Concerning Hallowe’en And Related Things

     The costuming, the candy, and the partying all to the side, Hallowe’en – the night before All Saints Day – is actually a Christian event of some antiquity. It and All Saints Day (November 1) itself arose as counterweights to the pagan festival of Samhain, which also occurs on these two days.

     The peasants and bourgeoise of European Christendom were taught to fear and abjure paganism and the festival of Samhain. Among the legends of the time was that on that evening, the pagans would conjure spirits from Hell to walk among them, doing what evil they could. Accordingly, it became a regular practice to lock and barricade the doors of every Christian home as the evening of October 31 approached. After a while, as the fear of supernatural mischief-makers abated, the same people and their descendants began to mock the pagans by costuming themselves as ghosts, witches, and devils, and then roving about their communities “scaring” those who would not propitiate them with an edible treat. Therein lie the origins of our contemporary, secularized practices.

     But Hallowe’en retains some supernatural significance, especially in Latin countries. It’s the opening of a triduum called The Day of the Dead, which is dedicated to those who have preceded us into eternity: remembering them (October 31), venerating those who have become saints (All Saints’ Day, November 1), and praying for the souls still immured in Purgatory (All Souls’ Day, November 2).

     The Church still maintains All Saints’ Day and All Souls’ Day celebrations and commemorations. On November 1, Catholics are encouraged to pray to their patron saints for guidance in this life and intercession with Jesus Christ for the sake of our eventual salvation. On November 2, we are encouraged to pray for our beloved dead, exhorting them to a swift exit from their final trials and admission to Heaven:

Prayer for the Dead:

In your hands, O Lord,
we humbly entrust our brothers and sisters.
In this life you embraced them with your tender love;
deliver them now from every evil
and bid them eternal rest.

The old order has passed away:
welcome them into paradise,
where there will be no sorrow, no weeping or pain,
but fullness of peace and joy
with your Son and the Holy Spirit
forever and ever. Amen.

Prayer for the Faithful Departed:

Eternal rest grant unto them, O Lord,
and let perpetual light shine upon them.
May their souls and the souls of all the faithful departed,
through the mercy of God, rest in peace.

Prayer for the Souls in Purgatory:

O Lord, almighty God, we beseech you,
by the very precious blood of Jesus, poured out during his Passion,
to deliver the souls of Purgatory,
and especially those which must as soon as possible enter your Glory,
so that they begin right now to bless you for all eternity
and intercede tirelessly for us.
Sweet Heart of Mary, be our salvation.


Remember, O most gracious Virgin Mary,
that never was it known
that anyone who fled to thy protection,
implored thy help,
or sought thy intercession,
was left unaided.
Inspired by this confidence
I fly unto thee,
O Virgin of virgins, my Mother.
To thee do I come,
before thee I stand,
sinful and sorrowful.
O Mother of the Word Incarnate,
despise not my petitions,
but in thy mercy hear and answer me.

     It’s hard to reach one’s mature years without accumulating at least a few beloved dead. Remember them throughout these next three days, and pray for them. Don’t expect them to send thank-you cards; the postage is prohibitive.

     May God bless and keep you all.

The attack on whites.

It can not be made any clearer that white people, their rights, culture, history, and achievements are under full scale attack by their own government and own school systems. This sense of helplessness, together with declining job opportunities and incomes, rising prices, overrun borders, and inability to correct the situation through elections, makes it clear that white Americans have had their country taken away from them.

Do Americans Have a Future?” By Paul Craig Roberts, The Burning Platform, 10/30/21.


H/t: Burning Platform.

Scientism, Democratism, And Statism

     The ism suffix particle most often indicates a faith, or a similarly faith-based system of beliefs. There are a few exceptions – bruxism, for instance, is dentists’ term for habitual grinding of the teeth, and a neologism is just a newly coined word – but the rule is usually reliable.

     Recently, we’ve had discussions about scientism versus actual science. Scientism, to be specific, is a de facto worship of men who call themselves scientists, whether or not they really are. We are told not to argue with them, as if they were a priesthood dispensing a revelation. But scientism has nothing whatsoever in common with science, which is a process of open inquiry, inference, prediction, and experimentation. It’s doubtful these discussions have changed many minds. My lexical approach isn’t likely to change many, either – what could, in these days of absolute polarization? – but it’s what I do.

     In keeping with the above approach to this important contemporary foofaurauw, I’d like to introduce for your consideration and possible rhetorical exploitation the coinage democratism, which I shall define as the worship of numbers presented to us as the results of honest elections. Thou shalt not question the election tallies! cry the apostles of democratism. They are a sacred gift, the fruits of our priceless inheritance of democracy! In this manner they shout down any Americans who doubt that the 2020 elections were conducted according to the applicable laws. The creed of democratism displaces the legally codified procedure of electoral balloting that’s usually albeit inaccurately called democracy.

     Note how nicely democratism conduces to the interests of the Ruling Class. What’s that? You claim we don’t have a Ruling Class? But then, why was it felonious lese majeste that Americans assembled in Washington to protest an election they sincerely believe was stolen from them? What makes it akin to treason to argue that there cannot be eighty-one million living American citizens who would vote to install as president a senile and demonstrably sick old man who has fantasized his entire history, continues to repeat thoroughly debunked lies, can’t complete three sentences in a row, has difficulty reading from a teleprompter, and spent nearly the whole of the campaign season hiding in his basement?

     Both scientism and democratism have been harnessed to the cart of statism: the worship of political power and those who wield it. They’ve proved extraordinarily strong draft animals. In combination with the engine of propaganda and deceit we call the media, they’ve all but completed the subjugation of what was once the freest, most prosperous, and most secure nation ever to have existed.

     Seems like November 2000 was just yesterday, doesn’t it, Gentle Reader?

     The very folks who screamed and raved and ceaselessly agitated to overturn the 2000 presidential election results are unanimous today about how the election is over and done and certified by the states and the Senate, so we should all “move on.” That includes a fair number of pundits considered right-of-center. While some advance arguments that have a little substance, most are simply trying to protect their rice bowls. As our English cousins might say, they’ve “done a corner” in democratism. When We the People demand that the many clear evidences of massive election fraud be properly investigated, it threatens to upset their applecarts. Impugn the integrity of those who turn the electoral wheels? Risk the ire of the regime by questioning its legitimacy? What would they do without their media perches, their access to politicians and Deep State officials, their welcome in the Georgetown cocktail party circuit? Sell used cars?

     The scientism promoted by the acolytes of Faucism plays into this rather nicely. Hey, there was a pandemic in progress! We had to go to voting by mail! There was no alternative! You didn’t want everyone to get sick, did you? Saint Anthony has spoken! Thou shalt not question the High Priest of Covidism!

     Ah, such fun. But it has been used to install a set of Usurpers at the levers of federal power. Removing their claws from those levers will be difficult at best. And until then, we must deal with their depredations, tacitly enabled and assisted by quislings and milquetoasts who call themselves Republicans.

     A people who deserve to be free would not be sitting idle as this transpires. There would already be purges of Boards of Election and state governments to remove and punish the villains who made it possible. They would evict the “go along to get along” Republicans from their seats and replace them with patriots good for more than mouthing self-righteous insincerities into microphones. They would not be satisfied to chant “let’s go Brandon” at football games. Neither would they be kept down by scientistic oppressors wielding an engineered quasi-flu virus as their bludgeon.

     But I’ve said all that before, to no demonstrable effect. Words on a computer screen can do very little. Anyway, I’ve emitted more than my quota. Do as you please, America. Pretend that everything will be back to normal by and by. I’ll shut up now.

     (Where the Hell is that planetoid?)

Pearls of expression.

Liberal/socialist pundits assure us that “unregulated” private-sector activity (although extinct since at least the 1970s) is to blame for every social ill; just a few thousand more rules and a few trillion more dollars for new centralized programs and we’ll be safe from those lingering free-market barbarians.

Financial False Hope.” By Steve Penfield, The Unz Review, 2/28/21 (emphasis removed).


     [Rather than strain a tired brain beyond its current capacity, I’ve decided to recycle a piece from 2017, when the urban rioting we’ve “enjoyed” since then was just coming over the horizon. – FWP]


     A great deal of one’s ability to feel secure – i.e., prepared for likely developments rather than threatened by them – depends upon the stability of one’s surroundings, both physically and conceptually. You can be the biggest, toughest, meanest SOB in all of Creation, armed to the teeth, ready, willing and able to fight a grizzly barehanded and utterly confident that you’d prevail, and you’ll still value the sense that things around you won’t change too swiftly or too radically. This is especially the case with persons who have loved ones to support, nurture, and protect.

     Conservatism in politics arises from the sense that things must not be permitted to change rapidly. The political conservative holds, with the two great Thomases (Aquinas and Jefferson), that stability in the law is valuable in and of itself. Even if some change in the law appears necessary or highly desirable, he’s loath to introduce it in a fashion likely to destabilize the settled arrangements of millions. He recognizes both the tendency of men to adapt to their surroundings and the stress and fatigue that rapid adaptation engenders. He’s probably experienced some of it himself.

     The Constitutional design embeds respect for those wisdoms. The bicameral legislature and the requirement for presidential approval of a new law were put in place to slow the rate of change. Even the most dramatic alteration to the legal landscape must pass all three gates. That makes it possible to see a change coming and ready oneself for the eventuality…in theory, at least.

     Changes in the social order aren’t nearly as well buffered. In recent decades there have been a huge number of truly radical alterations in our social customs. This especially concerns the poorly defined thing called tolerance and the efforts of various persons, institutions, and agencies of government to compel it. A considerable amount of linguistic legerdemain is involved, most of it originating from the political Left. The phenomenon reeks of the delusion that alterations in language can effect alterations in reality itself.

     It would be bad enough were the demands for mandatory “tolerance” to pertain to things that are genuinely tolerable. In fact, we’re being required to tolerate increasing amounts and degrees of the intolerable. The most recent demands for “tolerance” include open invasion, outright madness, and undisguised, rampant violence. It’s supremely difficult to prepare for a world in which such things reign.


     Early in the 1980s, Herman Kahn, one of the preeminent geniuses of the Twentieth Century, conducted an offhand survey, of persons in decision-making roles in government and the military, about whether nuclear weapons would be used in the foreseeable future. There emerged a strong consensus that they would be. Kahn proposed that that consensus alone was a sufficient reason to study nuclear weapons: what they can do, how they might be used, whether particular situations could justify their use, and what the consequences of various uses would be. As reasonable as Kahn’s statement was, nevertheless it evoked a hurricane of denunciation, some of it from normally sensible persons.

     The typical human mind creates barriers within itself to the consideration of developments it regards as “unthinkable.” (As a riposte to persons who were desperate to define Kahn’s studies as “unthinkable,” he titled one of his most important books Thinking About The Unthinkable.) Yet “unthinkable” has no meaning. Indeed, it’s a one-word contradiction in terms. Its de facto meaning is “I don’t want to think about it.” That response, of course, has no bearing on whether the “unthinkable” will actually occur.

     I’m not about to open a discussion about the use of nuclear weapons, the relevance of international arms-control negotiations and treaties, the quests of gangster-states such as Iran and North Korea for nuclear weapons and delivery systems, and whatnot. I do take an interest in those things – I have for a very long time – but most people shy away from them as “unthinkable.” My conjecture is that the prospect of a war, or a terrorist strike, that employs nukes horrifies them too greatly to engage their reason. They’d rather believe that it can’t happen…and therefore that it won’t.

     Americans have had that very reaction to other developments that have already taken place:

  • The nullification of the Constitutional order.
  • The rise of totalitarian rule by unelected bureaucrats.
  • The dismissal of the principles that once undergirded the law.
  • The emergence of delusions that afflict millions, especially among the young.
  • The invasion of the United States by persons openly hostile to its laws and norms.
  • Demands for the acceptance of deviances that threaten the basis of American society.
  • And of course, demands for legal privileges and “free stuff” by identity-politics groups.

     These things have already set the foundation of the nation quivering. Ordinary Americans, accustomed to the norms and arrangements of earlier times and desperate to believe that they’ll resume and continue, are being challenged to prepare for what might come next. So they narrow their focus; they concentrate grimly on only what’s immediately around them. It’s just one more way of saying that “it can’t happen here.”

     Persons in the preparationist community – “preppers,” for short – do as they do because they’re aware that “it can happen here” – that America is not divinely protected against disasters, especially disasters its people might bring upon themselves. The degree of dedication and the fraction of his resources any particular prepper puts to his preparations are determined principally by his estimate of the speed of transformation and the ugliness of what it portends. His physical arrangements might be impressive, but his mindset is the really important thing. He has taken responsibility for his own well-being and that of his loved ones. He may be wrong, but he’ll be prepared for his estimate of the (survivable) worst the future might bring.


“The world’s in a bad way, my man,
And bound to be worse before it mends;
Better lie up in the mountain here
Four or five centuries,
While the stars go over the lonely ocean,”
The old father of wild pigs,
Plowing the fallow on Mal Paso Mountain.

[Robinson Jeffers]

     It’s impossible to be adequately prepared for everything. The only possible response to some developments is death. Yet the will to prepare, to brace for a foreseeable eventuality, is among the most valuable of human traits. It’s an essential component of the virtue of fortitude.

     My friend Remus has invested a large amount of his considerable intellect and energy in preparing, in a generalized fashion, for the terminus of our handbasket’s journey. He’s issued several maxims of great value to just about anyone. The one that comes to mind this fine July morning is quite brief:

Stay away from crowds.

     Another friend in Virginia, cognizant of the danger of crowds from his years in law enforcement, has built himself – quite literally; he built it himself — a mountain redoubt: a compound well stocked with all the necessities and defensible against anything short of a national army or an airborne assault. He and Remus might not have prepared for every possible eventuality, but they’ve surveyed the visible developments with open eyes, have assessed what they threaten as credible, and have braced themselves for what seems most likely to come. (Yes, they’re among the many who’ve exhorted me to move off Long Island.) They regard their preparations as the responsible things to do – the measures appropriate to the protection of whom and what they love.

     Disaster might not come. My friends’ preparations might prove unnecessary. (I certainly hope so.) Ultimately, that doesn’t matter. What’s most important is the demonstration of how responsible persons act when their worries begin to surge.

     Not enough Americans would consider them models.


     I don’t intend to beat this into the magma. What I want to emphasize is the great value of taking responsibility for your own well-being, and for the well-being of anyone who happens to be under your protection. That virtue has been badly weakened these last few decades. It’s been displaced by the belief that our Big Nanny in Washington, in concert with the lesser nannies in the state capitals, will make sure everything comes out all right.

     They won’t. More to the point, they can’t.
     What you foresee and fear is yours to deal with.
     Your neighbors might assist you; “your government” won’t.
     That’s the way things are, regardless of anyone’s contrary opinion.

     Plan accordingly. And do please stay away from crowds.


     UPDATE: To those who believe that “the police will keep order,” I offer this item of evidence to the contrary. Don’t imagine that the police in your district, if faced with the same sort of situation, would prove any more reliable.

The precarious balance.

Americans are in a precarious position with regard to their own government. America has an empire, but the empire hates the Americans – largely using them as tax serfs to fund failed social programs at home and failed wars of choice overseas. If anything, the American people are an obstacle to the aims of the American Empire.

The American citizenry is one thing most of the rest of the world isn’t: A threat to the American empire. The massive reaction by globalist elites to Donald Trump shows just how particularly thin-skinned they are about peasant rebellions at home. And constant attacks on Second Amendment have failed to disarm the American middle class.[1]

Mr. Jacobs discusses the way in which changes in the lethality of military technology affect the power balance between ruler and ruled. Even armed Americans face overwhelmingly superior combat power in the hands of the state. The state has so far resorted to something short of a direct takeover but the betrayal of the constitutional scheme at the hands of the Congress, the president, and the Supreme Court has been ongoing for over a century and satisfactory to all but the most impatient of our domestic enemies. The end result of that is that now centralized political and judicial power is just as lethal as high explosives and super-accurate weaponry . . . and more cost effective, as Jacobs makes clear in his discussion of lockdowns targeting millions of small businesses and unrestrained street thuggery as an explicit threat to what remains of the yeoman class.

Violence against the American population, moreover, is problematic as members of our military may be willing to chase the Taliban in distant mountains but bombarding Omaha will not sit well with the servicemen with family in the target area.

Too, foreign military adventures can still rely on intact manufacturing and distribution systems but unpopular operations against the citizenry will not have that luxury. Rail lines, fiber optic cables, bridges, pipelines, power lines and transformer stations would require enormous manpower to secure. And truck drivers and other key people in the transportation system are unlikely to cooperate with serious attacks on the population. Not to mention the economic fragility of the nation given the gross mismanagement of the treason class. Our impressive organs of repression cannot depend on the robustness that existed in the Depression when some 60% of the population still lived on farms and had a modicum of independence from The Grid.

Even the inherently repressive or unequal feudal system involved a strong possibility of effective government that paid more than lip service to the notion of salus populi. We can discuss when and how that did not obtain then but one thing that is not true now is that our federal government is sincerely concerned for the welfare of the American people. It is not. It’s business is all about the foulest betrayal. And business is very, very good.

We’ll see how this all plays out if or when the clowns decide to make a move and order the military to take the field again a la Gen. Sherman some time ago. The vulnerability of complex systems to foot dragging and creative interruption will be tested.

