how to be happy in today’s society

Anyone with any experience in organizational leadership knows that what makes a difference are ACTION ITEMS.  Dreams, ideas, and visions are all important, but change comes in doing.

The largest problem in our personal lives is that we have given ourselves over to the pursuit of things that cannot bring us fulfillment or happiness.  Thus, here is my list of actionable items that I will guarantee will allow you to find fulfillment here and now.  The more of them you do, the happier you’ll become.  The proof is in the pudding.  If you don’t believe me, try these and observe the effect.

  1. Eat healthy
  2. Workout
  3. Avoid degenerate culture
    1. No Hollywood, little TV, no porn, no masturbation, no music that promotes gross values
  4. Read quality books
    1. Philosophy, fiction with traditional values, history
  5. Embrace classical culture
    1. Classical music, dance, opera
  6. Stay true to your family and ancestors
    1. Learn about your history
    2. Make your family the relationships you spend the most time working on
    3. Be a nationalist and honor your ancestors who built your homeland
  7. Have friends with similar values
  8. Give of your time to help others
  9. Get religion
  10. Get married
  11. Have children and rejoice in your posterity
Posted in modernity | Leave a comment

we will win no matter what: the case for staying on the trump train

There’s no easy way to go about this: Trump is disappointing and frustrating many of his staunchest supporters, the very people who put him in office.  We have people from Paul Joseph Watson to Mike Cernovich to Richard Spencer (detailed here) all taking their shots at Trump and drumming up anger from his base.   They all have understandable grievances and these grievances are about things that are not just the work of the deep state — those unelected bureaucrats in the government who are trying with all their might to “resist” the president — but mistakes Trump is making all on his own.  Things like bombing Syria, failing to rescind DACA, advancing a budget without funding for a wall, focusing too much on healthcare, backing off his brand of nationalism, and not pushing H1-B reform.

I wrote a letter to VDare a couple weeks ago in which I expressed continuing support for Trump despite all that he’s done that irritates me.  As I’ve written in the past, Americans put him in office for policy changes, not because he has cool handshakes and awesome hair.  However, it is not yet time to come after him for “betraying” us.  Considering all that’s happened in the first 5 months of his presidency, four years is a long time.  There will be plenty of time to run him out of the White House, but not yet.

People like Cernovich, Watson, and Spencer are too quick to abandon Trump.  They underestimate the powers that work against the president and the influence these powers have over on almost everyone who surrounds him.  Sure, Trump should have been smarter with his appointments and the transition into office, but that’s easy to say from the outside.  It’s clear that Trump underestimated the Deep State as well and this is primarily the reason his administration has been so passive on many of his key campaign promises.  However, as Trump slowly beats those forces back, there will be space for him to do meaningful things for us Americans.  Further, we who put him in office should be the ones to take him down for not fulfilling his promises, not these traitors in the government.

In the NBA, when a team drafts a new player, they get to retain that player at a cheap salary for a 3-year “rookie contract.”  So if he’s not panning out after year 1, there’s little to lose by keeping him around for another two years to see what kind of player he’s capable of becoming.  We as a nation essentially drafted Trump for a 4-year rookie contract.  Why kick him out after 5 months?  Let’s support him and see what he grows into.

Is that not enough reason for you?  Let me break it down further.

As PJW says, “conservatism is the new counter-culture.”  I believe we are on the path to victory — that nationalism, traditionalism, and patriotism are the future.  I will explain why our path is assured no matter the type of presidency Trump has.  I’ve constructed a model in which Trump’s time in office will be characterized by one of three basic presidency-types: 1) Successful, 2) Defeated, and 3) Betrayal.  I outline how whichever world we end up in, our goals and movement will “win” in the long run.  Each presidency-type also includes a potential “Risk Factor” that will undermine our win and the likelihood of this Risk Factor, together with the likelihood of the overall presidency-type, will influence which presidency-type you prefer.

Trump Presidency-Type 1: “Successful”  Trump listens to Steve Bannon and Jeff Sessions and uses them to root out traitors, leakers, and pedophiles. He then is free to act and keeps most of his promises on immigration, terrorism, and foreign wars. America prospers economically and the (largely white) middle-class which elected Trump unites behind more candidates like him.  Nationalism and traditional values flow naturally from this.

Risk Factor: Trump’s brand of civic nationalism creates such prosperity and optimism that Americans become complacent and never answer the existential question posed by large-scale immigration.  They remain duped by the historically-unprecedented belief that one can drastically change the demographics of his nation without drastically changing the nation itself.  This contentment with Trump’s successes causes Americans to start electing Republicans-as-usual, a la George HW Bush following Ronald Reagan.  Whatever you think about Reagan, the fact remains the American public went from an America-first populist president to someone who they thought would be more of the same, only to see it backfire.

While this presidency-type at first seems like a good thing (watching Trump keep his promises), I think the Risk Factor has a decent likelihood and could set us back for many years.

Trump Presidency-Type 2: “Defeated”  Trump only partially stamps out his opposition within the government and is ultimately defeated by backstabbing Republicans, the lying Cultural Marxist press, and unconstitutional judges.  As a result, Americans realize that even if they get their man in office, the system is utterly broken, our democracy is a farce, and we must use other means to secure our nation.  What these “other means” are I do not yet know, but I know a government cannot survive which disregards its people so thoroughly.  The middle-class grassroot supporters that once flocked to Trump rallies now flock to nationalists, Alt-Righters, and paleo-conservatives.

Potential Risk Factor: Americans don’t realize it was the courts and media who did this to them and continue to look for the next America-first “conservative” candidate instead of rejecting the journalist class and demanding a revamping of the court system.

This is the presidency-type I would favor. I think the Risk Factor only has a small likelihood (especially given the current distrust of mainstream media). Also, since I believe Trump is not a charlatan or a shill, just an ignoramus, I think this presidency-type is the most likely one.

Trump Presidency Type-1a: “Defeated Misinterpreted as Successful”  Trump has the appearance of a “Successful” presidency-type (type 1), but actually is in the “Defeated” presidency-type (type 2).  Many Americans will understand this and have the reaction described in “Defeated” above, but the rest of them are duped by the pro-Trump media (and the Leftist media wanting to divide us) into thinking we’re in “Successful.”  This means many Americans will still fall in the trap of voting for the next Trump-ish candidate when they should be aligning with the rest of us and demanding a reinvention of a broken system.

Trump Presidency Type-3: “Betrayal”  Trump completely betrays us and accomplishes none of his important campaign promises.  We get no wall, no meaningful immigration reform, wars in the Middle East, and more refugees.  All the anti-Trump anarchist/libertarians get to say “told ya so” and Trump goes down in history as either a shill, a cuck, or simply a failure.  Americans who voted for Trump now understand that we will never have the candidate we need.  No elite, regardless of his promises, will ever put our interests first.  Millions realize that we in the non-traditional-conservative camp are the only ones fighting for their civilization and their future and our numbers grow.

Potential Risk Factor: Americans remain susceptible to the next Trump-like candidate who promises the right things.  They don’t realize that no one is coming to save them and think all we need to do is quit voting for either party until they present us with the right candidate.  (This is the strategy we’ve been applying for the last half century.  Has it worked?)

The difference between this Risk Factor and the Risk Factor in “Defeated” is that in “Defeated” we are dealing with a defeat orchestrated by the Left, but we selected the right man.  We can avoid the Defeated Risk Factor if we simply continue to distrust the mainstream media.  For the Risk Factor in “Betrayal” we are not understanding that the candidates themselves are the problem.  Perhaps the system is broken, too, but we’ll never know since we won’t have a good candidate to test it.

I think this presidency-type is the least likely since, as I said above, I don’t think Trump is a charlatan or a cuck (but I could be wrong).  While the outcome seems like a bad thing at face value, it may not actually be too bad — we win in the long run as more people align with our ideas.  On the other hand, the potential risk factor I identified would be catastrophic.  It would essentially put us back at square one — hiding in our communities watching our nation vanish while we meekly stand by and wait for some lying politician to promise to save us.

Which world are we living in, Successful, Defeated, or Betrayal?  To find out, we will need to support Trump for the time being.  Do not underestimate the roll a passionate base has in the politics of Washington, DC.  We can insulate Trump from political pressure and bolster his resolve.  Our continued support will also cause the mainstream media to continue to fall out of favor with both the American public and the White House.  Let us be the enthusiastic base that got him elected. There will be time for dragging him out by that giant head of hair but that time is not yet.

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

reactions from the comment section on the london attacks (language warning)

Ariana Grande Manchester Concert Ends in Explosion, Panic and Death

Another tragedy in Europe perpetrated by a Muslim.  We don’t actually know at this time for certain if it was a Muslim, but let me put it this way: I read a Tweet right after one of the last terrorist attacks and I can no longer find the Tweet but the point is still relevant.  The writer was at a bar when the news came on reporting the attack.  He looked around and asked aloud, “Anyone here think this was done by a young Jewish kid?”

If you’re like me, you are a little saddened by the news, but hardly surprised.  You are also frustrated and angry.  For now, let’s just commiserate with some of the commentors at Barstool Sports.

To start, we get the generic, but sincere, heartfelt sorrow.  Notice the number of upvotes.

But people also know what is really going on.

So many people with anger.  I think it’s righteous anger, too.  The time for posting hashtags is over.  It’s time to be men and say what we’re all thinking.

Nigel Farage said something similar to these next two.

Unfortunately, the Brits have already had this lesson:

Also, call me crazy, but I agree with all the alternative-media pundits out there: people are waking up to all the bullshit they’ve been getting fed from the elites.  Here is a small example.  I posted something almost identical to this next comment about a year ago on Barstool.  No one want to hear it.  I got attacked left and right.  Now?  At least some people are willing to learn hard facts.  The next step is remembering that the media and French government tried to cover this up.

And don’t think more and more people are not understanding how the mainstream news is full of amoral liars.  You can now easily predict the narrative.

That last one is flirting with the point that it might be time to ask whether Islam itself is the problem.  This attack, and things like Sharia Patrols are making the point for me.

And we end with my favorite.  An impassioned (and perhaps poetic) plea for people to ask the tough questions.  Together with some healthy vitriol for those who have encouraged the transformation of Europe and America via demographic changes.

Couldn’t have said it better myself, toughguy.


Posted in culture | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

republish: so many non-leftist normies still don’t understand why trump won

Note:  This was published a few months ago at a different blog.  I’m re-posting it here because I’m trying to consolidate my writing into one place.  Plus, with all the people jumping off the Trump Train because of his failings, this seems like a good time revisit what got him into office.  That is, policy.


I clicked on the following article because The Federalist seems to produce pretty good content overall. That, and I’m still not always sure what Postmodernism actually is.

Donald Trump Is The First President To Turn Postmodernism Against Itself

At the risk of mischaracterizing Mr. Ernst’s article, the entire thing boils down to, “Modern culture has ended up in a place where our ‘heroes’ are really anti-heroes, embracing rather than eschewing the denouncements heaped on them by the establishment, thereby revealing their enemies’ hypocrisy and becoming beloved by the common folk.”

Has Donald Trump done this? Eh, probably.

But to what extent does this fully explain Trump’s rise and the “movement,” as he has termed it? Over the last year, there has been a shift in the manner in which the pro-Trump people have discussed him. That is, they are using the enthusiasm behind his victories to stand on a platform and condemn everything about modern discourse they hate: political correctness, anti-democratic protests, radical feminism, a biased media, an intolerant left-wing pop culture, etc.

Are they wrong to do this? No, not really. In fact, it can hardly be surprising, considering that these are the cultural issues which these media types come in contact with most often in their personal lives. This is why they hated Obama so much–because of his degradation of our culture.

We should also remember that the Trump campaign itself used the anti-establishment-bad-boy image as a defining characteristic for most of the election. This was out of necessity, both to distinguish Trump from a crowded Republican field and to distance him from Hillary Clinton. The campaign played the elites’ attacks against them, doing things such as embracing the “deplorables” label and making “drain the swamp!” a rallying cry in the final days of the election.


Let not the excitement we have for Trump’s rejection of political norms and political correctness distract us from the fact that Americans want meaningful policy change more than anything.

Americans are not so cavalier and nihilistic in their political affiliations as many have supposed. They did not turn to Donald Trump out of an “I hate all these politicians so I’m going to embrace the guy they hate” mentality. They came and they stayed because of Trump’s positions on policies that Americans want but have been ignored for decades, most notably, immigration, job outsourcing, and wasteful spending. Watch any interview with Trump supporters at his rallies. The theme of the interviews was the changes he could make. Trump could have rode these policies to the White House but when he was attacked from all angles, unlike our previously failed “traditional” conservatives, he was willing to punch back. Americans loved him for that, but would have voted for him for his policies and straightforward talk alone. This is why I find comments that Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden could have beaten Trump laughable.

So Mr. Ernst’s article is good, but still doesn’t quite get the Trump phenomenon. In fact, losing the Postmoderism tie-in with pop culture, the article really isn’t anything different than what we’ve gotten before. Previous articles such as this one and this one are actually more to the point.

The pro-Trump media must continue to beat the war drums regarding policy. Policy is what made Trump into the villain and policy is where his greatest potential lies. Shifts in cultural norms can easily be forgotten, just as everyone does not remember that Obama ran on an anti-gay marriage position. Trump can enact policies that, rather than Obama’s childish Executive Orders, will be around long after his time in office.

There’s a popular saying that goes, “Politics is downstream of culture,” but I’m not sure how true that actually is. Some would say the policy shift in 1965 regarding immigration is what caused the current we-are-a-nation-of-immigrants-diversity-is-our-strength cultural dogma, not the other way around.

We can get into chicken-and-the-egg debates later about culture and politics later. For now, know that Americans want a dramatic policy shift and have wanted it for many years. Remind our new president and his aides of this every chance you get.

Posted in modernity | Tagged , | 1 Comment

women and their stupid friends: “he’s nice, but is he good enough for you?”

A female acquaintance of mine asked this on Twitter a while back and I haven’t yet had the chance to break it down.


What a wonderful insight into how women’s brains operate.  Like little factories with nothing but destructive thinking coming off the assembly line.  Regardless of the poll results, the fact that this question was even asked reveals the problem.

This is why women should never listen to their friends’ dating advice.  Scratch that.  They can probably listen to advice from friends who are in a happy, committed relationship.  But only those friends.  Ladies, if your friends are single and start to ask about your relationship, run for the fucking hills.

Let’s catch up with the last two scenes of You’ve Got Mail.  In these, Meg Ryan first realizes she loves two men (Tom Hanks and her mystery online guy), and then is about as happy as you can imagine when she learns they are the same guy.  It’s a great ending with just the right amount of sappiness.  Meg now has a bright future ahead of her and will share it with a man she loves.  She’s completed the Hero’s Journey — the Road of Trials, the Abyss, the Reward, and now the Return Home with the Elixir (which includes, among other things, a dreamy guy).

Now we get to the post-credits scene.  What post-credits scene, you ask?  Why, the one where her shrew (and single) friends show up and start asking her questions that are along the same lines as the question in the tweet above, like:

  • “Didn’t he bankrupt you?  You deserve a guy that respects what you do.”
  • “You’re so smart and clever.  Don’t you intimidate him?”
  • “He’s too rich, there’s no way he’s going to respect what an awesome independent woman you are.”
  • “You’re so funny and witty.  Can he even keep up with you?”
  • “He lied to you this whole time about the online dating?  Why?  Cause he knew he could never get a girl like you?”
  • “Does he want children?  Are you sure?  Look how messed up his family is!  What’s he got, like 4 step-moms?”
  • “Look at all the good you do in the world, how much you help families and children.  You’re so great.  What’s he do?  Run a big business that crushes people like you?  You deserve a guy that does good in the world, like a pediatrician.”
  • “How do you know he won’t get in the way of your passions and dreams?”

And so forth.

The post-post-credits scene involves Meg Ryan showing up to Tom’s place with a lot of questions.  Tom, thinking everything was wonderful, has no idea where these questions are coming from.  What’s more, he doesn’t understand why they’re important.  He knows how he feels and these worries seem like they’re nothing more than random hypotheticals, projections from previous bad relationships.  Meg seemed fine just a few weeks ago.  What changed?

Meg, feeling that Tom is not being supportive of her concerns, starts wondering if maybe her friends were right.  She accuses Tom of not respecting her worries and wonders out loud if he really understands her at all.  He says she’s being ridiculous but that just makes the situation worse.  Meg says that if that’s how he feels, maybe this isn’t going to work.  Maybe they’re just too different of people.

Ho boy, you get the idea.  Their relationship falls apart from there.  Tom takes his dog, Brinkley, buys an expensive condo, and spends the next while bouncing from floozy to floozy and bankrupting a few more small businesses like Meg’s.  After a few years, he realizes Amazon is going to bury all these brick and mortar book stores and uses his considerable capital to pivot and invest in dating apps.  He then settles down and marries the bright 27-year-old who helped him get into Silicon Valley startups.  They have 3 kids.

Meg, on the other hand, goes on to write many successful children’s books and also has a high-paying job at a publishing firm.  She has many male suitors but none of them quite resonate with her the way Tom did.  There are times, in the middle of the night and when she’s feeling especially lonely, that she wishes things had worked out with Tom.  Why did they even break up?  Their differences now seem so inconsequential.  Eventually, she settles down as well, marrying the kind (but a little boring) president of her publishing firm.  At this point, children aren’t a very realistic option for her but she can now write full time and host reading events for kids.  This gives her some fulfillment, but sometimes she confides in her old mentor Birdie that she wishes life had turned out differently.

Moral of the story: Ladies, when you start dating a guy, do not listen to the shrill, lonely harpies who surround you.  Better yet, don’t even tell them about the guy until you have a rock on your finger.

Look again at the list of questions above.  Men literally never ask these questions of each other.  The only time we get involved is when we think the relationship is harming our buddy and even then, getting involved is usually done very carefully since men are protective of the women they’re dating.  Most of the time, men do not tolerate their friends attacking their girl.

There’s a reason men are always worried that their girlfriend’s stupid friends will submarine him.  For women, though, it’s different.  It honestly doesn’t matter if his friends like you, but even if it does, all you have to do is show up and be pleasant and you’ll be fine.  Guys, on the other hand, will get run through the gauntlet determining whether or not her girlfriends will spend the rest of their relationship trying to break them up.

Girls, stop it.  Stop downloading your insecurities into your friends’ relationships.  Stop inflating your own egos by asking if this guy or that guy is “good enough” for you or your friends.  It just will lead you down the road of relationship failure.


Posted in movies, xtra randos | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment