Thursday, November 15, 2018

IQ is Genetic: New Test Can Determine Intelligence Levels in Embryos

Conclusive proof that intelligence is genetic and not “environmental” has come with the news that a new test can determine intelligence levels in embryos—and can accurately predict a child’s low, average, or high level IQ before it is born.

News of the test is contained in a new article in The New Scientist magazine about the company Genomic Prediction, which has launched a “mental disability” test as one of its products.
According to the article, the “new genetic test that enables people having IVF to screen out embryos likely to have a low IQ or high disease risk could soon become available in the US.”
The breakthrough is the result of a new method of testing an embryo’s genes which can “assess complex traits, such as the risk of some diseases and low intelligence, in IVF embryos.”
The tests haven’t been used yet, but the firm began talks last month with several in vitro fertilisation (IVF) clinics to provide them to customers, The New Scientist said.
For intelligence, Genomic Prediction says that it will only offer the option of screening out embryos deemed likely to have “mental disability”.
However, the same approach could in future be used to identify embryos with genes that make them more likely to have a high IQ, the article continued.

Read More:

Falling Apart': Turmoil as UK Ministers Quit Gov't Protesting May's Brexit Deal

A still image from a video footage shows Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May speaking during Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons, in central London, Britain November 14, 2018
A number of UK ministers has left the government amid disagreements over the controversial draft Brexit deal with Prime Minister Theresa May after she managed to secure the cabinet's support of the agreement.
Following in the footsteps of the UK Northern Ireland minister, Brexit Minister Dominic Raab has also announced his resignation from the government. The announcement almost immediately affected the British currency, with the pound plunging.

"I regret to say that, following the Cabinet meeting yesterday on the Brexit deal, I must resign… For my part, I cannot support the proposed deal for two reasons," Raab said in his resignation letter posted on Twitter.

As the Telegraph revealed later, citing its sources, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Michael Gove has been offered the position of the Brexit minister. Meanwhile, Theresa May's spokesman stated that new ministers would be appointed in the usual way. That is the only official statement on the issue made so far.

Shortly after, the Evening Standard reported that Gove has turned down the Brexit Secretary position.

Raymond Chishti, the Vice Chairman of the British Conservative Party has followed his example, announcing resignation. In a letter addressed to Prime Minister Theresa May, he explained the reasons for the move.

"The terms of the backstop, in effect, the amount in my view to a hybrid membership of the EU Customs Union and Single market and further the EU would hold a veto over our ability to exit," Chishti wrote in the letter. "The UK in effect will be a part of a system where it will be a rule taker without any say on the rules."

At the same time, other officials joined the wave of resignations: Ranil Malcolm Jayawardena, a British Conservative Party politician, resigned as Parliamentary Private Secretaries (PPS) at the Ministry of Justice, the Daily Telegraph reported.

Read More:

The White Nationalist Manifesto reviewed by Gregory Hood

A timely and timeless statement of our values.
The word “racist” has been so overused it means virtually nothing. The same thing is beginning to happen with “white nationalist,” the label journalists have chosen for their opponents during the Donald Trump years. As Karl Marx once noted of the word “communist,” there is hardly a conservative faction, individual, or party that has not been accused of “white nationalism.” Yet unlike “racist,” which was always a slur, “white nationalist” has a real meaning. As Marx said of communists, it is time for white nationalists to publish their views and aims, and counter the nursery tale of the White Nationalist Menace with a manifesto. Greg Johnson has done just that, and in so doing has provided a focus for the entire movement.
The White Nationalist Manifesto clearly lays out the threat to the white race, the moral justification for resisting extinction, and the rationale for white homelands as the best way to ensure survival. Dr. Johnson is an ethnonationalist who believes each ethnicity should have a homeland. He denies the existence of “generic white people,” and would oppose a grand Imperium uniting the entire race.

