We cannot live with these people

Charlie Kirk was a normiecon, and a highly effective and influential influencer. So they murdered him and celebrated it. And still do.

The left, all of it, is persistently issuing a blood libel against the right, which justifies them murdering us in “self defence”, and instead of disowning leftwing murders (“I oppose all violence” he piously says) repeats the blood libel, justifying leftists’ murders of rightists in the same breath as disowning them.

For these people, all of them, disagreement is violence, justifying retributive violence as self defence.

If a leftist is taxed on the murder of Charlie Kirk, and fails to disown the violence of Antifa, Trantifa, and Black Lives Matter, he is saying that Charlie Kirk had it coming, that I have it coming, that you have it coming, that Charlie Kirk’s wife and children have it coming, that your wife and children have it coming, and as soon as the left is back in power, he is coming for you, your wife, and your children.

If a leftist is taxed on the murder of Charlie Kirk, and says “I oppose all violence” without disowning the left wing narrative that speech that disagrees with them is violence, that thoughts that disagree with them is violence, that thoughts of which one is not consciously aware are violence, he is saying that Charlie Kirk had it coming, that I have it coming, that you have it coming, that Charlie Kirk’s wife and children have it coming, that your wife and children have it coming, and as soon as the left is back in power, he is coming for you, your wife, and your children.

The left continues to get lefter: Zohran Mamdani is about become New York Mayor, after people in his campaign called on supporters to globalise the intafada, and he elaborately and ambiguously weaseled all over the place on the phrase, and told us that that the real victim of 9/11 was his aunt who got some allegedly bad looks on the New York Subway. (Needless to say is aunt was not in America at the time, but I suppose had she been in America she might have gotten some bad looks.) He did not actually say “globalise the intafada”, but he did not not say it either. Much like a leftist denouncing all violence, without denouncing the narrative that says that your continued existence is violence.

The 2023-10-07 terror attacks in Israel were the Intafada. What is “globalising the intafada” but killing people like Charlie Kirk, people like me, people like you?

Schumer has been displaced as leader of the Democrats by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who also wants to kill us all.

Normiecons are worried about Mamdani’s tax and spend proposals, which seems likely to drive productive businesses and valuable capital out of New York. There have not been any productive businesses or valuable capital in New York for some considerable time. New York is a parasite and a metastasising cancer. The businesses that remain in New York derive their profit from power, from the revolving door between regulators and regulated, and cannot leave.

I am worried about New York becoming a base of organised violence for people who intend to kill us all.

“I oppose all violence” combined with the left wing narrative that speech that disagrees with them is violence, that thoughts that disagree with them is violence, that thoughts of which one is not consciously aware are violence is related to their redefinition of democracy. By democracy they mean bureaucracy, a thousand kings three miles away instead of one king three thousand miles away. Thus, if the merely temporary government interferes with the running of the permanent government in order to give effect to its election platform, this is dictatorship, autocracy, a coup, oligarchy, and violence is needed to defend “democracy”

This redefinition of democracy is the inverse of the reactionary criticism of democracy. We say that the merely temporary government is inherently weak against the permanent government, leading to the problem of a thousand kings three miles away, and only a single king is able to keep the bureaucrats in line. They say that any interference by the filthy disgusting bitter clingers is autocracy. If the bitter clingers elect someone who promises to represent their interests, and he actually attempts to carry out the programs on which he was elected, this is autocracy, and he is acting like a king.

Which is the truth of reaction as seen by its enemies, that to keep the deep state in line needs Kingly power. The theory of the founders was that no one should have that kind of power, but this requires a virtuous people and a virtuous ruling elite, and we lack either one. Because the power of the permanent government is so enormous, intrusive, and pervasive, it can only be controlled by a ruler whose power is even greater. Checks and balances restrain only the merely temporary government, they pose no restraint at all on the permanent government.

Every moderate mainstream leftist politician engages in blood libel against the right — a blood libel is to falsely accuse the outgroup of murdering members of your ingroup — thereby providing justification for your ingroup to murder the outgroup. We are supposedly murdering blacks, we are supposedly murdering transexuals, we are beating our wives. (Actually we are beating our wives, which is part of the reason we generally have wives and they generally do not.)

We cannot let the left take power ever again, for they will kill us all, then kill each other. We need to restrict the franchise to married male taxpaying property owning Christians with children. Or just cancel elections from here on out. For a wicked people, elections turn into an advance auction on stolen goods, and there is too much on the table, with what is on the table to be voted on increasing in each election. It has to stop.