issue that galvanizes that resistance.  From counties to whole states, a showdown with the globalist Blob has been shaping up over what may be the bridge too far Middle America won’t allow to be crossed.

Under front man Biden, the Blob is preparing to attempt to cross that bridge. The aim, of course, is not to halt the recent surge in “gun violence.”  That would mean throwing more black criminals in jail, wrecking the Blob’s “white supremacist” threat narrative.  The aim is to disarm us, the people the globalists really fear

County sheriffs, other county level officials, state governments, and towns and cities around the country have refused to enforce gun control measures in “2nd Amendment sanctuary” zones.  In January, after a number of Texas counties had done just that, Governor Greg Abbot stated that he wanted Texas to become a 2nd Amendment sanctuary state so that “no government official at any level” could infringe Texans’ 2nd Amendment rights. 

Nullification is a key weapon in Middle America’s fight for survival. 

The states are resisting on other fronts as well.  Texas, for instance, had previously sued the federal government over the Biden administration’s intention to end immigration enforcement, and is at it again. Gun control may be the emotional trigger that sets off Middle American resistance, but it is mass immigration that has been the Blob’s indispensable weapon of mass destruction in its war on “deplorable” America.  We must act to preserve a sanctuary for our people if they are to have any future at all.

The key question is what the Blob intends to do about all this, but the administration’s intention to purge the military may tell us something. As noted in this space previously, the “boots on the ground” are largely on our side, so it’s no surprise that the Blob is targeting “extremists” in uniform. 

Don’t expect any help from bogus “populists” in the national level GOP—and we should not take it for granted that Republican “beautiful losers” at any level are completely trustworthy.

Wayne Allensworth is the author of The Russian Question: Nationalism, Modernization, and Post-Communist Russia, and a novel Field of Blood

Why do conservatives always lose?

By Wayne Allensworth

In my lifetime, social trends have inexorably tracked leftward. In a very short time in historical terms, our society’s popular culture, for instance, veered from The Andy Griffith Show to RuPaul’s Drag Race at a disorienting pace.  For every apparently good bit of news—divorce rates are down, for instance—we find a dark cloud behind a false silver lining: there are fewer divorces because marriage has collapsed, and with it, the family, the very bedrock of any social order.

Social conservatives have enjoyed few successes in recent decades. It mattered little who was president, or which party controlled Congress, or even who sat on the Supreme Court.  Yes, the court’s role in the revolution is clear, but were the justices determining social norms or following already extant trends?  Those “conservative” justices—vital to the survival of the republic, we heard again and again—had a way of “growing” in a way leftists did not. Something called “gay marriage” that was unthinkable not so long ago now appears to be widely accepted.  It’s difficult to believe that such a sea change in social attitudes took place because of a single SCOTUS decision.  The old social norms have evaporated like a glass of water in a desert.  The old unmentionables are becoming commonplace: homosexuality, cohabitation, even “trans-gendered” people.

What happened? 

American individualism was unmoored from traditional morality. Richard Weaver’s notion of an individualism limited by duty and responsibility in the “disciplined freedom” of “social bond individualism” is, as they say, ancient history. There are many interrelated reasons for that.  Urbanization, industrialization, increased mobility, and cultural homogenization undermined a sense of rootedness in our people. Deracination was the result. Those “little platoons” mainstream conservatives used to celebrate became fractured and atomized.

It’s no surprise that socio-economic structural changes were accompanied by a new zeitgeist that celebrated the myth of a completely autonomous individual, a demi-god unbridled by “oppressive” traditional institutions, a superior being capable of magical transformations.  No fault divorce and legal abortion were its products. The zeitgeist of the age promoted a “blank slate” theory of human nature that set the stage for mass, virtually uncontrolled, immigration from lands vastly different from our own.

Real conservatives tend to be wary of technological advancement and the social disruption that might accompany radical innovation. They should be. The sexual revolution, for instance, was not simply a matter of the legalization of abortion and pornography, or easy divorce. It could not have happened without penicillin and the pill. The former ended the fear of venereal disease.  The latter ended the fear of an “unwanted child.”  Sexual libertines had been around for centuries. The “liberated” world they desired could not have happened without the medical-technological advancements of the 20th century. 

What we as conservatives are confronted with is the late sociologist Zygmunt Bauman’s “liquid modernity,” a society that is in a constant state of becoming.  Our society sees “change” as a wholly positive phenomenon.  “Change” has no end point of perfection.  There is nothing “solid” in our new reality. “Trans-genderism” and “trans-humanism” are the next realms of exploration for a world that is constantly in flux. 

Conservatives lose because what we have to offer—restraint, traditional religious and cultural norms, self-sacrifice, delayed gratification, kinship ties, patriotism—has been unable to compete with “ye shall be as gods,” and the sense of omnipotence that accompanies the seductive power of modern technology.  Our young people are afloat in the sea of liquid modernity.  What attraction can a life of oppressive restraint, of blood, sweat, toil, and tears, have compared to the false promise of self-realization and instant gratification?  They wish to be “happy” and self-determined.  Our old notions of fulfillment are unappealing. 

All people long for a sense of purpose and direction. Drug addiction, depression, suicide, and the lost sense of place that haunt our society are the consequences of a vast array of structural, social, and economic disruptions. These are disruptions our self-styled mainstream conservatives celebrate, as they celebrate globalized capitalism’s role in creating a post-modern wasteland.  If there is to be any positive future for our people, we have to reject the tenets of a “conservatism” that can’t even conceive of conserving anything.

It may be that the present madness will have to run its course, that it will continue until enough people have experienced its destructive nihilism good and hard.  In the meantime, the rest of us will have a lot of thinking to do about how to survive, how to rebuild, and how to keep the old ways alive.

Wayne Allensworth is the author of The Russian Question: Nationalism, Modernization, and Post-Communist Russia, and a novel Field of Blood

Died of a Theory: What happened to the Old America?

By Wayne Allensworth

“If the Confederacy falls, there should be written on its tombstone: ‘Died of a Theory.’”—Jefferson Davis

The United States of America is as dead as a doornail.

Yes, a geographic body bears that name on maps, but like the term “American,” it has been drained of any substance.  The globalists and their leftist allies have made sure of that.  For decades, they maintained the “American” brand name and national symbols. But like a vampire bat, they bled the body politic dry as the American ethnos, induced into a stupor by propaganda, slept.  Our symbols and monuments to our past are now being jettisoned, and we ourselves are slated for replacement.

The old America died of a theory. 

Jeff Davis might have found it ironic that the USA died of the very theory that animated the most hateful enemies of the South.  Many of his influential compatriots so feared that theory that they refused to consider offering slaves freedom in exchange for their serving as Confederate soldiers.  It was their theory of slavery that Davis regretted.

Ideology has frequently overridden common sense.

The ideal of equality before the law, for example, was present at Enlightenment-age America’s creation.  Few of Jefferson’s contemporaries, however, interpreted his lofty assertion that “All men are created equal” literally.   The old America’s idea of all citizens being subject to the law was a cultural artifact of the American ethnos, the present day American Remnant.  That artifact unfortunately became infected with a radical egalitarian virus.  The idea of absolute equality, today’s “blank slate” theory of human nature, which denies any inherent differences in human groups, eventually undermined a more limited and workable idea of equality.

Each stage of the lengthy cultural revolution that overturned long accepted norms made America, indeed the entire Western world, more vulnerable to the radical pathogen.  As the infection set in, we lost confidence in ourselves, and with it, we lost our survival instinct.  Be that as it may, the proximate causes of the radical disease’s terminal stage were the “civil rights revolution” of the 1960s, and the decades-long Cold War.

Yours truly recently wrote a piece on how the “civil rights revolution” institutionalized white guilt in our educational system.  The powers-that-be, an alliance of globalists and leftists, wielded a white guilt-heavy revisionist view of American history as a bludgeon against the American ethnos, breaking down resistance to radical egalitarianism, and, concomitantly, globalism.

Under the blank slate theory, no distinctions could be made, for instance, between Americans and aliens. The world’s entire population was, at least potentially, “American.”  “Discrimination” was counted among the worst of all sins.  According to the theory, the “gaps” between whites and minorities could only be explained by “white privilege” and invisible “institutional racism.”

The Cold War helped spread the infection as well.

The Hart-Cellar Immigration Act of 1965 itself was part of the Cold War “architecture” of the era. As Dennis Petrov wrote at VDare:

“The propaganda aspect of the war was fought in ideological terms as a clash between Communism and Capitalism (‘the free world’), a war of ideas, not of countries with concrete national interests and distinct peoples. Hart-Celler, which opened the door to non-European immigration, was ideologically an extension of the Civil Rights legislation of the era, itself used in Cold War information campaigns to counter Soviet anti-capitalist and anti-U.S. propaganda. Discrimination of any kind was seen as arming the Communists with useful propaganda points—a Western democracy discriminating against the colored peoples of the earth undermined the global anti-Communist line.”

