Here's Trump's Communications Strategy

I see that Donald's new Press Secretary has informed a dismayed gathering of MSM presstitutes that tweeting will continue even after he becomes President. Good. Let him continue his tweeting. Ideally move to Gab and in the process destroy Twitter before it manages to silence him. But he should take it further. Do an FDR. Many attribute his success in selling the New Deal to the famous fireside chats with which he bypassed the media and directly addressed the American people. Donald Trump should establish the Internet Age equivalent by opening his own video channel (very cheap and simple to do) and live-stream to the nation directly while letting his spokespeople handle the weekly press briefings. All important policy initiatives should be announced on this channel, not via MSM briefings.

And he should make part of the sessions interactive by addressing questions submitted by the general public. For such a successful businessman and politician his grammar and syntax are extraordinarily bad. But that doesn't matter. He has the ability to resonate and interact with ordinary people in a way communications "professionals" cannot match. Sure he'd make snafus live on air but again people understand and forgive that.

Now is the time. With the MSM's credibility in tatters and their audience dwindling he can help render them irrelevant as a news source. Strike while they're down!  He must remember that the MSM, indeed all "liberals" will never forgive or forget. They will bitterly oppose him no matter what he does. Take away their ammunition and maybe one day we'll see the likes of John (Liebowitz) Stewart sitting on the sidewalk, holding up a sign that says 'WILL CONDESCEND FOR FOOD'.

Wouldn't that be loverly?

Here's the real "Russia"

From Philip Geraldi.

"Russian actions on its own doorstep in Eastern Europe do not in fact threaten the United States or any actual vital interest. Nor does Moscow threaten the U.S. through its intervention on behalf of the Syrian government in the Middle East.

That Russia is described incessantly as a threat in those areas is largely a contrivance arranged by the media, the Democratic and Republican National Committees and by the White House.

"Candidate Donald Trump appeared to recognize that fact before he began listening to Michael Flynn, who has a rather different view. Hopefully the old Trump will prevail.

"There is, however, another country that has interfered in U.S. elections, has endangered Americans living or working overseas and has corrupted America’s legislative and executive branches. It has exploited that corruption to initiate legislation favorable to itself, has promoted unnecessary and unwinnable wars and has stolen American technology and military secrets.

Its ready access to the mainstream media to spread its own propaganda provides it with cover for its actions and it accomplishes all that and more through the agency of a powerful and well-funded domestic lobby that, oddly, is not subject to the accountability afforded by the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) of 1938 even though it manifestly works on behalf of a foreign government.

"That country is, of course, Israel."

This year's greatest gift

2016 has given us many reasons to be hopeful, not least by way of the Trump and Brexit phenomena. But most of all as the year the (((mainstream media))) lost its credibility and therefore its power. This was the year of the Great Media Awakening, when the general public began to realise the true nature of the lies, equivocations and evasions, of the mind-rot peddled to them as news.

Earning credibility is a slow and painstaking process. Losing it can be devastatingly fast. Ordinary people can now discern The Agenda, maybe for now through a glass darkly, but soon they'll meet it face to face. Hard to see any way back for the presstitutes now that the internet provides a cornucopia of hard news, research, well written content - and most of all an alternative. Even The Donald, to their horror, largely ignored the MSM, instead communicating directly with the public via social media. And I believe that as President he'll still do this. I also believe that the full impact of this year's developments has yet to dawn fully on the media whores.

Their reaction, such as it is, has been soooooo, like, like .....pre-internet? I mean how McCarthy-era is it to ban readers from commenting, to close down offending outlets, to jail Thought Criminals? How about a spot of book burning for real authenticity? And now their war on "fake news"? Oh PULEEZE!!! In fact this has hit them with something even worse than distrust: Derision. Yes, there's now widespread laughter and ridicule at the idea of the MSM chasing down "fake news".

None of us of course will lose the run of ourselves here. The enemy still controls the commanding heights of the communications arena.....TV and print media, Hollywood, the main internet and social media platforms. And of course every Western government. We're still a bit like the samizdat rebels in the USSR.

But look how things worked out for them.

A development to celebrate

I see that the Democrats might elect a black Muslim as Chairman of the Democratic National Convention. I hope they do. Just like I hope the British Labour Party keep electing the likes of Dianne Abbot and Imram Khan as their public faces. And they probably will because as one splendid lady recently informed us 'we don't need White people running our (sic) parties anymore'.

Now much and all as I dread blacks being free to deploy their legendary organisational skills against us I otherwise welcome these developments because they'll accelerate the move to ethnicity-based politics. Or to be more specific they'll encourage Whites to finally wake up and embrace their own identity politics. Democrats and Labour will duly degenerate into a rag bag collection of blacks, browns, Muslims, sexual freaks and White cucks with nothing to bind them other than their antipathy to normal Whites. Cohesive they will not be. On the other hand an implicitly White party will, in an identity politics context, have every reason to be cohesive.

The position of Jews under such a dispensation is intriguing. Obviously White ethnic consciousness embodied in strong united Parties is their stuff of nightmares. But a black/brown/Muslim melange could be even worse, not least  because it'd give short shrift to any attempt at leveraging  muh Holocaust.  Bear in mind too that the Alt-Right, the genesis of White identity, carries a deep vein of scepticism towards the Tribe and their role in White displacement.

So yes, celebrate the ongoing takeover of the Dems and Labour by angry anti-White minorities. And in due course enjoy the sight of them scrabbling over the scraps they get thrown by their ethnically conscious White rulers. That's assuming we haven't sent them back to the hell-holes whence they emerged.

Happy Christmas everyone

Been a pretty good year what with Donald and BREXIT.

On to 2017!

A rhetorical device

When dealing with whinging immigrants most of us have probably used a derivative of 'well if you don't like it here just fuck off back to where you came from'. But based on the principle that if you're explaining you're losing maybe posing this recommendation in question form might be better.


Like:
'Why are you here in a White country?'  'If White countries are so bad for you why didn't you go to a non-White one?' 

'Can we assume by your choosing to live among Whites ahead of your own you see Whites as more desirable co-citizens? If so aren't we justified in not wanting these less desirable people coming to our countries?'

'If your own people and culture are so good can we assume you'll be heading back at the first opportunity? If not, why not? If it's the case that you actually prefer to live in a White country can we expect that from now on you'll STFU and just be glad we left you in?'

This structure can of course also be used when arguing with libtards about whingeing immigrants, replacing second person singular with third person plural. 

Remember, if you're explaining you're losing.

An interesting thought

There's this young girl that I know, thirteen, maybe fourteen. Highly intelligent and for her age very articulate. Although third or even fourth generation in the town where we both live she has to travel to another town, ten miles away for her secondary education. You see there's no room for her in the local school because hordes of cultural enrichers have needs too.

Although her current school developed an excellent reputation over many years it's experiencing problems aplenty in recent times. Its rapidly declining academic performance has coincided with the enrolment of large numbers of Africans. This girl freely tells me that the five Africans in her class are irredeemably stupid, make little effort to learn, are highly disruptive and require all kinds of remedial services (including full-time translators!).They loudly jabber away in their own lingua franca, ignore the teachers, and communicate via "clucking" (her word) noises. Leading the teacher to one day burst into tears and warn that the whole class might fail to graduate.

Anybody familiar with teaching blacks won't be in the least surprised by any of this. But here's my big takeaway: This girl (and I confirmed that most of her class felt the same way) had no problem seeing her black 'classmates' as very different, of lower intelligence, as a severe drag on the White students. And they have no inhibitions about saying so. Now this might just be a localised and short-term reaction, with grim acceptance and cognitive dissonance setting in as the kids get older. After all just about every institution of power (state, churches, educational establishment, media) forces them to point out the Emperor's fine clothes.

Or maybe they won't change. Maybe experiencing diversity at first hand, and its direct and tangible impact on their future prospects, will over-ride the unnatural constraints imposed on them. What would happen then?

Time will tell.