100%. Politics is a game of addition and Trumps public tantrums and unnecessary graceless taunts and fight-picking have grown tiresome. He got screwed and there is no justice in this world. Thems the breaks. It is the mushy 6-8% in the middle that decide elections and they will never vote for him. He will lose in 2024 because of that. His time has passed.
Let's not forget that DeSantis was a founding member of the Freedom Caucus, before Trump was even a candidate, so one could say Trump is more establishment than DeSantis.
That said, Trump was the best president of my lifetime, and I will match his petty grievances, which are at least publicly aired, to the backstabbings of most other politicans. Trump 2024 still in effect I am afraid.
Definitely this. Some of us hoped for a Trump / Cruz ticket in 2016 (and what and utter useless RINO dud Mike Pence turned out to be in retrospect), and if you watch the first two presidential debates, there even seemed to be a "bromance" between the two men.
And they were the ONLY two candidates who were not "open borders uber alles", and who did not slavishly follow the corporate masters and foreign policy interventionists. If we have learned *anything* in the last six years, it is that Big Business is NOT necessarily a GOP friend, and the people running certain industries are even bitter foes!
We have also learned that we are too far overextended in commitments overseas, and "nation building" does not work. And for this realism, the globalist neo-cons *joined with* the Leftist Media Liars in propagating "The Russia Hoax", simply because Trump told them we can no longer let those armchair generals treat our people in uniform like pawns in some New World Order fantasy scheme of theirs.
IIRC, and this may be apocryphal, rumor has it that someone churchy in Cruz's campaign in Utah said something nasty about Melania's past as a racy lingerie model, and The Donald, being The Donald, went Trumpzilla on Ted Cruz after that. In any case, a Trump / Cruz ticket in 2016, dare I say it, might have prevailed and be in its second term in the White House now.
Yes, Rand Paul ran. I was responding to this part of your comment in mentioning Rand Paul~ "And they were the ONLY two candidates who were not "open borders uber alles", and who did not slavishly follow the corporate masters and foreign policy interventionists."
My God how sick am I of hearing people constantly stipulate these flaws Trump allegedly has. It's ridiculous and self-destructive.
Absolutely nothing in his public conduct is in any way unprecedented. He does not gratuitously insult half the country (unprecedented itself before His Royal Blackness started mouthing off), he does not diddle interns in the White House, he does not put his feet up on the Resolute Desk, he does not pick up beagles by the ears, he does not grow rich in politics at the expense of the country and he does not conduct press conferences on the toilet.
Democrats ran three people in the last 14 years who were not only manifestly unqualified, crooked, and incompetent, but actively hated the country and its inhabitants and sought to undermine the Constitution at every turn.
We had a guy who delivered on more of the conservative wish list than anyone since Reagan and would have done even better had his own side circled the wagons the way the disloyal opposition do.
It’s in no way ridiculous nor destructive to state the obvious: Trump’s attacks on DeSantis and Youngkin are tone deaf and harmful to the America First movement.
One can say that without somehow being forgiving of the criminality of Democrats.
In 2009, I was essentially blackballed for writing that Barack Obama wasn’t a “good man” — and that he’d set race relations back 50 years.
Biden was a protege of segregationists; and Hillary is just awful. And?
If you’re sick of hearing truths, you’ve come to the wrong page, brother.
Bingo, Brother John. Trump was far from perfect, but Politics is not Fantasy Football, and by gum, he WAS the best president of my lifetime, even topping Uncle Ron in many respects. After all, Uncle Ron still had a large contingent of "Joe Sixpack", "Boll Weevil"" or "Blue Dog" (depending upon what part of the USA where they were) non-communist Democrats in Congress to work with.
You do both know that in the piece I write that if Trump's the nominee, I'd support him, right? And that I wrote that his policies worked?
I also pointed out that he had a 93% win rate. There's a lot to recommend him, which is why I supported him in 2020.
His problems aren't his policies. His problems are his personnel choices, his fame-fucking, and his inability to stop whining. It's gotten tiresome. I'm on record as saying the 2020 election was clearly fraudulent, and that Trump should have won. But this is 2022 moving into 2024 with Trump stuck in the past -- and his public attacks on those who turned D states to R, or greatly increased the percentage by which a state moved right are tone deaf.
The whole metaphor of this piece stands: Trump is impulsive and lacks a filter, and his enemies have learned to use those traits against him -- just as Sonny's enemies did, setting him up for an ambush. Meanwhile, DeSantis has both conservatives and a desperate establishment trying to use him to their separate ends. DeSantis was part of the Freedom Caucus. He has governed in a way that is a blueprint for other Red State governors. He is Michael: he's keeping his friends close and his enemies closer. Hell, he could very well turn out to be the one candidate the establishment backs who will turn on them the minute he takes office.
Coming out and attacking him before and after a win -- during a hurricane -- is petty, unbecoming, and a net negative for America First.
"His problems are his personnel choices" - and there is our problem. This is why well meaning outsiders try to change things "inside the Beltway" only to get either (1) devoured and destroyed by it (sadly it looks like Lauren Boebert might be going that way), (2) co-opted by it, or (3) adapting to it out of necessity, only to wind up part of it.
It takes people who know how to drain the swamp, but such people might just be part of its vile ecosystem. As for turning off the water flow, good luck to that. The best we can do is channel it with the right levees and dams and reclaim what we can. (I use the metaphors of the San Joaquin River region where I live).
"The whole metaphor of this piece stands: Trump is impulsive and lacks a filter, and his enemies have learned to use those traits against him -- just as Sonny's enemies did, setting him up for an ambush." - and neither of us disagree with that one bit. Spot on. Trump needs better advisors.
On the other hand, to use other metaphors from mythology, who else but Hercules Trump could have channeled rivers of outrage to clean out Hillary Clinton's political Augean Stables?
And I like DeSantis - He is certainly better than anyone else but a sadder but wiser Trump (assuming Trump has learned not to be set up, and signs point to not), otherwise, yes, he is the best for 2024.
Trump and DeSantis are either working together, or we're screwed. I'm inclined to believe the former. I don't know how I feel about the fact that almost no one gets this, or its implications. This is all kayfabe.
I hope so Eric, but after too many Trumpers believing Trump was playing 3 Dimensional Chess only to be let down (and I was one of them), I think Trump may sadly be just acting petty.
As disappointing as Trump was sometimes, the fact is that all too many "Establicans", as you put it once, stabbed him in the back, and certain "Classical Liberals", like yourself, just stood aside and looked.
Well, it's interesting that you cited posts from early in 2016, at about the time that my concern with Trump mostly came from the alt-right thinking he'd do their white identity politics bidding.
When he didn't, I did what I said I'd do when he was elected: watch how he governed and go from there.
Here's what I wrote in 2019, eg., which you somehow missed in your archeological dig for historical purity: https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=58621
Of course, by this time I was hardly writing on pw. Most of my material appeared on Twitter, where I was a very strong Trump supporter, especially in the lead up to the elections. I covered very closely the Spygate hoax; I championed Trump's policies; and I endorsed him wholeheartedly.
I'd tell you to look up those Tweets, but alas, you cannot, as I've been twice permanently banned from Twitter. So you're just going to have to take my word for it.
All that aside, what was the purpose of your comment? In 2015-16, I was a Cruz supporter. I wrote a column in the Federalist expressing concern about the identity politics of the self-professed "alt-right" who'd been the most vocal Trump supporters (https://thefederalist.com/2016/09/06/alt-right-mirror-image-new-left/). I've been a critic of identity politics going back to the beginning of pw -- and I was a vocal critic of the establishment and a huge TEA Party supporter, but suddenly I was both a "CUCK" and a "Kike," a rootless cosmopolitan bent on taking control of Hollywood, the banks, and the global order -- all of which was nonsense from antisemitics who imagined themselves as Vikings. (See, eg., here: https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=29785)
Forgive me for being turned off by those kinds of Trump supporters. But I also never ran from what I wrote in 2015-16, nor did I ever try to hide it. I don't believe people are born fully formed, like Athena birthed out of Zeus's dome. My positions evolve as I learn more, or challenge my own biases, or as reality sets me straight.
If you've been 100% correct in all your positions over your lifetime, send me your address and I'll send you an edible arrangements and a certificate declaring your greatness.
Trump didn't govern the way the white nationalists wanted. In fact, Richard Spencer, eg., went back to the Ds in 2020, knowing well which party actually engaged in racialism and racialist policy.
And because he didn't govern that way, I made my mea culpas and supported him both vocally and in writing.
So the answer to your gotcha question, "Did you?" is yes. And the roughly 16K followers I had through 2 Twitter stints would attest to it, too.
To be honest, I did see your Twitter Tweets, and you did change.
And to be honest, I preferred Ted Cruz at first as well, but once the Trump Train was chugging along, I jumped on. You go to the fight with the fighter you have, whatever the flaws. Don't treat Politics like Fantasy Football.
