Cultural whiteness versus ethnic whiteness. By the Feral Historian.

Being white isn’t really a question of color. It’s a whole mental outlook.

Cultural whiteness:

We see this idea from the other side with recent talk about dismantling whiteness and white supremacy. “White” not simply as a collection of ethnic groups native to Europe, but as a cultural foundation of Western civilization. It is essentially in part that social cohesion, which is often called high trust society, that general respect for people and their property.

While it’s certainly not been a universal and is generally in decline, it’s been widespread enough in the west that it was considered normal. The high trust society is one of the core social technologies of Western civilization. It’s also a prerequisite for democratic government that isn’t just big group dominance. …

Traditionally, one of the great strengths of the West has been its ability to absorb people from other civilizations, turning them white, so to speak, in keeping with this concept of white as a mental outlook. People from anywhere could become Roman or French or American by adopting the culture. Over the course of a generation or two, being part of those cultures and societies was not a
fundamentally ethnic distinction.

Attacks on whiteness then are attacks on this western idea of culture over blood.

 

 

And that’s ultimately what this story [the Camp of the Saints] is about. Less the elimination of the white race than the destruction of that cultural foundation that serves as the scaffolding for democracy, for industrial civilization, advanced science, and progressive politics. Including that strain of progressivism that’s fixated on destroying the foundation that makes its own existence possible. …

Two distinct forms of “whiteness”:

You are probably having the same reaction as most people that casually pick up the book, assuming that that bit about how many will be white is referring purely to race. But if we look at it in terms of what the Hamadura character explains most clearly, though it shows up at a few other points in this book, it says something quite different.

The two things coexist in this story. Cultural whiteness and ethnic whiteness. Just so that we can distinguish here. Two distinct and separate concepts.

Ethnic whiteness:

[In the book] Many of the new regime mean it in explicitly ethnic terms. For example, the Paris Multi-racial Commune, a collection of communists, race-baiting loudmouths, and immigrant activists styling themselves as a new government, are united by their fixation on destroying the native French.

In one instance, a self-loathing French woman is speaking of her campaign to breed out the native population. Only a white woman can have a white baby. Let her choose not to conceive one. Let her choose only non-white mates. And the genetic results aren’t long and coming. in the first provisional government. By the way, Elise was named minister of population.

Is cultural whiteness possible without ethnic whiteness?

Now, this is the point where this book gets really dicey. One of the questions this story implies without directly asking is how intertwined are culture and ethnicity.

It directly acknowledges that ethnically non-white people can be culturally white, which seriously is one of the most inclusive ideas that you can express. You of different background can join our tribe and become part of our society. Not just live among us, but really become one of us.

The Camp of the Saints is not … some screed proclaiming an inherent genetic superiority of European peoples. But it also, when taken altogether, implies that white culture is impossible without a critical mass of ethnically white people.

Is that really the case? Setting aside whatever our particular ideological alignments demand, we honestly don’t know.

The example of Japan suggests yes, they have an orderly, prosperous society, that high trust thing. Again, the Japanese might be whiter than we are in that cultural sense. How much of that is due to cultural exchange is open for vehement argument, but they have a good thing going there and absolutely rank high in the functional society scale.

On the other hand, the entire experience of postcolonialism suggests no. The British, the French, the Dutch left and things just ran down. There comes a point when it can’t all be blamed on a history of exploitation and racism. And we’re well past that point.

And it’s not just a question of how big the cities are or how bright the skyline shines at night. China has built some damn impressive cities in a massive economy over the last few decades. Unquestionably one of the great civilizations both today and historically. But at least today, it’s a low trust society.

Trust is vital to cultural whiteness:

I’m reminded of a conversation from many many years ago with one of my economics professors originally from China about doing business there. Basically that in the west we start with the assumption that the other party is legit and operating in good faith and we lose trust if they lie if they just seem shifty or they fail to deliver as promised. In China, it works the other way. Trust has to be built up from nothing. And since both parties expect the other to cheat them in some way, both are looking for ways to cut corners. …

A low trust baseline radically affects every level of social and economic interactions. It’s not just about convenience or business deals. It’s the foundation of how people interact with each other. Do you help a stranger change a flat tire? Do you spot a co-worker for lunch if they’ve lost their wallet? Can you have something delivered to your house and not have it stolen by porch pirates? What do you assume about the people that you encounter throughout the day? What do you assume they assume about you?

The story talks some about the new regime built on a brotherhood of mankind, the end of racism achieved by subjugating the whites, but it’s also a story about rapidly transitioning to a low trust society. Corruption and decay follows. …

Trust is necessary for color-blindness:

Incidentally, it seems likely that a high trust society is a necessary precondition for a non-racist society. Otherwise, race is just another in the long list of reasons to assume the worst of strangers.

Anyone who honestly thinks of themselves as anti-racist should be among the staunchest defenders of white culture, if for no other reason that no one else cares about not being racist….

The stupid woke left:

Overall, The Camp of the Saints is an unflattering portrayal of everyone it turns an eye toward, but it’s mostly an indictment of the irrational self-loathing that was really taking hold in the Western world at the time and has just festered since.

It takes on the lunacy of the whole movement that professes to be for alleviating poverty, fighting racism, giving the people a voice, and then directs all its attacks on the civilization that has done far more in service of those ideas than any other.

And it warns that we must temper compassion with a hard edge of realism… It assumes that if the West falls, the entire world suffers, and if history and the state of the world is any indication, it’s not wrong. …

Some thoughts on immigration:

No country has to let anyone in. It would be perfectly within their sovereign rights for any nation, whether France or China or Eritrea, to say, “Piss off. If you weren’t born here, you can’t live here.”

Just as it’s reasonable to be selective about who is let in, diversity is not our strength. Our strength is in coming together around the things we have in common. Western cultures have gotten rather good at finding those things, of integrating immigrants into the wider culture and value system.

Recolonization:

But with some people, they’re just isn’t enough to build on. Charity comes with a cost and it has to be balanced. Of course, you can argue that there’s a moral duty to help to provide an opportunity for a better life. But if you take that tack, none of the arguments for large-scale immigration from the third world — you know, fleeing from war, religious persecution, economic opportunity, lack of infrastructure, healthcare, education in their home countries — all of these could be addressed more effectively, more extensively, and more long-lasting, and with fewer downsides in the home countries with some form of recolonization. Make the places they’re running from like the places that they’re running to, save them the trip.

Yet, the activists go into a tizzy, if you say so. I don’t think it would be a good idea. It wouldn’t be worth the blood and treasure, and I want no part of it. But it would do everything that the migrants-welcome crowd claims to stand for and do it better, revealing some insincerity, or at least severe naivety in their stated reasons.

Being for or against ethnic whiteness is racist, but favoring cultural whiteness is not. The left likes to obscure this point and call everyone else “racists” — but what would they know, they voted for that most racist of proposals, The Voice.

 

Taxpayer-funded jobs are the payoff for being on “Team Left”.

Exhibit 1, by Craig Kelly:

 

If you drag yourself out of bed at dawn to grind away in a real wealth-creating job, congratulations — you’re getting absolutely screwed by taxes so some lazy grifter can pocket $400K a year plus $60K super.

Almost half a million dollars for a “Multicultural Coordinator.”

Half a million dollars for a completely useless parasite — a fake “job” manufactured for a Labor Party hack.

And then you wonder why Australia is circling the drain, productivity is in the toilet, and living standards are collapsing for everyone actually producing value.

Why the hell would anyone bust their arse to invest, take real risks, and build a business when you can just suck up to the political correctness machine, push the woke agenda, and rake in half a million dollars doing sweet FA?

Exhibit 2, by The Heartlands Tribune in the UK:

Westminster has built a country where we spend more money on the planning paperwork for a single road than it costs other nations to build an entire mountain tunnel.

This isn’t a system accidentally strangled by red tape: it is a highly lucrative industry. A vast priesthood of consultants and lawyers is making a fortune they have no interest in the work being done.

It is corruption by bureaucracy, and working-class communities are footing the bill for projects that never even see a spade in the ground.

The absolute paralysis of modern Britain was laid bare in a recent parliamentary committee. …

• Take the Lower Thames Crossing. The planning application alone has swallowed more than a quarter of a billion pounds. For that exact same amount, Norway actually constructed the world’s longest road tunnel. We spent it on paper, and we have not even turned a sod of earth. This is a permission state eating itself alive.
• Look at HS2, the most expensive railway line on earth. Part of the reason it cost so much is that we are spending £121 million on a specific “bat tunnel” to protect a few hundred bats living in a nearby wood, a wood the line does not even pass through.
• Look at Hinkley Point C, the most expensive nuclear power station in human history. For eight years, developers locked in a multi-million-pound wrangle with regulators over installing an underwater “fish disco”, an acoustic deterrent to stop fish swimming into the pipes. 20 years ago, we built nuclear fleets at a fraction of the cost. Today, we sacrifice national infrastructure to the gods of endless compliance.
• The final absurdity is the plan to reopen just 3.3 miles of an existing railway line between Bristol and Portishead, a route already built but closed during the Beeching cuts. The planning application is 80,000 pages long. Over one thousand of those pages are about bats.

We have created a system that trades in paper while the real economy rots. The working class pay the price for this institutional cowardice. They pay for it in soaring energy bills, missing homes, broken transport links, and a country that cannot build the future it keeps promising.

The purpose of the system is revealed by what it does. Naturally you only get these jobs if you have left credentials or at least express the woke pieties as required.

Two visions of society: 1776 and 1789. By Gerson Moreno-Riano at First Things.

1776:

America’s 1776 revolution was a revolution of covenant. The Declaration’s claim that all men are “endowed by their Creator” with unalienable rights is not decorative; it is the load-bearing pillar of the entire structure. Rights precede government because they come from God, not from the state.

That is why the American experiment could limit government at all: if rights were the state’s gift, the state could just as easily be their author and their undertaker.

Even the American Revolution’s radicalism — breaking with a king, disestablishing churches — was a revolt against a specific institutional arrangement, not against the idea of a transcendent moral order standing above human will. The Founders dismantled a throne; they did not dethrone God.

1789:

France’s 1789 revolution dismantled both. Lafayette’s constitutional-monarchist moment was real, but it did not hold the field. Within four years the revolution he helped launch had passed through the Declaration of the Rights of Man, the Cult of Reason enthroned in Notre Dame, and into the Reign of Terror. That trajectory is not a betrayal of 1789’s logic; it is its executor.

When rights are re-grounded in the “general will” rather than a Creator who stands above the state, the general will becomes infinitely elastic — and, in Robespierre’s or any revolutionary’s hands, infinitely lethal.

This is always the outcome of any mass political movement that dethrones God and the dignity of human life. …

America at a crossroads in 2026 :

The American order rests on a specific anthropology: human beings as both image-bearers and sinners, incapable of the perfect virtue utopian schemes require, yet possessed of a dignity and possibility for renewal no government or human actor may licitly cancel. That is why the Declaration of Independence is a call to renewal, and the Constitution builds in checks, balances, and federalism.

The French revolutionary tradition, and the socialist and Marxist movements it fathered, rest on a different anthropology: human beings as infinitely malleable, sin — if it exists at all — as a structural defect of unjust systems rather than the human heart, and the state as the proper instrument for re-forging both. …

Mamdani, NYC mayor, is the 1789 future

When American activists describe rights as whatever the collective currently wills, or treat institutions as illegitimate simply for predating the revolution’s verdict, they are reasoning in 1789’s destructive revolutionary tradition, not 1776’s — whatever their intentions.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Under Trump, America and its allies occupy a position of global preeminence not seen since the end of World War II. By Victor Davis Hanson at American Greatness.

With a whimper rather than a bang, the world has become a different place than it was in January 2021, when Donald Trump left office.

Almost everything we are now told [by the media] about the global status quo is mistaken — largely because critics focus only on what Trump says rather than on what he does. …

Summary:

We are not bogged down in a forever war with Iran; we are engaged in over four months of frustrating negotiations with a theocracy that has no intention of giving up its nuclear weapons and ability to bully and undermine most of the Middle East.

Israel is not without friends and is more regionally dominant than at any point in its history. Radical Islam — whether in the form of the Iranian regime, Hezbollah, Hamas, or the Houthis — is at its weakest point in half a century.

China is recalibrating nearly all of the assumptions it has held for the past two decades. Russia is humiliated and hemorrhaging. Latin America is more pro-American than ever before. …

Almost all illegal immigration from Mexico and Latin America has abruptly ceased, for the first time in history. …

Middle East:

The Middle East is now suddenly a different place. Whatever the final denouement with Iran, Tehran has lost a half-century and half-trillion-dollar investment in its military and nuclear industrial complex. The once-feared bully of the Muslim Middle East has been humiliated and exposed as a paper tiger, with its economy, and perhaps its very existence, now dependent on the disposition of the Trump administration. In its sporadic missile launches, Iran often leaves Israel alone because it knows the Jewish state can target any of its unhinged leaders whenever hostilities resume.

In a development that would once have seemed surreal, Israel is providing intelligence and missile defense to the Muslim Gulf states, which are effectively fighting alongside the United States and Israel against a fellow Muslim nation.

Hamas has been crushed. Hezbollah’s once-feared missile arsenal and many of its crazy leaders have been largely eliminated. The Houthis, lacking any credible air defenses, know that every missile they launch at Israel or into the Red Sea could cost them another port facility or power station. Lebanon is reawakening from its 50-year coma.

Russia lost its last client in the Middle East with the fall of the Assad regime. Neither China nor Russia can any longer supply Iran by land, sea, or air. Nor can they either purchase its sanctioned oil. …

Energy:

Soon the Strait of Hormuz — Iran’s supposed trump card — will be nearly as irrelevant to global energy markets as it is already to the United States. Existing pipelines that bypass the Gulf are being expanded. New ones are planned or already under construction to the Red Sea, the Mediterranean, and the Gulf of Oman beyond the Strait. The United States is the largest producer of oil and gas in history and does not need Middle Eastern oil or gas — or, for that matter, much of anything else besides. …

Europe:

Europe publicly despises Trump. Privately, however, many Europeans concede that his antics compelled them to meet their long-neglected 2 percent defense commitments and inspired their new pledges to spend 5 percent of GDP on defense. …

Europe now quietly acknowledges that Trump was right — and just in time to accelerate rearmament as Russia pressed westward. If left unchecked, Europe’s embrace of near-total disarmament, shocking demographic decline, unending hostility toward fossil fuels and nuclear energy, mass illegal immigration from the Middle East, Africa, and elsewhere, and steadily expanding socialism will turn the continent into a third world hellhole. …

Russia:

Our rival Russia is now in its weakest political, economic, and military condition since the post-Soviet chaos of the 1990s. Had anyone predicted five years ago that Russia would be importing gasoline or that buildings around the Kremlin would routinely be struck by drones, he would have been dismissed as delusional. Nor could anyone have imagined Russia suffering perhaps well over one million dead, wounded, missing, or captured in a Stalingrad-like slog of its own making in Ukraine — while losing perhaps half its arsenal of ships, tanks, and aircraft.

China:

It is stagnating almost as rapidly as it once rose, burdened by a fertility rate of just 1.0. …

An aging, increasingly isolated, and deeply paranoid leader knows that an invasion of Taiwan could prove as disastrous for China as the wars in Ukraine and Iran have been for Russia and Iran. Meanwhile, a gradually awakening West seems to be finally weary of Chinese mercantilism and is starting to demand reciprocity in trade. …

Military:

Meanwhile, with the departure of the Biden-era DEI apparatus, the U.S. military has exceeded every one of its recruiting targets, all of which had, in recent years, been anemic….

Its weapons procurement system is undergoing revolutionary changes, placing as much emphasis on quantity and affordability as on quality.

Small, high-tech defense start-ups are finally being given the chance to compete with ossified conglomerates that have long relied on lobbyists to preserve their costly monopolies. Even left-leaning Silicon Valley, once largely hostile to the defense industry, is now emulating the World War II-era War Production Board in its eagerness to ensure U.S. global supremacy in next-generation weaponry. …

Tech:

America is pulling ahead in most of the next-generation fields of rocketry, satellite launches, space exploration, artificial intelligence, robotics, genetic engineering, and cryptocurrency. Its stock market is at record highs. …

Conclusion:

America’s allies are growing stronger, while the China–Russia axis grows weaker. …

Add it all up, and the picture is almost surreal: at the very moment the Left insists that the United States has grown weak and isolated, America and its allies occupy a position of global preeminence not seen since the end of World War II.

Socialist mediocrity. By Trivael Le Pogam.

I’m on a “air-conditioned” train [in France] where it’s 26 degrees. The WiFi doesn’t work. No one says a word.

And that’s what fascinates me the most: not the breakdown, but the collective acceptance.

The socialist state has pulled off a psychological feat. It’s made us internalize that a mediocre service, paid for at exorbitant cost, is normal. That it’s even what “public service” means.

The same service in a free market would cost a fraction of the price. And if the AC broke down, you’d be refunded within the hour, because a competitor is waiting right next door for you to switch shops. …

Everything government touches turns bad:

Education: plummeting standards, teachers burning out, PISA rankings in freefall.

Healthcare: months-long waits, hallways full of gurneys, caregivers fleeing.

Transport: delays, breakdowns, strikes, prices exploding. Justice: years for a judgment. Police: overwhelmed, demoralized.

Colossal budgets. Record-high tax takes in Europe.

Result: everything’s rotten.

Why markets are better:

Because two things are missing that only the market provides: skin in the game and prices.

Skin in the game first. An entrepreneur who delivers a lousy service goes bankrupt. He loses HIS money, HIS reputation, HIS years of work. A bureaucrat who mismanages a public service loses nothing. He’ll get promoted, transferred, or at worst he’ll coast to retirement. Failure has no personal consequences. So failure repeats, indefinitely.

Prices next. Hayek showed it: market prices are an information system. Every price aggregates millions of individual decisions and signals where to allocate resources. When the state sets prices or subsidizes at a loss, it destroys that signal. No one knows anymore what anything is worth. We sprinkle money at random, we waste, and we call it “public investment.”

Mediocrity guaranteed:

That’s why the bureaucrat is the worst possible steward of your taxes: he spends other people’s money, on other people. No incentive to save, no incentive to serve well….

The problem isn’t this minister, that government, this reform. The problem is structural. A monopoly without competition, without prices, without skin in the game, will ALWAYS produce mediocrity. No matter who’s running it. No matter the budget.

If you’ve grasped that, you’ve grasped 90% of political economy.

The question the bureaucrats hate:

So do one simple thing: explain it to your loved ones. Next delayed train, next emergency room wait, ask the question: “Who loses money when this service sucks?” Answer: no one.

To illustrate the point, France snd Germany were similar in most ways in the 1960s and 1970s. Dynamic, productive, rising living standards. Then they diverged, as Michael Arouet explains:

France used to be an innovative, fast-growing country. Then it elected socialist Mitterrand as president in 1981 and moved to big state and high taxes. It has never recovered since then

Isn’t it ironic that Germany and the UK want to repeat the same mistake?

Now all of Europe is succumbing to the bureaucracy and their disastrous energy and migration polices. But the US has reversed course from that fate, and is recovering and forging ahead fast — as measured by GDP per capita, technology, its military, is energy prices, or its net immigration from the third world. Exception : NYC.

Australia? Our bureaucracy and the Labor Party are intent on aping the Europeans, and we will reap similar results. What a waste.

A generation of leftism ruined the world for today’s youth. By Devon Eriksen.

Teens can’t have a summer job because elders had to be Third-World Compassion Heroes, and give us Hart-Cellar and eleventy-billion barbarians who don’t care about civilization, but will work cheap.

Teens can’t have a car because elders had to be Climate Emergency Heroes and give us emissions control laws and Cash for Clunkers.

Teens can’t have safe schools to learn at, because elders had to Anti-Racist Heroes and made it illegal to exclude violent thugs from our school districts. Just because those thugs generally come color-coded for your convenience.

Teens can’t have safe public spaces to hang out in, because elders had to be Compassion for the Underclass Heroes, and release violent savages into society, again and again, with a lecture and a slap on the wrist.

Teens can’t have a healthy economy to inherit, because elders had to be Equality Heroes and make sure every corporation that actually did anything useful was punished for not being Diverse, Equitable, and Inclusive enough to suit the ideal universe that exists only in their heads.

Teens can’t have dates, because elders had to be Anti-Sexist Heroes, and let feminists spend forty years diminishing the social value of men, until you had to a be a billionaire rockstar adventurer to avoid being an unsexy loser by default.

Teens can’t even be fit, healthy, and pretty, because elders had to be Sex Equality Heroes, and move women into the corporate workforce in droves, leaving children to be fed by corporate industrial slop factories.

Teens can’t have sane, well-adjusted, unspoiled girlfriends and wives, because elders had to be Champions of Sexual Freedom, and normalize unlimited female promiscuity, all in exchange for the largely unfulfilled promise of a little unshaven free-love yeti snatch.

And the progressive left boomers don’t even realize it is happening:

And worst, of all, the crowning irony, the final dead hamster in the water pipe, is that all of this would be fixable, perhaps in three to five election cycles…

Except.

Except the elders don’t understand that any of this of this is happening.

• They haven’t had a child in the household since 1997.
• They haven’t looked for an entry-level job since 1973.
• They haven’t gone on a date since 1981.
• They haven’t been laid off… ever.

They are safe with their paid-off houses and their investments and their pensions from 45 years at the same company and their social security and their medical plans.

A world of left wing nonsense, and a generation of progressive elders who believed it. We must first dispel the nonsense (the battle of reality versus leftist ideology), then fix the policies.

Bringing down housing prices. By Robert Gottliebsen in The Australian.

Australia is attempting to cram approximately 11 million households into 10 million homes. It needs between 250,000 and 300,000 new dwellings a year, but in 2025, building starts came in at only 196,000.

Australia now has the highest level of mortgage stress in the developed world. Sydney households need 62.6 per cent of income to service a new mortgage. …

A major problem is banking policy:

Australia has too much household debt, with banks that have lent too heavily into mortgages and too cautiously into the construction sector that would relieve the housing shortage. ,,,

APRA’s capital framework treats residential mortgages as less risky than commercial and development lending, so banks drive mortgage lending hard while rationing development finance.

The result is a system that simultaneously inflates demand through abundant mortgage credit and constrains supply through tight construction lending. Australia has by far the largest proportion of residential mortgages as a share of bank assets of any comparable country.

Generous mortgage lending, set against the few homes actually being built, inflates the price of existing housing. Inflated values then justify still larger borrowings. …

Why don’t the banks lend enough money to developers?

Bankers demand fixed-price building contracts before they will lend. Builders are then forced to take the rising cost risk. Once again, builders have been caught between fixed-price contracts signed before recent cost spikes and the much higher costs of actually delivering them. This is a direct path to insolvency. …

When the Australian Government boosts the money supply with low interest rates and more, as it did during covid, it boosts CPI and building costs. This sends developers broke, because they have fixed price contracts. What developer wants to risk that again?

A building development only proceeds when the expected revenue exceeds the full stack of costs: land, construction, holding and finance costs, and a margin large enough to compensate for the risk being taken. …

Housing starts will not increase materially because the conditions required to unlock a significant increase in new dwelling supply (developer confidence, accessible finance, affordable construction costs and a skilled workforce) are all deteriorating simultaneously. This creates a supply problem. …

This has been further exacerbated by a very high rate of immigration. …

It is little wonder that our hospitals, schools, roads and ambulance services struggle to keep pace. Dwelling supply has fallen well short of the new demand.

A growing majority say house prices have to fall. Even owners. By Shane Wright in The SMH.

Sixty-one per cent of people supported a decline in property prices, an exclusive Resolve Political Monitor Poll has found, with a majority of every age, political and income group agreeing that prices were too high.

On the property market, money is exchanged for housing. It’s not just the supply and demand for housing that matters, but the supply and demand for money. It’s symmetric.

But the role of money is never questioned in the media, so people overlook it. Australian dollars are a commodity, just like any other, except they are manufactured by a monopoly of banks and government. Easy money since 1982 has driven all asset prices to the moon, because there is a glut of money. It took 20% interest rates in 1980 to bring the last bout of inflation under control, but debts were much smaller then. What government can afford 20% interest rates today?

It’s nice to see recognition that nose-bleed housing prices are socially harmful, and that a general consensus is developing that they need to be brought down. But unwinding a bubble in a controlled fashion is difficult.

The Bankers bullied Australia into Net Zero. By Joanne Nova.

We got another reminder this weekend of how Australia was sold out by our politicians — effectively coerced by large foreign financial forces. When Australia adopted “Net Zero targets” in late 2021 it was against the wishes of the voters. …

The Prime Minister and Treasurer laid it out with an extraordinary admission that “Global Financiers” threatened to jack up our national interest rates by 1.5%, which would have sparked a “17% investment collapse” (according to their models) and thus presumably a stock market crash. I’ve talked about this in speeches ever since, but hardly any political commentators seem to recognize the significance.

Foreign banks were setting Australian domestic policy with threats and intimidation.

The money changers look, act and smell like the One World Government we didn’t realize we had.

It is also a lesson in the peril of holding large debts. …

Scott Morrison before the bankers’ threats:

Scott Morrison had gone to a “climate election” in 2019 with no Net Zero target and astonished the pundits by winning. People forget how shocking the 2019 election result was. Sportsbet was so sure the Labor Party would win with their big climate action plan, they paid out $1.3 million dollars two days before the election was even held. …

Then, via Paul Kelly in The Australian:

Mr Morrison described the forces that drove his thinking: “I became convinced in early 2021, if not late 2020, that regardless of what we thought, global markets, capital markets, business, had already made up their minds. The world was moving to a new-zero economy. Australia had one of two choices –- to be part of that or be ostracized from the global economy.” ….

So the Australian PM buckled to the bankers:

Two years later, Scott Morrison set a Net Zero Target anyway, just in time for the Glasgow UN shindig. While Morrison got what he thought he wanted, it doomed the conservative Coalition.

They had thrown away one of their best weapons against an absurd Labor Party platform which was trying to change the weather. By pandering to the Woke Energy Gods, they had inadvertantly endorsed them. They could hardly criticise the Labor Party when they wanted the same goal. Six months later they lost the next election. Perhaps this was the point of coercing the Liberals into setting targets? Sabotage — to neutralize them in the political arena? …

The right choice is always the one closest to the truth. The conservatives picked the wrong side. They didn’t do their homework. …

Scott Morrison ignored the truth:

If Scott Morrison had paid a team of skeptical scientists and engineers to audit the mess in climate and energy policies — he would quickly have found out that the weather has always changed, the storms were always bad, the models are horribly wrong, and the random generators were doomed in the current form and hideously expensive.

Joanne and I could have explained it to him. Sigh.

The vibeshift explained – uniparty politics is over. By The Noticer.

One Nation hasn’t quintupled its vote over the past year by saying or doing anything new, it’s saying the same things it’s said for years, at least for the past decade since Pauline Hanson returned to parliament. For all its faults, it is consistent, and Pauline Hanson is the most consistent politician in Australia.

The player hasn’t changed, the game has.

The answer to why this is happening is, therefore, not to be found in the player, but in the game. The rise of One Nation is a symptom, not a cause. …

So what changed?

One Nation’s brand of politics was being artificially suppressed by Big Tech until Musk and Zuckerberg reversed the post-2016 censorship agenda.

After Trump won the presidency and the Brexit vote up-ended British politics in social media fuelled populist revolts, the leftist establishment got together and concluded that they needed to stop people having the freedom to say things they didn’t like and talk themselves into voting against things they didn’t like, in order to save “democracy”. They concluded, correctly, that if people have the freedom to use social media to circumvent the mainstream press’s gatekeeping of political discourse, they might all talk themselves into patriotism and vote accordingly.

Less than three years on from Zuckerberg de-censoring Instagram and Facebook, and less than four after Musk de-censored X, “right-wing populist” parties have surged to lead the polls in Britain, France and Germany, and are now backed by a quarter of Europeans.

Australia is not special. We all use the same American social media sites used by our European cousins, we are subject to the same terms of service they are. The leftist establishment was literally screeching about how the restoration of free speech on social media would “threaten democracy” by enabling the populist right to win more votes, for the simple and obvious reason that in the absence of suppression it naturally gets more popular.

Why the move away from Liberal Party?

The voter base didn’t identify with what the Liberal Party was selling and then all of a sudden have a change of heart, they simply didn’t think there was a viable alternative to uniparty blue and uniparty red. They were demoralised and checked-out. This illusion of the two-party system was manufactured by mainstream media, an illusion which a couple of years of speaking freely on relatively uncensored social media shattered.

This was a somewhat inevitable process, because the actual policy preferences of right-leaning voters were radically out of sync with the manufactured “centre-right” consensus.

Polls reveal interesting trends:

The poll showed One Nation is pulling more votes than Labor from those who earn less than $45k/year. Labor, the traditional “party of the working class” is, however, 7% up on One Nation with voters earning more than $125k/year.

Objectively, One Nation is now the party of the White working class.

Meanwhile Labor has become the party of (non-White) immigrants, now winning only 23% of voters who speak no languages other than English in contrast to 39% of the vote from people who speak another language. …

The vibeshift:

The new right-wing base is increasingly secular and economic nationalist, and where they differ with the left is on immigration and race, not Jesus and tax policy. All they lacked was a way to form a critical mass around a political movement that actually represents them, so once Big Tech in America decided to turn off the woke censorship to get Trump re-elected, this vibeshift became inevitable.

One Nation’s policies remain far more popular than the party itself, the sky is the limit, and by sky I mean its own incompetence. It is a deeply unprofessional party, benefitting by default from a vibeshift it didn’t create.

But One Nation will remain the dominant electoral force on the Australian right for the foreseeable future unless another party comes along that can do One Nation’s brand of populism better than it can. Whether one can remains to be seen, but it won’t be the Liberal Party — no matter how hard they try we’ll never believe they’re sincere, nor should we.

As former PM Bob Hawke admitted after retiring from parliamentary politics in the early 1990s, there was “an implicit pact between the major parties to implement broad policies on immigration that they know are not generally endorsed by the electorate” and “they have done this by keeping the subject off the political agenda”.

Well, now it’s not just on the agenda, where you stand on it fundamentally defines what side of politics you’re on. The uniparty is over, the politics of identity has arrived.

Climate change is not the issue that created the vibeshift, though it contributed. The vibeshift occurred when mass third world immigration became too much and too obvious.

Cute girls defecting to the far right. By Leaf Arbuthnot at The Telegraph.

Not so long ago, the stock image of someone from the far-Right was easily summoned: they’d be male, obviously, and very probably bald, with steel-toe boots and questionable tattoos.

Times, however, have moved on: this week, it was reported that the [UK] Government had banned seven “far-Right agitators” from entering the country to attend a Tommy Robinson rally on Saturday. Three are strikingly telegenic young women.

 

The interesting explanation, by John Carter:

The right basically has a monopoly on young men, making it very lonely on the left for young women.

Well what do you expect when the left discriminates so hard against white men and everything we built and stand for?

Contrary to popular belief, young men can go monk mode for much longer than women can. Men aren’t the ones whose literature consists more or less exclusively of romances, they don’t play house when they’re kids, they don’t daydream about the wedding day.

Eventually the cuter girls started to realize that the predominately male political environments of the far right are a target rich environment full of very friendly young men who are quite happy to see them.

So they defect.

Cute girls defecting is a precursor to the preference cascade.

There’s also the push factor, of the soy boys and the trans people:

Lefty activists still wearing masks!

Take a look at the crowd at yesterday’s Democratic Socialists of America [DSA] event. (The DSA is very influential within the Democrat Party now.) It’s 2026 and many are still wearing masks! Understanding reality isn’t their strong point.

Masks — useless against viruses, but great at signalling you’re far, far left in 2026

Clay Travis:

I’m stunned by the number of people still wearing masks in airports and on planes when I travel to the east or west coast. It’s a far left wing status symbol now.

Robby Starbuck:

People can laugh but don’t underestimate these people. In only a few years, these weirdos seized control of the city where this photo was taken (Denver). They mostly don’t have kids. Socialism and communism are their child and they’ll die for it like we’d die for our actual kids.

If you want to beat them long-term, the silent majority must see them as threats to our kids lives, because they are. …

To beat communists, you must overrun them, you must be louder, you must be stronger, you must be more vicious like a lion protecting their young and you must be just as willing to sacrifice.

Our Africans can beat your Africans. By Paul Serran at Gateway Pundit.

What’s really the point of national teams?

There’s no denying that first- or second-generation migrant players have become the absolute norm in football (soccer) national teams.

This became painfully clear during the US World Cup … We had no less than 6 black players in Scandinavian Sweden – and even the Japanese goalkeeper Suzuki was black. …

The French team:

Former Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy has said that France’s team, while a strong contender for the World Cup title, plays ‘without Frenchmen’.

Rajoy’s comment references the undeniable fact that France fields only people with immigrant backgrounds or who hail from former colonies.

Origins

Needless to say, Rajoy’s comments sparked widespread condemnation [in the globalist media]. …

What Rajoy said, while highly controversial, is the plain truth.

His critics say that, of the 26 players called up by France for the tournament, only three were born outside the country. But it’s also the case that they are all first or second-generation citizens from the colonies.

The left refuse to even countenance the notion that different races have different statistical distributions of abilities, such as IQ or sprinting speed or basketball skills. So much of the world must seem to mysterious to them, so they invent voodoo such as the woke idiocies to explain it to themselves.

Btw, has anybody noticed that the Argentinian team is all white? Like its population?

My Long Journey Home From the Left. By Elizabeth Nickson at Absurdistan.

The withdrawal and its consequences:

Decanted from the cultural left, I had to re-educate myself. It meant ten years, longer, of reading and thinking to the point where I despaired of ever making a living again.

Many of us have experienced that time now — when you have lost all your friends, all your income sources, and half if not more of your family treats you as if you are covered in ants. I had a mate, I had some equity, I had a supportive mother, but that basically was it. Any therapist disliked you on principle, so that door was closed. I remember going to one and at one juncture she said Trump was a psychopath, and that was that. Being a writer and reader I was habituated to solitude, I had terriers, we spent a lot of time climbing mountains and swimming in cold cold water.

Her lefty past:

I was never in left-wing politics, but I was more than a foot-soldier in the cultural left. Every newspaper, film, play, book, piece of art or music and all legacy journalism draws solely from the ideas of the left. We swim in it. It forms our reality and it is entirely false, fictitious, barely glances at reality. It is the second of two reasons, kids are self-styled noble socialist warriors. The other being their appalling schools.

I met many grandees: agents, famous musicians, actors, and film, play, book writers. Producers and publishers. People whose names you would recognize. I mean I had dinner with Al Pacino and gave a lunch for Princess Diana. I spent one New Year’s Eve with just the stunningly beautiful 90s breakout star Terence Trent D’Arby, me and my two best friends. I spent a week at Neil Young’s ranch in California and partied with Elvis Costello, and all those, but Diana, were purely social, with ‘friends’. Hundreds more work related.

Every individual, every single one, was a socialist, which is to say, they believed in capturing the wealth of the ‘rich’ and redistributing it fairly. As they thought fit.

The only difference between them and me was that by the time I was 30 I knew their ideas fully expressed, led to catastrophic bankruptcy across the board. They had no idea, no grasp of history, they lived in dreams. The left’s goal is always to break human reason, and when it comes to culture workers, it has effectively done so.

And then there’s the public opprobrium:

When I first started writing into the ideas of the right, I was policy-ignorant. I had a weekly column on the op-ed page of a national broadsheet. I needed ideas. The blowback was instant. Hate mail upon hate mail. Death threats, written, phoned in, email. Stalkers. One rich madman who moved to the island, a mile through the forest from my house, proceeded to make my life miserable for twelve years. “Everything you think is wrong”, he emailed through my newspaper’s email. He was going to reeducate me, or kill me. He was going to hire people to come to the island at night, creep up to my house, kill me, and vanish. He had the money and the limitless confidence to do just that. Two court cases and finally he died of pneumonia from life-long alcoholism. He was a trader, had a seat on the exchange.

I lost every connection in publishing, newspapers, magazines and books. No one would read anything I wrote, no one would answer calls. I was covered in ants. Not that I tried. …

Wake up!

We are facing something very dark and very bad, and despite various dismissals from people on the right, the Democrat party is undergoing a Marxist takeover. I take it seriously.

We’ve invited in millions who want what we have and will take it anyway they can, and our economy has been so broken by corruption and the mind-blowing stupidity of green/climate policies, we have stolen the lives of two generations.

A vast cohort is forming that wants to throw it all away, junking the furious, bitter sacrifice and devotion of 100 generations. Every single one of us was birthed from heroes and heroines who stood up to the evil of their day, survived and pushed us forward just a little bit. The cultural left has hid that heroism from us. …

When cracks of truth first appeared for her:

Time [Magazine] hurled me into hundreds if not thousands of interviews with politicians, artists, deposed kings and princes, scientists, torture victims, blood-soaked IRA chiefs, crooks and Nobel Prize winners. These encounters established a larger reality for me and hairline cracks appeared in my world view.

I became European bureau chief of Life magazine and one day Nelson Mandela’s lawyer, Ismail Ayoub, walked into my office and offered me the rights to Nelson’s autobiography. Tout London wanted to know how an obscure Canadian girl with no political heft got the rights to Long Walk to Freedom. There were a couple of reasons; Mandela was familiar with Life which had long treated him as a hero, and one of Time’s South African stringers was a one-time lover of Winnie. The clincher, I suspect, was that I had met Joe Slovo, and was friends with his daughter. I was safe.

When Nelson was released, I went to Soweto, and while waiting for our meetings I interviewed the wives of the men who had been in Robben Island with him. One day I had lunch in a tiny bungalow, owned by a woman whose brother attended. His face was badly scarred, he was missing an eye, and more than a few teeth. One shoulder had been broken and twisted and he couldn’t walk without a lurch. He said he had been tortured by the ANC in Zambia. I said, you mean the South African police or the military. No, he said, by the ANC; at one of their camps, he disagreed with their methods and ideas. He was not a communist, but had leadership potential, so they broke him. I didn’t believe him.

After Time, I wrote a book about the CIA’s mind control experiments in Canada. My English agent was a socialist, despite his childhood as the son of a wealthy Jewish peer. My publishers, both in the UK and Canada, two of the most august literary editors working at the time, were left of center, as were the staff. Because I had met Prime Minister Thatcher, they would ask: “Why was she so popular? What do they see in her?” People who voted for the right were deemed to be primitive and lacking virtue and the allegiance to Thatcher from “the people” confounded them. I am ashamed to say I agreed. In the world in which I lived — literature, theatre, film, design — everyone saw the right as devoid of compassion for the less advantaged. Exploiters all. And profoundly racist.

Change came rapidly. The catalyst was my father saying at a family dinner in Vancouver, when I was at the magic age of 40, that I reminded him of my great-great-grandmother, who declared in 1850, at the age of 20, that marriage was slavery, and set off to see the world. …

I began to comb my way through the family papers which were lodged in tiny libraries all through eastern Canada and the U.S. And immediately fell into a kind of trance from which I have not fully awoken.

The first thing I discovered was that they were Christian. And I mean very, very Christian. This was unnerving since on the intellectual left, faith in God, and particularly Christ, signifies a weak mind. But these people were anything but weak. They had been town, church and infrastructure builders from the time they arrived in 1630…. They also fought for the Indians …

The tiny museums through upper New York State and the Niagara peninsula had thousands of documents, photographs, letters, diaries, all original source material. To my dismay, however, none fit the narrative we were aiming for. Evidence of my great-great-grandmother’s oppression did not exist. She was not oppressed, she was free to do what she liked. Free to travel, not marry, and support herself by her own hand. The women of her family were decidedly not of the whining pathetic Susanna Moodie archetype so beloved by Margaret Atwood. They were mightily strong. They loved pioneering, and when they saw a problem, they damn well solved it.

This simply would not do for a modern publisher. There was none of the barbarism expected of those unenlightened times. Instead it was a 400-year history of a family who, like all the other families they knew, constituted a parade of virtue and strength. By 1900, there had been so much enthusiastic breeding and pioneering, a vast cousinage reached through every sector of the culture, stretching from sea to sea in both Canada and the U.S. Finally one of the librarians, after another afternoon of my obsessive digging for dirt, declared in frustration, “Look, they were good people.” …

Now:

It was now clear to me that our contemporary story tellers were telling lies. They had utterly corrupted our idea of our country and culture, religion and past. They misread the very ground of human character. They had taught us that with few exceptions, we came from exploiters, oppressors of natives and blacks.

All the “great” writers of our time read to me now as depressives caught in an almost demonic fiction, charlatans who had seized the criminal and disaffected and made of them the norm that must be defeated and replaced by another system. And that system was inevitably command and control socialism.

Ten years after the ANC took over South Africa, Oxbridge scholar R.W. Johnson moved home to South Africa and started a think tank. Joe Slovo, I discovered through reading his research, was an assassin, who ran torture/re-education camps in Zambia and who ranged through Europe neutralizing any African potential leader black or white, who could stand in the way of the communist party in the new Africa. I had set my lodestar on evil.

hat-tip David Archibald

Leftist comedian bashes the left. Bill Maher flays the modern left, with commentary.