See also: Michelle Malkin At AFPAC: The Charge of the America First Brigade, March 2020; and from March, 2019: "CPAC AT THE BRIDGE"— Michelle Malkin's Great Immigration Patriot Speech, With Links And Video

VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow writes: Michelle Malkin has emerged as an extraordinary force in U.S. politics, transitioning from a brilliant career in conservative journalism to becoming a genuine political leader. And, much as I respect the unique phenomenon that is a Trump rally, I have to say that Michelle’s speeches come closer to classical oratory in their intellectual force and sheer beauty.

What follows is adapted from her remarks at Nick Fuentes’ AFPAC conference, February 26, 2021. Congratulations to all concerned.

See her on video here.

Good evening, America First-ers. Mommy’s home!

 Mr. Potato Head has been neutered. Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben have been erased. Statues of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Confederate generals, Catholic saints, and Columbus have all been torn down. Our last legitimately elected president, Donald J. Trump, has been deplatformed everywhere. But the authentic America First movement is alive and kicking, growing and spreading.

We are the world’s healthiest, most viral virus. Nothing and no one—no masks, no vaccines, no amount of censorship, not the SPLC nor the ADL, not the snot-nosed tattletales at the Washington Examiner nor the smear merchants at the Huffington Post and NBC News, not that one sniveling soy boy at the Daily Dot nor his feckless counterparts at the Young America’s Foundation and TPUSA—can keep us at bay.

The title of my speech tonight is “AFPAC II: Bloody, but unbowed.”

For the last several years, I’ve written my major national addresses around classic poetry. It’s important to read and memorize beautiful things. We stand for beauty. We should embed beauty in our minds, hearts, and souls. I was reminded of this as I listened to the clunky, pedestrian black “youth poet laureate” at Biden’s inauguration—a Jesse Jackson/Maya Angelou knock-off whose prose has the aesthetic effect of nails on a chalkboard.

Last year at the inaugural AFPAC, I chose Tennyson’s “Charge of the Light Brigade.” The year before that, at the snoozefest pay for play racket known as CPAC, I sounded the alarm over the existential threat of mass migration using Macaulay’s “Horatius at the Bridge.”

This year, for you, I chose the Victorian poet William Ernest Henley’s famous and enduring 1875 ode to resilience, “Invictus,” which means unconquerable in Latin.

Henley was chronically ill and wrote his battle cry while hospitalized with crippling tuberculosis as he awaited amputation surgery. In the second stanza, he described his stoic response to adversity. And it is that stiff-upper-lipped defiance that we dissidents must channel as the going gets tougher in the ever-oppressive age of COVID lockdowns, Big Tech censorship, anarcho-tyranny, and the twin weaponization of Nov. 4 and Jan 6.

In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.

The fourth and last stanza of Invictus, contains one of the most famous concluding couplets ever written in the English language:

It matters not how strait the gate
How charged with punishments the scroll
I am the master of my fate
I am the captain of my soul.

See also: JOHN DERBYSHIRE: Merrick Garland—Antifa Attorney General Plans To Crush Dissent

Andy Ngo’s new book Unmasked: Inside Antifa's Radical Plan to Destroy Democracy is as important to understanding where we are today as Ann Coulter’s Adios America! was before Donald Trump election. Ngo shows that far from being just an “idea,” as President Joe Biden would have us believe, Antifa comprises highly organized groups of dedicated activists with an extreme political agenda and a commitment to violence. But Ngo also shows, perhaps less consciously, that Antifa operates with de-facto backing from the Ruling Class, including Main Stream Media journalists, the principal enforcers of the current order. Ngo suggests Antifa are a revolutionary threat to the power structure and could overthrow it. But the truth is much worse—Antifa are simply the System’s militant wing.

What makes Unmasked so remarkable is that Ngo doesn’t limit himself to anecdotal reporting, nor does he retreat to abstract theorizing. Instead, like a great historian, he seamlessly integrates his experiences and other primary sources with political theory. He shows, often literally with chapter and verse, what motivates Antifa, how they are organized, how they are trained, and how this is turned into concrete action:

Where there is no single capital A ‘Antifa’ organization with one leader, there are indeed localized cells and groups with formalized structures and memberships. Though officially leaderless, these are organizations by every definition.

The [Rose City Antifa] curriculum is modeled on a university course. Yet it includes training on how to use guns and do reconnaissance against enemies.

Ngo also helpfully reports on the history the Antifa brand, especially its origins in the Red Front Fighters’ League of the pre-Hitler German Communist Party. He’s especially astute to note that “the German Communist Party [KPD] and its various offshoots viewed social democrats and liberals as ‘social fascists’ no different from Nazis.”  Needless to say, KPD leader Ernst Thälman’s strategy of fighting the more moderate Social Democrats ahead of the Nazis was glossed over by Communist propaganda after World War II. East German hagiographies of Thälman, like Sohn Seiner Klasse and Führer Sonne Klasse (“Son of His Class,” “Leader of His Class”) portray him as fighting the Nazis above all else.

[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through VDARE.com]

Of the sixteen persons nominated for a cabinet position, as listed in the January 23rd issue of The Economist [After the chaos of the Trump era, what can Joe Biden hope to achieve?] nine have now been confirmed by the U.S. Senate and have assumed office. So we are better than halfway through the confirmation process.

You can't help but notice the diversity. Not one of them—not one of the sixteen—is a non-Hispanic white Protestant heterosexual male. To put that another way: Not one of the sixteen comes from the same slice of the diversity pie as did every single one of our nation's Founding Fathers.

(Am I still allowed to say "Founding Fathers"? "Founding persons," whatever.)

That is the working definition of the word "diversity" in our benighted age: no non-Hispanic white Protestant heterosexual males! That's true diversity!

Earlier (or 20 years later) NYT Complains Trump Doesn't Respect the Narrative: "Under His Presidency, the American Dream Would be Primarily Reserved for Americans." and Is Trump Un-American for Saying Americans Have a RIGHT to Choose Which Immigrants We Want?  both from 2016

Originally published in the Washington Post, October 15, 1995

James Fulford writes: VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow published this in the pages of the Washington Post more than 25 years ago. It's still on their website. Also on their website: savage attacks on Lawrence Kudlow for inviting Brimelow to his birthday party.

Brimelow's views on immigration haven't changed any. They're still in line with what the majority of Americans feel about immigration. But since then, the Post, and the Democratic Party, have moved far to the anti-American Left.

As for "mean-spiritedness" (which here means the opposite of "compassionate") it's a standard tactic of the Left to say that not giving into their demands would cruel to someone. In this case, that would be (a) illegal immigrants and (b) prospective legal immigrants, I.E. anyone in the world who wants to come to America.

The immigration issue is on the move. At last. Future historians will wonder what took it so long. "We are transforming ourselves," Immigration and Naturalization Service Commissioner Doris Meissner has said, approvingly. But no one bothered to consult "we."

This fall, however, bills authored by both Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.) and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) mark an historic watershed: Both propose the first reduction in the legal influx since the 1965 Immigration Act restarted mass immigration, quite accidentally, after the four-decade mid-century lull.

Official Washington is used to being told that it is out of touch with the rest of the country. But on the immigration issue, professional politicians are showing a touching bipartisan willingness to Get It. Even President Clinton initially endorsed the findings of the recent U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform headed by former liberal congresswoman Barbara Jordan, which concluded in effect that the system was broke and that legal immigration should be reduced.