From Dennis Prager’s website description of his radio show today: “Three American doctors at the CURE hospital in Kabul were murdered by an Afghani policeman who was assigned to protect them. It’s very hard for us to understand the evil behind Islamism.”
It’s not hard for me to understand. Many Afghans, perhaps most Afghans, want to keep on being Afghans and they are not interested in assimilating into Western culture. To defend their own culture, they seek to stop people who try to make Afghans less Afghani. It does not seem that complicated to me.
The pure altruistic motives attributed to CURE International don’t make it any less of a threat to the Afghan way of life. When Westerners go to backward countries and help them, it generally just embitters the recipients of help. American doctors curing Afghans makes many perhaps most Afghans feel lousy about themselves. They’d prefer to see their fellow citizens suffer rather than see them relieved of pain by Americans.
Do Afghans have the right to their own culture? Do Muslims have the right to be Muslim? If so, then we shouldn’t be intervening in their affairs. We shouldn’t send them money or doctors or food or medicines unless it is in our interest to stop the Soviets, etc. If you must intervene, send them your prayers and leave it at that.
Dennis: “There are times when you can only answer evil with good. I would like for their income to double as a result.”
Is the subtext here race? If it is law-abiding citizens using these services, such as typical whites and Asians, the system won’t break down, but what happens if the criminally inclined start using them massively?
I’ve never used either of these services, but if I got a text from somebody in ebonics wanting to rent my home for a few days, I would not be thrilled.
In most of rural Australia when I was growing up, almost everybody was white and people didn’t lock their cars or their homes (unless there were many aboriginees around) because they were safe. In Japan after an earthquake or some other disaster, there’s no looting, but in New Orleans after hurricane Katrina, there was massive looting and the same in south-central Los Angeles during the 1965 and the 1991 riots.
The sharing economy has come on so quickly and powerfully that regulators and economists are still grappling to understand its impact. But one consequence is already clear: Many of these companies have us engaging in behaviors that would have seemed unthinkably foolhardy as recently as five years ago. We are hopping into strangers’ cars (Lyft, Sidecar, Uber), welcoming them into our spare rooms (Airbnb), dropping our dogs off at their houses (DogVacay, Rover), and eating food in their dining rooms (Feastly). We are letting them rent our cars (RelayRides, Getaround), our boats (Boatbound), our houses (HomeAway), and our power tools (Zilok). We are entrusting complete strangers with our most valuable possessions, our personal experiences—and our very lives. In the process, we are entering a new era of Internet-enabled intimacy.
This is not just an economic breakthrough. It is a cultural one, enabled by a sophisticated series of mechanisms, algorithms, and finely calibrated systems of rewards and punishments. It’s a radical next step for the person-to-person marketplace pioneered by eBay: a set of digital tools that enable and encourage us to trust our fellow human beings.
In 2012, the British Sunday Times, wrote about the white town of Orania in South Africa:
Building sites are everywhere. Plots of land that went for £1,000 four years ago now change hands for £20,000. There are supermarkets, all manner of other shops, a doctor, dentist, lawyers, architects, two schools and a radio station. Orania has organised many trips to Israel to study Israeli farming techniques—the Israelis too have made the desert bloom. Orania exports jewelry to the whole of South Africa, air-freighted vegetables to British supermarkets and pecan nuts to China. The community is probably the greenest in South Africa: all farming is organic, everything is recycled and alternative energy is used whenever possible. People leave their keys in their cars, live with their doors open and children play, unmonitored, in the street until dark.
Posted inRace|Comments Off on How Airbnb and Lyft Finally Got Americans to Trust Each Other?
On “the Jewish question,” Taylor seems to walk a tightrope.
On the one hand, he has written, “People who are constantly talking about and complaining about Jewish influence remind me of blacks who think that everything that’s ever gone wrong for blacks is because of white racism. I think that blacks need to be responsible for the their successes and failures and whites do as well.” About half the speakers at the first AmRen conference were Jewish, and Jews continue to attend conferences and support the organization. Antisemitic intellectuals like Kevin MacDonald do not write for the site nor are invited to conferences. (There are, incidentally, occasional Black, Asian, and American Indian contributors of articles. These tend to be unusual individuals.)
When David Duke rose from the audience at the 2006 AmRen conference and addressed members and was rebuked by a Jewish participant, physicist Michael Hart, Taylor’s response was regarded as too tepid by Hart’s defenders, while fans of the former Grand Wizard thought he’d come down too hard on their man. The antisemitic right considers him a panderer.
Taylor acknowledges the animosity of a lot of his followers toward Jews: “Racially conscious whites tend to be suspicious of Jews for two reasons. First, Jews have been prominent in the effort to demonize any sense of white identity. Second, Zionist Jews support an ethnostate for Jews — Israel — while they generally promote diversity for America and Europe. This is annoying, but understandable for historical reasons.”
With 1.7 million Arabs, over 20% of the population, Israel is of course hardly an ethnostate. There was good reason these citizens, almost alone in the Middle East, took no part in the “Arab Spring”: they have all the rights of Jewish Israelis except the obligation to serve in the army and have no wish to be governed by the brutal and corrupt “Palestinian” parties. And many more American Jews are leftists rather than Zionists, and a number have been vocal critics of Israel. It is certainly true, though, that Jewish organizations have strongly supported open borders, ignoring the fact that the values of the 21st century’s “huddled masses” don’t bode well for Jews. And organizations like the ADL have led the attack on First Amendment rights.
Is Taylor then a “White Nationalist”?
He rejects the term: “To me, it has an unpleasant whiff of gunpowder. One thinks of Basque nationalists and Kurdish nationalists. But,” he adds, “I entirely agree with the concept of an ethnostate that reflects the heritage and aspirations of a people.” He prefers the French word “identitaire,” but there’s no English equivalent.
I screwed up at work, sending out a business letter saying that the client “was eating her friend.” I forgot the word “with.”
Can’t believe how many friends I’ve retained through my bouts of manic in your face postings.
A friend doesn’t buy my contrite spirit and says I’ll be acting like Desmond again in no time.
Today I almost made it two hours without saying anything racist.
A broken and contrite heart you cannot despise.
I had such anxiety last night about reaping the whirlwind of my arrogant ways, I could not fall asleep before 4 am. I went to bed at 10 pm, used my Fisher Wallace, put on my CPAP, listened to Paul Johnson’s Modern Times for an hour (covering Stalin and Hitler), then took off my CPAP, gulped more magnesium, adjusted the open window, put on a Sam Glaser CD, then gave up after an hour and turned on my computer and gulped more magnesium and watched the two-part series on the Great Train Robbery, then I gulped more magnesium and listened to three Dave Barry CDs until finally gulping more magnesium, drifting off, up at 6:30 am, interviewed Byron M. Roth at 8 am.
I was sick all eight days of Pesach (and the two preceding days), feeling better now.
I’m jolly lucky I have inner peace. Think of the state I’d be in if I had an uneasy conscience.
I want to say that Mexicans are awesome car mechanics at a good price but I don’t want to sound racist.
I was such a mentch all morning and now I hear, “You’re back again. You can’t help yourself.”
“When do you want your last day to be?”
Luke: “The day Moshiach comes.”
Luke: “This delicious tea is more than I deserve.”
Friend: “You deserve a lot, you’re just mentally ill.”
Luke: “I should listen to you more often.”
Friend: “At the rate you’re going, you’ll only be able to listen to me on the radio.”
When I first check whether or not what I am about to imbibe has sugar/carbs/caffeine/meat/kosher etc, does that give off a strong masculine vibe that the ladies love? Many of my girlfriends have called me “precious.”
Is it against the law when you put out an ad for an intern and you ask for a picture and whether or not they’re single? Asking for a friend.
“You don’t have to answer the phone. You’re not up to broadcast quality.”
Some people around here won’t introduce me to their mothers because they fear what I might say.
Seeking a gig as a Chief Diversity Officer. I have letters of recommendation upon request!
Which babies have you found provide the most electricity per pound?
Coming to the end (in June) of 2.5 years with my current therapist. What grade would you give her? I was with another therapist, on and off, for ten years. I’ve never been fired by a therapist nor have I ever fired one. Best one was a gay goy. When I get rich, I’m seeking him out again.
When I get a mattress and my Russian bride arrives, I’m going to do great things for the Jewish people.
I fear I’ll never feel truly Jewish until I can become a victim of antisemitism.
I’m like a black rapper hoping someone will shoot me (non-fatally) to give me street cred.
I got fired from every job I ever held from sixth grade through tenth grade, then I was not hired back (Pacific Union College summer camp for kids) but I don’t count that as a firing, and then I got a horrible job evaluation (PUC custodial), and then I managed to quit my next few jobs until inappropriate speech/use of computer got me canned from several temp jobs 1995-1997… How was I to know that when you send a fax at this workplace (a news tip I sent to the LA Time about HIV infections in the entertainment industry due to certain practices), a copy of it is stored and printed out later and everyone would hand it around and snicker.
I prefer to gloss over the several acting schools that kicked me out and other centers of learning got very close to kicking me out.
I’m not very good at doing things I’d prefer not to.
At least I’ve not yet needed to cold-call people to sell them burial plots.
This black guy asked me in front of two hotties to see my full tzitzit. I raised my shirt and showed him. “Just so long as you don’t ask to see my circumcision,” I said. A loud racket ensued.
“That’s not my true self,” I protested. “I don’t know where that came from.”
“That is your true self,” said the young hottie. “That’s the problem.”
Do I strike you as marriage-minded? Future husband/father material? Can you see yourself making Jewish babies with me? Raising them up to Torah, kindness and marriage? Having seders with my family in rural Queensland? Will Seventh-Day Adventists dance at my wedding? Will my father give the dvar Torah? Separate seating?
I’ve never had a boss who liked me cracking a lot of jokes on the job, no matter how many he liked to make.
I try to greet everyone with a friendly countenance. I walk up and down Pico Blvd on Shabbos and say with a smile “Gut shabbos” to every yid and half the time, people don’t respond to me, and I always feel bad when this happens. Am I overly sensitive?
I’ve written about immigration roughly every couple of weeks for eleven years now. So I’m constantly confronted by the fear that, after a half million or so words, there can’t possibly be anything left to say. But the subject of who and how many populate a country is so far-reaching—so fundamentally tied to innumerable questions—that in fact inspiration is unfailing.
That immigration is the most intellectually stimulating of all political topics is demonstrated by Byron M. Roth’s ambitious new book, The Perils of Diversity: Immigration and Human Nature. Roth, a professor of psychology emeritus at Dowling College in New York, has written a sober, yet sobering summa on immigration.
The seismic shift now transforming the demographics of Europe and the United States is likely to leave a more permanent mark on our civilization than even the two world wars of the last century. The survivors of those conflicts returned to a life that was poorer than before, but otherwise much the same. This is never the case when one ethnic group displaces another. Barring wide-spread violence, the effects of large-scale immigration are irreversible. Byron Roth is therefore right to note in The Perils of Diversity that our current pattern of immigration is therefore “of world historical significance that will affect future generations for centuries to come.”
Mr. Roth, who is professor emeritus of psychology at Dowling College on Long Island, offers us a cornucopia of information and argument about the threat immigration poses to our civilization. Three chapters summarize the relevant racial science, three longer chapters recount the history of immigration to America and Europe, and the conclusion predicts the consequences of current trends. Though long and ambitious, The Perils of Diversity reads easily, and rewards the reader with a thorough grasp of the crisis we face.
I call Dr. Roth Wednesday morning.
Luke: “What led you to write this book?”
Byron: “I wasn’t that much interested in immigration as my belief that contrary to most social scientists who believe that society shapes human beings, I’ve long believed that societies reflect the human beings living in them. Societies have to accommodate the strengths and weaknesses of their human populations. I developed that idea. I started writing about it ten years ago. Immigration was becoming an important issue. America was changing dramatically.”
“If you believe that the nature of a people determines the nature of society, if you change the people, you are going to change society.”
“I started teaching [Psychology] in 1967. I came out of graduate school wrapped up in behavioristic thinking and a little bit of Freudian thinking, but shortly after I began teaching, it’s hard to say things that sound foolish, I soon realized that none of these theories that were popular held any water.”
Behaviorism can perhaps be best summed up by the following quote from the famous psychologist John B. Watson:
“Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I’ll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select — doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors.”
