The Outer Limits of an Ideological Future

“See, it’s always the same. Clouseau is sitting there, in a chair, just like you, with his back to me. Then suddenly, my hands go round his throat, and I begin to squeeze. It’s wonderful. It’s marvelous. I’m squeezing. And the more I squeeze, the freer I feel. I’m in ecstasy. And then suddenly, suddenly my problem is solv-ved.” -Inspector Dreyfus

My old friend Millennial Woes has been cranking out a lot of thought provoking content as of late. One thing I like about his videos is that he tends to leave them somewhat open ended, often hinting at a conclusion but leaving it for the audience to ponder. One of his recent videos, titled “Signs of An Ideological Future” he talks about how we’re reaching (or have reached) a stage when many people are no longer interested in debating or even hearing from people that have views which don’t conform to their in-group orthodoxy opinions (even if the debate comes from someone within their own movement, and whose involvement in said movement predates their own by many years.) I’ll come back to this later. Near the end of the video, Woes floats the possibility that for those on the left that hate SJWs, there may be no alternative for them but to join the AltRight. A year or two ago I might have agreed with this likelihood but not now. I’m not sure what form they will take, but alternatives inevitably will emerge when push comes to shove. Why do I think this? Another of Millennial Woes videos offers a partial clue.

To put it mildly, there are too many crazy and retarded people in the AltRight itself. I’m not talking about people with “extreme beliefs” (or whatever.) I recognize the importance of desensitizing people to social taboos through trolling, irony and shock humor, and I operate on the principal that anything should be up for rational (small r) discussion. I addressed this before, defending Richard Spencer during the NPI “salutegate” uproar as well as the Milo controversy. What I’m talking about now though is the issue of personalities. There are substantial numbers of vocal groups in the AltRight that are outright lunatics and an even greater number that have such insufferable personalities that one wouldn’t want to get stuck hanging out with these jugheads alone for 5 minutes at a party, let alone live in an ethnostate with them and thousands of their cohorts, even if one might agree with them ideologically on 90% of issues.

Of course I’m not talking about the primary AltRight thought leaders like Spencer, Woes, and Greg Johnson (who are frequently attacked by the same socially abrasive mobs whenever they say something interesting) or other minor figures and writers. I’ll give some examples…

This happens to Richard Spencer almost weekly where he casually spouts an opinion that deviates from the traditional right wing dogma. Instances of this include his skepticism of the “holodomor,” his arguments against local ethnonationalism in favor of a European racial superstate, his support for universal health care and his having the audacity to express even the vaguest tolerance for transgendered individuals. In many cases these contrarian type statements are simply thought experiments, but according to ideological enforcers, no exploration of ideas is allowed, no creative thinking will be tolerated. You’re not permitted to question anything in the unwritten AltRight sacred mythological canon, no matter how many holes or inaccuracies you can demonstrate in it.

In another glowing example, Tara McCarthy took a break from promoting unfounded pizzagate conspiracy theories to make a video called “The Dark Side of the AltRight.” In this video she sensibly chronicles and denounces some of the recent incidents of random violence by a few kook members of the AltRight. Scores of morons in the comments pounced on her, attacking her for daring to suggest these acts of violence were dumb and counter-productive. Note that we’re not even talking about self-defense or some kind of perhaps inevitable political violence that could conceivably lead to a declared objective. These were instances of a lunatic killing other people in “his own movement” and another was just
some drunken idiot randomly stabbing an ordinary black guy on the street. There were other incidents and stories as well, but they featured more or less the same level of nuttiness. We all understand why the media amplifies these stories and downplays black on white crime, but at the end of the day it’s not unreasonable to demand mentally coherent conduct in public from members of a movement which purports to be fighting to preserve/restore civilization.

Yet another recent instance where hordes of unhinged AltRight people freaked out was when Beardson Beardly made what I thought was a very persuasive video in which he articulated the mildest criticisms of the ultra lame “white sharia” meme. I don’t even tend to agree with half of Beardson’s opinions, but I enjoy his vids because he has a fun going, down to Earth personality and more importantly he is able to think for himself. He’s someone you could get along with. Also he likes the Beach Boys and wore a Ween shirt in one of his videos, so you can’t really go wrong there. Anyway, later in the video Beardson takes issue with the people in the AltRight who were making fun of “Aids Skrillex” for working in a grocery store. Beardson makes an appeal to empathy and argues that they should prioritize directing their energy toward more big league opponents rather than harass some random kid who made a few anti-white comments at a shitty Trump rally. Incidentally I would have asked the question, “What’s wrong with working at a grocery store?” Especially the one he supposedly works at, which appears to be an awesome heath food / farmers market type of store. Even if it wasn’t though, who cares? I though the AltRight was supposed to be on the side of the working class. Why would they be shaming someone for working a perfectly respectable job? This hypocrisy reveals many of them to be no different from normie rat race republicans, equating someone’s worth in life with how much money they make. Anyway, commenters didn’t hesitate to pile on and trash Beardson for making this video. The significance of this is that Beardson is a far right, radical traditionalist and race realist. If the AltRight rank and file are willing to go berserk and shun someone like him over a minor disagreement, then it hardly seems worth it for people who have broader cultural disagreements to bother entertaining the idea of getting involved with the AltRight.

As Greg Johnson has pointed out, “bullying only works on psychologically weak people.” Intelligent, self-confident and capable individuals don’t care if you call them “beta males” or tell them they have “too much soy in their diet.” They don’t care about being called a “cuck” (a once clever insult which had a specific racial meaning that has since been ruined by misuse.) They don’t give a shit about being called a faggot or degenerate. They will just laugh it off and conclude you and your squad are a bunch of insecure halfwits. Ultimately though, they will dismiss you and move on.

At this point you might be thinking “Yes, but if these leftists or AltLite people hate SJWs enough they will come to the AltRight anyway. They’ll be forced to.” Don’t be so sure. If someone like me (who has been writing explicitly pro-white articles for several years) can deduce that the personalities that makeup the AltRight legions are so insufferable and illogical that one could actually find themselves preferring the company of the skeptic community or even actual SJWs…then what are the odds that normal people will take the Nestea Plunge into the AltRight and stay there? By normal, I don’t mean “normies” either, just intelligent open-minded people who may be willing to give identitarian ideas a fair consideration. Indeed, many writers and thinkers that have been pushed into the AltRight over the last few years as a result of excessive anti-white hatred and political correctness, have already come and gone, having grown weary of the toxic and loony atmosphere. They reached back into the medicine cabinet for another colored pill, the first one they could find…and checked out.

It’s become clearer and clearer over time, that when many in the AltRight talk about preserving “our people,” they’re certainly not talking about White people or Europeans. They’re talking about a teeny tiny subset of Whites that embrace radical traditionalism (which traditions though?,) “White Sharia,” arranged marriages, primitivism, Little House on the Prairie living, specific types of architecture, “nofap,” weird conspiracy theories, and a host of other things bundled in, which hundreds of millions of healthy and well-adjusted White people would want absolutely nothing to do with. Yet if one expresses a different preference on any of these issues, the AltRight mall security busybodies are out in full force to shake you down.

To be successful, these movements will require a unionization of many different types of White Europeans and even non-whites who display a willingness to contribute and prove they have a role to play in these societies. The choice though, won’t simply be limited to SJWs and AltRight. Whether it’s Nazbol, transhumanism, corporate monarchism, neoliberalism, communism, anarcho capitalism, LandBrand neoreaction, chic nihilism or whatever…there will be many different options for people to gravitate to, for those that decide not to lock themselves into what’s fast becoming the equivalent of an ideological padded room.

Brandon Adamson is the author of Beatnik Fascism

Advertisements

Nicole Sund Takes a Stab at Debunking Vaccine Myths

It’s not really a comprehensive debunking, as there is a lot more material to cover, but what she does well is illustrate how flimsy and absurd the “evidence” is that InfoWars bases many of their conclusions on. Most people who are fans of infowars just accept their bombastic claims at face value. Others are simply incapable of analyzing evidence critically or of properly interpreting the results of studies. I see this time and time again on Twitter and elsewhere with people citing studies about soy and sex hormones and fluoride and everything under the sun. For the most part, I just don’t even bother to say anything or point out the flaws in their interpretation because I’ve found that the people who think this way are simply unreachable with logic. It isn’t difficult in my mind to look at conflicting sources and weigh the evidence, but InfoWars attracts a certain kind of personality that is unlikely to be persuaded by evidence based presentation. So in my mind it’s a waste of time.

Still, I have to applaud Nicole for taking one for the team and actually watching several Alex Jones videos and researching the validity of their claims. I’ve been out on the fringes of politics for so long that it’s refreshing to watch someone with a fully functioning brain in action, calmly and methodically debunking quackery.

Revisiting The Wicker Man

I first saw The Wicker Man about 15 years ago when I rented a VHS copy from Blockbuster Video, in the hope that it might feature some 70’s nudity. I think I ended up fast forwarding through most of it, except briefly for that Britt Ekland seduction scene which ends disappointingly. So yeah, as far as erotic horror goes, it’s no Stormswept. However, in spite of having almost no interest in the plot of The Wicker Man at the time, I could not bring myself to fast forward through the final scene, which was genuinely disturbing.

Unlike a throwaway fun flick like “The Wraith” that you that you can watch like 50 times whenever you want some background ambiance, The Wicker Man is one of those movies you regret watching, not because it’s bad, but because it files a traumatizing memory image into your brain that can’t be unseen. I would have been happy to never see or think about this film ever again, but somehow I roped myself into rewatching parts of it and decided it was worth giving a few thoughts on.

*Spoilers ahead*

The plot centers upon a Christian police sergeant who travels to a small Scottish island to investigate a case of a missing young girl. He soon discovers that the locals on the island have abandoned Christianity and are practicing a crude form of Celtic paganism. He is disturbed by their promiscuous behavior and what he perceives to be bizarre and superstitious activities (they utilize folk medicine like swallowing live toads to cure sore throats.) The people on the island make his investigation frustrating as they claim the girl he is looking for never existed. Eventually he locates the girl and saved her from a fate of being sacrificed as the “May Queen” (only she doesn’t appear to want to be saved.) The sergeant gets caught with her while trying to escape. He winds up being the sacrifice instead, and the film ends with him being burned alive in a giant Wicker Man, while the townsfolk joyously look on and sing “Sumer Is Icumen In.”

The leader of the island, “Lord Summerisle” (played by legendary actor Christopher Lee) resembles something of a neoreactionary figure. Following in the footsteps of his grandfather, he manipulates the islanders into embracing traditional paganism (which he himself clearly doesn’t believe in) as a means to control them as well as to establish a harmoniously cohesive and functioning society. The island serves as a prototype for a mostly autonomous, rural “city state” which has deviated from modernity in favor of folklore and superstition. However, with people having wild orgies in graveyards, it is less prudish than the killjoy culture that “Little House on the Praireactionary” factions of neoreaction idealize. That being said, life on Pagan Island looks pretty groovy to me.

Anyway, near the end of the film when the police sergeant has been captured and is about to be sacrificed, he pleads with the villagers that their beliefs are a lie, and tries to convince them that sacrificing him to “their gods” won’t prevent the harvest from failing. The townspeople ignore his appeals to reason and gleefully carry out the sacrifice, burning him alive in a giant wicker man.

The irony is that for almost the entire duration of the event he is vocally professing the Christian afterlife beliefs, asserting that the Christian God he was brought up to believe in is the true one. As the flames slowly begin to engulf him, he desperately curses the islanders and recites Psalm 23, oblivious to the notion that his own prayers are no more or less likely to be answered.

What makes this film ultimately disturbing though is the way it mercilessly reveals the horror of being the odd man out among a mob of people swept up in groupthink. Regardless of what one believes, the viewer can relate the the movie to situations where they perceive themselves to be the rational individual caught in a world gone mad.

Brandon Adamson is the author of Beatnik Fascism

Pool’s Processing

There’s a lot that I relate to in this video by Tim Pool, especially regarding the way people have been redefining words, which inadvertently redraws ideological battle lines as people suddenly find themselves on the opposing side by default. In an otherwise interesting video, he himself misuses the (albeit relatively new) term “AltLeft” multiple times. He utilizes it to refer to the extreme social justice warriors rather then its original proper usage which was for pro-white and anti-pc people who hold liberal views on a wide variety of issues and didn’t quite fit into the AltRight. The real AltLeft is a combination of refugees and cast outs from the AltRight and people from the left that reject what they perceive as the utter lunacy of the social justice freaks. It was essentially for anyone willing to discuss taboo topics without bundling them with a laundry list of conservative extras. If you don’t believe me, then realize this blog is nearly 2 years old, and people like Robert Lindsay and I were using the term well before that.

Instead Pool uses the term “AltLeft” in the form that was nothing but a media invention created by clueless “dems are the real racists” republicans like Hannity that actually think the term AltRight is a negative slur and wanted to throw it back at the left as if it’s an insult or something (it isn’t.) Tim Pool is still in the mindset that we all need to stop being dicks to each other. This eventually becomes a tiresome position to take when you realize the sentiment isn’t universal or reciprocated by those who see their identities as being uniquely oppressed victim groups. Everyone ultimately may be forced to pick a side that one half of himself is diametrically opposed to. If we’re lucky we’ll have more than just two options in this Choose Your Own Adventure dystopia. There’s an internal battle that goes on in addition to whatever external one we each find ourselves in.

Cherry 2015 – If Loving A Fembot Is Artificial, I Don’t Want To Be Genuine

(this article originally appeared Nov 22, 2014 in Stepkid Magazine but has recently become relevant again)

One of the most prescient dystopian science fiction films of the 1980’s turned out to be the (direct to video?) 1987 movie, “Cherry 2000.”

The future depicted in Cherry 2000 is one where sexual encounters and relationships with real women have become complicated legal transactions requiring lawyers, and have been reduced to merely emotionless business arrangements. The women are typically aggressive, masculine, demanding and shrill. It leads to an environment where the rare romantic guy, who still longs for a traditional loving relationship, would actually find a courtship with a female android more emotionally fulfilling than one with a real live organic woman. It’s sort of a more sympathetic, less horrific spin on “The Stepford Wives” theme. In Stepford, the men killed their loving yet sassy wives in exchange for robot sex slaves who would do the dishes and clean the house without giving them any grief. They were portrayed unmistakably as as evil pricks. In contrast, the physically human women are the ones who display the robotic behavior in Cherry 2000, while the romantic men are forced to seek out the loving emulation of androids for any “meaningful” companionship. Of course the film sells out in the end, as the main character who sacrifices everything in a dangerous quest to replace his beloved, short circuited fembot (Cherry, played by Pamela Gidley) with the identical discontinued model, ultimately falls for the crass and bitchy, tomboyish tracker, “Edith”(Melanie Griffith) whom he’s hired to help locate the robot.

With the advent of “yes means yes” laws it doesn’t seem like it will be long before men will be required to get some type of verbally recorded or written consent to engage in sexual activity with a seemingly “turned on” girl, to shield themselves from litigation or criminal prosecution if she turns on them later. As if getting a girl pregnant or contracting an STD wasn’t enough to worry about, now we have bigger fish to fry. Indeed, there is already a phone app for sexual consent, called Good2Go.

Recent developments over the past two decades have lead me to conclude we’re headed towards Cherry 2000 style dating in America. Indeed, I’ve started to notice that the crudely annoying spambots on Tinder and Okcupid have been getting more sophisticated in their programming to the point where interacting with them can be more romantically stimulating than talking to actual chicks (which, if you’ve ever had an unfortunate exchange with one of these Tinderbots you would realize is more of a knock on the sorry state of the 21st century female conversational experience than it is one marveling in wonder at the advancements in artificial intelligence spam.)

Then there are video game characters. Back in a particularly isolated time period of my life in 2001 and 2002, when all I did was drink diet pepsi, eat microwave popcorn and play old Super Nintendo RPGs in my studio apartment, I would occasionally develop what I guess you could call “crushes” on some of the female sprites in the games (such as Rydia from Final Fantasy IV, Marle and Schala from Chrono Trigger, Paula from Earthbound, etc.) even to where I began to curiously research the technological possibilities of transferring human consciousness to a computer. I was thinking of course that if i could somehow hack a sprite that resembled me into the game’s ROM, that it might be possible to get something going. Yeah, it’s crazy but so what? Realized dreams are the work of madmen. I also saw Tron in the theater when I was a kid so perhaps it left a subconscious impression on me.

In any case, if that kind of emotion was possible to evoke in the days of 16 bit SNES pixelation, I can only imagine how real a romance could be in the context of modern video games which are now much more advanced in their elaborate overworlds, roleplays and simulations. Thousands if not millions of men and women find the virtual experience of video games more appealing than going outside and playing. It would be naive to think that organic human love would be any less vulnerable to competition from artificial intelligence than other components of our earthly existence.

Dust off your 1980’s JC Penney catalog and get your fembots on order, men! This scene is coming to a nightclub or campus near you.

Brandon Adamson is the author of Beatnik Fascism

The Scapegoat Generation – A Half-Hearted Defense of Boomers

The way people talk about baby boomers being the source of so many problems in our contemporary world, you’d think they were a generation that spanned over hundreds of years. In actuality, boomers are people that were born roughly between 1943 and 1960. That’s right, the boomer generation is comprised of people that were born during an 18 year timespan (give or take.) Yet millennials and my generation (Gen X) often malign them as being responsible for nearly every aspect of society’s decline. So the narrative goes, “Boomers inherited a wealthy white American utopia and grew up with every advantage, and frivolously pissed it all away, along with their children’s future.” Not so fast, I’m here to tell you that boomers did not have it so easy and many of the negative actions falsely attributed to them were really perpetrated by other generations (or at the very least..these actions and policies were not unique to boomers.) I should also add that some of these negative developments were implemented against the will of the majority of boomers (elites betraying the will of the people is nothing new, but it often gets lost down the historical memory hole how when things get implemented they may have been unpopular.) Here are some claims about boomers which I will address, one at a time:

1. Boomers had it easy growing up.

This one might seem true on its face, if all you did was watch the first few seasons of The Wonder Years on Netflix and completely ignored the fact that more than 2 million of them were drafted to go fight in the jungles of Vietnam. Nearly 60,000 US troops were killed in Vietnam and more than 150,000 were wounded and maimed…many of them boomers. Unlike the people who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, many young people that fought in Vietnam were forcibly conscripted to fight in a pointless war. Even for those that managed to avoid the draft, it was a real concern that they had to actively confront. Think about it for a second, while your millennial fatass is eating pizza, drinking some shitty energy drink and playing Call of Duty, this is what many “boomer cucks” were doing at the same age.  US involvement in The Vietnam War was initiated and subsequently sustained under the administrations of Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon (none of whom were boomers.)

2. Boomers spent us into debt and sold us out to globalization

One could say this is true, but it is nothing unique to the boomer generation. The first boomer president wasn’t until Bill Clinton in 1992, well after our national debt had already become massive and well after “debt culture” had become the norm in American society. National Debt greatly increased during the Reagan era (Reagan was about 70 years old when he took office in 1981.) Boomers only recently entered retirement age a few years ago, so all that Medicare and Social Security money that has been going to elderly people for the last 40 years has not been going to boomers. The rest of the money has gone to the military, largely in relation to commitments leftover from foreign conflicts and entanglements dating back well before the boomers’ ascendance to power, including many they did not even support being involved in in the first place. It’s correct that Clinton signed NAFTA and promoted other globalist free trade initiatives, however these same policies were supported by Reagan, the first president Bush, and Nixon, none of whom were boomers. In fact, the boomer left, independents and right wing working class overwhelmingly opposed NAFTA and other similar deals. This was one of the reasons for the success of Ross Perot’s candidacy,(whom many working class boomers voted for.) Most of these types of policies were imposed on Americans by elites against their will and politicians who betrayed their trust, just as they are today. The millennial criticism of boomers as having spent them into debt is somewhat bizarre, given that millennials want the government to spend even more money on even more frivolous endeavors. They enthusiastically supported Obama, who added nearly 8 trillion to the national debt (which they will someday have to pay,) and even he was only offering them a fraction of what they wanted. Millennials seem to be just fine with outsourcing jobs, importing cheap labor and foreign competition. Boomers may have used shortsighted thinking to make and save money, but millennials seem to be willing to sacrifice their current education and job prospects just to virtue signal about how “inclusive” they are or whatever.

3. Boomers are responsible for our problems in The Middle East

There’s no question that boomers have exacerbated many of our problems in the middle east, with the war in Iraq, Afghanistan in particular but also through stubborn and persistent meddling in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and various Arab civil wars. It was Eisenhower and Churchill that chose to overthrow Iran’s democratically elected leader in 1953 and install the Shah, which ultimately laid the groundwork for Iran to become the enemy of ours it is today. Our support in the 1980s for mujihadeen fighters in Iran in the 1980s (including Bin Laden) helped create the Afghanistan of the Taliban. The Soviet Union deserves some blame for the situation in Afghanistan as well, but not baby boomers. US material support and aid for Israel in the 1973 “Yom Kippur” war, and support for Israel in general has also played a large role. The list of pre-boomer interventions goes on and on…US troops stationed in Lebanon, US support for Saddam and Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, Gulf War I, etc. Boomers were not directly responsible for any of these decisions. Boomers were ultimately responsible for the Iraq War and the current war in Afghanistan (and perhaps the uprisings in Egypt and Libya) since they technically were/are in power, but to an extent these wars were misguided attempts to cleanup the messes left by previous generations’ interventions. Boomers do seem to be guilty of being overly attached to supporting Israel though and have forgotten the merits of non-interventionism now that there asses aren’t the ones on the line. I guess there’s no getting around that.

4. Boomers are responsible for mass immigration

The most significant contribution to mass third world immigration to the US was the 1965 Immigration Act. Not a single boomer was involved in the passage of this bill, and none were even old enough to be serving in any branch of government in this period of time. Remember in 1986 when the US gave amnesty to millions of illegal aliens? Well, that wasn’t boomers either. That was Ronald Reagan. It’s also important to remember that boomer voters have attempted to curtail mass immigration, but these were overruled by the courts. Remember Prop 187? SB1070 and a multitude of other laws which were gutted by the courts? What about forced desegregation busing in the 1970s, you know that thing that made your schools “diverse?” Boomers along with just about everyone else overwhelmingly opposed it:

According to Wikipedia:

In a Gallup poll taken in the early 1970s, very low percentages of whites (4 percent) and blacks (9 percent) supported busing outside of local neighborhoods.[3] A 1978 study by the RAND Corporation set out to find why whites were opposed to busing and concluded that it was not because they held racist attitudes, but because they believed it destroyed neighborhood schools and camaraderie and increased discipline problems.[3] It is said that busing eroded the community pride and support that neighborhoods had for their local schools.[3] After busing, 60 percent of Boston parents, both black and white, reported more discipline problems in schools.[3] In the 1968, 1972, and 1976 presidential elections, candidates opposed to busing were elected each time, and Congress voted repeatedly to end court-mandated busing.[13]

It would appear that some boomers in recent years have given up on the idea of restricting immigration, but this is probably because they feel it’s too late to do much at this point after having seen their country radically transformed throughout their lifetime. Many of them have reached a point in life where both financially and physically they are isolated from a lot of the negative effects of mass third world immigration and diversity. It’s a mistake to blame them for the associated policies though, which were largely set in motion long before boomers were put in charge of the wheel, and the attempts they made to resist were thwarted by judicial and corporate forces they had no control over.


Conclusions

Millennials and the younger generation (whatever you want to call it) pride themselves in having accumulated a wealth of useless knowledge of the intricacies of elaborate video game worlds and Harry Potter trivia, how to get the most out of Snapchat, etc, yet how many of them even know how to change a tire on their car or install an electrical outlet? I myself am guilty of some of this. When I was a kid I used to laugh when my dad would get frustrated when I would beat him so easily at Tecmo Bowl for Nintendo by using the same Bo Jackson running play over and over. 30 years later that “skill” seems as worthless as ever. Yet my boomer dad, on his own managed to build a 3 bedroom cabin in the middle of the woods with fully functioning plumbing, heat and electricity…like it was nothing. Meanwhile when I attempted to fix my own toilet once when it was running, the project quickly and farcically denigrated into the equivalent of a Peter Sellers skit. I ended up having to call someone.

If the boomers are guilty of something it is being overly idealistic, and in particular their error has been in gambling away their abundance of idealism by doubling down on the bad ideas handed down to them. Many boomers are not guilty of this though, and were never on board with a lot of this crap. My dad actually used to say to me “Life’s a bitch, and then you die.” Hardly the kind of naive idealism you would expect. Many of them were simply taken along for a ride, (the way many millennials are now with Trump’s betrayals.) Ironically, Trump is a boomer and articulated during the campaign many of the ideas that working class boomers have always wanted to see realized (protectionism, less military intervention, reduced immigration, etc.) Yet, like George W. Bush and Dan Quayle, Trump is a “Fortunate Son,” so his commitment to these issues was always going to be questionable. He still has plenty of time to redeem himself, but as a cynical Generation X dude, I personally have zero expectation that he will, nor do I care. I’ll be at the dying mall drinking an Orange Julius and playing Cruis’n USA in the arcade while it still exists.