* Continuing to pour resources into a war after sixteen years is an indication that the military-industrial complex really does govern the United States. The rest of us just live here.
* It’s interesting that the Pentagon was unenthusiastic about starting the war in Libya, but went along with the State / White House war fever. It’s sort of a One War for You, One War for Me deal. We’ll fight your war if you let us keep fighting our war.
Commie academic Justin Murphy writes:
Today, there is no longer any mass audience to speak to through dominant channels, overwhelming majorities do not trust mass media, and even the cognitively fragmented semi-mass audiences that remain will only listen to what they already think. Not to mention the masses probably have less power today than anytime in the twentieth century, so why bother even trying to speak to the masses? As a young academic, if I play by the rules for the next 10 years so that I might be respected by influential academics or gain access to regularly speaking on BBC or something like that, I would have sacrificed all of my creative energy for quite nearly nothing. As far as I can tell, today, the idea of biding your time as a young and respectable intellectual, to one day earn a platform of political significance, appears finally and fully obsolete. In one sense, this is already obvious to the millions who long ago stopped following mainstream media and long ago lost all respect for academic credentials; but in another sense, an overwhelming number of human beings continue to think, speak, and behave as if we are still operating in this old world, as if there is some reason to not say everything one feels like saying, as if there is some social or political or economic reward that will come toward the end of a respectable career of professional self-restraint. It’s easy for autodidacts and natural outsiders to say, “Duh, we told you so,” but this in no way comprehends or solves the really striking and politically significant puzzle that an extraordinary degree of human power remains voluntarily repressed for rewards and punishments that no longer exist.
Just as the self-restrained professional intellectual is shaped by the rewards of a media environment long dead, so too are they shaped by punishments which are little more than paranoid fears. Many academics and professionals believe that for the sake of their careers they must exercise the utmost discretion in what they put online, and they confidently tell young people to exercise the same discretion for the sake of their own futures. But the reality is almost the exact opposite. First of all, with some important exceptions of course, nobody gives a shit about what you put on the internet. Nobody with any power over you has the time to follow, and the few that do won’t care enough about you to follow or dig very much. In my now slightly above-average history of recklessly posting to the internet, before and after getting a competitive professional job, the worst that has ever happened is that nobody cares (and that’s most of the time). But the best that has happened, here and there, is that a lot of people care and appreciate it and new friends are made and all kinds of new paths appear, individually and collectively.
The self-restraining, strategic professional intellectual is not only operating on incorrect beliefs but beliefs which are almost exactly inverse to the truth: today, playing by rules of respectability is perhaps the straightest path to unemployment and impotent resentment, while simply cultivating the capacity to say or do something real (by definition prohibited by respectability), is a necessary (and sometimes even sufficient) condition for being genuinely valued by anyone, anywhere. Obviously if you have certain dimensions of poor character (i.e. you’re a racist or something) then reckless posting to the internet will likely, and perhaps rightly, lead to many negative consequences. But if you’re a basically decent person who just wants to push a little harder on what you really think, what you really feel, your experiences or your interests, or even just fuck around, the conventional wisdom still drastically overestimates the punishments and underestimates the rewards of doing so.
If these comments feel to you outdated because you think all of this already happened years ago with the initial rise of the internet, I would say you underestimate the quantity of human beings (and the qualitative intensities they could produce), who have yet to fully update their beliefs and behaviors around these matters. In some sense, the United States only just now, in 2016, elected its first President of the internet age. The fact that millions of people are genuinely perplexed and horrified by what is happening in this regard, is an index of how little the internet’s rewiring of power circuits has actually been integrated in the perceptions, beliefs, and behaviors of most people.
As the woman stormed through the Canadian medical facility, she was adamant: She wanted a white doctor to treat her son — not a brown one and not one with an accent.
“So you’re telling me that my kid has chest pains, he’s going to have to sit here until 4 o’clock?” she told an employee at the walk-in clinic in Mississauga, Ontario. “Can I see a doctor please that’s white, that doesn’t have brown teeth, that speaks English?”
