As soon as you see a super slur in an article, stop reading. Go someplace else. The rest of the article is probably not well-reasoned anyway. The opportunity costs of reading that article might prevent you from reading something better.
For the unfamiliar, examples of super slurs include c*nt, co*n, go*k, r*cist, p*nko, b*got, n*zi, femin*zi, cow*rd, n*gger, cr*cker, redn*ck, sh*tlord, Stal*nist, nat*vist, w*t back, Islam*phobe, far l*ft, far r*ght, wh*te supremecist, black nation*list, and white nation*list.
You will be glad you did. And it will be good for your character, the most important part of your being.
Wednesday, January 13, 2016
West of Eden
I just sat through The Perilous Fight, another error spewing, white bashing, non-white worshipping documentary, so I have questions for the multiculturalists about Japan and Japanese Americans, especially the fawning claims about how ethical, patriotic, democratic, and victimized the Japanese Americans were and are:
Why weren't Japanese Americans, alleged paragons of multicultural virtue, fighting with all their might to stop Japanese aggression in China from 1931 to 1941? (Almost surely, Japanese Americans were in a better position to influence the Japanese government than other Americans.)
Why were Japanese Americans and the Japanese government constantly complaining about mild discrimination in the West while ignoring or supporting mass rape, murder, and enslavement by the Japanese government?
Why did nearly all the millions of Japanese adult settlers in Asia and the Western Pacific help Japan, not the peoples in the lands they migrated into?
Why weren't the oh-so-patriotic Japanese Americans lined up outside American military recruiting offices on December 8, 1941?
Why did only four percent of male, military age Japanese Americans eventually volunteer for the U.S. military in World War II?
Japanese Americans visiting Japan on December 8, 1941 readily helped Japan and later served as translators in Japanese death camps. Why did these translators do almost nothing to help their imprisoned fellow Americans, who were being daily starved and tortured? Instead, these translators excoriated America and made glib, surreal conversations to Allied human skeletons about plans to move back to the U.S. once the war was over, exhibiting almost no ethical concerns.
Millions of Americans were interned in the U.S. military from 1941 to 1945 in conditions (Hurtgen, New Guinea, and elsewhere) far more horrific than the vacation camps Japanese Americans lived in. Why is this fact ignored?
Many Japanese Americans were paid reparations by the U.S. government for their stays in comparitive vacation camps. How many Japanese Americans donated their reparations to Asian survivors of World War II, who endured pure hell and had their lives ruined thanks to Japan, receiving nothing from Japan?
Why are almost all World War II oral histories from Japanese full of self-justifying BS?
Why weren't Japanese Americans countering the constant onslaught of anti-Western and anti-Asian bigotry being spewed by Japanese institutions during the decades leading up to World War II?
Why are present day Japanese and Japanese Americans silent or supportive of revisionist baloney such as the "Co-prosperity Sphere," which was little more than a sphere of rape, murder, torture, and enslavement?
Why are Japanese Americans, supposed multicultural universalists, so eager to call fellow white Americans slurs such as r*cist and b*got while not calling Japanese slurs for behavior thousands of times worse?
Why were non-Japanese Asian civilians, forced into helping the Japanese, called c*llaborators, deserving of death or condemnation, while arms producing Japanese at Nagasaki and Hiroshima were considered innocent civilians?
Why are there so many memorials throughout Asia and the Pacific dedicated to Japanese soldiers who engaged in mass murder? Why did Japan oppose memorials at death camp sites for Allied soldiers who were bravely defending against Japanese aggression?
Why did Japan think it had the right to stop the opening of a California memorial to comfort women?
In the 1930s, Japanese newspapers entertained readers with an ongoing sword killing contest as if the killing of Chinese were a sport. How many Japanese and Japanese Americans reported this contest to the outside world?
A Japanee soldier in the Philippines refused to surrender when World War II ended. He hid in forests and serial murdered Filipinos for decades. Why was he treated as a hero when he finally went back to Japan?
The Japanese American 442nd Regimental Combat Team received 21 Medals of Honor for fighting in Europe. Douglas MacArthur received a Medal of Honor despite ranking among the worst generals in U.S. history. Yet no American enlisted man or woman in the defense of the Philippines received a Medal of Honor despite fighting bravely, suffering incompetent leadership, and enduring nearly four years of hell. These POW enlisted men engaged in millions of brave sabotage acts against Japanese war industries, knowing full well that if caught their daily tortures would be increased unto death. Why the differences?