This distinction is crucial because white nationalism thus becomes a logical extension of patriotism: “We have to assert that being white is a necessary condition of belonging to any European national group, although of course we acknowledge that a shared language, culture, and history are also necessary.” White nationalists are the true defenders of existing nation-states.
Dr. Johnson also answers the question of whether “a worldwide European diaspora of a hundred flags, in which every self-conscious nation has at least one sovereign homeland” would lead to conflict and war as it has in the past. He argues that ethnostates would be “good neighbors to one another” because each would have a secure identity and sense of place that would encourage positive relations between peoples. Distinct homelands based on common peoplehood would encourage respect for the peoplehood of others and foster international trust. And even with distinct homelands, pan-European high culture and cooperation in matters of technology would help unify the white world.
Dr. Johnson also explains why nationalists cannot avoid talking about race. As he notes, the taboo against speaking in defense of white interests is a potentially fatal one that applies to no other group. Whiteness is considered a legitimate concept if it is used to punish whites, but suddenly becomes illegitimate when whites defend themselves. European national identities cannot be separated from whiteness; the pursuit of distinct homelands is fully consistent with a celebration of whites’ nature as “one extended family.”
Despite his attachment to ethnonationalism, Dr. Johnson seems to suggest that today, racial solidarity is more important than national solidarity. Echoing Sam Francis, Dr. Johnson argues that whites are attacked as whites, not as Germans or Frenchmen or Americans. Thus, “[W]hen Europeans resist ethnic displacement, they will increasingly regard their race as their nation and their skin as their uniform.” One could even argue that at the current stage of our efforts, there is already a new “nation” of racially aware Europeans who have more in common with each other than their fellow citizens.
Read More:

And So It Begins: House Dems Move to Ban AR Parts Kits by JORDAN MICHAELS

Democrats filed H.R. 7115 even before they regained control of the U.S. House of Representatives, and now that they hold a solid majority, they’re ready to make their gun control fantasies come true.
Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Democrat from New Jersey, filed the legislation on November 2, 2018, and it’s being co-sponsored by 13 additional representatives. The bill would “prohibit the sale, acquisition, distribution in commerce, or import into the United States of certain firearm receiver castings or blanks, assault weapon parts kits, and machinegun parts kits and the marketing or advertising of such castings or blanks and kits on any medium of electronic communications, to require homemade firearms to have serial numbers, and for other purposes.”
Legislators dubbed the bill the “3–D Firearms Prohibitions Act,” though the text doesn’t mention 3-D printed firearms anywhere beyond the title.
Under H.R. 7115, gun manufacturers would no longer be permitted to sell partially machined receivers for “assault rifles.” Also called “80 percent lowers,” these items do not qualify as “firearms” under U.S. law and have long been a target of gun-control lobbyists because they allow individuals to create “ghost guns,” or firearms without serial numbers.

SEE ALSO: House Dems Will Seek to Criminalize Private Transfers in 2019

For those wanting to manufacture a firearm without using an 80 percent lower, H.R. 7115 also requires all individual firearm makers to request a serial number from the federal government before creating a firearm. The prospective gun maker would contact a federal firearms dealer, who would issue the number using the same process as any other firearms transfer.


The Democrats' Secret Agenda For Impeachment Is Clear

Read More:

Wednesday, November 14, 2018

Killing Time With the Coen Brothers by Steve Sailer

Killing Time With the Coen Brothers
The Coen brothers’ eighteenth movie, The Ballad of Buster Scruggs, might be their whitest yet, despite Mrs. Joel Coen, Frances McDormand, having devoted her Best Actress speech at last March’s Oscars to demanding “inclusion.”
Since Blood Simple in 1984, Joel and Ethan Coen have never much concerned themselves with anybody’s demands for “representation.” Yet Buster Scruggs takes this old tendency of theirs to a new high.
An anthology of six premises for cowboy movies that the Coens have come up with over the years, Buster Scruggs features a cast—the biggest names in it are Liam Neeson, Brendan Gleeson, James Franco, Tom Waits, Tim Blake Nelson, and Tyne Daly (in, curiously, a role that would normally be played by McDormand)—whom the Hispanophilic John Wayne would have found problematically lacking in diversity. Heck, Bonanza featured more nonwhites than does Buster Scruggs (which will debut this Friday on Netflix).
Of course, being “represented” in a movie by the mordant Coens isn’t self-esteem-building. The white characters in Buster Scruggs tend to be homicidal, grasping, or, at best, long-winded.
The only nonwhites in the entire movie are American Indians. They savagely attack twice, comically in the jokey second segment starring Franco as a lowbrow bank robber, thrillingly in the grand next-to-last episode, “The Girl Who Got Rattled,” in which a heroic wagon-train guide makes a one-man stand against a Sioux raid.
This fifth episode of Buster Scruggs features the film’s only romance, starring an excellent Zoe Kazan, the granddaughter of the famous director Elia Kazan, as a well-spoken young woman on the Oregon Trail. “The Girl” is based on an exciting 1901 short story by the almost forgotten Western novelist Stewart Edward WhiteBuster Scruggs reproduces White’s dialogue almost word for word from this passage:
“Now, listen to every word,” he said, rapidly. “Those Injins is goin’ to rush us in a minute….
“And if they kill me first”—he reached forward and seized her wrist impressively—“If they kill me first, you must take that pistol and shoot yourself. Understand? Shoot yourself—in the head—here!” He tapped his forehead with a stubby forefinger….
Read More:

