Populism

Are Republicans Becoming the Party of White Identity Politics?

Donald Trump's popularity may signal a shift to a more European-style right populism.

|

Stephen Dyrgas/Flickr

Democrats are often accused of being the party of "identity politics," a connotation-laden, quasi-negative concept that the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy describes as "political formations (that) aim to secure the political freedom of a specific constituency marginalized within its larger context" rather than "organizing solely around belief systems, programmatic manifestos, or party affiliation." In the minds of many conservatives, identity politics represents the very worst of special-interest-mongering and "playing the race/gender/whatever card." As with political correctness, criticism of American identity politics isn't entirely unwarranted, but it gets muddied by folks who invoke the phrase anytime constituencies suggest they have social or legal concerns not directly relevant to straight, white, Christian men. In Europe, meanwhile, straight, white, Christian men and women have become their own sort of special-interest group, and one whose particular identity politics now form a core tenet of right-populist political movements. 

Could the same thing happen here? The Federalist's Ben Domenech is worried that it could, with the rise of GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump representing the proverbial canary in the coal mine. "Donald Trump could transform the Republican Party into a coalition focused on white identity politics," reads the subhead on Domenech's article. "We've seen this in Europe, and it's bad." 

At its best, Trump's popularity represents "an epic expression of frustration with the American political system," he suggests, and the Republican party could capture this frustration "in ways that lead to more freedom and less government." But the Trump brand of dictatorial, nativist, xenophobic, crony-capitalist fearmongering may just push mainstream conservative politics in a much less liberty-loving direction. 

Ultimately, Trump presents a choice for the Republican Party about which path to follow: a path toward a coalition that is broad, classically liberal, and consistent with the party's history, or a path toward a coalition that is reduced to the narrow interests of identity politics for white people.

For decades, Republicans have held to the idea that they are unified by a fusionist ideological coalition with a shared belief in limited government, while the Democratic Party was animated by identity politics for the various member groups of its coalition. This belief has been bolstered in the era of President Obama, which has seen the Democratic Party stress identity politics narratives about the war on this or that group of Americans… What Trump represents is the potential for a significant shift in the Republican Party toward white identity politics for the American right, and toward a coalition more in keeping with the European right than with the American.

"Identity politics for white people" is not the same thing as "racism", nor are the people who advocate for it necessarily racist, though of course the categories overlap. In fact, white identity politics was at one point the underlying trend for the majoritarian American cultural mainstream. But since the late 1960s, it has been transitioning in fits and starts into something more insular and distinct. Now, half a century later, the Trump moment very much illuminates its function as one interest group among many, as opposed to the background context for everything the nation does. The white American with the high-school education who works at the duck-feed factory in northern Indiana has as much right to advance his interest as anyone else. But that interest is now being redefined in very narrow terms, in opposition to the interests of other ethnic groups, and in a marked departure from the expansive view of the freedoms of a common humanity advanced by the Founders and Abraham Lincoln.

Domenech points to Alex Castellanos at CNN, who suggests Trump "is the inevitable result of decades of progressive failure. He is where frustrated nations turn when top-down, industrial age government fails to deliver what it promised and presents chaos instead…. This is how the autocrat, the popular dictator, gains power. We are seduced by his success and strength." (You know who else rose to power on white identity politics during a period of progressive reforms…)

But it's not only a matter of progressive failure. Domenech points out that "the two major party establishments are more or less complicit in (the) political and cultural invalidation of a large swath of the electorate."

In some circumstances, this pox-on-both-their-houses frustration feeds into a fondness for libertarian ideals and limited-government candidates. But in the case of Trump supporters, the frustration seems to stem from Democratic and Republican inaction in areas—such as tightening border security and stanching immigration—where libertarian policies will likely provide little solace. Still, it's perhaps not all bad news for liberty if the GOP becomes purely the party of white butthurt.

It's been clear for years that the old-school conservative coalition of classical liberals, crony capitalists, disgruntled working-class whites, and "values voters" isn't really working. What's more, millennials are fleeing the GOP en masse, even as they embrace certain typically-Republican values, like capitalism and abortion opposition, more than recent-generations past did in their youth. Maybe a Republican Party built largely on white identity politics (à la European populist movements) could actually aid in the birth of that libertarian moment we keep talking about. 

Or maybe not. "A classically liberal right is actually fairly uncommon in western democracies, requiring as it does a coalition that synthesizes populist tendencies and directs such frustrations toward the cause of limited government," Domenech writes.

Only the United States and Canada have successfully maintained one over an extended period. Now the popularity of Donald Trump suggests ours may be going away. In a sense we are reverting to a general mean–but we are also losing a rare and precious inheritance that is our only real living link to the Revolutionary era and its truly revolutionary ideas about self-government.

What we'd lose from the rise of a New New Right could be channeled into a freedom-minded, civil-liberties-respecting counter movement. Or it could coalesce into a disenfranchised middle flanked on either side by ever-more-extreme (and less effectual) ruling parties, intent on drowning us all in the narcissism of small differences and given to increasingly desperate identity-politics ploys for more pieces of a pie that's long since spoiled.

In conclusion: Deez Nuts/Warren G 2016, please?

Advertisement

NEXT: Reason Weekly Contest: A Dolphin Spy—The Movie

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I’m not commenting that I came on the picture.

    Wait, I mean I just came to comment on the picture.

    1. I’ll never understand how ‘just’ gets autocorrected to ‘not’. Fuck you, technology.

    2. Trump’s popularity represents “an epic expression of frustration with the American political system,” he suggests, and the Republican party could capture this frustration “in ways that lead to more freedom and less government.”

      yes we leaders of the republican party really just want to expand your freedoms and are earnestly looking for the best way to do so. We hope to learn valuable lessons from Trumps success and create focus groups to help us make a new campaign specially crafted to fight those damned blue DAWG socialist democrats and expand liberty to all indiviualist in this country who want higher standards for our public schools, more carefully nuanced tax credits for small business owners, a stronger military defense to insure that islamofascists and communists don’t destroy our freedoms and smarter and better FDA to help make sure we all take enough of our good freedom medicines.

      We will also make sure to support or police now that race baiters in Ferguson and Baltimore are on the attack against our proud public servants with badges..yes we will work against our sworn enemies harder than ever before to help provide a smarter, marginally-more-libertarian future for all!!

      1. I disagree with the first sentence. Actually it should read, “Trump’s popularity represents and epic expression of frustration with the idiotic cowards in the American political system.”

        When I read the second paragraph I couldn’t help myself but the think this was straight out of The Onion. Really? Republicans want to “expand liberty” and don’t want to “destroy our freedoms?” Wasn’t it a republicans who started all this spying on americans and the erosion of civil liberties after 9/11 while some, if not most of those running now, want to expand the roll? Carefully “nuanced” tax credits for small businesses? How about getting rid of crushing regulations that stifle small businesses. How about revamping the tax code and eliminating the IRS? I agree we need a stronger military defense since it was a republican president backed by other republicans (along with democrats but we’re talking about how great the republicans will be if they get control) that destabilized the middle east, pushed us into a global war that we may never get out of, but may cost us the lives of our sons and daughters in droves.

        Look around, there is a sense in which the “islamofascists and communists” are already winning.

        1. They may not have started the spying, but they have been working on perfecting it.

        2. Republicans want to “expand liberty” and don’t want to “destroy our freedoms?

          According to polls, compared to Democrats & even to some extent independents, the answer is yes. Don’t blame Republicans generally for what particular Republicans may have done.

  2. 400 comments, with a Bo vs John screaming match.

    HM will post two videos of women twerking.

    Tony is deny that the Democrats do identity politics, and insist that it’s the Republicans who started it and forced the Democrats to do it anyway.

    1. My prediction.

      Oh and erratum correction:
      Tony *will* deny…

    2. Amsoc will come on and make some attempt at a condescending remark about Reason and/or the commentators’ principles.

      John will make some kind of reference to gay marriage or porn despite no one else saying anything about it.

      Nikki will continue to be the worst.

      1. SIMPSONS DID IT

      2. Amsoc will come on and make some attempt at a condescending remark about Reason and/or the commentators’ principles.

        And everyone will pretty much ignore it while it seethes in frustration that trolls like Tony and PB get more attention.

      3. what about Mexicans? Always Mexicans.

        1. Mexicans are at least actually relevant to this discussion.

        2. In my personal life I see way too many people using what they call the “immigration issue” to bash Mexicans. It’s ugly.

          1. Well, if the Mexicans weren’t worth bashing, the immigration issue wouldn’t be such an issue. Nobody is terrified of rampant illegal immigration over the Canadian border, or hundreds of thousands of Swedes sneaking into the country in cargo containers.

            1. Nobody is terrified of rampant illegal immigration over the Canadian border, or hundreds of thousands of Swedes sneaking into the country in cargo containers.

              Fuck you, white boy, *I* am!

        3. Blame Canada!

    3. This should last until at least the PM links

      1. Not a request. In fact I figured you’d show me up by posting more than 2 videos.

    1. Wood, would, would, would.

        1. Disgusting. This is why Virginia does not approve of us.

          1. Ascribing a single opinion to the vaginas of the world….oh, you didn’t say vagina.

            ok, fair point.

          2. Do the 12 O’ clock tuck and she’ll never know…

      1. Ditto x 4

  3. Trump isn’t Hitler, but they’re not wrong about his popularity being the result of progressive failure. Unfortunately, that progressive failure has come from both parties, and conservatives know it. The person who sets fire to the RINO establishment will get a following, his abject unworthiness as a candidate notwithstanding.

    1. FTR, that was meant as a joke (/nod to you guys’ obsession with you-know-who-elses…)

      1. You know who else made jokes about you know who….

        1. Fred and George Weasley?

            1. Meh. They had it coming.

        2. Baal?

        3. Charlie Chaplin?

        4. Danger Mouse?

        5. Eddie Izzard?

        6. Batman’s arch enemy, The Jokester?

      2. This article didn’t appeal to me at all, but I do appreciate the several nods and appeals to the tastes of the commentariat.

      3. And bless you for that, it’s nice to get a wink or a well-meaning tweak from time to time.

      4. FTR, that was meant as a joke

        FTR is for cosmotarians. Plebes use FWIW. If you are going to slum with us, get the lingo right Ms Highbrow.

      5. You know who else had obsessions?

        1. That Sessions guy obtained them.

      6. She’s just pandering to the base, guys

    2. Trump doesn’t need to be Hitler for his election to have a similar outcome. The national security apparatus has largely already begun to operate independent of the executive branch, and it has been able to do this in part because it has been privatized and monetized. Since Trump is pro-business, he will refuse to oversee or reign in potential abuses, at a time when abuse of power is in the financial interest of that independent apparatus. It will be at liberty to do the things previous totalitarian entities could only dream of. I believe Trump’s election would enable this, and probably guarantee it.

    3. Trump isn’t Hitler

      Can he prove it? SHOW US THE LONG FORM!

  4. You know who else rose to power on white identity politics during a period of progressive reforms…

    Jerry Springer?

    1. ur doin it worgn!

    2. You know who else answered their own hypothetical question when Hitler was the answer?

      1. You know who else didn’t RTFA and realize I was quoting form it? (also, reasonable was broken, so I used the wrong tags for blockquote)

    3. Theodore Roosevelt?

  5. Speaking of Trump, on the way to work this morning I was stuck behind some some mini van with two bumper stickers: Trump 2016 and Steelers Country.

    1. They are the devil’s spawn.

    2. I’m sure you can find Trump fans among all NFL fanbases. It’s just that most NFL teams suck too much for their fans to openly identify themselves.

      1. But just try finding them among NJ Generals fans!

    3. I can’t decide which one the driver should be more ashamed of…

    4. Did you wave hi to Warty?

  6. DER YOKELSREICH

    1. Yinzreich?

      1. *Like*

  7. Alex Castellanos already compared Trump to Hitler on CNN yesterday.

    1. This is why I don’t read the articles.

    2. What the fuck is a “CNN”?

      1. Shut up, don’t play stupid.

      2. It’s an old network that originally was formed to show war footage, narrated by Darth Vader. Later, it became a reality show network, then later started broadcasting mockumentaries of real news. It’s respected as an introspective parody of the American press.

        1. So it’s the Christopher Guest News Network?

          1. Close. It’s the Nigel Tufnel News Network. “We go to 11.”

            And that’s the Lord Haden-Guest to you.

        2. Perfect explanation of that wreck of a network!

        3. It’s like the Onion, but less convincing?

          1. I would have set “less accurate”.

      3. What the fuck is the internet?

    3. Did the viewer approve?

  8. You know who else cheated by slipping the first comment into the actual article?

    1. your mom?

    2. Is she the first to troll her commenters in the article itself?

      1. No, that happened back when they hired a guy named Steve Smith and didn’t tell him anything about the existing running joke.

        1. WHAT JOKE?! STEVE SMITH NOT UNDERSTAND… MAYBE NEED TO RAPE COMMENTARIAT!

  9. I have never been so disappointed in ENB before.

    No alt text?

    I do not even have a comment. I am just going to finish my cheese sandwich, and awkwardly dance the day away while listening to some T-Swizzle.

    1. She got you that picture. She needs to give alt-text, too?

      1. Do you think I find that picture appealing? Jeepers creepers, no thank you.

        1. The three of them combined don’t come close to equalling one Lobster Girl.

          1. finally, someone I can respect on this board.

  10. Is there any *legitimate* social or legal concern that isnt relevant to straight, white, christian men?

    1. No white men were concerned over the demise of Soul Train .

      1. Hey now. *I* cried. Don Cornelius was like a surrogate father to me.

        1. I identify as a Soul Train dancer.

      2. I disagree, not too long ago we had to explain to our kids the meaning of the neon spray painted locomotive on the wall of our local soul food joint. Would have save me a lot of talking had they just kept the show going.

      3. All my best moves came from there.

      4. Fuck you! I learned how to dance watching Soul Train! It’s what helped me not dance like a white guy…

        THANKS, DON CORNELIUS!

        1. *pours a sip of PURPLE DRANK for ma homey*

          1. PURPLE DRANK

            I haven’t heard that term in a while. I think I feel a cough coming on.

      1. Marriage licensing is relevant to straight men.

        1. Okay but gay marriage was never going to change marriage licensing for hetero couples at all unless you happen to live in a county where the clerk is a butthurt little baby.

          1. But changing marriage licensing for heteros is relevant to my interests. I wanted it gone.

      2. Before I can accept your proposal Hugh, I need to know your net worth.

    2. Hair picks?

    3. *Legitimate*, no. But since when do politicians limit themselves to legitimate social or legal concerns.

      1. Fuck politicians.

        1. Well, yeah. But they still exist.

  11. Well, if the Democrats are the party of non-white interest groups, it’s going to be the Republicans benefiting from that race-based political choice.

    And if the Republicans are so white oriented then why the lingering popularity of Ben Carson? And plenty of mainstream Republicans like Bobby Jindal and Susan Martinez.

    1. why the lingering popularity of Ben Carson?

      I see ur false flag lurrking in ur crowds!

    2. It’s really a cultural divide that usually, but not always, follows racial lines.

      1. Which is basically why white populations tend to view economic liberty and limited government more favorably than many non-white groups do. Whites, whose culture is more distinctly rooted in European culture, have more directly inherited the political culture of respect for property rights and a desire for limited government that their distant ancestors happened to have passed on to their children and their children’s children and so on.

      2. Which is basically why white populations tend to view economic liberty and limited government more favorably than many non-white groups do. Whites, whose culture is more distinctly rooted in European culture, have more directly inherited the political culture of respect for property rights and a desire for limited government that their distant ancestors happened to have passed on to their children and their children’s children and so on.

        1. the branches of your property-respecting, white, European family tree seems to be infested with squirelzz

          1. Grey, or black ones?

            1. Both colors is deeveeuhz!

        2. Why yes that perfectly explains why the Europe of today is a free market paradise, and why Britain for example never had a 50 year period of Socialist darkness with 90% income tax rates.

          1. You know there is some evidence that being agreeable and obedient and being contrarian and resistant, are inherited.

            Maybe the congenitally more libertarian Europeans all moved to the colonies. Which is why Europe became less liberal.

  12. You know who else knew where the white women were at?

    1. AlbinoMatch.com?

      1. I just had to see if it was real.

    2. Sheriff Bart for the win!!

      1. Oh, it’s twue, it’s twue!

    3. The Black Swan?

    4. Pinto?

    5. The director and producers of the classic film “Let Me Tell Ya About White Chicks”?

    6. The director and producers of the classic film “Let Me Tell Ya About White Chicks”?

  13. If you want to convince me of the horror of white identity politics, you should have used this picture instead of the one you chose.

    1. No, the picture she used is just fine. Don’t rock the boat!

      1. Never have I enjoyed identity politics more.

        1. Does identity politics mean the gals pictured have identical left and right breasts?

      2. She could have gone with a picture that both had a hot chick and showed off the evils of National Socialism.

        This would be a good start.

        1. I suddenly feel the urge to find out what happened to Prussian Blue.

          1. Looks like they turned out ok: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/r…..ede-941546

        2. What, no ESB pic, you asshole?!?

        3. I was going for a Prussian Blue vibe

          1. Oh, WHAT THE SHIT?!

            1. Relax, man.

              The timestamps… the timestamps.

          2. By the way, ENB, I’ve been meaning to ask if you’ve seen this hilariously angry article some pants wetting social conservative wrote about how you’re evil because you once jokingly said you were ‘ashamed to be an American’ in AM Links.

            Here’s what you said:

            A new survey from Chapman University finds that the most common American fear is ? walking alone at night, followed by becoming the victim of identity theft, safety on the Internet, being the victim of a mass shooting, and public speaking. I have never been so ashamed to be an American.

            Which gets this response:

            Bless her little heart. Is Elizabeth so ashamed because she can’t blissfully go about her life in Condition White ? oblivious to what’s going on around her ? as an American? She’s perhaps unhappy that she might have to take a little personal responsibility to look out for herself and that the world isn’t an liberal utopia.

            We aren’t sure, but we think she might be better off tackling issues like hair care.

            Maybe if she felt more self-confident and empowered after taking a firearm training class or two and getting her own gun (or two), she could be a smidgen less ashamed to be an American.

            I didn’t know Mike M had a blog.

            1. Also, he’s a total tough guy who wants to die standing rather than live on his knees, you hippy liberal Condition White pansy:

              And for the record, my situational awareness coupled with a concealed carry piece on my hip gives me great peace of mind when I encounter situations that a great many Americans would fear. Fears of walking alone? Nope. Not here (okay, I admit, thanks to my flashlight). Fears of becoming a victim of a mass public attack? Never. I’ll do my best to put an end to any that unfold around me. I might die, but it’ll be on my feet not cowering and pleading for my life with a mad man.

              I don’t know what this has to do with what you wrote, but this is the Toughest Internet Tough Guy in American history.

              1. my situational awareness

                For the record, he seems totally unaware of how comes off as a douche

              2. Oh my god, he’s Mac from Always Sunny. OCULAR PATDOWN

                1. And he comes across as perpetually afraid that some guy is gonna whack him off.

                  I wonder if he’s into trannies.

                  1. He’s just putting in his time sloopy.

                  2. Manual or automatic?

                2. Glad I kept reading comments. Was about to post the same thing.

                3. And a latent homosexual.

            2. No, hadn’t seen it, but that’s beautiful (and deeply confused), thank you.

              At least they used a decent picture..

            3. p.s. re: Mike M…. you know, I wasn’t even intending the quotes around “patriot” as square quotes? They were used in the CNN article I was linking, and I assumed that was how the Oath Keepers self-identified.

              1. MikeM is to be taken very seriou…

                Oh, I just can’t.

              2. Tell us some more about libertarians should support paying taxes to Planned Parenthood.

                1. AND WHYCOME ISN’T THERE A WHITE HISTORY MONTH???

                2. Because those babies would be on welfare or prison. It’s a cost saving measure. Like wood chippers.

              3. Whatever, Elizabarf Moron Clown. That’s my Mike M name for you now. I didn’t want to have to do it, but you left me no choice.

            4. Relax Francis.

          3. re: those cute little teen neo-Nazis

            Marijuana Changed Prussian Blue From Nazis to Hippies

            “The girls, who once wore smiley-face Hitler T-shirts, both now have medical marijuana cards, consider themselves ‘healers’ and say they are ‘pretty liberal now’. ‘I’m stoked that we have so many different cultures,’ Lynx said. ‘I think it’s amazing and it makes me proud of humanity every day that we have so many different places and people.'”

            Well if that’s not a sales-pitch for FREE WEED FOR EVERYONE, I don’t know what….

            “Asked whether the Holocaust happened, Lynx replied, ‘I think certain things happened. I think a lot of the stories got misconstrued. I mean, yeah, Hitler wasn’t the best, but Stalin wasn’t, Churchill wasn’t. I disagree with everybody at that time.’

            Lamb added: ‘I just think everyone needs to frickin’ get over it. That’s what I think.'”

            …Ok, how about at least some Weed Discounts for people who are eligible? Its not the Nazi-cure, necessarily, but at least they’re just lazy Nazis, and isn’t that an improvement?

            1. Well, if you’re going to have a threesome with hot twins, they might as well be pot smoking, diversity cherishing Nazis, wearing Hitler T-shirts with smiley faces. It creates a helluva image when for when they’re on their knees servicing me together.

        4. Gotta go with the original:

          Ilsa

      3. The one in the middle looks a bit…off, though.

        1. None of them really do it for me.

        2. The one on the left didn’t get the memo about it being bleach blonde and raccoon eyes day

          1. On the Facebook post for this article, they cut off the one on the left. LOL.

    2. Booo!!! fuck you and the contextualized horse you rode in on.

    3. AAAAAHHHHH!!!!!

      Ze back button. It doz nozzing!!!!!!!

  14. Trump will turn the GOP into the Hair Club For Men before he turns it into the White Power Party. Jesus Christ, the world does not revolve around Donald Trump and the existence of Donald Trump does not have to have some deep significance. He’s just some huge asshole that caught the attention of the press and the public on a slow news day. If he’s some day a footnote to history at all, he’ll be a smaller footnote than Ross Perot or Ralph Nader or Harry Browne.

    1. I share this view. Just a lot of noise.

    2. Trump won’t turn anything into anything else. I think the observation concerns more of how the GOP base has gone apeshit.

      1. Trump won’t turn anything into anything else.

        I am pretty sure he has already turned an entire generation of white men into supposed cuckolds.

      2. Why do people keep talking about Trump’s supporters and the ‘GOP base’ as if they are one and the same thing.

        Is there any real evidence to support this? Other than ‘people coming out to support Trump’ also overlapping with ‘Trump running in the Republican primary,’ do we really know that these people would otherwise be coming out to support someone else in the primaries?

        Because when your ‘horse’ is covered in black and white stripes, maybe it’s not a fucking horse.

        1. Oh, I’m sure the establishment doesn’t care for him. Problem is that the most highly motivated primary voters are usually the most rabid on pet issues. They’ve used that to their advantage in the past, but now it’s come back to haunt them.

          1. I still think you are missing a significant distinction.

            Never mind the already well recognized detach between the party establishment and the people heretofore called ‘the base.’

            Rather than seeing the rise of Trump as “the base going apeshit” maybe it is a case of Trump bringing in a whole raft of people who maybe never previously got all that animated about the GOP primaries.

            Consider that it wasn’t exactly ‘the base’ who drove the Fox debate’s rankings through the roof, nor has the base shown any prior willingness or ability to fill football bowl stadiums for early primary rallies.

            No, Trump’s people are not the base, at least not what was previously described as the base of the GOP.

            If he gains actual political power then his base may indeed supplant the (then former) GOP base, but that will also render the entire party a different animal altogether. Apeshit or not.

        2. After the first debate every interviewed Republican in the voter grouping on CNN said Trump was not a serious candidate and not presidential on live TV. About a month and a half ago there was a poll that said that 80 percent of republican registered voters will not vote for Trump.

  15. You know who else rose to power on white identity politics during a period of progressive reforms…

    I love ENB.

    1. I did too, until she took from me the alt text I have surely earned.

      1. No one needs every article to have alt-text.

        1. Lynch – yer out. GTFO. Right now. OUT!

          1. YOU’RE NOT MY SUPERVISOR!!!!!

            1. HOW HARD IS IT TO POACH AN EGG PROPERLY!?

              1. Poaching is illegal.

    2. Are we ever going to get an answer?

    3. “I love ENB”

      Yes cuz getting a SJW hit piece proclaiming the world racist is so much better then actual political analysis.

      I really wish ENB would pull her Kerry Howley inspired Kiss off now rather then waiting until after the election.

      But her paymasters in the Binders probably won’t let that happen.

      1. You’re starting to sound like Winston

        And who are the “Binders”? For a second before I thought you were referencing Mitt Romney’s “Binders Full O’ Wimmins”.

        1. “I thought you were referencing Mitt Romney’s “Binders Full O’ Wimmins”.”

          Indirectly. “Binders” is a JournoList style mail group for progressive feminist women in journalism. They named themselves after Romney’s comments.

            1. And you’ve determined ENB is a member of this Coven of Witches by…. what, her “Bundle” (or is it Bindle?) writings?

              TIWTAN(rr*)LW

              (*really real)

              1. Just watch and wait.

                Called it with Weigel oh so long ago but sure feel free to doubt me.

  16. The funny thing is that…if one TEAM makes shit all about race and identity politics, eventually the other TEAM is going to do so as well, just the opposite race and identity politics. I mean, what did TEAM BLUE expect? That TEAM RED wouldn’t eventually react to their endless race-based idiocy with race-based idiocy of their own?

    This is why partisans and collectivists are so fucking pathetic. They aren’t an identity in and of themselves. They’re just a reaction to the people they hate/are opposed to. They form each other. They’re far more connected and interdependent than they would ever want to acknowledge.

    They’re just flip sides of a coin. What one does, the other will do, mirror-reflected, soon enough.

    1. I mean, what did TEAM BLUE expect?

      Exactly what is happening. Never let a crisis go to waste.

      1. I heard a radio ad for Dennis Prager, in which he says, “The motto of the left should be ‘We don’t care what happens next’.” I agree.

        Non curamus quid forte in posterum.

        1. People called Curamus, they don’t go in the back of the fort?

          1. No no, it’s “don’t block your asshole with band-aids”.

          2. Look, if you don’t like my Latin, call a centurion.

    2. It’s like people have never even heard of tvtropes.org.

    3. I tend to agree with this. The two parties are really just stuck in an endless dance with one another. One takes a step in one direction and the other steps back. There’s no real principles involved and most positions are determined by which way the other is going and where they started initially.

    4. So you’re saying they complete each other?

      1. I totally expected Jerry Maguire with that one.

    5. Trump is absolutely what happens when the left, the Republican establishment, and MSM demonize everyone as Rascist sexist homophobes who dare threaten to tip the apple cart.

      We got milk toast big government Bush, McCain and Romney for sixteen years and 7 years of shitting on the tea party and Ron Paul with lies and mischaracterization.

      Where the fuck did they think the opposition would go? Were they just going to up and vaporize in the aether after being tagged as unhuman bigots?

      1. Were they just going to up and vaporize in the aether after being tagged as unhuman bigots?

        I think that was the plan.

    6. “if one TEAM makes shit all about race and identity politics, eventually the other TEAM is going to do so as well,”

      This is absolute bullshit by the way. Here is how it really works:

      If one TEAM makes shit all about race and identity politics, then they will demonize their opponents as racist homophobe sexists. FULL STOP

      Your fake middle of the road anarchy bullshit is bullshit Epi. Trump and his supporters are no more of sexist racist homophobe then you are.

      This whole ENB spin is nothing more then leftist propaganda calling all the tea party white and therefore racist while calling Occupy wall street a diverse group.

      Make no mistake ENB is as white as snow.

  17. Sure – any white voter who isn’t consumed by PC guilt is going to react adversely to the Democrats’ rhetoric about taking Whitey’s money and giving it to minorities. But it really isn’t a racial divide.

    A much more obvious divide is city versus suburbs and rural areas. Look at the map by county of any Presidential election over the past 2 decades. With few exceptions (Lefties in VT, farmers on the agri-dole in IA) it’s city versus the rest of us.
    http://www.outsidethebeltway.c…..County.png

    1. 403’D!!!!!!

    2. It’s funny that right after I point out that all you partisan fucks do is react to one another, you immediately go “it’s city versus the rest of us!” You’re so robotic you can’t even stop yourselves even when what you’re going to do is pointed out ahead of time.

      1. I’m a partisan fuck because I can look at a map and see the same pattern in election after election?

        Noticing patterns and interpreting data is how people successfully navigate life. Calling names, flinging poop, and unwarranted self-aggrandizement – not so much.

    3. This. Ben Domenech’s concern trolling is hardly something new. “OMG the republicans are pandering to white racists” has been a reliable liberal trope for close to fifty years now, going back to at least Nixon and the so-called “Southern Strategy”.

      And even democrats who are deemed to be possibly not sufficiently left-wing can find themselves victims of this same stupid game. Team Obama pulled this same shit on Bill and Hillary back in ’08.

  18. after not reading the article, I find myself more sympathetic to white identity politics and would like to attend a few rallies.

  19. n conclusion: Deez Nuts/Warren G 2016, please?

    Figures ENB would support more regulation (ft. Nate Dogg)

    1. I am ready for the G-Funk era.

      1. Then mount up on the way to the booth.

  20. Republicans haven’t been a party of limited government for a long time. Precisely how long I’m not even going to bicker over. They tend to be the party that scrambles and reacts to whatever the Dem agenda becomes.

    Trump isn’t the sign of a new trend. Just further proof that many Republicans have nothing in common with libertarians.

  21. This is a much better article than I was expecting based on the title. I do think we can capture a lot of the frustration with the two party system and move things in a more libertarian-ish direction. But that would require framing limited government as means toward people own moral ends. We probably aren’t going to convince the majority of people to fully embrace the NAP. But like Mackey was saying, you *might* be able to convince people that a limited government and freer market would allow progressive or conservative values to spread more naturally to those who hold them. The hard part is convincing people that it’s OK to let others live in a way that you might not personally agree with if if means others will let you do the same. It’s much more tempting to try and smash the opposition. But maybe people will finally tire of the culture war and be open to a way out.

    Regardless, I wouldn’t read *too* much into the popularity of Trump. It could be pretty fleeting. Politics often are. He is an annoyance and if he actually gets nominated or, God forbid, elected, then I’ll be more worried about the long-term implications. But right now I think he poses the biggest risk to medium-to-long-term GOP relations with Hispanics.

    1. Tire of the culture war? The battle that’s been raging since the dawn of civilization?

      The culture war gives people an outlet. Big problems are big, scary, and hard to solve. It’s much easier to engage in inconsequential us vs them battles. Battles that can’t possibly be resolved based on the positions taken.

      For example, whites can never be black and blacks can never be white. This guarantees an endless conflict.

      1. Everything has it’s limit. I’m starting to see signs of it. The question is, will it be reactionary and simply push the pendulum back in the other direction, or can we motivate people to break the wheel.

        Probably it will be reactionary. But a man can dream.

        1. People need conflict. The easier life becomes, the stupider the conflicts get.

          Can you imagine what would happen if you tried to explain microagression to a starving Nigerian?

          1. The problem is that life becoming better and easier may not be a permanent trend, unless you think the modern welfare state can go on indefinitely. See Greece.

            1. I don’t believe that all of civilization will ever be blasted back to the stone age. Which is what it would take to restart.

              If things reach a certain boiling point, everyone is going and whatever comes next can try things differently.

  22. From “Deez Nuts’s Platform

    Social Justice

    I am not sure what social justice is, so I googled it just before I wrote this but all I saw were a bunch of teenage girls talking about how fat they are, so I am definitely not in favor of social justice. You aren’t fat, you’re beautiful. Oops, I just read the third result. Looks like social justice is not about teenage girls feeling fat because they were comparing themselves to the girls in the teen choice awards. Turns out it is about cops not going around killing people. I am also not in favor of that. Deez Nuts is, without hesitation, anti-girls without self-esteem/anti-murderous cops

    TAKE ALL MY VOTES NOW!

    1. Truly inspired

    2. Oh God, this is amazing:

      The minumum wage is a heated issue. I, too, have visited the shores of San Francisco where it costs $5 to have a bum spit in your face. Because of that, I am extremely in favor of a $15 nationwide minumum wage increase? Wait, an intern (I have several) just told me it’s now $7 to have a bum spit in your face, so replace $15 with $17 minimum wage increase. You know what? Let’s just make it an even $20 for good measure.

      If I am elected President, I will outlaw racism. It is an abhorrent thing and should not be allowed in our catholic schools, biker bars, and trailer parks. The first punishment for racism will be that you have to watch Roots. All of it. And then you have to write an essay on it and the person you were racist too gets to grade it even if they’re mean about how dumb you are. The punishment for a second offense is death.

      1. Abortion

        I beleive firmly in a women’s right to choose, as long as she chooses to follow the sacred word of Jesus Christ, Allah, Abraham, and L Ron Hubbard. Those were all very great men- where would be be if Mary aborted Jesus? Think about it.

        A Border Wall

        One of the definitions of a sovereign nation is that they control their borders. If elected, I will make sure America fulfills this requirement. Especially with our problem neighbors, if you know what I’m talking about. I mean, they come across the border, they take our jobs, they buy all our cool American clothes, and then they go back to their stupid homes across the border. I’m even in favor of NEVER allowing them in to our country at all- who needs Canadians anyways? Am I right people?

        1. *deafening applause*

        2. Booooooo, fuck you Deez Nuts, at least we’re polite about it and lie to customs. I mean…shit.

    3. Which stage does he get at the debates?

    4. That is awesome. If this is really a 15 year old kid, he is the coolest 15 year old kid ever. Deez Nuts all the way.

  23. Many in the R’s are nuts,but what does it say aout a party with Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders leading the pack?We are doomed,doomed.

  24. The Dems have a lock on the African-American vote, they have a comfortable lead among Latinos (besides Cubans), but…they are neck-and-neck with the Repubs when it comes to the Asian vote.

    So it’s not like the Repubs have the whites and the Dems have the nonwhite gringos. Of course, honkys form the core of the Repub coalition, but any account of Reps has to take into account the Asian Christians (you know, the people who Dalmia says aren’t really Asian). While some Asians are (masochistically) still into identity politics, others see that it’s basically a target painted on their backs, and they don’t want any part of it. The Dems aren’t going to get a lock on the Asian vote if they keep courting rioters who burn down Asian stores.

    And of all the racial groups, the honkys are the most self-conscious when it comes to specifically ethnic appeals. They are aware of the history of Jim Crow and slavery etc. – if you want to get the honky vote you, ironically, can’t make a blatant, divisive pitch for it. Whereas I don’t think blacks, latinos and asians feel all that embarrassed if someone specifically appeals for the black/latino/asian vote. And honkys like to be assured that some non-honkys agree with them. Thus the much-mocked tendency for Republicans and conservative groups to highlight nonwhite speakers, especially the rare black conservative.

    This could all change, of course, if the Dems keep up their racist, get-whitey, riot-contextualizing, who-needs-borders rhetoric.

    1. In Canada we have the exact opposite of the narrative in the U.S. pop up, that our immigration program is largely making the country more conservative, largely because of the influx of Asians. I’ve seen a few liberal commentators complain about letting in ‘rich foreigners’ that are traditionally socially and fiscally conservative rather than ‘poor refugees'(i.e. leftist who will support them). They don’t seem to realize that poor Africans tend to be just as socially conservative or moreso.

      1. Offshore Chinese are gonna be new Jews in Vancouver. There’s a proggie meme that real estate is unaffordable because all these offshore Chinese come, buy conds then leave them empty forever. Numbers upwards of 20% are bandied about.
        I guess Chinese should feel proud that they are no longer considered weak, oppressed group, but have joined the glorious ranks of The Oppressor.

          1. All this has happened before, etc!

    2. Asians voted Democrat in greater numbers than Latinos did. This isn’t 1992.

      1. *Specifically referring to 2012. Not sure about 2014, but Asians have been a reliable Democratic block for a while, at least as much as Latinos are.

        1. Repubs won Asians 50-49 in 2014.

          http://www.washingtontimes.com…../?page=all

          1. …according to one poll.

            But what the heck is this:

            “Mr. Lee’s poll showed that Asian-Americans voters tend to be more liberal: There is broad support for affirmative action, raising the federal minimum wage and granting citizenship to illegal immigrants.”

            Who are these turkeys voting for an early Thanksgiving?

    3. I prefer the term cracker

  25. Becoming?

    Also, MOAR SLUT PIX PLZ THX

  26. We need a Monty Brewster candidacy at the federal level.

    Seriously.

    1. I always wanted a giant, catcher’s mask neck medallion.

      1. What I don’t get is why he didn’t just keep,doing the stamp thing until he’d spent all of the money. That and leasing everything for a month.

        Movies are fucking bullshit.

        1. Or get him and all his friends piss drunk every day on the most expensive booze he could find.

  27. OT: did Bono really say this?

      1. Did anyone listen?

        No.

    1. Yes but he was talking about AIDS not aid.

  28. Trump will get more Black and hispanic votes if he is the nominee than any other potential republican candidate….this is fairly obvious , Trumps anti-immigration platform is popular with African-Americans ,and his strong style is appealing to Blacks and Hispanics

  29. That might be and that sucks. But if they are not now, someone will be eventually. We had a great run with a melting pot society. The progs have spent 50 years ending that. Sorry but you can’t have a society riven by racial identity and tell one group “no you can’t do that”. It doesn’t work that way. The emergence of a white idenity in politics has been long coming but is inevitable considering the way progressives have used and abused race as a political issue.

    1. (Some) whites demanding special treatment has never not been apart of American politics. They started a war over it once. They’ve been resisting any and every movement toward legal and social equality of others at every step, and the modern Republican party is built on a foundation of appealing to that resentment. Stop blaming liberals for their stupidity and evilness.

      1. You’re so reliable. It’s like clockwork.

      2. They started a war over it once.

        Citation needed

      3. The same party that failed at white identity politics is now trying minority identity politics.

      4. You know what your supervisors told you about posting on line before you’ve finished rounding up your daily quota of poor black kids to sell to the educrat cartels for HIllary campaign donations.

  30. I think you can make the argument that Trump’s positions are far less ‘white identity’ and more ‘asshole American nativist pride’. There’s a difference. Namely, you can build a coalition out of the second.

    Trump is just using immigrants as a scapegoat, and some people tend to already do that, so he attracts them. Everyone needs an Other, and you can certainly have multiracial groups uniting in the common cause of saying ‘fuck that guy’.

    I mean, consider the thought process that Trump is encouraging: “America was great, but now it’s failing. And why’s it failing? Not because of Americans! Americans are inherently great! Instead, it has to be the external influences of other people! They create crime and poverty and they’re what’s really making this country suck. You’re still great. You’re American. And we can make America great again.”

    Really Trump just encourages a nationalist/nativist narrative that has more to do with social and political status than race.

    I don’t think Trump will actually build the bloody wall, despite the fact that people continue to disappoint me by thinking that’s a good idea. I consider most of this ‘big talk’ on the level of Newt Gingrich’s moon base.

    1. That’s why I’ve *usually* tried to use the xenophobic label more than racist

    2. It is patriotism. I saw Trump on CNN this morning. The thing about Trump is how positive he is. He comes across with this very positive “we can make America great again” attitude that people eat up. I think he is very fortunate in his opponents. His opponents refuse to understand why he is appealing to people. They just dismiss him and get angry. That does no good. Trump’s opponents come across as whiny butt hurt losers. Trump comes across as a positive guy who believes in America. Can do beats butt hurt every time.

      His opponents constantly fall into this trap. It is like the wall. Instead of explaining how there are better ways to control the border, his opponents say “that is impossible” and allow Trump to play to the country’s ego by saying “we can do it”. And every single issue is that way.

    3. using them as a scapegoat.

      Buddy, you’re a joke http://therightstuff.biz/2015/…..-is-wrong/

      1. Oh no, I understand that Trump uses shitty emotional manipulation and tribalism to make nationalist idiots idolize him! I’m such a joke for understanding the easy way morons are controlled by politician figures! Don’t worry Wyatt, Trump will keep telling that cause you’re American, you’re great even if you are a piece of shit. Because that’s the kind of politician you want, the kind that pathetically validates your most petty and sad emotions.

  31. Having heard some of Trump’s more famous supporters say, more or less, “Yes, I understand that Trump isn’t a conservative, but I don’t care about any of that anymore. I just want to bask in his greatness”, I assume the issue in play here is either mind control, or replacing human beings with robot or alien duplicates.

    1. I assume the issue in play here is either mind control, or replacing human beings with robot or alien duplicates.

      Never chalk something up to mind control or duplicates that can be explained by ‘voters are morons’.

      1. Hanlon’s Razor.

    2. I had a Trump supporter try to force me into wearing a pair of sunglasses the other day.

      Not this year!

      1. Next time, just offer him a piece of bubblegum.

        1. I was all out…

    3. If I hear one more dingbat conservative give the “but Trump is not conservative” like it matters, I am going to throw up. First, people have been lied to about this or that guy “being a real conservative” for so long, the word no longer has any meaning. People want someone to tell the media and the establishment to fuck off and Trump is doing that. The “but he is not a conservative” charge from the conservative media means nothing to most people.

      1. He’s a supporter of government run healthcare and has given massive sums of money to Democratic candidates and he was a big supporter of Hillary Clinton.

        He’s not a real conservative because he literally isn’t a real conservative. Conservatives are jettisoning all their supposed values to support someone who opposes most of their beliefs because he’s willing to create bizarre and untenable plans regarding immigration.

        If anything should make you throw up, it would be the fact that 20% of the conservative base has shown itself to be completely unprincipled and would throw their support behind Stalin if he were willing to say bad things about Mexicans.

        1. Trump is the Obama of the Republican Party.

          The rank and file are projecting their hopes onto him. He’s a successful businessman! He talks bluntly! He’s no defeatist!!!!

          Unlike Obama, though, Trump’ll make the trains run on time, so there’s that, I guess.

          1. In some ways yes. I don’t think they are projecting on him quite as much as the Obama people did. I think they have gotten so cynical they figure all of them are frauds in someway so why not go with the guy who stands up and fights.

        2. I am not saying the charge isn’t true. It is. I am saying it doesn’t matter and the people making it thinking it does and will change his supporters’ minds are kidding themselves.

        3. “it would be the fact that 20% of the conservative base has shown itself to be completely unprincipled and would throw their support behind Stalin if he were willing to say bad things about Mexicans”

          I think of it more as laziness. It’s easier to take a poll than become informed. If any of the other candidates start pointing out Trump’s track record and getting more press, that could change.

          1. I disagree. At this point the smart candidates should embrace what Trump is doing, which is attacking the Republican bigwigs. Hell, my guy Rand totally blew the debate IMO for going after Trump at the beginning over a 3rd party run. I’ve given Rand money, but damn he has really screwed this up. He had his fathers backers waiting, and imagine what a wonderful position he could be in today If he hadn’t embraced the party so much.

      2. “If I hear one more dingbat conservative give the “but Trump is not conservative” like it matters,”

        Not as if Bush, McCain or Romney were particularly “conservative.” All three supported the bail outs, all three use progressive intervention reasoning for war all three expanded government health care, and all three are pro-immigration

        In fact there is a pretty good argument that all three are to the left of the Republican party which is left of their base which is pretty dang centrist to begin with.

        Why all of sudden are cuckservatives soooo very worried about trump’s right wing street cred when they haven’t worried about it for 16 years.

        1. “”cuckservatives””

          oh no you ditint

          1. He cashed in all his dumbass chits at once.

            1. I think I score like a 6 out of 10 on the Return of Kings “Are you a cuckservative” test and that is generously low as many of the items i find are built on false premises and/or just do not relate at all to me or my politics.

              http://www.returnofkings.com/6…..kservative

              So in other words go fuck yourself and the stawman you road in on sugarfree.

              1. That you would even mention that dipshit site with a straight face invalidates everything you have ever said or thought on any subject whatsoever.

                Go back to wondering why no women will touch you.

                1. This is exactly the only article at return of Kings i have ever read…and it is the definition of cuckservative most broadly used and perhaps its origin…

                  Anyway the day after Jesse posted his “Gawker is Great” article without a peep from you I hardly think Roosh’s house is somehow off limits here in the comments.

              2. I think I score like a 6 out of 10 on the Return of Kings “Are you a cuckservative” test and that is generously low as many of the items i find are built on false premises and/or just do not relate at all to me or my politics.

                I realize you’re a little hot under the collar right now, so I’ll emphasize that this is an honest question…why give the term any currency by using it in a non-ironic manner?

                1. “why give the term any currency by using it in a non-ironic manner?”

                  Why the fuck not?

                  I hate conservatives so why not revel in the terminology of their own civil war? When the Daily Show mocked Occupy Wallstreet I happily laughed at it. What is soooo very special about the right that I can’t laugh at their own internal mockery?

                  Also pretty sure i am using a bit of irony.

                  Irony does not have to be 100% 24/7

                  1. *shrugs*

                    I believe for most reading this thread, you’re not coming across the way you think you are. Nevertheless, thanks for clarifying things.

                    1. “I believe for most reading this thread, you’re not coming across the way you think you are.”

                      I don’t think it is me.

                      How did we go from “Woodchip it from orbit” to “cuckservative and SJW” are forbodin spake in like a two month period.

                      Trump and the MSM narrative around him have scrabbled your brains.

                    2. How did we go from “Woodchip it from orbit” to “cuckservative and SJW” are forbodin spake in like a two month period.

                      I’m not seeing that. To be honest, all I see is you and SF having a disagreement.

                2. The problem is that the term is currently the only existing term that describes a particular phenomenon. So, to kill it, you need a new term for the same thing.

                  Like “professional conservative”, maybe? Like, they don’t really believe it, any more than your defense attorney believes you’re innocent, but they believe that there is an untapped demographic and specialize in representing that market.

                  1. The problem is that the term is currently the only existing term that describes a particular phenomenon. So, to kill it, you need a new term for the same thing.

                    Why the fuck would you want to change it?

                    It has the word “cuck” in it. It is like a real cuss word, four letter word even, yet it isn’t and it gets even more of a repulsed reaction then even a real cuss word. It is AWSOME on every level that matters.

                    What the real problem is is that one actually has claim to be a conservative in order to be called a cuckservative. Why the fuck some libertarians feel the least bit offended probably has more to do with their own internal bullshit then with the word itself.

                    1. Why the fuck would you want to change it?

                      Because there’s an effective countermeme that the term is inherently racist, therefore anyone using the term is racist, and since the views of a racist are invalid, no one is allowed to concisely refer to the tendency of conservative politicians to act like jerks and not try to actually make policy changes, like politics is a wrestling match and they’re the heels who are scripted to lose.

                    2. Oh, boom, “heelservatives”. There you go.

                    3. “therefore anyone using the term is racist”

                      Jesus Fucking Christ

                      Next you are going to tell me “Woodchipper” is sexist.

                    4. Because there’s an effective countermeme that the term is inherently racist,

                      Honestly and more sincerely you should really stop giving a fuck.

                      The tea party, as far as they were from being libertarians, was the last and only hope libertarians had at influencing conservatives, cuckservative or otherwise, and they have been successfully labeled as racist sexist homophobes of the worse sort.

                      There is no counter measure for the labeling of libertarians in MSM. No matter where you go what you say what you believe you are a racist sexist homophobe in the eyes of MSM.

                      A lie defines you. Why buy into that lie when it is vomited on someone else?

              3. “Return of Kings “Are you a cuckservative” test”
                …..

                The Test =

                1. You care more about Israel’s borders than America’s
                2. You think that opposing free trade is Nazism
                3. You believe that the Democrats are the “real” racists
                4. You think the reason Detroit and other major U.S. cities are falling apart is because of unions
                5. You believe that Hispanics are “natural Republicans”
                6. You support corporations, despite their advocacy for leftist causes
                7. You think military veterans automatically deserve respect
                8. You think the GOP needs to moderate in order to win elections
                9. You spend more time attacking fellow conservatives than the left
                10. You’re always apologizing to your enemies

                1. Israel is a tiny nation surrounded by hostile neighbors. The US is a gigantic nation that has security hegemony over the entire western hemisphere. What the fuck are you even talking about in that comparison?

                2. “opposing free trade” isn’t nazism. Its stupid.

                3. “real” racists? i don’t think that’s a political party, but an individual thing.

                4. “A reason, not THE reason.” The US auto industry (aka ‘Detroit’) imploded because of failure to adapt to decades of growing global competition. Unions were part of that.

                5. *some* hispanics ARE natural republicans. Hispanics aren’t a monolithic voting bloc any more than “White People” are. They go to church and run businesses and pay taxes. Duh.

                1. 6. I support corporations by buying their products & services. I bet you do to, douchebag.

                  7. Why not? I come from a military family. As long as a guy isn’t a douchebag (*kokesh?) and wrapping himself in a flag while spouting nonsense, i tend not to spit on and/or deride people who served in the miltary as “tools of imperialism” or whatever the fuck Salon’s last article said.

                  8. I think the GOP needs to *change* back to its roots, not “moderate”. Because its brief stint in the 1990s-2010 as SoCon bible-beating hawkish xenophobes is fucking over, bro.

                  9. I don’t “attack” conservatives so much as mock them gently, while puking my guts out at the insanity of the left. Put some pampers on.

                  10.I don’t think of myself as having “Enemies” at all (*this term says much about these people’s worldview)… i think some people just don’t think very hard about their political views, and prefer “feelings”.

                  I suspect, despite the fact that there are no good “Yes/No” answers to most of these questions, that I’ve still scored “100% CUCKSERVATIVE”

                  1. I suspect, despite the fact that there are no good “Yes/No” answers to most of these questions, that I’ve still scored “100% CUCKSERVATIVE”

                    Well, I hate to do this to you, but I’m going to have to fuck your bitch, long dick style.

                2. “*GILMORE*|8.21.15 @ 3:51PM|#

                  “Return of Kings “Are you a cuckservative” test”
                  …..

                  The Test =”

                  As i said:

                  “many of the items i find are built on false premises and/or just do not relate at all to me or my politics.”

                  1. Well then, since we both seem to agree that the entire conception is incoherent and stupid… why bother throwing the label around?

                    It seems to be something insane racists use to tar non-racists with. rhetorical-judo of a sort, which they themselves think is very clever, but which only serves to highlight how fucking dumb these people are.

                    1. “It seems to be something insane racists use”

                      Jesus really?

                      Why become an SJW Gilmore? Why?

                      “Rascists rascists everywhere!!! Run for the hills!!!

                      AWWWWWWwwwwwww”

                      You do realize you can win a debate without falsely demonizing your opponents right?

                      What the fuck has happened to the Reason comments I have grown to love?

                      When did Joe from Boyle replace all my favorite assholes from hit and run with clones of himself?

                    2. I believe he is referring to this.

                    3. I actually read that article, and it is openly arguing that Race is more important than any coherent political theory.

                      i.e. “Detroit is bad because BLACK, not Unions or protectionist economics.”

                      they substantiate this by pointing out that lilly-white socialist-ish states like Vermont are quite successful.

                      *(nevermind the socioeconomic differences, or the Urban/Rural economic differences, or anything except race, really)

                      They’re merging racism with brain-dead economic populism, in a stew of incoherent stupid.

                      I’m not fucking “Demonizing” them. They’re going out of their way to INSIST that hysterical attitudes about Blacks and Hispanics are “rational” and not to be criticized as the shallow shit it is.

                      you’re basically playing the same game = trying to pretend *i’m* being emotional and hysterical….rather than you, gushing about “SJWs!!” and how we’re all brainwashed or something.

                      Half the comments in that piece are these knuckleheads trying to determine what the correct posture re: “The Jews” is supposed to be. I mean, come on.

                    4. “i.e. “Detroit is bad because BLACK, not Unions or protectionist economics.”

                      they substantiate this by pointing out that lilly-white socialist-ish states like Vermont are quite successful.”

                      I think they base that on some form of the “bell curve” IQ thingy. Basically IQ studies show that blacks on average score lower on IQ tests then whites on average. IQ they think somehow dictates weather a government and economy functions well or not. I am not an expert on the subject but i think that is the gist.

                      Anyway I am not entirely sure that can be called racist as it is based on a scientific provable fact blacks score less on average then white on average. (note: I am white and on every IQ test i ever took I got a zero)

                      Also it pre-supposes that if high IQ blacks populated and ran Detroit then it would be much better off and if it was populated by low IQ whites it would be just as bad as it is now.

                      it is not a prejudice against race it is prejudice against low IQ test scores

                      Anyway i disagree with the premise and analysis of the whole thing but I don’t think it is racist. Just wrong.

                      That is one out of 10. The other nine are definitely not racist. In fact some are down right socialist. Why are you focus on racist but not socialist? or trade protectionists?

                      If “cuckservative” was not “rascist” would you have a problem with me using it because it was socialist?

                      It seems you are focusing on only one element out of ten and then claiming the whole thing is that one thing.

                    5. “It seems you are focusing on only one element out of ten and then claiming the whole thing is that one thing.”

                      You’re saying their questions re: the Border (Q#1?) isn’t driven by paranoid xenophobia?

                      Or the idea that Hispanics are “naturally” unsuited for political allies?…

                      …or the commenters fulminating about Jews?

                      Yeah, it must be just me bro.

                      I pointed out that they combine stupid ideas about “race” with stupid ideas about economic populism (e.g. free trade bad, unions good, corporations bad, etc)

                      I never said it was all race. Its all stupid, with a healthy dose of race.

      3. Oh god, they got John too!

    4. Having heard some of Trump’s more famous supporters say, more or less, “Yes, I understand that Trump isn’t a conservative, but I don’t care about any of that anymore. I just want to bask in his greatness”

      Sounds like Obama supporters 8 years ago.

      1. Not quite. In 2008, Barry’s supporters were mostly “OMGSWOOOON He’ll undo all TEH EVULZ of BOOOSH and everything will be rainbows and unicorn giggles!!!!”

      2. Obama’s voters at least saw him as the avatar of their ideology. Trump’s supporters know he isn’t one of theirs. They’re single issue voters, and their issue is “I’m really mad about stuff”. He’s the candidate running on a platform of being really mad about stuff, so it’s a lock.

        But I never want to hear another fucking Trump-supporting Republican in my life claim that “liberals don’t think, they emote”. You don’t get to say that.

  32. And here comes ENB with the “Binders” SJW hit piece on Trump.

    “He’s Racsist…Whaaaaaaaaaaaa”

    It should be pointed out the only verifiable Trump supports i have seen anywhere are two black women.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP6S3KE2DaI

    In before the idiots start beating the strawman.

    1. I do so enjoy the endless back in forth between the warring “Reason is full of Republican-apologist stooges for the Kochs!” faction and the equally tiresome and ridiculous “Reason is full of SJW Progressive operatives!” group.

      1. “Reason is full of Republican-apologist stooges for the Kochs!”

        “Reason is full of SJW Progressive operatives!”

        These are the same group.

        By the way i do not think the tea party is racist either even though i am not a tea partier. I think Reason defended the tea party back in the day because they had slightly more libertarian bonafides then Trump.

        Also even though I am for open boarders between Mexico and the US i have defended people who are for closed boarders when they are knee jerk mischaracterized as racists in the past….for years…here in these very comments.

        So yes you and sugarfree can go fuck yourselves and the strawman you road in on.

      2. “Reason is full of SJW Progressive operatives!”

        Also one word:

        “Weigel”

        1. We already have Winston, Corning. You are superfluous in your paranoid whining.

          1. Been here over 12 years Sugarfree.

            Been pretty consistent if you don’t look at me flip flopping on the Iraq war like 10 years ago…

            Weird how this little thing pulls more responses from you in one thread then in all the 1000s of other threads over the past 11 years prior.

  33. (You know who else rose to power on white identity politics during a period of progressive reforms…)

    Richard M Nixon?

    1. The Kingfish

      1. Holy mackeral, Andy!

        1. I’m gonna perch up here and see what happens on this subthread.

    2. “Richard M Nixon?”

      That is bullshit by the way.

      Nixon followed through with the Civil Rights act and he lost most of the south in 68 (the parts he did win were because Humphrey and Wallace split the racist democrat vote) while Carter won the entire south in 76′

      1. Yep, it was bullshit then, and it’s bullshit now.

        But the left has been assuaging their defeats and stoking their delusions of moral superiority with this trope for almost fifty years, so I sure wouldn’t expect them to quit now.

  34. Trump is William Jennings Bryan. Sadly, we have no equivalent to H.L. Mencken today.

    1. Well Thomas Friedman is close to Mencken’s love of the Kaiser and Bismarck.

      1. OMG BIZMARK NOT THAT

        1. Militarist welfare statist who engaged in censorship, protectionism, kulturkampf, imperialism, collected taxes extra-legally, Germanisation Campaigns, what’s not to love? It’s not like he opposed Wilson and FDR for doing the same things….oh wait!

          1. He was indeed a militarist, but at least he knew when it was time to quit militaritating.

          2. And EVERYONE on H&R voted for Obama too, right?

            Its noted that for every page you’ve cited as example of why Mencken must be rejected as an impure supporter of disapproved WWI regimes, he’s written 10,000+ pages saying things far more consistent with a Classical Liberal worldview.

            You whinge endlessly about esoteric nits, even after its very clear no one is impressed. Give it up or find something new.

            1. why Mencken must be rejected as an impure supporter of disapproved WWI regimes

              Shorter Gilmore: Stop pointing out that Mencken had extremely shallow Thomas Friedmanesque views toward Imperial Germany!

              Also point out where I said that He “must be rejected”? And you won’t find me saying nice things about Edwardian Era-British Liberals or the pre-war Third Republic France.

              1. “”Stop pointing out that Mencken had extremely shallow Thomas Friedmanesque views toward Imperial Germany!””

                So what. As noted = even your cited examples weren’t quite the slam-dunk fascist-cocksucking you suggest. Your reading of his stuff (as with everything else) comes off as hyper-shallow and myopic. Its boring, tedious, and smacks of a desperate need to impress yourself.

                1. even your cited examples weren’t quite the slam-dunk fascist-cocksucking you suggest. Your reading of his stuff (as with everything else) comes off as hyper-shallow and myopic.

                  Stop being so obtuse. Mencken was pretty clear on why he liked Imperial Germany: they opposed Democracy and all the things about America he hated and they Got Things Done. He never tried to hide it. Whether that made him a fascist, an idiot or a troll is up to you.

              2. There are worse things than Imperial Germany.

                1. That isn’t the point. He defended Imperial Germany for behavior that he would never defend if done by Americans or the American Government. And you know he had plenty of nasty things to say about America and its government.

                  1. Yes, in fact, he had thousands of pages of it, work that far outshines any crap he said about imperial Germany. Which is exactly Gilmore’s point. You utterly obsess over the small details of one of his positions.

                    I don’t know Winston, maybe Mencken was a flawed human being who was ignorant on a subject? Maybe that doesn’t delegitimize any of his criticism of the United States, just his opinion of Germany, and maybe it’s not something worth constantly whining about a half dozen times a week?

        2. YOu! You got what I neeeeeed!

  35. This Trump shit would totally make sense if the race was between Chris Christie and Rand Paul. But Republicans actually have appealing, decent candidates (for them) this time around.

    If you want someone who is anti-establishment, unapologetically conservative, and boldly outspoken, you have Cruz.

    If you want someone with executive experience, reasonably conservative, and a demonstrated willing to fight the hard fights and win against Democrats, you have Walker.

    If you want someone who has a presidential demeanor, communication skills, executive experience, decent policy, and has some bullshit identity politics advantages for the general election, you have Fiorina.

    There is literally no good reason to support Trump except that media Democrats have convinced conservatives that nothing would make them angrier than watching conservatives punch themselves in the balls, because only a real man could repeatedly punch himself in the balls and it would totally make them feel weak and emasculated because they could never do that. And conservatives are like “Fuck you, media. We do what we want. I’m totally going to punch myself in the balls now, and you can’t stop me!”

    If I was more religious, I’d say that Trump was God’s judgment on the foolishness of “conservative” Republicans.

    1. “There is literally no good reason to support Trump except that media Democrats have convinced conservatives that nothing would make them angrier than watching conservatives punch themselves in the balls”

      This is sort of true.

      Media democrats (lets just call it all of media including Reason and even Fox News) have painted all the “good conservative ” candidates with the same brush. ie they are all racist sexist homophobes. Trump is just the only one successfully countering the media when they try to paint him.

      Any convincing the media has done that has benefited Trump is entirely by accident on their part.

    2. And beyond the candidates you name, others in the GOP primaries ? even if some less libertarian in nature ? Rubio, Jindal, Perry, and Kasich* ? have well-constructed and internally-consistant policy campaigns that represent parts of the wider conservative movement in modern America and can be debated amongst each other. Then Trump breaks in like the rich kid in town who wasn’t invited to the another child’s birthday party but decided to come anyway and then figures that all those presents must obviously be his…

      (*plus, as you reference Paul and even Christie ?whatever one thinks of Christie on issues like security, his ideas on entitlement and pension reform are generally considered worth hearing, for the sake of contributing to the eventual party platform, when someone like Trump leaves enough oxygen in the room)

  36. Was this article written in 1964?

  37. When you’ve run out of direct attacks against political stances by Christians and conservatives, it’s always good to come up with new nebulous catchphrases to use against them. ENB, she ain’t white. Ise can tell.

  38. And the Dems aren’t the party of Non-White Identity Politics?
    Give me a break.

    1. Fr?ulein Hilary McSaxon Rodham Blonde Clinton asks what difference at this point does it make?

      I mean come on, her Husband WAS the first black President.

  39. Well look at those cuties !
    HI, would you like some marijuana cookies? I just baked them.

  40. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail,,,,,,,

    http://www.homejobs90.com

  41. ENB. I am very disappointed in you for posting a race baiting article on Reason. However you have gotten 300 some odd comments. Good trolling job. Keep up the good work. =D

    1. DEEZ NUTZ ??? Bitch Please. Vermin Supreme 2016 !!!!!!

    2. What trolling? It’s certainly worth thinking about whether there are “white identity politics”, and whether there can and should be.

  42. I liked the picture.

  43. I fail to see how this is wrong. Everyone else plays identity politics, giving them a wild card that whites don’t have.

    Also, demographics is destiny when capitalism and liberalism are Anglo values. Not hispanic or black values.

    The Free State project (wherein libertarians move to a state to change its politics) belies this.

  44. I’ve said it before, I’ll keep saying it until I turn blue.
    Trump is only popular if you don’t understand the difference between majorities and pluralities.

  45. Becoming a party of identity politics? Evangelical identity politics has been the epitome of identity politics for the last 40 years. It would seem that the “available” alternative is the Coca Cola product merchandising type of political campaign such as we are seeing from Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush. The warm and fuzzy commercials may make you feel good, but what kind of rubbish is really in the product?

    1. Daily Beast has a great article on how many major donors Bush and Hillary share

  46. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…
    http://www.jobnet10.com

  47. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.online-jobs9.com

  48. “In Europe, meanwhile, straight, white, Christian men and women have become their own sort of special-interest group, and one whose particular identity politics now form a core tenet of right-populist political movements. ”

    If there are such movements, they are comparatively small. Take Germany, the have a radical left party, a left Green party, a left “social democrat” party, and a right “Christian democratic party” (CDU). (The liberal party is not in parliament, currently.) Remarkably, this turn, the CDU moved left and adopted significant positions of the social democrats it rules in colation with: minimum wage, vastly expanded government day care services, quotas for women, etc. Fundamentally egalitarian and redistributive policies reign at the European level and thus over national law. At the same time, bailouts (including monetary policy, bad bank strategies, whatever tricks you can imagine) for Greece, Italy, and Spain mark essential violations of EU law (there’s actually a “no-bailout” clause). This, again, is redistribution, and welcome to the visionaries, since it means further progress towards centralization and planned economy (and increases their power). Add fairly generous acceptance of migrants/fugitives (Germany alone faces 800.000 plus applicants on its ground in 2015), and you should come to a different conclusion.

    1. There is no particularly strong right-wing, white-people political union. The left dominates, and it is merely a subset of white men and women who are drawn to some such identity union, presumably in France — which has a socialist government and is likely to provoke backlash.

      By the way, I doubt that the colored v. white conflict is salient enough to override the men v. women conflict (as a side note: do women like Trump?). This should prevent any stable powerful white identity party — especially in Europe, as long as whites greatly outnumber colored people.

  49. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail,,,,,,,

    http://www.homejobs90.com

  50. “Still, it’s perhaps not all bad news for liberty if the GOP becomes purely the party of white butthurt.”

    In related news, it looks like ENB won’t be getting that Pulitzer Prize anytime soon.

    1. Why would one trivialize rapidly expanding statism, including racially inflected social engineering like imposing public housing on every county in the country, as “butthurt.”

  51. The most famous Trump fans, the WeBeSisters youtube stars, are black. I don’t think polls indicate he lacks black or Hispanic support.

    I believe his supporters are better understood as being like Wat’s rebellion or the other peasant revolts of the Middle Ages, where farmers temporarily limited predatory taxes imposed by the aristocracy.

  52. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.online-jobs9.com

  53. The Republican party has been the preferred party of conservative “white” identity politics for quite some time now. The only people who cannot see this are devoted or sympathetic to this party.

    Also, Donald Trump is not actually popular. He is simply being PROMOTED, which gives the impression of being popular. There is a huge difference.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.