www.vdare.com

Show post

Sofia Leung #racist vdare.com

SOFIA LEUNG
libraries. social justice. critical race theory.
WRITTEN BY SOFIA
APRIL 15, 2019
WHITENESS AS COLLECTIONS

… One of the mind-blowing things she shared was this idea of how our library collections, because they are written mostly by straight white men, are a physical manifestation of white men ideas taking up all the space in our library stacks. Pause here and think about this.

If you don’t already know, “whiteness as property,” is a seminal Critical Race Theory (CRT) concept first introduced by Cheryl I. Harris in her 1993 Harvard Law Review article by the same name. She writes, “slavery as a system of property facilitated the merger of white identity and property” (p. 1721) and the formation of whiteness as property required the erasure of Native peoples. Basically, white people want to stay being white because of the privilege and protection whiteness affords under the law that they created. Harris also makes this really good point, “whiteness and property share a common premise — a conceptual nucleus — of a right to exclude” (1714). Bam! That really hits it on the head.

As I’m collaborating on this book about CRT in Library and Information Studies (LIS), I’ve been having lots of discussions on these topics with some really smart folx.

… Listening to her talk about her ideas connected some dots for me and I made the final jump to whiteness as property as collections.

Let me now try to connect all these dots in a coherent way. As others have written (Fobazi Ettarh, Todd Honma, Gina Schlessman-Tarango, etc.), libraries and librarians have a long history of keeping People of Color out. They continue to do so, which you can read more about here and from the others I mentioned above. Legal and societal standards revolve around whiteness and libraries are no different.

If you look at any United States library’s collection, especially those in higher education institutions, most of the collections (books, journals, archival papers, other media, etc.) are written by white dudes writing about white ideas, white things, or ideas, people, and things they stole from POC and then claimed as white property with all of the “rights to use and enjoyment of” that Harris describes in her article. When most of our collections filled with this so-called “knowledge,” it continues to validate only white voices and perspectives and erases the voices of people of color. Collections are representations of what librarians (or faculty) deem to be authoritative knowledge and as we know, this field and educational institutions, historically, and currently, have been sites of whiteness.

Library collections continue to promote and proliferate whiteness with their very existence and the fact that they are physically taking up space in our libraries. They are paid for using money that was usually ill-gotten and at the cost of black and brown lives. …

I still have some thinking to do around this topic, but curious to hear what others think. I’m less interested in hearing that you don’t buy it, so don’t bother with those types of comments.

Show post

Lance Welton #racist vdare.com

[Note to mods: I'm filing this under RSTDT because that's the plurality of the quote, but there's enough misogyny and anti-LGBT content to contest this categorization]

The hysteria provoked by Donald Trump’s appointment of Brett Kavanaugh as an associate Justice of the Supreme Court may well be unprecedented in US history. Never before has a president’s judicial nomination been met with such an overwhelmingly emotional reaction. And it’s not in the least bit surprising, either. Females (especially when rejected), minorities and homosexuals—the very people most infuriated by Kavanaugh’s elevation—are highly emotional. And there are sound evolutionary reasons why this is the case.

Back to Kavanaugh. Chef, from South Park once observed that, “There’s a time and place for everything, and it’s called college.” Anyone who’s ever been to university—or even to a co-ed high school—knows that students are callow, promiscuous and strongly sexually-driven. When I was at university, sexual behaviour between opposite-sex friends—sexual touching, lip-kissing and even making out—was perfectly normal, as were intense but brief sexual relationships (what Tom Wolfe called “Hooking Up”) and the consequent breaking of hearts. But, “What happens in college stays in college.”

Things can become difficult, however, when it is the female’s heart that is broken. Adult females are much higher than males in the personality characteristic Neuroticism—the essence of which is feeling negative emotions strongly. [Age differences in personality traits from 10 to 65, By C. Soto et al., Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2011]. This is seemingly because, in the prehistoric environment, an optimum level of anxiety helped to ensure that the kids you were caring for didn’t get hurt. And worrying makes you more competitive to get your man and keep him, in a prehistoric context in which pregnant and nursing females needed males to support them. [Why Neurotics Haven't Died Out, By Rachel Rettner, Live Science, June 15, 2010]

And it really it is true that “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”. Females are higher than males in all negative emotions. Though some men never fully get over a break up, women feel the emotional pain of a break up far more intensely. [Quantitative sex differences in response to the dissolution of a romantic relationship, By Craig Morris et al., Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 2015].

...

Ramirez is also Hispanic. Hispanics being higher in mental instability than whites, probably because there was less intense selection against mental instability in ecologies where basic needs were more easily met, meaning that group cooperation is less important. [Mental Health Disparities: Hispanics and Latinos. American Psychiatric Association, 2017] Hispanics are also, on numerous measures, simply less honest than whites. [Race Differences in Psychopathic Personality, By Richard Lynn, Washington Summit, 2018, In Press]

A combination of Neuroticism and hysteria is likely to explain why Julie Swetnick went public, on 26th September, with her unfounded allegations that Kavanaugh attended parties where males would prey on young girls, spike their drinks, and rape them. [New Kavanaugh accuser Julie Swetnick details local house parties where girls allegedly were drugged and raped, By Dan Breuninger, CNBC, September 26, 2018]

Swetnick is also Jewish. Jews are much more likely than whites to suffer from schizophrenia [Scientists Discover Gene That Predisposes Ashkenazi Jews to Schizophrenia, By Ido Efrati, Haaretz, November 26, 2013]. The essence of schizophrenia is “hypermentalism”—being so acutely aware of the physical cues of mental states (such as facial expressions) that you read too much into them: a smile means he’s in love with me; a slight frown means he wants to kill me.

Schizophrenia also distorts your memories.Schizophrenia is at one extreme of a spectrum at the other end of which sits autism; the inability to infer emotion from physical cues. [Mentalism and Mechanism, By C. Badcock, in Human Nature and Social Values, 2003] If a group is subject to a harsh environment, such as the persecution which the Jews were historically subject to, it is more likely to survive if everyone in it cooperates together and gets along. This is more likely to happen if people are higher in “mentalism”—if they are better able to read the emotions of others. So, the average member of a highly cooperative group will be higher on the schizophrenia spectrum than the average member of a less cooperative group. But this means that a highly cooperative group will include a larger minority who are simply schizophrenic at the spectrum’s extreme end.

Kavanaugh was also strongly opposed by a group of senators that includes two African-Americans. African Americans, compared to whites, are high in psychopathic personality, meaning that they have poor control over their emotions, which can easily overwhelm their intelligence.(See Race and Psychopathic Personality, by Richard Lynn, Amren.com, July, 2002.) They also feel almost all negative emotions far more acutely that do white people, because in the easy ecology of Africa there was little selection for highly cooperative groups. The only exception: the trait psychologists call “social anxiety”. Blacks are so incredibly low in this—due to weak selection for cooperation—that, overall, it is found that they are lower in Neuroticism than are whites, despite their scoring higher on the other Neuroticism traits. [Race Differences in Anxiety Disorders, Worry and Social Anxiety, By Heitor Fernandes et al., Mankind Quarterly, Spring 2018]

Blacks are also higher in all psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia, partly because, in a relaxed ecology, there is less selection against genes which cause antisocial behavior. Indeed, Darwinian selection, in general, is weak in such ecologies, leading to high genetic diversity. [Racial disparities in psychotic disorder diagnosis, By Robert Schwartz and David Blankenship, World Journal of Psychiatry, December 2014]

Kavanaugh has also found himself subject to sustained attack by the “LGBTQI+” community, simply because he has refused to express an opinion on gay marriage. According to “Human Rights” campaigner Chad Griffin, Kavanaugh’s refusal to do this is “alarming and completely unacceptable” . [What does Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh mean for LGBT rights? By Ella Braidwood, Pink News, September 28, 2018]

We should expect such strong emotions from this group. Homosexuals are more mentally unstable than heterosexuals. They have higher rates of anxiety, depression, schizophrenia, suicide and, fascinatingly, left-handedness, than heterosexuals. [Review and theory of handedness, birth order, and homosexuality in men, by Ray Blanchard, Laterality, 2008] As I showed recently, we are evolved to be right-handed, so left-handedness means something has gone wrong: it betokens “developmental instability”, either due to mutant genes, a sub-optimal fetal environment or both.

In line with this, younger sons are more likely to be homosexual, because the mother’s immune system regards male hormones emanating from the fetus as enemy agents. It duly overwhelms them with female hormones; the mother’s immune system getting stronger with each pregnancy. If her immune system is too strong, due to mutations, her male offspring will not only be homosexual but they may inherit these mutations, explaining why homosexuals and the left-handed are prone to allergies; where the immune system overreacts. (See Blanchard, above.)

Lesbians are masculinized females. [Genetic and Environmental Influences on 2D;4D Finger Length Ratios, by Kyle Gobrogge et al., Archives of Sexual Behavior, 2008] They are often the product of mothers who produce too much testosterone [Early hormonal influences on cognitive functioning in congenital adrenal hyperplasia, By S. Resnick et al., Developmental Psychology, 1986] due to the mother’s mutation-caused conditions. And it is no surprise that transsexuals—suffering as they do from mind-body dysmorphia—tend to be mentally unstable.

The intensely emotional debate provoked by the judge’s nomination may seem beyond belief. But it makes sense if examined from viewpoint of evolution and genetics. “Hell Hath no Fury” not merely “like a woman scored” but also “like a minority” and “like a sexual deviant scorned.”

Moreover, the level of hysteria in American politics is going to get worse. As VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow documented recently, the Democratic Party has “tipped”—in 2016, for the first time ever, a majority (53%) of its Presidential voters were non-white, homosexual or Jewish. (61% of the Democrat vote was female). Non-whites are increasingly claiming leadership roles (New York, Massachusetts, Georgia, Florida) which means the kind of behaviour we saw from Kamala Harris and Cory Booker at Kavanaugh’s hearings (“I am Spartacus”, the “Jane Doe” letter) will become more common in Congress in the future.

...

In other words, there’s going to be a lot more screeching. My advice to the GOP (and America): Buy earplugs.

Show post

John Derbyshire #fundie vdare.com

Asians, East and South Asians, comprise about twenty percent of New York City high-school freshmen. Whites are around ten percent. Sun People—blacks and Hispanics—are seventy percent.

At the elite high schools admitting via the SHSAT exam Asians are 62 percent overall. Once again: They are twenty percent of the relevant population, 62 percent of those passing the SHSAT.

At Stuyvesant, the most popular of the specialized high schools, Asians are 73 percent (whites twenty percent, Sun People seven percent). Brooklyn Tech—which, by the way, Mayor de Blasio's son attended, is a mere 61 percent Asian (and again twenty percent white). Queens High School for the Sciences is seventy-six percent Asian.

Staten Island Tech bucks the trend somewhat. It's only 41 percent Asian, 52 percent white, seven percent Sun People. Yet more diverse is the High School of Math, Science, and Engineering up in Harlem: a paltry 37 percent Asian, 25 percent white, 38 percent Sun People.

They spoil the effect somewhat though by having a larger-than-average sex imbalance: seventy percent guys, thirty percent gals. The average for the specialized high schools is more like sixty-forty. Obviously some really flagrant discrimination going on there.

The local politics on this issue is getting pretty rancorous. June 10th there was a big demo outside City Hall: Asians—well-nigh all East Asians, to judge from the news pictures—protesting de Blasio's plan to scrap the SHSAT. Taking on those Tiger Moms, Comrade Bill, you're looking for trouble. [Protesters gather at City Hall to oppose de Blasio’s no-test plan, By Gina Daidone and Bruce Golding, NY Post, June 10, 2018]

For people who don't mind facing the realities of human nature, the two takeaways here are:

* One, the folly of mass non-European immigration—what elsewhere I have referred to as importing an overclass;

* Two, race and sex realism.

Importing An Overclass: To import an overclass is to invite resentment and disharmony. How is this not obvious?

Race and Sex Realism: On the second point, the truly depressing thing is how far outside the boundary of acceptable commentary race and sex realism remain.

Men and women display, in the statistical generality, different inclinations and preferences. The human races, again in the statistical generality, profile differently on intelligence, personality, and characteristic behaviors.

None of this is astounding or outrageous; it's just basic biology.

Yet these truths are unmentionable. Even sensible, well-informed commentators—people as based as you can be while holding a job writing for Main Stream Media publications—steer clear of them.

Show post

Rob Sanchez #racist vdare.com

It's very important to notice that one of the chief arguments used for the Navajo nation is that hiring foreigners (anybody who lives outside of the reservation) could degrade the sovereignty of the Navajo Nation.

Sovereignty arguments have been used by many Indian tribes to defeat challenges to preference hiring.

It seems to reason that if non-tribal workers from outside of the reservation could degrade the sovereignty of the Navajo Nation the same should be true when foreign workers are allowed into the U.S. Preserving sovereignty is a compelling argument but it lands on deaf ears whenever activists have tried the same argument against allowing guest workers like H-1B/H-2B/L-1 into the U.S.

So far the Navajos are winning these types of lawsuits. The EEOC and many other employers have tried to force the Navajo nation to hire non-Navajos but it's a losing battle because, as New Mexico attorney general Patricia Madrid wrote: Congress "expressly disallows the EEOC from suing a government, such as the Navajo Nation or the State of New Mexico or any of the individual States of the Union."

<<<<<>>>>>

Before we shed crocodile tears for SRP or Peabody, or even the Basha's supermarket chain, let's keep in mind that Basha's has a bad reputation for union busting and the hiring of illegal aliens. SRP hires large numbers of H-1Bs and in 2004 the utility actively lobbied with the Arizona Chamber of Commerce to expand the H-1B program. Discrimination in the hiring of engineers at SRP's Navajo Station happens because Navajo Indians don't want non-Navajos taking jobs away from their own people. Off the reservation SRP has shown they are willing to discriminate against American citizens by hiring H-1Bs from places like India. Perhaps we could learn something from the Navajos about doing what's best for their own people.

Show post

Lance Welton #fundie vdare.com

Two hundred years ago, human beings were subject to harsh Natural Selection. People born with mutant genes, those who had a poor immune system, simply didn’t grow old enough to procreate. Forty percent of us died before we reached adulthood. This is now down to negligible levels in developed countries.

Accordingly, Woodley of Menie and his team aver that Calhoun’s experiment–which created a “Mouse Utopia”–will provide a good indication of what will happen to us.

In Calhoun’s “Mouse Utopia” at the University of Maryland, there were no predators, no bad weather, no possibility to escape, and no epidemics, because the mice were ensured to be healthy when they entered. There was a huge amount of space. It was, in other words, paradise for mice.

In July 1968, the experiment began. The parallels with the Industrial Revolution are simply spooky. Just as with the Industrial Revolution, which witnessed the collapse of child mortality due to improved medical science and living conditions, there was an enormous population spike. Numbers doubled every 55 days until there were 620 mice.

At this point population growth began to slow down, just as happened in Western countries in the early Twentieth Century. Doubling then only occurred every 145 days. And, just as in the West, Calhoun started to see more and more elderly—and even senile—mice.

By day 315, Calhoun started to notice interesting behavior changes in the mice. More and more males became what he called “the beautiful ones.” These effete males would make no attempt to fight or copulate with females. They simply spend their time washing each other and eating.

By contrast, female behavior became increasingly aggressive: they would attack males, throw their offspring out of the nest too young, attack their young, and actively avoid sex.

...

Calhoun put this collapse down to the consequences of overcrowding. But Woodley and his team showed that the colony was nowhere close to overcrowded when the population growth began to decline. Woodley and his team see the problem as much more fundamental.

They argue that all health problems, both physical and mental, are interrelated. This is because they all reflect the same phenomenon: what the team call “high mutational load.”

For example, consider autism. It is definitely a result of mutant genes because it is more likely to develop the older your father is, meaning it a result of defective, mutant sperm. Autism is associated with all manner of other mental and physical health problems.

The Woodley of Menie team further argue that the brain is extremely sensitive to mutation, because it is fantastically complicated. 84% of our genome relates to the brain. This means that even a small number of mutations can have a massive impact on behavior. The effect is magnified in social animals like mice and men behavior is learned and mutations can interfere with social processes which allow adaptive behavior to be correctly taught.

Woodley of Menie calls these “spiteful mutations.” And as the carriers grow in number, they can pressure even non-carriers to conform to their maladaptive behavior.

For example, childless women may encourage other women not to have children. Mothers are shamed as “failures” because they didn’t focus on a career. Even non-carriers of maladaptive behavior are impacted.

In other words, mice have key evolved instincts which allow them to survive. Every generation, some mutant mice—who lack these instincts–are born. But their maladaptive instincts—no desire to breed or fight, or zero maternal instinct—are a product of mutation. They also carry other mutations, leading to poor immune systems or physical weakness. So they die young, and don’t pass on their mutant genes.

But in Calhoun’s mouse experiment, these mice survived and had children. The children survived and more and more mutations built-up until the potentially normal mice were a tiny minority who didn’t have the chance to learn appropriate behavior or how to relate to other mice.

And, ultimately, almost all the mice were mutants. The rest were totally maladapted and the population died out.

This “Mutational Meltdown” is happening in the West. The authors present clear evidence for it: huge spikes in autism and genetic disorders. This could be extended to include the prevalence of eating disorders, homosexuality, sexual identity problems, and the desire to not have children.

“Spiteful mutations” undermine things like religion, which is little more than a way of promoting evolutionary imperatives. For example: go forth and multiply, cooperative with each other, repel the invader.

But we now have liberal religion, which is basically post-modernism plus a vague religious sense. It reflects the increasing number of people whose instinct is to destroy their own genetic interests.

Humans have evolved instincts. In the past, those with mutant genes causing them to lack them died young without passing on their genes. Now, this is not the case. They live to adulthood, often pass on their own genes and, even they don’t, they still alter the carefully selected nature of the group.

Put simply, we are living in a society increasing composed of and dominated by mutants. And they can be tentatively identified by the fact that they reject the behavioral norms and views which were the unquestioned norm only a few generations ago.

But there is crucial difference between Mouse Utopia and the West. We are the scientists who are maintaining our own utopia. There is a growing body of evidence that intelligence is decreasing. Eventually we won’t be intelligent enough to sustain utopia and we will collapse back to pre-industrial levels of Natural Selection.

The current model of society, like the “Mouse Utopia,” is heading to collapse.

The only questions are whether we can turn it around.

And, if we can’t, what will succeed it.

Show post

Lance Welton #fundie vdare.com

Atheists are genetic mutants who, for the most part, would never have been born if we hadn’t managed to break free of pre-industrial conditions of Darwinian selection. This was the conclusion of a paper published just before Christmas in the leading journal Evolutionary Psychological Science[The Mutant Says in His Heart, “There Is No God”: The Rejection of Collective Religiosity Centred Around the Worship of Moral Gods is Associated with High Mutational Load Edward Dutton, Guy Madison & Curtis Dunkel. (PDF).] and it sent establishment psychologists into spasms of rage.

To be sophisticated, these days, means that you’re an atheist. Academia is overwhelmingly atheist and average intelligence weakly correlates with not believing in God [High IQ turns academics into atheists,’ Times Higher Education, byRebecca Atwood, June 12, 2008]. For SJWs, the religious are at best stupid and, at worst, racist bigots who vote for Donald Trump and Brexit. So it’s no surprise that the paper was greeted with disbelief by the SJWs who fill departments of psychology.

Reactions ranged from “Amazing!” to condemning it as the worst paper of the year and “one of the most egregious papers I’ve ever read.” Reported in newspapers worldwide [Atheists more likely to be left handed, study finds, by Olivia Rudgard,Daily Telegraph, December 21, 2017], its authors presumably delighted in the reaction.

And the reaction was all the more ferocious because the paper’s conclusions are difficult to dispute. The researchers—British anthropologist Dr Edward Dutton, Swedish psychologist Prof. Guy Madison and Western Illinois University psychologist Curtis Dunkel—presented a beautifully simple case:

Until the Industrial Revolution, we were under harsh conditions of Darwinian Selection, meaning that about 40% of children died before they reached adulthood. These children would have been those who had mutant genes, leading to poor immune systems and death from childhood diseases. But they would also have had mutant genes affecting the mind. This is because the brain, home to 84% of the genome, is extraordinarily sensitive to mutation, so mental and physical mutation robustly correlate. If these children had grown up, they might have had autism, schizophrenia, depression... but they had poor immune systems, so they never had the chance.

Under these conditions, prevalent until the nineteenth century, we were individually selected for but we were also “group selected” for. Ethnic groups are simply a genetic extended family and some groups fared better against the environment and enemy groups than others did, due to the kind of partly genetic psychological adaptations they developed.

Among these, the authors argue, was a very specific kind of religiosity which developed in all complex societies: the collective worship of gods concerned with morality. Belief in these kinds of gods was selected for, they maintain, because once we developed cities we had to deal with strangers—people who weren’t part of our extended family. By conceiving of a god who demanded moral behaviour towards other believers, people were compelled to cooperate with these strangers, meaning that large, highly cooperative groups could develop.

Computer models have proven that the more internally cooperative group—which is also hostile to infidel outsiders—wins the battle of group selection [The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation by Max Hartshorn, June 2013]. This very specific kind of religiousness was selected for and, indeed, it correlates with positive and negative ethnocentrism even today.

The authors demonstrate that this kind of religiousness has clearly been selected for in itself. It is about 40% genetic according to twin studies, it is associated with strongly elevated fertility, it can be traced to activity in specific regions of the brain, and it is associated with elevated health: all the key markers that something has been selected for.

And it is from here that the authors make the leap that has made SJW blood boil. Drawing on research by Michael Woodley of Menie and his team (see here and here)they argue that conditions of Darwinian selection have now massively weakened, leading to a huge rise in people with damaging mutations. This is evidenced in increasing rates of autism, schizophrenia, homosexuality, sex-dysmorphia, left-handedness, asymmetrical bodies and much else. These are all indicators of mutant genes.

Woodley suggests that weakened Darwinian selection would have led to the spread of “spiteful mutations” of the mind, which would help to destroy the increasingly physically and mentally sick group, even influencing the non-carriers to behave against their genetic interests, as carriers would help undermine the structures through which members learnt adaptive behaviour.

This is exactly what happened in the infamous Mouse Utopia experiment in the late 1960s, where a colony of mice was placed in conditions of zero Darwinian selection and eventually died out. [Death squared: The explosive growth and demise of a mouse population. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, January 1973(PDF)].

So Dutton and his team argue that, this being the case, deviation from this very specific form of religiousness—the collective worship of moral gods in which almost everyone engaged in 1800—should be associated with these markers of mutation. In other words, both atheists and those interested in spirituality with no moral gods (such as the paranormal) should be disproportionately mutants.

And this is precisely what they show. Poor physical and mental health are both significantly genetic and imply high mutational load. Dutton and his team demonstrate that this specific form of religiousness, when controlling for key factors such as SES, predicts much better objective mental and physical health, recovery from illness, and longevity than atheism.

It’s generally believed that religiousness makes you healthier because it makes you worry less and elevates your mood, but they turn this view on its head, showing that religious worshippers are more likely to carry gene forms associated with being low in anxiety. Schizophrenia, they show, is associated with extreme and anti-social religiosity, rather than collective worship. Similarly, belief in the paranormal is predicted by schizophrenia, and this is a marker of genetic mutation.

Next, they test autism, another widely accepted marker of mutation, as evidenced by the fact that it’s more common among the children of older men, whose fathers are prone to mutant sperm. Autism predicts atheism.

They then look at data on left-handedness. In agricultural societies we are overwhelmingly right-handed. Left-handedness means an asymmetrical brain and thus, to some extent, mutation. They show that there is a weak but significant trend whereby the more strongly religious you are the more likely you are to be right-handed, just as the theory would predict. Finally, they turn to plain ugliness—asymmetry. This shows that your immune system is so deficient that you haven’t been able to maintain a symmetrical phenotype in the face of disease or that you simply have mutant genes that make you asymmetrical. Believers in the paranormal have less symmetrical hands than do controls.

...

Dutton & Co.’s research is so incendiary because it is presenting the SJWs with what they really are: mutants; maladapted people who undermine carefully evolved, evolutionarily useful structures—such as religion—meaning they make even non-carriers maladapted; discouraging them from breeding or from defending their ethnic group.

Under normal Darwinian conditions, prevalent until the Industrial Revolution, these mutants would simply never have been born. They are, just like the mutant mice, people whose influence will ultimately lead to the collapse of society, as intelligence declines, and we return to a new Dark Age in which people are likely to be very religious indeed.

But perhaps there is some good news. It’s quite clear from the Mouse Utopia experiments that if the mutants are removed, then the society will recover.

Show post

Lance Welton #fundie vdare.com

If there’s one thing that unites wealthy Leftists, it’s the need to pretend they are compassionate.

And there are few better ways of doing this than campaigning against the death penalty.

Increasingly, Leftists take advantage of modern technology to do this: Activist groups like the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty have created a virtual cottage industry geared toward virtue-signalling on the death penalty. They use their websites to direct the bleeding hearts to the next execution site, so they can launch a protest rally.

Cutting-edge research, however, reveals just how fantastically ironic this is. It seems that without the death penalty there’d be no internet, no television; in fact, very little civilization.

The first scholars to develop this king of all Left-triggering ideas were Canadian anthropologist Peter Frost and the late University of Utah anthropologist Henry Harpending. They published their landmark research in 2015 under the title Western Europe, State Formation, and Genetic Pacification in the journal Evolutionary Psychology.[PDF]

It was a truly ingenious argument.

When Europe became Christian, the death penalty was abolished. Right up until the beginning of the Middle Ages, people were left to settle their own disputes by fighting each other or demanding, from the state, that the murderer pay a fine for killing their relative. But, as Frost and Harpending put it, the Church gradually came to accept that, the "wicked" should be executed "so that the good can live in peace."

With biblical justification, more and more crimes became subject to the death penalty. By the High Middle Ages, every single felony (any crime serious enough to have traditionally warranted the confiscation of property) was met with the hangman’s noose.

Those sent to the gallows were almost always high-testosterone young men prone to violent crime. In fact, Frost and Harpending calculated that one percent of the male population were executed every generation throughout the Middle Ages. And another one percent were killed at the scene of the crime or died in fetid prisons awaiting trial or execution. So two percent of young men were eliminated every generation.

And because they tended to be young, this process meant that they had fewer children than if they hadn't been executed. Thus, they would have passed on fewer of their genes.

It’s here that Frost and Harpending perceptively draw their conclusion. Capital punishment must have changed the nature of European personality—by, in effect, culling out the psychopaths.

Criminality is strongly predicted by three key traits associated with psychopathology:

Low impulse control
Low altruism
Low mental stability.

These traits are at least 50 percent genetic. [See Personality: What Makes You the Way You Are, by Daniel Nettle, OUP, 2007]

The murder rate collapsed between the 14th and 20th centuries and they statistically proved that part of the reason for this was the continual killing of the most impulsive and disagreeable young males every generation. The pool of violent men essentially dried up.

Those who were executed were overwhelmingly poor, with poverty associated with poor impulse control and low altruism. They had to be extremely poor because, in England at least, if you could read, then you could avoid execution by claiming "benefit of the clergy."

Frost and Harpending are clear: Widespread execution led to the genetic "pacification" of Western Europe. It made people more cooperative, more forward-thinking, less impulsive . . . in other words more psychologically able to develop civilization. And as the late Canadian psychologist J. Philippe Rushton showed in his 1995 book Race, Evolution and Behavior, that it is the ethnic groups with these personality traits that develop civilization.

More recently, anthropologist Edward Dutton and Swedish psychologist Guy Madison have taken this insight further. In a 2018 article in the journal Evolutionary Psychological Science [Execution, Violent Punishment and Selection for Religiousness in Medieval England] they point out that this system of widespread execution would also have selected strongly for intelligence. Low socioeconomic status is predicted by low intelligence and it was overwhelmingly young, low SES men who met the hangman's noose. Low IQ predicts living for the now and not thinking about the future. And considering the dire consequences of breaking the law up until the 19th century, in England for example, you’d have to have been fairly stupid to do it.

And it is quite clear that national-average intelligence is the motor of civilization. In their huge 2012 study, Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen showed that average national IQ strongly predicts national levels of education, research and development, wealth, earnings, employment, lack of poverty, lack of crime, democracy, honesty, health, life expectancy, sanitation, openness to change, lack of religious extremism . . . the list goes on [Intelligence: A Unifying Construct for the Social Sciences].

But central to Dutton and Madison’s study is something which, on the surface, might seem rather counter-intuitive in terms of the importance of the death penalty to civilization. They use the same statistical methods as Frost and Harpending to show that widespread execution was partly behind English people becoming more religious between the Medieval Era and the 16th century.

They argue that the English definitely became more religious, as evidenced by higher and higher percentages becoming monks and nuns, while heresy and witchcraft, deviations from accepted practice, grew increasingly unacceptable. And they estimate that religiousness is about 40 percent genetic, based on twin studies, and is predicted by exactly the same characteristics that predict not being a criminal: high altruism, high impulse control, and high mental stability.

Religiousness is also associated with low levels of autistic traits. Dutton and Madison demonstrate that there is a degree to which autism is associated with criminality. So the Medieval system of executing almost all criminals also effectively involved curtailing the fertility of the least religious young men every generation.

This policy bore fruit in the 16th and 17th centuries, according to the two researchers, with wars based around religion.

However, it also had another consequence, which they don’t look at but which has been explored by the German biologist Gerhard Meisenberg in his 2007 book In God’s Image. Precisely because Europeans were so intensely Christian, they didn’t adopt contraception, something which all previous civilizations had done when they got to about the stage the West reached in the early 18th century. Once contraception was adopted, it was taken up by cleverer and more educated people and used more efficiently by them, due to their higher IQ and better foresight. This has eventually resulted in a negative associated between SES [Socio-Economic Status] /intelligence fertility. Since the early 20th century, stupidity has predicted having lots of children.

Meisenberg shows this is exactly what happened in Greece and Rome. But because of this religious rejection of contraception, it didn’t happen in the modern West until much later in our development. This meant that we could get to the Industrial Revolution before the positive correlation between IQ and number of surviving children, which you see in all primitive societies, went into reverse due to contraception.

So, in a roundabout way, widespread execution made us more religious. And, paradoxically, if that hadn’t happened, there’d be no websites telling when and where the next execution will be, so we can Virtue-Signal about the death penalty. IQ would have declined, and we would have returned to the Dark Ages, just like the Romans and Greeks and Muslims did before us.

Put it this way: In April 2017, Johnny Depp made his way to Arkansas to protest against the planned execution of seven murderers that month. However, if it wasn’t for the widespread execution of young criminals, it’s very likely civilization would never have progressed beyond the technology and morality of Pirates of the Caribbean.

Show post

Michelle Malkin #fundie vdare.com

The left has concocted a lucrative category of politically correct victims: "climate refugees." It's the new Green racket.
U.S. taxpayers will now be forking over untold billions to ease the pain allegedly inflicted on "carbon's casualties" by industrial activity. By contrast, those who have suffered as a direct result of government incompetence by federal environmental bureaucrats continue to get the shaft.

Consider the plight of two tribes: the Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw in Louisiana and the Navajo Nation in New Mexico.

LOUISIANA2-superJumbo-v3The New York Times splashed a viral story on its pages this week spotlighting the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's $48 million grant to Native-Americans who live in the flood-ravaged coastal community of Isle de Jean Charles. About 60 residents, the majority of whom belong to the Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw tribe, will be resettled to drier land.

That's a whopping $800,000 per "climate refugee!"

Never mind that the Times' propagandists themselves admit that erosion on the island began in 1955 as a result of land-use and land-management factors that had nothing to do with climate change.

"Channels cut by loggers and oil companies eroded much of the island," the paper reported, "and decades of flood control efforts have kept once free-flowing rivers from replenishing the wetlands' sediments."

Never mind that there are conflicting scientific analyses on the extent to which man-made greenhouses gases have caused sea levels to rise; whether the rate is accelerating; and how much, if any, reducing carbon emissions would actually mitigate purportedly rising sea levels.

Never mind that enviro-alarmists have conveniently changed their tune from blaming global warming for causing sea level rises to blaming global warming for causing sea level drops.

Oh, and never mind that many of the inhabitants of Isle de Jean Charles—whose forefathers originally moved there to escape forced government relocation under the 1830 Indian Removal Act—don't even want to leave and have fought resettlement efforts for decades.

Obama's social engineers are already plotting how to replicate the climate change relocation program. "We see this as setting a precedent for the rest of the country, the rest of the world," declared HUD official Marion McFadden, who is running the program.

Even worse, the United Nations is looking to preemptively "address extreme weather displacement" by targeting refugees even before any apocalyptic event has caused them to seek refuge.

Can you spell "manufacturing a crisis"?

While these meddling liberals conspire to displace one tribe in the name of saving the planet, another tribe is still begging for help after Obama's destructive EPA poisoned their waters.

It's been almost eight months since an Environmental Protection Agency contractor recklessly knocked a hole at the long-abandoned Gold King Mine in Colorado's San Juan Mountains. You should know that Washington has long schemed to declare it a Superfund site, which would increase its power, budget and access over the region.

A federally sponsored wrecking crew poking around in the mine last August triggered a 3 million-ton flood of bright orange gunk into the Animas River. EPA's blithering idiots delayed notifying local residents for 24 hours and downplayed the toxic spill's effects.

Downstream, the muck seeped into the San Juan River in New Mexico, where the Navajo Nation lives and farms. The impact on drinking water and livelihoods has been catastrophic. But the Obama administration refused the tribe's request for disaster relief from FEMA last fall and yanked emergency water tanks the EPA had supplied for Navajo livestock.

Show post

John Derbyshire #racist vdare.com

Part Two of my answer: Jews are white, Asians are not, and while any overclass is resented, a racially distinctive overclass is resented more than one that barely looks any different from the resenters.

Anti-Semites know this; that's why they put out drawings of the hunch-backed, hook-nosed cartoon Jew when they want to inflame anti-Jewish feeling. It makes the Jew plainly a different race.

Part Three of my answer: even under the current covert quotas, Asian Americans are enrolled at elite colleges in numbers far above their five percent share of the U.S. population.

Yes, they're being held down: on a strictly meritocratic basis their numbers would be much higher yet, because of the arithmetic of those distribution tails. Still, strictly measured by demographic proportionality, they're high.
So yes, we were importing an overclass a hundred years ago. Elite universities dealt with the issue by fudging and chicanery—just as they are dealing with this repeat performance.

There are some key differences, though. Jews are white, which makes things easier to fudge.

Also, the high IQ of Ashkenazi Jews is more verbal than visuo-spatial, leading to that dominance in the shaping of opinion.
Asian Americans, by contrast, are much more visible as a group. And their high IQ is more visuo-spatial than verbal, giving us more engineers and scientists, fewer writers, lawyers, comedians, movie and newspaper moguls.

But in both cases, non-Asian gentiles get squeezed. We un-squeeze blacks and Hispanics with Affirmative Action, but that just squeezes white gentiles even more.
Under our current state ideology, the orthodox approach to that hovers somewhere between "Who cares?" and "Serve them right!"

Whether that ideology can be sustained going forward through the 21st century, is an interesting question.

Second point main point raised by readers: any merit-based immigration system imports an overclass.

I agree. Consider for example India. The mean IQ of that country is 82. The mean IQ of Indians in the U.S.A., on the other hand, is 106—higher than the mean for white gentile Americans.

So there's an overclass we've imported … from a low-IQ population.

The same applies to Africa. The mean IQ in black Africa is 70, which is very low. Assuming a normal distribution with mean 70 and standard deviation 15, Microsoft Excel tells me that only 0.0032 percent of the population is higher than 130 IQ.

That's a teeny-tiny percent; but there are an awful lot of black Africans: 1.2 billion is the latest number I've seen. Point zero zero three two percent of 1.2 billion is 38,000. Every one of those 38,000 very-smart Africans is applying for a U.S. student visa.
Caribbean blacks are, for complicated reasons, somewhat smarter than black Africans. Add them into the mix and we're importing a small black overclass.
Is this something we should be bothered about? We-e-ell … there are contrary factors to consider.

Under the present regime of chain migration, for example, all those smart Indians and Africans can bring in their way-less-smart siblings, brides, parents, and even cousins. You could argue that long-term that evens out the mix.

There's also regression to the mean. The offspring of these high-IQ immigrants will regress towards their population mean — although not all the way to it, or else Natural Selection wouldn't work. Given the likelihood of assortative mating, in fact — smart immigrants marrying other smart people — regression all the way back to the population mean is highly improbable, even after many generations.

So, no, this is not a great issue. It is an issue, though — an issue that lurks behind all the happy talk about a merit-based system of immigration.

The first time America imported an overclass, we did so accidentally. When that Great Wave of Ashkenazi Jews came in after 1881, we had only the vaguest ideas about population differentials in intelligence and personality. Psychometry as a quantitative science was just getting started.

Now we understand much more, and can make better decisions. If we import a new overclass today, we'll be doing it deliberately. We know enough to not do it.

And any overclass we import now will be nonwhite. That follows just from the balance of races in the world being much different than it was 100 years ago.

If you're a nonwhite who doesn't like white people, you are fine with that. If you're a white person living in one of the globalist-bubble districts — big coastal cities, college towns — you may think it's no big deal, we can all get along.

The rest of us are shaking our heads.

Show post

John Derbyshire #fundie vdare.com

Ah, the idealism of youth! Is there anything in this Children's Crusade to gladden the stony hearts of cynics?

You bet there is. If you've been wondering how a bunch of adolescents could manage the funding and organization of this march, and similar events nationwide, allow me to direct you to Daniel Greenfield's excellent bit of investigative reporting over at Front Page. Greenfield has done the spadework the Main Stream Media will not do, and uncovered the men behind the curtain.

And in fact the impression you got from MSM accounts — the impression I definitely got, that the Washington march was of youngsters, which is why I got to thinking about the Children's Crusade — is false. An academic sociologist (University of Maryland sociologist Dana R. Fisher) analyzed the crowd and concluded that no more than ten percent were under eighteen. The average age was 49! To be fair to the media, this lady's research was published in the Washington Post, but only as an op-ed. [Here’s who actually attended the March for Our Lives. (No, it wasn’t mostly young people.), by Dana R. Fisher, March 28, 2018] But you'd never have figured those facts from the news stories.
For a further dash of cynicism, note how, as always with these SJW glove puppets, the loud-heralded "revolution" turns out not to threaten anyone who actually holds actual power. Nitwits like that 17-year-old Cameron Kasky really seem to think they are sticking it to the man when, as Ramzpaul jeered on another occasion, "You are the man!"

Similarly with 17-year-old David Hogg, the foul-mouthed young twerp who seems to fancy himself the Stephen of Cloyes in this Children's Crusade of 49-year-olds. "Who here is going to vote in the 2018 election?" he asked the crowd. "If you listen real close, you can hear the people in power shaking," end quote.

No, David. What has the people in power shaking is the thought that if, as their hearts desire, they were to stage a coup and establish a Chinese-style panopticon of thought control and repression of dissent, they might find themselves opposed by millions of armed citizens.

These self-styled "revolutionaries" believe everything that those "people in power" believe: everything billionaires like Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg believe, everything every corporate HR Director believes, everything the academics and church leaders and media talking heads and Hollywood glitterati believe.

If this is revolution, Louis the Sixteenth and Tsar Nicholas the Second were foaming revolutionaries.

What I want to know is: Where are the Muslim slave traders when we really need them?

Show post

David Yeagley #fundie vdare.com

As an Oklahoma Comanche, I consider myself an "Indian"—an American Indian.

I am not a Native American, nor a First Nations, nor an Aboriginal, and least of all an Indigenous person.

I`m simply a descendent of savage hunters with the most lethal war skills and artful horsemanship known in American history.

I could refer to myself as "nerm" or "num," which, if pronounced half-way correctly, indicates I am of the Comanche people. "Numunu" is what we call ourselves in our own language. But who would know what I`m talking about except Comanches?

White people have called all our tribes "Indians" for over four centuries. And even when they referred to us as Sioux, Comanche, Nes Perce, Coeur d`Alene, most of those names were what some European explorer heard one tribe calling some other tribe.

Few of us are called by our own name in our own language. So what? Names of European countries also get changed quite a bit in other languages: Germans, "Deutscher" are called "Tedeschi" in Italian, for instance. Our Indian peoples are distinguished from one another in historical treaties by the use of these foreign names.

The quest for Ideological Correctness—through terms like Native American, First Nations, Aboriginal, or Indigenous—is ill-fated if not ludicrous. Why swap one European name for another? Why exchange a classy, descriptive French name, such as Coeur d`Alene ("heart of the awl"—indicating able hagglers) for an English derivative of a Latin abstraction like "aboriginal," a vague chronological distinction, or a Spanish derivative like "indigenous," originally meaning poor and naked?

"Indian" is the oldest, most sensible term. When Columbus used the term "Indios" when he wrote to Queen Isabella in 1492 it was because he thought he`d arrived on the western shores of India. What else would he call the people he encountered in the world new to him?

Columbus used no such phrase as "una gente en Dios," as modern revisionists like to say. These contortionists propagate this myth to suggest that we are spiritually superior beings, so impressive that Columbus called us "a people in God." But what he called us was "naked as when their mothers bore them."

That term "Native American," like so many things, appeared for the first time in the 1960s, as part of the legal definition of who is considered an American Indian. It involved land squabbles, of course, and the stakes have always been high. When other groups wanted in on the definition through the term "Native American," many "American Indians" objected strongly, to the agreement of some responsible scholars.

In general, however, academic trends list with the social winds. Name-changing, as other university fads, is generally the work of Marxist racial agitators, ever anxious to overturn "the establishment" as a means of clutching at power. Changing the names of things, usurping their meaning, or removing names entirely, are favorite tactics of these leftists. Thus "Negro" became "Colored," then "Black," then "Afro-American" and now "African American."

But then American states, counties, rivers, schools and teams weren`t generally named after Negroes, so that particular name game had its limits. Indian names are the next target. And that name game is just beginning.

But count me out. Don`t call me Native. Call me Savage, Redskin, Injun, Comanche, Red Devil. Don`t worry about being sued. You can`t victimize me with names. I`m not black, I`m red.

"Indian" is what Americans have always called us, and it is the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant with whom we have had mostly to do. The victory was his, not the Negro`s, the Hispanic`s, the Communist`s, or the Arab Muslim`s. Why should I care what they call me?

By the way, I am thinking of suing a certain Michael Weiner—for renaming himself with my honorable, sacred name, Savage!

Show post

David Yeagley #fundie vdare.com

America today is making the same mistake we Indians made nearly four centuries ago. America is letting in too many foreigners. And we Indians could end up losing this country all over again. It may come as a surprise to many white people who have been brainwashed by the media to see Indians as the ultimate liberals, but there are few groups in America today who take a dimmer view of mass immigration than the American Indian.

According to ProjectUSA.org, the U.S. population will double within the lifetimes of our children, as a direct result of the massive, uncontrolled influx of foreigners who began flooding our land after passage of the 1965 Immigration Act.

All Americans will suffer. But Indians will suffer most of all.

I`m not talking about competition for jobs, land, housing, energy, water and other finite resources—though these are all important. I`m talking about something deeper. The demographic destruction of Anglo-America will bring the final catastrophe on our people.

What catastrophe? The catastrophe of waking up one day and realizing that white people no longer control this country.

Now why should an Indian care about that? After all, white people are supposedly our enemies.

Well, yes, they were. But, as warriors, we found them to be worthy and formidable adversaries. Defeat is bitter. But when you respect your conqueror, it is a lot easier to swallow.

If Anglo-America turns this land over to blacks, Mexicans, Asians, Middle Easterners and other foreign peoples, for the Indian, it will be like losing this country for the second time. We have had generations to reconcile ourselves to white America. But we do not know these new people who are coming. We fought no battles with them, made no treaties with them, and have no reason to accord them any special respect.

If things keep going the way they are, we Indians could find ourselves bowing down to foreign peoples who never defeated our forefathers in battle—and who certainly never could!

We Indians—especially the more warlike tribes such as my people the Comanches—recognize a kindred spirit in the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. He is like us in more ways than he knows.

The Comanches were one of the most intolerant of all Indian peoples. We had no use for anyone else, white, Mexican or Indian. When we came thundering down on the southwest plains, we took the land we wanted and ran everyone else off. We created the life we wanted, at the expense of other people.

The white man did the same. Only he did it on a grander scale.

In the old days, Comanches were known to honor strength in other people. Comanche warriors even adopted white captive boys, if they happened to show courage and fight.

In many ways, Indians see the white man as a kind of adopted son—naïve, reckless and destructive, at times—but nevertheless cut from the same warrior cloth as we were.

We do not see blacks, Mexicans, Asians, Arabs and others in this light. These peoples may have their own virtues and traditions, but they have no history with us. They are strangers.

If they want to rule us, they must conquer us the way the white man did—on the battlefield, by force of arms. That is the only honorable way for a warrior.

The white man seems to have lost his spirit, and we Indians see it. We see that he is giving this country away to others. And this fills our hearts with fear. For we are part of the land he is giving away. He is turning us over to strangers the way medieval barons turned over their serfs when they sold their land.

But we are not serfs. We are warriors. And we will not be ruled by people who have never fought us.

The white man must regain his warrior soul and take back his land.

In that fight, I will stand by his side and offer whatever strength I have to ensure his victory. Ha tu vi chat! *

Show post

Peter Brimelow #fundie vdare.com

Well, you didn’t read that headline, although Wu (D-Ore) has indeed resigned after some sort of interaction with the 18-year old [i.e. legal] daughter of a donor. And he is indeed an immigrant, born in Taiwan in 1955 and coming to the U.S. with his parents in 1961. (Click here for Michelle Malkin’s view; here for Wu’s appearance in a John Derbyshire–Norm Matloff colloquy).

But, as of 5 pm ET, searching Google News on “David Wu“ produced about 3,580 results; “David Wu immigrant“ a mere 348. Searching Bing News (do you use Bing?) produced 5,170 results on “David Wu“; just 21 on “David Wu immigrant“.

This is a crude measure (the google Wu-immigrant search in particular seems choked with junk). But, nevertheless, it is evidence of the Main Stream Media’s priorities. There are circumstances in which Wu’s immigrant status must be whooped up, And there are others in which it must go down the memory hole.

Indeed, poor Wu tried, vainly, to push the immigrant button in his resignation statement (resulting in most of the hits on “immigrant”): “Rare is the nation in which an immigrant child can become a national political figure.”

(Bunk, of course. It’s common throughout the immigration-impacted First World: Canada—needless to say!—has even had a Haitian immigrant Governor-General, who was also a dual citizen of France [!!] and linked to Quebec separatism [!!!]).

Sexual harrassment, like mass murder, is not a job that Americans won’t do. I don’t really know what the significance of Wu’s immigrant status is. I do know, however, that it is being suppressed for a reason.

For the record, although Wu is regularly described as a “moderate Democrat”, NumbersUSA ranks his Career Record on immigration patriotism as an “F”.

Show post

Jeremy Cooper #racist vdare.com

So although South Korea will not maintain its complete “racial purity” indefinitely into the future, it is not facing the “Great Replacement” or wholesale dispossession taking place in the West. Nor does South Korea have to contend with huge settlements of hostile populations which can’t or won’t integrate into First World societies. The half-ethnic Koreans of the future will have at least one Korean parent, they will come from a variety of different backgrounds; most will have two Asian parents and be physically indistinguishable from the rest of society. Generally, Western-style identity politics usually results when there are groups of people that have the numbers to separate themselves from the larger society and are clearly physically distinct from the majority population.

Show post

Paul Kersey #fundie vdare.com

Of course, all this begs the obvious question how “fictional” Hidden Figures really is.

Contrary to myth, America was already thoroughly race-whipped when NASA was in its heyday. For example, a Washington Post reportorial entitled “Racism, Sexism, and Space Ventures” back in November 24, 1973, was a stereotypical lament that NASA lagged behind other federal agencies when it came to employing non-whites

Black leaders were intensely critical. As man was about to land on the moon, the black magazine Jet was condemning the space program for using money which could be better spent on welfare programs for blacks. [Blacks Scarce as Men on Moon at Launch, by Simeon Booker, Jet, July 31, 1969]

Not to be outdone, Ebony magazine published an editorial comparing white men going to the moon to Columbus’s voyage to the New World, which led “to one of the most infamous and long lasting rapes of all history” [Giant Leap for Mankind?, Ebony, October 1969]

On July 16, 1969, Ralph Abernathy—the heir to Martin Luther King’s civil rights shakedown machine—rode a mule cart, with three mules, along with 150 other poor black people to protest NASA’s launch to the moon. [Protesters, VIPS Flood Cape Area, by William Greider, Washington Post, July 17, 1969]

Even Time and Newsweek were upset by the lily-white nature of the moon launch. Time, for example, asked “Is the moon white?”

In long run, these black leaders got what they wanted. America gave up exploring the heavens to spend untold trillions pretending race didn’t exist.

Now, we are expected to fall on our knees to praise the obviously inflated contributions of three black women canonized in a film which has already won a Screen Actors Guild award and will no doubt win an Academy Award.

Hidden Figures was made with the painfully-obvious agenda of delegitimizing the contributions of white scientists, physicists, engineers, mathematicians, project managers, aviation experts and rocket scientists. Instead, America’s greatest triumph evidently hinged on unknown black women manually calculating trajectories already confirmed by computers and a white man named Jack Crenshaw.

But even in 1969, NASA and the federal government would have been proud to show off any black contributions to the moon landing. By highlighting black contributions to the Apollo program, NASA could have kept blacks from singing songs like Gil Scott-Heron’s “Whitey on the Moon” (which bemoaned how a rat could bite the black singer’s sister while white people were on the moon).

But this didn’t happen.

Why didn’t someone from NASA bring up Katherine Johnson back then to counter this negative publicity?

Simple. Her contributions were so insignificant no one with NASA noticed them enough to highlight them.

Which is why Hidden Figures matters and must be lavished with awards and praise. It creates a new narrative, completely devoid of truth, about black participation in man’s greatest achievement even in the face of discrimination. And it’s a narrative that a certain audience—it should be noted women made up 64 percent of the opening weekend audience, with minorities representing 57 percent of those seeing the film—want to hear [Hidden Figures cast celebrates as film hits No. 1, by Joey Nolfi, Entertainment Weekly, January 9, 2017].

Yet surely audiences wanted to believe it in 1969 as well. Katherine Johnson, were her contributions so vital, could have been the much-needed minority public relations asset to parade around to the media back then.

But her value as a symbol was limited—because her contributions were trivial.

And she can only be brought up now because the real truth about black opposition to the space program has been hidden in plain sight.

Show post

Jared Taylor #racist vdare.com

“Diversity” is a source of conflict and tension, not strength, and the Japanese know it. Thanks to very restrictive immigration, Japan is one of the most homogeneous nations on earth. Its people know that the country belongs to all of them, and they treat it and each other that way. If Japan had let in just a few of the Iraqis and Pakistanis who would love to come, there would not be as many admiring accounts of post-earthquake endurance and self-control.

Let us not forget that even the well-behaved Japanese can run amok in the face of diversity. After the Great Kanto Earthquake of 1923 killed more than 100,000 people, rumors spread that resident Koreans were looting and setting fires. The Japanese considered the Koreans expendable colonial rabble, and murdered an estimated 6,000.

Likewise, during the Second World War, Japanese brutalized prisoners and enemy civilians. Much as nationalists have tried to downplay it, the Japanese government now concedes that Imperial troops massacred thousands of people and looted indiscriminately during what is known as the “Rape of Nanking”.

But what brought out the murderous worst in the Japanese was confrontation, in times of war or crisis, with aliens. In the case of prisoners or conquered civilians, they were what the Japanese considered inferior aliens. Today`s earthquake survivors are exclusively among their own people. And they treat each other with courtesy and respect.

[Follow the link for the full retard. I'm only submitting this (the worst) section because it's a long article.]

Show post

John Derbyshire #racist vdare.com

If today you live in Sierra Leone or Pakistan or Laos and you want your kids to enjoy a good life, the sensible thing is to get the hell out of there. If you hope for your kids to live well, you want them living under white supremacy — in a country built by and governed by whites, preferably by northwest Europeans, most preferably by the British

Show post

Michelle Malkin #fundie vdare.com

Socialist genius Bernie Sanders has figured out what’s really ailing America.

Our store shelves have too many different brands of deodorant and sneakers. Just look at all those horrible, fully stocked aisles at Target and Walgreens and Wal-Mart and Payless and DSW and Dick’s Sporting Goods. It’s a national nightmare! If only consumers had fewer choices in the free market, fewer entrepreneurs offering a wide variety of products and fewer workers manufacturing goods people wanted, Sanders believes, we could end childhood hunger.

Nobody parodies the far left better than far-leftists themselves.

In an interview with financial journalist John Harwood on Tuesday, Sanders detailed his grievances with an overabundance of antiperspirants and footwear. “You don’t necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country. I don’t think the media appreciates the kind of stress that ordinary Americans are working on.”[10 questions with Bernie Sanders, CNBC, May 26, 2015]

Try to suppress a snicker: Sanders, Decider of Your Sanitary and Footwear Needs, is casting himself as the Everyman in touch with “ordinary Americans” to contrast his campaign with Hillary “my Beltway lobbyist and foreign agent operator Sid Blumenthal is just a friend I talk to for advice” Clinton.

Blech. By the looks of the 2016 Democratic presidential field, liberals really do practice the anti-choice principles they preach.

At Caracas-on-the-Green Mountains, every business owner’s success robs starving babies of vital nutrition. Because some tummies may be grumbling somewhere across the fruited plains, all must suffer. In Sanders’ world, it’s the “greedy”– America’s real makers, builders and wealth creators — who must be punished and shamed, specifically with a personal income tax rate hiked to a whopping 90 percent for top earners.

Of course, the wealth redistributors in Washington never bear any of the blame for misspending the billions they confiscate. Nearly 100 million Americans participated in dozens of federal food assistance programs in 2014. The General Accounting Office reported last year that $74.6 billion went to food stamps, $11.3 billion went to the national school lunch program, and $7.1 billion went to the WIC (Women, Infants and Children) program, along with $1.9 billion for nutrition assistance for Puerto Rico and $10.7 million for a federal milk program.

But no, it’s not the fault of command-and-control bureaucrats and their overseers on Capitol Hill that the War on Poverty and the War on Hunger have failed.

In Sanders’ bubble, childhood hunger is the fault of selfish consumers, self-serving entrepreneurs and rapacious retailers who engage in voluntary transactions in a free-market economy. Just as Sanders believes there are “too many” products on the shelves, President Obama recently opined that families of America’s top earners in the financial industry “pretty much have more than you’ll ever be able to use and your family will ever be able to use.”

We need not speculate about whether the wealth-shamers’ recipe of less capitalist consumption, fewer private businesses, stifling of entrepreneurship and more government control over goods and services would result in happier citizens and fuller stomachs. In Venezuela, the shelves are unburdened by “too many” deodorants and shoes and too much soap, milk or coffee. Food distribution is under military control. The currency of the socialist paradise just collapsed on the black market by 30 percent.

Here in America, dozens of private household goods companies make billions of dollars selling scented, unscented, quilted, two-ply, white and colored toilet paper that people want and need. In Sanders’ utopia in South America, the government imposed price controls in the name of redistributing basic goods to the poor and seized a toilet paper factory to cure the inevitable shortages. The lines are long. The shelves are empty. The daily battle for subsistence is brutal.

Show post

Peter Brimelow #fundie vdare.com

I am proud to say that I find all the writers at VDARE.com instinctively want to wait whenever there’s some atrocity like the Charleston Church massacre to see what actually happened—although of course we do feel free to point out that the MSM systematically memory-holes the far more numerous similar incidents with minority/ immigrant perps. Consequently, we are never caught in rush-to-judgement fiascoes like political elite’s notoriously disastrous effort to pin the Gabrielle Giffords shooting on white conservatives.

But every once in a while, it turns out that the perp is motivated by white racial feeling. If this were common, it might put us in the position of left-wing Democrats during the Weathermen rampages. (Hint: they ignored them). However, it is rare.

In what appears to be Dylann Roof’s manifesto, he expresses particular disquiet at the political elite’s race-baiting hysteria, clearly a blatant effort to mobilize the black vote and also subsequently discredited, about the Trayvon Martin Hoax. This must mean that the Left is at least partly to blame. Yet googling produces nothing significant on “Dylann Roof” + “Root Cause.”

Immigrant/ minority perps also always trigger sympathetic MSM coverage about their co-ethnics fearing backlash. But I haven’t even bothered to google for articles about white conservatives fearing backlash.

Show post

John Derbyshire #fundie vdare.com

So as a result of the Charleston murders, two dangers have been increased, with the willing connivance of the media in both cases. The first danger is to the persons of nonblack citizens. This is the danger that blacks, inflamed by the incident, will seek random revenge against nonblacks.

The second danger is to our liberties: the danger that Obama and his Justice Department will try to leverage the Charleston shootings to further erode our Second Amendment rights.

How should we respond to these two dangers? One: If you have guns, keep them as close by you as laws, and your carry status, allow. Two: If you are an NRA member and have been meaning for months to send them a donation check, send it now.

Show post

Frank Borzellieri #racist vdare.com

The hypocrisy of white liberals over integration and the wonderful enrichment that mass immigration is supposed to bring is the gift that never stops giving. If there is one thing you can be absolutely sure of whenever you hear a white liberal espousing the vital importance of diversity, it is that the same person lives in a safe, lily-white community.

What was termed “white flight” in the 1950s and 1960s is a demographic fact of life and everyone knows it. No less an unwilling witness than the U.S. government has reported what everyone knows: when the non-white population of a community reaches between 10 and 20 percent, whites simply leave. Whites will not live in non-white neighborhoods in any meaningful percentage.[The Residential Preferences of Blacks and Whites: A Four-Metropolis Analysis, Housing Policy Debate, January 1997(PDF)]

I personally, as a libertarian, think all people—black, white, Hispanic, or Asian—should be allowed to live anywhere they want without being browbeaten or forced to live where they don’t want to. My problem is with white liberals who claim that “diversity is strength” but whose actions are very different when it comes to their own lives, their own homes, their own children and their own neighborhoods.

Show post

Jared Taylor #racist vdare.com

Japanese who visit the United States are appalled by what they find here: ethnic politics, bilingual education, ballot papers in Chinese, racial preferences, interpreters in hospitals and courtrooms, jail-house race riots, foreign criminal gangs, etc. They wonder if millions of aging American whites can really count on blacks and browns to pay for their retirement. They have seen diversity in action, and they want none of it.

Show post

Pat Buchanan #fundie vdare.com

Abe is the most nationalistic leader of postwar Japan. He is rebooting nuclear power, building up Japan’s military, asserting her rights in territorial disputes with China and Korea.

And he is among a host of leaders of large and emerging powers who may fairly be described as the new nationalistic strong men.

Xi Jinping is another. Staking a claim to all the islands in the South and East China seas, moving masses of Han Chinese into Tibet and Uighur lands to swamp native peoples, purging old comrades for corruption, Xi is the strongest leader China has seen in decades.

He sits astride what may now be the world’s largest economy and is asserting his own Monroe Doctrine. Hong Kong’s democracy protests were tolerated until Xi tired of them. Then they were swept off the streets.

Call it Putinism. It appears to be rising, while the New World Order of Bush I, the “global hegemony” of the neocons, and the democracy crusade of Bush II seem to belong to yesterday.

Narendra Modi, leader of the Hindu nationalist party who was denied entry into the United States for a decade for complicity in or toleration of a massacre of Muslims is now Prime Minister of India.

“Members of the rightwing Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh,” the FT reports, “the Organisation of National Volunteers that gave birth to the Bharatiya Janata party headed by Mr. Modi — have been appointed to key posts in the governing party and cultural institutions.

“Nationalists have railed in public against the introduction of ‘western’ practices such as wearing bikinis on the beach, putting candles on birthday cakes and using English in schools — all to the chagrin of fretful liberals.”

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is another such leader.

Once seen as a model of the enlightened ruler who blended his Islamic faith with a secular state, seeking friendship with all of his neighbors, he has declared cold war on Israel, aided the Islamic State in Syria, and seems to be reigniting the war with the Kurds, distancing himself from his NATO allies and the U.S., and embracing Putin’s Russia.

Not since Ataturk has Turkey had so nationalistic a leader.

And as the democracy demonstrators were routed in Hong Kong, so, too, were the Tahrir Square “Arab Spring” demonstrators in Egypt, home country to one in four Arabs.

With the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak, the Muslim Brotherhood came to power in free elections, but was then overthrown by the Egyptian Army. General Abdul Fattah al-Sisi is now president and rules as autocratically as Mubarak, or Nasser before him.

Thousands of the Muslim Brotherhood are in prison, hundreds face the death penalty. Yet, despite the military coup that brought Sisi to power, and the repression, the American aid continues to flow.

What do these leaders have in common?

All are strong men. All are nationalists. Almost all tend to a social conservatism from which Western democracies recoil. Almost none celebrate democracy or democratic values the way we do.

And almost all reject America’s claim to be the “indispensable nation” or “exceptional nation” and superpower leader.

Fareed Zakaria lists as “crucial elements of Putinism … nationalism, religion, social conservatism, state capitalism and government domination of the media. They are all, in some way or another, different from and hostile to, modern Western values of individual rights, tolerance, cosmopolitanism, and internationalism.”

Yet not every American revels in the sewer that is our popular culture. Not every American believes we should impose our democratist ideology on other nations. Nor are Big Media and Hollywood universally respected. Patriotism, religion and social conservatism guide the lives of a majority of Americans today.

As the Associated Press reports this weekend, Putinism finds echoes across Central and Western Europe. Hungary’s Viktor Orban has said he sees in Russia a model for his own “illiberal state.”

The National Front’s Marine Le Pen wants to bring France into a new Gaullist Europe, stretching “from the Atlantic to the Urals,” with France seceding from the EU superstate.

“Of the 24 right-wing populist parties that took about a quarter of the European Parliament seats in May elections, Political Capital lists 15 as ‘committed’ to Russia,” writes the AP.

These rising right-wing parties are “partners” of Russia in that they “share key views — advocacy of traditional family values, belief in authoritarian leadership, a distrust of the U.S., and support for strong law and order measures.”

While the financial collapse caused Orban to turn his back on the West, says Zakaria, to the Hungarian prime minister, liberal values today embody “corruption, sex and violence,” and Western Europe has become a land of “freeloaders on the backs of welfare systems.”

If America is a better country today than she has ever been, why are so many, East and West, recoiling from what we offer now?

Show post

James Fulford #racist vdare.com

If you look at the people picking up the Nobel Peace Prize, they`re frequently “indigenous” people like the mendacious Rigoberta Menchu or Third World “wise men” like Mohammed Yunus. , Wangari Maathai, or Shirin Ebadi. (All together now–“Who?”)But if someone is going to discover something new in physics, chemistry, or medicine…not so much.

Even before the age of affirmative action, the Nobel Peace Prize has always been the Special Olympics of the Nobel World. You don`t have to achieve peace, you just have to mean well.

Show post

Steve Sailer #fundie vdare.com

Now, here’s a sensible suggest: that to do better at the highest levels, women need to respond to criticism more objectively. But of course, this nugget of good sense is buried under lots of feminism victimology and You Go Girlisms. Much of the appeal of feminism is that it encourages women to do what they always felt like doing anyway: take everything personally. But to succeed at the highest level, you need some objectivity, which feminism hates. Feminists see objective reality as a conspiracy out to make them feel bad about themselves.

This is a funny example of how feminism encourages women to do what they always felt like doing: interpret everything personally and subjectively. Do you really think Peter Thiel or Paul Graham would tell a man that five investors dismissing his start-up idea “doesn’t tell a [man] anything about the quality of [his] business idea” but instead is just about the investors’ peculiarities? Successful masculine thinking deals both with subjective realities and objective realities, such as that my idea might be objectively no good, or, at minimum, needs major improvements. And maybe there is something that investors don’t like about me? Can I improve that aspect of my performance? Or maybe I should get a partner who is a better front man?

The most successful men in Silicon Valley neither dismiss criticism of their proposals as merely the subjective preferences of the critics nor do they accept criticism as crushing permanent proof that they are worthless human beings who will never ever come up with a good idea. Obviously, maintaining your subjective self-confidence while being objective about your ideas is difficult to do. Most men can’t, but more men than women can, which is one reason why the high end of Silicon Valley is dominated by men.

Looking back on a lifetime of feminism dominance of the media, I can recall distant eras when certain feminists tried to be logical, but those attempts alienated other feminists. So, today, feminism is whatever any woman is upset about. It doesn’t have to be consistent with what other feminists are upset about. It doesn’t even have to be consistent with whatever other things that particular feminist is upset about. All that matters is that whoever is bitching about whatever claims the mantle of Team Women.

Show post

Steve Sailer #fundie vdare.com

While upwardly mobile Mexican-Americans marry blonde Anglos, downwardly mobile white men wed Mexicans. Now, there is no doubt plenty to be said for getting hitched to a Mexican lady. They probably tend to make better mothers, homemakers, and cooks than the leggy blonde careerists who, however, are so much more in demand in Southern California.

Show post

Federale #racist vdare.com

Over a period of years, dozens received legal permanent residence by the simple expedient of marrying an American. The fraud is common and given its frequency, not often caught by the fraud investigators and adjudicators at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

Now that marriage benefits have been extended unlawfully to homosexuals, USCIS will be inundated by homosexual marriage fraud. Since they are woefully unable to cope with heterosexual marriage fraud, the situation will only get worse.

Show post

Allan Wall #racist vdare.com

War On Christmas—War On American Food—War On America?

It’s not enough that Christmas is being replaced in the name of diversity–so is American food, at least according to the Main Stream Media, which wants to lecture us on how this means the historic American nation is inevitably being replaced too.

For years, we’ve been told that salsa now outsells ketchup in the US...But a recent Associated Press Article took it a step further, reporting that several well-known American foods are now being outsold by Mexican foods.

[...]

The AP article reports that

•“Tortillas and taco kits outsell hamburgers and hot dog buns”
•“Sales of tortilla chips trump potato chips”
•Tomato-based salsa not only outsells ketchup, but outsells ketchup 2 to 1

Gloatingly, the article explains that this is part of a demographic transformation (which, it implies, is inevitable and all good people support):

As immigrant and minority populations rewrite American demographics, the nation's collective menu is reflecting this flux, as it always has…This is a rewrite of the American menu at the macro level, an evolution of whole patterns of how people eat.

And we are reminded this is all due to a particular group of people who cannot be denied:

The biggest culinary voting bloc is Hispanic.

Ah, hah! Just as in electoral politics, the MSM is trying to persuade us that Hispanics trump all.

[...]

In fact, Hispanics make up only 17 percent according to the Census. But you get the idea.

This seeming contradiction is resolved via a coded racial slur by the Tortilla Industry Association’s CEO Jim Kabbani. Kabbani [Email him] is quoted as quipping:

"Having been raised on Wonder bread, I didn't think that this could displace the sliced bread that was such an item of the American kitchen."

This evokes the pejorative “white bread” epithet often hurled at traditional mid-20th century American culture.

The article ends with a contradictory quote from Terry Soto, an Ecuadorian woman who is “president and CEO of About Marketing Solutions, a consulting firm specializing in the Hispanic market”:

"There is a larger segment of the population that wants the real thing. It's not so much the products becoming mainstream. It's about ethnic food becoming that much more of what we eat on a day-to-day basis."

The contradiction is resolved—American Hispanics are, apparently, an authentic cultural bloc who will eat their own “real” food, while “white bread” Americans haplessly follow along until they are finally replaced.

[...]

The MSM multiculturalists are engaged in a bait-and-switch. They lull Americans to sleep with romanticized images of immigration, huddled masses, Ellis Island, etc. Then Americans wake up and are told their country has been irretrievably transformed into something else. That’s why we are told we can’t have Christmas anymore. In this case, it’s culinary fashion that is being used to promote the Demographic-Change-Is-Inevitable theme.

There’s that other subtext in the Hispanic Cuisine Hype.

Old White Anglo-European America—Bland and Boring—“White Bread”

Vs.

New Hispanic Multicultural America—Spicy, Vibrant and Exciting—“Salsa”

As a descendant of Old America, I naturally dispute its being characterized as “boring.” But that’s what the diversity-mongers want us to believe.

Whatever—the historic American nation has an origin, history, and identity. Is it to be radically transformed, beyond recognition, without our permission?

Apparently so, unless we can stop it.

It’s about who’s coming to dinner—not what is served on the table.

Show post

Pat Buchanan #racist vdare.com

And as I have never heard of anyone choosing a team name to insult it, who is really lacking in tolerance and mutual respect here?

If [Oenida Chief Ray] Halbritter has a problem with the Redskins, he's got more problems than that in D.C. Among this city's great monuments is the memorial to Jefferson whose Declaration of Independence speaks of those "merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction, of all ages, sexes and conditions."

Show post

Joe Guzzardi #racist vdare.com

The goal of Puerto Rican statehood is nothing as lofty like "self determination" or "democracy". Instead, it is to leveraging Congress with as many Democrats as possible, to keep the Obama agenda grinding along and crushing whatever opposition the Republicans may mount along the way.

All this and the threat of entrenching coast-to-coast bilingualism—which has happened in Canada because of its French-speaking province of Quebec—too.

What better reasons could there be to oppose Puerto Rican statehood?

Why not let all Americans vote on this subversive proposal?

We are the ones who will pay the price.

Maybe a majority will agree with Steve Sailer: USA Libre! Throw Puerto Rico out!

Show post

John Derbyshire #racist vdare.com

It seems I’ve picked up an interest in the Civil War just as America is undergoing a revival of Abolitionist Porn. That, at any rate, is what I take this much-talked-of new movie 12 Years a Slave to be.

No, I haven’t seen the thing, but I’ve read reviews. Also I’ve seen (and reviewed) a specimen of the allied genre: Civil Rights Porn.

And I’ve no doubt there was such a thing as Abolitionist Porn. It would have been surprising if there wasn’t. Whenever there’s a deep and long-standing difference between two sets of social principles, a genre of lurid tales will come up in one camp, denigrating the other.

[...]

So I’ve no doubt that antebellum Yankees enjoyed having their flesh made to creep by stories of the dreadful goings-on in Southern plantations.

There was at least enough of this kind of thing for Southerners to poke fun at it. Here is Gone With The Wind ’s Scarlett O’Hara making business calls on occupying Yankees in Reconstruction Atlanta:

Accepting Uncle Tom’s Cabin as revelation second only to the Bible, the Yankee women all wanted to know about the bloodhounds which every Southerner kept to track down runaway slaves. And they never believed her when she told them she had only seen one bloodhound in all her life . . . They wanted to know about the dreadful branding irons which planters used to mark the faces of their slaves . . . and they evidenced what Scarlett felt was a very nasty and ill-bred interest in slave concubinage.

[Gone With the Wind, Chapter 38.]

Reading that, and knowing something of the author’s background, I thought: Well, I bet there were bloodhounds; but I also bet there were young plantation women who had seen only one.

Some googling on the Slave Narrativesconfirms the first, at any rate. The Slave Narratives are recorded reminiscences from ex-slaves, gathered by the Federal Writers’ Project in 1936-38. The speaker here was born “around 1852”:

Mars George fed an’ clo’esed well an’ was kin’ to his slaves, but once in a while one would git onruly an’ have to be punished. De worse I ever seen one whupped was a slave man dat had slipped off an’ hid out in de woods to git out of wuk. Dey chased him wid blood hounds, an’ when dey did fin’ him dey tied him to a tree, stroppin’ him ’round an’ ’round. Dey sho’ did gib him a lashin’.

[Mississippi Slave Narratives, Harriet Walker.]

As that extract illustrates, though, the Slave Narratives also remind us how remarkably often ex-slaves spoke well of their masters.

Plainly there was more to American race slavery that white masters brutalizing resentful Negroes. How much more, though? What was slavery actually like?

Trying to get to grips with this, I found it easiest to divide up the topic the way Caesar divided Gaul, into three parts:

•Slavery as a condition.
•American slave society as a way of life.
•The position of blacks in America’s first century.

Of slavery as a condition—the ownership of human beings—the first thing to be said is that any person of feeling and imagination has to think it wrong, on the Golden Rule principle. The liberty to work out your own destiny, by your own volition, is a sweet thing, as the Spartans told the Persian. I wouldn’t deprive anyone of it.

That said, some historical imagination is in order. People are born, raised, educated, and find themselves in a certain kind of society to which those around them are all accustomed. American slave society was a way of life; a settled way that most people took for granted, as most people will anywhere.

There were aspects of life resembling slavery in the communist China where I lived, 1982-3. People had no liberty to find their own employment. You were “assigned” to a “unit.” If unhappy there, it was a devil of a job to get re-assigned.

Families broken up? One of my Chinese colleagues lived alone because his wife was “assigned” to a distant province. He only saw her once a year.

The guy drank a lot.

Yet while there was much grumbling, and some scattered seething rebelliousness, most Chinese got along with the system. A lot of people were very happy with it. You didn’t have to think much, or take much responsibility. And that suits many of us just fine.

[...]

Slavery is more irksome to some than to others; and freedom can be irksome, too. Personally, I’d be a terrible slave—too ornery. I know people, though—and I’m talking about white people—who I quietly suspect would be happy in slavery.

Show post

Steve Sailer #racist vdare.com

What you won't hear, except from me, is that 'Let the good times roll' is an especially risky message for African-Americans. The plain fact is that they tend to possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups. Thus they need stricter moral guidance from society. ... In contrast to New Orleans, there was only minimal looting after the horrendous 1995 earthquake in Kobe, Japan — because, when you get down to it, [the] Japanese aren't blacks.

Show post

John Derbyshire #racist vdare.com

What generated the most shrieking and swooning from the guardians of racial orthodoxy in this cycle was this remark in my VDARE.com column:

"White supremacy, in the sense of a society in which key decisions are made by white Europeans, is one of the better arrangements History has come up with."

On the John Locke principle, though—i.e. "I have always thought the actions of men the best interpreters of their thoughts"—the overwhelming majority of black Americans agree with me, and always have. From very early in the Republic, free blacks not only had the opportunity to escape from white supremacy, they were encouraged to do so by abolitionists.

The gentle Harriet Beecher Stowe, for example, closed out Uncle Tom's Cabin with an appeal, grounded in Christian charity, for freed blacks to be educated and trained…so that they would be better able to survive in Liberia!

Let the church of the north receive these poor sufferers in the spirit of Christ; receive them to the educating advantages of Christian republican society and schools, until they have attained to somewhat of a moral and intellectual maturity, and then assist them in their passage to those shores, where they may put in practice the lessons they have learned in America.[Concluding Remarks, Chapter 45]

Abraham Lincoln was keen to help blacks escape white supremacy, too. In August 1862 he invited a delegation of free blacks to the White House…in order to urge them to leave America.

(Lincoln's entire speech is here. I note in passing that the 150th anniversary of it is just a few weeks away. I await with keen interest the many articles that will no doubt appear in the Main Stream Media to commemorate the occasion.)

But with all this opportunity and encouragement, how many freed blacks actually chose to escape from under the iron heel of white supremacy? Most sources give 15,000-20,000—out of a Civil War-era black population of around four million. That’s less than half of one percent. Ninety-nine point five something percent preferred white supremacy. That's an even bigger proportion than voted for Barack Obama in 2008.

Show post

John Derbyshire #racist vdare.com

The enemies of conservatism are eager to supply their own nomenclature. "White Supremacist" seems to be their current favorite. It is meant maliciously, of course, to bring up images of fire-hoses, attack dogs, pick handles, and segregated lunch counters—to imply that conservatives, especially non-mainstream conservatives, are cruel people with dark thoughts.

Leaving aside the intended malice, I actually think "White Supremacist" is not bad semantically. White supremacy, in the sense of a society in which key decisions are made by white Europeans, is one of the better arrangements History has come up with. There have of course been some blots on the record, but I don't see how it can be denied that net-net, white Europeans have made a better job of running fair and stable societies than has any other group.