Iran is an Israeli problem not a U.S. problem

Even if the Israeli's have stolen legitimate Iranian documents proving that Iran has been lying about its nuclear weapons, Iran is an Israeli problem not a U.S. problem.

Only fools and cowards will fall for the old trick of "lets you and him fight," which the controlled Big Media in the U.S. is now promoting.

Will President Trump be suckered by Israel, or is it we who are being suckered by Trump into believing that he is for America First?

The future bad and good

In another fine review in Chronicles (May 2018) Tobias Lanz reviews the work of James Rickards, who says the whole planet is now deeply in debt and this massive bubble will soon explode.

Rickards believes that there is no free trade, trade cannot be free, it is always politically determined. But governments can then be controlled by money elites, that is, the G7 leaders, central banks, the Council on Foreign Relations, etc., which Rickards says are not a real "conspiracy" but are simply not covered by the media. The review doesn't talk about about the real conspiracies within the money elite, which can take the form of selfish or ethnic factions not well serving the other money elites.

In any case, Rickards says all we little people can do is reduce individual debt, hold cash, buy precious metals (especially silver), as stores against the coming storm, which Rickards says is certain to come.

I would add that we also need to vote in leaders who are determined to bring back the economic nationalism that made America great (and is now making China great). That is, tariffs on foreign products and using the tariffs to lower the taxes on American business which will bring them back from the dead. President Trump at least talked about doing that, and the people loved it.

And then, since people make the culture, culture only follows the traits of the people, and since people are kin-centered and ethnocentric, we can begin to develop an ethnopluralism of ethnostates legally adapted from the constitutional separation of powers and states (avoiding radical revolution). That is the real long term way---based on real human nature---to counter the money elites and to keep the planet from socially imploding or exploding.

President Trump was totally right to stay away from having dinner with the foul media people

I have heard that comedian Michelle Wolf is not Jewish, few would have guessed it. She's got the obscene comic delivery down cold, even the whiny nasal voice, with her total disrespect for everything and everyone (except Jews of course.) She was an ideal choice for the White House correspondents dinner crammed with people who also disrespect everything and everyone.

What is it with these modern liberals, they struggle mightily to be accepted and then they trash it all with their complete disrespect for everything and everyone, which makes people hate them. Then they complain about being discriminated against. They deserve their favorite fraud psychologist Freud to try to obscenely explain their anger and weirdness.

I say to hell with them and I wait for the day when the whole nation says to hell with them. President Trump was totally right to stay away from having dinner with the foul media people.

The main blunder was allowing the nefarious take-over of the academic world as well as the Big Media

Bizarre modern liberals have separated people from real human nature in their nefarious "march" through the academic world as well as the Big Media.

Modern liberals made permissible such sick ideas that it is the fundamental human right of every child to find its gender identity through proper educational and personal experimentation, and it is child abuse to object to that child abuse!

But they don't quit with that absurd perversion of real human nature, they go on to deny the biological origin of social behavior, rejecting such basic elements of human nature as being kin-centered, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection, which empirical studies in sociobiology have found existing in every society.

And they got away with that bizarre liberalism and were supported in their perversions by the whole academic world as well as the Big Media monopolies! Man oh man, how did we let this happen to our culture?!

It looks like the main blunder was in allowing the bizarre modern liberals---and those who exploited modern liberalism for their own non-liberal ends---to take-over the academic world as well as the Big Media.

The name no one will speak in predicting the political future

More realistic conservatives, the paleoconservatives, will go only as deep as to predict a deep war between theocratic religion and postmodern atheism. The courageous Pat Buchanan will mention the pull of ethnicity but he too sees the deepest war as between religion and atheism. This misses or underplays the realism of real human nature which is deeply based in the name no-one will speak: ethnocentrism. The biological origin of our deepest social behavior includes both the movements of religion and atheism.

In every human culture ever honestly studied human nature included, among other conservative things, kin-selection preferences, incest taboos, marriage, hierarchy, division of labor, gender differentiation, localism, and most importantly group-selection or ethnocentrism as the main unit of successful selection and survival, even before individual selection. If a culture proposes to not include these basic traits of human nature the culture does not last long and it will always return to these things. These biological traits also happen to be at the core of conservatism, whereas many of these things are missing in, say, communism, modern liberalism, and post-modernism.

This strongly suggests that real human nature will lead naturally to the cultural expression of regionalism, localism, and yes, the name no one will speak: ethnocentrism, leading to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, usually protected by some sort of federalism. The constitutional separation of powers and states in the U.S. could even be adapted to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Religion will remain, and so will atheism, but the name no one will speak, ethnocentrism, leading to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, will remain. Both conservatives and liberals would do better to affirm this realism as the social force of the future, and not totalitarianism on the left or the right, or some kind of lukewarm middle ground, although these things could prolong the inevitable social behavior of real human nature.

Class divisions and cleaning the swamp

There is sort of a multifaceted class war going on in the U.S., which is also a racial competition between the white working class and the liberals who ride ethnic minorities to power. The American WASPS or aristocrats sold out years ago and became part of greedy global capitalism which primarily rules all classes and ethnic groups, or tries to.

The middle class has been and is important, even vital, to holding onto traditional values and morals, but they are not good at cleaning out the Augean swamp of Washington DC---think of the unctuous Vice President Mike Pence. Although the Big Media, the liberals, and the minority revolutionaries hate Mike Pence's smarmy Christian values they would happily put him in power knowing their mud-swamp would then remain to wallow in. President Trump is no Hercules but he is also no Mike Pence.

Who knows what class to put Trump in? He seems like both a working class rebel and a spoiled rich kid. He is not middle class or aristocratic. The white working class actually liked Trump's vulgarity and elected him because they thought he might have the balls to clean out the Washington swamp.

Being no Hercules, Trump has been moving toward the nefarious agenda of the global capitalists---think of the idiot John Bolton, now in Trump's cabinet, who never saw a war he didn't want to start, especially those on behalf of Israel.

Will these multifaceted classes and races succeed in destroying President Trump? Trump is not predicable, but he may not be smart enough or strong enough to stop them all.

The deeper logic of the world

Is logic "the condition of the world," as Auden put it? Perhaps, but that is an anthropomorphic statement. Human logic does not define the condition of the world, human minds are far less evolved than the minds of Gods and therefore are unable to define the real logic or condition of the world.

Even the best religious philosophers did not define the real logic of the world. What is less logical than the idea of a non-material spiritual? Darwin was closer to the real condition of the world but even he stopped short of defining Godhood as that which life materially evolves to become.

The material evolution of life from the frogs to the Gods, and the process of the simple evolving to the supercomplex, or the unconscious world evolving to the superconscious world, all the way to Godhood, defines the deeper logic of the world, and the basis of real religion and culture for the future world.

Are modern liberals stupid or does it take more than intelligence to find political truths?

If you are not raised in a philosophically conservative or conservative populist home you won't find the conservative philosophy in the Big Media or the schools. It seems to require a curiosity or a skeptical eye to find political truths in our modern liberal culture.

The Internet has helped supply voices contrary to modern liberalism, but it too is gradually being dominated by the politically correct cultural Marxists who already dominate the Big Media and the schools. And the purveyors of porn garbage on the Internet have been demoralizing the public, including children.

The fact that conservative populists could elect Trump president says that the total brainwashing of the Media and the schools has not worked as well as they wanted it too, or perhaps the non-college educated simply managed to escape the academic brainwashing. But they do watch a lot of television...maybe they skip the news.

It's difficult to see the way out of this mess. I suppose the Internet is the best way to find real political truths, at least until it is completely taken over by the globalists and cultural Marxists. We should somehow not let that happen.

I say we have to find ways to show the public the basic truths about human nature---from which deep politics rises---coming in from the science of sociobiology.  Edward O. Wilson is the place to start, but even he, who writes so well, may have to be simplified a bit for mass consumption---although the people instinctively already know that real human nature is local, kin and ethnic-centered, and conservative, which you can't say about their patronizing teachers.

Whoever can develop an ethnopluralism of ethnostates will own the future

China's weakness, like the past weakness of the Soviets, is that China is an empire of conquered peoples of different ethnicities, with different languages, held together by the force of the Communist Party, which is more totalitarian than Stalin or Hitler. 

We know what real human nature naturally leads to, even though our schools won't teach it. Human nature is kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other conservative things, with group-selection or ethnic selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against this human nature, with such experiments as Marxism, but cultures are eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature.

So common interest (Cicero), love (St Augustine), equality (Marx), or globalism (Rand), will not bring distinctly different ethnic groups or cultures together in peaceful social harmony. Social harmony comes best in ethnostates where people share the same ethnicity and language. This suggest that an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the way to go for U. S. in the future, held together with our already existing constitutional separation of powers and states, with federalism protecting the whole.

China will eventually separate into ethnostates, as the Soviet Union did, but the U.S experiment with multiculturalism and global empire also will fall apart for the same reasons. Better to have the makings of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates planned and ready to go than to fall apart in chaos, as are competitors will. The U.S. has always been strong in being able to innovate, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is a political innovation based in the long history of human social behavior.

Can we do it? Whoever can develop an ethnopluralism of ethnostates will own the future.

Empires will continue to devolve back to natural ethnostates, and that is good

Even though it's not quite fair to compare the Chinese and American empires, since America at least began as a separation of powers and states, whereas China is an empire ruling over many different ethnicities and regions with unsubtle Marxist/capitalist force.

But the U.S. has also become a centralized empire more subtly ruling over different ethnicities and regions with culturally Marxist/capitalist brainwashing and propaganda from an unelected Media and educational system. Europe too attempted to become a Marxist/capitalist empire ruling over many different ethnicities and states with the European Union. Mass immigration is now causing a big backlash by the natural citizens of these nations.

I believe the corrupt empires will continue to devolve back to natural ethnostates, or an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, as the Soviet Union did. The nations and states that are threatened most by mass immigration will move first toward ethnostates, mainly do to real human nature, which remains as it has always been, kin-centered and ethnocentric. 

Wouldn't it be civilized if this devolution of corrupt empires back to ethnostates could be done rationally and voluntarily rather than radically and with civil war? It almost makes one understand those who advocate the dirty means of helping along or aiding mass immigration to speed up the natural devolution into ethnostates, but the empire rats are doing a good enough job sowing their own (and our) destruction without unethically helping them.

Hip and educated people need to define a deeper and broader view of human perversion and deviance

The corruption, lying, and ignorance in defining perversion and deviance in human behavior is largely based on the idea that there is no human nature, or if there is, it is entirely and randomly created by the environment we live in. But there is a human nature, biology and genetics determine who and what we are as well as our basic social behavior, the environment then offers adjustments and modifications to that basic human nature.

Even conservatives are too mild and weak in defining human perversion and deviance, and liberals usually don't even believe there is such a thing. Saying so has virtually become against the law.

Human nature has been affirmed by the science of sociobiology, and by examining human history in general, as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other basic conservative things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against this real human nature with such experiments as Marxism, or the increasingly wild perversions and deviance of our present popular culture---think of the perversions in the very popular Netflix series "Shameless."  There is even an Alt Right groups edited by homosexuals. But we see that cultures are eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature, because successful survival and reproduction demands it.

The Big Media and our educational system are now the main pushers of this perverse and deviant behavior, and it is overdo time to call them out for being the great corrupters that they are. Hip and educated people need to define this deeper and broader view of human perversion and deviance so that it is not seen only as the ravings of holier than thou hillbilly evangelists.

Snobbery and the hierarchy of real human nature

Music reviewer James Tate gave an illuminating definition of snobbery as someone with imposing standards but who affects those standards for social, not aesthetic reasons.

Looking deeper though, that could suggest another kind of snobbery of affecting aesthetic standards over social standards, which get us into the debate over the place of art and social behavior in society.

In the hierarchy of real human nature I believe first comes the biological activation, and close behind that the social activation, then finally comes the activation of art and culture. That would be the order of a true snobbery, if snobbery can be true.

The conservative standard of being against ideologies could be another kind of snobbery, especially if conservatism is defined as an ideology.

I believe conservatism starts with the activation of biology, then follows with the biological origin of our social and cultural behavior, including art, philosophy and even religion which synthesizes all of them.

That is how we arrive at the moral art suggested in theological materialism, and the political suggestion for an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Why do Democrats gloat over the suicide of the United States?

Democrats do actually gloat when they inform us that by mid-century the U.S. will become a majority-minority nation.

This behavior is not due only to bald ignorance on the part of democrats, it's often just selfishness. Democrats believe more immigration will give them lasting voting power since immigrants will vote for their lavish (unfunded) government programs.

Most white democrat's seem ignorant of the reality that as the people change the culture changes, and the change from a white to a black, brown and beige culture could very likely ( and naturally) throw white democrats out of office simply because they are white.

The majority-minority nation would also probably recreate the constantly changing dictatorships (left or right) common in the nations they come from, just as the Anglo Saxon founders of the United States recreated an English ethos.

But many whites will object to these changes in the same way they objected to crime-ridden inner cities, they moved out, not because they are evil but because real human nature is naturally kin-centered and ethnocentric and social order is naturally created by living in homogeneous societies.

Wouldn't it be excellent if we could rationally arrive at an evenhanded ethnopluralism of ethnostates carved out of the constitutional separation of powers and states which already exist (supposedly), rather than having territorial and civil disruptions or wars between distinctly different people?

We will probably have loudmouth empire-minded fascists on the left or the right (Marxist or racial) calling for a police states before more sane constitutional ethnostates become a reality.

It seems that most Democrats and many Republicans can't see this coming, or they are so decadent  they don't care.

Real democracies and ethnostates

Kirkpatrick Sales makes the argument ("Chronicles" April 2018) that only small-scale democracies can be real democracies, where laws and decisions are made directly by the people. Sales says that a Republican government such as the government in Washington DC where 535 people in congress with an average of 759,000 constituents is not a democracy. Sales would like to see a series of secession's of states into manageable sizes where real democracies can have real rule by the people themselves.

Human nature is essentially kin and ethnic centered, and group selection provides the best means of successful survival and reproduction. Human nature has been this way since humans became humans (and even before that). So if any small or large state wants to have longer-term stability it needs to be more than democratic, it needs to be an ethnostate with real biological homogeneity. Cultures are created from the distinctive traits of the ethnic groups who create the cultures as they adapt to whatever environment they find themselves living in. One size does not fit all, so real democracies, which may be one of the best forms of government, won't alone create longer term order.  (And representative government could be more practical if lobbies were curbed, as they should be.)

This is an unmentioned political reality that needs to be mentioned regarding real democracies and ethnostates. Perhaps that will be the next book by Sales.

Adding evolutionary science to conservative tradition

The conservative tradition of America came from common law, the Bible, and classical tradition, but conservatives also need to keep open to new wisdom and knowledge even as they affirm the old sources of tradition.

St. Thomas Aquinas was open to the new although in his case the "new" was the discovery of old Aristotle, who was synthesized by Aquinas into Christianity, which helped save Christianity intellectually.

I think conservatives need to synthesize Darwin and the evolutionary sciences into the conservative tradition to save conservatism from obsolescence. Real human nature leads naturally to the cultural expression of regionalism, localism, and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected by some sort of federalism. Given who we are this appears to be the best way we can optimize the gene expression we inherited from our human ancestors.

Beneath the various definitions of America as a business for profit, a mandate for everyone to be equal in all things, or a place where Christians can be Christians, is the the real biological origin of social behavior.

Darwin and the evolutionary sciences could be brought into conservatism by adapting the Constitutional separation of powers and states toward an ethnopluralism of ethnostates and regions, which would allow real kin-centered and ethnocentric human nature to flourish rather than compete in the same space often with fatal social disruptions.

The addition of the evolutionary sciences into conservatism could even bring a few liberals and scientists into the conservative fold, even though many of them still object to the biological origin of social behavior preferring the fantasies of cultural Marxism, just as many conservatives still think of evolution as evil.

I finally got around to watching a few episodes of "Shameless"

I finally got around to watching a few episodes of "Shameless" (American version) on Netflix, having heard it was well written and well acted, after surfing through and eliminating the huge quantity but few quality shows on Netflix.

Shameless is well acted and well written but in that postmodern way of using irony as if celebrating lewd garbage is equivalently opposite virtuous and heroic behavior.

All the actors are consistently good, which usually means the directer is good.  Except for William H. Macy, the father of the lewd brood, who gets caught in that old actor's trap of overacting and bungling the part of a drunk (hold back 50 percent William, 50 percent!).  

Shameless is "good'' but in the way the philosopher Plato describes artists as appealing to the basest desires while mocking and deriding everything.

Whimsical as it sounds in this age of bottom dwelling art, a good writer and a good story will show good people meeting good ends and bad people meeting bad ends, and do it with clever and brilliant writing. A bad writer and a bad story will show bad men profit and heroes suffer for their virtues, and will often also do it with clever and brilliant writing. There is truth and there is good and these are not relative things when based in the biological origin of social behavior---that cannot be intellectualized away. 

So as usually conservatives wait for brilliantly written moral art. Perhaps this will not come until the corrupt Big Media monopolies are broken up.

Causation

Causation is determined by the activation of life (Tirips) to evolve in the material world toward supermaterial Godhood, while life adjusts to whatever outside environment life finds itself living in.

That is the primal foundation of religion, culture and history whether humans are conscious or unconscious of it.

This definition of causation cuts through the serpentine complications and varieties of cultures and philosophies, which have been driven by this causation.

Regarding Syria the conspiracy has been the conspiracy to make real conspiracies look ridiculous

It looks to me like the latest chemical bombings in Syria have been implausibly blamed on the Syrians or Russians, who deny being involved.

Acts of immoral deception can be buried in such motto's as "by any means necessary" or "by way of deception." Naive Christian's think, "by golly, those motto's do not mean immoral means."

The deceivers and conspirators know that Northern Europeans tend to cling to the old military idea of moral leadership ("tell the truth and shoot strait.") or the Christian idea that leadership is moral leadership, and this is cunningly exploited.

So the conspirators waited until they could place war-hawk and neoconservative John Bolton officially in office as National Security Adviser to President Trump; they knew that chemical bombings in Syria could be exploited by Bolton and they knew that our military would be used to retaliate by bombing Syria, and even taking over sections of Syria.

That's my hypothesis, it's direct meddling to change things before they happen, or quickly exploiting mistakes, or both. The question also is, who uses immoral means as an operating principal? And who benefits most?

When a network is both ethnically and religiously bonded it makes the most powerful political network

Reading the Philips Jenkins review in "Chronicles" of Niall Ferguson's latest book, "The Square and the Tower," on the struggle of networks and hierarchies for global control, it got me thinking about how when a network is both ethnically and religiously bonded it makes the most powerful political network, such as the Israeli/Jewish network and the Islamic/Arab or Islamic/Iranian networks. If business and capital connections are also within these ethnic/religious networks then they have even more clout.

Ferguson suggests that there is a cyclic conflict between hierarchies (Tower) and networks (the Square) as governments and churches go from networks to hierarchies and are then challenged by new networks which eventually become hierarchies.

I see how present ethnic/religious networks are able to draw much larger less connected nations into their fierce competition due to their powerful lobbies within the larger nations, such as the U.S. supporting the Israeli/Jewish network and Russia supporting the Islamic/Iranian network. The Israeli/Jewish network and the Islamic/Arab network seem to have recently joined forces against the new upstart Islamic/Iranian network, and the U.S. and Russia have been corrupt or foolish enough to get involved their battles.

Christianity moved from its original small Jewish-oriented network into vast Western hierarchies ethnically unconnected, with new sects and new networks rising in rebellion against traditional church hierarchies until the new networks themselves became hierarchies. Powerful ethnic and religious connections have been lost in the West as cultural Marxism has made such connections socially unacceptable, leaving the West weakened to the influence of stronger ethnically/religiously connected lobbies, like the Israeli/Jewish and Islamic/Arab networks.

The Russians seem to have a better grip on their own power in their connections with the Islamic/Iranian network, perhaps because the Russians have been developing an Orthodox/Christian/Ethnic/Russian network of their own, which is the strongest kind of network, as we have seen.

Politically incorrect sociobiology really is the foundation discipline in seeing these connections.

What occurs before "power" and hierarchy?

It seems to me that at first it looks like only power defeats power---Nietzsche made a sort of God of the will to power which was the essence of his philosophy. But why does "life" seek power? Life seems to come before power and uses power for its needs.

"Love" doesn't really defeat power as some religions suggest, love is essentially the activation to reproductive and survival success---romanticism comes after that to help love along.

The ultimate goal of power, love, reproduction and survival, even the goal of natural evolution, is to evolve in the material world to the highest success possible, which is to evolve to supermaterial Godhood.

So the will or activation to Godhood is what "defeats" power. It seems to me that this makes, or will make, the religion or worldview that affirms the will or activation to Godhood (Tirips) the deepest foundation for civilization and culture. 

Then the elements that define being civilized, such as being educated, charming, elegant, and tasteful (which defines the old aristocracies) comes into play in any political system, even the ones that come to power as revenge or as envy against civilized people, like Marxism and other radical systems. It's the meritocracy of natural evolution toward Godhood always returning.

Should history be interpreted politically, theologically, or biologically?

Is it lack of knowledge or lack of courage that causes historians to interpret history politically rather than theologically or biologically? Now days if a historian interprets history biologically he will be called a racist or bigot and drummed out of history departments, which suggests a lack of courage that is almost, but not quite justified, especially if there is a family to feed.

I don't know if history departments will one day be subsumed by the science of sociobiology---after postmodernism is seen as a Machiavellian fraud---but I do think sociobiology will one day be one of the main academic tools in history departments.

Should history be interpreted politically, theologically, or biologically? I think history should be interpreted biologically but with a biology that includes theology, call it theobiology. Politics follows after those forces. Why? Because the essential drives of human history are biological and evolutionary as life seeks survival and reproductive success, which develops our cultures, and the ultimate or zenith of success is materially evolving to supermaterial Godhood, the essential evolutionary goal of life and history.

The triple internal threat to the survival of traditional America and the West

The triple internal threat we have to the survival of traditional America and the West is Latino and Islamic migration, legal and illegal, as well as the unassimilable minorities who have lived here for 100 years or more (not to here mention the external threats from China, Russia, etc)

A few conservatives have warned against unassimilable migrants but conservatives rarely have the courage to mention the unassimilable minorities already living here who have created their own cultures within multicultural America, or have succeeded in changing traditional America and West to better fit their own wills to power.

So what we are witnessing is the not so slow suicide of traditional America and white Western culture. This has been cheered on by recent migrants and older unassimilable minorities, as well as by leftists and liberals who were influenced by the cultural Marxism taught in our schools, which was mainly brought here by---you guessed it---unassimilable minority migrants from WWII.

Some may be surprised when I quickly say that it is perfectly natural behavior to be kin-centered and ethnocentric, even xenophobic. But this basic human nature only works well in homogeneous ethnostates. Which is why I advocate an ethnopluralism of ethnostates; in America this can be legally adapted from the constitutional separation of powers and states. Radical revolution is not advocated.

That is the real suicide prevention we require. It is not clear to me that we will prevent the suicide of the America and the West, but healthy people will at least try. In any case, history shows that social chaos eventually returns to natural ethnostates for order.

The co-option and corruption of real human nature

Being kin and ethnic centered is at the origin of the altruism which we all claim as a virtue against selfishness. But it is not and never was a universal altruism, it is and always was kin and ethnic centered.

We learned to advance our kin and ethnic groups because they shared our same genes and genetic traits and we could not survive alone. This behavior was selected because it was most successful in survival and reproduction and became embedded in the biology of human nature, and remains today.

The far left, far right, and traditional religion co-opted and corrupted this real definition of human nature, claiming we are all universally altruistic and then demanding that we show no favoritism toward any group. Or the opposite claim was made that one group is superior to the others.

How are we to arrive at a solution to our differences and our social problems when we deny and even criminalize real human nature, as Europe has done, and as some in America want to do? Human nature is "racist" and ethnocentric, but that does not call for fascism or Marxism.

We need to develop an ethnopluralism of ethnostates to harmonize with what we really are as human beings---there are too many people on earth now to successfully claim only one people.  Radical revolution is not even necessary to do this, in the U. S. we can gradually and legally adapt the already existing separation of powers and states.

Looking truthfully at human history this is what happens anyway, but often violently, as empires always fall and break up into natural ethnostates, as the Soviet Union recently did. Can't we do this consciously rather than unconsciously and violently? I think we can, and will---but either way it will happen, because that it what we are, and that is what we do.

"How does it feel?!"

Joe Scarborough, his next (3rd?) wife Mika, and the sycophants on his show were whining this morning about the Sinclair Broadcast Group who had all the anchors on all the local stations they own read the same words regarding fake news. Scarborough was comparing it to Pravda control of the news during the Soviet era, even though the cunning and sinister control of the Media by the left in the West makes Soviet Pravda look crude.

  I think of the old Dylan line: "How does it feel?!"

The right has been complaining about the complete leftist dominance of the media for years! The Zoo York Times, the Washington "Swamp" Post, etc. have been setting the agenda for news outlets across the country for years!  

What happened to the Joe Scarborough who used to be at least a moderate conservative? It all seemed to start when Trump, who Scarborough had earlier supported on his show, made cracks about Mika's plastic surgery and also said something about Scarborough being responsible for a murder.

Does that justify the all out war Scarborough has declared every morning against President Trump, even if Trump was lying? I understand how a gentleman should defend his woman but is there not a limit to the war? Do you change your whole political position as well as damage your public reputation?