* The word “discrimination” is a fight word. Make any distinction between two things today, however innocuous, and it seems someone will accuse you of discrimination.
But I’m at loose ends. I was taught that “discrimination” is the source of all knowledge as we learn to discriminate between truth and falsehood. I spent 20 years in school learning how to discriminate. We should, I would think, discriminate all of the time; it should become a life project. Otherwise, how can we make our way through the day? How can we collectively establish a peaceful, democratic, and productive industrial society and functioning families if we do not find and discriminate the preferred solutions among all of the lesser solutions?
Some days are hotter than others; some practical choices in life put our lives at higher risk than other choices; some women are more beautiful than others; some investments are safer than others; some attempts at describing particle physics are consistent with the evidence and some are not. Some people are smarter than others; some people are healthier than others; some religions and cultures are conducive to democracy and some are not; and some immigration policies are dangerous and some are not. This goes on and on.
However, the current PC doctrine is that “discrimination is wrong”. I guess some people don’t want us to notice the way the world works (or doesn’t work), and how we should best navigate that world. I guess they want us to be perpetually stupid (a.k.a. without knowledge … living lives of illusion) so we won’t notice the impact of their agendas on us. I can’t think of any other reason for someone so say something so stupid as, “Discrimination is wrong ….!”
* Discrimination is bad but perhaps a better word would be discernment? Most people, especially SJWs, like to think of themselves as “discerning.”
* The solution is logically simple, but politically impossible.
One, you could hand out welfare checks to women paired with a Depo shot. Or require them to implant some longer term birth control.
Or, if that isn’t workable, you could simply cap the welfare payments to single-parent households at three. Any more than replacement kids, and you can pay for them on your own dime.
Of course, both these simple and cost-effective ideas are complete political suicide to propose. But they are there, waiting. When the culture changes, they will be waiting.
* Living in and around the ghetto for a lot of my life, I’ve never been convinced the economic incentives that work on whites would work on blacks. They obviously don’t work on Hispanics. Limiting increases to welfare payments to one child would have little impact on behavior. Instead, you would have to implement mandatory birth control as Israel does with the Ethiopians.
That said, this is looking through the wrong end of the telescope. The social issue to address is illegitimacy. Before Civil Rights, about 15% of black children were in single parent homes. Today it is 80%. White illegitimacy has also spiked so it is not all blamed on the end of segregation.
* The key with self-esteem is that you need an identity/personality. Since contemporary discourse de-legitimises most healthy, grounded identities this is a common problem. I’d recommend you join the Army, ‘get’ religion or something else similar but really you might as well just find a hobby that people are passionate about and get really involved.
* Here’s a very simple solution: If you’re on welfare, you’re on Norplant (or some other highly reliable contraceptive). If and when you go off welfare, you don’t have to be on Norplant. You can have all the children you want, just not at taxpayer expense.
It’s not physically damaging. It’s not permanent. Most important politically, it’s race-neutral and would be difficult to portray as racist. If there’s a male version of Norplant, you could also make it sex-neutral.
Of course, it would have disparate impact and would hamper the breeding of a vast population of Morlocks to destroy America and Americans, so it has little chance of being implemented. But it would be hard even for Smooth Talker Barack to give a persuasive argument against it.
* More orientals=low trust society, stagnant society, dishonest society.
* The most effective way to get low-IQ women on birth control would be my “smartphone for birth control” incentive. Women who take birth control would receive a free smart phone with a fully paid plan so long as they check in and get their shot/maintain implant every three months. It should neither be mandatory nor discriminatory, i.e. every woman of reproductive age could take advantage of it and none would be forced to do so.
If you’ve ever lived in an urban underclass area you’d know why it would work. Those smartphones are the sine qua non of romance these days.
I estimate the cost would be around $1,500 per year per female, so it would only take preventing one birth out of twenty (that’s probably on the conservative side) or so to pay for itself.
* About twenty years ago, commentator George Will suggested that the government forcibly implement a policy on all teenaged girls regarding Norplant. Norplant, while it does not prevent an STD, has been proven to be effective for up to four years. So, if every teenaged girl were given Norplant in say, urban public schools at age 16, you’ve virtually solved the teenage pregnancy problem. Virtually, but not entirely, but still that would be a strong step in the right direction toward virtually eliminating the problem.
Norplant for virtually all teenaged girls was in fact one of Will’s best recommendations. That and term limits for congressmen.
* William Shockley had the right idea:
A cash payment for sterilization, based on each point below IQ 100.
The payment per point must be made so substantial that it makes an offer that just cannot be refused – we are talking tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars here.
* Yeah, libertarianism seemed sexy as a teenager but now I think it doesn’t work. I suspect Silicon Valley types and urban professionals can make it work in their own lives but I doubt it works with a mean IQ below 120 and average or below-average conscientiousness/future-time-orientation (which every nation on earth actually has). People below a certain level of affluence need religion (West) or tradition and custom (East) to tell them how to live healthy lives.
* According to economists, the cost of raising a child in a high-income western country is somewhere around $13, 000 dollars US per child. This makes it virtually impossible for working class parents to raise three children properly, yet low-income parents are never advised by teachers, social workers, journalists or politicians to have fewer children or stop having kids while on welfare.
Similarly, the rich, who are apparently getting richer, are never told to have more kids to help narrow the wealth gap and increase the supply of smart kids.
The mainstream right lacks the balls to challenge blank slate ideology, while the mainstream left is unwilling to tell the poor the harsh truth that can’t raise kids properly on low wage jobs and government welfare that is increasingly going to be directed towards the elderly.
* Alpha can be quite bad and socially destructive. (I remember arguing on Heartiste before it went full Nazi with one of the posters who claimed that Hitler was beta, and I pointed out–well, you might not like him, but seizing control of one of the world’s predominant industrial powers is about as alpha as it gets.) Even if, like a lot people here, you think Adolf was peachy, boinking lots of women and having lots of children you can’t pay for is something only an alpha can do, is practiced by the underclass of all shades, and it is downright terrible for society. Indeed, one of the things successful societies do is find ways to keep alpha males in check while still using them for the greater good.
I loved Fight Club too. The allure of the rebel is that he exists outside the rules we all have to follow, which get really annoying at times–and when the dominant group doesn’t like you, even more so.
PUA’s are all about getting laid–thus the name, ‘pick-up artist’. This is regardless of morality or long-term consequences. Mocking the disabled is definitely un-Christian. Eventually your attractiveness wanes and all you get are divorcees with kids, and after that nobody at all. To any younger people reading this, I’d say read their stuff with an eye to picking up techniques that are useful, but don’t adopt their whole philosophy, because it gets a lot less fun after 35. It’s actually a good skill to read multiple points of view without totally buying into each one–I read this site, NYTimes, Alternet, and National Review Online.
One of the things that got lost with the death of Christianity was the idea that there might be other valid goals than sexual and/or financial success. I don’t think Aquinas got much play (though hundreds of years later who knows what dalliances might be lost to history?), and Newton prided himself on his chastity. So, hey, if you decided you didn’t want to live in a cubicle…well, I can’t really blame you. Problem is, you need to pay rent and health insurance, because eventually you will get sick.
But does it make sense? Sure, it makes sense. You’re not crazy. (There’s a certain personality type that’s suspicious of authority but still loyal to group and tribe that gets attracted to the alt-right, I think.) When you’re younger and you’re not that greedy, you forget that you’ll be older and decrepit one day without a wife or kids to fall back on. A lack of materialism is good for one thing–you can save more money because you don’t really care about keeping up with the Joneses. You know you don’t need that big-screen TV or that new pickup, so you can hoard the rest of it.
* My take is that the way to tackle this is “workfare”. You don’t have cash welfare as such. You have a minimum wage make work jobs program–pick up trash, pull weeds, mow parks, rake leaves, shovel snow, clean public toilets, etc. etc.–that includes access to birth control. You don’t work … you don’t eat.
Work–stuff like “showing up on time”, “not acting like a nut”–has all sorts of positive benefits beyond just a fixed income that doesn’t scale with more kids. And if someone truly can not do those things, they’ve ripped away the leftist nonsense that it’s capitalism, or “good jobs” that’s the problem. You can easily make the case that people who can’t even handle the make work job are too incompetent to have children and subject to sterilization if supported by the taxpayers.
Giving people unearned cash to support themselves is an absolutely terrible social program.
* Steve,
For your consideration this year, include prescriptives in addition to the descriptives.
Your fertile mind generates articles to introduce your reader base to many early warning topics and so a natural extension would be to provide some policy considerations and solutions. Here are some ideas.
Blacks – What realistic solutions may reduce illegitimate births, broken homes and crime rates?
Jews – How do citizenists accelerate the crumbling Megaphone to highlight Jewish hypocrisy toward US social policies and Israel immigration and treatment of Palestinians?
SJWs – What campus groups may use university policies and constitutional tools to communicate the absurdity of academic discourse?
Media – Which added counterpoints and sources may be consulted and publicized to highlight dissembling and other non-journalistic activities by MSM outlets?
Thank you for helping put into words what so many people around the world have sensed but could not articulate.