Jair Bolsonaro And The Populist Crisis In Brazil

Establishment parties, the corporate press, and the major banks of Brazil are in a state of panic. The reason is not the financial and political disaster that has afflicted the country since around 2015, but the insurgent candidacy of a colorful outsider and the possibility he might win. After Duterte, Trump, Brexit, Le Pen, Kurz, Salvini and Abe in Europe and Asia, this global phenomenon should by now feel familiar; but in each new case, calcified institutions and their spokesmouths react with the same surprise and outrage. The latest and, for America and the Western world, the most instructive example is this summer in Brazil, where Jair Bolsonaro stands a good chance of becoming the next president.
The convulsions Brazil has experienced over the last few years are unprecedented—at least since democracy was reestablished in the 1980s. One president, Dilma Rousseff, was impeached. Her predecessor Lula da Silva—a figure who for the Brazilian left and also for much of the international left was almost as significant in Brazil as Obama was in the United States—is now in jail. Eike Batista, just a few years ago one of the wealthiest men in the world, an Elon Musk-like futurist who was preparing to revitalize many old neighborhoods in Rio de Janeiro, now has a negative net worth, stands convicted of bribery, and is looking at a thirty-year sentence. The economy is in its worst recession—really a depression—in Brazilian history.
As an on-and-off resident of Rio for some years, I can see how the downturn is felt in day-to-day life, by both rich and poor. The famous Maracana stadium was, at the depth of the crisis, turned into a “ghost” shell of itself; the elegant Theatro Municipal in downtown Rio is mostly shut down for lack of funds, as are many of the city’s other landmarks. Long-established businesses have closed with nothing to replace them; shuttered storefronts, empty bars and restaurants, are a common sight. Worst of all is the crime and lawlessness. The chief driver of criminality has been lack of pay for police, which for a while almost abandoned the streets of even middle-class neighborhoods; the military was invited instead to provide security in the city, as well as for other parts of Brazil that have experienced police strikes. In the better neighborhoods, the situation is not as bad and the danger is often exaggerated, but people live in fear: the streets are empty after 10 PM and many businesses have had to either shut down or shift their hours as a result. The few who can turn to private security firms.
After Rousseff’s impeachment, supported by the vast majority of Brazilians, there was little hope that Michel Temer, the new president, could fix any of these problems. His government pursued a textbook neoliberal reform program of austerity with unfortunately familiar results; he currently enjoys an approval rating in the single digits, and his administration has also been caught up in corruption scandals. Given the severity of the economic and political crisis since 2015 and the failure of Temer’s government to do anything at all about it, it shouldn’t be surprising that people are desperate for something new. Jair Bolsonaro, a nationalist and populist congressman long regarded by the international left as the “most hateful” politician in the democratic world, might be the next president.
Bolsonaro’s background and his views are alarming and possibly confusing to the establishment, but familiar, encouraging, and reassuring to middle-class Brazilians. He is a military man and known as such: trained in a military academy, then a parachutist and captain, he had according to many a distinguished and even brilliant career in the army; he became known nationally after he stood up to the top brass during the 1980s transition period when the new democratic regime was trying to purge the military.
In the early 1990s, he was elected to local government in Rio de Janeiro and then to congress, after which he remained a perpetual maverick and outsider, focused on the corruption of the new Brazil, on the defense of the military against the new left, and on matters of law and order. Law and order, and the problem of criminality, have since at least 1990 been a crucial concern of the Brazilian working and middle classes. To Brazil’s new liberal elite, promoted by the civil educational system and by multiple NGOs—many supported by the United States State Department—it is Bolsonaro’s connection to the military that is most troubling.
Read More:

Pope Orders US Bishops to Be as Negligent as the Vatican Is Written by Michael Matt

US Bishops were told by the Vatican today to suspend taking any action to address the sexual abuse scandals that have been rocking the Church over the past year.
Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, president of the USCCB and archbishop of Galveston-Houston, Texas, announced at the Conference’s national annual meeting this morning that the United States bishops’ expected vote on a new code of conduct for bishops would be postponed for several months.
Cardinal DiNardo told the assembly that the Vatican had requested that actions be delayed until after a global meeting on sexual abuse which is scheduled to take place in February, 2019.
“I remain hopeful that this additional consultation will ultimately improve our response to the crisis we face,” Cardinal DiNardo said.
Cardinal DiNardo’s announcement appeared to be a shock to most of the bishops assembled, who up until this morning had expected the voting to take place Tuesday as planned.
Several of the bishops in attendance expressed disappointment or concern about the delay, believing that actions should take place as quickly as possible to begin to rectify the situation and repair the damage done to the relationship between the faithful and the Church.
“This kind of thing is a blow to what we’re trying to overcome here in the United States – the perception of a hierarchy that is unresponsive to the reality of the tragedy,” said Bishop Shawn McKnight of Jefferson City, who became a bishop this year.
Among many who are scoffing at the latest Vatican sabotage, Anne Barrett Doyle, co-director, called this last-minute order “truly incredible.”
“What we see here is the Vatican again trying to suppress even modest progress by the U.S. bishops,” said Doyle, whose group compiles data on clergy abuse in the church. “We’re seeing where the problem lies, which is with the Vatican. The outcome of this meeting, at best, was going to be tepid and ineffectual, but now it’s actually going to be completely without substance."
REMNANT COMMENT: So much for decentralizing the governance of the Catholic Church.  Bergoglio is beginning to make Borgia look like pussy cats.
But does Pope Francis really think he can have it both ways?  On the one hand, he claims to want decentralization and greater freedom for the bishops to make their own rules regarding liturgy and moral theology. But when things don't go his way, he behaves more like an unhinged mob boss with a laundry list of vendettas to settle. Which is it, Holiness? The Synodal Church of Accompaniment, or the Bergoglian Church of Cosa Nostra?

Read More:

Ending Election Fraud By Daniel John Sobieski

Enough is enough. Election after election, boxes of Democrat ballots show up in counties run by Democratic election supervisors to benefit Democratic candidates who, once they steal their opponent’s election night victory, will join the chorus warning of Russian interference in our elections. Last time I checked, there were no Russian election officials in Palm Beach or Broward counties in Florida.
Democrats have long pushed for voting ease at the expense of voting integrity, pushing measures from voting by mail, to Motor Voter laws, to same-day registration while opposing voter ID laws which requires people to show up on election day with proof they are who they say they are. They claim Voter ID laws are designed to disenfranchise voters. So does the sudden appearance of mystery ballots days, even weeks, after elections without a documented chain of custody or certainty that other ballots weren’t destroyed or that the ballots found were cast by real, live American citizens.
One is reminded of the classic case of an arguably close stolen election, the 1960 presidential contest between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon and the vote early, vote often city of Chicago where voting was such a passion that death was no impediment to that civic duty:
At some point on election night Robert Kennedy, the candidate's brother and campaign manager, was counting electoral votes. Information was coming in quickly through the television networks but there was not much information on Illinois, a very large state. Most of Illinois was rural and traditionally Republican and the state's largest city, Chicago (then the second largest city in the country as I recall), was and remains heavily Democratic. The mayor of Chicago at the time was Richard J Daley, reputedly a powerful political boss. There was no information at all from Chicago and its suburbs at this point and it was coming in scattered from the prairie regions. Robert Kennedy wanted to know how many votes Mayor Daley and his people had counted in Chicago.
Daley was harried, dealing with precincts all over the city, trying to compile and report them at an alarming rate. His answer to Robert Kennedy's question on vote totals was reputedly, "How many votes do you need?" The campaign manager told the Mayor he'd get back to him and Mayor Daley called with a vote total about an hour later, shortly before Illinois' heavily Democratic total was reported on the three major television networks.
As election night victories seemingly slip away from GOP candidates like Martha McSally in Arizona, Brian Kemp in Georgia, and Rick Scott and Ron DeSantis in Florida, one can almost hear Democrat operatives and election officials asking the same question -- how many votes does the Democrat candidate need? As in the race that put Al Franken in the Senate, recounts and lawsuits will inevitably continue until the Democrat takes the lead and then the counting will stop with nary a protest from the legacy media or the Russians.
Take the little-noticed flip of a Republican congressional seat in New Mexico after a supposed election night victory was announced by local and national media for the GOP contender. This was the announcement by ABC:
Wednesday 2:18 a.m. EST -- Republican Yvette Herrell has defeated Democrat Xochitl Torres Small in New Mexico’s 2nd Congressional District, ABC News can project. Herrell is the first woman to represent the district.

Read More:

Liberals vs. Mother Nature: Freddie Mercury, AIDS, and Minority-Worship

Who is the biggest hate-criminal in the world? There’s only one contender and you may be shocked to learn that it’s a female. Worse still, that female is as immortal as she is immoral. For millennia, she’s been hating on humanity, discriminating between different groups and imposing inequality, preventing women from matching the intellectual, cultural and physical achievements of men, flatly refusing to allow sub-Saharan Africans to flourish in science, mathematics and philosophy.
Hateful, horrible and heretical
Yes, let me introduce you to that hateful, horrible and heretical harridan known as Mother Nature. Quite clearly she is the biggest hate-criminal there ever has been and ever will be. Forgetthe Patriarchy: it’s the Matriarchy, the rule of Mother Nature, that really explains why the world is such an unfair and unequal place.  She’s responsible for that vast and on-going hate-crime known as human evolution, whereby human beings in different environments have acquired different bodies, brains and psychologies. In other words, race exists and different races aren’t equal. Mother Nature hasn’t treated Homo as a special, post-biological genus. She didn’t relax natural selection when human beings invented new technologies like fire, the bow-and-arrow, and the written word. Instead, she accelerated it. Neanderthals had to be robust and muscular because they hunted at close range, but that selective pressure was removed whenHomo sapiens developed throwing-spears and poisoned arrows. Slender Bushmen bring down giraffe and rhinoceros with ingenuity and cunning, not brute strength and aggression.
But Mother Nature doesn’t commit her hate-crimes at the same rate all over the earth. There are hot-spots of hate, that is, places where human evolution has operated in particularly interesting and complex ways. One of the most intense hot-spots is the Indian subcontinent, the region of Asia that stretches from Pakistan in the west to Bangladesh in the east and Sri Lanka in the far south, with India in the middle. The subcontinent is what you could call anS.S.S.I. — a Site of Special Scientific Interest. Mother Nature has been very busy there for a very long time. Whether you’re interested in geology, zoology, or botany, in archaeology, anthropology or linguistics, in religion, literature or philosophy, the Indian subcontinent is a fascinating place.

