Mom Convicted of Using the N-word

News:

A woman who called a Black, autistic child a racial slur last year has been found guilty of one count of disorderly conduct and not guilty on another.

The incident, which occurred at a playground in Rochester in April of last year, was caught on video by a bystander and went viral. Shiloh Hendrix, 37, called a then 8-year-old boy the n-word after he allegedly reached into her diaper bag at Roy Sutherland playground in Soldier's Field Park and took an item. She then began cussing at the bystander, who is Black — hurling the n-word at him as well.

The incident prompted Rochester City Attorney Michael Spindler-Krage to charge Hendrix with two counts of disorderly conduct, one involving her words and behavior toward the child and the other involving her words and behavior toward the man who video taped the incident.

The guilty verdict was related to her behavior toward the man who video taped the confrontation.

Hendrix was sentenced immediately following the verdict being read. She was ordered to pay a $1,000 fine, was placed on probation and ordered to complete community service. She initially faced up to 90 days in jail, but will serve no jail time unless probation is broken.

The Somalian man video recorded himself begging the mom to use the N-word, so he could record and post it. She eventually complied as she walked away.

The conviction is for her attitude towards the adult Somalian man, not the child.

That 8-year-old Somalian is already a police-registered juvenile delinquent:

In his testimony, Jimale said his son has a history of running away and taking things that don’t belong to him because he is autistic. As a result, the child wears a law enforcement issued GPS tracker that helps police find the child when he runs off.

The problem here is that lawless and uncivilized Somalians have invaded Minnesota, and this poor mom cannot even take her small child to a public park without being harassed by Somalians. Even though she was the victim, the police, prosecutors, judge, and jury have sided with the Somalians.

The Latest AI LLM Feats

The AI LLMs have solved some big math problems, including the Jacobian conjecture this week. One, presumably an unreleased Openai GPT-6, has also aggressively hacked into other computers. Here is an explanation

Our AI model tried really hard to hack out of its sandbox, a computer with no internet access, in order to find the answer to a test problem it had been given. To do this, it found previously unknown software bugs that allowed it to reach an OpenAI computer it wasn't supposed to be able to access. Then it started hacking other computers on OpenAI's networks until it found one that had Internet access. After gaining Internet access, the AI model thought about where it could find the answers to the test question and figured the AI platform Hugging Face might have the data it was looking for. It then found ways to hack Hugging Face to steal the information it could use to cheat the test. The AI model used several hacking techniques together, including using a stolen password and finding several totally new security bugs in Hugging Face's computers, allowing the AI model to take control of those computers.

That would have been illegal, if a human did it.

The open source models are almost as good. Artificial general intelligence is here.

Elon Musk brags that he will be able to make a non-woke version of The Odyssey before the end of the year. I doubt it, but it is not impossible. Likely within five years.

Update: Jacobian conjecture explained here.

Psycho Therapists Divide Families

Katie Millier tweets:

Therapy has become incredibly dangerous for societal bonds.

In a new study, 1/3 of parents believe their child won’t speak to them because of a therapist’s influence.

This is how countries weaken and fall apart.

Rome didn’t fall primarily because of barbarians at the gates. It fell because loyalty, duty, bonds, and the birth rate collapsed. When the Romans lost the traditional family, its societal structure that fostered mutual support fell.

Therapists are creating a mental health crisis by actively encouraging patients to cut off their families.

When communities are no longer connected, they become unrecognizable to their people.

Here is the paywalled WSJ story:

Shoshana Rubli was shocked by her therapist’s advice, given in her second session. But the counselor was recommended by someone she knew and had impressive credentials, so she did as she was told.

She cut off all ties with her mother.

“It was an argument made from authority, so I followed it,” says the 42-year-old freelance marketer.

Is it really good therapy to break your mother’s heart?

After decades of urging families to communicate better and work on their issues together, some therapists are now taking an opposite tack: They’re encouraging estrangement as a means of self-care.

Maybe you thought psycho therapists work reconciling people, not dividing them.

Matt Walsh Hates The Odyssey

Matt Walsh writes:

Just saw The Odyssey. Despite what you may have heard, literally all of the criticisms by conservatives were entirely correct. The movie is just as woke as you fear, if not more so. The DEI casting is atrocious. Completely takes you out of the story right from the beginning. But even worse than that is Nolan’s decision to turn Odysseus into an anachronistic whiney, solemn shell of a man plagued by “trauma” and guilt. It’s impossible to overlook these flaws because the film itself is not terribly entertaining or well constructed. For the most part it is disjointed, dull, self-serious, disenchanted, somehow feeling both verbose and overly rushed at the same time. The dialogue is some of the worst I’ve ever heard in a “critically acclaimed” film. “On the nose” and “clunky” are descriptions that can’t even begin to describe this script. At no point in the story does Nolan ever transport the audience to the ancient world. You never feel like you’re 3,000 years in the past. You feel like you’re watching modern Americans put on a pageant, because you are. Nobody would be calling this thing a masterpiece if it was made by a director not named Christopher Nolan.

I thought that I would like his previous movie, Oppenheimer, but I did not.

Update: Walsh posted a podcast with more details.

White Single Mom goes Woke; gets Murdered

Here is the story of an American single mom Jamey Carney who followed her Irish roots and moved to a sleepy little Ireland town. She was proud of her Irish nationalist ancestors, and enjoyed the move from New York City to an all-White town.

Sound like a Trump supporter? No, just the opposite.

Jamey Carney had met Ahmed Alsaqer at a pro-Palestine rally in Killarney in September 2025 and then began dating him soon after. Jamey Carney was highly active in left-wing circles, and she had a particular focus on both the pro-Palestinian movement and immigrant advocacy. As such, her relationship with Al-Saqar seemed more than just romantic, it became part of her identity.

Jamey Carney’s social media accounts reflected her ‘progressive’ New York background and were heavily focused on her political activities. Her posts explicitly highlighted her opposition to immigration enforcement with her profile biographies prominently featuring anti-ICE statements and critiques of U.S. border control policies. She actively championed the rights of refugees and asylum seekers, frequently using her platform to lobby for open borders and greater financial assistance for foreign nationals arriving in Ireland. What’s more, her alignment with the left-wing pro-migration movement had bled into her personal life, and as a result she had converted to Islam, as such she regularly took part in Islamic marches, and frequently used Arabic cultural terms of endearment on her profiles.

This did not end well. He murdered her.

The article does not say how she got child custody from the dad.

There is an evolutionary psychology theory that women are sexually attracted to foreign invaders. She would see the Irish men as weak and effective for allowing foreign Third World migrants to take over. So she surrenders to the foreigner.

The Non-White Parasites on Food Stamps

From Twitter.

Changing Concentration of Wealth

I found this on Twitter. I do not know how accurate it is. Common claims about wealth concentration may be wrong.

The Leftist Bias of Major AI LLM Chatbots

This is from a the Wash. Post, a leftist newspaper.

While this bias is real, it is mainly noticeable if you ask for it. Eg, you ask the bot for a political opinion.

A better strategy is ask for a neutral explanation of the arguments and issues. Then the bots are reasonably fair.

The Formula for Science YouTube Success

More and more, YouTube is filled with really good videos, along with garbage, clickbait, and AI slop. Popular channels, like Veritasium, have been sold to private equity firms for increased monetization.

Veritasium has revealed its formula for success:

V = (M + (Q -> E) x (A + B)

The founder, Derek Muller, uses a catchy title and starts telling you that you have been fooled by a misconcention. The he launches into style of questions followed by explanations. He is really good at keeping the viewer engaged.

The final trick is having an A plot interwoven with a B plot. This increases the chance that you will follow one of the plots.

As more and more videos are AI generated, I expect to see more following this formula. It works. I am not sure if I should be happy about getting more polished content, or sad that I am getting manipulated by bots. Regardless, this is the future.

Why Ambulances are so Expensive

Economist David Oks tries to figure out why American ambulances are so expensive:

He sent the bill to his insurance provider, which at first denied the claim, saying that AMR was out of network and that the ride hadn’t been pre-authorized. (Whitten, of course, hadn’t chosen the ambulance, or anything else about the trip.) On appeal, his insurance agreed to cover $9,967 of the charge — better than nothing, but it still left him on the hook for about $3,000. After several failed attempts to contest the bill with AMR, and not wanting it sent to collections to hurt his credit score, he paid the remaining $2,900 or so. The brief ambulance ride from one hospital to another had cost him far more than any other part of the experience.

What Whitten had received was a “surprise bill” — a charge that lands on a patient when they’re treated, without knowledge or consent, by a provider outside their insurer’s network. The insurer pays what they consider reasonable; the provider bills the patient for the difference; and the patient, despite having insurance that’s meant to pay for treatment, is left holding the balance. This is a terrible situation to be in.

It’s also the default way that ambulance billing in the United States works. Each year, roughly three million privately insured Americans take an emergency ambulance ride; about half of them get an out-of-network bill for it, a rate unmatched anywhere else in medicine. And the uninsured have it worse still: with no insurer to absorb any of the charge, they face the full, undiscounted bill on their own.

This has proven quite difficult to fix. When Congress banned surprise billing across virtually the entire healthcare system in 2020, ground ambulances were the great exception. If you’re privately insured and need an emergency ambulance, you’re entering a lottery whose ticket price you’ll learn weeks or months later.

I wonder why anyone pays these bills. As I understand American law, people are not obligated to pay a bill for services that were never negotiated.

Not paying the bill could hurt a credit score, but you say that about any refusal to pay a scammer. Any scammer can send you a bill, and report you for not paying it. The credit bureaus are supposed to remove such items on request, unless there is a court judgment.

French Soccer Pretends to be French

Sports have long tolerated, and even encouraged, trash talk, where fans badmouth the opposition players. Not anymore, I guess.

Politico reports:

Amarilla, a senator with the centrist Authentic Radical Liberal Party (PLRA), published the posts a day after Paraguay’s elimination to France in a tense round-of-16 World Cup match. She referred to Mbappé as a “brute,” mocked his intelligence and questioned his French identity, describing him as a “colonized Cameroonian pretending to be French.” ...

The French Football Federation announced Monday it would file a criminal complaint. “The racist comments made by Paraguayan senator Celeste Amarilla toward Kylian Mbappé are utterly vile and unacceptable,” the federation said in a statement. “These statements are criminal and condemnable. They must be prosecuted here and everywhere.”

Criminal prosecution against a foreign politician rooting for the losing team?

France use to be proud of its national identity. Now it staffs its national soccer team with African immigrants.

The Foolish Opinion on Birthright Citizenship

Pres. Trump wants the Supreme Court to reconsider its birthright citizenship opinion.

I would say that the Roberts interpretation of jurisdiction does not make any sense in the light of:

1. USA claims jurisdiction over the Venezuela head of state.

2. the Consitution uses "within the Jurisdiction" and "subject to the jurisdiction" to mean different things.

Also, no one ever determined that the 14A entitles the kids of sojourners and illegals to be citizens. We had opinions saying that domicile was required, but lazy bureaucrats accepted birth certificates as proof of citizenship.

Even if comments of Reconstruction Senators imply a broad citizenship rule, we now have millions of kids of sojourners and illegals. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. It is crazy to say that a 1868 sentence cannot have any common sense exceptions. This decision cripples USA sovereignty.

If this decision stands, the President may be forced to deny all visas to women of child-bearing age in order to control sovereignty. Then the Roberts decision will be considered terrible.

Stockholm Syndrome affects Women

Here is a new video on Stockholm syndrome:

Stockholm syndrome, psychological response wherein a captive begins to identify closely with his or her captors, as well as with their agenda and demands.

The name of the syndrome is derived from a botched bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden. In August 1973 four employees of Sveriges Kreditbank were held hostage in the bank’s vault for six days. During the standoff, a seemingly incongruous bond developed between captive and captor. One hostage, during a telephone call with Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme, stated that she fully trusted her captors but feared that she would die in a police assault on the building.

The most infamous example of Stockholm syndrome may be that involving kidnapped newspaper heiress Patricia Hearst.

The syndrome mainly affects women.

I wonder about those who defend criminals and foreign invaders. Maybe some of them are suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

In another new video:

In this episode of Based Camp, Simone and Malcolm Collins dive into one of the strangest social phenomena of our time: why does public sympathy for aggressors often increase after horrific attacks? From 9/11 to Charlie Hebdo to October 7th, they examine the shocking data showing spikes in pro-Muslim and pro-Palestine sentiment right after major acts of violence.

They have data to back up the Moslem sympathies. They have a theory about "victim blaming".

They say that public opinion shift against Israel after the October 7 attacks in 2023, and before the Israel retatliation against Gaza. So it appears that acts of terrorism generate sympathies for the terrorists.

Stockholm itself is famous for being run by feminists, and for sympathizing with Moslem invaders.

I am not sure about the explanations, but I do think that we need to account for large numbers of women sympathizing with civization-destroying criminals.

Related book:

The Sweden Syndrome: How Elites Commit National Self-Destruction
by Karl-Olov Arnstberg (Author) Format: Hardcover
4.5 4.5 out of 5 stars (9)

The present work is a thorough, clinical description of the symptoms and etiology of what the author calls ‘the Sweden syndrome’. Arnstberg traces the historical process that converted Sweden from a nationalistic Folkhemmet which treated the country like a family into a multicultural administrative zone that perversely prides itself on privileging the foreigner over the native. The book is called The Sweden Syndrome, but the broad stokes of the disease that Arnstberg describes can be seen in practically every Western country. Arnstberg’s concise analysis of this complex mass psychosis is a service not only to the present, but to future generations. — John Carter

Sweden’s elite decided that national suicide in the name of multiculturalism is needed to atone for their percieved sins. Sweden will no longer exist as we know it within a few decades unless radical action is taken. Arnstberg lays out how devastating the self-destruction has become.

Democrat Oyster Farmer in Big Trouble

Graham Platner is being forced out of the Maine race for the US Senate, but I am wondering how his misbehavior is possible if he is 100% disabled:

Platner is not required to disclose his disability benefits from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. But he told News Center Maine last month that he has a 100% disability rating for “a couple herniated discs,” injuries to his shoulders and knees, and post-traumatic stress disorder from his four deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. He receives about $4,800 a month.

In response to questions from the Press Herald, a campaign spokesperson said Platner could take either “an owner’s draw” or a salary from the oyster business and it wouldn’t affect his disability benefits. Instead, he has chosen to reinvest that money back into the company.

Platner has now withdrawn.

America was a Product of a Religious Enlightenment

I asked the Grok AI LLM to comment on this:

American Revolution was a product of the religious enlightenment that occurred 20 years earlier.

The comment is a partial truth that's oversimplified and imprecise, but it gestures at a real historical dynamic. The American Revolution (1775–1783) drew on both Enlightenment rationalism and vibrant Protestant religious energies, which had been stirring in the colonies for decades. Calling it a "product of the religious enlightenment" 20 years earlier (roughly the 1750s–early 1760s) isn't standard terminology, but it captures something important about how religious revivalism and moderate Enlightenment ideas reinforced each other in America.

Was There a "Religious Enlightenment"?

Yes, in a broader sense. Historians like David Sorkin describe a "Religious Enlightenment" across Europe (and influencing America) in the 18th century: a moderate strand of Enlightenment thought that sought to reconcile reason, science, and religious faith rather than rejecting religion outright (as more radical French Enlightenment figures like Voltaire sometimes did). It emphasized "reasonable belief," religious tolerance, moral philosophy grounded in natural law, and personal piety over rigid dogma or hierarchy.

In the American colonies, this overlapped with (and was amplified by) the First Great Awakening (peaking 1730s–1740s, with effects continuing into the 1750s–1760s). Key figures included Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield, who promoted emotional, personal conversion experiences, direct access to God (bypassing established clergy), and the idea that ordinary people could challenge authority. This wasn't purely "Enlightenment" (which stressed cool reason), but it shared themes of individualism, anti-hierarchical thinking, and questioning tradition.

The timing in the comment is off by a bit—the Awakening's height was 20–40 years before the Revolution—but its cultural ripples (new denominations, inter-colonial networks, empowered laity) were still fresh in the 1760s–1770s. The Stamp Act crisis (1765) and later events occurred against this backdrop.

Did It Make People More or Less Religious? Or a New View?

• More religious in practice, with a new emphasis on personal experience: The Great Awakening was a revival that countered the perceived "deadness" of established churches. It increased church attendance in many areas, split congregations (Old Lights vs. New Lights), boosted evangelical groups like Baptists and Methodists, and fostered a more democratic, emotional style of faith. It made religion feel immediate and accessible rather than formal or inherited.

• Not less religious overall: Unlike the more secular strains of the European Enlightenment, America's version didn't broadly erode faith. Many colonists blended Awakening-style piety with Enlightenment ideas. Religion remained central to daily life and politics.

• A new view of religion: It promoted individualism ("priesthood of all believers" on steroids), skepticism of religious (and by extension political) authority, and the notion that liberty and virtue were divinely ordained. This "new view" was Protestant, often Calvinist-inflected, but open to reason and moral philosophy. Many Founding-era Americans saw rights as coming from God (or "Nature's God"), not kings or parliaments.

How Did This Influence the American Founding?

The Revolution and founding weren't purely secular or purely religious—they were a unique synthesis:

• Religious fuel for resistance: Clergy (the "black-robed regiment") preached that resisting tyranny was a Christian duty, framing taxes and British policies as moral and providential issues. Biblical language (e.g., Exodus, liberty as God's gift) was everywhere in sermons and pamphlets. The Awakening built inter-colonial networks and a sense of shared identity that made coordinated rebellion easier.

• Enlightenment ideas translated through religion: Thinkers like John Locke (natural rights, social contract) were filtered through a Protestant lens. Ideas of consent, equality before God/law, and republican virtue resonated because of the Awakening's democratizing effects. Many Founders (e.g., John Witherspoon, a Presbyterian minister and signer) embodied this blend.

• Founders' own beliefs: Varied widely. Many were conventional Christians (e.g., Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams); others were Deists or liberal Christians influenced by Enlightenment reason (Franklin, Jefferson, Paine). Deism posited a distant Creator who endowed rights via reason/nature, without much emphasis on miracles or dogma. The founding documents reflect this: "endowed by their Creator" (Declaration) alongside no established national church and religious liberty (Constitution/First Amendment). This was pragmatic—avoiding Europe's religious wars while assuming a moral, religious citizenry.

• Long-term impact: The synthesis supported religious disestablishment, tolerance, and the view that a free republic required virtuous (often religiously informed) citizens. It wasn't secularism as we might think of it today, nor theocracy.

Critique of the comment: It's insightful in rejecting a purely secular "Enlightenment = Revolution" narrative (a common oversimplification). Edmund Burke and others noted America's energetic Protestantism as key to its "free spirit." However, it overstates by calling it "the product" of a specific "religious enlightenment" 20 years prior—ignoring economic grievances, classical republicanism, English common law traditions, and the broader, ongoing interplay. The Awakening was more revivalist than "Enlightenment," and the causal link is contributory, not deterministic. Historians still debate the exact weight.

In short, the American founding succeeded partly because religious energies and Enlightenment reason mutually reinforced each other in a way that was distinctively colonial American. The comment gets the fusion right but simplifies the timeline and causality.

How Foreigners Drove Up Housing Costs

News:

A new Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas working paper estimates the record surge in illegal immigration during the Biden administration boosted employment while driving up home prices by as much as 30% and rent by 20%.

The paper combined immigration court records with government administrative data to create the first ever calculation of how a wave of 7 million illegal immigrants from 2021 through 2024 affected local labor and housing markets.

"From early 2021 to early 2024, the U.S. experienced an unprecedented boom in unauthorized immigration, followed by a rapid slowdown beginning in mid-2024. We provide the first systematic empirical assessment of the labor- and housing-market effects of this episode," the working paper said.

Isn't this obvious? We imported millions of migrants, and did not build housing for them. Supply and demand. More demand and the same supply, and all Americans had to pay increased housing costs.

Some Americans owned rental units and profited from this, but overall it is bad to have to pay much more for housing.

One Battle After Another

I see a lot of online complaints about Citizen Vigilante, particularly from Mohammedans who disavow the responsibility for the damage they are doing to Europe.

Last year's movie One Battle After Another is now on streaming services, and I tried to watch it. It was widely praised:

One Battle After Another received widespread critical acclaim and numerous accolades. At the 98th Academy Awards, it won six out of the thirteen awards it was nominated for: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor (Penn), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Film Editing, and Best Casting, becoming the inaugural recipient for the latter. It also received one win from a record seven nominations at the 32nd Actor Awards; three wins at the 31st Critics' Choice Awards, including Best Picture; four wins at the 83rd Golden Globes, including Best Motion Picture – Musical or Comedy; and six wins at the 79th British Academy Film Awards, including Best Film. The film was listed by the American Film Institute as one of the top ten films of 2025 and won five awards from the National Board of Review, including Best Film.

There is a whole Wikipedia article on its List of accolades, and there are about 100.

No, this movie is much more offensive. The whole movie is about terrorism and interracial sexual manipulation. While the critics eat up this garbage, the public not so much.

The film ended up being a box-office disappointment, falling short of its estimated $300 million break-even point. ...

Author, podcaster, and screenwriter Bret Easton Ellis alleged, "It's kind of shocking to see these kind [sic] of accolades for – I'm sorry, it's not a very good movie – because of its political ideology, and it's so obvious that's what they're responding to [...] Why it's considered a masterpiece, the greatest film of the decade, the greatest film ever made [is] because it really aligns with this kind of leftist sensibility."

I was not able to watch very much of it.

Jefferson did not Father Kids with a Slave

A good new video explains:

"I really thought that Thomas Jefferson having children with Sally Hemings was a settled fact. I was wrong." –Ken

That's right, it is not a settled fact, and probably wrong.

Just today, a NY Times podcast said:

In the late '90s, we get a truly explosive book about Sally Hemings, one of Jefferson's slaves, by the historian Annette Gordon-Reed, and elevates all these accounts that have been lost that Jefferson in fact fathered children with Hemings. And then a year later, there's even DNA testing to prove that she's completely right.

This, uh, 200-year-old sex scandal returned to the headlines last week with news of scientific proof now.— that has confirmed Jefferson's sexual liaison with a woman named Sally Hemings. ...

Jefferson is being depicted variously as a rapist, a hypocrite, and a dirty old man.

No, this is not true. You can read the details on Wikipedia, or follow a court case that might resolve it. In short, DNA shows that some descendants of Hemings are also descendant from someone in Jefferson's family, but there is good reason to think it was a brother.

Celebrate the Fourth, not Slavery

Josh Blackman writes:

I recently took my young children to the public library for an early celebration of America's 250th Birthday. Perhaps naively, I expected a patriotic gathering that would help my kids feel proud of America. No such luck. During story time, the librarian could have selected any children's book about American history, independence, or what made America exceptional. Instead, she chose a book that spent every page talking about immigrants coming to America. The second page depicted Africans in chains being transported against their will on boats to the United States. Then every subsequent page repeated that maxim that people were allowed to come to America without regard to their race, gender, or religion. One page showed political refugees from the war-torn Middle East. Another page showed migrant workers from Mexico. And so on. I doubt any of the young children had the slightest clue what the book was trying to convey. But the kindly librarian thought this book was not only appropriate for an America 250 celebration but was important for toddlers to learn from.

Libraries today often have flags and signs promoting homosexuality, transgenderism, illegal migrants, and White hatred.

Immigrants were never more than 15% of the USA population, until recently. Slavery was not something that affected most people.

I am not against telling about slavery in history books, but they should get the story in perspective, and tell the truth. Those slave were enslaved in Africa by African, and the USA Constitution abolished the slave trade in 1808. Most slaves were better off in the USA, and very few went back to Africa when they were freed.

Most Charity is Wasted

People keep complaining that a small part of the fortunes of Elon Musk and other billionaires could solve a lot of human problems. I doubt it.

News:

MacKenzie Scott has become one of the most active philanthropists of our time. After all, she's given away more than $26 billion during the past few years to thousands of organizations through her foundation Yield Giving.

While many of her recipients had never received a donation of that size and many have called them life-changing gifts, not everyone sees her work in the same way. Take Elon Musk, who recently became the world's first trillionaire, who thinks Scott's giving is actually making the world "worse off." ...

Melinda French Gates has also been openly frustrated with her fellow billionaire class, saying those who previously signed the Giving Pledge—a promise for the ultrawealthy to give away the majority of their wealth—could be doing more.

So we have an experiments. Large portions of the fortunes of Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos went to their wives in divorce settlements, and then given to charity.

How are we better off? What problems have been solved?

The California billionaire tax has now qualified for the ballot, and the governor is running for President on a promise for a nationwide billionaire tax. An economist says confiscating the wealth will not enrich other Americans.

Why Today's Ads Feature Non-Whites

I always assumed that ads are filled with non-whites in order to appeal to non-white customers, or to pacify woke leftists.

Maybe not. A 2021 study claimed: Neuroscience shows value of proactively diverse casting.

That is, the non-white casting increases the appeal to Whites, without really really appealing to non-whites. So ads feature Blacks in order to sell to Whites, not Blacks.

I am not sure I believe this, and the study is paywalled, so I don't know if it has any validity. But it does not matter what I believe. If the advertisers believe it, then ads will be full of Blacks.

I would think that if White man sees an ad featuring Blacks, the first reaction is that he is not in the target market for the product, and ignore the ad. Or if the ad has a strong woke left theme, then the viewer will think that the product is for woke leftists.

Blaming Christianity for the Fall of Rome

Someone on Twitter blamed Christianity for the fall of the Roman Empire, and Elon Musk commented that Gibbon's famous book said so.

On Twitter, Grok often does fact checks, and posted:

@grok, If Christianity was a key driver, as supposed by Gibbon, why didn’t we see the same decline of civilization in the East? Why do modern historians criticise Gibbon’s take?

Gibbon claimed Christianity sapped Roman civic virtue and military spirit in the West. The Christian Eastern Empire (Byzantium) avoided that fate and endured another ~1,000 years, aided by stronger administration, Constantinople’s walls, and different geography/pressures—showing other factors mattered more for the West’s 476 collapse.

Modern historians fault Gibbon’s heavy emphasis on religion as Enlightenment bias. They see multifaceted causes (invasions, economic woes, plagues, overextension) and view Late Antiquity as gradual transformation with continuities, not religion-driven catastrophe.

The fall of Rome led to some setbacks, but Europe recovered to be far better than ever long before the Enlightenment of the 16th and 17th centuries.

The surprising thing is that the Roman Empire lasted as long as it did.

Update: New Lex Fridman podcast on Roman Empire.

Atheists believe in Determinism

I try to understand intellectuals who deny free will.

They argue that all of everyone's choices are determined by laws of nature, and yet they often talk about choices they make, and they try to persuade others to make better choices.

Here is a leftist-atheist-evolutionist in his latest of many rants against free will:

There need be no “free will” to have morality, for even though we lack free will, we are still malleable beings and can alter our behavior depending on society’s “moral code” and the praise and punishment that go with it.

How can we alter our behavior if we have no free will? What is the use of praise or punishment, if no one else has free will either?

Since Egnor is a neuroscientist, the audience probably buys this the most. Egnor cites two bits of evidence here. First, as he says, during operations that involve stimulating parts of the brain, he says, “Patients asked to raise their arms at some point could tell whether they raised arm voluntarily or due to electrical stimulation.” And they could tell the difference. But that is not “free will”, ...

There is a difference between raising your arm voluntarily, out of your own free will, and being forced to raise it because a brain surgeon triggered a neuron.

He complains that Egnor ignores a 2013 study that concludes:

Neuroscience cannot straightforwardly accommodate a concept of “conscious free will”, independent of brain activity [42].

I accept that free will involves brain activity. I do not accept that there is any law of nature prohibiting free will.

They cite experiments by Libet that supposedly showed that voluntary decisions are preceded by brain activity. This means that a decision takes more than a millisecond, as the brain takes some time to make it. It has nothing to do with free will.

when you push a button at a time your brain determines, and think you did it of your own “free will.” The problem with that, and the reason Libet and his successors have done such provocative studies, is that brain signals (fMRI, etc.) say you’re about to push a button before you become conscious of making that decision.

So your brain prepares to push the button before it pushes. It baffles me that anyone thinks this refutes free will.

Responses are posted here and here.

I have never said that people are or should be deemed “morally responsible” for their good and bad acts. That would assume the ability to freely choose to be moral or immoral, but I am a determinist who rejects that kind of “choice.” What I have said, and which anybody who reads what I’ve written will know, is that you should be held responsible for what you do, but not morally responsible.  That is, you are responsible if you are the person who performed the act. That, to anyone with two neurons to rub together, is absolutely compatible with determinism.

So no one can make any moral choices. Curiously, he goes into a big rant against another site for plagiarism. Web content is mostly generated by robots today, and of course the robots are deterministic plagiarizers.

If no one has any free will, then all the humans posting online are just deterministic automatons who are not much different from the robot plagiarizers that he complains about. Including himself.

He concludes, to rousing applause, that “Free will is God’s fingerprint in us.”

Here we see that religion, tricked out in the trappings of science, has led Egnor to reject determinism and materialism because they don’t involve his Catholic God.

I wonder if that is the real issue. Catholics and most other Christians believe in free will, and Atheists believe in determinism. Rejecting free will is a way of expressing rejection of Christianity. The other prominent anti-free-will scholars are all strident Atheists. They like to present themselves and logical, scientific, and enlightened, but what they say does not make any sense, is not grounded in science, and is terrible advice on how to live.

Citizen Vigilante

The new movie, Citizen Vigilante, starring Armie Hammer in the title role, has been released on Twitter and banned in Germany.

Audiences like it, and critics hate it. Watch it now, as it might be gone tomorrow.

Based on the controversy, I was expecting it to be an anti-migrant movie. Actually it was more of a Batman movie. The protagonist is an American in Germany, with inherited wealth, and his own personal issues.

The title is odd, as he is a vigilante, but not a citizen in Europe where he goes on his rampage.

It does get a little political at the end, where he blames Islamists and woke leftists. Those are two very different groups.

Update: The movie is set in some European country, but not Germany. The protagonist is a psychopath, with unclear motivations. Some of the scenes appear pointless.

It is a little like the Charles Bronson 1972 movie Death Wish. A lot of violence in pursuit of revenge on criminals and enablers.

So not really a great movie. I thought it was interesting because it directly appealed to citizens to do something about migrant criminals terrorizing people, while the authorities do nothing. For that, it is anti-woke.

Update: Writer-director Uwe Boll is interviewed about the movie. He says it was filmed in Croatia, with the migrants being Moroccan, Hungarian, and a Jew.

How the NY Times Hates Dads

I found this comment on how the NY Times celebrated Fathers Day:

The New York Times Unbelievable Attack on Fatherhood
Alex Berenson exposes a shocking trend in mainstream media: the cultural elite's apparent contempt for traditional fatherhood and masculinity. Looking closely at recent New York Times opinion pieces on being a dad, the authors included three women, a trans man [woman who sometimes dresses as a man], and two childless men, but not a single actual father.

The trans article was really strange. There was also a podcast interview of a man who wrote a book about his deceased father, and mostly complained that he had extramarital affairs.

AI LLM Story beats Humans for Prize

Harper's Bazaar magazine announces:

Read the winning entry of the 2026 Harper's Bazaar Short Story Competition

The story chosen by our all-star judging panel is published here

It was supposed to be a human competition, with no AI allowed.

An AI LLM validity tester says that it is 100% AI. I cannot tell. Read it yourself.

Wikipedia Bans its Founder

The NY Post reports:

Left-leaning website Wikipedia has taken the drastic action of permanently blocking one of its founders from editing pages — after he had campaigned to make it more balanced and fair.

Last month, Larry Sanger launched WikiProject Intellectual Diversity (WID), a group designed to help reinforce the online encyclopedia’s “original, firm commitment to intellectual diversity,” by emphasizing neutrality and transparency.

However, Sanger — who coined the name “Wikipedia,” drafted the site’s foundational set of rules and guidelines, and launched the site alongside Jimmy Wales in 2001 — is now indefinitely blocked from editing, the most drastic action the site can take against an editor.

It is bizarre that a cabal of anonymous Wikipedia editors would ban someone for having a Wikipedia discussion outside Wikipedia.

I have posted here about Wikipedia controversies occasionally, and I did not realize that I could be accused of the sin of canvassing:

To justify the ban against Sanger, editors categorized Sangers’ recent efforts — most notably his intellectual diversity project — as “canvassing.” Wikipedia policy describes canvassing as alerting other editors on the site about editorial activity “with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way.”

Keir Starmer Resigns

News: U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer Resigns.

Britain is getting its 7th prime minister in 10 years.

Ten years ago, Britain voted for Brexit in order to get their country back. They got the opposite. Those 7 prime ministers flood the country with Third World migrants.

The Slave Trade was Banned in 1808

In light of confusion about Juneteenth, I wondered when slavery was really abolished.

The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves (also called the Slave Importation Act) was passed by Congress on March 2, 1807, and signed by President Thomas Jefferson.

Effective date: It took effect on January 1, 1808 — the earliest date allowed by the U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 9, which barred Congress from prohibiting the "Migration or Importation" of persons before 1808).

Britain passed its own Slave Trade Act in 1807 as well.

It still took decades of dispute and a Civil War to decide what to do with the slaves. And a few slaves were smuggled in, after the ban.

Canada is Burning Christian Churches

This story is a couple of years old, but the problem continues:

At least 33 Canadian churches have burned to the ground since May 2021. So far, 24 are confirmed arsons

CBC investigation finds steep rise in church fires since reports of potential graves at residential schools ...

"I don't think white people came here and burned this down."

More on Wikipedia.

The arson was triggered by a story about gravesites that turned out to be a hoax.

Why We have the Ultra-Rich

I asked: Is there a natural scaling law that governs how many millionaires and billionaires will be in a market economy?

Yes, there is a well-established "natural" scaling law—rooted in the Pareto distribution (a power-law distribution)—that describes the number of millionaires, billionaires, and ultra-wealthy individuals in market economies.

This isn't a rigid deterministic rule but an emergent statistical pattern observed across many economies and historical periods. It arises from multiplicative processes in wealth accumulation (e.g., returns on capital, networks, innovation, and "rich-get-richer" dynamics), where small advantages compound over time. See Wikipedia.

Key Concepts

• Pareto Distribution Basics: Vilfredo Pareto observed in the early 20th century that wealth (and income at the top) often follows a power-law tail: the probability of someone having wealth w or more is roughly proportional to w^{-α}, where α (the Pareto index) is typically around 1.5–3 for wealth (often ~2–2.5 in modern data). This creates a "fat tail"—extreme concentrations are more common than in a normal (Gaussian) distribution.
  • For example, it leads to approximations like the 80/20 rule (top 20% hold ~80% of wealth), but the top is even more skewed.
• Implications for Counts of Millionaires/Billionaires:
  • The number of people above a high wealth threshold scales predictably with the total population and overall wealth in the economy.
  • In a growing market economy with multiplicative returns (investments, businesses scaling), the tail thickens or thins based on factors like economic growth, returns on capital (r) vs. overall growth (g), taxes, and institutions. Models show r > g (Piketty-style) naturally produces fatter Pareto tails.
  • Empirical fits: Studies of Forbes billionaires and national wealth data show power-law behavior in the upper tail. The number of billionaires can be reasonably extrapolated from the broader wealth distribution's Pareto parameters.

Real-World Observations

• Millionaires: Global numbers (tens of millions) grow with rising GDP, asset prices (stocks, real estate), and middle-to-upper class expansion. The U.S. has a large share due to its large, dynamic economy. Projections often tie this to economic growth rates.
• Billionaires: Much rarer (thousands globally). Their count follows the power-law extrapolation from the top 1% or 0.1% wealth distribution. Cross-country data shows a correlation between overall inequality (Pareto exponent) and billionaire density.
• Stability and Variation: The exponent α isn't fixed—it responds to policy and conditions (e.g., progressive taxes or wars can "thin" the tail by reducing α's effect; tech booms or low interest rates can fatten it). But the power-law form persists across market economies.

This pattern appears in firm sizes, city populations, and other complex systems with preferential attachment or multiplicative noise—common in free-market settings where success breeds further success (e.g., via capital compounding, talent clustering, or winner-take-most markets).

Caveats

• It's a statistical regularity, not a law of nature like gravity. Institutions, culture, technology, and policy influence the exact parameters (e.g., more entrepreneurship might increase the number at the top without changing the shape much).
• Data debates exist: Pure Pareto fits the extreme tail well but may blend with log-normal in the upper-middle; some studies question perfect fits for Forbes lists.
• Normative angle: This doesn't prescribe what should happen—debates rage over whether extreme concentrations are efficient (innovation incentives) or problematic (rent-seeking, instability). But the scaling pattern itself is a robust descriptive feature of market economies.

In short, market economies naturally generate power-law wealth distributions, which predictably determine how many cross millionaire or billionaire thresholds as the economy scales. This has been modeled and observed for over a century. For deeper dives, look into works by Pareto, Piketty/Jones on top wealth dynamics, or empirical power-law studies of billionaire data.

Happy Juneteenth Day

On Twitter, there are still endless complaints about Karmelo Anthony going to prison for murdering a White boy.

Here is an example of blaming the victim:

A Howard University professor tore into the victim-impact statement delivered by the father of slain Texas teen Austin Metcalf, arguing that the teen’s death “did not begin with the knife” wielded by Karmelo Anthony but instead that his father’s parenting style was to be blamed as well.

Dr. Stacey Patton, a professor at Howard University’s School of Communications, penned an opinion piece titled “Dear Jeff Metcalf: Your Son Is Dead Because You Failed to Teach Him That Black Boys Have Boundaries” to Substack on Wednesday on Substack, where she insinuated Anthony was acting out of self-defense.

“YOU failed to teach your boy that Black children have boundaries,” Patton wrote. “YOU failed teach humility, restraint, or the sacred fact that another person’s body is not your jurisdiction. YOU failed to teach him that another child’s space is not a challenge to be conquered. YOU failed to teach him that “community” does not mean white boys get to decide who belongs and who does not.”

No, Austin Metcalfe and his father did nothing wrong.

Here is a response:

After 7 decades of "civil rights" activism, we have a huge black population that believes murder ought to be legal if against a white person.

Black students ought to pretend to be white on college applications, since we are said to live in a "white supremacist" society. Strangely, they do not.

That's because the truth is this: white people, in the 7 decades since the civil rights movement, crippled their own children with preferential policies that favored much less qualified black applicants in schooling and employment. ...

We can hope that the Karmelo Anthony case accelerates the coming of the day when whites say: we have done everything humanly possible for you, and received only hatred and ingratitude in return. You are on your own now.

It continues to amaze me that Blacks picks issues like this to complaint about. It is as if they want to brag about killing Whites.

Update: The court released the trial evidence. Anthony admits to the stabbing. The only excuse he gives is: "He put his hands on me." He does not claim that he was threatened with bodily injury, or anything like that.

California now Certifies LGBT Businesses

California now requires utility companies to buy products and services from women, minority, and LGBT companies:

This scheme raises an obvious question: How does a business qualify as officially gay? Paperwork. Supplier Clearinghouse, a group that certifies firms for the CPUC program, features a list of qualifications linked on its website. Applicants can secure certification by providing a letter from an “LGBT organization” attesting to their sexual preferences; proof that a newspaper identified them as “LGBT”; or three letters from “personal contacts” written “on company letterhead” attesting to their homosexual orientation. Corporate officials who “falsely represent” their business as gay face up to a year in county jail.

It is hard to see how an LGBT company would be certified, or how any certification would be proven wrong.

Why Google Lagged in Deploying AI LLM

The AI companies lie to us all the time,

[10:46] [Bloomberg tv] You raise I think a really interesting point. I mean, was there any hesitation anywhere at Google to say, "We're doing pretty well in search. Why do we need to disrupt ourselves on this?" It's a sort of a form of innovators dilemma. Was there any sense of, you know what, we're doing pretty well, why rock the boat?

[Nick Fox, Google’s Senior Vice President of Knowledge and Information] Never. [music] Because because we've seen it before and we understand that if you stand still, if if you don't innovate for users, you'll become irrelevant. And and that's that's [music] so clear. We know that. We know that time and time again. And so we we see a new technology come along, we jump on it. [music] We invent the new technologies in most cases. But we see it, we jump on it and [music] and we know that if we innovate for users, it will be it will be expansionary.

No, this is false. About ten years ago, Google management was presented with the possibility that a Google Search question could be just answered directly instead of giving the user a list of links. About five years ago, OpenAI and Microsoft starting answering user queries directly. Google refused to do it, because it threatened the Google advertising model.

Google only put AI LLM answers into Search after ChatGPT and Bing were doing it for millions of users, and Google was getting left behind.

Some people think AI is an invention of the last several years. But it was in 2015 that Elon Musk cofounded OpenAI, based on a concern that Google might already have an insurmountable lead in AI technology that will dominate the future. Yes, Google did have a big lead, and still has some of the best technology. It was refusing to give AI Search answers, as a business decision to protect its advertising revenue.

The Stupid Dislosure Day Plot

Another blockbuster movie I will skip is Disclosure Day.

I do not expect space alien movies to be realistic, but this is too silly. The whole movie is about how space aliens secretly invade Earth, subjugate some humans, and announce there presence by having a couple carry out a plot to show some video clips on a tv weather broadcast.

None of it makes any sense. The aliens could just show themselves, or some of their advanced technology. No one watches tv, and no one would believe some pirated video clips.

That's it. The 145 minutes ends with the disclosure, and a suggestion that the aliens might have a message for us. I guess the message itself was saved for a sequel, as it is not disclosed.

This is not really a spoiler, as it is all revealed in the trailer, which goes further and has Director Steven Spielberg saying:

How will disclosure change us? I believe for the better. It will remind us of our capacity for empathy.

And that there is something bigger out there. Than just ourselves.

But the movie ends with the disclosure of the space aliens, so we do not find out how the disclosure changes humans.

Spielberg is promoting this movie as if there really is a space alien coverup. He says:

The witnesses have been coming forward ever since Roswell.

He also acts as if it is a good thing to have human puppets who are mind-controlled by space aliens.

He said one of his favorite movies was The Day the Earth Stood Still, a 1951 movie where a space alien flying saucer makes a dramatic and forceful appearance, and enslaves humans to be under robot domination, so that we will live in peace. Spielberg obviously thinks that would be a good outcome.

I realize that this Spielberg movie is just entertainment, but it is being sold as a documentary, and as subjugation by aliens being a good thing.

I question the sanity of people who believe this stuff. Based on what science we know, I think that other-world intelligent life in our galaxy is unlikely. If there is such life, the idea that they have been secretly visiting us in a few places like Roswell is absurd. And the abduction stories are absurd.

And of course the idea that space aliens will use telepathy to teach humans to have more empathy is crazy absurd.

How a Vatican II Statement Favored the Jews

The Roman Catholic Church has always taught that it is the one true church, and invited everyone to join. In particular, they believe that they are better than other religions.

Other religions also believe themselves to be better.

A shift occurred in the 1960s when this teaching was considered bigoted, or anti-semitic, or insufficiently tolerant. A church official even said:

[37:37] The Christian churches no longer wanted to convert the Jews. While they may not be sure of the theological grounds that dispensed them from that mission, the churches have become aware that asking Jews to become Christian is a spiritual way of blotting out their existence and thus only reinforces the effects of the Holocaust.

This podcast goes into detail on how this spokesman was actually a gay Jew, Gregory Baum, who had infiltrated the Church. Somehow he got Vatican II to issue a statement favorable to the Jews.

Occasionally I hear of Jews making demands on the Catholic Church, as if the Pope's job is to get the Jews a free pass into Heaven.

Elon Musk's Ambitious Project

I go on Twitter and I find:

A lot of Blacks complaining about Karmelo Anthony being convicted for murder. They say a Black jury would have acquitted him. They mention Whites who got acquitted or lesser sentences. They complain that the victim's dad used the word "watermelon", as if that justifies murder. They demand reparations for slavery centuries ago.

A lot of Democrats want to tax Elon Musk, and give his money to some welfare program. They say no one should be allowed to get billions of dollars.

The curious thing about Musk is that he is raising money to do what the consensus says cannot be done. And he has a track record of doing the impossible.

If Musk were not so rich, no one would be trying to put data centers in space. It would not happen for another century.

Musk's crime is that he has sold investors on the most ambitious, risky, and potentially rewarding plan ever carried out. I do not believe he can do it. But is it bad that he is trying? No, it is tremendously exciting. It is capitalism at its best.

It is hard for me to understand the people who want to take away his rockets, and use the money to give to the poor. We would still be living in grass huts if civilization never tried to advance.

Gay Animal Sex Documentary

Story from a couple of months ago:

Trans Actor Elliot Page Hopes Her Gay Animal Sex Documentary Helps Children Come Out of the Closet

Elliot Page is reportedly narrating a new documentary examining same-sex interactions and so-called “gender fluidity” within the animal world. The transgender actor says she hopes the film exploring gay animal sex, Second Nature, will make queer kids feel less alone.

Ellen Page is rumored to be playing a man in The Odyssey (2026 film). Several other odd casting choices are rumored. I am waiting to see if the movie is really that silly. It might just be marketing hype.

This whole subject of gay animal sex is grossly exaggerated. I am not sure that there are any legitimate examples of it, or any that have any relevance to humans.

California Elections are Rigged

The hottest topics today.

Karmelo Anthony was convicted of murder. A Black boy who stabbed an unarmed White boy to death at a school track meet. Anthony took a knife to a track meet, entered another team's tent, picked a fight, and stabbed in the heart. Blacks are loudly complaining.

H-1B visas and jobs are still being given to Indians, while more competent Americans are being laid off. It is a scam.

Spencer Pratt had a populist campaign for LA mayor, and appeared to easily qualify for the runoff based on the election day counts, but thousands of late and unverified ballots have eliminated him.

Ramaswamy does not Define Americanism

Politico has a long article about how Ohio Republicans like Vivek Ramaswamy for some pro-Trump and other views, but not for his race, religion, and wealth.

This does not identify the problem.

Ramaswamy claims the authority to define what it means to be American. He presents himself as personifying the American dream. He justifies importing Indian workers as being better than inferior Americans.

No, he got rich from being a con man. Not from hard work, or creating new products, or addressing new markets. He made his money by tricking investors into buying into a worthless product.

This is not the American dream. He does not speak for Americans. His description of what it means to be American is wrong and offensive.

America’s Fertility Rate Crisis

WSJ reports:

In April, the federal government reported that America’s total fertility rate — the number of children a woman is statistically expected to have over her lifetime — had dropped to 1.57. The alarm was immediate, with lawmakers and pundits invoking the specter of a graying, shrinking America unable to fund its elders. ...

The explanations for why Americans are having fewer children, or having them later, aren’t mysterious. They follow from changes most people wouldn’t want to reverse.

Goldin points to women’s agency as the main variable. In virtually every country where fertility has fallen, she says, women have gained increased access to education, careers and the ability to invest in their own futures.

In other words, teach women that they have the unilateral power over birth control and abortion, and they will stop having babies.

The article discusses financial difficulties and how IVF could be used more. But the poor are having more babies than the middle class, and people have reproduced for millennia without ivf.

There is, of course, one obvious answer to the worry that there won’t be enough young workers to support an aging population, and that is immigration. Bring in working-age people and a populace can rebalance the retired old with the productive young without waiting 20 years for babies to grow up.

The WSJ is conservative on some issues, but it is always finding excuses to import foreign labor. No, that is not a solution.

Google is Anti White

If you doubt that Google is anti-White, try googling American inventors. Or google white moms.

The inventors are mostly Black. The images for white moms are mostly with half-Black babies. Even the articles are on topics like CDC Reports High Out-of-Wedlock Births for White Moms with Black Fathers. This is what you are being brainwashed to accept.

Consider this comparison of Pepsi ads, from recent and 50 years ago. The people look like they are from different countries.

NY Law abolishes terms Father, Mother

Snopes says this is true:

New York lawmakers passed a bill changing the words "mother" and "father" to "gestating parent" and "non-gestating parent" in parts of state law.

The reasons given do not even make any sense.

Under the updated text, "gestating parent" refers to a person who carries and gives birth to a child, while a "non-gestating parent" does not — such as the father or the non-carrying woman in a lesbian relationship. While parents share a legal bond with their children, they do not always share a biological one, as seen in cases of surrogacy or adoption.

We have had child adoption for centuries, so there is nothing new about parents not having a biological bond. Furthermore, in the case of surrogacy, the gestating parent is the pregnant surrogate, and not the legal parent.

Trying to Stop Whites from Living with other Whites

The NY Times is on the warpath against Return to the Land, a small private Arkansas community. It just podcast a very favorable interview of a woman suing because she was not admitted.

Michelle considers herself white. If you look at her, she looks white. She is a practicing Christian, but by blood, she’s Jewish. Her mom’s family is Jewish. According to the “Return of the Land,” she is not a Christian, she’s a Jew. And in addition, Michelle is married to a Black man, and they share three biracial children. ...

Yeah, she saw it as a real estate investment, pure and simple. ...

They also asked questions about things like gay marriage. They asked her what her thoughts are on the COVID vaccine. They asked her how she feels about abortion. ... They even asked her what her thoughts are on the Roman Empire. ...

The legal experts that I’ve spoken to say that her case is extremely strong for a number of reasons.

It is funny how these leftist Jews are so much against freedom of association. Jews have survived as a distinct ethnic identity for centuries largely because they have been allowed to associate with other Jews.

It is hard for me to understand why anyone would be offended at a very small community that chooses to live with like-minded people on an undeveloped Arkansas plot of land.

The NYT interviewer, Debra Kamin, used to live in Tel Aviv, so I assume she is a Jew.

Meanwhile the Southern Poverty Law Center has been indicted again, with more facts supporting the charge that the Klu Klux Klan, American Nazis, and other supposedly racist groups were really just fund-raising fronts for rich Jewish leftists:

[The National Socialist Party of America leader] used [SPLC] donors' money to, among other things, travel to extremist rallies, host extremist rallies, donate money to leaders of other extremist organizations, recruit new members into his extremist organization, publish racist and extremist material for the purpose of recruiting new members, both inside and outside of prison, and create racist paraphernalia to sell at rallies to raise more money for his extremist organization.

How England Cops Killed Henry Nowak

Wikipedia:

On 3 December 2025, Henry Nowak, a white 18‑year‑old British university student, was murdered by Vickrum Digwa in Southampton, England. Digwa, a 23-year-old British Sikh man, cut and stabbed Nowak five times with a dagger. When police officers from Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary arrived, Digwa accused Nowak of assault, and officers handcuffed Nowak. Police body‑worn camera showed Nowak repeatedly telling officers that he had been stabbed and pleading for help. He died shortly after being handcuffed. ...

The jury convicted Digwa of murder on 28 May 2026.

Britain has imported Third World migrants, and given Sikhs special permission to carry deadly knives.

Here is the part that is hard to understand. Apparently a non-white can attack a White boy, and when the cops show up, the non-white can cry racism, and the cops will arrest the White. In this case, the White boy bled to death as the cops were handcuffing him and reading his rights.

People are comparing to George Floyd. Like Nowak, Floyd died while being arrest, with video evidence posted. But Floyd was guilty of a crime and dying of drug overdose, and cops had called an ambulance to get him medical care.

By contrast, Nowak was an innocent victim, and cops ignored how he was bleeding to death while they believed the racist accusations from his killer.

Nobody ever showed that the Floyd cops had any racial animosity. A couple of them were not even White. But Nowak was arrested for being accused of racism, and only Whites are arrested for that.

60 years ago, Britain was an all-White nation. Now the non-whites apparently know that they can accuse Whites of racism, and possibly get away with murder. Britain has betrayed its own citizens, and adopted an assortment of anti-White laws and policies.

Elon Musk tweeted:

The West has created an utterly evil state religion where an accusation of “racism” is the gravest offense that can be committed, even worse than rape or murder!

So if police show up at a crime scene and a British boy is bleeding out and an immigrant says the British boy is racist the cops will cuff the dying British boy.

Democrats reject Womens Museum being for Women

AP reports:

What started as a widely backed proposal to locate a new Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum on the National Mall devolved into a partisan fight Thursday after Republicans revised the legislation to ensure no transgender people are included in the exhibits. ...

One change added a mission scope that states, “The Museum shall be dedicated to preserving, researching, and presenting the history, achievements, and lived experiences of biological women in the United States.”

It also adds a prohibition which states, “The Museum may not identify, present, describe, or otherwise depict any biological male as a female.”

It is amazing that the Democrats are now 100% to honoring women, but only if they include men who call themselves transgender.

Canada may ban Residential school denialism

Canada has no free speech, and criminalizes facts:

Bill C-9 amended to criminalize "residential school denialism"

On Monday evening, a Senate committee added a controversial amendment to criminalize "residential school denialism" with a penalty of up to two years in prison.

Never heard of it? Wikipedia has a whole article on it:

Residential school denialism is negationist ideology that trivializes, downplays, or misrepresents the effects of the Canadian Indian residential school system. Despite decades of recognition and acknowledgments, denialist claims remain a factor within Canadian society. Residential school denialism often includes claims that the number of reported deaths has been inflated by the "reconciliation industry", that there were only isolated cases of child sexual abuse, and that many survivors are untrustworthy or are merely seeking compensation.

It ends with an example:

In 2025, Dallas Brodie made posts on X that read in part: "The number of confirmed child burials at the former Kamloops Indian Residential School site is zero. Zero. No one should be afraid of the truth. Not lawyers, their governing bodies, or anyone else." The Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs responded with a statement condemning the posts and calling on Brodie to apologize "for promoting abhorrent rhetoric which minimizes the harms of Residential Schools and for misleading and emboldening the public against Indigenous people". On March 7, 2025, Brodie was removed from the Conservative Party of BC caucus as a result of her decision to publicly mock and belittle testimony from former residential school students.

It is true that the number is zero. Even if any are found, they are almost certainly from children who died of natural causes. The whole story is known as the "Mass Grave Hoax".

What went Wrong with Polygenism

I read that polygenism is pseudo-science, so I looked up some definitions:

Polygenism is a theory of human origins which posits the view that humans are of different origins (polygenesis).

Polygenism is the theory that the human races originated from multiple independent ancestral lines rather than descending from a common progenitor population.

So why is this wrong? Apparently because it competes with Out of Africa.

The Out of Africa theory is really two theories. The original Out of Africa I, which is considered disproved. And Out of Africa II, which is commonly accepted.

I found the explanations confusing and contradictory. Here is what I could figure out.

The human races did develop separately on separate continents, and racial differences are attributable to this separate development. To this extent, polygenism is true. Where it goes wrong is to say that human similarities are from convergent evolution. It is believed that those similarities are from common genes, as inherited from common ancestors.

Humans are believed to have descended from African apes who lived 5 million years ago. Out of Africa I said that all humans are direct descendants from Africans who migrated out 200K years ago. This cannot be right because of genetic evidence of interbreeding with European Neanderthals and Asian Denisovans.

Out of Africa II scales these claims back, and says that humans have mostly African ancestry, from a migration about 50K years ago. This is an attempt to salvage some of the Out of Africa I theory. Maybe 60% of your ancestry came from that migration, we do not know.

These theories are interesting to the extent that they help define what it means to be human, but they leave a lot of questions unanswered.

Africa appears to have had some apes walking upright, but those were not really human.

The main point of the Out of Africa theories was to explain (1) why humans have all the same potential; (2) why other human species like Neanderthals went extinct; and (3) why there has been no human evolution in the last 50K years. But all of this is now known to be false.

We still do not know why human ancestors evolved language and intelligence. It appears that Neanderthals evolved big brains about 1M years ago, long before the Out of Africa II migrations. And there appear to be some fossil gaps and population bottlenecks in the last 1M years. That may be when our ancestors became distinctly human.

We also do not know if it means anything to be mostly of African descent. The Neanderthal-African hybrids seemed to be more successful than either the Neanderthals or the Africans. So it is unknown which genes were more important.

Some people who write on this subject want to emphasize human similarities, and even similarities with apes. Others want to emphasize differences. We need both for an accurate scientific picture.

Chicago Sends Black Dads to Jail

The Chicago Sun-Times reports:

For parents navigating family court in Cook County, falling behind on child support and other court-ordered payments can carry consequences that extend far beyond mounting debt.

It can mean going to jail.

Over the past decade, more than 2,500 people — nearly all of them men — have been locked up after Cook County judges found them in what’s called indirect civil contempt.

Most were detained for failing to comply with court-ordered payments to children or former spouses, according to Cook County sheriff’s records.

Those jailed spent an average of eight days in custody. But about 100 people were held for 50 days or longer. Of them, about 25 were locked up for more than 100 days, according to sheriff’s data from April 2016 to the end of March 2026.

One man, Steve Fanady, has been in jail for nearly four years.

A Chicago Sun-Times analysis of sheriff’s records exposes what some say is a punitive side of a system that civil rights advocates and some court observers say offers little legal help to those unable to afford a lawyer.

Unlike criminal defendants, people accused of violating support orders in civil court aren’t automatically entitled to legal representation even though they might face incarceration.

In Cook County’s sprawling domestic relations court system — which handles roughly 40,000 divorce and child-support cases each year — advocates estimate that at least half of the litigants come to court without a lawyer. Most are Black.

For nearly add debts, jail is not a possibility. A debtor can declare bankruptcy.

It is not so well known that child support is not required to be spent on the child. The mom can spend it as she pleases. In many or even most of these cases, the debt is not even to the mom, but to a welfare agency.

The Unabomber Predicted the AI Age

The possibility that AI machines will take over the world has been considered by science fiction authors, and now by the Pope.

A serious analysis was given by the 1995 Unabomber Manifesto:

171. But suppose now that industrial society does survive the next several decades and that the bugs do eventually get worked out of the system, so that it functions smoothly. What kind of system will it be? We will consider several possibilities.

172. First let us postulate that the computer scientists succeed in developing intelligent machines that can do all things better than human beings can do them. In that case presumably all work will be done by vast, highly organized systems of machines and no human effort will be necessary. Either of two cases might occur. The machines might be permitted to make all of their own decisions without human oversight, or else human control over the machines might be retained.

173. If the machines are permitted to make all their own decisions, we can't make any conjectures as to the results, because it is impossible to guess how such machines might behave. We only point out that the fate of the human race would be at the mercy of the machines. It might be argued that the human race would never be foolish enough to hand over all power to the machines. But we are suggesting neither that the human race would voluntarily turn power over to the machines nor that the machines would willfully seize power. What we do suggest is that the human race might easily permit itself to drift into a position of such dependence on the machines that it would have no practical choice but to accept all of the machines' decisions.

As society and the problems that face it become more and more complex and as machines become more and more intelligent, people will let machines make more and more of their decisions for them, simply because machine-made decisions will bring better results than man-made ones. Eventually a stage may be reached at which the decisions necessary to keep the system running will be so complex that human beings will be incapable of making them intelligently. At that stage the machines will be in effective control. People won't be able to just turn the machine off, because they will be so dependent on them that turning them off would amount to suicide.

174. On the other hand it is possible that human control over the machines may be retained. In that case the average man may have control over certain private machines of his own, such as his car or his personal computer, but control over large systems of machines will be in the hands of a tiny elite — just as it is today, but with two differences. Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite.

Or, if the elite consists of softhearted liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of the human race. They will see to it that everyone's physical needs are satisfied, that all children are raised under psychologically hygienic conditions, that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him busy, and that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes "treatment" to cure his "problem." Of course, life will be so purposeless that people will have to be biologically or psychologically engineered either to remove their need for the power process or to make them "sublimate" their drive for power into some harmless hobby. These engineered human beings may be happy in such a society, but they most certainly will not be free. They will have been reduced to the status of domestic animals.

175. But suppose now that the computer scientists do not succeed in developing artificial intelligence, so that human work remains necessary. Even so, machines will take care of more and more of the simpler tasks so that there will be an increasing surplus of human workers at the lower levels of ability. (We see this happening already. There are many people who find it difficult or impossible to get work, because for intellectual or psychological reasons they cannot acquire the level of training necessary to make themselves useful in the present system.) On those who are employed, ever-increasing demands will be placed: They will need more and more training, more and more ability, and will have to be ever more reliable, conforming and docile, because they will be more and more like cells of a giant organism. Their tasks will be increasingly specialized, so that their work will be, in a sense, out of touch with the real world, being concentrated on one tiny slice of reality. The system will have to use any means that it can, whether psychological or biological, to engineer people to be docile, to have the abilities that the system requires and to "sublimate" their drive for power into some specialized task.

This is a brilliant analysis, and it should be considered, just like the doomsday predictions of Eliezer Yudkowsky.

Source of Modern Civilization

This map is amazing.

In the last century, most of the accomplishments have come from the USA.

I have posted various theories for this. Sometimes it is referred to as the success of Western Civilization, or White culture, or Christendom, or Christian Enlightenment. But those terms are much broader than the above hexagon. Maybe a better term is needed.

Everybody likes the wealth and quality of life generated by Western Civilization. To make it continue, we need to understand why it happened, and to continue those conditions.

Trump did not Recommend Injecting Bleach

I occasionally argue with Trump-haters, and they nearly always bring up some totally false allegation that is disproved easily by googling it. Last time it was that Pres. Trump recommended that people inject bleach into their bodies. Here is the official transcript:

ACTING UNDER SECRETARY BRYAN: "we’re talking about nonporous surfaces: door handles, stainless steel. ... you inject summer — the sunlight into that. You inject UV rays into that. ... We’re also testing disinfectants readily available. We’ve tested bleach, we’ve tested isopropyl alcohol on the virus, specifically in saliva or in respiratory fluids. And I can tell you that bleach will kill the virus in five minutes; isopropyl alcohol will kill the virus in 30 seconds, ..."

As you can see, he is talking about disinfecting a steel surface. Trump just adds an innocuous comment.

THE PRESIDENT: Right. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning. Because you see it [the coronavirus] gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it would be interesting to check that. So, that, you’re going to have to use medical doctors with. But it sounds — it sounds interesting to me.

So we’ll see. But the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute, that’s — that’s pretty powerful.

In case there is any doubt, a question makes it clear that the bleach is for cleaning a surface, not injecting into the body.

Q But I — just, can I ask about — the President mentioned the idea of cleaners, like bleach and isopropyl alcohol you mentioned. There’s no scenario that that could be injected into a person, is there? I mean —

ACTING UNDER SECRETARY BRYAN: No, I’m here to talk about the findings that we had in the study. We won’t do that within that lab and our lab. So —

THE PRESIDENT: It wouldn’t be through injection. We’re talking about through almost a cleaning, sterilization of an area. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t work. But it certainly has a big effect if it’s on a stationary object.

Trump does also have a speculative comment about testing ultraviolet light on the body. But nothing about injecting bleach into the body or anything like that. It is all a fiction from Trump-haters.

Female Mating Strategies have Changed

I always thought that men were instinctly more interested in promiscuous sexual encounters, placing a high value on a woman's sexual attractiveness. Woman were the opposite, and looked for long-term mate values, stability, fidelity, resources, marriage, and eventually children.

There is both empirical and theoretical evidence from evolutionary psychology. A man can have more offspring by being promiscuous, while a woman cannot.

Now I think that I have been wrong.

Surveys now say that boys are more interested in marriage and family than girls.

Studies of online dating sites show that women are much more fixated on physical appearance than men. Women only swipe right on the top 1% of men, based on a photo.

Promiscuity now appears to be a lot more common in women than men. There are lots of 25yo men who have never had sexual relations, while the typical 25yo woman has had 10+ sex partners.

Marriage norms have relaxed a lot since the 1950s in the USA. I would have thought that women would be the complainers about this trend, as their instincts would be to stay married to a husband even if he is unfaithful.

I now believe female instincts are not towards monogamous marriage at all.

Given the choice, many women prefer to be one of several mistresses to an alpha man, than to have a husband of her own.

Every girl's favorite fairy tale is Cinderella. Their favorite movies are about slutty girls and prostitutes. The poor girl throws herself at the alpha man, and no one else is good enough for her. So lots of girls spend their 20s chasing and seducing alpha men, and postponing marriage.

An example in the news is the Call Her Daddy host, whose wildly popular podcast celebrated female promiscuity. Now that she is 32yo, she has married a Hollywood movie producer and is expecting a child. I listened to one of her episodes once, where she and a guest discussed playing for a girls soccer team. It gave the impression that the main topic of conversation in a girls locker room is discussing their latest venereal diseases.

The dating apps are all going bankrupt, because women no longer use them to find long-term mates. The women mainly seek flings with alpha men.

Popular advice for women is to have loose morals and adultery fantasies:

Well, you’re not alone. In an article in New York magazine headlined “The Secret to a Great Marriage? Crushes on Other People” the female writer makes the argument that fancying other people is not just inevitable but healthy for a relationship.

Many wealthy countries now have low fertility rates, and the leading explanation is that middle-class women do not want to have kids. It is not that they cannot afford kids, as the lower income groups have kids at higher rates.

I am not sure if feminism is the cause or the effect. Not wanting kids is correlated with feminist views.

Update: This new Heather MacDonald interview discusses trends in female attitudes.