The weekend before last, Donald Trump egged on a frenzied crowd of sweaty Alabama rednecks as they beat, kicked, and bludgeoned a peaceful Black Lives Matter activist, while last Monday night five peaceful Black Lives Matter protestors in Minneapolis were shot by a group of armed white supremacists who came looking for trouble and fired wantonly into the crowd. This is all part of the ongoing terror and violence that our white supremacist society routinely rains down on noble, longsuffering black Americans.

Of course that’s all bullshit. But that’s the impression you’d get from reading most media accounts.

Let’s “deconstruct” these real-life events, shall we?

According to the Daily Beast, the black protester at the Alabama Trump rally, one Mercutio Southall, Jr., was “beaten” by the crowd and is planning to file hate-crime charges. Donald Trump is being considered as a possible accessory to the crime. The New York Times also states as fact that he was “beaten.” The Washington Post says that he was “punched.” Keep in mind that in the absence of clear evidence and a criminal trial, reporters are supposed to insert an “allegedly” or “reportedly.” But in all these cases, they claim without equivocation that a crowd of fat old angry white bigots assaulted this man.

Here is video of the beginning of the fracas with Southall. From what I can tell, he’s screaming and elbowing and gesticulating and generally being a bellicose prick. But I don’t see him getting punched or beaten. And here is video from a CNN reporter stating that Southall “was shoved, tackled, punched & kicked.”

“The entire Black Lives Matter phenomenon is moored in lies and rampaging innumeracy.”

I’ve closely watched the latter video at least ten times, and the only person I can see throwing a punch is Southall.

When one’s entire identity revolves around being persecuted…yet to one’s extreme dismay people aren’t actually persecuting you…one must often resort to making shit up. What’s truly unsettling is how easy it is these days for these blatant liars to be believed.

Despite the fact that the Birmingham crowd who came to see Trump was estimated to be at least 10,000 strong, Southall claims his mission was to start barking from the crowd to inform Trump “he’s not welcome here.”

What level of delusionally meddlesome asshole must one be to go somewhere you’re obviously not welcome merely so you can bark to the star of the show that he isn’t welcome?

As luck would have it, back when he wasn’t a full-time shit-disturber, Southall had attended police academy but was too goddamned fat to pass the physical test. Since then he has been repeatedly arrested for making a public nuisance of himself. He estimates he has been Tasered 30 times as a result of his “activism.” He says his mom was married to a “crackhead,” but for some reason he still seems to find white police more of a threat to his four younger sisters than the fact that his mom was married to a crackhead.

Southall had previously been involved in a two-hour armed standoff with police on July 4, 2014. Since then he has been arrested for public disturbances last December, this past April, and in October. Apparently he thinks taunting police with guns is the best way to keep his four younger sisters safe.

“I’m about black people,” Southall told a reporter. “I’m not a racist, but I am about my people.”

What a sweet sentiment. Let’s see a white guy try to get away with saying exactly the same thing.

Despite Southall’s clear record of being a gleefully full-throttle agitator, a Birmingham police official was deemed a Jim Crow-era tobacco-chawin’ bigot for referring to him as an “agitator.”

In Minneapolis last Monday night, five Black Lives Matter protestors were shot by someone in a group of three white males who’d attended the protest. In report after report, the whites were referred to as “white supremacists” who sprayed lead at “peaceful” protestors. There was no journalistic equivocation, no “alleged””€”this was all stated as fact.

The evidence that they were white supremacists? Simple hearsay from a spokeswoman for Black Lives Matter as well as from the aptly surnamed Nekima Levy-Pounds, who told the Minneapolis Star Tribune, “I am obviously appalled that white supremacists would open fire on nonviolent, peaceful protesters.”

That’s nice, Ms. Pounds, but what does the video evidence show?

It shows an angry mob of blacks surrounding and repeatedly sucker-punching someone who’s recording the event on his phone camera. It also shows two black males explaining that they were confused about whether the whites were actually “white supremacists” since one of the whites was holding a “Black Lives Matter” sign. It also shows those two black males explaining that the whites were surrounded, chased, and repeatedly punched before they reached for their guns.

But again and again, despite the clear evidence, the press described the black protestors as peaceful while referring to the whites they punched and chased as “white supremacists.”

Allow me to gently suggest that for all intents and purposes, objective journalism no longer exists in the United States.

The entire Black Lives Matter phenomenon is moored in lies and rampaging innumeracy. The idea that black Americans are routinely hunted down like wild game and shot cold by bloodthirsty white police officers”€”and especially the idea that this is the main threat to “black lives””€”stands in screaming contrast to reality.

To his severe discredit, Donald Trump recently tweeted an image about interracial crime statistics that was factually inaccurate.

The Week’s Sleaziest, Cheesiest, and Queasiest Headlines

From November 20-22, thirty-one separate groups representing college campus “White Student Unions” or some variation thereof were created on Facebook, that social-media colossus that causes cancer and stupidity.

At last count, at least half of those groups have already been removed, in many cases due to leftist outrage and/or direct strong-arming by school administrators.

Many insisted this sudden eruption of groups was some sort of elaborate prank”€”the work of “trolls””€”because, seriously, what manner of fool or knave would want to be white or take pride in being white or even not actively loathe themselves for being white? What good and decent white person doesn’t wish to crawl out of his or her skin?

Since scientists have yet to craft a machine that can quantify sincerity, it’s hard to tell which of these pages is sincere and which is merely a satirical spoofing of nonwhite identity politics gone wild. Some pages seem like a little of both.

Sample mission statements include this from the UCLA White Student Union page:

We affirm the dignity and ancestry of our proud people who have gifted the world with countless works of beauty, science, and wisdom, and are committed to promoting a dialogue and political resistance that will secure a future for our posterity and spirit….At the same time, we do not wish to denigrate or harm any other group or ethnicity.

Florida International University‘s White Student Union:

Though Americans were under the impression that race would improve after the election of a half-black man as President of the United States, the last eight years have witnessed a firestorm of assumptions, accusations, lies, division and violence….Could it be that most Americans, regardless of the color of their skin, are perfectly fine having people of other races as their friends, neighbors and colleagues, and that certain people in positions of power are using their influence to manipulate the masses?

“€œWhat good and decent white person doesn’t wish to crawl out of his or her skin?”€

And Union of White NYU Students:

We are told that we are privileged, that we have all the power and that activism on our own behalf is invalid because of this. We reject these claims. We reject the claim that a “victim narrative” that is validated by outsiders is necessary to organize on our own behalf. We exist and as such will be organizing in our own interest. Whether the authorities or the media or anyone approves is irrelevant. We are white. We have agency. We do, we do not ask.

The responses were predictable: These hateful white supremacists should be excluded from campuses whose principles are based on inclusivity, their intolerance will NOT be tolerated, and it’s OK to be racist against whites because they’re the only ones capable of being racist anyway. “Free speech or hate speech?” queried a clichéd headline about Portland State University’s White Student Union as if the words “free” and “hate” were somehow mutually exclusive. Across this once-great land, school officials and activists tried to calm a nervous public’s fears by reassuring them that the only way to keep campuses safe was to make everyone”€”including white people”€”hate white people.

Framingham State University”€”which we’ll assume is somewhere in or near Framingham, but we can’t be bothered to check”€”is offering counseling services for any students who may have suffered the accidental misfortune of espying a Confederate flag sticker on a student’s laptop computer. One dutiful student who saw the sticker filed a “bias report” on the incident, which brought out the running dogs of the school’s Bias Protocol & Response Team”€”whatever the hell that is”€”to investigate the incident. As partial penance, school officials offered free counseling for students who may have seen the sticker and been unfairly triggered by it.

Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings“€”by all appearances a white man”€”is welcoming Syrian refugees into his metropolis over the objections of Texas Governor Greg Abbott:

ISIS is no more Islamic than Nazi senior staff was Christian….I am more fearful of large gatherings of white men that come into schools, theaters and shoot people up, but we don”€™t isolate young white men on this issue.

One suspects that if Rawlings were truly fearful of “large gatherings of white men” shooting him, he’d keep quiet about it”€”you know, sort of how he kept quiet about fearing ISIS.

Harlem preacher James David Manning is truly one of the most enjoyable practitioners of unabashed hate speech workin’ the Chitlin Circuit these days. He keeps one-upping himself, as evidenced by a recent comment that “Starbucks is flavored with the semen of sodomites.” When a gaggle of social-justice butterflies swooped down outside his church last week, Manning baited and taunted them by chanting, “Oh, faggots, please come out tonight” and calling one woman a “nigger lesbo.”

We need more comedians like this.

I think I may safely claim to be one of the few people alive to have flown in a Malian air force DC-3 from Bamako to Timbuktu in the company of a winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature.

The Nobel Laureate in question was Nadine Gordimer, the South African novelist and short-story writer. We were in Mali for a UNDP conference (I paid my own ticket) on improving the image of Africa in the world’s press, which was presumably thought to be an easier task than improving Africa itself. In any case, I thought that the latter should and could only be left to the Africans themselves.

Nadine Gordimer exactly corresponded to the characterization of her by the South African satirist Pieter-Dirk Uys, as “€œComrade Madam”€: the lifetime habit of command combined with a theoretical and dogmatic egalitarianism. (In another of Uys”€™ brilliant sketches, he depicts a rich Johannesburg housewife laboriously making herself up”€”preparatory to going to bed.)

Nadine Gordimer had a voice whose timbre would have penetrated the best artillery-proof armor plating. On one occasion at the conference she condescendingly addressed a Ghanaian lady as “€œmy sister Susan.”€ “€œActually, my name’s Gloria,”€ said her sister Susan, but the great writer ignored this manifestation of pedantry and continued with what she was saying.

“€œIslam rushes in where Marxism can no longer tread.”€

It was my second visit to Mali. The first time, a few years before, I had been crossing Africa by public transport”€”to see the continent from the bottom up, as it were. This was about thirty years ago, and I doubt it would be safe to make the journey now: There are too many civil wars and guerrilla insurrections on the route I took. On the other hand, Africa is much more democratic nowadays than it was then.

Mali had the distinction”€”if distinction it was”€”of being the most corrupt of the many countries through which I passed. It took three days to go a hundred yards on the bus on which I was traveling because of the exactions of the various branches of Malian officialdom on the passengers (exactions from which I, as a white man, was exempt). When I lost my temper and complained, a Malian soldier said to me mildly, “€œBut, monsieur, we have not been paid for three months,”€ and I felt ashamed.

Considering that I had passed through Zaire, as it then was, and Nigeria, the fact that Mali appeared the most corrupt country of all was quite impressive; but of course my impression may have been wrong, for it was not based on scientific sampling (if such a thing exists, which I am inclined to doubt).

Another impression that may have been wrong was that I felt no antagonism toward me in the Muslim parts of the continent through which I traveled”€”Zanzibar, Northern Cameroon, Northern Nigeria, Niger, and Mali itself. I had no inkling of the trouble to come. It is true that there had been a riot recently in the sultanate capital of Sokoto, in Nigeria, between the Christians and Muslims on the question of drinking, the bars where it was permitted being all in a certain area. But this riot was”€”I was about to say”€”small beer by comparison with what was to come.

When I arrived in Maiduguri, in Northern Nigeria, the town was virtually empty. Everyone was away at the public executions, but this was under the auspices of Nigerian law, not of sharia. When in Kaduna market I bought some splendid Hausa robes; the merchants no doubt thought I was ridiculous, but they said that they were pleased because it showed them that I liked the local people”€”which I did. I certainly felt safe in the markets of Northern Nigeria because thieves there were chased and severely beaten when caught. There were not many thieves. It never occurred to me that I or my civilization was an object of hatred, for I never encountered any manifestation of such an emotion.

Was I merely being obtuse? Was everybody concealing his feelings from me? A movement like Boko Haram cannot materialize out of nothing, and perhaps my observations were too fleeting and superficial to detect any deeper currents under the calm waters of the surface. But if you had told me of what would happen less than thirty years later, I wouldn”€™t have believed you.

What does one do, go to or refuse a party after a tragic event such as the recent Paris outrage? My son happens to live next to the Place de la République, where the massacre of innocents by those nice Islamists showing off their manhood took place. He was having dinner with his two little children when the shooting started. Luckily they’re all okay, but I spent a couple of terrible hours trying to get through after the news came over the TV screens. The next evening in New York, at the Metropolitan Museum, the Costume Institute was celebrating “The Art of Style” with a black-tie dinner honoring Jacqueline de Ribes, the international style icon whose dresses are being exhibited at the museum.
I was of two minds, then decency prevailed and the whole thing was called off. It would have been pretty ridiculous. Hundreds of dead and wounded in Paris, and us fat cats dressed to the nines celebrating a Parisian lady who has dressed well for most of her 86 years. Consumerist lust: 0, good sense: 1. It also saved me from a hangover, as I loathe fashion and fashionistas, and alcohol is the only antidote to the dreaded latter.
Just before the massacre of innocents, Curt Schilling, an American sports announcer and analyst, was suspended by ESPN for equating Muhammadans with World War II Nazis. It seems that mass murderers acting on their god’s orders should not be slandered as Nazis, who acted on their führer’s dictates. Go figure! Nor, according to effete hacks of the lefty persuasion, should Donald Trump be closing mosques that preach hate against us, nor should Muslims that do likewise be registered.

“It sounds crazy, but the liberal media in Europe and in the United States are more concerned about the reaction to the ruthlessness of ISIS than the ruthlessness itself.”

It sounds crazy, but the liberal media in Europe and in the United States are more concerned about the reaction to the ruthlessness of ISIS than the ruthlessness itself. Stand up and take a bow, political correctness, you will have done more to bring about the end of our civilization than the maniacal bigots who are perpetrating these horrors daily. And if you think comedy is dead, think again. The Brussels clowns who thought up the system of passport-free travel throughout the states that signed the Schengen Agreement are huddling to find ways to assuage the suckers—us—after a summer of chaotic migration. Just think of it: Billions and billions of euros have been collected by the bureaucrooks in Brussels over all these years, thousands of laws have been passed, the southern half of Europe has regressed economically back to the early ’50s, and their greatest achievement, their most cherished accomplishment, has been to ensure travel around Europe without having to flash one’s passport.
I read somewhere that someone said that Angela Merkel has blood on her hands. She sure does. She makes a moral case for Saudi Arabia not allowing women to drive or be in politics. And what about that prehuman Australopithecus by the name of Jean-Claude Juncker, a malodorous cesspit discovered somewhere in Luxembourg whose reaction after the Paris catastrophe was to remind us that we should think of migrants and their plight? When history is written long after the collapse of Europe, those two will have replaced Nero and his fiddle. It will be Angela and Jean-Claude inviting in more hordes while the place goes up in smoke.
Let’s face it: Europe’s open-borders arrangement is effectively an international passport-free zone for terrorists, no ifs or buts about it. They can come in, murder at will, and make their escape. It is like hanging a sign welcoming terrorists to Europe. And they have been accepting it with alacrity. Human traffickers and drug dealers haven’t been doing so badly either, thank you, Jean-Claude and Angela yet again. And it all starts with the so-called elite. A humanoid like Jean-Claude and the rest of the garbage surrounding him distrust the opinions of simple folk like you and me. When we vote no it’s ignored and another vote is called for. The garbage of Brussels have totally lost touch with the people who pay their enormous salaries and expense accounts, and we in turn no longer feel represented.
Lastly, how come there are no resettlement schemes in the immensely rich Gulf States? How come Saudi Arabia, that feminine paradise where teenagers are at times crucified for holding up the wrong sign, hasn’t taken in a single migrant? Why hasn’t Europe or the U.S. demanded the kleptocrats in Saudi who financed ISIS at the start live up to their moral obligations to their fellow Muslims? Because one can’t mix morality and the Saudis. Whores, palaces, jets, and yachts—yes—but not morality. They say democracies are slow to anger, but once they do, all hell breaks loose. Yes, and there is a Santa Claus. The EU has literally killed democracy in Europe. Our anger at what happened in Paris has the bureaucrooks shrugging their shoulders in annoyance—at us. Who cares? It’s Europe, and what counts is the central power in Brussels; the rest is just stuff, nonsense that will go away. Next time you see a Brussels bureaucrat, aim some spittle at his face. I’ll pay your fine.

Thanksgiving is thousands of years old and can be traced back to Catholics, Puritans, and even Guy Fawkes. In the modern narrative, however, it’s a blasphemous day where we overindulge ourselves while ignoring the horrible slaughter of the American Indians. The Southern Poverty Law Center suggests we hold a Thanksgiving Mourning where we cry like a bunch of fags over what some guy’s great-grandfather did. As the father of many Indians myself, I don”€™t like this narrative. We didn”€™t just barge in and wipe out an entire people. We fought them from 1540 to 1890. That’s 350 years! They eventually lost, but nobody has proved to be as worthy an adversary as the Indians. We fought them a hundred times longer than we fought the Nazis. When we portray the Indians as an innocent tribe of peaceful hippies who were duped with “€œguns, germs, and steel,”€ as Jared Diamond would say, we make them look bad. They were warriors. After the Pueblo Indians overthrew the Spanish in 1680, they let their desert horses loose in the prairies. This changed the lives of all Indians just as much as colonization. Having millions of horses roaming the land equipped all Indians with an incredible hunting weapon. Buffalo weren”€™t a big deal before Indians were given horses because deer and elk were easier to catch. Now buffalo”€”and men”€”were easy game. Within one generation the Cheyenne, Sioux, and Navajo went from small-time hunter-gatherers to nomadic warriors who proudly formed alliances and destroyed their enemies. Yes, the vast majority of the killing was whites against Indians, and I”€™m not trying to trivialize the massacres, but it’s worth taking a moment on Thanksgiving Day to recognize how good the Indians were at fighting and how much they loved it.

Though women’s roles varied from tribe to tribe, ranging from second-class citizens (Comanche) to major authority figures (Arapaho), the men were always the leaders. Their job was to hunt and to war. They would adorn themselves with eagle feathers and paint their faces to celebrate their kills. Their value as men was directly tied to how many other men they had killed. They were not hippies. They were skinheads. They slaughtered rival tribes and threw the corpses in mass graves a thousand years before any white man showed up.

“€œIt’s worth taking a moment on Thanksgiving Day to recognize how good the Indians were at fighting and how much they loved it.”€

They fought us, but they fought each other with equal savagery. As Geronimo himself attested, the Apaches were godless heathens who only worshipped war. The Apache destroyed the Spanish and killed more whites than any other tribe. Their strong sense of community held back the American military for 40 years straight. Warring with this one tribe saw the Alamo, the Mexican-American War, and the Civil War come and go. The numbers seem to vary wildly on the casualties, but I”€™ve heard both sides lost about 20,000 people (census data from that time shows that was pretty much everybody). We fought against them, but whites also fought alongside them. During the American Revolution, the Iroquois banded together with the British and killed Americans in droves, often scalping them to death (can you imagine a worse way to go than having your scalp removed?). The entire continent was one big war and there was just as much red-on-red killing as there was white-on-red. After being chased out of the Black Hills by the Sioux, the Cheyenne formed an alliance with their attackers as well as the Arapaho. This alliance fought hard against the Kiowa, Comanche, and Apache, who had also banded together to gain territory.

Wounded Knee is often brought up as the worst behavior of American soldiers, ever, and it’s been described as the last battle of the Indian War. In that sense, it’s the Indian Hiroshima. It wasn”€™t anything to be proud of, to be sure, but as Glenn Beck points out in Miracles and Massacres, it was yet another example of men relinquishing authority over themselves and letting the government tell them what to do. Previous to the mass murder on Pine Ridge, American soldiers were transporting Indian prisoners and allowing them to remain armed. When the top brass discovered this faux pas, they insisted the guards confiscate the Indians”€™ guns and that is when the killing began. Dozens of Indians were murdered, including women and children shot in the back. The soldiers were then presented with Medals of Honor. What we don”€™t hear about, however, is how thoroughly disgusted American soldiers were with these awards. The reason we know about Wounded Knee is because it was meticulously documented by whites who wanted to ensure nothing like this ever happened again. To this day, white soldiers are demanding these Medals of Honor be rescinded. The president ignores these calls and is more focused on making the Washington Redskins change their name.

