Of the attack in Nice, the demise of Europe, and America’s work at home

Posted on July 21, 2016 by Luke Ford

Michael Scheuer writes: In sum, there are today, and have been for 30 years, only five issues that demand implementation by the U.S. national government: (a) the aggressive dismantling of the unconstitutional legal and economic preferences given to women, minorities, legal and illegal immigrants, sexual deviants, etc., and the restoration of the equality of all before the law; (b) a 180-degree change in the republic’s interventionist foreign policy; (c) control and then elimination of the national government’s debt; (d) promotion of the highest possible level of employment; and (e) closing the borders of the United States and a adopting 10-year ban on all immigration.

Posted in America | Comments Off on Of the attack in Nice, the demise of Europe, and America’s work at home

‘Ex-neocon’ Scott McConnell looks back on 20 years of ideological tumult

Posted on July 21, 2016 by Luke Ford

Mondoweiss: Q. Ten years ago in March you emailed me the Israel lobby article from the London Review of Books, by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt. What do you think of that paper and that book? And how does it influence us today?

Well I think The Israel Lobby is the most important political book to be published in this century [2007]. For a long time there have been these sort of hints of establishment malaise with the nature of our relationship with Israel. People think we’re too deferential to Israel or they say that the Palestinians are being unjustly denied a state or self-determination, and were unjustly cleansed from their land, and that we’ve put Israel on this huge moral pedestal, which is a mistake of judgement. This has been expressed before, perhaps most prominently by George Ball, who was maybe the smartest cabinet member of the Kennedy Johnson administration. But it tended to be expressed by people at the end of a long career. So it wouldn’t necessarily be followed through.

So here suddenly you have two first rate academics and writers with all the skills of knowledge and synthesis and self-expression who publish this really detailed book when they’re still very much in their professional primes, and every point was argued as well as it could be done. There was no exaggeration, but there was no pulling back either. And I sensed that the first time I read the first three paragraphs of the LRB piece, I just felt that there was something special about the language, it had an exemplary combination of forcefulness and restraint. And it was done by – you know it’s not easy to be an international relations professor, it’s not easy to be a professor at the University of Chicago and Harvard, and it’s not easy to be at the top of that profession; and never before had this argument been done really so well, even if had had been bouncing around for a long time.

Look, I have been doing research on 1956 and Dulles and Eisenhower, and you can see a lot of State Department people who show up in the archives, saying, Israel is going off the deep end here and why are Americans letting it happen, and can’t there be some counterpressure to all the pressure we’re getting from the Israel lobby? And that was in 1956, when all these problems were in embryo compared to now.

So it’s extraordinary. I think books stay around, and people will be reading that book for a long time. I don’t know whether a book can change the world, but probably half of the activists in the Democratic Party essentially know its arguments and agree with it and it comes out in the Sanders movement and the struggle over the platform. Maybe 15 percent of Republicans do…

Because there’s a reflexive hawkish response in the American Washington establishment or deep state almost whatever happens in the world with things that have no visible connection to Israel. For example, we help foment a coup in Ukraine and Russia responds with a countercoup and suddenly the beltway establishment is up in arms. This has nothing to do with Israel, but it has to do with a reflexive hawkishness, and the idea that it’s America’s duty or role, or destiny to be the indispensable nation muddling about in issues all over the world. So the Israel lobby has nothing to do with that. Or the Israel lobby kind of surfs on that sentiment, taking that sentiment and trying to use it to Israel’s advantage. And saying America’s this big global power and it has to do thus and such, and Israel like America is a democracy, and so it can do no wrong, in Gaza or Lebanon of anywhere else…

Q. You write about the 96 “Clean Break” paper. Various neocons believed that plan; and one can craft a conspiratorial understanding of how mayhem among the so called states of the Middle East that followed serves Israel. Annie Robbins has long talked about this.

I think that’s a fair conclusion. So the next question, which I don’t have an answer to, is to what extent has Israel helped foment, say, the civil war in Syria, which obviously has tremendous tragic consequences. I don’t know.

Q. Remind us, the Clean Break, what was that about?

In the 90’s several pro-Israel neoconservative intellectuals wrote a kind of platform or an action plan for [Israeli PM Benjamin] Netanyahu who had just been elected for the first time, suggesting that Israel should a, not be involved in any American sponsored peace process, but also that the disruption of various states in the Middle East including Iraq, Lebanon and I think Syria, would be very much in Israel’s interests. Some people have linked this to various rightwing Israelis who were writing earlier.

