Poor Men South of Richmond

Poor Men South of Richmond

Andrew Anglin

As everyone on earth is too well aware, a couple of weeks ago, a ginger-bearded hillman with gynecomastia and dogs took the world by storm with “Rich Men North of Richmond,” a song about how he is poor and it’s the fault of rich people. His name is Oliver Anthony or Anthony Oliver. (I legit don’t remember – it’s a stage name. His real name is Lunsford, which I do remember.)

I was pretty critical of the song, as I am incapable of seeing this kind of whining as a positive social trend. I’m also just generally critical of the poor, as I believe they are more or less genetic refuse created by the gluttony of industrial civilization. If you ever talk to a poor white person, you will discover that they are ridiculously stupid. They are in fact cartoonishly stupid. It is like talking to a parody. They are also very whiny, and talk constantly about themselves and their problems – usually, they have multiple women demanding child support and various substance abuse issues, including (but not limited to) alcoholism, pill addiction, and marijuana addiction.

On his Friday show, American Overlord Nick Fuentes was much more critical of this individual and his song and the people the song represents than I was.

I agree with the vitriol.

The song celebrates a culture – which is most associated with the South, but in my experience, exists everywhere in burned-out rural America – which is poisonous to white people. As I noted before in talking about the song, this is not anything new – there have been Southerners whining about being poor for a long time, and their specific style of neo-folk (basically a type of folk music that is mixed with emo or indie rock tropes) is something I associate with KEXP and Tiny Desk from about a decade ago. There were dozens of singers more capable and sophisticated (and more presentable, physically) than Oliver, who created this same type of music, and no Fox News viewer would know who they are – their audience was hipsters. Aesthetically, seeing the popularity of this “Rich Men” song reminded me of the most recent Taylor Swift album, in that it was repeating something that was done to death a decade ago, but is for some reason very popular now. Most pop culture trends, you will find, were a thing among trendy people 10-20 years before they became popular with the masses.

Jason Isbell is the most obvious example of “Southern folksy guy singing songs about poor white people being sad losers.” Jason Isbell was actually good. He got married a few years ago to some bitch and basically experienced what experts now call “Kanye West syndrome,” and changed all of his beliefs to match the woman. Now he sings songs about like, gun control and black people. (She also got him to lose weight.) But in 2007, when he left the Drive-By Truckers and went solo, he was singing songs about how poor white people are pathetic, on pills, and committing suicide because they killed too many kids in Iraq, and so on and on.

Here’s an example, for those unfamiliar, from 2011:

Obviously, this is a lot more than what Oliver is doing, musically and lyrically, and a lot better, but the vibes are very similar.

Another Southerner who talked about being sad and on drugs was Justin Townes Earle. He didn’t sing about being poor, because his father was a rock star, but he whined about how he hated his parents and was always on drugs. He was playing the “poor, stupid, pathetic Southern white boy” bit, which was popular among hipsters. He actually OD’d and died a couple of years ago, which says a bit about this entire culture.

This is 2012:

I could list two dozen other singer-songwriters in this same genre who were more impressive than Oliver.

We should note that the hipsters who listened to this music back in the late 00s and early 10s understood that this was a type of gimmick. The correct term is “aesthetic simulacrum.” These people were from the South, and presumably legitimately sad losers on drugs, but they were not poor. They were musicians, making significant money, going on Tiny Desk and having cocktails with the NPR Jews. This is effectively the same thing as a clown show – you’re putting on a costume and performing as a character. Maybe a fairer comparison is that people understood that Marilyn Manson was not actually a satanist.

No actual poor people were listening to this music. In 2011, poor people were listening to Bruno Mars, Lil Wayne, and Pit Bull. If they were trying to be “authentic,” they were listening to Brad Paisley or whatever other pop country tripe Nashville was shoving down their fat throats.

The people who are listening to Oliver now do not know this is a bit. He’s not actually a poor person who lives in the woods. This is a professionally produced song. Whether or not Oliver is actually from a working class family, whether he actually wrote this song himself – these things are incidental, because this is something that was fully produced and marketed, just as much as a single from Miley Cyrus or Justin Bieber is produced and marketed. It’s a consumer product – it’s not an authentic situation of “poor man records song and then it explodes totally organically.” All of these shills on Twitter were ready to shill this, and I think Oliver is somehow involved with The Daily Wire. It was an astroturfing campaign, led by “marketing guru” Jason Howerton, who is directly involved with The Daily Wire people (the guy explained it himself on Twitter – while also claiming that it’s all real).

The people who believed this mediocre song was organic are the same people who in the 199os went to a Garth Brooks concert and believed the reason he was wearing a cowboy hat and boots was that he’d spent the day wrangling cattle on the farm.

Having watched a video of Oliver speaking, I was left wondering if perhaps he himself does not quite understand that he’s a part of a mega marketing campaign. He seems to be legitimately stupid from what I’m able to gather. Of course, that could be a part of the act – I don’t know and it doesn’t matter. The issue is that the conservative movement – as run by people like Ben Shapiro – like this idea of the whiny, pathetic white man talking vaguely about rich people and vague social problems, then saying “oh but I ain’t racist, I just want good jobs.”

Obviously, music is a performance, but people should understand that this is what is going on. They would be less emotional about it.

Nick’s take is one I agreed with wholeheartedly, but I also enjoyed hearing from the billionaire on All-In, who didn’t bother to point out that this was astroturfed (although I’m sure this was obvious to them) and instead just talked about the implications of so many people identifying with these lyrics about being poor and rich people causing it.

They were more sympathetic, but noted that they – Jews and an Indian – all came from families that were not rich, and made hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. They basically said that there are legitimate grievances that poor people have, regarding shipping jobs to China, importing tens of millions of foreigners to purposefully lower wages, overly taxing small businesses, and so on, but that it’s impossible to say that in America, you simply cannot make any money. They implied, without aggressively stating, that this kind of attitude – “I’m poor and it’s other people’s fault” – is not ever going to be good for anyone.

But there are issues with the modern poor outside of state policy and even outside of this bad attitude of people feeling sorry for themselves. If you actually engage with a modern American poor person – if you’re around them for a significant period of time, and you really get to understand just how stupid they are – you will come to the conclusion that there is no way this person could have survived in an ancient tribal setting. They would have simply died. Moreover, and more incisively, these people could not have managed to get together the motivation and ingenuity to cross the ocean and settle the Appalachian mountain system.

Since the New Deal and the War on Poverty, there has been a sharp decline in the quality of certain populations. People who are too stupid and ugly to survive and reproduce in a natural setting are given enough calories to become human blimps. Along with a lack of environmental pressure, processed food and chemical pollutants have created a new monster race. I assume they are still human beings with souls, created by God, but so are mutant retards born to mothers who used drugs and alcohol during pregnancy.

It’s like the film Idiocracy. Seriously. I know people cite this film a lot, but I don’t think people are following the basic premise, which is that industrial civilization has created a glut that has eliminated natural selection pressures.

For several generations now, stupid people have had significantly higher breeding rates than intelligent people, and the food they eat is multiplying this situation of genetic decline.

Both of my grandfathers came from Appalachia, worked their asses off, and died exhausted and wealthy. This says something about the starting point. There were people in that mountain region there, as well as other rural areas in the United States, who took advantage of the exploding wealth after World War II and made a good life for themselves. Then, there were people who remained in a sharecropper type situation when sharecropping stopped being a thing, got factory or mining jobs, the jobs disappeared, and they started doing drugs. Some of them moved into cities and didn’t make money, but started having kids, so you have these urban poor whites as well. In both situations, these people had a lot more kids than the people with money, and their kids had kids, and they were raised on this processed food, and now it’s Monsterville, with people who are nearly retarded.

I know there are a lot of broke millennials who came from middle class families. But this is a totally separate phenomenon. These guys have just been unmotivated, and they’ve dropped out, played video games and jacked off.

As Nick mentions in his rant, speaking out against poor white people gets you a lot of pushback in far-right circles, where they are referred to as “the working class.” They’re not the working class. They don’t have work. Insofar as they have jobs, they work at Walmart or a gas station. Listen to the song. One of the lyrics is literally something like “damn you, I just want a job!” You could maybe call them “the aspiring working class.”

Here’s the thing: if you’re reading this right now, you’re not being personally insulted. People get mixed up when you talk about the poor or Southerners or “the working class.” The people I am talking about – the people that song was targeted to, primarily – do not read 2,500-word political essays. Their reading capacity is literally on par with the blacks – which is to say, they can barely read at all.

There is this idea on the far-right that there is something romantic about these downtrodden poor white people denied their jobs at the coal mine by greedy Democrat global warmists. There is nothing romantic about this. These people are fat, they are covered in tattoos, they stink, they’re on pills, they are belligerent, and they have no idea what is even going on.

The only romantic thing is the trees.

You can frame these people as victims – and in some senses they are victims, in some senses we’re all victims – but looking at them that way doesn’t really do anything but justify being pathetic. As Nick notes, Oliver’s Twitter handle is “@aintgotadollar.” This is (ostensibly) a person bragging about being poor, while also blaming other people for it. It’s a poisonous culture, and if you’re sitting here as someone from the middle classes thinking this is romantic, you are not helping your society or these pathetic parasitic poor mutant people with man boobs.

In a functional society, you would find something to do with these people. The first thing you would do is give them real food, which would possibly start to reverse some of this degeneration. You would have to give them some kind of work. Like, you would have to have state-backed make-work programs, where you literally have the government making jobs for them to do.

But most importantly, you would need to reverse feminism, so that men with intelligence, creativity, and motivation are able to produce large numbers of children. Right now, the way things are set up, the most capable men are either not getting married and having kids at all, because they’re too smart for that, or they are getting married in their late twenties or thirties to a woman their same age and at most having two kids. These fat, poor, swamp creature looking women are having 5 kids, or 8.

What would happen, in terms of the gene pool:

  • If you fixed the food, the girls from the lower classes would be thin and therefore attractive (fitness and nubility are really the only relevant measures of female attractiveness)
  • If you fixed the social order, men from the middle classes would stop dropping out
  • If you fixed the feminism, these girls would marry up as teenagers into the middle classes to men in their 30s
  • The most pathetic men would then be left without women, as the daughters of the most pathetic men would be moving up to a higher income bracket (which in a meritocratic society amounts to higher genetic quality)

Slowly but surely, the gene pool would just naturally increase in quality.

The Real Point Here

The bottom line thing that is happening in America is this: every problem is being caused by the Jews. That’s it. It’s not really very much more complicated than that. You can do a lot of analysis of how they got this power (it’s primarily a result of urbanization and industrialization, and in large part a result of the nature of the American situation, but it’s a complex issue), or as to why they do what they do (it’s relatively simple: they killed God and they brought a curse down on themselves), or go into the details of their long-term agenda and how we see it unfolding (it’s basically to destroy all life on earth), but the core thing is very simple.

There is no way you are going to fix any of this without talking about the Jews. You cannot do it.

“Rich Men North of Richmond” should have been “New York Yids.” Then you’d be on track for something.

Of course, if the song was about Jews, and telling poor people Jews created all their problems, poor people never would have heard it because the entire media would not have been organized to shove it down their throats.

Oliver made a statement last week sayingthat he believes “diversity is our greatest strength.”

Presumably, this is the way the marketing team decided to deal with the fact he’d been found to have “anti-Semitic” materials on his YouTube playlist (it was just basic stuff about Israel’s involvement in 911). As I said when the issue of the YouTube playlist came up, there was basically no way he was going to not back down.

So, the “controversial right-wing viral folk artist” is spouting the single most vile Democrat Party slogan.

It really makes you think.

The fact that the conservatives are all rallying around this song and claiming it is some kind of “anthem” of the people, simply demonstrates where we are in terms of the politics.

You’re not going to get anywhere with this sort of thing. There is no “thing” here.

The issue has to be addressed. We need to address the Jewish problem. There is no other possible solution to any problem. The fact that poor white people are whining that they want jobs is not an important development.

Poor people are not important.

If you’re experiencing hardship, then congratulations – you’re alive.

Whining never solved a single problem.

The song is important because it is leading to these conversations. Especially after Oliver made this statement about diversity, people are becoming critical of him, and it’s causing them to consider exactly what is going on with this agenda to astroturf the song. They do not astroturf you for your own good.

No one has ever been astroturfed for their own good.

Original Article 


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *