Nick Fuentes is Literally Retarded

Supporter: Nick, would you support a literacy test for more informed voting?

Nick Fuentes: If we did that, every election would be a Democrat landslide…

Fuentes is an ignorant retard. The fact that Republicans are, on average, more intelligent, more educated, wealtheir, and more literate than Democrats is logically obvious because Republicans are predominantly of European descent while essentially all Africans and most Hispanics vote Democrat. His inability to grasp the demographic essence of the two mainstream parties demonstrates his observable lack of intelligence.

His ignorance, on the other hand, is demonstrated by the fact that he clearly never spent two seconds looking into the matter before spouting an incorrect opinion in ignorance.

Carl (2014) analysed data from the U.S. General Social Survey (GSS), and found that individuals who identify as Republican have slightly higher verbal intelligence than those who identify as Democrat. This study examines three other measures of cognitive ability from the GSS: a test of probability knowledge, a test of verbal reasoning, and an assessment by the interviewer of how well the respondent understood the survey questions. In all three cases, individuals who identify as Republican score slightly higher than those who identify as Democrat; the unadjusted differences are 1–3 IQ points, 2–4 IQ points and 2–3 IQ points, respectively.

It’s true that the academic elite and the media elite skew heavily Left and Democrat. But they are not the cognitive elite! In fact, anyone who is smarter than their 2 SD ceiling tends to be banished from the academic and media ranks because they are too intelligent to be capable of mindlessly parroting the current narrative and talking points.

The mere fact that someone has a career in the media or academia is virtually tantamount to conclusive proof that they are not even Mensa material.

Furthermore, it makes no material difference which faction of the bi-factional ruling party is in office since they pursue the same objectives and answer to the same masters, and the inevitable end result will be the same either way. Which, some of you will recall, is something I pointed out more than two decades ago.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Banned Interview

The Italian media spiked this interview with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov for some reason:

Corriere della Sera: Units of the Russian Armed Forces are currently controlling less territory than in 2022, several weeks into what you call a special military operation. If you are truly prevailing why can’t you deliver a decisive strike? Could you also explain why you are not publicising official losses?

Sergey Lavrov: The special military operation is not a war for territories but an operation to save lives of millions of people who have lived on those territories for centuries and whom the Kiev junta seeks to eradicate – legally, by prohibiting their history, language and culture, and physically, by using Western weapons. Another important goal of the special military operation is to ensure Russia’s security and to undermine the plans of NATO and the EU to create a hostile puppet state at our western borders that, by law and in reality, relies on Nazi ideology. It is not the first time we have stopped fascist and Nazi aggressors. That happened during World War II and it will happen again.

Unlike Westerners who have wiped out entire neighbourhoods, we are sparing people – both civilians and military personnel. Our armed forces are acting extremely responsibly and delivering high-precision strikes exclusively at military targets and associated transport and energy infrastructure.

It is not customary to publicise battlefield losses. I can only say that this year, Russia has transferred over 9,000 bodies of Ukrainian personnel in repatriation. We have received 143 bodies of our fighters from Ukraine. You can come to your own conclusions.

This isn’t, and has never been, a conventional war about territory and the industrial slaughter of civilians. Even if the Russians hadn’t been consistently telling everyone that for nearly four years, it’s entirely obvious from their conduct of the Special Military Operation.

If the Russians ever decide to go to actual war with NATO or the EU, the difference will be very, very clear to everyone.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Deadly Moon Hoax

I don’t believe that Man ever went to the Moon. I don’t believe the Apollo landings were real; it’s beyond obvious at this point that they were faked in a studio. But for those who still cling to the idea that the Moon landings of the 1960s couldn’t have been faked, understand just how seriously the US government protected its hoax at the time.

I interviewed the widow of the man who was going to be the first man to walk on the moon, Virgil Grissom. He was the most beloved of all the astronauts. I interviewed his widow for four hours.

It’s her opinion, not mine, with 100% certainty that he was murdered by the CIA for not cooperating with fraud in the Apollo program. She told me so. She said on January 26, 1967, he came home from work and said this, Han, for some strange reason, the CIA is all over the launch pad today inspecting the equipment.

I’ve been here three years, he said. They’ve never been here before. Why did they show up today? The very next day, he’s dead from faulty equipment.

Because a few days before this, he held a press conference without permission when he took a bunch of reporters up to the top of the rocket and affixed a lemon the size of a grapefruit to the top of the Apollo rocket, calling it a piece of junk. He was preparing reports, according to his widow, to give to Congress and the Senate that the CIA confiscated from his house the day he died before they even informed his widow that he had died. He knew they were 10 years or more away from going to the moon.

He would not participate in the fraud and they killed him. So this is why the two of the three astronauts, you know, act kind of bizarre and don’t like giving interviews. This is why at their first and only press conference, they look like they’re at the funeral of their mother instead of the winning locker room of the Super Bowl.

At this point, if you still believe in the Moon landings, you’re pretty much left in the company of those who genuinely believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman responsible for killing JFK and that Drew Pearson didn’t commit offensive pass interference in the 1975 NFC playoffs.

DISCUSS ON SG

Disavow the Boomer

Bill Mitchell, the Platonic ideal of the Boomer pseudo-intellectual, endorses the jeetification of the USA:

Remember the last time MAGA lost it’s mind over H1-B’s? What did that achieve? Nothing. It weakened us. The left is more than happy to sit by and watch us shoot ourselves in the foot….

The younger generations couldn’t care less about “the left” or the false dichotomy of Left and Right as presented by the mainstream media.

We must reclaim America from the Boomers who have sold our country to the highest bidders and relish in our generation’s poverty. Their opinion is no longer relevant. They lived an easy life and have failed to position their grandchildren to do the same. Reject gerontocracy.

Indeed. There is nothing to be learned from elders who are foolish, narcissistic, and societally destructive. Disavow the Boomer mentality. Reject the Boomer mindset.

DISCUSS ON SG

Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc

Devon Eriksen implies that Christianity caused the fall of Rome. It’s not a view that’s original to him, but it’s obviously false.

Rome didn’t fall because the Romans were decadent and had orgies. They were the most decadent, and had the wildest orgies, at the height of their power. Rome fell after they became Christian.

No, Devon, Rome fell due to mass foreign immigration. No historian takes Edward Gibbon’s thesis put forth in his great The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire seriously anymore. The idea that Christianity caused the fall of the Roman Empire is obviously false because both Christianity and the Eastern Roman Empire continued for centuries.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Clock Ticks in Kiev

It’s increasingly clear that the Kiev regime’s Western backers are about to pull the plug on Zelensky:

The corruption scandal currently enveloping Ukraine is being described in stark – and even dire – terms by Kiev’s most ardent Western media backers. Although hardly the first instance of corruption coming to light under Zelensky’s rule, many commentators see this week’s events as the gravest threat the Ukrainian leader has faced thus far. Here’s a sampling of what’s being said.

Owen Matthews penned a widely read piece for The Spectator titled ‘The scandal that could bring down Volodymyr Zelensky’ in which he described the investigation as possibly having “momentous consequences for Zelensky’s political future.”

“A full-scale war seems to be about to break between independent anti-corruption agencies and Zelensky’s inner circle, and the consequences are likely to be ugly,” Matthews warns, while describing in vivid terms the power struggle between Ukraine’s National Security Service (SBU), which is loyal to Zelensky and “wields considerable domestic power through its control of the judicial system and prisons” and the country’s Western-backed anti-corruption agencies.

None of this is news. The corruption of the Kiev regime was well known prior to the launch of the Special Military Operation in 2022. What has changed is that the mouthpieces of Clown World have been instructed to start covering it, or in some cases, finally been given permission to pay attention to the obvious.

And that indicates that regime change is coming, sooner rather than later. Whether the new puppet will be permitted to surrender to the inevitable is the only real question that matters.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Last Thing America Needs

John Slaughter understands what Rod Dreher and his fellow conservatives in the Republican Party and the Trump administration do not. The very last thing that America needs is conservatives attempting to “reform” the United States of 2025:

Conservatism now finds itself wedged between the left and a resurgent right, and like any cornered animal it lashes out with full intensity. We have already seen this in its readiness to destroy anyone even mildly skeptical of the Israel lobby. Conservatives have fervently used opposition to Isreal as a way to discredit emerging right-wing voices, partly because they are tied to Israel ideologically and financially, but also because it provides a useful pretext to rid themselves of right-wing voices.

The left, notably, has its own internal split over Israel–Palestine, yet it does not use that this as a tool to destroy its coalition. Conservatism does…because at the end of the day it is closer to the left than to the right. It accepts the progressive project and merely wishes to slow it, and so it views an actual right as the true threat. It also knows that if a real right ever took power, the professional conservative class be exiled. A genuine right would reverse the revolution: it would say “no more,” it would define who belongs and who does not, it would close the gates, it would revitalize heritage Americans. Conservatism cannot permit that, so it will strike the right long before it risks open conflict with the left.

This is why we must step past conservatism. If we don’t, it will persist forever as a placebo, an aspirin for civilizational cancer. It will keep saying, “We’re not the left,” and a certain portion of Americans, terrified of what the left is doing, will keep taking that sugar pill and thinking something is being done, and sit quietly while their country is looted.

As America accelerates toward a minority–majority reality, politics will reveal itself for what it has always been in pluralistic societies: ethnic politics. This reality was long obscured because, for most of the nation’s history, the population was overwhelmingly White. Only after the 1960s did the ethnic reality of democratic competition begin to surface at the national level. In a multiethnic state composed of numerous rival peoples, every bloc becomes political capital, and parties exist to serve those blocs. The left understands this and has organized itself accordingly. The right, if it remains imprisoned in the conservative fantasy of an abstraction-based nation, will be defeated. You cannot win an ethnic game by refusing to play it.

Conservatism cannot supply a common enemy, cannot supply a shared nation, cannot supply a unified faith. It cannot define what an American is, cannot name who belongs, cannot name who does not. All it can do is administer decline.

He’s underlining what John Red Eagle and I were the first to point out ten years ago. Being neither a political philosophy nor an ideology, and having no principles of any kind, conservatism is a literal guarantee of eventual failure.

That was as true in 1980 as it is now. The difference is that now, the observation is inescapable.

DISCUSS ON SG

A Faith in Failure

Rod Dreher admits that conservatism has completely failed, but he still refuses to give up either his hopes for reform or his faith in the essential goodness of the Synagogue of Satan while he laments the refusal of young men to swallow the same bullshit lies that their fathers and grandfathers did.

As our conversation went on, I heard real despair — and well-informed despair — that democracy is going to hold in the West, because the conditions that make for a viable democracy are disappearing: the dissolution of a common culture, the collapse of religion in his generation, the material impoverishment of his generation, and so forth.

I tell you, it was dark. But I kept hearing this, over and over, and I concluded that it cannot be dismissed.

The inability of us older people — Boomers, Xers, and older Millennials — to comprehend the world through the eyes of Zoomers is a big, big problem. Another strong theme: while it’s important to take a clear stand against anti-Semitism in the ranks, there is no way to gatekeep our way out of this. You cannot simply point at the Zoomers and say, “Thou shalt not,” and expect it to work. The problems are too deep and complex, and anyway, they have learned to have no respect for authority.

Why should they? The institutions of our society, as they see it, have lied and lied and lied, and still lie. They still lie in many ways about race (e.g., refusing to be honest about black crime), they lied about Covid, they lied about males and females, and they forced the insanity of gender ideology on us all. The military lied about Iraq. The universities embraced and enforced ideologies of lies. The Catholic Church lied about sexual abuse, and the connection to the prevalence of sexually active gay priests honeycombing the institution. They lied about the benefits of mass migration and diversity. They lied about Trump and Russia. The political parties and their corporate allies lied about what globalism would mean for ordinary people.

The media have lied and do lie about most things… Trust in the system is gone. Hell, I share most of these conclusions myself! The difference is that I am not a nihilist; I don’t want to tear it all down, but rather reform it.

There will be no reformation. There can be no reformation, for the obvious reason that there is nothing left to reform. Democracy is dead. The USA is no longer an American nation. The very purpose of the Constitution has not only been subverted, but inverted and is actively used to suppress and repress the rights of the very Posterity it was meant to secure.

As I wrote in 2004, one cannot revive a corpse. The lamentations of the conservatives are nothing more than morning for the world that they lost, for the world that they refused to defend on the basis of their fundamentally false assumptions about the wicked who have labored without ceasing to destroy America, Western civilization, and Christianity itself.

They have already succeeded in destroying the USA. They may be successful in destroying Western civilization. They will never succeed in destroying Christianity.

In the meantime, what is Rod Dreher’s plan for “reforming” this? I really fail to see how importing more Indians on H1B visas, attacking antisemitism, or sending more money to Israel is going to improve this situation in the slightest.

So if the young men want to burn everyone who was responsible for this absolutely unnecessary and completely avoidable civilizational catastrophe at the stake, I, for one, absolutely understand their point of view and I don’t give a quantum of a fraction of a damn about all the conservative legalistic dancing about how those who were obviously responsible for creating the situation weren’t the only ones involved.

This perspective from a Republican politico of color only underlines how little the conservatives and the Republicans understand the situation.

“These idiots don’t understand that they can’t win an election on a whites-only platform,” he said. “They’re delusional. There are a lot of immigrants and native-born members of ethnic groups who are natural Republicans, and whom Donald Trump won in 2024. Take Indians, for example — if you think they are going to stick with a movement whose leader [Fuentes] denounces Usha Vance as a ‘jeet,’ you’re crazy. But that’s how they think.”

They’re not delusional. They simply don’t give one single solitary fragment of a fuck about winning elections anymore, nor should they. They are not Republicans! These myopic conservative morons should ask the young British men how much being ruled over by Jeets like Dishy Rishy appealed to them. They don’t want any foreigners as part of their movement, as part of their government, or as part of their society anymore. Because it’s not an ideological movement, it’s an identity movement, which is a natural, inevitable, and absolutely necessary development for whites in a multiracial, multireligious empire like the USA, as per Lee Kwan Yew, a politician whose grasp of politics vastly exceeded that of these conservative poltroons.

I publicly predicted all of this back in 2004. I said that the long-term winning strategy for Republicans was to stop pandering to minorities and become the White People’s Party. They didn’t listen then, they won’t listen now, and they probably won’t even begin to think about the possibility that I was correct until their electoral prospects begin to approach that of the current Conservative Party in the UK.

DISCUSS ON SG

What was Sports Illustrated, Grandpa?

If anyone ever asks you why Sports Illustrated ceased to be, this big front page article with a picture in the middle should suffice to explain it.

The Premier League’s Best (and Worst) Dressed Managers
From chic to shabby, “Grandpa tops” to “adverts for Dunhill,” former British Vogue fashion director Venetia Scott ran her expert eye over the style choices made by the division’s managers.

Okay, first, SI is not GQ. No one gives a damn about clothing unless it’s the new NFL uniforms. No one even cares about baseball, hockey, or basketball uniforms. The only college football uniform news people care about are a) Army, b) Navy, and c) Oregon.

Second, women should not write SI articles. British women should definitely not write SI articles. And no British Vogue fashion director, past or present, should not permitted within three football fields of any SI article at any time.

Third, the Premier League? Look, I know more about English football, League and non-League, than pretty much every American SI reader ever. And since I do, I know how few Americans can name more than one Premier League manager, much less give a quantum of a fraction of an airborne rodent’s backside about how any of them happen to clothe themselves.

Unless Mikel Arteta is coming out stark naked at Highbury, unless Arne Slot is walking the touchline in full leather bondage gear, unless Thomas Tuchal is going to show up for a match against Mexico in a full sombrero-and-poncho ensemble while riding a donkey, nobody cares.

I used to love reading SI. Rick Reilly, Dr. Z, even Peter King crushed it on a weekly basis. Now, it’s just sad, weird, and irrelevant.

DISCUSS ON SG

10 Different Versions

That’s absurd, of course, There are, at most, four Donald Trumps:

As someone who first voted for him in 2016, I can say it has been an endless cycle of “We’re so back” and “It’s so over.” There have even been single days where we cycle between the two multiple times a day.

He will make a statement saying “No more fatties on visas” and follow it up with “600k potential Chinese spies and 50 year mortgages are what MAGA wants.” An absolute rollercoaster of emotions. Some days, it seems like we have 10 different versions of him.

This is where logical heuristics like Ockham’s Razor shine. If it seems as if there are multiple versions of the man, that is because there are multiple body doubles being utilized by different political factions.

Consider the possibilities explaining the various inconsistencies and anomalies observed:

  • Donald Trump is crazy
  • Donald Trump is pretending to be crazy
  • Donald Trump tells different audiences different things in public.
  • Donald Trump is being controlled by Benjamin Netanyahu/Xi Jinping/Vladimir Putin
  • The warring political factions in the USA are utilizing different political decoys.

Now, if one considers that the use of body doubles goes back to the time of The Iliad, when Patroclus rallied the Greeks by wearing the armor of Achilles, combined with the fact that Josef Stalin and British general Bernard Montgomery are both confirmed to have utilized body doubles in the 1940s, what is the most reasonable answer to the questions concerning President Trump’s incessant inconsistencies?

DISCUSS ON SG