[1] “A Distributed Capacity for Violence: A Brief History of Weapons Technology and Political Power.” By Sam Jacobs,, 10/27/21 (?).

The Difference Between Public and Private Actions

Trevor Noah is not COMPLETELY wrong here.

NOAH: “And I’m sorry, guys, but any parent who thinks their 17-year-old school’s assignment is too explicit, they need to check out his browser history, because trust me, he can handle it. It this shows you that the real dangerous ideology in society isn’t conservatism or liberalism. It’s helicopter parenting. An AP is basically a college course. How long will this lady be trying to protect her kid?”

He is pointing out that MANY (certainly not all) 17-year olds are, in fact conversant with what used to be called ‘smutty talk”. Most of them have heard of the words, and have speculated – privately, with trusted friends – about the activities (or, perhaps, less extreme ones) mentioned in the assignments. Among closest friends, this would not be unusual to talk about.

Talk. Not engage in.

From the above linked report

So, even though the numbers include those 18 & 19, STILL less than 1/2. And, that does not break apart those barely adult people who MIGHT be married. I would suspect that the percent of sexually experienced teens increases sharply with age. Which would indicate that LESS than 40% of American teens aged 17 have engaged in sex.

Full report here.

Are SOME of those students checking out porn sites?


Does that mean that all, or even most of them are engaging in similar activities?

Probably not. For some, looking will satisfy their curiosity. For some, the videos will lead them to experiment IRL and engage in sex. And for some, the raunchier videos will leave them thinking “Ewwww!”, and vowing to never have sex.

This isn’t exactly a new phenomenon. See the graphs at the link – from at least the 1950s onward, premarital sex was not uncommon.

Researchers looking at birth records compared to wedding dates for Colonial America noted that approximately 1/3 of the births were well short of 9 months after the wedding. So, Americans have always been relatively relaxed about sex between the unmarried, as long as the couple got married.

What’s the big deal with marriage?

It represented a commitment to financial responsibility for one’s actions. Even the Puritans treated a ‘rushed’ marriage as a relatively minor incident. The full fury of the community was reserved for those cases where the man in the relationship would not marry the woman when their transgression was discovered, when one of the two was married to another, or when a woman was intimate with more than one person.

A failure to punish such acts would create a breach in community relations and possible financial costs to keep the children from starving. Shaming those who failed to uphold the standards sent a stern message to others who might be doing, or thinking of doing, the same.

Now, did that stop the antics? Of course not. But, it did drive the flouting of established morality underground. Privately, you might be a rake. But, publicly, you went along with the crowd. And, if caught, you married the woman. That action, belated though it was, satisfied the group.

Similarly, young people might discuss the most salacious acts in private. But, publicly, they generally don’t (yes, there are exceptions). The school assignment forces students to talk/write about their sex lives (real or imagined) with classmates, in a public setting. Kids being kids, any discussion will start mildly, and – as others get more outrageous, and get public acclaim for their “honesty”, even those not comfortable with it start going along with the crowd.

Once someone has committed to public talk, they find it hard to reserve their private life to themselves. This is a ‘grooming activity’ – the predator gets a kid to say something, or view some mildly raunchy porn, and it spirals from there.

I am taking the time to spell out what sensible people already know, as it needs to be stated – this is designed to de-sensitize kids about adult subjects, talking about them in public, and doing so in sex-mixed groups. The more evangelistic(!) of the pro-sex teens will drive this the rest of the way. Failure to fully participate will lead to those teens being targeted – as prudes, as liars (because EVERYONE thinks/views/talks about sex), and as people who can be ridiculed and harassed without fear of consequences. Unlike a Muslim or Hindu who will display discomfort, the Christian will be coerced/forced to “lighten up” and join in.

The Remedy

     I have a great deal to do today – yes, Gentle Reader, I have a life away from the computers, as implausible as that may sound – so this will be a brief piece. First, the response to:

     …has been overwhelming. It suggests that I’ve touched a nerve that’s been just short of firing, possibly for a long time. I hope that’s to the good.

     Second, I’m not the only writer in the Internet Commentariat thinking along those lines:

     The perfect storm has arrived and the dark winter is upon us. This is the time for serious men. Enough of the name-calling, caterwauling, one-upmanship of internet squabbles. Put it aside and concentrate on what to do about it. Yes, fight the political battles as a defensive maneuver, but find ways to go on the offensive. Strikes are one method, but somewhere along the line those who are protected by this communist regime must be exposed to the same dangers those on the right are exposed to. There has to be a challenge to the two-tiered justice system and if the system cannot administer justice, the people will have to do it themselves. A failure of justice has always fostered a vigilante solution. That knowledge used to be enough to keep the courts in line, adhering to their oaths, but one always displaces the other.

     Thank you, T. L. Davis, and thank You, God! I was beginning to think I was the only one who sees it. No matter how powerful the intellect, being of unique convictions can make anyone doubt his sanity. Whew!

     But it occurred to me, after reading T. L.’s essay, that he and I have merely seen what another writer saw some time ago:

     “I’m going to take the advice I saw on a license plate, once: Live Free Or Die.”
     “New Hampshire,” Allen said. “Used to be, at least.”
     “That may sound good,” Henry said quietly, “but you’re going to feel a whole lot different in your guts when the time comes—a whole lot different than you do right now. This isn’t an Outfit wiseguy who’s about to torture you in the middle of a rape. This is premeditated murder of people with families, and lovers, and kids in nursery school, and worries about the future, just like us. And on top of that, these are people who champion the democratic process. You are going to be killing a man because he voted the wrong way.”
     “No,” Cindy said without hesitation, “I am going to be killing a man because he voted away something that was not his to vote on in the first place. The people making the laws think that anything is okay if they can get 51% of the legislators or the people to go along with it. One hundred per cent of the people making the rules in the Vegas outfit thought it was just fine for me to be locked in a room and taken out when it suited them. I’ve had enough of that.”

     Unintended Consequences may be downloaded from here.

     John Ross may or may not have been perfectly serious when he wrote the book. I have no way to ask him for his opinion today. But as old and incapable as I am, include me among T. L. Davis’s “serious men.” I endorse the remedy he’s prescribed without reservation.

     The time has come for justice. Indeed, it came long ago:

     Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

     Are there enough serious men?

They’re Going For Broke

     The signs are all there.

     Consider this rather naive piece. “More Bad Polls For Joe Biden – Will Democrats Ever Learn?” Learn what? That one should sit on one’s opportunities until they’ve evaporated, as the Republicans do? Truly, if anyone in this country knows the value of political hegemony, however brief its tenure might appear, it’s the Democrats’ strategists.

     Being old, I remember many old things. One is a slice from an original Star Trek episode: “Errand of Mercy.” In that episode the Enterprise has come to “Organia,” a seemingly bucolic planet, just as a full-scale war has broken out between the UFP and the Klingons. Toward the end of the episode, Kirk and Spock are confronting Coor, the commander of the Klingon fleet that has arrived to subjugate Organia:

COOR: So, you are here. You will be interested in knowing that a Federation fleet is on its way here at the moment. Our fleet is preparing to meet them.
KIRK: Checkmate, Commander.
COOR: Shall we wait and see the results before you kill me?
KIRK: I don’t intend to kill you unless I have to.
COOR: Sentimentality, mercy. The emotions of peace. Your weakness, Captain Kirk. The Klingon Empire shall win. Think of it, as we sit here, in space above us the destiny of the galaxy will be decided for the next ten thousand years. Can I offer you a drink? We can toast the victory of the Klingon fleet.
SPOCK: You may be premature. There are many possibilities.
COOR: Today we conquer. If some day we are defeated, well, war has its fortunes good and bad.

     From the above, Coor understands that power is to be used. It cannot be conserved. He who has power must use it or lose it. Indeed, not to use it guarantees that it will be lost all the more quickly. The Democrats understand that, too.

     The Democrats are moving as swiftly as possible to build socialist institutions that will serve them as impregnable bastions. Should the next election or two go against them, as is often the case when they’ve managed to ram home one of their major strokes against freedom and Constitutional governance – remember what happened after they passed ObamaCare? – the designs of those bastions would eventually reinstall them at the top. Even if they should be compelled to wait a decade or more, they would have succeeded in centralizing key powers of national control in agencies whose very existence would render them predisposed toward the Left and its aims.

     Contrast this attitude with the GOP’s endlessly repeated “Not until we’re stronger” chant, and the lassitude it induces both in their officeholders and their supporters.

     The kinder assumption is that the Republican Party’s strategists don’t understand power. If that’s incorrect, then they don’t intend that it be used to further their party’s supposed aims. Draw from that whatever conclusions you prefer.

On Trusting Democrats


     New Jersey has a record for having produced the most deceitful and utterly corrupt Democrat politicians in the United States. Phil Murphy, though he’s “the next one in the series,” nevertheless seems determined to lower the bar still closer toward unalloyed evil. If New Jerseyans allow him another term, it will only be a confirmation of Mencken’s aphorism:

     Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.

     We shall see.

Jan. 6 – Is ANYONE Besides Gateway Pundit Interested in the Truth?

I’ve been following The Gateway Pundit lately, as its coverage of News TPTB would rather bury is far above that of the Mainstream Media. Today’s link is to a story about a likely FBI plant, who appears to have instigated much of the activity for which those involved got arrested.

The ‘investigative media’ has completely lost the little credibility that it had left. A Normal American might THINK they would be interested in uncovering the story behind the so-called insurrection.

But, no.

It makes me spitefully glad that the same media is dissolving and putting those highly-paid pundits out of business. Frankly, if it weren’t for a heavy-handed effort to demonetize the Alt-Media of the Not-Left, the last shreds of that legacy business would be – Poof! Gone.

The collapse of the media into shills for a partisan side is depressing to me. I do realize that it’s been going on for some time, but, it goes against the American Ideal of a Free Press. This piece, by an outsider, is both true and disheartening.

And, yet, Facebook and other social media continue to shoot themselves in the foot. The more they try to clamp down on dissidence, the more the not-compliant work to get around the restrictions.

If it weren’t for Facebook Marketplace (like a collection of yard sale merchandise, from individuals straight to buyers), I’d stay off it entirely. Alas, I need to clear out a house of cr@p, so will likely continue to use that part of it. Also need to buy some specific stuff for the new house.

And, to end on a positive note, the new place is beginning to take shape. I’ve bought a rug, table and chairs, and a lot of other needed items. Still spend more time shopping than I’d like, but I’m learning to shop online and use the pickup options. So, better.

The only way I’m leaving the house is if I can use drive-through or curbside pickup. The rain is heavy enough to have me looking for gopherwood. And, like a cat, I HATE being cold and wet.

Yeah, that’s me

The Storm Is Upon Us

     Yesterday’s piece, which I was reluctant to post, seems to have gotten a stir going. Perhaps that’s to the good. But if you liked it, you’ll purely love the following video: a speech from the most admirable man in entertainment, Jim Caviezel:

     I believe we see things the same way, which comes as no surprise.


     I once had a set-to with a left-liberal whose fundamental assumptions included that “the needs of the State come first.” (Yes, you read that right. He wasn’t aware of the origin of that phrase. Nevertheless, he endorsed it heartily when I cited it to him. Draw your own conclusions.) Accordingly, he approved of any and every tax measure, whether for the revenue it might generate or the effect upon people’s earning, saving, and spending habits.

     And so, unless he’s learned better since then, I imagine he’d approve of this proposal:

     A wealth tax on billionaires is included in the latest version of Joe Biden’s “Build Back Better” agenda, but it’s a sure thing the real target is your retirement savings.

     The so-called “Billionaire Income Tax” is being written by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) with “input from the U.S. Treasury Department and the White House,” according to SWFI.

     “It’s not a wealth tax, but a tax on unrealized capital gains of exceptionally wealthy individuals,” U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen told CNN on Sunday.

     That’s like saying you have a four-legged pet that eats kibble, barks, fetches, and looks exactly like a Golden Retriever — but it isn’t a dog.

     Yellen told Jake Tapper, “I think what’s under consideration is a proposal that Senator Wyden and the Senate Finance Committee have been looking at that would impose a tax on unrealized capital gains, on liquid assets held by extremely wealthy individuals, billionaires. I wouldn’t call that a wealth tax.”

     “Unrealized capital gains.” Do you know what that means, Gentle Reader? I do. It’s the increase in market value of the stocks and bonds in your IRA or 401(k). It’s the increase in market value of the home you own and live in right now. You would have to sell those stocks, those bonds, and that home to “realize” those gains and pay the “unrealized capital gains tax,” but what of that? The needs of the State come first!

     But Yellen has called it a “billionaire’s tax.” In light of that, I must resurrect a passage about the debate over the income tax, from the dim, dark days of 1913:

     The income tax is an excellent example: When the Sixteenth Amendment was being debated on the floor of the Senate, one of its opponents rose to ask the body what it could say to reassure the American public that this tax would not rise to seize some unconscionable fraction of their earnings — perhaps as much as ten percent! A pro-income-tax senator rose and replied that the country need never fear such a development: “The people would never allow it!”

     I pulled that passage from this critically important Baseline Essay. Please revisit it, and reflect upon the implications for what Usurper Yellen is touting as a “billionaire’s tax.”

     They are evil. They must be expunged to the last man. No prisoners and no mercy.


     But what are the visionaries of freedom doing as the Usurpers methodically destroy the rights of American citizens? Why, they’re launching new social-media platforms!

     As the government attempts to force the public to comply with medical tyranny and lockdowns, big tech is doubling down on censorship, configuring algorithms to bury information surrounding the coronavirus and vaccines.

     In 2020, tech giants brazenly censored a sitting President of the United States with no repercussions, making it abundantly clear they are tied to the hip of the Democrat Party.

     An end to Big Tech’s control over digital information flow is nowhere in sight amid politicians’ empty threats of antitrust legislation.

     But a video, live-streaming and social media platform that champions free speech and cannot be taken down by big tech may be a game-changer.

     The new platform, Sovren, is not only “a place of refuge for free thinkers,” but it is the first social media platform built on invincible blockchain technology, explains Sovren founder Ben Swann.

     There are quite a number of social-media platforms already, including several that have openly declared themselves to be “no censorship” sites, but perhaps just one more will turn the tide. I mean, clearly Gab, MeWe, Minds, Mumblit, USA.Life, Parler, OurFreedomBook, GETTR, and FrankSpeech aren’t getting the job done!

     I hear that President Trump is starting a social-media platform, too. Yay, team.


     Jim Caviezel has it right: the storm is upon us. Moreover, it’s a Cat 5, so an umbrella won’t do you any good. Even staying hunkered down in the basement is unlikely to be worth much.

     We must fight. Whether via passive resistance or active insurgency, we must fight. The Usurpers have left us no alternative. They have made it plain, with:

  • their taxes,
  • their vote fraud,
  • their racism-shouting,
  • their vaccine mandates,
  • their assault on the dollar,
  • their emasculation of the military,
  • their indoctrination of our children,
  • their flood of illegal alien immigrants,
  • their strangulation of America’s energy supply,
  • their pusillanimity toward America’s adversaries,
  • and their vicious denunciations of anyone who opposes them,

     …that they mean business.

     Do we?

Carts And Horses, 2021 Edition

     Good morning, Gentle Reader. I’ve given much of the past day or so to thinking about this Victor Davis Hanson essay. It’s a good piece – what else would we expect from Hanson – but I think it’s missing one component to give it a full picture of our enemies: both the visible figures in the Usurper Regime and the shadowed ones who pull their strings.

     Hanson leans upon ideology as the explanation for the disastrous (for the United States and its legitimate citizens) policies the Usurpers have deployed. That is: he posits that the damage they’re inflicting upon America and its people is in line with their strongly-held convictions about “the way things ought to be.” But once again: people, their desires, their beliefs, and their aversions exist in a distribution. Not everyone who publicly espouses an ideology regards it as primary, an end to be sought for its own sake. Some people promote an ideology because they believe it to be an excellent tool for acquiring what they value most: power over others.

     Indeed, I would venture to estimate that around 50% of the Leftists who promote a Marxist vision do so specifically because they think it will get them power. Remember this famous anecdote from the 1848 socialist upheaval in France?

     A famous anecdote from the 1848 socialist upheaval in Paris has a coal-carrier accosting a gentlewoman, saying, “Yes, Madame, everything’s going to be equal now. I’ll go in silks and you’ll carry coal.” Though it cannot be verified owing to time and the lack of attribution, as an illustration of the sort of “equality” left-leaning types truly cherish, this one is unparalleled.

     So while ideology is an important player in the dramas of the day, it’s not necessarily the Left’s end-in-itself as we might assume. Orwell was aware of this:

     “The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were- cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?”


     There is no arguing with a man who has decided that what he wants above all other things is power over you. You cannot reason with him. You cannot reform him. You cannot keep him from pursuing what he wants. Indeed, there is only one long-lasting countermeasure: you must kill him. As most of us in the Right are moderately reluctant to kill others, including the deepest-dyed of black-hearted villains, he has an edge over us that’s most difficult to overcome.

     I would surmise that a great part of the interest being expressed in partitioning the nation into separate “red” and “blue” sovereignties arises from the unexpressed awareness that we cannot triumph over the Left without “going for the guns.” If you know that the price of victory is mass executions, but are unwilling to kill, what remains but flight? Yet even flight would provide only a temporary respite, for they who want power want it over everyone and everything. They would pursue us. Ultimately, we would have to fight them to the death.

     I purely hate having to say such a thing. I’m more confrontation-averse than anyone else I know. But I can’t avert my mind from the facts and logic that have brought me here.

     And with that, I must close. Some will read the above and take it as a license to kill. Some will actively go out to do so. They will look at situations such as the one reported here and feel a moral imperative to strike before the enemy does so. For our enemy recognizes no absolute standard of right and wrong. He believes himself to be the supreme moral arbiter of our time. The only thing restraining him from killing us is the fear that he might not get away with it. He’s certainly discussed it with his fellows often enough.

     Still, I had to set my reasoning down in plain type. Perhaps someone wiser can find a flaw in it. I’d be grateful.

     Time to pray.

The War Is Over

     All right, enough of that uplift stuff. Let’s get back to the depressing crap:

     Yes, do have a nice day.

Mood Elevator

     Aware that my mood and my writing have been trending darker, I’ve been trying to post as many uplifting pieces as possible. Have one right now;

     Many virtuosi are more concerned with promoting themselves than with making music as it should be made. Pat Metheny is not of their ilk. Unparalleled in skill among jazz guitarists, he is nevertheless first and foremost a musician, whether as a composer or a performer. Live, he exhibits a joyous discipline that’s become all too uncommon in contemporary jazz. He and keyboard wizard Lyle Mays have produced a body of work for which I can find no equal.

     “Rain River” was first recorded on the 1992 Secret Story album.

The March Of Malevolence

     I was about to say “words fail me,” but in truth, they don’t:

     There have been transwomen and transmen for at least five decades. Time was, they were tolerated without much comment…because they were discreet and undemanding. They practiced public modesty. They worked to perfect their presentation, the better to be accepted by others. They accepted that they were a minority, that the majority would regard their preference as deviant if not delusional, and they strove to “keep themselves to themselves.” But that was then.

     I have two transwomen friends. Both are intelligent, courteous, and thoroughly civilized. I can’t think of a word to say against either of them. But the madness running rampant around us, nicely exemplified by the embedded tweet, is another matter entirely – and I think I know its genesis.

     It started with the “pride” movements.

     The origin, as far as I can tell, was in the “black power” movement of the Sixties. This ought to have been interpreted as a shot across our bow. It was openly aggressive: intended to frighten. It was reported and commented on by the media of that day in a curiously respectful fashion, as if the white majority of the nation was responsible for it, and required to kowtow to it. Yet it was only the sequel to another social phenomenon of note:

“Say it loud: I’m black and I’m proud.”

     Oh really? “Proud” of what? Did you make yourself black? Did you work hard to become black? Is it something you could do for someone else who lacks the strength or the skill?

     The arrant idiocy of “pride” in a birth condition – a condition whose bearer had not worked for it and could not claim to be responsible for it – went unrecognized. It ought to have garnered a strong negative response. However, the Left, ever alert for ways to divide Americans, used its colonies in the schools to encourage it, and in the media to report on it respectfully. It was treated as if all whites ought to respect it and all blacks should be chanting it. And so it gained a foothold. It became a bridgehead from which other assaults on Americanism could be launched thereafter.

     Shortly thereafter we had “gay pride” and “Latino pride.” (“Illegal alien pride?”) Today we have “trans pride.” Each “pride” movement morphed into a “power” movement: a militant thrust toward special privileges that others had to grant on demand. And normal Americans, averse to confrontation and desiring only to be left in peace, gave way before all of them.

     (I’m having a “waking nightmare” about “pedophile pride.” Perhaps it’s time to make another pot of coffee.)

     The Left’s allegiants gave each of these things propulsion by fiercely attacking anyone who questioned them. Ugly accusations – “racism,” “homophobia,” “xenophobia” – became the lingua franca of public discourse. The Public Choice effect reared its head: once again, militant minorities with compact agendas proved more powerful than peaceable majorities with divergent priorities at shaping our language, our attitudes, and our public policy.

     It could all have been avoided, if only the peaceable, easily accommodated members of those groups had disciplined the more aggressive and unruly ones from the outset. But that didn’t happen then, and is unlikely to happen now. Peaceable Negroes are as afraid of their aggressive kin as are whites; peaceable homosexuals are as wary of their aggressive fellows as are heterosexuals; and so forth.

     As I wrote above, I do have two transwomen friends. I don’t expect either would publicly criticize the aggressive one whose sentiments are on display in the embedded tweet. I’d hope for it – it’s the route back to social peace and general amity – but I don’t expect it. In their position, I’d be afraid of being swarmed under by the militants, so I could never blame them for feeling the same fear.

     Yet that is the one and only way back to public peace. For whites to discipline unruly, lawless blacks would be condemned as “racist oppression;” for straights to discipline unruly, aggressive gays would be similarly treated; and so forth. So the marches, the demands, the unrestrained aggression toward peaceable others – including others who are kindred to the militants — are overwhelmingly likely to continue.

     What began as unearned, aggressive “pride” has become hatred and malevolence. But hatred breeds hatred. Malevolence breeds malevolence. Should this go on, there will be an inimical counter-reaction, wholly lacking in anything resembling tolerance.

     May I be safely dead, may the earth be heaped high upon my grave and the mourners long departed to the proper pursuits of the living, before that day arrives.

Cynic’s corner.

In recent days, the UN and other international organizations have begun warning of a worsening humanitarian situation in Yemen. This is a testament to the Houthis’ success in their operations.

It has become customary that each time Ansar Allah evidently take the upper hand in the war, various international groups and organizations immediately start calling for a cessation of hostilities. The absence of those voices is noticeable when it is simply Saudi Arabia violating ceasefires and carrying out airstrikes.

Ansar Allah Are Unrelenting in Their Push for Ma’rib.” By South Front, 10/19/21.

A Great Man

     There are people who don’t believe in great men. That is, they don’t believe that a man can be “great” in any sense that would command the attention and respect of others. Such a person, upon hearing a man called “great,” immediately takes exception. He tends to regard it as a personal insult.

     But there are and have been great men: men whose deeds have shaped nations and history. Oftentimes, what made them great was their “voice:” their ability to inspire and lead great numbers of others in noble causes. In other cases, what made a man great was his ability to cause thousands or millions to go forth and slaughter as he commanded. “Great” is not synonymous with “good.”

     Today, Catholics celebrate the life of a great man, a man whose life and words inspired millions worldwide and, in fact, were central to the final defeat of the Soviet Union and its dominance of Eastern Europe. That man was born in 1920 in Wadowice, Poland. His birth name was Karol Józef Wojtyła. Early in life he proved to be a prodigy both of the mind and the body. Yet his was not an easy youth. By age twenty all the other members of his nuclear family had died. Then came the German occupation of Poland, the horrors that it brought, and the sense, which flowered during the war, that his life should be put to more than mere survival. In 1946 he was ordained a priest of the Catholic Church.

     He would eventually be known to the world as Pope John Paul II. Today Catholics remember him as Pope John Paul II the Great, one of only four popes to be awarded the honorific.

     John Paul II died in 2005, after a papacy of twenty-seven years, the second longest in Church history. He was canonized by Pope Francis in 2014, and is today a recognized saint. October 22 is his feast day. Historians consider him to be an essential member of a trio whose words, deeds, and policies shaped the great events of their era. The other two are Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.

     The century behind us was tumultuous and more. But tumult is inseparable from progress. John Paul II, by his teachings, his travels, and his gentle administration of a Church that had known much conflict and even more opposition from the forces of darkness, was responsible for more progress – spiritual and secular – than any other man of his time. To be remembered as “the Great” is an honor he richly deserved.

     May God hold you close, Karol Józef Wojtyła, teacher, world traveler, Supreme Pontiff, and saint.

This Piece Needs No Title…

     …except possibly “Holy shit!They’re not even trying to hide it any longer:

     The owner of a New York City supermarket chain predicted the food prices will increase sharply in the coming months, with some increasing 10 percent in the next two months.

     John Catsimatidis, the billionaire supermarket owner of Gristedes and D’Agostino Foods, warned that food giants such as Nabisco, PepsiCo, and Coca-Cola will prioritize raising prices on products.

     “I see over 10 percent [price increase] in the next 60 days,” he said in an interview with Fox Business on Monday, adding that the trend will not drop “anytime soon.” Catsimatidis cited rising inflation and supply chain bottlenecks that are currently plaguing supermarkets and other retailers around the United States.

     Catsimatidis then cautioned: “I see food prices going up tremendously” because food company CEOs “want to be ahead of the curve and the way they’re doing it is they’re dropping all promotions. They are dropping low-moving items.”

     Feel the fear.

     No, it’s not just that I got very little sleep last night…or that one of my dogs has been digging escape tunnels in the back yard…or that my wife got so drunk yesterday evening that she actually left her purse, which she normally clutches so fiercely that to detach it from her would take surgery, at a restaurant. Things are really, truly going to Hell in the Land of the Formerly Free.

     Save this URL. You’ll thank me later.


     The causal chains are somewhat tangled, but nevertheless they’re evident to anyone with eyes that see and a mind that doesn’t automatically block out the unpleasant like Zaphod Beeblebrox’s unique “safety glasses.” To my way of thinking, the most important elements are:

  • Usurper Biden’s deliberate attempt to shut down the American oil and gas industries;
  • Gavin Newsom’s decree that no internal-combustion vehicles will cruise California’s roads after 2035;
  • The upcoming OSHA regulation mandating COVID-19 vaccinations for all companies with 100 or more employees;
  • The destruction of the dollar by unlimited federal borrowing and deficit spending.

     The first of these has raised the price of all petroleum and natural-gas products, which compels an increase in the prices of anything that requires energy to produce, or that must be moved from producer to retailer. The second has resulted in a sharp decrease of trucks and truckers available to move goods from California’s port cities to their destinations in the U.S. The third has caused millions – yes, millions — of American workers in every field of endeavor to leave or lose their jobs, bringing about a worker shortfall that has crippled the economy generally. And the fourth, by weakening the dollar, has stepped on the accelerator of price escalation, especially as regards anything imported.

     With all this, the utterly contemptible Jen Psaki has the incomparable gall to claim that the economy is getting better because “people are buying things.” There’s the giveaway, Gentle Reader. She’s either too stupid to understand even basic economics, or she’s completely corrupt and willing to purvey any lie, however bald, that will keep her in her job at the lectern. Given that she works for America’s first demonstrably senile president – great God in heaven, you can practically see the marionette strings! – I could easily believe either or both.

     There’s no more pretending that “everything will work out just fine.” The Constitutional federated republic called the United States of America is dead. The Usurpers are busily shoveling dirt into its face.


     I just bought a second freezer. I intend to cram it to bursting with meats, legumes, any vegetables that will survive being frozen, coffee, and whatever other edibles belong in a freezer. I figure that between my two freezers and my large pantry, I can store enough to feed us for at least a year. (I can’t eat that “survival food” crap. Too much salt for a man whose blood pressure could be used to power a moonshot.) If we’re still under the Usurpers’ thumbs a year from now, I very much doubt I’ll still be alive. Some uniformed thug – “Just doing my job, sir” – will have posed me, a retiree of reclusive ways, the choice of vaccination or death.

     In that event, I intend to take as many such thugs to Hell with me as I can. I’d consider it a service to my fellow freedom lovers. (Also, I want a decent honor guard when I get there.) If you’re similarly inclined, a few words of advice:

  • Load the shotgun with slugs;
  • Aim for the face.

     Yes, you really did just read all that. Yes, I meant every word. For now, avoid crowds, keep your loved ones close, and be well. I’ll see you on the other side.

Load more