Lion of the Blogosphere

David Brooks and the “vigorous virtues”

with 106 comments

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/04/opinion/republicans-government-programs.html

I haven’t cited David Brooks in quite a long time. These days he usually doesn’t have anything interesting to say. But his most-recent op-ed, where he talks about the “vigorous virtues” is pretty interesting.

I would add HBD into the mix. Prole whites have genetically lower IQs and lower self-control compared to elite whites. (A fact not acknowledged by elite whites who don’t believe in genetic IQ, nor is it even acknowledged very much by commenters on HBD blogs.)

Despite these genetic shortcomings, the prole whites have the WISDOM to realize they’d be better off if some external force imposed stricter behavior on them. The elite whites don’t understand this, because they are already born with genes that give them internal self-control, so they don’t need it imposed by outside forces.

David Brooks also writes: “these voters may vote against their economic interests, but they vote for their emotional interests, for candidates who share their emotions about problems and groups.”

That applies to most all voters. Except the blacks. The Democrats give blacks affirmative action plus welfare and other social services which are disproportionally consumed by blacks. And the blacks show their appreciation for it at the voting booth.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 5, 2017 at 9:35 am

Posted in Uncategorized

106 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Its a decent column and theory, but has a very very important flaw.

    “She argues that these voters may vote against their economic interests, but they vote for their emotional interests, for candidates who share their emotions about problems and groups.”

    By labelling it ’emotions’ and emotional interests’, the theory is trivialized. Because emotions are transient, personal, and flighty. It would be more appropriate to label them ‘values’:

    ‘She argues that these voters may vote against their economic interests, but they vote for their moral values, for candidates who share their values about problems and groups.’

    Its the same argument, but by changing ’emotions’ to ‘values,’ the argument is more valid.

    Would that argument be used for other groups? Would blacks ever be accused of voting against their economic interests, but for emotional validation? Would women ever be accused of voting their emotions?
    Emotions are non-rational; thus accusing someone of voting their emotions is labelling them as non-rational.

    anon

    bingohead

    July 5, 2017 at 10:06 am

    • Excellent point.

      • An yet you support the party that pushes that.

        You and Otis love to tell me what I support.

        Magnavox

        July 6, 2017 at 6:37 pm

    • You’re saying that ‘values’ and ’emotions’ are so similar as to be interchangeable but at the same time so different that using one over the other is insulting and degrading.

      Would that argument be used for other groups? Would blacks ever be accused of voting against their economic interests, but for emotional validation? Would women ever be accused of voting their emotions?
      Emotions are non-rational; thus accusing someone of voting their emotions is labelling them as non-rational.

      The important thing to focus on and to be outraged over is that it’s taboo for whites, men, and christians to actually vote and organize around their actual interests. That’s why they get suckered while much less informed groups like blacks and women don’t. Who cares what language we would be using to describe blacks if they voted differently?

      Magnavox

      July 5, 2017 at 11:40 am

      • “Emotional” is probably the correct word, but it’s a valid point and true that if the article had been about other groups voting against their interests, such as rich people voting Democratic even though Democrats want to raise their taxes, it would not be described as “emotional voting.”

        I think that black people voting Democrat over “Black lives matter” stuff is also an example of “emotional voting.” Blacks need law and order, but being angry at whitey and at the cops feels good emotionally.

      • “The important thing to focus on and to be outraged over is that it’s taboo for whites, men, and christians to actually vote and organize around their actual interests. “

        An yet you support the party that pushes that.

        destructure

        July 5, 2017 at 12:07 pm

      • it’s been said for decades that Jews earn like Episcopalians but vote like Puerto Ricans. Jews are not flighty and emotional. They vote for the party that has upheld their values, and for the past 80 years that party has been the Democrat party. May change though.

        From the 1970s through the 2010s many white proles voted their economic interests vs. their values. That seems to have changed a bit. White proles are more willing to vote their values. But that might not last. One can take only so much economic abuse. If only the stupid Republican party would align their platform with the economic interests of white proles they would have a winner coalition for decades.

        Daniel

        July 5, 2017 at 5:50 pm

      • “. If only the stupid Republican party would align their platform with the economic interests of white proles they would have a winner coalition for decades.”

        Right now the GOP is fighting that tooth and nail. I think they would rather be an establishment party out of power than an anti establishment populist party in power.

        Mike Street Station

        July 6, 2017 at 10:28 am

      • Daniel: It’s more complicated than that. For instance, Jews benefit quite a bit by the double standards that encourage people to undermine and question the success of white christians while attacking anyone that does the same to jews as Nazis. It would be completely ‘woke’ for HanAssholeSolo to criticize the overrepresentation of men and whites at CNN, for instance, but he’s a monster for criticizing the even more dramatic overrepresentation of jews.

        Magnavox

        July 6, 2017 at 6:37 pm

      • Jews over overrepresented because of high-IQ genes, not because of some secret conspiracy. Dumb white people complaining about the Jews is no different than black people complaining about whitey keeping them down.

      • An yet you support the party that pushes that.

        You and Otis love to tell me what I support.

        Magnavox

        July 6, 2017 at 6:38 pm

      • I don’t think maggie was saying Jews were over overrepresented “because of some secret conspiracy.” He was pointing out that focusing on white over representation while ignoring the much greater jewish over representation was seemed self serving, Whether that’s deliberate is anyone’s guess. But one would have to think that at least a few of those jewish sjw’s who are making an issue of the “gaps” would have noticed.

        destructure

        July 6, 2017 at 8:04 pm

      • Jews are not considered a separate group by the MSM, they are just considered to be white people who have a different religion, just like Baptists, Catholics, Episcopals, and atheists can all be white and all have different religions.

      • It was one example of how supporting the democrats did serve jewish economic interests to counter Daniel’s idea that Jews voted for democrats purely because of values rather than self interest.

        magnavox

        July 6, 2017 at 10:15 pm

      • Races who are over represented on average pay an AA penalty and races who are under represented on average are net beneficiaries. But those penalties and benefits aren’t distributed evenly. Higher performing ethnic groups benefit by being lumped in with lower performing ethnic groups since much of the AA penalty is transferred to the lower performing groups. Similarly, a study of selective university admissions by Espanshade and Radford showed that upper/middle class whites were accepted at much higher rates than whites with similar grades and test scores. So AA isn’t just racial. There are a lot of ethnic and class games being played as well.

        destructure

        July 7, 2017 at 10:52 am

  2. Despite these genetic shortcomings, the prole whites have the WISDOM to realize they’d be better off if some external force imposed stricter behavior on them. The elite whites don’t understand this, because they are already born with genes that give them internal self-control, so they don’t need it imposed by outside forces.

    This is basically libertarians in a nutshell. A bunch of 120+ IQ guys (usually white) who can dabble in drugs,alcohol etc without having it ruin their lives think their should be unrestrained access to these substances. Of course, being 120+ iq whites they’re surround by other 120+ iq whites so they never see the destruction of their ideology.

    everybodyhatesscott

    July 5, 2017 at 10:17 am

    • Scott Adams comes to mind.

      SQ

      July 5, 2017 at 11:22 am

    • Liberals are usually the ones pushing destructive social policies and behavior ie drugs, promiscuity, etc. Libertarians are more into people having the freedom to do things. But they don’t usually encourage or do it themselves. Libertarians aren’t generally into activism anyway. So I think your comment describes liberals more than libertarians.

      destructure

      July 5, 2017 at 12:04 pm

    • @ everybodyhatesscott

      What if the destruction of others is the point of the ideology, or perhaps a pleasant side effect?

      Lowe

      July 5, 2017 at 12:38 pm

    • This is basically libertarians AND liberals in a nutshell.

      Many of the world’s problems stem from IQ 120+ people, who live exclusively near other IQ 120+ people, not being able to see the effects of certain laws on stupid people.

      SC

      July 7, 2017 at 10:29 pm

  3. Initial reaction: “Hmm this seems off brand for the current NY Times”. Then I check out the articles title- oh ok that makes sense now.

    This is all boring “Whats the Matter with Kansas” stuff from over a decade ago.

    The only interesting thing is why any Elite thinks it is intellectually defensible to have a system were people vote strictly on their own self interest. The result would be horrible.

    Lion o' the Turambar

    July 5, 2017 at 10:55 am

    • Working class whites vote for their values while NAMs vote for their interests.

      Liberals want working class whites to vote like NAMs.

      Jimi

      July 5, 2017 at 11:45 am

      • It’s true that Democrats propose some policies that would benefits whites more. But the consequence of that is further emboldening & empowering the NAM underclass, as well as making it less appealing for Whites to maintain dignity and ethicality, rather than become serfs. What morons!

        Panther of the Blogocube

        July 5, 2017 at 9:55 pm

    • Whats the Matter with Kansas is exactly what I thought of when I read Brook’s piece. Congratulations to him for rediscovering a twenty year old liberal trope.

      Mike Street Station

      July 6, 2017 at 10:38 am

      • It’s a very good and very important trope.

        magnavox

        July 6, 2017 at 10:16 pm

  4. Maybe in the far off past, the working class voted Democrat, the rich voted Republican, and the middle class voted according to whether they wanted more economic growth (Republican) or protection (Democrat).

    But as time has gone on, people have voted according to matters other than sheer economic interest. For example, Reagan Democrats are people who benefit from strong unions, social services, and safety net, but still vote Republican because of their stances on cultural issues, want strong law and order, and generally bear the brunt of racial tensions.

    Leftist writers generally cite this as an example of the Reagan Democrats being stupid. But the liberal upper middle and upper classes are similarly stupid by that measure. They would benefit from lower taxes. Many would benefit from fewer regulations. But they vote for Democrats largely because of their cultural and social values.

    More broadly, think of how much political bandwidth issues like gay marriage and trannies in bathrooms took up on the left from roughly 2011 to 2016. Democrats largely exhausted themselves on those issues and left things like income inequality on the back burner.

    Finally, I don’t think the white working class voted against their economic interests in voting for Trump. You might, MIGHT, have been able to make that case had the Democrats run Bernie Sanders. Instead, they went with Hillary Clinton, and I can’t think of anything she would have done for the white working class.

    Ohio went nearly 10 points in favor of Trump. He combined their cultural interests with their economic interests, so it was a blowout in what is usually a nail bitingly close state for conventional candidates.

    Sid

    July 5, 2017 at 11:06 am

    • The working class are voting Republican because the Democrats are an anti-White party.

      map

      July 6, 2017 at 3:53 am

  5. Do the vigorous virtues include leaving your wife for your research assistant?

    Jesse

    July 5, 2017 at 11:54 am

  6. Oh boy, the article was such dreck. It’s enraging that a non-entity like Brooks gets paid good money and is lionized as only a NY Times write can be, to write stuff like this when Steve Sailer languishes on the sidelines.

    I disagree with 50% of what Sailer writes, but his analyses of election trends is the best. David Brooks thinks it starts in the 18th century? What is he talking about? This is the usual Brooksian mess, going here, there, and ending up nowhere.

    So people vote their values and their pocket-books. Tell me something I don’t already know, and that hasn’t been pointed out a million, jillion gazillion times before? Do you really think, Lion, that this is remotely original? As the kids say, “bitch, please.”

    HERE is the reality that Brooks will never talk about:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/robert-jones-white-christian-america/532587/

    Jones may be wrong about the electoral prospects of White Christian America (I think there is life in the old dog, yet, if they can register more whites) but at least he’s dealing with the facts as they exist NOW, and not invoking some arbitrary thing from the 18th century!!

    The reality, which assimilated Jew David Brooks will never admit, is that whites in America are under both demographic and economic siege. Not only that, but they are expected to put up with this while being reviled from the elite campuses. Their greatest heroes (Jefferson, for signal example) are being torn to shreds as rapists and slave-owners.

    And meanwhile, there’s a superpower on the horizon, and all of TuJ’s posts on his website won’t change the fact that the Chinese are outclassing us, while we actively and purposefully destroy ourselves with this:

    https://www.hmc.edu/diversity/why-diversity/

    gothamette

    July 5, 2017 at 12:57 pm

    • You must get a new cat picture. This one, unless you look close, actually looks like a gray squirrel eating an acorn.

      Stealth

      July 5, 2017 at 10:53 pm

      • Is no importante.

        gothamette

        July 6, 2017 at 1:08 pm

      • !Gato nuevo!

        Stealth

        July 6, 2017 at 4:30 pm

      • Good comment, of course.

        Stealth

        July 6, 2017 at 4:31 pm

  7. Brooks didn’t say anything that I haven’t been telling you on your own blog for several years, People evolved in a harsh environment, It takes hardship to develop a healthy psychology and values. People who grew up too easy tend to be spoiled and have messed up values. They didn’t have enough hardship to develop properly.

    destructure

    July 5, 2017 at 1:00 pm

  8. It would be more precise to say that prole whites vote for their percieved ethnic genetic interests. Of course voting Democrat is not exactly in their economic interests either because immigration lowers wages and affirmative action limits white male job opportunities.

    Neither party serves prole whites so no matter who they vote for they’re sacrificing something. Republicans are the party of the rich. The Democrats are the party of minorities. Trump’s appeal was he appeared to make Republicans the party of whites.

    pumpkinperson

    July 5, 2017 at 1:57 pm

    • All Republicans make clear that they are the party for Whites. It happens that the same status quo has ignored them once they’re in office. Trump has ensured them, it wouldn’t happen if he was elected.

      The group of people in America who are the most miserable are libertarians or liberal conservatives. These are the types who wished America was like Canada or Europe with their socialist policies, but are unattainable, because there are too many NAMs and non-white immigrants to make it happen.

      JS

      July 5, 2017 at 6:53 pm

      • Bullshit. The most miserable people in the country are naturally decent, law-abiding, unaggressive types who didn’t get into Harvard or Stanford, and who therefore can’t earn enough to get away from blacks. It’s all about the as schvarz.

        Marty

        July 5, 2017 at 11:52 pm

      • Your comment best describes libertarians.

        JS

        July 6, 2017 at 11:53 am

  9. there is a thread on NeoGaf referencing a Vox article about Bernie for 2020.

    Yglesias, who hates Bernie, says that Bernie is the front runner for 2020 if he choses to run. On the surface it would seem like Bernie is too old, but there are heads of state that are older than Bernie so maybe he can do it. If Bernie does run, he may indeed be the front runner. Let’s view his serious potential competitors:

    Biden: If Biden runs, he will be very hard to beat. I would say Biden is the front runner if he runs.

    Booker: He is who the Democrats *should* nominate but there just doesn’t seem to be a lot of enthusiasm for him. His moderate temperament doesn’t fit with the current unhinged mood of the Democratic party. Probably ends up as VP.

    Harris: She is basically the NeoGaf candidate but I don’t see her having much widespread appeal. She certainly isn’t polling well now.

    Brown: Basically a poor mans Biden. He could make some noise if Biden doesn’t run.

    Other potential candidates like Zuckerberg, Hillary, Gillibrand, Cortez-Masto and too many others to name aren’t worth talking about because they have no chance of getting the nomination.

    It really comes down to Biden. If Biden runs, there is a pretty good chance he wins every primary. If Biden doesn’t run, I don’t think you can count on blacks saving the Dems because blacks actually like Bernie. They only voted for Hillary because they were told to do so. Without a strong establishment candidate to rally around, a lot of blacks will vote for Bernie.

    Obviously we want Bernie to win the nomination because he will lead the Dems to total destruction.

    Otis the Sweaty

    July 5, 2017 at 2:14 pm

    • Biden is too old.

      • Biden also has the creepy older uncle vibe. Presidential material is standing up and laying down the billionaire’s bodyslam, not pervily manhandling your coworkers 13 year old daughters.

        Panther of the Blogocube

        July 5, 2017 at 10:17 pm

      • Plenty of people think Trump pervily handles his own daughter

        Magnavox

        July 6, 2017 at 12:35 am

      • Great. You can play the youtube videos of Biden fondling little girls in Congress.

        map

        July 6, 2017 at 4:01 am

    • Other potential candidates like Zuckerberg, Hillary, Gillibrand, Cortez-Masto and too many others to name aren’t worth talking about because they have no chance of getting the nomination.

      Don’t underestimate Hillary’s potential for the 2020 nomination.

      The Democrats are a highly machine-like organization and the Clintons still have their many apparatchiks with their hands on the party levers.

      Assuming modern medicine can keep her in suspended animation for a few more years Hillary, probably runs again since she and her now out-of-work cronies will have nothing better to do. If she runs, because of how the DNC hierarchy works, she could win.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      July 5, 2017 at 5:47 pm

      • Curle

        July 5, 2017 at 10:59 pm

      • Hillary 2020 seems likely to me too. Trump’s “I’m the outsider” advantage will have withered away, and Clinton’s “Anointed of the Globalists” status will have faded. Trump’s success will depend entirely on making good on his promises, and if he actually decides to prosecute Clinton (he should).

        Panther of the Blogocube

        July 5, 2017 at 11:09 pm

      • Hillary 2020 seems likely to me too. Trump’s “I’m the outsider” advantage will have withered away, and Clinton’s “Anointed of the Globalists” status will have faded.

        Trump can still position himself as an outsider given the elites continued hostility.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        July 6, 2017 at 6:49 pm

    • Off-topic, but Otis could you please give us a rundown of the neogaf reaction to #CNNblackmail?

      driveallnight

      July 5, 2017 at 6:00 pm

      • This is an update we need, Otis.

        Horace Pinker

        July 6, 2017 at 12:50 pm

    • The white working class will not be fooled by Biden, and the minorities who desperately want to take control of the Democrat Party will not be enthused. Biden is a relic of a party that no longer exists.

      B.T.D.T.

      July 5, 2017 at 7:55 pm

    • “Booker: He is who the Democrats *should* nominate but there just doesn’t seem to be a lot of enthusiasm for him. His moderate temperament doesn’t fit with the current unhinged mood of the Democratic party. Probably ends up as VP.”

      Your description matches Obama to a tee. The enthusiasm comes from him being black, not from temperament, or any other factor. If I were an advisor to the DNC, that’s who I would tell them to put their money behind. Hillary couldn’t put together the Obama coalition, but Booker could, and demographically, the Obama coalition will be bigger in 2020.

      Mike Street Station

      July 6, 2017 at 10:58 am

  10. David Brooks has some balls. Leaves his wife of like 30 years and kids for some 20 year old research assistant and he holds himself out as some kind of authority on character and morality. What a complete hypocrite.

    Two in the Bush

    July 5, 2017 at 3:26 pm

    • She’s 32 but, wow, how do I get a “research assistant”?

      • Pay her.

        gothamette

        July 5, 2017 at 6:35 pm

      • Gothamette, I couldn’t be sure about this, but I imagine that some of the women on this blog would be Lion’s “research assistant” for free!

        Maryk

        July 5, 2017 at 7:30 pm

      • Become a professor.

        JS

        July 5, 2017 at 9:55 pm

      • Are there lots of hot 32 year old women that read this blog?

        Jokah Macpherson

        July 5, 2017 at 10:50 pm

      • “I imagine that some of the women on this blog”

        Are there more than two women on this blog?

        Curle

        July 5, 2017 at 11:03 pm

  11. Except the blacks. The Democrats give blacks affirmative action plus welfare and other social services which are disproportionally consumed by blacks. And the blacks show their appreciation for it at the voting booth.”

    ….

    This statement is true, but I’m not so sure that the policies advocated by the Democrats have helped the blacks all that much. A century ago, blacks voted mostly for the GOP, because “Lincoln was a Republican.” That began to change with FDR. Now, of course, blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic in return for the goodies you cite plus a big dose of “It’s not your fault” – that is, all the rotten things happening in the black community are not the fault of the members of that community but result from racism, discrimination, police brutality blah blah blah. One might wonder, after seventy or so years and trillions of dollars of various government programs ostensibly designed to improve the lot of African-Americans, just how much improvement has actually taken place. As David Clarke, the black sheriff of Milwaukee county, Wisconsin said, “The welfare state has hit the black community like a nuclear blast.” Maybe it’s time to try something else.

    Black Death

    July 5, 2017 at 4:53 pm

    • “One might wonder, after seventy or so years . . . just how much improvement has actually taken place.”

      None, because wealth transfer was always the only point, improvement simply the cover story.

      For all their so-called intelligence, Whites have proved themselves decidedly naive and vulnerable to black cons, especially collective cons. Of course the double whammy of increasing the naivety factor by giving women the vote combined with Lincoln’s coup centralizing the government resulted in the empowerment of the most naive whites in the affairs of those whites living in proximity to blacks (southern whites). Thanks to Lincoln and suffrage, naive female whites living in isolation from blacks (primarily in northern and western states) may now involve themselves in social affairs over which they have no practical experience. Nothing generates stupid decision making quite like women weighing in on matters that don’t effect them directly.

      Bring back states rights or greatly limit female suffrage and common sense will return to race relations.

      Curle

      July 5, 2017 at 11:23 pm

  12. For the Fourth More Thoughts on an F-23 Program

    https://pragmaticallydistributed.wordpress.com/2017/07/04/joint-strike-fighter/

    A highly appropriate post for the 4th of July intended as an update to earlier thoughts on reviving the F-23.

    And a post with the rare virtue of having its information supplied from acquaintances of my own in the Air Force and Navy who are familiar with both the F-22 and F-35 programs – i.e., no mere speculation on my part.

    We’ll start with the F-35.

    Its many flaws are ultimately the product of too many design tradeoffs in its fool’s quest to please everyone. The design specs were “iPhone”: Let’s have this shiny widget do everything design specs. This “iPhone” mentality is almost always the wrong design principle to work from when the shiny widget in question is a shiny weapons system.

    When it comes to military widgets combined arms is still King of air, sea, and land; and his Royal Majesty’s golden rule is for weapons to be designed at the outset with a focus on a few major functionalities that will complement other systems with different core functionalities.

    When the rule of combined arms is adhered to, the gods of war smile brightly as they recently have on very successful combat tests of the F-22 flying in combination with the F-15. The spectacularly advanced Raptor complements the lower tech functionality of the Eagle.

    Or, to put this pleasant Raptor-Eagle synergy another way – Stealth functionality requires many, very significant, design tradeoffs in other key mission areas; therefore, to make up for what stealth planes lack, different non-stealth planes should be given.

    Alas, the F-35 ignored the golden rule, the gods frowned, and the Joint Strike Fighter’s functionalities have fallen victim to much rust. As a result of specifications insufficiently specialized, the F-35 does little very well or great.

    Its stealth capabilities are limited; its range mediocre; speed and maneuverability both unimpressive.

    The VSTOL version for the Marines in particular should have been developed for an entirely separate fighter. That’s assuming VSTOL was needed at all for the Marines; I’ve been told by my Navy chums that vertical takeoff brings little to no advantage on a carrier where traditional takeoff and landing approaches are more than adequate for Marine aircraft.

    More than anything else the requirement for VSTOL derailed the program; not only for the Marines but for the non-VSTOL capable Navy and Air Force variants that inherited design constraints due to their sharing very similar airframe mechanics with the Marine variant.

    What the current state of the JSF means for Air Force, Navy, and Marines:

    Air Force

    The F-35 might be a good enough replacement for the Air Force’s fleet of F-16s. No plane flies alone. The JSF will be flying backed up a great arsenal ranging from AWACs, to satellites, and cruise missiles.

    But it will need more support from other military assets than usual, bordering on babysitting the F-35.

    You see, it cannot be pushed on missions too ambitiously on account of its mediocrity in every way except for its impressive electronic warfare suite.

    Contrary to public reports, the JSF does not normally lose to a single F-16 in simulated combat.

    Unfortunately, in real testing results the F-35 struggles to keep up with just 4 F-16s. By contrast, the F-22 Raptor routinely and easily defeats 10 F-16s simultaneously.

    By the way, none of the Russian or Chinese fighters supposedly meant to take on the Raptorwould survive against the Raptor. I’m told DoD warns new Russian and Chinese planes are competitive to keep pressure on the simpletons in Congress to fund the military as much as possible.

    But in truth America is far, far, ahead of any other power; whether enemy or ally.

    On balance the F-35 is an improvement on the F-16. And so the Air Force can live with it. But they will regret for decades that much better could have been had.

    Navy

    The F-35 looks like it will provide the Navy still less value than for the Air Force. It’s “blah” range is its greatest drawback for use on carriers where range can never be too great. Its lack of stealth means carriers can’t look forward to an extra element of surprise.

    In a dogfight it should be adequate. But captains would prefer it win quickly and crushingly instead of needing AEGIS and other support systems to “finish the F-35’s homework”.

    Marines

    What the fuck were you thinking?

    Out of all three Branches planning on including the F-35 in their inventories the Marine version is, as it was from Day 1, plagued with the worst malfunctions.

    That whoever insisted on VSTOL hasn’t been thrown out of a helicopter into the Pacific is a blight on the Marine Corps.

    F-23

    My beloved hypothetical.

    The version I would love to see is one with stealth features deemphasized in favor of a more robust airframe (especially for landing on aircraft carriers) and some of its other tech dropped to make it an affordable, still excellent, twin-engine replacement (or complement) for the F-18 Hornet. The F-23s potential maneuverability, range, and speed would make it the greatest multirole fighter in the world even if it had stealth no better than the F-18.

    The one downside is that even stripped of advanced stealth my ideal F-23 would probably not be available for export because its other abilities would be too close to the Raptor’s.

    While the Air Force can live with the F-35 for reasons already discussed, a stopgap measure would be needed for a decade or two to make up for cancelled F-35s intended for the Navy and Marines while the F-23 is developed.

    Existing and upgraded F-15, F-16, and F-18 fighters are sufficient for the Marines and Navy to deal with any threats that might arise over the next two decades. The most complex air superiority missions can be spearheaded by the F-22 and, in a few years, the B-21 Raider.

    As the greatest air superiority fighter of all time the F-22 production line deserves to be restarted. The expense of an F-22 restart could be mitigated by cancelling or reducing Navy and Marine F-35 purchases, smoothing the restart over several years, and finally having production run indefinitely with at least 5 produced every year to gradually build up Raptor inventory as well as make up for F-22s lost over time in combat or accidents.

