One of the best things about getting older is the benefit of having perspective and experience. Experience is one of those things you can’t steal, fake, or buy. It only comes with time.
I experienced a different Halloween.
30+ years ago, I remember which group was the primary enemy of Halloween. It was the church and the evangelical right. I remember churches used to HATE Halloween. Virtually every church used to run youth programs every Halloween, like movie nights, or youth fellowships to keep kids from trick or treating. The horrors of Halloween were always described in vivid detail, of how it was Satan’s doing, and someone would poison your candy or put razor blades in your Snickers bar. Now, it astounds me the switch that’s occurred. The primary enemy of Halloween has become the progressive left. Even as recently as 2014 you can find left wing outlets criticizing Christians for anti-Halloween practices. In the span of maybe 2-3 years, the cultural shift that’s taken place is staggering. All of a sudden, it’s the left that up in arms about Halloween. As the left has gotten progressively more radical, be it gender issues or mass immigration, Halloween becomes the newest casualty in the culture wars. Halloween used to be the one sacred cow among the left as they assaulted the various religious holidays, this recent attack proves that no institution is safe from the progressive left.
The War on Christmas I disagree with, but at least I understand it. Christmas is a Christian holiday, which makes the War on Halloween even stranger, because it’s been considered for a long time to be a secular holiday. Halloween’s origin is believed to have been Samhain, a pagan harvest holiday. However, the word Halloween or All Hallows’ Eve is actually of Christian origin, and All Saints Day, November 1, is actually meant to celebrate the Saints of the Church. Whether pagan or Christian, Halloween is an institution that has roots that are centuries deep. In addition, the act of wearing a costume originates in Scotland and Ireland, so the entire act of wearing ANY costume is technically cultural appropriation. For some reason though, I don’t hear the left complaining about appropriating Gaelic culture. It seems every holiday is on the left wing target list, Columbus Day, Christmas, Easter, Thanksgiving, and now Halloween.
You can currently find dozens of articles and thousands of tweets policing the costume choices people want to make. The concept of cultural appropriation as been around in academic circles for awhile, but didn’t really become a tenet of the left till about 2009 or so. As it started on college campuses, that’s where we usually see it coming from today. I actually read several of these college notices, and they are full of vague, pandering guidelines. It didn’t really start becoming a major issue till about 2014, so we are seeing a pretty recent trend. Now, let me state that I don’t support running around in blackface, for obvious reasons. There is actually a significant reason not to do that, as it was used in the past to make fun of and stereotype black people who were historically oppressed, but it isn’t just blackface that the left wants to police.
Want to dress as an inmate? Sorry that trivializes mass incarceration.
How about a psycho killer? Oops sorry that makes fun of mental illness.
Disney Princess? Promoting white supremacy and beauty standards.
Police officer? Sorry police brutality is nothing to condone.
Alternate gender? Sorry, that’s transphobic.
Clown Costume? Banned in several locations. Coulrophobia of course.
That doesn’t even begin to cover it. Sombreros, Kimonos, Native American headdresses, and a whole lot more are on the left’s puritanical appropriation radar. Personally, I always thought people dressed in those costumes because they thought that culture had a cool aesthetic, not to make fun of it. Am I appropriating Nordic culture if I dress like a Viking, even though I’m a white guy? I always thought people dressed up as things they thought were cool. Let’s be honest, every culture has some really cool aesthetics, so it’s a little strange to me that people would be so up in arms over it. As a matter of fact, I watched a video yesterday asking Japanese people what they thought of other people “appropriating” their culture. They thought it was awesome. They thought it was honoring and spreading what they consider to be an amazing culture. Numerous colleges have run “appropriation workshops” or seminars to determine what’s acceptable. There’s even an article in the New York Times about a mom who was triggered because her daughter wanted to be Elsa for Halloween, but she couldn’t stand the fact that Elsa promoted traditional beauty standards.
The roots of this are the left’s complete inability to deal with hurt feelings and the way they manufacture outrage to mobilize their base. We’ve raised an entire generation of people that are totally infantilized, and collapse into a heap of mush at every opportunity. Safe space culture and political correctness have bred an entire generation of radicals that believe we should all conform to their feelings. In their world, we should all think alike and no one should ever be offended. This is one reason I’m glad Donald Trump is the president. Political correctness must be destroyed, and every time he tweets or says something mildly inappropriate, I love it. He’s chipping away at this absurd politically correct culture, one tweet after another. A lot of these far left ideas have roots very recently. Cultural appropriation, Confederate statues, Safe Spaces, and so many other things have only been brought up in the very recent past. My theory is that Obama’s re-election in 2012 was the trigger point. They really thought they had won permanently, so it gave them the go ahead in their minds to go as far as they wanted. They also learned to organize around issues, and galvanize their base. The more oppression related issues they can manufacture, the more they fire up their base.
Regardless of whether you believe Halloween is secular or Christian, evil or good, it should be preserved if for no other reason than to keep triggering the left until the snowflakes are melted.
If you enjoyed this article on Americana Prime, please follow me on Twitter and Instagram, and subscribe to my YouTube channel! Watch me on Periscope as well!
I, like most everyone, watched General John Kelly’s riveting and emotionally charged appearance at the White House podium a few days ago. Speaking for myself, I found it to be an emotional plea to hold things sacred, especially as it relates to the heroes that give their life for this country. The dialogue this past week has been terrible, and our civility has been degraded to such a degree that I can barely comprehend it. And yet, somehow it continues to get worse. Just when you think that it can’t possibly get any worse, that we can’t become even more divided, we get this type of thing:
I would recommend reading this New Yorker article, as toxic as it is, just so you can understand the level of vitriol that’s held for this administration. The writer actually compared General Kelly’s speech to the Soviet Union under a Communist regime which is borderline insanity. She then proceeds to actually make the argument that dead American soldiers aren’t the best of us, they are just ordinary Americans, and we totally shouldn’t rank Americans based on whether or not they died for the country. The author, Masha Gessen, actually lived in Russia for 20 years, and is a journalist and far better educated on a myriad of topics than I. So who am I to attack her perspective? I’m just a miscellaneous guy who hasn’t done a fraction of what she’s done, nor am I a fraction of the writer. Well guess what, if she can attack a 4 Star Marine General, who also lost a son for this country, then I can go in on her. This isn’t her first go at the Trump administration. Back in July, she wrote a massive essay on comparing Trump to Hitler called The Reichstag Fire Next Time, which is just an advanced version of your average “Trump is Hitler” tweet. The entire premise of the article suggests that President Trump is going to false flag a terrorist attack to consolidate power, as it’s suspected the Nazis did in the Reichstag fire. At the very least if not false flagging a terrorist attack, then using one to increase his power.
Over the course of multiple articles she tries to tie Trump to Putin, Trump to Hitler, or Trump to any number of autocrats. The only tie I see is Gessen to Trump Derangement Syndrome. The entire basis of all of these attacks on the Trump administration is that he said Putin was a smart guy once. She, as a gay person who lived in Russia, rightfully hates Putin. To draw the connecting line between Putin and Trump because he said something fairly nice about him once requires some serious mental gymnastics, and a lot of confirmation bias. Gessen is a prime example of how no one is immune to confirmation bias, no matter how “smart” they are. The thing people never understood about Trump not criticizing Putin, was that Trump was trying to set the table for future deals by not trash talking a world leader on TV. I always found it hilarious how Obama or Clinton would go on TV and trash talk world leaders then expect them to deal in good faith on something. That’s not how it works. If I am coming to your place of business to make a deal with you, and you see me on TV trashing you before, how likely are you going to be to make a deal with me?
Now back to John Kelly and the “military coup”. In the wake of his speech, which was clearly from the heart and trying to restore some civility, we got gems like this:
And this winner from when he became Chief of Staff:
John Kelly was right. Nothing is sacred anymore. The left is in full warfare mode, with no quarter given. You served the country and even lost a son? Well you’re still a fascist collaborator. Despite the fact that not one “fascistic” policy has been enacted, it doesn’t matter. General John Kelly is pretty close to being of unimpeachable character, and yet he’s attacked as though he’s robbing a bank. This is a man who is literally doing a job he doesn’t even need, and could easily have retired at any point. After losing his son, it would have been easy for him to retreat into solitude, and become disaffected and separated from the world. Instead, he doubled down. He threw himself into his DHS job, and took on what might be the most difficult job ever, Chief of Staff for Donald Trump. Instead of retreating and falling prey to despair, he leveled up, not only for himself, but for the country. For his heroic and inspirational actions, he is now the recipient of the vitriol usually reserved for one man: his boss.
Now, this modern day American icon has the privilege of being called a fascist and collaborator by people who haven’t given a fraction of what he has to this country. Unlike what Gessen says, there are different rankings for American citizens. John Kelly and the soldiers who gave their lives for us have done and given more to this country than me, and likely most people reading this. We have equality in this country, which means no one should be better or get any special treatment, but we are only able to have equality because of those who came before. Whether it be John Kelly and other military heroes, or Martin Luther King Jr. and civil rights icons, there are those that merit special treatment, because they earned it. They built this country into what we have today, and this attempt to minimize their exceptional individuality is exactly the tactic the left loves.
Think of this: how often do you see the left lionize individuals? It’s really not often. They sort of do it with Barack Obama, but that’s about it. It’s not often that the left holds up an individual as an example. Even Martin Luther King Jr. is derided by some on the left as having been too soft. In my God of the Left article, I stated that in the absence of God, their god becomes altruism and the earth. The same applies to individual heroes. The common good is all that matters, and lionizing individuals undermines their “everyone is the same” mantra. They don’t want to acknowledge that some people are better than others, or that some gave more than others. Equality of outcome while being considered a good person is all that matters.
So to the left who have been undermining John Kelly all week I say this:
General John Kelly is better than you. The service members that died for our country are better than you. The civil rights icons are better than you.
And everyone knows it.
If you enjoyed this article, please follow me on Twitter and Instagram, and subscribe to my YouTube channel! Watch me on Periscope as well!
Or so I’m told regularly by left wingers on Twitter. I thought I was just a semi-normal guy hanging out in the woods and periscoping and tweeting every day, but apparently I fluctuate weekly between a Nazi and a Russian Bot. In addition of being accused of being a pro-Putin bot account, my profile as actually been run through a machine learning algorithm. It then determined that I have a 10/10 score, or the highest possible likelihood of being a Fake Russian Bot account. Here’s a picture of my score some left winger sent me.
Upon further research I discovered one of the tools being used to classify us as Russian Bots. It originated in a Medium blog post by a poster named conspirator0, and the address is makeadverbsgreatagain.us. You type in the twitter handle, and it will tell you the probability that you are a Russian bot. In looking at numerous twitter accounts, the biggest differentiator in a high score vs a low score is the use of the MAGA hashtag. If you use that hashtag your score skyrockets automatically. Use it in conjunction with USA or 1A, it’s a near max score. The article links to Melissa Ryan and her CTRL-ALT-RIGHT-DELETE newsletter on Medium. Going back through her post history, she’s been parroting these Russia-Trump talking points from the beginning. Go to the address and run your own profile to see if you too, could be a Russian Bot.
As the Left’s Russia narrative continues to evaporate, they continue to look for new and fantastical ways to explain the “Russian Connection”. They continually flounder at trying to prove any connection between Donald Trump and Russia. Trump’s “murky” connections as the Washington Post asserts, basically amounts to Trump running a pageant there, and selling a house to a Russian guy. So, they couldn’t prove direct collusion with Trump, so they started in on the fringe players like Roger Stone and Carter Page. As Roger Stone obliterated those ideas in his testimony and through media, they need to find another way to prove Russia helped Trump. The latest are the fact that Russia bought 100K in Facebook ads, and that the Pro-Trump messaging on Twitter is coming from Russian bots.
The Facebook ads are particularly hilarious, because 100K is nothing on Facebook. That’s so insignificant in terms of ad buys it barely rates a mention, to say nothing of the fact that the ads apparently weren’t explicitly pro-Trump. There was Black Lives Matter messaging among other divisive ads, which proves that maybe they had a small interest in sowing division. 100K is so insignificant, that barely rates a weekend getaway for Putin, so to act like that somehow swung an election is absurd. Then we come to the Russian Bot question on Twitter. No one disputes whether or not there are bots on Twitter. The question is are there bots specifically placed there by Russia to amplify pro-Trump messaging? So lets take a look at the “criteria” that’s used to by the left to determine what constitutes a Russian bot. Here’s a line from the New York Times with the headline:
So let’s take a look at that line. Russian “fingerprints”. What exactly constitutes a Russian fingerprint? That’s the question they hope you won’t look too closely at. Apparently I have them all over my account.
Use a particular hashtag too much i.e. #MAGA?
Possible Russian Bot.
Have an American Flag profile picture?
Possible Russian Bot.
Mention positive Trump messages too often?
Possible Russian Bot.
Talk about 1A and 2A a lot?
Possible Russian Bot.
Retweet and like a lot of pro-Trump messages?
Possible Russian Bot.
The criteria that’s being fed into these algorithms is faulty from the start. They try to throw around terms like “Machine learning” and “Algorithm” because they sound high tech and impartial. “Oh it’s an algorithm, it’s totally impartial” is the most ridiculous defense of all time. Someone has to feed the criteria into the algorithm, thus it is susceptible to manipulation. This is the same with a company like Google. They can rate sites in terms of perceived “legitimacy” thus causing the algorithm to place them higher in results. A YouTube staffer admitted to exactly this in the latest Project Veritas video, and a New York Times staffer did the same, admitting collusion between the Times and YouTube. In my article “The Real Collusion Scandal” I outlined how the media, tech companies, and liberal organizations work together to amplify their views, and suppress conservatives. Not only is it happening, it’s about to get worse. Twitter executives have routinely been meeting progressive activists and even partnering with the ADL, who classifies anything to the right of Marx as “hate speech”. One of the first steps they are taking is to flag “pro-Trump” accounts as being Russian bots.
Mark my words, the left may have lost the election, but they are working overtime behind the scenes to win the information war. They thought they had it all in the bag before November 8, and now they are re-energized. They are flooding the web with articles that bear striking similarities across multiple high profile sites. Check out this search result, near identical wording across multiple sites.
Apparently the Russians are really “honing” and “sharpening” attacks. What are the odds that all these sites would use the exact same wording like that in the title? You have to give the progressives one thing, they sure are good at message discipline and propagating information.
Today, I’m a Russian Bot, maybe tomorrow I’m a Nazi again. I might even get lucky and evolve into a Macedonian content farmer the day after.
Or maybe I’ll just be a regular American sitting in the woods tweeting about progressive nonsense.
If you enjoyed this article, please follow me on Twitter and Instagram, and subscribe to my YouTube channel! Watch me on Periscope as well!
Nazis and the NFL
Over the weekend, we had news regarding both Nazis and football. We had a walkout of a football game by the Vice President, and we had more Nazis in Charlottesville. Immediately as we usually do, factions formed. One group was happy that the Vice President took a stand and supported the administration’s view that protesting the flag and disrespecting veterans was unpatriotic. Another group was incensed at not only that action, but the lack of recognition of the white supremacists in Charlottesville the night before. All over Twitter and social media I saw people saying how can the President be talking about football protests when there are Nazis marching in the streets?
Hopefully I can answer that question. First lets understand a few things. I understand that the protests are about perceived inequality, oppression, and police violence. That’s the root of the reason the protests are happening. It did metastasize into an anti-Trump protest after he said something about it, but the root of it is the oppression argument. Then we have the “Nazis”. The people in Charlottesville were Richard Spencer and about 20 of his Alt-Right goons. So, obviously one side is clearly worse in this scenario, that being the white supremacists. So, when we have two situations, where one is clearly worse than the other, why would the President ignore the worst of the two, and spend a bunch of time slamming the other?
The answer: He’s trying to “trump” both at the same time, with one argument.
The argument that he’s using is what Scott Adams calls “The High Ground Maneuver.” The high ground maneuver is a technique in persuasion where you skip right past the details of an argument and elevate it to a higher place that is harder to argue with. His “High Ground Maneuver” is the brand of America. He’s skipping right over all the race-related arguments and calling us all to a greater ideal: Uniting in the name of the country to stand for the anthem. You see, Trump is a nationalistic president in uncharted territory. No world leader, save his predecessor, maybe ever, has to lead a nation that is more multicultural than the current United States. So how do you engender nationalism, in a nation with so many disparate races, religions, and ideology? Obama, by any measure, was not nationalistic at all, and race and ideology divisions fractured even more under his leadership. When it came to uniting America, President Obama was an abject failure.
The closest I can think of to nationalism that we’ve ever tried was under Reagan. The problem with any comparison to Reagan is that a significant amount of African Americans would likely disagree with you that Reagan presided over a golden age. In addition, Reagan didn’t preside over anywhere near the levels of multiculturalism Trump has in the country, due to the massive amounts of immigration we’ve had. Think of this, Trump has a population that is 61% or so white, 13% black, 19% or so Hispanic, and the rest Asian, Arabic, and Mixed. Then on top of that, he has multiple disparate religions and beliefs. You have Christians, Muslims, atheists, and every other type of religion. What he has before him is likely the most difficult leadership job in all of human history, in terms of pure demographics and beliefs. The only thing that is common to all of them other than just basic humanity, is the country. In addition, a multicultural nationalist has basically never happened. Trump is not in great company here since every single other nationalist ruler has presided over essentially an ethnostate, such as Hitler or Kim Il-Sung. He can’t unite via religion or race because there too many different ones. The only tool he has is the country’s ideals.
So I know what you are thinking, how can it be unifying to trash players who don’t stand for the anthem? Wouldn’t it be easier to condemn Nazis and get everyone to unite around that? The answer is no because that’s too small of an idea. We already agree to that, at least all the non-Nazis do, which is the 99% of people. Uniting around disliking or hating something isn’t enough to solve our problems. It has to be bigger. Right now we are too broken to unify. There is nothing he could say that would even start to unify the country. Half of the country literally believes we are in the beginnings of a fascist and racist dictatorship. The only thing that can make that belief fade, is time and gradual action. This is a long-term rebuilding and reimagining process of the brand of America, and what it means to be a citizen of this country. I think he’s aware, as I certainly am, this process will literally take years. If I’m being perfectly honest, I’m not sure it’s even possible. We are retreating into tribalism more than ever before, and social media is only exasperating the problem.
He said in a video over 20 years ago, that he wanted to see a leader who is “a cheerleader for America”. No one ever came along to do it, so he decided to do it himself. He is positioning himself as the most patriotic person alive and even built his campaign around improving the “brand” of America. Think of this, every single thing he utters that’s even vaguely pro-America gets him accused of racism. Apparently, we’ve gotten to a point where liking your country is actually controversial. Why? Because the left has a vested interest in devaluing the brand of the country. If people are nationalistic, there’s no way they will allow the sort of unchecked immigration and economic policy they want. This is why they’ve been so desperate to tie Trump to another nationalist: Adolf Hitler. Despite no policy being even remotely close to Hitler, they were both nationalists, so Make America Great Again must be a Nazi ethnocentric dog whistle.
The reality is that there’s no amount of disavowals he can do that would be enough. So, we are in a rebuilding phase of America’s brand, and he’s going to champion that brand at all costs. In his pursuit of rebuilding the brand, the NFL protests were a golden opportunity to pump up the brand. This is a scenario he really can’t lose, and it gives him a chance to show how ultra pro-America he is. Since he is the President, that sort of gesture matters. If the President isn’t the most patriotic person, why would anyone else be? Obama’s failure to unite the country is rooted not in the fact that he is black, but that he actively, and regularly demonized a significant chunk of the country. So if were the President, I’d immediately rule out any tactic Obama used, because nothing he did worked on the unification front. Isn’t Trump doing the same thing with his anti-NFL player stance? I would argue no, just simply because all he’s asked for is people to stand for the anthem. I would hardly call that a monumental ask. When the Cowboys kneeled before the anthem and stood for it, he praised them. Essentially, as I mentioned earlier, the left has tainted the brand of America so badly that even suggesting something patriotic is now a racist hate crime.
So again, why not denounce Nazis? Setting aside the fact that he has, multiple times, the only reason Richard Spencer and his crew even exist is the media exposure. The first time I heard of Richard Spencer and his crew was in a left wing Atlantic article. The reality is the left needs Spencer, so they promote him with relentless coverage every chance they get. They need someone to point at and stoke their base, despite him being a marginal fringe player at best. No one would even know who these guys are without the incessant media coverage. The truth is that the media loves Nazis, because it gives them an opportunity to play to the base, and demonize Trump. The left-wing media and Richard Spencer’s Alt-Right are symbiotic. They absolutely need each other, and they use one another to achieve their ends. Richard Spencer would absolutely love for Trump to denounce his group because it would lead to even more media coverage, which is exactly his goal. Spencer understands one thing: There is no such thing as bad press.
Trump is playing the only card he has that’s strong enough, theoretically, to unite the country, over time. That card is America itself, and the rebuilding of the brand.
Will it work? Only time will tell.
Why The Second Amendment is Non-Negotiable
Over the last few days in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting, we’ve seen renewed calls for gun control. Everyone from Jimmy Kimmel to Hillary Clinton has been stressing the need for more gun control. After a shooting like we just had, I can understand why the immediate reaction and frustration over guns boils over. Personally, I think the 2nd amendment is non negotiable, so I feel the need to explain to the other side why it is so important and fundamental to us as Americans that we have the 2nd Amendment. Even though I believe 100% in the 2nd amendment, I can understand where the other side is coming from. They see a mass shooting, and it seems to them that the obvious answer is just to take away the guns, then the problem is solved. They seek easy answers to a difficult problem, and that is understandable.
I was never super pro-gun. My Dad was, and had a veritable arsenal of over 200 guns, including assault rifles and all manner of devastating firepower. I have photos of me shooting a fully automatic M16 when I was 12 years old. When I was younger, I had no idea why people fetishized guns in the manner they did. Personally, I saw no reason why anyone needed to have an M16 or AK47, even though I thought they were fun to shoot. Even in my teens and 20’s, despite having grown up with them, I still would have been on board for most gun control measures. So what changed? What changed me from being pretty liberal on guns, to being absolutely hard as nails on gun rights? Several things. As with most issues, it’s research that improves one’s perspective. I’m significantly more educated and well-read than I was in those days. As an idealistic young person, I only thought in vague, simple terms. Context and history weren’t my strong suits, so I rushed to simple answers to complex issues.
The first thing that changed my opinion was learning history, both ours and other nations. You see, the entire reason we exist as a nation is because of citizens having guns. The reason we were able to win independence is because we didn’t let the British seize our guns at Lexington and Concord. We were only able to mount an offensive and seize freedom, because the average person took up arms, and fought the King. The founders thought it was so significant for the populace to have guns, because it would prevent tyranny from taking hold. There’s a reason it’s the SECOND amendment. It was thought to be so fundamental, that it had to be inscribed in the Bill of Rights. They understood that they wouldn’t have had their freedom to write it at all, without guns in the hands of the populace. It goes further than us though. It’s the history of other nations that shows us why we need guns.
In the 20th century, over 260 million people died from oppressive regimes. You see, the only way a truly oppressive government can take hold, is if the populace is disarmed. Whether it be Mao or Stalin, the only way those regimes exist and can implement their oppressive ideology, is if the populace can’t fight back. Over and over throughout history, we see examples of disarmament leading to tyranny. I saw a tweet last night about how gun control works amazingly well in England, Spain, Iceland, Israel, Australia, Sweden, Germany, Canada, Japan, and other countries. This is the problem on the other side: lack of context. They conveniently leave out that Sweden and Germany are the rape capitals of the world. Armed women would be able to defend themselves. Sweden has seen an increase in not only rape, but GRENADE attacks of all things. All they’ve done is disarm the citizens and enabled violence against them. Then we have Britain and Spain. These countries have a terrorist attack via truck or bomb every other week. Conspicuously absent from the list of nations above is France. The reason the author of the tweet left it out is because of the Bataclan. In case people forgot, 130 people died there, in a country where gun laws are some of the toughest in the world. In addition, you have the Nice devastating truck attack, and Charlie Hebdo attack. Even Canada literally just had a terrorist attack in Edmonton the other day. Want another modern example that he leaves out? Venezuela. Maduro, the socialist leader, immediately seized guns upon coming into power. Now, the populace is revolting, but they can’t really stop him because they don’t have guns. Maduro immediately redistributed the guns to guess who, his supporters and government.
The most comical ones in the list though are Japan, Iceland, Israel, and Australia. They neglect to mention that these are extremely homogenous societies with virtually no immigration. Israel is virtually militarized, and has a wall, along with armed soldiers everywhere. Australia has such tight immigration control that Johnny Depp had to issue an apology for bringing an unauthorized DOG into the country. Japan might be the most homogenous country on the planet, and has explicitly stated they have no need for immigrants. As we see in Sweden, disarming the population only means you are setting up normal citizens to be victims. Think about it, if you are a criminal and want to rape someone, knowing there’s virtually no chance of them having a gun only serves to embolden you. We’ve seen case after case of criminals finding a way to kill people. Even the Las Vegas shooter had tons of explosives. He was going to kill people, and he had multiple ways to do it ready to go. He could have easily waited for the concert to let out, and bombed them, or driven a truck over them.
The other thing that never happens, is the media never, ever shows the crimes stopped by gun owners. There are thousands of examples of this, but of course the media represses them all. The Tennessee church shooter was memory holed almost immediately by the media for a number of reasons, one of which was that a citizen with a gun stopped him. We also don’t take into account how many times a gun owner stopping a crime prevented possibly large amounts of other crimes. No one in the media cares that a woman stopped a rape because she was armed. She cares though, I can promise you that. You see, the problem with progressives is what I laid out in my God of the Left article. They believe that because they are a good person, then everyone else must have inherent goodness as well. They wouldn’t shoot up or rape someone, so obviously everyone must have that inherent goodness. That view is folly. Evil exists and must be stopped. Liberals and progressives live in a fantasy land where no one will rape if we are just tolerant enough. No government will abuse powers if we give them all of it.
One thing I know that frustrates the left is the general feeling that they can’t get any movement on incremental things, like banning bump stocks. The reason they can’t get any movement on things like that is that we know that it doesn’t stop there. Let’s say we ban bump stocks right now. Inevitably, unless we address our societal issues, we will have another mass shooting not using bump stocks. Then we ban say, high capacity magazines. Then we have another mass shooting. And so on and so on until guns are completely gone. Either that, or they just mass import enough poor immigrants to vote big government until they outright repeal the 2nd, which is the tactic they are currently trying. This is why conservatives aren’t willing to bend on small things these days, because we figured out the left’s tactics. Incrementally chip away freedoms and use the slippery slope for total government control. Fortunately, a lot of progressives are actually dumb enough to suggest repealing the 2nd outright, thus revealing their actual end goals.
The Second Amendment is non-negotiable. It is one of our most fundamental rights, and the one that protects all others.
We cannot allow it to be undermined.
How to build an Anti-Trump Narrative: Puerto Rico Edition
Over the past few days we’ve started to see a narrative develop about Puerto Rico. Virtually every progressive on Twitter and the mainstream media outlets have all jumped on the bandwagon parroting any one of several narratives, all centered around the following: The Trump Administration is doing nothing, or next to nothing in regards to aid to Puerto Rico. Some have even gone as far as to suggest the response has been minimal due to racism. So before I address a few of these things, lets take a look at what constitutes “nothing”.
1. Over 12,000 Federal personnel on the ground.
2. Over 300,000 Tons of Food, Medical supplies, and Water.
3. Evacuation of Patients and 59 of 68 hospitals functional.
4. Over 40 Million dollars just for Road work.
5. Over 125,000 Gallons of Fuel delivered.
6. FEMA Search and rescue has been in all 78 municipalities.
7. 14 Sea vessels providing food, water, evacuation, and supplies.
8. All 8 airports online.
9. Specialized canine, chainsaw, and rescue units deployed.
10. Waived the Jones Act (opens up shipping lanes)
Now I don’t know about you, but to me that seems pretty far from nothing and the media picture being perpetuated. In addition that’s not even close to the full totals, as that only accounts for FEMA, and not worldwide aid or donations, which will total in the billions once it’s said and done.
Then of course we have the San Juan Mayor, Carmen Cruz. Now, on one hand I totally understand her trying to get the message out on national TV that they need help. I totally get that. If I was mayor of a city ravaged like that I’d be trying to get the word out as well. In addition to that, she’s securing even more massive amounts of aid than she was already going to get. There is definitely a strategy to what she’s doing. There’s a lot more to this story though. She seems to be the lone voice criticizing the Trump Administration in this whole process. Everyone from the Governor to Geraldo Rivera are praising the federal effort. First, we have her clear dislike of Trump from her history and Tweets. Then we have the fact that she has participated in NONE of the FEMA coordination efforts, despite being invited multiple times. Virtually everything she’s doing seems to be for photo ops and getting on TV, and securing more aid by acting like nothing is happening. There’s a photo of her in the back of a truck, not with mountains of supplies, but mountains of reporters. Then, in the very conference she’s accusing Trump of killing them, she’s standing right in front of absolute mountains of supplies. She also managed to talk, not with the head of FEMA, but Senator Elizabeth Warren. In addition, despite having no power or resources for a few days, she somehow managed to get a “We Are Dying” shirt printed up. This is massive hyperbole because very few people have actually died, especially given the massive levels of destruction. Even Geraldo, who has been on the ground from the beginning, called her out to her face that that isn’t happening. Let’s put this in perspective:
Body Count directly after hurricane: 16
Body Count today: 16
Now, any body count is bad, but literally no one has died due to Trump admin ineffectiveness. Here’s what really happened though. An island rife with corruption sucked up billions of dollars, and instead of infrastructure projects and hurricane prevention managed to enrich a few people and waste it all instead of empowering the people and building the country. This is pure cover for the ineptitude of the Puerto Rican officials and local governments. Not only that, but the Economist labeled Puerto Rico “Welfare Island” as their entitlements spiral out of control, and the labor participation rate is astonishingly low at 61%. Massive government bloat and socialist practices have crushed the island’s economy. Median income is half of the poorest state in the union (Mississippi) yet welfare benefits are the same, thus de-incentivizing working. Also, we are still dealing with the crisis left from Harvey and Irma. Actually, I’m amazed the federal response has provided what it has, given the resources being poured into the relief efforts from Harvey and Irma. Then on top of all that, there was massive amounts of aid stuck at the dock because local truck drivers haven’t reported for duty. We aren’t seeing the same level of citizen engagement that we saw in the wake of Harvey and Irma. After that, we also heard a rogue Puerto Rican officer’s broadcast accusing the government of not distributing the aid properly.
The democrats and progressives tried really hard to make Harvey and Irma “Trump’s Katrina”. They couldn’t because literally everyone praised the federal response, giving them no ammunition. This time though, the far more difficult logistics and destroyed power grid, coupled with a PR seeking mayor, has provided that ammunition. Every left wing twitter account I look at has been all over this. Keith Olbermann, the left’s resident nut job, actually accused Trump of DELIBERATELY refusing aid because he hates Hispanic people. In addition, Michael Moore and others have actually suggested we resettle the ENTIRE island in swing states to flip the demographics so they can win elections. You see, that’s how democrats operate. If that’s not politicizing a tragedy I don’t know what is. They can’t win on ideas, so they just need to import enough people to tip the scales in their favor. Ana Navarro and Joy Reid have suggested similar practices. Don’t try to convince the actual population that you have the right plan and ideas, replace them with people that will block vote democrat. It’s really easy to offer free money, college, and healthcare to a poor population and get them to block vote for you. The disdain that progressives show for actual citizens amazes me every day.
By the time this is done, which will be years from now, given the state of devastation in Puerto Rico, the federal aid will easily be in the billions. We might even arrive at that number fairly soon. By taking shots at the Trump Administration, and the federal response they are indirectly taking shots at all the first responders, and the tax payers that are going to be fueling Puerto Rico for years. The officials are also milking the system, knowing good and well they were in big trouble before the hurricane, so why not push the government to get maximum aid to rebuild their horrible infrastructure? None of this is the fault of the Puerto Rican people. This a problem the government, both federal and state, created.
Welcome to the results of socialism.
The NFL is under siege.
Conservatives have been boycotting over the protests, and injection of politics into the game over the last few years. In addition, progressives are boycotting because of the appearance of a “blacklist” of Colin Kaepernick. Then, on top of all of that, you have the concussion and brain CTE issues, with fewer parents allowing their children to play football due to worry regarding injuries. The game is also struggling due to new rule implementation. Players can’t hit as hard, they can’t celebrate as much, and the game stops every two seconds for a review, replay, or penalty. Rivalries used to be hotly contested and vitriolic games that fans anticipated, now everyone is each other’s best friend on the other team. One could easily argue that the “soul” of the game has been compromised, and it isn’t as great as it used to be.
This season is off to an inglorious start. Before even the first game was played, we had an escalating war on the NFL from all sides. Now, it’s elevated several notches due to President Trump’s incendiary assault at his rally on the 22nd. In the speech, he called for the firing of those “sons of bitches” that kneel for the anthem. Personally, I can see why this is such a big issue. The disrespect shown to the anthem and the flag, and the sacrifices made by those who fought for it, is to me completely offensive. American football is a game created in America, played almost exclusively by Americans, that players are compensated millions of dollars to play, even on the low end. American Football, and the NFL, would not exist at all were it not for the veterans and those who have fought for this country. Personally, even if I disagreed with every single thing the country was doing, I’d still stand for the anthem to pay homage to those who died fighting for the ideals we aspire to.
Now, I also acknowledge the other side of that argument. If you are black in America, you constantly see in the media a black person being shot by law enforcement, so if you perceive law enforcement becoming judge, jury, and executioner, I can see why you’d protest. This is where we saw the initial reason for all these protests. Keep in mind, these players are not protesting for themselves, they are protesting the perceived racial injustice they see in their communities. If you are the average black person in America, you see virtually every shooting or death of a black person by law enforcement played over and over ad nauseam on every news show. Studies show, such as this Harvard study, that black people are no more likely to be subject to lethal force. However, if you see it from their point of view, all they see are the news reports that yet another black person is dead, and there is rarely punishment for the cop that did the shooting. The media does the country no favors here as they rarely show any white people getting shot, so it gives the appearance that black people are regularly being executed in the streets.
Then we have the assault on the game itself. I personally believe that radical progressives hate football, and I’ll tell you why. Football is violent. There is no equality of outcome. It is the ultimate meritocracy. Survival of the fittest, where only the biggest, strongest, toughest, and fastest survive. It is overwhelmingly masculine, or as a radical feminist might put it, it has a lot of “toxic masculinity”. In addition, it shows that no, gender is not a social construct, it is pure biology. No one cares that the NFL isn’t diverse, as Asians are wildly underrepresented. I believe that if radical progressives had their way, the NFL would be gone tomorrow. Every ridiculous narrative they try to push, from gender to diversity, the very existence of the NFL flies right in the face of it. They might be able force a company to up it’s diversity quota, but they can’t do anything to make the NFL sign more Asian players. Not that progressives don’t hate Asian people, since they discriminate against them in academia and the tech sector every chance they get.
I said the NFL has lost some of it’s soul. The same applies to virtually every sport, especially the NBA. These are two sports I loved and watched incessantly growing up, and I’ve watched them become sterile and soulless. Every incremental policy put into place has degraded the emotion and pace of the game. No, you can’t celebrate too much, you might hurt someone’s feelings. No, you can’t hit too hard, or play too aggressive defense. Yes, the game has to be far longer with an arduous pace so we can review and make sure every call is fair. Yes, you should totally switch teams every season to try to get a ring or more money. And yes, you should assemble these super teams comprised of insane talent, thus rendering the rest of the league at a massive competitive disadvantage. The combination of all these things and more, has crushed the souls of these leagues. Gone are the days of Lakers vs. Celtics, or Bulls vs. Pistons. 49ers vs. Cowboys. These intense rivalries barely exist any more, and the leagues are worse off for it.
So now, we have a league caught in the middle of a culture war. The NFL has become a battleground not just for teams, but for ideology. The NFL is in essentially a no win situation. Force the players to stand, you lose progressives. Don’t force them to stand you lose conservatives. The NFL is a microcosm of the country right now. Deeply divided, and highly partisan. Culture War 2.0 is real, and has infiltrated every level of our lives. The once sacred bastions of sports, music, movies, and comedy used to be the places we could put partisanship aside and enjoy each other’s company. Now we draw battle lines over every single one of these outlets, and wage war with one another. Is the answer to double down and just hate the other side more? I believe the answer is to really look at what the other side is saying and talk to someone you know who is on that side. The President, be it Trump or Obama, cannot force us to come together and see each other's perspective.
We have to do that ourselves.
If you enjoyed this article, please follow me on Twitter and Instagram, and subscribe to my YouTube channel! Watch me on Periscope as well!
I decided last night that I would watch the Emmy Awards as a public service to anyone who reads or watches anything I do, so they don’t have to experience it themselves. I also try to ensure that I consume plenty of ideologically opposed information that is against what I believe in, just to make sure I’m not living in the bubble I accuse others of living in. I watch a lot of progressive Twitter accounts, a few TV shows, and read articles from Left wing media. So, I took on the challenge to see if I could sit through 3 hours of self aggrandizing, Trump-Hating celebrities. I succeeded, but it was just as eye-rolling and pretentious as I assumed it would be.
I knew it was going to be very political just on the basis of the host, Stephen Colbert. Back in my progressive days, I watched Colbert, John Stewart, and John Oliver virtually every night. Their schtick eventually got old, just due to repetition of the same personality and writing style every episode, to say nothing of the fact that my politics evolved over the years. I’m about to enlighten you on how virtually all of these shows work in terms of psychology. I wish I could claim credit for being the one to notice this, but I actually never did until I saw a post originating from a psychologist and posted on the internet. You see, virtually all of these shows follow the exact same pattern. The originating post describes this process better than I can, so here it is:
I remember watching these shows and getting sense that the structure felt oddly familiar every episode, but I never put it together that there’s actually psychological reasoning behind the pacing. During the Emmys, SNL, Colbert, Oliver, and Meyer were all showered with awards and nominations. In the end, Oliver and SNL won the Trump Hate Olympics, which is all those awards really were. Even Alec Baldwin, whose Trump impression isn’t even all that good, won a major award.
The opening musical arrangement ran like an ad for the Democrats. They managed to work in climate change, racism, and virtually every other Democrat talking point into the musical. Then, throughout the night virtually every presenter and award winner made either an Anti-Trump diatribe, or some sort of social justice commentary. In a hilarious irony that even Colbert noticed, the biggest celebrity in the world was’t even there: The President. This morning it was confirmed as I expected that these Emmys pulled in some of the lowest ratings they’ve ever done. I guess regular people being lectured by a room full of rich celebrities isn’t something that’s appealing to the average person. There’s a delicious irony in the fact that Trump is a bigger celebrity than any of them.
You see, we are in uncharted territory right now. In days gone by, before the advent of social media, if a celebrity had something to say, you might hear about it once a month in a magazine, newspaper, or TV interview. They always had a big platform being famous, but only recently have they been able to really get their messages out there in a massive way. The people collected in that room last night collectively have Twitter feeds that literally number in the millions, if not billions, combined. Now, if Hollywood stars want to perpetuate a message, they can do so very easily to millions of people in one shot. You now generally know going into a movie or TV show the politics of the people involved.
When I was growing up, I loved several celebrities like Arnold and Stallone. I loved the fact that regardless of what was going on in my life I could sit in front of a Stallone movie and escape reality for a couple of hours. My perception of Arnold and Stallone wasn’t influenced by any sort of politics, so I was able to escape for a bit from reality. Now, a significant portion of the country reviles celebrity, because they’ve taken that escape away. For the average person, who just goes to work and wants to care for their family, they had tv, movies, and sports as an escape and relaxation time after a hard week of actual work. As we’ve seen, even football has become political, so now there’s no escape. Everything is political now, and even watching SportsCenter to get scores has become some sort of social justice lecture constantly. Celebrities and athletes only existed as a mechanism to entertain the average working person, and now that escape is shattered, as they’ve made their hatred for the average person obvious.
What we have now are a bunch of celebrities living in their own fantasy land. These are people who no longer have to worry about the economy, schools, jobs, taxes, or national security. They live in multiple story mansions with security guards and walls, and shower us peons with their virtue signaling about how awesome the world would be if only we were as good of a person as they are. You see, when you don’t need to worry about anything that concerns regular people, all you have left is climate change and social justice. When was the last time you saw a celebrity concerned about jobs in their hometown? Or finding a good school for their child? You don’t, but you do hear about how racist we all are. How we have held back so much progress and care nothing for equality, and the election of Donald Trump proves how we are all a bunch of White Supremacists.
Last night, Donald Glover deservedly won two of the most prestigious awards the Emmys have to offer: Lead Actor and Outstanding Director. He took this opportunity to tell us how oppressed black people are under Donald Trump. Setting aside the fact that black people won several of the top tier accolades, and that we just came off of a black president, I was unaware that there’s new oppression of black people that only started since January the 20th. Then we had the Winner of Best Show, which was the Handmaids Tale, a supposed commentary on authoritarian regimes, which we are quickly reminded we are currently living under. Again, I was unaware that Donald Trump is currently forcing breeding programs and rolling back rights for women. In addition, Elizabeth Moss is a scientologist, which is one of the most authoritarian ideologies out there.
To most celebrities, we hate you. Not because you have a differing opinion, but because you destroyed our escape, then afterwards, insulted us all right to our faces. By all means though, please keep it up.
Meanwhile, we will keep winning elections and tuning you out.
If you enjoyed this article, please follow me on Twitter and Instagram, and subscribe to my YouTube channel! Watch me on Periscope as well!
The Great Houston Triggering
Last week an interesting event took place. No, I’m not talking about North Korea’s nuclear weapons, nor the potential ending of DACA. The event I refer to is the massive triggering of cognitive dissonance from progressive Trump haters last week. For those unaware, cognitive dissonance happens when one holds a particular view and is then shown contravening evidence or information about the view they hold. Or, “the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes”. So what happens when someone is in a state of cognitive dissonance? They get uncomfortable, silent, blather incoherently, curse or they resort to personal attacks. For someone to enter cognitive dissonance, there needs to be a trigger. An event that conflicts with their views.
In Houston, Donald Trump and everyday Americans provided that trigger.
You see, the narrative since the election (which was also a cognitive dissonance trigger) is that America is a racist nation that intentionally elected a white supremacy enabler (who is also a Russian puppet) that routinely issues “racist dog whistles” to his racist base of cult like followers. The whole racist narrative, along with the Russian narrative, are responses to a triggering event (the election) that had to be explained away with something other than “I was wrong”. The tragedy in Charlottesville coupled with an admittedly imperfect response only served to further this narrative. With the Russian narrative up in smoke, there was a need for a new narrative for progressives to stick to Trump. This narrative came in the same form it usually does from the left: Racism and identity politics.
In the aftermath of Hurricane Henry, Houston showed what America was really about. We saw black people helping Hispanics and white people. We saw white people helping black and Asian people. Muslims and Christians helping everyone. You see, when the chips are down, people show you who they really are. What Americans showed in Houston is that they are overwhelmingly good people. Watching the guy with the confederate flag on his airboat ferrying black people, or the black guy on his jet ski rescuing a white senior shows what we are really about. At the end of the day, when it really matters, Americans are united. These radical fringes the media loves to play and give airtime to do not represent this country. Do the math, the hardcore racists are less than one tenth of one percent of this country. The ANTIFA goons are around the same. So what we have are two radical fringes that do not represent the 99.9% of this country.
Let me add to that: The hardcore racists and fringe elements are less than one tenth of one percent of the population of this country. How do I arrive at that number? Take a look at the various hate group registries, twitter followings, event attendance, etc. The number I arrived at is approximately 50,000 people in a country of 320 million, and that might even be a high estimate. In addition, that includes not only the hardcore racists but non-violent groups like identitarians. The KKK sports a whopping 3000 or so, nationwide. These numbers are infinitesimal compared to the overwhelming majority. Now, I’m not saying these groups aren’t a problem because of course, they are. My argument is that they don’t in any way represent the vast majority of America, and not even a remotely significant percentage. So, in effect, we have a media driven mass delusion that there are Nazis on every corner and that the President loves and enables them.
The President then showed up in Houston and the left alternated between making fun of Melania’s footwear and condemning Trump for not crying hard enough or going waist deep in water to save a child from drowning. Two days later, he shows up again, and here’s where the cognitive dissonance trigger happens: He is shown in pictures and numerous videos kissing black babies and taking selfies with Hispanic, white, Asian, and black families. I watch a lot of prominent left wingers on Twitter, and the cognitive dissonance supernova was off the charts. The reactions from the left ranged from silence to personal attacks, but most of all, they accused him of doing it for the camera. Deray McKesson, a Black Lives Matter organizer and someone who routinely calls for Trump to be removed from office said “Can we just get him out of here already?” in response to a tweeted video of Trump kissing a black child. That resigned, frustrated response is pure cognitive dissonance. He saw an image that conflicted with the belief he’s had for months of Trump as a hyper racist enabler, and all he could offer was frustrated resignation.
Let me also address this “doing it for the camera” argument. First, I’d argue that’s pretty much the job of a President during a disaster, to get on camera and project positivity and reassure everyone, even if he knows things are bad. Projecting a positive image is critical in times like these. Secondly, how many Neo Nazis do you think would be seen on camera kissing a black baby? My guess is exactly zero. That sort of compassionate act is really hard to fake, or not look uncomfortable doing. Third, if the argument is that he’s conning people, I’d just ask conning them into what? Seeing unity? Seeing a country united behind victims of a catastrophe? Is he conning us into thinking that Texas will be taken care of and all of its citizens cared for? Is he conning us into helping and accepting people regardless of race? I’d argue this is all the type of conning the country needs right now. Perception is reality, and right now both Houston and the President are showing the right kind of leadership.
So how do I know I’m not the delusional triggered one? That’s easy, there was no trigger of cognitive dissonance for me. Things are proceeding exactly as I expected them to, and have for the last year or so. I was not surprised by the election result, so I had no need to invent any kind of alternate reality or excuses. I didn’t think he was racist to begin with so those pictures didn’t trigger me. I’ve debunked the racist accusation multiple times in my YouTube channel, which you should subscribe to. Everything is proceeded exactly as predicted, except for maybe the ineptitude of the Republican Congress, which will be handled in the midterms of 2018. If you want to know more about social psychology and cognitive dissonance, read Scott Adams sometime for a lot more about how it works. Once you understand, it becomes so easy to recognize in others, and Houston was one of the clearest examples I’ve seen.
There is still a racist and Russian delusion bubble around half of the country, but after Houston, maybe there is a little hole in the bubble.
Thanks for reading. If you enjoyed this article, please share, tweet, and follow me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram.
The Diversity Lie
“Diversity is our strength” is one of the big current talking points of the left. Every single time the topic of Immigration comes up, progressives are quick to remind us how we are a nation of immigrants, and any attempt to restrict immigration in any way is hateful and not representative of “our values”. They are quick to point out how not being more accepting to refugees and the like is hateful and racist. We are told we aren’t supportive of enough diversity. In addition, at every decent sized company in the country, they all have diversity officers and metrics to try to ensure adequate representation for everyone. So, the narrative of the left is that America isn’t diverse enough, that we need more diversity and representation. Progressives constantly worship places like Canada for being a multicultural paradise, and how we here in America just hate everyone who isn’t white, which also ties into their current narrative and hysteria about white supremacy.
Take a look at diversity metrics. Google the phrase “most diverse country”. The United States is near the bottom on every single one of them, which furthers the narrative that the USA isn’t diverse enough. Meanwhile, the top 20 most “diverse” countries are almost entirely African. Why is this? Because here in the US, we take diversity to mean race and gender. In virtually every study, diversity is measured by a concept called fractionalization that takes into account different languages as well. So, by the diversity metrics, Papua New Guinea is by far the most diverse country, because they have hundreds of indigenous peoples with hundreds of different languages. New Guinea has about 8 million people, of which a sliver of a fraction is of a different racial ethnicity. So even though they have virtually zero racial diversity, they are considered most diverse because they have lots of different tribes that speak different languages.
Now, let's a take a look at the current progressive multicultural utopia, Canada. Liberals can’t get enough of Canada. They constantly threaten to move to Canada if their favorite politician isn’t elected, for example. Justin Trudeau is worshipped by the left and even had a Rolling Stone cover lamenting the fact that he isn’t our leader. Well, get ready to have your mind blown. Canada is one of the least racially diverse countries on the planet. Canada is almost 80% white, and 20% what they call “visible minority”. Only 2% of Canadians are black for example. Toronto has a fair amount of visible minorities, but as a whole Canada is one of the whitest countries on the planet. Let’s compare to the United States. At a quick glance, America is 76% White. Doesn’t sound very diverse, does it? Oh but wait, once you do a further inspection, Hispanics are considered White. What? That’s right, Hispanics are classified as white. When you look at White Americans in the census, it includes Hispanic people. So, if you separate that out then it becomes 61% White, 16% Hispanic, 13% Black, and the rest Asian and Mixed. Those numbers are projected to shift to a nonwhite majority by 2050. So, by any racial standard, America is extremely diverse and far more so than most countries that are touted to be bastions of diversity and multiculturalism. America is the most diverse, by far, of any major country. Go look at the demographics of China, India, Canada, and Great Britain, we have them all beat in racial diversity by a mile.
Then we have the companies. Every decent size company has diversity officers and executives. As we saw at Google recently, they will enforce diversity metrics at any cost. Notably, these diversity programs at companies and universities seem to exclude and disenfranchise Asians. Asians tend to be the ones to be discriminated against due to high grades and productivity, as we saw in the Harvard admissions recently. Asian discrimination even has a name: The Asian Tax. The Asian Tax basically means Asians have to score much higher on SATs and the like to be on equal footing for admissions with others. In addition, at a company like Apple, Asians are not considered a URM or Under Represented Minority. So, for all the progressive big talk about diversity, they never seem to care about whether Asians are discriminated against in the meantime. Managers must undergo diversity training to get rid of “implicit bias”, which really only serves to shift the implicit bias from one group another, as hiring practices clearly show.
So now, we’ve eliminated some of the myths of diversity, so what is the Diversity Lie? The diversity lie is that America isn’t diverse, that we aren’t open to new cultures and races. This lie is propagated through guilt. You see, socialist progressives figured out a long time ago that class disparity doesn’t sell. The Marxist ideas of the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat or upper class vs. working class didn’t work. Some time ago, progressives figured out that oppressed vs. not oppressed does work. This is why socialists and now Democrats are constantly pulling the race card and playing identity politics. They need you to believe that we are guilty of oppression and racism to be able to drive their open borders immigration plans, so they can secure a voting block. Democrats know that poor immigrants and migrants are going to overwhelmingly vote Democrat, to get the social programs they want in place, such as healthcare and welfare. This is why they viciously fight any kind of Voter ID or immigration law. Make no mistake, they try to cloak their plans in goodwill and humanitarian guises, but there is absolutely a political plan in place to keep them in power and to have as many people as possible reliant on the state. There are numerous extremely rich countries in the Middle East that could easily handle the refugee crisis, yet for some reason, Progressives are obsessed with bringing them all into Western countries. Ask yourself why that is.
We’ve seen what’s happened in Europe. Progressive politicians bringing in migrants by the millions. Take a look at these boats bringing migrants by the thousands and look to see how many women and children there are. Virtually none. This strategy has one purpose: Shift demographics at any cost to keep them in power. In addition, they hide the results from the people. The explosion of rapes, welfare, and crime statistics in places like Sweden are very difficult to acquire because if the population knew the impact, their game would be up, so they cloak the crime statistics. This is another example of political correctness run amok. Yet again, in the wake of Barcelona, everyone is told that the solution is to just love each other more, and be more accepting. In the meantime, the police are literally arresting people for mean tweets that dare to call out the terrorists.
Here in America, we love diversity. We have no problem accepting anyone regarding race, creed, religion. What isn’t going to happen though, is unsustainable mass immigration. The left loves to compare the immigration in the 1800’s to what we have today, which is absurd. There are literally billions of people on earth that have it worse off than the average American. We cannot just bring them all here. I am all for helping out developing countries through charitable works and the like. Besides the obvious security concerns of unfettered immigration, a significant percentage of our jobs will be robotic and based on Artificial Intelligence in a few years. It is not sustainable to bring in millions of people as we will barely even be able to support our own population once robotics and AI become the new norm.
We as a country are being lied to about how diverse and accepting we are. We will no longer be guilted into accepting policies that place the world’s concerns over our own, and we will expose these lies that only serve to undermine the greatness of our country. Make no mistake, I love diversity. I’ve worked and enjoyed being around some of the most diverse teams imaginable, but this insidious lie about the country and it’s people cannot stand. These globalist politicians and progressives that want us to hate ourselves to achieve their goals of establishing a global socialist state are on notice. We are onto you, and we are not buying the hateful version of the country you are selling.
Thanks for reading. If you enjoyed this article, please share, tweet, and follow me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram.