Friday, August 18, 2017

Living Without Highly Visible Leaders

Richard Spencer is an intelligent and articulate man, but he has no business being in a position of leadership, especially after the aggrandization tour. Whatever he touches from now on will be massively tarnished with spurious guilt by association attacks from the media, if that wasn't the case already.

He is winging it. That's not how political pros do it. Contemporary politicians may look like the are winging it, because they sometimes commit gaffes. but they often carefully plot according to political science research and the demands of their donors. Advisers can often quietly recite politicians' talking points as politicians say them.

I haven't read all of Spencer's writings, but I have seen no evidence his street protest strategies are more beneficial than harmful. Various nonmulticultural causes were rapidly attracting followers long before Spencer's rallies started.

Despite recent growth, mostly arising as a response to the evils of diversity, Spencer at least unconsciously knows the current political position of nonmulticulturalists is extremely weak. That's likely why he seeks to "unite the right," to garner more followers under his umbrella, no matter the character defects of some. But there is nothing moral to gain by uniting with Hitler's followers or others prone toward unethical, reckless actions.

Wise men do not do desperate things. Why would Spencer try to unite with these types? To give a street performance venue for protecting their speech rights? They can do than on their own.

James Fields has a legal case for self-defense. He does not have a moral case for goodness. He had no business being at that rally. (Neither did the now dead woman.) It could have been worse. Spencer is lucky as hell that some attendee didn't open up with an automatic rifle. And if Spencer keeps holding political rallies, it will be only a matter of time before someone does, thus bringing the full weight of the multicultural media, military industries crashing down on nonmulticulturalists.

Spencer's political prescriptions are often vague, so we don't know what he really stands for. For all we know, he could support Hitler's ideas. Spencer should remove himself from the limelight.

Too much opportunism exists on this planet, it should not be supported merely because it opposes the establishments.

But who will lead? Right now, not having publicly visible leaders would be a good thing. Numerous belief belief systems throughout history have spread without having highly visible leaders. Famous leaders become targets of establishments. The spread of nonmulticultural facts on the Internet and elsewhere should eventually lead to self-determination.

Failing that, let the multiculturalists overreach. Let them conduct a slaughter worse than 9/11 against ordinary moms and dads, then liberate Western institutions from totalitarianism. But what about the innocents? Many moms and dads are not so innocent. Most are currently multiculturalists. Many of them gloat and cackle as multiculturalists spread tyranny and commit thousands of assaults per year. Them being hoisted on their own petard is sad but not our fault. I hope they change their ways for themselves and almost everyone else.

Whites will not be wiped out as long we stop supporting leaders devoted to bait-and-switch and divide-and-screw practices. Easy to say. Difficult to do.

Monday, August 14, 2017

Many Sides Now

Donald Trump received severe criticism from the mass media for saying "many sides" in his condemnation of Charlottesville, creating outrage among multiculturalists twisting his words and claiming he expressed moral equivalence.

They're slightly right.

There is little ethical equivalence.

We stereotype. They stereotype. Only the anencephalic and others with severe brain problems don't stereotype. Our generalizations are more ethically accurate. Not surprisingly, multiculturalists support or oppose stereotyping depending on who is doing the stereotyping and how, trying to prevent their allies from facing ethnoracial criticism while they excoriate whites, using totalitarian force often enough to keep populations compliant. Few self-contradictions are too great for multiculturalists to ignore.

For multiculturalists, it is more than the current year. It is the current week. And Charlottesville tells the story. They act as if we arrived on this planet a few days ago and have forgotten their billions of lies. The lies about Ferguson. The lies on thousands of other issues. Like every totalitarian force in history, they act is if repeating a fallacy thousands of times turns the fallacy into a relevant truth. (As if fallacy filled news weren't enough, they spread umpteen thousand examples of sadistic and nihilistic art into living rooms.)

Muslims, Antifas, Neoconservatives, New Democrats, and other multiculturalists committed millions of acts of political violence during the first 17 years of this century, most of them unjustified. On a per capita basis, they commit dozens of times more unjustified political violence than contemporary nonmulticulturalists.

They have few qualms.

Nonsense rules. They claim that if a Muslim had rammed a car into nonbelievers, the media would be more strident. Oh, really. Like the dozens of times Muslims have already rammed nonbelievers and received a fraction of Charlottesville's coverage.

For years, multiculturalists heaped praise when multiculturalists assaulted peaceful nonmulticultural and counter jihad protesters, blaming the peaceful protesters for the assaults multiculturalists committed. They saw little wrong with not condemning multicultural aggression, but now Trump must be further demonized for including many sides in his condemnation. Little Trump could have said would have placated them, except demanding that everyone who opposes cultural Marxism in any way be treated as if they committed terrorism. And we know what types of downward spirals that leads to.

Fact facing whites seek self-determination, a most important right, a right most nonwhites grant to themselves but deny to outgroups, including Copts and Tibetans. A small sample fallacy of a few individuals in Charlottesville carried the despicable symbols of Nazism and the KKK. To multiculturalists, that indicates nonwealthy whites must have their rights stripped. To them, factual criticisms of multiculturalism must be ignored and straw persons created. To them, anyone who voted for Trump or opposes cultural Marxism now believes in Nazism. Seriously. Go read what they are writing. Twenty years ago writers would often be ridiculed for overusing false Nazi analogies. Not anymore. They act as if labels and analogies are evidence. No one taught most of them otherwise. And they aren't interested in finding the truth on their own. As their narratives shift in ever worse directions, dissent from their narratives receives even less tolerance.

They called themselves fair minded even as they destroyed America and excluded almost all well-reasoned counter evidence to their views. They denied the realities of logic, ethics, dysgenics, behavioral genetics, developing country overpopulation, irreconcilable cultural differences when doing so benefited own causes.

We warn about the horrors that will ensue if the present multicultural paths continue as has happened in thousands of previous societies. They reply with irrelevancies: stop whining, get a life, get a better job, light candles in the dark, and so on.

Oh, yes.

Get better jobs. So we can contradict ourselves as blatantly as they do. For multiculturalists in today's world, the primary point of having a better job is to afford a home far from low functioning diversity while trying to coerce low functioning diversity on others. And what if we all did get better jobs and all moved to decent all white neighborhoods? Then they'd complain about inequality and segregation, trying to undo such efforts. Their version of lighting candles in the dark is forcing others to make sacrifices of misplaced altruism on behalf those working to destroy us. Wealthy multiculturalists, who have never sent two cents of their own money to Oxfam, nevertheless feel ethically superior for using totalitarian coercion to ruin the lives of nonwealthy whites.

When cornered and forced to face their evil behaviors, multiculturalists then try to justify their totalitarian acts against living whites by citing now irrelevant evil acts done by long dead whites while ignoring far more evils done by their ancestors.

They spew billions upon billions of slurs at nonmulticulturalists and at each other. So ethically tone deaf are they that they do not even regard the slurs they spew as slurs, remaining self-unaware but automatically assuming the worst motives about any plausible enemy, which includes anyone who tells the moral truth more often than not.

Many on the Alt Right and Alt Light also have slur spewing habits but at least nonmulticulturalists have many writers who do not frequently resort to slurs. Even seemingly mild mannered multiculturalists resort to slurs when shifting to ethnoracial issues.

Many establishments assumed they could keep the population compliant and make more money if they allowed dissent but kept it in obscure corners, so that few ever read well-reasoned dissent, and the few that read it were hectored into regretting it. (Countries that murder anyone for any perceived thought crime have abysmal economies, even for many elites.) But too many individuals now know the real agendas of the establishments.

Paradoxes of hedonism fill their lives. They seek comfort by watching gossip and violence. Yet the dose must increase because their lives have few legitimate ethical purposes. Contrary to myth, for most individuals of various races and political ideologies, hate is a feel good emotion. They incite unjust wars for profits and to provide relief from the excruciating ennui of their lives. Now they want bigger wars with China, Russia or North Korea: anti-national multiculturalists in one country are supposed to kill anti-national multiculturalists in another country to eliminate the supposed scourges of nationalism and pan Europeanism. It doesn't matter to them that few contemporary individuals supporting militarism are actual nationalists of any kind.

They count on the wishy-washiness of present majorities. They don't need to devise pills to control the ideological majorities, although they could. Electronic technologies serve almost as well.

Like multiculturalists, many supposed white activists seem to be seeking excitement and escapes from boredom rather than building a decent future. Multiculturalists bait whites. Don't let them bait us. No matter how lopsided the aggression reality, they know they can still use a few small sample fallacies to increase the rhetorical power of their narratives. Frankly, many whites at Charlottesville were up to no good.

