Melinda Gates: Me Too slut

Melinda Gates writes in Time mag:

But 2017 is proving to be a watershed moment for women in the workplace and beyond. ... the message from women is the same: Me too. Me too. Me too.

In every country and every continent, we have been taught that being born female comes with a cost. That if we are the victims of harassment or discrimination or violence, it’s somehow our fault. It’s the price we pay for daring to have ambition, to seek a job, to express an opinion, to assert our inalienable right to decide who will have access to our bodies.

"Me Too" has become the slogan of slutty actresses who try to seduce Harvey Weinstein to get a movie role. And of star-struck sluts who will do anything for a TV star, over-ambitious sluts who use sex to get a promotion, and of gold-digging sluts who sue rich men like Bill Cosby.

It is surprising to see Melinda Gates join this group. She was a young Microsoft employee when she seduced the CEO, and got a piece of the world's greatest fortune. Most companies have policies against relationships with subordinates, but Bill Gates was the boss and I guess he could change the rules to his liking.

Saying "Me Too" suggests that women helplessly throw their bodies at men with money, fame, and power. Maybe so, but Melinda got to run a $100M foundation, and buy all the luxuries that she could ever want. And she still complains!!

Can Authoritarianism happen here?

Marginal Revolution announces:

Acclaimed legal scholar, Harvard Professor, and New York Times bestselling author Cass R. Sunstein brings together a compelling collection of essays by our nation’s brightest minds across the political spectrum—including Eric Posner, Tyler Cowen, Noah Feldman, Jack Goldsmith, and Martha Minow—who ponder the question: Can authoritarianism take hold here?

With the election of Donald J. Trump, many people on both the left and right feared that America’s 240-year-old grand experiment in democracy was coming to an end, and that Sinclair Lewis’ satirical novel, It Can’t Happen Here, written during the dark days of the 1930s, could finally be coming true.

I think that authoritarianism would have been more likely if Hillary Clinton had been elected.

Globalism is incompatible with Americanism. If we keep bringing in Third World migrants, then our political system will have to change.

NY Times found a real neo-Nazi

I mentioned that the NY Times profiled a white nationalist, without realizing that the guy appears to be a genuine neo-Nazi. Check out his web site, www.tradworker.org. I didn't see much about blaming the Jews, or that he even cares much about Jews, but he does advocate a national socialist political system along the lines of the German one in the 1930s.

I would not such a system right-wing, because it is so socialist.

This might be the first neo-Nazi I have heard of. There are others who like Nazi symbolism, but aren't really Nazis.

Meanwhile Hong Kong has censored another political site:

The world’s leading white supremacist and neo-Nazi news and commentary website The Daily Stormer has found a home on the regional “.hk” domain, after hosts around the world rejected it for violating their terms of service.

The Hong Kong Internet Registration Corporation (HKIRC), a non-profit which regulates the top-level “.hk” domain, told HKFP on Monday that it is reviewing the situation.

I cannot find the site anywhere, except on Tor.

The Daily Stormer is not really neo-Nazi, as it mainly just uses Nazi imagery as a way of trolling Jews.

Leftist weaponisation of social media

John Naughton writes a London Guardian essay:

One of the biggest puzzles about our current predicament with fake news and the weaponisation of social media is why the folks who built this technology are so taken aback by what has happened. ...

It never seems to have occurred to them that their advertising engines could also be used to deliver precisely targeted ideological and political messages to voters. Hence the obvious question: how could such smart people be so stupid?

No, they were not so stupid. Not only were they aware of the utility of political ads, they spent millions of dollars marketing those services to political operatives.

Now mathematics, engineering and computer science are wonderful disciplines – intellectually demanding and fulfilling. And they are economically vital for any advanced society. But mastering them teaches students very little about society or history – or indeed about human nature. As a consequence, the new masters of our universe are people who are essentially only half-educated.

Being half-educated is better than being negatively educated. Humanities majors are brainwashed into leftist thinking. Those professors do not teach human nature, they teach a denial of human nature.

“a liberal arts major familiar with works like Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America, John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty, or even the work of ancient Greek historians, might have been able to recognise much sooner the potential ...

Note that he has to go back centuries to find scholars concerned with human nature.

All of which brings to mind CP Snow’s famous Two Cultures lecture, delivered in Cambridge in 1959, in which he lamented the fact that the intellectual life of the whole of western society was scarred by the gap between the opposing cultures of science and engineering on the one hand, and the humanities on the other – with the latter holding the upper hand among contemporary ruling elites.

Snow's conclusion was that the humanities scholars were the half-educated ones. He found that the science and engineering scholars were well-educated in the humanities, but the humanities scholars were science illiterates.

Google, Facebook, and Twitter are run by leftists who use the platform to promote leftist views, and censor others. The same could be said for the NY Times, Wash Post, CNN, NBC, NPR, etc.

What seems to bug the leftists is that their control is not universal. You can hear non-leftist views on talk radio, Fox News, RT TV, and the internet. Furthermore, recent disclosures have shown that maybe 0.0001% of Facebook ad revenue was used for political ambiguous messages from sources that cannot be precisely identified.

Sure, RT has criticism of American capitalism, but so does NPR. At least RT is not using American tax money for its anti-American propaganda.

So what did Facebook do that was so bad? The essay refers to this:

Along with his fellow Jews, Mark Zuckerberg introspected over Yom Kippur and asked for forgiveness via Facebook from “those I hurt this year … for the ways my work was used to divide people rather than bring us together”. He promised to “work to do better”.

Presumably, Zuckerberg was referring to the two types of harm that Facebook has recently acknowledged causing: allowing Russian nationals to purchase Facebook ads to aid Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and allowing ad buys on hateful search terms.

It took congressional investigations, a special counsel investigation, and great reporting by Politico to get Facebook to fess up to these sins. It took President Obama pulling Mark Zuckerberg aside shortly after the election and schooling him in Facebook’s responsibility for distributing electioneering lies.

How is this harmful?

Clinton outspend Trump on advertising by about $1B to $200M. In terms of free partisan news stories and editorials in the mainstream media, favoritism towards Clinton was maybe 10-1 or 20-1. The Russians only spent several thousand dollars, and most of it did not even mention Trump.

I am all in favor of pointing out foreign influence on our elections, but the biggest NY Times stockholder is Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim. He is a Trump-hater with a financial interest in Mexicans invading the USA. The NY Times is run by Jews who have ties to Israel. The NY Times, and its foreign influences had a vastly greater effect on the election.

Everyone points to the 17 USA intelligence agencies that supposedly said that the Russians influenced the election. In fact, none of those intelligence agencies said that the Russians had any influence on the election. Their report mostly consisted of reciting some RT stories that were critical of the USA.

Whites looking to avoid hatred

A Jewish mag complains:

Late last month, posts began circulating on the site 4chan, calling for members to place posters with the slogan “It’s Okay To Be White” in public places as “proof of concept” that a “harmless message” would cause a “massive media sh*tstorm.” Some took to calling it “Operation White.”

The troll operation was launched Halloween night, according to screenshots of a 4chan post, and detailed seven simple steps. The plan? Make “normies realize that leftists & journalists hate white people, so they turn on them.” A hashtag circulated, #IOTBW. ...

While it may have felt like an innovation, Anti-Defamation League post showed that the phrase itself has a “fairly long history in the white supremacist movement.” ADL has tracked white supremacist flyers featuring the phrase “It’s okay to be white” as long ago as 2005. In 2012, United Klans of America, a Ku Klux Klan organization, even used the hashtag #IOTBW on Twitter.

So if you say it is okay to be white, then the Jews will call you a KKK white supremacist.

Remember that next time you hear of someone being called KKK or white supremacist. It is probably just some hysterical name-calling by a Jewish white-hater.

Associating whites with KKK white supremacists is worse that associating Jews with Communists.

Another Jewish publication, the NY Times, had a couple of stories about some white guy who thinks it is okay to be white. The reporter seems baffled by his views.

Part of the white guy's explanation concerns a news story about a black thug who visited a residential community and nearly beat a hispanic resident to death. The hispanic managed to pull a gun to save his life. The NY Times reported this as "white man who shot the black teenager", and ran 100s of stories blaming white ppl.

Yes, the NY Times hates whites.

Unix deletes Hitler quotes

FreeBSD unix has removed these quotes:

"Everlasting peace will come to the world when the last man has slain the last but one." -- Adolph Hitler

"I shall give a propagandist reason for starting the war, no matter whether it is plausible or not. The victor will not be asked afterwards whether he told the truth or not. When starting and waging war it is not right that matters, but victory." -- Adolph Hitler

"Success is the sole earthly judge of right and wrong." -- Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf"

"The very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence." -- Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf"

"A highly intelligent man should take a primitive woman. Imagine if on top of everything else, I had a woman who interfered with my work." -- Adolf Hitler

"What luck for the rulers that men do not think." -- Adolph Hitler

Goose pimples rose all over me, my hair stood on end, my eyes filled with
tears of love and gratitude for this greatest of all conquerors of human
misery and shame, and my breath came in little gasps. If I had not known
that the Leader would have scorned such adulation, I might have fallen to
my knees in unashamed worship, but instead I drew myself to attention, raised
my arm in the eternal salute of the ancient Roman Legions and repeated the
holy words, "Heil Hitler!"
-- George Lincoln Rockwell

Goose pimples rose all over me, my hair stood on end, my eyes filled with
tears of love and gratitude for this greatest of all conquerors of human
misery and shame, and my breath came in little gasps. If I had not known
that the Leader would have scorned such adulation, I might have fallen to
my knees in unashamed worship, but instead I drew myself to attention, raised
my arm in the eternal salute of the ancient Roman Legions and repeated the
holy words, "Heil Hitler!"
-- George Lincoln Rockwell

I go the way that Providence dictates.
-- Adolf Hitler

If I made peace with Russia today, I'd only attack her again tomorrow. I
just couldn't help myself.
-- Adolf Hitler

Imagine me going around with a pot belly.
It would mean political ruin.
-- Adolf Hitler

Thank God I've always avoided persecuting my enemies.
-- Adolf Hitler

The broad mass of a nation... will more easily
fall victim to a big lie than to a small one.
-- Adolf Hitler, "Mein Kampf"

The fact that Hitler was a political genius unmasks the nature of politics
in general as no other can.
-- Wilhelm Reich

The very first essential for success is a perpetually
constant and regular employment of violence.
-- Adolf Hitler, "Mein Kampf"

There is a road to freedom. Its milestones are Obedience, Endeavor, Honesty,
Order, Cleanliness, Sobriety, Truthfulness, Sacrifice, and love of the
Fatherland.
-- Adolf Hitler

"Violence accomplishes nothing." What a contemptible lie! Raw, naked
violence has settled more issues throughout history than any other method
ever employed. Perhaps the city fathers of Carthage could debate the
issue, with Hitler and Alexander as judges?

Some of these quotes are probably not authentic.

I think that these quotes were in the Fortune program for historical interest or amusement, and not for any endorsement. Nevertheless, it is probably offensive to mention Hitler, even if criticizing him.

Banned for nationalist opinions

AP reports:

A leading figure in the U.S. white nationalist movement said Wednesday that he hasn't received government confirmation of his reported ban from entering more than two dozen European countries.

Poland's state-run news agency PAP says Polish authorities banned Richard Spencer from entering 26 countries in Europe's visa-free Schengen area for five years. The news agency cited unnamed sources close to Poland's Foreign Ministry.

A source close to the Polish Foreign Ministry confirmed to The Associated Press that the ban has taken effect. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak on the ministry's behalf.

Spencer previously was banned from the Schengen zone for three years after his 2014 arrest in Hungary, where he had planned to host a conference.

Spencer told The Associated Press he would try to contest a new ban.

"I'm being treated like a criminal by the Polish government. It's just insane," he said. "I haven't done anything. What are they accusing me of?"

Just what is the accusation? He is mainly attacked for arguments that a nation should pursue its national interests.

He does identify with his ethnic group, but no more so than is typical for Jews, Chinese, and other ethnic groups.

Those same Schwengen countries are taking millions of Moslem who believe in killing infidels in the name of Allah.

Chinese lawyer whines that USA does not need him

A Chinese lawyer writes an NY Times op-ed:

After earning law degrees in China and at Oxford, after having worked in Hong Kong as a lawyer at a top international firm, after coming to United States three years ago for an M.B.A. and graduating and joining a start-up, I was given just 60 days to leave the country. I have 17 days left. ...

Many of my fellow international students are in situations similar to mine. ...

My two requests for evidence asked me to prove my job was a “specialty occupation” ...

The Trump administration is right to demand such evidence. This guy is just a lawyer with an MBA degree. Any job he can do would be better filled by an American. We have many thousands, if not millions, of Americans available to do that job. Letting him stay would put an American out of work.