The Cold War helped cement the notion of America as an idea, a radically egalitarian one at that, into the national psyche.  It was an idea that disarmed the American ethnos.  Henceforth, “we” could include anyone from anywhere.  To say otherwise was “racist” and “xenophobic.”

The USA as a political manifestation of the American ethnos is dead, but the ethnos, weakened and under siege, lives on.  Acknowledging that the global capital on the Potomac and the system it represents are indeed hostile to us is a necessary step toward thinking about what comes next.  To begin again, a reassessment of what “patriotism” means is necessary. And any patriotic movement worthy of the name must jettison the baggage of the egalitarian god that failed. America is not an idea.

Wayne Allensworth is a Corresponding Editor of Chronicles magazine. He is the author of The Russian Question: Nationalism, Modernization, and Post-Communist Russia, and a novel Field of Blood

Remembering Robert E. Lee on his Birthday

The following article was originally published by Chronicles Magazine in August, 2017:

After Lee: Charlottesville and Beyond

By Wayne Allensworth


Was it for this
That on that April day we stacked our arms
Obedient to a soldier’s trust? To lie
Ground by the heels of little men,
Forever maimed, defeated, impugned?

—Donald Davidson, “Lee in the Mountains”

There are times when I feel as though I’ve awoken in a madhouse, a madhouse that cannot possibly be the country I was born into.

Following Donald Trump’s heroic news conference in New York the week of the Charlottesville riot, and his subsequent “tweet storm,” in which our president, in defending historical monuments, displayed more common sense and sanity than our media, political, academic and economic establishments are accustomed to, I could only conclude that to display sanity these days is an heroic act in itself. I walked away from the computer screen long enough to scan the bookcase in my son’s room and pulled from the shelf a volume I had treasured as a boy, a beautifully illustrated biography by Henry Steele Commager and Lynd Ward entitled America’s Robert E. Lee. I had often borrowed it from the library of my elementary school and had found a copy of it decades later in a used book store.

The book ends with Lee at Appomattox:

“So ended the Army of Northern Virginia—Lee’s army . . . As he sat astride Traveller his men crowded around him, many with tears streaming down their cheeks, not cheering, but saluting the leader who had never failed them. Then he turned, and rode off into history.”

Lee’s portrait hangs in my office. A boxed set of Douglas Southall Freeman’s monumental Pulitzer Prize winning, four volume biography, R.E. Lee stands atop my book case, a prize I happened upon on a trip long ago. Lee’s greatness was once acknowledged by Americans North and South. President Eisenhower described Lee as “one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation . . . Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his faith in God. Taken altogether, he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history.” Indeed, for decades, Lee has often been listed as one of the most important leaders in American history.

Lee fought his war for all the right reasons, as a war for independence, much like that fought by his father, “Light Horse Harry” Lee, a century earlier, and he fought with honor. His Army of Northern Virginia remains legendary in the history of American arms. In victory, he was magnanimous, in defeat, he called for reconciliation. The post war social compact upheld the honor of both sides. Lee and all who fought are an essential part of the American story.

And now the great man, who, unlike many others who have left their mark on history, was also a good man, along with practically all our monuments dedicated to heroes of an often tragic past are under assault by the vilest of Bolshevism’s bestial epigones. They hate the South because they hate America, for that is the point. They hate Lee because they hate honor and despise the Christian faith. Their fanaticism is a sign of the demonic.

As James Jatras has pointed out, the aim of the fanatics and their enablers is nothing short of achieving the “death of a nation,” replacing it with “a new, borderless, multiethnic, multilingual, multi-religious, multi-sexual, ahistorical, fake ‘America’ now aborning in violence and lawlessness”:

He who says A must say B. When one accepts demonization of part of our history and placing those who defend it beyond the pale of legitimate discourse, one should hardly be surprised when the arrogant fury of the victors is unleashed. That takes two forms: the nihilist street thugs of “Antifa” and “Black Lives Matter,” and the authorities (both governmental and media, a/k/a the Swamp) who confer on them immunity for violent, criminal behavior. The former are the shock troops of the latter.

