Category Archives: Ilana Mercer

UPDATE III (4/16/019): Blocked By Twitter

Business, Cultural Marxism, Free Speech, Ilana Mercer, Left-Liberalism, Liberty, Technology

Twitter has blocked my account and is trying to extort a phone number from me. I never give these shysters any—but any—contact other than my public email. I can’t fathom why people give in and share personal information like a mobile phone number with these crooks.

I am literally off-the-grid when it comes to my mobile phone. (Why so weak? Resist. Stand for individualism.) The Twitter blocking is probably because I shared an innocent email of a terribly ugly Paris-based building, embodying “nihilism and liberalism.”

This accurate description of Paris’ modern aesthetic ethos came via—OMG!— Richard Spencer. Ridiculous. Fuck Twitter. Their patronizing time-out for those of us who do no confirm is pathetic.

You can find me on Gab: https://gab.com/ILANAMERCER.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE ILANA MERCER MAILING LIST: http://www.ilanamercer.com/mailing-list/

AND, many thanks in advance to those who’ve “Liked” and “Shared” my Facebook Author Page, https://www.facebook.com/PaleolibertarianAuthorILANAMercer/, in support of work that is now in its twentieth year. http://www.ilanamercer.com/weekly-column/

Discussion is on Facebook.

No photo description available.

 

UPDATE I (4/16/019): There is Right and there are Israel Firster, neocon Republicans like Ben Shapiro. We of the Old True Right are the true victims of censorship. The other establishment elites just get together on Fox News to kvetch about how libtards, who don’t know Left from Right, make them sad. As for President Donald J. Trump: He has generally defended the fake right. Or, as Jack Kerwick calls it, the Big Con.

UPDATE II: This might have been what got my Twitter account restricted. What’s objectionable about it? Asking why Millennial morons get to censor speech? The question itself is objectionable.

UPDATE III (4/17): Thanks to all who have shared my plight.

Via Gab:  

Author and Townhall.com writer @ILANAMERCER was recently censored and deplatformed by Twitter for wrongthink, so I figured I would highlight her recent work here on /g/GreatAwakening to help compensate. Here’s one of her more recent columns on the Mueller probe, in which she makes some interesting points about the way the Cabal stitches its storylines together …

MORE.

General Gab thread is here.

 

UPDATET (4/2/019): NEW COLUMN: TV Tarts: Cringe Factor Ad Infinitum (Part 2)

Critique, Culture, Feminism, Gender, Ilana Mercer, Media

NEW COLUMN is “TV Tarts: Cringe Factor Ad Infinitum (Part 2).” It’s on WND.COM and The Unz Review.

Excerpt:

It takes a foreign correspondent planted amid our White House Press Corps to highlight the latter’s dysfunction. During a presser with “Trump of the Tropics”—Brazil’s visiting prime minister, Jair Bolsonaro—a Brazilian lass distinguished herself by focusing exclusively on … hefty matters. When this foreign correspondent asked President Trump about the “OECD,” the furrows on the sloping brows who make up the American press scrum deepened.

To these presstitutes, it mattered not whether America was going to put in a good word for Brazil at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, when there was one overriding, life-or-death matter to tackle:

Trump’s irredeemable, unrelenting, absolute awfulness, which not even an exoneration by the sainted Mr. Mueller has ameliorated.

Yes, Grand Inquisitor Robert Mueller found no evidence that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia in the 2016 election. This has altered not a bit the hyperventilating done by the harridans on the ubiquitous television panels.

Let me be clear. When I allude to the women of TV, I include those with the Y Chromosome.

However, other than a few “men”—Don Lemon and his CNN sideshow, Chris Cuomo, come to mind—the housebroken boys on the typical TV panel are tamer than the tarts. Some of the “men” might even be pretending to be temperamentally unhinged in order to hook-up with good-looking girls in the Green Room.

Brooke Baldwin of CNN and Stephanie Ruhle of MSNBC continue to spit out Trump news in CAPS, just so you know HOW EACH ONE FEELS DEEP DOWN INSIDE, AND WHO ARE THE ANGELS AND THE DEMONS IN THE STORY. (Donald and his Deplorables are never angels, if you get the drift.)

Not coincidentally, the asphyxiating hysteria matches the vapid vocabulary. TV’s women rob the English language blind, deploying breathy figures of speech to fit a simpleton’s febrile, emotionally overwrought state-of-mind: “Unbelievable, incredibly embarrassing, amazing, OMG!”

This piss-poor, teenybopper English comes with sound effects. TV’s tarts all speak in insufferable, grating, staccato, tart tones. At least, that’s how I’ve always described the gravelly voice of the tele-ditz. Believe it or not, such a depiction is no longer politically proper. The voices from hell have been dignified. Explains the Economist,

Two vocal features are associated with young women: vocal fry and uptalk. Uptalk, as the name suggests, is the rising intonation that makes statements sound like questions? And vocal fry—often said to be typical of Kim Kardashian, an American celebrity—happens at the ends of words and phrases when a speaker’s vocal chords relax, giving the voice a kind of creaky quality.

Mandatory elocution lessons might ease the viewer’s pain.

Bad English and bad thinking are intertwined. By logical extension, the “ladies” resort reflexively to ad hominen attack. If Trump expresses an opinion, it’s not because he sincerely thinks it or believes it, but because he’s narcissistic, isn’t nice, makes them sad.

As befits the pedestrian minds described, our pig-ignorant panelists (with apologies to pigs) are incapable of grasping the role of government.

TV’s tele-tarts focus not on the role of government, but on the tone of government. …

… READ THE REST. NEW COLUMN, “TV Tarts: Cringe Factor Ad Infinitum (Part 2),” is on WND.COM and The Unz Review.

Previously: “The TV Tarts’ Reign Of Terror, Part 1.”

LETTERS:

Is MERCER a man?

I read both ‘Tart’ articles and assumed a man wrote them,” writes an Unz Review reader: “It did not occur to me that a woman would write so cogently, albeit negatively, about other women.”

This is not an uncommon reaction to what my friend, Dr. Chris Sciabarra, called “muscular writing.” See Raves and Reviews.

Writes Blenda Richter:

Next time don’t hold anything back and let it go, Mercer. Great column. I was happy to see the insufferable Marie Harf (‘barf’ lol!) and the irrational Jessica Tarlov lead your long list. Invective and caustic wit at its best. A modern Mencken. “Bomb China with American bimbos.

Related: “MERCER’S Like A Man …”

Writes Kerry Crowel: “That’s an insult, the modern man doesn’t have near the guts that you do Ilana.”

UPDATE (4/2/019):

MERCER’S Like A Man …

Britain, English, Gender, Ilana Mercer, Logic

My reply to John’s recent email about the Mercer writing style and thinking being like those of a man:

“Yes, I like that. But most men no longer write, think or behave like men ought to.
Post your comment to my Unz Review column and you’ll see THE REACTION you get from THE MINI MEN who dog me on the site.”

Just one example.

The oracular Dr. Sam Johnson, from his perspective in England of the 1770s, would have caned these mini men for their lack of manners. He certainly would have failed the prose of most men and women today for its billowing, self-indulgent quality.

—–Original Message—–
From: John
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2019 1:54 AM
To: ilana@ilanamercer.com
Subject: Re: NEW COLUMN: Covington Kid: Hated For The Color Of His Skin

Well considered and written.

A few years ago I said you wrote like a man. …

Well now I think you also think like one. So In you, I’ve found the best of both sexes…

Best wishes, John

NEW COLUMN: Wage Walls, Not Wars

Abortion, Addiction, Ilana Mercer, IMMIGRATION, Law, libertarianism, Paleoconservatism, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, The West, War, War on Drugs

NEW COLUMN IS “Wage Walls, Not Wars.” This “Big League Politics” Interview about paleolibertarianism is now on WND and the Unz Review.

Excerpt:

BIG LEAGUE POLITICS: Being a preeminent paleolibertarian thinker today, how would you define paleolibertarianism and how does it differ from standard paleoconservatism?

ILANA MERCER: First, let’s define libertarianism. libertarianism is concerned with the ethics of the use of force. Nothing more. This, and this alone, is the ambit of libertarian law.

All libertarians must respect the non-aggression axiom. It means that libertarians don’t initiate aggression against non-aggressors, not even if it’s “for their own good,” as neoconservatives like to cast America’s recreational wars of choice. If someone claims to be a libertarian and also supports the proxy bombing of Yemen, or supported the war in Iraq; he is not a libertarian, plain and simple.

As to paleolibertarianism, in particular, and this is my take, so some will disagree. It’s how I’ve applied certain principles week-in, week-out, for almost two decades. In my definition, a paleolibertarian grasps that ordered liberty has a civilizational dimension, stripped of which the just-mentioned libertarian non-aggression principle, by which all decent people should live, will crumble. It won’t endure.

Ironically, paleoconservatives have no issue grasping the cultural and civilizational dimensions of ordered liberty—namely that the libertarian non-aggression principle is peculiar to the West and won’t survive once western civilization is no more. Which is why, for paleoconservatives, immigration restrictionism is a no-brainer.

By the way, the statement is not meant to be culturally chauvinistic. There are indigenous tribal people (say, in Brazil) who’re peaceful and pastoral. I mourn their culture’s near-extinction, as well.  Where such extinction has been brought about by the West’s chauvinism—it must be condemned.

In any event, paleoconservatives would typically grasp that libertarian principles would not endure in certain cultures. Libertarians, on the other hand, have had a hard time linking civilizational issues with the libertarian axiom of non-aggression. What do I mean? Libertarians will chant, “Free markets, free minds, the free movement of people.” Let’s have ‘em all.

They don’t always explain how these principles are to endure once Western societies are overrun by individuals from cultures which don’t uphold these principles. (From the fact that our own societies are turning out liberty hating individuals—it doesn’t follow we should import more.)

On the other hand, paleoconservatives are far less focused on the state as an evil actor and often appear more concerned with culture wars: gay marriage, cannabis, pornography, abortion. The paleolibertarian rejects any attempts by the state to legislate around the issues of:

Abortion: Completely defund it is our position.

Gay marriage: Solemnize your marriage in private churches, please.

Drugs: Legalize them and stop the hemispheric Drug War.

Wage walls, not wars.

As a creedal paleolibertarian, I see the road to freedom, primarily, in beating back The State, so that individuals can regain freedom of association, dominion over property, the absolute right of self-defense; the right to hire, fire, and, generally, associate at will.

Foreign policy—specifically, no meddling in the affairs of other countries!—is the be all and end all of both paleoconservatism and paleolibertarianism. Don’t let any of the radio or TV personalities fool you.  If he or she liked, justified or rationalized Bush’s Middle-Eastern wars or Trump’s dabbling in Niger—he or she is no paleolibertarian. (Tucker Carlson is a fabulous paleoconservative.)

Both variants are for small government and big society. Again, more so than the paleoconservative, the paleolibertarian is radical in his anti-state position, sometimes even advocating a stateless society.

BIG LEAGUE POLITICS: In what ways does your political thought differ from CATO institute libertarianism? …

…  READ THE REST. NEW COLUMN IS “Wage Walls, Not Wars.” The interview is now on WND and the Unz Review. It was conducted by correspondent Seth Segal for Big League Politics. A version was published on Nov. 23, 2018.