Sailing Takes Me Away


Steve Sailer is an outstanding journalist. Witty, erudite, and possessed of sufficient guile that the less discerning might even believe his diffidence wasn’t an act. As with anyone worthy of notice he undoubtedly gathers detractors, though as an objective quality measure stripped of all finger-pointing hysterics, he should be a standard rather than a pariah. In context of even the profession’s supposed elite, he is in most instances embarrassingly superior.

Yet hatred permeates every word of his prodigious pen, thus rendering him quite unemployable.

And so that questing, insightful, angle-finding mind is left to solicit Internet donations from commenters whom Tom Friedman wouldn’t tip to park his Bentley.

This state of affairs quite noticeably chafes Mr. Sailer. And he plainly covets the rarefied air occupied by America’s premier media shamans, though is bitterly shackled by the principles that impede his ascension to their roosts. An aggrievement he assuages, at least in part, through self-certainty that the world is listening to, if not paying for, his analyses.

More succinctly: he seems a swell guy who does good work and hates being paid like a street urchin. And it is because he is held in such esteem that I will expend the next few dozen keystrokes disagreeing with the conclusion inferred from a recent column.

Obama is right mostly.

The world has gotten more peaceful under the post-WWII system that is:

– Mildly averse to redrawing borders (e.g., African countries complain about their legacy borders, but African rulers are very reluctant to allow them to be redrawn: splitting Sudan along sensible racial lines took decades)

Russian annexation of Crimea following military operations, even if by referendum (but only in Crimea, not in Ukraine) violates all three.

If Russia wants to annex Crimea, it should offer to buy it from Ukraine (like the U.S. bought Alaska from Russia), with the deal needing to be ratified by a majority of voters in both Ukraine (minus Crimea) and Crimea.

A purchase price that Ukraine would be willing to accept for Crimea would sneer down upon the term astronomical. And would further represent quite a return on investment since Khrushchev administratively transferred the peninsula gratis in 1954. While it is always preferable when parties agree on a transaction, when they can not are options now foreclosed to one? So our wives would have us think.

Though more importantly, the precedent of people deciding a border rather than a detached government and its pilot fish is one to be applauded. And not only because it devolves power away from hostile elites. But also because it would serve to focus the collective mind of the state and conceivably begin to realign its interests with that of the nation. If a state apparatus understood that its imported replacement drones may–and likely would–one day elect to secede from its control, while spiriting away a large parcel of valuable real estate, it may begin to embrace the nuevo aphorism: Homogeneity is a strength!

As a for instance, Mr. Sailer is no doubt advised of the revanchist impulse circulating among his state’s new plurality population. Undoubtedly it along with the whole of the American southwest would now have exited via plebiscite if the mestizos there didn’t have their canines deep into the neck of the white taxpayer. And if some economic maelstrom were to tear the sinews out of this host, the de facto border would soon enough become de jure. And empires only cry when they contract.

There is no small amount of utility in the state fearing its loss as acutely as the nation. Heighten that fear sufficiently and the former may even sue for peace with the latter.


13 thoughts on “Sailing Takes Me Away

  1. Interesting take on this whole borders thing. However, I don’t think it matters much what the mestizos in California think. They’re not in control, no more than the white population, and their masters are hardly going to let them break away from the hell on earth they are making out of America. That’s my view of it, anyway.

  2. I think you’re trying to say that Sailer is a grandiloquent fuckwit.

    Upon which I heartily concur.

    Correction: he is grandiloquent in his fuckwittedness rather than his style.

    3 kids, a mrs, a brain, good job prospects: blogging for leftovers. This does not compute.

    If you’re blogging for Truth’s sake then surely yes, it’s good and right to put up the cardboard sign and mangle a few begging felt tip pen strokes across it.

    But, if every post ends in groveling at the feet of those who hate you YET, still expect to get a paid position in their fleets of lackeys because you, and only *you* have the wisdom to see their plan and still admire it, even though it spells disaster for your own, then…well…

    • Sailer has come up with a few good quips: “Invade the world, invite the world” being his best.

      But only Sailer could come up with that and at the same time adulate the very people who put the phrase into motion.

      There’s only one thing lower than a journalist or MSM opinion writer and that’s someone who has seen what they do and still wants to be one.

      What would Sailer make from his gigs at Vdare, Takis and whatever arse-end of the internet backwater he writes for? That fag neocon Catholic, whose name escapes me now, was on $80K and he was peak leftard. What do you reckon Sailer makes? I say 50K at best.

      The mystery is: how does Sailer’s wife allow him to while away the hours moderating blog threads, doing shitty movie reviews of nothing of consequence (and no note), sometimes doing Youtube interviews with roadies, irregular comments at Mangan’s blog or praising Roissy for being so “out there”?

      Is HBD Chick’s (:-) 😦 ~-)))) blog moisties worth it all?

      I really don’t get it.

  3. But what does Sailer mean by his comment below?

    Steve Sailer said…

    Pollard is an all-around terrible, terrible person. He tried to spy for Pakistan for cash for his cocaine habit. At his summer camp in Israel as a child, he was remembered as the worst camper they ever had.
    4/3/14, 3:40 PM

    Sailer then turned it into a post: Jonathan Pollard, all-around terrible person

    I detect something snide in Sailer’s approach to the subject of Pollard, and it doesn’t seem to be snidely against Jews as such.

    Am I missing something?

    • Yes, and fair enough point to approach it from Sailer’s perspective. However, he’s supposed to be a High IQ genius yet he’s still asking questions that low IQ slobs like me knew the answers to when we slugged our first beer back in high school.

      I’m sure he’ll follow it up, Derbyshire style, adulating the inherent genius of the Jews and urge on philosemitism for all. Just, you know, can you guys turn down the blowtorch a notch? It’s really starting to burn.

  4. The thing is, there’s nothing about race realism that requires intelligence to understand or explicate. That Sailer has spent his life, apparently, grappling with the subject is remarkable. Especially so since he still seems to be just opening his eyes to the race realism the Jews have inculcated into them since birth.

    David Stove puts it succinctly:

    “Almost everyone unites in declaring “racism” false and detestable. Yet absolutely everyone knows it is true.”

    The question is: why does everyone unite in declaring “racism” false and detestable when everyone knows it is true?

    • And we should add, that by everyone we mean Whites.

      Kevin MacDonald has devoted this final stage of his life to answering that question. Sailer and MacDonald are chalk and cheese when it comes to race realism.

    • It’s a hybrid Socratic-Will Rogers approach to stating and condemning (with an aww shucks guilelessness) the obvious without ever overtly doing either.

      Ha, very good.

      I just looked up “Affirmative Will Rogers” and realised I thought you were referring to Will Robinson from Lost in Space. Was this Will Rogers some naive, “aw shucks” yokel living out on the prairies?

      As for Sailer’s approach: “I cannot accept that course of action.”

  5. I mostly regret this sequence of comments (If we could call them that).

    Sincerely hope Unz dot com gets back online soon.

    • Oh, and not an afterthought, sorry for abusing you. Pretty sure I did that elsewhere on your blog but refuse to search for it out of wishing for my night to remain fairly even tempered, avoiding all recriminations.

      Good on ya, Porter.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s