Every edition of The America First Weekly includes Five Questions (a Q&A with an interesting figure, pseud or otherwise), Links & Screeds (all editors get to weigh in on anything they choose), and a friends-link to an original Featured Article by one of the AFW editors.
Thanks for reading. Please share this newsletter with your friends!
Ulysses S. Musculus: You are one of the people lots of folks are following regarding the possible evidence of election tampering. Can you break down Benford's Law for our readers and how you used it to attempt to detect election fraud in the 2020 election?
Spotted Toad: I'm no statistician. My limited understanding of Benford's Law is that it is most useful in detecting manipulation of numbers that range across several orders of magnitude—vendor payments from a small business, for example. It might be that a large number of counties or other reporting units across a whole state would provide that range, but probably not precincts in a single city. In any case, I think the Benford's Law numbers are at best one minor indication of what appears to be a much broader pattern of manipulation, and I haven't emphasized it much in the threads I published about the shift in Milwaukee's vote totals overnight and the patterns of ballot returns in Pennsylvania.
As I said, I'm no statistician, and at one level it's reasonable to attack me for trying to show what I think is happening in the election, given my lack of credentials. On the other hand, it seems to me quite likely—just using your eyes and looking around at what just happened—that a concerted effort to steal a presidential election just took place with the active and passive collusion of media, some corporate and government actors, and with most of the relevant credentialed experts unwilling even to examine the possibility seriously from the onset, due to being dead-set against Trump. If there's even a reasonable chance that this describes accurately what just happened, it's an enormous threat to the country. Not only would a powerful coterie have decided that they can take elections for granted, but the nation as a whole will have learned that the powerful no longer serve at their discretion, and learn not to believe in their own power to demand representative government.
And so, even though I may be poorly qualified for this, I'm trying to approach the task of describing what I see as evidence for manipulation as honestly as I can, admitting my mistakes when I make them (I've already made some real boners) and moving on.
Musculus: If you had to place odds on the presidential election at this exact moment, what odds would you take for Trump?
Toad: Trump's great strength is that he seems to genuinely believe things are going to work out great in the end, no matter the circumstances. This year has had a lot of dark twists, but I'd like to think we're living in a comedy in the largest sense rather than a tragedy. America is a lucky country, and while we've had stumbles, I'd like to think we're going to right ourselves and move forwards. If there has been large-scale election fraud, this absolutely means some accountability for those responsible, but also a sense among the public that our systems have worked to provide an imperfect but broadly trustworthy result. To me, that is what I'd like to put my hopes on, though I don't know if that's a bet or a prayer.
Musculus: Great thinkers as diverse as the American Founders and Dante in his Divine Comedy have explained the dangers of factionalism. Many people sense that we are living in a divided nation. Do you see us as factional? Why/Why not?
Toad: My limited understanding of Dante's time is that the division centered on competing sources of authority, Pope and Emperor in particular. There's a parallel insofar as the factionalism of our own time also seems to pit a kind of religious against civil authority, with the sense-making institutions of academia, media, and technology taking on the role of a new church pitted against the constitutional structures of the American nation, and against the lingering stars-and-stripes civic religion of an earlier time. There was a lot of irony in the graffiti "1619" found on toppled civic monuments this summer, not least because it was a reference to a project of the once staid New York Times, that set out to undermine the civic religion's belief in the nation's birth. But 2020 is in many ways the year once staid sense-making institutions declared open hostility against the historical American nation.
One characteristic of this kind of factionalism, I believe, is that allegiance to faction actually supersedes broader patterns of identity, and I think that is what we are seeing. While immersion in and allegiance to these sense-making institutions matters—Democrats are increasingly the party of college goers across race and income—once you are committed to a faction that identity is what matters most. My own blue-state middle class neighborhood is a hodgepodge of BLM and "Hate has no Home Here" signs, Trump and Thin Blue Line flags, and stars-and-stripes. At this moment, it is hard to believe we are going to reconcile our differences and come to believe in ourselves as a united nation, but it may yet come to be; for the moment, my neighbors seem to look past their political differences and greet each other with friendliness and cheer.
On the other hand, I believe the Pope's forces won, and Dante spent the latter part of his life in exile, where he composed the Divine Comedy. The sense-making institutions are genuinely ascendant, and particularly if they brush aside the resistance of existing civil institutions in this election and continue to rule arbitrarily using the threat of coronavirus and climate change, it is difficult to envision the other side winning back—but never say never.
Musculus: You and I both use pseuds. Do you see the rise (or return) of pseudonymous writing as a means to an end or as an end in itself? Perhaps, "an end in itself" sounds too strange when said of pseuds. Maybe a better question is, "What is the end, or point, of writing as a pseud?"
Toad: The overwhelming majority of what I've written as Spotted Toad would never have been written under my own name. Part of that is because I would have been afraid to give offense, part because much of it is self-indulgent, part because I have often waded into waters I have no formal qualifications for, and part because having a pseudonym offers some mental distance that has helped me evade my own self-doubt and resistance to putting ideas down. Every few months I feel like I've finally exhausted whatever can come out of this identity—and admittedly a lot of what has come out is incoherent, inconsistent, and often not that good. And then it seems like there's something else I—or at least Toad—is supposed to say, and this part is not quite played.
Musculus: Any thoughts on the demographic breakdown of the election?
Toad: There's something a little sad about the loss of the Republican who won the most votes of non-whites in at least 60 years be cast as a defeat for white supremacy. It's pretty clear there's an increasing realignment in the country, in part based on class, with wealthier people moving left, in part based on immersion in those cross-national sense-making institutions I mentioned, and in part based on individuals' identification with the greatest of emerging sense-making institutions, the internet. The Democrats are becoming the Party of the Matrix, of people who perceive their sexual, familial, racial, and political identities solely through the prism of these magical glowing screens.
And yes, as someone who—clearly—has a lot of trouble logging off, you might easily say that I'm one to talk.
Links & Screeds
Every week, each AFW editor comments on the news, shares links, talks about what he’s reading, or just rants. Presented in the order they arrive in the Managing Editor’s inbox…
The 2020 Election is going to shove a giant redpill up our bungalows. Imagine all the normies out there who believe Biden is the uncontested “president elect.” It’s hard to imagine how they didn’t learn their lesson when they learned that Trump wasn’t a Russian spy, or that Nick Sandmann wasn’t a white supremacist bully, or that Jussie Smollet wasn’t victimized by MAGA monsters in the dead of night. It’s hard to imagine how they maintained credulity after the accusations that Kavanaugh was a serial rapist exposed the media’s sinister machinations.
But I have to believe that Old Media is running out of blue pills. They’ve exhausted their supply trying to cure the 2020 Election of jaundice.
To switch metaphors: Old systems are hard to raze, no matter how corrupt. Our Wrecking-Ball in Chief, though, is having a joyous time smashing through the dilapidation. I feel for the normies. They’ve been duped and duped and duped again.
Clearly, what’s needed is not just massive demolition but also new construction. We’ve heard that Parler is beginning to lay a foundation. Good for them. But to whom shall we turn for news? Take a look at a few electoral-map graphics as of Thursday. Which one seems the most honest? Which one seems to care about their readers, giving them an accurate glimpse into reality? Whose readership will be less likely to erupt in paroxysms of rage and incredulity when that glorious Orange Man is sworn in to his second term?
The Epoch Times:
Amazing that all these maps can be found at the same time, purporting to reflect the same event. What will be more amazing still is the Old Media’s attempt to rationalize their false reporting. By then, one hopes, the red pill will begin to take effect and the normies will have stopped listening to them.
When the truth drops, they will need time to recover. They won’t be ready to start a new relationship with other media quite yet. They’ll need to learn that it’s okay to be alone for a while. But when they’re ready to throw off their warm blankets of despair and disbelief, they’ll see that not all news outlets are as abusively manipulative as their past relationships. Some do play it straight. And the media that decided not to call the election when all others had should be credited for the audacity to state the obvious.
C. Bradley Thompson, author of the infamous “Pajama Boy Nietzscheans” essay at The American Mind, complains about the venom of his opponents, but he seems to have plenty himself. He also gets lots of things wrong. Here’s one, from his long email series on TAM’s Substack:
Most of the young men on the dissident Right were once dyed-in-the-wool conservatives or libertarians, but virtually all of them were red-pilled by the increasing radicalization of the totalitarian Left and by the inability, unwillingness, and cowardice of Conservatism Inc. and Libertarianism Inc. to defend the principles of a free society against the transgressions of the cultural Marxists.
Okay, okay, Thompson isn’t totally incorrect, here, but he’s overlooking something major in the development of the Dissident Right. As I noted on Twitter, the Dissident Right is more than just a backlash against woke leftism (and limp-wristed conservatism). While members of the Dissident Right may have been little BoomerCon clones first (I was), before that, many of us were leftists (I was). If not committed leftists, then many of us were at least formed and shaped in leftist laboratories (public schools, the media, liberal churches, universities/colleges, etc.).
Why does this matter? Because the Dissident Right learned to love America after being taught America was evil. Not just the old stuff like the “extermination” of the Indians, slavery, and Jim Crow. We’re talking about modern stuff like Cointelpro, Mossadegh, the Pentagon Papers, Watergate, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, WMDs, and more. We had to recover from all of that programming in order to love America—which we eventually did. But once we became patriots, we never lost the sense that our institutions are terribly corrupt.
So, the young Dissident Right is very different from the Pollyanna-ish, Morning in America conservatives not just because we’ve seen the BoomerCon Right totally fail to win any important battles against the Left. We’re starting from an entirely different point of view, that America is lovely despite the fact that most of our institutions are evil. And this “pessimism,” if that’s what you want to call it, is fundamentally different from Reaganesque suspicion of the federal government. We’ve been propagandized to believe that corruption (moral and intellectual) is the hallmark of all institutions, not just governmental. Of course, widespread institutional corruption is not all that hard to propagandize when your lying eyes see it all around you.
The potent combination of propagandized corruption and real corruption extends to all of our institutions:
Our churches (cf. the ‘90s era high-profile moral failings of evangelical pastors, the Catholic abuse crisis, widespread media mockery of Christians for their repressed, narrow-minded hypocrisy)
The media (public schools have long been relentless debunkers of the misogyny, racism, and fat-shaming in mass media, so the Dissident Right was primed to reject the media once Trump called it “Fake News” and “Enemy of the People”—once upon a time, liberal schoolteachers taught us basically the same thing)
Family (the preponderance of divorce, negative media portrayals of fathers like in The Simpsons, lurid tales of parental abuse of their children—I grew up with wall-to-wall news coverage of Scott Peterson)
Schools (personal experience is enough for this)
I could go on. But what should be clear is that leftism is not to blame for all of this. All of the adults are. And in many ways, the left primed us to understand and make the Trumpian critiques of at least some of these institutions.
What must be made clear, however, is that the Dissident Right is emerging from this civilizational disaster with a heart full of LOVE: love of country, love of lost tradition, love of family, love for Donald Trump, and love for each other. Even though we were taught to hate. That’s no small thing.
In joy and in sorrow, be thoughtful;
Long and fearful in suspended pain;
Rejoicing to heaven, grieving to death;
Blessed alone is the soul that loves.
-Clara from Goethe’s Egmont
Untameable Native King
Only a civil war will clear a path for virtue.
“I wish we were all going crazy fighting rather than hiding from this bullshit,” said a normie friend of mine just a couple days ago.
How do you emasculate the American man? Force him to stay inside his house and not go outside. It flies in the face of everything that men desire to do. Face the world and strive or fail? No. Go back inside. Watch the Antifa/BLM riot burn a nearby city down on the periscope stream. If you attend a Trump rally, you’re a super spreading bigot and if you attend your local church service, you’re a super spreader who isn’t a real Christian at all.
The initial American Revolution began, in part, because the British government forced its way into the colonists’ houses. Male energy meeting male energy. Whose dick is longer? Can you keep me out of your house? It’s the same root cause that drives young adolescents in locker rooms around the country to physically violate one another’s personal space.
“Can you keep me out, bitch?” And until you can, you have no intrinsic “right” to it.
Some would say I shouldn’t argue for a right to others’ personal space and my retort would be that if the Pueblo were stronger they wouldn’t have built their homes without doors. See, the Apache and Comanche were so vicious and powerful that the Pueblo tribes put holes on their roofs and then pulled up their ladders at night to prevent the despoliation of their dwellings.
“Live in your pod.”
“Eat your bugs.”
Back we go to Colonial America 1775. Perhaps some small village, Milford, outside Hartford, Connecticut. A soldier in red presents himself at your door, King George’s notice in hand, and claims sleeping space in your house. You’ve been emasculated. Your wife knows who owns the house. Your children see who is in charge.
“Dad, can’t tell those guys to leave,” they say, looking with longing at the grenadier’’s silver buckles. Your daughter passes by a redcoat and runs her fingers along his leg. With any luck he won’t leave here without, sometime later that night in the barnyard, passing her his “superior” genetics.
In 1776, we revolted over this. And yet, Joe Biden has already been doing this to America’s daughters for 47 years. Why? Because he knows America’s castrated men will do nothing about it. They will pay for their daughter’s therapy, hit their Juul, and go back to Call Of Duty where they can live out their male fantasy.
Why, you ask, do young men pick up guns and creep into school buildings or shopping centers to massacre as many people as possible before either committing suicide or submitting to the law?
Why, you ask, do so many men, both young and old, kill themselves either through direct violence, shooting, jumping off bridges, suicide by cop or indirect methods through substance abuse?
Why, you ask, do so many young men find themselves canceled, at a young age, by school authorities who demand submission and obedience without regard for justice or virtue?
Why, you ask, do 7 million men find themselves paroled, incarcerated or on probation?
They don’t want to have their balls cut off.
The majority of Joe Biden’s support comes from suburban, college-educated white men who’ve offered their testes to the Secular Materialist Dieties. 1.7 children and a sexless marriage in exchange for a comfortable couch, endless NFL replays and something warm and doughy they can shove in their mouth.
Comfort and stability at the small price of their vitality. They are the Docents whom Kierkegaard warned us about.
“What will the police do? What will the newspapers say?”
They have no future. A state that frees men and allows them to pursue their constructive (and sometimes destructive) vision of the good allows them to thrive. A state that quarantines them cuts off their balls.
Jesus said, “Some men are born eunuchs, some are made eunuchs and some choose to be eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom.”
These men chose a fourth way and there’s nothing for them but to be thrown in the fire.
Ulysses S. Musculus
Pandemic parties are only held in secret. We are, after all, in a nation-state along the West Coast and you never know who is watching. Young folks gather outside round a ping pong table with a thirty-pack of macrobrew sweating in the setting sunlight. The rigged election is still a few weeks off; we don’t yet know Donald Trump will win the largest percentage of minorities of any conservative in living memory. Still, in anticipation, political chatter bubbles through the normal small talk.
The Mexican-American woman talking to me is doing her graduate work in environmental engineering. She is twenty-five. Still young enough, by modern standards, to be marriageable and have kids. But when I ask about her future she describes the NGO she wants to go work for before moving on to a PhD. She doesn’t want to have more than one kid, and she may have none. This is so she can save the planet. She bears all the signs of having been brainwashed into a suicidal cult.
“Tell me about your family.”
Her parents were the first to make it to the USA. She had a sister and a brother. Her parents each had four or more siblings. I ask her what her abuela thinks of her.
“Mi abuela thinks I’m overeducated.” This is likely true. There is a sickness in an education which attempts to subvert the indigenous culture of these communities in favor of “elite” culture and replace their fulsome conception of justice with what environmental studies professors say is just.
I admonish her to be more like her Mexican ancestors and consider having kids, plural, before it is too late. It is either that or admit that the endpoint of your family is to assimilate into a faux elite “white” culture, the endpoint of which is the end of her genetic and cultural line.
She’s not unconvinced. But what failed with her seems to have convinced many of her kin. The logic of the realignment is setting in for many Latinos. As Chris Arnade has noted, the Democrat Party is the party of college educated, coastal, religionless, unmarried women.
The Republican party is for the aspiring classes, heartland, faithful, and for families. Just note the birth rate when broken down by political position: the more conservative, the more kids. Not only does that create a long term demographic advantage for conservatives, but it also creates an immediate attraction for anyone with lots of kids. Urban dwellers with two or more kids can only tolerate being shamed as retrograde for so long before they flip. And the Latinos don’t give a shit if you call them racist for voting in their self interest.
This realignment is bringing about the long delayed GOP dream of welcoming the Latinos and Latinas (but no Latinx) into the big conservative tent. What party operatives never suspected is that rather than having them come to us, we would have to drag the party to them. And ay mami can those Latinos party! The election isn’t over, and the realignment has just begun. We are all Hispanic supremacists now.
In every week’s edition of The America First Weekly, we provide a “friends link” (no Medium subscription required) to that week’s original article written by one of the editors.
Like the United Kingdom occupying Ireland, the globalists are a wealthy and powerful minority that considers the people they are ruling to be incapable of ruling themselves. If Biden “wins,” they will spend the next four years perfecting their technology of control.
While on a walk last week (solvitur ambulando), I (Bedivere) realized that we ought to conceive of our current situation as that of a colonial occupation. How so? And if so, what are we supposed to do about it?
I suggest you read the essay while listening to Beethoven’s Overture from Egmont, the Goethe play about the Count of Egmont, who resists the despotic power of the Spanish Crown. And he wasn’t just a theatrical character: Count Egmont was an historical figure whose execution by the Spanish power set off the Eighty Years War, which culminated, after generations of fighting, in the Netherlands’ victory over Spain and Dutch independence.
How appropriate, then, that Beethoven’s Overture in honor of that doomed (but, in the long run, victorious) figure became the unofficial hymn of the doomed (but, in the long run, victorious) 1956 Hungarian Revolution against Communism and Soviet power.
Here’s the 1965 Hungarian award-winning short “Overture,” which in a political allegory sets the Egmont Overture to a 21-day time-lapse of the embryonic development of a baby chick.
And here’s the opening of the Egmont Overture set to some historical footage of the ‘56 revolution (watch at least the opening to see the Red Star fall unceremoniously from atop a skyscraper). And it is in Count Egmont’s honor that we put his portrait (with a judicious AFW edit to the background) atop this week’s newsletter.
With all that out of the way, ecce: You Are Living Under an Occupation.