Gavin Newsom Elected Governor of California

By

The election in November is just going to be a formality.

No way can a Republican win governor in California in the age of Trump.

CNBC:

Liberal Democrat Gavin Newsom and Trump-backed Republican John H. Cox will face off in the November general election to decide California’s next governor.

Under California’s unusual “jungle primary” system, the top two vote-getters — regardless of party — advance to the general election. In all, 27 candidates vied to succeed Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown, who was ineligible to run again because of term limits.

Based on 92 percent of precincts reporting Tuesday’s statewide primary results, Newsom had 33 percent of the vote and first place while Cox was second with 26 percent. They were separated by about 286,000 votes.

Newsom, the state’s lieutenant governor and an ex-mayor of San Francisco, had been widely expected to be the top vote-getter since he was the longtime frontrunner in the governor’s race. Cox took the number two spot and had been gaining in most recent public opinion polling following President Donald Trump three weeks ago tweeting his endorsement of the conservative San Diego businessman.

Cox does have the best campaign slogan though:

“Clean Out the Barn.”

Jordan Peterson would be a lot more popular if he would have grabbed that instead of “clean your room,” “fold your socks” and “wash your penis.”

But Cox will get less votes from his borderline plagiarism of Jordan Peterson, as people are likely to take him as a Petersonite agent.

We’re at the point now where the Democrats are ready to start asking every person in any position of power: “are you now or have you ever been a Jordan Peterson Patreon?”

This guy is enemy number one.

Jews do not like clean rooms and penises.

You know what Cox could have won with though.

You know.

Don’t act like you don’t know.

That would have been it.

Even shitlibs can’t resist that kind of call to adventure.

He blew the screws loose on that one.

Ain’t nobody wants to clean a barn.

So yeah I mean, event over, Newsom wins.

And he is a complete shitlib, worse even than old Jer.

He’s gonna implode everything in that shitty state.

I don’t know if he supports secession or not, but he is the type of asshole who would.

He’s like, the type of asshole who thinks “All You Need is Love” is a legit strategy for life and running the government.

Polarization is good, kids.

Embrace it.

Demand it, in fact.

Other Primaries

I’m just gonna be honest here: I didn’t really follow the primaries that took place yesterday.

After Reverend Grass-on-the-Field managed to lose in Alabama, then Steve Bannon went one gin and tonic over the line, then the other weird events, I was just like “yeah okay, nevermind” as far as that whole thing goes.

On the Democrat side I’m more interested, because they are running a bunch of extremists. Who are, I believe, unelectable.

So hopefully some of those won yesterday.

I can’t follow every single event, guys.

The Daily Stormer needs a bigger staff.

Send shekels, please.

I’ve gotta hire Luke O’Brien to stalk and dox Jews, and he’s playing hardball on salary negotiations out of the gate, apparently.

For those of you who don’t understand salary negotiation tactics, I’m supposed to come out with an offer in response to “you can’t afford me.” He’s definitely read Art of the Deal.

Anyway, we need him on full time stalk & dox duty.

And we need someone who really closely follows electoral politics, Fash the Nation style.

A Middle East guy would be good too.

But srsly guys, how much is NYT or WSJ? Like $10 a month. Send that, all of you. We need some fucking money. I’m about to hit burnout here. Take the above article, just as an example.

What is going on here?

Why would I even think of “Paint Your Wagon”?

Overwork is causing my brain to develop irregular neural pathways.

I’ve worked every day for coming on 5 years now.

We need a legit staff.

Since 2006, 81.3% of Homicides in California Have Had a Non-White Suspect (State is 38.4% White)

In 2000, California was 46.7 percent white and 32.4 percent Hispanic.

Shot. [It’s official: Latinos now outnumber whites in California, Los Angeles Times, July 8, 2015]:

The demographers agreed: At some point in 2014, Latinos would pass whites as the largest ethnic group in California.

The Color of Homicide in California: Nonwhite
Determining when exactly that milestone would occur was more of a tricky question. Counting people isn’t like counting movie ticket receipts.
The official confirmation had to wait until new population figures were released by the Census Bureau this summer. The new tally, released in late June, shows that as of July 1, 2014, about 14.99 million Latinos live in California, edging out the 14.92 million whites in the state.
The shift shouldn’t come as a surprise. State demographers had previously expected the change to occur sometime in 2013, but slow population growth pushed back projections. In January 2014, the state Department of Finance estimated the shift would take place at some point in March.

Whites are 38.4 percent of the state’s population, yet homicides in California are 4 out of 5 times committed by a non-white
California is now the first large state and the third overall — after Hawaii and New Mexico — without a white plurality, according to state officials.
The country’s Latino population is now 55.4 million. California and Los Angeles County have the largest Latino populations of any state or county in the nation, according to the new figures.
The demographic shift has been a long time coming. In 1970, the 2.4 million Latinos in California accounted for 12% of the population, while the 15.5 million whites in the state made up more than three-quarters of residents, according to state figures. By 1990, the Latino population jumped to 7.7 million, or about 25% of the state’s population.
The Latino population is relatively young, with a median age of about 29, while the aging white population has a median age of 45. State demographers project Latinos will account for about 49% of Californians by 2060.
“It is going to accelerate,” Suro said. “This is really the beginning of a new phase that will play out over another generation.”
A young Latino workforce helps the economy by backfilling retiring baby boomers, said John Malson, the chief demographer for the state finance department.
The continued influx and growth of Latinos in the United States is not being fueled exclusively by immigration but by second- and third-generation immigrants who are settling down and starting families, said Marcelo Suárez-Orozco, a professor and dean of education at UCLA’s Graduate School of Education and Information Studies.
California is a harbinger of the national rise in Latinos. The nation’s Latino population has grown 57% since 2000, when Latinos numbered 35.3 million. Latinos accounted for most of the nation’s growth — 56% — from 2000 to 2010, according to the Pew Research Center.
“Where L.A. goes is where the rest of the state goes and where the rest of the country goes,” he said. “We announce, demographically speaking, the future for the rest of the country.”

Chaser. The Homicide In California Report 2015, issued by the California Department of Justice, makes quite clear just which racial group(s) is responsible for homicide in the state:

47.5 percent of homicide arrestees were Hispanic, 26.1 percent were black, 20.8 percent were white, and 5.6 percent were categorized as “Other.” 

Since 2006, official state data for California shows homicide suspects are – on average – 81.3% nonwhite.

So goes California, so goes the nation, right?

California Über Alles

California Über Alles

“Now it is nineteen eighty-four
Knock-knock at your front door
It’s the suede denim secret police
They have come for your uncool niece

Come quietly to the camp
You’d look nice as a drawstring lamp
Don’t you worry, it’s only a shower
For your clothes, here’s a pretty flower

Die on organic poison gas
Serpent’s egg’s already hatched
You will croak, you little clown
When you mess with President Brown!”-
The Dead Kennedys, “California Über Alles

Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown is leading the State of California into the bright multi-cultural future prophesied by demographers to finally come to fruition some time mid-century. California as it is becoming is the eternal wet dream of the Democrat Party—gated communities for the multi-culti architects; slums for their pool boys, landscapers, and iPhone assemblers; and shit-flecked and used-syringe-covered streets for the homeless. The non-White voting share of the Democrat Party is 44%, so it behooves the party to continue to hasten the demographic displacement of whites who are naturally more “conservative,” though a depressing number remain tethered to the sinking ship of “race-blind,” civ-nat, Chamber of Commerce ideology that is basically just the Democrat Party from twenty years ago, plus, ya know, CAPITALISM.

The William F. Buckley conservatives stand athwart history stopping nothing, and Big Labor nods in tacit approval. This is why, although the free market is generally the way to go, if left un-checked global free trade can wreak havoc on a nation, ultimately running it through with so many holes nothing remains but tatters. 91% of all jobs created during the George W. Bush presidency went to immigrants and illegal aliens while American soldiers were shipped all over the Middle East for the oil companies and the defense contractors to get filthy rich, and when they got home, they found home unrecognizable.

This is the future the “elites” envision—godlike, they loom over their newly-“elected” population of compliant, big-government illiterates who won’t have the gall or even understanding to agitate for their freedoms. And the profit margin on labor costs will be massive! You can “get away with” the consequences of white flight in many neighborhoods, cities, and even counties, but what happens when the Third World undertow threatens to pull under entire countries? That’s where we are now. The gated communities will stay gated, the policy-makers, commentariat, and financiers utterly unaffected but for increasingly-swollen bank accounts and lavish lifestyles, and everywhere else will sink into the corruption, dysfunction, and impoverishment that defines the Third World.

The macabre spectacle playing itself out on the Left Coast is “the shape of punk to come,” the social revolution turned loose—equal parts ruthlessly exploitative capitalism, anarcho-tyranny, and Bolshevism, barely held together as their basic contradictions burst at the seams. While Moonbeam Nero fiddles out California’s funeral dirge, disease, criminality, and impoverishment now define the state that used to epitomize the American Dream. Human trafficking is up 842% in the state over the last decade as illegal aliens pass largely unfettered through a porous border as just one more consequence of the Left’s perversely craven-yet-totalitarian ideology. California now has the worst quality of life among all fifty states and the worst poverty rate. The phrase “Diversity Is Our Strength” has a very Orwellian quality to it. It is essentially an umbrella to encompass the various economic and demographic machinations of the managerial classes to dispossess and ultimately erase the current population base.

The social revolution taking place in California, the United States, and much of the rest of the West is inherently destructive because it exists only in negative. It must always be in opposition to something, “critiquing” something. It does not create or generate, it only parasitizes and leeches from that which has already been called into existence by creative forces from without. It cannot survive on its own. Only once a model or form has been established will its “intellectuals” then find fault with and attempt to re-form/reform said model. It has no creative energies of its own; it remains simple, base, and barbaric with no impulses other than, as Hilaire Belloc wrote, to:

Consume what civilization has slowly produced after generations of selection and effort, but he will not be at pains to replace such goods, nor indeed has he a comprehension of the virtue that has brought them into being. Discipline seems to him irrational, on which account he is ever marvelling that civilization should have offended him with priests and soldiers…. In a word, the Barbarian is discoverable everywhere in this, that he cannot make: that he can befog and destroy but that he cannot sustain.

It is Le Bon’s Cain-as-the-Original-Bolshevist; as Lothrop Stoddard wrote in The Revolt Against Civilization, “progress” mysteriously looks an awful lot like regression:

The flight seems to lead backward toward the jungle past. Certainly the products of the “new” art bear a strange likeness to the crude efforts of degenerate savages…The only step which seemingly now remains to be taken is to abolish language, and have “poems without words.”…It means simply one more phase of the world-wide revolt against civilization by the unadaptable, inferior, and degenerate elements, seeking to smash the irksome framework of modern society, and revert to the congenial levels of chaotic barbarism or savagery…To the levelling gospel of social revolution…it is the mass, not the individual, which is precious; it is quantity, not quality, which counts.

The notion of the intrinsic equality of a human life, of respect for the individual, is that each one of us has the right to pursue our own destinies unencumbered by tyranny, to make of ourselves what we will. It is an analogue to God’s boundless love for his flock that defines Christian universalism. The uniquely Western concept of one man, one vote, of trust in your fellow citizen, forms the bedrock of democracy; we respect our fellow citizens and our participation in the voting process underscores our faith in each other. It is within the cozy confines of this notion, however, that alien universalism begins to nest and pervert Western Man’s natural and racially aberrant level of cooperation and trust. These traits are some of our greatest strengths, and yet it is this susceptibility to the perversion of these natural impulses that is our Achilles heel. Notions of “fairness” and equality may devolve into tyranny with frightening rapidity (see: the French Revolution). Pure democracy, as Thucydides and others have warned, can quickly devolve into tyranny—another Western concept, centering on the legitimacy to rule. The intermediate stage of the democracy-to-tyranny pipeline is incarnation of the inflamed mobile vulgus, the permutation of democratic tyranny first discussed by Polybius while discussing the “pathological” form of mob rule: “ochlocracy.”

Our Founding Fathers chose to ground the United States in republicanism for several reasons: to protect against the tyranny of the majority; the periodic disintegration of democracy into an ochlocracy via moral panics, hysteria, and mob mentality; and the inevitable ascension out of chaos of a tyrant. As the United States moves closer to a direct democracy, the ballot box and demographics become a weapon against the native population. Additionally, as Sam Francis noted, it is the much-mouthed platitudes of liberalism that easily lend themselves to corruption, where they become window-dressing for the advancement of policies and ideologies that are anything but “liberal.” This is where the “classical liberals” of the so-called “Intellectual Dark Web” go wrong, especially in terms of “radical individualism.” The much-vaunted “equality” of liberalism quickly becomes perverted into the idea that equality means everyone is exactly the same and thus inter-changeable. As Gonzalo Fernandez de la Mora posited in Egalitarian Envy: The Political Foundations of Social Justice:

Marxist egalitarianism is not only political and economic (“to each one according to his needs”) it is anthropological. The subject of the communist society is not the individual, but generic man. This is the famous text: “When the real, individual man will retake possession of the abstract citizen, when in his empirical life, in his individual work, and in his individual relations he becomes transformed into generic being; when man recognizes his own strength as the strength of society…only then will he attain human emancipation.” This is, therefore, almost a metaphysical egalitarianism, where man becomes a species, a universal concept, and acquires that property which belongs to the beings of reason, absolute equality…In its final phase, communist society would provide total equality to all subjects – generic man – and the total equality of the patrimony: everything according to the quota or collective (capital, power, work, and income). Marxist egalitarianism, despite its protestations of materialism and empiricism, is the most speculative and metaphysical of all: generic man and abstract work are two over-refined abstractions of reason.

Hollywood is Generic Man epitomized, a combo assembly line-recycling plant, the massive volume ceaselessly re-purposed in the incestuousness of the entertainment industry; waste, excess, uniformity, and inter-changeability form the true “landscape” of Hollywood behind the mass-marketed Potemkin village. The recycling aspect may also work as a metaphor for the perpetuation of certain ideals, as well as the recycling of careers and specific industry “types.” A number of my poems address the grotesque artifice of Hollywood, where virtue-signaling and adopted black babies are this year’s hottest fashion accessories; one such poem, “Matrimony,” was published on this site on October 24th just after the ((((((Harvey Weinstein)))))) “revelations.” The concluding stanza of Part I is illustrative of the piece’s bearing towards “Celebrity Culture”: “the photosynthesis has turned hollywood into a jungle, / where human trash sprouts like barnacles, / clinging to any scrap of fame / and swallowing phyto-plankton / and shitting sitcoms.” I have intentionally left everything lower-case to highlight the lack of individuality and absolute conformity to the dictums of an entertainment industry that is itself alien to our culture, whose mass-marketed products normalize degeneracy and ideologically homogenize; paradisal California, like the multi-cultural utopia of the future, is nothing but an illusion. Its ersatz glamor is naught but lipstick on a pig (no disrespect to pigs intended). The desired outcome of the model presently applied in the State of California is complete tribal fracture followed by the crushing uniformity of becoming an undifferentiated mass—life-imitating-art-imitating-life-ad infinitum. The mass-produced “culture” churned out of Hollywood is relentless in its erasure of distinctiveness, the worst aspects of capitalism and Bolshevism tied up in one gilded package. Quoting Lothrop Stoddard:

Proletarian art must, however, be mass art; the concepts of genius and individual creation are severely reprobated. This is, of course, in accordance with the general theory of Bolshevism: that the individual must be merged in the collectivity; that talented individuals merely express the will of the mass incarnated in them. This Bolshevik war against individuality explains why the overwhelming majority of the Russian Intelligentsia is so irreconcilably opposed to Bolshevism. It also explains why those who have bowed to Bolshevism have ceased to produce good work. They have been intellectually emasculated.

In the face of this characterless uniformity, this lobotomized culture—ennui and estrangement. Atomization, isolation, and despair. For the German art critic Johannes Volkelt:

The demoralization of our attitude and sentiment toward life itself is even more portentous than our declining recognition of artistic form. It is a mutilated, deformed, moron humanity which glowers or drivels at us through expressionist pictures. All they suggest is profound morbidity. Their jaded, unhealthy mood is relieved only by absurdities, and where these cast a ray of light into their rudimentary composition, it is only a broken and joyless one. Likewise, that which repels us most in the poetry of our younger school is its scornful stigmatizing of the past, without giving us anything positive in its place; its pathetic groping in its own self-wreckage; its confused, helpless seeking after some steadfast ideal. The soul is exhausted by its ceaseless chasing after nothing.

If this is the “revolution” the “elites” are calling for, it is little wonder Hollywood has such a vested interest in this narrative (and why there has been an almost-complete cessation in quality and originality). It is a retarded post-modernism, a microwaved TV dinner months past expiry, held in thrall by its own navel. That it is wholly artificial is not incidental. It is all too easy to note the superficiality of Hollywood and popular culture, but superficiality connotes that there is a surface to something, and thus, there is implied depth. It is quite another thing to realize that the character of Patrick Bateman from American Psycho is not so much a fictive creation but an avatar of the globalist:

I had all the characteristics of a human being—flesh, blood, skin, hair—but my depersonalization was so intense, had gone so deep, that my normal ability to feel compassion had been eradicated, the victim of a slow, purposeful erasure. I was simply imitating reality, a rough resemblance of a human being, with only a dim corner of my mind functioning…There is an idea of a Patrick Bateman, some kind of abstraction, but there is no real me, only an entity, something illusory, and though I can hide my cold gaze and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable: I simply am not there. It is hard for me to make sense on any given level. Myself is fabricated, an aberration. I am a noncontingent human being. My personality is sketchy and unformed, my heartlessness goes deep and is persistent. My conscience, my pity, my hopes disappeared a long time ago (probably at Harvard) if they ever did exist. There are no more barriers to cross.

CALIFORNIA TURNS OFF THE WATER: YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO WASH CLOTHES AND SHOWER IN THE SAME DAY

Permanent Water Rationing is Coming to California

Have you experienced water faucets that spray tiny jets of water onto your hands? You know, those eight tiny jets of water, each about 1.0 millimeter in diameter, that are emitted with so much pressure that the paltry quantity of water bounces off your skin before you can get it wet enough to apply soap, and makes rinsing the soap off nearly impossible? You can find these water faucets in airports and other public places, where they constitute a minor annoyance. But wait. Thanks to California’s state legislature, they’re on their way into your home.