But basically yes– there’s a certain kind of rightwing Israeli analyst who thinks, We benefit from chaos for obvious reasons; strong states that have a scientific infrastructure and a middle class are a threat to Israel, but warring tribes are not. I think that was part of the impetus for the Iraq war, an unspoken one of course; people said that we have to bring democracy to Iraq, but I have to think that for neoconservatives, chaos in Iraq and the division into an ethnic sectarian war, was a quite possible outcome of our invasion, and they were fine with that…

Q. Tell me the Joseph Sobran story.

It’s a very interesting story. I don’t know Joe Sobran. I think I met him once briefly but I know some people who knew him well, like Pat Buchanan. He joined The National Review as a young graduate student, he had a wonderful prose style that leapt off the page, and for William F. Buckley, he was a conservative Catholic, he was someone who was outraged by abortion and Roe v Wade and a lot of the cultural changes taking place in the ‘60 and ‘70s, but he had wide interests. When he was still a grad student in Michigan, Buckley would fly him to New York every two weeks so he could write editorials for a few days, and fly him back. This is, pre email, obviously, and that gives you a sense of how esteemed he was. And he and Buckley were personally close.
Joe also had fairly conventionally dissident views about Israel and the Israel lobby, and he would occasionally write somewhat snarky things about how quick we are when Israel says jump, to say how high. But it didn’t attract a great deal of notice until the first Iraq war. And I don’t really know what Sobran thought. I know conservative Catholics often have less of a braking mechanism about Jewish sensibilities than people who grew up with Jews. Whereas elite Protestants tended to have gone to school with a lot of Jews. So there’s a difference there, and I think Sobran didn’t have any brakes. But then the first Iraq war came, and he wrote several columns saying that Israel was lobbying for the war, and I know around this time, Midge Decter compiled a dossier of offensive Sobran columns and was circulating it around, and Buckley at first withdrew from Sobran and demoted him and said he wanted to read everything Sobran wrote before it went in the magazine. He wanted to have every column faxed to him, but Buckley didn’t have a fax machine, so he read it over the phone. And eventually Sobran who had been a key figure at National Review and was a self confident, self respecting intellectual, refused to do that, and wrote what he wanted, and Buckley severed him from National Review.

I don’t know Sobran, so this is a subject for a novel, but Sobran eventually wrote the kinds of things that only an anti-Semite would write. He was cut off from his regular source of income so he began to accept invitations from really fringey rightwing groups, and he didn’t have any money, and I remember Eric Breindel [late former editor NY Post editorial page] told me in great detail about his tax situation, his tax delinquency, and I kind of wondered how Breindel knew that, but it was must have been something that someone in the neoconservative world was paying attention to– with satisfaction.

My last and most memorable contact with Sobran was, we were starting a magazine in summer 2002, and Taki and Pat Buchanan and I wanted to rehabilitate Sobran as a columnist. Then I read in the Forward that he was going to give a speech to some Holocaust denial outfit. I said no. First Pat called him and then I called him and we said, Don’t go. And he basically blew us off. I’m not going to let them tell me what to say or where I can speak and this and that. Basically, you can’t have a writer who addresses a Holocaust denial organization be a writer for your magazine, it just isn’t going to work!

But it was funny. We were calling him at the airport. He was about to get on a plane…

…[Gore Vidal] wrote a piece for the Nation and he laid into the Podhoretzes combining their support for Israel and their general warmongering and he used a lot of phrases that were at least borderline anti-Semitic; it was sort of like, Go back to your own country. I don’t want to go back to the piece so I won’t characterize it one way or another, but the Podhoretzes tried to organize a big campaign against him to get the Nation and their editors and the Nation’s contributors to repudiate Vidal’s antisemitism. Probably 75 percent of the people they asked said they didn’t find anything egregious about what Vidal had said, and it was an attack on the Podhoretzes, and not on the Jews, which was true. Norman wrote this big essay, called the hate that dare not speak its name. Something like that. I remember reading the essay and thinking, going up the elevator, who’s Norman attacking now? Gore Vidal!

It wasn’t my issue at all. I knew that Israel had a problem with the Palestinians, there was injustice on that side, but it was number 9 among the things I cared about. And I thought eventually Israel would be forced to grant Palestinians a state.

Norman and Midge actually made a contrast between the left’s refusal to condemn, shun and push Vidal away from being a respected writer and Buckley’s readiness to accommodate them by getting rid of Sobran. It was kind of his main point. I guess their point was that Republicans and conservatives were not anti-semitic, but the left tolerates anti-semitsim. That was part of the polemical charge. It wasn’t a big issue to me.

Anyway, I guess maybe 5 years after that I was working as an editor and columnist for the New York Post and I had to write a column every week, after work. I had noticed an item in the paper during the 1992 Democratic primary that Gore Vidal was some kind of adviser to Jerry Brown, in talking about infrastructure and high speed rapid transit and things like that. I was sort of pro Clinton, but I didn’t have a strong preference, and I thought I could write a column, and the column could write itself. I would get Commentary to fax over the old copy of their essay, which they of course did quickly. So I wrote like an 800 word newspaper column based largely on the points that Midge and Norman had leveled years ago and I said, What is Jerry Brown going to do about this, why is he going to take advice from Vidal?

I was so lazy, I thought, I can write this column and be home for dinner at 9:30. I started after the paper had gone to bed at 530 or 6. And everybody praised it. I first got a whiff that if you’re named McConnell and you accuse someone of antisemitism, people say, Yay! Yeah, go for it.

And Jerry Brown severed Vidal from his campaign.

Q. He did?

He did. And some pretty significant New York radio station dragged poor Victor Navasky who had gone thru the woods on this issue 8 years before to debate me. I feel sorry for Victor. We went on the radio. Because there’s an infinite media market for accusations of anti-semitism, which I began to sense then.

Alright. So if you fast forward after that, I began to be more seriously thinking about Israel and Palestine, I came to realize that– Vidal wrote in such a way that I wouldn’t write it, but a lot of his key points were right. Midge and Norman and their magazine had consistently been pushing for more militaristic US policies and war, particularly in the Mideast. Vidal was right about that. And they do have a kind of divided loyalty. I don’t know the formal question of, do you have joint citizenship. But I know Norman, I used to know Norman pretty well, and he sees everything through the lens of what’s good for Israel, and all the neocons do. So Vidal was picking away at the scab, and he was doing it in an overly polemical and noncareful way, but there was a lot of truth in what he was saying, and I wasn’t immersed enough in the story in the 80s to think about that.

When he died I wrote a piece saying I wish I’d had a chance to apologize and explain what I thought then and now.

Posted in America, Israel | Comments Off on ‘Ex-neocon’ Scott McConnell looks back on 20 years of ideological tumult

Why Do Non-Whites Fear The Outdoors?

Posted on July 21, 2016 by Luke Ford

REPORT: Asked what safety concerns kept them from visiting the metro’s regional parks, focus groups of African-Americans spoke worriedly about violent crime and accidents.

This could happen

Asians tended to bring up snakes, bees, hunters and water viruses.

African immigrants feared rape, killings, stabbings and drownings.

Latinos brought up darkness, crime and animals.

A combined focus group talked of fears of kidnappings and getting lost in the wilderness.

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Blacks in the Army were petrified of the woods. A little ten inch green snake would get them screaming with fear. Best of all was when two of them threw rocks at a skunk to drive it off, and got sprayed good for it.

Aren’t State and National parks where we go to get away from the Diversity we’re forced to endure at home?

* Blacks and Mexicans are afraid of crime in the parks. I guess they are afraid that they’ll run into their own neighbors.

* There’s an old internet joke that African Americans are scared of three things.
Ghosts.
Dogs.
Registered mail.

* Let’s face it, beyond the park parking lot there is nothing to steal, its quiet, save for birds chirping and you can’t ‘swagger’ in the forest.

* Anglo visitors feared summonses, audits, and crazy ex-boyfriends.

* Sounds to me as if the Met Council should just let people do what they want to do, and if that includes not wanting to visit a park, fine. There is too much effort placed nowadays on trying to make everyone the same – which is exactly the opposite of the “diversity” that they are so urgently encouraging.

* My sense is that Minneapolis/Saint Paul is more earnest about the Diversity and Inclusion stuff than almost any other city.
For example, most cities try to have “commitment to racial equity” as a slogan on different school initiatives, but they don’t create a whole separate Department within their school system for it:

http://www.spps.org/equity

* With blacks and Hispanics, it may be a symptom of coming from low-trust communities. At home, or even in a motel, you’ve got a locked door between you and the people around you. Camping, you’ve only got a thin sheet of canvas (or synthetic substitute). Being a non-trusting person, I find this bothersome too. I like defense in depth.

BTW, after reading Bill Bryson’s A Walk in the Woods, I lost any interest in ever hiking the Appalachian Trail. He provides detailed descriptions of every risk, from crazed backwoods murderers to deadly spores emitted by decaying mouse feces.

* In modern America, this is called having a “conversation” about race. WE ask the questions, YOU provide the answers and you better answer right honky or you is in big trouble.

This sounds like revenge for school, where blacks are constantly being asked to answer questions and get the answers wrong. Cops are also always questioning blacks and Hispanics. Now the tables is turned!

In the less white America that people are “optimistically” looking forward to, this will happen more and more. YT has been in charge for 300 years, now WE is in charge and get to ask YOU the questions.

* The prevalence of camp movies in America (not the “gay camp”, but literally kids going off to camp in the woods for the summer) would make you think every American kid did it.

However, it’s really a Jewish and WASP thing. Middle class and blue collar kids don’t have the experience of going off to camp for the summer because it’s too darn expensive. So most of the Kids got to Camp films are really Hollywood Jews reminiscing about being sent off by rich parents for the summer. I’m pretty surprised the genre has stayed around so long.

For the record, I would have loved to have gone off to a camp for a summer, just for the experience, which seemed fun from the many movies made from it.

* A very common trope in horror movies is “city slickers trapped in rural area.” Apparently, rural America is infested with psychotic inbreds and violent ghosts and mutated animals that love murdering teenagers.

There’s this idea of the city representing civilization and rural being the dangerous wild, even today. Or the idea that city slickers have lost necessary survival skills, making them easy prey.

Or it’s merely reversing the Western movie tropes. In the Western, open nature is something where good men go to live happily, carving out homes and villages out of nature. The big city in the Western is dirty, overcrowded, and violent. Men leave the cities to keep their families wholesome and to worship God and bring civilization. Think John Ford/Henry Fonda films.

And those Western heroes are always white men, because whites alone tamed the West.

The Horror genre, however, spits on all that, and makes small town/rural America a heck-hole of evil. Those white backwoods men are now inbred violent nutjobs.

Blacks and Latinos, incidentally, love horror movies.

* The reason for this is Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome.

The actual, real-life, no-kidding medical condition that makes trees scary.

http://joydegruy.com/resources-2/post-traumatic-slave-syndrome/

* Three possible answers:

Blacks/Latinos are very poor and very urban. Does participation reach parity when one compares them to similarly poor, urban whites? I’d say a two parent home is more likely to go on such a trip to begin with anyway. Is there a disparity in the geographic locations of parks and the main population centres of Blacks/Latinos?

Blacks/Latinos are just ignorant louts and unappreciative of nature. You can hint at it passively because it makes middle-class and up whites feel good about themselves without having to actively admit it.

Blacks/Latinos are scared of being around non-blacks/Latinos, ie are scared of large numbers of white people.

Oddly enough the third one is what they are going with despite it being both irrational and making them look profoundly stupid and prejudiced as it implies they have to fear the readers of the piece.

When whites are implied to not enjoy something or some place due to it’s ‘vibrancy’ it’s cause to sneer, (My favourite was a commentary on white flight in London being good, since it filtered out those who couldn’t deal with a ‘chaning London’) when non-whites act this way it’s white people’s fault for existing.

The way they use the word ‘homogeneous’ as a slur, as if a normal functioning human community is an abomination reveals this ideology for what it is, anti-whiteness.

Though props to them always assuming black guides will help, as if the vast majority of blacks, who have never been to a national park, would ever be aware of how many black rangers there are or would think to look it up. Who would?!

* It’s white violence that blacks particularly fear about rural places. At least in NYC, blacks believe that just up I-87 are pickup trucks full of honkeys waiting to lynch an interloper. If you see blacks traveling north of the Sloatsburg service area, they won’t be in ones or twos, but in defensible numbers.

I heard on the radio a week or two ago that New Hampshire schools have set up obstacle courses to be crawled through in the dark by students while audio of dogs barking drives home the impressing of being a runaway slave on the freedom trail. No wonder they’re afraid of us.

* Real suggestion, if you are worried that POC are not getting enough exposure to the outdoors and parks, then ask a family to JOIN YOU when you visit a park. There, solved that at not cost to the rest of us who DGAS.

* Oh, yeah, if you want more Asians to go to parks you need to put up and advertise some statues etc that they can photograph themselves in front of. The pristine wilderness is not very interesting to them.

* The radio commercial played incessantly is from Discovertheforest.org. It features a black kid telling a white kid about the pleasures of seeing real frogs and nature when his parents took him to the forest (unlike the white kid who could only experience it online). Earlier radio ads also feature blacks enjoying the forest/outdoors (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7se_53FFNwM). Even the television spots feature a black family visiting parks and nature.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YBHzDyyVqIs

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=att338zi4xw

Here’s a Discovertheforest.org ad featuring a Hispanic family visiting nature:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x0W6uzCJ5eQ

Here’s a Discovertheforest.org ad featuring blacks, Hispanics, and Asian kids:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U1-T17DcCyI

* Yeah, Scandinavians (especially Swedes) take whatever is the dominant ideology handed down from above and take it more seriously than anyone else. Far different from,say, the Italians or Irish. But I still can’t figure out how the hell Minneapolis became “the capital of anti-Semitism in the United States” for the first half of the 20th Century and slightly beyond.

* Not true, at least for Hispanics, I’ve read numerous times that Latinos often use national parks in the southwest for grow ups, tagging and disposing vast amounts of trash.

* The SJW element of this is trying to force different genetics to be equal and as that’s impossible it can only end if the offending genetics are removed and everyone left is made to be the same.

The banking mafia element want 85 IQ slave-cattle.

On the surface at least the agendas mesh.

The SJW element might be persuaded eventually that genetic uplift is better than dragdown.

* One thing missing from this story though is how many of these parks in the twin cities are surrounding lakes and pools.

In the twin cities, you are not allowed to say out loud that blacks can’t swim. But that’s a major reason blacks don’t “use” the parks. Drowning happens in the twin cities to kids of all colors, but moreso we hear blacks and Somali immigrants drowning when with friends or at school pools.

Swimming lessons are extremely expensive in the twin cities.

This is a case where actual actions taken could be taken to change the numbers and enjoyment of city resources, but doing so would admit hbd. Can’t have that.

* The just completed season of Alone featured a black ex-military contestant. The basic premise of the show is that 10 people are dropped off in separate locations (in this case, on the coast of Vancouver Island) with some minimal, legitimate tools and left to fend for themselves, alone, in the wilderness. Homeboy literally lasted two hours. He started walking around a bit, saw some bear scat, said something like “this shit’s getting’ real”, freaked out, and called in the rescue squad.

It was doubly hilarious because in the lede up each contestant was interviewed at home with their friends and family and he was specifically joking about how, if he saw a bear, the bear was going to need to call in reinforcements.

Youtube video here. Video clip starts with my man, but I’m not sure if it’s clear how quickly he “tapped out”. The winner lasted something like 65 days.

* As a person who spends a fair amount of time outdoors, I must say that the fields, forests, lakes, rivers and oceans are full of danger; immediate, lethal, and otherwise. No wonder the white population seems to be declining.

Besides, it’s complete anarchy out there. Animals breeding out of wedlock, defending their territories, no religion or politicians and such, why, it’s chaos, I tell ya! Almost no gubbermint to protect ya…

I recommend that everyone head for shelter at once, and please stay there. That goes double for ATV enthusiasts. What are televisions for, anyway?!?

* Going to parks has always had a higher-class connotation to it. In the US, people who are middle-class and above do it. This is partially because the traditional white Anglo-Saxon working class in America used to farm in rural areas, and farmers had all the exposure to nature they wanted and then some. For the lower class, it was the city that was exotic and exciting, and it was where you went when you had a vacation. This explains blacks to some extent. Blacks worked the land first as slaves and later as sharecroppers, and they don’t like nature that much. Rural land in the south, the traditional place for black labor, is a place of godawful heat and chiggers. The northern woods are much nicer, but blacks don’t go there enough to find out.

But there’s another factor. Rural areas in America tend to be Republican and not so generous with welfare, and social services are far away. Plonk a black down in a rural area, and there’s no bus or subway. You must have a car in good working order. Stores are many miles off. In winter, travel is problematic because of deep snowfalls, and you have to plan ahead. You have to make sure you don’t run out of food or gas, because the nearest gas station or grocery store could be an hour away. Thinking ahead is not blacks’ strong suit, and they don’t thrive in a place where it’s necessary.

There are also other factors. There’s no one around to pay attention to you other than your own family. If blacks want to be able to pass on their genes, they need a pool of other black families to choose from. They need a crowd to show off to, to strut in front of, to parade their fancy new car for, etc.

But the most important factor is that the black economy is based on a parasitic triad: Welfare, robbery, and drug sales. If you don’t have people nearby to rob or sell drugs to, and getting welfare is difficult, then the poor blacks’ way of life isn’t possible. In rural areas, whites are armed with shotguns and the customer base for drugs may be so small and spread out that it’s not economically viable.

* There’s irony (or is it ignorance) in these explorations of difference, e.g. race/ethnic/gender/orientation/identity. It’s as if the study and categorization of difference should result in no observed difference in personal preferences among activities, avocation, interests, hobbies, recreation, habits, lifestyle, etc., which are indicators of the much heralded human diversity under discussion. Having discovered diversity, TPTB would prefer that there are no differences. A child-like ignorance and immaturity in the face of reality.

* Growing up in England in the 1950s my companions and I spent a lot of time playing or camping in woods and open countryside, however I do think that the woods in England are much friendlier and safer, having few dangerous animals larger than a fox or badger, very few poisonous snakes (only adders which hardly ever kill people, though they can be deadly for dogs), and wasps and bees that can give you a nasty sting. There are stinging nettles, which are easy to avoid, but no poison ivy, which is much worse and harder to avoid. Also there tends to be little undergrowth between the trees and less thorns, though blackberries grow wild in all parts of the country.

Woods and forests here in Florida are much more dangerous, having 4 species of poisonous snakes, a range of stinging insects, and deer hunters who will shoot at anything that moves. There are a lot of nasty plants that can scratch you, and for much of the year it is beastly hot.

* Being honest, I have kids, so am very particular about parks. I would absolutely never go to a park with any number of blacks. Not worth the risk. Avoid, avoid, avoid them at all costs (obviously if there is one black doctor’s son, it’s different). But if I see ghetto blacks, we would leave immediately, no questions asked. If I see Muslims, I just get furious and start wondering what they’re doing in our country. I cuss George Bush for not adopting Trump’s policies and I give them dirty looks before leaving. I won’t let my young kids around Islam at all until I introduce it to them that it’s evil. I wouldn’t be thrilled if there were Hispanic kids speaking Spanish – but it’s not a total deal breaker. It depends on the situation and how many. I would prefer my kids play with Americans who speak English. White and Asian kids are fine. No trouble. Anyone who tells you differently is lying…

* Translation: Blacks and Hispanics dont have enough money to enjoy the parks. Asians and Hispanics dont have the time. Only Whites, and increasingly Whites with government employement, have the time and money to drive a hour and spend the day in a pond. The safety explanations are just BS.

* Hispanics do avail themselves of national park facilities, but they’re understandably reluctant to discuss it.

* This is why I haven’t visited a park in years. It’s understood that they are Hispanic “spaces,” and unless you go in the freezing cold you’re going be near large Hispanic families, loud music, shouting, and litter. Lots and lots of litter that looks from a distance like snow covering the ground.

* This brings back memories. During college in the 70′s, I worked at a summer camp for disadvantaged children, mostly blacks and Hispanics. These kids were terrified of the woods during the day. At night, they would not leave the cabin. Fear not. Yours truly would calm them down by going out to ward off all the evils lurking in the woods. Actually the white boys and girl counselors would meet for a few ours of fun. The minority staff was never there. They were afraid of the woods also. Such great fun.

* There are racial differences in things like bone and muscle density which tend to make young black men (especially) not buoyant. They sink like stones. It doesn’t mean that they can’t be taught to swim, but they start out with a natural disadvantage. Just one more thing we are not allowed to talk about so if you mention it in public people will start looking for your tinfoil racist hat, but there is scientific data to back this.

* Who is the person who traditionally introduces you to the forest and the outdoors? It’s your Dad. Your father is the one who takes you out and teaches you all about it, and who teaches you all your backwoods skills. Few black families have fathers around anymore. They don’t have anyone to assume this traditional role in life.

Posted in America, Asians, Blacks | Comments Off on Why Do Non-Whites Fear The Outdoors?

Ted Cruz Declines To Endorse Donald Trump

Posted on July 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* After the last chance hissy fit stunt on the part of Cruz people on Monday, and that happened because Cruz didn’t tell his people to call off the dogs, if he wasn’t actually an active organizer, and for the fact that there is all this media talk about Cruz thinking ahead to 2020, that happening because of Cruz’s mixed message. (hint: You don’t tout your own ambitions for a year when presumably the guy you’re nominating at this convention will be running for re-election), if I was Trump, or Manafort whispering in Trump’s ear, I’d pull Cruz off the speaker’s list.

I’m really looking forward to Peter Thiel, because I know it’s going to hack off Mark Zuckerberg. In FB’s last Board of Directors membership vote, Thiel actually got more votes than Zuck, and Zuck started the whole thing!

* Laura Ingraham just gave the best RNC convention speech since….1992? Simple yet articulate. Bold & crystal clear. Good stuff Laura!! Why is straight talk like this so rare? Mealy mouthed pablum has been the norm for 20 yrs. Thank heavens the cultmarx pc-talk era is finally coming to an end.

* Eric Trump said that illegal immigrants are pushing Americans out of jobs.

Newt Gingrich said that Trump will stop visa programs that replace American workers. This must’ve been a reference to the H1b visa program.

Yesterday, Don Jr. made the point that foreign workers are pushing down wages and employment.

* Trump and crew should hammer trade / outsourcing and bringing back good-paying manufacturing and assembly jobs, cracking down on illegal immigration and those who hire illegals, and ending these constant debt-fund wars.

Not abortion.
Not homosexual “marriage”, disgusting and strange as that is.

Trade, jobs, combatting illegal immigration, staying strong but out of war, and ending special government privileges and subsidies and bailouts for the connected few, those must be trump’s issues and he will win.

* I believe that, ultimately, he is driven by his ego, but I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing.

Trump has rich-boy’s syndrome: His father was successful, so he was driven to become phenomenally successful. He needs the validation of knowing that his achievements are due to his efforts, and not his father’s.

And it has never been all about money. Fame has always been at least as important to him as fortune.

Becoming president would cement his place in history, but becoming the president who made America great again would be an accomplishment celebrated in song and verse hundreds of years from now. His name would echo through the ages. He would transcend mere fame to become a seminal figure in the annals of world history. (How’s that for validation?)

Trump is smart enough to see that most Americans are dreadfully unhappy about the fact that this country is being flushed down the toilet. He knows that whites are sick and tired of being blamed for everyone else’s problems. He also knows that the Republican establishment is too beholden to the elites to do anything other than dither about issues such as immivasion.

He saw an opportunity: a tremendous demand for someone with enough balls to speak the truth about the coming downfall of America and to do something about it, and a pathetic dearth of such men in the public sphere.

So he jumped into the breach, and the result is that he is now the Republican presidential nominee.

* Pence was amazing, hit the ball out of the park!

A Trump weakness is downscale white women, and Pence I felt was speaking to them. I think they will love his introduction of his sweet elderly mother, unglamorous school-teacher wife, and plain looking daughter. I can’t imagine Trump-skeptical Christian conservatives not also loving the speech.

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off on Ted Cruz Declines To Endorse Donald Trump

NYT: “White Women Have Spent Centuries Stealing Black Women’s Genius, Labor, Babies, Bodies.”

Posted on July 20, 2016 by Luke Ford

New York Times: But the mischievous teasing at times turned serious, as blacks invoked a painful history of prominent white figures stealing the work of black artists and presenting it as their own. “I’m not surprised Melanie plagiarized from Michelle,” wrote Yasmin Yonis. “White women have spent centuries stealing black women’s genius, labor, babies, bodies.”

Comments:

* Her remark has to be understood in the context of black rhetorical style. Facts are not really important – it’s more a matter of sound, rhythm and alliteration. She was rapping for the NYT reporter, making it up as she went along. She needed to quickly come up with a list of things that white women had “stolen” from black women just like Melanie had stolen from Michelle. Their genius, of course , but what else, uh, uh, …. black ….. bodies, babies , booties (no, not that)…

* It’s a little known fact that the poems of Emily Dickinson were actually all written by Harriet Tubman.

* Yeah. That was just prior to her tumultuous affair with Henry David Thoreau. She finally left him because of the neckbeard thing. Scholars have only recently discovered how huge swathes of Walden were lifted from her journals.

* Black people have things to actually be proud of; Jazz, Barbecue, Gospel. Those are not nothing. A more secure people would not have to make stuff up and be so delusional about what they did and did not do. Japanese people know they did not create Blues, Jazz, or Rock and Roll. They still are crazy for them all and do quite well as performers and interpreters of the music. They don’t feel ashamed because they did not produce Elvis, Howling Wolf, Louis Armstrong, or Bruce Springsteen.

It speaks poorly of any prospect of peace any time soon.

* Whites emphathize far too much with blacks. It’s a characteristic that will have to change or at least be suppressed if whites are to survive as a race. As Steve has pointed out, population projections for Africa indicate catastrophe by mid-century if not earlier. Whites will simply have to inure themselves to black suffering. Actually, they’ll have to be as impervious to black suffering as blacks are themselves.

* One of the nasty little secrets of BLM is that America’s orphanages (yes, we still have a lot of them) is outrageously over represented by black babies, children, and teens. Visit one sometime, and your heart will break.
Americans of all races just don’t want black babies.

* Wikipedia: It’s well known that MLKs Dream speech included parts from a speech by a black preacher at the GOP convention in 1952. He also plagiarized his academic work.

Martin Luther King Jr.’s papers were donated by his wife Coretta Scott King to Stanford University’s King Papers Project. During the late 1980s, as the papers were being organized and catalogued, the staff of the project discovered that King’s doctoral dissertation at Boston University, titled A Comparison of the Conception of God in the Thinking of Paul Tillich and Henry Nelson Wieman, included large sections from a dissertation written by another student (Jack Boozer) three years earlier at Boston University.[1] [5]
As Clayborne Carson, director of the King Papers Project at Stanford University, has written, “instances of textual appropriation can be seen in his earliest extant writings as well as his dissertation. The pattern is also noticeable in his speeches and sermons throughout his career.”[6]
Boston University, where King received his Ph.D. in systematic theology, conducted an investigation that found he appropriated[6] and plagiarized major portions of his doctoral thesis from various other authors who wrote about the topic.[7][8]
According to civil rights historian Ralph E. Luker, who worked on the King Papers Project directing the research on King’s early life, King’s paper The Chief Characteristics and Doctrines of Mahayana Buddhism[9] was taken almost entirely from secondary sources.[10] He writes:
Moreover, the farther King went in his academic career, the more deeply ingrained the patterns of borrowing language without clear attribution became. Thus, the plagiarism in his dissertation seemed to be, by then, the product of his long-established practice.

* The Japanese are also quite confident and proud that their nation, culture, heritage goes back nearly 2,000 yrs in a mostly unbroken continuous line. That’s why their nation remains ca.98% racially or ethnically Japanese. They know what their accomplishments and achievements are, are quite proud of them, and don’t need to make stuff up in order to make them feel better.

If you truly want to see what African-Americans have to be proud of, what their original accomplishments are/were, go back to the history of Sub-Saharan Africa and go back before western colonial intervention. In other words, examine the achievements of Sub-Saharan Africa from thousands of yrs ago up to about 1600 and compare them with the rest of the world.

* Someone who tried to make a living stealing black women’s genius would quickly find himself destitute.

* Kylie, last year black students at Oberlin College, arguably the most liberal campus in America, presented the college president with a list on non-negotiable demands. Oberlin has a strong music program. Demands included the inclusion of African music into the program and the end of Classical music studies. I think without musical notes it would be hard to teach music. But hey, whatever.

* In the case of Ambrose and Goodwin, the narrative was the details, so they simply copied or paraphrased long chunks of other people’s factual narrative into their own. I’m not sure about the “research assistants” but all high volume academic or quasi-academic authors use them.

The best way to avoid plagiarism is to fact check your sources and read other sources that cover the same material. The first thing that will give you is an insight into how common plagarism, paraphrase, and (probably) a lot of unintentional echoing is. The second thing such a read through will do is help you define another way of speaking about the same topic. That in turn usually means you will write less, but people who write 500 page books do not want less, they want their 500 pages.

All of this takes time. I remember reading Ambrose on Nixon once, and he was ridiculing Nixon for saying that he spent a lot of time on his 1968 convention acceptance speech, and he thought for hours about how to craft a few sentences. Ambrose said something to the effect, “nobody goes to that much trouble to write.” After the plagiarism stuff was revealed, I got a better insight into why he would say that.

Posted in Blacks | Comments Off on NYT: “White Women Have Spent Centuries Stealing Black Women’s Genius, Labor, Babies, Bodies.”