Luke Ford | No sacred cows.

Is Ann Coulter Donald Trump’s Brain?

Posted on October 21, 2015 by Luke Ford

Roland Dodds writes: Then in walked Donald Trump. He wasn’t content to say immigration was bad for America or the economy, but framed it as a plot by criminal groups and governments to infiltrate America and undermine its institutions and society. When Trump said he wanted to “make America great again,” it wasn’t hard to decipher which group of people he felt made the nation weaker to begin with.

While Trump reminds us ad nauseam of his superior intellect, I would wager he has not thought long and hard about his current crop of positions. Anti-immigration rhetoric is nothing new on the right; a slew of prominent sites like American Renaissance and VDare have spent the last few decades beating this very drum. But these sites have a limited appeal beyond their immediate base of readers, and I doubt Trump would have spent late nights poring through articles disparaging immigration and migrants. These ideas needed a simplified, media-savvy repackaging Trump could proclaim and refashion for use in a political campaign. Trump unquestionably knew Ann Coulter, and her new book was just the kind of text Trump could use as the philosophical core of his campaign.

This theory is more than simple conjecture. Coulter recently opened for Trump at an event in Iowa, asserting themes about Mexicans that even the Donald wouldn’t mention.

Ann also stated in a recent interview that Trump borrowed heavily from her recent book.

“Donald Trump read it,” Coulter said during the videotaped interview, held in a small side room where this reporter happened to walk in and film without objection at the Politicon conference at the Los Angeles Convention Center. “So you’re gonna understand everything that’s happening over the next year if you read it. It’s where he got that spicy stuff on Mexican rapists.”

Obviously, most pundits claim their work influences figures of power, but corroborating statements made by Trump appear to confirm Coulter’s assertion. A few months back, Trump argued:

“The Mexican government forces many bad people into our country because they’re smart,” he told interviewer Katy Tur. “They’re smarter than our leaders, and their negotiators are far better than what we have, to a degree that you wouldn’t believe. They’re forcing people into our country. … And they are drug dealers and they are criminals of all kinds. We are taking Mexico’s problems.”

In Coulter’s recent book, she stated:

“Sending undesirable immigrants to an enemy nation is a war tactic, such as, in 1980, when President Jimmy Carter idiotically offered to take any Cubans who wanted to come to America and Fidel Castro responded by emptying Cuba’s prisons and mental institutions onto the Mariel boatlift. Today, immigration is again being used as a war technique by America’s enemies: Democrats. Instead of Communist dictators conniving to send their headaches to the United States, American liberals are conniving to bring them here– and then hand them voter registration cards. Third World immigration is a win-win for the Left. They can instruct immigrants on hating the country and get their housework done at the same time!” [Adios, America, pgs. 21-22, 2015]

As my college professors used to say, there is a lot to unpack here, but a rhetorical link is clear. Both positions pronounce a litany of conspiracies behind America’s immigration policy, but they share the inkling that nations, political parties, and specific ethnic groups use immigration as a political tactic against the American state.

While Ann may have fallen out of favor with the National Review crowd, she may now have the ear of America’s next president. It’s a long shot, but still a possibility. Coulter’s impetuous panache was never going to put her in office, but Trump’s recent success may have her visualizing a cushy government appointment in his administration.

Posted in Ann Coulter, Donald Trump, Immigration | Comments Off

Blacks Default On Their Debts, Whites To Blame

Posted on October 21, 2015 by Luke Ford

Summary: “Blacks defaulting on their debts is proof of white racism, in order to fix it we need more affirmative action and public housing in order to fix it.”

Link: …a ProPublica investigation found massive racial disparities in debt collection lawsuits.

That’s not only true in Jennings. The story is the same down the road in Normandy and in every other black community nearby. In fact, when ProPublica attempted to measure, for the first time, the prevalence of judgments stemming from these suits, a clear pattern emerged: they were massed in black neighborhoods.
The disparity was not merely because black families earn less than white families. Our analysis of five years of court judgments from three metropolitan areas — St. Louis, Chicago and Newark — showed that even accounting for income, the rate of judgments was twice as high in mostly black neighborhoods as it was in mostly white ones.
These findings could suggest racial bias by lenders or collectors. But we found that there is another explanation: That generations of discrimination have left black families with grossly fewer resources to draw on when they come under financial pressure.
Over the past year, ProPublica has investigated a little-known but pervasive shift in the way debt is collected in America: Companies now routinely use the courts to pursue millions of people over even small consumer debts. With the power granted by a court judgment, collectors can seize a chunk of a debtor’s pay. The highest rates of garnishment are among workers who earn between $25,000 and $40,000, but the numbers are nearly as high for those who earn even less.
Despite their prevalence, these suits remain remarkably hidden, even to people in the communities most burdened by them.

Why, it’s almost like structural racism exists and that we should take those issues seriously and create policy, like public housing, affirmative action, schooling, etc., that seek to break down those legacies. Of course, all those policies I just mentioned have either been eliminated or significantly repealed by the courts or for that matter by upper class white people sending their children to private schools or moving to the suburbs for the schools. There’s something of a solution to the debt problem, which is significantly reforming the laws allowing for punitive debt collection, but the real story here is the long-term structures that leave African-Americans without the ability to fight against debt collectors or even realize what rights they have, problems whites face at significantly lower rates. More on the structural side of this:

The Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District provides service to almost all of the city of St. Louis and the surrounding county. The bill is not usually a large one — the average monthly rate in 2012 was about $29 for a single family home — but MSD, unlike other utilities like electricity, lacks the power to shut off service to customers who fall far behind.
In 2010, MSD decided too many customers weren’t paying their bills, so it dramatically increased its collection efforts. It went from filing about 3,000 suits in 2010 to filing about 11,000 in 2012, more than any other company that year.
Most of MSD’s customers are white, but the suits were largely filed against residents of black communities like Jennings. ProPublica examined MSD’s court judgments against residents of lower- and middle-income neighborhoods and found that MSD obtained judgments in the mostly black neighborhoods at a rate about four times higher than in the mostly white ones.
When MSD sues, the debts can be quite small, even as little as $350. And the size of those debts may help explain why MSD files so many more suits in black neighborhoods.
ProPublica’s analysis of court data for Newark and Chicago found that the debts that led to suits in mostly black neighborhoods were, on average, about 20 to 25 percent smaller than the debts of residents of mostly white ones.
In the Newark area, for instance, when a company sued a resident of a middle-income white neighborhood, the average balance was $3,466; in a black neighborhood, the average was $2,628.
This suggests white consumers are, in general, better able to resolve smaller debts.

This is sort of thing that both reflects difference created over generations and creates difference that will last for generations.

Posted in Blacks | Comments Off

Ostracized Powerless Despised Minority Celebrates James Franco’s Bar Mitzvah In Atmosphere Of Oppression, Fear, Prejudice

Posted on October 21, 2015 by Luke Ford

This is why I converted to Judaism — to be a part of such courage and commitment. It’s events like these that make me proud to be Jewish.

From the Jewish Journal:

The actor’s belated coming-of-age ceremony was a prelude to what may have been one of the biggest mitzvah projects in history, serving as a massive fundraiser for Hilarity for Charity, a movement led by comedian, actor and frequent Franco collaborator Seth Rogen to inspire change and raise awareness of Alzheimer’s disease among the millennial generation.
A sold-out Oct. 17 variety show-style event at the Hollywood Palladium, which has a capacity of 4,000 people, was a hot ticket and included a performance by Miley Cyrus. In a phone interview with the Journal after the event, “Conan” writer Rob Kutner, who wrote material for the event, said Franco referenced the week’s Torah portion (Noach) in his speech, saying that as he’s only now become a man, he shouldn’t be held accountable for anything he did before. (Franco is known for some eccentric behavior, especially in social media.)
Another segment featured Rogen requiring Franco to have a “circumcision.” It was performed by actor Jeff Goldblum (going by the moniker “Rabbi Jeff Goldblum”), and — in a bit Kutner came up with — actor Zac Efron played Franco’s about-to-be-severed foreskin, uttering its last words, which included, “While you have the mohel, why don’t you have him cut away some of your eyelids so you can finally see?” referring to the star’s famously squinty smirk.
Malina Saval, an editor for Variety who was covering the event, called it “spirited, sweet and meaningful in places that one would not necessarily expect.”
“The crowd rocked out and danced the horah to Haim’s guitar-heavy rendition of ‘Havah Nagilah,’ Seth Rogen, dressed as Tevye, sparked a sense of nostalgia for anyone who grew up starring in their Hebrew school production of the play [“Fiddler on the Roof”] and over $2 million was raised for Hilarity for Charity, which provides care and support for those suffering from Alzheimer’s. Talk about tikkun olam!” she told the Journal via email.
While the event was a spectacle of a fundraiser, it also proved to be a chance for Franco — whose mother is Jewish — to connect to a tradition that he never really felt a part of before, according to Mayer (aka Rabbi Brian). Two weeks before the media-filled fundraiser, the actor stood with the rabbi in front of a Torah and chanted in Hebrew and English before a small crowd of people from Franco’s production company.

Posted in Hollywood, Jews | Comments Off

The Strange Case of Anna Stubblefield

Posted on October 21, 2015 by Luke Ford

Why does it feel like there are a disproportionate number of Jews in every form of societal insanity (as well as brilliance)?

Oy. Is this lady good for the Jews?

From the New York Times:

She told the family of a severely disabled man that she could help him to communicate with the outside world. The relationship that followed would lead to a criminal trial.
Anna didn’t want to keep her feelings secret. As far as she knew, neither did D.J. In recent weeks, their relationship had changed, and it wasn’t clear when or how to share the news. ‘‘It’s your call,’’ she said to him in the lead-up to a meeting with his mother and older brother. ‘‘It’s your family. It’s up to you.’’
When she arrived at the house on Memorial Day in 2011, Anna didn’t know what D.J. planned to do. His brother, Wesley, was working in the garden, so she went straight inside to speak with D.J. and his mother, P. They chatted for a while at the dining table about D.J.’s plans for school and for getting his own apartment. Then there was a lull in the conversation after Wesley came back in, and Anna took hold of D.J.’s hand. ‘‘We have something to tell you,’’ they announced at last. ‘‘We’re in love.’’
‘‘What do you mean, in love?’’ P. asked, the color draining from her face.
To Wesley, she looked pale and weak, like ‘‘Caesar when he found out that Brutus betrayed him.’’ He felt sick to his stomach. What made them so uncomfortable was not that Anna was 41 and D.J. was 30, or that Anna is white and D.J. is black, or even that Anna was married with two children while D.J. had never dated anyone. What made them so upset — what led to all the arguing that followed, and the criminal trial and million-dollar civil suit — was the fact that Anna can speak and D.J. can’t; that she was a tenured professor of ethics at Rutgers University in Newark and D.J. has been declared by the state to have the mental capacity of a toddler…
Anna shared this interest in disabilities: As a high-school student, she studied Braille and learned the alphabet in sign language. But as a junior academic, she would apply the mandate of tikkun olam to a different focus — the fight for racial justice. Since getting her Ph.D. in 2000, she has become a prominent scholar in the field of Africana philosophy, has published widely on race and ethics and has served as the chairwoman of the American Philosophical Association’s Committee on the Status of Black Philosophers — the first and only white scholar ever to have done so. ‘‘Our world is in shambles,’’ she wrote in ‘‘Ethics Along the Color Line.’’ ‘‘White supremacy is central to this state of affairs, and we cannot repair the world without ending it.’’
Her own family is mixed-race — she has two children with her ex-husband, Roger Stubblefield, a black tuba player and classical composer. For 11 years, she served on the faculty at the Newark campus of Rutgers University, whose student body is among the nation’s most diverse. Yet for all her work on behalf of African-Americans, she worried that she might be ambushed by the ‘‘habits of racism.’’ ‘‘Even in well-intentioned quests to be antiracist,’’ she wrote, ‘‘white people all too often invade or destroy the space of nonwhite people.’’ The same essay lays out what could be a thesis statement for her whole career: It is crucial, she wrote, for white philosophers ‘‘to wrestle with the horrors and conundrums of whiteness.’’

A Jewish friend says:

There is just so much wrong that is going on there. Like it is the ultimate distillation of what is wrong with our world.
A Thought Experiment: Suppose the Jews had collectively decided in the first Millennium that it sucked being a Jew, and that conversion to whichever was the dominant religion in the area was the way to go. Let us assume that the last identifiable Jewish community dies out by 1492. Would the world of today be a better place?
There would be no loss in the arts.
But in the sciences of the last 150 years there would have been a huge impact.
There still would have been a WW 1, since the Jews had absolutely nothing to do with it.
But still, it is hard to see how America would have ended up as sick as it now is without the Jewish do-gooders of 100 years ago through to the present. When a Jew leaves the Torah Corral horrible things happen.
This NYT Magazine story makes me want to vomit. Every element of it.

Chaim Amalek writes: “Here is the set-up for today: The Rapture occurs just as the Christian eschatologists say it will except ONLY the Jews are taken. So we end up with a world without Jews. First thing that happens is once they figure out what has happened, the arabs swarm over Israel. And then various arab armies invade to see who gets to control it.”

Posted in Abuse, Blacks, Jews | Comments Off

Republicans Are The White Party

Posted on October 21, 2015 by Luke Ford

Steve Sailer writes: Maintaining a Coalition of the Fringes isn’t easy, especially when the most colorful and entitled-feeling element in the coalition are African-Americans. The Democrats have benefited from positioning the Republicans as the White Party while stirring up anti-white animus. But the Democrats’ danger is becoming the Black Party. If you are an Asian, say, and you have to choose who to cast your lot with, the White Party or the Black Party, is your choice really that difficult?

The Democrats have benefited from the decline of the crime problem. But it’s recent explosion precisely in places where Democrats are pandering hardest to blacks — e.g., St. Louis, Baltimore, and Capitol Hill — indicates the problems Democrats will face in future decades keeping their black constituents from driving out their nonblack sympathizers.

Posted in America, Democrats | Comments Off

Arab: If Israel disappears, others will too

Posted on October 21, 2015 by Luke Ford

An Arab writes: Since 1948, we Arabs have been taught that all we need to do is get rid of the Jewish state, and ‎everything else will go well after that. Our dictators took full advantage of this idea. Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser locked up and executed his opposition members ‎using his famous excuse: “No voices are to be allowed except for those for the war with ‎Israel.” Iraqi President Saddam Hussein adopted the Palestinian flag and had it ‎printed, distributed and flown alongside his own flag, and even said, “Palestine and Iraq share the same ‎identical cause.” In short, we Arabs have put 70 years of our existence on hold while awaiting that ‎‎”glorious day” when we defeat Israel and “feed the Jews to the fish.”

But that day did not come, nor does ‎it seem to be coming, as Jordanian opposition figure Emad Tarifi once told me: “It seems the fish in ‎the sea are not betting on us feeding them Jews.” ‎

In addition, we Arabs have given our dictators carte blanche to impoverish, terrorize, oppress and ‎destroy us all in the name of “the great Arab struggle to end the Zionist entity.” The outcome of this has ‎been clear: While Israel made 10 new breakthroughs in cancer and cardiac treatments in the last two years ‎alone, we Arabs developed new execution methods. The latest is death by drowning in a cage, as ‎shown in an Islamic State group video two weeks ago.‎

We Arabs have wasted seven decades of our existence awaiting Israel’s demise. It is time to think of the future, and whether Israel’s “disappearance” should be our ‎ultimate wish.‎

Being the son of two Palestinian-Jordanian refugees, I find myself inclined to fear for the future. Regardless of my stance toward Israel, I have to think: What would happen if, one day, Israel were to disappear? While it does not seem feasible, it is the day around which entire Arab political, social and economic systems revolve. ‎

It is not only Arabs who want Israel gone. There are others who seek the same, for ‎example anti-Semites in the West. Just last week, neo-Nazis marched in London with swastikas and the Palestinian flag. The organizer of the march claimed it was a protest “by all of those ‎who have suffered because of Israel.” There are groups calling for a boycott of Israel “for ‎the sake of the Palestinian people.” There are countries whose entire foreign policy seems to revolve around opposition to Israel. We ‎Palestinians might have believed that these groups and countries actually care about us, but they take no interest in the fate of the ‎‎150,000 Palestinians being starved to death in Syria’s Yarmouk refugee camp, nor in an estimated ‎‎5.8 million Palestinians in Jordan (as indicated by a U.S. Embassy cable) who live as second-‎class citizens and are banned from government jobs and any form of state benefits while paying full taxes.‎

If these Israel-haters got their wish to see Israel disappear, what would ‎happen?‎

First, Israel is the only reason Iran does not yet have nuclear weapons. Iran could buy the ‎technology to produce them, or could learn it quickly the way Pakistan did. Why has Iran been slow in ‎doing so? Because it learned a lesson from the experience of Saddam’s Osirak reactor, which Israeli jets reduced to rubble in 1981.‎

Then, almost everyone, including George H. W. Bush who was vice president of the United States at that time, were furious ‎with Israel’s move. But 10 years later, when the U.S. fought to liberate Kuwait, ‎the situation would have been totally different if Saddam had kept his nuclear program — and the only reason ‎he did not was Israel.‎

Further, Iran already controls at least a third of Iraq and its resources through a pro-Iranian ‎regime. If Israel were to disappear, Iran would extend its influence into Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain ‎the next day, as it would not have to fear an Israeli reaction. Iran could then bring the world to its knees by reducing oil ‎production.

Iran is not the only evil power in the Middle East: We also have Islamic State, which has now spread across ‎Iraq, Syria, Sinai and Libya, with clear ambitions to enter Jordan. Islamic State has not entered Jordan yet, and this is not ‎because of any fear of the Jordanian army. After all, the Global Firepower website ranks Jordan’s army at ‎the same level as the Iraqi army, which Islamic State has defeated many times. Islamic State does not dare enter Jordan for one reason only — its fear that Israeli jets would catch up with it 15 minutes later.‎

If Israel were to disappear and be replaced by a Palestinian state, the Palestinians would most likely end up ‎with another Arab dictatorship that oppresses them and reduces them to poverty. We have partially ‎seen that with the Palestinian Authority and the “liberated” areas it rules. I regularly visit the West ‎Bank and have interviewed scores of Palestinians there. I can confirm that, as much as they hate ‎Israel, they still openly yearn for the days when it administered the West Bank. As one Palestinian told me, ‎‎”We prayed to God to give us mercy and rid us of Israel; later, we found out that God had ‎given us mercy when Israel was here.”‎

Posted in Arabs, Israel | Comments Off

Bridge Of Spies

Posted on October 21, 2015 by Luke Ford

Steve Sailer writes:

Almost three years ago, the Academy Awards gave the Best Picture Oscar to Ben Affleck’s Iranian hostage drama Argo to encourage making more medium-budget movies for grown-ups. Bridge of Spies, Steven Spielberg’s Cold War film about the negotiations to exchange Soviet spymaster Rudolf Abel for American U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers, is very much in the Argo tradition.
With Spielberg’s eye for re-creating the physical environment of his childhood years, a screenplay rewritten by the Coen brothers, and Tom Hanks as master negotiator James B. Donovan, Bridge of Spies might well be better than Argo. Yet, while the liberties taken with history didn’t much hurt Argo’s impact (unless you are a Canadian annoyed by the diminishment of the heroic Canadian role), the rewriting of Bridge of Spies’ leading man to make the role more suitable for Hanks’ famous regular-guy routine has left Spielberg and the Coens seeming a little furtive.

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* For all those mad at the United States for violating the sovereign skies of Soviet Russia, the offered explanation is that doing this, which was believed to have left many of our unnamed pilots in the Gulag who are not spoken of in Spielberg’s movie, had an important reason. Our “open” society gave Soviet spies access in a way that the Soviet police state kept our spies out. Our radars and air defense kept Soviet planes out of our airspace in the way that the big-winged Canberra recce bomber and the U-2 were not kept out, but as the movie points out, it was a close thing.

For those folks who for whatever reason cannot get this message, there is the message sent by the RB-47 Incident, where the Soviets shot down a recce bomber gathering radio intelligence in what we claim was international airspace above international waters, killing the intelligence specialists in the bomb bay and taking the pilots prisoner.

Jerry Pournelle has long claimed that “our people” performed a “wet job” on Soviet agents in Vienna. The Soviets did not get all indignant and tu quoque as in the U-2 incident, pounding the table, “You Americans think you are so virtuous, but you just committed acts of murder of our people!” No, they “got the message” regarding the asymmetry of the Cold War intelligence gathering standoff, and they stop molesting our aircraft. They were aware that their agents had free reign in the free countries and that they had a lot to lose if we quietly started assassinating them.

Posted in Hollywood | Comments Off

Would I Give Up Blogging For A Wife?

Posted on October 21, 2015 by Luke Ford

Luke: I don’t think I could take you coming every week, I’d be too jealous of your celebrity.

Friend: We are both celebrities in our own worlds. FYI, I’m not enjoying your Twitter style retweeting on fb. Don’t be such a twit.
Would you be willing to give up ALL social media for a wife?

Luke: No, unless she was hot.

Friend: Did you even have to think of that dilemma, or was it a slam dunk?

Luke: I thought for 5-10 secs.

Friend: You are not going to get a hot wife, because in your mind she has to be in her twenties to be hot, so it’s not happening.

Really hot women are for dating, not for marriage. For marriage you need to look for the beauty within, then your eyes adjust and you always see beauty in her. The best long term beauty comes from the heart!

Posted in Personal | Comments Off

What’s The Point?

Posted on October 21, 2015 by Luke Ford

All Jews (as well as all blacks, Muslims, whites, Japs, and all peoples and countries) are in a boat. If a tiny number of your people are hacking holes in the boat, and they are not stopped, we all sink.

I often get asked what is the purpose of my postings. In short, I would like for Jews to avoid being thrown into a pit of death as has happened countless times in our history. Thus, I think it is important that we comport ourselves in an honorable way and stop drilling holes in America’s boat.

David Flory: “The Jews with real power in the US and Europe are fouling their own nest very badly (not that they aren’t getting a lot of help from decadent white gentiles). The only races with genuine goodwill for Jews are Western European/Americans, and as they fade demographically so will Jewish power. At the same time, younger whites are going to be very angry about becoming a despised minority in their own country and will be looking for someone to blame. Israel’s nukes are only useful as a deterrent or suicide gesture, and without US backing it’s toast. So I think Luke Ford’s concerns are well justified.”

I want to start an organization called “Jews for Consistency.” We’ll monitor Jewish organizations to make sure that they seek the same things for Jews that they push on non-Jews, and if they don’t, we’ll point it out.

In other words, we’ll ask Jewish organizations that pose as altruistic (such as the ADL, the SPLC, and the Simon Wiesenthal Center) to follow the Golden Rule.

I support all groups organizing in their group interest, but they should be liable for criticism when their actions go against the general good of their country of citizenship.

I support nationalism for everybody (for whites, blacks, Gentiles, Jews, Japanese, Cubans, Croats, etc). I want all peoples to work out their national destiny free of outside domination. I never seek anything for my group that I would not want all groups to enjoy (except in zero-sum cases where I side with my group).

Typically, Jewish organizations, while using the language of universal moral principles, push multiculturalism on the goyim while often seeking the benefits of unity for Jews. For instance, every major American Jewish organizations support immigration amnesty for America, but none of them support the same sort of policy for the Jewish state of Israel.

If Jewish organizations want to protest America being a Christian country, then they should also protest Israel being the Jewish state. If Jewish organizations want to ban hate speech, they should first turn their attention to Jewish texts beginning with the Torah and seek to ban all anti-Gentile sentiments.

If Jewish organizations want to protest anti-Jewish sentiments, they should first protest Jews making negative comments about non-Jews. If Jewish organizations want to track down and persecute ex-Nazis, we’ll demand that they devote equal resources to tracking down Jews who participated in genocides. If being a Nazi is horrible, then surely being a communist is equally horrible and just a couple of generations ago, close to a million American Jews were communists and socialists.

Now, if Jewish organizations such as the ADL and the SPLC will be honest and say that they are ethnic advocacy groups, then we’ll pay them no mind. Every group should organize in their self-interest. What’s obnoxious is when Jewish groups push a multicultural agenda on non-Jews in the name of selfless universal moral principles while reserving ethnic solidarity for Jews.

If Jewish organizations such as AIPAC want to lobby for policies against America’s best interests, we’ll demand that they come clean about how such pursuits brought on the 9/11 attacks.

If Jews want to call anti-Semitism a mental illness, we’ll demand that they apply the same label to Jews who dislike Gentiles.

If Jewish organizations want to make Holocaust revisionism a crime, we’ll demand that they also support criminalizing any criticism of the conventional wisdom that Jewish scholars typically love to challenge (the crucifixion of Jesus, the Crusades, etc). Why should Jewish suffering be any more sacred than the suffering of other peoples? If Jewish organizations want to push for Holocaust education in schools, we’ll demand that this education be proportionate to the number of deaths in genocides, so that most attention goes to the genocides under Mao and then to the genocides, often carried out by Jews, under Stalin (such as the Ukrainian famine), etc.

If it is illegal for whites to have free association and to have white businesses, white schools, and white neighborhoods, it should be similarly illegal for Jews to band together. As a gesture of good faith, these multi-cultural Jewish organizations should push for Jews who own their own homes to take in black and brown homeless and to always have a requisite number of blacks and Mexicans in synagogues, Jewish schools, Jewish organizations, and Jewish events so that Jews can also benefit from the vibrancy of racial diversity.

As Jewish organizations trumpet Jewish accomplishments while maintaining a universalist pose, they should be honest and point out the shortcomings of Jews as well. All individuals and groups benefit from accurate criticism.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off

A Unified Theory Of Crime

Posted on October 20, 2015 by Luke Ford

Dr. James Thompson writes: The team outline a number of general issues which a theory of criminality must cover.

First, there are consistent race differences in aggressive, violent, impulsive and criminal behaviors:

Second, there are consistent sex differences across many measures of criminal behavior: men cross-culturally display greater violence than women

Third, criminal behavior is age-graded: escalates around the time of puberty and then decelerates in the early to mid-20s

Fourth, a small proportion of the population develops temperament and conduct problems very early in development, perhaps even during the ﬁrst year of life

Fifth, there are genetic inﬂuences across virtually every human outcome, including antisocial and criminal behavior, and account for about half of the variance in antisocial behavioral outcomes

Sixth, consistent variation exists across geographic areas (neighborhoods, census tracts, etc.) for measures of crime yet there has not been a consistently supported explanation for why certain areas report more disadvantage, disruption, and illegal behavior.

The authors explain the lack of a unifying theory thus: The lack of unity can be traced to the fact that for decades certain lines of research were censored from the study of crime. Evolutionary biology for example,has struggled to gain true traction in the discussion of the origins of criminal behavior. Mainstream theories of crime causation (which originate within the ﬁeld of criminology by criminologists) are generally silent on the idea that selection pressures across millions of years of evolution could have shaped the qualities of modern offending behavior.

In my phrase: criminologists have tampered with the crime scene.

The authors suggest using r-K theory to unify the understanding of crime: from the vantage point of evolution by natural selection,criminality is the product of individual variation on certain traits relevant to life history strategies. Natural variation is the key point in that it has resulted in some individuals falling further away from K than others. [] Individuals falling relatively further from K will exhibit faster maturation and lower levels of parental investment. Additionally, they will display greater mating output (i.e., more effort invested in mating, instead of raising children), higher rates of disease and shorter life spans.

The authors quote compelling work on early childhood detection: Around 5–10%of the population begins displaying antisocial behaviors very early in childhood (Mofﬁtt, 1993;Mofﬁtt&Caspi,2001).These behaviors escalate with age eventually manifesting as childhood behavioral problems, transitioning next to adolescent delinquency,and ultimately to crime in adulthood. This segment of the population was termed life-course-persistent (LCP) offenders. According to Mofﬁtt (1993), the proximal predictor of LCP offending was the experience of neurological/cognitive deﬁcits coupled with family adversities including physical abuse and neglect in the ﬁrst few years of development(although other environmental insults, such as prenatal experiences, could also play a role).

Career criminals (the usual name for life-course-persistent) are more likely to possess traits representing a faster life history(i.e.,deviatingfurtherfromK)in that they disproportionately originate from disrupted homes, evince deﬁcits in impulse control, express difﬁculty with emotional and behavioral regulation, demonstrate faster physical maturation, reach sexual maturity and engage in sexual behavior at an earlier age,and father a disproportionately large number of offspring (fewer of which survive and thrive). With time and age these individuals should be less likely to engage in long standing pair bonded relationships involving high levels of parental investment.

The figure shows that life-course-persistent people are frequently in trouble with the law (exceed the threshold of lawful behaviour) the average citizen sometimes, and abstainers never.

The authors work through their initial points, and show how a life-history perspective applies to each, using the same principles. Just as an example, regarding race differences in crime, Beaver, DeLisi, et al. (2013) reported evidence that once intelligence and lifetime histories of violent behavior were held constant, race differences in criminal justice processing outcomes were no longer observed.

Here is their summary on group differences: There will be group differences in the rate of LCP offending, such that Blacks will be more likely to show signs of LCP offending than Whites, Whites will be more likely to show signs of LCP offending than Asians, and males will be more likely to show signs of LCP offending than females. Conversely, Asians and females will be more likely to exhibit behaviors consistent with Mofﬁtt’s (1993) abstainer group. Once again, it is important to reiterate that these group differences will be subtle and that they only apply to the group.This means that offending rates are not expected to drastically differ between groups and that the offending behaviors of any individual may be inconsistent with the group’s behavior.

There is a lot in this paper, and since it is expositional rather than data-reporting, it is worth reading the text to go through the supportive data referenced under each of the six points above.

The authors are aware that their paper might seem to be a just-so story, and suggest some initial broad testable predictions:

LCPs should be more likely to be born prematurely, to be born of lower birth weight,and to be exposed to noxious agents prenatally (indeed, Mofﬁtt [1993] suggested many of these possibilities herself). Additionally, LCP offenders are expected to reach sexual maturity more rapidly than their same-aged peers. LCPs will be expected to have more (unprotected) sex with a larger number of partners, yet fewer of their offspring are expected to be reproductively viable and survive until adulthood. The pregnancies of LCP offenders should be more likely to end in spontaneous (and perhaps intentional) abortions, miscarriages, or to experience medical difﬁculties and complications. LCPs, ﬁnally, should be far less likely to invest heavily in their children who survive to birth.

I like the general drift of this paper. I see it as strongest when it shows that, corrected for intelligence and life stage, many of the big differences in the 6 points are reduced, all falling under a common explanatory framework. I agree that mainstream criminology has averted its attention from any explanation of which it does not approve. Of course, my disapproval of improper forensics at the crime scene should not mean unthinking approval of this over-arching theory. I would like further hypotheses to be proposed and tested. As the authors say:

It is our hope that scholars will approach the question of criminality as a scientiﬁc query in need of an answer. This type of cold empiricism is far more likely to unearth truth and avoid the trappings of ideological debates. The litmus test for our theory will be whether or not it receives empirical support and our theoretical enterprise will rise, or fall, based on the evidence that accrues either for or against our predictions.

I look forward to the testing of the hypotheses, which I believe will energize criminology in general, and cut through the gluttonous mass of ad hoc explanations for criminal behaviour.

Posted in Crime | Comments Off