Aliens, Predators, and Orlando

Most are no doubt familiar with the late 70’s and late 80’s sci-fi thrillers Alien (1979) and Predator (1987). I assume that most are also well acquainted with the prodigious spinoffs, sequels, prequels, and crossovers spawned (heh) by both franchises. For the uninitiated, Alien introduced  us to a ragtag group of space cowboys returning to Earth aboard the Nostromo after a mission to space when they encounter a signal transmitted from a desolate planetoid. When the Nostromo lands on the planetoid, the crew discovers the wreckage of an alien craft, the remains of a deceased alien within the ship, and a chamber full of alien eggs. During the course of the crew’s assay, one of the eggs hatch and a hatchling attaches itself to the face of one of the crewmen and an alien subsequently bursts from the crewman’s chest while aboard the Nostromo. Unbeknownst to the crew they are explicitly expendable: their employer, the Wayland-Yutani corporation, knows of the creature’s existence and intentionally sent the crew to the planetoid to recover the organism at all costs, likely for development into some sort of biological weapon. Naturally, the mission goes horribly wrong when the target alien unexpectedly gets out of containment and cannibalizes the entire crew save the intrepid Ripley.

Predator, on the other hand, follows a crew of high T special forces agents enlisted by the CIA to rescue a high ranking official being held hostage by guerrillas in the Central American jungle country of Val Verde. Led by Maj. Alan “Dutch” Schaefer and supervised by former commando George Dillon, the team heads into the jungle to rescue the official, only to discover that they are “expendable assets,” intentionally sent there by USG not to extract an official, but to retrieve valuable intelligence from captured operatives. Unfortunately, the mission goes badly awry then the crew encounters the titular antagonist, an extraterrestrial predator that picks the crew off one by one, save the intrepid Schaefer.

On June 11, 2016, many celebratory LGBTQ folks and allies went to the Pulse nightclub (a gay venue) in Orlando, FL to enjoy the freedoms afforded them by virtue of living in an open and liberal society. Unfortunately for them, their celebrations went horribly awry and ended tragically when an American-born Afghani with Islamist leanings and an abiding hatred of faggotry named Omar Mir Seddique Mateen, entered the club and slaughtered 50 unsuspecting homos while wounding 53 more before himself being killed. The event now has the dubious distinction of being the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history and the most significant terrorist attack since the September 11 attacks. Unbeknownst to the party goers, Mateen was known to the FBI and called 911 during the attack to inform authorities that he had pledged allegiance to ISIS.

The question of why these mass murder psyops always seem to happen in June aside, what’s the connection between the three? Let’s begin with the films. What was it that made both Alien and Predator so poignant to viewers both then and now? Certainly, the storytelling in both movies was sterling and both were superbly acted. Nevertheless, the common theme shared by both films is apparent to every viewer. Thematically speaking, the crux of the problem, the catalyst for the supervening events in both films was elite malfeasance-particularly the willingness of elites to lie to and sacrifice non-elites for the sake of some unspecified agenda, whether pecuniary, programmatic, or ideological. In Alien, the Nostromo’s space cowboys were deceived by the Wayland Corporation and sent on a suicide mission so that the Corporation could create the ultimate bioweapon. In Predator, USG sent a cadre of “expendable [CIA] assets” into the heart of darkness to retrieve intel from a guerrilla faction. This is no different from what occurred in Orlando on Saturday night. Granted, cause and effect are much more tenuous than they were in either Alien or Predator, but the impulse remains the same-sacrifice of the lows for the benefit of the highs. The true battle is always and ever between the highs and the lows, with a healthy dose of pretext and a high body count in the middle.

Let us think about things logically. Mateen was known to the FBI and he openly voiced his opinions to anyone who would listen. Yet, he was deemed not to be a threat back in 2013. More abstractly, the Establishment Left struggles to reconcile the fundamentally irreconcilable differences of all the constituent parts of its coalition by falsely advancing the notion that everyone is equally capable of participation in a liberal democracy, that there are no differences between groups worth discussing, and that to suggest otherwise is incorrect and/or racist. The Left has people putting themselves at risk, running around believing utter balderdash that is false on its face: that Islam is not the problem, that it is a “religion of peace,” that it is racist to exclude Muslims from civic participation and from entry into the the U.S., that No True Muslim would do what Mateen did, that the true danger is from Angry White Christian Men, that guns are the problem, that homophobia is the problem, et cetera ad infinitum. So people are left incapable of parsing the truth from the lies. 

The Left has turned normies into total retards undesirious of looking at the totality of the evidence, lest they discover something that conflicts with the narrative. Narrative preservation is possible only when every element is viewed as discrete and unrelated. Meanwhile, those made of sterner stuff, those who are willing to call events as they see them, those who might save the world-are actively suppressed.

How is Orlando not a product of the active malfeasance of the political classes? 

How could the Left at once claim to advance the cause of liberal, Western democracy (and its attendant degeneracy) and in the same breath argue for the wholesale importation of individuals from cultures that hate liberalism and openly preach the gospel of its overthrow? How can the Left observe Muslims pledging allegiance to ISIS and shouting Allahu Akbar while gunning people down, and insist that it has nothing to do with Islam? Does it make sense to promote homosexuality as a value while simultaneously promoting a lax immigration policy that would allow in individuals who view the killing of homosexuals as a mitzvah? Casualties will naturally result from these clashing values; Orlando is the most recent evidence of this. Nevertheless, Americans are continually browbeaten by their (((elites))) into welcoming destablilizing elements into the country without questioning their motives, their allegiance to the state, or their compatibility with the wider culture.

Our (((elites))) are no different from the elites in Alien or Predator, actively weaponizing our ignorance and goodwill to use against us. Whether corporate or governmental, in every instance the powers that be are setting us up. In every instance, they know something you don’t know-and they’re not telling. We are being played. They are not above lying to us to get their way. We are all expendable assets in the ongoing struggle for power and supremacy. I feel for the families impacted by the events in Orlando, but this is the reality. We are the prey. And these events will continue to happen, so long as individuals are prevented from accurately identifying the nature of the problem and neutralizing the threat. We will continue to be cannon fodder in the war to vindicate prog ideology.

It’s time for us to begin approaching anything that our (((thought leaders))) and actual leaders advance with intense skepticism. It’s high time that we all become conspiracy theorists. The powers that be will dissimulate, will lie to you, will use you and then will kill you if doing so would enable them to accomplish their ends. Now we know: we are besieged from within and from without.

It’s time to act accordingly.




Behold the living dead:

Living Dead.jpg

Longing for death’s sweet embrace.

Secret Life of the Human Pups is a sympathetic look at the world of pup play, a movement that grew out of the BDSM community and has exploded in the last 15 years as the internet made it easier to reach out to likeminded people. While the pup community is a broad church, human pups tend to be male, gay, have an interest in dressing in leather, wear dog-like hoods, enjoy tactile interactions like stomach rubbing or ear tickling, play with toys, eat out of bowls and are often in a relationship with their human “handlers”.

The fate of Western civilization is the abattoir. Bit by bit, we begin to understand why. Boundaries are passe, limitations on individual comportment are philistine. In 2016, everyone demands to be themselves and demands acceptance, no matter how putrid those selves are and no matter how cancerous their acceptance would ultimately be to society as a whole. It’s 2016, goyim! No longer is it sufficient to be a functional human being. One must seek relevance through the concoction of increasingly exotic and idiosyncratic identities. Therefore: entire documentaries dedicated to men seeking to have their neg holes pozzed while wearing full body latex dog suits. Pups, you see. Simply harmless gentlemen innocently enjoying the surrender of assuming the personality of a dog while being anally violated.

But it’s all okay, because none of this affects you. Slippery slope don’t real, you provincial cunt. IT’S STUPID TO THINK THAT THIS COULD EVER LEAD TO ANY KIND OF NORMALIZATION OF BESTIALITY. Or anything like that.

The one thing that no one seems to understand, or at least the one reality that everyone studiously avoids is that nothing affects anyone until all of these discrete nothings combine to create one massive conglomerate of something packing enough of a wallop to completely obliterate a civilization. And how can a civilization endure, once values of licence and cum are substituted for foundational principles of order and temperance? Once the door is opened to one vice, all of the auxiliary perversions traipse in behind it in short order-because on what authority could the door be closed to them?

The average person spends so much time genuflecting before the gods of tolerance and liberalism that they are unable to perceive the extent to which pathological dysfunction has become the law of the land and the currency of the realm. They fail to see that everyone around them seeks only to debase themselves and in this pursuit, have become corrupt, capricious, and cum obsessed. That the condition of the average person’s soul has become little better than that of a third world favela.

A right wing junta is looking pretty good right about now. That and some piping hot ovens. 

West Virginia & Nebraska Primary Results

VW & NE Primary Results

Trump continues to roll towards clinching the Republican nomination. He’s now only 150 delegates and a general election away from Making America Great Again. There’s not much to say in this regard. Suffice it to say that I eagerly await the Trumpening and his formal coronation in July, not least of all for the soul-rending pain that it will cause naysaying cuckservatives and pleb tier progs alike. #MAGA2016

Sanders did excellently in West Virginia, capturing 51.4% of the vote and 16 delegates. His win came as a shock to no one but the Shillary drones. It’s not hard to see how Sanders’ folksy, avuncular style and staunchly populist platform would be more appealing to solidly working class Appalachian types than Clinton’s elitist & corporatist stance. Sanders has been gradually gaining on Clinton and trails behind her only by 286 delegates. Presently, he is 953 delegates away from nomination. While it is the case that Clinton carries the bulk of the Party’s superdelegates, it’s also abundantly clear from the numbers that a Sanders nomination is far from an impossibility. In the absence of superdelegates, it would be a distinct probability. Sanders has a demonstrated track record of success and has been steadily closing the Clinton-Sanders delegate gap, which makes the repeated calls for him to drop out all the more puzzling.

It is my personal opinion that Sanders would prove a more difficult foe for Trump to vanquish than Hillary. He has fewer defects of character, is also anti open-borders poz (albeit for shitty commiejewfuck reasons), and offers a smorgasbord of gibsmedat for the enticement of his rainbow coalition of economically illiterate constituents. I believe that he would be more difficult for Trump to defeat because like Trump, he is highly effective at cutting through the autism of data and appealing to voters on a limbic, emotional level-something that Madame Nehru Jacket is utterly incapable of. 2016 will not be an election year decided on the basis of sterile facts and figures; it will be an election year powered by principles and vision.

Indiana Primary Reflections

The Indiana primary has been all around good news for the Trump Train. His decisive win, combined with Cruz’s withdrawal from the race, all but ensures his nomination at the Republican convention in July. There was no question that Trump was favored to win-and favored to win big-in Indiana, as he was polling strongly against Cruz and Kasich going into the race.  The scale of Cruz’s loss in Indiana is astounding:

Trump Indiana


Cruz was handed a crushing defeat, winning only in perhaps more Evangelical/tradcon strongholds of the state, who knows. Overall, the bulk of his victories took place in states where the primary processes were heavily brokered and highly undemocraticThere are 9 remaining contests leading up to the convention with 520 delegates up for grabs. Without Cruz playing obstructionist, there is no doubt that Trump will obtain the necessary 190 delegates and thus garner the nomination:

Republican Delegate Count

Kasich has always been an irrelevancy, a plant in the race only for the purpose of spoiling the race for Trump in Ohio. With Cruz gone and with Trump only 190 delegates away from securing the nomination outright, the Republican Establishment can no longer plausibly flirt with a brokered convention, a very good thing. The Establishment cannot deny Trump the nomination without openly engaging in chicanery that will further undermine the Party’s legitimacy/put it even further down the road towards schism. Overall, events in Indiana telegraph clearly the Republican base’s disgust with politics as usual and with the open borders/free trade/foreign intervention stances characterizing the Republican elite that has served only to dilute the national character, export jobs abroad by the millions, compressed wages, and dispossessed and impoverished the average American.

On the Democratic side of the equation, Sanders won in Indiana, but it’s unclear whether his win makes a difference to the bottom line:

Indiana Head to Head.jpg

Sanders currently has 1400 delegates: 1361 pledged delegates and 39 superdelegates. Clinton, by contrast has 2202 delegates: 1682 pledged delegates and 520 superdelegates. The Democratic nominee needs 2383 delegates to secure nomination. 1163 delegates remain and realistically speaking, Sanders would have to score just about every last one of them to stay alive:

Democratic Delegate Count

While superdelegates can support any candidate and remain uncommitted until the convention in July, the vast majority of those superdelegates are Party functionaries likely to back Clinton come hell or high water, as she is the Democratic Establishment’s clear choice. It’s hard to tell if Clinton is better or worse off for relying so heavily on these SDs. On the one hand, the SDs are convenient way to circumvent the political process and place a modicum of power back in the hands of the Democratic Party machine (to the extent that democracy matters, or is desirable). On the other hand, Clinton’s delegate to superdelegate margin is massive and her reliance on them is substantial. 23.6 % of her tally is comprised of superdelegates whereas only 2.7% of Sanders’ tally is; it seems as though her win depends upon the caprices of a few people with the ability to switch sides at any moment. Improbable, but far from impossible.

An interesting development is how quickly the media has accepted the inevitability of Trump’s nomination, transitioning from Trump denialism and shifting gear into manufacturing reasons as to. . .the inevitability of Trump’s loss in a Clinton-Trump face-off in November. (See here, here, and here). While Trump may be trailing Clinton, he has been steadily closing that gap. Furthermore, now that Trump no longer has to spend time and resources rebuffing Republican competitors, he can train all barrels on Clinton. Clinton has failed at everything she has put her hands to. She is churlish, inauthentic, and utterly lacking in charisma. Her political career is entirely the byproduct of her husband’s political career. Left to her own extemporaneous devices, she’s liable to say things that piss off the various elements of her fractious and childish base. Trump by contrast is a YUGE business success who is relatable, jovial, and ultra charismatic. He also doesn’t have to worry about the hurt feelings of a perpetually aggrieved base-much of his appeal comes from his reputation as a straight talker. Barring some catastrophic skeletons-in-the-closet revelation, I think Trump has a great chance of winning the general.

It’s clear that Clinton stands for nothing more than the status quo of globalism, expansive government, and demographic replacement, propositions which the average American has decreasing tolerance for. I think that a Clinton presidency will serve to accelerate the decline, which is probably a welcome thought to the accelerationist set. At any rate, it’ll be interesting to see how things shake out over the next few months.

Edit: 2:57 PM CST: Kasich is out


Paris Terror Attacks

Paris Attacks

Reports of multiple and seemingly coordinated shootings and explosions erupt across Parisistan Paris.

Further reports of spontaneous “Allahu Akbar-ing” accompanying the attacks; body count now estimated at forty. 100 hostages taken at a Paris music venue.

Is it OK to conclude that opening Europe’s borders to deluges of hostile Muslim hordes was a bad idea now?

Cultural Incompatibility

I spent the last weekend in Miami Beach. Miami Beach is like the Land of the Ubers: open the app and there are always at least 25 drivers swarming the area & ready to arrive in under 3 minutes. One of my drivers was a young Syrian kid who’d just finished his MBA and was in the process of searching for full-time work. He was a conversational fellow, and we soon began a conversation that inevitably turned to the topic of the current events taking place in his country. I expressed my sympathies for the Syrians’ plight and asked him what measures he thought would be necessary for the country to move forward and reestablish some semblance of normalcy there. His answer left me slack-jawed:

“There is no hope. Syria is already gone. We may as well just finish it, if that means that we would be able to gather ISIS there, bomb them, and destroy them completely.” 

Now, I empathize with his anguish. I’m certain that sentiment came from a deep place of grief and frustration. It can’t be easy to watch as your country crumbles, besieged from within and from without. But this is precisely the attitude that makes the Standard Third World Immigrant completely incompatible with the First World. 

They would rather defect than fight for the preservation of their birthrights, their heritages, their ancestries.

They contemplate the utter destruction of their patrimony rather than mobilizing to expel the savages that have brought it to its knees and preparing for the future. 

These are bargains they’d be willing to strike. 

Such an outlook is so alien to the First World mind as to be completely incomprehensible. There is no question that if the U.S. were to come under attack in some WWIII/doomsday scenario, millions of Americans would take up arms and unleash guerrilla warfare upon the invaders, even if they believed that they had only a slim chance of victory. They would do this in spite of the reservations they may have about the country because they are fighters and patriots and because fundamentally, they believe in this country and in its principles.

By contrast, consider the Syrian kid’s position. It is one of defeat and resignation. If this is the attitude one has towards one’s own nation, how loyal will one be if and when one’s adoptive nation falls upon hard times or when there are no more gimmedats to be got? It is highly unlikely that such people will ever develop the sense that their new countries are worth preserving for perpetuity or that they are worth fighting for. These immigrants will never develop a sense of common history, common purpose, or common destiny. The new nation is simply a convenient host to be abandoned when a better host emerges or when the current host expires.

Could one imagine such a sentiment being expressed by anyone in the West or in the First World more generally? What if the Japanese adopted this defeatist attitude after the A-bomb? What if the U.S. adopted this attitude after the Revolution, or the Civil War, or during the Depression? What if Europe adopted this attitude after WWII or after any of the myriad wars waged across the continent throughout its lengthy history? These people didn’t flee. They didn’t abandon hope. They didn’t pray for the absolution of destruction. They rebuilt. They created cultures from the ashes. This is why they managed to achieve First World status while other countries, even ones substantially wealthier in terms of natural resources, have floundered.

A nation’s people are what make a nation either great or shitty. 

Replace the people, destroy the nation. 

This notion is completely lost upon the hoardes of cheering Western do-gooders.

There is a certain intrepidity, a certain nobility of spirit necessary to generate bounty and to create complex & durable civilizations that realistically speaking, few people in this world possess. The Syrian kid is a good kid, and I wish him well. Nonetheless, his comment demonstrated a poverty of spirit that instantly crystallized everything for me. The “European Migrant Crisis” will end in the end of Europe as we know it. It has broader implications for the First World as a whole. We are told that we are obligated to be arch humanitarians, to take in immigrant after immigrant as they face unimaginable hardship. But their hardship is totally imaginable and completely surmountable with time and with collective will. Have many peoples not endured hardship throughout history?

Were the U.S.’ formative years not ones of trials and hardships? Is European history not littered with examples of hardships and abject squalor? How did these civilizations become great? The difference lies in the manner in which the people responded to adversity. To import peoples by the millions to the West who do not share this general orientation is to destroy it by undermining and gradually eroding the cultural attitudes that made it the First World in the first place.