|
|
Home | Switchboard | Unix Administration | Red Hat | TCP/IP Networks | Neoliberalism | Toxic Managers |
| (slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and bastardization of classic Unix | |||||||
| Home | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section
|
|
Switchboard | ||||
| Latest | |||||
| Past week | |||||
| Past month | |||||
( Aug 26, 2017 , www.unz.com )
 |
 |
 |
Mar 09, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Yves here. The first release of the Wikileaks Vault 7 trove has curiously gone from being a MSM lead story yesterday to a handwave today. On the one hand, anyone who was half awake during the Edward Snowden revelations knows that the NSA is in full spectrum surveillance and data storage mode, and members of the Five Eyes back-scratch each other to evade pesky domestic curbs on snooping. So the idea that the CIA (and presumably the NSA) found a way to circumvent encryption tools on smartphones, or are trying to figure out how to control cars remotely, should hardly come as a surprise.
However, at a minimum, reminding the generally complacent public that they are being spied on any time they use the Web, and increasingly the times in between, makes the officialdom Not Happy.
And if this Wikileaks claim is even halfway true, its Vault 7 publication is a big deal:
Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.
This is an indictment of the model of having the intelligence services rely heavily on outside contractors. It is far more difficult to control information when you have multiple organizations involved. In addition, neolibearlism posits that workers are free agents who have no loyalties save to their own bottom lines (or for oddballs, their own sense of ethics). Let us not forget that Snowden planned his career job moves , which included a stint at NSA contractor Dell, before executing his information haul at a Booz Allen site that he had targeted.
Admittedly, there are no doubt many individuals who are very dedicated to the agencies for which they work and aspire to spend most it not all of their working lives there. But I would assume that they are a minority.
The reason outsiders can attempt to pooh-pooh the Wikileaks release is that the organization redacted sensitive information like the names of targets and attack machines. The CIA staffers who have access to the full versions of these documents as well as other major components in the hacking toolkit will be the ones who can judge how large and serious the breach really is. 1 And their incentives are to minimize it no matter what.
By Gaius Publius , a professional writer living on the West Coast of the United States and frequent contributor to DownWithTyranny, digby, Truthout, and Naked Capitalism. Follow him on Twitter @Gaius_Publius , Tumblr and Facebook . GP article archive here . Originally published at DownWithTyranny
CIA org chart from the WikiLeaks cache (click to enlarge). "The organizational chart corresponds to the material published by WikiLeaks so far. Since the organizational structure of the CIA below the level of Directorates is not public, the placement of the EDG [Engineering Development Group] and its branches is reconstructed from information contained in the documents released so far. It is intended to be used as a rough outline of the internal organization; please be aware that the reconstructed org chart is incomplete and that internal reorganizations occur frequently."
* * * "O brave new world, that has such people in it."Bottom line first. As you read what's below, consider:
That the CIA is capable of doing all of the things described, and has been for years, is not in doubt.
That unnameable many others have stolen ("exfiltrated") these tools and capabilities is, according to the Wikileaks leaker, also certain. Consider this an especially dangerous form of proliferation, with cyber warfare tools in the hands of anyone with money and intent. As WikiLeaks notes, "Once a single cyber 'weapon' is 'loose' it can spread around the world in seconds, to be used by peer states, cyber mafia and teenage hackers alike."
That the CIA is itself using these tools, and if so, to what degree, are the only unknowns. But can anyone doubt, in this aggressively militarized environment, that only the degree of use is in question?
Now the story.
WikiLeaks just dropped a huge cache of documents (the first of several promised releases), leaked from a person or people associated with the CIA in one or more capacities (examples, employee, contractor), which shows an agency out-of-control in its spying and hacking overreach. Read through to the end. If you're like me, you'll be stunned, not just about what they can do, but that they would want to do it, in some cases in direct violation of President Obama's orders. This story is bigger than anything you can imagine.
Consider this piece just an introduction, to make sure the story stays on your radar as it unfolds - and to help you identify those media figures who will try to minimize or bury it. (Unless I missed it, on MSNBC last night, for example, the first mention of this story was not Chris Hayes, not Maddow, but the Lawrence O'Donnell show, and then only to support his guest's "Russia gave us Trump" narrative. If anything, this leak suggests a much muddier picture, which I'll explore in a later piece.)
So I'll start with just a taste, a few of its many revelations, to give you, without too much time spent, the scope of the problem. Then I'll add some longer bullet-point detail, to indicate just how much of American life this revelation touches.
While the cache of documents has been vetted and redacted , it hasn't been fully explored for implications. I'll follow this story as bits and piece are added from the crowd sourced research done on the cache of information. If you wish to play along at home, the WikiLeaks torrent file is here . The torrent's passphrase is here . WikiLeaks press release is here (also reproduced below). Their FAQ is here .
Note that this release covers the years 2013–2016. As WikiLeaks says in its FAQ, "The series is the largest intelligence publication in history."
Preface - Trump and Our "Brave New World"
But first, this preface, consisting of one idea only. Donald Trump is deep in the world of spooks now, the world of spies, agents and operatives. He and his inner circle have a nest of friends, but an even larger, more varied nest of enemies. As John Sevigny writes below, his enemies include not only the intel and counter-intel people, but also "Republican lawmakers, journalists, the Clintons, the Bush family, Barack Obama, the ACLU, every living Democrat and even Rand Paul." Plus Vladimir Putin, whose relationship with Trump is just "business," an alliance of convenience, if you will.
I have zero sympathy for Donald Trump. But his world is now our world, and with both of his feet firmly planted in spook world, ours are too. He's in it to his neck, in fact, and what happens in that world will affect every one of us. He's so impossibly erratic, so impossibly unfit for his office, that everyone on the list above wants to remove him. Many of them are allied, but if they are, it's also only for convenience.
How do spooks remove the inconvenient and unfit? I leave that to your imagination;they have their ways. Whatever method they choose, however, it must be one without fingerprints - or more accurately, without their fingerprints - on it.
Which suggests two more questions. One, who will help them do it, take him down? Clearly, anyone and everyone on the list. Second, how do you bring down the president, using extra-electoral, extra-constitutional means, without bringing down the Republic? I have no answer for that.
Here's a brief look at "spook world" (my phrase, not the author's) from " The Fox Hunt " by John Sevigny:
Several times in my life – as a journalist and rambling, independent photographer - I've ended up rubbing shoulders with spooks. Long before that was a racist term, it was a catch-all to describe intelligence community people, counter intel types, and everyone working for or against them. I don't have any special insight into the current situation with Donald Trump and his battle with the IC as the intelligence community calls itself, but I can offer a few first hand observations about the labyrinth of shadows, light, reflections, paranoia, perceptions and misperceptions through which he finds himself wandering, blindly. More baffling and scary is the thought he may have no idea his ankles are already bound together in a cluster of quadruple gordian knots, the likes of which very few people ever escape.
Criminal underworlds, of which the Trump administration is just one, are terrifying and confusing places. They become far more complicated once they've been penetrated by authorities and faux-authorities who often represent competing interests, but are nearly always in it for themselves.
One big complication - and I've written about this before - is that you never know who's working for whom . Another problem is that the hierarchy of handlers, informants, assets and sources is never defined. People who believe, for example, they are CIA assets are really just being used by people who are perhaps not in the CIA at all but depend on controlling the dupe in question. It is very simple - and I have seen this happen - for the subject of an international investigation to claim that he is part of that operation. [emphasis added]
Which leads Sevigny to this observation about Trump, which I partially quoted above: "Donald Trump may be crazy, stupid, evil or all three but he knows the knives are being sharpened and there are now too many blades for him to count. The intel people are against him, as are the counter intel people. His phone conversations were almost certainly recorded by one organization or another, legal or quasi legal. His enemies include Republican lawmakers, journalists, the Clintons, the Bush family, Barack Obama, the ACLU, every living Democrat and even Rand Paul. Putin is not on his side - that's a business matter and not an alliance."
Again, this is not to defend Trump, or even to generate sympathy for him - I personally have none. It's to characterize where he is, and we are, at in this pivotal moment. Pivotal not for what they're doing, the broad intelligence community. But pivotal for what we're finding out, the extent and blatancy of the violations.
All of this creates an incredibly complex story, with only a tenth or less being covered by anything like the mainstream press. For example, the Trump-Putin tale is much more likely to be part of a much broader "international mobster" story, whose participants include not only Trump and Putin, but Wall Street (think HSBC) and major international banks, sovereign wealth funds, major hedge funds, venture capital (vulture capital) firms, international drug and other trafficking cartels, corrupt dictators and presidents around the world and much of the highest reaches of the "Davos crowd."
Much of the highest reaches of the .01 percent, in other words, all served, supported and "curated" by the various, often competing elements of the first-world military and intelligence communities. What a stew of competing and aligned interests, of marriages and divorces of convenience, all for the common currencies of money and power, all of them dealing in death .
What this new WikiLeaks revelation shows us is what just one arm of that community, the CIA, has been up to. Again, the breadth of the spying and hacking capability is beyond imagination. This is where we've come to as a nation.
What the CIA Is Up To - A Brief Sample
Now about those CIA spooks and their surprising capabilities. A number of other outlets have written up the story, but this from Zero Hedge has managed to capture the essence as well as the breadth in not too many words (emphasis mine throughout):
WikiLeaks has published what it claims is the largest ever release of confidential documents on the CIA It includes more than 8,000 documents as part of 'Vault 7', a series of leaks on the agency, which have allegedly emerged from the CIA's Center For Cyber Intelligence in Langley , and which can be seen on the org chart below, which Wikileaks also released : [org chart reproduced above]
A total of 8,761 documents have been published as part of 'Year Zero', the first in a series of leaks the whistleblower organization has dubbed 'Vault 7.' WikiLeaks said that 'Year Zero' revealed details of the CIA's "global covert hacking program," including "weaponized exploits" used against company products including " Apple's iPhone , Google's Android and Microsoft's Windows and even Samsung TVs , which are turned into covert microphones."
WikiLeaks tweeted the leak, which it claims came from a network inside the CIA's Center for Cyber Intelligence in Langley, Virginia.
Among the more notable disclosures which, if confirmed, " would rock the technology world ", the CIA had managed to bypass encryption on popular phone and messaging services such as Signal, WhatsApp and Telegram. According to the statement from WikiLeaks, government hackers can penetrate Android phones and collect "audio and message traffic before encryption is applied."
With respect to hacked devices like you smart phone, smart TV and computer, consider the concept of putting these devices in "fake-off" mode:
Among the various techniques profiled by WikiLeaks is "Weeping Angel", developed by the CIA's Embedded Devices Branch (EDB), which infests smart TVs , transforming them into covert microphones. After infestation, Weeping Angel places the target TV in a 'Fake-Off' mode , so that the owner falsely believes the TV is off when it is on. In 'Fake-Off' mode the TV operates as a bug, recording conversations in the room and sending them over the Internet to a covert CIA server.
As Kim Dotcom chimed in on Twitter, "CIA turns Smart TVs, iPhones, gaming consoles and many other consumer gadgets into open microphones" and added "CIA turned every Microsoft Windows PC in the world into spyware. Can activate backdoors on demand, including via Windows update "[.]
Do you still trust Windows Update?
About "Russia did it"
Adding to the "Russia did it" story, note this:
Another profound revelation is that the CIA can engage in "false flag" cyberattacks which portray Russia as the assailant . Discussing the CIA's Remote Devices Branch's UMBRAGE group, Wikileaks' source notes that it "collects and maintains a substantial library of attack techniques 'stolen' from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation.["]
As Kim Dotcom summarizes this finding, " CIA uses techniques to make cyber attacks look like they originated from enemy state ."
This doesn't prove that Russia didn't do it ("it" meaning actually hacking the presidency for Trump, as opposed to providing much influence in that direction), but again, we're in spook world, with all the phrase implies. The CIA can clearly put anyone's fingerprints on any weapon they wish, and I can't imagine they're alone in that capability.
Hacking Presidential Devices?
If I were a president, I'd be concerned about this, from the WikiLeaks " Analysis " portion of the Press Release (emphasis added):
"Year Zero" documents show that the CIA breached the Obama administration's commitments [that the intelligence community would reveal to device manufacturers whatever vulnerabilities it discovered]. Many of the vulnerabilities used in the CIA's cyber arsenal are pervasive [across devices and device types] and some may already have been found by rival intelligence agencies or cyber criminals.
As an example, specific CIA malware revealed in "Year Zero" [that it] is able to penetrate, infest and control both the Android phone and iPhone software that runs or has run presidential Twitter accounts . The CIA attacks this software by using undisclosed security vulnerabilities ("zero days") possessed by the CIA[,] but if the CIA can hack these phones then so can everyone else who has obtained or discovered the vulnerability. As long as the CIA keeps these vulnerabilities concealed from Apple and Google (who make the phones) they will not be fixed, and the phones will remain hackable.
Does or did the CIA do this (hack presidential devices), or is it just capable of it? The second paragraph implies the latter. That's a discussion for another day, but I can say now that both Lawrence Wilkerson, aide to Colin Powell and a non-partisan (though an admitted Republican) expert in these matters, and William Binney, one of the triumvirate of major pre-Snowden leakers, think emphatically yes. (See Wilkerson's comments here . See Binney's comments here .)
Whether or not you believe Wilkerson and Binney, do you doubt that if our intelligence people can do something, they would balk at the deed itself, in this world of "collect it all "? If nothing else, imagine the power this kind of bugging would confer on those who do it.
The Breadth of the CIA Cyber-Hacking Scheme
But there is so much more in this Wikileaks release than suggested by the brief summary above. Here's a bullet-point overview of what we've learned so far, again via Zero Hedge:
Key Highlights from the Vault 7 release so far:
"Year Zero" introduces the scope and direction of the CIA's global covert hacking program, its malware arsenal and dozens of "zero day" weaponized exploits against a wide range of U.S. and European company products , include Apple's iPhone, Google's Android and Microsoft's Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into covert microphones.
Wikileaks claims that the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation . This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.
By the end of 2016, the CIA's hacking division, which formally falls under the agency's Center for Cyber Intelligence (CCI), had over 5000 registered users and had produced more than a thousand hacking systems, trojans, viruses, and other "weaponized" malware . Such is the scale of the CIA's undertaking that by 2016, its hackers had utilized more code than that used to run Facebook.
The CIA had created, in effect, its "own NSA" with even less accountability and without publicly answering the question as to whether such a massive budgetary spend on duplicating the capacities of a rival agency could be justified.
Once a single cyber 'weapon' is 'loose' it can spread around the world in seconds , to be used by rival states, cyber mafia and teenage hackers alike.
Also this scary possibility:
As of October 2014 the CIA was also looking at infecting the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks.
The purpose of such control is not specified, but it would permit the CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations .
Journalist Michael Hastings, who in 2010 destroyed the career of General Stanley McChrystal and was hated by the military for it, was killed in 2013 in an inexplicably out-of-control car. This isn't to suggest the CIA, specifically, caused his death. It's to ask that, if these capabilities existed in 2013, what would prevent their use by elements of the military, which is, after all a death-delivery organization?
And lest you consider this last speculation just crazy talk, Richard Clarke (that Richard Clarke ) agrees: "Richard Clarke, the counterterrorism chief under both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, told the Huffington Post that Hastings's crash looked consistent with a car cyber attack.'" Full and fascinating article here .
WiliLeaks Press Release
Here's what WikiLeaks itself says about this first document cache (again, emphasis mine):
Press Release
Today, Tuesday 7 March 2017, WikiLeaks begins its new series of leaks on the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. Code-named "Vault 7" by WikiLeaks, it is the largest ever publication of confidential documents on the agency.
The first full part of the series, "Year Zero", comprises 8,761 documents and files from an isolated, high-security network situated inside the CIA's Center for Cyber Intelligence in Langley, Virgina. It follows an introductory disclosure last month of CIA targeting French political parties and candidates in the lead up to the 2012 presidential election .
Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.
"Year Zero" introduces the scope and direction of the CIA's global covert hacking program, its malware arsenal and dozens of "zero day" weaponized exploits against a wide range of U.S. and European company products, include Apple's iPhone, Google's Android and Microsoft's Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into covert microphones.
Since 2001 the CIA has gained political and budgetary preeminence over the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The CIA found itself building not just its now infamous drone fleet, but a very different type of covert, globe-spanning force - its own substantial fleet of hackers. The agency's hacking division freed it from having to disclose its often controversial operations to the NSA (its primary bureaucratic rival) in order to draw on the NSA's hacking capacities.
By the end of 2016, the CIA's hacking division, which formally falls under the agency's Center for Cyber Intelligence (CCI), had over 5000 registered users and had produced more than a thousand hacking systems, trojans, viruses, and other "weaponized" malware. Such is the scale of the CIA's undertaking that by 2016, its hackers had utilized more code than that used to run Facebook. The CIA had created, in effect, its "own NSA" with even less accountability and without publicly answering the question as to whether such a massive budgetary spend on duplicating the capacities of a rival agency could be justified.
In a statement to WikiLeaks the source details policy questions that they say urgently need to be debated in public , including whether the CIA's hacking capabilities exceed its mandated powers and the problem of public oversight of the agency. The source wishes to initiate a public debate about the security, creation, use, proliferation and democratic control of cyberweapons.
Once a single cyber 'weapon' is 'loose' it can spread around the world in seconds, to be used by rival states, cyber mafia and teenage hackers alike.
Julian Assange, WikiLeaks editor stated that "There is an extreme proliferation risk in the development of cyber 'weapons'. Comparisons can be drawn between the uncontrolled proliferation of such 'weapons', which results from the inability to contain them combined with their high market value, and the global arms trade. But the significance of "Year Zero" goes well beyond the choice between cyberwar and cyberpeace. The disclosure is also exceptional from a political, legal and forensic perspective."
Wikileaks has carefully reviewed the "Year Zero" disclosure and published substantive CIA documentation while avoiding the distribution of 'armed' cyberweapons until a consensus emerges on the technical and political nature of the CIA's program and how such 'weapons' should analyzed, disarmed and published.
Wikileaks has also decided to redact and anonymise some identifying information in "Year Zero" for in depth analysis. These redactions include ten of thousands of CIA targets and attack machines throughout Latin America, Europe and the United States. While we are aware of the imperfect results of any approach chosen, we remain committed to our publishing model and note that the quantity of published pages in "Vault 7" part one ("Year Zero") already eclipses the total number of pages published over the first three years of the Edward Snowden NSA leaks.
Be sure to click through for the Analysis, Examples and FAQ sections as well.
"O brave new world," someone once wrote . Indeed. Brave new world, that only the brave can live in.
____
1 Mind you, the leakers may have had a comprehensive enough view to be making an accurate call. But the real point is there are no actors who will be allowed to make an independent assessment.
salvo , March 9, 2017 at 3:13 amThat's all I needed.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/10/fbi-chief-given-dossier-by-john-mccain-alleging-secret-trump-russia-contactsSenator John McCain passed documents to the FBI director, James Comey, last month alleging secret contacts between the Trump campaign and Moscow and that Russian intelligence had personally compromising material on the president-elect himself.
The material, which has been seen by the Guardian, is a series of reports on Trump's relationship with Moscow. They were drawn up by a former western counter-intelligence official, now working as a private consultant. BuzzFeed on Tuesday published the documents, which it said were "unverified and potentially unverifiable".
The Guardian has not been able to confirm the veracity of the documents' contents,
Emphases mine. I had been sitting on this link trying to make sense of this part. Clearly, the Trump Whitehouse has some major leaks, which the MSM is exploiting. But the start of this article suggests that para-intelligence (is that a word? Eh, it is now) was the source of the allegedly damaging info.
This is no longer about the deep-state, but a rouge state, possibly guns for higher, each having fealty to specific political interests. The CIA arsenal wasn't leaked. It was delivered.
visitor , March 9, 2017 at 3:40 amhmm.. as far as I can see, noone seems to care here in Germany anymore about being spied on by our US friends, apart from a few alternative sources which are being accused of spreading fake news, of being anti-american, russian trolls, the matter is widely ignored
Yves Smith Post author , March 9, 2017 at 5:53 amI have read a few articles about the Vault 7 leak that typically raise a few alarms I would like to comment on.
1) The fact that the
CIA had managed to bypass encryption on popular phone and messaging services
does not mean that it has broken encryption, just that it has a way to install a program at a lower level, close to the operating system, that will read messages before they are encrypted and sent by the messaging app, or just after they have been decrypted by it.
As a side note: banks have now largely introduced two-factor authentication when accessing online services. One enters username (or account number) and password; the bank site returns a code; the user must then enter this code into a smartphone app or a tiny specialized device, which computes and returns a value out of it; the user enters this last value into the entry form as a throw-away additional password, and gains access to the bank website.
I have always refused to use such methods on a smartphone and insist on getting the specialized "single-use password computer", precisely because the smartphone platform can be subverted.
2) The fact that
"Weeping Angel", developed by the CIA's Embedded Devices Branch (EDB), [ ] infests smart TVs, transforming them into covert microphones.
is possible largely because smart TVs are designed by their manufacturers to serve as spying devices. "Weeping Angel" is not some kind of virus that turns normal devices into zombies, but a tool to take control of existing zombie devices.
The fact that smart TVs from Vizio , Samsung or LG constitute an outrageous intrusion into the privacy of their owners has been a known topic for years already.
3) The
CIA [ ] also looking at infecting the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks
is not a "scary possibility" either; various demonstrations of such feats on Tesla , Nissan , or Chrysler vehicles have been demonstrated in the past few years.
And the consequences have already been suggested (killing people by disabling their car controls on the highway for instance).
My take on this is that we should seriously look askance not just at the shenanigans of the CIA, but at the entire "innovative technology" that is imposed upon (computerized cars) or joyfully adopted by (smartphones) consumers. Of course, most NC readers are aware of the pitfalls already, but alas not the majority of the population.
4) Finally this:
He's so impossibly erratic, so impossibly unfit for his office,
Trump is arguably unfit for office, does not have a clue about many things (such as foreign relations), but by taxing him of being "erratic" Gaius Publius shows that he still does not "get" the Donald.
Trump has a completely different modus operandi than career politicians, formed by his experience as a real-estate mogul and media star. His world has been one where one makes outrageous offers to try anchoring the negotiation before reducing one's claims - even significantly, or abruptly exiting just before an agreement to strike a deal with another party that has been lured to concessions through negotiations with the first one. NC once included a video of Trump doing an interactive A/B testing of his slogans during a campaign meeting; while changing one's slogans on the spot might seem "erratic", it is actually a very systematic market probing technique.
So stop asserting that Trump is "unpredictable" or "irrational"; this is underestimating him (a dangerous fault), as he is very consistent, though in an uncommon fashion amongst political pundits.
visitor , March 9, 2017 at 6:59 amWhile I agree that it's worth pointing out that the CIA has not broken any of the major encryption tools, even Snowden regards being able to circumvent them as worse, since people using encryption are presumably those who feel particularly at risk and will get a false sense of security and say things or keep data on their devices that they never never would if they thought they were insecure.
Re Gaius on Trump, I agree the lady doth protest too much. But I said repeatedly that Trump would not want to be President if he understood the job. It is not like being the CEO of a private company. Trump has vastly more control over his smaller terrain in his past life than he does as President.
And Trump is no longer campaigning. No more a/b testing.
The fact is that he still does not have effective control of the Executive branch. He has lots of open positions in the political appointee slots (largely due to not having even submitted candidates!) plus has rebellion in some organizations (like folks in the EPA storing data outside the agency to prevent its destruction).
You cannot pretend that Trump's former MO is working at all well for him. And he isn't showing an ability to adapt or learn (not surprising at his age). For instance, he should have figured out by now that DC is run by lawyers, yet his team has hardly any on it. This is continuing to be a source of major self inflicted wounds.
His erraticness may be keeping his opponents off base, but it is also keeping him from advancing any of his goals.
RBHoughton , March 9, 2017 at 9:00 pmI believe we are in agreement.
Yes, not breaking encryption is devious, as it gives a false sense of security - this is precisely why I refuse to use those supposedly secure e-banking login apps on smartphones whose system software can be subverted, and prefer those non-connected, non-reprogrammable, special-purpose password generating devices.
As for Trump being incompetent for his job, and his skills in wheeling-dealing do not carrying over usefully to conducting high political offices, that much is clear. But he is not "erratic", rather he is out of place and out of his depth.
Ivy , March 9, 2017 at 10:09 amI am writing this in the shower with a paper bag over my head and my iPhone in the microwave.
I have for years had a password-protected document on computer with all my important numbers and passwords. I have today deleted that document and reverted to a paper record.
visitor , March 9, 2017 at 11:34 amPlease tell readers more about the following for our benefit:
"single-use password computer"
PhilM , March 9, 2017 at 11:35 amThat is an example of the sort of thing I am talking about.
jrs , March 9, 2017 at 2:36 pmI think he means a machine dedicated to high-security operations like anything financial or bill-pay. Something that is not exposed to email or web-browsing operations that happen on a casual-use computer that can easily compromise. That's not a bad way to go; it's cheaper in terms of time than the labor-intensive approaches I use, but those are a hobby more than anything else. It depends on how much you have at stake if they get your bank account or brokerage service password.
I take a few basic security measures, which would not impress the IT crowd I hang out with elsewhere, but at least would not make me a laughingstock. I run Linux and use only open-source software; run ad-blockers and script blockers; confine risky operations, which means any non-corporate or non-mainstream website to a virtual machine that is reset after each use; use separate browsers with different cookie storage policies and different accounts for different purposes. I keep a well-maintained pfSense router with a proxy server and an intrusion detection system, allowing me to segregate my secure network, home servers, guest networks, audiovisual streaming and entertainment devices, and IoT devices each on their own VLANs with appropriate ACLs between them. No device on the more-secured network is allowed out to any port without permission, and similar rules are there for the IoT devices, and the VoIP tools.
The hardware to do all of that costs at least $700, but the real expense is in the time to learn the systems properly. Of course if you use Linux, you could save that on software in a year if you are too cheap to send a contribution to the developers.
It's not perfect, because I still have computers turned on :) , but I feel a bit safer this way.
That said, absolutely nothing that I have here would last 30 milliseconds against anything the "hats" could use, if they wanted in. It would be over before it began. If I had anything to hide, really, I would have something to fear; so guess I'm OK.
visitor , March 9, 2017 at 2:45 pmopen source software often has a lot of bugs to be exploioted. Wouldn't it be easier to just do banking in person?
cfraenkel , March 9, 2017 at 12:07 pmBanks discourage that by
a) charging extortionate fees for "in-person" operations at the counter;
b) closing subsidiaries, thus making it tedious and time-consuming to visit a branch to perform banking operations in person;
c) eliminating the possibility to perform some or even all usual operations in any other form than online (see the advent of "Internet only" banks).
In theoretical terms, all this is called "nudging".
meme , March 9, 2017 at 3:53 amThey're key fobs handed to you by your IT dept. The code displayed changes every couple of minutes. The plus is there's nothing sent over the air. The minus is the fobs are subject to theft, and are only good for connecting to 'home'. And since they have a cost, and need to be physically handed to you, they're not good fit for most two factor login applications (ie logging into your bank account).
Direction , March 9, 2017 at 4:23 amI watched (fast forwarded through, really) Morning Joe yesterday to see what they would have to say about Wikileaks. The show mostly revolved around the health care bill and Trump's lying and tweeting about Obama wiretapping him. They gave Tim Kaine plenty of time to discuss his recent trip to London talking to "some of our allies there" saying that they are concerned that "all the intelligence agencies" say the Rooskies "cyber hacked" our election, and since it looks like we aren't doing anything when we are attacked, they KNOW we won't do anything when they are attacked. (more red baiting)
The only two mentions I saw was about Wikileaks were, first, a question asked of David Cohen, ex Deputy Director of the CIA, who refused to confirm the Wikileaks were authentic, saying whatever tools and techniques the CIA had were used against foreign persons overseas, so there is no reason to worry that your TV is looking at you. And second, Senator Tom Cotton, who didn't want to comment on the contents of Wikileaks, only saying that the CIA is a foreign intelligence service, collecting evidence on foreign targets to keep our country safe, and it does not do intelligence work domestically.
So that appears to be their story, the CIA doesn't spy on us, and they are sticking with it, probably hoping the whole Wikileaks thing just cycles out of the news.
skippy , March 9, 2017 at 5:46 amThanks for mentioning Hastings. His death has always been more than suspicious.
james wordsworth , March 9, 2017 at 5:50 amElite risk management reduction tool goes walkabout inverting its potential ..
disheveled . love it when a plan comes together ..
Yves Smith Post author , March 9, 2017 at 7:52 amThe unwillingness of the main stream media (so far) to really cover the Wikileaks reveal is perhaps the bigger story. This should be ongoing front page stuff .. but it is not.
As for using ZeroHedge as a source for anything, can we give that a rest. That site has become a cesspool of insanity. It used to have some good stuff. Now it is just unreadable. SAD
And yes I know the hypocrisy of slamming ZH and the MSM at the same time we live in interesting times.
3urypteris , March 9, 2017 at 12:14 pmYour remarks on ZH are an ad hominem attack and therefore a violation of site policies. The onus is on you to say what ZH got wrong and not engage in an ungrounded smear. The mainstream media often cites ZH.
NC more than just about any other finance site is loath to link to ZH precisely because it is off base or hyperventilating a not acceptably high percent of the time, and is generally wrong about the Fed (as in governance and how money works). We don't want to encourage readers to see it as reliable. However, it is good on trader gossip and mining Bloomberg data.
And I read through its summary of the Wikileaks material as used by Gaius and there was nothing wrong with it. It was careful about attributing certain claims to Wikileaks as opposed to depicting them as true.
sunny129 , March 9, 2017 at 7:20 pmMy rules for reading ZH:
1- Skip every article with no picture
2- Skip every article where the picture is a graph
3- Skip every article where the picture is of a single person's face
4- Skip every afticle where the picture is a cartoon
5- Skip every article about gold, BitCoin, or high-frequency trading
6- Skip all the "Guest Posts"
7- ALWAYS click through to the source
8- NEVER read the commentsIt is in my opinion a very high noise-to-signal source, but there is some there there.
TheCatSaid , March 9, 2017 at 6:14 amFinding the TRUTH is NOT that easy.
Discerning a 'news from noise' is NEVER that easy b/c it is an art, developed by years of shifting through ever increasing 'DATA information' load. This again has to be filtered and tested against one's own 'critical' thinking or reasoning! You have to give ZH, deserved credit, when they are right!
There is no longer a Black or white there, even at ZH! But it is one of the few, willing to challenge the main stream narrative 'kool aid'
Romancing The Loan , March 9, 2017 at 8:43 amIn addition to the "para-intelligence" community (hat tip Code named D) there are multiple enterprises with unique areas of expertise that interface closely with the CIA The long-exposed operations, which include entrapment and blackmailing of key actors to guarantee complicity, "loyalty" and/or sealed lips, infect businesses, NGOs, law enforcement agencies, judges, politicians, and other government agencies. Equal opportunity employment for those with strong stomachs and a weak moral compass.
nobody , March 9, 2017 at 10:10 amYes I can't remember where I read it but it was a tale passed around supposedly by an FBI guy that had, along with his colleagues, the job of vetting candidates for political office. They'd do their background research and pass on either a thick or thin folder full of all the compromising dirt on each potential appointee. Over time he said he was perturbed to notice a persistent pattern where the thickest folders were always the ones who got in.
craazyboy , March 9, 2017 at 8:20 amI learned this when I was in my 20s. The Catholic Church was funding my early critique of American foreign aid as being imperialist. I asked whether they thought I should go into politics. They said, "No, you'd never make it". And I said, "Why?" and they said, "Well, nobody has a police record or any other dirt on you." I asked what they meant. They said, "Unless they have something over you to blackmail you with, you're not going to be able to get campaign funding. Because they believe that you might do something surprising," in other words, something they haven't asked you to do. So basically throughout politics, on both sides of the spectrum, voters have candidates who are funded by backers who have enough over them that they can always blackmail.
flora , March 9, 2017 at 11:11 amI find the notion that my consumer electronics may be CIA microphones somewhat irritating, but my imagination quickly runs off to far worse scenarios. (although the popular phase, "You're tax dollars at work." keeps running thru my head like a earworm. And whenever I hear "conservatives" speak of their desire for "small government", usually when topics of health care, Medicare and social security come up, I can only manage a snort of incredulousness anymore)
One being malware penetrating our nuke power plants and shutting down the cooling system. Then the reactor slowly overheats over the next 3 days, goes critical, and blows the surrounding area to high heaven. We have plants all around the coast of the country and also around the Great Lakes Region – our largest fresh water store in a drought threatened future.
Then the same happening in our offensive nuke missile systems.
Some other inconvenient truths – the stuxnet virus has been redesigned. Kaspersky – premier anti malware software maker – had a variant on their corporate network for months before finally discovering it. What chance have we?
In China, hacking is becoming a consumer service industry. There are companies building high power data centers with a host of hacking tools. Anyone, including high school script kiddies, can rent time to use the sophisticated hacking tools, web search bots, and whatever, all hosted on powerful servers with high speed internet bandwidth.
Being a bit "spooked" by all this, I began to worry about my humble home computer and decided to research whatever products I could get to at least ward off annoying vandalism. Among other things, I did sign up for a VPN service. I'm looking at the control app for my VPN connection here and I see that with a simple checkbox mouse click I can make my IP address appear to be located in my choice of 40 some countries around the world. Romania is on the list!
craazyboy , March 9, 2017 at 12:40 pm"my consumer electronics may be CIA microphones "
I haven't tested this, so can't confirm it works, but it sounds reasonable.
http://www.komando.com/tips/390304/secure-your-webcam-and-microphone-from-hackerscraazyboy , March 9, 2017 at 12:46 pmActually, I very much doubt that does work. The mic "pickup" would feed its analog output to a DAC (digital to analog converter) which would convert the signal to digital. This then goes to something similar to a virtual com port in the operating system. Here is where a malware program would pick it up and either create a audio file to be sent to an internet address, or stream it directly there.
The article is just plugging in a microphone at the output jack. The malware got the data long before it goes thru another DAC and analog amp to get to the speakers or output jack.
flora , March 9, 2017 at 2:43 pms/b "plugging in a earbud at the output jack". They're confusing me too.
Stephen Gardner , March 9, 2017 at 2:53 pmah. thanks for vetting.
Stephen Gardner , March 9, 2017 at 2:52 pmIt's actually a input/output jack or, if you will, a mic/headphone jack.
Pat , March 9, 2017 at 8:27 amIt depends on how it is hooked up internally. Old fashioned amateur radio headphones would disable the speakers when plugged in because the physical insertion of the plug pushed open the connection to the speakers. The jack that you plug the ear buds into might do the same, disconnecting the path between the built-in microphone and the ADC (actually it is an ADC not a DAC). The only way to know is to take it apart and see how it is connected.
Eureka Springs , March 9, 2017 at 8:31 amThe CIA is not allowed to operate in the US is also the panacea for the public. And some are buying it. Along with everyone knows they can do this is fueling the NOTHING to see here keep walking weak practically non existent coverage.
Anon , March 9, 2017 at 2:40 pmAt what point do people quit negotiating in terrorism and errorism? For this is what the police, the very State itself has long been. Far beyond being illegitimate, illegal, immoral, this is a clear and ever present danger to not just it's own people, but the rule of law itself. Blanket statements like we all know this just makes the dangerously absurd normal I'll never understand that part of human nature. But hey, the TSA literally just keeps probing further each and every year. Bend over!
Trump may not be the one for the task but we the people desperately need people 'unfit', for it is the many fit who brought us to this point. His unfit nature is as refreshing on these matters in its chaotic honest disbelief as Snowden and Wiki revelations. Refreshing because it's all we've got. One doesn't have to like Trump to still see missed opportunity so many should be telling him he could be the greatest pres ever if (for two examples) he fought tirelessly for single payer and to bring down this police state rather than the EPA or public education.
This cannot stand on so many levels. Not only is the fourth amendment rendered utterly void, but even if it weren't it falls far short of the protections we deserve.
No enemy could possibly be as bad as who we are and what we allow/do among ourselves. If an election can be hacked (not saying it was by Russia).. as these and other files prove anything can and will be hacked then our system is to blame, not someone else.
What amazes me is that the spooks haven't manufactured proof needed to take Trump out of office Bonfire of The Vanities style. I'd like to think the people have moved beyond the point they would believe manufactured evidence but the Russia thing proves otherwise.
These people foment world war while probing our every move and we do nothing!
If we wait for someone fit nothing will ever change because we wait for the police/media/oligarch state to tell us who is fit.
Stephen Gardner , March 9, 2017 at 3:05 pmbeing "unfit" does not automatically make someone a savior.
Allegorio , March 9, 2017 at 4:00 pmBut being fit by the standards of our ruling class, the "real owners" as Carlin called them is, in my book, an automatic proof that they are up to no good. Trump is not my cup of tea as a president but no one we have had in a while wasn't clearly compromised by those who fund them. Did you ever wonder why we have never had a president or even a powerful member of congress that was not totally in the tank for that little country on the Eastern Mediterranean? Or the Gulf Monarchies? Do you think that is by accident? Do you think money isn't involved? Talk about hacked elections! We should be so lucky as to have ONLY Russians attempting to affect our elections. Money is what hacks US elections and never forget that. To me it is laughable to discuss hacking the elections without discussing the real way our "democracy" is subverted–money not document leaks or voting machine hacks. It's money.
Why isn't Saudi Arabia on Trump's list? Iran that has never been involved in a terrorist act on US soil is but not Saudi Arabia? How many 911 hijackers came from Iran? If anything saves Trump from destruction by the real owners of our democracy it is his devotion to the aforementioned countries.
HBE , March 9, 2017 at 8:47 amThe point again is not to remove him from office but to control him. With Trump's past you better believe the surveillance state has more than enough to remove him from office. Notice the change in his rhetoric since inauguration? More and more he is towing the establishment Republican line. Of course this depends on whether you believe Trump is a break with the past or just the best liar out there. A very unpopular establishment would be clever in promoting their agent by pretending to be against him.
Anyone who still believes that the US is a democratic republic and not a mafia state needs to stick their heads deeper into the sands. When will the low information voters and police forces on whom a real revolution depends realize this is anyone's guess. The day is getting closer especially for the younger generation. The meme among the masses is that government has always been corrupt and that this is nothing new. I do believe the level of immorality among the credentialed classes is indeed very new and has become the new normal. Generations of every man for himself capitalist philosophy undermining any sense of morality or community has finally done its work.
Arizona Slim , March 9, 2017 at 8:50 amGo take a jaunt over to huffpo, at the time of this post there was not a single mention of vault 7 on the front page. Just a long series of anti trump administration articles.
Glad to know for sure who the true warmongers were all along.
Eureka Springs , March 9, 2017 at 8:59 amWe need another Church Commission.
Arizona Slim , March 9, 2017 at 1:31 pmNo.. The Church commission was a sweep it under the rug operation. It got us FISA courts. More carte blanche secrecy, not less. The commission nor the rest of the system didn't even hold violators of the time accountable.
We have files like Vault 7. Commissions rarely get in secret what we have right here before our eyes.
Foppe , March 9, 2017 at 1:55 pmWell, how about a Truth and Reconciliation Commission?
River , March 9, 2017 at 10:59 amCute but the ANC lost the war by acceding to WTO entry (which "forbade" distributive politics, land/resource redistribution, nationalizations, etc.).
DJG , March 9, 2017 at 12:49 pmNeed Langley surrounded and fired upon by tanks at this point.
Err on the side of caution.
polecat , March 9, 2017 at 12:53 pmRiver: Interesting historic parallel? I believe that the Ottomans got rid of the Janissaries that way, after the Janissaries had become a state within a state, by using cannons on their HQ
From Wiki entry, Janissaries:
The corps was abolished by Sultan Mahmud II in 1826 in the Auspicious Incident in which 6,000 or more were executed.[8]
knowbuddhau , March 9, 2017 at 9:01 am"Nuke it from orbit it's the only way to be sure . "
Stormcrow , March 9, 2017 at 9:35 amTook less than a minute to download the 513.33MB file. The passphrase is what JFK said he'd like to do to CIA: SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds.
"The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer." Henry Kissinger, 1975.
SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds. , March 9, 2017 at 10:06 amHere is Raimondo's take:
Spygate
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2017/03/07/spygate-americas-political-police-vs-donald-j-trump/The campaign to frame up and discredit Trump and his associates is characteristic of how a police state routinely operates. A national security apparatus that vacuums up all our communications and stores them for later retrieval has been utilized by political operatives to go after their enemies – and not even the President of the United States is immune. This is something that one might expect to occur in, say, Turkey, or China: that it is happening here, to the cheers of much of the media and the Democratic party, is beyond frightening.
The irony is that the existence of this dangerous apparatus – which civil libertarians have warned could and probably would be used for political purposes – has been hailed by Trump and his team as a necessary and proper function of government. Indeed, Trump has called for the execution of the person who revealed the existence of this sinister engine of oppression – Edward Snowden. Absent Snowden's revelations, we would still be in the dark as to the existence and vast scope of the NSA's surveillance.
And now the monster Trump embraced in the name of "national security" has come back to bite him.
We hear all the time that what's needed is an open and impartial "investigation" of Trump's alleged "ties" to Russia. This is dangerous nonsense: does every wild-eyed accusation from embittered losers deserve a congressional committee armed with subpoena power bent on conducting an inquisition? Certainly not.
What must be investigated is the incubation of a clandestine political police force inside the national security apparatus, one that has been unleashed against Trump – and could be deployed against anyone.
This isn't about Donald Trump. It's about preserving what's left of our old republic.
Perhapps overstated but well worth pondering.
flora , March 9, 2017 at 11:21 amYeah I downloaded it the day it came out and spent an hour or so looking at it last night. First impressions – "heyyy this is like a Hackers Guide – the sort I used in the 80s, or DerEngel's Cable Modem Hacking" of the 00s.
2nd impressions – wow it really gives foundational stuff – like "Enable Debug on PolarSSL".
3rd impressions – "I could spend hours going thru this happily ".
4th impressions – I went looking for the "juicy bits" of interest to me – SOHO routers, small routers – sadly its just a table documenting routers sold around the world, and whether these guys have put the firmware in their Stash Repository. Original firmware, not hacked one. But the repository isn't in the vault dump, AFAIK.
Its quite fascinating. But trying to find the "juicy stuff" is going to be tedious. One can spend hours and hours going thru it. To speed up going thru it, I'm going to need some tech sites to say "where to go".
Sam F , March 9, 2017 at 10:10 amIt seems clear that Wikileaks has not and will not release actual ongoing method "how-to" info or hacking scripts. They are releasing the "whats", not the tech level detailed "hows". This seems like a sane approach to releasing the data. The release appears to be for political discussion, not for spreading the hacking tools. So I wouldn't look for "juicy bits" about detailed methodology. Just my guess.
That said, love what you're doing digging into this stuff. I look forward to a more detailed report in future. Thanks.
Outis Philalithopoulos , March 9, 2017 at 10:58 amYves, I think that you much underestimate the extremity of these exposed violations of the security of freedom of expression, and of the security of private records. The WikiLeaks docs show that CIA has developed means to use all personal digital device microphones and cameras even when they are "off," and to send all of your files and personal data to themselves, and to send your private messages to themselves before they are encrypted. They have installed these spyware in the released version of Windows 10, and can easily install them on all common systems and devices.
This goes far beyond the kind of snooping that required specialized devices installed near the target, which could be controlled by warrant process. There is no control over this extreme spying. It is totalitarianism now.
This is probably the most extreme violation of the rights of citizens by a government in all of history. It is far worse than the "turnkey tyranny" against which Snowden warned, on the interception of private messages. It is tyranny itself, the death of democracy.
susan the other , March 9, 2017 at 10:59 amYour first sentence is a bit difficult to understand. If you read Yves' remarks introducing the post, she says that the revelations are "a big deal" "if the Wikileaks claim is even halfway true," while coming down hard on the MSM and others for "pooh-pooh[ing]" the story. Did you want her to add more exclamation points?
NotTimothyGeithner , March 9, 2017 at 11:34 amSo we have a zillion ways to spy and hack and deceive and assassinate, but no control. I think this is what the military refers to as "being overtaken by events."
It's easy to gather information; not so easy to analyze it, and somehow impossible to act on it in good faith. With all this ability to know stuff and surveil people the big question is, Why does everything seem so beyond our ability to control it?
We should know well in advance that banks will fail catastrophically; that we will indeed have sea level rise; that resources will run out; that water will be undrinkable; that people will be impossible to manipulate when panic hits – but what do we do? We play dirty tricks, spy on each other like voyeurs, and ignore the inevitable. Like the Stasi, we clearly know what happened, what is happening and what is going to happen. But we have no control.
Arizona Slim , March 9, 2017 at 1:33 pmMy godfather was in the CIA in the late sixties and early seventies, and he said that outside of the President's pet projects there was no way to sift through and bring important information to decision makers before it made the Washington Post (he is aware of the irony) and hit the President's breakfast table.
Old Jake , March 9, 2017 at 6:05 pmDo you mean to say that the CIA leaked like a sieve? That's my understanding of your post.
Andrew , March 9, 2017 at 11:14 amAS, I would interpret it as saying that there was so much coming in it was like trying to classify snowflakes in a snowstorm. They could pick a few subject areas to look at closely but the rest just went into the files.
Leaking like a sieve is also likely, but perhaps not the main point.
Stormcrow , March 9, 2017 at 11:20 amThe archive appears to have been circulated among government hackers and contractors in a authorized manner
There, that looks the more likely framing considering CIA & DNI on behalf of the whole US IC seemingly fostered wide dissimilation of these tools, information. Demonstration of media control an added plus.
Cheers Yves
lyman alpha blob , March 9, 2017 at 11:42 amThe Empire Strikes Back
WikiLeaks Has Joined the Trump Administration
Max Boot
Foreign Policy magazineI guess we can only expect more of this.
Todd Pierce , on the other hand, nails it. (From his Facebook page.)
The East German Stasi could only dream of the sort of surveillance the NSA and CIA do now, with just as nefarious of purposes.JTMcPhee , March 9, 2017 at 3:02 pmPerhaps the scare quotes around "international mobster" aren't really necessary.
In all this talk about the various factions aligned with and against Trump, that's one I haven't heard brought up by anybody. With all the cement poured in Trump's name over the years, it would be naive to think his businesses had not brushed up against organized crime at some point. Question is, whose side are they on?
Skip Intro , March 9, 2017 at 12:55 pmLike all the other players, the "side" they are on is them-effing-selves. And isn't that the whole problem with our misbegotten species, writ large?
Then there's this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1Hzds9aGdA Maybe these people will be around and still eating after us urban insects and rodents are long gone? Or will our rulers decide no one should survive if they don't?
tegnost , March 9, 2017 at 1:05 pmTo what extent do these hacks represent the CIA operating within the US? To what extent is that illegal? With the democrats worshipping the IC, will anyone in an official position dare to speak out?
Oregoncharles , March 9, 2017 at 2:17 pmWell we know chuckie won't speak out..
FTA "Schumer said that as he understands, intelligence officials are "very upset with how [Trump] has treated them and talked about them.""
Stephen Gardner , March 9, 2017 at 3:51 pmI've long thought that the reason Snowden was pursued so passionately was that he exposed the biggest, most embarrassing secret: that the National "Security" Agency's INTERNAL security was crap.
And here it is: "Wikileaks claims that the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal "
The CIA's internal security is crap, too. Really a lot of people should be fired over that, as well as over Snowden's release. We didn't hear of it happening in the NSA, though I'm not sure we would have. Given Gaius's description of Trump's situation, it seems unlikely it will happen this time, either. One of my hopes for a Trump administration, as long as we're stuck with it, was a thorough cleanout of the upper echelons in the IC. It's obviously long overdue, and Obama wasn't up to it. But I used the past tense because I don't think it's going to happen. Trump seems more interested in sucking up to them, presumably so they won't kill him or his family. That being one of their options.
tiebie66 , March 9, 2017 at 2:59 pmAh, that's the beauty of contracting it out. No one gets fired. Did anyone get fired because of Snowden? It was officially a contractor problem and since there are only a small number of contractors capable of doing the work, well you know. We can't get new ones.
JTMcPhee , March 9, 2017 at 3:06 pmWhat I find by far the most distressing is this: "The CIA had created, in effect, its "own NSA" with even less accountability ." [My emphasis]. It seems to characterize an organization that operates outside of any control and oversight – and one that is intentionally structuring itself that way. That worries me.
It is becoming increasingly clear that the Republic is lost because we didn't stand guard for it. Blaming others don't cut it either – we let it happen. And like the Germans about the Nazi atrocities, we will say that we didn't know about it.
Stephen Gardner , March 9, 2017 at 4:08 pmHey, I didn't let it happen. Stuff that spooks and sh!tes do behind the Lycra ™ curtain happens because it is, what is the big word again, "ineluctable." Is my neighbor to blame for having his house half eaten by both kinds of termites, where the construction is such that the infestation and damage are invisible until the vast damage is done?
nonsense factory , March 9, 2017 at 8:57 pmAnd just how were we supposed to stand guard against a secret and unaccountable organization that protected itself with a shield of lies? And every time some poor misfit complained about it they were told that they just didn't know the facts. If they only knew what our IC knows they would not complain.
It's a dangerous world out there and only our brave IC can protect us from it. Come on. Stop blaming the victim and place the blame where it belongs–our IC and MIC. I say stop feeding the beast with your loyalty to a government that has ceased to be yours.
Studiously avoid any military celebrations. Worship of the military is part of the problem. Remember, the people you thank for "their service" are as much victims as you are. Sadly they don't realize that their service is to a rotten empire that is not worthy of their sacrifice but every time we perform the obligatory ritual of thankfulness we participate in the lie that the service is to a democratic country instead of an undemocratic empire.
It's clearly a case of Wilfred Owen's classic "Dulce et Decorum Est". Read the poem, google it and read it. It is instructive: " you would not tell with such high zest To children ardent for some desperate glory, The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est Pro patria mori." Make no mistake. It is a lie and it can only be undone if we all cease to tell it.
Here's a pretty decent review of the various CIA programs revealed by Wikileaks:
http://www.libertyforjoe.com/2017/03/what-is-vault-7.html
"These CIA revelations in conjunction with those of the NSA paints a pretty dark future for privacy and freedom. Edward Snowden made us aware of the NSA's program XKEYSCORE and PRISM which are utilized to monitor and bulk collect information from virtually any electronic device on the planet and put it into a searchable database. Now Wikileaks has published what appears to be additional Big Brother techniques used by a competing agency. Say what you want about the method of discovery, but Pandora's box has been opened."
|
|
|
Dec 17, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
JBird , December 16, 2017 at 5:14 pm
Plenue , December 16, 2017 at 6:45 pmYes, it can be used for that , but often the goal is to channel, and contain the thinking from or to whatever, not degrade. Using modern neoliberal economics as an example. The older 19th and early 20th century mainstream political economy were deeper, more comprehensive, and often better at explaining economics. It was also called political economy, and not just economics for that reason.
There was a real financed campaign to narrow the focus on what we call economics today. Part of that effort was to label people very narrowly as just economic beings, which is what libertarianism is, and to label economic thought outside of it as socialism/communism, which is Stalinism, which is the gulag, which is bad thought. The economists studying this were just as intelligent, thoughtful, and incisive, but the idea, the worm of people=money=economics created a thought stop, or an an un-acknowledgment of anything else, the inability to even see anything else.
I sometimes think some are against the masses getting any higher education because one is exposed to other ways of thinking, and believing. A student might never change their beliefs, but the mind is expanded for considering the possibilities and at looking at where others are coming from. Those mindworms are also more obvious, and less useful.
So you could be ninety year blockhead, but if you are willing to listen, to think on what you are exposed to in college, your mind is expanded and strengthen. Which is perhaps the main goal of a liberal arts education. Even a very hard college education will still have some of the same effect.
JBird , December 16, 2017 at 7:41 pm"The economists studying this were just as intelligent, thoughtful, and incisive, but the idea, the worm of people=money=economics created a thought stop, or an an un-acknowledgment of anything else, the inability to even see anything else."
So would you say identity politics is the same thing in reverse? Intelligent people looking at issues from every perspective but that of money and economics?
Yes, as it is used now. It can be very important, but what I have against identity politics as it is done today is that it is the first and last answer to everything. Many people can see, they just think one's identity is paramount. MLK said it best when he talked about being judged for the content of their character rather than the color of their skin.
Please keep in mind that the identity being used could anything. Your sex, gender, orientation, age, class, religion, anything.
Today it's skin color, tomorrow?
|
|
|
Dec 03, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
SpringTexan , December 2, 2017 at 12:08 pm
Big River Bandido , December 2, 2017 at 3:10 pmAnd I feel like the Democrats get so distracted. They have been talking about sexual harassment and stuff instead of the TAX BILL. It is so damn easy to get them to take their eyes off the ball! and get played again and again. . . and TRAGIC given the consequences . . .
jrs , December 2, 2017 at 3:18 pmIt's the perfect "distraction". Allows them to engage in virtue-signaling and "fighting for average Americans". It's all phony, they always "lose" in the end getting exactly what they wanted in the first place, while not actually having to cast a vote for it.
Kabuki theater in every respect.
Allegorio , December 2, 2017 at 11:07 pmIt's all related, less safety net and more inequality means more desperation to take a job, *ANY* job, means more women putting up with sexual harassment (and workplace bullying and horrible and illegal workplace conditions etc.) as the price of a paycheck.
Expat , December 2, 2017 at 8:01 amHorrible Toomey's re-election was a parallel to the Clinton/Trump fiasco. The Democrats put up a corporate shill, Katie McGinty that no-one trusted.
"Former lobbyist Katie McGinty has spent three decades in politics getting rich off the companies she regulated and subsidized. Now this master of the revolving-door wants Pennsylvania voters to give her another perch in government: U.S. Senator." Washington Examiner.
She was a Clintonite through and through, that everyone, much like $Hillary, could see through.
tony , December 2, 2017 at 9:30 amTo paraphrase the Beatles, you say you want a revolution but you don't really mean it. You want more of the same because it makes you feel good to keep voting for your Senator or your Congressman. The others are corrupt and evil, but your guys are good. If only the others were like your guys. News flash: they are all your guys.
America is doomed. And so much the better. Despite all America has done for the world, it has also been a brutal despot. America created consumerism, super-sizing and the Kardashians. These are all unforgivable sins. America is probably the most persistently violent country in the world both domestically and internationally. No other country has invaded or occupied so much of the world, unless you count the known world in which case Macedonia wins.
This tax plan is what Americans want because they are pretty ignorant and stupid. They are incapable of understanding basic math so they can't work out the details. They believe that any tax cut is inherently good and all government is bad so that is also all that matters. They honestly think they or their kids will one day be rich so they don't want to hurt rich people. They also believe that millionaires got their money honestly and through hard work because that is what they learned from their parents.
Just send a blank check to Goldman Sachs. Keep a bit to buy a gun which you can use to either shoot up a McDonalds or blow your own brains out.
And some people still ask me why I left and don't want to come back. LOL
False Solace , December 2, 2017 at 5:18 pmMacedonia of today is not the same are that conquered the world. They stole the name from Greeks.
That being said, the US is ripe for a change. Every policy the current rulers enact seems to make things better. However, I suspect a revolution would kill majority of the population since it would disrupt the all important supply chains, so it does not seem viable.
However, a military takeover could be viable. If they are willing to wipe out the most predatory portions of the ruling class, they could fix the healthcare system, install a high-employment policy and take out the banks and even the military contractors. Which could make them very popular.
Allegorio , December 2, 2017 at 11:20 pm> a military takeover could be viable
Yeah, right. Have you seen our generals? They're just more of the same leeches we have everywhere else in the 0.01%. Have you seen any of the other military dictatorships around the world, like actually existing ones? They're all brilliantly corrupt and total failures when it comes to running any sort of economy. Not to mention the total loss of civil rights. Americans have this idiotic love of their military thanks to decades of effective propaganda and think the rule of pampered generals would somehow be better than the right to vote. Bleh.
John Wright , December 2, 2017 at 10:45 amThis is a military dictatorship. The fourth and sixth amendments have been de facto repealed. Trump cared about one thing and one thing only, namely to repeal the estate tax. He is the ultimate con man and this was his biggest con. It is truly amazing how he accomplished this. He has saved his family a billion $$$. He will now turn over governing to the generals and Goldman Sachs. He may even retire. Truly amazing. One has to admire the sheer perversity of it all. When will the American electorate get tired of being conned? The fact is they have nothing but admiration for Trump. We live in a criminal culture, winner take all. America loves its winners.
Steve , December 2, 2017 at 2:45 pmThere is an old 2003 David Brooks column in which he mentions that
"The Democrats couldn't even persuade people to oppose the repeal of the estate tax, which is explicitly for the mega-upper class. Al Gore, who ran a populist campaign, couldn't even win the votes of white males who didn't go to college, whose incomes have stagnated over the past decades and who were the explicit targets of his campaign. Why don't more Americans want to distribute more wealth down to people like themselves?"
Then Brooks goes on to explain
"The most telling polling result from the 2000 election was from a Time magazine survey that asked people if they are in the top 1 percent of earners. Nineteen percent of Americans say they are in the richest 1 percent and a further 20 percent expect to be someday. So right away you have 39 percent of Americans who thought that when Mr. Gore savaged a plan that favored the top 1 percent, he was taking a direct shot at them."
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/opinion/the-triumph-of-hope-over-self-interest.html
The Republicans have conditioned people to believe government services (except for defense/military) are run poorly and need to be "run like a business" for a profit.
The problem is that not all government services CAN be profitable (homeless care, mental health care for the poor, EPA enforcement, OSHA enforcement). And when attempts are made to privatize some government operations such as incarceration, the result is that the private company tries to maximize profits by pushing for laws to incarcerate ever more people.
The history of the USA as viewed by outsiders, maybe 50 years hence, will be that of a resource consuming nation that spent a vast fortune on military hardware and military adventures when it had little to fear due to geography, a nation that touted an independent press that was anything but, a nation that created a large media/entertainment industry which helped to keep citizens in line, a nation that fostered an overly large (by 2 or 3 times per Paul Whooley) parasitical financial industry that did not perform its prime capital allocation task competently as it veered from bubble to bubble and a nation that managed to spend great sums on medical care without covering all citizens.
But the USA does have a lot of guns and a lot of frustrated people.
Maybe Kevlar vests will be the fashion of the future?
MyLessThanPrimeBeef , December 2, 2017 at 4:08 pmThanks for the great link on how sadly uninformed average Americans are! I've been looking for it for a while and great comment!
Vatch , December 2, 2017 at 7:24 pmThe provision to do away with the estate tax, if not immediately, in the current versions (House and Senate) is great news for the 1%, and bad for the rest of us.
And if more people are not against that (thanks for quoting the NYTImes article), it's the failure of the rest of the media for not focusing more on it, but wasting time and energy on fashion, sports, entertainment, etc.
Sydney Conner , December 2, 2017 at 5:06 pmhe provision to do away with the estate tax . . . is great news for the 1%
I think it's even a little more extreme than that. The data is a few years old, but it is only the top 0.6% who are affected by estate taxes in the United States. See the data at these web sites:
https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-historical-table-17
https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-estate-tax-statistics-year-of-death-table-1
DHG , December 2, 2017 at 8:13 pmThanks for the succinct, accurate eloquent description of our nightmare reality.
JTMcPhee , December 2, 2017 at 10:34 pmJonathan Holland Becnel , December 2, 2017 at 11:51 amThe military adventures were largely in support of what Smedley Butler so accurately called the Great "Racket" of Monroe Doctrine colonialism and rapacious extractive "capitalism" aka "looting."
For those who haven't encountered Maj. Gen. Butler's take on his 33 years of serving the Oligokleptocracy, here's a link: https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html
A smart and honest fellow, who even declined as a "war hero" to serve as the oligarchs' figurehead in an earlier and clumsier plot to get rid of the trappings and regulation of "democracy:" The Business Plot, https://jtoddring.wordpress.com/2008/01/19/smedley-butler-and-the-business-plot/
It took longer and costed the rich a bit more to buy up all the bits of government, but the way they've done will likely be more compendious and lasting. Barring some "intervening event(s)".
Doomed?
Project Much?
While Republicans show their true colors, im out there seeing a resurgence of civil society. And im starting to reach Hard core Tea Party types. Jobs, Manufacturing, Actual Policy.
IOW The Revolution Is Nigh.
2018 will be a Fn watershed.
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2017 | www.unz.com
I'd like to better understand the conservative media's orgy over Harvey Weinstein, the disgraced and disgraceful Hollywood film producer and studio executive who used his power over decades to have his way with starlets.
To listen to conservative talkers, the women affronted or assaulted by Weinstein were all Shakespearean talent in the making -- female clones of Richard Burton (he had no match among women) -- who made the pilgrimage to Sodom and Gomorrah in the Hollywood Hills, for the purpose of realizing their talent, never knowing it was a meat market. Watching the women who make up the dual-perspective panels "discussing" the Weinstein saga, it's hard to tell conservative from liberal.
"Conservative" women now complain as bitterly as their liberal counterparts about "objectification."
However, the female form has always been revered; been the object of sexual longing, clothed and nude. The reason the female figure is so crudely objectified nowadays has a great deal to do with women themselves. By virtue of their conduct, women no longer inspire reverence as the fairer sex, and as epitomes of loveliness. For they are crasser, vainer, more eager to expose all voluntarily than any male. Except for Anthony Weiner, the name of an engorged organism indigenous to D.C., who was is in the habit of exposing himself as often as the Kardashians do.
The latter clan is a bevy of catty exhibitionists, controlled by a mercenary, ball-busting matriarch called Kris Kardashian. Kris is madam to America's First Family of Celebrity Pornographers. (To launch a career with a highly stylized, self-directed sex tape is no longer even condemned.) Lots of little girls, with parental approval, look up to the Kardashians.
From Kim, distaff America learns to couch a preoccupation with pornographic selfies in the therapeutic idiom. Kardashian flaunts her ass elephantiasis with pure self-love. Yet millions of her admirers depict her obscene posturing online as an attempt to come to terms with her body. "Be a little easier on myself," counsels Kim as she directs her camera to the nether reaches of her carefully posed, deformed derriere. While acting dirty and self-adoring, Kardashian delivers as close to a social jeremiad on self-esteem as her kind can muster. Genius!
Liberalism and libertinism are intertwined. The more liberal a woman, the more libertine she'll be -- and the more she'll liberate herself to be coarse, immodest, vulgar and plain repulsive. Think of the menopausal Ashley Judd rapping lewdly about her (alleged) menstrual fluids at an anti-Trump rally. Think of all those liberal, liberated grannies adorning pussy dunce-caps on the same occasion.
By nature, the human woman is a peacock. We like to be noticed. The conservative among us prefer the allure of modesty. The sluts among us don't. On social media, women outstrip men in the narcissistic and exhibitionist departments. In TV ads, American women, fat, thin, young and old, are grinding their bottoms, spreading their legs, showing the contours of their crotches, and dancing as though possessed (or like primates on heat), abandoning any semblance of femininity and gentility, all the while laughing like hyenas and hollering hokum like, "I Own It."
The phrase a "bum's rush" means "throw the bum out!" When it comes to Allison Williams, daughter of NBC icon Brian Williams, a bum's rush takes on new meaning. Thanks in no small measure to her famous father, the young woman has become a sitcom star. And Ms. Williams has worked extra-hard to hone all aspects of an actress's instrument (the body). Alison has carried forth enthusiastically about a groundbreaking scene dedicated to exploring "ass motorboating" or "booty-eating ," on HBO's "Girls."
The lewder, more pornographic, and less talented at their craft popular icons become -- the louder the Left lauds their artistically dodgy output. (The "Right" just keeps moving Left.) "Singer" Miley Cyrus was mocked before she began twerking tush, thrusting pelvis and twirling tongue. Only then had she arrived as an artist, in the eyes of "critics" on the Left. The power of the average pop artist and her products, Miley's included, lies in the pornography that is her "art," in her hackneyed political posturing, and in the fantastic technology that is Auto-Tune (without which all the sound you'd hear these "singers" emit would be a bedroom whisper).
Liberal women, the majority, go about seriously and studiously cultivating their degeneracy. If "Raising Skirts to Celebrate the Diversity of Vaginas" sounds foul, wait for the accompanying images. These show feral creatures (women, presumably), skirts hoisted, gobs agape, some squatting like farmhands in an outhouse, all yelling about their orifices.
Do you know of a comparable man's movement? If anything, men are punished when they react normally to women behaving badly .
Female soldiers got naked and uploaded explicit images of themselves to an online portal. The normals -- male soldiers -- shared the images and were promptly punished for so doing. And the conservative side of that ubiquitous, dueling-perspectives political panel approved of the punishment meted to the men.
So endemic is distaff degeneracy these days that "protesters" routinely disrobe or perform lewd acts with objects in public. Vladimir Putin is a great man if only for arresting a demented band of performance artists, Pussy Riot, for desecrating a Russian church.
If men flashed for freedom; they'd be arrested, jailed and placed on the National Sex Offender Registry.
Talk about the empress being in the buff, I almost forgot to attach an image of this celebrity, bare-bottomed on the red-carpet. Rose McGowan is hardly unique. Many a star will arrive at these events barely clothed. (Here are 38 more near-naked Red-Carpet appearances .)
Expect a feminist lecture about a woman's right to pretend her bare bottom is haute couture, rather than ho couture, and expecting the Harveys of the world to behave like choir boys around her. Fine.
Being British, BBC News anchors are not nearly as dour about the Harvey hysteria as the American anchors. A female presenter began a Sweinstein segment by saying men claim the coverage of the scandal is excessive; women say the opposite. "That's why we're covering it," quipped her witty male sidekick. She roared with laughter. That's my girl!
Look, Harvey is a lowlife. But Hollywood hos are not as the sanctimonious Sean Hannity portrays them: "naive, innocent young things," dreams shattered.
Ilana Mercer has been writing a weekly paleolibertarian column since 1999, and is the author of The Trump Revolution: The Donald's Creative Destruction Deconstructed (June, 2016) & Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011). Follow her on Twitter: https://twitter.com/IlanaMercer .
whorefinder , Website October 20, 2017 at 12:22 am GMT
Agreed; most of those women are feigning shock at what happened. They're piling on now to prevent being called out as the prostitutes they are.TheJester , October 20, 2017 at 3:57 am GMTThank you, Ilana, for pointing out the hypocrisy of women behaving like sluts who object to men reacting to them signaling the world that they are sluts. Is the real issue that actresses in Hollywood will only take off their clothes for hard cash and Harvey was not offering hard cash but only nebulous hints at future roles in his productions? This is important when surveying the careers of many of the actresses jumping on the bandwagon to destroy Harvey Weinstein. We know they have and will take off their clothes for the right price.Rurik , October 20, 2017 at 4:12 am GMTThis is captured in the story of a man offering a woman a million dollars to go to bed with him. She agrees. Then, he changes the offer to one dollar. The woman objects! "What do you think I am a prostitute." The man answers, "We know what you are. We're negotiating the price."
Feminism promises women empowerment. However, there is a pornographic side to the promise. There are legions of women trying to give the world a hard-on for attention, money, status, etc. When the world reacts, as in the story, they say, "Don't touch me what do you think I am?"
So, it's about power and control, something dear to the hearts of feminists. "You can want me but you can't have me (until you meet my price)." Men have a word for these women. We call them "prick teasers". It is a dispute over price, and it makes men very, very angry to react to the signals and then be ridiculed for reacting to the signals.
Kirt , October 20, 2017 at 4:15 am GMTwho used his power over decades to have his way with starlets.
shiksas
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=shiksas&form=HDRSC2&first=1&cw=1263&ch=907
Your best column ever, Ilana! An instant Unz Review classic.utu , October 20, 2017 at 5:23 am GMTChief deputy US Marshal 'had sex with multiple women in his office in exchange for prime parking spots outside his office'Thomm , October 20, 2017 at 5:26 am GMTIf they do it for parking spots should anybody be surprised they do it for a movie career?
Cuckservatives are hardcore woman-worshipping feminists first and foremost. They will put aside any other objective when the prospect of groveling to women presents itself.Dave Pinsen , Website October 20, 2017 at 5:40 am GMTIlana,unpc downunder , October 20, 2017 at 6:41 am GMTMiley Cyrus may have been an exhibitionist earlier in her career, but no scare quotes belong around "singer" when describing her. She can sing. See below.
Must as I hate a lot of liberal ideology, I would disagree with the argument that left-liberal woman are more libertine than mainstream conservative women. Social class, personality and intelligence have a much bigger bearing on female (and male) sexual behaviour than political ideology. And there is no evidence than liberal women tend to be more sexually explicit in their appearance than non-liberal women. The make up is thicker, the women are louder, and the skirts are shorter on Fox News rather than CNN.Dan Hayes , October 20, 2017 at 6:49 am GMTLiberal women like Ashley Judd making vulgar comments to annoy religious conservatives doesn't really count. Playing up for the camera isn't necessarily an indication of real life behaviour.
Ilana,Wally , Website October 20, 2017 at 6:58 am GMTThank you for saying what you said about more equitably apportioning the blame among males and females. Fortunately or unfortunately only a woman such as you can say such things in our PC world. In our unfair world this is the best that is possible and for this you deserve our thanks.
Clueless 'feminists' ignore Muslim treatment of women while they protest for women's dignity, yet they say that Miley Cyrus is advancing women's dignity.Seraphim , October 20, 2017 at 7:15 am GMTWomen are legally stoned in Muslim countries and gays & lesbians are legally executed for being gay / lesbian in Muslim countries. And HILLARY took millions in 'donations' from those countries.
The Clearest Problem With Modern Feminism
Muslim Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), where are the 'feminists'?Something is deeply wrong when people show solidarity with Muslims who believe that women should be forced have their clitorises cut off.
Not Republican, but Muslim
In the grand times of Hollywood, before the War, an open secret was that all aspiring starlets had to pass through the couch of a personage known by the nickname of Ben Cinema or Kalkeinstein, (described as "horrible and more! ugly, old and dirty, lumbering and stupid, a real piece of garbage, in his person and in his surroundings a real vomiting forth from the ghetto").Simon in London , October 20, 2017 at 7:38 am GMT
History repeats itselfWell I think there's a causality issue here. Weinstein & co pick on them when they're mostly very young; they become degenerate later. There is an element of truth, but the really obscene behaviour is a feature of established veterans.The Alarmist , October 20, 2017 at 8:41 am GMTanimalogic , October 20, 2017 at 9:42 am GMT"To listen to conservative talkers ."
There's your problem. Reminds me of an old joke:
Patient: Doctor, it hurts my head when I bang it against the wall!
Doctor: Have you tried not banging your head against the wall?
Great article. Also funny: "ho couture" well, I liked it.Greg Bacon , Website October 20, 2017 at 9:51 am GMT
Couple points:
Worth remembering that often Weinstein selected women with NO power/influence; ie those way beneath Kardashians etc. This is not to contest Illana's points about female celebrities exploiting their sexuality, merely to note that Weinstein really was a slithering predator.Also worth noting that, although dreckification of female (actually, all) sexuality goes beyond simple commerce, there has been a rough parallel between unleashed Capitalism (neoliberalism) & unleashed sexuality. Of course, it's "old hat" that "sex sells" however, now increasing degrees of pornography are accepted, indeed celebrated as "liberated", artistic etc.
Illana is completly correct when she refers to the rank hypocracy re: male female sexuality. definitely "not equal" (unless male sexuality is considered under the heading of "gay" etc)
How can Hollywood proclaim to always be for women and their rights, shouting they are at the front of protecting women when the movie factories in that town have portrayed many a lead actress as a prostitute?Renoman , October 20, 2017 at 10:03 am GMTThis isn't something recent, women as prostitutes in films goes back decades. How can degrading women by showing them as money-craving whores be in any way defending women?
For thousands of years the terms Prostitute and Actress were interchangeable. Sure Harve is a douche bag but he's far from the only one. They knew what they were in for and were duly compensated.Lara , October 20, 2017 at 12:53 pm GMTIt's not that hard to deflect unwanted male attention or to downplay your looks. When I hear a woman complain of sexual harassment, I suspect she is most likely a trouble maker and desperate for attention. There are likely exceptions, but this tends to be my first reaction. It's rarely the prettiest women who complain of sexual harassment.UKUSA-1 , October 20, 2017 at 12:55 pm GMTI know plenty of liberal women who are not crude nor overtly sexual. I guess they just ignore that facet of the left.
Weinstein has always defended and represented the Western Values .imbroglio , October 20, 2017 at 1:04 pm GMTWhen I was in grad school, there were some women grad students who exchanged sexual favors for the possibility of career advancement. Sometimes the women initiated the swap. Sometimes the more well-connected male (or female) faculty member or administrator initiated the swap. Some women (and possibly men) who were propositioned declined.Anonymous , Disclaimer October 20, 2017 at 1:17 pm GMTQuery: If you said yes and got your payoff and if those who said no didn't get an equivalent payoff and if, by virtue of the payoff, you succeeded while those who declined the exchange didn't succeed, do you owe them anything? Morally.
Many who are posting #metoo on social media seem to feel that their membership in the victim class entitles them to receive benefits in exchange for sexual favors and then to recover, in attitudes of righteousness, the consideration they paid for those benefits: shaming, intimidating and threatening, under potential penalty of false or ambiguoous accusation, those who might seek to call them on their hypocrisy.
And let's not turn a blind eye to the feminized male enablers who seek women's approval by lauding this instance of having one's cake and eating it too.
Lest I be susceptible to laches (the legal term for clean hands that do the dirty work,) I was never tempted and, perhaps for that reason, recall the lady who died and sought admission to the pearly gates.
"May I have some evidence of your virtue," Saint Peter said as he riffled through her dossier.
"Indeed. I never succumbed to temptation," the lady proudly asserted.
"But were you ever tempted?"
"No," she said, fearing to lie to Saint Peter.
"Well, madam, if you've never been tempted, you get no credit for not having succumbed to it."Excellent article, Ms. Mercer. And thanks for the puncture holes delivered to Conservative Inc. (Hannity etal). As to the, er, "ladies" who prowl about Hollywood and are now crying wolf, "what goes around comes around."anonymous , Disclaimer October 20, 2017 at 1:28 pm GMTWhat's the big difference between Weinstein and former president Bill Clinton except that one was the frickin president of the US? Clinton used his various positions throughout the years to intimidate women, from the days of using Arkansas state troopers to act as procurers for him to later using federal agencies to harass them into shutting up. His wife Hillary, the almost-president, ran interference for him in muzzling the various women who might have spilled the beans. The Clintons postured themselves as champions of women's rights even as the reality of this sleazy couple was really tawdry. Weinstein was just a studio boss with money and film roles to dispense to a never-ending line of wannabe actresses. He fits right in with the Clintons as part of the Hollywood celebrity and glitz crowd and Hillary would never have called him a "deplorable". Yet even now there's many people who are Clinton fans and supporters even as they hypocritically play this game of 'get the fat guy'. The Clintons are a hundred times worse.Sergey Krieger , October 20, 2017 at 1:35 pm GMTThis is how feminine looks like. Note the class, the behavior and the voice of course. :Anon , Disclaimer October 20, 2017 at 1:45 pm GMT@Mallaken satifka , October 20, 2017 at 2:21 pm GMTYou do not need philosophy to explain a love for money. Whether the profiteering Kardashians or the profiteering Madonna (and a legion of her imitators), these women did the indecent, lewd, into-your-face pornographic performances for financial gains. They have been denigrating themselves (and other women, by association) for money. They wanted the money. By any means.
That the US government has extolled the deeply amoral Pussy Riot scum tells a lot about the moral crisis in the US, including the unending and very expensive wars of aggression run by the country that has no money for a single-payer medical system.
The pink pussies that demonstrated against Donald and for Hilary, used to be offended when reminded about Libyan tragedy ("we came, we saw, he died, ha, ha, ha ") and about the hundreds of thousands of human beings (including thousands and thousands children) slaughtered there on the Obama/Clinton watch. Did we have the pink pussies demonstrating against Obama's seven wars? – No. The pink pussies needed some brainwashing before suddenly going into a public activism phase with silly hats on their empty heads. Are pussy hats demonstrating against the impending wars of the US with Iran and Korea? – No. Nobody gave an order for and provided money for organizing the parades. These "progressive" female activists are ridiculous.
By the way, is Dershowitz cleared re his visits to Lolita Island where real underage victims were held for the pleasure of powerful sex predators?
I love reading Ilana Mercer's politically incorrect take on events and her brilliant use of language.. Seeing how far US society has descended since I was growing up in the 1960′s, I'm glad to be a married, monogamous senior citizen. We certainly had our problems then, with the Vietnam War at the top of the list, but at least the women were not covered in disgusting tattoos and man-hating feminism was still in its infancy.c matt , October 20, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMTI still don't get all the fuss about this. The wannabe starlets knew the price of fame and fortune (or if not, found out quickly), and were willing to pay it. It is just straight up prostitution. Seems to me the only ones with a claim are the ones who paid the price and didn't get the part.Andrei Martyanov , Website October 20, 2017 at 2:36 pm GMT@Sergey Kriegergwynedd1 , October 20, 2017 at 2:43 pm GMTSergey, you posted here an example of femininity of Senchina – a value long destroyed by feminism in the West–as opposed to sexuality, which is the fad. It is the same as comparing real love and real intimacy to raw sex, or porn. For former one needs a real woman, for the latter a slut will suffice.
The scandal, as I have portrayed it, was the leftist hypocrisy in their political attacks against Trump. All Trump did was describe a woman's nature around powerful men. They volunteer themselves. Weinstein was far more coercive and they said nothing all these years. Women were victimized by this , but not the ones we know. It was the women who didn't advance their careers by any means who were victims. Perhaps that is one reason why women do not draw so much at the box office. We do not get to enjoy the talent that got them there.Rurik , October 20, 2017 at 2:48 pm GMTYes, the culture today is far, far more crass and degenerate than say, in the 50s, when Leave it to Beaver played on America's TVs, and Norman Rockwell and all that. But what has happened to our culture? Has the race into the sewer been a consequence of loose women of America (England, etc..) driving the decline? Or, are the causes a more a top down affair? IOW resulting from the big-money producers and all those men who run Hollywood?Mark Presco , Website October 20, 2017 at 2:53 pm GMTwomen, as indeed many men, are given to fashions and peer pressure. If the prevailing culture is one of modesty and self-respect, the women's behavior will reflect that. The American women of the 1950s were of more or less the same stock of women as the gutter skanks Ilana rightfully laments today, but did women drive this downward trend, or did (a few) men?
One thing that has been noticed, are the striking similarities between American culture today and that of Weimar, Germany. Weimar was notoriously corrupt, with sexual degeneracy and prostitution rampant. Berlin was described as a giant brothel, where the desperate German youth were exploited and debased.
Perhaps it was the fault of those young Germans who, while likely starving from the wrath and rapine of the allies, (who deliberately looted the German economy dry). Or perhaps it was more the fault of the wealthy and powerful non-German men, who preyed on these young, often desperate women (and girls and boys). But the parallels are unmistakable.
which is why people are posting propaganda cartoons from back then, because the images are eerily familiar to what seems to be going on today, no?
https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-01c658fd480082cc2e02392133d69190-c?convert_to_webp=true
how can you not think of Harvey Weinstein when you see those cartoons?
Perhaps Ilana is right, and the blame starts and ends with the women. But then I think of all those Mickey Mouse Club girls who turned into skanks,
[I won't post the pictures, but you can find them..]
and I notice that they were raised in Hollywood, like Miley Cyrus, who seemed to be groomed specifically as an all American type of innocent Hanna Montana who then morphs straight into the gutter skank we all wince at- for all those preteen American girls to emulate. Just like Madonna was a generation before.
I confess it seems to me that the skankification of America's young women is part of a deliberate agenda coming straight out of Hollywood. No?
Women have been sexually exploiting Men for a living for 5 million years. Women's price for sex has always been that men provision them. There is nothing wrong with this. It helped shaped both human physical and cultural evolution and we might have gone extinct without it.Andrei Martyanov , Website October 20, 2017 at 2:55 pm GMTThe thing that interests me is, why now. The casting couch has been a stereotype all of my life. Why the piling on at this time?
@c mattJoe Hide , October 20, 2017 at 3:00 pm GMTI still don't get all the fuss about this.
The fuss is about glamour Hollywood whores trying to teach others non-stop what is good and right. Obviously they do all this form the supposition that prostitution is good and liberating. You know, lowest common denominator? Most of them are also dumb as fvcks and this goes not only to wo..sluts there, to the so called men too. Look at Clooneys and other Damons of that cabal. They should concentrate on doing what they allegedly do best–pretend to be other people. Most of them have no serious analytical skills to start with. Hey, at least Brad Pitt is in this just for fvcking chicks at the height of their hotness–at least it is honest.
I first began to totally ignore the MSM's comments on Putin when he had the degeneracy of the "Pussy Riot" in a Russian Church forcefully stopped. It was great to see the Cossacks beat the beejebans out of those morally offensive hooligans trying to illegally impose George Soro's world view on others.Ludwig Watzal , Website October 20, 2017 at 3:15 pm GMTEvery woman could have said No to Mr. "Sweinstein". Bros before hos are the name of the game not only in Hollywood. The hypocrites should not lament. It takes two to tango!Wally , Website October 20, 2017 at 3:37 pm GMT@RurikRurik , October 20, 2017 at 4:00 pm GMT"I confess it seems to me that the skankification of America's young women is part of a deliberate agenda coming straight out of Hollywood. No?"
Here you go. From: 'The Spirit Of Militarism', by Nahum Goldmann. Goldmann was the founder & president of the World Jewish Congress:
"The historical mission of our world revolution is to rearrange a new culture of humanity to replace the previous social system. This conversion and re-organization of global society requires two essential steps: firstly, the destruction of the old established order, secondly, design and imposition of the new order. The first stage requires elimination of all frontier borders, nationhood and culture, public policy ethical barriers and social definitions, only then can the destroyed old system elements be replaced by the imposed system elements of our new order.
The first task of our world revolution is Destruction. All social strata and social formations created by traditional society must be annihilated, individual men and women must be uprooted from their ancestral environment, torn out of their native milieus, no tradition of any type shall be permitted to remain as sacrosanct, traditional social norms must only be viewed as a disease to be eradicated, the ruling dictum of the new order is; nothing is good so everything must be criticized and abolished, everything that was, must be gone."
@Mark Prescounit472 , October 20, 2017 at 4:16 pm GMTThe casting couch has been a stereotype all of my life. Why the piling on at this time?
perhaps because of The Trumpening
perhaps now that Trump is in DC, there are forces at work that have bristled under the excruciatingly dishonest levels of hypocrisy coming out of the leftisphere.
accusing Trump of being disrespectful to women, as they rape women and girls wholesale, and the entire leftist power structure always looks the other way, so long as the rapist is a leftist himself, and will use his power for the leftist agenda.
so these serial predators like Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein all get a pass from the feminists and liberal, progressives, so long as they assist with The Agenda to destroy Western Civilization, (and the people who created it ; ).
As long as Bill Clinton hails the day when whites will be a minority in this country, (to the cheers of liberal college students), he can rape women all day long. He can sexually harass, as the most powerful man in the world, powerless girls in the White House, and all to a thunderous silence from the entire leftist, progressive (hypocritical / hatred-consumed) power structure. Because he works towards their agenda. [the same agenda, BTW - that destroyed S. Africa and Rhodesia]But for a man like Trump, who seems to have raised daughters who respect themselves, and seem to conduct themselves with a certain dignity- that isn't what's important. What's important is what is always important
THE AGENDA
the relentless, drum-beating agenda to destroy Western values. To eviscerate the culture of 1950s America (with virtues like honor and temperance) once and for all, and replace it with a septic tank value system, where self-respect is replaced with self-loathing. Where dignity and femininity is replace with twerking with your tongue out. Where Hollywood starlets howl about how "nasty" they are, as if being a skank is a moral badge of feminine honor.
That's what's going on here. We're in the trenches of the cold culture war, turned hot culture war.
They wanted to destroy Trump and the deplorables with shrieking about how Trump was disrespectful to women. But now the cover of the giant septic tank known as Hollywood has been lifted off, for all the world to gasp at the slithering creatures and whiff the terrible stench.
I wonder if it's a kind of payback time for Hillary and her army of morally preening orcs, feasting on the flesh of young women, and smacking their liver lips with anticipation of the next young shiksa to walk though that hotel room door.
I only hope we get an investigation into Pizzagate next, with perhaps a nice expose' of Jeffrey Epstein's Child Rape Island, and all those liberal, progressive morally preening men who take so many trips there.
this might just be all a sign of the great Trumpening
Let's be fair here. Women strut their 'stuff' same as men but in a different way. A man will buy a very expensive car or some other display of wealth or power to attract a female and females respond to these displays by highlighting their sexual desirability and availability. We are animals seeking mates after all and males have to demonstrate their dominance in nature before the female will mate with the male. Thus a Harvey Weinstein could no more have sex with an Ashley Judd than a derelict laying on the sidewalk absent some display of power and wealth that interested Judd.mp , October 20, 2017 at 4:41 pm GMTThe other side of this coin is that a woman cannot compel a man to have sex with her no matter how much money or power she has. Men do not sexually respond to a physically repulsive female and he cannot 'fake' an orgasm. This is why I do not believe in criminally prosecuting, e.g., a female school teacher for having sex with a 16 year old student. Fire her for improper conduct but jail her? Come on the boy was willing if he had sex with her!
It's like the old joke: Will you have sex with me for a million dollars? OK. What about one dollar? What kind of girl do you think I am? We've already established what kind of girl you are. We're just negotiating.Chicot le Fou , October 20, 2017 at 5:20 pm GMTExcellent piece, showcasing your good sense as always. I yield to no man in my hyper enthusiasm for the undraped female form but to cynically "launch a career with a highly stylized, self-directed sex tape" incites my scorn, not lust. I have been fed up for years when perusing the morning headlines seeing articles about the latest, most egregious examples of Hollyweird bimbos showing up at events more or less naked. I've long since ceased looking or caring; they just annoy me.Eric the Manager , October 20, 2017 at 5:54 pm GMTPutting all one's assets on constant public display destroys the allure and mystery that is woman and does not empower them, it makes them the "pieces of meat" that they've been screaming about for close on a century, especially for the last 50 odd years. Women have made quite the cottage industry of whining that guys don't understand them, "don't get it" but refuse to acknowledge the obverse. By tripping the lights fantastic with their fun bits exposed they appear to the primal great white shark which is the male sex drive as easily gotten chum; and like the Assyrian of old, we fall upon and devour them, in a manner of speaking. A rather old adage said "If it ain't for sale, don't advertise it". As for Harvey, the fascination of the hogs at the slop trough is that the revolting pig~man didn't just want to have sex with these women, but to have them observe his disgusting degeneracy. The Cities of the Pains had nothing on us.
I am nearly 60 years old. And jokes and stories about "hollywood casting couches" and how pretty young women got roles in productions have been around longer than I have. To me, this whole story is just filed under more "fake news". No, I don't doubt the stories. I don't doubt that harvey was not a good man. But, its all basically propaganda. Harvey supported a political opponent of the people now attacking him 24.7 all over the right-wing media, so now these stories that are older than I am are suddenly headline news and the big lead on right-wing sites all over the internet.Art , October 20, 2017 at 6:37 pm GMTThese stories have even bumped the stories about which NFL players should be lined up in front of a firing squad and shot for not maintain the proper posture during the sacred National Anthem here in the Land of the Free.
So, to me, this just more Fake News. Its propaganda and political attack using weaponized 'news'. And I don't care. If I had a daughter going to Hollywood, I'd give her the same warnings about scum-bags in the movie business and the casting couch that have been given out for a century now. Nothing new here.
Strange -- it seems that Harvey had the only casting couch in Tinsel Town. Hollywood is wall to wall Jews – yet NO new Jew names are being exposed by all those brave women. Only Gentile names.Anon , Disclaimer October 20, 2017 at 7:10 pm GMTHmm??? What could be going on? Stonewalling maybe – total fear absolutely! Say it isn't so.
p.s. Maybe Weinstein, Woody Allen, Polansky, and Weiner are the only sex obsessed Jews?
@druidSean , October 20, 2017 at 7:57 pm GMTHold your horses. Bill Clinton is Jewish?
@ArtMarkus Aurelius Tarkus , October 20, 2017 at 8:10 pm GMTAs I understand it, movies is a very high stakes business, and you cannot get cast in a role by being alone with an obviously-horny-as-a-jackrabbit producer and submitting to sex acts or harassment. It doesn't guarantee anything, and they all knew it.
Casting happens though getting an agent, who sends you to an audition, where there are other people around and the acts performed are of an acting nature. The only professional film actor I know cited Ellen Barkin's acting as superlative. Barkin studied acting for ten years before landing her first audition.
I try to restrict devoting any of the precious time I have left on Earth to such matters. I made an exception for the Mercer column, which is spot on. 99% of the time, I merely see the unavoidable headlines and continue surfing for something worth the time to read or watch.in the middle , October 20, 2017 at 8:30 pm GMTMy one take-away from l'affaire Weinstein is this: I am enormously enjoying the internecine, riotous and indiscriminate feeding frenzy it has generated. Like Heinlein's Igli, the Left is consuming itself.
@whorefindernjguy73 , October 20, 2017 at 8:34 pm GMTTheir existence is only to provide sexual pleasure to these perverts, and they like it; however, when something goes wrong, they howl and cry, 'he raped me!" Reminds me when I was at a military base, and a friend of mine found his girlfriend screwing another guy, she claimed, well, rape! How appropriate. the poor guy was court martial-ed, and done with!
@wowAnon , Disclaimer October 20, 2017 at 9:00 pm GMTI am 1000X more attractive and in far better shape that Harvey Fatstein. Yet he has tapped far better poon than I can ever hope to tap.
You should have gone into show biz. If you're what you claim to be, you've have tapped more poon than Justin Timberlake and John Mayer combined. And it would have all been consensual, so no worry about lawsuits.
@Anon-ogBeefcake the Mighty , October 20, 2017 at 10:17 pm GMTAlden's response to you is perfectly correct. But you'd have a good point if you talked about MGM.
Ms. Mercer is not defending Weinstein but attacking the women who allowed this to go on for decades. I declare a half-hearted "boycott" against Hollywood every time something like this happens; alas, this is rendered without force by the fact that I refuse to pay modern ticket prices for what is likely utter trash anyway.
I tend to assume by default that Hollywood producers (Jewish or otherwise) pressure actresses to have sex, so even if Weinstein was particularly egregious, I wonder what he really did to ignite this shit-storm. He obviously pissed off the wrong person(s).ThreeCranes , October 20, 2017 at 10:52 pm GMT@Sergey Kriegergp , October 21, 2017 at 12:53 am GMTSergey, realistically, most women–especially the lumbering, low skill, know-nothing women of America–cannot possibly match the woman you put before us in the video above.
They can't measure up and they know it. So instead of dieting, exercising, taking voice lessons or even mastering humble talents like cooking and sewing they take the cowards way out and denigrate her. They will revile her as an unliberated woman who depends on male affirmation for her self esteem, an unwitting tool of the Patriarchy.
While they, themselves? They don't need to charm no stinking men. They themselves depend on their cohort of disagreeable feminists for their "self esteem".
"The conservative among us prefer the allure of modesty." I'm a fan of 1970s-1980s Bollywood, with its casts of heart-stoppingly beautiful women, like Hema Malini and Sridevi, who performed in modest attire, and were all the more lovely for it. I can't bear to watch today's Bollywood product, featuring writhing undressed wenches indistinguishable from western gangsta ho's. Decades ago, Indian film assimilation from western pop culture often yielded bizarre but charmingly cute mash-ups, but now they've mimicked the very worst of what we have. Or maybe now we have only cultural garbage left for them to adapt.
|
|
|
Oct 11, 2017 | www.unz.com
DN: What about the impact that you've seen of identity politics in America?
CH: Well, identity politics defines the immaturity of the left. The corporate state embraced identity politics. We saw where identity politics got us with Barack Obama, which is worse than nowhere. He was, as Cornel West said, a black mascot for Wall Street, and now he is going around to collect his fees for selling us out.
My favorite kind of anecdotal story about identity politics: Cornel West and I, along with others, led a march of homeless people on the Democratic National Convention session in Philadelphia. There was an event that night. It was packed with hundreds of people, mostly angry Bernie Sanders supporters. I had been asked to come speak. And in the back room, there was a group of younger activists, one who said, "We're not letting the white guy go first." Then he got up and gave a speech about how everybody now had to vote for Hillary Clinton. That's kind of where identity politics gets you. There is a big difference between shills for corporate capitalism and imperialism, like Corey Booker and Van Jones, and true radicals like Glen Ford and Ajamu Baraka. The corporate state carefully selects and promotes women, or people of color, to be masks for its cruelty and exploitation.
It is extremely important, obviously, that those voices are heard, but not those voices that have sold out to the power elite. The feminist movement is a perfect example of this. The old feminism, which I admire, the Andrea Dworkin kind of feminism, was about empowering oppressed women. This form of feminism did not try to justify prostitution as sex work. It knew that it is just as wrong to abuse a woman in a sweatshop as it is in the sex trade. The new form of feminism is an example of the poison of neoliberalism. It is about having a woman CEO or woman president, who will, like Hillary Clinton, serve the systems of oppression. It posits that prostitution is about choice. What woman, given a stable income and security, would choose to be raped for a living? Identity politics is anti-politics.
|
|
|
www.moonofalabama.org
Piotr Berman | May 18, 2017 10:04:50 PM | 77"Donald Trump used alt-right messaging to get into the White House, but he and his third-rate staff haven't the slightest clue of what gave rise to the deplorables in the first place and how to address the root despair of the western working class." VietnamVetI do not know how highly rated the staff was, but it was sufficiently high. If the opponent has fourth-rate staff, it would be wasteful to use anything better than third-rate. Figuring what gave rise to the deplorable is a wasted effort, sociologist differ, and in politics the "root causes" matter only a little.
And all authorities suggest to exploit the despair with soundbites and posturing. Granted, this is a platitude, but how to obtain compelling soundbites and posturing? I think that the best technique is based on so-called wedge issues.
A good wedge issue should raise passions on "both sides" but not so much in the "center", mostly clueless undecided voters.
Calibrate your position so it is a good scrap of meat for your "base" while it drives the adversaries to conniptions, the conniptions provide talking points and together, drive the clueless in your direction. Wash, repeat.
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
(Never mind that if Thomas Frank is correct, and the Democrats are the party of the professional classes, the Democrats cannot possibly be the party of "marginalized" people.) Being the sort of person I am, my first thought was to ask myself what the heck Reid could mean by "tribe," and how a "tribe" can act as a political entity.[1] Naturally, I looked to the Internet and did a cursory search; and it turns out that, at least at the scholarly level, the very notion of "tribe" is both contested and a product of colonialism. David Wiley, Department of Sociology and African Studies, Michigan State University, 2013
Tribe, a concept that has endeared itself to Western scholars, journalists, and the public for a century, is primarily a means to reduce for readers the complexity of the non-Western societies of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the American plains. It is no accident that the contemporary uses of the term tribe were developed during the 19th-century rise of evolutionary and racist theories to designate alien non-white peoples as inferior or less civilized and as having not yet evolved from a simpler, primal state. The uses and definitions of 'tribe' in the sociological and anthropological literature are varied and conflicting. Some authors appear to define tribe as common language, others as common culture, some as ancestral lineages, and others as common government or rulers. As anthropologist Michael Olen notes, "The term tribe has never satisfied anthropologists, because of its many uses and connotations. Societies that are classified as tribal seem to be very diverse in their organization, having little in common." Morton H. Fried and this author contend that "the term is so ambiguous and confusing that it should be abandoned by social scientists."
Even more striking is the invention of ethnic (labeled tribal) identities and their varied and plastic salience across the African continent. In some cases, "tribal identifies" have been invented in order to unite colonial and post-colonial clerical workers or other occupational and social groups to serve the interests of the members even though they were not bound together by language or lineage.
In the United States, where similar derogatory language of tribe has been used to characterize and stereotype Native American or First Nations peoples, the identity has been reified in federal legislation that requires "tribes," formerly under the Bureau of Indian Affairs, to accept that formal tribal identification in order to access the hunting, fishing, farming, and casino rights of reservations. Almost humorously, the Menominee peoples of Wisconsin decided to decline that nomenclature because many members lived in Milwaukee and other non-reservation sites; however, they then learned they must reverse that vote and re-declare themselves as "a tribe" in order to regain their reservation rights.
So, from the 30,000 foot level, it seems unlikely that what scholars mean (or do not mean) by "tribe" is the same as what Reid means, simply because there is no coherent meaning to be had.[2] My second thought was to try to fit "tribe" into the framework of identity politics, where tribes would be identities, or possibly bundles of allied[3] identities. Here's a handy chart showing the various ways that identity can be conceptualized, from Jessica A. Clarke*, "Identity and Form," California Law Review , 2015:
(Clarke gives definitions of ascriptive, elective, and formal identity -- for Adolph Reed on ascriptive identity, see here -- but I think the definitions are clear enough for our purposes from the examples in the table.) However, if we look back to Reid's quote, we see that she conflates ascriptive identity ("black or brown") with elective identity ("the sort of Pabst Blue Ribbon voter, the kind of Coors Lite-drinking voter")[4], and also conflates both of those with formal identity (if one's ethnicity be defined by one's own citizenship papers, or those of one's parents, or a changed surname; one thinks of Asian cultures putting the family name last in American culture, for example). So there is no coherence to be found here, either.
Let's return then to Reid's words, and look to her operational definition:
which party goes out and find more people who are like them
It's not clear to me whether Reid conceptualize parties as tribes, or as meta-tribes of tribes bundled together; I'm guessing the latter. Here is an example of Reid's conceptualizations ("like" each other) in action. From Teen Vogue , "Amandla Stenberg and Janelle Monáe Open Up About Racism and Where They Were During the Election" (2017). Somewhat too much of this, but the build-up is important:
AMANDLA STENBERG: Janelle frigging Monáe!?
JANELLE MONÁE: Hi, sweetie. You know I love, love, love you. First: pronouns! I want to make sure that I'm being respectful of how I'm referring to you. I know that the way we view ourselves and how we want to be addressed can change depending on where we are in life.
AS: I love that you asked me! Thank you. I have felt at times that she/her pronouns weren't entirely fitting, but I've never felt uncomfortable with them. It's more important for me to open up that conversation around pronouns and how gender itself is a construct that doesn't make much sense in our society.
JM: Got it. I remember seeing you for the first time in Colombiana, and then, like many people, I was drawn to your character in The Hunger Games as Rue. I'm a huge sci-fi nerd, so just seeing this little black girl in a dystopian world being a hero for an oppressed community, I was intrigued! The way you embodied this character felt like you were mature enough to understand how important she was to the movie but also how important the Rues all over the world are to our society.
AS: That's one of the best compliments that I've received! I remember we saw each other at the Tyler, the Creator show; we took a picture with Solange. You were wearing a jacket that said "black girl magic" on it, and I flipped out.
JM: Me, too! I was like, I am right between you and Solange, two people who are the epitome of black girl magic! I saw you later on, and you had just shot Everything, Everything, which, by the way, you are incredible in. The original story was written by a black woman [NicolaYoon], and your director [Stella Meghie] is also a black woman. What was going through your mind as you were considering the role?
AS: I kind of wrote it off initially because I figured it was one of those instances where I was receiving a script for a YA romance project that was intended for a white actress. I thought maybe they'd float the idea of casting it in a more diverse manner but that ultimately it wouldn't end up going that direction, because that's happened to me a lot. Then I realized that this project was based on a book written by a black woman and that the casting was intentionally diverse. I'd never seen a story like this made for an interracial couple. I'm not someone who generally has a pop or mainstream sensibility, but I see the incredible power of infiltrating these larger movies that show a lot of people who we are and how diverse and beautiful our community is. I thought it would be really powerful to see a black girl [lead] character like Maddy who is joyous and creative and dimensional specifically marketed to teenagers and young adults. We don't always get to see black women carrying that energy. That's one of the reasons why I respect and love you so much!because I feel like you perpetuate such whimsy and joy!
JM: Aw! Well, whenever I see you doing your thing, I feel like we're from the same tribe because I take a similar approach when I'm choosing projects. With the roles of Teresa in Moonlight and Ms. Mary Jackson in Hidden Figures , they're two women of color from totally different backgrounds and eras!from the hood to NASA, these black women were the backbones of their communities. I thought it was so important to let the rest of the world know that we're not monolithic. And with Hidden Figures in particular, I was so proud to be a part of exposing that if it were not for these women, we would not have gone to space. That's American history! Black history is part of American history, and it should be treated as such.
(Note in passing that I loathe the phrase "open up," which I define as "carefully engineered for a celebrity by public relations professionals." ) Of course, both actors are -- and rightly -- proud of their work, but note the carefully calibrated ways they establish that they are (as Joy Reid says) "like" each other. Oh, and do note the caption: "Miu Miu dress, price upon request." Class snuck in there, didn't it? In fact, we might go so far as to formalize Reid's definition of "tribe" as follows:
Tribes are people who are "like" each other when class is not taken into account
With that, let's take an alternative approach to conceptualizing tribes and tribalism, one that incorporates class. From former Arab Spring activist Iyad El-Baghdadi , I present the following charts, taken from the Twittter . (I'll present each chart, then comment briefly on it.) There are five:
Figure 1: Tribal Divisions
Comment: I'm taking El-Baghdadi's "ethnic affiliation," as a proxy for Reid's "tribe"; the verticality is clearly the same.)
Figure 2: Class Divisions
Comment: El-Baghdadi's representation of class divisions is fine as a visual shorthand, but I don't think it's an accurate representation. I picture the class structure of the United States not as a "normal distribution" with a fat "middle class" (I don't even accept "middle class" as a category) but as a power curve with a very few people at the head of the curve ( the "1%," more like the 0.01% ), followed by a steep shoulder of the 10% (white collar professionals, from Thomas Frank's Listen, Liberal ), and trailed by a long tail of wage workers (and unwaged workers, as I suppose we might call the disemployed, unpaid caregivers, System D people like loosie-selling Eric Garner, and so on). If you want to find who hasn't had a raise in forty years, look to the long tail, which I would call l "working class," rather than "lower class."
Figure 3: Privilege Divisions
Comment: Taking once again El-Baghdadi's "ethnic affiliation," as a proxy for Reid's "tribe," and conceptualizing WASPs as a tribe, it's clear to me, if I look at my own history, that I'm more likely ti have good luck than some other tribes. I'm more likely to have intergenerational wealth in the form of a house, or even financial assets, more likely to be highly educated, more likely to have the markers and locutions that enable me to interact successfully with bureaucratic functionaries, etc. I didn't earn any of those advantages; I would have had to have chosen to be born to different parents to avoid them. I think we can agree that if we were looking for an operational definition of justice, this wouldn't be it.
Figure 4: Punching Sideways
Comment: Classically, we have owners following Gould's maxim by bringing in (mostly black) scabs to break the Homestead Strike in 1892, with a resulting "tribal" conflict -- although those scabs might protest -- and rightly -- that (a) they were only trying to provide for their families and (b) that the Jim Crow system had denied them the "good jobs" that in justice would have given them (leaving aside the question of who implemented Jim Crow, and for what material benefits). In modern times we have "tribes" (white, black, Asian, at the least) battling on the field of "affirmative action" having weaponized their ascriptive identities. Here again, representatives of some "tribes" would protest -- and rightly -- that systems like "legacy admissions" give some "tribes" unjust advantage over others, but the hidden assumption is one of resource constraint; given a pie of fixed size, if Tribe A is to have more, Tribe B must have less. Note that programs like "tuition-free college" tend to eliminate the resource constraint, but are "politically feasible" only if Tribes A and B solve their collective action problem, which is unlikely to be done based on tribalism.
Figure 5: Punching Up
Comment: This diagram implies that the only "legitimate" form of seeking justice is vertical, "punching up." This eliminates clear cases where justice is needed within and not between classes, like auto collisions, for example, or the household division of labor. More centrally, the nice thing about thinking vertically is that it eliminates obvious absurdities like "Justice for black people means making the CEO of a major bank black (ignoring the injustices perpetrated using class-based tools disproportionately against black people in, say, the foreclosure crisis, where a generation's-worth of black household wealth was wiped out under America's first black President). Or obvious absurdities where justice is conceived of as a woman, instead of a man, using the power of office to kill thousands of black and brown people, many of them women, to further America's imperial mission.
* * * Concluding a discussion on politics and power that has barely begun -- and is of great importance if you believe, as I do, that we're on the midst of and ongoing and highly volatile legitimacy crisis that involves the break-up and/or realignment of both major parties -- it seems to me that El-Baghdadi visual representation, which fits tribalism into a class-driven framework, is both analytically coherent (as Reid's usage of "tribe" is not) and points to a way forward from our current political arrangements (as Reid's strategy of bundling "punching sideways" tribes into parties while ignoring class does not). More to come .
NOTES
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
On Sunday night, Social Justice Warriors in Baltimore filmed themselves desecrating and damaging a 225-year-old monument to Christopher Columbus -- this, in the name of racial and economic justice:
Late last week, someone desecrated a statue of St. Junipero Serra in Mission Hills, Calif. The Franciscan priest is hated by Social Justice Warriors for his work in establishing mission churches in the 18th century.
In New Orleans earlier this summer, vandals spray-painted 'TEAR IT DOWN' on a statue of St. Joan of Arc standing in Jackson Square. Take 'Em Down NOLA is the name of the activist group that successfully brought down four of the city's statues of Confederate figures. The organization said that those opposed to taking down the statues was "the racist white capitalist establishment in New Orleans, seeking to preserve white supremacy". Now they've expanded their mission:
The group is seeking the removal of 13 statues in the city, including the equestrian monument to Andrew Jackson in Jackson Square. That monument, which commemorates Jackson's victory at the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812, has been a particular target of the group because Jackson owned slaves and, as president, was responsible for violently forcing Native Americans off their land in what came to be known as the Trail of Tears.
The group also wants the city to rename dozens of streets, buildings and institutions. In all, there are more than 100 symbols it wants removed or renamed.
In Houston late last week, someone vandalized a Christopher Columbus statue . On Monday in Houston, police arrested a man on charges that he tried to plant a bomb next to a Confederate statue. Reports the Houston Chronicle :
Andrew Schneck, 25, who was released from probation early last year after being convicted in 2015 of storing explosives, was charged in a criminal complaint filed in federal court, Acting U.S. Attorney Abe Martinez said in a statement Monday.
Schneck was arrested Saturday night after a Houston park ranger spotted him kneeling in bushes in front of the Dowling monument in the park, Martinez said.
When confronted Saturday night in the park, he tried to drink some of the liquid explosives but spit it out, officials said.
The ranger then asked if he planned to harm the statue, and he said he did because he did not "like that guy," according to a sworn statement submitted in federal court by an FBI agent investigating the case.
More NFL players are taking a knee instead of standing for the National Anthem, because racism. At USC, some black students and woke fellow, um, travelers are damning the name of the school's mascot, a white horse named Traveler, because it shares a name as Gen. Robert E. Lee's mount. For that matter, according to an op-ed contributor for The New York Times, enjoying college football at all is probably racist:
This attachment is less surprising when we consider that sports fans typically use their fandom as a means of telling themselves who they are. Sports fandom has become, to borrow a term from the philosopher Michel Foucault, a practice of subjectivization -- a phenomenon in which individuals subject themselves to a set of behavioral regulations, and by doing so, acquire a sense of their own identities.
Just as a practicing Christian may create and obtain new forms of self-knowledge through confession, prayer and the observance of Lent, a sports fan can come to understand himself as a particular sort of person -- a Southerner, for example, or a "real man" -- by adhering to certain rituals, like reading the sports page and watching ESPN every day to gather more and more knowledge about his team, by talking with other fans about that team in the right ways (and proving that he knows more than them), by learning and participating in the songs, chants, dress, tailgate rituals, game-day traditions and home décor choices of its fans.
The extraordinary reach of football into fans' lives makes perfect sense when we see it for what it is: the most popular mechanism in contemporary America for cultivating a sense of self that is rooted in a community. In a world of uncertainty, fragmentation and isolation, sports fandom offers us clear winners and losers, connection to family and community -- and at its best, the assurance that we are really No. 1.
Yet this "we" of fandom ought to give us pause -- perhaps just as much as the scandals, the violence and the exploitation that surround the game.
And our disease is spreading to England. The Guardian -- of course -- published someone calling for Nelson's Column to come down from Trafalgar Square , because he was a defender of slavery.
Lord Nelson, one of England's greatest heroes. My God.
Whether or not any or most of these people will succeed in their goal is not my concern here. Rather, I'm interested in what this new period of iconoclasm tells us about where we are as a society, and where we may be going.
Iconoclasm often accompanies radical, even violent, change in a society. The word comes from the Greek meaning "image-smashers," and was first used to describe a turbulent period in the Byzantine empire in which the Emperor attempted to ban the use of religious icons as idolatrous. He failed, as you can see by visiting an Orthodox church today. But the word stuck because it was useful.
Whether religious or political (e.g., French revolutionaries, militants in China's Cultural Revolution), real iconoclasts are violent. The damage Reformation-era iconoclasm did to religious art in Europe was incalculable. For example, in England:
Even now there is denial about the scale of the erasing of our medieval past. The Tate estimates we lost 90% of our religious art. It was probably even more than that. The destruction was on a scale that far outstrips the modern efforts of Islamist extremists. And it was not only art we lost, but also books and music.
We think of Henry VIII and the destruction of the monasteries, but that was not the end of the destruction, it marked the beginning. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, hailed the reign of his son, the boy king Edward VI, as that of a new Josiah, destroyer of idols. After his coronation an orgy of iconoclasm was launched. In churches rood screens, tombs with their prayers for the dead, and stain glass windows, were smashed. The Elizabethan antiquarian John Stow complained, some of this Christian Taliban "judged every image to be an idol", so that not only religious art, but even the secular thirteenth century carvings of kings in Ludgate were broken.
And:
The civil war, and the further destruction it brought, took place two generations after England had gone through what has been described as a "cultural revolution designed to obliterate England's memory of who and what she had been". There was not much of that past left. In our cultural history the Reformation is nearly always depicted as a force that opened up England from a closed minded past. But it was our knowledge of that past that was closed and if one future opened to us, we will never know what might have been, not least in art.
That's often what iconoclasm tries to do: erase cultural memory. The zealotry with which iconoclasts go after their targets has to do with their conviction that the image, and what it stands for, is so offensive that it cannot be tolerated, nor can its defenders be reasoned with. They can only be conquered by force.
In the case of our present iconoclasts, what they are attacking are aspects of what leftist academic critics "whiteness" . It is understandable why black Americans and others would object to monuments commemorating Confederate figures (though it is worth asking why all of a sudden removing these objects became an urgent imperative at this particular time). But those statues are the low-hanging fruit. As the New Orleans protesters signal, any American figure who had anything to do with slavery is on the hit list. Donald Trump was not wrong to wonder if George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are going to be next. Both men were compromised by slaveholding.
The argument in favor of eliminating Confederate statues but not those of the slaveholding Founders is that we honor the latter in spite of their owning slaves, but the former have monuments built to them because they fought to preserve slavery. That's a reasonable position to take, but it assumes that reason is driving this iconoclasm. Why is Columbus under siege, both in his monuments and in his holiday (e.g., the Oberlin, Ohio, city council just voted to replace Columbus Day with Indigenous People's Day)? Why are vandals going after St. Junipero Serra and St. Joan of Arc?
Because they represent European culture and civilization, which entails Christianity. Because, in the minds of the iconoclasts, they represent whiteness.
This morning I picked up a book from my shelves that I haven't looked at since it came out in 2004: the late political scientist Samuel Huntington's Who Are We? The Challenges To America's National Identity. It was startling to read Huntington in light of recent events, including most of all the Trump election. It was even more startling -- and deeply dismaying -- to read Huntington and consider that the odious white nationalists might have a clearer understanding of what's going on now than respectable people. Let me explain.
Huntington, who taught at Harvard, writes that the country has been losing a sense of coherent identity for some time now. It's not that Americans were a homogeneous people, but rather that its Anglo-Protestant founding culture was able to assimilate immigrants. This has partly to do with strong belief in the "American Creed," a commonly held set of assumptions about what the nation stood for: liberty, equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result), individualism, populism, limited government, and free-market economics. These ideas, Huntington said, came out of Protestant England and its reception of the Enlightenment.
On assimilation, the glaring exception, of course, were the descendants of the unwilling immigrants among us: those of African slaves, for whom the American Creed did not apply. Nevertheless:
American national identity peaked politically with the rallying of Americans to their country and its cause in World War II. It peaked symbolically with President Kennedy's 1961 summons: 'Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country.'
Starting in the 1960s, writes Huntington, "deconstructionists" of national identity encouraged "individuals were defined by their group membership, not common nationality." Pushing identity politics was a time-tested strategy for colonialist regimes, for the sake of dividing and conquering subject peoples. But the governments of nation-states instead focused on uniting their disparate peoples. (Indeed, the Civil Rights Movement was about compelling the white majority to extend the promises of the Constitution and the Creed to black Americans -- in other words, to fully unite them to the whole.)
Huntington says that this did not start from below, but was imposed from the top, by American political, legal, and cultural elites. He writes, "These efforts by a nation's leaders to deconstruct the nation they governed were, quite possibly, without precedent in human history."
By 1992, the liberal historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. warned that all this had become "a cult, and today it treatens to become a counter-revolution against the original theory of American as 'one people,' a common culture, a single nation." Huntington continues, talking about how the promises of the Civil Rights movement were turned on their head by racial preferences:
This replacement of individual rights by group rights and of color-blind law by color-conscious law was never approved by the American people and received only intermittent, passive, and partial acceptance by American legislators. "What is extraordinary about this change," the distinguished sociologist Daniel Bell commented, "is that, without public debate, an entirely new principle of rights has been introduced into the polity." "Group rights and equality of condition," Belz agrees, "were introduced into public opinion as a new public philosophy that distinguishes among individuals on racial and ethnic grounds and that ultimately denies the existence of a common good."
The implications of this view were cogently stated by the Thernstroms: "Racial classifications deliver the message that skin color matters -- profoundly. They suggest that whites and blacks are not the same, that race and ethnicity are the qualities that really matter. They imply that individuals are defined by blood -- not by character, social class, religious sentiments, age, or education. But categories appropriate to a caste system are a poor basis on which to build that community of equal citizens upon which democratic government depends."
If you want to talk about racializing American society, it didn't start with Richard Spencer and his crew. Led by elites, America has been balkanizing along racial and ethnic lines since the late 1960s. Multiculturalism, that 1990s buzzword, led to colleges emphasizing ethnic studies and non-Western courses, and devaluing those in Western civilization. Huntington, quoting Schlesinger Jr:
"The mood is one of divesting Americans of the sinful European inheritance and seeking redemptive infusions from non-Western cultures." At the turn of the century, none of fifty top American colleges and universities required a course in American history.
He who controls a culture's memory controls the culture. Huntington says that if a nation "is a remembered as well as an imagined community, people who are losing that memory are becoming something less than a nation."
One of the most remarkable things about Huntington's narrative is how this disuniting of America was led by elites, despite resistance from the population. Look, from the vantage point of a nation led by President Donald Trump, at this passage from Huntington's 2004 book. The political scientist is talking about the simple demographic and political fact that whites, especially white males, are losing power and place in US society:
It should not be difficult to see that "rebellion" and the reasons for it. It would, indeed, be extraordinary and possibly unprecedented in human history if the profound demographic changes occurring in America did not generate reactions of various sorts. one very plausible reaction would be the emergence of exclusivist sociopolitical movements composed largely but not only of white males, primarily working-class and middle-class, protesting and attempting to stop or reverse these changes and what they believe, accurately or not, to be the diminution of their social and economic status, their loss of jobs to immigrants and foreign countries, the perversion of their culture, the displacement of their language, and the erosion or even evaporation of the historical identity of their country. Such movements would be both racially and culturally inspired and could be anti-Hispanic, anti-black, and anti-immigration. They would be the heir to the many comparable exclusivist racial and anti-foreign movements that helped define American identity in the past.
Huntington points out that should they emerge, "the new white nationalists" (the term is political scientist Carol Swain's) will not be like the fringe extremists. They don't advocate white supremacy, but rather "racial self-determination and self-preservation." They will reject national identity, and locate culture in race. They don't want white culture replaced by black or brown culture.
Furthermore, whites attracted to these ideas will be those sick and tired of preferential treatment policies that violate the American Creed and disadvantage them. They will, Huntington predicts (remember, he wrote this in 2004), be stirred up by the loss of jobs and widening income inequality due to globalization. And they will hate the media for using what they consider to be bias against them. Finally, immigration may make them feel that they have their backs against the wall.
Because of several sociological factors, Huntington says that middle class and lower middle class whites have come to see themselves as victims. He quotes another political scientist who says these whites feel that they have no real culture or identity, so they are embracing victimization.
Whites, in sum, will start to act like any other ethnic or racial group in America. I have to confess that reading Huntington makes me question the (yes, liberal) media narrative on this new battlefront in the culture wars. Broadly speaking, the media construe the conflict as racist whites reacting to minority progress. No doubt there's truth to that, but that is not the whole truth, or even most of the truth. What we're seeing might be thought of as the entirely predictable and normal reaction of a particular group within a pluralistic society, when members of that group come to believe that they are losing ground. In this sense, when white grievance and protest is presented by the media as solely a manifestation of racism, it allows others to justify dismissing those grievances and consider themselves morally responsible for doing so.
Huntington again, citing Swain's 2004 book The New White Nationalism In America :
The makings of serious white nativist movements and of intensified racial conflict exist in America. Carol Swain probably overdramatizes the possibility, but her eloquent warning deserves serious though. We are witnessing, she says, "the simultaneous convergence of a host of powerful social forces." These include "changing demographics, the continued existence of racial preference policies, the rising expectations of ethnic minorities, the continued existence of liberal immigration policies, growing concerns about job losses associated with globalization, the demands for multiculturalism, and the Internet's ability to enable like-minded individuals to identify with each other and to share mutual concerns and strategies for impacting the political system." These factors can only serve "to nourish white racial consciousness and white nationalism, the next logical stage for identity politics in America. As a result, America is "increasingly at risk of large-scale racial conflict unprecedented in our nation's history."
Well, that's cheerful.
It is remarkable how much Huntington focuses on the wide disparity between elites and the public on these issues, stretching over 50 years. I couldn't help but think of the recent Marist poll showing that the broader public is far more supportive of leaving Confederate statues alone than the news reporting would have us believe.
Huntington also talks about the bottoming out of public trust in government and institutions. It's been declining since 1960s. Today, only the military, police, and small business are the only institutions in whom trust has been stable or grown. Think about what that means. Aside from small business people, by far the most trusted institutions in society are those armed and charged with defending it from foreign enemies and maintaining internal order. If that doesn't tell you something about how our society is coming undone, you are ineducable.
Huntington puts a troubling question to his readers:
Because of the Creed, "many Americans came to believe that America could be multiracial, multiethnic, and lack any cultural core, and yet still be a coherent nation with its identity defined solely by the Creed. Is this, however, really the case? Can a nation be defined only by a political ideology? Several considerations suggest the answer is no. A creed alone does not a nation make."
He says that historically, American identity has involved four key components: Race, Ethnicity, Culture (especially language and religion), and Ideology. Race and ethnicity as a defining core of nation is long gone. Culture is "under siege" (even more so today than when Huntington wrote his book). All that's left is ideology -- that is, the Creed. Writes Huntington: "For the Creed to become the sole source of national identity would be a sharp break from the past."
He points out that the only other examples we have of creedal nations are the communist countries. This is not an encouraging thought. After the ideology failed and the coercive power of the state collapsed, those countries more or less came apart along ethnic lines. China is the great exception, but it held together, he says, because of the widely shared Han Chinese identity.
Huntington concludes that because the American Creed emerged from Anglo-Protestant culture, it probably won't survive its demise.
Finally, the Harvard political scientist predicted that the rise in US religious consciousness in the 1980s and 1990s would would increase. He was quite wrong about that, as we now know. At end of book, Huntington cites research showing that globally, "those countries that are more religious tend to be more nationalist." I suppose this would help explain white Evangelical support for Donald Trump. As regular readers know, I am averse to nationalism mixing with the Christian religion, because it can easily lead to Christians making an idol of the state. That said, the data Huntington cites would lead one to predict that the decline of Christianity in the US will also hasten the unraveling of the social and cultural fabric.
If Christianity, with its universalist values, is declining, then something will take its place. Something will fill the vacuum it leaves. We should not at all be surprised if this turns out to be a heightened, even militant, racial consciousness. This is the logical outcome of identity politics.
This is what I mean by constantly saying that Social Justice Warriors of the Left have no idea what kind of demons they are summoning from the Right. And American elites of all kinds have no idea what they are doing by pushing the "diversity is our strength" lie. We are seeing from this side of the Atlantic how the resolute refusal of the European political and cultural establishments to take the radical challenge from mass immigration seriously is opening up a big space for the radical right to flourish. It's going to happen here too, for somewhat different reasons, ones I've explored in this blog post.
The other day in The Atlantic , Jonathan Haidt wrote a perceptive essay about how Trump's reaction to Charlottesville violated a powerful American taboo . It begins like this:
Taboo and sacredness are among the most important words needed to understand Charlottesville and its aftermath. Taboo refers to things that are forbidden for religious or supernatural reasons. All traditional societies have such prohibitions -- things you must not do, touch, or eat, not because they are bad for you directly, but because doing so is an abomination, which may bring divine retribution. But every society also makes some things sacred, rallying around a few deeply revered values, people, or places, which bind all members together and make them willing to sacrifice for the common good. The past week brought violent conflict over symbols and values held sacred -- and saw President Trump commit an act of sacrilege by violating one of our society's strongest taboos.
More:
That torchlight march, and the main rally the next day, gave the country the shocking spectacle of fellow Americans chanting "Jews will not replace us" while making Nazi salutes and anti-black slurs. It was a rejection -- a desecration -- of the story shared by most Americans in which we are not a nation based on "blood and soil," we are a nation of immigrants who accepted the American creed. That creed includes the idea that "all men are created equal." Americans know that we do not yet live up to our aspirations, but publicly accepting the premises of the nation's founding documents is a requirement for political leadership in America. To deny those premises is blasphemy, and so white supremacism, the KKK, and neo-Nazis are by definition blasphemous.
By the way he handled the Charlottesville violence (appearing to equivocate):
In that moment, Trump committed the gravest act of sacrilege of his presidency. In that moment, the president rendered himself untouchable by all who share the belief that Nazis and the KKK are not just bad -- they are taboo.
I'm not so sure about that. The new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows broad disapproval of the way Trump handled Charlottesville, but strong approval of it among Republicans. If you go deep into the poll , you'll see that 83 percent of Americans believe it is unacceptable to hold white supremacist views. That would appear to validate Haidt's thesis. Happily, white supremacy remains a taboo.
But it is plain that most Republicans do not believe Trump violated that taboo. That is no small number of Americans. Whether you believe they are right or wrong in that assessment is not the point. The point is that on an issue of intense feeling -- a feeling that Haidt correctly likens to religious conviction -- there is no broad agreement on what constitutes violating that taboo. My sense is that among elites -- including Republican elites -- there is shared conviction that Trump touched the third rail. But that sense is not shared by the broad mass of GOP voters any more than the Republican elite's 2016 disgust by candidate Donald Trump was.
Along those lines, I would love to see polling on the extent to which whites (Southern and otherwise) see attacks on Confederate monuments as an attack on white supremacy, and the extent to which they see these attacks as assaults on them . Again, notice the ABC/Post poll, which shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans reject white supremacy. The PBS/Marist poll from last week showed that only 27 percent of all Americans believe that Confederate monuments should be taken down. The racial breakdown is: whites 25%; blacks 40%; Latinos 24%.
It is reasonable to assume that a nation in which over 80 percent of the people believe white supremacy is unacceptable, but only 27 percent believe the Confederate statues should come down, is not a nation that sees those statues as symbols of white supremacy. So what do they symbolize? And who do they symbolize? The answer is important.
In light of Samuel Huntington's book, it seems to me that the culture war has shifted into a dangerous phase, accelerated by both Donald Trump and progressive militants, who feed off each other. Our unity is fragile -- more fragile than people think. This is not the time to be iconoclastic towards cultural symbols. The fact that we are seeing iconoclasm emerge, and that it is not only unchallenged, but actually encouraged by liberal elites, is a bad sign for the future. Remember how we started this post: with a recognition that iconoclasm usually accompanies or precedes actual violence.
The disassembling of the American Creed has been a 50-year project of American elites, but we are all going to reap the whirlwind. You cannot destroy symbols of people's identity without calling forth rage.
|
|
|
Sep 04, 2017 | www.unz.com
Decades from now experts will surly debate today's Summer of Monumental Hysteria. After all, by all objective criteria -- assuming, of course, that anything can be objective if it involves race -- it should not have happened. How many Americans really can correctly identify Robert E. Lee, let along Roger B. Taney? (According to one recent survey , half the American public did not know when the Civil War happened.) Do racially sensitive African Americans even notice the names on these statutes or plaques when they encountered them? Why now since most of these offense-giving inanimate objects have existed for decades?
Most critically, is there any evidence to suggest that the very existence of a park or a school horning a Confederate dignitary has adversely affected anybody, regardless of race in the slightest way? Do black children enrolled in J.E.B. Stewart Middle School under-perform academically compared to those attending the Malcolm X Academy ? Does the Jefferson Memorial emit a dangerous racial version of Radon ? Can visitors be "protected" by having a warning: Be advised that Jefferson once owned slaves so proceed at one's own risk." Tellingly, nobody is even interested in an evidence-based argument regarding this toxicity. "Everybody knows" that anything about the Confederacy is hateful and all hatefulness has to be exorcised from American life since hate, like asbestos and tobacco, is bad. At least leftish professors don't have to invent "studies" to make this point.
Some explanations for this sudden and unexpected hysteria immediately come to mind. There are countless organizations skilled at turning almost any event into a fund-raiser while those obsessed with bashing President Trump will find any excuse to condemn him. And let's not forget all those who enjoy cheap moral highs by marching against hate and bigotry even if the source of the "hate" is a coffee mug decorated with the stars and bars.
All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis: the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial equality. In a nutshell, for at least a half-century, perhaps longer, America has struggled with its "race problem" and while proposed solutions exceed dozens, and expenditures in the trillions, progress has been scant. In fact, on at least some indicators, for example, illegitimacy and crime, race-related matters where better off in the 1950s. Not even electing a black President has cured America's race strife despite all the assurances that Obama would be a "post-racial" President that would, once and for all, bring everybody together. What we have gotten for all our efforts is Black Lives Matter and yet even more black condemnation of whites.
This accumulated frustration can be likened to a situation where a patient with a grim prognosis grows ever more desperate as one standard treatment after the next fails to reverse the illness. These frantic patients often gravitate to quacks despite the low odds of a cure. Nevertheless, the very act of visiting a faith healer or drinking a magical herbal concoction outshines passivity. And who knows, the world abounds with testimonials to quack cures and "doing something" calms the despair.
Think of the Monumental Madness as social engineering quackery -- it probably will accomplish little if anything but it feels better than doing nothing. What encourages this desperate quest for today's "miracle" is that so many past solutions, at least according to all the learned experts, were "guaranteed" to perform as advertised and all failed. Recall when the surefire cure was improved education -- ending segregation, equalizing school expenditures, hiring more black teachers and administrators, altering textbooks to make it more relevant to black youngsters, intensive pre-school (Head Start, Sesame Street) and, more recently, eradicating unconscious teacher bias and no longer disproportionately disciplining blacks. We've had Bush's No Child Left Behind and Obama's Race to the Top and countless other expensive remedies.
A similar guaranteed cure was political empowerment, that is, the Department of Justice would ensure that blacks would live in cities run by black elected officials and self-government would cure everything from crime to joblessness. The upshot, of course, have been urban disasters like Detroit and Selma, AL. And let's not forget tough anti-discrimination laws that would ban employers from using racist job descriptions, and affirmative action programs that would temporarily give a leg up to those who began the race a few steps behind.
All and all, genuine successes are rare, typically only cosmetic, and if there were a Museum of Failed Cures for America's Racial Problems, it would be the size of Washington's Smithsonian.
In other words, by the summer of 2017, the frustration over repeated failures plus the lack of any more "guaranteed" solutions on the agenda had created a perfect setting for quackery. Now, as with all serious but likely intractable problems, the marketplace supplies something to meet these needs, and to continue our parallel with those suffering from incurable cancer, taking down statutes of Confederate soldiers or re-naming buildings is the equivalent of using Laetrile among countless other bogus cures . Yes, there is no scientific evidence that past crusade against "hate" has even helped African Americans, but given the sorry record of past efforts, why not give it a try? Hard to resist anything that feels so good.
What has permitted this quackery to explode is that Confederate statutes and similar hateful objects are everywhere and the cost of exorcizing the evil spirits is trivial vis-a-vis past solutions. Just compare the difficulties of purging racism from a police department with scrutinizing at a city map to find streets named after slave-owners and demanding that they be re-named. The especially good news is that this quest can be life-time employment. In 2016 the Southern Poverty Law Center estimates that there were some 700 Confederate statutes and monuments on public property and who knows how many schools, streets and cemetery markers similarly radiate hate ( Wall Street Journal, August 22, 2017, A3). Further add 10 Army bases names after Confederate generals. So much hate, so little time.
This is vigilante justice and everyone, regardless of training or brains, can anoint themselves as soldiers to overcome racial inequality and win a Participation Trophy. Be a hero; just find a statute of Stonewall Jackson hidden in storage room.
The cost of this hysteria far exceeds upsetting those who cherish the Confederate legacy. Yet again the public debate will carefully dodge that Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name: racial equality is impossible, and its quest can only generate yet more Noble Lies and, worst of all, increasingly totalitarian measures that accomplish nothing other than needlessly expand government power. But then again, perhaps this is what today's madness is all about -- far easier to rave and rant about Robert E. Lee than confront a very unpleasant reality. By that standard, tearing down statutes and re-naming schools is a great investment for those intent on keeping the racial peace.
Carlton Meyer > , Website September 4, 2017 at 4:56 am GMTDiversity Heretic > , September 4, 2017 at 5:05 am GMTWhen will BLM and other radicals demand a statue to honor John Brown? Of all the characters in our history, he should be their hero, but he was white! The US Navy even named a ship after the battle where US Marines (led by Robert E. Lee) crushed his violent attempt to end slavery, and executed Brown.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Harpers_Ferry_(LSD-49)
Since most black American have never heard of him, they should read this link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist)
Slavery existed for thousands of years and did not end because blacks rebelled. It ended because good whites ended it.
Robert Magill > , September 4, 2017 at 9:44 am GMTOccam's Razor suggests a simpler explanation: After the election of a black President, and the election of a white President, who is doing nothing to roll back racial favoritism for blacks, blacks now feel that they can move to a highly visible form of white dispossession. They feel they're on top and they want to rub whitey's nose in it.
Next step will be explicit white-to-black transfers under the guise of "reparations for slavery."
LiveFreeOrDie > , September 4, 2017 at 10:47 am GMTYet again the public debate will carefully dodge that Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name: racial equality is impossible, and its quest can only generate yet more Noble Lies and, worst
Racial equality is off topic here. Racial hatred worldwide and at home is caused by competition between groups having gone deeply personal. The onset of this malaise is, more often than not, heritage from a Colonial past. Very stubborn to address because of it personal aspect, it still can be lessened by reducing ongoing factors which inflame it.
Loveofknowledge > , September 4, 2017 at 1:36 pm GMT>>>"...this quest can be life-time employment." This quote explains much of this
All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis: the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial equality.
I think this is exactly it. It's like when a married couple gets into a big argument over some little thing around the house – it's always really about something else. And it's never an isolated incident – it's always an accumulation of resentment, not feeling appreciated, etc.
Blacks wouldn't feel so slighted by a Confederate monument if they weren't already feeling so disrespected, that they are seen as inferior, they have all the menial jobs and live in the worst neighborhoods, that white people don't want to be around them, etc.
But white people working ever harder to be extra nice to blacks won't work either, and the niceness will just be seen as condescending and patronizing, because it is. The problem is that white people end up being humiliating to blacks just be existing. The races are different, and the contrast is plain to see everywhere all the time.
Granted it's primarily white liberals more than blacks who are the instigators of tearing down these monuments. But that's just because white liberals feel bad for blacks given the realities, and also enjoy seeing themselves in the role of the heroes.
The problem is that everyone has bought into the mid-20th-century Franz Boas anthropology hoax that there are no genetic differences between the races. The truth is getting out though, I think it's happening right now – this might really be it. The establishment is obviously scared, hence the increasing attempts at censorship.
Acknowledgement of this truth actually provides a way to understand and be more sympathetic to the Confederates and the segregationists and other white people throughout history. They weren't evil – they thought the races were different, and they were right, and they were struggling with what to do about it.
This doesn't mean we need to agree with their conclusions – let's not bring back slavery. But I think we all need to start thinking seriously about what comes next once the truth is acknowledged and how to treat blacks as fairly as possible.
I'm hopeful that the solution will be just to stick to equality of individual opportunity and accept the unequal group outcomes, while trying to make society better for people on the low end of the IQ bell curve regardless of race. And if I'm feeling extra optimistic, maybe acknowledging the truth will actually dial down the hostility, because we won't have to be thrashing around looking for scapegoats all the time to blame for the differences.
|
|
|
Sep 01, 2017 | nationalinterest.org
spending nearly $13.7 billion. Just two years ago, it seemed that Seoul and Beijing were embarking on a honeymoon phase when President Park Geun-hye attended a military parade in Tiananmen Square commemorating the end of World War II!the only U.S. ally to do so.Then THAAD happened.
In July 2016, Seoul and Washington announced their decision to deploy the anti-missile system. China opposed the deployment, saying it undermined China's security and would destabilize the region because its radars could be used by the United States to track China's missile activities.
China wanted to "teach South Korea a lesson" for the effrontery of the THAAD deployment. Shortly after the announcement, Beijing banned the airing of Korean TV shows, films, and K-pop acts in China. After it was revealed that Lotte Group!a South Korean conglomerate operating 112 stores in mainland China!once owned the land THAAD would be based on, Chinese state media called for a nationwide boycott of the company. By March 2017, nearly half of Lotte's stores on the mainland were shutdown , due to vague "safety violations." That same month, Beijing banned its travel agencies from selling trips to Korea, resulting in a 66 percent decrease in Chinese visitors from last year. Shortly after President Moon Jae-in was elected to the Blue House in May 2017, he announced the suspension of further THAAD deployments until further review.
Many South Koreans told me they expected blowback from the decision to deploy THAAD, but the swiftness and intensity of Beijing's retaliation caught them off guard. Beijing's response to THAAD, they said, "opened our [South Korean] eyes to China's true colors ." Simply put, they believed Beijing could not be relied on to consider South Korea's interests if China's interests were on the line. This disillusionment is fanning mistrust and has damaged China's image in South Korea. A March 2017 Asan Institute poll found that, for the first time ever , Koreans had a more favorable view of Japan than of China. This was a shocking finding; Japan has consistently been South Koreans' least favorite country after North Korea.
In spite of growing mistrust, South Koreans recognize the crucial role Beijing plays in reining in Pyongyang. Many interlocutors said they believed, in spite of THAAD, that Chinese officials wanted to maintain good relations with South Korea!albeit on China's terms.
|
|
|
Sep 01, 2017 | www.unz.com
jorge videla > , August 31, 2017 at 6:53 am GMT
Rod1963 > , August 31, 2017 at 7:25 pm GMTthe purpose of identity politics is to avoid economic issues when they are more pressing than at any time since ww ii. the brainwashing of americans against socialism has continued for those born after 12/26/1991. as long as the alt-right is dominated by the brainwashed it will fail.
It needs to stop calling itself conservative and right.
What the majority of the electorate wants is bernie sanders, a wall, e-verify and the subsequent self-deportations, more environmental regulations, the end of affirmative action, etc..
the purpose of identity politics is to avoid economic issues when they are more pressing than at any time since ww ii. the brainwashing of americans against socialism has continued for those born after 12/26/1991. as long as the alt-right is dominated by the brainwashed it will fail. it needs to stop calling itself conservative and right. what the majority of the electorate wants is bernie sanders, a wall, e-verify and the subsequent self-deportations, more environmental regulations, the end of affirmative action, etc..
Yes, identity politics are a distraction, it's the political equivalent of sugar, it gets you high but eventually ruins you.
It also answers the question why is Silicon Valley, Wall Street and the bankers all of a sudden are supporting identity politics? Because it's a counter to populism and economic awareness.
This keeps people from noticing their politicians are all owned by wealthy special interests who don't give a shit about the people and it fact plan to reduce most to serfs in the name of profit. No one ever talks about why Wall Street gets a multitrillion dollar bail out for what amounted to was a scam concocted by the bankers and real-estate moguls and bond ratings agencies. Yet no one ever went to jail over this.
It distracts the young why they can't file for bankruptcy after graduating with a worthless college degree that they paid $150k for.
|
|
|
Sep 01, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
Asher Schechter at ProMarket discusses Raghuram Rajan's views on the rise of populist nationalism:
Raghuram Rajan: Populist Nationalism Is "the First Step Toward Crony Capitalism" : The wave of populist nationalism that has been sweeping through Western democracies in the past two years is "a cry for help from communities who have seen growth bypass them."So said Raghuram Rajan, the former governor of the Reserve Bank of India, during a keynote address he gave at the Stigler Center's conference on the political economy of finance that took place in June.Rajan, a professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, spoke about the "concentrated and devastating" impact of technology and trade on blue-collar communities in areas like the Midwest, the anger toward "totally discredited" elites following the 2008 financial crisis, and the subsequent rise of populist nationalism, seen as a way to restore a sense of community via exclusion.In his talk, Rajan focused on three questions related to current populist discontent: 1. Why is anger focused on trade? 2. Why now? 3. Why do so many voters turn to far-right nationalist movements?"Pointing fingers at these communities and telling them they don't understand is not the right answer," he warned. "In many ways, the kind of angst that we see in industrial countries today is similar to the bleak times [of] the 1920s and 1930s. Most people in industrial countries used to believe that their children would have a better future than their already pleasant present. Today this is no longer true." ...There's quite a bit more. I don't agree with everything he (Raghuram) says, but thought it might provoke discussion.
DrDick , August 31, 2017 at 11:03 AM
Frankly, "crony capitalism" has always been the primary one, as even Adam Smith noted.Paine , August 31, 2017 at 11:54 AMThe understanding of exploitationChristopher H. , August 31, 2017 at 11:54 AM
Of wage earning production workers
Is a better base then the 18 th century liberal ideal of equalityExploitation and oppression are obviously not the same
even if they make synergistic team mates oftener then not
So long as " them " are blatantly oppressed
It's easy to Forget you are exploited
Unlike oppression
Exploitation can be so stealthy
So not part of the common description of the surface of daily lifeCalls for equality must include a careful answer to the question
" equal with who ? "Unearned equality is not seen as fair to those who wanna believe they earned their status
Add in the obvious :
To be part of a successful movement aimed at Exclusion of some " thems " or other
Is narcotic
Just as fighting exclusion can be a narcotic too for " thems "But fighting against exclusion coming from among a privileged rank among
The community of would be excluders
That is a bummer
A thankless act of sanctimony
Unless you spiritually join the " thems"Now what have we got ?
Jim Crow thrived for decades it only ended
When black arms and hands in the field at noon ...by the tens of millions
were no longer necessary to Dixie"Pointing fingers at these communities and telling them they don't understand is not the right answer," he warned. "In many ways, the kind of angst that we see in industrial countries today is similar to the bleak times [of] the 1920s and 1930s. Most people in industrial countries used to believe that their children would have a better future than their already pleasant present. Today this is no longer true." ...gregory byshenk , September 01, 2017 at 08:54 AMI thought this sort of thinking was widely accepted only in 2016 we were told by the center left that no it's not true.
"Rajan, a professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, spoke about the "concentrated and devastating" impact of technology and trade on blue-collar communities in areas like the Midwest, the anger toward "totally discredited" elites following the 2008 financial crisis, and the subsequent rise of populist nationalism, seen as a way to restore a sense of community via exclusion."
Instead the center left is arguing that workers have nothing to complain about and besides they're racist/sexist.
'"These communities have become disempowered partly for economic reasons but partly also because decision-making has increasingly been centralized toward state governments, national governments, and multilateral [agreements]," said Rajan. In the European Union, he noted, the concentration of decision-making in Brussels has led to a lot of discontent.'I'd suggest that this part is not true. Communities have become politically disempowered in large part because they have become economically disempowered. A shrinking economy means a shrinking tax base and less funds to do things locally. Even if the local government attempts to rebuild by recruiting other employers, they end up in a race to the bottom with other communities in a similar situation.
I'd also suggest that the largest part of the "discontent" in the EU is not because of any "concentration of decision-making", but because local (and regional, and national) politicians have used the EU as a convenient scapegoat for any required, but unpopular action.
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 | www.unz.com
If all this sneering and gloating were not sufficiently emetic, this issue gives over four full pages to grinding a boot heel into the face of James Damore, the programmer fired by Google on August 7th for his internal company memo on sex differentials in suitability for software work.
This was actually The Economist's second attempt to break this particular butterfly on the wheel. Their previous edition (August 12th-18th) had run a 600-word editorial and a 1,000-word article in the Business Section both arguing that Google should not have fired Damore but that his arguments about women and men displaying different interests were wrong, wrong, wrong .
From the editorial:
An unbiased eye would light on social factors rather than innate differences as the reason why only a fifth of computer engineers are women It would have been better for Larry Page, Google's co-founder and the boss of Alphabet, its holding company, to write a ringing, detailed rebuttal of Mr Damore's argument.
From the article:
Many of the memo's assertions were risible, such as the idea that women are not coders because they are less intrigued by "things" than men are.
This is just ideological enforcement. Why is it more "unbiased" to presume social factors than to presume innate differences? It's not more unbiased; it's just more CultMarx-compliant.
And why is that latter assertion " risible " ("causing or capable of causing laughter; laughable; ludicrous ")? It's not preposterous; it's in the category of things that might or might not be true. Whether it is true or not can be determined by careful empirical enquiry.
Assertions in that category are not "risible" unless you have a strong ideological determination to find them so. The claim that men have one less rib than women could fairly be called "risible" since it is so easily disproved. Damore's claim, as stated, is of a different kind.
To the best of my knowledge, it has not been disproved: but even if it has been, it's still not "risible," as the disproving would have involved painstaking research and lengthy debates in scholarly journals. To persons not current with all that specialized research, it is a thing that might be true .
Well, the four-page heel-grinding in this current issue is an attempt to write the "ringing, detailed rebuttal of Mr Damore's argument" that The Economist recommended to Larry Page in last week's editorial. It is a jeering, sneering specimen of equalist triumphalism.
Your interpretation is wrong. Your memo was a great example of what's called "motivated reasoning"!seeking out only the information that supports what you already believe.
Uh: pot, kettle?
It was derogatory to women in our industry and elsewhere. Despite your stated support for diversity and fairness, it demonstrated profound prejudice.
You should be free of ideological prejudices, pure of heart , as we are!
Your chain of reasoning had so many missing links that it hardly mattered what your argument was based on. We try to hire people who are willing to follow where the facts lead, whatever their preconceptions. In your case we clearly made a mistake.
So then wouldn't it be right to fire him?
You don't seem to understand what makes a great software engineer You clearly don't understand our company, and so fail to understand what we are trying to do when we hire.
See previous.
I shouldn't have had to write this: I'm busy and a little effort on your part would have made it unnecessary. But I know I have it easy. Women in our industry have to cope with this sort of nonsense all the time.
Yours,
Larry
My impression is that Damore put considerable effort into his memo. And again, while some of his assertions could be wrong, they are not missing-rib-level "nonsense."
But then, who's this James Damore pest, anyway? How many billion is he worth? Feugh!
Hugh > , August 25, 2017 at 4:18 pm GMT
Google is 80% male in its most technical departments. This hiring "anomaly" cannot be blamed on the young Damore, as I doubt he has any say in hiring matters. Brin, Page and Schmidt built up the company in its present form.
Should Larry Page be so foolish as to write the sneering epistle suggested by the Economist, he would then have a hard time explaining Google's demographic makeup as he would have thrown away many of his best arguments.
I share Joe Levantine's sorrow over the demise of this once great weekly. What a shame.
|
|
|
Aug 23, 2017 | www.unz.com
John Derbyshire August 23, 2017 300 Words 4 Comments Reply
One of the side-effects of these periodic moral panics that sweep through American society -- Trayvon , Ferguson , Charlottesville -- is that they unmask people -- bring out their inner nature.
Well, two weeks ago on the podcast I said some kind words , or at least not un -kind words, about TV talking head Charles Krauthammer. I said that while I'd written him off for years as a, quote, "cucky neocon Israel-first GOP establishment front man," more recently I've been warming to him because of the mostly sensible things he's said on Tucker Carlson's show.
Well, I'm biting my tongue. Last Tuesday on Fox News Krauthammer reverted to cucky type, acting scandalized that Trump dared suggest there is anything wrong with masked anarchists throwing rocks at citizens lawfully demonstrating.
Fortunately Laura Ingraham was there to counter him. I have, as I have often noted , a very soft spot for Ms. Ingraham. Not to be shy about it, I would walk over hot coals for her, leap the ice floes of a swollen river for her, wrestle alligators for her.
Art Deco > , August 25, 2017 at 1:51 pm GMT
So OK, I yield. I got Krauthammer right the first time: cucky neocon shill.
"Shill"? A shill is a bogus competitor employed by a casino to promote interest in the blackjack tables. Krauthammer isn't a shill.
He's had a certain political trajectory over the years: from mainline Democrat to dissenting Democrat to mainline Republican (a trajectory traversed over the period running from about 1979 to 1995). There is no indication he's ever advocated anything but what he thinks or that he favors the party he's not formally affiliated with; his antagonism to Trump is an indicator of the crevasse which separates starboard opinion journalists from starboard voters.
A real shill would be someone employed by the media to play a Republican. The WaPoo hired David Weigel to do this, but the act wasn't credible after his private correspondence was published in the Journ-O-List scandal.
Tyler Cowen, whose public writings suggest he's consumed with anxiety about status considerations in faculty settings, might be seen as a manifestation of libertarian pseudo-opposition on the George Mason payroll (since he never critiques any progtrasn sacred cows). Bruce Bartlett, the Republican whose signature is attacking other Republicans, might be considered a shill or a poseur depending on who is paying his bills.
And, of course, 'neocon' is a nonsense term.
Krauthammer is a Canadian-reared scion of a very prosperous family. He's lived pretty much all his life in New York, Montreal, Boston, and Washington. His brother spent his adult life in Los Angeles. His son lives in the Bay Area, his niece and her husband in Washington.
Between them, his parents lived in a half-dozen countries during the course of their lives before landing in Quebec. He does not have any natural affinity for the Trump constituency.
The best he can do is to attempt to appreciate it, and at that he is very hit-and-miss.
|
|
|
Aug 27, 2017 | www.unz.com
My thesis is very simple: the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire . That's all there is to it.
I think that minorities often, but not always, act and perceive things in a way very different from the way majority groups do. Here is what I have observed:
Let's first look at minorities inside the US:
They are typically far more aware of their minority identity/status than the majority. That is to say that if the majority is of skin color A and the minority of skin color B, the minority will be much more acutely aware of its skin color. They are typically much more driven and active then the majority. This is probably due to their more acute perception of being a minority. They are only concerned with single-issue politics , that single-issue being, of course, their minority status. Since minorities are often unhappy with their minority-status, they are also often resentful of the majority . Since minorities are mostly preoccupied by their minority-status linked issue, they rarely pay attention to the 'bigger picture' and that, in turn, means that the political agenda of the minorities typically does not threaten the powers that be . Minorities often have a deep-seated inferiority complex towards the putatively more successful majority. Minorities often seek to identify other minorities with which they can ally themselves against the majority.To this list of characteristics, I would add one which is unique to foreign minorities, minorities outside the US: since they have no/very little prospects of prevailing against the majority, these minorities are very willing to ally themselves with the AngloZionist Empire and that, in turn, often makes them depended on the AngloZionist Empire, often even for their physical survival.
The above are, of course, very general characterizations. Not all minorities display all of these characteristics and many display only a few of them. But regardless of the degree to which any single minority fits this list of characteristics, what is obvious is that minorities are extremely easy to manipulate and that they present no credible (full-spectrum) threat to the Empire.
The US Democratic Party is the perfect example of a party which heavily relies on minority manipulation to maximize its power. While the Republican Party is by and large the party of the White, Anglo, Christian and wealthy voters, the Democrats try to cater to Blacks, women, Leftists, homosexuals, immigrants, retirees, and all others who feel like they are not getting their fair share of the proverbial pie. Needless to say, in reality there is only one party in the US, you can call the the Uniparty, the Republicracts or the Demolicans, but in reality both wings of the Big Money party stand for exactly the same things. What I am looking at here is not at some supposed real differences, but the way the parties present themselves. It is the combined action of these two fundamentally identical parties which guarantees the status quo in US politics which I like to sum up as "more of the same, only worse".
I would like to mention an important corollary of my thesis that minorities are typically more driven than the majority. If we accept that minorities are typically much more driven than most of the population, then we also immediately can see why their influence over society is often out of proportion with the numerical demographical "weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities being more intelligent or more creative and everything to do with them willing to being spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most people.
So we have easy to manipulate, small groups, whose agenda does not threaten the 1% (really, much less!), who like to gang up with other similar minorities against the majority. Getting scared yet? It gets worse.
Western 'democracies' are mostly democracies only in name. In most of them instead of "one man one vote" we see "one dollar one vote" meaning that big money decides, not "the people". Those in real power have immense financial resources which they cynically use to boost the already totally disproportional power of the various minorities. Now this is really scary:
Easy to manipulate, small groups, highly driven, whose agenda does not threaten the ruling plutocracy, who like to gang up with other similar minorities against the majority and whose influence is vastly increased by immense sums of money invested in them by the plutocracy. How is that for a threat to real people power, to the ideals of democracy?!
The frightening truth is that the combination of minorities and big money can easily hijack a supposedly 'democratic' country and subjugate the majority of its population to the "rule of the few over the many".
Once we look this reality in the face we should also become aware of a very rarely mentioned fact: while we are taught that democracies should uphold the right of the minorities, the opposite is true: real democracies should strive to protect majorities against the abuse of power from minorities!
I know, I have just committed a long list of grievous thoughtcrimes!
At those who might be angry at me, I will reply with a single sentence: please name me a western country where the views of the majority of its people are truly represented in the policies of their governments? And if you fail to come up with a good example, then I need to ask you if the majority is clearly not in power, then who is?
I submit that the plutocratic elites which govern the West have played a very simple trick on us all: they managed to focus our attention on the many cases in history when minorities were oppressed by majorities but completely obfuscated the numerous cases whereminorities oppressed majorities.
Speaking of oppression: minorities are far more likely to benefit and, therefore, use violence than the majority simply because their worldview often centers on deeply-held resentments. To put it differently, minorities are much more prone to settling scores for past wrongs (whether real or imagined) than a majority which typically does not even think in minority versus majority categories .
Not that majorities are always benign or kind towards minorities, not at all, humans being pretty much the same everywhere, but by the fact that they are less driven, less resentful and, I would argue, even less aware of their "majority status" they are less likely to act on such categories.
Foreign minorities play a crucial role in US foreign policy. Since time immemorial rulers have been acutely aware of the " divide et impera " rule, there is nothing new here. But the US has become the uncontested leader in the art of using national minorities to create strife and overthrow a disobedient regime. The AngloZionist war against the Serbian nation is the perfect example of how this is done: the US supported any minority against the Serbs, even groups that the US classified as terrorists, as long as this was against the Serbs. And, besides being Orthodox Slavs and traditional allies of Russia, what was the real 'crime' of the Serbs? Being the majority of course! The Serbs had no need of the AngloZionists to prevail against the various ethnic (Croats) and religious (Muslims) minorities they lived with. That made the Serbs useless to the Empire. But now that the US has created a fiction of an independent Kosovo, the Kosovo Albanians put up a statue of Bill Clinton in Prishtina and, more relevantly, allowed the Empire to build the Camp Bondsteel mega-base in the middle of their nasty little statelet, right on the land of the Serbian population that was ethnically cleansed during the Kosovo war. US democracy building at its best indeed
The same goes for Russia (and, the Soviet Union) where the US went as far as to support the right of self-determination for non-existing "captive nations" such as "Idel-Ural" and "Cossakia" . I would even argue that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo (What in the world is a "Belarussian"?!).
I am fully aware that in the typical TV watching westerner any discussion of minorities focusing on their negative potential immediately elicits visions of hammers and sickles, smoking crematoria chimneys, chain gangs, lynchmobs, etc. This is basic and primitive conditioning. Carefully engineered events such as the recent riots in Charlottesville only further reinforce this type of mass conditioning. This is very deliberate and, I would add, very effective. As a result, any criticism, even just perceived criticism, of a minority immediately triggers outraged protests and frantic virtue-signaling (not me! look how good I am!!).
Of course, carefully using minorities is just one of the tactics used by the ruling plutocracy. Another of their favorite tricks is to created conflicts out of nothing or ridiculously bloat the visibility of an altogether minor topic (example: homo-marriages). The main rule remains the same though: create tensions, conflicts, chaos, subvert the current order (whatever that specific order might be), basically have the serfs fight each other while we rule .
In Switzerland an often used expression to describe "the people" is "the sovereign". This is a very accurate description of the status of the people in a real democracy: they are "sovereign" in the sense that nobody rules over them. In that sense, the issue in the United States is one of sovereignty: as of today, the real sovereign of the US are the corporations, the deep state, the Neocons, the plutocracy, the financiers, the Israel Lobby – you name it, anybody BUT the people.
In that system of oppression, minorities play a crucial role, even if they are totally unaware of this and even if, at the end of the day, they don't benefit from it. Their perception or their lack of achievements in no way diminishes the role that they play in the western pseudo-democracies.
How do with deal with this threat?
I think that the solution lies with the minorities themselves: they need to be educated about the techniques which are used to manipulate them, and they need to be convinced that their minority status does not, in reality, oppose them to the majority and that both the majority and the minorities have a common interest in together standing against those who seek to rule over them all. Striving to remain faithful to my "Putin fanboy" reputation, I will say that I believe that Russia under Putin is doing exactly the right thing by giving the numerous Russian minorities a stake in the future of the Russian state and by convincing the minorities that their interests and the interest of the majority of the people are fundamentally the same: being a minority does not have to mean being in opposition to the majority. It is a truism that minorities need to be fully integrated into the fabric of society and yet this is rarely practiced in the real world. This is certainly not what I observe today in Europe or the US.
The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant motto to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement "Equality and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only political movement in France which does not want to favor one group at the expense of the other. Everybody else either wants to oppress the "français de souche" (the native, mostly White and Roman-Catholic majority) on behalf of the "français de branche" (immigrants, naturalized citizens, minorities), or oppress the "français de branche" on behalf of the "français de souche". Needless to say, the only ones who benefit from this clash is the ruling Zionist elite (best represented by the infamous CRIF , which makes the US AIPAC look comparatively honorable and weak). As for Soral, he is vilified by the official French media with no less hate than Trump is vilified in the US by the US Ziomedia.
Still, equality and reconciliation are the two things which the majorities absolutely must offer the minorities if they want to prevent the latter to fall prey to the manipulation techniques used by those forces who want to turn everybody into obedient and clueless serfs. Those majorities who delude themselves and believe that they can simply solve the "minority problem" by expelling or otherwise making these minorities disappear are only kidding themselves. To 'simply' solve the "minority problem' by cracking down on these minorities inevitably
Grandpa Charlie > , August 26, 2017 at 6:29 am GMT
Fran Macadam > , Website August 26, 2017 at 6:56 am GMT"While we all typically [have] several co-existing identities inside us (say, German, retired, college-educated, female, Buddhist, vegetarian, exile, resident of Brazil, etc. as opposed to just "White"), in manipulated minorities one such identity (skin color, religion, etc.) becomes over-bloated and trumps all the others." -- The Saker
That's a great critique of "identity politics" and one reason why identity politics is self-limiting, maybe even self-destructive (as well as destructive of democracy).
Grandpa Charlie > , August 26, 2017 at 7:13 am GMTTo distill it to an aphorism, "A million guys with one buck, are no match for one guy with a million bucks."
WorkingClass > , August 26, 2017 at 9:24 am GMTAnother point: The poorer people are, the more vulnerable they are to identity politics.
It's like an Indian movie I once saw that was constructed as a family history. When the family experienced many setbacks, one after another, until they were all disheartened, the patriarch of the family spoke up, saying, "Remember, we are Bengali!" That was the turning point in the film: after that things began to improve for the family so that the film could have a happy Bolliwood ending.
That was like saying, "Remember, we have a proud history!"
There was also a Yiddish joke that someone told me, like this: There was a young Jewish man in some place like Minsk, somewhere in Eastern Europe, and he saw an advertisement by none other than a great member of the Rothschild banking family. The ad said "Wanted: young Jewish man for difficult and physically challenging assignment." So the hero (or anti-hero?) of this story set out immediately for Paris. Unfortunately, our hero experienced many tragedies, even losing an arm and a leg. But he was determined and he persevered, with the help of a crutch. Finally, he had to camp out in front of the gate of the Rothschild mansion outside of Paris.
Eventually, the great Rothschild had his carriage stop and spoke to the man, saying, "You know, I've seen you standing here day after day what is it that you want?"
Our hero brought out the advertisement that he had carried with him through all his misadventures. The great Rothschild read the advertisement and exclaimed, "What's the matter with you? Did you not read that the job was physically challenging?" To which our hero responded, "Yes, but, Mr. Rothschild, the ad says "young Jewish man."
Being myself a gentile, I did not at first get the joke, but eventually I got a chuckle out of it.
Mao Cheng Ji > , August 26, 2017 at 11:17 am GMTWhat do all races, genders, nationalities and creeds have in common? An overwhelming majority of them are working class. That's why I am white and Nationalist but not a White Nationalist. The working class wants work and wages. The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats.
Anonymous > , Disclaimer August 26, 2017 at 4:24 pm GMTHere's a similar sentiment, by Nassim Taleb: https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15
Bartolo > , August 26, 2017 at 6:55 pm GMTI also lived for 5 years in Washington, DC, which was something like 70% Black and, at the time, openly and often rudely hostile to Whites (I never thought of myself as a color before, but I sure felt like one during those 5 years). And now I am a "legal alien" living in the US. Anyway, while I am "White" (what a nonsensical category!)
Nonsensical? Really? Both the DC blacks and their DC (((paymasters))) hate your "category" but you're still confused and want to hold hands and educate them ? Do you have children?
The French author Alain Soral has proposed what I think is a brilliant motto to deal with this situation in France. He has called his movement "Equality and Reconciliation" and as of right now, this is the only political movement in France which does not want to favor one group at the expense of the other.
Demographically speaking, the native French group ( white category FYI) is already doomed to lose their homeland unless they reverse the invasion and punish the plotters. Reconciling with their invaders would be assisted suicide, surely. Almost as bad as the forced miscegenation idea proposed by Nicolas "Jew Midget" Sarkozy a few years back.
You need to wake up and check for any vitamin/mineral deficiencies you might have, Saker. Our ancestors butchered countless invaders to give us the land we're standing on – they didn't reconcile it away.
Cyrano > , August 26, 2017 at 7:52 pm GMTExcellent diagnosis, ridiculous therapy.
One single question shows how profoundly silly The Saker's his "solution" is:
Why would it be easier to convince resentful, envious minorities to just get along with the majority than to convince the elites to act better, according to the noblesse oblige principle?
Elites will always misuse their power. Minorities/majorities will always quarrel and resent each other.
Give us (back) ethnically homogeneous states instead. No panacea, but the besf we can hope for.
RDM10005 > , August 26, 2017 at 8:46 pm GMTThe ruling elites of US (both democrats and republicans) can be divided into 2 categories:
1. The ones who think that they are better because of their race.
2. The ones who think that they are better because they were able to overcome the feeling of being better because of their race. In other words – the morally superior ubermensch instead of racially superior ubermensch.In reality, category 2 doesn't exist (at least not among the ruling elites) – they are all liars. They haven't been able to overcome any feeling of superiority, they just added another one – the one of moral superiority. Actually, the ruling elites for the most part are still category 1, only pretending to be category 2. Not only do they feel they are superior to other races, they feel they are superior to their own race – the poorer members of it.
The ruling elites are manipulating the population of US into declaring that they belong in either one of these 2 camps. Result: Charlottesville riots.
Issac > , August 26, 2017 at 8:54 pm GMTI already wrote about that here http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2016/08/29/deep-state-plutocrat-elite-use-protected-classes-to-do-their-dirty-work/ 2 years ago and published last year. This is old hat and old news.
Ricard > , August 27, 2017 at 4:50 am GMTThis post would sound eminently reasonable if the white identitarians had any kind of state blessing, but they are a de facto criminal element being suppressed. Not for the sake of democracy, but for the sake of the elite who are Jewish, not Zionist, and not very Anglo.
White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white leadership were transparently in control over the state. The wellspring of their support comes from the fact that what whites do exist in the power structure are absolutely and transparently subservient to other interests.
Alden > , August 27, 2017 at 4:57 am GMTWhile we all typically several co-existing identities inside us
Spot the missing verb.
jocose > , August 27, 2017 at 5:02 am GMT@Fran Macadam Here is the mantra of political fund raisers. " it's easier to get one donor to give $1,000 than to get 20 donors to give $50 apiece."
Beckow > , August 27, 2017 at 6:33 am GMTOne of the problems is that the US was (and still is) a republic-with a small r. The republican form of government assumes that the voters are too stupid or ignorant to pass laws, so they have to hire professional political types to write their governing laws for them. The politicos are easy targets for the powers that be to manipulate, evidently.
jilles dykstra > , August 27, 2017 at 6:48 am GMTThe problem is – as always – with the numbers. The large influx of migrants is changing the demographics and that changes the goals and behaviour of each group. The minority groups can see the promised land in the future when they will take over. The majority knows that they cannot stop it by "equality and reconciliation" (whatever that would mean in practise, maybe endless workshops to whine about each other?).
The numbers game has gone too far and there is no easy way to restore stability. E.g. the labor markets in the West cannot be fixed without drastic restrictions on supply of new labor from the Third World. The article has some valuable insights, but the lame 'solution' it suggests is useless.
Another issue not addressed is that many minorities are a majority in their regions leading to a geographic instability by putting borders in question. That separation actually makes sense in many cases.
What we have had for some time are the elites behaving badly, they have stopped being responsible and thoughtful. The best solution I can see would be for the elites to sober up and start taking their role seriously again. Short of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos. Those are the wages of the baby boomer idiocy.
bliss_porsena > , August 27, 2017 at 6:59 am GMTManipulated majorities are an even greater danger. At the last French elections the political elite did anything possible to prevent Front National getting legal political power. With fifteen % of the votes, of those who bothered to vote, some 44%, Macron got an absolute majority in French parliament, some 360 seats. FN six or so. Yet, alas, anyone knows he won the elections, but not the streets.
As his popularity goes down, Sun King habits, the strikes announced for 11 and 12 September will show who really is in power in France.
unpc downunder > , August 27, 2017 at 7:11 am GMTSome minorities are more equal than others. The Deep State, for example.
Jason Liu > , August 27, 2017 at 8:01 am GMTIf you want to lesson the influence of minorities in western democracies, then its essential to provide a more a la carte form of democracy that is less open to elite manipulation. Options include getting rid of political parties and voting directly for heads of government departments, or allowing voters to vote on which party gets to run each of the key government departments.
It's impossible to have a functional political system when the political parties themselves are allowed to decide what issues voters get to vote on, and can racially divide the electorate by providing policy packages which play to voter weaknesses. This results in absurd results like blacks in the US voting for mass unskilled immigration via the Democrats, and poor American whites voting for increased defense spending and financial liberalisation via the Republicans.
There is no way around this problem without radically changing the political system.
peterAUS > , August 27, 2017 at 8:12 am GMTEasier said than done. Most minorities would support anti-majority politics even IF they knew they were being manipulated. You severely underestimate the human attraction to tribalism.
A more plausible plan would be to turn minorities against so-called 'AngloZionist' values, which is already partially complete, since minorities are rarely Anglos and therefore don't subscribe to their values as much. Have a look at any SJW gathering. Always disproportionately white, even in very diverse cities. It's much easier to convince even longtime resident minorities like blacks that things like transgenderism is bullshit, than it is to convince emotionally committed whites.
This would result in a country that allows multiple competing tribalisms, but none of which would be very useful as pawns by the elites. Not as good as homogeneity, but better than the current situation.
"Everybody gang up against the WEIRDs" is a nice thought and I would love to see it, but it's just not very likely.
jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:44 am GMTThere is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:
Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being manipulated
Offer the minorities a future based on equality and reconciliation
Put the spotlight on those who fan the flames of conflict and try to turn minorities and majorities against each otherSurprisingly weak and naive.
A simple question:
What's wrong with Serb approach in Kosovo before Western intervention?
Spare me "virtue signalling" .. if you can.I think it would've worked if West hadn't stepped up with overwhelming FORCE.
It worked in "Operation Storm". Serbs as victims but that's precisely the point.
Perfect example how it CAN work.So .following the same logic ..if IF .West used the same approach why it wouldn't work?
Say .French government does exactly the same as Croats did with Serbs in Croatia or Serbs with Albanians/whatever in Kosovo.Just curious.
Anyone?
jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 12:15 pm GMTExcellent piece.
There is only effective way defuse the explosive potential of minorities:
Educate minorities and explain to them that they are being manipulated
Educate those joining anti-minority movements that they are also being manipulatedWhile those ideas have merit, I predict they'll be impossible to implement. Education is an active process and one cannot "be" educated in the passive sense. People, like other creatures, can be schooled and trained, but that's not the same as acquiring an education.
There are several reasons why the majority will never acquire any meaningful education. Most people simply do not possess the requisite curiosity to begin any sort of educational process and would rather make decisions based on immediate emotions. A true education requires active questioning of the standing myths and myths are evidently too comfortable for most to discard or even doubt. Most folks appear too lazy and or too timid to face the hard truths and would rather follow the dictates of some slick Peruna peddler.
A shocking percentage of people apparently love the feeling of "superiority" of "knowing" something even if their belief is utter, easily discardable, hogwash and actively reject any challenges to it. For example, the mindless charge of "conspiracy theorist" is used to dismiss, without thinking, anything but the spoon fed drivel they see on teevee.
I could go on, but this is already too long and is mostly preaching to the choir.
anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 12:31 pm GMTThe working class wants work and wages.
Which is a key reason that things are not likely to improve for at least a few more millennia. Accepting wages is a form of slavery, and most folks simply cannot see beyond that trap. The system has evolved so that people readily accept the idea of wages as a necessity (along with the extortion and theft known as taxes). There's a huge difference between making (earning) a living and holding a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince anyone of that.
Tolstoy wrote about the concept of wage slavery over a century ago and it makes good reading to this day.
"But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of [chattel] slavery was only the abolition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become unnecessary, and the substitution for it of a firmer form of slavery and one that holds a greater number of people in bondage."
- Leo Tolstoy
A few typos, but otherwise a fine summary: Tolstoy, Slavery of Our Times, Chap 8, 11 July, 1900 http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/WorldeBookLibrary.com/slaverytol.htm#1_0_7
The ruling class gives us war and welfare. Solidarity is the only effective defense against concentrated wealth. Absent solidarity the working class is a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Witness the American prole. Simultaneously under the lash and at each others throats.
All true, except the part about solidarity, which would definitely be a huge step in the right direction for us proles and peasants, but is probably as unobtainable as true education of the masses.
As I see it, the best an individual can do is to toss a monkey wrench into the system whenever we can get away with it, but that requires an understanding of who are enemies are and that seems nearly impossible to achieve. Thus it's effective only in theory. In practice, it's probably as ephemeral as a gas emission in a tornado.
anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMTShort of that, we will have chaos, and not the fun type of chaos.
Chaos is on the march.
It appears the minority has magically organized itself and planned a 10-day march from Charlottesville to DC, there to demand the impeachment/removal of Donald Trump, and to carry on a non-violent occupation (irony alert).
http://thehill.com/homenews/news/348136-ten-day-march-from-charlottesville-to-dc-to-start-monday
jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMTthen its essential to provide a more a la carte form of democracy that is less open to elite manipulation.
you mean something like state's sovereignty, which is what Robert E Lee stood for?
Robert Magill > , August 27, 2017 at 1:26 pm GMTManipulated majorities are an even greater danger.
An even bigger threat is the manipulat ing minorities aka certain (most?) elements of the money bag crowd.
This problem has been recognized for millennia and was discussed in detail by many early Americans who nevertheless argued in favor of a constitution and a centralized bureaucracy that favored the rich.
Virtue cannot dwell with wealth either in a city or in a house.
-Diogenes of Sinope, quoted by Stobaeus, iv. 31c. 88
But if you will take note of the mode of proceedings of men, you will see that all those who come to great riches and great power have obtained them either by fraud or by force; and afterwards, to hide the ugliness of acquisition, they make it decent by applying the false title of earnings to things they have usurped by deceit or by violence.
- Niccolo Machiavelli , HISTORY OF FLORENCE AND OF THE AFFAIRS OF ITALY, Book 3 chap 3Para 8
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2464/2464-h/2464-h.htm#link2H_4_0022
" wealth is no proof of moral character; nor poverty of the want of it. On the contrary, wealth is often the presumptive evidence of dishonesty; and poverty the negative evidence of innocence."
THOMAS PAINE, DISSERTATION ON FIRST-PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT, 1795
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/004809392.0001.000/1:2?rgn=div1;view=fulltext
War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:27 pm GMTAfroAmericans who are descended from slaves should take into account the fact that their ancestors were protected because they had value. As a result they now number some 42 million and produced the last President. Comparison with the indigenous natives who after centuries of genocide number about 2 million and are mostly on reservations should give pause.
https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2017/08/26/issues-seen-and-not-seen/
Intelligent Dasein > , Website August 27, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMTDear Saker
Nonwhites within the borders of the US are not innocent bystanders They are enthusiastically voting The Historic Native Born White American Majority into a violently persecuted racial minority within the borders of America..
If you have a greater identification with Muslim "Americans" and Hindu "Americans" than European American Natives then just go back to Russia..and take the Hindus and Muslims with you.
It wasn't very nice of you not to let my comment go through yesterday in response to commenter Eric .on The Vineyard of the Saker
You are waging demographic warfare against my Racial Tribe .
War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:38 pm GMT@Robert Magill Barack Obama was not the descendant of any African slaves, you idiot.
Michael Kenny > , August 27, 2017 at 2:42 pm GMT@WorkingClass The Chinese in California are Chinese Race Nationalist The Hindus in California are Hindu Race Nationalists You are a Civic Nationalist Cuck.
War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 2:45 pm GMTUsing minorities as an excuse to oppress majorities is a classic colonial technique. The British set themselves up as the "protectors" of the Muslims in India, the Turks in Cyprus and the Protestants in Ireland, for example. Putin justifies his actions in Ukraine by claiming that he is "protecting" the ethnic Russian minority from the dastardly ethnic Ukrainian majority. Ditto for the various cyber-attacks on Estonia. One assumes that the same treatment would be meted out to the Belarusians if they dared to assert their national sovereignty. The US captive nations legislation the author refers to includes Belarus (designated "White Ruthenia"), Ukraine and the three Baltic republics. I am unaware of any alliance ever having existed, or existing today, between Serbia and Russia. Like "Eurasia", that "alliance" seems to have been invented by US neocons when they were trying to use Putin as an "asset".
Anon > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 2:49 pm GMTSaker
Is it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted The Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into a racial minority?
Intelligent Dasein > , Website August 27, 2017 at 3:03 pm GMT"Manipulated minorities represent a major danger to democratic states."
Well, yes. But the manipulation of minorities to change legal frameworks or disassemble governments has been ongoing since the French Revolution. 'They' first foster a sense of oppression, more or less justified, then move to grant the new rights. Monarchies suffered the strategy. Europe should know the drill, witness the received oral tradition "Czechoslovaquia is another spelling for Rothschild."
Breaking up the US along racial lines is exactly what 'they' want. They want the fighting "whites" to come out, give the reason for changes in law. The Trump impeachment is deliberate provocation.
There has never been a 'white nation', it is a silly, ahistorical idea. Nations are built around culture. Fight for the culture. Use the damn high IQ.
Arithtoddle > , August 27, 2017 at 3:09 pm GMTI am unaware of any alliance ever having existed, or existing today, between Serbia and Russia.
There was a little tiff called World War One. It was in a couple of papers.
War for Blair Mountain > , August 27, 2017 at 3:21 pm GMT@Issac "White nationalism would have zero credibility if actual white leadership were transparently in control over the state."
Nope, but thanks for playing. White nationalism would have zero credibility if the leadership actually promoted American–WASP–interests. There is no escaping the Posterity clause, period. There is no magic dirt, no civic nationalism, no immersion in American culture, that can replace descendants of the English colonists that understand the importance of the Rights of Englishmen. The US was never intended to be the world's largest rest stop for every poor downtrodden person on Earth. Minorities now all undocumented immigrants since 1965 (Hart-Cellar).
Homogeneous nation's are born from Heterogeneous nation's. We are witnesses to the birth pains. The length of the labor depends on how long the majority will tolerate the minorities. Reconciliation isn't just impossible–its not even on the table, unless you reverse time. They. Have. To. Go. Back.
Wally > , August 27, 2017 at 3:25 pm GMT@Anon Well..you are wrong about that..America since it's inception has always been a White Nation If you don't believe me..just ask Professor Noel Ignatieve-the Father of White Studies. Where I differ from Professor Noel Ignatieve:I think it's GREAT that America has historically been a White Nation as did Socialist Labor Leader Samuel Gompers.
As far as your last two sentences go:Bring back the 1888 Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act!!!!
Saker
The highly racialized Nonwhite Democratic Party Voting Bloc is the Voting Bloc for War on Christian Russia not Trump's Whitey Racist Voting Bloc..
Francis G. > , August 27, 2017 at 5:07 pm GMT@jacques sheete Well stated.
And of course, what 'education' would these minorities be given?
Take a look at what is given them now in our systems.
Absolute lies about, and hatred of, white gentiles.Then there is the simple fact of minorities low IQs.
What, we think we're going to train dumb Africans to be engineers?By and large these people are unemployable in a modern society.
The entire matter of somehow 'educating' these people in the true sense of the word is laughable.
Just look at the countries they come from.WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 5:08 pm GMT@Intelligent Dasein Damned right. If anything, he is the descendant of African slave traders . But his skin is sort of black and he's got a funky name, so he can pass as one of the "oppressed" minorities.
anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 5:13 pm GMT@jacques sheete 1 Timothy 5:18 ESV /
For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain," and, "The laborer deserves his wages."Wages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable. But with what will you replace them?
There's a huge difference between making (earning) a living and holding a job for wages, but I doubt I'll ever be able to convince anyone of that.
Try me.
I was a union man back in the day when private sector unions were active and had support in Washington. We had a contractual relationship with employers that was qualitatively different from serfdom or chattel slavery and a huge improvement over the wage slavery that prevailed before the American labor movement.
As ideologies go the Anarchists have the best of it. But even they are Utopians. Capitalism sux. There will never be a free market utopia. But neither will there be a workers paradise. Human beings are limited in what they can accomplish by human nature. That's the law. I'm only interested in what works in the real world, however imperfectly.
yeah > , August 27, 2017 at 5:18 pm GMTWho said this:
Nature does not know political frontiers. She first puts the living beings on this globe and watches the free game of energies. He who is strongest in courage and industry receives, as her favorite child, the right to be the master of existence.
If a people limits itself to domestic colonization, at a time when other races cling to greater and greater surfaces of the earth's soil, it will be forced to exercise self-restriction even while other nations will continue to increase.
For some day this case will occur, and it will arrive the earlier the smaller the living space is that a people has at its disposal. As, unfortunately only too frequently, the best nations, or, better still, the really unique cultured races, the pillars of all human progress, in their pacifistic blindness decide to renounce the acquisition of new soil in order to content themselves with 'domestic* colonization, while
inferior nations know full well how to secure enormous areas on this earth for themselves, this would lead to the following result:The culturally superior, but less ruthless, races would have to limit, in consequence of their limited soil, their increase even at a time when the culturally inferior, but more brutal and more natural, people, in consequence of their greater living areas, would be able to increase themselves without limit.
In other words: the world will, therefore, some day come into the hands of a mankind that is
inferior in culture but superior in energy and activity.For then there will be only two possibilities in the no matter how distant future: either the world will be ruled according to the ideas of our modern democracy, and then the stress of every decision falls on the races which are stronger in numbers, or the world will be dominated according to the law of the natural order of energy, and then the people of brute strength will be victorious, and again, therefore, not the nations of self-restriction.
But one may well believe that this world will still be subject to the fiercest fights for the existence of mankind.
In the end, only the urge for self-preservation will eternally succeed. Under its pressure so-called 'humanity,' as the expression of a mixture of stupidity, cowardice, and an imaginary superior intelligence, will melt like snow under the March sun. Mankind has grown strong in eternal
struggles and it will only perish through eternal peace.Hint: today in an appearance on an internationally broadcast program, a minion from Foundation for Defense of Democracy (FDD) dismissed as "conspiracy theory" the suggestion that the USA/(Trump admin) is involved in Afghanistan "because Afghanistan has vast lithium resources, which US needs for new technologies" [see this 2010 report, Read More
Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 5:40 pm GMTMinorities are nothing but trouble, even though political correctness demands that we not see that or dare to say so. History offers not a single – NOT ONE SINGLE – example of harmony and mutual love between the minorities and the majority in any community/country/nation. Prove me wrong, cite one significant exception.
Don't cite Italian-Americans and Polish-Americans in the American melting pot. They came with full intent to be melted, they came white, Christian, and western in outlook and culture. They came pre-cooked for the melting pot. Can't say the same for the Muslims streaming in today. Nor for the Hindus and the Orientals coming in today. Leaving aside the Muslims (not even worth discussing in any talk of assimilation), the Hindus and Orientals today stand aside and apart, both groups highly conscious of their groups' share in the American pie. The Hispanics will make Spanish the lingua Franca – already largely done in California. So what exactly can the melting of Spanish and English languages produce? Spanglish? No, it will be one or the other, depending on which group acquires demographic majority and sufficient political clout. Who will melt whom?
Cloak And Dagger > , August 27, 2017 at 6:00 pm GMT@Fran Macadam Unless a million guys are organized.
Art > , August 27, 2017 at 6:43 pm GMTIs it ok with you that the Chinese and Hindus in California voted The Historic Native Born White American Majority in California into a racial minority?
Please elaborate on what you mean. I definitely do not see myself as a racial minority in California.
nsa > , August 27, 2017 at 6:43 pm GMTManipulated Minorities Represent a Major Danger for Democratic States
The solution is an easy one – we must abandon the Jew Matrix of identity politics and return to the Christian Matrix of neighborliness.
Jew thought is about biological identity, and all the fear and hate associated with it – the Christian philosophical mindset is an intellectual entreaty to "love your neighbor as you love yourself." Hmm – one favors gonad driven actions – the other using our brains to overcome our biology, and make peace and abundance.
The differences are stark and profound – we can see what the Jew way has brought us – Jew tribalism is killing America and the West.
If we want a just kind world we cannot abandon philosophical Christianity.
Philosophical Christianity is not about "the virgin birth" and "the ascension into heaven" – it is about a practical way to peaceably live with each other and build an abundance for all.
Think Peace -- Art
Ivy > , August 27, 2017 at 7:22 pm GMT@Cloak And Dagger Non-Hispanic white is now down to 37.7% of the California population as of 2016 according to the U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts ..probably less if you include all the uncounted illegals.
Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:29 pm GMT@nsa Will the increased supply of labor result in lower gardening bills? Or take-out food bills?
Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:33 pm GMT"I would even argue that the Empire has created several nation ex nihilo (What in the world is a "Belarussian"?!)."
Hey, us Anglo-Zionists didn't create Belarus. That was an indigenous or possibly German puppet state created (sort of) in early 1918. It was then conquered by the Bolsheviks and reborn as the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, a constituent republic of the USSR till it fell apart, at which point it became (sort of) independent.
The Anglo-Zionists had nothing to do with any of this, with probable exception of the collapse of the USSR.
Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:37 pm GMT@jacques sheete Since you consider "working for wages" as not "making a living," I'm curious what you would consider to constitute "making a living."
Yeoman farmer?
Small businessman?
Bank robber?
Logan > , August 27, 2017 at 7:44 pm GMT@Intelligent Dasein Actually, if we go back a dozen or two generations, it's probable most people on the planet are descended from both slaveowners and slaves. Especially if you're a little loose with the definition of slave.
Miro23 > , August 27, 2017 at 8:27 pm GMT@Bragadocious If we had ever made a serious consistent effort to kill all the Indians, they'd be gone. But there seem to be quite a few of them still around. About 5M, in fact, considerably more than lived in the boundaries of the USA in 1491.
Argentina had similar Indian problems during the same time period (late 19th century) we were fighting our final Indian wars. But they had a different approach: extermination.
Quite successful at it, too. Very few Indians left in Argentina. And they didn't import any other minorities, which means Argentina is now upwards of 90% "white." Much more so than USA, in fact.
prusmc > , August 27, 2017 at 8:34 pm GMTIf we accept that minorities are typically much more driven than most of the population, then we also immediately can see why their influence over society is often out of proportion with the numerical demographical "weight". This has nothing to do with these minorities being more intelligent or more creative and everything to do with them willing to being spend much more time and efforts towards their objectives than most people.
It's true that there is greater activism, but the key ingredient is probably ethnic patronage.
A.H. gave an (approving) explanation of how it works:
"In the old Austria, nothing could be done without patronage. That's partly explained by the fact that nine million Germans were in fact rulers, in virtue of an unwritten law, of fifty million non-Germans. This German ruling class took strict care that places should always be found for Germans. For them this was the only method of maintaining themselves in this privileged situation. The Balts of German origin behaved in the same way towards the Slav population."
Hitler's Table Talk. Conversation Nş 109, 15th-16th January 1942
American Jewry has been following the same policy since the early 1900′s, pushing for Jewish candidates in key placings, who if successful, are expected to return the favour. On a "level playing field" this has a ratchet effect whereby corporate management and key media, finance and government positions can be gradually taken over with Anglos squeezed out in a rather unobvious way ("He wasn't the right candidate for reasons A,B,C X,Y,Z").
Tradecraft46 > , August 27, 2017 at 8:40 pm GMT@jacques sheete Jacquez:
Educate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years. I believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education. How has it worked? What does the US Census data show for the indicator median education level persons over 25 years of age in 1960 demonstrate when compared to 2010? Compare for both white and black. Wow! we all are much smarter. Okay, as Rodney King so aptly stated it "why can' t everbody just get along?"
Lawrence Fitton > , August 27, 2017 at 8:52 pm GMTBetter still, they are making more enemies than they can put to any good use.
In that world, enemies validate, in the real world, it invites total destruction.
None of them, being religious and all, never count the costs, which Jesus suggested.
jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 8:59 pm GMT@Wally okay wally, i'm only going to say this once, so please pay attention. the gas chambers were but one method by which jews were killed. starvation, disease, forced labor, firing squads, killed legions. what if it was only 4 million jews who perished in the camps? or 3? does that make it better.
one last thing: elie wiesel is not the wonderful man he is purported to be.jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 9:09 pm GMTWages are as old as dirt. I can understand why you find them objectionable. But with what will you replace them?
Dear Sir, as I've often stated, I like what you have to say and agree with 99% of it. I also respect the fact that your reply to me was obviously respectful and sincere.
My usual answer to your question is to replace them with nothing. For example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it; I'd rather do without. Instead of wages and a time clock, I advocate finding other (hopefully respectable) sources of income.
I realize that in this environment, it's nearly impossible to do without wages, but that shows how much our system sux, hence my objection to them and the system. I pretty much became disgusted with the concept after working at a few jobs that were really akin to slavery or some other unsavory paid profession, so I worked to make a living without punching time clock. That's not to say that I did not receive money for my services, but I managed to do without a direct boss during my earning days. Several other rather cantankerous members of my family manged to do the same, and some still do. I'm not saying that to brag, but to point out that it can be done.
I do admit that it now seems nearly impossible to do that sort of thing, but a close neighbor, in his thirty's, manages to do that and does quite well. He does have the advantage of both a good work ethic and access to a family business though.
The bottom line for me is that it's too bad that we have to submit to bosses for the most part to earn a living. From that we seem to learn to submit to other forms of "authority" with little or no questioning, and it seems to be a downhill slide from there. Also, the more power the bosses get, they more they control, and the less chance there is for people to become independent. that's no way to live.
Skeptikal > , August 27, 2017 at 9:12 pm GMTSince you consider "working for wages" as not "making a living,"
That is a false statement. It is both illogical and unreasonable based on what I actually said.
Working for wages in one of several ways of earning a living. It just happens to be, in my way of thinking, one of the least desirable for many reasons.
I'm curious what you would consider to constitute "making a living."
Yeoman farmer?
Small businessman?
Bank robber?
All of the above, and many more.
jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 9:14 pm GMT@Logan Belorusian.
One r.Tim Howells > , August 27, 2017 at 9:23 pm GMTEducate the minorities! I have bwen hearing that for over 50 years. I believe that was a substantial rationale for Federal Aid to education.
Most folks are entirely ineducable and seem to like it that way. Of course, it's a fine sounding pretext for mass brainwashing and it's attendant bureaucracy and source of profits.
How has it worked?
It's probably worked just as intended but not at all as advertised!
See John Taylor Gatto and Upton Sinclair's "The Goslings" and the Goosestep" which basically describe schooling in America as a tool for corporations.
attilathehen > , August 27, 2017 at 9:59 pm GMTwhat if it was only 4 million jews who perished in the camps? or 3? does that make it better?
Well, in several countries you can go to jail, and many have, for saying it was less than 6, so go figure. Norman Finkelstein was destroyed by the "Holocaust Industry" for showing in the simplest terms that if you add up the numbers of supposed "victims" and "survivors", the official figures are patently absurd. The more you dig, the more absurd it gets.
Delinquent Snail > , August 27, 2017 at 10:13 pm GMTThe Saker: You are not a "minority." You are a Caucasian, the European branch, ethnically Russian. You are Christian, specifically Orthodox. You are one of the interesting groups that make up the Caucasian peoples. You have nothing in common with blacks/Asians.
The Democratic party is the party of nonwhites, non-Christians, sexual degenerates. Manipulation has nothing to do with this. Minorities know they are inferiors. What they are doing is because they realize they can never accomplish what Caucasians/Europeans/ Christians/neopagans have accomplished. This means it is time for separation/deportation/repatriation.
This is coming. An RCC priest "confessed" to having been in the KKK when he was a teenager. The US Conference of Bishops has established an ad hoc committee to address racism. This is the final nail in the coffin of the RCC. Homosexuals have taken over the priesthood. Priests do not preach about hell, sin, repentance. Now that this KKK priest has been exposed, from now on sermons will only cover "racism," the worst sin.
Caucasian Christans/pagans have to deal with the reality that world history can be summed up in two words: IQ, which is tied to race. The past 2000 years of Western civilization united under the RCC are gone. There has to be a new paradigm shift to deal with the future and what needs to be done.
Mulegino1 > , August 27, 2017 at 10:24 pm GMT@anonymous I hope they act like they have at every event they have been a part of and the president acts accordingly. Trump needs to hire people to record the whole thing and put it all up on a new website thats created just to host the event. Dozens of live feeds from dozens of angles. All put up on this new website just so there will be no confusion. Once the left riots, because they will riot, National guard needs to be called and these domestic terrorists need to be put down. He then needs to put out an executive order to shut down all propaganda news agencies that are spinning this, and if people want to see what happened, view the live feeds from dozens of angles on the newly created website. And if people bitch about how its wrong to have this up, fuck them. Its time to take off the kiddy gloves.
WorkingClass > , August 27, 2017 at 10:25 pm GMT@Tim Howells It was more like around 300,000 in all of the German camps since their inception back in the mid-1930′s, according to the International Red Cross. And that refers to all camp inmates of all ethnic backgrounds.
It is entirely possible that many Jews may have been killed on the Eastern Front or in the Soviet Union, but that can hardly be blamed solely upon the Germans, who were not known to be savagely cruel or vengeful- even though the anti-partisan actions may have led to some excesses.
In any case, there is zero evidence for "millions of Jews" killed by the Germans. There are no mass graves commensurate with such figures, nor is there any documentary evidence of a deliberate plan of "extermination."
nsa > , August 27, 2017 at 10:29 pm GMT@jacques sheete I understand you quite well I think. I have worked on commission. I have been self employed. For a time I was a soldier. I have worked for wages for mom and pop business and for large corporations and held both union and non union jobs. I did a few years working for a not for profit homeless shelter. I am a Jack of all trades and (unfortunately) master of none.
On union jobs (IBEW and Teamsters) I had the great benefit of having a contract with my employer that spelled out the duties and privileges of both the worker and the company. This meant that both labor and management worked from the same set of rules. The path to promotion was defined as was the possible cause for termination. Personalities had nothing to do with anything. The boss and I followed the same rules. It was nothing like being subject to the whims and prejudices of one man.
" For example if I had a case of the gleet, I'd rather not replace it; I'd rather do without."
Having a "job" can be worse than the gleet.
Unfortunately a mans gotta eat.Thanks for coming back.
Ivy > , August 27, 2017 at 10:49 pm GMT@Ivy The white trash (as of 2016, down to 37.7% of California's population) has simply been replaced by brown trash in California. The only question remaining is which ethnic elite will run the state ..the jooies or the chinkies or the hindus. Or will the ethnics simply rule via a de facto coalition? Whitey's demise in CA is an accomplished fact ..with AZ and TX soon to follow and eventually OR, WA, ID, and CO. The efforts of James K. Polk are soon to be fully reversed. And yes, Ivy, you will have employment ..every Chinese has been promised a white house boy and white concubine by 2050.
Cloak And Dagger > , August 27, 2017 at 10:51 pm GMT@nsa I'll be long dead by 2050 but will miss those Chinese masseuses.
anonymous > , Disclaimer August 27, 2017 at 11:15 pm GMTthe gas chambers were but one method by which jews were killed
There is much contention as to whether even a single jew was killed in a gas chamber. Asserting that statement can land you in jail in much of Europe.
hunor > , August 27, 2017 at 11:22 pm GMT@Logan Chaim Weizmann, who obtained the Balfour Declaration from the British, and went on to become first president of Israel, hailed from Belarus.
jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:25 pm GMTthe same tolerant technology has been applied five thousand years ago in the Sumerian civilization
what was a non semitic composed society. Few hundred years prior to the destruction of that culture
semitic tribes were allowed to settle in, first in smaller numbers , then in the name of tolerance larger migrating groups were allowed , and enjoyed benefits of education, comfortable, cultured living. The original majority of the population were builders and workers , the migrants for the most part were users, who's interest were to find an easy way to become the more. The complete opposite of mentality. In time the semitic migrants were able to build up a fifth column , moved in to powerful positions such as religion and astrology , and from then on destruction has begun. The original populous were pushed out, part of them were forcefully crossbred , the rest of them flee and
build new countries in Europa . The migrants of that time gained written culture , tailored clothing ,
the benefit of toilet so not to go to the bushes to relieve themselves . This time around there is no place left to flee.jacques sheete > , August 27, 2017 at 11:34 pm GMT@WorkingClass I, too, think I understand from whence you come.
I agree with the concept of labor unions but recognize that they too can be turned against the interests of the workers, and unfortunately, have been.
I do applaud you for your success working within the system and I have no doubt that you did it as a sincere, able and good man. I also respect your views and thank you for sharing them.
As for bosses, I loathe them so much that I myself never hired employees because I didn't want to be a boss any more than I wanted to answer to one. I almost get physically sick when I see that the window of opportunity for youngsters to follow a independent lifestyle is next to nil and getting tougher all the time.
I do still counsel my younger relatives to acquire as much experience as they can so that they are in a position to have some control over their own lives. I'm also actively involved in fortifying my grandkids with both defiance and the attitudes and skills to back it up.
Is that attitude Utopian? No doubt to some degree it is, but so is the attitude of submission, i.e., the wish for everything to be taken care of so long as one submits.
Jake > , August 27, 2017 at 11:43 pm GMTThere is much contention as to whether even a single jew was killed in a gas chamber.
Not only is there much contention, but there is no credible evidence that it really happened. Besides, the numbers are farcical.
Where do they get 6 million?
"Allowing for a maximum of 100,000 who succeeded in emigrating from Europe, this would bring the total number of Jews under the direct rule of Nazi Germany to about 3,200,000."
Distribution of the Jewish Population of Europe 1933-. 1940," prepared by Mr. Moses Moskowitz
AMERICAN JEWISH YEAR BOOK 1941-1942, page 662http://www.ajcarchives.org/AJC_DATA/Files/1941_1942_9_Statistics.pdf
I haven't checked in a while, but I wonder if the link is still active
"I submit that the real truth is totally different. My thesis is very simple: the reason why the US always support foreign minorities to subvert states and use domestic minorities to suppress the majority US population is because minorities are very easy to manipulate and because minorities present no threat to the real rulers of the AngloZionist Empire. That's all there is to it."
That is pretty much it, save for the origins. WASP culture's Germanic basis began by hating the native British Isles. That set the pattern:WASPs most hate those from whom they steal or otherwise wrong gravely. The Reformation provided the perfect theological and philosophical justifications for that pattern to become something much greater.
The Anglo-Saxon Puritans were Judaizing heretics. You cannot over-emphasize that point. WASAP culture from the moment it was crystalized, truly formed, was one that saw the world through Jewish-influenced, Jewish-fawning, eyes. Naturally and inevitably, once the true WASPs gained total control of the government, with the Puritan Revolution, their fearless leader, Oliver Cromwell, allied with Jews. He took Jewish money to wage war, to exterminate cultures and make at least virtual serfs of whole populations.
White Christian populations.
WASP culture began with an alliance with Jews, allowing Jews back into England, with special rights and privileges that the vast majority of British Isles native Christians did not have, that allowed the WASPs to continue waging war to exterminate white Christian cultures.
When WASPs encountered non-whites, they began to grasp the value of using them – non-whites and non-Christians – as tools and weapons with which to batter the white Christians they wished to destroy.
That is the reason the 'Anglo-Zionist Empire' uses minorities as it does.
You cannot separate the Jewish Problem from the WASP Problem. You cannot solve the Jewish Problem without solving the 'WASP Problem.
|
|
|
Aug 27, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
At the planned rightist march in Berkeley today, very few conservatives or alt-righters showed up, but antifa did. From the LA Times :Some anti-facists protesters, known as antifa, pounced when Joey Gibson, founder of the right-wing group Patriot Prayer, showed up with his crew. The protesters beat one man with a shield and another person wearing an American flag.
Some of the antifa protesters also threatened to break the cameras of anyone who filmed them, including journalists. One reporter tweeted that he had been pepper sprayed in one scuffle.
Moderate counter protesters were upset with the violence. "We need to get antifa out of here," said Jack Harris, who helped break up a fight.
Andrew Noruk, who was wearing a T-shirt denouncing both the Republican and Democratic parties when two young women came up to him and started yelling at him.
"You're a Nazi," they shouted, leaving Noruk, who said he came out to protest Trump supporters, confused.
Noruk denounced the fights breaking out near the park, claiming antifa and black bloc anarchists have given Trump's supporters exactly what they wanted: footage of violence perpetrated against the presidents supporters in a historically liberal city.
"We can't keep producing this audio visual propaganda," he said. "It is recruiting for the right."
Damn right it is. Why do the police allow this? Why are they not arresting antifa and throwing the book at them? This is outrageous, the way the Berkeley police behaved. From the Sacramento Bee :
Black-clad anarchists on Sunday stormed into what had been a largely peaceful Berkeley protest against hate and attacked at least five people, including the leader of a politically conservative group who canceled an event a day earlier in San Francisco amid fears of violence.
The group of more than 100 hooded protesters, with shields emblazoned with the words "no hate" and waving a flag identifying themselves as anarchists, busted through police lines, avoiding security checks by officers to take away possible weapons. Then the anarchists blended with a crowd of 2,000 largely peaceful protesters who turned up to demonstrate in a "Rally Against Hate" opposed to a much smaller gathering of right-wing protesters.
Berkeley police chief Andrew Greenwood defended how police handled the protest, saying they made a strategic decision to let the anarchists enter to avoid more violence.
Greenwood said "the potential use of force became very problematic" given the thousands of peaceful protesters in the park. Once anarchists arrived, it was clear there would not be dueling protests between left and right so he ordered his officers out of the park and allowed the anarchists to march in.
More:
Police pulled one supporter of President Donald Trump out of the park over a wall by his shirt as a crowd of about two dozen counter-demonstrators surrounded him and chanted "Nazi go home" and pushed him toward the edge of the park. At least two people were detained by officers for wearing bandannas covering their faces.
Anti-rally protesters chanted slogans "No Trump. No KKK. No fascist USA" and carried signs that said: "Berkeley Stands United Against Hate."
So an American man cannot peacefully state his support for the President of the United States without a mob of bullies surrounding him and physically coercing him?
Berkeley does not stand united against hate. Berkeley hates. Keep it up, leftists. You are doing the work of your enemies. Here's a short clip showing an antifa mob attacking a teenage boy Trump supporter and his father in Berkeley today, plus a short interview with them after the event. Warning: there's an f-bomb in the first few seconds of the crowd footage:
|
|
|
Aug 26, 2017 | www.unz.com
Decades ago, a debate over what kind of nation America is roiled the conservative movement.
Neocons claimed America was an "ideological nation" a "creedal nation," dedicated to the proposition that "all men are created equal."
Expropriating the biblical mandate, "Go forth and teach all nations!" they divinized democracy and made the conversion of mankind to the democratic faith their mission here on earth.
With his global crusade for democracy, George W. Bush bought into all this. Result: Ashes in our mouths and a series of foreign policy disasters, beginning with Afghanistan and Iraq.
Behind the Trumpian slogan "America First" lay a conviction that, with the Cold War over and the real ideological nation, the USSR, shattered into pieces along ethnic lines, it was time for America to come home.
Contra the neocons, traditionalists argued that, while America was uniquely great, the nation was united by faith, culture, language, history, heroes, holidays, mores, manners, customs and traditions. A common feature of Americans, black and white, was pride in belonging to a people that had achieved so much.
The insight attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville -- "America is great because she is good, and if America ceases to be good, she will cease to be great" -- was a belief shared by almost all.
What makes our future appear problematic is that what once united us now divides us. While Presidents Wilson and Truman declared us to be a "Christian nation," Christianity has been purged from our public life and sheds believers every decade. Atheism and agnosticism are growing rapidly, especially among the young.
Traditional morality, grounded in Christianity, is being discarded. Half of all marriages end in divorce. Four-in-10 children are born out of wedlock. Unrestricted abortion and same-sex marriage -- once regarded as marks of decadence and decline -- are now seen as human rights and the hallmarks of social progress.
Tens of millions of us do not speak English. Where most of our music used to be classic, popular, country and western, and jazz, much of it now contains rutting lyrics that used to be unprintable.
Where we used to have three national networks, we have three 24-hour cable news channels and a thousand websites that reinforce our clashing beliefs on morality, culture, politics and race.
... ... ...
To another slice of America, much of the celebrated social and moral "progress" of recent decades induces a sense of nausea, summarized in the lament, "This isn't the country we grew up in."
Hillary Clinton famously described this segment of America as a "basket of deplorables racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic bigots," and altogether "irredeemable."
So, what still unites us? What holds us together into the indefinite future? What makes us one nation and one people? What do we offer mankind, as nations seem to recoil from what we are becoming, and are instead eager to build their futures on the basis of ethnonationalism and fundamentalist faith?
If advanced democracy has produced the disintegration of a nation that we see around us, what is the compelling case for it?
A sixth of the way through the 21st century, what is there to make us believe this will be the Second American Century?
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever."
WorkingClass > , August 25, 2017 at 6:02 pm GMT
CaperAsh > , August 26, 2017 at 2:30 am GMTWith his global crusade for democracy, George W. Bush bought into all this.
The GWOT was never about exporting democracy. It has always been about war profiteering and imperial hegemony.
We have a democratic facade but we do not have government by consent of the governed Pat. Our political and financial institutions are absolutely corrupt. Imperial Washington is determined to rule the Earth by force of arms. Legions of Maoists want to turn white people into untouchables. It's over for our republic. Our Constitution is stone cold dead. The empire itself is in steep decline.
After the collapse the U.S. will be just another big country in the Americas. Survivors of the crash will have an opportunity to build something new.
This is a HUGE topic, hard to cover in a short article.
First, I echo Pat's sorrow at the negativity evidenced viz. our past.
However, the fact is that, much like the present, most of our history comprises lies covering up huge crimes, mainly massive deception on the part of those in charge. Only in the past two decades has any idea of the scale of decimation of the indigenous populations in North and South America emerged. When I was a boy I was told there were only a couple of million of Indians in America, whereas more recent estimations have it at 50 million plus. And Central America had larger cities than any in Europe at the time with close to 200 million perhaps, 90% of whom died in a matter of decades, an appalling price to be paid for our arrival. That most of this was due to lack of resistance to our imported microbes does not excuse that our history fails to tell this. What an appalling and inhuman lack of respect and decency. We are not as superior and tolerant as we pretend to be.Similarly: the slavery story: Slavery is a nasty business, but life back then was extremely hard, and furthermore blacks weren't the only ones in slavery – for a while white slaves far outnumbered them. In the late 1800′s children were sent down to the mines in England, many of them dying young. If you were an able-bodied male, even one as young as 12, and out at night in the wrong place and time, a press gang was legally allowed to knock you out and drag you into a life of service on the high seas.And if you tried to escape, it was the noose for you. It is both hard for us and wrong to judge people in the past based on our own more delicate sensibilities.
Indeed, it is thanks to their great work, sacrifice and yes, crimes, that we have progressed to the point that we can look back at many of their practices with disapproval. Unfortunately we seem unwilling to merge that with understanding, largely because of an inadequate educational institutions and a sensation-driven public press.
In order for us to unite, we have to dig much deeper, reject the storm und drang of outrageously polemic, Deep-State-managed press and many other institutions, and tap into our fundamental humanity along with learning what the constitution is and why it is the way it is. The attempt is to create a genuinely uplifted, and also flexible, society. But it can be hijacked by determined powers and become a plutocracy, which is what has happened.
What will unite us, truly, is when we realise the degree to which all normal people, both 'left' and 'right', 'black' and 'white' have been and are being manipulated so that they don't come together. We should unite to throw off the yoke of oppression placed and used by the Elites who have infested and bloated all major social institutions, private and public.
It is time to throw off that yoke.
|
|
|
Aug 26, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
In my experience with the alt-right, I encountered a surprisingly common narrative: Alt-right supporters did not, for the most part, come from overtly racist families. Alt-right media platforms have actually been pushing this meme aggressively in recent months. Far from defending the ideas and institutions they inherited, the alt-right!which is overwhelmingly a movement of white millennials!forcefully condemns their parents' generation. They do so because they do not believe their parents are racist enoughIn an inverse of the left-wing protest movements of the 1960s, the youthful alt-right bitterly lambast the "boomers" for their lack of explicit ethnocentrism, their rejection of patriarchy, and their failure to maintain America's old demographic characteristics and racial hierarchy. In the alt-right's vision, even older conservatives are useless "cucks" who focus on tax policies and forcefully deny that they are driven by racial animus.
... ... ...
To complicate matters further, many people in the alt-right were radicalized while in college. Not only that, but the efforts to inoculate the next generation of America's social and economic leaders against racism were, in some cases, a catalyst for racist radicalization. Although academic seminars that explain the reality of white privilege may reduce feelings of prejudice among most young whites exposed to them, they have the opposite effect on other young whites. At this point we do not know what percentage of white college students react in such a way, but the number is high enough to warrant additional study.A final problem with contemporary discussions about racism is that they often remain rooted in outdated stereotypes. Our popular culture tends to define the racist as a toothless illiterate Klansman in rural Appalachia, or a bitter, angry urban skinhead reacting to limited social prospects. Thus, when a white nationalist movement arises that exhibits neither of these characteristics, people are taken by surprise.
George Hawley (@georgehawleyUA) is an assistant professor of political science at the University of Alabama. His books include Right-Wing Critics of American Conservatism , White Voters in 21st Century America , and Making Sense of the Alt-Right (forthcoming).
Nate J , says: August 24, 2017 at 10:35 pm
It boggles my mind that the left, who were so effective at dominating the culture wars basically from the late 60s, cannot see the type of counter-culture they are creating. Your point about alt-righters opposing their parents drives this home.DonChi , says: August 25, 2017 at 5:17 amPeople have been left to drift in a sea of postmodernism without an anchor for far too long now, and they are grasping onto whatever seems sturdy. The alt-right, for its many faults, provides something compelling and firm to grab.
The left's big failure when all the dust settles will be seen as its inability to provide a coherent view of human nature and a positive, constructive, unifying message. They are now the side against everything – against reason, against tradition, against truth, against shared institutions and heritage and nationalism It's no wonder people are looking to be for something these days. People are sick of being atomized into smaller and smaller units, fostered by the left's new and now permanent quest to find new victim groups.
I'm disappointed to read an article at The American Conservative that fails to address the reality behind these numbers. Liberal identity politics creates an inherently adversarial arena, wherein white people are depicted as the enemy. That young whites should respond by gravitating toward identity politics themselves in not surprising, and it's a bit offensive to attribute this trend to the eternal mysteries of inexplicable "racist" hate.Nicholas , says: August 25, 2017 at 7:44 amThe young can see through the fake dynamic being depicted in the mainstream media, and unless The American Conservative wants to completely lose relevance, a light should be shone on the elephant in the room. For young white kids, The Culture Wars often present an existential threat, as Colin Flaherty shows in Don't Make the Black Kids Angry–endorsed and heralded as a troubling and important work by Thomas Sowell.
From the 16 Points of the Alt-Right:KD , says: August 25, 2017 at 9:15 am
5. The Alt Right is openly and avowedly nationalist. It supports all nationalisms and the right of all nations to exist, homogeneous and unadulterated by foreign invasion and immigration.
6. The Alt Right is anti-globalist. It opposes all groups who work for globalist ideals or globalist objectives.It is important to remember that nations are people, not geography. The current American Union, enforced by imperial conquest, is a Multi-National empire. It has been held together by force and more recently by common, though not equal, material prosperity.
With the imposition of Globalism's exotic perversions and eroding economic prospects the American Union is heading for the same fate as all Multi-National empires before it.
Nation(Identity) > Culture > Politics.
Mysteriously absent from the scholarly discussion seems to be the pioneer of sociology, Ludwig Gumplowicz. Incredibly so, as the same factors that led to the destruction of the Austro-Hungarian Empire abound in contemporary America.Steve , says: August 25, 2017 at 9:25 amI have two teenage sons – we live in Canada – and they tell that, no matter what they say, who they hang out with, what music they listen to, no matter how many times they demonstrate they are not racist, they are repeatedly called racist. They are automatically guilty because they are white. They are beaten over the head with this message in school and in the press and are sick and tired of it.Todd Pierce , says: August 25, 2017 at 10:48 amWhat might also be considered is the cultural effect upon a generation which has now matured through what the government calls "perpetual war," with the concomitant constant celebration of "warriors," hyper-patriotism as demanded of all public events such as shown in the fanaticism of baseball players engaged in "National Anthem standouts," such as were popular a couple years ago in MLB, the constant references in political campaigns to the "enemy," to include Russia as well now, and the "stab in the back" legend created to accuse anyone opposed to more war and occupation of "treason." We've "radicalized" our own youth, with Trump coming along with his links to Israel's ultra militarist, Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli "Right," and created a cultural condition much like this: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/04/conservative-revolutionaries-fascism/Doc Broom , says: August 25, 2017 at 10:49 amOdd, you write "How did the youngest white Americans respond to the most racially polarizing election in recent memory?" In reality it was less racially polarized than 2012, when 93 % of African Americans and 71% of Hispanics voted for Obama while in 2016 88% of Blacks and 65% of Hispanics voted from Hillary. So Trump won a higher percentage of African American votes and Hispanic votes than Mitt Romney. In 2008 Obama won 95% of Blacks and 67% of Hispanics, in 2004 the numbers were 88 and 53 for Kerry so the three elections between 2004 and and 2016 were all more polarizing than the 2016 race.Eric Mader , says: August 25, 2017 at 10:55 amYes, you make many important points, Mr. Hawley, but that you feel the need to join the chorus of those who see our president's reaction to Charlottesville as somehow inappropriate or even itself racist–that is sad. I don't see what else you may be implying in your opening paragraphs, since you move directly from the number of "likes" Obama's bromide received to this: "[Obama's reaction] also offered a stark contrast to that of President Trump."Todd Pierce , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:21 amIn spite of many liberals' frantic desire to read whatever they want into President Trump's words, he very clearly condemned the neo-Nazis and the evil of Heather Heyer's murderer. That he also condemned the violence coming from Antifa ranks does not lessen his condemnation of that coming from the alt right side. Rather, condemning the rising illiberalism on both sides of this growing conflict was both commendable and necessary.
Many Americans see these recent events in a context stretching back years. Myself, at fifty, having watched especially the steady empowerment of a demagogic left on our campuses, I'm not much surprised that a racist "white nationalist" movement should burst into flame at just this point. The kindling is right there in the anti-white, misandrous virulence of our SJW left.
Sane conservatives have strongly condemned the new alt-right racism. The problem is that we are not seeing anything similar from the left. Our left seems incapable of condemning, let alone even seeing , its own racist excesses. Which are everywhere in its discourse, especially in our humanities departments.
I would say that in the recent decades the American left has grown much more deeply invested in identity politics than the right has ever been during my lifetime. In my view, our left has grown more enamored of identity issues precisely because it has abandoned the bread and butter issues that really matter to most Americans.
I have many left-liberal friends and regularly read the left press. Surveying the reactions to Charlottesville and the rising conflict between alt-right extremists and a radicalized Antifa left, I see nowhere a step toward acknowledging the obvious: our rabid identity politics is by no means just a problem of the right.
Racial identity politics is a curse. Sadly, it seems we've been cursed by it well and and good. The poison's reaching down to the bone. Unless both smart moderates and people on the left start to recognize just how badly poisoned our left has been by this curse, no progress will be made. Identity politics needs to be condemned on both sides of this growing national street brawl, and it should start NOW.
But I'm afraid it's not going to happen. I see my friends on the left, and they're nowhere near acknowledging the problem. And I'm sad to see our president's attempt to call out both sides has gotten such negative reactions. I'm afraid this isn't going to end well.
Should read: "National Anthem standoffs," not "standouts."Siarlys Jenkins , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:29 amLiberal identity politics creates an inherently adversarial arena, wherein white people are depicted as the enemy. That young whites should respond by gravitating toward identity politics themselves in not surprisingCampNouidiote , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:34 amOne of many good reasons for rejecting "identity" politics generally.
A white friend attended a Cal State graduate program for counseling a couple of years ago; he left very bitter after all his classes told him that white men were the proximate cause of the world's misery. Then a mutual Latina friend from church invited him to coffee and told him that he was the white devil, the cause of her oppression. You can conclude how he felt.G. K. , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:39 amThe liberal universities' curricula has caused a storm of madness; they have unleashed their own form of oppressive thought on a significant portion on American society:white men. There is now an adverse reaction. Of course, even more opprobrium will be heaped upon on men who might question the illogicality of feminism and the left. How can all of this end well if the humanity of white men is denied in universities, public schools and universities?
The Alt Right simply believes that Western nations have a right to preserve their culture and heritage. Every normal man in these United States agreed with that premise prior to the Marxist takeover of our institutions in the 1960's. And you know it's true.Cornel Lencar , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:41 amMaybe at the bottom of it is not racism as in they are the wrong colour, but about cultural traits and patterns of behaviour that are stirring resentment. Plus maybe the inclusion towards more social benefits not available before (Obamacare?).Joe Beavers , says: August 25, 2017 at 11:50 amThe current rap music, as opposed to the initial one, that emphasized social injustice is such that one feels emptying his own stomach like sharks do.
The macho culture that black gangs, latin american gangs manifest is a bit antagonistic to white supremacists gangs and attitudes towards women. After all, vikings going raiding used to have shield maidens joining, and Celtic culture is full of women warriors. Northern European culture, harking back to pre-Christian times was more kinder to women than what women from southern Europe (Greece, Rome) experienced (total ownership by husbands, the veil, etc., all imported from the Middle East: but one must not judge too harshly, the book "Debt, the first 5000 years" could be an eye opener of the root causes of such attitudes).
Also, the lack of respect for human life expressed in these cultures is not that palatable, even for white supremacists (while one can point to Nazi Germany as an outlier – but there it was the state that promoted such attitudes, while in Japan the foreigner that is persecuted and ostracized could be the refugee from another village around Fukushima – see the Economist on that).
So I think there are many avenues to explore in identifying the rise in Alt right and white supremacists in the U.S. But colour is definitely not it.
Come now. There were the same types around me years ago at school, work, society. They just did not march around like Nazis in public, probably because the Greatest Generation would have kicked their butts.Jack V , says: August 25, 2017 at 12:17 pmNow, with the miracle of modern technology, a few hundred of them can get together and raise hell in one place. Plus they now get lots of encouraging internet press (and some discouraging).
A better article on this is:
http://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/keillor-my-advice-be-genial-dont-take-lunacy-too-seriously/
This article says virtually nothing.KD , says: August 25, 2017 at 12:24 pm
The author fails to define his terms, beginning with Alt-Right.
And he seems to operate from a dislike of Trump underneath it all. This dislike is common among pundits, left and right, who consider themselves to be refined and cultured. So it was that the NYT's early condemnation of Trump led with complaints about his bearing and manners – "vulgar" was the word often used if memory serves.
This gets us nowhere. Many in the US are disturbed by the decline in their prospects with a decrease in share of wages in the national income ongoing since the 1970's – before Reagan who is blamed for it all. Add to that the 16 years of wars which have taken the lives of Trump supporters disproportionately and you have a real basis for grievances.
Racism seems to be a side show as does AntiFa.Richard McEvoy writes:Alex (the one that likes Ike) , says: August 25, 2017 at 12:36 pm"The accusation of being racist because you are white is a misunderstanding of structural racism."
I agree, but I notice that Jews have the same misunderstanding when you mention structural "Zionist Occupied Government" or "Jewish Privilege".
Perhaps because they are both conspiracy theories rooted in hatred and ignorance, which is where we descend when the concept of a statistical distribution or empirical data become "controversial", or "feelings" overtake "facts".
And progressives still refer to KKK when they seek an example of a white supremacist group. Amazing. They are too lazy even to learn that the Klan lost its relevance long ago, and the most powerful white supremacist organization of today consists of entirely different people, who are very far from being illiterate.haderondah , says: August 25, 2017 at 1:35 pm***
Todd Pierce,
Israel's ultra militarist, Benjamin Netanyahu
I won't deny that Bibi is a controversial figure, but calling him an ultra militarist is quite a bit of a stretch.
Elite sports. After reading this article and it's underlying thesis, it occurs to me that the way sports have evolved in this country is very likely to be the experience that millennial whites have had that fosters their "out group" belief systems. It is very common, using soccer as my frame of reference, for wealthy suburban families to spend a fortune getting their children all the best training and access to all the best clubs. Their children are usually the best players in their community of origin and usually the top players all the way through the preadolescent years only to find all of that money and prestige gone to waste once their kids get to around sixteen at which point their children are invariably replaced on the roster by a recent immigrant -- mainly from Africa or south of our border and usually at a cut rate compared to the one they are bleeding the suburban families with. I'm assuming this is becoming more common across all sports as they move toward a pay to play corporate model. In soccer, the white kids are, seriously, the paying customers who fill out the roster that supports the truly talented kids (from countries who know how to develop soccer talent.)sedric , says: August 25, 2017 at 8:20 pmThe thing is when blacks begin to feel power and a secure place in America then their true colors show-at least among many. Left unchecked they would become the biggest racists of all. You can see that now. So what it comes down to are white people going to give away their country? Until blacks become cooperative and productive things need to stay as they are. Sad maybe but that's just the way it has to be.vato_loco_frisco , says: August 25, 2017 at 8:18 pmThere have always been fringe, rightwing groups in the US. Nothing new there. But the so-called alt-right, comprised of Nazi wannabes and assorted peckerwoods, is truly the spawn of the looney left, whose obsession with race has created the toxic environment we find ourselves in.
|
|
|
Aug 24, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
collin , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:31 am
But it is plain that most Republicans do not believe Trump violated that taboo.Justin Gregory , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:32 amThat is because Hugh Hewitt stated that Trump has the right enemies. And for conservatives they have standing behind Trump since he pursued Birtherism against the enemy.
I was reflecting on this last night and had an epiphany regarding Trump's "good people on both sides" statement last week.Aaron C. , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:33 amFor over a week now I've been baffled by the president's remark. What "good" person thinks, "Hey, the KKK and the Nazis are having a rally this weekend. Sounds like my kind of party!"? But now I'm glad he said it.
What I mean is this: if you watch the videos, you'll notice a large percentage of the participants in the Charlottesville rally were young white men, probably in their early 20's. At this age, people are spending a lot of time trying on identities and figuring out what they believe. This means occasionally doing foolish and embarrassing things.
Trump has basically given these guys an escape path. "Hey, I'm not really a Nazi or a Klukker. I'm a good person who's concerned about the danger of erasing our collective history, of throwing the baby out with the racist bathwater."
I know some will snark at that, but consider the alternative, more or less embraced by everybody else. Howling, "racist" and throwing stones, both rhetorical and literal, only serves to further radicalize these guys, driving them into the welcoming arms of the national socialists. (Note the similarities between the profiles for a young white supremacist and a domestic Islamic terrorist!) "They will hate me no matter what I do at this point," is not where we want people to be.
I have no idea whether this was the president's intention or even on his radar at the time, but if you back people into a corner without a path of escape, they will get desperate, which is to say, radical and violent. "Good people," as distinct from "racist Nazis", is an opportunity to step back from the abyss.
I am 35 years old, and I believe the country will tear itself apart in my lifetime. The forces separating us are stronger than those keeping us together, and they are not likely to be tamed with the weapons currently in our culture's arsenal (i.e., rote recitation of "Diversity is Strength").what is to come , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:33 amAs another commenter wryly noted, I happen to possess every quality despised by the SJWs (white, heterosexual, Christian, happily married, with four children and a dog), and their actions/words are increasingly convincing me and my family that they'd prefer not to share the same country as me.
That's fine; I'm happy to expend what little time and talent I have devising a way to peacefully (again, I repeat, PEACEFULLY) separate from those who think my very existence (aka "whiteness") is somehow a threat to their lives. At an earlier, more naïve point in my life, I thought that we, as a country, would get through this and start regarding each other according to the content of our character rather than the color of our skin. Alas, it seems that there is no interest in that type of social arrangement any longer, so I'm happy to help broker a two-state solution.
"They wouldn't stop. To them, it's a possibility to destroy things they hate and feel self righteous at the same time. Or, and to get media cheering. Why would they miss a chance like this?"Pat , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:47 amIt's a chance to use violence to force visible, lasting change in our shared space. To force their will on us, by violence or the threat of violence. A piece of the world that the rest of us loved or accepted or at least tolerated is smashed or removed because that's what they want. The rest of us are supposed to shut up and accept what they have done.
This won't last long. When it swings back in the other direction, as it inevitably will, many of those now watching in silent rage will cheer for the thugs who come to smash their faces in.
dave , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:51 amI once worked with someone who always had to be Winning™, and as soon as you managed to meet one set of demands a new set popped up – just for the sake of having something to win. Because *having won* didn't matter, it was the act of winning that mattered. I think the activist left is in the hands of this sort of person, and it's going to work out about as well as you'd expect.
Charles Featherstone, this:collin , says: August 23, 2017 at 8:55 am"It's always struck me as strange that no one reflects that the desire of the Left, to create a true multi-ethnic, multi-cultural democratic society, has never been done before."
That society will function is taken as a given, it seems to me. And it does, if one has enough money. But if not, there's a breakdown. And that's something I often see – some of the work I do involves economic and community development in poor communities. There isn't much to work with, and the language of the Left isn't particularly conducive to strengthening communities. Generally it is about freedoms from and rights, and rarely if ever – can't think of a recent example, actually – is it about obligation and responsibilities other than those for one's own expression and fulfillment.
I'd like to say the Right has stepped into the void, but for the most part they have not, they are just as insistent on freedoms from and a kind of a moral adjudication by the market, where struggling communities deserve to die. Dreher and a few others often write about the importance of community and the unappreciated difficulty of maintaining a civil society, but as a general rule what they write is misunderstood as an appeal to nostalgia or racism or both. Which is to say that reflecting on what makes a "multi-ethnic, multi-cultural democratic society" work is so far off the radar screen for most people that they are unable to identify a discussion about it.
Which is to say it strikes me as strange also. And then generally, Mr. Dreher, the problem I have with Huntington is that his keen perceptiveness easily clothes itself with an aura of prophesy. I don't attribute that to him, it's a thing I do on my own. But it's something I have to avoid in order to do the work I do. I can imagine numerous futures, and a part of the struggle for me is maintaining the facility of imagining one that inspires. So I repeat to myself – It need not be this way.
What we're seeing might be thought of as the entirely predictable and normal reaction of a particular group within a pluralistic society, when members of that group come to believe that they are losing ground.Potato , says: August 23, 2017 at 9:04 am
- In terms of history, I wish historians would state the Post WW2 Boom (1948 – 1973) was the historical oddity where we saw high increase in working class wages. And any reading of US history especially before WW1, the white race definition did not include the latest European immigrants. (Irish, German, East European and Jewish.) In many ways modern US is closer to American history than post war years.
- Although Civil Rights was primarily led by African-Americans, there were a significant other minorities that benefited in the long run.
- In terms of minority economic gains, the area of the economy where the minority gains have been the most is Tech and we have seen a huge conservative dislike of tech the last 3 – 5 years.
- In terms of economy, over the last 15 years the primarily hit more rural WWC towns. So it must be something and Trump ran on the Clintons free trade agreement and anti-immigrants to win the election. (I found it strange that it was not Koch Brothers or Apple fault but did not understand it until after the election.)
- Again it is hard to predict the future as there still things vastly better today than a generation ago. Literally nobody in 1992 stated that the US was on a verge of a historic drop in crime.
But there is room for all of us white people to extol what is great, and there was a LOT of great in our ancestors, while strictly denying and removing anything which seems to highlight profound injustices in the eyes of non-whites. I am now on-board. It's the christian thing to do. Let's retain all that is Christian about our ancestors, and let go all of the cultural blindness, willful or not, that resulted in slavery.Rob G , says: August 23, 2017 at 9:09 amI often disagree with Seven sleepers, but this is right on.
I am also noticing that not only do we not hear from black Americans on this board, we very seldom are moved to take any account of their opinions on this matter. That's OK I guess, I think we're all white or Asian here (not African American, I mean) but I am struck by our very consistent blindness on this topic.
Let us suppose for a minute that your Southern, Confederate ancestor was not riding about on a horse. Let us suppose that he was a field hand in the slave quarters, that he had been regularly beaten (this practice has been attested to by numerous documents from the old South), his wife had been taken by the son of the plantation owner, one of "his" children was suspiciously light of skin, and several of his children had been sold away from him. These things were not rare and unusual. This was the order of the day.
So now how do you feel about this "Heritage"?
Oh well, that's OK, right? The people who have good reason to feel this way are a minority. We need not trouble ourselves too much about them. And our Christian obligation to take care of our brothers and sisters, to love them in fact, to consider their feelings as well as our own .what happened to that?
"So, putting together ideas from the Clarence Thomas blog and some of Huntington and Swain's ideas here, I posit: Liberals believe in legal/economic collectivism and cultural individualism, while conservatives believe in legal/economic individualism and cultural collectivism. I'm sure somebody on this blog can demolish that hypothesis."grumpy realist , says: August 23, 2017 at 9:17 amNo, it's generally correct but it needs tweaking. The conservatives you describe are not really conservatives, they're right-liberals. Patrick Deneen is the guy to read on this.
Also, I'm not sure these "conservatives" want cultural collectivism as much as they want the freedom to reject the tyranny of left's cultural individualism. As J.W. Corrington put it (regarding a different issue), submitting to the unalterable vicissitudes of history is one thing. Being expected to genuflect to them is quite another. (paraphrase from memory).
Or to paraphase Fitzjames Stephen, you may not be able to resist being carried away by the flood, but that doesn't mean you have to sing 'Hallelujah' to the river god while being swept along.
Huh. Iconoclasts on the left, and on the right we've got the people who want to tear down the entire political system and who are loudly applauding Trump because he "sticks it to the conventional Republicans and the Democrats."Jon S , says: August 23, 2017 at 9:19 amIs there really that much difference? We certainly have enough of the latter group on these threads.
(And Joan of Arc? Really? Makes me think we've just got a plain anarchist who wants to tear down all statues, period. He'll probably go after the lions at the entrance of the NYC Public library next.)
Re: the American Creed:Matt , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:16 am"equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result),"
I am able to recognize that those two things are lies. No African-American is going to think they are equal under the law when the police are killing them. And no thinking American believes they have had the same equality of opportunity as Donald Trump.
The problem is the falseness of the American Creed. For minorities and there empathizers it should be discarded. For conservative whites, it creates a terrible cognitive dissonance. Why have they done all the right things: got an education, worked hard, married and still ended up in a precarious situation?
If we wanted to be a great nation, we should have adopted policies to create lots of working class jobs and filled them with Black men, so that they could support homes and families. But we didn't, instead we gave tepid support to stupidities like affirmative action. Something the white majority never supported.
In the meantime, the globalist, rich libertarians embedded its false ideology of "equality of opportunity" in working class whites, while simultaneously moving there factories and money outside of the country as quickly as possible.
And none of this is too late to fix. The country just needs the right leadership. And it won't come from Trump, the GOP, or the Democrats.
FYI SJWs,VikingLS , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:18 amThe Indians who marched on the Trail of Tears took their African American Slaves with them to Oklahoma.
"Let's just put it more plainly: Trump violated another important taboo pretty much every week of his campaign. Yet Republicans still elected him. They should be ashamed of themselves."Siarlys Jenkins , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:37 amHonestly at this point the only Republican response to statements like this is "we tried thousands of times to get the "lesser of two evils in a two party system" point across to you. NOT necessarily lesser to you with whatever values you may have, but lesser to US. If you STILL are going to try this idiotic attempt at shaming, you can go f**** yourself."
Sorry Rod but that's about the thousandth time that's come up here with these people.
Take 'Em Down NOLA movement is demanding, among *many* other things, that Tulane University change its name because Paul Tulane, whose land donation made the university possible, owned slaves.VikingLS , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:40 amOK. Let's parse that one. One alt-right response to taking down statues of confederate generals was "Where is it going to stop? Shall we take down statues of Washington and Jefferson too?" And then, like many poorly-conceived self-fulfilling prophecies, infantile disordered voices came out saying, yes, indeed we must.
In between a rational voice from a man who supported taking down confederate monuments affirmed "There is a huge difference between celebrating a flawed man, and celebrating a man's flaws."
Mr. Tulane has a university named after him because he donated the land for the university, not because he owned slaves. Braxton Bragg has statues put up because he fought against the United States of American in defense of slavery. Obvious difference. I think it might be worthwhile to discuss renaming Fort Bragg -- its an outrage that soldiers in the army that defeated the confederacy receive basic training at a post named after one of the generals they defeated. I'm sure my great-great-grandfather who served in the 11th Tennessee Cavalry, United States Army, would agree.
Can we dispense with Social "Justice" Warrior? Just as a matter of accurate labeling/description?
Sure. I prefer the Leninist term, "infantile disorder."
By Jove, Melbourne was right–Cicero, Plato, Aristotle and all those gentlemen were 'pro-slavery'.
Well, that aside, I think they're all greatly over-rated. Surely someone in antiquity said things more agreeable to my seldom humble self, but his writings had not the random good fortune to be preserved for late European antiquarians to pore over.
dd: Did you miss the ellipses at the end of my sentence?
And yes, Seven Sleepers is right on target today. There is nobody so crass I can't agree with him now and then. Even Clarence Thomas gets a few things right. If Seven Sleepers is Italian, he is also correct that originally his ancestors were not accepted as "white" at all.
"I am also noticing that not only do we not hear from black Americans on this board, we very seldom are moved to take any account of their opinions on this matter."TR , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:49 amFrom what I recall Baptiste and Eliminist (I think I spelled that wrong) are black. Dancer Girl is black, and all of them have weighed in on this.
From a footnote about a statue Joyce mentions in "The Dead": In 1701 an equestrian statue [of William III] was erected in front of Trinity College. From then on, it was systematically defaced, daubed, smeared, wrecked, rebuilt, protected, and finally, in 1929 blown up, as an emblem of oppression." Irish Pat Buchanan would probably be proud of his ancestors!Truth Dough , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:55 amI'm from Memphis, as was Nathan Bedford Forrest. I admire Forrest as a military iconoclast, but I must say I had to laugh at the picture of the statue of Forrest mounted on horse with some prankster's KKK hood draped on his head.
Q. "So what do they symbolize? And who do they symbolize? The answer is important."M_Young , says: August 23, 2017 at 10:57 amA. Whatever I say.
Art is cathartic; hopefully, it begets catharsis, if the artist or sculptor did their job. In the eye of the beholder it may appear as a "ministering angel" or a "demon" or may be "just some bloke riding horseback I didn't notice nor did I even care and could care less now because I have no connection to history or interest in it."
Imagine we had an educated collective of sovereign individuals who participated in government and kept a watchful eye we'd be in great shape with or without religion or deism. But, we don't. And because of this, the "American Creed" as you callit, is lost; none of those items or those you left out exists, none of it exists, absolutely zero.
Carl Bernstein recently said in an interview that obstructing free press is the first step toward tyranny. The Union can thank Lincoln (the tyrant) and Sherman (the tyrant's bloody hand).
Sherman to his Adjutant:
"For my part, I believe that this war is the result of false political doctrine, for which we are all as a people responsible, viz., that any and every people have a right to self-government; and I would give all a chance to reflect, and, when in error, to recant."And
"I am willing to bear in patience that political nonsense of slave rights, State rights, freedom of conscience, freedom of press, and such other trash, as have deluded the Southern people into war, anarchy, bloodshed, and the foulest crimes that have disgraced any time or any people."
Did you get that?
Freedom of the press is trash!
Ain't Benedict , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:00 am"Monuments referring to "Savage" Indians defending their homeland are pretty damn offensive, when you think about it."====
"He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."
Tho. Jefferson.
The right committed an act of vandalism against America that infinitely dwarfs any vandalism against old statuary. In a rejection of everything good and decent in America, they selected and then elected Donald Trump. The insult and tragedy of this act only worsens with each passing day.apples and worms , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:07 amAnd, even as Trump is actively desecrating and dismantling America's binding ideals with the eager support of most of the right, I'm supposed to fret about how the left is provoking them?!? That's so absurd it borders on obscene.
It's like a giant bully has me pinned on my back and is punching me relentlessly in the face (pausing occasionally to spit in it) and Rod is watching all this from among the gathered crowd and hollering that I just need to stop fighting back. What I need is the good people among the crowd to get this guy off of me before it's too late!
Trump's ongoing possession of power that he is terrifyingly unfit to wield and responsibility he is tragically unable to comprehend is a relentless and unbearable provocation and we all know who did it and who continues to support it. The left has almost infinitely more cause to feel aggrieved and nobody should be surprised that they latch onto whatever avenues of protest they stumble upon.
I say none of this to justify anybody's extreme actions, only to illustrate that the blame game cuts both ways and it cuts deeper when deployed against the right. People could knock down every last statue in America and it wouldn't do as much deep and lasting harm to our nation as Trump has already done and nobody knows how much worse it will get or how far the right will enable the unfolding catastrophe that they chose.
M_Young , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:08 am"Huh. Iconoclasts on the left, and on the right we've got the people who want to tear down the entire political system and who are loudly applauding Trump because he "sticks it to the conventional Republicans and the Democrats." "Thing is, Mr. grumpy realist, the Confederate statues didn't lie us into the Iraq War, bail out the Wall Street banksters, fail to stop millions of illegals from coming here, or outsource American jobs to Indians and Chinese.
If the Confederate statues had done those things you might have a point. But they just sat there as they always have, not doing too much of anything, really, mostly just looking grand or sorrowful or heroic or dignified or such like.
Unlike the political establishment, which has been painting a giant DayGlo target on its capacious and diseased hind quarters for a long time.
In other Baltimore news, 9 shot on a Monday! http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-park-circle-shooting-20170821-story.htmlDonald ( the left leaning one) , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:16 amI oppose vandalism of statues. Full stop. If we are going to waste time on more culture war nonsense it should be conducted legally. But since everyone loves arguing about this crap -- The Wikipedia article on Serra seems fair and balanced, to coin a phrase. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jun%C3%ADpero_SerraQ , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:29 amAnd it is tendentious in the extreme to say people oppose Serra because he erected missions, unless you explain why the critics think that was a bad thing. They think it was bad for a couple of reasons. First, they oppose the spread of Christianity by force. There was coercion involved and massiv cruelty. Serra seems to have fallen somewhere in the middle, endorsing some violence but opposing the more extreme versions of it.
Modern secular lefties also oppose the spread of Christianity because they see it as inherently wrong or oppressive for Westerners to try to convert native people. In practice it usually was coercive and monstrous in the way it was done and it is hard to separate the actual practice of missionary activity back then from the religion which inspired the coercion. As a Christian I think it is right to try to convert people, but if it is done via coercion than how is it any different from the more coercive versions of Islam?
This was nearly 300 years ago. Do we really have to have another culture war about religiously inspired conquest and violence that happened 300 years ago?
Don't know if it's the nature of the moment or the nature of this blog, but it's almost always the whitey righty types that predict an imminent apocalypse, never those the occupy the space between the center and, say, BadReligion. The Paranoid Style, i'd say, unless they're all right.Donald ( the left leaning one) , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:34 am
"Sure, I'm paranoid but am I paranoid ENOUGH?"Rod -- " I agree that I'm in a squishy place, being against taking down monuments in principle, but also agreeing that it's very hard to defend them successfully as 'heritage not hate,' which is the point of Ryan Booth's that I was agreeing with. I must agree, though, that the iconoclastic post-Charlottesville reaction of the Left has hardened my opinion against taking down the statues."fire sale , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:43 amPlease don't go down that road. This happens to be one of those issues where there really is some reasonable middle ground that people of good will can occupy without necessarily being in complete agreement. For instance, you can make a good case for taking down Lee and leaving up Jefferson or you could leave Lee up but include plaques detailing his flaws or explaining the historical circumstances in which the statues were erected. There are other reasonable positions one could argue for on the merits.
But don't start down the path of saying that you want to side with one bunch of extremists because there is another bunch of extremists over there that won't like you no matter what you do. This is how we allow extremists dictate our politics. In the worst case scenario, it is how we have civil wars.
I don't usually use the word extremist in this derogatory way because on some issues one extreme is correct. But this isn't one of those issues. The extremists on both sides are wrong and we shouldn't let ourselves be manipulated by them.
"He'll probably go after the lions at the entrance of the NYC Public library next.)"Hound of Ulster , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:55 amWell, given that the NY Public Library lions symbolize the Lion of Judah, they will indeed have to go. They are an obvious, obnoxious allusion to the Jewish role in the trans-Atlantic slave trade and of course to Judah Benjamin, the Confederacy's slave-owning Jewish Secretary of State.
By this formulation Rod, the tearing down of statues dedicated to the heroes of Communism in Eastern Europe and Russia was iconoclasm as well. I sense that it is iconoclasm of which you approve thoughBen H , says: August 23, 2017 at 11:58 amThe Confedercy killed more Americans than any foreign enemy the Republic has ever faced, and yet public statues and monuments to this vile treason, most of which were raised nearly 50 years after the war ended to commerate the (temporary) triumph of the Confederate ideology of White Supremacy, are somehow different and more noble than statues of Dzhersinsky and Lenin? Who committed crimes of the same vulgar type as the Confederate leaders (why is Longstreet not marked by statue or Beauregard? It's because Longstreet fought to defend black rights after the war, and Beauregard was creole). Now, like Communists, some good people fought for the Confederacy for good reasons (home and family in the case of your Confederate ancestor, bread and freedom in the Russian revolution. Read about some of the brutality from the Whites in the Russian Civil War. It will make your skin crawl.) So let the common soldiers be commenrated, but tear down the statues of the traitors who led them. Just as they tore down the statues of Dzhrsinsky, Lenin, and Marx after 1991.
The difference between Nelson's Column and the statues of Lee et al, was that Nelson fought to save Britain from foreign conquest. Lee and co. fought to defend white supremacy and slavery. Just read what they wrote about it themselves. Anybody who can't see that is a dope.
The taboo that was broken has less to do with not denouncing Nazis or political violence (things that were denounced), it's not doing it in the precise way demanded by the media. It's a denial that the media has the moral status that it claims to define the narrative and to elicit specific responses that support the narrative.Anne , says: August 23, 2017 at 12:45 pmThey don't get as mad when Trump subverts the narrative with a lie as when he does so with something that approaches the truth.
Tearing down statues that symbolize what you don't believe in is usually a crime of vandalism punishable by law, so normally that takes care of that. But of course symbols make handy targets during disputes and rivalries, even though, to maintain the peace, the law has to hold.Nicholas , says: August 23, 2017 at 1:03 pmConfederate statues are a separate matter, not because tearing them down unlawfully is OK !
You can still be prosecuted for vandalism if you do that -- but because their very existence threatens what we as a nation hold in common. Most were, in fact, put up as a symbol of dissent from our national creed, specifically the part that holds "all men are created equal." For most Americans, the Confederacy itself symbolizes that position of dissent, but the vast majority of these statues aren't mere leftovers from that bygone historical era;most were actually erected in the late 19th or early 20th century as symbols of the Jim Crow era when the Ku Klux Klan was at its peak and its basic philosophy of re-asserting white supremacy was riding high. Some others went up in the 1960s when they symbolized the South's opposition to the black civil rights movement. It's certainly easy for me to see why state legislatures and city councils are being asked to remove them now when white supremacists are rallying in public yet again.
The Statues represent reconciliation. When one town can have a statue of a Union hero and another town can have a statue of a Confederate hero while still acknowledging that both towns are American, you have reconciliation.KD , says: August 23, 2017 at 1:17 pmThat is what is being destroyed. The nation's wounds that took so long to bind are being ripped open.
I wonder how many Belfasts and Beruits we can endure, because it's coming.
Nothing good will come from removing monuments, anymore than anything good came from removing Mosques from Bosnia.KD , says: August 23, 2017 at 1:19 pmThere is no line here. The Founders all owned slaves, the Constitution based on a division of powers and federalism was written by evil slave-owning white men to pursue their economic interests, and the Bill of Rights was written by Jefferson the slave owner. Everything is up for grabs.
The Left is turning into the Westboro Baptist Church, but targeting monuments not funerals (yet).
God hates Confederates and Antebellum American Presidents.JonF , says: August 23, 2017 at 1:34 pmRe: No, the progressive assault on Confederate statues is an assault on history, memory, and mythM_Young , says: August 23, 2017 at 1:54 pmHistory lives on in books, museums, and national monuments and parks of a historical sort. We are not assaulting any of those. And indeed where statues have been removed by the legal actions of civil magistrates the intent is to move them to sorts of places where history is explicitly remembered. So if this is "an assault on history" it's an utterly incompetent one.
As for myths, well, there are good myths and bad myths. No one, I hope, would suggest we keep alive the wicked old calumnies (myths in their own day) of Jews poisoning wells or sacrificing Christian children. The myth of white supremacy is of a similar sort, and it needs to be buried at a crossroads with a stake through its heart.
The Southern states meanwhile have a 400 year old history, reckoning from Jamestown (longer of course if we take Native Americans into account). There's much in that to celebrate. Why obsess about the least felicitous few years out of that history?"why is Longstreet not marked by statue or Beauregard? " You know, Hound of Ulster, when you get your talking points from CNN you ought to independently check them. Here's a Longstreet memorial, Gainsville.(bad orientation) https://www.pinterest.com/pin/368028600772640099Stay Put , says: August 23, 2017 at 2:16 pm"God hates Confederates and Antebellum American Presidents."ludo , says: August 23, 2017 at 2:50 pmHe must hate intelligent Confederate statue smashers too, because he didn't create any.
Historical iconoclasm is actually a wondrous thing, highly advanced, anticipating by millennia the universe of problems associated with present-day, technologically mediated, iconophilia, including the transcendent, generation-defining problem of Internet pornography and related dynamic image-induced mesmerizations, where the possessed image ends up gradually possessing the unguarded possessor and entrapping him/her in the "prison house" whose very walls are the projections of unguarded sight.Mackayla , says: August 23, 2017 at 3:05 pmThe phantasmata channeled by the fathomless 'mirror', volatilized and dynamized by an incomprehensible and untrustworthy demiurge, are anticipated by the hyper-real "demon-possessed" anthropomorphic statues of antiquity, not to mention the actually existing automata of that age: combining the dual extraneous potential (i.e. enchantments) of representation-enhancing technologies and the primitive, unreflective, libidinal human urge. As Plato wrote: "This entire allegory, I said, you may now append, dear Glaucon, to the previous argument; the prison-house is the world of sight, the light of the fire is the sun, and you will not misapprehend me if you interpret the journey upwards to be the ascent of the soul into the intellectual world according to my poor belief, which, at your desire, I have expressed whether rightly or wrongly God knows. But, whether true or false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and is seen only with an effort; and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this visible world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in the intellectual; and that this is the power upon which he who would act rationally, either in public or private life must have his eye fixed.
I agree, he said, as far as I am able to understand you. Moreover, I said, you must not wonder that those who attain to this beatific vision are unwilling to descend to human affairs; for their souls are ever hastening into the upper world where they desire to dwell; which desire of theirs is very natural, if our allegory may be trusted.
Yes, very natural.
And is there anything surprising in one who passes from divine contemplations to the evil state of man, misbehaving himself in a ridiculous manner; if, while his eyes are blinking and before he has become accustomed to the surrounding darkness, he is compelled to fight in courts of law, or in other places, about the images or the shadows of images of justice, and is endeavouring to meet the conceptions of those who have never yet seen absolute justice?Anything but surprising, he replied.
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments of the eyes are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye; and he who remembers this when he sees any one whose vision is perplexed and weak, will not be too ready to laugh; he will first ask whether that soul of man has come out of the brighter light, and is unable to see because unaccustomed to the dark, or having turned from darkness to the day is dazzled by excess of light. And he will count the one happy in his condition and state of being, and he will pity the other; or, if he have a mind to laugh at the soul which comes from below into the light, there will be more reason in this than in the laugh which greets him who returns from above out of the light into the den.""Huntington's book sounds helpful but the work that continues to be even more prescient is Christopher Lasch's "The Revolt of the Elites," describing a ruling class that has severed its ties to its own cultural order as well as to the less powerful and privileged members of it. The result is incomprehension of reaction they provoke and chaos. In the short run, this may increase their illusion of control and power but the long run spells doom and replacement by more cohesive cultures."Waz , says: August 23, 2017 at 3:06 pmThat's exactly the book I was thinking of in this post. He also talks about how when the "Managerial Elites" replaced the "Wasps" as the ruling class they replaced the sense of responsibility and Noblesse Oblige the Wasps had for the country w/ disregard, selfishness and greed by the managerial meritocracy. Gone is the manufacturing economy replaced by the ephemeral finance and information economy.
"liberty, equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result), individualism, populism, limited government, and free-market economics. These ideas, Huntington said, came out of Protestant England and its reception of the Enlightenment"Siarlys Jenkins , says: August 23, 2017 at 3:42 pmBull. Neither England, nor Enlightment. Voltaire and his "enlighted" ilk were sycophants of the absolute monarchies of the Prussian militarist Frederic II,forerunner of the modern totalitarian state and imperialist Catherine II, whom they idealized. Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth destroyed primarily by Prussia, resorting even to counterfeiting of the Polish currency, was the font of the values Huntington finds foundational, far ahead of England.
Statutes of Cienia enacted around the time of Magna Carta, and of essentially the same nature, were actually implemented whereas MC for a very long time remained a dead letter. Neminem Captivabimus preceded Habeas Corpus by 143 years. Citizens with full political rights were 5-6 times more numerous in Poland than in England of France.
Religious freedom was unparalleled, people flocked to Poland from all over the continent running from persecutions. It was known as the country without stakes. Free markets were on the par with England. Government was by far more limited in Poland than in any other country. No objective historian can claim that English freedoms could come close to that.
The English have been veritable the masters of Imperial propaganda down to the current cult of the Queen. Historical record of English tyranny, persecution and exploitation is glaring. It would serve Americans, especially conservatives, well, to be more discerning when it comes to their ideological heritage as formed by Protestant England. The Puritans running from English persecution were persecutors themselves. Poland and Venice are worthy of conservative reflection searching for inspiration.
The Statues represent reconciliation.Daniel (not Larrison) , says: August 23, 2017 at 3:51 pmUnfortunately, they do not. They were mostly erected by "Redeemers" or later incarnations of triumphalist white supremacists (the real thing, not some unfortunate soul who gets tagged in a 21st century virtual replay), at a time when the northern and western elites didn't care any more, and anyone of African descent was being brutally disfranchised.
Many schools were REnamed for confederate generals as part of "massive resistance" to the final push against Jim Crow.
That is what those statues, by and large, represent. That is why a fair number of people want them to come down.
God hates Confederates and Antebellum American Presidents.
God has not given me any personal revelation on the subject, but from all the Christian education I've had, God is merciful to sinners and seeks to bring all into reconciliation with Him. He does, however, hate slavery and efforts to make war to perpetuate it. He may not have looked kindly on the annexation of Mexican territory either, but Santa Ana was no saint.
So let the common soldiers be commenrated, but tear down the statues of the traitors who led them.
That would be reasonable, but it may be a little late to do it right. We need more attention to novels like Cold Mountain, and of course to the Jones County Scouts.
Well, given that the NY Public Library lions symbolize the Lion of Judah, they will indeed have to go. They are an obvious, obnoxious allusion to the Jewish role in the trans-Atlantic slave trade and of course to Judah Benjamin, the Confederacy's slave-owning Jewish Secretary of State.
Explain that to all the black churches dedicated to the Lion of Judah, considered, rightly or wrongly, to be a reference to Jesus Christ. (Separately, I note that Lion of Judah was one of the titles of the kings of Ethiopia).
M_Young @ 10:57 am:JonF , says: August 23, 2017 at 4:31 pmI am well aware that the Sacred Declaration says "Savage" in reference to Indians.
Just because it's in a key founding document doesn't make it less offensive.
Nor does it mean we have to rip it up.
We don't have to accept or reject everything in a document (or anything, for that matter) to find value. A thing, or a person, can have overwhellming good, but also some ugly stains.
I think it would be the height of folly to reject the Declaration because it wasn't inerrant and also folly to dogmatically accept it all as unvarnished good merely because Jefferson wrote it.
It's like when the Constitutiin was read in toto in Congress a few years back. Some Republicans didn't want the (now defunct) parts about slaves read; others wanted it read, warts and all to do otherwise they would consider "whitewashing".
And no, none of them suggested burning the Constitution, or saying we must have slavery because the original Constitution provided for it.
Re: There is no line here.LLLurker , says: August 23, 2017 at 4:32 pmThe line is public opinion. Large numbers of people are on board with ditching the Rebs and race baiters. Large numbers of people are not on board with dumping the Founders. The recent failure of the ACA repeal-and-replace effort should be an object lesson of how public opinion really can prevent unpopular public actions from occurring, even when pushed by powerful and wealthy people– and in this case only a fringe gang of radicals would be pushing for what you fear.
Re: The Founders all owned slaves
All of them? Every last signer of the Declaration* and Constitution? Every officer with rank or colonel or better in the Continental Army?
Please document this!J Riley , says: August 23, 2017 at 4:35 pm"The Statues represent reconciliation. When one town can have a statue of a Union hero and another town can have a statue of a Confederate hero while still acknowledging that both towns are American, you have reconciliation."Remarkable. It's as if reaching reconciliation requires pretending that neither town contains folks who are not white. Yes we are, in a sense, finally trying to begin to deal with reconciling some old history. News flash though, it ain't about blue and gray uniforms
Interesting interview with Andrew Young on NPR this morning ("Civil Rights Activist Argues to Keep Confederate Monuments"): "A minority cannot be provoking a racist majority that is still underemployed, undereducated, and dying faster than we are. The issue is life and death, not some stupid monument." http://www.npr.org/2017/08/23/545435024/civil-rights-activist-argues-to-keep-confederate-monumentsTen Percenter , says: August 23, 2017 at 4:42 pmA bit of an aside, but since ya'll are more knowledgeable than me Do you know if there are any statues in the South to white southerners who opposed slavery?Craig , says: August 23, 2017 at 5:30 pmSlavery is something like original sin, as it pertains to the founding of this country. It is a blot that stains all the good things that came out of the revolution. Clearly, the ideals that the Founders promoted were not practiced very well in the beginning. And for too long, their failure to live up to the ideals they espoused was white washed away (pun intended) by the way the white majority looked at history. Granted, the Founders were handicapped by growing up in a different world, one that was less enlightened on matters involving race and sex than the one we live in today. Progress does not happen as one instantaneous cultural step change, but rather as a more fitful series of stops and starts. Of course, that isn't adequate as an excuse for those who were on the receiving end of injustices.grumpy realist , says: August 23, 2017 at 5:34 pmObviously, some people think that one of the outcomes of the Civil war, the freeing of slaves, which occurred at a rather high cost of lives and treasure, would have gone a long way to atoning for that original sin. But the follow through was clearly lacking, with racial resentments and overt discrimination lingering on until now. Despite our long history as a Christian nation, not enough of the mostly Christian and white majority was able to grasp that all men, not just white men, were presumably created in God's image.
So what shall we do about this?
Right now, those on the left seem to be indulging themselves emotionally by engaging in a frenzied purification of history, via the attack on historical personages and statues. In some ways, this strikes me as lazy, as it isn't clear that any of this will improve lives in struggling black communities, or solve the gang violence problems in Chicago, and other urban areas, or enable damaged young black men to have any kind of meaningful lives, regardless of who is to blame for the damage that they have suffered. In the same way, I don't see that white identity politics, the adoption by whites of the same aggrieved victim mentality, will help them advance in any meaningful way. Trump's promises to return things to the way they were are just tempting fantasies. There are no do overs in history. All sides need to check themselves and then focus on moving forward in the best way possible. That, unfortunately, seems to go against human nature. Vendetta is much more attractive in the short run.
I still can't get over it. Joan of Arc?!!!Alex Brown , says: August 23, 2017 at 5:44 pmMaybe we can make a decision based on artistic merit? I mean, a lot of these statues are mass-produced pieces of sentimental kitch that make me remember the excesses of oratory during the 1890s. Is it really all that terrible if we turn them into something else? Or should we just say: "if it's a statue of some guy on a horse and has moss on it, we'll leave it alone" and impose a statuary equivalent to the legal doctrine of laches?
Actually, I think getting to the point of being totally indifferent to the statues would be the most appropriate of all. After all, they are nothing more than huge hunks of metal that pigeons like to sit on.
Aaron C. I am 35 years old, and I believe the country will tear itself apart in my lifetime.Noah172 , says: August 23, 2017 at 5:47 pmTrouble with separatist scenarios in the US is that they're basically unworkable, if you think at the practical level. Most people have multiple identities, and they will start resisting when purists like SJWs try to enforce their will. Besides, in the real-world identities are fluid, not fixed. Neo-Marxists are focusing on race because it's one of the most stable component of human identity. They already failed with class war, where workers decided that they have other identities. And in the real world, most people in the US may already be non-white by the old 1/16th rule, and their numbers are going up daily. As for the Left and Right divide, people are moving from one side to the next, sometimes several times in a lifetime. Should they be forced to move *physically* too, to reach an ideologically pure state? And how to even think about dividing the country economically? Militarily? It would be a complete disaster, worse than any Yugoslavia.
I think it is much, much more likely that we will remain a single country. But what is really scary is deterioration of the public discourse, the endless 'f . you!!' as a sole argument in the debates. The outbursts of physical violence. The pretense that there are *good* SOBs because they are on *our* side – looking at you, liberal media!
We may end up as, I hate to say, spiders in the can, destroying each other instead of improving our country. Think about it: where do we want to be in 30 or 50 years? There is a tremendous *potential* for science and technology for improving our lives, eliminating hard and tedious work, reducing human pain and suffering, cleaning the environment. But instead of looking forward and thinking how to improve, we're focused on zero-sum game of endless reopening of the old wounds.
Will we ever learn?
JonF wrote:Siarlys Jenkins , says: August 23, 2017 at 7:19 pmLarge numbers of people are on board with ditching the Rebs and race baiters
Recent surveys show that removing Confederate statues is a minority view.
and in this case only a fringe gang of radicals would be pushing for what you fear
You of all people should know that redefining marriage was once a fringe idea.
Law of Merited Impossibility, yet again.
Re: The Founders all owned slavesJRP , says: August 23, 2017 at 7:29 pmJohn Adams is on record saying with pride "I have never owned a Negro or any other slave." McCullough's biography records that a young enslaved woman was once given to the family as a gift, but was promptly emancipated -- which is probably a better deal for her than refusing the gift and leaving her enslaved.
If the sum total of all indicators within the context of group, racial identity and the possible demise of an anglo/protestant cultural heritage is true, then violent conflict looms on the horizon and possibly in the near foreseeable future. Yes, it will not be a fight for racial(i.e. white)supremacy but an at-all-costs battle to avoid extinction.TR , says: August 23, 2017 at 7:53 pmIn Tampa, the Confederate monument now being challenged was erected c. 1912. Sure enough, someone checked the newspaper for that day and the dedication was by a white politician vowing that the South would never submit to being ruled by an "inferior" race.Battle lost! So much for "reconciliation."
|
|
|
Aug 24, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
He also raises the question of what can we do to make a positive difference in our lives? And this may sound terribly mundane, but for those of you who have time and money for the fees: get emergency training. IMHO, everyone should know how do to the Heimlich maneuver, but I only know the idea of how to do it. Ditto with CPR, and that bothers me. If I had been at the scene with all the horrible injuries, the only principles I know are "Don't move the injured since they may have a spinal break and you could increase the damage to nerves" and "If they are bleeding, put pressure on the wound". But is that OK if all you have is not clean cloth? I assume yes if they are bleeding profusely, but still
I assume there must be what amounts to first responder training (as in what to do before the medics get there). If readers can indicate what this type of training is usually called and where to go to find it, please pipe up in comments.
Separately, I've kept out of the discussions of Charlottesville in comments. I'm perplexed and disappointed on the fetishization of statues by both sides in this debate. I'm not enough of an anthropologist to get to the bottom of it, but the desire of some Southerners to preserve and elevate figures like Robert E. Lee isn't just about the Civil War. It has to do with the fact that the South was late to industrialize and remained poor relative to the rest of the US and is not part of the power structure at the Federal level (to my knowledge, there are no tracks from Southern universities to important positions in the Acela corridor. That isn't to say that people from the South don't get there, but it's not a well-greased path). And of course, people from the rest of the country tend to forget that Southerners are regarded as hicks and regularly treated as such in movies and on TV (remember My Cousin Vinny, for one of many examples?). Having a Southern accent = minus 10 attributed IQ points outside the South, with the possible exception being Texans. I had a Virginia client who used the "Southerns aren't so sharp" prejudice brilliantly to their advantage in negotiations, but I am sure on another level the perception still bothered them.
Mind you, I'm not defending the Southern position. If I were to believe family lore, I have a Hungarian ancestor whose statue in Budapest was torn down by the Soviets. Do I care?
But my guess is that while for some Southerners, Civil War iconography is meant to intimidate blacks, for many others, the storied Civil War generals are the only local boys held up as having historical importance. LBJ and Jimmy Carter weren't seen as great presidents. There must be important Southern scientists and inventors, but oddly I can't think of any, which means they aren't generally depicted as such.
By contrast, it's easier to present the point of view of blacks and reformers: that losers in war pretty much never get to have memorials, so that on its face, having so many images touting loserdom is perverse, and not justified because it separately holds up aggressive defenders of slavery as role models.
And I know I've probably touched on too many disparate threads in this short post, but the other part about Charlottesville that has been mentioned, but cannot be said enough is that this was a huge policing fail, and the passivity was no accident. As Lambert and others have said, if you'd had black protestors show up similarly attired and armed, you can bet you'd have seen mass head-breaking and arrests. The Charlottesville police knew this was coming and appear not to have sought advice from police forces with lots of experience in crowd control (Washington DC and New York City), nor did they get reinforcements (state troopers). It's one thing if they had tried to cordon off or break up the two sides and lost control of the situation. But there's no evidence they attempted to intervene.
In addition to watching the Lee Camp video, I strongly urge you to read the article from The Root that goes with this photo (Lambert flagged it yesterday):
Perhaps most important, this fight over symbols is diverting energy from tackling the many areas where African Americans have been promised equal protection under the law but don't get it. Let's start with the War on Drugs, which Richard Nixon envisaged as a way to disenfranchise blacks. Consider this comment from Governing (hat tip UserFriendly):
[Richmond's] Mayor Levar Stoney, who has rejected the idea of removing statues, spoke to reporters Monday about the controversy after a groundbreaking ceremony for the American Civil War Museum. He said he wanted the city to acknowledge "the complete truth" about its history as the Confederate capital.
"At the end of the day, those statues are offensive to me, very offensive to me," said Stoney, who is black. "But you know what I'm going to focus my time on? Destroying vestiges of Jim Crow where they live in our city -- public housing, public education, you name it."
https://www.youtube.com/embed/eh8UUUMHAWY
JTMcPhee , August 16, 2017 at 3:35 am
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 3:43 amHere's a significant Southern figure who has statues to honor him, a self-made scientist and inventor to whom today's kids and sandwich eaters owe so much: George Washington Carver. http://www.notablebiographies.com/Ca-Ch/Carver-George-Washington.html He was even a person of color, and born in Kansas, a violent battleground "border state" in the "time of Troubles."
Carver and Carter, the Peanut Twins
RickM , August 16, 2017 at 8:15 amThanks for that!
John Wright , August 16, 2017 at 9:39 amYes, as a Southerner, I was hoping someone would mention Carver early on. But the larger point is valid. IIRC the first Southerner to win a Nobel Prize, Medicine/Physiology, was Earl Sutherland at Vanderbilt in about 1971.
There have been a few since, I think. The reasons are historical, well covered by C. Vann Woodward (Johns Hopkins and Yale) in his Origins of the New South. Regarding E.O. Wilson, who is mentioned below, yes, he is a great scientist who knows more about ants than any other human being. And being of a certain age and a biologist-in-preparation when Sociobiology was published in 1975, I was well aware of him from that beginning.
That book was a great synthetic triumph, until the last pages. Then came On Human Nature and the unfortunate collaboration with Lumsden.
Still, Yves' friend is correct about the anti-Southern "feelings" directed at Wilson. He was not alone. Even inconsequential scientists like yours truly felt it. I spent nearly 5 years at the best medical school in the United States in the late 1990s, a famous place in sight of Fort McHenry.
Because I was from the South, more than one New England Yankee assumed that I had a Klan hood in my closet, mostly because of how we do things "down there," the latter being a direct quote.
You get used to it, but having a president from the South like Clinton LLC doesn't help, much. As far as the statues go, my compatriots don't believe me when I tell them most of these monuments appeared starting in the late-19th century, during the flourishing of the "Moonlight and Magnolias" glorification of the "Lost Cause" that accompanied the hardening of Jim Crow.
Just a bunch of Bourbons jerking working class chains, but damn, it worked well. And continues to work with money largely from elsewhere.
Carolinian , August 16, 2017 at 9:57 amProbably in the 1980's I had the task of demonstrating some expensive electronic equipment at a Bell Labs facility in New Jersey.
The local sales engineer advised our visiting California group to be wary of Bell Labs people with southern accents as they were teased by the northern Bell-Labs people about their accents and education and the Southerners had reacted to this when dealing with outside visitors/vendors..
As I remember, the advice was to be aware that a Bell-Labs Southerner might start with some basic questions and progressively ask more and more difficult questions simply to back the visitor into a corner.
Strange advice to receive, considering that at this time, Bell-Labs was one of the top industrial research/development facilities in the world.
I did not observe this behavior at all, but still remember the caution.
nowhere , August 16, 2017 at 1:03 pmThanks to Yves for the thoughtful intro.
And I think southerners aren't obsessed with the Civil War the way they used to be. When I was a kid the local radio station would sign off with a lovely choral version of Dixie rather than the national anthem. If Gone With the Wind played downtown the line would be around the block. Numerous houses in my town have the columned portico meant to evoke the exterior set for Tara.
Now increasingly cosmopolitan cities are more likely to feature blocky post modern architecture and people are more into their smartphones than what happened at Chancellorsville.
Black and white children can be seen walking home together from school and my town has had a black mayor and the state currently a black (albeit Republican) senator. These days it could be the north that is clinging to the past.
As for scientists: Charles Townes, Nobel prize winner, inventor of the laser, fellow Carolinian.
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 3:57 pmI grew up in Columbia (a largely mixed demographic area – though often very sharply racially divided), and while it is true that much of the veneer has changed, it is the seething beneath that doesn't seem to have changed much since I left. This seems especially true once you get a few miles outside of those more cosmopolitan cities.
On kids playing together – it has been one of my strangest experiences to go from elementary school where everyone was friends and played together, regardless of race. And then, after 3 months of summer, moving to middle school and the racial hell that ensued. But, maybe things have changed for the better since when I lived there.
Another SC role model – Ronald McNair.
clinical wasteman , August 22, 2017 at 5:01 pmI've seen a small data point supporting your theory of the Civil War being less important to most Southerners than it once was. When I first started visiting Alabama, every book store had a pretty significant section devoted to Civil War books. Even thought there aren't anywhere near as many bookstores these days, the few I've visited don't have proportionately as much space devoted to the Civil War, and some just have it as part of the History section.
Charley , August 16, 2017 at 9:30 amThanks Rick, especially for the perfect concluding summation, but also from the first-hand account and historical contextualization of this persistent sort of niche bigotry. From another continent it was hard to guess how prevalent that phenomenon still might still be, although harder to imagine that it could have disappeared altogether. It constantly disgusts me when the same sort of thing is extended to Americans at large by anglo/European bigots insufferably assured that their tiny colonist cultures are "superior".
As a long-term/tedious polemicist against sociobiology -- mostly as casual normative framework today, but the academic origins do matter too (see: [ http://www.theharrier.net/essays/kriminalaffe-sultan-at-the-dole-office-written-with-matthew-hyland/ ]; (I'm the other one, not JB/The Harrier)) -- I'm aghast at the thought that any critic of E.O. Wilson would stoop to invoking his geographical/cultural background, especially when discussing the racist applications of the body of theory. Really, if they can't do better than that they're missing huge swathes of the obvious, mimicking the worst of their opponents and ultimately doing latter-day neo-socio-bio presumptions an unwarranted favour.
Also, complete agreement with you, Yves, about the way excessive concern with statues and symbols generally can skew everything. Not that those things are meaningless, but the whole present-day world also bears witness to the past in the form of raging injustice -- much but not all of it involving the malign invention of "race" -- everywhere. Nohow is this a "bipartisan"/"everyone calm down"-type statement: I side unequivocally with the "grassroots" BLM, the direct-action anti-fascists and especially the IWW members, and would be delighted never to see one of those monuments (or its anglo/Euro equivalents) again, but if it had to be one or the other, I'd rather the statues were left standing while Lee, Sir Arthur 'Bomber' Harris, Christopher Columbus and friends were made to spin in their graves by the abolition of racist "criminal justice", housing and immigration policy and racialized top-down class warfare/imperial admin in general, if the alternative is just to take the statues down while leaving the policies in place and the Generals smirking in hell.
dcsos , August 16, 2017 at 4:02 amKary Mullis went to the high school a few blocks from my home.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kary_MullisLee , August 16, 2017 at 6:54 amWhat about an alternative method to these history rewrites. Every time A legislative body decides to remove one of these ancient tributes–instead of removing the offensive statue–the erection of a new and at least equal in size monument that points out the failure of the earlier tribute.
That is, the new monument would be larger, more noticeable, and will be to point out the error of the earlier structure. In this way history is preserved–and a much more educational site is created – pointing out the reasons for the new interpretation of the site. Thus a site without a physical monument, for example, would be treated in the following manner. Jefferson Davis Boulevard would become Former Jefferson Davis Bvd, or Ex-Jefferson Boulvard or such. What do you think?
JTMcPhee , August 16, 2017 at 9:13 amAdd adjacent statues of John Brown, Nat Turner, Sally Hemmings, southerners who fought for the union etc.
Synoia , August 16, 2017 at 12:27 pmAnd add effigies of J. Edgar Hoover (let us debate whether he should appear "dressed" or not), and Strom Thurmond, and Jesse Helms, and Al Sharpton, etc. to improve the contextual mapping
cocomaan , August 16, 2017 at 9:36 amJesse Helms.
Ah that brigs back a memory. I lived in Raleigh, NC when Jessie was in the Senate, and my children went to a local Episcopal School.
The head of the Schools was Jessie Helms' daughter, and I was asked, and an outside of my opinion in from of his daughter. My response is "He is very interesting," was acceptable.
Advice I was given when moving to the south was "Never say anything bad about one Southerner to another. They are all related."
The animus then, and possibly now, was strong, so much so that my view was "War of Independence, forgotten. Civil war, not at tall."
I was also told, by another Southern lady, that the difference between English Table Manners and the US', was devised because the ladies never wanted to entertain the English in the homes again after the War of Independence.
I'd also point out there is a significant difference between Spanish and English table manners. In some cases under the English rules you can eat with your fingers (chicken on the bone or unpeeled fruit, for example)t. Under the Spanish none I know of, its knives and forks for everything.
andyb , August 16, 2017 at 1:24 pmThere seemed to be a consensus a few years ago after that kid shot up the black church that confederate flags would not be sold and that any debate about it was over. Looks like that didn't take.
Point being that one part of the nation can't make another part of the nation erect certain statues or not carry certain colored pieces of cloth.
I've always been a bit of an iconoclast, but maybe we should get out of symbolic thinking and communication through pieces of political artwork and try communicating directly instead. Battling over art and architecture seems wrongheaded. The fundamental message here should be "What are the ideas we are debating?" not "These people over here are animals, what should we do about it?"
But as Yves said, this event really went down because of a failure of the local police. It was amateur hour over there.
And shame on the media for making this event into some kind of referendum on America. How many people died in Chicago over the weekend? Baltimore? Nationwide? How is that any different or less political in nature?
anonymouse , August 16, 2017 at 9:14 pmThe problem is that the statues and flags represent a part of American history, whether good or bad. I find it reprehensible that history must be rewritten, and the lessons learned discarded. What's next? Book burning, the destruction of Monticello or the Jefferson Monument? There seems to be an attempt by an elite cabal to destroy this country through division and vilification of the Founding Fathers. Shame!!!
Fiery Hunt , August 17, 2017 at 12:51 amI liked this response on Twitter:
THERE ARE NO MONUMENTS TO HITLER IN GERMANY, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S PART OF THEIR HISTORY. THERE ARE MEMORIALS FOR VICTIMS. THIS IS NOT HARD.
Elizabeth Burton , August 17, 2017 at 6:46 pmHitler was the leader of, and policy director, of a genocidal government. Southern Civil War generals were not. They were leaders of armies, of men not policy makers of slavery.
Subtle, I know. But DIFFERENT.
PlutoniumKun , August 16, 2017 at 4:17 amAnd the policy they were leading those men to fight for was the "peculiar institution." Forget Hitler. Are there statues of, say, Rommel in Germany? Yet he, too, a leader of an army.
It's doubly ironic that all this furor over removal of statues of R. E. Lee, which seem to be the ones the media likes to focus on, likely because Lee is the only Southern general that bulk of the under-educated population can recognize, never mentions what the man himself said about commemorating the war:
"I think it wiser not to keep open the sores of war but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife, to commit to oblivion the feelings engendered." -- Robert E. Lee
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 6:50 amE.O. Wilson is one of the greatest scientists alive, he's from Alabama and Duke University.
Incidentally, I'd be wary of teaching anyone without a medical background the Heimlich Manoeuvre – it may work in some situations, but there have been severe criticisms of its use – Hemlich himself seems to have been better at self promotion than medicine.
PlutoniumKun , August 16, 2017 at 8:47 amWhat is really funny is that he was teaching the intro biology course at Harvard when I was there. I didn't take it but one of my good friends did.
She said that she was a hick from California (actually she'd gone to a very good school) but the point was she didn't know that Stephen Jay Gould was the "hot" professor at the time, and that Wilson's "Sociobiology" view was considered to be retrograde, as unduly deterministic. So she got into Wilson's course when most people were pulling strings to make sure they got Gould, not him.
I saw her recently and asked about the Wilson course. She volunteered that another reason she thought he got a bad rap at Harvard was that he was Southern.
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 3:58 pmI'm deeply envious of anyone having the chance to attend classes from either Wilson or Gould. Both have their detractors (to put it mildly), but the are/were both wonderful writers, I think I've read pretty much everything both of them have written.
The 'Darwin Wars' between the determinists and the Gouldites was my introduction to just how deep epistemological divisions can be in science, even between those who essentially agree on 99% of the data. Wilson, despite his association with Sociobiology, seems to have kept a wary distance from the Dawkins disciples, quite wisely IMO.
clinical wasteman , August 22, 2017 at 5:06 pmI have the impression she very much liked the Wilson class. Had I been at all clued in, I would have taken that class, but I oddly wasn't into star professors.
Vatch , August 22, 2017 at 5:30 pmWe may actually be talking about different E.O. Wilsons then -- entirely my mistake, and nothing to do with 'greatness' or otherwise, but surely the one who invented sociobiology, or at least coined the term, isn't still alive? Quite possibly another mistake on my part there though.
PlutoniumKun , August 16, 2017 at 4:27 amE.O. Wilson, entomologist, author of "Sociobiology", "Biophilia", and co-author of "The Theory of Island Biogeography", was born in 1929 and is still alive.
JTMcPhee , August 16, 2017 at 7:21 amIts just past the 50th Anniversary here in Ireland of one of the most spectacular examples of removing old outdated symbols, the blowing up of Nelsons Column in Dublin. Despite its origin as an overtly Unionist attempt to mark the Battle of the Nile, it was popular with Dubliners because you could climb to the top for a good view.
In Ireland numerous monuments to Imperialism were removed over the years – some by public authorities, some by way of gelignite planted at night. But most people still accept the remains as part of history – there are still numerous 'Victoria Roads' around Ireland, plenty of old post boxes with crowns on them, as well as huge monuments to the the likes of the Duke of Wellington (who was Irish, although as O'Connell put it, 'just because you are born in a stable doesn't make you a horse'.) Hardly anyone notices that the beautiful arch in Stephens Green is a detailed monument to the Boer Wars and all that entailed.
I think monuments that give active offence should be removed, but in most cases its better to accept that time changes and alters the meaning of all public symbols. Eventually, some sort of equilibrium comes about and people accept with a shrug.
Enquiring Mind , August 16, 2017 at 10:35 amNot all people, including quite a few Irish– but of course they nurse their grievances better than they nurse their drink albeit with a lot of good historical basis, and with current hope of getting their own back, or at least some revenge. For some reason(s), some subset of every polity just won't let bygones be bygone
Synoia , August 20, 2017 at 11:31 pmFaulkner had much to say about the past. Will the Charlottesville events spark some resurgence on interest in his works? His quote "The past is never dead. It's not even past." from Requiem for a Nun seems to be at once forgotten or disavowed by many in this modern world.
Wade Riddick , August 16, 2017 at 4:38 amWhen I went to South Africa, I was in a community of young ex-pats, from may parts of Great Britain and its far flung parts.
One person was from Belfast, and one night after a few beers, and his round was next, he looked at me and rattled off a series of "efforts" the English had tried in Ireland, most of them bloody.
And accused in a strong Irish accent "You English!" Not wishing for a fight, especially before his round I considered his litany on English misdeeds, and said "You're right!" He looked utterly surprised, probably because he excreted a denial, and I wanted no fight, and it was his round.
The I added, "and I personally did none of them." Which after a thought he considered accurate, and bought his round.
We were friends for years, but time and distance have severed that bond.
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 7:00 amThe South captured and dominated the federal government for much of the antebellum period thanks to special gimmicks like the 3/5ths rule. In many ways, Southern interests directed federal power to advance their economy. The flood of free-thinking Germans and the election of Lincoln shocked the South, leading to panic and, ultimately, a bitter resentment in defeat. In this sense, the 1970's Southern strategy of harping on deficits while promoting tax cuts was just part of a long counterattack against federal power. The entire Republican policy edifice for a generation has been built around a segregationist backlash and you're watching it all unravel – Obamacare, tax cuts, deficit-hawkery – even the war on pot. Even Republican Secretaries of State have refused to cooperation with the voter suppression commission. It's not a coincidence they can't get anything passed and impotent rage erupts in the street.
skippy , August 16, 2017 at 8:07 amI think you need to read up on the origins of the groups that worked to move the county to the right. It was a very well funded, loosely coordinated corporate effort. The core group came out of the John Birch Society, which is based in Belmont, Mass and had people like William J. Buckley of Yale as prominent members. The Adolph Coors family out of Colorado were also big players. Fred Koch, the father of the Koch Brothers, was a founding member of the John Birch Society and a big early funder. The University of Chicago, and in particular Milton Friedman, played a huge role in promoting neoliberal ideology.
As we flagged in a post yesterday, the reason the country moved to the right wasn't due just to the Republicans. There were plenty of Democrats who were on board, starting in the 1970s.
And although I don't have data to support it, my perception is that Southerners have long been underrepresented in high profile Administration positions, like Cabinet members and as Supreme Court justices. I'd be curious as to whether any lawyers have a sense as to their participation levels on the Federal bench.
PH , August 16, 2017 at 9:02 amFEE
Vatch , August 16, 2017 at 10:20 amSouthern committee chairmen dominated Congress for decades last century. Of course, not sure many people remember.
I do not think that Southern sense of victimhood is particularly special. More another example of a more general phenomena, often seen in many times and places.
People are driven quite often by a sense of dignity or no dignity ( humiliation/rage). That is the emotional force behind many different sorts of notions of glory.
I find it ironic that you are arguing the "identity" angle here, while I feel little sympathy for it. During election discussions, I argued the emotional angles, and I felt that you focused more on objective conditions. Today, I feel your approach was better.
Anyway, in the end it is about finding a way forward that is fair to everyone. As you would probably agree, we have not seen much leadership from any group in that direction.
Wade Riddick , August 16, 2017 at 9:34 amSouthern committee chairmen dominated Congress for decades last century
Quite true. The Congressional seniority system worked very well for the "Solid South".
Yves Smith Post author , August 17, 2017 at 4:39 amYou're talking about the party funders – largely mining, fossil fuels, agribusiness and banking/insurance/real estate (mostly interests dominant in the South). I'm talking about the voters. They had real anger at the federal government over desegregation in the '70s and the oligarchs channeled that into a deregulatory agenda which is now falling apart. Witness Trump's pandering to regulate drug prices. He may be pushing deregulation but many popular parts of his agenda were reregulatory in some aspect – like giving everybody great health insurance – and he's reneging on them. In this sense, he's what Skowronek would call a Jimmy Carter – a bridge figure in a disintegrating political order.
Second, the South maintained immense influence throughout the New Deal era and deep into the '90s thanks to Democratic Party dominance in the region, seniority and the congressional committee system. No other region could match the clout of the John Stennises or Earl Longs. Of course, with the South flipping and the committee structure rearranged around fundraising instead of seniority, all that changed.
But I look at the current Republicans in Congress and I recognize all the major leadership positions as belonging to the segregationists, regardless of their geographic origin. They nurse deep racial grievances. They speak Dixiecrat, sputtering about state sovereignty, states rights and nullification (quite shrilly during the Obamacare debate). They block black voting. They gerrymander. They race-bait (birtherism/Dred Scott-ism). They attack programs if black people get it too (Obamacare). They like privatized police, prisons (slave labor) and civil forfeiture. They love those gun rights (regulators/slave catchers). They all want to pass laws legalizing private discrimination – which was a pet cause of the defeated segregationists at the tale end of the '60s. This agenda's contradictions are going down in flames.
I would also remind you that the Nuremberg laws were inspired by Southern anti-miscegenation legislation. Nazis came to Southern law schools to study them (though they weren't limited to the South). Fascism is the idea that private business should own and operate the government for private profit. That's where the party funders and the street racists come together.
Though the formal racist state institutions and ideology were never limited to the South, they did reach their fullest, most overt expression here. You're talking about a group that has supported the Articles of Confederation for going on two centuries after they fell apart. It's what the Koch brothers hope to bring back by negating congressional commerce regulation with a constitutional amendment.
Consider what props this up and you'll understand why their coalition is coming apart at the seems. New energy sources are slowly eviscerating the petrodollar complex and the money it pours into politics.
Mrs Smith , August 16, 2017 at 4:39 amNo, I've studied this in depth and you haven't. I have an entire chapter in ECONNED on this, with extensive footnotes, from contemporaneous sources. All you have is your opinion and on this it is incorrect.
The "free market" messaging was all about corporate and business interests. It had nothing to do with narrowcasting on identity politics issues. That came later with the rise of Karl Rove as a Republican party strategist.
And I'm sorry, Susan Collins just blocked Obamacare repeal and she's not a racist. I don't like sweeping inaccurate generalizations. We care about accuracy of information and argumentation. We make that explicit in our written site Policies. If you are not prepared to comment in line with our Policies, your comments will not be approved.
a different chris , August 16, 2017 at 9:04 amAs someone who used to be a group fitness instructor, I had to take both CPR (adult and child) and First Aid training to retain my ability to teach. Both are generally available in the US with the Red Cross (and others), and once you are certified, you can renew the certificates every 1 or 2 years with a quick multiple choice test and demonstration of CPR and AED techniques on the test dummy.
CPR standard practices have changed over the years, so it is important to keep up the certifications if you want to be genuinely prepared to assist. The First Aid cert is mostly common sense, but some of it seems counter-intuitive, until you know why it's done that way. The most important thing to know is to make sure someone calls for EMTs/Ambulance if there's any doubt about the severity of the injury/illness/unconsciousness of a victim. Don't wait.
Also: I LOVE George Washington Carver. I did my first stand-up school presentation on his amazing work with peanuts when I was in elementary school, and I've never forgotten what an impressive person he was.
UserFriendly , August 16, 2017 at 4:27 pm>The most important thing to know is to make sure someone calls for EMTs/Ambulance if there's any doubt about the severity of the injury/illness/unconsciousness of a victim. Don't wait.
Of course here in America you've probably kicked off a series of bills just starting at $800 for said ambulance making the victim feel like a victim twice over.
HotFlash , August 16, 2017 at 9:38 pmAs someone who teaches CPR/AED first aid, O2 administration, and lifeguarding for red cross, yes call them as soon as there is anything serious. If the person is conscious they can refuse care and not pay anything.
As basic first response; care for severe bleeding by applying constant pressure with gauze (any cloth will do).
If someone is unconscious check for a pulse and breathing, if they have either they don't need CPR. If they do need cpr two hands interlocking at the center of the chest push straight down, hard, and fast (you might break ribs) to the beat of Another One Bites the Dust or Stayin Alive . Just keep going with that till EMS comes.
That is basic community level training. 1. level up and I'd teach more about giving rescue breaths but that should do in most cases.
Conrad , August 16, 2017 at 9:40 pmI live in Canada, that horrible bastion of socialized medicine, and if you have to call 911 for an ambulance here, you will never, ever see a bill. No-one will. B/c there isn't one.
Note to USA: socialized medicine, you can do this!
russell1200 , August 16, 2017 at 5:48 amI view my limited First Aid Training as hopefully making me slightly less likely to be totally useless in an emergency situation. I think I'm less likely to just freeze or flap my arms in panic when confronted by a serious injury than I was before training.
JBird , August 17, 2017 at 12:38 amThe mainstream Republican have gotten the racist tag thrown at them so much that it doesn't seem to carry much weight anymore. That this is giving truly virulent racist groups a pass is a huge problem. Calling everyone a Nazi seems to be working in an unintended fashion.
The Social Darwinian ideology is a very powerful one, and a natural one for the groups vilified by identity politics to make. You are empowered because you were mean and took things from other people, your empowered because you are the sociological group that acts and thinks the right (Western) way. Your dominance is justified.
Of course given that same dominance, I can sympathize with folks who choose to push back physically against the storm troopers. But as it stands today, both sides start dressing themselves up in passive victimhood rather than as fallen warriors. Horst Wessel would be turning in his grave.
TheCatSaid , August 16, 2017 at 6:08 am"Social Darwin Ideology"
It seems to me that the ideas of a meritocracy and racism, rather than the circumstances they put in, to explain why some groups/individuals do great and others do not are very similar. Yet, somehow the neoliberal democrats use the former for poor people especially whites and the republicans use the latter for poor blacks. Although in the past few years they have been blending the ideas together into a modern version of Social Darwinism.
Livius Drusus , August 16, 2017 at 7:33 amSee also the Fabius Maximus article about this incident here .
He addresses the propaganda elements and other aspects not addressed here.kurtismayfield , August 16, 2017 at 8:23 amThat was a good piece, thank you. I think the author hit on the main issue which is that people now make up their owns facts and often live in their own ideological worlds. It started with talk radio and cable news but the Internet has made the situation much worse.
How would the Civil Rights movement get ahead in today's climate? Would the murders of Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner be declared false flag attacks orchestrated by George Soros and the Deep State? How about the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing, would that also be a false flag attack?
It is not just the Right that engages in this sort of thinking but some people on the Left too. How can you successfully promote reform when you cannot even get people to agree on basic facts or to engage in rational debate? Perhaps the most dangerous outcome of this state of affairs will be that the political and business elites will decide that the population is too feral for democratic, constitutional governance and decide to increase the assault on civil liberties. Many Americans, frightened by more incidents like Charlottesville, will agree to go along with such a project.
Jonny Canuck , August 16, 2017 at 11:56 amPlus Livius, there is an incredible lack of trust in this country. I don't trust many public figures nor do I trust that certain public servants will do the right thing. In an emergency I do think that strangers will help a person in need, but if it isn't considered an emergency good luck (see opiid crisis, the reactions of many that I thought to be decent human beings has been ghastly).
Art Eclectic , August 16, 2017 at 12:39 pmI agree. I think the Internet has altered news for the worse. Real factual news is hard work and expensive to produce. Opinion on the other hand is cheap and plentiful. And the more outrageous the opinion, the more clicks. So now opinion is the news.
Politics has gone the same route. I worry about societal problems like opioid addiction, a rise in alcoholism, and affordable healthcare. Dealing with these issues would require hard work and hard choices. It is a lot easier to shout and insult. So now insults have displaced policy.
I see no answer.
witters , August 16, 2017 at 6:41 pmThere is no rational debate possible with people who believe that one human being enslaving another is a right and just thing. There is also no rational debate possible with people who believe in any form of racial superiority.
Tribalism is one thing, belief in racial superiority leads to dehumanization of others and that ends in genocide, slavery, and host of other vile behaviors that decent people have moved beyond. My support for free speech ends at dehumanizing others.
Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 8:57 pm"There is no rational debate possible with people who believe that one human being enslaving another is a right and just thing. "
Here's the 13th Amendment: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted , shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
So there's no rational debate with anyone who swears alllegiance to the US Constitution; and, it follows, no possibility of rational debate between such adherents.
Seems about right.
sierra7 , August 16, 2017 at 11:05 pmBoy, you are really really reaching to claim that the point of the 13th Amendment you quoted was to permit slavery. Think what one may about the punitive nature of our criminal justice system (a completely different topic), this language was explicitly aimed at permitting that system to continue. Not chattel slavery.
jrs , August 21, 2017 at 10:32 amHow much authoritarianism will middle Americans tolerate for a continuance of their materialistic lives????
Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 9:02 amWell most of them go to work in highly authoritarian cultures called corporations so they actually tolerate a great deal of authoritarianism for that paycheck.
But regardless their materialistic lives are merely their lives, or at any rate the number of people that can actually share in much materialism is ever shrinking (yea I know they have smart phones or some such horror but by and large). While rampant materialism may have been at least a temptation to many baby boomers at one time, wages just haven't kept up. But with no carrot there are always sticks, if not one's physical life or anything, everything else one needs (needs not wants).
Vatch , August 16, 2017 at 10:38 amThe Catsaid,
Thanks for the pointer to my article! Note that it is intended at as first cut look at what happened, putting together the news stories of the first 24 hours to forms a coherent picture of the event.
It got 10,000+ hits in the first day, which is a lot for us – without any mention in a major website (the usual way a post goes viral). I assume that results from people who want to know what happened, and are dissatisfied with the major media's coverage -- which has been, imo, high school journalism level.
Two aspects are covered. First, the amazing -- even delusional -- statements by civilian and police officials about the policing of the event. Let's hope we get some accountability for the incompetent policing (e.g., not taking standard simple measures).
Second, how each side lies. "OUR side were innocent angels attacked by THOSE devils." That such nonsense is taken seriously by the tribes of Left and Right is very Weimar. Large numbers on both sides came armed and eager to fight, and they did fight.
The post linked to by Yves in The Root is typical. These are lies. Doesn't that bother you?
Reform of America is impossible so long as we prefer lies to truth.
Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 4:03 pmThe post linked to by Yves in The Root is typical. These are lies.
Could you please identify the specific lies?
Outis Philalithopoulos , August 16, 2017 at 5:29 pmVatch,
Good request! How is The Root article an example of "how each side lies. "OUR side were innocent angels attacked by THOSE devils.'" The article is exactly about that theme: good vs. evil, innocent vs. aggressors. Let's rewind the opening vignette:
"At first it was peaceful protest," Long said softly as he spoke. "Until someone pointed a gun at my head. Then the same person pointed it at my foot and shot the ground." Long said the only weapon he had was a can of spray paint that a white supremacist threw at him earlier, so he took a lighter to the spray paint and turned it into a flame thrower. And a photographer snapped the photo.
But inside every photograph is an untold story. If you look closely at Long's picture, there's an elderly white man standing in between Long and his friend. The unknown man was part of the counterprotests, too, but was afraid, and Long and his friends were trying to protect him. Even though, Long says, those who were paid to protect the residents of Charlottesville were doing just the opposite. "The cops were protecting the Nazis, instead of the people who live in the city," Long said. "The cops basically just stood in their line and looked at the chaos. The cops were not protecting the people of Charlottesville. They were protecting the outsiders."
This makes two assertions. First, that the alt-Right were the aggressors, the Left the victims. Videos and eyewitness accounts show otherwise. They show two sides, elements on both of which show up armed to fight, and do fight. See this in yesterday's LAT .
Second, it says that the police preferentially sided with the alt-Right. Not only is there no evidence of that, the alt-right believe the police deliberately flushed them out of their safe space in the park into the left's mob. See Rob Sterling's detailed account .
That does appear to be roughly what happened. The police cancelled the permit and forced the alt-right protesters out of the park. That decision led the the widespread fighting because the police had also not set up the standard transit routes for each group to their designated protest area -- along streets both patrolled and blocked off from vehicular traffic.
Now we can only guess at why the police did this. Panic, or incompetence, or a confused chain of command with so many officials present? Only after intensive analysis of the witnesses testimony and the videos (esp the Guard's video from the rooftop) can we say more.
Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 5:56 pmE. of the F. M. w. s., I feel like you can make a straightforward case that the Root article presents a picture of how one side was "innocent" and was attacked by bad "others." That isn't the same as saying that the first person testimony it provides is "lies." You can argue that an overall narrative is misleading and partial, and that a particular first person account plays into that misleading or partial narrative. But moving from this to calling the account itself a lie is also an oversimplified narrative, of the sort that you often zero in on for criticism. So I would suggest – given in particular that you set as your objective to try to avoid slipping into mass-produced narratives that are imperfectly grounded in evidence but easily propagated – that you choose your characterizations with a little more precision.
It's extremely common for eyewitness testimony to reflect a narrative that one side was the good guys and the others attacked them without provocation. This is true – on both sides – even when subsequent evidence shows substantial asymmetry in how tensions flared. It doesn't make those individual accounts baseless, or consciously lying (although of course out and out lying does sometimes occur in eyewitness accounts). It does mean that it can be quite difficult, in particular cases, to evaluate and synthesize eyewitness testimony into a big picture account that is fair and accurate.
Outis Philalithopoulos , August 16, 2017 at 6:34 pmOutis,
(A) "That isn't the same as saying that the first person testimony it provides is "lies."
That's a valid point of wordsmithing. It would be a powerful rebuttal if
(1) I could point to no material factual error. But there is little or no evidence for the Root's claim about police aiding the Right.
(2) I just said it was "a lie" and did not explain in what sense I meant that -- leaving ambiguity in my description. But my sentence was explicit in its description:
Second, how each side lies. "OUR side were innocent angels attacked by THOSE devils." That such nonsense is taken seriously by
(B) "It's extremely common for eyewitness testimony to reflect a narrative "
It's common for people to throw down hot butts and start forest fires. But it's a bad thing. DItto for writing a one-sided article that throws kerosene on a burning conflict.
(C) "It doesn't make those individual accounts baseless, or consciously lying"
Here we have different perspectives. I understand what you are saying, and have no basis to say you are wrong. But I see the situation differently.
* I believe the Founders were right about factionalism as one of the great dangers to the Republic.
* I believe these Weimerica-like street battles between extremists, cheered by masses on Left and Right, make us weak. They make rule by the 1% stronger.
* I believe our love for propaganda makes us weak.(D) " It does mean that it can be quite difficult, in particular cases, to evaluate and synthesize eyewitness testimony into a big picture account that is fair and accurate."
That is exactly the basis of my dislike for the Root article. It does not even try for accuracy, just tribal cheering. It is just propaganda.
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 3:31 pmEditor of the F. M. w. s.,
On (1), I think my explanation on this point still holds. The Root itself (i.e. the article when it is not quoting Long) does not say the police was aiding the "Unite the Right" people – only Long does. It's true that Long's statement, if propagated without context, would spread the idea that the police was literally intervening on behalf of the white nationalists. I argued in one of my responses to your comments that this is clearly not what Long meant. Long actually states clearly that the police did not get involved. However, Long believed the police should have intervened against the white nationalists, and in fact should not have even allowed them to march. From this point of view , he says that the police "were protecting the Nazis."
This is the sort of way of talking that is very easy to imagine in a participant or a bystander. For example, imagine if someone were mugged in broad daylight right in front of the police. Since in this case, we all expect the police to intervene on behalf of the victims, we might say the police were "obviously protecting the muggers." That doesn't mean the police were actually helping to beat anyone up, and it's an imprecise form of speech. But it's an understandable one.
(2) I'm willing to grant that you didn't say in what sense it was a lie and have since clarified the matter. By a strict standard of the sort we mentioned above, what you said was potentially misleading (i.e. it was easy to interpret it in another way). The same might be said of Long's statement about the police protecting the Nazis. In neither case is it impossible to understand, just a reason to try to be more careful.
(B) True, it would be better if eyewitnesses could strive to be very precise in how they report what they see. In practice, eyewitnesses come from all walks of life and involve all sorts of people. We are better off banking on their accounts being partial for the foreseeable future. I think the onus for completeness and fairness is considerably greater on journalists, analysts, and others whose putative role is to provide reliable summaries.
(C) I don't disagree with any of this, except that for "factionalism" I would say "tribalism" – but maybe we mostly mean the same thing.
(D) I think it's fair to criticize news outlets that only provide eyewitness testimony that fits with one particular frame. It doesn't mean that an outlet should never publish an article centered around one person's account – but if it does, it should presumably balance it elsewhere with other information giving a more complete picture.
(E) [not from your reply, but I was curious] As Yves says, the news has mentioned several cases of serious injuries suffered by counterprotesters (not to mention the deaths), and if there were serious injuries suffered by the "Unite the Right" side, I at least haven't run into any reliable accounts of such. Do you know of any?
TheCatSaid , August 16, 2017 at 3:59 pmIt passed fact checking by the New Yorker, which reported basically the same information. And you would have had to have sources who saw that incident, which seems awfully unlikely given how few there were in that photo (as in it seems to have taken place away from the main crowds).
The other part is I disagree with the equivalence. The antifa types (and this occurred with the Black Bloc in Occupy) weren't "our side" in that most of the people who came who were against the white supremacist types aren't pro violence. By contrast, it appears that the smaller group of "Unite the Right" types were heavily armed and they consciously and deliberately used symbols of violence against black people and minorities from the very outset.
So it would be possible for people in the anti-bigotry group to have marched and not seen what the anitfa types were up to, while I don't think you can credibly say anyone on the white supremacist side didn't see all of the intimidating weaponry and violent encounters.
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 4:30 pm"It passed fact checking by the New Yorker" is indeed tempting, isn't it?!
However in addition to Fabius Maximus I've come across additional reports with first-person accounts describing how both sides came prepared to do battle. At this point I'm of the opinion that there was not one "bad side" and other "poor victim" side. I have come across lots of info linking the Neo-Nazi side having connections to the Ukranian "revolutionaries" (funded by CIA among others, thank you very much) and of left-side groups having links to Soros-funded groups. It looks like the whole situation was a confrontation that was set up. I'm not suggesting all participants were part of this, but nonetheless there is enough evidence strewn around that at the minimum one should think twice before accepting any major media spin on the event.Jason Goodman and Crowdsource the Truth on YouTube had lots of videos documenting the neo-Nazi links to Ukrainian groups ("Blood and Soil"), flags in evidence, starting the night before the "big event". IIRC Lee Stranahan had info documenting the links to Soros-controlled organizations.
TheCatSaid , August 16, 2017 at 5:53 pmI disagree with your contention:
1. That violent antifa types were representative of most of the marchers on the left side. You are implying that both sides were raring for a fight. The white supremacists were. Only a minority of the marchers on the left were, and I further question how many would have approved of their tactics. I know from Occupy that pretty much everyone were not at all happy about Black Bloc tactics and regarded them as anarchist interlopers trying to take advantage of Occupy without having the consent of Occupy (Occupy was big on super-democratic processes). Black Lives Matter has consistently rejected violent tactics. I know Lee Camp would reject the antifa types as being part of "our side" or representing his values.
More generally, left-wing protests, particularly anti-globalization protests, have agitators show up who had nothing to do with the organizers of the protest. They are plants to make the protestors look bad. Here, I am sure the antifa types were genuinely motivated. But the bigger point is peaceful leftist marchers often have a violent minority show up that does not represent the approach of the majority. Hence it is not correct at all to say that they are representative of that side.
2. #1 above means it is possible for eyewitnesses on the left side not to have seen antifa provocations and to be truthful in saying and believing that that the fights were instigated by both sides.
3. The police THEMSELVES said the reason they didn't intervene was that the right wing protestors were heavily armed! Who are you kidding here?
4. You are ignoring the message that the white supremacists were sending. They made heavy and deliberate use of symbols of violence against blacks and minorities. The only thing that was missing was KKK robes. They were visibly carrying guns and bludgeons. Bludgeons are illegal in NYC because they are more effective in close combat than a gun. They were not signaling an intent to have a peaceful rally. They were signaling an intent to have a fight and the antifa types were all too happy to pick one.
And please explain the black schoolteacher who was nearly beaten to death? Pray tell how does that fit your theory?
All of the deaths and serious injuries were suffered by members of the leftist side and none by the white supremacists, even though they were much smaller in number. That's because the antifa types weren't using anything that would do more than bruise someone or make them filthy. All I have read is that they threw cans, bottles with urine in them, and I saw one account saying feces. So the implements used by each side were not remotely equivalent, contrary to what you imply.
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 7:12 pmI'm not sure you understood my contention. I didn't say all left-wing side people were out for a fight, but there is evidence that some were and yes these may have been infiltrators as you suggest. Numerous protests are infiltrated by troublemakers.
The fact that one side may indeed have felt more pain than another doesn't affect the point I'm making. What I'm suggesting is to pay attention to the entire "conflict" set up. It's predictable. There's a degree of scripting. It serves many functions–to make people insecure, feel convinced that others are out to get them (on either side), to feel that conflict is inevitable, to want the police/military to take a more active role.
It's not that any of these points necessarily lack merit on their own (e.g., in some situations law enforcement should play a constructive role), but rather that this is one tiny event within a larger picture of social engineering that has been taking place over an extended period of time (decades). Foment conflict artificially (e.g. CIA-funded insurrections such as Ukraine and many countries in South/Central America and currently Venezuela; create or increase a feeling of insecurity; get the people to give up rights in order to have "security" and "protection"; increase military/law enforcement budgets and sales to interested parties.
Focusing only on a single situation (xxx group was hurt "more" in yyy situation/event) can lead one to overlook the larger societal pattern, by not recognizing that there was manipulation occurring that affects both sides.
TheCatSaid , August 17, 2017 at 1:38 amThis is the first time I have had the software do this. I was replying to the editor of Fabius Maximus' comment and it wound up misplaced. It might be that it didn't go through the first time and what I did on the retry wound up relocating it.
As to the bigger issue, you are ignoring my contention that the two "sides" were equally cohesive. If you go to a soccer game, and hooligans who favor your team beat up on fans of the other side, are you responsible for their actions merely by virtue of having gone to the game to cheer on your team? That seems to be the basis of your and the editor of FM's comment. In fact, Black Lives Matter, which is opposed to violence, was represented there and I am highly confident other marchers opposed to the white supremacists were unarmed and has not interest in perpetrating or participating in violence.
By contrast, the organizers of Unite the Right called on the participants to come armed and not only did they come "armed," they brought implements that are designed to maim and kill. If their aims were defensive, to preserve their right to make a public statement, pepper spray would have sufficed. How can you depict that as equivalent?
Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 9:04 pmI didn't say anything at all about blaming one side or another. To the contrary, I suggested it was more important to look at the overall pattern of such conflicts and the overall societal impact (division! fear! giving up rights! agreeing to surveillance! increased law enforcement/military power and spending!).
Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 4:11 pmBoy, that Soros dude sure gets around. He is responsible for more mischief than the Kochs, Russian oligarchs, and Peter Thiel put together.
I apologize, but when people start talking about Soros, I sort of put them in the same category as UFO abductees and Antivaxers.
Outis Philalithopoulos , August 16, 2017 at 5:16 pmYves,
First, the assertion about the police favoring the Alt-Right appears baseless. Both sides report -- supported by videos -- that the police watched everybody fighting. Where are the accounts of the police intervening on just one side? The New Yorker fact checkers missed that.
Second, let's rewind to see what I said -- The Root article an example of "how each side lies. 'OUR side were innocent angels attacked by THOSE devils.'" The Root's article clearly paints that kind of incorrect picture due to its misrepresentations and omissions. See my reply to Vatch above for details.
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 7:20 pmThe Root article is at all times reporting the perspective of a single person, the 23-year-old Corey Long. Even when the article is not directly quoting Long, it is plainly summarizing his testimony.
In my opinion, you overstated your case by terming the Root article "lies." As you know, it's very common for eyewitness testimony to diverge dramatically. In the midst of big, chaotic situations, each particular person sees only a part of what is going on. They can be entirely sincere and the picture that they paint might still be a partial one.
Similarly, if you read what Long actually said, he agrees that the police "basically stood in their line and looked at the chaos." Long felt that the police should have intervened actively against "the Nazis," and relative to this baseline , interprets the police of having favored the white nationalists. He makes this quite clear when he says that a rapper was earlier not allowed to march and so why were white supremacists allowed to?
I don't see any evidence for Long lying in the article. When the article, near the end, says "we are in a Trump presidency, this is the world we live in," this is editorializing – maybe something Long said at one point, maybe something the article put in his mouth. But it still isn't distorted testimony about the events on the ground.
It might muddy the waters less if you stick to criticizing MSM accounts that are straightforwardly presenting themselves as unbiased general accounts of what happened.
Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 7:28 pmYou have shifted the grounds of your argument. You made a sweeping attack against The Roots article: "These are lies."
Despite Outis having patiently picked apart your argument, you in fact have not engaged with him but are broken recording. Your "let's rewind" is effectively an admission that you are not about to acknowledge what Outis described, that The Root article is a first person account, and you have not provided one iota of evidence to suggest that Long misrepresented what he saw. You are therefore unable to support your original claim and are thus trying to shout Outis down.
This is a violation of our site's written Policies. We don't make exceptions for anyone. You either need to engage with him in a good faith manner or stand down.
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 7:51 pmYves,
OK. I should not have said "lies" and just said the remaining text. Consider this an apology.
I did not claim that the root misreported what he saw, but that the article misrepresented what happened at the article. If anyone believed that is what I said, then I apologize for that too.
It's been an interesting discussion. I'm don't believe anyone has engaged with what I said -- but everybody has their own perspective on these things.
I'm signing off. Good-bye.
Moocao , August 16, 2017 at 6:20 amThank you for that. I was of two minds about posting the Lee Camp video because this horrible affair has gotten people very upset, we only have pieces of what happened, and many people are drawing inferences that go beyond the information. I think we all agree strongly with one of your big points, that this was a massive failure on the part of the police.
m , August 20, 2017 at 2:43 amI recommend the BLS class from the American Heart Association. It is the class that most nurses and doctors use for their training.
Sound of the Suburbs , August 16, 2017 at 8:00 amcause AHA certification lasts for 2 yrs not 1yr.
Charles Yaker , August 16, 2017 at 8:14 amThe history of the neo-liberal revolution is starting to come clear.
James Buchanan first became motivated by the US Government insisting that segregation between white and black children should end. He saw private schools as a way of maintaining this segregation outside the control of Government.
He started in Virginia, near Charlottesville, where racism festered not far below the surface and they still resented the Northern Government telling them what to do; removing the freedom of the wealthy to do what they liked and taxing them to look after others.
The Government shouldn't have the power to end school segregation in Virginia.
The beginnings of neo-liberalism / economic liberalism.
It is ironic the new liberals should now be so aghast at the goings on in a region where their own beliefs first started to take shape.
"Democracy in Chains" Nancy Maclean
How a right wing ideology was developed in the US to roll back the "New Deal" and give economic freedom back to the wealthy to do pretty much as they pleased.
Damson , August 16, 2017 at 8:23 amAmerica Red Cross has it all
http://www.redcross.org/take-a-class/cpr?gclid=CKHk0c7c29UCFdNWDQodY_8PEw
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 8:37 amFields was a diagnosed schizophrenic, who had been discharged from military training) :unsuitable ' – the standard euphemism for psychiatric).
He had been on anti – psychotics, though whether still on them at time of attack is unknown.
The car he was driving had been hit by someone with a bat, just before he drove into the woman blocking the street, and subsequently the crowd.
So it looks like a type of 'Road rage' episode, made worse due to driver's mental instability, violent context, aggravating factors.
To characterise it as a 'terror attack' is in my view misleading.
'Terrifying' for sure, but 'terror' implies a premeditation and tactical goals.
Words matter – never more so than in this Orwellian era.
Damson , August 16, 2017 at 9:10 amOur Brian C and Sluggeaux, a former state prosecutor, disagree. He disabled the airbag. An airbag deploying 1. could have injured him and 2. would have made it impossible to drive the car, as in exit. This is a strong tell that he planned to use the car as a weapon and was primed to find an excuse.
Both the way he drove into the crowd (hands steady on the wheel and well positioned when he started( and his impressive exit weren't consistent with road rage.
Michael Fiorillo , August 16, 2017 at 10:18 amHe was mentally unstable, a diagnosed schizophrenic.
His intention to kill is therefore problematic – insanity has always been a defence against intent.
He could have flipped anytime, anywhere.
Hence the 'Road rage' comparison.Not to diminish the victims experience, just pointing out the dangers of imputing political /ideological rationales to people with mental illness.
Damson , August 16, 2017 at 10:39 amYou fail to mention his disabling of the airbag; was that also part of his "insanity?"
nowhere , August 16, 2017 at 1:50 pmI wouldn't know.
Perhaps his psychiatrist could answer your very specific question?
If you think this is evidence of a planned attack, you could be right.
But mentally unstable people are perfectly capable of a greater or lesser degree of 'planning' a murder – even if it means only a walk to the woodshed to pick up an axe.
Arguably, only the 'crime passionel' is free from any prior decision – making.
So I still maintain my original point – that the question of culpability is complex when the perpetrator is known to be mentally unstable, and, in this case, professionally diagnosed.
As is the issue of motivation.
That means you cannot characterise his crime as a 'terror attack', as that assumes he was fully compos mentis, using the car in the same way as, for example, the takfiri attack in Cannes earlier this year.
Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 2:55 pmWhy?
Since this seems to be conjecture, what if the driver of the attack was not fully compos mentis and he was used and manipulated by a group of disaffected radicals?
Why do white men seem to get the pass (with Dylan Roof, also) that they are mentally unstable and therefore not guilty of acts of terror? Maybe if the jihadists had access to psychological screening we would find that they are unstable, possibly due to decades of war and economic privation.
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 3:36 pmYou seem to be quibbling over irrelevancies here. How many members of many terrorist groups might be diagnosed by the (questionable) standards of the brain babblers? We are all "insane" according to one section or other. So maybe nobody is to "blame' for anything?
To claim he was not motivated by politics seems insane in itself, given his history of interest in far right politics and racist ideologies.
David , August 16, 2017 at 10:22 amThere is a specific legal definition of insanity in murder cases, which is not understanding the difference between right and wrong. The fact that he disabled the airbag to facilitate a speedy exit and attempted to make one says he knew full well.
Enquiring Mind , August 16, 2017 at 10:40 amThere is more here than merely a guy who was "disturbed".
Driving in reverse – totally straight for extended period under duress is quite a feat. This guy was not an amateur. He was a Pro! Ask any of the posters here, if they can do that – no one I have asked said they could.
The Cops management of the event was deliberate. This was a permitted event so the authorities knew what the response would be, there should be no doubt about it. Yet they put the two groups together on a narrow street.
The typical establishment mime is to say the cops made a mistake and the guy was crazy. Always giving the benefit of the doubt to the committed narrative. Makes no sense.
New narrative play book to substitute for the dying Russia, Russia, Russia?
Damson , August 16, 2017 at 10:45 amestablishment mime
an interesting observation!
SubjectivObject , August 16, 2017 at 12:26 pmYou can verify the claim yourself online.
He was diagnosed with schizophrenia and hadbeen discharged from military training – that doesn't sound like 'whitewash 'to me.
True, it could be' fake news ', so it's a question of personal choice to accept it or not.
HotFlash , August 16, 2017 at 8:39 pmIt is relevant whether he had occasion in the past to back up at speed. If so, he would quickly learn how sensitive steering with the now rear wheels is. The trick is to brace one arm on the door (or door-leg-arm) and make the finest of steering adjustments using the braced fingers; start relative slow, establish direction, and then speed up. Young bodies with coordination talent can easily do this.
David , August 16, 2017 at 8:51 pmDriving backwards is common in Demolition Derby s, very popular in Ohio and throughout the midwest at country fairs and such.
Lambert Strether , August 17, 2017 at 12:04 amso its is easy is your promote – at high speed on a narrow street with people chasing you – any young guy can do that – nerves of steel for any amateur who is emotionally diagnosed with ??? Baloney
it gets worse:
"the discovery of a craigslist ad posted last Monday, almost a full week before the Charlottesville protests, is raising new questions over whether paid protesters were sourced by a Los Angeles based "public relations firm specializing in innovative events" to serve as agitators in counterprotests.
The ad was posted by a company called "Crowds on Demand" and offered $25 per hour to "actors and photographers" to participate in events in the "Charlotte, NC area." While the ad didn't explicitly define a role to be filled by its crowd of "actors and photographers" it did ask applicants to comment on whether they were "ok with participating in peaceful protests." Here is the text from the ad:
Actors and Photographers Wanted in Charlotte
Crowds on Demand, a Los Angeles-based Public Relations firm specializing in innovative events, is looking for enthusiastic actors and photographers in the Charlotte, NC area to participate in our events. Our events include everything from rallies to protests to corporate PR stunts to celebrity scenes. The biggest qualification is enthusiasm, a "can-do" spirit. Pay will vary by event but typically is $25+ per hour plus reimbursements for gas/parking/Uber/public transit."relstprof , August 17, 2017 at 12:48 amOh, a CraigsList ad. Dear Lord.
flora , August 16, 2017 at 5:13 pmWhat a magnanimous public relations firm, offering gas reimbursements for hires to drive 5 hours from Charlotte, NC to Charlottesville, VA.
Uber prices, no less!
David , August 16, 2017 at 8:48 pmaside:
"New narrative play book to substitute for the dying Russia, Russia, Russia?"This morning's NYTimes throws a curveball. This morning they report that a here-to-for unknown "witness" to the "hacking" has been found. Someone from Ukraine. (Ignores technical issues about the data download time-stamps and document meta-data).
" a fearful man who the Ukrainian police said turned himself in early this year, and has now become a witness for the F.B.I."Miracle , August 16, 2017 at 8:25 amcheck out Binney and the other former CIA / NSA employees analysis – they can prove not a hack with time stamps and ESP's
David , August 16, 2017 at 10:17 amConsidering the amount of armament the nazi militia brought plus Charlottesville's knowledge of caches of more weapons hidden – it's a miracle 3 souls were lost & not dozens.
There was over 1,000 law enforcement members there.
I fear, as I'm sure others do as well, the odds of of dozens dead happening Somewhere USA are high thanks to the ignorant facilitator in chief.
Eureka Springs , August 16, 2017 at 10:43 amThe helicopter crash is Trump's fault as well? How so?
Damson , August 16, 2017 at 10:51 amI for one am thankful police didn't get into the fray sooner. Police always make things worse. Although I'm curious about reports saying they were waiting on orders to do so which never happened. Waiting on orders from whom? Who decided to hold back our police state, which so rarely happens?
And never ever underestimate the possibility of agents provocateurs being all or part of this.
Isn't it funny how protests with armed citizens cause police to stay out of it.
Adar , August 16, 2017 at 3:07 pmThere were provocateurs in action there – on both 'sides'. Pepper spray being the preferred weapon.
Not for the first time I get the impression of theatre.
And somewhere, the backers of both 'sides' are sharing a mutually – congratulatory drink.
Editor of the Fabius Maximus website , August 16, 2017 at 7:20 pmAccording to an article in The Guardian, the armed militia members present (from NY and PA) intended to help keep the protesters separated, asked the police for permission to attend, and vociferously deny being Nazis in any way. Seems they are just garden variety survivalists preparing for the day society collapses. That they seemed better armed than the authorities is a different matter.
mk , August 16, 2017 at 8:27 amAdar,
Thank you for mentioning that. Here's the article: " Militia leaders who descended on Charlottesville condemn 'rightwing lunatics '" in The Guardian, 15 August. The money paragraph:
"The men in charge of the 32 militia members who came to Charlottesville from six states to form a unit with the mission of "defending free speech" were Christian Yingling, the commanding officer of the Pennsylvania Light Foot Militia
"We spoke to the Charlottesville police department beforehand and offered to come down there and help with security," Yingling told the Guardian. "They said: 'We cannot invite you in an official capacity, but you are welcome to attend,' and they gave us an escort into the event," he added.
Yingling said he had been asked to bring a team to Charlottesville by a local militia, the Virginia Minutemen Militia, to reinforce their numbers, and to be in charge on the day.
But Yingling said the original request for a militia force to attend the event had come from the organizers of the white nationalist rally, who wanted them to act as security.
The militiamen had said: "No, we will not come and defend just you," Yingling recalled. "It's important for us to say we were there in a neutral stance."Arizona Slim , August 16, 2017 at 8:50 amGreat place for training for people in Los Angeles area:
http://www.cert-la.com/
What is CERT?If a major earthquake (or any disaster) hits, do you
have enough supplies for a minimum of 72 hours up to an entire month for all family members, including pets?
know how to turn off the gas?
know how to safely turn off the power?
know how to apply first aid?
have enough water for all of your family and your pets?
have provisions for living outside your home for a length of time if the structure is compromised?
It is important to know, if a major disaster occurs, the LAFD, paramedics, police WILL NOT COME! They will be deployed FIRST to major incidents such as collapsed buildings. That is why you constantly hear You MUST be prepared to take care of yourself. In the CERT course they say "The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number of People." When you are trained, you are far more equipped to deal with your circumstances without needing aid from outside sources.CERT members are trained in basic disaster response skills such as fire safety, light search and rescue, team organization and disaster medical operations. You will learn how to prepare for emergencies, what supplies you should NOW have in your house, how much food, how much water but most importantly, how to protect your family in an emergency!
Sign-up for the FREE Training
link to list of training events:
https://www.eventbrite.com/o/lafd-cert-program-7803155391craazyman , August 16, 2017 at 8:29 amThanks for the CERT shout out. I have taken that training.
Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 2:58 pmHow could you call the guys in "Deliverance" hicks? Especially the banjo player and the dude pumping gas in overalls. The white collar guy with the glasses was no match for the banjo player on the porch. He was befuddled and he fumbled like an amateur. I guess they can't put up a statue of William Faulkner since not too many people have read his books. Maybe a statue of Janis Joplin who was from Texas and maybe Buddy Holly. I think Buddy Holly actually has a statue someplace. And Mississpi Muddy Waters too. And the guitar player to end all guitar players, the famous Robert Johnson from Mississippi. I'm not sure if he has a statue. He might! I'm not sure. But these could be southerners you could make statues of. How about Ted Turner?? We'd have to think about that one. As long as he's alive he's his own statue. That's the way a man should be.
No real southern hick would go to one of these race rallies -- it takes waaay to much effort, they have to work the Wal-Mart shift, they're too overweight, and it gets in the way of fishing. All those white guys are northerners, probably from the mid-west even.
That pic says it all. Jousting as a form of self-expressionary theater. Look at the laid back lazy gestures by both actors. What truly amazes me is this -- if it hadn't been for a mentally ill psycho behind the wheel of a car and a helicopter accident almost nobody would have been seriously hurt. That really is incredible, given all the guns and presumably ammo. I'm not sure if the armed individuals there just carried guns and no ammo but I doubt it. I find that really really amazing -- and that photo captures the underlying energetic structure of the whole phenomenon quite aptly.
This is a form of theater of the kind suggested by the great wacko himself -- Antonin Artaud. Who was a French guy. I suspect it will stay that way (I could be wrong, but I don't think so.) To grasp and grapple with the phenomenon at hand requires a conceptual vocabulary that I have yet to see in the media coverage and "I was there" narratives.
Arizona Slim , August 16, 2017 at 3:39 pmAll those guns cost money. Trips to the protest cost money.
Just like the false meme that Trump was elected by the working class. Nope. It was the gated community suburban megachurch religious nuts who elected him. Affluent small town and suburban nabobs
David Miller , August 16, 2017 at 9:00 amHigh-quality guns and good ammo cost serious money. This, in a nutshell, is why Yours Truly had to give up the shooting sports. I could no longer afford the cost of participation.
rc , August 16, 2017 at 10:27 amLeaving aside all other issues I always thought: Confederate memorials/statues commemorate actual treason and people who tried to dismember the country. Solely for the purpose of keeping other human beings as slaves. Thus zero sympathy from me to the "Heritage not Hate" crowd.
I am, however, unsympathetic to "applies 21st century standards of PC virtue-signalling to centuries-old figures" types, as they will inevitably be the authoritarian leftists that are as distasteful to me as the Confederafluffers.
Pretty well impossible to deal with the imbeciles who immediately jump to "George Washington owned slaves so 100% of everything about him must be rubbished." Unproductive on every level and outright destructive on most of them.
Vatch , August 16, 2017 at 10:46 amHistorically, those officers were taught that it was constitutional to secede from the Union. Constitutional law classes at West Point taught constitutional secession so when many of the southern states seceded those officers thought that these States were being denied what was their constitutional right. They lost the war so they were wrong. Most of these men's primary reason for fighting was for honor. Sadly, they were defending slavery as an institution.
DJG , August 16, 2017 at 1:09 pmWhich article and section of the US Constitution provides justification for secession or the proper procedure for seceding?
River , August 16, 2017 at 5:42 pmThanks, Vatch. Sheesh.
Vatch , August 16, 2017 at 11:36 pmNot the US Constitution but from the Declaration " But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security ."
Good enough if you want a Casus belli bad enough.
Fiery Hunt , August 17, 2017 at 12:40 amI think the Declaration of Independence seems more like a justification for slave revolts than for the secessions of 1861. The slaves experienced absolute despotism.
todde , August 17, 2017 at 8:10 pmCareful, Vatch.
Justifying one interpretation and denying the other smacks of bias.My problem is it's just so damned difficult to find my own response to being a hypothetical Southern farmer in 1860, without slaves, but facing a Northern pressure that puts my family and living at risk. I'm a let's say..Virginian. Neighbors (State) over strangers (Nation)? Practical over principle? What principle?
I guess my point is the Declaration of Independence isn't so much about economic models (although THAT is there) as it is about the ideals of freedom from political domination.
And in that interpretation, both slave revolts and the War for Succession are totally valid.
Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 3:01 pmWell, the Northern states violated the Constitution when they (rightfully so) didn't return fugitive slaves back to the South.
Article 4, Section 2: No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
We have the fugitive slave law passed by congress, the dread scott decision passed by the Supreme Court and a slew of other federal policies that (irony) the Northern states nullified.
I wonder when we Americanized the word Labor?
So if the North was in violation of the Constitution, at what point do you have the right to succeed? I don't know to be honest.
justanotherprogressive , August 17, 2017 at 12:22 amI think this is being far too kind. Most officers were from the landowning class, and the rationale for the secession was very clearly to preserve slavery. Saint Lee was not a kind master, he did little to stop the lynching and capturing or Northern freemen when his army invaded the north, nor did he actively oppose the rise of the neo-confederate terror groups during the postwar era.
Sometimes both siderism is wrong.
davidly , August 16, 2017 at 9:16 amI'd like to see a link or something that states (or even implies) that instructors at a facility for training officers for the US Military would ever say that it was "constitutional to secede" .sounds a bit treasonous to me ..
davidly , August 16, 2017 at 9:24 amRe. statues: My first reaction is that it is easy to predict the mindset of someone quick to defend Confederate symbolism. On the other hand it seems wrongfooted to spend energy trying to expunge all of it from our public spaces. I nevertheless cannot help but find the en masse demonstration in favor of the statue to be super predominantly white supremacist in nature. I do not come to this uninformed. As a middle American born white male, I have been privy in my life to the kinds of things white people say to other white people, who they either assume are like them, or simply don't care. As a one-term military enlistee, I found a similar saturation of racial bigotry in those ranks. It had already been abundantly clear to me from my upbringing that those who tend toward the police force likewise harbor racial animosity and wilful ignorance of the history that would inform the reasons behind some of the superficial observations made by those who don't bother to get to know black or brown people if they can avoid it.
In short, the military and police forces have a white supremacy problem, so institutionalized, it would explain how it is that even minority officers engage in brutal tactics against "their own". I hasten to add to your bit about Nixon's war on drugs the fact that someone in the Reagan/Bush realm also knowingly created the crack epidemic in South Central Los Angeles, something we now know is fact, thanks to the late Gary Webb. The culture that grew out of that era is paradigm shifting.
So whenever we are tempted to say that law enforcement failed in such situations, we should quickly reassess and remind ourselves of the proverbial "feature not a flaw". The authoritarian impulse in America has its own dynamic, but even here in Berlin, where there are plenty of ultra-right demonstrations, none of which exist without a counter demo that includes an antifa presence, the police don't fail as demonstrably, but it's pretty clear where their sympathies lie. The first such demo I attended was where I first heard the taunt out of the ranks of the right: "Sie schützen uns! Sie schützen uns!" (They [the police] 're protecting us! They're protecting us!") And they were in no way implying this meant they needed protection from the counter demonstrators; it was a taunt that clearly meant that the cops were on their side
The Rev Kev , August 16, 2017 at 9:34 amOne more thing: Trump has shown an ability to selectively and tactically tell truths otherwise unspoken in the political sphere. His comment on Washington and Jefferson memorials is totally legit. But it's couched in the rest of his rhetoric, which is utterly bullsh**.
Lynne , August 16, 2017 at 12:06 pmI fear that I may have to make issue with Yves's characterization of statues as fetishism. Do statues contain an element of ancestor-worship? Maybe likely. Are most of them poorly designed and thought out? Definitely. In any case in our culture, it is usually the leaders that get the statues, not the engineers and scientists who actually got it all done. But remember that they are actually symbols and people live by symbols and incorporate them into their lives. The pert Manhatten woman who totes a Gucci handbag and the San Fransisco hipster who takes pride in his artisanal cheese may look dissimilar but they are both using symbology to establish their identities. To threaten people's symbols is to threaten their identity and people will resist that to the hilt. That is why the resistance to the removal of those statues.
I think that we are going to have to go back to the old stick-and-stones attitude. That is, if you come to me and say that you see a statue in another state that causes bad feelings in you and makes you feel angry or that you find it wrong that the candidate that you voted for did not win, I would say build a bridge and get over it. But if you come to me and say that people are trying to restrict your voting rights, the courts charge you constantly so that that can fill their coffers with your fines, your churches are burnt and so on then brother, that is something that is actually worth fighting against. This is real damage versus emotional damage and I think may be the only workable way to go.
One last thing that came to mind. There were all sorts of rat-bag groups in Charlottesville and I am wondering just where the hell they came from. But then a disturbing thought occurred to me. Could it be that the identity politics that has been used for the past couple of decades in America for political gain has led to the unintentional formation of these sub-groupings? The politicians may have played it too clever by half in their angling for power and this may be the result. Movements like this from the left and the right do not come about spontaneously but must have a lineage somewhere. The only one that I recognize that has a lineage is the KKK but they just look ridiculous.PKMKII , August 16, 2017 at 9:38 amWhat makes you think the sub-groupings are unintentional? It's a classic divide and conquer strategy. Without it, after all, the great unwashed might have noticed that tea party and occupy sympathizer had more in common with each other than with the establishment, and started talking to each other instead of heaping ridicule on the other.
Yves Smith Post author , August 16, 2017 at 10:31 pmI know we're not big on smartphones around here, and it should be treated as a supplement rather than a replacement for training, but there is a Resucitate! app that gives a guide to assisting someone in a CPR, AED, or choking situation.
EoH , August 16, 2017 at 9:53 amNo, just because I don't use them is completely independent of what is useful advice for the overwhelming majority of readers who do. Thanks a lot!
Carolinian , August 16, 2017 at 10:30 amJosh Marshall, a historian by training, has a nice piece about this over at TPM. In brief, the elevation of the generals from the South after the War of Northern Aggression was one of the pacts that formed the post-reconstruction South. It whitewashed, hrm, their personal treason and allowed the South to rewrite its history, exonerating its leadership. It gave the planter class icons around which to form a revised culture, one that reconstituted slavery in all but name. Jim Crow lasted a hundred years; the culture that built it survives its demise.
Jim Crow kept a reconstituted planter class and its courtiers in power, It built on earlier culture and characterized former slaves as an extravagant threat, sexually, economically, politically. A variation on the British empire's divide and conquer. African Americans became the focus of poor whites angst rather than the southern elite. That, too, survives Jim Crow. It's part of the white supremacy that informs Trump.
The Charlottesville driver/killer, for example, is a minimum wage 20 year-old outcast, rejected by the US Army, and apparently with untreated mental health problems. (Not that he – or anyone similarly situated – would have had access to health care.) He's a textbook example of one personality type for whom white supremacy and the victimhood and promises of neonazism hold the most attraction.
Arizona Slim , August 16, 2017 at 3:44 pmWithout a doubt the southern aristocracy fought the war over slavery but what doesn't get mentioned as often is that the north, by and large, fought the war over union, not slavery. As for "treason," this was not a term that got bandied about so much back when people were closer to a Revolutionary War that was also called treason. Gore Vidal for one said that the south had a right to secede and perhaps the US would have been better off if they had done so. The premise of Vidal's book Lincoln was that Lincoln suffered under the great moral weight of almost single handedly keeping the Union together at the cost of 500,000 lives.
Of course few southerners now (certainly speaking for myself!) think the south would have been better off if they had won. An enduring south is the be the premise of an upcoming HBO series by the Game of Thrones creators–a very bad idea, especially in light of recent events.
marym , August 16, 2017 at 10:09 amHe sounds a lot like Jared Lee Loughner, who was the killer of six people at then-Representative Gabrielle Giffords' Congress on Your Corner event. The guy needed help, didn't get it, and the rest, they say, is history.
The Rev Kev , August 16, 2017 at 10:54 amApologies if this has been posted before, but here's a graph of when monuments were built.
https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/whoseheritage-timeline150_years_of_iconography.jpg
Thank you for this post and for all the links and commentary today and yesterday.
rc , August 16, 2017 at 10:14 amInteresting graph that. Only comment is that that second blimp in the 1960s was only marked down as the era of the civil rights movement. What should be noted is that it was also the centennial of the civil war so you would expect more memorials to be dedicated then.
davidly , August 16, 2017 at 2:10 pmThis was murder not 'terrorism'.
By propagating this word you are playing into the hands of the security establishment who want to turn the tools of war against the American people. Terrorism is a tactic used by smaller, less powerful groups to effect a response in what is generally a war.
By falling into the trap of misusing this word people are setting trap for themselves when law enforcement is given blanket authority to violate civil liberties.
Damson , August 16, 2017 at 5:47 pmI agree. And it's good you post that and it bears repeating, perhaps ad naseum. I doubt most people clamoring for equal inclusion in the terminology have given it any consideration.
hemeantwell , August 16, 2017 at 10:55 amDitto.
Terror is a violent political tactic conducted in full awareness and as part of the terrorists arsenal to reach specific goals.
State-sponsored terror is the real scourge of our times. Where's the outrage? Or is the killing of countless Brown people only 'racist' on US soil?
As Fields only known political affiliation was his registration as a Republican, we would have the to logically designate that party a terrorist organisation, if he is categorised as a terrorist.
While many would agree with that (Iraq) it is hardly practical, given the Democratic Party's equal enthusiasm for state – sponsored terror (just look at who is supplying arms to the numerous takfiris in Syria,or the destruction of Libya.)
So branding Fields a terrorist instead of a mentally disturbed killer opens up a real can of worms.
Are we to also allege 'religious motivation' for the 'God/Satan – told – me – to – kill' contingent too?
Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 3:04 pmif you'd had black protestors show up similarly attired and armed, you can bet you'd have seen mass head-breaking and arrests
If the question of fascism is at all relevant here, it's not in the mouthing of phrases and the medieval accoutrements of the neo-fascists. It's in the inaction of the police. Mcauliffe's recourse to saying the cops were outgunned to explain why the police didn't stop the neo-fascists, his hesitation to say this was a profound screwup, is a replay of the history of fascism in Germany and Italy. Tolerance and support from the cops were essential in its success. Demonstrators should be going after Mcauliffe, not Robert E Lee. The next move on the part of the neos, if they're smart, will be to see how much state support they can get if they more tightly focus on the left. Support/tolerance on the part of the state should be attacked in whatever form it takes, from Trump on down.
JTFaraday , August 16, 2017 at 4:49 pmExcellent points!
JTFaraday , August 16, 2017 at 5:00 pmAgree. The inaction of the police, the "both sider-ism" of Trump and the Trumpertantrums which normalizes white supremacist extremism on all of the right, and in its use by libertarians and neoliberals to advance the cause of the rich because that's the way to oppose the liberals, the left, and socialist antifa.
I can't pull a link right now but recommend the Vice documentary on Charlottesville. Bit chilling.
JTFaraday , August 16, 2017 at 5:08 pmAlso, in the way that young men are being radicalized & recruited on the web.
Brian , August 16, 2017 at 11:01 amAnd honestly, it's not just the excluded who are being radicalized, as the MRA phenomenon shows, the openly superior attitudes of silicon valley tech bros, etc.
Outis Philalithopoulos , August 16, 2017 at 11:05 amYves, the point you make about the perceived lack of greased tracks from Southern universities to the Acela corridor's hall's of power got me thinking about C. Wright Mills and where else the power elite create leverage points
NOTE: This is a reprint of a journal article with the following citation:
Domhoff, G. William. 2006. "Mills's The Power Elite 50 Years Later." Contemporary Sociology 35:547-550.[ ]
Brian , August 16, 2017 at 11:09 amBrian, can you post a link rather than pasting in the text of the article?
Jeremy Grimm , August 16, 2017 at 5:11 pmApologies, from the professor's website here: http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/theory/mills_review_2006.html
EoH , August 16, 2017 at 6:09 pmThank you for pointing to Domhoff's site. I too find his books and writings insightful.
Regarding C. Wright Mills -- the crafting of his demise is a scary reminder of the ways our state can undo those who speak against it.
Rhondda , August 16, 2017 at 12:04 pmMills's career (and that of Sloane Coffin at Yale) certainly engendered a response of "Never again" among the Ivy League and its patrons. The likes of Alfred McCoy at Wisconsin and G. William Domhoff at UCSC were confined to the state ivies. Later nonconformist critics of the establishment were lucky to be hired at mid-rank state schools. It was essential to deprive them of formal inclusion among the nation's intellectual elite. Stanford, under its longtime patron, arch-conservative Herbert Hoover was especially vigilant in excluding nonconformists. UC San Diego spent a long time in purgatory for hiring Herbert Marcuse.
Among many other achievements, Mills made a mockery of the McCarthy era demand for conformity and bland acceptance of the status quo.
Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 3:05 pmI found Mark Lilla's criticism of identity politics to be very worthwhile.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/mark-lilla-vs-identity-politics/It saddens me that the shrill media echo chamber (including that ridiculous Jacobin article) has me -- a lifelong 'liberal' -- reading TAC.
I reject identity politics. I am an American citizen. But I have no political home. I had hopes for the DSA, but now I see they were a proud part and parcel of the thuggery in Charlottesville.
Yes, I have a very tight tinfoil hat but I smell the fire and brimstone of Soros, provocations and color revolutions. "Heightening the differences" is I believe what this violent street theater was intended to do.
Rhondda , August 16, 2017 at 3:10 pmTAC is my go to source for foreign policy analysis. Daniel Larison is amazing, no matter what your purported left or right status.
Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 3:36 pmYes, they do have really good foreign policy analysis. Reality-based. But you have to wade through quite a bit of Christian-values-under-attack and Culture War yaya to get there. IMHO.
Damson , August 16, 2017 at 10:49 pmI only have Daniel bookmarked, and my browser takes me right to his exposes of the Peace Prize President's support of the horrors in Yemen, the bipartisan war crime disaster which is Syria, and the insanities of Trump's ignorant babbles. :)
TheCatSaid , August 17, 2017 at 1:53 amActually, the fire and brimstone could be coming from more institutional direction :
The video of Fields attack broadcast on corporate media was mainly the one filmed by one Brennan Gilmore.
The only description I found in an MSM report said he was a Charlotte resident, involved in start – ups, and had been present with friends at the scene.
He had tweeted extensively, characterising the incident as a :terrorist attack ' by' Nazis '.
He also claims that Nazis are running the White House.
Definitely not a' neutral' observer.
Now turns out he is a former State Dept employee, whose work smacks not a little of CIA regime – changing.
This is definitely looking more and more like a psyops.
But what's the goal?
Damson , August 17, 2017 at 5:28 am"This is definitely looking more and more like a psyops.
But what's the goal?"
I think the goals are clear. (Just look at the effects.)
What's less clear to me is what people/groups are orchestrating this. The aftermath–creating division and opinion regarding even the facts of what happened–is part of the goal. Look at this website and the data being generated by commenters. Who defends themself? Who attacks? Who retreats? What is the nature of the language used?
Quinn Michaels has analyzed that stirring things up in this way provides opportunities for Smart AI to create more data regarding how individuals and groups respond emotionally, thus further enabling future manipulation of society with even greater precision. Michaels' extensive analysis of advanced bot networks is chilling. But even so he sees beneficial opportunities. It's pretty intriguing, these games and deliberate disruption. His YouTube discussions (many of which include extensive screenshots to document what he has observed) are interesting stuff.
Estragon77 , August 16, 2017 at 1:29 pmThanks for the info – I can well believe that is a motive for some.
But I am focusing more on the political aims of what is looking more and more like an orchestrated event.
Trump's condemnation of both 'sides' was greeted with predictable outrage from much of the MSM.
Yet having watched an hour long video filmed by a non – partisan, who positioned himself between the :warring parties, it is clear he is correct : the police were ordered to stand down while both sides – one of which did not have a permit for a rally – went at it hammer and tongs.
That casualties were greater for one 'side'(though I take such reports with a large dose of salt given media disdain for facts, including' WMD: NYT) does not reduce culpability.
Interesting that Richard Spencer (the humanities graduate from an upper middle class background who supposedly represents the grievances of much of the Deplorable class – really?) was in Hungary months ago. Meeting with the 'far right' there. He sure gets around.
With no visible means of support, I can only assume he's being bankrolled by some very shy folk .Hungary also happens to be run by Soros nemesis, Victor Orban.
A little digging might turn some 'unexpected' connections.
'Unexpected 'to those who are unfamiliar with events in the Ukraine that is.
Robert E. Lee , August 16, 2017 at 1:37 pmWilderness First Responder (WFR) training is great you get everything you would in the above-mentioned Red Cross courses but with a wilderness overlay, the upshot being there is a focus on helping injured people for a longer period of time than just waiting for an ambulance. So longer term patient stabilization, splint making, assessment, etc. Strikes me as useful in a situation where professional medical help is not going to be immediately available for whatever reason. The Wilderness Medical Institute (WMI) runs courses all across the country but there are other outfits that teach the course as well.
nowhere , August 16, 2017 at 2:06 pmI have a unique perspective of sorts on this as I used to be "Robert E. Lee" on the Radio. Other than being kidded about the name, I never, ever saw any push back or any negativity from anyone. And my show was top-rated. Of course this was back in the 70's and things change. But seems to me some of these people protesting over confederate statues are missing the point and should read a book on the Civil war, which was mostly about oppression from the Northern states and really not that much about slavery.
Jeremy Grimm , August 16, 2017 at 4:41 pmThere are plenty of books that completely invalidate "the Civil war, which was mostly about oppression from the Northern states and really not that much about slavery." Not that any post here is going to change your mind.
Elizabeth Burton , August 17, 2017 at 7:26 pmWhat about the theory that the economic interests of the North in opposition to those of the South motivated the Civil War? The North wanted to compel the South to sell its cotton to Northern Mills at a lower price than the South could sell its cotton to English Mills. I thought I read about that in a Post here at NakedCapitalism -- ? I have trouble believing the Civil War was about slavery. If slavery were the driver then why did Lincoln wait until 1863 to make his emancipation proclamation? After the Civil War why did the North do so little to help the slaves they emancipated and protect their freedom? It took 100 years and considerable political and social pressure to compel the North to enforce even the most basic civil rights in the South.
todde , August 17, 2017 at 7:46 pmEvery single version of the secession articles issued by the Southern states says they were doing so to preserve their "peculiar institution." It's not about "belief." It's about demonstrable facts. That the North didn't really give a [family blog] about the actual slaves, and that anti-black racism was as bad north of the Mason-Dixon is irrelevant to this discussion.
Likewise, the reason why none of the freed slaves got their "40 acres and a mule" is available in any number of reliable historical sources, and just as has always been the case is the result of a combination of rich people and politics.
philnc , August 16, 2017 at 2:17 pmI would read them all again, Virginia's didn't mention preserving slavery.
Brian M , August 16, 2017 at 3:37 pmRead some diaries by Northerners who fought in that war. Whether they liked it or not, they knew the war was about ending slavery. An awful lot of them volunteered based on that understanding (except the mobs in NYC that attacked an orphanage for black children). In his memoirs Grant, writing much later in a time when the myth of "it was only about union" by then had a firm hold, was clear about the role abolitionism played. Those in the South at the time didn't pretend otherwise either.
Jeremy Grimm , August 16, 2017 at 5:05 pmBut Lee's slaves all WUVVVEDDDD him, we are told.
HotFlash , August 16, 2017 at 9:03 pmMany of those fighting in the Civil War were motivated by their feelings about slavery. However I am extremely skeptical that either a strong desire to abolish slavery or a commitment to maintain the union motivated the Elite of the North to war with the South. Their concern for the human condition didn't extend very far in time or space. Emancipated slaves were left to suffer under Jim Crow. Northern Mills and factories operated in conditions not greatly different than outright slavery.
Harry Cording , August 16, 2017 at 3:27 pmDisclaimer: I am totally not a historian. Evidence *wholly* anecdotal, *wholly* oral and simply a family story. My father had two great-uncles who died in Andersonville Prison, I have seen the letters and the little carved Bibles send back to their family in Ohio/ Pennsylvania but not otherwise verified anything. The story in the family is that they went for the substitute money, $100 (a whole lot of money back then). The draft was only for landowners, ie voters, but they could and very often did pay to have non-landowners, such as my greatuncles, take their duty for them. Irony: the family was awarded land, in Michigan.
dimmsdale , August 16, 2017 at 5:23 pmYves, CERT or Community Emergency Response Training is what you might want to check out for basic emergency training/preparedness. CERT operates on both a national and local level. Out here in earthquake country the local chapter is pretty active.
Local SF Bay Area CERT link:
http://readymarin.org/cerNational CERT link with overview:
http://ready.gov/community-emergency-response-teamJeremy Grimm , August 16, 2017 at 4:27 pmYves, here in NYC, I took a good basic first aid course at the American Red Cross (it included CPR, dealing with burns, broken bones, seizures, etc.); someone upthread mentioned the American Heart Association and their offerings look intriguing too. And NYC does indeed have an active CERT chapter; which fields teams of trained volunteer first-responders for all sorts of disasters. (I had looked into all this stuff just post-9/11; picked up a good manual on disaster prep from the ARC and still carry their first-aid kit and a pair of construction gloves in my backpack, just in case.)
RRH , August 16, 2017 at 4:51 pmI'm not sure what to make of the events in Charlottesville. They hold a dark foreboding I can't decipher.
Lee Camp's portrayal of how fleetingly brief is our moment of life and consciousness and his admonition to use that moment is what most moved me in his brief video.
anonymous , August 16, 2017 at 5:10 pmWhile Red Cross and other organization offer courses, you might try to find a good edition of the Boy Scout's First Aid Merit Badge booklet. It has probably been updated over the years, but was a good read and taught me enough to help several injured people since earning my Eagle rank. Not sure I could revive the dead, but I've kept a heart attack victim alive until help arrived, as well as many bleeding people.
Matthew Kopka , August 17, 2017 at 9:24 amThe South has long dominated key sectors of the US power structure, if not the ones where Yves has spent her time/ drawn her acquaintances.
Just look at those who have had prominent roles in Congressional leadership and committee chairmanships over the last century. What about Mitch McConnell? Jeff Sessions (before he became AG)? Russell Long? Jamie Whitten? Herman Talmadge? George Smathers? Lindsay Graham? John McCain (Mississippian by birth)? Strom Thurmond? Theodore Bilbo? Just to name a few.
Southerners are also over-represented in the military. http://www.ozy.com/acumen/why-the-us-military-is-so-southern/72100 NB, as Yves has mentioned, the retired general and flag officers often end up running defense contractors when they leave active duty– so Southern influence is also strong there.
The South continues to dominate our political life and our military industrial complex. Guilt tripping non Southerners about anti Southern prejudice continues to enforce such dominance. While that prejudice certainly exists, it's no reason to give the white South a pass, or the affirmative action program Trump wants to grant by re-orienting DoJ's Civil Rights Division.
anonymous , August 17, 2017 at 1:49 pmMcCain was born in Panama, there was a birther issue with his candidacy. I see nothing in his bio about MS, though he moved a great deal as a military brat.
The fact that southern pols attain such positions does not necessarily reflect dominance. And while Yves's' characterization elides some issues, it has the virtue of pointing up the obvious: there is prejudice toward white southerners and, like most prejudice, tends to prevent us from seeing the region clearly.
Matthew Kopka , August 20, 2017 at 9:20 pmOn his mother's side McCain comes from very wealthy Mississippi plantation owners with large slave holdings. http://www.salon.com/2000/02/15/mccain_90/ And while he has played this down (his bio being one example), he certainly knew of it. http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/news/2008/sep/23/john-mccains-mississippi-roots/
Furthermore, McCain makes no bones about his Southern heritage. He has also, among other things, defended the Confederate flag and spoken highly of his treasonous ancestors who fought for the Confederacy (as noted in Salon link above).
Regarding your disputation of Southern dominance on Capitol Hill -- I worked at CBO and got to see it first hand back in the 70s. With all due respect, your statement about the prevalence of southern pols in high positions on the Hill not "necessarily" reflecting dominance, is clueless. It may be a little different now but given the continued power of Southern Republicans on the Hill I tend to doubt that.
Of course there's prejudice towards just about everyone who isn't in one's own group. Unfortunately, that is the way humans are. The real issue is, has that group been victimized? Not all that much in the case of white Southerners, who run a great deal of the country.
I would also say: the prejudice against Southerners actually works in many ways to their advantage. Both in terms of outsiders underestimating them, and in terms of outsiders' being clueless about how powerful the South really is.
Wellstone's Ghost , August 17, 2017 at 3:10 amSimply saying that Southerners dominate the America power structure doesn't make it the case. Put that case together and I am interested. Calling me "clueless" looks to me like a sign that you are either operating out of your own prejudice rather than solid fact or just disputatious. I would gladly accept that Southerners are a disproportionate part of the power structure; that they dominate? Pony up.
Matthew Kopka , August 17, 2017 at 9:21 amOut here in Seattle we seem to be more and more segregated. The city is basically cut in half, with the north side of downtown/ship canal being primarily white and the south side of downtown being the last vestige of minority home ownership in the city. Gentrification is alive and well in the Pacific Northwest. We call it the "San Francisco-zation" of Seattle. Everyone is being priced out and the City of Seattle Government seems perfectly ok with it. Perhaps the era of the City-State is here?
K , August 17, 2017 at 10:24 pmYes, policing fail. But there were some reasons for that. This "From a member of UVA staff," which appeared on a trusted friend's FB page, which has a ring of authenticity:
'A few specifics that I learned from a very somber staff meeting with our Dean of Libraries just now. Some of these details may have been available in news reports but they were new to me. (1) Apparently on Friday night there was a 'very low level' request for permission for a group of 20 people to read a speech at the Rotunda. This overture to the University was then bait-and-switched to the march with torches that circled Central Grounds. (2) During the white nationalists' intimidating march around Grounds, many UVA police officers were actually located downtown, where they had been seconded to support Charlottesville City police. (3) On Saturday, there were "several deliberate attempts to spread police thin" through tactics such as fake bomb scares in parts of town away from the main action. (4) By UVA policy, students and employees are prohibited from carrying firearms on Grounds, but by state law, because this is a public property, people with no University affiliation are allowed open carry without a permit and concealed carry with a permit. UVA can make policy enforceable on its own students and employees but not on the general public .
"I am sharing all of this because I think there were several specific, calculated tactics by the white nationalists to leverage our laws and policies against us and to maximize the terrorizing effect of their activities in Charlottesville over the weekend. I believe the white nationalists are not done with us here in Charlottesville and I believe they will target other universities, university towns, and communities with progressive political reputations for similar attacks. I hope that forewarned is forearmed and that by disseminating information about the white nationalists' tactics we can be better prepared in the future.' (thanks to Gregory N Blevins)"relstprof , August 20, 2017 at 3:38 amNature. Skilled Labor. Community Bank credit creation. Shorting nature into a battery with debt expertise always ends the same way, a black hole of symptoms chasing their own tail, until all the financial and operational leverage is stranded.
An elevator eliminates the arbitrary clock in the compiler, allowing an increasing diversity of events to time themselves.
We are many. They are few.
|
|
|
Aug 24, 2017 | www.unz.com
The argument is that admitting academically unqualified blacks to elite schools is, at core, a policy to protect the racial peace and, as such, has nothing to do with racial justice, the putative benefits of diversity or any other standard justification. It is this peace- keeping function that explains why the entire establishment, from mega corporations to the military, endorses constitutionally iffy racial discrimination and why questioning diversity's benefits is the most grievous of all PC sins. Stated in cost-benefit terms, denying a few hundred (even a few thousand) high-SAT scoring Asians an Ivy League diploma and instead forcing them attend Penn State is a cheap price to pay for social peace.
This argument rests on an indisputable reality that nearly all societies contain distinct ethnic or religious groups who must be managed for the sake of collective peace. They typically lack the ability to economically compete, may embrace values that contravene the dominant ethos, or otherwise just refuse to assimilate. What makes management imperative is the possibility of violence either at an individual level, for example, randomly stabbing total strangers, or on a larger scale, riots and insurrections. Thus, in the grand scheme of modern America's potentially explosive race relations, academically accomplished Asians, most of whom are politically quiescent, are expendable, collateral damage in the battle to sustain a shaky status quo.
Examples of such to-be-managed groups abound. Recall our own tribulations with violent Indian tribes well into the 19 th century or what several European nations currently face with Muslims or today's civil war in Burma with the Karen People. Then there's Turkey's enduring conflict with the Kurds and long before the threat of Islamic terrorism, there were Basque separatists (the ETA ), and the Irish Republican Army . In the past 45 years, there have been more than 16,000 terror attacks in Western Europe according to the Global Terrorism Database . At a lower levels add the persistently criminal Gypsies who for 500 years have resisted all efforts to assimilate them. This listing is, of course, only a tiny sampling of distinct indigestible violence-prone groups.
The repertoire of remedies, successful and failed, is also extensive. Our native-American problem has, sad to say, been largely solved by the use of apartheid-like reservations and incapacitating a once war-like people with drugs and alcohol. Elsewhere generous self-rule has done the trick, for example, the Basques in Spain. A particularly effective traditional solution is to promote passivity by encouraging religious acceptance of one's lowly state.
Now to the question at hand: what is to be done regarding American blacks, a group notable for its penchant for violence whose economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs.
To appreciate the value of affirmative action recall the urban riots of the 1960s. They have almost been forgotten but their sheer number during that decade would shock those grown accustomed to today's relative tranquility. A sampling of cities with major riots includes Rochester, NY, New York City, Philadelphia, PA, Los Angeles, CA, Cleveland, OH, Newark, NJ, Detroit, MI, Chicago, IL, Washington, DC and several smaller cities.
The damage from these riots! "uprisings" or "rebellions" according to some!was immense. For example, the Detroit riot of 1967 lasted five days and quelling it required the intervention of the Michigan Army National Guard and both the 82 nd and 101 st Airborne divisions. When it finally ended, the death toll was 43, some 7200 were arrested and more than 2000 buildings destroyed. Alas, much of this devastation remains visible today and should be a reminder of what could happen absent a policy of cooling out black anger.
To correctly understand how racial preferences at elite colleges serves as a cost-effective solution to potential domestic violence, recall the quip by comedian Henny Youngman when asked "How's your wife?" He responded with, "Compared to what?" This logic reflects a hard truth: when confronting a sizable, potentially disruptive population unable or unwilling to assimilate, a perfect solution is beyond reach. Choices are only among the lesser of evils and, to repeat, under current conditions, race-driven affirmative action is conceivably the best of the worst. A hard-headed realist would draw a parallel with how big city merchants survive by paying off the police, building and food inspectors, and the Mafia. Racial preferences are just one more item on the cost-of-doing business list–the Danegeld .
In effect, racial preferences in elite higher education (and beneficiaries includes students, professors and the diversity-managing administrators) separates the top 10% measured in cognitive ability from their more violent down market racial compatriots. While this manufactured caste-like arrangement hardly guarantees racial peace (as the black-on-white crime rate, demonstrates) but it pretty much dampens the possibility of more collective, well-organized related upheavals, the types of disturbances that truly terrify the white establishment. Better to have the handsomely paid Cornel West pontificating about white racism at Princeton where he is a full professor than fulminating at some Ghetto street corner. This status driven divide just reflects human nature. Why would a black Yalie on Wall Street socialize with the bro's left behind in the Hood? This is the strategy of preventing a large-scale, organized rebellion by decapitating its potential leadership. Violence is now just Chicago or Baltimore-style gang-banger intra-racial mayhem or various lone-wolf criminal attacks on whites.
Co-optation is a staple in the political management repertoire. The Soviet Union adsorbed what they called the "leading edge" into the Party (anyone exceptionally accomplished, from chess grandmasters or world-class athletes) to widen the divide the dominant elite, i.e., the Party, and hoi polloi. Election systems can be organized to guarantee a modicum of power to a handful of potential disruptors and with this position comes ample material benefits (think Maxine Waters). Monarchies have similarly managed potential strife by bestowing honors and titles on commoners. It is no accident that many radicals are routinely accused of "selling out" by their former colleagues in arms. In most instances the accusation is true, and this is by design.
To appreciate the advantages of the racial preferences in higher education consider Henny's "compared to what"? part of his quip. Certainly what successfully worked for quelling potential Native American violence, e.g., forced assimilation in "Indian Schools" or confinement in pathology-breeding reservations, is now totally beyond the pale though, to be sure, some inner-cities dominated by public housing are increasingly coming to resemble pathology-inducing Indian reservations. Even less feasible is some legally mandated homeland of the types advocated by Black Muslims.
I haven't done the math but I would guess that the entire educational racial spoils system is far more cost effective than creating a garrison state or a DDR-like police state where thousands of black trouble-makers were quickly incarcerated. Perhaps affirmative action in general should be viewed as akin to a nuisance tax, probably less than 5% of our GDP.
To be sure, affirmative action at elite universities is only one of today's nostrums to quell potential large scale race-related violence. Other tactics include guaranteeing blacks elected offices, even if this requires turning a blind eye toward election fraud, and quickly surrendering to blacks who demand awards and honors on the basis of skin color. Perhaps a generous welfare system could be added to this keep-the-peace list. Nevertheless, when all added up, the costs would be far lowers than dealing with widespread 1960s style urban violence.
This peace-keeping aspect of affirmative action understood, perhaps we ought to view those smart Asians unfairly rejected from Ivy League schools as sacrificial lambs. Now, given all the billions that have been saved, maybe a totally free ride at lesser schools would be a small price to pay for their dissatisfaction (and they would also be academic stars at such schools). Of course this "Asian only" compensatory scholarship might be illegal under the color blind requirements of 1964 Civil Right Act, but fear not, devious admission officers will figure out a way around the law.
Carlton Meyer > , Website August 16, 2017 at 4:21 am GMT
Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 4:56 am GMTThis 18 second video clip is a great real world summary:
Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 5:03 am GMTInteresting take. But risky because :
1) Asians will grow in power, and either force more fairness towards themselves, or return to Asia.
2) WN idiots happy about Asians returning to Asia fail to see that Asians will return only when they control enough of America to manage large parts of it from afar (like the tech industry).
3) 2-3 million top caliber white male Western Expats might just move to Asia, since they may like Asian women more, and want to be free of SJW idiocy. This is all it takes to fill the alleged gap Asia has in creativity, marketing, and sales expertise. Asia effectively decapitates the white West by taking in their best young men and giving them a great life in Asia.
4) America becomes like Brazil with all economic value colonized by Asians and the white expats in Asia with mixed-race children. White trashionalists left behind are swiftly exterminated by blacks, and white women mix with the blacks. America becomes a Brazil minus the fun culture, good weather, and attractive women.Diversity Heretic > , August 16, 2017 at 5:12 am GMT@Carlton Meyer At first, I was surprised that they listened to him.
After a while, I realized that many negros are stupid enough to think that Hispanics and Asians would like to be in some anti-white alliance with blacks as a senior partner. In reality, they have an even lower opinion of blacks than whites do. US blacks have zero knowledge of the world outside America, so this reality just doesn't register with them.
War for Blair Mountain > , August 16, 2017 at 5:26 am GMTJohn Derbyshire has made similar arguments–racial preferences are the price for social peace. But, as Steve Sailer has pointed out, we're running out of white and Asian children to buffer black dysfunction and Asians are going to get less and less willing to be "sacrificial lambs" for a black underclass that they did nothing to create and that they despise.
There are other ways to control the black underclass. You can force the talented ones to remain in their community and provide what leadership they can. Black violence can be met with instant retributive counter-violence. (Prior to the 1960s most race riots were white on black.) Whites can enforce white norms on the black community, who will sort-of conform to them as best they are able.
Finally, Rudyard Kipling had a commentary on Danegeld. It applies to paying off dysfunctional domestic minorities just as much to invading enemies.
"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that pays it is lost!"jim jones > , August 16, 2017 at 5:30 am GMTRobert Weissberg
Could care less about your smart Asians The smart Asians are enthusiastivally voting Whitey into a racial minority on Nov 3 2020 They don't belong on Native Born White American Living and Breeding Space
Wally > , August 16, 2017 at 5:32 am GMT@Carlton Meyer This 18 second video clip is a great real world summary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHhy2Gk_xik You can just hears someone shouting at the end "Go back to Beijing"
Bro Methylene > , August 16, 2017 at 5:34 am GMTOnce you give in, they will keep demanding more & more.
There's always a manufactured excuse.
It's time to say no.
Priss Factor > , Website August 16, 2017 at 5:55 am GMTPlease stop trying to confuse Orientals with Indians and other subcontinentals. They are quite distinct.
This reminds me of the sinister (but largely successful) campaign to conflate San Francisco with "Silicon Valley." The two are separate in every way.
Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 6:21 am GMTHell with those 'smart Asians'. They are among the biggest Proglob a-holes.
Asians have servile genes that seek approval from the power. They are status-freaks.
They make perfect collaborators with the Glob.
Under communism, they made the most conformist commies.
Under Japanese militarism, they made the most mindless military goons who did Nanking.
Under Khmer Rouge, they were biggest looney killers.
Under PC, they make such goody good PC dogs.
If the prevailing culture of US was patriotic and conservatives, Asians would try to conform to that, and that wouldn't be so bad.
But since the prevailing culture is PC, these yellow dogs are among the biggest homomaniacal PC tards.
Hell with them. Yellow dogs voted for Obama and Hillary in high numbers. They despise, hate, and feel contempt for white masses and working class. They are servitors of the empire as Darrell Hamamoto said. He's one of the few good guys.
Just look at that Francis Fukuyama, that slavish dog of Soros. He's so disgusting. And then, you got that brown Asian tard Fareed Zakaria. What a vile lowlife. And that fat Jeer Heet who ran from dirty browns shi ** ing all over the place outdoors to live with white people but bitches about 'white supremacy'. Well, the fact that he ran from his own kind to live with whites must mean his own choice prefers white folks. His immigration choice was 'white supremacism'. After all, he could have moved to black Africa. Why didn't he?
PS. The best way of Affirmative Action is to limit it only to American Indians and Blacks of slave ancestry. That's it.
Also, institutions should OPENLY ADMIT that they do indeed discriminate to better represent the broader population. Fair or not, honesty is a virtue. What is most galling about AA is the lies that says 'we are colorblind and meritocratic but ' No more buts. Yes, there is discrimination but to represent larger population. Okay, just be honest.
Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 6:28 am GMTPlease stop trying to confuse Orientals with Indians and other subcontinentals. They are quite distinct.
In their original countries they are, but in America they are almost identical in all ways except appearance and diet.
Plus, since SE Asia has always had influence from both, there is a smooth continuum in the US across all of these groups by the time the 2nd generation rolls around.
helena > , August 16, 2017 at 6:33 am GMTThey don't belong on Native Born White American Living and Breeding Space
Three things wrong with this sentence.
1) I don't think you know that Native Americans (i.e. Siberians) were here first.
2) I will bet anything that all 128 of your GGGGG-GPs are not English settlers who were here in 1776. You are probably some 2nd gen Polack or something who still worries that WASPs look down on you.
3) There is very high variance among whites, and white trashionalists are SOOOO far below the quality threshold of any moderately successful white that they can't claim to speak for all whites. White Trashionalists represent the waste matter that nature wants to purge (which is the process that enables exceptional whites to emerge on the other end of the scale). That is why white women are absolutely doing what nature wants, which is to cut off the White Trashionalists from reproduction. If you care about the white race, you should be glad that white women want nothing to do with you and allow you to complete you wastebasket role.There.
Priss Factor > , Website August 16, 2017 at 6:36 am GMT@Carlton Meyer That's hilarious. Anti-ma should replace their flags with placards saying, "Hey, Hey, this is Library!" at all counter-anti-fa demos.
jilles dykstra > , August 16, 2017 at 7:00 am GMTWill this really keep the peace?
Obama was one of the beneficiaries of AA along with his wife and their kids. Did that prevent Baltimore and Chicago and etc from blowing up?
In a way, AA and Civil Rights made black communities more volatile. When blacks were more stringently segregated, even smart and sensible blacks lived among blacks and played some kind of 'role model'. They ran businesses and kept in close contact with black folks.
It's like white communities in small towns used to be much better when the George Baileys stayed in them or returned to them and ran things.
But as more and more George Bailies left for the big cities, small towns had fewer top notch role models and leaders and enterprisers. Also, the filth of pop culture and youth degeneracy via TV corrupted the dummies. And then, when globalism took away the industries, there were just people on opioids. At least old timers grew up with family and church. The new generation grew up on Idiocracy.
Anyway, AA will just taken more black talent from black community and mix them with whites, Asians, and etc. Will some of these blacks use their power and privilege to incite black mobs to violence? Some do go radical. But most will just get their goodies and forget the underclass except in some symbolic way. It's like Obama didn't do crap as 'community organizer'. He just stuck close to rich Jews in Hyde Park, and as president, he was serving globo-wars, Wall Street, and homos.
When he finally threw a bone at the blacks in his second term, it lit cities on fire.Did the black underclass change for the better because they saw Obama as president? No. If anything, it just made them bolder as flashmobs. The way blacks saw it, a bunch of fa ** ogty wussy white people voted for a black guy created by a black man sexually conquering a white woman. They felt contempt for cucky whites, especially as rap culture and sports feature blacks as master race lording over whites. To most underclass blacks, the only culture they know is sports and rap and junk they see on TV. And they are told blacks are magical, sacred, badass, and cool. And whites are either 'evil' if they have any pride or cucky-wucky wussy if they are PC.
The Murrayian Coming-Apart of whites took place already with blacks before. And more AA that takes in smarter blacks will NOT make things better for black underclass. And MORE blacks in elite colleges will just lead to MORE anger issues, esp as they cannot keep up with other students.
Even so, I can understand the logic of trying to win over black cream of crop. Maybe if they are treated nice and feel 'included', they won't become rabble-rousers like Al Sharpton and act more like Obama. Obama's race-baiting with Ferguson was bad but could have been worse with someone like Sharpton.
The Power can try to control a people in two ways. Crush everyone OR give carrots to comprador elites so that sticks can be used on masses. Clinton did this. He brought over black elites, and they worked with him to lock up record number of Negroes to make cities safer. As Clinton was surrounded by Negroes and was called 'first black president' by Toni Morrison, many blacks didn't realize that he was really working to lock up lots of black thugs and restore order.
Smart overlords play divide-and-conquer by offering carrots to collaborator elites and using sticks on masses.
British Imperialists did that. Gandhi would likely have collaborated with Brits if not for the fact that he was called a 'wog' in South Africa and kicked off a train. Suddenly, he found himself as ONE with the poor and powerless 'wogs' in the station. He was made equal with his own kind.Consider Jews in the 30s and even during WWII. Many Western European Jews became rich and privileged and felt special and put on airs. Many felt closer to gentile elites and felt contempt and disdain for many 'dirty' and 'low' Eastern European Jews. If Hitler had been cleverer and offered carrots to rich Jews, there's a good chance that many of them would have collaborated and worked with the Power to suppress or control lower Jews, esp. of Eastern European background.
But Hitler didn't class-discriminate among Jews. He went after ALL of them. Richest Jew, poorest Jew, it didn't matter. So, even many rich Jews were left destitute if not dead after WWII. And this wakened them up. They once had so much, but they found themselves with NOTHING. And as they made their way to Palestine with poor Eastern European Jewish survivors, they felt a strong sense of ethnic identity. Oppression and Tragedy were the great equalizer. Having lost everything, they found what it really means to be Jewish. WWII and Holocaust had a great traumatic equalizing effect on Jews, something they never forgot since the war, which is why very rich Jews try to do much for even poor Jews in Israel and which is why secular Jews feel a bond with funny-dressed Jewish of religious sects.
For this reason, it would be great for white identity if the New Power were to attack ALL whites and dispossess all of them. Suppose globalism went after not only Deplorables but Clintons, Bushes, Kaineses, Kerrys, Kennedys, and etc. Suppose all of them were dispossessed and humiliated and called 'honkers'. Then, like Gandhi at the train station, they would regain their white identity and identify with white hoi polloi who've lost so much to globalism. They would become leaders of white folks.
But as long as carrots are offered to the white elites, they go with Glob and dump on whites. They join with the GLOB to use sticks on white folks like in Charlottesville where sticks were literally used against patriots who were also demeaned as 'neo-nazis' when most of them weren't.So, I'm wishing Ivy Leagues will have total NO WHITEY POLICY. It is when the whites elites feel rejected and humiliated by the Glob that they will return to the masses.
Consider current Vietnam. Because Glob offers them bribes and goodies, these Viet-cuck elites are selling their nation to the Glob and even allowing homo 'pride' parades.
White Genocide that attacks ALL whites will have a unifying effect on white elites and white masses. It is when gentiles targeted ALL Jews that all Jews, rich and poor, felt as one.
But the Glob is sneaky. Instead of going for White Genocide that targets top, middle, and bottom, it goes for White Democide while forgoing white aristocide. So, white elites or neo-aristocrats are rewarded with lots of goodies IF they go along like the Romneys, Clintons, Kaines, Bidens, and all those quisling weasels.
Simon in London > , August 16, 2017 at 7:18 am GMT" Now to the question at hand: what is to be done regarding American blacks, a group notable for its penchant for violence whose economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs. "
I read an article, making a learned impression, that on average USA blacks have a lower IQ.
I do suppose that IQ has a cultural component, nevertheless, those in western cultures with a lower IQ can be expected to have less economic success.
A black woman who did seem to understand all this was quoted in the article as that 'blacks should be compensated for this lower IQ'.
One can discuss this morally endless, but even if the principle was accepted, how is it executed, and where is the end ?
For example, people with less than average length are also less successful, are we going to compensate them too ?Kyle McKenna > , August 16, 2017 at 7:45 am GMT"economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs"
It only stalled when the Great Society and the uplift programs started. According to The Bell Curve there was basically an instant collapse when LBJ started to wreaking his havoc. Go back to pre-1964 norms and no late-60s riots.
Realist > , August 16, 2017 at 8:04 am GMTWe have sacrificed smart white students for three generations to keep the hebraic component around 30% at our highest-ranked colleges and universities, and no one (except the jewish Ron Unz himself) made so much as a peep. And as he copiously documented, whites have suffered far more discrimination than asians have. The difference is, whites are more brainwashed into accepting it.
I hope this doesn't need linking here, but wth
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
Tom Welsh > , August 16, 2017 at 9:11 am GMT"Sacrificing Smart Asians to Keep the Racial Peace"
It is the sacrificing of smart white students that is the problem. Of all the races whites, on average are more innovative and ambitious.
Tom Welsh > , August 16, 2017 at 9:16 am GMT"The argument is that admitting academically unqualified blacks to elite schools is, at core, a policy to protect the racial peace "
In simpler language, appeasement.
Tom Welsh > , August 16, 2017 at 9:24 am GMT@War for Blair Mountain "They don't belong on Native Born White American Living and Breeding Space "
Your statement would be perfectly correct if it read, "White people of European origin don't belong on Native American Living and Breeding Space "
Yet there they are, in immense, pullulating numbers. And now they have the gall to complain that other people – some of whom resemble the few surviving Native Americans far more closely than Whites do – are coming to "their" continent.
Honestly, what is the world coming to when you spend centuries and millions of bullets, bottles of whisky and plague-ridden blankets getting rid of tens of millions of people so you can steal their land – and then more people like you come along and want to settle peaceably alongside you? That's downright un-American.
Maybe you'd be more comfortable if the Asian immigrants behaved more like the European settlers – with fire, sword, malnutrition and pestilence.
Wizard of Oz > , August 16, 2017 at 9:27 am GMT@Diversity Heretic The Kipling quote is stirring and thought-provoking (like most Kipling quotes). But it is not entirely correct.
Consider the kings of France in the 10th century, who were confronted by the apparently insoluble problem of periodic attacks by bands of vicious, warlike, and apparently irresistible Vikings. One king had the bright idea of buying the Northmen off by granting them a very large piece of land in the West of France – right where the invading ships used to start up the Seine towards Paris.
The Northmen settled there, became known as Normans, and held Normandy for the rest of the Middle Ages – in the process absolutely preventing any further attacks eastward towards Paris. The dukes of Normandy held it as a fief from the king, and thus did homage to him as his feudal subordinates.
They did conquer England, Sicily, and a few other places subsequently – but the key fact is that they left the tiny, feeble kingdom of France alone.
Logan > , August 16, 2017 at 9:45 am GMTRatioal cost benefit arguments could be applied much more widely to the benefit of America and other First World countries. If otherwise illegal drugs were legalised, whether to be prescribed by doctors or not, it would save enormous amounts of money on law enforcement and, subject to what I proffer next, incarceration.
What is the downside? The advocates of Prohibition weren't wrong about the connection of alcohol and lower productivity. That was then. If, say, 10 per cent of the population were now disqualified from the workforce what would it matter. The potential STEM wizards amongst them (not many) would mostly be nurtured so that it was only the underclass which life in a daze. And a law which made it an offence, effectively one for which the penalty was to be locked up or otherwise deprived of freedom to be a nuisance, to render oneself unfit to perform the expected duties of citizenship would have collateral benefits in locking up the right underclass males.
Colleen Pater > , August 16, 2017 at 10:19 am GMT@Bro Methylene "Orientals," east Asians, or just Asians in American parlance are indeed quite different from south Asians, called "Asians" in the UK,. These are quite different groups.
But the groups of east and south Asians include widely differing peoples. A Korean doesn't have much in common with a Malay, nor a Pathan with a Tamil. Probably not much more than either has in common with the other group or with white Americans.
That they "all look alike" to use does not really mean the do, it just means we aren't used to them.
Was recently watching an interesting Chinese movie and had enormous difficulty keeping the characters straight, because they did indeed all look alike to me. I wonder if Chinese people in China have similar trouble watching old American movies.
Colleen Pater > , August 16, 2017 at 10:28 am GMT@Carlton Meyer yeah and hispanics are natural conservatives. dont be a cuck once that slant is here long enough he will tumble to the game and get on the anti white bandwagon. and sure asians will eventually out jew the jews just what we need another overlord, only this one a huge percentage or world pop. .
joeshittheragman > , Website August 16, 2017 at 11:12 am GMTYou know weisberg youre not fooling anyone here peddle that cuck crap elsewhere affirmative action leads to nothing but more affirmative action at this point everyone but white males gets it, and you my jew friend know this so selling it to sucker cucks as the cost of doing business is just more jew shenanigans. There is a much better solution to the problem peoples deport them back where they belong israel africa asia central america.
Jake > , August 16, 2017 at 11:47 am GMTThis is all about nothing now. The only thing White people have to learn anymore is controlled breathing, good position, taking up trigger slack, letting the round go at exactly the right moment – one round, one hit.
Astuteobservor II > , August 16, 2017 at 11:58 am GMTWhen your child tosses a tantrum and tears up his bedroom, and you tell him his mean-spirited, selfish cousins caused it and then you reward him with a trip to Disneyland and extra allowance: then you guarantee more and worse tantrums.
That is what America and America's Liberals, the Elites, have done with blacks and violence.
TG > , August 16, 2017 at 12:18 pm GMTha, there is another group that is preying on the asian group and it is omitted.
Anonymouse > , August 16, 2017 at 12:58 pm GMTA very interesting post. Really a unique perspective – who cares if it's not fair, if it is necessary to keep the peace?
I do however disagree with one of your points. " whose economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs."
I think you have missed the main event. Over the last half-century the elites of this nation have waged ruthless economic warfare AGAINST poor blacks in this country, to an extent that far dwarfs the benefits of affirmative action (for a typically small number of already privileged blacks).
Up through the 1960′s, blacks were starting to do not so bad. Yes they were in a lot of menial jobs, but many of these were unionized and the pay was pretty good. I mean, if nobody else wants to sweep your floors, and the only guy willing to do it i s black, well, he can ask for a decent deal.
Then our elites fired black workers en masse, replacing them with Mexican immigrants and outsourcing to low-wage countries. Blacks have had their legs cut off with a chainsaw, and the benefits of affirmative action (which nowadays mostly go to Mexicans etc.!) little more than a bandaid.
And before we are too hard on blacks, let me note that whites are also being swept up in the poverty of neoliberal globalization, and they too are starting to show social pathology.
Because in terms of keeping the social peace, there is one fundamental truth more important than all others: there must be some measure of broadly shared prosperity. Without it, even ethnically homogeneous and smart and hard working people like the Japanese or Chinese will tear themselves apart.
Jake > , August 16, 2017 at 1:00 pm GMTNot New York. Wife & I were living there then and Mayor Lindsay went to Harlem and NYC negroes did not riot after MLK Jr was assassinated.
George Weinbaum > , August 16, 2017 at 1:04 pm GMTNote that there is not a word in this article about what this does to the white working class and how it can be given something in return for allowing Elites to bribe blacks with trillions and trillions of dollars in goodies. Nor is there is there any indication that this process eventually will explode, with too many blacks demanding so much it cannot be paid.
dearieme > , August 16, 2017 at 1:05 pm GMTWas this written tongue in cheek?
Affirmative action will never end. The bribes will never end. The US made a mistake in the 1960s. We should have contained the riots then let the people in those areas sleep in the burned out rubble. Instead through poverty programs we rewarded bad black behavior.
By filling the Ivy League with blacks we create a new class of Cornell West's for white people to listen to. We enhance the "ethos" of these people.
Eventually, certainly in no more than 40 years, we will run out of sacrifices. What then when whites constitute only 40% of the American population? Look at South Africa today.
We have black college graduates with IQs in the 80s! They want to be listened to. After all, they're college graduates.
I do not believe you have found "a cost-effective solution to potential domestic violence".
You mix in this "top 10%" and they get greater acceptance by whites who are turned left in college.anonymous > , Disclaimer August 16, 2017 at 1:19 pm GMT"The argument is that admitting academically unqualified blacks to elite schools is, at core, a policy to protect the racial peace "
IT IS always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
To call upon a neighbour and to say: –
"We invaded you last night – we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless you pay us cash to go away."And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
And the people who ask it explain
That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld
And then you'll get rid of the Dane!It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say: –
"Though we know we should defeat you,
we have not the time to meet you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away."And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we've proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say: –"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that plays it is lost!"Truth > , August 16, 2017 at 1:54 pm GMTwhose economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs.
The reality of this is become a huge stumbling block. In fact this group has actually been mostly regressing into violence and stupidity, going their own separate way as exemplified by their anti-social music which celebrates values repugnant to the majority. Look at the absurd level of shootings in cities like Chicago. That's not changing anytime soon. They're by far overrepresented in Special Ed, juvenile delinquency, prisons and all other indicators of dysfunction. Their talented tenth isn't very impressive as compared to whites or Asians. Their entire middle class is mostly an artificial creation of affirmative action. The point is that they can only be promoted so far based on their capability. The cost of the subsidy gets greater every year and at some point it'll become too heavy a burden and then it'll be crunch time. After the insanity of the Cultural Revolution the Chinese had to come to their senses. It's time to curtail our own version of it.
You All Look Like Ants > , August 16, 2017 at 1:57 pm GMTIt really is terrible and unfair that an Asian needs to score so much higher than you white oppressors to get into the Ivy league
A Princeton study found that students who identify as Asian need to score 140 points higher on the SAT than whites to have the same chance of admission to private colleges, a difference some have called "the Asian tax."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/us/affirmative-action-battle-has-a-new-focus-asian-americans.html
helena > , August 16, 2017 at 2:05 pm GMTI think this is brilliant satire.
It is actually an argument that is logically sound. Doesn't mean that it's good or sensible or even workable over the long run.
It's just logically sound. It holds together if one accepts the not-crazy parts its made out of.
I don't believe it's meant to be taken literally, because both the beneficiaries and those who get screwed will grow in their resentment and the system would melt down.
New fields with the word "studies' in them would get added and everyone would know – deep down – why that is so, and Asians would continue to dominate the hard sciences, math and engineering.
Still, as satire, it's so close to the bone that it works beautifully.Rich > , August 16, 2017 at 2:08 pm GMT@Tom Welsh "Yet there they are, in immense, pullulating numbers. And now they have the gall to complain that other people – some of whom resemble the few surviving Native Americans far more closely than Whites do – are coming to "their" continent."
Agree. The country should be returned to pre-1700 conditions and given over to anyone who wants it.
Thorfinnsson > , August 16, 2017 at 2:12 pm GMT@Anonymouse I guess one man's riot is another man's peaceful night. There was a bit of rioting in Brooklyn that night, businesses burned and looted, and a handful of businesses were looted in Harlem. There was a very heavy police presence with Mayor Lindsey that night and blacks were still very segregated in 1968, so I'd guess it was more that show of force that prevented the kind of riots we'd seen earlier and in other cities at that time. Still, there was looting and burning, so New York's blacks don't get off the hook. As a personal note. my older brother and his friends were attacked by a roving band of blacks that night in Queens, but managed to chase them out of our neighborhood.
War for Blair Mountain > , August 16, 2017 at 2:18 pm GMTThe costs of BRA may be lower than the costs of 1960s urban riots, though an accurate accounting would be difficult as many costs are not easily tabulated.
Consider, for instance, the costs of excluding higher performing whites and Asians from elite universities. Does this result in permanently lower salaries from them as a result of greater difficulty in joining an elite career track?
What costs do affirmative action impose upon corporations, especially those with offices in metropolitan areas with a lot of blacks? FedEx is famously centralized in Memphis. What's the cost to me as a shipper in having to deal with sluggish black customer service personnel?
The blacks are 15% of the population, so I doubt "garrison state" costs would be terribly high. I am certain that segregation was cheaper than BRA is. The costs of segregation were overlooking some black talent (negligible) and duplication of certain facilities (I suspect this cost is lower than the cost of white flight).
Jason Liu > , August 16, 2017 at 2:28 pm GMTHow did America ever manage to survive when there hardly any Chinese Hindus..Sihks .Koreans in OUR America?
Answer:Very well thank you!!!! ..America 1969=90 percent Native Born White American .places two Alpha Native Born White American Males on the Moon 10 more after this Who the F would be opposed to this?
Answer:Chinese "Americans" Korean "Americans" Hindu "Americans" .Sihk "Americans" .Pakistani "Americans"
anarchyst > , August 16, 2017 at 3:01 pm GMTThere would still be racial peace if affirmative action was abolished. They'll bitch for a while, but they'll get used it and the dust will settle.
Side note: Affirmation action also disproportionately helps white women into college, and they're the largest group fueling radical leftist identity politics/feminism on campus. In other words, affirmative action is a large contributor to SJWism, the media-academia complex, and the resulting current political climate.
bjondo > , August 16, 2017 at 3:15 pm GMT@jilles dykstra The statement "blacks should be compensated for this lower IQ" is no different than the descendents of the so-called jewish "holocaust ™" being compensated in perpetuity by the German government. Now, there are calls by the jewish "holocaust ™" lobby to extend the financial compensation to children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of these so-called "holocaust ™ survivors, stating the fake concept of "holocaust ™" transference" just another "holocaust ™" scam
Same thing.Poupon Marx > , August 16, 2017 at 3:20 pm GMTSmart means what?
More Monsanto, DuPont cancers and degraded foods.
New diseases from medical, biological, genetic research
More spying and censorship and stealing by Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Stanford, high IQ thieves.
All jobs overseas, domestic unemployment, endless wars, by the best and brightest.
Toxic pollution, mental pollution that dwarfs the back yard pollution of tires and old refrigs by "low IQ deplorables (white and black and brown".
Degraded, degrading entertainment and fake news to match fake histories by Phds.
Tech devices that are "wonderful" but life is actually better more meaningful without.jim jones > , August 16, 2017 at 3:28 pm GMT[Blacks] "whose economic advancement over the last half-century has largely stalled despite tens of billions and countless government uplift programs." No, Professor, it is Trillions spend over the last 50 years and millions before that. Countless Whites and other non-Negroid people have had to step aside in education, military, government, private industry, to let the lesser person advance and leap frog the accepted virtue-merit path to advancement. AND IT STILL IS NOT ENOUGN FOR BLECKS.
The obvious solution is to separate into uni-racial/ethnic states. For Whites, this would include a separate autocephalous, independent state of Caucasians, Asians, and Hindu. This is the Proto-IndoEuropean Family, related by genes and languages.
Rdm > , August 16, 2017 at 3:44 pm GMT@Logan I have the same trouble with Korean movies, all the women look the same:
Greg Bacon > , Website August 16, 2017 at 3:52 pm GMT@Thomm Interesting take. But risky because :
1) Asians will grow in power, and either force more fairness towards themselves, or return to Asia.
2) WN idiots happy about Asians returning to Asia fail to see that Asians will return only when they control enough of America to manage large parts of it from afar (like the tech industry).
3) 2-3 million top caliber white male Western Expats might just move to Asia, since they may like Asian women more, and want to be free of SJW idiocy. This is all it takes to fill the alleged gap Asia has in creativity, marketing, and sales expertise. Asia effectively decapitates the white West by taking in their best young men and giving them a great life in Asia.
4) America becomes like Brazil...with all economic value colonized by Asians and the white expats in Asia with mixed-race children. White trashionalists left behind are swiftly exterminated by blacks, and white women mix with the blacks. America becomes a Brazil minus the fun culture, good weather, and attractive women. Could agree 1 and 2.2-3 millions Top caliber White males moving to Asia?
haha, Top caliber White males (American) will stay in America, screw the rest WN, devour all the resources available, not only in America, but from the rest of the world.
This is a real White so-called Top caliber White males enjoying in Philippines.
You can see the typical features of White in Asia
1. Bald
2. Obese
3. Lanky
4. Gold watch
5. Cargo pants
6. Flip flopYou can't get away those Top caliber White males features in Asia.
Abelard Lindsey > , August 16, 2017 at 3:58 pm GMTI'm guessing the author would be screaming at the top of his lungs if it was Jewish students being told to go to some state university–instead of Harvard–since we have to make room for blacks.
BTW, your comment "..Recall our own tribulations with violent Indian tribes" needs clarification. Maybe the tribes got violent because of the 400 treaties Uncle Sam made with the various tribes, he honored NONE
üeljang > , August 16, 2017 at 4:12 pm GMTI would call it the Diversity Tax.
Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 4:14 pm GMT@jim jones A great part of that is because, well, let's say that the place where those actresses have got their work done is the same.
Whites have much greater natural variations in hair and eye color, but skin color among East Asian individuals is more naturally variable (especially when the effect of tanning is considered), and their facial features and somatotypes are also more diverse in my opinion. For example, East Asian populations contain some individuals who have what the Japanese call futae mabuta "double eyelids" and some individuals who have what they call hitoe mabuta "single eyelids," whereas White populations contain only individuals who have "double eyelids." Whether such increased physical variability is positive or negative probably depends on one's viewpoint; in the case of that eyelid polymorphism, the variant that is found in Asians but not in Whites is generally considered neutral or even positive when it occurs in male individuals, but negative when it occurs in female individuals, so plastic surgeons must be overflowing with gratitude for the single eyelid gene.
Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 4:31 pm GMT@Thorfinnsson The separate school facilities meant a major saving in the costs of school police and security guards, resource teachers, counselors buses and bus drivers, and layers and layers of administrators trying to administer the mess.
Separate schools were a lot cheaper in that the black teachers kept the lid on the violence with physical punishment and the White teachers and students had a civilized environment.
The old sunshine laws kept blacks out of White neighborhoods after dark which greatly reduced black on White crime. In the north, informal neighborhood watches kept black on White crime to a minimum until block by block the blacks conquered the cities.
George Wallace said segregation now, segregation forever. I say sterilization now, problem solved in 80 years.
Asians??? I went to college with the White WASP American young men who were recruited and went to work in Mountain View and Cupertino and the rest of Santa Clara county and invented Silicon Valley.
Not one was Asian or even Jewish. And they invented it and their sons couldn't even get into Stanford because their sons are White American men.
I think the worst thing about affirmative action is that government jobs are about the only well paid secure jobs that still stick to the 40 hour work week. Government is the largest employer in the country. And those jobs are "no Whites need apply".
BTW I read the Protocols years before the Internet. I had to make an appointment to go into a locked section of a research library. I had to show ID. It was brought to me and I had to sit where I could be seen to read it. I had to sign an agreement that I would not copy anything from the protocols.
And there it was, the fourth protocol.
"We shall see to it brothers, that we shall see to it that they appoint only the incompetent and unfit to their government positions. And thus we shall conquer them from within"Beckow > , August 16, 2017 at 4:44 pm GMT@Thomm Actually, Europeans arrived 20, to 30,000 years ago from Europe and were wiped out by the later arriving Asians.
nickels > , August 16, 2017 at 4:52 pm GMT@Thomm Only 4) is remotely possible. And Brazilian women are not that attractive, they are nice looking on postcards, but quite dumpy and weird-looking in person. But that is a matter of personal taste.
The reason 1,2,3 are nonsensical is that geography and resources matter. Asia simply doesn't have them, it is not anywhere as attractive to live in as North America or Europe and never will be. It goes beyond geographic resources, everything from architecture, infrastructure, culture is simply worse in Asia and it would take hundreds of years to change that.
So why the constant 'go to Asia' or 'Asia is the future'? It might be a temporary escape for many desperate, self-hating, white Westerners, a place to safely worship as they give up on it all. Or it could be the endless family links with the Asian women. But that misreads that most of the Asian families are way to clear-headed to exchange what the are trying to escape for the nihilistic dreams of their white partners. They are the least likely to go to Asia, they know it instinctively, they know what they have been trying to escape.
It is possible that the West is on its last legs, and many places are probably gone for good. But Asia is not going to step up and replace it. It is actually much worse that that – we are heading for a dramatic downturn and a loss of comfort and civilization. Thank you Baby Boomers – you are the true end-of-liners of history.
Alec Leamas (hard at work) > , August 16, 2017 at 5:04 pm GMTExcept that, of course, as with all forms of appeasement, it isn't working .
Realist > , August 16, 2017 at 5:07 pm GMTBright and talented white kids from non-elite families stuck between the Scylla and Charybdis of Cram-Schooled Study-Asians with no seeming limit to their tolerance for tedium and 90 IQ entitled blacks is 2017 in a nutshell.
Liberty Mike > , August 16, 2017 at 5:08 pm GMTWeissberg is a nutless quisling. The proper way to handle blackmail is to stop it in it's tracks.
Peaceful demonstrations are fine, property destroying riots should be stopped by any means necessary. Blacks would soon stop their dumb shit actions
Liberty Mike > , August 16, 2017 at 5:11 pm GMT@George Weinbaum That there Cornell West is a learned fellow. I bet his vocabulary is bigger than that of GWB and DJT – combined.
Jeff77450 > , August 16, 2017 at 5:17 pm GMT@Truth That study was slanted.
MEFOBILLS > , Website August 16, 2017 at 5:34 pm GMTSaid in all seriousness: I genuinely feel sorry for blacks but not because of slavery & Jim Crow. Those were great evils but every group has gone through that. No, I feel sorry for them because their average IQ of 85–yes, it is–combined with their crass thug culture, which emphasizes & rewards all the wrong things, is going to keep them mired in dysfunction for decades to come. Men like Thomas Sowell & Walter Williams have all the information that blacks need to turn themselves around but they won't listen, I guess because the message is take responsibility for yourselves and your families and refuse to accept charity in all its different forms to include AA.
"Thomas Sowell vs Affirmative Action's failures" (~13 minutes): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agkye3vlG0Q
Astuteobservor II > , August 16, 2017 at 5:41 pm GMTFrom the author:
some legally mandated homeland of the types advocated by Black Muslims.
Why not pay people to leave? A law change would convert the money supply from bank money to sovereign money.
AMI's HR2990 would convert the money supply overnight, and nobody would be the wiser.
At that point, new public money could be channeled into funding people to leave. Blacks that don't like it in the U.S. would be given X amount of dollars to settle in an African country of their choice. This public money can be formed as debt free, and could also be directed such that it can only buy American goods. In other words, it can be forced to channel, to then stimulate the American economy.
In this way, the future works, to then get rid of disruptive future elements.
It always boils down to the money system. There is plenty of economic surplus to then fund the removal of indigestible elements.
People automatically assume that the money supply must be private bank credit, as that is the way it always has been. NO IT HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN THAT WAY.
Rdm > , August 16, 2017 at 5:48 pm GMT@Alden source please, that I would like to read. something new.
segundo > , August 16, 2017 at 6:34 pm GMT@helena If Whites leave America and go back to their origin, no one, I repeat, NO ONE would complain about that. They'd be singing "God Riddance" song all along.
No one wants to migrate to Ukraine, a white country.
No one wants to migrate to Hungary, a white country.
No one wants to migrate to Austria, a white country.Everyone wants to migrate to the place where there's an over-bloated sense of job availability. In this case, America offers an ample amount of opportunity.
Let's wait and see how universities in CA populated with merit-based Asian Americans overrule all universities in the US anytime soon.
Name any state in the US that produces more than two universities (in the Top 50 list) in the world.
No state can compete against CA. You wonder why?
Diversity Heretic > , August 16, 2017 at 7:01 pm GMTAre you utterly oblivious to the fact that well over 95% of the blacks getting AAed into universities are then being trained/indoctrinated into being future disruptive activists? Activists with credentials, more money and connections. Entirely counterproductive and much of it on the taxpayers' dime. If there is a solution, AA isn't it.
David > , August 16, 2017 at 7:05 pm GMT@Rdm Can I count you in on the Calexit movement–followed by the purge of whites? Freed from the burden of those miserable European-origin Americans, the Asian-Negro-Mestizo marvel will be a shining light to the rest of the world!
Alec Leamas (hard at work) > , August 16, 2017 at 7:20 pm GMTI waited to make this comment until the serious thinkers had been here. Did anyone notice the dame in the picture is giving us the finger? I did a little experiment to see if my hand could assume that position inadvertently and it couldn't. It aptly illustrates the article, either way.
The Realist > , Website August 16, 2017 at 8:18 pm GMTName any state in the US that produces more than two universities (in the Top 50 list) in the world.
No state can compete against CA. You wonder why?
If you took the land mass of CA and imposed it on the U.S. East Coast between Boston and South Carolina, I don't think it'd be a problem to surpass California in any Top 50 University competition.
I'm not sure what your point is here.
Mis(ter)Anthrope > , August 16, 2017 at 8:23 pm GMTHere's a simpler and more effective solution-KILL ALL NIGGERS NOW. See, not so difficult, was it? Consider it a Phoenix Program for the American Problem. Actually, here's another idea-KILL ALL LIBERALS NOW. That way, good conservative people of different races, sexes, etc., can be saved from the otherwise necessary carnage. Remember, gun control is being able to hit your target.
Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 8:23 pm GMTThe affirmative action game may well serve the interests of the cognitive elite whites, but it has been a disaster for the rest of white America. I have a better solution.
Give the feral negroes what they have been asking for. Pull all law enforcement out of negro hellholes like Detroit and South Chicago and let nature take its course.
Send all Asians and other foreigners who not already citizens back to their homelands. End all immigration except very special cases like the whites being slaughtered in South Africa or the spouse of a white American male citizen.
Wally > , Website August 16, 2017 at 8:31 pm GMT@Rdm I am not referring to guys like in the picture.
I am referring to the very topmost career stars, moving to Asia for the expat life. Some of that is happening, and it could accelerate. Only 2-3 million are needed.
Liberty Mike > , August 16, 2017 at 8:31 pm GMT@Kyle McKenna " And as he copiously documented, whites have suffered far more discrimination than asians have. The difference is, whites are more brainwashed into accepting it. "
And that's the function of the fraudulent, impossible '6M Jews, 5M others, gas chambers'.
[MORE]
"The historical mission of our world revolution is to rearrange a new culture of humanity to replace the previous social system. This conversion and re-organization of global society requires two essential steps: firstly, the destruction of the old established order, secondly, design and imposition of the new order. The first stage requires elimination of all frontier borders, nationhood and culture, public policy ethical barriers and social definitions, only then can the destroyed old system elements be replaced by the imposed system elements of our new order.
The first task of our world revolution is Destruction. All social strata and social formations created by traditional society must be annihilated, individual men and women must be uprooted from their ancestral environment, torn out of their native milieus, no tradition of any type shall be permitted to remain as sacrosanct, traditional social norms must only be viewed as a disease to be eradicated, the ruling dictum of the new order is; nothing is good so everything must be criticized and abolished, everything that was, must be gone."
from: 'The Spirit Of Militarism', by Nahum Goldmann
Goldmann was the founder & president of the World Jewish Congresssee the 'holocaust' scam debunked here:
No name calling, level playing field debate here:
Mis(ter)Anthrope > , August 16, 2017 at 8:32 pm GMT@Rdm Almost all white people would rather migrate to Austria, Hungary, and the Ukraine than the following citadels of civilization:
Angola
Botswana
Burundi
Cameroon
Central African Republic
Djibouti
Ethiopia
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Gabon
Ghana
Kenya
Niger
Nigeria
South Africa
Sudan
Swaziland
Tanzania
Uganda
ZambiaYou know what? I bet most blacks would as well.
Wally > , August 16, 2017 at 8:40 pm GMT@Liberty Mike I don't know if anyone else got it, but that is pretty damn funny.
Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 8:57 pm GMT@Rdm - 45% of California is Federal land.
- Without US taxpayers money CA would be a 3rd world country completely filled with unemployable & dumb illegal immigrants.
- Think about this brief list made possible by the US taxpayers / federal government, money CA would not get and then tens of thousands of CA people would lose their jobs (= lost CA tax revenues):
aerospace contracts, defense contracts, fed gov, software contracts, fed gov airplane orders, bases, ports, money for illegal aliens costs, federal monies for universities, 'affirmative action monies, section 8 housing money, monies for highways, monies for 'mass transportation', monies to fight crime, monies from the EPA for streams & lakes, monies from the Nat. Park Service, monies for healthcare, monies for freeloading welfare recipients, and all this is just the tip of the iceberg
- Not to mention the counties in CA which will not want to be part of the laughable 'Peoples Republic of California'.
- And imagine the 'Peoples Republic of California Army', hilarious.
CA wouldn't last a week without other peoples money.
Calexit? Please, pretty please.
Macumazahn > , August 16, 2017 at 8:58 pm GMT@War for Blair Mountain You just want intra-white socialism so you can mooch off of productive whites.
Rdm > , August 16, 2017 at 9:18 pm GMTIt's particularly unfortunate that Asians, who can hardly be blamed for the plight of America's Blacks, are the ones from whom the "affirmative action" #groidgeld is extracted.
Rdm > , August 16, 2017 at 9:19 pm GMT@Diversity Heretic My impression and overall experience from interacting with White Americans is good in general. I have a very distinct view on both White Americans and Europeans. I'd come back later.
I don't recommend purging of Whites in America. Neither do I prohibit immigration of all people. But I do wish "legal" immigration from all parts of the world to this land. But I also understand why people are fed up with White America.
There is a clear distinction between Europeans and White Americans. White Americans born and bred here are usually an admixture of many European origins. They usually hide their Eastern European origin and fervently claim German, French, English whenever possible -- basically those countries that used to be colonial masters in the past.
White Americans are generally daring, optimistic and very open-minded. Usually when you bump into any White Americans born and bred here, you can sense their genuine hospitality.
Europeans, usually fresh White immigrants in this land, tend to carry over their old mentality with a bit of self-righteous attitude to patronize and condescend Americans on the ground that this is a young country.My former boss was Swiss origin, born in England, and migrated to America. If there's an opportunity cost, he'd regale his English origin. If there's a Swiss opportunity, he'd talk about his ancestry. He'd bash loud, crazy Americans while extoling his European majesty. He became a naturalized American last year for tax purposes so that his American wife can inherit if he kicks the bucket.
Bottom line is, every immigrant to the US, in my honest opinion, is very innocent and genuinely hard working. They have a clear idea of how they like to achieve their dreams here and would like to work hard. It seems after staying here for a while, they all change their true selves to fit into the existing societal structure, i.e., Chris Hemsworth, an Australian purposely trained to speak American English in Red Dawn, can yell "This is our home" while 4th generation Asian Americans will be forced to speak broken English. This is how dreams are shaped in America.
Coming back to purge of Whites, I only wish those self-righteous obese, bald, bottom of the barrel, living on the alms Whites, proclaiming their White skin, will go back to their origin and do something about a coming flood of Muslim in their ancestral country if they're so worried about their heritage.
Saxon > , August 16, 2017 at 9:26 pm GMT@Alec Leamas (hard at work) My point is, universities in CA are doing well commensurate with hard working students without AA action.
Rdm > , August 16, 2017 at 9:30 pm GMT@Thomm No, he just wants the street-defecating hangers-on like you to go back and show how awesome you claim you are in your own country by making a success of it rather than milking all of the entitlements and affirmative action and other programs of literal racial advantage given to you by virtue of setting foot in someone else's country.
Stan d Mute > , August 16, 2017 at 9:36 pm GMT@Wally - 45% of California is Federal land.
- Without US taxpayers money CA would be a 3rd world country completely filled with unemployable & dumb illegal immigrants.
- Think about this brief list made possible by the US taxpayers / federal government, money CA would not get and then tens of thousands of CA people would lose their jobs (= lost CA tax revenues):
aerospace contracts, defense contracts, fed gov, software contracts, fed gov airplane orders, bases, ports, money for illegal aliens costs, federal monies for universities, 'affirmative action monies, section 8 housing money, monies for highways, monies for 'mass transportation', monies to fight crime, monies from the EPA for streams & lakes, monies from the Nat. Park Service, monies for healthcare, monies for freeloading welfare recipients, and all this is just the tip of the iceberg
- Not to mention the counties in CA which will not want to be part of the laughable 'Peoples Republic of California'.
- And imagine the 'Peoples Republic of California Army', hilarious.
CA wouldn't last a week without other peoples money.
Calexit? Please, pretty please. So you're talking about Calexit in AA action?
Let us play along.
If CA is existing solely due to Fed Alms, I can agree it's the tip of the iceberg. But we're talking about Universities, their performance and how AA is affecting well qualified students.
Following on your arguments,
UC Berkeley receives $373 Millions (Federal Sponsorship) in 2016.
Harvard University, on the other hand, receives $656 millions (Federal sponsorship) in 2012.I'm talking about how Universities climb up in World ranking, based upon their innovations, productivity, research output, etc etc etc. Which to me, is reflective of what kind of students are admitted into the programs. That's my point.
If you want to talk about Calexit, you'd better go and refresh your reading comprehension ability.
War for Blair Mountain > , August 16, 2017 at 9:36 pm GMTThe thing that is forgotten is that white Americans DO NOT need the Africans in any way whatsoever. There is NOTHING in Detroit that we want – we abandoned it deliberately and have no interest in ever returning.
On the other hand, what do the Africans need from us?
Food. We own and operate all food production.
Medicine. Ditto.
Clean water. Look at Flint.
Sanitation services. Look at anywhere in Africa.
Order.To put a stop to African behavior from Africans is an idiot's dream. They will never stop being what they are. They simply cannot. So if we cannot expel them, we must control them. When they act up, we cut off their food, medicine, water, and sewer services. Build fences around Detroit and Flint. Siege. After a month or two of the Ethiopian Diet, the Africans in Detroit will be much more compliant.
The peril of appeasement > , August 16, 2017 at 9:40 pm GMT@Thomm You just want intra-white socialism so you can mooch off of productive whites. Thomm=the girly boy blatherings of a White Libertarian Cuck
The benefit to the Historic Native Born White American Working Class of being voted into a White Racial Minority in California by Chinese "Americans" Korean "Americans" .Hindu "Americans" Sihk "Americans" and Iranian "Americans"?
Answer:0 . Bring back the Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act!!!
Two Great pro-White Socialist Labor Leaders:Denis Kearney and Samuel Gompers go read Denis Kearney's Rebel Rousing speeches google Samuel Gompers' Congressional Testimony in favor of the passage of The Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act
Truth > , August 16, 2017 at 9:42 pm GMTAs some have pointed out, the trouble with appeasement is, it never ends. Those who are used to the handouts will always want more. There's the saying parents tend to strengthen the strong and weaken the weak, that's what paternalistic policies like affirmative action and welfare do to a society. It creates a cycle of dependency.
Those who think multiculturalism coupled with identity politics is a good idea need to take a good look at Malaysia, arguably the most multicultural country outside the US. The country is in Southeast Asia, with roughly 30m people, roughly 60% ethnic Malay(100% muslim), 23% Chinese(mostly buddhist or christian), brought in by the British in the 1800s to work the rubber plantations and tin mines, and 7% Indian(mostly Hindu), brought in by the British to work the plantations and civil service.
In 1957 the Brits left and left the power in the hands of the ethnic Malays. The Chinese soon became the most successful and prosperous group and dominated commerce and the professional ranks. In 1969 a major race riot broke out, the largely rural and poor Malays decided to "take back what's theirs", burnt, looted and slaughtered many ethnic Chinese. After the riot the government decided the only way to prevent more riots is to raise the standard of living for the Malays. And they began a massive wealth transfer program through affirmative action that heavily favors ethnic Malays. First, all civil service jobs were given to only ethnic Malays, including the police and military. Then AA was instituted in all local universities where Malays with Cs and Ds in math and science were given preference over Chinese with all A's to all the engineering, medicine and law majors. Today no one in their right mind, not even the rich Malays, want to be treated by a Malay doctor. I know people who were maimed by one of these affirmative actioned Malay "neurosurgeons" who botched a simple routine procedure, and there was no recourse, no one is allowed to sue.
Thanks to their pandering to the Malay majority and outright voting fraud, the ruling party UMNO has never lost an election and is today the longest serving ruling party in modern history. Any dissent was stifled through the sedition act where dissidents are thrown in jail, roughed up, tossed down 14th story buildings before they even go to trial. All media is strictly controlled and censored by the government, who also controls the military, and 100% of the country's oil production, with a large portion of the profit of Petronas going to the coffers of the corrupt Malay government elites, whatever's left is given to hoi polloi Malays in the form of fluff job positions created in civil service, poorly run quasi-government Malay owned companies like Petronas, full scholarships to study abroad for only ethnic Malays, tax free importation of luxury cars for ethnic Malays, and when the government decided to "privatize" any government function like the postal service or telcom, they gave it in the form of a monopoly to a Malay owned company. All government contracts e.g. for infrastructure are only given to Malay owned companies, even as they have zero expertise for the job. The clever Chinese quickly figured out they could just use a Malay partner in name only to get all government contracts.
As opposed to the US where affirmative action favors the minority, in Malaysia AA favors the majority. You know it can't last. The minority can only prop up the majority for so long. Growth today is largely propped up by oil income, and the oil reserve is dwindling. Even Mahathir the former prime minister who started the most blatant racial discrimination policy against the Chinese started chastising the Malays of late, saying they've become too lazy and dependent on government largess.
Yet despite the heavy discrimination, the Chinese continued to thrive thanks to their industriousness and ingenuity, while many rural Malays not connected with the governing elite remain poor -- classic case of strengthening the strong and weakening the weak. According to Forbes, of the top 10 richest men in Malaysia today, 9 are ethnic Chinese, only 1 is an ethnic Malay who was given everything he had. Green with envy, the ethnic Malays demanded more to keep the government in power. So a new law was made – all Chinese owned businesses have to give 30% ownership to an ethnic Malay, just like that.
Needless to say all this racial discrimination resulted in a massive brain drain for the country. many middle class Indians joined the Chinese and emigrated en masse to Australia, NZ, US, Canada, Europe, Singapore, HK, Taiwan, Japan. The ones left are often destitute and poor, heavily discriminated against due to their darker skin, and became criminals. Al Jazeera recently reported that the 7% ethnic Indians in Malaysia commit 70% of the crime.
To see how much this has cost Malaysia -- Singapore split off from Malaysia 2 years after their joint independence from Britain and was left in destitute as they have no natural resources. But Lee Kuan Yew with the help of many Malaysian Chinese who emigrated to Singapore turned it into one of the richest countries in the world in one generation with a nominal per capita GDP of $53k, while Malaysia is firmly stuck at $9.4k, despite being endowed with natural resources from oil to tin and beautiful beaches. The combination of heavy emigration among the Chinese and high birthrate among the muslim Malays encouraged by racialist Mahathir, the Chinese went from 40% of the population in 1957 to 23% today. The Indians went from 11% to 7%.
I fear that I'm seeing the same kind of problem in the US. It's supremely stupid for the whites to want to give up their majority status through open borders. Most Asians like me who immigrated here decades ago did it to get away from the corrupt, dishonest, dog-eat-dog, misogynistic culture of Asia. But when so many are now here, it defeats the purpose. The larger the immigrant group, the longer it takes to assimilate them. Multiculturalism is a failed concept, especially when coupled with identity politics. Affirmative Action does not work, it only creates a toxic cycle of dependency. The US is playing with fire. We need a 20 year moratorium on immigration and assimilate all those already here. Otherwise, I fear the US will turn into another basketcase like Malaysia.
Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 9:43 pm GMTTruth > , August 16, 2017 at 9:43 pm GMT@Tom Welsh There were only about one million Indians living in what is the United States in 1500. There are now 3 million living in much better conditions than in 1500.
I would be willing to accept non White immigration if the non White immigrants and our government would end affirmative action for non Whites.
Asians are discriminated against in college admissions. But in the job market they have affirmative action aristocratic status over Whites.
Joe Wong > , August 16, 2017 at 9:45 pm GMT@Liberty Mike The sno percentage is much higher an Ukraine, Hungary and Austria than here.
Thomm > , August 16, 2017 at 9:50 pm GMT@Diversity Heretic John Derbyshire has made similar arguments--racial preferences are the price for social peace. But, as Steve Sailer has pointed out, we're running out of white and Asian children to buffer black dysfunction and Asians are going to get less and less willing to be "sacrificial lambs" for a black underclass that they did nothing to create and that they despise.
There are other ways to control the black underclass. You can force the talented ones to remain in their community and provide what leadership they can. Black violence can be met with instant retributive counter-violence. (Prior to the 1960s most race riots were white on black.) Whites can enforce white norms on the black community, who will sort-of conform to them as best they are able.
Finally, Rudyard Kipling had a commentary on Danegeld. It applies to paying off dysfunctional domestic minorities just as much to invading enemies.
"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that pays it is lost!"admitting academically unqualified blacks to elite schools is, at core, a policy to protect the racial peace and, as such, has nothing to do with racial justice,
The Black are protesting relentlessly and loudly verbally and thru assertive actions about the racial discrimination they have been facing. I have never seen those academically unqualified blacks admitted to the elite schools have stood up using themselves as shiny examples to refute the discrimination allegations the Black made against the White.
While the policy to protect the racial peace by admitting academically unqualified blacks to elite schools failed miserably, the restricting the smart and qualified Asians to elite schools is blatantly racial injustice practice exercised in broad day light with a straight face lie. The strategy is to cause resentment between the minorities so that the White can admitting their academically unqualified ones to elite schools without arousing scrutiny.
Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 10:04 pm GMT@Saxon I'm white, you stupid faggot.
I am extremely committed that you White Trashionalists fulfill your duty as wastebaskets of genetic matter.
Excellent whites exist only because the waste produced gets removed in the form of WN wiggers.
Like I said, there is a huge variance within whites. Therefore, you have no business speaking for respectable whites.
Worst of all, you Nationalist-Leftists are un-American.
Priss Factor > , Website August 16, 2017 at 10:05 pm GMT@Astuteobservor II Just google solutrean theory Europeans arrived in America 20,000 years ago. Many articles come up including from smithsonian.
The east coast Canadian Indians always had the founding myth they came over the ocean.
There's a book, Across The Atlantic Ice by Dennis Stanford on kindle, Amazon and many book stores.
Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 10:20 pm GMTHere is one 'smart Asian' who is not a Self-Righteous Addict of Proglobalism, but what a clown.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNrytSEyUoY
Dineshisms are always funny as hell.
Because KKK were Southern Democrats, Democratic Party is forever the KKK party. Never mind Democrats represented a broad swatch of people.
And Dinesh finds some parallels between Old Democrats and Nazi ideology, therefore Democrats are responsible for Nazism. I meanDoesn't he know that parties change? Democratic Party once used to be working class party. Aint no more.
GOP used to be Party of Lincoln. It is southern party now, and most loyal GOP-ers are Southerns with respect for Confederacy. GOP now wants Southern Neo-Confed votes but don't want Confed memorials. LOL.
Things change.Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond came over to the GOP for a reason.
Dinesh seems to be stuck in 'caste' mentality. Because Dems once had KKK on its side, Democratic Party is forever cast or 'casted' as KKK. And now, 'Democrats are real Nazis'.
Actually, the real supremacism in America at the moment seems to be AIPAC-related.
Anyway, there were leftist elements in National Socialism, but its was more right than left.
Why? Because in the hierarchy of ideological priorities, the most important core value was the 'Aryan' Tribe. Socialized medicine was NOT the highest value among Nazis. Core conviction was the ideology of racial identity and unity. Thus, it was more right than left.
Just because National Socialism had some leftist elements doesn't make it a 'leftist' ideology.
Same is true of Soviet Communism. Stalin brought back high culture and classical music. He favored traditionalist aesthetics to experimental or avant-garde ones. And Soviets promoted some degree of Russian nationalism. And even though communists eradicated certain aspects of the past, they also restored respect for classic literature and culture. So, does that mean USSR was 'conservative' or 'rightist'? No, it had some rightist elements but its core ideology was about class egalitarianism, therefore, it was essentially leftist.
Liberty Mike > , August 16, 2017 at 10:22 pm GMT@Joe Wong All the Whites and Asians who are admitted to the top 25 schools are superbly qualified. There are so many applicants every White and Asian is superbly qualified.
The entire point of affirmative action is that Asians and Whites are discriminated against in favor of blacks and Hispanics. Harvard proudly proclaims that is now majority non White.
Don't worry, the Jews decided long ago that you Asian drones would have medicine and tech, Hispanics construction, food, trucking,and cleaning and Hispanics and blacks would share government work and public education.
Whites will gradually disappear and the 110 year old Jewish black coalition will control the Asians and Hispanics through black crime and periodic riots.
Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 10:31 pm GMT@Truth Do you think Beavis and Butthead are choosing Angola over Austria?
Alden > , August 16, 2017 at 10:35 pm GMT@Macumazahn Affirmative action punishes Whites as well and Asians are always free to go back to wherever their parents or grandparents came from.
After 400 years, Whites can't go anywhere.
Joe Wong > , August 16, 2017 at 10:40 pm GMT@Thomm Do you favor affirmative action?
Liberty Mike > , August 16, 2017 at 10:44 pm GMT@Wally So you are a tough guy, and never give in anything to anyone in your life? It seems the Jews have similar view as yours, the Jews insist that if they give in an inch to those Holocaust deniers, they will keep demanding more & more, at the beginning the Holocaust deniers will demand for the evidence, then they will demand the Jews are at fault, then they will demand the Nazi to be resurrected, then they will demand they can carry out Holocaust against anyone they don't like, Pretty soon they will demand they to be treated like the pigs in the Orwellian's Animal Farm.
F the media > , August 16, 2017 at 10:46 pm GMT@Thomm "Un-American" is descriptively flaccid. It means nada, nothing, zero. It is vapid and so empty and such a lame lexeme.
Any word that is hackneyed, lifeless, and so low energy would never be scripted by a White committed to excellence.
Anon > , Disclaimer August 16, 2017 at 10:46 pm GMT@Priss Factor Hell with those 'smart Asians'. They are among the biggest Proglob a-holes.
Asians have servile genes that seek approval from the power. They are status-freaks.
They make perfect collaborators with the Glob.
Under communism, they made the most conformist commies.
Under Japanese militarism, they made the most mindless military goons who did Nanking.
Under Khmer Rouge, they were biggest looney killers.
Under PC, they make such goody good PC dogs.
If the prevailing culture of US was patriotic and conservatives, Asians would try to conform to that, and that wouldn't be so bad.
But since the prevailing culture is PC, these yellow dogs are among the biggest homomaniacal PC tards.
Hell with them. Yellow dogs voted for Obama and Hillary in high numbers. They despise, hate, and feel contempt for white masses and working class. They are servitors of the empire as Darrell Hamamoto said. He's one of the few good guys.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bs_BbIBCoY
Just look at that Francis Fukuyama, that slavish dog of Soros. He's so disgusting. And then, you got that brown Asian tard Fareed Zakaria. What a vile lowlife. And that fat Jeer Heet who ran from dirty browns shi**ing all over the place outdoors to live with white people but bitches about 'white supremacy'. Well, the fact that he ran from his own kind to live with whites must mean his own choice prefers white folks. His immigration choice was 'white supremacism'. After all, he could have moved to black Africa. Why didn't he?
PS. The best way of Affirmative Action is to limit it only to American Indians and Blacks of slave ancestry. That's it.
Also, institutions should OPENLY ADMIT that they do indeed discriminate to better represent the broader population. Fair or not, honesty is a virtue. What is most galling about AA is the lies that says 'we are colorblind and meritocratic but...' No more buts. Yes, there is discrimination but to represent larger population. Okay, just be honest. Asia is a big continent and Asians of different ethnicity have very different voting patterns due to their culture and history. Japanese-Americans tend to be the most liberal ethnic group of all Asian groups because of their experience with internment during WWII. Somehow they conveniently forgot that it was a Democrat president who put them in internment, and are now putting the blames squarely on the right for what happened. These Japanese-Americans are drinking the kool-aid big time, but in the 90s I remember a Japanese prime minister got in big trouble for saying America's biggest problem is we have too many blacks and hispanics dragging us down.
Filipinos, Hmongs and other Southeast Asians tend to be poor and rely on government largess to a certain extent, and also benefit from affirmative action at least in the state of CA, they also tend to be liberal.
In this election cycle Indian-Americans have become the most vocal anti-Trumpers. From Indian politicians from WA state like Kshama Sawant, Pramila Jayapal to Indian entertainers like Aziz Ansari, Hasan Minaj, Kumail Nanjani, to Silicon Valley techies like Calexit mastermind VC Shervin Pishevar, Google CEO Sundra Pichai, all are socialist libtards. In my local election, several Indians are running for city council. All are first generation, all Democrats and champions of liberal policies. It's as if they have amnesia(or just lower IQ), not remembering that socialism was why they had to leave the shithole India to begin with. A Korean American is running as a Republican.
There are Chinese idiots like Ted Lieu and other asians who've gone to elite schools therefore drinking the kool-aid and insisted AA is good for Asian Americans, but most Koreans, Vietnamese and Chinese tend to be more conservative and lean Republican. During the Trump campaign Breitbart printed a story about a group of Chinese Americans voicing their support for Trump despite his anti-China rhetoric because they had no intention of seeing the US turned into another socialist shithole like China.
Per the NYT a major reason Asians vote Republican is because of AA. Asians revere education, esp. the Chinese and Koreans, and they see holistic admission is largely bullshit set up by Jews to protect their legacy status while throwing a few bones to under qualified blacks and hispanics. Unfortunately it didn't seem to dampen their desire to immigrate here. Given that there are 4 billion Asians and thanks to open borders, if it weren't for AA all our top 100 schools will be 100% Asian in no time. I suggest we first curtail Asian immigration, limit their number to no more than 10,000 a year, then we can discuss dismantling AA.
Anon > , Disclaimer August 16, 2017 at 10:46 pm GMT@Wally This is false. See:
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/#main-findings
California sends far more to Washington than it sends back. Also, there is no correlation between percentage of federal land and dependence on federal funding. If there were, Delaware would be the least dependent state in the US.
Clue: It isn't.
Astuteobservor II > , August 16, 2017 at 10:47 pm GMT@Wally This is false. See:
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/#main-findings
California sends far more to Washington than it sends back. Also, there is no correlation between percentage of federal land and dependence on federal funding. If there were, Maine would be among the least dependent states in the US.
Clue: It isn't.
Astuteobservor II > , August 16, 2017 at 10:48 pm GMT@Alden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis
if the wiki is reliable. you shouldn't be telling others like it is a cold hard fact. But still a very interesting read. thanks for bringing it up.
F the media > , August 16, 2017 at 11:06 pm GMTBut in the job market they have affirmative action aristocratic status over Whites.
that is another bold claim. I know of black quotas, but asian quota???
THe Realist > , Website August 16, 2017 at 11:13 pm GMT@Astuteobservor II The Indian tribe in tech is known to favor Indians in hiring. I've read from other Indian posters elsewhere that Indian managers like to hire Indian underlings because they are easier to bully.
Indian outsourcing firms like Infosys, TCS, Wipro are like 90% Indian, mostly imported directly from India, with token whites as admin or account manager.
F the media > , August 16, 2017 at 11:14 pm GMT@Truth See #65 above. You die, too, boy.
Joe Wong > , August 16, 2017 at 11:27 pm GMT@Carlton Meyer That's pretty funny. The guy's got balls. Probably son of some corrupt Chinese government official used to being treated like an emperor back home, ain't taking no shit from black folks.
I suppose this is what happens when universities clamor to accept foreign students because they are full pay. His tuition dollar is directly subsidizing these affirmative action hacks, who are now preventing him from studying. He has fully paid for his right to tell them to STFU.
Joe Franklin > , August 16, 2017 at 11:33 pm GMT@Beckow Romans did not think Europe was a nice place to live, full of bloodthirsty barbarians, uneducated, smelly, dirty, foul mouth and rogue manner, even nowadays a lot of them cannot use full set of tableware to finish their meal, a single fork will do, it is a litte more civilized than those use fingers only.
After a millennium of dark age of superstition, religious cult suppression, utter poverty medieval serf Europe, it followed by centuries of racial cleanses, complete destruction of war, stealing and hypocrisy on industrial scale, this time not only restricted to Europe the plague flooded the whole planet.
Even nowadays the same plague from Europe and its offshoots in the North America is threatening to exterminate the human beings with a big bang for their blinding racial obligatory. The rest of the world only can hope this plague would stay put in North America and Europe, so the rest world can live in peace and prosperity.
Reg Cćsar > , August 16, 2017 at 11:38 pm GMTAsians receive federal entitlements the same as the other protected class groups of diversity.
Diversity ideology lectures us that Asians are oppressed by Occidentals.
1. Preferential US immigration, citizenship, and asylum policies for Asian people
2. Federal 8a set-aside government contracts for Asian owned businesses
3. Affirmative Action for Asians especially toward obtaining government jobs
4. Government anti-discrimination laws for Asians
4. Government hate speech crime prosecutions in defense of Asians
5. Sanctuary cities for illegal Asians, and other protected class groups of diversity
6. Asian espionage directed at the US is common, and many times goes unprosecuted
7. American trade policy allows mass importation of cheap Asian products built with slave labor
8. Whaling allowance for some Asian ethnic groups
9. Most H1-B visas awarded to AsiansThomm > , August 17, 2017 at 12:10 am GMTPlease stop trying to confuse Orientals with Indians and other subcontinentals. They are quite distinct.
In their original countries they are, but in America they are almost identical in all ways except appearance and diet.
And odor.
Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 12:12 am GMT@War for Blair Mountain Thomm=the girly boy blatherings of a White Libertarian Cuck...
The benefit to the Historic Native Born White American Working Class of being voted into a White Racial Minority in California by Chinese "Americans"...Korean "Americans"....Hindu "Americans"...Sihk "Americans"...and Iranian "Americans"?
Answer:0.... Bring back the Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act!!!
Two Great pro-White Socialist Labor Leaders:Denis Kearney and Samuel Gompers...go read Denis Kearney's Rebel Rousing speeches...google Samuel Gompers' Congressional Testimony in favor of the passage of The Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act... It is MUCH better to be a libertarian than to be a Nationalist-Leftist. You have effectively admitted that you want intra-white socialism since you can't hack it yourself.Socialists = untalented losers.
Plus, I guarantee that your ancestors were not in America since 1776. You are just some 2nd-gen Polack or something.
Issac > , August 17, 2017 at 12:12 am GMTDo you favor affirmative action?
Absolutely not. It is one of the worst things ever devised.
Vinteuil > , August 17, 2017 at 12:14 am GMT@Thomm Sounds like a Jewish fantasy.
Issac > , August 17, 2017 at 12:15 am GMT@Priss Factor Here is one 'smart Asian' who is not a Self-Righteous Addict of Proglobalism, but what a clown.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNrytSEyUoY
Dineshisms are always funny as hell.
Because KKK were Southern Democrats, Democratic Party is forever the KKK party. Never mind Democrats represented a broad swatch of people.
And Dinesh finds some parallels between Old Democrats and Nazi ideology, therefore Democrats are responsible for Nazism. I mean...Doesn't he know that parties change? Democratic Party once used to be working class party. Aint no more.
GOP used to be Party of Lincoln. It is southern party now, and most loyal GOP-ers are Southerns with respect for Confederacy. GOP now wants Southern Neo-Confed votes but don't want Confed memorials. LOL.
Things change.Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond came over to the GOP for a reason.
Dinesh seems to be stuck in 'caste' mentality. Because Dems once had KKK on its side, Democratic Party is forever cast or 'casted' as KKK. And now, 'Democrats are real Nazis'.
Actually, the real supremacism in America at the moment seems to be AIPAC-related.
Anyway, there were leftist elements in National Socialism, but its was more right than left.
Why? Because in the hierarchy of ideological priorities, the most important core value was the 'Aryan' Tribe. Socialized medicine was NOT the highest value among Nazis. Core conviction was the ideology of racial identity and unity. Thus, it was more right than left.
Just because National Socialism had some leftist elements doesn't make it a 'leftist' ideology.
Same is true of Soviet Communism. Stalin brought back high culture and classical music. He favored traditionalist aesthetics to experimental or avant-garde ones. And Soviets promoted some degree of Russian nationalism. And even though communists eradicated certain aspects of the past, they also restored respect for classic literature and culture. So, does that mean USSR was 'conservative' or 'rightist'? No, it had some rightist elements but its core ideology was about class egalitarianism, therefore, it was essentially leftist. "Stalin brought back high culture and classical music. He favored traditionalist aesthetics to experimental or avant-garde ones."
Priss, you haven't the first clue what you're talking about, here. Stalin didn't favor "traditionalist aesthetics" – he favored vulgar pop-crap.
Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 12:15 am GMT@Joe Wong Ah yes, the whites are well known for their bigotry. That's why they're so mono-racial and China is so diverse. Good point Chang.
Joe Wong > , August 17, 2017 at 12:15 am GMT@Joe Franklin Asians receive federal entitlements the same as the other protected class groups of diversity.
Diversity ideology lectures us that Asians are oppressed by Occidentals.
1. Preferential US immigration, citizenship, and asylum policies for Asian people
2. Federal 8a set-aside government contracts for Asian owned businesses
3. Affirmative Action for Asians especially toward obtaining government jobs
4. Government anti-discrimination laws for Asians
4. Government hate speech crime prosecutions in defense of Asians
5. Sanctuary cities for illegal Asians, and other protected class groups of diversity
6. Asian espionage directed at the US is common, and many times goes unprosecuted
7. American trade policy allows mass importation of cheap Asian products built with slave labor
8. Whaling allowance for some Asian ethnic groups
9. Most H1-B visas awarded to Asians That is completely false. You just memorized that from some bogus site.Section 8a is used more by white women than by Asians, and Asians get excluded from it due to high income. It should be done away with altogether, of course.
Asians face discrimination in University admissions, as the main article describes.
H1-Bs are awarded to Asians because white countries don't produce enough people who qualify.
Plus, Asian SAT scores are consistently higher than whites. That proves that Asian success was not due to AA.
Saxon > , August 17, 2017 at 12:46 am GMTthe 110 year old Jewish black coalition will control
I am not sure the Muslim and Indian will agree to that, they have a very strong birth rate that can match if not surpass the blacks too.
Ron Unz > , August 17, 2017 at 12:47 am GMT@Thomm Green isn't a color that suits you. You're a subcontinental hanger-on who's only able to garner any success in any western country due to an anarcho-tyranny in enforcement against ethnonepotism as well as lavish handouts in the form of all sorts of party favors.
There are very few non-white groups that could do any well on a level playing field with equal enforcement against nepotism, and yours isn't one of them. Your country? Sad!
Astuteobservor II > , August 17, 2017 at 1:03 am GMTWhites will gradually disappear and the 110 year old Jewish black coalition will control the Asians and Hispanics through black crime and periodic riots.
I don't think this is correct
Since California already has (very roughly) the future demographics you're considering, I think it serves as a good test-case.
The Hispanic and Asian populations have been growing rapidly, and they tend to hold an increasing share of the political power, together with the large white population, though until very recently most of the top offices were still held by (elderly) whites. Whites would have much more political power, except that roughly half of them are still Republicans, and the Republican Party has almost none.
In most of the urban areas, there's relatively little black crime these days since so many of the blacks have been driven away or sent off to prison. I'd also say that major black riots in CA are almost unthinkable since many of the local police forces are heavily Hispanic: they don't particularly like blacks, and might easily shoot the black rioters dead while being backed up by the politicians, and many of the blacks probably recognize this. Admittedly, CA always had a relatively small black population, but that didn't prevent enormous black crime and black riots in the past due to the different demographics.
Meanwhile, Jewish-activists still possess enormous influence over CA politics, but they exert that influence through money and media, just like they do everywhere else in the country.
Priss Factor > , August 17, 2017 at 1:26 am GMT@F the media that is actually true about indians. I have first hand account of a 100+ tech dept getting taken over by indians in just 3 years :/ but that is not a "quota" that is just indians abusing their power once in position of power.
Truth > , August 17, 2017 at 1:35 am GMT@Vinteuil Priss, you haven't the first clue what you're talking about, here. Stalin didn't favor "traditionalist aesthetics" – he favored vulgar pop-crap.
Right.. Ballet, Prokofiev, Shostakovich, and classic literature. That's some pop crap.
Soviet Culture was about commie Lena Dunhams.Now, most of Soviet culture was what might be called kitsch or middlebrow stuff, but it was not 'pop crap' as known in the West.
Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 1:58 am GMT@THe Realist LOL, if you're the one holding the knife, hatchet, billy club or brick, I like my chances.
Joe Franklin > , August 17, 2017 at 2:03 am GMT@Saxon Green isn't a color that suits you. You're a subcontinental hanger-on who's only able to garner any success in any western country due to an anarcho-tyranny in enforcement against ethnonepotism as well as lavish handouts in the form of all sorts of party favors.
There are very few non-white groups that could do any well on a level playing field with equal enforcement against nepotism, and yours isn't one of them. Your country? Sad! Whatever helps you sleep at night..
Yesterday I was called a Jew. Today, it is Indian. In reality, I am a white American guy.
You white trashionalists can't get your stories straight, can you? Well, WNs are known for having negro IQs.
Asians don't get affirmative action. They outscore whites in the SAT.
But even blacks outscore WNs like you.
Heh heh heh heh
Truth > , August 17, 2017 at 2:20 am GMT@Thomm That is completely false. You just memorized that from some bogus site.
Section 8a is used more by white women than by Asians, and Asians get excluded from it due to high income. It should be done away with altogether, of course.
Asians face discrimination in University admissions, as the main article describes.
H1-Bs are awarded to Asians because white countries don't produce enough people who qualify.
Plus, Asian SAT scores are consistently higher than whites. That proves that Asian success was not due to AA. You have reading comprehension problems to have confused Federal 8A government contacts with Section 8 housing.
8A contracts are federal contracts granted to "socially and economically disadvantaged individual(s)."
The business must be majority-owned (51 percent or more) and controlled/managed by socially and economically disadvantaged individual(s).
The individual(s) controlling and managing the firm on a full-time basis must meet the SBA requirement for disadvantage, by proving both social disadvantage and economic disadvantage.
Definition of Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Individuals
Socially disadvantaged individuals are those who have been subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice or cultural bias because of their identities as members of groups without regard to their individual qualities. The social disadvantage must stem from circumstances beyond their control.
In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the following individuals are presumed to be socially disadvantaged:
• Black Americans;
• Hispanic Americans (persons with origins from Latin America, South America, Portugal and Spain);
• Native Americans (American Indians, Eskimos, Aleuts, and Native Hawaiians);
• Asian Pacific Americans (persons with origins from Japan, China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Korea, Samoa, Guam, U.S. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands [Republic of Palau], Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Laos, Cambodia [Kampuchea], Taiwan, Burma, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Brunei, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Macao, Hong Kong, Fiji, Tonga, Kiribati, Tuvalu, or Nauru);• Subcontinent Asian Americans (persons with origins from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, the Maldives Islands or Nepal);
• And members of other groups designated from time to time by the SBA.
Beckow > , August 17, 2017 at 2:25 am GMTThat's pretty funny. The guy's got balls.
Nah, just some goofy nerd working on his PhD in Library Science.
THIS Kat on the other hand is my N-!
Truth > , August 17, 2017 at 2:33 am GMT@Joe Wong Romans lived in Europe, get an atlas, Rome is in Europe. I will skip over your silly summaries of European history, we all can do it to any civilization all day. Pointless. Try China. Oh, I forgot, nobody knows much Chinese up and downs because it was mostly inconsequential.
If you call others 'racist' all the time, they might just not take your seriously. Or simply say, fine, if liking one's culture is now 'racism', if it is a white culture, then count me in. The rest of the world is tripping over itself to move – literally to physically move – to Europe and North America. Why do you think that is?
Truth > , August 17, 2017 at 2:35 am GMTI'd also say that major black riots in CA are almost unthinkable since many of the local police forces are heavily Hispanic: they don't particularly like blacks, and might easily shoot the black rioters dead
Oh, would you stop being a make-believe pundit, Ron? That is some commentary you copped from an OJ-era LA Times expose. You've had one conversation with a police officer in your life, and that was over an illegal left term outside the Loma Linda Starbucksand culminated in disturbing the peace when exited your Bentley yelling "DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?!?!" at the top of your lungs for 4 minutes.
Whenever you've had a nudity-mandatory, eyes-wide-shut, type globalist-soiree at your palatial mansion, the only people you invited were politicians, lawyers, Ivy-league economists, Silicon Valley tech nerds and hookers.
Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 2:37 am GMT@Priss Factor They had to be into all that tired, boring, 11-century old shit; they didn't have any black people.
War for Blair Mountain > , August 17, 2017 at 2:44 am GMT@Joe Franklin We've been over this. 8a is not given to anyone with over $250,000 in assets, as your own link indicates. This means most Asians can't use it anyway (not that they need to).
The whole program should be done away with, of course.
What is funny is that you can't accept that Asians have higher SAT scores than whites, which pretty much proves that they can (and do) outperform without AA. You WN idiots can't come to terms with that.
But Section 8a should be removed just so that WN wiggers don't have anything to hide behind, since Asians don't need it to excel.
uman > , August 17, 2017 at 3:09 am GMT@Thomm These untalented Socialists you refer to would include the vast majority of America 1969 90 percent Native Born White America .a White Nation that placed two Alpha Native Born White American Males on the Moon .ten more after that. Seems that Socialism worked just fine.
If you prefer an Asian Majority you can always pack your bags and pick the Asian Nation of your choice.
Ronnie > , August 17, 2017 at 3:11 am GMT@Ron Unz hmm i don't know that will be the case nationally. Southern cities like Atlanta will not have hispanic or white govt. Same with nyc, no need for blacks in harlem or bronx to leave if government aid continues to pay for rent controlled affordable housing. Same case can be made for most large northern cities like chicago, detroit, boston, philadelphia, DC, etc.
So with future aa population of 14%, that's 60 million blacks in america in 2060 timeframe, although that will have an increasing amount of immigration from africa, which tends to be more educated (at least 1st and 2nd generation).
Asians will be about 8%, so that's a poweful community of 40 million. I see tech and wall street with increasing amount of asian representations.
What i would be interested in seeing if there will any maverick asian billionaires that could disrupt the narrative.
Joe Franklin > , August 17, 2017 at 3:38 am GMTThis article may tend to take your mind off the real racial injustice at Harvard. In an article "Affirmative Action Battle Has a New Focus: Asian-Americans" in the NY Times, August 3, 2017 ANEMONA HARTOCOLLIS and STEPHANIE SAUL wrote ""The Harvard lawsuit likens attitudes toward Asian-Americans to attitudes toward Jews at Harvard, beginning around 1920, when Jews were a high-achieving minority. In 1918, Jews reached 20 percent of the Harvard freshman class, and the university soon proposed a quota to lower the number of Jewish students."" In my humble opinion this is a misleading statement which implies that the admission of Jews remained below 20% in the years after 1918. In fact Hillel reports that in recent years the admission of jews to Harvard has been around 25% of the class. This means that almost half of the class are white and half of this white group are Jews. That seems like an amazing over-representation of Jews who are only 2% of our population. So, at least as many Jews as Asians are admitted to Harvard. No wonder the Asians are upset. I note that this article does not point out this Jewish bias in admissions at Harvard and neither did the Asians. Is this another manifestation of political correctness? Or is it an egregious example of racism? This problem is the real elephant in the room. This is the Jewish racism that dare not speak its name. Until lately.
Priss Factor > , Website August 17, 2017 at 3:41 am GMT@Thomm Thanks for changing the subject back to 8A contracts, a subject I first brought up.
You ignorantly labeled me a liar and then prattled on about unrelated Section 8 housing.
I've never mentioned anything about SAT scores because they are irrelevant to anything whatsoever that I've posted.
SAT scores are your irrelevant preoccupation, not mine.
I'm just a person that detests government diversity schemes, group entitlements, and federal protected class groups.
Like it or not, Asians are one of many federal protected class groups entitled by law.
I'm not a WN nor did I ever claim to be a WN; just another example of your fevered and imagined conversations with me.
You are fairly stupid to claim that "most Asians" are rich.
You appear to be a grossly ignorant and arrogant dickhead.
Ron Unz > , August 17, 2017 at 3:54 am GMT@Truth Truth, you is so wise and true. You's right. Them Russian dummies didn't have no vibrant black folks to make fun music that could make them wiggle their butts all their night long. So, they grew stale and bored and drank too much vodka, caught fish with penis, and wrestled with bears and didn't have the all the cool stuff like the US has.
All the world needs to be colonized by superior Negroes cuz folks will just die of boredom.
At least if you get killed by Negroes, it's exciting-like.Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 4:23 am GMThmm i don't know that will be the case nationally. Southern cities like Atlanta will not have hispanic or white govt. Same with nyc, no need for blacks in harlem or bronx to leave if government aid continues to pay for rent controlled affordable housing. Same case can be made for most large northern cities like chicago, detroit, boston, philadelphia, DC, etc.
Well, my California analogy was self-admittedly very rough and approximate given the considerable differences in demographics. But I strongly suspect that such considerations provide a hidden key to some contentious national policies of the last couple of decades, and I've actually written extensively on the subject:
http://www.unz.com/runz/race-and-crime-in-america/#the-hidden-motive-for-heavy-immigration
MarkinLA > , August 17, 2017 at 4:27 am GMTYou are fairly stupid to claim that "most Asians" are rich.
They have higher household income than whites. Many do not qualify for 8a (not that they needed).
But yes, 8a should be abolished, just like ALL other affirmative action.
SAT scores are your irrelevant preoccupation, not mine.
It is relevant, because it demolishes your retarded belief that Asian success would not have happened without affirmative action.
You really are quite lacking in basic intelligence. A typical white trashionalist.
dearieme > , August 17, 2017 at 11:02 am GMT@Anon I imagine it was far different before the defense wind-downs of the mid 90s. Along with the many cut-backs a lot of defense was moved out of California by the contractors as punishment for California's liberal Congressmen. Companies that merged with California based operation usually consolidated outside California such as when Raytheon swallowed up Hughes Aircraft Companies defense operations and moved R&D to Massachusetts.
dearieme > , August 17, 2017 at 11:06 am GMT@Liberty Mike I know several white people who would rather live in Botswana than the Ukraine. They have the advantage of having visited . The rest of your list seems pretty sound with the possible exception of Swaziland.
P.S. If you deleted Austria and Hungary and replaced them by Albania and Kosovo you might make your point even stronger.
Saxon > , August 17, 2017 at 1:30 pm GMT@Joe Franklin Good God, how absolutely awful to hale from Portugal, Spain, or Singapore.
Truth > , August 17, 2017 at 2:49 pm GMT@Thomm You're non-white and really dumb to boot; you don't understand the ecology of a society. Even the white proles are better than your people's proles because they don't make functional civilizations impossible. If it were possible for a tiny minority to drag the lowers upwards you would be able to haul your lower castes upwards and make your own country work, then the Brahmins would have done it. They can't because the average abilities, intelligence and disposition of the masses is too low of quality in those countries to the point where tourists need to be given explicit warnings about rape and other problems which you will never need when visiting, say, some English village of completely average English people. The "white trash" you decry is probably only slightly below your midwit level of intelligence.
Asians do get affirmative action in employment and promotions in the workplace by the way, just not in education.
MarkinLA > , August 17, 2017 at 2:59 pm GMT@Priss Factor Alright, you're finally starting to get it.
Abracadabra > , August 17, 2017 at 3:10 pm GMT@Thomm I seem to remember you telling everybody that Asians DON'T get affirmative action JUST GOOGLE IT without ever offering proof. Of course it never occurred to you that there could never be any documented proof of something like that. There isn't even official documented proof that white males don't get affirmative action. When people claimed and linked to articles indicating Asians are considered disadvantaged by the government, you claimed those people didn't know what they were talking about JUST GOOGLE IT.
I think you made it quite obvious who the idiot is.
Azn_bro > , August 17, 2017 at 3:22 pm GMTIt's time to force our "Golden Dozen" (Ivies, Stanford, MIT, Amherst and Williams) to admit 100% black until the average black income($43k) equals that of average white income($71k).
I'm Asian and I approve of this message.
Abracadabra > , August 17, 2017 at 4:28 pm GMT@Thomm The worst hate crimes I have personally witnessed were perpetrated by black men. I have also seen more casual racism against Asians from blacks than from whites. This might be different in other parts of the country or world.
Outside of the U.S., East Asians are the least likely to want to engage in some kind of anti-white alliance since all of the West's most embarrassing military defeats have come from East Asians. We have always relied on guns and not white guilt for racial equality.
Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 4:32 pm GMT@Ronnie In case you haven't noticed, Jews run this country. They dominate the media, academia, Wall Street, Hollywood, Capitol Hill via the DNC and lobbying firms, Silicon Valley. Per the NYT 80% of Jews are self-proclaimed liberals. They are obsessed with dismantling the WASP World Order that in their mind has oppressed them for the last 2000 years. The Ivy League is the pipeline to these 6 sectors that collectively control the country, whoever controls Harvard controls the country. Jews not only make up majority of the elite college faculty (esp. in the social sciences) but are disproportionately benefiting from legacy admission and development cases(admission of the dim witted sons and daughters of the rich and famous like Malia Obama, Jared Kushner, all of Al Gore's kids).
Asians are the next up. Practically all Asians who've gone to the Ivy League or Stanford have voiced their support for affirmative action, many are left wing nuts like the Jews. CA house representative Ted Liu is one such kool-aid drinking Asian libtard, along with the HI judge Derrick Watson and Baltimore judge Theodore Chuang, both of whom blocked Trump's temp. suspension of Muslim refugees, both went to Harvard Law. As an Asian I would be more than happy if the Ivy League simply make themselves off limits to all Asians and turn their schools 100% black. We don't need more Asians to get indoctrinated in their dumb liberal ideology and go down in history as the group next to the Jews and the blacks who destroyed America.
Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 4:33 pm GMT@Saxon You're non-white and really dumb to boot; you don't understand the ecology of a society. Even the white proles are better than your people's proles because they don't make functional civilizations impossible. If it were possible for a tiny minority to drag the lowers upwards you would be able to haul your lower castes upwards and make your own country work, then the Brahmins would have done it. They can't because the average abilities, intelligence and disposition of the masses is too low of quality in those countries to the point where tourists need to be given explicit warnings about rape and other problems which you will never need when visiting, say, some English village of completely average English people. The "white trash" you decry is probably only slightly below your midwit level of intelligence.
Asians do get affirmative action in employment and promotions in the workplace by the way, just not in education.
Asians do get affirmative action in employment and promotions in the workplace by the way, just not in education.
No they don't, as this very article explains. Could you BE more of a retard?
Plus, the fact that Asians get higher SAT scores than whites proves that they don't need it. There is a left-wing conspiracy to hide Asian success.
Now, regarding an underachieving WN faggot like you :
Remember that white variance is very high. Excellent whites (like me) exist only because genetic waste master has to be removed from the other end of the process. You and other WNs represent that genetic waste matter, and that is why white women are doing a heroic duty of cutting you off (at least the minority of WNs that are straight. Most are gay, as Jack Donovan has explained). Nature wants the waste matter you comprise of to be expelled.
If you cared about the white race, you would be extremely glad that white women are cutting you off, as that is necessary to get rid of the pollution that you represent.
Heh heh heh heh . it is so much fun to put a WN faggot in its place.
Heh heh heh heh
Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 4:36 pm GMT@Azn_bro Yes, what you say is true.
Any real American would be proud of Asian success, as that represents the American Dream that our country was founded on.
Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 4:43 pm GMT@MarkinLA No, I talked about 8a even two weeks ago. Good god, you WN really do have negro IQs.
8a benefits Asians the least, and THE WHOLE THING SHOULD BE ABOLISHED ANYWAY. There should be no AA, ever.
8a harms Asians as it taints their otherwise pristine claim to having succeeded without AA. They don't need 8a, most don't qualify for it as they exceed the $250,000 cutoff, and it lets WN faggots claim that 'all of Asian success is due to AA', which is demonstrably false.
Read this slowly, 10 times, so that even a wigger like you can get it.
Saxon > , August 17, 2017 at 6:00 pm GMT@Abracadabra Heh.. good one.
Don't let these WN faggots get away with claiming all of Asian success is merely due to affirmative action. In reality, Asians don't get affirmative action (other than wrongly being included in the Section 8a code form the 1980s, which ultimately was used by barely 2% of the Asian community).
Remember that among us whites, variance is extremely high. The prettiest woman alongside pretty of ugly fat feminists (who the WN losers still worship). The smartest men, and then these loserish WNs with low IQs and no social skills. White variance is very high.
That is why WNs are so frustrated. They can't get other whites to give them the time of day, and white women are super-committed to shutting out WN loser males from respectable society.
Don't let them claim that Asian success is solely due to affirmative action. Remember, respectable whites hate these WN faggots.
George Orwell > , August 17, 2017 at 6:41 pm GMT@Thomm You're not white, though. You're a rentseeker hanging onto someone else's country and the fact that you write barely literate garbage posts with no substance to them tells all about your intellect and your "high achievement." You're not high quality. You're mediocre at best and probably not even that since your writing is so bad.
Do you even do statistics, though? Whites make up about 70% of the national merit scholars in the US yet aren't in the Ivies at that rate. Harvard for example is maybe only 25% white. Asians are over-represented compared to their merit and jews way over-represented over any merit. Now how does that happen without nepotism? The whole system of any racial favoritism should be scrapped but of course that wouldn't benefit people like you, Thomm.
üeljang > , August 17, 2017 at 6:42 pm GMTWhites aren't more innovative and ambitious than Chinese people. You only have to look at the chinless Unite the Right idiots in Charlottesville to dispel any idea that whites are the superior race. The
Diversity Heretic > , August 17, 2017 at 7:06 pm GMTThis Thomm character is obviously of East Asian origin. His tedious, repetitive blather about Asians, white women, and "white nationalist faggots" is a telltale sign. One of his type characteristically sounds like he would be so much less distressed if those white males were not white nationalist faggots.
Abracadabra > , August 17, 2017 at 7:54 pm GMT@Tom Welsh An interesting historical argument My reply Land isn't money Arguably the Normans came back in the form of the Plantagenets to contest the French throne in the 100 Years War. But by that time France wasn't nearly so feeble
Giving Negroes land in the form of a North American homeland appeals to me (provided whites get one too) although I know the geography is agonizing Blacks tend not to like this suggestion–they realize how depedent they are on whites That wasn't true of the Normans–quite self-reliant fellows!
Abracadabra > , August 17, 2017 at 8:12 pm GMT@Thomm I'm not sure what it was that I said that made you think I think all Asian success is due to AA. In fact I think the opposite is true, that Asians succeed in spite of AA, which is set up solely to hinder Asians from joining the club, and as far as I'm concern, it's a club of sell-out globalist libtards that I wouldn't want more Asians to join.
I've worked in tech long enough to know that in tech, no one gives a fudge where you went to school. I am surrounded by deca-millionaires who went to state schools, many aren't even flagship, some didn't even study STEM. Some didn't even go to college or graduate. The only people I know who still care about the Ivy League are 1st generation often FOB China/India trash, and a small number of Jewish kids looking to benefit from legacy admission, most are gay and/or serious libtards.
Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 8:52 pm GMTYou can tell that Jewish achievement has fallen off a cliff as Ron Unz asserted by looking at a certain popular college website. The longest running thread that's been up there for nearly a decade with over a thousand pages and over 18,000 posts is called "Colleges for the Jewish "B" student". The site is crawling with uber liberal Jewish mothers and monitored by a gang of Ivy graduated SJWs who strictly enforce their "safe space", posters who post anything at all that might offend anyone (affirmative action is always a sensitive topic) are either thrown in "jail" i.e. ban from posting for a month, or kicked off altogether. The SJW forum monitors even directly edit user comments as they see fit, first amendment rights be damned. This is the future of all online forums if the left have their way, the kind of censorship that Piers Morgan advocates.
Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 8:55 pm GMT@Abracadabra Not *you* , them.
There are plenty of KKK losers on here claiming that Asian success is due to AA. I am saying you should join me in fighting them.
Note the comments above from Saxon, MarkinLA, etc. They are alll White Trashionalists.
Vinteuil > , August 17, 2017 at 9:46 pm GMTAsians are over-represented compared to their merit
False. The main article here alone proves otherwise, plus dozens of other research articles.
You just can't stand that Asian success is due to merit. But you have bigger problems, since as a WN, you can't even compete with blacks.
What bugs you the most is that successful white people like me never give WN faggots the time of day. Most tune you idiots out, but I like to remind you that you are waste matter that is being expunged through the natural evolutionary process.
Vinteuil > , August 17, 2017 at 9:57 pm GMT@Priss Factor Priss, please, please, please try to get this right:
Stalin DID NOT favor Prokofiev, or Shostakovich. He treated them exactly the same way he treated everybody else – like dirt under his feet.
Shostakovich's (admittedly disputed) memoirs are essential reading, here. Please check them out before you say anything more.
Thomm > , August 17, 2017 at 11:04 pm GMT@Thomm " successful white people like me never give WN faggots the time of day "
So you've got a problem with "faggots?"
Astuteobservor II > , August 17, 2017 at 11:12 pm GMTSo you've got a problem with "faggots?"
Yes, more so if they are leftists (including Nationalist-Leftists like WNs are). But the fact that WNs are disproportionately gay (as Jack Donovan points out) also explains why they tend to look grotesque, and it supports the scientific rationale that they are wastebaskets designed to expedite the removal of genetic waste matter.
White variance in talent/looks/intelligence is high. WN loser males and fat, ugly feminists represent the bottom. In the old days, these two would be married to each other since even the lowest tiers were paired up. Today, thankfully, both are being weeded out.
Pachyderm Pachyderma > , August 17, 2017 at 11:35 pm GMTI just realized something. a commenter like thomm is the perfect counter to some of the others. hahaha.
Pachyderm Pachyderma > , August 18, 2017 at 1:00 am GMT@Saxon God! you are stupid, Saxon he isn't a Paki, he is a Chinaman. No wonder the Normans put you guys in thrall!
Thomm > , August 18, 2017 at 1:27 am GMT@Alden Sure you can why not go back to Europe to replace the growing number of Muslims? It can kill two birds with a single shor!
MarkinLA > , August 18, 2017 at 3:02 am GMT@Pachyderm Pachyderma Not just that, but some of these 'white nationalists' are just recent immigrants from Poland and Ukraine. They are desperate to take credit for Western Civilization that they did nothing to create. Deep down, they know that during the Cold War, they were not considered 'white' in America.
400 years? i.e. when most of what is now the lower-48 was controlled by a Spanish-speaking government? Yeah Many of these WNs have been here only 30-70 years. That is one category (the domestic WN wiggers are the other)
Both are equally underachieving and loserish.
Thomm > , August 18, 2017 at 3:50 am GMT@Thomm It's too late, everybody knows what I wrote is true and that you are some pathetic millennial libertarian pajama boy. The sad fact is that you can't even man up and admit that you wrote that BS about "Asians don't get affirmative action just google it". See that would have at least have been a sign of maturity, admitting you were wrong.
There is no point reading anything, even once, from a pathetic pajama boy like you.
Thomm > , August 18, 2017 at 4:03 am GMT@MarkinLA I openly said that I am proud to be libertarian. Remember, talented people can hack in on their own, so they are libertarians.
Untalented losers (like you) want socialism so that you can mooch off of others.
Plus, Asians don't get affirmative action outside of one obscure place (Section 8a) which they often don't qualify for ($250K asset cutoff), don't need, and was never used by more than 2% of the Asian-American community. The fact that Asian SAT scores are higher than whites explains why Asians outperform without AA.
Plus, this very article says that Asians are being held back. A WN faggot like you cannot grasp that even though you are commenting in the comments of this article. Could you be any dumber?
I realize you are not smart enough to grasp these basic concepts, but that is why we all know that white trashionalists have negro IQs.
Now begone; you are getting in the way of your betters.
Heh heh heh heh
TWS > , August 18, 2017 at 4:38 pm GMTRemember that White variance in brains/looks/talent/character is extremely high. Hence, whites occupy both extremities of human quality.
Hence, the hierarchy of economic productivity is :
Talented whites (including Jews)
Asians (East and South)
Hispanics
Blacks
Untalented whites (aka these WN wastebaskets, and fat femtwats).That is why :
1) WNs are never given a platform by respectable whites.
2) Bernie Sanders supporters are lily-white, despite his far-left views.
3) WN is a left-wing ideology, as their economic views are left-wing.
4) WNs are unable to even get any white women, as white women have no reason to pollute themselves with this waste matter. Mid-tier white women thus prefer nonwhite men over these WNs, which makes sense based on the hierarchy above.
5) WNs have the IQ of Negros, the poor social skills of an Asian spazoid, etc. They truly combine the worst of all worlds.
6) This is why white unity is impossible; there is no reason for respectable whites to have anything to do with white trashionalists.
7) Genetically, the very fact that superb whites even exists necessitates the production of individuals to act as wastebaskets for removal of genetic waste. WNs are these wastebaskets.
8) The 80s movie 'Twins' was in effect a way to make these wastebaskets feel good, as eventually, the Arnold Schwarzenegger character bonded with the Danny DeVito character. But these two twins effectively represent the sharp bimodal distribution of white quality. Successful whites are personified by the Schwarzenegger character, while WNs by the DeVito character. In reality, these two would never be on friendly terms, as nature produces waste for a reason.This pretty much all there is to what White Trashionalists really are.
Incontrovertible > , August 18, 2017 at 5:10 pm GMT@Thomm Tiny Duck? You decided to larp under a different handle?
Tradecraft46 > , August 18, 2017 at 10:00 pm GMTElite colleges are a prime example of left wing hypocrisy. The same people who are constantly calling for an equal society are at the same time perpetuating the most unequal society by clamoring to send their kids to a few elite schools that will ensure their entry to or retain their ranks among the elites. Equality for everyone else, elitism for me and my kids. David Brook's nausea inducing self-hating pablum "How we are ruining America" is a prime example of this hypocrisy.
Another good example of left wing hypocrisy is on "school integration". The same people who condemn "bad schools" for the urban poor and call for more integration are always the first to move into the whitest possible neighborhoods as soon as they have kids. They aren't willing to sacrifice their own kids, they just want other people to sacrifice their children by sending them to bad schools.
If the left didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.
Gene Su > , August 19, 2017 at 1:46 am GMTLook, the world is short handed: we need good help or we pay dues.
Affirmative action and the EEOC are not the answer.
When you need help you get help and don't care if they are green [in the color sense or have supernumerary digits.
I don't need agreement with my whimsy, I just need people who will turn to.
Nicholas Stix > , Website August 19, 2017 at 2:42 am GMTWhen I first saw the title of this article, I, being an Asian, was a tad insulted. It smelled like Dr. Weissberg was attempting to create (or at least escalate) racial strife between Asians and blacks. I then read through the article and evaluated the bad and the good.
First the bad: Dr. Weissberg's assertion that Asians are being hurt by the Affirmative Action promotion of blacks is a bit exaggerated. This is because most Asians go into rigorous difficult programs such as engineering, science, and medicine. Most black affirmative action babies go into soft programs such as Black Studies (and whatever else the humanities have degenerated into).
Now the good: I think this is the most true portion of the essay.
Better to have the handsomely paid Cornel West pontificating about white racism at Princeton where he is a full professor than fulminating at some Ghetto street corner. This status driven divide just reflects human nature. Why would a black Yalie on Wall Street socialize with the bro's left behind in the Hood? This is the strategy of preventing a large-scale, organized rebellion by decapitating its potential leadership.
I have once wrote that whites stopped sneering at MLK when Malcolm X and the Black Panthers began taking center stage. They sure became more accommodating of "moderate" blacks. With all of the terrorist attacks going on and with blacks converting to Islam, I don't think we're going to get rid of affirmative action any time soon.
Priss Factor > , Website August 19, 2017 at 3:28 pm GMTThis is a politically plausible but morally craven plan, if we're in 1960.
Oops.
Vinteuil > , August 19, 2017 at 6:31 pm GMT@Vinteuil Stalin alternated between favoritism and intimidation. The truth is he did have an eye and ear for culture unlike Mao who was a total philistine.
If Stalin really hated artists, he would have killed all of them.
He appreciated them but kept a close eye.
He loved the first IVAN THE TERRIBLE by Eisenstein, but he sensed that the second one was a criticism of him, and Eisenstein came under great stress.
DB Cooper > , August 19, 2017 at 7:41 pm GMTOK, well, Stalin loved the movies, and may have had an eye for effective cinema. But when it came to music he was, precisely, a total philistine. On this point, I again recommend Shostakovich's disputed *Testimony,* a work unique in its combination of hilarity and horror, both of which come to a head in his account of the competition to write a new national anthem to replace the internationale – pp. 256-64. A must read.
Stebbing Heuer > , Website August 19, 2017 at 8:33 pm GMT@Thomm Can you explain why if South Asians has such high economic productivity India is such a sh*thole?
MarkinLA > , August 19, 2017 at 11:29 pm GMT@Rdm That's the second comment here picking on bald guys.
What do you have against the bald?
You do realise that it's not possible to control baldness? It's an outcome of genetics, yes?
You do also realise that there is zero correlation between baldness and the quality of one's character?
Are you really as stupid as you appear to be?
Thomm > , August 20, 2017 at 3:04 am GMTIs this the Onion?
I wonder how a Bruin is going to be a symbol of racism?
Thomm > , August 20, 2017 at 3:11 am GMT@DB Cooper For the same reason North Korea is poorer than South Korea, despite being the same people.
For the same reason the GDR was so much poorer than the FRG, despite the same people.You probably never even thought about that.
A bad political system takes decades to recover from. Remember that the British also strip-mined India for 200 years..
Come on, these are novice questions
If you think the success of Asian-Americans in general (and Indian-Americans in particular) does not jive with your beliefs, then the burden of explaining what that is, is on you.
Indians happen to be the highest-income group in the US. Also very high are Filipinos and Taiwanese.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income
Most WNs are far, far below the intellectual level where they can grasp the complexities of issues like this.
Russ Nieli > , August 20, 2017 at 8:11 am GMTBTW, the economic center of gravity of the world has always been near Asia, except for a 200-year period from 1820-2020.
That the West would cede to Asia is really just a reversion to the historical norm.
WNs are not smart enough to understand maps/charts like this one, but others will find this interesting.
Avalanche > , August 20, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMTBob,
Racial preferences were ended at California public institutions -- including the elite public universities Berkley and UCLA -- by ballot initiative. No black violence ensued. There is little reason to think the black response would be different if the 8 Ivy League universities ended their policies of racial preferences. Blacks would adjust their expectations. Fear of black rioting and the desire to jumpstart the creation of a large and peaceful black middle class may have been important motives for the initial development of racial preference policies in the late 1960s; they are not major reasons for their retention and continued support from white administrators today. Other reasons and motives are operative (including what I call R-word dread).
PS: Cornel West has moved from Princeton to Harvard Divinity School.Avalanche > , August 20, 2017 at 1:08 pm GMT"Nevertheless, when all added up, the costs would be far lowers than dealing with widespread 1960s style urban violence."
Except back in the '60′s; the White, Euro-derived people were unwilling to fight back. They felt guilty and half-blamed themselves. Not. Any. More! The costs -- social, mental, emotional, physical; pick your metric! -- have now exceeded the patience of WAY more Americans than the media is letting on.
Did you not see 20- and 30-THOUSAND, mostly White Euro-derived, Americans rallying to candidate -- and now President -- Trump's side? (No, the media carefully clipped the videos to hide those numbers, but there they (we!) were! We're done! We're fed up! "FEEDING" these destructive vermin to keep them from destroying our houses and families (and nation and country!) is no longer acceptable! You "don't let Gremlins eat after midnight"? Well, we did -- and now we're in a war against them.
You think this capitulating in education is preventing 'widespread 1960s-style urban violence? Have you not watched the news? We pretty much already are: ask NYC how many "sliced with a knife" attacks they have there! In JUST Jan. and Feb., there were well more than 500! (Seriously vicious attacks with knives and razor blades -- media mentioned it once for a few days, and then shut up.) Look at the fair in Indianapolis; count up rape statistics; investigate the "knock-out game" ("polar bear hunting" -- guess who's the polar bear?!). (Oh yeah, and: Ferguson, Baltimore, Chicago; look at ANY black-filled ruin of a city ) If (when!) we finally have to (CHOOSE to) deal with this low-grade war -- WHO is better armed, better prepared, SMARTER, and fed up?
"This peace-keeping aspect of affirmative action understood, perhaps we ought to view those smart Asians unfairly rejected from Ivy League schools as sacrificial lambs."
Wait, wait -- these are White schools, built by White Americans FOR White Americans! "Oh, the poor Asians are not getting their 'fair share' cause the blacks are getting way more than their 'fair share'?! The Asians' 'fair share' is GO HOME!! The Asians don't have a 'fair share' in White AMERICAN universities; we LET them come here and study -- and that is a KINDNESS: they don't have a 'fair share' of OUR country! How about: stop giving preferences to every damned race and nationality other than the one that BUILT this country and these universities!
Check your premises!
Avalanche > , August 20, 2017 at 1:17 pm GMT@War for Blair Mountain Call them what they are: "paperwork Americans"! Having the paperwork does NOT make them Americans, and nothing ever will!
Imagine a virgin land with no inhabitants: if you took all the Chinese "Americans" or all the Pakistani "Americans" or Black "Americans" or Mexican "Americans" (funny, why did you leave those last two out?! Way more of them than the others ) and moved them there, would they -- COULD they ever -- create another America? No, they would create another China, or another Pakistan -- or their own version of the hellholes their forebears (or they themselves) came from. ONLY White, ONLY Euro-derived Americans could recreate an America.
And this goes, also, to answer the grumbling "Native" Americans who were also NOT native, yes? Siberia, Bering land bridge, ever heard of those? Do you not even know your own pre-history?! What "America" was here when it was a sparse population of warring tribes of variously related Indian groups? What did your forebears make of this continent?
Nothing. There would be no "America" where everyone wants to come and benefit by taking; because ONLY the White settlers (not immigrants: SETTLERS!) were able to create America! And as all you non-Americans (AND paperwork "Americans") continue to swamp and change America for your own benefit -- you will be losing the very thing you came here to take (unfair!) advantage of!
Avalanche > , August 20, 2017 at 1:22 pm GMTAt that point, new public money could be channeled into funding people to leave. Blacks that don't like it in the U.S. would be given X amount of dollars to settle in an African country of their choice.
Chip 'em and ship 'em! Microchip where they CAN'T 'dig it out' to prevent them from ever ever ever returning! And ship 'em out! I'd pay a LOT to have this done!
Avalanche > , August 20, 2017 at 1:43 pm GMTGive the feral negroes what they have been asking for. Pull all law enforcement out of negro hellholes like Detroit and South Chicago and let nature take its course.
They (we!) tried that years ago. The BLACK COPS SUED because they were working in the shittiest places with the shittiest, most violent people -- and "the White cops had it easy."
NOT EVEN the blacks want to be with the blacks -- hence them chasing down every last White person, to inflict their Dis-Verse-City on us!
Avalanche > , August 20, 2017 at 1:52 pm GMTThe larger the immigrant group, the longer it takes to assimilate them.
Alas, typical "paperwork American" lack of understanding! I wrote this to a (White) American who wants to keep importing everyone ("save the children!") -- and, she insisted, they "could" assimilate. However, here's what 'assimilate" means:
Suppose you and your family decided to move to, say, Cambodia. You go there intending to "get your part of the Cambodian dream," you go there to become Cambodian citizens, to assimilate and join them, not to invade and change them. You want to adopt their ways, to *assimilate.* Yes? This is how you describe legal immigrants to OUR country (The United States.)
How long would it take for you and your children to be (or even just feel) "assimilated"? How long would it take for you to see your descendants as "assimilated" -- AS Cambodians? Years? Decades? Generations? Would you be trying to fit in -- and "become" Cambodians; or would you be trying to not forget your heritage? ("Heritage"?! Like, Cinco de Mayo, which they don't even celebrate IN Mexico? Or Kwanza -- a CIA-invented completely fake holiday!)
More important: since it's their country -- how long until THEY see you as "Cambodians" and not foreigners. I know a man and family who have lived in Italy for over 20 years. To the Italians in the village where they live, they are still "stranieri": strangers. After this long, to the local Italians, they're not just "the Americans who moved here" -- they're " our Americans" -- but they are still seen as 100% not Italian, not local: not "assimilated"!
Would you and your children and grandchildren learn to speak, read, and write Cambodian -- and stop trying to use English for anything much in your new homeland? Would you join their clubs -- would you join their NATIONAL RELIGION!? Does "becoming Cambodian" -- does "assimilating" -- not actually include (trying to) become Cambodian (and, thus, ceasing to be American)? (If that were even possible; and it's not.) "Assimilation" is a stupid hope, not a possible reality.
That is where my friend balked. She said: she and her family are very Christian, and no way at all ever would they drop Christianity and pick up Cambodian Buddhism. So -- how can they EVER "assimilate" when they (quite rightly) REFUSE to assimilate?!
Please stop buying into the lies the destroyers of OUR nation keep selling. There is no such thing as "assimilation"; only economic parasitism, jihadi invasion, and benefiting from the systems set up by OUR forebears for THEIR posterity!
rec1man > , August 20, 2017 at 9:08 pm GMTJust because National Socialism had some leftist elements doesn't make it a 'leftist' ideology.
Yes. Yes it does. Go watch/listen to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roMLmYnjslc
The official topic being debated is: "Are National Socialists a legitimate element of the Alt-Right?"
Greg Johnson argues, Yes.
Vox Day argues, No.Thomm > , August 20, 2017 at 10:01 pm GMT@DB Cooper Socialism and Affirmative Action
In my origin state of Tamil Nadu, the effective anti-brahmin quota is 100% ( de-jure is just 69% )
Sundar Pichai or Indira Nooyi or Vish Anand ( former Chess champ ) or Ramanujam ( late math whiz ), cant get a Tamil Nadu State Gov , Math school teacher job
Also, the US gets a biased selection of Indians in terms of caste, class and education
Of Tamil Speakers in USA, about 50% are Tamil Brahmins, vs just 2% in India
The bottom 40% in terms of IQ, such as Muslims, Untouchables and Forest Tribals, are no more than 10% in the US Indian diaspora
For comparison, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis ( muslim ), perform much much lower
UtherWhys > , August 20, 2017 at 10:50 pm GMTFor comparison, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis ( muslim ), perform much much lower
This is interesting, as it puts paid to the obsession that WN idiots have with 'whiteness'.
Pakistan is obviously much more Caucasoid than India and certainly Sri Lanka.
Afghanistan is whiter still. Many in Afghanistan would pass for bona-fide white in the US.
Yet Sri Lanka is richer than India, which is richer than Pakistan, which is richer than Afghanistan.
Either Islam is a negative factor that nullifies everything else including genetics, or something else is going on.
What there is no doubt of is that Asia has been the largest economic region of the world by far except for the brief 200-year deviation (1820-2020), as per that map I posted.
Saintonge235 > , August 21, 2017 at 12:34 am GMT@Thomm Weissberg asks, "Why would a black Yalie on Wall Street socialize with the bro's left behind in the Hood?"
Why focus on the LEFT buttock? His point would be as relevant were he to ask, "Why would a black Yalie on Wall Street socialize with the bro's RIGHT behind in the Hood?" Either way, I smell kinkyness deep within Weissberg's question.
rec1man > , August 21, 2017 at 12:35 am GMTNot protection money. Imperialism.
"Divide and Rule" said the Romans. Incorporate the potential leaders of those you intend to rule into your hereditary upper class, and the vast majority will stay inert at the least. And many will actively support you. See this post by a black woman: Black Americans: The Organized Left's Expendable Shock Troops .
People like Cornel West are not only NOT rabble-rousing in the 'hood, they're telling blacks to support the people who actively keep them poor. "Affirmative Action" is designed to sabotage its alleged goals. Almost all who 'benefit' from it end up among people whose performance is clearly superior to their own, thus fostering feelings of inferiority, subtly communicating that it doesn't matter what the 'beneficiary' of AA does, they'll always fail. This is no accident.
Without AA, there might still be separation, (consider "ultra-orthodox" Jews), but the separate groups would have to be treated with some respect. Really, viewed amorally, it's a marvelous system for oppressing whites and minorities.
MarkinLA > , August 21, 2017 at 1:06 am GMT@Thomm Islam is a negative factor, and the higher IQ castes did not convert to Islam
I have data from California National Merit list, IQ-140 bar
Among Indian Punjabis ;
Jat Sikh peasants = 3 winners ( 75% of Punjabis in USA )
Khatri merchants = 18 winners ( 25% of Punjabis in USA )Both are extremely caucasoid, both appear heavily among Indian bollywood stars ; genetically very similar, just the evolutionary effect of caste selection for merchant niche vs peasant niche
Thomm > , August 21, 2017 at 3:19 am GMT@Russ Nieli Racial preferences were ended at California public institutions -- including the elite public universities Berkley and UCLA -- by ballot initiative.
But the admissions people immediately started using other dodges like "holistic" admissions policies where they try and figure out if your are a minority from other inferences such as your essay where you indicate "how you have overcome". They also wanted to get rid of the SAT or institute a top X% at each school policy.
rec1man > , August 21, 2017 at 8:39 am GMT@rec1man I don't know . a lot of the richest Indians in the US are Gujratis who own motels and gas stations. Patels and such..
They were not of some 'high caste' in India; far from it.
Plus, a Tamil who is of 'high caste' is not Caucasoid in the least. Caste does not seem to correlate to economic talent, since business people are the #3 caste out of 4. The richest people in India today are not 'Brahmins'..
Islam is a negative factor, and the higher IQ castes did not convert to Islam
I disagree. Pakistan is 99% Islam, so all castes converted to Islam and/or many of the lighter-skined Pakistanis are Persians and Turks who migrated there..
Afghanistan's religion prior to Islam was Buddhism, not Hinduism
Fotosynthesis > , August 21, 2017 at 10:43 am GMT@Thomm I don't know.... a lot of the richest Indians in the US are Gujratis who own motels and gas stations. Patels and such..
They were not of some 'high caste' in India; far from it.
Plus, a Tamil who is of 'high caste' is not Caucasoid in the least. Caste does not seem to correlate to economic talent, since business people are the #3 caste out of 4. The richest people in India today are not 'Brahmins'..
I disagree. Pakistan is 99% Islam, so all castes converted to Islam and/or many of the lighter-skined Pakistanis are Persians and Turks who migrated there..
Islam is a negative factor, and the higher IQ castes did not convert to Islam
Afghanistan's religion prior to Islam was Buddhism, not Hinduism... Afghanistan was 33% Hindu, 66% buddhist before islam, but in actual practise lots of overlap between Hinduism and Buddhism, and many families had mixed Indic religions
Pakistan was 22% non-muslim in 1947, these 22% were higher caste Hindus and Sikhs – all got driven out in 1947 ; Pakistan is low IQ islamic sludge residue of Punjabi society
I am Tamil speaking, 80% of Tamil brahmins ( 2% ) can be visually distinguished from the 98% Tamil Dravidians ;
vs
Tamil dravidian
Truth > , August 21, 2017 at 2:39 pm GMTThomm you take up too much oxygen in the room insisting on the importance your opinions, the whole conversation is much more interesting when i skip past your stupid WN focused city boy sheltered viewpoint. Big words and that retarded hehehe thing you do would get you wrastled to the ground and your face rubbed in the dirt
Truth > , August 21, 2017 at 2:54 pm GMT@Fotosynthesis hehehehe
Thomm > , August 21, 2017 at 3:44 pm GMT@rec1man Does anyone want to fill in my comment here in "Miss" Lakshimi?
Bill the Kid > , August 21, 2017 at 10:17 pm GMT@Fotosynthesis By you and what army?
Remember, WNs represent the absolute bottom of every desirable trait.
Heh heh heh heh
Not Another Unz Commenter > , August 21, 2017 at 10:30 pm GMT@jim jones They look the same because they are all clones of the same body.
Thomm > , August 21, 2017 at 11:13 pm GMT@Thomm Why would 'idiot WNs' be happy about the fact that blacks successfully chased asians out of the country, though? That would be a sign that they are gaining a scary degree of power, would it not? Moreover how are white males who want to escape SJW idiocy going to like a country that still actively enforces all sorts of thought control policies of its own? You wannabe libertardian analysts always say silly things like this and it just sounds dumber every time.
JohnMc > , August 22, 2017 at 3:32 pm GMTWhy would 'idiot WNs' be happy about the fact that blacks successfully chased asians out of the country, though? That would be a sign that they are gaining a scary degree of power, would it not?
It would be, but WN retards don't think that far.
You wannabe libertardian analysts always say silly things like this and it just sounds dumber every time.
This is what WNs want, not want I want. It is easy to predict WN opinions.
Plus, being a libertarian is much more desirable than being a WN socialist. Talented people thrive in a libertarian society. WN losers just want to mooch off of successful whites.
S. B. Woo > , August 22, 2017 at 8:36 pm GMT"Better to have the handsomely paid Cornel West pontificating about white racism at Princeton where he is a full professor than fulminating at some Ghetto street corner."
Really? All that does is give the man a bigger sanctioned soap box. In the ghetto he might affect a couple of hundred people. Siting in academia he gets a lever than can affect tens of thousands. Not a good trade.
Incontrovertible > , August 23, 2017 at 4:30 am GMTDear Mr. Weissberg.
Truth is often stranger than fictions. The real reason for discriminating against Asian Ams is not to help make the other minority happy. It is to benefit the whites. The Ivy League schools are using the diversity to give the white applicants an advantage of 140 pst in SAT points. Please see below:
In Table 3.5 on p 92 of Princeton Prof. Espenshade's famous book, "No Longer Separate, Not Yet Equal", the following shocking fact was revealed:
Table 3.5 (emphasis added)
Race Admission Preferences at Public & Private Institutions
Measured in ACT & SAT Points, Fall 1997
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-
Public Institutions Private Institutions
ACT-Point Equivalents SAT-Point Equivalents
Item (out of 36) (out of 1600)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-
Race
(White) -- –
Black 3.8 310
Hispanics 0.3 130
Asian -3.4 -140Why are 140 SAT pts. taken away from AsAm applicants? To give the white applicants an advantage of 140 SAT pts. over the historically disadvantaged AsAms by using the nobility of diversity as a cover? This is the reverse of affirmative action. This is a gross abuse of affirmation action. This is outrageous discrimination. If
the purpose is to give the blacks an advantages, why not add more SAT points to blacks and hispanics?S.B. Woo
Incontrovertible > , August 23, 2017 at 4:36 am GMT@Avalanche That's an interesting point you brought up, whether anyone can ever really be "assimilated". Even after hundreds of years, blacks and Jews in this country remain very distinct groups. I think for blacks the reason is skin color and culture, while for Jews it is the religion. Both groups have had low out marriage rate until maybe the last couple of decades.
Assimilation is most successful when there's a high intermarriage rate, but intermarriage rate and immigration rate tend to go in opposite directions. The higher the immigration rate, the lower the intermarriage rate.
Hispanics and Asians have been in this country since the 1800s yet you rarely ever meet a hispanic or Asian person who's been here for more than 3 or 4 generations. Why is that? I think it's because many of these earlier groups, due to their small number at the time relative to the population, had intermarried, blended in and disappeared. I would say these earlier immigrants have fully assimilated. The ones who are unassimilated are the new arrivals, those who arrived in large numbers since 2000.
But for some peculiar reason blacks who are mixed with whites often continue to identify as blacks. We see this in Obama, Halle Barry, Vanessa Williams and many other black/white mixes. Black identity is so strong even Indian-black mixed race people call themselves black, like Kamala Harris.
My theory is that most white-hispanic and white-asian marriages are white males with hispanic/asian females. In most cases the white males who married hispanic/asian women are conservatives who prefer women in cultures that are perceived to be more traditional compared to white females who are often selfish and want a divorce at the first sign of personal unhappiness. Many of them then raise their children in full white traditions including as Christians and encourage them to identify themselves as whites.
OTOH, many white-black mix marriages are white female with black male, in many instances these women marry black men because they are liberal nuts who want to raise black children. Jewish women for instance marry black men at a high rate. Many of these women then raise their children as black or biracial children and encourage their children to identify themselves as black.
Education used to be the biggest tool for assimilation, but these days thanks to libtards running amok, our schools are where racial identity is amplified rather than de-emphasized. Now all minority groups are encouraged to take pride in their own cultural identity and eschew mainstream (white) culture. Lured by affirmative action, more and more mixed race hispanic kids are beginning to identify themselves as latino. Thankfully mixed race Asian kids are running in the opposite direction and now mostly identify themselves as white so they are not disadvantaged by AA.
I think assimilation can occur when you have low immigration rate coupled with high intermarriage rate and a smart education system that discourages racial and individual identity and focuses on a single national identity. The biggest reason assimilation is failing now is a combination of high immigration rate, and a failed education system that promotes identity politics and victimhood narrative. The internet and easy air travels back to the homeland also make it much harder to assimilate newcomers. For these reasons I'm in favor of a moratorium on immigration for the next 20 years. All those not yet citizens should be encouraged to return to their home countries. No more green cards, work visas or even student visas should be issued.
Truth > , August 24, 2017 at 12:02 am GMT@S. B. Woo That's the argument of mindless Asian SJWs who've been fed the libtard kool-aid. Just look at the numbers you yourself provided. Whites who were turned down still vastly outperformed blacks and hispanics who were given admission, to the tune of 340 points and 130 points respectively. Libtards who came up with AA want everyone to turn against whites, and mindless Asian SJWs like you are parroting them without thinking things through.
So much for "smart Asians".
Truth > , August 24, 2017 at 12:03 am GMTOTOH, many white-black mix marriages are white female with black male, in many instances these women marry black men because they are liberal nuts who want to raise black children. Jewish women for instance marry black men at a high rate. Many of these women then raise their children as black or biracial children and encourage their children to identify themselves as black.
Yeah, and the rest of them wanted the SCHLONG!
@Incontrovertible That's the argument of mindless Asian SJWs who've been fed the libtard kool-aid. Just look at the numbers you yourself provided. Whites who were turned down still vastly outperformed blacks and hispanics who were given admission, to the tune of 340 points and 130 points respectively. Libtards who came up with AA want everyone to turn against whites, and mindless Asian SJWs like you are parroting them without thinking things through.
So much for "smart Asians". But they still needed a lower score for admittance than Asians
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2017 | www.unz.com
The hysteria unfolding regarding events in Charlottesville reminds me of the anti-Russia madness that has made front page news ever since Hillary Clinton discovered that she had lost the presidential election to Vladimir Putin. The media train is again rushing headlong into a terra incognita with its only goal being to bring down President Donald Trump by riding a wave of anti-right wing extremist revulsion. The establishment press is essentially enforcing its own code of ethics, insisting that just because what the mainstream characterizes as morally repugnant "Nazi-scum" and white nationalists exist they are ultimately fully responsible for any violence that is required to defeat them and disrupt their activities. For the ubiquitous talking heads like Wolf Blitzer and Rachel Maddow to believe otherwise is to posit moral equivalency between the good guys and bad guys, something that cannot be tolerated.
As far as I can determine, almost no one knows much about the specific agendas of the various parties that were involved in last week's fracas in Charlottesville. My own viewpoint extends only as far as a strong belief that the deconstruction of this nation through the elimination of select historical monuments is wrong, particularly when said monuments commemorate people who fought and died for their country. As I am a Vietnam-era army veteran I would concede that my judgment in that regard is somewhat skewed.
That aside, there are several other issues that should be of general interest that have been largely obscured by the violence that erupted and the media interpretation of the event to fit in with its own preferred narrative.
First and foremost is the free speech issue which is being conveniently ignored by a media and political class intent on punishing the white nationalist protesters no matter what rights have to be trampled along the way. As far as I can determine, the primary objective of the Unite-the-Right gathering was to protest against removing a statue, so one has to at least assume that some demonstrators were there in good faith based on that issue. And surely many of the counter-demonstrators were there to protest peacefully against some of the admittedly extremist groups marching under the Unite umbrella.
... ... ...
Alfa158 > > , August 22, 2017 at 5:03 am GMT
Dube > > , August 22, 2017 at 5:39 am GMT"The likelihood that there were paid FBI informants on both sides of the conflict leads me to believe that the federal government knows exactly what took place on August 12th in Charlottesville, but perhaps no one has either the guts or requisite integrity to be honest about it as it might be embarrassing all around. What if it turns out that the politically more acceptable counter-demonstrators deliberately provoked the violence and were allowed to get away with it?"
Gee you think?
Well there won't be any embarrassment because a) the Imperial media will never cover such a story and if it leaked out anyway; b) The Empire is inherently incapable of being embarrassed about anything.
Mark Green > > , August 22, 2017 at 6:28 am GMTCharlottesville: the numbers in the field. If you don't know the numbers and deployment, you don't know the event.
anonymous > > , Disclaimer August 22, 2017 at 7:22 am GMTBased on eyewitness accounts and video footage of what took place in Charlottesville, these facts have emerged: antifa agitators came to Charlottesville impose street justice on their 'Nazi' opponents and shut down the lawful and peaceful assembly of a conservative minority.
This is not the first time that antifa activists have unleashed premeditated violence upon their political adversaries.
Antifa thugs (and their political enablers) are on a dark mission: to deny the constitutional guarantees of free speech, public assembly and free association to racially-conscious whites. This is a totalitarian agenda.
Further, the mainstream media–using biased analysis and inflammatory reporting–is enabling this pernicious pattern of antifa violence to spread.
Today, Americans are taught to celebrate the 'Jewish Community', the 'gay community', the 'black community', the 'Hispanic community'.
But never the 'white community'. That is not allowed. Never–even though Euro-Americans are the heart and soul of our extraordinary, English-speaking civilization.
Fact: white advocacy is not 'white supremacy'.
Yet our mainstream media declares it so.
This deception does real harm. Whites are divided. Ashamed.
White children are increasingly isolated and estranged from their own roots and community. Political self-loathing and downward mobility have become common among whites.
White cohesion has been declared racist and uniquely evil. This may be good news for ambitious and envious blacks, gays, Hispanics and Jews. But whites are in decline.
This worldview is partly the product of double standards. These double-standard are underhanded.
Antifa extremism is being used by the Liberal establishment to crush if not eradicate white memory and white continuity.
Please sign and circulate the petition to declare antifa a terrorist organization.
https://www.change.org/p/president-of-the-united-states-declare-antifa-a-terrorist-organization
Another excellent essay. Mr. Giraldi, I would appreciate knowing what you think about one particular aspect of the stagecraft.
Having watched a few (not all, especially as some have been squelched) of the videos assembled under the parallel Cleburne article, my impression is that these so-called Uniters of The Right may have selected the forum because they, like the Establishment generally, desired a violent altercation.
The Friday night torchlight parade as filmed by Vice seems almost scripted, provocative "reality TV" to stoke fear and loathing among the American manipullati. Men who look like Haven Monohan's frat brothers chanting "Blood And Soil" (really?!), in perfect formation behind a drum major who looks like a Viking Hell's Angel, all left undisturbed by observers. Are these even the same people sent packing on Saturday from the park and down the street to be abused by hundreds of counter-protestors, as seen in the Goldy video?
Thank you.
Greg Bacon > , • Website August 22, 2017 at 10:55 am GMT
tjm > , August 22, 2017 at 11:07 am GMTGee, look at the positive side, at least if your part of the MIC or a TBTF Wall Street Casino. The riots helped box Trump in on the Afghanistan war thing, as he now declares we'll stay there, bombing the rubble for years to come.
That Afghan opium will keep flowing and the hundreds of billions laundered by those Wall Street gangsters will also continue to flow.
When the hate-filled Senator Graham admires Trump's Afghan war speech, you know the nation is in trouble.
Chris Dakota > , August 22, 2017 at 11:17 am GMT"The media train is again rushing headlong into a terra incognita with its only goal being to bring down President Donald Trump by riding a wave of anti-right wing extremist revulsion".
What a load of main stream media BS!
The media is owned by the same Wall Street Zionist filth that own Trump.
This idea that Trump is an "American Firster", worked during the election, but has been seen for the lie it truly is now.
Trump has filled his cabinet with Wall Street Zionists, continued sales of weapons to terrorist states, has INCREASED our presence in Isreal's wars, and has continued to antagonize Russia, while TOTALLY IGNORING MASS LATINO IMMIGRATION.
Just like with Obama, the media is playing a role as "anti-Trump", to give Trump cover for being another Zionist puppet. When Obama was in office the ZioMedia called him the "most liberal President", even as he took away our rights, bailed out Wall Street and sold arms to third world despots.
Americans need to GROW UP, stop thinking the world is so black and white and see how we are being played for fools. Zionists rule Washington, and certainly Trump. Peter Thiel and Adleson are Trump's biggest financial supporters, are we supposed to believe THEY ARE AMERICA FIRSTERS, please, they hate America, they are Zionists.
Stephen Paul Foster > , • Website August 22, 2017 at 11:24 am GMT@Anonymous Nobody died at Columbine. Boston Marathon 9/11 passengers, etc.
Its time Americans wake up to reclaim the nation.Staging this kind of event is child's play for the CIA. For them, its part of the standard regime change profile.
Mind control technology delivers activist to the place in the space to commit overt ....acts and to take in true patsy form the untraceable source of the blame for conflict of ideas to be escalated to mayhem.
Conflict escalation [Ce} was a major tool for the Leninist plan to bring the Czar of Russia down in February, 1917 Such Ce and it has been successfully applied in the political space of many nations to bring down well like national leaders. Ce Chaos is the name of the game! Chaos is one of the dispersant that can be added to separate the people of a nation from the peace afforded to them by their political structures. Chaos unleashes abusive power the law and order prevent. Those hidden behind the scenes have a plan..but it cannot be implemented if the political and cultural structures of the target society remains strong and its principles upheld . To weaken structure: opposing interest are pitted against each other to disturb the peace and to create chaos. As the structural integrity of the target political and cultural system begin to weaken the plan is put into action.
The nations people's support for the structure is generally strong enough to keep the political and cultural structure in place(i.e.the people continue to adhere to the law and order accustomed to their national society). What destroys that structure is chaos! Chaos works because it weakens the leadership. What chaos does is to allow behind the scene take-overs, it allows to enrage the uninformed public so, that the public itself encourages legislatures to enact the kind of Draconian rules that self-generate chaos (i.e. limits on free speech, curfews, and intrusions by governments of law and use of force). My fellow Americans find themselves once again victims of a mirage staged by those who intended chaos to be generated , the tools of the chaos generating teams were used to stir to a frenzy, those who were sincere as to a heart-felt. I quote the article "radical groups .. came together to demonstrate on both sides?" just as was done in 1917 Russia!
OUTCOME: chaos disperses the people caught inside of media controlled political space.. I said to a cop a few yrs ago "Boston Marathon was a false flag" he said "Does it even matter?"
True it doesn't matter, it is taken as real and the objective is realized anyway.
Trump didn't call out Charlottesville as a false flag, he folded to the deep state and extended the war in Afghanistan.JackOH > , August 22, 2017 at 12:09 pm GMT"It is important to bear in mind that there is great danger in selectively endorsing politically correct Free Speech. If either the left or right is successful and we lose our First Amendment rights through "hate speech" legislation or other forms of state censorship such as have been introduced in Europe it is safe to say that we will have lost our republic."
I hate to break it to this writer but the train has already left the station, and some time ago. The left HAS been successful beyond "endorsing politically correct Free Speech". They now with little resistance enforce the ever expanding PC speech codes because they own the enforcement apparatus, i.e., the MSM, the courts, the propaganda outlets that make the shaming machinery of popular culture so efficient. They have us self-censoring. Go to any university campus and see how far free speech takes you. At your workplace just casually mention a politically incorrect fact, like black-on-white homicide statistics, and see where your career goes. Technically, yes, state censorship is not yet in place, but the left doesn't really need it that much. Plus the censorious SJWs are just one or two Supreme Court (Democrat appointed) justices in the near future, who will mop things up by upholding "hate speech" legislation that will criminalize speech that includes facts that hurt the feelings of "marginalized" people -- delayed for a bit by Trump's surprise upending of Hillary Hugo Chavez Clinton.
The left wants more than state censorship. They see the destruction of European (white) civilization.
http://fosterspeak.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-exterminationist-left-happy-trails.html
jack ryan > , Website August 22, 2017 at 12:25 pm GMTPhilip, thanks. My local newspaper, an intelligent and literate independent, came out against neo-Nazis today. I suspect the editor was pressured into it, because the phenomenon of neo-Nazism as a meaningful political movement doesn't exist in my area. Neo-Nazism doesn't exist as a meaningful political phenomenon in the United States.
Chrissake–I'm venting here–does anyone else here see an obvious parallel between the actual historical Nazis opportunistically grasping for power after the Reichstag fire, and the Left grasping at opportunities to efface the memory of prominent Southerners using the trivial Charlottesville fracas as a pretext? What's that old saw: he who accuses, excuses. The real Nazis seem to me the other guys–the Left.
anarchyst > , August 22, 2017 at 12:29 pm GMT@Alfa158 Yeah, maybe some. But, almost all of this was done by corrupt, lying folks in Virginia state and local. The Virginia governor and the (J tribe) Charlottesville VA mayor openly worked to deny the UnitetheRight their legal right to demonstrate in Lee Park/Emancipation Park and the local police and state national guard force the UnitetheRight Demonstrates to exit the park to be attacked by massed mobs of Antifa/BlackLivesMatter mobs. This was deliberate. So it wasn't all some Federal conspiracy in the Trump administration.
These college towns like Charlottesville VA or Durham (Duke) N.C. have been taken over politically and in the faculty by hard core Leftists, anti Whites – the wealthy alumni of these once solid Conservative Southern colleges generally doesn't care as long as the basketball teams do well and the College rankings stay high (rankings done by Harvard and Yale type academics).
I know the score as I went to the former Southern Conservatives University of Vanderbilt University in Nashville TN. Vanderbilt now has a J tribe Chancellor Nicholas Zeppos who was a former Leftist Law professor at the University of Wisconsin Madison – the same college town that now has an openly Castro Communist mayor who just ripped out Confederate grave stones outside of Madison.
TheJester > , August 22, 2017 at 1:49 pm GMTHas anyone noticed that the so-called "white supremacists" were holding brand new, recently unfolded flags and were wearing brand new, recently unfolded k kk regalia?
It is no secret that a jewish-owned company "Crowds On Demand" was advertising for (left-wing) protesters for Charlottesville on craigslist.
Sorta tells you something
The "Unite the Right" promoter Kessler was an 0′bama operative
The whole thing was orchestrated in order to further demonize whitesJoe Hide > , August 22, 2017 at 2:30 pm GMTYes, this is confusing. One day Vladimir is coming to get us he is hiding under our beds and infecting our computer systems. Disregard. The next day it is the Alt-Right hiding under our beds and infecting our water supply.
It appears that the MSM and Progressive movement, no matter how well organized, are a "one-trick pony". They can only posture one hysterical The End is Nigh meme at a time for public consumption. This in itself should raise suspicions that these are all pre-staged political carnivals theaters of the absurd. The question, Who is organizing and paying for these carnivals and to what end?
Skeptikal > , August 23, 2017 at 2:16 am GMTTo Phillip Giraldi,
You had me laughing with some of your writings. For instance, "When Hillary Clinton discovered she had lost the election to Vladimir Putin." HA!
Also, Your style of asking questions and then giving only some of the possible answers made me do some thinking I wouldn't have done otherwise. I hope You continue with this great style in the future.@Sam Shama I don't think the Antifa protesters were "allowed" in the square.
They had no permit.
They weren't "allowed" to be anywhere around there and should have been made to disperse and go somewhere else, with force if necessary (I mean to be made to go somewhere else to hold their protest).
The police do this all the time.
"Cage" protesters to avoid problems they foresee.
So, WFT, C'ville Police???McAuliffe definitely had a hand in this "standing down."
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2017 | www.unz.com
Conservative HQ concluded:
Knowing that the Antifa thugs were there with cans filled with cement, baseball bats and even improvised flame throwers why would the police stand down?
One answer is because the Democrats wanted a riot to lay at President Trump's feet
I would add that the Treason Lobby wanted a pretext to launch the next stage of their internet purge against the Right, which clearly was long planned.
Angry White Dude 's astute writer RedStaterNYC states plainly in The Establishment Strikes Back August 16 2017 what I think is no more than the truth
the Charlottesville chaos was obviously a setup designed specifically to corner the white men into violent confrontation with the Establishment's hired goons, "Antifa". Then, they would use that violence as a pretext to both suppress the rights to peaceable assembly by the white men, and then plaster the mayhem all over the airwaves to smear them as a group of unhinged, violent, "domestic terrorists".
The Establishment's muscle, the VA police, did their job, and then their propaganda arm–the MSM–went right to work hysterically demanding Trump demonize the white men
He points to the aftermath:
Since suppressing white men's right to peaceable assembly, they have now gone to fully suppressing their rights to speech and association.
All of the prominent alt-right sites have been taken offline. We are now on day three or four without most of them. They're just gone. And this is despite having DDOS-protection services in place and very smart guys on the SA side of things.
Clearly, we aren't dealing with Antifa script-kiddies, but state actors who are behind this effort to snuff this insurgent pro-white group of young men out of existence before TPTB lose any more power to them
Expect this to go federal in short order
They are clearly scared, they clearly aren't taking any chances any more and they clearly aren't going to be stopped by appeals to conscience.
This concurs remarkably closely with our "Charlottesville Survivor"s conclusion:
The American government, at every level, is waging a campaign of extermination against its own people. If you protest against it, law enforcement tries to get you killed. And if you survive that, journalists try to get you fired.
And we are told this is "freedom."
Don't kid yourself any longer . You are under occupation .
Thanks to the self-control of the Unite The Right people, Charlottesville might well have passed off without giving the Pogrom leaders the big incident they needed
... ... ...
Two long videos here and here give vivid impressions of lethal menace of the Antifa mob in Charlottesville. A week later the Boston authorities easily minimized violence by keeping the Antifa and their prey strictly apart. This highlights the key question: why was this not done in Virginia?
It was because the Left's response to to the MAGA is MAAG (Make America A Gulag). And they needed a pretext.
(No doubt I have missed useful material. Please send it in.)
Carlton Meyer > , Website August 21, 2017 at 4:33 am GMT
utu > , August 21, 2017 at 4:45 am GMTFrom my blog:
Aug 21, 2017 – Foolish Protestors
The billionaires of America control our media so control the masses. So called "leftists" should be conducting antiwar marches, or marches for higher wages and single payer healthcare. However, the billionaires manipulate them to march against non-issues to keep workers fighting amongst each other. It was good to see Charles Barkley speak out and say black people never noticed confederate statues and don't care about them.
This game begins when billionaires have someone propose removing confederate statues, then encourage groups of whites to protest, pay for a permit, and publicize the event. They have their paid agitators show up to hand out confederate and Nazi flags, give the Hitler salute, and start fights. They also organize leftist groups to have counter-demonstrations and send their black clad agitators to incite violence. Finally, they direct their media to provide massive coverage so that workers are distracted while they continue to loot the world.
Readers may be confused why "single payer" is an important issue. Our bizarre healthcare systems cost twice as much as other modern nations and produces below average results. The great Jimmy Dore clarifies in this video clip.
Wally > , Website August 21, 2017 at 5:18 am GMTThe System has won. The establishment got the anti-estblishmnet extreme right and the anti-establishment extreme left fight each other. It can't be any better.
It is the simplest thing to set up known by police forces around the world since the 19 century.
You want to play politics you need to learn and do your homework. Start with the class "Agent provocateurs 101."
jilles dykstra > , August 21, 2017 at 6:30 am GMTThe entire Charlottesville event was a staged event, a classic strategy of provocation operation which is going to be used as psywar pushing for national imposition of martial law and the deep state coup against Trump and the remnants of the Republic.
Read on.
The facts about Charlottesville that the Zionist dominated MSM do not allow:
and:Proof of staging, see video: different cars, different driver than alleged driver Fields, photo shopped 'flying people' & crash backgrounds, lot's more.
It's not difficult, just open your eyes.Charlottesville, a set-up
... ... ...
Alden > , August 21, 2017 at 6:54 am GMTSeen from the other side of the Atlantic the conflict seems to be over identity, who is the real American ? American here, in the sense hated by those in S America, of USA citizen. When I visited the USA, and met USA citizens, the real Americans obviously were those whose ancestors arrived on the Mayflower, and/or signed the Declaration of Independence. Of course the ancestors of the real Americans fought on the right, that is, winning, side of the Civil War.
These real Americans thus are of NW European, preferably British descent, they are not Irish or catholic, and they are white. Immigration numerically changed the USA, catholics hardly arrive any more from Europe, but they do arrive from the South and Middle America's, speaking spanish. Muslim immigrant also get a stronger position in USA society, their advantage is that they do speak english.
Maybe it is this advantage that made Chaim Saban do anything to prevent that a USA Muslim Senator became chairman of the USA democratic party, Saban also did not want Bernie Sanders, Sanders seems to be not enough pro Israel.
So what we see now is Cold Civil War, between the voters of Trump and Deep State, and between the 'real Americans' and those who 'just' have the USA nationality, but are not seen by the Mayflower/ Declaration Americans as real Americans. What confuses these two cold civil wars further are religious issues, about homosexuality, abortion, euthanasia. The present Dutch political problem of families with three or more parents does not even seem to have reached the other side of the Atlantic.
anonymous > , Disclaimer August 21, 2017 at 10:14 am GMTI'm thinking of going to the Crissy field San Francisco demo next Saturday. It's on federal land, the Presidio. The city of San Francisco is trying to get the Feds to revoke the permit. "Natural conservative" high IQ Mayor Ed Lee and the rest of the Chinese politicians are really pushing to get the permit revoked.
So much for the natural alliance of hardworking high IQ Whites and Asians hoped for by the conservatives who run websites imagining a future in which Whites and Asians unite against anti White liberals.
The pro White group doing the protest is "Patriot Prayer". I don't know much about them. But patriot? I hate America as much as George Foxman and George Soros do. Prayer? I don't believe in God and the Christian churches are as anti White as the government.
If it's permitted the national park rangers will be in charge of security. Generally, neither city nor state police come on federal land.
Antifa is a replay of the 1960s riots and Revolution . But there's a big difference: in the 60s the FBI and police fought the revolutionaries. Now they side with the revolutionaries
joeshittheragman > , Website August 21, 2017 at 10:37 am GMT"(Look at them quickly: the way things are going they will all be shut down in a few days.)"
At least three apparently already have been. I view the statue stuff as the summer replacement for transgender bathroom hysteria, all in the service of division and distraction. However, Ron Unz is doing people a great service by courageously publishing this proof of the corruption and suppression of journalism.
Brabantian > , Website August 21, 2017 at 10:40 am GMTThis reminds me of the Travon Martin situation. All the main stream media came out big time against Zimmerman. The incident with the Dodge Challenger is the same, just to pat. I look for an unraveling to take place when it comes to the trial.
anonymous > , Disclaimer August 21, 2017 at 10:56 am GMTThe USA is now in the grip of oligarch-fostered mass hysteria, giving a large segment of the population – its AntiFa, 'left-libs', poor minorities etc – a thrill of momentary power over other human beings, to substitute for what they are being denied in their lives
It is just like Mao's 1966 'Cultural Revolution', or poor Muslims led today to bray for the hanging of 'blasphemers' The oligarchs play on how common people will take the 'path of least resistance' to what makes them feel more powerful against vulnerable targets easy to hand, whom the plebs can feel 'safe' in attacking in the USA & the West generally, that is now of course the oligarch-run 'cultural Marxism' agenda against alleged 'bigots, racists' etc superbly distracting from how common people are being violated in a crony-corrupt economy
Long ago, Albert Jay Nock (1870-1945), suggested that 3 things explain much of human social behaviour:
- The law of dimishing returns
- That the inferior will tend to drive out & overwhelm that of higher quality
- The path of least resistance
Oligarch media has put this whole AntiFa etc purge insanity on a platter, & offered it to any miscreant who would like to power-trip over some now-vulnerable victims, formerly 'powerful' but now able to be cut down. But like any mania, this will in time burn itself out as its absurdity becomes more obvious, probably more on the time-scale of the Cultural Marxism Maoist excesses, which Mao himself declared 'over' in 1969 after just 3 years
What may be a more permanent legacy, tho, is the USA mass censorship that has begun, parallel to the Chinese & to some degree also Russian internet web forum de-platforming Big Powers Agree, control those interwebz!
WorkingClass > , August 21, 2017 at 11:48 am GMTI have another comment awaiting moderation, but have now watched the last (Faith Goldy) video which appears to have captured in real time the automobile horror.
Again, I see the statue controversy as manufactured distraction.
But how many Americans who still rely on MSM are aware that the car reportedly driven by Fields struck another, which in turn struck a third, which then struck people in the street? If Heyer was hit by that third car – assuming this video is legitimate – then much of what is being reported via Establishment outlets is inarguably false.
War for Blair Mountain > , August 21, 2017 at 11:59 am GMTThe Mayor, the Governor, the cops and Soros' new Pinkertons. All of them criminal scum.
Judge Dredd > , August 21, 2017 at 12:35 pm GMTRichard Spencer has to start throwing the "Nazi" charge back at the Antifa, the Clintons and Obama. Point out that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton gave the direct order to organize and fund a Neo-Nazi Coup in the Ukraine that caused the death of 15-20 Conservative Russian Christians in the Eastern Ukraine .
Then Point out the fact that Hillary Clinton created Al QUEDA and ISIS ..
Then point out that the Antifa voted for the WAR CRIMINAL NeoNazi enablers Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton
Spencer must be unrelenting and obsessive on these points .every day every minute denounce Obama and the Clintons as indictable WAR CRIMINALS!!
Reveal > , August 21, 2017 at 12:45 pm GMTConspiracy theory: the Deep State is behind this and they are preparing for a coup.
Think about it.
1. In 1930s Germany, the old order collapses. The Nazi party is on the verge of splitting apart then one faction purges the other, leaving only one left.
https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007885
Alt-right purged = SA purged by SS.
2. The other day, Secretary of Defense Mattis was in Silicon Valley – traveling to Google. His excuse was something like "not wanting soldiers to be disadvantaged by technologies on the battlefield." Does anyone buy that? Does that even make sense?
3. Youtube "adpocalypse" happens. Google uses this as an excuse to curb dissenting political opinions. They announce that they will be shadow-banning content they disapprove of even if it does not violate their terms of service. Many videos, and entire channels, are mysteriously demonitized without explanation. Notoriously left-wing anti-free speech organizations including the SPLC and the ADL, along with several foreign government NGO fronts, are providing the information to Youtube on what channels/videos to ban.
Other Social Media follow suite: Facebook, Twitter, etc.
4. Then a potential false flag happens (Charlottesville = Reichstag fire).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire
Dissenters purged from government (Steve Bannon = Hitler's enemies within the government).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Long_Knives
5. Then an enabling act happens in the wake (Internet Purge by Corporations = Enabling Act).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933
Website potentially purged due to a long essay with videos alleging that the police colluded with antifa to attack protesters: http://www.occidentaldissent.com/cgi-sys/suspendedpage.cgi
Alternate media outlets allowing for dissenting opinion are shut down or come under attack: Hatreon, Gab, etc.
6. Hysteria sweeps the nation.
"White Supremacists everywhere." http://www.unz.com/forum/censor-white-supremacy/
Tearing down confederate symbols, desecrating confederate graves = "Jews have betrayed the nation" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht
6. Trump under constant attack by leakers and traitors. Paving the way?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_von_Hindenburg
7. Wars and rumors of war on the horizon: North Korea, Russia, Iran = Poland, Austria, Czechoslovakia.
WHAT > , August 21, 2017 at 1:21 pm GMTThe website referenced in this piece, Occidental Dissent, seems to have been purged shortly after the publication of this piece: http://www.occidentaldissent.com/cgi-sys/suspendedpage.cgi
Is there something they don't want you knowing?
iffen > , August 21, 2017 at 1:22 pm GMT@utu Left IS the estabilishment, open your goddamn eyes. In what world exactly antifags working hand in hand with pigs constitutes adversity?
War for Blair Mountain > , August 21, 2017 at 1:25 pm GMTWhich UTR groups came "combat ready" and which did not? It would be instructive to know why some did and some did not. Were some groups better informed?
Wizard of Oz > , August 21, 2017 at 1:32 pm GMTRichard Spencer point out that the black racist organization BLM .it's leadership .made many trips to the Obama Whitehouse where they plotted with Valerie Jarrett to racially harras White Americans across the US .Point out the role of BLM in the post-Ferguson race riots and the murder of White Police Officers across the US .Also point out that the SPLC was-is openly endorsing the black racial identity politics of BLM and their enabler Valerie Jarette
jacques sheete > , August 21, 2017 at 1:41 pm GMT@Judge Dredd Why would it be to difficult to set ip an Alt- Google by crowdfunding?
Michael Kenny > , August 21, 2017 at 1:54 pm GMTHowever, the billionaires manipulate them to march against non-issues to keep workers fighting amongst each other.
The verity of that concept is so glaringly obvious that it's a pity it has to be stated so clearly.
If one really looks at the causes of WW2, that concept applies as well. Note that it was a mass slaughtering of Christians vs Christians to a great degree. Since they haven't been able to stir up enough hate against Muslims, I guess they'll just make up any excuse to stir the pot. It's all against all and through it all the banksters keep rubbing their greasy grubby hands and raking in the moolah.
Linh Dinh, in another excellent article stated it thus
Slitting each other's throat, we can't even see that our common enemy is the American Israel Empire, or what the Saker calls the AngloZionists. (Emphasis mine.)
- Linh Dinh, Siurana, Charlottesville and Barcelona
http://www.unz.com/ldinh/siurana-charlottesville-and-barcelona/#comment-1977614
Joe Hide > , August 21, 2017 at 1:59 pm GMTI'm intrigued by the expression "historic American nation". What does it mean? Who is part of it? Who isn't? Who decides whether someone is "in" or "out"? Clearly, the word "nation" is not being used in the European sense.
jacques sheete > , August 21, 2017 at 2:00 pm GMTThe primary question is, what are the psychopaths that are losing control of us, trying to hide with these created distractions? It must be so horrific as to boggle the mind, as these distractions have become ever more violent, insane, and inhuman
wayfarer > , August 21, 2017 at 2:07 pm GMTLeft IS the estabilishment, open your goddamn eyes.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
In the '30s, after the establishment quit bashing Commies, it became all the rage, indeed fashionable, to support them and the establishment backed the Reds to the hilt.
Once their usefulness expired, it was back to bashing "Commies" again.
These things shift and the establishment backs what it thinks will do its bidding best. The reason(s) they keep flip-flopping is(are) usually not too hard to discern.
War for Blair Mountain > , August 21, 2017 at 2:17 pm GMTI'll admit it. I'm racist. I hate the entire human race.
Today, I'd like to point a hateful middle finger at the demagogue Israel as it actively engineers zionist-nazism within and zionist-communism beyond, its borders.
Their deceptive false flags abound, including 9/11 and Charlottesville Virginia.
Couldn't help but think of the self-serving Israel and their "friendship" with the U.S., while watching this particular video.
War for Blair Mountain > , August 21, 2017 at 2:26 pm GMTThe Alt Right position on the economy:Our goal is for the Historic Native Born White American Working Class to control-the means of production Google Microsoft the internet belongs to OUR PEOPLE!!!
Greg Bacon > , Website August 21, 2017 at 2:37 pm GMT@Michael Kenny Whose out? Greater China's GENELINE in California Greater India's GENELINE in California .Greater Korea's GENELINE in California .anyone serving in the IDF Muslim Michigan .and this is just for starters
The nonwhite majority Democratic Party Voting Bloc in California is biological warfare against The Historic Native Born White American Working Class
Socialist Labor Leaders Denis Kearney and Samuel Gompers had the right idea in 1888 .
jacques sheete > , August 21, 2017 at 2:44 pm GMTHere's the REAL enemy, Boston Antifa, who wants to destroy the Constitution. Next Stop, a FEMA Gulag Comrade!
"No room for capitalists, conservatives, libertarians, "classical liberals" or supporters of the US constitution in our city"
Wally > , Website August 21, 2017 at 3:22 pm GMTI'm intrigued by the expression "historic American nation". What does it mean?
"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean -- "
Alice in Wonderland[During the war]words had to change their ordinary meaning and to take that which was now given them.
Reckless audacity came to be considered the courage of a loyal ally; prudent hesitation, specious cowardice; moderation was held to be a cloak for unmanliness; ability to see all sides of a question, inaptness to act on any.
- Thucydides, The History of the Peloponnesian War, Chap X, ~400 BC
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!"
! Samuel Adams, Letter to John Pitts, January 21, 1776
SolontoCroesus > , August 21, 2017 at 3:25 pm GMT@Judge Dredd Hilarious.
You largely rely on two sources for your "facts". Both notorious for their easily debunked lies, Jew supremacist hatred of white gentiles, and their redneck Zionist control.The US Holocaust Theme Park and Wikipedia.
Zionist Wikipedia Editing Course
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/139189
Science, rational thought, & logic simply demolish the 'holocaust' storyline.
[MORE]
And that's why there are Thought Crime Laws that imprison those who engage in free speech about it.
Truth is hate to those that hate the truth.
There were the 'Nazis' with the mythological '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' and there were the 'Nazis' without the mythological '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers'.The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here:No name calling, level playing field debate here:
And who is it that demands massive immigration into Europe and the US, but demands that non-Jew immigration be prevented into "that shitty little country"?
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."
SolontoCroesus > , August 21, 2017 at 3:34 pm GMT@jacques sheete h/t to you for spotlighting Linh Dinh's concise statement of who the adversary is.
The "Jews will not replace us" chants were jarring -- they made me cringe and made my well-mannered Sunday-go-to-church self feel embarrassed.
But a revolution is not a tea party.
And the reality of Charlottesville is that Jews -- more appropriately, the Anglozionists -- are replacing Charlottesville's old-line, Jefferson-loving culture and elites.
Charlottesville and the DC-to-Charlottesville corridor has experienced a major increase in federal government institutions, including outfits that monitor geospatial satellites. This in turn draws private sector entrepreneurs in highly specialized highly-educated data and intelligence gathering fields to the area: these are fields Israelis/Jews have traditionally been very interested in.If Blacks, in Charlottesville or anywhere else think that changeover will make Black lives better, they should check their reality meters.
RobinG chides me for saying so, but imo it is also appropriate to have "Nazis" represented in the UTR coalition. I say this because, as many of us here know, any alternative narrative of the wars in Europe that does not comply with the Jewish narrative is censored. Therefore, the full story has never been told; our children are taught lies, about themselves first and foremost. The full and honest history of the era of the world wars -- the Anglozionist wars -- needs to be told.
In addition, those who study the means by which the three groups that Lindbergh cited -- the British, FDR, and Jews -- ginned up hatred of Germany/Hitler/Nazis, beginning from the very earliest days of the 'Hitler counter-revolution,' recognize that almost exactly the same pattern is being played out today.
The fact that the same behaviors that eventuated in war in Europe and in an alleged holocaust of Jews is being repeated today, almost step-for-step, apparently with the same goals -- to gin up war to perpetuate Anglozionist dominance, implies either that
a. the first holocaust did not occur as claimed; or
b. Anglozionists are so bent on killing masses of goyim that they are willing to -- or eager to cull their own ranks as well, and are setting up the conditions for another holocaust; or
c. that Anglozionists are so stupid that they think the same behaviors will produce a different outcome.Alden > , August 21, 2017 at 3:42 pm GMTSometimes yes, sometimes no.
Left IS the estabilishment, open your goddamn eyes.
In the '30s, after the establishment quit bashing Commies, it became all the rage, indeed fashionable, to support them and the establishment backed the Reds to the hilt.
Once their usefulness expired, it was back to bashing "Commies" again.
These things shift and the establishment backs what it thinks will do its bidding best. The reason(s) they keep flip-flopping is(are) usually not too hard to discern. David Horowitz and Ron and Allis Radosh are the poster children for this sort of opportunistic, playing-both-sides switcheroo.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?427125-2/interview-david-horowitz
Anon > , Disclaimer August 21, 2017 at 4:49 pm GMT@anonymous "(Look at them quickly: the way things are going they will all be shut down in a few days.)"
At least three apparently already have been.
I view the statue stuff as the summer replacement for transgender bathroom hysteria, all in the service of division and distraction. However, Ron Unz is doing people a great service by courageously publishing this proof of the corruption and suppression of journalism. I agree confederate statutes are the next artificial cause after transgender bathrooms. I wonder what the next cause will be? Probably something cooked up at Soros central. I predict the 2018 elections will be a sweep for the Republicans. The radical democrat candidates will repel everyone but lunatic radicals. The non White and moderate democrats will stay home. The normal sane people will elect republicans. And the republicans will as always betray the Whites who vote for them.
WHAT > , August 21, 2017 at 5:49 pm GMT"You largely rely on two sources for your "facts". Both notorious for their easily debunked lies"
Those "sources" are themselves sourced by dozens of other sources. Wikipedia has also been found by recent studies to be about as accurate as most professional sources of information. In any case, it's the point that matters, not the details. Ironically, you didn't bother to counter anything he said. All you did was attack the messenger.
Alden > , August 21, 2017 at 5:51 pm GMT@Greg Bacon It`s very likely a parody account. There are many like that, I think I`ve subscribed to Beverly Hills Antifa even.
utu > , August 21, 2017 at 6:11 pm GMT@Reveal I'm not a southerner but I used to read occidental dissent a lot. They often had confederate flag demonstrations. The demos were all peaceful, just a few Whites with the confederate battle flag, no police, no counter demonstaters, just a peaceful little demonstration of the confederate heritage . They also had larger demonstrations against the chicken and meat packing plants that hire nothing but illegal Hispanics. Good for them.
Anon > , Disclaimer August 21, 2017 at 6:20 pm GMT@WHAT Why are you so shortsighted? I am afraid that when the time comes you might be the first to be manipulated and used as a useful idiot just as the left is being used right know. Let's suppose you and your buddies on the right will learn that we are going to attack, say Venezuela, because, say they sunk our ship. How many from the right, i.e. your buddies will show with flags and start flag waving and how many on the right will be protesting the war? Are you sure you and your buddies will be on the right side? The identity politics was exactly invented to keep the left going after issues that in larger scheme of things are irrelevant to the establishment. This is to sow the discord only. It is a perfect distractor from all kinds of stuff that is wrong in this pathetic country of pathetic people. Do not be like the stupid carp in the park pond that always takes a bait and goes through infinite number of catch and release cycles.
Chris Bridges > , August 21, 2017 at 6:34 pm GMT@Wally Seriously, could you explain this "redneck Zionist" thing you keep banging on about? Zionists, i.e., Jews, are notoriously urban in their habits and culture. Thus, "redneck" would seem to be oxymoronic.
anonymous > , Disclaimer August 21, 2017 at 6:52 pm GMT@jilles dykstra Jilles
You know nothing about America. The American Civil War was fought on both sides by people of the same British and NW European background. Further, there was no "right" side, you fool. Slavery had existed all over the USA and New Englanders brought the slaves here, not Southerners. Slavery was just one cause of the war.
As for South Americans resenting the term "American", tough. We are not called USA citizens. We are Americans. We won that name on the battlefield 40 years before the Latin Americans ceased being Spanish subjects.
My advice to you is to study our history before you open your mouth.RobinG > , August 21, 2017 at 8:04 pm GMTWhatever "proof" this author may provide, one truth remains crystal clear, for those who can see all apologists for the klanscum, and other assorted naziscum, are simply soulless zombies. You know, sort of.
On a somewhat related note, I hear most of them zombies, are fervent pagan polytheist human worshippers and that too a presumed white human. After all, "heaven forbid" worshipping a "coloured" man, yeah?
A batshit deluded faith well suited for the likes of them.
Sherman > , August 21, 2017 at 8:29 pm GMT@SolontoCroesus " RobinG chides me for saying so , but imo it is also appropriate to have "Nazis" represented in the UTR coalition."
Umm, no.
First, 'chide' is not accurate. I razzed you for suggesting that I should accost my neighbor in the same (aggressive, accusatory) manner that you routinely confront Sam Shama.
Second, I've said nothing about 'appropriateness' of Nazi representation. My only stated position is agreement with ACLU. (And, less directly, that the whole debacle was manipulated, color revolution style. N.B., I said manipulated, not fake.)
Third, this misattribution of words and thoughts to me, does nothing for your status as an analyst. Sorry.
SolontoCroesus > , August 21, 2017 at 8:30 pm GMT@SolontoCroesus Hey Chuck-
What was that part about your parents teaching you to respect Jews?
Sherm
@RobinG whatever
|
|
|
Aug 20, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com
doug , 17 August 2017 at 04:54 PM
The media, and political elite, pile on is precisely what I expect. The chattering political classes have converged on the belief that Trump is not only incompetent, but dangerous. And his few allies are increasingly uncertain of their future.turcopolier , 17 August 2017 at 05:19 PMThe thrust appears to be to undercut components of his base while ratcheting up indignation. WaPo and the Times dribble out salacious "news" stories that, often as not, are substance free but written in a hyperbolic style that assumes a kind of intrinsic Trump guilt and leaps from there. They know better. No doubt they rationalize this as meeting kind with kind. Trump is the epitome of the salesman that believes he can sell anything to anyone with the right pitch. Reporters that might normally be restrained by actual facts and a degree of fairness simply are no longer so constrained.
It reminds me of the coverage in the run up to Nixon's resignation. Except this one's on steroids. I believe the DC folks fully expect Trump to be removed and now are focusing on the strategy that accrues the maximum benefit to their party. Unfortunately, things strongly favor the Democrats.
Democrats want to drag this out as long as possible and enjoy the chipping away at segments of the Republican base while the Republicans want to clear the path before the midterms. However, the Republican officials, much as many or most can't stand Trump, have to weave a thin line because taking action against Trump would kill them in the primaries and possibly in the general.
So the Democrats are licking their chops and hoping this can continue until the midterms with the expectation they will then control Congress. After that they will happily dispatch Trump with some discovered impeachable crime. At that point it won't be hard to get enough Republicans to go along.
The Republicans can only hope to convince Trump to resign well prior to the midterms. They hope they won't have to go on record with a vote and get nailed in the elections.
In the meantime the country is going to go through hell.
kerim,Tyler , 17 August 2017 at 05:30 PMYes, we are staring into the depths and the abyss has begun to take note of us. BTW the US was put back together after the CW/WBS on the basis of an understanding that the Confederates would accept the situation and the North would not interfere with their cultural rituals.
There was a general amnesty for former Confederates in the 1870s and a number of them became US senators, Consuls General overseas and state governors.
That period of attempted reconciliation has now ended. Who can imagine the "Gone With the Win" Pulitzer and Best Picture of the Year now? pl
Some of you still don't get it. Trump isn't our last chance. Its your last chance. Yet still so many of you oxygen thieves still insist RUSSIA is the reason Hillary lost. You guys are going to agitate your way into a CW because you can't accept you lost. Many of you agitating are fat, slow, and stupid, with no idea how to survive.Murali -> LeeG... , 17 August 2017 at 05:38 PMI totally disagree with you LeeG. From day one after the unexpected (for the punditry class and their media coherts) elections results everybody was piling on Trump. The stories abound about his Russia Collusion (after one year of investigation not even a smoke signal) or his narcistic attitudes (mind you LeeG Trump always addresses people as We where as Humble Obama always addresses in the first person).AK -> Dr.Puck... , 17 August 2017 at 06:27 PMI get this feeling the Swamp doesn't want a President who will at least try to do something for the American people rather than promises (Remember Hope and Change ala Obama, he got the Change quite a bit of it for him and his Banker Pals from what is left of the treasury and we the people are left with Hope). I hope he will succeed but I learnt that we will always be left with Hope!
Dr. Puck,BillWade , 17 August 2017 at 06:47 PMThe calls have begun:
- https://www.rt.com/usa/399834-chicago-pastor-president-parks-renamed/
- https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/kristine-marsh/2017/08/17/cnns-rye-calls-washington-jefferson-monuments-come-down
- https://twitter.com/ajamubaraka/status/897890816366137344?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F399834-chicago-pastor-president-parks-renamed%2F
That last tweet is from the Green Party candidate for VP. Those are just a few examples from a quick Google search before I get back to work. Those of you with more disposable time will surely find more.
Someone on the last thread said in a very elegant way that what binds us Americans together is one thing, economic opportunity for all. I believe that was Trump's election platform, with the "for all" emphasized frequently.A.I.Schmelzer , 17 August 2017 at 07:20 PMI believe Charlottsville was a staged catalyst to bring about Trump's downfall, there seems now to be a "full-court press" against him. If he survives this latest attempt, I'll be both surprised and in awe of his political skills. If he doesn't survive I'll (and many others, no matter the "legality of the process") will consider it a coup d'etat and start to think of a different way to prepare for the future.
There is quite the precedent for the media treating trump as they do, Putin has been treated quite similarly, as well as any other politician the media cars disagree with [neocons/neolibs]...Haralambos -> turcopolier ... , 17 August 2017 at 07:29 PMI think, during the election campaign, the negative media coverage may have well be a boon to him. Anyone who listened to the media, and then actually turned up at a Trump rally to see for himself, immediately got the idea that the media is full of shit. I think this won Trump a fair number of converts.
But I think by now they are just over the top. It almost reminds me of Soviet denunciations of old communists who have fallen out of favor.
As far as statue removal goes: There should be legal ways of deciding such things democratically. There should also be the possibility of relocating the statues in question. I imagine that there should be plenty of private properties who are willing to host these statues on their land. This should be quite soundly protected by the US constitution.
That these monuments got, iirc, erected long after the war is nothing unusual. Same is true for monuments to the white army, of which there are now a couple in Russia.
As far as the civil war goes, my sympathies lie with the Union, I would not be, more then a 100 years after the war, be averse to monuments depicting the common Confederate Soldier.
I can understand the statue toppler somewhat. If someone would place a Bandera statue in my surroundings, I would try to wreck it. I may be willing to tolerate a Petljura statue, probably a also Wrangel or Denikin statue, but not a Vlassov or Shuskevich statue. Imho Lees "wickedness", historically speaking, simply isn't anything extraordinary.
Col., thank you for this comment. I grew up in the "North" and recall the centenary of the Civil War as featured in _Life_ magazine. I was fascinated by the history, the uniforms and the composition of the various armies as well as their arms. I would add to that the devastating use of grapeshot. I knew the biographies of the various generals on both sides and their relative effectiveness. I would urge others to read Faulkner's _Intruder in the Dust_ to gain some understanding of the Reconstruction and carpetbagging.Fred -> Lars... , 17 August 2017 at 07:36 PMI believe the choice to remove the monument as opposed to some other measure, such as the bit of history you offer, was highly incendiary. I also find it interesting that the ACLU is taking up their case in regard to free-speech: http://tinyurl.com/ybdkrcaz
I was living in Chicago when the Skokie protest occurred.
Lars,Seamus Padraig -> Dr.Puck... , 17 August 2017 at 07:40 PM"They came to Charlottesville to do harm. They came armed and were looking for a fight."
I agree. This means Governor McAuliffe failed in his duty to the people of the Commonwealth and so did the Mayor of Charlottesville and the senior members of the police forces present in the city. Congradulations to the alt-left.
They - the left - previously came to DC to do harm - on flag day no less. Namely the Bernie Bro James Hodgkinson, domestic terrorist, who attempted to assasinate Steve Scalise and a number of other elected representatives. The left did not denounce him nor his cause. Sadly they did not even denounce the people who actually betrayed him - those who rigged the Democratic primary: Donna Brazile and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
VietnamVet , 17 August 2017 at 08:32 PM"I know of no call by anybody to remove all statues of the slaveholders. Please edify."Well, it appears that Al Sharpton is now in favor of defunding the Jefferson Memorial. That's close, isn't it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gg4XKIX1bs4&feature=youtu.be&t=5
PTJames , 17 August 2017 at 09:32 PMThe one clear thing is that there is a coup attempt to get rid of Donald Trump led by globalist media and supra-national corporate intelligence agents. Charlottesville may well be due to the total incompetence of the democratic governor and mayor.
On the other hand, the razing of Confederate Memorials started in democrat controlled New Orleans and immediately spread to Baltimore. This is purposeful like blaming Russia for losing the 2016 election.
The protestors on both divides were organized and spoiling for a fight.
The unrest here at home is due to the forever wars, outsourcing jobs, tax cuts for the wealthy and austerity. Under stress societies revert to their old beliefs and myths. John Brennon, Lindsey Graham, John McCain, George Soros and Pierre Omidyar are scorpions; they can't help themselves. After regime change was forced on Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine; a color revolution has been ignited here in the USA; damn the consequences. We are the only ones that can stop it by pointing out what is really happening.
It seems to me that this brouhaha may work in Trump's favor. The more different things they accuse Trump of (without evidence), the more diluted their message becomes.Jack , 17 August 2017 at 09:56 PMI think the Borg's collective hysteria can be explained by the "unite the right" theme of the Charlottesville Rally. A lot of Trump supporters are very angry, and if they start marching next to people who are carrying signs that blame "the Jews" for America's problems, then anti-Zionist (or even outright anti-Semitic) thinking might start to go mainstream. The Borg would do well to work to address the Trump supporters legitimate grievances. There are a number of different ways that things might get very ugly if they don't. Unfortunately the establishment just wants to heap abuse on the Trump supporters and I think that approach is myopic.
There will always be an outrage du jour for the NeverTrumpers. The Jake Tapper, Rachel Maddow, Morning Joe & Mika ain't gonna quit. And it seems it's ratings gold for them. Of course McCain and his office wife and the rest of the establishment crew also have to come out to ring the obligatory bell and say how awful Trump's tweet was.Cvillereader -> turcopolier ... , 17 August 2017 at 10:17 PMWhat I see in my Democrat dominated county is that the blue collar folks are noting this overt coup attempt and while they didn't vote for Trump are beginning to become sympathetic towards him. I sense this is in part due to the massive mistrust of the MSM and the political establishment who are viewed as completely self-serving.
It is illegal in the Commonwealth of Virginia to wear a mask that covers one's face in most public settings.luxetveritas , 17 August 2017 at 10:45 PMLEOs in Central Va encountered this exact requirement when a man in a motorcycle helmet entered a Walmart on Rt 29 in 2012. Several customers reported him to 911 because they believed him to being acting suspiciously. He was detained in Albemarle County and was eventually submitted for mental health evaluation.
This is not a law that Charlottesville police would be unfamiliar with.
Chomsky: "As for Antifa, it's a minuscule fringe of the Left, just as its predecessors were. "It's a major gift to the Right, including the militant Right, who are exuberant."Bill H , 18 August 2017 at 02:02 AM"what they do is often wrong in principle – like blocking talks – and [the movement] is generally self-destructive."
"When confrontation shifts to the arena of violence, it's the toughest and most brutal who win – and we know who that is. That's quite apart from the opportunity costs – the loss of the opportunity for education, organizing, and serious and constructive activism."
I read a transcript of the entirety of Trump's news conference upon which CBS and others are basing their claims that Trump is "defending white supremacists," and at no point did he come within hand grenade distance of doing anything of the sort. What he did do is accuse the left wing group of being at fault along with the right wing group in causing the violence, and he did not even claim that they were equally at fault.Old Microbiologist -> Lars... , 18 August 2017 at 03:53 AMThere is no doubt whatever that his statement was entirely accurate, if in no other respect in that the left's decision to engage in proximate confrontation was certain to cause violence and was, in fact, designed to do so regardless of who threw the first punch. CBS and other media of its caliber are completely avoiding mentioning that aspect of the confrontation.
CBS et. al. have been touting the left's possession of not one but two permits for public assembly, but they carefully do not point out that the permits were for two areas well removed from the area where the conflict occurred, and that they did not have a permit to assemble in that area. A pundit on CBS claimed that "if they went" to the park in question, which of course they did, "they would not have been arrested because it was a public park." He failed to mention that large groups still are required to have a permit to assemble in a public park.
The media is flailing with the horror of Trump's advocacy of racial division, but it is the Democratic Party which has for more than a decade pursued the policy of "identity politics," and the media which has prated endlessly about "who will get the black vote" or "how Hispanics will vote" in every election.
Lars, but they came with a legal permit to protest and knew what they would be facing. The anti-protestors including ANTIFA had a large number of people being paid to be there and funded by Soros and were there illegally. The same mechanisms were in place to ramp up protests like in Ferguson which were violent and this response was no different.AK -> Richardstevenhack ... , 18 August 2017 at 04:02 AMHowever, the Virginia Governor a crony of the Clintons, ordered a police stand down and no effort was made to separate the groups. I remind you also that open carry is legal in Virginia.
So, IMHO this was deliberately set up for a lethal confrontation by the people on the left. I will also remind you that the American Nazi Party and the American Communist Party among others, are perfectly legal in the US as is the KKK. Believing and saying what you want, no matter how offensive, is legal under the First Amendment. Actively discriminating against someone is not legal but speech is. Say what you want but that is the Constitution.
Richardstevenshack,Old Microbiologist -> FourthAndLong... , 18 August 2017 at 04:12 AMYour last paragraph is a suitably Leftist post-modern ideological oversimplification of an infinitely complex phenomenon. It also reveals a great deal of what motivates the SJW Left:
" As for the notion that this is a 'cultural issue', I quote: 'Whenever I hear the word culture, I reach for my revolver.' 'Culture' is the means by which some people oppress others. It's much like 'civilization' or 'ethics' or 'morality' - a tool to beat people over the head who have something you want. "
First, it is a cultural issue. It's an issue between people who accept this culture as a necessary but flawed, yet incrementally improvable structure for carrying out a relatively peaceful existence among one another, and those whose grudging, bitter misanthropy has led them to the conclusion that the whole thing isn't fair (i.e. easy) so fuck it, burn it all down. In no uncertain terms, this is the ethos driving the radical Left.
Second, I don't know exactly which culture created you, but I'm fairly sure it was a western liberal democracy, as I'm fairly certain is the case with almost all Leftists these days, regardless of how radical. And I'm also fairly certain the culture you decry is the western liberal democratic culture in its current iterations. But before you or anyone else lights the fuse on that, remember that the very culture you want to burn down because it's so loathsome, that's the thing that gave you that shiny device you use to connect with the world, it's the thing that taught you how to articulate your thoughts into written and spoken word, so that you could then go out and bitch about it, and it even lets you bitch about it, freely and with no consequences. This "civilization" is the thing that gives rise to the "morals" and "ethics" that allow you to take your shiny gadgets to a coffee shop, where the barista makes your favorite beverage, instead of simply smashing you over the head and taking your shiny gadgets because he wants them. These principles didn't arise out of thin air, and neither did you, me, or anyone else. This culture is an agreed-upon game that most of us play to ensure we stand a chance at getting though this with as little suffering as possible. It's not perfect, but it works better than anything else I've seen in history.
Not as significant but along a similar trend to re-write history is this pastor asking Chicago mayor Emmanuel to rename parks named for Presidents because they were also slave owners. http://legalinsurrection.com/2017/08/inevitable-chicago-pastor-demands-washington-name-be-removed-from-park-because-of-slavery-ties/AK -> Tyler... , 18 August 2017 at 04:33 AM
In his inimitable fashion, I'll grant Tyler (and the Colonel, as well) the creditable foresight to call this one. Those of you who find yourselves wishing, hoping, agitating, and activisting for an overturn of the election result, and/or of traditional American culture in general would do well to take their warnings seriously.[email protected] -> rick... , 18 August 2017 at 07:19 AMIf traditional American culture is so deeply and irredeemably corrupt, I must ask, what's your alternative? And how do you mean to install it? I would at least like to know that. Regardless of your answer to question one, if your answer to question two is "revolution", well then you and anyone else on that wagon better be prepared to suffer, and to increase many fold the overall quotient of human suffering in the world. Because that's what it will take.
You want your revolution, but you also want your Wi-Fi to keep working.
You want your revolution, but you also want your hybrid car.
You want your revolution, but you also want your safe spaces, such as your bed when you sleep at night.If you think you can manage all that by way of shouting down, race baiting, character assassinating, and social shaming, without bearing the great burden of suffering that all revolutions entail, you have bitter days ahead. And there are literally millions of Americans who will oppose you along the way. And unlike the kulaks when the Bolsheviks rode into town, they see you coming and they're ready for you. And if you insist on taking it as far as you can, it won't be pretty, and it won't be cinematic. Just a lot of tragedy for everyone involved. But one side will win, and my guess is it'll be the guys like Tyler. It's not my desire or aim to see any of that happen. It's just how I see things falling out on their current trajectory.
The situation calls to mind a quote from a black radical, spoken-word group from Harlem who were around in the early to mid 60s, called the Last Poets. The line goes, "Speak not of revolution until you are willing to eat rats to survive." Just something to think about when you advocate burning it all down.
Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe (D) has added his name to a growing list of public officials in state governments encouraging the removal of Confederate statues and memorials throughout the South. Late in the day on Wednesday McAuliffe released an official statement saying monuments of Confederate leaders have now become "flashpoints for hatred, division and violence" in a reference to the weekend of violence which shook Charlottesville as white nationalists rallied against the city's planned removal of a Robert E. Lee statue. McAuliffe further described the monuments as "a barrier to progress" and appealed to state and local governments to take action. The governor said:James F , 18 August 2017 at 07:29 AMAs we attempt to heal and learn from the tragic events in Charlottesville, I encourage Virginia's localities and the General Assembly – which are vested with the legal authority – to take down these monuments and relocate them to museums or more appropriate settings. I hope we can all now agree that these symbols are a barrier to progress, inclusion and equality in Virginia and, while the decision may not be mine to make...
It seems the push for monument removal is now picking up steam, with cities like Baltimore simply deciding to act briskly while claiming anti-racism and concern for public safety. Of course, the irony in all this is that the White nationalist and supremacist groups which showed up in force at Charlottesville and which are even now planning a major protest in Lexington, Kentucky, are actually themselves likely hastening the removal of these monuments through their repugnant racial ideology, symbols, and flags.
Bishop James Dukes, a pastor at Liberation Christian Center located on Chicago's south side, is demanding that the city of Chicago re-dedicate two parks in the area that are named after former presidents George Washington and Andrew Jackson. His reasons? Dukes says that monuments honoring men who owned slaves have no place in the black community, even if those men once led the free world.
Just a few I've seen....
Salve, Publius. Thanks for the article. Col. Lang made an excellent point in the comments' section that the Confederate memorials represent the reconciliation between the North and the South. The same argument is presented in a lengthier fashion in this morning's TAC http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/when-confederate-monuments-represent-reconciliation/ . That reconciliation could have been handled much better, i.e. without endorsing Jim Crow. I wish more monuments were erected to commemorate Longstreet and Cleburne, JB Hood and Hardee. I wish there was more Lee and less Forrest. Nonetheless, the important historical point is that a national reconciliation occurred. Removing the statues is a symbolic act which undoes the national reconciliation. The past which is being erased is not the Civil War but the civil peace which followed it. That is tragic.Ishmael Zechariah -> Dr.Puck... , 18 August 2017 at 08:14 AMDr. Puck,Kooshy -> Richardstevenhack ... , 18 August 2017 at 09:21 AM
Do you agree w/ this elected representative's statement: ""I hope Trump is assassinated!" Missouri state Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal, D-University City, wrote during a morning Facebook exchange, referring to Republican President Donald Trump."
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/chappelle-nadal-posts-deletes-facebook-post-hoping-for-trump-s/article_406059d6-1aa4-52fc-89ee-2a6a69baaf2e.html
Ishmael Zechariah
IMO, most of the problems majority of people (specially the ruling class) have with Donald Trump' presidency is that, he acts and is an accidental president, Ironically, everybody including, him, possibly you, and me who voted for him knows this and is not willing to take his presidency serious and act as such. IMO, he happens to run for president, when the country, due to setbacks and defeat on multiple choice wars, as well as national economic misfortunes and misshapes, including mass negligence of working class, was in dismay and a big social divide, as of the result, majority decided to vote for some one outside of familiar cemented in DC ruling class knowing he is not qualified and is a BS artist. IMO that is what took place, which at the end of the day, ends of to be same.Croesus -> doug... , 18 August 2017 at 09:52 AMNetanyahu is under pressure for failing to speak out forcefully against TrumpFred -> James F... , 18 August 2017 at 10:03 AMBibi has keen political skills. He hasn't lasted this long based on his mastery of judo.
James F,TV , 18 August 2017 at 10:18 AM" Removing the statues is a symbolic act which undoes the national reconciliation."
That is the intent. The coalition of urban and coastal ethnic populists and economic elites has been for increased concentration and expansion of federal power at the expense of the states, especially the Southern states, for generations. This wave of agitprop with NGO and MSM backing is intended to undo the constitutional election and return the left to power at the federal level.
I agree with most of Trump's policy positions, but he is negating these positions with his out-of-control mouth and tweets.blowback , 18 August 2017 at 10:33 AM
As much as I have nothing but contempt and loathing for the "establishment" (Dems, Republicans, especially the media, the "intelligence" community and the rest of the permanent government), Trump doesn't seem to comprehend that he can't get anything done without taming some of these elements, all of whom are SERIOUSLY opposed to him as a threat to their sinecures and riches.
"Who is this OUTSIDER to come in and think that he in charge of OUR government?"
What seems like a balanced eyewitness account of Charlottesville that suggests that although the radicals on both sides brought the violence, it was the police who allowed it to happen.doug -> Tyler... , 18 August 2017 at 10:40 AMhttps://newrepublic.com/article/144365/cops-dropped-ball-charlottesville
The need to keep protesters away from counter-protesters particular when both are tooled should be obvious to anyone, but not so with the protest in Charlottevlle.
-"Trump isnt our last chance. Its your last chance."turcopolier , 18 August 2017 at 10:45 AMReminds me of the 60's and the SDS and their ilk. A large part of the under 30 crowd idolized Mao's Little Red Book and convinced themselves the "revolution" was imminent. So many times I heard the phrase "Up Against the Wall, MFs." Stupid fools. Back then people found each other by "teach-ins" and the so called "underground press." In those days it took a larger fraction to be able to blow in each other's ear and convince themselves they were the future "vanguard."
These days, with the internet, it is far easier for a smaller fraction to gravitate to an echo chamber, reinforce group think, and believe their numbers are much larger than what, in reality, exists. This happens across the board. It's a rabbit hole Tyler. Don't go down it.
BoobyISL , 18 August 2017 at 10:53 AMYes, Forts Bragg, Hood, Lee, AP Hill, Benning, etc., started as temporary camps during WW1 and were so named to encourage Southern participation in the war. The South had been reluctant about the Spanish War. Wade Hampton, governor of SC said of that war, "Let the North fight. the South knows the cost of war." pl
I would like to share my viewpoint. As a firm believer in the media efforts to sabotage Trump and a former supporter (now agnostic, trending negative - Goldman Sachs swamp creatures in the Oval Office????), he greatly disappointed me. First, i will state, that I do not believe Trump is antisemitic (no antisemite will surround himself with rich Jewish Bankers).sid_finster , 18 August 2017 at 11:29 AMBut violence on all sides is absolute BS. Nazi violence gets its own sentence and language at least as strong as the language he has no trouble hitting ISIS with. Didn't hear that. So I guess in his mind, the threat the US faced from Nazis during WW2 was less than a ragtag, 3rd world guerilla force whose only successes are because of 1. US, Saudi, and other weapons, and their war on unstable third world countries. Give me a break - did he never watch a John Wayne movie as a kid?
When I discuss nazi's, F-bombs are dropped. I support the right of nazi's to march and spew their vitriolic hatred, and even more strongly support the right of free speech to counter their filth with facts and arguments and history.
I am sorry, but Antifa was not fighting against the US in WW2. If one wants to critique Antifa, or another group, that criticism belongs in a separate paragraph or better in another press conference. Taking 2 days to do so, and then walking it back, is the hallmark of a political idiot (or a billionaire who listens to no one and lives in his own mental echo chamber).
If Trump gets his info and opinions from TV news, despite having the $80+ billion US Intel system at his beck and call, he is the largest idiot on the planet.
It doesn't matter whether Trump is getting a raw deal or not. Politics has nothing to do with fairness.But when you've lost Bob Corker, and even Newt Gingrich is getting wobbly, when Fox News is having a hard time finding Republicans willing to go on and defend Trump, you don't need to be Nostradamus to see what's going to happen.
- http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/17/politics/bob-corker-criticizes-trump-charlottesville/index.html
- http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/18/newt-sounds-the-alarm-trump-wont-have-stable-presidency-without-serious-changes-video/
- http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/346867-foxs-shepard-smith-we-couldnt-find-a-republican-willing-to-come
|
|
|
Aug 18, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
Just Sayin' | Aug 17, 2017 4:18:43 PM | 58
re #50OT but not really -
"In an article for Quillette.com on "Methods Behind the Campus Madness," graduate researcher Sumantra Maitra of the University of Nottingham in England reported that 12 of the 13 academics at U.C. Berkeley who signed a letter to the chancellor protesting Yiannopoulos were from "Critical theory, Gender studies and Post-Colonial/Postmodernist/Marxist background."
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-unfortunate-fallout-of-campus-postmodernismThis is a shift in Marxist theory from class conflict to identity politics conflict; instead of judging people by the content of their character, they are now to be judged by the color of their skin (or their ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, et cetera).
"Postmodernists have tried to hijack biology, have taken over large parts of political science, almost all of anthropology, history and English," Maitra concludes, "and have proliferated self-referential journals, citation circles, non-replicable research, and the curtailing of nuanced debate through activism and marches, instigating a bunch of gullible students to intimidate any opposing ideas.""
|
|
|
Aug 17, 2017 | www.unz.com
Peripatetic commenter > , August 16, 2017 at 4:20 pm GMT
James Thompson > , Website August 16, 2017 at 5:05 pm GMTOT, but I am looking for a list of references to criticism of the criticism of The Bell Curve or supporters of The Bell Curve.
Can anyone help. A quick search via Duck Duck Go turned up a couple.
res > , August 16, 2017 at 5:09 pm GMT@Peripatetic commenter Fine, but better to read a few chapters of the book.
res > , August 16, 2017 at 5:20 pm GMTThank you for your comprehensive post.
One thought about:
This argument makes me smile. Hyde seems to take as granted that males have an advantage on "tightly timed tests for mathematical and spatial tasks". Is it simply my male point of view that to do well on any test, in the sense of getting things right, and doing so quickly, would be considered a double advantage? Why regard speedy thinking as a complexity of interpretation? Why is speed in correctly completing a task judged to be "speed as much as skill"? Absurdly, the prompt and correct completion of a task seems to be cast as mere male impetuosity. Furthermore, any employer reading this argument would be justified in thinking "On difficult tasks involving maths and spatial analysis, women need more time" so, given a chance, it might be better not to employ them.
Agreed, but the timing issue for spatial tests actually strikes me as even more important than that. I am good at typical spatial tests, but one thing I have noticed is that for the hardest items I find myself going through a very working memory loaded process of checking whether a rotation works for a variety of details (number of details being limited by WM). I am pretty sure this process is more g loaded than spatial (have to find, remember, and analyze these differences). It is also slow at my WM limits (I trial and error choose which details to focus on for the hardest items). I am certain I could improve my performance by making pen and paper notes, but consider that cheating on those tests. It would be interesting to explore differences in solution speed and style both within and between groups (e.g. do similar scoring men and women differ in technique?).
Thus I tend to think the need for more time indicates a relative deficit in "real" spatial skill in favor of g. Whether this "real" spatial skill is what drives the relationship of spatial skills with programming is unclear, but I think it might be. I would hypothesize that it might not be easy for someone like me to emulate the reasoning a higher spatial ability person might use to solve real world problems (rotations are a relatively simple special case problem). If so, presumably this problem would be even worse for someone with even less "real" spatial ability.
Part of what I base my self assessment on is my sense that some people just immediately see the answer to hard spatial problems. Another part of this is my experience with tasks like navigating in complex topographical environments (I suspect that is a related skill). I routinely encounter people who I think are much better at navigation than I am (especially considered in tandem with more g loaded differences). My sense is that this instant recognition correlates with g but is a separate ability (perhaps more separate than the spatial test correlations indicate given my substitutability observation above). I would be very interested in either anecdotal observations or research discussing this!
Overall, my takeaways from the whole l'affaire Damore (surprised I haven't seen this pun used yet, just searched and here is a use , though I disagree with it that post and the comments are worth a look) are:
- Preferences are important and should be the first differences mentioned in this discussion.
- Relevant measurable trait and preference differences exist and the magnitudes seem in the right ballpark (given tail effects) to explain the representation differences we observe.
- The evidence for biological vs. cultural explanations for these differences is not definitive and therefore is controversial. This controversy provides much of the heat underlying the overall debate IMHO.
- Sexism and discrimination probably exist. In both directions (Google's hiring practices are clearly discriminatory in intent, the reason for Damore's memo!). I am not sure which direction is greater in effect in the Current Year
- There are an astonishing number of inept thinkers out there (not a surprise, but rarely is ineptness displayed so proudly). More than a few call themselves scientists.
Peripatetic commenter > , August 16, 2017 at 6:29 pm GMT@Peripatetic commenter Perhaps a good start is to read (or at least skim) Intelligence, Genes, and Success: Scientists Respond to The Bell Curve as a collection of critiques of The Bell Curve which seem better than most. Then look for critiques of that book and its papers.
Another approach would be to look at Linda Gottfredson's work, most notably: Mainstream Science on Intelligence: An Editorial With 52 Signatories, History, and Bibliography
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.366.7808&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Though IIRC that is more useful as a source of information to form critiques than as ready made rebuttals to any particular work.
P.S. I agree with Dr. Thompson about reading TBC, but based on your other comments assume you have done so already.
res > , August 16, 2017 at 7:40 pm GMTThe Note makes it very clear that men and women "differ in part due to biological causes", that many such differences are small, with significant overlaps, and that you cannot say anything about an individual on the basis of population level distributions.
So, noting that on average, men have 90% more upper body strength than women, would I not be able to claim that any woman my height or less will not have my upper body strength?
Peripatetic commenter > , August 16, 2017 at 8:04 pm GMT@Peripatetic commenter Short answer, no. Though it arguably depends on where you fall in the male range and the population size (which controls how much of an outlier one can expect to occur). If you want to make this more concrete, here is a paper on strength differences which seems to imply (though I don't see it stated) a Cohen's d of about 3 for upper body strength: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4756754/
Plugging that into the visualizer here (3 is the maximum value supported) you see only 13% overlap: http://rpsychologist.com/d3/cohend/
Worth noting that these analyses don't account for size differences (so your equal height condition skews things).To answer your question a different way, try looking at world championship weightlifting results. Can you lift more than the strongest woman there less than or equal to you in height (or weight as a proxy)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_Olympic_weightlifting
https://rawpowerlifting.com/records/world_records/
Razib's grip strength post is a worthwhile look at this sort of thing: https://www.unz.com/gnxp/men-are-stronger-than-women-on-average
Peripatetic commenter > , August 16, 2017 at 9:36 pm GMTTo answer your question a different way, try looking at world championship weightlifting results. Can you lift more than the strongest woman there less than or equal to you in height (or weight as a proxy)?
I don't do weight training but if I did, I think I could and I would assert that world championship male weight lifters could.
Priss Factor > , Website August 17, 2017 at 4:38 am GMTI started reading https://people.ok.ubc.ca/lgabora/papers/Gabora-Russon-EOI-2011.pdf
and found this:
The more we learn about nonhuman intelligence, however, the more we find that abilities previously thought to be uniquely human are not. For example, it was thought until the 1960s that humans alone make tools. But then Jane Goodall (1963) found wild chimpanzees making them. Later, several other species were found making tools too (Beck, 1980). Thus, ideas about what marks the boundary between human and nonhuman intelligence have undergone repeated
There is an enormous qualitative difference between the tools that Chimps (or other primates) use and something like, say, https://www.thoughtco.com/acheulean-handaxe-first-tool-171238 .
What is the use of making such statements? Chimps are not going to suddenly start making screw drivers or knives or bows and arrows etc. Is it thought that all other tool making is layered on top of the neural support Chimps use for making their very primitive tools?
wayfarer > , August 17, 2017 at 4:44 am GMT2 Kevins says we are living 'matriarchy'.
utu > , August 17, 2017 at 4:44 am GMT"Google Memo: Fired Employee Speaks Out!"
Tom Welsh > , August 17, 2017 at 8:44 am GMT
- The Tainted Sources of 'The Bell Curve' http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1994/12/01/the-tainted-sources-of-the-bell-curve/
- The Inferiority Complex http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1981/10/22/the-inferiority-complex/
- Is Intelligence for Real? An Exchange http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1982/02/04/is-intelligence-for-real-an-exchange/
Tom Welsh > , August 17, 2017 at 8:52 am GMTI suspect that no one with enough intelligence to think clearly understands what all the fuss is about. I have never been particularly successful at anything, despite my IQ of over 160 (according to Mensa). The only clearcut effect this has had, as far as I can make out, is that most people find my conversation obscure and boring.
If an IQ 60% above average confers no apparent practical advantage, what is the point in squabbling heatedly about hypothetical differences on the order of 1%? It is surely well established, even if it weren't glaringly obvious to common sense, that while pure intelligence is vital in some fields of work, its effects are usually swamped by those of other characteristics such as persistence, enthusiasm, charisma and empathy.
Indeed, there is a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest that the very most intelligent people are disproportionately prone to mental disorders, existential horror, and despair. There is a lot to hate and fear in the world, and most people seem to be spared the worst consequences by the simplest of defence mechanisms – a sheer failure to notice.
James Thompson > , Website August 17, 2017 at 10:27 am GMT@Peripatetic commenter "Is it thought that all other tool making is layered on top of the neural support Chimps use for making their very primitive tools?"
Yes. Although of course we are not chimps, nor are we directly descended from chimps. The human brain is immensely flexible and adaptable, and once the practice of solving problems by making tools became established, a whole vast new world opened up. Note that people were making stone tools for a very, very long time before the first metals were discovered. Note also that many of the human race's greatest discoveries may have been made only once or twice before spreading worldwide.
One serious weakness that most humans suffer from is an inability to visualize long periods of time. Just as, to the average citizen, a million, a billion, and a trillion are all more or less just "lots and lots", most of us really cannot conceive of a million years or what might happen in such a time. At about three generations per century, a million years represents about 30,000 generations. A mere 50 generations ago the Roman Empire was still flourishing.
James Thompson > , Website August 17, 2017 at 10:50 am GMT@res Thanks for your thoughtful and detailed comments.
On the speed issue, for all tasks, I was objecting to Hyde's implied distinction between speed and ability, because ability is related to speed. I think that W.D.Furneaux was onto this issue years ago, and progressed it well. From memory, I have classified his key insight as saying that intellectual achievement depended on: speed, accuracy and persistence.
The first two are often a trade-off, though of course the brightest people are both speedy and accurate. Persistence is often an ignored characteristic, though it is a key part of most great intellectual achievements.
As regards g, at higher levels of ability it account for less variance.
1. Furneaux, W. D., Nature, 170, 37 (1952). | ISI |
2. Furneaux, W. D. "The Determinants of Success in Intelligence Tests" (paper read to Brit. Assoc. Adv. Sci., 1955).
3. Furneaux, W. D., Manual of Nufferno Speed Tests (Nat. Found. Educ. Res., London, 1955).
4. Furneaux, W. D., in Intellectual Abilities and Problem Solving Behaviour in Handbook of Abnormal Psychology (edit. by Eysenck, H. J.) (Pergamon Press, London, 1960)Miro23 > , August 17, 2017 at 12:21 pm GMT@Peripatetic commenter I think you are right if we alter it from "any woman" to "almost any woman", simply because the difference in body strength (in the paper Res references, and in the others) is a d of 3.5 so I wouldn't bother with further calculations to correct for height. What would make a difference is the small numbers of elite women athletes, as shown in the paper Razib posted.
If one simplifies the whole issue to look at height, weight and body strength together, then women are at risk in any physical encounter with men, even old ones. This has been noticed before, resulting in kind societies paying extra respect to and showing more consideration for women, and in less kind societies to their abuse.
Moi > , August 17, 2017 at 1:10 pm GMTI find the ferocity of some of the replies to Damore extreme. The vehemence of the opposition is coruscating, and absolute. These issues should be matters of scholarly debate, in which the findings matter, and different interpretations contend against each other.
Or maybe it's not for ferocious attacks or scholarly debate. It's just a difference of opinion (remember "diversity") – not something to get so excited about. The problem is that PC is on the way to functioning like militant Islam with regard to unbelievers and apostates.
James Thompson > , Website August 17, 2017 at 1:19 pm GMTFree speech is an interesting concept – but don't try to put it into practice.
dc.sunsets > , August 17, 2017 at 2:10 pm GMT@Tom Welsh Dear Tom,
An IQ of 160 is only found in 1 in 31,560 persons, being higher than 99.9976142490% of the population. This is more than a 60% advantage over the average citizen. IQ points are not percentages.The work of Benbow and Lubinski shows that the higher the intelligence the greater the achievement. While other personality factors may be involved, they have yet to be shown to be as important. Typically, high ability people are shown to be more balanced than average, with lower rates of mental disorder.
Tom Welsh > , August 17, 2017 at 2:10 pm GMT@James Thompson Not to worry. We have Hollywood providing young women with all the confidence necessary that, should she walk down a dark alley and be accosted by a man, she will likely strike him a few times in the face and walk away unscathed.
/sarc off.
If women grasped even vaguely just how great is the gulf between them and the overwhelming majority of men, I suspect we'd see a lot fewer women using their divorce attorney to torment their soon-to-be (or already) ex-husband. I've watched women metaphorically poke the most dangerous animal on Planet Earth, an adult male human, as he sits in a cage that lacks bars.
The only time I've seen the "Entertainment Industry" show what can really happen in a confrontation between a typical woman and a typical (in this case viciously predatory) man, it was in a foreign-made film titled "Irreversible," available on Amazon Video. It was without a doubt the most horrifying rape-beating ever put on film, and watching it would scare the living daylights out of women. It ran rings around any horror film ever made.
Moi > , August 17, 2017 at 2:54 pm GMT@Moi That's nothing new, either.
"It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them".
– Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar, Ch. XX
szopen > , August 17, 2017 at 3:22 pm GMT@Tom Welsh Sam Clemens was sui generis. And I love this one of his: "There are only two important days in the life of any person, the day that your are born and then day you find out why."
res > , August 17, 2017 at 3:25 pm GMTWell, I was looking for people-vs-things preference differences expressed in easily calculable terms (i.e. something in terms of "men are rated as 10 on this trait, with SD 2, while women as 8, with SD 1.8″) but I couldn't; Can anyone help?
The best I could found was the study which claimed that in people-vs-things rating, within the top 25% of topc scorers – which would be, if I understood correctly, people who are the most interested in things (as contrasted with "interested in people") ratio of women to men is 0.287. That would mean there would be around 78% men, 22% women.
Now, the question is what is the cutoff for going to STEM, ie. what is average "things" preference for people to decide to follow career in STEM (or, more specifically, in engineering and computer science). Depending on value of this cutoff, the gap in CS and engineering might be, indeed, completely explained away by difference in people-vs-things interest, or even might imply men are discriminated against, HOWEVER, seeing as some of those preferences are calculated, I wonder whether it is not a kind of circular argument, kind of "there are more men into computer-related work, because more men are interested in computers".
Also, it seems that i saw in one study taht this difference decreases with age, which is strange. This would contradict the theory that the preference is driven by the social expectations (because, then "sexist" expectations would cause is to go up with age) but this could be explained by "it is caused by biology" theory; HOWEVER, the bad thing and the weakness is that "it's caused by biology" could be used to justify BOTH increasing and decreasing the gap – a realisation which leaves bad taste in my mouth.
Anyway I'd love to see
(1) studies quantifying the differences on a scale, not saying "the effect is large with Cohen's d=1.23″
(2) studies looking at specifically computer science and comparing their preferences with general population
(3) studies measuring the trait in very early ageres > , August 17, 2017 at 3:32 pm GMT@James Thompson Thanks for expanding on the speed, accuracy and persistence idea. And giving references!
I am having trouble chasing down your references though. This 1967 letter gives a very similar list of references but states that there were errors in the 1952 Furneaux paper equations: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v214/n5092/abs/2141056a0.html
This book (The Measurement of Intelligence, edited by Michael? Eysenck, copyright 1973, I actually have a copy but am having trouble finding it, I think that chapter would be a good starting point for me): https://books.google.com/books?id=wjLpCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA236&lpg=PA236
gives a title for your first reference: Some Speed, Error and Difficulty Relationships within a Problem-solving Situation
From which I find: https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v170/n4314/abs/170037a0.html
It is nice that Nature assigns DOIs to its old papers. That appears to be a two page letter. Interesting, but I am having trouble drawing inferences from it.I am not sure I communicated my agreement with your earlier speed, accuracy, and persistence comments. I was trying to extend the idea to consider that slow speed might be an indicator of the substitution of skills (other than persistence, though that is certainly critical there) for the skill nominally being tested for. In my earlier example, g for spatial ability. For another example, I took an online autism test a while ago (identifying emotions from pictures). I scored above average (in a good way ; ), but found myself again using a more "logical" (g based IMHO) process for the harder items. I doubt that is the way most people approach that test (though I could be wrong) and my result might overstate my ability on the skill they are trying to test .
The fundamental distinction I am trying to make is between solving a problem in the same way (or sufficiently similar) just more slowly and solving the problem using a fundamentally different approach (or skill/ability?!). The former could be viewed as changing the clock speed on a computer and I think corresponds with the point you make about persistence. For the latter envision a case where one person solves a problem using visual intuition and a quick mathematical check while another person uses an extended mathematical derivation. I think this kind of substitutabiltity could be a problem in subtests intended to measure a specific skill (e.g. spatial!). And g is a very useful Swiss army knife ; ).
Perhaps this is a second order effect relative to the basic speed/persistence issue and should (could?) not really be considered until that has been solved? I guess I am just interested in anyone who has thought about this substitutability idea in the more general form. Furneaux seems focused on the speed side. In particular, Furneaux limits his consideration to the 10-85% range of difficulty while my personal experience is much more about the hard end of the difficulty scale.
This seems like a fairly obvious idea to me so I presume it has been considered. Perhaps some combination of "second order effect" and "hard to test" prevents something having been done about it?
One other thought that occurs to me. Does Furneaux's deemphasis of higher D(ifficulty) items say something about the difficulty of creating high ceiling tests? Is it possible that the combination of substitutability and more idiosyncratic skill profiles at the high end are part of that problem?
Tom Welsh > , August 17, 2017 at 3:49 pm GMTIt's just a difference of opinion (remember "diversity") – not something to get so excited about.
The supreme irony of l'affaire Damore is that was a primary point of Damore's memo and the response was perhaps the best proof of the validity of that point possible. Hence my "inept thinkers" comment.
Tom Welsh > , August 17, 2017 at 3:51 pm GMT@dc.sunsets "No one is insuring your foods are safe".
Actually, Western governments have for decades been going out of their way to recommend actively unhealthy foods and drinks. In 1865, in 1910 and in 1939 it was clearly understood everywhere that meat, fish, poultry, eggs, vegetables, and nuts, together with some dairy and fruit, were the essential dietary items. Carbohydrates, sugars and grains in particular, were clearly understood to be fattening and probably causative of many diseases.
Yet since the US government led the charge with its McGovern Committee Report in the 1970s, Western governments have been warning against meat, saturated fat, and other healthy foods while urging consumption of more foods made from sugars and grains. We all require about 20% of daily energy from protein, and the rest is a mixture of fats and carbs. Cut out the fats, and that means 70-80% carbs, which leads inexorably to weight gain, metabolic syndrome, and for many people eventual diabetes.
Did I mention that Senator McGovern represented a grain-producing state?
James Thompson > , Website August 17, 2017 at 4:15 pm GMTI would like, in this context, to repeat my quotation of Alfred Korzybski's declaration.
"I have said what I have said. I have not said what I have not said".
Intelligent, let alone constructive, discourse will not be possible until everyone understands that saying and takes care to make sure they understand what others mean.
res > , August 17, 2017 at 5:00 pm GMT@res Good points. Sorry about the references: I took the first ones to hand, and should have searched through my own posts. Have done that now, and found this:
http://www.unz.com/jthompson/you-want-it-good-or-you-want-it-tuesday
This will add some content, but I agree that I did not properly answer your question. I think the question you raise would be considered a task solving strategy problem: "I have tried shape, as I did on the easier items, but that doesn't work for this more difficult problems, so I will try feature categorization". That is, you went from a modular solution to a g-loaded general strategy when the module seemed to fail you.
My first point is that if we can find someone who solves even the difficulty problem easily, we hire them because their module does the job for us!
Second, and more interestingly, most problem solving approaches fail when the problem is both novel and very difficult. (I cannot say what makes a problem difficult, but it probably relates to the number of items and the number of operations involved in solving it). At that point in the act of creation, people try all manner of re-framings and re-descriptions, in the hope that an analogy might open up a new line of attack. For example, I cannot assist anyone with finding new elements. Despite that, out of ignorance I can make some suggestions. For example, would anything be gained by taking the target close down to absolute zero? Would it make it easier to hit something?So, problem-solving strategies often become the real test. That also involves working out what problems you don't have to solve. During the Manhattan project one group started worrying that in focusing the charges they would get wear in the system which would throw out their very crucial calculations about the critical mass required. After a while a team member pointed out the obvious fact that the firing mechanism would only be used once.
You are right that a different approach is what we generally need for very difficult problems.
Sorry that I cannot answer all your interesting questions.Priss Factor > , Website August 17, 2017 at 6:34 pm GMT@Tom Welsh That is a good quote. Perhaps I am being a bit dense, but I don't see the applicability to my comment 32. Especially given that I was not responding to you. Perhaps you could elaborate?
If anything the obligation to understand lies first with those criticizing Damore's memo.
Delinquent Snail > , August 17, 2017 at 6:40 pm GMTI don't mind DS not existing. The question is IF they can go after DS, where does it end?
Look how Canadian 'hate speech laws' began with silencing 'Neo-Nazis' (fake ones, btw) and then spread to going after those who don't use proper pronouns. Self-Righteous Addiction created all these Self-Righteous Junkies.
Astuteobservor II > , August 17, 2017 at 7:08 pm GMT@Tom Welsh What? 3 generations a century? That would mean people are having kids in their 30s . Which didn't happen until this last century. Its more like 4-5, maybe even 6, generations a century.
I agree humans can't visualize large spans of time. Plus, a very large minority think the world was created 2017 years ago, so that doesn't help.
Bill Jones > , August 17, 2017 at 7:50 pm GMTI find the ferocity of some of the replies to Damore extreme. The vehemence of the opposition is coruscating, and absolute. These issues should be matters of scholarly debate, in which the findings matter, and different interpretations contend against each other. Expressing different opinions should be a cue for debate, not outrage.
this is why I support him.
Art > , August 17, 2017 at 8:04 pm GMTThe bigger question is why Homo Sapiens is the only primate on the planet where The female is expected to be equal to the male .
Bill Jones > , August 17, 2017 at 8:27 pm GMTThe whole argument "for equality" is fundamentally flawed – it is the wrong goal. As individuals we humans want to be different – not equal. We want to bring something different to the table of social interaction. People who are equal have nothing to give to each other.
Our goal is to find a niche for ourselves – there is room for all different capabilities in a rational society. There is only so much need for rocket scientists.
Proving that men and women are equal is fools work.
Smart people will endeavor to prove that all work is of value – and deserving of a living compensation.
Peace -- Art
P.S. No matter our intellectual capabilities, for 99% of us – doing a good job of raising our children – is the most lasting thing that we can ever do. They are our true legacy – what we do on the job is all too soon lost in the evolution of business.
szopen > , August 17, 2017 at 8:57 pm GMTCspan had an excellent two hour or so interview of the guy on one of their weekend book shows a decade or so ago. Worth the search and a download of at least the audio.
res > , August 17, 2017 at 10:02 pm GMT@res Thanks a lot for a link to "interpretating cohen's d"! FInally I understood the concept
However, the problem with COhen's d is that it assumes – if I am not mistaken – the equal standard deviations, while I think it is quite likely that variation is bigger in males, as usual with many other traits. That would mean that using "d" would not truly reflect the ratios of population over some cutoff, am i right?
Bill Jones > , August 17, 2017 at 11:45 pm GMT@szopen My understanding is the official definition of Cohen's d uses the pooled SDs of the subpopulations, but I am not sure how rigorously that subtlety is observed. For example, this page gives them as alternate definitions: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Cohen%27s_d
I am not sure how much of a difference that makes in practice. That might be a good thing to investigate with some simulations.
"To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not O.K."
Even if it demonstrably true. Can't let reality get in the way of the religion , can we?
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
In the aftermath of competing protests in Charlottesville a wave of dismantling of Confederate statues is on the rise. Overnight Baltimore took down four Confederate statues. One of these honored Confederate soldiers and sailors, another one Confederate women. Elsewhere statues were toppled or defiled .
The Charlottesville conflict itself was about the intent to dismantle a statue of General Robert E. Lee, a commander of the Confederate forces during the American Civil War. The activist part of the political right protested against the take down, the activist part of the political left protested against those protests. According to a number of witnesses quoted in the LA Times sub-groups on both sides came prepared for and readily engaged in violence.
In 2003 a U.S. military tank pulled down the statue of Saddam Hussein on Firdos Square in Baghdad. Narrowly shot TV picture made it look as if a group of Iraqis were doing this. But they were mere actors within a U.S. propaganda show . Pulling down the statue demonstrated a lack of respect towards those who had fought under, worked for or somewhat supported Saddam Hussein. It helped to incite the resistance against the U.S. occupation.
The right-wing nutters who, under U.S. direction, forcefully toppled the legitimate government of Ukraine pulled down hundreds of the remaining Lenin statues in the country. Veterans who fought under the Soviets in the second world war took this as a sign of disrespect. Others saw this as an attack on their fond memories of better times and protected them . The forceful erasement of history further split the country:
"It's not like if you go east they want Lenin but if you go west they want to destroy him," Mr. Gobert said. "These differences don't only go through geography, they go through generations, through social criteria and economic criteria, through the urban and the rural."Statues standing in cities and places are much more than veneration of one person or group. They are symbols, landmarks and fragments of personal memories:
"One guy said he didn't really care about Lenin, but the statue was at the center of the village and it was the place he kissed his wife for the first time," Mr. Gobert said. "When the statue went down it was part of his personal history that went away."(People had better sex under socialism . Does not Lenin deserves statues if only for helping that along?)
Robert Lee was a brutal man who fought for racism and slavery. But there are few historic figures without fail. Did not George Washington "own" slaves? Did not Lyndon B. Johnson lie about the Gulf of Tonkin incident and launched an unjust huge war against non-white people under false pretense? At least some people will think of that when they see their statues. Should those also be taken down?
As time passes the meaning of a monument changes. While it may have been erected with a certain ideology or concept in mind , the view on it will change over time:
[The Charlottesville statue] was unveiled by Lee's great-granddaughter at a ceremony in May 1924. As was the custom on these occasions it was accompanied by a parade and speeches. In the dedication address, Lee was celebrated as a hero, who embodied "the moral greatness of the Old South", and as a proponent of reconciliation between the two sections. The war itself was remembered as a conflict between "interpretations of our Constitution" and between "ideals of democracy."The white racists who came to "protect" the statue in Charlottesville will hardly have done so in the name of reconciliation. Nor will those who had come to violently oppose them. Lee was a racist. Those who came to "defend" the statue were mostly "white supremacy" racists. I am all for protesting against them.
But the issue here is bigger. We must not forget that statues have multiple meanings and messages. Lee was also the man who wrote :
What a cruel thing is war: to separate and destroy families and friends, and mar the purest joys and happiness God has granted us in this world; to fill our hearts with hatred instead of love for our neighbors, and to devastate the fair face of this beautiful world.That Lee was a racist does not mean that his statue should be taken down. The park in Charlottesville, in which the statue stands, was recently renamed from Lee Park into Emancipation Park. It makes sense to keep the statue there to reflect on the contrast between it and the new park name.
Old monuments and statues must not (only) be seen as glorifications within their time. They are reminders of history. With a bit of education they can become valuable occasions of reflection.
George Orwell wrote in his book 1984: "The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history." People do not want to be destroyed. They will fight against attempts to do so. Taking down monuments or statues without a very wide consent will split a society. A large part of the U.S. people voted for Trump. One gets the impression that the current wave of statue take downs is seen as well deserved "punishment" for those who voted wrongly - i.e. not for Hillary Clinton. While many Trump voters will dislike statues of Robert Lee, they will understand that dislike the campaign to take them down even more.
That may be the intend of some people behind the current quarrel. The radicalization on opposing sides may have a purpose. The Trump camp can use it to cover up its plans to further disenfranchise they people. The fake Clintonian "resistance" needs these cultural disputes to cover for its lack of political resistance to Trump's plans.
Anyone who wants to stoke the fires with this issue should be careful what they wish for.
Merasmus | Aug 16, 2017 12:42:12 PM | 1
"That Lee was a racist does not mean that his statue should be taken down."james | Aug 16, 2017 12:42:57 PM | 2How about the fact that he was a traitor?
"George Orwell wrote in his book 1984: 'The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.'"
The only reason statues of traitors like Lee exist is because the South likes to engage in 'Lost Cause' revisionism; to pretend these were noble people fighting for something other than the right to own human beings as pets.
isn't taking down statues what isis does?DMC | Aug 16, 2017 12:45:04 PM | 3erasing history seems part of the goal.. i feel the usa has never really addressed racism.. the issue hasn't gone away and remains a deep wound that has yet to heal.. events like this probably don't help.
The statues of Lee and his ilk should come down because they are TRAITORS who deserve no honor. Washington and Jefferson may have owned slaves but they were PATRIOTS. Its really that simple.RUKidding | Aug 16, 2017 1:03:54 PM | 4I don't want to get derailed into the rights or wrongs of toppling statues. I wonder whose brilliant idea it was to start this trend right at this particular tinder box moment.kgw | Aug 16, 2017 1:09:10 PM | 5That said, the USA has never ever truly confronted either: 1) the systemic genocide of the Native Americans earlier in our history; and b) what slavery really meant and was. NO reconciliation has ever really been done about either of these barbarous acts. Rather, at best/most, we're handed platitudes and lip service that purports that we've "moved on" from said barbarity - well I guess WHITES (I'm one) have. But Native Americans - witness what happened to them at Standing Rock recently - and minorities, especially African Americans, are pretty much not permitted to move on. Witness the unending police murders of AA men across the country, where, routinely, most of the cops get off scott-free.
To quote b:
The Trump camp can use it to cover up its plans to further disenfranchise they people. The fake Clintonian "resistance" needs these cultural disputes to cover for its lack of political resistance to Trump's plans.While I dislike to descend into the liturgy of Both Siderism, it's completely true that both Rs and Ds enjoy and use pitting the rubes in the 99% against one another because it means that the rapine, plunder & pillaging by the Oligarchs and their pet poodles in Congress & the White House can continue apace with alacrity. And: That's Exactly What's Happening.
The Oligarchs could give a flying fig about Heather Heyer's murder, nor could they give a stuff about US citizens cracking each other's skulls in a bit of the old ultra-violence. Gives an opening for increasing the Police State and cracking down on our freedumbs and liberties, etc.
I heard or read somewhere that Nancy Pelosi & Chuck Schumer are absolutely committed to not impeaching Donald Trump because it means all the Ds have to do is Sweet Eff All and just "represent" themselves as the Anti-Trump, while, yes, enjoying the "benefits" of the programs/policies/legislation enacted by the Trump Admin. I have no link and certainly cannot prove this assertion, but it sure seems likely. Just frickin' great.
Lee was not a racist; I'd say you are addressing your own overblown egos. The U.S. Civil War was long in coming. During the 1830's during Andrew Jackson's presidency, and John Calhoun's vice-presidency, at an annual state dinner, the custom of toasts was used to present political views. Jackson toasted the Union of the states, saying "The Union, it must be preserved." Calhoun's toast was next, "The Union, next to our liberty, most dear."Curtis | Aug 16, 2017 1:27:39 PM | 6Calhoun was a proponent of the Doctrine of Nullification, wherein if a national law inflicted harm on any state, the state could nullify the law, until such time as a negotiation of a satisfactory outcome could come about. The absolute Unionists were outraged by such an idea.
My memory tells me that the invention of the cotton gin made cotton a good crop, but that you needed the slaves. Slaves represented the major money invested in this operation. Free the slaves and make slave holders poor. Rich people didn't like that idea. I think maybe the cotton was made into cloth in the factories up north. Just saying.dh | Aug 16, 2017 1:27:57 PM | 7How would 'addressing the problem' actually work? Should all native Americans and people of colour go to Washington to be presented with $1 million each by grovelling white men?joeymac | Aug 16, 2017 1:34:24 PM | 8kgw | Aug 16, 2017 1:37:23 PM | 9Did not George Washington "own" slaves?But, the memorials to GW, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, et al , does not honor them for owning slaves. Memorials of Lee, Stonewall Jackson, Jefferson Davis, et al , is because they took up arms against a legitimate government simply to support of a vile system.@6therevolutionwas | Aug 16, 2017 1:46:02 PM | 10
The manufacturing states put export duties on the agricultural states, and tariffs on British imported cloth. The English mills were undercutting the U.S. mills prices for a number of reasons, not the least of which was they were more experienced in the industry.The civil war in the US was not really started because of slavery. Robert E. Lee did not join the south and fight the north in order to preserve slavery, in his mind it was state's rights. Lincoln did not start the civil war to free the slaves. See https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/show_picture.pl?l=english&rais=1&oiu=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fc%2Fc9%2FThe_Real_Lincoln_cover_art.jpg&sp=b359dec0befbd12fc479633d5b6c6de4Dan Lynch | Aug 16, 2017 1:49:57 PM | 11The difference between a statue of Lee vs. a statue of Washington, Jefferson, LBJ, etc., is that Washington, Jefferson, and LBJ did some good things to earn our respect even though they did a lot of bad things, too. The Confederacy did no good things. It would be like erecting a statue to honor Hitler's SS.fi | Aug 16, 2017 1:56:38 PM | 12If there were statues honoring the SS, would anyone be surprised if Jews objected? Why then does anyone fail to understand why blacks object to Confederate symbols?
I would, however, support statues that depict a Confederate surrendering. Perhaps the statue of Lee on a horse could be replaced with a statue of Lee surrendering to Grant?
I am not a fan of the "counter-protests." Martin Luther King never "counter-protested" a KKK rally. A counter-protest is a good way to start a fight, but a poor way to win hearts and minds. It bothers me when the 99% fight among themselves. Our real enemy is the 1%.
maningi | Aug 16, 2017 2:00:24 PM | 13
George Washington "the father of our country" was a slave owner, a rapist and a murderer. What do we expect from his descendants?
should we remove his face of the dollar bill and destroy his statues?The civil war was due to economic reasons, free labor is good business.
Now cheap Mexican-labor ( the new type of slavery) is good business to the other side.
when will the new civil war in the US start?
@bNorthern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 2:03:05 PM | 14
Many years ago, within the leadership of my student organization, I initiated to rename the University I was attending, which was named after a communist ideological former state acting figure, with very bloody hands, co-responsible for the death of tenths of thousands and thousands of people. Today I still think, that educational and cultural institutions (and many more) should be named either neutral, or by persons with cultural background and with impeccable moral history, no many to be found. On the other side, I opposed the removal of the very statue of the same person at a nearby public plaza - and there it stands today - as a rather painful reminder of the past bloody history of my country, that went through a conflict, that today seems so bizarre. Wherever I go, I look into black abyss, knowing, that the very culture I belong to (the so called Christian Liberal Free Western World) has inflicted so many horrors and crimes against other nations and ethnic groups, its even difficult to count. Karlheinz Deschner wrote 10 books, titled "The Criminal History of Christianity (Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums - on YT you can find videos him reading from it). Yes, this is the very civilization, we Westerners originate from. It was deadly for centuries - and its about time to change this. And keeping the memory of our so bloody history, will help us to find the right and hopefully more peaceful solutions in the future. Don`t tear down monuments or change street names, but give them the so often shameful meaning, they had in history.Then southern states have no business being part of United States of America since their history and customs are not honored. That is good overall I think. Best for the world. Southern states are very unlikely to attack any other sovereign state thousands of miles away, but all united as unitary state, we can see how persistent in their aggression on the rest of the world they are. 222 years out of its 239 years US has been aggressor:james | Aug 16, 2017 2:05:07 PM | 15
https://www.infowars.com/america-has-been-at-war-93-of-the-time-222-out-of-239-years-since-1776/
Time to break US lust for attacking, invading and raiding other countries.what little of this history i know - which is to say very little - kgw reflects what i have read.. the problem is way deeper.. if you want to address racism, you are going to have to pull down most of the statues in the usa today of historical figures..james | Aug 16, 2017 2:06:35 PM | 16if - that is why way you think it will matter, lol.. forgot to add that.. otherwise, forget pulling down statues and see if you can address the real issue - like @4 rukidding and some others here are addressing..ben | Aug 16, 2017 2:10:18 PM | 17A little false equivalency anyone? I'm sure Adolph Hitler had some reasonable remarks at some point in his life, so, I guess we should tolerate a few statues of him also? States rights as the cause for the U$A's civil war? baloney, it was about the murder and enslavement of millions of humans.Grieved | Aug 16, 2017 2:12:25 PM | 18Bob Dylan's "Only a Pawn in Their Game" still spells out unsurpassed the divide and rule strategy, to my mind. Powers that be are rubbing their hands with satisfaction at this point, one would think.Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 2:12:50 PM | 19I like your observation, b, that statues don't necessarily represent what they did when they were erected. It's an important point. It meant something at the time, but now it's a part of today's heritage, and has often taken on some of your own meaning. To destroy your own heritage is a self-limiting thing, and Orwell's point is well taken. Perhaps people without history have nowhere in the present to stand.
Have to add, slavery wasn't the cause for the war. It was centralization, rights of the states. Yankees wanted strong central government with wide array of power, Southerners didn't. Yankees were supported by London banking families and their banking allies or agents in the US, Southerners were on their own. I personally think Southerners were much better soldiers, more honorable and courageous, but we lacked industrial capacity and financial funds. I could be biased having Southern blood, but my opinion anyway.PavewayIV | Aug 16, 2017 2:13:51 PM | 20therevolutionwas@10 - Have to agree. The events leading up to the US Civil War and the war itself were for reasons far more numerous and complex then slavery. Emancipation was a fortunate and desirable outcome and slavery was an issue, but saying the entire war was about ending slavery is the same as saying WW II was mostly about stopping Nazis from killing jews. Dumbing down history serves nobody.dh | Aug 16, 2017 2:14:02 PM | 21Still wondering how specifically the 'real issue' can be addressed. I don't think any amount of money will compensate plains Indians .actually some are quite well off due to casinos. But the days of buffalo hunting are gone and white people will not be going back where they came from. As for blacks in urban ghettos you could build them nice houses in the suburbs but I doubt if that will fix the drugs/gangs problem.michaelj72 | Aug 16, 2017 2:15:36 PM | 22"That Lee was a racist does not mean that his statue should be taken down."psychohistorian | Aug 16, 2017 2:17:06 PM | 23If the sole criteria for taking down any statues was that a man was a 'racist', meaning that he hated people of color/hated black people, can we assume then that all those who owned slaves were also racist?
Then all the statues in the whole country of Jefferson, Washington, Madison, Monroe and perhaps all the Founding Daddies who owned slaves, should be removed. I am playing devil's advocate here.
Fashions come and go.... and so the vices of yesterday are virtues today; and the virtues of yesterday are vices today.
Bernard is correct at the end: "The fake Clintonian "resistance" needs these cultural disputes to cover for its lack of political resistance to Trump's plans." The Demos have nothing, so they tend to fall back on their identity politics.
FYI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States_who_owned_slaves....In total, twelve presidents owned slaves at some point in their lives, eight of whom owned slaves while serving as president. George Washington was the first president to own slaves, including while he was president. Zachary Taylor was the last president to own slaves during his presidency, and Ulysses S. Grant was the last president to have owned a slave at some point in his life.
Pitting people against people by inciting and validating fringe groups is a tried and true social manipulation ploy.....and it seems to be working as intended.ben | Aug 16, 2017 2:20:12 PM | 24Focus is on this conflict gets folks riled up and myopic about who the real enemies of society really are.....and then that riled up energy is transferred to bigger conflicts like war between nations.....with gobs of "our side is more righteous" propaganda
Humanity has been played like this for centuries now and our extinction would probably be a kinder future for the Cosmos since we don't seem to be evolving beyond power/control based governance.
And yes, as Dan Lynch wrote just above: "It bothers me when the 99% fight among themselves. Our real enemy is the 1%"
The U$A was conceived in genocide. I think we should throw out much of our historywoogs | Aug 16, 2017 2:27:34 PM | 25Robert E. Lee a racist? No, he was a man of his time. B, you blew it with this one. You have confused what you don't know with what you think you know.ben | Aug 16, 2017 2:36:31 PM | 26Now, if Lee was a racist, what about this guy?
From Lincoln's Speech, Sept. 18, 1858.
"While I was at the hotel to-day, an elderly gentleman called upon me to know whether I was really in favor of producing a perfect equality between the negroes and white people. While I had not proposed to myself on this occasion to say much on that subject, yet as the question was asked me I thought I would occupy perhaps five minutes in saying something in regard to it. I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races -- that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making VOTERS or jurors of negroes, NOR OF QUALIFYING THEM HOLD OFFICE, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any of her man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
@ 25: Leading an army to perpetuate a system that enslaves and murders millions, is just a bit different than being a racist. More false equivalency?b | Aug 16, 2017 2:38:38 PM | 27All states who joined the confederation cited the "need" and "right" to uphold slavery in their individual declarations. To say that the civil war was not about this point is strongly misleading. Like all wars there were several named and unnamed reasons. Slavery was the most cited point.P. S.--If it were up to me, I'd tear down monuments to most of the U$A's presidents for perpetuating and abetting the rise of an empire who has enslaved and murdered millions around the globe, simply for profits for the few. Economic slavery has replaced the iron shackles, but the murder is still murder...The argument of rather unlimited "state rights" is simply the demand of a minority to argue for the right to ignore majority decisions. With universal state rights a union can never be a union. There is no point to it. What is needed (and was done) is to segregate certain fields wherein the union decides from other policy fields that fall solely within the rights of member states. The conflict over which fields should belong where hardly ever ends.
Posted by: ben | Aug 16, 2017 2:45:29 PM | 28
P. S.--If it were up to me, I'd tear down monuments to most of the U$A's presidents for perpetuating and abetting the rise of an empire who has enslaved and murdered millions around the globe, simply for profits for the few. Economic slavery has replaced the iron shackles, but the murder is still murder...Jackrabbit | Aug 16, 2017 2:48:00 PM | 29Posted by: ben | Aug 16, 2017 2:45:29 PM | 28 /div
Northern Lights @19 is right.woogs | Aug 16, 2017 2:53:03 PM | 30The Northern manufacturers were exploiting the South and wanted to continue doing so. They didn't much care that the raw materials came from slave labor.
Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation to encourage slave rebellion (meaning fewer white Southern men available for military service) and to punish the South.
Yet, while slavery ended when the North won, we all know how that turned out. For nearly 100 years (and some might say, even today) , many black people were still virtual slaves due to discrimination and poor education.
B@27: you're missing a couple of very basic points.Oilman2 | Aug 16, 2017 3:09:32 PM | 31First, not all states that seceded issued declarations. Virginia, for example, of which the 'racist' Robert E. Leehailed, only seceded after Lincoln made his move on fort sumter. In fact, Virginia had voted against secession just prior but, as with 3 other southern states, seceded when Lincoln called for them to supply troops for his war.
Speaking of declarations of causes, have a look at the cherokee declaration. Yes, united indian tribes fought for the confederacy.
Finally, the causes for secession are not the causes for war. Secession is what the southerners did. War is what Lincoln did. One should not have automatically led to the other.
Well, just reading the comments here it is obvious that there are several versions of history taught at different times in the last century. If not, then all of us would "know" the real reason for the CW - there would be no need for discussion. What is also obvious is that this delving back into a muddied history, the defacing of formerly meaningful objects, the thrusting of certain "rights" into the face of anyone even questioning them - all of it is working. It is working extremely well in distracting us from things like the numerous economic bubbles, the deep state scratching at war or chaos everywhere, politicians who are at best prevaricating prostitutes and at worst thieves enriching themselves at our expense as we struggle to maintain in the face of their idiocy.Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 3:14:42 PM | 32It simply doesn't MATTER what started the Civil War - it ought to be enough to look at the death toll on BOTH sides and know we don't need to go there again.
Who stands to gain from this? Because it surely isn't the historically ignorant antifa bunch, who are against everything that includes a moral boundary. It isn't the alt-right, who get nothing but egg on their face and decimation of position by virtue of many being "white". CUI BONO?
The single answer is threefold: media, the government and the military - who continue to refuse to address any of our problems - and feed us a diet of revolting pablum and double-speak.
Honestly, congress passed a law legalizing propaganda - did anyone notice? Did anyone factor in that they allowed themselves freedom to lie to anyone and everyone? It wasn't done for show - it was done to deny future accountability.
Don't let this site get bogged down in history that is being constantly rewritten on Wikipedia. Don't buy into the left/right division process. Don't let your self identify with either group, as they are being led by provocateurs.
The lies we know of regarding Iraq, Syria, Libya - aren't they enough to force people to disbelieve our media completely? The HUGE lies in our media about what is going on in Venezuela should be quite enough (bastante suficiente) to make most people simply disbelieve. But they cannot because they are only allowed to see and hear what our government approves - and for our government, lying is quite legal now.
Let the emotions go - they are pushed via media to force you to think in white or black, right or left, old vs young - any way that is divisive. Getting beaten for a statue would likely make the guy who posed for it laugh his butt off most likely...
Speaking of Lincoln's quotes, here is a good one to dispel the myth about slavery being the cause of war.MRW | Aug 16, 2017 3:18:49 PM | 33
Pres. Abraham Lincoln: "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."I the civil war was for the most part connected with the federal reserve central bank charter right which unionist Yankees frightful about possible restraints of bankers rights were keen to give London banking families unrestricted rights to do whatever they please in the US. Other reasons exclusively included expanding federal government powers. Adding personal income tax would be unimaginable prior to CW. Creation of all those fed gov agencies too. It was all made possible by London bankers' servants Yankees.
Posted by: therevolutionwas | Aug 16, 2017 1:46:02 PM | 10Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 3:19:39 PM | 34
The civil war in the US was not really started because of slavery. Robert E. Lee did not join the south and fight the north in order to preserve slavery, in his mind it was state's rights. Lincoln did not start the civil war to free the slaves.
You're right. The Emancipation Act was an afterthought really because Europe had turned against the idea of slavery before the Civil War broke out, in fact was repelled by it, and Lincoln knew that it would hurt commerce.@29woogs | Aug 16, 2017 3:21:37 PM | 35
Jack the South was right. The South was always right.The southern states felt they had a right to secede, using the tenth amendment as the legal basis. It states simply " The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.".Lea | Aug 16, 2017 3:29:49 PM | 36Furthermore, the union of states was referred to many times by the founders as a compact. Under the theory of compacts, when one party doesn't honor said compact, it is rendered null.
Slavery, regardless of how we may feel today, was a legal and federally protected institution. With the rise of the republican party, a campaign of agitation towards the south and slavery had begun. It is this agitation towards a legal institution that rankled southerners.
The south saw this coming well before the election of Lincoln. William seward, the favorite to win the election, gave a speech in l858 called "the irrepressible conflict". The south well knew of this and saw the writing on the wall if a republican was elected president.
When reading the declarations of causes, this background should be kept in mind if one wants to understand the southern position. Or, one can just count how many times the word 'slavery' appears like a word cloud.
Probably the best articulated statement on the southern position was south Carolina's "address to the slaveholding states".
I'm afraid if you go back in time, no US president can be saved from a well-deserved statue toppling. Including Abraham Lincoln, the hypocrite who DID NOT, and I repeat, DID NOT abolish slavery. The U.S "elite" has always been rotten through and through, so good luck with those statues.woogs | Aug 16, 2017 3:33:55 PM | 37
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/06/the-clintons-had-slaves
Northern Lights@32:historicus | Aug 16, 2017 3:35:02 PM | 38You used Lincoln's inaugural address to show that the war was not over slavery. It's plain enough coming from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
Lincoln, in that same inaugural address, stated what the war would be fought over ...... and it was revenue.
Here's the quote:
The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.
As a rare book dealer and history buff with thirty-odd years of experience reading and studying original civil war era periodicals and documents, a fact stands out for me about these now-controversial statues. None is from the civil war period. Many, like the Lee statue in this article, date to the 1920's, which was the era of the second Ku Klux Klan. The infamous movie "Birth of a Nation" inspired the nationwide revival of that faded terrorist group. The year that statue was dedicated a hundred thousand Klansmen paraded in full regalia in the streets of Washington.I.W. | Aug 16, 2017 3:35:32 PM | 39The children and grandchildren of the men who had taken up arms against the United States had by then completed a very flattering myth about 1861 - 1865. Consider too that romanticized lost cause mythology was integral to the regional spirit long before the rebellion. The Scots Irish who settled the American south carried with them the long memory their forebears' defeats at the Boyne and Culloden, at the hands of the English – the very ancestors of the hated Yankees living to the north of their new homeland.
Note also that many more CSA statues and memorials were built in the 1960s, as symbols of defiance of the civil rights movement of that era. The War for the Union was fought at its heart because the elite of the old south refused to accept the result of a fair and free democratic election, but for those who came after, white supremacy became the comforting myth that rationalized their ancestors' incredibly foolish treason.
"Robert Lee was a brutal man who fought for racism and slavery."Don Wiscacho | Aug 16, 2017 3:37:30 PM | 40Would this have been written in his time? Would it be written today in other countries (Africa included) where slavery (aka human trafficking) is big business today?
I'm disappointed that Moon of Alabama, usually so astute in its presentations, would print this article.
A whole lot of false equivalence goin' on.Joe | Aug 16, 2017 3:39:00 PM | 41That the many statutes of America's founding fathers should be re-evaluated is actually a great idea. Many of these people were simply oligarchs who wanted to be the top of the pyramid instead of the British. Many owned slaves and perpetuated slavery. Others, like Andrew Jackson were legitimate psychopaths. Pretty much all of them cheered the genocide of Native Americans. So maybe we *should* have different heros.
Using the logic b spells out above, one could argue that statues of Nazis should be allowed too, after all they did come up with the Autobahn (modern highways), jet engines, and viable rockets, all technology used all over the world. Some patriotic, well meaning Germans fought in the Wehrmacht, don't they deserve statues, too? What about the Banderists and Forest Brothers? The Imperial Japanese? Don't those well-meaning fascists deserve to celebrate their heritage?
But simply saying that idea out loud is enough to realize what a crock that notion is. Nazis and fascists don't deserve statues, neither do confederates. Neither do most Americans, for that matter.
Trying to make some moral equivalence between NeoNazis and the leftists who oppose them is about as silly as it gets. I don't support violence against these idiots, and they have the same rights as anyone else in expressing their opinion. But to paint legit NeoNazis and the leftists opposing them (admittedly in a very juvenile manner) in the same brush ("Both sides came prepared for violence") is utter hogwash. We don't give Nazis a pass in Ukraine, don't give them a pass in Palestine, and we sure as hell don't give them a pass in the US. It doesn't matter what hypocritical liberal snowflake is on the other side of the barricade, the Nazi is still a f*****g Nazi.
"Robert Lee was a brutal man who fought for racism and slavery."folktruther | Aug 16, 2017 3:41:47 PM | 42b, you have just displayed your ignorance of the character of Robert E. Lee, why he fought, and what he fought for. To give you the short n sweet of it, General Lee was a Christian gentleman respected by those in the North as well as the South. He fought the Federal leviathan as it had chosen to make war on what he considered to be his home and country--the State of Virginia. The issue at hand was not racism and slavery but Federal tyranny. Lincoln himself said he had no quarrel with slavery and as long as the South paid the Federal leviathan its taxes, the South was free to go. Make a visit to Paul Craig Roberts site for his latest essay which explains the world of the 1860s American scene much more eloquently than I can ...
b is completely wrong in thread. The USA has been a highly racist power system historically where killing non-Whites has been a major historical policy. Lee is not merely a racist, he epitomizes this policy and is a symbol of it. Attacking racist symbols is essential to destroying racism.woogs | Aug 16, 2017 3:45:05 PM | 43Historicus@38: that 'fair and free democratic election' was replete with Lincoln supporters printing counterfeit tickets to the convention in order to shut out seward supporters.Ian | Aug 16, 2017 3:45:37 PM | 44The gambit worked and the rest, as they say, is history.
I suggest reading this article for some perspective:karlof1 | Aug 16, 2017 3:51:18 PM | 45http://takimag.com/article/carved_upon_the_landscape_steve_sailer#axzz4pwMfiSP8
Wow! What to write? Craig Murray wrote a very intriguing piece related to Charlottesville while putting the event somewhat into the context of the Scottish Independence Movement; it and the many comments are well worth the time to read and reflect upon, https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2017/08/americans-irish-uzbeks-ukrainians-pakistanis-balls-scots/ruralito | Aug 16, 2017 4:01:10 PM | 46james @2--You are 1000000000% correct. And given the current state-of-affairs, will continue to fester for another century if not more thanks to historical ignorance and elite Machiavellian maneuvering.
Southern Extremist self-proclaimed Fire Eaters were the ones that started the war as they took the bait Lincoln cunningly offered them. If they'd been kept away from the coastal artillery at Charlestown, the lanyard they pulled may have remained still and war avoided for the moment. The advent of the US Civil War can be blamed totally on the Constitution and those who wrote it, although they had no clue as to the fuse they lit.
Chattel Slavery was introduced in the Western Hemisphere because the enslaved First Peoples died off and the sugar plantations needed laborers. Rice, tobacco, indigo, "Naval Stores," and other related cash crops were the next. Cotton only became part of the mix when the cotton gin made greatly lessened the expense of its processing. But, cotton wore out the thin Southern soils, so it cotton plantations slowly marched West thus making Mexican lands attractive for conquest. But slaves were used for so much more--particularly the draining of swamps and construction of port works. The capital base for modern capitalism was made possible by slavery--a sentence you will NOT read in any history textbook. There are a great many books written on the subject; I suggest starting with Marcus Rediker's The Slave Ship: A Human History , followed by Eric Williams's classic Capitalism and Slavery , Edward Baptist's The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism , and John Clarke's Christopher Columbus and the Afrikan Holocaust: Slavery and the Rise of European Capitalism .
There are even more books published about the war itself. But as many have pointed out, it's learning about the reasons for the war that's most important. Vice President Henry Wilson was the first to write a very detailed 3 volume history of those reasons, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America beginning in 1872, and they are rare books indeed; fortunately, they've been digitized and can be found here, https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Wilson%2C+Henry%2C+1812-1875%22 Perhaps the most complete is Allan Nevins 8 volume Ordeal of the Union , although for me it begins too late in 1847, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordeal_of_the_Union Finally, no study of the period's complete without examining the unraveling and utter dysfunction of the political process that occurred between 1856 and 1860 that allowed Lincoln to win the presidency, Roy Nichols's The Disruption of American Democracy illustrates that best.
The US Civil War can't be boiled down to having just one cause; it's causes were multiple, although slavery--being an economic and social system--resides at its core. As an historian, I can't really justify the removal of statues and other items of historical relevance, although displaying the Confederate Flag on public buildings I see as wrong; better to display the Spirit of '76 flag if stars and stripes are to be displayed. (I wonder what will become of the UK's Union Jack if Scotland votes to leave the UK.) Personal display of the Stars and Bars for me amounts to a political statement which people within the Outlaw US Empire still have the right to express despite the animus it directs at myself and other non-Anglo ethnicities. (I'm Germanic Visigoth with Spanish surname--people are surprised at my color when they hear my name.)
The current deep dysfunction in the Outlaw US Empire's domestic politics mirrors that of the latter 1850s somewhat but the reasons are entirely different yet solvable--IF--the populous can gain a high degree of solidarity.
There's also the school of thought that holds that Honest Abe freed the slaves in order that northern industrialists could acquire replacements for workers lost in the war.Pareto | Aug 16, 2017 4:05:35 PM | 47"racism" i.e., when a white person notices demographic patterns lol.Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 4:06:37 PM | 48@37ken | Aug 16, 2017 4:11:20 PM | 49
Aye Woogs. All about expanding fed gov powers, most of which was focused on permanent central banking charter. Many forget that central banking charter had been in place before CW in the US and that great statesman Andrew Jackson repelled it. The first central banking charter caused terrible economic suffering, which is why it was repelled. People had more sense then. Not so much now."Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal I will rout you out!"
~Andrew Jackson
It saddens me that so many buy into the South fought for slavery. That story line was used in the same manner that Weapons of Mass Destruction was used to war with Iraq. The difference is the internet was able to get the truth out. Doesn't do much good to argue as most believe the Confederate slavery propaganda. The US is done as a nation. A thousand different groups that hate each other preaching no hate. Yes it will limp along for a while but it's done for.michaelj72 | Aug 16, 2017 4:23:39 PM | 50@46 karlof1joeymac | Aug 16, 2017 4:24:42 PM | 51many thanks for the history, and the books. I read Murray's essay and consider it a good take....
".... As an historian, I can't really justify the removal of statues and other items of historical relevance, although displaying the Confederate Flag on public buildings I see as wrong..."I have to agree.
& there is at least one sane (african american) person in LA, as per below articlehttp://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-hollywood-forever-monument-20170815-story.html
"....Los Angeles resident Monique Edwards says historical monuments, like the Confederate statue removed from Hollywood Forever Cemetery, need to be preserved and used as teachable moments...."
@Northern Lights (19)Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 4:26:38 PM | 52
Yankees wanted strong central government with wide array of power, Southerners didn't. Yankees were supported by London banking families and their banking allies or agents in the US, Southerners were on their own.
I recall that it was the slavers that wanted the central government to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act even in states that outlawed slavery; it was the slavers that insisted that slavery be legal in the new territories, regardless of the wishes of the settlers.Also, the London industrial and banking interest strongly supported the breakaway slavers because:
(1) It was the slave produced cotton that fueled the textile industry in England.
(2) Imported British ¨prestige¨ items found a ready market with the nouveau riche planters grown fat on stolen labor.
(3) A Balkanized NA would be more subject to pressure from the ¨Mother Country.¨
(4) Lincoln refused to borrow from the bankers and printed ¨greenbacks¨ to finance the war; this infuriated the bankers.Neo-Confederate revisionism creates mythical history, in a large part, by attempting to deify vile human beings.
Me too Ken. Used to say to those I would like to offer them fairy dust to buy. Half of them didn't catch the meaning.somebody | Aug 16, 2017 4:30:53 PM | 537somebody | Aug 16, 2017 4:34:53 PM | 54
How about memorials for red indians and slaves.Like this one .
51woogs | Aug 16, 2017 4:35:22 PM | 55
I would say a country that cannot agree on its history has a huge problem.Ben@26: Lincoln stated that he would only use force to collect imposts and duties.Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 4:36:10 PM | 56The first battle of the war (actually more a skirmish) was the battle of Phillipi in western Virginia in early June, l86l.
To the best of my knowledge, there were no customs houses in western Virginia as it was not a port of entry. This was simply an invasion by the union army at Lincoln's command that revealed his true colors. The war was Lincoln's war, plain and simple.
@51NemesisCalling | Aug 16, 2017 4:40:58 PM | 57
Joey, I would like yo offer you fairy dust to buy. Interested? Luckily we should part our ways soon. Should have happened ages ago if you ask me. Your history is not our own. You were aggressors fighting for foreign entity. Time for us to part I think. have your own history and say whatever you want there. We will have ours.In my view, b is comparing a modern sensibility on race relations with that of a mid 19th century confederate leader and so with this bad thesis it is quite easy to dismiss this post entirely. Was the north that much more enlightened on the treatent of blacks? I think not. Was the emancipation proclamation largely a political gesture to incite ire and violence not only among southerners but also slaves living in these states towards their owners? Meanwhile, the effect of such a proclamation was exempt on states where said effect would not "pinch" the south. The north, if anything, was even more racist using blacks as a means towards the end to consolidate power even more centrally.Clueless Joe | Aug 16, 2017 4:43:56 PM | 58It honestly reads like most neutral apologetic drivel out of the "other" msm which is on the ropes right now from an all-out wholly political assault. If you truly wanted to educate people on their history you would stand up for fair and honest discourse. Make no mistake, this is all about obscuration and historical-revisionism. Globalists gotta eat.
"Slavery as an institution, is a moral &political evil in any Country... I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race... The blacks are immeasurably better off." Robert E. Lee
Sounds like a man with opinions, but without the burning fire to see that evil enshrined in a state-policy towards blacks. Basically, one condemns him for sharing a popular view of the day. CALL THE THOUGHT POLICE!
From a British point of view, Washington and Jefferson were traitors as well.john | Aug 16, 2017 4:51:09 PM | 59
As for Lee, he was racist, but doesn't seem to have been more racist than the average Yankee. No more racist than Sherman or Lincoln, and less racist than many of the Confederate top guys, for instance.Then, there's the nutjob idea that forcefully taking down other statues in the South will make these guys "win". At least, the Lee statue had a more or less legal and democratic process going on, which is the only way to go if you don't want to look like a Taliban.
Really, did these idiots not understand that bringing down Confederate statues without due process will massively piss off most of the locals? Do they really want the local hardliners to come armed and ready to use their guns, one of these days? Is this the plan all along, to spark another civil war for asshat reasons?(Like B, toppling Saddam and communist statues was the very first thing I thought of. As if these poor fools had just been freed from a terrible dictatorship, instead of nothing having changed or been won at all in the last months)
ben says:Mithera | Aug 16, 2017 4:54:03 PM | 60I think we should throw out much of our history
Paul Craig Roberts thinks so too
I agree with Woogs (25). How stoopid are we ? History has been re-written and manipulated going back a long way. Most of the readers here know that our "masters" , and their versions of history are not accurate. Yet here we are arguing and such ... " he was good...NO He was bad...." acting as if we know truth from fiction. Back then, as now, it was all planned. Divide and conquer. Slavery was the "excuse" for war. The Power Elite" were based in Europe at that time and saw America as a real threat to their global rule. It was becoming too strong and so needed to be divided. Thus the people of those times were played....just as we are today. Manipulated into war. Of course America despite the Civil War , continued to grow and prosper so the elite devised another plan. Plan "B" has worked better than they could have ever imagined. They have infected the "soul" of America and the infection is spreading rapidly.Everyone , please re-read oilman2 comments (31)Pnyx | Aug 16, 2017 5:16:11 PM | 61Thanks B, precisely my thinking. It has a smell of vendetta. And I believe this sort of old testament thinking is very common in the u.s. of A. What's currently happening will further alienate both sides and lead to even more urgent need to externalize an internal problem via more wars.virgile | Aug 16, 2017 5:18:00 PM | 62If We Erase Our History, Who Are We?somebody | Aug 16, 2017 5:19:47 PM | 63
Pat Buchanan • August 15, 2017There is a reason for this craze to get rid of confederate statues.47 | Aug 16, 2017 5:20:32 PM | 64Dylann Roof who photographed himself at confederate landmarks before he shot nine black people in a church .
It is futile to discuss what the confederacy was then, when white supremacy groups consider them their home today.
These monuments were not built after or during the civil war. And the reason for building them was racism .
In 2016, the Southern Poverty Law Center estimated that there were over 1,500 "symbols of the Confederacy in public spaces" in the United States. The majority of them are located, as one might expect, in the 11 states that seceded from the union, but as Vice aptly points out, some can be found in Union states (New York, for example has three, Pennsylvania, four) and at least 22 of them are located in states that didn't even exist during the Civil War.How can that be possible? Because largely, Confederate monuments were built during two key periods of American history: the beginnings of Jim Crow in the 1920s and the civil rights movement in the early 1950s and 1960s.
To be sure, some sprung up in the years following the Confederacy's defeat (the concept of a Confederate memorial day dates back to back to 1866 and was still officially observed by the governments of Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina, as of the publication of the Southern Poverty Law Center's report), and some continue to be built!USA Today notes that 35 Confederate monuments have been erected in North Carolina since 2000.
But when these statues!be they historical place markers, or myth-building icons of Lee or Stonewall Jackson!were built seems to suggest these monuments have very little to do with paying tribute to the Civil War dead and everything to do with erecting monuments to black disenfranchisement, segregation, and 20th-century racial tension.
I don't know if b. realizes how many German monuments got destroyed because people did not wish to recall this particular part of history, the bomb raids of the allies helped, of course, but there are cemeteries of Marx, Engels and Lenin statues, and only revisionists recall what was destroyed after WWII .
Young people need some space to breath. They don't need monuments of war heros.
b wrote "Statues standing in cities and places are much more than veneration of one person or group. They are symbols, landmarks and fragments of personal memories..."virgile | Aug 16, 2017 5:20:37 PM | 65Symbols indeed, traits in cultural landscapes. This piece may add another dimension to the importance of cultural landscape in the context of this conversation:
"To this day, the question remains: why would the Southerners remember and celebrate a losing team, and how come the non-Southerners care about it so passionately? A convenient answer revolves around the issue of slavery; i.e., a commemoration of the era of slavery for the former, and, for the latter, the feeling that the landscape reminders of that era should be entirely erased."
and
"In the past two decades, the American(s)' intervention has brought down the statues of Hussein, Gaddafi, Davis, and Lee respectively. Internationally, the work seems to be completed. Domestically, the next stage will be removing the names of highways, libraries, parks, and schools of the men who have not done an illegal act. Eventually, all such traits in the cultural landscape of Virginia may steadily disappear, because they are symbols of Confederacy."
http://www.zokpavlovic.com/conflict/the-war-between-the-states-of-mind-in-virginia-and-elsewhere/What about the statues of the American "heroes" who massacred the Indians?Robert Browning | Aug 16, 2017 5:24:32 PM | 66It warms my heart that you are not a racist. But who really gives a fuck? And what makes you think not favoring your own kind like every other racial and ethnic group does makes you a better than those of your own racial group?? Something is wrong with you.Bill | Aug 16, 2017 5:33:25 PM | 67Statues are kim jong un like silly and useless anyway. Put up a nice obelisk or rotunda instead.joeymac | Aug 16, 2017 5:33:44 PM | 68@Clueless Joe (58)joeymac | Aug 16, 2017 5:47:36 PM | 69From a British point of view, Washington and Jefferson were traitors as well.Kindly correct me if i´m wrong, but, to my knowledge, there are no monuments to Washington or Jefferson on Trafalgar Square.did these idiots not understand that bringing down Confederate statues without due process will massively piss off most of the locals?It is my understanding that ¨due process¨ was underway because of pressure from the locals when the neo-Nazis sought to short circuit this process.@Northern LightsAnonymous | Aug 16, 2017 5:59:02 PM | 70
Your history is not our own.You are certainly entitled to your attitudes, hatreds, memories, affinities and such. You are not entitled to your own history. History is what happened. Quit lying about it!
Lee is the past. Obama is the present. The 'Nobel Peace Prize' winner ran more concurrent wars than any other president. He inaugurated the state execution of US citizens by drone based on secret evidence presented in secret courts. He was in charge when ISIS was created by the US Maw machine. What about removing his Nobel Peace Prize?Erlindur | Aug 16, 2017 5:59:30 PM | 71
A long time ago Christians destroyed the old god's statues because they were pagan and didn't comply with their religion (or is it ideology?). Muslims followed and did the same on what was left. They even do that now when ISIS blows up ancient monuments.aaaa | Aug 16, 2017 6:02:53 PM | 72What is next? Burning books? Lets burn the library of Alexandria once again...
Just posting to say that I'm done with this place - will probably read but am not posting here anymore. Have funClueless Joe | Aug 16, 2017 6:11:39 PM | 73Joeymac 69:Merasmus | Aug 16, 2017 6:38:35 PM | 74
I didn't mean the Charlottesville mess was done without due process. I refer to the cases that have happened these last few days - a trend that won't stop overnight.
Extremists from both sides aren't making friends on the other ones, and obviously are only making matters worse.Somebody 63:
"It is futile to discuss what the confederacy was then, when white supremacy groups consider them their home today."
That's the whole fucking problem. By this logic, nobody should listen to Wagner or read Nietzsche anymore. Screw that. Assholes and criminals from now should be judged according to current values, laws and opinions, based on their very own crimes. People, groups, states, religions from the past should be judged according to their very own actions as well, and not based on what some idiot would fantasize they were 1.500 years later.Looks like the Lee apologetics and claims that the war was about state's rights (go read the CSA constitution, it tramples the rights of its own member states to *not* be slave holding) or tariffs are alive and well in these comments. That's what these statues represent: the utter perversion of the historical record. And as pointed out @38, none of these statues are from anywhere near the Civil War or Reconstruction era.Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 16, 2017 6:43:32 PM | 75https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-myth-of-the-kindly-general-lee/529038/
https://www.civilwar.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states
http://www.americancivilwarforum.com/five-myths-about-secession-169444.html?PageSpeed=noscript
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/05/the-great-civil-war-lie/?mcubz=3
I think anyone and everyone who instigates a successful campaign to destroy a memorial which glorifies war should be awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace & Sanity and be memorialised in bronze, nearby, as a permanent reminder that war WAS a racket, until Reason prevailed.Anonymous | Aug 16, 2017 6:49:20 PM | 76
No offense intended.Arch-propagandist Rove said "[Those] in what we call the reality-based community, [who] believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality. That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality [e.g Russia hacked the election]. And while you're studying that reality!judiciously, as you will!we'll act again, creating other new realities [e.g. Neo-Nazi White Supremacism], which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."Lemur | Aug 16, 2017 6:50:58 PM | 77There is a coup underway to get rid of Trump [who's 'unpardonable crime' seems to be that he isn't going along with the War Party]. The War Party will try anything, anything, if there is a hope that it will work to get rid of him. When Trump launched the cruise missiles against Syria, there was a moment's silence, totally spooky given all the bs that was flying ... Would he start a war with Russia? Would Trump go all the way with that, as Clinton probably would have done? When the attack fizzled out, the chorus resumed their attacks as though nothing had happened.
Their tactical attacks change as they are revealed to be fakes. The current attack, probably using War Party provacateurs operating on both sides, is the next tactical phase - out with 'Russian Hacking the Election', in with 'Trump White Supremacist Nazi'. If there is the standard CIA regime change plan behind this (as outlined by John Perkins and seen in Ukraine, Libya, Syria)] and the relatively passive actions don't work, they will ultimately resort to hard violence. At that stage, they resort to using snipers to kill people on both sides.
The anti-fas' are supposedly liberal, anti-gun, but there already have been stories of them training with weapons, even working with the Kurds in Syria so the ground is laid for their use of weapons. There are those on the Trump side who would relish the excuse for gun violence irrespective on consequence so the whole thing could spiral out of control very rapidly and very dangerously.
Disclosure - I do not support Trump [or any US politico for that matter]. The whole US political system is totally corrupt and morally bankrupt. Those that rise [or more accurately those that are allowed to rise] to the top reflect that corruption and bankruptcy. This could get very very messy.
There's nothing wrong with being racist. Racism is simply preference for one's extended family. 'b' calls the admittedly rather goony lot at C'ville 'white supremacists'. But do they want to enslave blacks or rule over non-whites? No. In fact most of the alt-right lament the slave trade and all its ills, including mixing two groups who, as Lincoln pointed out, had no future together. What the left wants to do is reduce Confederate American heritage and culture down to the slavery issue, despite the fact only a few Southerners owned slaves.Seamus Padraig | Aug 16, 2017 6:57:50 PM | 78Now, within ethnic European countries, should whites be supreme? You're goddamn right they should. Just as the Japanese should practice 'yellow supremacy', and so on and so forth. Most of you lot here, being liberals, will be in favour of no fault divorce. You understand there can be irreconcilable differences which in way suggest either person is objectively bad. The same applies to disparate ethnicities. If white Slovaks and Czechs can't get one, why would white and non-white groups?
You lefties need to have a serious moral dialogue over your rejection of ethno-nationalism! Time to get on the right side of history! Have you noticed the alt-right, despite being comprised of 'hateful bigots', is favourably disposed toward Iran, Syria, and Russia? That's because we consistently apply principles which can protect our racially, culturally, religiously, and ethnically diverse planet, and mitigate conflict. But the woke woke left (not a typo) meanwhile has to 'resist' imperialism by constantly vilifying America. ITS NOT THAT I'M IN FAVOUR OF ASSAD OR PUTIN, ITS JUST THAT AMERICA IS SO NAUGHTY! OH, HOW BASE ARE OUR MOTIVES. OH, WHAT A POX WE ARE. Weak tea. You have no theoretical arguments against liberal interventionism or neoconservativism.
Newsflash folks. Hillary Clinton doesn't fundamentally differ from you in principle. She merely differs on what methods should be employed to achieve Kojeve's universal homogeneous state. Most of you just want to replace global capitalism with global socialism. Seen how occupy wall street turned out? Didn't make a dent. See how your precious POCs voted for the neoliberal war monger? Diversity increases the power of capital. The only force which can beat globalization is primordial tribalism.
I suggest you all start off your transition to nationalism by reading up on 'Social Democracy for the 21st Century'. http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.co.nz/
All in all, b, a pretty brave post -- especially in these dark times. Only a few minor points to add:jdmckay | Aug 16, 2017 6:58:20 PM | 79
Robert Lee was a brutal man who fought for racism and slavery.
Lee wasn't known for being brutal. You're probably confusing him with Nathan Bedford Forrest, who had a notorious mean streak: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Bedford_ForrestLee actually thought the Civil War an awful tragedy. He was asked to choose between his state and his country. That's not much different from being asked to choose between your family and your clan.
Lee was a racist.
That might be true, depending on one's definition of a racist. But then, why should Abraham Lincoln get a pass? It's well known that he did not start the Civil War to end slavery -- that idea only occurred to him halfway through the conflict. But there's also the fact that, while he was never a great fan of slavery, he apparently did not believe in the natural equality of the races, and he even once professed to have no intention of granting blacks equality under the law:
"While I was at the hotel to-day, an elderly gentleman called upon me to know whether I was really in favor of producing a perfect equality between the negroes and white people. While I had not proposed to myself on this occasion to say much on that subject, yet as the question was asked me I thought I would occupy perhaps five minutes in saying something in regard to it. I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races -- that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making VOTERS or jurors of negroes, NOR OF QUALIFYING THEM HOLD OFFICE, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any of her man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
It turns out that history's a complicated thing! To bad it wasn't all written by Hollywood with a bunch of cartoon villains and heroes ...
One gets the impression that the current wave of statue take downs is seen as well deserved "punishment" for those who voted wrongly - i.e. not for Hillary Clinton. While many Trump voters will dislike statues of Robert Lee, they will understand that dislike the campaign to take them down even more.You nailed it, b. The way things are headed, I now wonder if I will someday be arrested for owning Lynard Skynard albums (the covers of which usually had Confederate battle flags) or for having watched Dukes of Hazard shows as a child. It's starting to get that crazy.
Anyway, thanks for running a sane blog in a mad world!
Good interview with a Black, female pastor in Charlottsville who was in church when the march began Friday night. They caught a lot that wasn't on network news.George Smiley | Aug 16, 2017 6:58:29 PM | 80http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/trump-is-lying-about-charlottesville-says-witness-1025515075632
"Don't let this site get bogged down in history that is being constantly rewritten on Wikipedia. Don't buy into the left/right division process. Don't let your self identify with either group, as they are being led by provocateurs.Peter AU 1 | Aug 16, 2017 6:59:17 PM | 81The lies we know of regarding Iraq, Syria, Libya - aren't they enough to force people to disbelieve our media completely? The HUGE lies in our media about what is going on in Venezuela should be quite enough (bastante suficiente) to make most people simply disbelieve. But they cannot because they are only allowed to see and hear what our government approves - and for our government, lying is quite legal now.
Let the emotions go - they are pushed via media to force you to think in white or black, right or left, old vs young - any way that is divisive. Getting beaten for a statue would likely make the guy who posed for it laugh his butt off most likely..."
Posted by: Oilman2 | Aug 16, 2017 3:09:32 PM | 31
Well said. Hope to see your thoughts in the future.
And as always, Karlof1 you have some insights I rarely get ever else (especially not in a comment section)
______________________________
"The US Civil War can't be boiled down to having just one cause; it's causes were multiple, although slavery--being an economic and social system--resides at its core. As an historian, I can't really justify the removal of statues and other items of historical relevance, although displaying the Confederate Flag on public buildings I see as wrong; better to display the Spirit of '76 flag if stars and stripes are to be displayed. (I wonder what will become of the UK's Union Jack if Scotland votes to leave the UK.) Personal display of the Stars and Bars for me amounts to a political statement which people within the Outlaw US Empire still have the right to express despite the animus it directs at myself and other non-Anglo ethnicities. (I'm Germanic Visigoth with Spanish surname--people are surprised at my color when they hear my name.)
The current deep dysfunction in the Outlaw US Empire's domestic politics mirrors that of the latter 1850s somewhat but the reasons are entirely different yet solvable--IF--the populous can gain a high degree of solidarity."
Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 16, 2017 3:51:18 PM | 45
____________________________
Also, somebody @63, very poignant to mention. While I could care less whether about some statues stand or fall (it helps living outside the empire), to deny that they are (generally) symbols of racism, or were built with that in mind, is a little off base in my eyes. Going to repost this quote because I think it had quite a bit of value in this discussion.
"In 2016 the Southern Poverty Law Center estimated that there were over 1,500 "symbols of thE Confederacy in public spaces" in the United States. The majority of them are located, as one might expect, in the 11 states that seceded from the union, but as Vice aptly points out, some can be found in Union states (New York, for example has three, Pennsylvania, four) and at least 22 of them are located in states that didn't even exist during the Civil War.
How can that be possible? Because largely, Confederate monuments were built during two key periods of American history: the beginnings of Jim Crow in the 1920s and the civil rights movement in the early 1950s and 1960s.
To be sure, some sprung up in the years following the Confederacy's defeat (the concept of a Confederate memorial day dates back to back to 1866 and was still officially observed by the governments of Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina, as of the publication of the Southern Poverty Law Center's report), and some continue to be built!USA Today notes that 35 Confederate monuments have been erected in North Carolina since 2000.
But when these statues!be they historical place markers, or myth-building icons of Lee or Stonewall Jackson!were built seems to suggest these monuments have very little to do with paying tribute to the Civil War dead and everything to do with erecting monuments to black disenfranchisement, segregation, and 20th-century racial tension."
@77NemesisCalling | Aug 16, 2017 7:01:45 PM | 82Racism means zero understanding or tolerance of other people/cultures, an attitude that ones own culture or skin colour or group is far superior to those 'others'.
@77 lemurannie | Aug 16, 2017 7:05:36 PM | 83Hear, hear. Generally, a resurgence of American nationalism WILL take the form of populist socialism because it will mark a turning away from the global police state which America is leading currently and will replace it with nationalistic spending on socialist programs with an emphasis on decreased military spending. This will continue ideally until a balance of low taxation and government regulation form a true economy which begins at a local level from the ground up.
the city council, elected by the people, voted to remove the monument.anon | Aug 16, 2017 7:06:12 PM | 84Where are America's memorials to pain of slavery, black resistance?
In 1861, the vice-president of the Confederacy, Alexander H. Stephens, offered this foundational explanation of the Confederate cause: "Its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. "how much public space in the US should be dedicated to monuments honoring these people in the coming century? and for the children and grandchildren of slaves walking by them every day? what about their heritage? and the public monuments to the indigenous people of this land who we genocided? oh right, as a country we have still not even officially recognized that genocide. monuments should not be solely a reflection of the past, but of the future, of who we want to be. who we choose to recognize in our public spaces says a lot about us.
It's pretty fair too say several of the "alt-right" leaders who planned this event agent are provocateurs or Sheep Dipped assets running honeypot "white nationalist" operations.Zico the musketeer | Aug 16, 2017 7:11:22 PM | 85You can see from the make-up of the phony "Nazis" in the groups and their continued use of various propaganda that serves only to tie people and movements OPPOSED by the Deep State to "Nazis" and racist ideology, you can see how on the ground level, this event has psyop planners' fingerprints all over it.
It's also fair too say the complicit media's near universal take on the event signals a uniform, ready-made reaction more than likely dictated to them from a single source.Trump is attacked. The ACLU is attacked. Peace activists opposed to the CIA's regime change operation in Syria are attacked. Tucker Carlson is attacked. Everyone attacked that the CIA and various other aspects of the Deep State want attacked as if the MSM were all sent the same talking points memo.
And keep in mind, this all comes right after the news was starting to pick up on the story that the Deep State's bullshit narrative about a "Russian hack" was falling apart.
Also keep in mind it comes at a time when 600,000 Syrians returned home after the CIA's terrorist regime change operation fell apart.
(from Scott Creighton's blog)
Is there a left in America?Sigil | Aug 16, 2017 7:21:33 PM | 86
I think is really fun to watch those burgers call an US citizen a lefties.From outside US you ALL looks like ULYRA right wing.
This is ridiculous!The statues were erected when the KKK was at its peak, to keep the blacks in their place. They started getting torn down after the 2015 massacre of black churchgoers by a Nazi. For once, don't blame Clinton.Vas | Aug 16, 2017 7:28:08 PM | 87as the country becomes less and less whiteperry | Aug 16, 2017 7:51:05 PM | 88
more and more symbols of white supremacy
have to go..Karlof1@45Peter AU 1 | Aug 16, 2017 8:01:00 PM | 89My only argument with your post is "Chattel Slavery was introduced in the Western Hemisphere"
Chattel = movable property as opposed to your house. In that day and long before women and children were chattel.Thinking about what might have been might help. If the south had won would we have had a strong enough central government to create and give corporate charters and vast rights of way to railroads which then cross our nation. Would states have created their own individual banking systems negating the need for the all controlling Federal reserve? Would states have their own military units willing to join other states to repel an attack instead of the MIC which treats the rest of the world like expendable slaves?
Before our constitution there was the Articles of Confederation. Article 1,2+3.....
Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
Article III. The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.
This first set of laws in the new world was later undone in a secret convention with Madison, input from Jefferson and others found on our money and other honorariums. 1868 gave us the 14th amendment to the constitution that freed all who are born within this nation and were given equal rights. (Not saying that this worked for all slaves. Within a few years this was used to create corporate persons with access to the bill of rights.
I am thinking there were many reasons that people who lived in those times had to fight for what they did. We today are not in a position to judge why individuals fought. Certainly many poor white southerners who owned no slaves at all fought and died. Was it to keep slaves they did not own enslaved or did they fight and die for issues around protection of local or state rights, freedoms and way of life?
Histories are written and paid for by the winners who control that particular present time for the glorification of those rulers. A vast removal of historical artifacts speaks of a weak nation fading into the west's need to clean up some points from history of mean and brutal behaviors which we as a nation support now in the present but try and make it about others.
A paragragh here from lemur 77 comment...psychohistorian | Aug 16, 2017 8:01:58 PM | 90
"Now, within ethnic European countries, should whites be supreme? You're goddamn right they should. Just as the Japanese should practice 'yellow supremacy', and so on and so forth. Most of you lot here, being liberals, will be in favour of no fault divorce. You understand there can be irreconcilable differences which in way suggest either person is objectively bad. The same applies to disparate ethnicities. If white Slovaks and Czechs can't get one, why would white and non-white groups?"What is the United States of America? It is made up of British, French, Spanish and Russian territories aquired or conquered, the original colonists in turn taking them from the native inhabitants. The US has had a largley open imigration policy, people of all cultures, languages and skin colours and religions.
Why should white Europeans be supreme in the US lemur?
The following is the guts of a posting from Raw Story that I see as quite related.Curtis | Aug 16, 2017 8:25:00 PM | 91
"
White House senior strategist Steve Bannon is rejoicing at the criticism President Donald Trump is receiving for defending white nationalism.Bannon phoned The American Prospect progressive writer and editor Robert Kuttner Tuesday, according to his analysis of the interview.
In the interview, Bannon dismissed ethno-nationalists as irrelevant.
"Ethno-nationalism!it's losers. It's a fringe element," Bannon noted.
"These guys are a collection of clowns," he added.
Bannon claimed to welcome the intense criticism Trump has received.
"The Democrats," he said, "the longer they talk about identity politics, I got 'em. I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats."
Kuttner described Bannon as being in "high spirits" during the call
"You might think from recent press accounts that Steve Bannon is on the ropes and therefore behaving prudently. In the aftermath of events in Charlottesville, he is widely blamed for his boss's continuing indulgence of white supremacists," Kuttner explained. "But Bannon was in high spirits when he phoned me Tuesday afternoon to discuss the politics of taking a harder line with China, and minced no words describing his efforts to neutralize his rivals at the Departments of Defense, State, and Treasury."
"They're wetting themselves," Bannon said of opponents he planned to oust at State and Defense.
"
Curtis 6 isn't me. However, I somewhat agree with the point.Alexander Grimsmo | Aug 16, 2017 8:37:55 PM | 92Joe 41
Very true. Lee saw himself as defending Virginia. Slavery was the chief issue used in the states declarations of secession. But the end goal was a separate govt (that actually banned the importation of new slaves).Nemesis 57
Excellent. Racism was bad in the North, too.Strange how the left are pulling down statues of democrats, and the right are fighting to have them stand. The confederates were democrats, but nobody seem to remember that now anymore.sigil | Aug 16, 2017 8:51:24 PM | 93Nothing strange about it. The Democrats dropped the southern racists and the Republicans picked them up with the Southern Strategy. It's all pretty well documented. The current Republicans are not heirs to Lincoln in any meaningful way.michaelj72 | Aug 16, 2017 8:53:14 PM | 94some may consider this interesting.. at the end of Robert Kuttner's conversation with Steve Bannon, Bannon says:Petra | Aug 16, 2017 9:11:29 PM | 95http://prospect.org/article/steve-bannon-unrepentant
...."The Democrats," he said, "the longer they talk about identity politics, I got 'em. I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats.".....
Those who make silly talk about "Patriots and Traitors" (Swallows and Amazons?) are being obtuse about their history. The whole system was racist through and through, depended upon it and was built upon it, starting with the very first rapacious sorties inland from the swampy coast.Krollchem | Aug 16, 2017 9:33:38 PM | 96Some excellent commentary here, including james's percipient notes, Grieved's point, RUKidding's and karlof1's, perry's observations and speculations.
Aside, this "99% v.1%" discourse is disempowering and one has to ask whose interests such talk and attendant disempowerment serve.
Both sides of this ideological issue are frooty and do not see the invisible hands that manipulate their weak minds. See Mike Krieger On Charlottesville: "Don't Play Into The Divide & Conquer Game"VietnamVet | Aug 16, 2017 9:40:12 PM | 97
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-14/mike-krieger-charlottesville-dont-play-divide-conquer-gamePlease note that slavery persisted in some Northern States after the end of the Civil War. The slave trade was even a profit center in the North:
http://www.tracingcenter.org/resources/background/northern-involvement-in-the-slave-trade/
This is a meaningful post on a touchy subject. Global Brahmins are looting the developed world. Color revolutions and ethnic rifts make great fire sales. In a sane world, old monuments would molder away in obscurity. Instead a faux resistance to divide and conquer the little people has commenced. But, it is careening out of control due to austerity and job loss. Deplorable Bushwhackers are fighting for tribalism and supremacy. After the 27 year old war in Iraq, subjected Sunnis turned to their ethnic myths and traditions to fight back; obliterating two ancient cities and themselves. The Chaos is coming west.John Merryman | Aug 16, 2017 9:43:21 PM | 98The problem is that people focus on the effects of history, like slavery and the holocaust, but if you go into the causes and context of these events, then you get accused of rationalizing them. Yet being ignorant of the causes is when history gets repeated. By the time another seriously bad effect rises, it's too late.John Merryman | Aug 16, 2017 9:47:52 PM | 99
As for slavery, it's not as though peoples lives haven't been thoroughly commodified before and continue to be. Yes, slavery in the early part of this country was horrendous and the resulting racism arose from the more reptilian parts of people's minds, but that part still exists and needs to be better understood, not dismissed.
It should also be noted that if it wasn't for slavery, the African American population would otherwise only be about as large as the Arab American population. It is a bit like being the offspring of a rape. It might the absolute worst aspect of your life, but you wouldn't be here otherwise. It's the Native Americans who really got screwed in the deal, but there are not nearly enough of them left, to get much notice.PS,
For those who know their legal history, no, I'm not using a pseudonym. There is a lot of family history in this country, from well before it was a country.
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com
I vividly recall staying up past 1 AM on election night 2016, watching CNN, as it became clear that Donald Trump had been elected the next President of the United States. News anchor Dana Bash was beside herself at the outcome, and at one point, in a fit of honesty, she exclaimed, "This means the end of identity politics." Well, yes, but a deep ideology like identity politics does not die a quiet and sober death. Last weekend in Charlottesville, Virginia, we saw identity politics playing out--violently. Whether it was the white protesters who formed part of the original crowd, or the black and "antifa" protesters who formed part of the counter-demonstration, we witnessed a clash of identities.
President Trump was not wrong when he said that there were violent protesters on both sides of the clash, and that many of the protesters were not there to show their racism, but to protest the tearing down of a statue of a figure in American history who cannot be airbrushed out of our nation's story. Is the next step to burn down the campus of Washington and Lee University in Lexington, Virginia, because it was co-named after Robert E. Lee after the Civil War?
Watching the tirades on MSNBC and other news outlets over the past 48 hours, I can't help but lament how twisted our public discourse has become. Clearly some of the counter-demonstrators were part of the very same "antifa" apparatus that got very different news coverage when they torched and trashed Seattle a number of years back in protest at a WTO meeting. This time around, they were defended by the icons of media, who denounced any thought that there was "moral equivalence" between their violence and the violence of the hardcore white racists who made up part of the protesters on UVA campus.
There is a difference between legitimate civil rights struggles, which at times led to violence, and the reverse racism that I see and hear far too often out of the Black Lives Matter people.
And there is the matter of George Soros spending millions of dollars to help launch that movement after Ferguson. Soros Money Matters too. He is not a benign figure but a promoter of division and discord. I sat in a room when he complained bitterly, with racist overtones, during a meeting of the Drug Policy Foundation years ago, that there were not black voices promoting the legalization of crack cocaine, part of his libertine agenda. Is he a friend of the black community? I don't think so.
Identity politics is a disease. It divides people and makes them into the sum of their self-defined attributes. Far from bringing about the end of identity politics, the Trump election has hardened the fault lines, whether on Capitol Hill or on the streets of American cities.
gaikokumaniakku , 16 August 2017 at 06:27 PM
Brennan Gilmore, Tom Perrielo, Michael Signer, and other friends of Podesta arranged the Charlottesville violence. This isn't just a bunch of college-age leftists getting excited about Derrida. The Charlottesville violence was the result of a conspiracy by well-connected insiders.turcopolier , 16 August 2017 at 06:47 PMI quote the "Signs of the Times" website linked below:
The STOP KONY 2012 psyop was all about using the Joseph Kony boogieman to justify letting Barack Obama send Special Operations troops into Africa to run around and squash any and all resistance to our new imperialism campaign. It was a fraud. A show. And Brennan was part of it.
He was also part of the campaign of Tom Perriello's in Virginia to become the next governor.
End quote.
"Signs of the Times" dot net has a story on this that I will link in the third field below.
https://www.sott.net/article/359361-Charlottesville-Brennan-Gilmore-and-the-STOP-KONY-2012-Psyop
gaikokumaniakkuLars , 16 August 2017 at 06:48 PMI fear that we are approaching a season of disintegration. September 11 at Texas A&M and September 16 on Monument Avenue in Richmond, Virginia will be indicators. pl
On June 6, 1944, a bunch of "protesters" attacked Nazis and did so violently. Was there a moral equivalency then too? You have to reach rather low to accept Nazis, et al, and try to deflect blame for what they stand for. What the defenders of the Confederacy has managed to do is to thoroughly discredit their cause by associating with these despicable groups. It is again a lost cause and again, they only have themselves to blame.turcopolier , 16 August 2017 at 06:48 PMWe may be watching the end of the Trump era come nearer. By association, he is rapidly losing the moral stature of the office that he holds. A lot of people near him are losing their reputations forever.
LarsOf course Sweden did not fight the Nazis at all. Was there a moral equivalence there or was it just self-interest? In fact there were many Swedish volunteers in the 5th SS Panzer Division. What is the factual basis for saying that the people who would not have the statues moved are Nazi-associated or supporting? Do you think the UDC and SCV (of whom I am not qualified to be a member) are Nazi-associated? pl
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
In the aftermath of competing protests in Charlottesville a wave of dismantling of Confederate statues is on the rise. Overnight Baltimore took down four Confederate statues. One of these honored Confederate soldiers and sailors, another one Confederate women. Elsewhere statues were toppled or defiled .
The Charlottesville conflict itself was about the intent to dismantle a statue of General Robert E. Lee, a commander of the Confederate forces during the American Civil War. The activist part of the political right protested against the take down, the activist part of the political left protested against those protests. According to a number of witnesses quoted in the LA Times sub-groups on both sides came prepared for and readily engaged in violence.
In 2003 a U.S. military tank pulled down the statue of Saddam Hussein on Firdos Square in Baghdad. Narrowly shot TV picture made it look as if a group of Iraqis were doing this. But they were mere actors within a U.S. propaganda show . Pulling down the statue demonstrated a lack of respect towards those who had fought under, worked for or somewhat supported Saddam Hussein. It helped to incite the resistance against the U.S. occupation.
The right-wing nutters who, under U.S. direction, forcefully toppled the legitimate government of Ukraine pulled down hundreds of the remaining Lenin statues in the country. Veterans who fought under the Soviets in the second world war took this as a sign of disrespect. Others saw this as an attack on their fond memories of better times and protected them . The forceful erasement of history further split the country:
"It's not like if you go east they want Lenin but if you go west they want to destroy him," Mr. Gobert said. "These differences don't only go through geography, they go through generations, through social criteria and economic criteria, through the urban and the rural."Statues standing in cities and places are much more than veneration of one person or group. They are symbols, landmarks and fragments of personal memories:
"One guy said he didn't really care about Lenin, but the statue was at the center of the village and it was the place he kissed his wife for the first time," Mr. Gobert said. "When the statue went down it was part of his personal history that went away."(People had better sex under socialism . Does not Lenin deserves statues if only for helping that along?)
Robert Lee was a brutal man who fought for racism and slavery. But there are few historic figures without fail. Did not George Washington "own" slaves? Did not Lyndon B. Johnson lie about the Gulf of Tonkin incident and launched an unjust huge war against non-white people under false pretense? At least some people will think of that when they see their statues. Should those also be taken down?
As time passes the meaning of a monument changes. While it may have been erected with a certain ideology or concept in mind , the view on it will change over time:
[The Charlottesville statue] was unveiled by Lee's great-granddaughter at a ceremony in May 1924. As was the custom on these occasions it was accompanied by a parade and speeches. In the dedication address, Lee was celebrated as a hero, who embodied "the moral greatness of the Old South", and as a proponent of reconciliation between the two sections. The war itself was remembered as a conflict between "interpretations of our Constitution" and between "ideals of democracy."The white racists who came to "protect" the statue in Charlottesville will hardly have done so in the name of reconciliation. Nor will those who had come to violently oppose them. Lee was a racist. Those who came to "defend" the statue were mostly "white supremacy" racists. I am all for protesting against them.
But the issue here is bigger. We must not forget that statues have multiple meanings and messages. Lee was also the man who wrote :
What a cruel thing is war: to separate and destroy families and friends, and mar the purest joys and happiness God has granted us in this world; to fill our hearts with hatred instead of love for our neighbors, and to devastate the fair face of this beautiful world.That Lee was a racist does not mean that his statue should be taken down. The park in Charlottesville, in which the statue stands, was recently renamed from Lee Park into Emancipation Park. It makes sense to keep the statue there to reflect on the contrast between it and the new park name.
Old monuments and statues must not (only) be seen as glorifications within their time. They are reminders of history. With a bit of education they can become valuable occasions of reflection.
George Orwell wrote in his book 1984: "The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history." People do not want to be destroyed. They will fight against attempts to do so. Taking down monuments or statues without a very wide consent will split a society. A large part of the U.S. people voted for Trump. One gets the impression that the current wave of statue take downs is seen as well deserved "punishment" for those who voted wrongly - i.e. not for Hillary Clinton. While many Trump voters will dislike statues of Robert Lee, they will understand that dislike the campaign to take them down even more.
That may be the intend of some people behind the current quarrel. The radicalization on opposing sides may have a purpose. The Trump camp can use it to cover up its plans to further disenfranchise they people. The fake Clintonian "resistance" needs these cultural disputes to cover for its lack of political resistance to Trump's plans.
Anyone who wants to stoke the fires with this issue should be careful what they wish for.
Merasmus | Aug 16, 2017 12:42:12 PM | 1
"That Lee was a racist does not mean that his statue should be taken down."james | Aug 16, 2017 12:42:57 PM | 2How about the fact that he was a traitor?
"George Orwell wrote in his book 1984: 'The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.'"
The only reason statues of traitors like Lee exist is because the South likes to engage in 'Lost Cause' revisionism; to pretend these were noble people fighting for something other than the right to own human beings as pets.
isn't taking down statues what isis does?DMC | Aug 16, 2017 12:45:04 PM | 3erasing history seems part of the goal.. i feel the usa has never really addressed racism.. the issue hasn't gone away and remains a deep wound that has yet to heal.. events like this probably don't help.
The statues of Lee and his ilk should come down because they are TRAITORS who deserve no honor. Washington and Jefferson may have owned slaves but they were PATRIOTS. Its really that simple.RUKidding | Aug 16, 2017 1:03:54 PM | 4I don't want to get derailed into the rights or wrongs of toppling statues. I wonder whose brilliant idea it was to start this trend right at this particular tinder box moment.kgw | Aug 16, 2017 1:09:10 PM | 5That said, the USA has never ever truly confronted either: 1) the systemic genocide of the Native Americans earlier in our history; and b) what slavery really meant and was. NO reconciliation has ever really been done about either of these barbarous acts. Rather, at best/most, we're handed platitudes and lip service that purports that we've "moved on" from said barbarity - well I guess WHITES (I'm one) have. But Native Americans - witness what happened to them at Standing Rock recently - and minorities, especially African Americans, are pretty much not permitted to move on. Witness the unending police murders of AA men across the country, where, routinely, most of the cops get off scott-free.
To quote b:
The Trump camp can use it to cover up its plans to further disenfranchise they people. The fake Clintonian "resistance" needs these cultural disputes to cover for its lack of political resistance to Trump's plans.While I dislike to descend into the liturgy of Both Siderism, it's completely true that both Rs and Ds enjoy and use pitting the rubes in the 99% against one another because it means that the rapine, plunder & pillaging by the Oligarchs and their pet poodles in Congress & the White House can continue apace with alacrity. And: That's Exactly What's Happening.
The Oligarchs could give a flying fig about Heather Heyer's murder, nor could they give a stuff about US citizens cracking each other's skulls in a bit of the old ultra-violence. Gives an opening for increasing the Police State and cracking down on our freedumbs and liberties, etc.
I heard or read somewhere that Nancy Pelosi & Chuck Schumer are absolutely committed to not impeaching Donald Trump because it means all the Ds have to do is Sweet Eff All and just "represent" themselves as the Anti-Trump, while, yes, enjoying the "benefits" of the programs/policies/legislation enacted by the Trump Admin. I have no link and certainly cannot prove this assertion, but it sure seems likely. Just frickin' great.
Lee was not a racist; I'd say you are addressing your own overblown egos. The U.S. Civil War was long in coming. During the 1830's during Andrew Jackson's presidency, and John Calhoun's vice-presidency, at an annual state dinner, the custom of toasts was used to present political views. Jackson toasted the Union of the states, saying "The Union, it must be preserved." Calhoun's toast was next, "The Union, next to our liberty, most dear."Curtis | Aug 16, 2017 1:27:39 PM | 6Calhoun was a proponent of the Doctrine of Nullification, wherein if a national law inflicted harm on any state, the state could nullify the law, until such time as a negotiation of a satisfactory outcome could come about. The absolute Unionists were outraged by such an idea.
My memory tells me that the invention of the cotton gin made cotton a good crop, but that you needed the slaves. Slaves represented the major money invested in this operation. Free the slaves and make slave holders poor. Rich people didn't like that idea. I think maybe the cotton was made into cloth in the factories up north. Just saying.dh | Aug 16, 2017 1:27:57 PM | 7How would 'addressing the problem' actually work? Should all native Americans and people of colour go to Washington to be presented with $1 million each by grovelling white men?joeymac | Aug 16, 2017 1:34:24 PM | 8kgw | Aug 16, 2017 1:37:23 PM | 9Did not George Washington "own" slaves?But, the memorials to GW, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, et al , does not honor them for owning slaves. Memorials of Lee, Stonewall Jackson, Jefferson Davis, et al , is because they took up arms against a legitimate government simply to support of a vile system.@6therevolutionwas | Aug 16, 2017 1:46:02 PM | 10
The manufacturing states put export duties on the agricultural states, and tariffs on British imported cloth. The English mills were undercutting the U.S. mills prices for a number of reasons, not the least of which was they were more experienced in the industry.The civil war in the US was not really started because of slavery. Robert E. Lee did not join the south and fight the north in order to preserve slavery, in his mind it was state's rights. Lincoln did not start the civil war to free the slaves. See https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/show_picture.pl?l=english&rais=1&oiu=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fc%2Fc9%2FThe_Real_Lincoln_cover_art.jpg&sp=b359dec0befbd12fc479633d5b6c6de4Dan Lynch | Aug 16, 2017 1:49:57 PM | 11The difference between a statue of Lee vs. a statue of Washington, Jefferson, LBJ, etc., is that Washington, Jefferson, and LBJ did some good things to earn our respect even though they did a lot of bad things, too. The Confederacy did no good things. It would be like erecting a statue to honor Hitler's SS.fi | Aug 16, 2017 1:56:38 PM | 12If there were statues honoring the SS, would anyone be surprised if Jews objected? Why then does anyone fail to understand why blacks object to Confederate symbols?
I would, however, support statues that depict a Confederate surrendering. Perhaps the statue of Lee on a horse could be replaced with a statue of Lee surrendering to Grant?
I am not a fan of the "counter-protests." Martin Luther King never "counter-protested" a KKK rally. A counter-protest is a good way to start a fight, but a poor way to win hearts and minds. It bothers me when the 99% fight among themselves. Our real enemy is the 1%.
maningi | Aug 16, 2017 2:00:24 PM | 13
George Washington "the father of our country" was a slave owner, a rapist and a murderer. What do we expect from his descendants?
should we remove his face of the dollar bill and destroy his statues?The civil war was due to economic reasons, free labor is good business.
Now cheap Mexican-labor ( the new type of slavery) is good business to the other side.
when will the new civil war in the US start?
@bNorthern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 2:03:05 PM | 14
Many years ago, within the leadership of my student organization, I initiated to rename the University I was attending, which was named after a communist ideological former state acting figure, with very bloody hands, co-responsible for the death of tenths of thousands and thousands of people. Today I still think, that educational and cultural institutions (and many more) should be named either neutral, or by persons with cultural background and with impeccable moral history, no many to be found. On the other side, I opposed the removal of the very statue of the same person at a nearby public plaza - and there it stands today - as a rather painful reminder of the past bloody history of my country, that went through a conflict, that today seems so bizarre. Wherever I go, I look into black abyss, knowing, that the very culture I belong to (the so called Christian Liberal Free Western World) has inflicted so many horrors and crimes against other nations and ethnic groups, its even difficult to count. Karlheinz Deschner wrote 10 books, titled "The Criminal History of Christianity (Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums - on YT you can find videos him reading from it). Yes, this is the very civilization, we Westerners originate from. It was deadly for centuries - and its about time to change this. And keeping the memory of our so bloody history, will help us to find the right and hopefully more peaceful solutions in the future. Don`t tear down monuments or change street names, but give them the so often shameful meaning, they had in history.Then southern states have no business being part of United States of America since their history and customs are not honored. That is good overall I think. Best for the world. Southern states are very unlikely to attack any other sovereign state thousands of miles away, but all united as unitary state, we can see how persistent in their aggression on the rest of the world they are. 222 years out of its 239 years US has been aggressor:james | Aug 16, 2017 2:05:07 PM | 15
https://www.infowars.com/america-has-been-at-war-93-of-the-time-222-out-of-239-years-since-1776/
Time to break US lust for attacking, invading and raiding other countries.what little of this history i know - which is to say very little - kgw reflects what i have read.. the problem is way deeper.. if you want to address racism, you are going to have to pull down most of the statues in the usa today of historical figures..james | Aug 16, 2017 2:06:35 PM | 16if - that is why way you think it will matter, lol.. forgot to add that.. otherwise, forget pulling down statues and see if you can address the real issue - like @4 rukidding and some others here are addressing..ben | Aug 16, 2017 2:10:18 PM | 17A little false equivalency anyone? I'm sure Adolph Hitler had some reasonable remarks at some point in his life, so, I guess we should tolerate a few statues of him also? States rights as the cause for the U$A's civil war? baloney, it was about the murder and enslavement of millions of humans.Grieved | Aug 16, 2017 2:12:25 PM | 18Bob Dylan's "Only a Pawn in Their Game" still spells out unsurpassed the divide and rule strategy, to my mind. Powers that be are rubbing their hands with satisfaction at this point, one would think.Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 2:12:50 PM | 19I like your observation, b, that statues don't necessarily represent what they did when they were erected. It's an important point. It meant something at the time, but now it's a part of today's heritage, and has often taken on some of your own meaning. To destroy your own heritage is a self-limiting thing, and Orwell's point is well taken. Perhaps people without history have nowhere in the present to stand.
Have to add, slavery wasn't the cause for the war. It was centralization, rights of the states. Yankees wanted strong central government with wide array of power, Southerners didn't. Yankees were supported by London banking families and their banking allies or agents in the US, Southerners were on their own. I personally think Southerners were much better soldiers, more honorable and courageous, but we lacked industrial capacity and financial funds. I could be biased having Southern blood, but my opinion anyway.PavewayIV | Aug 16, 2017 2:13:51 PM | 20therevolutionwas@10 - Have to agree. The events leading up to the US Civil War and the war itself were for reasons far more numerous and complex then slavery. Emancipation was a fortunate and desirable outcome and slavery was an issue, but saying the entire war was about ending slavery is the same as saying WW II was mostly about stopping Nazis from killing jews. Dumbing down history serves nobody.dh | Aug 16, 2017 2:14:02 PM | 21Still wondering how specifically the 'real issue' can be addressed. I don't think any amount of money will compensate plains Indians .actually some are quite well off due to casinos. But the days of buffalo hunting are gone and white people will not be going back where they came from. As for blacks in urban ghettos you could build them nice houses in the suburbs but I doubt if that will fix the drugs/gangs problem.michaelj72 | Aug 16, 2017 2:15:36 PM | 22"That Lee was a racist does not mean that his statue should be taken down."psychohistorian | Aug 16, 2017 2:17:06 PM | 23If the sole criteria for taking down any statues was that a man was a 'racist', meaning that he hated people of color/hated black people, can we assume then that all those who owned slaves were also racist?
Then all the statues in the whole country of Jefferson, Washington, Madison, Monroe and perhaps all the Founding Daddies who owned slaves, should be removed. I am playing devil's advocate here.
Fashions come and go.... and so the vices of yesterday are virtues today; and the virtues of yesterday are vices today.
Bernard is correct at the end: "The fake Clintonian "resistance" needs these cultural disputes to cover for its lack of political resistance to Trump's plans." The Demos have nothing, so they tend to fall back on their identity politics.
FYI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States_who_owned_slaves....In total, twelve presidents owned slaves at some point in their lives, eight of whom owned slaves while serving as president. George Washington was the first president to own slaves, including while he was president. Zachary Taylor was the last president to own slaves during his presidency, and Ulysses S. Grant was the last president to have owned a slave at some point in his life.
Pitting people against people by inciting and validating fringe groups is a tried and true social manipulation ploy.....and it seems to be working as intended.ben | Aug 16, 2017 2:20:12 PM | 24Focus is on this conflict gets folks riled up and myopic about who the real enemies of society really are.....and then that riled up energy is transferred to bigger conflicts like war between nations.....with gobs of "our side is more righteous" propaganda
Humanity has been played like this for centuries now and our extinction would probably be a kinder future for the Cosmos since we don't seem to be evolving beyond power/control based governance.
And yes, as Dan Lynch wrote just above: "It bothers me when the 99% fight among themselves. Our real enemy is the 1%"
The U$A was conceived in genocide. I think we should throw out much of our historywoogs | Aug 16, 2017 2:27:34 PM | 25Robert E. Lee a racist? No, he was a man of his time. B, you blew it with this one. You have confused what you don't know with what you think you know.ben | Aug 16, 2017 2:36:31 PM | 26Now, if Lee was a racist, what about this guy?
From Lincoln's Speech, Sept. 18, 1858.
"While I was at the hotel to-day, an elderly gentleman called upon me to know whether I was really in favor of producing a perfect equality between the negroes and white people. While I had not proposed to myself on this occasion to say much on that subject, yet as the question was asked me I thought I would occupy perhaps five minutes in saying something in regard to it. I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races -- that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making VOTERS or jurors of negroes, NOR OF QUALIFYING THEM HOLD OFFICE, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any of her man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
@ 25: Leading an army to perpetuate a system that enslaves and murders millions, is just a bit different than being a racist. More false equivalency?b | Aug 16, 2017 2:38:38 PM | 27All states who joined the confederation cited the "need" and "right" to uphold slavery in their individual declarations. To say that the civil war was not about this point is strongly misleading. Like all wars there were several named and unnamed reasons. Slavery was the most cited point.P. S.--If it were up to me, I'd tear down monuments to most of the U$A's presidents for perpetuating and abetting the rise of an empire who has enslaved and murdered millions around the globe, simply for profits for the few. Economic slavery has replaced the iron shackles, but the murder is still murder...The argument of rather unlimited "state rights" is simply the demand of a minority to argue for the right to ignore majority decisions. With universal state rights a union can never be a union. There is no point to it. What is needed (and was done) is to segregate certain fields wherein the union decides from other policy fields that fall solely within the rights of member states. The conflict over which fields should belong where hardly ever ends.
Posted by: ben | Aug 16, 2017 2:45:29 PM | 28
P. S.--If it were up to me, I'd tear down monuments to most of the U$A's presidents for perpetuating and abetting the rise of an empire who has enslaved and murdered millions around the globe, simply for profits for the few. Economic slavery has replaced the iron shackles, but the murder is still murder...Jackrabbit | Aug 16, 2017 2:48:00 PM | 29Posted by: ben | Aug 16, 2017 2:45:29 PM | 28 /div
Northern Lights @19 is right.woogs | Aug 16, 2017 2:53:03 PM | 30The Northern manufacturers were exploiting the South and wanted to continue doing so. They didn't much care that the raw materials came from slave labor.
Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation to encourage slave rebellion (meaning fewer white Southern men available for military service) and to punish the South.
Yet, while slavery ended when the North won, we all know how that turned out. For nearly 100 years (and some might say, even today) , many black people were still virtual slaves due to discrimination and poor education.
B@27: you're missing a couple of very basic points.Oilman2 | Aug 16, 2017 3:09:32 PM | 31First, not all states that seceded issued declarations. Virginia, for example, of which the 'racist' Robert E. Leehailed, only seceded after Lincoln made his move on fort sumter. In fact, Virginia had voted against secession just prior but, as with 3 other southern states, seceded when Lincoln called for them to supply troops for his war.
Speaking of declarations of causes, have a look at the cherokee declaration. Yes, united indian tribes fought for the confederacy.
Finally, the causes for secession are not the causes for war. Secession is what the southerners did. War is what Lincoln did. One should not have automatically led to the other.
Well, just reading the comments here it is obvious that there are several versions of history taught at different times in the last century. If not, then all of us would "know" the real reason for the CW - there would be no need for discussion. What is also obvious is that this delving back into a muddied history, the defacing of formerly meaningful objects, the thrusting of certain "rights" into the face of anyone even questioning them - all of it is working. It is working extremely well in distracting us from things like the numerous economic bubbles, the deep state scratching at war or chaos everywhere, politicians who are at best prevaricating prostitutes and at worst thieves enriching themselves at our expense as we struggle to maintain in the face of their idiocy.Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 3:14:42 PM | 32It simply doesn't MATTER what started the Civil War - it ought to be enough to look at the death toll on BOTH sides and know we don't need to go there again.
Who stands to gain from this? Because it surely isn't the historically ignorant antifa bunch, who are against everything that includes a moral boundary. It isn't the alt-right, who get nothing but egg on their face and decimation of position by virtue of many being "white". CUI BONO?
The single answer is threefold: media, the government and the military - who continue to refuse to address any of our problems - and feed us a diet of revolting pablum and double-speak.
Honestly, congress passed a law legalizing propaganda - did anyone notice? Did anyone factor in that they allowed themselves freedom to lie to anyone and everyone? It wasn't done for show - it was done to deny future accountability.
Don't let this site get bogged down in history that is being constantly rewritten on Wikipedia. Don't buy into the left/right division process. Don't let your self identify with either group, as they are being led by provocateurs.
The lies we know of regarding Iraq, Syria, Libya - aren't they enough to force people to disbelieve our media completely? The HUGE lies in our media about what is going on in Venezuela should be quite enough (bastante suficiente) to make most people simply disbelieve. But they cannot because they are only allowed to see and hear what our government approves - and for our government, lying is quite legal now.
Let the emotions go - they are pushed via media to force you to think in white or black, right or left, old vs young - any way that is divisive. Getting beaten for a statue would likely make the guy who posed for it laugh his butt off most likely...
Speaking of Lincoln's quotes, here is a good one to dispel the myth about slavery being the cause of war.MRW | Aug 16, 2017 3:18:49 PM | 33
Pres. Abraham Lincoln: "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."I the civil war was for the most part connected with the federal reserve central bank charter right which unionist Yankees frightful about possible restraints of bankers rights were keen to give London banking families unrestricted rights to do whatever they please in the US. Other reasons exclusively included expanding federal government powers. Adding personal income tax would be unimaginable prior to CW. Creation of all those fed gov agencies too. It was all made possible by London bankers' servants Yankees.
Posted by: therevolutionwas | Aug 16, 2017 1:46:02 PM | 10Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 3:19:39 PM | 34
The civil war in the US was not really started because of slavery. Robert E. Lee did not join the south and fight the north in order to preserve slavery, in his mind it was state's rights. Lincoln did not start the civil war to free the slaves.
You're right. The Emancipation Act was an afterthought really because Europe had turned against the idea of slavery before the Civil War broke out, in fact was repelled by it, and Lincoln knew that it would hurt commerce.@29woogs | Aug 16, 2017 3:21:37 PM | 35
Jack the South was right. The South was always right.The southern states felt they had a right to secede, using the tenth amendment as the legal basis. It states simply " The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.".Lea | Aug 16, 2017 3:29:49 PM | 36Furthermore, the union of states was referred to many times by the founders as a compact. Under the theory of compacts, when one party doesn't honor said compact, it is rendered null.
Slavery, regardless of how we may feel today, was a legal and federally protected institution. With the rise of the republican party, a campaign of agitation towards the south and slavery had begun. It is this agitation towards a legal institution that rankled southerners.
The south saw this coming well before the election of Lincoln. William seward, the favorite to win the election, gave a speech in l858 called "the irrepressible conflict". The south well knew of this and saw the writing on the wall if a republican was elected president.
When reading the declarations of causes, this background should be kept in mind if one wants to understand the southern position. Or, one can just count how many times the word 'slavery' appears like a word cloud.
Probably the best articulated statement on the southern position was south Carolina's "address to the slaveholding states".
I'm afraid if you go back in time, no US president can be saved from a well-deserved statue toppling. Including Abraham Lincoln, the hypocrite who DID NOT, and I repeat, DID NOT abolish slavery. The U.S "elite" has always been rotten through and through, so good luck with those statues.woogs | Aug 16, 2017 3:33:55 PM | 37
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/06/the-clintons-had-slaves
Northern Lights@32:historicus | Aug 16, 2017 3:35:02 PM | 38You used Lincoln's inaugural address to show that the war was not over slavery. It's plain enough coming from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
Lincoln, in that same inaugural address, stated what the war would be fought over ...... and it was revenue.
Here's the quote:
The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.
As a rare book dealer and history buff with thirty-odd years of experience reading and studying original civil war era periodicals and documents, a fact stands out for me about these now-controversial statues. None is from the civil war period. Many, like the Lee statue in this article, date to the 1920's, which was the era of the second Ku Klux Klan. The infamous movie "Birth of a Nation" inspired the nationwide revival of that faded terrorist group. The year that statue was dedicated a hundred thousand Klansmen paraded in full regalia in the streets of Washington.I.W. | Aug 16, 2017 3:35:32 PM | 39The children and grandchildren of the men who had taken up arms against the United States had by then completed a very flattering myth about 1861 - 1865. Consider too that romanticized lost cause mythology was integral to the regional spirit long before the rebellion. The Scots Irish who settled the American south carried with them the long memory their forebears' defeats at the Boyne and Culloden, at the hands of the English – the very ancestors of the hated Yankees living to the north of their new homeland.
Note also that many more CSA statues and memorials were built in the 1960s, as symbols of defiance of the civil rights movement of that era. The War for the Union was fought at its heart because the elite of the old south refused to accept the result of a fair and free democratic election, but for those who came after, white supremacy became the comforting myth that rationalized their ancestors' incredibly foolish treason.
"Robert Lee was a brutal man who fought for racism and slavery."Don Wiscacho | Aug 16, 2017 3:37:30 PM | 40Would this have been written in his time? Would it be written today in other countries (Africa included) where slavery (aka human trafficking) is big business today?
I'm disappointed that Moon of Alabama, usually so astute in its presentations, would print this article.
A whole lot of false equivalence goin' on.Joe | Aug 16, 2017 3:39:00 PM | 41That the many statutes of America's founding fathers should be re-evaluated is actually a great idea. Many of these people were simply oligarchs who wanted to be the top of the pyramid instead of the British. Many owned slaves and perpetuated slavery. Others, like Andrew Jackson were legitimate psychopaths. Pretty much all of them cheered the genocide of Native Americans. So maybe we *should* have different heros.
Using the logic b spells out above, one could argue that statues of Nazis should be allowed too, after all they did come up with the Autobahn (modern highways), jet engines, and viable rockets, all technology used all over the world. Some patriotic, well meaning Germans fought in the Wehrmacht, don't they deserve statues, too? What about the Banderists and Forest Brothers? The Imperial Japanese? Don't those well-meaning fascists deserve to celebrate their heritage?
But simply saying that idea out loud is enough to realize what a crock that notion is. Nazis and fascists don't deserve statues, neither do confederates. Neither do most Americans, for that matter.
Trying to make some moral equivalence between NeoNazis and the leftists who oppose them is about as silly as it gets. I don't support violence against these idiots, and they have the same rights as anyone else in expressing their opinion. But to paint legit NeoNazis and the leftists opposing them (admittedly in a very juvenile manner) in the same brush ("Both sides came prepared for violence") is utter hogwash. We don't give Nazis a pass in Ukraine, don't give them a pass in Palestine, and we sure as hell don't give them a pass in the US. It doesn't matter what hypocritical liberal snowflake is on the other side of the barricade, the Nazi is still a f*****g Nazi.
"Robert Lee was a brutal man who fought for racism and slavery."folktruther | Aug 16, 2017 3:41:47 PM | 42b, you have just displayed your ignorance of the character of Robert E. Lee, why he fought, and what he fought for. To give you the short n sweet of it, General Lee was a Christian gentleman respected by those in the North as well as the South. He fought the Federal leviathan as it had chosen to make war on what he considered to be his home and country--the State of Virginia. The issue at hand was not racism and slavery but Federal tyranny. Lincoln himself said he had no quarrel with slavery and as long as the South paid the Federal leviathan its taxes, the South was free to go. Make a visit to Paul Craig Roberts site for his latest essay which explains the world of the 1860s American scene much more eloquently than I can ...
b is completely wrong in thread. The USA has been a highly racist power system historically where killing non-Whites has been a major historical policy. Lee is not merely a racist, he epitomizes this policy and is a symbol of it. Attacking racist symbols is essential to destroying racism.woogs | Aug 16, 2017 3:45:05 PM | 43Historicus@38: that 'fair and free democratic election' was replete with Lincoln supporters printing counterfeit tickets to the convention in order to shut out seward supporters.Ian | Aug 16, 2017 3:45:37 PM | 44The gambit worked and the rest, as they say, is history.
I suggest reading this article for some perspective:karlof1 | Aug 16, 2017 3:51:18 PM | 45http://takimag.com/article/carved_upon_the_landscape_steve_sailer#axzz4pwMfiSP8
Wow! What to write? Craig Murray wrote a very intriguing piece related to Charlottesville while putting the event somewhat into the context of the Scottish Independence Movement; it and the many comments are well worth the time to read and reflect upon, https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2017/08/americans-irish-uzbeks-ukrainians-pakistanis-balls-scots/ruralito | Aug 16, 2017 4:01:10 PM | 46james @2--You are 1000000000% correct. And given the current state-of-affairs, will continue to fester for another century if not more thanks to historical ignorance and elite Machiavellian maneuvering.
Southern Extremist self-proclaimed Fire Eaters were the ones that started the war as they took the bait Lincoln cunningly offered them. If they'd been kept away from the coastal artillery at Charlestown, the lanyard they pulled may have remained still and war avoided for the moment. The advent of the US Civil War can be blamed totally on the Constitution and those who wrote it, although they had no clue as to the fuse they lit.
Chattel Slavery was introduced in the Western Hemisphere because the enslaved First Peoples died off and the sugar plantations needed laborers. Rice, tobacco, indigo, "Naval Stores," and other related cash crops were the next. Cotton only became part of the mix when the cotton gin made greatly lessened the expense of its processing. But, cotton wore out the thin Southern soils, so it cotton plantations slowly marched West thus making Mexican lands attractive for conquest. But slaves were used for so much more--particularly the draining of swamps and construction of port works. The capital base for modern capitalism was made possible by slavery--a sentence you will NOT read in any history textbook. There are a great many books written on the subject; I suggest starting with Marcus Rediker's The Slave Ship: A Human History , followed by Eric Williams's classic Capitalism and Slavery , Edward Baptist's The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism , and John Clarke's Christopher Columbus and the Afrikan Holocaust: Slavery and the Rise of European Capitalism .
There are even more books published about the war itself. But as many have pointed out, it's learning about the reasons for the war that's most important. Vice President Henry Wilson was the first to write a very detailed 3 volume history of those reasons, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America beginning in 1872, and they are rare books indeed; fortunately, they've been digitized and can be found here, https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Wilson%2C+Henry%2C+1812-1875%22 Perhaps the most complete is Allan Nevins 8 volume Ordeal of the Union , although for me it begins too late in 1847, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordeal_of_the_Union Finally, no study of the period's complete without examining the unraveling and utter dysfunction of the political process that occurred between 1856 and 1860 that allowed Lincoln to win the presidency, Roy Nichols's The Disruption of American Democracy illustrates that best.
The US Civil War can't be boiled down to having just one cause; it's causes were multiple, although slavery--being an economic and social system--resides at its core. As an historian, I can't really justify the removal of statues and other items of historical relevance, although displaying the Confederate Flag on public buildings I see as wrong; better to display the Spirit of '76 flag if stars and stripes are to be displayed. (I wonder what will become of the UK's Union Jack if Scotland votes to leave the UK.) Personal display of the Stars and Bars for me amounts to a political statement which people within the Outlaw US Empire still have the right to express despite the animus it directs at myself and other non-Anglo ethnicities. (I'm Germanic Visigoth with Spanish surname--people are surprised at my color when they hear my name.)
The current deep dysfunction in the Outlaw US Empire's domestic politics mirrors that of the latter 1850s somewhat but the reasons are entirely different yet solvable--IF--the populous can gain a high degree of solidarity.
There's also the school of thought that holds that Honest Abe freed the slaves in order that northern industrialists could acquire replacements for workers lost in the war.Pareto | Aug 16, 2017 4:05:35 PM | 47"racism" i.e., when a white person notices demographic patterns lol.Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 4:06:37 PM | 48@37ken | Aug 16, 2017 4:11:20 PM | 49
Aye Woogs. All about expanding fed gov powers, most of which was focused on permanent central banking charter. Many forget that central banking charter had been in place before CW in the US and that great statesman Andrew Jackson repelled it. The first central banking charter caused terrible economic suffering, which is why it was repelled. People had more sense then. Not so much now."Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal I will rout you out!"
~Andrew Jackson
It saddens me that so many buy into the South fought for slavery. That story line was used in the same manner that Weapons of Mass Destruction was used to war with Iraq. The difference is the internet was able to get the truth out. Doesn't do much good to argue as most believe the Confederate slavery propaganda. The US is done as a nation. A thousand different groups that hate each other preaching no hate. Yes it will limp along for a while but it's done for.michaelj72 | Aug 16, 2017 4:23:39 PM | 50@46 karlof1joeymac | Aug 16, 2017 4:24:42 PM | 51many thanks for the history, and the books. I read Murray's essay and consider it a good take....
".... As an historian, I can't really justify the removal of statues and other items of historical relevance, although displaying the Confederate Flag on public buildings I see as wrong..."I have to agree.
& there is at least one sane (african american) person in LA, as per below articlehttp://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-hollywood-forever-monument-20170815-story.html
"....Los Angeles resident Monique Edwards says historical monuments, like the Confederate statue removed from Hollywood Forever Cemetery, need to be preserved and used as teachable moments...."
@Northern Lights (19)Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 4:26:38 PM | 52
Yankees wanted strong central government with wide array of power, Southerners didn't. Yankees were supported by London banking families and their banking allies or agents in the US, Southerners were on their own.
I recall that it was the slavers that wanted the central government to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act even in states that outlawed slavery; it was the slavers that insisted that slavery be legal in the new territories, regardless of the wishes of the settlers.Also, the London industrial and banking interest strongly supported the breakaway slavers because:
(1) It was the slave produced cotton that fueled the textile industry in England.
(2) Imported British ¨prestige¨ items found a ready market with the nouveau riche planters grown fat on stolen labor.
(3) A Balkanized NA would be more subject to pressure from the ¨Mother Country.¨
(4) Lincoln refused to borrow from the bankers and printed ¨greenbacks¨ to finance the war; this infuriated the bankers.Neo-Confederate revisionism creates mythical history, in a large part, by attempting to deify vile human beings.
Me too Ken. Used to say to those I would like to offer them fairy dust to buy. Half of them didn't catch the meaning.somebody | Aug 16, 2017 4:30:53 PM | 537somebody | Aug 16, 2017 4:34:53 PM | 54
How about memorials for red indians and slaves.Like this one .
51woogs | Aug 16, 2017 4:35:22 PM | 55
I would say a country that cannot agree on its history has a huge problem.Ben@26: Lincoln stated that he would only use force to collect imposts and duties.Northern Lights | Aug 16, 2017 4:36:10 PM | 56The first battle of the war (actually more a skirmish) was the battle of Phillipi in western Virginia in early June, l86l.
To the best of my knowledge, there were no customs houses in western Virginia as it was not a port of entry. This was simply an invasion by the union army at Lincoln's command that revealed his true colors. The war was Lincoln's war, plain and simple.
@51NemesisCalling | Aug 16, 2017 4:40:58 PM | 57
Joey, I would like yo offer you fairy dust to buy. Interested? Luckily we should part our ways soon. Should have happened ages ago if you ask me. Your history is not our own. You were aggressors fighting for foreign entity. Time for us to part I think. have your own history and say whatever you want there. We will have ours.In my view, b is comparing a modern sensibility on race relations with that of a mid 19th century confederate leader and so with this bad thesis it is quite easy to dismiss this post entirely. Was the north that much more enlightened on the treatent of blacks? I think not. Was the emancipation proclamation largely a political gesture to incite ire and violence not only among southerners but also slaves living in these states towards their owners? Meanwhile, the effect of such a proclamation was exempt on states where said effect would not "pinch" the south. The north, if anything, was even more racist using blacks as a means towards the end to consolidate power even more centrally.Clueless Joe | Aug 16, 2017 4:43:56 PM | 58It honestly reads like most neutral apologetic drivel out of the "other" msm which is on the ropes right now from an all-out wholly political assault. If you truly wanted to educate people on their history you would stand up for fair and honest discourse. Make no mistake, this is all about obscuration and historical-revisionism. Globalists gotta eat.
"Slavery as an institution, is a moral &political evil in any Country... I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race... The blacks are immeasurably better off." Robert E. Lee
Sounds like a man with opinions, but without the burning fire to see that evil enshrined in a state-policy towards blacks. Basically, one condemns him for sharing a popular view of the day. CALL THE THOUGHT POLICE!
From a British point of view, Washington and Jefferson were traitors as well.john | Aug 16, 2017 4:51:09 PM | 59
As for Lee, he was racist, but doesn't seem to have been more racist than the average Yankee. No more racist than Sherman or Lincoln, and less racist than many of the Confederate top guys, for instance.Then, there's the nutjob idea that forcefully taking down other statues in the South will make these guys "win". At least, the Lee statue had a more or less legal and democratic process going on, which is the only way to go if you don't want to look like a Taliban.
Really, did these idiots not understand that bringing down Confederate statues without due process will massively piss off most of the locals? Do they really want the local hardliners to come armed and ready to use their guns, one of these days? Is this the plan all along, to spark another civil war for asshat reasons?(Like B, toppling Saddam and communist statues was the very first thing I thought of. As if these poor fools had just been freed from a terrible dictatorship, instead of nothing having changed or been won at all in the last months)
ben says:Mithera | Aug 16, 2017 4:54:03 PM | 60I think we should throw out much of our history
Paul Craig Roberts thinks so too
I agree with Woogs (25). How stoopid are we ? History has been re-written and manipulated going back a long way. Most of the readers here know that our "masters" , and their versions of history are not accurate. Yet here we are arguing and such ... " he was good...NO He was bad...." acting as if we know truth from fiction. Back then, as now, it was all planned. Divide and conquer. Slavery was the "excuse" for war. The Power Elite" were based in Europe at that time and saw America as a real threat to their global rule. It was becoming too strong and so needed to be divided. Thus the people of those times were played....just as we are today. Manipulated into war. Of course America despite the Civil War , continued to grow and prosper so the elite devised another plan. Plan "B" has worked better than they could have ever imagined. They have infected the "soul" of America and the infection is spreading rapidly.Everyone , please re-read oilman2 comments (31)Pnyx | Aug 16, 2017 5:16:11 PM | 61Thanks B, precisely my thinking. It has a smell of vendetta. And I believe this sort of old testament thinking is very common in the u.s. of A. What's currently happening will further alienate both sides and lead to even more urgent need to externalize an internal problem via more wars.virgile | Aug 16, 2017 5:18:00 PM | 62If We Erase Our History, Who Are We?somebody | Aug 16, 2017 5:19:47 PM | 63
Pat Buchanan • August 15, 2017There is a reason for this craze to get rid of confederate statues.47 | Aug 16, 2017 5:20:32 PM | 64Dylann Roof who photographed himself at confederate landmarks before he shot nine black people in a church .
It is futile to discuss what the confederacy was then, when white supremacy groups consider them their home today.
These monuments were not built after or during the civil war. And the reason for building them was racism .
In 2016, the Southern Poverty Law Center estimated that there were over 1,500 "symbols of the Confederacy in public spaces" in the United States. The majority of them are located, as one might expect, in the 11 states that seceded from the union, but as Vice aptly points out, some can be found in Union states (New York, for example has three, Pennsylvania, four) and at least 22 of them are located in states that didn't even exist during the Civil War.How can that be possible? Because largely, Confederate monuments were built during two key periods of American history: the beginnings of Jim Crow in the 1920s and the civil rights movement in the early 1950s and 1960s.
To be sure, some sprung up in the years following the Confederacy's defeat (the concept of a Confederate memorial day dates back to back to 1866 and was still officially observed by the governments of Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina, as of the publication of the Southern Poverty Law Center's report), and some continue to be built!USA Today notes that 35 Confederate monuments have been erected in North Carolina since 2000.
But when these statues!be they historical place markers, or myth-building icons of Lee or Stonewall Jackson!were built seems to suggest these monuments have very little to do with paying tribute to the Civil War dead and everything to do with erecting monuments to black disenfranchisement, segregation, and 20th-century racial tension.
I don't know if b. realizes how many German monuments got destroyed because people did not wish to recall this particular part of history, the bomb raids of the allies helped, of course, but there are cemeteries of Marx, Engels and Lenin statues, and only revisionists recall what was destroyed after WWII .
Young people need some space to breath. They don't need monuments of war heros.
b wrote "Statues standing in cities and places are much more than veneration of one person or group. They are symbols, landmarks and fragments of personal memories..."virgile | Aug 16, 2017 5:20:37 PM | 65Symbols indeed, traits in cultural landscapes. This piece may add another dimension to the importance of cultural landscape in the context of this conversation:
"To this day, the question remains: why would the Southerners remember and celebrate a losing team, and how come the non-Southerners care about it so passionately? A convenient answer revolves around the issue of slavery; i.e., a commemoration of the era of slavery for the former, and, for the latter, the feeling that the landscape reminders of that era should be entirely erased."
and
"In the past two decades, the American(s)' intervention has brought down the statues of Hussein, Gaddafi, Davis, and Lee respectively. Internationally, the work seems to be completed. Domestically, the next stage will be removing the names of highways, libraries, parks, and schools of the men who have not done an illegal act. Eventually, all such traits in the cultural landscape of Virginia may steadily disappear, because they are symbols of Confederacy."
http://www.zokpavlovic.com/conflict/the-war-between-the-states-of-mind-in-virginia-and-elsewhere/What about the statues of the American "heroes" who massacred the Indians?Robert Browning | Aug 16, 2017 5:24:32 PM | 66It warms my heart that you are not a racist. But who really gives a fuck? And what makes you think not favoring your own kind like every other racial and ethnic group does makes you a better than those of your own racial group?? Something is wrong with you.Bill | Aug 16, 2017 5:33:25 PM | 67Statues are kim jong un like silly and useless anyway. Put up a nice obelisk or rotunda instead.joeymac | Aug 16, 2017 5:33:44 PM | 68@Clueless Joe (58)joeymac | Aug 16, 2017 5:47:36 PM | 69From a British point of view, Washington and Jefferson were traitors as well.Kindly correct me if i´m wrong, but, to my knowledge, there are no monuments to Washington or Jefferson on Trafalgar Square.did these idiots not understand that bringing down Confederate statues without due process will massively piss off most of the locals?It is my understanding that ¨due process¨ was underway because of pressure from the locals when the neo-Nazis sought to short circuit this process.@Northern LightsAnonymous | Aug 16, 2017 5:59:02 PM | 70
Your history is not our own.You are certainly entitled to your attitudes, hatreds, memories, affinities and such. You are not entitled to your own history. History is what happened. Quit lying about it!
Lee is the past. Obama is the present. The 'Nobel Peace Prize' winner ran more concurrent wars than any other president. He inaugurated the state execution of US citizens by drone based on secret evidence presented in secret courts. He was in charge when ISIS was created by the US Maw machine. What about removing his Nobel Peace Prize?Erlindur | Aug 16, 2017 5:59:30 PM | 71
A long time ago Christians destroyed the old god's statues because they were pagan and didn't comply with their religion (or is it ideology?). Muslims followed and did the same on what was left. They even do that now when ISIS blows up ancient monuments.aaaa | Aug 16, 2017 6:02:53 PM | 72What is next? Burning books? Lets burn the library of Alexandria once again...
Just posting to say that I'm done with this place - will probably read but am not posting here anymore. Have funClueless Joe | Aug 16, 2017 6:11:39 PM | 73Joeymac 69:Merasmus | Aug 16, 2017 6:38:35 PM | 74
I didn't mean the Charlottesville mess was done without due process. I refer to the cases that have happened these last few days - a trend that won't stop overnight.
Extremists from both sides aren't making friends on the other ones, and obviously are only making matters worse.Somebody 63:
"It is futile to discuss what the confederacy was then, when white supremacy groups consider them their home today."
That's the whole fucking problem. By this logic, nobody should listen to Wagner or read Nietzsche anymore. Screw that. Assholes and criminals from now should be judged according to current values, laws and opinions, based on their very own crimes. People, groups, states, religions from the past should be judged according to their very own actions as well, and not based on what some idiot would fantasize they were 1.500 years later.Looks like the Lee apologetics and claims that the war was about state's rights (go read the CSA constitution, it tramples the rights of its own member states to *not* be slave holding) or tariffs are alive and well in these comments. That's what these statues represent: the utter perversion of the historical record. And as pointed out @38, none of these statues are from anywhere near the Civil War or Reconstruction era.Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 16, 2017 6:43:32 PM | 75https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-myth-of-the-kindly-general-lee/529038/
https://www.civilwar.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states
http://www.americancivilwarforum.com/five-myths-about-secession-169444.html?PageSpeed=noscript
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/05/the-great-civil-war-lie/?mcubz=3
I think anyone and everyone who instigates a successful campaign to destroy a memorial which glorifies war should be awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace & Sanity and be memorialised in bronze, nearby, as a permanent reminder that war WAS a racket, until Reason prevailed.Anonymous | Aug 16, 2017 6:49:20 PM | 76
No offense intended.Arch-propagandist Rove said "[Those] in what we call the reality-based community, [who] believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality. That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality [e.g Russia hacked the election]. And while you're studying that reality!judiciously, as you will!we'll act again, creating other new realities [e.g. Neo-Nazi White Supremacism], which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."Lemur | Aug 16, 2017 6:50:58 PM | 77There is a coup underway to get rid of Trump [who's 'unpardonable crime' seems to be that he isn't going along with the War Party]. The War Party will try anything, anything, if there is a hope that it will work to get rid of him. When Trump launched the cruise missiles against Syria, there was a moment's silence, totally spooky given all the bs that was flying ... Would he start a war with Russia? Would Trump go all the way with that, as Clinton probably would have done? When the attack fizzled out, the chorus resumed their attacks as though nothing had happened.
Their tactical attacks change as they are revealed to be fakes. The current attack, probably using War Party provacateurs operating on both sides, is the next tactical phase - out with 'Russian Hacking the Election', in with 'Trump White Supremacist Nazi'. If there is the standard CIA regime change plan behind this (as outlined by John Perkins and seen in Ukraine, Libya, Syria)] and the relatively passive actions don't work, they will ultimately resort to hard violence. At that stage, they resort to using snipers to kill people on both sides.
The anti-fas' are supposedly liberal, anti-gun, but there already have been stories of them training with weapons, even working with the Kurds in Syria so the ground is laid for their use of weapons. There are those on the Trump side who would relish the excuse for gun violence irrespective on consequence so the whole thing could spiral out of control very rapidly and very dangerously.
Disclosure - I do not support Trump [or any US politico for that matter]. The whole US political system is totally corrupt and morally bankrupt. Those that rise [or more accurately those that are allowed to rise] to the top reflect that corruption and bankruptcy. This could get very very messy.
There's nothing wrong with being racist. Racism is simply preference for one's extended family. 'b' calls the admittedly rather goony lot at C'ville 'white supremacists'. But do they want to enslave blacks or rule over non-whites? No. In fact most of the alt-right lament the slave trade and all its ills, including mixing two groups who, as Lincoln pointed out, had no future together. What the left wants to do is reduce Confederate American heritage and culture down to the slavery issue, despite the fact only a few Southerners owned slaves.Seamus Padraig | Aug 16, 2017 6:57:50 PM | 78Now, within ethnic European countries, should whites be supreme? You're goddamn right they should. Just as the Japanese should practice 'yellow supremacy', and so on and so forth. Most of you lot here, being liberals, will be in favour of no fault divorce. You understand there can be irreconcilable differences which in way suggest either person is objectively bad. The same applies to disparate ethnicities. If white Slovaks and Czechs can't get one, why would white and non-white groups?
You lefties need to have a serious moral dialogue over your rejection of ethno-nationalism! Time to get on the right side of history! Have you noticed the alt-right, despite being comprised of 'hateful bigots', is favourably disposed toward Iran, Syria, and Russia? That's because we consistently apply principles which can protect our racially, culturally, religiously, and ethnically diverse planet, and mitigate conflict. But the woke woke left (not a typo) meanwhile has to 'resist' imperialism by constantly vilifying America. ITS NOT THAT I'M IN FAVOUR OF ASSAD OR PUTIN, ITS JUST THAT AMERICA IS SO NAUGHTY! OH, HOW BASE ARE OUR MOTIVES. OH, WHAT A POX WE ARE. Weak tea. You have no theoretical arguments against liberal interventionism or neoconservativism.
Newsflash folks. Hillary Clinton doesn't fundamentally differ from you in principle. She merely differs on what methods should be employed to achieve Kojeve's universal homogeneous state. Most of you just want to replace global capitalism with global socialism. Seen how occupy wall street turned out? Didn't make a dent. See how your precious POCs voted for the neoliberal war monger? Diversity increases the power of capital. The only force which can beat globalization is primordial tribalism.
I suggest you all start off your transition to nationalism by reading up on 'Social Democracy for the 21st Century'. http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.co.nz/
All in all, b, a pretty brave post -- especially in these dark times. Only a few minor points to add:jdmckay | Aug 16, 2017 6:58:20 PM | 79
Robert Lee was a brutal man who fought for racism and slavery.
Lee wasn't known for being brutal. You're probably confusing him with Nathan Bedford Forrest, who had a notorious mean streak: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Bedford_ForrestLee actually thought the Civil War an awful tragedy. He was asked to choose between his state and his country. That's not much different from being asked to choose between your family and your clan.
Lee was a racist.
That might be true, depending on one's definition of a racist. But then, why should Abraham Lincoln get a pass? It's well known that he did not start the Civil War to end slavery -- that idea only occurred to him halfway through the conflict. But there's also the fact that, while he was never a great fan of slavery, he apparently did not believe in the natural equality of the races, and he even once professed to have no intention of granting blacks equality under the law:
"While I was at the hotel to-day, an elderly gentleman called upon me to know whether I was really in favor of producing a perfect equality between the negroes and white people. While I had not proposed to myself on this occasion to say much on that subject, yet as the question was asked me I thought I would occupy perhaps five minutes in saying something in regard to it. I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races -- that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making VOTERS or jurors of negroes, NOR OF QUALIFYING THEM HOLD OFFICE, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any of her man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
It turns out that history's a complicated thing! To bad it wasn't all written by Hollywood with a bunch of cartoon villains and heroes ...
One gets the impression that the current wave of statue take downs is seen as well deserved "punishment" for those who voted wrongly - i.e. not for Hillary Clinton. While many Trump voters will dislike statues of Robert Lee, they will understand that dislike the campaign to take them down even more.You nailed it, b. The way things are headed, I now wonder if I will someday be arrested for owning Lynard Skynard albums (the covers of which usually had Confederate battle flags) or for having watched Dukes of Hazard shows as a child. It's starting to get that crazy.
Anyway, thanks for running a sane blog in a mad world!
Good interview with a Black, female pastor in Charlottsville who was in church when the march began Friday night. They caught a lot that wasn't on network news.George Smiley | Aug 16, 2017 6:58:29 PM | 80http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/trump-is-lying-about-charlottesville-says-witness-1025515075632
"Don't let this site get bogged down in history that is being constantly rewritten on Wikipedia. Don't buy into the left/right division process. Don't let your self identify with either group, as they are being led by provocateurs.Peter AU 1 | Aug 16, 2017 6:59:17 PM | 81The lies we know of regarding Iraq, Syria, Libya - aren't they enough to force people to disbelieve our media completely? The HUGE lies in our media about what is going on in Venezuela should be quite enough (bastante suficiente) to make most people simply disbelieve. But they cannot because they are only allowed to see and hear what our government approves - and for our government, lying is quite legal now.
Let the emotions go - they are pushed via media to force you to think in white or black, right or left, old vs young - any way that is divisive. Getting beaten for a statue would likely make the guy who posed for it laugh his butt off most likely..."
Posted by: Oilman2 | Aug 16, 2017 3:09:32 PM | 31
Well said. Hope to see your thoughts in the future.
And as always, Karlof1 you have some insights I rarely get ever else (especially not in a comment section)
______________________________
"The US Civil War can't be boiled down to having just one cause; it's causes were multiple, although slavery--being an economic and social system--resides at its core. As an historian, I can't really justify the removal of statues and other items of historical relevance, although displaying the Confederate Flag on public buildings I see as wrong; better to display the Spirit of '76 flag if stars and stripes are to be displayed. (I wonder what will become of the UK's Union Jack if Scotland votes to leave the UK.) Personal display of the Stars and Bars for me amounts to a political statement which people within the Outlaw US Empire still have the right to express despite the animus it directs at myself and other non-Anglo ethnicities. (I'm Germanic Visigoth with Spanish surname--people are surprised at my color when they hear my name.)
The current deep dysfunction in the Outlaw US Empire's domestic politics mirrors that of the latter 1850s somewhat but the reasons are entirely different yet solvable--IF--the populous can gain a high degree of solidarity."
Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 16, 2017 3:51:18 PM | 45
____________________________
Also, somebody @63, very poignant to mention. While I could care less whether about some statues stand or fall (it helps living outside the empire), to deny that they are (generally) symbols of racism, or were built with that in mind, is a little off base in my eyes. Going to repost this quote because I think it had quite a bit of value in this discussion.
"In 2016 the Southern Poverty Law Center estimated that there were over 1,500 "symbols of thE Confederacy in public spaces" in the United States. The majority of them are located, as one might expect, in the 11 states that seceded from the union, but as Vice aptly points out, some can be found in Union states (New York, for example has three, Pennsylvania, four) and at least 22 of them are located in states that didn't even exist during the Civil War.
How can that be possible? Because largely, Confederate monuments were built during two key periods of American history: the beginnings of Jim Crow in the 1920s and the civil rights movement in the early 1950s and 1960s.
To be sure, some sprung up in the years following the Confederacy's defeat (the concept of a Confederate memorial day dates back to back to 1866 and was still officially observed by the governments of Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina, as of the publication of the Southern Poverty Law Center's report), and some continue to be built!USA Today notes that 35 Confederate monuments have been erected in North Carolina since 2000.
But when these statues!be they historical place markers, or myth-building icons of Lee or Stonewall Jackson!were built seems to suggest these monuments have very little to do with paying tribute to the Civil War dead and everything to do with erecting monuments to black disenfranchisement, segregation, and 20th-century racial tension."
@77NemesisCalling | Aug 16, 2017 7:01:45 PM | 82Racism means zero understanding or tolerance of other people/cultures, an attitude that ones own culture or skin colour or group is far superior to those 'others'.
@77 lemurannie | Aug 16, 2017 7:05:36 PM | 83Hear, hear. Generally, a resurgence of American nationalism WILL take the form of populist socialism because it will mark a turning away from the global police state which America is leading currently and will replace it with nationalistic spending on socialist programs with an emphasis on decreased military spending. This will continue ideally until a balance of low taxation and government regulation form a true economy which begins at a local level from the ground up.
the city council, elected by the people, voted to remove the monument.anon | Aug 16, 2017 7:06:12 PM | 84Where are America's memorials to pain of slavery, black resistance?
In 1861, the vice-president of the Confederacy, Alexander H. Stephens, offered this foundational explanation of the Confederate cause: "Its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. "how much public space in the US should be dedicated to monuments honoring these people in the coming century? and for the children and grandchildren of slaves walking by them every day? what about their heritage? and the public monuments to the indigenous people of this land who we genocided? oh right, as a country we have still not even officially recognized that genocide. monuments should not be solely a reflection of the past, but of the future, of who we want to be. who we choose to recognize in our public spaces says a lot about us.
It's pretty fair too say several of the "alt-right" leaders who planned this event agent are provocateurs or Sheep Dipped assets running honeypot "white nationalist" operations.Zico the musketeer | Aug 16, 2017 7:11:22 PM | 85You can see from the make-up of the phony "Nazis" in the groups and their continued use of various propaganda that serves only to tie people and movements OPPOSED by the Deep State to "Nazis" and racist ideology, you can see how on the ground level, this event has psyop planners' fingerprints all over it.
It's also fair too say the complicit media's near universal take on the event signals a uniform, ready-made reaction more than likely dictated to them from a single source.Trump is attacked. The ACLU is attacked. Peace activists opposed to the CIA's regime change operation in Syria are attacked. Tucker Carlson is attacked. Everyone attacked that the CIA and various other aspects of the Deep State want attacked as if the MSM were all sent the same talking points memo.
And keep in mind, this all comes right after the news was starting to pick up on the story that the Deep State's bullshit narrative about a "Russian hack" was falling apart.
Also keep in mind it comes at a time when 600,000 Syrians returned home after the CIA's terrorist regime change operation fell apart.
(from Scott Creighton's blog)
Is there a left in America?Sigil | Aug 16, 2017 7:21:33 PM | 86
I think is really fun to watch those burgers call an US citizen a lefties.From outside US you ALL looks like ULYRA right wing.
This is ridiculous!The statues were erected when the KKK was at its peak, to keep the blacks in their place. They started getting torn down after the 2015 massacre of black churchgoers by a Nazi. For once, don't blame Clinton.Vas | Aug 16, 2017 7:28:08 PM | 87as the country becomes less and less whiteperry | Aug 16, 2017 7:51:05 PM | 88
more and more symbols of white supremacy
have to go..Karlof1@45Peter AU 1 | Aug 16, 2017 8:01:00 PM | 89My only argument with your post is "Chattel Slavery was introduced in the Western Hemisphere"
Chattel = movable property as opposed to your house. In that day and long before women and children were chattel.Thinking about what might have been might help. If the south had won would we have had a strong enough central government to create and give corporate charters and vast rights of way to railroads which then cross our nation. Would states have created their own individual banking systems negating the need for the all controlling Federal reserve? Would states have their own military units willing to join other states to repel an attack instead of the MIC which treats the rest of the world like expendable slaves?
Before our constitution there was the Articles of Confederation. Article 1,2+3.....
Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
Article III. The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.
This first set of laws in the new world was later undone in a secret convention with Madison, input from Jefferson and others found on our money and other honorariums. 1868 gave us the 14th amendment to the constitution that freed all who are born within this nation and were given equal rights. (Not saying that this worked for all slaves. Within a few years this was used to create corporate persons with access to the bill of rights.
I am thinking there were many reasons that people who lived in those times had to fight for what they did. We today are not in a position to judge why individuals fought. Certainly many poor white southerners who owned no slaves at all fought and died. Was it to keep slaves they did not own enslaved or did they fight and die for issues around protection of local or state rights, freedoms and way of life?
Histories are written and paid for by the winners who control that particular present time for the glorification of those rulers. A vast removal of historical artifacts speaks of a weak nation fading into the west's need to clean up some points from history of mean and brutal behaviors which we as a nation support now in the present but try and make it about others.
A paragragh here from lemur 77 comment...psychohistorian | Aug 16, 2017 8:01:58 PM | 90
"Now, within ethnic European countries, should whites be supreme? You're goddamn right they should. Just as the Japanese should practice 'yellow supremacy', and so on and so forth. Most of you lot here, being liberals, will be in favour of no fault divorce. You understand there can be irreconcilable differences which in way suggest either person is objectively bad. The same applies to disparate ethnicities. If white Slovaks and Czechs can't get one, why would white and non-white groups?"What is the United States of America? It is made up of British, French, Spanish and Russian territories aquired or conquered, the original colonists in turn taking them from the native inhabitants. The US has had a largley open imigration policy, people of all cultures, languages and skin colours and religions.
Why should white Europeans be supreme in the US lemur?
The following is the guts of a posting from Raw Story that I see as quite related.Curtis | Aug 16, 2017 8:25:00 PM | 91
"
White House senior strategist Steve Bannon is rejoicing at the criticism President Donald Trump is receiving for defending white nationalism.Bannon phoned The American Prospect progressive writer and editor Robert Kuttner Tuesday, according to his analysis of the interview.
In the interview, Bannon dismissed ethno-nationalists as irrelevant.
"Ethno-nationalism!it's losers. It's a fringe element," Bannon noted.
"These guys are a collection of clowns," he added.
Bannon claimed to welcome the intense criticism Trump has received.
"The Democrats," he said, "the longer they talk about identity politics, I got 'em. I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats."
Kuttner described Bannon as being in "high spirits" during the call
"You might think from recent press accounts that Steve Bannon is on the ropes and therefore behaving prudently. In the aftermath of events in Charlottesville, he is widely blamed for his boss's continuing indulgence of white supremacists," Kuttner explained. "But Bannon was in high spirits when he phoned me Tuesday afternoon to discuss the politics of taking a harder line with China, and minced no words describing his efforts to neutralize his rivals at the Departments of Defense, State, and Treasury."
"They're wetting themselves," Bannon said of opponents he planned to oust at State and Defense.
"
Curtis 6 isn't me. However, I somewhat agree with the point.Alexander Grimsmo | Aug 16, 2017 8:37:55 PM | 92Joe 41
Very true. Lee saw himself as defending Virginia. Slavery was the chief issue used in the states declarations of secession. But the end goal was a separate govt (that actually banned the importation of new slaves).Nemesis 57
Excellent. Racism was bad in the North, too.Strange how the left are pulling down statues of democrats, and the right are fighting to have them stand. The confederates were democrats, but nobody seem to remember that now anymore.sigil | Aug 16, 2017 8:51:24 PM | 93Nothing strange about it. The Democrats dropped the southern racists and the Republicans picked them up with the Southern Strategy. It's all pretty well documented. The current Republicans are not heirs to Lincoln in any meaningful way.michaelj72 | Aug 16, 2017 8:53:14 PM | 94some may consider this interesting.. at the end of Robert Kuttner's conversation with Steve Bannon, Bannon says:Petra | Aug 16, 2017 9:11:29 PM | 95http://prospect.org/article/steve-bannon-unrepentant
...."The Democrats," he said, "the longer they talk about identity politics, I got 'em. I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats.".....
Those who make silly talk about "Patriots and Traitors" (Swallows and Amazons?) are being obtuse about their history. The whole system was racist through and through, depended upon it and was built upon it, starting with the very first rapacious sorties inland from the swampy coast.Krollchem | Aug 16, 2017 9:33:38 PM | 96Some excellent commentary here, including james's percipient notes, Grieved's point, RUKidding's and karlof1's, perry's observations and speculations.
Aside, this "99% v.1%" discourse is disempowering and one has to ask whose interests such talk and attendant disempowerment serve.
Both sides of this ideological issue are frooty and do not see the invisible hands that manipulate their weak minds. See Mike Krieger On Charlottesville: "Don't Play Into The Divide & Conquer Game"VietnamVet | Aug 16, 2017 9:40:12 PM | 97
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-14/mike-krieger-charlottesville-dont-play-divide-conquer-gamePlease note that slavery persisted in some Northern States after the end of the Civil War. The slave trade was even a profit center in the North:
http://www.tracingcenter.org/resources/background/northern-involvement-in-the-slave-trade/
This is a meaningful post on a touchy subject. Global Brahmins are looting the developed world. Color revolutions and ethnic rifts make great fire sales. In a sane world, old monuments would molder away in obscurity. Instead a faux resistance to divide and conquer the little people has commenced. But, it is careening out of control due to austerity and job loss. Deplorable Bushwhackers are fighting for tribalism and supremacy. After the 27 year old war in Iraq, subjected Sunnis turned to their ethnic myths and traditions to fight back; obliterating two ancient cities and themselves. The Chaos is coming west.John Merryman | Aug 16, 2017 9:43:21 PM | 98The problem is that people focus on the effects of history, like slavery and the holocaust, but if you go into the causes and context of these events, then you get accused of rationalizing them. Yet being ignorant of the causes is when history gets repeated. By the time another seriously bad effect rises, it's too late.John Merryman | Aug 16, 2017 9:47:52 PM | 99
As for slavery, it's not as though peoples lives haven't been thoroughly commodified before and continue to be. Yes, slavery in the early part of this country was horrendous and the resulting racism arose from the more reptilian parts of people's minds, but that part still exists and needs to be better understood, not dismissed.
It should also be noted that if it wasn't for slavery, the African American population would otherwise only be about as large as the Arab American population. It is a bit like being the offspring of a rape. It might the absolute worst aspect of your life, but you wouldn't be here otherwise. It's the Native Americans who really got screwed in the deal, but there are not nearly enough of them left, to get much notice.PS,
For those who know their legal history, no, I'm not using a pseudonym. There is a lot of family history in this country, from well before it was a country.
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2017 | www.unz.com
Original: https://tsargrad.tv/articles/triumf-gendernyh-sharikovyh_79187
Translated by Fluctuarius Argenteus
Google fires employee James Damore for "perpetuating gender stereotypes.
– You persecute your employees for having opinions and violate the rights of White men, Centrists, and Conservatives.
– No, we don't. You're fired.
A conversation just like or similar to this one recently took place in the office of one of modern information market monsters, the Google Corporation.
Illustration to the Google scandal. James Damore fired for "perpetuating gender stereotypes". Source: Screenshot of Instragram user bluehelix.
Google knows almost everything about us, including the contents of our emails, our addresses, our voice samples ( OK Google ), our favorite stuff, and, sometimes, our sexual preferences. Google used to be on the verge of literally looking at the world with our own eyes through Google Glass, but this prospect appears to have been postponed, probably temporarily. However, the threat of manipulating public opinion through search engine algorithms has been discussed in the West for a long while, even to the point of becoming a central House of Cards plotline.
Conversely, we know next to nothing about Google. Now, thanks to an ideological scandal that shook the company, we suddenly got a glimpse of corporate values and convictions that the company uses a roadmap to influencing us in a major way, and American worldview even more so. Suddenly, Google was revealed to be a system permeated by ideology, suffused with Leftist and aggressively feminist values.
The story goes this way. In early August, an anonymous manifesto titled Google's Ideological Echo Chamber was circulated through the local network of Google. The author lambasted the company's ideological climate, especially its policy of so-called diversity. This policy has been adopted by almost all of US companies, and Google has gone as far as to appoint a "chief diversity officer". The goal of the polity is to reduce the number of white cisgendered male employees, to employ as many minorities and women as possible and to give them fast-track promotions – which, in reality, gives them an unfair, non-market based advantage.
The author argues that Leftism and "diversity" policies lead to creating an "echo chamber" within the company, where a person only talks to those who share their opinions, and, through this conversation, is reinforced in the opinion that their beliefs are the only ones that matter. This "echo chamber" narrows one's intellectual horizon and undermines work efficiency, with following "the party line" taking precedence over real productivity.
In contrast to Google's buzzwords of "vision" and "innovation", the author claims that the company has lost its sight behind its self-imposed ideological blindfold and is stuck in a morass.
As Google employs intellectuals, argues the critic, and most modern Western intellectuals are from the Left, this leads to creating a closed Leftist clique within the company. If the Right rejects everything contrary to the God>human>nature hierarchy, the Left declares all natural differences between humans to be nonexistent or created by social constructs.
The central Leftist idea is the class struggle, and, given that the proletariat vs. bourgeoisie struggle is now irrelevant, the atmosphere of struggle has been transposed onto gender and race relations. Oppressed Blacks are fighting against White oppressors, oppressed women challenge oppressive males. And the corporate management (and, until recently, the US presidency) is charged with bringing the "dictatorship of the proletariat" to life by imposing the "diversity" policy.
The critic argues that the witch-hunt of Centrists and Conservatives, who are forced to conceal their political alignment or resign from the job, is not the only effect of this Leftist tyranny. Leftism also leads to inefficiency, as the coveted job goes not to the best there is but to the "best woman of color". There are multiple educational or motivation programs open only to women or minorities. This leads to plummeting efficiencies, disincentivizes White men from putting effort into work, and creates a climate of nervousness, if not sabotage. Instead of churning out new ground-breaking products, opines the critic, Google wastes too much effort on fanning the flames of class struggle.
What is the proposed solution?
Stop diving people into "oppressors" and "the oppressed" and forcefully oppressing the alleged oppressors. Stop branding every dissident as an immoral scoundrel, a racist, etc.
The diversity of opinion must apply to everyone. The company must stop alienating Conservatives, who are, to call a spade a spade, a minority that needs their rights to be protected. In addition, conservatively-inclined people have their own advantages, such as a focused and methodical approach to work.
Fight all kinds of prejudice, not only those deemed worthy by the politically correct America.
End diversity programs discriminatory towards White men and replace them with non-discriminatory ones.
Have an unbiased assessment of the costs and efficiency of diversity programs, which are not only expensive but also pit one part of the company's employees against the other.
Instead of gender and race differences, focus on psychological safety within the company. Instead of calling to "feel the others' pain", discuss facts. Instead of cultivating sensitivity and soft skins, analyze real issues.
Admit that not all racial or gender differences are social constructs or products of oppression. Be open towards the study of human nature.
The last point proved to be the most vulnerable, as the author of the manifesto went on to formulate his ideas on male vs. female differences that should be accepted as fact if Google is to improve its performance.
The differences argued by the author are as follows:
Women are more interested in people, men are more interested in objects.
Women are prone to cooperation, men to competition. All too often, women can't take the methods of competition considered natural among men.
Women are looking for a balance between work and private life, men are obsessed with status
Feminism played a major part in emancipating women from their gender roles, but men are still strongly tied to theirs. If the society seeks to "feminize" men, this will only lead to them leaving STEM for "girly" occupations (which will weaken society in the long run).
It was the think piece on the natural differences of men and women that provoked the greatest ire. The author was immediately charged with propagating outdated sexist stereotypes, and the Google management commenced a search for the dissent, with a clear purpose of giving him the sack. On 8th August, the heretic was revealed to be James Damore, a programmer. He was fired with immediate effect because, as claimed by Google CEO Sundar Pichai, "portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace". Damore announced that he was considering a lawsuit.
We live in a post-Trump day and age, that is why the Western press is far from having a unanimous verdict on the Damore affair. Some call him "a typical sexist", for others he is a "free speech martyr". By dismissing Damore from his job, Google implicitly confirmed that all claims of an "echo chamber" and aggressive Leftist intolerance were precisely on point. Julian Assange has already tweeted: "Censorship is for losers, WikiLeaks is offering a job to fired Google engineer James Damore".
It is highly plausible that the Damore Memo may play the same breakthrough part in discussing the politically correct insanity as WikiLeaks and Snowden files did in discussing the dirty laundry of governments and secret services. If it comes to pass, Damore will make history as a new Martin Luther challenging the Liberal "Popery".
However, his intellectual audacity notwithstanding, it should be noted that Damore's own views are vulnerable to Conservative criticism. Unfortunately, like the bulk of Western thought, they fall into the trap of Leftist "cultural constructivism" and Conservative naturalism.
Allegedly, there are only two possible viewpoints. Either gender and race differences are biologically preordained and therefore unremovable and therefore should always be taken into account, or those differences are no more than social constructs and should be destroyed for being arbitrary and unfair.
The ideological groundwork of the opposing viewpoints is immediately apparent. Both equate "biological" with "natural" and therefore "true", and "social" with "artificial" and therefore "arbitrary" and "false". Both sides reject "prejudice" in favor of "vision", but politically correct Leftists reject only a fraction of prejudices while the critic calls for throwing all of them away indiscriminately.
As a response, Damore gets slapped with an accusation of drawing upon misogynist prejudice for his own ideas. Likewise, his view of Conservatives is quite superficial. The main Conservative trait is not putting effort into routine work but drawing upon tradition for creative inspiration. The Conservative principle is "innovation through tradition".
The key common mistake of both Google Leftists and their critic is their vision of stereotypes as a negative distortion of some natural truth. If both sides went for an in-depth reading of Edmund Burke, the "father of Conservatism", they would learn that the prejudice is a colossal historical experience pressurized into a pre-logical form, a collective consciousness that acts when individual reason fails or a scrupulous analysis is impossible. In such circumstances, following the prejudice is a more sound strategy than contradicting it. Prejudice is shorthand for common sense. Sometimes it oversimplifies things, but still works most of the time. And, most importantly, all attempts to act "in spite of the prejudice" almost invariably end in disaster.
Illustration to the Google scandal. A fox sits gazing at the Google's Ideological Echo Chamber exposing the ideas of the fired engineer James Damore. Source: Screenshot of Instragram user bluehelix.
However, the modern era allows us to diagnose our own prejudice and rationalize them so we could control them better, as opposed to blind obedience or rejection. Moreover, if the issue of "psychological training" ever becomes relevant in a country as conservative as Russia is, that is the problem we should concentrate on: analyzing the roots of our prejudices and their efficient use.
The same could be argued for gender relations. Damore opposes the Leftist "class struggle of the genders" with a technocratic model of maximizing the profit from each gender's pros and cons. This functionalism appears to be logical in its own way, but is indeed based on too broad assumptions, claiming that all women are unfit for competition, that all of them like relationships and housekeeping while all men are driven by objects and career. And, as Damore claims biological grounds for his assumptions, all our options boil down to mostly agreeing with him or branding him as a horrible sexist and male chauvinist.
However, the fact that gender roles historically developed based on biology but are, as a whole, a construct of society and culture does not give an excuse to changing or tearing them down, as clamored by Leftists. Quite the contrary: the social, cultural, and historical determinism of these roles gives us a reason to keep them in generally the same form without any coups or revolutions.
First, that tradition is an ever-growing accumulation of experience. Rejecting tradition is tantamount to social default and requires very good reasons to justify. Second, no change of tradition occurs as a result of a "gender revolution", only its parodic inversion. Putting men into high heels, miniskirts, and bras, fighting against urinals in public WCs only reverses the polarity without creating true equality. The public consciousness still sees the "male" as "superior", and demoting "masculinity" to "femininity" as a deliberate degradation of the "superior". No good can come of it, just as no good came out of humiliating wealth and nobility during the Communist revolution in Russia. What's happening now is not equal rights for women but the triumph of gender Bolshevism.
Damore's error, therefore, consists in abandoning the domain of the social and the historical to the enemy while limiting the Conservative sphere of influence to the natural, biological domain. However, the single most valuable trait in conservative worldview is defending the achievements of history and not just biological determinism.
The final goal of a Conservative solution to the gender problem should not be limited to a rationalist functionalization of society. It should lead to discovering a social cohesion where adhering to traditional male and female ways and stereotypes (let's not call them roles – the world is not a stage, and men and women not merely players) would not keep males and females from expressing themselves in other domains, provided they have a genuine calling and talent.
The art of war is not typical of a woman; however, women warriors such as Joan of Arc leave a much greater impact in historical memory. The art of government is seen as mostly male, yet it makes great female rulers, marked not by functional usefulness but true charisma, all the more memorable. The family is the stereotypical domain of the woman, which leads to greater reverence towards fathers that put their heart and soul into their families.
Social cohesion, an integral part of it being the harmony of men and women in the temple of the family, is the ideal to be pursued by our Russian, Orthodox, Conservative society. It is the collapse of the family that made gender relations into such an enormous issue in the West: men and women are no longer joined in a nucleus of solidarity but pitted against one another as members of antagonistic classes. And this struggle, as the Damore Memo has demonstrated, is already stymieing the business of Western corporations. Well, given our current hostile relations, it's probably for the better.
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2017 | www.unz.com
Simply because the immediate reaction to the Google Memo concentrated on sex differences I gathered together some posts on sex differences, showing that the sexes differ somewhat in their abilities: not very much, but enough to make a difference at the extremes, and it is the extremes which make a difference to technology based societies, and to a technology dependent world. I left out any mention of the notion that a "diverse" workforce is better than better than a workforce selected purely on ability to do the task in question. My mistake, which I will try to repair now.
I wondered, some years ago, what evidence there was for the proposition that diversity was a good thing. I would like to collect more proposals, because the ones sent to me proved unconvincing. You may have heard a claim that having women in the workforce boosts profits by 40%. This turns out to be a misunderstood joke.
http://www.unz.com/jthompson/davos-diversity
Now to the general claim that having women in a group boosts anything, or that having a variety of intellectual levels in a group boosts anything. That was taken apart in a set of experimental studies by Bates and Gupta.
http://www.unz.com/jthompson/group-iq-doesnt-exist
My conclusion was:
So, if you want a problem solved, don't form a team. Find the brightest person and let them work on it. Placing them in a team will, on average, reduce their productivity. My advice would be: never form a team if there is one person who can sort out the problem.
Perhaps Damore was a guy who could sort out problems, until the last problem, that is.
I repeat my January 2015 request: if you have any good studies showing that having a sexually or racially diverse workforce boosts profits over a workforce selected on competence alone, please send me send them to me in a comment to this item.
Roast beef, August 10, 2017 at 4:18 pm GMT
epochehusserl , August 10, 2017 at 4:40 pm GMTSome of the findings of our initial report are confirmed – greater diversity in boards and management are empirically associated with higher returns on equity, higher price/book valuations and superior stock price performance. However, new findings emerge from this added management analysis – we find no evidence that female led companies reflect greater financial conservatism where leverage is concerned. Also, dividend payout ratios have been shown to be higher. Female CEOs have proven to be less acquisitive than men when assuming the leadership position. The analysis makes no claims to causality though the results are striking.
TheJester , August 10, 2017 at 5:42 pm GMTDiversity and inclusion are buzzwords made up by Gramscian marxists to rationalize group rights made up by the courts after not being satisfied with equality under the law. Those buzzwords do nothing to resolve the existential and morals issues raised by group rights. Whose diversity and inclusion are the best anyways? What if I think I would be enriched by this rather than that diversity and inclusion?
MikeyParks , August 10, 2017 at 6:35 pm GMTAn Example: Talented Individuals vs. Mediocre Groups
In the late 1990s, I was in charge of a regional office of a high tech company that had a problem. We had delivered a complex air defense system but the command module could not communicate with the missile batteries. This was serious stuff. The company put teams of software developers on the problem back at the main campus. They worked for over a month without result. The customer was getting antsy, which is a euphemism for nasty.
Then, the company deployed Burt (not his real name) to the customer location to see what he could do. Burt sat at the conference table in my outer office reading reams of code printed in large binders like a novel (I'm not kidding) no notes, just reading and noticing. Burt didn't even bother with a computer screen or debugging software.
Then, he exclaimed, "I've got it!" (I'll always remember that moment.) Burt noticed that the date format for the commands being sent from the command module was in a different format than the date format expected by the missile batteries.
QED a technical problem that had been plaguing the company for months, that had immobilized a major air defense system, and that had put the company's product line at risk solved by an individual with a few hours of work. I made sure that Burt got a big bonus.
The point: If you ran a startup hoping to bring "creative destruction" to a sector in a high-tech society, would you want (1) a politically correct software development team carefully tailored to meet affirmative action quotas for males, females, Blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals, lesbians, and the transgendered in spite of their IQs and personal qualities or, as James Damore argues, would you want (2) a group of "Burt's" acting alone or in concert because of their IQs and unique personal qualities?
The histories of Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, and Google suggest the latter. The former brings with it progressively higher social and financial "carrying costs" that prejudice the success of any bleeding-edge high-tech endeavor.
res , August 10, 2017 at 6:44 pm GMTWhen the "diversity" is strictly cosmetic and all points of view are basically identical, what you have is not diversity, it's as Damore described it, an "echo chamber." Google should be smart enough to know this. I would guess that this kind of non-diverse diversity hinders productivity because there are no new ideas, just regurgitations of the party line.
Anonymous , Disclaimer August 10, 2017 at 7:09 pm GMTI like this one: https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/diverse-backgrounds-personalities-can-strengthen-groups
In a recent article disentangling what researchers have learned over the past 50 years, Margaret A. Neale finds that diversity across dimensions, such as functional expertise, education, or personality, can increase performance by enhancing creativity or group problem-solving. In contrast, more visible diversity, such as race, gender, or age, can have negative effects on a group!at least initially.
Of course viewpoint diversity is never what is actually meant by "diversity."
Sadly that article did not include a link to the research. I think this is it (free full text): http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2005.00022.x
The summary has a paragraph matching my quote above.James Thompson , Website August 10, 2017 at 8:35 pm GMTWe used to abhor meetings back in the days before the US military was feminized and subject to collaborative group think. So much to do so little time.
We called meetings and other collaborative exercises "circle jerks".
From Wikipedia:
A circle jerk is a sexual practice in which a group of men or boys form a circle and masturbate themselves or each other. In the metaphorical sense, the term is used to refer to self-congratulatory behavior or discussion amongst a group of people, usually in reference to "boring time-wasting meetings or other events".
I suspect that "circle jerks" will become more frequent as Google transitions to a more female-friendly, collaborative organizational structure.
lump1 , August 11, 2017 at 1:52 am GMT@Roast beef Thanks. Reading it now. Makes good points, but hard to find appropriate comparison companies for longitudinal comparisons. As authors say, it could be bigger companies doing the "female quota" thing while smaller companies are less inclined or less able to do so. Still reading it, and mostly thinking about the methods .
YetAnotherAnon , August 11, 2017 at 8:56 am GMTThis is definitely an important question to tackle directly. My two bits is that we should try to disentangle causality if possible. It's not enough just to find correlations between high valuation and racial diversity. It might be like finding correlations between high valuation and having Michelin-star chefs in the company cafeteria. I bet the correlation exists, but it happens because already-successful companies get money to blow on inessential nice things. Diversity is a nice thing that already-successful companies can buy when they have money to spare, but just because they end up with it doesn't mean that it helped them succeed. I mean, it might – I don't know the data – but mere correlations could mislead us. Correlations across time would impress me more. If individual companies grow faster when more diverse and slower after they lose diversity, then the findings would be harder to dismiss.
Dieter Kief , August 11, 2017 at 11:17 am GMTOff topic, but it seems Guardian readers are woke to the "everyone must go to university" scam. Bit late but never mind.
Top rated comment
I think the "50% of the population must have degrees" brigade are to blame for this. It was always going to devalue the worth of an academic degree by attempting to have half of the population wandering the job centres armed with a useless (but very costly) scrap of parchment.
What on earth were successive governments thinking?
But even if the degrees are not as valuable as the salesman (who came to your school and persuaded you, age 17, to sign up for a Ł60k loan with hefty interest rates) told you, at least you've had three years of leftie indoctrination (e.g. "no borders, no nations" or "Farage is a racist") which will stand our elites in good stead over your lifetime. And you've paid for it yourself!
James Thompson , Website August 11, 2017 at 1:56 pm GMT"if you want a problem solved, don't form a team"
Novels are written by one person – (as Steve Sailer mentions here and there, novels, especialy the really good ones, are very complex things). Great works of art or compositions, – mostly the same thing as in the novels-example.
Pop-music (Rock etc. too) might be an exception: Here, groups yield very interesting results.
(On usually not that high intellectual levels – is that the reason for this exception?)Joe Franklin , August 11, 2017 at 3:23 pm GMTInteresting example of pop-music. Usually the song writers are far fewer than the song players.
@epochehusserl Diversity and inclusion are buzzwords made up by Gramscian marxists to rationalize group rights made up by the courts after not being satisfied with equality under the law. Those buzzwords do nothing to resolve the existential and morals issues raised by group rights. Whose diversity and inclusion are the best anyways? What if I think I would be enriched by this rather than that diversity and inclusion? Diversity and Inclusion are euphemisms when employed by leftist (i.e. Democrats and Neocons) .
The federal government recognizes Diversity as a number of protected class groups that self-identify as being underprivileged, oppressed, disadvantaged, underutilized, and underserved.
Protected class groups identify the Nazi and white supremacist as their common oppressor.
The federal government recognizes Inclusion as federal entitlements for protected class groups.
Here's an example of several federal protected class groups recognized and entitled by the University of Nebraska:
http://www.unk.edu/about/compliance/aaeo/hiring_guidelines/identification_of_protected.php
Identification of Protected Class Groups
The following five groups are considered "Protected Classes" under various federal laws. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) requires reporting employment information on the first two groups, females and minorities, which are traditionally underutilized.
See also
Google Sex French Fries Fear and Loathing in Psychology Friday MoviesThe Lack of Progress in Science: Sex Differences Razib Khan July 31, 2016 1,300 Words 100 Comments Genetics Allows the Dead to Speak from the Grave Razib Khan June 14, 2015
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2017 | www.unz.com
...Damore has joined an increasing number of people from the worlds of business and academia to be sacrificed at the altar of diversity. In an unsurprising public relations move, Google has succeeded in saving some face by appeasing the partisans of political correctness and of so-called equality. Meanwhile, those who don't subscribe to the progressive delusion may feel more anxious at the prospect of failing to play the coward's game correctly. Can one sneeze these days without offending the HR department?
Google CEO Sundar Pichai, in a memo laden with incoherence and hypocrisy, says that
we strongly support the right of Googlers to express themselves, and much of what was in that memo is fair to debate, regardless of whether a vast majority of Googlers disagree with it. However, portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace. Our job is to build great products for users that make a difference in their lives. To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK. It is contrary to our basic values and our Code of Conduct, which expects "each Googler to do their utmost to create a workplace culture that is free of harassment, intimidation, bias and unlawful discrimination."
The memo has clearly impacted our co-workers, some of whom are hurting and feel judged based on their gender. Our co-workers shouldn't have to worry that each time they open their mouths to speak in a meeting, they have to prove that they are not like the memo states, being "agreeable" rather than "assertive," showing a "lower stress tolerance," or being "neurotic."
At the same time, there are co-workers who are questioning whether they can safely express their views in the workplace (especially those with a minority viewpoint). They too feel under threat, and that is also not OK. People must feel free to express dissent. So to be clear again, many points raised in the memo!such as the portions criticizing Google's trainings, questioning the role of ideology in the workplace, and debating whether programs for women and underserved groups are sufficiently open to all!are important topics. The author had a right to express their views on those topics!we encourage an environment in which people can do this and it remains our policy to not take action against anyone for prompting these discussions.
What were those "harmful gender stereotypes," so "offensive" to the good team members at Google? Let's take a look at the first paragraph of the memo that has so many people worried about the white patriarchal obstacle that, now as ever, stands cruelly in the progressive path.
I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don't endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can't have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem. Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber. Despite what the public response seems to have been, I've gotten many personal messages from fellow Googlers expressing their gratitude for bringing up these very important issues which they agree with but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired. This needs to change.
Surely no unbiased reader can fail to find Damore's words eminently reasonable. Though recently fired, the man is no enemy of diversity and inclusion, nor does he say sexism is not a real problem. There is nothing here (or elsewhere in the memo) to suggest he is not fair-minded. Indeed, if you read his memo, you will surely see!so long, again, as you are not biased!that as people go, Damore is exceptionally fair in his perceptions and reasoning, though it is well to remember Emerson's maxim: "To be great is to be misunderstood." Damore is concerned to give some nuance to understanding the issues since, after all, it is not prima facie evident that men and women are utterly the same; with the result that, where a corporation's representation of gender does not wholly reflect the national population, sexism is present by definition. The crucial phrase is "differences in distribution." Though feminists, progressives and Leftists generally are keen to deny it, men and women are not mere blank slates on which the "unequal" environment imprints its ink; we should not assume as a matter of course that something is awry if the workplace reflects! as it inevitably must !those gender differences which we all seem to notice the moment we leave it.
Neuroscientist Debra W. Soh, writing at Quillette, observes that
within the field of neuroscience, sex differences between women and men!when it comes to brain structure and function and associated differences in personality and occupational preferences!are understood to be true, because the evidence for them (thousands of studies) is strong. This is not information that's considered controversial or up for debate; if you tried to argue otherwise, or for purely social influences, you'd be laughed at.
Sex researchers recognize that these differences are not inherently supportive of sexism or stratifying opportunities based on sex. It is only because a group of individuals have chosen to interpret them that way, and to subsequently deny the science around them, that we have to have this conversation at a public level. Some of these ideas have been published in neuroscientific journals!despite having faulty study methodology!because they've been deemed socially pleasing and "progressive." As a result, there's so much misinformation out there now that people genuinely don't know what to believe.
Also at Quillette , eminent evolutionary psychologist Geoffrey Miller remarks that "almost all of the Google memo's empirical claims are scientifically accurate. Moreover, they are stated quite carefully and dispassionately. Its key claims about sex differences are especially well-supported by large volumes of research across species, cultures, and history."
Steven Pinker himself!he of the very solid liberal credentials!has published much rigorous work on natural gender differences, in both intelligence and personality traits. Here he is on YouTube, giving a talk which might be used to support James Damore's case:
Note, what is so revealing, that Pinker takes care to appease the dogmatic academic crowd via the usual trite and simplistic reduction of human history to patriarchal oppression, lest, like Ibsen's Dr. Stockmann, he be thought an enemy of the people. It can't be that man simply found himself in a harsh world in which his superior brute strength was an immense advantage. It can't be that a severe division of labor was for most of history inevitable for the sexes. Like the Jews, man has always been behind the scenes, conspiring to oppress everyone. Well, at least Pinker was prudent. After all, those aggressive, broad-shouldered feminists have been known to body slam many an hysterically logical speaker.
Like Geoffrey Miller's, Pinker's work helps us to see better what ordinary people already know well enough from everyday life (and which, thankfully for them, they feel no need to deny, outside of the increasingly touchy workplace, anyway): that men and women are indeed different; nor is it obvious, in a sane world, why that should be such a scandal. For these differences, qua differences, are value neutral. My working-class mother, who never finished high school, is not obviously inferior as a person to Heather MacDonald, despite my own admiration for that excellent and courageous scholar-journalist.
It is well-established by Pinker and other scientists that women have higher IQs on average, while men preponderate the extremes of brilliance and dullness. Many if not most Google employees surely do have exceptionally high IQs. That men should so excel at the Google corporation!as they do at so many other things at the highest level!reflects Nature itself and is consistent with a massive amount of empirical findings. It is also consistent with many traditional stereotypes, for the most part. The psychologist Lee Jusim, among others, has done excellent work on the overwhelming accuracy (though typically, much suppressed) of stereotypes. If you want to see a humorous example of the truth of stereotypes, see the exceedingly emotional reactions by the female Google employees!who have made their disgust well-known on Twitter!that Pichai describes in the second paragraph where I quote him above. It is reported that many female Google employees stayed home from work on Monday, triggered into melancholy by Damore's truthful words. Tragically, the feminist quilting bee soon degenerated into a wild intersectional tizzy, the rotund blue and pink-haired ladies of various races and gender identities squabbling over whose cat should first be allowed to peck at Damore's soon to be flayed carcass. Looking at the photos and social media accounts of Google's Diversity-rabble, one is struck by how stereotypical they are; virtually everyone looks fresh from a Judith Butler conference at Bryn Mawr college: trans-this, queer-that, communist, ad nauseam . Defective specimens of divorce culture, therapy culture, and human folly and degeneration generally. Persons who, hardly ever having been around traditional masculinity, cannot but misunderstand it, and with the all-too-human fear and hatred of the unknown. Perusing pictures of Google CEO Sundar Pichai, one perceives, quite palpably, a typical skinny, weak, effete twenty-first century Last Man: born to take orders from nasty women and resentment-pipers generally
Gender differences may be bad news for Feminist Dogma, yet as Pinker says in his talk, the truth cannot be sexist, nor should it be "harmful"!to an adult mind, at least. Of course, like Lawrence Summers, who was obliged to step down from the Harvard Presidency a while back for not going along with Feminist Dogma, Pinker has caught fire from feminists!increasingly nasty women, as it were. Sundar Pichai, like our feminists, says all the right things about diversity and the like, but when it comes to the reality of one gender being better, on average, at, say, engineering, he goes in for cant about "harmful gender stereotypes." If, though, anybody was to say, what there is also much evidence to support, that women, on average, are better at language skills than men, nobody would be troubled. Such hypocritical intolerance by the partisans of tolerance should be expected to continue apace, unless we others make a principled stand. Looking at the academy and at our intellectuals in general, we may wonder how so many people can manage to walk upright without a spine. Alas, more vital work for the deplorables.
The Diversity Idol is confused and inherently self-defeating. As Debra W. Soh puts it in the The Globe and Mail ,
research has shown that cultures with greater gender equity have larger sex differences when it comes to job preferences, because in these societies, people are free to choose their occupations based on what they enjoy.
As the memo suggests, seeking to fulfill a 50-per-cent quota of women in STEM is unrealistic. As gender equity continues to improve in developing societies, we should expect to see this gender gap widen.
The Diversity Idol also reeks of hypocrisy. Where are all the calls for more women in bricklaying and coal mining, fields in which there are hardly any women?
As for women's relative lack of leadership positions, at Google and elsewhere, much the best explanation is that by Jordan Peterson. The issue is not so much lack of ability as (sensible) lack of interest. Why, Peterson asks, should women want anything to do with what is commonly called leadership, seeing as it is generally a quite mad and foolish affair (endless work and stress, all for wealth that does not make happy)? Women's relative lack of interest in so-called leadership!which ultimately, today as yesterday, amounts in the main to men vying to outdo one another in order to win the favor of women in the sexual marketplace!signifies their greater good sense, which certainly is of a piece with their greater psychological and emotional discernment generally, and quite a long way from man's lunatic competitiveness and zeal for mammon. It is well to reflect on just what women are really missing out on by not exercising the power that men do, all in all. Is it a power worth having, most of the time? Do we not find our highest good when we are free to pursue that which has inherent value? Then too, there is the reality, hardly recognized in our time, that, as G.K. Chesterton put it, "feminism is mixed up with a muddled idea that women are free when they serve their employers but slaves when they help their husbands." For my own part, though an awful cook, I should rather be a house husband at home tending to my children than live a professional death-in-life at some touchy, humorless office.
In our status-obsessed society, there are constant gripes about how women are "excluded" from exercising power in the workplace. Meanwhile nobody says anything about the enormous psycho-biological power women possess simply by virtue of being women. This power, of course, is essentially determined by a woman's attractiveness, which is closely associated with youth and good health. No surprise, then, that women all over the world are forever trying to appear as attractive as possible, to the cost of billions every year. Such power, though inevitably prevalent in the workplace itself, far transcends it: it is a law of Nature itself, and indeed one of the strongest. As noted above, the endless male struggle for status mostly comes down to being able to obtain a desirable woman.
Today we see countless attractive young women spending vast amounts of time uploading photos of themselves on social media. How many wish to be a star! Hence that increasingly common phenomenon the duck face, which some might take for a kind of strange medical affliction: "Pucker up," thinks the generic young beauty in her vanity; "everybody's watching!" Like women on the many dating websites and apps, these social media darlings find that they can hardly keep up with all the male attention!surely an intoxicating pleasure, although doubtless often corrupting. No matter their intentions, and whether they are aware of it or not, such women are extremely powerful. The notion that a woman like Emily Ratajkowski is "oppressed" because of her "objectification" is absurd beyond description. Hers is a most willful objection; there is massive power in it; and even if the stunner was not affluent through her modeling and other endeavors, she would still not have to work: countess men would get in line to provide for her, now as ever. On the other hand, take away Bill Gates' billions, and how many women would even give that unattractive, uncharming fellow the time of day?
Google and other corporations, to maximize their profits, feel obliged to keep the diversity crowd happy. Yet there is, ironically, nothing the diversity crowd opposes more than diversity itself. To see this, consider that to effect "social justice," we must all become thesame , like a mad God who chooses to bungle His creation. For, so long as I differ from you in some way or other, it will always be possible to make a value judgment!of inferiority, of superiority, or of whatever!concerning that difference. And this would be true even if everyone had the same amount of money, even if there were no private property, and so on. For the most part, the social justice crowd is not motivated by benevolent justice, but by wicked resentment: that is why it wants not universal economic sufficiency (which I strongly support, insofar as it is achievable), but equality of outcome; with the result that comparative value judgment will be impossible.
Now equality of outcome derives from human psychology, from the permanent truth that there's nothing we children of pride detest more than the thought: "That person is better than me." Seeing other people perceive that superiority induces the same burning, violent envy, like a child who wants to destroy his parent's favored sibling. Indeed, from childhood on, man!the esteeming animal!defines himself in terms of competition, of rank, of hierarchy. No artist or athlete wants to be equal to another. Not every person, waxing indignant about inequality, wants to make the same income as every neighbor; very few do, in fact. Like suffering and death, this extreme competiveness is a law of Nature, from which we merely issue. Try to get rid of it, and see what mediocrity, corruption and degeneration follow. I say, look around you.
Biographical note: Christopher DeGroot is a writer and independent scholar in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
CanSpeccy > , Website August 11, 2017 at 4:27 am GMT
bliss_porsena > , August 11, 2017 at 4:58 am GMTregardless of whether a vast majority of Googlers disagree with it.
Pichai is is an idiot. If a vast majority of "Googlers" disagreed with Damore's memorandum, how come most oppose his firing .
If Google's board wishes to avoid massive damage to the company, they should fire Pichai without delay on the grounds of his dishonesty and stupidity.
But the won't.
Good.
Let the manipulative, globalist, scum suffer massive damage to their credibility: credibility they do not deserve.
jilles dykstra > , August 11, 2017 at 6:10 am GMTI have just staggered through Pepe Escobar on the Goolag Deep Swamp Memo and beg to be excused from more of the same, or similar.
TG > , August 11, 2017 at 7:46 am GMTChristopher Lasch, 'The Culture of Narcissism, American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations', 1979, 1980, London
already argues that truth does not matter any more.Dieter Kief > , August 11, 2017 at 8:56 am GMTThe field of Optometry is increasingly dominated by women. I have served on the admissions committee for an optometry school, and we'd like a better balance between male and female, but if most of the best applicants are female, well that's that and nobody whines. Many of these applicants are quite up-front about choosing optometry because it offers a better work-life balance than, say, ophthalmic surgery, and again, so what?
New enrollment in US medical schools is now 50/50 between men and women, and will likely become majority female before too long. Where is the angst?
And I remind you that, on average, people with degrees in medicine and optometry have significantly larger salaries than people with degrees in engineering, and significantly longer careers. On balance, I'd not say that professional women are doing all that bad. It's just that, for whatever reasons, the smart women tend to choose medicine over engineering. I fail to see a problem here.
Zogby > , August 11, 2017 at 11:13 am GMTThe Pope, Emerson an Chesterton quotes are great. Especially the Pope-quote.
Thanks for putting Pinker, Peterson and Soh at the right place in the big picture.These lines are a little bit misleading, because siblings rivlary is nothing exclusively boyish. There are women-athletes who want to win too, aren't there?
Seeing other people perceive that superiority induces the same burning, violent envy, like a child who wants to destroy his parent's favored sibling. Indeed, from childhood on, man!the esteeming animal!defines himself in terms of competition, of rank, of hierarchy. No artist or athlete wants to be equal to another. Not every person, waxing indignant about inequality, wants to make the same income as every neighbor; very few do, in fact.
((Article is very good – if a tad long, maybe.))
Njguy73 > , August 11, 2017 at 11:26 am GMTHow come noone is discussing the role that Pinchai is himself a product of affirmitive action plays in this? Do people really believe an Indian immigrant would serve as CEO of Google, as CEO of Microsoft if not for affirmitive action? Being CEO is not an engineering position. There are plenty of native-born mainstream Americans that could do these jobs. Most large American companies would never give the job of CEO to an immigrant from a 3rd-world country. Some of the business men that founded large companies may be immigrants, but it's different if they built the company. They're in control. Pinchai is just a hired hand, like Damore was.
jim jones > , August 11, 2017 at 11:28 am GMT"Science is an odd sort of pursuit, way off the beaten track of human intellection There were theologians and politicians long, long, long before there were scientists. In dark moments I am inclined to think the former will still be with us long after the latter have been eliminated, probably via mass lynching Scientists themselves tend to forget this because they associate mainly with other scientists."
John Derbyshire, 2007
http://www.johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/Religion/religionandpolitics.html
Anonymous > , Disclaimer August 11, 2017 at 1:02 pm GMTGood thread on Reddit by a hiring manager about the realities of diversity:
https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/6scd84/long_my_experience_as_a
CanSpeccy > , Website August 11, 2017 at 3:24 pm GMT"It is well-established by Pinker and other scientists that women have higher IQs on average, while men preponderate the extremes of brilliance and dullness."
First time I'm hearing that claim. I've heard about the flatter, wider Bell Curve for men but the average IQ was either the same or even higher. That's also more logical since men need higher IQs to both prove themselves as providers and charm the pants off their mates. Women love intelligence + health in their mates while men look for beauty + health. A highly stratified, unequal and un-meritocratic (old money, castes or arranged marriages) system can distort the choices quite a bit but that's the baseline.
This is also interesting if true:
Recent research using DNA analysis answered this question about two years ago. Today's human population is descended from twice as many women as men.
I think this difference is the single most underappreciated fact about gender. To get that kind of difference, you had to have something like, throughout the entire history of the human race, maybe 80% of women but only 40% of men reproduced.
anonymous > , Disclaimer August 11, 2017 at 3:41 pm GMT@The Alarmist Damone is somebody's shill. Nobody with two functioning brain cells would publish that memo in that environment without some expectation of losing his job; either he is looking for fame and a payout, or he is simply insane.
Damone [sic] is somebody's shill.
.So exposing the reality of liberal-leftist bigotry, bullying and discrimination is proof that you're "sombody's shill"? What kind of bullshit argument is that?
Nobody with two functioning brain cells would publish that memo in that environment without some expectation of losing his job; either he is looking for fame and a payout, or he is simply insane.
Which reveals what a scoundrel mentality you have. Exposing corruption, bigotry, and manipulation of the public mind through the control of information is something you think a sane person would do, only for fame or money.
The idea of blowing the whistle on a bunch of dirty manipulators, bigots, bullies and scumbags who routinely misdirect the public for both political ends or to boost profits because you no longer wish to work with them, or because you think the public should know what such people are doing, or because you believe in propagating truth not using the most powerful tools for the enlightenment of humanity for the purpose of pushing some grotesque leftist agenda is, apparently, to a moral numbskull such as yourself, unintelligible.
What a sick society America has become, that it can produce individuals who not only think as you do, but who think anyone who thinks otherwise is insane.
But the cherry on the cake is that Damore did not blow the whistle on anyone. He merely circulated a memorandum among what Pichai, Google's idiot savant CEO, calls "Googlers". It was Pichai, confirming his own idiocy, who blew the whistle on himself by firing Damore.
What delicious irony. The shit CEO of the dirty search engine company, dicked himself.
@jilles dykstra Christopher Lasch, 'The Culture of Narcissism, American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations', 1979, 1980, London
already argues that truth does not matter any more. Thanks for referencing this book. Read it when it was first published. As such it served as my introduction to Lasch, who was a very prescient thinker (read "The True and Only Heaven"). And here's what's disturbing: Lasch, as I recall, pointed out that narcissism is in fact a mental disorder which is considered to be so deep-seated as to be impossible to cure.
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2017 | www.wnd.com
( Editor's note: The following is a 10-page memo written by an anonymous senior software engineer at Google.)
I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don't endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can't have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem. Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber. Despite what the public response seems to have been, I've gotten many personal messages from fellow Googlers expressing their gratitude for bringing up these very important issues which they agree with but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired. This needs to change.
TL:DR
- Google's political bias has equated the freedom from offense with psychological safety, but shaming into silence is the antithesis of psychological safety.
- This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed.
- The lack of discussion fosters the most extreme and authoritarian elements of this ideology.
- Extreme: all disparities in representation are due to oppression
- Authoritarian: we should discriminate to correct for this oppression
- Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don't have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.
Background [1]
People generally have good intentions, but we all have biases which are invisible to us. Thankfully, open and honest discussion with those who disagree can highlight our blind spots and help us grow, which is why I wrote this document.[2] Google has several biases and honest discussion about these biases is being silenced by the dominant ideology. What follows is by no means the complete story, but it's a perspective that desperately needs to be told at Google.
Google's biases
At Google, we talk so much about unconscious bias as it applies to race and gender, but we rarely discuss our moral biases. Political orientation is actually a result of deep moral preferences and thus biases. Considering that the overwhelming majority of the social sciences, media, and Google lean left, we should critically examine these prejudices.
Left Biases
- Compassion for the weak
- Disparities are due to injustices
- Humans are inherently cooperative
- Change is good (unstable)
- Open
- Idealist
Right Biases
- Respect for the strong/authority
- Disparities are natural and just
- Humans are inherently competitive
- Change is dangerous (stable)
- Closed
- Pragmatic
Neither side is 100% correct and both viewpoints are necessary for a functioning society or, in this case, company. A company too far to the right may be slow to react, overly hierarchical, and untrusting of others. In contrast, a company too far to the left will constantly be changing (deprecating much loved services), over diversify its interests (ignoring or being ashamed of its core business), and overly trust its employees and competitors.
Only facts and reason can shed light on these biases, but when it comes to diversity and inclusion, Google's left bias has created a politically correct monoculture that maintains its hold by shaming dissenters into silence. This silence removes any checks against encroaching extremist and authoritarian policies. For the rest of this document, I'll concentrate on the extreme stance that all differences in outcome are due to differential treatment and the authoritarian element that's required to actually discriminate to create equal representation.
Possible non-bias causes of the gender gap in tech [3]
At Google, we're regularly told that implicit (unconscious) and explicit biases are holding women back in tech and leadership. Of course, men and women experience bias, tech, and the workplace differently and we should be cognizant of this, but it's far from the whole story.
On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren't just socially constructed because:
- They're universal across human cultures
- They often have clear biological causes and links to prenatal testosterone
- Biological males that were castrated at birth and raised as females often still identify and act like males
- The underlying traits are highly heritable
- They're exactly what we would predict from an evolutionary psychology perspective
Note, I'm not saying that all men differ from women in the following ways or that these differences are "just." I'm simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don't see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there's significant overlap between men and women, so you can't say anything about an individual given these population level distributions.
Personality differences
Women, on average, have more:
- Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men (also interpreted as empathizing vs. systemizing).
- These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or artistic areas. More men may like coding because it requires systemizing and even within SWEs, comparatively more women work on front end, which deals with both people and aesthetics.
- Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness. Also, higher agreeableness.
- This leads to women generally having a harder time negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up, and leading. Note that these are just average differences and there's overlap between men and women, but this is seen solely as a women's issue. This leads to exclusory programs like Stretch and swaths of men without support.
- Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance).This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs.
Note that contrary to what a social constructionist would argue, research suggests that "greater nation-level gender equality leads to psychological dissimilarity in men's and women's personality traits." Because as "society becomes more prosperous and more egalitarian, innate dispositional differences between men and women have more space to develop and the gap that exists between men and women in their personality becomes wider." We need to stop assuming that gender gaps imply sexism.
Men's higher drive for status
We always ask why we don't see women in top leadership positions, but we never ask why we see so many men in these jobs. These positions often require long, stressful hours that may not be worth it if you want a balanced and fulfilling life.
Status is the primary metric that men are judged on[4], pushing many men into these higher paying, less satisfying jobs for the status that they entail. Note, the same forces that lead men into high pay/high stress jobs in tech and leadership cause men to take undesirable and dangerous jobs like coal mining, garbage collection, and firefighting, and suffer 93% of work-related deaths.
N on-discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap
Below I'll go over some of the differences in distribution of traits between men and women that I outlined in the previous section and suggest ways to address them to increase women's representation in tech and without resorting to discrimination. Google is already making strides in many of these areas, but I think it's still instructive to list them:
- Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things
- We can make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming and more collaboration. Unfortunately, there may be limits to how people-oriented certain roles and Google can be and we shouldn't deceive ourselves or students into thinking otherwise (some of our programs to get female students into coding might be doing this).
- Women on average are more cooperative
- Allow those exhibiting cooperative behavior to thrive. Recent updates to Perf may be doing this to an extent, but maybe there's more we can do. This doesn't mean that we should remove all competitiveness from Google. Competitiveness and self reliance can be valuable traits and we shouldn't necessarily disadvantage those that have them, like what's been done in education. Women on average are more prone to anxiety. Make tech and leadership less stressful. Google already partly does this with its many stress reduction courses and benefits.
- Women on average look for more work-life balance while men have a higher drive for status on average
- Unfortunately, as long as tech and leadership remain high status, lucrative careers, men may disproportionately want to be in them. Allowing and truly endorsing (as part of our culture) part time work though can keep more women in tech.
- The male gender role is currently inflexible
- Feminism has made great progress in freeing women from the female gender role, but men are still very much tied to the male gender role. If we, as a society, allow men to be more "feminine," then the gender gap will shrink, although probably because men will leave tech and leadership for traditionally feminine roles.
Philosophically, I don't think we should do arbitrary social engineering of tech just to make it appealing to equal portions of both men and women. For each of these changes, we need principles reasons for why it helps Google; that is, we should be optimizing for Google!with Google's diversity being a component of that. For example currently those trying to work extra hours or take extra stress will inevitably get ahead and if we try to change that too much, it may have disastrous consequences. Also, when considering the costs and benefits, we should keep in mind that Google's funding is finite so its allocation is more zero-sum than is generally acknowledged.
The Harm of Google's biases
I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we should strive for more. However, to achieve a more equal gender and race representation, Google has created several discriminatory practices:
- Programs, mentoring, and classes only for people with a certain gender or race [5]
- A high priority queue and special treatment for "diversity" candidates
- Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for "diversity" candidates by decreasing the false negative rate
- Reconsidering any set of people if it's not "diverse" enough, but not showing that same scrutiny in the reverse direction (clear confirmation bias)
- Setting org level OKRs for increased representation which can incentivize illegal discrimination [6]
These practices are based on false assumptions generated by our biases and can actually increase race and gender tensions. We're told by senior leadership that what we're doing is both the morally and economically correct thing to do, but without evidence this is just veiled left ideology[7] that can irreparably harm Google.
Why we're blind
We all have biases and use motivated reasoning to dismiss ideas that run counter to our internal values. Just as some on the Right deny science that runs counter to the "God > humans > environment" hierarchy (e.g., evolution and climate change) the Left tends to deny science concerning biological differences between people (e.g., IQ[8] and sex differences). Thankfully, climate scientists and evolutionary biologists generally aren't on the right. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of humanities and social scientists learn left (about 95%), which creates enormous confirmation bias, changes what's being studied, and maintains myths like social constructionism and the gender wage gap[9]. Google's left leaning makes us blind to this bias and uncritical of its results, which we're using to justify highly politicized programs.
In addition to the Left's affinity for those it sees as weak, humans are generally biased towards protecting females. As mentioned before, this likely evolved because males are biologically disposable and because women are generally more cooperative and areeable than men. We have extensive government and Google programs, fields of study, and legal and social norms to protect women, but when a man complains about a gender issue issue [sic] affecting men, he's labelled as a misogynist and whiner[10]. Nearly every difference between men and women is interpreted as a form of women's oppression. As with many things in life, gender differences are often a case of "grass being greener on the other side"; unfortunately, taxpayer and Google money is spent to water only one side of the lawn.
The same compassion for those seen as weak creates political correctness[11], which constrains discourse and is complacent to the extremely sensitive PC-authoritarians that use violence and shaming to advance their cause. While Google hasn't harbored the violent leftists protests that we're seeing at universities, the frequent shaming in TGIF and in our culture has created the same silence, psychologically unsafe environment.
Suggestions
I hope it's clear that I'm not saying that diversity is bad, that Google or society is 100% fair, that we shouldn't try to correct for existing biases, or that minorities have the same experience of those in the majority. My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don't fit a certain ideology. I'm also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I'm advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism).
My concrete suggestions are to:
De-moralize diversity.
As soon as we start to moralize an issue, we stop thinking about it in terms of costs and benefits, dismiss anyone that disagrees as immoral, and harshly punish those we see as villains to protect the "victims."
Stop alienating conservatives.
- Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity and political orientation is one of the most fundamental and significant ways in which people view things differently.
- In highly progressive environments, conservatives are a minority that feel like they need to stay in the closet to avoid open hostility. We should empower those with different ideologies to be able to express themselves.
- Alienating conservatives is both non-inclusive and generally bad business because conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness, which is require for much of the drudgery and maintenance work characteristic of a mature company.
Confront Google's biases.
- I've mostly concentrated on how our biases cloud our thinking about diversity and inclusion, but our moral biases are farther reaching than that.
- I would start by breaking down Googlegeist scores by political orientation and personality to give a fuller picture into how our biases are affecting our culture.
Stop restricting programs and classes to certain genders or races.
- These discriminatory practices are both unfair and divisive. Instead focus on some of the non-discriminatory practices I outlined.
Have an open and honest discussion about the costs and benefits of our diversity programs.
- Discriminating just to increase the representation of women in tech is as misguided and biased as mandating increases for women's representation in the homeless, work-related and violent deaths, prisons, and school dropouts.
- There's currently very little transparency into the extend of our diversity programs which keeps it immune to criticism from those outside its ideological echo chamber.
- These programs are highly politicized which further alienates non-progressives.
- I realize that some of our programs may be precautions against government accusations of discrimination, but that can easily backfire since they incentivize illegal discrimination.
Focus on psychological safety, not just race/gender diversity.
- We should focus on psychological safety, which has shown positive effects and should (hopefully) not lead to unfair discrimination.
- We need psychological safety and shared values to gain the benefits of diversity
- Having representative viewpoints is important for those designing and testing our products, but the benefits are less clear for those more removed from UX.
De-emphasize empathy.
- I've heard several calls for increased empathy on diversity issues. While I strongly support trying to understand how and why people think the way they do, relying on affective empathy!feeling another's pain!causes us to focus on anecdotes, favor individuals similar to us, and harbor other irrational and dangerous biases. Being emotionally unengaged helps us better reason about the facts.
Prioritize intention.
- Our focus on microaggressions and other unintentional transgressions increases our sensitivity, which is not universally positive: sensitivity increases both our tendency to take offense and our self censorship, leading to authoritarian policies. Speaking up without the fear of being harshly judged is central to psychological safety, but these practices can remove that safety by judging unintentional transgressions.
- Microaggression training incorrectly and dangerously equates speech with violence and isn't backed by evidence.
Be open about the science of human nature.
- Once we acknowledge that not all differences are socially constructed or due to discrimination, we open our eyes to a more accurate view of the human condition which is necessary if we actually want to solve problems.
Reconsider making Unconscious Bias training mandatory for promo committees.
- We haven't been able to measure any effect of our Unconscious Bias training and it has the potential for overcorrecting or backlash, especially if made mandatory.
- Some of the suggested methods of the current training (v2.3) are likely useful, but the political bias of the presentation is clear from the factual inaccuracies and the examples shown.
- Spend more time on the many other types of biases besides stereotypes. Stereotypes are much more accurate and responsive to new information than the training suggests (I'm not advocating for using stereotypes, I [sic] just pointing out the factual inaccuracy of what's said in the training).
[1] This document is mostly written from the perspective of Google's Mountain View campus, I can't speak about other offices or countries.
[2] Of course, I may be biased and only see evidence that supports my viewpoint. In terms of political biases, I consider myself a classical liberal and strongly value individualism and reason. I'd be very happy to discuss any of the document further and provide more citations.
[3] Throughout the document, by "tech", I mostly mean software engineering.
[4] For heterosexual romantic relationships, men are more strongly judged by status and women by beauty. Again, this has biological origins and is culturally universal.
[5] Stretch, BOLD, CSSI, Engineering Practicum (to an extent), and several other Google funded internal and external programs are for people with a certain gender or race.
[6] Instead set Googlegeist OKRs, potentially for certain demographics. We can increase representation at an org level by either making it a better environment for certain groups (which would be seen in survey scores) or discriminating based on a protected status (which is illegal and I've seen it done). Increased representation OKRs can incentivize the latter and create zero-sum struggles between orgs.
[7] Communism promised to be both morally and economically superior to capitalism, but every attempt became morally corrupt and an economic failure. As it became clear that the working class of the liberal democracies wasn't going to overthrow their "capitalist oppressors," the Marxist intellectuals transitioned from class warfare to gender and race politics. The core oppressor-oppressed dynamics remained, but now the oppressor is the "white, straight, cis-gendered patriarchy."
[8] Ironically, IQ tests were initially championed by the Left when meritocracy meant helping the victims of the aristocracy.
[9] Yes, in a national aggregate, women have lower salaries than men for a variety of reasons. For the same work though, women get paid just as much as men. Considering women spend more money than men and that salary represents how much the employees sacrifices (e.g. more hours, stress, and danger), we really need to rethink our stereotypes around power.
[10] "The traditionalist system of gender does not deal well with the idea of men needing support. Men are expected to be strong, to not complain, and to deal with problems on their own. Men's problems are more often seen as personal failings rather than victimhood,, due to our gendered idea of agency. This discourages men from bringing attention to their issues (whether individual or group-wide issues), for fear of being seen as whiners, complainers, or weak."
[11] Political correctness is defined as "the avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against," which makes it clear why it's a phenomenon of the Left and a tool of authoritarians.
|
|
|
Aug 09, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
memo about " Google's Ideological Echo Chamber - How bias clouds our thinking about diversity and inclusion ":At Google, we're regularly told that implicit (unconscious) and explicit biases are holding women back in tech and leadership. Of course, men and women experience bias, tech, and the workplace differently and we should be cognizant of this, but it's far from the whole story. On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren't just socially constructed because:
- ...
- ...Google company policy is in favor of "equal representation" of both genders. As the existing representation in tech jobs is unequal that policy has led to hiring preferences, priority status and special treatment for the underrepresented category, in this case women.
The author says that this policy is based on ideology and not on rationality. It is the wrong way to go, he says. Basic differences, not bias, are (to some extend) responsible for different representations in tech jobs. If the (natural) different representation is "cured" by preferring the underrepresented, the optimal configuration can not be achieved.
The author cites scientific studies which find that men and women (as categories, not as specific persons) are - independent of cultural bias - unequal in several social perspectives. These might be life planning, willingness to work more for a higher status, or social behavior. The differences evolve from the natural biological differences between men and women. A gender preference for specific occupations and positions is to be expected, Cultural bias alone can not explain it. It therefore does not make sense to strive for equal group representation in all occupations.
From James Damore's memoFrom there he points to the implementation of Google's policy and concludes:
Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.Google fired the engineer. Its 'Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance' stated:
We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company. [..] Part of building an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions. But that discourse needs to work alongside the principles of equal employment found in our Code of Conduct, policies, and anti-discrimination laws.(Translation: "You are welcome to discuss your alternative policy views - unless we disagree with them.")
The current public discussion of the case evolves around "conservative" versus "progressive", "left" versus "right" categories. That misses the point the author makes: Google's policy is based on unfounded ideology, not on sciences.
The (legal) "principle of equality" does not imply that everyone and everything must be handled equally. It rather means that in proportion with its equality the same shall be treated equally, and in proportion with its inequality the different shall be treated unequally.
The author asks: Are men and women different? Do these differences result in personal occupation preferences? He quotes the relevant science and answers these questions with "yes" and "yes". From that follows a third question: What is the purpose of compelled equal representation in occupations when the inherent (natural gender) differences are not in line with such an outcome?
Several scientist in the relevant fields have stated that the author's scientific reasoning is largely correct. The biological differences between men and women do result in observable social and psychological differences which are independent of culture and its biases. It is to be expected that these difference lead to different preferences of occupations.
Moreover: If men and women are inherently equal (in their tech job capabilities) why does Google need to say that "diversity and inclusion are critical to our success"? Equality and diversity are in this extend contradictory. (Why, by the way, is Google selling advertising-space with "male" and "female" as targeting criteria?)
If women and men are not equal, we should, in line with the principle of equality, differentiate accordingly. We then should not insist on or strive for equal gender representation in all occupations but accept a certain "gender gap" as the expression of natural differences.
It is sad that Google and the general society avoid to discuss the questions that the author of the memo has asked. That Google fires him only confirms his claim that Google's policy is not based on science and rationality but on a non-discussible ideology.
Posted by b on August 8, 2017 at 01:41 PM | Permalink
TSP | Aug 8, 2017 2:03:15 PM | 1
I worked under a lady CEO. It was so refreshing compared to life under men. There was open dialogue, I felt I could voice ideas safely.karlof1 | Aug 8, 2017 2:06:12 PM | 2I think all CEO's would be females. It's like their social approaches to inclusion is unilaterally better than (white) men.
Is that sexist?
(From a 50 year old white man).
Thanks, b, for the change in academic realms from geopolitics to anthropology. You wrote:marxman | Aug 8, 2017 2:18:30 PM | 3"The biological differences between men and women do result in observable social and psychological differences which are independent of culture and its biases."
I disagree. From an anthropological perspective, biological differences form the basis for all cultures and thusly cannot be independent of culture since they form its core. Yes, Google's policy is ideological, but what policy can claim to be ideologically neutral? IMO, the answer is none. Here I invoke Simon de Beauvoir's maxim that females are "slaves to the species" that she irrefutably proves in The Second Sex . Fortunately, some societies based upon matrilineal cultures survived into the 20th century thus upending the male dominated mythos created to support such culturally based polities.
bell curve much? read the Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould. generally your work is excellent but this post is of poor quality.Thegenius | Aug 8, 2017 2:45:39 PM | 4The truth is google only hire women so that the nerds working there can get laid.Thegenius | Aug 8, 2017 2:48:13 PM | 5@TSPAnti-Soros | Aug 8, 2017 2:50:21 PM | 6Were you beaten senselessly by your dad when you were a child?
Social engineering is what it is. Social engineering is what it does.Bruce Ballai | Aug 8, 2017 2:52:24 PM | 7It's an elite corporate project to androgynise humanity, a la 1984.
Simply put, women will not achieve their full potential outside the family.
The corporate project will continually have to put in place special discriminatory measures to pretend they're equal in the SMET areas when all the evidence shows they're not, other than in very special cases.
It's a project that's doomed to failure in the end, but much misery will be caused to both men and women as this elite project continues.
Thankfully, the rest of the world isn't as brainwashed as Westerners.
They're the future.
You can disagree with B's science, and you can disagree with James' science. James was fired for expressing his opinions and beliefs. This is so little about sexism and so much about freedom of speech and freedom to consider other ideas. Bias shut that down at Google. These comments are in line with shutting down independent thinking. I'm a little surprised to see that sort of ideology here. When people - like B, like James - put their own circumstances at risk for the sake of open mindedness, they deserve as much support as culture and society can offer.Thegenius | Aug 8, 2017 2:54:50 PM | 8If Google or other silicon valley tech companies dont hire unqualified women, the place would be a sausage fest of socially inept nerdsBamdad | Aug 8, 2017 2:55:42 PM | 9Ivan Illich wrote a very interesting and controversial book "Gender" on the difference between Gender and Sex. I do recommend every one to read this book (and all of other Illich's writings).james | Aug 8, 2017 2:57:20 PM | 10thanks b... this is more politically correct material.. it is what canada and probably many western countries have been doing for some time.. google is a piece of crap corporation as far as i am concerned, so this is in keeping with their neo-liberal agenda..dh | Aug 8, 2017 3:04:46 PM | 11@7 bruce... i agree it is about freedom of speech, something sorely missing in the politically correct realm of western society at this point in time..
'non-discussible ideology'.....great phrase b. None of it much matters because in 10-20 everybody will be bi-sexual or trans-gender anyway. Any hold outs will be required to attend re-education courses.anon | Aug 8, 2017 3:12:33 PM | 12he says men are better than women - women are "neurotic" and can't handle stress and don't do as much hard work as men and spend more money and on and on and on....Anti-Soros | Aug 8, 2017 3:14:18 PM | 13his level of argument and citation is about that of a teenager. he makes a lot of statements with no support, such as men are better coders than women because women like social interaction more. and even if men really are more cutthroat than women, his assumption is that being cutthroat in management makes better companies. (Microsoft made great money, not great products.)
furthermore, his definition of 'left' and 'right' are narrowed to probably his entire life experience which appears to be just out of college?
There is some hope though.Anti-Soros | Aug 8, 2017 3:18:11 PM | 14The whole SJW thing is being exposed day and daily for the complete nihilistic fraud it is.
Especially in America.
If you wanted to destroy a country then Gender Games is the way to go.
Globalists must destroy the US and Europe to achieve their goal, but they must just keep them alive until Russia is destroyed.
A delicate balancing act.
Left and Right are elite frauds, though the Left primarily carried forward the gender destruction project.james | Aug 8, 2017 3:20:20 PM | 15The Right was bullied into it and for the most part has jumped aboard.
They seem to be fighting back a bit now.
@11 dh.. lol.. that's about it... it isn't enough us old white males are trying to be flexible here...Merasmus | Aug 8, 2017 3:21:12 PM | 16@6T-Sixes | Aug 8, 2017 3:22:14 PM | 17"Simply put, women will not achieve their full potential outside the family.
The corporate project will continually have to put in place special discriminatory measures to pretend they're equal in the SMET areas when all the evidence shows they're not, other than in very special cases."
I really wonder how someone can go through life interacting with women every day, and most likely having wives, daughters, nieces, etc, and still hold the opinion that "by the way, you're inferior shit and stupid and only good for producing babies". I would think first of all that actual interaction with women would reveal this not to be the case, but if nothing else I would think not being a freaking sociopath with a bleak worldview would prevent someone from being ending up as such a douchebag.
I also love stuff like this: "It's an elite corporate project to androgynise humanity, a la 1984."
Good god, masculinity is the most fragile thing in existence. Anything, absolutely anything, that in any way threatens its privileged position brings forth the waves of hyperbolic whinging. Talk about being triggered. How about you stop defining your manliness by subjugating women. Efforts to correct inequalities do not mean men are being turned into women, or whatever gibberish you're complaining about.
With respect to the commenter alias "karlof1", you seem to have drifted off-topic somewhat.Anti-Soros | Aug 8, 2017 3:25:23 PM | 18Please point out specifically where the author of the now infamous Google memo seeks to in any way denigrate women to a position in any way resembling slavery.
You have signally failed to refute anything in the memo as you have resorted to the lazy straw man of sexism.
You can doubtless try harder and probably do better -- 0/10, for now, and see me at the end...
And while you're at it, why is feminism preferable to chauvinism - do please explain clearly and try to stay on point.
Who, I mean who!Anti-Soros | Aug 8, 2017 3:29:57 PM | 19Who truly believes that women prefer coding all day long.
You need to be a bit autistic spectrum to enjoy that.
That's why there's so many nerds in these areas.
Perhaps women need to be given extra vaccines at a young age and then they'll develop the skills necessary to succeed in these spheres.
Trading your sociality for nerdom is not a choice many women want to make.
I wouldn't make it myself, and I worked in this area.
Used to make my brain hurt, a lot.
All abstract, nothing tactile.
keep women human, is what I say!
MerasmusDafranzl | Aug 8, 2017 3:36:05 PM | 20The family is not an inferior thing. Women are not an inferior thing.
The family is the centre of life and women its masters.
That's where they will achieve a truly fulfilling life.
Why should women want to demean themselves by accepting the poor male equivalent of female creativity.
I was a pilot for Lufthansa and really had no problems with ourT-Sixes | Aug 8, 2017 3:42:57 PM | 21
ladypilots. Of course they had and have the same salary as males. But what was interesting:only a few chose to apply for the job, with LH this meant to pass a test then enter the pilotschool and passt al checks, incl. licencing. But:the percentage of the few who reallly passed all this was around 90 percent, I mean, a girl who wants this real tech job and is intelligent will get it. Boys tend to overestimate their abilities and therefor fail. Only about 10 percent who try the test actually pass it. That is pne typical gender difference. PS:I am male ;)Completely agree with poster "Anti-Soros" -- "Merasmus" is twisting this obtusely beyond all recognition, read the memo, "Merasmus", and make your own mind up, so as you don't come over so utterly lopsided and brainwashed in your awareness of sexual politics. And, on that note, as to "Dafranzl", is your comment not verging on real, like genuine, sexism in that you are expressing some kind of shock horror that women can actually pass a couple of tests and fly a plane?Merasmus | Aug 8, 2017 3:46:10 PM | 22@Anti-SorosAnti-Soros | Aug 8, 2017 4:03:23 PM | 23I'm pretty sure it should be up to the women to decide what they want to do with their lives. Some may want to be housewives, others don't. It's about freedom of choice (you know, that thing conservatives are always claim they care so much about). You really don't see any problem with men telling women what women truly want in life, and ensuring that that one thing is the only option available to them, do you? It's amazing how men will declare that the different sexes have different natural spheres, and then put family in the women's column, and literally everything else, and the freedom to choice from all those other things, in the men's column.
MerasmusJohan Meyer | Aug 8, 2017 4:07:20 PM | 24You seem to think that the family and children are some sort of lower form of achievement.
Where'd you get that idea?
As I said, female creativity is the closet thing to godliness any human can get.
Don't trade that for poor male efforts at creativity.
There only sadness and frustration lie.
So much so indeed that the elite project in creativity is currently engaged in attempting to undermine God and Female creativity with its own version of androids, robots and all the rest of the cheap Frankenstein tricks for which frustrated males and their ersatz creativity are famous.
When will a bridge or an app, a poem, a book, a piece of music, ever come close to creating and nurturing life itself.
There is a big cultural problem that keep women out of technical fields. In the west, the striving to a career leads to a sudden mid 30s realization that maybe they do want a family. My experience with west Africans is that they marry younger, have their families and get on with careers. This also has the benefit of them going into the work force when they are a bit more mature, and have actual life responsibilities.okie farmer | Aug 8, 2017 4:19:29 PM | 25The Mismeasure of ManPiotr Berman | Aug 8, 2017 4:22:17 PM | 26
From WikipediaThe Mismeasure of Man
Stephen Jay Gould
The Mismeasure of Man is a 1981 book by Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould.[1] The book is both a history and critique of the statistical methods and cultural motivations underlying biological determinism, the belief that "the social and economic differences between human groups!primarily races, classes, and sexes!arise from inherited, inborn distinctions and that society, in this sense, is an accurate reflection of biology."[2]
The principal assumption underlying biological determinism is that, "worth can be assigned to individuals and groups by measuring intelligence as a single quantity." This argument is analyzed in discussions of craniometry and psychological testing, the two methods used to measure and establish intelligence as a single quantity. According to Gould, the methods harbor "two deep fallacies." The first fallacy is "reification", which is "our tendency to convert abstract concepts into entities"[3] such as the intelligence quotient (IQ) and the general intelligence factor (g factor), which have been the cornerstones of much research into human intelligence. The second fallacy is that of "ranking", which is the "propensity for ordering complex variation as a gradual ascending scale."[3]
The revised and expanded second edition (1996) analyzes and challenges the methodological accuracy of The Bell Curve (1994), by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray. Gould said the book re-presented the arguments of what Gould terms biological determinism, which he defines as "the abstraction of intelligence as a single entity, its location within the brain, its quantification as one number for each individual, and the use of these numbers to rank people in a single series of worthiness, invariably to find that oppressed and disadvantaged groups!races, classes, or sexes!are innately inferior and deserve their status."[4]For starters, good coding is not a male characteristic, because most of the gender is quite terrible. So the question is: are "good coders" a more sizable minority among men or women? Both percentages are culture related, and they probably have a gender component.Merasmus | Aug 8, 2017 4:37:41 PM | 27A weird thing is the gender ratio of women/men students of computer science seems quite even in some Asian cultures, like Iranian, and very lopsided (1-9, 2-8) in American culture that has a "feminity ideals" like "girls are not good at math". That is overlayed with relatively meager rewards in American society for engineering fields, compared to law and medicine. I suspect that the ratio of male jurists in Iran is very lopsided, so girls, for the want of good legal jobs, go for engineering and math. (That is not a serious theory.)
@Anti-SorosThegenius | Aug 8, 2017 4:38:00 PM | 28Ah, benevolent sexism. Putting women on a pedestal and making it their prison.
"Women are not an inferior thing."
It would help in convincing others that you actually believe this if you hadn't literally opened with (and then reiterated later) saying that women are generally too stupid to work in STEM fields.
"Who truly believes that women prefer coding all day long."
You could start by asking some women programmers. Though I really should point out the false dichotomy you're engaging in here: women can be mothers or they can be something else, in your mind they can never be both.
"So much so indeed that the elite project in creativity is currently engaged in attempting to undermine God"
Because I'm sure the (supposed) creator of the entire universe can be undermined by a hairless chimpanzee. "And I would have gotten away with it too, if hadn't been for you meddling humans!"
@T-Sixes
I don't particularly care about the memo or its asinine content. I'm responding to what people have said in these comments.
As for the memo itself, neither side comes out looking particularly good. The engineer's memo essentially boils down to "girlz r stoopid, and need to get out of my workplace" (he's not attempting to engage in debate, which some of his defenders have claimed, as in 'he's just asking questions and the PC police are too scared to engage him'), and Google's response was "you voiced an unacceptable opinion so we're going to fire you" (they aren't interested in debate either, but he wasn't offering one in the first place). It also has a lot of the inane 'both sides have good points, the best answer is in the middle' centrist faux wisdom I've come to expect from the type of idiot who makes up most of the Silicon Valley echo-chamber. Ah yes, the right is 'pragmatic'. They're pragmatically destroying their economies by forever seeking tax cuts and the reduction of a national 'debt' they don't even understand the nature of. Spare me.
@26Damon Harris | Aug 8, 2017 4:46:21 PM | 29
Women are more group oriented and dont like to do solitary work like codingConvenient that we just ignore the substantial body of research on gender bias in professional fields, particularly tech.Damon Harris | Aug 8, 2017 4:47:03 PM | 30Abstract
Biases against women in the workplace have been documented in a variety of studies. This paper presents a large scale study on gender bias, where we compare acceptance rates of contributions from men versus women in an open source software community. Surprisingly, our results show that women's contributions tend to be accepted more often than men's. However, for contributors who are outsiders to a project and their gender is identifiable, men's acceptance rates are higher. Our results suggest that although women on GitHub may be more competent overall, bias against them exists nonetheless.
Link to the earlier post: https://peerj.com/articles/cs-111/Merasmus | Aug 8, 2017 4:50:17 PM | 31
@26james | Aug 8, 2017 4:58:00 PM | 32The explanation for Iran I've heard is that STEM fields simply aren't held in high esteem in Iran, so at a minimum it's a dearth of male interest in the area that has created a lot of openings for women. On top of that there may be cultural/social pressure for women to go into less prestigious fields while all the 'more important' areas are dominated by men. It's certainly fun to think about how projects like Iran's recent ballistic missile test are in large part facilitated by female input. If Iran is to hold the US at bay (or punish it heavily should it actually attack), it's going to be with weapons created by people working in fields that are apparently held in low esteem.
one thing women can do that men can't? that's right.. some things are factual.. a lot of stuff is culturally and socially imposed though... women working doing coding.. have at it.. forcing equal numbers being hired sure seems like 'politically correct thinking' to me... give the job based on the qualifications.. skip with the politically correct bullshit..Johan Meyer | Aug 8, 2017 5:05:11 PM | 33@okie farmerJohan Meyer | Aug 8, 2017 5:07:33 PM | 34
Perhaps different types of intelligence exist, but if they do, they are highly correlated, hence the emphasis on (the mathematically dubious) g .FWIW, I advocate a modified lead/iodine deficiency model to explain most variation in IQ. Unlike older studies, more recent studies have found a small IQ gap between men and women, and women having a narrower IQ range (standard deviation) than men, i.e. fewer outliers high and low. If you look at US blacks, they have a narrower standard deviation of IQ than whites as well as a lower mean IQ. This may be understood quite readily:
Healthy pubertal brain development adds to the standard deviation e.g. 9 points standard deviation in my proposed model---12^2+9^2=15^2, where 15 is the defined std deviation over population of IQ. Poor environment e.g. poison or lacking nutrition cause mean to differ as well.
The environmental argument is usually attacked on the basis of twin studies, e.g. using the Falconer equations. That is because the equations are not usually derived from first principles. To wit, one has mean environmental effect, deviation from mean environmental effect correlated with gene, and uncorrelated with genes, which might not even be environmental, but simple developmental noise. Those arguing that twin studies show the environmental effect to be small, ignore that means are subtracted in calculating the Pearson correlation.
For women, especially after bromide replaced iodine in preparing dough for bread, late 70s or early 80s, the need for iodine will not be met sufficiently during puberty, as both breasts and the brain require iodine for development, in large quantities, and with feminising endocrine disruptors in greater quantities in the environment, breast sizes have risen on average (cup size inflation). Note deviation from previous generations' size should matter for same genes, not deviation from population mean, so if daughter is bigger than mother, e.g., then lower IQ expected, but not because daughter is bigger than agemate, as the environmental mean is shared (but does not enter Falconer equations' correlations, being subtracted)...
With US blacks, lead poisoning is still an issue, albeit much smaller than during the 90s. Look at the NHANES III data---the histogram of blood lead is nearly inverse, which suggests sporadic poisoning (lead paint, with dBLL/dt=R-BLL (ln 2)/\tau_{1/2} where R is the rate of intake (function of time, zero most of the time under sporadic poisoning). Also, sub-Saharan Africa largely avoided the Bronze Age, going straight to iron work---the Bantu used a bit of copper but not much evolutionary pressure to develop resistance to lead uptake. If you read e.g. Unz review, I did previously argue that blacks in US are more likely to live in lead painted housing, based on BLL, but US data show whites as likely to live in such housing---blacks take up more lead for same environment.
Forgot to add---lead almost always is present in soft metal e.g. copper deposits.ab initio | Aug 8, 2017 5:10:44 PM | 35I find it fascinating that the liberal snowflake SJWs claim to promote diversity except diverse opinion. There's a reason that the neocons were liberals.ben | Aug 8, 2017 5:12:48 PM | 36And the communist heroes of the left including Lenin & Mao are comparable to the fascists with my way or the highway to death.
depends entirely on the type of jobs applied for. If one can pass the physical and mental tests for the job applied for, gender or race shouldn't matter. That's assuming the employer's requirements are reasonable.somebody | Aug 8, 2017 5:13:08 PM | 37Google probably knows that Russia and China have competitive advantage in employing women.ben | Aug 8, 2017 5:19:14 PM | 38According to Unesco, 29% of people in scientific research worldwide are women, compared with 41% in Russia. In the UK, about 4% of inventors are women, whereas the figure is 15% in Russia.Is engineering destined to remain a male-dominated field? Not everywhere. In China, 40% of engineers are women, and in the former USSR, women accounted for 58% of the engineering workforce.Women get these jobs when they are needed, if not, they are expected to stay at home. It is not about free speech, feminism, ability or choice.
This plateau is of concern to policy experts. For the last decade, the European Commission has highlighted the risks related to the shortage of engineers and has called on member states to draw more widely on the pool of female talent. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics warned last year that the demand for computer engineers in the U.S. would see an increase of 36% by the year 2012. It seems urgent in these conditions to train more women. So what are the obstacles?Google needs those female engineers. As simple as that.
P.S.---If men weren't so afraid of the power women weld, because of our lust for pro-creation, things could be different.karlof1 | Aug 8, 2017 5:19:39 PM | 39T-Sixes @17--Lea | Aug 8, 2017 5:34:19 PM | 40I didn't address the content of the memo, if you had read more carefully. I quoted a sentence b wrote and went on from there. Seems your knee-jerk hit you I the head.
The same thing had been said in 2011 by a Norwegian documentary, "Brainwash" (highly recommended viewing, it can be found on Youtube with English subtitles).T-Sixes | Aug 8, 2017 5:36:15 PM | 41
The Norwegian government cut its funding for "Gender studies" after its airing.I am a woman, and its seems to me the politically correct comments here all have one thing in common: they confuse two distinct notions, difference and inferiority.
I feel different from men, I know I am, but in no way do I feel inferior. I am not interested in sports, cars or coding. I am interested in psychology, childhood and fashion. Sorry, it's not cultural, since it's the same the world over. I will add it cannot be cultural, because the sex roles are differentiated in the animal kingdom too. Take a male lion and a female - the male naps, she hunts. All the other animals equally show different patterns of behaviour according to their sex, save ants, amoebae, viruses and other microbes, bugs or non-mammals. So, pretending that there are no differences between men and women, when all it takes is two minutes of observation of nature (let alone a clothes shop during sales) is sheer gaslighting.Men and woman are complementary, which is way more beautiful, diverse and life-enhancing than that drab uniformity/sameness that, it seems to me, emanates from people who are so narcissistic they are scared stiff of anything that is not their mirror image.
As for me, I love men, and I love the fact we are different. With men's abilities and women's, there is nothing we can't accomplish together.
@MerasmusT-Sixes | Aug 8, 2017 5:41:10 PM | 42"I don't particularly care about the memo or its asinine content. I'm responding to what people have said in these comments."
-- OK, so be a good girl and make yourself useful: you can start with the housework. Please explain how can you comment so vitriolically upon specific matters you admit that know almost nothing about?
"As for the memo itself, neither side comes out looking particularly good. The engineer's memo essentially boils down to "girlz [sic] r stoopid [sic], and need to get out of my workplace""
-- You are mistaken, as usual: the points are societal, biological and anthropological in their character and not AT ALL driven by chauvinism, which your bitter and ill-informed input, certainly, is.
"(he's [sic] not attempting to engage in debate, which some of his defenders have claimed, as in 'he's just asking questions and the PC police are too scared to engage him'), and Google's response was "you voiced an unacceptable opinion so we're going to fire you" (they aren't interested in debate either, but he wasn't offering one in the first place)."
-- Absolute nonsense, as usual: the guy's gripe seemed to be that there's no oxygen in which to engage with certain subject matter. There's a stultifying, stifling, suffocating, oppressive atmosphere perpetuated and sustained by people just like you, "Merasmus".
"It also has a lot of the inane 'both sides have good points, the best answer is in the middle' centrist faux wisdom I've come to expect from the type of idiot who makes up most of the Silicon Valley echo-chamber."
-- You mean, it's balanced and considered? Have you finally read it now, then?
"Ah yes, the right is 'pragmatic'. They're pragmatically destroying their economies by forever seeking tax cuts and the reduction of a national 'debt' they don't even understand the nature of. Spare me."
-- Are we drifting tediously away from the salient points, due to your total lack of knowledge or awareness of what you are talking about?
@karlof1 - so, to be clear, you are commenting on an article regarding a memo you haven't read? Do you not think it might be an advisable next step for you to take the time to read the memo, in order to better inform yourself, so that you don't keep jerking and hitting yourself in the head?T-Sixes | Aug 8, 2017 5:46:05 PM | 43If you would like to read the memo, let me help you: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdfTemporarily Sane | Aug 8, 2017 6:26:24 PM | 44
@TSP 1smuks | Aug 8, 2017 6:38:28 PM | 45I worked under a lady CEO. It was so refreshing compared to life under men. There was open dialogue, I felt I could voice ideas safely.I think all CEO's would be females. It's like their social approaches to inclusion is unilaterally better than (white) men.
Is that sexist?
Your experience says more about your boss as an individual and has little or nothing to do with her gender. The worst boss I have had was a woman and so was the best boss I have worked for.
The myth of the "kinder, gentler" female leader has been thoroughly debunked. Hillary Clinton and Margaret Thatcher were both women. Thinking woman are morally and ethically "purer" than men is ridiculous.
As for Google vs. the engineer...of course he was fired. Corporations are not democracies. They are top-down dictatorships.
Sorry, but you miss a or perhaps 'the' crucial point here.james | Aug 8, 2017 6:50:00 PM | 46So let's say that men & women are indeed different, and this also influences their job preferences, independently of societal influence. I have my doubts, but let's just assume it for now.
Now if an employer thinks that men and women have different qualifications and strengths, s/he might come to the conclusion that they complement each other. It would thus make perfect sense to build teams with a balanced gender mix, in order to optimize results for the company. Whether or not each individual employee is the best possible hire is secondary - it's overall performance that counts.
Actually the first commenter TSP pretty much confirms this thesis, albeit only anecdotally.
PS. had to laugh reading post #4, thanks!
@40 lea. thanks.. i see it much the same way as you..George Smiley | Aug 8, 2017 7:07:43 PM | 47@45 smuks... as i mentioned - hire people, regardless of sex, race, and etc - based off merit and qualifications.. skip with the politically correct bs.. yes, i agree with @1, however anecdotal is it and i got a laugh from @4 too!
as for a lack of engineers and etc in the west.. i always think back to the joke about their being 30 engineers for every 1 banker in japan, verses 30 banker types for 1 engineer in the usa.. it was something like that... i guess you could throw in real estate sales people instead of bankers if you want... it paints a picture that probably has a good degree of relevance to the changing fortunes of countries, or cultures that pursue a certain path, over other ones also available.
What awful discussion here. Says a lot that the most adult and mature commentators here are those that I find myself somewhat in disagreement with.Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 8, 2017 7:49:44 PM | 48Looking forward to your next piece though as always Bernard. Not that I don't like this either per se - but I'd be lying if I didn't say I find your non-geopolitical work to result in the silliest and most ideological of discussions and commentators. Though I still encourage you to keep doing what fufils you regardless.
...Curtis | Aug 8, 2017 8:26:23 PM | 49
Good god, masculinity is the most fragile thing in existence.
...
Posted by: Merasmus | Aug 8, 2017 3:21:12 PM | 16How dare you ponder male flaws in a debate about female flaws!?
I agree with his ultimate conclusion:Merasmus | Aug 8, 2017 8:42:28 PM | 50
Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.Forced equality is not the way to go. It winds up twisting society in bad ways. Is this the number one problem facing the US and American businesses? Isn't group think bad whether from the inside or the outside? Playing one group (sex, race, etc) off against the other does make a good distraction.
@T-SixesNemesisCalling | Aug 8, 2017 8:46:56 PM | 51I'm not a woman, you idiot. And I never said I hadn't read it, I said I wasn't addressing it, only responding to things said in these comments.
>various [sics]
Good job! It's almost like I was mocking the memo-maker as a grown up version of the kind of boy who puts 'No Girls Allowed' signs outside his treehouse. A kind of manchild, if you will.
"Absolute nonsense, as usual: the guy's gripe seemed to be that there's no oxygen in which to engage with certain subject matter. There's a stultifying, stifling, suffocating, oppressive atmosphere perpetuated and sustained by people just like you, "Merasmus"."
Riiiiiiiiiiight.
The part about centrism is in relation to the memo explicitly talking about Left and Right politics, and how each side supposedly has valid points. This is precisely the type of centrism that is a. destroying the US and the EU, and b. rapidly disintegrating, especially in America.
@Lea
One key difference would be that humans are (ostensibly) a higher lifeform that isn't driven entirely by instinct. So appealing to how things work in the wider natural world is something of a non-starter. Regardless, even if you were going to do that, there are creatures far more closely related to us than lions we could draw comparisons to. For some *strange* reason people appealing to nature never have much to say about the Bonobo...
"So, pretending that there are no differences between men and women, when all it takes is two minutes of observation of nature"
Literally no one is making this claim though. I have literally never met a feminist who claimed sexual dimorphism didn't exist in humans. What I seen is a whole lot of people who absolutely refuse to differentiate between sex and gender, however.
"Men and woman are complementary [...] With men's abilities and women's, there is nothing we can't accomplish together."
Nice sentiment. The problem is I have never met anyone who, while complaining about women in the workplace and talking about how there's some natural division of labor, then suggested anything like a 50/50 split. Or even 60/40, or 70/30. Instead, they do what Anti-Soros above does, and relegate women to breeding and housekeeping, making the divide more like 90/10 or 95/5 or some similar extremely lopsided value. They give to men by far the greater share of opportunity and freedom, and claim this is a natural and fair division, while telling the women they shouldn't even desire more, and should be content with a 'woman's unique happiness'.
@40 Leaben | Aug 8, 2017 9:08:59 PM | 52Nailed it. And I believe the purpose of b's foray into gender and/or lgbtq discrimination is that, currently, it is intrinsically tied to the empire's tactics of subversion and infiltration. It upsets me to no end that fomenting discord between the yin and the yangs of the world is the lockstep modus operandi of the bringers of chaos. "Linear" thinking a la "women can't do it" or "women must do it" are really just distractions, and they are important architectural designs of the true believers in the uniparty who are trying to crush the way to peace.
Any meddlesome actions taken by any entity, whether affirmative action or discrimination against men due to preferencing female hires, is sure to end in disaster anyway. Look at the US and tell me it is not a powder keg. Russia, in the wisdom of ages, saw the ngos in their country for what they were. Eliminating these meddlesome devices is best by nipping them in the bud.
The female always overcomes the male anyway by weakness and stillness. Water over rock. When women want to be rock (Hillary Clinton), you've got problems.
Lea @ 40: Very thoughtful and insightful comment, thanks..psychohistorian | Aug 8, 2017 9:15:31 PM | 53Unfortunately, most men can't get by the second strongest drive in human existence, the drive to pro-create, and it clouds our thinking. History gives credence to this theory.
I haven't seen the term patriarchy introduced to this discussion. I think patriarchy is a good term for the historical attitudes that assert innate/generic/gender related qualitative differences between female/male capabilities.x | Aug 8, 2017 9:15:51 PM | 54I posit that women are better at gestating children than men and any other comparison is mostly self serving conjecture because of woefully inadequate science.
And I agree with NemesisCalling that ".....it is intrinsically tied to the empire's tactics of subversion and infiltration. It upsets me to no end that fomenting discord between the yin and the yangs of the world is the lockstep modus operandi of the bringers of chaos. "Linear" thinking a la "women can't do it" or "women must do it" are really just distractions, and they are important architectural designs of the true believers in the uniparty who are trying to crush the way to peace."
@ Posted by: Lea | Aug 8, 2017 5:34:19 PM | 40Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 8, 2017 9:22:18 PM | 55A pleasently mature position expressed clearly.
...falcemartello | Aug 8, 2017 9:27:45 PM | 56
..."Dafranzl", is your comment not verging on real, like genuine, sexism in that you are expressing some kind of shock horror that women can actually pass a couple of tests and fly a plane?Posted by: T-Sixes | Aug 8, 2017 3:42:57 PM | 21
There was nothing ambiguous about what Dafranzl wrote. He expressed genuine respect and explained why he is NOT surprised by their success.
Oh the totalitarian times we are living.gepay | Aug 8, 2017 9:31:14 PM | 57I read the memo. Compare the tone of the memo to the misogyny and sexism of the miners in the movie North Country starring Charlize Theron - the racism of the segregated South of the 50s. There were a number of statements he definitely should have left out even if he thinks they are true. "Considering women spend more money than men and that salary represents how much the employees sacrifices (e.g. more hours, stress, and danger), we really need to rethink our stereotypes around power." or "Women are more prone to stress" (although I would agree with him if he had said - women who are mothers worry more than men) "Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs." He could have left out his poor analysis of left-right. It is true for me that suffocating and/or just silly political correctness is found more often on the left liberal side. Of many conservatives it can be said, "The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental." Robert Anton Wilson He did show a bias when discussing the differences between men and women. Maybe because I'm an older white man I didn't find them so much insulting as debatable.Grieved | Aug 8, 2017 9:39:28 PM | 58
There are many other statements that I found correct "men take undesirable and dangerous jobs like coal mining, garbage collection, and firefighting, and suffer 93% of work-related deaths." "Philosophically, I don't think we should do arbitrary social engineering of tech just to make it appealing to equal portions of both men and women." It certainly is true that many of the problems that diverse peoples or women have are equally true of many white men not in the upper crust. "This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed." (Have I found this to be true - revisionist Holocaust history for example)
I certainly think he shouldn't have been fired for bring up these issues. The differences between men and women as they relate to employment should be considered and studied. His firing, in fact, proves one of the points he was trying to make.Wow.fudmieer | Aug 8, 2017 10:28:34 PM | 59So this is what they call identity politics. And this is how it drives out issue-based discussion - in this case freedom of expression within the corporation.
Got it, thanks.
ps.. @ 37 somebody - thanks for that slice of real life.
observable biological diffs (karlof1); womanless females (AntiSoros). google perks (thegenius); thought blockouts (Ballai); neo-liberal agenda (james); non-discussible ideology (dh); a unique corporate category-classified androgine (Merasmus); blinder-enhanced directed-answer response (T-Sixes); amazing test results (Dafranzl); the (statistically) mature woman (Hohan Meyer); determinism (okie farmer); absolutes (ab initio); train more women (somebody); different but not inferior; even complimentary (Lea); top down dictators (Sane); flaws (Hoarsewhisperer); discriminatory (Curtis); rocking women are problems (NemesisCalling);Johan Meyer | Aug 8, 2017 10:48:34 PM | 60
please consider the following http://www.unz.com/jman/the-five-laws-of-behavioral-genetics/@59 I actually referred to that piece obliquely, by calling variation not correlated with genes, 'noise,' in particular his last point, from Emil Kierkegaard. Btw if the latter is reading, Mr Kierkegaard, in our last email exchange, in references to a paper by Debes, you interpreted his beta (-2.2) times his proxy (blood lead level's base 10 logarithm) naively, to wit that the logarithm of blood lead level predicts IQ. A simple problem, involving that same ODE---maternal leave, paid or not---expectant mothers' exposure to lead during the pregnancy, under the frequent poisoning regime (gasoline/petrol) will roughly stop upon taking maternal leave, and thus the (linear) dose during the pregnancy will be linearly related to the logarithm of the cord (birth) blood lead level. There is more to say, and I shall email a more detailed commentary shortly...Thirdeye | Aug 8, 2017 11:34:00 PM | 61@45Thirdeye | Aug 8, 2017 11:37:08 PM | 62The memo actually said something similar about using the complementary traits of men and women in teams. He mentioned how women's traits were good for the design of user interfaces and men's traits were good for the back end. What made Steve Jobs so distinctive wasn't that he was a great engineer or inventor (he wasn't). He thought about user experience like a woman. Apple was great on the "female" side of software engineering while Microsoft was great on the "male" side. Microsoft did, and still does, better on the back end but, as Jobs famously criticized them for about 25 years ago, their products lacked culture and taste.
Camille "if it were up to the women we would still be living in grass huts" Paglia would have a field day with this one.Thirdeye | Aug 8, 2017 11:53:56 PM | 63@25IQ is not biological determinism. Saying that it is strictly hereditary is. There is a strong correlation between IQ and ability to perform intellectual tasks, and with social performance up to about IQ 120. The correlation drops away above that because the extremely profound thinking at which higher IQ provides an advantage is less tied to social performance. I see no contradiction between saying IQ is a valid measure of cognitive ability and saying that it is culturally influenced. Some cultures do not foster the development of cognitive ability.
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2017 | discussion.theguardian.com
, 21 Aug 2016 02:16This is a good analysis. Given the author's not insignificant role in the surreptitious imposition of the cultural Marxism under which we all live today in which the expression of any ideas by those in public life which run counter to the cultural and economic consensus are greeted with loud indignation, feigned offence and derision, frequently leading to social ostracism, one wonders how the new ideas are to be even debated, let alone taken up., panchozecat GalahadThreepwood , 21 Aug 2016 03:07Pikkety (?) is a good example of original thinking, with whom I don't personally agree, but the way in which he has been derided in most MSM or, worse, completely ignored shows up shallowness of modern political and philosophical discourse.
I have no idea what you mean by 'cultural Marxism', it seems you're way off beam. We have lived through a period of hegemony dominated by neo liberal capitalism - as Martin describes so well. Share Facebook Twitter, zibibbo panchozecat , 21 Aug 2016 10:38'Cultural Marxism' is usually a euphemism for political correctness and identity politics which the right-wing commentariat see rooted in 1960s counter culture supposedly influenced by French and Frankfurt School marxian philosophy., Marscolonist , 21 Aug 2016 02:17Similarly Malcolm Turnbull, the ultimate symbol of the success of greed who promoted massive tax cuts to the corporations as an election strategy, was stunned by his rejection at the last election and by the rise of Pauline Hanson, an individual who represents an Australian version of Donald Trump.Meanwhile other neo-liberal reactionaries like the Premier of NSW, Mike Baird, continue to sell public assets such as the electricity supply, dismantle and dismiss democratically elected local councils, give business owners two votes in Sydney City council elections, tear down functional buildings such as the Power House Museum and the Entertainment center in order to hand the sites to property developers and approves coal mines on prime agricultural land and in areas of great natural beauty yet imagines that he will get away with what he is doing.
He may well discover that come the next election, even the ordinary members of his own party will desert him as the revolt against his destructive and arrogant mis-government catches up with him.
|
|
|
Jul 03, 2017 | www.unz.com
Among the sources of division are the various forms of identity politics that have swamped academia and popular culture, and which the alt-right sees as "inclusive" of everyone except white people many of whom are clearly "have nots." In this world, some, as George Orwell (1903 – 1950) predicted, are clearly more equal than others.
The Left, frustrated by Trump's rise and its inability to control the public conversation, has reached the point where violence is acceptable (Richard Spencer has been physically sucker-punched on video).
Its representatives in dominant media, including social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter, are doing everything they can to censor the alt-right, including making it difficult for its most visible leaders to function in public.
As I finish this essay, Spencer was verbally confronted by - who else? - a female academic while working out in a gym, minding his own business. She demanded - and got - his membership in the gym revoked!
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
libarbarian , April 17, 2017 at 9:05 amDH , April 17, 2017 at 9:57 amRE: "Fearless Girl"
A few seasons back, South Park pointed out how easy it was for corporations to co-opt social justice rhetoric. Since then, life has stubbornly insisted on supporting that thesis.
Ernesto Lyon , April 17, 2017 at 2:20 pmEvery now and then the un-system bites back as we just saw with the Pepsi ad, although they did get a ton of free press, similar to United. That approach worked for The Donald ..
Corporations love non-class based identity politics. They love arguing that the real problems in society are not about economic inequality but rather on identity based sensitivity. You can learn the fancy sensitivity codes at your uppity college and look down your nose at the poor whites who don't get the semiotic coaching. Business as Usual.
|
|
|
Jan 09, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
Fred C. Dobbs -> Fred C. Dobbs... January 08, 2017 at 09:20 AM Can the white working class lead?
http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2017/01/08/can-white-working-class-lead/oGc7aKbrJUfsuJdiH66AhI/story.html?event=event25
via @BostonGlobe - David M. Shribman - January 8Make room, African-Americans, Latinos, the LGBTQ community, feminists. And while we are at it, Catholics, Jews, evangelicals, too. There is a new identity group in American life. It's the white working class.
This is the group whose members were largely ignored by the mainstream media - at least until Donald Trump's campaign drew attention to them - and left behind by the new media. It is the group that was mobilized by Franklin Roosevelt but felt unmoved by Hillary Clinton.
"This crisis of white working people has been going on for some time, but we are just noticing it,'' said Robert D. Putnam, the Harvard scholar from industrial Port Clinton, Ohio, who has written widely on this group. "The Mon Valley around Pittsburgh didn't just suddenly run into economic problems. The jobs left Rust Belt Ohio a long time ago. The white working-class people who voted for Trump did so not because of the issues, or because they thought he'd bring back the auto parts factory in my hometown. The people living in a place that has been hopeless for 20 years were just angry at the world, and their vote was an upturned middle finger.''
With Trump's inauguration fast approaching, the surge is on: to define this newly prominent group, to explain their viewpoints, to win their allegiance - everything, perhaps, but to address their grievances. The big question of the dawning Trump era is this: Can Trump, or anyone else, turn an upturned middle finger into a program for governing?
When ethnic minorities and many other identity groups entered the political mainstream, their agenda was self-evident: protections against discrimination, the ability to serve in positions of political power, the ability to pursue the American dream. The white working class, in contrast, is unorganized, increasingly suspicious of government programs, and accustomed to seeing itself as Middle America - not as a special interest.
Meanwhile, the policies that seem to be emerging out of the Trump transition lean more toward traditional conservatism than populism. This is unfolding as an administration that would be favored more by the acolytes of William F. Buckley than by the fans of Willie Nelson.
In theory, November's revolt of the white working class will usher in what could be a momentous transition, the most startling political example of "Changing Places"' since the New Deal social engineers replaced the free-market mandarins of engineer-president Herbert Hoover, in 1933. Big switches, to be sure, are a familiar aspect of American politics - the substitution of George W. Bush's movement conservatives for Bill Clinton's boomer liberals, for example. But in tone and timbre, the transition of 2017 is of a different order entirely - in part because, as Sarah Purcell, a Grinnell College historian, put it, "the result was so unexpected, the divisions are so pronounced, and the passions are so great."
Besides the Washington transition, there is the transition in the profile of the two major parties and the transition between those who found succor and success in the Barack Obama years and those who found insult and indignity in it. "The people who were despondent about the Obama administration were lurking in the background, and now they are front and center,'' said Steffan W. Schmidt, an Iowa State political scientist. "And the people who supported the Obama administration are upset and frightened and worried about retribution.''
Indeed, the Great Switch of 2017 involves those who feel their voices will now be heard and those who worry theirs no longer will be heard.
"Black and brown people feel right now that the forces who opposed our rights of full citizenship are coming into power,'' said Elaine Jones, former president and director-counsel of the NAACP's Legal Defense Fund. "We now see that the people who fought us will be in office."
The Obama administration, to be sure, resembled the Obama electoral coalition - eggheads, upscale professionals, and environmentalists, as well as the representatives of a multicultural America. Trump's new administration looks less like his working-class voters than like Dwight Eisenhower's Cabinet, which was once described as "nine millionaires and a plumber.'' Except there's not even a plumber in the Trump inner circle. And the profile of his Cabinet leans more toward billionaires than millionaires.
Especially if the Trump administration ends up pursuing a corporate-friendly economic policy, working-class Americans' anxieties aren't going away. Half of working-class whites, according to a CNN poll, expect their children's lives will be worse than their own. Two-thirds of the white working class, according to separate CNN polls, believe hard work will no longer get people ahead in the United States.
"This part of America is not participating in the economy the way they once did,'' said John Dick, the new-generation pollster who is the CEO of CivicScience, a consumer and market intelligence company in Pittsburgh. "Now they have a voice - but that voice speaks in the simplest possible narrative about their difficulties."
The challenge for politicians courting these voters is to identify a policy agenda built on something more than nostalgia - or explicit appeals to racial identity. Half of the Trump voters among a group of white working-class Americans surveyed by CNN think that the increasing diversity of the United States threatens the country's culture. The GOP nominee explicitly bemoaned the country's changing demographics and shifting cultural norms.
His victory raises an uncomfortable question: Is there a less racially charged way of appealing to a group whose members used to feel a sense of power but now see they're losing ground? Richard L. Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, believes that it is possible - and necessary. "Working people in general are looking for someone to address their issues - issues they discuss every day around the kitchen table: jobs, security, and health care,'' he said in a year-end interview. "Anyone who comes out with that is going to get support from working people." Of course, Hillary Clinton made just such an economic pitch but came up fatefully short in once-reliable Democratic counties.
The political shift that white working-class voters have now triggered could prove wrenching. "This powerful reversal, where one group is now down and another is up, is a lot like the 1930s,'' says David Greenberg, a Rutgers historian. "Then you saw polarization not just between a liberal party and a conservative party but also between different conceptions of what government is for.''
Fred C. Dobbs said in reply to Fred C. Dobbs... , January 08, 2017 at 08:03 AM
The Rust Belt needs a bailout.Peter K. -> Fred C. Dobbs... , January 08, 2017 at 08:06 AM
A big one http://bv.ms/2fZvKEO
via @Bloomberg - Conor Sen - December 2Trade and immigration restrictions won't bring back the Rust Belt. What might? Consider the transformation of the Sun Belt.
The South used to be the nation's Rust Belt. The devastation of the Civil War rightly gets the headlines, but the devastation didn't end when Sherman marched out of Atlanta. Industrial agriculture had the same impact on the Southern economy that automation and outsourcing have had on the manufacturing economy of the Midwest. In the late 19th century, much of the South consisted of an increasingly uncompetitive agricultural economy and woefully inadequate infrastructure. Those who could leave for other parts of the country, like factory jobs in what we now call the Rust Belt, did.
The South used to be the nation's Rust Belt. The devastation of the Civil War rightly gets the headlines, but the devastation didn't end when Sherman marched out of Atlanta. Industrial agriculture had the same impact on the Southern economy that automation and outsourcing have had on the manufacturing economy of the Midwest. In the late 19th century, much of the South consisted of an increasingly uncompetitive agricultural economy and woefully inadequate infrastructure. Those who could leave for other parts of the country, like factory jobs in what we now call the Rust Belt, did.
Many parts of the South continue to struggle to this day, but those that are thriving embraced two things -- infrastructure and recruitment. Much of the infrastructure was courtesy of the federal government -- programs like the Tennessee Valley Authority during the Great Depression, military bases during World War II and interstate highways later on. But the recruitment was an attitude the New South adopted on its own. By seeking out talent and businesses from the rest of the country and the world, the major metro areas of today's South generated some of the strongest economic growth and most promising labor trends in the country.
The Rust Belt has two main challenges to address -- poor demographics and legacy obligations in the form of pension costs and physical infrastructure that needs maintaining. The demographic component is the part it most needs to solve on its own.
One type of institution has figured this out: the region's universities. Last week, in college football, the University of Michigan played Ohio State University in their annual rivalry game. But in some ways it wasn't a clash between Rust Belt foes. Michigan's coach, Jim Harbaugh, was hired from the West Coast. Ohio State's coach, Urban Meyer, was hired from Florida. Both teams have rosters full of increasing numbers of players from regions other than the Midwest. The reason is simple. Youth populations are shrinking in the Midwest, and increasingly the best high school football players are in other parts of the country like the South and the West that still have growing populations. Both universities hired coaches from elsewhere, and both coaches are using the prestige of their universities to recruit the best players in the country, no matter where they're from.
This recruitment isn't just happening on the football field. To address enrollment shortfalls due to dwindling numbers of home-grown students, Midwest universities are recruiting students from all over the world. Two of the eight universities in the U.S. with more than 10,000 international students are in the Midwest -- Purdue University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
As a recruitment pitch, the Midwest needs to figure out its message and sell it to the world. As Midwest urbanist and blogger Pete Saunders noted in a tweetstorm this week, the resurgence of coastal cities began with assets that the cities had all along. Wall Street and media for New York, higher educational institutions for Boston, the federal government for Washington, a unique topography and culture in San Francisco. Similarly, the Midwest has great educational and medical institutions, an incredibly affordable lifestyle that becomes more compelling as housing costs rise on the coasts and in the Sun Belt, plentiful water that could become a competitive advantage because of climate change, and a sense of "rootedness" that many find compelling.
The most influential policy change the federal government could employ to "save" the Midwest is one that would have been unthinkable when Congressional Republicans were battling President Obama -- a huge bailout of the Rust Belt's legacy obligations. Pension costs are eating a higher and higher share of tax revenue in cities like Chicago and states like Illinois. That leaves municipalities less money to spend on ongoing operations and maintenance, let alone infrastructure improvements. Eroding public services not only keep people from moving to the area, but also encourage young people to leave for places with better public services. If President-Elect Donald Trump could persuade Congress to bail out the region, that could the fiscal slate clean and give the Midwest the breathing room to invest in its future.
It took a Nixon to go to China, perhaps it takes a Trump to save the Rust Belt.
"It took a Nixon to go to China, perhaps it takes a Trump to save the Rust Belt."pgl -> Fred C. Dobbs... , January 08, 2017 at 10:25 AMUnlikely.
Tim Duy:
http://economistsview.typepad.com/timduy/2016/12/responsibility.html
Jared Bernstein:
http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/yes-the-rust-belt-demands-an-answer-but-does-anyone-know-what-it-is/
Noah Smith:
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-12-16/four-ways-to-help-the-midwest
DeLong:
But we are not at full employment right now. So build, build, build. If you are worried about too much stimulus, then tax those Uppity East Siders.B.T. -> pgl... , January 08, 2017 at 11:14 AMLol, just lol at anyone who thinks Krugman would be against fiscal expansion with a Hillary presidency.Fred C. Dobbs said in reply to pgl... , January 08, 2017 at 11:32 AMIronic that Bernie would have been the guy to give us a proper fiscal stimulus.
We are probably reasonably closepgl -> Fred C. Dobbs... , January 08, 2017 at 11:51 AM
to full employment except for those
'still displaced' by the Great Recession.Reasonable people can disagree. Then again - my views on these issues have dovetailed DeLong's for over a decade. In fact he gave me credit for the "Natural Rate of the Employment to Population Ratio" back in 2005. I should have patented the concept.Fred C. Dobbs : , January 08, 2017 at 07:12 AMTrump's Infrastructure Plan Is a Full-on Privatization AssaultPeter K. -> Fred C. Dobbs... , January 08, 2017 at 07:22 AM
https://www.thenation.com/article/trumps-infrastructure-plan-is-a-full-on-privatization-assault/
via @thenation - Michelle Chen - December 2, 2016Donald Trump barreled into the White House with a "terrific" plan for infrastructure, and Washington is abuzz with a seemingly "bipartisan" job-creation initiative. Though the GOP-dominated Congress has for years thwarted similar infrastructure-based stimulus proposals, fiscal conservatives in Washington and market profiteers nationwide are now fully confident in Trump's vision for shovel-ready business partnerships.
After all, the one competency Trump has demonstrated so far seems to be making money off of building stuff, from casinos and golf courses to his promised Mexican border wall.
But the public project of fixing America's crumbling bridges and highways is a different animal than Trump's private real-estate empire of gleaming glass towers, at least for now.
Trump wants private investors to basically direct $1 trillion in infrastructure projects nationwide through a "revenue neutral" financing plan, which banks on financing from private investors, allegedly to control deficit spending (which the GOP generally deems wasteful, while promoting tax breaks as a wiser redistribution of public funds into corporate coffers). To draw some $167 billion to jumpstart the $1 trillion, 10-year infrastructure plan, Washington would grant a giant tax break "equal to 82 percent of the equity amount." The goal isn't fixing bridges so much as fixing the corporate tax codes to promote privatization and unregulated construction with virtually no public input. Moreover, whereas effective stimulus plans aim to fill infrastructure gaps that big business has ignored, Mike Konzcal observes in The Washington Post, that the developers Trump is courting would follow the money and "back profitable construction projects. These projects (such as electrical grid modernization or energy pipeline expansion) might already be planned or even underway."
Dave Dayen calls the program a "privatization fire sale" that ensured that private, not common, interests determine where funding is focused.
Trump is further sweetening the pot by promising drastic deregulation that would "provide maximum flexibility to the states" and "streamline permitting and approvals."
Activists now fear that Trump's job plan will yield relatively substandard jobs by mowing down longstanding regulatory protections, including environmental review process (a critical tool activists use to challenge developments that involve public-health threats) and prevailing wage regulations. While private business partnerships on federal construction projects are routine, Trump's camp is distinctly poised to launder corporate money through federal coffers at workers' and taxpayers' expense.
The details of Trump's infrastructure vision are fairly sparse, summarized in a cheerleading 10-page pre-election analysis. But the author byline is telling: right-wing business professor Peter Navarro and private equity mogul Wilbur Ross (Trump's pick for commerce secretary, with historic links to the Sago mine accident scandal). And Trump's own investment track record speaks volumes: The president-elect is facing allegations of major wage violations involving his latest project site, which is sited on federal property, an antique Post Office to be transformed, in Trump's words, into "truly one of the great hotels of the world."
It hasn't been so great for the non-union subcontracted construction workers who have complained of getting paid below the wage standard that should apply under the federal Davis Bacon Act. Vice President–elect Mike Pence, meanwhile, has actively pushed to repeal his state's similar prevailing wage laws for publicly contracted workers.
Trump may have previewed his approach to publicly funded construction with his glamorous Bronx golf course on a 192-acre landfill site, using public money to reclaim a wasteland for the benefit of wealthy golfers, charging the highest fees of any other city golf grounds. Not only did it colonize a tract of a borough starved for community recreational spaces and affordable housing, it also produced a mere 100 local jobs and, according to community advocates, little additional economic activity in the surrounding neighborhood.
Trump's real-estate portfolio embodies the long-term danger that watchdog groups see in so-called "public-private partnerships" for infrastructure development.
In the Public Interest (ITPI) observed in a recent report on abuses of private contractors:
To maximize profit, companies have often cut corners by reducing the quality and accessibility of services, reducing staffing levels, lowering worker wages, and sidestepping protections for the public and the environment.
The stakes are higher now than ever. Get The Nation in your inbox.
"[T]he bottom line is that they will strip away standards, provide hefty subsidies and guaranteed profits and hand over control over large scale projects for decades," according to ITPI executive director Donald Cohen.
The overarching drive to privatize resources and services, meanwhile, might not only fail to solve infrastructure problems but might also disrupt the structure of democracy; the process of, for example, privatizing a highway or contracting out a public utility, in the long-term, effectively outsources governance. "With control comes hidden information," Cohen adds. Institutionalizing opacity in government-funded ventures could give corporations free reign to decide unilaterally on electricity rates or easements on tribal lands.
There is no doubt that infrastructure investment is still crucial. However, a more progressive approach would aim to bring more social equity into the private sector, not more profit motives into government budgets.
An alternative, progressive infrastructure proposal, penned by Senator Bernie Sanders, would operate on a similar scale as Trump's, with $1 trillion over five years. But instead of handing a blank check to contractors, the budget would prioritize the critical infrastructure needs identified by engineering authorities, and support stimulus through workers' wages rather than corporate financing.
Such a plan could also be used to direct investment toward green energy development, expanding public Wi-Fi networks, or increasing wage standards. While legislation to mandate these types of projects and standards was continually stonewalled in the GOP-controlled congress, Obama did manage, through a series of precedent-setting executive actions, to raise the minimum wage for subcontracted federal workers, expand anti-discrimination protections, and to penalize subcontractors who have failed to comply with regulations. Those initiatives may disappear as the new administration takes over in January. Given that Trump has previously blown off crucial policy priorities like the Paris Climate Change Treaty, there's no reason why his infrastructure plan should reflect pro-worker interests.
If Trump is serious about rebuilding the country, his infrastructure program will both expose his underlying kleptocratic motives and offer community and labor organizations an opportunity to hold his administration accountable for spending responsibly.
Trump has big plans to make taxpayers and workers pay for his big gamble; the public has a lot on the line, but also a chance to reclaim the public trust.
"An alternative, progressive infrastructure proposal, penned by Senator Bernie Sanders, would operate on a similar scale as Trump's, with $1 trillion over five years. But instead of handing a blank check to contractors, the budget would prioritize the critical infrastructure needs identified by engineering authorities, and support stimulus through workers' wages rather than corporate financing."Peter K. -> Fred C. Dobbs... , January 08, 2017 at 07:26 AM
If Michelle Chen is right and this is Trump's final plan, then the Democrats shouldn't support any of it.EMichael : , January 08, 2017 at 07:19 AMWill Trump need 60 Senate votes to get it through?
And the deplorables will do their best to make sure this is the last time.Peter K. : , January 08, 2017 at 07:20 AM"f you're in the area of 500 5th St in DC at 11:00AM on January 11, you might want to stop. You could see something you may never see again
Valuing Climate Damages:
Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon Dioxide (Phase 2 report)This new report from the Board on Environmental Change and Society of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine examines potential approaches for a comprehensive update to the current methodology for estimating the social cost of carbon dioxide (SC-CO2) for U.S. regulatory analysis. The SC-CO2 is an estimate, in dollars, of the net damages incurred by society from a 1 metric ton increase in carbon dioxide emissions in a given year. As required by executive orders and a court ruling, government agencies use the SC-CO2 when analyzing the impacts of various regulations.
The report also recommends near- and longer-term research priorities. The study was requested by the Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, which is co-chaired by the Council of Economic Advisors and the Office of Management and Budget."
Bernstein on the Republican's DBCFT.pgl -> Peter K.... , January 08, 2017 at 10:28 AMhttp://jaredbernsteinblog.com/a-few-more-comments-on-the-republicans-corporate-tax-plan/
A few more comments on the Republicans' Corporate Tax Plan
by Jared BernsteinJanuary 3rd, 2017 at 11:18 am
I didn't want to jam too much into my piece last week on the interesting Border Adjustment Tax-come on peeps, you know that BAT is a much better acronym than DBCFT (destination-based-cash-flow tax)-that House R's want to use to replace the current corporate tax. Like I said, it's a complicated bit of work about which we know little, particularly regarding its impact on consumer prices (and thus, its distributional impact) and on exchange rates.
That said, it's hard to imagine a scenario in which a tax that clearly favors net exports would not lead to some degree of dollar appreciation. Ed Kleinbard, a guy who thinks deeply about such things, makes the intuitive point that a multi-trillion-dollar side effect of the dollar appreciation is a transfer of wealth from US investors with foreign holdings to foreign investors holding US assets. He explains here using Freedonia to symbolize not-the-US:
It also follows from this that the transition to a destination based profits tax, and with it the appreciation in the U.S. dollar, will work a one-time very large wealth transfer from U.S. investors to foreign investors. Foreign investments held by U.S. investors overnight will be worth less in dollar terms, and U.S. investments held by Freedonian investors overnight will be worth more in Freedonian pfennig terms. Carroll and Viard have estimated that at the end of 2010 the wealth transfer attributable to the introduction of border adjustments without any transition relief would have amounted to a $7.88 trillion loss to American investors and an $8.85 trillion pickup in wealth for foreign investors. As of the time of this writing, I am reasonably confident that policymakers have not weighed the implications of this.
Those are many more trillions than I would have guessed, but note that the analysts Ed's citing are strong proponents of the tax, so I don't think their thumb would be on the scale.
I'm not saying this is or should be a deal killer-any transition to a better corporate tax system will create winners and losers. But I share Ed's "reasonable confidence" that policy makers haven't thought much about this, and you can add US investors holding foreign assets to the retailers and other producers that depend on imported inputs to the list of those who will fight hard against the BAT.
One more point on this dollar appreciation business. I enjoyed this useful oped in today's NYT about how Trump will probably have to go through Congress if he wants to increase tariffs (I've seen some counter-arguments, but the NYT piece made more sense to me). But this part seemed off (my italics):
A border adjustment tax is a far better option than tariffs. It would eliminate incentives in the current tax system to manufacture abroad, and to shift income abroad. Unlike a tariff, it aims to be trade neutral, with any changes in consumer pricing of imports and exports being offset by a rise in the dollar. And with strong support in the House, it could be enacted in full compliance with the Origination Clause, lending it legitimacy that a unilateral tariff would lack.
If the dollar fully adjusts, then the trade balance, which is measured in dollars, not quantities, is unaffected. Tariffs, of course, are designed to improve the trade balance. I'm not sure they would, and, in fact, I suspect our trading partners would retaliate against either tariffs or a tax scheme that subsidized exports, so the impact on the trade balance of either of these interventions is not clear. But a selling point by BAT proponents is that the balance of trade would be unaffected, which is a very different selling point than the one offered by proponents of tariffs.
AS much as I appreciate what Jared is saying, he is pulling his punches. I have hinted at why I hate the transfer pricing angles but I too have pulled my punches. Working on something (after I clear this snow) for Econospeak that goes after what Auerbach ducks. Think Disney as I shovel.pgl -> pgl... , January 08, 2017 at 11:51 AMhttp://econospeak.blogspot.com/2017/01/disneys-transfer-pricing-and_8.htmlPeter K. : , January 08, 2017 at 07:40 AMhttp://magic-maths-money.blogspot.com/2017/01/some-implications-of-bank-of-england.htmlPeter K. : , January 08, 2017 at 08:03 AMInteresting, thought-provoking post from Tim Johnson in today's links. There's a video with the Bank of England's chief economist Andy Haldane who also discusses Brexit.
http://www.bradford-delong.com/2017/01/pseudoerasmus-_the-bairoch-conjecture-on-tariffs-growth-pseudoerasmus_-the-bairoch-conjecture-on-tariffs.html#morePeter K. -> Peter K.... , January 08, 2017 at 08:15 AMDeLong, January 8, 2017
Should-Read: Manufacturing-centric industrial policy works (or worked) best when the hegemon of the world economy plays the role of the Importer of Last Resort. And only worked when there was a highly competent government--which raises the possibility that pretty much any other non-nonsensical development strategy would have worked as well...
Pseudoerasmus: The Bairoch Conjecture on Tariffs and Growth:* "There is a vast empirical literature which finds a positive correlation between economic growth and various measures of openness to international trade in the post-1945 period...
...This huge body of research does have a few very compelling critics, the most prominent being Rodríguez & Rodrik (2000). That widely cited paper argues - amongst many other things - that there is no necessary relationship between trade and growth, either way. It depends on the global context as well as domestic economic conditions. I think that's correct. There is also a smaller literature on 19th century trade and growth associated with the historian Paul Bairoch. He argued informally that European countries with higher tariffs grew faster in the late 19th century. This rough eyeball correlation was confirmed econometrically by O'Rourke (2000)... [and] Clemens & Williamson (2001, 2004), but was disputed by Irwin (2002).... Lehmann & O'Rourke (2008, 2011) then countered by disaggregating tariffs of those 10 rich countries into revenue, agricultural, and industrial components, reporting that duties specifically protecting the manufacturing sector were indeed correlated with growth....
The positive growth-tariff relationship for the rich countries is large; much smaller for the non-European periphery, and negative for the European periphery (e.g., Spain, Russia, etc.) So obviously even with the same global conditions there's a lot of heterogeneity. According to Clemens & Williamson (2001, 2004) the reason there was an overall positive correlation in the 19th century, is that most countries with high tariffs exported to countries with lower tariffs. In other words, Great Britain et al. acted as free-trade sinks (my phrase, not theirs) for exporting countries such as post-Bismarckian Germany which protected their steel and other industries.... Jacks (2006) - using the Frankel-Romer gravity model approach - both replicates O'Rourke (2000) and supports the free-trade-sink view of Clemens & Williamson (2001, 2004).... Tena-Junguito (2010) focuses on industrial tariffs and supports the other aspect of the Clemens & Williamson finding: the tariff-growth correlation applies only to the "rich country club"...
It would be interesting to look at how possibly hegemonic Great Britain (or Cold War America) acted as a free-trade sink/Importer of Last Resort in order to further its aims of diplomacy and empire.anne -> Peter K.... , January 08, 2017 at 11:13 AMAh, I had not come on this essay and following comment here.anne -> anne... , January 08, 2017 at 11:48 AMManufacturing-centric industrial policy works (or worked) best when the hegemon of the world economy plays the role of the Importer of Last Resort. And only worked when there was a highly competent government--which raises the possibility that pretty much any other non-nonsensical development strategy would have worked as well...RC AKA Darryl, Ron : , January 08, 2017 at 08:23 AM-- Brad DeLong
[ This passage unfortunately makes no sense. ]
EMichael : , -1
The Republican Party in 2018: I'm from the current administration of the US government and I am here to take away your health insurance. And oh by the way, vote for us."The election of 2016 may well have been stolen-or to use Donald Trump's oft-repeated phrase-"rigged," and nobody in the media seems willing to discuss it.The rigging was a pretty simple process, in fact: in 27 Republican-controlled states (including critical swing states) hundreds of thousands (possibly millions) of people showed up to vote, but were mysteriously blocked from voting for allegedly being registered with the intent to vote in multiple states.
Greg Palast, an award-winning investigative journalist, writes a stinging piece in the highly respected Rolling Stone magazine (August 2016 edition), predicting that the November 8, 2016 presidential election had already been decided: "The GOP's Stealth War Against Voters." He also wrote and produced a brilliant documentary on this exact subject that was released well before the election, titled The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.
He said a program called the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck had been quietly put together in Kansas and was being used by Republican secretaries of state in 27 states to suppress and purge African American, Asian and Hispanic votes in what would almost certainly be the swing states of the 2016 election.
Crosscheck was started by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach back in 2007 under the guise of combating so-called voter fraud. In the ultimate thumb in the eye to the American voter, the state where Crosscheck started was the only state to refuse to participate in a New York Times review of voter fraud in the 2016 election, which found that, basically, there wasn't any fraud at the level of individual voters. Turns out, according to Palast, that a total of 7 million voters-including up to 344,000 in Pennsylvania, 589,000 in North Carolina and up to 449,000 in Michigan (based on available Crosscheck data from 2014)-may have been denied the right to have their votes counted under this little known but enormously potent Crosscheck program."
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-gops-stealth-war-against-voters-w435890
|
|
|
Jan 09, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
EMichael : , January 08, 2017 at 09:18 AM"The other day on Twitter, a man posted a picture of my coloring book he'd given his daughter for Christmas. He was excited to give her a coloring book full of badass intersectional feminists. He wanted to thank me for creating it.RC AKA Darryl, Ron -> EMichael... , January 08, 2017 at 09:38 AM"I don't know," chimed in a random stranger (because Twitter), "Sounds like identity politics to me."
Hell yeah it does.
"Identity Politics" is now thrown about as an insult at many progressive activists. Critics say that Identity Politics make everything about gender, everything about sexuality, and everything about race. And to this I say: yes, yes, and hell yes.
Call it what you want. I don't care. Complain that we're making shit about race - you know what? We are. Complain that we're keeping the left from focusing only on class - yup, and proudly so. Complain all you want because I am not and will never be ashamed of focusing on the politics of identity. I will not feel a moment's guilt for slowing this whole train down to make sure that everyone can get on and we're on the right track. I will proudly own up to making shit hard for you.
... ... ...
http://www.alternet.org/i-will-never-apologize-my-identity-politics
Apologies are highly over-rated. People apologize and then go right back to doing the same shit all over again. Late in his brief life Martin Luther King refocused his civil rights movement into the Poor People's Campaign and union activism because he wanted to win and new that social division could keep him for winning. King did not suddenly turn towards advocating for only white dudes. King got smart, so smart he became dangerous enough that a white dude killed him.EMichael -> RC AKA Darryl, Ron... , January 08, 2017 at 10:21 AMMost of the beneficiaries of King's Poor People's Campaign and his union activism would be black people, but it would go further faster with less resistance from his natural allies, poor white people maybe - but fair and decent white people more so, by being more inclusive rather than inviting white backlash. Martin Luther King wanted to fulfill his dream for his people. It is a lot easier to be just a self-absorbed and self-righteous loser than it is to be a winner. The identity politics campaign that survived after Martin Luther King was murdered has done a great job of winning, for Republicans.
RC AKA Darryl, Ron -> EMichael... , January 08, 2017 at 10:54 AM"The identity politics campaign that survived after Martin Luther King was murdered has done a great job of winning, for Republicans."This is of course, correct. But I do not think it means what you think it means.
The GOP has done a great job of convincing white racists that the Dems have destroyed, or are destroying, their lives. They have used identity politics for over 50 years. Now it is time(past time) to turn that around and give them their own medicine.
In terms of King, he already had "fair and decent white people" with him, and the Dems do also. Can't alienate, or worry about alienating, white racists. That white backlash has given the GOP the majority of their votes the last 50 years. That number is not going to get better regardless of Dem policy.
From your background working with lower income people I would think that you would not paint it all so black and white as you do. There is a lot of gray area between racists and secular humanists of activist conscience including a lot of church people and blue collar whites. A lot of these are disaffected voters, nothing in it for them to vote. These were the people that King wanted to include. If King's movement were just for black people then what reason would they have to vote for liberals supporting his cause, that of blacks rather than lower income working people?RGC -> RC AKA Darryl, Ron... , January 08, 2017 at 10:53 AMThe AtlanticRC AKA Darryl, Ron -> RGC... , January 08, 2017 at 10:55 AMMartin Luther King's Economic Dream: A Guaranteed Income for All Americans
Jordan Weissmann Aug 28, 2013
One of the more under-appreciated aspects of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s legacy is that by the end of his career, he had fashioned himself into a crusader against poverty, not just among blacks, but all Americans.
In the weeks leading to his assassination, the civil rights leader had been hard at work organizing a new march on Washington known as the "Poor People's Campaign." The goal was to erect a tent city on the National Mall, that, as Mark Engler described it for The Nation in 2010, would "dramatize the reality of joblessness and deprivation by bringing those excluded from the economy to the doorstep of the nation's leaders." He was killed before he could see the effort through.
So what, exactly, was King's economic dream? In short, he wanted the government to eradicate poverty by providing every American a guaranteed, middle-class income-an idea that, while light-years beyond the realm of mainstream political conversation today, had actually come into vogue by the late 1960s.
To be crystal clear, a guaranteed income-or a universal basic income, as it's sometimes called today-is not the same as a higher minimum wage. Instead, it's a policy designed to make sure each American has a certain concrete sum of money to spend each year. One modern version of the policy would give every adult a tax credit that would essentially become a cash payment for families that don't pay much tax. Conservative thinker Charles Murray has advocated replacing the whole welfare state by handing every grown American a full $10,000.
King had an even more expansive vision. He laid out the case for the guaranteed income in his final book, 1967's Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community? Washington's previous efforts to fight poverty, he concluded, had been "piecemeal and pygmy." The government believed it could lift up the poor by attacking the root causes of their impoverishment one by one-by providing better housing, better education, and better support for families. But these efforts had been too small and too disorganized. Moreover, he wrote, "the programs of the past all have another common failing-they are indirect. Each seeks to solve poverty by first solving something else."
It was time, he believed, for a more straightforward approach: the government needed to make sure every American had a reasonable income.
In part, King's thinking seemed to stem from a sense that no matter how strongly the economy might grow, it would never eliminate poverty entirely, or provide jobs for all. As he put it:"We have come a long way in our understanding of human motivation and of the blind operation of our economic system. Now we realize that dislocations in the market operation of our economy and the prevalence of discrimination thrust people into idleness and bind them in constant or frequent unemployment against their will. The poor are less often dismissed from our conscience today by being branded as inferior and incompetent. We also know that no matter how dynamically the economy develops and expands it does not eliminate all poverty.
[...]
The problem indicates that our emphasis must be two-fold. We must create full employment or we must create incomes. People must be made consumers by one method or the other. Once they are placed in this position, we need to be concerned that the potential of the individual is not wasted. New forms of work that enhance the social good will have to be devised for those for whom traditional jobs are not available."Note, King did not appear to be arguing that Washington should simply pay people not to work. Rather, he seemed to believe it was the government's responsibility to create jobs for those left behind by the economy (from his language here, it's not hard to imagine he might even have supported a work requirement, in some circumstances), but above all else, to ensure a basic standard of living.
More than basic, actually. King argued that the guaranteed income should be "pegged to the median of society," and rise automatically along with the U.S. standard of living. "To guarantee an income at the floor would simply perpetuate welfare standards and freeze into the society poverty conditions," he wrote. Was it feasible? Maybe. He noted an estimate by John Kenneth Galbraith that the government could create a generous guaranteed income with $20 billion, which, as the economist put it, was "not much more than we will spend the next fiscal year to rescue freedom and democracy and religious liberty as these are defined by 'experts' in Vietnam."
As practical economics, ensuring every single American a middle class living through government redistribution and work programs seems a bit fanciful. The closest such an idea ever really came to fruition, meanwhile, was President Nixon's proposed Family Assistance Plan, which would have ended welfare and instead guaranteed families of four $1,600 a year, at a time when the median household income was about $7,400.
But as a statement of values, King's notion remains powerful. So with that in mind, I'll leave you with man's own words:
"The contemporary tendency in our society is to base our distribution on scarcity, which has vanished, and to compress our abundance into the overfed mouths of the middle and upper classes until they gag with superfluity. If democracy is to have breadth of meaning, it is necessary to adjust this inequity. It is not only moral, but it is also intelligent. We are wasting and degrading human life by clinging to archaic thinking.
The curse of poverty has no justification in our age. It is socially as cruel and blind as the practice of cannibalism at the dawn of civilization, when men ate each other because they had not yet learned to take food from the soil or to consume the abundant animal life around them. The time has come for us to civilize ourselves by the total, direct and immediate abolition of poverty."
THANK you sir. You are a gentleman and a scholar.Peter K. -> RC AKA Darryl, Ron... , January 08, 2017 at 10:55 AMGood point about MLK and support for the Memphis Santiation workers strike.RC AKA Darryl, Ron -> Peter K.... , January 08, 2017 at 10:57 AMI agree with your take. You can alieniate people on the fence. You can ween sons and daughters from the racism of their parents, if you have an economy with shared prosperity and opportunity like in the 1950s and 1960s. Their parents' scapegoating will fall on deaf ears if they have good jobs and lives. Stupid racist grandparent.
What have been possible to elect a black president back then before decades of economic progress? No.
Economic stagnation is fertile ground for scapegoating and xenophobia.
Yep. More than alienation, King needed inclusion to gain effective political solidarity. We don't have that much of a democracy, but minority rule only works here for the rich.Peter K. -> RC AKA Darryl, Ron... , January 08, 2017 at 11:08 AMIn the recent HBO series on LBJ and his passage of the Civil Rights legislation, the screenwriters had the unions - specifically the autoworkers - funding MLK's civil rights campaign.Peter K. -> RC AKA Darryl, Ron... , January 08, 2017 at 11:41 AMMLK was unhappy with LBJ's compromises on the first act in 1964, but then Walter Reuther told him to back off and wait for LBJ to get the rest of what they wanted the second time around, which LBJ did to some degree in 1965. MLK listened in part b/c the unions were funding his campaign.
According to the screenwriters. I don't know how true it is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965
"In Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the coverage formula as unconstitutional, reasoning that it was no longer responsive to current conditions.[11] The Court did not strike down Section 5, but without a coverage formula, Section 5 is unenforceable.[12]"
(the labels are shorthand)ilsm -> EMichael... , January 08, 2017 at 09:41 AMThe progressive neoliberals suggest that it's not worth to try to appeal to the white working class or to try to change their minds.
I would suggest it doesn't work to try to move to the center on economics and appeal to upper middle class or upper class voters. Suburban Republican women voted for Trump even though he was obnoxious.
One needs to get the poor and working class politically active and involved in fighting for their fair share as MLK was doing instead of relying on the noblesse oblige of wealthier classes.
The progressive neoliberals want to be Republican lite with their talk about opportunity and entrepreneurship. That helps with wealthy donors but isn't a good long term strategy as it alienates your working class base.
Hey out that GLBT leg in the stool!Watch what happens in 2018!
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
Peter K. : January 08, 2017 at 11:49 AM , 2017 at 11:49 AMhttp://fredrikdeboer.com/2017/01/08/they-can-sweep-up-broken-glass/Fredrik deBoer:
" Socialists, [neo]liberals insist, are just as bad as fascists. [they claim that] Now is not the time to criticize the Democrats. [neo]Liberalism is working. Women and people of color who criticize identity politics are rendered white men or called self-hating. Glenn Greenwald is a Russian agent.
Leftists are accused of believing that only class matters...
Google matched content |
Society
Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers : Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy
Quotes
War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes : Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce : Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes
Bulletin:
Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law
History:
Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds : Larry Wall : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS : Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development : Scripting Languages : Perl history : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history
Classic books:
The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month : How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite
Most popular humor pages:
Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor
The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D
Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
|
|
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site |
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.
Last modified: June, 18, 2020
