As of this publication, Shiloh Hendrix has raised over $542,000 after a Somali immigrant (and alleged pedophile kidnapper, hanging out at a park in the middle of the day on a Wednesday for some reason) accused her of calling an unattended 5-year-old the hard R.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. Every day it seems we get more evidence that the old order is dying. I wonder what will come after, but like you, my focus is on strengthening my family and preparing for the troubles.
So to be clear, you're tone policing this woman who had the nerve to speak up against White's being a subservient Hellot class in their own country? Because it's unclear.
> Ernst Junger published The Forest Passage in 1951, at the very dawn of the postwar liberal order. He recognized, as so many failed to, that all the managerial systems of the early 20th century were totalitarian — and that liberal democracy was, in some ways the most insidious, since it required not just obedience, but enthusiastic consent to function. The authoritarians could make you say the right things, but liberals demanded that you actually believe them.
I know that language is fluid, and most people who use the word 'totalitarian' do not mean it's original dictionary definition.
But by the original dictionary definition of 'totalitarianism', the US in 2025 is more totalitarian than Nazi Germany ever was.
The original dictionary definition of 'totalitarianism' is what you'd expect from its base word. The idea that the state's scope of responsibility is _total_, and that it has the moral authority to intrude on absolutely any aspect of your life that it pleases.
Well, the Nazis definitely did a lot of that, to be certain. They were not good guys. But there are three notable ways in which Nazi society was, paradoxically, more free than American society.
1) The Nazis exercised totalitarian control over _certain demographics_ that we all have heard about a million times before, but they weren't eg shipping regular Germans to prison at scale. The scope of the goverment's totalitarian control was much smaller (Note: the _scope_ was smaller. The _extremity_ was most certainly not, but I'm not talking about evil, I'm talking about totalitarianism)
2) The Nazis lacked the technological capacity to be truly totalizing over various spheres of life. Compare today, where just about every citizen in America has multiple video cameras streaming the contents of their house, 24/7, to a server in the cloud that the NSA has absolutely, certainly wiretapped. No matter how evil the Nazis were, they didn't have the capacity to put spy cameras into every single house, so they didn't. We do, so we do. The Nazis might throw you in prison for distributing samizdat, but they didn't have the capacity to physically prevent you from doing so, the way that you can today be kicked off of social media and silenced in public.
3) The Nazis lacked the state capacity to be truly totalizing over the minutiae of life. For all of their truly horrific evil, even the Nazis didn't presume to be so fascistic as to tell you how big of a shower head you can legally have in your house. But in America, if it outputs more than 1.5 gallons per minute, you're going to jail if you don't pay the fine.
"Totalitarian" is not just a synonym for "evil" or "authoritarian", although it is these days used that way. It is rather the staking of a moral position, that any boundary to the government, any line between your public and your private life, is invalid. As Mussolini put it: "everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state". Totalitarianism says that the temperature of the thermostat in your home is a valid thing for the government to care about. Freedom says it's not.
> The problem for the regime is not that white popular opinion has shifted away from them — it hasn’t — but in some ways that would be a simpler problem, the kind of problem Western liberal democracies are actually built to solve.
> The problem is that a critical mass of people and money has become politically activated, so that transgressors against the regime will receive unconditional support regardless of popular opinion.
Assuming that this entire thing isn't some kind of glow op, I think this is the correct lesson to take aware from this.
Race relations haven't changed. What is and is not "acceptable" to say in public hasn't changed, and the punishers still give out the punishments they always do.
The right is still full of cucks, and care more about avoiding Liberal name-calling than they do about winning, or justice, or fairness.
But what this shows is that, exactly as you said, there is now a critical mass of people asking "what's the punishment for being late? And what's the punishment for treason?" in the back of their minds, and coming to certain conclusions.
Public opinion hasn't shifted (+/- I kind of don't think public opinion is a coherent concept). What has happened is that there's now a critical mass of disaffected people who can act unilaterally even without public support.
It remains to be seen if this is good or bad. For all my internet edgeposting, actual racists and actual right wing supremacists _are_ bad, and I would prefer them not to have this level of power in society. But the silver lining is that this incident represents a critical mass of people who are unafraid to speak _and act_ in defiance of the FAG GAE(*)'s state religion, regardless of the pushback.
Commenting before reading, I apologize if this post addresses this in any way
I dug into this event last night, and part of me thinks the whole thing is a hoax. I don't know.
But basically, I wanted to reach out to this woman to express support, so I spent almost half an hour looking for her contact information. I couldn't find anything. I couldn't even find any record of her being a real person online.
Meanwhile, she's raised half a million dollars because she needs to move to a new city because everyone is posting her private identifying information online. The same information that I couldn't find with a half an hour of searching.
It could be that the news coverage is just drowning out the search results. It could be that she meant this information is being traded privately, in woke activist group chats. But all I know is, she has half a million dollars because people posted her information online, but I can't find any of that information. Take that as you will.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. Every day it seems we get more evidence that the old order is dying. I wonder what will come after, but like you, my focus is on strengthening my family and preparing for the troubles.
So to be clear, you're tone policing this woman who had the nerve to speak up against White's being a subservient Hellot class in their own country? Because it's unclear.
Tangent
> Ernst Junger published The Forest Passage in 1951, at the very dawn of the postwar liberal order. He recognized, as so many failed to, that all the managerial systems of the early 20th century were totalitarian — and that liberal democracy was, in some ways the most insidious, since it required not just obedience, but enthusiastic consent to function. The authoritarians could make you say the right things, but liberals demanded that you actually believe them.
I know that language is fluid, and most people who use the word 'totalitarian' do not mean it's original dictionary definition.
But by the original dictionary definition of 'totalitarianism', the US in 2025 is more totalitarian than Nazi Germany ever was.
The original dictionary definition of 'totalitarianism' is what you'd expect from its base word. The idea that the state's scope of responsibility is _total_, and that it has the moral authority to intrude on absolutely any aspect of your life that it pleases.
Well, the Nazis definitely did a lot of that, to be certain. They were not good guys. But there are three notable ways in which Nazi society was, paradoxically, more free than American society.
1) The Nazis exercised totalitarian control over _certain demographics_ that we all have heard about a million times before, but they weren't eg shipping regular Germans to prison at scale. The scope of the goverment's totalitarian control was much smaller (Note: the _scope_ was smaller. The _extremity_ was most certainly not, but I'm not talking about evil, I'm talking about totalitarianism)
2) The Nazis lacked the technological capacity to be truly totalizing over various spheres of life. Compare today, where just about every citizen in America has multiple video cameras streaming the contents of their house, 24/7, to a server in the cloud that the NSA has absolutely, certainly wiretapped. No matter how evil the Nazis were, they didn't have the capacity to put spy cameras into every single house, so they didn't. We do, so we do. The Nazis might throw you in prison for distributing samizdat, but they didn't have the capacity to physically prevent you from doing so, the way that you can today be kicked off of social media and silenced in public.
3) The Nazis lacked the state capacity to be truly totalizing over the minutiae of life. For all of their truly horrific evil, even the Nazis didn't presume to be so fascistic as to tell you how big of a shower head you can legally have in your house. But in America, if it outputs more than 1.5 gallons per minute, you're going to jail if you don't pay the fine.
"Totalitarian" is not just a synonym for "evil" or "authoritarian", although it is these days used that way. It is rather the staking of a moral position, that any boundary to the government, any line between your public and your private life, is invalid. As Mussolini put it: "everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state". Totalitarianism says that the temperature of the thermostat in your home is a valid thing for the government to care about. Freedom says it's not.
Commenting while reading
> The problem for the regime is not that white popular opinion has shifted away from them — it hasn’t — but in some ways that would be a simpler problem, the kind of problem Western liberal democracies are actually built to solve.
> The problem is that a critical mass of people and money has become politically activated, so that transgressors against the regime will receive unconditional support regardless of popular opinion.
Assuming that this entire thing isn't some kind of glow op, I think this is the correct lesson to take aware from this.
Race relations haven't changed. What is and is not "acceptable" to say in public hasn't changed, and the punishers still give out the punishments they always do.
The right is still full of cucks, and care more about avoiding Liberal name-calling than they do about winning, or justice, or fairness.
But what this shows is that, exactly as you said, there is now a critical mass of people asking "what's the punishment for being late? And what's the punishment for treason?" in the back of their minds, and coming to certain conclusions.
Public opinion hasn't shifted (+/- I kind of don't think public opinion is a coherent concept). What has happened is that there's now a critical mass of disaffected people who can act unilaterally even without public support.
It remains to be seen if this is good or bad. For all my internet edgeposting, actual racists and actual right wing supremacists _are_ bad, and I would prefer them not to have this level of power in society. But the silver lining is that this incident represents a critical mass of people who are unafraid to speak _and act_ in defiance of the FAG GAE(*)'s state religion, regardless of the pushback.
(*) (F)ake (A)nd (G)ay (G)lobal (A)merican (E)mpire
Commenting before reading, I apologize if this post addresses this in any way
I dug into this event last night, and part of me thinks the whole thing is a hoax. I don't know.
But basically, I wanted to reach out to this woman to express support, so I spent almost half an hour looking for her contact information. I couldn't find anything. I couldn't even find any record of her being a real person online.
Meanwhile, she's raised half a million dollars because she needs to move to a new city because everyone is posting her private identifying information online. The same information that I couldn't find with a half an hour of searching.
It could be that the news coverage is just drowning out the search results. It could be that she meant this information is being traded privately, in woke activist group chats. But all I know is, she has half a million dollars because people posted her information online, but I can't find any of that information. Take that as you will.