No rational arguments can penetrate the ideologically thickened skulls of fanatics. Others have already noted the hypocrisy, the Orwellian distortions of reality (not only about what happened at Charlottesville, but about what President Trump said concerning the violence there), and the mendacity and hatefulness of those who would destroy monuments in Taliban-like fashion, erasing our country along with our freedoms and civilization itself. George Neumayr has commented in The American Spectator that he wonders “what entitles this generation to speak so confidently about past evils given its inability to recognize present ones,” including being “awash in the blood of millions of aborted children.” That’s something I’ve often wondered myself. How can these people sit in judgement on heroes of the past as they tolerate even a trade in body parts from aborted babies? The blogger “Roman Dmowski” has made a similar point:

“We live in a country with over a million abortions a year and gay marriage. Is that somehow better than the generation that fought World War II and also didn’t want school bussing? I don’t think so.”

As the Left and, indeed, the establishment as a whole, continues to hyperventilate over the election of Donald Trump, Charlottesville has given them a pre-text for what Mr. Neumayr has called “an orgy of self-righteousness,” including toppled statues, vandalism, and a call to assassinate the president, an orgy that the “stupid party” (aka “the GOP”) seems eager to participate in:

“Naturally, ‘conservatives’ and members of the stupid party are joining the lynch mob instead of stopping it. By the way, what exactly do ‘conservatives’ conserve anymore? It is difficult to say, except maybe their seats on Meet the Press and Morning Joe. Turn on the TV and you are likely to hear some ‘conservative’ rebuking Trump for his ban on transgendered troops, extolling the glories of gay marriage, and casting Robert E. Lee as a traitorous dirtbag. Rich Lowry wants to see the Confederate monuments ‘mothballed.’

 . . . The press had grown accustomed to Republican presidents who suffered under what might be called a conservative inferiority complex. Trump, fortunately, isn’t touched by it and is willing to call the self-appointed ruling class on its propaganda and lies.”

Post-modern people lack the tragic view. They fail to grasp that there are many problems in this world that cannot be fixed, that utopia is a satanic temptation, and that all human societies are flawed. Slavery was not unique to America or to whites or to the South, blacks sold and owned slaves, and the ever present tensions between races and the “gaps” between them cannot be wholly avoided, or closed by acts of legislation or political fanaticism.

This fight isn’t over yet.

Wayne Allensworth is a Corresponding Editor of Chronicles magazine. He is the author of The Russian Question: Nationalism, Modernization, and Post-Communist Russia, and a novel Field of Blood

Identity in Black and White

By Wayne Allensworth

For some time now, the powers-that-be have denied the American ethnos, what we call “the American Remnant,” any positive identity.  They acknowledge only a negative identity for our people: We are slandered as a pack of “racists” who, even without being conscious of it, supposedly cause stress, anxiety, and even premature death among “people of color.” The left has fetishized blacks as eternal victims, granting them sacred status.  The message of Black Lives Matter is that black lives count more than white ones.  Stating that all lives matter is a grievous sin in the post-American landscape of 2021.

The reasons blacks have been accorded special status and weaponized by the enemies of the American Remnant have deep roots.  For now, suffice to say that the left has used blacks in white guilt propaganda as a battering ram to break down resistance among our people to globalism, which is projected by those who despise us as the end of History with a capital “H.”  Both the neo-liberals and hard left agree on that.

In my lifetime, the key historical moment in undermining our people’s sense of positive identity was the “civil rights revolution” of the 1960s.  Integration, particularly of our schools, was a key aim of that revolution, and it facilitated the erosion of the American Remnant’s sense of positive identity.

In the past, pundits on the right spent a lot of time and energy attacking relativism, the idea that there is no objective right or wrong, truth or untruth, only varying perspectives, varying situations.  In the post-modern world, the language and symbols that express those various perspectives are instruments of power. 

The left was not entirely wrong about that. 

Take the teaching of history in integrated schools, which pointed out a flaw in the mainstream right’s argument. 

At one time, American students learned about a pantheon of heroes that included a number of slaveholders and certainly some hard-nosed, even ruthless men. Now, none of them can pass muster under the ideological precepts of today’s globalists and their hard left shock troops.  Iconoclastic attacks on monuments to our heroes bear this out.  

In permitting the left to rewrite history textbooks, what the right forgot was that education was not merely about passing tests or mastering “the material.”  Education originated as a means of socializing members of tribe and nation. It was a means of transmitting a heritage and confirming a positive identity.  Under the old view of education, the fact that Andrew Jackson owned slaves was not the most important thing about him. What was most important was “Old Hickory’s” heroism in battle, and his role in the building of our country. Now, it appears that Jackson will eventually be replaced by Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill.

Something similar can be said about any number of American heroes from Washington to Charles Lindbergh. When whites and blacks were taught in segregated schools, there was no controversy over how such heroes were portrayed.  Then came the civil rights revolution. The inculcation of white guilt, which focused on putative American failings, followed.  Given the circumstances, it was inevitable that American history would eventually be portrayed through the prism of the so-called “1619 Project.”

Under the new rules of integrated, anti-American education, the only point that really mattered about Washington was that he owned black slaves, while Lindbergh was tagged as an anti-Semitic isolationist.

White guilt was effective in beginning the transformation of how the children of the American ethnos were taught and what they were taught.  The old ways did not last long in an integrated school environment. They could not.  

Integration meant that whites had to give up their positive heritage.  The very act of forcing the two races together was meant as an acknowledgement of wrongdoing by whites.  Blacks were cast as the victims, whites the sinners asking for forgiveness.

Two narratives, one white, one black, could not co-exist. One would prevail. As in all black-white mutual relationships since the 1960s, it is whites who are expected to yield—and widely prevalent “virtue signaling” means that many whites happily do so.

I do not begrudge blacks their heroes. Malcom X was a proud black man who called on his people to stand up for themselves.  MLK was the inspirational leader of the civil rights revolution.  There are other aspects of the character of both men black people would rather ignore. 

That’s the way of the world.  People need their heroes.

We should remember that as we consider how our people might survive and preserve their heritage in what will likely be an increasingly hostile future.

 Wayne Allensworth is a Corresponding Editor of Chronicles magazine. He is the author of The Russian Question: Nationalism, Modernization, and Post-Communist Russia, and a novel, Field of Blood.  

Mike Pence, Ashli Babbitt, and Ted Cruz: Where do We go From Here?

By Wayne Allensworth

This is Mike Pence:

And after the events in the capital this week:

Z-Man has written an excellent piece on what transpired at the capital.

Some excerpts:

“Yesterday, Ashli Babbitt was shot in the neck and died while protesting inside the Capitol with other protestors. A group of angry Trump supporters had got into the building and were making a racket. This is not an unusual occurrence. During the Kavanaugh hearings, Democrats organized mobs of screeching women to harass Republicans in the halls of the Capitol. Party media was there to celebrate it as the purest expression of democracy. It was power to the people time.

That was not the case yesterday, according to the media. Instead, it was a direct threat to ‘our’ democracy. This is a bit ironic in that the protests are over the obvious corruption in the election system. The direct threat to democracy is the people demanding their elections be fair and honest. That’s why Ashli Babbitt was inside the Capitol making a racket. Her whole life she had been told this was how citizens angry at their government demand redress when the system fails…

Ashli Babbitt was not some drug-addled degenerate, like we saw last summer, when the ruling class unleashed their mobs on us. She was a veteran, serving 14 years in the US Air Force, and she was a high-level security official throughout her time in service. She was like most of the people at the protest, in that she had bought into what she was told about America. So much so she signed onto serve in the military and go overseas in various deployments.

Like most of the protestors, she was there because she had spent her life playing by the rules and defending those rules. She was there because the people in charge of maintaining the rules have been violating those rules. They ignored the official corruption in the 2016 election and they laughed about the grotesque fraud that was plainly obvious in the 2020 election. Like the rest of those protestors, she was angry that the politicians were not following the rules.

For her trouble, she died in a pool of her own blood inside what is supposed to be the people’s house in America…The video, for those interested, is here

Of course, unlike George Floyd, Ashli Babbitt will not get three nationally televised funerals and be treated as a fallen hero. That honor goes to drug-addled criminals who overdose in police custody. In this America, patriots who served their country and exercise their rights get gunned down by agents of the state. This woman, this patriot, bleeding out in the halls of the Capitol, murdered by an agent of the state, is the perfect image of what has gone terribly wrong in America…

Be angry, but also remember Ashli Babbitt. The Republican Party will not remember her or even mention her name. The media will work hard to make sure you forget her name and how she died yesterday. Dissidents need to remember her so we never forget why we are angry and why we are dissidents.”

The piece ends with this quote from Jefferson:

We have had 13 states independent for 11 years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. 

Meanwhile, Ted Cruz described Ashli Babbitt and people like her as “terrorists.”  By the way, reports of a police officer dying of injuries sustained in a clash with Trump supporters are false. See the items here and here.

I agree with the Z-Man that the anger of the Trump people was justified—that does not, however, mean that they acted prudently.  Our own Tom Piatak has echoed Talleyrand in noting that their actions were a major blunder.  Christopher Roach concurs. Mr. Roach has noted that the Trump supporters at the capital were only following the example the left has been setting since the 1960s.   He further noted, however, that “guerilla theater” has worked for the left only because leftists have had the support of “media, big business, and other institutions of power.”

