Sunday, March 31, 2019

Snap Shots

A few news items I found interesting/amusing/infuriating recently.

From Infowars, the rare honest Muslim cleric:

PALESTINIAN CLERIC: “FRANCE WILL BECOME AN ISLAMIC COUNTRY THROUGH JIHAD”

In an address to Al-Aqsa mosque-goers, Palestinian cleric Abu Taqi Al-Din Al-Dari said that France will become an Islamic state because it will mostly be inhabited by Muslims by 2050.

“France will become an Islamic country through jihad; the entire world will be subject to Islamic rule,” the cleric said.

Al-Dari said that this would happen because young European natives are not getting married, settling down and having children whereas Muslims have a high fertility rate and have lots of children.

This is what they all want. Christians want to peaceably convert the whole world to Christianity, Muslims also want to convert the whole world but don't mind killing those that object. This isn't really about humanitarianism or refugees. It is a simple invasion of Europe and the West.

---

In Savannah, Georgia local mayoral candidates decide a return to segregation is just what the nation needs in these tumultuous times.

Two black candidates for Savannah’s mayor attend meeting that bars white reporters

Race was front and center on Wednesday night during a meeting coordinated to garner support for just one black candidate in Savannah’s mayoral election.

With signs stating “Black press only” on the doors of the church where the meeting was held, white reporters were barred from entry, while black reporters for at least two television stations were permitted inside.

The event was coordinated by the Rev. Clarence Teddy Williams, owner of the consulting firm, The Trigon Group, who declined to discuss the entry policy.

Former Savannah Mayor Edna Jackson declined to comment before going inside, as did Chatham County Commissioner Chester Ellis.

“This is not my idea,” Ellis said.

Oh, it wasn't his idea. That makes it OK. It isn't worth the effort to point out that this would be national news for weeks if the races were reversed. Sometimes I wonder if we wouldn't all just be better off divvying up the nation and going our separate ways....

----

From the occupied nation of Great Britain comes  this story of identity groups coming into inevitable conflict.

Dozens of parents and children protest outside a second primary school over lessons on gay relationships – handing out leaflets declaring: 'We DO NOT believe in homosexuality'

Dozens of parents and kids have protested against lessons on gay relationships outside a second primary school in Birmingham.

Parents staged a demonstration against the controversial 'No Outsiders' curriculum programme at Anderton Park Primary School yesterday.

They handed out leaflets that declared 'We DO NOT believe in homosexuality. Parents do NOT want their children's belief changed.'

Others read, 'This programme promotes a whole-school gay ethos' and 'You can't be gay and Muslim'.

More than 80 per cent of the pupils at Anderton primary are Muslim. 

It is baffling that the homo and other sexual deviants communities in the West don't seem to understand that they are making common cause with Muslims who hate them. When they vanquish the hated white heterosexual Christian population, they are going to be faced with an ascendant Muslim population that is not nearly as cucked. When the stones start flying and the bodies start tumbling from buildings, maybe they will wake up but by then it will be too late.

As an aside, one of my conspiracy theories is that Muslims encourage this deviant behavior to make Sharia seem like a reasonable alternative. Sure your wife can't drive and has to wear a hijab in public but isn't that better than your kids being taught anal sex in school and being groomed by transvestites in public libraries? You have to admit, it makes some sense.

Another aside, how many schools are like this in the UK where 80% of the students are Muslim?

---

From the perpetually gloomy Zero Hedge...

US Budget Deficit Hits A Record $234 Billion As Interest On Debt Soars

Another month, another frightening jump in the US budget deficit. And this time it was a record.

According to the latest Treasury data, the US budget surplus in February - traditionally the worst month of the year due to tax refunds - was a whopping $234 billion, missing the $227 billion deficit expected, and well worse than the $214 billion deficit recorded last February. And even though there may have been one-time tax refund and government shutdown factors at play, the February deficit was also the biggest budget deficit on record.

Some solid graph porn here. Replacing high wage Americans with low wage migrants coupled with endlessly increasing expenditures is a sure way to insolvency or some catastrophic currency manipulation. Every single Democrat that has a reasonable chance of winning in 2020 is proposing a massive increase in spending with no way to pay for it. You should be stocking up on precious metals, not gold so much as lead and brass, if you take my meaning.

Welcome To South Africa

Last week was dominated by two news items, first the nothing-burger Mueller report that shows that in spite of searching far and wide for evidence of a pre-determined "crime", there is no evidence that the Russians colluded with the Trump campaign and second the sudden dismissal of the charges against hate crime hoaxer and racist sodomite Jussie Smollett in Chicago. It was the most blatant subversion of justice for reasons of racial solidarity we have seen in a long time. More on this here.

Although Jussie is the butt of innumerable jokes, there are people who don't care that he obviously was lying about this whole fiasco. It was suggested, completely seriously, that the Nigerians he paid to pretend assault him might have been wearing "white face" make-up and that this confused Jussie into thinking he was "attacked" by two white men. Why he would think this when he paid the men to do this and was on the phone with one of them immediately before and after the attack is left unanswered.

It also turns out that Jussie Smollett is up for an award from the NAACP Image Awards, a separate awards program for non-white actors and entertainers as "Best Supporting Actor in a Drama Series" (edit: he ended up not showing up for the awards and didn't win anyway)



The host of the Image Award, Anthony Anderson of "Black-ish", another show I have never watched, is hoping that Jussie Smollet wins because he got away with something.

Smollett is nominated for the 2019 NAACP Image Awards, scheduled for Saturday. Six-time host and "Black-ish" star Anthony Anderson told Variety on Wednesday that he hopes to see the controversial actor there.

“I hope he wins," Anderson added. "I’m happy for him that the system worked for him in his favor because the system isn’t always fair, especially for people of color. So I’m glad it worked out for him."

So Mr. Anderson is happy that the "system" worked in his favor, not because he is under any illusion that Jussie was lying about the whole thing, but because he is black and thinks the system is "unfair". In other words, he is happy that Jussie got away with slandering white people and Trump supporters because it helps, in his mind, to balance the scales of injustice. The situation is not one of facts and evidence. It doesn't matter if Jussie lied or not. What matters to Anthony Anderson is that someone on his team won. To him that is justice, a "person of color" putting something over on the "system".


It reminds me of the O.J. Simpson verdict. In spite of what seemed to be pretty clear evidence that Simpson murdered his ex-wife Nicole and Ronald Goldman, he was acquitted. Attitudes about the verdict were very mixed depending on your race. According to CNN in a poll right after the verdict, whites believed Simpson was guilty by a margin of 62-21 while blacks thought he was not guilty by a mirror image margin of 66-14. Almost 2/3 of blacks surveyed thought Simpson was framed. About equal percentages of whites thought that blacks assumed Simpson was not guilty because he was black (58%) as blacks believe that whites thought he was guilty because he was black (60%). What that means is that how people viewed the verdict was overwhelmingly based on their race.

Jussie Smollett seems to be a modern manifestation of this. Most non-cucked whites understand that Jussie Smollett set this whole thing up to help his acting career and had no problem lying about being attacked by two white men and that this happens a lot when it comes to "hate crimes". An awful lot of blacks seem to understand this as well but don't care because what matter is not what actually happened but whether it evens the imaginary score they keep in their heads. "Justice" is when my team scores, not an outcome based on the facts and evidence.

What does all of this mean?

My take is that we are seeing the "justice" system rapidly morphing away from an imperfect system where the goal was to determine fact from fiction and deliver justice either way based on those facts and evidence to an outcome based system where what matters is who wins depending on their oppression score. It is already common practice to shop for venues where minority defendants can get a jury that is more racially similar. The illegal who alleged murdered Millie Tibbets in Iowa, Cristhian Bahena Rivera, is being moved to a different county with a much larger percentage of Hispanics. His lawyer knows full well that a jury with more Hispanics is more likely to refuse to convict a Hispanic man accused of killing a white girl, regardless of the evidence (which included his confession of abducting Mollie and his leading of the police to her body).

