Friday, March 23, 2018

Review of Amy Chua's POLITICAL TRIBES

What’s up with academics in America? Why are even the less ideologically partisan intellectuals so devoid of truth where it really matters? Obviously, these people are not dumb. They are smart, and some are very smart. And surely, they are better-read and more learned than 99% of Americans. As academics, their role is to research the truth and speak honestly and without fear, especially in a Liberal Democracy. And on a wide array of issues, they do speak candidly and write with integrity. And yet, when it comes to what really matters, they fail time and time again. How can academics who write so truthfully about B and C be so untruthful about A? This conundrum reminds me of what a film critic said about Chinese film-making in the 1980s: Some budding ‘auteurs’ preferred to make films about the periphery or non-Chinese cultures because of less likelihood of censorship. A film about failures of Han Chinese society might be construed as criticism of the System, but a film that deals with issues of tyranny, superstition, cruelty, and madness in, say, Tibet might be overlooked as ‘exotic’ by the censors. This rule applies to academics all over the world. Obviously, even a Cuban or North Korean scholar can write freely about birds or reptiles. He would also be relatively free to write about some Other Culture(unless it happens to be arch-enemy Uncle Sam and its allies or puppets). But when it comes to Cuban government or the Kim Klan, the scholars better tread carefully. Or consider the Soviet Encyclopedia that had perfectly fine entries on most topics and subjects(by universal standards of knowledge) but gave totally skewed accounts of sensitive topics in relation to Soviet history and power. This being a near-universal rule — who expects total academic or press freedom in Iran? — , why is it so jarring when we see evidence of it in the West? Because the West, especially the US, bills itself as ‘exceptional’, ‘liberal democratic’, and committed to free inquiry & expression. After all, the New York Times declaration of principles runs as follows: "It will be my earnest aim that THE NEW-YORK TIMES give the news, all the news, in concise and attractive form, in language that is parliamentary in good society, and give it as early, if not earlier, than it can be learned through any other reliable medium; to give the news impartially, without fear or favor..."

From an early age, we’ve all been fed the truism that the US is land of the free and the Liberal West differs from repressive China and autocratic Russia. Americans believe people want to come to the US for freedom and liberty, to speak their minds, challenge power and authority, and call it like it is. And yet, we are not supposed to notice the Real Power, and those who do end up like Rick Sanchez and Helen Thomas. And despite all this mania for change as a good thing, we are not supposed to notice certain changes that are inconvenient to the Narrative. (Never mind that the power in America went from Wasps to Jews some time ago. And notice how sports narrative still runs on ‘not enough blacks in ____’ when the overwhelming fact of American Sports is that Biological Discrimination favoring naturally tougher and faster blacks have made certain sports No-Go Zones for non-blacks. No one asks, "Why aren’t there any white or Mexican running backs?" but the annual media mania is about "not enough black quarterbacks.") Instead, the Tropes of Power and Injustice are chosen and enforced by the Real Power that is not supposed to be noticed and named. So, do NOT notice the real power of the Jews and just pretend that Wasps still rule most of America while the KKK dominates the South. And never mind all the changes in race relations, with most of the violence being black-on-white. Just pretend we are still back in the days of Bull Connor. (And forget about the reality of South Africa and Zimbabwe. Just gaze at the screen featuring Wakanda as a vision of what Africa would have been without colonization. Never mind that parts of Africa that had come under direct European rule did far better than parts that were only indirectly ruled. What are we to pretend next? American Indians would be flying to Mars on space tepees, riding around in Beaver-trucks, and computer-coding in Hopi lingo IF ‘pale face’ had never set foot in the New World? I suppose China and Japan would have modernized EVEN MORE all on their own if not for the intrusion of Western powers that forced them to open. Damn those British who prevented Hong Kong from becoming what it really could have been: A super high-tech city-state that would have colonized a million star systems by now if not for the occupation by evil whitey.) Even though the US is about liberty and speaking truth to power, in reality The Power gets to decide the practical perimeters of ‘liberty’ and the means of gaining wealth and influence(that better be conducive to the interests of The Power). 

Read More:

Thursday, March 22, 2018

McCabe’s Bogus Witch Hunt Of Jeff Sessions Confirms Worst Fears About FBI/DOJ Politicization

 McCabe’s Bogus Witch Hunt Of Jeff Sessions Confirms Worst Fears About FBI/DOJ Politicization
Thousands upon thousands of media reports over the last year and a half have intimated, suggested, or flat-out asserted that President Donald Trump is a traitor who colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election from Hillary Clinton. What this widely held theory lacks in evidence, its diehard supporters in the media and other anti-Trump bastions make up for with their faith-filled conviction of its truth.
An alternate storyline has been unfolding over that same time. The basic contour is that claims Trump stole the election by treasonously colluding with Russia are the result of a coordinated campaign that was bought and paid for by the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee, weaponized by the federal government, and promulgated by a completely compliant media.
This week ABC News reported that former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe personally authorized a criminal investigation into Attorney General Jeff Sessions over his alleged ties to Russians. Sessions fired McCabe last week after the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of Inspector General (IG) reported his misconduct to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility. These internal overseers determined McCabe had made unauthorized disclosures to the news media and not been truthful when asked about it on multiple occasions, including when he was under oath. McCabe was long considered one of the bureau leadership’s many leakers while still employed.
This latest leak to ABC News was viewed by many in the media as bad for Sessions. For the people who still cling to the Russia conspiracy theory, this news was proof of that theory.
Read More:

California in Chaos – Loyalists vs Rebel Scum

I think that California’s secession might be the best thing to happen to the United States. It will set a precedent at the very least.  It seems that we are headed towards a showdown regardless and I look forward to it.
But there are still loyalist cities and counties out in Occupied California. Loyal to Trump and White America that is.
The County of Orange and several cities in Southern California soon might join Los Alamitos in its bid to opt out of a controversial state law that limits cooperation with federal immigration officials.
Officials with the county as well as leaders in Aliso Viejo and Buena Park said Tuesday they plan to push for various versions of the anti-sanctuary ordinance approved in Los Alamitos late Monday by a 4-1 vote of that city council.
In other words, there are some places in California resisting the treacherous state laws that require California to shelter illegals.
The County of Orange and several cities in Southern California soon might join Los Alamitos in its bid to opt out of a controversial state law that limits cooperation with federal immigration officials.
Immigration advocates said Los Alamitos and cities and counties that follow its opt-out ordinance will be violating state law and at risk of litigation.
But Los Alamitos’ anti-sanctuary push also received wide attention in conservative media, and gained support from those who don’t agree with California’s protective stance on all immigrants, regardless of legal status.
In other words, these rebellious counties are defying California state law and saying that they will follow Federal law.
If the state of California comes down hard on them, what will Trump do?

The Daily Shoah 270: Champion Of The Bits

Italy is the Beginning of a New Political Order in Europe!!!

Abortionist: “I Cut Their Larynx First So They Don’t Scream”

Pop Talk With The People: Featuring Nationalist, Activist Tiina Wiik -Exclusive Finland

Before we talk about riots, Arson and Bomb attacks… a little bit about Finland-
There is a population of about 5.5 Million
Finland is a Northern European nation bordering Sweden, Norway and Russia. Its capital, Helsinki, occupies a peninsula and surrounding islands in the Baltic Sea. Helsinki is home to the 18th-century sea fortress Suomenlinna, the fashionable Design District and diverse museums. The Northern Lights can be seen from the country’s Arctic Lapland province, a vast wilderness with national parks and ski resorts.
According to the BBC, “Finland participates actively in the development of the EU’s migration and asylum policy.Following the refugee crisis 2015, the number of asylum seekers arriving in Europe and Finland has multiplied. As a country upholding the rule of law, Finland took in over 32,000 asylum seekers in 2015. This number is ten times higher than in previous years.
As the numbers of asylum seekers grow, it has become evident that existing EU regulations cannot cope with the pressure created by large numbers of people. Finland is supporting EU efforts to better manage migration and is participating actively in developing common EU migration and asylum policies. Finland is in favour of expanding the reception of quota refugees to additional Member States, as a way of promoting legal migration.
Read More:

Szijjarto: Migration deadly danger

The terror attacks of recent years have made it clear in Europe that“migration implies the threat of terrorism and deadly danger”, Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said on Thursday, marking the anniversary of a terrorist attack in Brussels which claimed 32 lives and injured 340 people two years ago.
A total of 24 terrorist attacks have been committed by persons with a migration background in the past two and a half years in Europe, he said. These attacks claimed 330 lives and injured more than 1,300 people, he added.
Some of the terrorists used the recent wave of migration to get to Europe, others had arrived earlier or were born in Europe to migrant parents, he said. In their cases, social integration has failed and they have not accepted the basics of European forms of living or European values, he added.
The focus of the current dispute over migration is whether the rights of migrants or those of Europeans are given priority, Szijjarto said.
“The right to a safe life is a basic human right but migration is not.”
It is “unacceptable and intolerable” that some forces in Europe seek to give the rights of migrants priority over the right of Europeans to a safe life, the minister said. It is a basic right of every European, including every Hungarian, to live safely without the threat of terror.
Read More:

Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Operation: Get The White Girls

Last week, Youtube personalities Brittany Pettibone and Martin Sellner were arrested by the police forces of Air Strip One and held in prison for two days, questioned about their political beliefs and then deported as threats to public safety. Lauren Southern, an independent Canadian youtube personality mostly concerned with “the threat of Islam in the West,” was detained at the border and refused entry.
Brittany Pettibone and her boyfriend, Martin Sellner, were refused entry to the UK when they landed at Luton Airport on Friday. They were detained for two days, and then deported. Another activist, Lauren Southern, was refused entry by the Border Force near Calais on Monday. She had planned to meet with the couple and the former leader of the English Defence League, Tommy Robinson.
BBC, Why 3 far-right activists were refused entry to the UK

Both Southern and Pettibone have flirted with Identitarian, pro-White ideas, but especially Southern has until recently mostly engaged in neo-connish, Israeli-friendly “Islamophobia.”
Southern says she was questioned under the Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, on her political views and her opinion on right-wing terrorism. She tells BBC Trending that she was refused entry on the grounds of her involvement “in the distribution of racist material in Luton”.
In February, the Canadian activist displayed flyers saying “Allah is a gay god” outside a restaurant in the town centre. Southern, who has nearly half a million subscribers on YouTube and regularly posts politically charged stunts, says this was part of a “social experiment” video.

Read More:


After 20 years of silence from academics, Nathan Cofnas has written a comprehensive critical review of The Culture of Critique in an academic venue. I have been waiting for this to happen and was beginning to think it never would. Academics want their work to be taken seriously, and honest academics value the rough and tumble of academic debate. But what I got was silence, or comments like that of Steven Pinker, who is listed in the Acknowledgements section of Cofnas’s review, saying that it was below the threshold of academic interest—and that he hadn’t read it.[1]
My book was incendiary, and I knew that. What had begun as a theoretical idea on how human groups could become vehicles of natural selection (rank heresy at the time and still controversial but increasingly respectable[2]) had turned into a life-changing project. As a result of the silence, my response was to continue to expand on my ideas and to keep them out there so people could judge for themselves. I would have much preferred to be a respectable academic with a solid reputation, attending conferences and writing only academic papers and books. But respectability was impossible, so I decided to continue writing in this area outside the academic realm.
Thus I became something of an activist intellectual—following in the footsteps, one might say, of the many Jewish intellectuals discussed in my work, but completely outside the academic system. Hounded out of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society and ostracized at my university,[3] I decided to push the envelope. I started by writing a few blogs on my website related to my three books on Judaism and other topics related to evolutionary psychology. Then, in 2008, I started The Occidental Observer where I could get other writers involved A few years later, I took over editing The Occidental Quarterly and am proud to have published a great many academic-quality articles over the years, many by Ph.Ds. Sadly most of the writers for both TOO and TOQ have had to remain anonymous because of the reign of terror at universities (and in the private sector) against anyone who dissents from the status quo on race and ethnicity.
A major reason for my activism was because of the reading I had done in writing the trilogy, particularly CofC.A People that Shall Dwell Alone was about how Judaism operated in traditional societies, and Separation and Its Discontents was essentially about anti-Semitism in traditional societies. This is water over the dam, one might say, however one might analyze causes of anti-Semitism in times past. But that changed in reading about the role of Jewish activism on the left over the past century. Misguided intellectual movements like psychoanalysis may be successfully rebutted and eventually fall by the wayside—as psychoanalysis has. Disastrous political ventures such as Communism may eventually self-destruct after wreaking untold horror and dysgenic mass murder. However, the effects of immigration policy are of immediate and critical concern for the entire West. As I noted at the outset of Chapter 7 of CofC:
Immigration policy is a paradigmatic example of conflicts of interest between ethnic groups because immigration policy determines the future demographic composition of the nation. Ethnic groups unable to influence immigration policy in their own interests will eventually be displaced by groups able to accomplish this goal. Immigration policy is thus of fundamental interest to an evolutionist.
In other words, I began to see myself as having a dog in this fight. What was happening was, from an evolutionary perspective, a disaster for the White people of the West. Ethnic displacement is like reducing an extended family or other lineage—a drastic loss of fitness, as Frank Salter has shown,[4] and really no different from displacement of one species or subspecies by another in the natural world. This is natural selection in action (although one hesitates to call a consciously engineered process “natural”), as the gene frequencies, genetic combinations and bio-cultures characteristic of other peoples increase relative to those of the indigenous people of Western European countries as well as their descendants in North America, Australia, and New Zealand.
So I was highly motivated to continue my work, even outside the academic setting. And, as Cofnas notes, the books became influential—particularly CofC. I think a lot of that was because of my newfound activism aimed at building an audience and continuing to expand on the trilogy, but also because there hadn’t been any noteworthy critiques of it. The lack of credible criticism created something of an anomaly: What is now called the Alt Right—a movement that is vilified by all sectors of the establishment, from left to right—was embracing an academic book on Jewish activism published by a mainstream academic publisher that had never received a proper hearing in the academic world. One would think that the academic establishment would come down hard on such a book, bringing all its prestige and media access to eradicate this heresy. But nothing. So, it continued to fester and gain popularity.
Whatever one thinks of this reply, I welcome the opportunity to respond. Frankly, a reasoned exchange is long overdue.
Read More:

Deep-Freezing the Truth at Penn. A distinguished law professor is publicly shamed for pointing out truths about race preferences. By Heather Mac Donald

The diversity imperative demands dissimulation and evasion. The academic-achievement gap, the behavioral differences that produce socioeconomic disparities, and the ubiquity of racial preferences must all be suppressed in public discourse, since they undercut the narrative that white racism is the driving force in American society. This dissimulation was on display last week at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, when Dean Ted Ruger announced that law professor Amy Wax would no longer teach mandatory first-year law courses at the school. In a memo announcing his decision, Ruger accused Wax of “conscious indifference” to truth. It is Ruger, however, who has distorted facts.
Ousting Wax from her first-year civil-procedure class has been a desideratum of the academic Left since she published an op-ed last August celebrating bourgeois virtues like the work ethic, respect for authority, and sexual temperance. Wax was deemed a “white supremacist” for suggesting that not all cultures were equal in preparing people for participation in a modern economy.
In December, Dean Ruger asked her to desist from teaching first-year students and to take a leave of absence, in the hope that the controversy spurred by her op-ed would die down. As a “pluralistic dean,” he said, he needed to accommodate all factions in the school. Wax declined the request and reported the details of the conversation immediately thereafter to friends. (I was one of the people to whom she spoke.) Wax later described the conversation in a Wall Street Journal op-ed. Ruger denied her account through a spokesman, claiming that he had merely engaged in a pro forma discussion of her sabbatical schedule, such as he would have done with any other professor. Ruger’s version is not credible, though: in an informal survey, no law professor polled reports ever having a dean drop by his office to discuss a routine sabbatical. This alleged bureaucratic convention does not exist, unless Dean Ruger has only recently introduced it.
Ruger’s request that Wax stop teaching first-year students became non-negotiable, however, after a video dialogue Wax had recorded in September came to the attention of her opponents. On the video, Wax and Brown University economist Glenn Loury discuss affirmative action. Wax talks about how racial preferences hinder the ability of their alleged beneficiaries to succeed academically, by catapulting them into schools for which they are significantly less prepared than their peers; this negative consequence of affirmative action is known as the “mismatch effect.” At Penn’s law school, Wax said, she didn’t think that she had ever seen a black law student graduate in the top quarter of his class, and “rarely” in the top half. Loury asked Wax if the University of Pennsylvania Law Review had a “racial diversity mandate.” Wax answered “yes.” In his memo to the school, Ruger denied this point: “theLaw Review does not have a diversity mandate,” he wrote. “Rather, its editors are selected based on a competitive process.”
Read More:

Why I’m the Only True Race-ist - How Misuse of Terminology confuses Meanings - We need to go Cold Jive Turkey on Magic Negro Myth - Why Everyone is a race-ist even if unknowingly or subconsciously

The term ‘Racism’ blurs ‘race’ and ‘ism’ and confuses people. The proper spelling should be race-ism. That way, people would be more aware of the true meaning of the word. ‘Race’ means race and ‘Ism’ means belief. So, race + ism = belief in the reality of race, racial differences, and/or necessity of racial consciousness.

So, I say I am a race-ist. Ism means belief, therefore race + ism should mean belief in race reality. Ism doesn’t mean hatred, chauvinism, or supremacy. It means belief, creed, conviction, or thought system. Now, race-ism can become radicalized into supremacism, as with Nazism or Nation of Islam or even extreme strains of Zionism, as with Meir Kahane. But rational race-ism seeks to understand race and racial differences for what they are on factual basis and for their psycho-social implications.

The big problem is ‘racism’ has been defined by the Powers-that-be to mean Racial Supremacist Hatred. But when Ism is defined in such way, it negates the possibility of formulating a useful term that simply means belief in the reality of race and racial differences. Because the neutral formula of race + ism has been defined to mean Racial Supremacist Hatred(especially among white folks), it’s difficult to conceive of an objective term about belief in race reality. I suspect the term ‘racism’ was specially designed to suck out all the air so that a neutral rational term about race would be near-impossible. If ‘racism’ means hateful racial supremacism, what would be the proper term for belief in the reality of race, racial differences, and need for racial identity and consciousness? Some defensively use ‘racialism’ and ‘race realism’, but even those terms become tainted because the neutral formulation of race + ism has been associated with the Worst Evil.

Suppose I define ‘heliocentrism’ as a hateful supremacist ideology that the sun is great and everything else sucks eggs. Such meaning should be called ‘helio-supremacism’ or ‘helio-chauvinism’. Heliocentrism should just mean the belief that planets revolve around the Sun. It’s a belief in objective fact based on science. But if ‘heliocentrism’ is defined as hateful supremacy of sun-worship, then a neutral term denoting the centrality of the Sun in the Solar system becomes difficult to conceive. 

Or take the term ‘humanism’. It doesn’t mean humans are the bestest and superduperest things in the cosmos and deserve supremacy rule over everything. It means humans have worth as moral beings and that humans should be mindful of their role, responsibility, and rights as thinking-and-feeling beings on the planet.
But suppose ‘humanism’ is defined as hateful supremacy of humanity over the entire planet or a conviction that humans are the greatest things in the universe and all extraterrestrials must bow down to human earthlings.
Such an outlook should be called human-supremacism, human-chauvinism, or human-megalomania, NOT humanism. After all, Ism just means belief. So, there is no reason for human + ism to mean something extreme, maniacal, or demented. As it happens, ‘humanism’ is defined properly. It doesn’t carry supremacist baggage.

Read More:

Black-a-Block - Steve Sailer

“Extensive Data Shows Punishing Reach of Racism for Black Boys,” blared the headline in Monday’s New York Times, announcing the latest massive study from Stanford economist Raj Chetty. The Times tweeted:
Black men raised in the top 1 percent—by millionaires—were as likely to be incarcerated as white men raised in households earning about $36,000.
In reply, Charles Murray laughed:
An analysis destined for the unintended-consequences-of-publicizing-technically-accurate-data hall of fame.
Five years ago, Chetty began publishing his “Equality of Opportunity Project” results. He had somehow talked the IRS into giving him the numbers on tens of millions of (purportedly confidential) 1040 tax returns, from which he could look at the income of parents in the 1990s and their now-adult children in the 2010s. He had assembled a crack team of young data wizards to crunch some of the biggest social science data sets ever assembled.
Chetty has apparently reassured the feds that your private information won’t be leaked, although this database must be growing in allure as a target for hackers. But the economist is very respectable, having been consulted by candidates Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush.
Moreover, Chetty struck up a relationship with The New York Times to have each of his subsequent papers lavished with attention and spectacular graphics.
Read More:

Diversity Bridge Is Falling Down, My Fair Lady - David Cole

Well, that is damned inconvenient. A state-of-the-art pedestrian bridge hailed as the inevitably wondrous result of diversity in engineering has collapsed within days of being paraded before the media. Did I say inconvenient? I should have said symbolic.
“Diversity Bridge” (that’s not the structure’s official name, but I think it fits) was designed to connect Florida International University to the city of Sweetwater, where many FIU students and staff reside. The bridge, installed (though not yet opened to the public) a mere four days before its failure, spanned a busy Miami highway, and the collapse crushed cars and people underneath. Authorities report at least six deaths.
Prior to pancaking, Diversity Bridge had been championed as “an engineering feat come to life.” One of the geniuses who accomplished this “feat” is an engineer who was hailed by President Obama in 2015 as a “champion of change”: Atorod Azizinamini, director of FIU’s Accelerated Bridge Construction Center (now renamed the Accelerated Bridge Destruction Center). The firm that built the bridge, Munilla Construction Management (MCM), is run by the Munilla brothers—Raul, Juan, Jorge, Lou, Fernando, and Pedro (is that a construction firm or the latest incarnation of Menudo?). And then we have Leonor Flores, MCM’s senior manager. On March 14, as Diversity Bridge was being installed, Flores was quoted in this breathless puff piece on the FIU website:
Twelve-year-old Michelle Flores shared a special moment with her family at FIU this past Saturday: She and her sister Gabriela joined their parents, FIU alumni Leonor and Henry Flores MIS ’01, to watch a 950-ton section of a pedestrian bridge swing into its permanent position across Southwest 8th Street. Leonor Flores ’98 is a project executive and one of 63 FIU alumni who work for MCM, the construction firm building the FIU-Sweetwater University City Bridge. She was excited to share her work with her family, especially Michelle, who is interested in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) in school. Said Leonor: “It’s very important for me as a woman and an engineer to be able to promote that to my daughter, because I think women have a different perspective. We’re able to put in an artistic touch and we’re able to build, too.”
She’s an artist, all right. That bridge became a pile of junk art that would have made Arman jealous.
Read More:

What is actually behind the 'gun control' push?

Tillerson Out, Neocons In!

50 Years Later: Why Do They Still Riot?

Tuesday, March 20, 2018

Reprobate Hollywood, From Ancient to Modern.

Image result for Reprobate Hollywood, From Ancient to Modern.
The world is now coming to realize what some keen observers have known all along: that Hollywood as a cultural institution is rotten to the core. As a major part of the culture industry (to borrow Horkheimer and Adorno’s phrase,) Hollywood has eaten away at the moral and spiritual fabric of society while also serving as a major conveyor belt for the absolute worst ideological excesses of the modern world. The cultural legitimacy and influence of deep-pocket creeps like Harvey Weinstein are shocking, to say the least - this is a man who has thrown vast sums at Democratic political campaigns and various Hollywood-championed, ultra-progressive ideological causes. That much is clear, but it is merely a facile and labored point American conservatives like to make when throwing barbs at fallen celebrities and Hollywood moguls.
Alongside certain masterpieces and your standard crass propaganda films (his bankrolling of Michael Moore and post-90s Tarintino pieces to name a few), what is even more insidious are the pieces of vile celluloid Weinstein has produced that are designed to denigrate populations the coastal Hollywood elites find objectionable. Take any Larry Clark / Harmony Korine film like 1995’s Kids, or 1997’s Gummo that the Weinstein brothers had a hand in producing. There you will find a visceral, morally repugnant (and ironically honest) look inside the degeneration of American youth. Behind the layers of faux “thinkpiece” style provocative filmmaking that expose the state of the MTV generation's youth culture, what one can really extract from the major Hollywood films that deal in such subject matter is a hidden conceit of crass exploitation.These films are a look into the “flyover state” people as envisioned by millionaire Hollywood elois who would gladly spit on them from their connector flights between New York and California, if only they were allowed to open up the windows.
Read More:

Rue the Day, Britannia! In Majority Non-White London, Knife Crime Almost Entirely Committed by Black Immigrants

The United Kingdom has extreme gun control laws

It doesn't have control over its border. 

London is now home to more than 8.6 million people, the highest the city’s population has been since 1939. What’s more, 44% of London now consists of black and ethnic minorities, compared to only 28.9% in 2001. That’s according to the Greater London Authority, which serves the London mayor’s office [via the BBC]. 
London’s proportion of immigrants may seem high, but that’s not an uncommon balance for many global business capitals. Below are diversity readings for some of the world’s largest financial centers, according to research group Long Finance’s Global Financial Centres Index. (Zurich, Seoul, Tokyo, and Geneva are also in the top 10, but reliable demographic data for those cities was not readily available.) 
London has always attracted immigrants, but they’ve often come one group at a time, the Economist notes. That began to change in the 1990s, as conflicts in Africa and the Middle East, the Soviet Union’s collapse, EU expansion, and growing emerging market wealth drove more foreigners to Britain. Between 2001 and 2011, London’s white population decreased by 6%, while the “Black other” population (not African or Caribbean) increased 110%, according to the 2014 Greater London Authority report. Overall, black and ethnic minorities grew 55.5% over the decade. 
The growth could have a major impact on politics. A recent report from the Migrants’ Rights Network and the University of Manchester estimates that around four million foreign-born residents will be eligible voters in this year’s May elections. Though they don’t vote uniformly, there are a few issues immigrants tend to agree on. For instance, the report suggests that migrant voters (ethnic minorities who are not born in the UK) care more about issues of immigration and discrimination. Those sentiments could be bad news for the right-wing UK Independence Party, which has veered toward anti-immigration policies.
Read More:

Jordan Peterson and Identity Politics

The Skeptics are Wrong: Attitudes About Free Speech On Campus are Changing

By Sean Stevens (HxA Research Director) and Jonathan Haidt (HxA Board Chair)
Abstract: Recent essays by Jeffrey Sachs and Matt Yglesias have asserted that widespread concerns about free speech on American college campuses are essentially a moral panic with no basis in fact. In this blog post, we show that such skepticism is not justified by the survey data the skeptics point to. When the analysis is properly focused–on iGen college students since 2015, rather than on Millennials at large over the last ten years–the GSS  does in fact show a recent downturn in support for controversial speakers. We show the same trend in a much larger survey of college students from the Knight Foundation, which was released the week after the skeptics published their essays.
Over the past two weeks, Jeffrey Sachs (a political scientist at Acadia U; not the economist at Columbia) has made the argument that There Is No Campus Free Speech Crisis, as he put it in a long twitter thread on March 9. Matt Yglesias then expanded on Sachs’ argument in a post titled Everything we think about the political correctness debate is wrong, and Sachs expanded his case in a Washington Post Monkey Cage essay with a similar title: The ‘campus free speech crisis’ is a myth. Here are the facts. Sachs and Yglesias both draw heavily on analyses of the speech questions in the General Social Survey, which were plotted and analyzed well by Justin Murphy on Feb. 16. In this blog post we will show a reliance on older datasets and the failure to formulate the question properly have led Sachs and Yglesias to a premature conclusion. Something is changing on campus, but only in the last few years.
Sachs and Yglesias claim that the current wave of concern about speech on campus that began around 2014 (with media reports about safe spaces and trigger warnings), and that intensified in 2015 (after the Yale Halloween controversy, and the earlier publication of The Coddling of the American Mind, by Lukianoff & Haidt) is a classic moral panic. They believe it is merely a media frenzy in response to a few high profile incidents. In a typical moral panic, people on one side of the political spectrum get riled up because stories about outrageous incidents appeal to their desire to believe the worst about a group on the other side. Sachs and Yglesias claim that conservatives and conservative media have gleefully exploited a handful of campus stories to fuel hatred of left-leaning students, or “social justice warriors,” when in in fact nothing has changed on campus.
Given how frequent moral panics are, especially as political polarization and cross-party hatred increases, and as social media makes it easy to whip up a panic, it is vital to have skeptics. It is important for people with different biases and prior beliefs to dig into survey data that bears on the question. It is also crucial to formulate the question properly. What exactly is it that has changed, or not changed, on campus in recent years?
Here are the three major positions in the current debate, along with our proposal for how each should be operationalized.
Read More:

South Africa: Blacks Kill One White Farmer Every Five Days in 2018

Black criminal gangs have killed one white South African farmer every five days so far this year, according to new figures released by the AgriSA agricultural union in Pretoria.
In a statement issued by Ian Cameron, AfriForum’s Head of Safety, it was revealed that there had been 109 farm attacks in less than 100 days of 2018. During these attacks, 15 farm murders had taken place.
“Our rural areas are trapped in a crime war,” Cameron said. “Although the South African government denies that a violence crisis is staring rural areas in the face, the numbers prove that excessive violence plague these areas.”
Cameron added that torturing with irons, blow-torches, melted plastic and boiling water often continues for hours during these attacks
He also said that there had been a significant increase in these types of attacks in the Northern and Western Cape.
“Government cannot deny the facts – our people are being mowed down,” Cameron concluded.
Meanwhile, a straw poll conducted by the Afrikaans online news service Nuus24—which serves the Afrikaans-speaking community in South Africa—revealed that over 85 percent of whites would leave the country immediately if the opportunity presented itself.
Read More:

BREAKING: Tony Podesta Creepy Photos Leaked!

Monday, March 19, 2018

Bullshit Degrees Are Scamming College Students

College once was an institution for educating society’s best and brightest to their highest potential. Later, a degree came to be seen as a guaranteed ticket to the middle class. During the 1990s, promoting higher education for the masses became a big effort. That social experiment demonstrated that not just any degree is worthwhile.

Low ROI majors

Well, at least I’m not at home raising precious children. My grandmothers were so oppressed! If only they had the opportunity to file TPS reports all day instead….
There are many articles online about degrees with the lowest return on investment. From “30 Worst Paying College Majors For 2013“, here are the ten least profitable, and their starting salaries:
Many of the above salaries will increase during mid-career, but some less so. Why get deeply indebted for a degree that gets only fifteen bucks an hour, taking years to improve? Further, traditional housewives always have been experts at both culinary arts and child/family studies, even illiterate Bronze Age peasants.

Low opportunity majors

At least studying art history lets you understand how this happened.
For many “soft studies” degrees, there’s a very limited market for new graduates. Career paths for an art history Ph.D. are:
  • Museum curator
  • Art history professor
  • Fivebucks Coffee
How many unfilled job openings at museums requiring Ph.D. knowledge are there? New York City is the Mecca of the American art scene (though say what you will about today’s recent quality). The Big Apple has a few dozen art museums, but in a city of 8.5 million, that’s not quite a gold mine. At the big ones like MoMA and Guggenheim, competition for high-ranking positions must be pretty fierce.
The academic track is competitive too, especially in obscure subjects with questionable social value (like art history) or none (see below). Also, qualified candidates can forget about becoming professors in many faculty departments if they don’t hold the “correct” political views—or at least fake it until tenure.

Read More: