The Dismal Tide:
The Left’s Response to the Orlando Massacre

Omar Mateen: just one more Muslim mass murderer

3,727 words

This weekend’s mass shooting at the Pulse, a gay bar in Orlando, Florida, provoked all the usual NAXALT casuistry and dissimulation from the agents of tolerance that we’ve come to expect. Omar Mateen, the “American” Afghan shooter, reportedly called 911 and pledged allegiance to ISIS, and mentioned the Tsarnaev brothers from the Boston bombing attacks, before committing the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history. Mateen had also been under FBI investigation, but his father claimed that “homophobia” alone was responsible after Mateen witnessed two men kissing and flew into a deadly rage thereafter, eventually culminating in the shooting. Police, however, are investigating the angle that Mateen was radicalized.

Nevertheless, with this information already circulating, President Obama took to the airwaves and delivered a low energy speech to announce that “we have reached no definitive judgment on the precise motivations of the killer.” Although several witnesses have reported that Mateen yelled “Allahu Akbar!” during the shooting, Obama appears to be implying that he may have been a “hipster” Muslim who did so ironically. My neighbor Bob often yells “Allahu Akbar” while engaging in mass shootings, but he’s a Unitarian, so these things happen. Abe Foxman at the ADL once insisted that we speak not of the fact that Hollywood is “run by Jews,” but rather by “people who happen to be Jewish.” Therefore, massacring gays while yelling “Allahu Akbar!” was perpetrated by an “American with a gun” who “happened to be a Moslem,” according to received wisdom.

Obama went on to note that “The place where they were attacked is more than a nightclub, it is a place of solidarity and empowerment, where people have come together to raise awareness, to speak their minds, and to advocate for their civil rights.” I expect that ball gags, rubber gimp suits, and drugs had a stronger presence than awareness-raising, but civil rights come in many forms.

Obama’s uncertainty about Mateen’s ideology turned into sudden crystal clarity about the solution: “This massacre is therefore a further reminder of how easy it is for someone to get their hands on a weapon that lets them shoot people in a school, or in a house of worship, or a movie theater, or in a nightclub.” By pure coincidence, Obama mentioned the shootings perpetrated by Adam Lanza, James Holmes, and Dylann Roof, with no reference to Seung-Hui Cho and Virginia Tech, the previous record-high mass shooting. All the tens of thousands of shootings by Obama’s sons in the various slums across America, which caused vastly more suffering in the interim, also escaped mention. Rather than tying the violence into non-white irrationality and impulsiveness, Obama predictably tied Mateen’s actions into the same “hate” that motivates those “white guys who go crazy and kill people” that the Left loves to bring up at every opportunity, regardless of their statistical irrelevance compared to standard black and mestizo violence. These crimes, overwhelmingly committed with unregistered pistols, therefore mean that Bill the white guy hunter must give up his guns, while we continue to import Moslems en masse. Somehow, making murder illegal didn’t stop Omar, but making guns illegal for Bill will make us safer from Omar. This serpentine logic, devoted to promoting an a priori agenda irrespective of facts, was hardly confined to Obama. The Twittersphere erupted with all the usual pedantry and special pleading that emerge every time the actions of a Vester Flanagan or Salah Abdesalam bring some inconvenient facts to bear against the narrative.

Like Rahm Emanuel, Hillary Clinton is a proponent of “never letting a crisis go to waste.” Her team tweeted some of her statements out:

@HillaryClinton “This is the time to stand together and resolve to do everything we can to defend our communities and country.” 

@HillaryClinton “To the LGBT community: please know that you have millions of allies across our country. I am one of them.”

@HillaryClinton “Declaraciones de Hillary Clinton sobre al ataque en Orlando.” 

By removing the ability of regular, law-abiding citizens to hold firearms, and by insisting on fighting “hate” by bringing in an endless flow of Moslems, Hillary and those like her are taking precisely the steps most likely to ensure more such attacks in the future. Who needs enemies when you have such “allies across our country?” The opportunistic Hispandering tweet shouldn’t surprise anyone familiar with what is likely the most shameless and dishonest presidential candidate in American history.

Many of the other tweets had a certain ((((coincidental))) nature.

@SarahSilverman Please remember Isis may be Muslim but not all Muslims are Isis. All serial killers are white guys but not all white guys are serial killers.

According to Radford University and the FGCU Serial Killer Database in a 2015 report entitled “Serial Killer Statistics,” 32.3% of serial killers operating between 2000-2010 were White, compared to 59.1% black, 8.6% hispanic, 0.0% Asian, and 0.0% Native American. While blacks were over-represented, and Whites under-represented throughout the 20th century, the 2010 results were higher than any other percentage throughout the 20th century. Given that the media and entertainment industry tend to focus on White serial killers partly because their victims are typically white, the typically black victims of over-represented black serial killers receiving such dismissal from Sarah Silverman must indicate some sort of negrophobia! When will Jewish supremacism and bigotry end, it’s 2016!

@adamGoldenberg “This didn’t happen because the shooter was Muslim. It happened because the victims were gay. And because the shooter had an assault rifle.” 

@adamgoldenberg “When you think of who, in America, encourages hatred of gays and ownership of guns, Muslims aren’t exactly the people who come to mind.”

“Goyim, the things we’re going to blame are the things we already hated: Christians, guns and homophobia. The Islamic religion which motivated the killer was entire incidental.” The kvetching intensifies:

@SallyKohn “Homophobic, misogynistic, racist extremist hate is the problem. It is problem in Islam, in Christianity, in Judaism, or any other form.” 

Karen [email protected] “@realDonaldTrump domestic terrorism targeted hate violence because of YOU #NeverTrump” 

@alfredstuckwish “this is what happens when ur nominee promotes a culture of white nationalism, racism bigotry & violence. Orlando is the result.”

@Lubchansky “shift the goddamned conversation by demanding that nobody gets any guns, period.”

@igorvolsky “The AR-15 is the same weapon that killed 26 people, 20 of them children, at Sandy Hook elementary school in 2012.”

Sara Schwartz @SaraSch814 “if everyone in all groups and religions kill people then no one should be residents.”

Somehow, they strung multiple consecutive tweets together without mentioning the six million. Beyond the most recognizable (((pattern))) among the proponents of this vile collection of dissimulation and half-truths, several other themes emerge. One is the curious removal of agency when a non-white perpetrates a crime. Dylann Roof shot some blacks? The entire living public memory of the Confederate States of America must be wiped out. A Moslem shot some people? Clearly, the AR-15 is to blame! This blatant double standard is old hat, and one of the Left’s worst talking points due to its clumsiness.

Another pattern is a rootless “citizen of the world” mentality specializing in tu quoque “whataboutism.” “You can’t judge Moslems from the actions of one Moslem, because what about these White guys, who also kill people?” The White European historic nature of the United States is thus surreptitiously removed to put whites on an equal footing with Moslems, despite their historical near-irrelevance in the nation. By this logic, in 1258 the Abbasid caliph Al-Musta’sim should have told the denizens of Baghdad to open the gates and tear down the walls as Hülegü Khan’s horde approached to sack the city. After all, citizens of Baghdad have killed people, too, so you can’t judge Mongols and keep them out! The reshaping of the us/them distinction has been cleverly engineered over the years, from a former “us” of White Europeans being distinct from Native Americans, blacks, foreigners, or communists, to a conglomerated “us” of multi-racial, multicultural, multisexual entities whose sole unifying principles are that no person can be judged on anything, ever, unless it has anything to do with the racial heritage, masculinity, independent spirit, and western values that animated the nation for most of its history. The independent spirit remains in a bastardized form, adapted to the society that developed it, to enforce collective insanity on the basis of all groups being composed of individuals, suggesting a modern day inability to “judge” or exclude the Mongols, because they’re just individuals.

One of the salient arguments during China’s “Hundred Schools of Thought” period of intellectual efflorescence centered around the Legalists and Confucians and their conceptions of human nature. Some Confucians like Mencius (Meng Ke) insisted on innate human goodness, and believed in a kind of “trickle down virtue” whereby the rulers could spread “right conduct” by setting a good example of material abstention, filial piety, and development of moral character. In contrast, Legalists like Shang Yang and Han Feizi had a dimmer view of human nature, seeing humanity as naturally tending toward avarice, caprice, and short-sighted lawlessness. A powerful state to regulate humans and prevent them from acting out their worst desires, then, was the solution. Although Qin Shi Huangdi eventually took such a view after unifying China, the suppression of former ruling nobility quickly led to the collapse of his dynasty after his demise, but Legalism survived through his successor Liu Bang’s syncretism of the two philosophies at the beginning of the Han Dynasty.

I mention this because the philosophy represented by the Left’s reaction to the Pulse Club mass shooting seems to reflect a certain kind of “Neo-Mencius” thinking. All the incompatibilities and mutual contradictions of Islam and other conflicting ideologies will supposedly cease to matter if we all disavow guns, and disavow the very real parts of our ideologies that make cooperation possible. Holding no value but non-judgmental tolerance will, according to these people, paper over all our differences. This end goal of this vision is essentially a transposition of the Jews’ old favorite hangout in Odessa, where criminality of a patently obvious ethnic bent went unchecked due to the city’s cosmopolitanism. The question of whether these people actually believe in “tolerance” as a virtue, rather than as a masque for their actions, remains.

In terms of the sincere gentile SWPLs who follow this “non-judgment,” however, it amounts to unilaterally disarming and handing over one’s own home to hostile foreigners, in the hope that reciprocity of this kindness will return the favor. It never has, and it never will, but feigning wisdom by pretending to understand that “love” is at the heart of Islam and other malicious ideologies and races is the central means by which these people have been taught to signal their status as good human beings. When NPR emphasized the “American” shooter, the anti-gay sentiment behind the attack, and “gun violence” as the motivating forces, it carefully trod on the acceptable ground of simultaneously avoiding the real issues of race and Islam while surreptitiously attacking traditional American sentiments on sexuality and the Second Amendment. The actual issues in this or any other incident are irrelevant; the perceived power behind minorities, their ideologies, and the ideologies of the perceivably more “powerful” White American majority is the only true issue. Getting women and minorities on board for a larger percentage of table scraps from a dwindling feast, while Jews take the lion’s share, is the only true goal. This is how White men end up being the implicit target of condemnation, not the shooter himself or what motivated him. We see the same thing with black violence. “Jamal shot 8 people? Time to examine how Whites’ institutional racism left him no other options!”

A politically incorrect psychology professor could find a treasure trove of data on how self-deception works from the responses to the Pulse shooting. During Obama’s press conference, Moslems in the comments section were mentioning the First Crusade’s capture of (formerly Byzantine Christian-held) Jerusalem in 1099 as a “gotcha” that apparently justified a murderous Moslem in 2016. Others insisted that Mateen being born in New York simply meant that a typical gun-toting, homophobic “American” was responsible. As with Gonzalo Curiel, the magic soil of America meant that no references could possibly be made to the ethnic and tribal loyalties that motivated either man in his life without being a “racist” for observing obvious facts of intimations toward out-group loyalty which are not race-based in these instances, but mentality-based. Despite being as American as apple pie, Mateen was filled with “hatred” for no particular reason, so we’ll make hundreds of millions of guns disappear and not be “hateful,” and everything will work out. We keep animals separate in a zoo, yet we balk at the notion that different humans unnaturally thrown together end up disliking each other, like so many lions, wolves, and rhinos in the same cage. It’s illogical because it isn’t intended to be logical, it’s intended to serve the interests of a clique of rootless internationalists, for whom closed borders and closed markets are the enemy. Pointing out double standards or hypocrisy when such groups are attacking you is missing the point, and relying on an appeal to honor and fairness that they never shared sentiment for.

One would like to think that truth will out, that such an irrational and obviously untrue vision as the “diverse, multicultural global village” will not long stand the test of time in the face of constant undermining by the reality of events like Moslems mass-shooting homosexuals. With the rise of the New Right/Alt-Right, the slippery hack arguments and sophistry are beginning to receive pushback like never before, finally being challenged instead of bouncing around their erstwhile impenetrable echo chamber. The reaction to Islamic terrorism is also considerably wiser than after 9/11, and the disastrous handling of the neocons’ war in Iraq by Perle, Feith, Wolfowitz et al. has led Trump and many others to eschew such costly reactions in service of Israel.

A “middle ground” that enjoys attacking “silly college feminists,” “SJW’s” and the like has formed its own niche in our ongoing culture war, but it is a road leading to nowhere. When Moslems, radical feminists, invading minorities, and ethnic organizations form and attack the White Man and all he has built, the response must not be to hold oneself above playing “identity politics.” Doing so will simply lead to the same outcome of white dispossession and ideologies like Islam running rampant while decreasingly powerful whites insist that universal values that were never truly held, much less dominant during our founding, can negate the ethnic group strategies and conflicts that are only strengthened by this refusal to fight. Simply going after “Trigglypuffs” and the most outrageously stupid leftist shenanigans of the week will not save us. Even deporting illegals and banning Moslems permanently will not save us, given the breeding rates of the populations we are currently paying to despise and replace us. The will to do more must be cultivated. For-profit ventures seeking to turn frustration and skepticism of the status quo into penis pills and “crisis actor” explanations, as if Moslem violence was unthinkable, are thankfully on the decline in their influence from several years ago.

The great struggle of our time cannot be won with half-measures while fighting only “liberal hypocrisy” and “political correctness.” The failure to identify why these things truly exist, which is to secure the safety of the diaspora, would mean that no solution could exist to a problem which remained obfuscated from view. Knowing this to be true, the already Sisyphean task of getting the masses to understand and care about the forces undermining the West has been headed off at the pass by conspicuous attempts to pathologize “anti-semitism” as the province of kooks, conspiracy theorists, and losers in their mother’s basements trying to explain away their failures in life. Jews and their apparatchiks on the Left presently hold all the institutional megaphones that determine the path of our Zeitgeist. Anti-racism, xenophilia, homophilia, tolerance and diversity are presented as the foundations of morality, thus the average person believes what he is told to think and follows suit. The difference between the forces “in the know,” who cynically push an ethnic strategy, and that of the clueless true believers, is a distinction worth making. Naturally, the latter get the majority of ridicule, because they know not what they do, or why they do it, and inevitably make public asses of themselves more than someone like Herbert Marcuse would do. The psychoanalysts and the Frankfurt School had a chuckle when Carl Jung and Jürgen Habermas, respectively, flirted with their ideologies. Understanding why they were amused to see gentiles thinking of participating in their movements is one of the keys to solving our problems in the present.

In No Country for Old Men, the retired deputy Ellis laments the moral direction of Texas by the early 1980s, saying “it’s the dismal tide . . . It is not the one thing.” Anyone arguing with a recalcitrant Leftist, trying so hard to convince him or her of the value of western civilization and the justness of the White Man’s world, can sympathize. Breaking down ideas on a single topic for a single person can be frustrating, and even in the event of success, that person will still hold innumerable other destructive ideas because social conditioning has demanded it be so. “Redpilling” a single person, then, seems like a fruitless endeavor as a million more children just took Mr. Goldstein’s class on slavery and the Holocaust and the glories of the suffragettes, then left school to watch a movie or see an ad with similar anti-White themes. Because of this onslaught, many people, including plenty of white men, will never embrace our ideas, but the sense of impending large-scale conflict, the sense that we’re being lied to, grows stronger by the day. We can reach more and more alienated people, we are reaching many of them, and it requires tapping into their sense of propriety which the modern world is trying to eliminate. The dismal tide of Leftist talking points and the lemmings who espouse them will not soon be receding, but the very fact that our democracy is largely illusory makes victory possible. The true holders of power are few, and their silent takeover by the 1960s is not any more irreversible or unconquerable than the blue blood, old money network that the recent shtetl peddlers began to eclipse in the 1920s. Some of the forces arrayed against us, whether Mexicans burning American flags and flying Mexican flags, or deranged Moslems shooting up night clubs, help us to undermine the narrative more than we ever could, by dint of their own stupidity. We just need to be able to jump on the outrage and direct it toward the right course.

@lgbtphoenix “We wanted you to be the first to know, after this horrific attack, we’re officially endorsing Trump. Enough is enough.” 

While such a development as this tweet may be underwhelming to many in our movement due to its source, it at least proves that we can capitalize on the self-interest of groups that are more intellectually honest and can comprehend the direction things will otherwise be going in. Jonathan Weisman fleeing Twitter’s “anti-semitism,” or Julia Ioffe assuredly thinking twice before writing another hit piece, are positive developments that we can build on. We are far from the point where anonymity can be easily discarded, or an attack on White Men can be met with the same disgust that an attack on blacks, Moslems, or Jews is met with at the present, but we’re getting there.

If we are to launch a counter-Gramscian re-establishment of our own cultural hegemony in a march “back” through the institutions, we might take a few lessons from the Left’s predictable rote recitation of its talking points after the Orlando shooting. Argumentation and logic have limited appeal, particularly in this smartphone generation. Appeals to self-interest and emotionality, interspersed with humor, in an easily digestible format, are the keys for an aspiring rhetorician in the current year. Bob Whitaker was trying to tap into this idea of simplicity and repetition with the “White Genocide” mantra, and the character-limit of Twitter may have actually enhanced the power of the blowback against the Left by forcefully maintaining a taciturn simplicity in its responses. The accessibility provided to shitlords publicly challenging the predictable and banal platitudes of the Left, by virtue of Twitter’s platform, is likely a feature which its designers never anticipated, but “trolls” have exploited to the fullest. The fact that the masses care so little for politics and the atmosphere of the public square makes them difficult to awaken, but also serves as a force multiplier for a minority to drive the culture war, as the tribe has certainly capitalized upon.

As the Left’s prognosticable talking points of untruth as truth are trotted out once again after Orlando, they begin to appear stale and boring, just lifeless and hackneyed tripe from the inoffensive status quo. In consequence, naturally rebellious youth will be looking for an avenue to express their disdain. With the fortuitous rise of Trump, an opportunity to assert ourselves has appeared, one which the ceaseless ack-ack kvetching over “online racism, xenophobia, and anti-semitism” proves is over the target, unlike the attacks on “SJWs” or “crisis actor” explanations. The ADL’s formation of a “task force” to fight “online hate,” working in concert with the government, is working just like #NeverTrump to expose the leaders of the modern egalitarian zeitgeist as a very rich, very exclusive, very hypocritical, and very “uncool” set of elites. Rather than having “double standards” for Israel and the West, they have a single standard of advancing their own interests, and this standard is at the core of so much that ails the West. Bringing the common man to an understanding of the real factors at work behind non-white immigration, and LGBTQIIEXPIALIDOCIOUS madness, is harder than pointing at “SJWs” and laughing without understanding why they exist, or lamenting Moslem violence without addressing the pretense that Moslems would ever be good for us in the first place, but we’re on a path toward rivaling the Left’s megaphone like never before. Maintaining standards and not watering down the message is often at odds with mass appeal, but we may just be able to achieve maximum exposure, sufficient to start getting real things done in the halls of power, without sacrificing principles for controlled success that leads nowhere.