Who's behind it all? Who pulls the strings?

Image scraped from "No American voted to be replaced by third world savages", on Blazing Cat Fur, 19/9/25. 

For any libtards who don't quite see the connection, here's a very simple illustration of a stone truth.

On Labour Day weekend at Queenston Heights, this happend

Queenston Heights, located in Niagara-on-the-Lake ON, is known to pure laine Canadians (American's don't like to talk about it) as the site of the defeat by British soldiers and Canadian patriots (including Indians First Nations) of American invaders at the start of the War of 1812. A tower honouring General Sir Isaac Brock, who led the counter-attack, dominates the land scape.

What better setting, then, for a public rally -- not a "mostly peaceful protest" but a totally peaceful show of strength -- by Second Sons Canada, one of many white nationalist groups emerging in the Great No-longer-white North in response to the plans of the Liberal governments of Blackie McBlackface and his successor Marx Carnage to make Canada over into a veritable Canuckistan.

More than 50 men, many wearing sunglasses echoing the outfits of the Patriot Front, one of the largest white nationalist groups in the United States, lined up at the Brock monument chanting the group’s slogan, "All thy sons."

The public gathering was the first known by the group in Niagara, though a report by CBC' visual investigations team in July into white nationalist "active clubs" found the group was present in the area and had training in a gym in Welland ON.

Second Sons Canada's first known sighting was reported by the Canadian Anti-Hate Network (known haters of all things and people who resist the Great Replacement) after the group gathered at a cenotaph for Canadian soldiers in Dartmouth NS in March.

Prof. Kawser Ahmed, an obviously unbiased professor of political science at the University of Winnipeg, said choosing the Brock monument was symbolic. He said the site has symbolism of British imperialism, settler nationalism and military defence. "This is something very common in white supremacist groups throughout the Western world, Europe, the US, Australia and here. This is the symbolism they often pick up, because they think that these countries were founded by Anglo-Saxons and there’s no place for the immigrants to come here."

Indeed. One video showing scenes from the Niagara rally was posted on Second Sons Canada’s X site, formerly Twitter, with the statement, "Canadian Nationalism is inevitable. Remigration is coming." Many Canadians will share their sympathies. What to do next should be obvious.

Thanks and a tip o' the touque to Agent 3 for the lead.

VIDEO: Victor Davis Hanson exposes blatant anti-white racism

Hey, whitey! The attack on your race and your culture -- not to mention, in some places, your life -- is now out in the open. 

Former MSNBC host Joy Reid is under fire for blasting white people on her podcast, saying "they can’t invent anything" and claiming American music is solely the domain of black Americans. This type of rhetoric, embraced by DEI ideology, is nothing short of racial essentialism... and dangerously divisive. 

In this short (6.26) of "Victor Davis Henson: In His Own Words", the sage explains why such rhetoric threatens America's identity as a successful multiracial democracy (if you accept that premise) and why ethnic and racial chauvinism must be rejected.

Key takeaways: "Joy Reid is basically saying that black people are cognitively superior to other people. I wish this was an isolated incident. But remember, we've had this controversy before, about the president of Sacramento State, Luke Wood, who, in his past, was an African American intellectual activist, as he self-describes himself. And he said he wanted to 'eliminate' — that's a bad word to use, given the history of it in the 20th century — 'eliminate whiteness.' Again, no repercussions. 

"We have zero tolerance when racists, who are white, say such things about other groups. But in a truly multiracial, tolerant society, people who not only attack a group, collectively, and stereotype it, but they do so from positions of influence and power — like The New Yorker magazine or a former MSNBC anchor — they can do a great deal of damage, unless they're called out for it."

Thanks to BCF/PA Cat for the tip.

USA to admit 40,000 refugees. Guess who goes to the head of the line?

If you guessed Palestinians or Afghans, let me remind you that this is President Donald J. Trump's America, not the woke train wreck that preceded it. America is becoming great again! Anyhoo, a report from Reuters today says the new administration is discussing a refugee admissions cap of around 40,000 for the coming year, with a majority allocated to... wait for it... white South Africans!

Some readers may be puzzled by a story about white South African "refugees". Walt has written several times about the plight of the Afrikaners -- those of Dutch descent known as "Boers" (meaning "farmers") -- trying to get out of the moribund black-ruled state before their land is taken from them.

See, for instance, "Aussies welcome Boers fleeing South African land grab", WWW 14/3/18. Woke governments like those of Canada, the Disunited Kingdon and Joe Biden's USA have not welcomed them. "They're white supremacists, you know... believers in apartheid... racists... Nazis... Hitler..."

Not so the government of Australia, which (as the post linked above says) decided seven years ago that they were the kind of immigrants who would contribute something to a country where they would't be subject to anti-white racism.

Now the USA has done a 180 from the woke refugee policies of the Dimocrats. In an e-mail cited by Reuters, Angie Salazar, the top refugee program official at the Department of Health and Human Services, told state-level refugee workers that she expected the cap to be 40,000, with about 30,000 of those spaces allocated to  devoted to Afrikaners.

The 40,000-person cap would be a sharp drop from the 100,000 refugees brought in by Demented Joe in fiscal 2024, but higher than the record-low 15,000-person ceiling set for fiscal 2021 before the end of President Trump's first term. 

A separate person familiar with the matter said that in addition to the 40,000 figure, a cap as low as 12,000 had also been discussed. President Trump froze refugee admissions immediately after taking office in January, but weeks later launched a programme for Afrikaners, saying the white minority group suffered racial discrimination and violence in majority-Black South Africa.

I, for one, welcome the Boers to my corner of the forest. Chances are they'll do well here, like the Heysteks, who immigrated to Alberta, Canada in the late 1990s, when the black Africans took over the most prosperious country in Africa and started running it into the ground. Here's daughter Susanna and her family, playing some very Canadian fiddle tunes.

 

If you liked the music and/or want to know more about the Heysteks and why they left South Africa, check out "South Africa's loss is Canada's gain", WWW 28/4/19. 

Guys wanting to propose marriage to Susanna (age 15 in the video) are advised to check out her most recent bio, here. She plays the viola now.

VIDEO: A word from our sponsor

VIDEO: What's wrong with the Sydney Sweeney ad?

Walt was not far enough away from civilization (?) to avoid the controversy over this ad for American Eagle jeans. "Some people" (you know who I mean) are criticizing the ad for being "provocative", "divisive" and even... wait for it... "racist"! Well, let's have a look.

 

I'd say 1000s of real women are running down to their local clothing emporium, even as we speak, to buy a pair or three. And hundreds of thousands of real men are buying a pair (or three) for their significant others. 

Why not? Well, the wokesters at The Body Optimist will tell you why this ad offends them, in an article headed: "It's even racist!": Sydney Sweeney criticized for an ad deemed provocative", by Léa Michel (note the pretentious spelling of the name) posted today. No need to follow the link. Walt is going to turn on the bullshit meter and analyze the whole steaming load. The woke BS is in pink and my comments are in brackets.  

Now American Eagle's latest campaign featuring actress Sydney Sweeney has set social media ablaze. With the slogan "Sydney Sweeney has great jeans," the brand aimed for "a stylish homage to denim classics." Except the message wasn't received the same way by everyone. Accused of reviving sexist stereotypes and even flirting with racist codes, the ad campaign has sparked a lively debate about the boundaries between marketing provocation, gendered representation, and latent cultural racism. [Who "sparked" the debate? I didn't hear anyone complaining.]

In the most talked-about clip of recent days, Sydney Sweeney, who rose to fame in the series "Euphoria" and "The White Lotus," repairs a vintage car—a Mustang GT350—wearing a fitted tank top and skinny jeans from the brand. [The video above is not the offending clip. This is the hot one!]  

The whole thing is a mix of modernized pin-up aesthetics and a tribute to the codes of male auto mechanics. [See, for the wokesters, nothing offensive is ever said directly. You have to know the "code" to get the sexist, racist, yada yada message.] She is then seen wiping her hands on her jeans before getting into the vehicle. The slogan, in turn, refers to the cut of the jeans and, according to the brand, the "confidence each person can have when wearing them." 

What could have been a slightly retro and sexy campaign quickly drew the ire of several internet users. Some people saw it as an "anti-woke" or even supremacist message. Others denounced the staging as reducing a woman to her appearance, in a pose that flirts with the most persistent clichés of 1990s marketing. [Some people saw it like that? Were they looking through pink- or mauve-coloured glasses?]

A gendered and racial reading of the message The phrase "superb jeans" has been accused of playing on a double meaning: jeans (pants) and genes (genetics). A potentially problematic pun, according to critics, who point out that in English, the pronunciation is identical (jeans / genes). 

[Wait. It gets worse.] On the X network (formerly Twitter), some voices saw in this choice an allusion to the supposed "purity" of the actress's origins - young, white, blonde, thin - often elevated to a Western aesthetic fantasy. [You bet! I've been trying for years to construct a real fantasy out of a fake reality.]

Criticism also focuses on the actress's posture, her sexualization, and the fact that the campaign once again exploits a hyper-standardized image of femininity: a slim body, a soft gaze, suggested but controlled sexuality, all in a setting that recalls the appropriation of a so-called masculine universe (mechanics) to divert it for aesthetic purposes. An approach deemed dated by some commentators, who denounce a vision still largely dominated by the male gaze. [That's a lot. Pass me the barf bag.]

Faced with the controversy, American Eagle quickly took to its Instagram account to speak out. Refusing to apologize [Good on `em!], the brand insists that the slogan refers only to jeans, the ones worn by the actress, and in no way to anything else. It writes: "The slogan 'Sydney Sweeney has great jeans' is and always will be about jeans. Her jeans. Her story." 

She [sic] also says she wants to "continue to celebrate the way each person wears their AE jeans with confidence, in their own way," emphasizing a desire for inclusivity. [Oops, got some weasel words in there, at the last minute.] The brand therefore seems to be taking ownership of its approach, focusing on a visually strong editorial line, even if it means shaking things up. [Shaking what things up? Do they mean the woke narrative that anything that appeals to men and their "toxic masculinit" is baaddd?]

Notably, the White House itself intervened. Steven Cheung, the presidential communications director, posted a message on X declaring: "Cancel culture has no limits. Liberal ideology is twisted, stupid, and blocked, which is a big reason why Americans voted the way they did in 2024." [Right on, Steven!]

This unexpected support, in particularly virulent language, reinforced the idea that this campaign is now being co-opted in an ultra-polarized political climate, both in the United States and elsewhere. [Co-opted by whom? Steven Cheung is a Chinese-American. Is he working for the white supremacists? LOL]

The fact that American Eagle's stock jumped nearly 10% [Forget the jeans. Buy the stock.] after the campaign aired is no coincidence: commercial provocation still pays off, especially in a context of growing rejection of political correctness in certain circles. [Are you in the same circle as Walt?!]

[Last words to the woke.] Ultimately, this campaign highlights a growing tension in contemporary society: how can we speak to the greatest number of people, in an era saturated with images, without offending? Should we please or disturb in order to sell? And at what cost? 

The Sydney Sweeney case also illustrates the tension between female injunctions to emancipation and those that continue to sell a standardized, desirable, and performative femininity. By choosing a renowned pop icon with an image that was both glamorous and accessible, American Eagle knew it wasn't speaking into a vacuum. However, the reception shows how diverse, sometimes contradictory, and deeply politicized contemporary interpretations are. [Last word to Walt: If these ads are divisive, it's only because "certain people" want them to be so, as the culture wars continue.]

VIDEO for Canadians: Nature abhors a vacuum

Canadians, the inhabitants of the Great No-longer-white North shown in Liberal Red on the map above, are getting tariffied by President-elect Trump's threat to annex what's left of their country, now that Emperor Trudeau II has finished wrecking it. (See yesterday's post, below.)

Tariffied, yes, but also puzzled? Why is he saying these things? Why now? Because, dear frostback readers, the time is ripe. After almost a decade of your woke, gliberal, anti-Caucasian leaders -- the ones you dopes elected! -- telling you that you're nothing but a bunch of privileged, white-supremacist, racist colonialists, you have no pride left... no will to defend yourselves against the resurgent pan-American nationalism of your neighbours to the south!

If you don't want to join the Disunited States of America -- Why would you? -- it's time to stop letting the Liberals (big- and small-L) and their lickspittle media stop putting you down! Stand up on your hind feet, and shout, loudly and proudly, "I... am... Canadian!"

 

You don't have to drink Molson's beer. There are lots that are better, and all are better than the swill Americans call beer. But a couple of cold ones will put you in the right (as well as Right) frame of mind.

Brother Dave Gardner invites you to join the NAAWT*

* National Association for the Advancement of White Trash. This is for all our readers who can't, or don't want to join BLM, NAACP, SPLC, Antifa, etc etc etc.

 

This is the last track on Brother Dave Gardner's fourth album for R-uh-CA Victor, "Did You Ever?" (1962). It concerns Brother Silas, the Twist, money-backs, and the cowboy who tore her heart in two. Whatever happened to those great old stand-up comedians from the heart of Dixie? Guess they, like Dixie itself, have been cancelled.

Protests in Memphis over white supremacist murder of Tyre Nichols

On January 7th, police in Memphis TN stopped 29-year-old Tyre Nichols on suspicion of DWB (Driving While Black). A struggle ensued as they dragged Mr Nichols out of his car. He managed to free himself from the clutches of the law, only to be cornered a few minutes and a few blocks from the scene.

The minions then beat the living snot out of Mr Nichols, who died three days later in hospital. 

This week, five of the arresting officers were charged with murder, and last night the authorities released graphic videos showing what happened. Memphis and other cities across the Excited States of America braced for another round of BLM protests and "reparations shopping".

On cue, Ben Crump, successor to "Rev." Al Sharpton in leading charges for justice for (fill in name of deceased black person), appeared in front of the cameras to call for calm. Whether he winked as he did so isn't clear, but it appears that last night's protest marches were indeed "mostly peaceful".

Since the five accused cops are just as black as Mr Nichols, the bleeding heart liberals and lickspittle media (Hello! Clinton News Network) had to twist themselves into pretzels to paint the killing as yet another example of anti-black racism. Here are two theories which have been advanced, with straight faces, by "journalists" in the "legacy media".

1. The speed with which charges were laid against the dusky-hued officers by white prosecutors proves the point. If the cops had been white (they argue) there would have been a long delay while white authorities sought excuses to lay lesser charges or no charges at all. They rush to judgment only against blacks.

2.  Although the policemen involved were all visibly black, they were in fact "oreo cookies" -- black on the outside but white on the inside. When they joined the police force they were imbued with the white supremacist culture of the police, and that's what made them turn on a brother. Geddit? Give a black man a uniform and a badge and he turns white!

Expect variations on that theme to be aired 24/7 for the next week or so, particularly if the mostly peaceful protests degenerate into the customary rioting and looting. Lifetime pct .987.

"Summer of rage" = Civil War v 2.0? - NOT a new idea!

This morning's headlines... 

1 dead, 5 critically wounded after shooting at church in gun-controlled California 

2 killed, 3 injured after shooting at busy Houston flea market 

33 Shot During Weekend in Mayor Lori Lightfoot's Chicago

Biden: Buffalo shooting "racially motivated act of white supremacy and violent extremism"

And so it begins... No. That should be: And so it continues.

President Brandon, and all the other liberal loonies acting like this weekend's mass murder in  Buffalo is something new (and obviously the fault of President Trump!) seem to have forgotten about "race riots" (as they were called in more innocent times) in:

Detroit - June 1943 - President FDR (Democrat)

Watts - August 1965 - President LBJ (Democrat), the great champion of equal rights and "freedom now"

Newark - July 1967 - President LBJ (again)

Detroit - July 1967 - aka the 12th Street Riot, aka the Detroit Rebellion - President LBJ (yet again) 

I don't remember the 1943 event very well, but the Detroit Rebellion is clear in my mind. You could see the smoke from across the river in Canada, which is where sensible Americans went to wait it out. And of course there was the TV news. Images of mobs of black people (they weren't "Black", back then) in the streets, protesting discrimination and racism, demanding equality and justice...

...and maybe doing a bit of "reparations shopping". Of course it wasn't called that, in those more innocent days. It was called "looting", `cause that's what it was! Martin Luther King would be horrified, I think, to see what's being done nowadays, in his name and in the name of "justice".

"No justice, no peace!" That's what they're yelling now. In the long hot summer of 1967, it was "Burn, baby, burn!" The point of yesterday's  post was to predict another long hot summer, a "summer of rage". Lifetime pct .991. 

I think now that I should have added "and riots" to that phrase. But the message was clear enough for our sponsor to call to let us know that a civil war between blacks and "others" was predicted in  the January 1980 "Fantasy Issue" of National Lampoon, "the Humor Magazine for Adults". Check this out!

This excellent piece of satire, written by John Hughes and superbly drawn by George Evans, could never be published today. The editors would probably report the creators to the Department of Homeland Security's new "Disinformation Governance Board", so they could be re-educated in a pleasant summer camp somewhere in Alaska.

Fortunately, the DHSDGB has not yet been able to destroy the archives of National Lampoon and other politically incorrect publication. Our sponsor has made a .pdf file of this prescient piece, which you can buy for only $2.00. Hard copy is also available. Tell `em Walt sent ya!

Pope Francis, the Consecration, the apology -- an assessment

In the course of the last two weeks, I have been asked several times what I think, now, about Pope Francis, his March 25th Consecration of Russia and Ukraine to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and his apology, yesterday, to the First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples of Canada for the abuse of children at residential schools run by the Church.

I confessed, in "Did Francis' consecration of Russia work?" (WWW 28/3/22), that I am unsure what to think about the purported Act of Consecration performed  by the Pope (with a goodly number of bishops joining from their cathedrals around the world), on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception.

Francis' lengthy prayer added a good deal of "progressive" political sentiment to the simple prayer requested by Our Lady of Fatima. At the same time, the words "consecrate", "Russia", and "Immaculate Heaert of Mary" were there. The full video is embedded in our post, so you can watch it and judge for yourself. 

After all, in Francis' words, "Who am I to judge?" Heaven knows. All we mere mortals can do -- those of us who believe in the Message of Fatima -- is to keep praying for the period of peace promised to us by the Blessed Virgin.

With regard to the Papal apology to the indigenous peoples of Canada, I will say first that sight should not be lost of the fact that the residential schools were established by the government of Canada with the aim of providing for the education and upbringing of poor children who were, by the standards of the mid-19th century, uncivilized.

About 70% of the schools were run by various Roman Catholic orders, and it was not only in the Catholic schools that abuses occurred. You can call it "white supremacy" if you like, but the sentiment of the day was that Christian civiliation (read: Western, European civilization) was superior to that of the rest of the world.

We ought not to condemn the residential schools system outright. 1000s of residential school "survivors" got a decent education and health care, and grew up to lead successful and comfortable lives -- some as legislators and judges -- as citizens of Canada. That there were abuses is a fact, but much good was done.

Nevertheless, Francis made a fulsome and apparently sincere apology on behalf of the Roman Catholics who sinned by abusing the children for whom they had the duty of care. He also said that he would visit to apologize in person, and see what could be done to make amends. 

That was all any pope could do. It should be noted that it is dogma that the Church Herself cannot sin. But members of the Church -- human beings, after all -- can sin and do sin. Even the Pope has to go to confession and ask forgiveness of God.

Francis has form when it comes to delivering apologies for wrongs committed by Catholic clerics. In August 0f 2018 he published an open letter to the laity, in which he wrote: With shame and repentance, we acknowledge as an ecclesial community that we were not where we should have been, that we did not act in a timely manner, realizing the magnitude and the gravity of the damage done to so many lives. We showed no care for the little ones; we abandoned them.

But, as politicians in the liberal democracies are learning the hard way, the distemper of our times is such that there will be no end to demands for more apologies, and... wait for it... "reparations". Words, however sincere, are no longer enough. There must be money on the table... lots of it. 

The more apologies are made, the more "victims" come forward, saying that they should be paid thousands, even millions of dollars for wrongs done to their grandparents, great-grandparents, and ancestors back to Adam. 

I do not wish to impute motive to Pope Francis. I give him credit for trying to do good things, according to his conscience. I believe he is sometimes the victim of bad advice from bad people -- inside and outside the Church -- who have bad motives, such as the establishment of the Great Reset / New World Order. And I pray that God's will be done on earth, as it is in Heaven -- with or without Francis.

Further reading: "Memorandum for Next Conclave Calls Francis Pontificate 'A Disaster'", Breitbart News, 18/3/22.  Dr Thomas Williams shares a 2000-word memo being circulated among Catholic cardinals, signed by "Demos" (Greek for "people"), likely (Dr Williams says) a pseudonym for George Cardinal Pell of Australia.

Further viewing: "Bishop Fulton Sheen knew the secret to save Russia", VIDEO, The Kennedy Report, 23/3/22.

UPDATED: Reaction to result of CA recall election

UPDATE ADDED 17/9/21: The original headline for this post was: "Californians! Just for once, cast your vote for a reasonable alternative". As the last sentence suggests, I didn't really expect that the drive to get Gavin Newsom recalled would succeed... and it didn't. 

I have been thinking about what to say by way of comment, but have been spared the necessity of further thought by the posting on the Babylon Bee of the following: "Californians Desperate To Escape Cling To Landing Gear Of Last Jet Leaving LAX". Thank you, BB. 

I don't write much about California, its leftist politicians and loony left policies because, frankly,I wish the whole state, or the lower coastal part of it at least, could be sawed off and left to drift forever in the Pacific. I do recognize that there are some sensible people in California -- the kind who read WWW! -- and I urge you to vote today (if you haven't already done so) in the election to recall Gavin Newsom.

The effort to get rid of the one of the wokest governors in the nation comes to a conclusion today. If you haven't voted by mail, you can still vote in person. Polls close at 2000 PDT.

The recall is opposed by all the Dumbocrat heavyweights, from President Biteme and Nancy Pelosi down to AOC and Mad Maxine Waters, and let's not forget Kamala Harris. [Who she? Ed.] The Hollywood elites also want to keep Mr Newsom in the state house, and are trying to discredit the main challenger, Larry Elder, as "the black face of white supremacy." You couldn't make this stuff up, but that's California!

Walt urges you to vote YES on the recall and for Larry Elder as Governor. 

Please, dear people of California, just this once, do the right thing and vote for sanity. Go ahead and make my day! 

Proof that all white people are racists!

See also "Q. How can you prove you're not a racist? A. You can't!", WWW 13/5/21. Nothing has changed in the five weeks since then. 

Reminder to hockey fans: Golden Knights @ Canadiens, 2000 EDT tonight. Consult your TV listings for availability. Faut absolument regarder!

What's wrong with this picture?

Here you see one of Walt's agents in conversation with a statue of Sir John Eh Macdonald (aka Sir John A. Macdonald), the first prime minister of Canada. The statue was erected in 1967 in beautiful downtown Charlottetown PEI, as a Centennial project.

What's wrong with it? It's actually a pretty good statue, in a genre that was popular until recently, showing historical or other figures standing or sitting in poses such that people can have their pictures taken with them. Any objections? Well yes... 

Sir John, very much a product of his times and Scottish origins, was a hard drinker ("Single malt, but make it a double!"), anti-French, and anti-Catholic. He was also determined to civilize the natives, by means such as sending their kids to residential schools where they could be turned into quasi-whites.

Today, Sir John is called a white supremacist by, among others, the Epekwitk Assembly of Councils, a joint forum that includes the councils of both Abegweit First Nation and Lennox Island First Nation. (For our American readers, "First Nations" is the current politically correct term for the people who used to be called "Indians".) 

In keeping with the current fad for iconoclasm, the Assembly petitioned the Charlottetown city council to "amend" the art installation and "tell the true story of this individual and begin to address the trauma that its presence is continuing to perpetuate." 

The councillors, with the exception of Clr Mike Duffy [That Mike Duffy? The erstwhile Senator? Ed.] voted to leave the statue where it is, albeit with some modifications. The assembly made five suggestions to the city, viz:

Add another figure, such as an Indigenous child or elder. 

Fill in or seal off the empty space on the bench so it can't be used for photo opportunities like this picture.

Install signage so viewers understand "the devastating role that Sir John A. Macdonald played in the Indigenous history of Canada." 

If the artist engaged is not Indigenous, a Mi'kmaw artist should be hired as a consultant.

Complete the work as soon as reasonably possible.

In voting against the resolution, Councillor Duffy referenced a survey last summer that indicated the majority of respondents wanted the statue to remain as is. The other councillors predictably said what the majority of the people want doesn't matter. Such are the times.

Amazing! Tucker Carlson dissects CIA's latest ultra-woke VIDEO

Tucker Carlson takes aim at a new video from the Central Intelligence Agency trumpeting how woke they are. The spokesthingy for the CIA is a woman of colour (of course) who checks all the other boxes: disabled (emotionally), cisgender (whatever that means), a baby mama, a feminist, and (of course again) "intersectional". Mr Carlson calls her "the Kim Philby of wokeness".

   

What does this mean? What, nowadays, is the real mission of the CIA? Who are the enemies from whom these ultra-woke spooks are supposed to be protecting us? Look in the mirror, you evil male white supremacist! Their enemy is YOU!

VIDEO: Proud Boys founder Gavin McInnes sets the record straight

Gavin McInnes, the founder of Proud Boys, has been taking a lot of heat lately. His alleged organization -- which isn't an organization really -- has just been declared a terrorist organization by the alleged government of his native Canada. 

In addition to being labelled as terrorists, the Proud Boys and Mr McInnes are being demonized for being white supremacists, neo-Nazis,alt-right monsters, yada yada yada. In this video, which is nearly three years old, Gavin discusses his 15 most controversial moments (to that point). 

In almost every case, he says, his destractors are taking a phrase or sentence completely out of context, and/or failing to recognize that he is indulging in the millennia old technique of hyperbole -- exaggerate for effect. In other words, what he says is not be be taken all that seriously.

 

Putting his self-defence another way -- and he would probably say that he wasn't defending himself, just explaining -- Mr McInnes likens himself to Walt's favourite stand-up comedian Bill Burr. What he and Bill do is to say out loud stuff that a large percentage of us "regular people" say in bars. 

A few of the Proud Boys may be genuine right-wing fanatics, but Walt reminds those who are crying for the censorship of every expression of politically incorrect thought that there are plenty of loony left nutbars out there too. 

Those who are already "beyond the fringe" don't need Gavin McInnes or (for that matter) President Trump to incite them to the acts of violence that may be characterized as "terrorism" (in the case of the right) or "mostly peaceful protests" in the case of Antifa and BLM.

Is that THE Gavin McInnes, the Proud Boys guy, over there?

Benjamin Dover writes from Dildo NL [You can look it up. Ed.] to enquire whether the bearded gentleman shown in the photo atop our Featured Post, "Don't even think about moving to Canada" (at right) is one and the same as Gavin McInnes, the founder of Proud Boys, mentioned by Still-President Trump in the Dumpster Debate. 

The answer is YES. And so what? But (Ben sez), the Proud Boys have been identified by the Canadian Broadcorping Castration, Antifa and all the others suffering from TDS (see previous post) as a horrible, racist, pro-Republican hate group! 

And Mr Trump told them to "stand back and stand by", so he must be a horrible racist yada yada yada too! 

Dear readers, the Proud Boys are not a far-right hate group. Founded by Gavin McInnes, who is (gasp) a Canadian, they describe themselves as as "Western chauvinists" and have consistently disavowed racism. 

But they are proud to stand up for Western culture and the values that made our countries, Canada and the United States of America, the great countries that they used to be before half a century of progressivism and secular humanism. And they are not afraid to stand up to Antifa, BLM, and the Soros-funded haters on the extreme left.

The CBC (aka CNN North) quotes (((Bernie Farber))), chair of the leftist "Canadian Anti-Hate Network", as saying that President Trump's comments during the debate are "the best thing that could have happened to Proud Boys and the white supremacist movement in probably half a century." He goes on to say that says Mr Trump's words "certainly engaged many Proud Boys supporters on social media." 

Hey, he's talking about us! But, he warns Canucks, the Proud Boys "have a proud history here in Canada of defiance. Some would argue that they're actually more white nationalist here than they are in the States." Believe it or not! 

Note from Ed.: You may have noticed the Montréal Canadiens toque worn by Mr McInnes in the photo on the featured post. Any resemblance between him and Poor Len Canayen is purely coincidental!

Further reading/viewing: "Gavin McInnes calls Canada 'a fucking mess'", WWW 15/1/17. The Proud Boys founder gives some good political reasons for not moving to the Great No-longer-white North.

White antifa anarchists have taken over the BLM "protests"

Ed. here. Poor Len thinks that Walt left the picture we posted yesterday where it could be seen easily as a way of putting us off his trail. In reality, Len thinks, Walt is not in the wilderness, but inside the bubble around the Scotiabank Centre in Toronto, where Canada's team (the Montréal Canadiens) are trying to get through the NHL "play-ins", to advance to the Stanley Cup playoffs. Only the hockey players, their support workers and a handful of media types are allowed inside, so if Walt has found a hiding place in the rafters -- "The Phantom of the Arena"? -- he's not about to tell us! Stay tuned...

Meanwhile, it falls to me [and Poor Len! Len.] to fill this space, and not with irrelevant funny stuff, as Walt made clear in a rather scathing message two days ago. Today I've chosen "How white radicals hijacked Portland's protests", by Michael Tracey, on the UnHerd blogsite, 4/8/20. As before, space doesn't allow us to repost the whole article, so I've selected a few trenchant excerpts. If you wish to read the whole thing, click on the link above.

The overwhelmingly white, anarchist activists who populate the ongoing protests in Portland...[have] discovered a work-around to arrogate moral cover for whatever insurrectionary upheaval they would have been ideologically committed to fomenting anyway. The Left/liberal political and media class is deeply invested in preserving the untouchable sanctity of "BLM". So by fusing themselves in the public mind with this ambiguously-defined protest movement, or even putting themselves at the vanguard, the anarchist whites insulate themselves from the type of scrutiny that might ordinarily be prompted by activists whose ultimate goal is the overthrow of the state....

To characterise what's gone on in Portland as a traditional "protest" is a misnomer, however. Pay a visit to the area around the Federal Courthouse in Downtown after midnight and you are greeted by brigades of black-clad "Antifa" foot soldiers — geared up in full body armour, complete with industrial-grade gas masks, shields and even customised radio systems. Being overwhelmingly white, they are strategic about public presentation: the speakers appointed to address the nightly "rallies" are almost exclusively black, as "amplifying black voices" to whom whites must dutifully "listen" is a central tenet of the Summer 2020 protest ethos.

If there is any foundational idea operative in Portland, it's to keep a frenetic confrontation with the state going for as long as possible, so as to maximise the chances that an incendiary incident might occur and catalyse a larger insurrectionary uproar — similar to the killing of George Floyd in May, which sparked nationwide riots. One fateful tear gas canister fired into the temple of a "protester" could reverberate rapidly across the country; "Portland solidarity" actions have already sprouted up as far away as Richmond, Virginia....

When protesters chant "NO GOOD COPS IN A RACIST SYSTEM", the "system" to which they are referring is the foundational system of governance of the United States — again, deemed inherently "fascist" and "white supremacist", and therefore impossible to reform. As one sign wielded by a protester declared: "The Revolution will not come by asking or voting"....

A strange feature of this protest movement is that one would barely know Barack Obama, a black man elected president in a majority white nation, ever existed. Not that Obama's mere election was supposed to have eradicated every last trace of racial inequities in the United States: of course it wasn't. But you'd think it would at least inform popular conceptions of the role of race within the nation's elite power structure. Instead, Obama seems to have been simply "erased" — the significance of his tenure not even worth mentioning. Are we to believe that a country so intractably defined by "white supremacy" — a totally uncontested truism among protesters and their media allies — nonetheless elected a black man not once, but twice? Apparently....

Further reading: "Riotous BLM Protesters Suddenly Realize They're All White People", Babylon Bee, 5/8/20. Don't forget, folks, that the BB is "Christian satire", to be taken cum grano salis... but not too large a grain. Truth is stranger than fiction!

UC Berkeley horrified as anonymous prof shreds BLM injustice narrative

Ed. here. This post is much longer than what space normally allows us, but deserves to be read in full. To set this up, the History Department of the University of California at Berkeley today tweeted its response to an anonymous letter, allegedly written by one of their professors, making the rounds on the Net. Here's what they said.

"An anonymous letter has been circulating, purportedly written by a @UCBHistory professor. We have no evidence that this letter was written by a History faculty member... We condemn this letter: it goes against our values as a department and our commitment to equity and inclusion."

Seriously?! Did you catch that play? Instead of addressing, or inviting a vigorous debate over its content, Berkeley's response validates one of the letter's key claims, that dissent outside "a tightly policed, narrow discourse" is not welcome! So much for academic freedom or, more broadly, freedom of thought in general. Since you're not likely to see the actual letter in the (((controlled media))), we're pleased to present it here, in full.

Dear profs X, Y, Z

I am one of your colleagues at the University of California, Berkeley. I have met you both personally but do not know you closely, and am contacting you anonymously, with apologies. I am worried that writing this email publicly might lead to me losing my job, and likely all future jobs in my field.

In your recent departmental emails you mentioned our pledge to diversity, but I am increasingly alarmed by the absence of diversity of opinion on the topic of the recent protests and our community response to them.

In the extended links and resources you provided, I could not find a single instance of substantial counter-argument or alternative narrative to explain the under-representation of black individuals in academia or their over-representation in the criminal justice system. The explanation provided in your documentation, to the near exclusion of all others, is univariate: the problems of the black community are caused by whites, or, when whites are not physically present, by the infiltration of white supremacy and white systemic racism into American brains, souls, and institutions.

Many cogent objections to this thesis have been raised by sober voices, including from within the black community itself, such as Thomas Sowell and Wilfred Reilly. These people are not racists or 'Uncle Toms'. They are intelligent scholars who reject a narrative that strips black people of agency and systematically externalizes the problems of the black community onto outsiders. Their view is entirely absent from the departmental and UCB-wide communiques.

The claim that the difficulties that the black community faces are entirely causally explained by exogenous factors in the form of white systemic racism, white supremacy, and other forms of white discrimination remains a problematic hypothesis that should be vigorously challenged by historians. Instead, it is being treated as an axiomatic and actionable truth without serious consideration of its profound flaws, or its worrying implication of total black impotence. This hypothesis is transforming our institution and our culture, without any space for dissent outside of a tightly policed, narrow discourse.

A counternarrative exists. If you have time, please consider examining some of the documents I attach at the end of this email. Overwhelmingly, the reasoning provided by BLM and allies is either primarily anecdotal (as in the case with the bulk of Ta-Nehisi Coates' undeniably moving article) or it is transparently motivated. As an example of the latter problem, consider the proportion of black incarcerated Americans. This proportion is often used to characterize the criminal justice system as anti-black. However, if we use the precise same methodology, we would have to conclude that the criminal justice system is even more anti-male than it is anti-black.

Would we characterize criminal justice as a systemically misandrist conspiracy against innocent American men? I hope you see that this type of reasoning is flawed, and requires a significant suspension of our rational faculties. Black people are not incarcerated at higher rates than their involvement in violent crime would predict. This fact has been demonstrated multiple times across multiple jurisdictions in multiple countries.

And yet, I see my department uncritically reproducing a narrative that diminishes black agency in favor of a white-centric explanation that appeals to the department's apparent desire to shoulder the 'white man's burden' and to promote a narrative of white guilt.

If we claim that the criminal justice system is white-supremacist, why is it that Asian Americans, Indian Americans, and Nigerian Americans are incarcerated at vastly lower rates than white Americans? This is a funny sort of white supremacy. Even Jewish Americans are incarcerated less than gentile whites. I think it's fair to say that your average white supremacist disapproves of Jews. And yet, these alleged white supremacists incarcerate gentiles at vastly higher rates than Jews. None of this is addressed in your literature. None of this is explained, beyond hand-waving and ad hominems. "Those are racist dogwhistles". "The model minority myth is white supremacist". "Only fascists talk about black-on-black crime", ad nauseam.

These types of statements do not amount to counterarguments: they are simply arbitrary offensive classifications, intended to silence and oppress discourse. Any serious historian will recognize these for the silencing orthodoxy tactics they are, common to suppressive regimes, doctrines, and religions throughout time and space. They are intended to crush real diversity and permanently exile the culture of robust criticism from our department.

Increasingly, we are being called upon to comply and subscribe to BLM's problematic view of history, and the department is being presented as unified on the matter. In particular, ethnic minorities are being aggressively marshaled into a single position. Any apparent unity is surely a function of the fact that dissent could almost certainly lead to expulsion or cancellation for those of us in a precarious position, which is no small number.

I personally don't dare speak out against the BLM narrative, and with this barrage of alleged unity being mass-produced by the administration, tenured professoriat, the UC administration, corporate America, and the media, the punishment for dissent is a clear danger at a time of widespread economic vulnerability. I am certain that if my name were attached to this email, I would lose my job and all future jobs, even though I believe in and can justify every word I type.

The vast majority of violence visited on the black community is committed by black people. There are virtually no marches for these invisible victims, no public silences, no heartfelt letters from the UC regents, deans, and departmental heads. The message is clear: Black lives only matter when whites take them. Black violence is expected and insoluble, while white violence requires explanation and demands solution. Please look into your hearts and see how monstrously bigoted this formulation truly is.

No discussion is permitted for nonblack victims of black violence, who proportionally outnumber black victims of nonblack violence. This is especially bitter in the Bay Area, where Asian victimization by black assailants has reached epidemic proportions, to the point that the SF police chief has advised Asians to stop hanging good-luck charms on their doors, as this attracts the attention of (overwhelmingly black) home invaders. Home invaders like George Floyd. For this actual, lived, physically experienced reality of violence in the USA, there are no marches, no tearful emails from departmental heads, no support from McDonald's and Wal-Mart. For the History department, our silence is not a mere abrogation of our duty to shed light on the truth: it is a rejection of it.

The claim that black intraracial violence is the product of redlining, slavery, and other injustices is a largely historical claim. It is for historians, therefore, to explain why Japanese internment or the massacre of European Jewry hasn't led to equivalent rates of dysfunction and low SES performance among Japanese and Jewish Americans respectively. Arab Americans have been viciously demonized since 9/11, as have Chinese Americans more recently. However, both groups outperform white Americans on nearly all SES indices - as do Nigerian Americans, who incidentally have black skin. It is for historians to point out and discuss these anomalies. However, no real discussion is possible in the current climate at our department. The explanation is provided to us, disagreement with it is racist, and the job of historians is to further explore additional ways in which the explanation is additionally correct. This is a mockery of the historical profession.

Most troublingly, our department appears to have been entirely captured by the interests of the Democratic National Convention, and the Democratic Party more broadly. To explain what I mean, consider what happens if you choose to donate to Black Lives Matter, an organization UCB History has explicitly promoted in its recent mailers. All donations to the official BLM website are immediately redirected to ActBlue Charities, an organization primarily concerned with bankrolling election campaigns for Democrat candidates. Donating to BLM today is to indirectly donate to Joe Biden's 2020 campaign. This is grotesque given the fact that the American cities with the worst rates of black-on-black violence and police-on-black violence are overwhelmingly Democrat-run. Minneapolis itself has been entirely in the hands of Democrats for over five decades; the 'systemic racism' there was built by successive Democrat administrations.

The patronizing and condescending attitudes of Democrat leaders towards the black community, exemplified by nearly every Biden statement on the black race, all but guarantee a perpetual state of misery, resentment, poverty, and the attendant grievance politics which are simultaneously annihilating American political discourse and black lives. And yet, donating to BLM is bankrolling the election campaigns of men like Mayor Frey, who saw their cities devolve into violence. This is a grotesque capture of a good-faith movement for necessary police reform, and of our department, by a political party. Even worse, there are virtually no avenues for dissent in academic circles. I refuse to serve the Party, and so should you.

The total alliance of major corporations involved in human exploitation with BLM should be a warning flag to us, and yet this damning evidence goes unnoticed, purposefully ignored, or perversely celebrated. We are the useful idiots of the wealthiest classes, carrying water for Jeff Bezos and other actual, real, modern-day slavers. Starbucks, an organisation using literal black slaves in its coffee plantation suppliers, is in favor of BLM. Sony, an organisation using cobalt mined by yet more literal black slaves, many of whom are children, is in favor of BLM. And so, apparently, are we. The absence of counter-narrative enables this obscenity. Fiat lux, indeed.

UPDATED: Was Lincoln a white supremacist?

An assiduous reader has challenged my assertion this morning that the views of Abraham Lincoln on the question of race and the position of African-Americans in society were not that much different from those of Robert E. Lee. "Are you saying," our reader asks, "that Lincoln was a racist?" No, that wasn't what I said. I was just alluding to a half-remembered quote, which Ed. checked with Snopes. Here's what he found.

During his famous debates with Sen. Stephen Douglas, Lincoln explained to the crowd: "I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races.... I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

Snopes concludes that "Lincoln was no different than most white males, North and South, at the time. He was a white supremacist."

Now here's the quote from General Lee: "The negroes have neither the intelligence nor the other qualifications which are necessary to make them safe depositories of political power. They would inevitably become the victims of demagogues who...would mislead them to the serious injury of the public."

If anything, I would call General Lee's statement mild by comparison with that of President Lincoln. Snopes, being the arbiter of liberal truth, makes a half-hearted apology for Mr Lincoln. "Of course," they say, "this excerpt from one speech does not represent the totality of Lincoln's views on race and racial equality, but the remarks were far from a complete outlier, and Lincoln's views were more complex and uncomfortable than the prevalent modern impression of him as the racially-enlightened Great Emancipator." (My emphasis. Walt)

So there you have it, folks. Both Abraham Lincoln and Robert E. Lee are guilty, guilty, guilty, and every white male in America must apologize profusely (and continually), and make amends (preferably in cash) to all persons of colour for those vile racist comments.

Footnote added 13/2/20: It's not just in the Paranoid States of America that such fulsome apologies are required. The Daily Caller reports that the heretical Church of England has decided to commission an expert to prepare a report on the church's "deeply, institutionally racist" history following an official apology for its past.

The General Synod, the church's legislative body, voted on February 11th to issue an official apology for the racism that "countless black, Asian and minority ethnic people" have experienced in the past 70 years. The church is also commissioning an expert to prepare a report on the racism of the church. Walt expects the Episopalian Church -- the American version of the C of E -- to follow suit any day now. [Hasn't it done that already? Washington and Lee were both Episcopalians and slave-owners. Ed.]