Vox and Greg discuss the recent internecine battles among other topics.
Vox Day Interviews Greg Johnson on the Alt Right
Charlie Rose - From Radar in 2007:
3 hours ago
Deutsche Bank concerns just went to '11' as Bloomberg reports a number of funds that clear derivatives trades with Deutsche Bank AG have withdrawn some excess cash and positions held at the lender, a sign of counterparties’ mounting concerns about doing business with Europe’s largest investment bank.At heart, the global financial markets are short U.S. dollars. Any time you borrow in U.S. dollars, you are in a sense short U.S. dollars because you have to pay it back later. Most money in existence is created by banks and is ultimately a short position on the U.S. dollar. As long as everyone doesn't rush to convert to dollars (or repay debt), the system is fine. When the system went into deflation starting in 2008, the global central banks bailed out a very small slice of the existing debt. They didn't restart the system though, and the far larger bank balance sheets continued shrinking through today. Additionally, the stimulus ran out in 2011. Commodity prices topped, China started slowing along with most of the global economy. Negative interest rates and QE in Europe and Japan didn't work. Now the Fed is raising rates, Japan is not adding QE, and the ECB says QE could finish next year. China is trying to not collapse, and for its efforts it created another housing bubble. Even the Saudis are running out of dollars.
While the vast majority of Deutsche Bank’s more than 200 derivatives-clearing clients have made no changes, some funds that use the bank’s prime brokerage service have moved part of their listed derivatives holdings to other firms this week, according to an internal bank document seen by Bloomberg News.
This blog, I’m guessing predictably, takes a count me out position. Neoreaction, as I understand it, predicted the emergence of the Alt-Right as an inevitable outcome of Cathedral over-reach, and didn’t remotely like what it saw. Kick a dog enough and you end up with a bad-tempered dog. Acknowledging the fact doesn’t mean you support kicking dogs — or bad-tempered dogs. Maybe you’d be happy to see the dog-kicker get bitten (me too). That, however, is as far as it goes.I largely agree, except I think "count me out" conceded a definition. Alt-Right was a generic term that a subset of the Alt-Right wanted to brand. Now the battle to define the term is erupting from within the Alt-Right.
A short definition, that seems to me uncontroversial: The Alt-Right is the populist dissident right. Set theoretically, NRx is therefore grouped with it, but as a quite different thing. Another obvious conclusion from the definition: the Alt-Right is almost inevitably going to be far larger than NRx is, or should ever aim to be. If you think people power is basically great, but the Left have just been doing it wrong, the Alt-Right is most probably what you’re looking for (and NRx definitely isn’t).
For the Alt-Right, generally speaking, fascism is (1) basically a great idea, and (2) a meaningless slur concocted by (((Cultural Marxists))) to be laughed at. For NRx (XS version) fascism is a late-stage leftist aberration made peculiarly toxic by its comparative practicality. There’s no real room for a meeting of minds on this point.
When the flea on the tip of the tail thinks it is wagging the dog, that's the #AltRetard branch of the #AltRight. The Alt-Retards are so ideologically incoherent and inept that to call them incompetent would be giving them too much credit. Setting aside the fact that they clearly fail to understand my position, they appear to genuinely believe that the ALTernative RIGHT can be national SOCIALIST. Yes, because that's exactly what all the conservatives and libertarians disgusted with the cuckservatism of the Republican establishment concerning immigration are demanding, more socialism, the return of Alsace-Lorraine, and the invasion of Poland.Vox is talking about a very narrow set of the #Alt-Right there, specifically those actually advocating for socialism, but there is a larger battle underway over what exactly Alt-Right stands for.
The #AltRetard aren't a viable alternative for the obvious reason that they are not even of the political Right.
Gold may be in for a bumpy ride in the final quarter as Republican candidate Donald Trump now has a 40 percent chance of winning the presidential election and investors will be preparing for the possibility of higher U.S. interest rates, according to Citigroup Inc.Gold and the yen are joined at the hip right now and the yen started soaring as soon as traders anticipated negative interest rates from the Bank of Japan. The dollar/yen is now pushing up against 100 and could move to 95 after the Bank of Japan said it would raise long-term interest rates.
At a closed session of Social Democratic finance lawmakers this week, Deutsche Bank’s woes came up alongside a debate over Basel financial rules, according to two people familiar with the matter. Participants discussed the U.S. fine and the financial reserves at Deutsche Bank’s disposal if it had to cover the full amount, according to the people, who asked not to be identified because the meeting on Tuesday was private.
While the participants -- members of the junior party in Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government -- didn’t reach any conclusions on the likely outcome, the discussion signals that the risks have the attention of Germany’s political establishment.
Merkel’s government is now maintaining a public silence on Deutsche Bank’s woes. For all the turmoil surrounding the bank, the topic didn’t come up at a 90-minute closed session of the German parliament’s Finance Committee with Schaeuble on Tuesday, participants said. The Finance Ministry in Berlin didn’t respond to phone calls seeking comment.
Perhaps we could call this Oscar Wilde nationalism. Naturally one would expect Milo’s paradigms to come across in his presentation of the Alt-Right, and they do.And the Alt-West agrees as explained by Vox: Of Alt-West and Alt-White
Right out of the gate Milo seeks to minimize the share of White nationalists in the Alt-Right. He sees claims that the Alt-Right is heavily White nationalist as a variation of how leftists brand all of their enemies as “racist.” And they do brand all of their enemies as racist (as well as claim that people of color cannot be racist). But a racist is just a White person who is illiberal on identity issues. The Alt-Right views identity issues from a eurocentric perspective and believes in ethno-nationalism (not the “ideas” or magic dirt of propositional or civic nationalism). Hence if one truly is Alt-Right, on some level they must be sympathetic to if not outright in favor of White nationalism.
lt-White and Alt-West are largely in accord. They generally share a philosophy and a direction, but their priorities and perspectives are different. More importantly, with the possible exception of Christianity in the long term, there is very little reason for conflict between Alt-White and Alt-West, indeed, the distinction between the two eliminates the Alt-White's primary objection to the Alt-West, which is the possibility of being sidelined by the media and by the larger potential appeal of the Alt-West.
So could a state bailout for Deutsche Bank be needed? With next year’s general election looming, and the populist Alternative for Germany party rising in the polls, this would be the last thing the German government wants. But there is no panic in the federal finance ministry as yet. In the past, American banks have been confronted with similarly breathtakingly initial settlement demands, only to see them radically reduced in the final deal.If DB goes down, it will benefit anti-EU and anti-euro parties in Europe. Whether it is German parties or those outside of Germany that benefit most will depend on how Germany acts. Does Germany sacrifice national interest to benefit the EU, or act in the national interest at the expense of the EU? There is a way to act both in the national and European political interest: devalue the euro. But the Germans remain very opposed to easy money and a devaluation risks a global recession and global financial crisis.
Unfortunately, Deutsche Bank may not be so lucky. Even if theories are discounted that the $14-billion charge is payback for European tax demands on Apple, the German bank may face tough treatment in the United States.
Many incidents occur in many parts of the world, get to the bottom up, not the "local specialty", but "made in America." For example, the United States launched the Iraq war, to the local political order and cause serious damage to the balance of power to make this country into long-term instability. US-led Western countries gross interference in the internal affairs of Libya and Syria, the two countries has resulted in civil war still intoxicated. US-led NATO's eastward expansion under the deterioration of the relations between Russia and Ukraine, the European Union. Since the implementation of the United States' Asia-Pacific rebalancing strategy "has been heightened tension on the Korean Peninsula, Japan openly revise the pacifist constitution and on the Diaoyu Islands issue openly challenge China's territorial sovereignty, the Philippines in the South China repeatedly fuss. United States brazenly sent warships illegally entered China Nansha Islands and adjacent waters, it is the result of the security situation in the region appeared undue backwards and tension.谋一己之私的国际战略（当今聚焦）
Thus the US reform package, four fan the flames, to a large extent is a fading empire peculiar psychological distortions in behavior reflect. This is a typical "hegemony neurosis." Early Cold War ended, the United States at the peak of power, powerful, mighty. But in recent years due to the relative decline of its economic strength, its ability to mobilize the resources and services is limited political and diplomatic objectives. Helpless, the United States had to start from the old "hegemony positive" to "negative hegemony", that is, from their ability to lead the world with confidence, for the transformation to maintain its leadership powerless; inclined to the establishment and maintenance and peaceful world order to enhance its international status, into inclined to disrupt and destroy the existing world order and peace to keep position; do not worry about the other countries and regions catch up and surpass themselves, change for the good momentum of development in some countries and regions, deeply panic.
