Mother replaced by Birthing Parent

News:

Parents will have new, gender-neutral options for identifying themselves on a child’s birth certificate in Wisconsin starting July 1, Governor Tony Evers and the Wisconsin Department of Health Services announced Monday.

Starting July 1, birth forms will also begin using "parent giving birth" as opposed to the term mother. This is a move backed by the Biden administration, who also prefers the term "birthing person" to mother.

According to Fox 6, birth forms, which are used to generate birth certificates, will be updated to include the option for "parent-parent," in addition to the traditional "mother-father."

Evers said the change reflects the administration's commitment to recognizing diverse families and gender-neutral terminology.

California did this several years ago. It used to be that if a man wanted to be the sole parent of a baby, then he had to be listed as the mother on the birth certificate. No more.

New York City had a mayoral primary election last week, and the Democrats running the election cannot tell us who won. This is a disgrace. We should have had winners over a week ago. I don't know who rigged this election and why, but we can have no confidence in the winner, just as we have no confidence in Joe Biden having won the 2020 election.

NY Times magazine essay:

But the most common feature among the laws, and the one most familiar to a student of repressive memory laws elsewhere in the world, is their attention to feelings. Four of five of them, in almost identical language, proscribe any curricular activities that would give rise to “discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress on account of the individual’s race or sex.”

It goes on to argue that school should teach controversies such as why Blacks and others were lynched a century ago, why Nazis put Jews into labor camps, and more modern theories of racial animosities.

I don't think that the typical NYT reader would be happy with these teachings. Schools do not usually teach why Hitler hated the Jews, or why we had school segregation.

UN Reports asks for African Reparations

The NY Times reports:

GENEVA — The United Nations human rights chief urged nations to take action to root out systemic racism against people of African descent on Monday, as she released a report calling for measures to dismantle discrimination and for sweeping changes to policing, as well as reparations.

“The status quo is untenable,” Michelle Bachelet, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said in a statement. “Systemic racism needs a systemic response. There is today a momentous opportunity to achieve a turning point for racial equality and justice.”

The 20-page report and an accompanying 95-page conference paper draw on evidence from 60 countries. …

“We could not find a single example of a state that has fully reckoned with the past or comprehensively accounted for the impacts on the lives of people of African descent today,” said Mona Rishmawi, who supervised the preparation of the report. …

I agree with that last point. No country accounts for the impact of people of African descent.

The report recommends:

20.States should collect and make publicly available comprehensive data disaggregated by race or ethnic origin, as well as by sex and other factors, with strict safeguards and in accordance with international human rights law.34 Additionally, States should analyse the cumulative effects of laws, policies and practices on specific racial and ethnic groups.

If they did that, they would document the incredible destruction caused by Blacks. An honest accounting would result in Blacks owing Whites trillions of dollars in reparations.

Some people say that Whites profited from Black slavery, centuries ago. But there is little evidence of that. The poorest states are the ones that had the most slaves. American Blacks are much better off than their relatives in Africa. It appears to me that slavery benefited Blacks much more than Whites. Nothing in this UN report refutes the idea.

But I could be wrong. We need a systematic accounting to find out.

Detroit went from being a White city to a Black city. When the Blacks took over the city, did they make it better or worse? An accounting should answer that question.

The Meaning of all those Colors

Nickelodeon is the most popular source of kids videos, except for maybe Disney. So you think it sticks to inoffensive content?

No, check out this video: The Meaning of Pride ft. Drag Queen Nina West 🏳️‍🌈 (Pride Song).

The song is supposedly about inclusiveness, but the color White is not for White people. No color for them. No color for heterosexual or cis-gender or non-queer or White people. Inclusiveness has become a code word for excluding straight Whites.

Homosexuality is only outlawed in Moslem countries. It is promoted in most Western countries. A few, like Russia and Hungary, have some restrictions on promoting homosexuality to minors. For this, the gay press attacks them as if they are the most horrible countries in the world.

Explain to me why it is good to show perverted videos like this to minors. What is the purpose?

Here is a new Netflix trailer, THE HARDER THEY FALL | Official Teaser | Netflix. This is described as a "assured, righteously new school Western", where Blacks go round murdering White people.

Over on Amzon Prime, we hve Karen Movie Teaser/Trailer. The term "Karen" has become a racial slur for White women, and this is about a Karen who is hated by her Black neighbors.

I haven't seen either of these movies. They are not out yet. So maybe they have some purpose other than promoting racial hatred. We shall see. It is almost as if Hollywood has been taken over by some ethnic group that hates White Christians above all else.

Here is video of Biden offers encouragement to LGBTQ Americans. I could not stand to watch it. A cabinet secretary told lies about Matthew Shepard, and how proud he is to have a "husband". There was a 16-year-old freaky-looking Black-Latino trans with female sex and male gender. Biden also babbled about Shepard, transgendered soldiers, and other LGBTQIA talking points. He pushed for boys playing on girls sports teams.

Biden made the common LGBTQIA argument that if a teenage boy is mentally ill and suicidal, then the best thing is to castrate him and get him trans counseling. They want to ban cis counseling. This is now what the Democrat Party represents, more than anything else.

Rudy Giuliani was just disbarred, with the judges ruling:

The seriousness of respondent’s uncontroverted misconduct cannot be overstated. This country is being torn apart by continued attacks on the legitimacy of the 2020 election and of our current president, Joseph R. Biden.13 The hallmark of our democracy is predicated on free and fair elections. False statements intended to foment a loss of confidence in our elections and resulting loss of confidence in government generally damage the proper functioning of a free society.

E.g. A May 17-19 national poll conducted by Reuters/Ipsos reported that while only 3% of Democrats believe that Trump won the 2020 election, 53% of Republicans so believe (Reuters, 53% of Republicans view Trump as true U.S. president, https://www.reuters.com/world/us/53-republicans-view-trump-true-us-presidentreutersipsos-2021-05-24/

I did not know that opinion polls can get a lawyer disbarred.

No, if anything is tearing this country apart, it is lies about George Floyd, systemic racism, and transgenderism.

Tucker Carlson reports:

In the universities, this is called "critical race theory," so that’s the term many people go with. "Critical race theory" — that’s what we so often debate on TV. But it’s an inaccurate way to describe what’s happening. Like so much academic jargon, the phrase "critical race theory" doesn’t mean anything. It obscures, rather than illuminates. It’s designed to confuse you. What’s happening in our schools and our military and our government is both simpler and easier to recognize than that. It’s not critical race theory. It’s racism. Not "neo-racism" or "reverse racism." Those are meaningless terms. It’s race hate, peddled by the people in charge in the hope it’ll make them more powerful. That’s all it is.

That's right, and the racism is coming from the highest levels in our govt.

NY Times essay, by X-Files guy:

Attendees believed that this program used, among other things, reverse-engineered technology from captured U.F.O.s to weaponize space. By outward appearances, these were respectable and accomplished professionals, including former government officials and lawyers. Some of them also believe that the military has hidden bases on the dark side of the moon and meet secretly there with reptilian aliens.

They were speaking in code.

Our leaders do act as if they meet in secret with aliens to plan their betrayal of our civilization. We as might as well speak of them that way.

Warning about Domestic Terrorism

A new U.S. military training document obtained exclusively by The Intercept places socialists in the same "terrorist ideological category" as neo-nazis, worsening long-standing progressive fears that a federal crackdown on "domestic terrorism" would just as likely be used to target leftists who want a truly democratic society as to thwart far-right extremists who favor racist authoritarianism.

I don't get it. Nazis were National Socialists. Of course socialists and neo-nazis belong in the same category.

We now know that the only organizations involved in the Jan. 6 protests were controlled by FBI informants. So the feds know much more than they are telling us. Maybe the FBI planned the whole thing. Maybe it was a false flag operation. The feds also have 15,000 hours of video recording that they refuse to release. Obviously the feds are covering up something.

ACLU wants to Ban Book on Transgenders

A book can be both praised and hated. But praised and banned? Former NY Times columnist writes:

You may have heard of Shrier. She is the author of Irreversible Damage, which the Economist named one of the best books of last year, and a dogged journalist who has taken on the difficult and thankless subject of the enormous rise of gender dysphoria among teenage girls.

I say thankless because it’s hard to capture the decibel of the vitriol that has met her work. To give you a taste: one of the ACLU’s most prominent lawyers said that “stopping the circulation of this book and these ideas is 100% a hill I will die on.” (The subject of how the ACLU came to favor book banning is taken up brilliantly here.)

Here is the top comment:

And I understand why so many people object. I recently learned that my niece is now my nephew. His parents are both conservative. They wrestled with the issue and only relented and affirmed his identity as male after a long period of adjustment and a lot of counseling. It's easy for me to understand why their family would be upset about a book that questions their decision. ...

And I think that's a positive step for America. We are becoming a less closed-minded, bigoted nation thanks to free speech and the activism of the lgbtq+ community and their supporters. Yay America!

Here is a positive review of Shrier's book, now retracted by the journal, and a negative review.

I am trying to understand both sides of this issue, but it is difficult. I read the retraction statement, and it is transparently dishonest. I read the negative review, and there is very little substance to it. Its best point was that the transgender medicos are following published recommendations. So what? Those recommendations could be written by sick perverts. There does not appear to be any serious science in support of what they say.

The review even has a paragraph attacking the publisher for publishing other books that are politically conservative books. I wonder if that is really the point here. Advocating transgenderism is just a way of taking sides in the culture war. After all, the percentage of the population with a direct interest in transgenderism is much less than 1%, and yet the issue dominates the leftist agenda.

The UK BBC reports:

The US government has announced it will offer gender confirmation surgery for transgender veterans through its health care coverage for the first time.

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) secretary Denis McDonough announced the change at a Pride event in Florida.

This is what used to be called sex change surgery. I guess that they decided that the term was inaccurate because the surgery helps change gender, not sex.

Mr McDonough made the announcement in Orlando on Saturday. The city this month marked five years since a gunman opened fire at a gay nightclub, killing 49 people.

The gunman was a Moslem who did not know that the nightclub was gay. But I guess we can compensate for it by castrating some retired soldiers. Plus Disney is going to remake Snow White with a non-white actress.

Update: Here is a defense of killing the review. Seems lame to me, but decide for yourself.

Update: This might help you decide. The journal, Science-Based Medicine, that retracted the positive review of Shrier's book, has then published a review trashing the book, and that review is filled with fake quotes from the book!

I accused the journal of being "transparently dishonest", above. That was an understatement. Putting fake quotes into a very negative book review is about as transparently dishonest as it gets.

The journal denies that it fabricated quotes, and says that it will correct the false quotes.

Feminists Emasculating Men

South Koreans feminists use an emoji symbol to celebrate small penises. Weird.

Harvard-MIT feminists are gloating about declining sperm counts:

The human species is in grave reproductive danger, according to recent headlines. Some scientists say that sperm counts in men around the world have been plummeting, with Western men approaching total infertility by 2045. Far-right “Great Replacement” theorists, who fear that people of color are “replacing” the white population, have taken up the research with gusto. […]

The narrative that white, Western men are in danger of emasculation and disappearance has deep roots in white nationalist discourse. It is tied to a nostalgic cultural myth of a past in which white men held unchallenged power.

Yeah, White men are nostalgic about the days when they had high sperm counts and everyone accepted them as dominating the sexual hierarchy.

Breitbart reports:

LGBT activist Jayne Ozanne has insisted that “gentle non-coercive prayer” should be included in UK legislation banning LGBT conversion therapy.

Ms. Ozanne has said that prayer asking for God’s help to overcome same-sex attraction resembles hate speech, even in the case of “gentle non-coercive prayer,” and therefore should be outlawed.

“All prayer that seeks to change or suppress someone’s innate sexuality or gender identity is deeply damaging and causes immeasurable harm,” Ozanne asserted, dubbing such a practice “hate prayer.”

“Prayer isn’t prayer if it causes you to hate yourself for being LGBT!” Ozanne wrote on Twitter last month. “It’s actually ‘Hate prayer.’ It is dangerous, damaging & must be included in a bill to #BanConversationtherapy.”

“I know – I spent years trying to ‘pray the gay away’ & ended up in hospital wishing I would die,” she said.

This is the future, I am afraid. We will not even be able to pray for a normal life.

WashPo Video prepares for Racial Reckoning

The Wash. Post and other liberal news media keep telling us to prepare for a racial reckoning, such as with this video:

The Lily What is White racial identity and why is it important?

When George Floyd died, people across the United States started to look more critically at how white supremacy affects all of us. In this episode, we talk to mental health experts and scholars about why understanding your whiteness and the ways that white supremacy benefits you is an important part of becoming self aware.

Ben Shapiro has a video explaining what is wrong here.

Wash. Post gives the impression that (1) given the choice, BIPOCs prefer to live among White supremacists; and (2) BIPOCs will endlessly complain about it.

The Black woman on the Wash. Post video says that since Floyd died, for the first time White people became of their whiteness. A White woman says Whites are experiencing an awakening of their racial identity. She says Whites are not racist, and do not even understand the supposed racism that BIPOCs are complaining about.

I am not sure this propaganda is going to do what they think. If White start identifying with Whites as a group, they may want to disassociate with criminal junkies like Floyd, and other BIPOCs who are perpetually resentful of Whites and White culture.

A new poll shows that all this racism propaganda has mainly convinced White women:

In the Angus Reid Institute poll released on Monday, 54% of women under age 35 were ready to condemn Canada as racist, while only 21% of men over 55 agreed.

Young women, in fact, were even more likely than non-whites to take a negative view on race relations. The survey showed that 42% of non-white Canadians see the country as racist. Among women over 55, 30% agreed that Canada is racist.

Those Canadian women under 35 have probably never even witnessed any racist acts. They are just reciting what they have been told in school, or about George Floyd.

The poll showed that 85% of Canadians believe the country is made stronger by having residents from various ethnic and racial backgrounds. In other words, they agreed with what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has said repeatedly, that “Diversity is our strength.”

Now this is seriously delusional. Canada was almost split by Quebec separatists. Most Canadians have no idea how much worse it can be with other ethnic groups.

Update: Here is a good criticism of the Wash. Post video.

White Fagility is now Nice Racism

According to a new book, Nice Racism, the worst racists are those guilty of:

-rushing to prove that we are “not racist”;
-downplaying white advantage;
-romanticizing Black, Indigenous and other peoples of color (BIPOC);
-pretending white segregation “just happens”;
-expecting BIPOC people to teach us about racism;
-carefulness;
-and feeling immobilized by shame.

Okay, I will try to avoid these.

White segregation does not just happen. It is nearly always the result of BIPOC hostility.

No, I do not expect BIPOCs to teach us about racism. BIPOCs are much more racist than Whites, by any measure. We can learn by seeing their examples of their own racism, but that's about all.

We should not romanticize BIPOCs. Racists are treating George Floyd as a hero, but he was just a criminal junkie.

There is no shame in being White. The book says all Whites are racist, by definition, so there should be no shame in being a White racist. It is a necessary consequence of being born into a multiracial society.

It is a mistake for Whites to rush to prove that they are not racist. They and others would be better off celebrating White ethnicity and culture.

Finally, let's not downplay White advantage. This author portrays BIPOCs as emotionally retarded infantilized pitiable creatures in perpetual of what they regard as their White superiors.

I have heard of the 1973 French novel The Camp of the Saints being called a White supremacist textbook. The Robin DiAngelo books are the White supremacist books of the 21st century.

I should note that there are sensible Blacks who are disgusted by everything in these books. The books are mainly popular with White liberals.

Happy Fathers Day

Research shows that fathers are extremely important, as their presence is correlated with all good parenting outcomes. Eg, crime comes from kids raised in fatherless homes. Kids do better with fathers in every way that anyone has ever measured. Singles dads do better than single moms.

Fathers Day usually has a lot of messages blaming fathers for not doing more. In a way, this is a recognition of the crucial importance of fathers.

If the importance of fathers were truly recognized, then fathers would get child custody in divorce cases. Instead, the bias is against fathers. Angelina Jolie sued Brad Pitt for divorce 5 years ago, and says she will never forgive him for seeking joint custody, and is now trying to manipulate the kids to testify against him. If the importance of fathers were really recognized, then the case would have ended 5 years ago.

The scientific evidence doesn't really prove what it appears. It is possible that all the bad outcomes are caused by bad mothering, and bad behavior by the mom is also what drives the dads away.

Or it may be that the parenting practices are irrelevant. The damage may be all at the genetic level. That is, the mom may have bad genes that cause her to choose dads with bad genes, and cause her to be unable to keep a husbands. Inheritance of those bad genes is then what causes the bad outcomes in kids, not the bad parental behavior.

Regardless, we would all be better off with a father custody rule. The consensus of the comments on the above story is that Jolie is a evil lunatic who should never have been allowed to litigate custody for 5 years.

Evolution by Jerks, Falsified

During about 1980-2000 the leading science popularizer and intellectual was Harvard evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould. His biggest scientific accomplishment was something his detractors called Evolution by Jerks. He called their theory Evolution by Creeps. Supposedly Gould had replaced Darwinian evolutionary thoery.

Evolution professor Jerry Coyne writes:

Punctuated equilibrium (PE) was first proposed in a paper by Niles Eldredge and Steve Gould (“E&G”; reference below) in 1972, the year before entered graduate school. When I entered Harvard in 1973 it was a huge deal, heavily promoted by Gould, a professor in the Museum of Comparative Zoology as a replacement for the view of evolution most people held (“neo-Darwinism). Not a little of the theory’s popularity came from Gould’s nonstop promotion as well as his extraordinary ability to write popular science. ...

But, over time, PE became more than a hypothesis about the relative rate of evolutionary change in fossil lineages. It morphed into a theory of evolutionary process — a theory that was pretty much “non-neo-Darwinian” and also much more controversial. And while the pattern may be right, the processes proposed by E&G are so wrong that I’d call them “definitively falsified”.

Gould was also an over-opinionated Jewish Marxist.

Among the general public, Gould's most famous work was a book attacking the measurement of intelligence. The book was trashed by experts, and praised by non-experts. As Wikipedia politely explain:

The book received many positive reviews in the literary and popular press, including many written by scientists, but the reviews in scientific journals were, for the most part, highly critical.[4] Literary reviews praised the book for opposing racism, the concept of general intelligence, and biological determinism.[4] Reviews in scientific journals accused Gould of historical inaccuracy, unclear reasoning, and political bias.

Gould is dead. He is still a good example of how a very high status public intellectual can be full of crap.

Older woman gets lucky with IVF

NY Times guess essay:

I Did I.V.F. Without a Partner. It Shouldn’t Have Been So Hard. ...

Aziz Ansari, the co-creator of “Master of None” and the director and co-writer of the episode, is a friend, and in the fall of 2019 he told me that he wanted to write a story about a woman doing I.V.F. without a partner, as I had done. He wanted to hear my story. ...

Then there is the societal judgment that single would-be mothers face, especially those over 40, as I was. Doing I.V.F. alone is still seen as an outlandish choice, even by some of those that offer the services. At times it felt as though I was offending everyone else’s morality, just because my circumstances did not fit their idea of what’s “normal.”

Those who offer the services do a lot of their business with women like her. That is, older single women who passed up many earlier opportunities to get married and pregnant.

The essay implies that clinics and insurance companies should do more to enable her right to be a parent. I wonder if she thinks the same about men wanting to be parents.

The top reader comment is:

I'm sorry, what was so hard about this? The title implies that there is some systemic flaw that warrants correction, but it's just a story about a fairly privileged human traveling to different countries to find a doctor who will give her what she wants, which is to bring yet another human into an already overpopulated world. The scope of vision here is absurdly shallow.

The next top reader comment says:

When I was 29, an unkind family member suggested that 29 was getting too old to get pregnant. I thank that unkind family member mentally every day of my life, because if my husband and I had waited another few years to get pregnant, we probably would not have had our children. We just didn't know about my fertility problems until we started trying. ...

No one should voluntarily wait until the last possible moment (early 40's) to get pregnant and then hope technology bails them out. I'm sorry if this sounds unkind, but again, I owe my children to unkind advice.

Every 29 year old woman should hear that unkind advice. Another NY Times article says women in their 20s are not having kids anymore.

The Netflix show has this summary:

Three years after the events of Chapter 3, Alicia discusses the possibility of being a single mother and the grueling process of getting pregnant at her age at a nearby fertility center. Her first round of IVF shots do not go well, as they only produce a fragmented embryo that can't be implanted. Her mother consoles her through her efforts and with a renewed spirit she tries again with a determination to be a "bad bitch" and get the job done. The episode ends with Alicia being ecstatic after being informed about her pregnancy.

The real-life IVF Alicia of the essay is White, while the fictional IVF Alicia is Black. Replacing Whites with BIPOCs is a theme of the Netflix series.

Both Alicias complain that insurance pays for infertility treatments, but the company is reluctant to pay unless there is some evidence of infertility.  

A law firm is offering these benefits:

A law firm has offered to fund surrogate mothers for staff wanting to start a family as part of a £45,000 package of fertility care measures.

The perk will cover not just IVF or egg-freezing treatment but also ‘gestational carriers’ as the country’s top law firms rush to provide pioneering medical benefits and to show their credentials as employers committed to diversity.

The offer to London-based solicitors employed by Cooley will see employees, including single men and women and gay couples, subsidised to have children, even to the point of surrogate mothers bearing their offspring.

It follows the offer from another firm to provide IVF and egg freezing, and another to pay for gender transition surgery.

Cooley, which is based in San Francisco and has clients among Silicon Valley tech businesses, has extended the fertility treatment package offer to London staff after it was made available in California offices.

The firm will reimburse staff up to £45,000 for fertility treatment.

It said it was a package for ‘personalised fertility care and family-forming support’ and that it was available to ‘single parents by choice and LGBTQ+ individuals and couples’ as well as employees with opposite sex spouses and partners.

The offer extends to adoption expenses.

Paying for adoptions and gestational carriers is illegal in England, if the money goes to the mom.

My guess is that the firm has a lot of female employees who are being persuaded to indefinitely defer motherhood in favor of career advancement at the firm. It offers this benefit in order to trick them into thinking that they are keeping their options open. Very few of them will actually have babies at age 40.

Public is concerned about the Satanic Cabal

The NY Times reports on a new poll:

15 percent of Americans say they think that the levers of power are controlled by a cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles, a core belief of QAnon supporters. The same share said it was true that “American patriots may have to resort to violence” to depose the pedophiles and restore the country’s rightful order.

And fully 20 percent of respondents said that they thought a biblical-scale storm would soon sweep away these evil elites and “restore the rightful leaders"....

14 percent of Americans fall into the category of “QAnon believers,” composed of those who agreed with the statements in all three questions. Among Republicans only, that rises to roughly one in four. (Twelve percent of independents and 7 percent of Democrats were categorized as QAnon believers.)

But the analysts went a level further: They created a category labeled “QAnon doubters” to include respondents who had said they “mostly disagreed” with the outlandish statements, but didn’t reject them outright. Another 55 percent of Republicans fell into this more ambivalent category.

Which means that just one in five Republicans fully rejected the premises of the QAnon conspiracy theory. For Democrats, 58 percent were flat-out QAnon rejecters.

What are we supposed to think, when our leaders, from Pres. Biden on down, openly support sex changes on minors?

And why won't they tell us what really happened on Jan. 6? The feds are sitting on 15,000 hours of video recordings that they refuse to release. And now it turns out that some of the leaders of the protests are not being charged, because they were FBI informants:

“We know that because without fail, the government has thrown the book at most people who were present in the capital on January 6. There was a nationwide dragnet to find them, and many of them are still in solitary confinement tonight. But strangely, some of the key people who participated on January 6 have not been charged…The government calls those people unindicted co-conspirators. What does that mean? Well it means that in potentially every single case they were FBI operatives,” the host added.

Tucker cited the example of a mystery individual identified in court filings only as “Person Two,” who stayed in the same hotel room as Thomas Caldwell, a 65-year-old Virginia man alleged to belong to the Oath Keepers, described by the Justice Department as a “paramilitary” and “militia” group which was involved in the Capitol unrest.

According to a DoJ filing against Caldwell his alleged co-conspirators, the retiree joined “Person Two and others known and unknown in storming past barricades and climbing stairs up to a balcony on the west side of the Capitol building.”

Black crime in our cities is skyrocketing, but Biden's only answer is to tell everyone to spy and snitch on your White friends and neighbors:

President Joe Biden’s administration announced their plans to create ways for Americans to report radicalized friends and family to the government, in an effort to fight domestic terrorism.

If you tell the truth about what is going on, you risk losing your bank account. Even Trump's lawyers are being persecuted.

Belgium is Already a Lost Country

From a translated video:

A couple of days ago I posted a video from Silvia Sardone, an Italian MEP for the Lega, talking about the enormous mosque being built in Strasbourg with funding from the city government. In the following video Ms. Sardone visits the other “capital of Europe”, Brussels, to discuss the recent conviction of four members of the Flemish nationalist group Voorpost. The four men were given six-month prison sentences for displaying a banner with the words “Stop Islamization” above stylized figures clad in niqabs.

Apparently Moslems have enough political power that they cannot be criticized.

This is not freedom of religion. This is subjugation by an invading people.

The US is not even concerned about Islam anymore. The feds just want to blame Whites. The Atlantic reports:

In the two decades since September 11, the U.S. has fought terrorism and extremism by concentrating on law-enforcement and intelligence readiness, with experts focused on disrupting fringe groups before they carry out violence. This Band-Aid approach is ill-suited to combatting modern far-right extremism, which has spread well beyond fringe groups and into the mainstream.

No, there is no far-right extremism in the mainstream. This is just silly.

If we have learned anything in the last year, it is that BLM has led to a huge upsurge in murders and other criminal violence. And not by far-right extremists. About 95% of it is in groups that vote Democrat.

The Dark Side of Bitcoin

The NY Times has an essay on The Brutal Truth About Bitcoin.

The entire essay is about positive aspects of Bitcoin, until this paragraph at the end:

Ironically, rather than truly democratizing finance, some of these innovations may exacerbate inequality. Unequal financial literacy and digital access might result in sophisticated investors garnering the benefits while the less well off, dazzled by new technologies, take on risks they do not fully comprehend. Computer algorithms could worsen entrenched racial and other biases in credit scoring and financial decisions, rather than reducing them. The ubiquity of digital payments could also destroy any remaining vestiges of privacy in our day-to-day lives.

This is like a parody of leftist nonsense. Yes, of course every investment threatens to benefit some more than others. That is what investments do.

There are no racial biases in credit scoring. The agencies do not track race.

It does not even mention the real brutal truth of Bitcoin -- it is primarily used for financial crimes. It is used for extortion, tax evasion, smuggling, and money laundering. If some country or large corporation would create a suitable digital currency, then there would be no use for Bitcoin. A trillion dollars in digital assets could disappear, and we would be better off.

The Mental Health Gap

It used to be that the Republican Party had the more educated and wealthy members. On average, Republicans had about one more year of schooling than Democrats. Over the last 25 years this has reversed.

Now the super-rich are Democrats, and so are the college professors and govt workrs. The Democrats have also become the hate-whitey party. Working class whites have shifted to Republican. On the coasts the elites are Democrats, while elsewhere many of the elites are Republicans.

There is another gap that is rarely mentioned. One out of six Americans is on psychiatric drugs, and the big majority of them are women.

Want to guess their political leanings?

Breitbart reports on a Pew study:

When sex and age were factors, 56.3 percent of white women between the ages of 18 and 29 and who labeled themselves as “liberal,” said they had been given a mental health diagnosis, compared to 27.3 percent of conservatives in the same categories and 28.4 percent of moderates

Donald Trump would still be President, if the election were limited to sane voters.

Here is some typical liberal commentary:

America’s story is threaded with racial bias. Does anyone seriously question that we would move forward more effectively if we all move together? Does Texas really think it can suppress its non-white majority in coming elections? ...

South Africa confronted apartheid. Germany acknowledged the Holocaust. We Americans have a tragic history of racism that began with slavery and has never ended. We cannot be afraid to look at our own past.

I recently came across a photo from the 1940s of a young boy of 8 or 9 drinking from a “colored” water fountain in North Carolina. That is the definition of systemic racism, and proof that racial bias and the American legal system have been intertwined during our ongoing fight for equality in the United States.

Really? While Germany was gassing the Jews 80 years ago, America was providing separate drinking fountains for young boys. It is all just systemic racism, right? Today, we have school programs to teach those boys to hate Whites, and then segregated graduation ceremonies.

Here is another, from the London Guardian:

Food injustice has deep roots: let’s start with America’s apple pie

From amnesia about apple pie to burger battlefields, author and academic Raj Patel says today’s food justice fights have long, bloody histories

So some Indian guy hates America, as symbolized by apple pie. Maybe I will write an essay on why I hate Indian food, and on how everyone in India is to blame for it.

These essays are increasingly common, and appeal only to liberals suffering mental illnesses.

Donald Trump has been proven correct

Matt Margolis writes:

Ten Media Lies Trump Has Been Proven Right About Since the Election

1. Hydroxychloroquine works

2. The Virus came from a Chinese lab

3. Hunter Biden’s laptop was real

4. Lafayette Square was not cleared for a photo op

5. The “Russian bounties” story was fake

6. We did produce vaccines before the end of 2020, in record time

7. Blue state lockdowns didn’t work

8. Schools should be opened

9. Critical race theory is a disaster for our schools and our country

10. Our southern border security program was an unprecedented success

He does not even mention the election being stolen, or Pres. Biden being incompetent.

As one example, the NY Times had dozens of stories about how Trump was evil because he cleared out protesters for a photo-op. The story was fake news. Not that there would be anything wrong with the President of the USA crossing the street for a photo-op, but the press reports were mostly false.

There were many bigger press lies about Trump, but this one is particularly revealing.

Gallup reports increase in same-sex marriage support

I posted some comments on public opinion about same-sex marriage, and now I see a new Gallup Poll:

Today's 70% support for same-sex marriage marks a new milestone in a trend that has pointed upward for a quarter of a century. A small minority of Americans (27%) supported legal recognition of gay and lesbian marriages in 1996, when Gallup first asked the question. But support rose steadily over time, eventually reaching the majority level for the first time in 2011.

20. Do you think marriages between same-sex couples should or should not be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages?

This appears to be a dramatic change, but notice the strange wording of the question. When California voted twice on the issue, the question was whether marriage is between a man and a woman. This question assumes that same-sex couple can get married, and asks about legal recognition and rights.

It does appear that politicians and other public figures making arguments for traditional marriage have totally evaporated. I do not believe that they were persuaded. They were intimidated and harassed. In part by the gay lobby, but also by feminists and others who oppose marriage.

There are even some factions that pretend to support traditional marriage, but don't. For example, consider:

Angelina Jolie reportedly will 'never forgive' Brad Pitt after he was awarded joint custody of their children last week.

According to reports from US Weekly on Tuesday, the actress, 45, was left 'bitterly disappointed' by the result and feels their legal battle is 'far from over'.

Advocates of traditional marriage should be siding with Brad Pitt on this. But they don't. Even some very religious advocates believe in a mom-custody rule that is contrary to traditional marriage.

We see something similar with transgender issues. I have never heard of anyone persuaded by transgender arguments. But a great many people have been intimidated and harassed. You can get canceled for saying a simple truth like "a man is a man". So now most politicians and public figures will not say it. Were they convinced that a man is not a man? Of course not. They just don't want to get sucked into some stupid transgender debate where they get persecuted for saying the obvious.

Update: Another Gallup poll says more LGBT adults are married to a spouse of the opposite sex (11.4%) than to a spouse of the same sex (9.6%). Overall, less than 1% of U.S. adults are married to a same-sex spouse.

Some of those classify themselves as bisexual (B of LGBT). Of the T for transgender, it is possible that one could have an opposite-sex spouse who is also same-gender. Or same-sex and opposite gender, as transgenders change gender but not sex.

Biden replaces Mothers with Birthing People

This sounds like a joke, but is serious.

Newsweek reports:

The White House's 2022 fiscal year budget replaced the word mothers with birthing people in a section about public health funding, prompting ridicule Monday from President Joe Biden's conservative critics.

The Biden administration's budget includes a public health section which addresses efforts to "reduce maternal mortality rates and end race-based disparities in maternal mortality." The budget specifically addresses racial disparities between Black, American Indian/Alaska Native and other women of color.

The biggest race-based disparity is the low Hispanic mortality.

The NY Post reports:

A white New York City psychoanalyst is under fire after publishing a report decrying his skin color as a “malignant, parasitic like condition” without a “permanent cure.”

Dr. Donald Moss — a published author who teaches at the New York Psychoanalytic Institute — published “On Having Whiteness” last month in the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association.

“Whiteness is a condition one first acquires and then one has — a malignant, parasitic-like condition to which ‘white’ people have a particular susceptibility,” an abstract of the article on Sage Journals says.

“The condition is foundational, generating characteristic ways of being in one’s body, in one’s mind, and in one’s world.

“Parasitic Whiteness renders its hosts’ appetites voracious, insatiable, and perverse,” states the paper, also published on the National Library of Medicine’s PubMed site.

Okay, but he is not a "white New York City psychoanalyst". He is Jewish.

I know, he looks white, and would be considered white in a lot of contexts. But not this.

The whole practice of psychoanalysis is a Jewish anti-white ideology. When Jewish psychoanalysists attack whites, they are attacking their biggest enemy, White Christianity.

Republicans need to resist the Democrat election control

A bunch of Democrat professors have posted an open letter:

We, the undersigned, are scholars of democracy who have watched the recent deterioration of U.S. elections and liberal democracy with growing alarm. Specifically, we have watched with deep concern as Republican-led state legislatures across the country have in recent months proposed or implemented what we consider radical changes to core electoral procedures in response to unproven and intentionally destructive allegations of a stolen election. ...

We urge members of Congress to do whatever is necessary — including suspending the filibuster — in order to pass national voting and election administration standards

No, that Democrat measure, H.R. 1, is the most radical change to election law in American history.

It is telling that Democrats want to abolish traditional Senate voting rules in order to impose its idea of Democracy.

It is also telling that they complain about "intentionally destructive allegations". It is not really possible for allegations to be destructive. An election should be demonstrable free and fair. It should not be dependent on no one making any allegations.

Donald Trump won a majority of the verifiable votes cast on election day. Democrats want us to accept Biden's win based on secret vote casting and counting. We should not. If allegations lead to fairer elections, so much the better.

But H.R. 1 is just a Democrat power play. For the most part, Republicans just want to return elections to the fairer procedures of several years ago.

The NY Times says it is all about race, as usual. The whole point is to import non-white voters to displace White voters. It says the Democrats want to counteract what Tucker Carlson said:

In a democracy, one person equals one vote. If you change the population, you dilute the political power of the people who live there. So every time they import a new voter, I become disenfranchised as a current voter.

Democracy is not compatible with open borders, or with identity politics.

List of Psychology Research Reversals

Here is a list of bogus psychology research:

A medical reversal is when an existing treatment is found to actually be useless or harmful. Psychology has in recent years been racking up reversals: in fact only 40-65% of its classic social results were replicated, in the weakest sense of finding ‘significant’ results in the same direction. (Even in those that replicated, the average effect found was half the originally reported effect.) Such errors are far less costly to society than medical errors, but it’s still pollution, so here’s the cleanup. 1

Psychology is not alone: medicine, cancer biology, and economics all have many irreplicable results. It’d be wrong to write off psychology: we know about most of the problems here because of psychologists, and its subfields differ a lot by replication rate and effect-size shrinkage.

One reason psychology reversals are so prominent is that it’s an unusually ‘open’ field in terms of code and data sharing. A less scientific field would never have caught its own bullshit.

You might think that the controversial research would be that involving IQ and personality types. But that research has held up fairly well. Other areas have done much more poorly.

Russia calls out American Racism

Robert Hampton writes:

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov apparently shows more concern for ordinary white Americans than the average Republican lawmaker. ...

Lavrov’s purpose was to skewer the United Nations dedicating a day to acknowledging the horrible threat posed by “white supremacy.” The Russian diplomat said that the decision reflects the UN operating as the “the Organization Promoting American concepts, or American trends.”

This position contrasts sharply with that of our own diplomats. Joe Biden’s UN Ambassador, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, went before the international body twice this Spring to denounce white Americans and the Founding Fathers.

Four-hundred-and-two years ago, African slaves were forced onto the shores of the colony of Virginia. Two years ago, the 1619 Project brought attention to this anniversary, and put the consequences of slavery, and the contributions of Black Americans, back at the center of our history and of our national narrative. As the project detailed, slavery is the original sin of America. It’s weaved white supremacy and black inferiority into our founding documents and principles.

She repeated those remarks again a month later. American media outlets praised her comments as a “powerful” rebuttal against racism.

America is fond of calling out Russia’s alleged human rights abuses and disregard for democratic norms. Lavrov responded to these claims with a reminder of America’s own record, particularly its persecution of Trump supporters involved in the Capitol protests.

“We are following with interest the persecution of those persons who are accused of the riots on January 6 this year,” Lavrov said last week, stressing that Vladimir Putin will press Biden on this issue when the two meet this summer. “A lot of really interesting things are happening from the point of view of the rights of the opposition and protecting those rights,” the Russian diplomat added.

It is rich for America to attack other countries that suppress protesters and dissidents when our regime does the same thing. We attack China for denying bail to non-violent election protesters while we deny bail to non-violent election protesters here. We criticize Belarus for diverting a flight to arrest a dissident while we don’t even allow dissidents to fly here. We denounce Russia for firing government workers for their political beliefs while every corporation and institution does the same thing here. This isn’t the Land of the Free anymore.

He is right that we criticize suppression of protesters in other countries, while the USA has jailed 500 pro-democracy protesters from Jan. 6. Many of those have been held without bail, and sometimes in solitary confinement. Most of them were just peacefully expressing a political opinion to lawmakers.

Meanwhile our elite universities have gone fully anti-white. The Sun reports:

THE psychologist who confessed to fantasizing about shooting white people during a talk at Yale has defended her comments.

Dr. Aruna Khilanani says her words were taken out of context to “control the narrative" after it was reported she had discussed her "fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white person".

In an email to The New York Times Khilanani said: "My work is important. And, I stand by it. We need to heal in this country.” ...

The Yale School of Medicine said in a statement that leaders there "found the tone and content antithetical to the values of the school".

Apparently she has been mad at Whites for many years because a White therapist observed that she was psychotic. Why are these people even allowed into the USA? Or Yale?

LGBTQ Lobby uses Intimidation, not Persuasion

I mentioned a NY Times article that explains that the gay lobby won legal victories by intimidation and harassment, not persuastion.

With a contrary view, Greg Mayer argues:

Issenberg is just flat wrong here. Marriage equality was achieved not through shaming and boycotts of its largely conservative opponents, but by convincing judges of the arguments for marriage equality. Andrew Sullivan, a tireless campaigner for marriage equality, summarized his argument for it at the time of the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges:

Homosexuality, at its core, is about the emotional connection between two adult human beings. And what public institution is more central — more definitive — of that connection than marriage? The denial of marriage to gay people is therefore not a minor issue. ... We are not disordered or sick or defective or evil ... the exclusion of gay people from this institution was a statement of our core inferiority not just as citizens but as human beings.

I doubt that anyone was persuaded by Sullivan's argument. I even doubt that Sullivan was. He identifies as a gay Catholic who likes anonymous sex with strangers. His real complaint is that his Church declares that homosexual acts are sins.

The court decision did not affect church marriage. It was more narrowly focused on who can file a joint tax return, or avoid inheritance taxes, or request a death certificate. Sullivan obviously has some kind of psychological self-esteem problem, and I doubt that anyone thinks that we needed a change to civil marriage law to boost his self-esteem.

No, we have same-sex marriage licenses for other reasons.

Another hysterical NY Times guest essay complains about Republicans trying to undo trends in LGBTQ rights. Some states have passed laws supporting girls' sports and bathrooms, to protect practices that have been customary as long as anyone can remember. There are also laws limiting surgery on children.

The essay makes little attempt to persuade, and encourages "defiant intervention" and "active resistance". I guess that means breaking the law to enforce an LGBTQ ideology on everyone. It compares the laws to law legitimizing slavery, and says those were struck down by defiant interventions.

I guess this means that the LGBTQ lobby is threatening civil war to expand the castration of underage boys. They are looking for a fight.

Professors defend Eugenics

Philosopher Peter Singer is famous for arguing that some animals should have more rights than handicapped people, and other outrageous ideas, and now co-authors this paper:

In recent years, bioethical discourse around the topic of ‘genetic enhancement’ has become increasingly politicized. ... Here, we address the question of whether ‘eugenics’ can be defended ...

The term ‘eugenics’ (which means ‘good birth’) was coined by Francis Galton in 1883 to capture the idea that we should use insights from the new science of hered-ity to improve the welfare of future people (Levine 2017). But as Galton understood the term, eugenics involved both the study of heredity, and the use of this knowl-edge to by parents to shape their reproductive choices. It is more common now to sharply distinguish the study of genetics (a term that wasn’t coined until 1905) from eugenics. For example, in their recent book The Ethics of the New Eugenics MacKellar and Bechtel define eugenics as involving ‘strategies or decisions aimed at affecting, in a manner which is considered to be positive, the genetic heritage of a child, a community, or humanity in general’ (2016, p. 3). If we use this definition, many contemporary bioethicists support eugenics ...

The important conclusion is this: everyone who considers pre-natal testing justifi-able, or who thinks women should be free to weigh genetic information in the selec-tion of a spouse or a sperm donor is a eugenicist.

This is becoming a hot issue because of CRISPR, but the debate goes back 140 years. For decades, it was an obvious good that most sensible intellectuals endorsed. Then it became so unpopular that few dared to even use the term. For decades, the subject was considered unworthy of debate.

It is worthy of debate. As the paper notes, many eugenics ideas have quietly become accepted without using the term.

Population control is similarly controversial. Libertarian Jacob Sullum writes:

In a 2015 HuffPost essay titled "In Praise of China's One-Child Policy," Israeli environmentalist Alon Tal cited the famines that killed an estimated 45 million Chinese in the late 1950s and early '60s as evidence that strict population control was necessary. ...

The assumption that coercion was necessary to reduce China's birth rate is contradicted by trends in other developing countries that never adopted such a policy.

The Libertarian view seems to be that people have a right to make a billion excess starving babies if they want to. The better strategy is to make all the women fat and lazy, so then they would not want kids.

China is a horrible Communist country, but at least they make long-term planning for the good of their nation.

How the gay lobby wins

A NY Times "guest essay" (they don't call them op-eds anymore) explains:

Cancel Culture Works. We Wouldn’t Have Marriage Equality Without It.

By Sasha Issenberg
Mr. Issenberg the author of “The Engagement: America’s Quarter-Century Struggle Over Same-Sex Marriage.”

Anyone looking to understand how same-sex marriage went from legal in one state to the law of the land a decade later ...

Long before the phrase “cancel culture” entered the lexicon or Republican senators complained about the power of “woke capital,” Mr. Karger refined a digital-era playbook for successfully redirecting scrutiny to the opposition's financial backers. The movement to legalize same-sex marriage is often understood as one of civil rights test cases. And indeed, savvy legislative lobbying, fortuitous demographic change and pop-culture influence all played their part, too. But a largely forgotten story is the way a group of political entrepreneurs changed the economic terrain on which cultural conflict was waged. They demonstrated that shaming and shunning could amount to more than an online pile-on and serve as a potent tactic for political change.

The article tells the story of the homosexual lobby getting political wins by intimidation, harassment, outing, and other scumball tactics. Networks of homosexual activists were extremely nasty.

The public was never really convinced of same-sex marriage, but the opposition was bullied into silence. Even California, the more liberal big state, passed a referendum to add to its constitution that marriage is between a man and woman. The amendment is still there, but not enforced.

This reminds me of how Scientology got status as a religion. It personally harassed all of the sensible people with opinions on the issue, until no one wanted to fight them anymore.

Buoyed by this success, what is this gay lobby doing next? It appears that their next target is transgender children. Say anything sensible on the subject, and you will be targeted with all sorts of threats.

I expect most organizations to cave into the extortion on this subject. It is not worth the fight, to them.

This is no way to make social policy. It means that the most immoral factions have the most say.

Another NY Times opinion column argues:

The Supreme Court is expected to rule this month on a case that could upend, in the name of religious freedom, 50 years of progress in the effort to provide better support for L.G.B.T.Q. children in the foster system. Such a decision would be a devastating setback for all children in foster care, and set a dangerous precedent that could have broad repercussions.

The question the court has been asked to decide is whether the city of Philadelphia can bar Catholic Social Services from screening future foster parents. The agency claims a religious right under the First Amendment’s free exercise clause to exclude lesbian and gay couples as foster parents. ...

When the case, Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, was argued before the Supreme Court in November, lawyers for Catholic Social Services maintained that the city should grant it an exemption from Philadelphia’s anti-discrimination law and simply allow it to refer lesbian and gay couples to another agency.

That seems reasonable, but the article argues that the LGBTQ movement will get a setback unless they can erase any possible LGBTQ stigma, and use every opportunity to support foster kids becoming LGBTQ.

We are way beyond tolerance of what consenting adults do in private. The object here is to de-stigmatize child abuse. I wonder what they next plan is, after they win that battle.

Pupil Size Is a Marker of Intelligence

SciAm reports:

Our pupils respond to more than just the light. They indicate arousal, interest or mental exhaustion. Pupil dilation is even used by the FBI to detect deception. Now work conducted in our laboratory at the Georgia Institute of Technology suggests that baseline pupil size is closely related to individual differences in intelligence. The larger the pupils, the higher the intelligence, as measured by tests of reasoning, attention and memory. In fact, across three studies, we found that the difference in baseline pupil size between people who scored the highest on the cognitive tests and those who scored the lowest was large enough to be detected by the unaided eye.

Some day AI programs and surveillance cameras will automatically detect such things, and decide what we can and cannot do.

A new TED Talk on The science behind how parents affect child development | Yuko Munakata claims that parents have no measurable effect on how their kids turn out.

That sounds bizarre, but here is a new study out of Finland concluding:

Associations between childhood family income and subsequent risks for psychiatric disorders, substance misuse and violent crime arrest were not consistent with a causal interpretation.

If true, and applicable outside Finland, then it is foolish to believe that monetary subsidies to families will have any effect on those problems.

Biden compares three historical events

I am learning that the three most important events in American history were:

The Tulsa race riots of 1921.

The Charlottesville statue protest of 2017.

The Capitol vote-counting protest of 2021.

Pres. Joe Biden has been promoting the importance of all three. The Hill reports:

President Biden on Tuesday compared the white mob that attacked Black residents in Tulsa, Okla., in 1921 to the "white supremacists" who marched in the far-right "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville, Va., four years ago. ...

“Just close your eyes and remember what you saw in Charlottesville four years ago on television,” the president continued. “Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, the KKK [were] coming out of those fields at night in Virginia with lighted torches, the veins bulging as they were screaming.” ...

Biden when announcing his presidential campaign in April 2019 cited the violence in Charlottesville, as well as then-President Trump’s response to it, as the defining moment that prompted his decision to launch his White House bid. ...

“And in that moment, I knew the threat to this nation was unlike any I had ever seen in my lifetime,” the then-presidential candidate explained. ...

“Mother Fletcher said when she saw the insurrection at the Capitol ... it broke her heart,” Biden said Tuesday. “A mob of violent white extremists, thugs.”

“She said it reminded her of what happened here in Greenwood a hundred years ago,” the president added.

Here is how Encyclopedia Britannica explains the start of the Tulsa riot:

On May 30, 1921, Dick Rowland, a young African American shoe shiner, was accused of assaulting a white elevator operator named Sarah Page in the elevator of a building in downtown Tulsa. The next day the Tulsa Tribune printed a story saying that Rowland had tried to rape Page, with an accompanying editorial stating that a lynching was planned for that night. That evening mobs of both African Americans and whites descended on the courthouse where Rowland was being held. When a confrontation between an armed African American man, there to protect Rowland, and a white protester resulted in the death of the latter, the white mob was incensed, and the Tulsa massacre was thus ignited. ...

When the massacre ended on June 1, the official death toll was recorded at 10 whites and 26 African Americans, though many experts now believe at least 300 people were killed.

I thought that the movement to believe all women was a recent one. Obviously not, as a riot was caused by an overreaction to a MeToo story.

How does this relate to Charlottesvilles 2017 and Jan. 6 Capitol protests? The only death directly related to the Jan. 6 event was a non-white police officer shooting and killing an unarmed white woman visiting the Capitol.

Meanwhile, I see video of Vice President Harris Swears In Eric Lander as the Director of the Office of Science and Technology. No, he was not sworn in on a Bible. Being a scientist, he could have chosen some great scientific work, such as a book by Newton or Darwin. Instead, he was sworn in on a 500-year-old book on a Jewish conspiracy to repair the world to their liking. He calls it Tikkun olam, and says that it is the Hebrew version of "build back better".

Update: Here is more info about Tulsa 1921. Apparently no one has been able to figure out what happened in that elevator. Previously Tulsa lynched white men, not black. The black rioters were well armed.

Americans unconvinced by WWII history

The London Dail Mail reports:

The question was asked: 'Do you think the United States made a mistake sending troops to fight in the following wars?'

The poll considered conflicts spread over more than 100 years including both World Wars, the Vietnam War and the more recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Some 14 percent of Americans said they believed sending troops to fight the Nazi-led Axis powers during World War II was a mistake and an additional 18 percent weren’t sure, although the support for the decision to send troops to fight the Nazis received more support than any other war at 68 percent.

However, one third of Americans were still unsure if President Roosevelt made the right decision.

Of those supporting the war, their reasons could be based on defending against Japan, as Japan attacked the USA.

The more interesting question is whether the USA should have joined the war in Europe, for WWI and WWII.

Vox Day writes:

resident Roosevelt didn't make the right decision. In fact, it is now obvious and well-documented that both President Roosevelt and Winston Churchill were very clearly taking orders from someone, presumably someone connected to the small group of Jews who declared war on Germany in 1933, and that both elected leaders were instructed to back Stalin without question, even to the direct and material detriment of their own soldiers, countries, and national interests. The treasonous subservience of Roosevelt, in particular, eventually resulted in the attempted mass murder of 28 million Germans by US Secretary of State Henry Morgenthau, and also created the industrial Soviet Union by propping up the Soviet economy for 40 years despite the intrinsic economic dysfunctionality of communism. ...

The undeniable historical fact is that D-Day was totally unnecessary, as Germany attempted to surrender more than TWO YEARS before its surrender was finally accepted in May 1945. In other words, every single American life lost in the campaign on the Western Front was a needless sacrifice and a tragic waste.

Happy Memorial Day.

This is heresy. WWII was the last good war, with very broad public support, and in the history books.

Some say that FDR deliberately provoked Japan into attacking us, as he was secretly supplying war goods to the European allies, and wanted an excuse to enter the war.

I have heard these stories for a long time, but I am surprised that so many Americans question WWII.