The Academy Awards, and The Rot of Empire

As the Empire Falls

Multiethnic, multicultural empires have a tendency to vanish into thin air. Jim Goad’s complaint regarding Black American’s complaints on the Academy award is a case in point. He compares the black demand for representation – token representation, I’d say – with the relative silence of American Hispanics.

But many black Americans these days seem quite happy to promote a culture of complaint.

And this is the problem in my eyes – something encouraged by our socialist intellectuals. It would be far wiser to build up your own culture, than cry out for additional dependence on someone else’s money. But no matter: when the fantasy money games are up, things will be sorted out.

Will Smith has taken the fact that he’s a boring black guy and milked it to the point where his Hollywood career has given him a net worth of a quarter-billion semolians. Yet this uppity ingrate has announced that due to the fact that none of the major acting nominees this year is a Negro, he and his wife Jada Pinkett-Smith will not be gracing this year’s Academy Awards ceremony with their coconut-scented presence. Spike Lee, that noble auteur and proud descendant of the pygmy peoples, has likewise dropped out.

Yes, this is racist mockery. But then again, white people are relentlessly mocked and denigrated in today’s media, so I can understand the tit-for-tat hostility. Payback is payback, yes: but there comes a time when it should come to an end, instead of being some eternal license to grind your heel into the face of another nation.

But our intellectual and media classes – and ‘our black leadership’ – will not relent. They will push and push, until the money runs out, and White Americans decide to look out for themselves, as surely as Black Americans do.

I would prefer a peaceful disintegration of the Empire. This could happen, but there is no guarantee.

Top media executives are so disproportionately Jewish, one wonders why everyone is complaining about white people in Hollywood but no one makes a peep about Jews.

We appear to live in a world where everything is “too white” but nothing can ever possibly be “too Jewish.” That seems like a dangerously fragile double standard. Interesting times.

I’m not so worried about it myself – but then again, I have no particular objection to various forms of self-segregation: it is a function of actually existing forms of liberty, which includes the liberty to exclude, for good or ill. I do agree, though, that the unmentioned double standard is waiting to be exploited.

The way these things tend to work out historically, people will point out the nakedness of the Emperor after he is weak and vulnerable. I don’t much care myself: everyone gets their time in the sun, only to lose it in the fullness of time. Even while Hollywood vs Selected Religions remains true, most of the old media strongholds are making a power dive into the ground.

(It doesn’t have to be this way: a nation really could continuously obey God, and continuously advance in wealth, power, respect, and technological power. But what usually happens is that the pious, courageous and hardworking elders build the society up, and worthless heirs burn it all down to show how independent and different they are from their fore-bearers.

Can you imagine what the world would be like today, if Europeans in the 1910s decided to resolve their difference peacefully?)

But there’s a lot of antisemitism out there on the far right – just like on the far left – lots of hate (which will only grow as the economy sinks), and not much of a willingness to build an alternative. Other than “The Mighty Leader and the Fascist/Communist State” kind of thing, which is worse than worthless.

But to answer my original question, I think that American Hispanics aren’t complaining about the Anglo media because Hispanics have their own media. This is in addition to their own language, their own culture, and their own neighborhoods. They have a couple of their own major cable channels, hundreds of their own newspapers, and over a thousand of their own radio stations. With their numbers topping fifty million, they are the largest deliberately self-segregating ethnic bloc in America, slowly forming their own nation while the rest of the nation largely ignores them.

The American Hispanics have the right idea. The Empire is going to go down: why be dependent on a dying culture?

Elite whites want to keep the empire going, to rule a vast number of conflicting peoples, as they believe that Universal Humanity, the source of meaning, must have a Universal State. Post-White America was supposed to be the seed of the New World Order, just as the European Union was to be.

But the New World Order is a dying thing, now. Too bad the cultural revolutionaries of the 1960s successfully destroyed the social fabric and social capital of the old America, leaving behind only an incompetent security state and welfare/old-age program.

Worrying about “diversity” only seems to happen in majority-white countries.

I see it as a mix of guilt and the Universal Empire instinct. This PC business will be dead and gone, about 20 years after the fall of the welfare state.

All Black Americans should understand the times, and get their business ready to meet the future. But realistically, I expect that only 5% care to know what’s coming down the pike, and are taking steps to be in the right place at the right time.

But Hispanics seem fine just keeping to themselves. That’s why they don’t need no stinking Oscars.

I have a suspicion that Presidents Johnson and Nixon had no love for blacks, but instituted the current civil rights regime – the ‘necessary catalyst’ of today’s PC culture – in order to keep the United States intact, and avoid a long-term racial insurgency.

It would have been wiser to only desegregate the US government, and let every state work out it’s own problems with their own minorities: no central point of failure, no forced compliance, and local blacks get to talk to local whites to build local solutions. But this would have taken power away from the Imperial Capital, so it simply wouldn’t do.

(Does anyone in power knows the relationship between flexibility, local & individual liberty, and anti-fragile societies? Anyone?)

After the Empire

White cultures put too much value on a massive, united and powerful nation state, a flaw stemming from Greece and Rome. How is the German nation-state helping Germany today? (or in the 1940s, for that matter) How about the French State: did Napoleon smearing all Europe with the blood of young French boys really help the Glory of France? All the Roman Empire managed to do is destroy Roman freedom, and exhaust Roman wealth, in the name of the Emperor and his friends. And both the Athenian and Spartan empires did little but eat up their wealth, letting the Macedonians conquer both, and insuring that a neutered Greece would wear Roman, Byzantine, and Ottoman chains for centuries to come.

Empires are worthless, and bureaucratic nation-states are not to be trusted. I much prefer local kinship networks and small, county and city-scale governments.

The Great Academy Blow-up is nothing but a symptom of the coming End of Empire. I hope everyone reading this will push for a peaceful end, and so preserve their people’s lives and their wealth.

But hopes and dreams don’t always come true, so it would be prudent for all to buy a set of firearms for their family, white and black alike. Gary North recommends a pistol, a shotgun, and a rifle: that seems reasonable to me. Of course, training and practice is needed as well, for the whole family.

As he says:

Guns are controversial. I don’t think you need an arsenal. You need a few simple weapons and the training to master them. This poem gets the point across.

A .45 for the bedroom,
A shotgun over the door,
A 30.06 for distance,
You don’t need any more.

I would add a snub-nosed .357 for a lady’s purse. Two shots will normally settle the issue. Either the assailant runs or else he cannot run.

As for the police


The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution asserts the right — the legal immunity from interference by the State — of American citizens to keep and bear arms. This means a rifle strapped to my back and a pistol or two strapped to my hip, day or night.

It doesn’t go far enough. It leaves guns in the hands of a subculture that has proven itself too irresponsible to carry them: the police.

If I were called upon to write the constitution for a free country, meaning a country no larger than Iowa, I would require every citizen to be armed, except members of the police. A policeman would have to apply for an on-duty gun permit. He would not be allowed to carry a gun on duty, just like England’s bobbies are not allowed to carry them.

We will eventually have free nations again, covering the world. It’s just going to take a bit of time.

“Does anyone seriously believe that people who are prepared to defy the laws against murder are going to obey laws against owning guns or large-capacity magazines?” — Thomas Sowell

Exactly. We know why people should own guns: it is up to you to protect innocent life, including your own, as you are in the image of God – something that is worth protecting from lawless thugs. This will always be true, no matter what happens in the future.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s