Monday, September 19, 2011

Mr. EBT and the Death of the Welfare State

One of the most fascinating things about the internet is how it collapses different cultures, events, and people into an "endless now" entirely outside the mainstream media's attempt to edit and control the news that people receive. The video on Youtube linked by Drudge today ("My EBT" by "Mr. EBT") promises an incendiary repudiation of not just Obama, but every Democratic policy since LBJ.




Clive Crook at the Financial Times believes only a "move to the middle" can save Obama's Presidency, but Obama encapsulates much of what the Democratic Party has become: the Anti-White Guy/anti-White Middle Class party.

Democrats rely on gerrymandered districts, with Black and Hispanic voters, and state and nationwide, on Black votes around 95%+, and Hispanic votes around 65-70%+, to win. With a about 30% of the White vote, this is often enough. And the coalition of the anti-White votes and the White elite (Steve Sailer's "hi-lo" team-up) is based on transferring money from middle class voters to Black/Hispanic patronage politicians, and folks like Mr. EBT.

At a time when unemployment is at record highs, families are stressed by ever rising food and energy and clothing costs, Clive Crook does not get it, nor do most of the establishment. Voters among the White middle and working class have rejected the Welfare State because the Welfare State does not exist for them. The Welfare State exists for Mr. EBT. A man incapable of earning a living or doing much of anything, other than "keeping it real, dog." The Bismarckian Welfare State, giving ordinary workers a direct stake in the State, by getting various checks and benefits, regularly, is gone. Taken up by race-based Welfare and a permanent Jihad against the White working and middle class.

It is Mr. EBT on the lower end, making life miserable for pretty much everyone, and various enthusiasms of the White Elite Upper Classes, such as "green" lunacy, hideously expensive electricity rates, banning private autos (but not limousines), flights for the average person (but not private jets) and the like.

There is no more money to be gotten out of the White middle and working class, without a French Revolution style fight over taxation. There is no legitimacy or trust or desire to fund a Welfare State oriented around Mr. EBT. This video, a trivial affair, may yet be the opening start of the widespread repudiation of the Welfare State. Drudge has linked to it from the top of his page. The NYT obviously does not want anyone to see it, nor does the rest of the media. But the very act of the Drudge Report alone (which dwarfs the page views of say, the NYT or CNN) linking it and millions of voters and taxpayers seeing it, is revolutionary.

There is no going back to the Welfare State. The Tea Party exists because ordinary White working people, of some money or struggling means, just don't believe the government exists for any other purpose other than to take money from them and give it to Mr. EBT. Barack Obama and his policies just to borrow a Marxist phrase, sharpen the contradictions and class warfare (with overt racial underpinnings) between the hi-lo team up and the White majority. White guilt and shame are poor foundations for that sort of coalition, and the "swipe, swipe" of Mr. EBT may just start the beginning of the end of the Welfare State. You cannot ask the majority of the nation to make themselves patsies forever.

33 comments:

An Unmarried Man said...

The gov't needs to end this ridiculous charade and let Mr EBT purchase weed and 40's of St. Ides with his EBT. All the cash he saves by buying Kix and potato chips with taxpayer money will simply be transferred into the adjoining income column where all his cash purchases occur.

jules said...

Yeah I saw this on Drudge and I immediately thought of this blog. I can't tell if this is supposed to be a smart parody or "for real".
Whiskey, I don't know if you read comics but something really depressed me today. It's on par with my disappointment with A Game of Thrones or Harry Potter where ideology ultimately infects everything.
I used to be a huge alan moore fan. That is until I discovered conservatism and read about his love for Bertolt Brecht. Realizing my disgust for brecht ruined so many modern speculative fiction writers for me, they all love this misanthrope. Even Neil Gaiman, he divorced his wife to shack up with a songwriter who LOVES brecht.
I finally managed to get my hands on the latest League of Extraordinary Gentlemen graphic novel from Alan moore. It just depressed me within 5 pages with this line, "Don't be such a straight". Get it? Because straight people suck and they're uncreative and they've never done anything for civilization. Alan Moore is a cunt.
He's the Jane Lynch of comic book writers. He's the Louis CK of creative genius.
This guy has such talent, his subject matter is so interesting. And all I hear when I read his eloquent interviews is "fox news sucks, conservatives suck and corporations ruin creativity". All he does with his genius is push ideology and acts like he's above it because he has intellectual predilections.
The only people with that much talent are sadly, not creative people. They're conservative intellectuals who are unaware of people like Alan Moore and that they're controlling the cultural narrative.

jules said...

I know Whiskey likes to comment on American television and films, but I do dabble a bit in reading science fiction and fantasy books.
Alan Moore and his "friends" are doing to comic books and scifi what the bloomsbury group did to the literary world post WW2. They shat on everyone who wasn't part of their "we hate the west" clique. When TS Eliot converted to anglicanism, suddenly we find that he had been writing anti-semitic verses. Of course, the anti-semitism of the bloomsbury group is largely forgotten.
Before I start ranting again, just read this article by Theodore Dalrymple on how and why exactly did Woolf cause damage to Western culture and understand that her cultural mindset now rules American culture.
http://www.city-journal.org/printable.php?id=841

josh said...

Of course we have one slight problem: a nation full of worthless black males,with more coming in all the time.The lefty NGO's know this all too well as they aim their efforts in the MuvvaLand at the female,with micro-loans and other well-meaning bullshit. the female does the work,the black male loafs and contemplates the universe,life and death,and his dick.(But mainly his dick.)This fits in well with the female supremacy wishes of the femcunts. here in the USA we are bleeding money (and jobs) to these idiots. Massive amounts of "dat social spandin" (investing in the black community they call it!)are stolen by the top echelon blacks before it can be stolen and wasted by the bottom blacks.Here in Chicago,we just had a scandal with Obamas very,very close friend (and whats THAT all about?) Dr. Eric Whitaker,with someone under him stealing 65k to buy a Hummer for "Aids outreach".(Got dem reeyums!!)The fraud is everywhere. The village of Maywood being busted for massive fraud and stealing. So what do we do with all these good for nuffin blacketty blacks?

Anonymous said...

Have you thought through the implications of ending the Welfare state?

For what remains of the working people, this means a much lower level of consumption, lower investment in what kids they do have (of which the responsible ones will be having fewer) and deflation from everybody moving to zero sum hording. A modern economy or even a functional one with todays technology can't survive 30% savings rates and people refusing to take on debt

Worse because pretty much everyone will be doing this and being unable to push exports onto other people (since the US is no longer buying) , this means the global economy and production shrinks. And yes services too, which means a good chance of a deflation spiral like we see in Japan, only everywhere on Earth at once, well till trade probably falls apart.

Also rather more important, a lot of people need these cards to eat , shut them off and you have at least 40 million people of all races who using EBT or other programs (disability going to go too?) , most of whom are armed or can be in a trice, who now as you mentioned will have no connection of any kind to the existing social order and no hope for a future.

How precisely do you plan to contain the violence?

Assuming we ignore most Whites and Asian on EBT ( they don't show up for the food riots) there are at least 30 million at least lightly armed people (7.5x the size of the entire armed forces!) to contend with.

If you think the mob actions are bad now, holy crap wait till the radical cousins La Raza and Nation of Islam and all that decide to even the score.

Now its perfectly possible White people could win but I do not think a war that kills millions possibly with gas or worse would do much for us in any way shape or form.

And BTW, you can't do a gradual cutback and hope that decent jobs will be created.

Even if somehow you can train up the EBT crowd, the CONservatives and LIEbertarians won't hire if they can help it . That crowd are basically thieves and only does the right thing in the broader sense with forced too with government guns.

And while I agree that welfare sucks, there really are no alternatives.

Rum said...

Anon 12:55
Destructive rioting in the US has had one prominent feature - it has been a localized, neighborhood phenomenon. Angry folks have not traveled across big, sprawled out MetroPlexes in their cars to attack other ethnicities in their home neighborhoods.
There are several good reasons for this. One is a lack of any coherent motivation for doing so and another is that they would surely lose the ensuing gun-fight. On some level, I think they understand this.
The Law in a place like Texas is overwhelmingly on the side of defending property owner. There is not even a need for "I was in fear of my life" BS. You can do whatever is necessary to prevent felony crimes against your property. If you are in the right, there is no duty to retreat or even to fore-warn. They already know better...
These kind of legal understandings arose in a time and place where it was well understood that law enforcement was only days away(when seconds counted). Which, BTW, is what would describe a large scale urban riot.
Check out the gun laws in the State of Alaska. You could put them all on the cover of a match-book.

Anonymous said...

Anon-

I'm not advocating violence, and I'd hate to see it come to that. But I'm not about to cave in to the threat of violence, either.

What you are asking us to accept is a legalized form of mugging -- "hand over your money or I'll kill you!" That's not OK with me.

I am tired of the underclass. It is hard enough for me to feed, clothe and shelter my own family without being forced to feed, clothe and shelter someone else's. I could really use the extra money that is being taken from me to pay for the welfare mooches. And even if money were no object, I'd still resent paying for someone else to sit on their behind. People should pull their own weight.

Yes, the economy is tough. But not tough enough for blacks to stand around outside of Home Depot, bus tables, or clean floors. They'd rather collect welfare.

I'd rather not pay. And if the underclass is going to try and shake me down by threatening violence should benefits be reduced or eliminated, I'm not going to be intimidated. Bullets are cheaper than welfare, if it comes to that. I hope it doesn't come to that. Such an outcome would be a tragedy.

And if it did ever come to that, my pasty-faced suburban friends and I would annihilate the Crips and the Bloods. It wouldn't even be close. See, we have things like organization, discipline, strategy and tactics that the urban underclass lacks. It won't come to that, because we have the police. But even if civil unrest did break out, working and middle-class whites would mop up the urban underclass in short order. We'd organize ourselves into neighborhood watches and militias and could easily repel any attack.

Agan, I hope it doesn't come to that. But anyone threatening to riot if they don't get their EBT card can go to hell as far as I am concerned.

Whiskey said...

Anon, yes people will starve. But the video is just so explosive. It pretty much eliminates any compassion by the White working/middle class which is struggling to support Mr. EBT and swipe-swipe. Most figure, he can get a job sweeping somewhere. Instead of the vulpine lope Dalrymple nailed.

Yes they will riot. They already riot. They don't have the means to travel outside, America is so big the tyranny of time and distance works against them.

Besides, the money is running out. There are far too many Hispanics (Mexican illegals and their kids) to support and not enough Whites and rising White incomes. It's become an issue of fight rather than flight.

Svigor said...

Jules, if you're only just now coming to hate Alan Moore, you're either obtuse, or only recently came to your senses. He's so obviously a mindless cunt (one must obviously be soullessly mercenary or mindlessly leftoid to pretend the danger for England is right-wing totalitarianism).

I don't see how anyone misses the fact that Watchmen takes a great big shit on the superhero genre, btw. It's funny how this even seems to have escaped Zack Snyder, a fact which IMO elevates the movie far above the graphic novel.

Anonymous said...

Rum, I don't think Texas is as set to defend itself as they think. If it all goes to hell now, well maybe, but in 1--20 years when the HUGE 2006 baby boom starts to come of age.

By than many of the Boomers will be dead, Gen X is tiny (and by than middle aged) and you can't count on them or Gen Y to defend you on racial solidarity grounds anyway, not when they have been shafted far more by big White money than by welfare.

Also counting on the foe to act as you think they should or just be localized is folly. Its getting to be a global guerrillas world and everyone is vulnerable.

Speaking bluntly, you opponents are quite capable of ruining the quality of everyones life, running snatch squads, shooting, burning and killing anywhere anyhow, anytime and maybe even going global; guerrilla on the infrastructure, food supply and water enough to bring society down. Trust me its a fight no one wants.

And sure you can defend your self with your private handgun or carbine, they always have the advantage. They have the readiness in ways a defender does not (they have to prep to act once, a defender always has to prep which is exhausting) . Its the reason that people in say the recent Reno shooting did respond despite being military and others armed.

And yes YT can probably will win here but at a terrible cost, one far far greater than a smarter welfare system.

And Anon 338, I don't blame you for not wanting to pay for that. However with automation and such, you are going to have to for greater numbers of all races. Computers kill jobs and in turn kill the economy . Also such programs are Constitutional legal and necessary. You don't get to pick and choose even in a Republic.

Whiskey to your point about the illegals, well thats a fair one. Understand though the brats are mostly US citizens and thats not however as much as all of us would like going to change. You can kick Los Madres Southward but they kids will end up on your door anyway.

Now you certainly can go all civil war on them and do a little ethnic cleaning. , I am not sure how that would go. There are lots of people who might just intervene from down South if we decide to mega-kill their nationals.Its could get real ugly, real quick.

Also mobility, well thats not really true. Most Whites live in cities that are vulnerable to the horde and almost all our economic activity is there.

We are not a nation of tiny rural townships but of great cities, we lose too many of those, we lose us.

However despite my disagreement it was as always enjoyable and thanks.

Anonymous said...

Paying for the protection racket for peace from the black underclass has been a failed experiment. There is more black-on-white violence now than there was in the 1950s when the income transfer payments were 1/10th (even adjusted for inflation) of what they are today. The payments shouldn't be eliminated outright, but first things like drug testing should be implemented, ability to vote taken away, mandatory weekly classes that must be attended with tests that must be passed about basic functional literacy and proper citizenship (not comitting violence, destroying public and private property, properly raising a family and being in relationships), and certain other privleges like use of parks and recreation and other fringe benefits offered to cetains suspended while receiving payments.

This would do one or both of two things, cut down on the number of people receiving payments, or make those receiving payments unable to vote in candidates who promise them more payments. Hopefully both.

The goal is that a lot fewer people would get the payments thus erasing much of the cost to the us the taxpayer who need to be raising our own families, stigmatizing those who receive the payments, and restricting the ability of those getting payments to proliferate the costs associated with the programs, cutting out the most violent and degenerate of society from getting the payments, as well as possibly teaching them to function in a civilized society.

Anonymous said...

@Josh

What do you do? Continue to whine on blogs. Thanks for the tax money, btw. :-)

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 3:38pm

Modern neighbors who don't even know each other's names are going to form militias? This isn't your father's America.

They didn't fight back in Rhodesia or South Africa, they won't fight back here.

Anonymous said...

@Josh

What do you do? Continue to whine on blogs. Thanks for the tax money, btw. :-)


@Anonymous 3:38pm

Modern neighbors who don't even know each other's names are going to form militias? This isn't your father's America. They didn't fight back in Rhodesia or South Africa, they won't fight back here. This is reality, not the Turner Diaries.

Rollory said...

"Also rather more important, a lot of people need these cards to eat , shut them off and you have at least 40 million people of all races who using EBT or other programs (disability going to go too?) , most of whom are armed or can be in a trice, who now as you mentioned will have no connection of any kind to the existing social order and no hope for a future.

How precisely do you plan to contain the violence?"

That's the point. It can't be contained. The EBT will end voluntarily, or it will end when the government is bankrupt and the bond auctions are failing and the government checks are bouncing. But it will absolutely end. The only thing that can be controlled is how to react to that ending, and the events that will come with it.

I keep saying that the USA is going to disappear, and that a USSR-style collapse is the best case scenario. People keep telling me I'm crazy - or worse, don't argue at all. But they never have specific counterarguments to the facts I point out.

Anonymous said...

The Bismarckian Welfare State, giving ordinary workers a direct stake in the State, by getting various checks and benefits, regularly, is gone.

So Whiskey, does this mean you are alright with a Bismarckian welfare state? A multi-racial welfare state is bad but a uni-racial welfare state is good? Gee, some liberty lover you are. Why not oppose the welfare state on principle? Oh I forgot, you're a conservative. That explains it.

D. Bandler

Anonymous said...

White men are weak cowards and won't do a thing to the black man.

If they do they will get smacked just like they did in Africa.

Fred said...

@josh "the black male loafs and contemplates the universe,life and death,and his dick.(But mainly his dick.)" HAHAHA, I laughed out loud at that one!

Anonymous said...

I noticed we had a couple of Black troll-umphalists here over the last couple of days.

No matter, just to play along. Understand something, the conditions that allowed South African and Rhodesian Whites to lose do not exist in the US.

There is no global liberal boot on the US's face, that era is over.

Also numbers matter, Blacks are 15% or so of the population, not nearer to 90% as in SA or Zimbabwe . Upcoming changes are not on their side either, many of the the Hispanics hate them with a passion (see Azusa 13 for details) in ways a White Supremacist could only envy and the Asians , well remember the LA riots? No allies, No numbers.

Also re: SA the Whites though about 11% of the population control almost all the wealth and while not strong enough or ruthless enough to take the whole country are holding out. Y/T is not doing as well as I might like but is doing ....

Whiskey said...

A place like Germany, which did not want to change too much, and had no colonies, required pretty much a Bismarckian Welfare state. There was not much other alternative, given how disruptive industrialization and unification both were, to Germany society. The same holds true for Scandinavian nations, which went from poor agrarian societies that mostly preyed upon their neighbors (Sweden was a scourge of the Baltics and Germany in particular until the early 1700s) ... to modern industrialized states. They avoided their own French revolutions by giving people a stake, just as Napoleon ended that process by making French peasants small landholders. There is nothing so conservative as those who own a small piece of property, or own a stake in the state where the property cannot be given.

As far as EBTs go, there is no more money, to fund Mexican/Black welfare and give money to the Middle Class. The middle class no longer believes in the Bismarckian Welfare State, and wishes to dismantle it, because it has morphed into a simple funds transference with no more benefit to the White middle class.

As far as that goes, the National Guard and Army can crush any racial rioting, Black or Hispanic, once a political consensus is made. The LA Riots of 1991 were far different than a White Middle Class no longer able to afford or willing to pay not to riot. Yes the drug gangs southwards are good at killing people who have no guns, they are not good at a stand-up military force basically killing anyone who even looks like a threat.

The most significant thing is that the West ran out of money, and the ability as well as willingness to pay off non-Whites who cannot survive on their own is at an end.

Whiskey said...

Regarding Alan Moore, he is interesting. His League of Extraordinary Gentlemen reveals an astonishing nostalgia and desire for a return of British Imperialism and Victorian Ways -- with everything except sexual license. Moore is a self-described heavy drug user and Black Magic devotee -- both fairly pathetic in indicating unsound mind and habits.

Watchmen was tripe, in that it posited "real heroes" had to create some fake threat to stop nuclear annihilation. Yet the nuclear duopoly was remarkably stable, Ike kiboshing Suez, Stalin making sure Korea did not extend to Japan. After Stalin, even more so. The elderly, time-serving apparatchiks who survived Stalin's purges had no ambition whatsoever (why they survived) and merely wanted their comfort. On the West side, after Kennedy, compromise and accommodation was the watchword.

The real risk was already in plain view by 1979 -- ascendant Islam with nukes viewing both the USSR and USA as weak targets of opportunity. Moore missed the obvious, caught up as he was in the world of 1952.

But even he doesn't want to die for the Colors of Benetton. He still longs for an era when Britain mattered and style, clothing, and confidence in the West reigned supreme.

Whiskey said...

Comics generally have been left-wing and self defeating. DC has killed off many White superheroes to make them Black, Gay, Hispanic etc. (Blue Beetle being the best example). But Blacks, Gays, Hispanics do not buy comic books. It is nerdy White guys who do and they do not care about Black, Hispanic, or Gay superheroes.

Most comic books and companies are not about publishing anyway, but licensing their characters for movies and toys. Where the real money is. So it becomes an agit-prop basement for media companies, allowing idiots to make their social statements about how enlightened they are.

Anonymous said...

Whiskey, Tell me what you think of this article.

http://www.coalpha.org/Post-Game-Culture-td6256108.html

Zeta said...

It sounds like the anon advocating welfare and the buying off of the minority underclass is advocating, in essence, the Roman strategy. As in, let's placate the invading hoards and underclass because it's more convenient. It (being anchor babies, massive welfare, etc.) is also, in his incorrect view, "legal" (and somehow welfare is supposed to be good for the economy as well, and presumably by the negating of the rules of mathematics, fiscally sustainable). So just leave all the problems in place, the demographic timebombs and all the rest. Yeah. Remind me again how that worked out for Rome.

Of course, since our elites are so against any change, and the middle class is so disorganized relative to them and the various minority grievance groups, foundations, and the like, any discussion on how to change this is likely to stay strictly in the realm of the theoretical, unfortunately.

Anonymous said...

Zeta,

having a welfare state as bad an idea as it is can stabilize things between lower and middle long enough to get rid of the leeches.

The problem is that we are so busy worrying about the lower ranks when they are less of a threat that the 1-3% richest. yes, the Blacks and Mexicans are an issue but its a manageable one.

To use the Latin Divide et impera

While we are distracted, the zero sum sociopaths in the upper class simply do not allow anyone else to get ahead if they can help it and are engaged in Disaster Capitalism on a Massive scale just like they did on Latin America.

To save the union you have to get rid of the Super Rich with crippling taxes,(try 99% above 4 million with foreign ownership restrictions among other things) and break their power base .

Once they are slammed down hard enough and you close the borders you can figure out a better solution.

And note if you tie taxes to job creation and middle class wealth distribution, you create a middle class society and limit the ability of the powerful to wall themselves off.

Do these things and you force them (through lack of better options) to share the Middle interests. They'll still be powerful and detached, just much less so.

Its just as Elizabeth Warren says, no one got rich on their own.

As I see it baring a populist White and Asian (and BTW I include some upper class Blacks and Hispanics here as well) revolt and real enforced change, the US is doomed to 3rd world status or collapse anyway.

Why not give yourself a breather.

Pete said...

"the National Guard and Army can crush any racial rioting, Black or Hispanic, once a political consensus is made."

I don't think so. Come the DIAHTF (Day it all hits the fan), the primary function of the police and national guard will be to confiscate white guns and otherwise prevent whites from fighting back. That is what happened in New Orleans during Katrina.

And if things get REALLY bad, law enforcement will either abandon law and order to riot and loot with the rest of them (except with better armaments), or simply hole up in the police stations and army bases and wait for the worst to blow over (That is what happened during England's recent riots).

Either way, don't count on agents of our government to come running to your aid on the DIAHTF.

Remember, our government is implementing a population-replacement project. They want whites out, browns in. Why would they help you?

Jules said...

True that Alan Moore has a fetish for Victoriana, but From Hell is a very harsh marxist indictment of a culture and social structure that managed to rule over a large part of the planet. The same with the 3rd volume of the LOEG, where imperialist quatermain and libertine mina murray beat the shit out of a misogynist, murderous rape-attempting james bond.
Wait, wasn't Vita-Sackville West a predatory lesbian who tried to have sex with an unwilling-shhh-shhh...patriarchy patriarchy evil patriarchy.
Even Obama's own feminist heavy cabinet couldn't resist playing the victim while occupying THE HIGHEST government posts in the world.

R7 Rocket said...

I noticed that there is some black supremacists crowing about the Whites becoming a minority (as well as anonymous concern trolls claiming that Whites (or Asians) won't form militias in a chaotic situation. The claim is false, as shown in LA and New Orleans). The problem is that they are delusional. The American Black population is actually shrinking both in numbers and as a percentage of the population. With concurrent decrease in the size of the ghetto underclass.

The black birthrate is below replacement, much like the Metrosexual Whites. The increase in the "non-white" (I put that in quotes because Hispanics have largely European ancestry and Asians are quite similar to Europeans in average behavior) population isn't going to give power to black people, it will crush the power and influence of black people since the newcomers despise blacks with more passion than the kkk can muster. Like other posters have already said.

As far as birthrates are concerned, the two largest groups with replacement or above replacement birthrates are Hispanics and Rednecks. The African-Americans should be clamoring for mile high steel border walls instead to protect their interests.

Californian said...

The welfare state was originally emplaced to keep the working class from getting too radical. But the welfare state has now morphed into support for a permanent and dysfunctional underclass. A working class welfare recipient might have taken the government money until back on their feet. But the underclass sees little reason to form families, stay in school, or learn employable skills.

The American Great Society/War on Poverty of the 1960s was intended to be a temporary state of affairs, leading to an eventual transition of the underclass into the middle class. This has not happened, and we can blame any number of factors.

Regardless, the pathologies of the underclass--massive illegitimacy, violent crime, illiteracy, gang formation--are becoming permanent states of affairs.

Effectively, the inner cities become reservations for excess populations. There's one theory (from the left) that the war on drugs is intended to neutralize the underclass via mass arrests and paramilitary policing. Maybe, just maybe.

But how long can the lid be kept on?

Californian said...

As for a catastrophic conflict coming the day after welfare stops: I'd speculate that we are today living in post-catastrophic times. It's just that the decline has been so gradual that there is no particular defining event which we can label "X-Day."

Look at the following, which have been in progress for several decades:
* Ruling elites in the West who are indifferent to the interests of their own citizenry.
* De facto open borders and mass migrations from the third world into the first (abetted by those same elites).
* The growth of urban gangs (mainly minorities) to the point of becoming low level insurgencies.
* The decline of infrastructure (especially in the USA) and the trashing of inner cities via the welfare class and gang violence.
* The narcotization of the populace via mass media.
* Urban rioting and flash mobs in which the perpetrators have been primarily blacks.
* The support of Western elites for "liberation" movements against white governments in Rhodesia-South Africa.
* etc and etc.

An objective observer might note that there has been a low level race war going on; and that the mainstream seems incapable of recognizing it is taking place.

(I will note that a race war is an ugly thing, and that many if not most people would rather look the other way than face reality. But this war is being forced on various Western peoples by the violence of the underclass, third world illegal immigration, the "youths" burning cars and such in Europe, etc.)

To give but one example: doesn't it register in the public consciousness that virtually every last race riot in the USA since the 1960s was initiated by blacks? And this in an era when civil rights is the law of the land. How does that fit in with the elite narrative that minorities are somehow oppressed in America? It doesn't, but that does not keep this agitprop line from being pushed.

And what does a young white liberal couple think the future will be for their children in a country in which they will be the minority? Do they believe that one day gang violence, flash mobs and riots over police brutality will end?

Or is liberalism, pace James Burnham, simply an ideology which rationalizes Western suicide by translating symptoms of decline into victories for progress?

Yet are rightists that much better? There seems to be an expectation that one day a catastrophic event will occur, perhaps a 1929 style stock market collapse to be followed by massive urban rioting. At this point, white people (or whomever) will then awaken to the threat, lock-and-load their firearms, and the big battle will be on. And after that...well, what?

But waiting for that future event means waiting until the worst possible moment to begin taking action, i.e., when the balance of power has already turned against the citizenry.

I think what bugs me is the assumption that the apocalypse is going to come down to a gun battle between the middle class and underclass, or citizens against non-citizens, or counter-jihadis against jihadis, or whatever. The real problem for the Western world is that these conflicts are all symptoms of a deeper dilemma.

Western elites (government, academia, media, corporations, etc.) have pretty much sold out their own people. Now they are playing segments of the populace off against each other. Even assuming it came down to some massive gun battle in the future, and whites came out on top, what would have changed?

The issue is political: recognizing that we live today in catastrophic times. I'd note that the growth of websites such as this one is an example of how people are starting to wake up to the reality. Westerners need to come up with a viable political plan to guide the action.

The current crop of Western elites have to be discredited and replaced with leaders who represent the citizenry.

My two denarii worth.

Leon Chase said...

I'm not going to argue with the idea that there are problems with the EBT program, or that short-sighted idiots of this caliber might actually exist.

In fact, neither would Stanley LaFleur, the man who created "My EBT". Because, lest we forget, Mr. EBT is a character, and the video is obviously (to most of us, anyway) a comedic parody, poking fun at both the perceived abuses of the EBT program within his community and the pseudo-rich posturing of wanna-be rap stars. Regardless of whether you personally find him funny, or can even stand the music and language involved, you need to understand that this is a PERFORMER in a staged comedy scenario. Your blog would have us believe that this video is a documentary, and that Mr. EBT is a real person, genuinely lamenting his inability to buy malt liquor and weed with his card.

I find it curious that, when the performer is a black rapper, people in the mainstream seem to have a much harder time separating the performer from the song. As if, because Mr. LaFleur is (we assume) from a certain background and income level, he is somehow incapable of the thought and creativity involved in creating a separate character and taking on his voice. Was there a public outcry when Johnny Cash sang about stealing car parts from his job, or when he stated that he "shot a man in Reno just to watch him die"? Granted, in terms of talent, Stanley LaFleur is no Johnny Cash. But neither, to use a more modern example, is Larry the Cable Guy. I find it equally tasteless when "Larry" sings about "retards" and threatens to beat starving African children, but like most people I also don't believe that those are the real beliefs and practices of Daniel Whitney (the creator of "Larry"), any more than I believe that Larry is a broke white moron who actually works for the cable company.

If this song had been set in a trailer park and sung by Larry the Cable guy, would the public response be as dead-serious as all this? I wonder.

Whiskey said...

Why does Mr. EBT generate so much outrage? Because most of the crime and nearly all the welfare usage come from Black and Hispanic people, while Whites who now NEED Welfare are told to get to the back of the line, Mr. EBT needs to swipe-swipe.

Johnny Cash can sing about shooting a man in Reno, few Whites shoot people. By contrast, Black people shoot someone at least every day (mostly, granted, each other).

It is the same way Garrison Keilor can advise say, a nerdy guy in the Chess club to "go crazy" because Kielor's idea of going crazy is staying up till Ten PM, and a whole second helping at Hometown Buffet. For the Chess Club nerd, that's probably the same thing -- staying up till eleven to play WoW or something. For Lindsay Lohan, whom Keilor advised to "go crazy" that advice is ... disastrous. Generally involving a commandeered car, a late night arrest, and community service (if everyone is lucky).

Black and Hispanic people DEPEND on US Whites agreeing to their tax money. Now when Whites need that tax money for their own use, anything less than a grateful, non-agitating attitude is going to make the White middle class pull the plug, absolutely, on Welfare and construct their own, non-Whites not invited. [This is particularly true since massive welfare transfers go hand in hand with Black mob anti-White violence, and fifth class citizenship, if that, for Whites specifically EXCLUDED from any and all Civil Rights.]

In short, Blacks and Hispanics had a good thing going, times changed, and they did not realize that kicking a bear in the ribs was a bad move. Now that the bear is hungry and in survival mode.

Columnist said...

Cut out the middle-men, and hand over the money directly to the thugs. Works better.