But to also be honest, the "alt right" is:
1. a vague term used to smear all too many of us who have grown wise to the reality that globalist Big Business and armchair foreign policy hawkish wonks are NOT the friends they may have been in Cold War days anymore, and it is time to seriously rethink Trade and Foreign Policies.
The term is also:
2. a boogeyman invented by the Demunist Commiecrat Left, and those kind of "alt-right" people are marginal inconsequential creeps. Who is *really* doing all the "anti-Asian hate"? You can watch recorded video after recorded video, and it isn't the "alt right".
And to be honest further, ANY fighting back against the Demunist Commiecrat Left will be smeared by the lamestream Globalist Media Machine and labeled "alt-right" and "White Nationalism". And at a certain point I am saying fuck it, if people are going to smear us anyway no matter what we do, well then, what shall we do? And there IS a certain dreadful logic in "fighting fire with fire". Or at the very least, shooting back, a la Kyle Rittenhouse.
The self-styled "alt-right" leader I responded to literally wrote a piece titled "What the Alt Right is." So no, I wasn't responding to a vague term, nor to a "boogeyman invented by the Demunist Commiecrat Left." I was responding to an alt-right manifesto laying out the precepts of the alt right, written by a major figure in the alt-right movement.
I know who the actual racists are, as I've been writing about them in print since at least 1996. The Klan were Democrats; and many on the alt-right returned to their roots when it became clear Trump wouldn't champion them. What they wanted was identity politics -- though identity politics that rewarded them. Me, I don't want identity politics at all. The whole lot of it is Balkanizing and toxic.
How major a figure is Theodore Beale (a.k.a., Vox Day) really? He certainly has never won political office. And even as a pundit on that side of the political spectrum, or that portion of the political map, does he compare in content to other hard right thinkers like, say, Pat Buchanan, the late Sam Francis, or even Mike Cernovich?
I will give him credit as a videogamer and a science fiction writer. With "Gamergate", and "Sad Puppies / Rabid Puppies", he has been taking on the Demunist Commiecrats who have poisoned gaming and science fiction writing, that Commiecrat cuntcreme N.K. Jemisin in particular. (It would be delightful if she was beaten and violated by the underclass for whom she covers, but I digress).
OF COURSE "identity politics" are horrid. But if they keep using such dirty tricks, why should we not fight back? There is a dreadful logical sense in Vox Day's quote that "white supremacy simply isn't true. Whites are not superior, but whites are the only tribe willing and able to maintain Western civilization because they are the only tribe that truly values it." OK, he is wrong about the last seven words, we can and certainly *should* find allies of all ethnicities and both genders (only two!), but I am sick and tired of being told that when the AntiFA and BLM goons are no-holds-barred, that we must stick to Marquess of Queensberry rules.
Or to put it another way, it took an Air Marshal Harris and a General LeMay to do the Saturation Bombing necessary to destroy *that* monstrosity, and today we need such fighting back methods again. The Holocaust probably would not have been stopped without Dresden raid like methods.
He was major enough a figure to the alt-right that his piece was receiving a lot of attention, and my response to it was featured in the Federalist.
You can fight back with identity politics all you'd like. I prefer to point to the racialism within the identity politics paradigm. Enjoy the constant drumbeat of white nationalism, though. It's served us well with voters thus far.
I have NEVER said to stick to Queensberry rules. In fact, I'm on the opposite end of that spectrum. Go look up my Hot Air piece in 2009, "How I learned to stop caring and love the f bomb," which was a direct repudiation of such flaccid faux warriors.
That said, I'm strategic about how we attack; and normalizing identity politics is a mistake, one that requires incoherent linguistic assumptions to be institutionalized, and one that serves only to further Balkanize us. It's not that the Vox Day alt-right was being aggressive that I despise; it's that they were racialists engaging in the leftist thinking, which makes them both stupid and harmful to the idea of individual liberty and autonomy.
You aren't going to change my mind; I'm not going to change yours. The only difference between us at this point is that I have the advantage of being correct ;)
100%. Politics is a game of addition and Trumps public tantrums and unnecessary graceless taunts and fight-picking have grown tiresome. He got screwed and there is no justice in this world. Thems the breaks. It is the mushy 6-8% in the middle that decide elections and they will never vote for him. He will lose in 2024 because of that. His time has passed.
Who doesn't love a good reference (and pretty accurate too) to the Godfather?
Thanks
Let's not forget that DeSantis was a founding member of the Freedom Caucus, before Trump was even a candidate, so one could say Trump is more establishment than DeSantis.
That said, Trump was the best president of my lifetime, and I will match his petty grievances, which are at least publicly aired, to the backstabbings of most other politicans. Trump 2024 still in effect I am afraid.
Definitely this. Some of us hoped for a Trump / Cruz ticket in 2016 (and what and utter useless RINO dud Mike Pence turned out to be in retrospect), and if you watch the first two presidential debates, there even seemed to be a "bromance" between the two men.
And they were the ONLY two candidates who were not "open borders uber alles", and who did not slavishly follow the corporate masters and foreign policy interventionists. If we have learned *anything* in the last six years, it is that Big Business is NOT necessarily a GOP friend, and the people running certain industries are even bitter foes!
We have also learned that we are too far overextended in commitments overseas, and "nation building" does not work. And for this realism, the globalist neo-cons *joined with* the Leftist Media Liars in propagating "The Russia Hoax", simply because Trump told them we can no longer let those armchair generals treat our people in uniform like pawns in some New World Order fantasy scheme of theirs.
IIRC, and this may be apocryphal, rumor has it that someone churchy in Cruz's campaign in Utah said something nasty about Melania's past as a racy lingerie model, and The Donald, being The Donald, went Trumpzilla on Ted Cruz after that. In any case, a Trump / Cruz ticket in 2016, dare I say it, might have prevailed and be in its second term in the White House now.
Rand Paul - so not ONLY TWO. No one was ever against the globalists in modern times more than Rand Paul and his father Ron.
Did Rand run in 2016? But anyway, yes, there also has been Ron Paul. But did that not also happen to him? Was he not smeared in the same way? Yes.
Yes, Rand Paul ran. I was responding to this part of your comment in mentioning Rand Paul~ "And they were the ONLY two candidates who were not "open borders uber alles", and who did not slavishly follow the corporate masters and foreign policy interventionists."
My God how sick am I of hearing people constantly stipulate these flaws Trump allegedly has. It's ridiculous and self-destructive.
Absolutely nothing in his public conduct is in any way unprecedented. He does not gratuitously insult half the country (unprecedented itself before His Royal Blackness started mouthing off), he does not diddle interns in the White House, he does not put his feet up on the Resolute Desk, he does not pick up beagles by the ears, he does not grow rich in politics at the expense of the country and he does not conduct press conferences on the toilet.
Democrats ran three people in the last 14 years who were not only manifestly unqualified, crooked, and incompetent, but actively hated the country and its inhabitants and sought to undermine the Constitution at every turn.
We had a guy who delivered on more of the conservative wish list than anyone since Reagan and would have done even better had his own side circled the wagons the way the disloyal opposition do.
It’s in no way ridiculous nor destructive to state the obvious: Trump’s attacks on DeSantis and Youngkin are tone deaf and harmful to the America First movement.
One can say that without somehow being forgiving of the criminality of Democrats.
In 2009, I was essentially blackballed for writing that Barack Obama wasn’t a “good man” — and that he’d set race relations back 50 years.
Biden was a protege of segregationists; and Hillary is just awful. And?
If you’re sick of hearing truths, you’ve come to the wrong page, brother.
Bingo, Brother John. Trump was far from perfect, but Politics is not Fantasy Football, and by gum, he WAS the best president of my lifetime, even topping Uncle Ron in many respects. After all, Uncle Ron still had a large contingent of "Joe Sixpack", "Boll Weevil"" or "Blue Dog" (depending upon what part of the USA where they were) non-communist Democrats in Congress to work with.
You do both know that in the piece I write that if Trump's the nominee, I'd support him, right? And that I wrote that his policies worked?
I also pointed out that he had a 93% win rate. There's a lot to recommend him, which is why I supported him in 2020.
His problems aren't his policies. His problems are his personnel choices, his fame-fucking, and his inability to stop whining. It's gotten tiresome. I'm on record as saying the 2020 election was clearly fraudulent, and that Trump should have won. But this is 2022 moving into 2024 with Trump stuck in the past -- and his public attacks on those who turned D states to R, or greatly increased the percentage by which a state moved right are tone deaf.
The whole metaphor of this piece stands: Trump is impulsive and lacks a filter, and his enemies have learned to use those traits against him -- just as Sonny's enemies did, setting him up for an ambush. Meanwhile, DeSantis has both conservatives and a desperate establishment trying to use him to their separate ends. DeSantis was part of the Freedom Caucus. He has governed in a way that is a blueprint for other Red State governors. He is Michael: he's keeping his friends close and his enemies closer. Hell, he could very well turn out to be the one candidate the establishment backs who will turn on them the minute he takes office.
Coming out and attacking him before and after a win -- during a hurricane -- is petty, unbecoming, and a net negative for America First.
YMMV
"His problems are his personnel choices" - and there is our problem. This is why well meaning outsiders try to change things "inside the Beltway" only to get either (1) devoured and destroyed by it (sadly it looks like Lauren Boebert might be going that way), (2) co-opted by it, or (3) adapting to it out of necessity, only to wind up part of it.
It takes people who know how to drain the swamp, but such people might just be part of its vile ecosystem. As for turning off the water flow, good luck to that. The best we can do is channel it with the right levees and dams and reclaim what we can. (I use the metaphors of the San Joaquin River region where I live).
"The whole metaphor of this piece stands: Trump is impulsive and lacks a filter, and his enemies have learned to use those traits against him -- just as Sonny's enemies did, setting him up for an ambush." - and neither of us disagree with that one bit. Spot on. Trump needs better advisors.
On the other hand, to use other metaphors from mythology, who else but Hercules Trump could have channeled rivers of outrage to clean out Hillary Clinton's political Augean Stables?
And I like DeSantis - He is certainly better than anyone else but a sadder but wiser Trump (assuming Trump has learned not to be set up, and signs point to not), otherwise, yes, he is the best for 2024.
Great analogy. Totally agreed. I would love another 4 years of Trump (followed by 8 for big D) but it just cannot be.
Spot on. DeSantis is wise not to rise to Trump’s bait. 2016 is not 2022 and 2024 is still far enough away to wait.
I wish Trump could be less transparent.
Trump and DeSantis are either working together, or we're screwed. I'm inclined to believe the former. I don't know how I feel about the fact that almost no one gets this, or its implications. This is all kayfabe.
I feel that way about our “democracy” at this point.
I hope so Eric, but after too many Trumpers believing Trump was playing 3 Dimensional Chess only to be let down (and I was one of them), I think Trump may sadly be just acting petty.
Solid take
"I supported Trump in 2020. Happily."
Did you?
https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=58521
https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=58377
As disappointing as Trump was sometimes, the fact is that all too many "Establicans", as you put it once, stabbed him in the back, and certain "Classical Liberals", like yourself, just stood aside and looked.
Well, it's interesting that you cited posts from early in 2016, at about the time that my concern with Trump mostly came from the alt-right thinking he'd do their white identity politics bidding.
When he didn't, I did what I said I'd do when he was elected: watch how he governed and go from there.
Here's what I wrote in 2019, eg., which you somehow missed in your archeological dig for historical purity: https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=58621
Of course, by this time I was hardly writing on pw. Most of my material appeared on Twitter, where I was a very strong Trump supporter, especially in the lead up to the elections. I covered very closely the Spygate hoax; I championed Trump's policies; and I endorsed him wholeheartedly.
I'd tell you to look up those Tweets, but alas, you cannot, as I've been twice permanently banned from Twitter. So you're just going to have to take my word for it.
All that aside, what was the purpose of your comment? In 2015-16, I was a Cruz supporter. I wrote a column in the Federalist expressing concern about the identity politics of the self-professed "alt-right" who'd been the most vocal Trump supporters (https://thefederalist.com/2016/09/06/alt-right-mirror-image-new-left/). I've been a critic of identity politics going back to the beginning of pw -- and I was a vocal critic of the establishment and a huge TEA Party supporter, but suddenly I was both a "CUCK" and a "Kike," a rootless cosmopolitan bent on taking control of Hollywood, the banks, and the global order -- all of which was nonsense from antisemitics who imagined themselves as Vikings. (See, eg., here: https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=29785)
Forgive me for being turned off by those kinds of Trump supporters. But I also never ran from what I wrote in 2015-16, nor did I ever try to hide it. I don't believe people are born fully formed, like Athena birthed out of Zeus's dome. My positions evolve as I learn more, or challenge my own biases, or as reality sets me straight.
If you've been 100% correct in all your positions over your lifetime, send me your address and I'll send you an edible arrangements and a certificate declaring your greatness.
Trump didn't govern the way the white nationalists wanted. In fact, Richard Spencer, eg., went back to the Ds in 2020, knowing well which party actually engaged in racialism and racialist policy.
And because he didn't govern that way, I made my mea culpas and supported him both vocally and in writing.
So the answer to your gotcha question, "Did you?" is yes. And the roughly 16K followers I had through 2 Twitter stints would attest to it, too.
To be honest, I did see your Twitter Tweets, and you did change.
And to be honest, I preferred Ted Cruz at first as well, but once the Trump Train was chugging along, I jumped on. You go to the fight with the fighter you have, whatever the flaws. Don't treat Politics like Fantasy Football.
But to also be honest, the "alt right" is:
1. a vague term used to smear all too many of us who have grown wise to the reality that globalist Big Business and armchair foreign policy hawkish wonks are NOT the friends they may have been in Cold War days anymore, and it is time to seriously rethink Trade and Foreign Policies.
The term is also:
2. a boogeyman invented by the Demunist Commiecrat Left, and those kind of "alt-right" people are marginal inconsequential creeps. Who is *really* doing all the "anti-Asian hate"? You can watch recorded video after recorded video, and it isn't the "alt right".
And to be honest further, ANY fighting back against the Demunist Commiecrat Left will be smeared by the lamestream Globalist Media Machine and labeled "alt-right" and "White Nationalism". And at a certain point I am saying fuck it, if people are going to smear us anyway no matter what we do, well then, what shall we do? And there IS a certain dreadful logic in "fighting fire with fire". Or at the very least, shooting back, a la Kyle Rittenhouse.
The self-styled "alt-right" leader I responded to literally wrote a piece titled "What the Alt Right is." So no, I wasn't responding to a vague term, nor to a "boogeyman invented by the Demunist Commiecrat Left." I was responding to an alt-right manifesto laying out the precepts of the alt right, written by a major figure in the alt-right movement.
I know who the actual racists are, as I've been writing about them in print since at least 1996. The Klan were Democrats; and many on the alt-right returned to their roots when it became clear Trump wouldn't champion them. What they wanted was identity politics -- though identity politics that rewarded them. Me, I don't want identity politics at all. The whole lot of it is Balkanizing and toxic.
How major a figure is Theodore Beale (a.k.a., Vox Day) really? He certainly has never won political office. And even as a pundit on that side of the political spectrum, or that portion of the political map, does he compare in content to other hard right thinkers like, say, Pat Buchanan, the late Sam Francis, or even Mike Cernovich?
I will give him credit as a videogamer and a science fiction writer. With "Gamergate", and "Sad Puppies / Rabid Puppies", he has been taking on the Demunist Commiecrats who have poisoned gaming and science fiction writing, that Commiecrat cuntcreme N.K. Jemisin in particular. (It would be delightful if she was beaten and violated by the underclass for whom she covers, but I digress).
OF COURSE "identity politics" are horrid. But if they keep using such dirty tricks, why should we not fight back? There is a dreadful logical sense in Vox Day's quote that "white supremacy simply isn't true. Whites are not superior, but whites are the only tribe willing and able to maintain Western civilization because they are the only tribe that truly values it." OK, he is wrong about the last seven words, we can and certainly *should* find allies of all ethnicities and both genders (only two!), but I am sick and tired of being told that when the AntiFA and BLM goons are no-holds-barred, that we must stick to Marquess of Queensberry rules.
Or to put it another way, it took an Air Marshal Harris and a General LeMay to do the Saturation Bombing necessary to destroy *that* monstrosity, and today we need such fighting back methods again. The Holocaust probably would not have been stopped without Dresden raid like methods.
He was major enough a figure to the alt-right that his piece was receiving a lot of attention, and my response to it was featured in the Federalist.
You can fight back with identity politics all you'd like. I prefer to point to the racialism within the identity politics paradigm. Enjoy the constant drumbeat of white nationalism, though. It's served us well with voters thus far.
I have NEVER said to stick to Queensberry rules. In fact, I'm on the opposite end of that spectrum. Go look up my Hot Air piece in 2009, "How I learned to stop caring and love the f bomb," which was a direct repudiation of such flaccid faux warriors.
That said, I'm strategic about how we attack; and normalizing identity politics is a mistake, one that requires incoherent linguistic assumptions to be institutionalized, and one that serves only to further Balkanize us. It's not that the Vox Day alt-right was being aggressive that I despise; it's that they were racialists engaging in the leftist thinking, which makes them both stupid and harmful to the idea of individual liberty and autonomy.
You aren't going to change my mind; I'm not going to change yours. The only difference between us at this point is that I have the advantage of being correct ;)
Yes.