When Ad Hominem Attacks Are Relevant

In a totalitarian societies, including the former United States, there is no such thing as a legitimate authority.

There are only experts and non-experts.

It is often logical to criticize the circumstances of an alleged expert, especially when they fail to provide well-reasoned arguments for their positions. In other words, circumstantial ad hominem attacks are often relevant when judging the expertise of experts. An expert witness should face circumstantial ad hominem attacks if he has been previously convicted of fraud or for various other character traits.

It is logically legitimate to criticize the expertise of Judge Gonzalo Curiel, a member of the La Raza Lawyers Association, though Donald Trump did so in a poorly reasoned manner, regardless whether Trump University was a scam, which it was.

Those who support Hispanic supremacism have no business living in the same country as white non-Hispanics and have no business deciding court cases involving white non-Hispanics.

Judges in the former United States are not democratically elected by individuals having self-determination. They are merely experts at best.

Not surprisingly, those who support establishment totalitarianism jumped to the defense of Curiel, the same thinkers who bombard whites with irrelevant circumstantial and abusive ad hominem attacks suddenly imagined that the circumstances of their alleged expert are irrelevant and any criticism of Curiel "racist."

(The ability to experience cognitive dissonance is seldom learned in law schools or journalism schools.)

Naturalistic Fallacies

I discern five ways in which the phrase naturalistic fallacy is thrown around, often without being defined and often in a pseudo profound manner:

1. The origins fallacy, also known as the genetic fallacy, a type of irrelevance: This is a legitimate fallacy type but calling it the naturalistic fallacy sows confusion. Six examples of the origins fallacy: X is artificial. X is unnatural. Y is natural. Americans have not believed X for years. Y is the American way. X comes from the word for W.
2. The idea that you cannot find the truth value of most prescriptive claims (ethical and other value claims) with 100 percent accuracy using formal or informal logic or any other method. Big deal. Some value claim conclusions are 58 percent likely to be true, others 99.9999 percent likely, others somewhere else between zero and 100 percent likely. Whether a prescriptive conclusion is 99.9999 percent likely to be true or 100 percent likely should have little affect on our willingness to act based on expected values and other moral arguments. You should avoid being eaten by flesh eating bacteria, no matter whether a tiny probability exists that flesh eating bacteria might be good. The truth value of most real world empirical claims (is claims) cannot be found with 100 percent accuracy either.
3. The fact-value rubbish: the assertion that empirical claims can be facts while value claims cannot. In other words, the idea that the moon is made of cheese is somehow capable of becoming a fact, even though it isn't a fact, simply because it is an empirical claim. But "You shouldn't walk in front of that bus," is incapable of being a fact because it is a value claim. Facts are any claims that have good arguments supporting them, whether value claims or empirical claims. In other words, facts have a high probability of being accurate because they have sufficient evidence supporting them.
4. The belief that a value claim conclusion requires a value claim premise. More rubbish. For example, "Don't eat that box of poison. Doing so has a 99.92 percent likelihood of killing you," contains a value claim conclusion followed an empirical claim premise. It doesn't need a value claim premise.
5. The assertion that value claims are worthless or meaningless. Self-contradictory rubbish. If value claims are worthless or meaningless, then the claim "value claims are worthless or meaningless" is not worth anything or does not mean anything.

We should not help whites "to preserve our race," because that is a genetic fallacy. We should do so to make our race better. We should do so to prevent the mass destruction that cultural Marxism brings, especially the increasing mass destruction the young and future generations will face. We should want our children to have better genes and environments than ourselves. We should want to reach their ethical potentials.

And by better, I don't mean more exciting toys. Children of wealthy, high achievers often turn out bad, despite high investments by their parents because these children have worse environments than their parents. Consumer items consumed their children. Their peers, in prestigious schools, devote themselves to hedonism and other bad causes, which these children dutifully follow. These kids never develop chips on their shoulders to find ethical facts and fight for them. Instead, they believe what makes them feel good, and hating nonwealthy whites makes them feel real good about themselves. (For most humans, hate is a feel-good emotion. Wealthy whites, apparently, almost never feel any cognitive dissonance for hating nonwealthy white over spurious reasons.)

Thus, nearly all wealthy whites practice egoism mixed with militarism and cultural Marxism. What little noblesse oblige once existed toward fellow whites is almost gone.

Forced Integration

Governments have no right to use totalitarian force to require individuals to live among rent seeking and destruction seeking ethnoracial outgroups.

Being forced to live surrounded by hostile outgroups is odious and degrading, worse than being forced to live surrounded by nihilism practicing 15-year-olds. Would it be acceptable for the government to force us to live surrounded by nihilism practicing 15-year-olds for the remainder of our lives?

The Miseducation Pageant

Another example of wrong versus wronger: the current curriculum education standards groups versus the poverty is the most important cause of poor educational outcomes groups.

Big deal if a few studies find super teachers make a big difference. Maybe the studies are rigged. Maybe the effects are not long lasting. A few thousand super teachers exist while thousands of times that many students exist.

Sure, we could practice eugenics, including cloning the super teachers, but the current establishments are fanatically opposed to eugenics--and are getting more dysgenic every day.

Today's students are too low IQ, ethnoracially diverse, and enveloped in cultures of hostility.

And much of the hostility comes from the fact that the curriculum, beyond basic reading and math, is filled with garbage that has no practical or ethical value, not to mention the cultural Marxism. I once knew a high school auto mechanics teacher. He found multitudes of decent jobs for his medium IQ students. He was a job creator. So what happened? The school district decided to replace the auto mechanics classes with vague, vapid technology classes--the sort of classes where you make worthless objects out of Popsicle sticks--on the unsupported opinion that doing so makes students more creative, confident, and well-rounded.

Equality and Anti-White Governance

Oppressing whites is supposedly necessary for the equality cause.

But how much equality motivation is true?

Multiculturalists show almost no concern for inequalities that harm any non-ally individuals. Every racial and religious minority in majority Muslim countries could be quietly exterminated over the next 40 years and multiculturalists would do little more than slightly wring their hands. Rulers bomb Muslim countries on behalf of globalism, neoconservatism, and war profiteering, not to protect non-Muslim minorities.

Blacks are dozens of times more likely to commit stranger on stranger interracial violent crimes than whites, yet the national media show almost no concern for these victims, even when blacks are heard to be shouting slurs while committing crimes, no matter the color of the victims.

But when a black dies under suspicious circumstances at the hands of a white stranger, the national media goes into full anti-white demonization mode, even when the evidence suggests legitimate self defense. And even when the alleged perpetrator isn't white.

Multiculturalists have no explanation for how their brethren--whipped into long-lasting frenzies of hate, sadism, and schadenfreude--will suddenly turn into just rulers. Multiculturalists spend little time weighing evidence and studying actual policy issues.

Few multiculturalists are aware that age, IQ, educational level, educational field, task persistence, spending habits, number of working adults in a family, and other factors more than completely explain differences in wealth between Northern Eurasian and black families. Some multiculturalists demand reparations for slavery as if they were completely unaware that de facto affirmative action and various welfare programs already cost the US economy well over $1.1 trillion dollars per year. Affirmative action even exists for groups wealthier than whites.

Even comparatively well-meaning multiculturalists seem oblivious of the overwhelming ethical evidence against multiculturalism. Paul Krugman regularly rants against economic conservatives who ignore well-reasoned economic evidence, yet Krugman is worse on biocultural issues than establishment Republicans are on economic issues. The only time I can remember Krugman being slightly right on an ethnoracial issue was when he slightly criticized Stephen Jay Gould's arguments. (It is no accident that Krugman, rephrasing Barry Goldwater, calls his blog "Conscience of a Liberal." Conscience refers to intuitions. The message: Multicultural intuitions matter more to Krugman than ethical evidence.)

None of the Grey Lady's pro-multicultural arguments are well-reasoned. Demands for compassion are rampant, even as the New York Times shows little compassion for the massive harms nonwealthy whites suffer from multiculturalism. The attitude among multiculturalists seems to be my team is automatically right and superior regardless of the evidence.

The end stages of neo-Marxism resemble Zimbabwe, Venezuela, North Korea, and South Africa, never universal equality or even semi-universal equality. Even in societies of unmitigated totalitarianism, the hunt for alleged reactionary forces is considered more important than actual equality. Dysgenics marches on.

Various slogans make multiculturalists superior, but goodness seldom exists. Harmful actions help the team, and the team is what matters most to them. And if multiculturalism wins complete victory the team will become even more factious than now, with Muslims and blacks wiping out other supporters of multiculturalism, just as various secular supporters of neo-Marxism were previously wiped out in North Africa and Southwest Asia by serious Muslims and just as white supporters of neo-Marxism in Zimbabwe fled or were murdered by blacks.

But if multiculturalism wins complete victory, there will be no white areas left for white multiculturalists to flee toward.

The Current Litmus Tests

Things that get you ostracized from Team Progressive:

1. mentioning an unwanted biocultural truth (race, gender, religion, eugenics, dysgenics, migration, and self-determination).
2. opposing welfare.
3. criticizing the progressive response to global warming.

Things that get you ostracized from Team Third Way:

1. mentioning an unwanted biocultural truth.
2. fighting rent seeking by Wall Street and members of Team Third Way.

Things that get you ostracized from Team Establishment Republican:

1. mentioning an unwanted biocultural truth.
2. fighting rent seeking by Wall Street and members of Team Establishment Republican.
3. planning large tax increases on the wealthy.

In twenty years, the litmus tests will likely change, especially for the Republican establishment.

For nonmulticulturalists, there is, as yet, no major team. A fairly big tent exists. Even John Derbyshire and other slow multiculturalists avoid ostracization, but you cannot be a fast multiculturalist, in other words, a typical multiculturalist without earning shunning from nonmulticulturalists.

Elephants in the Multicultural Room

Multiculturalists and their allies believe nonwhites are genetically equal or superior to whites in all important matters.

Multiculturalists and their allies have believed for several generations they have the world's greatest ideologies: Islam, Maoism, Putinism, globalism, Stalinism, Mugabeism, Keqiangism, Trotskyism, libertarianism, paleo-Marxism, neoconservatism, neoprogressivism, third wayism, and many others.

Multiculturalists and their allies control every major institution on the planet.

Advocates of ethnoracial self-determination, from the Thames estuary to the Tibetan highlands, are fined, fired, jailed or ostracized for thought crimes.

Yet given the above elephants in the room--there's barely breathing space in that room--multiculturalists and their allies act as if "whiteness" deserves primary blame for their own abysmal moral performance, as if some white trailer park in the Ozarks pulls the strings.

Costs of Brexit and Multiculturalism

Paul Krugman estimates Brexit would cost two percent of GDP, all other things remaining equal. But all other things won't remain equal.

In the long run, any Western country that continues to import several hundred thousand to several million nonwhites per year can expect massive GDP declines due to exponentially increasing anti-white mayhem and bigotry.

Nonwhites devote themselves to free riding in Western countries. Increasing nonwhite political power results in economic Marxism coexisting with or dominating capitalism. Put simply, nonwhites pursue rent seeking almost anyway they can get away with, whether by the dole, affirmative action, Wall Streeting, ethnoracial networking or dozens of other methods. As free riding increases, whites increasingly adopt self-destructive ideologies, especially Hitlerism, African values, and Southwest Asian values.

As the West already found out, it doesn't take a plurality of individuals of Southwest Asian descent to cause totalitarianism.

Racial diversity makes most individuals of most races worse than they would otherwise have been.

Genetic engineering might not save matters if, as expected, nonwhites engineer their children eugenically for IQ but dysgenically for even more egoism, familism, and ethnoracial nepotism. Many individuals underestimate the dangers of high IQ, low character individuals. Studies finding high IQ Ivy Leaguers to be more ethical are junk science. The studies use unrepresentative sampling, faulty measures of character, and participants smart enough to self-promote by seeing through the study design. The historical evidence of mass destruction caused by the Ivy League's "best and brightest" far outweighs the junk science. Levels of economic and industrial espionage by nonwhites will continue to escalate.

Brexit still leaves cultural Marxism in charge. But at least Brexit is a tiny first step toward taking control from global totalitarianism.

Random Thoughts:
What's one difference between a libertarian multiculturalist and a man wearing a tinfoil hat? The man with the tinfoil hat in more likely to be moved by evidence.

Women are inclined to seek signs of commitment. But are taught in hedonistic cultures to seek superficial signs of commitment. Thus, empty words and ethically worthless pieces of carbon are given more value than more practical gifts. Buying a woman a stroller would be a major faux pas.

Men from societies with few eugenic forces seek control over female fertility by rape, seduction games, and de facto slavery.

A major part of the multicultural war to demoralize the West is getting white men and women to have no accurate self-respect, making us easier to take advantage of.

Happy Father's Day.

Negative Externalities of Chickens

Bill Gates supports more chickens for poor countries.

Gates' plan raises some questions: what happens to the price of chickens when 30 percent of rural families reach Gates' goal of raising chickens? Will those chickens eat cheaper calories? It takes 4.5 pounds of grain to make one pound of chicken, not counting insects and other calories the chickens scrounge for themselves.

More chickens. More viruses. More chicken thefts. More roosters. More cock fighting. More noise. Less sleep. Roosters make noise throughout the night, not merely in mornings.

There has to be much better investments, including IUDs.

Chicken farming is amiss in the former United States, too.