But the most important part of its dazzling variety may turn out to be its genetics. It’s one of the places where Mother Nature has most comprehensively blasphemed against the liberal dogma that “We’re All the Same under the Skin.” In fact, we aren’t, and the Indian subcontinent provides abundant proof. The genetic complexity introduced by ancient invasions and migrations was further enhanced by the intricate rules of the Hindu caste system, whereby different professions and classes were banned from intermarriage. This created a whole series of ethnicities and micro-ethnicities, as genetic lines separated, occupied different cultural environments, and evolved in different ways. Literacy and mastery of complex intellectual systems were compulsory for Brahmins, but prohibited for Dalits.
Sectarian supernovae
Today, India is one of the most genetically complex and cognitively stratified nations on earth. It has groups with high average IQ and groups with low average IQ. The self-taught Indian genius Srinivasa Ramanujan (1887–1920) was a Tamil Brahmin who contributed more to mathematics in a short lifetime than many millions of sub-Saharan Blacks have in centuries. He was like a supernova outshining all the millions of stars in a galaxy.
You could say the same of the Pakistani scientist Abdus Salam (1926–96). He contributed more to physics in seventy years of life than many millions of Blacks have in centuries. And he won a Nobel Prize in 1979 for his contributions. It was the first scientific Nobel ever won by a Muslim — at least, that’s what infidels outside Pakistan would say. But in Pakistan itself it’sillegal to say Salam was a Muslim, because he belonged to a heretical sect known as the Ahmadis, who are persecuted in Muslim countries (and outside them — see the murder of the Ahmadi shopkeeper Asad Shah in Glasgow). But is it genetically significant that Abdus Salam was Ahmadi? Has the group evolved or preserved higher intelligence by separation and interbreeding? Or were Salam’s caste and clan the important thing? He was a “Jat of Rajput descent from Jhang on his father’s side” and “a Kakazai from Gurdaspur” on his mother’s.
Biology is bigger than biography

Read More:


Image result for ON WOKE CAPITAL parallax optics
Twitter account @WokeCapital charts the intersection of Capital and the Cathedral, illuminating it via retweeting / re-contextualising some of the most egregious, yet disturbingly typical, corporate equality and diversity PR circulating the twittersphere. 
Parallax Optics is privileged to have secured an exclusive interview with the man behind the account, the first in an upcoming series of interviews to be hosted here.
When did you first become aware of Woke Capital as the nexus connecting orthodox state progressivism to large ‘capitalist’ corporations?
The campaign/run up to the Election of Trump – not to mention what came after – really laid things bare. Prior to that, I hadn’t really formulated a coherent conception of Woke Capital. I’ve worked in big bureaucratic organizations for most of my adult life, and I’m a product of the American public school system (not to be confused with Public Schools in the UK, which are analogous to what we call Private Schools here). As far back as middle school, I could recall a certain preaching with regard to certain topics, and how we were being Made to Care (narrator voice: I never did). The clearest examples include Global Warming (now given the Orwellian moniker “Climate Change”) in Science classes, Black History in History class. As a kid, I remember doing a project on George Washington Carver, the Great Black American who… invented Peanut Butter? (Turns out, he actually didn’t even do that). I mention this context, because I distinctly remember feeling the same way when I had my first workplace sexual harassment, diversity training, etc. It felt like I was being manipulated, being Made to Care.
During the 2012 presidential election, I noticed the failings of conservatism and libertarianism, and came to some conclusions that somehow led me to the Reactosphere and, of course, Moldbug. Having had pretty strong Libertarian “muh corporations” impulses in the past, it probably took me a few more years to truly notice Woke Capital as a Thing. If I had to pinpoint a time where it all coalesced, I’d have to say it was in 2015 when I was made aware that Goldman Sachs was flying a Pride Flag on their flagpole next to the American Flag.
Do you perceive a who > whom dynamic at the core of the interrelationship of the Cathedral and Capital, or do you view the relationship as symbiotic?
You know, it’s a bit hard to pinpoint things because I think there are actually multiple phenomena at play with regard to Woke Capital. If I had to break it down, I’d come up with something like this; you’ve got the True Believers, the Havel’s Greengrocers, the Cynical Opportunists, and some mixture of the three. Be easy on me, this is a somewhat half-baked idea, but I’m going to forge ahead with wild abandon nonetheless.
True Believers – this is pretty straightforward. They’ve taken the Blue Pill, they’ve internalized decades of Cathedral Propaganda, and they basically walk the walk. Very few successful corps have been built up or run by True Believers, because the Cathedral religion is basically a giant fuck you to Gnon. On the other hand, some successful corporations have been cordycepted by true believer entryists, or cynically promote them into positions of power for PR. I’ll come back to that last point in a moment, but basically this ends in “Go Woke, Get Broke” and a steady decrease in quality, innovation, performance, etc. as the True Believers burn accumulated capital/brand value in a conflagration of wokeness.
Havel’s Greengrocers – this is a reference to Vaclav Havel’s seminal essay “The Power of the Powerless”, wherein a greengrocer puts a “Workers of the World, Unite!” sign on his store in communist Eastern Europe not because he believes it, but because it’s the party line and he wants no trouble. The analog to today’s Woke Corp is the Pride Flag, or the Black Lives Matter sign, or some other iconography of the Progressive (Cathedral) Religion. The motivation for these types is to stay in business; it’s basically a risk mitigation strategy, as any company perceived as insufficiently woke may be penalized with lawsuits or boycotts, etc. Pay some lip service to the religion, pay the danegeld, pay the mafia protection money. It’s the path of least resistance, and it’s unsustainable, but one can understand this impulse. It’d be wrong to call it a coward’s impulse, because heretics truly can be (and have been) destroyed. If you’ve got a family to feed, or employees who depend on you for a livelihood, you swallow the bitter pill and do what you think must be done. There’s nothing brave about being destroyed, where your “martyrdom” would just encourage others to try even harder to avoid that fate. Note that I’m anon. Other characters who fit this archetype are your Boomer, your normie flavored NPC, your naive, principled moderates, whose principles and good faith get exploited.
Cynical Opportunists – these are the ones who see an angle to virtue signaling. Hey, those gays and single women sure do have a lot of disposable income! Hey, we can import cheap immigrant labor to drive down costs! Hey, we can get benefits/take advantage of government programs if we do X, where X might be something like build affordable housing, or hire a certain number of diversity candidates, etc. These people don’t actually believe the bullshit, but are hyperaware of status dynamics and from whence power flows. Many of these are Sociopathic Status Maximizers (SSMs; not a term I made up).
Mixture – this is the most common for your average WokeCorp. Most often, you’ve got true believers in the HR/Diversity and Inclusion positions, who then instruct leadership on how they’re supposed to engage with Wokeness. The greengrocers either go ahead with it due to naivete or as a risk management technique to avoid seeming out of touch or regressive. The ol’ Boomer in the corner office thinking “Well, it doesn’t make sense to me, but this PhD in People Studies is saying this is best practices, so I trust that this is how we do business in the 21st century”. The opportunists see an opportunity to pick up good PR, or sell more to a certain segment with lots of disposable income.
What I find most powerful about the @WokeCapital account is how it takes something I was previously aware of and proves it, definitively. Your method involves compounding thousands of tweets, which are effectively corporate sacramental offerings, in the process distilling them into something extremely potent. Can you say a bit more about the methodology of the @WokeCapital account, from your perspective?
You and I both find this most powerful. I recognized Woke Capital as a Thing back in 2015, but it’s hard to really wrap your head around if you’re not actively studying the phenomenon. You see some woke ad on TV, role your eyes at it, and go back to your life. You see blatant political advocacy in some corp in the news, and feel irritated, but forget about it. This account documents everything; from the most egregious PC protestations, to the everyday virtue signal that people often don’t even recognize as virtue signaling. By aggregating it all in one place, showing the constant barrage of Cathedral proselytizing from virtually every company, I think we craft a powerful narrative that can’t simply be dismissed or forgotten.
Credit Suisse giving Woman of the Year to some married hetero man is arresting, and gives people the “whoa, what a wacky, one-off story” sort of feel. But showing how all companies constantly signal diversity and inclusion, future is female, intersectional garbage… this is the real power of Woke Capital. The comparatively subtle “we embrace diversity and inclusion” crap is actually more dangerous than the outrage generating calculated PR “gaffe”. It’s a matter of boiling the frog vs sautéing it, though both ultimately move the Overton window left. And this is the point I try to get across. In fact, when I first started, I tried to find woke tweets from every company on the Dow and S&P 500 I could think of. Name a company, I’ll show you Cathedral propaganda. To date, I know only ONE publicly traded company where I couldn’t find any woke signaling whatsoever. I’m not going to reveal which company, as I wouldn’t want to bring the Eye of Soros down upon them.
As for the methodology, I try to stay on brand with WokeCapital, and for maximum impact I try to avoid the industries that everybody already knows are woke (Big Tech, Big Media, etc). At the beginning, it was unclear whether WokeCap should simply RT companies, post screengrabs without comment, or add some of my own perspective. Ultimately, I went with the lattermost option. RT’s would fail if the company deleted their tweet, and would likely irritate my followers because the tweets would be indistinguishable from corporate advertising on their TL. I informally A/B tested screengrabs with and without comment, and found people responded better to tweets with my commentary. I try to minimize my “voice” as much as possible, but my message discipline varies day to day. One thing that I’d like to clarify with regard to my “voice” is that my objection is to the corporate behavior more than anything else. Nigga, you sell children’s toys, what does that have to do with poopdick? (the answer to this question is actually quite troubling). What I personally think about gays, women, minorities, miscegenation, the environment, overseas conflict, refugees, etc. doesn’t matter, and I don’t want it to be a distraction.
Read More:

Saturday, November 10, 2018

Russia Driven Into China's Arms By Bad American Policy

It is difficult to understand why any country would adopt a foreign policy so stupid it results in driving its chief adversaries into each other's arms but that is exactly what America has done. The clowns directing such things could not have devised a more self-defeating pathway to take us down if they had made it their goal. While there is much blame to lay about we must place a great deal of it at the feet of the Obama administration.  Putin, when challenged, ran over Obama and showed the world who ran the show in both Syria and Ukraine. We can thank Obama's misguided policies and all the anti-Russian talk flowing out of America for this. Much of what we see today grows out of Putin's mid-2012 response to Obama.  

Simply put, Putin is a thorn in the side of America's deep state and the pro "New World Order" forces. He stands as a shield against the Western progressive vision of what mankind’s future ought to be and rejects the New World Order agenda established at the Cold War’s end by the United States. By putting "Russia first" he defies progressives and speaks for those millions of Europeans who wish to restore their national identities and recapture their lost sovereignty from the supranational European Union. When pressed Putin is non-apologetic in reminding the world Russia has a huge nuclear arsenal and will use it if necessary. 

Our deep state's relentless effort to destroy Putin has failed and instead elevated his position as a power broker. Over the years we have seen Putin reach out and establish relationships and bonds with many countries in reaction to the constant barrage and attacks from the warmongers of the deep state, however, the biggest and most concerning should be the growing bond between China and Russia which is based on logic and reciprocity. Russia which borders China has vast natural resources and China has become a low-cost producer of consumer goods searching for a market so the potential for trade is massive and a big win-win for both the economy of China and Russia. 

The irony of what is happening should not be lost nor the cost America has incurred underestimated as a result of our poorly crafted policies. While many Americans cringe when they think about the billions of dollars of consumer goods we import from China every month what makes it even more bizarre is that China is an American made product. Decades ago America started down a perilous path to build China into a world power,  a  pathological fear of  Russia and the Kremlin’s atheism caused America to seek a counterbalance in the region. Central to the American effort was offering the prospect of economic incentives to China, we combined this with a hard-line military response to communist aggression. 

Read More:


From traffic accidents to troops relieving themselves in public places and bars left without beer, this year’s edition of NATO-led Trident Juncture drills has every chance to leave lasting memories in Norway and beyond.
Trident Juncture 2018 was by far the largest exercise hosted by Norway since the end of the Cold War and the largest NATO has held in decades. Involving some 50,000 troops from 31 countries, about 10,000 combat vehicles and 250, the Trident Juncture was to hone the troops’ combat skills in harsh Nordic climate – the one that probably led to some embarrassing setbacks.

‘Sh**ty job’

Residents of Norway have filed hundreds of complaints with their country’s military, drawing attention to human waste left by foreigners in public places. NATO troops – mostly Swedes and Americans – were reportedly caught relieving themselves near kindergartens, schools, and sports facilities, according to Norway’s broadcaster NRK.
Other complaints came from local farmers who were angry about their property being damaged by armored vehicles. Norwegian Major Marianne Bo, responsible for damages and environmental protection during the NATO exercise, said the army usually has “a system for treating this” but something apparently went wrong.
“This is terrible, it’s about having common decency,” the officer lamented. “We have to clean up after soldiers who have relieved themselves. It’s literally a s****y job.” The news was met will little praise from Trident Juncture HQ either, which promised to take all the complaints seriously.
Read More: