On Slight Politically Incorrectness

Individuals often try to be a little bit politically incorrect, as if a tiny bit of contrarian grandstanding makes them brave fact facers.

Some counter-jihadists, for example, criticize Islam, figuring Islam is chosen, which Islam is, therefore fair game. These counter-jihadists demand the mythical moderate Islam while continuing to support most of cultural Marxism. They urge mullahs to publicly condemn terrorism, as if that will make much difference.

Counter-jihadists should know by now that mullahs say one thing for infidel consumption and something else for Muslim consumption. Public ecumenical statements by Muslims have little effect on Muslim behavior. These statements primarily make white multiculturalists even more gullible.

Ideology matters, but genes matter, too, especially when individuals are genetically inclined to fanatically cling to evil ideologies.

Many counter-jihadists consider race off limits since race is unchosen, but crushing flaws with this view exist.

Cultural Marxism is wrong about thousands of issues, not just Islam. As we see in Zimbabwe, South Africa, and almost everywhere else nonwhites live with whites, nonwhites cause massive harms to whites--and whites cause harms to nonwhites and each other. Multiculturalism makes most individuals worse than they would have been, especially white rulers practicing bait-and-switch, divide-and-screw strategies.

Nonwhites from outside Northeast Asia practice inbreeding and polygamy. They politically support mass dysgenic breeding, plus demographic conquest and annihilation.

Many nonwhites have lower levels of empathy for outgroups. They more frequently have the lower activity variants of the MAOA gene, and they have lower IQs--all of which increase destruction for whites. Multitudes of other behavioral genetic differences exist, but have yet to be discovered because almost all social scientists support cultural Marxism.

The destruction rises exponentially as nonwhite numbers increase. The solitary nonwhite surrounded by whites behaves fairly well. White minorities in nonwhite countries face mass destruction.

All nonwhite groups seek to dominate, not assimilate.

Multiculturalists emphasize the allegedly humble Japanese in America during World War II. They don't mention the millions of Japanese fifth columning in Asia and the Pacific during the the same period. The Japanese in America were acting humble out of self-interest and their comparative weakness, not moral goodness.

Already, numerous Chinese have been caught spying in the West. Those caught probably represent a fraction of those spying.

We have ethical duties to face all important ethical facts, no matter whether the facts are a tiny bit politically incorrect or colossally politically incorrect.

Followers of Bill Maher and the late Christopher Hitchens seem to revel in their contrarianism and political incorrectness, but their dissent is mostly trivial, doing little to save Westerners from mass destruction.

Christian Neoconservatism Versus Secular Neoconservatism

The mass media tell us that Christian neoconservatism--the Elmer Gantry menace--is a great threat, yet the mass media also tell us Jeb Bush, David Brooks, John Kasich, Hillary Clinton, and other secular neoconservatives are moderate and responsible.

What's the difference?

Both groups have few qualms about supporting kleptocracy, promoting cultural Marxism, and bumbling into world wars. Both groups are largely immune to ethical evidence. The big media difference: Christian neoconservatives believe in creationism, which is more a scientific issue than an important moral issue. Other differences revolve around school prayer and other minor issues. Clinton opposes many tax cuts for the wealthy but also lets personal enmity with Putin and others drive foreign policies.

Paul Krugman seems to relish commiserating with David Brooks, yet regularly refers to Christian neoconservatives as "crazies."

My head be scratched.

Labor in Union

Once upon a time some nations figured out a semi-solution to the fact that oligarchism caused mass destruction. Other nations were not so fortunate. They tried to fight oligarchism with paleo-Marxism, causing worse destruction, replacing one oligarchism with another.

The lucky nations fought oligarchism with labor unions, but the labor unions became corrupt. Some were co-opted by ruling groups, some taken over by rent seeking from within. Others were wrecked by the divide-and-rule practices of militarism and multiculturalism. A few become homes for organized crime. Workers needing unions the most didn't get them. Workers needing unions the least--public sector workers--did get them.

Unions helped nonunion workers by creating tighter labor markets, via the politicians unions supported. But now that private sector unions are rarer and less powerful, unions have less influence on the labor market. Witness the incredible political tolerance for loose labor markets for the past eight years, which seeks ever cheaper labor, no matter the ethical costs.

Many unions fought only for their current members, losing sight of their role in checking oligarchism.

Many became soft with hedonism.

Unions had comparatively little influence over the mass media. Most intellectuals and media celebrities, in their bubbles of unreality, favored variants of Marxism and establishmentism. The rare intellectual contradicts his institutions, especially when those institutions put money in his wallet. The mass media fought hard for oligarchism and cultural Marxism, known by such variants as globalism, third wayism or, even worse, neoconservatism. The techniques and technologies of propaganda kept developing. The media became dominated by the wealthy and individuals predisposed to idealistic sounding fanaticism.

Some tried to fight oligarchism with protests. But the ruling groups only budged when the protests agreed with the cultural Marxism of the ruling groups. Thus, Occupy Wall Street and similar protests accomplished almost nothing, but the University of Missouri protesters and related protests extracted concessions. The ruling groups probably laugh in secret at most contemporary non-ethnoracial protest movements.

Marxism adapted. It decided economics didn't matter as much, except when it comes to supporting the parasitism of multicultural leaders.

What mattered most for Marxism was being anti-white. Almost anything anti-white was tacitly or explicitly supported. White laborers went from being treated as subhumans by the likes of Andrew Carnegie to being treated as subhumans by wealthy multiculturalists and their allies.

Diversity lectures hectored whites with fallacious rhetoric and resembled paleo-Marxian struggle sessions.

Attempts to revive unions floundered due to ethnoracial conflicts and the past several decades of indoctrination in neoclassical economics.

In the establishment view, the rise of the American middle class had almost nothing to do with labor unions or pro-worker policies or anti-rent seeking movements or centuries of eugenic breeding in Europe or the fact that the United States was nearly 90 percent white. Establishments emphasized imaginary free markets, sainted figures, formal education, Southwest Asian religions, and, even more preposterously, the alleged benefits of ethnoracial diversity.

Bernie Sanders tries to market himself as a supporter of Scandinavian style mixed economies, yet refers to himself as socialist. Sanders' past behaviors, especially his Eugene Debs documentary, indicate Sanders has more in common with Marx than FDR. Sanders seems unaware that Scandinavian style economies work only with racially homogenous populations, practicing reciprocal altruism and eugenic breeding. Unfortunately, dysgenic immigration plus dysgenic breeding caused by the welfare state and the lack of explicitly eugenic policies, spells big trouble for Scandinavia. Even without outgroup invasions, egoism caused by dysgenic breeding would slowly ruin Scandinavia.

Even if he wins the presidency, Sanders faces courts and legislatures stacked against him, in some cases, rightfully so. The mass media will magnify every flaw, to bring back a neoconservative or third way president.

Though Donald Trump is mostly pro-establishment, Trump also faces a juggernaut arrayed against him for not being pro-establishment enough.

No matter who wins the presidency, working class workers will continue to suffer.

An Immodest Affirmative Action Proposal

White supporters of affirmative action almost never volunteer to give up their own jobs to nonwhites. Perhaps they think, "There is no contradiction. I support affirmative action in general, not affirmative action for my job. I have unique skills that cannot be replaced by a nonwhite."

Or some don't notice a potential contradiction at all. Multiculturalism requires that believers ignore multitudes of self-contradictions, and white multiculturalists aren't people who notice self-contradictions. Browbeaten into evil beliefs by establishments, careful thinking is anathema to them.

True, some white multiculturalists are irreplaceable by nonwhites, but millions of other white, affirmative action supporters are not, especially white, multicultural social scientists. We don't benefit from junk science. And let's not forget the rubbish taught in the so-called humanities.

Thousands of white social scientists and humanities professors should resign tomorrow.

The sight of upper middle class white professors hectoring working class white students about multiculturalism is more than a little despicable, especially when working class whites have grown up in diverse schools that are worse for white children than the camps the Japanese were sent to by FDR.

Affirmative action costs over $1.1 trillion per year. Its supporters should pay the costs.

Some libertarian multiculturalists don't directly support affirmative action, but they support invasions by millions of affirmative action demanding nonwhites, overriding their direct opposition.

Many older white multiculturalists have considerable assets. High asset, low skill older white multiculturalists could afford to give up their high paying jobs for low wage jobs, so nonwhites can have their old jobs.

White multiculturalists act as if nonwhites are better than whites, yet see themselves as superior. They mix anti-white supremacism with their own personal supremacism.

Multiculturalists ignore mountains of ethnoracial evidence and believe in neoconservatism, third wayism or full bore Marxism, indicating general inclinations to ignore evidence. They think the totalitarianisms of Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush, Jill Stein, John Kerry, John Kasich, Hillary Clinton or Gary Johnson are "centrist." Remember when Jon Stewart had that "moderate" Rally to Restore Sanity, inviting the Sharia supporting Yusuf Islam? Apparently, no one working at the Daily Show knew who Mr. Islam really was. People who ignore moral evidence make worse employees. No one should trust those who think Jeb Bush is a good guy.

Almost everything on television is garbage. Let's replace all the whites. Heighten the contradictions. Let nonwhites make worse garbage. Maybe whites would watch less television.

And Wall Street. Wall Street is roughly 31 percent white despite the mass media rhetoric that blames whites for Wall Street. Get rid of the remaining whites. Let's replace white Wall Streeters with Down Syndrome nonwhites. Making Wall Street less clever at rent seeking and destroying economies will be splendid.

In general, any white multiculturalist employed in rent seeking should either give their job to a nonwhite, or better yet, eliminate their job. The more rent seeking is competent, the more rent seeking costs most of us.

Many white multiculturalists who refuse to give up their own jobs have no business supporting affirmative action in general, especially when they use totalitarian methods on affirmative action opposing whites. That includes the de facto affirmative action corporations practice to avoid boycotts, lawsuits, and other activism.

Selfishness and loss aversion be damned.

Weighing Globalism

If wealthy individuals in country Y gain X dollars per year from globalism and nonwealthy workers in country Y lose less than X, that's not a net moral benefit.

That's a moral catastrophe.

Poorer workers lose money they desperately need. Wealthy individuals gain more money for environmental destruction, legalized bribery, and status competitions. Increased money for the wealthy deserves negative moral weight.

Globalism is primarily a moral issue. The moral consequences of migration, rent seeking, cultural Marxism, military spying, industrial spying, legalized bribery, status competitions, environmental destruction, ethical cultures destroyed, institutions corrupted by hostile foreigners, and trade caused military conflicts are greater than the moral value of the money involved.

Spot the Fallacies Hunt

This photo contains at least three fallacies.

Meth, Kevin Williamson, and Working Class Whites

In his paywalled, evidence free broadside against nonwealthy whites, Kevin Williamson mentions meth. Meth is made with pseudoephedrine and other products of globalization. Pseudoephedrine is worth little as a medicine and nearly impossible for most home chemists to produce.

A few decades ago, the burgeoning quaalude epidemic was crushed because its components required sophisticated chemical factories for production. Chemical companies agreed to stop producing that substance.

Now, destruction profiteering is so entrenched that corporations and politicians refuse to stop producing the crap medicine named pseudoephedrine and refuse to close the Mexican border, where much illegal pseudoephedrine crosses.

(Other stuff: Most of the National Review is an evidence free zone, a magazine that exists to provide rhetorical cover for ruthlessness. Williamson doesn't mention the massive amount of brain drain and dysgenic breeding that played a role in creating downscale communities. Meth is also a massive problem for Hispanics and other ethnoracial groups.)

Ethnoracial Fact Facing and Free Will

Free will, if it exists, occurs when we have thoughts that contradict all the genetic and environmental forces acting on us. Some free will spark in our consciousness says, "I will otherwise."

With all the evidence supporting genetic and environmental causes, if free will does exist, it exists only during a small percentage of our activities. We wake up and conduct most banal activities without engaging in acts of free will.

Psychologists conduct studies purporting free will does not exist, but since free will might exist a fraction of the time, free will's existence might be beyond the measurement errors of those studies. These studies employ faulty measures of free will. We cannot accurately measure something using the wrong tests for it.

The participants in those studies are likely college students, many of whom are victims of wantoness, no matter how large their IQs. College students become enthralled with favorite professors. They idolize Neil deGrasse Tyson and other celebrity intellectuals. They are easy prey for academic fads, mass media indoctrination, and other forces, including students who act with know-it-all behaviors. Free will might require high levels of mental and philosophical development.

Emergent properties often arise from objects not possessing those properties. Consciousness arises from brain meat. Consciousness is no illusion. It is through consciousness that we provide evidence for all arguments. There is no physical law that proves free will can not emerge from brain meat.

Research suggests that beliefs in free will are important for creating beneficial ethical consequences, whether free will exists or not. Individuals who do not believe in free will are more likely to be selfish or apathetic, more tolerant of evils by perceived ingroups since they view their perceived allies as not being able to act otherwise. Contradicting themselves, they treat their political opponents as if they do have free will. The history of Marxism is riddled with apathy or support toward ingroup evils, and demonization of non-Marxists. Marxian evils are almost always viewed as necessary for the cause. Opponents are viewed as disposable biological machines with no dignity and other human characteristics.

Contemporary multiculturalists seem oblivious to the fact that multiculturalism is anti-equality. Equalities that treat whites as full members of the human race are discarded. Orwell's maxim that some animals are more equal than other animals, meaning some are far less human, applies to both economic and cultural Marxism.

Nearly all whites live in environments where almost every political force pressures whites to support cultural Marxism. The punishments for not supporting cultural Marxism are severe, the rewards for opposition tiny. The indoctrination campaigns are carefully crafted.

Free will sparks might be involved in opposition to cultural Marxism.

Some might argue that Western patriots are simply rare individuals whose genetic and environmental influences force them go where the evidence leads, at least on multicultural issues, rather than where propaganda and other forces lead. No actions by Western patriots need free will as a cause.

I have no good counter to this counter argument and proof that free will exists.

But thank goodness for ethnoracial fact facing. The ethical greatness of properly opposing cultural Marxism is far more important than the fact of whether free will exists or not.

Quota Systems

Jews and Asian Indians don't say, "Oh, we earn much more than whites. We don't need our tribalism, ethnic networking, and anti-white quotas any more."

Muslims don't say, "We get trillions in welfare and unearned oil money. We should start doing our share."

Black college educated women don't say, "Hey, we earn more than white college educated women, even though we have lower IQs, worse credentials, and worse behavior. We can stop with the affirmative action."

Non-white millionaires and billionaires don't say, "I've got it made. Maybe I should cut back on playing my personal victim card about so many trivial things."

Black athletes don't say, "We're overrepresented in professional sports. We need some whites, Asians, and Hispanics in proportion to their populations."

Wealthy college coaches don't say, "I'm making out like a bandit by exploiting poor students at public universities." Coach Dale Brown once referred to college coaches as "whoremasters," but that was long ago when cognitive dissonance was slightly more common.

Wealthy white multiculturalists don't say, "I've benefited massively from other whites. Maybe I shouldn't try to destroy the West and White peoples."

Hell no.

And almost none of them ever will. They keep fighting like hell for poorly reasoned narratives. They will only get worse, especially as dysgenic breeding keeps increasing and the technologies of propaganda keep improving.

Few contradictions are so great that they can not be ignored or rationalized. They understand the word more better than they understand justice and cognitive dissonance.

Few nonwhites believe in giving away power for ethical or pseudo-ethical reasons. They excoriate dead and living whites while white washing the far worse behavior of themselves and their ancestors. And neither do whites devoted to egoism and cultural Marxism. They put that knife in deeper and twist harder.

And it's not just in Western countries. Malaysia has Bumiputera policies, giving racial Malays massive affirmative action benefits over minority Indians and Chinese.

Affirmative action cost $1.1 trillion per year many years ago. The costs will continue to escalate far more than most people realize.

Some whites act uninterested in the consequences of cultural Marxism, but cultural Marxism is interested in them--and their progeny.