Leftist terrorists attack trumps family. 

From: Foxnews.com

Vanessa Trump hospitalized after opening suspicious envelope

Donald Trump Jr.’s wife Vanessa Trump and two others were taken to a New York City hospital for evaluation after opening a suspicious envelope containing an unidentified substance.

Donald Trump Jr.’s wife, Vanessa Trump, was taken to the hospital Monday after receiving a letter containing white powder that was later deemed to be non-hazardous, New York City police told Fox News.

FILE - In this Thursday, Nov. 30, 2017, file photo, Donald Trump Jr., far second right, his wife Vanessa Trump, center, and their family, watch performances during the National Christmas Tree lighting ceremony at the Ellipse near the White House in Washington. New York police said Donald Trump Jr.'s wife, Vanessa Trump, opened an envelope, Monday, Feb. 12, 2018, that contained white powder, felt ill and was taken to New York City hospital as a precaution. They said Vanessa Trump called 911 Monday morning after opening a letter addressed to Donald Trump Jr. at their midtown Manhattan apartment. Police said she said she was coughing and felt nauseous. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

Vanessa Trump, center, was taken to a hospital in New York City Monday after opening a letter containing white powder.  (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

Vanessa Trump was taken to the hospital as a precaution, police said. Two other people who were also exposed to the powder were taken to the hospital. 

Trump Jr. tweeted of the “scary situation” on Monday afternoon, and blamed the incident on people with “opposing views.”

“Thankful that Vanessa & my children are safe and unharmed after the incredibly scary situation that occurred this morning,” Trump Jr. said. “Truly disgusting that certain individuals choose to express their opposing views with such disturbing behavior.”

The U.S. Secret Service said in a statement: “The Secret Service and our law enforcement partners in New York City are investigating a suspicious package addressed to one of our protectees received today in New York, New York. This is an active investigation and we cannot comment any further.” 

Ivanka Trump, Vanessa’s sister-in-law, tweeted Monday afternoon, “No one deserves to be frightened this way. There is no excuse.”

Leftist terrorism no doubt. Anyone who gets in the way of the left and their globalist masters, (the people of the lie) find out quickly why they have been expelled from every nation they have ever parasitized from.

Alt Tech Trailblazer Gab Unleashes The Exodus Protocol

by Brett Stevens on February 7, 2018

Gab.ai made waves in Silicon Valley by being outside Silicon Valley, both in physical location and mental state. Instead of trying to make walled gardens where people could experience digital safe spaces, Gab aimed to re-create the Wild West of the early internet, where there was always something shocking — and actually useful, non-Crowd-converged information — around every corner.

Now, Gab hopes to make waves again with an Initial Coin Offering (ICO) and new censorship-resistant, blockchain-inspired P2P protocol known as The Exodus Protocol. As Gab explains:

Our vision is to evolve beyond one application by empowering developers from around the world to build on top of an open peer-to-peer social media protocol. We are calling this the Exodus Protocol and will be building on top of existing open sourced peer-to-peer technology to create a new peer-to-peer social media protocol of our own. We recognize that existing blockchain technology has many limitations including latency, cost, scalability, and a rapidly evolving ecosystem. While we are excited by the future potential of many projects in the blockchain space, we believe that building on top of existing peer-to-peer protocols such as the Dat Project, IPFS, and existing cryptographic peer-to-peer protocols are the best immediate path forward to getting the Exodus Protocol off the ground.

Peer-to-peer connections and exchanges of value are paramount to our vision for the Exodus Protocol. With this in mind, we’ve determined that an ICO (Initial Coin Offering) is the crowdfunding approach that aligns most directly with Gab’s market offering. We believe that, like many of our users, investors in Gab will be supportive of a crowdfunding campaign that champions a decentralized and truly democratic approach to raising capital. The crypto community inherently understands the importance of defending a free and open exchange of ideas on the web. Our aim is to empower everyone, not simply VCs or the 1%, to participate in our ICO. Unlike many ICOs, Gab has an existing product, customers, brand, and track record of success. We are seeking partners who share our longterm vision for the future and want to help us build a protocol that defends the freedom we love for generations to come.

The primary objective of this ICO fundraising campaign is to establish an Open Developer Ecosystem for the Exodus Protocol. We will follow these key steps to make this happen:

  • Incentivizing developers to build on top of the Exodus Protocol
  • Recruiting select developers who have been scorned by ‘Big Social’
  • Providing an open source protocol that any developer can contribute to or build on

The Exodus Protocol stands for bringing people together of all races, religions, and creeds who share in the common ideals of Western values around individual liberty and the free exchange of ideas.

Much like Neoreactionary ((((((Curtis Yarvin))))))’s Urbit, The Exodus Protocol aims to “re-decentralize” the internet in order to recapture its “Wild West” nature.

When the internet was first introduced to consumers, it represented a radical departure from the paradigm to which they were accustomed: “channels” on a one-way medium, such as how television was beamed to their homes and they could choose what to watch out of what was available at the time from the large corporations and government that provided it as what were effectively monopolies.

By contrast, the internet operated in three dimensions. The user was the channel, and selected information from what was available 24-7; as the famous saying goes, the internet also “routes around” damage or obstructions, so if something was not available one place, it popped up in another.

In an echo of what would be later called “peer to peer” technology, the internet operated on the principle that any computer on the net would forward little bits of information called packets to any other, so that if one computer was unavailable, others would send the information along so it reached its destination. This was the opposite of a single broadcaster offering channels.

Industry hated this model, as did most consumers. They wanted something easy to tune into. For the smarter consumers, the internet was a lifeline that saved them from being enslaved to the same lowest common denominator stuff that won out because the most warm bodies thought it was fine.

That old internet provided better information than we could find anywhere else. Professors, lone inventors, radical dissidents, random geniuses, and other content creators invested many hours into constructing web pages offering a wide variety of information and perspectives. This made the internet the greatest research library in history.

This in turn caused collapse among industries based on scarcity. Cookbooks made money because finding recipes was hard; when everyone could slap their grandma’s orange chocolate chip cookies recipe online, the cookbooks became less valuable. Movie and music reviews exerted Darwinistic pressure on the industry by quickly calling out the worst of the worst.

Technical information, hacks and knowledge about products, and descriptions of basically every place on Earth hit the internet. This both democratized knowledge by making it freely available and encouraged elite contributors to put their viewpoints out there, which allowed regular people to make connections between different ideas and enhance their own understanding.

Its darkside was that it killed all secret places, local culture, and exclusive activities by revealing them to people across the globe. The best local bar was now an article on a large website; your favorite record store became an eBay superstar; those out-of-the-way places to take a date were now flooded with people who read about them on AOL or Yelp.

This democratization killed off industries based on the “channel” paradigm. Your travel agent was a channel; now, you just went online to book hotels and flights. Manufacturers were a channel; instead of using their booklets, you found someone else who had fixed the gadget and took their advice. Experts and gatekeepers of all kind were under assault.

Around the year 2000, industry finally found a way to recapture the internet: centralize it. Instead of having consumers go to many different sites, have them do all their searches through Google, read all their factual data from Wikipedia, buy all their products from Amazon, and spend all their time on Facebook and Twitter, which shot up in the Google results and so quickly crowded out other, better information just like Wikipedia did.

It took another decade, but soon the “nu-internet” had eclipsed the old. There was no point spending hours creating content to put on an independent website when no one would see it because it got pushed to page seven of the Google search results by Facebook pages, Wikipedia nodes, Amazon products, and iTunes offerings. The old content dried up; the new stuff, which was pulped and sugared like baby food, took over.

This even affected intelligent users because they simply could not find their way to the “underground” content outside the Googlesphere. Instead, they had to hack through the same content that everyone else had, and this meant that this content had to be made inoffensive, to keep the consumers happy, and manipulative, to keep money flowing into the FAANG companies.

While this meant a decrease in the diversity of the internet and the loss of much of its great information, companies loved it: they had greater control over their brands, and now they had the exclusive power of “channels” again. Consumers went to a handful of sites about any product or brand, and never looked beyond it, so they could be controlled.

At the same time, many of us were seeing a trope we recognized from the early days of computing: yesterday’s heroes become tomorrow’s villains, mainly because once a company succeeds and hires lots of people, it needs to squeeze more money out of its product and it does that by manipulating consumers to use its products more and avoid those of its competitors.

The Google ecosystem, once legendary for email and a search engine that indexed more pages than any other, now became a way to force people to use Google’s advertising, to manipulate search results to benefit advertisers, and to crowd out any pages that did not follow the Google way. Even their recent switch to demanding encrypted pages reflected a desire to exclude non-conformists.

As a result, the big story of the 2010s has been the revolt against the newly-centralized internet, and a desire to return to the days when choice and actual diversity defined the internet, so that people are again incentivized to put quality content online. Gab, Urbit, BitTorrent and other decentralized, peer-to-peer notions are leading that charge.

Combining antitrust law with libertarian ideals of freedom of association leading to competition, Gab addresses this change as the future of the internet, which as large giants like Facebook and Google reveal themselves to be just as manipulative as the old monopolists, and compulsively forcing us into “channels” instead of three-dimensional user space, seems necessary:

Google’s exclusion of Gab from the Google Play store in April 2017 was arbitrary, anti-competitive, and in clear violation of federal antitrust laws.

This analysis was made under the narrowest and most conservative interpretation of the Sherman Act, rather than under any broad view of the market power created by network effects or by making free speech an intrinsic good. Nonetheless, it’s impossible not to consider the larger issues of internet censorship.

Gab has been directly impacted by the digital gatekeepers of the centralized internet as we know it, and we take this to be a dangerous attack on free speech across the board. Those who support free speech on social media should support the Exodus Protocol as a revolutionary new means of communication and connection protected from censorship, regulatory interference and/or intimidation.

While Gab’s fight against BigTech’s control on speech may not immediately topple the giants, it is a critical first step in showing that these companies cannot arbitrarily use their market power to stamp out pro-free speech competitors.

As mainstream social networks continue to censor certain views and crack down on what they choose to be ‘objectionable content,’ consumers’ hunger for alternative platforms will only continue to rise. In addition, the trend of ‘cutting the cord’ will also continue as the popularity of streaming content over the internet increases.

The Exodus Protocol is well-positioned to outlive, outlast and benefit from this fragmentation of the mainstream social networking ecosystem into smaller niche communities with shared values and ideals.

They point to the rise in ad blocking as a symptom of the need for this change, but we might also point to the flight away from Facebook and Twitter by many of their more advanced users, creating a “MySpace cycle” where companies die as their most savvy users flee once the crowd arrives.

The internet succeeded, and by succeeding, it failed, because in attracting large industry and a clueless consumer base, it removed what made it successful and replaced it with what people were familiar with. That excluded those who form the cutting edge of user experience, and catapulted users back into the bad old days.

Gab is attempting to fix this with its social media platform and new features that advanced users desire:

This past week we filed our Offering Circular with the SEC for review, becoming one of the first companies in the world to do so. We expect to hear back from them sometime over the next several weeks.

Our Testing The Waters campaign has reached a phenomenal $4.7 million dollars in reservations for our ICO out of our goal of $10 million total. This is truly a people-powered revolt against Big Tech and Silicon Valley and we are excited to continue on this journey with you to defend individual liberty, free speech, and the free flow of information on the internet.

In the last quarter alone we have shipped many new product improvements and features. We’ve also expanded our engineering and design teams and are in the process of revamping the entire user interface of Gab to make it easier to use for everyone.

Here are just some of the many things we have shipped this quarter:

  • The ability for creators to make money via tips/subs‬
  • Longer posts up to 3,000 characters, formatting (bold, italic, underline)
  • Totally overhauled Android app
  • A brand new mobile site‬ experience
  • Favorite topics feature
  • Revamped search feature‬
  • A new Gab Shop with stickers, shirts, and more

We also recently passed a big milestone of 400,000 total Gab accounts.

