65 Comments
User's avatar
RevelinConcentration's avatar

The Great Awokening is over? Or just on hiatus until AOC becomes President? Look at the current Democratic Party and who has the highest Q rating. It’s scary.

Expand full comment
Derek Leaberry's avatar

I can see a Newsom-AOC ticket that would re-enact woke policies in 2029. And they would pay the price in 2030, a massive Republican surge. Yet Newsom would likely be re-elected.

Expand full comment
Clever Pseudonym's avatar

I don't know about ol' greasy Gavin. As a California resident, I just can't imagine what achievements he has to run on and boast of: everything he's touched has turned to shit! But I am dying to watch him head to Iowa and wear his "dress down" clothes and pretend to care about normal working people. That's gonna be hilarious!

Expand full comment
Derek Leaberry's avatar

Lefties care most about style. Substance is irrelevant. Yes, it will be fun to see Newsom looking like Mr. Greenjeans pitchforking hay on some Iowa farm in zero degree weather.

Expand full comment
michael mitchell's avatar

As a fellow Californo, I agree that Newsom is all style, no substance. That; however, may be sufficient. Clearly he is running, hard.

But wait, the Dems have a genuine ace-in-the-hole:

Rahm Emanuel.

Expand full comment
RevelinConcentration's avatar

The big picture isn’t really about personalities. My comment about AOC was a joke. The question is are we in a barrel heading over a waterfall as the combined effect of demographic changes and ideological/political control by the Left of our institutions is too strong to get back to ‘normal’

Expand full comment
Derek Leaberry's avatar

Sadly, we won't be able to go back to 1950 again. Or even 1985. But the good news is that more and more whites are thinking of their own group just as the other groups do.

Expand full comment
RevelinConcentration's avatar

That is the reactionary response. Not ideal.

Expand full comment
Steve Wood's avatar

It's possible that both things are true: That is, that we are in a reactionary phase and some degree of wokism will return, but that it will never again be as extreme as it was in the late '10s and early '20s.

All moral panics fade eventually, but they don't always fade away as though they never happened.

Expand full comment
Slaw's avatar

Hispanic (and all minority voters) were supposed to be a reliable Democratic demographic in the master plan. Instead they went for Trump.

Expand full comment
Craig in Maine's avatar

Steve-

It’s like you’ve suddenly become normal instead of evil.

Maybe Derb can publish his “Talk” in the Times now?

Expand full comment
Handle's avatar
3dEdited

The Trump administration has done a surprisingly large number of right things and right out of the gate. Whether they will have any lasting impact is a different question. One -yuge- thing was to directly tackle the problem of the left annually diverting billions in public money in the form of corrupt grants and contracts and fake settlements to keep a vast para-governmental ecosystem flush with cash and lucrative positions for party insiders and troops. This was the swamp Trump should have drained back in 2017 but didn't have the understanding, advice, or enough loyal and competent executives to carry out.

I have lately been wondering about the question of whether, after the initial Blitzkrieg, during which comprehensive pre-election mission planning was enough on its own to carry the teams of political appointees to their current fighting positions, they have now run out of scripted moves and are having to draft the sequel on their own. And there are already early, very troubling signs that things are quickly reverting to the Trump-run Organization mean, and the discoordination, corporate soap-opera, inner circle drama, chaos, and infighting that characterized Trump 1.0 is all coming back. I can only pray that the pros near the top realize this too and are already trying to get ahead of it. I suspect, however, that they are too focused on the (important, unavoidable) fights with the bureaucracy, courts, and Blue States to see that they are meeting the enemy and it is them.

Expand full comment
Mr Whipple's avatar

Those peapods... in the pool... Ya know... Brian Dennehy and Don Ameche... Dont come with birth certificates. Newsom came from a peapod. AOC from PR. They can't become president.

Expand full comment
Branford's avatar

I often think about the period of Mao's rule when he relaxed censorship just so he could identify his enemies and flush them out into the open.

Expand full comment
Boulevardier's avatar

Trump tends to have good instincts at a high level but suffers in execution and follow through, not that the Congressional GOP is much help. He really needs to lock things in through legislation rather than executive order.

The left is still plainly devoted to anti-white discrimination, they are just rebranding it where they can. However, whereas in the past the term “equity” implied fairness, more of the public now recognizes it really means animus. That means more open discussion - and rejection - of it. There is no question that the left will try to reinstitute DEI across a broad spectrum once they have political power but I don’t think the targets will take it lying down.

Offering refugee status to a small number of Afrikaners was brilliant. It successfully baited a lot of people into showing how strong their anti-white hatred is, and that will move some people who are sympathetic to the Dems on other issues to a ‘no’. Trump has to keep giving the left opportunities to publicly react negatively to whites.

Expand full comment
Derek Leaberry's avatar

Well-written. Good analysis.

Expand full comment
Ralph L's avatar

The Episcopal Church sure showed its ass, to put it gentilely, or genteelly.

Expand full comment
Boulevardier's avatar

Exactly. There are loads of nice white people who nod along to narratives about "justice" without it ever impacting them directly. This is a good example of what that concept means to the activist left, and a hint that if things got tough the nice whites are the last ones anyone cares about. We need more of this to really poison the well though, and this is something that I have no doubt the left will provide.

Expand full comment
Steve Wood's avatar

For your approach to be effective - and I hope it is - Nice White People have to hear the truth about (for example) what's happening in South Africa. They won't get that from mainstream news sources. Old NWP are probably lost forever, but where do middle-aged and younger NWP get their news? If they are really NWP, they're probably not listening to right-wing podcasts or reading right-wing Twitter.

Who will tell these well-motivated and not completely crazy people the true story?

Expand full comment
AggieHawk's avatar

I was at a black history month event where an all white choir composed mostly of Episcopalians (and liberal Presbyterians) sang South African songs, presumably in Xhosa. I had to suppress a chuckle thinking that it wouldn’t be that much of a stretch to have them break out a rendition of “Kill the Boer.” Reality these days is nearly impossible to satirize.

Expand full comment
MikeCLT's avatar

I think Trump actually calling the past and current DIE and affirmative action policies policies anti White racism is a big help. As is the granting of refugee status to the White South Africans. Watching the Dems go full in on their hate Whitey should be instructive. I think White South Africans deserve their own homeland in South Africa so I am not hoping they leave. A friend there said, "just send us ammunition and we will take care of ourselves."

Expand full comment
Guest007's avatar

The issue is in giving White South African refugees status while ending it for people from Haiti and other countries where the situation has not really improved. Of course, that is too long a sound byte and too nuanced for politics in 2025.

Expand full comment
42itous's avatar
2dEdited

Liberals are coming out against refuge status for a white group puts them on record for tightening it for all refugees. South African whites don't need it? Economic migrants don't either.

The most surprising thing is Trump simply announcing that he will be enforcing the borders was enough to solve the emergency. Residents of the US who are illegals need to be afraid enough to start acting like guests.

Expand full comment
Guest007's avatar

The argument is over the sob stories and who is telling it. Being threatened with murder seems to work for white refugees while not working for non-whites.

Expand full comment
barnabus's avatar

It's not like whites were murdering non-whites in Haiti.

Expand full comment
Guest007's avatar

And what does that have to do with the reason for being a refugee?

Expand full comment
barnabus's avatar

There is an obvious difference if someone is murdered by his brother or by some racially different community. If it is latter, sure one can flee. If it is former - no one would want to take you in because of the familial propensity to violence.

Expand full comment
barnabus's avatar

The problem with Boers is that they can't do the agriculture in South African Republic all by themselves. Even if they had all the permissions for white-only farms, it wouldn't be competetive. Almost everything there is mixed-labor.

So far, Russia gave them enough offers to resettle in Russian Federation as farmers - there were no takers. While there were some Germans who went East after 1991 and established new and successful agricultural companies.

So it will be interesting if the Boers that resettle in USA - whether some of them reemploy in agriculture or not. We shall see see...

Expand full comment
JWM_IN_VA's avatar

DEI ain't dead yet ... trust me on this

Expand full comment
Guest007's avatar

IF DEI is just short hard for everything one dislikes about the government, it will always be with us. However, if DEI is defined as equality of outcome (equity), then it is over.

Expand full comment
JWM_IN_VA's avatar

No, it's the latter as you described. They declared it dead way too early.

Expand full comment
AnotherDad's avatar

Diversity is the health of the state.

Expand full comment
Guest007's avatar

There are lots of issues that most conservatives have ignored for decades and thus. left money on the table. However, there are a lot of issues such as:

1. The U.S. is running out of white kids in K-12 to use for affirmative action. Less than 50% of the children in public schools are non-Hispanic whites. And many of those do not live near large populations of blacks.

2. Universities hurt themselves when they lumped recent African immigrants to the U.S. in with African-Americans. There is no way to balance the argument about correcting past wrongs with so many African-American students with parents from Nigeria or even Egypt.

Expand full comment
AnotherDad's avatar

"Woke" is just minoritarianism driven by girls on twitter.

So it is no surprise that it comes across as considerably more stupid, hysterical and embarrassing than essentially the same polices and moral framework that were pitched much more cleverly and opaquely the last 60+ by sharp Jewish guys in the NYT or TNR.

But the essential moral logic of minoritarianism that was pushed to dominance over the last 60 years, remains in place: White gentile normies are *not* entitled to their own stuff--neighborhoods through nations. Are not entitled to govern themselves in their own interests, according to their own norms and values. White gentiles are serfs whose job is to provide goodies for looting and bend over for "virtuous" minorities.

A whole lot of looting, a whole lot of comfy sinecures, millions of people's self-esteem, and their ideas of "morality" and knowledge of themselves as virtuous people and the entire political operation of super-state party (the Democrats) depend on this toxic minoritarian ideology.

Trump's won a few battles and destroyed a few salients of "woke" hysteric over-reach-- which has served to help shed a little light on the fundamental ugliness of minoritarianism. All interesting and great fun. But no one should think this evil is being routed. It is firmly in place.

Expand full comment
42itous's avatar
2dEdited

We have our expensive suburban enclaves...I used to see high home prices as a problem, but it 'a feature', not a 'bug'. A minorities with money are ok by me. We got our good schools. We also have strict law and order. While I don't disagree with you, we have our work arounds. Lots of neighborhoods with no on street parking. You gotta have money, you gotta keep a prime credit rating, pay your bills, pay taxes, buy insurance, have a drivers license, not drive around half drunk. Perform lots of white behaviors. You can easily get jail for breaches, whereas in black neighborhoods, you need a serious victim to get time.

Look...I prefer Europe where co-ethnics get their own countries, but they have their own problems. Without economic de facto segregation, we would be truly fuxxxx.

Expand full comment
Alexander Scipio's avatar

Trump won’t be an historical president returning American government to its constitutional role unless he identifies (easily done via an AI query) every federal law and regulation lacking a foundation in the enumerated powers - and then EOs them all out of existence. That *IS* the swamp. Everything & anything else is just playing around the edges.

Expand full comment
barnabus's avatar

DEI is utopian ideology based on the false conception that the so-called "West" will win anyway, no matter how badly it handicaps itself. Kind of magically. So one is free to do meritless-race and fertility-unaligned rent-seeking.

Obviously, Global South is no competition for the "West".

But Russia and China are. Hence, the realization in some part of the political spectrum and among the new big tech that one better drop the DEI deadweight. One can't compete with these competent foreign state entities while engaging in DEI. The war in Ukraine has gone badly, and the recent flare-up in Kashmir has shown the superiority of Chinese weapons. Atm it seems only a matter of time till China wll acquire all the technology it needs to build state of the art microchips too. And then, what is one going to do?

Expand full comment
Guest007's avatar

Russia has an economy with size of Italy and has a shrinking population. Russia is also so corrupt that it cannot get out of its own way in doing anything.

Expand full comment
JWM_IN_VA's avatar

Except fight a war in Ukraine highlighting the flaws in western / NATO military doctrine.

Expand full comment
Kathleen Lowrey's avatar

That it is winning

Expand full comment
Guest007's avatar

Russia is four times the size with an armaments and munition industries and yet, three years later, still has not established air superiority over the Ukraine which is should have done in the first week.

Russia has been using human wave attacks. That is not a sign of a world power ready to project power to distant countries.

Expand full comment
JWM_IN_VA's avatar

Yeah ...think carefully about what you just wrote there.

Expand full comment
barnabus's avatar

Guest007 doesn't understand that Russia is fighting against the whole West - that is 6x its size in population. If the West's GDP on paper were real, Russia would be toast.

Expand full comment
barnabus's avatar

They wouldn't be fighting that well if Western military production, overall production and military discipline were not so abominally substandard. Importing low performing Global South into the West isn't helping either.

Expand full comment
The Last Real Calvinist's avatar

"DEI is utopian ideology based on the false conception that the so-called "West" will win anyway, no matter how badly it handicaps itself. Kind of magically. So one is free to do meritless-race and fertility-unaligned rent-seeking."

Excellent insight. The woke/DIE vision is indeed utopian, and it's fueled by pride, not by self-perceived weakness. The woke see themselves as saviors of the oppressed, and ultimately of the world itself. Their own resources -- including, sometimes, themselves, because a strain of perverted self-sacrifice runs through wokeism -- are assumed to be constant, inexhaustible. There is always more tax money. There are always more white children whose classrooms can be 'diversified'. There's always enough renewable energy to keep the electrical grid viable. There are always enough elite university places for the truly deserving. And so on.

Expand full comment
Thomas Herring's avatar

Racism (aka Tribalism) appears to be a constant in human history.

Expand full comment
Nico Bruin's avatar

When I'm infuriated by the latest stupidity coming from the white house (like the threats to attack Canada or Denmark), I force myself to count up the myriad of significant plusses and minuses brought about by the second Trump administration.

The pushback against DEI probably takes the number 3 slot for positive developments.

Competing for the top slot is immigration. I know deportations aren't at the scale mant want it to be yet, but look at the reduction in border crossings!

The other big thing for me is the halting of federal funding for gain of function research. It is as of now temporary (except for funding in low-safety countries like China, which is permanent), so it doesn't go far enough yet. But existential risk reduction is hard to overvalue.

Expand full comment
Ralph L's avatar

When did he threaten to attack Canada or Denmark? He wants them to keep China out of the Arctic. That and Albertan oil are what all the fuss was about.

Expand full comment
AKAHorace's avatar

He has said that military action against Greenland is not out of the question and that Canada should become part of the US. The Danes were willing to have the US put bases in Greenland and Canada was willing to sell oil to the US, so both moves were foolish

The Danes used to be one of the most pro US countries in Europe and Canada was expected to get got sympathetic to Trump before this happened.

Expand full comment
barnabus's avatar

Greenland was occupied by USA and Iceland by UK in WW2. Thank G'd for that! Otherwise, Atlantic convoys would have had even higher losses. And Russkies would have ended up taking the whole of Europe, lol.

Seeing how it all developed thereafter, USA should have annexed Greenland during the war. Would have spared Donald having to pay 100G$ for Greenland now.

Expand full comment
michael mitchell's avatar

Pro-US? Against whom?

Expand full comment
AKAHorace's avatar

The Danes sent troops to both Afghanistan and Iraq. They are also one of the few western European nations to have sensible immigration policies.

Expand full comment
John Michener's avatar

But he is going about it wrong. What can be undone by executive order can be redone by executive order. While the Republicans have the congress, see how much of this can be backed by legislative action to make it more enduring. I want to see the end of modern affirmative action and disparate impact policy - and I don't want it coming back.

Expand full comment
Nico Bruin's avatar

Very true. If Trump discredits himself and his political movement enough, every bad thing he got rid of has the potential to come back with a vengeance.

Expand full comment
barnabus's avatar

Not really - there is still war in the Ukraine, and economic competition with China isn't going to end either. Besides, Chinese weapons have been outperforming vs French in the recent Kashmir flare-up.

The Democrats have no winning strategy there. That's why China and Russia hoped Kamala would win. They were surprized to be so misled by the MSM. They thought she would win, lol.

Expand full comment
AggieHawk's avatar

Yeah, except Congress isn’t interested. They’re attempting to roll back as many spending cuts as they can, and I suspect more than a few would keep immigration open to keep labor costs down. Most Republican pols are internationalist corporatists and happy to enter failure theater on any initiative a Democratic President offers.

Expand full comment
Tim Condon's avatar

Hereditarianism’s triumph over egalitarianism would be quicker if the end of disparate impact ushered in widespread intelligence testing and a sorting of the workplace by cognitive ability. Egalitarians don’t mind it when sorting by physical ability produces unequal outcomes. They’ll come to consider cognitive ability just another physical ability.

Expand full comment
Guest007's avatar

Not true at all. Just look up the work on dream hoarding or opportunity hoarding.

Expand full comment
barnabus's avatar

"dream hoarding" is just another way of saying white privilege, right?

In other words, if no systemic racism, there wouldn't be disparate outcomes?

Expand full comment
Guest007's avatar

Dream hoarding is all of the resources expended to make sure that those in the top 20% economically stay in the top 20% economically. And no one would call rampant credentialism a privilege.

Expand full comment
barnabus's avatar

Like I said, "white privilege".

Expand full comment
Guest007's avatar

How is having to get a law degree to work in public policy because so many people have public policy degrees a "white privilege?" How is working unpaid internships to work in certain career fields a white privilege? How is having parents pay for one to live in NYC or Los Angeles a white privilege?

And all of companies would hire any black who walks through the door with the same qualifications as the multitude of whites or Asian-Americans.

Expand full comment
barnabus's avatar

You don't understand the concept of money. The reason money is so sought after is BECAUSE you can buy so many things with it. Including top of the line health care and careers for kids.

But then, in terms of careers it is very easy to right: just give out more places on pure merit in universities and companies.

Expand full comment