Instead of waiting for the multiculturalists to overreach, Richard Spencer overreaches. You'd think he'd learn a lesson from all the overreaching done by leaders in the past. All it takes is a few violent acts by nonmulticulturalists and the establishments pounce, destroying goodwill generated by more thoughtful nonmulticultural thinkers. When your allies don't control the mass media megaphones, little good comes from your street protests.

Donald Trump is not the last chance to save whites from unmitigated hells. And he has no intention of helping most whites anyway.

The focus on the Confederacy is poison. It is not present and forward looking. It has little spirit of beneficence. It opens old wounds and alienates potential allies. Multiculturalists seldom waste time protecting statues of Lenin and Stalin. They're busy expanding their global dominance. The New Right Subreddit features artwork of what looks like Kaiser Bill's soldiers. Right away, they've alienated many first time visitors. All loud on the wrong fronts.

We must not pursue self-determination while glorifying those who denied self-determination to others.

Monday, August 7, 2017

Willingness to Accept All the Excellent Reasons

On occasion, a multiculturalist will treats it as acceptable to oppose mass nonwhite migration if you worry about decreasing wages or losing your job but unacceptable to oppose migration and multiculturalism for every other damn good reason.

So opposing migration and multiculturalism because of crime, dysgenics, genocide, corruption, ruined schools, congested roads, cultural destruction, increased pollution, wrecked nieghborhoods, anti-democratic practices, militarization of police, loss of trustworthiness, loss of speech freedoms, one-sided mass media, divide-and-screw practices, ever more hostile de facto colonial rule, multicultural incitement of antiwhite hatred, and so on is treated as inherently off limits for no good reason.

So let's say your daughter has a mixed race kid, then she is predictably abandoned. Your daughter then follows her next whim, leaving you with the mixed race kid, who will in many cases grow hostile toward you and other whites (peer cultures trump nurture assumptions). And while you are raising the grandchild, in all his insolent glory, you probably will be experiencing excruciating health problems. But only a "bigot" could oppose such dating and breeding, though you are harmed far, far worse than losing a job. And multitudes of other results are even worse than the grandparents being cuckolded scenario.

But all that ethical evidence is treated as worthless or offensive because most people care less about evidence once issues shift from the more pragmatic and technical to the more ethical.

Wednesday, August 2, 2017

Sanctions, Selling Out, and Salami Slicing

Trump signed the Russia sanctions today. Some evidence suggests sanctions fail, though some other evidence suggests while sanctions fail, the threat of them against some elites has some influence. Against Russian elites with a track record of paranoia the sanctions will likely lead to more tit for tat conflicts.

Almost every politician for over a century has sold out the people. It is difficult to think of a single one who has not. Even the politicians uninterested in personal wealth engaged in cronyism, militarism, kin nepotism, cultural Marxism or all four. A few preoccupied themselves with leaving admired legacies, never mind that when Muslims and multiculturalists take over, they trash perceived outgroup legacies. Being popular with professional historians and opinion makers is an ad populum fool's errand.

The sellout by Trump ranks among the oddest. On the important issues, Trump sold out to neoconservatives and New Democrats who publicly insulted and humiliated him millions of times. While neoconservatives don't call him "Fucko," "Shithead," "Trumpanzee," "Piss Hair," "Der Fuhrer" and so on as much as the multicultural left, they do it often enough.

Even after Trump's cave ins, neoconservatives continue to attack him.

Saudi royals likely hate the Western "leaders" they bribe and manipulate. That's what you get with Islam and dysgenic practices, but Saudi royals seldom publicly insult those they have bribed. Despite ranking with North Korea in the evil department, the Saudis royals try to act publicly cordial.

While the Overton windows for many individuals have been shifting toward facing facts despite social stigma and legal punishments, Trump's keeps narrowing his to the confines of Planets Pentagon, J Street, and Wall Street.

It wouldn't surprise me if Congressional leaders have subtly informed Trump to do what they say or they'll support efforts to impeach him. Salami slicing applies in the domestic arena as well as the international. We should have little interest in the Spratly Islands. And we should have no interest in World War III. But in the domestic arena, Trump has much more leverage, yet he caves repeatedly while reaping few rewards from the individuals he caves in to. Congress wouldn't consider impeaching him if he did the right things because Congress would face a backlash.

Trump seems big on family nepotism, but if he keeps this up, all his children and grandchildren will end up dead.

Monday, July 31, 2017

The John Kasich Based Base

If the establishments want to see whether I can turn purple with anger, they can keep promoting the John Kasich is the "voice of reason" horse crap.

Kasich supports guest worker programs but also opposes sending illegals back, whether by force or punishing employers. If he won't send illegals back, how willing will Kasich be to get guest workers to go home at the end of their guest period? Kasich won't.

Kasich claimed to support the border wall, then became outraged when Trump ordered a travel ban on some of the worst individuals on the planet. Kasich is a bait and switch master.

Kasich's foreign policy views are straight out of the failed neoconservative playbook.

Kasich supports balanced budgets mixed with policies that would make the balanced budgets disastrous due in part to an economics accounting identity:
(exports - imports) = (private savings - private investments) + (government taxes - government spending)

If an empire (Lord knows which one) has a trade sector of -$502 billion (trade deficit) and balanced budgets for a given year, it must have -$502 billion net in the domestic private sector (-$502 billion = -$502 billion + O).

So what's wrong with that?

If you have -$502 billion in the domestic private sector now, you get financial tumors, also known as bubbles, including in the auto, housing, and tuition loan sectors.

In a nation with no trade deficit or trade surplus, it's splendid to have balanced budgets and no net amount in the domestic private sector (0 = 0 + 0), as long as the economy does not suffer from demand shortages. But that is not our economy.

Kasich's website supports the repeal of Obamacare and the replacement of it with a bunch of vague mumbo jumbo about cooperation.

When contemporary politicians talk in vague platitudes, that's when we need to protect our lives and wallets. When contemporary Democratic and Republican establishments cooperate, mass destruction results.

Saturday, July 29, 2017

Voting on Reddit

Since early in their creations, I have been a very, very frequent visitor to the HBD, Eugenics, and New Right Subreddits. Most visitors to Subreddits appear to sort posts by hot or top, not new. I sort by new, often providing the first up or downvotes. Though I have no way of quantifying it, my initial votes appear to affect the numbers of upvotes, downvotes, and brilliant readers many articles eventually receive.

So if you want to have a tiny bit of influence, vote away

Such a strategy is largely worthless on more popular Subreddits. There's little point in downvoting a cat photo that already has thousands of upvotes. Also, initial votes seem to have less influence now that Reddit instituted a delay in showing vote totals.

Though vote totals are irrelevant to the logical merits of articles, so much media exists now that time starved readers often find the voting systems useful.

Far from being a downvote brigade, I upvote about three or four times as often as I downvote, though I have been a one man curse on Yahoo's and Bruce Charlton's upvote totals.

Saturday, July 22, 2017

Secessions Must Be on the Basis of Race and Beliefs, Not Existing State Borders

Secession at the state level solves few major problems. Huge divides exist within blue and red states. If California secedes, New Democrats will run it, or at least be the public face of power, until Marxian Hispanics take over, then Muslims take over, including Hispanic and other converts to Islam. If Texas secedes, Rick Perry's donors will run Texas until the likes of Hugo Chavez take over, then the likes of Ibrahim Hooper replace them, with much violence resulting.

It is more accurate to call the left a coalition of incompatibles than what Steve Sailer calls a coalition of fringes. The same goes for the right.

In the long term, the following will not live together harmoniously:

  1. black firsters
  2. Muslims
  3. Amerindian groups
  4. anarcho-Marxists
  5. Greens
  6. New Democrats
  7. New Dealers
  8. Mexican firsters
  9. many others

The few remaining New Dealers will opt out or be wiped out.

On the so-called right, little harmony will exist among:

  1. open borders Libertarians
  2. neoconservative secularists and Wall Streeters
  3. neoconservative evangelicals
  4. Amish and Mennonites
  5. nonmulticulturalists
  6. multicultural counter jihadists
  7. many others

Neoconservatives and Libertarians will import more nonwhites until the current red states are bluer than the current blue states.

There is little to gain from US state or county level secessions because of large transition costs combined with few policy reforms. The same problem faces the UK. It doesn't matter much in the long term whether globalist multiculturalists rule you from London or Brussels. The totalitarianism is similar, though economic policies shift somewhat.

The mass media play down within blue and red divides because they are invested in maintaining the power of establishments, including themselves. So when the mass media occasionally encourage states to secede, what they really support is the maintenance of present power arrangements without interference from the other major political party, at least in the short term.

They are too fanatical and hedonistic to give a crap about the long term.

