Moses Wouldn’t Expect ‘China’ to Change

Chris* writes: In fact, no rational observer since Hegel has doubted his incisive judgment that nothing fundamental has changed in China over a span of three-plus millennia (‘Lectures on the Philosophy of History,’ ca. 1830). Hegel didn’t make it perfectly clear whether it was “nature” (race) or “nurture” (culture), but reading between the lines shows he believed the former.

Therefore, scientifically, and also informally, the fundamental question about the intractability of “China” remains. Is it because “Chinese leaders” have never and do not now see any advantage to their own status and the situation of their countrymen, as writer Christopher Balding suggests? Is it merely their inscrutably obtuse pragmatism? (Baldwin ignores the vast sweep of Chinese history.)

No, the reason why the Asian (or Mongolid) mind won’t change is simply that it is incapable of fundamentally changing–that is how it is made or, in modern terms, is “wired.” Thus arises its notorious ANCESTOR WORSHIP and its well-documented, bloody disposition to kill anyone who steps spiritually or “corporeally” out of line. RESPECT THE ELDERS, it teaches every generation. Violation of the rules means ostracism or death.

All this implies that Caucasid and Negrid brains are also hard-wired differently, each from the other. In fact, modern science is on the verge of showing at last that this is CORRECT. Neuroscience can easily falsify this prediction simply by stepping out from behind its paralyzing “political correctness.” The answers it is likely to find will surprise it.

High-density EEG (“hdEEG”) and task-based response regimes can now establish precisely how the three races neurophysically use their brains in three different ways, with serious cognitive consequences. It is NOT A QUESTION OF SUPERIORITY but, rather, EACH RACE IS DEFECTIVE IN ITS OWN WAY. (We must pass by the supremely interesting question of precisely WHY the three races were each created DEFECTIVE.)

We also must pass by an adequate neuropsychological characterization of the Caucasids and the Negrids, except to assert that, in the deep theory of all three races, one can find the ultimate explanation for the palpable and quite obvious political-historical differences in their “achievements” over historical time. (Classic authors, such as Gobineau, and recent authors, such as John Baker, Nicholas Wade, and Kevin MacDonald, may be consulted, though each of them falls short of the fundament outlined here.)

Notwithstanding the obvious, it is still not likely that Bloomberg.com will appreciate this wonderfully deep problem rationally, given its uncritical Hebrew bias towards VICTIMHOOD and towards hiding behind race differences in order to disguise RELIGIOUS differences (specifically the 3,500-year-old Hebrew ethnic war against the goyim). We state our unbiased position: Hebrews are racially Caucasids and sons of Shem (see below).

This is the way it is, gentlemen: When one speaks of “China” one is really speaking of A RACE. When one speaks of RACE (if one refers to Hebrews) one really is speaking of a RELIGION and of a RELIGIOUS FEAR going back to Abraham. (To speak of these fears is not “racist.”)

Moses, however–blessed of God–was spiritually big enough to see through the smoke and did so in ‘Genesis’ with his story of Shem, Japeth, and Ham. One only has to understand him deeply enough.

Modern science indeed has the power to truly understand Moses and to isolate the biased (anti-mosaic), unreconstructed Hebrew position at last, while simultaneously UNBIASING modern science’s proclivity to avoid the highly important concept of the RACES and their actual neurocognitive differences. (To reconstruct the relentlessly faithless Hebrew mind and make it beloved of Moses again is a heavenly prospect.)

We can imagine what the arch-liberal Michael Bloomberg would think about these ideas. Hence, we can imagine what his employee-writer Christopher Balding will say in response–nothing. But perhaps we underestimate Balding’s love of reason and truth? Can Balding learn to read and comprehend Moses aright, and understand the scientific consequences of doing so? Happy day!

…The deep theory of the races, in addition to what has been suggested between us, is likely to demonstrate further that “race mixture” does not somehow make the defects of the pure-blooded races better. On the contrary: the result is worse.

Michael Levin suggested, as you may remember (on p. 57 of his book ‘Why Race Matters’) that definitive proofs could be obtained with modern neurophysiological and/or neurocognitive methods, which is absolutely true and MUST BE DONE sooner or later.