We know full well that the events at the capital will be treated as something far worse than the leftist riots that have rocked major cities for months. And they will likely be used to justify a crackdown on patriots.  True, the establishment had been planning to tighten its grip regardless, but the MSM portrayal of an “assault on democracy” this week has given the Blob even more ammunition to use against us.

There will be more clashes.  There will be more violence, and our side will be vilified in the strongest terms.  We are going to have to be smart about how we proceed. Our focus should be on trying to organize our people at the state and local level, and on when, where, and how to resist.  The impulsive rushing of the capital—even if it was spurred on by provocateurs—was a mistake.

At the same time, we must understand that there is, as Mr. Roach put it, “No reason to believe that any right-wing political activity that accomplishes anything will ever be given a ‘fair shake’ in the ‘optics’ department.”

We can’t allow ourselves to be paralyzed by concerns about “optics,” though prudence is called for.  We do have to be smart and disciplined in deciding on how and when to act.

 Wayne Allensworth is a Corresponding Editor of Chronicles magazine. He is the author of The Russian Question: Nationalism, Modernization, and Post-Communist Russia, and a novel, Field of Blood.  

What happened yesterday?

By Wayne Allensworth

The short answer is that it is still not clear what actually happened. It’s quite plausible that provocateurs may have been present who encouraged a group of Trump supporters to enter the capital.  See items concerning that scenario here, here, and here.    

If that was the case, then, yes, the Trump people fell into a trap. Either way, the incident—as far as the level of violence displayed by the Trump supporters, a minor one after nearly a year of leftist riots across the country—is already being used to potentially target anyone deemed a threat to “our democracy.” The usual suspects are predictably calling for more censorship, especially of social media. I think we all know who will, and who won’t, be censored.

From ZeroHedge:

 “In and of itself this won’t sound terribly concerning to the average citizen. Nothing wrong with taking steps to prevent people from plotting violence and terrorism on social media, right?

But how do you predict what protests are going to be ‘violent’? How do you decide which protests and what political dissent need to be censored and which ones should be permitted to communicate freely? Do you just leave it up to Silicon Valley oligarchs to make the call? Or do you have them consult with the government like they’ve been doing? Are either of these institutions you’d trust to regulate what protests are worthy of being permitted to organize online?

Because the actual power structures in the United States seem to be interested in simply censoring the internet to eliminate political dissent altogether.”

 Wayne Allensworth is a Corresponding Editor of Chronicles magazine. He is the author of The Russian Question: Nationalism, Modernization, and Post-Communist Russia, and a novel, Field of Blood.  

Shots fired in the Capital: What next?

By Wayne Allensworth

Whatever else happened in DC today, the Stop the Steal rally resulted in the fatal shooting of a female Trump supporter, who was part of a group that forced its way into the capital building.

Here are some things we need to keep in mind:

First, as Steve Sailer reminded us, the left has staged similar actions before, with little reaction from law enforcement.

Second, the events in DC will likely be used as a pretext to impose further censorship on the patriotic right and tighten the grip of what I call “the globalist Blob” on all of us.  The MSM cast the BLM/Antifa riots as “mostly peaceful protests”—the people who showed up in DC today to angrily protest the rigged election will be condemned as a violent mob.

Third, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”  As I’ve noted previously, politics are over in what used to be our country.  The powers-that-be have excused and encouraged violence against our people, making further violence inevitable.

And fourth, there is an as yet unorganized and undirected Middle American resistance out there. Mass participation in the Stop the Steal rallies has shown that our people can be mobilized, but they need organizers and coordinators at the state and local level—that’s where battles that we can win could be fought. Disparate patriotic groups could form a resistance network.  We need to face the reality that national elections will not save us.  The aim now is to defend ourselves and salvage something for our posterity, hopefully carving out enclaves where we can live our lives as we see fit.

Do not be taken in by the political show being staged by some GOP luminaries, such as Ted Cruz: Remember that in 2016, Cruz portrayed the violent attacks on Trump supporters at campaign rallies as Trump’s fault.

This will be a long battle.  Hopefully, our people will have the determination, will, and wisdom to fight it.

  Wayne Allensworth is a Corresponding Editor of Chronicles magazine. He is the author of The Russian Question: Nationalism, Modernization, and Post-Communist Russia, and a novel, Field of Blood.  

« Older Entries Recent Entries »