You can argue about the legitimacy of this change. Many can and have argued that there is historical evidence of discrimination against minorities in our legal system. I am sure much of this is true but I question whether it has been true in the last 40-50 years. How you view the fairness of our legal system has a lot to do with your race. Most whites are like me, we believe that the wildly disproportionate rates of incarceration for blacks and Hispanics is because they commit crimes at wildly disproportionate rates. Minorities generally assume that the incarceration disparity is due to discrimination, and that whites are likely to get off when charged with a crime while blacks and Hispanics are more likely to be jailed and jailed for much longer.

In an outcome based legal system the question is not "What are the fact in this case?" but rather "What is the overall score between my team and the other team?". In this sort of team-score system, it is OK if someone gets away with a crime because that offsets someone being jailed unjustly. Just like laws in South Africa are being applied to settle scores, our legal system is headed the same way. This is obviously very dangerous. Right now the country is on edge as the various identity groups and tribes look at the shrinking pie and start maneuvering themselves to get their share. One of the only things holding it together is the faith the majority of Americans have in the justice system. We know it is often imperfect but we believe it is our best way of keeping the peace. What happens when the majority of Americans no longer believe they will get a fair shake in the justice system? For starters we stop worrying about "getting into trouble". What is keeping this simmering cold civil war in America from going hot is that most of us still, probably naively, believe that the rule of law still applies. We trust in our system of government and our fellow American. But when it becomes apparent that we no longer can trust in a fair shake from the legal system and when more of us realize that our "fellow American" is no longer interested in fellowship and isn't even American, the disincentive for playing by the rules that are being stacked against us diminishes. I have quite a bit more to say on this topic later.

In the big picture, long term, it is clear to all who are watching on either side of the fake partisan divide that we are headed for a single party rule in America. The Democrats have created what appears at first blush to be the perfect long-term strategy. They locked in the black vote decades ago and that is never going to change. Candace Owen is not a sign of things to come, she is an outlier. There is no "Blexit". The same is true for Jews. No matter how much Republicans pander to AIPAC and talk about our "greatest ally", no matter how much money we throw at Israel every year, Jews reliably vote for Democrats 3-1. Jewish groups are happy to take our money and our unquestioning support while refusing to back those that vote to fund and protect them. Hispanics will continue to vote in mass number for Democrats, at least 2-1. Every three million new Hispanic voters means a net permanent edition of 1 million new Democrats. Muslims will vote Democrat. Asians inexplicably vote Democrat, even though Democrats support policies like affirmative action and higher taxes that disproportionately harm that community. Wealthy urban whites, single white women terrified of losing the "right" to murder their unborn children, various sexual deviants, all are locked in for Democrats.

Meanwhile the most stalwart Republican voters, middle/working class white evangelicals are not having enough children and their institutions are riddled with either cowardly old men afraid to lose their cushy jobs at seminaries and para-church groups or outright wolves among the sheep pushing for normalizing nonsense like same sex acceptance or reparations. The next five years will see "conservatism" under assault from within as much as from without. You can't fight your enemy when you are constantly having to guard your own back lest you find a knife in it from your "allies".

What that means is that as Democrats take control by promising free gibs and punishing heritage America for their past sins, the only way to keep their coalition from devouring each other is to continually escalate the bribes and retribution against a shrinking heritage population. The government in the very near future will be used only for rewarding some groups and punishing others, rather than forming a system of government to allow people to exercise quaint, outdated concepts like responsibility and liberty. This is already happening in South Africa where the government seems obsessed with punishing the Boers while letting the country fall apart. It doesn't matter if something will work or makes sense, all that matters is whether your proposal will temporarily satiate the desire for vengeance.

Get ready for a a new South Africa but this time in a nation with over 6 times as many people, covering 8 times as much land, with multiple large racial/ethnic groups and with hundreds of millions of guns and trillions of rounds of ammunition. A nation where there are millions of private citizens with extensive military and law enforcement training. You can govern a nation with 100,000,000 gun owners but you can't rule one.

Prepare accordingly

Saturday, March 30, 2019

Trolling On Beast Mode

Senator Mike Lee responds the only appropriate way to dimwit Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her "Green New Deal" that got a total of zero votes from her fellow Democrats in the Senate: with vicious mockery. Here is the Senator using Reagan on a velociraptor, a Tauntaun and Aquaman to scorch AOC:



Needless to say she was not amused and claimed Lee was not taking his job seriously. I disagree, he was taking his job quite seriously but when confronted with an idiotic plan like her Green New Deal, the only response it deserves is mockery.

AOC is a lot like Trump in that she can't let any slight or insult pass, the merest hint that someone is making fun of her sends her into a frenzy like a junkyard dog because in the fever swamp of her imagination she is like totally smart and wise and stuff and they all just be hatin' on her cuz they are like jealous and stuff. Well played Senator Lee. Well played.

A Sadly All Too Familiar Story

I saw a story on social media the other day and it was one of those reminders of what is becoming all too common across the west.

The headlines all start off innocuously enough, tragic but short on specifics.

Woman found dead in Kentucky closet, husband arrested in Arkansas

HPD: Husband arrested in Arkansas in connection with wife’s death

Police release information about baby of Henderson woman found dead in closet

It sounds like just another case of lethal domestic violence. You know, the kind that Gropin' Joe Biden blames on "white man's culture". But as you start to look at the story, some things start to pop up. First the name of the accused: Mohamud Abdikadir. Obviously not a Scotsman. In fact you find, after several stories, that Mohamud is "a native of Somalia who moved to the United States approximately two years ago". Then you notice from some media reports that the victim was his estranged wife and that they were planning on divorcing and there were child custody issues. Then her name: Chloe Randolph Abdikadir. Her maiden name doesn't seem to be a common Somalian name. Searching Facebook for her name turns up a Chloe Randolph in Henderson, Kentucky with pictures of a baby that looks about the right age but no pictures of a father. The baby is very cute and is clearly mixed race. As you keep looking, as macabre as it is, you see that her estranged husband went by the name "Gabriel Abdikadir" on Facebook although the link to his profile is for Mohamud Abdikadir. There are pictures of him that match the mugshot photos, lots of posts complaining about "baby mamas" and pictures of the same baby so it definitely is him. Then something chilling from the news stories about this: "Following Sunday's autopsy in Louisville, a medical examiner ruled the preliminary cause of death is that her throat had been slit.". Her throat had been cut, which is pretty common among Muslims as a way of killing someone, like the recent rape and murder of two Scandinavian girls in Morocco. As Jihad Watch pointed out in an article about their murder, this is in keeping with the Qur'an: "“When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks” — Qur’an 47:4". So this social media post was sadly ironic:


I guess the idea of some Muslim terrorist beheading the President of the United States is hilarious. But the comment below the picture was chilling, coming from "Gabriel Abdikadir" aka Mohamud Abdikadir.


This comment from the same Somali man who would later allegedly kill his estranged wife by cutting her throat. Not so funny anymore. It was never funny to begin with. I would never have wanted someone to murder Barack Obama and I despise him. But when you post a meme laughing about the murder of the President by a Muslim terrorist and then end up murdered by a Muslim, no one is laughing. Not her crying parents, not her son who is going to spend the rest of his life with no mother and a "father" in prison.

Chloe Randolph was pretty young, just 20, but already headed for divorce and with a 9 month old baby. Her estranged husband, a Somali, is 21 but has only been in America for 2 years. I don't want to get too deep into speculation but the quickest way to citizenship for a new migrant is to marry an American.

But, but, but...Americans commit domestic violence too! Absolutely but the argument that we already have criminal behavior in America is not an excuse to import more people to commit crimes. We already have plenty of criminals here and as I pointed out in the post I linked to earlier, domestic violence is far more common among blacks and Hispanics, as is child abuse and rape. When you look at Somalis in particular you see a great deal of criminal behavior, whether in Maine or Minneapolis. The district in Mineapolis that inflicted doltish Ilhan Omar on the American Congress is "the terrorist recruitment capital of the US", as Somalis who have been given shelter from other Somalis in America seem angry and bitter about it. Somalis also are involved in other violent crimes, gang activity and sex trafficking. We already have enough criminal behavior from existing Americans that grew up in a culture based on Western law and morals, bringing in people that don't share those values and often reject them outright is a disaster.

When you invite Third World people to come live in America, they don't magically become Americans. Instead they hasten the transformation of America into the Third World. A Norwegian or Irish immigrant in the 19th century is not indistinguishable from a 21st century immigrant from Somalia or Bangladesh. Somalian culture does not have the same understanding about men and women, marriage, domestic violence, or anything else as American culture. It is time to stop importing people that will undermine our culture because forcing together people from incompatible cultures is a guaranteed recipe for conflict and eventually violence.

Friday, March 29, 2019

The Impotent God Emperor

President Trump held yet another self-congratulatory rally last night, this time in Grand Rapids, Michigan, to crow about the end of the Russia collusion investigation. He apparently even titled it a "Total Exoneration" rally. I didn't watch but a lot of it seemed to be him crowing about the failure of his political enemies. I get that but did we need yet another rally to talk about it? He also talked about Jussie Smollett but I expect that to be another issue where the Swamp thwarts him and nothing happens to Jussie.

He did manage to talk a little about the issue he ran on and that won him the White House: immigration. Trump said Mexico had to stop these caravans and boy he really means it this time:

"If they don't — and I'm telling you right now — we will close the damn border," he says."

Hasn't he been President for over two years, making this same threat, and nothing has happened? There is no wall and there doesn't appear to be plans for one. For a God-Emperor he doesn't seem to be terribly effective.
Can you spare a few legions to secure our border?
That isn't to say he hasn't done anything. Sure he got the tax cuts. He has made two solid Supreme Court nominations and a bunch of lower court nominations. The economy seems to be humming along. He has done lots of stuff to appease Israel.

None of that matters.

Even if Trump ends up replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg with some super conservative jurist, it won't matter. The Dems are already planning to add to the number of Justices and pack the Supreme Court with as many far-left "justices" as they need in order to have a bullet-proof majority that will rubber stamp whatever laws and executive orders they pass.

The tax cuts will go away as soon as the Congress and White House flip and will actually get much higher. Of course the Left will build in exemptions for their corporate partners so the tax increases will mostly hit the average American instead to pay for their new spending programs.

The economy is being driven by cheap debt and that is going to come to an end sooner or later.

Israel is going to find pretty quickly that they are not as influential in today's Democrat party as they used to be, especially with the young ones, but as long as the Democrats are funded by multi-billionaire Jewish donors, Israel should be OK.

Meanwhile the flow of illegal aliens invading and occupying our nation is continuing unabated. That is the only thing that matters.

I am afraid Trump is reverting to the old Republican ploy of trying to use the same issue to get elected over and over (see: abortion) by running on securing the border in 2020 even though he squandered his entire first term by doing nothing on that very issue. I am sure lots of people will still vote for him but even a small decrease in enthusiasm will sink his re-election. It is pretty hard to get enthusiastic about his border rhetoric when it has thus far been nothing but talk.

Even though the Russia collusion hoax was just that, a huge hoax, it perhaps was enough of a distraction to keep Trump from focusing on his signature issue. That assumes he ever meant to do anything about it in the first place. Now Trump is looking more and more like an empty windbag. I really wish some days that Trump would be the dictatorial despot that the left accuses him of being.

Thursday, March 28, 2019

Gropin' Joe Biden Virtue Signaling For All He Is Worth

I knew that the race for the 2020 nomination among the Democrats was going to be a dumpster fire but even I didn't realize what a crapshow it was going to be already in March of 2019. The race is really about who can virtue signal the hardest (for white candidates) or promise the most free stuff (non-white candidates). Joe Biden, notable for being dumb as a bag of hammers and a creepy perv that likes to sniff and paw at young women, is for some reason one of the leading candidates for the nomination. He brings nothing to the table as there are plenty of dumb people in America. He is also already pretty old, turning 78 next November, and again there are lots of other, less creepy old people in America. He has almost no significant work experience, having worked as a lawyer before I was born for a year or so. Since 1973 when he was sworn in, he has been oozing around Washington, D.C. as a Senator or the Vice-President but he still likes to play the "aw shucks" shtick which fools a lot of people.

Then yesterday he came out with this little gem:



Domestic violence is a pretty safe thing to be against but being against domestic violence isn't really sexy enough for a primary contender. So Biden spiced it up with his declaration that it is really "white man's culture" that leads to violence against women. I wonder if he saw this storty




This was from 2016 when it was OK to say something critical about non-white Islamic people. Morocco in case you missed it is over 99% Muslim. It is pretty safe to say that in general a woman is far safer in the presence of white men, or especially an East Asian man, than she is from black men or Muslim men. Black and Hispanic men are far more likely to rape women than white or East Asian men:

The rate for rape is about five-and-a-half times greater for blacks than whites, and two to three times greater among Hispanics and Indians as compared to whites, while East Asians commit rape at about half the white rate.

White men are also far less likely to be the abusers of children (assuming most children are abused by an adult of the same race):



Also this:


Must be swell to be able to grope and borderline sexually assault young women on camera with no repercussions. I wouldn't leave this lecherous old freak alone in a room with my wife, so I am not really interested in having him be our President.

It probably isn't worth noting that everything Joe has is because of the "white man's culture" and he wants to become President of the United States, an office and a nation that only exist thanks to "white man's culture". In fact I would argue that women have it better in virtually every possible measure in nations founded in "white man's culture" than they do in non-white man's cultures, like Islamic countries where pundits argue on TV about how much beating is permissible for a disobedient wife or India where women ride gender segregated train cars to keep from being raped while traveling.

As usual, the people who have it best in America precisely because it was founded by white men and remains a white majority nation are the most likely to complain about that same culture.

Joe is trying his best to show how woke he is but he missed the memo. An old white heterosexual man can't be woke enough in today's Democratic party. It isn't anything he says or any positions he takes that disqualify him. It is just that he is the wrong race, wrong gender and wrong sexual orientation. Sorry Joe, like Lizzie Warren you missed your window of opportunity when your party chose Crooked Hillary as the nominee in 2016. You tried to be a gentleman and now you will probably never get to be President. Maybe Bill Clinton and Jeff Epstein can give you a complimentary flight on the Lolita Express as a consolation.

Wednesday, March 27, 2019

Facebook Choosing Sides

About two weeks ago I downloaded all of my Facebook data and deleted my account. Of course it isn't really deleted for about a month, in case you change your mind and come back.


Facebook was just a huge time suck. I met some great people and interacted with people I consider friends like Dan Edelen and Eric Carpenter. I reconnected with some high school classmates and family. But in general it was a waste of time. Then when you consider that Facebook is selling your data and serves mostly as a platform to shove ads in your face all day, plus the very serious privacy concerns, I decided to let it go. I really don't miss it at all.

Then today I saw news that reconfirmed my decision:

Facebook and Instagram ban 'white nationalism and separatism'

Facebook and Instagram are expanding their ban on white supremacy on their platforms, almost two weeks after a shooter associated with such ideology committed the worst terror attack in New Zealand history and livestreamed it on Facebook.

"We're announcing a ban on praise, support and representation of white nationalism and separatism on Facebook and Instagram, which we'll start enforcing next week. It's clear that these concepts are deeply linked to organized hate groups and have no place on our services," the company announced in a post on its newsroom site on Wednesday.

More....

"But over the past three months our conversations with members of civil society and academics who are experts in race relations around the world have confirmed that white nationalism and separatism cannot be meaningfully separated from white supremacy and organized hate groups," the statement said. "Going forward, while people will still be able to demonstrate pride in their ethnic heritage, we will not tolerate praise or support for white nationalism and separatism."

"Experts in race relations". I bet. I would love to see who that included, I can guarantee that no one anywhere on the right was consulted and the oft discredited SPLC was.

One doesn't have to be a "white nationalist" to recognize that this is a troubling issue because Facebook is choosing sides. According to Facebook, some forms of racial and ethnic separatism are perfectly fine. The article even specifically says that "Basque separatism" is OK. Basque separatism/nationalism is described as:

Basque nationalism is a form of nationalism that asserts that Basques, an ethnic group indigenous to the western Pyrenees, are a nation, and promotes the political unity of the Basques. Since its inception in the late 19th century, Basque nationalism has included separatist movements.

Basque nationalism, spanning three different regions in two states (the Basque Autonomous Community and Navarre in Spain, and the French Basque Country in France) is "irredentist in nature" as it favors political unification of all the Basque-speaking provinces.

So that sort of ethnic nationalism is just fine, but not whatever Facebook decides to lump in as "white nationalism".

Facebook won't ban group pages associated with the Nation of Islam, an avowedly black separatist and overtly racist and antisemitic group. Nor "Chicano nationalist" groups like La Raza. Pro-Israeli groups won't be touched even though Israel is an actual ethnostate. Or any other race or religious or ethnic pride group that promotes separation. Nope, just "white nationalism" and "white supremacy", two terms that your average gender non-binary obese purple-haired fruitcake working for Facebook couldn't define anyway. Just search "Nation of Islam" on Facebook and you get a ton of results.


The people who work at Facebook, pulling the levers behind the curtain, are manipulating what information you see, certainly violating the privacy you think you have and selling your data to corporations so they can better market to you. It has some benefits but the negatives far outweigh them. I expect to see lots of generic conservatives like Paul Joseph Watson and Stefan Molyneux to get swept up in this even though they are not "white nationalists", simply as a way to stifle free expression.

Time to stop patronizing Facebook and delete your account. Go get on Gab and say what you want, when you want, instead of letting Mark Zuckerberg decide what is permitted.

If Forced To Choose....

...I choose civil war.



(HT: Bearing Arms)

Tuesday, March 26, 2019

The Jussie Smollett Farce Comes To The Least Surprising Conclusion Ever

To the surprise of many, but not me, homosexual black actor Jussie Smollett was allowed to walk away today from the charges surrounding his report of a "hate crime" that everyone knew was bogus from the word go. I assumed at worst he would get a slap on the wrist and he didn't even get that. He apparently has to forfeit his bond of $10,000 but since he made $65,000 an episode working on Empire, that isn't much of a loss and he will make it back on the leftist talk circuit, still proclaiming himself to be the victim of a vicious crime. The Chicago Police are publicly furious as is Mayor Rahm Emmanuel but I assume his outrage is carefully orchestrated. I have to think that as a cop at some point you see your hard work going to waste thanks to racial solidarity and you just stop trying.

This appears to be a combination of factors. The State's Attorney for Cook County, Kim Foxx, is a black woman and at a minimum this appears to be a case of racial solidarity. There are also reports swirling that the Obama's indirectly intervened on Jussie's behalf as well as black Democratic Presidential contender Kamala Harris. Then news started breaking that Kim Foxx is a wholly owned property of George Soros, who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to influence the results of a local U.S. election where the winner was already guaranteed to be a liberal. Why is Soros donating to a local Democrat candidate in Chicago? There is an answer to that question:

George Soros Donated $408k to Kim Foxx, Prosecutor Who Let Jussie Smollett Walk

Left-wing billionaire mega-donor George Soros donated $408,000 to a super PAC that supported Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx, the prosecutor in the Jussie Smollett case, in her election campaign in 2016.

In a shock announcement Tuesday, Foxx dropped all 16 felony charges against the left-wing Hollywood actor, whom police had accused of faking a hate crime in January that he blamed on racist, homophobic white Trump supporters.

Soros has spent heavily on backing “progressive” candidates for local prosecutorial offices across the nation, following the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement in 2014, which alleged that black defendants have been treated unfairly by the justice system.

Basically a Hungarian billionaire is influencing local U.S. elections, as well as the larger races, in order to help black criminals avoid jail time. You can draw whatever conclusions you like from this.

What I find interesting is that just after we see the complete collapse of the Russian collusion narrative with the end of the Mueller witch-hunt, we are now seeing another example of an actual foreign power, George Soros, successfully influencing U.S. elections to push a Marxist agenda. But no one is investigating him. Apparently when some groups buy influence in American politics, it is OK.

The Jussie Smollett fiasco is a prime example of what the Zman calls "the Opposite Rule of Liberalism". From his recent post The Grand Conspiracy:

One of those iron laws of life that will not go away, despite every attempt to pretend otherwise, is the Opposite Rule of Liberalism. Whatever the Left is howling about at the moment, you can be sure something like the opposite is the truth. Their need to deceive and their natural habit of projecting their sins onto others, combine to create a predictable part of Progressive culture. Wherever they are focusing the attention of their cult, find the spot 180 degree the opposite and you are getting close to the truth.

We are endlessly scolded about "white privilege", the notion that whites get away with stuff because we have a secret network of other whites helping us out of racial solidarity, complete with secret handshakes. The converse is actually true. In almost every situation, white people are the only identity group that no only doesn't participate in racial solidarity, we do everything we can to avoid even the appearance of doing so. Blacks form racial organizations and stick together. So do Asians. So do Jews. So do Muslims, and Hispanics, and just about every other identity group. But not whites. We are supposed to be so dominant racially and so privileged but we are terrified of standing in solidarity based on our race. Thus the Opposite Rule. We are accused of in-group racial preferences while never actually engaging in this and being the only group that doesn't. I don't blame the other groups for sticking together but I wonder why whites are not allowed to?

The Jussie Smollett case is a sign of things to come as the "justice" system at every level is transformed into a tool of Cultural Marxism backed up by the power of the armed state. At some point a couple of things are going to happen. First the rank-and-file police are going to get sick of being used as the shock troops of the Left. We are already starting to see that with sheriffs refusing to enforce gun laws. Second the average American is going to realize that playing by the rules and our fear of getting in trouble is not going to cut it anymore. Right now we get kicked around again and again but still keep showing up to work to pay our taxes like good little wage slaves. Not for much longer.

Prepare accordingly.

How To Get More Plane Crashes And Collapsed Bridges In Just Four Years!

One could make a full-time career of pointing out the insanity that goes on in our obscenely overpriced "education" system. So when I saw an old Campus Reform article tweeted out that said that "Prof: Algebra, geometry perpetuate white privilege", I wasn't even slightly surprised. From the article:

A math education professor at the University of Illinois argued in a newly published book that algebraic and geometry skills perpetuate “unearned privilege” among whites.

Rochelle Gutierrez, a professor at the University of Illinois, made the claim in a new anthology for math teachers, arguing that teachers must be aware of the “politics that mathematics brings” in society.

“On many levels, mathematics itself operates as Whiteness. Who gets credit for doing and developing mathematics, who is capable in mathematics, and who is seen as part of the mathematical community is generally viewed as White,” Gutierrez argued.

Gutierrez also worries that algebra and geometry perpetuate privilege, fretting that “curricula emphasizing terms like Pythagorean theorem and pi perpetuate a perception that mathematics was largely developed by Greeks and other Europeans."

Ah, so mathematics is just perpetuating "unearned privilege" because modern mathematics, the foundation of many of the hard sciences we depend on for, well just about everything, is skewed toward whites. Clearly this is unfair and there are just as many non-white math wizards out there that are overlooked because they are not white. More evidence of this is that only around 0.7% of mathematics professors in colleges and universities are black. More racism and "unearned" privilege for whites! Except as one astute commenter pointed out, very few black students that sit for the SAT score top marks in mathematics, quoting from the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education:

If we raise the top-scoring threshold to students scoring 750 or above on both the math and verbal SAT — a level equal to the mean score of students entering the nation’s most selective colleges such as Harvard, Princeton, and CalTech — we find that in the entire country 244 blacks scored 750 or above on the math SAT and 363 black students scored 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test. Nationwide, 33,841 students scored at least 750 on the math test and 30,479 scored at least 750 on the verbal SAT. Therefore, black students made up 0.7 percent of the test takers who scored 750 or above on the math test and 1.2 percent of all test takers who scored 750 or above on the verbal section.

Ms. Gutierrez seems to be from the school of thought that any perceived disparity in outcome must be the result of racism and discrimination. But looking at the list of Fields Medal winners, you see lots and lots of white guys, Asians and Jews. While I didn't look at every single entry, especially the ones with obviously Asian names, I also didn't see a single black or Hispanic on the list (I might have missed some), nor did I see very many women (only one out of 60 winners, and that one in 2014). So apparently there is a conspiracy to keep non-whites and also women out of the field. Or perhaps this is the result of inherent differences in people groups? That is a forbidden topic of conversation but that doesn't mean it is less true. In fact it often seems that the forbidden topics are the most important topics.

Twitter profile screenshot 3/25/19
But clearly Ms. Gutierrez would disagree. It is significant to note that she is not a professor of mathematics, but is rather a professor of math education. In other words she isn't teaching math so much as teaching people how to teach math. That is also somewhat debatable because she seems pretty disinterested in actual mathematics. Her concern is less with whether the science of mathematics is being advanced as she is with whether the people doing math check off the right boxes on the oppression checklist. She styles herself a revolutionary of some sort and a "community organizer", which is code for rabble rousing grifter (see: Obama, Barack Hussein). When you read her biography on the faculty page of the University of Illinois College of Education, it almost appears that she is disinterested in actual mathematics as a discipline. She even has coined her own cutsey term for mathematics that isn't really about mathematics, calling it "mathematx".

Dr. Gutierrez' scholarship focuses on issues of identity and power in mathematics education, paying particular attention to how race, class, and language affect teaching and learning. Through in-depth analyses of effective teaching/learning communities and longitudinal studies of developing and practicing teachers, her work challenges deficit views of students who are Latinx, Black, and Indigenous and suggests that mathematics teachers need to be prepared with much more than just content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, or knowledge of diverse students if they are going to be successful. They need political knowledge. Her current research projects focus upon: developing in pre-service teachers the knowledge and disposition to teach powerful mathematics to urban students; the roles of uncertainty, tensions, and "Nepantla" in teaching; and the political knowledge (and forms of creative insubordination) that mathematics teachers need to effectively "rehumanize" mathematics in an era of high-stakes education. She also builds upon Indigenous principles and has argued for a new form of mathematics where humans are no long centered. This form of mathematics is referred to as living mathematx.

Why do I suspect that "teaching powerful mathematics" to urban students has more to do with politics than it does with actual math? Meanwhile many of these same "urban students", which is slang for black and Hispanic kids, are going to sit for the SAT/ACT and are going to find out that those tests measure your proficiency in actual mathematics, not "mathematx". Then when they do poorly because their SJW teachers didn't teach them math, we will get the same accusations of racial bias. In reality the standardized tests are biased but they are biased toward people that have mastery of the actual subjects being tested.

The social sciences have long been so infected with political correctness and various forms of pseudo-intellectual Marxist nonsense that a degree in them is not only useless but generally harmful. Now we are starting to see the same thing in the hard sciences and that is dangerous. When an engineer is building the bridge I will drive over, I want them to be selected to design the bridge because they are experts in engineering, not because they are the "right" gender or race to meet a quota. If I die in a bridge collapse it will be little consolation to my family that the designer of the bridge was a woman or minority chosen to overcome the disparity in STEM fields.

This sort of crackpot "education" has far reaching and cumulative impact. The college students being indoctrinated with this garbage are going to be teaching math in public schools. Middle and high school is where kids interested in studying math are supposed to discover that interest and their own inclination. Instead of being exposed to math as a serious discipline, they are going to be taught that the foundations of math are racist or colonialism or some other risible notion and that the goal of mathematics is not the advancement of math and the associated sciences but overcoming "oppression" and advancing a political agenda. This means that many students are going to show up to college ill prepared for college math courses. Of course kids from affluent families will be able to go to academically rigorous schools where they will learn actual math so they have a leg up when they get to college, thus perpetuating their privilege to the next generation.

If you really want to overcome racial disparity in math, you don't change the subject to make it less based in mathematics. You provide a challenging curriculum that focuses on actual math. Dumbing math down, changing it into "mathematx" and making a hard science into a political movement is not going to make minority kids better at math. Math is math. 2 plus 2 will always equal 4. Teach kids math fundamentals and they will be in a position to succeed in the real world. Fail to do that and you just perpetuate the very problems you complain about.

Monday, March 25, 2019

The Ingratitude Files, Fruit Roll-Up Edition

A young gal by the name of Charlotte Alter posted a tweet last week that got absolutely scorched. Here it is and you can imagine what the replies and retweets looked like.


14,000 replies to this tweet and counting. Of particular note is that Ms. Alter is in some pretty rarified air when it comes to being privileged. Her daddy, Jonathan Alter, is a best-selling author and "journalist". He is published by the major media outlets and is on TV to offer his opinion. Her mom, Emily, used to be the executive producer of "The Colbert Report". She went to Harvard for crying out loud. Her family lives in Montclair, New Jersey, which has a median family income of $126,983. She is a 28 year old that writes for Time Magazine, an outlet that was pretty prestigious 25 years ago. Even her comment about Fruit Roll-Ups is telling, that is basically a pre-chewed fruit mixed with sugar so you don't even have to put in the effort of peeling or washing the fruit before eating. It is about 90% digested already. In other words, this girl has grown up surrounded by prosperity and privilege from birth but we are supposed to believe she has her finger on the pulse of a generation that doesn't know anything about prosperity and that complains non-stop about the raw deal they got on iPhones that cost more than billions of people make in a year.

Lots of people are piling on with the usual complaints about millennials but this is actually a pretty serious issue since so many of them are going to be voting and holding elected office soon.

Human existence is largely defined by struggle. Most of human history is a series of struggles for survival. It was only 100 years ago that the Spanish flu pandemic killed as many as 100 million people or around 5% of the entire population of the world. In much of the world the struggle for survival is a daily reality. Cyclone Idai (and can we stop naming every single weather event?) in southern Africa killed hundreds and possibly thousands of people earlier this week. The greatest stories of the human experience have to do with people overcoming the odds and triumphing over hardship. No one writes moving accounts of being misgendered by a store clerk.

This generation of Americans doesn't have that. They have lived in a bubble-wrapped existence where everything was available without effort. Need something? You just order it from Amazon and it magically appears at your door in two days. Want to read a book, really just about any book ever written? Download it instantly. Need to be entertained? Every possible entertainment is available in a little handheld box on demand, 24-7. You can have your groceries delivered and now you can even get McDonalds and Taco Bell delivered. Really, unless you are stoned out of your gourd, why would you pay to have Taco Bell delivered? (That comment is mostly out of jealousy that I live where you can't get Taco Bell delivered).

That is not to say that none of them have ever experienced struggle or hardship. Many of them have of course. But as a whole they have a terribly skewed perspective on just how easy they have it.

People that have had everything spoon-fed to them their entire lives don't react well to the real world. It is a truth many of us have observed when it comes to the grandchildren of wealthy people. That third generation doesn't appreciate it. The children of the newly wealthy seem to understand it a little better, they probably saw their father building the wealth they enjoy but for their grandkids it is just something they come to expect so they seem to squander it and never appreciate what they have. Richest guy I ever knew was third generation rich and he was unhappy all the time even though he was insanely rich and literally had to do nothing but deposit the checks each month.

In the absence of real struggle and oppression, they make up up their own out of thin air. They are endlessly and breathlessly complaining about ridiculous "systems of oppression" and then proceed to "fight" against mostly non-existent problems. This is a generation that thinks they are the most oppressed and therefore the most activist in history but in reality they are fighting against phantom problems that only exist in their minds. Deep down they know something is missing from their lives, something very basic that makes them human, but rather than finding some worthy, actual causes to champion, causes that might take effort and commitment to address, they battle bad thoughts and uncomfortable feelings. Many of them seem to think that virtue signaling tweets, putting something about punching Nazis in your profile and calling the President "Drumpf" or some variation is really courageous and on par with climbing out of a landing craft on Normandy Beach.

Theirs is a generation of Don Quixote's, tilting at the windmills of racism and sexism and homophobia and transphobia and Islamophobia and every other nonsensical type of oppression under the sun.

