Western schizophrenia

swim hajib
Nike’s “Swim Hijab” so Mohammedans can take a modest dip.

There is no more Left or Right. There are only Globalists and Nationalists.

— Marine Le Pen

THE FRENCH politician speaks the truth. And we have cracked into two halves, i.e. Western schizophrenia. It is not a global phenomenon because Latin America does not think this way, nor does Africa or Asia. Those places still embrace nationalism, i.e. patriotism.

And common sense.

In the United States, the Democrats are the Globalists, and the Republicans are the Nationalists. There are other distinguishing characteristics of the parties. Democrats get very angry. Republicans far less so, being the generally polite party.

Once the party of the Working Man, Democrats have become the party of the Screaming Woman.

— Robert Stacy McCain

Schizophrenia, of course, is a mental illness and, with some exceptions (most notably in Eastern Europe), the West is mentally ill. How else to explain American companies like Nike hawking hijabs to the people who brought down the Twin Towers in 2011?


How else to explain Time magazine’s naming Greta Thunberg, an hysterical, clueless, parentally abused, mentally ill teenager, its Person of the Year?

As the saying goes, You can’t make this stuff up.

23 thoughts on “Western schizophrenia

  1. And today I read the U.N. is telling US (USA) that we WILL pay for climate change funding!

    Time to pull the plug on that U.S.-funded globalist propaganda spewing artifact!


  2. So true. What is the word in Mexican? Esquisofrenico? Something like that. I have never seen Western society so divided. One side is fairly rational and measured. The other (leftist) side seems to have lost it completely. The Trump Derangement Syndrome is a real thing and it’s not just affecting Americans. My cousin in France won’t even watch the news anymore and admits she doesn’t even know who the prime minister of England is. And her marriage just broke up. It seems like 1/10 of marriages have ended in divorce due to TDS. With millennials it’s 1/5.

    If Trump wins again in 2020 (quite likely), the psychiatrists will be quite busy, I imagine. It’s amazing to me that the choice of a president can cause such a ruckus. I never bring up Donald Trump in polite conversation, but I’ve noticed with those stricken with Stage 4 TDS that they can’t help mentioning Trump in any conversation. It doesn’t matter if you’re discussing apple trees or the best way to flambé shrimp. They will always mention Trump in a derogatory way seemingly wanting you to agree, “orange man bad” or something like that. Very bizarre and not healthy. A strange but interesting time to be alive.


    1. Brent: As I have noted elsewhere, the last presidential election was unique in that it was not so much one party pitted against the other. It was Insiders vs. Outsiders, and the Outsiders (in the person of Trump) shockingly won. That is why some Republicans also oppose Trump.

      It’s a very unusual situation.


      1. In 2016, the Democrats nominated the ultimate insider. That decision played right into Donald Trump’s hands. Unfortunately, they seem to be determined to try it again. Sad.


    1. Ms. Shoes: That would be appropriate. And the editors at Time magazine have similar symptoms, obviously.

      They are hysterical, clueless and mentally ill. Parentally abused? Who knows?


  3. Political extremism is naming a Swedish teenager Person of the Year for her knowledge of climate change. Just what was her run-up to being a featured speaker at the UN? My first memory of her is just seeing a picture of a girl with a twisted smile in the news.


      1. The Time article says she has Asperger’s Syndrome, which can explain her expressed emotionality about something that has caught her fancy. People on the autism spectrum don’t process information in the same way as a typical person, neurologically. Explains to me the frozen expressions on her face in pictures.


  4. Democrats globalists, Republicans nationalists? It’s more complicated. Multinational business and finance are largely pushing — and are the beneficiaries of — globalism. The Republican establishment is behind this all the way, the base not so much. The Democratic establishment has swallowed globalism also, but there are significant elements of the left that oppose it strenuously. Bernie Sanders and his followers, for example. Also see books like “Reclaiming the State” by William Mitchell and Thomas Fazi. (From my review of the book on Amazon: As the interests of citizens are overridden by the interests of global economic forces, especially finance, right wing populism promises some protection for ordinary citizens while the left remains stuck in identity politics. Thus we get Brexit and Trump. The authors show that states have the ability to reject those choices and reclaim the ability to make economics work better for ordinary citizens.”)

    Bu t… Democrats are angry, Republicans polite? Have you watched a Trump rally, where everything he says is either a boast, an insult, a lie, or an incitement to violence or lawlessness? Have you watched Matt Gaetz and Jim Jordan in the hearings?


    1. Creigh: Yes, it’s likely more complicated but, generally speaking, the Democrat rank-and-file are the globalists. The hallmark of that position is the support of open borders.

      And the GOP rank-and-file want the border wall. They are Nationalists. Multinational business and finance is another category altogether. Some are Democrats and some Republican. That part of the GOP establishment that pushes globalism does not reflect the rank-and-file GOP, as you noted.

      Yes, the Democrat establishment is all in for globalism. And Bernie does not support open borders, which makes him a Democrat oddball to a degree. Yes, Democrats are the angry side. They are the ones blocking speakers with whom they disagree from college campuses. They are the ones spitting on folks sporting Trump caps in restaurants. They are the ones punching people with opposing opinions in the streets. If you are unaware of these relatively frequent events, I recommend you broaden your news sources.

      If all you’ve got is pointing to enthusiasm at Trump rallies, you haven’t much to demonstrate that conservatives are the angry side. But we do get angry, of course. How not? But there is nothing equal about the violence, both verbal and physical. The violence and anger comes almost 100 percent from leftists. As for Trump’s speaking style, he does not incite violence. (Maxine Waters does, however, literally.) Trump does boast with good reason. When he insults, it is invariably a response to initial insults from the other side. He does not instigate, but he certainly ends things. I think it’s fine because the conservative side has been quiet for too long. And Trump does not advocate lawlessness either. Have you been reading the NYT or Huffpost? Stop that right now!


  5. Being of that bent, my mind immediately jumps to economics when I see “globalism.” Immigration is of course one of the dimensions. On that topic, there’s a lot of room between a $25 billion wall of dubious effectiveness and open borders. And where I know of one person who advocates for the wall, I’m not aware of anyone calling for open borders.

    I don’t know what’s up with WordPress lately, it keeps asking me to log in when I try to comment, then loses the text. Not just on this site.


    1. Creigh: Calls for open borders abound from the left. It’s the Kumbaya thing. This is particularly prevalent on university campuses where ignoramuses run rampant.

      As for walls, they work. Ask the Israelis.

      WordPress is touchy at times. Problems, I have noticed, tend to correct themselves in time. Well, usually.


        1. Creigh: You are right. Still, some additional border wall on the southern border of the U.S. would be advisable. And I’d love to see a very high wall on the much-shorter border between Mexico and Guatemala. I like border walls.


  6. Can’t get a lot of argument out of this old man on the points you’ve made above.

    What will it take to bring us closer to reasoning with each other? Here where the Texicans live, it’s mostly conservative, especially among the old like me, but go to the metro areas, different story. Even in our smallish cowtown arguments abound.

    Perhaps the best answers take time?


    1. Ricardo: Time? Yes. When everything implodes, which it’s going to do due to this obsession with multiculturalism, I imagine things will be rebuilt out of the ashes. That’s what history shows us.


  7. I fear my dislike for Trump is coloring my objectivity in the job he is doing. He is not someone I would ever want to meet, but looking back at my past I have to wonder how many people would feel the same about me.

    To those thinking about throwing out Trump at any cost, who is a reasonable alternative?

    One thing I’ve learned over the years, there are few politicians who can actually be trusted.


    1. Dave: What am I seeing here? A Trump foe thinking clearly? Cutting him a little slack? I am gobsmacked and pleased.

      As for few politicians who can be trusted, I agree. I think the trustworthy ones are a small minority. I do think, however, that honest ones get into the trade, but the problem is that they get corrupted over time. Sad.


Comments are closed.