Woman wants laws to regulate online hookups

I am convinced that legal trends will result in legalized prostitution.

A female law professor found her second husband on an online hookup site, and now writes a scholarly essay and Wash Post op-ed arguing that lying on online hookup sites is a form a fraud that ought to be prosecuted under the law.

Anyone who uses an online dating site — Tinder, Bumble and the rest — quickly learns that people don’t always look like their photos, they sometimes add an inch or two to their height and maybe they fudge their weight. One study found that 80 percent of people lie in their profiles. Many falsehoods are mild, easy to see through within seconds of meeting someone in person and do little harm.

But other lies are more dangerous: They become instruments of sexual fraud. A 44-year-old woman in Britain, for example, fell in love with a man who told her he was a single businessman who often traveled for work. A year later, she learned that he was a married London lawyer using a fake name to sleep with several other women whom he had apparently tricked in the same way. ...

Currently, the law only haphazardly penalizes misrepresentations in the context of sex. ... How to handle sexual fraud in the age of Tinder should be a part of those debates.

She has a point, but only if you assume that she was selling her sexual favors online.

Fraud means getting cheated out of money somehow. She is not talking about the cost of a dinner. She means getting into a sexual relationship without the expected financial rewards.

Online dating is increasingly popular, and a lot of other women may feel the same way. The only way to resolve these concerns is to have contracts that cover exactly what is given in exchanged for sexual favors. In another era, marriage law and religion filled that role, but now we need short-term contracts that cover just a few romantic hours.

I am not saying that such contracts are desirable, or preferable to marriage or other options, or good for society. I am saying that cultural and legal trends are making them inevitable.

Our society is not coping with #MeToo very well. No one wants to say that the accusers are stupid sluts who got what they deserved. The actresses who seduced Harvey Weinstein were presumably seeking movie roles. Did they get what they expected? Maybe they did, but there were no written contracts so we don't know. Because of prostitution laws, it would have been hard to have written contracts. If prostitution were legal, and Weinstein required his clients to sign the appropriate waivers, then everyone would be happy according to the way our law currently works.

Investigation shows Facebook Leftism

The Jewish newspaper NY Times has published an investigation of the Jewish social media monopoly, Facebook. It complains:

Mr. Zuckerberg considered it — asking subordinates whether Mr. Trump had violated the company’s rules and whether his account should be suspended or the post removed. ...

Mr. Trump’s post remained up.

That's right, the NY Times complaint is that Facebook did not censor Donald Trump.

It also complains:

In fall 2016, Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, was publicly declaring it a “crazy idea” that his company had played a role in deciding the election.

In fact, the company was doing everything it could to elect Hillary Clinton. The NY Times complaint is that it did not block a small number of pro-Trump postings.

The NY Times controls its newspaper enough that all 15 columnists are Trump-haters. No pro-Trump columns are allowed.

Facebook faced worldwide outrage in March after The Times, The Observer of London and The Guardian published a joint investigation into how user data had been appropriated by Cambridge Analytica to profile American voters.

This was manufactured outrage.

We would be better off if Facebook were not a Leftist monopoly, and if it had some healthy competition. For competition to be practical, users and others would have to have some practical way of extracting their data and using it on another platform. Any such attempt is likely to be met by Facebook lawyers claiming that it violates the terms of service.

My hunch is that this so-called Cambridge Analytica scandal was actually beneficial to Facebook. Now, if govt regulators or anyone else demand that Facebook allow data exports for competitors, Facebook will that it cannot do that because we would probably have another Cambridge Analytica breach. Facebook must keep all the data to itself, it will argue, and the Jewish leftists at the NY Times will agree.

Meanwhile, the Jewish TV network CNN is suing Pres. Trump claiming that its reporter has been denied his free speech rights to hog the microphone during a press conference!

CNN has repeatedly supported censoring Alt Right advocates who really are exercising their free speech rights to express political opinions to the public.

Yes, NY Times, Facebook, and CNN are all enemies of the people. They seek to censor everything contrary to their Jewish Leftist politics.

Jews overwhelmingly vote Democrat again

Jewish news:

The overwhelming majority of American Jews voted Democrat in Tuesday’s elections, a CNN poll found.

Nearly 80% of Jewish voters polled voted Democrat, while 17% voted Republican. Jews also voted Democrat at the highest rate of any other religion included in the poll, which included several denominations of Christianity. The poll did not include a large enough sample size of Muslim voters to make a determination for the religion.

It was a banner night for Jewish candidates, five of whom picked up Democratic seats in the House as the party retook control of the chamber. Some of the candidates also staged upsets in suburban areas that went for Trump in 2016.

A lot of orthodox Jews vote Republican.

Some Jews say that it is anti-Semitic to generalize about the political opinions of Jews. CNN is controlled by Jews, and is not anti-Semitic.

Jews enable felons to vote Democrat

A Jewish mag brags:

An amendment to Florida’s constitution that would restore voting rights for felons passed Tuesday with the help of Jewish groups that campaigned for the measure.

Amendment 4 won 64 percent of the vote, passing the needed 60 percent threshold for passage.

A number of Florida branches of Jewish groups, including the Reform movement’s Religious Action Center, the Anti-Defamation League, the National Council of Jewish Women and Join for Justice, campaigned for the amendment, which excludes felons convicted of murder and sex crimes.

Florida, long a swing state, could go more decidedly Democratic: Minorities, who form a substantial portion of the 1.4 million newly enfranchised voters, tend to vote for Democrats.

“‘Kol hakavod’ to the Reform Jewish communities in Florida — and across the U.S. — who organized and mobilized to make this happen,” the national Religious Action Center said on Twitter, using the Hebrew term for “well done.” “This is huge. 1.4 million Floridians will have their voting rights restored.”

A number of major Jewish philanthropists contributed to the campaign, including George Soros, Seth Klarman and Stacy Schusterman.

Are there a lot of Jews in Florida prisons? I don't think so.

Anything to help destroy white Christian civilization, I guess.

A lot of Jews retire in Florida, but not enough to control elections. For that, they need more white-haters.

The NY Times says that it is anti-Semitic to blame stuff like this on Soros, but I guess it is okay for a Jewish magazine.

Companies like attractive applicants

Some research has shown that job applicants are much more likely to get called for an interview if they are physically attractive. The study used identical resumes, and only the pictures were different. The effect was more pronounced for female applicants. Sorry, I lost the link.

They authors suggested some subconscious invidious discriminination to the detriment of the hiring company.

Maybe not. Here are other explanations.

1. Maybe beautiful people have superior genes that make them better workers. Evolution would predict this, as the beautiful applicant probably had a beautiful and choosy mom who only mated with a man who was superior in multiple ways, including heritable job skills.

2. Maybe beautiful ppl are happier, better adjusted, and better socialized because they have always been treated with the respect that beauty draws, while ugly ppl are lonely, bitter, uncooperative, and distrustful.

3. Maybe beautiful and ugly applicants do equivalent work, but the beautiful workers inspire co-workers to do better work. Maybe the guys work harder to impress the pretty girl.

If any of these theories is true, then it makes sense for companies to try to hire beautiful applicants. Otherwise, companies could save time and money by hiring the ugly applicants.

Other research shows:

“Our research shows that people infer a wide range of personality traits just by looking at the physical features of a particular body,” says psychological scientist Ying Hu of the University of Texas at Dallas, first author on the research. “Stereotypes based on body shape can contribute to how we judge and interact with new acquaintances and strangers. Understanding these biases is important for considering how we form first impressions.”

Previous research has shown that we infer a considerable amount of social information by looking at other people’s faces, but relatively little research has explored whether body shapes also contribute to these judgments.

Certain psychological traits make ppl much more suited for some jobs over others, so maybe employers should be judging physical appearance more.

Atlantic mag endorses Nazi opinions

Jewish organizations are claiming that there has been a recent increase in anti-Semitism. The evidence for this consists almost entirely of Jewish-perpetrated hoaxes.

The mainstream news media, like the NY Times, reports this supposed anti-Semitism as if it were a fact.

It is almost impossible to find any example of anti-Semitism in the USA. For example, the recent trial over Harvard's admissions policy has shown that the main biases are in favor of Jews and against Asians.

I am beginning to think that anti-Semitism is just some weirdo religious belief that Jews have.

Yes, some lone wolf shot up a Pittsburgh synagogue. But contrary to many news reports, he was not shooting his victims because of who they were or how they pray. He was mad at them for importing criminal migrants. There is no support anywhere for what he did.

The most anti-Semitic site I know is The Daily Stormer. It claims to be the most censored publication in history, as it has been aggressively blocked by Google and other internet companies for its political content.

It is mainly an Alt Right political site, with the distinction that it uses memes, humor, exaggeration, and trolling to make its political points. And it blames the Jews for almost everything bad.

It just does political commentary, and is very much against any violence like the Pittsburgh shooting.

The Daily Stormer writes:

Atlantic Jew: Yes, We Do Support Massive Nonwhite Immigration, And That is Why People Hate Us

So the Jewish response to the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting – commonly known as “The Gunfight at O.K. Synagogue” – has been very… strange.

The shooter wrote about opposition to the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, a Jewish group that is flooding America with the lowest form of life on earth from the entire third world.

Whereas the Jews have typically refused to answer or even acknowledge the question of “why do people hate the Jews?”, in the wake of this shooting, many are coming out and saying “oh yes, many people hate us because we are flooding them with brown people – it’s evil for them to disagree with us on this issue.”

The most shocking “yes, we did that” article thus far is from Peter Beinart, a Jewish professor of journalism at City University of New York. ...

This is a Jew, in The Atlantic – a magazine that once put me on their cover calling me evil – admitting that everything the Daily Stormer says about Jews is true.

The Atlantic magazine article explains that Jews really are overwhelmingly in favor of importing Third World migrants to destroy white Christian America, and therefore any American conservative movement like Trump's is necessarily anti-Semitic.

Yes, the Daily Stormer is anti-Semitic. Their excuse is that they are going to be called Nazis anyway, for taking their political positions, so they embrace the insult and move on. It is probably not a good strategy, as it gets them banned from Google, Facebook, and PayPal.

Jews control much of the news media (like NY Times and CNN), Hollywood, and internet giants (like Google and Facebook). So they can censor the Daily Stormer. But they can't hide the fact that they really are working to destroy white Christian America. Here is how the Jewish Atlantic explains it:

The segregationist anti-Semites of the mid-20th century and the nativist anti-Semites of today are wrong about Jews’ motives. Jews didn’t support civil rights then — and they don’t support immigrants’ rights now — because they want to subjugate white Christians. They’re just predisposed — because of their understanding of Jewish history — to identify with outsiders and fear ethnically and religiously exclusive definitions of Americanism.

Got that? Secular Jews oppose Trump's efforts to make America great again. No question about that. It is anti-Semitic to say that those efforts are motivated by wanting to subjugate white Christians.

Instead we are supposed to say that Jews are just acting out their historical prejudices against Americanism!

It is usually foolish to attribute motives to people. Most people are pre-programmed automatons who cannot explain why they do what they do, and lack the free will to do anything but what they have been told. Their behavior is complicated combination of nature and nurture, and it is very difficult to separate the genetic and cultural causes.

In the case of Jews, certain beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors have persisted for centuries. They even persist in Jews who do not appear otherwise to be religious. Why? Ask scholars who have studied the matter. There is no simple answer, as far as I know.

On this blog, I regularly criticize unjustified attempts to attribute motives to people. There is something about the human mind that wants to attribute motives, and sees motives when they aren't there.

So I am agreeing with the Jewish Atlantic article that Jews are not necessarily motivated by wanting to subjugate white Christians. Likewise, Trump supporters and Alt Right activists are not necessarily anti-Semitic or have any motivation to harm Jews. From what I have seen, most of them don't care about Jews at all, and are happy to see orthodox and Israeli Jews support Trump.

Secular Jews have abandoned what we normally think of as religious beliefs. Instead they maintain their social cohesion by calling everyone else anti-Semitic and working to undermine white Christians. This is confirmed by the Jewish Atlantic article. Just don't call it a motivation, and assume that Jews are pre-programmed to behave that way because of their peculiar understanding of Jewish history.

What is essential to conservatism?

CH writes:

Isn’t [Ben] Shapiro a NeverTrumper?

Jewish “conservatives” are misleading allies, the same as Black “conservatives”. At some point, when their tribal interests are threatened, they revert to the mean – anti-white animus. ...

The reason I assert there is no conservatism without White Christian nationalism is because White demographic hegemony is necessary to perpetuate the ideals of generic anglo-saxon conservatism, which is a creation of WHITE CHRISTIAN MEN. When White Gentiles lose majority rule, their ideals, values, moral sense, and culture go with them.

There is no Constitutional Conservatism without constitutional Whiteness. It really is as simple as that.

I do not think that this is true.

But what if it is true? What if ppl think it is true, whether it is or not?

Perhaps we will find out, if white Christians lose their majority in a country like Sweden. This is an empirical question, and the experiment is being done.

White men have had a long run

TheHill.com:

Academy Award-winning documentary filmmaker Michael Moore asked for the “angry white men” of America to “just take a break” in an interview on Thursday.

During an appearance on “Late Night with Seth Meyers,” Moore said that he, being an “angry white guy over 50 with a high school education,” is part of President Trump’s targeted demographic.

But he said he and his “fellow angry white American guys” have been “running the show for 10,000 years,” and it’s time to give someone else a chance.

“It’s like, we’ve had a long run as men running everything and the Yankees could never win as many pennants as we’ve won in these 10,000 years as men,” Moore said.

“So, why don’t we just take a break? Let the majority gender run the show. What are you scared of?” he continued. “Women actually like us, most of us.”

No, women do not like Michael Moore. He would just be a slave to the women, Jews, hispanics, and Moslems that he wants to empower.

Of course a Jewish host on a Jewish network is all in favor of enslaving white Christian men. Talk about enslaving any other group would not be tolerated.

Breitbart:

The Los Angeles Times is facing criticism after it endorsed three white candidates in its English edition, but endorsed their Latino opponents in its Spanish edition. ...

The races include:

In addition, the center-right “OC Political” blog notes, the English and Spanish versions differed on two ballot propositions, and the Spanish version left out several races where there were no Latinos running (but in which Latino voters will still be casting ballots).

In addition, the blog noted, “While the LA Times en Español endorsed 7 Latinos and 1 white man, the LA Times English endorsements for Statewide offices were much more ethnically balanced, with 3 white people, 3 Latinos, 2 Asian Americans, and 1 African American for State office.”

Not even 3 white people, unless you count Jews as white.

Is anyone surprised by this? Latinos, Jews, Asians, and African Americans just vote anti-white, as instructed. Only white people make individual decisions, based on the issues. Democracy only works in white countries, or ethnically uniform countries like Japan.

Meanwhile, see these NY Times articles for more proof that anti-Semitism is a Jewish hoax. With some help from a gay black dude promoted by lesbian Democrats.

Telling the truth is called hate speech

The American Spectator reports:

Americans are no longer a free people, if debate on major public-policy issues is effectively criminalized, which is what the Democrats and their allies are attempting to do with regard to our immigration policy. We are now being told in effect that it is “hate speech” to express opposition to the open-borders agenda of Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and such of their billionaire donors as George Soros. ...

George Soros has been a major funder of much of the institutional infrastructure the Left has built during the past 20 years. ...

When Hungary’s prime minister Viktor Orban took action to halt the influx of “refugees” into his country and named Soros as the sponsor of this invasion, Soros responded: “[Orban’s] plan treats the protection of national borders as the objective and the refugees as an obstacle. Our plan treats the protection of refugees as the objective and national borders as the obstacle.” ...

To identity Soros as the sponsor of this open-borders agenda, however, is to be guilty of hate, as explained last week in a Washington Post headline: “Conspiracy theories about Soros aren’t just false. They’re anti-Semitic.” You will not be surprised to learn that the author of that article, Talia Levin, works for Media Matters, which is funded by Soros.

Trump challenges birthright citizenship

A Jewish mag writes:

President Trump’s calls to strip American-born citizens of their citizenship should chill all Americans, but it is especially disturbing to anyone with knowledge of Jewish history.

Citizenship is a profoundly Jewish issue.

No, Trump has not called for stripping anyone's citizenship. There are some Supreme Court rulings making it nearly impossible to strip citizenship, and Trump is not challenging them. He is saying that anchor babies should never get citizenship.

Saying that Jews want to flood the USA with anchor babies, refugees, and migrants is not a paranoid conspiracy theory. Just read any Jewish publication, and you will find Jews arguing that Jewish beliefs include such things. In countries other than Israel, of course. Only Jews get to immigrate to Israel.

England expelled all Jews in 1290. Many British Jews then fled to France. But that didn’t bring a permanent solution; Philip IV, known as Philip the Fair, expelled all the Jews of France in 1306.

In 1935, the Nuremberg Laws stripped German Jews of their citizenship, making them subjects of the state.

I have a friend who has been kicked out of five restaurants. When he tells the story about a particular restaurant, he usually gets some sympathy. But if he says that it has happened at five restaurants, they just ask what he is doing to get kicked out.

The management at Google is supporting a walkout by employees who identify as female.

Okay, that sends a message that the female employees are not doing any work that is critical to the company anyway.

The Google incident was apparently triggered by a NY Times story revealing that a Google hiring manager flirted with an applicant at the Burning Man festival, and she complained about it two years later.

France is 20% Muslim and climbing

Birth news:

As can be seen, France and Belgium have experienced similar developments, with the granting of Muslim names rapidly rising from 5-8% in 1995 to around 20% today

Those kids with Muslim names will have to be Muslims, as Islam does not allow anyone to leave the religion.

ADL defends killing white Christians

The NY Times reports:

The anguish of Saturday’s massacre heightened a sense of national unease over increasingly hostile political rhetoric. Critics of President Trump have argued that he is partly to blame for recent acts of violence because he has been stirring the pot of nationalism, on Twitter and at his rallies, charges that Mr. Trump has denied.

Here is a Jewish newspaper again blaming the President for being pro-America, as if Jewish collective interests were to destroy America.

The President tweeted:

…This evil Anti-Semitic attack is an assault on humanity. It will take all of us working together to extract the poison of Anti-Semitism from our world. We must unite to conquer hate.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 27, 2018

I agree with this, but 99% of the hostility between Jews and non-Jews is coming from Jews, and it would help if the Jews would lighten up. Trump himself is a very pro-Jewish President, and is extremely popular among Israeli Jews.

The Jewish ADL writes in the NY Times:

And while Jews have enjoyed a degree of acceptance and achievement in the United States perhaps unrivaled in our people’s history, recent trends have been alarming.

While the overall trend in anti-Semitic incidents has been a downward one, last year we saw the largest single-year increase since the A.D.L. began this annual audit in 1979 — a 57 percent increase in anti-Semitic incidents in 2017. These incidents include high-profile ones such as neo-Nazis marching in Charlottesville, Va., chanting “Jews will not replace us,”

For its totals, ADL includes hoaxes perpetrated by Jews, and most of the incidents have turned out to be Jewish hoaxes.

Just what is the objection to someone chanting “Jews will not replace us”? I infer that ADL and other prominent Jewish organizations favor the systematic extermination of white Christians.

Anti-Semitism is being normalized in public life.

As you read this, there are television ads being run by mainstream political candidates and parties that invoke the specter of the Jewish philanthropist George Soros to instill fear in voters’ hearts. ... There are those — including the president of the United States — who rail against “globalists” that are ruining the country, a term those on the far-right use as code for Jews.

So it is now anti-Semitism to criticize Soros and globalism?

These incidents seem small, but add them together, nurture them with silence and acquiescence, and what grows is the poisonous weed of anti-Semitism.

This must end.

Now the Jewish ADL and NY Times is threatening us. They now have the power to censor open communication platforms like Gab, and they are doing it. No one will be allowed to criticize Soros, globalists, white genocide, and other Jewish causes. They seem to be admitting that free speech will result in people hating the Jews.

More than 100 years ago, the lynching of a Jewish factory superintendent, Leo Frank, in Marietta, Ga., shocked the Jewish community and the nation. It directly led to the formation of the A.D.L. to fight anti-Semitism.

Really? Frank was convicted of raping and murdering a Christian girl, and nearly everyone agrees that he was guilty and got a fair trial. Jews at the time defended him just because he was Jewish.

OTOH, no one is defending the Pittsburgh killer. He is a Trump-hater, not a Trump supporter. By all means, prosecute him to the fullest and investigate why he hated the Jews. By some reports, he attacked the synagogue because it was actively involved in importing refugees from anti-American countries.

I will be looking to see whether any prominent Jews denounce this attempt by ADL and the NY Times to provoke hatred against white Christians.

Vox Day slams Jordan Peterson

Vox Day writes:

Jordan Peterson is believed by many to be the greatest thinker that humanity has ever known. He is Father Figure, Philosopher-King, and Prophet to the millions of young men who are his most fervent fans. He is the central figure of the Intellectual Dark Web, an academic superstar, and an unparalleled media phenomenon who has shattered all conceptions of what it means to be modern celebrity in the Internet Age.

But Jordan Peterson is also a narcissist, a charlatan, and an intellectual con man who doesn't even bother to learn much about the subjects upon which he lectures. He is a defender of free speech who silences other speakers, a fearless free-thinker who runs away from debate, difficult questions, and controversial issues, a philosopher who rejects the conventional definition of truth, and a learned professor who has failed to read most of the great classics of the Western canon. He is, in short, a shameless and unrepentant fraud.

Peterson is not what he appears. How can he be a professional psychologist and not understand that Christine Blasey Ford suffers from a serious mental illness?

He is not really a conservative or a right-winger. He just stubbornly doesn't like being told what to say. People think that he is a real-talker because he acknowledges that there are differences between men and women. But those differences were recognized in nearly all of recorded history, and by scientific research today.

He got a lot of fame for objecting to transgender pronound mandates, but he doesn't really take a principled stand on the issue. He was just saying what most professors would have said a few years ago. It is remarkable that so few professors will advocate independent thinking, but maybe Peterson is just an old curmudgeon who has not adapted to the changing academic climate.

He now has a cult following that makes him $5M per year.

Peterson is a big fan of Jung, Solzhenitsyn, Dostoevsky, and Nietzsche. Is that why it is so popular? I don't think so. I think people like his style when he tells them to stand up straight and clean up their rooms. He talks about how order is better than chaos, and people find it inspiring.

Why Johnny can't read

A radio program explains teacher stubbornness to use proven teaching methods:

"I am philosophically opposed to jumping on the bandwagon of the next great thing that's going to teach every child how to learn to read," said Stacy Reeves, an associate professor of literacy. "Phonics for me is not that answer."

Reeves said she knows this from her own experience. In the early 1990s, before she started her Ph.D., she was an elementary school teacher. Her students did phonics worksheets and then got little books called decodable readers that contained words with the letter patterns they'd been practicing. She said the books were boring and repetitive. "But as soon as I sat down with my first-graders and read a book, like 'Frog and Toad Are Friends,' they were instantly engaged in the story," she said.

A NY Times essay summarizes:

What have scientists figured out? First of all, while learning to talk is a natural process that occurs when children are surrounded by spoken language, learning to read is not. To become readers, kids need to learn how the words they know how to say connect to print on the page. They need explicit, systematic phonics instruction. There are hundreds of studies that back this up.

Educators ignore this research, and always talk about the importance of reading to kids, instead of teaching kids to read.

This seems scandalous, but it is not news. It was all explained in a best-selling 1955 book.

Trump is a nationalist, not a globalist

The Jews at the NY Times are attacking Pres. Trump again:

Mr. Trump’s opponents quickly denounced his comments, saying they were not-so-veiled appeals to racism and nativism; the word “globalist,” they said, appeals to anti-Semitism.

“The President of the United States openly identifies himself as a nationalist, calls for the jailing of his political opponents, attacks the press & cozies up to dictators, while Republicans in Congress stand idly by,” Robert Reich, a former labor secretary under President Bill Clinton, wrote on Twitter.

Trump is not trying to jail Hillary Clinton or other opponents. But many prominent Democrats advocate impeaching and jailing Trump.

The press attacks Trump more that any other person in my lifetime. And yet there is a complaint that Trump attacks the press?

Now they are saying that it is anti-Semitic to be an American nationalist, instead of a globalist. What they are really saying is that leftist Jews hate America. Professor David Gelernter explains it well in a WSJ article on The Real Reason They Hate Trump.

Jews are the only ones in the world who have a problem with nationalism. That is because nationalism to them means Zionism, and the superiority of the Chosen People. Their whole religion is based on promoting Jews, and cutting down non-Jews.

CNN is run by Jews, and reports:

White nationalism, which reared its ugly head in Charlottesville, Virginia, last year is organized under the principle that Caucasians are inherently superior and in order for society to truly prosper, the agenda of whites needs to be recognized as a first priority -- at the necessary expense of anyone who isn't white.

No, Jewish nationalism may be based on beliefs of superiority, but others are not. Almost every nation on Earth has a population that has some national identity that is not based on inherent superiority. If Italians root for Italians in the World Cup, it is not because they think Italians are inherently superior. It is because they identify with other Italians.

USA was once a united people

People sometimes say that USA was founded on an idea, as opposed to being a cohesive people.

Consider The Federalist No. 2:

With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people -- a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.

This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence, that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a band of brethren, united to each other by the strongest ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties.

Similar sentiments have hitherto prevailed among all orders and denominations of men among us. To all general purposes we have uniformly been one people each individual citizen everywhere enjoying the same national rights, privileges, and protection. As a nation we have made peace and war; as a nation we have vanquished our common enemies; as a nation we have formed alliances, and made treaties, and entered into various compacts and conventions with foreign states.

Obviously John Jay was referred to those descended from English settlers, and not Indians or African slaves.

Immigration is splitting America in a way that John Jay said should never be done.

We need more identity politics

I sometimes post lists of things that I have changed my mind about.

Up until now, I always thought of identity politics as a bad things. One of the main things I detest about the Democrat Party is that it relies almost entirely on identity politics for it supporters.

The Republican try to appeal to all groups, with superior policies. Eg, Republicans supported Brett Kavanaugh because he is an apolitical follower of the law, while opposition was from political interest groups and identity politics. The Republicans try to stay above identity politics.

This just isn't going to work. It is hopeless to teach ethnic groups to vote other than with their ethnic identities. Blacks vote with blacks, Chinese vote with Chinese, Jews vote with Jews. It is just human nature. Whites are the only ones who do not vote their ethnic identities.

I cannot condone killing Jamal Khashoggi, but let's face it. He was working to exterminate his ethnic enemies. He was not an American, and would never be a real American. The Wash. Post only hired him because he hates white Christians. There is no reason for American to mourn his death.

Elizabeth Warren is apparently embarrassed to be white. She desperately needed some non-white credentials in order to gain status in the Democrat Party.

There is no chance of persuading the non-whites to abandon their anti-white politics. As I write this, I listen to an NPR Radio program that explains that Latinos can be expected to vote for whatever party is perceived as the anti-white party, and how that will be true for generations to come.

Khashoggi was living in the USA so that someday his grandkids could kill your grandkids.

If women are voting for female candidates just because they are female, then men should vote for male candidates, to help balance the voting.

There is something seriously wrong with the USA that being a white male is a political disadvantage.

This is crazy because 99% of American greatness is due to white men.

I now believe that the USA would be much better off if whites adopted identity politics.

CH writes:

Your Daily Ugly Truth: The Purpose Of Nationhood

Nations are in fact distinct geopolitical systems for privileging races and ethnicities. If the heritage stock of a nation isn’t privileged, then what is the point of the nation? It has failed its fundamental duty.

A nation which privileges all comers, from alien races and cultures, will lose the loyalty of the race of people which established the nation for the benefit of themselves and their posterity. It will become de-nationed, a nation in name only, divorced from the mystic chords which historically composed it.

This is right. The French nation is based on being French. Otherwise, what is it?

It the USA is to become a real nation again, then we need an American identity, with an American population that his proud of that identity and willing to defend it.

Scientists stay quiet about population differences

Amy Harmon writes in the NY Times:

[name redacted] is a black high school student in Winston-Salem, N.C., who does not appear in my article on Thursday’s front page about how human geneticists have been slow to respond to the invocation of their research by white supremacists.

But the story of how he struggled last spring to find sources to refute the claims of white classmates that people of European descent had evolved to be intellectually superior to Africans is the reason I persevered in the assignment, even when I felt as if my head were going to explode. ...

But another reason some scientists avoid engaging on this topic, I came to understand, was that they do not have definitive answers about whether there are average differences in biological traits across populations.

She goes on to say that the leading geneticists are unwilling to explain publicly whether the white supremacists are right or wrong.

She did find some who were eager to rebut the white supremacists in trivial ways. For example, she says that white supremacists claim that only European whites can digest milk in adulthood, while geneticists say that there is also an obscure African tribe of dairy farmers than can also do it.

This issue appears to have been precipitated by Elizabeth Warren having a DNA test to prove something about her. Maybe next she will try to show that she has the genes for a higher IQ that she needs to be President.

The real issue with Warren is not whether she has any Mexican DNA, or whether Harvard will admit to giving her racial preferences. Harvard never admits to racial preferences, even tho a current lawsuit is exposing lots of racial preferences.

The real issue is why Warren is embarrassed to be white. She seeks status in the Democrat Party, and that party stands against whites. So Warren must pretend to be non-white.

There is something seriously wrong with a white women who is embarrassed to be white. And there is something wrong with a party that requires some non-white DNA to get ahead.

Meanwhile, the NY Times argues:

To get a handle on what automated fake-news detection would require, consider an article posted in May ...:

The Boy Scouts have decided to accept people who identify as gay and lesbian among their ranks. And girls are welcome now, too, into the iconic organization, which has renamed itself Scouts BSA. So what’s next? A mandate that condoms be made available to ‘all participants’ of its global gathering.

Was this account true or false? Investigators at the fact-checking site Snopes determined that the report was “mostly false.” But determining how it went afoul is a subtle business beyond the dreams of even the best current A.I.

Actually, this is easy for current AI technology.

The article says that it is hard to identify the story as fake news because all the elements of it are true. Leftists want to label it as "mostly false" because it mocks liberal Jewish-promoted values. The Facebook AI programs will just block news that mocks the leftist agenda. FB can do this today.

Update: The NY Times has now redacted the name of the black high school student, so I am doing that also. Apparently he doesn't want to be cited as someone confused by conflicting claims by geneticists. In particular, the article quotes him as saying “It’s convincing me of things I really don’t want to be convinced of.”

Defining white nationalism

Wonder what white nationalism is? Here is a defense of it:

White Nationalists believe that the current social and political system has put our race on the road to biological extinction. If present trends are not reversed, Whites will disappear as a distinct race. ...

Blacks, Arabs, and South Asians in Europe do not see Frenchmen, Englishmen, and Germans. They simply see White men. And we simply see non-Whites. Our differences do not matter to them, and their differences do not matter to us. As racial tensions increase in Europe, our people will realize that they are not being attacked as Frenchmen or Germans, but simply as White men. And when Europeans resist ethnic displacement, they will increasingly regard their race as their nation and their skin as their uniform. The sooner we see ourselves as White people, united by common enemies and challenges, sharing a common origin and a common destiny, the sooner we will be equal to the tasks facing us.

White nationalism will never catch on from whites listening to white nationalists. It will only catch on by whites realizing that they are increasingly attacked by non-whites for being white.

As hostilities increase between whites and non-whites, I expect Jews to decide to either align with the whites or the non-whites.

Now that Elizabeth Warren is celebrating that she is 99.9% white, and possibly 0.1% Mexican, white nationalists are looking at genetic info, as the NY Times reports:

One slide Dr. Novembre has folded into his recent talks depicts a group of white nationalists chugging milk at a 2017 gathering to draw attention to a genetic trait known to be more common in white people than others — the ability to digest lactose as adults. It also shows a social media post from an account called “Enter The Milk Zone” with a map lifted from a scientific journal article on the trait’s evolutionary history.

In most of the world, the article explains, the gene that allows for the digestion of lactose switches off after childhood. But with the arrival of the first cattle herders in Europe some 5,000 years ago, a chance mutation that left it turned on provided enough of a nutritional leg up that nearly all of those who survived eventually carried it. ...

Genetic ancestry tests advertise “ethnicity estimates” (Senator Elizabeth Warren appealed to the perceived authority of DNA this week to demonstrate her Native American heritage, in response to mocking by President Trump), and some disease-risk genes have turned out to be more common among certain genetic ancestry groups. ...

“Science is on our side,” crowed Jared Taylor, the founder of the white nationalist group American Renaissance, in a recent video that cites Dr. Reich’s book. ...

Many geneticists at the top of their field say they do not have the ability to communicate to a general audience on such a complicated and fraught topic. Some suggest journalists might take up the task. Several declined to speak on the record for this article.

It is funny that the geneticists do not want to talk about this issue. The DNA tests allow ancestry to be quantified, along with physical, medical, and behavioral traits.

As a step toward changing that, Dr. Di Rienzo has helped organize a meeting of social scientists, geneticists and journalists at Harvard next week to discuss the social implications of the field’s newest tools.

Participants have been promised that the meeting will be restricted to some three-dozen invitees and that any remarks made there will be confidential.

And David L. Nelson, a Baylor College of Medicine geneticist who is president of the human genetics society, says it will not stay completely quiet on the issue, promising a statement later this week.

“There is no genetic evidence to support any racist ideology,” he said.

If there were never no evidence, then they would not be holding secret meetings.

Of course there is DNA evidence to support racist ideologies. Elizabeth Warren is just the latest example.

Warren has done us all a great service, by exposing leftist nonsense about human biodiversity. The NewYorker mag writes:

It is important to understand that, contrary to the impression created by television and online advertising, a DNA test can never provide definitive information about one’s heritage. ...

Warren, meanwhile, has allowed herself to be dragged into a conversation based on an outdated, harmful concept of racial blood—one that promotes the pernicious idea of biological differences among people — and she has pulled her supporters right along with her.

These are total lies, of course. DNA tests are very good at providing definitive info about heritage and ancestry. And they certainly confirm biological differences among people.

I don't know how leftist can deny, with a straight face, that there are biological differences among people. The differences are obvious to small children, noticed by educated observers for millennia, and quantitatively confirmed by modern DNA science.

Do not take obvious fiction seriously

I can't find it now, but I once read a letter to the editor of a book review periodical that said:

I am surprised that the review of Million Little Pieces took the stories seriously. I don't know anything about the subject matter, but I am a novelist, and I know novels. The book is structured as a novel, and should be treated as a work of fiction.

The letter was correct, and the book was fiction that many mistook for a factual memoir. Many of the stories were wildly implausible.

I am reminded of this when I see people take seriously allegations against Brett Kavanaugh. This was a political hit, making use of a mentall ill woman. Why take it seriously?

Real life memoirs do not have the structure of a novel, and they don't have the structure of a politcal hit either.

Some people actually argued that the phony drug memoir should be taken as real, because it was an inspiring story. Some people tried to determine whether the events in it could have happened. But why? Don't those people know what a novel is?

Likewise, don't people know what a political hit is? Why would you even think that truth has anything to do with it?

I think similar things of a lot of MeToo stories. Most fit the pattern of a revenge seeker, a faker looking for a monetary settlement, or a disturbed person who foolishly believes that personal anxieties can be released by blaming others. Such people need not be taken seriously.

Today's liberals are NPCs

Psychology Today reported several years ago that most people are pre-programmed robots:

But Bernard Baars, one of the leading researchers in consciousness science, says:

Human beings talk to themselves every moment of the waking day. ...

I'm pretty sure that Baars and McWhorter are entirely mistaken. Maybe Baars talks to himself all the time, and maybe McWhorter himself sees images of written words while he talks (there's reason to be skeptical of both claims), but I've investigated such things as carefully as I know how and become convinced that most people (let alone all people) do not do such things.

Kevin Roose reports in the NY Times:

Several months ago, users on 4chan and Reddit, the online message forums, started using the term NPC to refer to liberals. These people, they said, join the anti-Trump crowd not because they are led by independent thought or conscience to oppose President Trump’s policies, but because they’re brainwashed sheep who have been conditioned to parrot left-wing orthodoxy, in the manner of a scripted character.

As a Reddit user, BasedMedicalDoctor, explains in a thread about the appeal of the meme, NPCs are “completely dependent on their programming, and can’t do or think on their own.”

Twitter has now banned these memes, on the theory that they might influence the election.

This is pretty funny. If you read right-wingers, you find lots of different opinions, and reasoning behind those opinions. If you read leftists in the mainstream news media, you just get mindless recitation of stupid pre-programmed talking points. And now the leftists at Twitter are trying to control the election commentary so that more people will vote leftist.

Update: This NPC meme is really taking off. It is a linguistic kill shot.

The term NPC is borrowed from the digital games industry. It refers to characters managed by artificial intelligence whose behavior is limited to certain scripted responses and actions.

The NPC meme began as a satirical attempt to ridicule the New Left’s sound-bite, cliched culture. The BBC quoted one poster saying, "If you get in a discussion with them it's always the same buzzwords and hackneyed arguments…It's like in a [video game] when you accidentally talk to somebody twice and they give you the exact lines word for word once more."

Afraid of discussing Cultural Marxism

Libertarian Brian Doherty writes:

Don't Blame Karl Marx for 'Cultural Marxism' ...

The story goes that these eggheads saw that Marx's predictions about the contradictions in capitalism producing a proletarian revolt were failing to come true. They decided that traditional Western culture was keeping the masses from their revolutionary mission and needed to be annihilated. Religion, the family, traditional sexual mores, belief in objective truth — all had to be overturned. So they launched "critical theory" to demolish the sacred principles that made Western civilization great and pave the way for communist tyranny and an eventual stateless utopia. ...

Andrew Breitbart, who ran articles on his Big Hollywood site in 2009 headlined "Political Correctness is Cultural Marxism" and who appeared that year on Sean Hannity's Fox News show to declare that "cultural Marxism is political correctness, it's multiculturalism, and it's a war on Judeo-Christianity," was one of the major modern vectors of belief in the conspiracy. ...

The cultural Marxism conspiracy cultist who made the most hideous public impact was Anders Breivik, who murdered 77 people in Norway in 2011. Breivik wrote in his 1,500-page manifesto that "you cannot defeat Islamization or halt/reverse the Islamic colonization of Western Europe without first removing the political doctrines manifested through multiculturalism/cultural Marxism." ...

It's true that campus leftists have shifted some of their attention from specifically economic concerns to ones based in cultural identity.

He doesn't like the term "cultural Marxism", but no one blames Marx for it. Maybe some blame XX century Jews, but not Marx.

Libertarians have a huge blind spot on this subject. They refuse to recognize the dangers of giving liberties to your enemies.

Netflix has a new movie on Breivik, 22 July. It is very boring, and does not really explain what he explained in his manifesto. The movie spends a lot of time dwelling on someone who struggles to recover from his injuries, but of course that is trivial compared to whether cultural Marxism is good or bad for Norway. Apparently the movie makers were afraid to explain Breivik's philosophy, for fear that a lot of viewers would agree with it.

Wives who lie about paternity

You think women never lie about something personal or important?

The Atlantic mag reports:

As DNA-testing companies sell millions of kits, they’ve started to rearrange families. The tests have reunited long-lost cousins and helped adoptees find their birth parents, donor-conceived kids their sperm donors. They have also, in some cases, uncovered difficult family secrets.

Earlier this year, I heard from dozens of people who took a DNA test only to discover their fathers were not their biological fathers. Many of them belonged to a private Facebook support group called DNA NPE Friends—where NPE stands for “not parent expected”—that sprang up to connect the thousands of people who’ve had their identities altered by a DNA test.

There are other sides to the story, too. The creator of DNA NPE Friends, Catherine St Clair, recently created a group for the fathers. One such father is Christopher, whose real name we are withholding at his request. Earlier this year, after buying his now-15-year-old daughter an AncestryDNA test, Christopher found out that he is not her biological father. His wife had an affair. (They also have a 13-year-old son, who is his biological child.)

Two and a half weeks after the discovery, he filed for divorce.

Think about what these women do. They lie every day, to their husbands and kids. They lie about who their kids are, and about whom they are asking their husbands to support. They lie every day for 10 to 20 years. They conceal the most fundamental betrayal of a marriage. They only stop lying when they get caught by a DNA test.

Max Boot hates white Christians

Most American non-orthodox Jews are Democrats, but a few prominent ones claim to be conservatives. One is columnist Max Boot. He writes:

The GOP must suffer devastating defeats starting in Nov. It must pay a heavy price for its embrace of white nationalism & know-nothingism. Only if GOP is burned to the ground will there be a chance to build a reasonable center-right party out of ashes.

He is very much in favor of foreign wars that benefit Israel, and very much against white Christians. His hatred for white Christians appears to overwhelm all his other views, as he claims to support GOP policies.

Update: I posted this without realizing that the Max Boot quote was excerpted from a longer essay he wrote for the Wash. Post trashing my mom.

He claims that he is leaving the Republican Party because it has become too extremist. As evidence for his thesis, he says that Barry Goldwater and Phyllis Schlafly were extremists back in 1964.

And what was so extremist? They were anti-Communist, and Goldwater was against using the US Constitution to mandate forced racial school busing.

Boot is more of a foreign policy hawk than the Republican or Democrat Party today, so his problem is not really foreign policy. No, his real problem is that many Republicans do not go along with his Jewish anti-white-Christian policies.

In fairness, many Republican voters and their leaders, from Wendell Willkie to Mitt Romney, have been a lot more moderate. Their very centrism stoked the fury of some on the right. The pattern was set early on, in 1964, with Phyllis Schlafly’s best-selling tract “A Choice Not an Echo.” Schlafly was baffled why Republicans candidates had lost presidential elections in 1936, 1940, 1944, 1948 and 1960. “It wasn’t any accident,” she wrote, ominously. “It was planned that way. In each of their losing presidential years, a small group of secret kingmakers, using hidden persuaders and psychological warfare techniques, manipulated the Republican National Convention to nominate candidates who would sidestep or suppress the key issues.” These nefarious “kingmakers” were New York financiers who supposedly favored “a policy of aiding and abetting Red Russia and her satellites.” And how did these “kingmakers” manipulate the GOP? By promulgating “false slogans” such as “Politics should stop at the water’s edge.” In other words, for Schlafly the very idea of bipartisanship was evidence of incipient treason.

This was not the ranting of some marginal oddball. Schlafly was one of the leading lights of the right who in the 1970s would lead the successful campaign against the Equal Rights Amendment. Trump’s claim that he is going to “Make America Great Again” — after it has been betrayed by disloyal elites — is simply an echo, as it were, of Schlafly’s conspiratorial rants.

Max Boot is one of the disloyal elites who are betraying America.

Update: I listened to a long interview of Max Boot on NPR. While he denounces Trump in the strongest terms, he presented no substantive arguments at all. Occasionally he would refer to allegations that Trump paid someone off, or something like that, but that's all.

RIght-wingers now allowed in Germany

The far-left NY Times reports:

The entire affair is only one in a series of events that have marked a change in the public perception of the far right in Germany. Only two years ago, many right-wing politicians were still reluctant to officially endorse nationalist, anti-immigrant street movements such as Pegida. Now it is normal for not only Alternative for Germany politicians to back them officially, but even members of the putative political center to make shows of sympathy. Wolfgang Kubicki, vice chairman of the liberal Free Democratic Party, was quick to attribute “the roots of the riots” in Chemnitz to Ms. Merkel’s policy of admitting refugees and asylum seekers in 2015.

For decades, the right-wing elements in the German state never had the opportunity to cooperate with a major party that shares its views. Now they do.

This is great. To these leftists, "far right" means critical of importing millions of Moslem immigrants and refugees. Germany will never have a sensible policy until it at least allows public discussion of the issue.

Men do take more risks

The Atlantic mag reports:

Why Men Sexually Harass Women

Men vastly outnumber women among sexual harassers. The reason has more to do with culture than with intrinsic maleness.

OLGA KHAZAN

SCIENCE

… I can’t help but feel like the difference between teen me and how teen Kavanaugh allegedly behaved, and indeed between me and the other accused #MeToo perpetrators, comes down to how our different genders are conditioned to approach anything of a sexual nature.

… For one, women seem just as keen to take certain kinds of risks, like disagreeing with their friends on an issue or attempting to sell a screenplay. It’s just that when surveys measure risk taking in terms of things like unprotected sex and motorcycles, women tend to demur, since those types of activities are either more dangerous for women (the unprotected sex) or less familiar to them (riding motorcycles).

In fact, when researchers measured risk using more stereotypically feminine risky behavior, such as “cooking an impressive but difficult meal for a dinner party,” women turned out to be just as, if not more, likely to take risks as men. “Maybe there isn’t anything so special about male risk taking, after all,” wrote the University of Melbourne professor Cordelia Fine in Nautilus.

Several prominent psychologists believe there are actually few psychological differences between men and women.

If this were true, then we might expect to find societies where women are the aggressors, and women go around sexually assaulting men. But we don't.

This article is an example of blank slate disease, and leftists who refuse to accept human nature.

Simple evolutionary thinking should convince you that men will take more risks. If a man takes great risks to inseminate women, then he will have more grandchildren. Women have no such payoff for risk-taking.

White-hater cannot hear thru her rage headache

The white Christian haters at the NY Times publish this op-ed, complaining about the confirmation of a white male Supreme Court justice:

We’re talking about white women. The same 53 percent who put their racial privilege ahead of their second-class gender status in 2016 by voting to uphold a system that values only their whiteness, just as they have for decades. White women have broken for Democratic presidential candidates only twice: in the 1964 and 1996 elections, ...

Women of color, and specifically black women, make the margin of difference for Democrats. The voting patterns of white women and white men mirror each other much more closely, and they tend to cast their ballots for Republicans. The gender gap in politics is really a color line.

That’s because white women benefit from patriarchy by trading on their whiteness to monopolize resources for mutual gain. ...

This blood pact between white men and white women is at issue in the November midterms. ...

Meanwhile, Senator Collins subjected us to a slow funeral dirge about due process and some other nonsense I couldn’t even hear through my rage headache as she announced on Friday she would vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh.

The Democrat Party is now all about identity politics, and voting against white Christian men.

If there is one common theme to Jewish publications like the NY Times, it is to organize hatred for white Christian men.

This woman admits that her rage against whites and the patriarchy is such that she cannot even listen to what a white woman has to say. She simply urges everyone to act to the detriment of whites, men, and Christians.

The vote on Brett Kavanaugh will be remembered for a long time. Nearly every Democrat took the position that no matter how good a man and a judge he is, they would use phony personal attacks to advance their evil identity politics.

The marriage gap and crazy psychologists

Think that the Brett Kavanaugh nomination is a men v. women issue? Not really.

Sailer reports:

Parenthetically, the putative war on women is really a war on marriage. One of Steve Sailer’s many great insights over the years has been noting how the much talked about gender gap is reliably dwarfed by the much larger marriage gap.

So it is with the Kavanaugh calumny. The following graphs show firstly the percentages of respondents, by sex and marital status, who support Kavanaugh’s nomination

The poll shows that a majority of married women support the nomination, as well as a majority of married men. The opposition comes from unmarried folks.

Married people are much more likely to have a mature understanding of the realities of male-female relations.

Christine Blasey Ford obviously suffers from a serious mental illness.

It is not so well known that she subscribes to a branch of psychology that believes that anxiety and neuroses stem from childhood trauma, that therapy can recover those memories if lost, and that it is therapeutic to relive those trauma memories.

If such memories cannot be found, then they must be invented in order to gain the therapeutic value.

None of this has any scientific backing, and yet it is widely believed among psychologists.

Many people assume that she was making a sacrifice by coming forward. On the contrary, to her it is an opportunity to get a massive public therapy session where she relives her supposed traumas.

James Woods banned from Twitter

Zero Hedge reports:

Outspoken conservative actor James Woods was suspended from posting to Twitter over a two-month-old satirical meme which very clearly parodies a Democratic advertisement campaign. While the actor's tweets are still visible, he is unable to post new content.

The offending tweet from July 20, features three millennial-aged men with "nu-male smiles" and text that reads "We're making a Woman's Vote Worth more by staying home." Above it, Woods writes "Pretty scary that there is a distinct possibility this could be real. Not likely, but in this day and age of absolute liberal insanity, it is at least possible."

Really? Is that what these companies mean by election manipulation?

The tweet is funny. There is no reason to block it, except that leftist companies hate those with other views.

Monsters in their personal lives

Economist, multi-millionaire, and NY Times columnist Paul Krugman writes:

A trivial personal thought: I don't spend a lot of time with wealthy and/or powerful people, but it does happen occasionally given my line of work. And from now on I'll always wonder how many of the well-spoken men around the table are monsters in their personal lives

Not sure what he means here, but if he is piling MeToo victims, then he should worry about his fellow Jews being monsters in their personal lives.

PBS TV show is gay Jewish propaganda

News:

For years, people who said that Ernie and Bert of Sesame Street fame were a “gay couple” or suspected them of homosexuality were mocked for being ‘religious nutjobs’ and with other pejorative language. However, Mark Saltzman, a Jewish sodomite who wrote many of the scripts for the two characters, admitted in a recent interview that he wrote them and many other characters on the show based on his own life as an active homosexual in a relationship with another man

This propaganda is everywhere. It is not even news anymore. If you donate to PBS TV, you should realize that you are supporting a Jewish effort to undermine Christianity.

Update: Sesame Street denies that these characters are gay, and says that they are just puppets with no sex organs.

More Jewish lying to slander Christians

A Jewish feminist NY Times columnist writes:

Obviously, I believe Christine Blasey Ford, the psychology professor who says that Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her in high school while his friend Mark Judge watched and, at moments, egged him on. I believe her when she says that Kavanaugh, who she says was drunk, held her down, covered her mouth when she tried to scream, and ground against her while attempting to pull her clothes off. I believe her when she says this incident haunted her all her life.

There’s rarely hard evidence in a case like this, but Blasey — the surname she prefers to use publicly — has done everything possible to substantiate her claim.

No, just the opposite. She never complained to the police, the school, the parents, or anyone else. There is no proof that she told anyone, until she hatched what was supposed to be an anonymous plot to derail the nomination a few weeks ago.

Her supposed memory of the incident only was reveal to her during a recovered memory session with her shrink in 2012. She cannot even tell us what year the original event took place. It is hard to imagine a more frivolous accusation.

The NY Times role in this is particularly disgusting. The MeToo movement has been mostly about exposing Jewish perverts. When a Jewish feminist says she believes this, what is it based on?

Goldberg goes on to explain how eager she is to paint all conservative Christian men as perverts and rapists, and how it is good to publish baseless accusations in order to achieve that end. Jewish Senator Diane Feinstein has been leading the charge.

Censored explanation of male intelligence

Math professor Theodore P. Hill writes:

In the highly controversial area of human intelligence, the ‘Greater Male Variability Hypothesis’ (GMVH) asserts that there are more idiots and more geniuses among men than among women. Darwin’s research on evolution in the nineteenth century found that, although there are many exceptions for specific traits and species, there is generally more variability in males than in females of the same species throughout the animal kingdom.

Evidence for this hypothesis is fairly robust and has been reported in species ranging from adders and sockeye salmon to wasps and orangutans, as well as humans. Multiple studies have found that boys and men are over-represented at both the high and low ends of the distributions in categories ranging from birth weight and brain structures and 60-meter dash times to reading and mathematics test scores. There are significantly more men than women, for example, among Nobel laureates, music composers, and chess champions—and also among homeless people, suicide victims, and federal prison inmates.

This got him into trouble:

Theodore Hill, a retired professor of mathematics at Georgia Tech, claims that activists successfully pressured the New York Journal of Mathematics to delete an article he had written for the academic journal because it considered a politically incorrect subject: the achievement gap between men and women at very high levels of human intelligence.

This is a subject that women appear to be incapable of understanding. Or maybe they understand it, and are desperate to censor research that they cannot refute. Either way, you can forget about hearing the truth in today's colleges.

Update: This issue has drawn commentary from Terry Tao, Tim Gowers, and Lubos Motl.

It is funny to see these prominent mathematicians make excuses for leftist egalitarian groupthink. Gowers actually says that it is a myth that being good at math is a question of raw brainpower. He presumes that there are no many female mathematicians because of discrimination, lack of role models, and similar reasons. He doubts that women are really so picky as to only want to mate with the top 30% or so of men. So he rationalizes rejecting the paper. He later retracted some of his criticisms of the paper.

It is instructive to see Gowers' thought process in action. He is a brilliant mathematician and he struggles with some fairly simple ideas that are commonly observed about male-female sex differences. It is impossible that the ideas are difficult for him. It can only be that many years of leftist brainwashing have made it difficult for him to think clearly on the subject.

Arabic to replace French in France

RT reports:

France’s minister of national education has expressed support for adding Arabic language to the school curriculum for French children, enraging the country’s right-wing that has warned of dire consequences if the plan goes ahead.

France should draw up a “qualitative strategy” for teaching Arabic language in schools, Jean-Michel Blanquer said during an interview on French television. He insisted that Arabic, along with Chinese and Russian, is one of the “great languages of civilization” and should be learned “not only by people of Maghrebi origin or Arabic-speaking countries.”

Blanquer’s comments were made in response to a report authored by the Montaigne Institute, a Paris-based think tank, which found that middle and high school students learning Arabic have increasingly turned to religious schools that teach Salafism – a radical branch of Islamic that advocates Sharia law. The report called on the French government to incorporate Arabic into the public school curriculum in order to counter the political and religious indoctrination taught at these Salafi schools.

Google insists on qualifying anything from RT as Russian propaganda.

If the Russians are the only ones publicizing this news, then I am all in favor of it. The Democrats and the mainstream news media call this election interference.

France is on a path where it will soon cease to be French. Teaching Arabic is just enabling the eventual Moslem takeover.

Tolerating the intolerant

Nassim Nicholas Taleb argues "The West is currently in the process of committing suicide." [Skin in the Game, chap. 2, p. 86]

This comment follows an explanation of why Islam cannot coexist with other religions. If a society tolerates Islam, then eventually Islam will take over. Islam takes new members by marriage, conquest, and taxation, and it never lets any go.

Other religions are not like that, he explains, and thus can stably co-exist with other religions.

He suggests that society must be intolerant of certain intolerances, or else the most intolerant factions win.

The Silicon Valley monopolists argue that Alex Jones must be banned, because he is the truly intolerant one, and that we should import as many Moslems as possible.

This is crazy. Alex Jones is just a guy with an opinion. Sometimes he recites conspiracy theories.

Moslems believe in killing or enslaving infidels. Their kids will have a religious duty to kill your kids. Their grandkids will have a religious duty to kill your grandkids. And so on. There is no way to avoid it, except to keep Moslems out of your country.

(Before someone tells me that most Moslems are not murderers, I know that. Some Moslems do not believe in killing infidels. In those cases, their kids and grandkids are the bigger threats.)

From Justin Trudeau of Canada:

“The world is moving towards more diversity, not less diversity. It’s a form of entropy where people will come with different perspectives, the advancement of communication, raising standards of living around the world…[it] means that our communities, our boardrooms, are going to be more and more diverse,” Trudeau said at a forum in Canada’s capitol. …

National Post columnist Andrew Coyne quipped, “Entropy is our strength,” mocking Trudeau’s mantra of “diversity is our strength.”

Does he really think that entropy is a good thing?

If you want diversity in your food, you do not add poison. Because once you add poison, it is all poisonous.

French white genocide propaganda

Anti-white propaganda:

How do we make babies?”

This sex education book which, according to the publisher’s website, is designed for children of 5 years and up, seems to think the magic recipe is: find a white woman and a brown man.

It is not just French propaganda. Just watch Netflix. It is full of the same stuff. And it occurs without comment, in an attempt to normalize it.

Norma Rae portrays whites as trash

I recommend this video about the 1979 movie Norma Rae, if you want to understand what Hollywood Jews think of white people. The movie was made by Jews, and won Oscars. Throughout the movie, it mocks white Christians as being inferior humans like blacks. Jews are morally, culturally, and intellectually superior.

You would think that reviewers would at least point out that the main messages of the movie are Jewish supremacy, and Jewish-created animosity among Christians. No, the reviewers praised the movie as telling a true story.

The true part is something about a woman urging some workers to vote to unionize. Maybe the real true story is how Jews think that they are so superior, and how they are doing something noble by putting down white Christians as white trash, and stirring up conflict between whites and blacks. Apparently it is a survival strategy for Jews to undermine white society and support Jewish cohesiveness.

Perhaps you are thinking that if Christians ran Hollywood, then they would make some movies with negative portrayals of Jews. After all, a couple of Shakespeare's plays had negative stereotypes of Jews 400 years ago.

That may be true. But as it is, I get the impression that most of the criticisms of Jews comes from non-Christians.

Meanwhile, the new movie Dragged Across Concrete has been attacked as Mel Gibson’s New Police Brutality Movie Is a Vile, Racist Right-Wing Fantasy. It has gotten some good reviews. I am not sure the cops are really portrayed as good guys. I have not seen it.

The movie was written, directed, and financed by Jews, so it could be a sneaky attempt to make whites look bad.

Babies cannot lie

Neuroscience news:

A new study reports there are cognitive benefits for children who learn to lie early in life. Researchers say children who learn to lie early have more self control, better executive function and improved theory of mind. ...

Children have been found to be capable of fibbing before they are seven years old, and some as early as two. He caught his own son lying for the first time at 14 months. He had taught him some American sign language, and their son gestured for more milk although he wasn’t hungry. “We ran over to the fridge to get milk and he went, ‘Ha ha ha!’ He started to laugh.”

This is a good example of psychologists doing too much mindreading. It is very unlikely that the 14-month old baby was trying to deceive his dad. Babies just don't have thought processes that complex. Maybe the baby can learn that a certain hand symbol has some relation to milk, but that's about all.

Three-year-olds can lie. Probably all kids learn to lie by age four or so.

Human diversity is as large as it ever was

SciAm reports:

At the dawning of Homo sapiens, our ancestors were born into a world we would find utterly surreal. It's not so much that the climate and sea levels or the plants and the animals were different, although of course they were — it's that there were other kinds of humans alive at the same time. For most of H. sapiens' existence, in fact, multiple human species walked the earth. In Africa, where our species got its start, large-brained Homo heidelbergensis and small-brained Homo naledi also roamed. In Asia, there was Homo erectus, a mysterious group dubbed the Denisovans and, later, Homo floresiensis — a hobbitlike creature, tiny but for its large feet. The stocky, heavy-browed Neandertals, for their part, ruled Europe and western Asia. And there were probably even more forms, as yet undiscovered.

How was that any different from today?

All humans today are considered the same species, but it is not known that the above groups were really distinct species either. In fact, those that have been DNA sequenced are known to have interbred. And the hobbit was not really later, as it was dated incorrectly.

The difference between Europeans and Africans is about the same today as it was 100k years ago.

If humans were aware of the rival human sub-species back then, would they have been concerned that alien invaders would wipe them out? The answer is likely to be yes. Basic evolutionary theory teaches that the sub-species will fight to the death, leaving one surviving group. Someday Europe may have another fight to the death with African invaders.

New Yorker writer hates Christians

I listened to Sam Harris Waking Up #131 podcast, with New Yorker writer Russian homosexual Jew queer Gessen. Those descriptors are from her.

She was anti-Russia, anti-Trump, and anti-Christian.

The curious thing was that she was much more tolerant of Islam than Christianity. She was very much in favor of importing Moslems into the USA, and hated evangelical Christians more than any other group.

Harris repeatedly asked for clarifications, and pointed out that Moslem countries treat homosexuals and Jews very poorly, and even kill homosexuals, while Christians treat them very well.

She could not give any example of any harm to the groups she identifies with (homosexuals, Jews, queers, feminists), but she nevertheless made it clear that she hates Christians so much that Moslems are to be preferred to Christians.

Of course she obviously would much rather live in a Christian country than a Moslem country or even a Jewish country.

She is just someone with an opinion, but the New Yorker is not known for permitting a diversity of opinion. If she is expressing these opinions in the New Yorker, then those opinions are probably common to most New York liberal Jews.

It is curious that Jews hate evangelical Christians so much, because evangelical Christians tend to be very pro-Israel and very friendly towards Jews.

Update: The New Yorker just disinvited Steve Bannon, out of some sort of unexplained animosity against whites by themselves and Hollywood allies.

Central values of the US Constitution

UCLA law prof Eugene Volokh discusses the central values of the US Constitution:

We can see that from the Preamble, which reads,

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

That suggests that the Constitution has many purposes: justice, domestic peace, defense against foreign enemies, general welfare, and liberty alike. To be sure, some of them may be seen as aspects of "liberty" in a large sense, such as liberty from foreign oppressors, or even from domestic criminals. But they are not limited to liberty, or even focused primarily on liberty.

It is funny how he can paraphrase the Preamble, and miss the most important word: Posterity.
The term "We the People" did not refer to American Indians, African slaves, Mexicans, eskimos, or conquistadors. The term "Posterity" did not include future immigrants or foreigners.

Some argue that America is an idea, but what is that idea? Volokh argues that it is not democracy or liberty.