Outlaw Conservative S01E029 – Defeating Racism

In the wake of a racially motivated mass shooting in El Paso, Texas, President Donald Trump took to the airwaves to condemn racism and White Supremacy, calling for these ideologies to be defeated.

It wasn’t the first time, either. At Trump’s inauguration speech, he said “We will rediscover our loyalty to each other. When you open your heart to patriotism there is no room for prejudice. The Bible tells us how good and pleasant it is when God’s people live together in unity. We must speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity.” In the wake of the communist riots in Charlottesville, Virginia, the President said racism was evil, and condemned Neo Nazis, the KKK, White Supremacists, and other hate groups. After Robert Bowers shot up a Pittsburgh synagogue, the President said “the vile hate filled poison of anti-Semitism must be condemned and confronted everywhere and anywhere it appears. There must be no tolerance for anti-Semitism in America, or for any form of religious or racial hatred or prejudice“.

Indeed, Donald Trump has often repeated such condemnations. He has always denied and expressed offense at the accusations that he is a racist. His close family ties with Jews seem to make the accusations absurd on their face, but this has never stopped the Left from lobbing them. Perhaps this is because, despite their absurdity, they have been rewarded so frequently with these displays of weakness from the President.

Now, speaking as one who was accused of being a racist and an anti-Semite so many times that I embraced the labels, you can imagine I was less than enthusiastic to hear the President I supported so enthusiastically, condemning what I viewed as simple observations of reality. The President is no dummy, and so one must assume that when he condemns racism, White Supremacy, and anti-Semitism, he means something very different from the idiotic screeching we hear from the Left.

Racism has no doubt been with us for a very long time. Indeed, there is no time in the history of man in which it has not been with us. So if we hope to truly defeat it, we have our work cut out for us. Here, I will try to illustrate a course to excising this “vile hate filled poison” from our National body.

As I see it, there are four steps we must take, which I’ll elaborate upon as we go forward.

  1. To claim that racism is evil, we must first acknowledge that evil exists. Racism cannot be wrong, if there is no such thing as morality.
  2. To defeat the evil of racism, we must carefully and precisely define it.
  3. In defining racism, it must be severed from all that is true and righteous.
  4. Identify and eliminate the sources of racial stereotypes

Step 1. Morality

In most societies, this is easy. Morality comes from God, and the people of the society all more or less believe in the same God with the same rules.

In our society, God has been all but stamped out of the public square. We operate on a demonstrably false premise that Jews, Christians, and Muslims all believe essentially the same things, and when the conflicts of that false belief system become unavoidable, we sacrifice the interests of Christians.

This stems from our new, seemingly secular religion, of communism. Since Christians have long been the dominant religious group in the United States, and their beliefs are steadfastly opposed to the communist way of life, their interests must be sacrificed in favor of the newcomers and minority groups, as part of the perpetual revolution strategy of Leon Trotsky.

Fortunately, we have a remedy to some portion of this problem. All three of these faiths, and most others, if their texts are adhered to, and even most people without religious affiliation, reject with limited exceptions, dishonesty, and initiatory violence, by private citizens. While they all vary on what they consider justification for government force, they all can generally agree that government should not force people without some justification.

If all religious and non-religious people can alike agree that it is evil for private citizens to engage in dishonesty or initiatory violence, and we likewise agree that racism is evil, then we can agree on the confines within which we must define racism.

Step 2. Defining Racism

Indeed, much of the problem with “racism” today comes from the hysteria surrounding the terminology. Beto O’Rourke said, without anyone on the Left contradicting him, that “This country was founded on white supremacy“. Elizabeth Warren, likewise lacking in Leftist condemnation, said our justice system is ‘Racist, all the way, front to back.” Keith Ellison said the US Constitution is “the best evidence of a white racist conspiracy to subjugate other peoples“. Luis Gutierrez said Trump’s immigration plans are an “extension of the white supremacist agenda“. Ilhan Omar said Trump is pushing a “White Nationalist Agenda“. Jay Inslee said explicitly, that Trump is a White Nationalist. This list could get kind of long, so hopefully you get the idea.

All of the people who have made these statements are in good standing with the Democrat Party. With “racism” defined so broadly, it cannot be defeated. Every reasonable person, every patriotic American, is, by these broad definitions, a racist and a White Supremacist. If defeating racism means we must set ourselves to the task of defeating the founding of our country, our borders, our justice system, the United States Constitution, and the President of the United States, then only the most detestable people will take up that mission, and all decent people will oppose them.

Many have referred to immigration enforcement as “concentration camps” and other Nazi-esque terminology. Since immigration enforcement is a good thing, the only conclusion an honest person can reach, if taking such language seriously, is that Nazis and concentration camps are also good things.

For proof of my theory, we recently have heard a poll touted that says 51% of the country thinks the President is a racist. Yet, he enjoys 88% approval among Republicans (seriously, not a dog whistle), and an overall approval rating in the low to high 40% range. This would seem to indicate that with racism defined as it is today, a considerable portion of the population, particularly those in the Republican Party, approve of racism. With racism so broadly defined, as an almost all encompassing view of the world, we cannot set ourselves to defeating such a significant portion of our own population. It would literally be a civil war.

We tried that. It was the deadliest war in our blood soaked history. It did not solve the problem.

As a brief aside, it is worth noting here that, of course, the careful observer realizes that this is precisely what the Democrat Party wants. That is why they refuse to condemn Willem Van Spronsen, who very recently, after appearing on CNN’s United Shades of America, glorifying the violence of Antifa, including the armed Redneck Revolt variety, attempted to bomb an ICE detention center, and was killed by law enforcement in the process. That is why Democrat Presidential Candidate Joe Biden, hailed the Antifa terrorists who inspired that attack as “a courageous group of Americans” when they attacked Patriots in Charlottesville, Virginia. That is why they were mum when a transgender student shot up a school in Highlands Ranch, Colorado. That is why they only care about the El Paso shooting, but ignore the 9 dead at the hands of an Antifa crossdresser in Dayton, Ohio.

Obviously, we cannot be taking our moral cues from the Democrat Party.

So, back to the task of defining racism.

We know what it isn’t. The President isn’t a racist. Supporting the President isn’t racist. Immigration enforcement isn’t racist. Our justice system isn’t racist. The founding of America isn’t racist. The Constitution isn’t racist.

So what is racism?

Racism is evil, as we’ve established, and evil, we’ve established as dishonesty or lawless violence.

So from here we can deduce that racism is dishonesty or lawless violence, along racial lines, or with racial motivations. Defined this narrowly, there is far greater hope for defeating this wickedness, than there is to defeating the all encompassing madness purveyed by the Left. Indeed, defined thusly, even most White Nationalists, can condemn this evil.

What more powerful ally in the fight against racism could we ask for, than White Nationalists? Without White Nationalists, would racism have any power at all?

Perhaps, but we’ll put a pin in that for now.

Step 3. Severing Racism from Truth & Righteousness

Surely others would object. They see racism everywhere. Private property, they say, is racist. Inequality, they say, is racist. This list could get kind of long…

It is perhaps no coincidence that where these folks see racism, communism too, finds its foes. And what is communism but dishonesty, and lawless violence? Communism is everything we define as evil, all rolled up into one all encompassing sociopolitical (and sociopathic) worldview, which attempts to impose itself by force and deception upon all the peoples of the Earth.

Perhaps it has come to pass, that communism has taken up the mantle of defeating racism, falsely, while calling all of its foes this thing we all ought to be united in defeating?  It surely would not be communism’s greatest deception.

This would explain the popular opposition to science that emanates from so called “anti-racist” circles. Communism rightly views truth as a lethal threat to its dominion, and seeks to ruin all the decent people who would stand for the truth at the expense of their own comfort and security. A startling account of precisely this phenomenon is provided by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in his excellent book, The Gulag Archipelago. In the story of his own captivity, and through the accounts of other prisoners, we are provided with countless stories of engineers, geneticists, scientists, doctors, philosophers, and religious figures, all imprisoned for no other crime than deviating from the Narrative.

In our own time, we have startlingly similar examples, and if we hope to defeat racism, we must sever it from the enemies of communism, which are true and righteous.

James Watson, a Nobel Prize winner for his part in the unravelling of DNA, was stripped of his titles, chased from polite society, and so impoverished that he had to sell his Nobel Prize. Not because he expressed hatred or irrational prejudices, but because he made some rather easily observed statements concerning the genetic origins of racial IQ disparities, and their impacts on social outcomes. If we hope to defeat racism, we cannot define racism as understanding genetics, because if we try to defeat genetics, we will fail.

In that same vein, we have to decouple opposition to racism from other Left wing delusions. For example, transgenderism. These two concepts have been joined to one another by the Democrat Party, and really every honest person understands that transgenderism is just plain insane. It stands in root and branch opposition to every bit of scientific, genetic, and biological information we have ever collected. If racism and “transphobia” are in the same category, then we cannot defeat racism, because that would mean only insane people opposed racism.

Transgenderism of course, stems from the mythologies of feminism, sexism, and misogyny. This ideology, likewise presents a similar challenge. Men and women are different, on a genetic and biological level, and there are very good reasons for this. Nobody with a 2nd grade education can honestly deny this, and yet the Left insists that acknowledgement of this reality is sexism, and that sexism and racism are in the same category of wickedness. If men and women were the same, then homosexuality actually would be equal to heterosexuality, and then humans beings would be incapable of reproducing. It would literally spell the extinction of human beings, and whatever your opinions about racism, the extinction of mankind is definitely worse than that.

To defeat racism, we must first embrace the actual facts of the human condition, and separate racism from it. We cannot defeat racism if racism and reality are one and the same. “That true statement” cannot be “racist” if racism is to be defeated.

Communism dupes its victims through false promises of “equality” and, in the current supposed crusade against racism, we are told that every inequality is evidence of racism. We cannot defeat racism thusly defined, since inequality is inseparable from the human condition.

And in these false promises we find the Leftist opposition to math, and statistics in particular.

Take for example, crime statistics. Blacks are roughly 13.2% of the population, and the impetus of the “Black Lives Matter” riots was that blacks are disproportionately represented, as 23%  of those killed by police and 34% of those incarcerated in America. From this they conjure a supposed right to smash windows, set fires, and attack White people on the street. And one might understand their complaint, if this were happening purely on the basis of skin color, but we know quite certainly that this is not the case. In fact, blacks are also disproportionately represented as more than 50% of murderers and robbers, and as the perpetrators of 27% of all violent crime in America. Thus begging the question as to why they are so underrepresented in other criminal justice statistics.

We certainly cannot fight racism by setting violent criminals loose on our streets. Nor can we do so by imprisoning innocent White people. To defeat racism, it must be decoupled from such demands of equality.

Likewise in poverty statistics, we find black families living below the poverty line at a rate of roughly 23%, compared to the national family poverty rate of 11%. Were it the case that blacks were living identical lifestyles as the rest of the country, indeed this would be a serious problem. That just so happens to not be the case. Roughly 65% of black children live in single parent households, nearly twice the national average of 34%, and more than twice that of White families at just 24%. This combined with their criminal proclivities more than explains the poverty gap, before we even venture into their genetic IQ deficiencies.

We certainly cannot fight racism by subsidizing single motherhood and criminal behavior. In fact, our doing so at present is almost certainly exacerbating the problem. Nor can we do so by impoverishing Whites through public policy. In fact, our doing so at present is almost certainly exacerbating the problem. If we hope to defeat racism, it must be decoupled from such demands of equality.

The above mentioned statistics can be applied, albeit to a lesser degree, to Hispanics as well.

Anti-Semitism presents an interesting deviation from the typical racist norm. We do not typically hear Jewish people asking for equality for themselves, only for darker skinned peoples. Jewish people enjoy dramatically disproportionate wealth, status, and political power in the United States, and for all their talk of equality, they do not seem at all interested in relinquishing it. Their complaints usually come from stereotypes about them, which we’ll address next.

4. Identifying and Eliminating the Sources of Racial Stereotypes

Combating racist stereotypes presents a challenge in large part because so many of them are true.

Blacks, as the easiest example, are stereotyped as violent and poor and not particularly intelligent. As previously established, crime, poverty, and IQ data seems to confirm this, and thus we are met with quite the burden in combating such observations of reality.

However, the stereotypes are no less harmful to the majority of black people who do not fall into these categories, and so combat them we must.

In identifying the sources of these stereotypes, those on the Left typically seek to attack the truth. This is not at all helpful, and often results in anti-Semitism. A better way to go about it would be to attack the representations of blacks as such in popular culture. Most notably, in rap music, and hood movies.

Of course, we must be careful in this pursuit not to stoke the flames of anti-Semitism, since Jews are the primary purveyors of rap music and Hollywood films.

This brings us to anti-Semitic stereotypes, which are some of the most stubborn in mankind’s long racial history. Jews are viewed by racists as everything from greedy capitalists to communist revolutionaries, which seems contradictory to the casual observer. Fortunately for the Jewish people, this seeming contradiction allows them to escape the overcast of such perceptions in the popular mind in the United States.

But for those who still believe these stereotypes, convincing them otherwise proves challenging due to the sources thereof. Careful observation of anti-Semitic online chatter reveals that they are most often sourcing from Jewish publications, such as Haaretz and Forward.com.

Do Jews run Hollywood? According to the Times of Israel, they do.

Are Jews disproportionately wealthy? According to the Times of Israel, Jews make up ten of the top 50 richest people on Earth.

Are Jews pushing homosexuality into popular culture? Maybe, maybe not, but this Haaretz article titled “As a Queer Jew, Learning Anne Frank Was Bisexual Is a Game-changer” certainly isn’t helping the Jewish people any. Neither is this Times of Israel article about how US Jews are more supportive of gay marriage than even their fellow Democrats.

And speaking of Democrats, we previously mentioned the communist revolutionary stereotype, and what is the Democrat Party if not communist? This piece in the Jerusalem Post is not helping the Jewish people by pointing out that Jews finance half of the Democrat Party, despite being less than three percent of the population in the United States. The same piece also points out that they are funding a quarter of the Republican Party, amplifying the stereotype that Jews wield unwarranted political influence.

Those contributions of course come from a minority of very wealthy Jews, but the Jewish Telegraphic Agency doesn’t help the “Left Wing Jew” stereotype by informing us that 75% of Jews vote Democrat.

Do Jews run the media? Well, yes, just not in a conspiratorial fashion, says Alan Dershowitz, in a piece published at the Huffington Post.

Are Jews pushing homosexuality on Children? Perhaps not, but you should probably talk to the Jewish producer of Queer Kid Stuff about that perception.

Are Jews responsible for US foreign policy? Maybe, maybe not, but you should blame John Bolton for that perception, not the Nazis.

In fact, if one were to copy and paste the contents of Jewish websites, and rebrand them with swastikas, nobody would question their authenticity as anti-Semitic propaganda. If one were to attempt this endeavor, they might simultaneously be attacked by the same Jewish attorney, for both hate speech and plagiarism.

The challenge of course is that shutting down Jewish websites would itself be perceived as anti-Semitic, but if we want to defeat racism, do we really have any choice?

Conclusion

I realize that this mission of defeating racism is far bigger than what I’ve outlined here. Racism is omnipresent throughout time and space, and it might never be fully eradicated.

I will concede to the wisdom of the President that we must nonetheless try, and I offer the above as a series of first steps in that mission.

However, in order to remain fair and balanced, I will conclude with the words of one of my favorite Jewish authors and philosophers, the great Murray Rothbard.

In his essay, Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature, Rothbard warns us of the folly that is the pursuit of impossible goals.

Let us proceed, then, to a critique of the egalitarian ideal itself — should equality be granted its current status as an unquestioned ethical ideal? In the first place, we must challenge the very idea of a radical separation between something that is “true in theory” but “not valid in practice.” If a theory is correct, then it does work in practice; if it does not work in practice, then it is a bad theory. The common separation between theory and practice is an artificial and fallacious one. But this is true in ethics as well as anything else. If an ethical ideal is inherently “impractical,” that is, if it cannot work in practice, then it is a poor ideal and should be discarded forthwith. To put it more precisely, if an ethical goal violates the nature of man and/or the universe and, therefore, cannot work in practice, then it is a bad ideal and should be dismissed as a goal. If the goal itself violates the nature of man, then it is also a poor idea to work in the direction of that goal.

“The goal of equality has for too long been treated uncritically and axiomatically as the ethical ideal.”

Suppose, for example, that it has come to be adopted as a universal ethical goal that all men be able to fly by flapping their arms. Let us assume that “proflappers” have been generally conceded the beauty and goodness of their goal, but have been criticized as “impractical.” But the result is unending social misery as society tries continually to move in the direction of arm flying, and the preachers of arm flapping make everyone’s lives miserable for being either lax or sinful enough not to live up to the common ideal. The proper critique here is to challenge the “ideal” goal itself; to point out that the goal itself is impossible in view of the physical nature of man and the universe; and, therefore, to free mankind from its enslavement to an inherently impossible and, hence, evil goal.

But this liberation could never occur so long as the anti-arm-fliers continued to be solely in the realm of the “practical” and to concede ethics and “idealism” to the high priests of arm flying. The challenge must take place at the core — at the presumed ethical superiority of a nonsensical goal. The same, I hold, is true of the egalitarian ideal, except that its social consequences are far more pernicious than an endless quest for man’s flying unaided. For the condition of equality would wreak far more damage upon mankind.

Continue reading

Radical Agenda S05E058 – A Tale of Two Shooters

A 21 year old 8chan user named Patrick Crusius is alleged to have used a WASR10 (AK-47)  to kill 20 people and wound 26 others in a mass shooting that spanned between a Walmart and a shopping mall in El Paso, Texas. He is reported to have left a poorly written manifesto behind, citing the immigration crisis as his motivation for the slaughter. He said he supported Brenton Tarrant’s slaughter at a New Zealand Mosque, and encouraged others to join in the killing, preferring soft targets where as many invaders as possible could be killed.

Thus far, no reports have emerged of Patrick having a criminal history. One look at him, and you know he’s not in the habit of bullying people.

Predictably, the Jewish press ran with the familiar theme of White Supremacist terrorism, conveniently ignoring the all too familiar statistics on black and interracial crime. They blamed the President of the United States, and feigned curiosity at the lack of Republican interest in condemning White Nationalism, which those familiar with the subject matter will recall, is synonymous with Western Civilization, in their lexicon.

Just 13 hours later, 24-year-old Connor Betts of Bellbrook, Ohio, took an AR-15 with a hundred round drum to a bar called Ned Peppers. In 30 seconds, he murdered his sister and 8 others, leaving at least 26 more people injured. Fortunately for his would be targets, police shot and killed him before he could make use of his spare magazines.

He had a minor criminal history, and had been suspended from school for bringing a kill list and a rape list for men and women respectively, to class.

He left no manifesto, but his Twitter feed told you everything you needed to know about him. He described himself as a Leftist, felt it worth clarifying his pronouns, and has, for more than a year, been spouting violent antifa propaganda. He was following, retweeting, and engaging with known Antifa communists, including Molly Conger (@SocialistDogMom) and Christian Exoo (AntiFash Gordon), and even some that I’m prohibited by court order from mentioning.

Connor repeatedly posted threats of violence to Twitter, and predictably he was never censored. He got it from his mother, we found out, as she too, posted violent communist propaganda to her Twitter feed, and was likewise never censored. The Jews of course, don’t mind violence, so long as it favors their interests, and so such terrorism is free to spread and gain momentum, without any sort of hindrance at all.

Interestingly, if unsurprisingly, this revelation of Connor’s deranged political ideology, and history of threats, changed not the narrative of White Supremacist terrorism. He was White, some of his victims were black, and though he spent his days threatening the lives of everyone Right of Elizabeth Warren, he too was categorized as a White Supremacist terrorist by the Press.

One hopes they have the Internet in Hell, so that he can see what is being done to his name.

This morning, the President of the United States joined his nemesis Fake News Media in condemning “White Supremacy,” and hinted at support for increased gun control measures, including red flag laws, to disarm those who express crimethink in public. He ordered the FBI to work with social media companies to spot crimethink in advance and stop it, apparently abandoning any concern for the social media censorship he once railed against.

Conspicuously absent from all the coverage is Connor’s Leftist views. His terrorism follows on the heels of two years of constant, unmitigated, Left wing political violence. He was free to threaten violence on Twitter, because Twitter endorses that brand of violence. Indeed, his Twitter account was only suspended after he was dead and it began to make the Democrat Party look bad. We’ve long forgotten about Vester Flanagan, the black man who murdered a reporter and her cameraman in an effort to start a race war. We’ve long forgotten about James Hodgkinson, who took an SKS to a baseball field in Alexandria, Virginia, to gun down the Republican Freedom Caucus. We’ve even forgotten about Willem Van Spronsen, who very recently, after appearing on CNN’s United Shades of America, glorifying the violence of Antifa, including the armed Redneck Revolt variety, attempted to bomb an ICE detention center, and was killed by law enforcement in the process.

Patrick killed strangers who were invading his country because he perceived them to be a threat. The family members of his victims were afraid to show up at reunification centers, because they feared being apprehended by authorities, driving home the point that he was doing away with lawbreakers which his government failed to deal with. Without addressing morality, we can say that this was stupid, as it only served to advance Left wing agendas and Narratives.

Connor Betts murdered his own sister, and random strangers he had every reason to believe were his countrymen.

Connor Betts is thus infinitely more wicked than Patrick Crusius, even if his body count was mercifully cut short by the quick action of heroic law enforcement. But only the violence of Patrick Crusius is addressed, because Jews find this more convenient than telling the truth.

Thus it transpires that CloudFlare announced that they would be terminating service to 8Chan, the website where Patrick posted his manifesto. Twitter suffers no such hindrances, despite their openly permitting Leftist terrorism to grow unabated on their platform, including that of Connor Betts.

It is important to connect some dots, to fully understand the implications.

Beto O’Rourke said, without anyone on the Left contradicting him, that “This country was founded on white supremacy“. Elizabeth Warren, likewise lacking in Leftist condemnation, said our Justice System Is ‘Racist, All the Way, Front to Back.” Keith Ellison said the US Constitution is “the best evidence of a white racist conspiracy to subjugate other peoples“. Luis Gutierrez said Trump’s immigration plans are an “extension of the white supremacist agenda“. Ilhan Omar said Trump is pushing a “White Nationalist Agenda“. Jay Inslee said explicitly, that Trump is a White Nationalist.

When Trump condemns White Supremacy and racism, this is what he is condemning. Our country’s founding, our justice system, our constitution, and needless to say, his own immigration policies.

There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Radical Agenda S05E057 – Siberian Candidate

My hopes for Kamala Harris to make Leftists the clear aggressor in the coming race war, seem to have been dashed upon the rocks on Wednesday. Tulsi Gabbard wrecked her facade of hip pot smoking negress, by pointing out that Harris was a loyal foot soldier of the White Supremacist justice system, after prostituting her way to becoming a prosecutor.

Not only was the Jew’s favorite Wakandan putting potheads under the jail, she was actively covering up evidence tampering at the crime lab, and blocking DNA testing to see an innocent man executed, for a murder probably committed by her cousin.

Met with the damning truth, Harris was more stunned than she was during that candidate mix tape bit.

She filibustered when offered a chance to respond, later blaming the attacks on poll envy, and the Assad regime in Syria.

Tulsi became the most Googled candidate during that debate. A rather astonishing feat, given that the Jews who run Google had previously relegated her to the spam trap, and invited a long overdue lawsuit in the process. #KamalaHarrisDestroyed trended on Twitter, which apparently managed to slip by the censors unnoticed, despite the best efforts to stamp out such White Supremacy by way of (((algorithms))).

Kamala’s hasbara surrogates quickly got to work blaming the storm on our Lord and Savior, Vladimir Putin. Even Harris’ press secretary, Ian Sams, labeled Gabbard’s supporters part of “the Russian propaganda machine.” One Twitter user said “Putin took Tulsi, an American soldier, and turned her into a Trojan Horse, his own #SiberianCandidate.”

Quite the clever ruse…

But we Nazis, through our use of the Russian encrypted messaging app Telegram, were hip to the real scheme. Vlad stopped by the Radical Agenda Telegram group to yuck it up about about the plot.

We’ve already decided that Kamala Harris will be the Democrat nominee. I had previously predicted that Joe Biden would have deleted his Twitter account by now, but the strategy has shifted, and Vlad is letting him stay so as to further rile up the blacks. As Kamala Harris continues to torture sleepy Joe, and Joe accepts the flogging as penance for his White Privilege,  our Cyrillic mission to sow racial discord into American politics will come to a crescendo.

We have cleverly taken credit for Tulsi’s attacks, so no Democrat primary voter can discover her renegade patriotism, or the path to racial harmony which a Tulsi presidency would surely usher in, permanently dismantling the White cis-heteropatriarchy.

Harris will go on to debate Donald Trump, and with a woman of color as the Democrat nominee, Leftist media will invariably construe everything Trump disagrees with her about as racist and sexist. The American people will thus conclude that racism and sexism are good, and the price of Mein Kampf will skyrocket, netting a healthy profit for EdgyGoodies.com.

There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Outlaw Conservative S01E028 – Dueling Dems

Many years ago, I took a girl on a date to a circus. On the way in, we saw some animal rights fanatics outside, and my date was drawn to their message.

She spent the duration of the show whining about the cruelty that had to have been involved in training the animals, and it kinda ruined the whole thing. I hated those animal rights people for that.

Last night, I felt similarly about John Delaney, and John Hickenlooper. Here we have this amazing opportunity to watch the Democrat Party destroy itself, and these idiots have to screw it up by reminding Democrat primary voters that math is real and White people still vote. Were it not for them, I suspect we’d have seen proposals to ban algebra for its focus on division, and disparate racial impacts. Candidates would have gone Left of Vermin Supreme, calling “Free Ponies” a “Republican Talking Point” and claiming that Unicorns are, as the name implies, a Universal Human Right.

The Democrats are so shielded from criticism by their big tech and media allies, that they don’t even seem to realize that there are people out there who disagree with radical Leftist policy proposals anymore. To go any further Left, they would have to ban private walls, and demand we build only bridges between what used to be our homes. Abortion wouldn’t just be a right, it would be a duty. The Supreme Court would obviously be packed, with kindergarteners. Venezuela would be granted American statehood, whether they liked it or not. Free trade would become quite literally free, as in, no payments could be made, and this would clearly be unilateral in nature, prohibiting only inbound payments, since every country but the United States is entitled to some degree of sovereignty. Our broader foreign policy agenda would seemingly involve slashing military spending until we were fighting Israeli wars with only milkshakes and sucker punches. And of course we would then have to ban milkshakes a since they are weapons of war which do not belong on our streets.

Delaney and Hickenlooper must have felt a lot like Ron Paul last night, but one doubts they’ll have quite the same legacy. At this rate they’ll be lucky if they don’t get called Nazis and jumped by Antifa.

I’m in the process of extracting tumors editing audio from this freak show. Critiques and jokes will  be in abundance. Don’t miss this one.

 

Follow Chris on TelegramParlerMinds – Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Join us, this and every Wednesday from 5-7pm US Eastern time for another exciting episode of Outlaw Conservative! I’m looking forward to hearing from you at 808-4-Outlaw, and the more you talk the less I have to, so please do give us a call.

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

 

The players on this site now have 24/7/365 streaming content!

You can always listen to live Radical Agenda episodes at

https://ChristopherCantwell.com/live

PAY ME!

Become an Outlaw Conservative premium member today to support this production, and get access to members only perks!

Hire Me To Say Things at PennedAndPronounced.com

Shop At EdgyGoodies.com

 

This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. 

.

Radical Agenda S05E056 – Infested

America has a new favorite racist dog whistle, and not a second too soon. We Nazis used to have to say things like “Sieg Heil” or “1488” to recognize one another, but thanks to Trump, we have lots of new code words to communicate our genocidal intent.

With the rampant infestation of Jews turning our country into a shithole from which none of these animals will ever go back voluntarily, the attacks on free speech have really gotten out of hand. So the only way we’ll ever be able to defeat these rootless cosmopolitans, clean up our inner cities, restore law and order, and put America First, is to hide in plain site, without the globalist elites getting wise.

Adding to the list of words which have been banned by the Jews under the Trump administration, we are no longer permitted to say “infested,” because it calls attention to the vermin like nature of non-Whites in our Country.

Trump sparked outrage by saying that Maryland’s 7th Congressional District, represented by black Democrat Elijah Cummings, was the “Worst in the USA” and that it was “FAR WORSE and more dangerous” than the US Southern Border. So awful in fact, that it was a “disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess” in which “no human being would want to live”.

As of the 2010 census, Baltimore was 63.7% black, with the 7th district being 59.1% black, and of course, those blacks elected Cummings, primarily because he was black too. Therefor, any mention of problems in that area is obviously racist, because it is racist to know the truth about vermin infested crime ridden nigger neighborhoods. That of course, is why all reasonable people, are racists.

Of course, this presents a problem for Democrats who might seek to improve the living conditions in Baltimore. Not that they would ever desire to improve living conditions, I’m just trying to make a point. How can you possibly address the problems in a place, if mentioning them is racist?

And Baltimore certainly has some problems worth addressing…

Baltimore is one of the most Jewish metropolitan areas in the country, according to the Jewish Virtual Library. More than 32,000 Jews live in the 7th Congressional district alone, which explains a lot. We’ll get into symptoms momentarily, but now you know where the problem comes from.

CheatSheet.com has Baltimore listed as the 4th most corrupt city in the United States, as of 2018.

According to data released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 2010, Baltimore was the 7th most welfare dependent city in the country, with 24% of its population, and 42% of its children, receiving food stamps. That number had increased 36% under the Obama administration.

Maryland overall was the third largest recipient of federal funds as of 2010, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Consolidated Federal Funds report, which breaks out how much the federal government spent on various programs, grants and public employee salaries by state. Maryland had the fifth-highest federal spending per capita from the Defense Department — the state has 11 military bases. In addition, the state received more spending per capita in nonmilitary programs than any other. The state’s proximity to the capital is likely a major factor in this. The state received more than 5% of the total U.S. procurement expenditure, and ranked second in per capita procurement spending — $4,593.79 — nearly three times the national average.

The amount per capita net of income the percentage of U.S. funds per person was 2.98%

According to data compiled by Numbeo.com, Baltimore has the 18th highest crime rate on Earth at 71.14, just slightly better than Sao Paulo, Brazil, and just a bit more dangerous than Cape Town, South Africa. Indeed one would be safer in San Juan Puerto Rico, Lima Peru, Kingston Jamaica, Damascus Syria, Lagos Nigeria, Manila Philippines, Baghdad Iraq, Tijuana Mexico, Guatemala City Guatemala, and notably though not surprisingly, Moscow, Russia, than in Baltimore.

According to 2019 data from NeigborhoodScout.com, Baltimore is the 6th most dangerous city in the United States, with a violent crime rate of 20.4, leaving you with a 1 in 49 chance of being the victim of a violent crime.

But it isn’t just humanoid pests infesting Baltimore. The so called “city of neighborhoods” is the 17th most roach infested city in the United States, according to the American Housing Survey from the U.S. Census Bureau.

As for being rodent infested, Trump may have played that part up just a little bit. Baltimore is not nearly as rat infested as Chicago, New York, Or Los Angeles. According to pest control company Orkin, Baltimore was the 8th most rat infested city in the United States as of 2017, dropping two places from the prior survey, and by 2018 had become only the 9th most rat infested city in the country.

Bed bugs were another story, though. According to Orkin, Baltimore is the single most bed bug infested city in the country in both 2018 and 2019.

Outdoor life in Baltimore on the other hand, is a bit more tolerable than fourteen other US cities. They rank 15 for mosquitoes, according to Orkin.

As for termites, they have better company in 16 US Cities. Baltimore ranks 17th in the United States for termite infestations, according to Orkin.

WebMD lists Maryland’s flea and tick infestation as “severe”

I found this information in just an hour or so of DuckDuckGo searching. I don’t bother with Google anymore, because they are clearly part of the Jewish cabal trying to dupe the American public into bondage and destruction.

But I say all of this not to discredit the media narrative. Of course it is racist to say that Baltimore is a crime ridden, vermin infested, Jew run shithole that no human being should want to live in, and indeed no humans do want to live there, though tens of thousands of Jews do, and the blacks get difficult to count due to the rampant murder and irresponsible breeding. Of course it is racist to say this, because racism and truth are one and the same. Racism is the only clarity left in American politics, and the real sin is that so called “dog whistles” are necessary to utter such wisdoms in public.

The really sick thing is that, in a country which supposedly values the idiotic notion of “free speech”, anybody should need to “dog whistle” about anything.

When was the last time you heard a major media publication talk about a communist “dog whistle”? Never.

When was the last time you heard a major media publication talk about a race mixing “dog whistle”? Never.

When was the last time you heard a major media publication talk about a Judaism “dog whistle”? Never.

When was the last time you heard a major media publication talk about a homosexual “dog whistle”? Never.

When was the last time you heard a major media publication talk about a transgender”dog whistle”? Never.

When was the last time you heard a major media publication talk about a Muslim “dog whistle”? Never.

When was the last time you heard a major media publication talk about a Black Nationalist “dog whistle”? Never.

Yet all of these groups claim to be oppressed, by “White Supremacists” and “Nazis” who have to speak in coded language, just to communicate to people who sympathize with them?

Who is oppressing who?

When it gets to a point where the only people complaining about crime, pestilence, corruption, dishonesty, and officiated racial discrimination, are “racists”, and they have to speak in coded language to do so, it gets kinda difficult to claim that racists are the evil people oppressing everyone.

But that won’t stop the Jews from trying, will it?

 

There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Radical Agenda S05E055 – Prepping to Pivot

Like you, I’ve found it profoundly amusing to watch the Left completely lose their composure over the last four years. They’ve obviously been having a blast as well, even if their frenzied ideological crescendo does look more like bad trip from the outside. Loudly complaining, frothing at the mouth with threats and profanity, rioting in the streets, attempting to gun down legislators and burn down federal facilities is, after all, their idea of a good time, sick as that might be.

Viva La Resistance…

I’ve learned a lot from this display, and how it compares to our own adventures of the last few years. I was contemplating those lessons this morning as  I watched the aftermath of Robert Mueller’s testimony from Wednesday, and I was chuckling to myself about the implications as I did.

Just a few short years ago, I was pretty well convinced that the entire concept of the State was some kind of unnatural superstition which mankind would have to overcome in order to see his full potential unbound. I suppose one could be forgiven for this worldview, given where things were at during that time. I had a pretty poor conception of what it mean to to be “Right Wing” and the Left seemed to be firmly in control of both parties. If the GOP establishment had their way, our answer to Barack Obama would have been Jeb Bush, and if the libertarians were to prevail, we’d have Rand Paul race shaming us about the drug war’s disparate impact on blacks.

Met with either of those choices, or Hillary Clinton, a bloody civil war which I’d surely not survive, sounded like the more appealing option.

The Trump effect was, and remains, profoundly transformational. Even as he proves a staggering failure in terms of execution, his cultural impact is a rather spectacular gift.

In 2015, you had to be a careful observer to realize that the Left was dangerously out of step with reality. Transgenderism was successfully tailgating gay marriage through our cultural turnstyle, without paying the fare. BLM race riots were accepted by most as a legitimate expression of an oppressed group’s frustration with civil rights abuses. Referring to elected Democrats as communists was largely seen as hyperbolic. It mattered if somebody called you a racist.

The Left had a certain way about them, that they would bombard us with propaganda for some sick idea or another, and without even waiting for that concept to be fully accepted, they would pretend it had been so solidified, and move on to the next. Conservatives, still dizzy from the last battle, abandoned their prior defenses, and rushed to build new ones against the next onslaught, in a ceaselessly repeating pattern of defeat.

The effect was to stifle debate and keep Republicans on constant defense, and without any meaningful opposition to Leftist ideas, we can hardly act surprised that their cultural domination went unabated.

When Trump came in and made immigration the central issue, refusing to budge, and masterfully manipulating the media, the whole process was short circuited. Leftists had only one playbook, and suddenly the rules had changed. They kept trying to propose more and more extreme ideas, but the country was fixated on Trump and the border. Their extremism, which one once could not recognize without fine tuning of one’s perceptions, suddenly became obvious to casual observers.

Meanwhile, the Alt Right had emerged and adopted many of the rhetorical tactics the Left had previously mastered. Trump was talking about enforcing existing immigration laws, and we were talking about a full blown ethnostate. The Overton Window, for the first time in my recollections, had begun to move in the other direction. When the Left found themselves outside of it, rather than adapt to the changing circumstances, they started throwing rocks at it. This, shockingly enough, did not endear them to the people inside the building.

Things changed in August of 2017. The Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville proved to be a master stroke by the Left. They poured all of their cultural, financial, political, and criminal resources into this attack, and we were overwhelmed.

Trump tried to hold the line, “fine people on both sides” etc… But this quickly dwindled to condemnations of bigotry. Steven Bannon was ousted from the administration. Conservative media dared not question the narrative of the story, for fear of being lumped in with Nazis. We were banned from every major social media platform and payment system. It became impossible to meaningfully respond to the slander. Guys went to jail, and those who remained free, were keen to keep it that way.

Suddenly, masked anarchists who made no secret of their violence, were hailed as “a courageous group of Americans”. Rioting had been functionally legalized.

Our own people turned on one another, and a circular firing squad snuffed out what external pressures could not.

In celebrating their victory, the Left returned to their usual excesses with reckless abandon. They were quickly rewarded with modest victories in the 2018 midterm elections, which included the ushering in of “the Squad” – Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Presley, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, and Rashida Tlaib. These radicals took center stage in the political discourse, as the Left wing media, now walled off from all criticism thanks to social media censorship, drifted from reality and the pulse of public opinion.

By this same mechanism, they convinced themselves that the Mueller investigation would result not only in Trump’s impeachment, but his imprisonment. They became completely deaf to the blaring sirens that this was not the case, and overplayed their hand. They pounded the Russia conspiracy drum incessantly, and when the Mueller report failed to produce the goods, they were stunned. Rather than reevaluate, they dragged Muller before congress on the hopes that their low IQ constituents would be better convinced of the story if they could “see the movie”.

Instead, they got a doddering old man who didn’t even recognize the name of Fusion GPS. Mueller had noted at the outset that it was unusual for a prosecutor to testify, and it quickly became obvious that he was wholly unprepared to be cross examined.

Some on the Left were ready to reassess their strategy, but they seem to be in the minority now. The currents of radicalism sweeping through the Democrat Party, are now too powerful to tame. One might doubt the reality of this, since those responsible for shaping public perceptions are those most out of touch with the rest of the country. Fortunately for us, Democrat candidates are dependent upon the taste makers for their cues, and it thus appears unlikely that they will be altering course before next year’s elections.

Party-centric electoral politics is a difficult balancing act, particularly in a milieu so polarized as the one in which we find ourselves. One must promise enough to their side to win a party primary, without alienating the less informed, or providing too much energy to the other side. Once they win their primary, they have to pivot and appeal to the center, without alienating those who supported them in the primary, or coming off like a total flip flopping hypocrite.

Trump is terribly unlikely to face a serious primary challenger, and his ideological pivot was facilitated by an uncooperative Republican Party. Simultaneously, he has so enraged the Left that they have completely lost their composure, and gone out of step with the rest of the country.

At first glance, it is difficult to imagine any of the Democrat candidates pulling off that necessary pivot. How does one go from open borders and free everything for everyone who can cross a geopolitical boundary, to anything resembling sanity? They can’t.

But the idea I’m getting at is a lesson for us to learn, rather than to gloat about our prospects for a coming election. Shifting the Overton Window isn’t just about being extreme. It’s about finding the edge of allowable opinion, and bumping against it repeatedly so as to move it in the desired direction. Angrily screaming from outside the house is a futile exercise which alienates one from those inside.

The test of political talent is whether one can maneuver with changing perceptions to maintain one’s position on that edge and effectively shift perceptions as desired. Fail to do that, and you cease to be at the ideological vanguard, and are instead relegated to Mayor of Crazytown.

 

There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Outlaw Conservative S01E027 – Deconstruction

Robert Mueller sat before two congressional committees to answer questions about his so called Russia investigation. Democrats, still counting on the stupidity of the American electorate, hoped to obtain soundbites for their media propagandist friends to run with, in order to paint the President of the United States as a criminal.

And of course, they found it. Within the first 5 minutes of questioning, committee chairman Jerry Nadler asked Mueller if his report had exonerated of obstructing justice. Mueller predictably responded in the negative, as it is not the role of a prosecutor to exonerate suspects. Before the next 5 minute round of questioning had completed, I saw a news alert on my phone from the SmartNews app, about story from ABC News, headlined “Mueller contradicts Trump, says report did not exonerate him“.

This was in no way news, of course. Mueller never reported to exonerate anyone. It was never his job. His report nonetheless exceeded expectations in this regard, handing congressional Democrats the gift they sought, in stating that they did not clear the President of obstruction. He further called a press conference, and there stated, yet again, that he did not exonerate the President. The “News Alert” thus, was yet more propaganda.

Were anything newsworthy, it would have been the reversal of the burden of proof which has ensued in the course of this ruse, but then again, that particular perversion of our justice system is perhaps as old as the republic itself.

Of course, if the President were, in fact, a criminal, those same talking heads and legislators would be assuring us that all was right with the world.

If criminals were in any way held in the disfavor of the Democrat Party, Christine Pelosi never would have lamented that it is “quite likely that some of our faves are implicated” in the Jeffrey Epstein child molestation scandal. Corey Booker would not be calling for reparations for drug dealers. Bernie Sanders would not be championing the supposed right of convicted murderers to vote from their prison cells. Trump’s criminal justice reform efforts, which we were recently made aware has set violent criminals loose on our streets, and will surely release countless more in the coming years, would have been condemned as loudly and as hysterically as his immigration policies. And of course, speaking of immigration enforcement, this would be wholly uncontroversial.

Were Democrats opposed to the criminal element, Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, and Ayanna Pressley would have unhesitatingly condemned Willem Van Spronsen, the Antifa terrorist who was recently shot while trying to firebomb an ICE detention center in Tacoma, Washington. Trump’s “fine people on both sides” remarks about Charlottesville would have been met with equally hysterical condemnation as they were, but only because of the implication that Antifa terrorists could possibly have been “very fine people”.

Tucker Carlson recently had a segment where he played clips of Democrats out on the campaign trail, repeating the popular slogan that “nobody is above the law,” in their attacks on the President. A phrase often repeated today. He and Victor David Hanson, made quick work of eviscerating this foolishness. Not that of the slogan, of course, which is quite sound, but that of the people saying it, since their entire philosophy rests on some people, most notably illegal immigrants, and their fellow party members, being precisely that. Above the law.

But perhaps it is not so clear as Carlson and Hansen make it out to be. I was made to recall some commentary in this vein by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in The Gulag Archipelago. After a lengthy description of upright people who had been tormented by the State apparatus in the post revolution Soviet Union, Solzhenitsyn explains the theory under which this sort of thing was justified.

Should we wrap it all up and simply say that they arrested the innocent? But we omitted saying that the very concept of guilt had been repealed by the proletarian revolution and, at the beginning of the thirties, was defined as rightist opportunism! So we can’t even discuss these out-of-date concepts, guilt and innocence.

And later

We have once more gone astray with this rightist opportunism—this concept of “guilt,” and of the guilty or innocent. It has, after all, been explained to us that the heart of the matter is not personal guilt, but social danger. One can imprison an innocent person if he is socially hostile. And one can release a guilty man if he is socially friendly. 

And in this, the framework of the Democrat sense of justice is revealed. Trump, with all his so called “racist tweets” and unwillingness to sacrifice the interests of his constituency to that of his political opponents, is not socially friendly. He is not, as is often said, a “threat to our Democracy” but rather, a social danger.

Attempts to portray him as having violated some statute, are mere efforts to reconcile their certainty of his guilt in the Soviet sense, with the framework of the modern bourgeois justice system, which they of course mean to do away with entirely, upon presentation of the chance.

On the prior episode of the Radical Agenda, I talked about how the far Right would be well served to maintain good relationships with law enforcement, despite the hazards that this poses in the current environment. In support of that position, I illustrated a combination of stories in which law enforcement had proven sympathetic to the injustice we face, or in which our enemies had proven hostile to law enforcement.

In the subsequent 48 hours, the world rushed to further illustrate my point.

Two police officers in Gretna, Louisiana were fired. One for social media commentary critical of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, and another, for simply clicking “like” on said commentary.

Video emerged of two separate incidents in Brooklyn and Harlem, in which police were set upon by urban residents who doused them with water as they attempted to arrest criminal suspects. In one incident, an assailant hurled a bucket of water at the officers, and it struck him in the head. Rather than set their sights on the unruly youths who had attacked them, officers walked away in silence, no doubt for fear of being slandered as racists. The offenders and onlookers laughed, and taunted the officers as they slunk away. In the Brooklyn incident, one of the attackers was identified to be a gang member.

CNN said nothing of the matter, until AFTER an arrest was made, on which they reported. MSNBC, best as I can tell, still has not mentioned the incident.

Another video emerged of a subway rider telling police to, well, we can’t say what he told them to do on the Outlaw Conservative, but suffice it to say it involved the use of a mouth and the removal of a belt, or at least, the undoing of a zipper. Similar silence from the Leftist press.

Most conservatives sum this sort of thing up to a misguided attempt at helping the less fortunate, or an almost Christian sense of forgiveness. They foolishly take Leftists at their word, when they assert their noble intentions, and debate only the outcome of policies and attitudes which further the chaos.

Likewise in the arena of economics. Be it welfare statism, reparations, taxes, wage and price formation, or the issuance of money and credit, we are similarly met with a near total upending of all the wisdom on the subject that man has collected to date. We are repeatedly assured that an influx of unskilled labor applies no downward pressure on wages. That increases in the minimum wage, no doubt applied to correct the prior accounting error, be it to $15 or $20 per hour, has no impact on unemployment. That the State’s provision of a “living wage” regardless of employment status, will in no way diminish the incentives to find employment. That tariffs are paid by consumers, and this somehow stands in contrast to taxes on wealth or corporate profits. And finally, perhaps the most laughable of all, that the money supply, and inflation, are entirely different subjects of discussion.

And likewise, conservatives sheepishly recite the familiar consequences of the many failed attempts to implement these ideas, and speak with confused astonishment when their political opponents feign ignorance of the obvious.

Even in matters seemingly too ridiculous to take seriously, our fellow conservatives find themselves arguing breathlessly in circles. Can a man become a woman? Well, no, of course not. What if one’s opponent persists that they can? Well, we’ll explain DNA, chromosomes, hormones, and reproductive biology, as though one would need to be a geneticist or biologist or medical professional to understand this most basic building block of the human condition and indeed all non-hermaphrodite life. Even with the entirety of scientific wisdom on the matter readily available, the debate is never won, and the Leftist opponent only insists that his Rightist opponent is an ignorant religious zealot for believing the obvious.

Whatever the subject matter, Leftists are almost singularly devoted to tearing down, or, deconstructing, our norms and institutions.

It would be worth returning to the subject of deconstruction in a future episode as a singular focus, but sadly I did not have time to put that together today before showtime, due in part to its inherent and perhaps intentional difficulty in describing, and in part due to my divided attentions watching the Mueller hearings. For our immediate purposes, a superficial, and heavily borrowed, description will have to suffice, as I attempt to bring the previously mentioned events into focus.

Deconstruction was founded by a Sephardic Jew named Jacques Derrida at Yale University between the 1960s and 1980s. Briefly summarizing, it is a theory of literary criticism that questions traditional assumptions about certainty, identity, and truth, particularly those of Western origin. Its methods are incorporated into a school of thought known as postmodernism, which the Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy describes as “a set of critical, strategic and rhetorical practices employing concepts such as difference, repetition, the trace, the simulacrum, and hyperreality to destabilize other concepts such as presence, identity, historical progress, epistemic certainty, and the univocity of meaning.” Both are central to “critical theory” better known as Cultural Marxism.

Suffice it to say for our purposes today, that conservatives keep getting their teeth kicked in because they are competing in a wholly different arena than their leftist counterparts. While you attack the factual accuracy of a statement, Leftists attack the concept that factual accuracy is even possible to determine. While you attack whether or not a thing is known, Leftists attack whether or not it is knowable. While you attack the predictable outcomes of a proposal, Leftists attack the notion that outcomes can be predicted.

Applied to the news of the day, much fuss has been made about the presumption of innocence apparently subverted by the Mueller report’s use of the word “exonerate”. In the intelligence committee, one representative made a point to illustrate that the Department of Justice is not in the business of exonerating people, that there is no office of exoneration, and that in fact there is no legal process to exonerate a person. For Mueller to say that he did not exonerate the President is a truism, he could not have done so if he wanted to, anymore than he could declare an individual guilty. Less so, in fact, as at least a judge or jury could determine guilty, whereas neither can formally exonerate. As a prosecutor, his only purview is to determine whether or not sufficient evidence exists to prosecute a crime, and whether or not to pursue the prosecution thereof.

The careful observer would notice that this was of little interest to congressional Democrats. Our underlying assumptions about guilt or innocence were the target of the attack. The current occupant of the White House is an inconvenience to them, and they want him removed. The most expedient means of doing so is to paint him as a criminal, and so despite their affinity for the criminal class, they lump their rival in with them to undermine the legitimacy of his rule, in the minds of those watching the proceedings.

But even to sum this up to political thirst for power would be to give too much credit to the charade. It is not so much that they want the presidency for themselves, so much as they want the presidency and all the assumptions it entails, to be torn down. Of course, so long as there is to be a president, they want to wield the power of the office, but even their exercise of those powers is wholly subversive to the institution.

Themselves and their constituents being actual criminals in the traditional sense, all law enforcement personnel acting in accordance with the traditional obligations of their profession, are likewise to be subverted and undermined. If police harm or kill a criminal, they are the socially hostile element, not the criminal. If they are assaulted, and disrespected, they deserve it, and this is hardly newsworthy.

But again, we would give them too much credit to sum this up as a rational self preservation instinct. The institution of law enforcement necessarily operates under the assumption that there is such a thing as right and wrong, and that such a delineation can be determined, concepts they would surely contest, were they not so busy convincing us of “White Supremacy’s” inherent wickedness.

The very conception of economics as a science is to be undermined. Yes, of course so they can appropriate resources for themselves and their constituents, but more as a means by which to undermine attempts to rationalize the economy, or rather, to use the economy as proof of rationalism.

They undermine the very foundations of our existence, with the best example being gender. Though paraded under the guise of pursuing equality, though that itself would be sufficiently subversive to earn our derision, it is again more an attack on the concept of unchangeability.

The very idea of certainty is, to them, a form of domination, oppression, even slavery. They tear apart everything that purports to be an authority on anything, until no authority is strong enough to stand.

Then they usurp the authority for themselves, and havoc ensues. Continue reading

Radical Agenda S05E054 – On Cops

White Nationalists, by necessity, operate with a certain well earned skepticism toward law enforcement, to say the least of it. Our enemies exert a great deal of influence over the political organs, and have an even more frightening grip on the court systems. By extension, this pervasive contamination necessarily impacts law enforcement, putting us at odds entirely too often.

Simultaneously, it becomes obvious to the careful observer that our enemies despise law enforcement personnel, even more than we fear them. Democrat Presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren famously said that our criminal justice system is racist “from front to back”. Border enforcement officers, though 51% Hispanic, have been relentlessly subjected to accusations of running Nazi-esque concentration camps, and myriad other hysterical claims of racially motivated malice. On August 12th 2018, Antifa communists celebrated the anniversary of their riot in Charlottesville, by carrying a giant banner that read “Last year they came with torches, this year they come with badges”.

The Left associates law enforcement with “White Supremacy” for reasons which are not immediately obvious to the casual observer, but make a great deal more sense once one clears the fog of Jewish deception aimed at each.

They attempt to paint the picture as though law enforcement were just out hunting for melanin content trophies, similarly to how one counts the points of deer antlers. This is ridiculous, and so law enforcement personnel are understandably anxious to distance themselves from us, because we are painted with a similar brush. Since we lack the power or platform to respond, they internalize this lie along with the rest of the population.

In reality, the sort of ordered liberty, characteristic of Western Civilization, is the target of Leftist enmity. Our efforts to preserve this way of life, however lawfully or peacefully, are relentlessly targeted with violence, deception, and most notably, lawfare. Law enforcement personnel, though beholden to more easily corrupted institutions, largely enter the profession with similar intent, and thus are met with similar tactics.

In this, we are natural allies, set in opposition to one another by our mutual enemies.

Yet it is precisely those same enemies who open up the opportunity for warmer relations between us, and the hand of power. If the Left insists that law enforcement and White Supremacy are synonymous, who are we to argue? Why not apply the tactic of “agree and amplify” this meme, as we did with so many other tropes? Would not we be better received by the broader populace, as right thinking upstanding members of society, if we were in alliance with law enforcement, than as we stubbornly persist in being perceived today, as lawless enemies of the State?

Some recent news causes me to contemplate the subject.

In 2016, the Department of Homeland Security issued a Field Analysis Report detailing a “Heightened Threat Environment at Lawfully Organized White Supremacist Events” wherein “violent anti-fascists, including anarchist extremist elements, attacked a group of white supremacists who gathered for a legally permitted rally.”

The event that landed our comrade Will Planer in enemy custody was the subject of that report, and a subsequent investigation pursued Leftists as the terrorist threat, much to the dismay of the Jewish Press.

While I was awaiting trial in Virginia, headlines were made when I published a recording of a phone call I had with Charlottesville police agreeing with me, that Left wing rioters were the problem, contrary to the Jewish lies about Unite the Right.

As policing has become impossible in that city due to political correctness, Charlottesville has witnessed a “mass exodus” of officers, whom they are finding it increasingly difficult to replace.

I released another recording of a conversation I had with a detective from Charlottesville PD, in which he informed me that despite the fact that I was obviously assaulted with a weapon on August 12th 2017, and had identified my attacker, prosecutors refused to charge the case as a felony, and in any case I would have to violate a court order to lodge my complaint only to see it go unpursued. The detective was clearly uncomfortable with this state of affairs, but was powerless to do anything about it.

While I was in the custody of the Albemarle Charlottesville Regional Jail, my captors would make frequent stops on our cell block to chat. We were, by necessity, segregated from the general population, and the officers noted that it was most unusual to see Fox News on the television sets in other cell blocks. To avoid causing these men any undeserved trouble, I must be vague, but suffice it to say, the injustice of our predicament was not lost on them, even the non-White ones. Some spoke frankly about the corruption of the city, and bluntly confessed to tolerating it only because their livelihoods depended on it.

Last year, Unicorn Riot published emails obtained through a public records request, wherein Tennessee Homeland Security intelligence analyst Misty Phillips said the Traditionalist Worker Party “typically is not the issue but rather opposing groups.”

Earlier this year, a police Sergeant in Virginia was fired after being accused of having an “affinity for White Nationalist symbols” by an Antifa group.

Just last month, a group calling itself the Plain View Project published a catalog of what it described as racist (translation, awesome) social media posts by police officers, along with names of hundreds of police officers they say belonged to racist and violent social media groups. In Philadelphia, 13 officers were fired over the scandal.

More recently, Pro Publica infiltrated a Facebook group called “I’m 10-15,” Border Patrol code for “aliens in custody.” They were none too fond of “The Squad” and shared some rather hilarious material pertaining to current events. That group had nearly 10,000 members.

Subsequently, CNN claims to have discovered another such group called “The Real CBP Nation.” Though smaller, they had considerable meme talent, and were just as repulsed by the communists trying to destroy our country as we are.

Over the weekend it was reported that a police officer from Gretna, Louisiana is under investigation after posting to Facebook that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a “vile idiot” who “needs a round, and I don’t mean the kind she used to serve.”

Conspicuously absent from the leaked posts, is any mention of Jews. Law enforcement cannot help but notice the obvious social problems that come with black and brown populations, but they have, along with the rest of the country, been inoculated against anti-Semitism by the secular religion of Holocaustism. They share the mystic faith of our foreign policy failures, that America’s entry into World War II, was a holy act to rescue God’s Chosen People from history’s most evil dictator. To go against this narrative, in their minds, would be to denigrate our military, and this is a very serious taboo in law enforcement culture.  Thus, though they can readily see the problems that correlate with skin pigmentation, their eyes are yet untrained to spot the Jewish root, as they hack breathlessly away at the brown branches.

Moreover, police are trained to sympathize with victims, and who plays the victim better than a Jew? It has been reported that 50% of all “hate crimes” are against Jews, and although you and I know most of these are fake, and the rest are carried out by blacks, this wisdom is consciously absent from these supposedly racist law enforcement social media posts and groups.

Yet, as these public servants are attacked for observing the obvious decline of our civilization, who do you think is working the hardest to destroy them? How hard could it be for a trained investigator to spot the pattern, once presented with the information?

Police and their families and supporters all readily recognize that law enforcement is under attack. They are, at present, powerless to defend themselves, as they recognize not their foe. In this they are in a similar boat to Christians, and other conservatives.

Making inroads with conservative and Christian groups has largely proven elusive for White Nationalists. Once we are spotted, we are shunned and ostracized and accused of wickedness.

Law enforcement on the other hand, are actually assigned to monitor us. They have to listen, in order to pursue investigations into our activities. During the course of that investigatory work, they cannot help but be exposed to the information we are privy to. We are also the constant targets of criminal behavior by people who have been led to believe that we are without the protection of the law. This combination of factors gives us ample opportunity to communicate with law enforcement, in a way we cannot with other natural allies.

The hazards of this are, perhaps obviously, too numerous to list. But let’s give the most obvious reasons some contemplation.

Our own cultural influences are the greatest obstacle, even if not the most obvious. I know from experience that collaboration with law enforcement, even if done openly and honestly, is called “snitching” by elements of the movement. However, to the trained eye, it becomes obvious that the people most hostile to such communications are those whom you’ll never have a chance to meet in person, most of whom operate under aliases and could not be picked out of a lineup. For all we know, they are hasbara trolls in Tel Aviv.

Indeed, this would be the most obvious explanation for their hostility to the concept. You’ll also find these types hostile to Donald Trump and the Republican Party, and while a healthy skepticism toward “Capitalism” is warranted in today’s environment, and grifters in the movement are not exactly unheard of, they launch into hysterics about “shekels” anytime a Nationalist tries to make money, which is obviously a prerequisite of meaningful political activity. Any effort we make to get in proximity to power, to profit, or to recruit new members into our ranks from less radical elements, is met with hysterical claims about immorality, not entirely dissimilar to the hysterical moral claims about racism from the Left.

They spend more time attacking White Nationalists and fence sitters than they do Leftists, and this tells us a great deal about their motives.

The trouble with this element extends well beyond their affinity for friendly fire. When cops, Christians, and Republicans see our memes as derogatory toward them, they are obviously disinclined to join in the fun. When the Left solicits them to condemn us, they do so with enthusiasm, and to suggest this has nothing to do with our own behavior, is to make the same error Jews make in analyzing anti-Semitism.

Particularly when it comes to law enforcement, they are inclined to believe the lies our enemies pedal about our being violent criminals, if upon inspection, we are hostile to those whose profession it is to confront that element of society. It does little good to profess the innocence of James Fields, or the Rise Above Movement, if in the next breath, one hails Dylann Roof as a Saint.

Anybody who thinks it beneath the dignity, or beyond the capacity, of our enemies to see that weakness, and exploit it through our need for anonymity, is a fool. While many good men surely fall into this trap, those who set the trap are anything but.

The more obvious, if less likely hazard, is the prospect of opening oneself or one’s associates to persecution at the hands of the State. While this risk can be mitigated substantially through obedience to the law, it can never be completely eliminated.

Owing in part to the above mentioned cultural influences within our movement, and in part to the incentives provided by our more forthcoming adversaries, law enforcement can easily come under the impression that their collective and individual interests are served by making human sacrifices of White Nationalists. Some will leap at the opportunity to prove their anti-racist credentials, by using every tool at their disposal to harm us. Similarly, some will prove hesitant to take action against criminals who attack us, for fear of being seen as “protecting Nazis”.

Law enforcement is permitted, and indeed trained, to lie to suspects. While you may think you are recruiting a law enforcement official to our cause, he may well be feigning sympathy as a route to access information which could subsequently be misused.

A friendly liaison with law enforcement in day to day life, could result in unwarranted suspicion, should circumstances later dictate that silence become the better strategy. If one maintains a general policy of not speaking to law enforcement, then all is going according to plan when one laywers up. A general willingness to talk, which is revoked upon a changing of subjects, understandably could lead to increased and unwelcomed scrutiny from law enforcement.

In dealing with federal law enforcement, and with many state and local agencies, it is a crime to provide false information to investigators. This is selectively enforced, as was most prominently on display in the prosecutions stemming from the Mueller investigation into the Trump campaign, juxtaposed with Hillary Clinton’s email “matter”. If Michael Flynn, Jerome Corsi, Roger Stone, Michael Cohen, and Paul Manafort can fall victim to such traps,  a lowly member of the Radical Agenda audience would be quite powerless to avoid the same fate, should his interactions with law enforcement prove hostile to his interests.

Then of course there is the all too real fact that some among us actually do run afoul of the law, sometimes intentionally, and with varying degrees of merit for their reasoning to do so. Though we are generally in opposition to vice, property crime, and initiatory violence, our perilous dealings with the financial system, for example, could result in what might charitably be described as paperwork errors. Some may doubt the legitimacy of laws infringing upon their 2nd Amendment rights, or have missed the memo about the bump stock ban, or have difficulty counting the round capacity of his magazines in a place where limits are imposed on such things. The line between self defense and criminal violence is often exceedingly technical, and putting aside for a moment the very real prospect of being prosecuted for legitimate self defense, it is not unheard of for a legitimate exercise of defensive force to actually cross the line into criminal violence, whether through ignorance of the law, or the passions of the moment. Whatever the case, one who strays from the guidance of statutes, would obviously be well served to maintain a safe distance from those who enforce them.

While these hazards are very real, and the risks difficult to overstate, I would make the case that the greater peril lies in our present course.

As it stands, the communists are the ones doing all the talking when investigations proceed into our activities. If they are the only source of information that law enforcement can access, then we have no right to be surprised when we are treated as criminals. If someone accuses you of being a criminal, and whether owing to peer pressure or misguided moral concerns, you refuse to proclaim your own innocence, then law enforcement cannot be accused of wrongdoing for operating under the assumption that the accuser has a point.

Moreover, if one only proclaims their innocence during interrogation, after arrest, or at trial, then he is not so different in the eyes of most, than any actual criminal. A proactively positive relationship with authorities is far less common for thieves and predators, than are denials ex post facto.

So intimidated are we by the perils of interactions with the State, that we often fail to report crimes committed against us. Those crimes thus continue unabated, ultimately resulting in escalation of violent conflicts, which necessarily result in self defense situations, thereby raising the aforementioned prospect of being prosecuted for legitimate use of defensive force. Better to lodge a harassment complaint, I’d say, than to ignore warnings that violence may be on the horizon.

Say you were receiving threatening messages from Left wing agitators, and let us imagine that later on down the line, one of those agitators decided to make good on the threat. Let us further imagine that you were a combat capable man, perhaps with a carry permit, and when the threat materialized, you neutralized it forcibly.

Let us picture the aftermath under two sets of circumstances.

In one circumstance, you reported your threatening messages to law enforcement when they came in. You did everything in your power to help the government deal with the issue before it rose to the level of your needing to defend yourself. During the investigation into the incident, law enforcement is aware of your prudence, and this influences their perceptions about the circumstances of the encounter, whether you opt to speak to them now, or not.

In the other, you abide by the rules of a prison gang. No talking to cops. You dare your tormentor to try and follow through on his threat, assuring him that you look forward to the opportunity. He takes you up on the invitation, and is promptly carried off by first responders. You tell those first responders only about your adherence to the inmate code, and demand an attorney.

If your assailant is fortunate enough to be breathing, he is terribly unlikely to confess his crime. Rather, he enthusiastically informs the authorities from his hospital bed, that he was out there virtuously expressing his opposition to genocide, when a Nazi shouted an epithet describing some favored demographic of the Democrat Party, and shot him for no reason at all.

Now, I’d not be so foolishly confident in our justice system to say that either would certainly result in a judicious outcome. Indeed, my own experience betrays the message I mean to convey. In Charlottesville, we did coordinate with law enforcement in advance, doing everything in our power to avoid violence, and using only such force as was necessary to neutralize the threats that nonetheless emerged. And yet, I was imprisoned for 107 days, and held against my will on electronic monitoring for another seven months or so, before being coerced into a plea deal in order to keep my gun rights intact. The men I shared those cages with, had no such opportunity, and remain in Virginia custody to this day. Even now, I remain a defendant in frivolous lawsuits which will most likely bankrupt me even upon my vindication.

But I sure am glad to have all this proof that we proactively coordinated with law enforcement, even though they did betray us, and the outcome was spectacularly horrible. However precarious my situation may be today, it would surely have been worse had I lacked the ability to point to the video and say “Here I am, insisting that I will only participate if law enforcement is involved”.

Perhaps more importantly, I have come to regret much of my unwise commentary prior to all of this. My many inflammatory statements about law enforcement, born of misguided Utopian libertarian ideals, surely made it easier for cops and prosecutors to justify their involvement in the corruption. They saw the conflict on those streets as one between two extremist elements, both hostile to their interests. The political organs ordered them to let the violence ensue, and they gladly obliged, as it surely seemed senseless to risk their safety or careers for the sake of either.

And when the orders came down to persecute only one side, what reason had they to care which side it was? What care they if the truth favored our interests, seeing as to how our interests were at odds with theirs? Had they any cause to think that we would risk our necks to help them? Quite the contrary.

Emboldened by the ordeal, communists now riot with impunity. They have taken up arms, and revolution is on the tip of every tongue Left of Ted Cruz. Absent some yet unforeseen change in circumstances, we are well on our way to a broader and more conspicuous breakdown of the civil order, as the thin blue line grows thinner by the day.

Should we fail to hold back the Red tide, and chaos overtakes us, those of us set to the task of restoring order will receive our mandate not from badges or officialdom, but rather, from a higher authority. To accomplish that righteous purpose, a mutual shifting of perceptions, and mutual forgiveness of our respective sins, will be necessary for all involved, to form the sort of alliances necessary to overcome the challenges of that monumental undertaking.

We can set ourselves to that mission today, or we can do so in the haze of revolution.

But make no mistake, we’ll have to do it at some point.

 

 

There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Radical Agenda S05E053 – Up The Escalator

The Reds have been in hysterics all week over Trump’s “racist tweets” – which has now been officially defined as literally any criticism of brown skinned communists who hate the country they were elected to serve. The House of Representin’ voted 240 to 187, almost entirely along party lines, to condemn the microholocaust tapped out by the President  in the hours before a massive roundup of illegal immigrants failed to materialize.

Only four Republicans, and former Republican turned future Libertarian joke candidate Justin Amash, joined the unanimous Democrat vote in supporting the House Resolution. The Republicans who voted for the resolution were Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Will Hurd (R-TX), Fred Upton (R-MI), and Susan Brooks (R-IN). We await word on how their gender transition processes are coming along, and whether the Internet has enough parentheses to sufficiently mark up their donor lists.

While the Radical Agenda research team investigates these crucial questions, the Nation becomes more Nazified by the second. Trump supporters chanted “Send Her Back!” at his speech in North Carolina last night. Concrete proof that racist tweets result in racist chants, and racist chants, result in hysterical Jewish media, which results in more racist voters.

I titled the most recent episode of Outlaw Conservative “Stop Resisting” and suggested conservatives would do well to stop arguing with Leftists who call them racists. This is not a strategy most could feel comfortable pursuing at present, but we do seem to be getting close to that point.

Chris Cuomo damn near had a heart attack while talking to Kris Kobach, a Republican candidate for the United States Senate in Kansas. He spent most of the discussion trying to get Kobach to call the President a racist, and when he completely failed to accomplish this pathetic feat, he retreated to what he thought was a safer position. Cuomo asked Kobach “What would you do if the president said, ‘I am a racist. That’s why I said it.’ What would you do?”

“Uh, then I would not defend him, because there’s no excuse for racism in America,” Kobach responded first.

“Really?” Cuomo asked. “Would you still support him as president?”

Kobach paused. “Uhm. I don’t know.”

“You have to think about it!” Cuomo exclaimed. “You have to think about whether or not you would support a racist! Really!?”

“I’d have to know who was running against him,” Kobach said.

“A racist! An admitted racist you would have to know more?” Cuomo continued, as Kobach stammered. “Kris, come on man. It can’t be that partisan.”

“These are ridiculous hypotheticals,” Kobach protested.

“It’s ridiculous that it took you that long to answer it,” Cuomo said. “You’re running for Senate, and you have to take a pause whether or not if he said he was a racist you’d still support him. Come on, brother.”

Cuomo feigned shock at Kobach’s failure to follow the expected protocols of Jewish programming, but you could tell he was more afraid than surprised. That momentary silence was like the sound of screeching tires to the CNN host. There he was, firmly in control of the National vehicle, hands on the wheel, certain nothing could deter the Ship of State from its Leftward course. Then, all of a sudden, a White man had the courage to say he might just vote for an unapologetic racist on national television.

There were a lot of those “deer in the headlights” type stares from the Left this week. Since time immemorial, Jews and their pets have safely operated under the assumption that they could evade the rules of civil discourse by accusing their opponents of racism. It was working out pretty well, too. Until they overplayed their hand, and convinced the populace that President of the United States and the #2 show in cable news were White Nationalists.

Kinda hard to make people think White Nationalism is some kind of bizarre irrational evil, when stadiums full of people are joyously chanting, free of fear, with the Nation’s most influential people smiling and nodding in approval.

There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Outlaw Conservative S01E026 – Stop Resisting

The last words many criminals hear are “Stop Resisting!”

Today being the anniversary of the death of Eric Garner, it is worth contemplating the implications…

In rare, though not unfathomable circumstances, decent, innocent folks might meet a similar fate. However, innocent folks tend to heed the advise, and sort out confusions in the court system. Thereby avoiding the need to say “I can’t breath” on their way to the morgue. Here I’ll suggest that our fellow conservatives take a similar course when accused of racism by hysterical Left wingers, who are, in the words of Lindsay Graham, “a bunch of communists.”

“Racist tweets” has been the most repeated phrase in American politics for the last week, topping “manufactured crisis” and “Russian collusion” in frequency if not duration. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ran afoul of House parliamentary rules this week, by trying to turn the House floor into a CNN panel with the phrasing. Rachel Maddow used the image of your humble correspondent on Monday night to call the president a racist. The entire Leftist media, and more than a few coward Republicans, have been mindlessly repeating the catch phrase ever since President Trump told a bunch of America hating members of the House, essentially, “love it or leave it”.

Since these four communists happen to be “women of color” the tweets were condemned by the usual suspects as racist, and from there, a familiar debate ensued over what is and is not racist. As is par for the course, nothing positive has come from the ensuing discourse, for reasons a properly educated society should not need to have explained to them.

Many years ago, in a former life, I was guest on the Tom Woods show. Back then, I thought being a racist was a very bad thing, and was offended when people accused me of this wicked sin. The accusation came in so frequently, and so meritlessly, that I eventually decided it had lost all of its meaning. So during the interview I said to Mr. Woods, something to the effect of “When somebody calls you a racist, the best thing you can say is, ‘And?'”

The term racist has always been ill defined, and more of a tactic than a description of some illicit behavior. In recent years, it has become more of a racial epithet hurled at White people, not entirely dissimilar to words which would get you banned from Facebook for describing blacks or Jews. As the hysteria gets ratcheted up beyond any comprehensible measure, Jews like Ben Shapiro and Blacks like Ben Carson are similarly accused, and the resulting dilution of the terminology is, I think, a positive thing for the future of America. Continue reading