As for the general problem of presentation of the deep theory, given the hugely difficult problem of “political correctness” afflicting the entire world of politics as well as science as a whole, I would welcome your ideas and/or solutions.

Posted in China | Comments Off on Moses Wouldn’t Expect ‘China’ to Change

The NFL Controversy

Joe* says: I see no point in weighing in on the NFL controversy.

However, I observed when Trump first made his comments about firing players who took a knee that after decades of wrapping itself in the flag, and seeing the mostly negative response to Kaepernick’s protests last year, it was eminently foreseeable that to whatever extent the protests of the players are considered legitimate expression, the number of person who do not usually attend football games or watch them on television who might as a result of the protests, show up or tune in, would be significantly fewer than the number of NFL attendees and television watchers who would stop attending games or watching them on TV.

What we see in our society is that everything is political. Liberals/progressives/leftists try to quell conservative radio hosts by organizing advertising boycotts. They have done the same thing with Breitbart. And conservatives are not above this as well when looking at programming that ideologically they find offensive.

Here the NFL learned the hard way (although anyone really could have foreseen this even before the first Trump tweet) that it is best to steer clear of political controversy in that you will alienate some portion of your audience Even if the NFL fans who end up permanently deserting professional football is only 5% (and from the TV ratings appears to be much higher) that is worth hundreds of millions of dollars in television revenue to the NFL. They may have long term contracts now, but if networks are forced to give back ad buys for failure to deliver the promised audience, that will quickly make its way down to the players.

That is the reason that Roger Goodell (the son of former liberal New York Senator Charles Goodell) put out the letter yesterday that everybody must stand. Ideologically Goodell is sympathetic to the protests of the black players, but as someone who works at the behest of the owners to maximize profits for the league, he was in an untenable position This is the only position he should have taken immediately, instead of now after the damage is done. Look for him to lose his job and look to the NFL to have a heart to heart with its players explaining that their principles (or posturing if you feel that way) simply must take a back seat to keeping the customers coming in for entertainment spectacles. The players will get the message, as this is not a life or death matter of principle, but rather something discretionary that they want to promote.

Again this is not taking sides on whether Trump properly tweeted, or whether Pence properly walked out, or whether the protesters (and coaches and owners) were acting out of deeply held principles protesting something that should have been protested. It is simply an application of (1) how the NFL has branded and marketed itself, (2) the general propensity of NFL fans to be more patriotic (in a traditional sense of honoring the flag and national anthem) than non fans, (3) that the NFL is a business depending on maintaining a high fan base and viewership.

Posted in Football | Comments Off on The NFL Controversy

Dreammakers and Predators-Thoughts on Harvey Weinstein

Robert Oscar Lopez writes:

I don’t remember the date, but it must have been around June, 1996, because it was before I got transferred to Miami Beach the following October. It was sunny and hot out, because I remember wearing loose-fitting shorts, sandals, and a T-shirt. It was Nickelodeon, the Manhattan office, and in the 1990s “casual” wear meant dressing up like we were still en route to college keg parties. My Yale degree, fluency in foreign languages, and trove of original fiction had not really been the key to landing a job at MTV Networks and the famous tower of 1515 Broadway. I’d gotten the job because some employees of the company knew me as the cute little gay boy working the towel desk at the New York Sports Club Crowne Plaza, a few blocks away. I’d managed to get my resume passed on to some higher ups at MTV Networks, and I’d wormed my way in to an entry-level job.
“Pretty little slut boy,” was a phrase one lecherous homosexual used to use, in reference to people like me. “Young, dumb, and full of [—],” another slang term often surfaced. I had started in as a dubbing & acquisitions coordinator, so at least I was on the buying end rather than the selling end. If you were trying to break into ad sales, and all you had was your youth and ambition, the pressure was even higher on you to work around the usual rules of ethics to get ahead. Like many young workers in the company at that time, I was not “staff.” I was working under a temporary labor category and “promoted” to coordinator so I could get neither health insurance nor overtime.
I was lithe and had an athletic build, plus I was obviously Puerto Rican. The market niche in which I would fit was quite predictable. What went on, back then, explains the origination of my obesity later in life, after I got out of the Army. Once I was in my late thirties, a part of me hated everything that came with having a “good body.” I hated men looking at me. I hated being reminded of past times when all people saw was the shape of your torso. I started putting on weight and loving the anonymity and even invisibility of obesity. It freed me, for a time, of being targeted by creepy men. That was all okay until the doctor told me I was at risk of diabetes, so then with God’s help I lost a lot of the weight this year.
But if I can go back in my mind to the 1990s, before I reached the breaking point and decided, consciously, to become fat, I recall a lot of experience pertinent to the whole Harvey Weinstein controversy. On that summery day in 1996 a tall, overweight guy in management, who was in his late thirties, had noticed me when I first got there. “Noticed” might not be the right word. Apparently, from what I understand, he’d “heard” about me from some people who remarked that I cut a nice figure at that towel desk before someone scored me the job in MTV. This guy was “staff.” He was rich. He seemed to have come from a rich family. Like most of the men who were circulating in the TV industry and had professional favors to give, he was attracted to men; I think he was gay but many of them were bisexual.
He asked me to step into a conference room that wasn’t being used, so he could talk to me about opportunities in the company. I was dumbstruck and a little shy, so I didn’t know what to say. I was twenty-five years old. Despite having finished an Ivy League degree, I had been working at only $7 an hour for some time. When I started at MTV Networks it was $30,000 and that seemed like gold to me. I wanted to get ahead. I knew that for every job opening or opportunity in the industry, there were hundreds of posers, parvenus, and “climbers,” people trying to do whatever they could to get ahead. In programming, the area where I worked, people wanted to get into writing and creating their own material. That was all the big status. Like me, lots of them were creative writers who’d gone to college and dreamed of becoming storytellers, somebody famous, the postmodern version of an oracle. I knew I wasn’t going to be known to history as the next Thomas Aquinas. But maybe I’d sell a script.
I stepped into the empty conference room, which I remember had glass windows so everyone in the work area outside could see what was happening. The tall, overweight guy on staff stuck his hand up my shorts and grabbed my private parts. “Just let me explain,” he said. This was clearly the usual routine.
I knew he’d introduce me to people and get me meetings if I just stood there and let him fondle my genitals in full view of a whole office of people working. The complete contempt gay men had for other gay men in that era was stunning. If you were a self-identified homosexual in the industry, the assumption was you had no qualms about being used and sleeping your way to the top. You wouldn’t get as much blowback as straight women, and there was no risk of getting pregnant. But the downside was, back then, that you had to accept a public identity of a highly paid whore, one of the thousands upon thousands of gay men with low self-esteem wanting to overcome their lack of masculinity by making it big in entertainment.
By grabbing me in a conference room with glass partitions that everybody could see, this person was obviously playing a game. He wasn’t actually trying to keep anything secret. He was marking his territory like a terrier urinating on a fire hydrant. Other gay men could go after me if they wanted, but he wanted credit for being the first to draw me into the way things worked in entertainment.
I understand how women can feel oppressed and exploited by men in entertainment. As an industry it’s completely exploitative and fake, full of users and glorified pimps. But I can’t pretend that these women are all victims. Because I remember this moment very clearly–and I remember that I made a CHOICE. I knocked this man’s hand out of my shorts and pushed him off me. I didn’t care if that meant I would not have a huge future in the company. I had already accepted money for sex from disgusting old men more than once by this stage in my life. Forget being famous. I just wanted to wake up feeling like a decent, whole human being instead of feeling like a cheap piece of meat.
There is no way Harvey Weinstein could have racked up this much bad blood, unless multitudes of women decided in moments like the one I faced, to just let the guy get his thrills in the hopes of a big break. It wouldn’t be that hard. You just close your eyes, think about other things, and “reclaim” the whole episode like a badge of honor. Like the sassy widow in “Harper Valley PTA” you could just carry yourself with an heir of “honi soit qui mal y pense.” The thing is, you know what the game is. You choose whether to play the game or not. At the juncture when many of these actresses were faced with the choice of how to respond to Harvey Weinstein, they were young enough to have bright futures in other careers ahead of them, if they chose to get out. They could have reported him ages ago.
Harvey Weinstein’s conduct was horrible but he’s only one player in a very dirty game. If you don’t like what you hear about him, don’t just banish him from the game. You have to put an end to the whole system of shallow fame and meaningless glory. Boycott Hollywood.

Posted in Abuse | Comments Off on Dreammakers and Predators-Thoughts on Harvey Weinstein

The Guardian: ‘The rise of antisemitism in Australia has a distinctly American tone’

The Guardian:

A few years ago, I sat in the office of a rabbi in Perth discussing the state of the local Jewish community. The rabbi spoke with effusive pride at the academic success of the city’s Jewish high school, the warmth and charity of his small but sturdy flock, and the overall security and comfort in which the community lived and worshipped.

Then his tone became grave. He recalled how a short time before, a group of Holocaust survivors arrived at his synagogue for a special sabbath service and was confronted with neo-Nazi slogans and swastikas emblazoned on the walls of the building. The rabbi shed tears as he recalled the horror on their faces in what he termed “an attack on the souls” of people who had already experienced the limits of human suffering.

The community had previously experienced a campaign of attacks in the 1980s and 1990s at the hands of a white nationalist gang led by Jack Van Tongeren, that was also responsible for firebombing Asian restaurants and plotting to assassinate the state’s attorney general.

In other states, a Tasmanian woman, Olga Scully, distributed offensive antisemitic literature through letterboxes in 1995, while Fredrick Toben published material on his Adelaide Institute website denying material aspects of the Holocaust, including the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz. Both incidents resulted in successful actions brought by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, the peak representative body of the Australian Jewish community, under provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act.

These incidents, which represented the most visible and egregious examples of far-right or neo-Nazi activity targeting Australia’s Jewish community, were exceptional and were perpetrated by people on the extreme fringes of Australian society. But in the past 18 months, there has been a wave of activity and racist campaigns by new far-right groups.

Since February 2017, a neo-Nazi group called “Antipodean Resistance” has daubed synagogues with swastikas, and plastered posters across university campuses, public transport and schools with messages including, “legalise the execution of Jews” and “reject Jewish poison”.

Earlier this year, a group called Chemtrails Geelong distributed leaflets at five Australian universities calling the Holocaust a “gigantic political and financial swindle”.

Groups like Battalion 88 and the United Nationalists Australia became active online at the beginning of last year. The Dingoes, an Australian “alt-right” group with links to American neo-Nazis including Mike Enoch, host of The Daily Shoah, began broadcasting around the same time. Former Labor leader Mark Latham and Nationals MP George Christensen both gave interviews on The Dingoes’ podcast.

The notorious “echoes”, triple parentheses placed around names or words on social media posts to denote their Jewish origin, and Pepe the Frog, both ubiquitous markers among the American hard-right, began to enter the lexicon of Australian white nationalists. The usually civilised social media channels of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry have recently been targeted with messages containing the phraseology of American neo-Nazis. Suddenly a succession of posted comments ended with references to the “goyim” and “oy vey,” a snide distortion of common Yiddish words.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Australia | Comments Off on The Guardian: ‘The rise of antisemitism in Australia has a distinctly American tone’

How To Live As A Jew

I just read an essay, “How to Live as a Dissident.”

It reminds me of how Jews have often felt. You could change a few words around in this piece and it would fit the situation of Jews in vulnerable places.

In some circumstances, Jews are the persecuted. In other circumstances, we are the persecutors.

No people are inherently good or evil, superior or inferior. Our fortunes wax and wane depending on our make-up and our circumstances.

Life is a spiral staircase. At one moment we’ll feel grandiose, in the next vulnerable, in the next small, and in the next masterful. We circulate between these four states throughout our lives. The one thing we can do at any time is to increase our mastery.

At some points in my life, I’ve felt like a vulnerable 22yo Gwyneth Paltrow fending off Harvey Weinstein’s advances. At other times, I’ve acted like Harvey Weinstein. Most men would act like Harvey Weinstein if they could get away with it. A stiff prick has no conscience.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on How To Live As A Jew