On the con side, the wrong type of political environmentalism now dominates, the type prone to knee-jerk, poorly reasoned actions, closing completed and uncompleted reactors, creating enormous costs. In other words, the same people bringing us militarism, financialism, and cultural Marxism.
Then we have non-working reactors in poor countries for blatant behavioral genetic reasons.
But Per joule of energy produced, coal is hundreds of times more deadly than nuclear energy. Due to radioactive elements in coal, one hundred times as much radiation enters our surroundings from a coal plant than from a nuclear plant.
Chernobyl is not the fault of the West. Western reactor designs were already far safer than Soviet designs, and the newest designs make meltdowns astronomically improbable.
But terrorism or earthquakes could strike a nuclear plant, then we would really be in trouble--but not if we build new nuclear plants in remote areas, away from earthquake zones. If attackers want to target remote nuclear plants, that is less worse than targeting packed public places.
Destroying a nuclear plant is not easy.
Most waste from nuclear plants results because we do not reprocess the waste into plutonium and reuse it. The alleged reason we do not reprocess waste is we do not want certain wonderful peoples stealing plutonium and making bombs. But plutonium is too hot for them to mess with.
If enemy nations want plutonium, they'll make their own. They don't even need uranium deposits or purchases of uranium from others to make nuclear weapons. They can make nuclear weapons from the uranium present in coal ash.
If we reprocess nuclear fuel and keep the Marxians, neoconservatives, and third wayers out of political power, the mean cost to produce nuclear energy is less than almost all other energy sources, not counting the massive pollution costs of coal. Heck, we would be better off using the nuclear energy in coal than the combustion energy in coal.
The mighty political forces of not-in-my-backyard is a political problem for nuclear energy but also for wind and solar too. But research suggests that citizens much more likely to agree with something in their vicinity if it is presented as a moral imperative.
Nuclear waste, even after reprocessing, is very dangerous for a long, long time. Yes, but paradoxically its danger makes us vigilant about containing and storing it properly. Compare that with other industries such as mining and fossil fuels, which spew millions of tons of hazardous waste into the environment.
Opposition often gets ridiculous. Years ago, I saw a proposal to fill the lands around nuclear waste sites with stone warning devices to scare future generations, so they will know that nuclear waste is near, thus, assuming future generations will be too inept to construct radiation counters, retrieve data on nuclear waste sites or even remember where nuclear sites are.
Wind and solar show promise, but on many days the sun and wind vanish. We use coal and natural gas plants as backups. The hottest days of the year are the least windy, the days when electrical energy usage spikes. Wind and solar require enormous amounts of metals and plastics which cause their own environment problems. Storage methods for wind and solar are nowhere near cost effective.
What about wave nuclear fusion and other newcomers? God bless us if they arrive. But we cannot base policy on technologies that, for now, have a too low of an expected value.
Saturday, June 11, 2016
Friday, June 10, 2016
Friday Thoughts
Why are neoconservatives so eager to tick off Putin?
Neoconservatives support worse dictatorships, including many Islamic states.
Who benefits from this? Neoconservatives have little leverage in Russia, but Russia has the ability to inflict severe pain on the the West and Israel. Russia is still the greatest nuclear power.
**********
A helpful heuristic when reading the mass media: assume their economic main conclusions are almost always wrong because they are almost always wrong in the direction of supporting rent seeking, usually Randism, neoconservatism, and third wayism, but also often in the direction of economic Marxism.
Assume their other issue main conclusions are also almost always wrong because they are wrong, often because of rent seeking and cultural Marxism. Thus, mass media treat global warming as far more important than deforestation and nonwhite overpopulation due to the malign influence of cultural Marxism and habitat destroying industries in environmental movements.
**********
I doubt the GOP will give a skybox with a banner to Al Jazeera at this year's convention.
**********
In cultures drowning in hedonistic temptations, too much time must be wasted fighting temptations and suffering the consequences of giving in, including negative externalities of others' hedonism.
**********
World War II blunders by the Western Allies (1931-1945):
Who benefits from this? Neoconservatives have little leverage in Russia, but Russia has the ability to inflict severe pain on the the West and Israel. Russia is still the greatest nuclear power.
**********
A helpful heuristic when reading the mass media: assume their economic main conclusions are almost always wrong because they are almost always wrong in the direction of supporting rent seeking, usually Randism, neoconservatism, and third wayism, but also often in the direction of economic Marxism.
Assume their other issue main conclusions are also almost always wrong because they are wrong, often because of rent seeking and cultural Marxism. Thus, mass media treat global warming as far more important than deforestation and nonwhite overpopulation due to the malign influence of cultural Marxism and habitat destroying industries in environmental movements.
**********
I doubt the GOP will give a skybox with a banner to Al Jazeera at this year's convention.
**********
In cultures drowning in hedonistic temptations, too much time must be wasted fighting temptations and suffering the consequences of giving in, including negative externalities of others' hedonism.
**********
World War II blunders by the Western Allies (1931-1945):
- failure to assassinate Hitler prewar.
- promising to defend Poland in 1939.
- lack of eugenic and pro-natal policies in decades prior to war.
- failure to use massive anti-austerity military spending to escape the Great Depression.
- slow, inadequate mobilizations in 1939, 1940, and 1941.
- infiltration by thousands of Axis and Soviet agents, treating enemy agents as if they were participants in a game. (If you demand your own citizens suffer hells, enemy agents better suffer many times the hell.)
- poor training, especially before 1943.
- overinvestment in strategic bombing.
- underinvestment in infantry, submarines, mine warfare, skip bombing, convoy protection, fighter aircraft, and medical research.
- failure to thoroughly test weapons in a variety of situations, then fanatically resisting reports of failure from front line forces, especially regarding defective torpedoes.
- over garrisoning Wake, Guam, Burma, Malaya, Shanghai, Singapore, Aleutians, Philippines, and Hong Kong.
- under garrisoning Java, Borneo, Midway, and Sumatra.
- shortages of shared sacrifice.
- underuse of teen labor.
- poor reconnaissance, especially long-range recon, and, most especially, regarding the HMS Glorious, HMAS Sydney, and the French bocage terrain.
- failure to send the best and most equipment to front line forces.
- poor strategic planning for postwar world.
- Douglas MacArthur and the Southwest Pacific campaigns.
- Ernest King and other 1942 Battle of the Atlantic failures.
- 1943-1945 Italian mainland campaign.
- Huertgen forest.
- Market Garden and the failure to use more forces to quickly capture the Scheldt estuary
- Greece, including Crete.
- failures to heed Ardennes warning signs.
- sending supplies to China.
- lack of Pigouvian taxes.
- too many immobile defenses.
- Lloyd Fredendall.
- Norway.
- lack of a good assault rifle.
- divided Pacific commands.
- general overconfidence.
- Churchill's false analogy thinking style.
- Arctic convoys.
- underpowered bazookas.
- hiring nonwhite mercenaries.
- Peleliu.
- Okinawa.
- Doolittle raid.
- Makin raid.
- Halsey's typhoons.
- Pearl Harbor.
- shooting down Yamamoto's plane, which predictably led to Japan figuring out their military codes were compromised.
- using Marines to defend Iceland.
- premature counteroffensives, including invading Guadalcanal with inadequate air and sea power.
- the USS Isabel mission off Indochina (fortunately the Japanese did not take the bait).
- resistance to better tactics, especially better fighter tactics.
- Ledo Road, Burma Road, and Alaska Highway.
- The HMS Repulse and HMS Prince of Wales debacle.
- Dieppe raid.
- inadequate lend-lease to Britain in 1940 and 1941.
A few of the many notable successes by the Western Allies during World War II: sonar, radar, hedgehogs, antibiotics, code breaking, synthetic rubber, Hugh Dowding, Raymond Spruance, Andrew Cunningham, Troy Middleton, Joseph Lawton Collins, the Battle of Britain, 100 octane aviation fuel, Rolls Royce Merlin engines.
Wednesday, June 8, 2016
More Uses and Abuses of Rhetoric
One problem for ethnoracial fact facers is the use of inaccurate euphemisms, sometimes borrowed from multiculturalism: egalitarianism, moral universalism, pathological altruism, and other terms.
When apt, we should prefer moral language over medical or psychological language. Pathological altruism should be called misplaced altruism or unethical altruism or destructive altruism.
Moral universalism should be called immoral universalism or anti-white parochialism.
The semi-euphemistic s*cial justice warrior should be replaced with AMB (anti-white mega bigotry) or something similar.
On the plus side, the euphemisms immigration and replacement are now regularly being replaced with the more accurate dysphemism invasion.
Our political opponents, who control nearly all the mass media, use inaccurate super slurs without apparent feelings of guilt: N*zi, b*got, r*cist, f*scist, sh*tlord, n*tivist, r*dneck, Islamophobe, is*lationist, white tr*sh, and white s*premacist.
Some cruder blogs on the alternative right use co*n, k*ke, and other ethnoracial super slurs. This has unintended consequences. Such blogs scare away potential converts. The mass media ban or fire critics of establishments both because because the mass media support anti-white totalitarianism and because crude criticism scares away profitable customers.
Humans have been indoctrinated by establishment institutions to be offended by nonwhite slurs but be blissfully unaware of the ad hominem nature of slurs directed at whites. It is not fair, but that's our situation. Thus, we have multiculturalists, who have spewed thousands of irrelevant ad hominem attacks, making the breathtaking claim they don't use ad hominem attacks or pretending to be civil or moderate or fair minded.
Keep pointing out contradictions. So many exist, especially multiculturalists falsely accusing other beliefs of defects multiculturalism wallows in.
Attack the imagined strengths on multiculturalism: "You think that's moral universalism? No, it's egoism mixed with xenocentrism. You guys demand that nonwealthy whites sacrifice their jobs, lives, schools, countries, freedoms, families, and neighborhoods to vibrant diversity while you guys engage in profiteering and sacrifice almost nothing."
Prefer more accurate words and phrases rather than euphemisms while avoiding ethnoracial slurs.
Keep pointing out how naive whites are about how much unwarranted hatred is felt toward whites, thanks to the onslaught of biocultural totalitarianism.
Keep mentioning that multiracial societies have become long-term disasters 100 percent of the time. Keep pushing secessions and invasion bans. Keep reminding them that bad behavior by multiculturalists rises exponentially as their numbers increase: "You think living in Detroit sucks. You ain't seen nothing yet. Wait till the likes of Ibrahim Hooper become presidents and prime ministers." One hundred percent of majority Muslim countries are totalitarian. The same goes for majority black countries.
When articles praise the projected brown and black majority rule over us, point out that that turned out to be a good thing nowhere on earth in the past.
The word nationalist should be avoided simply because it has negative connotations for most Westerners, though nationalists saved the world from Nazism, Maoism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, and economic Marxism. Most individuals don't realize that by the 1970s most of the planet was ruled by economic or cultural Marxism or both. White liberation or pan-whitism or self-determination universalism should be used instead.
Ask economists to provide thorough, well-reasoned arguments on exactly how low IQ, low skill, low productivity, low conscientiousness, high fertility, high totalitarianism, and high free riding brown and black migration is a good alternative, not some BS model full of preposterous assumptions (masses of older whites will retrain for better jobs, everybody is the same deep inside, humans are massively malleable in good directions, nonwhites won't use more political power over whites for nihilism, genocide, and rent seeking). How come these wonderful migrants didn't make their own countries wonderful?
Keep telling the truth. It's one of the few things on the nonmulticultural side.
When apt, we should prefer moral language over medical or psychological language. Pathological altruism should be called misplaced altruism or unethical altruism or destructive altruism.
Moral universalism should be called immoral universalism or anti-white parochialism.
The semi-euphemistic s*cial justice warrior should be replaced with AMB (anti-white mega bigotry) or something similar.
On the plus side, the euphemisms immigration and replacement are now regularly being replaced with the more accurate dysphemism invasion.
Our political opponents, who control nearly all the mass media, use inaccurate super slurs without apparent feelings of guilt: N*zi, b*got, r*cist, f*scist, sh*tlord, n*tivist, r*dneck, Islamophobe, is*lationist, white tr*sh, and white s*premacist.
Some cruder blogs on the alternative right use co*n, k*ke, and other ethnoracial super slurs. This has unintended consequences. Such blogs scare away potential converts. The mass media ban or fire critics of establishments both because because the mass media support anti-white totalitarianism and because crude criticism scares away profitable customers.
Humans have been indoctrinated by establishment institutions to be offended by nonwhite slurs but be blissfully unaware of the ad hominem nature of slurs directed at whites. It is not fair, but that's our situation. Thus, we have multiculturalists, who have spewed thousands of irrelevant ad hominem attacks, making the breathtaking claim they don't use ad hominem attacks or pretending to be civil or moderate or fair minded.
Keep pointing out contradictions. So many exist, especially multiculturalists falsely accusing other beliefs of defects multiculturalism wallows in.
Attack the imagined strengths on multiculturalism: "You think that's moral universalism? No, it's egoism mixed with xenocentrism. You guys demand that nonwealthy whites sacrifice their jobs, lives, schools, countries, freedoms, families, and neighborhoods to vibrant diversity while you guys engage in profiteering and sacrifice almost nothing."
Prefer more accurate words and phrases rather than euphemisms while avoiding ethnoracial slurs.
Keep pointing out how naive whites are about how much unwarranted hatred is felt toward whites, thanks to the onslaught of biocultural totalitarianism.
Keep mentioning that multiracial societies have become long-term disasters 100 percent of the time. Keep pushing secessions and invasion bans. Keep reminding them that bad behavior by multiculturalists rises exponentially as their numbers increase: "You think living in Detroit sucks. You ain't seen nothing yet. Wait till the likes of Ibrahim Hooper become presidents and prime ministers." One hundred percent of majority Muslim countries are totalitarian. The same goes for majority black countries.
When articles praise the projected brown and black majority rule over us, point out that that turned out to be a good thing nowhere on earth in the past.
The word nationalist should be avoided simply because it has negative connotations for most Westerners, though nationalists saved the world from Nazism, Maoism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, and economic Marxism. Most individuals don't realize that by the 1970s most of the planet was ruled by economic or cultural Marxism or both. White liberation or pan-whitism or self-determination universalism should be used instead.
Ask economists to provide thorough, well-reasoned arguments on exactly how low IQ, low skill, low productivity, low conscientiousness, high fertility, high totalitarianism, and high free riding brown and black migration is a good alternative, not some BS model full of preposterous assumptions (masses of older whites will retrain for better jobs, everybody is the same deep inside, humans are massively malleable in good directions, nonwhites won't use more political power over whites for nihilism, genocide, and rent seeking). How come these wonderful migrants didn't make their own countries wonderful?
Keep telling the truth. It's one of the few things on the nonmulticultural side.
To Get a Gig in Mass Media Opinion Making:
- Support some establishment. Even calling the Saudi establishment "ally" and "moderate," makes you eligible. Walter Duranty won a Pulitzer Prize for fawning over the Soviet establishment.
- Feign support for general interests.
- Be narrative based, devoted to official myths, not evidence based. You must have enough rhetorical chops to keep ordinary readers from noticing your contradictions. You must be able to say you support the establishment's buzzwords and catch phrases without puking or diabolically cackling. You never apologize for having been wrong on thousands of specific issues. You focus on the few issues you are semi-right about while ignoring or relying on arbitrary rules for other issues.
Sunday, June 5, 2016
To Young Adults Thinking About Joining Militaries
Graduation season is here. Military recruiters are in high gear but before you join remember a few ideas.
You grew up in a world of political fallacies. It wasn't your fault. But it is your fault if you don't take control of your life now. The consequences of decisions you make after graduation will reverberate for the rest of your life.
All the establishments around the world do not tell the truth. Few establishment individuals care about your well-being. If you are lucky, your establishments merely devote themselves to parasitism. If you are unlucky, as in the West, your establishments devote themselves to treason plus parasitism.
Military recruiters tell fallacies at rates rivaling politicians. Multitudes of service personnel wish they could legally maim their ex-recruiters. Public schools teach gullibility to whites. But gullibility gets severely punished in the adult world.
(Many anti-establishment ideologies also fail to tell the truth. Finding evidence and accurately weighing that evidence is difficult.)
Every media depiction of war is to some extent cartoonish. Even the most realistic movie cannot simulate war. If movies did so, audiences would exit theatres with dead relatives and serious, chronic illnesses. Most audiences cannot imagine what real war is like.
And most audiences cannot imagine what serious, chronic illnesses are like.
Establishments inculcate beliefs that if enemies act evil, then the establishments must be good. But most shooting wars among contemporary states are battles of establishment evils versus other evils. The psychological temptation to pick sides in unjust wars is great, so your will must be greater.
Maybe you plan to join a military to fight entrenched moral and financial corruption within the military. Maybe you want to learn survival skills. Maybe you want to fight cultural Marxism within militaries. Good for you. But remember, militaries are highly skilled at direct and corrosive indoctrinations. Many a corruption fighter has found himself corrupted with Potomac fever or other immoral fevers several years down the road. Contemporary militaries promote conformity, networking, and vapid, vicious "command presence."
If bravado fills you and you think you can accomplish something by killing bad guys in third world countries, remember that most adults in those countries practice cultural Marxism or worse. Someone similar will replace them. And they add over 50 million adults per year. Getting yourself killed or wounded does more harm to yourself and the West than to bad guys.
The occupation rulers of China, Russia, and the West all practice variants of egoism, militarism, and cultural Marxism. Do you have so little respect for your individual worth that you are willing to die for any form of egoism, militarism, and cultural Marxism?
Some wars should be fought. But most of today's just wars require the hard work of non-violent actions against demographic and ideological conquest, fighting for ethnoracial self-determination.
You grew up in a world of political fallacies. It wasn't your fault. But it is your fault if you don't take control of your life now. The consequences of decisions you make after graduation will reverberate for the rest of your life.
All the establishments around the world do not tell the truth. Few establishment individuals care about your well-being. If you are lucky, your establishments merely devote themselves to parasitism. If you are unlucky, as in the West, your establishments devote themselves to treason plus parasitism.
Military recruiters tell fallacies at rates rivaling politicians. Multitudes of service personnel wish they could legally maim their ex-recruiters. Public schools teach gullibility to whites. But gullibility gets severely punished in the adult world.
(Many anti-establishment ideologies also fail to tell the truth. Finding evidence and accurately weighing that evidence is difficult.)
Every media depiction of war is to some extent cartoonish. Even the most realistic movie cannot simulate war. If movies did so, audiences would exit theatres with dead relatives and serious, chronic illnesses. Most audiences cannot imagine what real war is like.
And most audiences cannot imagine what serious, chronic illnesses are like.
Establishments inculcate beliefs that if enemies act evil, then the establishments must be good. But most shooting wars among contemporary states are battles of establishment evils versus other evils. The psychological temptation to pick sides in unjust wars is great, so your will must be greater.
Maybe you plan to join a military to fight entrenched moral and financial corruption within the military. Maybe you want to learn survival skills. Maybe you want to fight cultural Marxism within militaries. Good for you. But remember, militaries are highly skilled at direct and corrosive indoctrinations. Many a corruption fighter has found himself corrupted with Potomac fever or other immoral fevers several years down the road. Contemporary militaries promote conformity, networking, and vapid, vicious "command presence."
If bravado fills you and you think you can accomplish something by killing bad guys in third world countries, remember that most adults in those countries practice cultural Marxism or worse. Someone similar will replace them. And they add over 50 million adults per year. Getting yourself killed or wounded does more harm to yourself and the West than to bad guys.
The occupation rulers of China, Russia, and the West all practice variants of egoism, militarism, and cultural Marxism. Do you have so little respect for your individual worth that you are willing to die for any form of egoism, militarism, and cultural Marxism?
Some wars should be fought. But most of today's just wars require the hard work of non-violent actions against demographic and ideological conquest, fighting for ethnoracial self-determination.
Saturday, June 4, 2016
Establishment Science Writing
I laugh when writers call some behavioral genetics pseudoscience or scientific racism. They're throwing BS at a wall, hoping it will stick.
Then I get sad because mass media consumers believe establishment BS. "Oh, famous writer X, with no expertise in behavioral genetics, says behavioral genetics is BS. I guess I'll believe him."
Move along. Nothing to see here. Watch the world burn.
Then I get sad because mass media consumers believe establishment BS. "Oh, famous writer X, with no expertise in behavioral genetics, says behavioral genetics is BS. I guess I'll believe him."
Move along. Nothing to see here. Watch the world burn.
Thursday, June 2, 2016
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump
Paul Krugman claims, "You may dislike Hillary Clinton [irrelevant], you may disagree sharply with her policies [irrelevant], but she and the people around her do know their facts [false]."
Here is Clinton's platform. Most of it is unsupported by evidence, that is, not facts.
This year's federal election, like every federal election for over half a century, will be a battle of wrong versus wronger.
Donald Trump is fooling us. He is already backtracking. His presidency would be a mixture of egoism, neoconservatism, and destructive unpredictability.
If you want to know your real values, look at your receipts. If you want to know what politicians think, follow the money and look at who they meet with in private. Any politician who meets in private with Sheldon Adelson should be avoided.
These people have track records, and the track records are despicable.
The alternative right is taking a huge risk in supporting Trump. Trump will produce terrible results. And the establishments will gleefully bash the alternative right for Trump's failings. At best, Trump is beneficial as a candidate for shifting the Overton Window. As an actual politician, Trump will shift the Overton Window in the wrong direction.
Considering the disastrous bait-and-switch, divide-and-rule records of desperate solution rulers over the past century, you'd think the alternative right would be more careful about picking politicians, not falling for an egoism promising relief from establishment totalitarianism.
The time is not ripe in America. Let the establishments screw up some more. Let's form our own alternative villages. Maybe the American Freedom Party or some other party will find some decent candidates in the future. If not, the alternative villages can attract others by setting shining examples, growing into shining cities.
Here is Clinton's platform. Most of it is unsupported by evidence, that is, not facts.
This year's federal election, like every federal election for over half a century, will be a battle of wrong versus wronger.
Donald Trump is fooling us. He is already backtracking. His presidency would be a mixture of egoism, neoconservatism, and destructive unpredictability.
If you want to know your real values, look at your receipts. If you want to know what politicians think, follow the money and look at who they meet with in private. Any politician who meets in private with Sheldon Adelson should be avoided.
These people have track records, and the track records are despicable.
The alternative right is taking a huge risk in supporting Trump. Trump will produce terrible results. And the establishments will gleefully bash the alternative right for Trump's failings. At best, Trump is beneficial as a candidate for shifting the Overton Window. As an actual politician, Trump will shift the Overton Window in the wrong direction.
Considering the disastrous bait-and-switch, divide-and-rule records of desperate solution rulers over the past century, you'd think the alternative right would be more careful about picking politicians, not falling for an egoism promising relief from establishment totalitarianism.
The time is not ripe in America. Let the establishments screw up some more. Let's form our own alternative villages. Maybe the American Freedom Party or some other party will find some decent candidates in the future. If not, the alternative villages can attract others by setting shining examples, growing into shining cities.
Tuesday, May 31, 2016
Genetic and Environmental Determinism Seldom Exist
Despite the straw person attacks, few strict followers of genetic or environmental determinism exist. Ethnoracial fact facers mostly care both about genes and the malign environmental influences of cultural Marxism.
Multiculturalists care about genetic issues related to health and trivial traits. Anti-genetic fanaticism pours out of multiculturalists mainly when someone starts making well-reasoned arguments about behavioral genetics.
Multiculturalists care about genetic issues related to health and trivial traits. Anti-genetic fanaticism pours out of multiculturalists mainly when someone starts making well-reasoned arguments about behavioral genetics.
Monday, May 30, 2016
Third Wayism Versus Contemporary Progressivism: a Guide for the Suplexed
When comparing the similarities and differences among Third Wayisms (Hillary Clinton, Tony Blair, Steve Israel, John Kerry, Robert Rubin, Angela Merkel, Haim Saban, David Axelrod) and Contemporary Progressivisms (Bernie Sanders, Cornel West, Tim Wise, Raúl Grijalva, Al Sharpton, Keith Ellison) I will rely on the record of past behaviors, not the falsehoods in platforms.
Third Wayism: tolerates or stealthily supports neoconservatism.
Contemporary Progressivism: opposes neoconservatism, except the cultural Marxism in neoconservatism.
Third Wayism: tolerates almost no dissent on cultural and ethnoracial issues, immune to well-reasoned ethnoracial arguments.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: supports Wall Street.
Contemporary Progressivism: opposes Wall Street but sometimes in hamfisted ways.
Third Wayism: supports legalized bribery.
Contemporary Progressivism: opposes legalized bribery, except when good for the cause.
Third Wayism: supports militarism against Infidels, Northern Eurasians, and opponents of Sunni Gulf States.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports militarism against Infidels and Northern Eurasians.
Third Wayism: supports cash-for-clunkers, cap-and-trade, and other pro-rich schemes on environmental issues.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports bans, personal responsibility, government investments, or rarely, Pigouvian taxes on environmental issues.
Third Wayism: supports rule by an unaccountable, global ruling class.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports rule by a different unaccountable, global ruling class.
Third Wayism: pretends to support democracy.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: supports dysgenic mass destruction.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: supports small increases in the minimum wage during election years, which if passed, are eroded by inflation.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports $15 per hour minimum wage, welfare for any applicant, universal childcare funding, paid family leave, and paid vacations.
Third Wayism: supports small increases in taxes.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports large tax increases on the wealthy.
Third Wayism: pro-austerity and pro-quantitative easing.
Contemporary Progressivism: anti-austerity.
Third Wayism: ridicules straw person opponents to promote own thoughts of superiority.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: encourages individuals to attend colleges and acquire debts while being indoctrinated.
Contemporary Progressivism: free public college indoctrination, plus tuition debt jubilee.
Third Wayism: uses trade agreements to support global rule and redistribution to the top.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports fair trade.
Third Wayism: supports stealth affirmative action quotas more than explicit quotas.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports explicit and de facto affirmative actions quotas.
Third Wayism: supports genocide of whites.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: supports tokenistic infrastructure projects.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports large increases in infrastructure spending, often misspending.
Third Wayism: supports public sector unions.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports most unions.
Third Wayism: supports the Affordable Care Act.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports Medicare for all or a Canadian style health system.
Third Wayism: supports freedom of association, except for whites and any other perceived enemies.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: supports stealth opening of borders in white majority countries.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports explicit open borders in white majority countries.
How do you pay for the above with billions of aggressive, low productivity welfare and affirmative action seeking migrants and their descendants?
Third Wayism: tolerates or stealthily supports neoconservatism.
Contemporary Progressivism: opposes neoconservatism, except the cultural Marxism in neoconservatism.
Third Wayism: tolerates almost no dissent on cultural and ethnoracial issues, immune to well-reasoned ethnoracial arguments.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: supports Wall Street.
Contemporary Progressivism: opposes Wall Street but sometimes in hamfisted ways.
Third Wayism: supports legalized bribery.
Contemporary Progressivism: opposes legalized bribery, except when good for the cause.
Third Wayism: supports militarism against Infidels, Northern Eurasians, and opponents of Sunni Gulf States.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports militarism against Infidels and Northern Eurasians.
Third Wayism: supports cash-for-clunkers, cap-and-trade, and other pro-rich schemes on environmental issues.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports bans, personal responsibility, government investments, or rarely, Pigouvian taxes on environmental issues.
Third Wayism: supports rule by an unaccountable, global ruling class.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports rule by a different unaccountable, global ruling class.
Third Wayism: pretends to support democracy.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: supports dysgenic mass destruction.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: supports small increases in the minimum wage during election years, which if passed, are eroded by inflation.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports $15 per hour minimum wage, welfare for any applicant, universal childcare funding, paid family leave, and paid vacations.
Third Wayism: supports small increases in taxes.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports large tax increases on the wealthy.
Third Wayism: pro-austerity and pro-quantitative easing.
Contemporary Progressivism: anti-austerity.
Third Wayism: ridicules straw person opponents to promote own thoughts of superiority.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: encourages individuals to attend colleges and acquire debts while being indoctrinated.
Contemporary Progressivism: free public college indoctrination, plus tuition debt jubilee.
Third Wayism: uses trade agreements to support global rule and redistribution to the top.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports fair trade.
Third Wayism: supports stealth affirmative action quotas more than explicit quotas.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports explicit and de facto affirmative actions quotas.
Third Wayism: supports genocide of whites.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: supports tokenistic infrastructure projects.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports large increases in infrastructure spending, often misspending.
Third Wayism: supports public sector unions.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports most unions.
Third Wayism: supports the Affordable Care Act.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports Medicare for all or a Canadian style health system.
Third Wayism: supports freedom of association, except for whites and any other perceived enemies.
Contemporary Progressivism: same.
Third Wayism: supports stealth opening of borders in white majority countries.
Contemporary Progressivism: supports explicit open borders in white majority countries.
How do you pay for the above with billions of aggressive, low productivity welfare and affirmative action seeking migrants and their descendants?
Genocidal Contradictions
Multiculturalists claim to oppose cultural and genetic genocide. Yet the peoples most at risk of cultural or genetic genocides or are the peoples multiculturalists and their allies actively try to genocide--whites, Copts, Mandeans, Tibetans, Yezidis, etc.
The peoples least at risk of genocide--Jews, Africans, Hispanics, Muslim Arabs, and many Asians--are the protected peoples and the peoples working hardest to genocide whites.
As on most ethnoracial other issues, multiculturalists' beliefs about genocide are riddled with despicable self-contradictions. And I doubt most multiculturalists have the genetic and cultural wherewithal to notice or fix their wrongs. Their causes matter more to them than noticing or fixing contradictions.
The peoples least at risk of genocide--Jews, Africans, Hispanics, Muslim Arabs, and many Asians--are the protected peoples and the peoples working hardest to genocide whites.
As on most ethnoracial other issues, multiculturalists' beliefs about genocide are riddled with despicable self-contradictions. And I doubt most multiculturalists have the genetic and cultural wherewithal to notice or fix their wrongs. Their causes matter more to them than noticing or fixing contradictions.
Thursday, May 26, 2016
The Missing Truths
Most multiculturalists tell the truth most of the time. The problem is that their truths are irrelevant or otherwise fallacious, including straw person attacks, especially errors of omission. Other irrelevancies include appeals to origins, novelty, popularity, momentum, and most ad hominem attacks.
Some reasoning errors result from historical causal factors. A causal factor is a factor that changes the probability of thing(s) occurring. The legacy of slavery is a causal factor. It increased probabilities of various African-American behaviors, mainly because without slavery most African-Americans would not be in America. But the legacy of slavery is seldom an ethically important causal factor today. Nearly all of it cannot be undone. A big current legacy of slavery is unethical white guilt, not the sort of legacy multiculturalists mention.
On another side, manorial feudalism was a causal factor. But manorial feudalism cannot be undone and manorial feudalism is not coming back. Manorial feudalism is ethically unimportant now.
Multitudes of currently unimportant factors changed history. Everything from super volcanos to the acts of powerful individuals. In general, historical causal factors are seldom ethically important today, except when used in studies to make prescriptions, explain current actions, and predict future actions.
Other historical factors, the MAOA gene variants, for example, are with us today and their frequencies can and should be changed. They are very, very important.
In addition to irrelevancies, the other major category of "true fallacy," is the small sample fallacy. Mass media and cultural Marxian wars against whites sometimes rely on small sample fallacies, often cases of police attacks on African-Americans. But nonmulticulturalists know the reality that African-Americans are dozens of times more likely to commit stranger-on-stranger, interracial assaults. And those assaults will rise exponentially as whites become weaker and less numerous, with massive support from Muslims, Asians, and Hispanics.
In mass media and cultural Marxism:
1. It's true that small sample fallacy X happened.
2. Therefore white guilt and holy war against whites.
3. Mass destruction and anti-white genocide.
4. Profit.
Every establishment political ideology is cover for rent seeking.
Other types of true fallacies include circular claims, misleading stats, and unrepresentative sampling.
Sometimes multiculturalists make good points, but then try to use the good points to support atrocious conclusions, often because they know almost nothing about alternative prescriptions. No matter the situation, they see more establishmentism and cultural Marxism as solutions. The fixation on prescribing more wrongs as solutions is a feature of all types of totalitarianism. Their straw person attacks also often result from the fact they know almost nothing about the alternative right and other political alternatives.
When multiculturalists make outright false claims, multiculturalists still think they are telling the truth, primarily because humans tend to believe the truth is what they hear first and most often. And multiculturalists dominate nearly all the mass media. Groupthink, avoidance of ostracization, and absence of cognitive dissonance add to the likelihoods of telling falsehoods.
Some reasoning errors result from historical causal factors. A causal factor is a factor that changes the probability of thing(s) occurring. The legacy of slavery is a causal factor. It increased probabilities of various African-American behaviors, mainly because without slavery most African-Americans would not be in America. But the legacy of slavery is seldom an ethically important causal factor today. Nearly all of it cannot be undone. A big current legacy of slavery is unethical white guilt, not the sort of legacy multiculturalists mention.
On another side, manorial feudalism was a causal factor. But manorial feudalism cannot be undone and manorial feudalism is not coming back. Manorial feudalism is ethically unimportant now.
Multitudes of currently unimportant factors changed history. Everything from super volcanos to the acts of powerful individuals. In general, historical causal factors are seldom ethically important today, except when used in studies to make prescriptions, explain current actions, and predict future actions.
Other historical factors, the MAOA gene variants, for example, are with us today and their frequencies can and should be changed. They are very, very important.
In addition to irrelevancies, the other major category of "true fallacy," is the small sample fallacy. Mass media and cultural Marxian wars against whites sometimes rely on small sample fallacies, often cases of police attacks on African-Americans. But nonmulticulturalists know the reality that African-Americans are dozens of times more likely to commit stranger-on-stranger, interracial assaults. And those assaults will rise exponentially as whites become weaker and less numerous, with massive support from Muslims, Asians, and Hispanics.
In mass media and cultural Marxism:
1. It's true that small sample fallacy X happened.
2. Therefore white guilt and holy war against whites.
3. Mass destruction and anti-white genocide.
4. Profit.
Every establishment political ideology is cover for rent seeking.
Other types of true fallacies include circular claims, misleading stats, and unrepresentative sampling.
Sometimes multiculturalists make good points, but then try to use the good points to support atrocious conclusions, often because they know almost nothing about alternative prescriptions. No matter the situation, they see more establishmentism and cultural Marxism as solutions. The fixation on prescribing more wrongs as solutions is a feature of all types of totalitarianism. Their straw person attacks also often result from the fact they know almost nothing about the alternative right and other political alternatives.
When multiculturalists make outright false claims, multiculturalists still think they are telling the truth, primarily because humans tend to believe the truth is what they hear first and most often. And multiculturalists dominate nearly all the mass media. Groupthink, avoidance of ostracization, and absence of cognitive dissonance add to the likelihoods of telling falsehoods.
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
Gene Genie: Don't Let Yourself Go
Let's imagine person X with the world's best genes for ethical character. Person X shares 99.5 percent of her genes with person Y and 99 percent of her genes with person Z. But X shares nearly all her best character genes with Z while Y has two mutations that have a high probability of causing major evils.
By ethical character, I do not mean individuals prone to misplaced altruism and establishment respectable egoism. I do not mean those the mass media worship. I mean someone who reasons well and acts on well-reasoned ethical conclusions.
Person X would be right to help Z reproduce, before helping Y reproduce, though she shares more genes with Y, all else being equal. Genes for earlobes and other non-moral traits should not matter to us, except when they affect health. In short, we should care most about health and character related genes when making reproductive decisions, not overall genetic similarity of junk genes and other unimportant genes.
If high IQs make individuals more ethical, then we should support IQ eugenics for ethical reasons. If it is someday proven that genotypic IQs above 150 cause sufficient harms or insufficient benefits, then we should reduce the birth rates of above 150 IQ individuals.
Some individuals might select for genes related to beauty and other traits, but there is no moral imperative for doing so. In many cases, selection for non-moral traits could lead to mutually destructive status competitions, for example, producing millions of extra tall athletes, having health problems, competing for a handful of professional sports jobs.
We would be more right to help some peaceful cetaceans than nonwhites waging demographic and other unconventional wars against whites, though we share more genes with nonwhites than cetaceans.
The above is not an argument for whites to breed with nonwhites. Why? Biracial children have more health and behavior problems. Mixed race children adopt the dominant culture of anti-white bigotry. Mixed race children cause massive harms to their white parents and whites in general. They often make a white parent's life living hell. They're not bundles of joy when they become teenagers. Biracial children do not respect the difficult task of improving Western Civilization. Every land dominated by biracial individuals is or was a divide-and-rule disaster. Parents are more cruel to mixed race children once the warm, fuzzy multicultural superiority feelings wear off. Parents care about children in proportion to how closely related the children are to the parents. Mixed race children, having black fathers, are born out of wedlock and abandoned by their fathers overwhelmingly often.
And it is no argument for nonwhite immigration, since almost all conscious, nonwhite adults support anti-white totalitarianism, plus multiracial states are almost always long-term disasters.
White women can almost always find a healthy, higher character white man or sperm sample to breed with if they make an honest effort to do so. White men without decent white women should not breed in Western countries or should do so by sperm donation. In most cases, the problem is lack of effort. Most whites who make an good effort to interact with thousands of other whites, and ask many whites on dates, will find decent to excellent spouses.
What about rights? A legal right to miscegenation exists in many countries. That does not make it a moral right. No moral right to cause self and others undeserved harms exists. A key point about well-reasoned moral claims is that they override other claims. For example, saving a good life overrides the right to make a good painting.
By ethical character, I do not mean individuals prone to misplaced altruism and establishment respectable egoism. I do not mean those the mass media worship. I mean someone who reasons well and acts on well-reasoned ethical conclusions.
Person X would be right to help Z reproduce, before helping Y reproduce, though she shares more genes with Y, all else being equal. Genes for earlobes and other non-moral traits should not matter to us, except when they affect health. In short, we should care most about health and character related genes when making reproductive decisions, not overall genetic similarity of junk genes and other unimportant genes.
If high IQs make individuals more ethical, then we should support IQ eugenics for ethical reasons. If it is someday proven that genotypic IQs above 150 cause sufficient harms or insufficient benefits, then we should reduce the birth rates of above 150 IQ individuals.
Some individuals might select for genes related to beauty and other traits, but there is no moral imperative for doing so. In many cases, selection for non-moral traits could lead to mutually destructive status competitions, for example, producing millions of extra tall athletes, having health problems, competing for a handful of professional sports jobs.
We would be more right to help some peaceful cetaceans than nonwhites waging demographic and other unconventional wars against whites, though we share more genes with nonwhites than cetaceans.
The above is not an argument for whites to breed with nonwhites. Why? Biracial children have more health and behavior problems. Mixed race children adopt the dominant culture of anti-white bigotry. Mixed race children cause massive harms to their white parents and whites in general. They often make a white parent's life living hell. They're not bundles of joy when they become teenagers. Biracial children do not respect the difficult task of improving Western Civilization. Every land dominated by biracial individuals is or was a divide-and-rule disaster. Parents are more cruel to mixed race children once the warm, fuzzy multicultural superiority feelings wear off. Parents care about children in proportion to how closely related the children are to the parents. Mixed race children, having black fathers, are born out of wedlock and abandoned by their fathers overwhelmingly often.
And it is no argument for nonwhite immigration, since almost all conscious, nonwhite adults support anti-white totalitarianism, plus multiracial states are almost always long-term disasters.
White women can almost always find a healthy, higher character white man or sperm sample to breed with if they make an honest effort to do so. White men without decent white women should not breed in Western countries or should do so by sperm donation. In most cases, the problem is lack of effort. Most whites who make an good effort to interact with thousands of other whites, and ask many whites on dates, will find decent to excellent spouses.
What about rights? A legal right to miscegenation exists in many countries. That does not make it a moral right. No moral right to cause self and others undeserved harms exists. A key point about well-reasoned moral claims is that they override other claims. For example, saving a good life overrides the right to make a good painting.
Monday, May 23, 2016
Status and Cultural Marxism
More than the political system is threatened by inconvenient facts. Most respected individuals in contemporary societies have been exposed for engaging in evils and unmitigated buffoonery. How do we not laugh at every establishment celebrity?
In the late twentieth century and early twenty-first century, humans gained status by hundreds of methods, including:
Alternative righters prefer prepping over consumer junk. Arbitrary sports teams don't matter much when your country is being conquered and subjugated by unconventional warfare. Nonmulticulturalists aren't fooled by assertions of noble savagery. Coolness is little more than banal shtick. Most white collar jobs are drudgery. Prestigious universities charge students massive sums to be indoctrinated. Establishment writings deserve derision. Xenocentrism is increasingly and correctly seen as vice, not virtue.
Almost any white adult tainted by unrepented cultural Marxism gets the low status treatment from the alternative right.
Establishmentism relies on the folk psychology of special people, cultivating the impression that establishment individuals are wiser and better than other humans. Unfortunately, for the establishments, nonmulticulturalists know quite a bit about psychology and philosophy, often more than psychologists, philosophers, and establishment writers, at least on the important issues.
In the 1960s and 1970s, baby boomers mocked traditional sources of status, but were co-opted for various reasons, including the fact that the fashionable utopian attempts were worse than establishment utopianism.
Nonmulticulturalists must channel rising skepticism about establishments into something better. We must not fall for those who sell out or pursue their own evils.
In part, opposition to cultural Marxism represents a partial return to acquiring status for moral actions. In some prior societies, you gained status by being a dedicated mother or father to several children. You gained status when each hand washed the other. You gained status for telling a larger portion of the truth. Even if you knew little about logic, you weren't easily distracted or intimidated by demonization from outgroups.
This is likely to return.
Multiculturalists are already apoplectic about the fact that their demonization tactics aren't working as well as they once did.
In the late twentieth century and early twenty-first century, humans gained status by hundreds of methods, including:
- having expensive consumer junk.
- being athletic in team sports or at least cheering for the same teams as peers.
- being nonwhite.
- being cool.
- being famous.
- having a white collar job.
- having a degree from a prestigious university.
- practicing popular pedantry.
- practicing egoism mixed with xenocentrism if white ("virtue" signaling).
Alternative righters prefer prepping over consumer junk. Arbitrary sports teams don't matter much when your country is being conquered and subjugated by unconventional warfare. Nonmulticulturalists aren't fooled by assertions of noble savagery. Coolness is little more than banal shtick. Most white collar jobs are drudgery. Prestigious universities charge students massive sums to be indoctrinated. Establishment writings deserve derision. Xenocentrism is increasingly and correctly seen as vice, not virtue.
Almost any white adult tainted by unrepented cultural Marxism gets the low status treatment from the alternative right.
Establishmentism relies on the folk psychology of special people, cultivating the impression that establishment individuals are wiser and better than other humans. Unfortunately, for the establishments, nonmulticulturalists know quite a bit about psychology and philosophy, often more than psychologists, philosophers, and establishment writers, at least on the important issues.
In the 1960s and 1970s, baby boomers mocked traditional sources of status, but were co-opted for various reasons, including the fact that the fashionable utopian attempts were worse than establishment utopianism.
Nonmulticulturalists must channel rising skepticism about establishments into something better. We must not fall for those who sell out or pursue their own evils.
In part, opposition to cultural Marxism represents a partial return to acquiring status for moral actions. In some prior societies, you gained status by being a dedicated mother or father to several children. You gained status when each hand washed the other. You gained status for telling a larger portion of the truth. Even if you knew little about logic, you weren't easily distracted or intimidated by demonization from outgroups.
This is likely to return.
Multiculturalists are already apoplectic about the fact that their demonization tactics aren't working as well as they once did.
Thursday, May 19, 2016
Marc Mezvinsky, Wall Street, and the Clintons
The hedge fund of Chelsea Clinton's husband, Marc Mezvinsky, collapsed after making a preposterous bet that Greece's economy would rebound in the face of grinding austerity.
The above suggests one of the following is likely:
Now Hillary is even more psychologically in debt to Wall Street after seeing her Wall Street partners lose with her son-in-law. "I gave your son-in-law my money, and I didn't even get a t-shirt." Lloyd Blankfein doesn't invest money with a neophyte hedge fund for fun and games. The Clintons have a history of rewarding donors.
The above suggests one of the following is likely:
- Bill or Hillary (or both) had information that Greece would get an adequate rescue, which reached Chelsea's husband, but the rescue fell apart.
- Mezvinsky believes in the cleansing powers of austerity for reasons that have nothing to do with the Clintons.
- Bill or Hillary (or both) believe in the cleansing powers of austerity, which they imparted to Chelsea's husband.
Now Hillary is even more psychologically in debt to Wall Street after seeing her Wall Street partners lose with her son-in-law. "I gave your son-in-law my money, and I didn't even get a t-shirt." Lloyd Blankfein doesn't invest money with a neophyte hedge fund for fun and games. The Clintons have a history of rewarding donors.
Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Introducing Alternatives to a Smart Individual
Let's imagine you know a bookish person starting to show doubts about her beloved cultural Marxism. Like most bookish individuals, she thinks she's open minded. She regards intellectual outgroups with kneejerk contempt while viewing herself as tolerant. She thinks she has most of the moral universe figured out.
But you and I know better than that. We know she believes based on manipulation. She is far from being who she thinks she is.
How should you go about introducing her to nonmulticulturalism? You don't want to scare her away with poorly reasoned rants.
If she wants books, I would suggest The Nurture Assumption by Judith Rich Harris first, then Race, Evolution, and Behavior by JP Rushton, then Future Human Evolution by John Glad.
If her fanaticism hasn't yet overpowered her, and sent her fleeing, then I would introduce her to some edgier stuff: The Culture of Critique by Kevin MacDonald and Gregory Hood's upcoming book.
If her fanaticism hasn't yet overpowered her, and sent her fleeing, then I would introduce her to some edgier stuff: The Culture of Critique by Kevin MacDonald and Gregory Hood's upcoming book.
Maybe she prefers internet articles. I would start with the Judith Rich Harris homepage, then Cousin Marriage Conundrum by Steve Sailer. Most Americans despise the Iraq War by now, so she won't need to move her soul far. I'd continue with this book review, then some stuff by JP Rushton, plus Thomas Jackson's archives, then Gregory Hood's archives here and here, then Amren print archives, then some resources on secessions.
At some point, she might realize she has been told too many political lies via the mass media.
Let's hope that this realization motivates her. Let's hope she doesn't get bogged down in genetic infotainment. Let's hope she continues to move toward supporting ethnoracial self-determination.
It's time for her to grow.
Sunday, May 15, 2016
Public Intellectuals
Greg Cochran devoted a post to naming "ideal" public intellectuals. Note that Cochran doesn't name anyone in his original post, which hints at what Cochran thinks of other public intellectuals. Many commenters nominated intellectuals having mediocre to atrocious writings. Only a few commenters named Cochran while others named intellectuals with inferior track records to Cochran.
I doubt Cochran was fishing for compliments, but the results should irk him.
I doubt Cochran was fishing for compliments, but the results should irk him.
Thursday, May 12, 2016
The Future We Make
The short, charitable version of the multicultural manifesto: all should be ethically judged on the content of their characters, nothing else.
We live a planet with more than three billion nonwhite adults. How many nonwhite adults oppose anti-white bigotry: Frank Salter, Jewamongyou, and some others, probably totalling fewer than 1,000. Even Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams act more multicultural than not.
Nearly all the remainder, no matter how kind they act on the surface, believe in freedom of association for nonwhites but not whites, migrant invasions of white nations but not nonwhite nations, blood guilt for whites but not nonwhites, and multitudes of other contradictory ideas, not to mention the piles of other fallacious rhetoric spouting from cultural Marxism.
So, apparently, nearly all nonwhites find it nearly impossible to treat whites as full humans. How can we have multiracial societies based on individuals being judged by the content of their characters when nearly all nonwhites refuse to do so? Why try to create said societies when nearly all nonwhites are genetically and culturally predisposed to poor character on ethnoracial issues?
Future genetic engineering might not help matters among nonwhites. Nonwhite parents will likely engineer their children for higher IQs, increased familism, and increased egoism. They don't want their children acting white.
The love and tolerance rhetoric has made almost no dent among nonwhites. Such rhetoric mostly makes whites more gullible and easier to exploit.
Nonwhites have made their own dysgenic and totalitarian choices. Let them suffer the consequences of their own choices. They will not reform themselves when whites keep rewarding them for evil actions. And whites will not reform themselves when they keep supporting multicultural, divide-and-screw rulers.
Millions of white children and future generations depend on the decisions we make now.
We live a planet with more than three billion nonwhite adults. How many nonwhite adults oppose anti-white bigotry: Frank Salter, Jewamongyou, and some others, probably totalling fewer than 1,000. Even Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams act more multicultural than not.
Nearly all the remainder, no matter how kind they act on the surface, believe in freedom of association for nonwhites but not whites, migrant invasions of white nations but not nonwhite nations, blood guilt for whites but not nonwhites, and multitudes of other contradictory ideas, not to mention the piles of other fallacious rhetoric spouting from cultural Marxism.
So, apparently, nearly all nonwhites find it nearly impossible to treat whites as full humans. How can we have multiracial societies based on individuals being judged by the content of their characters when nearly all nonwhites refuse to do so? Why try to create said societies when nearly all nonwhites are genetically and culturally predisposed to poor character on ethnoracial issues?
Future genetic engineering might not help matters among nonwhites. Nonwhite parents will likely engineer their children for higher IQs, increased familism, and increased egoism. They don't want their children acting white.
The love and tolerance rhetoric has made almost no dent among nonwhites. Such rhetoric mostly makes whites more gullible and easier to exploit.
Nonwhites have made their own dysgenic and totalitarian choices. Let them suffer the consequences of their own choices. They will not reform themselves when whites keep rewarding them for evil actions. And whites will not reform themselves when they keep supporting multicultural, divide-and-screw rulers.
Millions of white children and future generations depend on the decisions we make now.
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
Two for Tea and Eugenics for Thee
All large societies have no fertility alternatives but to practice eugenics or dysgenics (or both), whether the societies realize it.
Some examples of hidden eugenics or dysgenics:
Pensions: a method for childfree, farsighted individuals to obtain care from others in old age while avoiding the costs of childrearing themselves. In the past, adult children provided for their elderly parents.
Seniority based pay: makes children more expensive for young individuals. Harmful mutations increase with age. Older parents pass on more harmful mutations. Female fertility plummets past age 28, affecting the total fertility rate of women postponing childbirth.
Welfare: rewards low IQ, low character individuals for having more children.
Migration: low IQ or low character (or both) nonwhites migrate to the West.
Reckless Wars: altruists often die on behalf of those genetically predisposed to egoism. The eugenic or dysgenic effects vary widely depending on who volunteers or gets drafted or makes the decisions.
Austerity: uncertainty, lower incomes, and postponement of childbirth.
Cultural Marxism: pressures whites to mate with low IQ, low character nonwhites, causes many other whites to see their own fertility as an impediment to a better world rather than as a solution for creating a better world.
Religion: contemporary religions spread dysgenic Sharia and cultural Marxian ideas.
Computers at prisons: online dating sites make it easier for prisoners to set up relationships that produce children after release or during conjugal visits.
Environmentalism: now dominated by cultural Marxism. Encourages whites to avoid childbirth while acting too feckless to oppose migration and population explosions by nonwhites.
Miseducation: status symbol college degrees create immense direct and opportunity costs, making families unaffordable, often creating debt peonage.
Finance, insurance, and real estate (FIRE): huge direct and opportunity costs to society while making childbearing families less affordable.
Wrecked public schools: dysgenic breeding forces good parents to homeschool or send children to private schools, leaving parents having good genes with less money for additional children. Forces parents to labor and compete fiercely for spots in decent schools and neighborhoods having fewer neighbors of poor breeding. A vicious spiral.
Helicopter parenting: parents have fewer children while investing in destructive, economically expensive childrearing activities and status competitions.
Nurture assumptions: low IQ, low character, high self-esteem individuals think they can have and mold great offspring when a look at themselves and their relatives indicates bad news. Nurture assumptions cause children to blame their parents parenting instead of taking control of their own lives and their fertility.
Other: Randism, abortion, pathogens, hedonism, consumerism, birth control, health care, mass media, cultural fads, and so on.
"Idiocracy" results from anti-reason Marxian, liberal, libertarian, and neoconservative policies. Followers of such ideologies should blame themselves and their allies for the atrocious results they created.
Societies should avoid mass destruction by having dozens of explicitly eugenic policies, including:
Some examples of hidden eugenics or dysgenics:
Pensions: a method for childfree, farsighted individuals to obtain care from others in old age while avoiding the costs of childrearing themselves. In the past, adult children provided for their elderly parents.
Seniority based pay: makes children more expensive for young individuals. Harmful mutations increase with age. Older parents pass on more harmful mutations. Female fertility plummets past age 28, affecting the total fertility rate of women postponing childbirth.
Welfare: rewards low IQ, low character individuals for having more children.
Migration: low IQ or low character (or both) nonwhites migrate to the West.
Reckless Wars: altruists often die on behalf of those genetically predisposed to egoism. The eugenic or dysgenic effects vary widely depending on who volunteers or gets drafted or makes the decisions.
Austerity: uncertainty, lower incomes, and postponement of childbirth.
Cultural Marxism: pressures whites to mate with low IQ, low character nonwhites, causes many other whites to see their own fertility as an impediment to a better world rather than as a solution for creating a better world.
Religion: contemporary religions spread dysgenic Sharia and cultural Marxian ideas.
Computers at prisons: online dating sites make it easier for prisoners to set up relationships that produce children after release or during conjugal visits.
Environmentalism: now dominated by cultural Marxism. Encourages whites to avoid childbirth while acting too feckless to oppose migration and population explosions by nonwhites.
Miseducation: status symbol college degrees create immense direct and opportunity costs, making families unaffordable, often creating debt peonage.
Finance, insurance, and real estate (FIRE): huge direct and opportunity costs to society while making childbearing families less affordable.
Wrecked public schools: dysgenic breeding forces good parents to homeschool or send children to private schools, leaving parents having good genes with less money for additional children. Forces parents to labor and compete fiercely for spots in decent schools and neighborhoods having fewer neighbors of poor breeding. A vicious spiral.
Helicopter parenting: parents have fewer children while investing in destructive, economically expensive childrearing activities and status competitions.
Nurture assumptions: low IQ, low character, high self-esteem individuals think they can have and mold great offspring when a look at themselves and their relatives indicates bad news. Nurture assumptions cause children to blame their parents parenting instead of taking control of their own lives and their fertility.
"Idiocracy" results from anti-reason Marxian, liberal, libertarian, and neoconservative policies. Followers of such ideologies should blame themselves and their allies for the atrocious results they created.
Societies should avoid mass destruction by having dozens of explicitly eugenic policies, including:
- Federally funded sperm banks with sperm obtained from high IQ, high character teen boys and young men.
- Payments for fertile, former special education students to obtain surgical sterilization.
- Mandatory surgical sterilization of fertile felons.
- Comprehensive, government funded sex, family, and eugenics education, including advertising warning potential parents that if they mate with bad individuals, they'll have bad children, who make their lives living hell.
- Inducements to marry young but after a six month waiting period.
- Dismantling cultural Marxism, stopping the spread of ghetto and Sharia values.
- Immigration bans.
- Legalized secessions.
- Laws encouraging and enforcing surrogate contracts.
- More research funds for embryo selection and human genetic engineering.
- Laws enshrining freedom of association.
- Welfare and affirmative action bans.
Sunday, May 8, 2016
A Differing Nation
A couple generations ago, roughly 45 percent of U.S. white adults were Democrats and 30 percent were Republicans. By the 1960s, multiculturalists dominated both parties. Democrats claim whites should not have been fooled by the Republican Southern Strategy, the dog whistling from Republican politicians, combined with anti-white policies while pretending to be pro-white or racially neutral.
Both parties practiced the Cultural Marxism Strategy: rent seeking combined with anti-white practices. Whites voted against good interests with every major Western political party.
Let's imagine a world where that 45 to 30 voting pattern continued. Democrats would have a political monopoly. Not good. Political monopolies are even worse than duopolies. The power of cultural Marxism would be even greater, causing increasing multisclerosis. Political monopolies based on ethnoracial differences are much harder to overthrow.
Open borders would have arrived much sooner.
Nonwhites would vote overwhelmingly for Democrats for tribalistic reasons, the same as now.
The pattern of welfare recipients being better off than the working poor would have continued from the 1970s onward. There would be no welfare reforms. Welfare might be indexed to inflation. Incentives to work would be even less.
Schools, including colleges, would have even more social promotion. As in poor countries, tens of millions would have degrees in fields the graduates are incompetent in. Millions more would have unethical degrees in various anti-white studies. Public schools would be even greater indoctrination centers.
Martin Luther King's explicit quota systems would have been enacted. King believed the nonwhite percentage of employees in a business or government entity should equal or exceed the nonwhite percentage of the population. Groups with r strategies have more children, so their proportion of the total population would be greater than their proportion of the working age population. For example, a fast breeding group with eight percent of the total population, but six percent of the working age population, would demand eight percent of good jobs.
Nonwhites would be even more difficult to fire than they are today. Many would collect paychecks for doing little or nothing. Businesses would be forced to engage in bidding wars for incompetent nonwhite employees.
Filled with inept and lazy employees, manufacturing would be eliminated faster. The only major U.S. export industries would be agriculture and intellectual property. Trade deficits would be larger, leading to worse private sector debt bubbles or greater government deficits, which would be owned by explicit foreigners and the top one percent, who are de facto foreigners, seeking tax havens and other global rent seeking solutions.
Section 8 style programs would be near universal for nonwhites. There would be few white majority neighborhoods, even among the top one percent. Every public school would be ruined. Schools would be concentration day camps for white children. Few whites would be able to afford children. Those few whites would be forced to homeschool or send children to private schools. There would be even more social and political pressure on white females to breed with low IQ, low character nonwhites, who abandon white women and their mixed race children. But at least the mixed race children would have the advantage of fitting in with anti-white culture.
Ugh.
There would be more government and private sector commissarism, using coercion to get nonwealthy whites to labor on behalf of free riding others. The system would suck. Frustrated by the suckitude, multiculturalists would do what they normally do: demand more of the disease as a cure, blaming the mysterious powers of hidden white racism.
Practical freedom of speech might be nearly gone. Thousands, if not millions more, whites would be fired, fined, assaulted, imprisoned or ostracized for thought crimes. The one-sided dominance of multicultural mass media and other institutions makes matters worse than any explicit government bans on speech. At least, if free speech were banned, more whites might be willing to see the totalitarian face of cultural Marxism.
The situation would be worse than Puerto Rico, where the majority of adults rely on welfare, black markets, affirmative action, family remittances, and government make work.
Humans respond to incentives. Multiculturalism wrecks decent incentives.
Nonwhites seldom experience cognitive dissonance, including nonwhites of Southwest Asian descent, as millions of whites in Eastern Europe found out the hard, hard way. The anti-reason culture of cultural Marxism makes cognitive dissonance even less likely. Every conscious multiculturalist on the planet has thousands of contradictions rattling around in his or her head, contradictions they are unaware of or that they dismiss from their minds.
Nonwhites keep demanding more, regardless of the consequences.
In short, once you have a Western country dominated by political monopolies or oligopolies, mixed with anti-white totalitarianism, the result will be a long-term disaster or a short-term disaster either way. Ethical policy and genetic fixes go against the genetic and cultural preferences of powerful individuals.
A coalition of billionaires could have saved the U.S. by buying mass media and out bribing wealthy multiculturalists. That did not happen and seems unlikely now. Nearly all wealthy individuals are devoted to egoism, multiculturalism, and dark triad activities.
The Southern Strategy and the Cultural Marxism Strategy were both disastrous for whites and many nonwhites, with cultural Marxism being far worse. The Southern Strategy was simply one aspect of cultural Marxism.
The main way to hold formerly white multiracial states together or keep them from collapsing is by increasing totalitarianism. But no Lee Kuan Yew lesser totalitarianism is likely because whites are much easier to guilt trip than Chinese. Whites act more pusillanimous and are more prone to misplaced altruism.
Some might say that whites get what they deserve for cowardice. But fact facing whites don't deserve totalitarianism simply because anti-white whites support anti-white totalitarianism.
Much self-criticism has been directed within nonmulticultural circles about why nothing seems to work, no matter how totalitarian multiculturalists behave. If a nonmulticultural party starts to rise, all other parties coalesce against fact facers. If a nonmulticultural party threatens to become a majority, they will be banned, as happened in Belgium. After terror attacks, the main backlash is against critics of the system.
One problem is that humans are so easy to indoctrinate with schools and mass media that working within the system seems pointless, unless several billionaires decide to spend their fortunes on ethnoracial fact facing. Even if Jared Taylor or someone else writes the most perfect argument in human history, it will be unseen and unheard by most of the population. And even if multiculturalists read it, prior indoctrination will cause multiculturalists to reject the argument
No matter whether a white country has multiracial Randism, multiracial socialism, multiracial Neoconservatism or multiracial third wayism, the result will be totalitarianism and rent reeking. The greatest flaw of the New Deal was not welfare. The New Deal provided workfare far more than welfare. The greatest flaw of the New Deal was cultural Marxian infiltration.
Without help from the rich, whites must form alternative communities, especially living communities, not mere Internet communities. The communities will need religions or pretend to have religions, to prevent nonwhites from making specious housing discrimination claims. The religions would need boot camps, first, to weed out infiltrators and the lukewarm, second, because humans become more attached to groups after going through tough initiations. The boot camps should emphasize both schooling and physical activities. Even the racially aware have adopted bad habits from establishments. The boot camps should not be military style. They should not degenerate into mindless marching and indoctrination.
Whites should work for white homelands, whether the homelands include explicit or de facto secessions. Groups of eugenic, monoracial, reciprocal altruists will outcompete groups devoted to dysgenic, multicultural rent seeking as long as they don't allow psychological egoists (Hitler!) to take over and engage in aggression and other harmful activities.
The communities should be in rural areas, where the likelihood of surviving establishment caused nuclear wars and other establishment disasters are greater.
Both parties practiced the Cultural Marxism Strategy: rent seeking combined with anti-white practices. Whites voted against good interests with every major Western political party.
Let's imagine a world where that 45 to 30 voting pattern continued. Democrats would have a political monopoly. Not good. Political monopolies are even worse than duopolies. The power of cultural Marxism would be even greater, causing increasing multisclerosis. Political monopolies based on ethnoracial differences are much harder to overthrow.
Open borders would have arrived much sooner.
Nonwhites would vote overwhelmingly for Democrats for tribalistic reasons, the same as now.
The pattern of welfare recipients being better off than the working poor would have continued from the 1970s onward. There would be no welfare reforms. Welfare might be indexed to inflation. Incentives to work would be even less.
Schools, including colleges, would have even more social promotion. As in poor countries, tens of millions would have degrees in fields the graduates are incompetent in. Millions more would have unethical degrees in various anti-white studies. Public schools would be even greater indoctrination centers.
Martin Luther King's explicit quota systems would have been enacted. King believed the nonwhite percentage of employees in a business or government entity should equal or exceed the nonwhite percentage of the population. Groups with r strategies have more children, so their proportion of the total population would be greater than their proportion of the working age population. For example, a fast breeding group with eight percent of the total population, but six percent of the working age population, would demand eight percent of good jobs.
Nonwhites would be even more difficult to fire than they are today. Many would collect paychecks for doing little or nothing. Businesses would be forced to engage in bidding wars for incompetent nonwhite employees.
Filled with inept and lazy employees, manufacturing would be eliminated faster. The only major U.S. export industries would be agriculture and intellectual property. Trade deficits would be larger, leading to worse private sector debt bubbles or greater government deficits, which would be owned by explicit foreigners and the top one percent, who are de facto foreigners, seeking tax havens and other global rent seeking solutions.
Section 8 style programs would be near universal for nonwhites. There would be few white majority neighborhoods, even among the top one percent. Every public school would be ruined. Schools would be concentration day camps for white children. Few whites would be able to afford children. Those few whites would be forced to homeschool or send children to private schools. There would be even more social and political pressure on white females to breed with low IQ, low character nonwhites, who abandon white women and their mixed race children. But at least the mixed race children would have the advantage of fitting in with anti-white culture.
Ugh.
There would be more government and private sector commissarism, using coercion to get nonwealthy whites to labor on behalf of free riding others. The system would suck. Frustrated by the suckitude, multiculturalists would do what they normally do: demand more of the disease as a cure, blaming the mysterious powers of hidden white racism.
Practical freedom of speech might be nearly gone. Thousands, if not millions more, whites would be fired, fined, assaulted, imprisoned or ostracized for thought crimes. The one-sided dominance of multicultural mass media and other institutions makes matters worse than any explicit government bans on speech. At least, if free speech were banned, more whites might be willing to see the totalitarian face of cultural Marxism.
The situation would be worse than Puerto Rico, where the majority of adults rely on welfare, black markets, affirmative action, family remittances, and government make work.
Humans respond to incentives. Multiculturalism wrecks decent incentives.
Nonwhites seldom experience cognitive dissonance, including nonwhites of Southwest Asian descent, as millions of whites in Eastern Europe found out the hard, hard way. The anti-reason culture of cultural Marxism makes cognitive dissonance even less likely. Every conscious multiculturalist on the planet has thousands of contradictions rattling around in his or her head, contradictions they are unaware of or that they dismiss from their minds.
Nonwhites keep demanding more, regardless of the consequences.
In short, once you have a Western country dominated by political monopolies or oligopolies, mixed with anti-white totalitarianism, the result will be a long-term disaster or a short-term disaster either way. Ethical policy and genetic fixes go against the genetic and cultural preferences of powerful individuals.
A coalition of billionaires could have saved the U.S. by buying mass media and out bribing wealthy multiculturalists. That did not happen and seems unlikely now. Nearly all wealthy individuals are devoted to egoism, multiculturalism, and dark triad activities.
The Southern Strategy and the Cultural Marxism Strategy were both disastrous for whites and many nonwhites, with cultural Marxism being far worse. The Southern Strategy was simply one aspect of cultural Marxism.
The main way to hold formerly white multiracial states together or keep them from collapsing is by increasing totalitarianism. But no Lee Kuan Yew lesser totalitarianism is likely because whites are much easier to guilt trip than Chinese. Whites act more pusillanimous and are more prone to misplaced altruism.
Some might say that whites get what they deserve for cowardice. But fact facing whites don't deserve totalitarianism simply because anti-white whites support anti-white totalitarianism.
Much self-criticism has been directed within nonmulticultural circles about why nothing seems to work, no matter how totalitarian multiculturalists behave. If a nonmulticultural party starts to rise, all other parties coalesce against fact facers. If a nonmulticultural party threatens to become a majority, they will be banned, as happened in Belgium. After terror attacks, the main backlash is against critics of the system.
One problem is that humans are so easy to indoctrinate with schools and mass media that working within the system seems pointless, unless several billionaires decide to spend their fortunes on ethnoracial fact facing. Even if Jared Taylor or someone else writes the most perfect argument in human history, it will be unseen and unheard by most of the population. And even if multiculturalists read it, prior indoctrination will cause multiculturalists to reject the argument
No matter whether a white country has multiracial Randism, multiracial socialism, multiracial Neoconservatism or multiracial third wayism, the result will be totalitarianism and rent reeking. The greatest flaw of the New Deal was not welfare. The New Deal provided workfare far more than welfare. The greatest flaw of the New Deal was cultural Marxian infiltration.
Without help from the rich, whites must form alternative communities, especially living communities, not mere Internet communities. The communities will need religions or pretend to have religions, to prevent nonwhites from making specious housing discrimination claims. The religions would need boot camps, first, to weed out infiltrators and the lukewarm, second, because humans become more attached to groups after going through tough initiations. The boot camps should emphasize both schooling and physical activities. Even the racially aware have adopted bad habits from establishments. The boot camps should not be military style. They should not degenerate into mindless marching and indoctrination.
Whites should work for white homelands, whether the homelands include explicit or de facto secessions. Groups of eugenic, monoracial, reciprocal altruists will outcompete groups devoted to dysgenic, multicultural rent seeking as long as they don't allow psychological egoists (Hitler!) to take over and engage in aggression and other harmful activities.
The communities should be in rural areas, where the likelihood of surviving establishment caused nuclear wars and other establishment disasters are greater.
Friday, May 6, 2016
To Hell with Political Spectrums
Here is a google image search of various political spectrums.
The main thing they have in common is affinity for bullcrap. They distort and oversimplify. They use euphemisms for establishment totalitarianisms. They use dysphemisms for outsider beliefs. They omit beliefs based on accurate reasoning, limiting the range of thought. Some spectrums emphasize psychological categories rather than policy beliefs. They assist establishments in getting individuals in to join establishment teams rather than getting individuals to weigh the evidence on specific issues, leading individuals to think the are morally superior based on team faith, as if politics should be a ruthless sports contest.
To hell with them all.
The main thing they have in common is affinity for bullcrap. They distort and oversimplify. They use euphemisms for establishment totalitarianisms. They use dysphemisms for outsider beliefs. They omit beliefs based on accurate reasoning, limiting the range of thought. Some spectrums emphasize psychological categories rather than policy beliefs. They assist establishments in getting individuals in to join establishment teams rather than getting individuals to weigh the evidence on specific issues, leading individuals to think the are morally superior based on team faith, as if politics should be a ruthless sports contest.
To hell with them all.
Wednesday, May 4, 2016
Establishment Behavior
Predictable establishment behavior around the planet:
De facto affirmative action seems to violate the above, but CEOs support affirmative action to avoid costly boycotts, lawsuits, and negative publicity. Plus, multicultural CEOs are inept, thinking human races interchangeable. And contemporary governments don't care whether their employees serve the public interest.
Most humans like to think themselves ethically superior, but establishments are very, very evil. To assert superiority, establishments grandstand on issues requiring almost no sacrifice by themselves. Or they blame victims of establishment evils. As an added bonus for establishments, these issues distract populations from the evils done by the establishments.
So now we live on a planet where every nuclear weapon is controlled by militaristic anti-white factions, mostly using nonconventional warfare. Even Putin and Chinese leaders are dedicated multiculturalists. The white fraction of the planet is under ten percent and falling. And establishments try to tell us that whites are at no risk for genocide.
Yeah, okay.
Jews fret about a new Holocaust, though Jews have an nuclear armed Israel and massive political power protecting them.
If a super war occurs, the mass media and the likes of Tim Wise will be front and center blaming "whiteness" and "nationalism," though the factions are anti-white and anti-nationalistic.
- If it serves perceived short-term selfishness, do it.
- If it is anti-white or anti-Infidel and does not contradict the above, do it.
De facto affirmative action seems to violate the above, but CEOs support affirmative action to avoid costly boycotts, lawsuits, and negative publicity. Plus, multicultural CEOs are inept, thinking human races interchangeable. And contemporary governments don't care whether their employees serve the public interest.
Most humans like to think themselves ethically superior, but establishments are very, very evil. To assert superiority, establishments grandstand on issues requiring almost no sacrifice by themselves. Or they blame victims of establishment evils. As an added bonus for establishments, these issues distract populations from the evils done by the establishments.
So now we live on a planet where every nuclear weapon is controlled by militaristic anti-white factions, mostly using nonconventional warfare. Even Putin and Chinese leaders are dedicated multiculturalists. The white fraction of the planet is under ten percent and falling. And establishments try to tell us that whites are at no risk for genocide.
Yeah, okay.
Jews fret about a new Holocaust, though Jews have an nuclear armed Israel and massive political power protecting them.
If a super war occurs, the mass media and the likes of Tim Wise will be front and center blaming "whiteness" and "nationalism," though the factions are anti-white and anti-nationalistic.
Monday, May 2, 2016
Why We Should Help Whites
We shouldn't help whites because of origins fallacy reasons (because they are our race or we share some genes). The origins fallacy is a type of irrelevancy.
Here are six examples of the origins fallacy: X is artificial. X is unnatural. Y is natural. Americans have not believed X for years. Y is the American way. X comes from the word for W.
We should help whites because:
Here are six examples of the origins fallacy: X is artificial. X is unnatural. Y is natural. Americans have not believed X for years. Y is the American way. X comes from the word for W.
We should help whites because:
- Whites suffer astronomical harms from nonwhites and cultural Marxism. Whites, like other conscious beings, have value in themselves, no matter whether we have Nobel Prizes or minimum wage jobs.
- Whites, despite their misplaced altruism and other serious flaws, are the most beneficial people on earth. Whites invented or spread nearly all of modern medicine, agriculture, and environmentalism. Billions of nonwhites owe their well-being to whites. Whites saved China from Japanese tyranny and from economic Marxism, yet the cultural Marxians running China deluge whites with anti-white bile. Yes, whites spread some rotten ideologies, but the track record of nonwhite ideologies is worse. Whites are important for continuing beneficial developments in science and technology. Nonwhites are more likely to produce junk science and other harmful results.
- The only way to protect the legitimate claims of white individuals is with white groups. Thanks to cultural Marxism, billions of nonwhites support the harm and destruction of white individuals and cultures. Whites acting solely as individuals have almost no chance against billions devoted to the destruction of whites.
- Love-and-compassion white multiculturalists have done little to fight anti-white bigotry, and it is almost certain they will not in the future. Instead, they blame the victims of their biocultural engineering schemes.
- Harms from Muslims and nonwhites rise exponentially as their numbers increase. White ancestors made heroic sacrifices to make better lives for their descendents against a universe that doesn't care. The past several generations of whites benefited from those sacrifices while refusing to sacrifice for future generations, a failure to reciprocate forward. The harms today's white children will suffer in the future will dwarf what we see today.
- Whites are not well-adapted to current situations, situations dominated by technology and despicable isms. Whites need eugenics and new environmental situations to rescue themselves from the horrors created by these isms and technologies. We will not get the eugenics and environments we should by having our lives dominated by global, colonial, multicultural, rent seeking rule. The same goes for many nonwhite groups.
- Humans are incredibly easy to indoctrinate with fallacious rhetoric, especially when the rhetoric is incessantly repeated using modern media. The media merely need say "white supremacist" and readers close their minds to reason. Establishments get away with massive evils merely by tossing slurs and other fallacious rhetoric around. Such indoctrination provides cover for causing massive harms.
- Freedom of political speech is under siege. Whites support speech freedoms. Without whites, we can kiss freedom of speech goodbye for millennia or forever. Other legitimate freedoms for nonwealthy individuals are similarly under siege.
- Humans need purpose. We can find purpose climbing mountains and in other consumeristic activities. But if we are ethical, a nagging voice will tell us we didn't accomplish anything worthwhile in those consumeristic activities. Ethical white advocacy is the most important moral mission of our time. It is the great cause, nevermind the alienating, anti-white propaganda coming from establishments.
- It is important to direct refugees from modernity and establishment totalitarianisms toward ethical activities. Many individuals flee to the hive activities of Islam, Hitlerism, third wayism, cultural Marxism, neoconservative Christianity, and other horrific ideologies. We must help whites create and find a better missions. Whites currently seek relief from modernity by fanatically attaching themselves to the very ideologies causing ruin.
- Whites are the only major group fighting cultural Marxism. Cultural Marxism opposes accurate ethical reasoning. It is no accident that multiculturalists tend to be terrible at policy prescriptions on most other issues. You put multiculturalists in charge and most other things go to hell, too.
- For many other reasons I don't have the time to write.
Saturday, April 30, 2016
Bernie Sanders' Mask Slips
The above statement gives insight into the character of Bernie Sanders.
Multiculturalists attend Donald Trump rallies to deny freedom of assembly and freedom of association--to push, chase, block, punch, heckle, and otherwise incite violence, then assert victim status if any Trump supporter retaliates.
Few Trump supporters would do the same at a Democratic Party rally. And if Trump supporters did so, multiculturalists would claim the Trump supporters got what they deserved.
Sanders' quotes give tacit approval to the behavior of multiculturalists, to encourage mild red guarding.
None of this reality appears in Sanders' statement.
Instead, Sanders pretends to be above the fray while practicing demagoguery, by engaging in irrelevant ad hominem attacks.
Sanders acts as if he doesn't live in a land where whites have been constantly demonized for decades. Instead, the totalitarianism of cultural Marxism is the eternal victim. Atrocious behavior by multiculturalists, caused primarily by their genes and cultures, gets ignored or excused.
While Bernie Sanders is a comparatively civil guy for a contemporary politician, a Sanders presidency would see the federal government hire thousands of progressive multiculturalists devoted to totalitarianism and rent seeking. As in every Marxian nation, they would cause dystopian results while fellow believers, including Sanders, would make excuses and blame victims. Sanders' statement indicates he believes the cultural Marxian worldview, where whiteness is alleged to cause most of the world's ills while ignoring or dismissing overwhelming counter evidence that other factors cause nearly all the world's ills.
In Sanders' administration, mass destruction would be deemed necessary for the cause. And major red guarding would almost certainly result.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
Fighting for Contemporary Empires?
What would we be fighting for?
If Mexico or Saudi Arabia sent us letters, saying they were drafting us into their army, would we go? Then why fight self-destructive wars for the former United States? The rulers of the former United States are committed to replacing white Americans with Mexicans and other nonwhites. We would be fighting a war for nonwhites, who hate us, and their descendants--plus egoism and war profiteering, of course.
In war and peace, one goal should be to get yourself, your allies, and potential enemies to pursue ethical goals. Yet we keep rewarding unethical enemies while harming ourselves
In some just wars, another goal should be to maximize the ratio of destruction to the enemy's ability to fight over destruction of your own when alternatives are gone. We must seek to maximize benefits and minimize harms to ourselves. We must have thurough knowledge of self, allies, and enemies, avoiding glib and overconfident conclusions. We must explore worse case scenarios and potential countermoves by enemies. We must not assume enemies will fight the way we want them to fight. No one should be promoted based on bribery or halo effects. None of this matters to those devoted to parasitism, that is, almost everyone with power in the West. Self-interest and ethical interest are assumed to be the same by establishments.
Situations where you should fight on behalf of peoples seeking to destroy you are historically almost nonexistent, yet we keep fighting on behalf of those working to destroy us.
Almost every war Western establishments entered during the last several generations produced worse long-term consequences than the establishments expected, in part, because the people being ruled don't matter to the people doing the ruling.
If establishments bumble into a nuclear war with China or Russia or both, surviving whites would likely find themselves in a civil war with the nonwhites the multicultural establishments rashly imported. The dead and wounded would be killed or wounded by technologies multicultural establishments permitted China and Russia to steal because establishments didn't want ethnoracial profiling.
We should seldom ally with contemporary establishments, no matter how tear-jerking their propaganda.
If Mexico or Saudi Arabia sent us letters, saying they were drafting us into their army, would we go? Then why fight self-destructive wars for the former United States? The rulers of the former United States are committed to replacing white Americans with Mexicans and other nonwhites. We would be fighting a war for nonwhites, who hate us, and their descendants--plus egoism and war profiteering, of course.
In war and peace, one goal should be to get yourself, your allies, and potential enemies to pursue ethical goals. Yet we keep rewarding unethical enemies while harming ourselves
In some just wars, another goal should be to maximize the ratio of destruction to the enemy's ability to fight over destruction of your own when alternatives are gone. We must seek to maximize benefits and minimize harms to ourselves. We must have thurough knowledge of self, allies, and enemies, avoiding glib and overconfident conclusions. We must explore worse case scenarios and potential countermoves by enemies. We must not assume enemies will fight the way we want them to fight. No one should be promoted based on bribery or halo effects. None of this matters to those devoted to parasitism, that is, almost everyone with power in the West. Self-interest and ethical interest are assumed to be the same by establishments.
Situations where you should fight on behalf of peoples seeking to destroy you are historically almost nonexistent, yet we keep fighting on behalf of those working to destroy us.
Almost every war Western establishments entered during the last several generations produced worse long-term consequences than the establishments expected, in part, because the people being ruled don't matter to the people doing the ruling.
If establishments bumble into a nuclear war with China or Russia or both, surviving whites would likely find themselves in a civil war with the nonwhites the multicultural establishments rashly imported. The dead and wounded would be killed or wounded by technologies multicultural establishments permitted China and Russia to steal because establishments didn't want ethnoracial profiling.
We should seldom ally with contemporary establishments, no matter how tear-jerking their propaganda.
Monday, April 25, 2016
Frontiers in Cultural Marxism
Now that cultural Marxism is on the verge of spreading open female bathrooms for crossdressing men through most of the West, what will be the next fronts for the unconventional war? Churches deemed discriminatory for refusing to hire Muslim pastors? More Fergusons? More aggression at Trump gatherings by multiculturalists? Car insurers deemed discriminatory for car insurance rates for reckless nonwhite drivers? Rural zip codes, having high percentages of whites, ordered to pay, to make make zip codes more inviting to migrants and nonwhites?
The Muslims for pastors thing sounds like crazy talk. But think about where we are now. We have, against overwhelming ethical evidence, establishment demonization of eugenics and immigration patriotism. We have schools spending six figure lifetime sums to educate lower IQ individuals, the main thing these students learn is to hate whites. We have foreign billionaires with more political influence than millions of nonwealthy citizens. Muslims for pastors is comparatively mild compared to the anti-white aspects of cultural Marxism.
Gradual mass destruction is part of the new normalcy.
The establishments are wrong about almost every important issue. More wrongness doesn't matter to them when they can profit from it.
Minor wedge issues distract and divide populations from taking on the militarism, robber baronism, and cultural Marxism of establishments. And major wedge issues indoctrinate nonwealthy white multiculturalists to assist in mass destruction.
The Muslims for pastors thing sounds like crazy talk. But think about where we are now. We have, against overwhelming ethical evidence, establishment demonization of eugenics and immigration patriotism. We have schools spending six figure lifetime sums to educate lower IQ individuals, the main thing these students learn is to hate whites. We have foreign billionaires with more political influence than millions of nonwealthy citizens. Muslims for pastors is comparatively mild compared to the anti-white aspects of cultural Marxism.
Gradual mass destruction is part of the new normalcy.
The establishments are wrong about almost every important issue. More wrongness doesn't matter to them when they can profit from it.
Minor wedge issues distract and divide populations from taking on the militarism, robber baronism, and cultural Marxism of establishments. And major wedge issues indoctrinate nonwealthy white multiculturalists to assist in mass destruction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)