A Bookshelf for Families with Children

If your children don't have electronic gadgets or you strictly regulate their usage, most intelligent kids will start reading your bookshelf books out of curiosity or boredom, providing a way for you to indirectly influence your children.

For young children:

1. the better Christian children's books. Even if nonreligious, your children should gain familiarity with a little bit of Christian culture.
2. non-ideological childrens' books, so your children will develop reading skills. Older books from second hand stores are less infected with the poorly reasoned propaganda of cultural Marxism.

For older children:

1. logic and consequentialist ethics books. Look hard for books not filled with cultural Marxism.
2. ethnoracial fact facing books, including Race, Evolution, and Behavior by JP Rushton. Dysgenics by Richard Lynn. Paved with Good Intentions by Jared Taylor. Future Human Evolution by John Glad. The Perils of Diversity by Byron Roth. 
3. biology and physical anthropology, including The 10,000 Year Explosion by Cochran and Harpending. Sociobiology by EO Wilson. Signals by Timothy Perper.
4. up close accounts of war and past times to discourage the self-pity and self-absorption teenagers have. Other examples include Go Ask Alice and The Good Old Days: They Were Terrible!
5. photo albums
6. some books on blue collar activities, so your children don't see the college prep track as the only alternative, so they develop some handy man or handy woman skills.
7. prepping
8. books on various other policy issues, including secession, economics, democracy, corruption, and the environment.
9. body language and general psychology, The Nurture Assumption is especially helpful because teenagers get bombarded with Freudian and psychobabble ideas blaming parental practices for things teens don't like, including things they don't like about themselves.
10. a guide to manners and etiquette. Even if someone plans on breaking rules, it is good to know the rules.

Print worthwhile articles and throw them into three ring binders, especially when it comes to logic, ethics, prepping, and public policies. Individuals need much practice at fallacy recognition.

If your children are permitted to use electronics, downloading materials to a family e-reader and to the desktop of a family computer is also a good idea.

Yes, these books are hard core. But there is no evidence that reading harsh facts harms development. Kids benefit from street smarts. If your children have grown up in a diverse neighborhood, they have already experience harsh realities. Kids feel confused, alienated or pressured by the behaviors of their peers. If kids grow up sheltered, they end up easily exploited in schools and workplaces. Ideological vacuums tend to get filled. If your children aren't thinking well and forming their own belief systems, with indirect assistance from yourself, they will fall for the nihilism, hedonism, cultural Marxism, and additional fanaticisms peddled by others.

But what if visitors see these books? The books could open the door to fruitful discussions. But what if a boss or gossipy coworker sees them? Then you should probably put sensitive books in your bedroom, then keep visitors out of the bedroom, so you don't get doxed or worse.

Nurture assumption alert: attempts to directly encourage your children to read your books might backfire, especially if you have children who reflexively recoil at suggestions made by mom or dad.

Why not mass culture books? First, they're rotten. Second, your children will be exposed to massive amounts of mass culture BS from outside sources, so it is not as if they will be exposed to only the worldviews of your bookshelf.

Remember to punish your children should they call anyone ethnoracial slurs and explain why it is wrong to use slurs. You can't directly influence your children once they are out of your sight, but you can prevent them from influencing siblings and peers with slurs in your presence.

Contradictions of Multiculturalism, Part I

Multiculturalism is riddled with billions of contradictions.

On the rare occasions someone confronts multiculturalists with their contradictions, multiculturalists respond with irrelevancies ("What about so and so") or dismiss the contradictions from their minds. Note that multiculturalists seldom notice the contradictions on their own. Ethical reasoning is not their thing. This behavior includes philosophers, individuals societies trust with teaching logic and ethics.

Twelve big contradictions:
Multiculturalists use totalitarian government actions to force dysfunctional diversity on nonwealthy whites while multiculturalists flee dysfunctional diversity.

The sacrifice contradiction: Wealthy multiculturalists destroy the jobs, lives, schools, cultures, incomes, countries, families, and neighborhoods of nonwealthy whites while wealthy multiculturalists benefit from cheap labor and divide-and-rule practices.

Multiculturalists support freedom of association for nonwhites but not for whites.

Multiculturalists incessantly bash whites for the behavior of dead whites while minimizing the importance of worse actions by dead nonwhites and present day nonwhites.

Multiculturalists deny refugee status to peaceful whites fleeing disasters created by multiculturalists (Ukraine, Zimbabwe, and South Africa) yet grant refugee status to nonwhites devoted to invasion, conquest, and mass destruction.

Multiculturalists support freedom of speech for multiculturalists but not for ethnoracial fact facers.

Multiculturalists claim to support democracy while destroying it.

Multiculturalists claim to be open minded, yet almost all mass media fights to make sure well reasoned counter arguments are unseen and unheard.

Multiculturalists claim to be egalitarian, yet engage in massive amounts of economic rent seeking (parasitism).

Ordinary whites who simply want freedom of association for all humans are constantly called fascism related slurs, yet multiculturalists having ideological similarities to Marxism and fascism imagine themselves to be holy.

Multiculturalists think it okay to talk about eugenics and dysgenics if you call it idiocracy and associate it with white tr*sh. But if you mention the words eugenics and dysgenics, then suddenly eugenics and dysgenics become off limits to discussion.

Multiculturalists demonize the victims of dysgenic breeding caused by multiculturalists' own policies while not blaming themselves.

Friday's Random Thoughts

The ability to get a job as an opinion maker is inversely proportional to willingness to tell the ethical truth.

**********

National conversations on race consist of liberal multiculturalists and conservative multiculturalists. Any fact facer mistakenly invited would be considered a thought criminal (fired, harassed, assaulted or ostracized). The liberal multiculturalists bash whites with poorly reasoned arguments. The conservative multiculturalists do likewise but throw in some poorly reasoned personal responsibility rhetoric. Nevermind that those needing personal responsibility the most are genetically and culturally not inclined to listen to personal responsibility rhetoric.

**********

The "only whites can be r*cist" rhetoric implies whites are subhumans and nonwhites are gods with automatic virtue, no matter their behaviors.

**********

Contemporary Christian leaders aid billionaires devoted to the destruction of the West, distracting followers with ethically unimportant issues--school prayer, creationism, the Pledge of Allegiance, flag burning, and nativity scenes. Worse, these leaders encourage ethical misbehavior by emphasizing grace, the rapture, and Armageddon. In the meantime, the West gets destroyed by combinations of Randism, globalism, neoconservatism, third wayism, and cultural Marxism.

**********

The more important the issue, the more inaccurate Wikipedia becomes.

**********

We seldom feel like starting duties. Start them anyway. The aversive feeling usually passes. Waiting until the right feeling wastes too much time.

**********

Almost all humanities or social science degree holders support one or more of the following horrific ideologies: Randism, neoconservatism, hedonism, xenocentrism, cultural Marxism, paleo-Marxism, third wayism, globalism. Some support four or more of those ideologies. So to hell with the propaganda that the organized humanities and social sciences produce great human beings.

**********

The multicultural circle of life: Promote dysgenic breeding and vile actions, especially bait-and-switch, divide-and-screw practices. Blame whites. Promote more dysgenic breeding and vile actions. Blame whites. Promote more. Blame whites. Whoops, there aren't any whites left.

**********

Almost any time someone in the mass media claims a perceived opponent says, wants or believes something, the mass media claim will be a straw person.

Almost any time some one in the mass media tries to demonize someone by quibbling with a few minor claims, especially statistics, it will be a massive straw person. Politically unpopular writers will often publish books with thousands of claims and statistics. Some critic in the mass media will look for the few errors and try to demonize the author.

**********

Wall Street gives Barack Obama a 17 percent approval rating despite the fact that Obama helped Wall Street at the expense of ordinary citizens.

The pro-Wall Street Congress has an eight percent approval rating.

Freedom of Secession Association

Twenty-four percent of respondents to a 2014 Reuters poll support secession for their state.

But, oddly, there isn't a single decent website on secession. You would think for a topic so momentous, sites would proliferate.

Secessions should happen but not at the state level. The empire split in two model will fail also. You end up with the same totalitarianisms--blue states controlled by third wayism, red states controlled by neoconservatism.

But wouldn't the blue states become more progressive and the red states more alternative right?

Not likely.

Blue states would attract Libertarians, secular neoconservatives, nonwhite migrants, and others devoted to free riding and ruling group totalitarianisms, yet turned off by Christian neoconservatism. You end up with a hell run by the likes of David Brooks, Patri Friedman, Haim Saban, Reza Aslan, Prince Bandar, Al Sharpton, Joe Lieberman, and Louis Farrakhan.

Red states would attract multicultural, neoconservative pro-lifers. Pro-lifers consider abortion more important than other issues combined. Research suggests that pro-lifers who converted from Democratic to Republican over the past couple decades simply ditched their previous views on other issues, that is, they converted to Christian neoconservatism. You end up with a dystopia run by the likes of Rick Perry, Ben Carson, Marco Rubio, and Sheldon Adelson.

Any good split must create dozens of new nation-states, one each for Third Wayers, Libertarians, religious neoconservatives, secular neoconservatives, conservative ethnoracial fact facers, nonconservative ethnoracial fact facers, black secessioners, Hispanic secessioners, to name a few.

The first key for fact facers is ending dysgenic trends and reintroducing eugenics. The second key is good laws that fight free riding (rent seeking), plus citizens moving heaven and Earth to make sure those laws are enforced.

Present empires and crypto colonial states will eventually break apart or become more dystopian simply due to ever increasing dysgenic breeding and free riding. Groups of ethical, reciprocal altruists prosper when they separate. If groups don't separate, creeping evolutionary and psychological egoism result. Reciprocal altruism exists now because the ancestors of today's reciprocal altruists split from tribes that became increasingly dominated by egoism and tyranny. And they kept on splitting, usually with their kin and their kins' genes for reciprocal altruism.

Now that (some) humans understand reason and evolution better, some splinter groups should consciously direct their evolutions, to keep free riding in check, potentially preventing the costs of splitting.

But contemporary groups dominated by egoism and Machiavellianism use technology to try to lock in dystopian societies with servant altruistic classes and ruling groups devoted to egoism--as we see today today with ruling groups using the electronic mass media for an onslaught of despicable rhetorical tricks.

Be careful what you support. You could end up worse.

Winning Hearts and Darts from Non-Westerners

One little noted feature of Western self-destruction is the refusal of almost everyone in the ruling groups to verbally defend the West, not to mention their unwillingness to defend Western individuals.

Sure, they'll promote Islam, Randism, globalism, neoconservatism, third wayism, and cultural Marxism, but those are anti-Western beliefs.

Leaders won't stand up against cultural Marxism and say billions of non-Westerners owe their existences to Western science, technology, and generosity. Instead, leaders join the irrelevant, anti-Western, ontological guilt train. Why did Swedes acquiesce when Jesse Jackson hectored them with fallacious, genocidal rhetoric?

China prattles on about its "century of humiliation." Western leader dare not challenge the multicultural narratives. No leader mentions that Imperial China was a totalitarian, Malthusian hell. Females had their feet bound. Almost any Chinese man could be murdered for almost any reason, including having the wrong hair style.

No leader states that the West saved millions of Chinese from enslavement and destruction at the hands of the Japanese in the 1940s, then again from Maoism during the past 40 years.

If Chinese leaders were so great, why did millions of Chinese flee to Western enclaves in Shanghai and Hong Kong?

Russian leaders continue to play their victim games without mentioning the centuries of invasions and subjugations Russian leaders and the Soviet Union engaged in. Russia didn't become the world's largest country by accident or free association.

The supporters of globalism, neoconservatism, and third Wayism, who despise us as they rule us, want us to pivot to Asia and Russia, to intensify conflict with Chinese and Russian supporters of globalism and multiculturalism, who also despise us. This is not our fight. This is battle of egoism versus egoism among the global rich. No one in China, Russia, and the West should obey the military prescriptions of the ruling groups.

Multiculturalists tell us the mass slaughter of the American Civil War was necessary to end the evil of slavery in America, but fail to mention the far more brutal slavery and tribal wars practiced by Amerindians prior to the arrival of Westerners. Nor do they pay attention to today's slavery, often allying themselves with those spreading forced labor.

Barack Obama tells us the former United States is “one of the biggest Muslim nations” and thanks Muslims for "building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy.”

Right.

Thanks for stealth jihad, the police states, and all the legalized bribery on behalf of OPEC.

Western leaders have been disasters. Their egoism and groupthink bring continuing ruin. And nonwealthy Western individuals are starting to run low on available ruin.

The Cons of a Big Con

Beliefs and actions common among various forms of Marxism from Stalinism to multiculturalism (and a few other ideologies as well):

The cause matters more than the humans affected by the ideology, especially when both the means and ends are evil. Ideology and rage at perceived opponents suffice as substitute opiates of the masses. Critics get accused of anti-intellectualism despite the blatantly poorly reasoned arguments of the cause.

Free speech is for Marxian leaders or followers only.

The atrocious results of Marxism must some how have whites or opponents as the most important causes. Good things must have Marxism or nonwhites as the causes, for example, the cottage industry devoted to overstating the scientific contributions of Muslims.

Believers think triumph is inevitable, life will magically get better once whites or other opponents are gone. Counter evidence gets ignored, dismissed, distorted or demonized. Contradictions gets noted in the actions of opponents, not within Marxism. If it makes Marxian leaders feel good, others must imagine it is good. Cognitive dissonance is for whites and opponents. Moral facts (those from HBD writers, for example) must be made to appear as shameful, unthinkable thoughts. Believers should feel guilty only for not fighting correctly for the cause.

Military means mix with "boring from within" and the "the long march through the institutions." Once institutions are taken, believers bombard individuals with slurs, small sample fallacies, straw person attacks, and other fallacies. Believers act as if repeating fallacies turns fallacies into facts.

Instead of accurately developing and weighing arguments, followers focus on finding the most effective talking points to intimidate or manipulate.

Gurus get worshipped, especially those spewing pseudo profound jargon.

Rulers sow confusion, alienation among enemies. When behaviors of Marxian leaders become too evil to ignore, the evils must magically be relabeled no-true-Scotsman fallacy style into "conservative," "not Islamic," or "not real Marxism." Followers blame the victims. Rulers practice bait-and-switch, divide-and-screw. They chant the magic buzzwords and catch phrases (equality, diversity, compassion) and watch as opposition melts away. Platitudes and kumbaya activities cover the real goals.

And remember "no enemies to the left."

Followers act as if labeling intuitions and junk research scientific makes the the intuitions and junk research accurate.

The specific economic system is a lower priority, varying from communes, Maoism, Castroism, Stalinism, socialism, to cronyistic contemporary Chinese economics (but the system must follow the rule of from each according to what can be extracted from them, to those toward the top).

Found an Old Note to Myself

In July 2011, I Googled the following phrases:

"Sociology of terrorism" (14,600 Google results)
"Sociology of Sharia" (three results: first, a pro Sharia "social constructionist approach to the study of Sharia," then two copies of incoherent musings at Millatfacebook.com)
"Sociology of dhimmitude" (zero results)

You see the intersection of groupthink, the vividness bias, the garbage values of multiculturalism, and the junk science of sociology.

Priorities.

More Random Thoughts

Differences among multicultural liberal political parties (Green, Labour, Democratic) and multicultural conservative parties (Tory, Republican, Libertarian, Constitution) are largely arguments about how fast to destroy the West and how fast to increase rates of rent seeking from the tops and bottoms, with Libertarians and neoconservatives preferring the most and fastest destruction. The often unstated end is similar for all of them.

The longer we wait to reform the West, the higher the costs to ourselves and future generations. But real reformers have almost no power now. And most Westerners swallowed ruling group propaganda for so long, Westerners have few ideas about what should be done.

As ruling groups steal more power, their promoters emphasize the greatness of thousands of things, except organized nonwealthy citizens, labeling increases in available propaganda or consumer goods democracy while real democracy flounders, claiming we have bio wiring for what benefits them, but no wiring for what HBD discovers. Ruling groups call activities and technologies that indoctrinate or kill time healthy or educational. Instead of talking about moral beings, they talk about whatever slurs they can attach to nonwealthy individuals.

No one should let even the most wonderful of Muslims into their land, including diplomats. The children of these wonderful Muslims will behave according to genes and and non parental environments that the wonderful Muslims have little control over. And if they are so wonderful, they wouldn't be Muslim to begin with.

If you don't consciously make massive improvements to your environments and keep making them, you will end up surprised at how easily destructive elements insert themselves into your life.

The Consumer price Index is a faulty measure of inflation and living standards. The government admits that the CPI does not measure living standards. Home productivity (self-cleaning, home-cooked meals, etc.) plummeted during the past generation. The CPI measures quality improvements, but fails to accurately measure the ways new products are new and worse. Switching from incandescent bulbs to fluorescent bulbs, for example, causes sleep disorders because of blue wavelengths in fluorescent lighting. Antibiotics continue to lose effectiveness. Quality improvements were greater during the 1945 to 1973 period. Growth during that period was more likely understated than in recent decades. The total fertility rate at the peak of the baby boom roughly doubled the current total fertility rate. Comparing the number of toys adults have now versus then does not help. Parents had less money for toys in the 1960s because they had many children to support. Individuals had much less destructive diversity around them.

Many individuals push gun bans, not because of the bans objective merit, but because:

1. they have been baited into it
2. doing so makes them feel good about themselves without them having to do much good
3. vividness bias
4. doing so helps the divide-and-screw agendas.
5. all of the above

Afterall, they get much less worked up by things with fewer benefits and greater harms than guns--cars, smoking, dysgenics, asbestos, alcohol, bioweapons, motorcycles, cultural Marxism, nuclear weapons--to name but a few.

Some people who describe borders as arbitrary or pointless, nevertheless think this or that actor or sports team is ethically superior and worthy of support, though doing so is trillions of times more arbitrary and pointless.

Screwing People Over

A field of knowledge consists of many accurate, well understood ideas within that area. If a ten-year-old memorized an accurate article about astronomy, she would not be knowledgeable in that field because knowledge requires a huge number of accurate, well-understood ideas.

Trump gets criticized for not knowing politics and policy issues. And they're right.

The problem is that almost all other ruling group Western politicians have similar flaws. Their knowledge consists of how to screw people over, call it the political SPO field. These politicians have little knowledge of logic, ethics, and policy reforms. If you asked most ruling group politicians what Pigouvian taxes we should enact, their answers wouldn't be close to right, many wouldn't know the meaning of the word Pigouvian.

Ruling group politicians know thousands of leaders, lobbyists, diplomats, and advisors. They memorized thousands of talking points. But the talking points are either fallacious or intended as bait-and-switch morsels. They have political SPO knowledge, but not ethical and policy knowledge. Politicians are altruistic toward their friends and relatives, at the expense of the people. But since they are devoted to egoism, politicians easily believe helping allies is the same as doing their duties for the people.

Most people become national politicians because they want more power, status, and money, no matter what they claim their ethical motives are. In evolutionary terms, this is called psychological egoism.

Trump also has SPO knowledge from business fields, note his ability to have his corporations file for bankruptcy without his own wealth being destroyed. Trump's egoism is well documented.

That's why a random person walking down the street would likely be a better president than most billionaires or national politicians. The random person is less likely to be devoted to egoism. The professional politician will parrot or come up with all sorts of SPO schemes and fallacious rhetoric to support the schemes. Often Congressional bills will be written by lobbyists.

The random person turned politician might just say no to many such schemes, realizing what is at work.

We are now subjected to a plethora of poorly reasoned "As a lifelong Republican..." articles warning us about Trump, the fake centrism on full display. Being a lifelong Green, Republican, Democrat or Libertarian does not make one an expert. If anything, it makes one guilty. These authors would rather vote for a totalitarianism that starts a super war with China or Russia than anyone who opposes the invasion and annihilation of the West by migrants. These lifelong articles contrast Trump with the disastrous presidency of Reagan. The authors assume readers will be unaware of Reagan's real record, the over 30 percent decline of median incomes in young families with children during the 1980s, despite massive increases in wives working. Instead, the fairy tale emphasizes winning the Cold War and the Reagan boom, nevermind that the West lost the Cold War and boom was only for the wealthy.

You might as well vote for yourself rather than anyone the ruling group political parties offer.