Why Do Non-Whites Fear The Outdoors?

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

This could happen

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

African immigrants feared rape, killings, stabbings and drownings.

Latinos brought up darkness, crime and animals.

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

Comments at Steve Sailer:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

http://www.spps.org/equity

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Blacks and Latinos, incidentally, love horror movies.

* The reason for this is Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome.

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

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

* Three possible answers:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The banking mafia element want 85 IQ slave-cattle.

On the surface at least the agendas mesh.

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

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

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

Swimming lessons are extremely expensive in the twin cities.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ted Cruz Declines To Endorse Donald Trump

Comments at Steve Sailer:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Comments:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fake Coup In Turkey

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Who … whom? A false flag? Yes!

It wasn’t a successful coup. Indeed, it was the “keystone cops” at play. Consider:

1. Most coups (and certainly most Turkish coups) take place early in the morning when the plotters generally know the whereabouts of the leadership they are targeting (they are home in bed or having morning coffee), the TV stations and other communication nodes are minimally manned and protected, and opposition forces are not assembled much less deployed. THIS COUP occurred Friday evening when friendly police and military forces were on station and just in time for Erdogan to call his mobs into the streets to protest.

2. The senior leadership of the Turkish military were not involved in the coup. Historically, the senior leadership led the coups. Indeed, the coup leadership has historically vetted their actions with the CIA before acting to insure US support.

3. Erdogan says that the coup plotters missed him at his vacation resort by 30 minutes. In a decently lead coup, Erdogan would have been the first target.

4. Even with the alleged coup plotters having F-16 armed fighters airborne to attack the government, Erdogan arrogantly had his private jet fly him (with transponder on) to and land at Istanbul airport that was allegedly closed and under the control of the rebels. If he had not known the outcome beforehand, it would have been foolish for Erdogan to take to the skies, announce his route, and then land in rebel controlled territory. Or, this scenario might, from Erdogan’s perspective, have been calculated to enhance his image as the Big Man … brave and without fear. Indeed, two rebel F-16s were said to have shadowed Erdogan’s plane. Why didn’t they shoot? Who knows. In a real coup, they would have shot Erdogan’s plane down to secure the coup in this one action.

5. The failed coup was a pretext for Erdogan to purge all of his political opponents and their supporters. The purge is so massive that the lists and the purge had to have been preplanned. Erdogan and his supporters now have a free hand to loot Turkey in a massive transfer of wealth and power to Erdogan and his loyal cronies.

6. Erdogan has voiced that there can be no limits on his power nor any opposition to his regime because (his version of democracy) there is no such thing as a loyal opposition. Once the people have spoken, he is President for Life. Anyone opposing the will of the people or criticizing his sacred person are by definition against the people … traitors and terrorists … and they will be dealt with accordingly. Thousands upon thousands of traitors out there that have to be dealt with.

My take is that Erdogan is a narcissistic sociopath, but not a very bright one at that. He can’t even pull off a decent false flag operation because he cannot resist the temptation to have his fingerprints all over it. “See, I can run the country and launch a coup against myself … all at the same time. What power! I can save myself from myself and I hope everybody notices.”

* During that same silly FaceTime phone call with the TV reporter, however, he calmly told supporters to take to the streets and he would be landing shortly in either Ankara or Istanbul. Guess what? He did! That’s truly an accurate and bizarre call to make (pun intended) in the middle of a true coup. As a non-Turkish observer, that seemed off to me. Every action taken since Saturday further points to Erdogan staging the whole thing.

While he has gutted as much as possible Kemalists/secularists from the military, putting his people (and, yes, in the past some Gulenists as well) in higher-ranking positions, there are still a few secularists and perhaps they were sincerely following orders to go through with what they thought was a real coup. That’s the only part that looks real here.

If that whodunnit chart were to be broken up by who respondents politically support, we would likely see all that those blaming Gulen are Erdogan/AKP supporters, and those saying Erdogan staged the coup attempt are Kemalists/CHP supporters. The later have groaned about Gulen for years, but since the break with Erdogan, these CHP supporters are far more concerned with Erdogan.