During the Cold War, Toshiba willfully sold top secret military technology to the Soviet Union, technology that could have cost millions of Westerners their lives. Why does Toshiba still exist? Why no severe punishments for its executives?
In what ways are Chinese propaganda techniques for the past 70 years similar to propaganda techniques of the Japanese Empire?
Should Nixon's opening up of Communist China be considered as ominous as the opening up of Japan in the 19th Century?
Hollywood movies increasingly "humanize" Japanize soldiers as nice guys caught up in circumstances, though their actual beliefs and actions were more horrific than multiculturalists are willing to imagine. Why the despicable contradiction between humanizing barbarity and dehumanizing ethnoracial realists, who are telling moral facts? Why are ethical persons such as JP Rushton treated as worse than Hirohito, the latter responsible for nearly 30 million unwarranted deaths? Care to explain the millions of other despicable contradictions in multiculturalism?
How is Japan a Western ally? Japan's policies are riddled with mercantilism. Japan is doing almost nothing to increase global demand in the face of austerity and almost nothing to stop the invasion of the West by non-white peoples. If war occurs between China and Japan, why should millions of whites die to save Japanese who despise whites? Even as whites' own countries are being demographically invaded and conquered?
Why weren't Japanese Americans, alleged paragons of multicultural virtue, fighting with all their might to stop Japanese aggression in China from 1931 to 1941? (Almost surely, Japanese Americans were in a better position to influence the Japanese government than other Americans.)
Why were Japanese Americans and the Japanese government constantly complaining about mild discrimination in the West while ignoring or supporting mass rape, murder, and enslavement by the Japanese government?
Why did nearly all the millions of Japanese adult settlers in Asia and the Western Pacific help Japan, not the peoples in the lands they migrated into?
Why weren't the oh-so-patriotic Japanese Americans lined up outside American military recruiting offices on December 8, 1941?
Why did only four percent of male, military age Japanese Americans eventually volunteer for the U.S. military in World War II?
Japanese Americans visiting Japan on December 8, 1941 readily helped Japan and later served as translators in Japanese death camps. Why did these translators do almost nothing to help their imprisoned fellow Americans, who were being daily starved and tortured? Instead, these translators excoriated America and made glib, surreal conversations to Allied human skeletons about plans to move back to the U.S. once the war was over, exhibiting almost no ethical concerns.
Millions of Americans were interned in the U.S. military from 1941 to 1945 in conditions (Hurtgen, New Guinea, and elsewhere) far more horrific than the vacation camps Japanese Americans lived in. Why is this fact ignored?
Many Japanese Americans were paid reparations by the U.S. government for their stays in comparitive vacation camps. How many Japanese Americans donated their reparations to Asian survivors of World War II, who endured pure hell and had their lives ruined thanks to Japan, receiving nothing from Japan?
Why are almost all World War II oral histories from Japanese full of self-justifying BS?
Why weren't Japanese Americans countering the constant onslaught of anti-Western and anti-Asian bigotry being spewed by Japanese institutions during the decades leading up to World War II?
Why are present day Japanese and Japanese Americans silent or supportive of revisionist baloney such as the "Co-prosperity Sphere," which was little more than a sphere of rape, murder, torture, and enslavement?
Why are Japanese Americans, supposed multicultural universalists, so eager to call fellow white Americans slurs such as r*cist and b*got while not calling Japanese slurs for behavior thousands of times worse?
Why were non-Japanese Asian civilians, forced into helping the Japanese, called c*llaborators, deserving of death or condemnation, while arms producing Japanese at Nagasaki and Hiroshima were considered innocent civilians?
Why are there so many memorials throughout Asia and the Pacific dedicated to Japanese soldiers who engaged in mass murder? Why did Japan oppose memorials at death camp sites for Allied soldiers who were bravely defending against Japanese aggression?
Why did Japan think it had the right to stop the opening of a California memorial to comfort women?
In the 1930s, Japanese newspapers entertained readers with an ongoing sword killing contest as if the killing of Chinese were a sport. How many Japanese and Japanese Americans reported this contest to the outside world?
A Japanee soldier in the Philippines refused to surrender when World War II ended. He hid in forests and serial murdered Filipinos for decades. Why was he treated as a hero when he finally went back to Japan?
The Japanese American 442nd Regimental Combat Team received 21 Medals of Honor for fighting in Europe. Douglas MacArthur received a Medal of Honor despite ranking among the worst generals in U.S. history. Yet no American enlisted man or woman in the defense of the Philippines received a Medal of Honor despite fighting bravely, suffering incompetent leadership, and enduring nearly four years of hell. These POW enlisted men engaged in millions of brave sabotage acts against Japanese war industries, knowing full well that if caught their daily tortures would be increased unto death. Why the differences?
During the Cold War, Toshiba willfully sold top secret military technology to the Soviet Union, technology that could have cost millions of Westerners their lives. Why does Toshiba still exist? Why no severe punishments for its executives?
In what ways are Chinese propaganda techniques for the past 70 years similar to propaganda techniques of the Japanese Empire?
Should Nixon's opening up of Communist China be considered as ominous as the opening up of Japan in the 19th Century?
Hollywood movies increasingly "humanize" Japanize soldiers as nice guys caught up in circumstances, though their actual beliefs and actions were more horrific than multiculturalists are willing to imagine. Why the despicable contradiction between humanizing barbarity and dehumanizing ethnoracial realists, who are telling moral facts? Why are ethical persons such as JP Rushton treated as worse than Hirohito, the latter responsible for nearly 30 million unwarranted deaths? Care to explain the millions of other despicable contradictions in multiculturalism?
How is Japan a Western ally? Japan's policies are riddled with mercantilism. Japan is doing almost nothing to increase global demand in the face of austerity and almost nothing to stop the invasion of the West by non-white peoples. If war occurs between China and Japan, why should millions of whites die to save Japanese who despise whites? Even as whites' own countries are being demographically invaded and conquered?
That Extra Eye
One added bonus of spending thousands of hours weighing evidence, including ethnoracial evidence, is that you begin to see facts that few others have the slightest inkling about.
That Extra Eye can look at various international relations schools of thought, dozens of them, from neorealist to feminist, and see something immediately: the schools are almost all variants of biocultural Marxism.
The ethnoracial fact facer knows that contemporary rulers are not acting on nationalism or national interest as some foreign policy types presume. Rulers are acting on egoism, groupthink, xenocentrism, and other bad motives. The budding young IR student might look at all those IR variants taught at prestigious universities and come to the conclusion that those schools offer all the ways of thinking, the sacred canon. In reality, IR schools are (mostly) collections of BS, as are most of the humanities and social sciences.
A Third Way Democrat will look at this article by Jon Chait and think he sees pure genius, an accurate representation of the world. A fact facer would immediately note that almost every sentence in Chait's article contains a fallacy--ad hominems, straw persons, false claims, small samples, appeals to tradition among them. (Note that I am not endorsing Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio. Those two politicians are wrong about almost everything important.)
The same goes for millions of other arguments produced by ruling groups.
The fact facer can look at a social science study and think of many omitted confounding factors, especially genetic factors, plus other reasoning errors that make the study probable rubbish,
Fact facers gain an almost encyclopedic awareness of contradictions. How could they not? Biocultural Marxism and other ruling group ideologies contain contradictions by the millions.
Most people go through their lives believing certain political thoughts are taboo, no matter how well supported those ideas are by evidence, especially those who imagine themselves to be open minded. They rationalize. The're not even half conscious of their rationalizations. They experience shame or other anxieties for even thinking taboo political thoughts, not because of the evidence, but because of indoctrination and social pressures. They attack the motives of taboo breakers as if ad hominem attacks will make the facts change.
The fact facer doesn't care. She has already decided to follow the evidence, whether ideas are taboo or not. Adding more taboo ideas to existing beliefs is no big deal to the fact facer. If you already faced the fact that nonwhite immigration is unethical, you might as well face taboo facts about eugenics and thousands of other issues, too.
Someone once said blacks know extra things about whites because blacks gain the perspective of being outsiders peering at whites.
Let me tell you, fact facers know thousands of facts about whites, nonwhites, and ruling groups that most people don't have the slightest idea about.
That Extra Eye can look at various international relations schools of thought, dozens of them, from neorealist to feminist, and see something immediately: the schools are almost all variants of biocultural Marxism.
The ethnoracial fact facer knows that contemporary rulers are not acting on nationalism or national interest as some foreign policy types presume. Rulers are acting on egoism, groupthink, xenocentrism, and other bad motives. The budding young IR student might look at all those IR variants taught at prestigious universities and come to the conclusion that those schools offer all the ways of thinking, the sacred canon. In reality, IR schools are (mostly) collections of BS, as are most of the humanities and social sciences.
A Third Way Democrat will look at this article by Jon Chait and think he sees pure genius, an accurate representation of the world. A fact facer would immediately note that almost every sentence in Chait's article contains a fallacy--ad hominems, straw persons, false claims, small samples, appeals to tradition among them. (Note that I am not endorsing Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio. Those two politicians are wrong about almost everything important.)
The same goes for millions of other arguments produced by ruling groups.
The fact facer can look at a social science study and think of many omitted confounding factors, especially genetic factors, plus other reasoning errors that make the study probable rubbish,
Fact facers gain an almost encyclopedic awareness of contradictions. How could they not? Biocultural Marxism and other ruling group ideologies contain contradictions by the millions.
Most people go through their lives believing certain political thoughts are taboo, no matter how well supported those ideas are by evidence, especially those who imagine themselves to be open minded. They rationalize. The're not even half conscious of their rationalizations. They experience shame or other anxieties for even thinking taboo political thoughts, not because of the evidence, but because of indoctrination and social pressures. They attack the motives of taboo breakers as if ad hominem attacks will make the facts change.
The fact facer doesn't care. She has already decided to follow the evidence, whether ideas are taboo or not. Adding more taboo ideas to existing beliefs is no big deal to the fact facer. If you already faced the fact that nonwhite immigration is unethical, you might as well face taboo facts about eugenics and thousands of other issues, too.
Someone once said blacks know extra things about whites because blacks gain the perspective of being outsiders peering at whites.
Let me tell you, fact facers know thousands of facts about whites, nonwhites, and ruling groups that most people don't have the slightest idea about.
The Passion of the Crestfallen
I made the mistake of reading Rod Dreher, a writer at the American Conservative.
Correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't spent much time reading Dreher's work, but Dreher's shtick consists of complaining that multiculturalists mistreat white, Christian multiculturalists like himself.
Golly.
You mean to tell me that multiculturalists, devoted to antiwhite totalitarianism, act badly toward white, Christian multiculturalists?
I'm shocked.
How could multiculturalists not respond with kindness at the displays of altruism and obsequiousness exhibited by white, Christian multiculturalists? It's as if the white, Christian multiculturalists are thinking, "Hey, Guys. What are you doing? We're on the same antiwhite team," as if nonwhites have genetic and cultural tendencies that differ from whites, but don't tell that to the new American Conservative. It's been awhile since Steve Sailor pointed out a few unpopular truths at the American Conservative.
Dreher proposes the Benedict Option, that is, Christians retreating from societies, spending much time in prayer.
But, of course, there is no evidence that any God ever answered any prayer. Almost nobody remembers the Gods of the peoples wiped off the face of the earth, nor the peoples themselves. The Thule peoples once dominated the arctic for thousands of miles. Where are the Thule peoples and their Gods now? Nowhere. Exterminated by Inuits. The Inuits didn't even bother to breed with captured Thule females, or if Inuits did so, they slaughtered or sterilized resulting offspring. White Christians should realize that without white people you can kiss ethical Christianity goodbye. If a Christian God who judges up death exists, what would it do with white, multicultural Christians responsible for the destruction of Christianity and the white individuals?
The Benedict Option reeks of antiwhite fatalism, selfishness, and antinomianism.
I hope I don't make the Dreher mistake again.
Correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't spent much time reading Dreher's work, but Dreher's shtick consists of complaining that multiculturalists mistreat white, Christian multiculturalists like himself.
Golly.
You mean to tell me that multiculturalists, devoted to antiwhite totalitarianism, act badly toward white, Christian multiculturalists?
I'm shocked.
How could multiculturalists not respond with kindness at the displays of altruism and obsequiousness exhibited by white, Christian multiculturalists? It's as if the white, Christian multiculturalists are thinking, "Hey, Guys. What are you doing? We're on the same antiwhite team," as if nonwhites have genetic and cultural tendencies that differ from whites, but don't tell that to the new American Conservative. It's been awhile since Steve Sailor pointed out a few unpopular truths at the American Conservative.
Dreher proposes the Benedict Option, that is, Christians retreating from societies, spending much time in prayer.
But, of course, there is no evidence that any God ever answered any prayer. Almost nobody remembers the Gods of the peoples wiped off the face of the earth, nor the peoples themselves. The Thule peoples once dominated the arctic for thousands of miles. Where are the Thule peoples and their Gods now? Nowhere. Exterminated by Inuits. The Inuits didn't even bother to breed with captured Thule females, or if Inuits did so, they slaughtered or sterilized resulting offspring. White Christians should realize that without white people you can kiss ethical Christianity goodbye. If a Christian God who judges up death exists, what would it do with white, multicultural Christians responsible for the destruction of Christianity and the white individuals?
The Benedict Option reeks of antiwhite fatalism, selfishness, and antinomianism.
I hope I don't make the Dreher mistake again.
Tuesday, January 12, 2016
Support Draconian Hate Crime Laws for Whites Who Violently Attack Nonwhites
Seriously.
Whites who attack nonwhites rank among our worst enemies. Such Whites become national news and small sample fallacy focal points for bashing the rest of us.
Meanwhile, nonwhites who attack whites become no news or local news. Or, perversely, additional fodder for excoriating whites. In multicultural thinking, nonwhite aggression wouldn't have occurred if it weren't for white r*cism or white privilege or some other victim blaming malarky. Mumia Abu Jamal and similar individuals become martyrs, no matter how atrocious their motives. Egalitarians act as if nonwhites lack moral agency. The fanaticism of most multiculturalists is impenetrable by unwanted, well reasoned moral arguments. As we have seen, multicultural media types are fantastic at manufacturing mythological, one sided narratives.
Pretending to be ethnoracially blind makes matters worse. Nonwhites see it as a sign you don't care about the truth, that you are easy to manipulate and intimidate.
Aggression is no help. Whites have ethical duties to organize and form their own communities. Aggression is the rotten solution of indolence, impulsiveness, dysgenic breeding, and high, unstable self-esteem.
There is no going back. There is little of the historical United States of America left. There is the land mass that was once America.
New constitutions must be designed. The old constitution, combined with dysgenics and cultural rot, was not enough to protect us.
Westerners and Western Civilization can be saved and reformed but not with aggressive acts or poorly reasoned devotion to the unethical entities of the past.
Whites who attack nonwhites rank among our worst enemies. Such Whites become national news and small sample fallacy focal points for bashing the rest of us.
Meanwhile, nonwhites who attack whites become no news or local news. Or, perversely, additional fodder for excoriating whites. In multicultural thinking, nonwhite aggression wouldn't have occurred if it weren't for white r*cism or white privilege or some other victim blaming malarky. Mumia Abu Jamal and similar individuals become martyrs, no matter how atrocious their motives. Egalitarians act as if nonwhites lack moral agency. The fanaticism of most multiculturalists is impenetrable by unwanted, well reasoned moral arguments. As we have seen, multicultural media types are fantastic at manufacturing mythological, one sided narratives.
Pretending to be ethnoracially blind makes matters worse. Nonwhites see it as a sign you don't care about the truth, that you are easy to manipulate and intimidate.
Aggression is no help. Whites have ethical duties to organize and form their own communities. Aggression is the rotten solution of indolence, impulsiveness, dysgenic breeding, and high, unstable self-esteem.
There is no going back. There is little of the historical United States of America left. There is the land mass that was once America.
New constitutions must be designed. The old constitution, combined with dysgenics and cultural rot, was not enough to protect us.
Westerners and Western Civilization can be saved and reformed but not with aggressive acts or poorly reasoned devotion to the unethical entities of the past.
Dear Economists
The next time you conduct one of your benefits of nonwhite migration "studies" please include the following costs:
Theft or other acquisition of media, technologies, and institutions by Japanese migrants, leading to the murders of nearly 30 million between 1931 and 1946, plus grievous harms caused to billions of other individuals. More important: the future costs of military technologies stolen by Chinese migrants.
Migrants spreading Marxian ideas, leading the murder of over 90 million and the enslavement of billions.
Totalitarian bait-and-switch, divide-and-screw practices by ruling groups, the near certain result in multicultural societies--wrecking democracy, wrecking pro-worker organizations, ruining political parties, causing general mass destruction.
The demonization of nonwealthy whites by wealthy, ruthless multicultural ruling groups.
Loss of freedom of association.
Massive fifth columning.
Ethnic cleansing of white, working class neighborhoods, loss of property values, costs of moving, costs of competing for slots in decent neighborhoods, costs to working class whites left behind.
Millions of antiwhite rapes and other assaults in schools and prisons not counted in crime stats.
Loss of freedom of speech.
Wrecked ethical environment where moral facts are treated as worthless or evil, where fallacious rubbish is repeated until most of the population believes, where well-reasoned ethnoracial arguments are de facto banned from the mass media, where good points are automatically countered with straw person, ad hominem, and small sample fallacies.
Odious interpersonal environments where various ethnoracial groups groups try to assert their dominance and degrade others.
Massive traffic increases, causing cancer, congestion, cardiovascular disease, wasted hours,
Costs of replacing Western cultures with alienation and fanatical flight to destructive non-Western cultures.
Dysgenic breeding.
Massive legalized bribery by wealthy foreigners and de facto noncitizens.
Affirmative action salary costs and massive costs from inept professionals, especially nonwhite doctors. Public costs of college and college prep educations for migrant groups having IQs in the 80s, leaving them with no degrees, junk degrees or grade inflation degrees in fields they lack proper training for.
Loss of trustworthiness, which is more important than the loss of trust.
Don't forget to include dozens of other costs I forgot to mention here.
Thank you, economists. Your historical devotion to the whole truth softens my heart. I'm sure I'll see the whole truth in your next "study."
Theft or other acquisition of media, technologies, and institutions by Japanese migrants, leading to the murders of nearly 30 million between 1931 and 1946, plus grievous harms caused to billions of other individuals. More important: the future costs of military technologies stolen by Chinese migrants.
Migrants spreading Marxian ideas, leading the murder of over 90 million and the enslavement of billions.
Totalitarian bait-and-switch, divide-and-screw practices by ruling groups, the near certain result in multicultural societies--wrecking democracy, wrecking pro-worker organizations, ruining political parties, causing general mass destruction.
The demonization of nonwealthy whites by wealthy, ruthless multicultural ruling groups.
Loss of freedom of association.
Massive fifth columning.
Ethnic cleansing of white, working class neighborhoods, loss of property values, costs of moving, costs of competing for slots in decent neighborhoods, costs to working class whites left behind.
Millions of antiwhite rapes and other assaults in schools and prisons not counted in crime stats.
Loss of freedom of speech.
Wrecked ethical environment where moral facts are treated as worthless or evil, where fallacious rubbish is repeated until most of the population believes, where well-reasoned ethnoracial arguments are de facto banned from the mass media, where good points are automatically countered with straw person, ad hominem, and small sample fallacies.
Odious interpersonal environments where various ethnoracial groups groups try to assert their dominance and degrade others.
Massive traffic increases, causing cancer, congestion, cardiovascular disease, wasted hours,
Costs of replacing Western cultures with alienation and fanatical flight to destructive non-Western cultures.
Dysgenic breeding.
Massive legalized bribery by wealthy foreigners and de facto noncitizens.
Affirmative action salary costs and massive costs from inept professionals, especially nonwhite doctors. Public costs of college and college prep educations for migrant groups having IQs in the 80s, leaving them with no degrees, junk degrees or grade inflation degrees in fields they lack proper training for.
Loss of trustworthiness, which is more important than the loss of trust.
Don't forget to include dozens of other costs I forgot to mention here.
Thank you, economists. Your historical devotion to the whole truth softens my heart. I'm sure I'll see the whole truth in your next "study."
The Fear Mongering Charade
If you have been following politics recently, you've probably seen plenty of the circumstantial ad hominem "fear mongering," usually directed at those who even slightly oppose cultural Marxism or other establishment nonsense. This farce would be hilarious if the consequences were not so tragic for nonwealthy Westerners. Alleged fear in arguers is, of course, usually irrelevant, as are other emotive states
But the contradictions. Oh, my! For decades, establishment political parties have relied on fear, groupthink, repetition, and media dominance to keep individuals from facing facts, from deviating from the crypto totalitarianisms of Republicanism, and Third Way Democratism.
"Ooga booga. He opposes invasion and annihilation. He must be a r*cist, b*got, and goose st*pper."
So we have the establishments, the same establishments who have been bombarding us with preposterous terror alerts, telling us to be afraid of the moral facts, to freak out about terrorism, but to seldom mention the far more massive threats of egoism, globalism, nihilism, dysgenics, militarism, oligopolies, creeping Sharia, super volcanos, nuclear war, legalized bribery, biological weapons, biocultural Marxism, and one sided mass media.
Those inclined to grandstand offer dire global warming pronouncements when it is still an open question whether global warming is harmful or beneficial. Meanwhile, more important environmental issues (smoking, overfishing, deforestation, overuse of fertilizers, indoor air pollution, outdoor air pollution, antibiotic overuse, overpopulation in poor countries, asbestos in poor countries) get little attention.
(By the way, stop quoting the Pope, celebrities, and natural scientists on public policies. Logic, ethics, and public policies are not their areas of expertise.)
"Ooga booga. Don't use fiscal policies or a trillion dollar platinum coin. The economy is self-correcting."
Of course, the hands off economists are often silent when it comes to the thousands of policies that redistribute money to the top.
We're told to fear whites most of all, despite the fact that individuals from some other ethnoracial groups are many, many times more likely to commit stranger on stranger interracial crimes.
"Ooga booga. White tr*sh. White privilege. White terrorism. Whoops! It's past my bedtime. Let me retire to my mansion that happens to be in a gated community for no reason at all."
I'm so effing sick of establishment egoism, propaganda, contradictions, and gradual mass destruction.
But the contradictions. Oh, my! For decades, establishment political parties have relied on fear, groupthink, repetition, and media dominance to keep individuals from facing facts, from deviating from the crypto totalitarianisms of Republicanism, and Third Way Democratism.
"Ooga booga. He opposes invasion and annihilation. He must be a r*cist, b*got, and goose st*pper."
So we have the establishments, the same establishments who have been bombarding us with preposterous terror alerts, telling us to be afraid of the moral facts, to freak out about terrorism, but to seldom mention the far more massive threats of egoism, globalism, nihilism, dysgenics, militarism, oligopolies, creeping Sharia, super volcanos, nuclear war, legalized bribery, biological weapons, biocultural Marxism, and one sided mass media.
Those inclined to grandstand offer dire global warming pronouncements when it is still an open question whether global warming is harmful or beneficial. Meanwhile, more important environmental issues (smoking, overfishing, deforestation, overuse of fertilizers, indoor air pollution, outdoor air pollution, antibiotic overuse, overpopulation in poor countries, asbestos in poor countries) get little attention.
(By the way, stop quoting the Pope, celebrities, and natural scientists on public policies. Logic, ethics, and public policies are not their areas of expertise.)
"Ooga booga. Don't use fiscal policies or a trillion dollar platinum coin. The economy is self-correcting."
Of course, the hands off economists are often silent when it comes to the thousands of policies that redistribute money to the top.
We're told to fear whites most of all, despite the fact that individuals from some other ethnoracial groups are many, many times more likely to commit stranger on stranger interracial crimes.
"Ooga booga. White tr*sh. White privilege. White terrorism. Whoops! It's past my bedtime. Let me retire to my mansion that happens to be in a gated community for no reason at all."
I'm so effing sick of establishment egoism, propaganda, contradictions, and gradual mass destruction.
Monday, January 11, 2016
Signs of Life and Death
I have scant evidence for the following claims since little research is done on these things, but it appears white political thinking is moving in slightly better directions, at least outside of wealthy circles.
Signs of progress compared to several years ago:
The popularity of totalitarian neoconservatism among ordinary citizens declined, especially the version supported by the Bushes, though Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio or Hillary Clinton could steal the executive office.
Race realism and counter jihadism often united, brought on by the situation in Europe. Ten years ago counter jihadists bombarded race realists with slurs as if counter jihadists thought they could escape establishment opprobrium by throwing race realists under the bus. Fact facers realize genes and cultures both matter, though some counter jihadists (Robert Spencer) still act as if culture is almost everything.
Despite his massive defects, Donald Trump has redirected many Republicans from knee-jerk economic redistribution to billionaires to nonwhite invasion issues.
Pan-European ideas are spreading.
Signs of decline:
The latest Pope provides full bore support for antiwhite totalitarianism. Western militaries do likewise. Establishment propaganda is turning into an exact science.
What little democracy existed in the Western world is almost gone.
Living standards continue to decline, and the decline is covered up with hedonic pricing, statistical redefinitions, and other fallacies.
Self-described neoreactionaries are no help. The word reaction*ry is a slur used by ruling groups and followers of Marx. No movement that describes itself as a widely accepted slur has ever gained power. Would a majority support a party calling itself the D*mb Party, no matter the content of their characters? The millions of individuals tarred as reactionaries and murdered would be spinning in their graves (if they could) at the thought of people willingly calling themselves reactionaries. Neoreactionaries blame democratic systems that don't exist while praising the kings and queens who got us into this mess.
Chinese, Russian, and Western rulers are more similar than different, almost all are devoted to egoism, militarism, and biocultural Marxism.
The tribal fanaticism of white multiculturalists keeps increasing, impervious to ethical reasoning. Years ago multiculturalists would cite Eisenhower as an example of a moderate Republican. Now they regard Eisenhower as a pariah for not being antiwhite enough.
More oligopolies. More dysgenic breeding. More environmental destruction.
Signs of progress compared to several years ago:
The popularity of totalitarian neoconservatism among ordinary citizens declined, especially the version supported by the Bushes, though Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio or Hillary Clinton could steal the executive office.
Race realism and counter jihadism often united, brought on by the situation in Europe. Ten years ago counter jihadists bombarded race realists with slurs as if counter jihadists thought they could escape establishment opprobrium by throwing race realists under the bus. Fact facers realize genes and cultures both matter, though some counter jihadists (Robert Spencer) still act as if culture is almost everything.
Despite his massive defects, Donald Trump has redirected many Republicans from knee-jerk economic redistribution to billionaires to nonwhite invasion issues.
Pan-European ideas are spreading.
Signs of decline:
The latest Pope provides full bore support for antiwhite totalitarianism. Western militaries do likewise. Establishment propaganda is turning into an exact science.
What little democracy existed in the Western world is almost gone.
Living standards continue to decline, and the decline is covered up with hedonic pricing, statistical redefinitions, and other fallacies.
Self-described neoreactionaries are no help. The word reaction*ry is a slur used by ruling groups and followers of Marx. No movement that describes itself as a widely accepted slur has ever gained power. Would a majority support a party calling itself the D*mb Party, no matter the content of their characters? The millions of individuals tarred as reactionaries and murdered would be spinning in their graves (if they could) at the thought of people willingly calling themselves reactionaries. Neoreactionaries blame democratic systems that don't exist while praising the kings and queens who got us into this mess.
Chinese, Russian, and Western rulers are more similar than different, almost all are devoted to egoism, militarism, and biocultural Marxism.
The tribal fanaticism of white multiculturalists keeps increasing, impervious to ethical reasoning. Years ago multiculturalists would cite Eisenhower as an example of a moderate Republican. Now they regard Eisenhower as a pariah for not being antiwhite enough.
More oligopolies. More dysgenic breeding. More environmental destruction.
The Visitor
During a break at a contract job, I tried to visit a tame, obscure ethnoracial realist web site (I forgot the name of it). The site was blocked because spurious h*te accusations. Somehow that obscure website had made The List. Every mass media political site I visited was not blocked. The wifi belonged to the company, so the company had a legal right to block sites. The company probably buys the blocking software and has only a vague idea of which sites are blocked.
The contradictions are what bothered me. Mass media political sites spew millions of antiwhite slurs, yet mass media sites were not blocked (the hard bigotry of low mass media moral expectations).
I visited Salon. I could have read the Salon article calling for whites to be burned alive. (No problem!) I could have read thousands of other articles devoted to antiwhite totalitarianism on other sites.
But if I wanted to read about whites peacefully seceding, no way.
The mere idea that nonwealthy whites might have claims for ethical autonomy and full human rights is anathema, but antiwhite demagoguery is treated as normalcy. And judging from their behaviors, almost all multiculturalists have no inkling they are doing anything wrong.
The contradictions are what bothered me. Mass media political sites spew millions of antiwhite slurs, yet mass media sites were not blocked (the hard bigotry of low mass media moral expectations).
I visited Salon. I could have read the Salon article calling for whites to be burned alive. (No problem!) I could have read thousands of other articles devoted to antiwhite totalitarianism on other sites.
But if I wanted to read about whites peacefully seceding, no way.
The mere idea that nonwealthy whites might have claims for ethical autonomy and full human rights is anathema, but antiwhite demagoguery is treated as normalcy. And judging from their behaviors, almost all multiculturalists have no inkling they are doing anything wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)