Thursday, July 13, 2017

The Seldom Quotable Koran

Among the conspicuous by its absence items of our time is the fact that our Islam loving mass media seldom quote the Koran (or Hadiths). They far more often dig up quotes from The Bible. Nevertheless, Pew claims over 70 percent of Muslims "across most of the African nations polled," believe the Koran "should be taken literally, word for word."

One beloved assertion the media do print: "If anyone slays a person, it would be as if he slew the whole people. And if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people," is unclear, misquoted, and quoted out of context. No matter the meaning, one does not equal multitudes. Mass murder is worse than one murder.

Years ago I put a few synonyms for unbeliever(s) into this searchable Koran. By my count, the Koran contains at least 161 despicable claims about infidels and probably many more, a preoccupation in a comparatively small religious text, including at least nine rotten claims of the "right hand possess" variety, a reference to the rape slavery of unbelievers. It is easy to see why individuals imbued with egoism and sadism support the Koran. For the rest of us? No.

It is a text in which an ethical individual will find exactly nothing worth putting in their ethical toolkit.

But to our mass media, the Koran is simultaneously sacred, off limits to opprobrium, and seldom worth accurately quoting for some odd reason.

Monday, July 10, 2017

Legitimate Propinquity: Caring More About Evils in the West

Someone once criticized whites because we care more about Rotherham than evils in nonwhite places.

Here's one reason why we should care more: because nonwhites seldom take ethical advice from whites anyway, so there's little point. (You might as well waste time ordering a volcano to stop erupting.)

Yes, nonwhites take practical advice, for example, planting a new strain of grain. They'll also take advice on how to exploit and destroy whites, but the latter is not ethical advice.

Ironically, if you start writing about Boko Haram or other evils in developing countries, they'll slur you as a troll, racist or Islamophobe. (In 2016, an increase of the troll epithet was used to ban or dismiss unwanted truths. Where once trolling applied to inciting mindless internet spats, the word is now used to fanatically dismiss political counter evidence.)

Rotherham is part of our civilization, something we have a little influence over.

When it comes to multiculturalists, you get what you tolerate when they have the power to implement it. The more we acquiesce, the more evils explode. If we ignored Rotherham, which the British establishment tried to do for years, you get more Rotherhams. Opposing the events in Rotherham is more than just protecting the rights of girls in Rotherham. It helps prevent worse.

Every federal elected official in the United States is, to put it in ad hominem terms, crooked. Each is also, to varying degrees, a multiculturalist. The 1.0 correlation coefficient is no coincidence. It is extremely difficult to get multicultural whites to see beyond themselves, their friends, their close kin, and their feel good xenocentrism. Even a few nonmulticulturalists seem to care more about lifeless confederate statues than living whites in South Africa.

Most nonwhite adults, and many whites, support anti-white supremacism, waging an unconventional, long term war of aggression. Even the uber multicultural War Nerd admitted it in "War of the Babies." It is ethically wrong to aid individuals, who support aggression. Misplaced altruism created multitudes of horrors in the past and will create horrors for future generations. "Common humanity" is an irrelevant genetic fallacy. Fighting just, nonviolent, unconventioanl wars should inspire us as much as just, conventional wars.

Simply because nonwhites suffered from genetic and environmental bad luck doesn't relieve them from the bare minimum of ethical duties to not support aggression, no matter how unconventional.

Adults who won't organize and fight for their legitimate claims deserve less compassion, too. I have little sympathy for Soviet citizens who tolerated Soviet invasions and other evils. Solzhenitsyn noted that Chechen gangs (predictably) stuck together while whites were solitary gulag sufferers with their immoral universalism. There's a world of difference between an ethical martyr and a cowardly martyr. The latter's self-pity and hope in eternal reward has almost no power to make the world better. If there is an ethical God(s), who judges after death, why would that God send cowardly, fanatical, xenocentric individuals to heaven? Bertrand Russell had a few scathing remarks about pious, feeble religiosity.

Over a decade ago, Slate published dozens of articles about the poor, wonderful Kurds, many with "Kurd Sellout Watch" in the title. Guess how those wonderful Kurds behave when they become refugees? Like you would expect Southwest Asians to behave.

Obama hectored us about being afraid of women and children. Damn right we should be afraid. Fact facers know what those women have between their ears and what those children will grow into. We know their devotion to evolutionary and psychological egoism.

Tuesday, June 27, 2017

The Cycle of Contemporary Ruin


  1. wealthy, rent seeking multiculturalists run the country
  2. wrongs increase
  3. wealthy, rent seeking multiculturalists and their mass media affix blame
  4. wealthy, rent seeking multiculturalists and their mass media support somewhat different wealthy, rent seeking multiculturalists
  5. voters vote for somewhat different wealthy, rent seeking multiculturalists
  6. back to step one, repeat for decades

Saturday, June 24, 2017

The Hard Ways Out Are the Most Likely Ways Out of the Multicultural Catastrophe

After a this or that somewhat publicized evil by the multiculturalists, some whites announce that they have had enough. A few go into mad as hell Howard Beale mode. (Note that Howard Beale didn't offer specifics. That hurts movie sales. Most humans are so riddled with fanaticism they do not tolerate hearing specifics that differ from the official myths of their teams. And if Beale had offered specifics, he would have spewed Hollywood nostrums.)

So multiculturalism must end now, some say.

How? Or what?

Multiculturalists live in a massive ideological bubble but so do many nonmulticulturalists. We massively misperceive our power. We can't just stroll into institutions of power and force the present occupants out. They will arrest or murder us. Despite their wrongs over the past 50 plus years, multiculturalists are entrenched, controlling almost all the mass media and other Western institutions. Contemporary political violence increases their power.

Majorities or pluralities often tell pollsters they oppose mass nonwhite immigration, yet they won't vote for even Gert Wilders, Marine Le Pen, and other slightly edgy assimilationists. Millions did vote for Donald Trump's obvious bait-and-switch of mostly Randian neoconservatism.

The masses in the West have made it clear that they don't care enough about slowly escalating cultural Marxism to organize ethically and effectively, not wanting their work and hedonism interrupted with unpleasant truths. Multiculturalists figured how to manipulate us into a sickness unto death. Even evils committed by multiculturalists are followed by more demonizations of whites, attacking the moral and psychological weaknesses of whites, creating havoc and demoralization.

Our paths out of the cultural Marxism mess are limited. To wit:

  1. Keep reasoning until at least one super rich individual converts to nonmulticulturalism and purchases a mass media outlet with quality commentators. It should eventually occur. And by conversion, I don't mean conversion to Nazism, empty counter-jihadism or crypto neoconservatism. Nazism and neoconservatism must be opposed wherever they appear. The problem is that almost nothing is sacred to most billionaires, except their own egoism. They despise the people they rule over. If their wives were murdered by a nonwhite, they would find a new model. Other humans are fungible objects to them. Piercing their bubbles will not be easy. But the increasing demands for economic Marxism by nonwhites could result in enough pearl clutching to change a few of their worldviews.
  2. Build cities on a hill or in this case, villages on a hill. Organize a few whites to create model villages that say to other whites, "This is what you're missing." The villages must be religious to avoid government desegregation policies. They must be environments nonwhites want to avoid. They must have ethical bootcamps to weed out infiltrators, the lukewarm, and the indolent. They must be sustainable, not driven merely by a charismatic leader. Ideally, retirees and the independently wealthy would be driving forces since they can't be fired or boycotted into poverty.
  3. Endure major disasters (epidemics, supervolcano eruptions, etc.) large enough to break the power of totalitarian governance. Famished whites won't support cultural Marxism. This is what is meant by a the worse, the better strategy, not the gradual infliction of ever greater cultural Marxism. Events like 9/11 are not large enough to change results for the better. Such events increase the power of multicultural police states, creating the worse, the worse. In an ethical society, 9/11 would have been more than enough to rid multiculturalism, but ethics left the establishment political houses long ago.
  4. Encourage secessions almost everywhere. Let people separate by beliefs and genetics. A Calexit makes other exits more probable. Without separations egoism and misplaced altruism win.

Terraforming other planets and other radical alternatives are far beyond our financial and technological means.

The above requires hard work and imposes large short term transition costs but for greater rewards. Our ancestors made great sacrifices for us and many contemporary whites decided to repay those sacrifices by defecating all over the Western bed, rewriting history to fit only specious cultural Marxian narratives. There will be no great awakening from this or that small terror attack, no matter how many of them occur. And hoping for a spontaneous great awakening is a lazy fantasy that ignores the massive indoctrination power of the mass media and other powerful institutions.

We must be up to the challenges.

Monday, June 5, 2017

Children in India Know Who General Dyer Was. Should we?

India is now the second or third largest source of legal migrants to the US and a fast growing source of illegal migration.

Establishments think little about the long term ramifications. The more Indians we import, the more political power they gain, the more they lobby for more Indian migration and anti-white privilege (as other nonwhite groups do). Instead of the comparatively high IQ Indian elites we import now, we will import more Indians having lower IQs and hypertribalistic behaviors, plus more of their increasing Muslim population. The estimated mean phenotype IQ in India is 82, probably a little lower than the mean genotype IQ because of the abysmal cultures and other environments in India.

Like other nonwhites, Indians are not shy about practicing egoism, kin nepotism, and racial nepotism. Stories abound of massive Indian cheating on tests, and of Indian workers taking over US companies, hiring kin, and firing non-Indians.

Something slightly similar happened before. The first Cubans to migrate to the US were whiter, higher IQ, and better working. The later Cuban arrivals, not so much. Much of Miami turned into hellholes, places many wouldn't recognize as part of the US, though other diverse groups deserve much of the blame.

A big difference is that India's population is about 150 times larger than Cuba's.

If China and India fight a war against each other, we face Indian and Chinese migrant populations fighting the war by direct or other means on our shores. If India and Pakistan fight, more imported destruction for us. If one or more have a nuclear or conventional war against us, even worse.

Most Indians cannot afford airfare to the US now, but as elsewhere, humanity movers will increasingly succeed with exploitative quid pro quo arrangements to deliver migrants. Some already have.

India has much potential for irrelevant historical grievance mongering, including the Bengal famine of World War II, though most of the blame for the famine belongs to Axis countries, Indian dysgenics, and Indian overpopulation.

Then there's General Dyer: "Every schoolchild in India knows the momentous effect this incident had on the course of nationalist politics in India [a somewhat exaggeration]." The fact that General Dyer was white matters more than the fact he wasn't American. And thanks to multicultural control of all our major institutions, grievances escalate via propaganda.

Some white children know who General Custer and Lieutenant Calley were, but they are sources of great white shame, not motivation to exploit outgroups. Few white children know who Lazar Kaganovich was. And it is probably best young children don't, at least until they are older. Because children are more easily manipulated than adults, who are themselves easily manipulated.

Good luck with importing peoples with culturally and genetically driven egoism and grievances, no matter how well they pursue the "bitch-goddess Success" in the short term.

But the establishments wouldn't be reckless enough to import several hundred million Indians, would they? Why not? Cultural Marxism hasn't lost a major political battle since the Eisenhower Administration.

Saturday, June 3, 2017

Tangled Up in Blue Words

Words are symbols made by humans with meanings concocted by humans. If we wanted, we could replace the word apple with numbers or the word erteyu. Most individuals would reject or ignore our new apple word. Some words feel good and some feel rotten. Some start out feel good, then become dysphemisms--the euphemism treadmill. The word retard was once a euphemism. The  government once made compassionate postage stamps with the words "Retarded Children" printed on them. Other words start out as dysphemisms, then are reappropriated as neutral or euphemistic, often only in specific contexts, for example, the word infidel in They Call Me Infidel. Using infidel in a different context could result in violence. Even words as unimportant as first names acquire negative or positive feelings over time. Few parents name their children Ralph or Betty anymore.

Many words--shithead and scumbag, for example--will likely remain slurs in most English fluent minds for as long as English exists.

Establishments and many others are masters of language tricks, rebranding themselves with more euphemistic words, trying to attach positive feelings to terrible ideas. James Kirchik has a new book out. I bet it seldom contains the word neoconservative, though neoconservative was once a euphemism. Neoconservative became more neutral or dysphemic in many minds due to horrific neoconservative actions. Instead, Kirchick's book contains plenty of the phrase liberal democracy, though neoconservatives regularly destroy democratic practices and much else. 

One Third Way group calls itself the Progressive Policy Institute to attract unwary progressives to the Democratic Party.

Many individuals reply with demagoguery to innocently intended words. If an elderly person uses the archaic neutral word lady, colored or oriental, they can find themselves demonized. Activists don't care what individuals intend. They twist words and meanings to fit their own totalitarian causes.

A few individuals with alternative beliefs act as if they can turn dysphemisms into euphemisms. But they cannot turn them into euphemisms because they lack the media power to do so. Most whites will never support groups that label themselves white nationalist or national socialist, no matter the attached beliefs. Those two phrases are political poison. In most white minds, those phrases represent Nazism, meaning mass murder, economic cronyism, and pro-Hitlerism. It doesn't matter to political readers whether they actually support pan-Europeanism or nationalist universalism or Teddy Rooseveltism or neoclassical pan-Arcticism or self-determination universalism.

When you don't control the mass media, you should not describe your beliefs with dysphemic terms, unless you prefer losing or your beliefs really are evil. Our attachments to labels should be minuscule compared to our commitments to people and better reasoned beliefs.

Thursday, June 1, 2017

Dear Europeans: Please Leave NATO

It's less you, mostly us. Our neoconservative and third way dominated empire brings you more military harms than benefits. 

Russia's decaying multicultural, "civic nationalist" empire cannot gobble large chucks of outgroup neighbors without risking guerrilla wars, plus massive social and economic losses. China is too far away to project large conventional forces into Europe.

You have your own problems with austerity, globalism, and multicultural invasions, but at least many of your leaders lack extreme militarism. While your rulers engage in domestic treason and throw you in jail or ostracize you for telling truths, you still have a bit of control over their foreign policy militarism. The knee jerk militarism of our colonial rulers rivals that of Muslims. We must be better friends than we are now--outside the alliance.

Ignore sunk costs and the inertia of the status quo.

You don't want to risk being caught in a nuclear war between us and the world's most powerful nuclear arsenal. The aftermath of nuclear war will not be pure survivalism. The history of wars past suggests increased tit for tat conflicts in the aftermath.

Tuesday, May 30, 2017

The Longer, Stranger Trip of Sixto Rodriguez

In the early 1970s, Sixto Rodriguez created two albums of abysmal, didactic folk-rock music. Few copies sold, though a few big timers in the music industry regarded Rodriguez's work as fantastic. After losing his contract, Rodriguez vanished into greater obscurity, reemerging to tour Australia in 1979 and 1981. The ruthlessness of the music industry is such that even unprofitable "justice" acts can't be spared cash for long.

Unknown to Rodriguez, a few copies of his work traveled to South Africa. Bootleg copies spread, creating a sensation "bigger than Elvis" among White, multicultural South Africans. Since Rodriguez disappeared, South Africans believed rumors of his death.

In the late 1990s, fans found Rodriguez living a working class life in Detroit, informing Rodriguez of his superstar status in South Africa. Rodriguez then performed before adoring White, multiculturalist crowds in South Africa.

A 2012 Academy Award winning film, Searching for Sugar Man, documented the events, a story so bizarre, skeptical viewers may be excused for thinking the narrative is a ruse, a subtle mockumentary, but, in fact, the story is mostly true.

Now why am I wasting time on this?

Because the film came and went without much comment on nonmulticultural sites, though it has some relevance to understanding multicultural whites. The film gives an unintended lesson in how naive, creepy, and feel good orientated multiculturalism is. The lives of white multiculturalists lack moral purpose, and they vainly try to find purpose in the evils of cultural Marxism. No one in the film stops to say, "This music is cliched demagoguery, lacking hooks."

I wonder how many of those screaming and sobbing Rodriguez fans in South Africa are still multiculturalists or even alive.

The film reminds us how multiculturalism evolves as its power increases. They talk about what they imagine is justice, then years later the justice talk includes far more kill the whites rhetoric and actions.

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

Sounds Like a Eugenic Plan for Schools

We somewhat improve the academic performance of nonwhite disadvantaged children by sending them to almost all white schools. In other words, one environmental factor that lowers the performance of disadvantaged nonwhites is being around other lower IQ nonwhites, primarily through increased concentrations of rotten values and those children wrecking learning environments via misbehavior, plus quality individuals not wanting to teach in those schools. Mass media, of course, ignore the disadvantaged harming each other. They imagine institutional racism and vaguely bad neighborhoods as if bad neighborhood vapors were rising from sewers.

So let's help by sending every disadvantaged nonwhite student in America to schools that are almost all white.

Oh, wait.

Then those schools overflow with disadvantaged nonwhites, recreating the same problem and creating the additional problem of nonwhite children wrecking the social and learning environments for whites.

The way the scheme could work is by creating several billion more high IQ white children.

It almost sounds good, except for the fact that by itself it doesn't reverse cultural Marxian boring from within, not to mention the difficulty of creating several billion more white children.

We're better off with self-determination and complete separation.

Friday, May 12, 2017

Migrants and the Immune System: a Sickening Study

An article about a new study asserts "strong feelings about immigrants are controlled by something as surprising as the immune system."

"The research also shows that hypersensitive people are completely indifferent to any good intentions that immigrants might have to contribute to society." Because good intentions are fleeting and done for grandstanding and conspicuous tokenism reasons. Nonwhites gradually make things worse, then when society collapses, they almost always side with their own kind and blame the victims of their invasion.

"Those who are very concerned about the risk of infection are those who are most reluctant to seek out social contact with immigrants–something that we otherwise know fosters tolerance," says Associate Professor Lene Aar√łe. Nope. Nope. Nope.

"People with a hypersensitive behavioral immune system do not avoid immigrants because they are consciously afraid of becoming ill if they interact with them. Immigrants are not a source of infection." Oh, really.

"If some people see dangers in immigrants that others don't, it's difficult to reach a mutual understanding with reason-based, rational arguments." Oh, please. Apparently, evidence from the billions of horrors caused by diversity doesn't matter. Circumstantial ad hominem attacks on people's immune systems and abusive ad hominem attacks on "hypersensitive people" are what matter. This study is more scientism gone wild, part of a trend in studies used to promote political policies unsupported by the research.

But "if people are concerned about an entirely different risk–and perhaps one they aren't even fully aware of–it's difficult to achieve a mutual understanding of what is the right policy."

Moriori Man: Hey, these migrants are really effing us over.
Moriori Woman: Oh, don't worry. It's just your hypersensitive immune system. Just relax and make more contact. Those thoughts will go away. They're plenty friendly to your face.

(later)
Moriori Woman: Why are we the last Moriori? Why are we being tortured and why are we slaves?

The article provides no evidence of any direction of causation, if any even exists. And any direction of causation between migrant acceptance and the immune system is ethically irrelevant anyway.

Studies of why multiculturalists have such poor ethical character would be much more beneficial to society.

Thursday, May 4, 2017

Context on the Murders of South African Farmers

The official murder rate of (mostly white) South African farmers is 313 per 100,000 population. Some argue that the real number is larger, that the South African government deliberately undercounts.

To those less familiar with statistics, the annual number does not look astronomical by itself, but it means over the course of their lifetimes those farmers have at least a 20 percent chance of being murdered if the stat were to remain the same and nothing else changed. But like neighboring Zimbabwe, that stat will likely skyrocket.

In Zimbabwe, the former bread basket of Africa, the black ruling group's forces murdered white farmers and gave the farms to allies. Lacking the character, intelligence, and conscientiousness for modern farming, the new black farmers sold the farm equipment for scrap, leading to famine. Some hungry blacks resorted to starting brush fires, then eating animals that died in the conflagrations.

For comparison, much less than one percent of Americans were murdered during World War II by Axis countries. We frequently see photos of burned out Japanese cities from that era, but roughly three percent of Japanese died from war related causes during the same period.

America's murder rate in 2013 was about 64 times lower than among South African farmers.

If those White farmers were to organize, arm themselves, and carve out a country for themselves, the global multiculturalists would be outraged, though they permit nonwhites to defend themselves from much lesser threats.

Multiculturalists treat all of South Africa as present or future Bantu property because Bantus are indigenous to Africa. though whites migrated to those South African farms well before Bantus, who arrived after expanding their population from around Cameroon. Of course, multiculturalists don't treat all of Asia as Chinese or Indian property because that would be an irrelevant and ludicrous property claim.

But the irrelevant and ludicrous becomes conventional belief when it involves Whites.

Wednesday, May 3, 2017

The Content of Ethical Character

An internet poster once claimed, as best I remember, that no one on Earth judges by the content of character, those most vociferous in saying they do so are often least likely to judge based on real character.

That poster did have a bit of a point, though many individuals do somewhat judge according to character. Pollsters asking respondents for their most admired person tend to get wealthy celebrities and politicians having atrocious policies for answers, hardly examples of good character.

Our rulers regularly portray nonwhites as pious, humble, innocent, and filled with goodness, much to the surprise of fact facers, who live among large numbers ordinary nonwhites. The film Elysium takes this portrayal to hilarious extremes.

The few multiculturalists who talk the content of character talk run smack into multicultural dogma, power, and groupthink, then acquiesce.

Multicultural nonwhites behave as if:

  1. they have a right to colonize Western countries but that their own countries should not be colonized by outgroups. 
  2. they have a right to genocide whites but would wage war if anyone tried the same on their own ingroups. 
  3. they should have freedom of association but whites should not. 
  4. equality should be supported when it benefits themselves or their perceived allies but seldom otherwise. 
  5. excessive self-interest is good, except in whites. 
  6. eugenics related arguments are automatically very, very frightening, but ally themselves with individuals spreading many copies of their atrocious genes, leading to disasters.

Polls hint that large percentages of nonwhite Muslims think infidels, apostates, blasphemers, and females accused of adultery should all be murdered. Given the reluctance of humans to self-report such views to pollsters, the actual numbers are probably closer to 100 percent. The unstated end game of multiculturalism is nonwhite, endogamous Islam everywhere humans exist.

Individuals having such beliefs do not have good character, no matter how polite or hard working they appear.

Ironically, nonmulticulturalists behave closer to the content of character norm. Nonmulticulturalists are willing to make exceptions for Frank Salter and other ethical nonwhites.

Nonmulticulturalists should separate themselves from nonwhites because nearly all nonwhites are unable or unwilling to walk the content of character walk. Everyone has a right to avoid massive undeserved harms from ethnoracial outgroups. We should not be deemed "racist" for wanting to avoid those who seek to exploit and destroy us. (Anyone calling others the R word condemns and contradicts themselves with their own ad hominem claim.) Lack of freedom of association is a form of servitude, of not owning your own life.

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

The Bigger Story on Straw Person Attacks

On Reddit, a heavily upvoted thread discussed straw person attacks. The posters repeatedly wrote about distorting others' words. But there's more to the story.

If some ordinary stranger posts something preposterous on Twitter and we attack their claims, a straw person exists, even if you quote it exactly.

Taking a blatantly ironic comment and pretending the writer actually has that belief is also a straw person.

In short, a straw person is:

  1. twisting someone's quote or otherwise pretending others have beliefs they are unlikely to have.
  2. attacking easy, unimportant targets rather than presenting the strongest arguments that differ from your own.

The exception is if powerful individuals--billionaires, national politicians, university presidents--post preposterous ideas. It is not a straw person to attack their arguments because atrocious ideas in powerful hands have disastrous consequences.

But if all we do is ridicule powerful political opponents without addressing the strongest counterarguments to our own views, then that is also a straw person.

A cottage industry of mocking Trump's tweets and speeches now exists. That's sometimes good, but the people doing the mocking believe in neo-Marxism, neoconservatism, and other horrific ideologies. They're often merely trying to bolster their own rotten world views.

We also have a duty to focus more on what politicians do than what they say because previous behavior is a better guide than political boilerplate.

The power of contemporary establishments rests on slurs, straw person attacks, small sample claims, and other fallacies spread through the mass media. The individuals who profit from and listen to the mass media often have no idea what the strongest counterarguments to their worldviews are because they haven't heard them and don't want to hear them. Fifty-four percent of respondents to a 2016 post election Pew poll claim to have never have heard of the "alt-right." Among those who have heard of the alt-right, many make no attempt to read the strongest arguments on the alt-right. Instead, they believe what the mass media tells them the alt-right stands for. In addition, most people seem to think the slurs they call their opponents aren't slurs or that they're just "calling them what they are," though that's seldom what they are. Such behavior is a recipe for unjust wars and extreme totalitarianism.

And if the strongest arguments that differ from our own, deserve more weight than our own, then we all have ethical duties to switch our beliefs.

Monday, April 24, 2017

The Smart Person's Guide to College

Graduation season approaches, so let me explain college to young readers considering college:

Psychology: junk science of pretending genes have no relevance to parental and ethnoracial issues while noticing genes when health and other pragmatic issues are at stake.

Engineering: you may assume that a field as efficiency oriented as engineering will teach only the stuff important for engineering jobs. Wrong. Engineering degrees often require matrix theory and differential equations, though many engineers find jobs requiring little more than algebra.

Business: field for mediocre, partying students, culminating in the MBA: Mendacity Buttressing Arrogance.

History: art of historical one-sidedness and small sample fallacies.

English and literature: art of treating fictional claims as if they were well-reasoned facts.

Computer science: intrinsically boring as hell field made interesting by hype, money, intermittent reinforcement, and the attraction of staring at glowing screens. Be thankful they seldom teach Fortran anymore.

Nursing: deliberately understaffed, often having waiting lists to enroll, so we can import low competence nurses from developing countries. Another example of our rulers failing to provide the beneficial things while bombarding us with harmful things.

Primary education: important for teaching reading and basic math to children, but increasing used to politically influence young children, who haven't even mastered the art of not pissing and shitting their pants.

Secondary education: provides workers for custodial institutions as teenagers eat and breathe their way toward their IQ genotypes and mass media role models.

Queer studies: study of things that aren't worth two seconds time.

Natural sciences: demanding fields that consume the minds of practitioners. Nevertheless, activist natural scientists act as if they should be treated as experts in public affairs in which they have no expertise.

Administration: art of creating more and higher paid administrators until their are more administrators than producers.

Medicine: rigorous field but not ethically rigorous enough to prevent doctors from being unjustly influenced by cartels and free samples.

Philosophy: bizarrely entrusted with teaching logic and ethics, though philosophers are culturally more similar to preachers and aesthetes.

Sociology: junk science of teaching egoism and tribalism to nonwhites--not they need help in that regard--while excoriating whites for their legitimate interests.

Cultural anthropology: Ditto sociology.

Economics: junk science of exaggerating the benefits of policies that agree with economists' perceived self-interests while ignoring the costs of those policies to others.

Other humanities and social science degrees: expensive degrees for people who should have dropped out of middle school and helped their family or themselves out. Not surprisingly, they blame society for their college debts.

Better yet. Don't attend college. Getting a college degree is merely an expensive way to signal smartness and task persistence to potential employers. Here is what you do: You take Methoxsalen to make your skin dark. You buy yourself some spiffy corporate gear. You research when colleges have job fairs. You stride around the job fair, engaging recruiters, carrying some Tennyson in one hand and Classical Electrodynamics in the other, making you look smart but not one dimensional. Recruiters will want to talk to you. They may even chase after you. Don't worry about being an empty suit. Empty suits abound. You can usually learn on the job.

Once they hire you, stop taking Methoxsalen. If they wonder why you suddenly have white skin, tell them you contracted severe vitiligo and it affected your entire surface area.

Even better: learn for free at libraries and in the real world. Start your own business in a field having a high probability of success, copying the practices of successful businesses in that field.

Whatever you do, don't take any loans unless you enter a low unemployment field paying six figure incomes.

(Note: this article is satire. Don't take Methoxsalen unless you want skin and liver damage.)

Friday, April 21, 2017

The Never Ending "Scandal"

Donald Trump's Russian ties remained the top news story for most of the past five months. A recent study suggests that Rachel Maddow's show spends more time on "Russia focused segments" than everything else in the world combined.

Whatever happened to scandal fatigue?

Interest in ongoing scandals seems to increase when individuals are highly aroused, explaining why sex and violence scandals linger. In this case, the driving arousal is illogical hatred of Whites and the West. Multiculturalists can barely wait for the next juicy details, no matter how preposterous, leading to 52 percent of Democrats believing the evidence free baloney that Russia directly hacked the election.

And when the mass media repeat garbage often enough, most people believe it.

The left once again allowed itself to be used by neoconservatives, especially considering this "scandal" involves trying to improve relations with a power and paranoia driven nuclear giant. (We should not trust people who brag about being former Trotskyites. Once a person chooses an abysmal ideology they typically stick with it or replace it with another horrific ideology.)

The media act as if Russia influencing the kleptocratic process is worse than the risk of nuclear war. Never mind that establishment Democrats and Republicans have far worse entanglements with African, Hispanic, and Southwest Asian countries actively working to destroy us from within. (When the Soviet Union engaged in much worse meddling, the left seldom noticed. The reason the Soviet Union didn't need any U2 style spy planes flying over the U.S. was it had multitudes of agents and activists on the ground.)

The big scandal we should be focusing on is the role the media, business, and political establishments play in trying to incite World War III, especially with an erratic, easily manipulated president.

For more ethical individuals, that is, almost no one in the establishments, our focus should be on de-escalating tensions and seeking alliances with fellow whites. The establishments claim we can't get along with Russia because our "interests conflict" and because Russia is corrupt.

Well, guess what?

We have worse and bigger conflicting interests with dozens of corrupt countries, yet establishments coddle them and often take marching orders from them.

Every nation should have interests that sometimes conflict with other nations. Otherwise, you get cucked and steamrolled.

At one point, Trump should have said, "Yes, I conspired with Russians to avoid World War III. I'm sorry so many of you prefer World War III.'' Instead, Trump sold part of his soul to neoconservatives, for their money and faint praise. At least Trump still has Jeff Sessions.

The establishments may not meet the legal definition of treason, but they sure as hell meet the moral definition.

Thursday, April 20, 2017

Blameworthiness and the Legacy of Slavery

Multiculturalists love the legacy of slavery causal explanation for African-American problems.

Why?

Because it cannot be undone. It implies that whites are permanently guilty and permanently liable, no matter the consequences. To them, it doesn't matter whether Whites have already given umpteen trillion in welfare, health care, affirmative action, and other benefits to African-Americans.

The word cause means to change the probability of a thing occurring. Bringing African slaves to the Western Hemisphere was a cause of what happens to African-Americans, just as millions of other causes were and are. Otherwise, there would be few, if any, African-Americans and few African-American events.

But the problem with overemphasizing these distant historical causes and harms are that a) the villains are dead, b) millions of distant historical causes exist, c) they lead to mutually destructive tit-for-tat conflicts, d) they de-emphasize policies that would make things better, e) they help ruling groups exploit us with divide-and-screw policies.

The English treated the Irish worse than they treated African-Americans. Would Ireland be a better place today if today's Irish spent massive energies denouncing the British and demanding reparations? I doubt it.

If Africans and African-Americans started pursuing a rigorous program of eugenics 100 years ago, life would be much better for them than chanting the legacy of slavery. But that didn't happen.

Robert Mugabe and his successors will still blame whites as they loot what little wealth Zimbabwe creates in the future.

Multitudes of events (bad luck, good luck, volcanic eruptions, comet collisions, manorial feudalism, random mutations, harmful policies, beneficial policies, the evolution of malaria, Middle Eastern religious texts, etc.) caused our present situations. We can't change that they happened. It would do whites no good to endlessly blame manorial feudalism for our present decline. Sure, we should note what manorial feudalism caused but not dwell on it.

Every racial group has suffered grievous harms from ethnoracial outgroups in prior centuries. Bantu tribes enslaved and wiped out multitudes of outgroups, including Bushmen and other hominids.

Despite establishment propaganda to the contrary, Southwest Asians and North Africans have caused massive harms to Europeans and black Africans for centuries, including slave taking that dwarfed the trans-Atlantic slave trade. But they seldom mention that legacy of slavery, a far more brutal death camp form of slavery. Or the slavery White establishments inflicted upon other Whites. Nevertheless, Whites shouldn't sit around demanding reparations from Arabs and other Southwest Asians.

We must focus on liberating our own lives and nations from every ingroup and outgroup that seeks to harm and destroy us.

Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Intolerable Tolerance

"People who believe political views have a biological basis are more intolerant, study finds"

So that explains why individuals who believe in environmental determinism committed the most political murders in the 20th century. Those were tolerant murders.

Tuesday, April 4, 2017

Street Protests and Organizing for Liberation

In 1941, African-Americans planned a protest to obtain more hiring quotas for African-Americans. This threat, according to the story, so unnerved Franklin Roosevelt that he required companies receiving government contracts to implement hiring quotas. (Maybe Roosevelt simply used the threat to implement quotas he already preferred.)

By the Nixon era, the ruling groups lost their fear of marches and learned to use protesters to their own advantage, infiltrating protests with false flag agents to make protesters look rotten.

Contemporary establishments often ignore protesters, except to the extent they can use protesters to aid what politicians seek. Thus, Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and similar groups engaging in terrorism, often receive free passes simply because they do what the ruling groups want, that is, support anti-white totalitarianism, aiding the ruling groups' bait-and-switch, divide-and-screw goals. Anyone with their head at least part way out of their rear end knows that "activism" is a euphemism for cultural Marxian crypto totalitarianism, that we should be wary of almost anyone calling themselves an activist.

Multicultural tolerance is tolerance for increasing tyranny by their perceived allies. For them, few enemies exist to the multicultural direction. The intra-multicultural enemies that do exist arise during the ruthless competition for power, Stalin having Trotsky eliminated, for example.

Occupy Wall Street lasted long but accomplished almost nothing because ruling groups vehemently opposed Occupy Wall Street.

Almost any other group that sought to curtail ruling group parasitism by taking it to the streets also floundered. The concept of claiming to be right because you have a slogan bearing sign in your hands is anti-reason. The real solution to treasonous ruling groups is organization that reforms or secedes. And by organization, I mean such organization that dictates to political parties which ethical, reliable individuals are permissible candidates, not individuals devoted to disingenuous platitudes and back stabbing egoism. The problem is that (outside of multiculturalism, the media, K-Street, and similar groups) politically organizing contemporary whites is harder than organizing a bag of cats. Kevin MacDonald writes about the amazing political ability of whites to organize, but we seldom see it in contemporary whites. Sure, you can organize millions of whites to support one arbitrary sports team or another but that's pathetic.

Whites in Zimbabwe tolerated ever increasing hells without forming effective, organized resistance. South Africa has the inspiring small sample of Orania, but without greater outside organization, the long term future of Orania, a town surrounded by millions of hostile outgroup members, looks bleak.

Sometimes a "the worse, the better" strategy tempts us, and maybe life getting worse will spur reforms in some lands. But Zimbabwe, South Africa, and numerous white flight cities are cautionary tales that when things get worse, many contemporary whites hunker down, take a pill, and run out the clock on themselves and posterity.

What to do? Protests by nonmulticulturalists face false flag actions by both establishments and the cultural Marxism industry, especially hoax crimes. But other methods exist. We should use multiculturalists' own tactics against them, including many of the 198 nonviolent methods here. We can form communities like Orania in the West, but geographically linked and mutually supporting, despite whatever differences exist among nonmulticulturalists on less important issues.

Being hated for telling the moral truth should never distract us.

Saturday, April 1, 2017

Globalist Backed Saudi Arabia

Notice how often the media and others refer to Saudi Arabia as "U.S. backed," a whopping 427,000 Google results, yet another rhetorical guilt knife in our backs, as if we're mostly to blame for their centuries of Jihad, egoism, endogamy, and mass murder. The media don't write the more accurate "puppets of Saudi Arabia" or "globalist backed Saudi Arabia" or "multiculturalist backed Saudi Arabia" or "neoconservative backed Saudi Arabia" or "Colonial Occupation Force backed Saudi Arabia."

You can just imagine all the molecular machinery going nuts in humanitarian brains when they discovered the "U.S. backed" phrase. That's anti-white gold!

Saudi Arabia, despite the massive pro-Saudi propaganda coming from the ruling groups, has roughly a 30 percent favorable rating in the U.S. Saudi AramcoWorld seems to be in more libraries than almost any other print magazine. A mere Twenty percent of Canadians approve of their country's arms sales to Saudi Arabia. At least the Saudis have the Pakistanis. A staggering 95 percent of Pakistanis approve of the Saudis.

It is more accurate to describe our ruling groups as Saudi backed than to imply that real Americans back the Saudis. You have to respect the Saudi's evil brilliance. They go right to the top when they bribe. None of the just write random checks for treason crap that whites do. Prince Bandar bought Colin Powell a Jaguar. The Bushes frolicked with the King and did much worse. The Clinton Foundation received millions more.

What exactly can we do to stop the Saudis? Our rulers rule over the West as a colonial occupation force. They almost never do what the people want, and they won't abide our right to self-determination. Are the humanitarians implying that we should use violence to stop Saudi influence? Good luck with that against the global police states. If we actually did anything significant to stop Saudi influence, those same "humanitarians" would start screaming about racial and religious intolerance.

We don't need Saudi Arabia and we don't need their oil. The Saudis need infidel goods, money, and workers far more than we need their oil.

I sometimes read establishment message boards to see whether they have any good ideas and also to learn the current establishment zeitgeist. On one board, popular with lawyers and financiers, a wealthy lawyer posts hundreds, if not thousands, of humanitarian Yemen articles, complete with feigned conspicuous empathy. Not surprisingly, he was voted poster of the year. He seems to revel in "U.S backed" articles. To my knowledge, he has never posted a Saudis backed by Israel article or Saudis backed by Qatar article. And he never ever posts anything about about anti-white atrocities.

Because whites don't count as humans, you know.

Thursday, March 30, 2017

Ways of War: Hidden Vulnerabilities

On the Credible Defense Subreddit, a thread covers how to take down America's nuclear aircraft carriers. Not surprisingly, voters decide that the most efficient method would be to destroy the carrier's supply chain.

Foreign leaders, especially Chinese leaders, almost certainly know this as well.

But the Reddit posters--devoted to militarism and cultural Marxism--do not mention the elephants in the room: race and cultural Marxism driven sabotage, espionage, and invasion by immigration. People of gravitas "know" that nonwhites do not do evil things and that the harmful things they do must somehow be the fault of whites, including acts by Northeast Asians.

Just like they imagine they know that Japanese settlers in the 1930s and 1940s were wonderful and innocent people. Never mind that almost none of the millions of World War II Japanese settlers living in Asia and the Western Pacific sided with the natives. And if Japan had been so powerful it could have easily conquered the West Coast, almost none of those freedom and democracy loving Japanese-Americans would have sided with the US. As it was, only a few percent of military age Japanese-Americans volunteered for the US military, partly to aid the Double Victory on behalf of anti-white supremacism. Prior to Pearl Harbor, Japanese-Americans sent millions of dollars for Japan's war efforts in China, including the brazen act of publicly sponsoring a war plane. Japan didn't even need to recruit Japanese-Americans for espionage. Japanese-American "civilians" volunteered themselves at no charge. Another 3,500 Japanese out of a small population of roughly 127,000 were specifically exported to the US to engage in espionage.

People of gravitas also "know" that Chinese, Vietnamese, and North Korean actions during the wars for full bore communism were not unethical and racially motivated against the "pigs," "imperialists," "long noses," and "hairy monkeys."

If you evince knowledge of nonwhite tribalism, behavioral genetics, and establishment unapproved history, that's a bannable offense on many Subreddits.

But the recognition of nonwhite perfidy does not mean we should endorse knee jerk militarism toward potential enemies. We should stick to our kind and we should encourage them to stick to their kind.

The minions of militarism pursue unwinnable wars against China and Russia, merely to continue the process of eliminating and replacing whites. What good would fighting China or Russia do when we are giving our countries away to far worse people?

A war against China or Russia is not our war.

Imagining Counter Evidence as Evidence

In the bizarro realm of multiculturalism, overwhelming evidence against multiculturalism supposedly counts as evidence for multiculturalism: racial diversity was an unmitigated long term disaster in every nation that practiced it? Oh, that means we need more multiculturalism to teach tolerance, though multiculturalists spend far more time teaching demagoguery than tolerance and their one-sided tolerance lectures are directed toward neutering their perceived enemies while emboldening the aggression of their perceived allies.

Consistency in Labeling

When a white nonmulticulturalist assaults or murders a nonwhite individual, he is immediately dubbed a white supremacist by the mass media. Given that almost every nonwhite adult believes in freedom of association their own preferred ethnoracial groups but not for whites, along with dozens of other contradiction filled anti-white beliefs, shouldn't almost every nonwhite adult who assaults or murders a white individual also be slurred as a supremacist by the mass media?

And nonwhites do a hell of a lot more stranger-on-stranger interracial aggression than whites do, not including the multitudes of uncounted interracial crimes in schools and prisons.

Of course, millions of peaceful nonmulticulturalists, who care about truth and ethics, also get slurred as supremacists. Yet billions of nonwhite adults, in all their anti-white glory, are not.

Thursday, March 9, 2017

Into Arcadia

Or as David Brooks puts it (along with a bunch of false analogies):
I can’t figure out why so many Republicans prefer a dying white America to a place like, say, Houston.
One reason is rural people, cultures, and environments. Though attachments to people and place diminished for decades, many remain. It's thousands of shared stories that become parts of ethical narratives, a strange concept to some, whose idea of a narrative consists of anti-white fictions. It's thousands of regional recipes such as grandma's homemade bread, the best you ever tasted. A good recipe off the internet is just something that tastes good, not a part of you.

It's rituals. It's doing specific activities during certain calendar dates each year.

A tree in a contemporary city park is a random tree, often a semi-dwarf cut to look the same as its neighbors. A tree in the woods behind your home becomes the special place where you had your first kiss with your spouse. These sacred attachments cannot be adequately conveyed by the mediums of film and television, which often reduce rural life to satire or mawkishness.

Big cities can be decent or excellent places, as long as they are racially homogeneous. They can be places deserving of great attachment. But not now.

Even those who believe nurture assumptions, have an inkling that moving to a contemporary big city results in handing children over to ghetto and Hollywood cultures, leaving parents with teenagers who seem like hostile strangers in the nest.

Rural areas are not immune to these destructive cultures, but they are better.

Many whites do move, including high IQ whites, causing brain drain in rural areas. Attend rural advanced placement classes and you will hear big city and big college dreams. It's quite unfair for city dwellers to mock country folks for low intelligence when big cities poached millions of bright, rural graduates. Farm boys make especially good engineers.

When poorer, lower IQ individuals move to big cites, they often end up exchanging one low paying job for another in a higher cost of living area, including the costs of being surrounded by hostile individuals. Fifty years ago, working class individuals could walk off farms and into decent paying factory jobs, even when they were unskilled. Now, it's often better to make $7.50 per hour in a rural area than $10.50 per hour in the big city.

The often unmentioned big attraction of contemporary cities is massive opportunities for semi-anonymous philandering, avoiding walks of shame. It's much easier to be abusive toward someone you probably will never see again anywhere. But philandering is usually reserved for high status men and is always accompanied by lies to self and others--and I do mean always. In a few cases, it involves the raping and trafficking of runaways. In places like Rotherham, the drugging, raping, and trafficking happens to non-runaways, not far from home. If you are predisposed toward guilt and other ethical traits, such philandering holds little appeal.

The "respectable" mass media seldom talk about philandering and its consequences.

Instead, the mass media emphasize their cultural activities, often claiming there is little to do in rural areas. But if you have a low paying job, many big city cultural activities are off limits anyway. Most big city cultural activities are overrated hedonistic behaviors, propped up by pedantry and advertising. Someone once called Los Angeles, with some exaggeration, the world's biggest city with nothing to do. Paintings can be viewed in books and on the internet less expensively. And much contemporary art should be ignored.

For most people, outdoor activities are more ethically and personally rewarding than didactic cultural activities, which often involve destructive status competitions.

One purpose of agitprop is to make us alienated from sources of purpose, except cultural Marxism, making us willing to psychologically flee and fill voids with cultural Marxism's lies and "activism."

Small towns are often sources of petty and malicious gossip, but often the individual complaining about the gossip earned the gossip through their own actions.

Big city work places have their own social treachery. You have to keep your mouth shut while your coworkers spout their political narratives, lest you get fired by coworkers who have never honestly studied and weighed issues. And nothing is quite like the horrors of multicultural, big city schools for whites.

Even if co-workers cared about finding more of the whole truth, well-reasoned arguments seldom turn up on the first few pages of Google results.

Some urbanites create more purpose with gentrification, community gardens, and other activities, but the result is hollow and ephemeral, often childfree and philosophically sterile. Gentrified children end up in expensive private schools, which have problems with spoiled children. And gentrification makes neighborhood nonwhites livid when they see their property taxes rocketing upward.

Economists, of course, will rightly lecture rural areas about wasteful farm subsidies, but they usually avoid the non-tax entitlement ways governments redistribute far more to big cities, especially the free riding financial industry. The economic vibrancy of some big cities is not driven by nonwhite immigrants, It's driven by crooked redistributions. Working migrants move to big cities to provide services to the free riding individuals. Other non-working migrants join in the free riding.

The better economies in certain coastal and sunbelt cities aren't due to neutral policies. They're due to deliberate corruption favoring rent seeking industries in those cities.

Rural individuals often underestimate the costs of driving.
The risk of injury death — which counts both violent crime and accidents — is more than 20% higher in the countryside than it is in large urban areas.
Long distance driving also causes cardiovascular disease and large negative externalities. But many whites seem to loath cities so much that they work in cities but drive over 100 miles per day to make a home in the country.

Rural areas have drug problems but those addicted would probably be addicted in cities as well. Alone in a city is not where you want to be if you have self-control problems. Selection effects are a bigger problem than people realize. High functioning, eugenically bred individuals know better ways of responding to boredom than drugs.

Most of all, rural areas provide better protection from nuclear wars and other human inflicted catastrophes, the sorts of disasters the establishments and defense industries are right now prodding us into.

David Brooks, the self-anointed social science expert, will never ever move to Houston's vibrant neighborhoods. Instead, he noted this about his $120,000 cosmopolitan vacation:
But sometimes money allows you to see too many things, too quickly. Sometimes if you seize all the opportunities your money affords, you may end up skimming over life and nothing is deep enough to leave a mark.

Friday, March 3, 2017

We Live on a Creepy, Evil Planet

The reality of this planet is worse than almost any horror movie. Imagine describing this planet to an alien.

We are in yet another Thucydides Trap. Good people should be screaming and doing their best to get the hell out of it, yet humans keep letting ego driven salami slicers rise to the top.

The threats of nuclear weapons, biological weapons, rapidly evolving pathogens, and potential space based calamities hang over the planet with greater ominousness than a Sword of Damocles, yet the latest social media outrages are treated with more seriousness.

Biting and sucking creatures, plus the pathogens they carry, have killed billions. Viewing these creatures under a microscope gives us shivers. Gut bacteria influence actions in surprising ways. Other organisms completely take over their hosts. Geological hazards add to the carnage. On much of Earth surface, humans seldom survive without protective technologies, in particular, weapons, clothing, and housing.

At our planet, the worse a powerful race or ideology behaves, the more off limits to reform or criticism it is.

With the exception of the Dalai Lama, Frank Salter, and a handful of other thinkers, almost every nonwhite public figure believes in freedom of association for their own races but not for whites. Few seem to notice the contradiction and its monstrous implications.

History books regale us with the horrors of McCarthyism, which harmed a handful of Marxians--individuals and ideologies that were and are waging aggressive, unconventional warfare against us. These books fail to enlighten about the thousands of whites fired, fined, imprisoned or ostracized for thought crimes against cultural Marxism.

The most admired individuals exhibit extreme egoism or misplaced altruism or both.

Powerful individuals are treated as if they have gravitas due to halo effects, when in reality, they are more articulate than wise. This also applies to military leadership, yet polling suggests more public trust in the military than other institutions. Let's hope the poll respondents meant they lower ranking military personnel. The jargon and banalities, especially multicultural, coming from military officers is nearly as bad as what exists in journals of neo-pragmatism.

Multiculturalists tell us nonwhites will treat us fairly when we become minorities in our own countries, even though nonwhites don't treat us fairly now and have relentlessly abused other minorities throughout history.

Professional ironists inform us (without irony) that reality (meaning truth) has a liberal bias (though there are millions of mutually contradictory worldviews calling themselves liberal), a self-contradictory claim. The truth cannot have a bias.

Those with long formal educations spent small fortunes to learn millions of trivial facts but do not face facts on the most important issues. Instead, they succumb to social pressures, availability biases, and other reasoning mistakes. And they aren't even dimly aware how skewed their worldviews are. If you point out their lack of accuracy, you will be demonized for anti-intellectualism. Almost every politician, intellectual, and wealthy individual born in the 20th century believed in one or more totalitarian ideologies. Almost. Every. One.

Billions form their unethical views based on how those views affect their own status and wallets. Multicultural billionaires, who acquired their wealth via inheritance or unethical activities, are viewed as admirable philanthropists merely for donating a small portion of their ill-gotten wealth to (mostly) crooked charities.

The results of economic models that weigh a small number of one-sided factors are treated as iron laws.

It is considered offensive to tell low IQ, low character individuals to have fewer children, even wards of the state and wards of international charities. But it is cool to tell productive Westerners to stop having children on behalf of the planet. Let's get rid of the people who saved billions of lives with their altruism and scientific revolutions (sarcasm)! Dysgenic supremacism cannot continue forever. At some point, individuals will become so bad off they will no longer understand the simple, fatuous slogans of cultural Marxism, then they will start breeding for worthwhile traits or their groups will become extinct.

The ruling groups think its wrong to make the world better by spreading better genes, as if things will get better as genes gradually get worse, as if the right environmental schemes will make things better, even though they haven't yet figured out such a scheme and even though doing right things contradicts their own perceived self-interest. Nevertheless, they are very, very careful about not marrying someone with genes far beneath them.

Fathers are often stripped of their children without an ethical process of law or even due process of law.

These realities must not induce fatalism. There are good things on this planet. The fight for good things is a good in itself. J.K. Rowling now finds herself facing a petition to make her mansion a home to migrants. This is a good thing. Hammer their contradictions. If she decides to invite a small, unrepresentative sample of obsequious migrants into her home and pronounce it a success, excoriate her for using small, unrepresentative sampling.

There are worse things than being socially ostracized. Multiculturalists hate whites for existing and many other specious reasons. Groveling doesn't eliminate their misplaced hatreds. They need their hatreds to give their lives purpose, to increase social status for themselves. While their expertise at many professions is abysmal, multiculturalists are experts at exploiting the self-loathing of whites. I write this so that we will find warranted confidence, so that we will not be browbeaten by the tactics and technologies of mass manipulation.

Our rights and duties do not disappear because others behave poorly or cleverly.