Thursday, February 23, 2017

Name for invasive peoples

Much of the news media refuses to use the term "illegal alien", and saying things like "undocumented immigrant" instead.

Now I learn that ecologists use the terms "alien species" and "invasive species", with the main difference being that the latter term is used to imply harm.

And many ppl argue that illegal aliens are beneficial to the USA, because they supply cheap labor, drive down wages, and support Democrats. And they validate some silly poem about "wretched refuse" ppl.

So maybe we need a term like "invasive peoples" to convey harm. The main objection to illegal aliens is not that they are illegal or that they are alien; it is that they are intruders who are destroying the ecosystem. The term "wretched refuse", which seems popular among pro-immigration folks, seems too pejorative.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

High Noon was a Commie Film

NPR Radio Fresh Air just broadcast an episode on how the 1952 movie High Noon was made by a Communist. He knew the the Commies were evil but refused to testify about them and got a fat financial settlement.

The guest was pushing a book claiming that the movie was some sort of statement about Communism. In his view, the town was a metaphor for Hollywood, and its spineless amoral cowardly residents represent the leftist Jews who run the movie business.

The guest also complains about the Hollywood blacklist and President Trump.

I do not see this movie as creating sympathy for Communists and leftist Jews who refused to testify. I do not get whatever point the guest was making.

NPR says:
In the late 1940s and early 1950s, as anti-communist sentiment gained ground in the United States, paranoia and persecution swept through Hollywood. The House Un-American Activities (HUAC) began interrogating some of the country's most talented filmmakers and actors, accusing them of being communists or communist sympathizers.

Author Glenn Frankel tells Fresh Air's Terry Gross that the government was "looking to see or to prove that there had been communist infiltration in Hollywood, that this was part of a mass plot engineered by Moscow to take over our cultural institutions."

Many who appeared before the HUAC were put on a blacklist that made it impossible for them to work in show business. Among the blacklisted was screenwriter Carl Foreman, whose 1952 classic western High Noon is seen as a parable about the toxic political climate of the time.
But as the program explains, Foreman was not blacklisted for appearing before the HUAC. He was blacklisted for being a Communist, for refusing to repudiate Communism, and for cowardly refusing to testify about Communist infiltration of Hollywood.

It may seem paranoid today to suggest that Hollywood filmmakers were communists or communist sympathizers, but this author confirms that Foreman was both. He was a member of the Communist Party, and he went to a lot of trouble to cover up for other Communists who were putting propaganda into films. Apparent Foremen himself was putting propaganda into High Noon, altho his thinking was apparently so twisted that most ppl missed it.

Representation in Hollywood

Ever hear anyone say that blacks are not properly represented in Hollywood? From this chart, it appears that black representation more closely matches the American population than other major groups. The underrepresented groups are Whites and Latinos.

The NY Times had an article complaining that Beyonce had only won 22 Grammys. It is funny how that paper always finds a way to blame white non-Jews for everything.

Monday, February 20, 2017

Are Liberals Helping Trump?

From a NY Times opinion column:
Are Liberals Helping Trump? ...

Liberals may feel energized by a surge in political activism, and a unified stance against a president they see as irresponsible and even dangerous. But that momentum is provoking an equal and opposite reaction on the right. In recent interviews, conservative voters said they felt assaulted by what they said was a kind of moral Bolshevism — the belief that the liberal vision for the country was the only right one. Disagreeing meant being publicly shamed.

Protests and righteous indignation on social media and in Hollywood may seem to liberals to be about policy and persuasion. But moderate conservatives say they are having the opposite effect, chipping away at their middle ground and pushing them closer to Mr. Trump.

“The name calling from the left is crazy,” said Bryce Youngquist, 34, who works in sales for a tech start-up in Mountain View, Calif., a liberal enclave where admitting you voted for Mr. Trump is a little like saying in the 1950s that you were gay. ...

“The Democratic Party has changed so much that I don’t even recognize it anymore,” she said. “These people are destroying our democracy. They are scarier to me than these Islamic terrorists. I feel absolutely disgusted with them and their antics. It strengthens people’s resolve in wanting to support President Trump. It really does.”
There has been a political re-alignment. The crazy left (aka the Ctrl-Left) is on one side, and Trump is on the other.

The NY Times prints lies about Trump every day.

Pat Buchanan explains some of Trump's enemies:
But the deep state is after larger game than General Flynn. It is out to bring down President Trump and abort any move to effect the sort of rapprochement with Russia that Ronald Reagan achieved.

For the deep state is deeply committed to Cold War II.

Hence, suddenly, we read reports of a Russian spy ship off the Connecticut, Delaware and Virginia coasts, of Russian jets buzzing a U.S. warship in the Black Sea, and Russian violations of Reagan’s INF treaty outlawing intermediate-range missiles in Europe.

Purpose: Stampede the White House into abandoning any idea of a detente with Russia. And it appears to be working. At a White House briefing Tuesday, Sean Spicer said, “President Trump has made it very clear that he expects the Russian government to … return Crimea.”

Is the White House serious?

Putin could no more survive returning Crimea to Ukraine than Bibi Netanyahu could survive giving East Jerusalem back to Jordan.
From another opinion column:
A ton of folks are coming to Kjellberg’s aid after this whole thing, saying that The Journal has blown the whole thing out of proportion. Do you buy that?

Farhad: Well, if by “blown out of proportion” he means they accurately reported that he’s repeatedly invoked Nazi imagery and recently paid some folks to hold up a sign saying “Death to All Jews,” then I guess that’s right!
As I understand it, PewDiePie was paying ppl $5 to make distasteful statements, to see how far they would go. The WSJ is more Fake News. Disney is also pretty disgusting for going along with this.

Yesterday's NY Times editorial argued:
Where could the demonizing and dehumanizing of the foreign born lead but to a whiter America? You have heard the lies ...

Think of the message sent if the “day without immigrants,” in which foreign-born workers stayed home, became a week or a month.
I guess it is saying that a "whiter America" would be the message, and the non-white interests that control the NY Times are against that. They advocate anti-white policies at every opportunity.

Of course these white-haters call Trump and his followers a racist at every opportunity. After his press conference last week, they were all calling him racist for how he offered to meet with the Congressional Black Caucus. Or maybe it was for not recognizing the initials "CBC" in a black reporters question. Or maybe it was for thinking if someone is trying to get him to have a particular kind of meeting, then that someone might want to facilitate the meeting. I am not sure, as they mainly just use name-calling and do not explain themselves.

Saturday, February 18, 2017

Why Jews are called Jews

I think that I am understanding the Israel-Arab situation better. The United Nations, Democrat Party, and various others propose a two-state solution. The ppl who live in what would be those two states are against it.

Israel's position is:
So here’s the substance: There are two prerequisites for peace that I laid out two years -- several years ago, and they haven’t changed.

First, the Palestinians must recognize the Jewish state. They have to stop calling for Israel’s destruction. They have to stop educating their people for Israel’s destruction.

Second, in any peace agreement, Israel must retain the overriding security control over the entire area west of the Jordan River. ...

Why do - - why are Jews called Jews? Well, the Chinese are called Chinese because they come from China. The Japanese are called Japanese because they come from Japan. Well, Jews are called Jews because they come from Judea. This is our ancestral homeland. Jews are not foreign colonialists in Judea.
The Palestinian Arabs also have two demands: ethnic cleansing of the West Bank, and unlimited Arab immigration into Israel.

Israel has repeatedly offered a separate state to the Palestinian Arabs, if it would bring peace, but they have rejected it every time.

In short, the Jews want an ethnic state like China and Japan, and the Palestinian Arabs want to exterminate the Jews.

Friday, February 17, 2017

Unprecedented: ICE nabs illegal alien criminal

The Wash. Post reports:
A hearing in El Paso County in Texas went from ordinary to “unprecedented” last week when half a dozen Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents showed up at a courthouse where an undocumented woman was seeking a protective order against the boyfriend she accused of abusing her.

The woman, a citizen of Mexico who was living in El Paso had been driven to the courthouse by a victim’s advocate from the Center Against Sexual and Family Violence, a shelter for victims of domestic abuse where she had been living.

She left under arrest. ...

The woman had a prior criminal record and had been previously deported, ...

Last fall the undocumented immigrant filed her first of three police reports against her live-in boyfriend, whom she accused of punching, kicking and choking her, and of pulling her hair. A report from December alleged, according to Bernal, that after failing to stab her with a knife, the boyfriend threw the blade at her instead. He missed. ...

The ICE affidavit does not identify from whom they learned of the woman’s undocumented status, but it says the department “received information that an individual who had been previously deported was in the United States.” The information “mentioned” that the woman had filed a protective order against her boyfriend, who, at the time the affidavit was filed, was in custody for forgery of a financial instrument. The affidavit also states the exact time and place of the woman’s court hearing and that she was living at the domestic violence shelter.
Unprecedented? Now that there is a precedent, I hope to see more deportations of ppl like this.a

I hope I don't hear anyone say that she should be allowed to stay because she filed three police reports, or because tax-funded legal aid workers are assisting her.

Even if you want to help this poor woman, there is very little you can do for someone who keeps filing police reports against her boyfriend, but also keeps moving back in with him.

Thursday, February 16, 2017

Day without Immigrants

Did we really have a day without immigrants? I don't think that they made their point well enuf. Maybe we need a year without immigrants to make the point.

Wednesday, February 15, 2017

Rants against virtue signalling

Beau Albrecht writes about virtue signalling:
Following a discussion about the transition of power from the old American elite to what James Burnham called the managerial class, Francis describes the type of world the globalists want:
The culture the managers seek to build places more value on individual achievement and “merit” (defined largely as the ability to acquire and exercise managerial and technical skills) than on family inheritance, on sexual fulfillment than postponement of gratification and the breeding and rearing of children, on social mobility and advancement rather than identification with family, community, race, and nation.

But in addition to the family, the managerial class simply does not need other traditional institutional structures to maintain its power— not the local community, not religion, not traditional cultural and moral codes, not ethnic and racial identities, and not even the nation-state itself. Indeed, such institutions merely get in the way of managerial power. They represent barriers against which the managerial state, corporations, and other mass organizations are always bumping, and the sooner such barriers are leveled, the more reach and power the organizations, and the managerial elites that run them, will acquire.
So this is why they favor rootless cosmopolitanism and anti-family policies. These are goals that they have in common with cultural Marxism, though for their own reasons. This new version of leftist ideology fits their agenda quite well, and (at least in practice) it’s not too concerned with vast extremes of wealth, quite unlike old-school Socialism. So globalist plutocrats naturally latch onto something that lets them feel good about themselves and what they’re doing.
And here is a CH rant on the matter, in his peculiar jargon:
Her husband is nothing more than a plush betablob placeholder to grant legitimacy to his reckless Queen’s rule. He has the look of a man in pain. Physical pain as well as soul pain. His limbic system is constipated with suppressed and compacted emotions; you can tell he’s got something big to shout at the world, but he dare not lest his Queen cast him the icy gaze implying present and future sexlessness.

Christcucks are a scourge on Christianity, the Final Feminization of a once-great religion that is rapidly degenerating into a feelz therapy session for the racially alienated and the egotistically coddled. Jesus would, if he were alive today, lash them and strike them from His kingdom like he did the money-changers from the temple. He would know that Christcuckery isn’t love, but empty virtue signaling and moral posturing, much like the ostentatious shows of religiosity of the Pharisees that Jesus condemned in his day.
That blog CH (aka Roissy, aka Citizen Renegade, aka Heariste) frequently faces censorship demands. Truth hurts.

I am getting more and more contemptuous of those who engage in virtue signalling. Those ppl are nearly always making the world a worse place.

Monday, February 13, 2017

The globalists want a managerial class

Beau Albrecht writes about virtue signalling:
Following a discussion about the transition of power from the old American elite to what James Burnham called the managerial class, Francis describes the type of world the globalists want:
The culture the managers seek to build places more value on individual achievement and “merit” (defined largely as the ability to acquire and exercise managerial and technical skills) than on family inheritance, on sexual fulfillment than postponement of gratification and the breeding and rearing of children, on social mobility and advancement rather than identification with family, community, race, and nation.

But in addition to the family, the managerial class simply does not need other traditional institutional structures to maintain its power— not the local community, not religion, not traditional cultural and moral codes, not ethnic and racial identities, and not even the nation-state itself. Indeed, such institutions merely get in the way of managerial power. They represent barriers against which the managerial state, corporations, and other mass organizations are always bumping, and the sooner such barriers are leveled, the more reach and power the organizations, and the managerial elites that run them, will acquire.
So this is why they favor rootless cosmopolitanism and anti-family policies. These are goals that they have in common with cultural Marxism, though for their own reasons. This new version of leftist ideology fits their agenda quite well, and (at least in practice) it’s not too concerned with vast extremes of wealth, quite unlike old-school Socialism. So globalist plutocrats naturally latch onto something that lets them feel good about themselves and what they’re doing.

Saturday, February 11, 2017

Apple wants to censor the news

The London Telegraph reports:
Tim Cook, the boss of Apple, is calling for governments to launch a public information campaign to fight the scourge of fake news, which is “killing people’s minds”.

In an impassioned plea, Mr Cook, boss of the world’s largest company, says that the epidemic of false reports “is a big problem in a lot of the world” and necessitates a crackdown by the authorities and technology firms.

In an exclusive interview with The Daily Telegraph, he calls for a campaign similar to those that changed attitudes on the environment to educate the public on the threat posed by fabricated online stories.

Made-up news reports trying to promote a particular agenda gained huge traction on social media in the US during the election.
NPR radio news quoted this with approval.

Cook and NPR are on the Ctrl-Left, and they want to police the fake news. They are mad that they lost the election, and blame their loss on their failure to control the dissemination of info. Meanwhile, NPR broadcasts Trump-haters doing anti-Trump rants every day.

Monday, February 06, 2017

Psychologists were motivated by anxiety

The LA Times reports:
In Washington, D.C., revelers and protesters are marking the ascendance of a new president and the populist movement he says he has mobilized.

Some 1,600 miles away in San Antonio, thousands of psychologists from around the world are also marking the dawn of the Trump era by focusing their attention on the thought processes that prompt some people to resist and reject science. Matters for which there is a broad scientific consensus — including man-made climate change, the safety of childhood vaccines and Darwin’s theory of evolution — have been attacked as hoaxes and lies by senior members of the new administration.

Psychologists have come up with a name for this trend: the “anti-enlightenment movement.”

To better understand it, these professional observers of human behavior will draw from a recent election campaign in which fake news exploded, conspiracy theories flourished and derision was heaped on elites of all kinds.

“We were motivated by anxiety,” said social psychologist Matthew Hornsey, who organized a symposium on the issue for this weekend’s annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology.
Is this a joke? Psychologists want to lecture us on scientific thinking and fake news?

Psychology, more than any other field, has been a big source of fake science news. More bogus research comes out of Psychology than anywhere. From the top universities on down, probably half the published papers are completely worthless.

It is also one of the most politicized. There are no social psychologists who are conservatives. I doubt that you could even find 1% of them who would use the term at all. Pretty much all psychologists live in some sort of bubble that is detached from science and reality.

Friday, February 03, 2017

Uber chief is the latest America hater

The Trump presidency has clarified the aims of the Left. The latest company to be exposed as an anti-American evil is Uber.

Here is a silly argument:
According to the Cato Institute, the United States admitted 3,252,493 refugees between 1975 and 2015. Twenty of them were terrorists. This represents some 0.00062 percent of all refugees. Only three attacks carried out by these refugees were successful.

In total, in a span of forty years, “terrorist refugees” have killed three people in the United States.

But what about the attacks in San Bernardino, the Orlando Pulse Nightclub shooting, the Boston Marathon bombings, and 9/11? Are these not “proof” that such a ban is warranted? After all, the individuals responsible for the attacks had some connection to foreign countries.

In reality, the current executive order would have stopped exactly none of these attacks.

The Pulse Nightclub shooter was born in New York and was a U.S. citizen. Of the two San Bernardino shooters, one was born in Chicago. The other, his wife, was born in Pakistan and lived in Saudi Arabia — neither country is on the “banned” list. The Tsatnaev brothers, responsible for the Boston bombings, were born in Kyrgyzstan. People from Kyrgyzstan aren’t banned under the current executive order. Of the 19 people responsible for hijacking four airplanes on 9/11, 15 were from Saudi Arabia, two were from the UAE, one was from Egypt, and one was from Lebanon. Again, these countries aren’t on the “banned” list. ...

Yes, you are more likely to be killed by a gun-wielding toddler than a terrorist.
So we should let the Moslem refugees in, and jail the toddlers?!

No, this is an argument to extend the ban to other Moslem countries. And to deport the Moslems who are already here.

It is true that the govt can spend 2 years vetting a Moslem refugee, determine that he is not connected to any terror networks, let him become a citizen, and then his kid could become a Moslem terrorist.

Terrorism is just the most obvious problem. These refugees and migrants cause a long list of other problems. Just look at how Uber has exploited immigrants and turned them into America-haters.

White House accused of softcore denial

Deborah Lipstadt writes in Atlantic mag:
I quickly learned that the White House had released a statement for Holocaust Remembrance Day that did not mention Jews or anti-Semitism. Instead it bemoaned the “innocent victims.” ... the White House, by not referring to Jews, was acting in an “inclusive” manner.

The de-Judaization of the Holocaust, as exemplified by the White House statement, is what I term softcore Holocaust denial. ...

Softcore denial uses different tactics but has the same end-goal. (I use hardcore and softcore deliberately because I see denial as a form of historiographic pornography.) ...

What we saw from the White House was classic softcore denial. The Holocaust was de-Judaized. ...

Deborah Lipstadt is the Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish History and Holocaust Studies at Emory University.
I first heard of her when she wrote a book arguing that Holocaust scholars should not debate or try to refute historians with alternative facts.

I guess she gets paid a big salary for sticking to her Holocaust views.

I just post this as info on what a Holocaust denier is. It might be someone who merely used inclusive terms for Holocaust victims.

Here is another Jewish view:
We, Rabbis from across the United States, call on our newly elected officials to keep America’s doors open to refugees.

Faced with the largest refugee crisis in all of human history, the United States must continue to be a safe haven ...
Of course they want to flood America with non-Christians, and keep non-Jews out of Israel. It is amazing how much these ppl hate white Christians.

The NY Times also hates white Christians, and complains:
Mr. Thiel weighed in on the controversy Saturday night, saying through a spokesman that he did not support a religious test for entry into America, “and the administration has not imposed one.” He was the only major figure in Silicon Valley to vocally support the president. ...

About 30,000 people apply for citizenship every year in New Zealand, where the population is less than five million, according to data from the country’s Internal Affairs Department. Only a handful — around one to two dozen a year — are approved for citizenship by the minister of internal affairs under “exceptional” circumstances, the data showed.

Mr. Thiel was one of those. In the application, he noted that he did not fulfill the residency requirements and said that he did not intend to live in the country if he secured citizenship.
Thiel wants to invest money there, but not live there. Who would have a problem with that? The fact that they are so restrictive about immigration makes it a better place to live.

Thursday, February 02, 2017

Have to say pregnant people

Breitbart reports:
Doctors have been told to refer to expectant mothers as “pregnant people” so as not to offend transgender people, in official guidelines issued by the British Medical Association (BMA).

The controversial advice appears in a 14-page booklet on “inclusive language in the workplace” which also rules that the terms ‘biologically male’ and ‘biologically female’ are problematic, and instructs doctors to instead say that the individual was ‘assigned’ male or female at birth.

The union’s new guidelines come just weeks after it emerged that a British woman in the process of ‘transitioning’ gender put her operation on hold to have a baby, the Mail on Sunday reports.

775,000 women give birth in Britain each year, yet there are no other known cases of people in the process of ‘transition’ becoming pregnant.

Despite this, the BMA demands the word ‘mothers’ be dropped from doctors’ vocabularies in relation to pregnancy because it’s offensive to transgender people, and in order to “celebrate diversity”. ...

Members are advised against using ‘male-centric language’, an example of which is the instruction to use the term ‘family name’ instead of ‘surname’, the booklet noting that some linguists believe the latter word “may originate from sire-name, the name derived from one’s father”.

‘Christian name’ is another term the BMA say should be banished from doctors’ vocabularies, the guidelines stating that “to ask a Jewish or Muslim person their Christian name not only makes no sense, but is also highly disrespectful of their beliefs.”

In a section of the booklet relating to race, doctors are warned that “difficulties can arise with expressions that use ‘black’ in a negative way, eg ‘black sheep’, or ‘black mark’.”
This sounds like a joke, but it is not. I didn't even think that "black sheep" was a negative term. It means someone who is different from the crowd, but not necessarily worse. Maybe the BMA thinks that there is something inherently bad about being black or a mom.

I thought that "surname" just meant "last name".

The University of California at Berkeley used to be famous for its Free Speech Movement, but now it is famous for its Regressive Left using violence and arson to silence Milo expressing his opinion.

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Nazis infiltrate the Left

I am beginning to think that the Left has been infiltrated by neo-Nazis. Here is a translation of a Sam Harris rant:
"make the case against Trump prior to the election"

please listen, you Hillary voters

"bound to be ineffective in stopping the spread of Islamism"

we need to kill the Moslems

"it is also internally inconsistent"

ignore the inconsistencies in my own position

"opposition to Trump’s order is thoroughly contaminated by identity politics and liberal delusion"

your Trump hatred is wrong

"hire fascists to do the job liberals won’t do"

we need fascism

"speak about the ideological roots of Islamism and jihadism"

we need to snuff them by any means possible

"further provoke and empower Trump"

Go Trump!

"terrifyingly blunt (and even illegal) countermeasures by the Trump administration"

We can only hope.

"you are part of the problem"

Shut up and let the fascists get the job done.
And then PZ Myers attacks him:
“Identity politics” is racist code ...

black people are not more closely related evolutionarily to gorillas than are white people. ..

I reject the politics of white heterosexual male supremacy ...

Sam Harris ... is able to condemn Trump without reservation ...

“Identity politics” is a far right dog whistle. The only identity politics being practiced is a refusal to accept the privileges of being a white man. ...

I have a moral duty to defend Muslims from oppression, violence, and discrimination. I am also able to recognize that someone identifying as Muslim has not confessed to being an Islamist on jihad. ...

At the March for Science, we are committed to centralizing, highlighting, standing in solidarity with, and acting as accomplices with black, Latinx, Asian and Pacific Islander, indigenous, non-Christian, women, people with disabilities, poor, gay, lesbian, bisexual, queer, trans, non-binary, agender, and intersex scientists and science advocates.
Myers writes about identity politics a lot, and then tells us that it is racist code. Isn't he just telling us that he is a racist?

Why does he keep saying crazy things like comparing black ppl to gorillas? He couldn't keep his job and following if he kept denigrating black ppl as being like gorillas. So what is a good racist to do? He can cite his expertise in evolutionary biology to keep telling us that black ppl are not just gorillas in disguise.

His defense of Muslims is so weak that it is silly. He as might as well say, "I am not supposed to badmouth Muslims so I will point out that they have not all been convicted of murder."

That "March for Science" statement sounds like a joke. Is there a science of white-Christian-male hatred?

Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright tweeted: "There is no fine print on the Statue of Liberty."

This sounds too dopey to be serious. Aren't the pro-immigration folks the ones claiming that there is some fine print on the statue?

My theory is that the lizard ppl have such complete control over ppl like Harris and Myers that they have to say stupid things as code.

Suppose you were a blogger in North Korea, and criticizing the govt or Kim Jong-Un could get you executed. You don't like the dictator and would like to express your disapproval, but do not dare. So what would you do? You would praise the dictator in gushing terms that do not make any sense. He would not execute you for flattering him, and your readers might understand that you are writing in code.

Likewise, I think that Harris and Myers could be neo-Nazis of some sort. Their arguments are silly and undermine their stated goals.

Sunday, January 29, 2017

Skepticism about immigration economics

The London Guardian reports:
Nowhere is this more vividly manifest than with immigration. The thinktank British Future has studied how best to win arguments in favour of immigration and multiculturalism. One of its main findings is that people often respond warmly to qualitative evidence, such as the stories of individual migrants and photographs of diverse communities. But statistics – especially regarding alleged benefits of migration to Britain’s economy – elicit quite the opposite reaction. People assume that the numbers are manipulated and dislike the elitism of resorting to quantitative evidence. Presented with official estimates of how many immigrants are in the country illegally, a common response is to scoff. Far from increasing support for immigration, British Future found, pointing to its positive effect on GDP can actually make people more hostile to it. GDP itself has come to seem like a Trojan horse for an elitist liberal agenda. Sensing this, politicians have now largely abandoned discussing immigration in economic terms.

All of this presents a serious challenge for liberal democracy. Put bluntly, the British government – its officials, experts, advisers and many of its politicians – does believe that immigration is on balance good for the economy. The British government did believe that Brexit was the wrong choice. The problem is that the government is now engaged in self-censorship, for fear of provoking people further.
There is nothing wrong with quantitative evidence, when done right, but the public can recognize that the govt is lying about benefits of immigration.

The British claim that immigration has a positive effect on GDP, but the same arguments says that crime is good because it causes us to spend more money on prisons and law enforcement. It neglects effects on the quality of life, and on long term effects. It is like saying negro slavery was good because it boosted cotton production.

The biggest current controversy is about Syrian immigration. Can anyone tell me specifically how such immigration has any positive effect on Britain or the USA at all? Where I live, most of the social problems are traceable to immigration.

Saturday, January 28, 2017

TED Talk reveals Moslem hatred

TED talks always have leftist messages, and you will never see one that is anti-immigration. I once saw a TED official claim that they did not have political criteria, but then the interview asked if they would consider a talk skeptical about global warming. He said no.

Consider this TED Talk:
As the child of an Afghan mother and Pakistani father raised in Norway, Deeyah Khan knows what it's like to be a young person stuck between your community and your country. In this powerful, emotional talk, the filmmaker unearths the rejection and isolation felt by many Muslim kids growing up in the West -- and the deadly consequences of not embracing our youth before extremist groups do.
All I got out of this was that Moslems from that part of the world are horrible ppl; that you would be crazy to let any of them into a Western country; and if you do, you better surrender to them as children or they will grow up to be terrorists who will kill you.

She says violence will not work against Moslem terrorists, because they want us to be intolerant like them. A better plan, she says, is for Western countries to turn over our white girls to the Pakistani Moslems so that those Moslems will not feel rejected.

Did this audience realize what it was applauding?

Another recent one is the Sofia Jawed Wessel TED Talk
"When we tell women that sex isn't worth the risk during pregnancy, what we're telling her is that her sexual pleasure doesn't matter ... that she in fact doesn't matter," says sex researcher Sofia Jawed-Wessel. In this eye-opening talk, Jawed-Wessel mines our views about pregnancy and pleasure to lay bare the relationship between women, sex and systems of power.

Sofia Jawed-Wessel
Sex researcher
Sofia Jawed-Wessel's teachings utilize a sex-positive and pleasure-inclusive approach to providing medically accurate, comprehensive sexuality education.
This talk reminded me of this insight:
Chateau maxim: “the goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality”
She is a prime example. All she can talk about is increasing her own personal sexual pleasure, while putting down male sexuality.

Monday, January 23, 2017

Racist inquiries about Neanderthals

The NY Times reports:
Geneticists tell us that somewhere between 1 and 5 percent of the genome of modern Europeans and Asians consists of DNA inherited from Neanderthals, our prehistoric cousins.

At Vanderbilt University, John Anthony Capra, an evolutionary genomics professor, has been combining high-powered computation and a medical records databank to learn what a Neanderthal heritage — even a fractional one — might mean for people today. ...

What we’ve been finding is that Neanderthal DNA has a subtle influence on risk for disease. It affects our immune system and how we respond to different immune challenges. It affects our skin. ...

Was there ever an upside to having Neanderthal DNA?

It probably helped our ancestors survive in prehistoric Europe. ...

Maybe those of us of European heritage should be thinking, “Let’s improve their standing in the popular imagination. They’re our ancestors, too.’”
So research by Capra and others has shown that Neanderthals were human ancestors and Europeans today have traits associated with Neanderthal genes.

This is perfect material for the NY Times, as its editors have said that they most like stories that challenge our beliefs about what it means to be human.

But then the interview gets weird:
What has been the response to your Neanderthal research since you published it last year in the journal Science?

Some of it’s very touching. People are interested in learning about where they came from. Some of it is a little silly. “I have a lot of hair on my legs — is that from Neanderthals?”

But I received racist inquiries, too. I got calls from all over the world from people who thought that since Africans didn’t interbreed with Neanderthals, this somehow justified their ideas of white superiority.

It was illogical. Actually, Neanderthal DNA is mostly bad for us — though that didn’t bother them.
He does research on how Africans differ from Neanderthals and other humans, and he is offended that ppl ask questions about his research?

It appears that they just wanted the facts about the diffences, since they were not bothered by whether the differences were good or bad. That is completely normal curiosity about what it means to be human.

It appears to me that any genetic or anthropological research in this field must badmouth the white race in order to be politically acceptable. Articles always refer to Africans as modern humans, and Neanderthals as backward and inferior, even tho Neanderthals were human and Neanderthal genes may have been crucial to the development of civilization.

Saturday, January 21, 2017

Obama's farewell speech

Barack Obama's crying farewell speech said:
If we're unwilling to invest in the children of immigrants, just because they don't look like us, we will diminish the prospects of our own children -- because those brown kids will represent a larger and larger share of America's workforce. (Applause.)
What does he mean here? That we have to pay brown kids to come to America and take our jobs, and that will somehow make our children better off?

No, our children do not benefit from importing brown kids.

This speech got a lot of praise, but all I get out of it is that he hates white ppl, and favors policies that subsidize brown kids replacing white kids.

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Psychology textbooks filled with errors

I have posted many times about bogus psychology research, and this article shows that the textbooks are bad:
Psychology is mired in a replication crisis: Many famous, established findings that experts had assumed to be robust have, in the light shed by newer and bigger and more sophisticated follow-up studies, been revealed as rather flimsy. But what about the very basic, Psych 101 stuff taught in introductory textbooks? That stuff’s all on safe ground, right?

Maybe not. In a paper published last month in Current Psychology by Christopher Ferguson of Stetson University and Jeffrey Brown and Amanda Torres of Texas A&M, the authors evaluated a bunch of psychology textbooks to see how rigorously they covered a bunch of controversial or frequently misrepresented subjects. The results weren’t great.
For another example of bad research, implicit bias studies are flawed. These supposedly show that ppl are racist, but they don't work.

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

Facebook can spy on your messages

Ars Technica reports:
The Guardian roiled security professionals everywhere on Friday when it published an article claiming a backdoor in Facebook's WhatsApp messaging service allows attackers to intercept and read encrypted messages. It's not a backdoor — at least as that term is defined by most security experts. ...

Critics of Friday's Guardian post, and most encryption practitioners, argue such behavior is common in encryption apps and often a necessary requirement. Among other things, it lets existing WhatsApp users who buy a new phone continue an ongoing conversation thread.
No. I am an encryption practitioner, and such behavior is neither common nor necessary.

Since Facebook refuses to fix this problem, it should not be promising "end-to-end encryption". Facebook has engineered in a system for spying on messages.

Facebook/WhatsApp argue that their system is more convenient than true end-to-end encryption. That may be. It may also turn out to be useful for law enforcement to track possible terrorists or child molesters. Most users do not need to be concerned about this vulnerability. They are happy to give up some privacy in order to get some free services. But I would not recommend the system for high-security messages.

Update: Bruce Schneier concludes:
How serious this is depends on your threat model. If you are worried about the US government -- or any other government that can pressure Facebook -- snooping on your messages, then this is a small vulnerability. If not, then it's nothing to worry about.
It is a little strange that Facebook/Whatsapp refuses to fix it.

Monday, January 16, 2017

Trump as a kind of steppingstone

NPR Radio celebrates the decline of the Alt-right:
"I see Donald Trump as a kind of steppingstone. He is a step in the right direction in terms of understanding America and history and the world in essentially racial terms," Taylor says.

But white nationalist enthusiasm for Trump has fallen off substantially. Since the election, the so-called alt-right has splintered, and the movement now looks a lot less potent than it once appeared. ...

"I think it's good to be the person talked about, even when it's negative," Spencer tells NPR. "Our ideas are entering the discourse." ...

A movement that sprang from obscurity with Trump's election seems to be dropping back into the shadows even before Trump takes power.
This is wishful thinking. The Alt right got the most publicity when Hillary Clinton gave a speech denouncing it, and when she called the Trump voters deplorable.

Trump's election has redefined the Alt right to be what his administration is doing. Sure, there are factions who are trying to steer him in other directions, and fringe players who troll the press. Milo is probably the biggest trolls. These factions did not agree before Trump, and they will not agree now either.

They agreed that Trump is far better than Hillary Clinton, and so did millions of others.

The Alt-right will always have fringe groups trolling the Democrats, and the Democrats will be calling them deplorable. The possible new DNC leader says:
Top Democrat Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) told his party on Friday that Donald Trump has brought “white supremacy” back to the White House.

Sunday, January 15, 2017

Trying to abolish marriage licenses

Some marriage law reformers announce:
INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. (Jan. 11, 2017) – A bill introduced in the Indiana House would end government licensing of marriages in the state, effectively nullifying in practice both major sides of the contentious national debate over government-sanctioned marriage.

Rep. Jim Lucas introduced House Bill 1163 (HB1163) on Jan. 9. The legislation would eliminate three marriage requirements currently in place in the state.

That individuals obtain a marriage license before getting married
That the marriage be solemnized by an individual specified by state law
That the marriage license be filed with a circuit court clerk and the state department of health.

The bill instead “provides for marriage by marriage contract by any two individuals who are competent to contract in Indiana or otherwise permitted to marry in Indiana.”
There are a lot of ppl who foolishly say that disputes over marriage policy can be dodged by govt getting out of the marriage business.

No chance. A lot of states already has common law marriage, so having marriages without govt-issued licenses is nothing new. The article gives the impression that the law would be a return to practice in previous centuries, but that is not true either. The Catholic Church has required marriage ceremonies for 800 years.

The govt has taken over a long list of marriage issues, such as this:
A man in Oklahoma is hoping to change the law after he has to continue to pay child support for a baby that is not his, according to our affiliate KOTV.

When Thomas’ high school girlfriend got pregnant, he married her. Five months later she had a little boy and he believed he had a son, but their marriage fell apart.

Thomas decided to take a paternity test when the boy was three years old.

“It comes back zero percent. I was in my office and I saw that. I should’ve expected it but I didn’t and it hit me. I’m telling my co-worker how shocked I am that someone could do this to someone,” he said.

The judge ordered Thomas to take another DNA test and he got the same result. The judge first ruled that Thomas was off the hook financially, but then reversed the decision because Oklahoma law says men must question paternity within two years of the child’s birth.

Thomas said that he had no reason to question it before he did, but, because he missed the deadline, the judge ordered him to pay around $500 a month in child support and nearly $15,000 in back support – for a child that is not his.
Oklahoma has common law marriage, but this problem is independent of that.

There have been many changes to marriage law, and they are nearly all to increase state control over families. Same-sex marriage is just one of those changes.

Update: It is divorce season.

Friday, January 13, 2017

Europeans want Asimov's laws of robots

Some Europeans are panicking about robots:
To combat the robot revolution, the European Parliament's legal affairs committee has proposed that robots be equipped with emergency "kill switches" to prevent them from causing excessive damage. Legislators have also suggested that robots be insured and even be made to pay taxes. "A growing number of areas of our daily lives are increasingly affected by robotics," said Mady Delvaux, the parliamentarian who authored the proposal. "To ensure that robots are and will remain in the service of humans, we urgently need to create a robust European legal framework." CNNMoney reports:

The proposal calls for a new charter on robotics that would give engineers guidance on how to design ethical and safe machines. For example, designers should include "kill switches" so that robots can be turned off in emergencies. They must also make sure that robots can be reprogrammed if their software doesn't work as designed. The proposal states that designers, producers and operators of robots should generally be governed by the "laws of robotics" described by science fiction writer Isaac Asimov. The proposal also says that robots should always be identifiable as mechanical creations. That will help prevent humans from developing emotional attachments. "You always have to tell people that robot is not a human and a robot will never be a human," said Delvaux. "You must never think that a robot is a human and that he loves you."
I used to agree with some of this, but now I think that it is naive.

We will have robots doing functions so critical that no one will dare turn them off. We will also have robots with software derived from AI learning, and no one understand how it works or how to fix it to correct the behavior.

There will also be human-like robots, and ppl will want robots to love them.

Google and Microsoft now have natural language translation systems that are derived from so much data that no one really understands them. Microsoft even has real-time Skype translation. It is possible that these could become essential parts of the infrastructure of our civilization. It is also possible that translation quirks result in some ppl getting killed. Asking Google or Microsoft to fix those quirks might be hopeless.

Thursday, January 12, 2017

Neanderthals were humans and ancestors

I posted before Neanderthals belonged to the human species. Now the NY Times Magazine has a long article on Neanderthals Were People, Too
But Neanderthals weren’t the slow-witted louts we’ve imagined them to be — not just a bunch of Neanderthals. As a review of findings published last year put it, they were actually “very similar” to their contemporary Homo sapiens in Africa, in terms of “standard markers of modern cognitive and behavioral capacities.” We’ve always classified Neanderthals, technically, as human — part of the genus Homo. But it turns out they also did the stuff that, you know, makes us human.

Neanderthals buried their dead. They made jewelry and specialized tools. They made ocher and other pigments, perhaps to paint their faces or bodies — evidence of a “symbolically mediated worldview,” as archaeologists call it. Their tracheal anatomy suggests that they were capable of language and probably had high-pitched, raspy voices, like Julia Child. They manufactured glue from birch bark, which required heating the bark to at least 644 degrees Fahrenheit — a feat scientists find difficult to duplicate without a ceramic container. In Gibraltar, there’s evidence that Neanderthals extracted the feathers of certain birds — only dark feathers — possibly for aesthetic or ceremonial purposes. And while Neanderthals were once presumed to be crude scavengers, we now know they exploited the different terrains on which they lived. They took down dangerous game, including an extinct species of rhinoceros. Some ate seals and other marine mammals. Some ate shellfish. Some ate chamomile. (They had regional cuisines.) They used toothpicks.

Wearing feathers, eating seals — maybe none of this sounds particularly impressive. But it’s what our human ancestors were capable of back then too, and scientists have always considered such behavioral flexibility and complexity as signs of our specialness. When it came to Neanderthals, though, many researchers literally couldn’t see the evidence sitting in front of them.
The author of this article is still infected with this ignorant anti-Neanderthal bias. It refers to "our human ancestors" to mean non-Neanderthals.

The fact is that DNA tests of the last 5-10 years have proved that Neanderthals were ancestors to the vast majority of non-Africans today. They had large brains, and now archaeological evidence shows that they were behaviorally very similar to other human ancestors.

There is every reason to call Neanderthals our human ancestors. They were humans and ancestors (to all but sub-saharans).

30 years ago, textbooks said:

(1) Neanderthals were very primitive and sub-human.
(2) Neanderthals went extinct, with no extant DNA.
(3) A wave of anatomically modern African migrants 70-100k years ago are our sole ancestors.
(4) Humans have not evolved since that wave.

These are all now known to be completely false.
Some of this is documented in this 2016 PNAS article, Neandertals revised, which also says:
However, from the hundreds of thousands of years in which Neandertals and their African near-modern contemporaries littered their landscapes with all kinds of artifacts, nothing has been retrieved that is in any way comparable to the visual representations (“art”) and the general increase in diversity in material culture we see from around 40 ka onward. These developments coincided with a significant range expansion of modern humans, for the first time in human history colonizing the arctic parts of the Old World (121, 122), as well as moving into Sahul (123), crossing a major biogeographical boundary that had prevented hominin eastward migration for more than a million years.
The date "40 ka" (40,000 years ago) is crucial because that is the time that Africans migrated into Europe and the time that Neanderthals got wiped out. The obvious explanations are that the African killed off the Neanderthals, or out-competed them for resources, or spread disease. Whatever the explanation, it appears that interbreeding resulted in humans that were capable of much more advanced art and travel than either the Neanderthals or African migrants by themselves.

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

Lame report on Russia

The Obama administration just released this report:
We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.

Moscow’s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on Russia’s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on undermining her future presidency. ...

RT's criticism of the US election was the latest facet of its broader and longer-standing anti-US messaging likely aimed at undermining viewers' trust in US democratic procedures and undercutting US criticism of Russia's political system. RT Editor in Chief Margarita Simonyan recently declared that the United States itself lacks democracy and that it has "no moral right to teach the rest of the world" (Kommersant, 6 November). ...

RT has also focused on criticism of the US economic system, US currency policy, alleged Wall Street greed, and the US national debt. Some of RT's hosts have compared the United States to Imperial Rome and have predicted that government corruption and "corporate greed" will lead to US financial collapse (RT, 31 October, 4 November).
Are we supposed to be impressed by this?

Of course Putin does not like Hillary Clinton. She was a warmonger who was threatening war on multiple fronts, economic sanctions against Russia, and NATO troops on Russia's borders.

But Obama has our spy agencies tell us that Russian TV badmouths us? I have heard worse stuff about the USA from the Democrat Party.

These are spy agencies that were not smart enuf to know that Trump might win the election, and now they are 70-90% certain that the Russians do not like Clinton?!

Now we are told that the classified version of the report has some dirt on Trump, but no one can verify any of it. This is really lame. I think that Obama just wants to undermine Trump.

I watched the Meryl Streep rant againt Trump that got so much publicity. She first says that she has lost her mind, and so she has to read from notes. Then she says that Hollywood is the most vilified segment of American society right now. After mentioning a couple of blacks and an Israeli, she says that all the nicest ppl are Canadian. Then she attacks Trump for imitating a disabled reporter. Finally she says that we need a press that will tell the truth.

Yes, she has lost her mind. If you think that you saw Trump imitating a disabled reporter, then go watch the video of the reporter, and tell me if you see any similarities. And watch also the videos of Trump criticizing others who have been badmouthing him. Then you will see that the press has been lying to you.

