NYT: “White Nationalism Is Destroying the West”

Another day, another prominent NYT article against WN. We must be doing something right.

Today we have “White Nationalism Is Destroying the West” by Sasha Polakow-Suransky:

But this isn’t happening only in European countries. In recent years, anti-immigration rhetoric and nativist policies have become the new normal in liberal democracies from Europe to the United States. Legitimate debates about immigration policy and preventing extremism have been eclipsed by an obsessive focus on Muslims that paints them as an immutable civilizational enemy that is fundamentally incompatible with Western democratic values.

Yet despite the breathless warnings of impending Islamic conquest sounded by alarmist writers and pandering politicians, the risk of Islamization of the West has been greatly exaggerated. Islamists are not on the verge of seizing power in any advanced Western democracy or even winning significant political influence at the polls.

The same cannot be said of white nationalists, who today are on the march from Charlottesville, Va., to Dresden, Germany. As an ideology, white nationalism poses a significantly greater threat to Western democracies; its proponents and sympathizers have proved, historically and recently, that they can win a sizable share of the vote — as they did this year in France, Germany and the Netherlands — and even win power, as they have in the United States.

Far-right leaders are correct that immigration creates problems; what they miss is that they are the primary problem. The greatest threat to liberal democracies does not come from immigrants and refugees but from the backlash against them by those on the inside who are exploiting fear of outsiders to chip away at the values and institutions that make our societies liberal.

Got that?

Posted in Anti-White, NYT, White Identity | Comments Off on NYT: “White Nationalism Is Destroying the West”

NYT Hires “Gender Editor”

More diversity of opinion (and employee ethnicity) from the NYT:

The New York Times on Tuesday announced the hire of a new “gender editor,” a role focused on reimagining the news “through an intersectional lens.”

Former Newsweek editor Jessica Bennett had occasionally freelanced for the Times in the past. She is also the author of the “part manual, part manifesto,” Feminist Fight Club: A Survival Manual for a Sexist Workplace.

“As executive editor of Tumblr, she helped oversee the first live-GIFed presidential debate,” the Timespress release notes.

“In her new role, which she officially starts on Oct. 30, Bennett wants to reimagine the news through an intersectional lens — and not just in one section of the paper,” Teen Vogue reports.

“The reality is that institutions, and old-school media institutions, were primarily created by and for white men,” Bennett told Teen Vogue. “But that has changed.”

Bennett first approached Times executive editor Dean Baquet three years ago, pitching a full-time reporting position focused solely on gender issues, according to Poynter. The discussions fell through, but the Times subsequently created the gender editor role.

So, what inspired her to finagle a position with the NYT? Well, Der Trumpenfuhrer of course!

At first she was overwhelmed, and didn’t know if she should apply, but the 2016 presidential election motivated her to make the leap.

“But then the election happened, and I knew I wanted to help shape the coverage,” Bennett said.

Yes, help ‘shape the coverage’.

Posted in Culture Wars, NYT | Comments Off on NYT Hires “Gender Editor”

Birds of a Feather – Pt. 291,825

Here’s a pic of Harvey Weinstein alongside a pic of Noah Oppenheim, the NBC executive who spiked Ronan Farrow’s bombshell Harvey Weinstein story:

The Nose Knows

I’m sensing a pattern, but I can’t quite place it…

From FNC:

NBC News’ recently appointed president, Noah Oppenheim, is facing intense criticism for reportedly spiking an exclusive story exposing movie producer Harvey Weinstein’s history of sexual assault allegations. Oppenheim, who is a Hollywood screenwriter, should have recused himself from making decisions about a powerful player in the entertainment industry, critics say. Instead, the usually hands-off executive — who is still actively writing screenplays —  intervened in the editorial process and killed the story, according to The Daily Beast.

Oppenheim often has told industry colleagues that he’s likely to one day return to Hollywood full time. He wrote “Jackie,” a 2016 film starring Natalie Portman, and has been attached to multiple other projects. Weinstein was one of the most influential people in the movie business until a series of bombshell sexual harassment and assault allegations derailed his career.

One of the most damning reports was by former MSNBC host Ronan Farrow, who was still an NBC News reporter, but Oppenheim’s news organization refused to run the story. Farrow, who eventually took his 7,718-word bombshell to the prestigious New Yorker magazine, was told by Oppenheim’s team months before publication that his Weinstein scoop didn’t meet NBC’s standards…

Sources close to Oppenheim and NBC News say that he has been telling colleagues that he does not have a business relationship with Weinstein. That’s also got colleagues scratching their heads, as it’s unlikely a screenwriter of prestige projects like “Jackie” would not have been interested in one day doing business with the premier producer of Oscar-nominated films.

There’s also the intimation that Oppenheim himself may have been the source of the leaked Trump “Access Hollywood” tape:

Oppenheim was also at the middle of NBC’s controversial decision a year ago to sit on the notorious “Access Hollywood” tape of Donald Trump making lascivious comments about women. At the time, Oppenheim was running the “Today” show, whose co-host Billy Bush also was recorded on the tape egging on Trump. As with the Weinstein story, NBC argued strenuously that they had not been able to work out legally how to broadcast the tape before it was leaked to the Washington Post’s David Fahrenthold, who is a friend of Oppenheim’s from prestigious Harvard University.

It’s one big cozy circle.

Posted in Hollywood, Jewish | Comments Off on Birds of a Feather – Pt. 291,825

Dreher: God vs. Identity Politics

In “God Vs. Identity Politics”, Rod Dreher embarks on another long-winded dance with the ‘Devil’ that is identity politics. (Over at Counter-Currents, I previously wrote about Dreher’s growing internal struggle with the increasingly obvious tenets of race-realism and identity-politics-for-white-people in a piece titled “The Red Pilling of Rod Dreher”.) Dreher writes:

I’ve been saying for a long time here that the racial essentialism of people like Ta-Nehisi Coates is unavoidably calling up the same thing among white nationalists and other right-wing whites. You cannot have it both ways…

Ta-Nehisi Coates and Richard Spencer are both atheists who have found a strong source of belief in their respective races. Spencer, a Nietzschean, has said that Christianity is a religion of the weak. They have drawn the line between good and evil not down the middle of every human heart, as that great Christian prophet Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn did, but between their race and the Other. There is immense power in that kind of tribalism, and it lies in large part because it denies the fallenness of one’s own people. Where in contemporary American Christianity can we find the resources to resist falling prey to the malign power of racialism, in all its versions?

Why is racialism a ‘malign power’ rather than a rational position based on empirical and historical evidence?

It is true that we all have multiple identities, but for the Christian, his fidelity to Jesus Christ, as revealed in the Bible (and, for many of us, in the authoritative teachings of the apostolic church), has to be primary. It has to be the identity that gives all the other identities order, meaning, and legitimacy. I am neither proud nor ashamed of my race, but I do not believe in the racialism of Ta-Nehisi Coates and Richard Spencer because it is impossible to reconcile with the Gospel — which, as the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., famously said, directs us to judge not by the color of one’s skin, but by the content of one’s character.

Dreher’s statement that he is “neither proud nor ashamed of my race” helps explain how Christianity, in the last instance, was the historical enabler of the very hyper-individualism he rails against. The entirety of human history is one of social frameworks emerging from in-group vs. out-group distinctions, and the most salient in-group vs. out-group distinction in human history has been that of race. It is why national borders today tend to fall along ethnic lines.

It is as if Dreher and his type are adamant to pretend race doesn’t matter, that it played (and plays) no significant role in the West’s development, rise, and subsequent ongoing fall. As such, Dreher’s statement serves as Axiom #1 of Civic Nationalism.

In the West, the history of Christianity has been tantamount to a continuous expansion of the idea that race doesn’t matter, and following this logic qua Pope Francis, neither should borders matter. We are one big family, and borders simply act as barriers from us all living together. This leads naturally to pathological altruism, which is the cancer eating away at the West, allowing hordes of non-whites to enter the formerly white nations of the West.

The asceticism, self-masochism, and aforementioned pathological altruism of Dreher’s type of theology is quite striking in its public display of denial towards that which social identity theory argues is not only an innate part of human nature but a most central part of human nature.

Near the heart of the power of identity politics — which Justin Dean Lee rightly identifies as a pseudo-religion — is its power to explain, to absolve and to bind. It explains the tribes suffering by blaming those outside of it. This absolves those who embrace the identitarian ideology of their sins, and releases them from the responsibility to examine their own consciences in light of the transcendent truth. And it binds them in a brotherhood of the sanctified — sanctified not because of anything they have done or accomplished, but simply by their membership in the tribe.

Only a strong Christianity can counter this nihilistic tribal religion.

It ain’t gonna happen, Rod.

Posted in Alt-Right, Christianity, Identity Politics | Comments Off on Dreher: God vs. Identity Politics

Jared Taylor: How to Achieve Racial Separation

Posted in White Identity | Comments Off on Jared Taylor: How to Achieve Racial Separation

Justin Trudeau & The War Against Boyhood

In the women’s magazine Marie Claire (yes, a women’s magazine), the alarmingly effeminate Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, has penned “Why I’m Raising My Kids to Be Feminists”. It begins:

I am in politics because every day, I get to work to make the world a little better—for my kids, and for yours. I’m proud of the dedicated work our team is doing to make Canada more open, more inclusive, more just—and gender equal. But some of the most important work I do is not as a political leader, but as a parent. Every day, at home, I have the astonishing and humbling opportunity—together with my wife Sophie—to nurture empathy, compassion, self-love, and a keen sense of justice in our three kids.

No, this is not a parody.

Trudeau sets a new high in metrosexual pretentiousness by discussing how he and his wife are instilling a certain ideology into their 3 children, each of whom has a requisite, special-snowflake name: his daughter Ella-Grace, and his two sons Xavier and Hadrien (the latter an admittedly cool name, but not for the reasons Trudeau likely chose it.)

The piece reads like it was written by a stoned freshman hippie in his dorm at 3 am:

Feminism is not just the belief that men and women are equal. It’s the knowledge that when we are all equal, all of us are more free.

Ummm…. Yeah.

For his sons, Trudeau wants to:

… help them grow into empathetic young people and adults, strong allies who walk through the world with openness, love, and a fierce attachment to justice. I want my sons to escape the pressure to be a particular kind of masculine that is so damaging to men and to the people around them.

Between stuff like this, surely taught in primary schools as well, and news today that the Boy Scouts of America will now be ‘fully inclusive’ and admit girls, what does it take to stop this War Against Boyhood?

Posted in Culture Wars, Political Correctness | Comments Off on Justin Trudeau & The War Against Boyhood

How Men and Women Define Success

Psychologist Susan Pinker believes there are hard-wired differences in how men and women (on average) perceive happiness and success at work (“His Standards or Hers? How Men and Women Define Success”).

When I was in Amsterdam in 2008 to talk about my recently published book, The Sexual Paradox, I was interviewed by a senior editor of a major daily newspaper. She had reached the age when she was unlikely to have small children at home and as the executive editor of a major daily, she was at the pinnacle of her career. Despite this executive status, she worked part time and had always worked less than a full week. I asked why. “Wednesdays are for my family and friends,” she told me, “and Friday is piano day. Practicing the piano is essential to my happiness and I want to make sure I have time for it.”

I was stunned. Working full time—if not at least 60 hours a week—is de rigueur for professionals in North America. Not so in the Netherlands, where almost half of the population works fewer than 40 hours a week. This is especially true for Dutch women, over 76% of whom work part time. Legislation enacted in 2000 protects the jobs of anyone who wants to work part time in the Netherlands. If they move from full to part-time for any reason, they can neither be fired, nor refused benefits. Yet even if this arrangement is open to women and men alike, the number of women who take advantage of it eclipses the number of men. While three-quarters of all women in the Netherlands work part time—two-thirds of whom have no children at home—that figure is only one-quarter for men…

Let’s take Silicon Valley as an example. Extreme workaholism characterizes work in the high tech sector. “Working 18 hours a day. Every day. No vacations, no going on dates, no watching TV,” is how the Silicon Valley work ethic was described in the New York Times by Dan Lyons, one of its former denizens.2 No matter how much they might earn in IT, the evidence shows that the majority of educated women put a premium on other life priorities.3 But suggesting as much is to be vilified publicly and to commit professional suicide, as former Google software engineer James Damore discovered when his memo was leaked about why uneven sex ratios persist in Silicon Valley. Fifty years after the birth of second-wave feminism, it is still taboo to express the idea that many women find happiness and fulfillment in ways that might diverge from the male norm.

“Money is not the only thing affecting people’s happiness; it’s not remotely the whole story,” said British economist Baron Richard Layard in 2014. “People must understand that they would do well to preserve their human relationships; they should give them a higher priority than how much they earn.” As I point out in The Village Effect, this is more commonly a female perspective than a male-typical one.

Some triggered SJW needs to make a violent threat against the Intitute for Family Studies, so that they revoke this article’s publication.

Posted in HBD, Psychology | Comments Off on How Men and Women Define Success

Low-Trust Societies in Latin America

As KMac notes, such is life in a low-trust society:

One in three people using public services in Latin America and the Caribbean report having to pay a bribe over the last year, according to a survey.

report by Transparency International found Mexico has the highest bribery rate in the region, with one of every two people reporting paying bribes, followed by the Dominican Republic and Peru.

Overall, the police were the least trusted public institution, with 47% of those questioned across 20 countries saying most or all officers were corrupt.

These are the peoples we are bringing into the U.S. en masse.

Posted in HBD, Hispanics | Comments Off on Low-Trust Societies in Latin America

NYT: “Campus Hate Lives on the Internet. Administrators Need to Catch Up.”

It is absolutely delicious watching the Elites panic at the remarkable, troll-driven ascent of the Alt Right.

The NYT is now resorting to giving desirable op-ed space to leftist college students to help them make sense of sh*t-posting.

Posted in Alt-Right, Culture Wars, NYT | Comments Off on NYT: “Campus Hate Lives on the Internet. Administrators Need to Catch Up.”

NYT: “The Prophet of Germany’s New Right”

In the NYT, James Angelos writes a long piece on “The Prophet of Germany’s New Right”. The piece begins:

Götz Kubitschek, a self-proclaimed “rightist intellectual,” lives in a medieval manor house in Schnellroda, a rural village in eastern Germany. From this isolated, antique outpost, Kubitschek, who is 47, wields considerable influence over far-right thinkers, activists and politicians across Germany, who make regular pilgrimages to Schnellroda for an audience with him. The manor serves as the headquarters for the magazine and publishing house that Kubitschek runs with his wife, the writer Ellen Kositza, and also for a rightist think tank, the plainly named Institute for State Policy, and a small organic farm where he raises rabbits and goats. Kubitschek calls himself a conservative, battling to preserve Germany’s “ethno-cultural identity,” which he says is threatened by immigration and the alienating effects of modernity. He identifies as part of the German “New Right,” which seeks to dissociate itself from the “old right,” which in Germany means Nazis. German political scientists, by contrast, classify the brand of thinking Kubitschek ascribes to as either an ideological “hinge” between conservatism and right-wing extremism, or as simply extremist — not vastly different, in other words, from the old right. Kubitschek, however, presents his views with a disarming, Teutonic idealism that recalls a Germany that long preceded the rise of Hitler. The German magazine Der Spiegel once referred to him as a “dark knight.”

There is this gem:

Kubitschek was immediately recognizable, a towering black-clad figure with a well-trimmed goatee and the upright posture of a military officer.

Wow, project much?

For the most part, however, the piece is an informative albeit liberal take on Alt-Right political developments in Germany.  For example, of der Flügel, the ethnonationalist wing of AfD:

Flügel politicians are now ascendant within the party — and they are increasingly mixing their nationalism with the antiliberalism agenda of the New Right. Before the election, I attended an Alternative for Germany rally in Artern, a depressed-looking town not very far from Schnellroda. There, I was struck by how Flügel politicians devoted much of their speeches to a number of economic issues traditionally though of as leftist — low wages, poverty in old age, insufficient social benefits, rhetoric designed to shift the party away from its roots in economic liberalism. One of the politicians, a man named Jürgen Pohl, who was subsequently elected into Parliament, denounced the claim that Germany is doing “better than ever” economically. Should Angela Merkel and “our new African citizens” come to the former East Germany, he said, they’d see the “poor house of Germany.” Another speaker, André Poggenburg, the head of the party in Saxony-Anhalt, declared Alternative for Germany to be “the new party of social justice.” The message was simple enough: more benefits for the Volk, and fewer foreigners to take those benefits away. In the former East, where unemployment remains higher and salaries remain lower than in the former West, that message seems to resonate, helping the party peel away hundreds of thousands of voters from die Linke, the descendant of the East German Communist Party.

The shift is not entirely surprising. New Right thinkers often entertain the idea of establishing a querfront, or a “cross front” that would unite opponents of liberalism on both extremes of the political spectrum. During my talks with Kubitschek, I often found myself detecting what at first seemed to me a perplexing leftist bent, an aversion to American-style materialism. You had only to go the shopping center on a Saturday morning, he once told me, and observe people in their “consumption temple” to see how there is “nothing at all there, spiritually.” For Kubitschek and other New Right thinkers, American liberalism — with its emphasis on individual rights and the individual pursuit of happiness — is perhaps the most corrosive force eating away at the identity of the Volk,replacing a sense of “we” with individualism and profit-seeking self-interest.

Sound familiar?

This same dynamic is happening all over the West.

Kubitschek casually mentioned that he would not mind at all if a strongman came to replace Merkel, if that was the only way to correct her decision to allow the migrants to enter Germany. In a time of great peril, he noted soberly, a leader must act beyond the law. He cited Carl Schmitt, the conservative political theorist who criticized parliamentary democracy and aligned with the Nazis after they took power: “Sovereign is he who decides on the exception.” Merkel herself had acted outside the law by opening the border, Kubitschek said, and that proved she was sovereign. And yet, he continued, “I’d have absolutely nothing against it if someone came along and with the same sovereignty did the opposite. Someone who would say: ‘The experiment is over. The Parliament won’t be consulted. I will prop up with my power the administration, the organs of the state, the police’ — who would in any case be supportive — ‘the border patrol, the military, and we will end this experiment.’ That means: borders shut. Test to see who can be assimilated; they can stay. Those who can’t be assimilated, they’ve got to go.”

It was clear the Kubitschek considers “refugee” a misnomer. These were not, for the most part, refugees fleeing persecution or war, but opportunists — mostly “hungry young men,” as he put it — acting “very rationally” to improve their lot. These migrants arrived in an “insecure” country, he said, where the people “don’t know who they are or what belongs to them.” The migrants, he said, therefore begin to think, Doesn’t everything here belong to everyone? “And then the waves are set into motion, and they say: ‘All right, here we have a country, a fallow country, and it’s a country that must be conquered, and it can be conquered. And it won’t be conquered with ladders for storming fortresses or with machetes, but with sheer presence.’ ” Everyone at the table seemed to agree that the consequences of this conquering were dire. Crime, they argued, was on the rise; women could no longer feel safe walking alone outside at night. “We all know the dystopian stories,” Kubitschek said. Matters might get “supercharged in a hyper-identitarian way,” he added. “If it once again becomes really brutal or cruel, we don’t know. It can also transition over into a country that is no longer Germany.”

Things are moving fast.

Posted in Alt-Right, Europe, White Identity | Comments Off on NYT: “The Prophet of Germany’s New Right”