–John Watson, Behaviorism, 1930
Byron: “I was very influenced by two books that came out in the mid ’70s — Sociobiology by E.O. Wilson and The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins. I started using them in my classes. The more I studied them, the more I became convinced that they were correct. And I’m even more convinced now.”
Luke: “What percentage of your peers held similar views?”
Byron: “It depends on what you mean by ‘peers.’ If you mean social psychologists, maybe 5%. If you define peers by people who share similar interests in literature, I’d say probably half, but it’s growing, particularly in anthropology and sociology. People are recognizing the value of the evolutionary approaches… The discovery of specific genes that have specific effects on intelligence and law-abidingness, it’s becoming harder to deny that genetics plays a major role in individual behavior, and if you have culture-wide genetic patterns, they are bound to influence the culture. If you have a society in which a lot of people are more prone to criminality than other societies, you are going to have to have a different society. A place like Europe, say France, or England, which had a low crime rate, the bobbies didn’t even carry guns until about 20 years ago, they are going to have different problems when they import people who have a greater proportion of people who have a greater propensity to criminal behavior. It takes a while for a society to adjust. I don’t think they’ve adjusted yet in places like France. They haven’t made the understanding they have to change policing techniques and educational processes. In the United States, we still haven’t quite known how to deal with the fact that you have two different populations, blacks and whites, who come to school with different talents and different abilities and their propensities to misbehave. You spend billions of dollars trying to change the gap and the government can’t do it. We have an Attorney General who thinks it is a scandal that black kids get reprimanded more than white kids.”
Luke: “Is the Attorney General similarly troubled by the higher proportion of whites who are disciplinary problems compared to Orientals?”
Byron: “No. When I started studying this stuff, I did cross-country comparisons and the same disparities which exist in the United States, the same rankings in misbehavior and school performance are worldwide. Chinese kids do better in school. Europeans do almost as well, a little more troublesome. Intermediate groups such as Hispanics in the United States, Arabs, South-East Asians, West Asians, don’t do as well. Generally, the females in all these groups that tend to under-perform do better in schools until graduate school. Girls tend to be more well-behaved than boys and accommodate better to institutional settings.”
Luke: “I wonder if Judaism is also a product of the people who created it?”
Byron: “Interesting. I don’t understand the appeal of Orthodox Judaism. The Orthodox Jews are every bit as bright as the secular Jews.”
“Both of my daughters married non-Jews.”
Luke: “Paul Gottfried says the impact of Jews on American culture has been overwhelmingly negative.”
Byron: “On balance, I agree. I don’t like to agree. I’ve read Kevin MacDonald. He’s a creative scholar… I agree with his idea that Jewish culture tends to be an adversarial culture [towards the non-Jewish majority]. I find it unfortunate. I don’t like to say that to my Jewish friends.”
“I was raised in a secular home. Most of my friends were Jewish. At an early age, I began to be annoyed with extreme conformism among my friends. As a reaction, I began to be rebellious and contrary in my thinking and that has influenced my scholarship. Almost always, I take the contrarian view. In most cases, I’ve been correct, especially when it comes to things like genetic affects on human nature and abilities.”
Luke: “It seems that all the major Jewish organizations support immigration amnesty.”
Byron: “Yes. And I am appalled by that. It’s contrary to what most people in the West want. Elite opinion runs contrary to that, and Jews have an important influence on elite opinion. Considering that the largest group of non-European immigrants to Europe are Muslims, many of whom detest Jews and Israel, and make life uncomfortable for Jews in places like Amsterdam, Paris, etc. So not only are the Jewish organizations running counter to popular opinion in their own countries, they are running counter to the interests of their own constituents. That the average Jew doesn’t rebel against it just reinforces my idea that Jews tend to be conformist… Most of the Jews I know go along with that and are very uncomfortable going against the party line.”
“Whenever you have third-world people moving into first-world countries, you have similar problems.”
Luke: “I found Robert Putnam’s research interesting, that [racial] diversity is inversely proportionate to social capital.”
Byron: “I was appalled that he sat on that finding for ten years.”
“The one thing I learned as a young student was that if you do research and it comes contrary to what you expect, you have an obligation more than normal to let your readers know. His results came out different and he sat on it for ten years and he sat on it to try to find a way around it.”
“I have friends in France who looked at my book and were complimentary about the scholarship but they were appalled by my conclusions. They were Jewish, but they reflect [elite opinion]. If they are in elite circles, they have identical attitudes to American liberals. If you talk to the average Frenchman, they’re disgusted about what is going on, just like the average America, but just like the average American, they have no influence. The average citizen of a Western democracy has no influence and no place to turn to find a voice. Good and bad, Jews are influential in elite opinion, even though the number of Jews in places like France are minuscule and yet they have a powerful influence.”
Luke: “How do you explain the comfort perhaps most Jews have with Israel being an ethno-state?”
Byron: “I don’t think most Jews recognize that but because when you bring that up, they look at me with bewilderment. It’s a Jewish state. How could it not be? It’s perfectly legitimate for Jews to want their state to be Jewish and to be ethnically homogeneous but the thought that Europeans might want to have their own ethnic homogeneous mix appalls them as racist, ethnocentric, xenophobic. I’ve never been able to elicit from the Jews I’ve known that there is some inconsistency there. They don’t get it.
“Right now, [Israel] is in the process of exporting huge number of Africans [illegally in Israel back to Africa] and you raise the point that if we made it more difficult for [illegal] hispanic immigrants to work here if we enforced the e-verify program and got serious about border security, many [illegal] hispanics would self-emigrate and move back, ohmigod, if you say that, how can you be so cruel and horrible? Then you point out that the Israelis are sending back Africans by the planeload, it doesn’t register.”
“There is tremendous social pressure against whites expressing any ethnic or racial solidarity, which is unfortunate. As Jared Taylor likes to point out, why not? Every other group looks out for the self-interest, why not whites?”
Posted inImmigration, IQ, Jews, Kevin MacDonald|Comments Off on The Perils of Diversity: Immigration and Human Nature by Byron M. Roth
I asked a Jewish friend for his views and he replied:
The term “nationalism” doesn’t ring right for me. I don’t know what term would work better for me. John Derbyshire’s disposition is in the ballpark of my own, and as far as I know he hasn’t described himself as a nationalist.
You have to remember that for most of my life the people I’ve loved best have not been Jewish, and many have not been white. So emotionally I’m not going to be able get on board with a POV in which my interests as a white guy sets me up in a hostile opposition to non-whites.
On the other hand I’m contemptuous of the taboo against white people discussing their interests as white people. Frankly I think that’s a cultural sickness with severe costs. I’ve been blown away reading white Congressmen’s good-sense speeches in favor of immigration restriction in 1924. It would be healthy to hear that kind of talk again. on
I’m unimpressed and unmoved by non-whites resentment toward whites. American whites are more decent to people of other races than any other group of people I’ve encountered on this planet. Some of my Asian friends have anti-white feelings, and whenever they’ve tried to cast me as “not really white” or “an honorary [whatever]” I’ve always flatly rejected it. I’m a white guy. I find no compliment in being told otherwise.
I’m baffled when non-whites with whom I don’t share a personal relationship assume I have an obligation to be “educated” in their struggles with The Man. I’ve got my own struggles. I don’t ask them to spend their days contemplating them. I used to shit my pants twice a year, like clockwork. Perhaps they should be educated about what that’s like.
To answer your question, I could get on board with an unapologetic and honest white identity, in which white interests were discussed forthrightly and bluntly.
Posted inJews, Nationalism|Comments Off on Is White Nationalism Kosher?
Apr. 22, 2014, Dennis Prager asked professor Rodney Stark, author of the book How the West Won: The Neglected Story of the Triumph of Modernity: “The Romans at least had a literature. I’m asking about those African, South American, and Meso-American and aboriginal societies that never developed an alphabet?”
Dr. Stark: “A lot of that has to do with geography.
“One of the questions these days you are not supposed to ask is if why when the Europeans went out in the era of discovery, the main thing they discovered was how far ahead they were of the rest of the world. They thought the Chinese would be way ahead and they were way behind.”
“Religion was the ballgame. The Judeo-Christian concept of God held the key to the rise of the West — the belief in a rational Creator God. That had the implication that the Creation was rational, that it obeys rules. Hence humans have the ability to reason, it might be possible to discover the rules of Creation. That was the basis of science. Science only happened in the West.”
I notice that people who are rooted in the traditions of their people like it when others are similarly rooted. Orthodox Jews, for instance, do not rejoice when the goyim become secular and lose their traditional ties. It is better when all peoples have transcendent allegiances, when everybody has things to live for beyond satisfying their impulses. Men who have families to provide for, hobbies to pursue, and roles to play in their communities, for example, are more likely to work hard and to be obey the laws of the land. It is the shiftless, rootless and idle who are particularly dangerous.
Christians rooted in Christianity, I’ve noticed, tend to prefer Jews who are rooted in their Judaism. Chinese and Japanese who are rooted in the traditions of their people are also comfortable when outsiders observe their peculiar ways of life.
Life is exhausting and living an insular life is usually inevitable, efficient and comforting.
With the upcoming Easter in mind, I could not help but to share a Twitter observation reposted by Scott Richert:
“Advertisers now call an Easter ham a “holiday ham”. You know, so as not to offend all those celebrating Passover with a ham”
Funny? Of course. Sad? Even more so. As someone who actually observes Passover (which I prefer to call by its original name of Pesach) fairly strictly – even the vodka in my freezer is kosher for Passover – I have a few observations about the ridiculous, evil, and idiotic dechristianization campaign that has been taking place in America for the last few decades.
First, people who seriously observe Jewish holidays by and large, do not object to Christmas and Easter having a prominent, public place in American society. I have never met an Orthodox Jew (Hasidic, Modern Orthodox, or non-Hasidic hareidi) who were offended, bothered, or even annoyed by public displays of Christianity. Such Modern Orthodox public figures as Dennis Prager and Michael Medved (whatever their faults) have always spoken in favor of a Christian America. The same goes for Conservative Rabbi Jacob Neusner who used to write for this magazine. Indeed, the more religiously observant a Jew is, the less he is bothered by public displays of Christianity.
Second, there were more public displays of Christianity on Easter in the former Soviet Union than in today’s America. As a child in post-Soviet Moldova, I remember how seriously Easter was taken by local people – and this was just two or three years after the fall of the militantly atheist Soviet Union. You could literally feel something different in the air on Easter. Coming to America, the only public displays of Easter I would see were colorful bunnies with egg baskets on the front lawns of suburban houses in upstate New York.
Posted inChristianity, Jews|Comments Off on In Praise Of Traditional Ties
Liberals often accuse conservatives of dog whistling for race when they talk about law and order, states rights, lower taxes and welfare payments, Obamacare and the like.
I have a lot of sympathy for this liberal argument. Arguing on the basis of race to favor whites is to end your career in public life in the western world. It is simply not acceptable. So instead people who would prefer to live and work among their own tend to speak in code. They often move to the suburbs and to rural America and create white enclaves.
My position is that every people, every culture, every race, and every religion deserve the right to live in peace and on their own from other influences. I believe in nationalism for everyone.
I think race is a subtext in this Victor Davis Hanson article:
So Mr. Bundy must realize that in about 1990 we decided to focus on the misdemeanor of the law-abiding citizen and to ignore the felony of the lawbreaker. The former gave law enforcement respect; the latter ignored their authority. The first made or at least did not cost enforcers money; arresting the second began a money-losing odyssey of incarceration, trials, lawyers, appeals, and all the rest.
Mr. Bundy knows that the bullies of the BLM would much rather send a SWAT team after him than after 50 illegal aliens being smuggled by a gun-toting cartel across the southwestern desert. How strange, then, at this late postmodern date, for someone like Bundy on his horse still to be playing the law-breaking maverick Jack Burns (Kirk Douglas) in (the David Miller, Dalton Trumbo, Edward Abbey effort) Lonely Are the Brave.
But the interest in Mr. Bundy’s case is not about legal strategies in revolving fiscal disagreements with the federal government.
Instead, we all have followed Mr. Bundy for three reasons.
One, he called attention to the frightening fact that the federal government owns 83% of the land in Nevada. Note that “federal” and “government” are the key words and yet are abstractions. Rather, a few thousands unelected employees — in the BLM, EPA, Defense Department, and other alphabet soup agencies — can pretty much do what they want on the land they control. And note, this is not quite the case in Silicon Valley or Manhattan or Laguna Beach. The danger can be summed up by a scene I see about once a month on a Fresno freeway: a decrepit truck stopped by the California Highway Patrol for having inadequate tarps on a trailer of green clippings, just as a new city garbage truck speeds by, with wet garbage flying over the median. Who will police the police?
Two, this administration has a long record of not following the law — picking and choosing when and how to enforce immigration statutes, depending on the particular dynamics of the next election; picking and choosing which elements of Obamacare to enforce, again depending on perceived political advantage; and picking and choosing when to go after coal companies, or when not to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, or when to reverse the order of the Chrysler creditors, or when to allow Lois Lerner to destroy the credibility of the IRS for partisan advantage.
In other words, the Obama administration regularly breaks the law as it sees fit. So we wonder why a federal agency sends out swarms of armed security agents to the empty desert on behalf of a tortoise, when it could just as easily storm Jay Carney’s press conference and demand that the president promise to enforce the Affordable Care Act. Or start apprehending those who are not just violating immigration law, but also serially signing false federal affidavits or providing employers with fraudulent identities.
Posted inRace|Comments Off on Is The Subtext Of This Article Race?
In some sports stadiums, you take your life in your hands if you wear a jersey of the visiting team, while in other stadiums, it is no problem. I notice that in some stadiums, such as Green Bay’s, fans are safe wearing the gear of the visiting team.
I have this picture of people in the mid-West and the north of America being particularly nice. If this is true, I wonder if this primarily has to do with religion, culture, ethnicity, race, socio-economic status, education, amount of government welfare or what? I suspect one factor does not provide the whole answer. Take race, for instance.
In many countries in Europe, white fans in white stadiums are not at peace (Catholics hating Protestants and vice versa, many people hating Jews, low-class whites looking for fights with other low-class whites over sporting allegiances, etc). Despite this, I expect there’s less criminal violence in European sports stadiums than at African sports stadiums and Latin American sports stadiums.
I have this idea, perhaps wish, that people who go to church or synagogue regularly are less likely to riot and to commit crime.
On his radio show Apr. 22, 2014, Dennis Prager talked about his great experience attending a San Diego Padres home game but did not mention the obvious factor of race.
Dennis: “The fans there were so nice that it was tempting to root for the Padres. I have rarely experienced — this sense of calm niceness. I wonder if you can measure niceness and go to various stadiums? Compare Yankee Stadium fans with Fenway Park Fans with Kansas City Royals fans? The sandlot for little kids. I was touched.”
I wonder if the racial/religious/socio-economic make-up of Padre fans and Dodger fans and Angels fans is different.
I suspect that the whiter the city in America, the whiter the crowd at a stadium, the more law abiding it is. If the city and stadium population was dominantly Oriental, it would be even more peaceful. Generally speaking, Orientals are more law abiding than — in the order of the universal crime statistics — whites, followed by latinos and blacks.
If you talk to prosecutors in America, they’ll tell you that their typical Oriental defendant will say something like, “I wish to receive my punishment.” The typical white defendant will have a lot of excuses. The typical latino defendant will be proud of his crime. And the typical black defendant will blame racist police.
The kind of close-knit community Prager advocates is in inverse proportion to racial diversity noted leftist Harvard sociologist Robert Putnam, who was so upset by the results of his study that he didn’t publish it for a decade and only then with a pro-diversity spin. Putnam found that Los Angeles, the most racially diverse of America’s cities, had the least trust, meaning that people in such a racially mixed community tend to pull their heads in, go out less, cooperate less, and watch more TV. By contrast, the whitest cities such as Portland have the most neighborliness.
Steve Sailer (highly regarded by psychometricians) asked: “Can you guess which two cities lead the list of top 50 metropolitan areas in terms of the highest percentage of adults volunteering for charity? And which two cities came in last?” Lilly-white cities Minneapolis-St. Paul and Salt Lake City came in first, while diverse cities Miami and Las Vegas came in last.
A resident of Chicago, Steve Sailer worked with his community to do good things, but concluded: “Multiculturalism doesn’t make vibrant communities but defensive ones…”
Posted inDennis Prager|Comments Off on What Creates Civility At A Sports Stadium?
"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)
