Are You a “Cuckservative”? Take This Simple Quiz to Find Out!

In case you’re a bit late to the party, there’s a new and important political meme spreading, a game-changing litmus test for fortunes on the Right.  Some are still scratching their heads over what it’s all about, this #cuckservative thing.  I’m here to help sort it out.

Do you loudly crow about how morally reprehensible it is for anyone to say that Dylann Roof expressed legitimate grievances in his manifesto, but you think black men raping white women and murdering whites by the thousands are just sociological effects, about which we should only whisper?

Do you think those who advocate for white interests are a bigger threat to the Republican party image and electoral chances than politicians like Rand Paul and Jeb Bush, who abandon whites and pander to minorities in vain trying to get them to vote GOP?

Do you join Democrats in calling for even more measures to guarantee equal pay for women and men in similar jobs, regardless of employers’ prerogatives or natural circumstances?

Do you think the achievement gaps between races are attributable to failures of our socioeconomic systems and government, not innate differences among races?

Do you preach that most blacks and hispanics are at heart really conservatives, except they just don’t realize it yet?

Do you make sure to distance yourself from any white person who might postulate heresy on racial matters?

I think you’re getting the picture here.

As a good “cuck,” you take pains to argue for more legal immigration into the U.S.(from wherever), even while you feebly object to the ongoing waves of millions of illegals pouring in from the third world.

You’re cautious to explain that people of any and all ethnic nationalities can be expected to become good, loyal Americans, and not alter the essential character of our country no matter how many millions of them swarm in — so long as they “accept the rule of law” and the Constitution, etc.

You’d sooner denounce and ban the Confederate flag than the rainbow fudgepack-flag which flies at your workplace, because your bourgeois lifestyle, image, and sense of self-worth demand that you maintain your job and polite relationships with whoever.  Better that your children be taken camping by Dan Savage than anyone see you as some kind of hateful bigot!

You’re so terrified of being labelled a racist that you’ll eagerly continue to support or at least be quiet about anti-white trends, and angrily throw other whites under the bus if they try to stick up for white interests.

You’ll make sure everyone knows how much you revere Martin Luther King, while you wouldn’t be caught dead praising Jared Taylor.

You’ve been cuckolded by the anti-white elements pervading our politics.  You imagine that the invasion and rape of your nation by non-whites is happening under your own altruistic direction, even while you watch in the sick satisfaction of your ethno-masochistic expense, and you get a smug and sanctimonious feeling of superiority when you chastise, censor, and condemn anyone expressing ideas about preserving a white majority and protecting white interests.

You’re repulsed more by white racism than you are by the non-white predators and the perverts who are raping and murdering your wives, sons, and daughters, and you think the KKK are worse than mainstream whites actually paying to be out-bred by non-whites.  That makes you a disgusting and pathetic cuckservative.  What makes it even worse is that your conventional, play-it-safe mindset helps perpetuate the status quo, instead of pushing for radical change.

I Was Becoming a Carly Fiorina Fan Until I Saw This

In her interview with Katie Couric from May, Carly Fiorina went on and on about how if you don’t have a room full of “diversity” when making an important decision, you will not get the decision right.  For Fiorina, it’s all about hiring women (and of course anyone else who isn’t a straight white male), and she goes on at length insisting that a lack of diversity is, in and of itself, evidence of an absence of merit.

I had been inclined very favorably toward Fiorina, especially because of her ability to otherwise handle left-biased media encounters like this with supreme skill, until I saw the politically correct total b.s in this interview.

The remarks to which I refer begin at the 9:43 mark, and continue to 13:00.

Fiorina emphasizes, adamantly, that she believes that unless you have “true meritocracy,” you won’t have the diversity she advocates.  Pu-leeze.

She’s completely stellar in the rest of the long interview, on other important topics.  But I’m done with her.

America Was a Blip on the Timeline of History

Entities have identities.  To identify a nation, or anything else, is to define it.  That is, it must have specific limits — one must be able to tell what it is, largely by ruling out what it is not, implicitly and explicitly.  In the case of a country, there must be territorial boundaries.  It also has have additional characteristics to distinguish it from other countries.

That’s where America went wrong.  In trying to be all things to all people everywhere around the globe (not so much a place, necessarily, but an idea, of limitless opportunity and diversity), we have dissolved ourselves right out of existence.  Paradoxically, we’ve reached our limit on the timeline of history by not observing the limits which would allow us to continue as a nation.

It seems to the point where any person, anywhere on the planet may be declared to be “in the true spirit of what it is to be an American,” while anyone else who might dare to question that claim is suspected of a hate-crime.

When everything is up for grabs, you do not have identity.  You have an imaginary, formless jump-ball with no surface rubber or skin, a dry vapor, on a court with no boundaries in a game with no rules.  Chaos.

We have elected leaders who see the very idea of border and interior immigration enforcement as either cruel and immoral, or an undesirable impediment to commerce, or to continuing generational transfer-payments (or all of the above), and so they refuse to enforce immigration law to the point where our territorial identity has about vanished.

These same leaders give speeches in foreign lands, proclaiming themselves foremost to be citizens of the world.  The overall message is that national identity and integrity/sovereignty is something to be eschewed, in favor of a pan-global universalism wherein the United Nations is the governing body, and anyone holding out loyalties to a particular nation is a backward bigot.

Our eventual demise was baked into our founding documents from the beginning, really.  The Enlightenment gave us: “…all men are created equal.”  Nowadays, it’s all people (women too).  Therefore, everyone on the planet has just as much right as anyone else to proclaim themselves citizens of wherever.  The concept of American identity, then, becomes more and more meaningless, because if everyone everywhere has equal opportunity and identity, then comparatively no one really has any actual opportunity, nor any particular identity which can be verified.  Why bother, then, with borders or distinct cultures?

In the early-stage Enlightenment decades during and after America’s founding, the men who made the rules still firmly believed in racial hierarchy and ethnic nationalism, despite their professed egalitarian ideals.  For better or worse, all white men were ostensibly deemed to be created equal; black men were not really considered men, in the same way that a donkey is not a horse, even though the two share enough DNA to be able to produce offspring — which is a mule, not a horse.  I’m just stating facts here, regarding history, biology, identity, and our founders’ beliefs.

My, how things have changed.  Over time, equality and representative democracy mean everyone can vote, and just keep voting themselves more rights and more stuff, virtually to the point of “voting for a living.”  Conservatives and progressives alike accept and cherish the stated ideal of the Declaration of Independence, and we’ve watched it all hurtle toward the obliteration of all boundaries and limits.  Staggering debt means nothing, because it’s reached the point of being mathematically impossible to ever pay off.  Responsibility?  For chumps.

So we’re alive in the time of the unraveling of the national sweater our grandmothers knit to protect us from the elements.  And we haven’t yet found it worthwhile to knit anything new to replace it — it’s like we’ve gone nudist colony, in the cultural sense.  We’ve swallowed the Enlightenment idea that we won’t need a sweater to protect us from moral hazard, because after all, if everyone’s equal, everyone’s entitled to whatever territory and redistributed property, and so on.

It was a nice sweater while it lasted.

We do need new layers of skin and social fabric, to protect us and give us a distinguishable identity.  On the infinitely broad timeline of history, it will emerge to be seen where and how the lines and layers are drawn, constructed, and defended, and what name we will give the new entity.

The emperor really needs to get some clothes on.