Donald Trump persuading Republicans, but would lose to Hillary Clinton, polls suggest Reply

According to this analysis, Hillary will beat Trump, and Sanders would have an even better chance against Trump. Read the article Eric Grenier’s of CBC News here.

What seems to be happening now is something that I have been thinking for a while would happen. I always thought that as the demographic groups that normally vote Republican continued to shrink in size and lose power politically, they would become more militant and try to go down with a fight. I figured that at some point the Repugs might actually adopt what has been called the “Sailer strategy” and essentially become the party of “white nationalism lite” (like the Euronationalist parties in Europe, e.g. Front National, Sweden Democrats, etc).

It seems to actually be happening now with the Trump phenomenon, and it’s happening quicker than I thought it would. I suspect if the GOP becomes the party of Trumpism on a permanent basis the neocons will go back to the Democratic Party, since they came from there originally, and join the Hillaryites, or whoever succeeds her. I think this would largely guarantee Democratic dominance in national politics and the US would be essentially a one-party state. The GOP would be a fringe party, and it might split into two fringe parties, one the party of Trumpism and one the party that attempts to continue the old Reagan coalition. Meanwhile, the Democraps would be faced with an insurgency from the left in their own ranks. It’s happening now with Sanders, and it may take on a more radical form in the future.

More…

Keith Preston on Totalitarian Humanism at C-Realm Podcast 1

The full transcript of my recent interview with the C-Realm podcast.


KMO:
You are listening to the C­Realm podcast. I’m your host, KMO. And I’m speaking with Keith Preston of Attack the System. Keith, welcome to the C­Realm podcast.

Keith Preston: Thank you for having me.

KMO: I have been listening to your podcasts. I live in New York city. My children live near Baltimore, and I drive there every now and again to visit them. And so, I have a lot of time to listen to big chunks of people’s podcast archives. So, just recently I listened to probably 3 or 4 of your shows over the course of a couple of days. And they’re pretty dense, I have to say, and erudite. Very impressive. And I feel like I have been enriched by those drives.

Preston: Oh. Well, thank you.

KMO: You have a great turn of phrase that I want to get around to, and that is “totalitarian humanism.” But rather than dive right into that, I would like to invite you to just say more about your general project of the work that you do with podcasting and writing.

More…

“The most socially destructive public policy since slavery…” Reply

By Simon Oxenham

Politics.Co.UK

Suzanne Sharkey is a former constable and undercover officer at Northumbria Constabulary
Suzanne Sharkey is a former constable and undercover officer at Northumbria Constabulary

Last week Neil Franklin, a retired major from Marylyn State Police, led a troop of serving and former police chiefs, soldiers and a former spy into the Parliament to call MPs to end the war on drugs. Their testimony was damning and revealing.

Franklin opened the meeting with an explanation of the campaign’s mission to “reduce crime, disease, death and addiction by ending the most socially destructive public policy since slavery.” Franklin explained how his organisation of “police officers, agents, judges, criminal prosecutors, corrections officials and others” including over 180,000 members and supporters in over 180 countries share one goal, to end “the world’s longest war”.

According to Franklin “we have been attempting to solve a public health crisis with criminal justice solutions and the results have been catastrophic”. While repeated calls from academia and public health have failed to convince most politicians, the group hopes calls from within the criminal justice system will finally make them listen. What follows are all direct quotes, edited for concision.

Suzanne Sharkey (pictured above): Former Constable and Undercover Officer at Northumbria Constabulary

“When I look back at my time in the police I feel ashamed, I feel a sense of failure. I feel ashamed that I wasn’t arresting career criminals. I was arresting people from poor socially deprived areas with little or no hope whose crime was non-violent drug possession, a complete failure of the war on drugs. I believe that one of the biggest barriers for people with problematic substance misuse to seeking help and treatment is the current drug policy. It does nothing, it achieves nothing except creating more harm for individuals, families and society as a whole. All of us know the problems and what we need to do but rather than be united by the problems let’s be united by the solutions. Solutions based in health, education and compassion rather than criminalisation.”

READ STORY

Alt Right Podcast: Trumpophobia-The Madness of the Left and the Weakness of the GOP Reply

My recent appearance on Alt Right.

Listen here.

Andy and Colin are joined by political analyst Keith Preston of Attack the System to talk about the Trump phenomenon and why a man who essentially makes sensible, middle-of-the-road statements so successfully “triggers” the media, the establishment, and the Left, and what this reveals about the deeply unhealthy nature of American society and its economy.

Failure as a Way of Life Reply

By William S. Lind

The American Conservative

10 FACE/Shutterstock

The fault line in American politics is no longer Republican vs. Democrat nor conservative vs. liberal but establishment vs. anti-establishment. This is an inevitable result of serial failure in establishment policies. Nowhere do we see this more clearly than in the establishment’s repeated military interventions abroad in wars against non-state opponents. When such interventions fail in one place—first Somalia, then Iraq, then Afghanistan, then Libya, now Syria—it does the same thing again somewhere else, with the same result.

Why has the establishment allowed itself to be trapped in serial failure? Once we understand how it works, the answer is plain: it cannot do otherwise. On Capitol Hill, the legalization of bribery—“campaign contributions”—means money rules.

READ MORE

San Diego Banishes References to “Founding Fathers” 1

This article from World Nut Daily raises an interesting question.

It would appear that in regions of the U.S. where the Blue Tribe is especially dominant, there is an effort to fully eradicate references to the traditional American past. Even in the conservative South, there have efforts to remove references to the Confederacy, which is somewhat understandable from a “pro-American” perspective given that, after all, the Confederacy was a separatist revolutionary movement (and good for them), and from a civil rights perspective given that the Confederacy was a slavocracy. However, there have  also been efforts to remove references to Christopher Columbus (for obvious anti-racist or anti-colonial reasons), and increasingly I come across reports on attacks against the “founding fathers” of the United States as well (which also makes sense from a leftist perspective given their rather un-PC views on many things). However, the sum total of this is to essentially delegitimize the traditional American nationalism. If you dismiss America’s “founding fathers” as racist, sexist, classist, homophobic whatevers, then obviously there’s not much case for the traditional American patriotism.

More…

Two Flavors of Tyranny: Red? Or Brown? Reply

This article by Jeffrey Tucker is a similar to this piece I did about a decade ago.

By Jeffrey Tucker

Foundation of Economic Education

Maybe you have noticed the strangely implausible similarities between the cobbled-together platforms of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. On the surface, they represent opposite extremes. But in their celebration of the nation state as the people’s salvation — their burning calls to overthrow the existing elites and replace them with a more intense form of top-down rule — they have much in common.

Remember that the Nazis and Communists hated each other in the interwar period and, of course, fought each other to the bloody end in the war itself. After the Nazis lost control of the nations they conquered, the Communists swept in, trading one tyranny for another.

To imagine that these systems somehow represent polar opposites is bizarre. Both systems extolled the primacy of the state. Both practiced economic central planning. Both upheld the nation over the individual. Both created a cult of leadership. Both experiments in top-down social order ended in calamity and massive violations of human rights.

How could these two systems, so similar in operation, be so antagonistic? I guess you had to be there.

READ MORE

 

In U.S., New Record 43% Are Political Independents Reply

Are the growing ranks of independents the future demographic base of the Grey Tribe?

By Jeffrey Jones

Gallup.Com

  • Record 43% of Americans are political independents
  • Democrats maintain edge among those with a party preference
  • Democratic advantage smaller in 2014 than in 2013

PRINCETON, N.J. — An average 43% of Americans identified politically as independents in 2014, establishing a new high in Gallup telephone poll trends back to 1988. In terms of national identification with the two major parties, Democrats continued to hold a modest edge over Republicans, 30% to 26%.

U.S. Party Identification, Yearly Averages, 1988-2014

Since 2008, the percentage of political independents — those who identify as such before their leanings to the two major parties are taken into account — has steadily climbed from 35% to the current 43%, exceeding 40% each of the last four years. Prior to 2011, the high in independent identification was 39% in 1995 and 1999.

READ MORE

Contra the Self-Ownership Principle: The Nightmare of Libertopia 22

By Todd Lewis

Praise of Folly

Recently I have been reading Ed Feser’s blog entries on Murary Rothbard here:

http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2009/08/rothbard-as-philosopher.html                            http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2009/08/rothbard-revisited.html

With Feser’s insights, along with my own separate inquiries facilitated by my friend Brock Bellerive, I have found Rothbard to be a very shoddy philosopher and anarcho-capitalism in general bereft of any serious intellectual firepower. The specific point that Feser was critiquing was Rothbard’s concept of self-ownership, which Feser handily disposes of with rigorous use of logic. This in turn facilitated some of my own thoughts on the self-ownership principle and found it wanting both intellectually and morally. The thrust of this paper is to show that self-ownership is both intellectually and morally bankrupt.

More…

Donald Trump is the least favorably viewed presidential candidate since at least 1992 2

This latest poll from Gallup is consistent with what one would expect given the prevailing demographic, generational, cultural, economic and partisan trends in the wider society, as this recent article by Peter Beinart indicates. Contrary to the hysteria of the Left, Donald Trump is not ushering in a fascist revolution in America. Instead, he is emerging as the candidate of a dying demographic that regards him as their last hope. Donald Trump resembles Ross Perot more closely than any previous presidential candidate, but his fans more closely resemble George Wallace supporters in 1968 who regarded him as their last hope to overturn the civil rights revolution. Sorry, folks, it ain’t gonna happen.

By Philip Bump

Washington Post

READ MORE

Augustus Invictus’ Letter to the People of Europe 7

Here’s the transcript.

To the People of Europe,
Fate lays upon me the task of writing you from distant shores. My name is Augustus Invictus, and I am a candidate for the United States Senate. Though I am an American, I am by blood a son of Europe. My ancestry is British, my name Roman, my religion pan-European. I am trained in Anglo-American law, educated in continental philosophy and politics, steeped in Western aesthetic. Though Florida may be a great distance from my ancestral land of Scotland, I am in blood and in soul your brother.
And though I am an American politician, the issues I raise in my campaign for the Senate here affect every man, woman, and child of the West. I write to you today not to condescend or to advertise my American arrogance, but to call for the unity of all Westerners against the powers that would destroy our people.
From New Zealand & Australia to the United States & Canada, and even to South Africa, we share a common civilization, born of Europe. This is impolitic to say in any country, and it is now evidence of “hate speech” in several. We must ask ourselves why the self-described elites in our respective countries would keep us divided, why they would insist that we have no common culture, why they would insist that we take literally countless immigrants into countries callously neglecting their rightful sons and daughters.
I hope that we may come to see each other as fellows. I pray that we may come to cherish what we share more than we might lament the differences between us. Though we have warred, though we have viewed each other with great suspicion, these misfortunes are, I hope, passed. We share a common bond that the millions of immigrants recently recruited to our ancestral land will never share. We, as Westerners, are brothers, though long-separated; they are foreigners being imported by your own governments to destroy the proud heritage and people of Europe.
Your officials have betrayed you.

LaVoy Finicum’s message to Native Americans Reply

Lingit Latseen

In a video released the evening of his death, LaVoy Finicum, the man who was shot and killed on Tuesday in Harney County, addresses some concerns voiced by Natives regarding the occupation. In the video he voices his support for the establishment of independent, sovereign tribal nations. Finicum was a part of the armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

“It is time to throw off the BIA, and become a completely sovereign independent nation without the overseer-ship of the BIA,” Finicum says. “It is time for them to stand up and throw off the federal government out of their nations.”

More…

Debate I Part 2: Todd Lewis (Christian Distributism) vs. Danilo Cuellar (Voluntaryist Anarchist) 1

Please enjoy the continuation of my recent debate with Todd Lewis. Herein we discuss individual responsibility, peaceful parenting, the belief in authority, legal plunder, Child Protective Services, lack of accountability, the State perverts Free Market incentives, private armies cannot compete with the evils of the military, the State is a mass murdering entity, Aristotle definition of friendship, abortion, the moral case for Anarchy, legality is diametrically opposed to morality, everything the State does is constitutional, self ownership, intellectual property, special pleading, voluntary communities, homesteading, you are your own master, morality is associated with human beings and more!

“Intellectuals can debate. Idiots just argue.” – Dani Reynolds

More…

Debate I Part 1: Todd Lewis (Christian Distributism) vs. Danilo Cuellar (Voluntaryist Anarchist) Reply

Please enjoy my recent debate with Todd Lewis. Herein we discuss Mere Christianity definition, Distributism definition, Aristotle on magnanimity, Economy definition, the importance of family and close friend bonds, perverse incentives of the welfare State, ways to distribute land, calling what we have today as Crony Capitalism is like calling rape Crony Lovemaking, Capitalism definition, Corporate Fascism, Mussolini’s Fascism, Mercantilism, Karl Marx 10 planks of Communism, Roman empire collapse, property owners raising private army theory, debt based system, railroad fascism, characteristics of money vs. currency, voluntary communities, legal plunder, if your ideas require force they are worthless, punished for heroism, Pareto 80/20 principle and more!

“Intellectuals can debate. Idiots just argue.” – Dani Reynolds

More…

Augustus Sol Invictus – Libertarian Realism: Folk, Culture & Borders Reply

Great interview with Augustus by Lana Lokteff. Listen here.

Augustus Invictus is an attorney and community leader in Orlando, Florida who is a candidate in the 2016 US Senate election. Best known as a radical philosopher and infamous social critic, he is Managing Partner of Imperium, P.A., the law firm he founded in 2013. As an attorney, Augustus has worked to defend those who have become collateral damage of America’s two longest-running wars: the War on Drugs and the War on Terror.

Augustus begins with an explanation of the name he has chosen to identify with, along with the mystical path that led him to study law and eventually pursue politics. He talks about his affiliation with the Libertarian Party (LP) and the problems he sees with its watered down, mainstream message. Augustus describes the main issues he aspires to tackle as Senator: the drug war, foreign policy, and the financial crisis. We get into the customary LP stances on open borders, immigration and equality, and we look at how these key concerns have been muddled with leftist contention. Augustus shares his view on the problems that will ensue for Libertarian ideals if non-Westerners continue to flood into America, and he also speaks to the Marxist degeneracy that has infected pop culture and the educational system. Then, we discuss the absence of natural law and hierarchy in the current US government system, along with the tyrannical forces pushing oppressive mandatory regulations, censorship and hate speech laws. At the end, Augustus sums up the actions he is taking to tackle the looney left’s war on White men and inspire a resurrection of the American front.

National Review Fails to Kill Its Monster Reply

The New Republic takes on National Review‘s take on Trump.

By Jeet Heer

The New Republic

National Review is the great intellectual gatekeeper of the American right, a journal of opinion that has long served as the arbiter of what counts as respectable conservative thought. Throughout its six-decade history, the magazine has been known for launching crusades against ideological factions it regards as unworthy of belonging to the conservative tribe, including anti-Semites in the late 1950s, libertarians and members of the John Birch Society in the 1960s, and anti-war conservatives in the 1990s and post-September 11. Acting as a kind of bouncer, National Review has earned enemies who accuse it of purging dissident thought on the right. But there’s no question that the many wars National Review has fought to purify the conservative movement have often had a salutary effect, particularly in excluding anti-Semitism and more overt forms of racism.

READ MORE

Sorry, Folks, But Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders Are Not Revolutionaries 1

It is understandable that Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders have been able to garner a tremendous amount of support among many who are inclined to think ill of the system (which is rapidly becoming a majority of the U.S. population).

Both men are a refreshing alternative to the scripted politicians that comprise the “mainstream” presidential candidates, and both are raising topics of interest that many people find compelling but which the establishment candidates will not touch for obvious reasons.

Bernie Sanders is essentially a single-issue candidate, and his issue is the widening class divisions that have appeared in the United States in the era of globalization, and which are now the greatest at any point in the past century. Trump is essentially addressing the same issue, albeit from a different implicit ideological perspective.

More…

The Strongest Prejudice Was Identified Reply

democratic_vs_republican_party_in_america

From Edge: Jonathan Haidt on politribal prejudice.

______________

If you were on a selection committee tasked with choosing someone to hire (or to admit to your university, or to receive a prize in your field), and it came down to two candidates who were equally qualified on objective measures, which candidate would you be most likely to choose?

__A) The one who shared your race
__B) The one who shared your gender
__C) The one who shared your religion
__D) The one who shared your political party or ideology

The correct answer, for most Americans, is now D. It is surely good news that prejudice based on race, gender, and religion are way down in recent decades. But it is very bad news—for America, for the world, and for science—that cross-partisan hostility is way up.

My nomination for “news that will stay news” is a paper by political scientists Shanto Iyengar and Sean Westwood, titled “Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization.” Iyengar and Westwood report four studies (all using nationally representative samples) in which they gave Americans various ways to reveal both cross-partisan and cross-racial prejudice, and in all cases cross-partisan prejudice was larger.

First they used a measure of implicit attitudes (the Implicit Association Test), which measures how quickly and easily people can pair words that are emotionally good versus bad with words and images associated with Blacks vs. Whites. They also ran a new version of the test that swapped in words and images related to Republicans vs. Democrats, instead of Blacks vs. Whites. The effect sizes for cross-partisan implicit attitudes were much larger than cross-race. If we focus just on White participants who identified with a party, the cross-partisan effect was about 50 percent larger than the cross-race effect. When Americans look at each other or try to listen to each other, their automatic associations are more negative for people from the “other side” than they are for people of a different race.

In another study they had participants read pairs of fabricated resumes of graduating high school seniors and select one to receive a scholarship. Race made a difference—Black and White participants generally preferred to award the scholarship to the student with the stereotypically Black name. But Party made an even bigger difference, and always in a tribal way: 80 percent of the time, partisans selected the candidate whose resume showed that they were on their side, and it made little difference whether their co-partisan had a higher or lower GPA than the cross-partisan candidate.

In two additional studies Iyengar and Westwood had participants play behavioral economics games (the “trust game” and the “dictator game”). Each person played with what they thought was a particular other person, about whom they read a brief profile including the person’s age, gender, race, and political ideology. Race and ideology were manipulated systematically. Race made no difference, but partisanship mattered a lot: people were more trusting and generous when they thought they were playing with a co-partisan than a cross-partisan.

This is extremely bad news for America because it is very hard to have an effective democracy without compromise. But rising cross-partisan hostility means that Americans increasingly see the other side not just as wrong but as evil, as a threat to the very existence of the nation, according to Pew Research. Americans can expect rising polarization, nastiness, paralysis, and governmental dysfunction for a long time to come.

More…

More Than a Whiff of Cologne 1

1032873731

More than you might wanna inhale!

~MRDA~


Opinions/Editorials:

How to deal with the sexual assaults in Cologne and Hamburg by Musa Okwonga

German Feminists: Forget Rapist Migrants, They’re Already Marginalised by Liam Deacon

Why We Can’t Stay Silent on Germany’s Mass Sex Assaults by Maajid Nawaz

The solution to Germany’s migrant problem is simple. But not easy. by Janet Bloomfield a.k.a JudgyBitch

Chaos and Violence: How New Year’s Eve in Cologne Has Changed Germany by Spiegel Staff

We need to talk about Cologne by Greek Forum of Refugees (et al)

The Charlie Hebdo cartoon about Aylan Kurdi and sex attackers is one of its most powerful and important by Jessica Brown

The false dilemma of the rapacious Muslim narrative by Hannah Wallen

Cologne and the ‘sexism of the other’: Why tougher migration policies won’t solve sexual abuse by Anne Jenichen

A reply to Anne Jenichen on the link between immigration and sexual violence by Daniel Falkiner

Is Europe Choosing to Self-Destruct? by Judith Bergman

Summary of the Coordinated Sexual Assaults by Immigrants Against Europeans on N.Y.E. by Govan Kilgour

After Cologne, Feminism is Dead by Phillip Mark McGough

Europa: When Feminism is Silent by NM Phoenix

Lie Back and Think of Brussels by Ann Sterzinger and Jamie Mason

Reports:

The Guardian: German minister suggests New Year’s Eve assaults were coordinated

Breitbart: Berlin, Cologne, Hamburg, Stuttgart, Dusseldorf… New Year’s Migrant Sex Assault In Every Major German City

The Huffington Post: German Train Station Attacks In Cologne: Ralf Jaeger Compares Right Wing Commenters To New Year’s Sex Attackers

BBC News: Cologne Mayor’s ‘code of conduct’ to prevent sexual assault angers many

Breitbart: Eyewitness Cologne: Germany Deploys 143 Officers To Stop Migrant Rape, 1,500 Officers To Stop Anti-Rape Protest

Daily Mail: UK celebrities furious as far-right group uses bloody pictures of them as examples of Cologne sex attacks

The Local: Backlash after women told not to go out alone

International Business Times: Cologne sex attacks: Syrian refugees take to streets to condemn mass assaults by migrants on New Year’s Eve

The Independent: Cologne attacks: American woman tells how Syrian refugees rescued her from New Year’s Eve sexual assault

Discussion:

Paleolibertarian book from the UK Reply

cover.jpg

Liberty from a Beginner: Selected Essays (Second Edition)

Twenty Five Essays with an Introductory Overview

By Keir Martland

Foreword by Sean Gabb

Buy as a paperback

Also available for the Kindle

FROM THE REVIEWS

“[these essays] break out of the dead end that British libertarianism – and much American – has found itself in since about 1980.” – Sean Gabb (Libertarian Alliance)

“Keir Martland provides a perspective that synthesizes Rothbardian libertarianism with cultural traditionalism to offer insights that are as penetrating as they are rare.” – Keith Preston (Attack the System)

More…

ISIS Attacks are Excuses for Censorship and Disarmament Reply

Truth Axis

The Paris terrorist attacks and San Bernardino shootings have ushered in a new era of urban terror. The combined death toll of both attacks was 146 dead with hundreds wounded. The response from American politicians, law enforcement and intelligence departments has varied, but is unified in their calls for expansion of government power to fight a terrorist threat that the the US had a hand in creating. Together, mass shootings and the threat of terrorism have been the primary fears upon which the ruling elite has played upon to legitimize their mass surveillance programs, mass disarmament plans, and expansion of their wars for global hegemony. Here is how they are doing it.

Democrats want you to support expanded gun control.

An editorial in the New York Times said that rifles were “marketed as tools of macho vigilantism and even insurrection” and said that politicians “reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing”. It is clear that the left wing of the global plutocracy wants us to fear and even hate armed civilians, though it remains entirely uncertain that gun ownership rates have anything to do with recent reductions in violent crime and homicide rates. Furthermore, mass shooting deaths accounted for only .09% of homicides from 1984 to 2014. Most recently, President Obama is pushing for an executive order to expand background checks and close the so-called “gun show loophole” that allows people to buy weapons without a background check at gun shows. Though, again, it is unclear if such measures would have prevented any recent terrorist attack or mass shooting. In fact, it is believed and almost assured that the Paris terrorist attacks were carried out with weapons smuggled in from the Balkans and other European nations with a thriving black market in firearms. How are measures designed to keep guns out of the hands of citizens supposed to stop terrorists? One can only conclude that they are not supposed to stop terrorists, only stop people with intentions of so called “macho vigilantism” and “insurrection,” also known as US citizens.
More…

Reading Through An Indigenous Peoples’ History of the United States: Multiculturalism 1

Originally posted at Lingit Latseen

AnIndigenousPeoplesHistory

An Indigenous Peoples’ History of the United States. Photo: Vince Rinehart

I’ve finally picked up Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz’s book, An Indigenous Peoples’ History of the United States. The book is an attack on the legitimizing ideology and narrative of the United States’s subjugation of the indigenous people of North America. Though I have only just begun reading it, I am familiar with indigenous decolonization efforts and thought. Even in the little I’ve read so far, I am more than impressed with Dunbar-Ortiz’s critique of the founding myths of the US, which attempt to erase the deep and rich history of this continent and the Native peoples who have lived on it for millennia.

As I read through I will be recording some of my thoughts and highlights from the book, both as a way to remember and to analyze what I’ve read. Maybe you’ll find this useful, or maybe it will just be a series of articles that I may reflect on myself. More…