Wednesday, June 7, 2017
Monday, June 5, 2017
Children in India Know Who General Dyer Was. Should we?
India is now the second or third largest source of legal migrants to the US and a fast growing source of illegal migration.
Establishments think little about the long term ramifications. The more Indians we import, the more political power they gain, the more they lobby for more Indian migration and anti-white privilege (as other nonwhite groups do). Instead of the comparatively high IQ Indian elites we import now, we will import more Indians having lower IQs and hypertribalistic behaviors, plus more of their increasing Muslim population. The estimated mean phenotype IQ in India is 82, probably a little lower than the mean genotype IQ because of the abysmal cultures and other environments in India.
Like other nonwhites, Indians are not shy about practicing egoism, kin nepotism, and racial nepotism. Stories abound of massive Indian cheating on tests, and of Indian workers taking over US companies, hiring kin, and firing non-Indians.
Something slightly similar happened before. The first Cubans to migrate to the US were whiter, higher IQ, and better working. The later Cuban arrivals, not so much. Much of Miami turned into hellholes, places many wouldn't recognize as part of the US, though other diverse groups deserve much of the blame.
A big difference is that India's population is about 150 times larger than Cuba's.
If China and India fight a war against each other, we face Indian and Chinese migrant populations fighting the war by direct or other means on our shores. If India and Pakistan fight, more imported destruction for us. If one or more have a nuclear or conventional war against us, even worse.
Most Indians cannot afford airfare to the US now, but as elsewhere, humanity movers will increasingly succeed with exploitative quid pro quo arrangements to deliver migrants. Some already have.
India has much potential for irrelevant historical grievance mongering, including the Bengal famine of World War II, though most of the blame for the famine belongs to Axis countries, Indian dysgenics, and Indian overpopulation.
Then there's General Dyer: "Every schoolchild in India knows the momentous effect this incident had on the course of nationalist politics in India [a somewhat exaggeration]." The fact that General Dyer was white matters more than the fact he wasn't American. And thanks to multicultural control of all our major institutions, grievances escalate via propaganda.
Some white children know who General Custer and Lieutenant Calley were, but they are sources of great white shame, not motivation to exploit outgroups. Few white children know who Lazar Kaganovich was. And it is probably best young children don't, at least until they are older. Because children are more easily manipulated than adults, who are themselves easily manipulated.
Good luck with importing peoples with culturally and genetically driven egoism and grievances, no matter how well they pursue the "bitch-goddess Success" in the short term.
But the establishments wouldn't be reckless enough to import several hundred million Indians, would they? Why not? Cultural Marxism hasn't lost a major political battle since the Eisenhower Administration.
Establishments think little about the long term ramifications. The more Indians we import, the more political power they gain, the more they lobby for more Indian migration and anti-white privilege (as other nonwhite groups do). Instead of the comparatively high IQ Indian elites we import now, we will import more Indians having lower IQs and hypertribalistic behaviors, plus more of their increasing Muslim population. The estimated mean phenotype IQ in India is 82, probably a little lower than the mean genotype IQ because of the abysmal cultures and other environments in India.
Like other nonwhites, Indians are not shy about practicing egoism, kin nepotism, and racial nepotism. Stories abound of massive Indian cheating on tests, and of Indian workers taking over US companies, hiring kin, and firing non-Indians.
Something slightly similar happened before. The first Cubans to migrate to the US were whiter, higher IQ, and better working. The later Cuban arrivals, not so much. Much of Miami turned into hellholes, places many wouldn't recognize as part of the US, though other diverse groups deserve much of the blame.
A big difference is that India's population is about 150 times larger than Cuba's.
If China and India fight a war against each other, we face Indian and Chinese migrant populations fighting the war by direct or other means on our shores. If India and Pakistan fight, more imported destruction for us. If one or more have a nuclear or conventional war against us, even worse.
Most Indians cannot afford airfare to the US now, but as elsewhere, humanity movers will increasingly succeed with exploitative quid pro quo arrangements to deliver migrants. Some already have.
India has much potential for irrelevant historical grievance mongering, including the Bengal famine of World War II, though most of the blame for the famine belongs to Axis countries, Indian dysgenics, and Indian overpopulation.
Then there's General Dyer: "Every schoolchild in India knows the momentous effect this incident had on the course of nationalist politics in India [a somewhat exaggeration]." The fact that General Dyer was white matters more than the fact he wasn't American. And thanks to multicultural control of all our major institutions, grievances escalate via propaganda.
Some white children know who General Custer and Lieutenant Calley were, but they are sources of great white shame, not motivation to exploit outgroups. Few white children know who Lazar Kaganovich was. And it is probably best young children don't, at least until they are older. Because children are more easily manipulated than adults, who are themselves easily manipulated.
Good luck with importing peoples with culturally and genetically driven egoism and grievances, no matter how well they pursue the "bitch-goddess Success" in the short term.
But the establishments wouldn't be reckless enough to import several hundred million Indians, would they? Why not? Cultural Marxism hasn't lost a major political battle since the Eisenhower Administration.
Saturday, June 3, 2017
Tangled Up in Blue Words
Words are symbols made by humans with meanings concocted by humans. If we wanted, we could replace the word apple with numbers or the word erteyu. Most individuals would reject or ignore our new apple word. Some words feel good and some feel rotten. Some start out feel good, then become dysphemisms--the euphemism treadmill. The word retard was once a euphemism. The government once made compassionate postage stamps with the words "Retarded Children" printed on them. Other words start out as dysphemisms, then are reappropriated as neutral or euphemistic, often only in specific contexts, for example, the word infidel in They Call Me Infidel. Using infidel in a different context could result in violence. Even words as unimportant as first names acquire negative or positive feelings over time. Few parents name their children Ralph or Betty anymore.
Many words--shithead and scumbag, for example--will likely remain slurs in most English fluent minds for as long as English exists.
Establishments and many others are masters of language tricks, rebranding themselves with more euphemistic words, trying to attach positive feelings to terrible ideas. James Kirchik has a new book out. I bet it seldom contains the word neoconservative, though neoconservative was once a euphemism. Neoconservative became more neutral or dysphemic in many minds due to horrific neoconservative actions. Instead, Kirchick's book contains plenty of the phrase liberal democracy, though neoconservatives regularly destroy democratic practices and much else.
One Third Way group calls itself the Progressive Policy Institute to attract unwary progressives to the Democratic Party.
Many individuals reply with demagoguery to innocently intended words. If an elderly person uses the archaic neutral word lady, colored or oriental, they can find themselves demonized. Activists don't care what individuals intend. They twist words and meanings to fit their own totalitarian causes.
A few individuals with alternative beliefs act as if they can turn dysphemisms into euphemisms. But they cannot turn them into euphemisms because they lack the media power to do so. Most whites will never support groups that label themselves white nationalist or national socialist, no matter the attached beliefs. Those two phrases are political poison. In most white minds, those phrases represent Nazism, meaning mass murder, economic cronyism, and pro-Hitlerism. It doesn't matter to political readers whether they actually support pan-Europeanism or nationalist universalism or Teddy Rooseveltism or neoclassical pan-Arcticism or self-determination universalism.
When you don't control the mass media, you should not describe your beliefs with dysphemic terms, unless you prefer losing or your beliefs really are evil. Our attachments to labels should be minuscule compared to our commitments to people and better reasoned beliefs.
Thursday, June 1, 2017
Dear Europeans: Please Leave NATO
It's less you, mostly us. Our neoconservative and third way dominated empire brings you more military harms than benefits.
Russia's decaying multicultural, "civic nationalist" empire cannot gobble large chucks of outgroup neighbors without risking guerrilla wars, plus massive social and economic losses. China is too far away to project large conventional forces into Europe.
You have your own problems with austerity, globalism, and multicultural invasions, but at least many of your leaders lack extreme militarism. While your rulers engage in domestic treason and throw you in jail or ostracize you for telling truths, you still have a bit of control over their foreign policy militarism. The knee jerk militarism of our colonial rulers rivals that of Muslims. We must be better friends than we are now--outside the alliance.
Ignore sunk costs and the inertia of the status quo.
You don't want to risk being caught in a nuclear war between us and the world's most powerful nuclear arsenal. The aftermath of nuclear war will not be pure survivalism. The history of wars past suggests increased tit for tat conflicts in the aftermath.
Tuesday, May 30, 2017
The Longer, Stranger Trip of Sixto Rodriguez
In the early 1970s, Sixto Rodriguez created two albums of abysmal, didactic folk-rock music. Few copies sold, though a few big timers in the music industry regarded Rodriguez's work as fantastic. After losing his contract, Rodriguez vanished into greater obscurity, reemerging to tour Australia in 1979 and 1981. The ruthlessness of the music industry is such that even unprofitable "justice" acts can't be spared cash for long.
Unknown to Rodriguez, a few copies of his work traveled to South Africa. Bootleg copies spread, creating a sensation "bigger than Elvis" among White, multicultural South Africans. Since Rodriguez disappeared, South Africans believed rumors of his death.
In the late 1990s, fans found Rodriguez living a working class life in Detroit, informing Rodriguez of his superstar status in South Africa. Rodriguez then performed before adoring White, multiculturalist crowds in South Africa.
A 2012 Academy Award winning film, Searching for Sugar Man, documented the events, a story so bizarre, skeptical viewers may be excused for thinking the narrative is a ruse, a subtle mockumentary, but, in fact, the story is mostly true.
Now why am I wasting time on this?
Because the film came and went without much comment on nonmulticultural sites, though it has some relevance to understanding multicultural whites. The film gives an unintended lesson in how naive, creepy, and feel good orientated multiculturalism is. The lives of white multiculturalists lack moral purpose, and they vainly try to find purpose in the evils of cultural Marxism. No one in the film stops to say, "This music is cliched demagoguery, lacking hooks."
I wonder how many of those screaming and sobbing Rodriguez fans in South Africa are still multiculturalists or even alive.
The film reminds us how multiculturalism evolves as its power increases. They talk about what they imagine is justice, then years later the justice talk includes far more kill the whites rhetoric and actions.
Unknown to Rodriguez, a few copies of his work traveled to South Africa. Bootleg copies spread, creating a sensation "bigger than Elvis" among White, multicultural South Africans. Since Rodriguez disappeared, South Africans believed rumors of his death.
In the late 1990s, fans found Rodriguez living a working class life in Detroit, informing Rodriguez of his superstar status in South Africa. Rodriguez then performed before adoring White, multiculturalist crowds in South Africa.
A 2012 Academy Award winning film, Searching for Sugar Man, documented the events, a story so bizarre, skeptical viewers may be excused for thinking the narrative is a ruse, a subtle mockumentary, but, in fact, the story is mostly true.
Now why am I wasting time on this?
Because the film came and went without much comment on nonmulticultural sites, though it has some relevance to understanding multicultural whites. The film gives an unintended lesson in how naive, creepy, and feel good orientated multiculturalism is. The lives of white multiculturalists lack moral purpose, and they vainly try to find purpose in the evils of cultural Marxism. No one in the film stops to say, "This music is cliched demagoguery, lacking hooks."
I wonder how many of those screaming and sobbing Rodriguez fans in South Africa are still multiculturalists or even alive.
The film reminds us how multiculturalism evolves as its power increases. They talk about what they imagine is justice, then years later the justice talk includes far more kill the whites rhetoric and actions.
Tuesday, May 23, 2017
Sounds Like a Eugenic Plan for Schools
We somewhat improve the academic performance of nonwhite disadvantaged children by sending them to almost all white schools. In other words, one environmental factor that lowers the performance of disadvantaged nonwhites is being around other lower IQ nonwhites, primarily through increased concentrations of rotten values and those children wrecking learning environments via misbehavior, plus quality individuals not wanting to teach in those schools. Mass media, of course, ignore the disadvantaged harming each other. They imagine institutional racism and vaguely bad neighborhoods as if bad neighborhood vapors were rising from sewers.
So let's help by sending every disadvantaged nonwhite student in America to schools that are almost all white.
Oh, wait.
Then those schools overflow with disadvantaged nonwhites, recreating the same problem and creating the additional problem of nonwhite children wrecking the social and learning environments for whites.
The way the scheme could work is by creating several billion more high IQ white children.
It almost sounds good, except for the fact that by itself it doesn't reverse cultural Marxian boring from within, not to mention the difficulty of creating several billion more white children.
We're better off with self-determination and complete separation.
So let's help by sending every disadvantaged nonwhite student in America to schools that are almost all white.
Oh, wait.
Then those schools overflow with disadvantaged nonwhites, recreating the same problem and creating the additional problem of nonwhite children wrecking the social and learning environments for whites.
The way the scheme could work is by creating several billion more high IQ white children.
It almost sounds good, except for the fact that by itself it doesn't reverse cultural Marxian boring from within, not to mention the difficulty of creating several billion more white children.
We're better off with self-determination and complete separation.
Friday, May 12, 2017
Migrants and the Immune System: a Sickening Study
An article about a new study asserts "strong feelings about immigrants are controlled by something as surprising as the immune system."
"The research also shows that hypersensitive people are completely indifferent to any good intentions that immigrants might have to contribute to society." Because good intentions are fleeting and done for grandstanding and conspicuous tokenism reasons. Nonwhites gradually make things worse, then when society collapses, they almost always side with their own kind and blame the victims of their invasion.
"Those who are very concerned about the risk of infection are those who are most reluctant to seek out social contact with immigrants–something that we otherwise know fosters tolerance," says Associate Professor Lene Aarøe. Nope. Nope. Nope.
"People with a hypersensitive behavioral immune system do not avoid immigrants because they are consciously afraid of becoming ill if they interact with them. Immigrants are not a source of infection." Oh, really.
"If some people see dangers in immigrants that others don't, it's difficult to reach a mutual understanding with reason-based, rational arguments." Oh, please. Apparently, evidence from the billions of horrors caused by diversity doesn't matter. Circumstantial ad hominem attacks on people's immune systems and abusive ad hominem attacks on "hypersensitive people" are what matter. This study is more scientism gone wild, part of a trend in studies used to promote political policies unsupported by the research.
But "if people are concerned about an entirely different risk–and perhaps one they aren't even fully aware of–it's difficult to achieve a mutual understanding of what is the right policy."
Moriori Man: Hey, these migrants are really effing us over.
Moriori Woman: Oh, don't worry. It's just your hypersensitive immune system. Just relax and make more contact. Those thoughts will go away. They're plenty friendly to your face.
(later)
Moriori Woman: Why are we the last Moriori? Why are we being tortured and why are we slaves?
The article provides no evidence of any direction of causation, if any even exists. And any direction of causation between migrant acceptance and the immune system is ethically irrelevant anyway.
Studies of why multiculturalists have such poor ethical character would be much more beneficial to society.
"The research also shows that hypersensitive people are completely indifferent to any good intentions that immigrants might have to contribute to society." Because good intentions are fleeting and done for grandstanding and conspicuous tokenism reasons. Nonwhites gradually make things worse, then when society collapses, they almost always side with their own kind and blame the victims of their invasion.
"Those who are very concerned about the risk of infection are those who are most reluctant to seek out social contact with immigrants–something that we otherwise know fosters tolerance," says Associate Professor Lene Aarøe. Nope. Nope. Nope.
"People with a hypersensitive behavioral immune system do not avoid immigrants because they are consciously afraid of becoming ill if they interact with them. Immigrants are not a source of infection." Oh, really.
"If some people see dangers in immigrants that others don't, it's difficult to reach a mutual understanding with reason-based, rational arguments." Oh, please. Apparently, evidence from the billions of horrors caused by diversity doesn't matter. Circumstantial ad hominem attacks on people's immune systems and abusive ad hominem attacks on "hypersensitive people" are what matter. This study is more scientism gone wild, part of a trend in studies used to promote political policies unsupported by the research.
But "if people are concerned about an entirely different risk–and perhaps one they aren't even fully aware of–it's difficult to achieve a mutual understanding of what is the right policy."
Moriori Man: Hey, these migrants are really effing us over.
Moriori Woman: Oh, don't worry. It's just your hypersensitive immune system. Just relax and make more contact. Those thoughts will go away. They're plenty friendly to your face.
(later)
Moriori Woman: Why are we the last Moriori? Why are we being tortured and why are we slaves?
The article provides no evidence of any direction of causation, if any even exists. And any direction of causation between migrant acceptance and the immune system is ethically irrelevant anyway.
Studies of why multiculturalists have such poor ethical character would be much more beneficial to society.
Thursday, May 4, 2017
Context on the Murders of South African Farmers
The official murder rate of (mostly white) South African farmers is 313 per 100,000 population. Some argue that the real number is larger, that the South African government deliberately undercounts.
To those less familiar with statistics, the annual number does not look astronomical by itself, but it means over the course of their lifetimes those farmers have at least a 20 percent chance of being murdered if the stat were to remain the same and nothing else changed. But like neighboring Zimbabwe, that stat will likely skyrocket.
In Zimbabwe, the former bread basket of Africa, the black ruling group's forces murdered white farmers and gave the farms to allies. Lacking the character, intelligence, and conscientiousness for modern farming, the new black farmers sold the farm equipment for scrap, leading to famine. Some hungry blacks resorted to starting brush fires, then eating animals that died in the conflagrations.
For comparison, much less than one percent of Americans were murdered during World War II by Axis countries. We frequently see photos of burned out Japanese cities from that era, but roughly three percent of Japanese died from war related causes during the same period.
America's murder rate in 2013 was about 64 times lower than among South African farmers.
If those White farmers were to organize, arm themselves, and carve out a country for themselves, the global multiculturalists would be outraged, though they permit nonwhites to defend themselves from much lesser threats.
Multiculturalists treat all of South Africa as present or future Bantu property because Bantus are indigenous to Africa. though whites migrated to those South African farms well before Bantus, who arrived after expanding their population from around Cameroon. Of course, multiculturalists don't treat all of Asia as Chinese or Indian property because that would be an irrelevant and ludicrous property claim.
But the irrelevant and ludicrous becomes conventional belief when it involves Whites.
To those less familiar with statistics, the annual number does not look astronomical by itself, but it means over the course of their lifetimes those farmers have at least a 20 percent chance of being murdered if the stat were to remain the same and nothing else changed. But like neighboring Zimbabwe, that stat will likely skyrocket.
In Zimbabwe, the former bread basket of Africa, the black ruling group's forces murdered white farmers and gave the farms to allies. Lacking the character, intelligence, and conscientiousness for modern farming, the new black farmers sold the farm equipment for scrap, leading to famine. Some hungry blacks resorted to starting brush fires, then eating animals that died in the conflagrations.
For comparison, much less than one percent of Americans were murdered during World War II by Axis countries. We frequently see photos of burned out Japanese cities from that era, but roughly three percent of Japanese died from war related causes during the same period.
America's murder rate in 2013 was about 64 times lower than among South African farmers.
If those White farmers were to organize, arm themselves, and carve out a country for themselves, the global multiculturalists would be outraged, though they permit nonwhites to defend themselves from much lesser threats.
Multiculturalists treat all of South Africa as present or future Bantu property because Bantus are indigenous to Africa. though whites migrated to those South African farms well before Bantus, who arrived after expanding their population from around Cameroon. Of course, multiculturalists don't treat all of Asia as Chinese or Indian property because that would be an irrelevant and ludicrous property claim.
But the irrelevant and ludicrous becomes conventional belief when it involves Whites.
Wednesday, May 3, 2017
The Content of Ethical Character
An internet poster once claimed, as best I remember, that no one on Earth judges by the content of character, those most vociferous in saying they do so are often least likely to judge based on real character.
That poster did have a bit of a point, though many individuals do somewhat judge according to character. Pollsters asking respondents for their most admired person tend to get wealthy celebrities and politicians having atrocious policies for answers, hardly examples of good character.
Our rulers regularly portray nonwhites as pious, humble, innocent, and filled with goodness, much to the surprise of fact facers, who live among large numbers ordinary nonwhites. The film Elysium takes this portrayal to hilarious extremes.
The few multiculturalists who talk the content of character talk run smack into multicultural dogma, power, and groupthink, then acquiesce.
Multicultural nonwhites behave as if:
Polls hint that large percentages of nonwhite Muslims think infidels, apostates, blasphemers, and females accused of adultery should all be murdered. Given the reluctance of humans to self-report such views to pollsters, the actual numbers are probably closer to 100 percent. The unstated end game of multiculturalism is nonwhite, endogamous Islam everywhere humans exist.
Individuals having such beliefs do not have good character, no matter how polite or hard working they appear.
Ironically, nonmulticulturalists behave closer to the content of character norm. Nonmulticulturalists are willing to make exceptions for Frank Salter and other ethical nonwhites.
Nonmulticulturalists should separate themselves from nonwhites because nearly all nonwhites are unable or unwilling to walk the content of character walk. Everyone has a right to avoid massive undeserved harms from ethnoracial outgroups. We should not be deemed "racist" for wanting to avoid those who seek to exploit and destroy us. (Anyone calling others the R word condemns and contradicts themselves with their own ad hominem claim.) Lack of freedom of association is a form of servitude, of not owning your own life.
That poster did have a bit of a point, though many individuals do somewhat judge according to character. Pollsters asking respondents for their most admired person tend to get wealthy celebrities and politicians having atrocious policies for answers, hardly examples of good character.
Our rulers regularly portray nonwhites as pious, humble, innocent, and filled with goodness, much to the surprise of fact facers, who live among large numbers ordinary nonwhites. The film Elysium takes this portrayal to hilarious extremes.
The few multiculturalists who talk the content of character talk run smack into multicultural dogma, power, and groupthink, then acquiesce.
Multicultural nonwhites behave as if:
- they have a right to colonize Western countries but that their own countries should not be colonized by outgroups.
- they have a right to genocide whites but would wage war if anyone tried the same on their own ingroups.
- they should have freedom of association but whites should not.
- equality should be supported when it benefits themselves or their perceived allies but seldom otherwise.
- excessive self-interest is good, except in whites.
- eugenics related arguments are automatically very, very frightening, but ally themselves with individuals spreading many copies of their atrocious genes, leading to disasters.
Polls hint that large percentages of nonwhite Muslims think infidels, apostates, blasphemers, and females accused of adultery should all be murdered. Given the reluctance of humans to self-report such views to pollsters, the actual numbers are probably closer to 100 percent. The unstated end game of multiculturalism is nonwhite, endogamous Islam everywhere humans exist.
Individuals having such beliefs do not have good character, no matter how polite or hard working they appear.
Ironically, nonmulticulturalists behave closer to the content of character norm. Nonmulticulturalists are willing to make exceptions for Frank Salter and other ethical nonwhites.
Nonmulticulturalists should separate themselves from nonwhites because nearly all nonwhites are unable or unwilling to walk the content of character walk. Everyone has a right to avoid massive undeserved harms from ethnoracial outgroups. We should not be deemed "racist" for wanting to avoid those who seek to exploit and destroy us. (Anyone calling others the R word condemns and contradicts themselves with their own ad hominem claim.) Lack of freedom of association is a form of servitude, of not owning your own life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)