Or maybe Streep is a closet Nazi. When ppl say that Canadians are the nicest, it is just a polite way of saying that white ppl are nicer than blacks and Jews. When ppl blame Trump for how he waves his arms when he criticizes others, they are just saying that they have no substantive criticisms of him. Obviously Streep could not openly be a Nazi or a Trump supporter and get Hollywood jobs, but maybe this is as close as she can get.

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

Bogus theories of attachment and spanking

The NY Times reports:
It’s called attachment theory, and there’s growing consensus about its capacity to explain and improve how we function in relationships.

Conceived more than 50 years ago by the British psychoanalyst John Bowlby and scientifically validated by an American developmental psychologist, Mary S. Ainsworth, attachment theory is now having a breakout moment, applied everywhere from inner-city preschools to executive coaching programs. Experts in the fields of psychology, neuroscience, sociology and education say the theory’s underlying assumption — that the quality of our early attachments profoundly influences how we behave as adults — has special resonance in an era when people seem more attached to their smartphones than to one another.
Many psychologists say attachment theory as the most scientific thing in all psychology, but it is more like voodoo. See criticisms here and here.
The main idea of Bowlby's attachment theory can be summed up by the following, "...observation of how a very young child behaves towards his mother, both in her presence and especially in her absence, can contribute greatly to our understanding of personality development. When removed from the mother by strangers, young children respond usually with great intensity; and after reunion with her, anxiety or else unusual detachment" (Bowlby, 1969, p. 3).
That is an easy experiment that is supposed to have great significance, but 50 years of research has not proved much. The observations are supposed to have broad policy implications, but none have verified.

Furthermore, there is no proof of the nuture assumption that parents influence the personality of their kids.

But beliefs persist:
A new law in France bans spanking of children, making it the 52nd country to prohibit the practice. ...

A growing body of research suggests that spanking poses risks to children. A 2016 analysis of more than 50 years of research found that children who are spanked are more likely to defy their parents, develop mental health problems and show antisocial behavior and aggression.

Most countries in Europe now ban spanking, with the exception of the United Kingdom, Italy, Switzerland and the Czech Republic, the Telegraph said. The United States allows spanking.
Yes, and ppl who take aspirin are more likely to have headaches.

Correlation is not causation. Perhaps the defiance and anti-social behavior is causing the kids to get spanked. There are no good studies showing that any other method of discipline works better than spanking.

The anti-spanking zealots say that it is unethical to do a scientific study on spanking because it is unethical to ever hit a child. But there are twin studies, and they do not show any harm to spanking.

Of course most parents believe that they are profoundly influence their kids, and they may be right, but currently there is very little science to back up those beliefs.

Stefan Molyneux (Freedomain Radio) has another anti-spanking video to brag about the new French law. His position is that spanking violates his philosophical "non-aggression principle", as it is contrary to his utopian ideals of everyone of all ages living in peace and harmony thru rational judgment and mutual consent.

While he wants spanking to be illegal, he refuses to express an opinion on what the penalty should be. That is not the job of a philosopher like him, he says. He can say what is moral and what is not, but he is not concerned with the consequences.

Eg, if a 5yo kid wants to run out into the street, the parent is supposed to be persuasive enuf to non-violently explain the matter to the kid. I think that Molyneux's wife is some sort of psychotherapist, and psychotherapists say nonsense like that.

I like Molyneux's podcasts, but he is way off the deep end with this one. We live in a world where civilization depends on the use of force, and kids need to be prepared for the real world, not Molyneux's hypothetical philosophers libertarian paradise. And psychotherapists tend to make the worst parents.

Monday, January 09, 2017

$237M for phony recovered memories

AP reports:
It’s called attachment theory, and there’s growing consensus about its capacity to explain and improve how we function in relationships.

Conceived more than 50 years ago by the British psychoanalyst John Bowlby and scientifically validated by an American developmental psychologist, Mary S. Ainsworth, attachment theory is now having a breakout moment, applied everywhere from inner-city preschools to executive coaching programs. Experts in the fields of psychology, neuroscience, sociology and education say the theory’s underlying assumption — that the quality of our early attachments profoundly influences how we behave as adults — has special resonance in an era when people seem more attached to their smartphones than to one another.
AP reports:
Penn State's costs related to the Jerry Sandusky scandal are approaching a quarter-billion dollars and growing, five years after the former assistant football coach's arrest on child molestation charges.

The scandal's overall cost to the school has reached at least $237 million, including a recent $12 million verdict in the whistleblower and defamation case brought by former assistant coach Mike McQueary, whose testimony helped convict Sandusky in 2012.

The university has settled with 33 people over allegations they were sexually abused by Sandusky, and has made total payments to them of $93 million.
All that, and no physical or contemporaneous evidence that Sandusky ever abused anyone. McQueary is probably the biggest villain here, as he is the only one who certainly did bad things, and he got $12M.

Just ask yourself -- with that much money changing hands, shouldn't there be some critical assessment? Why does everyone so blindly believe the recovered memories of ppl who collecting millions of dollars for telling fanciful stories of implausible events that supposedly happened many years earlier?

I think that the public has been conned, as the public has been in other child abuse scandals.

Sunday, January 08, 2017

They live

Wired mag reports:
Late Tuesday night, writer-director John Carpenter — the man behind such late-night-cable classics as Halloween, The Thing, and Escape from New York — sent out a jarring, seemingly random tweet about one of the best-known entries in his decades-long filmography: They Live, the cult sci-fi conspiracy thriller about a working-class drifter (played by wrestling icon “Rowdy” Roddy Piper) whose discovery of a pair of special sunglasses leads to the revelation that Los Angeles — and possibly the world — is under the control of blister-faced, poorly wigged aliens. ...

In recent years, They Live has in recent years become a meme-muse for online neo-nazis, some of whom have adopted the film’s messages about media manipulation and secret powers, and used them for their own anti-Zionist propaganda ... more importantly, the fact that such an interpretations makes no sense ...
Really? If the interpretations make no sense, why are you writing an article about it?

Why would neo-nazis put out anti-Zionist propaganda? I thought that they would be happy to have all the Jews live in Israel.

Maybe Wired is neo-nazi, and it is deliberately vague so that you will go read a neo-nazi. One says:
THEY LIVE is about yuppies and unrestrained capitalism. It has nothing to do with Jewish control of the world, which is slander and a lie.

— John Carpenter (@TheHorrorMaster) January 4, 2017

One of the major themes presented in “They Live” is how an alien race took over our systems by pretending to be humans. Specifically, the film focuses in on how they took control over banks, big business and media. Sound familiar? This is what Jews have done to the West. They have masqueraded as a member of our own people and have exploited our trusting nature to subvert our societies.

Quite honestly it does not matter what Carpenter’s original intention for “They Live” was. Art takes on a life of its own through the people who experience it. There are obvious similarities between the aliens depicted in the film and Jews in real life. To pretend that this connection doesn’t exist is to deny reality.

If you watch “They Live” and look at the aliens as Jews, the movie can be perceived as a documentary on Jewish power.
Or it can be perceived as about the elites who use mass media to manipulate the public.

In the movie, the aliens are most fearful of anyone who might see them for what they are.

Friday, January 06, 2017

School choice is a parental right

Reason blogger Robby Soave writes:
A recent New York Times story that slams the free market approach to education policy is rife with inaccuracies. Amazingly, the author of the piece misrepresents the very data she is using to build her erroneous case against school choice.

"Free Market for Education? Economists Generally Don't Buy It," claims Susan Dynarski, a professor of education, public policy, and economics at the University of Michigan, in The Times. This is a betrayal of expectations, according to Dynarski, because economists generally understand that free markets produce better outcomes than central planners (much to the chagrin of education professors). Economists are usually the ones calling for less regulation and more unrestricted capitalism; if they're super conflicted about markets in education, that would be a serious indictment of the school choice approach.
He is right that the NY Times is lying about the data, but I have a different point. It gives the impression that most economists are against school choice, but only about 5% are against it.

Both sides are a little sloppy about what is meant by terms like "better outcomes" and "higher quality". They act as if there is some agreement about what is better.

If there were agreement about what is better, then we could require the public schools to do that. But there is no such consensus. For example, some say teaching English is paramount while others are more concerned with LGBT bathrooms.

Free markets in things like cars give better outcomes partially because competition forces higher quality cars, but also because diverse cars are better able to meet the demands of consumers.

Supposed you asked: Would consumers be better served by having a choice of cars to buy?

Most everyone would say yes, because having a choice is better than not having a choice.

