Luke Ford | No sacred cows.

Pundits Who Changed Sides

Posted on October 30, 2015 by Luke Ford

I’m reading an interesting thread on Steve Sailer:

* It seems as if English pundits change their views more than American pundits. My vague impression is that it’s a pretty standard move in British press circles for a columnist to change sides: e.g., Paul Johnson, Christopher Hitchens, and a lot of people who aren’t as well known in America.
* Weren’t all the original neo-cons (Kristol and Podhoretz srs. etc.) American pundits who changed sides?

From one perspective, Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz and the neo-cons changed from the left to the right, but on another perspective, they stayed loyal to their team — Jews. They just changed their choice in which American political party was best for Jews.

According to Steve Sailer: "The greatest trick the intelligent ever pulled was convincing the world intelligence doesn't exist."

Sailer wrote: "Jewish intellectuals have a tendency that on any topic related to Jews, they tend to think baroquely many steps down the line. Thus, the full panoply of the subjects that have been assumed to be bad-for-the-Jews and therefore ruled out of discussion in polite society is breathtakingly broad — for example, IQ has been driven out of the media in large part because it is feared that mentioning that Jews have higher average IQs would lead, many steps down the line, to pogroms."

Sailer wrote:

To quantify the statement that "Jews are a small group, but influential in their areas of concentration," in 2009, the Atlantic Monthly came up with a list of the top 50 opinion pundits: half are of Jewish background.
Over 1/3rd of the 2009 Forbes 400 are of Jewish background, according to the Jewish Telegraph Agency's reporter who covers Jewish philanthropy.
Joel Stein of the LA Times found in 2007 that people of Jewish background hold a large majority of the most powerful positions in Hollywood.
This is not to say that influential Jews are at all united in what they favor. On the other hand, it is more or less true that Jews hold something of a veto over what topics are considered appropriate for discussion in the press, Jewish influence itself being the most obvious example of a topic that is off the table in polite society.

John Derbyshire wrote: "I can absolutely assure you that anyone who made general, mildly negative, remarks about Jews would NOT—not ever again—be published in the Wall Street Journal opinion pages, The Weekly Standard, National Review, The New York Sun, The New York Post, or The Washington Times. I know the actual people, the editors, involved here, and I can assert this confidently."

Posted in Jews | Comments Off

The Great Weakness Of Republican Politicians

Posted on October 30, 2015 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* One of the reasons I trust Trump on immigration is that he doesn’t mind hurting the feelings of Mexicans. Candidates like Rubio and Kasich who are so concerned with not offending minorities are going to fold like a cheap umbrella the first time their policies are criticized. Seeking universal approval is a great weakness of Republican politicians.

* It seems as if English pundits change their views more than American pundits. My vague impression is that it’s a pretty standard move in British press circles for a columnist to change sides: e.g., Paul Johnson, Christopher Hitchens, and a lot of people who aren’t as well known in America.

* The real danger is when a candidate doesn’t want to hurt the feelings of his major contributors. Many of these candidates are pro-immigration less due to PC than the influence of business interests. Fortunately, Trump is self-funding, which gives him a certain degree of autonomy. He’s also politically incorrect, unlike Sanders.

Trump has come out 5 times against the H1b – in his position paper, twice on Twitter, in this recent Breitbart interview, and during his rally in Nevada. He also says that only foreign H1bs he wants are the graduates of Ivy league schools (whose numbers are trivially small anyway).

* I’ve grown to really hate my country, America. So many self-interested traitors seeking immigrant votes, cheap labor, or social status. Anti-whites control and run everything. Nobody will dare espouse explicitly pro-white views in mainstream discourse, but many will preach with smug self-righteousness about how it is a moral imperative for whites to be replaced and for the world to become a non-white planet. California girls used to be regarded as some of the most beautiful women in the world, but today that state is overrun by endless waves of brown masses. There’s just no resistance to the rape and defilement of America. Even Jeff Sessions will only talk about immigration in economic terms. No mainstream figure will take a stand for white people.

Posted in Republicans | Comments Off

Genes & Culture

Posted on October 30, 2015 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Since you are convinced this is genetic, you are missing the elephant in the room about Asians who have been in America for a long time which is that they tend to assimilate. I’ve yet to see a “Tiger Mom” among assimilated Chinese mothers because when the become American, they don’t push their kids as hard, just like other Americans. That the less high scoring Asians also have different cultural traits also suggests one should look at culture as a factor. One can also look at the performance of Carbbean blacks against African Americans, where there can be a significant cultural difference despite a very similar genetic heritage.

Finally, people need to remember that the whites that came in on the 19th and early 20th centuries were not necessarily the cream of Europe and were often not welcomed by the indigenous whites of different ethnicities. There is a reason why people used to tell “stupid Pollack” jokes (poor IQ scores by Poles around WW1) and why the Irish often weren’t welcome, not to mention the “Hillbilly” culture of earlier Scots-Irish immigrants being portrayed as less than intellectually stunning, yet they are all “white” now.

Yes, genes play a role but culture does matter. A lot.

* The best predictor of the salaries a college’s graduates will earn is previous academic achievement, as measured by results on the SAT aptitude test.

* Having a separate–racially or culturally or simply in identity–elite group is very, very bad for a nation as the American experience with the Jews has shown. (I think basically it’s turned out to be fatal. Though in fairness a good part of that is that the white package of traits–cooperation, altruism, high-trust–which makes *closed* white nations so pleasant, is also easily exploitable by hostiles.) I have about as much desire to be lectured to and bossed about by Ivy educated Chews like Amy Chua’s kids–or the insane “mattress girl”–as i do by the Jews themselves–i.e. zero. Asians *may* integrate and see themselves as just “Americans”, better than the Jews–not having a 2000+ year tradition of explicit religiously mandated majority hostility. But … who knows? Bringing more and more of them over here, to purge smart white guys from tech jobs is unnecessary, dangerous and wrong.

But Steve isn’t cheerleading this–far from it, he’s explicitly outed himself as a nasty “citizenist who believes a nation belongs to–and its policies should be in the interest of–its citizens. Steve’s reporting the data. It’s up to you to ponder it and make use of it. Your comment was both clueless (about Steve) and low class.

Posted in Asians, Genetics, Race | Comments Off

The Best Tweets You’ll Read All Day

Posted on October 30, 2015 by Luke Ford

From Professor Monica Osborne:

Sitting in my pitch black office because the power is out and I don’t have a window. #academia

Dance like no one’s watching. Tweet like you have tenure. Isn’t that what they say? #Academia

My husband says he’s worked hard to get us out of this BH hell hole. I say just you wait until my midrash book comes out. #dollardollarbills

Instead of writing a resignation letter I would submit a print-out of all my tweets. #academia

Proof of my tendency toward reckless behavior: I taught Robert Mapplethorpe and Angels in America in the same week at Pepperdine. #BDSM

Thinking of when I was told they didn’t want to hire me for a Jewish Studies position because I’m Jewish. Which totally makes sense. #TBT

Neighbor’s 9-pt turn to get out of his garage woke us. But it was worth it to see him crash into his wife’s flowerpots and run them over.

Listening to my 2-year-old playing, I realize he has named one of his cars “sholom aleichem.” #judaism #shabbat

My husband wants another baby. I want a Tesla. Let the negotiations begin. #family

Prospective students visiting my class say they’re looking for a place that will uphold Christian values. Then I teach Angels in America.

Posted in Monica Osborne | Comments Off

Jonathan Marks: BDS Nonviolence Provides Cover for Violent Allies

Posted on October 30, 2015 by Luke Ford

By Jonathan Marks

October 30, 2015

Since 2005, the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement has been on American college campuses recruiting students to join a movement to isolate Israel.

Much has been written about BDS and I will not revisit here the debate over its merits. Instead, I will home in one aspect of its character: its espousal of nonviolence. That BDS supporters call for economic, academic, and cultural boycotts, rather than for violence, has been among its most important selling points. As Corey Robin of Brooklyn College put it in a post challenging BDS critics, Palestinians “have taken up BDS as a non-violent tactic, precisely the sort of thing that liberal-minded critics have been calling upon them to do for years.”

But the nonviolent tactics of BDS may be nothing more than a smokescreen for its organizers’ real intention—to takedown Israel by any means.

Although the BDS movement is not centralized, the response of movement leaders to the recent increase in violence in Israel and the West Bank can illuminate what the BDS commitment to nonviolence means in practice. Consider the October 10 statement by the Palestinian BDS National Committee, which bills itself as “the Palestinian coordinating body for the BDS campaign worldwide.” Bear in mind that by October 10, the violence was targeting Israeli civilians, not only in disputed territories but also in central Tel Aviv.

That October statement, entitled “Solidarity with the Palestinian popular resistance: Boycott Israel now!” begins: “whether the current phase of Israel’s intensified repression and Palestinian popular resistance will evolve into a full-fledged intifada or not…a new generation of Palestinians is…rising up en masse.”

The Palestinian BDS National Committee, speaking for a movement whose mainstream acceptance depends on its commitment to nonviolence, concedes that the new generation it is praising is engaged in violence, then calls for solidarity via boycott. That is, the statement calls for boycott not as an alternative to violence but as a means of expressing solidarity with Palestinians engaged in violence.

Other organizations promoting BDS piled on with equally misleading propaganda. The U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel promptly issued a statement that began:

“Palestine is in flames. At this moment, racist lynch mobs are marching through the streets of Jerusalem, chanting “death to Arabs,” and hurling threats and insults at terrorized and bleeding Palestinian children and youth, left to die surrounded by dozens of Israeli soldiers, when they are not summarily executed on their way to or from school.”

This overwrought and misleading beginning is followed by the observation that “Palestinians are rising up.” With breathtaking dishonesty, the Statement suggests that the uprising is a response to the unprovoked killing of young Palestinians, rather than the real reason young Palestinians, cheered on by their elders, are getting killed: not while walking to school, but while participating in deadly attacks on Israelis. Certainly, some Israeli actions have been deplorable, but if Palestine is indeed in flames, the U.S. Campaign is propagandizing for those who have set it on fire.

Indeed, the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, in full awareness that some Palestinians are trying to and sometimes succeeding in killing noncombatants, chose to justify these attacks as “the resistance” and call for solidarity with the resisters. Here, too, the purported nonviolence seems merely a strategy to complement, not a substitute for, violent resistance.

This should surprise no one. Some of the most violent groups in the Middle East are BDS backers. First among the endorsers of the 2005 Palestinian call for BDS is the Council of National and Islamic Forces (NIF) in Palestine, described as a “coordinating body for the major political parties in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

The NIF coalition was formed during the Second Intifada (2000-2005), the period of violence to which the present violence is being compared. It includes under its umbrella such groups as the Palestinian Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Islamic Jihad, and Hamas that are committed to violence, including violence against noncombatants.

Posted in Israel | Comments Off

Let The Goyim Go!

Posted on October 30, 2015 by Luke Ford

Not a single oligarch is on our side. Consequently, there is no resistance to be had. Neocons are firmly in the drown the whites camp. We are the West’s terrible pharaoh, demographically drowning the Euros in an ocean of multiculturalism. Trump has a daughter in pharaoh’s house. But if he doesn’t succeed in getting us to let his people go, we will suffer 10 plagues.

Despite the shrieks against Trump from organized Jewry, Trump will actually get Jewish votes, especially from the Orthodox and from Jewish men.

A Jewish friend says: “Why do goyim so care about what some fraction of 2% of the population thinks about things? These are not the seventies. Jewish clout is in decline.”

Posted in Diversity, Immigration, Jews | Comments Off

Israeli Reality Series to Document Porn Star Jenna Jameson’s Conversion to Judaism

Posted on October 30, 2015 by Luke Ford

REPORT: A former adult film star will be the subject of a new reality series, set to follow her conversion process to Judaism.

The Times of Israel reports that an Israeli television station will film the actress, who was born Catholic and had a change of faith following her engagement to Israeli diamond dealer Lior Bitton.

Bitton sat down with the Walla Isreali news site and teased that the couple’s personal lives will be fully exposed to the camera, but in a different way than in Jameson’s past.

“It’s a bit stressful, because I’m not used to being in front of the cameras,” said Bitton. “But I can assure you there won’t be any ‘adult content’ in the show. I’m not going there.”

Jameson’s fiance described the upcoming reality series as “something like ‘Keeping Up with the Kardashians’” as the couple makes all of the necessary preparations for their 2016 wedding.

The untitled series is reported to air on Israel’s Channel 2.

Posted in Conversion, Jenna Jameson | Comments Off

Steve Sailer: NYT Tries to Reintroduce Readers to the Concept of “The Deep State”

Posted on October 30, 2015 by Luke Ford

Steve Sailer writes:

A cultural change over my lifetime has been whether it’s cool to believe in the existence of a deep state. There was first a big change from the 1960s to the 1970s, when handsome actors like Warren Beatty and Robert Redford, made deep state conspiracy thrillers.
The class connotations are important to recall: Conspiracy theorizing in 1975 was upscale, leftist, and sexy. After awhile though, it became downscale, like Randy Quaid in 1996′s Independence Day.
Here’s an NYT article that tries to gently introduce readers to the fact that practically everybody in Turkey is a conspiracy theorist, perhaps for good reasons. The reporter appear convinced that of course the deep state notion is useful in understanding Turkey, but he has to initially act like it’s some wild and crazy 1970s idea.

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* The first problem of the Deep State concept is one of definition, how is it defined and how is it different from typical elite or oligarchic machinations?

The second problem is that the Deep State concept implies decisions are still taken at the level of the nation-state. For example policies resulting from globalization are obviously not due to national cabals all independently agreeing to the same suicidal policies for the citizens and nation states. There is instead a Deep Globe of Davos men and women pulling the strings of the individual national marionettes in order to destroy the various nation-states.

One interesting fact is that is that the leaders of Turkey have not yet made the transformation from being national leaders to being Globalist marionettes. But after some amuse-bouches of EU subsidies and early benefits once accepted into the EU, the Globalist hope would be they could do an end-around Turkey’s nationalist leaders and support a new elite of Young Globalist Turks who could lead Turkey into the Globalist fold.

* Didn’t the Bourne movies reintroduce the deep state concept in recent years? The way I remember it, we went from deep state villains post-Watergate (e.g., Three Days Of The Condor) to secretive government types being generally good guys during the Reagan years (e.g., the Archangel character in Air Wolf). Then, the Bourne movies start during W.’s first term.

* So basically in America conspiracy theories have gone from signalling membership of the upper intellectual classes to being a pastime of Birchers and the loony left. So obviously nobody in the intellectual elites believes in conspiracies anymore.

I’ve fallen prey of that too. Except that my homeland (Italy) often brings me back to the ground. First of all, half (and potentially all) of the country is ruled by a secret cabal of powerful men with strong connection into politics and no reluctance to using violence to achieve their goals – known to the rest of the world as the mafia (but if you want to be sophisticated, you should distinguish between the main four regional mafias: Campania’s camorra, the most violent and fragmented, basically owns the city of Naples; Calabria’s ‘ndrangheta, which basically owns a monopoly on the import of cocaine into Europe thanks to its connections to Latin American drug cartels, and which controls all the illegal trade into Rotterdam; Puglia’s Sacra Corona Unita, which is the softest of the four and has diversified into renewable energy; and the one and only Sicilian mafia, AKA the Cupola, AKA Cosa Nostra, supposedly defeated after losing the “War of the Mafia against the State” in the early 1990s, or triumphant after getting Berlusconi elected in 1994, depending on which conspiracy you choose to believe).

Then there’s the Italian secret service, thrice disbanded for conspiring against the State (yes, literally; Wikipedia has a good summary under “Italian intelligence agencies”), the second of which followed the 1990 government admission that yes, Gladio was real, it had weapons, it had CIA backing, but no of course it wasn’t planting bombs in the 1970s when the Communist Party was on the brink of joining government (you decide whether you believe that or not).

Funnily enough, it was the second incarnation of the Italian secret service (SISMI) that forged the documents that “proved” Saddam Hussein had tried to buy yellowcake from Niger to make nuclear bombs, which the US and UK used to justify the war. When that came up in 2007 it led to the third disbanding and reforming of the secret services. I’m sure it has worked this time.

* I did seem to note though that the NYT writer seemed almost wistful with regret that there is no judicial means to jail wreckers that post anti-narrative writing onto the internet. That would make it oh so much more easy for the American Deep State. Instead we have to take a round about means of “non-platforming” and shaming dissenters.

Posted in Conspiracy | Comments Off

Young Adult (2011)

Posted on October 30, 2015 by Luke Ford

Ruth Ward writes: Being “independently successful” and self-reliant while waxing and preening religiously to “stay young” (as our protagonist does periodically throughout the story) may not be all that is necessary for fulfillment. In the end, these things may only be suitable for bragging rights and regret which comes too late. This movie succeeds in expressing an unpopular opinion which could keep most 20- and 30-somethings up at night. Someone who has built their whole life on this individualist “success” ethos and an aimless self-serving existence, foregoing a traditional family unit, encounters the realization of the emptiness of this life too late, and they have no choice but to cling to the failed fantasy as it slowly drives them into insanity.

Posted in Feminism | Comments Off

Ben Carson’s Greatest Weakness

Posted on October 29, 2015 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* A little late to the party but something Ben Carson said last night is quite telling (the question being what is your greatest weakness)…

“Probably in terms of the applying for the job of president, a weakness would be not really seeing myself in that position until hundreds of thousands of people began to tell me that I needed to do it.”

Campaigning for president–the travel, speeches, TV/radio appearances, social media politicking, learning the intricacies of policy, etc.–certainly isn’t for everyone. Not to mention actually serving as chief executive. Carson intuitively knows this job isn’t for him, if for nothing else he doesn’t have the eloquence or gravitas voters crave. But when nice, smiling whites have devised your presidential campaign from thin air, helped you sell your autobiography, donated millions, and written op-eds singing your praises–you’re going to start believing them.

The cuckold wing of the Republican base (one can’t blame the establishment on this one) is solely responsible for this mess. The promotion of an Affirmative-Action by well-meaning nice whites will inevitably lead to a bewildered and bitter Carson once the heat (from Repub. opponents, media, leftist pols, etc.) is applied, causing the inarticulate Carson to inevitably backstab his nice white supporters and cite inherent racism as the reason for his political failures. See: Michael Steele, Colin Powell, Condi Rice, etc.

* Donald Trump will win the nomination, and Senator Jeff Sessions will be his immigration point-man, as he is now. Trump scored points again, even though there was little opportunity to go into money-and-trade-related issues in his wheelhouse — as there should have been in a “business network” debate.

* BTW in his closing remarks at the debate Trump bragged about how he and Ben Carson had worked together to force CNBC to abandon its plans to run a 3-3-1/2 hour debate and limit it to 2 hours, with opening and closing remarks by the candidates. To my great surprise, chief moderator John Harwood took issue with Trump’s claim and falsely contended that a 2-hour debate was the plan all along. That evoked the moment during the second Presidential debate in 2012 when Candy Crowley managed to throw Romney off his stride by interjecting herself into the debate by siding with Obama on a particular issue. Here is the segment of last night’s debate:

“HARWOOD: Just for the record, the debate was always going to be two hours. Senator Rubio?

TRUMP: That’s not right. That is absolutely not right. You know that. That is not right.”

It turns out that Trump was absolutely right on this issue. What galls me is that Harwood not only had the arrogance to engage in a mini-debate with Trump but had the audacity to lie about the matter.

Ted Cruz called it right when he said during the debate that he doubted that any of the moderators in the various debates was going to vote in a Republican primary. I don’t know what the answer to the problem is, but I think the situation with the Republican debates is scandalous. Now that the Republican debates have proven to be real ratings successes for the networks carrying them and have proven highly profitable, you would think that the guys who run the Republican Party would read Trump’s “Art of the Deal” and use their leverage to secure a more non-partisan moderation of the Party’s debates.

Posted in Ben Carson, Donald Trump | Comments Off