Antifragile and White Nationalism

No sooner has the election results were formally announced on the night of November 8, the normalization of Trump has begun in full force. The days and weeks after the election, true to form, Trump has appointed a motley crew of neo-fascists, neoconservatives, anti-semites, the conventional hawkish military conservatives, with a few token conservative women and minorities thrown in the mix. Almost all of them subscribe to his world view of white superiority and within that, only a certain group of white men of exceptional intelligence are fit to run this country, him being one of them.

But this is not the worst of it. This was to be expected. What did people think when they voted Trump into White House? He’ll suddenly do an about face and appoint a bunch of socialists to occupy cabinet seats? No. The worst is mainstream media giving “alt-right” (which is a grossly misleading name, they should be referred to as what they are, neo-Nazis) Trump supporters a legitimate media platform to air their disgusting and abhorrent views. They include a self-hating “half-Jew” who is angry at his parents for daring to procreate a waste of space like him. A former Z-list reality TV star doing the Nazi salute, and this Z-lister is woman of color. An assortment of other white men and an occasional woman who subscribe to pseudo racial genetic theory who know not the difference between what’s someone of Arab origin or someone who follows the Islamic faith. These people do not need to be speaking to the press and mainstream media providing link backs to their deplorable racially coded blogs. These people should visit a therapist first. This level of self-hating surely cannot be healthy.

Along the theme of ‘fake news’; there has been a lot of ‘reported’ increase in racist abuse and hate crimes since election night. The media wants us to believe that since the night of November 8, the number of racists in this country multiplied many times over. But it doesn’t work like that. No one becomes a racist overnight. Becoming a racist is a conditioning over one’s lifetime. All of these racists and hateful people already existed before Trump was elected, and a non racist person will not suddenly become racist just because Trump got elected, the only difference is with Trump’s white nationalist hateful agenda, these people who expressed their disgusting views in their basements with their friends are out into the open. Trump gave these people a legitimate platform to air these racist views. It gave overt racists permission to perform their heil sieg in public. It gave latent racists cover to air their racists views using legitimate issues such as the economy, jobs and crime. It gave self-hating minorities, who really should be visiting their therapist a legitimate platform to identify with their oppressors or with who they perceive as the superior race or group.

The poison that is Trump is not just the orange ferret himself. It’s that he, using the political process, has fomented a fascist movement. He has found a way using the most base and ugliest factors to unite his political base. He outdid Richard Nixon and his ‘Southern Strategy’ (that was at least dog whistling and somewhat covert) and brought out the ugly to the national platform and every closet racist, white nationalist, white supremacists, KKK, former Klansmen went wild. Donald Trump said in public what they dare not say: Mexicans are criminals, they steal our jobs, they use public assistance, the Chinese manipulate currency and that’s why their factories are closing and going overseas etc. Trump used ‘political correctness’ as his ace card. He knew everyone on every political spectrum was sick of being ‘politically correct’, it’s what spineless liberals do, and so he used that to rail against women, minorities even people with disabilities.

So, what to do about fascists? There are really just two options, you take away their platform or you beat their asses with baseball bats. Fascism is also what Dr. Nassim Taleb calls antifragile:

Some things benefit from shocks; they thrive and grow when exposed to volatility, randomness, disorder, and stressors and love adventure, risk, and uncertainty. Yet, in spite of the ubiquity of the phenomenon, there is no word for the exact opposite of fragile. Let us call it antifragile.

Things which are antifragile thrive on disorder and shock. Every time when fascists rise to power is usually a time of economic distress and social disorder which arises from that. Dr. Taleb also describes terrorism as antifragile, and when negative things are antifragile, there are only 2 things one can do: totally ignore terrorists and soon they realize their terrorizing ways don’t scare people anymore or you obliterate them totally, leave no man standing. Doing anything in between those two extremes will only feed the beast (8 years of President Obama’s ‘surgical drone strikes’ on supposed terrorist cells have not weakened terrorism around the world). The same can be applied to fascism, and as Dr. Taleb pointed out, it’s near impossible to totally ignore fascists or terrorist due to presence of 24 hour news, only the second option is left.

When some neo-Nazi openly muses if Jews are really people or just a bunch soulless golems, instead of shutting down the debate, CNN convenes a panel and ‘debates’ whether if Jews are really people. Liberals, in the name of ‘being liberals’ have allowed any and all debate on national television on grotesque subjects, such as pussy grabbing, the qualifying metrics of anti-semitism, racism, sexism and misogyny. We all know instinctively when speech goes from offensive to hateful, there needs no debate on whether if pussy grabbing is is misogynistic, of if Trump ‘has a point’ in his abhorrent beliefs because he has so many supporters, therefore he must be a little bit right. No. Many will cite freedom of speech rights to allow these white nationalists and neo-Nazis to have a platform on television or print, or that some producer at CNN or MSNBC decided that they need better ratings and so they want to have neo-Nazis come on their show and ‘debate’ their point of view. Freedom of speech also goes the other way, actively removing a platform from people which don’t deserve to have one. National television and print media aside, neo-Nazis and white nationalists have plenty of places to spew their hate. They can get blogs for free, they can self-publish, they are free to hold gatherings in their smelly basements and they are also free to gather at public places per the constitution, but then it’s up to everyone else to make sure they don’t hold hateful public rallies; this is when you beat them back to that shitty basement whence they came. They are antifragile. They thrive on disorder, mayhem and attention; if society at large can’t withhold the attention, then there leaves only one other option; shut them down by all means necessary.

If the students of Rutgers University can protest and force the cancellation of Condoleezza Rice’s speech; then professional adults who are in charge of mainstream media can ban Nazis from coming onto their programs.

45 thoughts on “Antifragile and White Nationalism

  1. re: ” then professional adults who are in charge of mainstream media can ban Nazis from coming onto their programs”

    Or at least not seek out obscure Nazis and elevate them out of nowhere.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. re: “They include a self-hating “half-Jew” who is angry at his parents for daring to procreate a waste of space like him.”

        Someone pointed out that Elliot Rodger (the mass murderer) said something very similar, that his father selfishly robbed him of whiteness by conceiving him with an Asian.


  2. This is an interesting analysis of the election, so kind and loving. And so thoughtfully free of liberal buzzwords.

    Yes, I voted for Donald Trump not because I thought he was a Jeffersonian messiah but because he was the only candidate who understood that an overly centralized Marxist economy could only lead to a ruination of the American republic just as Marxist economies have destroyed every nation in which they have been implemented. He like I understood that the implementation of Marxism is the ultimate practice of bigotry. He like I had no desire to see America transformed into a giant polluted favela from sea to shining sea.

    Our country for all its faults has virtues worth preserving. That is what his supporters were and are articulating.

    You would deny the same people who permitted you to speak that very right. We would not. Therein lies the difference between us.


      1. Socialism. Fascism. In the real world, precise definitions aside, they both are elitist and totalitarian; and they both stink. What was the formal name of Hitler’s party? National Socialist German Workers Party? Am I right?


        1. Precise definitions aside…says it all. Clearly the real definitions don’t matter to you. Btw, putting the word socialist in the formal name of your party doesn’t make one a real socialist, but we aren’t hung up on definitions here.


          1. I try to look at things as they actually exist in the real world. Of course there is a spectrum and some societies are more tame than others, but ultimately they end up very close to each other.

            My dad told me when I was a kid that the only purpose of a socialist government was to wage war, and he was right. That’s all these socialist governments do because it’s the only thing they know how to do whether it’s a physical war or an abstract war against poverty, literacy, misogyny, racism, crime, drugs. These wars always require vast sums of money that go to big corporations who provide the munitions and supplies necessary to fight the war. Whether the state owns those corporations or whether the corporations are owned by crony capitalists tightly allied with the government is irrelevant. It comes down to a centralization of power and robbing of wealth that works against the people .

            Liked by 1 person

            1. re: “My dad told me when I was a kid that the only purpose of a socialist government was to wage war, and he was right. That’s all these socialist governments do ”

              Why don’t we compare the military budget of the United States with Sweden or Finland?

              And try to do it without the “No True Scotsman” fallacy, the idea that the United States “isn’t really capitalist.”

              Military budget of socialist Sweden vs. the capitalist USA: Go……..


              1. The military budget of capitalist USA is higher. What does that prove? The USA chooses to fight physical wars (not my choice or desire); Sweden chooses to fight abstract wars against poverty, illiteracy, crime, drugs and so forth. They are still wars nonetheless requiring huge capital outlays and crony capitalists. Sweden’s effective tax rate is 57% much higher than the US effective per capita tax rate.

                So in Sweden you have less of your own money to create your own way of life, which is why the United States had a standard of living 30% higher than Sweden and the rest of Europe – until, of course, our genius leaders began to bring down our standard of living through globalization.

                Now you can try and argue that Sweden had and has a higher standard of living, but that is a quality judgment on your part. I would not agree with you. I don’t want central committees and politburos making decisions for me.


            2. Don’t forget the contribution of Wall Street, central bankers, currency manipulators, and futures markets. Not to mention the Fed, which benefits from everyone else’s crises.

              That Trump thinks like a businessman offends the liberal (socialist) media, but he is a gambler, and the house always wins, especially if it plays its cards right. If he can inspire a new wave of entrepreneurialism in America, I applaud him.


              1. That’s not why he offends socialists. It’s every other reason but that one. It’s that he thinks it’s ok to exploit workers for the benefit of capitalists is a problem. Also, liberals aren’t socialists. Liberals are The politically correct versions of trump.


        2. Unlike most people, I’ve actually read Mein Kampf. Hitler explicitly says that he used the name “socialism” to confuse people, and that he considered Marxism to be his biggest enemy.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. When people begin on their road to power, I have no doubt that they are into the isms and the theory behind the movements. But as you climb up the ladder reality sets in and you begin to view these theories and their adherents as tools. – thus the term ‘useful idiot.’ So it does not surprise me at all that Hitler would use the word socialist as a ruse. But if he did, he used it to attract socialists. And wasn’t it he himself who said that his best recruits came from the Communist Party?

            My point is that Hitler didn’t hate Communists because they were theoretically communists but because they attracted people who would otherwise be attracted to him.
            It was all a power game, a game of attention. “Look at me. Look at me. Join me.” It’s no different than the stupid game our politicians play today. There has been no fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans in our country for many years now. They both work against us. They both wage war incessantly. They both steal our money. They both waste our money.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. He hated communists because they were the only genuine opponents of his scientific racism. He is ridiculously clear on it. He also purposefully tried to confuse people about the meanings of socialism and Nazism. When the American right argues that Nazis are socialists they are following Hitler’s program to the letter. He also had no desire to attract communists because he literally believed that ideology was an expression of race. Thus if you declared yourself a Marxist it was proof you were a Jew. It’s all written down and translated into English.

              Liked by 2 people

            2. It’s written into the Constitution that way. The Constitution is written to protect the wealthy from the poor, and every government drone knows it. That’s why the war machine sells so well on Wall Street. And the Big Pharma machine and the Big Food machine. And of course the plastics industry, the various waste industries, like paper mills for junk mail. Look around you if you want to see the socialist agenda run amok. Paperwork rules, and nothing of value gets produced.


                1. It sounds like we are saying the same thing. The wealthy landowners eventually became the publicly traded corporations, starting with George Washington, whose whiskey distillery business gave rise to the whiskey tax and first central bank (which was unconstitutional) and almost destroyed the infant republic. Now we have the ethanol mandate to keep Archer Daniels Midland’s profits up.


                2. Dah, de, dah, de,dah, de, dah. So what’s your suggestion? Perhaps I can quote from a very old (1970’s) comedy album by David Fry… when the announcer asked a hippie dissident what he would do after “tearing it all down to start over” he replied, “Oh, I dunno. Groove on the rubble.”

                  Liked by 1 person

                3. One pro-active step would be to repeal the ethanol mandate. Trump is for it, but so was Hillary. It’s a corporate welfare subsidy to Archer Daniel Midland, Big Oil and Big Food, has a huge carbon footprint, depletes and pollutes the land and water, wastes water, and raises the price of food across the board. Most grain production already goes to feed animals. Now we’re forcing taxpayers to waste it to feed cars?


          2. Hehe… many years ago when the Internet was just becoming real, I published an article on what the “authorities” would find should they have ever found a need to raid my home, and how the press would interpret what they found. Now, mind you, I have no reason anyone would want to raid my place.. I am hardly of that stature. I was poking fun at what could be found and misinterpreted by the press. One example is that I have lots of books on academic subjects (since I tend to be more cerebral), I have lots of non-fiction works, biographies, etc. I am a history nut so I have a lot of history books. And.. ohmigawd.. I have some sex books (not porn by any stretch,, scientific stuff based on my degree in the behavioral sciences). Here’s how the headlines might read…
            “Home Of Local Nazi Sex Pervert Raided!” (meaning, my clinical sexual resources on the same shelf as Mein Kampf… which is also on the same shelf as a King James version of The Bible.. but there would never be a headline, “Home Search Of Local Resident Reveals He Was A Learned Christian”)

            Anyway, I digress from the subject a bit.. but you having read Mein Kampf triggered the thought. Nonetheless, it does illustrate the nature of the press hasn’t changed in spinning truth for more viewers.


              1. That’s not completely true. His dad did have a lot of money, but he died leaving some to Karl. As he got older Karl did live poor requiring the assistance of relatives. They don’t pay political writers a lot. Still he was free to theorize on the backs of the working class. Ha ha. What irony. In the final analysis, though, the only that counts is whether you are right. Unfortunately, Karl was only half-right. To ignore incentives in economics is folly; consequently Marxist societies taken to extremes have caused incredible misery and suffering – all of which makes Karl one of the biggest mass murderers and morbiditers in human history.


                1. There are so many basic historical errors in this thread it’s hard to know where to begin. I think people here have been reading some of that “fake news” we’ve been hearing so much about.

                  1.) Marx did get an small inheritance in 1856, but it was unlikely that it was from his father, since he died in 1838 when Marx was only 19. Yes, I know what it says on Wikipedia, but Wikipedia can be edited and should never be taken as a primary source. The money in the 1850s came from his wife’s mother, and didn’t last very long.

                  2.) Marx was offered a bribe in the 1860s by the Prussian government. Not only turned it down. He kept the evidence for years to use against Bismarck.

                  3.) He didn’t live “on the assistance of relatives” but on the assistance of Frederich Engels, who was from a somewhat wealthier family, and donated where and when he could. It was a pretty modest amount. If you want to call that “theorizing on the backs of the working class,” so be it, but it’s more or less the same argument that you can’t criticize capitalism if you own an iPhone. We live in the society we live in, and Marx didn’t live very well.

                  4.) He received a somewhat larger inheritance in the 1860s from an admirer, which lifted him out of the chronic poverty he lived in until he was in his 50s. If you want to criticize Marx’s personal life, criticize him for letting his wife and kids live in poverty, not for living high off the hog. He spent the last 15 years of his life in modest, middle-class comfort, but that’s about it.

                  5.) Marx hardly ignored “economic incentives” in his economic theory. In fact, he wrote in the tradition of “classical economics” and believed that economic incentives were the most important incentives of all. That’s exactly why a capitalist constantly seeks the cheapest labor power. His incentive is to make money. Where he differed from Adam Smith and David Ricardo was in his belief that capitalism would eventually destroy itself through its own contradictions, not in any denial of the “economic incentive.”

                  6.) As for Marx being a mass murderer, well I’d also look at Adam Smith (the Irish genocide in 1847 was partially justified in the name of “free trade”) or the Bible. Or even JD Salinger (who killed John Lennon, after all).

                  A pretty good biography of Marx is by Franz Mehring, if you’re interested. It’s a long, hard slog but it’s better than the Drudge Report or Wikipedia.



                2. Fake news? Ha ha.

                  1. I didn’t get my info from Wikipedia. Please give me a little credit. I’d read Sperber’s book on Marx few years ago.

                  2. I’ll double-check on whether it was relatives who gave him money or whether it was a fellow publisher or indeed Engels. I felt the important point was that he relied upon others.

                  3. Regarding incentives, the impact of his teachings is to give collectivism precedence over individualism which disregards or diminishes individual achievement. Why should I bust my ass if I’m going to get the same pay as everyone else?

                  4. Regarding mass murderers, I thoroughly agree. Capitalists, especially crony capitalists, can be effective at mass murder also. Example: Jacob Fugger, an early day crony capitalist, who helped kill many in the German Peasant War. But we must not lump all capitalists together. Bob and Sue who run the local ice cream shop are capitalists but hardly murderers – at least not that we know of.


    1. re: “You would deny the same people who permitted you to speak that very right.”

      You’re missing something very important. The mainstream media is giving these nobodies a platform because they’re trying to create a sense of panic that will stampede people into the Democratic Party.

      In any event, the right to free speech and the right to be on TV are two different things. It seems like all you have to do these days to get a platform is to Sieg Heil someone.

      It’s also funny how you (a Trump supporter) don’t mind your candidate’s “brand” tarnished by a couple of ludicrous, self-hating little fascists.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Maybe I’m getting too old and I’ve seen and experienced too many lies in my life. I rarely watch mainstream media to get the truth. As a matter fact if I do watch it’s only to amuse myself at how they distort it. That’s why they exist. They work for a misguided Corporate America that manipulates the truth to further their own goals and aims. Unfortunately, history is lies agreed-upon.

    As for Trump’s team, I can’t control who he puts around him. I am not in anybody’s inner circle nor will I ever be.

    I do think your fears have been shaped by the media. I do not believe that Trump is a warmonger nor someone who is going to lock people away based upon their religion or identity. I think he and his followers want a more prosperous economy. I think what they want less of are the politics of divisiveness and racIsm – nonstop under Obama.

    Unfortunately I don’t think we will even get to that point as Trump’s opponents will never accept him as President. As such they will wage a civil war, physical or political, against him. They have to as Trump represents an existential threat to their globalist bullshit empire.

    And that is why the mainstream media is highlighting the rioting. That is why the media highlights Trump’s fascist connections. They are just revving up their masses for the war, real or political, to come.

    Do any of these crazy people belong on television? I don’t like them, but the sad fact about humanity is that people don’t listen to reasonable, sane people. People love to watch crazy, insane people say crazy, insane things.


    1. re: “As such they will wage a civil war, physical or political, against him.”

      I wish. The Democrats will collude with him exactly the way they colluded with Bush and do their bet to coopt and shut down any real opposition.


  4. It boggles the mind exactly what the Trump supporters were thinking.. which suggests it was for various reasons, like “I hate Hillary” mostly. But when you think that one of those popular reasons for supporting Trump was the “drain the swamp”, “throw the bums out”, “Washington is loaded with crooks and special interests out for their own agendas”, “big business is corrupting Washington”, mindset, look who they supported…

    He’s not even in charge yet and he’s already gone back on a half dozen or so campaign promises he made to his supporters and this idea of big business taking over the world.. now we have in the news the Secret Service is considering paying Trump $1.5 million a year to protect him… by renting a floor in the Trump Tower as a command center. Jeez.. a soon-to-be sitting president making money off the government in which he is serving?? Even Hillary wasn’t THAT obvious!

    But, yes, Trump has managed to become a poster boy for the country’s neo-nazis. While I hardly think he has any nazi empathies himself, he does seem to attract such white supremacist feelings simply because he himself is so way out in left field (or “right” field) in his political approach. I would NEVER attribute Trump to knowingly have understood some pulse of the nation. He was simply some popular rich guy who started on a whim and it took off to his own surprise.. all the way to the White House. He is NO genius, political or otherwise. He was as surprised as anyone when he won the election.

    Good rant you posted, by the way.  Although.. being a guy.. there is something about pussy-grabbing Nazis not sounding as nasty as the real facists.


        1. All Nazis are racists. Not all racists are Nazis. Benjamin Netanyahu, for example, is certainly a racist but I doubt he’s a racist against himself.

          Unlike George W. Bush, however, who may have responded to Hurricane Katrina in a way that indicated he “didn’t care about black people,” but about whom there still remains some doubt as to his being an actual racist, there’s no ambiguity in Trump’s case.

          He’s a son of a (probable) Klansman and a long time racist.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. If he was a racist, why would he appeal to black Americans? Just to get votes. Well, that’s exactly what the Dems have done for 70 years, and yet few liberals call Dem politicians racists. If Trump were a racist why would he offer Ben Carson a place in his administration? Let’s wait and see how well Trump does.


              1. Veto to that. It certainly does work. If I treat people evenly without bias, then you can’t call me racist. Otherwise we can call everyone and anyone a racist. If we don’t evaluate and treat people fairly why should anyone act responsibly?


  5. People make way too much of the race issue. I speak as a Southerner who believes the whole world is friendly to friendly people. The urban media’s constant stoking of the hatred flames only generates needless paranoia.

    Remember the media is funded by advertisers, those corporations that depend on stock sales to stay afloat and pay dividends. As long as America has its retirement money invested on Wall Street and in government bonds, it is invested in maintaining the current less than ideal status quo.

    The belief that this election separated the urban from rural Americans rings true with me. New York and Washington are sadly out of touch with the people who supply their food.


    1. Last time I checked Trump was from NYC not the south. He’s a long time racist who shut blacks out of his buildings in the 1970s, called for the deaths of 5 innocent (and framed) black kids in the late 1980s and continued to maintain they were guilty, even after the real killer came forward in the late 1990s.

      The south has gone for Republicans since the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s. So there’s nothing new about 2016. Where Trump did pick up votes was in the North Midwest, and largely in industrial, not farming areas. It has a lot to do with Clinton’s incompetence. She refused to return the calls, even of the Mayor of Madison Wisconsin. Sanders would almost certainly have taken those states (but was shut out of the nomination by Clinton’s black support in the South).

      If you want to understand 2016 think of it as a race to the bottom. You had two terrible candidates and the worst one won. Let’s just hope Clinton has now been driven out of public life and Trump is only a one term president.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. You’re sort of agreeing with me. I contend racism is worse in Northern, urban areas than in the South, where black and white intermingle on a daily basis. I believe Trump has changed with the times, as Castro and others did.

        The industrial areas may have believed Trump would bring large-scale manufacturing back, but I believe that time has peaked. The future is in parts for vintage machines, like cars and washing machines. Manual controls. The digital fad has crowded out manual controls, but anyone who wants to reduce their carbon footprints should consider that much digital technology wastes energy.


        1. re: ” I contend racism is worse in Northern, urban areas than in the South, where black and white intermingle on a daily basis.”

          Well, Jeff Sessions isn’t from New York.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s