The Coming Backlash

The Coming Backlash. By Kurt Schlichter.

They want to blind us. They want to gag us. They want us tip-toeing through the PC minefield, afraid to take a step less we trigger a detonation of cancellation.

But have you noticed the rumblings of resistance?

Have you noticed the stirrings of pushback?

For a while we had Trump to do the pushing, but with him in Florida we can now see others stepping up. Ron DeSantis is banning critical racism. Brian Kemp found some vertebrae and he’s defying Delta, Coke, and “Major League Chinaball” to demand election integrity.

The other night, Tucker Carlson charged into the “replacement theory” ambush where we are not supposed to say what the Democrats explicitly say, which is that they intend to import pliable foreign peasants to replace American citizens at the ballot box (of course, sensible Latinos had other ideas, coming around to Trump significantly in 2020). The garbage media and establishment announced that this fact must not be spoken and Tucker spoke the hell out of it.

The backlash begins.

Right now, it is mere stirrings. Americans are slow to anger, but they are mighty in their wrath. When woke bull-Schiff was confined to college campuses, we could live with it. We didn’t see it. It was not in our faces. But now it is. It’s everywhere in the institutions, and it’s filtering down to people in their jobs, on their televisions and even in their homes when young Kaden returns from Cornell as “Kasey” and informs xir parents they are committing literal violence on xim by not paying xir tuition anymore.

Do they imagine that people will just give up and give in?

Some will. The Fredocons did, of course, but they are weak.

But with Normal Americans, the risk is mistaking patience and restraint for weakness. …

The backlash is building. The anger is real and rising. Yeah, everyone’s getting their .45s and AR15s, which is proper — an armed people is a free people — but the reality is we are unlikely to get to the kind of crisis where they come into active play. As much as some leftists salivate at the idea of declaring war on normal people (read their social media and tell me I’m wrong), there’s almost certainly not going to be civil conflict, though with cops as competent as Taser Girl and our broken military focused on pretending boys can turn into girls, I kind of like patriots’ odds against those few traitors who would not quit rather than suppress the American people for the benefit of their leftist masters. No, the violence will be limited to Democrat areas as Democrat voters burn Democrat cities ruled by Democrat politicians. Which would seem make it a Democrat problem.

But the backlash is coming, peaceful but unstoppable. First, you’ll see the social pushback. We will see brave pols like DeSantis and the newly-concervawoke Kemp. We’ll see conservative media figures refusing to honor the narrative guardrails of the lib-fascists, just like Tucker does.

Hope so. Seems a bit late, but then I am always early.

Coke to Republicans: Why can’t we all just get along?

Coke to Republicans: Why can’t we all just get along? By Paul Mirengoff.

When woke corporations started attacking Georgia over its new voting law, Coca-Cola led the charge. Its chief executive James Quincey went on television to declare the law “unacceptable.”

But now, following outrage by Republicans over corporate America’s attempt to do the Democrats’ bidding on state election law issues, Coke isn’t so sure that alienating a large portion of the electorate is a good idea.

Thus, as Karen Townsend observes, Coke’s name didn’t appear on a two-page ad in yesterday’s print editions of the New York Times and Washington Post that expressed opposition to voting law reforms under consideration in various states. Delta Airlines, another leader in the charge against Georgia’s law, also declined to join in the latest effort to virtue signal and help Democrats.

General Motors, Netflix, Starbucks, BlackRock, Target, Facebook, Bank of America, MasterCard, and, inevitably, United Airlines were among the virtue signalers. …

Unacceptably racist and woke:

But, whatever it’s now saying about voting, Coke hasn’t given up on woke. As we reported here, the company is requiring that law firms representing it set aside 30 percent of billable hours on Coke matters for “diverse” attorneys, with at least half of that time going to Black attorneys. This, despite the fact that Blacks make up only about 5 percent of Americans licensed to practice law. …

Coca-Cola has brazenly announced that it is basing contracting decisions on race. It is thumbing its nose at the nation’s civil rights laws. There can be no common ground with Coke on this.

Two Systems of Justice — One for the Allies of the People in Charge, and a Very Different One for Their Enemies

Two Systems of Justice — One for the Allies of the People in Charge, and a Very Different One for Their Enemies. By Tucker Carlson.

The ironically named civil rights division of the Biden Justice Department announced today there will be no charges brought against the man who shot and killed protester, Ashli Babbitt in the Capitol back in January. …

The Biden administration says the man who killed Babbitt is a Capitol Hill police officer and he did the right thing. That is all they’ve said.

We know that Ashli Babbitt was short. She was female and she was unarmed. There was no evidence the officer who killed her gave her any kind of verbal warning before he pulled the trigger. Is that now standard procedure? …

The only person who died of political violence at the Capitol “riot”. The only change in Congress was that the scheduled and constitutionally mandated debate on election rigging was never held. (To combat scammers, watch the actual outcome, not what they say.)

You can’t just shoot people without warning because they are in the wrong place. That is not allowed. Except now, apparently it is allowed. …

The Washington Post wrote a long story today about the DOJ’s announcement and … did not name the shooter or even acknowledge that the government is withholding the name of the shooter. [What, is the shooter black?]…

The rest of the piece was a personal attack on Ashli Babbitt and on her political views. She deserved to die. That was the point of The Washington Post story.

How amazing to read something like this, especially now. Eleven hundred miles from Washington, in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, a police officer accidentally reached for her gun instead of a Taser and killed a man called Daunte Wright. It was a tragedy. All shootings are tragedies.

But we know that officer’s name because every news organization in the country printed it immediately. She has now resigned. She is now facing charges. Her mug shot is everywhere. It is all over the internet.

And that is why two nights ago, a mob showed up at her house and forced she and her husband to flee.

Now, she is not the only one. Last August, a police officer in Kenosha, Wisconsin shot a man called Jacob Blake. Do you remember that? Riots erupted immediately.

Well, yesterday, that officer was cleared of all charges. When that story broke, NPR, National Public Radio, put that police officer’s name and photograph on the front of their website. So, that is the standard, except in this case, where they are still hiding the identity of the officer who shot Ashli Babbitt. Are you sensing a theme here?

The standards that big news organizations who used to cover shootings depend entirely on the political views of the people who get shot. When The Washington Post does not like the candidates you vote for, they suppress the details of the case. …

It gets even more blatant and political:

Samuel Montoya … was in the U.S. Capitol that day. Montoya does not look much like a white supremacist. He has no criminal history that we are aware of.

On January 6, Samuel Montoya took what may be the clearest video of Ashli Babbitt’s death. …

What is most striking and never discussed is that several Capitol Hill police officers in paramilitary gear, the guys with the helmets with the cameras, were standing directly behind Ashli Babbitt when she was killed.

They were carrying what Joe Biden refers to as weapons of war, loaded AR- 15s. So explain to us slowly how Ashli Babbitt posed an imminent physical threat to anyone when she was killed? Well, she didn’t.

Samuel Montoya’s footage proves it, and we are grateful that we have that tape. If we did not have that tape, The New York Times will be telling us that Ashli Babbitt was beating people to death with a fire extinguisher when she was killed, but thanks to Samuel Montoya, The New York Times cannot claim that.

We would love to have Samuel Montoya tonight on the show to describe what he saw that day, but we can’t do that because he is in jail. Yesterday, a large group of armed Federal agents showed up at Montoya’s home in Austin, Texas. They smashed his front door, they confiscated his electronic devices, and they threw him in jail.

He is still there. He is behind bars right now. …

Now, to be clear, Montoya did not shoot the woman, Ashli Babbitt, he just happened to be nearby. …

If this happened in Ukraine, what are the chances that NBC News would describe Samuel Montoya as a dissident journalist? And then describe Ashli Babbitt as an unarmed pro-democracy demonstrator? The chances are roughly 100 percent.

But this is America, and they are not saying that. Instead, they are telling us that Ashli Babbitt deserved to die.

JOY REID, MSNBC HOST: She embraced conspiracy theories. Her name was Ashli Babbitt, 35 years old. She tweeted about pizza gate, she tweeted thousands of tweets to FOX News hosts. She engaged in social media with the conspiracy news internet site, Info Wars. In 2020, she began to tweet with QAnon accounts and used QAnon hashtags.

Oh, so not a pro-democracy demonstrator, not an unarmed military veteran. No, she sent tweets to FOX News hosts, so no problem, Ashli Babbitt got what she deserved.

What is amazing is not simply the grotesque cruelty of assessments like that, a young woman is shot to death and the media applaud her death. No. What is more amazing is the contrast between this and the coverage of other violence that is now in progress.

Last night, Biden voters burned a police building in Portland, Oregon. Did you know that? Probably not. Didn’t get much coverage. …


BLM leader Bree Newsome no longer talks about peaceful protest. She doesn’t want those anymore. Quote: “I’m definitely in the camp of defending looting and rioting as a legitimate politically informed response to state violence.” She wrote that in a tweet that the Twitter censors have pointedly left up.

What’s really striking is that Bree Newsome once committed a more aggressive version of the offense that Samuel Montoya is charged with.

A few years ago, Bree Newsome trespassed at the Capitol in South Carolina and ripped down the flag. She also trespassed in the State Lawmakers Office and refused to leave. Is she rotting in jail? No. She was arrested briefly, and then she drew praise from no less than Hillary Clinton herself.

Hillary Clinton endorsed that particular insurrection, but not everyone gets the same treatment, you may have noticed, and that should worry you, no matter who you voted for, no matter how fervently you may support Joe Biden.


This is a huge, society-ending problem. Laws have no meaning if they are not applied equally. When they are not applied equally, they are not even laws. They are purely tools of persecution, and you don’t want to live in a country like that. Even if people you don’t like are the ones being persecuted.

One law for the left, another for its opponents (especially if they wear a MAGA hat). They are increasingly not bothering to pretend in one law for all.

hat-tip Charles


The Middle Class Has Finally Been Suckered Into The Casino

The Middle Class Has Finally Been Suckered Into The Casino. By Charles Hugh Smith.

Record inflows into equities adds more evidence that the middle class has been suckered into the Fed’s rigged casino. Why lose money every day in savings and money market accounts when newbie punters are raking in $250,000 a month playing options on Gamestop?

Alas, the majority of this “wealth” is phantom, as revealed by the chart of tangible (real) / intangible (financial) assets. The Fed’s casino prints trillions of dollars and gives them to the biggest gamblers for free, and so the artificial semblance of free money for everyone who gambles is compelling.



Unfortunately, the Fed’s casino is only rigged to benefit the Fed’s cronies. Everyone else is suckered in to lose whatever they have. The Fed’s cronies have been impatiently waiting for the suckers to surrender their rational risk aversion and flood into the rigged casino to share in the Fed’s limitless wealth machine: the more you risk, the more you win!

But the wealth is illusory. The Fed can create currency out of thin air and give it to its predatory, parasitic cronies, but this isn’t real wealth. Real wealth has to be generated by work and investing in productive assets.

The Fed’s casino isn’t just rigged; it’s criminally unstable. Once the phantom wealth evaporates and returns from whence it came (i.e. thin air), the unfairness of the Fed’s financial system will trigger a Cultural Revolution that the Fed will be helpless to control, for everything the Fed can do will only accelerate the unraveling.

Decades in the making (arguably centuries), it’s within sight now.

Chinese Navy: Machines yes, sailors not so much

Chinese Navy: Machines yes, sailors not so much. By James Dunnigan.

The Chinese navy has a worsening problem attracting qualified recruits for its growing fleet of new warships. The larger new ships, like carriers and amphibious assault ships require large crews and operate as part of task forces containing many additional smaller ships. Not enough Chinese are willing to serve on these ships.

The recruiting problem is caused by several factors. The longer voyages are essential to train sailors to Western standards and this sort of thing is particularly unpopular with young Chinese. Then there is the growing labor shortage in China that provides too many more better paying jobs that don’t involve months at sea on a warship.

The labor shortage is turning into a crisis that was caused by a 1980s policy of one-child per couple. This limited population growth, as intended, but the introduction of a market economy helped create the first large (several hundred million strong) Chinese middle class of well-educated engineers and other professionals. These are the people who were key to China quickly creating the second largest GDP in the world.

But there is a catch. Affluent, talented women everywhere, and throughout history, don’t have a lot of children. Even though the one-child rule was revoked several years ago, the population is not growing, especially with educated couples.

Worse the children of middle-class families are not eager to join the military, which needs their skills to operate all this new gear. China has conscription but it is not enforced because it is unpopular, especially among the educated. Those carriers, and all their support ships, need lots of capable officers and sailors.

Someone did the math and realized the ships could be built faster than competent crews could be found. One carrier task force, with a carrier, five warship escorts and four or five resupply ships, requires over 5,000 sailors. …

The military, in general, has had a hard time getting capable young men to do all the tech jobs the army and air force, as well as what the navy now requires. Given the shrinking workforce, because of the one-child rule, that situation is not going to improve for a decade or more.

The army and air force are more attractive options for Chinese seeking a military career. China has no tradition of a high-seas fleet, something the West invented and have been using for over 500 years. The only other East Asian nation to develop a high-seas fleet was Japan, which starved its economy in the 1920s and 30s to do so and saw that impressive fleet largely destroyed by the American fleet after two years of heavy combat. …

Military strategy in China, since ancient times, has placed emphasis on having a powerful military but using it mainly as a threat and giving enemies an incentive to accept bribes and allow China to get what they want.

The Narcotic Of Unreality

The Narcotic Of Unreality. By the Z-Man. On the George Floyd trial:

[On cross-examination, the state medical expert] was asked a simple question. “Would George Floyd be alive today if he had just followed instructions and got into the police car as the cops asked many times?”

If Chauvin is acquitted, that is probably the moment the jury realized the absurdity of the show going on in court. This question never gets asked in any of these traffic stops that go bad, like the latest one from Minnesota.

In every one of these cases, the guy getting shot could have avoided the problem by simply not being an asshole. The prevailing moral orthodoxy says you can never question the actions of a nonwhite, so the conversation veers into increasingly weird logic.

Another example is the voter ID stuff. Right now, we have the largest corporations on the planet holding secret meetings to figure out how they can overturn election laws like the one just passed in Georgia. No one dares ask these people why they think blacks are too stupid or lazy to get a driver’s license. The fact that they have no trouble getting a license is another relevant factor. Voter ID is racist because it just is. Not one dares question it, so we have these bizarre public debates.

So many truths that cannot be mentioned leads to a pretty insane public conversation.

The Virus: Vaccines Aren’t Forever

The Virus: Vaccines Aren’t Forever. By David Archibald.

In the meantime the Wuhan virus is mutating, creating thousands of different variants. In a recent paper entitled “The impact of viral mutations on recognition by SARS-CoV-2 specific T-cells” is the following figure:

The significance of all this is that the virus is mutating fast enough that vaccines developed for it are likely to have relatively short periods of usefulness. Some of the vaccines create carriers who can transmit the disease asymptomatically, especially the new variants.

Control of the disease will then have to revert to anti-virals, such as ivermectin, and social isolation. There are some antiviral molecules that the virus will not be able to mutate around.

And you don’t want to get this disease. It had been thought that children were somehow immune to the Wuhan virus, but everyone gets damaged by it. Researchers at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia have found elevated levels of a biomarker related to blood vessel damage in children with SARS-CoV-2 infection, even if the children had minimal or no symptoms of COVID-19. They also found that a high proportion of children with SARS-CoV-2 infection met clinical and diagnostic criteria for thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA). TMA is a syndrome that involves clotting in the small blood vessels and has been identified as a potential cause for severe manifestations of COVID-19 in adults.

There is also likely to be a long term cancer burden with the Wuhan virus caused by inflammation, just as Hepatitis C results in 20% of those infected developing liver cancer in the disease progression.

With vaccines destined to lose their efficacy, it is time to revisit what cheap antiviral molecules can do. This site has compiled Wuhan virus test results. From that site, this table summarises the data from the “no side effects” molecules in that list:

A combination of these molecules is likely to be good. Ivermectin and iodine have different binding sites on viruses and so are likely to be synergistic. These things are as good as most vaccines and no virus is going to mutate around them. China’s vaccine has less than 50% efficacy by comparison.

The big picture is emerging from the chaos of the last year. Vaccines probably iffy, anti-virals may be the longer term solution, it’s worth making some effort to avoid this disease, and there may be more Chinese bioweapons in the future. Read it all.

Big Corporations Now Deploying Woke Ideology the Way Intelligence Agencies Do: As a Disguise

Big Corporations Now Deploying Woke Ideology the Way Intelligence Agencies Do: As a Disguise. By Glenn Greenwald.

The British spy agency GCHQ is so aggressive, extreme and unconstrained by law or ethics that the NSA — not exactly world renowned for its restraint — often farms out spying activities too scandalous or illegal for the NSA to their eager British counterparts. There is, as the Snowden reporting demonstrated, virtually nothing too deceitful or invasive for the GCHQ. They spy on entire populations, deliberately disseminate fake news, exploit psychological research to control behavior and manipulate public perception, and destroy the reputations, including through the use of sex traps, of anyone deemed adversarial to the British government.

But they want you to know that they absolutely adore gay people. In fact, they love the cause of LGBT equality so very much that, beginning on May 17, 2015 — International Day against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia — they started draping their creepy, UFO-style headquarters in the colors of the rainbow flag. …

Who could possibly be opposed to an institution that offers such noble gestures and works behind such a pretty facade? How bad could the GCHQ really be if they are so deeply committed to the rights of gay men, lesbians, bisexuals and trans people? Sure, maybe they go a little overboard with the spying sometimes …

Similar agencies of deceit, militarism and imperialism now robustly use this same branding tactic. The CIA — in between military coups, domestic disinformation campaigns, planting false stories with their journalist-partners, and drone-assassinating U.S. citizens without due process — joyously celebrates Women’s Day, promotes what it calls The Agency Network of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Officers (ANGLE), hosts activities for Pride Month, and organizes events to commemorate Black History Month. The FBI does the same. …

Like the GCHQ, how menacing can an intelligence agency be when it is so deeply and sincerely supportive of the rights of the people they routinely spy on, repress and kill?

Corporations now making the same PR play:

Large corporations have obviously witnessed the success of this tactic — to prettify the face of militarism and imperialism with the costumes of social justice — and are now weaponizing it for themselves. As a result, they are becoming increasingly aggressive in their involvement in partisan and highly politicized debates, always on the side of the same causes of social justice which entities of imperialism and militarism have so effectively co-opted.

Corporations have always sought to control the legislative process and executive branch, usually with much success. They purchase politicians and their powerful aides by hiring them as lobbyists and consultants when they leave government, and those bought-and-paid-for influence-peddlers then proceed to exploit their connections in Washington or state capitals to ensure that laws are written and regulations enforced (or not enforced) to benefit the corporations’ profit interests. These large corporations achieve the same goal by filling the campaign coffers of politicians from both parties. This is standard, age-old K Street sleaze that allows large corporations to control American democracy at the expense of those who cannot afford to buy this influence.

But they are now going far beyond clandestine corporatist control of the government for their own interests. They are now becoming increasingly powerful participants in highly polarizing and democratic debates. In the wake of the George Floyd killing last summer, it became virtually obligatory for every large corporation to proclaim support for the #BlackLivesMatter agenda even though many, if not most, had never previously evinced the slightest interest in questions of racial justice or policing. …

With Democrats controlling both houses of Congress as well as the Executive Branch — all of the instruments that can legislate and regulate their businesses — they may be calculating that using their massive weight to serve the Democratic Party’s political agenda is wise. Doing so could curry favor with powerful lawmakers and regulators and result in rewards or, conversely, allow them to avoid punishment and recrimination for the crime of refusing to engage in activism. …

What a crock:

The farcical nature of all of this is obvious. Just as it is laughable that the CIA and GCHQ care about social justice, feminism, and racial diversity as they bomb and subvert the rest of the world in ways that contradict all of those professed values, the idea that corporate giants who use sweatshops, slave labor, mass layoffs and abuse of their workforce care about any of these causes would make any rational person suffocate on the stench of their insincerity.

Pointing this out doesn’t suit the left, so you’re not going to hear this anytime soon in the mainstream media.

Who Rules in America? Not You

Who Rules in America? Not You. By Pedro Gonzalez.

“Top CEOs plan to get dramatically tougher on state legislators over proposed new restrictions on voting,” Axios reported on Monday. After a weekend Zoom summit, these CEOs are “threatening to withhold campaign contributions — and to punish states by yanking investments in factories, stadiums and other lucrative projects.” The call featured a constellation of leading industry managers, including James Murdoch, Ken Chenault, Ken Frazier, LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, Levi Strauss CEO Chip Bergh, Atlanta Falcons owner Arthur Blank, and executives of Delta, United, and American Airlines.

The debate over whether the [US voting] laws in question are racist or excessively restrictive is ultimately a waste of time because this has less to do with policy than it does with power. Even with ideological considerations accounted for … the outcome is the same: a stronger Democratic Party is good for them.

Of course, the Republican Party is similarly beholden to the same economic elites and organized interest groups — which makes them especially pathetic because, by an odd turn of fate, corporations have aligned themselves more closely with the Democratic Party. Recall Joe Biden received more billionaire support than former President Donald Trump during the 2020 election, and there was, by Time’s proud admission, “a conspiracy . . . behind the scenes” spearheaded by CEOs to ensure Biden’s victory. …

Conservatives, Republicans, and others who, in response to these woke corporatists, attempt to disprove that a specific law is racist miss the point. There is no good faith argument to be had, no common ground to seek.

For too long the right has deluded itself with the belief that the better argument will prevail on the merits. But these people don’t care about rational debate, and as long as that is the situation, neither should you. In the current reality, only power checks power and what the Right lacks is not a better argument, but a willingness to exercise power where and how it can. …

The challenge CEOs are issuing to Americans is that they are too big to take on and too big to fail. The only appropriate response would be to raise their taxes, close tax loopholes, deploy anti-trust action, fine, and see as many of them go bankrupt as possible. If we can’t do that, then they’re right about who rules America, and we’re left waiting for Caesar.

We are edging ever closer to the pre-Christian politics of might makes right, where morality is irrelevant.