The Dem morality is based on the human Hitler as the Devil, so G Good is to be against Hitler. No need for God, nor any limits on Human.

The Demonize their target, equate him to Hitler, and then the fact of his evilness is enough to justify getting rid of him.

This Demonization creates a Derangement in some people, so much so they actually try to kill the target. Now Trump, but also Charlie Kirk, and all Rep Presidents.

The Demonization will be redirected after Trump leaves, tho many will continue believing lies about him. Whoever is the Rep nominee, Vance, De Santis, Rubio.

Like Kavanaugh, all will be subjected to lies & false accusations which are loudly publicized, and many gullible Dems will believe them.

It wasn’t a norm here because we had a Christian society which taught otherwise & a Hippocratic Oath that made life sacred.

When you realize that the 10 commandments & the teachings of Christianity are directly opposed to human nature these developments make a lot more sense.

Once you removed prayer from schools & played with the oath it took only 3 generations to reach this point.

Bingo.
And they will suppress any such metrics or feedback with tooth and claw.

physicsguy on April 28, 2026 at 9:10 am
“I keep wishing that someone well-versed in psychology could explain this phenomenon to me, and also provide a solution.” While not providing definitive answers to this, perhaps we should start here: “Our emotions are a much more basic decision-making mechanism than our reason and well precede it in evolutionary development. Tribalism is also normative and can have great emotional power. Politics operates by mobilising shared emotions and sense of belonging. Normative is not the same as moral.”
This is the 2nd to last paragraph at: https://www.lorenzofromoz.net/p/political-categories-are-not-moral

HC68 on April 28, 2026 at 2:15 pm
“They aren’t persuadable unless you can convince them that the goal itself, the dream itself, is invalid…and that would mean setting aside a lifetime of belief.” Looking at LorenzoFromOz.net again, I can’t find a suitable essay quickly, but in several of them over the last year plus, he suggests the reason the Rousseauxian/ Marxist/ Progressive / Leftist position is so hard to counter is because their future vision is a utopia that cannot and never will provide any metrics or feedback that might call their goals and programs into serious question.

I want to add that Jews can be of any race or ethnicity, both because they are widely dispersed and have been for millennia and there has been some intermixing, plus conversion is open to anyone who puts in the study and hours and is serious about it. There are plenty of converts of different races.

You’ve confused Sailer himself with his combox acolytes.

Firstly: No not really. They tend to be far more odious and shallow than Sailer himself, who as you pointed out does things other than Jew Bait, but they are his acolytes for a reason. Check out what he has said about Jews or Israel (preferably directly and not through a filter) as well as other dubious things like Sailer’s Law of Shootings. To what little credit I will give the mofo he is less outright prone to Israel bashing than most of the left and a lot of the “Woke Right” such as the amused note that Coates coming out against October 7th required far more courage than demonizing white people (true) and asking if he would remain such a golden child if he continued punching “sideways” rather than punching “down.”

But he also traffics in a lot of horrid nonsense, like theatrically doubting if there are left wing donors that are anti-Israel and can finance the Dems (which should have been obvious for half a century, because the answer is yes and has been for a while), and a lot more dubious as well as playing up stuff like the Dual Loyalty stuff (and I say this mid post where I was writing how unseemly it was for Horowitz to make Israel one of the masthead reasons for outright supporting Republicans, but while noting how – as Sailer himself noted when it does not directly gut the thesis he is pushing – the lack of ethical or spiritual affinity for Israel dominates much of the world’s Jews and helps explain much of the left wing, globalist, secular tinge of many Jews in the US).

In essence he supports the existence of Israel as a kind of ethnostate of the Jews, interprets Jewish identity primarily through an ethnic:racial lens (which while having large elements of truth to it downplays or ignores the spiritual side of it), and likes tiptoeing around things like how harsh society or the state should pursue the eugenicist positions he advocates.

There are definitely far more odious and far less interesting creatures than Sailer (Carlson and Owens come to mind) even on the right and I will not deny his stances on Western civilization, the US, Israel, and Ukraine put us in the same trench network. But Winston Churchill and Oswald Mosley were also in the same trench network once upon a time. And in any case that he attracts so many Gormless Jew baiting idiots as his acolytes is not an accident, but a reflection.

Secondly: Considering you tried to whitewash Pat Buchanan by claiming he was not a Jew Hater in spite of his multiple tracts whitewashing Jew Hating monsters like Hitler and Kaiser Wilhelm II and demonizing the likes of Churchill and Wilson far beyond any justifiable explanation, claiming Hitler did not want war (something that flies in the face of almost all his philosophical, practical, and ideological writings and actions), and claiming only Israel and its “amen corner” wanted the US to fight Saddam’s Iraq in 1990-1…. You might want to sit this one out. Because this is starting to look like a pattern.

Sailer offers from time to time some dubious assertions (e.g. that Wm. Kristol sold the Iraq War to G.W. Bush to protect Israel)

Frankly “dubious” is not even what I am concerned about with his assertions. It is the outright horseshit ones that get me, as well as misuse of actual facts to advance dodgy nonsense (the infamous claim that Hitler murdered far fewer people in the name of inequality than the communists did in the name of equality ignores both the nature of the Nazi Volksgemeinschaft as both hierarchical but defined by kinship and a fundamental equality on race and nationality that justified why the Fuhrership was not to be hereditary, as well as that from the people the Nazis had power over and the time they did their murder rate was higher than almost any communist regime save Pol Pot’s).

and associated himself ca. 2002 with ill-considered paulbot critiques of American foreign policy.

Indeed, though it is a testimony that I find him less outright stupid or dishonest than most Paulbits and even a lot of Buchananites on foreign policy, since he at least can acknowledge threats.

His most salient intellectual project – reducing sociology to anthropology and tests-and-measurements psychology and reducing those two to biology doesn’t have much to do with Jews per se.

Firstly: that per se is doing so much heavy lifting maybe Atlas could successfully shrug the sky onto its shoulders. It is certainly true Sailer’s interests go far beyond Jews, but they have much to do with that interest. Namely that he views them as a high IQ vanguard minority par excellence and talks about them extensively as useful asset, ally, threat, and competitor. He certainly lacks the outright poisonous hatred of many of his half baked imitators, but the obsession remains, as does the like of Jew baiting or using Jews for bait for other audiences.

Secondly: As much as I love anthropology, trying to dumb down sociology to a marriage of anthropology and psychology is some of the dumbest stuff I have seen and heard because humanity simply does not work like that. Nor do most higher animals including the likes of turtles or dogs. Those things are hugely important, as is genetic inheritance vis a vis things like intelligence and mood, but at least as important are outside stressors or boons and how we cope with them. As are different forms of intelligence or social skills; I can fully believe that Einstein’s IQ was vastly above that of say Adam Smith but it did not prevent the latter from having a far healthier and more in depth grasp of human nature and economics than Einstein’s tendency towards domestic neglect and socialist Utopianism.

He’s also notable for lite versions of consqpirazoid thinking (which are more plausible nowadays than they were 25 years ago).

Which often have a number of problems.

He’s been a consistent critic of the immigration tsunami

Credit is due where credit is due, and I will not deny him due credit for that. But a lot of other due credits are less charming to him.

I don’t think it’s limited to Americans.

“The human heart is the most deceitful of all things,
and desperately wicked.
Who really knows how bad it is?

But I, the LORD, search all hearts
and examine secret motives.
I give all people their due rewards,
according to what their actions deserve.” – Jeremiah 17:9-10

This describes the natural man left to his/her own devices.

I suggested to Grok that “every society that turns/abandons God’s precepts has ended in ruin”.

It gave me a few examples of Eastern countries that didn’t fit that statement. But refined my assertion.

A more precise historical observation (held by many serious thinkers) is: Societies that actively wage war on the Christian moral framework and replace it with utopian ideologies have a terrible track record.
Societies that quietly drift into practical secularism while retaining some Christian-influenced values can coast for a while — but long-term sustainability looks questionable.

No explicitly atheist civilization has ever produced a long, stable, flourishing society on the scale of Christendom or the post-Christian West. The 20th century was basically a massive, deadly experiment that proved that.

My Honest Take

You’re right that history does not show any society explicitly built on the denial of God that has produced lasting human flourishing. The most successful modern secular societies are not truly “denying God’s existence” in a militant way — they’re mostly indifferent or post-Christian. And many signs ( plummeting fertility rates below replacement, rising loneliness, loss of social cohesion) suggest they may be coasting on borrowed moral capital.

This is why the current cultural debate is so intense. Many believe we’re running a real-time experiment on whether a society can maintain liberty, prosperity, and meaning while systematically removing the God who (they argue) made those things possible in the first place.

But hasn’t Israel gotten less and less leftist over the years?

“The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted.” — D.H. Lawrence
==
This is cr!p.

— Art Deco

I assume you meant it was crap.

I would say it’s 1/2 of the essential American soul. Yes, that side of our collective personality is real, and it exists. But the other side is dominant most of the time. The side Lawrence is talking about comes out in extremis,, that’s the side that is utterly ruthless in war and other matters and it’s best not to awaken if you can avoid it. But it is there.

The root of the hate is quite simple: incompatible core beliefs and values. We’ve become diverse, and with diversity comes anger and resentment and distrust and hate, as a natural consequence of human nature and human tribalism. It’s not even Trump that drives it, any more than it was GWB when that same hate was flowing 20 years ago. ANY President attempting to implement the policies we want would generate that hate, because the policies are seen as a direct attack on them and their own beliefs and tribe. Politicians and influencers can shape it, but they don’t generate the underlying rage.

If that underlying, initial rage was not already present, all the propaganda in the world would be a waste of time.

Interestingly, Neil Howe and William Straus predicted a period like this decades ago, as the Boomer generation reaches late-life, still animated by the same passions and beliefs they have been for decades.

The educated Left, to a first approximation, wants the world of John Lennon’s Imagine and the old Coke Christmas commercials where the multiracial multiethnic multifaith kids gather to make a tree and sing together. Of course, they take for granted the primacy of educated secular-western values in that, but the rage arises from the perception that this dream is under attack.

They aren’t persuadable unless you can convince them that the goal itself, the dream itself, is invalid…and that would mean setting aside a lifetime of belief.

The politicians and influencers and PR men just shape and guide the rage.