Hey, that sounds SO familiar!!
Gavin McInnes writes:
As the father of many Indians myself, I don’t like this narrative. We didn’t just barge in and wipe out an entire people. We fought them from 1540 to 1890. That’s 350 years! They eventually lost, but nobody has proved to be as worthy an adversary as the Indians. We fought them a hundred times longer than we fought the Nazis. When we portray the Indians as an innocent tribe of peaceful hippies who were duped with “guns, germs, and steel,” as Jared Diamond would say, we make them look bad. They were warriors.
David Cole writes:
It’s become a media cliché to say that the white population in the U.S. is “rapidly aging,” but clichéd though that claim may be, it’s not inaccurate. Like all elderly people, aging whites will become increasingly susceptible to crime, and matters relating to self-defense will become more and more important. Which is why I consider it a small victory that this year, two separate attempts to penalize old white men for not abiding by the Chuck Norris rule failed miserably. If you didn’t read about these two cases in the news, it’s almost certainly because, since all the participants were white—the good guys and bad guys alike—neither story got Trayvonified into a national cause célèbre involving rioters, burned-out CVS stores, and presidents waxing poetic about hypothetical sons.
Steve Sailer writes:
Thus the most liberal institutions in America, colleges, are presently self-destructing during the Black Autumn. They are paying the price for encouraging their lowest-IQ denizens, football players and other blacks admitted under affirmative-action standards, to act out in tantrums of racial animus against white liberal administrators.
But why would blacks self-discipline themselves when they are rewarded for infantile outbursts? (…)
Life imitates Lord Copper: “strong mutually antagonistic governments everywhere”
The leading writers of the age are growing concerned about this central challenge of our time. Michel Houellebecq’s new novel, Submission, envisions a future France where the white left and center, simply for the satisfaction of frustrating the white right, barter the presidency to the Muslims. Even more disturbingly in Houellebecq’s insidious plot, disloyal, deracinated men of the right then find justifications to welcome their new Iron Age overlords.
I don’t agree. Besides Houellebecq, which major fiction writers are writing about what matters?
Only at Taki’s, via Sailer, did you read about the black-football-player-campus-rapes at Mizzou that preceded the recent tantrum throwing.
Turns out that the only place in America where there WERE campus rapes has decided to pick on white teachers and Asian student journalists instead!
I call it “squirrel!ing.”
Adam Carolla to #SyrianRefugees: You’re fleeing because YOU f—ed up. Don’t bring your shit here. (And same with Mexicans.)
Benedict Cumberbatch’s portrayal of a trans model hurts anyone who has been boxed in by statements such as ‘men don’t cry’ or ‘women are nurturing’. Gender is a prison we all live in.
‘Marco Rubio struck a nerve with his welders comment because he challenged the core from which liberalism draws strength: higher education’
James E. Miller writes:
As economist F.A. Hayek points out in his illuminating essay “The Intellectuals and Socialism,” Western, democratic countries are heavily influenced by intellectuals who “wield” their power “by shaping public opinion.” During the 20th century, socialism as a movement grew primarily in intellectual circles before it trickled down to the masses. “Socialism,” Hayek wrote, “has never and nowhere been at first a working-class movement.”