I recently reregistered to vote for the first time in fourteen years. The last time that I cast a ballot was in 2012, when it was a clear-cut decision between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. After that, the presidential candidates became increasingly bleak—Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump vs. Joe Biden, Donald Trump vs. Kamala Harris—a perverse choice between the lesser of two weevils. Like many people, my mother cracked under the weight of this moral dilemma and developed delusions that baffled her psychiatrist. She hailed a liberal celebrity, who she’d formerly mocked, as a messiah and assigned to him Christlike qualities that he doesn’t possess. A danger to herself and others, my sisters and I were forced to commit her as soon as her doctors agreed on a name for her psychosis: Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS). The last time that I visited her, she was still drawing parallels between Trump and Jesus and became verbally abusive when I ventured a different opinion based on the Bible that she read to me as a child. Meanwhile, Trump liked having a mental illness named after him so much that he appropriated it for his own use, which gives him an excuse for shouting his own name in public instead of when he’s making love to Melania.
For the last fourteen years, I’ve chosen to conscientiously abstain from casting a vote instead of throwing it away on a third party, but the threats of multiculturalism, socialism/communism, and Islamism have forced me to reassess my position. Will Trump ever be the Moses that the far right makes him out to be? Of course not. But even people like Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar serve a purpose. Trump’s “reign” could forecast the beginning of a Christian revival or the end of the Republican Party, depending on whether the far right can find it in their Bibles to stop denigrating the rest of us as RINOs, even though many of us identified as conservative before MAGA made us seem moderate.
People forget that before the rise of these red-state rednecks, the right was known for being rational, educated, and capitalistic, while the left was essentially the opposite of that. A lot has changed since then. Conservative Republicans are now characterized by Bible-thumping hillbillies, hellbent on raising up the next generation of misogynists, while liberal Democrats graduate from Ivy League universities with degrees in Marxism so that they can admit to knowing nothing in words of three syllables. Understandably, this scholarship has necessitated a revision of leftist propaganda. Before 2012, Democrats claimed that they were the people’s party because Republicans were too wealthy and well-educated to understand the common man. Now, they’re saying that it’s because illegals should vote and go on welfare. The only thing that hasn’t changed is their hatred of America, which should easily unite all Republicans, regardless of whether we lean conservative or liberal.
Now, some of you may be clutching your pearls and thinking that it’s unseemly of me to reveal where I stand on religion or politics. If you have the misfortune to be one of the nincompoops, I have four things to say: first, a person’s relationship to God is the most important thing about them; second, the Great Commission denies Christians the luxury of keeping our religious convictions private; third, this milksop brand of Christianity is responsible for the decline of common decency and common sense; and fourth, a country whose citizens can’t speak freely isn’t a free country. It therefore follows that I have no reason to safeguard my politics more religiously than I do my faith or to hide behind social niceties that our Founding Fathers forfeited when they staked their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor on independence. God forbid that liberty, safety, or prosperity should ever make us too soft to fight for the principles that others died to defend. Such cattle are unworthy of freedom and will never have the courage to keep it.
That’s why I chafe at right-wing influencers who tiptoe around assimilation, as if it can be cultural without being racial. Assimilation is meaningless without culture, culture is a product of race, and the race in question is Caucasian. Even the boldest of these influencers are afraid of being canceled; yet, the left accuses them of being racist anyway. Why? Because the left doesn’t care about truth; it only cares about winning. Even now, it plots to replace capitalism with socialism/communism and use our democratic process to vote “no” on democracy.
Over my dead body. And it may well come to that if Republicans can’t agree to disagree and unite against this common threat.
The left has sold us a story in which all nonwhites are decent, hardworking people just trying to get by. As a decent, hardworking Caucasian who’s driven a beater car for years, I can assure you that this racist romanticization of reality couldn’t be further from the truth. The truth is that most nonwhite immigrants are not the highly educated, highly skilled paragons that Trump promised us but uneducated, unskilled workers who take affordable housing away from underprivileged Americans who could do any entry- or mid-level job better than they could. The truth is that most nonwhite citizens complain about capitalism and whine about white privilege and then look down on natural-born Caucasians who are less privileged than they are. The truth is that this hypocritical, superficial materialism is a product of their culture, not ours. Decent, well-raised Caucasians don’t teach their children to look down on people because they’re underprivileged; they teach them that a person’s value stems from their character. Furthermore, being less privileged than a natural-born citizen isn’t an injustice to an immigrant; being less privileged than an immigrant is an injustice to a natural-born citizen. Natural-born citizens are living, breathing personifications of their country, the standard by which immigrants measure themselves. They may extend certain rights to the immigrant, but the immigrant will never be entitled to the same privileges. Only natural-born citizens are entitled to privilege. That’s what nationalism means.
The truth is that nonwhite immigrants come from inferior countries with inferior governments because they have inferior cultures with inferior values; and generally speaking, the darker their skin tone, the worse their culture tends to be. This is an observable fact rather than a moral judgement: “inferior” doesn’t refer to the equal, inherent worth that God gives us at birth but what we choose to make of ourselves after that. By this definition, being good will always be objectively superior to being bad. Being smart will always be objectively superior to being stupid. Being polite will always be objectively superior to being rude. Pursuing excellence will always be objectively superior to being less than what you could be. And living in a first-world country that honors God, individual rights, and women will always be objectively superior to living in a second- or third-world country that does none of those things. That’s why so many people want to live in the West.
No matter what kind of country a person comes from, it’s impossible to fully separate their government from their culture, as if the former isn’t a product of the latter. Corruption flourishes in second- and third-world countries because the people in power are products of the same culture that produces their “common man”; and it’s foolish to assume that people from socialist/communist/fascist countries, weaned on socialist/communist/fascist values, will suddenly become democratic lovers of liberty as soon as they set foot on Western soil. Many of these people are greedy for gains that their cultural values have made impossible in their own countries, while others might’ve only been allowed to leave on the condition that they’ll vote in ways that benefit their country as soon as they’re firmly established in ours. These people aren’t loyal to the United States and shouldn’t be permitted to hold public office.
Recent examples of this are Lu Jianwang “Harry” Lu, Wanying “Heather” Zhang, and Eileen Wang (the former mayor of Arcadia, California)—all naturalized U.S. citizens who were secretly working for the Chinese government. Other examples include the ongoing allegations against Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, who was born in Somalia, as well as the tech-savvy Asians and Middle Easterners who pose as red-blooded Americans on social media to indoctrinate and recruit impressionable people to their antisemitic, misogynistic, totalitarian way of thinking in preparation for more violent forms of infiltration. The tech age ushered in an era of first-world envy as well as the means to abuse it. People who used to be easy to manipulate are now directing their rage not at the governments that lied to them but at the people who they were taught to hate. It’s kind of hard for a dictator to keep his soiled masses contained when the people he was using to exemplify the evils of democracy have observably better lives than the people he’s trying to brainwash.
Westerners are under no obligation to harbor snakes in our bosom—to welcome people who accuse us of imposing our culture on others and then use that as an excuse for imposing their culture on us. These countries must learn to solve their own problems for their own people instead of blaming centuries of failure on our success. Every country was undeveloped once; yet, some have failed to make any perceivable progress. Why? Because they lack the principles that would make it safe for them to wield power—a divine mercy that won’t shield the West forever. Already, the tide has begun to turn for both good and evil. The question is: on what hill will we plant our standard when the wave breaks on our shore?
At some point, every Christian must decide how forbearing God commands us to be before it becomes more virtuous to take up arms than to turn the other cheek. At what point does inaction, indifference, or misapplied love make us complicit in someone else’s sin? Is it when Muslims groom and rape our daughters? When nonwhites refuse to hire anyone who isn’t brown? When foreigners deny us precedence in our own country and claim privileges greater than our own? When they disrespect us to our faces? Turn our suburbs into ghettos? Drive like they’re still in second- and third-world countries? Abuse the privileges of a culture that they refuse to embrace? Monopolize our government and law enforcement so that we no longer have legal recourse to justice? Force us to beat our plowshares into swords and form vigilante militias to defend our families, friends, and neighbors?
I can’t tell you how to vote but I can tell you how I intend to vote. The left has been criminally clear about its intentions; let me to be equally clear about mine. To the best of my knowledge and ability:
I will only vote for candidates who (a) are at least fourth-generation American and (b) have spent all or most of their life in the United States. That way, any living relatives will be natural-born citizens and the candidates’ loyalty won’t be divided by having a dual cultural identity.
Diversity, inclusion, and multiculturalism are not our strength. Our strength doesn’t lie in sharing one land but in sharing one culture. Our national motto, E pluribus unum, means “from many, one,” not “from many, many.” Many people, one nation—i.e., a group of people who share the same culture (in this case, Caucasian). Fifty years ago, this wasn’t “white nationalism/supremacy”; it was common sense. Immigrants showed gratitude, initiative, and respect, not just for natural-born citizens but for themselves. They didn’t freeload off America’s privileges but embraced the values that made them possible.
If we want to preserve our history and culture, we must prevent immigrants who know and care nothing about either from voting for candidates who’ll prioritize their niche concerns over the good of America as a whole—i.e., people who vote for candidates who “look like them” because they want to be represented by people who’ll make America more like the countries that they chose to leave. It’s not “bigoted/discriminatory” to want to keep the house that you built for yourself instead of sharing it with a guest who’s trying to abuse your hospitality. This may be acceptable behavior in other countries but it isn’t in ours, which could explain why the United States is a first-world country and these other countries aren’t.
I will only vote for Caucasian candidates unless there’s a more qualified nonwhite candidate.
The left has made it abundantly clear that it’s either “them” or us. What began as a bid for equality has become a blatant push to prioritize nonwhites over the Caucasians who created our country and culture. If the left thinks to guilt-trip or strong-arm us into flipping a narrative that they claim was unjust, to gain power and privileges that only we’re entitled to, they have another thing coming. Their perceived victimhood is based on the premise that Caucasians are inherently racist and will oppress nonwhites as soon as look at them; yet, they’re plotting to invade and conquer us through immigration, multiculturalism, and non-assimilation. If that’s their idea of justice, we have no reason to be welcoming or tolerant. If that’s the best they can do with the equality that we gave them—yes, gave them—my only regret is that we didn’t limit it as much as they claim that we did. If their agenda is no longer about equality but power, people will eventually ask themselves who has more right to that power: a white person in a white country or a nonwhite person in a white country. The right answer will always be the former, even if they succeed in using “majority rule” against us by buying foreign voters that real Americans have to pay for. The fact that these immigrants lack the character or integrity to be moved by any sense of guilt or shame is precisely what makes them unsuited to our culture and precisely why it works. If the left tried the same scheme on the Europeans who used to dominate our immigration charts before President Johnson formally introduced chain migration in 1965, they’d be disgusted.
No one has a right to be racist, but no one has more right than the people whose country it is. If anyone’s going to be racist, it’s us, not a bunch of hypocritical, entitled minorities who’ve been faking victimhood to worm their way into power that they fully intend to abuse like some sort of elaborate insurance scam. By forcing us to treat the left like children—by ignoring their tantrums until they finally stop screaming and rolling around on the floor—they’re making life harder for the people who they claim to serve. I guess they’ll just have to explain to national treasures like Yo-Yo Ma, Denzel Washington, Colin Powell, and Condoleezza Rice how their overreaching hubris failed “their people” and set civil rights back by fifty years.
I will only vote for candidates who are Christian, Catholic, or atheist. Candidates can be conscientiously nonreligious but they can’t promote other religions over Christianity.
