Luke Ford | No sacred cows.

2016 Top Democratic Donors Are Almost All Jewish

Posted on April 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

The scene was a J Street panel Sunday night about the 2016 election at the Sixth and I Synagogue in Washington, and the dialogue began when Roger Cohen of the New York Times asked J.J. Goldberg of the Forward (at 44:00) to explain the importance of “funding” to pro-Israel politics.

“Funding?” Goldberg gave a little uncomfortable laugh then said:

Up until recently I was under the impression that the Democrats had to go to Jews. You ask a Democratic fundraiser, where do you get the money from? “Well from trial lawyers, from toys, from generic drugs, from Hollywood. From Jews.” Those are all essentially Jewish industries… When you are raising money, you need to find rich people who are not right wing, and there are not– pardon me for saying this, there are not many rich goyim who are not right wing. Forgive me for saying that.

Then Goldberg said he had just read something “that knocked my socks off.” The Center for Responsive Politics issued a list of the top 50 donors to 527’s and super-PACs, and eight of the 36 Republican bigs were Jewish, and of the 14 Democrats, only one was not Jewish.

There was one non-Jew who was giving big money to the Democrats. That’s gigantic in the terms of American politics. If Bernie Sanders sets a new model, then this may change, and the weight of Jews in the political system may go down.

Goldberg’s candor about the Jewish “weight” on the Democratic side liberated the one person on the panel who I don’t think was Jewish, Stephanie Schriock of Emily’s List, the pro-choice group. She said “the money… is a big piece of this story and cannot be overlooked at all.”

She works with 50 federal candidates a year, most of them coming out of state legislatures or new to politics, with little foreign policy experience; and when the Iran deal came up they all had a lot “of angst” about taking a position. For the first time in her career, Schriock said, she was able to tell these candidates they could buck the Israel lobby group AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, was telling them to do: kill the deal.

As someone who has been doing this now for two decades, I realized that I had freedom as an operative, as a strategist to say to some of our candidates, which I, in fact, did: do what you feel is right here…. Because I think there’s enough energy around all of it now [meaning, all sides] than there used to be. So if you decide to be against the deal, there’s going to be folks that are going to be with you. If you’re going to be for the deal, there’s going to be folks that are going to be with you.

Folks means donors. Schriock concluded, “That was the first time I went, Wow, there’s really a change.”

She then explained how congressional candidates’ views on Israel are determined by the need to raise money from pro-Israel Jews.

I started as a finance director. I worked for candidates in the 90’s as their finance director. And I would come on a congressional race, I am a twenty-something kid who also knows nothing beyond the state borders, let alone overseas, and you thought about where you are going to go to raise the money that you needed to raise to win a race. And you went to labor, you went to the choice community, and you went to the Jewish community. But before you went to the Jewish community, you had a conversation with the lead AIPAC person in your state and they made it clear that you needed a paper on Israel. And so you called all of your friends who already had a paper on Israel – that was designed by AIPAC – and we made that your paper.
This was before there was a campaign manager, or a policy director or a field director because you got to raise money before you do all of that. I have written more Israel papers that you can imagine. I’m from Montana. I barely knew where Israel was until I looked at a map, and the poor campaign manager would come in, or the policy director, and I’d be like, ‘Here is your paper on Israel. This is our policy.’ We’ve sent it all over the country because this is how we raise money. … This means that these candidates who were farmers, school teachers, or businesswomen, ended up having an Israel position without having any significant conversations with anybody…

The papers were the same? Cohen asked.

“Very similar. Incredibly similar.”

For a country with 300 million people, that’s a cornering of the market, Cohen observed.

It’s astounding. And when I look back at it, it’s shocking. [Someone in audience applauds] Thank you. I agree. Jeremy Ben-Ami [of J Street] and I had the great pleasure of meeting each other during the Howard Dean campaign and one of the conversations we had was, ‘Oh my gosh. Is there really only one foreign policy on this?’ Because it felt like it. And that was the case.

Now, she said, there is more than one position on Israel. J Street opened up the conversation, though she hinted that others are now permitted into the discussion, too. She exclaimed about how undemocratic this process has been:

It’s incredibly important. Yes: this country had one very clear unmovable set of policies, and it wasn’t driven by voters. It wasn’t driven by voters.

Cohen asked what would happen if a candidate didn’t take the AIPAC position on Israel?

You thought that the money was going to be gone.

Just going to dry up? Cohen said.

“Yes,” Schriock said. These are candidates, she said, who “really have to get those $5000 PAC checks from the pro-Israel PAC in St. Louis.”

A few comments. The silence in the synagogue was about the unspeakable being spoken: the disdain on the part of the Israel lobby for popular opinion and the lobby’s use of money to dismiss the public by essentially bribing politicians.

“It wasn’t driven by voters.” This is the obvious story that our press has failed to do for the ten years since the Israel lobby was declared fair game in Walt and Mearsheimer’s expose of the power over policy of the lobby, an expose the Atlantic killed so it had to be published in England. Schriock said the power of the lobby began to weaken in 06– surely in some measure because of the Iraq war and Walt and Mearsheimer. As J.J. Goldberg also said, the Iraq war left the “Jewish neocons” with their pants down as a bad influence on the United States, and the Jewish community, which had opposed the war largely, was not happy about being put in that light. J Street formed in part to be the lobby of anti-dual loyalty Jews who would support the Iran deal even if Israel said, No way.

And that’s why J Street was so vilified. Because it shivered the monolith; and as soon as the Jewish community failed to speak in one concerted voice on Israel, it gave Democratic politicians an opening to conclude, as Schriock says, that if they took a position opposed to AIPAC they could still get “folks” on their side.

But again, Where is the press? Embarrassed. (Even Jewish Insider, which beat me on this story, softened her comments. And Roger Cohen mentions Jewish funding in a column on Israel policy today, but doesn’t dare say what Goldberg and Schriock just told him.) The financial role that Goldberg and Schriock are describing is mirrored in the Jewish role in the media. We’re all over the media because of education, wealth, and culture; but to speak of Jewish donor influence is to broach the fact that Mort Zuckerman owns the Daily News, or the Times is Jewish owned, or that Comcast is led by Jews, or that and all these folks are sympathetic or ardently supportive of Israel. People are afraid to say the truth. And P.S. Time Warner executive Gary Ginsberg wrote speeches for Netanyahu.

Did Schriock know what she was saying? Yes; she spoke intentionally. A dam had burst; Goldberg gave her permission. And she, like so many others, is deeply offended by this corruption. “It wasn’t driven by voters.” That’s starting to change. There are now non-Zionists lobbying on Capitol Hill. Some day one of em may even get a column in the Times.

COMMENTS:

* Goldberg left out unions, or are they all “Jewish money” too?

Sounds likes Clinton’s DLC sprint away from representing the interests of working people left the Dems little choice. Glad Sanders is changing that back to a more distributed funding base.

* You’re cleverly leaving out a bit of J.J.’s comment and adding a lot of stuff that isn’t there. J.J. said that there was a PERCEPTION that some neocons who were Jewish advocated for the Iraq War. This perception led some (clearly he’s thinking of people like you) to suggest that Jews were dually loyal, which hadn’t been heard since “Father Coughlin.”. Your response is to tall about how the Jews own the media, and you mention that the New York Times is owned by a (heavily, heavily assimilated) Jewish family, as if this proves that the Times editorial line, which is indistinguishable from a number of other liberal newspapers that are not owned by Jews, is somehow what it is because it’s owned by a Jew.

Your type of poison is exactly the reason why Jews can’t speak out about these things. You contribute, dishonorably, to our vilification.

I think that readers here think the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a work of non-fiction and that they’re primed to believe any conspiracy theory someone spins about the American Jewish community.

Jew baiting is wrong. Emulating Father Coughlin is wrong. Speaking about the fact the the owner of the NY Times is Jewish, as if the fact of his Jewishness proved anything, is wrong.

* Have you ever read the Protocols? I have. It is easily the dullest, most repetitious thing I have ever read, containing virtually no useful information. I forced myself to keep reading because of the continued reference to “the Protocols.” I needed to confirm that, in spite of a worthless beginning, there wasn’t anything interesting toward the end. The current primary function of the Protocols is as a perjorative label used by Zionist propagandists such as you to avoid any empirical evaluation, relying instead on proof by labeling. Pablo Christiani, blood libel, Protocols, Father Coughlin, conspiracy theory, etc. You throwing mud doesn’t alter the empirical reality.

* Because saying that the owner of the NY Times is Jewish as an argument for why the NY Times takes the editorial position that it does is an empirical evaluation, right? See, that’s the problem. You talk about an empirical evaluation. That’s not what’s going on at Mondoweiss. What goes on here is polemical extremist, not dispassionate science.

“Pablo Christiani, blood libel, Protocols, Father Coughlin, conspiracy theory, etc. You throwing mud doesn’t alter the empirical reality.”

What mud? Yoni said that Pablo Christiani, who advocating making Jews wear badges, forced Jewish audiences to listen to him give pro-conversion speeches and to pay him for the privilege, told the Pope to burn Jewish books, and used the force of both monarch and Church to do all of it, was not a Jew-hater. This is the level of dreck we have here.

And I bring up Father Coughlin because J.J. referenced him, and Phil cleverly left that out of his summary; J.J. said that people hadn’t spoken of Jews in the way some speak about them now since Father Coughlin. That’s why it’s a conspiracy theory. When you use someone’s religion as an explanation of all you find disagreeable, and you go further than that to suggest that people of that religion work together to subvert the country, that’s a conspiracy theory, not an empirical case. And it’s the very definition of bigotry.

Posted in America, Jews | Comments Off

Steve Sailer: People with normal American names — except Deedee — don’t really get the concept of being generous toward politicians. In contrast, other cultures seem to find American politicians to be bargains.

Posted on April 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

Link: Names with high donation medians
Below: Per name, the median of per-individual median amounts donated. Includes only names with at least 40 individuals. Excludes the candidates themselves.
Name Median donation
Akram $1000
Chaim $1000
Chana $1000
Dov $1000
Judah $1000
Mayer $1000
Mendel $1000
Mordechai $1000
Moshe $1000
Murat $1000
Navin $1000
Rivka $1000
Shlomo $1000
Shoshana$1000
Vishal $1000
Yehuda $1000
Javad $950
Ling $875
Meir $875
San $875
Zvi $850
Deedee $825
Jian $750
Kyung $750
Mehmet $750

Comments:

* I think there is a more pragmatic explanation than bribery.

$1000 isn’t going to get you much more than a picture with a presidential candidate after all. But for entrepreneurial immigrant strivers in the US, that’s just fine as it can be marketed to the bumpkins back home as quite an accomplishment. Just think of the bragging rights mom and the mother-in-law would have!

This snapshot of a local immigration attorney’s webpage demonstrates the point.

The site had remarkably amateur web design and was prole as all hell, but I’m sure these pictures worked just as intended.

* There is no greater honor in America than to be a victim of white racism. That’s why there are so many made up incidents. You counterfeit things that are valuable.

Adopting a black child is a loophole to the rule:

But, we knew, especially in the South, that a white couple with non-white children would draw a myriad of different reactions. There will always be the older white woman in Walmart who stared at us with sheer disgust, or the African-American mother who looked at us and just shook her head

Of course they did knew. I can only hope their racial victimization was as wonderful as they were hoping, planning, and expecting.

There is something beautiful and enriching being the only white face sitting and chatting with some of my African-American friends as my son gets his hair cut on a Saturday morning. There is also something wonderful in the relationship that is built as my wife asks a black friend on Facebook how to care for our little biracial daughter’s hair.

Some of your African-American friends? You have multiple? There is no way a white person can ascend any higher.

* The desire to be cool by being a white with a black baby was parodied by Absolutely Fabulous in 2004.

* My God.

This is a beautiful example of the truth in the kind of work people like Steve do. Could there be a data set that proves our gut feelings and stereotypes any more than this one?

These are the things you see when you take the red pill.

* These are not ordinary American Jewish names but names associated either with being ultra-Orthodox or being Israeli or both. Non-Orthodox American Jews (the great majority) give their kids typical white suburban names – Isabella, Madison, Alexander, Michael, etc.

* “Kate has been associated with feminist women since Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew.”

* That’s odd, since Taming of the Shrew is one of the most anti-feminist works in our common culture. Is this a case of feminists not getting the joke? I’m guessing the logic is as such: Shakespeare is good, and feminism is good, ergo Shakespeare is feminist.

Posted in America | Comments Off

The Rise Of Trump Studies

Posted on April 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

Politico: There’s a measure of irony in that Trump’s candidacy—grounded in an anti-elite message and regular bashing of the political correctness “crap” rooted on college campuses—is such a boon to professors. Though Trump flaunts his academic bona fides—the degree from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and an exceptional vocabulary (“I know words. I have the best words.”)—his almost proud indifference to detail and accuracy has made him perhaps the least popular candidate among the American professoriate in recent memory. None of the two dozen professors and student researchers interviewed for this story signaled they were a Trump supporter…

By research standards, the Trump phenomenon is still young, but fields are littered with the certainties it’s already shaken. For political scientists, Trump’s primary and caucus victories challenge the reigning belief that a strong party institution is the ultimate key to electoral success. For communications pros, his freewheeling use of social media and a penchant for saying things that alienate different segments of society shatter assumptions about what should kill a presidential campaign. Trump has even put his own imprimatur on the conspiracy theory playbook that typically targets powerful people and institutions. He has dropped the Obama birther shtick he peddled in 2012 in favor of a rhetorical dog whistle the size of a tuba that attacks far more vulnerable populations like Mexican immigrants and Muslims.

Trump’s candidacy is also a cannonball aimed straight at perhaps the most influential book on electoral politics in the past decade: The Party Decides, which argues establishment insiders ultimately determine who wins a presidential nomination, despite the primary voting process. Martin Cohen, the James Madison University political science professor who co-authored the book, has found his work the subject in recent months of an intense online debate over whether its findings hold up—or whether Trump’s success, in blunt defiance of his own party’s elders, is undercutting the entire idea. “Certainly, he’s had an impact on the way we think about politics and how they are supposed to work,” Cohen acknowledged, while still insisting that more study needs to be done to assess whether Trump is just an aberration who doesn’t change the fundamental findings spelled out in his book’s thesis…

Of course, academics like MacWilliams aren’t shying away from revealing some of their early findings. After all, the media beast is hungry and the opportunities for self-promotion are abundant while Trump’s campaign is still at the center of the political world. And there are numerous outlets hungry for their kind of analysis, from the Washington Post’s Monkey Cage blog to Vox, Huffington Post and Politico Magazine.
“I feel like a prostitute,” said Restad, the Oslo-based professor who earlier this month wrote an essay for the London School of Economics’ website about how American exceptionalism has returned with a force via the Trump candidacy. “If you put Trump in a title people will click on it.”

…Obviously, nobody knows what will happen at the conclusion of the 2016 election, but some are already focusing on what would be the ultimate research bonanza: a Trump presidency, perhaps the strangest and least predictable political development in American history. Last month, for example, University of Virginia law professor Michael Livermore published a commentary predicting Trump “would face huge challenges in effectively overseeing the executive branch and pursuing a coherent policy agenda.”
But the very thing that makes Trump so interesting from a scholar’s standpoint also makes him impossible to pin down conclusively: He keeps producing a steady stream of surprises.
“The way I like to describe it to my friends is to imagine we were astrophysicists and there’s this weird blob of ectoplasm that seems to defy all laws of time and space,” Oliver said. “We’re desperately trying to get our instruments out to measure it while it’s going on.”

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off

How To Find The Right Rehab

Posted on April 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

Here is one of the questions on paperwork hospital routinely hand out to those seeking recovery from addiction:

* Does the treatment program also address sexual orientation and physical disabilities as well as provide age, gender and culturally appropriate services?

Posted in Addiction | Comments Off

Ben Southwood: How far a child is allowed to walk on their own, then vs. now

Posted on April 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

Posted in Crime | Comments Off

VDARE: ‘Turns out the guys from Porky’s trying to look into the girls’ room were actually civil rights heroes’

Posted on April 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

Separated at birth:

Not from The Onion:

* Leon Wolf: “I block Trump supporters on sight. There’s no real point in treating them like actual people, I’ve learned.”

VDARE: Literally dehumanizing rhetoric is fine, as long as it’s directed against people who support Donald Trump.

* Alice: White privilege = being held responsible for the acts of your ancestors by folks who accept no responsibility for the acts of their children.

* Weird how collective punishment is an incomprehensibly barbaric notion up to the moment it’s turned against white people.

* Conservative Pundit: All I can say to a party contemplating Trump is: “Good luck winning the general without my genius punditry and my consulting expertise!”

Posted in Trans | Comments Off

Free Speech and Islam — In Defense of Sam Harris

Posted on April 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

Jeffrey Tayler writes: “It’s gross! It’s racist!” exclaimed Ben Affleck on Bill Maher’s Real Time in October 2014, interrupting the neuroscientist “New Atheist” Sam Harris. Harris had been carefully explaining the linguistic bait-and-switch inherent in the word “Islamophobia” as “intellectually ridiculous,” in that “every criticism of the doctrine of Islam gets conflated with bigotry toward Muslims as people.” The result: progressives duped by the word shy away from criticizing the ideology of Islam, the tenets of which (including second-class status for women and intolerance toward sexual minorities) would, in any other context, surely elicit their condemnation.

Unwittingly, Affleck had confirmed Harris’ point, conflating religion with race. In doing so, the actor was espousing a position that can lead to a de facto racist conclusion. If you discount Islamic doctrine as the motivation for domestic violence and intolerance of sexual minorities in the Muslim world, you’re left with at least one implicitly bigoted assumption: the people of the region must then be congenitally inclined to behave as they do.

There was a disturbing irony in Affleck’s outburst. Few public intellectuals have done as thorough a job as Harris at pointing out the fallacies and dangers of the supernatural dogmas of religion, for which far too many are willing to kill and die these days. An avowed liberal (who plans to vote for Hillary) Harris is the author of, among many books, the groundbreaking The End of Faith. Yet Affleck seemed predisposed to regard him with hostility, possibly because Harris, at least for some on the Left, has acquired a toxic reputation — one stemming from what amounts to a campaign of defamation involving, by all appearances, a willful misrepresentation of his work, plus no small measure of slipshod “identity politics” thinking.

Harris has been lambasted as, among other things, a “genocidal fascist maniac” advocating “scientific racism,” militarism, and the murder of innocents for their beliefs, as well as racial profiling at airports, a nuclear first strike on the Middle East, plus, of course, Islamophobia and a failure to understand the faiths he argues against. (This is just a partial list.) The result? Harris has had to take measures to ensure his personal security, with negative ramifications in almost every area of his life. “I can say that much of what I do,” he told me in a recent email exchange, “both personally and professionally, is now done under a shadow of defamatory lies.”

The attacks against Harris have emanated predominantly from a prominent yet persistent handful of supposed progressives (and their peons), among whom are the religion scholar and media personality Reza Aslan, and the journalists from The Intercept, Glenn Greenwald (famed for transmitting Edward Snowden’s NSA revelations to the world) and Murtaza Hussain. Lately, with Harris’ publication of Islam and the Future of Tolerance, they have even taken aim at his coauthor and friend, the onetime Islamist turned reformer Maajid Nawaz.

Nonetheless, Harris’ own words, conveyed through his books, podcasts, blog posts, interviews, and Twitter feed, bely the attacks, which can be as mean-spirited as they are groundless and muddled. They have tainted the debates we need to conduct about Islam and terrorism in particular, but, more generally, the danger religious fundamentalism poses to our constitutionally secular republic and to the largely post-Christian countries of Western Europe now confronting huge inflows of Muslim migrants. The sum effect is to leave us all less well-off, less safe. And certainly more confused.

The charge of insufficient religious expertise is the least substantial, but nonetheless worth dispensing with, given that it could potentially be leveled at any nonbeliever disagreeing with faith’s precepts. In a 2007 debate, for instance, Reza Aslan accused Harris of having a “profoundly unsophisticated” view of religion, and of relying on Fox News as his “research tools” – an assertion that can be disproved by just opening The End of Faith, a meticulously compiled treatise with 237 pages of text (in the paperback edition) followed by sixty-one pages of footnotes and twenty-eight pages of bibliography listing some six hundred sources. In this opus, Harris walks us through the many follies of faith (mostly Christianity and Islam), but one key message transpires: belief guides behavior. A self-evident proposition no reasonable person would argue with.

Which has not stopped Reza Aslan from doing just that. Writing in relation to Harris’ skirmish with Affleck, Aslan has stated that religion “is often far more a matter of identity than it is a matter of beliefs and practices” and that “people of faith insert their values into their Scriptures,” with other, often contingent factors causing them to act as they do. So when ISIS guerrillas behead their captives, justifying their bloodshed by proclaiming jihad and citing verses from the Quran, by Aslan’s definition we cannot blame the doctrine of jihad or the contents of Islamic scripture, but must seek out other motives. This is prima facie obfuscatory, because it involves discounting the testimony of the perpetrators themselves.

The “genocidal fascist maniac” moniker was born of a certain @dan_verg_ on Twitter (account since suspended), and retweeted by Reza Aslan and Glenn Greenwald. The tweet misquoted, without context, a line from Harris’s The End of Faith: “Some beliefs” — “propositions” in the original — “are so dangerous that it may be ethical to kill people for believing them.” Which suggests Harris might endorse the death penalty for thought crime.

Yet context is critical and deprives the words of controversy. As is clear in reading the text, Harris was discussing terrorism and how to deal with the likes of Osama bin Laden, a fanatically committed ideologue with the capacity and demonstrated willingness to order others to murder on the basis of his (religious) beliefs. (Harris was not, thus, proposing death for thought crime.) Following the last line cited above, Harris wrote: “Certain beliefs place their adherents beyond the reach of every peaceful means of persuasion, while inspiring them to commit acts of extraordinary violence against others . . . . If they cannot be captured, and they often cannot, otherwise tolerant people may be justified in killing them in self-defense.” (Italics mine.)

Note “If they cannot be captured.“ The beliefs in question? Not surprisingly, those of jihad and martyrdom, the primum mobile for the 9/11 hijackers (and so many other Islamist terrorists since then). As Harris went on to note, 9/11 proved “beyond any possibility of doubt that certain twenty-first-century Muslims actually believe the most dangerous and implausible tenets of their faith.” This is a truism, not evidence of an Orwellian mindset, and it underlies the U.S. government’s targeted assassinations of radical Muslim clerics and Al Qaeda and ISIS commanders, carried out before such people have a chance to harm Americans. Such killings are, to be sure, controversial, but the proposition that belief in certain tenets of Islamic doctrine can lead to murderous behavior is not.

Conservative Pundit: ‘Our conservative principles are absolute and universal, drawing fervent support from all races and nationalities’

Posted on April 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

* My favorite game is where my Democrat friends admit millions of D voters to the country, and I try to convert some trivial fraction of them.

* Sad commentary on the GOP’s failed outreach to naturally conservative communities like Mexicans and jihadis.

* Letting savages pour over your borders and rape women in the streets is like a shortcut to the moral high ground.

* Germany knows the true test of democracy is whether your country takes in millions of violence-prone Third Worlders.

* I hope the GOP can sleep at night knowing its likely nominee upsets our wise and beneficent global overlords.

* I bet if Trump were in charge we would have gone from gay-is-mental illness to illegal-to-not-bake-gay-wedding-cakes in a single lifetime.

Posted in Conservatives | Comments Off

Do White Lives Matter?

Posted on April 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

Rabbi Nachum Shifren emails his list April 14: In America today, there’s some things you just don’t say. I will say them…

I taught for 25 years in arguably the worst school district in the nation: Los Angeles Unified (?). I endured racists and incompetents of all colors. During my tenure standards disappeared, being replaced with the mantra of “diversity” and “cultural sensitivity.” One could sense a certain element of “pay back” from minority low and upper-level administrators against an entire educational system that once was the envy of the world. Gradually pride in America and American exceptionalism gave way to the chalkboard of revisionist history. Suddenly our Founding Fathers were “racists”, the bedrock of our freedoms and individual liberties, the Constitution, became a means of enslavement by the White Man.

As an inner city teacher, my students were Black with a large percentage of Latinos. As my career came to a close, increasingly violent confrontations surfaced. Tires slashed, graffiti-smeared car windows, and death threats dared. At one point, the failure rate of my classes was over 70%. Nothing to be proud of, despite herculean attempts to stem the tide: tutorials were offered to failing students, before and after school. My breaks during school hours never saw me lounging in the cafeteria. I remained at my desk for those that needed help. But when the day known as “back-to-school-night” came, out of 150 students, 4 parents dropped by, not to see what their kids were learning, or how they could improve academically, but rather to complain about their student’s failing grades.

“He/she never told me there was any homework!” was the common refrain.
“But she comes to class!?” one naive parent’s transparent dysfunction surfaced.

As I witnessed the increasing deterioration around me, and unabashed dumbing down of curriculum, I realized I was in a war zone. The pressure to comply with feel good prompts from administrators frazzled at having to explain how $18,000 per student per year is being wasted, became unbearable for many teachers. This explains the 7-year average turnover rate of today’s schoolteachers. Ever ridiculous demands to turn my class into “rappers” and “break-dancers” from one administrator were enough to challenge every ounce of an educator’s dignity and integrity.

What is here being described is the bitter experience of tens of thousands of teachers, trapped in a system of corruption and racism, not daring to expose the horrific truth of America’s inner city schools today. Americans cannot, dare not, confront the present reality that not just white teachers, but Whites in any capacity, are under the gun.

Among the Latino students in my classes, many if not most were illegal aliens. One day my principal, himself a Latino, asked me to come to his office immediately (it couldn’t wait till after school).

“Mr. Shifren, can I have the keys to your classroom?” he asked, unceremoniously.
“One of our students has accused you of threatening to shoot him,” he blandly went on.

I was incredulous. He was using the “terrorist act” against me, believing a straight-F student over the teacher. The “La Raza” community activists had schemed to transform an illegal alien troublemaker into a victim of white racism.

This scandal plays itself out daily in thousands of classrooms throughout the country. Very few teachers are prepared emotionally or financially (lest they lose their mortgages or find themselves black-balled by the politically corrupt school district, with their careers in shambles, and all the hype about “changing America” a pathetic illusion, destroyed in one instant on the alter of “students of color”) to deal with this reality. Meanwhile, white flight has turned our government schools into third world education-free zones, where if you made a surprise visit you’d never suspect you were in America.

Lakisha was my best student, a true American success story. I was shocked one day when she revealed to me, with tears in her eyes, that she “had” to leave the school.

“You’re doing tremendous work here, I don’t understand it” I said, saddened as I was dumbfounded.
“Other students are harassing me, calling me an “oreo”, she said. ‘White on the inside, black on the outside!'”

The one means of survival for teachers has recently been denied them: many districts, pressured by the catapulting rates of graduation (50% in L.A.) of “students of color”, have instituted an insidious plan to prevent teachers from expelling students for rowdy and uncivil behavior . Translation: when one of my students was sent to the dean’s office for stabbing another student, she was immediately sent back to class with the following note: “you may not deprive our students of an education!”

And so it goes. Racist apologists increasingly move to the forefront of society, blaming the plunging math and English scores on lack of “self esteem” due to White/societal indifference. Note: we never hear about our grandparents’ lack of self-esteem, coming to American from distant lands with the clothes on their backs. Sans ESL courses, no community activists, or racist incitement to quash their thorough immersion into the English language and american culture. Yet, their children went on to become doctors, lawyers, engineers, providing the bulwark of the most prosperous society in the world.

The last 8 years of the Obama era has seen a precipitous increase in the war against Whites in America. Any mayhem or civil unrest can find its source as determined by whistle blowers of “white racism.” Any pretext for rioting and looting is met with total silence where non-Whites are involved

Question: How have the communist and progressives succeeded in marginalizing White America, while allowing for a steady erosion of standards and accountability at all levels?

Many are the factions of useful idiots, a consortium of tenacious marauders along with the ACLU, a battery of civil rights lawyers, and the malevolent disgruntled, that have tied the hands of America, forcing compliance with Hussein Obama’s pledge to transform the nation. The obstacles are daunting: from local city councils, school boards, state legislatures and down the line to Congress and the Justice Department, the clock is ticking.

The examples of attacks against White America are many: Ferguson, the Confederate flag, the recent Supreme Court decision to count illegals in redistricting (the death knell of the middle class), the “Dream Act”, the wave of illegals storming the border, the refusal to come to terms with Islamic terror, the introducing of Ebola patients onto american soil, Common Core (it’s author admitted it was the antidote to “White privilege”), the outrage of the “New Black Panthers'” violence toward white voters, the issuing of drivers’ licenses to illegal aliens from Mexico and not requiring them to drive with liability insurance (if you’re white and you’re stopped without such insurance, your care will immediately be confiscated and assigned a $300 fine.) When questioned about the blatant unfairness of this policy, LAPD Chief Bill Bratton commented: “If you don’t like it, move somewhere else!”, and the mother of all deceptions, the documented illegal smuggling of Muslim “refugees” via UPS cargo planes and surreptitiously released into unsuspecting civilian populations without background checks, ad nauseum. Note: Christians in the Middle East are undergoing a genocide. Why are we not hearing about their resettlement? Answer: they’re Christians, let ’em burn in Hell! And burn, they are. Not one word of empathy from our Golfer in Chief. He knows that they will not fit into his narrative of transforming America, no expectations of raping white women, inciting violence among the middle class, voting for leftist candidates, breaking the treasury with welfare issues, housing, food stamps, etc.

The king coward himself, Eric Holder, disgraced his justice department and his sacred duty by whipping out the race card at every opportunity when black thugs were dealt with by the authorities. No amount of grand jury testimony about the facts would dissuade his racist agenda. Like some sort of racist cabal, one could expect herrs Sharpton, Jackson, and the NAACP lackeys to extend their carbon footprint to every city where a white officer had confronted black hooliganism.

All the while, Whites were raped, murdered, and harassed with flash mobs descending on parks and shopping malls, pillaging and destroying–it’s all been caught on film dozens of times, we know it, we see it, it’s there. Where is the opposition to this fascism? Like the deer in the headlights that they are, they will never say the truth: this is a war against Whites.

“OTM” has become a household term, sort of. Border officials warn of an increasing number of Other Than Mexicans infiltrating through the porous southern border. OTM, a.k.a., jihadists, The degree of nonchalance about this scandal can only be interpreted thusly: Only Whites and Christians need be concerned. The same government that is mandated to our security, is the one paving the way to another 911. And they ALL tell us to get ready for another major terror attack!
George Orwell must be sweating bullets in his grave….We know with certainty we’ll be hit, yet we’re perilized by fear: NOT of dying in some nuclear holocaust, not by having our wives or children raped or assaulted, not by a fifth column sworn to destroy us–no, we can deal with a certain level of mass destruction aimed at the heartland. Our REAL fear is identifying and stopping our sworn enemies: muslim jihadists and their domestic facilitators and apologists.

One thing is clear: if these mobs of haters and killers were white Christians, the embarrassing scene being played out before our very eyes would have been resolved yesterday. Let’s stop to think: the 911 hijackers were here illegally on visas that had expired. There are over 100,000 middle easterners, many from countries who are openly hostile to us, that are here illegally. We do nothing. Worse, Obama and his water carriers are planning on bringing hundreds of thousands of Syrians to America. Again, people who haven’t been vetted and are not suited to our culture, mores, and constitutional way of life. But let the American taxpayer foot the bill…those of still working our 2 or 3 jobs to stay alive. Their billionaire brothers in Saudi Arabia , Qatar, Bahrain and Dubai are not suckers, not like us. They refuse to take in the “refugees”, since they know the problems they’ll have to deal with. Ironically, their argument, “let them stay in Syria!”, is right on the money. Yet when Americans with sense utter those very words, they’re met with cries of “racism.” But the point is, the wave of Muslims washing onto our shores has nothing to do with “relief”, as the abandonment of the Christians in the Middle East clearly shows. The whole purpose is to first destroy the Republican party, and then to neutralize and transform America and its white population. Recent reports of “Black Lives Matter” folks creating havoc with Palestinians in Israel is another example of racism on display. And how are Black activists from Chicago, with the highest homicide rate in the US, highest unemployment rates, highest incarceration rates, able to waltz over to the Middle East and cause grief there? Answer: gotta address the Jewish racism. Not even a Kafka could make sense out of this nonsense….

There is no one to oppose Obama and his push to national (White) suicide. The Republicans, far from being a “loyal opposition”, have kowtowed to his every whim. Their cavalier attitudes regarding their treachery and abandonment of their core beliefs is on record. Obama’s, and the left’s intentions on bringing a massive Third World wave into America goes unopposed, as they’ve stymied the conversation masterfully using the race card. Not even America’s survival is open for discussion, truly remarkable. We’re chided by Obama about being paranoid about absorbing a few “grandmothers and children”, yet we see clearly that the vast majority of “refugees” are single, young Muslim men, unskilled at anything except furthering the plot to destroy White, middle class America without firing a shot. And that’s the point: they need not subdue America through force of arms; they’ll be given free rein at the ballot box. There is no normal country in the world that would concede to such a suicidal plan.

The fact that the FBI has identified at least 30 armed encampments of Muslim extremists within our borders bothers no one. The fact that they’re still free to operate shows the effectiveness of Islamist PR in stymying debate about our national security.
Very few Republicans have been willing to step up, especially after they saw Michelle Bachmann eviscerated by the pro-Islamist lobby. The practice of “seeding” Islamists into middle class communities proceeds unabated, with the help of Christians and Jewish “charity” groups, who are getting big bucks from the government, and serve as a smoke screen to deflect from where the responsibility lies about the breakdown of our society and security. But there’s good news: Out of the 1.5 billion Muslims world-wide, it is estimated that only 1% of them (1.5 million) will attempt to blow themselves up as shahids, or martyrs, in order to neutralize the west and establish their long-cherished caliphate.

I gave a speech on the steps of city hall in Dearborn, Michigan (Youtube: “Rabbi Shifren speaks in Dearborn Before Muslim Mobs), home to over 100,000 Muslims. This was not Teheran or Mogadishu, but if not for the vigilance of the local police during my speech, my fate well could have been at the hands of a vicious mob.

The Egyptians were able to accomplish what our country doesn’t have the guts to do: outlawing the Muslim Brotherhood and their network of jihadists. Instead, we wine and dine them in the West Wing, where our muslim president lectures us on “peaceful Islam.”

As the first president of the American Communist Party aptly stated: “Americans will never accept Communism, but they will accept liberalism. And behold: we have a presidential candidate whois a devotee of Saul Alinsky, whose “Rules for Radicals” is her mantra in her quest to destroy the country! The overt cooperation between radical jihadists and the Left to vanquish America is in full gear. And again, the communist/progressives are little worried about jihadists designs, as long as they are instrumental in bringing down the White middle class.

As of this writing, China, Mexico, and the rest of the world are mortally afraid of a new spectre: it isn’t ISIS or worldwide Muslim terror; it isn’t the horror of a dirty bomb falling in the hands of our enemies; it isn’t the transformation of America into a third world nation, without borders or national resolve; nor is impossible national debt on anybody’s mind. No, the only thing haunting America and the rest of the world, is Donald Trump- the perfect storm.

The latest news is that Black Lives Matter, NAACP, and other leftist hispanic groups will be assembling the most massive protest against the probable nominee, Trump. They promise violence, a show of force that will be “unprecedented”. Against the legally nominated candidate? And what about all those Americans whose vote will be denied? Is their only crime that they were born White?

Virginia responds: “Thank you so much for speaking truth even in the face of great danger to yourself. You are a true hero! I was part of LA Unified many years ago as a student at Venice High School and even then I could see the race war going on. I am an immigrant from Argentina and am white but I am also of Hispanic roots. I was bullied by chicanos and blacks and still have bad memories of those times. Since then, the situation with whites and “people of color” is exactly what you describe in an essay of yours I just read. The purpose of all this is to destroy good people, destroy the United States and other very diabolical agendas.”

Posted in Crime | Comments Off

The Sexual Market

Posted on April 21, 2016 by Luke Ford

From the Chateau: Forget the free market economy. The sexual market is the one market to rule them all. As if my preening weren’t already supremely ostentatious, here’s a recent SCIENCE! study confirming another Heartiste axiom: every human interaction and transaction is downstream from the existential struggle to find a quality mate, fuck, and procreate.

Fewer romantic prospects may lead to riskier investments
Encountering information suggesting that it may be tough to find a romantic partner shifts people’s decision making toward riskier options, according to new findings from a series of studies published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.
“Environmental cues indicating that one will have a relatively difficult time finding a mate can drive people to concentrate their investment choices into a few high-risk, high-return options,” says psychological scientist Joshua Ackerman of the University of Michigan, lead author on the research. “This is true even when the decisions people are making are not explicitly relevant to romantic outcomes.”

I’ve received some scoffing from spergy types projecting their spergitude onto this ‘umble outpost of love concerning the assertion often made here that the sexual market governs, consciously or subconsciously it doesn’t really matter, the machinations and ultimately the outcomes of the more palpable activity that takes place in the economic market. But here we have a study proving the truth of the CH observation that ripples and undercurrents of sexual compulsion and romantic desperation are the “invisible loin” that guides all human behavior in the secondary market of the economy and its supporting markets (like academia).

“This is exactly opposite from the pattern of investing we would predict if we assumed people were using an economically ‘rational’ decision strategy,” Ackerman explains. “From an evolutionary perspective, if the options are to do whatever it takes to find a romantic partner or risk not finding one, the more rational choice may be to do whatever it takes.”

This is a stone cold truth that no libertardian like Alex Tabbarak or Cheap Chalupas will ever get. Humans aren’t rational actors; they’re rationalizing actors. And what they rationalize are choices, in all spheres of transaction, that directly or indirectly improve their chances of landing that alpha male or that hot babe.

In a second online study, 105 participants read a newspaper article discussing demographic trends in the U.S. They then evaluated stock packages with equivalent values (e.g., 100 shares in 8 companies, 200 shares in 4 companies, etc.) and chose which package they would invest in.
Again, the data showed that both male and female participants who read about unfavorable sex ratios opted for riskier investments, choosing more shares in fewer companies, than those who read about favorable ratios.

In practice, “riskier strategies” for women amounts to what we see today on college campuses, where women outnumber men 60-40. The zeitgeist is a sexual pornucopia for a few alpha men getting the milk for free without buying the cow, and a lot of disappointment and depression among marginally pretty women who thought they could turn that fling into a thing.

The fact that sex ratio had an impact on decisions that were not directly linked with mating success suggests that sexual competition elicits a general mindset geared toward achieving the largest possible reward, regardless of the risk involved.

Polygyny, as is the norm throughout Africa, can induce the same risky investment strategizing from men as can an unfavorable sex skew. When a few men lock up many women, each individual man has an incentive to throw caution to the wind to be one of those few winner men.

As such, the researchers argue, these findings could have implications for decision making in domains as diverse as retirement planning, gambling, and even making consumer purchases.

Executive Summary: The meaning of life is to ….

COMMENTS:

* Even more interesting to compare post-pubescent eunuchs with castratos. Testosterone “therapy” for F2M transgender LARPers changes both the physical structure and effective function of the brain, in the usual stereotypes.

And those changes are irreversible, so a trans-trans-woman is not the same as a cis-woman. She still thinks more like a cis-man. Therefore, a male castrated before puberty could be expected to behave differently than one castrated after, whose surge of testosterone triggered routines that may continue to run after they are no longer capable of achieving their purpose.

Similarly, one hypothesis is that childless women are destroying white nations because their barrenness triggers risk-seeking routines for rape babies, and that this continues after menopause — even though that would be irrational — because there is no way for natural selection to work on the infertile.

* “Gender Ideology Harms Children” (statement from the American College of Pediatricians (“ACP”))

Among other points stated by the ACP:

“3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-V).5 The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.

4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous. . . .

5. According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.

6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.

7. Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT – affirming countries. . . .

8. Conditioning children into believing that a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse. Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.”

* Sperg Risk Strategy Exhibit A – Elliot Rodger.

“I knew I was always destined for great things. This must be it! I was destined to be the winner of the highest lottery jackpot in existence. I knew right then and there that this jackpot was meant for me. Who else deserved such a victory? I had been through so much rejection, suffering, and injustice in my life, and this was to be my salvation.

With my whole body filled with feverish hope, I spent $700 dollars on lottery tickets for this drawing. As I spent this money, I imagined all the amazing sex I would have with a beautiful model girlfriend I would have once I become a man of wealth.

Without the prospect of becoming wealthy at a young age, I had nothing to live for now. I was going to be a virgin outcast forever. I realized that I had to start planning and preparing for the Day of Retribution, even though I hadn’t yet had any idea of what day that would be.”

* “The meaning of life is to fuck…”

I wonder if there’s some correlation between the innate sense of restraint of northern European stock and restraint in fucking. Children born in the spring would have the best chance of surviving the first few months of life, and of being strong enough to survive to following winter. This would mean the the ideal time of year to fuck would be early summer. The flip side is that couples that favored fucking in early summer would be more likely to pass on their genes.

Contrast this with r-selected type people from equatorial regions where children have an equal chance of surviving year round, and frivolous fucking is the norm.

Just wondering…

* You know you can really have that truth shoved in your face by doing a simple experiment. Observe the people at your local “upscale” grocery store one day, then visit a run-down discount grocery store on the next. In my experience you’ll see an average attractiveness difference of like 3-4 points on a 10 scale.

* Yup. I used to live in Beverly Hills and the ladies there were gorgeous. Would dress well, showing God-given cleavage at times in lovely sundresses.

Moved 5 miles south. Eesh

And this was before the proliferation of yoga pants, aside from actually doing yoga.

Now I’ve got the United Nations supermarket in my ghetto area and you’ll see one hot Latina or Armenian girl dolled up out the 1000s of fatassery there.

I was south of Pico Blvd which is ’nuff said.

Surprising how shit can deteriorate in such close proximity.

For those not in CA, do a google maps “drive” on Sunset Blvd from east to west and be amazed at the transition.

* “I saw a nature show about lions once. The alpha male had control of all the females, and if he caught a beta lion trying to get it on with one of his females, the alpha would give the beta a thrashing. But the betas still have needs, ya know? So the betas would slink around in the shadows, watch the alpha, hang out on the periphery and maybe skip a hunt to be alone with the pride. Then, when the alpha was not around and would not catch them, they would jump in and grab a quick one from one of the females.“

“Cruz’s efforts to get delegates reminds me of that. He slinks around on the periphery, not trying to get them by overtaking Trump directly and becoming an alpha. No, he’s still a beta, but he’s trying to get what he wants the sneaky way, the beta way. The Cruz way.”

* 25% of women in the US are on anti depressants. They are all on them at my work and very open about it. My neighbor told me her gorgeous 16 year old had a breakdown and her and her five friends are all in therapy for self harm. WTF is going on?

* Four Reasons:

-Women are being told to act in a way that is completely the opposite of how they want to behave.

-Women love attention, and self-harm gets them that (drama queen teens).

-Shrinks describe any behavior that is normal as “depressive” in need of “medication and therapy.” Because the science is a joke and their pockets need a lining.

-Lack of strong men around (neutered by society) to give them a rock to lean on.

* At least 30% have what is now called histrionic personality disorder. Research the history and meaning of the words “hysteria” and “hysterical.” Any man who has known at least 4 women has experienced it.

They do not belong in the office environment other than as secretaries and typists in the former sense of those professions. (They do not belong in an office under the current Jew-feminist brainwashing idea that they are equal and should be the senior partner in the corner office. They know this in their hearts, hence the internal conflict.)

It is obvious that women should not vote or dominate the national discussion on talk news shows. All civilizations for 12,000 years have known this.

“Histrionic personality disorder is characterized by a long-standing pattern of attention seeking behavior and extreme emotionality. Someone with histrionic personality disorder wants to be the center of attention in any group of people, and feel uncomfortable when they are not. While often lively, interesting and sometimes dramatic, they have difficulty when people aren’t focused exclusively on them. People with this disorder may be perceived as being shallow, and may engage in sexually seductive or provocative behavior to draw attention to themselves.”

In other words, attention whores.

The new DSM is getting rid of “Personality Disorders” because they’re too d@mned descriptive of the reality of the situation [i.e. too politically incorrect; shine too much light on Eskimo perfidy, etc], and because the insurance companies refuse to pay for PDs. Fortunately, at least for the time being, Wikipedia still has some good overviews: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_B

Any female co-worker given responsibility suffers anxiety because of it. They just cannot lead or handle any responsibility.
They hate deadlines. They cannot deal with that either and this field is interior design so a female type of job.
A poster on another thread said it well…they live in a world man has created…working in buildings man has created. Women cannot handle cars either. Any bad choices I see on the road I always look around to see who the driver is and it’s always a woman.

* “The happiest women I know are housewives with good husbands and several children”.

Bingo.

Few on this earth will ever comprehend – let alone match – the abject misery of a 42 year old woman who sacrificed her fertility window for meaningless corporate advancement, only to be tortured for the rest of her life by the laughter of other people’s children.

* You could finish construction of The Wall this afternoon. It would still be 30 years too late.

“Perhaps a President Trump would build a wall to Uranus… or maybe he wouldn’t. Though such speculation isn’t what’s most relevant. The foreign majority is now born domestically each day, and the annual population equivalent of Montana supplements white Americans legally. At some point a huge border wall just becomes a monument. You don’t lock doors inside your own house. And you won’t maintain a fence to keep Mexicans out of northern Mexico. Once pressure equalizes, no one needs an airtight seal.

But all of that is far beyond the reckoning of most conservatives, who still consider 90% of the Earth’s exploding population as “minorities.” The notion that their national inheritance was stolen while they drooled at football games only seems to emerge in brief moments of lucidity.”

* Walking to work one morning, you see a woman making eyes at you from inside her front door of her house. It’s slightly open and you see she’s showing skin.

You have a choice:

1) Keep walking to work, arrive on time, get paid, buy food, eat well tonight.
2) Go inside, fuck the woman, arrive late for work, lose job, don’t eat, starve for the next two months.

If it came down to such a stark choice — if you could know all of these consequences — which do you choose?

According to Maslow, you choose #1. The basic needs of food, water, rest, and warmth are first-tier needs. He placed “intimate relationships” on the third tier.

* Why don’t you include your fantasy option:

#3 — feral dindu breaks-and-enters the house, rapes you, takes a nap, wakes up, calls his boy D’arflavius on his Obama-phone, goes down to the liquor store to buy a forty, then picks up some ice cream and potato chips with his EBT card and goes home to watch his flatscreen TV in his free govt-supplied apartment waiting his baby momma to bring by some money from the child-welfare checks to buy some crack with.

Posted in Sex | Comments Off