[Majorityrights News] Trump will ‘arm Ukraine to the teeth’ if Putin won’t negotiate ceasefire Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 12 November 2024 16:20.
[Majorityrights News] Alex Navalny, born 4th June, 1976; died at Yamalo-Nenets penitentiary 16th February, 2024 Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, 16 February 2024 23:43.
[Majorityrights Central] A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity’s origin Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 25 July 2023 22:19.
[Majorityrights News] Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine? Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 18 May 2023 18:55.
Angela Nagle (7:53): They think (also) that women making the completely voluntary choice to have children with a non-White man is White genocide (laughs) you know, it’s just so ridiculous, I mean…
Matt Christman (8:14): “It’s not of their own volition.”
Angela Nagle (8:14): laughing
Matt Christman (8:15): Porn! Jewish produced porn has brainwashed them into thinking that big dicks are more pleasurable to have sex with.
Angela Nagle (8:22): Continues to laugh in approval of the sarcasm.
Matt Christman (8:24): They literally believe that by the way.
It has always been theoretically uncomfortable when White advocates white knight or try to counter “the misogyny” of White advocacy regarding White mudsharks by suggesting that they are sheerly brainwashed by cultural Marxsim.
I have tended to lay off these arguments as I believe there is truth to cultural coercion and veritable psy-ops of cultural Marxism and demoralization through Jewish porn; and it is a help to take a step away from completely deterministic, objectivist arguments; better still, as opposed to the White genders blaming one another, to look critically at Jews, who have been egregiously critical of us and divisive of White men and women. These angles are true enough to consider along with being helpful to take the pressure off of gender antipathy and to put the social realm and culture (by which I mean rule structured practices) into play.
However, the cultural Marxism angle has always been insufficiently explanatory when dealing with “voluntary” miscegenation and White genocide. The little discourse above provides occasion for correction.
Angela Nagle might believe that outbreeding is not killing European genotypes; here White advocates haven’t done that bad in showing that it (coercion that suppresses breeding of a race) can meet with the UN definition of genocide.
Matt Christman might think that all White advocates believe miscegenation and outbreeding is only a result of brainwashing; and maybe some do. But his and Angela Nagle’s mockery exposes a puerility and weakness of their own argument, which calls for exploitation through the added sophistication of the hermeneutic circle.
White females, as any females, do have base drives that can incite genetic competition, miscegenation, incline toward strong black men with big weenies (though even I, in my distaste and disrespect for blacks on the whole, would not reduce miscegenation to only these causes), an inclination that can be activated under certain circumstances - particularly by pandering to them in atavistic circumstances such as the disorder of modernity. However, for a self proclaimed leftist, Nagle is making a surprisingly reductionist, liberal, right wing argument in saying “it’s completely voluntary.” There are definitely cultural rule structures that are encouraging and promoting it; even more significantly, there are heavy taboos against criticizing it; literal laws against taking critical and opposing stances against it. These are cultural/ political violations of even the most reasonable and natural extent for mature White men (and women) to protect their kind.
This would be a part of the pleasure pain matrix that Matt Christman invokes. As White men overcome their right wing reactionary position and adopt the reality of social construction and the hermeneutic circle, they will not have to accept the “way it is-ness” of Matt Christman’s “white knighting” on behalf of mudsharks (likely overcompensating pandering for the fact that he is ugly - about as ugly as the typical black woman - and desperate to be in the good graces of Jews, if not part Jewish himself).
As we step into hermeneutics, we move beyond the tropism of the high contrast porn episode of the gargantuan black weenie and the White woman. But first, porn does some corrective favor in the sense that it is compelled to show that we White men can be quite well hung - so, if that’s what a woman feels she needs… Finally, porn does not tend to reveal the fact that blacks are not necessarily heavy hung; I don’t need to belabor this point here, except for the fact that their Not having a big weenie does not suddenly make them OK to intermarry with by our estimation. And as a very fundamental point, we are not discriminating against White guys with big Weenies.
Our kind was averse to blacks as children, before sexuality was even an issue, let alone weenies. After that it was the presumtuousness, arrogance, hyper-assertiveness, aggression, brutal antagonism and violence against Whites. Things that the puerile might find titillating, perhaps puerile girls, but not us. Along the way, we noticed subtleties of our female co-evolutionaries which we found compelling; and the physicality of blacks generally displeasing by contrast, let alone their behavior and fall-out of their way of life.
We did not expect that we would be blamed for everything and told we owe them everything - including those we might hope to be our wives and daughters. We never could have imagined that we would be expected to accept this in servitude. We thought others would naturally think as we do, and though some naive adults thought it was a good idea to integrate us with blacks, when we got old enough, that we would join the rest of normal Whites who want to get away from them and be with Whites.
That didn’t happen in any articulate way. And we have to confront not only the fact of cultural Marxism, but that our enemies are playing the objectivist angle where it works against us - heavily now that they’ve hoodwinked the Alt Right and other large tracts of popular culture to argue against PC and “the left.”
We have to confront the fact of thrownness, that our group co-evolutionaries can miscegenate, but by the same token, thrownness, we are thereupon able to invoke and collaborate on cultural rule structures; it is not something that we have to accept as just the way it is, merely a voluntary choice that owes nothing to the tens of thousands of years of evolutionary struggle that went into our differentiation; along with its hundreds and thousands of years of social capital.
Even if they argue that some black guy might provide a more pleasurable moment and episode than some White guy, might be more confident (and coherent of identity, in part as a Jewish backed thug coalition) in the Jewish provoked disorder of modernity, where the rule structure of our guard and classificatory boundary is down, we can easily rebut that plenty of us White guys will provide not only quite fine moments, but as we rebuild our full class, a far more pleasurable and satisfying way of life than the blacks manage.
With that, rather than mocking and laughing at the servitude of black interests that has been imposed upon White men, we will be having the last laugh as we send miscegenators and their half cast broods to live with blacks and the way of life that they create. They will either accept that or the recognition that they are indeed the supremacists and slave masters who need to be overturned by any means necessary. Do you know Angela and Matt, a White guy might not want to be a slave, paying for the babies of the mudsharks who destroy the genome bestowed them through tens of thousand of years of struggle, might just find a White woman’s face and skin color more appealing, a European’s way of life more pleasurable?
Angela Nagle claims to be open to talking to people who are dealing in topics forbidden by PC. We have offered to talk to her and that remains a standing invitation.
Oswald Mosley died in 1980 but his ideas live on. ‘Ten Points For Action’ was published forty years ago but they are still relevant. Compare these visionary policies to the paranoid fantasies of the far-right.
1) Action to Build Houses. We want Action to solve the housing problem. It should be taken out of the hands of local authorities and entrusted to Government leadership with powers to mass produce houses and flats like an ‘operation of war’, turning out homes as munitions were mass-produced in time of war.
2) Stop the Land and Rent Rackets. Give the Government the power to acquire land at pre-boom prices and to finance housing by low-interest loans, paid for by high-interest charges on all non-essential and luxury building. Such action would bring down house prices and rents and at last provide good but cheap housing for all.
3) Stop Immigration - Start Repatriation. We want Action to ease the pressure on housing and other social problems (like the reintroduction of diseases unknown in Britain for hundreds of years) by stopping all further immigration and by repatriating all post-war immigrants to good jobs and conditions in their homelands, to which prosperity had been restored by using the surplus wealth and production of united Europe. But Britain could make a start now before the complete union of Europe is achieved.
4) Choice in Education and Health. We want Action to build good schools, colleges, universities and hospitals, just as we would mass-produce houses and flats. Parents should have a choice of schools for their children. We should not be taxed to provide those health services we will never use (maternity benefits for confirmed bachelors!) but free to pay in proportion to our requirements.
5) Free Speech - Law and Order. We want Action to ensure freedom of speech for everyone, guaranteed by the Government, which has a duty to maintain law and order in the State and to take effective action against mob violence, which today denies freedom of expression to any views of which its agitators disapprove. Let us maintain local police forces with their local knowledge and experience, but let us supplement them with a highly-trained, well-equipped, mobile national police force, to put down organised crime and to maintain public order.
We would ensure freedom of the Press for both newspapers and the public. Any man who felt himself misrepresented in the Press should be guaranteed (by law) equal space to reply in the newspaper concerned. This would free the public from the expense of seeking justice through costly libel action and free the newspapers from the legal blackmail of a threatened libel action by some unscrupulous racketeer.
6) Capital Punishment. The death penalty should be restored to the statute book, to be used sparingly in the case of premeditated murder. The Court of Appeal should have a solemn duty to reprieve if in any doubt. The sentence could be carried out not by hanging, but by a quick and painless injection or by some other humane method.
