I had a couple of articles I had about 3/4 finished, but haven’t posted them yet due to events in the news and just generally being busy with other things. I was a guest and co-host on The Stark Truth podcast with Robert Stark for 3 upcoming episodes and will post links to the shows here once they air. They will most likely be up sometime over the next few weeks.
Meanwhile, here are some thoughts on Sanders’ recent statements as well as some overall related observations:
Sanders’ continuous stream of anti-white comments such as those he made at the debate make him unsupportable to any self respecting white person. He appears to have gone all in with the “black lives matter” and the social justice crowd and completely abandoned the white working class demographic. His young ethnomasochist supporters are too naive to realize pandering doesn’t work and that the people their sacrificing their interests for are simply exploiting their altruism to advance their own tribal interests(whether conscious of it or not.)
I support many of Bernie’s economic policies, but any potential benefits are of course cancelled out by his social justice/anti-white commitment. For example, I agree with the $15 minimum wage increase he proposes as a means of countering manipulative corporations and cheap assholes, but you can’t have a $15 minimum wage *and* invite millions of people here from the 3rd world. It’s financially unsustainable. This is the same with free college education. It’s a great idea and works in other countries, but you can’t have government sponsored college *and* take in massive amounts of refugees and other third world migrants. Such noble collective endeavors require a delicate balance to ensure they remain fiscally feasible and everyone is on the same page in terms of their investment in the society. Such programs require high trust, low time preference populations to remain successful. People like Sanders are well intentioned but lack the will to make the difficult choices. They are too afraid of being called racist, heartless, nationalist etc to take the necessary steps to confront politically incorrect obstacles to the success of their own programs.
Of course, I’m not strictly talking about race/immigration. Bernie would no doubt institute environmental reforms in the US, but would he forbid the US from importing goods from countries which have(comparatively) little to no pollution or hazard controls, such as China, India or Mexico? What good is it to tell our companies they can’t pollute, so we can feel good about ourselves here, while at the same time we gladly take in products from countries that don’t care about the environment? It’s hypocritical. Bernie’s positions on trade with China are good, and he seems to understand this. He is also though one of those people that believes the US should be subservient to the “international community,” the will of the United Nations etc. This leads me to believe that as a leader he would be weak in asserting our national interests when faced with opposition from so-called “oppressed” third world nations. If he can’t say no to amnesty for millions of illegal aliens or to the untold number of people around the world who want to flood the US,(even though they will render his domestic programs insolvent and unsustainable) it’s hard to see him putting his foot down on the world stage. Sure, he’s voted against dubious trade deals while in congress and as a senator, but that’s not the same thing as having to face actual foreign leaders and being willing to accept the wrath of cutting them off. Being the bearer of bad news just doesn’t fit with Bernie’s temperament, but I may be wrong on this issue.
The bottom line for me though is that as a white person, Sanders’ “net anti-white” vision for America would permanently transform it in ways I find undesirable.
From Sanders’ campaign website:
Bernie firmly rejects the idea that America’s standard of living must drop in order to see a raise in the standard of living in China.
This illustrates exactly how I feel about concepts like “white privilege.” I’m not willing to allow the country/state/city/neighborhood I live in to be downgraded so that someone else can upgrade from whatever third world shithole they came from. I reject the idea that I have to forfeit or handicap my own prospects to improve someone else’s and that we must give away what our ancestors sacrificed for and bequeathed to us for people who openly express hatred for us. Many of these advantages are likely a result of genetics anyway. I have no guilt and owe these people nothing. As a biological organism, self preservation instincts(for those of us who still embrace them) trump your feels. I imagine this is how corporations feel about minimum wage laws and wealth redistribution, but it seems to me that community and national interest may conflict with personal economic interests from time to time, and the state must intervene occasionally if nation states themselves are to survive as distinct entities. Everyone hates heavy handed HOAs too, but “anything goes” neighborhoods tend to look like shit. I do believe that collectively humans can build a superior functioning society than a strictly individualist / libertarian one, which lacks any cohesive vision or aesthetic consciousness. Yet when someone starts talking about “checking your privilege” or turning the country over to low IQ people with poor future time orientation, I intuitively get the feeling I’m being scammed. Looking at Oakland, Camden, Memphis, Detroit, Baltimore, South Africa, Zimbabwe, etc. it’s unclear why I should support policies that inevitably lead to more majority nonwhite cities.
We know how that story ends, not with universal humanism but with reduced social capital and increased violence toward whatever whites are too poor, naive or stoic to escape the consequences of some shielded politician’s virtue signaling.