    But always remember that the gods are happiest when the Raptor is paired with the Eagle.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    July 5, 2017 at 5:33 pm

    • Great stuff!

      Sid

      July 5, 2017 at 6:22 pm

    • The F-23 will not be revived.

      The US is headed towards breakup anyway so soon it will no longer be able to afford to develop weapons systems like front line aircraft.

      Otis the Sweaty

      July 5, 2017 at 6:24 pm

      • How is the US gonna break up?

        Remember the last one?

        How well did that go?

        gothamette

        July 5, 2017 at 7:52 pm

      • “Remember the last one?”

        The Soviet Union? Yugoslavia?

        Curle

        July 5, 2017 at 11:27 pm

    • The F-35 – the Chinese may have already figured out an antidote to it. Pfffftt…..

      gothamette

      July 5, 2017 at 6:37 pm

    • Great stuff!

      I know that.

      The F-23 will not be revived.

      I admit reviving the F-23 is more hope on my part (the rest, btw, is solid because I got it from current and former military acquaintances with relevant program knowledge) but you never know: The F-35 is still not combat ready after 25 years of development.

      The F-35 – the Chinese may have already figured out an antidote to it.

      Yes, the program’s management…

      The Undiscovered Jew

      July 5, 2017 at 8:22 pm

    • F-35 is the air services Bradley Fighting Vehicle.

      map

      July 6, 2017 at 4:18 am

  13. I tire of pundit claims that white proles vote against their self interest by voting Republican. Voting for the party that opposes ones cultural and demographic displacement is completely within their best interest.

    B.T.D.T.

    July 5, 2017 at 5:47 pm

    • Up until Trump, Republicans were pretty gung ho about the displacement of whites as well.

      Remember, Reagan is the one that started the whole amnesty rigamarole..

      Kaz

      July 5, 2017 at 10:21 pm

      • That was for Cold War propaganda purposes. We were the country the world wanted to move to, and the Soviet union was the evil empire people wanted get out of but were trapped inside.

      • “That was for Cold War propaganda purposes.”

        That’s what everyone says when they don’t want to finger industry and bankers wanting to lower the cost of labor or those other mysterious forces sometimes ID’d as Puritan interests, other times as business interests, cosmopolitan interests or Marxists, who nevertheless find nationalism in any political union where they do business a threat to their overall political leverage and who therefore prefer tense ethnic pluralism and cosmopolitanism over ethnocentric national identity.

        Curle

        July 5, 2017 at 11:37 pm

  14. NeoGaf is shaken about the backlash to the CNN doxing. They don’t know how to deal with the Trumpist right that fights back.

    Otis the Sweaty

    July 5, 2017 at 6:30 pm

    • The alt-right is saying that the CNN guy, Kaczynski, is Jewish. They are insane. Kaczynski is an obviously Polish Jewish name.

      Who else is profoundly depressed about the future of the country? Can someone argue me out of this?

      gothamette

      July 5, 2017 at 7:56 pm

      • Kaczynski is probably Polish American. If he was Jewish his name would be spelled with a “y”

        Otis the Sweaty

        July 5, 2017 at 9:48 pm

      • It’s a Polish Catholic name, y or i. Like the Unabomber – remember him? A Catholic math genius.

        gothamette

        July 6, 2017 at 1:05 pm

      • There are definitely Jews with –ski surnames. And many German surnames could be Jewish or gentile.

        JS

        July 6, 2017 at 10:39 pm

      • Name one.

        And I know about the German Jewish thing. I know that Zimmerman just means Carpenter. You can’t put anything past me. I’m so far ahead of you it’s not even funny.

        gothamette

        July 7, 2017 at 4:18 pm

      • Ha! Feldmann — feel the man!

        JS

        July 7, 2017 at 8:32 pm

      • You skipped the Jewish “skis.” Still waiting!

        gothamette

        July 8, 2017 at 11:20 am

      • Roman Polanski, who’s 100% Jewish from his paternal side.

        JS

        July 8, 2017 at 1:42 pm

    • That 15 year old is heading for a beautiful legal settlement.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      July 5, 2017 at 8:23 pm

  15. Someone here, please define elite vs prole in the context of cities.

    JS

    July 5, 2017 at 7:34 pm

    • Are not all cities prole within the Anglo-sphere?

      B.T.D.T.

      July 5, 2017 at 9:16 pm

      • Pretty much, yes, and yes, and America is one of the prolier nations of the Anglo Sphere!

        Anchorage in Alaska looks like your typical messy, cognitive dissonant, American city despite sharing the same territory with Canada, and it has little semblance with anything that is civic and Canadian.

        What class markers distinguishes Anglo Elite Whites from their prole brethren in our cities? American Whites lack so much class out of all the Anglophones, it’s really hard to tell. Me tells me that American petty capitalism/consumerism is responsible for all the prole drifting/degeneracy among the upper classes. And worse, many American Whites across the board are par excellent – anti-cerebral, and hence their proleness anyway.

        It appears that only the poorest of the prole Whites are suburban and rural dwellers, and this is where Lion gets his idea of “prole”.

        JS

        July 6, 2017 at 12:09 am

    • Why don’t we let Hans-Hermann Hoppe explain how cities become “fraught with conflicts between groups…a sad commentary on the modern city, founded in the middle ages as a place of peace and commerce and which became the very foundation of civilization.”

      https://mises.org/library/rise-and-fall-city

      Njguy73

      July 5, 2017 at 11:10 pm

  16. Brooks is the kind of hand wringing, moralistic cuck that needs to be purged from the right. His kind is no longer welcome.

    B.T.D.T.

    July 5, 2017 at 7:57 pm

  17. Ugh, I meant to write, Polish Catholic. Look what they’ve done to me.

    gothamette

    July 5, 2017 at 7:57 pm

    • Ugh, I meant to write, Polish Catholic. Look what they’ve done to me.

      Well, Buzzfeed and CNN have massively over represented with Jewish liberal types.

      No sense denying it. Same with the New York Times. So they have a right to be suspicious. But they just need to do something called INVESTIGATING the claim.

      If he’s not Jewish they need to stand corrected.

      Rifleman

      July 5, 2017 at 10:59 pm

      • I don’t deny it. Just pointing out a fact, as you are. Kaczynski is an obviously Polish Catholic name. The fact that they would immediately peg him as a Jew says that they are obsessed and maniacal.

        If yer gonna be an anti-Semite, at least be smart about it!

        gothamette

        July 6, 2017 at 1:09 pm

  18. “In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion…So I found a formula that changes that…” – Lee Kuan Yew

    Njguy73

    July 5, 2017 at 11:02 pm

  19. O.T. but notable: Bill Gates has finally been taken the immigration redpill as of today, 7/6/2017. Mark it in history.

    Dan Hesd

    July 6, 2017 at 4:44 am

    • Maybe, maybe not…more like Mr. Microsoft now wants to invest heavily in Africa and wants black people to stay there and make it happen.

      JS

      July 6, 2017 at 10:32 pm

  20. “For example, I have a friend who is an avid Trump admirer. He supports himself as a part-time bartender and a part-time home contractor, and by doing various odd jobs on the side.”

    I don’t believe Brooks has any such friend. it might be more truthful if he had said, “For example, I hired a guy once…”

    Mike Street Station

    July 6, 2017 at 9:56 am

    • I think you’re absolutely correct. It’s really hard to imagine Brooks hanging out with a blue-collar guy. Especially given the fact that Brooks had absolutely no idea that there were millions of blue collar whites fed up with both parties.

      Lewis Medlock

      July 7, 2017 at 12:26 pm

      • Right, this is a lot like Thomas Friedman’s taxi drivers.

        BTW, David Frum is now saying that you should never speak from behind a pseudonym. Well fine. David Brooks should at least give us the first name of the bartender that he’s so friendly with.

        gothamette

        July 7, 2017 at 4:19 pm

      • Right, this is a lot like Thomas Friedman’s taxi drivers.

        BTW, David Frum is now saying that you should never speak from behind a pseudonym. Well fine. David Brooks should at least give us the first name of the bartender that he’s so friendly with.

        gothamette

        July 7, 2017 at 4:19 pm

      • Every comment you’ve posted twice. You’re using some software that’s broken.

      • Apologies. Some glitch when I use my phone.

        gothamette

        July 7, 2017 at 9:16 pm

      • Apologies. Some glitch when I use my phone.

        gothamette

        July 7, 2017 at 9:16 pm

      • Lion, do you think it’s because I have two browsers on my phone? (Using computer now.) I can’t see why that would be. it’s annoying.

        gothamette

        July 8, 2017 at 11:17 am

      • Oy, it happened again. I won’t use my phone anymore.

        gothamette

        July 7, 2017 at 9:18 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: