(Zero Hedge)—Last week, Cincinnati, OH made the national news after video footage went viral of crowds exiting a “black culture” jazz music festival. Marauding groups of the fatigue subset (the usual suspects) attacked at least three unsuspecting white victims as they walked along the bustling business district. One victim was an older man who was stomped and punched repeatedly into the road by multiple assailants. Another victim was a woman who was beaten unconscious.
Why did they do it? Because those people were convenient targets, it would seem. Or, perhaps simply because they were the most convenient white targets. It’s hard to say, but one can make an educated guess according to the evidence and common sense.
If this garbage persists, federal funding must be cut. The group should face hate crime charges. A mob of Blacks brutally attacked a white man and woman at the Cincinnati Jazz Festival. Such savage behavior is increasing nationwide, yet the mainstream media ignores the surge in… pic.twitter.com/rRf79X75rs
— Jason (@jason1Patterson) July 27, 2025
‼️BREAKING‼️
Extremely brutal attack on a couple in Cincinnati Music Festival.
—victim of a black mob at the Cincinnati Jazz Festival being BRUTALLY assaulted for no reason#Cincinnati #CincinnatiOhio #cincinnatimusicfestival #brutalfights #attackoncouples https://t.co/t8wSDwpynu pic.twitter.com/q435QKbLJJ— Make Europe Great Again – M.E.G.A (@ScaryEurope) July 28, 2025
Most witnesses filmed the incidents or laughed. Keep in mind that if this was a group of white attackers targeting lone black victims, the national news would be in an uproar and there would be riots in the streets. As it stands, the Mayor of Cincinnati and the media have only briefly acknowledged the violence because it was exposed on social media. The discussion will disappear down the rabbit hole in a week or less as with all such crimes.
As the “black fatigue” debate continues, the general consensus is that solutions are few and difficult due to Democrat leadership in most major cities and also legal structures that prevent any separation of conflicting groups based on race. As Scott Adams, creator of the Dilbert cartoon strip, famously noted after discovering a poll in which over half of all black respondents said they don’t like white people:
“Based on the way things are going, the best advice I can give to White people, is to get the Hell away from Black people. There’s no fixing this. You just have to escape.”
“Based on the way things are going, the best advice I can give to White people, is to get the Hell away from Black people. There’s no fixing this. You just have to escape.”
-Scott Adams- 2023
This will always be a hall of famer. ?
— Uncommon Sense (@Uncommonsince76) May 27, 2025
Apparently some white Americans took this revelation to heart. One group called “Return To The Land” has launched an initiative in Arkansas with the goal of building a town of people limited to traditional values and European descent. The project, operating on private club laws on a 150 acre expanse, has of course drawn the ire of numerous activist groups and the leftist media.
The group was at least partially inspired by efforts in South Africa by Afrikaners to protect themselves from genocidal black communist movements in the region. Some towns in South Africa have formed with exclusively white residents and farmers. This comes after thousands of murders which they argue are race related.
Black commentators refer to the group as “white supremacist” (they are actually separatists, not supremacists) and call for their organization to be taken down through lawsuits.
The obvious question needs to be asked: Why do these critics care? Calls for black Americans to separate and isolate from whites have been rampant the last several years and such efforts are widely applauded. The low IQ commentators above ask what would happen if “blacks tried to do the same thing”? If they did a modicum of research they would discover that black Americans already have, many times.
In fact, only a few years ago the media was lavishing praise on a blacks only town called “Freedom” being established in rural Georgia. There were no accusations of malice or racism, only rivers of fanfare.
White people: *create a Whites-only town*
Media: “THIS IS LITERALLY SEGREGATION!”
Black people: *create a blacks-only town*
Media: pic.twitter.com/Rcw2OQeRVm
— David Santa Carla ? (@TheOnlyDSC) July 27, 2025
The double standard is clear. Black only town = stunning and brave – White only town = evil and fascist.
Black critics argue that the Return to the Land project is unnecessary because rural towns across America are already predominantly white. If this is true, then why does one more white town enrage them so much?
Maybe it’s not so much quiet separation that bothers leftists; it’s the open and loud call to separate that angers them. It’s the lack of fear on the part of white Americans. It’s important to understand that for decades progressives have used the power of white guilt to facilitate gains in political power and social influence. But what happens when that guilt disappears?
Ideally, none of this would be needed and all groups within the US could unite around a shared culture of American values. However, this is not the case. Far-left ideology has permeated the black community and ghetto culture has made coexistence impossible in the majority of cases. A percentage of black Americans are waking up to the problem and are trying to reverse course, but it may be too late.
In terms of legality, the Arkansas group will certainly face a multitude of challenges. Laws regarding private clubs do allow for discrimination, but not for skin color. Selective membership can be applied for groups that are based on a shared ancestry (a Sub-Saharan African Women’s club can legally discriminate against anyone who is not descended from Sub-Saharan Africa, for example). This may be why Return to the Land specifies that they are looking for people of European descent (a majority percentage of European DNA). It gives them legal latitude to block entry to certain undesirables.
How the group handles private property is another matter. There are legal loopholes that allow for the group to congregate in the same area, as long as traditional property sales don’t involve discrimination. Access to the property would therefore have to be tied somehow to private club laws. Return to the Land specifically notes on their website that they do not engage in real estate sales or rentals.
The separation, though, is not just about genetic heritage, it’s also about principles and culture. Beyond the legal debate, it’s fair to ask if people should be free in general to choose their associations; to choose who they live close to? Logic and reason would say “yes”. Why is it okay for one group (black Americans) to build their own town, but not okay for another group (white Americans)?
Why are leftists insistent on forced associations, particularly when it comes to whites?
Because that is how they accumulate power. The most productive group, the most wealthy group, must be forced to feed the needs of all orbiting groups. Minority groups can be tribal but white Americans cannot, because they are the resource pillar needed for the socialist machine to function. Separation undermines the foundations of the multicultural agenda, but also the socialist economic agenda. The progressive structure falls apart if enough whites walk away. It’s happening now in South Africa and the same result would be inevitable in the US.
Safeguarding Your American Dream: Discover the Power of America First Healthcare
In today’s economy, healthcare costs remain one of the biggest threats to financial stability and family security. Americans work hard to build a better life, yet rising medical expenses can quickly erode savings, force tough trade-offs, and even push families toward debt or bankruptcy. Medical bills continue to rank as the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States, with millions facing underinsurance or unexpected out-of-pocket burdens that no one plans for. Many turn to government-run marketplace plans under the Affordable Care Act, hoping for relief, only to discover that what appears affordable on paper often delivers higher long-term costs, limited real protection, and coverage that may not align with personal values or family needs.
America First Healthcare stands out as a private insurance agency dedicated to helping conservatives and families secure better coverage and better rates through customized, values-aligned options. By conducting free insurance reviews, the agency uncovers hidden gaps in existing policies and connects clients with private alternatives that emphasize personal responsibility, small-government principles, and genuine affordability—often delivering up to 20% savings while providing stronger protection for the American Dream.
The allure of marketplace plans is easy to understand: open enrollment periods, premium tax credits for many households, and the promise of “comprehensive” benefits mandated by law. Yet recent data reveals a different reality, especially after the expiration of enhanced premium subsidies at the end of 2025. Enrollment for 2026 dropped by more than one million people compared to the prior year, with many shifting to lower-tier bronze plans to keep monthly premiums manageable.
These plans feature significantly higher deductibles—averaging around $7,500 nationally—and greater cost-sharing requirements. Families who once paid modest amounts after subsidies now face average premium increases of $65 or more per month, even as they accept plans that leave them responsible for thousands in upfront costs before meaningful coverage kicks in.
High deductibles create a dangerous barrier to care. Studies show that people in such plans are less likely to seek timely treatment for chronic conditions, attend preventive screenings, or fill necessary prescriptions. A seemingly minor illness or injury can balloon into major expenses when patients delay care until problems worsen. For a family of four, a single hospitalization, cancer diagnosis, or unexpected surgery can easily exceed the deductible, triggering coinsurance and out-of-pocket maximums that still leave substantial bills. One recent analysis noted that some proposed changes could push family deductibles toward $31,000 in future years, further exposing households to financial risk.
Beyond the numbers, marketplace plans often carry structural limitations. Coverage for certain critical services may include waiting periods or narrower networks that restrict access to preferred doctors and specialists. Preventive care is required to be covered without cost-sharing, but everything else—lab work, imaging, specialist visits, or ongoing treatment—typically waits until the deductible is met. This reactive model contrasts sharply with the proactive, holistic approach many families prefer, especially those focused on wellness, early intervention, and maintaining health to enjoy life rather than merely reacting to illness.
Values alignment represents another growing concern. Government-influenced plans operate within a framework shaped by federal mandates and political priorities that may not reflect conservative principles of limited government, personal freedom, and ethical stewardship. Families who want to direct their healthcare dollars toward providers and benefits that honor traditional values sometimes find marketplace options feel misaligned, forcing a compromise between affordability and conviction.
Private alternatives, by contrast, offer year-round flexibility without the restrictions of open enrollment windows. Independent agents can shop across a wider range of carriers to design plans tailored to specific family needs—whether that means lower deductibles for frequent medical users, broader provider networks, or add-ons that support wellness and preventive services from day one. Clients frequently report more stable premiums that do not automatically escalate each year, along with genuine cost savings once the full picture of deductibles, copays, and coverage depth is considered.
Take the experience of real families who made the switch. Amanda C. shared that her new plan felt “way better” than what she had through the marketplace. Johnny Y. noted his previous coverage kept increasing annually until he found a more stable private option. Sofia S. expressed delight with her plan and began recommending it to others. These stories echo a common theme: when families move beyond one-size-fits-all government marketplaces, they often discover customized protection that better safeguards both health and finances.
Founder Jordan Sarmiento’s own journey underscores the stakes. In 2021, a six-day hospitalization generated a $95,000 bill. Under a well-structured private “Conservative Care Coverage” plan, his out-of-pocket responsibility would have been just $500. That stark difference illustrates how thoughtful planning and private options can prevent a medical event from becoming a financial catastrophe.
Practical steps exist for anyone questioning their current coverage. Start with a no-obligation review of your existing policy to identify gaps—high deductibles, limited critical-care benefits, or escalating premiums. Compare total projected costs (premiums plus potential out-of-pocket expenses) rather than monthly premiums alone. Consider family health history, anticipated needs, and lifestyle priorities. Private agencies can present side-by-side options that include stronger wellness incentives, broader access, and plans built on shared values of self-reliance and freedom.
In an era when healthcare inflation continues to outpace general cost-of-living increases, relying solely on marketplace solutions carries growing risk. Families who proactively explore private alternatives frequently achieve meaningful savings while gaining peace of mind that their coverage truly works when needed most.
America First Healthcare makes this exploration straightforward through its free review process. Families and individuals receive personalized guidance to close coverage holes, reduce unnecessary expenses, and secure plans that align with conservative principles—protecting wallets, health, and the American Dream without government overreach. Many who complete a review discover they can enjoy better benefits for less, often saving up to 20% while gaining the customization and stability that marketplace plans struggle to deliver.
Ultimately, protecting your family’s future requires looking beyond the marketing of “affordable” government options. By understanding the long-term costs hidden in high deductibles, shifting coverage tiers, and values mismatches, Americans can make empowered choices. Private, values-driven insurance offers a smarter path—one that rewards diligence, supports wellness, and delivers real security. For those ready to move beyond the limitations of traditional marketplace plans, a simple review can reveal options designed to serve families, not bureaucracies. The American Dream thrives when individuals and families retain control over their healthcare decisions, and thoughtful private coverage plays a vital role in making that possible.