In my view, the social media site is a jump-start to something much larger, which is a decentralized internet where independent contributors can be recognized outside of social media sites, which end up being conformist by their very nature as mass media with the ensuing demands for content to be inoffensive and dumbed down.

This could be the birth of a useful internet again.

China Putting RAILGUNS On Ships

Adrian Sol

Daily Stormer
Febuary 4, 2017

America is getting straight-up rail-cucked.

China is one-upping America in terms of cool sci-fi shit, and that should make you very, very angry.

Railguns are the sort of thing you’d expect to see on spaceships – or Gundams. It’s the manifest destiny of the White man to start using railguns to shoot down alien motherships or repress colonial insurrections.

If it weren’t for the Jews squandering all our resources on brown people and women, we’d all have railguns on our cars by now – never mind our battleships.

Big Think:

China has put a railgun on a warship. That sentence alone might trigger the heebie-jeebies in some members of the American military. It’s the first time any nation has ever put such a powerful gun on a warship. But there’s more to the story than that.

That’s… so embarrassing.

America’s been working on railgun tech for years.

And yet, somehow, these shifty slant-eyes managed to beat us to the punch.

The physics behind the railgun are particularly impressive. Since the specially designed “bullets” are 22lbs each and are capable of traveling about 100 miles at Mach 7 speeds (approx. 5,300mph), the bullets have to be fired with an extreme amount of energy: about 32 megajoules. That’s about enough energy to propel a 1 ton object at 566mph, so, to give you a rough idea of how powerful this thing is: it’s like giving something the size of a basketball the speed (and ultimately destructive power) of a 747.

Yes. It’s awesome, and I want one.

Yet the navy, under the pretense of it “using too much power,” dropped the ball big-time.

If it uses too much power, just put a nuclear reactor on the ship, jeez. It’s like these people don’t realize just how cool railguns are.

Trivial things like power consumption mean nothing before the almighty power of the railgun.

While we can’t do much (save for interchanging the lyrics to Aerosmith’s “Janie’s Got a Gun” to “China’s got a gun”), we can rest somewhat assured that the railgun might not actually work. Fancy though it may be, it’s not easy to get a machine this powerful to fire at a target. The American military had up until fairly recently working on railgun technology but since dropped it in favor of more short-range weaponry; it looks like China was watching pretty closely and picked up the ball where America either lost interest or lost focus.

Sigh…

So, should anyone be worried? Maybe. It could be a while until the railgun actually gets used, and if certain Big Thinkers are to be believed this is more-so the kind of show-off weapon that is built mostly as a deterrent and/or status symbol.

Of course it’s a show-off weapon!

Having a railgun is like having a friggin’ death star! You get it so that people know not to mess with you!

Let’s not build a death star. After all, it uses too much power. It’s just a show-off weapon.

Our military seriously needs to get their priorities straight. We need new leadership which understands the pressing need for cool sci-fi weaponry.

Trump Identifies The Actual Opposing Force To America

by Brett Stevens on February 1, 2018

In international politics, you do not have enemies so much as opposition or more gently stated, competition. This occurs because everybody wants to rule the world, mainly because only when one is on top can goals be realized; otherwise, any effort spent on reaching goals is effort taken away from necessary defense.

Diversity fails for the same reason. Every group wants its people in charge, its rules to predominate, society to be shaped after its preferences and aesthetics, and the sense of being in command of its future. It cannot do this when it shares any space with other groups, so conflicts arise. The only solution is for one group to be supreme in each area, and even then, if they are not separated by large bodies of water or mountain ranges, they tend to engage in constant jockeying for who is on top. Anyone who has seen a wolf pack, plate tectonics in action, or even streams of water acting on rock knows this: everything wants to be in the position of effortless power.

