The Right to Defend Ourselves

Steve King faced a deluge of criticism for accurately implying that whites invented almost everything worthwhile.

In self-determined, ethnoracially homogenous societies, it wouldn't matter much which race invented what. Which individual and how would matter more.

But it matters now. Nonwhites bombard whites with fallacious race blaming rhetoric, yet when someone semi-famous attempts to counter the fallacies, he gets treated as if he has no moral right to tell the truth.

The Media and Fact Facers

Mass media multiculturalists often announce that ethnoracial fact facers aren't being brave, that fact facers are merely trying to get attention by being contrarian.

But ethnoracial fact facing is the sort of contrarianism that gets you little attention. Few Americans have heard of Thomas Jackson, Gregory Hood, and other realists. Facing facts gets you fired or unhired. You don't get much attention by being permanently banned from the mass media and other institutions. Most Westerners still know almost nothing about ethnoracial issues. (The mountains of fallacious propaganda spread by establishment institutions counts as information, not knowledge.

Cutesy, infotainment contrarianism (Freakonomics, for example) gets attention. When no powerful groups are threatened by contrarian facts, powerful groups love contrarian infotainment. Sports writers love to throw shocking contrarian claims out to grab attention. Human memories are so limited that sports fans forget the previous, inaccurate contrarianism and rumor mongering by sports reporters.

Ethnoracial fact facers write on obscure websites that barely stay afloat. Most Americans cannot name a single race realist writer. Millions have now heard of the phrase Alternative Right, but they mainly hear straw person attacks from the mass media. The mass media in no way want fact facers to get attention, other than demonizations. There are thousands of influential mass media positions in the world, no open race realist holds any of them.

Despite the protection of being African-American, Walter Williams was fired by NPR merely for stating that he gets nervous seeing "Muslim garb" on a plane. He didn't call Muslims slurs. Dozens of others were fired or unhired for simply facing moral facts. Meanwhile, multiculturalists keep their jobs while getting away with monstrous slurs and murderous rhetoric.

Sally Kohn still has a job at CNN after writing "i have no reason to believe not justified" in regards to Vester Flanagan murdering two colleagues. Among Flanagan's spurious racial complaints were statements by co-workers saying they were going "out in the field."

The mass media do not want certain ethical facts entering the minds of citizens.

But then, the media live in unethical bubbles. The fact that millions of working class whites are being massively harmed by multiculturalists--losing their jobs, lives, incomes, families, schools, neighborhoods, countries--does not occur to multiculturalists as motivation for race realism. Treating nonwealthy whites as full humans with equal rights to others seldom occurs to multiculturalists.

Establishment conservatism's favorite buzzword is freedom, yet establishment conservatism destroys freedoms for nonwealthy and ethical individuals. Multiculturalism's favorite buzzword is equality, yet multiculturalism destroys both freedom and equality, especially for whites and nonmuslims.

Nonwhite Medical Workers: Avoid Them If You Can

They are low in empathy, especially toward whites.

The minimum IQ of competent doctors is at least 115, more than two standard deviations above most black and dark brown groups. The amount of information doctors must know and carefully weigh is staggering. Lower IQ individuals, even when well-meaning, simply don't have a chance of accurately handling that load of information.

The glib, lazy, selfish, uninformed, overconfident decisions they make, kill or cause lifetimes of severe suffering.

And when they screw up, they'll do what they can to evade responsibility and blame you, simply out of their own egoism and tribalism.

Ignore the fatuous praise heaped on them by white multiculturalists. White multiculturalists are vapidly enthralled by things done nonwhite mammals, including stupid pet tricks, drawing their conclusions from faith, indoctrination, and small sample fallacies.

Ignore nonwhite doctors' skills in BS artistry. It doesn't take much brilliance to be a good BS artist. Look at how talented 15-year-olds are in BS artistry.

In the West, dark triad types congregate in law, finance, government, and mass media. In nonwhite countries, those professions pay little, except for individuals at or near the top. Filipino nurses in the U.S. earn many times more than lawyers in the Philippines. Selfish, dark triad individuals in those countries seek out medical professions, hoping to migrate to the West. Academic cheating in nonwhite countries is the norm and nonwhite students who don't cheat quickly learn that not cheating gives their classmates advantages they consider unfair.

You are usually better off with white nurse practitioners than experienced black and dark brown general practitioners.

Despite their advantages over nonwhite medical workers, white medical workers should also be treated with ethical doses of skepticism. Your life and health are too valuable to be ruined by poorly reasoned decisions, especially decisions motivated by the self-loathing rampant among contemporary whites.

Rely on nonwhite medical workers only in emergencies or when whites are unavailable.

Do Mess with Paris, Texas

Congratulations to actor Harry Dean Stanton on reaching his 90th birthday today.

Stanton's pairing with Natassja Kinski in 1984's Paris, Texas seemed implausible then and more so now. The young, attractive Kinski played Stanton's estranged wife despite Stanton's character lacking gorgeous wife attracting traits--looks, youth, money, status, humor, power, warmth, purpose, similarity, trustworthiness, BS skills, resource altruism, fatherly characteristics, dark triad attributes. Almost nothing except proximity.

The Law Enforcement Assimilationism Nightmare

The political focus of the mass media now is multicultural law enforcement issues.

So let's imagine that beings came down from the heavens to always enforce laws with complete impartiality, a dream of multicultural law enforcement assimilationism. No legal innocent would ever be imprisoned. No suspect would ever be unjustly wounded since police would be replaced by heavenly beings. If someone was fined for driving slightly over the speed limit, everyone driving the same amount over would be fined the same amount. Would that then make multiculturalism a good thing?

Hell no.

Why?

Because the overwhelming majority of multicultural harms come from legalized activities: Welfare. Cheating. Dysgenics. Militarism. Mercantilism. Totalitarianism. Demagoguery. Self-contradictions, Migrant invasions. Legalized treason. Legalized bribery. Nightmarish schooling. Mass deception. Bait-and-switch. Divide-and-screw. Pump-and-dump. health problems. Cultural nihilism. Affirmative action. Relationship conflicts. Loss of freedoms. Atrocious public policies. Ethnoracial nepotism among multiculturalists. And Cultural imperialism by garbage cultures.

Then there are the massive harms from illegal activities that the heavenly beings would punish equally, but fail to prevent: fraud, espionage, illegal bribery, interracial violent crime, to name a few. Preventing harms is far more important than punishing them afterward.

Multiculturalists legalize harmful activities that should be illegal and also ban beneficial actions by whites and other ostracized groups.

Multiculturalists, despite what they say, don't pursue impartiality. They pursue egoism, conquest, and the annihilation of whites and other perceived opponents. Doing so gives their lives emotive purpose. Get justice, get less peace. They take your country, then they treat you as an enemy of the state for not slavishly supporting they dystopian empire they create, acting as if patriotism means selflessly aiding free riding. When we treat persons of psychological or evolutionary egoism fairly or equally, they will still view the treatments as unfair or unequal, They view whatever they want to believe as fairness. Wealthy Persian Gulf persons, who never worked a day in their lives, nevertheless view themselves as victims of Westerners.

Massive genetic differences related to behavior make differing races incompatible, except when using totalitarian force to keep the temporary peace.

You get more of what you reward. And today's rewards are out of whack and unsustainable.

The main ideological result of assimilation has been assimilating whites into totalitarian, anti-white beliefs systems.

Leave us alone to go our own ways. We are not the property of multiculturalists. Millions of future generations depend our actions.

No Rhetorical Enemies to the Biocultural Left

For years, multiculturalists have been hammering Hillary Clinton's "super predators" comment and other allegedly tough on crime and welfare comments she made in the 1990s.

It is not enough that Clinton supports open borders and a multitude of other lesser multicultural initiatives. Even slight deviations from cultural Marxism are no longer tolerated among multiculturalists.

So Clinton's recent Dallas comments are no surprise. Her rhetoric is now utterly tamed by cultural Marxism. Almost every rotten behavior by nonwhites can now be grist to excoriate whites. Whites are assumed to be a blamable cause of almost everything harmful done by nonwhites.

For Democrats, almost no rhetorical point for even slight ethnoracial fact facing now exists. Slight dog whistling will no longer get them additional votes and donations from whites.

Almost no race realist will vote for her, period.

White, third way multiculturalists are now so well indoctrinated that they see nothing amiss with whites being blamed for nonwhite actions in Dallas, Orlando, and more importantly, J Street and Wall Street. She can say almost anything negative about whites and still get votes and money from white, third way multiculturalists.

Unfortunately, for nonwealthy domestic multiculturalists and most of us, Clinton's major policy prescriptions support dysgenics, militarism, financialism, and open borders. She's devoted to Haim Saban and George Soros. (Ignore the gold buggism following that latter article.)

The anarcho-tyranny joke's on the nonwealthy domestic multiculturalists and us. African-Americans may get Clinton to be soft on crime, but they'll be many of the crime victims. They may get a little more affirmative action and Section 8 housing, but they'll keep getting reduced wages from chaos, dysgenics, globalism, militarism, and financialism--as will we.

Latin America

Gregory Hood delivers a solid article about Brazil and cultural Marxism.

I once worked with a very, very smart white supporter of Marxism, especially regarding Marxism south of the Rio Grande. If you asked him to improvise a 10,000 word soliloquy about Zapatistas, he could probably do so.

He would buttonhole coworkers into conversions about Latin American politics, talking to coworkers as if they were four-year-olds, fuming about their ignorance of Latin American politics and how much blame Americans allegedly deserve for failings south of our border.

Though he would have been a good candidate for a Latin American Jeopardy contest, if you asked my coworker what the phenotype IQs of various Latin American countries were, he might have said, "One-hundred. Like everywhere else." Or maybe, "What's a phenotype?" Asking him about dysgenics or free rider problems would have been even more of an adventure. Asking him how many coups Latin America had before Washington starting seriously messing around in Latin America would have been another interesting topic.

My coworker was smart, not wise.

Since then I have met many other progressive white guys, who act as if their banal historical knowledge of Latin America makes them political prescription experts. They read their Chomsky. The US government did something wrong, therefore they prescribe prescriptions that have been unrelentingly disastrous, as if US government actions justify their own evils. I met one guy who illegally traveled to Cuba and marvelled about Cuba, the Cuba untainted by excesses of consumerism and turbocapitalism.

Once my coworker bragged about how America would become like Brazil and have lots of beautiful women like Brazil. I told him American women were more attractive to me than Brazilian women, and that Brazil was the world capital for women who unintentionally look like drag queens.

He never spoke to me again about non-work topics.

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.