7) Action in Europe. To put these policies into practice Britain must advance beyond the concept of a so-called united Europe and Common Market to which the Conservative Party has at last been converted and which the Labour Party still opposes. We must advance quickly to “Europe a Nation”, which we have advocated since 1948. We stand for a union of all Europe, our former white Dominions and southern Africa, a great “third force” independent of both America and Russia.
This “third force” must have a central government for its defence, the economy, finance and scientific development, with power to raise wages and control prices as production increases for a guaranteed market, insulated against unfair competition from the rest of the world.
We need a European army, equipped with the most modern weapons to defend our continent against attack from any quarter. This should be financed on a European budget, instead of each small country straining its economy to finance its own defence.
8) National and Regional Governments. There should be independent national and regional governments for each European country and the main regions. This would enable England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland and other European countries and regions to have their own parliaments for internal affairs and for the preservation of their national and regional cultures.
9) The Irish Problem. The ultimate solution to the Irish problem is the union of that country within a united Europe. But the bloodshed must first be brought to an end by a free vote on a county basis in each of the Six Counties and a subsequent readjustment of the border. The bulk of the Catholic population in the North would then be ruled (as is their wish) from Dublin, with a lessening of present tensions, the IRA would lose its bases in the North and the British Army would have a much shorter border to patrol against infiltration from the South. In this improved situation agreement could more easily be reached on the eventual union of Ireland, with the rights of the Protestant minority protected and guaranteed by European government.
10) Government of National Union. We stand for a government of national union and effective action, drawn from the whole nation, from the professions and the trade unions, arts and science, the law and the armed forces. Government elected by the whole people alone should govern. It should have power to lead the economy, raising wages and controlling prices as science increased production. Then we will have cooperation instead of conflict in industry.
We want Action to halt the “brain drain” and to arouse a new spirit of national service in our British people, by relating all reward directly to skill, effort, initiative and responsibility. There should be “great reward for great service”, crowned by higher pensions drawn from the wealth of the new economic system, as the reward in old age for those who had loyally served the nation throughout their lives.
Posted by DanielS on Monday, 25 September 2017 09:52.
Sam Francis was creating ‘young fogies’ - Alex Linder.
It’s going to require some nuance, but it is important to explain why James Lawrence is a walking piece of dog shit masquerading as a human being, a manifestation shown in his article at (((Alternative Right))):
In brief, James Lawrence has elevated Sam Francis young fogeyism = an aspiration to conceive of oneself as precociously wry in protection of the “traditional” already Jew infested culture against “progressivism.” This is anti modernism without being sufficiently post modern (to incorporate the best while leaving behind the worst of both modern and inherited ways), as it stops with a neo-traditionalism, read (((paleoconservatism))).
Now, Francis, and by proxy Lawrence, have some things right.
Namely, that there is a significant portion of influential White people circulating among our elite functions who do not have our ethnonational interests at heart. More, that there is a managerial elite who want to share in this self interested good fortune, who will thus also betray ethno nationals in order to gain favor of this elite, internationalist power.
It is also true that both these kinds of White people can gain international backing by importing foreigners against Whites (or exporting elitist interests, e.g., compradors, against ethnonationals) and they can and do also virtue signal by sacrificing Whites and quelling any backlash against foreign impositions on ethnonationalism.
But I more accurately and descriptively call these people right wingers, and their underpinning objectivism: which is directed by Jewry - hence, Lawrence’s commitment to end his article in (((his masters))) bidding by espousing the “true right” on behalf of (((paleoconservatism))) against “the left”...“the Cosmopolitans” and the occasional bad Jew - yes, they have bad ones too, he knows.
Here Lawrence takes a turn into disingenuous speculation, by saying these Whites who betray eithnonationalism are not “traitors” - well, objectivists are not perfectly described as “traitors”, true - they are loyal to their own subjective interests through a disingenuous pretense of objectivism or naively subject to the subjective/relative interests of others through the pretense of objectivism.
Although there are distinct patterns of the treacherous Whites among elite positions, there is not necessarily a well organized elite group to which they subscribe as Lawrence would provide for the diversion of conspiracy theorists - it is more facile than that.
Indeed, the only real reason to circumscribe it so perfectly with the designation of a “Cosmopoitain” elite which is strictly loyal to its in group, is to function as a tool for Jews to deflect attention away from what is indeed their more organized half of the elite internationalist equation. So that they can point to their (((paleocons))), who can say, “see? we are the good ones”, we have paleocons who are on your side, not like those bad Jews, we’re here with you to protect your (((Christian traditions))) against those “Cosmopolitan elites” and the occasional bad Jew, like Soros and neo cons like William Kristol.
That is to say, like the site Alternative Right, James Lawrence is disguising, perhaps even to himself, the fact that he is kissing Jewish ass in order to keep his means to power afloat.
White elites who betray our interests are indeed one giant pole of our problem, but their loyalty functions a bit more arbitrarily on the happenstance of subjective fortune and selling out; along with the mutual admiration and facile croneyism of their “objective” attainment, which is why, in their unaccountabilty, they are so easily bribed and outmaneuvered by the Jewish group, which is organized as a distinct group in its relative interests (is it good for Jews?) and which will send forth posers as representatives of (((paleoconservatism))) against the “Cosmopolitan” elite.
That is to say, objectivism functions in a much more slippery way against ethnonational interests and Jewry knows how to play it - e.g., through reactionary narratives like those of Sam Francis and James Lawrence. It is a nebulous, quasi group created de facto by the ever present temptation of facile betrayal in self interest, and that is why it requires the ever present default vigilance of accountability through left nationalism and its White variant, the White class, White Left nationalism.
Posted by DanielS on Tuesday, 19 September 2017 10:04.
* Please feel free to forward or pass on to other nationalists *
The 2017 Annual John Tyndall Memorial Meeting
Friday 6th October, 2017
Preston - Lancashire. 1pm – 6pm
Keith Axon: Meeting Chairman: - Longstanding friend of JT, former NF and BNP organiser
Speakers include (in alphabetical order):
Benny Bullman: - lead singer of the Blood & honour band Whitelaw, and longstanding British Movement activist
Mark Collett: - former Young BNP organizer, twice acquitted on ‘race-hate’ charges and author of Decline of Western Man
Richard Edmonds: - Longstanding friend of JT, National Front directorate member activist - former BNP national organiser
Stephen Frost: - National secretary of the British Movement and author of the Colin Jordan biography ‘TWAS A GOOD FIGHT’!
Julie Lake: - former BNP organiser, now National Front & South West Forum organiser
Dr. James Lewthwaite: - former Bradford City Councillor, archaeology lecturer, organiser for the British Democrats and Orangeman
Eddy Morrison: - Longstanding White nationalist, former NF, BNP and WNP organiser – now editor of the online newsletter White Voice
Peter Rushton: - Assistant editor of Heritage and Destiny magazine & Russia Today and Press TV commentator
Jez Turner: – former soldier, Arabic & Pashtun translator, & now chairman of The London Forum
Posted by DanielS on Thursday, 17 August 2017 17:38.
...purposefully leaked or not, apparently kissing-up to YKW
Robert Kuttner revealed his conversation with Bannon: “To me,” Bannon said, “the economic war with China is everything.” ... “Ethno-nationalism—it’s losers. It’s a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it, you know, uh, help crush it more.” ...“These guys are a collection of clowns,” he added.
American Prospect, “Steve Bannon, Unrepentant”, by Robert Kuttner, 16 Aug 2017:
Trump’s embattled strategist phones me, unbidden, to opine on China, Korea, and his enemies in the administration.
You might think from recent press accounts that Steve Bannon is on the ropes and therefore behaving prudently. In the aftermath of events in Charlottesville, he is widely blamed for his boss’s continuing indulgence of white supremacists. Allies of National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster hold Bannon responsible for a campaign by Breitbart News, which Bannon once led, to vilify the security chief. Trump’s defense of Bannon, at his Tuesday press conference, was tepid.
But Bannon was in high spirits when he phoned me Tuesday afternoon to discuss the politics of taking a harder line with China, and minced no words describing his efforts to neutralize his rivals at the Departments of Defense, State, and Treasury. “They’re wetting themselves,” he said, proceeding to detail how he would oust some of his opponents at State and Defense.
Needless to say, I was a little stunned to get an email from Bannon’s assistant midday Tuesday, just as all hell was breaking loose once again about Charlottesville, saying that Bannon wished to meet with me.
Needless to say, I was a little stunned to get an email from Bannon’s assistant midday Tuesday, just as all hell was breaking loose once again about Charlottesville, saying that Bannon wished to meet with me. I’d just published a column on how China was profiting from the U.S.-North Korea nuclear brinkmanship, and it included some choice words about Bannon’s boss.
