Thursday, September 14, 2017

Feminists Don’t Care About Gang Rape by Nicholas Farrell

Unless the perps are white.
Whenever a Muslim shouting “Allahu Akbar” commits a terrorist outrage the reaction of the liberal élite is always the same: The attack has nothing to do with Islam and what it preaches about the infidel.
It is exactly the same with rape: It has nothing to do with Islam and what it preaches about women—especially infidel women.
Nor does terrorism or rape committed by immigrants from Africa, the Middle East or the Indian sub-continent, ever have anything to do with mass immigration.
It was the same old story late last month in Italy. One night in the city of Rimini, on the beach among the pedal boats and umbrellas, four Africans—at least two of them Muslims—gang-raped a 26-year-old Polish tourist. They did so after beating her boyfriend unconscious and robbing him. Later that night, they gang-raped a transgendered Peruvian as well.
Italian journalists, like journalists everywhere in Europe and America, are so beholden to the diktats of political correctness that nearly all declined to publish the racial origins of the suspects sought by police. In a normal world, to publish and broadcast the racial characteristics of a suspect whom the police want the public to help them track down is just plain common sense.
Yet those few Italian journalists who dared reveal the race of the suspects in this truly appalling case of gang rape were vilified by the media and political mainstream as racist bigots and Islamophobes.
The Marxists may not have taken control of the means of production in the West, but they sure as hell have taken control of the means of thought—so much so that strident feminists such as Laura Boldrini, the left-wing president of the Italian lower house, who can never keep her mouth shut about white men being misogynistic, homophobic, and racist, remained completely silent.
When this woman, who holds Italy’s third highest office of state, did at long last break her silence, she did so to condemn white people for their racist reaction.
She did not speak out against the Muslim/African view that women are the property of men. Or speak out against the Muslim/African view that Western women behave and dress like sluts and that it is their fault if they are raped.
Read More:

Welcome to hell -- Black on white murder beyond belief

DACA Demolition Debate - Nicholas J Fuentes vs Will Nardi

Alt-Right Politics – Sept. 13, 2017 – “iphone Signaling”

After a month-long shabat, Richard Spencer and Greg Ritter are back on the airwaves, with AltRight Politics, America’s most triggering
Sunday midweek news program. Issue 1) Bannon backs down. Issue 2) 9-11, where were you? (31:10) Issue 3) Charlottesville Mensiversary. (49:13) Issue 4)  iphone, iphag (1:10:03).
They are joined by NPI Executive Director Evan McLaren, suffering from extreme jet-lag.
Read More:

In Memoriam: Jerry Pournelle by Steve Sailer

My friend Jerry Pournelle has died at age 84.

Jerry was the embodiment of a famous quote by his mentor in the science-fiction business, Robert A. Heinlein:
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.
I didn’t meet Jerry until 1999, but I’d known his son Alex in high school. The Pournelle family asked me to go with them to Kansas City in August 1976 to the science-fiction convention at which Heinlein, the central American sci-fi writer of the 20th century, received his lifetime achievement award. (But I had to be at college that week.)
But Jerry, one of the great Southern California Cold Warriors, had a remarkable number of careers, starting as a teenage artillery officer during the Korean War, which deafened him in one ear. (At the lunch table, he’d choose his seat carefully to position his one remaining good ear next to his guest.)
He once recalled a question from the Army Officer Candidate School test:
Q. You are in charge of a detail of 11 men and a sergeant. There is a 25-foot flagpole lying on the sandy, brush-covered ground. You are to erect the pole. What is your first order?
The right answer is:
A. “Sergeant, erect that flagpole.”
In other words, if the sergeant knows how to do it, then there’s no need for you to risk your dignity as an officer and a gentleman by issuing some potentially ludicrous order about how to erect the flagpole. And if the sergeant doesn’t know either, well, he’ll probably order a corporal to do it, and so forth down the chain of command. But by the time the problem comes back up to you, it will be well established that nobody else has any more idea than you do.
Read More:

The Russian Hacking Story Continues to Unravel By MIKE WHITNEY

Photo by sime simon | CC BY 2.0
A new report by a retired IT executive at IBM, debunks the claim that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential campaign by hacking Democratic computers and circulating damaging information about Hillary Clinton. The report, which is titled “The Non-Existent Foundation for Russian Hacking Charge“, provides a rigorous examination of the wobbly allegations upon which the hacking theory is based, as well as a point by point rejection of the primary claims which, in the final analysis, fail to pass the smell test. While the report is worth reading in full, our intention is to zero-in on the parts of the text that disprove the claims that Russia meddled in US elections or hacked the servers at the DNC.
Let’s start with the fact that there are at least two credible witnesses who claim to know who took the DNC emails and transferred them to WikiLeaks. We’re talking about WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and WikiLeaks ally, Craig Murray. No one is in a better position to know who actually took the emails than Assange, and yet, Assange has repeatedly said that Russia was not the source. Check out this clip from the report:
Assange …. has been adamant all along that the Russian government was not a source; it was a non-state player. …
ASSANGE: Our source is not a state party
HANNITY (Conservative talk show host): Can you say to the American people unequivocally that you did not get this information about the DNC, John Podesta’s emails — can you tell the American people 1,000 percent you did not get it from Russia…
HANNITY: … or anybody associated with Russia?
ASSANGE: We — we can say and we have said repeatedly… over the last two months, that our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party…
(“The Non-Existent Foundation for Russian Hacking Charge”, Skip Folden)
Can you think of a more credible witness than Julian Assange? The man has devoted his entire adult life to exposing the truth about government despite the risks his actions pose to his own personal safety. In fact, he is currently holed up at the Ecuador embassy in London for defending the public’s right to know what their government is up to. Does anyone seriously think that a man like that would deliberately lie just to protect Russia’s reputation?
No, of course not, and the new report backs him up on this matter. It states: “No where in the Intelligence Community’s Assessment (ICA) was there any evidence of any connection between Russia and WikiLeaks.” The reason Assange keeps saying that Russia wasn’t involved is because Russia wasn’t involved. There’s nothing more to it than that.
Read More:

Another white community activist dead in Philadelphia -- Another victim ...

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

Steve Bannon Exposes Republicans Fighting Trump's Agenda

DEBATE: Andrew Anglin vs Vox Day on National Socialism

STE 41 Live Show. David Duke Interview.

The fellas go on a stabbing spree AT HARVARD!

Hillary Not Doing Well on New Book Tour ��

Why anti-business business writers give tech titans a free pass on ‘red in tooth and claw’ capitalism… By Andrew Ferguson

Among the enduring questions of American journalism – What happened to Amelia Earhart? Who was that guy lurking behind the fence on the grassy knoll? How does Gail Collins keep her job? – is this: Why are business journalists so anti-business?
That is, why do the boys and girls who write about capitalism bear such hostility to the men and women who practice it?
Having worked over the course of a long career for a number of outlets that cover business, I speak from personal experience. You could set off a neutron bomb in the Bloomberg News headquarters without bumping off a single Republican. That is, if you don’t count the maintenance crew and maybe a couple of nerds writing code in the basement.
But this timeless conundrum of hackery admits one exception: business journalists love tech titans. Tim Cook, Larry Ellison, Eric Schmidt, Sheryl Sandberg, and Mark Zuckerberg… These folks at the very tippy top of the capitalist heap enjoy a view that would have made the most successful robber baron green – or greener, anyway – with envy.
Not only have they become admired, even beloved by business reporters – they have become darlings of the left generally, somehow indemnified against the bitterness directed at pharmaceutical executives or the CEOs of oil companies.
The traditional posture of progressives toward people who have won the market lottery is mistrust with a generous helping of moral outrage, on the assumption that success is always underpinned by the exploitation of the disadvantaged by the powerful.
Every good statist has learned about the great 19th century robber barons from Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, the best-selling history textbook of the last 30 years and the most effective anti-capitalist propaganda ever printed. “In industry after industry,” Zinn instructed his young readers, there were “shrewd, efficient businessmen building empires, choking out competition, maintaining high prices, keeping wages low, using government subsidies.”
Progressives despise the accumulation of wealth when they can’t get their hands on it. Except when it comes to tech titans, anyway.
Read More:

Sunday, September 10, 2017

COFFEE HOUSE Political intolerance is again becoming normal in Europe by Douglas Murray

Four years ago, I pointed out here that today’s anti-fascists appeared to be getting rather fascistic. The occasion for that observation then was a group of ‘anti-fascists’ surrounding a man in Scotland and screaming at him to go back to where he came from. For some reason that action was deemed ‘anti-fascist’ rather than ‘fascist’ because the target was Nigel Farage and the mob proclaimed themselves to be ‘anti-fascists.’ To which one might add that North Korea is officially titled ‘The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’.
Anyway, I pointed out back in 2013 that the left appeared to be priming itself to extend their definitions of ‘fascism’ because they hope to be able to win a political battle and recognise that attacking everyone they disagree with as ‘fascist’ might bring some short-term political gain. Though, as I also warned at the time, one long-term effect of all this might be that the public decides that if everybody is a fascist then nobody is. A conclusion that could have its own unpleasant consequences.
I rake up this piece of not very ancient history because of events in Holland.  I was in the country last month and whilst there did a couple of interviews with the Dutch media. In one of them (whose publication seems to have been inexplicably delayed), I mentioned how struck I was that the head of the Forum for Democracy party, Thierry Baudet, appeared to be receiving what one might call the ‘Pim Fortuyn treatment’ from the country’s media.  Readers will remember that as the libertarian Marxist Fortuyn was transforming the political landscape of his country, fifteen years ago, the Dutch political and media class decided to throw everything they had at preventing him from reaching power. They called him a racist and a fascist and a Nazi and the new Hitler and all that sort of thing and eventually a left-wing environmentalist decided Fortuyn must be all these things, and who wouldn’t kill Hitler if they could travel back in a time machine? So Volkert van der Graaf got a gun and shot Fortuyn repeatedly in the head, spending just over a decade in prison for this murder. He was released in 2014 and today, still only in his forties, apparently lives a happy life in the centre of the country whose future he changed so completely.
Read More:

Saturday, September 9, 2017

Qatar needs Jews on its side

On September 5, O’Dwyer, PR magazine reported that Qatar has retained the services of an American Jew public relations firm Stonington Strategy, to lobby for Qatari interests as result of the siege of the oil-rich Sheikhdom by Saudi Arabi and its regional clients.
Qatar government has agreed to pay US$50,000 per month to Canadian-born Jew millionaire Nicholas David Muzin, a Republican political strategist, founded the Stonington Strategy. The firm provided PR services to a number of pro-Israel Republican and Democrat politician and Jewish lobby groups.
Muzin was the driving force behind a coalition of more than 50 pro-Israel groups, including Tea Party, Evangelical and Jewish organizations, to oppose the Iran nuclear deal.
Engagement with Qatar can only be in the best interests of the United States and the Jewish community, as we cannot allow Qatar to be ostracized by its neighbors and pushed into Iran’s sphere of influence,” claimed Muzin.
After Turkish and Kuwait mediation failed to resolve Saudi-Qatar conflict – the Qatari ‘royals’ have come to the conclusion that since Zionist entity is behind the Saudi siege only organized Jewry could get them out of Arab isolation.
Muzin is a close friend and fundraiser for Sen. Ted Cruz. Both view Islamic Iran being greatest threat to Israel due to its support for Assad, Hizbullah and Hamas. Muzin is a former senior adviser to Sen. John McCain.
One of Muzin’s famous client had been Chicago-based Indian-US Hindutva billionaire Shalabh Kumar – the founder-chairman of Republican Hindu Coalition and an ardent Donald Trump, Narendra Modi supporter based on their common hatred toward Muslims. He donated US$1.1 million to Trump presidential campaign.

Book Review: Foucault: The Birth of Power by Stuart Elden

In his conclusion to Foucault: The Birth of Power, the political theorist and geographer Stuart Elden cites Michel Foucault on writing:
Basically, I do not like to write. […] Writing interests me only to the degree that it incorporates the reality of combat […] I would like my books to be like a kind of scalpel, Molotov cocktails, or undermining tunnels and to be burned up after use like fireworks (Dits et écrits 152; see 186-87).
Foucault’s contemporary Gilles Deleuze also described Foucault’s works in terms of instrumentality, although in less violent language –as ‘tool boxes’ for readers (187). In this volume, Elden argues that the theorisation of power was the essential tool Foucault developed during the early 1970s.
The period that forms the focus of Foucault: The Birth of Power is from the late 1960s to 1975, when Foucault returned from three years of teaching in Tunisia to a post-1968 France whose political and intellectual landscape had changed utterly. These are the years of ‘the political Foucault’, of wanderings ‘from the streets to the archive, from the classroom to the desk’ (20), in Elden’s own words, during which Foucault worked with the Groupe d’information sur les prisons (GIP), medical groups and on campaigns for abortion rights.
Elden draws on the familiar works of this period (between the publication of The Archaeology of Knowledge and the completion of Discipline and Punish), lecture courses at the Collège de France, short writings and interviews, as well as unpublished manuscripts from the Bibliothèque Nationale de France (BNF) and material related to Foucault’s activism from the Institut Mémoires de l’édition contemporaine. The corpus thus provides an overview that would otherwise be inaccessible to anyone but the specialised scholar. Furthermore, Elden’s task is not a simple matter of systematisation: in addition to his dislike of writing, Foucault was famous for his vexing of epistemology. In a lecture course, he described knowledge as ‘allied first with malice’ (33). We consider, then, the work of a writer with a deep aversion to writing, and a philosopher who does not love knowledge, or, at least, one who shows us that knowledge is constructed, shifting, multiple and intertwined with power.

Germany rejects Polish call for WWII reparations

I should hope NOT….
Poland is currently occupying the German Provinces of Pomerania, Silesia, and half of East Prussia, what more do they want?

Read More:

Vox Day Shows Everybody Who’s Boss!

“Vox Day” has been securing his right flank for some time now, with Jonah Goldberg style explanations of why Nazis are leftists and useless losers too.
He has picked up the clever insult “alt-retards” in his attempt to establish his social dominance. The problem is there’s no social dominance here, he’s just a guy, he’s not a leader of anybody. Labeling insiders and outsiders helps group cohesion, but there’s no group here.
This would be normal internet retardedness (on his part, not the “alt-retards”) except some piqued party decided to insult him back, on Gab, the free speech alternative to Twitter, with words that can in all fairness be described as libelous.
So he wants Andrew Torba, the founder of Gab, to take them down. Torba is not some guy on the internet, he’s trying to do something to preserve free speech and debate. He has already been threatened by his registrar and doesn’t want to provide private information, take down the posts or close the accounts. So Vox will sue.
Read More:

RIP Jerry Pournelle by Vox Day

J. Lamplighter Wright recalls Jerry Pournelle's last public performance at Dragoncon, where he gave out the Dragon Award for Best Science Fiction novel.
What Mr Pournelle did not tell you is that when he went up to hand out the award, he got a standing ovation. Everyone stood up...even Larry Niven. It wasn't a big crowd, but it was a wonderful moment. I also noticed that, unlike everyone else who seemed to be reading the names, I could have sworn that Pournelle had his list memorized. He recited them smoothly while looking out at the audience.
I'm so pleased to hear that he was publicly celebrated to the very end, as he deserved. My favorite memory of Mr. Pournelle was talking to him after the publication of Riding the Red Horse. At almost the last possible moment, he had agreed to let me use "His Truth Goes Marching On", a story which had appeared in the first volume of There Will Be War, which Riding the Red Horsewas consciously designed to imitate. I thought that would be a fitting symbol of the torch being passed from the one series to the next, since I had been unable to obtain the rights to the original anthology series.

Then, at absolutely the last possible moment, I happened to see an article written by him in an old issue of The General, which combined strategy, wargames, and game design. Excited to have discovered it, I shot him an email asking him for permission to republish it, which right he graciously granted. This is the introduction I wrote for it.
Editor's Introduction to:


by Jerry Pournelle

Science fiction's gain was the game industry's loss.

There are few, very few, readers of this anthology who do not know of Jerry Pournelle, the science fiction writer. Nearly everyone has heard of the author of Jannissaries and The Mote in God's Eye, the editor of many anthologies, the techno-savvy Byte columnist, the SFWA president, the Lord of Chaos Manor, even the aphorist who coined the Iron Law of Bureaucracy.

In any bureaucracy, the people devoted to the benefit of the bureaucracy itself always get in control and those dedicated to the goals the bureaucracy is supposed to accomplish have less and less influence, and sometimes are eliminated entirely.
Read More:

The Last Picture Show (Steyn Version) by Mark Steyn

On Friday, I covered for a hurricane-afflicted Rush and guest-hosted America's Number One radio show. You can find a few moments from the show here. We send Rush and our colleagues all good wishes as they leave EIB Southern Command and endeavor to stay one step ahead of Hurricane Irma and the largest evacuation in American history.
Perhaps the least useful bit of meteorological commentary these last 24 hours was that of the actress Jennifer Lawrence, who suggested Irma was "Mother Nature's rage" at America voting for Trump. It's always striking how parochial these global celebrities are:
Ninety-five per cent of Barbudan structures have been destroyed, so presumably Mother Nature hates Barbuda even more than Trump.
Two-thirds of Saint Martin, a French territory, has been destroyed, so presumably Mother Natures hates France for not only signing the Paris Climate Accord but hosting the post-signing banquet.

Read More:

Thursday, September 7, 2017

Guns, Germs, and Steel revisited by Gregory Cochran

Jared Diamond’s thesis, in Guns, Germs, and Steel, is that regional differences in civilizational achievement are entirely caused by biogeographical factors, while regional differences in ability have had no effect. It isn’t that he believes that there are no such regional differences: he argues that the populations with the fewest achievements are the most intelligent !
In particular, Diamond argues that people in PNG (Papua New Guinea), are significantly smarter than the average bear. “in mental ability, New Guineans are probably genetically superior [my emphasis] to Westerners”: p21. “Modern ‘Stone Age’ peoples are on the average probably more intelligent, not less intelligent, than industrialized peoples. ” p 21.
This is sufficiently odd that readers of GGS often refuse to admit that Diamond ever said it. They’ll deny that it’s even in the book. They tend to replace this meme with another of their own device: you see, hunter-gatherers are innately better at hunting and gathering – at their own way of life – than developed peoples would be. Of course that doesn’t really work either, since innate superiority at obsolete tasks ( a born buggy-whip maker?) doesn’t necessarily translate to modern superiority, or even adequacy.
I’ve only seen this claim – PNG Über Alles – in one other place, ever. A character in a book by Poul Anderson said “The only true humans on earth, my friends, the main line of evolution, the masters of the future, are the lordly Melanesians. ”
Of course that character was feigning insanity, but still.
In arguing that the last actually are first – that populations that invented calculus and gunpowder and penicillin are duller than those that invented very little – Diamond dismisses the entire field of psychometrics. He mentions no evidence, doesn’t even bother to argue about it. It’s his personal impressions of the locals in PNG versus everybody from Alfred Binet to the College Board. The word “IQ” isn’t even in the book.
Read More:

Rough Diamond by Steve Sailer

This year marks the 20th anniversary of one of the odder best-sellers of the 1990s, polymath Jared Diamond’s ambitiously entitled but rather dry Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies.
Why did a book stuffed with more arcane data about the history of crops and livestock than most readers care to know ignite such unbalanced enthusiasm? This question is especially curious considering that Diamond’s previous book, the more interesting The Third Chimpanzee: The Evolution and Future of the Human Animal, a collection of Diamond’s fascinating articles from popular science magazines, had failed to make much of an impression.
The difference is that Diamond marketed Guns, Germs, and Steel as the definitive politically correct answer to the query that must trouble anyone with much awareness of the world: Why are some races of humans so much more economically and scientifically productive than other races?
Diamond charmingly phrased this as Yali’s Question, after a Melanesian cargo cultist the UCLA physiologist had met on a bird-watching trip to New Guinea:
“Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?”
It’s not that New Guineans don’t care about cargo. In fact, after observing American and Australian military men deposit upon jungle airfields vast quantities of delightful goods, they formed cargo cults to replicate the white man’s magic. As William Manchester recounted in Goodbye, Darkness: A Memoir of the Pacific War:
The native is no dummy. He can imitate any rite. He puts together a facsimile of a telephone with tin cans and string. He shuffles papers and speaks into the can; then he searches the sky, predicting, “Moni i kam baimbai.” (“Money he come by and by”)...
Frustrated, a New Hanover tribe formed a “Lyndon B. Johnson cult” in the 1960s. Even in New Guinea people knew that nobody was more effective with gadgets and telephones than Lyndon Johnson…. Somehow they amassed sixteen hundred dollars for a one-way ticket from Washington to Moresby and sent the ticket to the White House. Johnson didn’t arrive…. It seems a pity. LBJ would have made a marvelous king of the blackfellows, and he would have enjoyed the job immensely.
Read More: