Scotland: Funeral Held for Six-Year-Old White Girl Raped and Murdered on Haji-Enriched Island

Michael Byron
Daily Stormer
July 22, 2018

In 2015, the British government made plans to force 20,000 bearded Syrian children into the United Kingdom over a five-year period. In true Kalergi style, those Moslems weren’t merely to be injected into major cities and towns, but also sparsely populated islands far removed from the beaten path.

One island that was hit particularly hard (in proportion to its tiny population of 6,500) was Bute. Located off the shores of western Scotland, Bute forcibly received an initial 15 “migrant” families to “invigorate” its shrinking native population, with more presumably intended thereafter.

The Daily Mail made a big fuss about it at the time. Here are two paragraphs that stood out from that first report:

Although this is one of the most impoverished parts of the UK, the Home Office says each adult migrant is eligible for £200 emergency cash to tide them over until they are given National Insurance numbers which will entitle them to claim state benefits. Under a settlement programme funded by Whitehall, the families also get free heating, lighting and their council tax bills are being paid.

Indeed, nothing is too much trouble. A specially appointed imam is to be ferried from Glasgow each week to lead Friday prayers. A local supermarket has promised to sell halal meat from animals slaughtered according to rules set out in the Koran, after the renowned butchers, MacQueens of Rothesay near the seafront, refused to supply it.

So, while the Scottish locals continued to remain impoverished (with the local government undoubtedly citing “budget cuts” and other excuses reserved for white people seeking aid), that same government unhesitatingly rolled out the red carpet for these camel-faced invaders, giving them access to a bottomless well of resources that didn’t seem to exist before.

Almond-activating stuff.

Anyway, at the beginning of this month, three years after the first Moslems arrived on Bute’s shores, six-year-old Alesha MacPhail was found dead.

She was raped and murdered in the woods by a 16-year-old boy whose name “cannot be identified for legal reasons.”

Now, while it’s possible that a teenage Scot raped and killed her despite living in a close-knit community where everyone knows each other (and where nothing like this has ever happened before), I’m going to assume that it was a haji.

Because 2+2 usually does equal 4.

Little Alesha’s funeral occurred this week. As you can imagine, her murder deeply affected the community.

Daily Mail:

Alesha MacPhail’s mother has led the tributes to the tragic six-year-old who was killed on the Isle of Bute as mourners wore pink at her funeral today.

Georgina Lochrane said that ‘every single day will be harder than the day before to walk this earth without you by my side’ and added: ‘Goodnight my sweetie’.

The schoolgirl’s family carried her little pink coffin to the waiting hearse, a white carriage drawn by two white horses with pink feathers and pink drapes.

Alesha was staying with relatives on the island in the Firth of Clyde at the start of the summer break when she was found dead. A 16-year-old boy was charged with rape and murder following the discovery of Alesha’s body in woodland on July 2.

A piper played as mourners entered Coats Funeral Home in Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire, on Saturday, with dozens of bows tied to the railings of the building while cuddly toys including teddies and unicorns lined the wall outside.

After the ceremony Alesha’s family carried her little pink coffin to the waiting hearse, a white carriage drawn by two white horses with pink feathers and pink drapes.

Mourners lined the street as the hearse set off for Coltswood Cemetery, followed by two black carriages carrying flowers, and family members in cars.

The natives of Bute have just been given a very small taste of what’s occurring on a much greater scale on the mainland. Millions of Pakis and other genetic abominations are pouring into UK at the behest of a government controlled by pedophiles and Jews, then granted carte blanche to rape and murder the white natives at will.

Fortunately for these locals, they’re still in a position to protect their small island from further tragedies. But if they fail to act, and remain meek and passive in the face of conquest like their mainland kinfolk, then they’d better start preparing for the next child’s funeral.

Italy warns EU: ‘We are no longer the refugee camp of the world’

Matteo Salvini, Italy’s Minister of the Interior, has warned the EU that his country will no longer be the world’s refugee camp.

“Italy is no longer the refugee camp of the world. There is now a government that protects the interests of its citizens, and now everyone in the EU has realised that we cannot be the only ones to accept migrants,” Salvini said.

While the minister was satisfied with the new EU migrant redistribution plan which spreads migrants throughout Europe, he said that “the objective is to stop them leaving their countries, not the division at a European level”.

“The next goal of stopping once and for all the mafia of human trafficking, will be to bring the migrants back to their places of origin,” Salvini said.

Regarding the NGO ships that are returning to Libya, he said: “Save time, effort and money. Be aware the Italian ports are not available”.

Trump on Camp of the Saints: “I Think What Has Happened to Europe Is a Shame”

From The Sun:

Mr Trump told The Sun: “I have great love for countries in Europe.

“Don’t forget, essentially I’m a product of the European Union, between Scotland and Germany.

“Right? My father Germany, my mother Scotland.

Trump says the wave of migrants from the Middle East and Africa is permanently changing the continent
But in a controversial outburst, he added: “I think what has happened to Europe is a shame.

“Allowing the immigration to take place in Europe is a shame.

“I think it changed the fabric of Europe and, unless you act very quickly, it’s never going to be what it was and I don’t mean that in a positive way.

“So I think allowing millions and millions of people to come into Europe is very, very sad.

“I think you are losing your culture. Look around. You go through certain areas that didn’t exist ten or 15 years ago.”

By the way

Mexicans Quickly Losing Faith in Democracy; Indigenous Communities Refuse to Participate in Election, Block Roads

Luis Castillo
Daily Stormer
July 2, 2018

This is fake, and gay.

And stupid.

And, also, annoying.

Aztec “Democracy” is basically a joke, a joke that no one is laughing at any more. Except for those people in the crowds – they’re laughing I guess, or feeling something – but, those are Aztecs, not people. I almost didn’t even write this article because of how fake, gay, stupid and annoying the subject is, but I figured that if I didn’t, you might read about it somewhere else, and think that it is a real thing.

There is the fact that 20%+ of Mexicans have lost faith in Democracy in last 14 years. That’s the only really interesting thing here, since it reflects on a global trend in the West. Of course, Mexico is part of the West the same way that India is part of the English-speaking world – as a failed project, and as a people who could never really be made to start acting like European hu-white people, and stop acting like the people they are.

But, in the case of Mexico and Latin America in general, their entire identity is a schizophrenic mix of an inferiority complex, wishing that they were Spain, and having a “la raza” victim complex, hating Spain for destroying their romantic sun-worshipping, child-sacrificing Aztec traditions.

It’s a strange thing that goes on in that shrunken frontal cortex.

But, the point is that, our social trends trickle down to them, so Mexico losing faith in Democracy is a sign of what the West is projecting to the world.

I’ll try my best to explain Democracy in Mexico in one image.

You have a bunch of turd-skinned indios doing the Che Guevarra fist-pumping thing and just LOVIN’ IT like an obese black woman at McDonald’s, because they do not get the joke, and you have the one guy in the crowd who looks relatively like a person- could maybe pass for Italian – just looking down at his phone like “lol, what is this shit?” because he gets the joke, but he’s not laughing, because it’s not funny.

It’s a joke with multiple layers. First, there’s the initial black humor of the notion of Aztec “society,” when Mexico is running at a new high score of 93 murders a day, which makes chimpanzee “society” look like a real thing by comparison, as it is peaceful and ordered compared to Aztec behavior.

Then, on top of this, there is another layer of “if only you knew how bad things really were” tragicomedy in the notion of Aztec “Democracy” as a form of Aztec “society,” when there have been 133 politicians assassinated in this election as of the last counting, which would invalidate it under any reasonable standard of “free and fair elections,” a thing which almost never happens in practice anyway, but which cannot even happen in theory if you cannot vote for a genuinely anti-cartel candidate because all of those have been murdered, or intimidated into not even running.

Mexico News Daily:

Andrés Manuel López Obrador won a landslide victory in Sunday’s presidential election, winning between 53% and 53.8% of the vote according to the “quick count” conducted by the National Electoral Institute (INE).

Is it really necessary to put the term “quick count” in quotation marks there, Pedro?

The results of the conteo rápido as it is called gave Ricardo Anaya of the For Mexico in Front coalition between 22.1% and 22.8% and José Antonio Meade of the ruling party-led Everyone For Mexico coalition between 15.7% and 16.3%.

Apparently, counting something quickly is such a unique and novel invention that it justifies inserting its own name in original burrito-speak into an English-language article, by the standards of Mexican intellectuals.

Independent Jaime Rodríguez Calderón trailed with a range of 5.3% to 5.5%.

Voter turnout was 62.9% to 63.8%, the INE said.

The institute announced the results a few minutes after 11:00pm, sticking with its promise to have the numbers ready before 11:30. The count is based on a sample of votes from 5% of all the polling stations in the country.

Basically, the election result was clear and inevitable months in advance.

All Democracy is of course gay and stupid, but as far as Democracies go, the United States is by far the most interesting one, such that it is difficult for an American audience which is justifiably uninterested in the rest of the world to understand just how fake, gay and stupid democracy can be in other countries.

Like every American election in my lifetime with the exception of Trump, this Mexican one was just a choice between what color of paint to put on the same old behemoth, a spectacle devoid of real choices, and a ritual act of submission in which the individual disciple of the state religion would write down the name of their leader and put it in a box, as an act of submission to a system opposed to their race and to the natural order, for which no alternative was offered.

This, basically.

However, unlike this Mexican election, and Latin American elections in general, American elections are at least interesting spectacle, because they are relatively close, not at 53% to 22% that just leaves a writer asking himself “what I am I going to write tomorrow when Lopez Obrador wins?”

Even Obama vs McCain, which was basically McCain winning one more victory for communism by throwing an election he was too old and low-energy to win against a magic negro, was a competitive, edge-of-my-seat election compared to the tiresome rituals across this backwards part of the world.

At least it produces weird, funny things we can laugh about.

Like this.

Reuters:

Mexican voters will stream to the polls this Sunday in a pivotal presidential contest, but leaders representing tens of thousands of indigenous people have vowed to block voting in their communities to protest a system they say has failed them.

Polls say Mexico is on the verge of electing its first leftist anti-establishment president in modern history, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. But the prospect of change has failed to resonate with inhabitants of small towns nestled in the lush, wooded countryside of southwestern Michoacan state.

Lopez Obrador is about as authentically anti-establishment as ((((((Milo Yiannopoulos)))))) is authentically alt-right – except that Milo is less of a faggot.

Residents here have destroyed campaign signs and set up blockades to prevent the government from delivering ballots. Election officials have declared 16 towns here “unviable,” and will not likely risk confrontation to force polling stations to open.

Among the no-go zones is the impoverished hamlet of Nahuatzen, where Purepecha indigenous locals grow avocados and eke out a living on tiny plots. On Thursday, several dozen men, some in cowboy hats, stood vigil near the town’s entrance. They had laid a tree trunk across the road to stop outsiders from entering.

“The politicians haven’t done anything besides enrich themselves and they’ve left us behind,” said Antonio Arriola, a member of a recently-created indigenous council that has petitioned the Mexican government for autonomy.

After word spread on Friday that local party bosses may try to deliver ballots in their personal cars, indigenous leaders said they would use bulldozers to dig a trench in the main road to strengthen their blockade, a tactic already employed in a nearby town.

They are basically rejecting what they think is the white man’s religion and his stupid little cult of the state, and refusing to engage in ritual submission to a system that even their 85-IQ indio brains can figure out is screwing them over.

Of course, they are doing it for cringy, indigenous reasons.

This, basically.

But, I mean, someone has to do it. Fuck Democracy.

Arriola and other local leaders grudgingly acknowledged some common ground with Lopez Obrador, the 64-year-old former Mexico City mayor who got his start in politics decades ago advocating for indigenous rights.

But Arriola said the Purepecha have learned the hard way not to pin their hopes on promises coming from politicians, even ones that purport to have their best interests in mind.

“Our roads, schools and health care have been in the gutter for more than 40 years,” he said.

Nahuatzen is part of a growing movement among Mexico’s indigenous communities, who are seeking self-rule and turning their backs on mainstream elections.

Dissent in Michoacan ignited seven years ago, ahead of the 2012 presidential election, when just one jurisdiction, the municipality of Cheran, opted out of voting. This year, the boycott spread to six additional municipalities affecting dozens of polling stations across the 16 towns, home to at least 50,000 voters.

And that’s the gem, here. One jurisdiction in 2012, seven in 2018.

Even the indios are getting sick of this bullshit. The government is owned by the narcos, the narcos are owned by drugs and money, and the indios who identify as indios can see it, whereas the indios who identify as Mexicans – a term which basically means nothing – have not all figured it out yet.

Agitation has likewise spread to traditional Maya communities in the southern Mexican states of Chiapas and Guerrero.

Indigenous leaders in at least six towns and small cities in those states are also pledging to block balloting on Sunday. That could impact tens of thousands more voters.

Electoral authorities may set up polling stations outside towns that have rejected them, allowing those who want to vote to do so, said Erika Barcenas, a lawyer based in Morelia, Michoacan’s capital, who advises communities that want more autonomy.

“But I think the view of the majority is a more global rejection, a rejection of political parties and of the kind of democracy we have right now,” she said.

The growing complaints of indigenous Mexicans appear to track a broader restlessness in the country, where widespread political corruption, drug violence and entrenched poverty have fueled discontent.

Support for democracy among Mexicans plummeted from slightly more than 70 percent in 2004 to just under half last year, according to data from the Latin America Public Opinion Project.

Anyone with eyes can see what is going on.

Anyone can see that Democracy means childless old hags rubbing their hands together as they enthusiastically follow the orders of international Jewish capitalists to open their borders to a flood of welfare-scamming terrorists.

Anyone can see that it means a permanent, faceless bureaucracy that keeps policy the same, no matter how many presidents go through office, and chambers of greedy, spineless congressmen who will not give the people things they explicitly vote for, like a wall.

And anyone can see the rise of China, of a system that can engage in long term planning, and choose its own people over the bottom line.

Anyone can see that this is not working – and with the rise of Imperator Salvini, we can begin to see something that has worked before coming over the horizon.

As all the Jewish press pines and pines about this new, meaningless result, they are too eager to sweep under the rug the meaningful result of this otherwise meaningless election:

Unprecedented disenchantment with a failing system, and an exponential growth in open rebellion, not against this party or that party, but against the whole charade.

In the 1980s, China was a wasteland with no infrastructure, full of illiterate peasants, devastated by the second World War, the civil war between the republicans and communists, and the disaster of first-generation communism. And now, forty years later, they’re establishing themselves as an industrial and economic power that is overtaking our own.

That is how quickly history happens.

Democracy as a system is faltering across the world, and something new will grow out of it.

You will see great things happen within your lifetime.

All you have to do is let go of those things which truly do not matter, and make them happen.

You will see your nation rise to greatness, under the leadership of great men.

Scared Monkeys

We are accustomed to our version of Aztec sacrifice: someone, usually without meaning any ill-will, makes a statement that contradicts our social narrative and the origin story that portrays us as the good guys. A voice in the crowd speaks up, and then the rest descend from their trees to attack.

This invokes the script of the sacrifice. The victim must plead for life, but no amount of apologies or explanations will work; instead, they simply make the victim look guiltier. Since all eyes are on them, anyone who helps throw stones gets temporary fame that they can parlay into a career, so everyone speaks up to humiliate the victim.

Eventually, it reaches the stage of contagion. No one wants to be associated with this person lest they are assumed to agree with or support whatever taboo was broached. Employers, friends, family, and local businesses refuse to serve or contact this person. They stand alone, all coverings ripped away, when the executioner finally appears.

These ritual sacrifices appease the herd because they affirm our safety. If someone else is screwing up, we are safe, for now, and whatever transgressions we have committed during the two-week attention span of a human group are forgotten for the most part.

People have differing opinions on Darwin. I submit that whatever you think of Darwinism as an origin story, it accurately describes the mechanism of human breeding: whatever prospers spreads its genes around, and so we get more of it. For this reason, choosing what succeeds determines the fate of a nation.

And, whether describing us evolving upward from ancestors of the apes, or evolving downward to become like them, Darwinism describes the monkey within humanity. This monkey proves not different from other species because like all animals, it responds to incentives and threats. We behave similarly.

Monkeys, when frightened, tend to attack whatever frightened them in groups. This enables them to both defeat real threats, and banish threats they can do nothing about, through a “shoot the messenger” style assault. That in turn allows them to remain functional in the face of otherwise crippling fear.

This is similar to approaches taken at other times in nature. I observed a friend feeding a snake; the mouse meal, dropped to the floor of the cage, ran in circles until he bumped up against the snake. At that point, the mouse seemed to stop seeing the snake at all, and comfortably nibbled on a plant until the snake struck, ending its life.

When nothing can be done, nature instructs her animals to go into the psychological version of anaesthesia: denial. They ignore that which threatens them but cannot be addressed, like being in a closed container with a vastly stronger, faster, and more violent predator. This allows them to continue functioning; after all, the snake might miss.

When we look at the Aztec ritual sacrifice of those who violate taboos on equality, whether race- or gender-based, we are looking into the face of this denial. The scared monkeys attack the messenger so that they can continue to function. This superstitious and cult-like attitude at least gives them a chance of personal survival.

Similarly monkeys attack whatever monkey notices a problem and brings it to their attention, if nothing can be done about it. This enables the others to carry on until the cataclysm, at which point the troupe divides and flees in panic. Avoiding this panic is part of the brilliance of nature’s design.

To a troupe of monkeys, an insolvable problem is a contagion. Any infected with it must be destroyed for the safety of the troupe. That enables the others to carry on, while undoubtedly the smarter monkeys creep away from whatever danger is there, leaving the dumber to be sacrificed.

If we want to fight the Aztec sacrifice of destroying lives over political ideas, the first step is to ensure that those who are connected to people with “bad” ideas do not get destroyed. At that point, paranoia relaxes; no one else will suffer for being friends with, family to, working with, or knowing the target.

At this point, the monkey attack loses its fangs and begins to look like bullying. After all, none of the other monkeys are at risk, so why attack the one? Instead, pretend that the lone monkey is simply incorrect and carry on as necessary.

The fact that our society has up until this time been unable to do this suggests that we acknowledge that diversity is a threat that will end us, and feel that we can do nothing about it. This shows us another area where we can strike in order to disable the Aztec ritual sacrifice of political correctness.

When people complain about diversity by targeting certain groups — “blacks are bad, but Asians and Irish people are great!” — this causes the troupe, which sees itself as mixed, to react as if it were attacked. However, when diversity itself is attacked, anyone who responds personally looks like someone who profits from diversity instead.

We are entering a time when America and Europe will split internally, not just by ethnic group and religion, but by politics as well. It turns out that we cannot coexist because we want different things, and compromise means that no one gets what they want, resulting in more friction not less.

As this accelerates, we can transition to the coming break-up by placing the blame on the ill-designed institutions which have gotten us here — equality, democracy, and diversity — instead of on each other. Through acceptance of our imminent dissolution, we can reach agreement on the necessity of this separation.

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.