Now it’s only Erdogan supporters who give a damn about Gulen, and how convenient now that with this “Gulen coup” they can remind John Kerry that Erdogan was, after all, democratically elected and hey since you like democracy so much and Gulen is undermining it, you’ll be contradicting yourself if you don’t hand him over…

I personally won’t lose much sleep over Gulen being wrongfully extradited, but it would be a clear injustice.

* The Turks are, of course, inherently prone to conspiracy theorising. My former girlfriend’s husband (both are Turks) believes that this was a conspiracy in which Erdogan, Gulen and the CIA were together!

On a more serious note, there are some serious problems with the Turkish Government’s version of events. Erdogan gave a TV interview in Istanbul about one hour before the coup’s soldiers started rappelling down their ropes into the Marmaris Hotel where he was supposedly staying. The fact that he wasn’t there was already public knowledge.

All I can say is that the law of unintended consequences applies here and that needs to be carefully considered. I personally doubt very much that Erdogan himself believes too deeply in the Islamist stuff. He is utterly corrupt as hell, loves money and his sons have pilfered billions from various sectors of the economy (including tourism). If Erdogan were to impose an Islamist state as one sees in other parts of the Middle East, the gravy train would come to a grinding halt and most of his property in Turkey will be of diminished value.

But here is the problem: Islam is like a genie in a bottle. There is a reason Ataturk created this secular regime and empowered the military to forcefully remove governments that did not adhere strictly to secular principles. Ataturk KNEW that the dangers of clerics is ever present in a society with a Muslim population exceeding 90 per cent. Once Erdogan has removed the Kemalist establishment and imprisoned/destroyed/executed it, the last effective checks on the more militant and “purist” Islamists will be removed. When some clerics start demanding imposition of Sharia law, how is he going to resist that? He might succeed in the short term but by waging a war on the secular establishment, he has already handed all the cards to the hard-core Islamists.

Where does this end? If you want to know, read about General Zia and Pakistan and see what it has become. I have never been to Pakistan but I have numerous friends who have. And I have spent plenty of time in Turkey. For all its faults, Turkey is a prosperous middle income country. if the clerics become ascendant, it is a matter of time before it turns into Pakistan.

Posted in Turkey | Comments Off on Fake Coup In Turkey

Silicon Valley: Smoking in ‘merica

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Google, under pressure for its low diversity numbers, addressed the issue by making groundskeepers and janitors employees instead of outsourcing the work.

Of course, Google is much more racially diverse than The New York Times, The Washington Post, Gawker and other media outlets complaining about the lack of diversity in the tech sector. This is because, for the media at least, Asians are no longer a minority because, well, because.

* Classic quote from Mason Harrison, the token Silicon Valley Republican whose strategy is to surrender: “… it almost seems like [Trump] has gone out of his way to smite Silicon Valley leaders on the issues they care about.”

No shit, Sherlock. Trump recognizes these Silicon Valley leaders are the enemy. He’s not going to pander to them, he’s going to attack them. That’s how politics works.

* More mass confusion on how the world works from the left. The same industry and area that they are constantly accusing of sexism, racism, and elitism is now the vanguard of leftist thought in business apparently. I have read other posts saying Trump opposing illegal immigration would kill high tech because forty percent of business in the Valley were founded by immigrants or the children of immigrants, despite the complete non-existence of Mexicans and Central Americans, much less illegal immigrant Mexicans and Central Americans in Silicon Valley. No one says that virtually all the people in the industry that come from abroad come from South Asia, East Asia, Europe, and even the white population of South Africa ( More on that later ) . There is also a strong libertarian contingent in the Valley and always has been and Thiel is part of that, just more outspoken politically about it ( He was a big backer of Ron Paul in 2008 and 2012 ). Blacks and Latinos are practically non-existent in any leadership, technology, or founder capacity in the Valley at all ( I say practically because I don’t know for a fact that the number is zero, but I suspect it is, notwithstanding the fact the NYT found a black libertarian in the valley who founded a wait for it…. non-profit, a tech captain of industry indeed! ).

In fact you could argue there are more white South Africans contributing to tech in the valley and elsewhere than there are native born American blacks. Just off the top of my head there is PayPal alums David O. Sacks, Elon Musk, and Roelof Botha, all major movers and shakers in the valley as well as Mark Shuttleworth, who founded the Linux software giant Ubuntu in the UK. I saw recently a list of the top 100 VC’s in the US from Forbes magazine with photos, what was there was overwhelmingly white and Asian, overwhelmingly male, ( Among the roughly one third that were Asian, only two were women ) and a few white women, no Barry’s, Michelle’s, or Loretta’s to be found anywhere on the list. When the NYT and other SJW’s get riled up about the workforce demographics of tech giants like Apple and Facebook they count the numerous Asian tech guys working in the valley as white for purposes of moral condemnation, but now because the MSM wants to blackball Thiel, suddenly everyone is the valley is a closeted liberal. I also love them calling Trump a technological ignoramus? And Clinton is a masterful tech guru? Well we know both Obamas, Barry and Michelle, were instrumental founders of the PayPal Mafia, that group that went on to found dozens of startups in the Valley, No, oops, I’m sorry, that was Peter Thiel and Elon Musk, two stale pale males from Germany and South Africa that did that, so easy to get successful tech entrepreneurs and affirmative action driven community activists who never practice law confused with each other, they are so similar.

* I wonder what the Silicon Valley bigwigs really think about IQ. They seem to be hiring more or less on the basis of it (specifically, talent at STEM-type fields).

The resulting employees have the expected diversity: besides whites, there’s lot of Chinese and Indians. Women are underrepresented and so are blacks and Hispanics.

So they’re hypocrites.

I support their right to hire as they please, but they need to realize that they can’t pass for “progressives” unless change their hiring practices.

* Two men vie for the title of Father of Silicon Valley: William Shockley and Fred Terman. They were both friends and proponents of eugenics. Terman’s father created America’s first IQ test, the Stanford-Binet.

* Re: 1950s.

1) Ordinary Americans’ purchasing power was never higher, before or since: peak purchasing power

2) Wages continued to rise

3) Jobs were so plentiful that you could walk out of one, and the next day get a new job, and for most jobs you didn’t need a résumé; and you could house, feed, and educate a family on most jobs. Also, if you took a job you liked, you enjoyed every confidence you would work it until you’d retire comfortably on its pension and benefits. And millions of American teens and college students worked ample summer jobs, often menial jobs that taught solid virtues

4) Unprecedented numbers of ordinary Americans could and did afford one-family homes; and rents were also very affordable; and atop all that Americans socked away solid savings – the complete opposite of today’s spreading indebtedness, insolvency, and rash of bankruptcies. Up to about 1970, banks paid depositors 5% interest on deposits – try finding that rate today

5) College tuition was affordable – no one I’d heard of had taken out a loan to send their children to college

6) Pro sports were still a game. Yes, they were businesses, but no league would even think to hire criminals, or to pony up considerable sums to cover up players’ or coaches’ crimes or disgusting behavior. Even media of that time – as liberal as they were – maintained a probity that makes today’s media foulness and enforcement of p.c. (which has replaced genuine, cultivated virtue with a fascist code) look pretty awful

7) Movies and TV were not vehicles for smut or foul language

8) There was nothing of today’s burdensome, intrusive, obtrusive Anarcho-Tyranny

9) Everyone could and did speak freely, without fear of being penalized, because there were no Diversity Commissars or Social Media Shaming mobs. No one then was so “offended” by another’s speech that he telephone-summoned the entire neighborhood to mass en masse at the “offending” speaker’s home. And someone disciplined, punished, or fired for a speech “violation” was unheard of

10) The illegtimacy rates of Whites and blacks were much lower; and many more dads had jobs than dads have today

11) Schools (and media) had not yet become Indoctrination Gulags. Campuses were bucolic, safe whereon civilized and genuine free, open debate flourished. A well-rounded education in Western Civilization was the norm, and so was pride in America and in being American. Student misbehavior received well-deserved punishment – and the overwhelming majority of parents supported such condign punishment

12) Children – including high school students – were still regarded, rightly, as children, and not as “young people” with “something to say”; and no student of any race ever read aloud – or even in private silence – a pathetic ethnomasochist screed

13) The U.S. enjoyed massive positive balance of trade (a negative trade deficit would have had Americans up in arms), solid, steady economic growth, and widespread domestic prosperity; national debt was low, manageable, and still under control; and GDP per capita was (if I recall correctly) at an all-time high, as trade protectionism kept American industries humming and kept Americans employed

14) For all those liberal “The Sky Is Falling” books & films you listed, there were others that countered or refuted their doom-&-gloom: Strategic Air Command; A Gathering Of Eagles; The Great Escape; Ben-Hur; The Ten Commandments; The Alamo; The Robe; Mister Roberts; The Longest Day; & many more such

15) There was none of today’s nonstop saccharine worship, elevation, importation or imposition of inimical Third World “cultures”

16) Common courtesy was common; there was none of today’s knee-jerk indulgence in smearing, in contemptuous accusations of “hate” and “evil” and “Hitler”; and there was no such Orwellian thing as a “hate crime”

17) Americans enjoyed broad trust in one another, and Americans had faith in the future and faith in the affordability of attaining the American Dream through conscientious hard work: everything was Looking UP!

18) Standards held: there was no Affirmative Action absurdity or any other race-based set-asides or preferences – to get ahead one had to make the grade, had to show that one had the goods and could cut the mustard

19) Perpetual Adolescence was not the rule, but was the extreme exception. There were no Trekkies, no mohawks, no piercings or tattoos, no goth or zombie “lifestyles” – and, aside from some military men and veterans, anyone who wore a tatto or had any part of their bodies (except for women’s earlobes) pierced was rightly regarded as gutter trash to avoid, or as an oddball to be, at best, tolerantly humored

20) The overwhelming majority of adults didn’t enthuse about, or endlessly analyze, or even much discuss pop music, or follow the antics of pop group members, or jaw endlessly or ludicrously emulate pop stars or pop culture: adults had more important things to do with their minds and their time, and so did children. TV/mass media had yet to completely monopolize people’s attention, time, or energies

21) Appliances and other goods were often repaired or mended, often in the home (thrift was still a common virtue); or you took your shoes to the shoemaker, you took your radio or toaster to the appliance shop; much less was then disposable. Mending work employed millions, often in their own Mom & Pop shops

22) If you’d told someone in those days there’d be a multi-decades-long, multi-mega-billions of dollar taxpayer-funded War on Drugs because scores of millions of Americans would abuse God knows how many kinds of illegal and prescription substances, he’d have directed you to an asylum: “Why would Americans want to take illegal drugs?!”

23) Welfare was still an embarrassment; welfare rolls were much, much shorter; and the number of taxpayer-funded welfare programs you could count on the fingers of one hand

24) The middle class was large and growing; today’s rump middle class verges on extinction. The wealth inequality gap was much smaller than today’s vast wealth gulf – so too was the power gap smaller, and political power was far more balanced between the top and ordinary Americans. Our elites were note nearly so remote from or so alien to us as they now are, because they were still of us

25) Infrastructure was still growing: the Interstate Highway System became reality; the Verrazzano Narrows Bridge; the World Trade Center. Today infrastructure crumbles.

26) Last but not least: Americans were still 90% White and both Whites and blacks were overwhelmingly Christian – the Protestant Ethic held, but soon would perform its swan song. That much homogeneity was its own reward, its own most widely-ever shared blessing.

Compared to today, the 1950′s and early 1960′s were an American Paradise, a genuine Golden Age. By every measure of civilization – except those of improved appliances and today’s improved (though far more costly) medicine – for the largest proportion of Americans ever, those days had today beat by several parsecs.

* Life in America prior to 1965 was superior for 95% of the people who were here then, almost all whites except the hyper-wealthy, and most blacks, and most of the others. The only Muslims here were a few oil sheiks, but the kind of Muslims we have now would probably have found it somewhat less to their liking. Orientals in general and Chinese in specific might have been a little worse off because no AA and no government programs for blacks and mestizos they can occasionally exploit and get rich off.

Homosexuals-they did exist then-had to keep it “on the down low”, and opportunities for the most promiscuous sex for them were probably much less. They were probably better off healthwise for it, because even with no AIDS, they had syphilis, hepatitis, and of course mechanical damage to the anus and rectum, and the surgeries for that were far cruder. Most homosexuals accepted the fact they were a tiny minority and that the rest of us did not need to know how they were or what they did with equanimity. Those that didn’t, a minority of a minority, had to move to a place where that sort of thing could be done more or less openly. Lesbians were more open as lesbianism “wasn’t a thing” in people’s minds. If two women lived together, well, that just made them friends, not girl-girl friends. Women could dance with other women all the time and no one thought of it. Plausible deniability was incredibly simple-unless they went around telling everyone they were lesbians, or were munching each other out on the front porch, well, they were not lesbians as far as anyone but other lesbians or beatniks or male homoisexuals knew or cared.

Illegitimacy simply didn’t exist for middle class people. A girl who “got caught” married the guy, some cuck she could talk into it or put it up for adoption. It could be “taken care of” if the girl had no scruples and enough money, but it never entered most girls’ mind to do that. The very poor and the very rich, then as now, did just what they wanted. If you were rich you sham-married a guy and divorced him and kept custody if you wanted, and there were always men who’d go along: if they were gay they’d do it for cover (they didn’t actually have to, you know, consummate the marriage-bloody sheets off the balcony are not a White thing, and even if they were….) and otherwise if just poor would take a pay packet or two to do it.

Middle class people did not use illegal drugs. Period. There was alcohol, of course, and women especially could get doctors to prescribe barbiturates and amphetamines easier than now, but overall there was much less abuse.

Pornography and “filthy” music and comedy records did exist-but were kept under the counter at any establishment and even their existence was unknown to most underage people and most women. Most men had either nothing to do with them or they would watch a “smoker” (a 16mm film of, almost always, one man and one woman “doing it”) with a bunch of frat or lodge brothers, fully clothed and usually puffing frantically on cigars, or-a littlemore common in mixed party company-would play “party records” like Rusty Warren, risque but not over the top filthy. Black and hillbilly raunchy records somewhat more explicit did exist and again were vended discreetly. (The famous outro to the Rolling Stones’ “Start Me Up”-’you’d make a dead man come’- was pilfered from 1930s “hokum blues” records, that one by one Lucille Bogan ((Shave ‘Em Dry,1935)). YouTube features most of these raunchy blues records for those of a musico-sexological bent.)

Certainly, because so many women were full-time homemakers, and because of the lack of computer automation, jobs were plentiful. Any white male, almost, and also any white female who wasn’t married or whose kids were grown, and any black of any intelligence and determination could find a job. They all paid a lot more in relation to housing costs.

You repaired torn or frayed clothes, most appliances and electrical items, and so forth, instead of throwing them out. Furniture was a bigger investment than today, if bought new, but it was all solid wood and held up a lot better. If it broke, you repaired it. People ate at home a lot more and women were expected to cook and sew well. The prospect of steady home cooked meals rivalled even the prospect for legit sex in the minds of many men contemplating giving up on bachelorhood.

In all, if you were a person with an animus against the social mores of the time, or could exploit things like affirmative action and the welfare-warfare state, you might be better off now. And if you had a medical condition treatable now not treatable in 1965, you are better off now. But most normal people would have been much happier in 1965. I know I would.

* I too was born in the early ’50s. It makes me sad that my children will never understand how great things were in this country before 2000 and how everything was ruined. When I was a teenager, summer jobs were yours for the asking. In my 20s through 40s, there was plenty of high-paying work available in my field.

Young Americans face a very bleak future. Most of them have no idea what’s wrong because the propaganda is relentless and effective.

Posted in America, California | Comments Off on Silicon Valley: Smoking in ‘merica