The American Tribune
@TAmTrib • 68,895 subscribers
Restore Western Greatness
Shorts
Videos
For all the people whining that critiques of Nolan's Odyssey are just chuds trying to stay mad about ancient texts being modernized... Baz Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet (1996) took a foundational text of Western society and updated it for modern audiences. The cast was diverse to reflect inner-city gang rivalries which were making headlines at the time, and it was set in the heart of these troubles in Verona Beach. Handguns were called "knives" and long guns called "swords". Everything was set against a totally contemporary backdrop. You'd think everyone would be up in arms and furious, right? Wrong, it was generally well received by critics and home audiences. It earned $132.8 million in profits. All because it kept the original spoken script of Shakespeare's play spoken by present-day people, and stayed true to the source material. It was an interesting take on a classic that had swag and didn't subvert the original for weirdo antisocial political agendas. All you have to do is not fundamentally hate the story you're trying to tell (or the culture it comes from) while making a concerted effort to make it shittier. Make actual art and people will be just fine with it. Who knew?
The American Tribune637,338 views • 23 days ago
So, to recap, "racism" is when: > We don't let illegal, 67-IQ, dirt-cookie eating Haitians stay within our borders. > We deport them in accordance with existing immigration law. > When they are sent back to their homeland that we so desperately need the cultural enrichment of, they are *checks notes* beheaded. Haitians gonna Haitian I guess. > This is still somehow the fault of wypipo. Remember kids, it's not that Africans naturally act this way when left to their own devices, it's actually white people's fault for not giving them access to our lands and proximity to our culture so they can behead US instead.
The American Tribune110,148 views • 14 days ago
Another great article by Helen, but she once again falls short of the mandatory solution. It's possible that it's because as she herself might say, she's a woman and still has the sensitivities of her sex, which is why she's uncomfortable with taking the maximalist stance. It's also possible that she's still trapped in the frame of liberalism, as many on Right still are, where all solutions have to be moderated through the rule of law and the Constitution (a hindrance our enemies don't make the mistake of giving credence to). The only decision that will actually solve this issue is a total reversal of everything that has come since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and aggressive industrial scale remigration, anything short will just reset the timer on the same outcome. As Christopher Caldwell lays out in his book, The Age of Entitlement, the CRA replaced the Constitution and made illegal the baseline Right of Association. The entire system Helen is decrying was born and exists because of the legal precedent set by the CRA (and the scrapping of the actual American Constitution) Everything that followed, from Hart-Celler in 1965, to the Immigration Act of 1990, to affirmative action and DEI, to NGO's facilitating massive migrant caravans, all have the CRA as their ideological bedrock. We cannot allow the poisonous tree to continue spreading its fruit. If we are to continue as a country, we need to unequivocally outline the preconditions for being an American, and we cannot shy away from the ethnic component. Otherwise, as Helen says, we will be demographically replaced and the preferential racial laws already in place will be used against us. If you want to see what this looks like just look at Zimbabwe or South Africa. American Whites must not be sheepish about our Rights and our ability to rule in the country created by our ancestors for us. We've had 3 generations to see what sharing power gets us, and the result is disgustingly clear. It would be madness to repeat the same mistake again. When the pretext of sharing power with our enemies ends, we can't be shy about eradicating the legal framework used to oppress us in our own homeland.
The American Tribune46,590 views • 6 days ago
Sayed won his primary and people are already blackpilling. The thing we need to remember about this sudden "success" of socialism is that it is entirely driven by demographics. You'll notice that all of the new shiny faces of socialist America are all Third World invaders. AOC, Ilhan Omar, Milat Kiros, Francesca Hong, Abdul El-Sayed, Darializa Avila Chevalier, Rashida Tlaib, the list goes on. These are not Americans, they are invaders with the ideology of replacement, extraction, and consumption. This has never been an organic rise in the popularity of Socialism, this is a rise in demographic replacement and the promise of expropriating what Americans create and giving it to the teeming biomass of the global favela. This is all just downstream of the Civil Rights Act and the Hart-Celler Act letting in intruders and giving them entitlements over Americans. But my friends, never blackpill. Think about it, they entirely rely on us to produce and create so they can feed on us like leeches. They want to expropriate what we have because they are incapable of productive achievement. Even if they win and banish all "evil colonizer whites" to some gulag in remote Alaska, within 20 years it will be a productive and stable society. They will demand access to the prison they sent us to, because they will have turned what we had into a stinking mud hole, because that is all they are capable of doing. We banished our dysgenic European prisoners to one of the most hostile islands in the world (Australia), and it's now a first world nation that people get on boats made of tires to try and reach. They would have to execute all of us, and then they would still lose because they would have nothing left to feed on. Something tells me if they start trying to liquidate the white Kulaks, we won't be going quietly into the night. We are still the most disagreeable and heavily armed white population in the entire world. They can only push Socialism because we insist on continuing to let them import ethnic enclaves and garner votes by promising to give them our stuff. This is all a choice and at any moment we could simply choose to stop it. It is a choice to let invaders hold political authority in our country that our ancestors built for us, let's make a different choice.
The American Tribune23,406 views • 5 days ago
Obviously *checks notes* "Abdul" should be sent back to whatever rubble pile he and his family were extracted from. The fact he's giving a speech at all is a moral condemnation on all of us. But look over his shoulder. Look at the wild-eyed women nodding along like they're at black church. You'll notice it's not Arabs in his crowd. This is the reason Abdul is at the microphone and not "herding" goats. This runaway toxic femininity is what is treating the hostile foreigner as family and actual blood relatives as the evil other. We will not be able to move forward as a civilization until traitors are disenfranchised and invaders are expelled. How many of these people do you know in your life? How brainrotted have they become? Do you even think they're capable of coming back to reality? Would cult deprogramming even work at this point?
The American Tribune78,436 views • 20 days ago
1:52
Sensitive content
This media may contain sensitive content.
The question "what is an American?" has the same glitching effect on a Neocon that "what is a woman?" does to a Leftist. If you ask them where these "classical liberal principles" they venerate come from, whether they successfully export to other cultures, or if they're even still present in our society today, they short circuit. 404 Error. "Individual liberty" has always carried with it extreme presuppositions. Liberty requires the foundation of a cohesive culture with a shared morality. The founders wrote at length that our system was wholly inadequate for other peoples. "A Republic if we could keep it", well we didn't keep it. Liberty without morality immediately devolves into degeneracy. This is why libertarians complain about the fact that they can't buy heroin at CVS, or whine about age of consent laws violating individual liberty. Without the underlying responsibility that liberty requires, it is just lizard brain hedonism. They think that the law dictates ethics, when actually ethics precede law. Liberty requires something of you. It demands a complimentary host of responsibilities in order to keep it coherent. "Rights" without duties are just entitlements. Liberalism was only ever an adjudication mechanism for a preexisting moral people group. It was a way for various Western European Christians to work out their grievances peacefully. It was never meant to represent or be wielded by hostile hordes of Third Worlders against Americans. It's purpose is nullified under these conditions. Mexicans might be good at building things, but they are not Western European. Indians might allegedly be very smart (they're not), but they still worship a heretical pantheon of blue elephant monkey gods. Neither are Americans, they just want access to American riches, and they will say anything to get proximity to these riches. Our tolerance of others was always contingent on their ability to emulate Western European ways of being. When blacks were still mostly Christian and behaved themselves (or were made to behave), they were largely tolerated. Now that those expectations are gone (or made illegal) and they once again behave like Africans. The fatigue climbs daily. The French tried their hand at an American-style Revolution. It looked more like Lenin than Jefferson and ended with Napoleon. They were both Western European and largely Christian and even they couldn't pull it off. Leftism was spawned from their failed attempt. No one who should be taken seriously actually thinks that the Somali migrant cares about, is capable of, or wants to preserve "individual liberty". There is no amount of paperwork or government documentation that will make them an American. This is why we call them "paperwork Americans". The idea that they can is the type of nonsense that people like James Lindsey still try to push, not realizing that it's just Blank Slatism with extra steps. The material conditions necessary for liberalism are mostly gone, we can go back to spirited college debates about individual liberty once those preconditions are once again met. As Christianty has faded or been made illegal and the founding American stock has been diluted with compounding waves of Third World waste, liberalism has proven to be incapable of solving these issues. That's because it was never meant to. No one on the "post-liberal Right" hates America or thinks that the founding was a mistake (with the possible exception of Curtis Yarvin, still love you Curtis). We are simply realists who are able to look around and see what time it is. The only question that matters now is: "what is an American?" or more accurately, "what do Americans do with non-Americans?" The way this question gets answered over the next decade will decide the fate of the next 250 years of our continent.
The American Tribune47,748 views • 18 days ago
It is very exciting to imagine a world where agricultural scale involves not vast reservoirs of chemicals, but high-tech, precision equipment Things like the weeder (shown below) that burns thousands of weeds a minute, dozens a second, saving farmers money and obviating RoundUp We shall see, but it is very exciting, and the sort of innovations that could come from an industrial sector that produces such equipment in America would be incredible This is what America has done so well in the past, with using the building of useful machinery to drive massive investment and innovation in an ever-growing sector. It would be really cool to see it happen again
The American Tribune90,018 views • 5 months ago
No more content to load