Radio and Television

I was wading through the trivia and junk science at Kevin Lewis' Findings blog when I found this study. During the John F. Kennedy administration, with "Kennedy's encouragement, the Internal Revenue Service audited conservative broadcasters to impair their ability to raise money while the Federal Communications Commission discouraged radio stations from airing their programs."

I doubt many individuals have read about this blatant partisanship before.

Not that political TV and radio are mediums for better politics. For every hour citizens spend learning political propaganda in schools, they spend dozens more learning sound bites from radio and TV. Repetition creates and increases belief. Tendencies toward hedonism and indoctrination are inherent in those technologies.

In an ethical nation, political discourse should take place primarily in print and on the internet. No political activists should own the electromagnetic spectrum--or TV and radio end up being dominated by terrible ideologies versus other terrible ideologies.

Politically driven oligopolies in print and on the internet should also face severe restrictions.

The domestic electromagnetic spectrum should be limited to military, emergency, cell phone, walkie talkie, and nonpolitical music uses.

In post America's case, TV and radio are a battle ground of Neoconservatism versus Marxism and Third Wayism, while more accurate worldviews get ignored. Restricting the uses of TV and radio violates the rights of politicians and billionaires, but there is no other ethical alternative. Political TV and radio are ideological weapons of mass destruction.

We live in Western lands, where millions of whites face firings and other punishments for telling the truth about cultural Marxism. Meanwhile multiculturalists ignore their totalitarianism and keep lecturing us about McCarthyism. In McCarthy's defense, communism waged violent, physical war against the West in addition to the far worse "boring from within." Politicians and billionaires used the media to goad us into focusing on economic Marxism while ignoring the more destructive cultural Marxism.

Whataboutism and the Establishments

Whataboutism is the quick raising of irrelevancies, often of the those guys also do terrible acts variety.

Examples:
Person one: Putin is a terrible leader.
Person two: What about Saudi leaders? They are more evil than Putin. Every ruler on Earth is terrible.

Person three: I can't believe Jarad Kushner is permitted in the White House.
Person four: Al Sharpton was permitted in the Obama White House.

Whataboutism infuriates establishment individuals more than expected because they don't want us to see or hear anything that contradicts poorly reasoned establishment political beliefs. Hence, their efforts to obtain total domination of mass media and all other major institutions. Even total institutional domination is not enough for them: they resort to totalitarian speech restrictions.

Seldom able to recognize and articulate the existence of logical fallacies, the shout of whataboutism is their way of saying some claims are unfair or irrelevant. Note how they are blind to the straw person, ad hominem, and other irrelevancies they bombard the rest of us with.

Masters of confirmation bias, they would prefer we talk about only their favored issues, framed in mythical ways.

How should we deal with poorly reasoned establishment narratives without resorting to irrelevancies: "Okay, let's argue about your issue. Then let's talk about other issues thousands of times more because other issues are thousands of times more important--dysgenics, migration, militarism, self-determination, et cetera."

Cohn Jobs

Donald Trump's former chief economic adviser, Gary Cohn, bashed Trump on the way out of the White House, reportedly for Trump's steel tariffs and Trump's handling of Charlottesville. So great was Cohn's outrage over Trump's Charlottesville response that he waited over five months to resign. Notably, Cohn expressed no outrage over thousands of acts of terrorism and intimidation by "activists." Trump, in full kowtow mode, praised Cohn, but claimed Cohn is a globalist, thus attempting to distance Trump from his own globalism. Mass media, of course, went into hysterics over the word globalist because totalitarian thought policing is the media's gig.

Cohn was likely a source of some of Trump's redistribute to the top agenda, not that it mattered much. If not for Cohn, thousands of other Wall Streeters would have lined up to fill a similar role. Cohn likely took the the top adviser role merely as a temporary gig to boost his resume.

Most human beings believe they are ethically superior to most other human beings, so predictably, even the likes of Cohn grandstand about tariffs and Charlottesville, but serving the public interest is an utterly alien concept to Wall Streeters.

Cohn will probably now write about so-called free trade, not including such topics as tax entitlements, military spycraft, human trafficking, OxyContin peddling, industrial espionage, environmental destruction, currency manipulation, disastrous conflicts, downward wage pressures, international legalized bribery, rule by outgroup tyranny, militarism on behalf of crooked businesses, and excessively lengthy intellectual property rights.

Trump's tariff exemptions for Mexican and Canadian steel will help Mexican and Canadian steel producers compete in America. Maybe now Mexico will pay for the wall.

Or not.

The assertion that Mexico should pay for the wall was a clever tactic by Trump to leave him with an out for not building the wall himself.

The cost of the wall is comparative chump change for the US federal government, a government that wastes more money every month than the cost of an adequate wall. The cost of landmines behind the wall would also be minuscule compared to the benefit obtained. A fence behind the landmines to keep individuals from accidentally stepping on mines would also be inexpensive. The mass media would commence screeching, commenting with the "that's not who we are" irrelevancy. Defending America from demographic mass destruction is a job American politicians just won't do.

Trump surrounds himself with neoconservative multiculturalists and practices neoconservative multiculturalism. Trump has yet to publicly meet with a single nonmulticulturalist, but that doesn't fit the narrative, so our ever media keep calling him Hitleresque.

Nonmulticulturalist pro-Trumpers need to distance themselves from Trump. They're being set up to take the fall for Trump, though Trump gives nonmulticulturalists little but policy crumbs.

Reducing School Gun Violence Without Violating Gun Rights

Let's lower the age children may voluntarily drop out of school to 13, requiring students to have no arrest or expulsion record and be in the top 30 percent of their sixth grade class to attend seventh through twelfth grade public education. Let's require teenage public school students to remain arrest and expulsion free. Let's prohibit anyone above 13 from attending primary grade classes. Let's relax child labor laws for individuals above age 12.

For most students, public secondary schools are more propaganda shows and custodial institutions than important learning institutions.

Many severe behavioral problems begin during the teenage years. The above policies will rid many such problems, not to mention many students enraged because they are bullied or don't fit in. Some of these students will improve if they hang around adult groups and have adult responsibilities.

Most shooters of humans shoot themselves or acquaintances. Those who never attend high schools are unlikely to shoot up high schools.

Use media to spread knowledge of behavioral genetics, to change cultures from pretending that secondary education makes students much smarter or prepared for life outside schools. Help students grow up. Two hundred years ago it was common for teenagers to take on many adult duties--and they did them well. Adolescences that last decades are cultural and dysgenic creations. Globalist multiculturalists created a world with a demand for low skilled service workers. Teenagers should do many of these jobs.

Are any of the above policies probable? No. But so are most other worthwhile reforms. It's good to talk about policies that should be done, to shift the Overton Window and have ideas for newer, better societies.

Comedy

Mark Ramsey and many others assert, "Comedy tells the truth." But that is often wrong. Comedy thrives on the fallacious (and unexpected)--puns, exaggerations, small samples, bad definitions, false analogies, straw person attacks, false cause claims, and irrelevant ad hominem points, not to mention various other false or irrelevant or otherwise worthless claims.

Jaded by hedonism, some audiences demand ever more shock value.

A good sign of ethical growth is an ability to see most political comedy as banal or destructive, consisting of glorified talking points. In strident believers, the banal becomes humorous. Cliches become group identification symbols. In previous decades, saying "thanks Obama" hundreds of times would be considered a sign of a hackneyed, tiresome sense of humor.

The problem is not limited to multiculturalists. Many memes on Voat and other sites are terrible.

The talking point hammers increase while clever, subtle, and sophisticated humor declines.

Not laughing at political humor is seldom a sign of lacking a sense of humor, but a sign of seeing through the BS. Especially irksome is when comics pretend their pathetic attempts at humor are over your head.

Emo Phillips once had a damn poignant joke:

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"

He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"

Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.

(Monty Python had a similar joke. I don't know which came first.)

Now we're stuck in a country where Republican Neoconservatives for John Kasich and Jeb Bush act as if Republican Neoconservatives for Donald Trump are heretics, deserving of death via multiculturalism or World War III, along with most of us, despite the fact that Trump keeps kowtowing to their policy demands.

Truthful dissent from multiculturalism results in expulsion or other punishments.

It's hardly a laughing matter.

Ivy League Home Cramming

Many noticed when Ron Unz wrote his article noticing that people of African, Hispanic, and recent Southwest Asian ancestry and cultures were over represented at Ivy League schools, that Whites and Northeast Asians were underrepresented, based on academic performance. To the extent that the mass media noticed, they ignored the White part and emphasized how Northeast Asians were wronged (the mass media almost never notice anti-White wrongs).

Lots of noticing.

The strongest counterargument: Peoples of recent Southwest Asian descent live disproportionately in the Northeast and therefore should be expected to be a disproportionate number of Ivy League students. Also, Andrew Gelman claims Unz overestimated using nontransparent methodology. But Gelman's methodology is also nontransparent. For all we know, Unz, Gelman, and Gelman's allies are all making up numbers.

Whether Unz or Gelman is closer to the truth, that's still a weak counterargument. Ivy League schools demand affirmative action. Peoples of recent Southwest Asian descent rank among the most IQ and economically gifted peoples in post-America. They also benefit from massive ethnoracial networking. Given their gifts, affirmative action would require that Southwest Asians be close to zero percent of Ivy League students, not many times their proportion of the general population.

Another counterargument: Ivy League schools are private. They should admit those they want. Despite being allegedly private, Ivy League schools receive massive infusions from student aid and tax entitlements. We're paying for our own tyranny. Universities are increasingly "hedge funds" with indoctrination centers attached. Harvard had an endowment of roughly $38 billion in 2016. And the individuals managing those funds make fortunes from allegedly non-profit institutions.

Difficult to get into but also difficult to flunk out of, decent educations seldom happen at Ivy League schools. Many community colleges have more difficult classes. They are instead places where unjust elites make connections with each other and reaffirm their fallacious, groupthink worldviews--finishing schools for  totalitarianism.

To the extent that the Ivy League looks like post-America, it looks like psychological and evolutionary egoism, especially from parasitic sectors of the economy: finance, insurance, multiculturalism, and real estate. Future ruling classes shouldn't come from among those already devoted to bribery and tyranny.

In addition to antitrust actions against tech and other oligopolies, we need antitrust actions against the Ivy League.

If a Jewish individual genuinely has a goal of winning a Nobel Prize in chemistry, she can do it elsewhere.

Self-Control: Let Them Smash Cakes?

Here's a what the hell thread: young children enter a store and start smashing expensive cakes on the floor. Guess how the threadsters explain it? MrNogi's parental "ripple effect" gets over 1,000 upvotes.

Well, it just so happens a new study suggests that 64 to 75 percent of variance in self-control among seven to 12-year-olds has genetic origins, with the rest caused by non-shared environments, but the study relies on self-reports, so that's a caveat.

Of course, the study stats don't tell us about the smasher's specific situation, so we shouldn't rush to causal conclusions about them, although I know what I would do if they were my kids, and it wouldn't be pretty.

Scandals of the Century or Nanosecond

Dozens of new scandals arose this week involving somebody or others.

Sigh.

Scandals turn into bashathons while the media ignore or downplay bigger wrongs.

To wit:

1. trillions wasted for decades on overpriced OPEC oil because it almost never occurs to politicians and media types that we could create a buyer's cartel to counter OPEC. (Most opinion creators have probably not even heard of the phrase buyer's cartel.)
2. trillions lost because we tax productive work far more than harmful finance and negative externalities.
3. global warming treated as more important than deforestation, other pollution, ocean overharvesting, and dysgenic overpopulation. Several million dead each year from non carbon dioxide air pollution alone. 
4. mass invasions by nonwhites devoted to free riding and anti-white tyranny.
5. trillions wasted defending Asian and African states pursuing our destruction. Post-America's military: doing the jobs that no one else is wrong enough to do, including trillions wasted on no win counterinsurgency wars.
6. hidden in plain sight: ordinary Muslims and other multiculturalists have beliefs worse than individuals the media pretend are neo-Nazis.
7. financial tumors (bubbles) treated as legitimate measures of economic performance, trillions wasted on housing bubbles created by individuals fleeing the neighborhood diversity they shove down our throats.
8. few restrictions on modifying bird flu to murder billions. Freedom of political speech of gets damned by colonial occupiers of the West, but don't interfere with 'muh scientific freedom.
9. antagonizing Putin and risking a world war because he does rotten acts while billions of others devoted to rotten acts get praised. Great idea. Let's antagonize the one person who can cause us the most harm. What could go right?
10. trillions wasted on health care systems that serve profits better than health.
11. education systems increasingly devoted to indoctrination. In Soviet Post-America, students and tax payers pay fortunes for indoctrination. What a country. No two kopek struggle sessions for you.

Decades of scandal mongering have not been enough to reform the Green, Democratic, Republican, and Libertarian Parties. Perchance a new approach in this divide-and-screw near sleep of near death? Nah.

No doubt the winners of the scandal wars will turn their attention to doing the right policy things just as soon as they finish up the winning (sarcasm).

Remember the scandal involving Kimba Wood? Me neither.

The industries of media and legalized bribery lack senses of proportion, but they do have a sense of opportunism.

Ethnoracial Diversity Thought Experiments

Let's suppose we did some survey research of whites, asking which they would prefer:

1. being a convenience store cashier, living in an apartment in the most diverse neighborhood in Baltimore or being homeless in a 99 percent white, middle class neighborhood, assuming the police don't remove you.
2. owning a 5,000 acre farm in Zimbabwe or having a similar homeless situation as above.
3. attending 1970s Detroit Cooley High School or living in 1970s Poland, assuming you speak fluent Polish.
4. earning $100 thousand per year as a contractor in a Pashtun Afghan province or earning five dollars per hour in the white, middle class neighborhood.
5. living at frigid, isolated South Georgia Island or living in the US if diversity inspired Putin, Xi Jinping, neoconservatives, and Democratic Party interventionists incite World War III.
6. being an eighth grade teacher at a random middle school named after MLK or being unemployed.

It would be difficult to get honest answers, but I bet a majority of whites would select the second options.

Most whites would consider high levels of diversity to be worse than being homeless in brutal heat and cold, worse than living under 1970s Polish communism, and so on.

There's worse. End stage multiculturalism would be probably something like Somalia, without the foreign aid. Bad trends keep getting worse unless good individuals deliberately stop them. And multiculturalists almost always prefer ever more diversity over less.

(By the way, credible estimates suggest nearly half of Pushtun men sodomize young boys, so the next time a multiculturalist points at a middle aged white man and tells you he looks like a pedophile, tell her about our pashtun "allies.")