Auto Added by WPeMatico


Peter Turchin reintroduced me to the concept of asabiya in his War and Peace and War. 

Asabiya is a term borrowed from the Arabic philosopher of history Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406). Asabiya is the power of a society to accomplish things collectively, such as build an empire, a cathedral or a bridge, or fight a war. If you want to experience the power of asabiya, just consider how the entire British nation and its institutions buried their monarch. mourned her loss, televized the funerals, held complex ceremonies in centuries-old churches, organized 4000 soldiers, sailors and airmen and the the top ranks of the governing classes into parades, solemn processions, and ceremonies of the state church, as the people organized themselves into disciplined throngs of hundreds of thousands enduring hours of patient waiting in order to flow past the coffin of the dead Queen.


Says Turchin:

“Different groups have different degrees of cooperation among their members, and therefore different degrees of cohesiveness and solidarity…. Asabiya refers to the capacity of a social group for concerted collective action. Asabiya is a dynamic  quantity; it can increase or decrease with time. Like many theoretical constructs, such as force in Newtonian physics, the capacity for collective action cannot be observed directly, but can be measured from observable consequences”.

Great Britain manifestly has huge asabiya. So does the United States or Japan. Canada had asabiya. It demonstrated this in two world wars. Whether it still has asabiya is doubtful. It is rent by too many ethnic fissures, and the group most asabiya-endowed,  English Canada, is constantly denigrated and weakened by the governing Liberals as a matter of multicultural policy. “Diversity is our strength.”  The French Canadians fear English Canada’s asabiya and seek always to diminish it. For that matter, all of woke ideology is an attempt of the political left and their black allies to weaken the asabiya of the American people – “white fragility”, “systemic racism”. So is the attack on organic sexual divisions in the species a different form of attack on asabiya, as the idea of fixed sex roles, indeed fixed anything, goes against the idea of personal choice.

Life is not a matter of expressing our puny selves. It is a matter of belonging  to something great. Think if the political left as being in a permanent war against every other kind of asabiya but their own, when theirs is a weak and hate-filled search for enemies.

Asabiya is real, though not material.






Why do I agree with this left wing faggot?

The question is posed as obnoxiously as I can. Sorry. The real point is that the left/right political divide is increasingly irrelevant. I don’t care  very much  about disagreements I may have with Glenn Greenwald. I find myself agreeing with him about far more than I disagree, and that the agreements in our analysis matter far more. The issues have changed.   The previous left/right divisions in society are largely irrelevant. Who cares about how much of our money the state should absorb, when the issues seems to centre around malignant authoritarian governments that hate us and seek to lower our living standards through energy and food starvation? (Nitrogen fertilizer restrictions, pipeline shutdowns, carbon taxes).

Greenwald asks the right questions. How can you vote for Obama and then for Trump and feel no contradiction? It is because previous left/right policy differences are no longer pertinent. People are voting for outsiders who appear to share their contempt for the new governing classes. The globalistic, de-industrializing elites are the common enemy of left and right. Or people vote left and right at various times to express their contempt for the governing classes for how they are being treated.

In whose interests is society being divided by race, sexual orientation, and ethnicity? Two completely different realities are characterizing US politics: one the one side, white people are threatening to impose white supremacist government; on the other, Latino and other non-white voters are flocking to the Republicans. You know who threatens the Establishment by who is demonized.

Hence Tucker Carlson is now enemy #1.

A fascinating discussion ensues between Nick Gillespie and Glenn Greenwald, which worth your attention. Lots of forbidden topics are discussed.

At minute 57 they turn to the subject of control of speech on the Internet.








The number is 30

Number of unarmed black men killed by police in 2019 in the USA was 30, in fact.

The coloured bars indicate that there is a grotesque exaggeration of the number of deaths of unarmed black men at the hands of police in the minds of many Americans; the rightmost two bars in each grouping stand for “about 10,000” and “more than 10,000”. The interesting point is that across the political spectrum, so many believe massive numbers of unarmed black men are killed annually by police, falling from about 22% among the very liberal to about 7% among the very conservative.

I might have answered “zero” but I was thinking the word was “innocent”, not “unarmed”. That was a very wicked thought and I must now go and perform acts of repentance before attending mandatory sessions of DIE supervized by aggressive black dykes. Sorry. 🙁

Why I read Fred Reed

Fred Reed is cranky and ex -US military. He is intelligent, and not deceived. Apart from occasionally rude and always accurate things he has to say about American blacks and the intelligence issue, his views are centrist. He has been advising against war with China for years. You can read more of him at the Unz review. But perhaps he found the Unz review too weird, and now writes privately. Try his subscription page here.


Speaking of wars, he writes:

“The reason for this curious behavior is that war is only tangentially a rational endeavor, being chiefly a limbic, instinctually driven habit probably of genetic provenance. War is just what men do, tribe against tribe, country against country, empire against empire, world without end. War is a major, perhaps the major, focus of human endeavor. A glance at history reveals it to be chiefly a tapestry of war. The literature of civilizations reflects this: The Gilgamesh Epic, the Iliad, the Aeneid, El Cid, Orlando Furioso, Lord of the Rings.”

Gore Vidal, American Empire, and on Re-reading Claudius the God

Imperator Claudius 

I have been watching biographies on the late and highly talented American writer, Gore Vidal, who lived from 1925 to 2012. Vidal grew up on the floor of the US Senate, as a page boy to his blind grandfather, Senator Thomas Gore, a southern populist. Vidal was at the centre of American public life for decades, as a writer, essayist, TV guest, controversialist, and occasionally as an aspiring politician. He was gay and out from a young age. He turned to Hollywood and became a highly successful scriptwriter for movies and television, made a pile of money and retired to the coast of Italy with his life partner of many years. From his vantage point he continued to write and to criticize the American Empire, as he saw it.

A BBC documentary on Vidal is here,  and his lectures on the American Presidents is here. Plenty of good material on him can be found on youtube. He makes for witty, stylish, and agreeable conversations, except if he thought you were a fool. Informed of the death of Truman Capote, a rival gay American writer, he was said to have said that it was “a good carrer move”.

Vidal was the first to proclaim that the Republican and Democratic parties were two wings of the same party, the ownership party. Campaigning for the Democratic primary in California against Gerry Brown, Vidal showed up at an unemployment insurance office and told the plaid-shirted working class people that the United States was a conspiracy against people like them, in the most Brahmin of Southern accents. They could believe him because he was so authentically American upper class, and he was saying the truth.

When he saw Obama’s Presidential acceptance speech from the comfort of his living room, he turned to the camera and said “This is the end of the Republican Party”.

I have had plenty of occasion to think about that comment in recent days. Did Obama’s election signal the end of the Republican Party? A good case can be made that Trump ‘s election was the reaction of people like those California white unemployed to whom Vidal was speaking so many years before. A plausible argument can be made, as Peter Zeihan does, that each of the American major parties are undergoing a once in eighty years morphing of their electoral bases. And it can be plausibly argued that the party changed least by recent events is the Democrats. It still remains a fragile coalition of minorities, cemented if at all by wokeism, but it is the more committed of the two parties to the maintenace of Empire.

The Democrats are in the main the war party. And if the war party, then the party of Imperial America. It is no accident that the heads of America’s state security agencies, FBI, NSA and CIA, were openly agitating against Trump during his recent presidency. Why? I think because Trump signaled the end of Imperial America, of America acting as world cop. It might be dragged back into that role again by the force of events, but if you believe the analysis of Zeihan, America is retreating from its post WW2 role as guarantor of the sea lanes and world policeman. A decade of chaos and small wars is about to be upon us.

Which leads me back to Gore Vidal. He thought that the US started to go off its constitutional limitations when President Jefferson bought the Louisiana Purchase without the permission of Congress, and that it went further astray when President Lincoln used the civil war for a vast accretion of power to the federal government. This led to Teddy Rooselvelt seizing the Philippines as America’s Pacific bastion, and you know the rest. Truman capped it all with the national security state of the 1950s.

I call this kind of reasoning “impossibilist”. Vidal had an idea of what America ought to be like, and he was nowhere satisfied that his vision of constituional restraint had been followed. So it is easy when you are as bright, accomplished and privileged as he undoubtedly was, to set your self a standard so high that it could never be attained. Doesn’t mean he wasn’t right; it is just that realtity did not turn out as he wanted.

If you are in the mood for a meditation on the nature of Imperium, read Robert Graves’ I, Claudius and Claudius the God. I was reminded of Vidal because  Claudius was acclained Emperor  by the Praetorian Guard immediately after the assassination of his nephew Caligula, but Claudius was by avocation a historian, amd the reign of Claudius reads like what Vidal would have been like if Imperial responsibilities had been thrust upon him. By no means was Claudius an Imperialist, he was a Republican by sympathies, but the days of the Republic were forever a foreclosed past, and there he sat, in the throne of command, deluding himself that he could retire from his responsibilities and take up writing history once more.

I have toyed with the idea of a history in the manner of Suetonius’ The Twelve Caesars – another great read – that would start at Truman or Eisenhower (the Caesar Augustus of the American Rome) and carry on for the next 150 years or whenever the United States finally fell. It would assume, as its core premise, that whatever the United States had orginally intended itself to be,  it had been transmuted by global responsibilties after World War 2 into an Imperium. Naturally the  only game in town was the Presidency. The side players were the Senate and the House of Representatives, with occasional deference to the augurs of the Constitution, the Supreme Court. China,  Russia, Afghanistan,  and Europe have walk-ons  just as Parthia, the Germanic tribes, or the provincial Roman elites would figure in the histories of the Roman Caesars.

What is now delicious gossip and insider knowledge will become assuredly known in the passage of years:  about the sexual proclivities of Emperor Lyndon Baines Johnson (the Tiberius of this metaphpor), Bill Clinton (very hetero) his wife Hillary (lesbian but more discreet), Obama (yeah, you know it), or the insider treatment of Emperors Nixon and Trump – both deposed for angering the Imperial Party. All that is now considered to be opinion, marginal, secret, or conspiratorial, will then be known as common facts, and it would only take a future Gore Vidal to write it down in a novel, and call it “Imperium, the first twenty Caesars” to be published in 2257. I say it will take a political insider like Vidal to write such a book. Some people are born too far from the councils of the Great to understand what it means to decide upon peace or war, or when it is time to assassinate a rival, or when it is time to fake an election. But a boy raised on the floor of the US Senate as a page to his blind Senator grandfather Gore, now that is an environment where, I suspect, any such future Suetonius will come from.

Both Machiavelli and Thucydides were once insiders who used their defeats and exiles to invent, respectively, political science and history. But novelists who turn to gossipy inside histories, like Vidal and Suetonius, have an enduring place in the canons of good writing. Even if they are wrong, or perhaps, especially if they are wrong, in their political causes and beliefs.












Megan Kelly and Dave Rubin

I find Megan Kelly to be as sharp as any political observer in the United States, and I found her analysis of the end of Trump to be discerning. (We may need to overcome our lust to hear her properly, but listen to her carefully).

  • Republicans have become good at winnng elections and have been poor at fighting the culture wars.
  • Democrats control the media, sports, high-tech, Hollywood, academia and half the country does not feel represented on all the information that comes back to them publicly.
  • This leads to the feeling that everything conservatives think is wrong
  • She doesn’t think conservatives have a future on big media, and it will need a Peter Thiel to establish a new platform.
  • Wokeism was dealt a blow in this election. The media lost this one.
  • The idea of “Defunding the police” killed the Dems in this election.
  • She has no time for people who obsess about politics, about those who may say the wrong thing but who are good people.


I am beginning to believe


Late October. Thank heaven for the length of autumn because if we had to adapt overnight, or within a month, to winter I think we might expire from the shock. So we need September, October and most of November (usually) in which to adapt mentally and spiritually to the season of deprivation ahead. The pleasures of Christmas are merely a hiccup in the stately procession from warmth and gladness to cold and darkness and back out again by February, March or April, depending on your latitude and your hemisphere.

The evidence of my own eyes in the American Presidential campaign tells me a different story than the polls. Manufactured crowds of maybe a couple of dozen or real ones of a couple of hundred for Biden and Harris, immense throngs for Trump. What this requires me to do is to imagine that the polls in which Biden is leading, and the armies of sycophants in the media, are manifestations of the same disinformation that characterized the original Trump-Clinton contest of 2016. The polls are being manipulated (likely), or the methodology is wrong (more likely), or the shy Trump voter feels that he gains nothing by telling a pollster how he feels (most likely).

If, as seems likely to me, that Trump wins on Tuesday, it will come as a surprize to millions of people who have dwelt exclusively inside the media whale. If I am wrong and Trump loses, there will be no suprize but only the exhultations of the Usual Suspects, for four more years. Trump will be excoriated and the riots will continue, and the attacks on civilization will intensify.


Engage Google Image  search “Biden rally today” and “Trump rally today”. See what you get. The first picture below is from Breitbart, the next two were produced by a search.







The Kielburgers explained: transferring wealth upward under cover of high-mindedness


The main thing, says Eric Weinstein, at 2:00 into the interview,  is to find an ideology or sentiment that covers your trail. Thus wealth transfer upward to the elites can take place under cover of “we are the World”, concerts for Africa, or for the American farmer. “The dominant narrative of a time is a false narrative disguising how we can make money during that time.” [roughly] “There was some process by which globalization was a betrayal of your countrymen.That thing was the Davos idealism, which is now cratering because it was a wealth transfer program posing as a philanthropic effort.”

I may not agree with Eric on everything, but I agree with him on many many subjects. And one of them is his clear sighted take on how the noble vision has been used to disguise and legitimate the transfer of wealth from the working classes to the rich.

But back to the Kielburgers, those grifters. Do you see how it is done? Pose as champions of social justice. Get youth and politicians behind you. Ensconce yourself in the crowd of mega-rich. Virtue signal all the time. Find a narrative in which you are point men for world-scale caring and concern Shift the funds into real estate.

The Queen was overheard to say about one of the Kielburgers, when she was on tour in Canada, that he was a model little politician, or words to that effect. Don’t say we weren’t warned. One of the rotten aspects of Her Majesty’s job is to greet cordially people you know from the bottom of your heart are greasy-pole climbing frauds.


ImageMoments ago

just informed the Commons finance committee that in addition to the $312,000 paid to Margaret Trudeau for speaking at WE Day events she was reimbursed an additional $167,944 in expenses. So a total of $479,944. #cdnpoli #WEscandal

Eric Weinstein stands up at the right moment

I am overwhelmed by the amount of things to blog about. Riots, mayhem, pandering to blacks, moral posturing, Black Lives Matter, professors being fired, diversity inclusion and equity, anti-white ideology.  But I can raise a hand to salute Eric Weinstein on his balanced and incisive attack on the movement to defund police, and the reasons why it is nonsense.

On the other hand, he takes twenty minutes to say what the redneck cracker said in twenty seconds.  But he takes an adult and balanced approach. Moral posturing is the death of the search for the right moral balance. “You are opening the gates of hell” says Eric. And indeed we are.