* I went to the physical therapist today for my tight hamstrings.
PT: “So what do you do?”
Luke: “I teach freedom of movement.”
* If you want to get ahead in Hollywood, take Crescent Heights. I did five miles around 8am in 15 minutes.
* Luke: “Is she the fat one?”
Friend: “You have a way with words.”
* Given the large number of stupid accidents stupid people get into, it seems stupid to employ stupid people.
* I’m not worried about North Korea. They only do what China tells them to do, and no more.
* Oriental: “I was in NZ recently eating a meat pie at a table. a white NZer came up to me and dropped some chopsticks in front of me and said, do you need these? also, i was walking along a street in Auckland and some maori youths racially abused me for being asian. I’m not going back to NZ.”
“I’m very disturbed by what’s happening in Cologne and equally disturbed that outrage seems to be channeled into whether the Star Wars monopoly has a female token.”
“As for Asians in Australia, I think it is mainly still whites in managerial positions. The biggest race tension in Australia right now is Chinese buying too much baby formula.”
Posted inPersonal|Comments Off on Freedom Of Movement
* I had a while back a conversation with a Swedish girl doing volunteer work in Africa. She had come to visit friends in a dangerous African city and traveled alone. Even on the Swedish scale she was above average in leftist internationalism. We talked about immigrants from far away places living in Sweden and at one point she remarked in an elated way that down the line there would be a day when people are mixed all around so no more blondes would exist and the world would all look the same. What was striking was her demeanor that seemed to relish this glorious vision of the future. She was blonde and had blue eyes and attractive so not one of those I want to wreck the world types because I’m not pretty and don’t get laid.
This conversation seems to me an express manifestation of probably what a lot of liberal Western Europeans want or are sympathetic to. Although others are not so blunt outside of Swedish leftism, the desire is to create a new stock of people in Europe through blending with other races. Such an idea is of course the product of a long reaction to WWII. If what brought so much destruction in the early 20th century in Europe centered on pride in Nordic supremacy, then a way to ensure that that tendency does not return is to make sure there are no longer any Nordic people.
Although when expressly stated it seems far-fetched, there’s a wide range of attitudes that are sympathetic to this end goal. So the sexual vibe you sense is real, there is a desire not for large scale race replacement but a desire to see other races amalgamated on a large scale into the European gene pool.
* This attitude must include an aspect of Nordic supremacy: we are, on the whole, more beautiful, competent, and creative than anybody else, so we must be miscegenated out of existence.
* This silly but demented girl-woman-child was travelling to Africa to get boinked by the natives. She can dress it up in any kind of crap she wants but she was already putting into practice her mixing philosophy. In civilized societies men get restrained by women but women need restraining and channeling too. As in Kinder, Küche, Kirche. Lets admit the Muslims have this part right though taken too far.
I like combat and I’ve watched a ton of the GoPro videos of the street fighting in Syria.
The fireworks streaking past the Cologne Cathedral look identical to tracer rounds. Did any of the Merkel Youth yell “Allah akbar” as they do in all the Syrian war videos?
Are the fireworks and rapes a foreshadowing to something worse? I can hear Enoch Powell: “As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding.”
* When people from that part of the world come to the West, they have contradictory passions.
1. Contempt. “These women are shameless whores in the obscene decadent west.”
2. Boing!!!!! “Finally, we can have massive orgies and screw anyone in sight cuz they’re just begging for it”… or at least that’s what they’ve seen from Western media that promote and hype the likes of Nikki Minaj, Kim Kartrashian, Miley Cyrus, and etc.
If space aliens were to learn about the West from the pop culture media, they would get the impression that Western women are all whores who are just dying for some action. From rappers, they’d think normal male behavior in the West is to act like thugs. They’d think the West is one big BEASTIE BOYS party. Of course, in people in the West take that stuff with a degree of irony and fun.
Can’t really blame Muslim men for thinking western women are a bunch of hookers. Just look at the pop culture.
Muslim men have been Joe-Buck-ized.
But people in other cultures(with far less sense of irony) see it as reality, even a ‘right to party’.
I knew an Assyrian family that left Kuwait after the Gulf War. Ironically, they sided with Hussein’s invasion and then found refuge in the US that destroyed Hussein. Wacky, I know.
But anyway, their three sons had such passion for American trash culture. But at the same time, their old world values felt nothing but contempt for western whores.
They are happy to be in the land of whores and treat women like whores, but they also feel nothing but derision for these women.
But to some degree, I think Bob Dylan felt it too. In some ways, he was very modern and cosmopolitan. But there was another side of him that was near-Biblical and family-oriented.
It’s partly there in PORTNOY”S COMPLAINT too. On the one hand, there is the ‘boing’ for the shiksa. But there is also the powerful pull of Jewish culture and the tribe. The Jewish guy hooks up with some shiksa bimbo and is happy to bang her… but also despises her as a slut dolt trash.
Sort of like what happens with the Sydney Pollack character in Husbands and Wives.
Initially, he likes the bimbo shiksa but comes to feel contempt for her as a bimbo who thinks King Lear is King Leo.
Comment: “A Gay Indian man is complaining that a lot of Gay White guys on dating sites are not open to dating men from his race. Wow Indian men really are seen as extremely undesirable in the American dating market. Not only are Heterosexual White women rejecting the sexual advances of Indian men, Gay White men are turning them down as well.”
Denis Fernando writes for GayStarNews.com: I go to Pride in 2015 and see black, Asian and Muslim LGBTIs applauded like never before. I go on Grindr and see profiles saying ‘no blacks’, ‘no Asians’.
Everyone knows being a gay Asian means facing homophobia and racism. Some people are surprised to hear this includes negative experiences as an Asian man within the LGBTI community, which is supposed to be a liberal, welcoming environment.
The Islamophobic abuse of Muslim men on Grindr in the days after the Paris terror attacks again highlighted the prejudices within the gay community.
Anthony Magallanez was accused of being part of ISIS by another Grindr user. The irony of course being that ISIS is barbarically homophobic and Muslims are by far the most numerous of its victims.
I regularly go on Pride marches. The warm welcome that Black and Muslim groups get at these events show boundaries are being broken down all the time. All is not rosy – it’s often a fight to get high profile visibility and these environments are not free of racism and prejudice either. But, from what I’ve seen, that is improving and people are listening.
So when I see phrases such as ‘no blacks’ ‘no Asians’ and ‘no Muslims’ on dating apps, it feels like something from the intolerant Britain of the 1960s when my parents faced ‘No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs’ signs in landlord’s windows.
As a black man, when I see these words, I do not feel like I’m on a dating app in the 21st century and I’m surprised there are forums in which people think such language is socially acceptable. It certainly wouldn’t be in a bar, café or workplace.
Some people argue they are entitled to date and sleep with who they want and that in some instances, that preference can be for black or Asian men over white men. This is true although I personally don’t have any ethnic preference.
To gay men who don’t understand what the fuss is about, I would ask you to subject your profiles to the ‘1960s racist landlord’ test. If what you are writing sounds like one of those signs my parents faced, then you need to change your wording.
By the way, that racist landlord from the 1960s was also a homophobe, so you and your boyfriend were not getting a room there just like my parents.
There is a way of stating your preferences positively. ‘(Preferred ethnic preference) to the front of the queue,’ for example. Although if there was a queue to speak of, I doubt you would be on Grindr.
The truth is that dating apps are a tiny expression of a bigger issue.
The idea of that the LGBTI community, liberated and liberal on sexuality, would also be liberal, enlightened and liberated on the issue of racism was shattered quite early on in my foray into this community and politics.
And I can tell you that coming out was hard enough without having to also accommodate these problems.
This is not just my experience. I know Muslim women in hijab, some of whom are straight but huge advocates of our community, others who are lesbian Muslims looking for a night out at a gay venue, who get stopped in the queue and questioned.
The assumption by security guards is they are straight and they don’t belong. This could easily be the first experience of a young Muslim LGBTI person looking for a supportive environment to come out. They describe it as being the same as being stopped at immigration in an airport.
A study by FS Magazine in the UK shows African Caribbean and Asian men’s experiences range from flagrant racism, to being excluded in clubs to being considered fetishized sexual objects.
Posted inHomosexuality, Race|Comments Off on ‘No blacks, no Asians’ on Grindr shows how racist gay men actually are
John Reid writes: Donald Trump has shifted the Overton Window, soaring to the top of the polls while championing issues the political class believed were off-limits. But even Trump seemed to side with the Left in deploring Justice Antonin Scalia’s recent remarks about Affirmative Action’s paradoxical negative impact on African-Americans. Of course, Scalia had an entirely reasonable point. However, it’s time to face up to the real scandal: the damage that Affirmative Action does to displaced whites (and Asians).
During oral arguments in Fisher v. University of Texas, UT attorney Greg Garre argued that when school dropped Affirmative Action policies, diversity plummeted. Scalia commented:
“I’m just not impressed by the fact that the University of Texas may have fewer [black students without Affirmative Action]. Maybe it ought to have fewer…And I don’t think it stands to reason that it’s a good thing for the University of Texas to admit as many blacks as possible.”
“There are those who contend that it does not benefit African–Americans to get them into the University of Texas where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less advanced school, a less —a slower—track school where they do well,”
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid [Email him] claimed that Scalia’s words do not belong in “the mouths of national figures” and show “just how out of touch he is with the values of this nation” [Reid: Scalia’s ‘racist’ comments worse than Trump, by Jordain Carney, The Hill, December 10, 2015]
That a sitting Supreme Court justice could feel emboldened enough to articulate the kind of boldfaced belief in white supremacy thought to have ended with formal racial segregation illustrates the contours of the nation’s New Jim Crow, a system that justifies the dearth of African-American bodies in predominantly white spaces by questioning whether they truly belong there in the first place. [Scalia Comments Shine Light on U.S. Institutional Racism, Newsweek, December 10, 2015]
The NAACP claimed that “We were alarmed and extraordinarily disappointed to hear a justice of the Supreme Court make comments that were laden with racial prejudice and that were based on an assumption of racial inferiority.” It demanded that Scalia recuse himself. [Justice Scalia under fire for race comments during Affirmative Action argument, by David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times, December 10, 2015]
Of course, those less-muted gaspers already favored Affirmative Action anyway. And Scalia had his defenders. But by shrieking and creating a scandal, the Left once again succeeded in shifting the Overton Window in its direction. What was once the most Politically Correct reason to oppose Affirmative Action—that it was damaging to blacks—is now Officially Offensive.
Note that Scalia was not suggesting that blacks are inherently unfit to succeed at top schools, merely that blacks who have inferior grades and test scores t o their white and Asian peers will not excel. This is known as the Mismatch Theory.
Admitting blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans to hypercompetitive colleges that otherwise would have rejected them, Mismatch Theory holds, just means that these students are more likely to burn out and fail. Even those who do manage to graduate often end up taking less challenging majors and ultimately learn less. Mismatch Theory suggests that these students would have been better off attending a less competitive school where they would have excelled.
The Mismatch Theory is popular amongst Conservatism Inc. intellectuals because it argues that we should oppose Affirmative Action because it hurts blacks—not because it hurts whites and Asians. This is not a new argument, but it’s more plausible than the “soft bigotry of low expectations” trope about black self-esteem, and much more acceptable in the current climate.
But, though plausible, the theory may be overstated. To take an extreme example: one Kashawn Campbell, an African American student who lacked basic writing skills, was admitted into the University of California-Berkeley, where he struggled. He was profiled by the Los Angeles Times.
At Cal, he was among the hardest workers in the dorm, but he could barely keep afloat. Seeking help, he went at least once a week to the office of his writing instructor, Verda Delp. The more she saw him, the more she worried. His writing often didn’t make sense. He struggled to comprehend the readings for her class and think critically about the text. “It took a while for him to understand there was a problem,” Delp said. “He could not believe that he needed more skills. He would revise his papers and each time he would turn his work back in having complicated it. The paper would be full of words he thought were academic, writing the way he thought a college student should write, using big words he didn’t have command of.”
Campbell was an extreme example of racial preferences. He attended Jefferson High School, which was 91% Hispanic, 8.4% African American, 0.0% Asian, and is 0.0% white. When Campbell graduated from the school in 2012, only 4.1% of the students were proficient in Math and only 18.9% were proficient in English (that was an improvement from a few years earlier when the numbers were 0.6 and 12.9). Campbell was likely admitted through California’s policy of admitting the top students at every high school. Even under normal racial quotas, Campbell probably would not have been admitted. But because California ostensibly did away with racial preferences after Proposition 209 and now just takes the top of the class at non-white schools, this created distortions from which he benefitted.
Reflecting upon the story, UCLA Law professor Eugene Volokh suggested “it seems likely that Campbell would have been more successful at a school such as Cal State, which is more likely to spend more time remedying the gaps in Campbell’s education” [The Mismatch Effect, in the L.A. Times, Volokh Conspiracy, August 23, 2013].
But is this true? During his first year, Campbell managed to squeak through by taking African American Studies classes. A year later he seemed happy at Berkeley, writing “I have learned more about what it means to be black in a new environment. It’s a beautiful struggle that warms me up like morning tea, knowing that I am making a statement with all of these activities and my ethnicity” [Beyond the banner: what inspired our poster students, The Daily Californian, November 3, 2014].
Between the tutors, teachers allowing Campbell (right) to retake classes, and African American studies courses, he will probably manage to graduate. He may lack basic writing skills, but Campbell no doubt has a profitable career ahead of him being black for a living.
Responding to the hoopla over Scalia’s comments, Stuart Taylor wrote,
[M]any recipients of large racial preferences would be better off in the long run—with more learning, better careers, and perhaps happier lives—if they went to less prestigious but still excellent schools where they could do well academically.
Prestige has obvious advantages. The question is whether they outweigh the costs of being near the bottom of the class.
I’m skeptical. I attended a semi-prestigious undergraduate school and an elite law school. When I applied for jobs after undergrad, not one employer asked for my transcript. They were confident that I was smart enough just based on the school’s pedigree. To most employers, being a poor student in undergrad at a top-notch institution is better than floating by at a mediocre one.
I did have to give my grades when I applied to Law School, but of course, these law schools also have racial preferences. It’s hard to argue that most Affirmative Action admissions harmed their recipients at elite law schools. Virtually no one fails out and at the top 3 law schools in the country—Harvard, Yale, and Stanford—do not have grades, nor does UC Berkley (ranked 8h). While all these schools have some distinctions among students, it is impossible to determine who is at the bottom of the class. Most other of the elite top 14 (T-14) law schools do not let students know their rank and some do not allow them to put their GPA on their resumes when applying for jobs. Similarly, elite MBA programs do not allow students to disclose their grades until after they are hired.
Based on their test scores, it seems like many, if not most, blacks who attend the top three Law Schools would have not been accepted to any of the “T-14” schools, but may have been accepted on the merits at schools at the bottom of the top 20. Most of the students accepted at the other schools would have ended up in schools ranked 20th-50th without Affirmative Action.
At most T-14 schools, if you have decent social skills and have OK grades you can get a job at a corporate law firm, while at the 20-50 ranked schools, you need to have top grades and law review. As blacks rarely make law review or honors at any school (at my law school, not one black received honors for being in the top quarter of the class), the firms choose based on where they attended.
And of course, Affirmative Action continues through graduation with law firms giving jobs to minority students with poorer grades than the white students at the same schools…
COMMENTS:
* SCALIA HAS A VERY GOOD POINT—BAN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.
Thanks for the great article, Sir. Well written and agree with almost everything you said. (Harry Reid, the election thief, is a disgrace and simply utters what he thinks his liberal masters want to hear).
The mismatch theory applies not just to admission, but even the pressure to graduate or get into college that is being pushed on blacks.
Maybe some blacks do not want to graduate. Maybe they are not that keen on going to college, let alone top colleges where they will do poorly. So why entice them with affirmative action towards a path they don’t wish to walk?
School standards have been watered down, and math and science classes diluted to allow blacks to graduate at the same rate as whites and the whole society pays the price.
Affirmative action is racist, not only because it discriminates against whites, but because it eventually hurts blacks by conning them into thinking they are capable in areas that they are not and leading them into fields they are not cut out for.
* The entire ‘scandal’ over Scalia’s sensible remarks is pure political cant. Unfortunately, reality-denial has now become a requirement for public service. Even our Courts are feeling the heat. ‘Equal treatment under law’ is constantly being tweaked and revised. This is a very unhealthy trend.
Significantly, ‘outraged’ liberal writers like Liptak, Rothwell and Savage (above) are probably very comfortable with the idea of diverging mental capacities among/between whites (and by implication, Jews). Of course they are.
After all, that’s why there’s Harvard, Princeton and Yale!
And that’s why Jews are found at elite universities in such great numbers. These are the children of Einstein!
Indeed, differences in human intelligence have always been taken for granted–even among siblings with the same two parents.
In fact, many ‘gifted’ students have siblings with average–and sometimes below-average–IQs. This should not be shocking. Like inborn athletic potential, intellectual capacities are bestowed by nature in unequal portions. True?
So why shouldn’t genetically-isolated populations (races) mirror this ‘diversity’?
Variations in human intelligence occur. Among families, tribes, ethnic communities, and races. Even breeds of dogs exhibit differences in innate mental capacity. This is biology talking. The rest is politicized nonsense.
But science has become a VERY BIG OBSTACLE for the ‘racial egalitarian enforcers’ who manage America’s political discourse. Genes and intelligence? Different ethnic backgrounds…. Race?
That’s white supremacism!
And so, the Social Justice Warriors must pretend (and declare) that the descendants of African slaves must have precisely the same proportion of intellectually-gifted children as Ashkanazi Jews, Boston Presbyterians, or Hong Kong Chinese. Call in the bean-counters!
The offspring of NBA players need equal representation at MIT.
But this ruse is even more absurd that it looks. Even the bean-counters have to pull their punches.
After all, we cannot (and must never) count (apply) ‘quotas’ to Jews. Heavens no!
Whites must bow (as well as Asians) but Jews are exempt from the machinations of affirmative action. Even the US government is prohibited from counting them.
On the other hand, sacrificing a little white ‘privilege’ is an appropriate and necessary step for achieving social justice.
But why should mandating an equal and proportional sacrifice from America’s most successful group be beyond the pale?
Why?
It’s anti-Semitic!
Just watch this movie or read that book if you don’t believe me.
So it’s whites (or Asians) who must pay for ‘unequal outcomes’ in education. No ‘social remedy’ or demographic slight-of-hand can be implemented if it victimizes you-know-who. That’s when ‘affirmative action’ slips down the ugly slope into ‘quotas’.
Therefore, Jews are exempt from numerically-derived (and politically-correct) policies of academic exclusion. This is a very kosher remedy for academic inequality.
When can we examine these policies and discuss their disparate impact?
When?
Not now. Maybe never.
* A well known economist/investment advisor mentioned in his Christmas newsletter that an associate of his, a wealthy hedge fund manager, had funded an academy in Somalia for boys and that we were encouraged to donate. He pointed out that this schools graduates had been ‘accepted” into elite schools in America and the UK. That they would be the leadership of tomorrow’s Somalia.
I about threw up upon reading this. While anyone is free to spend their own money as they see fit, the idea that it is, somehow, morally preferable to assist a poor African by sending him to school at an elite Western school and deny the American student a spot at his own universities is appalling. It is also naive to believe the Somalian, having had a taste of Yale or Cambridge, is going to be in any hurry to head back to Somalia and ‘build’ his own nation. Experience tells us he is more likely to overstay his visa and do whatever it takes to never return home.
* Black surgeon? Black lawyer? Black teacher? Heck, even a black mechanic, who on Earth wants to trust any of them are competent?
Affirmative Action is a stain on EVERY single black in the middle or higher class now.
By raising the actual cost of every black (brown, LGBT, etc.) employee (because each one carries a risk of lawsuit-publicity-settlement extortion), I can’t help wondering just how high is the dead-weight cost to businesses in America today.
* True story: about 15 years ago, while working as an intern in the Dept of Clinical Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health, I suffered a broken tooth, so I went to the nearest provider on my included healthcare plan to have it capped. Turned out to be a black woman.
What followed was the most horrifically painful experience of my life. A couple of hours of searing, excruciating pain, with the tears running down my face, while she kept insisting that all was well, it was nearly over, and there was no need for any more pain killers.
I assumed that she knew what she was doing – that this was just what you had to go through to get a broken tooth capped.
So when, ten years later, living in rural Missouri, I again broke a tooth, I put off fixing it for weeks, in fear of what it would be like.
Finally bowed to the inevitable and went to the local dentist – a middle-aged white guy who couldn’t seem to stop telling you about the latest news he’d gleaned from Rush Limbaugh.
Result? Totally painless procedure, out in half an hour.
To this day, I wonder about what that lady in Bethesda put me through: was it mere incompetence? Or active malice?
Regardless, the moral of the story is: never, ever, put yourself in the hands of a black professional, no matter how “qualified,” if you’ve got the option of some nobody white grunt instead.
* Granted that Japs are the most innovative East Asians, but Canada and Australia are not getting Japs right? They are getting Chinese. The vast majority of Japs seem happy to stay in Japan. About the Indian Brahmins, they ran India into the ground after the British left, what makes you people think that they will run the Canadian or Australian government any better once they are in charge whatever their IQ is, and what makes you people think that Indian Brahmins will be any more benevolent towards the black and Latino underclass, or towards the Abos and Canadian First Nations, or poor whites, than they are to the untouchable and lower castes underclasses in India?
* When AA hires prove that they can’t be productive in the stock in trade of the business or professional association that hired them, they can get shoehorned into “minority recruiting,” “event planning,” “VP of diversity,” “community liaison,” “head of pro bono practice group,” etc.
AA isn’t just necessarily bad for students – those who benefit and those who are displaced alike – but is corrupting to the institution itself. There was a scandal involving a Philadelphia area lawschool wherein the admissions office was reporting false (augmented) LSAT and GPA data for incoming students to the accrediting authority. One of those insiders scandalized and dismissed was the Dean assigned the responsibility for diversity and inclusiveness. Higher hard scores would boost U.S. News rankings. It’s fairly apparent that they were pursuing diversity at the expense of the quality of the incoming classes and simply lied to prevent the inevitable result from negatively affecting the ranking.
In my own Law School experience black students were offered special treatment by, inter alia but especially the black professors. What was rumored was anything from special and inexhaustible office hours through special tutoring in which the exam material would be “tipped” (and, of course, if the relevant material is reinforced enough by the professor it could be possible to “game” the blind exam system with a repeated recitation of a pattern of words). N.B. Exams were usually three to four hours a piece but cover only a limited scope of material such that knowing what would be on the exam before preparing would be an extreme advantage to the student. The other gambit was the offering of silly advocacy classes (“Women and the Law”) which were easy As and Bs, while serious students would take courses like “Federal Taxation” or “Corporations.”
Posted inAffirmative Action|Comments Off on Affirmative Action’s Real Damage Is To Whites, Asians, And America
I am an archaeologist and artist, based in Sydney, used to have a gallery in the Blue Mountains, now shut down due to Aboriginal violence and vandalism and the corruption in the Aboriginal industry.
Our ordeal started in 2009, and with the local council deciding to censor our art because some aborigines (especially those white people who nowadays pretend to be aborigines) were “offended”.
We kept fighting for our rights to create and display our art in front of our own private gallery, took the local council to land court (since local councils have no jurisdiction over art and it was unlawful decision). We lost and were forced to remove our “offensive sculpture”. Our case coincided with Andrew Bolt case (who “offended” white aborigines by pointing out that they are white) we both lost at the end of 2010 – but those two cases – our Wanjina Watchers in the Whispering Stone sculpture and Andrew’s court case, marked a beginning of change in people’s attitudes. Australians are no longer so willing to just accept all the nonsense we are forced to tolerate.
We’ve been proactively reclaiming our basic rights to academic and artistic freedom ever since; we have good support and achieved some success in raising awareness of these taboo issues. We keep urging Australian authorities to investigate corruption in the Aboriginal industry, and publish relevant material. I also publish articles regarding Australian prehistory in the American webzine Pleistocene Coalition News.
Posted inAborigines, Australia|Comments Off on Aboriginal Violence & Censorship
Paul Gottfried writes: Lately I’ve been looking at the nasty stuff that the neocon-Republican establishment has been throwing at the Donald to bring down his poll numbers. Some of it is so ridiculous that it points not to any failing in a controversial presidential candidate but to the narrow twilight world in which the establishment’s lackeys are comfortably nestled together. An utterly self-defeating attack has come from that decrepit “conservative” icon, George Will, who in his nonage has given up wearing his once accustomed bow-tie but continues to be an insufferable bore. George has warned ad infinitum that Trump is “no true conservative.” If he were, he would be rallying to the established positions of the established Republican Party and perhaps divvying up his fortune with Jeb Bush, who was Will’s favorite candidate for president, as long as Jeb showed signs of life. What is more, Trump by leading an insurgency against the GOP establishment might contribute to “the destruction of the Republican Party.” Since that party and its current leadership are the true guides to what is “conservative,” Trump is in fact destroying conservatism, which is presumably dependent on that living oracle, the RNC. Needless to say, George misses or pretends not to see that most of the Right despises his living oracle and may be supporting Trump precisely because he may bring about what Will conjures up as a nightmare. His nightmare is the hope of others.
An even dumber strategy has come from Jonah Goldberg, who has just announced that “no movement that embraces Trump can call itself conservative.” Apparently, Jonah’s glaringly leftist positions on social issues, including gay marriage, in no way conflict with his right to determine the nature of conservatism—or his right to call Trump on TV “the bane of humanity.” Jonah has also reached for some bewildering historical analogies in his diatribes against the Donald. Indeed his historical parallels are so obscure as to leave his probable readers running to Wikipedia for enlightenment.
Okay, let’s give Jonah the right to belabor his strained comparison of Trump to Mussolini. Other establishment journalists are using it, and his readers may have heard of the interwar fascist leader who fell into Hitler’s clutches. This doesn’t mean of course that there is any substance in the comparison drawn (the last I heard Trump was not replacing the Constitution with a corporate national state). But at least Jonah’s likely readers, who are GOP junkies and for the most part culturally illiterate, might have encountered il Duce’s name somewhere, perhaps on a quiz show or in an undergraduate course on twentieth-century history at Jonah’s alma mater Goucher College.
But how does the average reader of Jonah’s pap deal with such scare figures as Huey Long and (I’m kidding you not!) Father Coughlin? In a recent column Jonah warns that by advancing Trump, we may be giving prominence to a dangerous populist like the interwar Louisiana Senator or the anti-Semitic demagogue Father Coughlin. Now I’m not here to defend either the flamboyant Long or the Michigan priest who slammed Wall Street and Jewish capitalists in the 1930s (before going back to being a New Deal Democrat). But I can’t imagine that most under-eighty Americans, or perhaps anyone but aging Jewish liberals who attend Bernie Sanders rallies or subscribe to Commentary, would have heard of Jonah’s villains. Perhaps that is the group that Jonah is reaching out to.
I’ve encountered even dumber historical comparisons coming out of conservatism, inc., for example, by Goldberg’s frenetic companion-in-arms Glenn Beck. This yap show host, with a pleading voice that is perpetually about to crack, has had pictures projected on to a wall behind him of Hillary Clinton and German existential philosopher Martin Heidegger. Beck’s viewers were urged to look at these juxtaposed pictures, to understand why American democracy is now in danger. It would surprise me if Beck, who’s been ranting against Trump for several months now, hasn’t added a photo of the Donald to his Rogues’ Gallery. Once again I can’t see how this linkage of current GOP villains to dead historical figures, whom one’s audience is not likely to have heard of, can assist the GOP cause. I won’t dwell on the by now minor problem that the historical figures we’re supposed to boo have generally been misrepresented.
In view of these clumsy assaults on Trump, I must compliment the Washington Post syndicated columnist Richard Cohen for comparing Trump to someone whose name we would know, namely Adolf Hitler. Cohen started the “Trump is like Hitler” routine as early as April, 2011, before this comparison had taken off in the national press. He’s had to work hard to make this comparison sound plausible. And certain obvious difficulties remain, for example the impossibility of finding anti-Semitism in Trump’s background or the absence in his rhetoric of anything resembling the Nazis’ expansionist foreign policy. I don’t even know whether Trump can speak German with Hitler’s Upper Austrian accent. Although Cohen’s view of two parallel lives may not convince all of us, among certain readers even paranoid fantasy can pass for truth.
It make no difference if I, as someone with an impoverished imagination, can’t think of anything that would make Trump and Hitler seem similar, except for the facts that both talked about unemployment and threats to the homeland, shared the same gender and had hair on their heads. Cohen’s comparison can catch on, because his readers know who Hitler was, that is, a very evil man who killed lots of people and, perhaps even worse, made politically insensitive remarks. If a journalist wants to pummel Trump with poisonous darts, then at least come up with a usable historical comparison. Don’t bring up liberal villains who aren’t even featured on the History Channel. Just go for the big H.
Posted inDonald Trump|Comments Off on Is Trump Hitler?
I can’t wait for Donald Trump to be elected president so he can tell these pompous twits to get lost and to pay for their own defense. They’ve been sucking on the American tit for too long. Grow up mates! Time for America to leave NATO.
In an unusually disdainful statement, London’s Metropolitan Police said, “Mr. Trump could not be more wrong.”
London Mayor Boris Johnson, a member of the right-wing Conservative Party who is tipped by some to be the next British leader, also responded: “The only reason I wouldn’t go to some parts of New York is the real risk of meeting Donald Trump.”
British Prime Minister David Cameron described Trump’s comments as “divisive, stupid and wrong.”
But the petition to ban Trump from entering Britain could go beyond words. The British Home Office really does reserve the right to refuse entry to foreigners coming to the country to speak under the unacceptable behaviors or extremism exclusion policy.
Anti-Muslim American speakers such as Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer have been blocked from entering the country by these rules before, as have extremist Islamic preachers and others whose presence the home secretary has decided would “not be conducive to the public good.”
Some prominent politicians, including Jack Dromey, home affairs spokesman of the opposition Labour Party, and Natalie Bennett, leader of the Green Party, have backed the proposed Trump ban.
To an American reader, banning someone from entering the country because of words they’ve uttered may seem extreme, but Britain and much of Europe have a very different attitude toward free speech. There has been some debate in the country as to whether to ban the Islamic State’s signature flag, for example. In theory, at least, anti-Muslim sentiment is dealt with just as seriously.
Posted inDonald Trump, England, Islam|Comments Off on British lawmakers will soon debate whether to ban Donald Trump from the U.K.
When I was growing up at Avondale College, if an abo gave you a hard time, you took him and his family on a lengthy walkabout and explained to him that the white man now ruled the land. If that didn’t work, we made him listen to five hours of my dad’s lectures on righteousness by faith. That always sorted them out.
It took four long years, but during the second half of 2012 we started seeing the good results of our awareness-raising campaign. In 2009 Goomblar Wylo decided to tell the truth about Australian Aborigines, for the DreamRaiser Trilogy. His honesty and courage served as an example and inspiration to other brave Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people, who have stepped forward to repeat, confirm and expand on the truth as told by him, about the extent of damage done by Aboriginal hatred and violence, and political correctness gone mad. Recommended articles:
Following the Aboriginal attacks on the Prime Minister on Australia Day 2012, we have received a great number of enquiries about Aboriginal violence in general and their bad behaviour in the Blue Mountains in particular.
We cannot respond to each individual enquiry, but here is a link to a very informative website:
For a wide range of current affairs and indigenous issues, discussed in the context of current political correctness which is paralysing Australian society, visit:
Our case and harassment of ModroGorje artists belong to an entirely new level of violence, which has been going on for quite some time, but has stayed under the radar and was allowed to continue unreported.
We have achieved a great outcome for all Australian artists. After years and decades of being lied to, the Australian public has become aware that there is no copyright of any ancient imagery – or even more recent art, 70 years after the artist’s death. There is no copyright on styles and designs, there is no ownership of ideas, and nobody needs Aboriginal permission to create art and sell their own work.
The public has now been made aware that many forms of violence against non-Aboriginal artists and ‘disobedient’ writers and free-thinkers are legally and morally unfounded.
There is a growing number of indigenous and non-indigenous Australians striving to change the current reality of bad attitudes, violent behaviour and self-destructive Aboriginal conduct.
As a result, a database is now being compiled, with details of specific cases of violence against intellectuals, artists, writers, journalists, and small business owners in Australia, to be available soon.
Race, of course, has shaped political choices for a long time. The Republican takeover of the South is understood by scholars as a reaction to whites’ sense of betrayal after the Democratic push for desegregation under President Lyndon Johnson.
Racial animosity has long helped foster a unique mistrust of government among white Americans. Nonwhite voters mostly like what the government does. But many white Americans, researchers have found, would rather not have a robust government if it largely seems to serve people who do not look like them.
Americans owe their unusually minimalist state in large measure to racial mistrust. As the economists Alberto Alesina and Edward Glaeser put it in an important paper, European countries are much more generous to the poor relative to the United States mainly because of American racial heterogeneity. “Racial animosity in the U.S. makes redistribution to the poor, who are disproportionately black, unappealing to many voters,” they wrote.
The eminent sociologist William Julius Wilson described two decades ago how race and economics collided. In the United States, he wrote, white taxpayers have opposed welfare because they see themselves “as being forced, through taxes, to pay for stuff for blacks that many of them could not afford for their own families.”
Scholars have found evidence for these attitudes all over the place.
For instance, Julian Betts of the University of California, San Diego and Robert Fairlie of the University of California,Santa Cruz found that for every four immigrants entering public high schools, one native student switched to a private school.
Daniel Hungerman from the University of Notre Dame found that all-white congregations became less charitable as the share of black residents in the community rose.
Perhaps because they have relied more on government programs and protections, members of minority groups have decidedly different beliefs about supporting social solidarity. Another study published by the Pew center in November found that 62 percent of white Americans would like the government to be smaller and provide fewer services. Only 32 percent of blacks and 26 percent of Hispanics agreed.
Notably, minorities in the United States have never held much power. They are unlikely to feel that political influence to direct and constrain what government does is slipping away.
The rich democracies of the West are living through strange times. In Europe, voters are increasingly drawn to xenophobic politics, driven, according to the former German foreign minister Joschka Fischer, by fear “based on the instinctive realization that the ‘white man’s world’ — a lived reality assumed by its beneficiaries as a matter of course — is in terminal decline.”
Right-wing parties, Mr. Fischer added, are replacing the notion of a nation built on a shared commitment to a common constitutional and legal order with an ethnic definition of nationhood, derived from common descent and religion. White Europeans, in other words, are circling the wagons.
A few years ago it looked as if the United States — long more tolerant of immigration, with a more fluid sense of national identity that readily allowed for hyphenation — could avoid this turn.
But judging by this year’s political debate, held against the background of improving but still insufficient prosperity, Americans are moving in the same direction. Racial identity and its attendant hostilities appear to be jumping from their longstanding place in the background of American politics to the very center of the stage.
Posted inAmerica, Politics, Race|Comments Off on Race Takes Center Stage In American Politics
From Breitbart: TEL AVIV – A Michigan woman posted a video on YouTube defending Palestinian stabbing attacks against Jews and compared Jews to animals.
In the Arabic-language video (watch it here) translated by MEMRI and titled “Is stabbing Jews haram [forbidden]?”, pro-Palestinian activist Lina Allan blasts Muslims who say that stabbing is “haram,” or forbidden under Islamic law, and tells such Muslims to “go back to watching Turkish soap operas.”
“I support any decision made by the Palestinian people in order to regain its rights and its land,” said Lina Allan in reference to the act of stabbing Jews.
Throughout the video, Allan does not use the word “Israelis” in her description of the stabbing attacks, choosing instead to use the word “Jews.”
“Some people have commented on the Palestinians’ stabbing of Jews by saying that it is haram, that it is prohibited,” Allan said in the video.
“Who are you to say what is halal [permissible] and what is haram,” she asked critics of stabbing attacks. “Sadly, there are many people in the Arab world who think that just because their mother and father are Muslim, they themselves automatically became muftis, and are allowed to say what is halal and what is haram — according to their whims and personal desires, of course.”
“If they like smoking, they pronounce cigarettes halal; and if they hate cigarettes, they pronounce them haram,” she said.
She compares those who believe stabbings are prohibited under Islam to defenders of “animal rights – not human rights, but at best, animal rights.”
“Let me tell you, even animals would not object to this if they could talk,” she continues.
“Nobody can feel the suffering of the Palestinian people but the Palestinians living in Palestine,” Allan admonishes fellow Muslims. “I wish that you would stop interfering. Spare us your views, and go back to watching Turkish soap operas. It would be better if you didn’t talk about something you don’t understand.”
According to MEMRI, Allan represented the State Department’s US-Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) at the Jameed Festival in Jordan, a food and culture event honoring rural women.
Posted inIslam|Comments Off on What is with these midwestern women?
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)
Even a brave conservative like Heather Mac Donald has claimed that Mismatch Theory “is the most powerful critique of Affirmative Action yet developed” . 
Between the tutors, teachers allowing Campbell (right) to retake classes, and African American studies courses, he will probably manage to graduate. He 
