No Country for Last Men.

Two recent events have highlighted just how vast the gulf is between decadent postmodern American civilization and a particularly aggressive breed of everyone's favorite old-timey Middle Eastern religion.

On a university campus in Missouri, an alleged "shit-Swastika" appeared on a bathroom wall, and supposedly a couple of drunks yelled "Nigger!" in the presence of Dindu Americans. This resulted in a social media campaign, widespread protesting, the football team threatening to strike, and the University president and chancellor both resigning in the face of increasingly petulant demands from the emboldened negro college student union.

Meanwhile, in Paris, Islamic radicals murdered at least 129 people. They didn't hashtag something snarky about western imperialism, they didn't demand a safe space, and they sure as fuck left no requests for additional cultural sensitivity.

In a contest between these two cultures, who would win?

Obviously the limp purple dildo of the insulated and pampered college-age lefty would be sliced to ribbons by the hard steel scimitar of the average radical Islamic kebab.

America is populated now with what Nietzsche referred to as "The Last Men", an indolent, spoiled, soft and weak-willed assortment of individuals looking only for their own comfort. Existing as the final metamorphosis of slave morality, first as a Judaic religion, then a rudderless secular ethos, we've finally arrived at the establishment of a literal victimhood culture that venerates weakness and punishes strength. In the most advanced Western society, serious conversations are conducted on how it is wrong to make slovenly fatasses feel bad about idly stuffing themselves into a state of permanent obesity. For the Last Men in America, discomfort and shame are so odious that tactical nihilism must be regularly deployed to erase distinctions of "better" and "worse", lest someone feel bad.

Meanwhile, in Iran, homosexuals are still publicly executed.

Interestingly enough, the final conclusion of man as a sort of fat, idle and petulant child is only possible in an advanced first world society where the machinations of a faceless bureaucracy serve to minister to his trivial desires. Note that the average dildo American leftist isn't truly part of any sort of over-arching political ethos, and they are simply milling around central Schelling points that appeal to their entirely predictable individual interests. This is why liberal support for politicians resembles the attention an overweight feline might show for the cat lady that feeds her, a sort of trivial affection without any real conviction of concrete political premises. The current political structure consists of a bureaucratic monolith on one hand, and spoiled school-children with rent-seeking demands on the other.

We aren't dealing with an ethos so much as the inverted absence of an ethos combined with resentment for anyone that provokes shame or discomfort. These are over-fed cattle; their concerns are gibsmedat, air-conditioning and the sorts of trivialities only overgrown children could find rewarding. These aren't Marxists or Communists—have you even cracked the cover of Das Kapital? If it won't fit on a bumpersticker or an Internet meme, these lumpenprole haven't read it.

The question is, when a large enough proportion of the populace consists of soft, rubbery dildos as unpossessed of physical stamina as they are of ideological conviction, how are they to offer any resistance towards potential enemies? Worse, how are they capable of defending themselves against adversaries they openly apologize for? Taking an ideological stance is burdensome, and might involve being mean to people. This unwinnable state of affairs hasn't gone unnoticed by "thinkers" who swing left of center, and recently the "Fourth Horseman of the Fedora" Sam Harris lamented that liberal enablers of Islam are insuring that only "Christian fascists" will be capable of defending the country against the Muslim hordes.

I think one of the nuances that should be understood about the Last Men is that they see themselves as individuals with only a superficial interest in group causes and tend to view foreigners as mere collections of individuals too, regardless of how many of those foreigners decapitate infidels or detonate suicide vests in crowded streets. (Note similar postures from libertarians on this subject.) Their only real experience with groups and groupish behavior usually consists of being excluded from them, which does a lot to explain their infantile hatred of White Christians and terror at the specter of ethnonationalism.

The Last Men don't have the tools or willpower to actually fight an actual adversary, and their only tactic at this stage in the game is to beg an intercessor to please step in and make sure all the cattle are comfortable. "Just don't imply that in the current year, we might have to grow some cojones and fight for anything in the literal sense!"

We're poised at a crossroads in history where the fattened herd of Western Whites are either slaughtered by Bronze Age religious fanatics, or a new strain of ideology finally shakes off the shackles of slave morality and carries the torch of civilization to new frontiers.

"One still worketh, for work is a pastime. But one is careful lest the pastime should hurt one.

One no longer becometh poor or rich; both are too burdensome. Who still wanteth to rule? Who still wanteth to obey? Both are too burdensome.

No shepherd, and one herd! Everyone wanteth the same; everyone is equal: he who hath other sentiments goeth voluntarily into the madhouse."