Daily Stormer The Most Censored Publication in History
A few weeks ago, people said I was crazy to talk about secession, and that it’s impossible.
Now, however, the idea that we should partition America between red and blue is headed towards the mainstream.
Michael Rectenwald writes for RT:
In the latest issue of its publication The American Mind, the Claremont Institute published a series of articles entitled ‘A House Divided’ – a conversation the conservative think tank says is taking place in private among Americans on both sides of the political divide. Matthew J. Peterson argues in the introduction that a discussion of possible remedies needs to come into the public light so the nation can avoid “serious and sudden shocks to our political and cultural life.” What remedies, you ask? The possibility and desirability of parting ways.
The division in the US seems to have reached an insurmountable impasse. America is divided – culturally, economically, and politically – into two separate tribes. Descriptions of a rankled, bitterly alienated nation are by now a cliché.
According to this view, red America – die-hard Republicans – consists of the mostly rural and suburban, religious, gun-toting, pro-America tribe. This tribe takes pride in America’s past and prizes its cultural and traditional heritage. Its members relish the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights. They enjoy high school football and hunting, and proudly display the American flag. They hate ‘socialism’ and ‘communism,’ and prize individual freedom and the system of free enterprise. In the context of the virus, this group embraces risk and autonomy, and despises the orders of governors and mayors for masking, social distancing, and lockdowns. This is Trump’s America: the ‘deplorables’.
The other tribe, blue America – die-hard Democrats – consists of a ‘progressive’, urban, secular, sophisticated coastal elite, along with those who identify with said values and prize the cultural capital that comes with espousing them. Many among this tribe believe America’s history is beyond redemption, marked with stains it nevertheless furiously attempts to expose and then remove by all means necessary. It keeps faith with a technocratic elite and a society administered by an academic, bureaucratic, and medical expert class. It extols collective responsibility and despises red-neck individualism. In the context of the virus, it welcomes universal masking, social distancing, and lockdowns. This is now Biden’s America.
At this point, so the argument goes, the two tribes have little in common and nothing but contempt for each other. The acrimony between blue and red is so intense and thoroughgoing that something must be done – or so argue two of the Claremont Institute’s contributors. (A third suggests the federalism in the Constitution is sufficient to deal with such factionalism).
But these writers, a pseudonymous ‘Rebecca’ and ‘Tom Trenchard’, suggest the tribal differences are irreconcilable. The first calls for a formal “separation” under an enhanced federalism (or more state autonomy). The second suggests that a “divorce” and two-state solution is the only remedy. In any case, a second civil war must be avoided at all costs. It wouldn’t lead to the reunification of the country, as the first did, but would bring only needless violence and further enmity.
…
In modern America, ‘the working classes’ aren’t all poor, although they have less cultural capital. Many own, or have owned, small businesses. They also work in any number of jobs. Yet they are opposed and silenced by the legacy media and internet technocracy and lack the power to resist the national Covid measures likely to be imposed by the incoming Biden administration.
The ‘coastal elites’, on the other hand, aren’t all rich. They include students and former students who’ve accrued enormous student loan debt, activists living incommodiously in groups in family or non-family housing, and the laptop class surviving on piecemeal, occasional freelance gigs under the Uberization of the labor force.
Despite their hatred of the ‘coastal elites’, the supposed ‘country bumpkins’ use the technology, the educational systems, and even the legacy media and social media platforms that treat their values like so much refuse.
Blue America relies on the red for ‘essential services’, including food, housing, industry, and the market that red America represents. They also need red America for propping up their sense of intellectual superiority. Without the supposed contrast provided by red America, blue Americans would have to base their self-esteem on actual accomplishments, which are quite sparse in many cases.
Furthermore, red and blue are not all strictly middle America or coastal. Red and blue live among each other, the former more than a little afraid to voice their opinions for fear of being mobbed by the latter. Some blues work as professors and live in otherwise red college towns. Reds live in urban centers too and some are as ‘educated’ as their blue peers.
The writer says that geography is what makes the split unlikely:
So, could the nation irrevocably split into a red heartland and a blue one? It’s unlikely in my view. While the prevailing portrait of two Americas has some merit, it is a caricature that fails to account for the degree to which the two nations intermingle and depend on each other.
Look at the map of how individual counties voted. While Trump won some 2,500 generally sparsely populated ones, and Biden some 500 largely heavily populated ones, there is no easy divide. Even within counties, there are mostly significant minority red or blue factions. The pain of separation would be greater than the discomfort of remaining ‘together’. Thus, these antipathetic twins will remain locked in a loveless, rancorous, and intolerable marriage – for the foreseeable future, at least.
That is just dumb, and he should have called me before writing this article.
Both sides are extremely passionate. What’s more, we really are tribes, with most people having a family that shares their allegiances.
Everyone who has strong feelings about any of this will be ready to pack up and move. Those who wouldn’t be ready to move don’t feel passionate enough about their convictions, or their perceptions of where this is all going if it goes one way or the other, for it to matter which side they’re on.
Rectenwald doesn’t even address in his conclusion the core reason for the discussion: this is inevitably going to lead to very serious violence if we do not split peacefully.
There is no theoretical reality where the current state of things can be maintained more than another decade, and frankly, I don’t see how it can be maintained that long. Something is going to have to give, and when it does, it’s going to be a mess.
Anything would be worth avoiding mass death.
Right now is the time to drive in the wedge. Trump is the wedge. Imagine if Trump supported this split, and said that he would become the Real President of Real America – and then went on a rally tour across the red states.
This is within the realm of the possible. Obviously, it’s statistically unlikely to happen. Statistically, the likelihood is that the Jews will gain total control of the entire planet and wipe out everyone who disagrees with them and enslave the rest in their weird satanic circus show.
But as I’ve explained: we cannot go by statistical likelihood, we have to go by what is right, lined up of course with what is technically possible (even if statistically unlikely). Secession meets both criteria – and nothing else does. The only other option is to die and allow the Jews to take over and dominate all life on earth.
Anyway – whatever. I simply wanted to report that RT is now discussing this, and this discussion is going to spread, quickly. It is a very obvious necessity that we split, and everyone, left or right, that hears about such a plan is inclined to support it, or at least want to learn more about it. The only people who are against it are the ruling elite, who only care about power.
I should be invited to write my own piece in RT about this topic, giving the opposite view of that presented in this piece.
I want to present a vision of victory.
