Miscellany 4: Son of Miscellany

(1) Anonymous Conservative:

Columbus was an innocent immigrant, who came here for opportunity and freedom, fleeing an oppressive monarchy and aggressively religious theocracy back home. When he got here, the evil nativist, nationalist Indians tried to close their borders to him, and deport him with violence. Who were they to create borders from thin air, and claim people shouldn’t cross them? …Fascists, are what they were.

(2) Vox Day: Deal With It, Commies.

Day quotes a couple of lefty “journalists” bitching about their jobs being threatened by competitors who will work for less. One whines,

“LAWeekly fired their staff in favor of unpaid ‘contributors.’ If you are an aspiring writer, and you submit to them, you are insuring it becomes impossible to make a living in this field.”

Ha ha! Looks like a couple of lefty reporters don’t like low-cost interlopers coming into their profession and undercutting them!

Let’s think: Is there another issue of the day with this phenomenon occurring? You lefties laugh when Americans have their jobs stolen by low-cost immigrants. And you call people bigots if they point out the harm that causes to American workers. Looks like low-cost competition is replacing you now! Ha ha! Eat shit and die, leftist assholes!

Enjoy living in the world you advocate!

(3) Regarding (2):

Why are leftists so against volunteering?

(4) Also regarding (2): Why do lefties always say they’re empathetic? No, they aren’t. They have no sympathy for American workers displaced by immigrants. I, in contrast, am employed, yet I have sympathy for the unemployed. I would like to see that problem solved.

Lefties just say they have empathy because, as always, they like to lie. No black nominees for an Oscar Award? Lefties shriek with outrage! Millions of people slaughtered by Stalin and Mao? “Yawn, you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs.”

(5) From Ace of Spades HQ, November 9, 2017:
ESPN has laid off 600 people over the last couple of years. That is, since they started experiencing the effects of their SJW stuff. As Ace notes, “Social Justice Warrioring is an expensive proposition.”

(6) Public Service Reminder:

You’re still boycotting Tor, right?

(7) On the recent mostly-leftist sexual harassment scandals (Harvey Weinstein, Al Franken, John Conyers, etc., etc.):

We always should have known the Left was a cesspit of sexual molesters. After all, what’s one of the things the Left always does? P R O J E C T.

(8) You might recall that in October two House Democrats, Bonnie Watson Coleman and Emanuel Cleaver, threatened Twitter’s CEO with censorship if he didn’t hew the line on politically incorrect speech. (It would be impossible – right now – to get this through Congress and the courts, but it’s the thought that counts.) Part of their threat to the CEO was:

We are disturbed by the ease in which foreign actors were able to manipulate your platform to advance anti-American sentiments…

Really? Then I guess we must fire all foreign citizens teaching political subjects at US universities. After all, if foreigners speaking about politics is “foreign interference/meddling in our election process”…


Roger Goodell: Moron, Loser

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell takes $89 million away from breast cancer and military charities to pay off SJWs:


Yeah, that will help with the NFL’s unprecedented decline in popularity and ratings.

Problem: Drop in viewer popularity and support.

Solution, by Roger Goodell: Offend your base more.

LOL, what an idiot.

No, idiots, Trump is not going to be removed from office

Trump is not going to be kicked out of the White House, people. Before you either lick your chops in anticipation (if you’re a leftist or a cuck) or run around in a latherous panic (if you’re a Trump supporter), do the electoral math:

Removing a President requires a vote on articles of impeachment in the House (simple majority) and then a two-thirds vote to convict in the Senate. We’re done. This is not going to happen. If you’re a Trump supporter, stop worrying. If you’re a Trump hater, stop clinging to empty hope. Move on with your life.

You can stop reading now, but if you have some time on your hands and are interested in the electoral arithmetic:

Here’s the Wikipedia page on the 2018 Senate elections:
Infogalactic’s analogous page doesn’t have as much info, but if you’re curious:

In the Senate in 2018, there are 25 currently Democratic seats that will be defended and 8 Republican seats. (Technically, 23 Dem seats, but two “independents” who caucus with the Dems, and 6 Republicans defending their seats, with 2 Republicans retiring so their seats will be open.) [UPDATE December 7: Now that Franken is resigning from the Senate, the Dems will be defending 26 seats, though the word around the campfire is that that seat is a pretty safe Dem seat.]

Republicans have 44 seats that are not open for election in 2018, so they will have at least 44 seats. Similarly, the Dems will have at least 23. The rest will be contested. Since the Dems are defending 25 seats and the Repubs only defending 8, the Dems are in a more precarious position. Some of each party’s seats are safe, of course, but that’s the basic idea.

Now let us think about it: The Reps have a locked in 44 seats. So the theoretical upper limit for the Dems – that’s if they win every election! – is 56. But they need two thirds, that is, 67, to convict! So even if they won every single Senate contest in 2018, which obviously is not going to happen, and even if every Dem Senator votes to convict – and some are from now-Republican-leaning states, so they won’t all dare to – they’d still need to pick up 11 Republican votes to convict!

Do you see now that this is seriously not going to happen? I can see, as an outside possibility, the notion that the House of Representatives might pass some articles of impeachment – though there’d be a lot of suddenly unemployed former House Republicans two years later – but the notion that the Senate would convict is beyond fanciful. Obviously the Dems aren’t going to win every Senate contest. Obviously not every single Dem is going to dare to vote to convict. Obviously they are not going to peel off 11 Republicans to vote to convict.

The best-case scenario for the left is that the House votes to impeach, i.e., to submit articles of impeachment to the Senate, and this is an annoying distraction for Trump and a short-run rhetorical victory for the left. In fact, this would be a significant long-term propaganda defeat for them, because it would be a pulling off of the mask that the left respects democracy. The more the left pulls hijinks like this, the more normies they wake up to their dictatorial nature.

So The God-Emperor is secure until he runs for re-election in 2020. At that point it’s moot, because he will either be re-elected or he won’t be. If he’s not re-elected, then the impeachment thing is obviously moot. If he is re-elected it’s a vote of confidence such that the Senate won’t dare to convict because his popularity will have been ratified twice.

Furthermore, after four years of “Impeach Trump!” it simply will have gone on too long. It be even more stale by then than it is now. Seriously, think about how stale it is now. Now imagine suffering through three more years of it. No one will even be listening to impeachment talk at that point.

Sexual Harassment: The Left’s Three Bad Options

November 2017: The proliferating sexual harassment scandals that started with Harvey Weinstein are now proliferating too rapidly for one to keep track. And they are disproportionately affecting leftist men. Enhancing the deliciousness is the fact that the left itself started this crap, back in the 1990s.

The left now has three bad options for dealing with the current sexual harassment conflagration:

1) Keep going with it, ruthlessly assailing the leftist men and ending their careers. In this scenario, Democrats like Al Franken and John Conyers are forced out of Congress. And many a leftist media personality is gone, gone, gone. The left doesn’t want this, obviously.

2) Admit that it has gone too far and try to step on the brakes. That means that a fullthroated affirmation of the presumption of innocence replaces the “Always believe a female accuser” thing that the left has embraced now. It also means a return to sanity about what constitutes “sexual harassment” and so forth. E.g., grabbing someone’s boobs is sexual harassment; saying something that some woman claims made her “feel uncomfortable” isn’t. This requires a return to sanity by the left and is therefore almost certainly off the table as an option.

The other problem with this option is that feminism is now such a huge part of the modern left. For the non-feminist left to try to excise the feminist branch would not be like excising a tumor; it would be like the tumor trying to excise the rest of the body.

Furthermore, the culture and incentives of “victimhood” are too deeply embedded in leftist constituencies for this to be stopped now. Victimhood claims now ARE the left; that’s what modern leftism IS. To admit, even as a theoretical possibility, that a claim of victimhood could ever be wrong would be to undercut the very foundations of modern leftism itself. They will never do this.

3) Explicitly say “It’s okay if leftist men do it, but not okay if non-leftist men do it.” They actually do go that far, some of them, but it’s not a convincing argument for sane people, naturally.

The problem for the left here, obviously, is that “Anyone who agrees with my politics should be allowed to get away with sexual molestation” is not going to be a winning argument with most people.

In the event, what they are actually going to do is try to have their cake and eat it too, as the left has always tried to do. That is, they will try to make a big deal out of it when men of the right commit some leftist sin, or are accused of doing so, but to totally ignore it, or do the minimum amount of media coverage and commentary possible, when men of the left do it or are accused of doing it. This is a bad choice for the left, especially now that we have the Net to provide information, but they may think that it’s their best of a set of bad options.

Memo to leftists: The actual best option is (2), Admit that it has gone too far and try to step on the brakes.

The left won’t want to do this, though, because it would constitute an admission that it is possible for a leftist witch hunt to go too far. For the left, even admitting that such a thing is possible in theory is unacceptable. So, while that would actually be best for everyone, it won’t happen.

This is one of the reasons, of many, that I hate sharing a planet with leftists. Out of spite and blind stubbornness, they will do everything in their power to AVOID win-win situations, if that requires admitting that non-leftists are correct about something.

ADDENDUM: Mike Pence’s rule about being alone with women who aren’t his wife doesn’t look so dumb now, does it, left-wing morons?

Do You Believe in Republican Traitors NOW?

I mean “believe in their existence,” obviously, not “trust them.”

Fills me with seething rage:

Republicans considering bill to admit millions more replacement workers:


Un-fucking-believable. This is them giving us, their base, the finger and saying, “What are you going to do about it?”

They are literally laughing in our faces and saying, “What are you going to do about, pussies?”

We must primary at least one of these traitors. Failing that, it’s getting closer to time for non-standard options.

Red Pill in Fiction: Index

My “Red Pill in Fiction” series of posts reliably gets more Likes than any other kind of post. (BTW, WordPress doesn’t let the Likes show up on my page as viewed by visitors; I’m the only one who can see them. WTF, WordPress?) Here’s an index to this series of posts, in chronological order; I’ll update as appropriate.

Note the first one, The Inverse Bechdel Test, is one of the more “serious” of the series. (“Serious” being a relative term in this context.)

1. The Inverse Bechdel Test

2. Jerks, Nice Guys, and Female Self-Awareness: An Example

3. Red Pill in Fiction: Harry Potter edition

4. Red Pill in Fiction, part like, whatever

5. Red Pill in Fiction: Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell

6. Red Pill in Fiction: Bridget Jones’s Diary

7. Red Pill in Fiction: Every Rose Has Its Thorn

8. Red Pill in Fiction: Oh My Freakin’ God Edition: Suddenly Royal

9. Red Pill in Fiction: The French Lieutenant’s Woman

10. Red Pill in Fiction, Classics Edition: Gone with the Wind

11. Red Pill in Fiction: Red Pill Romance

12. Red Pill in Fiction, 200-Proof Edition: Nancy Werlin’s Impossible

13. Red Pill in Fiction: The Other Boleyn Girl

14. Red Pill in Fiction: Grossman’s Magicians series

15. Red Pill in Fiction: Kelley Armstrong’s Driven

16. Red Pill in Fiction, Reverse Edition: Heinlein’s Friday

LOL. In this thread about movies that pass a reverse Bechdel test, Banksiman’s comment is fuckin hilarious:


1. Are there at least two male characters with names?

i. Kyle Reese ii. Does ‘Cyberdyne Systems Model 101 Terminator with living tissue over a metal endoskeleton’ count as a name? There are bit-part cops named, but wouldn’t count that more than a nametag.

2. Do they have a minute of conversation with each other in the movie?


3. Is the conversation about something other than women?

Its all Sarah Connor this, Sarah Connor that …

A much better chick flick would have had lines like ‘Cyberdine … , you look sad. What’s wrong? If Kyle can’t see beyond the living tissue over the metal endoskeleton he’ll never know the real you, and then its him you should feel sorry for.’

Why Trump’s Election Freaks Out the Left

I drafted this within a few weeks of Trump’s election in November 2016 but didn’t get around to fleshing it out as much as I wanted, so I kept delaying posting it to the blog. It still isn’t really as fleshed out as I’d like, but since it’s been a year, I think it’s time to pull the trigger. Consider it a commemoration of the one-year anniversary of the God-Emperor’s glorious election.

Without further ado…

Why Trump’s Election Freaks Out the Left

1. A very small minority of Lefties are genuinely afraid, because they are truly, deeply insane and they’ve swallowed their own BS about how Republicans want to kill all gays or whatever. The number of people who actually believe this and are not institutionalized is probably only in the double digits, though.

2. The complement of that set within the Left is afraid for the opposite reason: Now that he’s elected and of course will not round up all gays and put them into death camps, the youngsters who bought the BS mentioned above will see that the Left is full of BS. Obviously that’s going to be bad news for the Left. It’s not only bad news for their hysterical “bigots are coming to kill you!” nonsense in general; it’s bad for an attempt to say “Trump’s going to kill you!” in the 2020 election in particular. Your average gay black dude is going to say, “You told me he was gonna kill me in 2016, and he didn’t. Yawn.” I’m not predicting that your average gay black dude is going to vote for Trump in 2020 (though he should, given that Trump wants to hold off the Muslims who really do want to kill that gay dude). What I’m saying is, if that moronic scare-mongering didn’t work in 2016, how the fuck is it supposed to work in 2020, after four years of being proven false?

3. A point related to the first one: They project. They imagine what they would do in Trump’s position, with a federal government as dominated by their party as thoroughly as it is now dominated by Republicans.

4. They like to tell themselves that they’re in the firm, large majority. They want a political minority that’s just large enough to be noticeable that they can claim to be bravely fighting. Odds of about 99-to-1 in their favor are about right, from the left’s point of view. (While they say, all the while, “We’re an oppressed minority, bravely standing up to the Powers That Be at grave risk to ourselves!”)

But the election reveals that this isn’t true. Even if we discount the documented electoral fraud and take the official tallies at face value, it’s still 47% of the country that voted for Trump. That’s waaaaaaaaaaay too much from lefties’ point of view, horribly close to evenly-matched sides. (And they know that it’s actually worse than that for them because they know damn well about the electoral fraud.)

5. The election reveals that they’re not as smart as they thought they were.

“We know how to manipulate the rubes! We’ll just propagandize them into voting for Clinton!” Ha, didn’t work out that way, did it, assholes? Looks like “the rubes” have caught on.

I mean, think about this: They threw everything they had into defeating Trump. They did their absolute best. And it wasn’t good enough. They lost. That does not bode well for the future for them.

6. A related point: The election reveals that media bias can’t guarantee desired electoral outcomes any more. Uh-oh!

7. The election reveals that their victory against the USA is not inevitable, as they thought it was.

8. The election reveals that electoral fraud can’t guarantee desired electoral outcomes, at least this time.

9. The election destroyed the Left’s comforting delusion that the outcome of their war against the West is a foregone conclusion of victory for them. They thought, many of them, that it was in the bag for them. That all they had to do was sit around and wait for the inevitable.


How many people, how many political movements in the last couple of centuries, have thought that the western world was done, was past its peak and safe to attack? How many have said, “The West used to be strong, but is now weak and in decay; it is safe to attack it now, and indeed it’s so rotten that all we need do is give it a little push and it will topple”? How many have said that, hmmm? And how many of those have gotten their asses handed to them? All of them.

This isn’t the first time that a leftist movement has said that the inexorable tides of history are on their side, guaranteeing their victory. Whatever happened to Communism, anyway?

If you decide to take on the most successful system in the history of the world, you should… um, I don’t even know how to finish that sentence. Why would you do that? Unless you actually had some reason, which they don’t. I suspect that, aside from the general genetically-hardwired aggression of leftists, there’s this: Old leftists who came of age during the Cold War are still burned about the collapse of the Soviet Union. They want to destroy the U.S. so they can say, “Ha! You got our main country, but we got yours too! So you didn’t win; it’s a tie. It’s totally a tie!” For fuck’s sake, grow up. GROW. THE FUCK. UP.

10. The election reveals that white/European populations are starting to figure out what the Left is up to. That is, putting it very delicately, population replacement. Bluntly: white genocide. That should be terrifying for the left. If nothing else, it means white voters will start to block vote along identity lines the way minorities do. That’s electoral death for the left.

And maybe the reaction won’t be limited to electoral politics, which takes me to…

11. While the Left doesn’t have guilt, they have a mental module that is functionally isomorphic to guilt: They are aware of how they have screwed over people on the right (Obama’s IRS, e.g.), and European-descended populations generally (inviting a flood of invaders into their countries), and what those groups’ natural reaction could be now that they’ve started to awaken. In short, the Left knows what they have coming to them.

12. Worst, from their point of view – devastatingly – the election reveals that identity politics a la “You’re racist!” is past its peak. It is now on the downswing. And since the left spent the last 25 years leaning on that, and forgetting how to make an argument, once that magic spell has totally stopped working– and it’s close to that point– they are politically dead.

At some level they know this, but most won’t entertain this realization on a conscious level. Even the minority among them who admit it qualify the admission with more of the same! Even the most astute of the post-election analyses from the left, which admit this is a problem, try at the same time to… not admit it. A prototypical such statement has gone something like this:

“Of course a strong minority, at least, of Trump voters are racist and sexist. Trump definitely appealed to the worst impulses of America’s shameful past with vicious bigotry. Yet perhaps we shouldn’t have yelled quite so loudly “You’re an ultra-Nazi!” at every single person who said that the U.S. has the right to exist as a nation. There is a possibility that we might have turned off a couple of voters by saying things like that. Of course, this isn’t to deny the very real problem of ethnic hatred which has persistently plagued the U.S. and to which Trump gave voice and legitimacy…blah blah.”

It really is amusing. At one level they clearly see the problem and the obvious implication that they have to stop doing this, but even as they admit that, they continue to do it! Have frivolous accusations of bigotry become a physical addiction on the Left at some neurological level? It reminds me of a smoker saying, “This shit is going to kill me,” even as he lights up a cigarette.

Consider this, for example: The population of Michigan is around 10 million. Think about the number of white people in Michigan who are fed up with constantly being told “You’re racist!” for no reason. Now think about Clinton’s margin of loss in Michigan: about 11 thousand votes.

Well, whatever. All signs from leftists provide good cause for optimism that they will continue to shoot themselves in the foot with this crap. It’s almost 100% doubling down on the “They’re racist/they’re sexist” stuff. Those of us on the right should find that very encouraging.

13. Or is THIS one the worst from their perspective: The events of 2014 – 2016, especially 2016, reveal that the trend is worldwide in the western world. Continental Europe, Brexit, now Trump… This isn’t history; it is History.