Establishment Behavior

Predictable establishment behavior around the planet:

1. If it serves perceived short-term selfishness, do it.
2. If it is anti-white or anti-Infidel and does not contradict the above, do it.

De facto affirmative action seems to violate the above, but CEOs support affirmative action to avoid costly boycotts, lawsuits, and negative publicity. Plus, multicultural CEOs are inept, thinking human races interchangeable. And contemporary governments don't care whether their employees serve the public interest.

Most humans like to think themselves ethically superior, but establishments are very, very evil. To assert superiority, establishments grandstand on issues requiring almost no sacrifice by themselves. Or they blame victims of establishment evils. As an added bonus for establishments, these issues distract populations from the evils done by the establishments.

So now we live on a planet where every nuclear weapon is controlled by militaristic anti-white factions, mostly using nonconventional warfare. Even Putin and Chinese leaders are dedicated multiculturalists. The white fraction of the planet is under ten percent and falling. And establishments try to tell us that whites are at no risk for genocide.

Yeah, okay.

Jews fret about a new Holocaust, though Jews have an nuclear armed Israel and massive political power protecting them.

If a super war occurs, the mass media and the likes of Tim Wise will be front and center blaming "whiteness" and "nationalism," though the factions are anti-white and anti-nationalistic.

Why We Should Help Whites

We shouldn't help whites because of origins fallacy reasons (because they are our race or we share some genes). The origins fallacy is a type of irrelevancy.

Here are six examples of the origins fallacy: X is artificial. X is unnatural. Y is natural. Americans have not believed X for years. Y is the American way. X comes from the word for W.

We should help whites because:

1. Whites suffer astronomical harms from nonwhites and cultural Marxism. Whites, like other conscious beings, have value in themselves, no matter whether we have Nobel Prizes or minimum wage jobs.
2. Whites, despite their misplaced altruism and other serious flaws, are the most beneficial people on earth. Whites invented or spread nearly all of modern medicine, agriculture, and environmentalism. Billions of nonwhites owe their well-being to whites. Whites saved China from Japanese tyranny and from economic Marxism, yet the cultural Marxians running China deluge whites with anti-white bile. Yes, whites spread some rotten ideologies, but the track record of nonwhite ideologies is worse. Whites are important for continuing beneficial developments in science and technology. Nonwhites are more likely to produce junk science and other harmful results.
3. The only way to protect the legitimate claims of white individuals is with white groups. Thanks to cultural Marxism, billions of nonwhites support the harm and destruction of white individuals and cultures. Whites acting solely as individuals have almost no chance against billions devoted to the destruction of whites.
4. Love-and-compassion white multiculturalists have done little to fight anti-white bigotry, and it is almost certain they will not in the future. Instead, they blame the victims of their biocultural engineering schemes. 
5. Harms from Muslims and nonwhites rise exponentially as their numbers increase. White ancestors made heroic sacrifices to make better lives for their descendents against a universe that doesn't care. The past several generations of whites benefited from those sacrifices while refusing to sacrifice for future generations, a failure to reciprocate forward. The harms today's white children will suffer in the future will dwarf what we see today. 
6. Whites are not well-adapted to current situations, situations dominated by technology and despicable isms. Whites need eugenics and new environmental situations to rescue themselves from the horrors created by these isms and technologies. We will not get the eugenics and environments we should by having our lives dominated by global, colonial, multicultural, rent seeking rule. The same goes for many nonwhite groups.
7. Humans are incredibly easy to indoctrinate with fallacious rhetoric, especially when the rhetoric is incessantly repeated using modern media. The media merely need say "white supremacist" and readers close their minds to reason. Establishments get away with massive evils merely by tossing slurs and other fallacious rhetoric around. Such indoctrination provides cover for causing massive harms.
8. Freedom of political speech is under siege. Whites support speech freedoms. Without whites, we can kiss freedom of speech goodbye for millennia or forever. Other legitimate freedoms for nonwealthy individuals are similarly under siege.
9. Humans need purpose. We can find purpose climbing mountains and in other consumeristic activities. But if we are ethical, a nagging voice will tell us we didn't accomplish anything worthwhile in those consumeristic activities. Ethical white advocacy is the most important moral mission of our time. It is the great cause, nevermind the alienating, anti-white propaganda coming from establishments.
10. It is important to direct refugees from modernity and establishment totalitarianisms toward ethical activities. Many individuals flee to the hive activities of Islam, Hitlerism, third wayism, cultural Marxism, neoconservative Christianity, and other horrific ideologies. We must help whites create and find a better missions. Whites currently seek relief from modernity by fanatically attaching themselves to the very ideologies causing ruin. 
11. Whites are the only major group fighting cultural Marxism. Cultural Marxism opposes accurate ethical reasoning. It is no accident that multiculturalists tend to be terrible at policy prescriptions on most other issues. You put multiculturalists in charge and most other things go to hell, too.
12. For many other reasons I don't have the time to write. 

If tomorrow, many white babies were genetically engineered for genes that caused massive evils, then we should not help those whites reproduce. We should actively work to prevent those whites from reproducing, no matter our race. And any existing white with genes likely to cause evils should be incentivized to not reproduce.

Bernie Sanders' Mask Slips

The above statement gives insight into the character of Bernie Sanders.

Multiculturalists attend Donald Trump rallies to deny freedom of assembly and freedom of association--to push, chase, block, punch, heckle, and otherwise incite violence, then assert victim status if any Trump supporter retaliates.

Few Trump supporters would do the same at a Democratic Party rally. And if Trump supporters did so, multiculturalists would claim the Trump supporters got what they deserved.

Sanders' quotes give tacit approval to the behavior of multiculturalists, to encourage mild red guarding.

None of this reality appears in Sanders' statement.

Instead, Sanders pretends to be above the fray while practicing demagoguery, by engaging in irrelevant ad hominem attacks.

Sanders acts as if he doesn't live in a land where whites have been constantly demonized for decades. Instead, the totalitarianism of cultural Marxism is the eternal victim. Atrocious behavior by multiculturalists, caused primarily by their genes and cultures, gets ignored or excused.

While Bernie Sanders is a comparatively civil guy for a contemporary politician, a Sanders presidency would see the federal government hire thousands of progressive multiculturalists devoted to totalitarianism and rent seeking. As in every Marxian nation, they would cause dystopian results while fellow believers, including Sanders, would make excuses and blame victims. Sanders' statement indicates he believes the cultural Marxian worldview, where whiteness is alleged to cause most of the world's ills while ignoring or dismissing overwhelming counter evidence that other factors cause nearly all the world's ills.

In Sanders' administration, mass destruction would be deemed necessary for the cause. And major red guarding would almost certainly result.

Fighting for Contemporary Empires?

What would we be fighting for?

If Mexico or Saudi Arabia sent us letters, saying they were drafting us into their army, would we go? Then why fight self-destructive wars for the former United States? The rulers of the former United States are committed to replacing white Americans with Mexicans and other nonwhites. We would be fighting a war for nonwhites, who hate us, and their descendants--plus egoism and war profiteering, of course.

In war and peace, one goal should be to get yourself, your allies, and potential enemies to pursue ethical goals. Yet we keep rewarding unethical enemies while harming ourselves

In some just wars, another goal should be to maximize the ratio of destruction to the enemy's ability to fight over destruction of your own when alternatives are gone. We must seek to maximize benefits and minimize harms to ourselves. We must have thurough knowledge of self, allies, and enemies, avoiding glib and overconfident conclusions. We must explore worse case scenarios and potential countermoves by enemies. We must not assume enemies will fight the way we want them to fight. No one should be promoted based on bribery or halo effects. None of this matters to those devoted to parasitism, that is, almost everyone with power in the West. Self-interest and ethical interest are assumed to be the same by establishments.

Situations where you should fight on behalf of peoples seeking to destroy you are historically almost nonexistent, yet we keep fighting on behalf of those working to destroy us.

Almost every war Western establishments entered during the last several generations produced worse long-term consequences than the establishments expected, in part, because the people being ruled don't matter to the people doing the ruling.

If establishments bumble into a nuclear war with China or Russia or both, surviving whites would likely find themselves in a civil war with the nonwhites the multicultural establishments rashly imported. The dead and wounded would be killed or wounded by technologies multicultural establishments permitted China and Russia to steal because establishments didn't want ethnoracial profiling.

We should seldom ally with contemporary establishments, no matter how tear-jerking their propaganda.

Frontiers in Cultural Marxism

Now that cultural Marxism is on the verge of spreading open female bathrooms for crossdressing men through most of the West, what will be the next fronts for the unconventional war? Churches deemed discriminatory for refusing to hire Muslim pastors? More Fergusons? More aggression at Trump gatherings by multiculturalists? Car insurers deemed discriminatory for car insurance rates for reckless nonwhite drivers? Rural zip codes, having high percentages of whites, ordered to pay, to make make zip codes more inviting to migrants and nonwhites?

The Muslims for pastors thing sounds like crazy talk. But think about where we are now. We have, against overwhelming ethical evidence, establishment demonization of eugenics and immigration patriotism. We have schools spending six figure lifetime sums to educate lower IQ individuals, the main thing these students learn is to hate whites. We have foreign billionaires with more political influence than millions of nonwealthy citizens. Muslims for pastors is comparatively mild compared to the anti-white aspects of cultural Marxism.

Gradual mass destruction is part of the new normalcy.

The establishments are wrong about almost every important issue. More wrongness doesn't matter to them when they can profit from it.

Minor wedge issues distract and divide populations from taking on the militarism, robber baronism, and cultural Marxism of establishments. And major wedge issues indoctrinate nonwealthy white multiculturalists to assist in mass destruction.

Some Thoughts

Every cultism looks creepy as hell to outsiders, yet normal to insiders. Too bad campaign contributors seem oblivious to the cultisms of various establishments.

**********

To tell whether a multiculturalist believes race exists, you merely look at the situation and time of day. Multiculturalists act as if race exists when it helps their causes, not when it hurts their causes.

**********

America would have turned out better if sixty years ago all ethnoracial realists migrated to the Democratic Party and all multiculturalists migrated to the Republican Party. In the Republican Party, realists had little leverage, giving Republican politicians votes and money but getting little in return, except destruction. In the old Democratic Party, Dixiecrats and other realists might have have been able to take over unions, using that power to supply or leverage Democratic politicians. Doing so would have required some effort and backbone. Republicans would have been out of power and forced to make strange bedfellow offerings to African-Americans.

But practitioners of divide-and-rule wouldn't stand for that, so now we have a political oligopoly devoted to smiley faced militarism, cultural Marxism, and robber baronism.

Or better yet: broke America up into smaller nations and implemented proportional representation years ago.

**********

Hundreds of multicultural, tough on crime rulers existed throughout history, their methods often brutal. But once greater tribalisms gained dominance, it was over. The tough guys kept the peace for themselves and others devoted to short term self-interest, but their descendants inherited horrors. Multicultural tough guys (Rudy Giuliani) are short term thinkers devoted to helping wealthy, living adults maintain their lifestyles, with little concern for posterity.

**********

We pay taxes so people who work to destroy us and keep us from spreading the truth can have nice things we can't afford.

**********

Marxism in practice historically emphasized three things:
1. redistribution of power and money to insiders.
2. anti-white supremacism.
3. class rhetoric as a pretext to support the first two.

Stalinism, Mugabeism, and other Marxian systems vary from each other and from Marx on economic issues, caring little about fidelity to Marx. Western supporters of Stalinism and other economic heresies excused them as a necessary stages on the way to communes.

So the economic malleability of neo-Marxism should be no surprise.

Everyone from Bill Keller to Grover Norquist to Al Sharpton can join the club for cultural Marxism. And if you do not join, you face assaults, firings, boycotts, lawsuits, ostracism, demonization, and speech crime charges. Control of the mass media and major institutions is enough to get Northern Eurasian peoples to believe ideas contradicted by massive counter evidence.

**********

Just speculating, but there might be an evolutionary reason why some people notice and really, really dislike slight disturbances to nature settings. Historically, what often existed where nature is slightly disturbed? Ambushes. People who didn't notice potential ambushes often didn't survive to spread their genes.

The Alleged Superiority of Establishments

Establishments seem to believe they're automatically ethically superior, therefore the things they do to harm others or escalate conflicts don't matter because they're the superior ones, as if to say, "When establishments do something, that makes it ethical."

In their view, if outgroup X legitimately deserves part of the blame, then that outgroup deserves all the blame, including when harms or conflicts could have easily been avoided. If millions or billions of people die or suffer, that's little price to pay compared to sacrificing "humanitarian" establishment principles, or more accurately, establishment status, power, and profiteering.

"Multiculturalism is an unmitigated disaster? Too bad. We have the KKK boogie man to worry about."

"We expanded NATO and overthrew the government of Ukraine? So what. Putin didn't have to be paranoid and escalate that civil war."

"Working class incomes declining? Whatever. We'll just invent some quality improvement stats and blame them for taking meth."

"Saudi Arabia has been getting away with mass evil for decades? Big deal. Look at Iran."

"Tens of thousands die in car accidents every year? Come on. Don't we have another Trayvon to excoriate whites about."

"We constantly call our critics super slurs and control the direction of civilization with slurs? We're just calling them what they are. You better watch what you say or I'll have you fined, fired or arrested for offending me."

"Bioweapons and rapidly evolving pathogens? Too abstract. Let's shove some more antibiotics into cattle."

"Those islands are nearly worthless? Get a grip. We can't let China engage in land grabs. What about demographic conquest of the West? It doesn't matter. We are all the same inside. Forget the behavioral stats. We have an anecdote to tell you about evil whites. China has nukes? We have more. China has high IQ individuals? We have Dreamers."

"Oligopolies, tax havens, and Wall Street? That sounds antisemitic to me. We should focus on glass ceilings."

As for a beneficial posterity, that's utterly alien to contemporary establishments.

On Slight Politically Incorrectness

Individuals often try to be a little bit politically incorrect, as if a tiny bit of contrarian grandstanding makes them brave fact facers.

Some counter-jihadists, for example, criticize Islam, figuring Islam is chosen, which Islam is, therefore fair game. These counter-jihadists demand the mythical moderate Islam while continuing to support most of cultural Marxism. They urge mullahs to publicly condemn terrorism, as if that will make much difference.

Counter-jihadists should know by now that mullahs say one thing for infidel consumption and something else for Muslim consumption. Public ecumenical statements by Muslims have little effect on Muslim behavior. These statements primarily make white multiculturalists even more gullible.

Ideology matters, but genes matter, too, especially when individuals are genetically inclined to fanatically cling to evil ideologies.

Many counter-jihadists consider race off limits since race is unchosen, but crushing flaws with this view exist.

Cultural Marxism is wrong about thousands of issues, not just Islam. As we see in Zimbabwe, South Africa, and almost everywhere else nonwhites live with whites, nonwhites cause massive harms to whites--and whites cause harms to nonwhites and each other. Multiculturalism makes most individuals worse than they would have been, especially white rulers practicing bait-and-switch, divide-and-screw strategies.

Nonwhites from outside Northeast Asia practice inbreeding and polygamy. They politically support mass dysgenic breeding, plus demographic conquest and annihilation.

Many nonwhites have lower levels of empathy for outgroups. They more frequently have the lower activity variants of the MAOA gene, and they have lower IQs--all of which increase destruction for whites. Multitudes of other behavioral genetic differences exist, but have yet to be discovered because almost all social scientists support cultural Marxism.

The destruction rises exponentially as nonwhite numbers increase. The solitary nonwhite surrounded by whites behaves fairly well. White minorities in nonwhite countries face mass destruction.

All nonwhite groups seek to dominate, not assimilate.

Multiculturalists emphasize the allegedly humble Japanese in America during World War II. They don't mention the millions of Japanese fifth columning in Asia and the Pacific during the the same period. The Japanese in America were acting humble out of self-interest and their comparative weakness, not moral goodness.

Already, numerous Chinese have been caught spying in the West. Those caught probably represent a fraction of those spying.

We have ethical duties to face all important ethical facts, no matter whether the facts are a tiny bit politically incorrect or colossally politically incorrect.

Followers of Bill Maher and the late Christopher Hitchens seem to revel in their contrarianism and political incorrectness, but their dissent is mostly trivial, doing little to save Westerners from mass destruction.

Christian Neoconservatism Versus Secular Neoconservatism

The mass media tell us that Christian neoconservatism--the Elmer Gantry menace--is a great threat, yet the mass media also tell us Jeb Bush, David Brooks, John Kasich, Hillary Clinton, and other secular neoconservatives are moderate and responsible.

What's the difference?

Both groups have few qualms about supporting kleptocracy, promoting cultural Marxism, and bumbling into world wars. Both groups are largely immune to ethical evidence. The big media difference: Christian neoconservatives believe in creationism, which is more a scientific issue than an important moral issue. Other differences revolve around school prayer and other minor issues. Clinton opposes many tax cuts for the wealthy but also lets personal enmity with Putin and others drive foreign policies.

Paul Krugman seems to relish commiserating with David Brooks, yet regularly refers to Christian neoconservatives as "crazies."

My head be scratched.