The Pain Of The Watermelon Joke

From the New York Times, a black woman writes:

But by the time I was 11 years old, even the smell of watermelon was enough to send me running to the bathroom with my most recent meal returning to my throat. It seemed I had grown violently allergic to the fruit.

I was a brown girl growing up in the United States. By that point in my life, I had seen the racist representations associated with African-Americans and watermelons, heard the terrifying stories of black men being lynched with watermelons hanging around them, watched black migrants from the South try to eke out a living in the big city by driving through neighborhoods like my own — Bushwick, in Brooklyn — with trucks loaded down with the fruit.

In a book I found at the library, a camp song about a watermelon vine was illustrated with caricatures of sleepy-looking black people sitting by trees, grinning and eating watermelon. Slowly, the hideousness of the stereotype began to sink in. In the eyes of those who told and repeated the jokes, we were shuffling, googly-eyed and lesser than.

Perhaps my allergy was actually a deep physical revulsion that came from the psychological impression and weight of the association. Whatever it was, I could no longer eat watermelon.

Comments to NYT:

* Clearly a demon she wrestles with. We don’t pick our demons; they seem to pick us. I am less curious about why she wrote this piece and more about why the Times chose to run it. What discourse does it advance? Misconceptions about whom we let in to our circle of friendship where familiarity pricks the balloons of sensitivity or self importance generally come up when we realize that some things still sting. Ms Woodson does her friend the disservice of lack of honesty at the outset or lack of loyalty at the end of this story. I feel more sorry for her dilemma than for her story.

* I’m a non-white immigrant who has been in this country for most of my life. There are many like me who are tired of this incessant emphasis of the NYT on all things black and racist. Authors (such as this one in the article) who write about this are published and lauded, movies about this are praised, and incidents involving this are blown out of all proportion. The current perception is that if it does not have a race angle, it won’t appear in the NYT. The liberal white guilt is nauseating. There are many other facets to America and American history, and we need to go forward as one people in a society where race does not matter, but culture does.

* It’s pretty clear we need a law that stops all remarks with any ethnic content that could offend or displease anyone — no more Scottish jokes, Irish jokes, cowboy jokes, etc. This would probably be illegal:
“And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or …”

Posted in Blacks | Comments Off on The Pain Of The Watermelon Joke

High Trust Vs Low Trust Societies

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Hungary has been fighting Muslim invasions for over 500 years. Hungary has experienced the conflict and eventual collapse of three multicultural empires, the Ottoman Empire, Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Soviet Empire. The EU is likely Hungary’s fourth bite at the apple of being in a multi-cultural empire.

Hungary is also a lower trust, more diverse society, which likely knows the precarious status of civil society. Iceland is high trust and homogenous without much experience with diversity or civil strife.

* The majority of union workers in the US now are employed by various government bureaucracies. Mass migration now may actually expand job opportunities for union workers in public sector bureaucracies relating to welfare, immigration and law enforcement. Mass immigration is no longer viewed as competition, but an aggregate demand stimulus for government expansion.

* The problem (in Hungary and Romania if not in Finland) is that a lot of people seemed to equate “Bolshevik” with “Jewish”. While there certainly were Jewish Bolsheviks, especially in the early days, not all Bolsheviks were Jews nor (by far) were all Jews Bolsheviks. A lot of Hungarian Jews identified very strongly as Hungarian patriots. Stalin himself was no Jew lover in his later years. But a lot of locals took the war against Bolshevism as a license to oppress their local Jewish population. Not only were hundreds of thousands shipped off to be gassed at Auschwitz with the cooperation of the local authorities, but many of the local Jewish men (while not trusted to serve in the military itself) were conscripted as forced labor to dig trenches, etc. on the Eastern front lines where they were treated very poorly.

What happened to Hungarian Olympic fencer Attila (note the super patriotic Hungarian name) Petschauer was unfortunately all too illustrative.

These atrocities were committed by the Hungarians themselves without needing any encouragement from the Germans.

I don’t envy the position of the nations of central Europe in the 40′s – caught between the devil of Hitler and the deep blue sea of Stalin. They really had no good choices. But I’m not sure taking it out on the local Jewish population was really the right move.

* The Bela Kun thing probably didn’t help. But there might have been other things that made the locals dislike the Jews. The Spanish felt the Jews collaborated with the Moors, the Ukrainians thought they had helped the Poles oppress them, and the Greeks thought they had helped the Turks collect the child tax. I don’t know much about Hungarian history, but there are probably grievances the locals have.

This is the problem you have when a group remains separate from the society at large. Whether the separate group is Jewish or some other ethnic group like Germans, if they are perceived as separate from the main group and of helping other groups oppress the main group, then they will be a target.

* There were a lot of reasons for “East Europeans” to be allied with Nazi Germany, and, for that matter, for a lot Europeans to support Nazism, without at the same time supporting the persecution and murder of Jews.

The fascist Arrow Cross of Hungary was responsible for a certain number of Jewish deaths, and perhaps also Rumania but I think Finland was largely guiltless, as far as the Holocaust goes. But before we even begin to blame things on Finland, let’s not forget that Stalin declared war on them first.

* The Jewish connection was not only with Bolsheviks. If you were a leftist, or a fascist with a social bent in favor of nativist worker’s rights (like Codreanu’s Iron Legion, which I have recently learned has an oddly large Internet fan base abroad), then you were also against exploitative capitalism. Jews figured prominently there as well. It all comes down to power and the Other.

* The megaphone is turned on when the Hungarian Jobbik camerawoman is filmed (and fired for) tripping the old man carrying a child, but the megaphone is turned off when, just moments before, the same woman was (on film) almost knocked over herself by waves of charging immigrants, who were charging past police containment lines (and therefore, in essence, breaking the law.) Hers was a futile attempt to aid the police in stopping those migrants who were escaping. Nothing more. But there was a little kid crying over his fall, and that’s all that matters.

* I am not sure why German companies don’t realize that their reputation for quality comes from their German workers. Replacing German for Syrian or Turkish quality will do the same for their reputation and profits as the crappy quality US auto makers were known for did for theirs.

* My new tactic when discussing race/migration/invasion with SJW types: I declare myself as racist and call them such also. I point out that like me) they live in predominantly white and protected neighborhoods, 2) and have close to zero black/brown “friends” on their Facebook feed, etc…If I consider myself racist by such markers then there is no reason they should not be considered racist also.

Now, I have no idea whether these SJWs do live in protected white areas or whether or not they have any colored Facebook “friends”, no matter. To a man and woman they all become flustered, defensive and are at a loss for words. They stammer on that such markers are not determinative, etc. I insist that they are. Being objectively assessed as racist breaks their tender hearts. Everytime I use this tactic it has a satisfying effect. Make the SJWs eat their “personal is political” mantra till they choke on it.

MORE COMMENTS:

* The bizarre thing about Juncker’s position in all this is that he sees it as perfectly natural and morally acceptable for foreigners to fight to enter another nation to reach safety but morally wrong for the inhabitants of that nation to resist the influx to preserve their safety and way of life.

Given that Muslims have a demonstrated record of violence and intolerance in Europe the balance between the two competing interests has to favor the people of Europe in blocking the influx of foreigners especially as there are alternatives such as camps in Turkey, Jordan or even in Greece, which could use the money and jobs involved in holding these people if the EU would pay for it.

* In any other age, a large group of males between the ages of 18 and 40 crossing a border into a foreign country would be rightly considered an army on campaign – an invasion. Why is it any different now?

Posted in Diversity, Immigration | Comments Off on High Trust Vs Low Trust Societies

Replication Failure In Psychological Research

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* I have long wondered whether psychologists’ ideological refusal to recognize group differences undermined the bulk of these studies. They rarely identify the race or ethnicity of subjects and blindly assume that these factors would not have any effect on the outcome. It seems very unlikely. The replication failure may be linked to this, at least on some significant level.

* I think two other major factors are affecting the reproducibility of psychology studies, and social sciences studies generally. First, there’s an enmeshment between popular outlets that publicize these studies’ results, and the scientists who perform the studies. The scientists want the publicity of having their study referenced in some magazine, and the magazine writers love having the veneer of Science fronting for their biases. This puts pressure on the research to find “interesting” results, rather than particularly honest ones – and this is especially true if the study can be related to political alignments, however spuriously (see e.g. “Conservatives scare easily”). The second factor is the biases of the scientists themselves. It’s been repeatedly shown that social science peer groups have remarkably similar worldviews. This of course pushes results away from the unfettered truth, toward an ideologically preferable one. There is research about this that has been published, particularly by Haidt et al. Although who knows if it will prove reproducible.

Posted in Race | Comments Off on Replication Failure In Psychological Research

No Evidence of Racial Discrimination in Criminal Justice Processing

Abstract: One of the most consistent findings in the criminological literature is that African American males are arrested, convicted, and incarcerated at rates that far exceed those of any other racial or ethnic group. This racial disparity is frequently interpreted as evidence that the criminal justice system is racist and biased against African American males. Much of the existing literature purportedly supporting this interpretation, however, fails to estimate properly specified statistical models that control for a range of individual-level factors. The current study was designed to address this shortcoming by analyzing a sample of African American and White males drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health). Analysis of these data revealed that African American males are significantly more likely to be arrested and incarcerated when compared to White males. This racial disparity, however, was completely accounted for after including covariates for self-reported lifetime violence and IQ. Implications of this study are discussed and avenues for future research are offered.

Posted in Blacks, Crime, IQ, Race | Comments Off on No Evidence of Racial Discrimination in Criminal Justice Processing

Islam Is Not A Good Fit For America & Europe

John Derbyshire says: Mention of Razib Khan brings us to Islam, the religion of Razib’s ancestors. In fact, if I remember right, Razib’s grandfather was an Imam, and Razib himself got part of his education in a Madrassah.

I’ve stated Radio Derb’s position on Islam before, and I’ll state it again now. We have nothing against Islam. It seems like a fine religion that’s given spiritual support and consolation to millions of people across hundreds of years. Jolly good luck to Islam.

The evidence is plain, however, that Islam is not a good guest in non-Islamic countries. A wise country that is not Islamic in its culture and traditions will not permit mass settlement by Muslims. It’s just asking for trouble.

Muslims have plenty of countries of their own. Plenty — 57 listed on the website of the
Organization of Islamic Cooperation, from Afghanistan to Yemen. Forty-nine of those countries have Muslim majorities. Any Muslim who wants to move to another country is spoiled for choice. Any Western nation that allows mass settlement by Muslims is being very foolish, given the trouble caused by a fanatical minority of Muslims. 9/11 should have made that point beyond dispute.

It didn’t, of course, and Western nations, I think without exception, continue in the gross folly of permitting mass settlement by Muslims.

On Monday this week Daniel Horowitz at Conservative Review wrote about the breathtaking scale of that folly in the particular case of the U.S.A. Using statistics from the Department of Homeland Security [laugh] Horowitz shows that the pace of immigration from Muslim countries has doubled since 9/11. From 2001 to 2013 more than 1.6 million people from predominantly Muslim countries were issued green cards for permanent settlement in the U.S.A.

Heading the list of nations there: Pakistan, which has settled over 200,000 people here since 9/11; Iran, 167 thousand; Nigeria and Bangladesh, 150 thousand each …

One point six million. As Horowitz says, if only ten percent are jihadists, that’s 160,000 jihadists. If only one percent are, that’s still sixteen thousand.

True, not every immigrant from a Muslim-majority nation is a Muslim. Still, not every immigrant from a non-Muslim nation is a non-Muslim, either. Some proportion of immigrants from Britain, France, and India are Muslims. So that’s a wash.

As Horowitz also said, this is just the numbers for green cards issued — immigrant-status visas. Huge numbers of non-immigrant visas have also been issued. Student visas, for example. Saudi Arabia
alone
was granted 54,000 student visas during the 2013/14 academic year. That’s almost a thousand percent increase since 9/11. A thousand percent! Eleven times as many as when Saudi nationals flew planes into the World Trade Center!

This is sheer insanity. We gain nothing from the mass immigration of Muslims — nothing but danger for our citizens, and an increase in surveillance by our security agencies, with corresponding de-crease in our liberties. Our immigration policy is nuts. It’s crazy. Quote
from Daniel Horowitz, quote:

Who voted for these policies? When did the American people ever have the opportunity to give input through a transparent process to the radical transformation of America? How many Americans would have supported a decision post-9/11 to roughly double the rate of Islamic immigration?

Posted in Islam | Comments Off on Islam Is Not A Good Fit For America & Europe

Stereotyping While Waiting In Line At Ralphs

It was a mess at Ralphs this afternoon. As I waited in line, I noticed patterns.

WASPs are the best behaved group. They are the best at waiting in line and they are the best, in general, in acting like good citizens. They create the best countries (think England, Canada, USA, Australia and New Zealand).

Bad Behavior Index

Blacks 106
Mexicans 85
American Indians 85
Italians 70
Irish 67
Jews 64
Germans 56
English/Welsh 47

Low IQ people are a horror show to try to deal with in life, not just on the roads and at work, but also in the line at Ralphs. People on welfare tend to be worse behaved than other groups and they often seem to feel more entitled to make other people pay for their bad behavior. Jews often seem to me like the most aggressive people around (in all ways except crime and violence). The Ralphs 90035 checkout line reminds me of the nightmare of driving in Israel.

So while I sweat in line, it’s 100 degrees outside, I am not in the best of moods to read on my phone Rabbi Abraham Cooper’s latest pathologizing of the goyim. The goyim I know are very good at conducting themselves efficiently and courteously in a supermarket checkout line and so I am not eager to read the rabbi rip the goyim for trying to maintain their traditions and to resist the invasion of their Islamic and African enemies.

Why Europe is so woefully unprepared for the new refugee crisis
by Rabbi Abraham Cooper
Posted on Sep. 8, 2015 at 3:07 pm

No time is a good time for an epic humanitarian crisis. But Europe today seems woefully unprepared for the human wave from the Maghreb, the Horn of Africa and lands reaching all the way to Afghanistan…

It is not only about the lack of political will and social cohesion. For even as French, British and German leaders talk about evenly distributing the burden, others such as Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban have made it brutally clear that they want no part of the migrant/refugee wave; they simply want them gone. If it means constructing barbed-wire fences, posting a phalanx of police at the central train station in Budapest and duping refugees to board trains to camps, so be it.
Of course, when we see people so desperate to escape their homes that they knowingly put themselves and their children in harm’s way, when we see the lifeless body of a drowned child, we Jews are reminded of another era in Europe.
Why then is Europe so unprepared for this challenge?
It is precisely because the European Union (EU) has failed to evolve into a true “union.”
It has failed to articulate what 21st-century European social values are.
It never has addressed the failure to integrate the millions of Muslims already living in Europe.
Its foreign policy has failed to stem the killings and dislocation of Bashar Assad’s Syria. It has failed to stop ISIS.
It attempted to stop Libyans from leaving their country by removing Muammar Gadhafi. The results? The disintegration of a country and even more boat people perishing in the Mediterranean.
But are Europeans exclusively to blame for all of this? What about the United States? Tragically, the policies of “leading from behind” and “no boots on the ground” may mean fewer Americans in harm’s way in the Middle East, but the leadership vacuum has left millions of innocent people to fend for themselves with corrupt and dangerous governments who can’t even pick up the garbage.
There is one other gaping hole in the leadership of the EU: 70 years after the Shoah, rabid anti-Semitism and hate for the Jewish state infect an estimated 150 million Europeans. Seven decades after the defeat of Nazism, European governments and nongovernmental organizations have been silent over the ethnic cleansing, murder and serial rape of tens of thousands of Christians and other minorities across the Middle East.
It seems that Europe’s elite may have learned to mark their calendar to remember dead Jews one day a year, but too many have failed to internalize or apply any lessons from the Nazi era as to how to treat living Jews and other minorities.
There are no easy solutions to this crisis, but as Jews who come to pray for the wellbeing and safety of the entire world on Rosh Hashanah, we must find ways to do our share to help all legitimate refugees, be they Christian, Muslims or Yazidis.

Let me begin with the headline: “Why Europe is so woefully unprepared for the new refugee crisis”

Has any continent or country been better prepared to deal with a refugee crisis of this magnitude? No. But context does not matter to Rabbi Abraham Cooper. He’s just looking for any excuse to batter the goyim.

What was Israel’s response to the refugee crisis? Rabbi Abraham Cooper does not mention that Israel does not want to admit any of these Islamic refugees and instead, Israel is devoting its resources to building more fences against the outside world. In other words, Israel is acting sanely, in its self-interest, in much the same way Hungary has.

When Jews pursue their group interest (in not admitting Muslims who hate them), that is not worth remarking upon by Rabbi Cooper, but when goyim pursue the identical strategy, then it is time to bring out the big rhetorical guns, and you know a Holocaust analogy — completely unjustified — is about to drop on us.

Here is the crux of the rabbi’s essay:

Why then is Europe so unprepared for this challenge?
It is precisely because the European Union (EU) has failed to evolve into a true “union.”

Jews love Jewish nationalism. They take it for granted that Jews should look out first for their own people. On the other hand, Jews fear Gentile nationalisms because by definition, Gentile nationalisms excludes Jews. This is why so many Jews love the United Nations and the European Union and the idea of one world government and the like, so that the people in power can protect Jews from popular resentment. Throughout history, Jews have looked repeatedly to the people in power to protect them from the rage of the common folk. Jews often feel safer with big government. That’s a major reason so many Jews supported communism.

It has failed to articulate what 21st-century European social values are.

Values are not what hold a people together nearly as much as genetic ties. I can prove it to you. Swedes, wherever they live in the world, tend to have life results similar to Swedes who live in Sweden. Adopted children tend to have life results that mirror those of their genetic parents, not their adopting parents. Japanese, wherever they live in the world, tend to have life results that mirror those of the Japanese in Japan.

Racial diversity destroys social capital. The more diverse Europe becomes, the more frayed it will be.

As Jason Richwine wrote in 2009:

[Robert] Putnam began by telling us about one result he encountered that was thoroughly upsetting to him—the more ethnically diverse a community is, the less social capital it possesses. When a person lives in a diverse community, he trusts everyone less, including those of his own ethnic group.

So how did Putnam come to conclude that ethnic diversity is so problematic? The answer begins with the notion of “social capital,” which Putnam defines in simple terms—“social networks and the associated norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness.” Social capital turns out to be an exceptionally valuable commodity. Building complex networks of friends and associates, trusting others to keep their word, and maintaining social norms and expectations all grease the wheels of business by enabling cooperation.

But the value of social capital goes well beyond economics. Many of the activities from which people draw the most deep and lasting satisfactions are stronger and more prevalent in areas with high social capital. People living in these places tend to have more friends, care more about their community, and participate more in civic causes. Where social capital is greater, Putnam says, “children grow up healthier, safer, and better educated; people live longer, happier lives; and democracy and the economy work better.”

Rabbi Cooper continues: “It never has addressed the failure to integrate the millions of Muslims already living in Europe.”

Gypsies have lived in Europe for hundreds of years and they still have not assimilated. Is that Europe’s fault? Gypsies, like Muslims, have low IQs and are not assimilable.

Jews have assimilated to Europe in superficial ways, but as long as a Jew identifies as a Jew, his primary identity, in all likelihood, will be as a Jew, as a nation within nation if he lives in the diaspora.

Jews see themselves as a people apart. As long as they maintain their identity, they will only assimilate in superficial ways.

All peoples assimilate in only the most superficial ways. In the end, they tend to act like their genetics. Blacks act black, the Japanese act Japanese, and Jews act Jewish, wherever they live.

Christians have been struggling with Jews and Muslims for over a millennia because these individual groups have different interests that repeatedly clash with each other. You can argue about whether or not Jews are conducive to a Christian country, but there can be no argument that Muslims are a bad fit.

Rabbi Cooper writes:

There is one other gaping hole in the leadership of the EU: 70 years after the Shoah, rabid anti-Semitism and hate for the Jewish state infect an estimated 150 million Europeans. Seven decades after the defeat of Nazism, European governments and nongovernmental organizations have been silent over the ethnic cleansing, murder and serial rape of tens of thousands of Christians and other minorities across the Middle East.

No group likes to comes to terms with its distasteful past. I don’t recall much of an effort in Jewish life to come to terms with the millions of Jews who supported communism. Jews played a big role in carrying out Stalin’s genocides. All of the Americans who illegally passed nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union to build their first bomb were Jews.

I’m not listing this off to say that Jews are rotten. Jews, like all peoples, have good and bad in their history. I just don’t understand how this rabbi gets away with bashing the goyim for acting as Israel does with unwanted refugees. Rabbi Cooper rips Europe for not coming to terms with the Holocaust but he never says a peep about Jews not coming to terms with the genocides they helped carry out for Joseph Stalin.

Aiming for Clarity writes:

Let’s take a sort-of metrics-based analysis. I worry that the author of this thesis – Dr. Peter Hammond, who wrote “Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat”- may be/ is a biggot. But it’s hard to argue with these numbers:

As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:
United States — Muslim 0.6%
Australia — Muslim 1.5%
Canada — Muslim 1.9%
China — Muslim 1.8%
Italy — Muslim 1.5%
Norway — Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:
Denmark — Muslim 2%
Germany — Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom — Muslim 2.7%
Spain — Muslim 4%
Thailand — Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves — along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:
France — Muslim 8%
Philippines — 5%
Sweden — Muslim 5%
Switzerland — Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands — Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago — Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in:
Guyana — Muslim 10%
India — Muslim 13.4%
Israel — Muslim 16%
Kenya — Muslim 10%
Russia — Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in: Ethiopia — Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:
Bosnia — Muslim 40%
Chad — Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon — Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and ***ya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:
Albania — Muslim 70%
Malaysia — Muslim 60.4%
Qatar — Muslim 77.5%
Sudan — Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:
Bangladesh — Muslim 83%
Egypt — Muslim 90%
Gaza — Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia — Muslim 86.1%
Iran — Muslim 98%
Iraq — Muslim 97%
Jordan — Muslim 92%
Morocco — Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan — Muslim 97%
Palestine — Muslim 99%
Syria — Muslim 90%
Tajikistan — Muslim 90%
Turkey — Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates — Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of ‘Dar-es-Salaam’ — the Islamic House of Peace. Here there’s supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:
Afghanistan — Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100%
Somalia — Muslim 100%
Yemen — Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

Posted in Christianity, Diversity, Immigration, Islam, Israel, R. Abraham Cooper, Race | Comments Off on Stereotyping While Waiting In Line At Ralphs

Oil and the Business of Terror

A friend has published a new book and he tells me: I would like to invite you to read my new paper that tries to answer a question that has bothered me since September 11th, 2001. The question is “why?” Why did we respond to that attack with a war that was unnecessary and disastrously executed? Why are we on the verge of going back to war in that region? No explanation I have read makes any sense.
In my analysis, the war and its aftermath were driven by forces intent on manipulating the price of crude oil, the world’s most lucrative commodity. This is not a new idea, but I believe I have connected a few more dots than others.
Though the story is complicated, my paper is based on four simple, but seldom discussed facts:
• Oil is a commodity whose price goes up when there is a shortage or fear of a future shortage.
• Terror violence and instability in oil producing countries tends to raise the price of crude oil by taking oil production offline or creating fear that supplies will be disrupted in the future.
• The higher the price of crude oil, the more money the Saudi Royal Family, the Emir of Qatar and others earn from oil production.
• Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait, which benefit from terror-related oil price increases are the same entities who fund the terror groups that are sowing the shortage-causing mayhem.
Terrorism is part of the oil industry business model. Oil companies and Wall Street firms profit passively, but I suspect knowingly, from carnage that creates artificial oil shortages. The Bush and Obama White Houses seem to have played the role of enabler, helping their biggest donors earn huge profits regardless of the cost in American lives.

Posted in Terror | Comments Off on Oil and the Business of Terror

William F. Buckley’s Quest For Respectability

Paul Gottfried writes: In a commentary, “Golden Days,” commemorating the 50th anniversary of National Review, Jonah Goldberg describes how his magazine’s founder dealt with ideological dissent:

“Buckley employed intellectual ruthlessness and relentless personal charm to keep that which is good about libertarianism, what we have come to call “social conservatism,” and what was necessary about anti-Communism in the movement. This meant throwing friends and allies off the bus from time to time. The Randians, the Rothbardian anarchists and isolationists, the Birchers, the anti-Semites, the me-too Republicans: all of these groups in various combinations were purged from the movement and masthead, sometimes painfully, sometimes easily, but always with the ideal of keeping the cause honest and pointed north to the ideal in his compass.[1]”

A few lines later, we learn the ideal that William F. Buckley assigned to his movement existed “only on paper,” that “conservative dogma remains unsettled, and that conservatism remains cleaved ideologically.” Nonetheless, the movement Buckley built was for Goldberg a breathtaking success—and had been achieved with minimal commotion.

E.J. Dionne, in a similar tribute in the Washington Post, NR’s putative adversary, proclaims that Buckley was not only a man of splendid parts but also one who had “determined to rid the right of the wing nuts. He was, to his everlasting credit, the scourge of anti-Semitism that had once infested significant parts of the right.”[2] Dionne blasted the strange conspiracy theories of the John Birch Society, which he applauds Buckley for unmasking. Unfortunately, little truth can be found in most of his remarks and no more than a sliver in Goldberg’s.

The NR staff devoted a special feature on October 19, 1965, to denouncing the Birch Society, but not for being anti-Semitic (of which there was scant evidence). The complaint was the Birchers did not support the war in Vietnam and had given up the struggle against Communism.[3] It’s worth noting that the best man at Buckley’s wedding, Revilo Oliver, was an outspoken anti-Semite, as well as a formidable classicist and Sanskrit scholar.[4] Oliver continued to write for Buckley’s publication well into the 1960s. Most of those expelled from his magazine and from Buckley’s movement were Jewish libertarians, like Ayn Rand, Frank Chodorov, Murray Rothbard and Ron Hamowy.[5] If the movement before Buckley’s interventions had been dominated by “anti-Semites,” his excommunications hardly amounted to a crusade against them. Goldberg’s mentor was especially hard on Jews who opposed his call for an accelerated struggle to overthrow the Soviet Empire. In Rand’s case, he turned against someone who was stridently atheistic.

Even more astonishing, although not likely to be challenged by the liberal-neoconservative media, is Goldberg’s suggestion that purges occurred in the conservative movement only quite rarely. To the contrary, they were frequent; one could say that they shaped the conservative movement.

English historian A.J.P. Taylor once observed, with regard to the Habsburgs, that “countries were episodes in the history of a dynasty.” In a like way, purges were episodes in the journalistic careers of those who led the conservative movement. And these expulsions took place so frequently that it may be helpful to divide them into different periods in accordance with the changing interests of movement elites. The purges did not all take place for the same reason, and identifying this complicated process with “fighting the scourge of anti-Semitism” is to indulge in fantasy.

“Being thrown off the bus” had implications beyond being kept from writing essays for National Review. As the conservative media empire took form, thanks largely to steady infusions of money each year from Australian benefactor Rupert Murdoch, being banned by one of its organs brought huge consequences. Someone banned from Wall Street Journal, The Weekly Standard, or National Review, for example, would not likely be welcome in an affiliated movement publication or be put on FOX News, which enjoys the same sponsorship and represents the same ideology.

There are exceptions to this rule, as seen by the occasional appearance on FOX of Pat Buchanan, someone who is clearly offensive to NR and The Weekly Standard. But this exception may have been allowed because Buchanan is a widely read journalist. His occasional appearance on FOX may also be conditional on his not stirring the pot unduly on a channel run by neoconservatives and the Republican establishment. During his recent TV appearances, Pat (to my knowledge) has never contradicted his host, which may be why he is allowed to maintain his exceptional status.

There may be another reason for this status, namely that Buchanan had been removed from a Democratic rival channel, MSNBC. For years the directors of this channel had provided a berth for a figure of the Old Right; and it featured him on a regular basis, unlike FOX, which only permits Buchanan to participate in its discussions every now and then. Like other members of the Old Right, Buchanan was sent into limbo in the early 1990s for having ticked off Buckley’s esteemed New York friends.[6] A bad enough sin under the old order, this faux pas has proved even costlier under Buckley’s successors. His epigones may be driven even more than their master by desire for acceptance from mainstream journalists. The Heritage Foundation, The American Enterprise Institute, National Review, The Wall Street Journal, and other movement fixtures have had nothing to do with Buchanan for decades. They have carefully maintained their distance, although Buchanan’s books on politics and international relations have soared on the New York Times bestseller list.

For the less successful and less fortunate, however, being kicked off the bus has usually brought catastrophic results. The campaign of vilification that has accompanied marginalization has usually left its object socially and professionally ruined. Typical targets of this process were the Southern conservative M.E. Bradford and the populist journalist and critic of managerial democracy Samuel T. Francis. The elimination of Bradford as frontrunner for the National Endowment for the Humanities Directorship in 1981 and, 10 years later, the removal of Samuel Francis as the star columnist by the already neoconservative-controlled Washington Times followed a now-familiar course. Those condemned as outcasts by movement leaders suffered repeated journalistic attacks and were accused of being bigots rather than “conservatives.” Liberal journalists joined these campaigns and often seemed to be working in tandem with their neoconservative acquaintances, in order to drive “wing nuts” out of respectable conservatism. Printed assaults against the designated extremists were so devastating that their victims never regained standing as respectable writers.

Speaking as a minor target of such attacks, which operated in my case mostly surreptitiously, I noticed that my adversaries were working doggedly to isolate me. Mine, of course, was not a typical purge. Unlike others who were purged more dramatically, I never left a paper trail on such abrasive issues as Jews in the media. The recent decision of Intercollegiate Studies Institute to sever any connection with me as a writer did not arise because I was thought to be a “racist.” This action was taken because, through my leadership of the HL Mencken Club, I have associated myself with people who stress hereditary cognitive differences.[7] But in the 1980s, I fell out of favor for less ridiculous reasons. I was marginalized merely because I insisted too loudly that generic leftists had been permitted to take over the Right.

I had no illusion when neoconservatives slandered me to the administration at Catholic University of America, which resulted in my being denied a graduate professorship that was about to be offered to me, that the attacks would thereafter stop. After this incident, I was never again allowed to write for “movement conservative” publications. The editors of these, also not incidentally, refuse to review my books; and my name has scarcely appeared in a movement magazine after my rejection at CUA. One of the rare times it has was in David Frum’s wholesale denunciation of the non-aligned Right, “Unpatriotic Conservatives.” Here, he claimed that his friends had done nothing to harm me professionally, let alone to occasion my outbursts; indeed I had fabricated my narrative because I was a troubled person.[8]

My case was exceptional because aside from suggestions that I had taken leave of my senses, there was no campaign waged against me as an “anti-Semite” or “racist.” I held on to an academic post until I retired in 2011, although I might have obtained higher professional prizes, if neoconservatives had not weighed in against me, as I subsequently learned, at other institutions beside CUA. But I cannot claim that I was as badly battered as other exiles.

The more abused victims died within a relatively short time of their humiliation, emotionally as well as professionally crushed. Goldberg’s comment about people in his movement being pushed off the bus only from time to time borders on the puerile. the American Communist Party looked like a band of cloistered monks in comparison to the cannibalistic movement that Buckley founded, and which Goldberg continues to slobber over.

Posted in Conservatives | Comments Off on William F. Buckley’s Quest For Respectability

Germany Doesn’t Want Gypsies

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Germany has been very stingy about granting residency to Balkans refugees, while being generous to Syrians. Why? Because a large number of these Balkans refugees are gypsies, who nobody wants.

* This is a source of constant amazement to me. Europeans are schizophrenic in continuing to bring in the third world masses while absolutely rejecting the Gypsies. It’s like cognitive dissonance, because the Gypsies are poster children for non-assimilation. More than 30 generations in Europe and a lot of them still look the way they did in the homelands. Perfect examples of endogamy and in-group morality. Maybe it’s because they’re from European countries (or EU countries) and so, in the PC hierarchy, they are an ok target for cathartic and public revilement. The government can safely deport a band of swarthy troublemakers for the eyes of the public, while letting in 5 times more under immigration and refugee rules. In truth, Roma immigration from my part of the EU should have been a vaccine which would let Western European countries do a little soul searching about the kind of people they want to let in their countries where the effort at blocking them would be trivial (the third world). It didn’t happen like that and now pent-up frustration with these unopposable policies needs to find other outlets, like the rapidly diminishing White and Eastern European EU migrants (meaning their populations).

* It’s always amusing how the Gypsies never come up when the West waxes poetically about assimilation & multiculturalism.

One of its oldest minorities groups still no better assimilated then in the days of Martin Luther but we’re told this time it’ll be different.

* I can’t really think of anything more terrifying than the concept of an Islamic Germany. This was of course Hitler’s ultimate wet-dream. And no, I’m not talking about a bottom up takeover. What better way for cynical German elites to show how “multicultural” they are than to submit to Islam. What they gain is a total escape from Holocaust / White Guilt. The German spirit is much more in tune with Islam than it is with Christianity.

What a lethal combination the expansionist and martial ideology of Islamic Jihad is when combined with the tenacity, technical prowess, and tactical brilliance of Germans.

If it comes from above, it could happen quite quickly. There is no turning off this spigot of refugees. Already girls are getting raped and being warned to not wear shorts. Soon modest dress will be mandatory but will this really stop the rapes? This crisis will only get worse and under the cover of tolerance and multiculturalism, elites could fundamentally transform Germany into an Islamic state.

Paradoxically, the biggest cheerleaders of multiculturalism, Feminists, Gays, Leftists, and some elements of the Jewish Community, are going to be the first victims of their success in forcing the Islamification of Germany. I wonder just when they will get that first terrible twitch in their stomachs when they realize exactly what they have wrought?

What is about to happen is that everyday Europeans are going to increasingly feel the Islamic heat, fear their daughters being raped, and start fleeing to the United States. But would, for example, a President Trump open the door to these European refugees fleeing Islam? The US may be about to receive more and more multicultural-hating Europeans who want to live free of Islamic domination. And if they come in large enough numbers it could change US demographics!

And so the debate on refugees may very quickly flip as Leftists howl in horror at the sudden whitening of America due to these potential indigenous stock refugees from Europe.

Posted in Germany, Gypsies | Comments Off on Germany Doesn’t Want Gypsies

Questions about the Hegira to Germany

By Steve Sailer

The German chancellor is being celebrated for finally redeeming her subjects’ innate Nazi bloodguilt by inviting into the European Union huge columns of helpless Syrian refugees.

Or at least that’s what you are supposed to think, just as you were supposed to assume the innocence of Michael Brown and the guilt of Haven Monahan.

On the other hand, you may have some questions. Such as, if these are civilian war refugees, where are all the women, children, and elderly? Why are the incoming masses instead so heavily made up of young louts with smartphones? One of my readers, Lot, looked at a half-dozen photographs of the new arrivals and estimated, “Overall, these migrants are more male than the United States Army.”

Posted in Europe, Germany | Comments Off on Questions about the Hegira to Germany