You’ll just love your personal space filled up with these expensive gadgets. For example, these faucets will probably require voice-activation, turn off after ten seconds, and send a report to your utility in order to help you manage your usage patterns. Smart faucets. Smart washers. Smart dish washers. Smart shower heads and smart toilets – all coming your way, thanks to the California State Legislature and their partners, the scarcity profiteers of Silicon Valley.

You’ll love how all these water-sipping, next-generation durable goods can go “down,” get hacked, don’t work very well, and require annual warranty payments. You’ll also love purchasing bargain basement annual software upgrades, but only affordable, barely, if you join their green team club for life special VIP program. You’ll love how the control panel on your washer will look like the bridge of a starship, and can only be operated after you’ve mastered the virtual version of a two-inch thick instruction manual.

California’s ruling coalition of government employee unions, extreme environmentalists, and high-tech billionaires are at it again, this time with a water conservation bill, AB 1668, that is going to impose a mandatory limit of 55 gallons per person per day on indoor water consumption. Bring on the gadgets.

To put the impact of this bill into perspective, consider what it would cost to retrofit a household to reduce indoor water consumption:

COST TO RETROFIT A HOME TO REDUCE WATER CONSUMPTION

The biggest cost on this table is the cost for a tankless water heater or a hot water circulation system, necessary if we don’t want to waste water while waiting for it to get hot. Because there’s no good solution to that problem, this is a significant source of water waste that is blithely ignored by water conservation activists. It’s reasonable to expect people in a developed, wealthy nation like America to wait until they have warm water before washing their hands, shaving, hand washing dishes, or showering. And there is no way a person is going to bring their indoor water usage down to 55 gallons a day without either performing all these tasks with cold water, or by installing a system to deliver instant hot water.

But if every Californian did their best to comply with AB 1668, could they reduce their water usage to 55 gallons per day? The next table shows how much they could save, using USGS data. Please note the USGS data is for America, not for California, where decades of conservation incentives have already yielded tremendous reductions in use. Per capital indoor water use in California isn’t anywhere near 139 gallons per day. More on that later.

PER CAPITA POTENTIAL WATER SAVINGS USING WATER EFFICIENCY APPLIANCES

Apart from water efficient toilets which save water and don’t require lifestyle changes, there’s not much here that isn’t expensive and inconvenient. Notwithstanding the fact that Silicon Valley moguls are salivating over the prospects of subsequent mandates that will require all these retrofit appliances to be “smart,” they aren’t going to make life better. Low flow shower heads require longer duration showers, especially if you have to rinse shampoo out of long hair. Consumer reports offer mixed reviews on low water consumption dishwashers and washing machines. Some of us like to wash our dishes by hand – in many cases because it’s less time consuming. And who wants to pull wet clothes out of side loading washers? As for waiting for hot water to make it to faucets, there’s no inexpensive and effective solution.

Enforcing the 55 gallon indoor limit will also be costly not only for California’s residents, but for every water utility in the state. After all, to regulate indoor water consumption, you have to measure indoor water consumption separately from outdoor water consumption. And, of course, residential outdoor water consumption is also in AB 1668’s cross hairs. To accomplish this, AB 1668 calls for dedicated outdoor water meters, separate from indoor water meters, and it calls for water utilities to prepare a water “budget” for each customer parcel based on the size of the parcel and other factors such as the local climate.

THE COST/BENEFIT OF RESIDENTIAL WATER RATIONING

Since AB 1668 proposes to effectively ration residential water consumption, at staggering expense, it’s worthwhile to explore the cost and benefit of this policy. If we assume that five million of California’s 12.5 million households still have legacy appliances, just the retrofit would cost these unlucky homeowners $37.5 billion. But it doesn’t end there, because the water utilities would have to install indoor/outdoor meters on around 10 million households (some households are in multi-family dwellings with no yard or a shared yard). Assuming the cost to install these meters and conduct site visits to assign individual outdoor “water budgets” at $1,000 per household means another $10 billion will have to be spent – i.e., implementing AB 1668 will cost $47 billion.

But how much water would actually be saved, for $47 billion? According to the most authoritative study available on current indoor water consumption, the average Californians uses 62 gallons per day. (ref. California Water Plan Update 2013 Chapter 3, page 12, 1st paragraph “Indoor Residential.”) This means that if California’s 40 million residents got their indoor water use down to 50 gallons per day from 62 gallons per day, it would save 537 thousand acre feet per year (0.54 million acre feet). This is a minute fraction, less than 1%, of California’s total water diversions for environmental, agricultural, and urban uses.

AB 1668 is not about saving water. It’s about control. It’s about power and profit for special interests. Otherwise we could just expand sewage treatment plants, which we should do anyway. How can you waste indoor water if it can go down the drain, to be treated and pumped right back up the hill for reuse?

Let’s keep this in perspective by imagining best case scenarios whereby indoor and outdoor residential water use is dramatically reduced. If Calfornia’s 40 million residents reduced their household water consumption by another 20%, it would only save 0.74 million acre feet per year. An impossible 40% reduction? Savings of 1.5 million acre feet per year. For one-tenth the cost, the proposed “off-stream” Sites Reservoir could easily capture over 2.0 million acre feet each year in storm runoff. Just one good storm dumps ten times that much water onto California’s watersheds.

TOTAL ANNUAL WATER SUPPLY AND USAGE IN CALIFORNIA

So what could Californians do instead with $47 billion? We’ve looked at this before. Limiting ourselves to water infrastructure, here’s a list:

WAYS TO CREATE WATER ABUNDANCE IN CALIFORNIA

First of all, market-based incentives can eliminate water scarcity at almost no cost. For example: Allow farmers to sell their water allotments at market rates without losing their vested rights. Or permit utilities to engage in mild price hikes that encourage people to use less water, instead of resorting to punitive tiered pricing or rationing. These alternatives, to some extent, have already been tried. They work. But if you accept the premise that increasing the absolute supply of water in California is desirable – here are the capital costs for water infrastructure that would create water abundance in California for decades to come.

  • Desalinate 1.0 million acre feet of seawater  –  $15 billion.
  • Reclaim and reuse 2.0 million acre feet of sewage  –  $10 billion.
  • Build the Sites Reservoir for off-stream storage of 2.0 million acre feet of run-off  –  4.4 billion.
  • Build the Temperance Flat Reservoir for 1.3 million acre feet of storage  –  3.3 billion.
  • Aquifer recharge to store runoff – there isn’t even a good study exploring this option at a statewide level.

As can be seen, all of these water infrastructure projects could be built for $32.7 billion. They could be financed via infrastructure bonds, increased rates to consumers, redirection of funds currently being squandered on high-speed rail, or even redirection of proceeds from carbon emission auctions.

What California’s ruling junta prefers, however, is to create a surveillance state defined by expensive scarcity. In the 1950s and 1960s, California’s legislature approved and implemented what remains the finest system of inter-basin water transfers in the world. But today, after over 30 years of neglect, at the same time as California’s population has doubled, California’s water infrastructure is crumbling at a time when it should be expanded. The reasons for this are plain enough. Special interests have replaced the public interest.

THE SCARCITY PROFITEERS

Instead of building water infrastructure to increase supplies of water, public employee unions want to see tax revenues pour into their pockets and into the pension funds. High-tech billionaires want contracts to build “smart” appliances and monitoring systems to enforce water rationing. Extreme environmentalists, and the trial lawyers who get incredibly wealthy representing their organizations, want more legal bases upon which to file lucrative lawsuits. Sadly, major corporate agribusinesses often acquiesce to this abuse of residents because they’ve decided that a bigger slice of a smaller pie is all they can hope for from this legislature.

Until Californians realize there will be no end to these encroachments on their freedom and prosperity until they resist, California’s ruling junta will prevail. California will be a harder and harder place to live. If ordinary Californians value their freedom, they will form a coalition with farmers, energy companies, civil engineering firms, and construction unions to demand water abundance. They may rediscover the vision and leadership that built a water infrastructure that is still one of the wonders of the modern world.

New California Law Limits How Much Water People Can Use

SACRAMENTO (CBS13) – There will soon be more focus on flushes and scrutiny over showers with a new law signed in by the governor.

California is now the first state in the nation to enact tough new water-efficiency standards. The controversial rules limit how many gallons a person can use inside their home per day.

 

“So that everyone in California is at least integrating efficiency into our preparations for climate change,” said Felicia Marcus, Chair of the State Water Resources Control Board.

So, what are the new rules?

In 2022, the new indoor water standard will be 55 gallons per person, per day. by 2030, it will fall to 50 gallons.

“With a child and every day having to wash clothes, that’s, just my opinion, not feasible. But I get it and I understand that we’re trying to preserve…but 55 gallons a day?” said Tanya Allen, who has a 4-year-old daughter.

Just how many gallons do household chores take?

 

An 8-minute shower uses about 17 gallons of water, a load of laundry up to 40, and a bathtub can hold 80 to 100 gallons of water.

“She likes to bathe three times a day and she does laundry all day,” said Rocka Mitchell from Texas.

He and his wife Ginger are living in Sacramento for work and say it would be hard to conserve.

“I couldn’t do it. My family is way too large,” she said.

Retrofitting homes with water-efficient fixtures could help cut back.

“I think the average new home is 35 gallons per person per day, so we are not talking emergency conservation here,” Marcus said.

Greg Bundesen with the Sacramento Suburban Water District says they already assist customers.

 

“We offer toilet rebates, we offer complementary showerheads, we offer complementary faucets,” he said.

The new laws also require water districts to perform stress tests of their water supply and curb loss due to leaks.

“Right now we lose up to 30 percent of urban water just to leaks in the system,” Marcus said.

Agencies believe fixing those leaks and educating residents is the key.

“Some people may not be aware that you’re going to use a lot more water in a bath and you wouldn’t shower and it’s our job to make sure they’re informed,” Bundesen said.

Water districts who don’t comply face fines up to $10,000 a day.

The ultimate goal is to make conservation a way of life in California. Outdoor water use is also covered by the new laws.

Standards will be based on a region’s climate and other factors instead of just one standard for the whole state.

Decline and Fall of California – what does this mean for the rest of America?

Steve Hilton: Is Loony Left Gov. Jerry Brown killing California? What does that mean for America?

Exuberant Democrats – carried along by the self-righteousness of their authoritarian and puritanical identity politics zealotry, and self-confidence in the supposedly inevitable electoral annihilation of President Trump and Republicans in November – are starting to see a long-cherished liberal dream as an imminent reality: California as a model for the whole nation.

You’ll get the picture if you read a widely-shared article published earlier this year by Medium, written by tech guru Peter Leyden, headlined “The Great Lesson of California in America’s New Civil War.” The article is subtitled: “Why there’s no bipartisan way forward at this juncture in our history – one side must win.”

The article describes California as “the harbinger of America’s political future … a model for America as a whole.”

The fact that Democrats in California now have complete control of all statewide political offices, the state Legislature and local government in cities like San Francisco is touted as great news for “working people.”

The author celebrates the fact that political debates in California involve choices between different degrees of left, with other voices excluded – even though independents and Republicans still comprise a majority of voters in the state, according to the latest party identification data.

The vision of a Californiaized United States is captured in all its glory in the concluding paragraph of the article: “America can’t afford more political paralysis. One side or the other must win. This is a civil war than can be won without firing a shot. But it is a fundamental conflict between two worldviews that must be resolved in short order. California, as usual, resolved it early. The Democrats won; the Republicans lost. The conservative way forward lost; the progressive way forward began. … California is the future, always about 15 years ahead of the rest of the country. That means that America, starting in 2018, is going to resolve it too.”

Lest you think these are just the random ramblings of a Silicon Valley bubble-dweller, let me point out that the article was not just widely shared but publicly endorsed by such luminaries as the founder and CEO of Twitter. And I can testify from personal experience that this is exactly what members of the California liberal elite actually think. It’s just that few of them say so publicly.

So we’d better take this seriously. Democrats, as the old political adage goes, now want to do to America what they’ve done to California. It’s an alarming prospect.

It’s true that California is the world’s fifth-largest economy; possesses (in my view) unparalleled natural beauty and cultural diversity; and has a spirit of openness and adventure – not to mention great weather – that makes it the best place in the world. I’m a proud California resident and I wouldn’t want to be anywhere else.

But increasingly, it seems that many of the Golden State’s extraordinary advantages are being recklessly undermined by a governor who likes to think of himself as a beacon of rectitude – but who has a record of bumbling incompetence, special interest corruption and ideological extremism that places him firmly on the Loony Left.

Let’s start with the incompetence. It’s surely quite an accomplishment for Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown to have presided simultaneously over a massive splurge in public spending and a reduction in public services. Health spending has ballooned, but actual health outcomes have not improved. Meanwhile, California is on the brink of a fiscal crisis.

So where has all the money gone? That’s where the special interest corruption comes in. Brown has repeatedly used public money to reward his – and his party’s – paymasters in the public sector unions.

The generous pensions of public employees remain essentially unreformed – that’s the main cause of the looming fiscal crisis. And while workers in the private sector suffer wage stagnation, Brown has thrown pay raise after pay raise at powerful unions like the prison officers.

In interviews, Brown poses as a responsible grownup holding back the tide of mayhem that his more liberal successors will inevitably unleash. But Brown is ending his California career much as he started it: on the fringes, ideologically extreme and the modern-day symbol of the Loony Left. You see it in his extraordinary position on immigration, pandering to the Democrats’ extremist open borders base with his utterly irresponsible “sanctuary state” preening.

And you see it in Brown’s bizarre championing of Proposition 47, which essentially decriminalized the theft of any item under $950. His stance has been a social policy disaster, giving a green light to drug-fueled crime throughout the state.

Above all, Brown will be remembered for his colossal failures on the economy and poverty. California has the highest poverty rate in the nation, the highest level of inequality – and at the same time, the highest taxes.

The cost of living, particularly housing and transportation, is accelerating out of control for working people. It’s no surprise that the number of people moving out of the state has more than doubled in the last three years, with little compensating inward migration. Per capita, California is 46th out of 50 states in attracting newcomers from other parts of the country.

But the most shameful and vivid symbols of Jerry Brown’s failure must surely be the staggering, Third World-style homeless encampments on the streets of California’s big cities.

According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the homeless population in California rose by 14 percent from 2016 to 2017 to 134,000. In Los Angeles the increase was even worse – 26 percent in one year. In sharp contrast, the national homeless population increased by only 1 percent in 2017, to about 553,000, driven primarily by the increase in California homelessness.

What a grotesque epitaph for this self-styled champion of the people. The truth is that Brown’s rule has been great for the rich; grim for the rest.

Now it’s rumored that Brown, who will shortly complete his fourth term as California’s chief executive, is eyeing a national future. He has run unsuccessfully for president three times: in 1976, 1980 and 1992. Party insiders are convinced he wants a fourth go at that too. Given his track record as governor, that’s a frightening prospect for America.

Hubristic Democrats may survey their blue enclaves in the Golden State and dream of exporting their Loony Left revolution to the rest of the country. But any serious look at what life is actually like for working people in California should bring that fantasy crashing to the ground.

OUR TAKE

This process of decay which has eaten away at everything great about California at its peak is now spreading to the rest of American, its a demographic issue, racial at its core, a parasite class of mostly non-whites consuming the social capital created by whites decades ago, replacing our high trust society with a 3rd world culture of corruption, low trust, and racial Bolshevism. Without large scale system disrupting mass deportation of non-whites and their citizen-by-birth alone offspring, all we can do is prepare for the inevitable apocalyptic collapse and survive long enough to rebuild.

The Great Lesson of California in America’s New Civil War

Why there’s no bipartisan way forward at this juncture in our history — one side must win

By Peter Leyden and Ruy Teixeira

The next time you call for bipartisan cooperation in America and long for Republicans and Democrats to work side by side, stop it. Remember the great lesson of California, the harbinger of America’s political future, and realize that today such bipartisan cooperation simply can’t get done.

In this current period of American politics, at this juncture in our history, there’s no way that a bipartisan path provides the way forward. The way forward is on the path California blazed about 15 years ago.

In the early 2000s, California faced a similar situation to the one America faces today. Its state politics were severely polarized, and state government was largely paralyzed. The Republican Party was trapped in the brain-dead orthodoxies of an ideology stuck in the past. The party was controlled by zealous activists and corrupt special interests who refused to face up to the reality of the new century. It was a party that refused to work with the Democrats in good faith or compromise in any way.

The solution for the people of California was to reconfigure the political landscape and shift a supermajority of citizens — and by extension their elected officials — under the Democratic Party’s big tent. The natural continuum of more progressive to more moderate solutions then got worked out within the context of the only remaining functioning party. The California Democrats actually cared about average citizens, embraced the inevitable diversity of 21st-century society, weren’t afraid of real innovation, and were ready to start solving the many challenges of our time, including climate change.

California today provides a model for America as a whole. This model of politics and government is by no means perfect, but it is far ahead of the nation in coming to terms with the inexorable digital, global, sustainable transformation of our era. It is a thriving work in progress that gives hope that America can pull out of the political mess we’re in. California today provides a playbook for America’s new way forward. It’s worth contemplating as we enter 2018, which will be a critical election year.

Understanding the Context of the New American Civil War

This is no ordinary political moment. Trump is not the reason this is no ordinary time — he’s simply the most obvious symptom that reminds us all of this each day.

The best way to understand politics in America today is to reframe it as closer to civil war. Just the phrase “civil war” is harsh, and many people may cringe. It brings up images of guns and death, the bodies of Union and Confederate soldiers.

America today is nowhere near that level of conflict or at risk of such violence. However, America today does exhibit some of the core elements that move a society from what normally is the process of working out political differences toward the slippery slope of civil war. We’ve seen it in many societies in many previous historical eras, including what happened in the United States in 1860.

Two Systems at Odds

America’s original Civil War was not just fought to emancipate slaves for humanitarian reasons. The conflict was really about the clash between two very different economic systems that were fundamentally at odds and ultimately could not coexist. The Confederacy was based on an agrarian economy dependent on slaves. The Union was based on a new kind of capitalist manufacturing economy dependent on free labor. They tried to somehow coexist from the time of the founding era, but by the middle of the 19th century, something had to give. One side or the other had to win.

America today faces a similar juncture around fundamentally incompatible energy systems. The red states held by the Republicans are deeply entrenched in carbon-based energy systems like coal and oil. They consequently deny the science of climate change, are trying to resuscitate the dying coal industry, and recently have begun to open up coastal waters to oil drilling.

The blue states held by the Democrats are increasingly shifting to clean energy like solar and installing policies that wean the energy system off carbon. In the era of climate change, with the mounting pressure of increased natural disasters, something must give. We can’t have one step forward, one step back every time an administration changes. One side or the other has to win.

Two Classes at Odds

Another driver on the road to civil war is when two classes become fundamentally at odds. This usually takes some form of rich versus poor, the wealthy and the people, the 1 percent and the 99 percent. The system gets so skewed toward those at the top that the majority at the bottom rises up and power shifts.

The last time America was in that position was in the 1930s, during the Great Depression. We were on the road of severe class conflict that could have continued toward civil war, but we worked out a power shift that prevented widespread violence. Franklin Roosevelt, the so-called traitor to his class, helped establish a supermajority New Deal coalition of Democrats that rolled all the way through the postwar boom. The conservative Republicans who had championed a politics that advantaged the rich throughout the 1920s and promoted isolationism in the 1930s were sidelined for two generations — close to 50 years.

Today’s conservative Republicans face the same risk. Since 1980, their policies have engorged the rich while flatlining the incomes of the majority of Americans, from the presidency of Ronald Reagan through to last December’s tax overhaul, which ultimately bestows 83 percent of the benefits over time to the top 1 percent. Make no mistake: A reckoning with not just Trump, but conservatism, is coming.

Two Cultures at Odds

The differences between two economic systems or two classes that are fundamentally at odds could conceivably get worked out through a political process that peacefully resolves differences. However, culture frequently gets in the way. That’s especially true when pressures are building for big system overhauls that will create new winners and losers.

Two different political cultures already at odds through different political ideologies, philosophies, and worldviews can get trapped in a polarizing process that increasingly undermines compromise. They see the world through different lenses, consume different media, and literally live in different places. They start to misunderstand the other side, then start to misrepresent them, and eventually make them the enemy. The opportunity for compromise is then lost. This is where America is today.

At some point, one side or the other must win — and win big. The side resisting change, usually the one most rooted in the past systems and incumbent interests, must be thoroughly defeated — not just for a political cycle or two, but for a generation or two. That gives the winning party or movement the time and space needed to really build up the next system without always fighting rear-guard actions and getting drawn backwards. The losing party or movement will need that same time to go through a fundamental rethink, a long-term renewal that eventually will enable them to play a new game.

Today’s American Civil War

Trump is doing exactly what America needs him to do right now. He’s becoming increasingly conservative and outrageous by the day. Trump could have come into office with a genuinely new agenda that could have helped working people. Instead, he has spent the past year becoming a caricature of all things conservative — and in the meantime has alienated most of America and certainly all the growing political constituencies of the 21st century. He is turning the Republican brand toxic for millennials, women, Latinos, people of color, college-educated people, urban centers, the tech industry, and the economic powerhouses of the coasts, to name a few.

The Republican Party is playing their part perfectly, too. They completely fell for the Trump trap — and that’s exactly what America needed them to do. The Republican Party could have maintained some distance from Trump and kept a healthy check on him through Congress. Instead, they fully embraced him in a group bear hug that culminated in a deeply flawed tax law in the waning days of 2017. This mess of a law, thrown together without traditional vetting, is riddled with outrageous loopholes that benefit the crony donor class and line the pockets of many of the politicians who passed it. The law is hugely unpopular, and everyone who voted for it is marked for the election of 2018.

Perfect.

Now the entire Republican Party, and the entire conservative movement that has controlled it for the past four decades, is fully positioned for the final takedown that will cast them out for a long period of time in the political wilderness. They deserve it.

Let’s just say what needs to be said: The Republican Party over the past 40 years has maneuvered itself into a position where they are the bad guys on the wrong side of history. For a long time, they have been able to hide this fact through a sophisticated series of veils, invoking cultural voodoo that fools a large enough number of Americans to stay in the game. However, Donald Trump has laid waste to that sophistication and has given America and the world the raw version of what current conservative politics is all about.

The Republican Party is all about rule by and for billionaires at the expense of working people. Trump is literally the incarnation of what the party stands for: shaping laws for the good of billionaires and the 1 percent. His cabinet is stuffed with them.

The Republican Party is the party of climate change denial. Trump is the denier-in-chief, but there are 180 climate science deniers in the current Congress (142 in the House and 38 in the Senate), and none of them are Democrats. More than 59 percent of Republicans in the House and 73 percent of Republicans in the Senate deny the scientific consensus that climate change is happening, that human activity is the main cause, and that it is a serious threat. Another way to say it is that the Republican Party is in the pocket of the oil and carbon energy industry. Trump just cut through the crap and named Exxon’s CEO as our secretary of state to unravel the United Nations climate accords. No beating around that bush for the sake of appearances — Trump burned the bush down.

The Republican Party for the past 40 years has mastered using dog whistles to gin up racial divides to get their white voters to the polls. Trump just disposes of niceties and flatly encourages white nationalists, bans Muslims, walls off Mexicans, and calls out “shithole” countries.

Trump is just making clear to all what was boiling under the surface for decades, and that’s exactly what we need him to do. Why? Because America finally needs to take the Republican Party down for a generation or two. Not just the presidency. Not just clear out the U.S. House. Not just tip back the Senate. But fundamentally beat the Republicans on all levels at once, including clearing out governorships and statehouses across the land.

The Dramatic Collapse of Republicans in California

Could such as collapse of the Republican Party really happen? Won’t it take decades of trench warfare to put the GOP on the run? Not at all. A political collapse could happen very fast, as it did in California.

California was a model of governmental dysfunction in the 1990–2005 period, with Democrats and Republicans at each other’s throats and little being accomplished. The political atmosphere became so toxic that Democratic governor Gray Davis was recalled in 2003 and replaced with populist Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, who then proceeded to up the ante on polarization by pushing a series of conservative ballot initiatives in a special election in 2005. They were all handily defeated by the voters, marking the zenith of conservative Republican attempts to control California.

After that point, it was all downhill for the conservative GOP agenda in California. Schwarzenegger understood the sea change early and dumped right-wing populism and became far more moderate, going along with many progressive priorities. He soon started working with Democrats in the legislature on infrastructure, culminating in the passage of Proposition 1B in 2006 ($20 billion for roads and public transportation). Also in 2006, he and the legislature allocated an additional $150 million to stem cell research, supported a successful move to raise the minimum wage, and passed the Global Warming Solutions Act, which targeted a reduction of 25 percent in greenhouse gas emissions in the next 20 years. And in 2008, voters passed Prop 1A, authorizing $10 billion for high-speed rail.

Meanwhile, even though Schwarzenegger remained governor, the Democrats steadily expanded their majority in the state assembly. Then, in 2010, Democrat Jerry Brown was elected governor, and with the 2012 election, Democrats finally attained a supermajority in both houses of the state legislature. This was critical for overriding constant Republican filibusters and passing tax revenue laws (which still required a supermajority by Prop 13 dictates). The supermajority attained in 2012 was the first California legislative supermajority since 1933 and the first one for the Democrats since 1883. This is remarkable considering that in the dysfunctional 1990s, the state assembly and senate were closely divided between Republicans and Democrats, seemingly light-years away from the supermajority Democrats really needed to get things done.

Alongside these developments, Democratic domination of California representation in the U.S. House of Representatives steadily increased. Back in the 1990s, under Republican governor Pete Wilson, there was essentially parity between Republicans and Democrats in Congress. Today, there is almost a 3:1 split (39–14) in favor of the Democrats. Plus, they control both U.S. Senate seats and every single statewide elected office. There are no longer any Republicans able to mount a credible statewide election.

So, going from the zenith of right-wing populism to progressive domination in California did not take very long. That could easily happen in the country as a whole. The national GOP, after the 2016 election, controlled the presidency, the House, the Senate, and a strong majority of governorships and state legislatures. Since then, President Trump has become historically unpopular among American voters and the GOP Congress and its actions have become widely detested. Very quickly, their 2016 triumphs have morphed into a poisonous electoral environment where the GOP in 2018 is probably going to lose control of the House of Representatives and possibly the Senate, lose governorships and many hundreds of state legislative seats. And while the 2020 election is still a couple years away, an early forecast from political scientist Eric R.A.N. Smith has Trump (assuming his unpopularity continues) netting only 41 percent of electoral votes in that election.

In short, political change is slow until it’s very fast. The fall of the GOP is likely to be no different.

Life on the Other Side of Democratic One-Party Rule

There is life on the other side of that Republican political collapse. There is a clear way forward in the land of Democratic, progressive supermajorities. California is thriving right now, the economy is booming, state government budgets are setting aside surpluses, and the public is happy with its political leaders (as we have laid out in other articles in this series). California is leading the world in technological innovation and creative policies to counter climate change.

What about the need for checks and balances? Many Americans might be wary of trusting a political environment where one party has complete control of political power. How does society process the range of differences in political opinions in elections and in forming policies?

Californians faced those same questions and dealt with that new reality. In 2008, voters passed Proposition 11, which created a Citizens Redistricting Commission to redraw state legislative districts that over time had been heavily gerrymandered to protect incumbents of both political parties. That commission was insulated from politics and changed districts along more rational lines that took into consideration natural geography and longstanding contiguous communities. Then, in 2010, the voters passed Proposition 20, which applied a similar logic to congressional redistricting.

Alongside that effort, voters in 2010 also passed Proposition 14, a state constitutional amendment that established a top-two primary system in which all candidates, regardless of party, are placed on the same primary ballot, and the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, head into the general election. The immediate result was to bolster competition within almost all districts. In a district populated by Democrats, the voters still got a choice between, say, a more progressive candidate and a moderate candidate.

Politics in California today still has a range of political differences that get worked out within political bodies. The city council of San Francisco is made up of all Democrats but is often trapped in fierce policy battles between supervisors who are more left of center than their colleagues who are more moderate and supportive of the tech industry. However, everyone on that city council is a Democrat and would be considered a progressive Democrat in the national context. They all embrace creating a diverse society, fighting climate change, etc. The California Legislature holds a similar range of political opinions, from very left to pro-business Democrat, but they almost all operate within a worldview that shares much common ground — a worldview that is not shared by the few remaining Republicans still in the chambers.

In short, California has a supermajority of 60 percent of the population, and thus a supermajority of elected officials, who share a common vision of a general way forward. Their differences are worked out within the confines of that general vision. California Republicans, like their conservative national colleagues, don’t share that general vision, and so they have been pushed out of serious political discourse. They were beaten, and beaten badly. And they almost certainly won’t be part of that discourse until they go through a lengthy process of reform over many years.

The Final Battle Begins in 2018

America is desperate for a functioning political supermajority that can break out of our political stasis and boldly move ahead and take on our many 21st-century challenges. The nation can’t take much more of our one step forward, one step back politics that gets little done despite the need for massive changes.

America today has many parallels to America in the 1850s or America in the 1930s. Both of those decades ended with one side definitively winning, forming a political supermajority that restructured systems going forward to solve our problems once and for all. In the 1850s, we fought the Civil War, and the Republican Party won and then dominated American politics for 50 years. In the 1930s, the Democratic Party won and dominated American politics for roughly the same amount of time.

America today is in a similar position. Our technologies, our economy, our geopolitics are going through fundamental changes. We are facing new challenges, like climate change and massive economic inequality, that must be addressed with fundamental reforms.

America can’t afford more political paralysis. One side or the other must win. This is a civil war that can be won without firing a shot. But it is a fundamental conflict between two worldviews that must be resolved in short order.

California, as usual, resolved it early. The Democrats won; the Republicans lost. The conservative way forward lost; the progressive way forward began. As we’ve laid out in this series, California is the future, always about 15 years ahead of the rest of the country. That means that America, starting in 2018, is going to resolve it, too.