What is really troubling is that they will soon be running everything in the country, from businesses to the government to religious institutions. Given the very tenuous connection with reality we are seeing from people like Charlotte Alter and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, it doesn't bode well for when something actually serious happens. People who think putting #PunchNazis in their social media profile is somehow brave and effective are probably not going to fare well in a serious economic downturn or major civil unrest. When the nation is forced to make hard choices about defaulting on the debt or Social Security or whatever, posting a hackneyed hashtag isn't an actual solution.

The millennial generation has grown up in the lap of luxury but thinks they are oppressed. They were born on third base but instead of thinking they hit a triple, they feel cheated because they didn't get an automatic home-run. Charlotte Alter was roundly mocked but seems to think she is vindicated because her fellow entitled millennials came to her defense.

We are in big trouble.

Plan accordingly.

Wednesday, March 20, 2019

The Media Is Lying, Episode 12,652: Senegalese Man Tries To Burn Italian Children To Death In Bus

When Brenton Tarrant allegedly shot up a couple of mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, the media reponse was swift. In record time we knew who the alleged shooter was. We knew his name and saw his picture, revealing that he was a white guy and were told over and over for some reason that he was short. We were told what his motivations were before the final victim was even dead: he was branded a "white supremacist" immediately and the manifesto that was allegedly written by him and posted online swiftly circulated around the internet, only to be just as quickly suppressed so that we could be provided with snippets of the manifesto selected by the media. The response from the media was actually pretty impressive in its uniformity. Before the news cycle really even ramped up Brenton Tarrant was declared a white supremacist killing Muslims as a response to mass migration.

Fast forward to a few hours ago. The BBC ran a report from Italy of an attempted horrific crime. Here is a screenshot of the headline:


Some crazy Italian, right? Well not exactly. In spite of the headline, Italian driver hijacks and torches school bus full of children, we find that the man wasn't actually Italian.

The driver, a 47-year-old Italian citizen originally from Senegal, was arrested.

In other words he was a Senegalese man that had been granted Italian citizenship. So he was not in fact Italian. His name is obviously known but isn't in the story. There are no pictures of him. That is probably because someone from Senegal would almost certainly be black. Since Senegalese people are overwhelmingly Muslim (92%), he is probably a Muslim. He is probably not named Antonio or Salvatore, he likely has a clearly African name. So of course the media is not going to rush to judgment, like they did in Christchurch, so even though the BBC reports that:

A teacher who had been on board the bus said the suspect was known to be angry about Italy's migrant policy. Some reports said the man had shouted "stop the deaths in the Mediterranean".

They still try to leave the door open that it could be something else:

Milan prosecutors said they were investigating all possible motives including terrorism.

"All possible motives" while in Christchurch the media found their motive within moments, spread it and never wavered (and never will). Even when noting that the Senegalese man was also a drunk, the BBC didn't miss the chance to take a shot at Italian interior minister Salvini:

Italy's right-wing interior minister, Matteo Salvini, reacted with outrage that a man with a record of driving while under the influence of alcohol could have been allowed to drive a coach full of children.

What does Salvinin being "right-wing" have to do with the story? Absolutely nothing but it is a chance to try to paint him as being reflexively against migrants.

What is really going on here is that a man from Senegal, a craphole of a country with high illiteracy, a per capita GDP of around $2,600 compared to over $37,000 for Italians and bottom tier average IQ who has been given a new home in Italy but is still angry apparently because Italy isn't taking in enough "refugees" and migrants so he decides to hijack a bus full of Italian kids and burn them to death, for justice or Allah or something.

Fortunately he didn't succeed because he was probably either drunk or didn't plan it out or both.

It is no coincidence that the BBC refers to a Senegalese man as an "Italian driver". It is an attempt to deflect attention away from the man being a migrant from a Muslim dominated African nation. This is the sort of open manipulation perpetrated by the media on an hourly basis, subtly changing the perception of their generally willfully dumb audiences to avoid noticing inconvenient facts. Don't believe anything you read or hear without doing your own research.

P.S.

I hit refresh on the story and now the BBC has expanded the story to talk even more about "right-wing" Italian politicians. Here is the updated language which removes the reference to the Senegalese driving being a drunk.

Italy's right-wing interior minister, Matteo Salvini, reacted with outrage, alleging that the man had a criminal record.

Since coming into power in June, Italy's ruling right-wing League party and populist Five Star Movement have established a strong anti-immigration stance.

Located at the frontline of migrants crossing the Mediterranean Sea into Europe, Italy has tried to close its ports to boats.

On Tuesday, around 50 people were rescued by a charity ship from a rubber boat off the coast of Libya and taken to the Sicilian island of Lampedusa. Italian authorities ordered that the ship was seized and launched an investigation into the alleged aiding of clandestine immigration.

A decree issued in September makes it easier to deport migrants and take away their citizenship if they commit serious crimes.

Now they mention "right-wing" twice, as if that is the real story. Right-wing! Populist! Anti-immigration!

All quotes copied and pasted directly by me.

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

Elizabeth Warren Is Running As Big Brother

Late last night, fake Indian and generic liberal old white broad Elizabeth Warren tweeted out the following:


It looks like it was a series of preplanned tweets to accompany her "town hall". I am not going to bother watching any of it because it looks like a staged operation where she fielded pre-planted questions and the tweets of her talking points were pretty predictable stuff: reparations, "free" housing, "free" health care, gun control, global warming climate change, voter disenfranchisement, etc. It looks like she didn't make a single factually correct statement other than her statement about endless wars. It was just her pandering to voters and essentially bribing them with "reparations" and free stuff. But the statement in the tweet above is incredibly dangerous. Like I said, I am sure these questions and answers were all prepared ahead of time. So the language she used here is very dangerous.

If a hypothetical Warren "Justice" Department is going to "go after white nationalists with full prosecution", what does that mean? Prosecute them for what exactly? What crime is being committed? White nationalism is a political ideology, one that is pretty fringe right now. It already draws incredible levels of attention from the government. It is something of a running joke on the dissident right that half of the members of the Klan are FBI undercover agents and informers. I doubt there are any white nationalist groups of any significant size that are not riddled with informers and agents. But simply being a white nationalist is not itself a criminal act and quite the contrary is absolutely iron-clad First Amendment protected speech.

When a white nationalist does commit an actual crime, the government jumps on them with both feet. The sham show trial of James Fields is a perfect example. In fact the whole Charlottesville rally demonstrates that the legal world is already heavily tilted against any sort of white nationalism. People marching for a political cause, another clear case of First Amendment guaranteed free expression and assembly, who were set upon by violent protesters and provided no protection by the police, have been routinely prosecuted even when defending themselves while their attackers were not.

Obviously any reasonable person understands that being a white nationalist is not only not criminal but a textbook example of free speech, just as advocating for "reparations" being paid by people who never owned slaves to people that never were slaves is free speech. So I assume that like her Indian ancestry, her promise to "fully prosecute" people for white nationalism is fake. But she is appealing to her leftist base even though I am sure that Senator Warren knows that her promise is empty, completely contrary to the Constitutional and utterly immoral. She just doesn't care because she and her advisers understand the far left Democrat primary voter mindset. Tucker Carlson mentions this in his book, Ship of Fools:

A large and growing proportion of Americans under thirty, the country’s most liberal cohort, don’t believe in unfettered free speech. According to a Pew survey, 40 percent of millennials think the government should have the power to ban statements offensive to minority groups. A 2017 Cato Institute survey found that 52 percent of self-identified Democrats, of all ages, viewed government suppression of offensive speech as more important than the unfettered right to say whatever one wants.

Carlson, Tucker. Ship of Fools: How a Selfish Ruling Class Is Bringing America to the Brink of Revolution (p. 131). Free Press. Kindle Edition. 

Americans, especially younger Americans, and Democrats in general, think the government should be able to suppress speech that they don't like. This is the same political party that used to screech about banning books and McCarthyism. Today the average Democrat makes McCarthy look like what the ACLU used to look like.

I am glad to see a lot of pushback on twitter but from the people Warren is trying to appeal to, there isn't any. The leftist primary voters she is trying to lure not only doesn't see this as a troubling statement, it is perfectly in line with what they believe. The average Democrat millennial voter believes that they should be given whatever they desire (college, housing, food, health care) paid for by someone else, be guaranteed a great and fun job at whatever salary they want and most of all never, ever be confronted with any ideas that might trouble them. What is the point of having a government if people can say stuff that upsets me or even worse makes me think?!

As of right now there is no chance that the Justice Department under any President would be successful in prosecuting someone for the "crime" of white nationalism but that can change and will given the trajectory we are on. It would have been unthinkable that the Supreme Court would make up a "right" for homosexuals to marry a few decades ago but now it is the law of the land and no one in "conservative" circles even talks about reversing it.

Sadly, this sort of rhetorical overreaction from Elizabeth Warren in response to the Christchurch shootings in New Zealand are exactly the sort of reactions the shooter was hoping for. He isn't American but he clearly understand the leftist mindset far better than they do and he is getting exactly what he wanted. This is pretty obvious to any observer but Elizabeth Warren and her ilk are so desperate to be President that they will make these sort of wildly un-American statements just to get a few extra votes in the 2020 primary season.

Monday, March 18, 2019

Book Review: Ship Of Fools

In 2017 pundit Tucker Carlson took over the coveted 8 PM time slot at Fox News once held by Bill O'Reilly. O'Reilly was fired over sexual harassment allegations and while I couldn't stand listening to him, he was incredibly popular. Tucker seemed like an odd replacement, he is not as bombastic as O'Reilly, but he has soared in his new time slot. Late last year Tucker released a new book, Ship of Fools and it was a huge success. Tucker is a new voice in conservatism that espouses some old views. In many ways Tucker voices what is often known as paleoconservatism, a more America First kind of conservatism that is in marked contrast to the neoconservatism that has dominated Republican politics for decades, especially foreign policy.

Given my affection for paleoconservatism and my general deep disdain for neoconservatism and neoconservatives in particular, this was a book I had been looking forward to reading for some time but seeing as how I am cheap and lots of other people wanted to read it, it took me several months for it to become available from our library. Having finally read it, I can say I was not disappointed.

As luck would have it, I finished up Ship of Fools at about the same time the attempted smear of Tucker by far-left propaganda organ Media Matters, in the vain hope of driving Tucker off the air. It appears to have been unsuccessful. Apparently people just don't care about making off-color or even distasteful jokes on a radio show a dozen years ago. It is usually a reliable indicator that you are pushing the right buttons when you get attacked by the junkyard dogs of liberalism.

Ship of Fools isn't a great work of literature and it isn't a deep work of political theory. It isn't intended to be. Rather it is a series of topical essays where Tucker tends to break ranks with "conservatives". He calls out Republicans for backing mass immigration, challenges the demonstrably false notion that diversity is our greatest strength and even takes aim at the holiest of Grails in the GOP, the endless clamoring for more wars. His mockery of Max Boot and Bill Kristol is delicious and well deserved, and obviously it struck a nerve because the loathsome Max Boot keeps screeching at Tucker on twitter while wearing a stupid hat and having a tantrum because conservatives don't buy his crappy book scolding conservatives for not being liberals.

Every chapter in Tucker's book deserves a book length treatment. Perhaps he will write more specifically in the future but Ship of Fools is more of a declaration of where Tucker diverges not just from the liberal dominated paradigm but also modern "conservatism". It is full of clever quips and I highlighted a lot of passages but again it is a collection of chapters giving the sort of surface level treatment that is common in a short attention span world. It is still a great read especially for anyone that is wondering why exactly they keep showing up to vote for the Republican party. Anytime someone pushes back against the dominant orthodoxy and asks verboten questions it is a little win for the free exchange of ideas.

Ship of Fools is just the latest sign of the growing rebellion against the elitist order. It is probably too late to save our Republic but these are the sorts of ideas we will need to consider when rebuilding our civilization from the rubble.

Saturday, March 16, 2019

The Littlest Candidate

A recurring theme for me has been how small and insignificant so many of our "leaders" have become. We are no longer led by men who have accomplished much and then moved into public service. Look at Dwight Eisenhower. He and his brother took turns attending college while the other one worked so they could afford it. He attended West Point. He served as an officer in the Army for over 35 years, culminating in becoming Supreme Allied Commander. He eschewed political ambitions believing it inappropriate for career military officers. He finally ran for President in 1952, not because he desired to be President but because he felt that it was his duty. He was re-elected in 1956. Whatever your opinion of his Presidency, he was an accomplished man long before reluctantly seeking office.

Fast forward to 1988. While George H.W. Bush was an accomplished man, he was an awful leader. The men who followed him were neither accomplished nor leaders. Barack Obama was the smallest man to ever hold the highest elected office in the world and he demonstrated how small and petty he was on a daily basis. As I wrote in my post A Parade Of Small Men In The Highest Office:

It seems odd, does it not, that the most powerful office in the world seems to mostly attract such mediocre leaders? I think many decent men and leaders just simply are not willing to do what it takes to become President. The endless holding out of your hand for money, sucking up to people you probably don't like, the endless scrutiny and criticism. Why would someone put themselves through all of that for any motivation other than narcissism?

Then Trump came along and for all of his faults he is someone who has done stuff in his life, even as he gives Obama a run for his money when it comes to narcissism but at least Trump has some accomplishments to point to. Obama isn't qualified to manage a CVS, much less be President. But even by the already rock-bottom standards of modern American politics, we are about to witness a dumpster fire of small, insignificant people contending for the chance to unseat Trump. Cory Booker, a closeted homosexual who thinks he is Spartacus. Kamala Harris who slept her way up the ladder in California politics. Faux Injun Elizabeth Warren, an garden variety liberal old white lady who missed her window of opportunity. Joe Biden, an over the hill creepy old white man that is notable mostly for pawing and sniffing little girls on camera. Bernie Sanders, a loony old Jewish "socialist" that has never been gainfully employed for any significant time and rails against the wealthy while owning three homes and making a million bucks a year. But none of them compare to Robert Francis Beta "Beto" O'Rourke. He is an Irish guy pretending to be Hispanic and his claims to fame are a couple of arrests (drunk driving and burglary) and  losing an election to Ted Cruz. That is really it. He is perhaps the least distinguished man to ever serve in Congress, apparently running for the sole purpose of trying to legalize weed, but now his legion of adoring fans think he should be President. Trump will eat this guy alive if he gets the nomination. But The Zman really hit the nail on the head with his assessment of "Beto":

Like most of this generation’s political class, Beto O’Rourke ran for office because he was unqualified to do anything useful in the private sector. Rather than go on welfare or resort to a life of crime, he rents himself out as a spokesmodel for whatever political interests will hire him.

That rings true in my ears. Robert Francis O'Rourke has a degree in English lit from Columbia, a vocationally useless degree. He worked for a couple of years at an internet company doing who knows what (other than getting high). He has no marketable skills other than rolling a blunt and skateboarding but he looks good on camera. That is enough. No one can name a single significant achievement in his life. He has been married for 13 years and has three kids, so I guess that is to his credit but he is about my age and I have been married more than twice as long and have more than double his number of kids. Again, he has no skills, no education, no experience, that would qualify him for any significant private sector job but people think he should be President. No one would hire "Beto" to be a front line customer service manager in a call center, but let's give him the nuclear codes.

We are only a few years away from living in a literal Idiocracy.

Friday, March 15, 2019

More Selective Outrage From The Media

Overnight the news was filled with reports from New Zealand that a gunman had killed a number of people in Christchurch. The reports are still pretty scattered as is often the case but a man named Brenton Tarrant has apparently been arrested for the shooting and we are being told that at least 49 people are dead, presumably all of them Muslims, at two mosques. Tarrant allegedly released a manifesto that expressed "anti-immigrant" and "white supremacist" sentiments. I haven't read it yet so I am going off of media reports, always a risky proposition. His arrest, identification and listed motivation happened lightning fast in contrast to many, many other terrorist attacks where we often see someone yelling "Allahu Akbar" but we aren't allowed to speculate about motives ("His motives may never be known...").

Media coverage is predictably intense, dominating every media site and almost all of Twitter trending topics, and the recriminations from prominent voices in America followed the usual pattern with people blaming Trump, guns and anyone who is insufficiently enthusiastic about mass immigration. Uber-twit Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez posted a tweet mocking people for offering prayers after Muslims were killed...while at Friday prayers.


Most tone-deaf tweet ever? She then launched into a series of tweets about the dangers of "white supremacy", continuing her string of daily demonstrating her absolute lack of any understanding of any topic. You can be sure that, as apparently intended, this act will launch any number of actions designed to confiscate weapons from law abiding citizens and suppress free speech, at least on the right. Again that is apparently the intent of the gunman.

It ought to go without saying that this is a horrible act. This guy allegedly planned this out well in advance, wrote an extensive manifesto, was prepared for his act. This wasn't spur of the moment. It was the epitome of terrorism and political violence, aimed at causing worldwide response.

There are few things more horrible than unarmed, essentially defenseless people being killed. If he had shot up an ISIS training camp, no one would have cared. These were people attending their house of worship, including women and children. It is not an uncommon scene in the world, in fact it is quite common. What is different is a) the victims and alleged perpetrator and b) the coverage from the media.

What is noteworthy here is the near universal condemnation of this act by white conservatives, while similar frequent attacks by Muslims elicit little notice. That is not hyperbole. This list contains the targeted attacks on Christians by Muslims since 9/11. It includes recent attacks like an attack on Christians in Maro, Nigeria that left 32 dead on February 26th. An attack on Catholics in Angwan Barde, Nigeria that resulted in 10 dead on February 10th. A large attack in Jolo, Phillipines that left 27 dead and 111 wounded on January 27th. A week later on the 20th of January in Zaoro Sangou 13 more dead. Last November in Alinado 42 people were killed in a cathedral. October of last year 36 Christians killed by men shouting about Allah in Kasuwan Magani. That skips over a number of smaller attacks where one or a handful of Christians were killed by Muslims. According to their database there have been dozens and dozens of religiously motivated attacks by Muslims against Christians, often at worship, just in this year alone. You rarely hear anything about the attacks apart from occasional brief mentions in passing.

Why?

Not because this attack was more horrible than the others. The only reason this is getting so much attention is because of the alleged perpetrator and the victims. A white guy angry at mass immigration shooting non-white Muslims is tailor made for the media. It reinforces all of their prejudices and biases. For all of their talk about diversity and inclusivity, it just isn't very interesting when non-white Christians are hacked to death, shot, stoned or blown up by Muslims in Africa or Asia or the Middle East. Dead black or brown people are just not that important when killed by another black or brown person. But in a western nation like New Zealand where the attacker is a white guy (regularly described as a short white guy) and the victims are Muslims is perfect for pushing the narrative of the dangers of "white supremacy" and gun ownership.

Of course the media won't mention that New Zealand already has pretty strict gun laws, including some of the same stuff that liberals claim will stop these sorts of attacks if enacted in the U.S.. This is a coordinated effort to push a singular agenda.

Remember whenever a Muslim commits yet another atrocity, whether a bombing or driving a truck into a crowd or shooting up a nightclub or systematically grooming young white girls for rape gangs, the media and talking heads come out of the woodwork to remind us that not all Muslims are terrorists ( #NotAllMuslims ). When a white guy attacks Muslims though? It is an indictment of any white person that speaks up about mass immigration. The double-standard is obvious. No Muslim is ever culpable when a Muslim commits an atrocity but all white men are culpable when any white man commits an atrocity. It doesn't matter that the ratio is wildly skewed toward Muslims killing non-Muslims, only the narrative matters.

As the forces of globalism continue to force people from incompatible cultures together and then choose one side to vilify and another to lionize, it is inevitable that this will cause conflict. That is not a justification for violence in any way. It is simply true and has been going on for as long as mankind has come into contact with other cultures. Muslims have been butchering other Muslims for centuries. Christians have done the same. Singing the song from the Coke commercial doesn't change human nature and the experiment with mass multiculturalism is unraveling before our eyes. I expect to see more and more violent incidents from both sides in the years to come. We have been in a one-sided cultural war for decades but expect to see this widen and escalate.

Prepare accordingly.

Thursday, March 14, 2019

The Lies We Tell Ourselves

It is one of those non-stories that is all over the media, a little titillation for the masses who love to see the beautiful people that we both adore and resent in equal parts getting laid low. Some very wealthy and famous people bribed "elite" universities to get their kids accepted, including a couple of actresses. It is a mostly meaningless story because it doesn't mean anything and doesn't change anything. Actress Lori Loughlin will be forced to pay a fine and maybe do some community service. Her daughter Olivia Jade that spends spring break from USC on the megayacht of a billionaire USC trustee will stay in school long enough to graduate and keep on making inane "beauty" videos and rambling about her life. But nothing will really change and the real lesson of this kerfuffle is going to be lost on most people. More on that in a moment.

Game of Thrones is a cultural phenomena like few others. The upcoming 8th and final season is almost certainly the most anticipated new season of TV ever, amazing because it is on a premium cable channel HBO. The things that is great about the show is not the battle scenes, which are often mediocre (especially in earlier, lower budget seasons). It is when the characters engage in quiet dialogue and you get great lines like Tyrion saying “That’s what I do: I drink and I know things.”. One of the most powerful exchanges is when Littlefinger is speaking to Varys about the lies we tell ourselves. Here is the whole exchange:




The pivotal line is this:

The realm. Do you know what the realm is? It's the thousand blades of Aegon's enemies- a story we agree to tell each other over and over, until we forget that it's a lie.

America is often like that. We live in a world held together by lies we agree to tell each other, lies that preserve the illusion of a Union as it crumbles into rubble around us. People say things like "diversity is our greatest strength" even though no one believes that and the people who say it the most do their utmost to insulate themselves from diversity. But we keep saying it because to say otherwise "Is not who we are" even though it is precisely who we are.

One of those lies is that the "elite" colleges and universities in this country are full of the very best teachers and students. Only the very best get into these schools and therefore the graduates of those schools are also the best. They are the people best suited to govern us because they are smart and wise.

Look at our recent Presidents. George H.W. Bush went to Yale.  Bill Clinton went to Georgetown and then Yale Law. George W. Bush went to Yale and then Harvard Business. Barack Obama went to Columbia and then Harvard Law. Trump graduated from Wharton at Penn. For the last quarter century every President went to an Ivy League school for at least some of their education. They have also been the greatest collection of dimwits and fools to ever govern this nation. They were little men too small for the greatest elected office in the world. Even Trump seems like he is being swallowed up by the Presidency.

The dirty little secret is that there isn't much of a relationship between being smart and having an Ivy degree. We like to think there is and that is the lie we repeat to each other but it isn't true. In our cultural mythology everyone going to Yale is like Rory Gilmore in The Gilmore Girls, a precocious, super eloquent and worldly teen that is just better than everyone else but mostly it seems like the people getting into the Ivy League schools bribed their way in, have some sort of connection that got them in or are an above-average minority accepted so the whole school isn't white, Asian or Jewish. Sure there are some brilliant students at Harvard and Yale but there are plenty of people only there because their daddy wrote a big endowment check or because grandpa was a Dartmouth alum. Yoram Hazony had this to say and I think he is correct:

Ivy League schools are where elites who network with other elites send their kids so they can build elite networks of their own and eventually use that network to get their kids into Ivy League schools. I have seen first hand that the smartest kids don't necessarily go to Ivy schools and kids that do go to Ivy schools are often not the smartest. This bribery scandal is just further proof of what many of us have known for a long time. The elites in our country are elite only because they have created their own circles and convinced us they are better than the rest of us. They cheat and bribe and lie their way into the elite circles and tell us lies that they are there because they are better than us. They are not.

It is time for America and her people to grow up. Time to stop believing the lies and time to stop letting the liars rule over us.