October 13, 2015 Do Jews Have Superior Souls? Luke Ford No sacred cows.

Do Jews Have Superior Souls?

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Luke Ford

It does not bother me that parts of Judaism and Jewish life consider Jewish souls superior. Every group at heart thinks it’s group is superior, the very center of the world.

I don’t think Jews are different in this respect from the Japanese, Chinese, Germans, English, etc.

I don’t think this ethnocentrism is a bad thing. You should think your group is superior and rack your mind to find ways that your people outdo all others.

The stronger your group identity, the more likely you are to think negatively about outsiders. This is a universal law, it applies equally to Jews and gentiles.

I don’t think Jews need to duck or hide from these statements. Instead, we should place them in the context of universal human proclivities.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off

Jill Soloway and the “Transgender” Agenda

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Luke Ford

From the perspective of Jewish law, it is a big sin for a man to dress like a woman.

This whole transgender movement is repellent for the traditional Jew. Orthodox Jews can’t stand this stuff. It turns the stomach.

Orthodox Judaism is structured around separations between men and women, Jews and Gentiles, adults and children, holy time and secular time, etc. The Hebrew word for holiness is “kadosh” which literally means separate.

It is discombobulating for me as a convert to Orthodox Judaism to see how non-Orthodox Jews in Hollywood, the media and academia are pushing the transgender agenda. It’s as weird as finding that the pornography industry is controlled by Jews as pornography is the very opposite of the holiness and familial solidarity that Orthodox Judaism seeks.

Are things Jewish because some Jews do them or because Jewish texts endorse them? There are no traditional Jewish texts that support the gay and transgender agenda.

Posted in Hollywood, Trans | Comments Off

Funniest Moments Of Illegal Immigrants

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Luke Ford

Published on Sep 30, 2015
– Beginner picture: Macedonia
– Disastrous migrant: Hungary-Serbia border (Serbian side)
– Grateful migrants: Hungary (Budapest)
– Border Control: Austria (Slovenian border)
– Migrant actor: Hungary-Serbia border (Serbian side)
– Intelligent migrants: Hungary-Serbia border (Hungarian arie) (The fence was built from the border 2,5meters, in Hungarian area)
– Idiot migrant: Hungary (Bicske)

Posted in Immigration | Comments Off

Self-Improvement Talk From 1890

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Luke Ford

From the Chateau: QFT from the self-improvement guide “Might is Right”, authored in 1890 by an Original Realtalker:

There is nothing particularly inviting about barren, dyspeptic, blue-stocking ‘New Women,’ in pants and spectacles; talking idiotic snuffle through their noses; with busts made of adjustable india-rubber; with narrow or padded hips, and “wheels between their legs,” scorching across the curbstones like mad. When such women are ‘captured’ what good are they? They won’t even breed; or if they do so (by accident) their puny embryos, have to be delicately nurtured into life with steam-heated incubator-mechanism and afterwards fed and weaned on ‘the bottle.’ The sons of such women — bottle fed abortions — of what good are they?
It is women of this kind (unnatural monsters they are) that cause so much domestic unhappiness. They have been “educated” along false lines, filled with bookish artificialism, and thereafter when called upon to take up their maternal duty, they are organic incapables. Hence the divorce court scandals — the fruit of wholesale degeneracy — encouraged by State interference with domestic affairs.
Gradually the curse of ‘Law’ invades the privacy of every home. It encourages emotional feminines to defy husbands, and Deify an irresponsible Authority. In other words it deliberately promotes unfaithfulness and unlimited free-love. It undermines the husband’s Control, but at what a dreadful cost? With the “equalization” of women comes wholesale panmixia — scientific concubinage, State-regulated polyandry, and the poisoning of all inter-family intercourse. When average women find in Statute Law a “deliverer” and a “champion” more powerful than their husbands and brothers, they become both unfaithful and profligate — especially if “well educated.”

-Ragnar Redbeard, patron saint of Chateau Heartiste.

Bonus! R.R. on open borders, miscegenation, and alien mystery meats:

Purity of blood has played (and is yet to play) a leading role in the drama of racial evolution. Races held in bondage are necessarily mongrelized, degraded, ‘equalized.’ Homeliness is one result of bad breeding.
When a higher type allies itself by marriage with a lower, it paves the way for its own ultimate degeneracy. When Spartans and Athenians mixed themselves with imported Asiatic and Egyptian slaves, their downfall was foretold; and when “Equality” became the motto of Christian Italy; Latins, Asiatics, and Negroes miscegenated, evolving the modern ‘Dago’ — who slaves for the descendents of the men his ancestors conquered.

Posted in Feminism | Comments Off

Black Lives Matter

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Luke Ford

From the Chateau:

Black Lives Matter is the name of a political/social bowel movement pushed out into the toilet bowl formerly known as America by a diarrhetic alliance of Talented Tenth high yellas and pathologically ethnomasochistic and xenophilic white equalist leftoids. Its premise is the belief, outright asserted or heavily implied, that White cops are gunning down innocent dindu nuffins for the crime of having a black body, as Ta-Nigesi Coates might put it.

This movement has incited angry dindus to, in presumed retaliation, gun down cops in cold blood. President Butt Naked on down through the Hivemind propaganda apparatuses have blared the BLM agenda almost nonstop since its inception, not-so-surprisingly coinciding with a big increase in violent crime in a number of dindu central cities over the past nine months as cops have pulled back from aggressive policing of America’s Little Zimbabwes.

The problem with the Black Lives Matter movement, like so many regressive anti-White leftoid movements, is that it is bogus. Built on a foundation of lies. Utter bullshit, if you will.

When an actual, fact-based analysis of police shootings is conducted, we find that most black suspects killed by cops are 1. armed, either with gun or automobile 2. shot by black cops 3. had prior arrest records or 4. are mentally ill (and thus more likely to behave erratically around cops).

Furthermore, a meta-analysis of simulations testing police use of deadly force, which was quickly shoved down the memory hole by Hivemind information gatekeepers, found that police reacting to threatening scenarios are biased IN FAVOR of black suspects and AGAINST white suspects.

Participants in an innovative Washington State University study of deadly force were more likely to feel threatened in scenarios involving black people. But when it came time to shoot, participants were biased in favor of black suspects, taking longer to pull the trigger against them than against armed white or Hispanic suspects. […]
The findings also run counter to the public perception, heightened with the recent shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., that police are more willing to shoot black suspects. Statistics show that police shoot ethnic and racial minorities disproportionately to their population.
But the last comprehensive look at the racial makeup of justifiable and non-justifiable shootings was a 2001 study (pdf) using more than two decades of U.S. Bureau of Justice data, said James. And while statistics show black suspects are shot at more frequently than white suspects, the 2001 study found black suspects were also as likely to shoot at police as be shot at. […]
James’ study is a follow-up to one in which she found active police officers, military personnel and the general public took longer to shoot black suspects than white or Hispanic suspects. Participants were also more likely to shoot unarmed white suspects than black or Hispanic ones and more likely to fail to fire at armed black suspects.
“In other words,” wrote James and her co-authors, “there was significant bias favoring blacks where decisions to shoot were concerned.”
When confronted by an armed white person, participants took an average of 1.37 seconds to fire back. Confronted by an armed black person, they took 1.61 seconds to fire and were less likely to fire in error. The 24-millisecond difference may seem small, but it’s enough to be fatal in a shooting. […]
“…there is some evidence from the field to support the proposition that an officer’s threat bias could cause him or her to tend to take more time to make decisions to shoot people whom they subconsciously perceived as more threatening because of race or ethnicity. This behavioral ‘counter-bias’ might be rooted in people’s concerns about the social and legal consequences of shooting a member of a historically oppressed racial or ethnic group.“

Blacks as a race and on the whole are innately more violent and stupidly impulsive than Whites. This is genetic in provenance and amplified by leftoid cultural messages of encouragement and race-based acquittal for black misbehavior. FBI statistics and real world observation attesting to this reality are clear as day, and have been for a long time. Blacks commit homicides at upwards of eight times the rate of Whites. Blacks are likewise over-represented as perpetrators of a whole host of social-fabric-destroying criminal activities, and cops know this, especially cops who have to work the Dinduville beat and daily come face to face with anti-social black dysfunction and antipathy to civilized norms of behavior. This means, in practice, that black criminal suspects will be 1. numerically disproportionate in arrest stats, 2. more antagonistic towards cops and, 3. more likely than other races to resist arrest and to fight back against armed cops, all of which in turn means more of them won’t make through the arrest procedure alive. Cops will naturally and justifiably feel more threatened for their safety and the public’s safety while patrolling ghetto cesspits, and coupled with the reigning anti-White narrative will know what a personal hell awaits them in the court of media and public opinion if they wind up getting caught in the whirlwind of some dindu’s spontaneous outburst of vibrancy which they are required by the code of their occupation to neutralize. This ever-present knowledge of the Eye of Soros and his mau mau shock troops salivating at the chance to put a Great White Defendant to the gallows will create perverse incentives for cops to permit more black dysfunction to go unquestioned and unmolested in black communitaaaaaahs; far more and far worse dysfunction than would be permitted by cops to go unchallenged in predominantly White neighborhoods. This will then devolve into a nigative feedback loop as black crime rises and blacks victimized by it demand more be done to make their hoods livable while simultaneously screeching about police racism, effectively wishing to have their purpa drank and drink it too. And make no mistake: an increase in overall black crime means an increase in violent predation of Whites by blacks. Unless you are lucky enough to live in a Whitopia where the median home price is north of half a million dollars, like Bryan Caplan is able to do.

*wipes blood from blade on sleeve, returns shiv to sheath*

There may or may not be a rise in the rate of police shootings of criminal suspects over the decades in the US (data on that are hard to find), but that is a separate issue from the lies regurgitated by BLMers. Responsible journalists can discuss police arrest methods and the possibility of an enlarging police state that may be an emergent reality of an increasingly Diverse™ society; what they can’t do is malevolently massage that discussion into one of White cops targeting black men so that they may status whore for their noodle-armed leftoid scum buddies, because the facts on the ground say precisely the opposite of their precious and religiously manicured anti-White fiction.

Race creationism kills. It is time to kill the lies that animate the race creationists.

Posted in Blacks, Crime | Comments Off

Who Wants In-Bred Muslim Migrants?

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* With the increasing levels of automation in manufacturing (or for that matter services) it makes no sense to worry about fake labor shortages. The Japanese apparently aren’t doing so except to the extent that they will need to push robotic technology to be able to handle complex tasks such as caring for aged humans.
Judging by the now famous selfie of Angela and a refugee, I think she is more concerned with reducing the German population’s average number of eyebrows per person. (BTW, I wonder if that monobrow look is a symptom of inbreeding? You don’t see it so much even among European ethnic groups who are known for lots of face and body hair.)

* Japanese and Koreans are smart ; they would never let in such large number of non ethnic kinfolk and especially not Muslims. Germans are being sold up-river by the scheming Euro elites.