“In Kim, Trump has met his match,” I wrote. “The risk of two arrogant fools blundering into a nuclear exchange is more serious than at any time since October 1962.” Maybe Bannon wanted to scream at me?
I told the assistant that I was on vacation, but I would be happy to speak by phone. Bannon promptly called.
Far from dressing me down for comparing Trump to Kim, he began, “It’s a great honor to finally track you down. I’ve followed your writing for years and I think you and I are in the same boat when it comes to China. You absolutely nailed it.”
“We’re at economic war with China,” he added. “It’s in all their literature. They’re not shy about saying what they’re doing. One of us is going to be a hegemon in 25 or 30 years and it’s gonna be them if we go down this path. On Korea, they’re just tapping us along. It’s just a sideshow.”
Bannon said he might consider a deal in which China got North Korea to freeze its nuclear buildup with verifiable inspections and the United States removed its troops from the peninsula, but such a deal seemed remote. Given that China is not likely to do much more on North Korea, and that the logic of mutually assured destruction was its own source of restraint, Bannon saw no reason not to proceed with tough trade sanctions against China.
Contrary to Trump’s threat of fire and fury, Bannon said: “There’s no military solution [to North Korea’s nuclear threats], forget it. Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don’t die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don’t know what you’re talking about, there’s no military solution here, they got us.” Bannon went on to describe his battle inside the administration to take a harder line on China trade, and not to fall into a trap of wishful thinking in which complaints against China’s trade practices now had to take a backseat to the hope that China, as honest broker, would help restrain Kim.
“To me,” Bannon said, “the economic war with China is everything. And we have to be maniacally focused on that. If we continue to lose it, we’re five years away, I think, ten years at the most, of hitting an inflection point from which we’ll never be able to recover.”
Bannon’s plan of attack includes: a complaint under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act against Chinese coercion of technology transfers from American corporations doing business there, and follow-up complaints against steel and aluminum dumping. “We’re going to run the tables on these guys. We’ve come to the conclusion that they’re in an economic war and they’re crushing us.”
But what about his internal adversaries, at the departments of State and Defense, who think the United States can enlist Beijing’s aid on the North Korean standoff, and at Treasury and the National Economic Council who don’t want to mess with the trading system?
“Oh, they’re wetting themselves,” he said, explaining that the Section 301 complaint, which was put on hold when the war of threats with North Korea broke out, was shelved only temporarily, and will be revived in three weeks. As for other cabinet departments, Bannon has big plans to marginalize their influence. “I’m changing out people at East Asian Defense; I’m getting hawks in. I’m getting Susan Thornton [acting head of East Asian and Pacific Affairs] out at State.”
But can Bannon really win that fight internally?
“That’s a fight I fight every day here,” he said. “We’re still fighting. There’s Treasury and [National Economic Council chair] Gary Cohn and Goldman Sachs lobbying.” “We gotta do this. The president’s default position is to do it, but the apparatus is going crazy. Don’t get me wrong. It’s like, every day.”
Bannon explained that his strategy is to battle the trade doves inside the administration while building an outside coalition of trade hawks that includes left as well as right. Hence the phone call to me.
There are a couple of things that are startling about this premise. First, to the extent that most of the opponents of Bannon’s China trade strategy are other Trump administration officials, it’s not clear how reaching out to the left helps him. If anything, it gives his adversaries ammunition to characterize Bannon as unreliable or disloyal.
More puzzling is the fact that Bannon would phone a writer and editor of a progressive publication (the cover lines on whose first two issues after Trump’s election were “Resisting Trump” and “Containing Trump”) and assume that a possible convergence of views on China trade might somehow paper over the political and moral chasm on white nationalism.
The question of whether the phone call was on or off the record never came up. This is also puzzling, since Steve Bannon is not exactly Bambi when it comes to dealing with the press. He’s probably the most media-savvy person in America. I asked Bannon about the connection between his program of economic nationalism and the ugly white nationalism epitomized by the racist violence in Charlottesville and Trump’s reluctance to condemn it. Bannon, after all, was the architect of the strategy of using Breitbart to heat up white nationalism and then rely on the radical right as Trump’s base.
He dismissed the far right as irrelevant and sidestepped his own role in cultivating it: “Ethno-nationalism—it’s losers. It’s a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it, you know, uh, help crush it more.”
“These guys are a collection of clowns,” he added.
From his lips to Trump’s ear. “The Democrats,” he said, “the longer they talk about identity politics, I got ’em. I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats.”
I had never before spoken with Bannon. I came away from the conversation with a sense both of his savvy and his recklessness. The waters around him are rising, but he is going about his business of infighting, and attempting to cultivate improbable outside allies, to promote his China strategy. His enemies will do what they do.
Either the reports of the threats to Bannon’s job are grossly exaggerated and leaked by his rivals, or he has decided not to change his routine and to go down fighting. Given Trump’s impulsivity, neither Bannon nor Trump really has any idea from day to day whether Bannon is staying or going. He has survived earlier threats. So what the hell, damn the torpedoes. The conversation ended with Bannon inviting me to the White House after Labor Day to continue the discussion of China and trade. We’ll see if he’s still there.
Posted by DanielS on Saturday, 29 July 2017 09:43.
....tasked with out-Koshering other goyim alum and to put the hit on them gangster style for being in/convenient goyim to the kosher mob. From our point of view, we can be glad that Bannon’s (((Paleocon))) misdirection into his (((Neo-Reaction))) is being throttled by a more distinctly (thereby didactic) Kosher and neo-liberal effort.
Scaramucci blanks like a hootchi.
First, some commentary on the situation by Kumiko:
All the FVEY accounts are indicating “LOL we’re coming for all of you.”
The collapse is going to be good fun.
Why would Cernovich be subpoena’d?
Because Putin, quite seriously.
It’s encouraging that this has started to bleed into the Alt-Lite.
Since they thought that everyone had forgotten about them.
It forms part of the logic of why we have actively tried to keep our audience from falling into that garbage when it started up.
All of these people will go down with the ship, because that’s how it works.
The only way to not get taken down is to just not be there.
“I’m just a blogger, surely I can be a grey vector of Active Measures and be left alone, right?”
Yeah no.
The only they were going to escape would have been if Trump had swiftly crushed the entire US intelligence community within a few months of entering office.
But these fluffy guys didn’t think about that, and Trump was incompetent, so now it’s all catching up to them.
There’s still chances for them to squirm out, if Trump starts a firing spree before Graham’s bill passes.
But it’s looking like they won’t make it.
Trump is behind schedule, since he fired Priebus today, but then he realized that Scaramucci doesn’t care about anything and wants to actually fight Bannon.
So they are wasting precious time because Trump didn’t realize that Scaramucci only wanted to enter the White House so he could destroy Priebus and Bannon.
....because they screwed him in a business deal back n 2016.
Now he’s coming back pure ITALIAN BOSS.
...and now they are all falling over each other to try to ‘calm that down’... wasting precious time.
That’s why you see Raheem Kassam and Cernovich now trying to rally the base against Scaramucci “or it’s all over” according Kassam.
If you want to be rid of Bannon’s Neo-Reactionary misdirection into counter-Jihad Paleoconservatism, you have to love the hit Salabucci is putting on him.
Salabucci is just there to kill two guys.
He’s just some guy Trump knew from some business thing, who used to also go on Fox News and give financial commentary.
He spent the whole electoral cycle accusing Trump of being a protectionist bastard, until he realized Trump could be induced to make it worth his while; so he quietly went pro-Trump, sold off his business, and then asked to join the Trump admin.
That’s when Priebus and Bannon blocked him, saying he was on an agenda, and so it meant Scaramucci had divested himself for no reason. At this stage I assume he decided to go for the revenge plot, and this may be it.
So he becomes a factor in the chaos. ...since Trump is an idiot and brought him in despite the fact that he was a time bomb.
That’s why Sean Spicer resigned, since he refused to work under Scaramucci, since he knew Scaramucci is there to wreck things.
Then Scaramucci immediately came in and destroyed Priebus as Spicer likely predicted, lol.
And is now attacking Bannon, claiming that “I’m here to serve America, unlike Bannon who is here to suck his own dick.”
Anyway, yeah, this is why day to day politics can be fun.
On the other side, Trump just ruined his senate majority.
In the process of trying to pass the Obamacare repeal, Trump threatened to economically attack Alaska if Murkowski wouldn’t vote ‘Yes.’
In reaction, Murkowski doubled down on opposing Trump, and voted ‘no.’
So Pence entered the chamber again to try to break the tie.
But then Collins and MCCAIN defected too.
....and the whole chamber erupted as McCain tilted his chin up.
...and the whole fucking thing imploded.
So now Trump is in a position where he is just getting nothing done.
That’s what Kumiko had to say. Here’s what The New Nationalist has to say. They consider themselves “Third Position,” which means that they have some things right - like an eye on the J.Q. and some right wing perfidy. However, they remain insufficiently emancipated from the right wing and are unstable as a result, resorting to some wild speculation where socialization would be corrective.
The New Nationalist, “Move Over Trump, There’s a New Sheriff in Town: Mad Tony ‘The Mooch’ Scaramucci”, 28 July 2017:
Trumpian apologists are doing cartwheels and backflips trying to explain away the bizarre behavior of the administration’s latest “communication director,” one Anthony Scaramucci, also known as “The Mooch.” Sean Spicer was a piker compared to this character. Predictably, The Mooch, 53, is a Goldman Sachs alum and hedge fund manager who boasts “29 years on Wall Street.” He is a member of the nefarious Council on Foreign Relations and, on June 19, became senior VP and chief strategy officer for the U.S. Export-Import Bank.
During his first week on the job as Trump’s chief mouthpiece, Scaramucci engaged the president’s drama squad in a WWWF-style brahaha, culminating in an interview during which he declared, “I’m not Steve Bannon. I’m not trying to suck my own cock. I’m not trying to build my own brand off the fucking strength of the president. I’m here to serve the country.” Classy.
In another rambling interview, The Mooch vowed to hunt down the White House leakers. He suggested that embattled White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus would be fired if he leaks and said he was incensed that Priebus “cock-blocked” him for six months from getting a position in Trump’s administration. He also called Priebus “a fucking paranoid schizophrenic” and seemed to imply that some White House staffers may have committed a felony by leaking sensitive financial information about Scaramucci, even though his financial disclosure form was publicly available. It is also interesting that The Mooch had nothing bad to say about globalists Jared Kushner, Gary Cohn and Dina Powell during his rant.
Sampling of the Mooch’s claims:
The 6 most unusual quotes from Anthony Scaramucci’s CNN interview
No sensible leader would turn such a man loose. No sensible leader would be undercutting his own attorney general six months into his presidency. His Secretary of State Tillerson is rumored to have had enough. There is every indication that the Trumpian executive branch is ungovernable; and worse, governed by tweet. Just about anybody within the sistema will distance themselves soon enough. Former media supporter Breibart is playing a role by doing exactly that.
It is just a matter of time before steps are taken to remove him. The New Nationalist (TNN) theorizes the trigger will be a market swoon, possibly triggered by a faux pas from “Red Queen” Donald himself. This happens after the cognescenti are convinced the rigged “markets” are bulletproof against Trumpian buffoonery and skullduggery. But alas, that will prove not to be the case.
This further reinforces our post-election theory regarding Trump mafioso and oligarch-like appointments. This is a devious and traitorous Trojan Horse operation designed to deliberately take what’s left of the American system down. This is the end game of a multi-generation national demolition project.
Trump’s role is as closer of that project. Unfortunately, few understand that, even his among his opponents. In fact, his Democratic opponents like Hillary and Obama are in on it. Readers need to jettison the erroneous Hanlon’s Razor, which says, “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” There is true evil and malice at loose in the world and they operate at the highest level.
Although at this juncture this feels like watching red paint dry, it’s anything but. This crisis phase, when it erupts, should last about six weeks, ending in total breakdown and chaos. The moving parts, such as a summer of urban turmoil (Baltimore and Ferguson multiplied) are in place. The neo-feudal plans of the Crime Syndicate and their international bankster bosses are in place. The police state and Gulag system have been tested and are in place. Human harvesting implementation was test run in Haiti and is in place. Human terrain intelligence for every person in America, if not the world, is in place, locked, loaded.
Posted by DanielS on Thursday, 27 July 2017 11:26.
However much of a taboo one is breaking by saying it, there is no cultural identity in a population without a stable ethnic composition
Visigrad Post, “Full speech of V. Orbán : Will Europe belong to Europeans?” 24 July 2017:
Viktor Orbán’s speech at the 28th Bálványos Summer Open University and Student Camp, 22 July 2017, Tusnádfürdő (Băile Tuşnad, Romania)
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán: “First of all, I’d like to remind everyone that we started a process of collective thinking 27 years ago in Bálványosfürdő, a few kilometres from here. That is where we came to a realisation. Just think back: at that time, at the beginning of the nineties, most people – not only in Hungary, but also across the whole of Central Europe – thought that full assimilation into the Western world was just opening up to us again. The obvious approach was adjustment to that world: to in a way shed our skin and grow a new, fashionable Western skin. From this it followed that in our politics we would simply need to copy what they were doing in the West. Back then – 27 years, 28 years ago – we came together here, and we thought that we freedom fighters living on this side of the Iron Curtain could also have something valuable to say to a Europe which had by then been living in peace, freedom and prosperity for forty years. Back then we weren’t surrounded by television cameras, and our words commanded no attention whatsoever.
Now, however, they do. And if I were to name the most important event, the most important Hungarian and European event of the past year – the twelve months since our last meeting – I would say that it is the strengthening of the Visegrád Four. Although there was a presidential election in the United States, and not so long ago the French presidential and parliamentary elections swept away the entire French party system – which are both important things – I’m convinced that the most important development of the past year has been the Visegrád Four cooperation becoming closer than ever before. We can say that Warsaw, Prague, Bratislava and Budapest are speaking with one voice. This is a great achievement, as these are countries which are very different in their characters. Here we have the enthusiastic Poles, the ever-cautious Czechs, the sober Slovaks and the romantic Hungarians; and yet we are able to speak the same language. We can be truly proud of this.
It is customary for the Open University presentations to seek to give an account of the extent of change over the past year, also in a broader civilisational context. Certainly not everyone remembers that in 2009, after his election, President Obama made his first important speech abroad in the city of Cairo. This year the newly-elected US president delivered his first important speech abroad in the city of Warsaw. To illustrate the extent of the changes, it’s enough to quote a few sentences from the speech made by the American president in Warsaw. I’ll quote from it now:
“We have to remember […] that the defence of the West ultimately rests not only on means, but also on the will of its people to prevail and be successful and get what you have to have. […] Our own fight for the West does not begin on the battlefield. It begins with our minds, our wills and our souls. […] Our freedom, our civilization and our survival depend on these bonds of history, culture, and memory.”
He then went on to say: “So together let us all fight like the Poles: for family, for freedom, for country and for God.”
Ladies and Gentlemen,
These words would have been inconceivable anywhere in the Western world two years ago. This is the extent of the change that is taking place around us. This, perhaps, is the point at which I should greet Piotr Naimski and the Polish delegation led by him. He is the President of the Hungarian-Polish Parliamentary Group in Warsaw. Welcome, Dear Polish Friends.
Alt-Right publisher Daniel Friberg from a promotional speech for right-wing 2015
Acrimony on the Alt-Right/New Right, etc. Right: predictably, the inherent instability of The Right emerges. For those who like soap operas, the right is perhaps good for that. But their instability rather highlights the preferability of our platform for organizing nationalists in two way accountability to our interests (to us and from us); against foreign antagonists, whether elite or rank and file; and against traitors among our own, whether elite, or rank and file.
There isn’t a lot of consensus among the right - their primary orientation, against “The Left” and “equality”, was given to them by brackets (viz. Gottfried 2008), adopted then and only became the “common sense enemy” by consensus since the YKW allowed them to do that. Brackets, those in service of brackets, and those willing to sell our people-out for personal gain or sheer ideology are rife in all camps of the right.
“GREG JOHNSON TURNS DOWN DANIEL FRIBERG’S CORDIAL OFFER TO HAVE A COFFEE AT STARBUCKS”
In the latest bit of juicy infighting here in the Alt-Right, Daniel Friberg, the head honcho of intellectual (but fashy) book publisher Arktos has been defriended on Facebook by Greg Johnson, the mysterious “voice without a face” who runs the fashy (but intellectual) Counter-Currents webzine and book publisher.
The defriending follows weeks of behind-the-scenes bickering and accusations that Johnson had been bad-mouthing Friberg behind his back.
In an attempt to clear the air, Friberg who lives in Budapest, Hungary, heard that Johnson was in town on a low-profile speaking tour, and cordially invited him to have a face-to-face meeting, posting the following message on Facebook:
Hey Greg Johnson, you have been attacking my character publicly and behind my back for close to a year now. Considering we’re neighbors here in Budapest, how about I buy you a latte at Starbucks; you can say all these things to my face. What do you think?” - Daniel Friberg
Alt-Right: “The Attacks on Arktos,” 17 June, 2017: