Recently, our family traveled to Johnstown, Pennsylvania to be with my father-in-law when he was in the hospital there because of a major medical issue. During this time, I had the opportunity to observe the city firsthand. I hate to admit, but what I saw was both unimpressive and a bit depressing. Johnstown is very definitely a city that has seen better days. Certainly, it has many beautiful buildings dating back to its prime, days when American architectural choices demonstrated much more grandeur than they do now, back when ours was a culture full of confidence and self-assurance. But just as evident are the many empty homes and buildings, many former factories or other industrial-style edifices now sitting barren, or housing charities of one kind or another, or even the occasional church. Everything is dingy looking, almost as if to say that the town has given up, that it no longer has the drive to keep up appearances.

Johnstown is emblematic of what decades of globalism – both external and imported – have done to the Rust Belt, and to America as a whole.

Continue reading

A few weeks ago, I gave the Republican Party some unsolicited advice about what they should do if they want to get back into the saddle and start winning elections again after this year’s string of off-season/special election losses. Essentially it boiled down to using power to fight the Democrats while giving your own client base the things that it wants. In other words, what people throughout history, in every era, in every type of political system from the most despotic to the most egalitarian, would recognise as basic political acumen. The Democrats, despite their complete disconnection from several basic facets of reality, understand this principle and apply it effectively. The Republicans, on the other hand, are absolutely abysmal at doing anything for their putative base, almost as if they don’t want to dirty their hands with something as tawdry and plebeian as “giving the voters what they want.” As a group, they will routinely use “democracy” as an excuse to not actually do democracy. My advice was (in theory) predicated on Republicans actually wanting to win, but given their behaviour, both recently and at other times when they’ve accidentally been given power by the voters, I don’t think we can take that as a given.

The Republican Party, both nationally and the state level, has been handed once more the opportunity to fundamentally alter the direction of this country in a way favourable to restoring some sanity, in the very least. Yet, they refuse to take it. When standing at the precipice, they will never fail to choose the cowardly path of going back to the camp. They’re simply not a serious political party anymore.

Continue reading

As we all know, the Republicans appear to have taken quite a drubbing in last Tuesday’s off year elections. Among other things, they lost the slate of statewide races in Virginia from the governourship on down; they also lost New Jersey’s election for governour, as well as the mayorship of New York City, which went to the newly crowned bugaboo of the American Right, Zohran Mamdani. Granted, these losses were disappointing. However, my personal opinion is that they were not particularly surprising and therefore these results are not actually as bad for the Republicans as many commentators have been saying.

After all, Virginia has been trending Blue for a while and the GOP nominated what was possibly the worst candidate available to try to hold onto the chief executive office in the current political climate. Likewise, New Jersey (while generally moving Right in recent elections) is still very much a Blue state, and New York City is, well, New York City. Anyone who thought Curtis Sliwa had a prayer there probably falls for scams on Facebook, too. So no, I’m not really convinced that last Tuesday was this apocalyptic disaster for the GOP.

However.

Continue reading

There are few things that demonstrate someone’s charactre and true loyalties more than when they are suddenly put on the spot and have to make a quick decision about something. Certainly, for left-wingers this was put on display six weeks ago when Charlie Kirk was assassinated and we saw a flood of commies showing their true colours. More recently, we saw it again – except for people supposedly on the Right – with the leak of several group chats involving Young Republicans, via the response to these chats by various prominent voices on the Right. Granted, the participants in these chats were (admittedly) being pretty edgy in some of the things they were joking about, so one can understand why there might be controversy over these things, even if you personally believe (as I do) that jokes are just that – jokes. Now, you might be thinking that I’m writing this to criticise these YRs. I am not. Instead, my purpose here is to call out the type of ConInc retard who consistently runs interference for the Left while throwing their own side under the bus and who jumped all over this as a chance to gatekeep.

This was a test of both loyalty and intelligence – and there are a great number of so-called right-wing “thought leaders” who failed it on both counts. The opportunity was there for people to take a stand against the Left and they failed to do so. The fact that they can’t admit to understanding the distinction between sophomoric jokes on the one hand and established politicians in major states literally saying they want to kill their political opponents and their kids on the other hand, well, this speaks volumes.

These fools believe they are “acting on principle.” They are not. Often, these politicians and influences are bought and paid for, so their principles would revolve around whoever is cutting them a check. Even in those cases where they are countersignaling those further to the Right than themselves out of some genuine though misguided sense of moral propriety, these people are not truly “principled” in any sort of way that matters. Simply put, being a “principled loser” is not principled. If you purposefully seek to undercut your own side to try to conform to the ideals of or for the benefit of the other side, you are not principled, you are merely insipid and untrustworthy. Truly being principled means at least trying to put yourself into a position where you can act on those things that you believe to be right and necessary in the political and social spheres. Failing this, your “principles” are simply gas escaping from your mouth.

Continue reading

I am back from a month-long hiatus made necessary by a lot of busy-ness in real life. As fun as touching grass may be, it’s now time to get back in the saddle.

Just a little over a month ago in Charlotte, North Carolina, the nation and the world were treated to yet another spectacle that has becoming far too common over the past few decades. Iryna Zarutska, a 23-year-old refugee from the Ukraine war was riding the light rail, minding her own business when she was attacked from behind and stabbed in the neck by a repeat-offender black career criminal. Certainly, this is FAR FROM the only story of this type that we have seen in recent months. Some commenters tried to criticise the fact that she was riding alone. Yet in a sense, she couldn’t have been expected to anticipate the attack since in most of the world you can ride public transportation without having some groid randomly puncture your neck out of nowhere.

The Left tried to ignore the story – seriously, there was practically zero interaction with this story by the MSM and other left-wing outlets for nearly two weeks until it broke free and got out onto social media, where it blew up. Since then, they’ve been trying to poo-poo it – it’s really about the mental health crisis, or the pressures caused by white racism, or whatever else – whatever can be done to distract away from the ramifications of per capita crime stats and whatnot. Our side, however, should definitely not let this story drop out of the public consciousness. As with other similar cases, the Left seems to be very invested in advancing the cause of random, unpredictable, and unpunishable criminality.

Continue reading

It has been one week since the assassination of Charlie Kirk at a Turning Point USA event held at Utah Valley University. In the intervening time, we’ve found out that the shooter was one Tyler Robinson, a far-left activist with a trans boyfriend and a penchant for referring to Kirk as a “fascist.” Further, every indicator suggests that Robinson didn’t act alone. At the time of the shooting, a local left-wing gadfly claimed to have shot Kirk but later confessed to doing so because it would distract police from the real shooter. A number of participants in transgender-related Discord chats appear to have had advanced knowledge of the shooting. Trump’s administration is now investigating possible networks which may exist among radical trans and LGBTQ activists. All in all, the story runs much deeper than the typical “lone wolf” who is usually involved in left-wing stochastic terrorism.

It has been just as interesting, however, to see the absolute mask-off moment that the Left has been having since last Wednesday. The news was greeted almost immediately by left-wingers of all stripes – from politicians and social media influencers to regular rank-and-file nobodies – by dancing on his grave, declaring that he “served it,” mocking his wife and children, and generally just showing us what absolute garbage people they really are. Many others, in addition to cheering the shooting, took to social media to start demanding other assassinations, some even giving lists of other Rightists that they’d like to see “liquidated.” Hundreds of these people have been facing social accountability for this, losing their jobs and otherwise facing the just consequences for their actions. Eventually, some of them started clueing in to how unpopular this was making them, so they hit upon on a new tactic, claiming that Robinson was ReALLy a RiGhT wInGeR!!1!, despite all the opposing evidence and common sense. Others, who are less savvy, have continued to barrel down the avenue to oblivion.

All of this has been very enlightening. Indeed, it shows us a number of things about this Left, things which they do not possess.

Continue reading

The “nothing ever happens” crowd was once again proven wrong today, in one of the most horrific ways possible. While speaking at the opening event for his American Comeback tour at Utah Valley University today, conservative influencer Charlie Kirk was shot in the neck by a sniper and sadly passed away shortly afterwards. As of the time of this writing, the murderer has not been captured. However, there seems to be a pretty good suspect, a transgender who made some fairly obvious threats against Kirk just yesterday.

If the truth be told, this kind of escalation was practically inevitable, given the increasingly unhinged rhetoric and behaviour coming from the Left. The Left has been purposefully accelerating our social and political collapse because of their delusion that they’ll finally get the revolution they’ve wanted since the 1960s. Despite the vast differences between earlier successful communist revolutions and what they’re trying to do in the USA now (armed vs. unarmed populations, broad-based versus relatively small middle class, etc.), they are still essentially following the same gameplan they’ve tried elsewhere, which has had some notable failures. The sort of dysgenic biotrash that comprises the majority of today’s modern Left simply doesn’t have the staying power that earlier generations of leftist revolutionaries did.

Continue reading

The latest big news we’re seeing right now is the decision by the Trump administration to curtail home rule for Washington DC and refederalise aspects of the city’s governance, especially those having to with law enforcement. This move was provoked by the prevailing insouciance towards crime in the capital that has been shown by the left-wing Democratic city leadership. Several recent high-profile cases of people being robbed/assaulted/carjacked in the city apparently came to the president’s attention and moved him to intervene. As of this writing, the city’s police force are being augmented by federal officers and National Guardsmen and a crackdown on violent crime is beginning to take place.

Of course, this has provoked a vigourous response from the Left, with BLM and antifa black bloc “protestors” coming out in full force to try to prevent police from making arrests. More generally, left-wing pundits have decried the “fascism” inherent in preventing violent criminals from preying upon normal people. This response, coupled with the recent revelation (which was, let’s be honest, more of an open secret all along) that the city leadership in DC was cooking the books to try to hide the extent of their crime rate, highlights the Left’s ongoing symbiotic relationship with the nation’s criminal element. Other cities have seen the same type of phenomena take place – violent crime is excused and covered up by progressive Left politicians while regular (and nearly always White) people continue to be victimised with no relief provided. A good example recently was seen in Cincinnati where several partygoers were nearly beaten to death in the streets by a crowd of feral blacks. The response from city officials and local black community leaders ranged from disconcern to outright victim blaming.

Continue reading

Those familiar with the writings of the American Founding Fathers know that one of the great fears of the founders was the formation of factions. Factions are groups of people within a polity (and the form of government of that polity really doesn’t affect their formation all that much) who seek to use power solely or primarily to gain more power for themselves and to divert power and monies into their own hands. Many early American writers sounded the alarm against this phenomenon and our first president, George Washington, even warned against this tendency in his farewell speech, quoted above.

Now what we need to understand is that factions are not really contiguous with “political parties” or “interest groups,” though of course there can be some overlap. A group is not a “faction,” per se, just because they are advocating for the interests of a certain subset of the population. Indeed, whether in republican, democratic, or monarchic contexts, it’s pretty much a truism in human government that public policy is the distillation of the results of various competing interests. In many cases, however (and this especially applies during the growth phases of a polity’s demographic-structural cycle, which usually feature less intraelite competition and more intraelite cooperation and a shared sense of solidarity), competing special interests and parties will “keep their eye on the ball” and be willing to compromise for the good of the people and the nation as a while. It’s generally during the secular downturns, the periods of demographic-structural collapse phase, that intraelite competition most heavily contributes to the formation of genuine factions. These factions occur when a particular group seeks to gain and enhance its power at the expense of the unity and/or the safety of the nation for its own selfish purposes. The faction doesn’t care about the nation as a whole but is focused on its own oligarchical concerns and what can be used to accrue more resources (of all kinds) to itself.

Continue reading

Before beginning this piece, I’d like to take a moment to encourage everyone to go over and check out The Neo-Feudal Review’s tribute to the ZMan. Sadly, we lost one of the good ones who really helped to get our entire movement into the mainstream. RIP ZMan!

I recently finished a book entitled, “Axial Civilizations and World History” which is a compendium of academic articles collected into one work. The subject of this work is the “Axial Age,” an historical theory that was originally developed by Karl Jaspers, and subsequently expanded upon by other scholars such as Eric Voegelin and Samuel Eisenstadt. The “Axial Age” as an historical concept suggests that around the middle part of the first millennium before Christ, there was a fundamental shift in the “mental framework” of several civilisations across the breadth of the Eurasian continent. By this is meant that in these civilisations (primarily, from West to East, Greece, ancient Israel, Persia, India, and China), the socio-intellectual elite underwent an intellectual revolution in which the previous “mythological” cognitive orientation that viewed this world and the “other-world” as distinctly separated and which, to the extent that it even had a concept of “history,” saw “history” as a sort of “once upon a time” phenomenon, changed to one in which transcendence in religion and philosophy became the norm and individuals developed a greater sense of interiority and reflexivity (essentially the ability to exercise personal agency).

Thus, in ancient Greece we saw the rise of pre-Socratic philosophy. Israel, Persia, and India experienced the rise of strict ethical monotheism, Zoroastrian dualism, and Buddhist enlightenment philosophy. China developed ethical philosophies under Confucius and Mencius, as well as the Mohist school. Religion became transcendent, allowing followers to live in this world while having access to the next. Philosophy was oriented towards rationalism and this-worldly concerns that often asked the individual to be personally responsible and cognizant of themselves and their influences on their societies. The question as to the cause(s) of this continent-wide shift has been explored but remains largely unsettled.

Continue reading