https://www.dropbox.com/s/jhtvv4b9urr3ns4/MUM%27s%2090TH.mp4?dl=0

Our Civilisation is Already Way Off Track

Say What, Al Gore, Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump?

By Thomas Friedman, Dec. 7 2016 (LINK to article)

"The stakes couldn’t be higher. When so many big forces — technology, globalization and climate change — are accelerating at once, small errors in navigation can have huge consequences. We can get really far off track, really fast."

I agree, but with one profound reservation: we are already "far off track".

Why is Tom, like most people, unable to recognise this?

There is an evolutionary explanation. The human brain evolved to want (not just consciously, but also subconsciously) to maintain the environment on which it depends and has been successful in, which everyone who is anyone in society invariably has been.

We rationalise our view of reality accordingly, and the more intelligent and articulate we are, the better we are at doing so, of convincing ourselves and others that the state and status quo are fundamentally OK, when in fact they are not. Our civilisation is way off track for surviving this century.

No, I am not a "doom-monger", but a realist. I can see that we are way of track and heading towards disaster. Unfortunately, I'm not as intelligent or articulate as Tom and all the others who think I'm talking nonsense, because they are loath to question the fundamental soundness of state and status quo.

All I can do is refer you to my BLOG, in which I elaborate, from an evolutionary perspective, on why our civilisation is on course to self-destruct.

What the Alt-Right Really Means

By Christopher Chadwell, Dec 2 2016 (LINK to article)

"a scattered half-dozen men stood and raised their arms in Nazi salutes."

Were they meant as "Nazi salutes"? I find that very difficult to believe, Nazism being the very embodiment of evil.

Like the Nazi swastika, this salute is of much older origin. Like much else, including the concepts of nationalism, socialism and Darwinism, the Nazis hijacked and abused what seemed useful to them.

Progressives are much too eager to demonise expressions of white identity, which they do as a way of virtue signalling and asserting their own moral superiority.

Man is an inherently tribal animal, with a deeply rooted need for a sense of tribal identity and belonging. Our original tribes and nations having been long eliminated by the state, we are dependent on creating substitutes for them.

The state wants us to identify with itself as our nation and for this reason demonises and suppresses any serious rivals, which racial identity, of course is. A very serious rival.

It the state were a good substitute tribe and nation, one might accept it as such, but it is not. It simply uses its claim to nationhood as a way of legitimising itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse.

We need a better understanding of the state and how it manipulates and exploits human tribal nature, and the only way to acquire this is from an evolutionary perspective, which I elaborate own in my BLOG.

Al M  Norfolk

Don't soft-peddle or try to somehow explain the "alt-right." These are the same old neo-nazi racists. There is no "white race." Unlike Black Americans, Native Americans, Americans of various European descent share no common history or culture. My ancestry and culture may be very different than yours in spite of the coincidence or broad brush identity.   If we learn anything from history and if we care about our country, racist hate-groups and the incitement of hate speech need to be suppressed.  

574 Recommends

My response: What an ignorant and hateful comment this is - and endorsed by the NYT!

What Al M clearly hasn't learned from history is that when you demonise the other side/tribe and seek to suppress them, as he expressly does, you pave the way for violent conflict.

He is stirring up hatred, just as both the Left and the Right did in the Weimar Republic - and we know where that led.

Even if you don't agree with them, you need to know and understand the other side  - white nationalists in this case - if you want to avoid bloody conflict with them.

Just because I disagree with your ideology white racial self-denial and self-contempt, doesn't make what I say "hate speech".

I've put a lot of effort into trying to understand your side/tribe and views, and ask you to do the same in respect to me and my, white nationalist, side. I invite you to inform yourself on my blog. I don't hate you and I don't want to be forced into having to fight you.

Learning to Live with Human Tribalism

Do Not Go Gentle

By Roger Cohen, Dec. 2 2016 (LINK to article)

"one of those periodic reminders that the raging beast in humankind always lurks."

It's interesting how "progressives" like Roger only see this "raging beast" on the "far right" or the "far left", but not in their own enlightened and progressives selves, allowing them to indulge their sense of moral superiority.

I don't doubt that most "progressives", including Roger, mean well, but in demonising and suppressing the "raging beast" of human tribalism, instead of seeking to understand and harness it, they are paving the way for the very horrors they fear and desperately want to avoid.

We must learn to live with our tribalism, which I'm sure we can, but only by developing an understanding of it, not as a "raging beast" to be forcefully constrained and suppressed, but as a product of human evolutionary development.

In overreaction to the Nazis having hijacked and abused, for their own evil purposes, the half-baked ideas of social Darwinism, a previous generation of academics made a taboo of applying Darwinian logic to their own species, but this is exactly what we need to do, if we are to develop a realistic understanding of ourselves and the societies we have created (see BLOG).

Fake Cowboys and Real Indians

By Timothy Egan, Dec. 2 2016 (LINK to article)

"a living diorama of so much awful history between the First Americans and those who took everything from them."

It's interesting how we think in terms of "them and us"; only in this piece the author, a white man, is siding with "them" rather than with his own side/tribe or race.

Why? Because in overreaction to the evils committed by white men (especially slavery, Jim Crow and the Holocaust, despite the latter being white on white) it is now deemed a moral virtue for them to deny and despise their own white race. And with moral virtue comes personal advantage, privilege and power.

I'm not defending the evils committed by my own white race, put pointing out how an ideology of white racial self-denial and self-contempt now serves the state and its liberal elites as an instrument of socio-political intimidation and control, just as medieval church ideology once did.

It's the age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, with America's white elites demonstrating their moral superiority, and thus right to rule, over both white majority and all the ethnic minorities, by themselves embracing this self-destructive ideology, and not just of white America, but of American society at large.

It is exactly the kind of overreaction the NYT itself warns about in an editorial response to the Paris terror attacks in November 2015:

“In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism [evil] comes the risk that society will lose its way.”

The West's elites have indeed lost their way (see The West's Overreaction to Nazism).

Seduced and Betrayed by Donald Trump

By Paul Krugman, Dec. 2 2016 (LINK to article)

"the white working class is about to be betrayed."

You are probably right, Paul. But whoever is in power invariably betrays the majority of those who elected them. Your own side is no better, although, of course, you cannot see this.

As an inherently tribal animal, our brains evolved to be blindly loyal to its own tribe, which made sense when tribes were real, before being replaced by the state, which is not a genuine tribe or nation at all, but merely poses as such, in order to lay claim to our tribal loyalty, thereby legitimising itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse.

And it is not just the "white working class" that is being betrayed. Blacks are betrayed even more, despite all the Democrats claims to be their champions. Ultimately EVERYONE is betrayed by the STATE, the primary purpose of which is to facilitate society's SELF-exploitation (and self-betrayal), to the personal advantage of its ruling elites and favoured (especially wealthy and academic/formerly priestly) clients, at the expense of society at large and its long-term survival.

This is why civilisation itself (not just particular economies) are bound to a cycle of boom and bust, which ultimately leads to their demise.

Academics' own tribal loyalties blind them to this, making it impossible for social and political scientists to develop a realistic understanding what are supposed to be their subjects of expertise.

White Nationalism is about White Identity

White-Collar Supremacy

By  Kelly J. Baker, Nov. 25, 2016 (LINK to article)

Ms Baker seeks only to demonise "white nationalism” which she maliciously equates with white supremacism and racism.

Does it not occur to her that there might be more to it than that? White nationalism is on the rise, in America, Europe and other western countries, and those who would demonise and suppress it, should think again, because what they are demonising and suppressing is human tribal nature, which is as much a part of being human as human sexuality is.

It is ironic that people calling themselves "progressives", while celebrating our newly acquired sexual freedoms, lead the mob in condemning anyone wanting to express their own sense of tribal identity, at least if they are white with a sense of white identity, which is what white nationalism is really about: racial/ethnic IDENTITY.

When minorities choose to assert their own ethnic identities that's fine, but the moment members of the white majority attempt to do the same, they are condemned, mainly by fellow whites, as "white supremacists" and racists.

This issue is going to dominate, even more than it does now, the politics of the years ahead. We urgently need to stop demonising and suppressing human tribal nature with accusation of xenophobia (we are also an inherently territorial animal) or racial prejudice, which we all have, and instead study and understand it, which can only be from an evolutionary perspective: LINK.

Moral Supremacism of Extreme Left is Mainstream

Trump Embarrasses Himself and Our Country

By Nicolas Kristof, Nov. 19, 2016 (LINK to article)

Is Steve Bannon really a "white supremacist", or just a white man who doesn't deny and despise his own race the way that white liberals do, because beholden to an ideology of white racial self-denial and self-contempt?

It's an ideology which began as an overreaction to the evils of Nazism and the Holocaust, before being incorporated into the state's age-old strategy of divide and rule, whereby society is divided into a morally superior, now supposedly unprejudiced, "colour-blind" and xenophilic elite, on the one hand, and the morally inferior, naturally (evolved human nature being what it is) prejudiced, not colour-blind, but xenophobically-inclined masses, on the other, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

It is not white supremacism of the extreme Right we have to fear, but the moral supremacism of the extreme Left, which for decades now has been mainstream and dominates the West's political culture.

Society has always been dominated by moral supremacists, of course. It used to be the clergy with their religious ideology; now, in our more secular times, it's their modern heirs and counterparts in academia, politics and the media with their ideology of post-racial  multiculturalism.

I elaborate on these ideas in this and appended BLOGS.

Demonising Tribalism in Others, While Indulging Our Own

Donald Trump’s Demand for Love

By Frank Bruni, Nov. 22 2016 (LINK to article)

"Donald Trump’s Demand for Love"

Don't we ALL want to be loved?

Of course we do, but we need to clarify what it means, in this context, which we can only do from the perspective of evolutionary psychology.

We are an inherently tribal animal, who craves the approval of his or her tribe. Only, our original tribes are long gone, their place now filled by substitute tribes, the most important of which is, of course, the state.

The state conflates and confounds very different aspects of the original tribal environment in which human nature evolved, long before the first states and civilisations emerged from it, with the modern "nation state" now deceitfully posing as our tribe or nation (intra- and inter-tribal environment) itself, while at the same time facilitating society’s SELF-exploitation (as an extra-tribal environment, on a par with the natural environment) to the personal advantage of its ruling elites and favoured (especially wealthy and academic/formerly priestly) clients, at the expense of society at large.

Academics have failed to recognise this, because they are themselves privileged clients and employees of the state, with a massive personal self-interest in rationalising and defending its role, self-image (as our "nation") and ideologies (social, political, economic and racial, formerly religious), on which the state bases its claim to moral and knowledgeable authority: http://philosopherkin.blogspot.co.uk

2nd comment

I've just submitted a comment in which I argue that we ALL crave to be loved, not by anyone, but by members, especially high status members, our own tribe, being the inherently and intensely tribal animal that we are.

The problem is that our original tribes are long gone and members of the same society identify with different substitute tribes with varying degrees of overlap.

Most citizens of a state identify with it as their nation, because that is what we have been taught for centuries to do, but with increasing DIVERSITY there is an increasing divergence between how different groups and individuals perceive this nation.

America's liberal left have a very different understanding of America than conservatives, especially the Alt Right, which they demonise as a consequence.

The liberal left form an ideological, "progressive", tribe of their own, whose values and perceptions are increasingly out of touch with much of the rest of America, as Donald Trump's election win demonstrates.

The only way to deal with this is not by demonising other tribes, but by developing an understanding of them, and of one's own tribe(s), in the context of human tribal nature and how it is manipulated and exploited by the state, for its own purposes, as well as by capital for commercial purposes, branding being the most conspicuous example.

The Left's Demonisation of White Identity

Trump: Making America White Again

By Charles Blow, Nov. 21 2016 (LINK to article)

"The appointment by President-elect Trump of a racist individual like Mr. Bannon to a position of authority is totally unacceptable"

Perhaps Bernie Sanders knows something about Steve Bannon that I don't, but I doubt it.

For decades, the Left has been demonising as "racist" anyone who refuses to embrace its ideology of white racial self-denial and self-contempt, which started life as an understandable overreaction to Nazism and the Holocaust, before being transformed into an instrument of socio-political intimidation and control, a modern, secular replacement, effectively, for the power-political role of medieval church ideology and serving the state's age-old strategy of divide and rule, whereby society is now divided into a morally superior, supposedly unprejudiced, "colour-blind" and xenophilic elite, on the one hand (people like Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton), and the morally inferior, naturally (evolved human nature being what it is) prejudiced, not colour-blind, but xenophobically-inclined masses, on the other, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

Society is in desperate need of genuine moral authority to guide out of the mess it is in, but most of those offering such authority are in fact moral supremacists, the likes of which got us into this mess in the first place.

Distinguishing between genuine moral authority and moral supremacism is difficult, but possible. See this BLOG, which I hope will help.

NYT Demonisation of Steve Bannon & White Identity

‘Turn On the Hate’: Steve Bannon at the White House

By the Editorial Board, Nov. 15 2016 (LINK to editorial)

"Mr. Bannon, and his toxic [far-right, white ethno-nationalist] ideology . . "

I don't know Mr Bannon, but I have a lot of sympathy with "ethno-nationalism", which the NYT so despises, along with the whole notion of white, i.e. ethnic European, identity.

White nationalism might have spared Europe centuries of civil war, culminating in WW1, WW2 and the Holocaust. It might also have spared America its own civil war.

White nationalism, as I see it, has nothing to do with white supremacism and is the very opposite of Nazism, which, insanely and self-destructively, divided Europeans into different races, some of which it sought to exterminate. The Nazis were not motivated by racial hatred, but by racial SELF-hatred.

In overreaction to the evil of Nazism and the Holocaust, western academics, and with them its ruling elites, embraced the exact, but equally extreme, opposite ideology of post-racial multiculturalism, which denies the importance - even the very existence - of race altogether (even when it is real and manifest), along with the Orwellian oxymoronic absurdity of "multi-ethnic (multi-racial and multicultural) nationhood".

I'm not suggesting that the NYT love those it sees as enemies, e.g. white nationalists, but that it ceases to hate and demonise them the way it does, and to seek to understand them instead. They are not as evil, nor you at the NYT and the Southern Poverty Law Center as good, as you  imagine.

See my BLOG, where I elaborate on these ideas.

Widening the Divide

I’m Muslim, but My Roommate Supports Trump

By Romaissaa Benzizoune, Nov. 11 2016 (LINK to article)

"Did she really expect me to respect her choice . . ?"

Of course she did. And YOU are the one being divisive by refusing to do so.

She offered you the chance to work on an understanding of WHY she and millions of other Americans chose to vote for Trump, rather than for Clinton, and you rudely declined it. YOU have widened the very divide that you fear.

You don't necessarily have to agree with the other side, but you do need to understand them. Otherwise the path really does lead towards civll war.

America, like western Europe, has had the madness of mass immigration (not just of Muslims)) and DIVERSITY imposed on it by its"progressive" elites, who have dismissed all criticism of it as bigotry, xenophobia or racism.

What is "Celebrating DIVERSITY", for white people, other than Orwellian newspeak for them to celebrate their own ethnic displacement (white flight), replacement (we have already been reduced to an ethnic minority in large swathes of our major cities) and ultimate demise?

Try to see things from mine and your roommate's perspective. Would any majority Muslim country accept Muslims to be reduced to an ethnic minority in their country?

Why are our elites (Clinton & Co) inflicting this madness on their fellow whites and misleading minorities like you? In part it is an overreaction to slavery, Jim Crow and, above all, Nazism and the Holocaust, which I elaborate on in this BLOG.

If America is to Unite . . .

Homeless in America

By Thomas L. Friedman Nov. 8 2016 (LINK to article)

Hillary lost - and deserved to lose - because of her contempt for white American identity. A contempt shared by the NYT and "progressives" in general.

If America is to unite, it has to stop denying the reality and importance of RACE.

The NYT could play a leading role in ending this denial, which is a consequence of an overreaction to the evils of Jim Crow, Apartheid and, above all, Nazism and the Holocaust.

It is exactly the kind of overreaction the NYT itself warned about in an editorial response to the Islamist attacks in Paris last November:

“In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism [evil] comes the risk that society will lose its way.”

America, and the West in general, have indeed lost their way: The West's Overreaction to Nazism.

A More Perfect Union?

Republicans and the Myth of Election Fraud

By William Barber II, Nov. 4 2016 (LINK to article)

"We must press on and vote as never before for a more perfect union and a future that includes all Americans."

"A more perfect union".  What can that mean other than complete assimilation of white America into the global melting pot that America has become?

And not just white Americans, but ALL racial/ethnic identities, so that eventually there will be just ONE "mixed-race American master race".

Is this really what most Americans what to become? I don't think so. I think most Americans want to preserve their racial/ethnic identities.

Forced segregation, according to state requirements (Jim Crow, Apartheid) is an evil, but being an inherently tribal animal, people will segregate naturally into groups whose members are like themselves, i.e. of the same race, ethnicity and culture, sharing the same history.

All states seek to manipulate and control human tribal nature for their own mercenary purposes, which I elaborate on in this BLOG.

The American state is bullying its citizens into an ever closer union most do not really want. But Orwellian doublethink is very much in play, with those demanding a "more perfect union" still striving to retain their OWN ethnic identity.

Please, read the blog I've linked to, which seeks to explain the nature of the state (all states) and our situation (which is dire) from an evolutionary perspective.

Why Do White Liberals Mock Their Own Race?

5 Reasons to Vote Trump

By Nicholas Kristof NOV. 3, 2016 (LINK to article)

"Many Americans troubled by demographic change complain that they have been left disenfranchised. Trump speaks up for such oppressed groups — like white men."

But Nick you are a white man yourself. One might expect you to have more sympathy with members of your own race and gender, but no, instead you show your racial self-contempt by mocking them.

Why? I know, it's what all liberals and "progressives" do. But still, why?

America's founding fathers would be horrified to learn that their descendents will soon become an ethnic minority in the country they founded, and yet you shrug your shoulders at the prospect. You don't seem to care if your race becomes a minority, or disappears entirely. 

Why? How can you not care about that?

I think it is a grotesque overreaction to the evil of Nazism (and Jim Crow), which made a big, ugly and misconceived issue of race, in response to which a previous generation of academics decided that race shouldn't matter at all, that it was just a social construct, only of importance to bigots and racists - like the Nazis.

No one wants to be associated with the Nazis or with racism, so we are forced to embrace an ideology (the exact but equally extreme and insane opposite of Nazi racial ideology) of white racial self-denial and self-contempt.

I elaborate on these ideas, which I believe are very important, HERE.

Don't Mention Darwin,

in a social or political context, except in jest.

Nostalgia for the Grace of George H.W. Bush

by Jon Meacham, Oct 15 2016 (LINK to article, which was approved & published)

"As Henry Adams once remarked of the movement from Washington to Grant, the journey from George H. W. Bush to Donald J. Trump disproves Darwin."

Many a true word is spoken in jest. Only, it's not that Darwin is disproved, so much as mentioned at all in a political context, which is, of course, only permissible as a joke, Darwin having been banned from all political thought in the aftermath of WW2 and the Holocaust.

He was banned, because the Nazis hijacked and abused, for their own evil purposes, the half-baked ideas of social Darwinism.

They may have been half-baked and largely misconceived, but they didn't deserve to be demonised the way they were, and still are.

Darwinian logic has a vital role to play in understanding ourselves, Homo sapiens, human societies and civilisation at large, and the fact that a taboo has been made of it is comparable to the Catholic Church once having made a taboo of the Copernican view of the universe, only much more serious. The taboo on Copernicus delayed our understanding of the universe by just a few decades, while the taboo on applying Darwin to our own species may delay our understanding of civilisation permanently, i.e. fatally.

The reason the world is in such a mess and heading towards an even bigger mess (civilisational breakdown, no less) is because of the complete lack of a human-evolutionary, i.e. Darwinian, perspective in the social and political sciences.

I've made a start on correcting this HERE. 

Latest Batch of Unapproved Comments

Just Like Trump, I Avoided Paying Federal Taxes

by Bert Stratton, Oct. 17 2016 (LINK to article)

If America were a genuine nation, its citizens would be sharing with each other, instead of always being on the make, always seeking their own profit and advantage.

In this America is no different from any other country, of course, but why the deception and deceit of nationhood, when truthfulness is what we really need?

It is because the state legitimises itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse by deceitfully posing as a nation it is not.

This is a difficult, painful and frightening truth to recognise and face up to, but the truth it is, and if western civilisation is to have a future extending beyond the next few decades this is what we (especially academics) have to do (LINK).

My Syllabus, My Self

by Christy Wampole, Oct. 17 2016 (LINK to article)

"We would be able to take a course [great thinkers] privately, separated by time but nonetheless plugged into their brains and hearts."

What separates us from past thinkers, is not just time, but also circumstance and world view. 

We live in very exceptional times and circumstances, which are changing at an unprecedented pace. Things changed in the past, of course, but rarely at a pace that people noticed. Now the rate of change is quite dizzying, which makes many of us sick (I've just read and commented on the editorial about the millions struggling with pain and missing from the labor market (LINK). But not the author of this piece, who has clearly found a secure and satisfying niche for herself in academia. As have most academics, who, at the centre of things are not subjected to the same centrifugal forces and insecurities that affect those on the periphery.

I hope the author will excuse my critical comment, but academics are the ones most people, including our leaders, look to as authorities in understanding the world, which I see hurtling towards oblivion, while they tinker with and delight in their syllabuses.

http://philosopherkin.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/contrapot.html

Millions of Men Are Missing From the Job Market

by Editorial Board, Oct. 16 2016 (LINK to article)

"Millions of American men are struggling with pain and missing from the labor market . . "

The principal, underlying cause, I suggest, is that we are dealing with people, who struggle with being treated as "human resources" and consumers, rather than as the human beings they actually are.

We are taught that state and economy exist to serve society and people (human beings) at large, but this is simply not true.

Then why do we believe it? Because we are naturally inclined to believe what we are taught by those in authority, who are well served by the state and the existing socio-economic order.

Everyone who is anyone in society, with any power or influence (including our teachers in academia) is well served by the state and status quo, which blinds them to their fundamental flaws. The system is working well for them, so they rationalise and defend it, something their above average intelligence makes them very good at.

This presents such a huge challenge that it is tempting to give up on it and simple to make the most of the current, favourable situation while we can, before the system breaks down, as it eventually must.

However, I think we owe it to our children and grandchildren, who are going to experience the fast approaching breakdown, to at least think about this challenge, even if it does seem insurmountable at the moment: http://philosopherkin.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/civilisation-evolutionary-cul-de-sac.html

Their Dark Fantasies

by Paul Krugman, Oct. 17 2016 (LINK to article)

"the portrait of America Mr. Ryan painted last week was, in its own way, as out of touch with reality as the ranting of Donald Trump"

While Nobel Laureate and NYT columnist, Paul Krugman, is fully in touch with reality, of course.

Being a reasonable man, I suspect that Prof. Krugman would not claim to have a perfect grasp of reality, but a pretty good grasp, nevertheless.

But then, who doesn't believe themselves to have a good grasp of reality? How can we not believe this without going mad?

From an evolutionary perspective, our brains evolved a need to believe in the soundness of its sense of reality. Otherwise, it would not know how to respond to its environment, which would cause it distress. It is comforting to be sure of yourself and your view of reality, and have it confirmed by others, especially to the extent that Prof. Krugman has.

Prof. Krugman's view of reality, I believe, is deeply flawed, as is that of most, probably all, people.

My view of reality is also flawed, of course, but less flawed than most, because based on an evolutionary understanding of my species and its situation. An understanding that is blocked to Prof. Krugman, because a previous generation of academics made a taboo of viewing their own species from a evolutionary perspective, in overreaction to the Nazis having hijacked and abused, for their own evil purposes, the half-baked ideas of social Darwinism: http://unapprovedcomments.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/the-wests-overreaction-to-nazism.html

‘Only White People,’ Said the Little Girl

by Topher Sanders, Oct. 13 2016  (LINK to article)

"And what of the little girl? . . infected by racism before she can even spell the word."

And when it's a white kid being racially discriminated against, as also happens - is that "racial hatred" as well?  

The West's liberal elites - in politics, the media and, most authoritatively, academia - have, for decades, been teaching ordinary people that race is just a "social construct", only of importance to bigots and racists. The author has clearly also swallowed these misguided teachings.  

Race is NOT a "social construct" (except when you try dividing closely related peoples from the same subcontinent into different races, as the Nazis insanely did), but REAL and important. Not in the way that racial supremacists believe it is, but because central to any deep and meaningful sense of both personal and group, i.e. genuine national, identity.  

These liberal elites want everyone to identify with the state as their nation, so that they can lay claim to their tribal loyalty, and obedience. That is why they deny and suppress the reality and importance of race.  

It also serves the age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, dividing society into a morally superior, now supposedly unprejudiced, "colour-blind" and xenophilic elite, on the one hand, and the morally inferior, naturally (evolved human nature being what it is) prejudiced, not colour-blind, but xenophobically-inclined masses, on the other, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

The Wall Is a Fantasy

by (LINK to article)

"Public sympathy for immigrants . .  has been curdled by terrorist attacks in Brussels, Paris and Nice."

Wrong! It's been curdled by the SCALE of immigration and demographic change. No one likes being reduced to an ethnic minority, where traditionally they have been the majority. Naturally, it makes them very unhappy and angry.

But what to do with their anger? At the moment state authority forces them to suppress it, by demonising it as racism and xenophobia, but increasingly people are realising that this is nonsense. Many of Donald Trump's white supports, I suggest, are directing their anger at those responsible for the madness of policies that will soon make them an ethnic minority in the country their forebears founded, namely America's liberal elites, embodied in the Clintons.

"With the rise of Mr. Trump, America’s sense of itself is suddenly less sure."

Wrong again! The rise of Mr. Trump is a consequence of mass poor-world immigration undermining many Americans sense of what it means to be an American. There used to be white America, which was overwhelmingly dominant, alongside black America and a number of other less numerous ethnic minorities. America has now gone global, a mishmash of all humanity, with white Americans on course to become just another ethnic minority, and in which Orwellian newspeak and doublethink is all that holds the country together - but for how long? (LINK)

Delusions of Nationhood

Can the U.S. Win This Election?

By Thomas Friedman, Oct. 12 2016 (LINK to article)

"it won’t just be emotionally depressing, we’ll really start to decline as a nation."

America (nor any other country) can not begin to tackle its problems, which are now existential, until it recognises its OWN true nature as a mercenary "patron state" deceitfully posing as a nation, in order to legitimise itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse, at the expense of society at large and its long-term survival.

States have been deceitfully posing as nations since the end of the Middle Ages, supported by their academic elites, as they always are, because of their massive personal self-interest (subconscious more than conscious) in rationalising and defending their state employer, its role, self-image (as a "nation") and ideologies (social, political, economic and racial, formerly religious), on which the state bases its claim to moral and knowledgeable authority.

And it is not just academics, of course, who have a massive personal self-interest in rationalising and defending the state and status quo, but everyone who is anyone in society, with any power or influence.

Why would they want to question the state and status quo which serve them personally so well?

I can think of only one reason: state and status quo are leading us towards disaster, which they are. But first they have to recognise THIS.

Two More Comments on Articles Demonising Donald Trump

When Whites Just Don’t Get It, Part 7

By Nicholas Kristof, Oct. 1 2016 (LINK to article)

"only 39 percent of Trump supporters believe that President Obama was born in the United States."

This, I suggest, is an example of Freudian displacement behaviour. Not allowed to admit publicly, or perhaps even to themselves, that they have difficultly accepting a black president, they invent other grounds for rejecting him.

In the land of the free, people are not free to say what they really think or how they really feel in regard to race, because if they do they will be demonised as "racist".

European societies have always been ruled by a supposedly morally superior elite. It used to be the clergy, of course, with their religious ideology. Now its the clergy's modern heirs and counterparts in academia, politics and journalism, with a more secular, racial ideology (not coincidentally, the exact but equally extreme and insane opposite of Nazi racial ideology) who are the moral supremacists, telling others how they should and shouldn't feel.

Racial prejudice is the new original sin, which only submission to priestly/academic/state authority and ideology can save us from eternal damnation for, not as sinners, heathens or heretics, as in the past, but as bigots, xenophobes or racists.

No one with any self-respect allows themselves to be told how they should think or feel, which is why millions are turning to Donald Trump. He may be very imperfect, but at least he does not belong to America's moral supremacist, liberal elite.

How Could Anyone Vote for Trump?

By Gail Collins, Sept. 30 2016 (LINK to article)

"It’s possible Trump is just riding a swell of white-male alienation."

White males, for better and for worse, played a very dominant role in making not just America, but western civilisation at large , what they are.

Most recently, they both created and defeated fascism (militarily and intellectually) and put men (white men, of course) on the Moon, but for some reason they have turned against themselves, embracing an ideology white racial self-denial and self-contempt.

More subconsciously than consciously, support for Trump is, I think, a reaction to this.

One might wish for someone better than Trump, but beggars can't be choosers. It is either him or Hillary, and Hillary makes no secret of her contempt for her own race, in which regard, she is just a typical liberal, of course.

The NYT is a liberal newspaper, and there are many liberal values and attitudes that I agree with, but what I cannot accept is this ideology of white racial self-denial and self-contempt, which is perverse, an overreaction, I believe to the evils of slavery, Jim Crow, Apartheid and, above all, Nazism and the Holocaust, all of which white men were largely responsible for, but which white men also defeated.

I appeal to the NYT and its white liberal readers to look inside themselves and examine their attitude towards their own race, which has little to do with skin colour, but a great deal to do with ethnic origins, one's ancestors and cultural heritage.

Trump, Clinton & White Identity

Trump? How Could We?

By Thomas Friedman, September 27 2016 (LINK to article)

"Electing such a man [as Donald Trump] would be insanity."  

I'm inclined to agree. But electing Clinton, who, like her husband and all so-called "progressives",  is committed to an ideology of white racial self-denial and self-contempt, would also be insane - certainly for white America.

In overreaction to the evil of the white supremacism of Jim Crow, mainstream America (especially in academic circles) went to the opposite extreme of white self-denial and self-contempt.

It is exactly the kind of overreaction that the Editorial Board itself warned its readers about in response, The Price of Fear, to the Islamic terror attacks in Paris last November:

“In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism [evil] comes the risk that society will lose its way.”

It wasn't just an overreaction to Jim Crow, but also, and probably more so, to the evil of Nazism and the Holocaust, which white people were also responsible for and Jewish academics (although white themselves) especially traumatised by.

This overreaction is understandable, but urgently needs to be recognised and understood, because it has caused, not just America, by western civilisation at large, to badly lose their way (see BLOG)

Not that we were on a good, sustainable course before hand. But it is preventing us from finding such a course, which I elaborate on HERE.