Shortly before he died, I saw Howard Zinn deliver a talk at Cooper Union, where Lincoln so famously made his mark. Zinn was a smug prick who smiled mischievously as he told us, “€œAndrew Jackson loved killing Indians.”€ If we”€™re going to take that for granted, let’s also allow that many Indians loved killing us. While it’s clear we eventually won, it was a helluva fight and to pretend the Indians were all peace-loving wimps is to deny them that victory. They weren”€™t victims. They were the greatest warriors we ever faced. That’s how they should be remembered.

As this is Thanksgiving week, I thought I”€™d take a break from Muslim terrorists and social justice warriors and all the other negative stuff to give thanks for something positive that happened in 2015. In two separate but similar criminal cases that were resolved this year, a precedent was established that will possibly, hopefully, influence prosecutors in the years to come: Elderly white guys are not legally mandated to play by the “€œChuck Norris rule”€ if they believe their lives are at risk.

What’s the Chuck Norris rule? As anyone who’s ever seen his family-friendly brand of martial-arts ass-kicking knows, the Chuck Norris rule is simple: Force can only be met with equal but not greater force. An evil ninja comes at you with fists, you use fists to defeat him. Kicks can be met with kicks. Weapons like a staff or a sword are only allowable when the bad guys use them first. And a gun? That’s only a permissible line of defense when the villain is firing directly at you with intent to kill.

In the Chuck Norris universe, this type of proportional response to villainy is mandated. It’s why, for eight seasons, CBS was able to promote Walker, Texas Ranger as family-friendly entertainment. At heart, the Chuck Norris rule is the direct antithesis of the “€œChicago way“€ from The Untouchables.

It’s become a media cliché to say that the white population in the U.S. is “€œrapidly aging,”€ but clichéd though that claim may be, it’s not inaccurate. Like all elderly people, aging whites will become increasingly susceptible to crime, and matters relating to self-defense will become more and more important. Which is why I consider it a small victory that this year, two separate attempts to penalize old white men for not abiding by the Chuck Norris rule failed miserably. If you didn”€™t read about these two cases in the news, it’s almost certainly because, since all the participants were white”€”the good guys and bad guys alike”€”neither story got Trayvonified into a national cause célèbre involving rioters, burned-out CVS stores, and presidents waxing poetic about hypothetical sons.

“€œWhy should an 80-year-old with a broken collarbone and multiple bodily injuries be held to a different standard than Walker, Texas Ranger?”€

In July 2014, 80-year-old Long Beach resident Tom Greer had the utter gall to think he could just waltz into his own house after spending an evening out. Unfortunately, his act of aggression”€”coming home”€”surprised two local thugs (both with a history of crimes against the elderly) who were in the process of ransacking Greer’s house when the old man returned. The criminals”€”a 26-year-old man and a 28-year-old woman”€”began mercilessly beating Greer, breaking his collarbone and knocking him to the floor. As the male robber tried to force open Greer’s safe, the female continued the attack, stomping on the helpless octogenarian. Finally, she left to help her boyfriend with the safe, giving Greer time to crawl toward where he kept his .22 Smith & Wesson. Injured, in great pain, disoriented, frightened, but not particularly keen on the idea of dying that night, Greer managed to get to his feet and come after the wealth redistributors, who fled at the sight of the gun. Greer pursued them into the alley behind his house, where the female hoodlum pleaded with Greer, “€œDon”€™t shoot me, I”€™m pregnant, I”€™m going to have a baby.”€

He plugged her like a carnival shooting-gallery duck.

There were two things that Greer did not know at that moment. One was that the female hood was not pregnant. Her plea was a rehearsed line to be uttered should one of her victims get the upper hand. The other was that the male thug wasn”€™t just running away out of fear. He was actually heading to his getaway car to bring back reinforcements. However, the “€œlookout”€”€”his 49-year-old mother, a Snooki-tanned gorgon“€”decided that now that a gun was in play, it was best to flee.

Mother and son went to jail, and Miss Phantom Pregnancy 2014 went to the morgue. End of story…or it would have been, if not for the leftists who began pressuring prosecutors to charge Greer with murder because he violated the Chuck Norris rule: He shot a woman who had no gun (proportional self-defense only!). The fact that Greer was 80 years old, badly injured, and completely certain that the attempted murderers were going to finish the job if given the chance made no difference. Greer should have taken out the girl with a well-executed leg sweep and a gentle karate chop to the neck. Why should an 80-year-old with a broken collarbone and multiple bodily injuries be held to a different standard than Walker, Texas Ranger?

Hispanic activist Ruben Navarrette led the charge to have Greer put away for the danger to society that he is. In an op-ed for CNN, Navarrette rather coldly declared, “€œIf there is any justice, the 80-year-old should spend the remainder of his golden years in prison.”€ He accused Greer of “€œstalking his prey.”€ Yes, the beaten and panicked 80-year-old is a “€œstalker,”€ and the thugs who broke into his home and tried to kill him are “€œprey.”€

“€œGreer should have called police and waited for them to arrive,”€ said Navarrette, a vocal gun-control advocate.

As 2014 came to a close, prosecutors in Long Beach were still mulling exactly what type of punishment, if any, to mete out to old Tom Greer. At roughly the same time, prosecutors in Reno were wrangling over the case of 74-year-old Wayne Burgarello, a retired schoolteacher. Burgarello had the nerve to own a rental unit, a duplex, that he wasn”€™t using (greedy white man! So many people can”€™t afford one home, and he dares to have two?). A heroic junkie decided to break into the duplex and use it as her own personal medicinal meth clinic. Burgarello had been becoming more and more agitated about break-ins and thefts at the duplex, so one evening he decided to drop by, foolishly thinking he had the right to visit his property anytime he wanted. After calling out a warning demanding that any trespassers leave, Burgarello entered. He found the junkie and a trick she picked up that night sleeping on the floor. Startled, the trick picked up a black flashlight, and Burgarello, armed and thinking the flashlight was a gun (the room was dark, as there was no power in the unit), opened fire, killing the trick and wounding the junkie.

In the spirit of Aristotelian moderation, allow me to suggest that an emerging danger of the 21st century is that the non-Western world could get overly right-wing. Ironically, a major cause would be that white Western liberals are focusing all of their firepower”€”using as cat’s paws flagrantly illiberal nonwhites such as Muslim immigrants”€”upon the second-most progressive group on earth, white Western conservatives.

In a world where Western whites are an increasingly tiny minority, falling from roughly 19 percent of the world’s population in 1950 to perhaps 9 percent today, this divide is dangerous. The internecine status war among the people who built the modern world looks increasingly likely to embolden the rest of the human race to regress into bad old habits, such as religious dogmatism and bellicose tribalism.

As Tom Wolfe entitled his last novel, the world seems to be headed Back to Blood.

For example, ever since the Paris massacres, American liberals have been engaged in a collective nervous breakdown over their insistence that their War on Islamophobia is the most important value imaginable. The respectable opinion has become that whites cannot morally allow themselves to recognize that Middle Eastern Muslims tend to be the most violently reactionary people. Noticing would be, we are lectured, “€œun-American.”€

But that raises the question: Why should Muslims in the West bother to behave better if rewarding the bad behavior of Muslims with visas has become the acid test of gentility among Western whites? What’s the incentive?

“€œThe question of the century will be whether we Westerners can set aside our self-indulgent resentments of our fellow citizens to bond together in self-defense.”€

For a long time, Westerners have provided the moral leadership of the world by emphasizing objective principles rather than humanity’s default nepotism and opportunism. But Western whites have now upped the ideological ante with one another over their new highest standard: Never, ever perceive the faults of nonwhites.

Thus the most liberal institutions in America, colleges, are presently self-destructing during the Black Autumn. They are paying the price for encouraging their lowest-IQ denizens, football players and other blacks admitted under affirmative-action standards, to act out in tantrums of racial animus against white liberal administrators.

But why would blacks self-discipline themselves when they are rewarded for infantile outbursts?

Therefore this has been the year of shrieking young black women: at a Bernie Sanders rally in Seattle, at Yale, and now at Princeton. (Here’s a striking video.) A small number of angry black coeds occupied the office of the college president and extorted an agreement to consider going all Taliban on Princeton’s various memorials to its onetime leader, Woodrow Wilson.

Of course, Wilson, whether for good or bad, was the epitome of the white progressive reformer. But in 2015, all that matters is tribe.

Likewise, the Democrats are increasingly abolishing the name of their traditional annual fund-raising occasion, the Jefferson”€“Jackson Day dinners, due to racial hostility toward the two great white Democrats. Jonathan Martin wrote in The New York Times in August that the abandonment of the names of the Democratic Party’s founders

underscore[s] one of the most consequential trends of American politics: Democrats”€™ shift from a union-powered party organized primarily around economic solidarity to one shaped by racial and sexual identity.

A few years down the road, we can expect to see Democrats dynamiting Franklin Delano Roosevelt under the theory of America’s foremost public intellectual, Ta-Nehisi Coates, that the problems of black people today are due to racist redlining by FDR’s Federal Housing Administration.

Coates”€™ lowbrow hate is, of course, deified as liberal simply because his racism is antiwhite. His apotheosis (National Book Award, MacArthur genius grant) is perhaps an extreme case of the current regression away from reason and toward primitive emotions.

If you look around the non-Western world, you can see conservatism in ascendance with little need for this kind of pretense of progressivism. The Muslim Middle East, of course, is beset by the furious holy men of ISIS, who have displaced al-Qaeda by being even more maniacally bigoted.

In much of the rest of the world, fortunately, more responsible leaders hold sway. Paradoxically, the contemporary clamor for diversity is more fulfilled by nationalism than by the homogeneity of globalism.

China has rehabilitated Confucius and looks to Singapore’s late rightist ruler Lee Kuan Yew as his modern oracle. The Japanese are increasingly outspoken about their appreciation for their own culture under Shinzō Abe. India is ruled by the Hindu nationalist Narendra Modi. Turkey is controlled by a populist conservative party of Islamist and Ottomanist leanings.

The Russian government has revived some aspects of Czarist ideology to give its people a philosophy after the disastrous failures of secondhand Americanism in the 1990s. In Ukraine, all the fighting spirit is on the extreme nationalist right (although the state is saddled with a cabinet of itinerant globalists and oligarchs).

Without anybody especially noticing, the world has been trending toward the editorial line espoused by Lord Copper, the newspaper baron of The Daily Beast in Evelyn Waugh’s satirical masterpiece Scoop: “€œThe Beast stands for strong mutually antagonistic governments everywhere.”€

If the purpose of terrorism is to terrify, the Islamic State had an extraordinary week. Brussels, capital of the EU and command post of mighty NATO, is still in panic and lockdown.

“In Brussels, fear of attack lingers” was Monday’s headline over The Washington Post‘s top story, which read:

“Not since Boston came to a near-standstill after the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013 has the life of a major Western city been brought to a halt this way by the fear of terrorism.”

Below that is this headline: “After Paris, a campaign changed by fear.”

That story is about what’s happened in our presidential race: “Across the country … have come pronouncements of anger and fear not seen after the terrorist attacks in London and Madrid—or even in some ways after Sept. 11 2001.”

Voters speak of “feeling more afraid of the Islamic State, more horrified by the imagery of the beheadings and other atrocities.”

The New York Times’ Roger Cohen describes the Paris he loves.

“The colonized are slowly becoming the conquerors.”

“[T]hey are shaken. There is a void in the streets too empty, a new suspicion in appraising glances, a wary numbness. Paris is afflicted with absences—the dead, of course; visitors frightened away; minds frozen by fear; and tranquility lost. The city feels vulnerable.”

“I think France is attacked above all for what it is,” writes Cohen, “That in turn is terrifying. … I don’t think Paris has ever felt so precious or precarious to me as it did over the past week.”

Terrible as the massacres were, some perspective is in order.

What happened on Friday the 13th is that nine fanatics of the Islamic State, using suicide vests and AK-47s, slaughtered people at restaurants, a soccer stadium and in a concert hall.

The death toll of 130 is being called the “worst attack on French soil since World War II.”

Yet, from August 1914 to November of 1918, World War I, 850 French died every day for 51 months, a total of 1.3 million in four years in a country not nearly so populous as France is today.

On Aug. 22, 1914, some 27,000 French soldiers died resisting the German invasion. Yet France survived to dictate terms to Berlin.

But that France was another country than today’s.

In our own Civil War, in a country one-tenth as populous as today, 400 Americans, North and South, died every day for four years.

The point of this recital is not to minimize the horror in Paris.

But it is to suggest that when Jeb Bush calls the attack on Paris “an organized effort to destroy western civilization,” he is ascribing to our enemies in ISIS powers they do not remotely possess.

Indeed, the terror, fear, panic and paralysis exhibited today is in ways more alarming than the massacre itself. Russia lost twice as many people on that airliner blown up over Sinai as died in France. But Russia and Vladimir Putin do not appear to be terrorized.

Every week in Iraq, terrorists claim as many lives as were lost in France. In Syria’s civil war, 250,000 have died. This translates into more dead every day for four years than died in Paris on Nov. 13.

What has happened to a West that once ruled the world?

By any measure—military, economic, scientific—the Islamic State, compared to the West, is a joke.

Since its 1964 debut, Fiddler on the Roof has been the leading philosemitism gateway drug. Ever the contrarian, I”€™m a Jew-lover in spite of that musical, not because of it.

The movie adaptation aired on TV when I was a temperamental, tantrum-throwing teenager; all those adolescent-angst antibodies rendered me mostly immune to what Philip Roth called the musical’s insidious “€œshtetl kitsch”€ charms.

So while I naturally adored the idea of Tevye bellowing at God, songs like “€œTradition”€ and “€œMatchmaker, Matchmaker”€ gave me a rash. But “€œTo Life”€ was particularly galling. Why would these poor, pushed-around people want longer shabby, crabbed lives with that mud and those cows and the Tsar?

Still, “€œThe Jews love life more than any other people,”€ observed one frustrated Hamas leader, “€œand they prefer not to die.”€ (Whereas, “€œAll we hear of ISIS is puritanical & punitive; is there nothing celebratory & joyous? Or is query naive?” asked Joyce Carol Oates this weekend, to her immediate regret.)

So while I”€™m often mistaken for a Jew, even by other Jews, the toast “€œL”€™chaim”€ never quite makes it out of my mouth. Every cradle Catholic’s default setting is that having too much fun tempts a dreadful comeuppance. And yes, I”€™m still a miserable, morbid (now middle-aged) brat.

It’s something tourists to Israel never fail to remark upon: that its people compulsively eat, sing, and dance between siren blasts”€”even during. In violence veritas? “€œNot Knowing What Else to Do, Woman Bakes American Flag Cake“€; photos of Blitz-era Londoners depict stoic resignation, with an occasional dash of whimsy. Israelis, who scorn cornball sentimentality, lean toward the British approach, except with bonus execrable disco.

“€œThe same race that gave us the phrase “€˜joie de vivre”€™ also came up with “€˜ennui.”€™”€

Now let’s consider the French response to the Nov. 13 Muslim terror attacks.

The French hate America because you saved their asses during World War II while they were screwing German officers and pretending to be in the Resistance. They never stop bitching about Coca-Cola colonialism and America’s tacky, shallow, plastic “€œculture”€”€”yet they”€™ve nevertheless embraced one of the Anglosphere’s most embarrassing exports: those “€œmakeshift memorials”€ that have been de rigueur mortis since the death of Diana.

Except, as Taki’s own Gavin McInnes reported, Parisians added weird stuff to their stupid piles of flowers, like a poster of the Doors”€™ Jim Morrison (?) with his eyes blacked out (!).

Of course they did. Progressives live in the past; apparently the sickly anemic spirit of the soixante-retards still possesses the city. (And yet it was a Frenchwoman of that very era who concocted the reigning world-champion memoir title: Nostalgia Isn”€™t What It Used to Be.)

“€œWhy Paris is doomed, in one image,”€ I blogged, in a post that went viral: “€œOutside the Jewish-owned Bataclan, this guy (a) played “€˜Imagine”€™ on a piano with (b) a peace sign on it, which he”€™d transported to the site (c) on a bicycle.

“€œCouldn”€™t that at least have been”€”I rack my brain”€”(a) “€˜Rock the Casbah”€™ on a guitar with (b) a Star of David on it, next to your (c) Hummer or something?”€

A disgusted Mark Steyn added (which is why he makes the big bucks):

“€œWhen Pearl Harbor was bombed in 1941, did everyone coo because somebody dragged along a piano to the naval base and played a hit song from 1896?”€

We were also ordered to be deeply moved or else by this immigrant father’s assurance to his little boy that they were safe from “€œthe bad men.”€

“€œThey might have guns,”€ the father tells him, “€œbut we have flowers.”€

“€œBut flowers don”€™t do anything,”€ his son replies, rightly.

The boy is gently corrected:

“€œThe flowers and candles are here to protect us.”€


A segment later in the same video was less remarked upon: A mother tells the reporter that her daughter “€œsaid to me, “€˜This time, France lose [sic] the fight.”€™ And I said, “€˜Yes, it’s true in a way. But it will never happen again.”€™”€

Jesus squared.

I hate to sound like, well, a goddam hippie, but:

Listen to your children, parents!

Irredeemably dissolute actor Charlie Sheen revealed last week that he tested positive for HIV four years ago. The Mirror alleges that since then, Sheen has “slept with more than 700 [people] including call girls, strippers and porn stars as well as more than a dozen men and transsexuals.” Although Sheen claims he informed every one of his partners that he was infected, one of those partners”€”ex-porn star Bree Olson”€”says he’s lying. “I could be dead right now,” Olson says. “He is a monster.”

It is unclear whether Sheen transmitted the virus to any of his partners, but seventy-five or so of them have reportedly contacted lawyers seeking to sue Sheen for negligence.

But hypothetically at least, if he was aware of his infection and proceeded to have unprotected sex with someone who had no clue he was HIV-positive, any resultant transmission of the virus can hardly be seen as accidental. In such a scenario, Sheen would be aware there was a risk. So it could be argued that there was at least a smidge of malicious intent there, however passively it was expressed.

It all makes me nauseous, and this is one of the rare articles where I feel as if I’m typing with one hand and holding a puke bag with the other.

There are multiple documented cases of people purposely infecting others with HIV, which makes me puke just a little bit more into the bag.

“€œWhile most people try to avoid acquiring viruses online, these fellas make it their mission.”€

But surely one of the sickest, saddest, and most revolting social phenomena of the past, I don’t know, ten thousand years is a small yet virulent sub-community of gay men who actively seek to become infected with HIV. While most people try to avoid acquiring viruses online, these fellas make it their mission.

They are known as “bugchasers.” The men who willingly infect them with HIV, usually straight up the cornhole without a condom and hopefully with a little bit of blood smeared into the spermy fecal mix, are known as “giftgivers.”

Feeling sick yet?

The bugchaser/giftgiver “community” is but a tiny subset of the larger “barebacking” scene of homo dudes who have unprotected sex without the explicit intent of getting infected or infecting someone else. Again, that’s a bit more passive than doing it on purpose, but if you wind up weighing ten pounds and shitting your diapers because you have AIDS, the difference is nearly meaningless.

Some bugchasers say they merely operate from a sort of suicidal impatience and simply want to “empower” themselves by taking their HIV infection into their own hands”€”to be precise, their own asses”€”because it’d be a relief to just go ahead and “get it over with” since they’re not going to stop having sex with bajillions of partners anyway. Some say they feel it’d be a relief to actually know you’re HIV-positive than having to, you know, worry about it.

Others eroticize the act of getting infected”€”or, as they call it, “charged” or “pozzed””€”framing it as the ultimate sexual taboo, and who wouldn’t be thrilled by that?

Still others say that by purposely allowing their HIV-positive partners to infect them, they are choosing to enter a quasi-mystical “brotherhood” of gay men, a spiritual fraternity dedicated to fight a hatefully straight society that stigmatizes and is bigoted against the act of infecting yourself with a fatal disease by asking someone to squirt his HIV-positive cum up your rectum. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face!

Finally, there are those who frame it as the gay version of reproducing. They refer to it as “breeding,” getting “knocked up,” or even being “impregnated.”

Back in a sec. Have to vomit again….

If you think I’m making this up, have yourself a gander at, this academic paper on the phenomenon, or the Twitter account of Poz Man, who hasn’t tweeted since 2012, possibly because he finally dropped dead from AIDS.