The nature of capital is profit, profit-capitalist nature is the essence of the capitalist countries is exploitation and oppression. As the world's largest capitalist country, the United States has put its own interests ahead of the interests of other countries, but at different times and in different regions in different ways. At present, the maintenance of world hegemony is the largest US national interests. Obama said the United States also leads the world for 100 years. To achieve this goal, the world is messing up almost under the present circumstances the United States the "best" choice, because provoke various zero-sum game, lost against the parties, while the United States may beneficiary. Specifically, the following benefits can be obtained.
One world currency status of the dollar gains are maintained. Today, although the United States system of hegemony in the international financial system has been weakened, but the dollar is still the world's strongest currencies, the United States remains the only country to obtain wealth by printing money in the world today. This is largely due to a number of other national and regional economic downturn, social disintegration and political instability, and contrasting the US economy is still relatively safe state leader. This situation makes people maintain confidence in the US, and thus tend to buy dollars and US debt; on the other hand, other areas in turmoil, under normal circumstances will make it the status of the currency has been weakened, thus effectively reducing these currencies against the US dollar hegemony the extent of the challenge.
Two gains of military hegemony has been consolidated. The more tense the situation in other parts of the world, the more intense the conflict, the more heated the arms race, the United States military enterprises more able to sell a large number of arms, the United States, the more chance there is a show of force, sending troops overseas to engage in military expansion.
Three benefits of political hegemony continuity. In the case of international political organization of control and influence as before, the United States hopes that the deterioration of international relations with other regions, other countries suffered setbacks and failures in politics. Big country split, power is weakened, the United States became the only country to have the opportunity to be able to control the situation.
Four benefits of cultural hegemony is strengthened. Cultural expansion is an important means and methods of implementation of American cultural hegemony. US emphasis on "soft power", after years of painstaking efforts, the US has a strong value judgment the right to speak in the international arena. Meanwhile, in the United States go all around the world to promote their ideology. "Sublime" place of this approach is that, regardless of other countries, and therefore ideologically become a vassal of the United States, or in the spirit of chaos, are in line with US interests.
Of course, the United States is bent on messing up all the people of the world. The country at the time of clogging up a tumult never forget to be treated differently depending on the country's relationship with their distance intimacy. North America is the US base, the need to ensure peace and stability; EU dubious, must guard against and constraints; the Middle East and Central Asia bordering Russia more chaotic the better; in neighboring China, it is necessary to manufacture a controlled chaos and tension.
Although the EU is a US ally, but also has its own interests and ideas. United States doesn't want to see the EU integration process accelerate or the rise of Russia. To avoid the same time face a strong Europe and a strong Russia, the United States launched a strong NATO's eastward expansion, so that some belonged to the Russian sphere of influence of the European countries to seek refuge under the command of NATO. US further wedge between Russia and the EU, claiming that Russia poses a threat to European security, incite the EU to join the ranks of Russia's economic sanctions. Russia's neighboring countries vigorously around the color revolution agitation Chechen independence, Georgia from the CIS, manufacturing crisis in Ukraine, provoking civil war in Syria and Libya. The turn of events is not an isolated occurrence. Russia and Europe against each other, each other as enemies, will suffer, the United States is in a most satisfied state.
US East confuse the main purpose is to contain China. In recent years, China's economy continued to grow steadily. In China, driven by East Asian regional economic cooperation to carry out impressive. But the tree still while the wind blows, good momentum of development in East Asia presented allow countries to see the hope and future, has forced the US civil liberties. In order to stifle the formation of a new order in East Asia, the United States would resort to military power to achieve the default Japanese attempts to encourage its condition first to break the calm the East China Sea, the challenges China's core interests on the Diaoyu Islands issue; support for individual countries to go against China in the South China Sea; advance "Trans-Pacific partnership Agreement" negotiations, in order to disrupt the existing regional economic integration process. So many, and so forth.
United States selfish confuse the world, although not change the peace, development, cooperation and win-win development of the general trend of the world, gave the order and stability in a number of areas of casting a shadow on the peace and development in emerging countries pose a threat . To these challenges, China should be the defenders of regional and world peace, unswervingly take the road of peaceful development, active use of existing international mechanisms, developing countries enjoy good relations, to make more contributions to world peace, to bring more people around the world more interest.
(Author: Academy of Social Sciences Research Center of the theoretical system of socialism with Chinese characteristics)
Sensing this dissatisfaction, entrepreneurs have introduced hundreds of digital currencies in the past few years, of which bitcoin is only the most famous. Now governments want in: The People's Bank of China says it intends to issue a digital currency of its own. Central banks in Ecuador, the Philippines, the U.K. and Canada are mulling similar ideas. At least one company has sprung up to help them along.I'm not a fan of the government controlled blockchain, even if I expect it.
Much depends on the details, of course. But this is a welcome trend. In theory, digital legal tender could combine the inventiveness of private virtual currencies with the stability of a government mint.
There is growing concern that Chinese government influence over Western media organizations will lead to direct censorship or pressure to self-censor content to Beijing’s liking. This concern will only grow due to a surge of Chinese investment in the United States. Over the past five years, Chinese investment here has grown from $2 billion per year to an estimated $20 billion this year. This growth is significant given that Chinese companies are effectively controlled — whether through state ownership or strict direction — by Beijing.China uses extremely soft power. If you displease China, you lose out on deals. If you do something China likes, you are rewarded. This is how corruption works in American government too: you do a "good job" and the Saudis or Goldman Sachs pay you $500,000 for a speech, or in the latter case offer you a lucrative job. Trying to root out this type of corruption in government is a far easier task than fighting it in the private market. If China wants to pay Hollywood money to make pro-China or pro-CCP movies (often superficially), how can the government violate the first amendment? How is it different from GM paying to have the Transformers turn into GM cars?
It should be no surprise that a major focus of China’s investment in the United States is media companies, which produce the news and entertainment that so often shape our understanding of the world. One Chinese company, Dalian Wanda, has purchased the Hollywood movie studio Legendary Entertainment for $3.5 billion and is now seeking a 49 percent stake in Paramount Pictures, as well as purchases of America’s two largest movie theater chains: AMC and Carmike Cinemas. Wanda’s goal is to control 20 percent of the global box office by 2020 — and it may reach that threshold sooner. This doesn’t include other Chinese investments in film studios, which would push the total share of Chinese box office control even higher.
Why should we be concerned? By controlling the financing and distribution of American movies, and subjecting them to censorship to gain access to the Chinese market, Beijing could effectively dictate what is and isn’t made — providing powerful control over America’s greatest cultural exports.
We have already seen examples of studios editing movie content to appease Chinese censors, such as “Mission: Impossible III,” “Skyfall,” “World War Z” and the remakes of “The Karate Kid” and “Red Dawn.” A recent report by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission noted that “China views film as a component of social control: in a 2014 speech, President Xi [Jinping] reaffirmed Mao Zedong’s dictate that ‘[Chinese] art serve politics.’ Through strict regulations governing film content, the CCP’s concerns are positioned above all other interests.”
Modern conservatism is a creation of the 1950s, to replace the so-called “Old Right” which was routed by FDR, the New Deal, World War II and the like. William F. Buckley and the crew he assembled had to build something new to respond to the challenges of their time. Which, as they perceived it, was a totally dominant liberalism in academia, the intelligentsia and the bureaucracy plus an accommodationist Republican party. Sound familiar?Part of an interview with the author of the "Flight 93 Election", Publius Decius Mus.
The Old Right didn’t want the New Deal. It lost. It didn’t want World War II. It lost. It didn’t want desegregation and Civil Rights. It lost. Buckley’s “New Right” at first thought Ike and the post-war Republicans were too soft on the New Deal, but they eventually gave up that fight. They fought the Great Society and also lost, but at least scored a partial victory with the Reagan Revolution. They thought the Republicans were too soft on Communism, and they eventually won that argument almost totally. And they began by supporting the old South on Civil Rights but eventually turned.
It isn’t that anti-Semites have taken over the party of Lincoln. To be sure, white supremacists like David Duke have made clear that they are happy to support Donald Trump. But unlike Clinton and the progressives, Trump never sought nor accepted their support. Moreover, in sharp contrast to the situation on the Democrat side of the aisle, Republican support for Israel is all but unanimous.Leftism and anti-European, anti-Christian bigotry has sunk its roots too deeply. To be a Progressive now is to call for the destruction of Israel, as they call for the destruction of America. In response, right-wing White Christians increasingly see race and religion. Presented with a way out, nationalism for White Americans, many Jews opted to attack pro-Whites and pro-Christians as anti-semitic. Which propels a cycle of Christian-Jewish conflict:
All of the Republican primary candidates were pro-Israel to varying degrees. The GOP platform passed at the convention is the most pro-Israel document in its history.
The problem on the Republican side of the aisle then is not that the party has turned against the Jews. The problem is that a large contingent of prominent Jewish Republicans has decided to commit political suicide.
This week the Intelligence Squared debating society held a public debate in New York. The debate was posted on Real Clear Politics website.
Two sides debated the proposition that the American elites are to blame for Trump’s rise. Arguing in favor of the proposition were two Christian journalists – Tim Carney and Ben Domenech.
Arguing against it were two Jewish journalists – Bret Stephens (a former Jerusalem Post editor-in-chief) and Jennifer Rubin.
Both Rubin and Stephens voiced their support for Clinton’s controversial assertion that half of Trump’s supporters are deplorable, unworthy of attention, un-American and irredeemable.
For their part, Domenech and Carney argued that Stephens and Rubin were ignoring the social and economic dislocation of the lower middle class. They argued that the suffering of members of this group has caused millions of Americans to feel betrayed by their political elites and turn to Trump to put a stop to a political game they believe is rigged against them.
Two-thirds of the way through the event, Carney brought up religion.
Carney allowed that many of Trump’s supporters are indeed bigoted. However, he said that “as a Christian,” he couldn’t accept that they are irredeemable because Christianity teaches that all men can be saved.
Rather than grant his point or simply ignore it, Rubin chose to respond in the name of Judaism. In so doing, she turned the debate into a contest between Christianity and Judaism.
Incorrectly arguing that Judaism does not believe in repentance as a road to redemption, Rubin pointed to herself and Stephens and said sardonically, “We Jews just believe in good and evil. We don’t believe that everyone is redeemable.”
The Christians won the debate in a knockout.
Making matters hostile, in a statement on Friday morning, the German bank's CEO rejected the opening settlement claim and said that he “has no intent to settle these potential civil claims anywhere near the number cited", adding that “the negotiations are only just beginning. The bank expects that they will lead to an outcome similar to those of peer banks which have settled at materially lower amounts."Each time DB breaks to new lows, global financial markets slide. Whether this current slide in DB move causes another drop remains to be seen, but this is undoubtedly the single worst company for the DoJ to target. A slide in financial markets right now will shift voters in the direction of Trump.
Maybe, but the market is not so sure, and after opening for trading minutes ago, Deutsche Bank stock tanked a whopping 8% on news of the DOJ's $14 billion proposed settlement, once again approaching its all time lows.
FIRST, an apology, or rather a regret: The Economist would prefer not to advertise the rantings of racists and cranks. Unfortunately, and somewhat astonishingly, the Alt-Right—the misleading name for a ragtag but consistently repulsive movement that hitherto has flourished only on the internet—has insinuated itself, unignorably, into American politics. That grim achievement points to the reverse sway now held by the margins, of both ideology and the media, over the mainstream. It also reflects the indiscriminate cynicism of Donald Trump’s campaign.
To most Americans, the purposes to which these gimmicks are put will seem as outlandish as the lexicon. One of the Alt-Right’s pastimes is to intimidate adversaries with photoshopped pictures of concentration camps; a popular Alt-Right podcast is called “The Daily Shoah”. To their defenders, such outrages are either justified by their shock value or valiantly transgressive pranks. Jokes about ovens, lampshades and gas chambers: what larks!
Jared Taylor of American Renaissance, an extremist website, dismisses these antics as “youthful rebellion”. (Mr Taylor is also involved with the Council of Conservative Citizens, which Dylann Roof cited as an inspiration for his racist massacre in Charleston last year.) But the substance behind the sulphur can seem difficult to pin down. The term Alt-Right, reputedly coined in 2008 by Richard Spencer of the National Policy Institute, a bogus think-tank, encompasses views from libertarianism to paleoconservatism and onwards to the edges of pseudo-intellectual claptrap and the English language. Many Alt-Righters demonise Jews, but a few do not. Some, such as Brad Griffin of Occidental Dissent, another website, think “democracy can become a tool of oppression”, and that monarchy or dictatorship might be better; others, such as Mr Taylor, disagree. Some are techno-futurists; others espouse a kind of agrarian nostalgia. Many mourn the Confederacy. Mr Griffin thinks that, even today, North and South should separate.
Yet from the quack ideologues to the out-and-proud neo-Nazis, some Alt-Right tenets are clear and constant. It repudiates feminism with misogynistic gusto. It embraces isolationism and protectionism. Above all, it champions white nationalism, or a neo-segregationist “race realism”, giving apocalyptic warning of an impending “white genocide”. Which, of course, is really just old-fashioned white supremacism in skimpy camouflage.
As U.S. politicians of both political parties are still shuffling back and forth between the White House and the Capitol Hill without striking a viable deal to bring normality to the body politic they brag about, it is perhaps a good time for the befuddled world to start considering building a de-Americanized world.China issued SDR bonds in August. The IMF issues SDRs and could become the global central bank to the world.
Emerging from the bloodshed of the Second World War as the world's most powerful nation, the United States has since then been trying to build a global empire by imposing a postwar world order, fueling recovery in Europe, and encouraging regime-change in nations that it deems hardly Washington-friendly.
The developing and emerging market economies need to have more say in major international financial institutions including the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, so that they could better reflect the transformations of the global economic and political landscape.
What may also be included as a key part of an effective reform is the introduction of a new international reserve currency that is to be created to replace the dominant U.S. dollar, so that the international community could permanently stay away from the spillover of the intensifying domestic political turmoil in the United States.
Just when some of China’s neighbors were seeking to curtail its expansionism, along came Rodrigo Duterte.Neocons have a consistent logic. The neocons want America to rule the world. Let's assume the American economy continues growing at its present rate or even a little faster, and suffers no major financial or economic crisis ever again. Even in this optimistic scenario, American economic power will decline in relative terms because India alone will add trillions to the global economy. After relative economic power declines, cultural, military and political power follows. Therefore, if you are a neocon, job #1 is to smash your enemies' economies: China and Russia. Russia's relatively easy to smash, it is a petro state. Take down oil, take down Russia (and kill funding for Islamic terror to boot). Fracking takes care of supply, and natural gas exports could steal market share. Bonus: by restricting U.S. imports of oil, the supply of petrodollars dries up and unleashes compounding effects of deflation by driving up the value of remaining dollars.
In less than three months on the job, the 71 year-old Philippine leader has used expletives in talking about U.S. President Barack Obama and vowed to end cooperation with the U.S. military in both fighting terrorism and patrolling the disputed South China Sea. He’s moved to boost economic and defense ties with China and Russia.
While Duterte is unpredictable -- one day calling China “generous" and the next threatening a “bloody" war if Beijing attacked -- his behavior has undermined U.S. efforts to rally nations from Japan to Vietnam to Australia to stand up to China’s military assertiveness.
In doing so, he risks shifting from the 1951 Philippine-U.S. defense treaty, which has been a bedrock of American influence in the region. While Duterte has said he’ll respect the alliance he’s repeatedly stressed the need for an “independent foreign policy" and questioned America’s willingness to intervene if China were to seize territory in the South China Sea.
In the 1995-1996 California school year, whites made up 40.42 percent of students and Hispanics trailed with 38.74 percent of the student population. Fast forward 20 years and Hispanics make up 53.97 percent of California’s student population, and whites represent just 24.10 percent.White flight is playing a role, along with demographics.
Political elites in the most liberal democracies will therefore face more and more dramatic versions of the choice faced by France’s constitutional court: They can either heed the anger of their constituents — turning their countries into places where the people rule but individual rights are regularly violated. Or they can insulate the political system from the views of the people by giving more and more power to unelected institutions like constitutional courts, independent bureaucratic institutions, or international organizations — turning their countries into places where individual rights are upheld but the views of the people go ignored. One way or the other, liberal democracy is increasingly under siege. Over the next few years, it is likely to decompose into its constitutive elements, facing us with a tragic choice between illiberal democracy (or democracy without rights) and undemocratic liberalism (or rights without democracy).Nationalist government is stable. Rule by an unpopular leadership which punishes the majority in favor of a minority, is a recipe for ethnic/racial violence and removal of the leadership.
Talked to my brother and his wife recently. They live in a very expensive township with lots of Asian and some NAM diversity. They're blue pill to the core, upper middle class NeverTrumpers who champion H1B visas because they are in pharma, and without Indian people the business would fail due to not enough qualified Americans.As Vox explains:
Anyway. Their son just started kindergarten in the overloaded public schools. My (((SIL))) is upset because her son is a minority in his class. None of the NAMs or Asian kids want to play with him.
I said to her, "this is what you want, though, right? Diversity is our strength."
She blinked for a second and said she wanted diversity, she just doesn't want her son to be a minority.
Remember, most people cannot think in the abstract. They cannot make sense of concepts that are outside their range of direct experiences. To them, diversity means an imaginary limit of perhaps 40 percent people with different color skin who are nevertheless ordinary white people just like them on the inside. They have never spent a single day in Tokyo, where there are thousands of Asians in every direction without a single white face as far as the eye can see. They have never sat in a single meeting where everyone is rapidly speaking a language you don't know well enough to follow.They also don't understand that changes begin with the presence of one minority and then scale up. Less than 2% of America is Jewish, most of China is not Muslim, yet you can find Kosher food everywhere in America, and Halal food in China, because the broader population doesn't care. As the percentage of minorities rises, the political calculations change much faster than understood.
They simply cannot imagine any situation where those like them are not in complete control of the situation. They think it is safe to indulge themselves in their virtue-signaling in favor of diversity and equality and progress, never realizing that those things not only have consequences, but will have severe consequences that will impact the lives of them and their children.
The one-child policy of China, which was initiated in 1980 and was reversed in 2015, has been conceived of as a decision made independently and arbitrarily or a product of impulsive decision making. Therefore, it has received a great deal of criticism from Western democracies. Of course, China faced internal problems related to population, such as the Great Famine of 1958–1961. This might be deemed the direct cause of the one-child policy. However, the more powerful factors were indirect and of foreign origin. China's one-child policy was deeply influenced by the West, especially by Western population science. Since the May 4th Movement in 1919, China has had a tendency to worship science because of the Chinese obsession with Western-style modernization. In other words, China's one-child policy is a product of blind imitation of Western population science. The action has resulted in serious negative consequences such as an imbalance of the sex ratio, elder-care problems, human rights violations, undermining of traditional values, and even endangering the regime. Those problems caused China to reverse its one-child policy. The authors believe that China should develop a postmodern population policy with Chinese character, based on organic thinking, which takes human feelings seriously and empowers people and allows them to act as subjects or agents in decisions about their families, including the size of their family and the selection of gender.
"I think this will be the last election if I don't win. I think this will be the last election that the Republicans have a chance of winning because you're going to have people flowing across the border, you're going to have illegal immigrants coming in and they're going to be legalized and they're going to be able to vote and once that all happens you can forget it. You're not going to have one Republican vote. And it's already a hard number. Already the path is much more difficult for the Republicans. You just have to look at the maps."Trump is good on economics, globalism and foreign policy, but demographics is destiny. If the demographic transformation of America isn't addressed, every victory will be rolled back.
As you can see, there are still a relatively small number of grandfathered plans in a few states. But these plans are only available to those who had them in 2013 and they can only have them as long as their carrier is willing to let them continue. All new people rolling through the individual health market are required to be in ACA-compliant plans.As the cost of healthcare rise, driven by laws such as Obamacare, more middle class people fall out of the market and into Medicaid. If Trump loses and the GOP is finished politically, there will be a growing segment of the population enraged at government, but with no political voice.
And, what's the political outlook for Obamacare given that these millions of middle class voters appear "on the path to [being in a health plan] looking like other safety net programs we know, offering limited services to a predominantly low-income population?
It’s absurd to assume that any of this would stop or slow—would do anything other than massively intensify—in a Hillary administration. It’s even more ridiculous to expect that hitherto useless conservative opposition would suddenly become effective. For two generations at least, the Left has been calling everyone to their right Nazis. This trend has accelerated exponentially in the last few years, helped along by some on the Right who really do seem to merit—and even relish—the label. There is nothing the modern conservative fears more than being called “racist,” so alt-right pocket Nazis are manna from heaven for the Left. But also wholly unnecessary: sauce for the goose. The Left was calling us Nazis long before any pro-Trumpers tweeted Holocaust denial memes. And how does one deal with a Nazi—that is, with an enemy one is convinced intends your destruction? You don’t compromise with him or leave him alone. You crush him.The conclusion is correct as well:
So what do we have to lose by fighting back? Only our Washington Generals jerseys—and paychecks. But those are going away anyway. Among the many things the “Right” still doesn’t understand is that the Left has concluded that this particular show need no longer go on. They don’t think they need a foil anymore and would rather dispense with the whole bother of staging these phony contests in which each side ostensibly has a shot.
If you haven’t noticed, our side has been losing consistently since 1988. We can win midterms, but we do nothing with them. Call ours Hannibalic victories. After the Carthaginian’s famous slaughter of a Roman army at Cannae, he failed to march on an undefended Rome, prompting his cavalry commander to complain: “you know how to win a victory, but not how to use one.” And, aside from 2004’s lackluster 50.7%, we can’t win the big ones at all.
The election of 2016 is a test—in my view, the final test—of whether there is any virtù left in what used to be the core of the American nation. If they cannot rouse themselves simply to vote for the first candidate in a generation who pledges to advance their interests, and to vote against the one who openly boasts that she will do the opposite (a million more Syrians, anyone?), then they are doomed. They may not deserve the fate that will befall them, but they will suffer it regardless.
Once, I seem to recall, we had philosophical and ideological differences. Once, politics was a debate between liberals and conservatives, between different views of government, different views on values and America’s role in the world.But he totally fails to understand it:
But this year, it seems, everything has been stripped down to the bone. Politics is dividing along crude identity lines — along race and class. Are you a native-born white or are you an outsider? Are you one of the people or one of the elites?
Politics is no longer about argument or discussion; it’s about trying to put your opponents into the box of the untouchables.
Donald Trump didn’t invent this game, but he embodies it.La Raza embodies identity politics. The NAACP. The ADL. I could run off a list of hundreds of left-wing organizations that embody identity politics.
This is false, too. The fact is, a vast majority of Americans benefit. A study by John McLaren of U.Va. and Gihoon Hong of Indiana University found that each new immigrant produced about 1.2 new jobs, because immigrants are producers and consumers and increase overall economic activity.This is merely insourcing of population. If you bring in 100 Somalis to work in your garment factory, they open Somali restaurants staffed by other Somalis. So you can claim you created 220 jobs by importing 100 Somalis workers and their families, but you created ZERO jobs for natives, to say nothing of the impact on crime, welfare, real estate prices, rents, and so on.
Identity politics distorts politics in two ways. First, it is Manichaean. It cleanly divides the world into opposing forces of light and darkness. You are a worker or an elite. You are American or foreigner.They aren't intellectually lazy, they are stupid. You let in tens of millions of low IQ people who fall for progressive identity politics.
Seeing this way is understandable if you are scared, but it is also a sign of intellectual laziness. The reality is that people can’t be reduced to a single story. An issue as complex as immigration can’t be reduced to a cartoon. It is simultaneously true that immigration fuels American dynamism and that the mixture of mass unskilled immigration and the high-tech economy threatens to create a permanent underclass.
Second and most important, identity politics is inherently the politics of division. But on most issues — whether it is immigration or the economy or national security — we rise and fall together.If that's true, why did your son join the IDF and not the US Army? David Brooks: Gaza War Proved My Son Was Right to Serve in IDF
Human beings are too complicated to be defined by skin color, income or citizenship status. Those who try to reduce politics to these identities do real violence to national life.Identity politics is a means, not an end. When you go full tribalist, you go full retard.
While half of the 70 seats in the chamber are directly elected by universal suffrage, known as geographical constituency seats, the other half are elected through so-called “functional constituencies,” returned by a mix of individual and corporate votes organized roughly by industry.
It’s a colonial arrangement that still weighs on Hong Kong’s democratization, critics say. “The colonial regime used to co-opt the business elite through the functional constituencies, which allowed them to get a seat in Legco,” said Ma Ngok, a professor of government and public administration at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
The system continues to serve a purpose for Beijing, Ma added, by protecting the Beijing-leaning business sector’s interests. “The Chinese government sees [the functional constituencies] as an important buffer between itself and the pro-democracy legislators returned by universal suffrage,” he said.