The 2016 US Election, along with various other political events around the world this year, confirmed to us two things. Firstly, the mainstream media is dead. If everybody took their news at face value from the BBC’s and the CNN’s of this world, there is no way Donald Trump could have won the election. The print media, especially in the US, is equally dead, as their slander and untruths against populist politics has been exposed, along with their “fraudulent journalists”.
Secondly and, more importantly, we have seen the beginning of what can only be described as a white revolution. Some in the media have christened this phenomenon ‘whitelash’, but that implies that this is a temporary reaction or some kind of protest vote, yet this is truly the beginning of a revolution that can bring about long-term change. Of course, ‘whitelash’ sounds better in the eyes of the media, who want to present Trump’s election as the result of ‘angry white men’ attempting to hold onto an order that is destined to shrivel and die, but what has happened is actually so much more sophisticated and complex than this.
For once, we have seen the interests of white people sway an election, instead of the usual circumstances where it is ‘minority’ causes that swing most political decisions in the western world. Incidentally, this is a big contributing factor to Clinton’s loss in this election. She relied far too heavily on the minority vote, particularly blacks and Hispanics, all the while neglecting the group that still makes up an overall majority in the United States: white people. This is where Trump provided us with a masterclass on getting elected, as he knew that if he could get his main support base out to the polls then he would surely win, as proved to be the case.
This theory is evidenced by the demographic breakdown of the 2016 US election results, which showed that every minority group, from Jews to blacks to Hispanics, voted overwhelmingly for Clinton. Trump, on the other hand, won the hearts and minds of white people which ultimately ensured he would win the election. Over 63% of white men voted for Trump, whilst white women favoured Trump over Hillary by 52-41%. This pattern played out over the various subsections of white society in much the same way, with college-educated whites, white millennials, older whites and so on, all voting for Donald Trump.
On the other hand, 65% of Hispanic voters backed Clinton, as did a massive 88% of black voters.
It could be said that this is a scenario we often see, with non-white minorities overwhelmingly backing the left-of-centre candidate and whites often backing the right-wing candidate, particularly in elections won by a Republican. But, the opposing messages and world views put forward in this election highlight that these voting patterns were no coincidence, but instead it was white folk finding their collective voice (better late than never, at least). Clinton was not just the continuity candidate, she was the candidate who blamed the hard working American police departments for the misfortunes of blacks, she was the candidate on the side of communist terror group Black Lives Matter, she was the candidate of mass unpunished violations of the southern border and, she was the candidate of the hundreds of thousands of non-white, non-Christian refugees whom she wished to import should she had won.
Trump, on the other hand, was the candidate of law and order, of immigration control and deporting illegals, of repealing the Obama legislation that disproportionately benefits minorities, of halting the arrival of refugees and of saving American manufacturing (which just happens to be the industries that support predominantly white communities).
These are two sets of policies that are polar opposites as we can see, but also that are designed to appeal to two very different groups of people. Clinton’s policies are clearly designed to appeal to minorities and ‘cucked’ whites – that is, white people who still soak up the media’s double-standard rule that whites must care about everybody, but minorities only have to care about themselves. Trump’s platform was clear: white America has been left behind economically, socially and politically, and its about time that changed. Therefore, it is hardly any wonder that white people voted en masse for Trump, despite the media machine pulling out every trick in the book to guilt trip them into doing otherwise.
In a way, we are seeing a similar phenomenon this side of the pond, although it is less obvious to see because European nations are not yet as ‘diverse’ as the United States. In the UK, the results of the EU referendum showed a similar pattern, with whites (particularly Christian whites) voting overwhelmingly in favour of Britain leaving the union and non-whites voting overwhelmingly in favour of remaining. When asked, the majority of white people who voted for Brexit also said they disliked multiculturalism and political correctness – two instruments of non-whites and liberal elites that always work against white people.
Similarly, we are seeing across the European continent the rise of nationalist parties and politicians who are keen to roll back the institutionalised cultural Marxist agenda that has influenced our societies so heavily since the early 20th century. It is no coincidence that minorities have been the overwhelming beneficiaries of cultural Marxist ideologies such as multiculturalism, egalitarianism and political correctness, whereas whites have been adversely affected. Therefore, we can take the rise of these movements as further indication that white people are finding their voices across the western world.
Should the establishment elites have expected anything different? No, if they had any shred of intellectual integrity they would have foreseen this long ago. For years, they have advanced the causes of racial minorities in our societies, giving them jobs ahead of whites, giving them higher education places head of whites despite having worse results, even going as far as to enact legislation specifically designed to shield these minorities from criticism – to complete the rout, they ensured that any white people who questioned these policies would be ridiculed to the point of them becoming unemployable and totally ostracised from mainstream society. When these conditions are imposed upon a group of people, it is only a matter of time before said group begin to fight back against the injustice of it all.
This white revolution is undoubtedly a positive, not because we want to treat non-whites unfairly, but because we are beginning to believe that we deserve a future too. This future is available to us, but we are in the early stages of this change and it is currently very fresh and fragile. The establishment elite know that there is nothing more threatening to them than this white revolution, so they will try to destroy it and in these fragile early stages it is entirely conceivable that they will. This means we must nurture this revolution wherever we find it and be unashamedly part of it as if our future depends on it, because, well, it really does.
The signs are positive – judging by his early cabinet appointments, it appears that Trump will not soften from the rhetoric of his campaign that in a way began this revolution and the possibilities for progress are endless if we have 8 years of a pro-white White House on our side. We are seeing poll gains across Europe for populist and nativist movements, with electoral success just inches away, beginning with the probable victory for Norbert Hofer in the Austrian presidential election in two weeks time. Next year, there are elections in France and the Netherlands in which populist movements stand a good chance of success. If all goes as it should, we could be looking at a very different western world in 12 months time and with it, a much better future.