Rather, I’m frustrated, because I know I’m part of a pattern: America is losing many very skilled workers because of its anti-immigrant sentiment, and while this is a disappointing blow to me and my classmates, it will also be a blow to the United States’ competitiveness in the global economy. ...

As I make plans to go back to China, I find myself wondering: If I am not qualified to stay in the United States, then who is?

A lot of Americans are better qualified. We don't need him. Many millions are more desirable than him.

He blames this on "anti-immigrant sentiment", but H-1B is a guest worker program, not an immigration program. Even if he got the visa, he would not be an immigrant. He would merely be a Chinese lawyer who is displacing an American worker for 3 years.

This guy is a creep, and I am glad he is going. He acts as if America owes him something. China does not allow immigrants from America, so why should we allow Chinese immigrants? We have an excess of lawyers and MBA graduates already.

Update: Here is an essay explaining the H-1B human trafficking.

Jewish paper rationalizes anti-Christian hatred

A Jewish Trump-hater editor for the NY Times reports:

Last week, voters in Alabama — rocked, befuddled or riled by allegations that Mr. Moore, the Republican nominee for the Senate, sexually assaulted teenage girls — were treated to an electronic “robocall” that intoned, or really whined:

I’m a reporter for The Washington Post calling to find out if anyone at this address is a female between the ages of 54 to 57 years old, willing to make damaging remarks about candidate Roy Moore ...

The anti-Semitism of the alt-right, the newest manifestation of bigotry that combines age-old hatred with internet-era technological savvy, biting wit and a self-conscious sense of irony, shows no more logical consistency than the anti-Semitism of the past.

There really is a Jewish effort to dig up dirt on Roy Moore, and to destroy him.

The 684 anti-Semitic hate crimes were more than the rest of the religiously motivated crimes of bias and bigotry combined.

The article does not mention that many of those supposed hate crimes have turned out to be Jewish hoaxes, or the result of natural causes.

Leaving aside the low esteem that many Alabamians hold the national media in, no mainstream outlet is paying women for dirt on Mr. Moore, and no one is promising to publish half-baked uncorroborated allegations.

Oh yes they are.

The NY Times and Wash. Post have now published dozens of stories with half-baked uncorroborated allegations against Roy Moore. Most of them do not even mention the fact that the most serious allegation has been proved to be a forgery.

There is a hatred of Roy Moore that is far beyond disagreement with his politics. And the campaign against him is being led by Jews. Among public opinions I've seen, Jews seem to be almost universally against him. He is openly Christian, and they are obviously anti-Christian bigots. If someone calls them on their obvious anti-Christian hatred, then they cry anti-Semitism.

Moralizing about private lives of others

I used to often hear complaints about how the religious right was moralizing about the private romantic lives of others, and how they should just mind their own business.

Who says that now?

I should keep a list of all those denouncing non-criminal, personal, consensual behavior based only on uncorroborated raw allegations years afterwards. They obviously do not believe ppl are innocent until proven guilty, or that they have a right to private romantic lives.

They also have sever misunderstandings about how human memory works, and whether accusers can have bad motives.

The accusers and the accused are mostly left-wing Jewish feminist Democrats, so I don't have a dog in this fight.

This is a witch-hunt. The Salem witch prosecutors probably had more incriminating evidence against their targets.

How Mike Pence has avoided scandal

Six months ago, the Wash. Post published this article mocking Mike Pence:

The Billy Graham Rule was soon adopted by evangelical pastors and business executives. Men in positions of influence wanted to “flee from sexual immorality” and be “above reproach” (both biblical commands), as well as abstain from “every appearance of evil.” ...

The article cites a 2002 interview with Vice President Pence — who has called himself an “evangelical Catholic” — saying that he “never eats alone with a woman other than his wife,” and that he doesn’t attend events serving alcohol unless she is with him as well. ...

The Billy Graham Rule also denies the reality of LGBT people. As a friend pointed out to me: Should a bisexual person refuse to ever be alone with anyone, full stop? ...

In this conversation, we also have to keep in mind the fact that Pence is the vice president of the United States. He is not a pastor and does not act in that capacity. How on earth can he be expected to represent half the country if he won’t eat at the same table as us?

About once a day, some well known Jewish leftist feminist Democrat has had his career sabotage by ridiculous allegations from women, published in newspapers like the Wash. Post.

I don't think anyone is making fun of Pence today. He looks like a genius.

Meanwhile, Judge Roy Moore's chief accuser has finally given a public interview, and she now tells a different story about how she met Moore. She also admits that she agreed to tell her story contingent on it being part of a coordinated attack on Moore.

Stop immigration to cut carbon emissions

Here is some green research from a few months ago:

The greatest impact individuals can have in fighting climate change is to have one fewer child, according to a new study that identifies the most effective ways people can cut their carbon emissions.

The next best actions are selling your car, avoiding long flights, and eating a vegetarian diet. These reduce emissions many times more than common green activities, such as recycling, using low energy light bulbs or drying washing on a line. However, the high impact actions are rarely mentioned in government advice and school textbooks, researchers found. ...

The researchers found that government advice in the US, Canada, EU and Australia rarely mentioned the high impact actions, with only the EU citing eating less meat and only Australia citing living without a car. None mentioned having one fewer child. In an analysis of school textbooks on Canada only 4% of the recommendations were high impact.

Chris Goodall, an author on low carbon living and energy, said: “The paper usefully reminds us what matters in the fight against global warming. But in some ways it will just reinforce the suspicion of the political right that the threat of climate change is simply a cover for reducing people’s freedom to live as they want.

This research was also chicken to give the high-impact advice.

The paper measured results in tons of CO2 emissions per year, and found that per capita averages in developed countries was much greater than for other countries. So the most effective thing is to keep Third World migrants and refugees out of developed countries.

But none of the textbooks or govt guides mentioned that option.

Fired for including white men

Apple fires its black female diversity chief:

Denise Young Smith, who was named Apple’s vice president of diversity and inclusion in May, is “stepping down” after saying white people can be diverse last month.

During a summit in Colombia, Young Smith, a black woman, claimed she likes to focus “on everyone” and that “diversity goes beyond race, gender, and sexual orientation.”

“There can be 12 white, blue-eyed, blonde men in a room and they’re going to be diverse too because they’re going to bring a different life experience and life perspective to the conversation,” Young Smith declared, sparking controversy. “Diversity is the human experience… I get a little bit frustrated when diversity or the term diversity is tagged to the people of color, or the women, or the LGBT.”

Young Smith later apologized, claiming her comments “were not representative of how I think about diversity or how Apple sees it.”

Obviously, "inclusion" does not mean including white men.

It is more and more apparently that diversity just means hating white men.

Dunham backstabs her accused friend

Does anyone believe ppl are innocent until proven guilty? Can't someone at least defend a friend?

Apparently not, among creepy Jewish left-wing feminists:

"I now understand that it was absolutely the wrong time to come forward with such a statement and I am so sorry."

Lena Dunham has apologized for comments she made supporting Girls writer Murray Miller, who has been accused of sexually assaulting actress Aurora Perrineau.

On Friday, after the claims against Miller were made public, Dunham took to Twitter to support Miller on behalf of herself and Girls executive producer Jenni Konner, ...

The witch-hunt continues. She was defending a Jewish producer accused of raping a 17yo non-Jewish actress. Dunham had previously said:

While our first instinct is to listen to every woman’s story, our insider knowledge of Murray’s situation makes us confident that sadly this accusation is one of the 3 percent of assault cases that are misreported every year,” the statement added. … We stand by Murray and this is all we’ll be saying about this issue.

No doubt she will continue to express dopey opinions about this.

Michigan shared parenting

A Michigan lawyer writes:

Michigan House Bill 4691 would mandate shared custody of children in divorce cases with few exceptions. ...

This bill also presupposes that all parents are able to get along well enough to co-parent their children and that conflicts in a shared custody situation will be at a minimum. Most people divorce because they can’t get along and concur on parenting issues.

No, very few get divorced because of an inability to cooperate on parenting issues.

The American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers has come out against the recent legislative movement toward mandated shared custody in Michigan and other states,

Yeah, the divorce lawyers want to make money over custody disputes, instead of having custody rights codified by law.

Child custody arrangements should take into account the child’s best interest, first and foremost and forever. This bill does not.

The term "child’s best interest" is a euphemism for lawyers and judges overriding the wishes of the parents.

If we truly want to do something to encourage parents spending more time with their children -- as proponents of this bill claim is their goal-- we should eliminate any relationship between parenting time and money.

Currently in Michigan, the number of overnights a parent has with his or her children, very much drives the amount of child support paid. That is the worst legislation ever passed. It discourages parents who receive child support payments to be agreeable to their children spending more time with the other parent as it would diminish that support.

He finally writes something sensible. Not everyone knows this, but the laws in all 50 states create extreme financial incentive against sharing custody. The mom can get a whole lot more money by refusing to let the dad see the kids. That is what "child support" is all about, as it is currently implemented.

Parents should be encouraged to have their children spend time with both parents without a financial penalty or reward linked to it.

That is what a shared custody bill should do. Then there would be no reason to fight over custody or support in most cases, and divorce lawyers would not have much to do.

With the Child Custody Act of 1970, we have 47 years of case law giving judges guidance over a variety of child-related issues. To scrap that would an egregious error.

Each divorce is different and it is a mistake to mandate a cookie-cutter decision without careful consideration into the nuances of each family situation. Again, it is the child in child custody cases whose needs should be the priority, not a parent’s.

He is just saying that judges and lawyers should run the lives of kids, not their parents. We have 47 years of a system that is worse that what we had before.

A right-wing philosopher argues:

Parental rights and authority have been under scrutiny from some lefty liberals and and socialists recently (here’s an example). The concern is usually grounded in “children’s rights” and their autonomy, though there is also attention paid toward critiquing the basis for parental authority. I used to think parental authority is a given, but it seems as though “the left” is willing to challenge any traditional source of authority that is not the state itself. Conservatives should always pay close attention to philosophies and ideologies that dissolve or undermine non-state authorities, such as the family or religious institutions, because that is a mechanism on which totalitarianism depends. The idea is to slowly eliminate the authority of and allegiance to non-state institutions.

Consider this. Just a few days ago, the democratic socialist government of Alberta legislated that schools cannot inform parents whether their child is a member of the school’s Gay-Straight Alliance. It’s called Bill 24. The justification for this law, so far as I have heard, is that such information “outs” a child to his parents, which therefore can violate his privacy or is too great a risk for his safety. ...

Caring of children requires choosing particular goods and ends for children. But who gets to make those decisions? Plausibly, it’s either the parents or the state. If the state chooses for children, then parents would serve as mere bodily donors and custodians for the state. But that is perverse: The parent-child relationship is naturally much deeper and more intimate than that, as I argued earlier. Hence, it is not the state should choose, but the parents. Yet, if it is the parents who should choose, then they need a great deal of space to exercise their choices in accordance to their conscience, particularly within matters of education, sexuality and morality, for each is deeply consequential to the child’s identity, good and life trajectory. In fact, aside from providing the necessities of life, it is hard to think of a contribution more important to the life and good of a child than those aforementioned things.

Yes, right-wingers favor family autonomy, while left-wingers, lawyers, and judges seek to let the state make decisions for children.

Planned software obsolescence is not a myth

The NY Times reports:

The phenomenon of perceived slowdowns is so widespread that many believe tech companies intentionally cripple smartphones and computers to ensure that people buy new ones every few years. Conspiracy theorists call it planned obsolescence.

That’s a myth. While slowdowns happen, they take place for a far less nefarious reason. That reason is a software upgrade.

“There’s no incentive for operating system companies to create planned obsolescence,” said Greg Raiz, a former program manager for Microsoft who worked on Windows XP. “It’s software, and software has various degrees of production bugs and unintended things that happen.”

That guy is lying. The companies certainly have an incentive to induce customers to upgrade to the latest version. Microsoft is notorious for planting logic bombs in Windows 7 and 8 to trick users into upgrading to Windows 10.

Here’s what happens: When tech giants like Apple, Microsoft and Google introduce new hardware, they often release upgrades for their operating systems. For example, a few days before the iPhone 8 shipped in September, Apple released iOS 11 as a free software update for iPhones, including the four-year-old iPhone 5S.

The technical process of upgrading from an old operating system to a new one — migrating your files, apps and settings along the way — is extremely complicated. So when you install a brand-new operating system on an older device, problems may occur that make everything from opening the camera to browsing the web feel sluggish. ...

The good news is that because tech companies are not intentionally neutering your devices, there are remedies ...

This article is contradicting itself. Now it acknowledges that these companies do make software changes that slow down your device, and these changes are timed to coincide with the availability of upgrades that the company wants you to get.

The catch seems to be the word "intentionally". And maybe the word "nefarious".

The companies are certainly intentional about their upgrade policies. They are certainly intentional about writing bigger and slower software on the assumption that you will be buying devices with more memory and faster chips. They are certainly intentional about adopting business strategies that make more money for the company. So how is this different from the "conspiracy theory"?

I guess the Microsoft guy is trying to say that they don't deliberately put in bugs for the explicit purpose of annoying users. Instead the bugs just occur naturally in all the software they write, and they are most conscientious about fixing the bugs in the latest and best-selling products. The "planned obsolescence" is not from deliberately planted bugs, but from bugs that occurred naturally and deliberately not fixed because they were assigned low priority.

This seems like a distinction without a difference to me.

Anglin defends Roy Moore, is censored

The Atlantic mag has an expose of Andrew Anglin:

“I am not actually a ‘Neo-Nazi White Supremacist,’ nor do I know what that is,” he wrote in mid-September. He claimed that his violent rhetoric was never sincere but simply a way to mock those who slap a Nazi label on anyone who “stands up for white people’s rights” or “refuses to believe the stupid lies about Hitler” or rejects the “alleged Holocaust” narrative. Anglin now shared what he said had been his true editorial approach all along: “Ironic Nazism disguised as real Nazism disguised as ironic Nazism.”

Five days later, he posted about “the world being ruled either by reptiles from another dimension or some other type of reptilian or insectoid race of aliens.” Where the irony started and stopped was hard to know. ...

At times while tracking Anglin, I couldn’t help but feel that he was a method actor so committed and demented, on such a long and heavy trip, that he’d permanently lost himself in his role. ...

Who was he if not the king of the Nazi trolls?

He is indeed the king of the Nazi trolls. His Daily Stormer site is back up, but it is regularly shut down and can be hard to find sometimes.

It is clear that Anglin is not really a Nazi, but believes that he would be called a Nazi anyway, so he embraces the term for rhetorical purposes. It is also clear that he does not believe that his political enemies should be allowed to define the boundaries of acceptable discussion.

He is sometimes accused of making violent threats, such as this:

Like many young men on the extreme right, Anglin hadn’t just given up on the idea of the United States as a liberal democracy. He wanted to burn it to the ground. “There is rapidly approaching a time when in every White Western city, corpses will be stacked in the streets as high as men can stack them,” he wrote. “And you are either going to be stacking or getting stacked.”

This is exaggerated, but I do not take it as a threat. If trends continue, I do believe that we are headed for race and religion wars. Open discussion of the issues might be the best way to avoid war.

To give a flavor of Anglin's posts, here is a current rant:

So the situation is, Roy Moore got his money in order by the time he was 32, then he went cruising for a teenage virgin wife. He was doing interviews with these women.

This isn’t weird.

So then they throw in this 14-year-old who says he grabbed her by the pussy, then add some other lying whore.

And based on the accusation alone, all of these cuckolds come out and say he needs to drop out.

Could anything be more obvious than this?

The one guy who is standing up to the establishment just happens to also be the one guy who is a sexual deviant?

What the hell are the chances of that, statistically?

CROWN PRINCE CUCK Paul Ryan of course rushed out right with KING CUCK Mitch McConnell to condemn. ...

I don’t care if this man was fondling jailbait. No one cares about that. What we care about is the fact that our country is being destroyed, and that Roy Moore is set to be the first guy in decades in the Senate that is going to stand up for us. Period.

And he is going to win.

And then revenge begins.

You might not agree with him, but he is posting worthwhile opinions. His site is probably the most censored site in the history of the internet, among sites being censored for political opinions.

Update: Anglin responds. Funny, as usual.

The piece is written by an obsessive failure at life named Luke O’Brien who spent this year tracking and harassing my family and people I went to high school with. I’ve previously published some of the threats, though most of them were over the phone. What he would say is “if you don’t talk to me, you’re protecting him and that makes you part of the story.” That is a threat of defamation.

He had a vendetta against me because when he was writing an article on the Alt-Right for Huffing Post, I published emails where he faked statements from the FBI, which was presumably illegal. ...

Obviously, the article is a product of the Jew editors. The Atlantic is an entirely Jewish publication.

The Editor-in-Chief, Jeffery Goldberg, even does Atlantic events in a synagogue.

The article does everything to try to make Anglin look bad, but some of it is so over-the-top ridiculous that it give the impression that The Atlantic has been trolled. The reader will be impressed that Anglin is important enough to be the cover story.

Update: See also Heartiste, who notes that Anglin is blamed for dumping a girlfriend in high school, when everyone said that the girl was a slut.

Ideological opposition to spanking

ScienceAlert.com reports:

Spanking — usually defined as hitting a child on the buttocks with an open hand — is a common form of discipline still used on children worldwide. However, to date, spanking has been banned in 53 countries and states globally.

The use of spanking has been hotly debated over the last several decades. Supporters state that it is safe, necessary and effective; opponents argue that spanking is harmful to children and violates their human rights to protection.

As two scholars with extensive research experience and clinical insight in the field of child maltreatment, and with specific expertise related to spanking, we would like to move beyond this debate.

The research clearly shows that spanking is related to an increased likelihood of many poor health, social and developmental outcomes. These poor outcomes include mental health problems, substance use, suicide attempts and physical health conditions along with developmental, behavioural, social and cognitive problems.

Equally important, there are no research studies showing that spanking is beneficial for children.

Those who say spanking is safe for a child if done in a specific way are, it would seem, simply expressing opinions. And these opinions are not supported by scientific evidence. ...

An updated meta-analysis was most recently published in 2016. This reviewed and analysed 75 studies from the previous 13 years, concluding that there was no evidence that spanking improved child behaviour and that spanking was associated with an increased risk of 13 detrimental outcomes. ...

Evidence from over 20 years of research consistently indicates the harms of spanking. There is also increasing global recognition of the rights of children to protection and dignity, as inscribed in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and in targets within the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to eliminate violence.

Taken together, these tell us that spanking should never be used on children or adolescents of any age.

This is another example where the supposed scientific consensus is wacky.

Perusing these articles, I find:

The anti-spanking studies are just correlations, and cannot distinguish between spanking causing bad behavior and bad behavior causing spanking.

The papers are written by zealots who mainly oppose spanking for ideological reasons.

The studies fail to show that any other method of discipline works better.

Saying that spanking does not cure bad behavior is a bit like saying that dieting does not cure obesity. Yes, studies show that most diets fail, and most attempts at behavior modification also fail.

It is nutty to say that spanking never is beneficial, or that it never improves child behavior. There are probably 100 million parents who say otherwise.

White self hatred is sick

This billboard got taken down, because of complaints from some white guy.

I am just wondering why he or anyone else would be offended. Why would he care? Does he think that white self hatred is normal? Does he want to promote white self hatred? Weird.

On the subject of offensive messages, the latest NY Times allegation of sexual misconduct is:

Ellen Page has become one of the latest actors to share her story of sexual harassment, accusing the director and producer Brett Ratner of suggesting crudely that another woman have sex with Ms. Page “to make her realize she’s gay.”
Ms. Page, 30, known for films including “Juno,” “Inception” and “To Rome With Love,” said in a Facebook post on Friday that when Mr. Ratner made his comment, she was 18 and had not yet come out as a lesbian. She came out in 2014.

So 12 years ago, some guy made a private comment that some lesbian actress might be a lesbian. I think that she was already playing roles suited for lesbians. That's all. He did not touch her or proposition her. Why would anyone care about this?

Romney cucks out again

Here is the attack on Roy Moore:

Three other women said Moore asked them out on dates as teenagers but did not allege forced sexual contact.

Moore and his campaign denied the allegations.
What did Romney say?

In a tweet Friday, Romney said the idea that one is innocent until proven guilty is “for criminal convictions, not elections.”

“I believe Leigh Corfman,” Romney said. “Her account is too serious to ignore. Moore is unfit for office and should step aside.” ...

“He should immediately step aside and allow the people of Alabama to elect a candidate they can be proud of,” McCain said.

The chief accuser says that she went out on a date with Moore 40 years, and he touched her clothes inappropriately.

Romney and McCain get creepier every day.

First, very few ppl can remember an incident accurately from 40 years ago. They often think that they can, but science shows that human memory does not work that well.

Second, it is not possible to read an account and decide whether it is credible. Again, experiments show that humans get fooled easily. She could have made it up, or heard it somewhere, or presented a composite of awkward dates she experienced. All of these sound the same as a truthful account.

Third, do you really want a society where lives can be ruined and political battles reversed because of some 40-year-old accusation of some rude behavior?

We are living in another Salem-type witch-hunt hysteria. The sharks smell the blood in the water, and have ruined Harvey Weinstein, Louis C.K., Kevin Spacey, and others. In some cases, the accusations are trivial even if true. In most cases, the allegations were many years in the past, and unverifiable. There is a reason that we have a statute of limitations.

Consider Louis C.K. He apparently sometimes asked women on dates if he could masturbate in front of them. If she said no, then he didn't do it.

If you think that such behavior is intrinsically immoral or sinful, then you will disapprove of Louis C.K. But the big majority of his critics have no such beliefs, and advocate for rights to unusual sexual practices between consenting adults. If so, then it is should always be acceptable to ask consent for some sexual practice.

Louis CK issued an apology statement:

The power I had over these women is that they admired me. And I wielded that power irresponsibly.

This is like a beautiful woman seducing a man, and then saying that she wielded her power irresponsibly.

Perhaps we are headed to a day when consensual relations are forbidden if the woman admires the man, or if the man thinks the woman is beautiful.

Genius sperm bank

My local NPR Radio station seems to mainly complain about Pres. Trump, and about various allegations of sexual harassment. Last Sunday it replayed this eugenics program, as described by Jewish SJWs.

The program never explains that the sperm bank operated just like all the other sperm banks today operate.

Year 2100 demographics

Those who worry about predictions for the year 2100 fall into two camps: concern over CO2 and population. The latter say this is “the world’s most important graph.”


American Renaissance,asks:

We asked our contributors to answer the following questions: “What should the white West do about this prediction, and what will we do about it?”

The chart show moderate increases for Europe and N. America, but these increases are likely to be entirely non-white.

I think that whites will do nothing about it, until it is clear that they are about to be enslaved. Then they will resist, and a world-wide racial and religious war will result. It will be ugly.

What should the white West do? Something to avoid war, of course, and also to avoid enslavement.

Jews did not invent modernity

Jeffrey Goldberg wrote a 2011 post in The Atlantic:

It's become clear to me that the Fox commentator Glenn Beck has something of a Jewish problem. Actually, he has something of a modernity problem, and people with modernity problems tend to have problems with Jews, who more or less invented modernity (Einstein, Marx, Freud, Franz Boas, etc.)

... This is a post about Beck's recent naming of nine people -- eight of them Jews -- as enemies of America and humanity. ...

It is fair to ask if Beck knows that these people are Jewish (It is not widely-known that Rendell is Jewish, I think).

Really? Jews invented modernity? Notably Einstein, Marx, Freud, Boas?

Einstein is famous for inventing relativity, refusing to accept quantum mechanics, and being a commie fellow traveler. He did not really invent relativity, as I have detailed elsewhere. Relativity was invented by Maxwell, Lorentz, Poincare, and Minkowski.

Marx is famous for inspiring Communism, Freud for the symbolic interpretation of dreams and other bogus pseudoscience, and Boas for cultural relativism.

Wikipedia defines:

Modernity is a term of art used in the humanities and social sciences to designate both a historical period (the modern era), as well as the ensemble of particular socio-cultural norms, attitudes and practices that arose in post-medieval Europe and have developed since, in various ways and at various times, around the world. While it includes a wide range of interrelated historical processes and cultural phenomena (from fashion to modern warfare), it can also refer to the subjective or existential experience of the conditions they produce, and their ongoing impact on human culture, institutions, and politics (Berman 2010, 15–36).

As a historical category, modernity refers to a period marked by a questioning or rejection of tradition; the prioritization of individualism, freedom and formal equality; faith in inevitable social, scientific and technological progress and human perfectibility; rationalization and professionalization; a movement from feudalism (or agrarianism) toward capitalism and the market economy; industrialization, urbanization and secularization; the development of the nation-state and its constituent institutions (e.g. representative democracy, public education, modern bureaucracy) and forms of surveillance (Foucault 1995, 170–77).

The article does mention Marx and Freud, but says very little of Jews.

There are many Jews with great accomplishments, but Goldberg holds out the charlatans for praise.

Here is a reference to Einstein on the recent SNL TV show:

After a long grimace, Mr. David said, “I don’t like it when Jews are in the headlines for notorious reasons. I want, ‘Einstein Discovers the Theory of Relativity.’ ‘Salk Cures Polio.’ What I don’t want? ‘Weinstein Took It Out.’”

Those names look as if they rhyme, but they are usually pronounced Ine-stine and Wine-steen. Apparently Jews really need to believe that Einstein discovered relativity.

Jewish shrink favors moms

James Taranto writes a WSJ book review:

Motherhood used to be as American as apple pie. Nowadays it can be as antagonistic as American politics. Ask Erica Komisar.

Ms. Komisar, 53, is a Jewish psychoanalyst who lives and practices on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. ...

The premise of Ms. Komisar’s book—backed by research in psychology, neuroscience and epigenetics—is that “mothers are biologically necessary for babies,” and not only for the obvious reasons of pregnancy and birth. “Babies are much more neurologically fragile than we’ve ever understood,” Ms. Komisar says. She cites the view of one neuroscientist, Nim Tottenham of Columbia University, “that babies are born without a central nervous system” and “mothers are the central nervous system to babies,” especially for the first nine months after birth.

What does that mean? “Every time a mother comforts a baby in distress, she’s actually regulating that baby’s emotions from the outside in. After three years, the baby internalizes that ability to regulate their emotions, but not until then.” For that reason, mothers “need to be there as much as possible, both physically and emotionally, for children in the first 1,000 days.” ...

Women produce more oxytocin than men do, which answers the obvious question of why fathers aren’t as well-suited as mothers for this sort of “sensitive, empathetic nurturing.” ...

Whereas a mother of a crying baby will “lean into the pain and say, ‘Oh, honey!’ ” a father is more apt to tell the child: “C’mon, you’re OK. Brush yourself off; let’s go back to play.” Children, especially boys, need that paternal nurturing to learn to control their aggression and become self-sufficient. But during the first stages of childhood, motherly love is more vital.

Jewish women are famous for being feminists, but that does not mean that they favor equality between moms and dads. In Israel, moms get custody of small children.

The book claims to be relying on scientific data, but according to the National Parents Organization, she is wrong:

“Women produce more oxytocin than men do.” Really? Actually, no they don’t. See here (Medical Express, 4/20/16) and here (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2014).

Taranto explains that her view is resisted by some liberals:

When she was shopping for a literary agent, she tells me, “a number of the agents said, ‘No, we couldn’t touch that. That would make women feel guilty.’ ” Another time she was rejected for a speaking gig at a health conference. She quotes the head of the host institution as telling her: “You are going to make women feel badly. How dare you?”

In Ms. Komisar’s view, guilt isn’t necessarily bad. “My best patient is a patient who comes to me feeling guilty,” she says. “Women who feel guilty — it’s a ‘signal’ feeling, that something’s wrong, that they’re in conflict. If they go talk to a therapist or deal with the conflict head-on, they often make different choices and better choices.”

Now there is the view of a pseudo-scientific Jewish psychoanalyst. Jews very much believe in using guilt and psychotherapy to control people. They act as if everyone has the same weirdo anxieties that they do.

I can believe that there are natural differences between moms and dads, and how they relate to kids. I can also believe care from natural parents jointly is better than the alternatives. But I don't think that we have any proof that mom-care is better than dad-care. In fact, I suspect that day-care is better than care from a single mom. Mom-care works best when it is under the direction and authority of the dad.

Marriage may not improve life

Glenn T. Stanton writes in The Federalist:

A consistent and irrefutable mountain of research has shown, reaching back to the 1970s and beyond, that marriage strongly boosts every important measure of well-being for children, women, and men. Pick any measure you can imagine: overall physical and mental health, income, savings, employment, educational success, general life contentment and happiness, sexual satisfaction, even recovery from serious disease, healthy diet and exercise. Married people rate markedly and consistently better in each of these, and so many more, compared to their single, divorced, and cohabiting peers. Thus, marriage is an essential active ingredient in improving one’s overall life prospects, regardless of class, race, or educational status. ...

Marriage generates wealth largely because marriage molds men into producers, providers, and savers. Singleness and cohabiting don’t. Nobel-winning economist George Akerlof, in a prominent lecture more than a decade ago, explained the pro-social and market influence of marriage upon men and fathers: “Married men are more attached to the labor force, they have less substance abuse, they commit less crime, are less likely to become the victims of crime, have better health, and are less accident prone.”

Akerlof explains this is because “men settle down when they get married and if they fail to get married, they fail to settle down.” This is precisely why every insurance company offers lower premiums on health and auto insurance to married men. ...

Working for healthy, well-formed, enduring marriages is one of the most effective ways we can do the work of social justice.

This might be correct, but I doubt it. Correlation is not causation.

Women would rather marry a man who is healthy, successful, rich, and who scores high on all those measures. As long as the man scores high, the women want to stay married to such men also. Men also want to marry women who are healthy and happy. So of course marriage will be correlated with all those things.

There are men who have decided that if they don't have a wife and family to support, they only need to work two days a week. These men will score lower on measures of income, but they also have much higher leisure time and may be leading happier and more satisfying lives.

Saying that a man will become richer by getting married is dubious. There are some careers where a man can focus on a high-status job much better if his wife is taking care of personal matters at home, so he will work harder and get promoted more. But there are probably just as many examples of men who are impoverished by marriage, because the wife spends too much money or she sues him for divorce.

The article mentions declines in marriage rates, but marriage law and incentives have also changed dramatically in the last few decades. It can now be more profitable to avoid marriage, for a lot of different reasons. Any "mountain of research" should address those matters.

It's Okay to be White

This phrase is the latest controversy on college campuses. Apparently it is being interpreted as a statement of white supremacy, and anyone who sees this anywhere should call the police immediately.

Compare to Black Lives Matter, or other expressions of ethnic pride.

Update: From the white-haters at Harvard:

More than a dozen handmade stickers reading “It’s okay to be white” surfaced around Harvard Square Wednesday, prompting Cambridge officials to remove them and a Harvard Law School Dean to denounce the signs as “provocations intended to divide us.” …

“It seems likely that these anonymous postings, made in the middle of the night, were provocations intended to divide us from one another,” Law School Dean of Students Marcia L. Sells wrote in an email sent to Law students Wednesday after the stickers were spotted at Wasserstein and Hastings Halls.

“HLS will not let that happen here. We live, work, teach, and learn together in a community that is stronger, better, and deeper because of our diversity and because we encourage open, respectful, and constructive discourse,” Sells wrote.

And the Wash. Post reports:

Posters proclaiming “IT’S OKAY TO BE WHITE” have been appearing on college campuses and on city streets across the country this week, prompted by an anonymous chat-room comment that suggested the message would feed social unrest and sway white Americans to far-right ideologies.

If it is no longer socially acceptable to say that it is okay to be white, then I expect some white ppl to take this as a direct threat to their identity.

I have heard ppl say that they don't like blacks or members of various other ethnic groups, but I've never heard anyone say that it is not okay to be black, or not acceptable to say it is okay to be black, or similar statements for any other ethnic group. Apparently only whites are hated so much that their existence and identity is not okay.

The factual basis for claims that white Americans are collectively suffering is difficult to find. On average, they continue to enjoy better income, personal wealth reserves, health, health care, housing, schools than any other group.

The paper is not looking very hard.. A number of groups do better than whites by those measures, such as Jews, Indian-Americans, and Chinese-Americans.

Regardless, it is okey to be white no matter how whites compare to other groups. Any attempt to say otherwise should be confronted in the strongest ways. I hope students continue to post these signs until they are accepted.

Update: The U. of Toronto says in an official statement:

Messages like this are antithetical to the University’s commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion,”

Muslim defends Allahu akbar

Wajahat Ali writes in the NY Times:

Allahu akbar. It’s Arabic for “God is greatest.” Muslims, an eccentric tribe with over a billion members, say it several times in our five daily prayers. ... I say “Allahu akbar” out loud more than 100 times a day.

It also means "Allah is greater than the Christian God" and "Kill the infidels".

I dropped it in a conference room at the State Department, where I’d been invited to address a packed room of government employees about the power of storytelling. Specifically, I expressed my continuing gratitude for the election of Barack Obama, whom, in a joking nod to the Islamophobic paranoia that surrounded him, I called “our first Muslim American president,” adding “Allahu akbar!”

Many Muslims consider Obama to be Muslim because he has a Muslim name, he had a Muslim father and step-father, his early upbringing was Muslim, and he continues to speak favorably about Islam.

terrorists like ISIS and Al Qaeda and their sympathizers, who represent a tiny fraction of Muslims

The terrorists are a tiny fraction of Muslims, but the sympathizers are a large fraction. Maybe even a majority, depending on how poll questions are asked.

This essay is presented as from one of the good Muslims, who doesn't go around killing ppl. But sure enuf, he launches into a tirade on how he hates Donald Trump and other white ppl.

The attack had similarities to the one that took place in Charlottesville, Va., in August, when a neo-Nazi, James Alex Fields, rammed his car into a crowd of people who were protesting against a rally staged by white nationalists, killing 32-year-old Heather Heyer and injuring 19 people. President Trump defended his initial response blaming violence on “many sides,” saying, “It takes a little while to get the facts.” That caution doesn’t seem to be applied when the suspects have been described by witnesses as “Middle Eastern” — and definitely not when they’ve said, “Allahu akbar.”

The facts are now in, and Trump was 100% correct.

If only the hurricane that devastated Puerto Rico, leaving American citizens in desperate need of power, food or water, could have yelled, “Allahu akbar,” triggering that kind of tough response. Perhaps our president would have been able to see the storm as evil. Perhaps he would have been energized by a “them versus us” rage to insist on swift action to repair the damage.

This is a revealing analogy. Muslims don't believe in free will, and see terrorists killing infidels as an inevitable course of events like hurricanes. We should just accept it, and praise Allah.

I took my children trick-or-treating in the Virginia suburbs. We walked the streets with friendly, diverse neighbors and hordes of happy kids wearing costumes and clutching bags filled with fattening goodies. My 3-year-old was a pirate and my 1-year-old was Supergirl. We all shared smiles and candies with strangers, with open hearts, without fear. Allahu akbar. God is greatest.

So from his point of view, there is no need to kill infidels. Americans will peacefully submit to a slow Muslim takeover.

After Muslim terrorist attacks, we are always told that most Muslims are not terrorists, with examples like this guy. However, it seems clear to me that this guy believes in the Islamic subjugation of infidels by any means necessary.

A highly rated comment says:

The guy who drove this truck no more represents Islam than the torturers of the Inquisition represent Christianity.

Is he really comparing to something 500 years ago? I guess you have to go back 500 years to find Christians behaving as badly as Muslims. But of course the Inquisition torturers were not as bad as today's Muslims. Christians did not go around randomly killing innocent ppl in the name of God.

Net neutrality will not help artists

A NY Times op-ed argues:

Whenever anyone wants to see her set, boom! It’s right there on the internet. Anyone — her friends, bookers, fellow comedians or maybe just millions of strangers — can search for it or stumble upon it. ...

Issa Rae started the web series “The Misadventures of Awkward Black Girl” on YouTube in 2011. Thanks in large part to its success, six years later, her comedy series, “Insecure,” is set to air for a third season on HBO. It’s hard to imagine this happening in a world without net neutrality. ...

Thanks to our current net neutrality rules, when people like this take their genius beyond Twitter, to the rest of the internet, they don’t have to worry about whether it’s in a pay-to-play internet “fast lane” that makes access to certain types of content easier. They’re in the same lane as everyone else, because net neutrality means there can be only one lane.

The trouble with this argument is that Google, YouTube, and Twitter have lobbied to exempt themselves from the net neutrality rules. Those companies can censor whomever they want, based on their business plan or political views or incompetence, and they do.

Google, Apple, etc. want themselves to be at the master control switches that determine what you can see on the internet, and net neutrality is just a scheme to lock in their power. The rules say that those companies can apply whatever content favoritism they please, and no other companies can interfere with the choices that Google and Apple are dictating on us.

Can civilization be transmitted

Jan Sobieski IV criticizes this view:

As Samuel Francis proclaimed at the first American Renaissance conference in 1994 in Atlanta:

…The civilization that we as whites created in Europe and America could not have developed apart from the genetic endowments of the creating people, nor is there any reason to believe that the civilization can be successfully transmitted to a different people. If the people or race that created and sustained the civilization of the West should die, then the civilization also will die.

So, it’s not enough to say whites built Western civilization in the sense that a long time ago whites started Western civilization — that the West originates with white people — even though many Alt-Righties imprecisely articulate their view as such. Rather, for the Alt-Right, whites perpetuate, maintain, and define Western civilization. They’re necessary, but more importantly, essential to it.

I am not sure that the Alt Right is making that argument.

But is the argument true?

It seems to me that Western Civilization could be transmitted to the Japanese, but then it wouldn't really be Western Civilization. It would become a Japanese civilization. How different would it be? That is hard to say.