Christian Syrians wouldn’t be a problem but Muslims will never integrate, instead they will work towards taking over Germany …gradually, and like Ghadaffi said: through the womb. As if all those Turks weren’t problem enough, Merkel wants Germans to expereince even more masochism.

* I just learned there is a scholarly treatment of mass migration as a means of coercion:

Weapons of Mass Migration (2010) by Kelly Greenhill.

From the blurb:

In Weapons of Mass Migration, Kelly M. Greenhill offers the first systematic examination of this widely deployed but largely unrecognized instrument of state influence. She shows both how often this unorthodox brand of coercion has been attempted (more than fifty times in the last half century) and how successful it has been (well over half the time). She also tackles the questions of who employs this policy tool, to what ends, and how and why it ever works. Coercers aim to affect target states’ behavior by exploiting the existence of competing political interests and groups, Greenhill argues, and by manipulating the costs or risks imposed on target state populations.
This “coercion by punishment” strategy can be effected in two ways: the first relies on straightforward threats to overwhelm a target’s capacity to accommodate a refugee or migrant influx; the second, on a kind of norms-enhanced political blackmail that exploits the existence of legal and normative commitments to those fleeing violence, persecution, or privation.

As of now, there is only one customer review on the Amazon page, by a German who thinks this has all been orchestrated by “the Americans” to “destroy the economy and political stability of the new host country, and to sow the seeds of civil war” in order to “further cement their imperial control”.

Well, I dunno. If nothing else, Germany and Europe are important trading partners for the U.S. Destroying their economies would severely impact U.S. businesses and jobs. Of course, one never knows what schemes are being hatched in the Obama White House, but I am skeptical.

More likely, in my opinion, is that Turkish President Erdogan decided to utilize the weapon of mass migration for his own goals. Until this summer, he had diligently enforced the integrity of his country’s border by preventing Syrian (and transiting Afghan etc.) refugees from emigrating en masse. Opening the floodgates meant putting Europe in a world of hurt, with him holding the power to make it stop — if his demands were met.

We know only some of his demands, such as billions in financial aid for Syrian refugees in Turkey and the abolition of visa requirements for Turkey’s 70+ million citizens. The EU has now announced that these demands will be met. At a minimum he will also want assurance of no interference as he ratchets up oppression of his country’s Kurdish population (whose birth rate is much higher than that of non-Kurdish Turks). It’s possible that after he closes the border to Syrians trying to get into Europe, he will launch an even bigger refugee tsunami by making the lives of Turkish Kurds unbearable. The extent of Erdogan’s regional superpower ambitions is not known, therefore we do not know the full extent of his demands either.

In any case he has not yet shut down border crossings by Syrians (fake and real ones) into Europe. Whether this is due to EU bureaucratic bungling and slowness or because he is trying to drive a still harder bargain is not known. My guess is that he is surprised that it took the EU so long to cry uncle and acknowledge that Erdogan holds the keys to the gate.

What is also unknown is the extent to which Qatar and Saudi Arabia, the two main financiers of Turkey’s economic expansion, are influencing Turkish policy in return for making funds available at below-market rate, and what their specific goals in this game of hardball are. One would think that, being major shareholders of European corporations, they do not wish to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs — but the lure of islamizing Europe may be a powerful temptation.

P.S.: A crazy thought, maybe Merkel has known all along what Erdogan’s plan is and by holding off on giving in to his demands she is trying to demonstrate Germany’s resistance to blackmail? As in, “we can take whatever you throw at us and remain standing”? To be honest, I don’t believe it myself. Merkel is simply too stupid for Machiavellian statecraft.

* “…German Chancellor Merkel’s decision to let in (literally) countless numbers of newcomers from the Muslim world…”

This is something obvious, yet easily ignored, yet extremely important. It’s common in any debate on immigration in any Western country:

John: “What if 100 million people immigrate?”

Matt: “That many people won’t immigrate.”

John: “Then why don’t we place a limit on how many can come?”

Matt: {Stone-cold silence}

They never, never, ever want to talk about limits, just like they never want to talk about enforcement measures, even when pretending to be pro-enforcement:

John: “Why don’t we deny illegals driver’s licenses and car registrations?”

Matt: “That won’t work, they’ll still come and drive without them.”

John: “Why don’t we deny them access to welfare?”

Matt: “That won’t work – they’ll still come, and they don’t use much welfare?”

John: “So, then why don’t we deny them welfare?”

Matt: “That would be immoral.”

John: “So why don’t we deny their kids public education, and fine businesses that employ them?”

Matt: “Those won’t work, either; and denying education to their kids would also be immoral”

John: “So what measures to fight illegal immigration would work?”

Matt: {Stone-cold silence…again}

They say that open borders won’t cause too many people to come, and yet they won’t allow even an insanely high number, like 5 million a year, as a limit.

They say they’re for enforcement, yet can’t name a single damn enforcement measure they would find acceptable.

* Korea has lower consanguinity than Japan does (which makes sense since in Korea it used to be illegal to marry someone with the same surname, even those related by 8 degrees or some such thing, while Japan has been considerably less eugenicist on this score). But my experience in both countries and peoples is that the Japanese are substantially more civic-minded (and polite) than Koreans are. The rough comparison would be that the Japanese are akin to the English while the Koreans are more like the Irish, that is, less mannered and communitarian than the Japanese, but more soulful and unruly.

* Because another inbred people are ruling over the West and demand that the West open up.

Who are these inbred people?

PS. WOWS is overly over-the-top, but the fat guy(best thing in the movie and such an accurate portrayal of his kind) is hilarious, and this scene is a masterpiece.

I love how the fat guy says ‘no’ but then describes the situation that sums up to a ‘yes’.
He says ‘yeah.No’ to the question of whether he married his first cousin and then says her father is brother to his mother which indeed makes her a first cousin.

It’s like a mini-version of how PC works at NYT. NYT will have Nicholas Wade mention and describe the facts that would indicate racial differences do exist, but then say NO, race is just a social construct.

No, we have bananas(or its opposite, ‘yes, we have no bananas’.)

Btw, when the fat guy says he would take a hypothetically retarded kid and let him out of the car, it’s just the funniest thing.

* I’ve always thought that people who were pro-diversity tend to be rather inbred themselves, or rather, ‘lacking in genetic diversity,’ and their crazed insistence on how terrific outbreeding is, is merely their own genes shrieking for the introduction of more variation before their own offspring die out from sheer feebleness. Mental preciousness and neuroticism is a warning that your genetic lines lack robustness and are going downhill.

Germans descend from a small number of tribes that were floating around in the Roman days, so the present multi-million population of the German state doesn’t have that much of a particularly wide genetic base to it.

Many people who live in New England happen to have ancestry from a smaller genetic pool than you would think, namely the Puritan families who emigrated from the same areas in England in the 1600s. Their WASP descendants in America kept marrying each other for generation after generation unless they moved out of region, which is why Northeast liberals can be so remarkably alike in their mentality. It’s not just culture, it’s lack of genetic diversity. Much of this process took place from about 1620 to 1800, a period in which roads were terrible and people rarely traveled away from their local village. Take a rigid Puritan and raise him with today’s culture, and you’ve got a New England liberal.

According to this notion, those who are anti-diversity should have a more varied and wholesome collection of genes, and they wouldn’t see the need for such mass invasions by newcomers. Midwesterners, for example, by moving away from the east coast, met up with and married persons from a wider numbers of breeding enclaves, and they aren’t as keen on diversity as New Englanders are.

* Germany is allowing mass migration because Germany itself is not clannish. (That’s presumably why they are so inclined to “empathize” with folks outside their clan.) On the other hand, the Eastern European states, more clannish than Germany, are apt to resist migration – precisely because they’re clannish. (Is not universalism the ultimate in anticlannish?) Presumably (perhaps I have this wrong) conservatives generally tend to be more clannish than Western liberals: this explains why their loyalty (as you explain in a post on Haidt) is more to their immediate circle.

Then, what about you hbds: do you tend to be innately clannish or not? If clannish, aren’t you to be distrusted? At least, you are suspect of hypocrisy in advocating for the unclannish. If unclannish (which I suspect), how did you manage to adopt a clannish (group-protective) ideology?

* The solution is, of course, moderation in the tradition of Aristotle and Franklin. You don’t want to live in an extremely clannish society. But an extremely unclannish country is likely to be exploited by more clannish elements, such as the Bush Dynasty, families of billionaires, and foreigners from more clannish cultures.

* Pathological altruism, Swedish style:

Per capita, Sweden has taken in more migrants than any other European country, much more than Germany even. Crime has shot up and most migrants are on welfare. Even so, a plurality of Swedes are asking for more of the same:

http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/kraftig-forandring-fler-vill-se-okat-flyktingmottagande/

Refugee-friendly public opinion has strengthened significantly in only six months, according to DN / Ipsos.
44 percent of respondents believe that Sweden should take more refugees – an increase of 18 percentage points since February.
Close to one in three Swedes are willing to accept a refugee in their home.
During 2015, migration and integration issues have become increasingly important in public debate in Sweden. The civil war in Syria and IS terror in the region have displaced millions of people and the number of asylum seekers who have come to Sweden has increased for four consecutive years.
In February, Ipsos conducted a survey on DN’s behalf on attitudes to immigration and integration. Then, 36 percent said that Sweden should receive fewer refugees than currently. Only 26 percent wanted to receive more refugees at the time.
Now the situation is reversed.
When Ipsos repeated the question in September, 44 percent said Sweden should take in more refugees. That is an increase of 18 percentage points.
– It is not so common to see very strong public opinion changes, this is a big increase, says Nicklas Källebring, analyst at Ipsos.
At the same time, the number of Swedes who want their country to accept fewer refugees declined from 36 percent to 30 percent.

On the other hand, I have seen opinion polls that indicate that the number of people planning to vote for the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats is on the rise.

It’s obvious, isn’t it, that this is a (non-bloody, for now) civil war between goodthinkers and badthinkers and that immigrants are merely the preferred weapon in this war.

Keeping in mind differences between Sweden and Germany, nonetheless the Swedish poll numbers do not augur well for a quick turnaround in Germany’s immigration policy.

* Strong borders are something that evolves naturally in any place inhabited by humans. The present “migrant crisis” can have two possible outcomes. Europe can close its borders and shut off the flow. Or – in the very long term – it will fill with aliens who will eventually create their own borders to safeguard the countries Europeans handed over to them. Absence of borders is never a permanent state of affairs, but an interlude before which territorial integrity is reasserted.

* The US and UK media insist it is mandated by economic reality. But Merkel says otherwise and there are very good reasons to think economic reality has nothing to do with it. Germany was formerly led by a man who never reproduced but had racial theories which required war. Now Germany is led by a woman who never reproduced, but has racial theories about how to avoid war. Merkel has specifically said that the EU is all that prevents war.

A fear of WW3 was certainly the explanation for opposition to nuclear power generation in Germany, which culminated in Merkel’s 2011 declaration that Germany would be nuclear free by 2022. Of course that was when Germany was expected to have a rapidly shrinking population. Now that Merkel has decided to import over a million people a year , Germany will certainly not be able to meet its own needs in the future, and will have to import nuclear generated electricity from Czech republic or somewhere. Financial Times: The growing absurdity of German energy policy.

What is motivating both the anti nuclear and immigration policy is a dread of war. It lies very deep in the German psyche and now they are safely cocooned within friendly states (including Poland now in EC and Nato) they are free to dump any kind of policy with nationalist connotations, leading to them taking mirror image positions to Hitler. Nothing to do with economic /demographic considerations.

http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2015/oct/12/bake-off-winner-nadiya-hussain-muslims-britain

Above is about winner of a competition on Britain’s biggest TV show. Lots about how she and her husband look, but nothing about how they look like siblings of course.

Posted in Immigration, Islam | Comments Off

NR: What the Conservative Grassroots Get Right on Immigration — and What the GOP Establishment Gets Wrong

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Luke Ford

From National Review: David Brooks has just written a stinging denunciation of the Republican party. Though he reserves his harshest criticism for self-described Republican radicals, his larger argument is that the party as a whole has “abandoned traditional conservatism for right-wing radicalism.” To give Brooks his due, many aspects of his critique ring true. His frustrations are my frustrations. In one passage, for example, Brooks observes that even as Republicans denounce government in the most strident terms, they make ever more outlandish promises about what they can accomplish once elected. When the accomplishments themselves inevitably fail to materialize, members of the outrage caucus find some shadowy villain to blame. This cycle of overpromising and recrimination engenders a great deal of cynicism among rank-and-file conservatives, which in turn further strengthens the hand of the radicals who want to burn the GOP establishment to the ground. Unlike Brooks, however, I have some sympathy for the Republican radicals. That is because in at least one respect, it is the GOP establishment that has embraced radicalism while the Republican Right stands against it. House Republicans are divided on many policy questions, but the most important of them by far is the question of immigration reform. Though Brooks never mentions this divide over immigration, I would argue that it is playing a central role in the ongoing Republican civil war.

Broadly speaking, establishment Republicans favor an approach to immigration reform that would, among other things, grant legal status to unauthorized immigrants and increase legal immigration, including that of less-skilled workers. Anti-establishment Republicans oppose this approach. If the rise of Donald Trump proves anything, it is that immigration matters a great deal to Republican voters. Indeed, one recent survey found that a large (67 percent) majority of Republicans favors decreasing immigration levels. Almost half (49 percent) of independents feel the same way, as does a significant (33 percent) minority of Democrats. Is it surprising that many conservatives object to a House GOP leadership dominated by proponents of increased immigration levels when only 7 percent of Republicans favor such an increase?

…For a variety of reasons, the United States has a large population of people who are not just poor, but who are the children and grandchildren of poor people, and who are isolated from our society’s economic and cultural mainstream. One of the great dangers we face is that while less-skilled immigrants are upwardly mobile, in that they generally lead better lives in the U.S. than in their native countries, their children and grandchildren are in many cases experiencing “downward assimilation.” That is, they find themselves stuck on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, suffering from many of the same problems that plague other very poor Americans — they are being raised in unstable families, they are victimized by criminals at high rates, and they have far less faith in American institutions than their immigrant forebears did. This is not because these men and women are any less admirable than more affluent, more established Americans. It just so happens that there is only so much that government can do to ensure that the children of parents with low levels of literacy and numeracy will flourish in a society that prizes skills and social capital. Congress can increase transfers, certainly. But it can’t repair frayed social bonds.

Posted in Immigration, Republicans | Comments Off

WP: The secret surveillance of ‘suspicious’ blacks in one of the nation’s poshest neighborhoods

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Luke Ford

Washington Post:

These are questions being asked across the country as people experiment with services that bill themselves as a way to prevent crime, but also expose latent biases. The application “SketchFactor,” which invited users to report “sketchy” people, faced allegations of racism in both the District and New York. Another social network roiled Oakland, Calif., when white residents used Nextdoor.com to cite “suspicious activity” about black neighbors. Taking it even further was GhettoTracker.com, which asked users to rate neighborhoods based on whether they thought they were “safe” or a “ghetto.”
Now “Operation GroupMe” is stirring controversy in Georgetown. In February of last year, the Georgetown Business Improvement District partnered with District police to launch the effort, which they call a “real-time mobile-based group-messaging app that connects Georgetown businesses, police officers and community members.” Since then, the app has attracted nearly 380 users who surreptitiously report on — and photograph — shoppers in an attempt to deter crime.
The correspondence has provided an unvarnished glimpse into Georgetown retailers’ latest effort to stop their oldest scourge: shoplifting. But while the goal is admirable, the result, critics say, has been less so, laying bare the racial fault lines that still define this cobblestoned enclave of tony boutiques and historic rowhouses that is home to many of Washington’s elite.

Comments to the WP:

* Why don’t you tell us the statistics of who is committing crimes in these businesses? That would help us assess whether any group is being unfairly profiled. I imagine that DC police has those statistics readily available for use by journalists and anyone else with a legitimate interest.

* I’m not sure the point of this article. What are the shop owners supposed to do when there is a fight going on in their alley? Not report it because it is black people fighting?

* Go to MPD’s Second District police station. Ask to see the offense reports for shoplifting and theft from the Georgetown area/Wisconsin Ave./M Street. Look at the suspect descriptions for those crimes. Care to take a wild guess what color 95% of them are? The other 5% are hispanic. The police cant be everywhere and these roaming groups of black thugs are stealing those stores blind. So yes, the shop owners need to do something.

* As others have pointed out, what are the facts as to who commits the crimes?

Blacks would help improve their group image if many of them volunteered to help catch and punish their wayward brothers.

* Most shoplifting, otherwise known as larceny, is committed by blacks. If the writer had bothered to do any research, he would have learned this fact. You can weep and wail and complain about racial profiling but those are the facts. Blacks commit crimes of all kinds at a higher rate than any other group. A sad fact, but a fact nonetheless.

* Go to the second district police station. Ask to see the reports involving theft or shoplifting from the Georgetown area-Wisconsin Ave/M Street. Look at the suspect descriptions: 95% black, 5% Hispanic.

* Most of us profile or make some type of judgment about others based on our life experiences in general, and whether the person is a stranger, or someone we know marginally or well. Plus everyone gives off some kind of vibe and you are foolish to ignore it.

A lot of this is common sense and survival. And all of us make judgments about who we want to spend Friday night with.

* I have worked in retail in a similar situation here in Atlanta at an upscale shopping center. Every robbery, car break in’s, assaults were perpetrated by young Black men. This is not rumor – it has been confirmed with videos, eye witnesses and arrest.

Yes, when we see young Black men that fit similar description of the perpetrators of earlier crimes, yes, security is notified immediately and it has probably prevented even a greater number of crimes.

Sorry, but not willing to risk my life in order to be politically correct.

* Let’s be honest here. Whenever you see one of those videos of kids over running a store and stealing items, what color are they? I have yet to see one of white kids doing that stuff.

* It would have been nice for the reporter to take a look at all the shoplifting convictions in Gtown for say the last 5 years, and give us a breakdown of the races committing the crimes. I’m guessing those numbers would not have fit his narrative though. I wouldn’t profile by race. I would profile by the class of the person entering my store. If you have a person with facial tattoos, poorly groomed, dressed poorly, no teeth, and can’t speak English properly then I’ll assume you have no class and are more likely to commit a crime because you probably come from a poorer background. I don’t care if you’re Asian, black, or white.

Posted in Blacks, Crime | Comments Off

Top Twenty NFL Quarterbacks

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* The one thing that most impresses me in a quarterback is his ability to avoid doing something stupid when the game is on the line. It doesn’t even matter so much whether he actually manages to win the game, because that’s often not in his power. But I simply detest quarterbacks who just do something stupid to screw up the game — throwing an interception when there is no need to throw the ball at all, or calling a pass play when a run is obviously called for, or running out of time when a little bit of brains would make it obvious how to avoid doing so, etc. I can live with a quarterback who just misses his receivers sometimes, or lacks a certain amount of athleticism, but I really just can’t deal with quarterbacks who do stupid things. As a fan, it just drives me crazy.

And one thing I’ll say about Tom Brady: he doesn’t do a lot of stupid things, not when it’s important.

There aren’t many other quarterbacks about whom I can say that. For what it’s worth, these kinds of problems seem to be pretty common with black quarterbacks, including Russell Wilson. They make one great play after another, and then they commit some infamous boner. It would drive me out of my gourd if I was rooting for their team.

* It is in the NFL’s interest to keep the majority of quarterbacks white, even if blacks were more suited to the position (they aren’t.) Quarterback is the most high profile position on the team, and arguably the most singularly important. If QB demographics were to suddenly match the rest of the league, it would shatter the illusion that it is an “integrated” sport, and consequently lose a lot of white middle class fans. It would become another basketball or boxing. MMA is overtaking boxing because it is representatively white, and more suited to white abilities. Whether they say it out loud or even admit it to themselves, whites don’t like to watch sports that are completely dominated by nonwhites.

I guarantee NFL executives have had a more coded version of the above conversation on multiple occasions.

* Jason Whitlock, the black sportswriter who likes to say un-black sportswriter things, has pointed out that if the NFL switches to a “black” quarterback system—i.e. a lot more rushing, juking, diving, less emphasis on field general/throwing in complicated systems/drop back and pass—then the quarterback position will diminish.

And , Whitlock isn’t blaming “racism.”

Instead, Whitlock pointed out that the quarterback-as-running-back makes them much easier targets to injure and also, inevitably, will wear out their legs a lot faster than a drop-back-and passer while, simultaneously, making their legs even more important. A drop back passer can have crappy knees, but thanks to his pass protection and rules protecting him in the pocket, a dropback quarterback with poor but manageable knees can get along to his mid-30s or beyond, but a running quarterback will be worn out just from wear and tear.

So Whilock envisions that teams will have 2-3 quarterbacks that they will just rotate into plays—in other words, the same system as the other running backs on the field. So if one gets injured, there’s a couple replacements jumping right in on the next play without any significant drop off. And the other running backs tend to be done by their late 20s.

Whitlock is basically telling blacks that if they clamor for the NFL to change the game to suit them as quarterbacks they will actually diminish their own value. “Shut up and learn the position!”

Of course, what goes unsaid is that blacks largely won’t put the effort in to learn the nuances of the position if they can’t merely physically dominate it. Once in the NFL Michael Vick couldn’t just physically push over his opponents like he did in college, and his “Madden” and ESPN-friendly highlights were belied by his stats. Steve Young had great wheels, but at least learned a system and didn’t abuse them; Tim Tebow, who himself has great wheels, is stubborn like Vick about improving himself (but at least he doesn’t abuse dogs and is nice to the public).

* More glaring than the lack of black persons is the lack of funny black names. I just checked a few rosters going back to 2006. Not a single typical underclass name among a starter. The closest thing was Jameis and Tyrod, but those could be Mormon or Palin names.

By contrast, here are some names from a list of 40 defensive players:

D’Qwell
NaVorro
Reshad
Lavonte
Karlos
Donte
Deone
Ha’Sean Treshon (“Ha Ha”)

* Right now the NFL ideal qb is a tall guy with a missile launcher arm (“He can make all the throws”), and a positronic brain to make all those reads and go through checkdowns in a hurry.

If you run a “spread” offense the throws get a lot easier. Spread is kind of an ambiguous term to me, because it includes things like both Oregon’s offense and Mike Leach’s Air Raid.

But for the part about easier throws, the key is the qb is a threat to run. To me the biggest component of the pro defenses we’ve seen for about 50 years is the ability to double cover. Which is possible because the defense is playing 11 on ten, because the qb is no threat to run.

Remove this restriction and it opens up a lot of things. Obviously the defense can still double cover, but if it does, you leave a gaping weakness in another part of the field.

You really haven’t seen this done in the NFL yet, aside from parts of that one miracle season Tebow had in Denver. San Francisco, Seattle, they’ve used parts of the college playbook, but they haven’t gone full blown with it.

It is pretty standard to say it won’t work in the NFL. I tend to disagree. For a long time I’ve had a scheme like Whitlock’s in mind. Carry a number of qb’s and play all of them.

And trust me, I’d run qb power 40 times in a game until Ray Lewis (or whoever) is a bloody mess.

All these black/white things aside, to me it seems to be the natural evolution of the game at this point. For a number of reasons pro set/I formation teams are really the new “gimmick” teams in college football.

* Black dual-threat quarterbacks have led their teams to the last 3 Superbowls (that’s 400% over-representation). They won one Super Bowl by blowout and were one play away from winning the other two. And when was the last time the college championship did not feature a black quarterback?

* When I started to listen to jazz pianist Art Tatum (in my fifties), I finally figured out why I spent more time playing basketball with black guys when I was in college. Art Tatum was a self-taught genius; his amazing ability was in spontaneous creativity, not rote repetition. His best work was as a soloist; he didn’t work out as well in small groups (Clarinetist Buddy DeFranco said that playing with Tatum was “like chasing a train”). I enjoyed the style of black basketball players; in my own modest way, I was also creative and spontaneous, not to mention self-taught. I hated the rote repetition of playing on basketball teams that tried to run the same plays over and over.

This style of spontaneous creativity works in basketball; it wins games. More importantly to basketball as a spectator sport, it’s way more exciting to watch. One of the reasons that women’s basketball never catches on is that women basically can’t do it (there aren’t any women jazz pianists who do spontaneous performance, as opposed to classical pianists who do rote repetition). When I watched women’s basketball, I thought to myself that they looked like well-coached men’s intramural teams. They look like that because they run plays over and over. It’s inherently boring to watch.

This spontaneous creativity doesn’t work as well in football, because running plays that coordinate the effort of the linemen with the backs with the receivers with the quarterback is the only way to win. There can be individual creativity, but it is subordinated to running organized plays. One obvious place where creativity is treasured by fans is in the (useless) activity of victory dancing, which now takes place after every play. Other areas include hair styling (especially when it protrudes from the helmet), trash talking and tattoos. Of course none of these creative efforts advance the game.

* Maybe fans just didn’t care enough about interceptions back in Namath’s day?

To some extent that was rational since teams weren’t that good at moving downfield reliably, so a turnover on a deep pass wasn’t too much worse than punting.

I can remember around 1969 Roman Gabriel being cited for seldom being intercepted, but it was presented as minor positive side effect to the problem that he threw the ball so hard and with so much spin that his receivers couldn’t hold onto it.

My vague recollection is that the touchdown-interception ratio wasn’t a big deal to football fans in the 1960s-70s. Today, it seems like a really simple, obvious stat, but for some reason I don’t have a lot of old TD-interception ratios stored away in my head.

It seems to me that sheer passing yardage was the glamor stat way back then. Namath’s 4007 in a 14 game season was a big deal, like OJ’s 2003 yards rushing. Namath’s 4000 yard 1967 was an important breakthrough in that it showed you could pass all the time and do pretty well. Nobody broke that mark until Dan Fouts in 1979.

Or maybe the New York Jets had a strategy that once they got close to the end zone they’d always run it in?

In Bill Simmons’ book on the NBA, he found a lot of answers to statistical puzzles like this by reading old Sports Illustrated articles and player autobiographies and watching some old games on Youtube.

* Vick has little short range to middle range accuracy left & doesn’t have the wheels to make the highlight moves he had 10 years ago…but he still is in the top 20% of NFL qb mobility, imo. What he does have is a fucking cannon, and he can sling it (see the Wheaton TD in the 4th quarter).

The problem is 1/ Haley has designed an offense that is short to medium throws that gets the ball to the Steelers myriad of offensive weapons 2/ Big Ben is out until November-ish 3/ Bruce Gradkowski, the original back-up, is out for the year 4/ Landry Jones, the young draft pick from 2014 is not ready. So it became Vick by default in the preseason.

After another failed 3 and out in the middle of the third quarter, both Gruden and Tirico were openly wondering how bad Landry Jones must be to not get in for an inept Vick. But Vick made up for it w/ the bomb to Wheaton (his strength) and a last minute drive where he made a huge 25 yd run up the middle.

He’s a band-aid, and the Steelers were fortunate to get the win against a Chargers team that has 3 replacement level players playing O-Line.

* The key for the running QBs is getting to the point where the brain (I’m supposed to complete a pass!) overrides the instinct (Pressure…Take off!). Wilson has mostly gotten there. Taylor seems to be further along than most expected. Bridgewater averaged less than a yard per carry in college, so he was never a real runner.

Now they’re ready for the second step: the check-down list, an infinitely more difficult process. Some never master it. Some only look for the primary and then take off, leaving them to take the coaching staff’s abuse in the film session about missing those guys waving their hands downfield.

The key to it all is to find the guy who fits what you’re trying to do. Bradshaw’s job was to hand the ball to Franco Harris or Rocky Bleier, while occasionally using his cannon of an arm to throw it to the moon where Lynn Swann or John Stallworth would jump to said moon to pull it in. The offense didn’t run through Bradshaw.

Contrast that to the current wearer of 4 rings, Tom Brady. The entire offense runs through him. He’s had an ever-changing cast of characters lining up at running back not because they have 1,000 yard potential, but because they fit what Belichick is doing, Dion Lewis being the latest example. He’s had a steady supply of slow but precise white guys to throw to, and he’s seems to be able to get at least one of them 100 catches every year. As Steve has pointed out, too, the Patriots are pretty white, and they’re all smart enough to buy into what Belichick is selling.

* The Mel Blount Rule, introduced in 1978, where CB’s could no longer bump and manhandled WRs past five yards clearly helped Bradshaw’s overall passing numbers and helped get him into the HOF. Before ’78 he never had thrown 20TDs in a single season whereas he did for the next four. Its true that for first part of his career Terry was almost an afterthought since pgh had one of the all time greatest defenses in NFL history. All he had to do during that time was manage the game and not blow it.

But he definitely was the difference maker for Super Bowl XIII, the one where Jackie Smith dropped an easily catchable pass in end zone and he was wide open; on one within ten yards of him, so that’s on Smith for not catching an easily thrown pass to tie the game.

But in that game, Bradshaw threw 4 TD passes and had only 1 interception. It was a closely played game all the way til the Smith dropped pass in end zone. Even then he got it done in the end by passing to Swann in end zone for winning score.

Super Bowl XIII provided a glimpse into the future: A predominantly passing league, with higher scoring, with occasional big plays being made on defense.

* Tebow is interesting in that, more than perhaps any other quarterback, his career is a victim of the media age. He’s a lightning rod in the culture wars. Look up the second and third string QBs on active rosters, and even the most skeptical of his ability must admit that he’s a superior option to at least 10 or 15 of them. A sample: Bryce Petty, Kellen Moore, E.J. Manuel, David Fales, Blaine Gabbert, and Checkdown Charlie Whitehurst.

Unfortunately, he’s so popular that as soon as an offense struggles for a couple of games, fans will clamor for “Tebow Time”, and no GM or head coach wants to deal with the hassle. Imagine Tebow backing up Kaepernick right now.

* I recall in 1977 when black QB James Harris was traded to the Chargers from the Rams, San Diego columnist Jarry Magee remarked, “Harris is prone to the big error.”

That was his pattern on the Rams as well.

* Super Bowl XIII. “There’s no telling how the game would have gone if Smith had made the catch. The one thing I’m sure of is, if Pittsburgh had been up by 14 instead of 17 in the middle of the 4th quarter, their defense would have been a little more dialed in for the rest of the game.

Maybe Dallas lost focus after the drop? But if so, that’s on them, not on Jackie Smith.”

The two best defenses of the era (two SB titles for each before the game), two great offensive lines, outstanding QBs, receivers and runners, this was the real, greatest game ever played. Yes, who knows how it progresses if Smith makes the catch and it is 21-21. However, some shit luck came the Cowboys’ way after that drop, and not all of it made by Pittsburgh. A questionable PI penalty, a 3rd down sack of Bradshaw nullified by a questionable delay of game by the Steelers. Top the drive off with Franco’s TD run on which Charlie Waters was screened out by the Umpire, 28-17. Then on the kickoff Roy Gerela slips and squibs the kick right at Randy White, who with his broken hand in a cast, loses the ball and may have recovered the ball, but the refs allow a scrum and a late to the pile Steeler ends up with the ball 20 yards from the end zone. Next play, 35-17. So, yes, it could be argued that the Smith drop set in motion a bunch of bad luck for the Cowboys. I do agree that Bradshaw was outstanding in XIII and even more lights out in SB XIV.

Posted in Blacks, Football | Comments Off

The Big Short

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Luke Ford

Comments to the Steve Sailer blog:

* I saw the trailer for the upcoming film of Michael Lewis’s “The Big Short.” It looks like the movie will attribute the surge in demand to blond strippers who own 6 houses.

* Immigrants always have an out that Americans don’t have. And that’s to skedaddle back home to the third world nation they came from:

a) so they can pile up the real estate debt
b) use their homes like ATMs
c) skim from all cash businesses
d) evade most taxes (their mentality is paying taxes is for suckers meaning Americans)
e) employ illegal aliens (from their homeland) at slave wages
f) get SBA loans at preferential rates
…….. THEN when the law is coming down on them, go back home where they have been depositing profits all these years.

How can a native born American compete with this business model?

* That fact that two people called Zhenguo Lin and Yingchun Liu are both teaching at Cal State, Fullerton, is itself a massive indictment of our immigration policies. Is “college professor” now a job Americans won’t do?

Second, there are some good nuggets around Chinese mortgage and tax behavior in this recent New Yorker article on a Chinatown bank. The New Yorker occasionally lets true-facts slip into its reporting, thought it never quite gets to where those facts lead. One tidbit:

“However, unspoken in many discussions about the Chinatown economy is the issue of tax evasion. The under-reporting of income means that the gap between a prospective home buyer’s official income and his or her actual resources can be enormous.”

* Nobody noticed that all of the profs doing the study are Chinese who didn’t even bother to anglicize their names.

Posted in Economics, Immigration | Comments Off