To Get a Gig in Mass Media Opinion Making:

1. 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. 
2. Feign support for general interests.
3. 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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 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.

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.