So why would anyone say that choice leads to a worse outcome? Presumably they think worse schools will somehow trick students into going there. Or maybe they don't like the costs of competition, such as undermining teachers unions. For example, the Democrat Party gets a lot of support from public school teachers unions, so it is against anything that the teachers unions don't like.

Is there a concern that ppl will choose worse schools? If so, then how is it that economists or other do-gooders know better than the parents?

This goes right to the heart of the merits of school choice. The best argument for school choice is not that charter school students will have better test scores or other objectively-defined advantages.

The better argument is that parents should have the right and authority to decide what is best for them and their kids. One school might suit the needs of a particular child better. Choice also makes the school more accountable to the parents, so they can switch to another school if something is unsatisfactory.

Leftists generally believe that families should not have that sort of autonomy, and that the schools should be used to indoctrinate the next generation and absorb them into the collective. So leftists hate school choice.

Discussion of charter school test scores is a smoke screen. Likewise with homeschooler test scores. I guess some parent homeschool their kids in the hope of getting higher test scores. but most have other reasons, and those parents should have the right to base their own decisions on their own judgments and priorities.

Wednesday, January 04, 2017

Trolling is a good thing

In 2016, I changed my mind about trolling. I now think that it is a good thing.

If the Ctrl-Left is trying to limit what you can say, then the proper response is to say whatever offends them the most. Trying to be nice and to avoid all their supposed micro-aggressions is foolishness.

Our computer systems are made more secure by hackers trying to punch holes in them. Spammers can be annoying too, but these are part of the costs of a free society. Tools should be available to block the stuff you do not want, but there is no need to censor it from everyone.

Every since Trump was elected, the mainstream news media and lizard ppl have been complaining that hackers, leakers, and trollers might have had some influence. If so, so much the better.

If the lizard ppl get their way, you will get your news on Facebook, with the unapproved stories being blocked. We need trollers to make such censorship impractical.

Monday, January 02, 2017

One button mouse is bad design

NPR Radio reports:
Design Thinking Could Help Those Who Want To Get Unstuck
Listen · 6:46
6:46 Download

January 2, 20175:04 AM ET
Heard on Morning Edition
Shankar Vedantam

Psychologists and self help gurus have advice for people who feel stuck. If you're looking for new ways to reboot your life as you enter the new year, you could also turn to the tech world.
This is a regular source of dubious research. Today's story brags about the "design thinking" that convinced Apple to use a 1-button mouse, instead of 2 buttons.

No, that was bad design, it came from a bad design ideology. Apple is all about constraining the user. Another company would have just make both kinds of mouse, and let the user decide. Or make the 2-button mouse, and let the user use just one, if he wants.

Simplicity is good, but the 1-button mouse is not simple. To make the Mac work with it, Apple had to introduce double-clicking, triple-clicking, and shift-clicking. Furthermore, it had to add a bunch of other shift keys to the keyboard with goofy symbols on them. I have a keyboard with the usual "Ctrl" and "Alt", but Apple maps these in inconsistent ways, so I have to guess which one will work.

Apple seems to realize that the 2-button mouse is better, as the system lets you use such a mouse. But Apple won't admit. It goes against their religion to do what the customer wants.

For another example of how NPR Hidden Brain distorts the research, see this.

Sunday, January 01, 2017

Dylann Roof fires his attorneys

The NY Times reports:
“I want state that I am morally opposed to psychology,” wrote the young white supremacist who would murder nine black worshipers at Emanuel A.M.E. Church in Charleston, S.C., in June 2015. “It is a Jewish invention, and does nothing but invent diseases and tell people they have problems when they dont.” ...

“I will not be calling mental health experts or presenting mental health evidence,” he wrote to Judge Richard M. Gergel of Federal District Court on Dec. 16, a day after a jury took only two hours to find him guilty of 33 counts, including hate crimes resulting in death, obstruction of religion and firearms violations. ...

Mr. Bruck and his team have argued in court filings that Mr. Roof, a ninth-grade dropout, “has no right to represent himself in a capital trial, and even less so at the penalty phase.” But in the 41 years since the Supreme Court recognized a Sixth Amendment right of self-representation for criminal defendants, in Faretta v. California, the court has never specifically narrowed that holding for death penalty trials, despite their complexity.
This makes sense to me. With his attorneys arguing, he is 99% likely to get the death penalty. If he argues the penalty phase himself, he is no going to change that probability much.

He apparently committed this horrible crime to make some sort of statement, and he was willing to die for it. However misguided his thinking, he would probably rather explain himself in court than have some lawyer say he was crazy. Besides, he gets a lot of free appeals if he is on death row, and he throws a monkey wrench into the process by forcing lawyers and judges to spend years discussing his motives.

What I learned in 2016

A year ago, I posted:
I should post every year what I have learned in the year. Here is where I have changed my mind in 2015. ...

More than ever, the USA is ruled by elites who are selling out the interests of the American people. It appears that Donald J. Trump is the only one who can save us. ...

Six months ago I thought that Donald Trump was a buffoon. Now I think that he is a genius.
In 2016, this became conventional wisdom.

A lot of ppl complained about political polarization during the G.W. Bush era. But the Trump v Clinton election was Good v Evil. The efforts of the lizard ppl to elect Clinton exceeded my expectations, and so did the free citizens who voted for BREXIT and Trump.

I am not saying that everyone who voted for Clinton is evil. Most of them are just stupid, misinformed, or brainwashed. They are unwitting tools of the lizard ppl.

Saturday, December 31, 2016


I learned a new word, bulverism:
But this method also reminds me of something else. This is Christopher Hitchens:

“I think Hannah Arendt said that one of the great achievements of Stalinism was to replace all discussion involving arguments and evidence with the question of motive. If someone were to say, for example, that there are many people in the Soviet Union who don’t have enough to eat, it might make sense for them to respond, “It’s not our fault, it was the weather, a bad harvest or something.” Instead it’s always, “Why is this person saying this, and why are they saying it in such and such a magazine? It must be that this is part of a plan.” ...

The Bulverist assumes a speaker’s argument is invalid or false and then explains why the speaker came to make that mistake, attacking the speaker or the speaker’s motive. The term “Bulverism” was coined by C. S. Lewis to poke fun at a very serious error in thinking that, he alleges, recurs often in a variety of religious, political, and philosophical debates.
Many times I have pointed out some fact, only to have someone attack me with some strange and false theory about my motivations.

Thursday, December 29, 2016

Montana religious dispute escalates

I mentioned coverage of a Montana dispute, and now it is getting more attention:
The Whitefish, Montana, Police Department says it is aware of the white supremacist website “The Daily Stormer” and its call for an upcoming “armed march” through the city of Whitefish, CBS affiliate KXLH reports.

Top elected officials in Montana issued a joint statement Tuesday condemning “attacks on our religious freedom manifesting in a group of anti-Semites,” CBS affiliate KPAX reports.

“Rest assured, any demonstration or threat of intimidation against any Montanan’s religious liberty will not be tolerated. It takes all Montanans working together to eradicate religious intolerance,” the statement reads.
Religious freedom? Liberty?

One side has Jews who hate Christians, and the other has Christians who hate Jews. So I guess you could say both sides are showing religious intolerance. But who is doing the intimidating? The Daily Stormer says:
The lawmakers did not make specific reference to the group or realtor Tanya Gersh, who was serving as operating “street boss” running an extortion conspiracy targeting the mother of a perceived political opponent of international Jewry. Gersh threatened Sherry Spencer, mother of Richard Spencer, with a protest that she claimed would drive down the value of her property in Whitefish if she did not sell the property, denounce her son and make a “donation” to local human rights groups.

Gersh had provided Spencer with a pre-written apology/confession, which they asked her to read to the community. This practice is also popular among ISIS, which usually requires public execution victims to read aloud a scripted apology/confession before death.
It posts a copy of the confession, and it appears to be criminal extortion from the Jewish side.

The news stories do not mention that. They probably would mention it, if they could prove that the scripted confession demand were fake.

The Daily Stormer site is a little extreme, and says:
In a related development, while the international Jewish media has taken interest in our Whitefish march – dubbed the “March on Whitefish” – so have nationalist groups across the country. So far, it looks like we will have representatives from at least three European nations marching with us in January, a sign of increasing global white racial solidarity against the international Jewish agenda to exterminate the white race through programs of mass immigration, feminism and the promotion of homosexuality.
I will be interested to see whether there are any neutral news stories about this dispute.

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

Robots are taking our jobs

Jobs will be disappearing:
Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania has warned that all the developed nations on earth will see job loss rates of up to 47 per cent within the next 25 years.

The statistic is based on a recent Oxford University study and includes blue and white collar jobs. So far, the loss has been restricted to the blue collar variety, particularly in manufacturing so no one has cared that much as this has been happening since the 1960s.

