Pandoras Box


Democrats have opened Pandoras box with their Russia narrative. Earlier republicans would have already fallen all over themselves in apology. They would have prostrated themselves at the altar of biased fake media in the hopes that they would be spared the wrath of CNN and MSNBC. We are not the previous generation of Republicans are we? If they hit us we hit back twice as hard. If CNN and MSNBC throw their hat in the ring for the Democrats then we marginalize them and diminish their power. The Democrats want to investigate Russia collusion so we should oblige them and investigate Russian collusion. The Trump administration has already started on this by requesting investigations on who funds certain environmentalist groups. That is not enough. We have to expand this to others. As Hillary Clinton would say after the last week in Haiti “Let the bodies hit the floor”


As mentioned the Trump administration is looking into this already. The Russian economy is based on oil and natural gas. The higher the price for these goods the better the Russian economy does. Certain environmental groups are exerting effort to prevent the US from using fracking and other efforts to produce natural gas. If they are successful this means that there would be a lower available supply of natural gas and the US would not be able to compete with Russia in the Visegrad markets. Pushing the price of gas higher makes the Russian economy stronger and allows them to bully the Eastern European countries.

We have to look at environmentalists who push for this and see if they are funded by Russia.


The Iran deal gave billions of dollars to Iran and eased sanctions on Iran in exchange they agreed to some inspections they may or may not comply with in the future. This deal has been very beneficial for Iran while it has not been for the US. The primary ally of Russia in the middle east is Iran. Anything that benefits Iran benefits them as well.

We must take a look at the people who supported the Iran deal and check for funding from Russia.


As everyone knows the US and its NATO allies bordering Russia rely on the US military remaining strong in order to combat the Russian threat. Democrats are mainly against any increase in military spending. We have to check and see if any of them are funded by Russia and are working for a weaker US military.

These 3 scenarios are just the start. Illegal immigration advocates could be setting up a situation like the refugee crisis in Europe to weaken America using Russian funds. The Paris treaty gets funds from developed countries like the US and hands it to “developing” countries like Russia. This is an instance where Russia could directly be receiving funds from the US. We have to investigate the people who support that deal for Russian funding.

The Democrats want Russian hysteria. We should give them Russian hysteria.


The Truth About Obama

th (11).jpg

It is always difficult to discuss a recent President objectively. If he is a Democrat they would like him because he pursued the liberal agenda and if he is a Republican they would like him because he pursued a conservative agenda. He would then be hated by the other party for the exact same reason. When I write that Obama was a terrible President, I say it not because he pursued a globalist agenda which I am against, but rather how he pursued his globalist agenda.

Once you observe the various agreements Obama pursued you can see the general pattern he uses to strike major landmark deals. He would pick an issue and then give so much benefits up front while requiring so little back that the other party that they would have to be stupid not to agree. To make the deal defensible there would be some sort of commitment the other party would have to make in the far future but the US would have no way to force the other party to comply. After all the benefits have already all been given up front. In essence all of the landmark deals he made were just to improve his image while providing no benefit to the United States.


Let us go thru some of his agreements to see Obama in action. The most popular would of course be the Paris agreement on climate change. The fact that he did not go thru the senate already makes this suspect as it would be easily cancelled.

As everyone knows Paris was supposed to get a commitment from all its signatories on how much they can reduce emissions every year. Once you take a look at the actual commitments you will realize one thing. The United States is one of the very few countries that actual put forth a meaningful commitment and is sticking to it. If you look at countries like Germany, India, and China they are actually increasing emissions not decreasing. The US is one of the very few countries that are actually decreasing its emissions.

In effect Obama pushed for a deal which limited US industry and promised billions to developing countries. In return he got a commitment which countries had no incentive to keep.  Of course getting that many countries to agree to free money looked good to the press and got good coverage.

Iran Deal

The Iran deal returned billions of dollars the US froze to Iran, allowed Iran to continue enriching Uranium, and promised to lift economic sanctions in the future. In return Iran agreed to inspections from the UN. Inspections that they will be forewarned about from a organization that has a vested interest in giving them a clean bill of health to keep the peace.

I don’t think I have to explain any further about how this was another deal which America paid a lot for but was just a way to generate positive coverage for Obama.

Compare this with the carrier deal for President Trump. Yes it did generate positive coverage for him and yes incentives were given. But those incentives are contingent upon maintaining a certain level of employment in the state of Indiana. If carrier reneged on the deal they would not get the incentives. If Iran reneges on this deal we are not getting the billions back.

A good leader makes decisions that may be unpopular now but is necessary. Take Truman and the nuclear bomb for example. He knew he may be condemned by history after he used the bomb but he still made the choice to do so because he wanted to save American lives that would be thrown away in an invasion of the home islands. On a personal note I think this may have saved Japan as a country as well. Resistance like they showed in Okinawa and Iwo Jima would not have left enough Japanese afterwards to continue having their own country. You can even see this trait with Trump. There would be nothing easier than to join the rest of the country in condemning Russia. The media and all the politicians would all join together in praising him. Yet we would ruin our relationship with Russia and Trump knows we would need them as leverage on China in the future.

It is not a coincidence that the democrats lost the greatest number of seats they ever did under Obama.


4th of July: The Hypocrisy of Hate

th (9).jpg

Another year and another celebration of Independence day. My peeve about this day is that it is the day liberals come out of the woodwork to complain about all the “terrible” things America has done in the past. I put the word terrible in quotation marks because it is precisely these actions which allow Americans to enjoy the standard of living they do now.

Liberals hold America to an impossible standard. Particularly when you consider the actions of other countries in that time period. If you were to actually follow the rules prescribed by those who complain about the actions of America in the past the country would have never become anything more than a minor power and would have most likely failed completely. For this article I will take a look at the two major complaints that normally come up. That of slavery and the various wars of aggression the US has engaged in.


When the subject of wars come up the first thing that gets brought up is the American Indian war and the Mexican American war. This is the best place to see the impact of these policies liberals condemn America for as the America we know today would literally not exist without them. The first thing we need to realize is that the Indian nations, Mexico, and the early form of America made up of the initial colonies were distinct countries. Each with their own diplomacy, interests, economy, and people. The Indians and Mexicans were not Americans. The Indians just happened to live in the same continent.

Without these wars of expansion America would have never extended beyond the original colonies. The rest of the continent would not have remained vacant. A combination of Mexican, Indian, or Canadian interests would have taken over. Instead of one great nation spanning from sea to shining sea we would have 3 to 4 nations of equal strength throughout the continent. When we look at the history of Europe and Africa I can think of no greater evil to inflict on North America than this. The entire reason the continent has been stable and escaped the damage of the world wars is because of the relative strength of the US as compared to its neighbors.


What would this discussion be without slavery? Everyone is against it and acknowledges how horrible it was. The truth is America would not have the economic power it now does if we did not go through a period of slavery. At the end of the Revolutionary War the US was bankrupt. It had no money to pay its soldiers and most of its economy consisted of subsistence farming. The government even had to pay some soldiers with land grants because it had no money.

Without slavery there would be no cotton or other cash crops. Other countries in this time period used slave labor or some form of its equivalent with their colonies so US agricultural products would not have been competitive in other markets. Without this capital the US would have a difficult time setting up other industries. In fact it would be very likely that the country would never have developed out of subsistence farming and would have been the equivalent of yet another third world country.

Think of all the good America has done for the world. Take a look at World War 1 and World War 2 for example. Without American intervention how much longer would those have lasted? Would the allies even have won? An America that did not go thru a period of slavery and expansionism would not have had the men or materiel to send over. The most likely outcome is that it would have had its own fight with the other nations in the continent.

America is America warts and all. If you are a liberal and want an America that can take the lead in Climate Change, rescuing refugees, forcing people to acknowledge there are 30 million genders, or whatever other cause you are fighting for then it would have to be an America that went thru slavery, imperialism, and all other things that you hate. The moralist America that you preach, that never existed, would never have made it out of infancy.


The Great Democrat Con


The Democratic party has run the most amazing con job in political history. For the longest time it has convinced the American public that it is the party that works for the benefit of the working class while painting the Republicans as evil tools of corporate greed. In reality every single one of their major policies have massively enriched the big business they are supposed to be railing against. Despite their demonization from the press and complete lack of effort in defending their viewpoints it is actually the Republicans who pursue efforts that end up helping the poor and middle class citizens.

Lets take a look at a few of the most popular Democrat accomplishments.


I have written about this in the past. According to Democrats this was supposed to protect the economic system from the banking industry being too big to fail and requiring bailouts. In reality it increased the market share of giant backs from 25% to 63% and increased the share of 4 banks from 11% to 43%. It has devastated smaller banks causing 25% of them to close outright and creating a period in the Obama administration where only 3 new banks opened as opposed to 100’s per year under Bush. Of course since there is no competition consumers take it on the chin as well as they have more fees to contend with.

Due to their brilliant marketing consumers still think Dodd-Frank is good for them and major Democrats like Bernie Sanders still want to continue this policy even after seeing its effects.


Obamacare was billed as a way to deliver affordable quality healthcare to every man , woman, and abortion in America. It was supposed to lower all premiums, let everyone keep the same doctor, and let people with existing illnessess benefit from insurance. The insurance companies complain about Obamacare but in reality they have more than doubled their profits under this system. In exchange for their doubled profits they have delivered massive premiums and sky-high deductibles. People were indeed covered but deductibles are so high very few people could use their insurance effectively. After all there is no incentive to provide quality insurance when the government holds a gun to your head and forces you to purchase it. In most cases you are forced to buy it from an effective monopoly.

Illegal Immigration

Democrats have always been big supporters of illegal immigration. The cynic in me says they do it for voters. Others will say because they want to help the poor citizens of South America and other places. Whatever the reason the policy depresses income for those who make the least.

Labor like anything else is a commodity. As with any commodity when there is plenty of supply its value drops. Illegal immigration increases the supply of labor massively undervaluing the labor provided by citizens. The concept is similar to plantations importing slaves in the past because they could not make the same profit paying citizens fair wages.

It is very sad that Republicans are too shy to point out these failures of Democrats enabling them to continue misleading their public about their image.



Never Forget: Democrats Incite Assassinations


I have been getting some pushback from my previous article about the connection between the Democrats and the attempted political assassination of the Republican lawmakers. Make no mistake Democrats are responsible for these attempted assassinations and they should be held responsible for it.

Let us try to look at things logically. Before we go further the first question we have to ask is are political assassinations ever acceptable? Can somebody or some group be so evil or so damaging to the world that its better to just kill him or them in cold blood for the greater good? I have something called to Hitler test to answer this question. When asked some people would say that if they had a chance to kill baby Hitler they would. Please note that you do not need everyone to believe this. The Democrat dog whistles for political assassination only needs to reach a minority of their followers for results to be achieved. All we have to do is check whether or not the Democrats have painted Trump and the Republicans to be at least as great a threat as Hitler.


Democrats have already compared Trump to Hitler and everyone supporting him to brown shirts. I could stop the article right here but lets go on.

The Planet

Not content with painting Trump and the Republicans as Hitler Democrats have actively tried to paint them as threats to the planet and life itself. Noam Chomsky one of the more prominent liberals has called the Republicans the most dangerous organization on earth.

Never mind that the United States is reducing emissions while China , India, and Germany are increasing theirs. It has to be Trump and the Republicans that are destroying the world.

And Your Little Dog too!

Not content with portraying Republicans as Nazis who want to destroy the world Democrats go one step further. According to them Trump and the Republicans want to personally remove your healthcare so you can die in a gutter.

This is, of course, despite the fact that medicare and medicaid are getting more funding that they have the year before.

Democrats have sent out dog whistles that Republicans want to destroy the planet and make you personally suffer while worshipping Hitler. It is not a surprise one of their followers picked up on this and started hunting Republican lawmakers. It is a surprise that more of them have not done this.


The Truth About Gun Violence


Democrats are quick to link anything they possibly can to gun control. They argue that since Republicans are hesitant to pass laws limiting the second amendment rights of citizens they are responsible for these killings as well. As usual since the Trump administration and mainstream Republican sources are unwilling or unable to offer up a counter argument to this accusation so it falls to independent bloggers like me to do so. Once I am done you will find it is actually the Republicans doing more to stop gun violence than Democrats. In essence what I will show that it is immigration from the developing countries into developed ones that cause most of the violence not any gun control laws that a country may or may not have.

Developed Countries

Do you ever notice that when liberals give stats about gun violence it is always a comparison between the US and other developed countries. I admit this does make sense. Developed countries have different cultures, laws, and habits than developing countries. The reason that I even bring this up is to point out that it is not racist to think like this. Even liberals acknowledge it when they refuse to compare the US to developing nations in the same continent.


When presented with the list of countries which the US is compared to pay attention to the ones with the highest rate of gun violence and the lowest. The nations with the lowest rates like Japan or Australia have draconian immigration policies to keep unwanted immigrants out. Australia even goes the extra mile of isolating illegal immigrants in a special island. They also have the added benefit of being island nations surrounded by water which form another natural barrier. Other countries that have relatively low rate are separated from developing countries by other nations like Poland or Hungary which have put up literal walls to control unwanted immigration. The countries with the highest rates like Greece or Italy are on the front lines of the migration crisis but even they have the Mediterranean Sea providing a natural barrier.

America is in a unique situation where it directly shares a sizable land border with a developing nation. To make matters worse that developing nation shares borders with a whole host of others each clamoring to get in. To further entice the people America offers something other developed countries don’t. Birthright Citizenship.


It is of course important to provide facts to back up my statements. These are all stats from 2013 as this was the only year I could find comparative stats.

In that year the US had 3.55 death per 100,000 people. Mexico had a rate of 12.55 deaths. Columbia had 35.08 and Venezuela had 32.66. El Salvador had a rate of 52.39. The other countries are somewhere in the middle.

The Truth

There is nothing wrong with gun control laws but it is not the solution to our problem. What is worse is it asks people to give up constitutional rights for no reason at all setting precedent that we can legislate away rights when we want to. To the credit of Republicans they have seen the unique geographical disadvantages of the United States and are working to secure the border solving the problem without requiring people to give up constitutional rights.



How Democrats Incite Political Assassinations


This is part of my #bloodontheirhands series of articles.

Political assassinations have proven to be of great benefit to the party that calls for them. In the American scenario not only do the Democrats have a chance to replace any slain Republicans in special elections they also delay any votes and derail the agenda of the opposition. Rand Paul was already confirmed to be in the practice area when the attempted assassination happened. If the Democrat assassin were successful the Republican majority would have dropped to 51-49 making everything that much harder to pass. Details are scarce about who else was there but if by chance two more senators were then the Democrats would have made the Republicans lose their majority pending special elections. Best of all some statements of sympathy afterwards absolves you of all blame.

Now that Democrats have brought political assassinations into American politics it is important for us to understand how they use dog whistles to tell their followers that it is perfectly fine to kill Republicans.

Step 1: Dehumanization

The first step is to use your media mouthpieces and allies to paint Republicans as the enemy of humankind. Take a look at the New York Times, Washington Post, or any other major news outlets. Whenever a Republican does anything it is because they want to destroy humanity, destroy the country as we know it, or slay you personally. There is no nuance or any other motive. Republicans are portrayed as parasites that must be killed if the body is to survive.

My favorite example is Dodd-Frank. According to the propaganda arm of the Democrats the Republicans want it repealed because they are greedy and have been paid for by the giant banks. They do not care whether or not they cause a financial crash. Nothing is mentioned about how at the end of a bill designed to prevent banks from becoming too big to fail giant corporations have somehow increased the market share of these banks from 11% to 43%. Quadrupling their size. No mention of how a bill meant to protect and nurture small banks caused 25% of them to close. Notice that there is no reason given why the bill is good. It is just necessary and the Republicans are evil because they oppose it because the propaganda arm of the Democrats say so.

Once you succeed in portraying Republicans like this then it becomes an act of good that is even heroic for them to be slain.

Step 2: Normalization

The second step is to normalize the portrayal. Every story must be of world shattering importance where the Republicans step up to destroy everything that is good in the world. Experts have warned Democrats of this stance as there would be nowhere to escalate to after. They are of course wrong. These stories do have an escalation and the Democrats have been sending their base dog whistles for someone to step up and do it.

In order for this to be successful it must be a unified effort. When a Democrat or Democrat leaning voter listens to any source he trusts whether it be the media arm, the political arm, or the celebrities in the entertainment arm of the DNC he must hear the same message. Republicans are evil and are coming to destroy you and all you hold dear. They must be destroyed. This reinforces the belief in the mind of the average citizen.

More than the image of the Republicans themselves the reaction to Republicans must be normalized too. Violence against Trump supporters, disruption of their rallies, tear gas employed against their children must be seen to be done over and over again. Celebrities then use their platform to advocate for this violence in the form of “harmless satire”.

At the end of step 2 violent reprisals against Republicans whether through economic, physical, or social means must become the norm.

Step 3: Deification

This is the final step of the creation of the political assassin. The calls and acts of violence against Republicans must not only be normalized but they must be applauded. In this step violence is elevated to be the superior form of retaliation, while other forms while still valid are less worthy of praise. Katie Griffith beheading Trump, plays calling for his violent death, musicians from the entertainment arm calling for his death and the sale of his wife into prostitution and slavery are all met with cheers from the Democrats.

This sends a dog whistle to their base that if they do these things not only do the Democrats approve but they applaud them for it as well. Not everyone will take up the cause of course and it would not be beneficial if everyone did. The Democrats only need to swing a few votes and a successful political assassination would go a long way towards cowing the rest of the Republicans. The majority can show their disdain and preference for violence against Republicans through social media while a chosen few can do the actual deed.

This is how Democrats incite political assassinations. #bloodontheirhands

Political Assassination #BloodonTheirHands


A terrible incident happened in that baseball field yesterday and we can never truly process the event until we are honest with ourselves at what occurred. It was not left-wing terrorism nor was it a random act of violence or any other name we could come up with to sugarcoat the event. It was an attempt at political assassination plain and simple. All of these things cause tragedies but with political assassination there is an attempt to sway the balance of power towards your chosen side.

This was not the first time political assassinations happened in America. 6 years ago you had Gabby Gifford. Before then you had Reagan and of course the most famous one would be the Kennedy assassination. This assassination was unique among others though and represents the first of its kind. In all other cases the assassins knew who their target was going to be. They wanted to kill Reagan, Gifford, Kennedy, or whoever the target was and found a way to do it. In this case the Democrat Assassin did not know who he was targeting specifically. It was enough for him that the victims would be Republican lawmakers. The hatred is not for a specific person but rather for the party itself and everyone in it.

It is clear that the Democrat Assassin did not like how Republicans voted in certain bills and thought that they were pawns of Russia, destroyers of the planet, or whatever narrative the media was pushing that particular day. He then decided to eliminate any Republican lawmakers he could. If the Democrat Assassin was successful there would have been major implications. First off any Republican lawmakers slain would need to have special elections to fill their seats. This creates opportunities for Democrats to win those seats. More significantly this means that the slain Republicans cannot vote. This is even more important for Democrats as they would most likely lose the special elections anyway.

I want everyone reading this to consider the implications if the Democrat Assassin were to be successful. Details are thin on who was actually there but we can confirm that Rand Paul was in the area. The GOP only has a two seat majority. If Rand Paul died that majority would have dropped to one making everything harder to pass. If there were two or three more senators in the area then the GOP would not be able to pass anything until special elections were held eating up more of President Trumps term. Publicly the Democrats would mourn but privately they would be cheering. After all they have stopped a party they deem as traitors and racists.

Democrats are absolutely responsible for this assassination attempt. For months Democrats were told that by keying everything to 10 they would have nowhere to escalate to. Every issue was life or death. Every issue was the Republicans destroying the world, being puppets to Putin, or strangely enough bringing about world war 3 by fighting with Putin’s allies Iran. Every violent outburst was cheered on by the left as a necessary part of resistance. After all they were fighting for the future of the world. Is it any wonder one of the faithful brought it upon themselves to go lawmaker hunting?

Every time the Republicans say something slightly off Democrats accuse them of dog whistling to racists. With their rhetoric Democrats have been dog whistling to these potential assassins. The honorable thing to do would be to own up to it and apologize to the people for bringing this to the country.

3 Important Points from Comey


The entire country watch Comey testify yesterday and there were some important details that are easy to overlook. Others have already done a discussion on each word and what they could possibly mean. For this article I am focusing on 3 things and their implications.

FBI did not access the DNC Server

The entire narrative behind Russia gate is that the Russians hacked the DNC servers and then gave the information to wikileaks to damage the Clinton campaign. With the collusion of President Trump of course. It is normally very hard to pinpoint the exact perpetrator of an attack in cyberspace. False IP addresses, methods, and other things could easily lay the blame on another party when it did not do the act in the first place. Despite all of these difficulties the various intelligence agencies were able to power through with diligent forensic investigations and were able to determine without a shadow of a doubt that it was the Russians.

Except Comey stated under oath that they did not have access to the DNC server. The Democrats refused to grant the FBI access to their servers. In fact none of the intelligence agencies were able to access the server. The only entity who seems to have had access to it to be able to determine that the attack originated from the Russians is Crowdstrike. A firm retained and paid for by the DNC. Instead of a non-partisan inquiry by intelligence agencies we now have a partisan inquiry by the DNC. The intelligence community who have every motive to discredit wikileaks are predictably not to bothered by this.

NYT , CNN, WAPO are Fake News

As you are reading this section please do recall that wikileaks, an organization that has said the DNC leaks came from a leak and not a hack, has never had to issue a correction or pull any of their released documents as false.

Democrats are saying that yesterday was a vindication of mainstream media. Some of their stories published only on the word of unnamed sources were proved correct. The exact opposite happened yesterday. Each of these outlets had to retract some of their stories as the testimony of Comey contradicted them. Retracting articles is bad enough as that is an admission of sloppy journalism but these are unnamed sources.

When you publish a story with unnamed sources you are asking the public to substitute your judgement for their own. You are telling them that there are valid reasons which prevent you from releasing the name of your source but you are willing to lay your credibility on the line because you have full confidence that what you are saying is the truth. You are telling the public that they do not need any way to verify what you are saying but they should treat it as gospel truth because you are CNN, Wapo, or the NYT.

Then you get your story with unnamed sources retracted. What happens when you lay all your credibility on the line for a story and it gets proved false? What is worse the fake stories that you have printed get used as corroboration for other stories and those stories do not get retracted. In a previous article I already showed that in these types of articles featuring unnamed sources you only have one paragraph of new material. Everything else rehashes and links to older articles including these fake stories to give more credibility to the unnamed source. If these outlets were to publish more unnamed sources in the future how are we to trust that these are real stories instead of fake?

Obama Wiretapped Trump

Remember this issue? It hinged on the Obama administration using the powers of his office and the government to influence the election for Hillary Clinton. In that case we had the administration itself asking for FISA warrants to wiretap American Citizens in the Trump campaign to get information of political value. We then Susan Rice attempt to unmask these citizens and the information shared between agencies to maximize potential leakers.

Democrats said Obama could not possibly do that. He was too nice.

Now we have Comey testifying under oath that Loretta Lynch asked him to refer to the investigation of Hillary Clinton as a matter and not as an investigation as that would be detrimental to the campaign. Again we have the very same administration using its powers to influence the election for Hillary Clinton.

This clearly establishes a pattern where the officials in the Obama administration used their power to benefit the Democrat nominee. We have to begin a congressional investigation on what else they may have done to abuse their positions of power and if they did so with the direction and knowledge of Obama.

The Masochist Ctrl-Left


I recently wrote an article labelling the ctrl-left and discussing their methods and tactics. What I left out is the goal. Why do they seek to control what you can think and do? What type of world do they seek to achieve? The fundamental nature of the ctrl-left is masochism. They enjoy their own pain and suffering. Their ideology denies credit or pleasure they get for their own achievements and amplifies the credit others get for theirs. While any credit and pleasure is denied any pain or blame is amplified and assigned to the person. This works on both a micro-personal level and a macro-cultural level.


The best example of this attitude is the “you did not build that” speech by President Obama. He was telling business owners that they were not entitled to the fruits of their labor because they are not responsible for its success. This is evident in colleges as well. If you succeed as a white male then you have either white or male privilege. If you succeed as a white female then you have white privilege. If you succeed as an asian then it is because you are asian. If you succeed as a minority female then it is because of your community. It is never because of you or your efforts. The situation is different when the person next to you succeeds. When that happens it is purely due to his efforts and he is lauded for overcoming adversity or some other reason the left can think of. In fact the more you succeed because of your privilege then the greater your guilt because you have gotten things that you did not earn.


This operates on a cultural level as well. The best example for this is terrorism. What does the ctrl-left say when they discuss the origins of terrorism and how to combat it? It is because of climate change, income inequality, racism, and a whole host of other things which is blamed on the west but not on Islamic culture. The terrorists are not the problem, we are. We pollute too much, earn too much money, or give enough to the countries with terrorists in them. If only we did that then terrorism will stop.

Listen to the left when they talk about various cultures worldwide. Every single culture is celebrated for something that the contribute except for western culture which arguably has contributed the most to the world. Just like in the personal sense when a culture that is not western succeeds it is because it overcomes adversity. When the west is successful it is not because of any merit of its people or economy but rather because they exploit the other countries in the world. In essence if there is any good that happens it is to the credit of other cultures but if anything bad happens it is the fault of the west.


This is why I am against social justice warriors. At the end of their road lies a society full of bitter servile creatures. Bitter because you are not allowed to take any credit for your achievements and servile because achievements others achieve are to be hailed as triumphs against adversity. In that society the greater your success the greater your guilt for gaming the system and the greater your neighbors success the greater his triumph. When that creature virtue signals it is because it is all he has left. There lies an inherent desire in any person to prove that he is better than the person next to him. On this road the only avenue he has left is to prove he is more servile and broken than the creature next to him. I do not wish to live in this society.