When the Soviet Union fell, the United States and Western Europe went into calm oblivion because they had eliminated the last threat that they recognized. At that point, they turned entirely toward internal disputes and ignored the possibility that someone else might be scheming to dethrone them, even though they had fought two wars against this power and suffered historical invasions by its race. They even lulled themselves to sleep on easy wealth based on its labor, and then, easy debt purchased from the people we had just finished enriching with our lust for cheap consumer goods.

Then rumors began to move like shapes in murky air. Hollywood seemed to be being bought up, bit by bit, by a new group. This same group was also investing heavily in real estate in America and Europe, especially the UK, and sending most of its students to our universities. Members of this group seemed to get caught spying and awful lot, especially around military contractors. Their companies began blocking ours overseas, and regulating our products out of existence, while making steady inroads in our market. Still we slept, in part because those in power — the Obama-Clinton gang — seem to have been receiving funds from this group. The Clintons in particular were always known to be friendly with them and even gave them military technology.

The experts tell us that we are entering a multipolar world where instead of having two big superpowers and then only one after the Soviets fizzled, there will be many powers each ruling over the areas around their continents. The Leftist narrative, always one to delight in the failure of anything good so that the failed can feel better about themselves, points out that much of this involves former “developing” nation-states like Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa rising to become new powers. What few will say is that this situation has happened before and always resolves itself the same way: some rise above the rest, and those become the new superpowers.

What the West might tell these people is that being a superpower is a kind of a trap, a slaves-and-masters paradox. When you are a superpower, you can pursue your visions of power without restriction, but at the same time, this converts you from being a country focused on its own health to a country being used as a means-to-the-end of power itself. By being masters, you become servants of power, and this leads you to treat your people, customs, values, history, and even existence as secondary to financial, political, and ideological objectives. America for example was happier before it became the guardian of the world, and Europe was glad to relinquish colonialism because of the high cost of maintaining overseas bases and the destructive social effects that it had. In the end, the lesson of power is that it is a lot like alcohol: too little is frustrating, but too much can be lethal, all ensconced within the same warm feeling of fuzzy anesthesia that makes the danger invisible until the next morning, when everything is destroyed and you have to peer through a hangover to realize the growing dread.

China finds itself in the grip of both thymos, or a desire to be recognized for excellence in a natural hierarchy, and hubris, or the compulsion to rise above its station despite the negative externalities that are generated. It has many internal instabilities that will need to be rectified before it can become a stable power, and lacks the time to fix those, so instead it will become increasingly repressive, which will backfire the same way it did for the Soviets. Speaking the Russians, they are — as they were during the Cold War — allies of the Chinese and yet always scheming against them, much as the Chinese are doing in return. The American Left is fanatical about blaming the Russians in order to take the heat off the Chinese, and Russia aims to both sabotage America/Europe and destabilize China by goading them into radicalism much as the USA used military programs like SDI to goad the Soviet Union into over-extending its unstable and incapable system.

If the Chinese stay true to form, their approach will be to do as much damage indirectly as possible, then humiliate the West in some conflict like the Vietnam war, which despite being a win — Chinese expansion stopped — was quite a PR hit for the otherwise previously undefeated West, not least of all because of the social instability it created through anti-war protests and the quivering neurotic paranoia it unleashed in our political system. If they can buy up enough of the West to influence it, spread destructive habits throughout the society, and then lure it into over-extending itself and getting clobbered in another Asian land war, then the Chinese will consider themselves to have risen above the West as a superpower, even though their own internal disorder will prevent them from being anything like the stable society needed to be powerful without consuming itself. Part of this advance manipulation has come through buying the allegiance of the Left and certain key industries so that the 1960s scenario can be replayed with every newspaper shouting the same message of pacifism, disarmament, and focus on nonsensical social issues in order to weaken the West.

Unlike the stumblingly incompetent Obama administration, Team Trump has tackled the Chinese problem head on with hard negotiation on trade while strengthening both infrastructure and industry. At the same time, Trump is now signaling that the Chinese Cold War (via /.) is entering its final stages before it potentially becomes “hot”:

“Trump national security officials are considering an unprecedented federal takeover of a portion of the nation’s mobile network to guard against China, according to sensitive documents obtained by Axios.” This is based on a PowerPoint presentation Axios has in their possession. Two options are described — a national 5G network funded and built by the Federal government, or a mix of 5G networks built by existing wireless providers. A source suggests the first option is preferred and essential to protect against competition from China and “bad actors”. The presentation suggests that a government-built network would then be leased out to carriers like AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile.

The PowerPoint presentation was produced by a senior National Security Council official, and argues that the move is necessary because “China has achieved a dominant position in the manufacture and operation of network infrastructure,” and “China is the dominant malicious actor in the Information Domain.”

It also suggests America could export its secure 5G technology to protect its allies, and “Eventually this effort could help inoculate developing countries against Chinese neo-colonial behavior.”

If you read between the lines, the point here is clear: China is a national security threat, they are using industry as their vanguard, and they are attempting to subvert former colonial nations so that they can spread their system and mobilize allies against us. Basically, the old Communist plan is the new Communist plan, mainly because Communist like dysentery is eternally unchanging.

And look, it gets even more explicit as Team Trump acts against Chinese embedded spyware (via /.):

Huawei devices still work on both companies’ networks, but direct sales would’ve allowed them to reach more consumers than they can through third parties. The government’s renewed concern about Chinese spying is creating a potential roadblock in the race between Verizon and AT&T to offer 5G, the next generation of super-fast mobile service. Huawei is pushing to be among the first to offer 5G-capable phone, but the device may be considered off-limits to U.S. carriers who are beginning to offer the next-generation service this year in a few cities. U.S. security agencies and some lawmakers fear that 5G phones made by companies that may have close ties to the Chinese government could pose a security risk.

This is point two of the message above, reiterated. China is not just the government, but its industry. The two are one and the same as in Communism or fascism, and they are working against us much as the “deep state” Establishment spanning government, media, academia, and industry is working against us here. The point is to cut them off and also savage their economic lead, forcing them to fund their ambitions through state funds instead of American product dollars.

Right now, Trump and the Democrats are playing a long dance. They demand something; he offers a compromise; they reject it and blame him. This benefits both sides. Trump gets to keep peeling back layers of the last seventy years of Leftist insanity. The Left gets to escape being blamed for not doing what they promised their coalition.

Why are both sides okay with this? Once the Obama fog lifted, it became clear that China was moving aggressively against the West. Then China formalized that with a slow reveal of its plans for world domination that scared the heck out of the West. This meant that the West has to get out from under China’s thumb, which remains reducing our debt because China is our biggest creditor and if they stop buying our debt, they can crush us. That means they can manipulate us by regulating their buying, and sabotage our markets by simply announcing that they plan to stop buying.

Trump and the Left are seeing eye-to-eye on this, behind the scenes. America and Europe have to get free from their creditors. The only way to do this is to remove the 60% of our budget that goes to entitlement payments and get competitive again. That means making our own car parts, computers, televisions, phones, and basic life gadgets. We will have to starve the Chinese of our consumer dollars and radically cut our spending, or they will own us.

And the Russians? They continue to sabotage us with psyops that emphasize our internal division not on the basis of race, but politics:

There is a third possibility, namely that the dossier was part of a Russian espionage disinformation plot targeting both parties and America’s political process. This is what seems most likely to me, having spent much of my 30-year government career, including with the CIA, observing Soviet and then Russian intelligence operations. If there is one thing I have learned, it’s that Vladimir Putin continues in the Soviet tradition of using disinformation and espionage as foreign-policy tools.

…The pattern of such Russian operations is to sprinkle false information, designed to degrade the enemy’s social and political infrastructure, among true statements that enhance the veracity of the overall report. In 2009 the FSB wanted to soil the reputation of a U.S. diplomat responsible for reporting on human rights. So it fabricated a video, in part using real surveillance footage of the diplomat, that purported to show him with a prostitute in Moscow.

…The FSB probably believed that Mrs. Clinton would win the election, and that once the dossier became public Mr. Trump would vociferously argue that she had played dirty. Thus the dossier would have had dual benefits: The salacious portions would undermine the Republican candidate, and then his attacks would delegitimize the eventual Democratic administration. The 2017 ODNI report says that pro-Russia bloggers even prepared an election-night Twitter campaign, #DemocracyRIP, designed to question the election’s validity after a Clinton victory.

For Russia, the winning move is for both China and the US/EU to fall, which will enable Russia to occupy Europe and subjugate China. To that end, it would be best if the American society became unstable and paranoid at the same time China was emboldened by Russian support, guaranteeing war between America and China in which Europe would join. Afterwards, Russia would attack and conquer the victor, who would be almost certainly massively weakened by that great contest. That is Machiavellian realism.

In the meantime, China faces an uncertain future. Its hybrid economic system requires intense state control by a state that is notoriously slow to respond to change. Its people are mostly peasants, and its economic growth is based on a boom in consumer electronics that may not last. Even more, its quality seems to have issues as many of its products are low-quality, leading to a question of how well its own infrastructure and technology will work. The tiger may be partially a paper tiger, and that may make them as unstable as the Mongols, who were able to conquer vast swathes of territory but not administrate it.

China probably needs — in parallel to Hitler’s Germany — several generations to begin recovering from the chaos of the past three thousand years. But, like Russia, China sees the solution to internal instability in external conquest. Russia wants to own Western Europe for its wealth, forgetting that under Russian management, that will likely be paltry much as it is in Russia now despite massive reserves of natural resources. These countries need solutions that are part structural, and part eugenics, in that they are bottom-heavy with peasant laborers and short on actual visionaries.

For reasons unknown, America and Europe have decided to follow that lead by making their already slightly bottom-heavy societies really bottom-heavy through the importation of large numbers of third world laborers who will take more from the welfare benefits state than they will put into it, guaranteeing a systemic crash on economic and political levels.

Despite that, the Trump/Brexit years show us the West re-awakening to a need for a general direction other than further into the ghetto of Leftism. Instead of bowing to China, Trump has challenged China. Instead of indulging in pity politics as the Left does, he encourages growth through competition and excellence. And now, by identifying China as the force that is historically and in the present day most likely to attempt to overthrow us, he has changed the dialogue on the Western future entirely.

China Will Eat The West

by

The Current Year in the West is unbalanced and self-destructive. Native Westerners’ demography is in free-fall, families are rare or fragile, the mainstream culture is treacherous and toxic, the power and money have been taken away and given to violent organized anti-male, anti-white groups. Most women and effete blue pills try to ignore or trivialize the situation when they’re not straightly SJWish.

I recently witnessed a leftist soyboy talking for hours to a female “friend” he never fucked and will likely never fuck to pressure her into remaining inside the leftist creed. “Doesn’t matter to be a friendzoned beta wimp, I will pretend I’m someone by acting as a leftist watchdog!” Many whites behave like that. They direct their need for identity and belonging to some version of the blue pill, thus only gaining some semblance of being by contributing to the ignominious fall of their own civilization.

Some women admire us. At another time I saw a self-claimed female “love coach” whose eyes sparkled when I told her I was writing at Return of Kings. “God, at least someone who’s neither left-wing nor an egregious MGTOW!” These kindred feelings, though, tend to remain discrete. Women are natural born conformists and fear getting singled out if they express beyond the “normal” degeneracy cesspool.

Drawing up an exhaustive list of the problems in Current Year West looks like pouring water into the Danaides’ sieve. Parasites who pose as regular people or poor unprivileged abound. White guilt, female narcissism, male conformism—the Current Year is a clusterfuck of problems fostering endless divisions and confusions.

Sometimes you just want to turn the media off

And then there’s China.

In 1816, Napoléon Bonaparte is supposed to have said “let China sleep, for when it will wake up, the world will tremble.” A century later, Lothrop Stoddard wrote in the Rising Tide of Color about China’s cheap labour combined with enormous reserves of iron and coal, then the basis of industry. Later again the French politician Alain Peyrefitte wrote a two-volumes book on China’s potential, followed by a sequel, China has woken up. These men were right.

In Peyrefitte’s words, China has been an “immobile empire” for centuries. It was forced into mobility by English cannons, debilitated by the opium trade, taken over by Communists who killed between 30 and 50 million people in the name of progress, and even then, the Middle Kingdom did come back. In a very short time, this purportedly undeveloped nation managed to become an industrial powerhouse and flood the world with its products.

Sure, many Chinese are working their asses off 14 hours a day in sweatshops. But deep down, they can do so because they are motivated to do so. They aren’t isolated atoms—they still follow traditions that keep female hypergamy in check, and they are part of a mighty empire, like cells who can fully identify to a magnificent higher organism. They do not suffer from the disease that became normal across the West. The Chinese tend to be realistic about leftism, powerful communities, to care about their family and traditions, and they are extremely optimistic about the future of their country.

When we, red-pilled Westerners, tend to struggle individually to get our lives in order and, in the better case, start a family, the numerous Chinese tend to form a homogeneous block who has been expanding in all directions. Since whitey has been leaving Africa, China has steadily taken his place. On the other side of the pond, as Brazil keeps paddling into a typical Latin-American corruption scandal, the Confucian dragon invested more than $30 billion there so that the vast Brazilian fields will keep growing food for the Han instead of feeding their own industry.

China is also heavily involved into the research race. In September, a Beijing lab has held the world’s first quantum intercontinental video call on what is said to be a breakthrough in secure communications. Before that, China had already build a complete quantum communications network between Beijing and Shanghai. Disgruntled CIA and NSA spies will have to shift to another target—for example, their own young commenting the news on Facebook.

China has also embarked on a space race and may take the lead there, in spite of decades of American accumulated advances.

Also, last but not least, China was never hostile to eugenics. Just like their Singaporean cousins, the Chinese constantly tried to improve their stock since they have become aware of it:

A Eugenic Law of 1994 made it compulsory for pregnant women to undergo prenatal diagnosis for the presence of genetic and congenital disorders in the fetus and to have abortions where these disorders have been diagnosed. Chinese physicians and geneticists are much more sympathetic to eugenics than are those in Western democracies. For instance, in a survey of attitudes to eugenic practices carried out from 1994 to 1996, 82 percent of Chinese physicians and geneticists supported the mandatory sterilization of, for example, a single blind woman on public welfare who has already had three blind children by three different men (all absent from the household), as compared with around 5 percent of physicians and geneticists in the Western democracies. (Richard Lynn, Eugenics: a Reassessment, p.41)

The Chinese prove that a high IQ, ethnocultural homogeneity and a strong work ethic can achieve much. Intelligence can be used to succeed in almost any field. No leftism at all is needed to build a flourishing civilization. Leftism looks more like a cancer, feasting on an old man’s barely alive body. China has no real leftism inside, and China wants its place under the sun. Who’s going to prevent it from taking the first place?

Even if we could, I’m not sure we would do so. No one’s motivated to defend the Western world when the West is not Western anymore. Instead, one could drift towards favoring a meritorious people over the degenerate white normies. In Richard Lynn’s words: “I am profoundly thankful for the existence of the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans. The torch of civilization will pass to them.”

Will the West witness the rise of tradition again, with patriarchal nationalism, identity and a vivid spiritual breath blending into a rejuvenating fountain of youth? Could China’s system crumble due to its own failures? Or will we become “a bemused footnote in the Chinese Encyclopedia of World History”, as Jared Taylor once wrote?

On the other hand, no one is forcing us to buy cheap crap all the time or to die with countries we cannot identify with anymore. The Chinese haven’t been investing in Bitcoin as they were too busy making our clothes. And definitely, we can live on our own, travel, tinker, and build the tribes we need.