The new trend is not creating new jobs either. By 2034, just a few decades, mid-level jobs will be by and large obsolete.

So far the benefits have only gone to the ultra-wealthy, the top 1 per cent. This coming technological revolution is set to wipe out what looks to be the entire middle class.
By contrast, this TED Talk assures us that new jobs will be created somehow:
Here's a paradox you don't hear much about: despite a century of creating machines to do our work for us, the proportion of adults in the US with a job has consistently gone up for the past 125 years. Why hasn't human labor become redundant and our skills obsolete? In this talk about the future of work, economist David Autor addresses the question of why there are still so many jobs and comes up with a surprising, hopeful answer.
When farms were automatics, ppl moved to factories, and when they were automated, they moved to office work. What is next?

Sure, there will be work, like giving baths to elderly ppl. But I think that the first article is right that the good jobs will be disappearing, not increasing.

What are the policy implications? It seems to be that we need to reduce our population.

Besides robots taking our jobs, a few experts say marriage will be legal between humans and robots by 2050.

Monday, December 26, 2016

A volcano killed the Neanderthals

I did not know that there was a good theory that a volcano wiped out the Neanderthals:
The Phlegraean Fields (Italian: Campi Flegrei) are a series of craters and volcanic areas located near Naples, Italy. ... There’s even archaeological evidence suggesting that a Phlegraean eruption some 37,000 to 39,000 years ago was so massive, it may have killed large segments of the extant Neanderthal population, either directly or by causing a volcanic winter. Now, the massive supervolcano is showing signs of awakening.
I did not know this. All the popular science articles say that the Neanderthals went extinct because they were out-competed by the superior African hominids, who are usually called "modern" and just like today's humans.

No, the African hominids were not modern, and Neanderthals did not go extinct.

Sunday, December 25, 2016

White Guy Resolutions 2017

The MTV's "White Guy Resolutions 2017" can still be viewed here.

It is giving me a resolution: Call out anti-white-male hatred when I see it.

Somehow MTV thought that it was acceptable to celebrate the killing of white cops, and to other denigrate whites, men, and the USA.

Saturday, December 24, 2016

Hockey Stick Mann maintains libel lawsuit

Jonathan H. Adler writes:
Simberg and Steyn authored a pair of blog posts alleging that Penn State University had failed to adequately investigate the alleged misconduct of climatologist Michael Mann that may have been revealed by the release of the “ClimateGate” e-mails. The posts were colorful and rude, accusing Mann of “molesting” data to produce the infamous “hockey stick” graph and comparing Penn State’s investigation of his alleged improprieties to its inquiry into the child-molestation accusations against Jerry Sandusky. ...

Simberg and Steyn authored a pair of blog posts alleging that Penn State University had failed to adequately investigate the alleged misconduct of climatologist Michael Mann that may have been revealed by the release of the “ClimateGate” e-mails. The posts were colorful and rude, accusing Mann of “molesting” data to produce the infamous “hockey stick” graph and comparing Penn State’s investigation of his alleged improprieties to its inquiry into the child-molestation accusations against Jerry Sandusky. ...

In refusing to dismiss claims against Steyn and Simberg, the D.C. Court of Appeals placed tremendous weight on the fact that Penn State and other institutions investigated Mann and did not find evidence of academic misconduct. Yet it is the alleged inadequacy of Penn State’s investigation that was the focus of the very posts at issue. Indeed, this was the whole point of the Sandusky comparison. ...

Because the university and other investigations failed to find evidence of scientific misconduct on Mann’s part, the court declared that claims Mann engaged in such action were “definitively discredited.”
So since Penn State also failed to find evidence against Sandusky, then no one else should blame him either?!

I posted the opinion that Sandusky is innocent of the more serious accusations against him, and that his accusers were lying for their own financial benefit. His biggest accuser got millions of dollars. But does this case mean that I can get sued for expressing my opinion?

Friday, December 23, 2016

Name-calling leftist professor attacks alt-right

Brian Leiter is a law professor, over-opinionated philosophy blogger, and typical Jewish leftist, and he has spent the last year calling Donald Trump a Nazi. He says that he is in favor of academic freedom, but he tries to shame any right-wing professors with name-calling. He writes:
All of which brings us to "Charles Martel," the pseudonym of one of the "philosophy" bloggers at what I jokingly called awhile back "Stormfront for philosophers," except I'm beginning to wonder if it is a joke. ... These are not philosophers "on the right," these are NeoNazi morons.
Here is the essay he attacks:
A key thesis of the alt-right, as some contributors here have discussed, is that race is a real feature of the human person ...

Next comes the following claim by the alt-righter: these biological facts about one’s race go on to influence, outright determine, or, more poetically, flavor the sort of civilization that a race will establish. ...

it is not implausible at all to suggest that Western civilization — by which we mean European civilization — can only be fully and genuinely carried on by people of European biological stock (just as, say, Jewish civilization can only be genuinely or fully carried on by people of Jewish stock).
If Martel is wrong, where is the rebuttal?

No, the ctrl-left just wants to silence with name-calling. He is just a hater of white Christian civilization.

Update: BTW, I do agree with Donald Trump that the USA should have vetoed the UN resolution condemning Israel. The West Bank settlements do not violate any international law. I would think that Jews should be calling Barack Obama the Nazi, since he is the one who is saying that Jews should not live in certain places.

SciAm offended by scientific evidence

Leftist and Skeptic Michael Shermer writes in SciAm:
Yet a new study published in the fall issue of the nonpeer-reviewed journal The New Atlantis by Johns Hopkins University's Lawrence S. Mayer and Paul R. McHugh on “Sexuality and Gender” claims that “our scientific knowledge in this area remains unsettled,” that there is no “scientific evidence for the view that sexual orientation is a fixed and innate biological property,” and that no one is “born that way.” ...

Evangelist Jimmy Swaggart articulated the logic this way: “While it is true that the seed of original sin carries with it every type of deviation, aberration, perversion, and wrongdoing, the homosexual cannot claim to have been born that way any more than the drunkard, gambler, killer, etc.”
Shermer is very much offended by this, and cites others who say there is evidence for moderate genetic influences, and that this evidence is greater than that for the most commonly hypothesized social causes.

Okay fine, but isn't that also true for the drunkard, gambler, killer, etc.? And how does this refute the above Mayer-McHugh claims? Don't all the studies imply that no one is "born that way", but rather the product of various social and nonsocial causes?

The peer-reviewed gay research overwhelmingly supports the ideology that ppl should be able to choose their genders, but not their sexual orientations. Shermer admits that publications on this subject are tainted by "the possibility of motivated reasoning and the confirmation bias".

Shermer also makes this argument:
When did you choose to become straight?

Say what?

By demographic distribution (about 95 percent of the population identifies as heterosexual), the majority of you reading this column are straight. You no more chose this sexual orientation than gays or lesbians choose theirs.
This is a poor argument. If you ask straights this question, many of them will vividly recall the moment that they decided in favor of heterosexuality.

The academics would do this study if they thought that it would help their cause.

I don't know why Shermer calls himself a skeptic, because he uncritical accepts pseudoscience all the time.

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Blaming all hatred on Trump

The NY Times reports:
This Week in Hate tracks hate crimes and harassment around the country since the election of Donald Trump. ...

On Friday, a post on the anti-Semitic website the Daily Stormer called for a “troll storm” against Jewish people in Whitefish, Mont., where Sherry Spencer, the mother of the white nationalist leader Richard Spencer, owns a building. The post’s author, apparently reacting to calls for Ms. Spencer to sell the building, published pictures of Whitefish residents, including a child, with Star of David symbols and the German word for “Jew.”
If you want both sides of the story, see Sherry Spencer and Daily Stormer. She posts some evidence that she is the victim here.

This appears to be some sort of rural conflict between a left-wing Jewish group that hates Christians, and a right-wing group that hates Jews. The NY Times takes the side of the Jewish leftist Christian-haters, and blames it all on Trump.

Speaking of hating Jews, a Si Valley paper reports:
Google says it is “thinking deeply” about improving its search results after learning that Holocaust deniers and others were successful in making their links rise to the top. ...

In the U.S. and the United Kingdom, those searching for “Did the Holocaust happen?” received a top result linking to a website with the headline, “Top Ten Reasons why the Holocaust didn’t happen.” The site is run by Stormfront, a neo-Nazi white supremacist group.
The Jewish groups should just rebut the reasons, instead of trying to censor them.

Update: Most of these Trump hate stories have turned out to be hoaxes. In other words, fake news from Trump haters.