Under no circumstance will I vote for a Muslim. Muslims don’t recognize separation of church and state. To embrace Islam is to embrace all elements of Muslim culture, including the violence that crushes any opposition to it. Islam is antithetical to Western values and can’t coexist peacefully within Western culture. The fact that Muslims openly shame the people who let them live in their countries is proof of this. Caucasian Americans who behave badly abroad are labeled “ugly Americans”; yet, the left would have us believe that it’s reasonable to reframe our laws to accommodate people whose perceived superiority entitles them to rape our underage daughters, marry little girls, and dress like walking trash bags. I’d rather nuke the Near East, the Far East, and everything in between than give Islam a foothold in the United States.
Obviously, it might not always be possible to implement the above strategies, if throwing my weight behind an unwanted candidate could prevent a worse one from winning. For example, I’d reluctantly vote for a Democrat if it helped defeat a Democratic Socialist Communist.
Other things to bear in mind:
- Not voting or voting for a third party could give the opposition enough votes to win the election. A write-in vote, where you physically write in the name of someone who isn’t on the ballot, is often another way of throwing away your vote, as the person you name can only advance to the general election if they’re (a) eligible and (b) one of the top two vote-getters in the primary election. Are these risks that you’re willing to take on principle? Or is backing your party’s candidate the lesser of two evils?
- Judging by my own state, some of the measures and candidates—including the state and federal legislators, which are arguably the most important—may not appear in your “Official Voter Information Guide.” Consult your ballot for the full list of candidates and measures.
- Don’t make the mistake of assuming, as I did, that the candidates who didn’t submit statements were too lazy to do the work. In California, a candidate statement can cost up to $6,250 and requires gubernatorial candidates to spend no more than $19,611,000 on a statewide campaign that could easily cost a hundred million. Some candidates prefer to promote themselves in other ways instead of paying for a statement that could cost them the election, which at least shows that they have integrity in terms of abiding by the rules, even if you disagree with their politics.
- Thoroughly research each candidate instead of automatically choosing all the candidates affiliated with your party. It’s not illegal for candidates to campaign under one party and then switch to the opposing party after they’re elected to secure one or more seats for their party regardless of who wins. This is known as party switching. There are also politicians who make deals with the opposing party simply to stay in “power” (whatever that means when you’re a spineless weasel). The party endorsements in your voter guide could help determine if a candidate is actually a long-standing member of their stated party. I also found Reform California to be a great help with the judicial candidates, who I ran out of time to research.
- Your ballot is valid if you leave certain items blank, but it could lead to someone god-awful holding public office. Mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day are still valid if they’re postmarked on or before it. The most common reasons for ballot rejection are (a) forgetting to sign and date and (b) signatures that don’t match the ones on file. I don’t know about you but the one on my driver’s license looks like an illiterate scrawl (#YesonProp39).
I could never be a politician. It sounds like a heap-ton of work for people who are never satisfied; only care about policies that effect them directly; and turn on you as soon as their rent, gas, or groceries go up. No sense of taking one for the team simply because it’s right. They rag on politicians for being corrupt and tut-tut about conditions in second- and third-world countries, but are unwilling to make the comparatively small effort to be courteous to the people who they encounter in their own communities. Everyone wants to be a hero until it actually requires something difficult or selfless, which is sort of like saying that you want a man like James Bond but without the killing or womanizing.
In 1961, President Kennedy famously said, “My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world, ask not what America will do for you but what, together, we can do for the freedom of man.” That’s a far cry from the Democratic Party of today. Nowadays, they’re mostly preoccupied with importing foreign voters who they expect taxpaying Americans to support at higher levels of affluence than some of us enjoy ourselves. They vilify “right-wing capitalists” while raising taxes to support people whose morals and manners lower the tone of every neighborhood that we have to pay for them to live in. No wonder so many of us are outraged. This is the sort of demoralization that leads to civil war.
Vote wisely!
