site banner
Goodguy  1d ago (text post)   Edited 1d ago   8145 thread views

Midterms Megathread

Cause otherwise midterms discussion will be scattered around a bunch of separate Culture War thread posts. And it's nice to have more off-the-cuff rapid reactions in a dedicated megathread.

The first thing I've noticed so far: if the exit polls are correct, Americans are very pessimistic about AI.

12
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I get the frustration, but I don't know how much more good tzar, bad boyars cope I can handle. The only people giving small-dollar donations to Republicans are 78-year-old paypigs. Maybe the consultants sucked Musk and Adelson dry. Of course, no one can say that Miriam didn't get what she paid for.

Trump betrayed the voters himself. First by playing hide-and-seek with the Epstein Files, then more substantively by starting and losing a war with Iran. Don't think for a second that he isn't okay with whatever brazen corruption is occuring in the campaign finance realm. It is at least a small credit to him that he keeps the corruption network close and in-house, rather than treating it as an expandable franchise enterprise as the Democrats are wont to do.

If you think I'm here to defend Trump, you are badly mistaken. I have written about a dozen comments livid with Trump specifically saying that his behavior is shredding the coalition. At the same time, we need to realize none of this happens if Trump doesn't create the opportunity himself near single-handedly to begin with.

Trump indeed did betray the voters himself, but he's certainly not alone and it's worth it to talk about why and how it went off the rails. You're talking about the donor base after Trump already shredded the coalition.

Your criticism is true for a good portion of people, but it doesn't have much to do with me.

Don't think for a second that he isn't okay with whatever brazen corruption is occuring in the campaign finance realm.

you base this on what, exactly?

Trump isn't okay with brazen corruption, he just largely doesn't know about most of it and doesn't really want to be involved enough to know about it, especially when he feels it's other people making money off of his name (at least without him getting a cut). Trump isn't a details guy or a daily manager guy.

rather than treating it as an expandable franchise enterprise as the Democrats are wont to do

not for lack of trying, he's just not that competent at doing it and the GOP are largely the junior varsity team derps

Exactly. I’m amazed there are still Trump supporters here. He’s not that guy. He’s had 10 years and hasn’t delivered anything meaningful. He has to go. He is the problem. Time to give someone else a chance even if you like Trump’s policies.

"He dunks on the woke" has been absurdly motivating for 10+ years. I don't think its rocket surgery, at least for our cohort.

Trump's gotta go and yet we would be far worse off without Trump creating it all to begin with

I wish some of you were around to the truly dark, pointless days of the GOP under McCain or Romney

Not necessarily. Only if the right seizes the moment because he also radicalized the left.

the Obama administration's behavior, especially post 2012, is good evidence it's not Trump causing the radicalization on the left and they find something to get radicalized and push until they find resistance anyway

no one is coming to save any of us, we're going to have to do something in the real world

Obama is nothing like Mamdami, The Squad, and the DSA. Wd have a Muslim mayor of NYC and a Muslim Senator now. Socialism is massively popular now with young people.

The problem with Trump though is that he super charges the left without actually making any long term gains. Obviously they are going to be pissed and that is fine, but he pisses them off and then does nothing tangible. The things he does do well he communicates poorly on and can all be overturned by the next administration

The only thing he did well was blow open the Overton Window on race, immigration, and white identity, but that has no benefit if nobody does anything with the opportunity.

Obama is largely the same as these three, except earlier, more dangerous and effective. Obama winning in 2012 radicalized and emboldened the left. Mamdani and Abdulla are not Muslims in any meaningful sense; they're empty foreigners who are playing racial resentment politics and saying whatever they need to say to get power just like Obama did. They're the solved meta for leftist politics. The demographic replacement happened before Trump "super charged," them with likely 100,000,000 foreigners in the US by the time he took office.

The American economic system is socialism for the rich and the poor and capitalism for the middle-class. Why wouldn't the young be interested in socialism for themselves as well? The current American economic system is everyone gets stuff except for them and they're looking at their lives being far worse than their parents or their grandparents. They would be interested in anything which gives them answers to these problems.

The only thing he did well was blow open the Overton Window on race, immigration, and white identity

even if this was true: Oh? Is that it? As opposed to pre-Trump GOP who were constantly trying to convince their voters for decades to accept illegal amnesty deals and destroying the lives of anyone on their own side who even got slightly close to these topics?

sure dude, this has been a fuckup and a failure and a disaster, but having no Trump would have been worse

not that it particularly matters, we didn't know it would end up like this when we first started and trying anything, especially in politics, means putting something on the table and accepting risk you could fail and things get worse

When is Hitler 2.0 running?

I’d be fine with Vance, DeSantis, or Rubio at this point. As long as Trump is gone. He’s incompetent and chaotic for no benefit. If we’re not getting Hitler 2.0 then let’s just do managed decline and we can all live peacefully. I’ve accepted that’s probably best case scenario at this point.

If we’re not getting Hitler 2.0 then let’s just do managed decline

As opposed to...

Presumably Hitler 2.0 would be immediate and catastrophic decline that leaves the country a bombed-out ruin?

Hitler 1.0 was defeated by the combined armies of white men that are long dead.
Who could possibly stop Hitler 2.0?

Well…himself.

What are these guys going to do?
Could they even win against one of these drunk women the Dems are fielding?

we can all live peacefully.

That's until the President says that that rioter the police shot was his son or some other bs.
Without Trumpian youth American streets would not get pacified. You'll get a cop knocking at the door after your next X (formerly Twitter) post right for tea time. What we've seen so far is the beginning of the bad. Trump put a halt to much of it, but it barely even began.
Remember in 2021 they wanted to get you fired if you did not take a shot.
Have you taken your daily capsule of Anti-whiteness yet citizen? We have reports that bad thoughts were being emitted in your area.

I don't think you understand how fucked we (as in white conservatives) are already. I moved out of Texas recently and it is probably 30% white now. Chicago is noticeably more white than Texas cities. Texas is going to be permanently Blue. All you need to do is go to a Costco to see this. It's done. Trump's antics have radicalized the left so much that if they win all 3 branches of government in 28, they are going to open the borders like we've never seen before. At this point, if you care about demographics, it's either Hitler 2.0 Reconquista right now or it's over. If you aren't down with that (and it looks like America isn't hence the response to ICE raids) then that's about as good as we can hope for. There are no white pills to be had. Vance is the best the dissident right can ever hope for, as sad as that is.

Trump did not make anybody open the borders.
Trump's antics got him elected which is better than any of these other yahoos could hope for.
I don't really care about demographics, maybe local power at this point.
Demographics vote their way into what we have now anyway.

Accelerationists are so tiresome. There are still white progressives in South Africa.

I'm not pro or against accelerationists.
Source on the white progressives in South Africa? A combination of extremely low birthrates and aversion for same-race coupling should lead them to extinction.

Trump is the accelerationist. At this point I want Trump out of the way so maybe we can get a competent Republican in there in 28. I want Trump to step down and give JD a shot at turning this shit show around.

Cool. What’s the most controversial thing you believe which the highest percent of progressives would disagree with about?

Outlaw Islam and Judaism. Tear up the constitution and rewrite it to make America and explicitly white nation. Strip the vast majority of non-white people of their citizenship. Sanction Israel so harshly it doesn't exist anymore (but they'd probably agree with me there). None of the Israelis would be allowed to move to America or Europe. Deport all Muslims from Europe and outlaw Islam there too. Execute Trump for treason for selling out the US to Israeli interests.

Sanction Israel so harshly it doesn't exist anymore [...] None of the Israelis would be allowed to move to America or Europe.

Making the Muslims do your dirty work seems unsporting, not to mention quite fraught wrt. the Samson Option. If you want a job done well, do it yourself.

Strip the vast majority of non-white people of their citizenship.

How considerate of you to acknowledge America's original owners. Less sarcastically, why merely "the vast majority", and if you are (presumably) convinced of the white man's superiority, why do you constrain yourself to America?

Bonus nitpick, but if you're willing to implement explicit ethnonationalism, religious exclusion on top seems a bit redundant - unless you also really hate Albanians/only hate Orthodox Jews for some reason.

Bonus nitpick, but if you're willing to implement explicit ethnonationalism, religious exclusion on top seems a bit redundant - unless you also really hate Albanians/only hate Orthodox Jews for some reason.

"White" as a political category is closer to "non-Black and culturally Christian" than it is to "member of the Caucasian family of ethnic groups". Nobody thinks that Arabs and Turks (who are no swarthier than white Sicilians) are politically white, and most white nationalists are not fond of Jews either. Which religion we don't believe in is fundamental to who the ingroup is.

Albanians are unwanted immigrants in western Europe based on their religion and criminality in spite of their skin colour, and this is not controversial among European ethno-nationalists.

Most European ethnonationalists are ethnonationalists of a specific European ethnicity (French, German, Scottish etc.) The superordinate identity that covered all Europe was Christendom, not whiteness - "white nationalism" was an American thing about justifying slavery and later outgrouping ADOS blacks. Pan-European Christian nationalists have been confused about whether Christian Africa is outgroup since the days of medieval Abyssinia and Prester John.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats