See also: Christchurch Massacre: Yes, It’s Terrorism, Yes, It’s Tragic—and Yes, Elites Could Halt It, By Halting Immigration. But They Won’t.

New Zealand has a very serious problem. Of course, any Western country would be in trouble in the wake of a malcontent of European descent massacring 50 people in a mosque and live-streaming it over Facebook. From Ireland to Australia, such an outrage would certainly lead to attempts to tighten the Politically Correct screw, to further suppress criticism of immigration and multiculturalism, and to move towards an even more authoritarian Leftist state. But in New Zealand, the situation is so much more serious…because the Prime Minister is emotionally unstable, even by female standards.  And, although it’s no longer Politically Correct to mention, that’s saying something

Almost everything that 38 year-old Jacinda Ardern has done in the wake of the bloodshed in Christchurch has spoken volumes about her perilous psychological state. Forget the impetuous, knee-jerk reaction of banning semi-automatic weapons [Assault rifles to be banned in New Zealand in aftermath of massacre, Prime Minister announces, Sandi Sidhu & Helen Regan, CNN, March 21, 2019,], and the convulsive efforts to curb the internet, including a bizarre ban on the U.S.-based financial website ZeroHedge. [NZ Threatens 10 Years In Prison For 'Possessing' Mosque Shooting Video; Web Hosts Warned, 'Dissenter' Banned, by Tyler Durden, March 18, 2019] Ardern has had the Muslim call to prayer broadcast across the country. She has publicly donned Islamic dress, when not even in a mosque, in order to show solidarity with New Zealand’s Islamic community, and she has encouraged other Kiwi women to do the same—in other words, ironically, to conform to a patriarchal aspect of Islamic culture. [New Zealand Will Broadcast The Muslim Call To Prayer Across The Nation And Have Jesus Removed From Their Parliamentary Prayer, by Alex Graham, Defiant America, March 20, 2019]

In a curiously superstitious reflex straight out of the Harry Potter series, in which the villain Voldemort is referred to as “he who must not be named,” Ardern won’t even mention the name of the Australian in custody for the Christchurch bloodbath. [New Zealand “will give gunman nothing - not even his name”, Jacinda Ardern vows, Sky News, March 19, 2019] And she literally burst into tears during the memorial for those killed in the attack. [New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern bursts into tears during Friday sermon, The International News, March 22, 2019]

Ardern has gone miles beyond the status-playing virtue-signaling that we would expect of mainstream politicians—who of course are responsible for bringing unassimilable Islamic immigrants to New Zealand in the first place. Even the appalling Tony Blair (for whom Ardern once worked) did not have homosexual anthems played after the bombing of the Admiral Duncan pub in 1999. She has behaved in such an extreme way—“A leader with love on full display” according to the BBC [Jacinda Ardern: “A leader with love on full display”, by Ashitha Nagesh, BBC News, March 21, 2019] that one starts to question her state of mind.

And this is not just spiteful speculation. Jacinda Ardern’s mental health problems are a matter of public record.

Of course, females are, in general, higher than males in anxiety [Women are far more anxious than men – here’s the science, The Conversation, June 10, 2016].  But Ardern is extreme even for a woman. In an interview with British newspaper The Guardian in 2017 Ardern’s thoroughly sympathetic female interviewer noted that:

Two years ago, the Forum for Democracy was a new fringe party in the Netherlands. Today, it is poised to become the largest party in the Dutch Senate after a decisive victory in recent elections. [Dutch government loses Senate majority amid populist surge, by Toby Sterling and Bart Meijer, Reuters, March 20, 2019] And the Forum’s model has important lessons for patriots around the West.

Forum’s leader is Thierry Baudet, who is educated, charismatic and skilled at deflecting a hostile media utterly determined to paint him as “the telegenic European face of a Donald Trump-style alt-right politics”. [The naked populist: Thierry Baudet stuns the Netherlands, Channel News Asia, March 21, 2019] He baffled journalists with classical references during his victory speech, declaring, “The owl of Minerva has landed” . [New populist star emerges from Dutch local elections, by Mike Corder, Washington Post, March 21, 2019] One Dutch-language article broke down Baudet’s “remarkable” statements to explain how racist and evil they were. For example, Baudet referenced the “Boreal World” and how it is being destroyed by those who should protect it. Naturally, this was explained as a way for “right-wing nationalists to talk about… the Aryan race”. [De speech van Baudet: 5 opmerkelijke uitspraken en wat ze betekenen, RTLNieuws, March 21, 2019]

When journalists and academics are panicking this way, you’re probably doing something right. Corné Hanssen of the University of Utrecht asked on Facebook, “Volkert, where are you?” [“Walgelijke Utrechtse universitaire docent roept op tot moord van Thierry Baudet: ‘Volkert, waar ben je?!,’ by Tim Engelbart, De Dagelijkse Standard, March 21 2019] This is a reference to Volkert van der Graaf, the murderer of Dutch populist Pim Fortuyn in 2002. (The answer, by the way, is that van der Graaf was paroled in 2014, after serving 11 years of an 18-year sentence.)

James Fulford writes: The Mueller Report, which was supposed to be about alleged “Russian collusion” with Trump, is due out, and many people in the Democrat/Media conglomerate are hoping for a rerun of Watergate, which they think of as a victory for the Rule of Law. It wasn’t, and we need to have one of those famous “conversations” about what it was, and why it mustn’t happen again.

In 1972, Richard Nixon was reelected with 520 electoral votes. He was running on winning the Vietnam War and also fighting a War on Crime. His opponent, George McGovern (17 electoral votes) was running on a plan to lose the Vietnam War, and surrender on the War on Crime.

But by August 1974, Nixon was removed from office, and in April 1975, Vietnamese Communist troops occupied Saigon. What finished off South Vietnam was the “Watergate Congress” which voted to cut off all supplies. For details see James Webb's Peace? Defeat? What Did the Vietnam War Protesters Want?, American Enterprise Institute, May/June 1997.

Who did this? Well, the Democrat-controlled Senate investigated the hell out of a break-and-enter committed by Republicans, which they never did when LBJ, JFK, Truman, and FDR engaged in similar activities (See It Didn’t Start With Watergate, [PDF]by Victor Lasky, published in 1977). On the Senate investigative staff was a young, far-Left Wellesley graduate named Hillary Clinton.

The Democratic media, which hated Nixon with the same kind of hate they now display towards Trump, did the same thing, led by the famous Woodward and Bernstein, who probably get too much “credit” for this.

Finally, in something that VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow speculated about in his 1981 Policy Review article reposted below, the secret figure of “Deep Throat” (Woodward and Bernstein’s name for an source inside the Government) turned out to Mark Felt, second in command of the FBI. [The Myth of Deep Throat | Mark Felt wasn’t out to protect American democracy and the rule of law; he was out to get a promotion, by Max Holland September 10, 2017]

Peter Brimelow described this phenomenon of using lawfare to overturn elections by trying to criminalize the victors in his post Manafort, Marlborough, And Robert E. Lee: Criminalizing Policy/ Personnel, Differences— U.S. Politics Regressing To The Primitive.

Once again, the Establishment is trying, as they did during Watergate, to overturn the results of an election with the aid of a Deep State, and the “foreign policy” establishment. “Deep Throat” Felt claimed Nixon was interfering with the “independence” of the FBI, which he thought should be immune to interference by the President of the United States, and apparently James Comey feels the same way.

If this coup succeeds, instead of the Republic of South Vietnam being overrun by foreign invaders and destroyed, the victim will be the Historic American Nation.

Machiavelli Redux, By Peter Brimelow, Policy Review, Winter 1981

Machiavelli concluded The Prince by quoting Petrarch in an attempt to inspire the rulers of Italy:

For th’ old Romane valour is not dead

Nor in th’ Italians brests extinguished.

Reading these three books (Go Quietly...Or Else, by Spiro T. Agnew, The Terrors Of Justice, by Maurice Stans, and Will: The Autobiography Of G. Gordon Liddy) by survivors of the Nixon disaster brings home how totally that Administration, which more than any other in recent history would have welcomed comparisons with Machiavelli, departed from his prescription. The reason was not exactly lack of patriotism, but rather a failure to understand the humane, even idealistic spark that animated Machiavelli’s ironic realism. Indeed, the books raise the broader question of whether American society itself is going through the kind of degeneration Machiavelli decried in Italy, so that it no longer supports what might loosely be called the “Roman” or “military” virtues: courage, loyalty, and personal integrity.

These reflections may seem odd, given that all three authors fought losing bouts with the law. Spiro Agnew resigned the Vice-Presidency and entered a plea of nolo contendere to a charge that he received payments in 1967 which were not expended for political purposes and which were therefore subject to income tax. The prosecution’s statement included forty pages about Mr. Agnew’s alleged bribe-taking while he was Governor of Maryland; Mr. Agnew issued a one-page denial. The judge said, accurately, that both were irrelevant to the case before him, and fined Mr. Agnew $10,000. Maurice Stans, Nixon’s 1972 Finance Chairman, pleaded guilty to two charges of unknowingly accepting illegal contributions and three charges of reporting contributions tardily. He was fined $5,000. Previously Mr. Stans had been found innocent, along with John Mitchell, on ten counts of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury relating to an alleged attempt by financier Robert Vesco to buy protection from the Securities and Exchange Commission. Gordon Liddy was sentenced to twenty years in prison and fined $40,000 for the Watergate burglary, a year and a half for refusing to talk to the Watergate grand jury, and a (suspended) year for contempt of Congress.

Of 895 slots in the freshman class of Stuyvesant High in New York City, seven were offered this year to black students, down from 10 last year and 13 the year before.

In the freshman class of 803 at The Bronx High School of Science, 12 students are black, down from last year's 25.

Of 303 students admitted to Staten Island Technical High School, one is African-American.

According to The New York Times, similar patterns of admission apply at the other five most elite high schools in the city.

Whites and Asians are 30 percent of middle school students, but 83 percent of the freshman at Bronx High School of Science, 88 percent at Staten Island Technical and 90 percent at Stuyvesant.

What do these numbers tell us?

They reveal the racial composition of the cohort of scientists and technicians who will lead America in the 21st century. And they tell us which races will not be well represented in that vanguard.

They identify a fault line that runs through the Democratic Party, separating leftists who believe in equality of results for all races and ethnic groups, and those who believe in a meritocracy.

Nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars, Roma has generated controversy in Mexico. Written and directed by Euro-Mexican filmmaker Alfonso Cuaron (right) it tells the story of a Euro-Mexican family (pictured above )and their live-in Indian maids in Mexico City’s Roma neighborhood. Understandably, its success has caused no small measure of joy and pride. But it has also triggered difficult “conversation about race”—not supposed to be an issue in Mexico. Eric Holder, call your office!

Roma received 10 Oscar nominations: Cuaron for Best Picture and Best Director, Yalitza Aparicio for actress and Marina de Tavira for supporting actress. It won Best Foreign Language Film, with Cuaron picking up Best Director and Best Cinematography. He shot the film himself.

Significantly, Aparicio, a 25-year old “indigenous” A.K.A.  Indian woman from Oaxaca, portrayed the protagonist. The half-Mixtec-half-Triqui, actress (left) studied to be a teacher. Roma is her maiden role and made her a star.

Again and again, we are told, Americans are inveterate racists who should be more like Mexicans and other Latin Americans, who not only don’t care about race, but also are more open to and accepting of those of a different hue and background.

That’s bunk, of course. Race is supremely important in Mexico, as the hullabaloo over Roma has made clear.