The employee responded that the facility couldn’t suddenly summon a Caucasian pediatrician.
But the angry mother was steadfast.
“You’re telling me there’s not one white doctor in this entire building?” she continued. “Well, what’s the closest that you have to speaking English?
“Being white in this country, I should just shoot myself. My kid is part not-white, so can we get somebody to see him that at least speaks English?”
The Sunday afternoon incident was captured on video by a man — himself an immigrant, according to HuffPost Canada — waiting to see a doctor at Rapid Access to Medical Specialists in Southern Ontario, near Toronto…
A sociology professor from Ryerson University in Toronto said “everyday racism” is “beginning to resurface” in Canada.
I too feel more comfortable with people like myself, people who are white and speak English and don’t have brown teeth. Given that seven out of eight black doctors have benefited from affirmative action, not wanting a black doctor is a rational choice if you know nothing else about the doctor. Obviously, I would prefer a great black doctor to an average white doctor.
Would you go to a doctor who benefited from affirmative action?
Would you go to a doctor who you knew was admitted to medical school based on lower standards simply because of his ethnicity? It's an important question, because the left is clamoring for even more of it:
Too few women and minorities are entering certain medical specialties in the U.S., researchers say.
Diversifying the physician workforce may be key to addressing health disparities and inequities, Dr. Curtiland Deville of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, who worked on the study, said in an email.
I'm confused already. Is he saying we need more black doctors to treat black patients? Why can't minorities go to doctors of any race?
"Minority physicians continue to provide the majority of care for underserved and non-English speaking populations,” Dr. Deville added.
Non-English-speaking populations? This is America. The language of our citizenry is English. Why should we be concerned about the welfare of foreign populations?
Yet "in no specialties . . . were the percentages of black or Hispanic trainees comparable with the representation of these groups in the US population," he and his colleagues wrote in JAMA Internal Medicine.
It must be racism. It always is. I would add medicine to the fields of professional basketball and jazz instruction for investigations of racism.
Using publicly reported data, the researchers determined that of the 16,835 medical school graduates in 2012, 48 percent were women and 15 percent were minority groups (including 7 percent Hispanic and 7 percent black).
In 2012, women accounted for 82 percent of trainees in obstetrics and gynecology and for 75 percent of pediatrics trainees. Women also accounted for more than half of all trainees in dermatology, family medicine, pathology, and psychiatry – but for only 14 percent of trainees in orthopedics.
So there is sexism at work as well! It looks as though there is a conspiracy to keep men out of OB-GYN. Or is it a choice? Is gynecology simply one of the jobs men won't do?
Among black trainees, family medicine and obstetrics and gynecology were top picks, while otolaryngology (ear, nose and throat) was least favorite. Among Hispanic trainees, top picks were psychiatry, family medicine, obstetrics and gynecology and pediatrics, while ophthalmology was least favorite.
This is very important to know.
What's needed to increase diversity in medical specialties? “First is the need to increase the available pipeline of diverse medical students,” Dr. Deville said.
Guess what: there is no "pipeline." Blacks are not tar sands in Alberta. This is code for "lower standards for affirmative action." This brings me back to my question: would you go to a doctor who you knew was admitted to medical school using lower standards?
My guess is that most people wouldn't. But by lowering standards, all minorities get tarred with the same brush. That's why affirmative action is such a pejorative negative action for minorities.
Instead of trying to get more black otolaryngologists, why not simply figure out if there is a doctor shortage and recruit more doctors generally of that kind, without spending so much time worrying if too many white doctors are treating too many black patients or vice versa?
Steve Sailer comments on this article by Dana Goldstein: “When it comes to educations, “segregated” now means: not enough white kids. On the other hand, when it comes to adults voting, not enough whites is seen by the New York Times as a feature, not a bug. Granted, that’s kind of a logical contradiction, but when you’re holding The Megaphone, you don’t have to worry about being called out on minor issues like not making any sense.”
“America’s big educational problem is that it’s running out of white children. Our ideologies still assume that America is a white-dominated country with only a small percentage of minorities, but the reality is that whites are rapidly heading toward being a minority too. So theories of solving the problems of blacks and Hispanics by diluting their troubles in the great mass of white children are out of date.”
COMMENTS:
* It’s only a logical contradiction, not a real one. If you look at it through the lens of race it makes perfect sense. You don’t want whites to have any political influence, but you do want their children to be terrorized by violent minorities when they’re at their most vulnerable age.
* This is a misuse of language by the (((author))). Schools are not “segregated.” That issue was resolved by the Supreme Court in 1954.
Properly speaking, integration and desegregation are two separate and distinct concepts. If Dallas is “trying ambitious integration programs,” then what the author is really saying is that Dallas is trying to use government power to force racial mixing.
Forced integration should be illegal under the First Amendment’s free association clause. But of course we no longer live under the Constitution, we live under a clique of elite busybodies who know what’s better for us than we do.
* Let’s put this together:
Fact #1 “The district’s student population is 93 percent Hispanic and black.”
Fact #2 “Racially segregated schools are overwhelmingly low-performing.”
And this is true in most major cities. I know about those black lady rocket scientists who sent us to the moon, but where is the next generation of people who are supposed to maintain our technological leadership going to come from? High schools in Brooklyn that used to churn out Jewish Nobel Prize winners now churn out barely literate thugs. As I have mentioned before, the general enrollment public high schools of Philadelphia produce zero National Merit Scholars – none, nada, zip. Most of the (mostly black) students can barely add 2 numbers together or write a complete sentence let alone excel on the SAT. How is this going to work in the future? Doesn’t this catch up with us bigtime at some point? You already see that, for example, the black run DC Metro system is on the verge of collapse. The rare competent white person who gets a job in the system gets pushed out because he makes all of his black colleagues look bad by comparison.
* The ugly anti-White animosity that animates the ruling spirit of the American Empire is given collaborationist fuel by White dolts who welcome their own displacement and dispossession.
* …my personal experience is that large populations of Hispanics tend to drag down the average level simply because they perform somewhat below average, but for the most part they don’t get in the way of higher-achieving (typically white and Asian) folks. So a largely Hispanic school might have mediocre average test scores and therefore look bad on paper, but it can still play host to a substantial minority of white and/or Asian students who take AP classes, earn high SAT scores, gain admission to good colleges, and generally get a good education out of the experience. And an appreciation for mariachi music.
By contrast, large populations of black students not only drag down the average due to their lower individual scores, they are also far more likely to contain violent and disruptive individuals who ruin the experience for others and make it impossible for more talented students to succeed — and would be particularly racist and hostile towards non-black students.
* Yes it is true that we are running out of low crime, high performing White children who can be sprinkled in amongst the Blacks and Hispanics, however, while the White children are declining in numbers, we are replacing them with even lower crime, even higher performing Asian children who can take over the same function. I’m sure their parents, who vote 75% the same as their Black and Hispanic fellow Democrats, will have no hesitation in volunteering their kid’s bodies to help the higher cause. We all just have to get past the misconception that there is some characteristic of only pink skin that turns tragic dirt into magic dirt.
* US demographics keeps getting worse, white fertility has been below 1.8 children per white female since 1965. Plus most of the immigrants since 1980 have been non-White, compounding the issue.
Decade – US Births … White Births
1950s – 40,500,000 … 35,100,000
1960s – 38,800,000…. 31,400,000
1970s – 33,400,000…. 25,200,000
1980s – 37,500,000 … 24,300,000
1990s – 39,900,000…. 22,950,000
2000s – 41,400,000 …. 21,200,000
2010s – 40,500,000… 20,000,000*
*projected.
25% of white Millennial females are expected to die childless at current trends.
* Magic dirt isn’t magic dirt. It’s magic skin. Get close enough to whites and your IQ will shoot up and your vile manners and thuggish behavior will become civilized. At least this is what liberals, Hispanics, and blacks act like they believe. What the blacks and browns actually want are the genes of the whites, so they can breed blackness and browness out of themselves, and what liberals want is for everyone else who’s white (besides themselves) to breed all the nastiness out of the blacks and the browns.
But conservative whites are not interested in sacrificing their quality of their descendants’ genes for someone else’s crazy and fanatical breeding program. Liberals assume that a such massive population mix will make everyone like the Swiss, except a little browner. But wherever race mixing actually takes place in real life, you always end up like Brazil, and your society is very stratified instead of egalitarian.
The problem is, the gap between the population pools of high-quality genes and the low-quality genes is too large to be overcome. Kids with IQs of 80 cannot go to schools with those who have IQs of 160. Kids who have civilized genes that make them polite, obedient, and productive cannot go to schools with those who have sociopathic genes that make them rude, criminal, lazy, and constantly disruptive in the classroom. Liberals keep trying to shove people together to create a ‘modern society that works’ while refusing to recognize they keep trying include population pools with high concentrations of genes that actually destroy modern societies.
* It’s hard to keep progressive ideology, as filtered through the cosmic medium MacArthur Genius Ta-Nehisi Genius Coates, straight these days. Are whites to blame for NAM dysfunction because they segregate themselves from non-whites, thus denying young black and brown scholars the magic learning aura that comes from white privilege, as alleged in Nicole Hannah-Jones’ articles on education for the New York Times Magazine? Or are they to blame because of their integrating themselves into NAM neighborhoods, i.e. practicing settler colonialism and dispossessing indigenous people of color (i.e. illegal immigrants) from their ancestral homelands?
One thing is clear: whites are to blame!
* There’s going to be a lot more of this sort of thing. The economy has come to the point in which younger whites cannot afford to live in big cities at all unless they move into cheaper black and Mexican areas. I predict the next decade is going to see a profound demographic turnover in which blacks are ejected from northern cities entirely, and they’ll move south to places like Atlanta and turn them into massive super-ghettos more akin to the type of deadbeat cesspool cities you see in third-world cities like Haiti. Once this demographic change is complete, the US will have about a dozen or so big southern cities that are all like Detroit. Whites who want a decent life with flee these cities like crazy because their crime rates will skyrocket and their schools collapse into utter messes.
As for Mexicans, even if they work, the efforts of the elite to keep blue collar workers’ wages low means they won’t be able to afford the million dollar suburban houses of the whites in the coastal cities. They may end up joining the blacks in New Haiti-town. What’s more, any serious contraction of the US economy, which happens now and then according to natural economic cycles, will mean tens of millions of Mexican in the US will be out of work and on welfare along with the blacks, likely permanently once they get used to it ala Puerto Ricans (53% of Puerto Ricans are on welfare and don’t work), with whites expected to support them all in a bad economic environment even for themselves. I’m not hopeful for the future.
* I have personal experience with this. I work in a neighborhood near Boyle Heights and, one day, I (gringo) and my coworkers (also gringos) showed up to our small studio to find posters slapped on the outside walls telling us, among other things, that we were “colonizing” that neighborhood and that our “white faces” were displacing “brown faces” in the neighborhood. I seem to also remember the word “community” being used repeatedly in the same sense that Black politicians use it, where Whites can tell themselves that they’re included in it, but it’s obvious to everyone else that Whites are not included.
Three points:
1) “Anti-gentrification” protests have been simmering on the east side of Los Angeles for nearly a decade now. It’s been clear for a long time that they’re largely just anti-White, ethnic community-preservation protests; within the past year or two the fig leaf has been discarded almost entirely, though. This is really obvious because, if you look at who the “gentrifiers” are, they are maybe 50% White, maybe. Yet if you ever speak to the “anti-gentrification” protesters about what’s bothering them, the word “White” will usually come up within the first two sentences.
2) One of the comments mentions a protest of a coffee shop where the owner turned out to be Salvadorean. I’ve heard of lots of business arrangements in these neighborhoods where a group of (non-Hispanic) people wants to open a business catering to SWPLs and, in order to stave off protests, decides to use a Hispanic person as the face of the business, to show that gentrification is good for everyone in “the community”. Unfortunately for these entrepreneurs, they don’t get that these protests are not primarily about economics; they’re about maintaining community homogeneity and, in the eyes of the protesters, the owners of coffee shops, etc. are just operating for-profit fora for outsider communities.
3) I’m a little torn about whether this is ultimately good. On the one hand, your average White person on the eastside of LA is a political retard and these blatantly anti-White sentiments could potentially redpill a lot of them. One the other hand, the “anti-gentrification” protesters will almost certainly lose in the end and have their communities radically transformed, just as so many other communities across America are being radically transformed by seemingly-endless waves of newcomers who have little interest in adopting the extant culture of their new locale.
* I am a big fan of the German three-tier schooling system, which funnels pupils into three types of secondary education based on intellectual profiles – Hauptschule, Realschule, and Gymnasium, with further education/training into manual labor, technical apprenticeship/training, and university.
It’s an excellent, realistic system that produces workers whose tasks are appropriately matched to their capacity. It’s certainly better and more productive than the pseudo-egalitarian fantasy of “everyone can go to college” that is sold in the United States.
The real reason why we can’t have it in the U.S. is the racial implication of such a system. If we were to implement a system such as this, we will end up with high-end whites and Asians at universities, average whites doing apprenticeships and technical work, and blacks and Hispanics as the menial labor force… which is, by and large, what we have anyway, but under the German-style system the racial-education/employment division will be even starker and institutionalized. And, of course, that just won’t cut it with the prevailing establishment ideology human bio-uniformity.
What would have happened if a Trump supporter had shot a Democratic congressman and other Democratic Washington officials?
The answer is obvious.
The New York Times, the rest of the left-wing media and the Democratic Party would have made the shootings the dominant issue in American life. It is not possible to understand the left — and, therefore, the media and the current state of American life — without understanding how the left uses and relies on hysteria. Hysteria is to the left as oxygen is to biological life.
From the moment Donald Trump was elected president, America has been drowning in left-wing hysteria, all fomented by the media and the Democratic Party.
The charge of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign is hysteria. The claim that the president engaged in obstruction of justice is hysteria. As I have pointed out, the charge of Trump’s election unleashing hate and anti-Semitism, which dominated American media for months, was hysteria.
If Democrats had been shot by a Trump supporter, all you would be hearing and reading about is how much hate the Trump election has unleashed in America, how his election is threatening our democracy and how he is unleashing fascism.
But it was a not a Trump supporter who attempted to murder a Democratic congressman, Capitol Police officers, a House GOP aide and a lobbyist; it was a Trump-hating leftist who attempted to murder a Republican congressman and other Republican officials. And, for that reason, what would have been the dominant issue in America today is already a nonissue. The shooting took place on Wednesday. On Friday, the only article about it on The New York Times front page was about the “harmony” engulfing Democrats and Republicans in the wake of the shooting. By Saturday, there was nothing about the shooting on the front page.
The “harmony” issue is worth noting. As sure as the sun rises in the east, had a Trump-supporting fanatic shot Democratic officials, the Democrats would not have said a word about the need for “harmony,” or the need to lower the temperature in American political discourse. On the contrary, they would have greatly raised the temperature of their already blistering rhetoric. They would have attributed the shooting entirely to Trump’s “hateful” rhetoric having permeated conservative and Republican America.
But it was a leftist who attempted to slaughter Republicans, so it was Republicans who had to respond. And they did so by calling for harmony and lowering the temperature of political differences.
