Category Archives: Republicans

Another Professor Disciplined for Telling the Truth

The law professor said she has never seen a Black law student graduate in the top quarter of their class, and they usually are not even in the top half. She also said that the university’s law review had a diversity mandate that required them to put minority editors and writers on the publication.

Here is a very inconvenient fact Glenn, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a black student graduate in the top quarter of the class and rarely, rarely in the top half. I have a class of 89, 95 students every year. I see a big chunk of students every year — so I am going on that, because a lot of this data is a closely guarded secret.

She’s probably telling the truth. Why lie? What for?

She’s also in trouble for telling more uncomfortable facts in an article she wrote for a newspaper last year:

The piece lamented:

the breakdown of the country’s bourgeois culture…the single-parent, antisocial habits prevalent among some working-class Whites; the anti-‘acting white’ rap culture of inner-city Blacks; the anti-assimilation ideas gaining ground among some Hispanic immigrants.

 

She’s right. All this BS is going on right now and the Cultural Left fools are all cheering for this or at least running cover for it. It’s disgusting and the Alt Left talks about this disgusting breakdown in our bourgeois culture a lot. If you don’t know otherwise, we’re against it.

The Black Law Association at the university protested what they called bigotry and posted this:

Prof. Amy Wax has violated the spirit of @PennLaw’s grade nondisclosure policy by claiming demonstrably false allegations against black students and alumni.

I doubt if what she is saying is demonstrably false. The liars here are probably in the BLA for stating as facts figures that they have never even investigated. Also, how is what she said bigotry. Truth is a defense against bigotry, right? How can facts be racist or bigoted? It makes no sense. Facts are facts. They don’t have any subjective values attached to them. All facts are indifferent in terms of bias.

The dean stepped in:

It is imperative for me as dean to state that these claims are false: Black students have graduated in the top of the class at Penn Law, and the Law Review does not have a diversity mandate. Contrary to any suggestion otherwise, Black students at Penn Law are extremely successful, both inside and outside the classroom, in the job market, and in their careers.

He’s probably lying in spirit. Sure, maybe one or two graduated high in their class, but if it happened with any frequency, I am sure the professor would have heard of it. He’s also probably lying about there being no diversity mandate at the law review. People in his position lie about these things constantly. That’s one more painful thing about the Cultural Left. In order not to be racist and bigoted, we are all required to lie continuously. So you end up with a society of liars.

The sad thing is that just about everyone who agrees with this professor is going to vote Republican and support Trump. In fact, I would bet dollars to donuts that that professor votes Republican. If you agree with this woman, you are automatically labeled a conservative Republican and you start to act that way. This is why we need an Alternative Left: so liberals and Leftists can agree with this woman’s facts without having to flee the Left and take up reaction.

6 Comments

Filed under Affirmative Action, Anti-Racism, Blacks, Civil Rights, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Higher Education, Hispanics, Law, Left, Liberalism, Northeast, Political Science, Politics, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Republicans, Social Problems, Sociology, US Politics, USA, Useless Western Left, Whites

Most Societies Will Always Have a 1%

Jason Y: Another thought is that having a 1 percent isn’t so bad – if only they’d throw out bigger scraps. Isn’t that the Trump message?

You are always going to have a 1% in most societies, surely in all capitalist societies. Even Sweden has some very rich people there. It’s just that the rich in places like Sweden are a lot less rich compared to the rich here. Things are much more equal over there. Most people are more or less some version of middle class. Very rich and very poor people are not common.

The rich will never throw out larger scraps to everyone else. Why should they? Give me one reason why the rich would ever throw out larger scraps for everyone else. What for?

To be nice? I got some news for you. Rich people aren’t very nice. If they were nice, they wouldn’t be rich. They didn’t get rich by being nice. In fact, most of them got rich by being quite the opposite. In any capitalist society the rich are among the worst people in the country. Capitalism is like a pond – the scum rises to the top.

Of course that is Trump’s message though in a sense – trickle down economics. Trickle down economics says that the more money you give to the rich, the more they will share it with the rest of us. It is truly amazing how many White Americans I have met who actually believe this tripe. One thing I have noted is that this year I have seen more Americans catching on to the scam of supply side economics and the general insanity of Republican economics than ever before.

You can’t fool all the people all the time.

And I would add another – you can’t fool people forever.

My attitude is that I don’t care if some people are rich. We had rich people in the 1950’s when we had a 90% marginal tax rate on millionaires. That’s fine with me. But those who have must share with those who have not. If they don’t want to, fine, then we the People (the State) will simply use force to take money away from the rich and give it to everyone else. That means guns, cops, agents, the threat of incarceration, and especially taxation.

6 Comments

Filed under American, Capitalism, Capitalists, Culture, Economics, Europe, Government, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Republicans, Scum, Social Problems, Sociology, Sweden, US Politics, USA, Whites

The Rich 1, The People 0

Here.

From the link, summing up my text below:

Wealthy politicians & working class ppl don’t mix, I don’t care what you’ve been taught in ur life! Wealthy ppl have their own specific interests & agendas which really doesn’t include helping the working poor!

Not just the working poor I might add.

Low income, working class, lower middle class and middle class – none of these classes ever benefit for the rule of the rich. The rich are always hostile to all of these classes, and oligarchic rule always results in the slow impoverishment and eventual devastation of all of these classes.

So the governor’s race in very liberal Illinois is down to a billionaire investor, an heir to a hotel empire (sound familiar?) on the “Democratic” side versus a hedge fund mogul ( figures) on the “Republican” side. I’ve been saying forever on here that we have two parties of the rich, a liberal party of the rich (the Democrats) and a conservative party of the rich (the Republicans). I suppose if you are rich and either liberal or conservative, these distinctions without a difference might even matter, but for the rest of us, it’s game over before the first pitch.

How many times do I have to keep telling people? The rich are not your friends. Not not not not not never ever ever your friends, not in a million years your friends, not in any possible universe your friends. If you are anywhere from poor to low income to any middle class less than the upper one, you’re always screwed voting for a rich man.

This is where it is instructive to read Marx. One thing we never learn in a  capitalist country, because no one bothers to teach us for fear that a bit of knowledge is dangerous, is that people pursue something called “class interests.” The poor  are supposed to pursue the class interests of the poor, the lower middle class, the middle class and the upper middle class all pursue their class interests.  And of course, the rich and the ruling class never fail to pursue their class interests because they are smart, well educated and know the score. The eternal scam of capitalist politics is a game where the rich are always trying to get everyone else to vote for the class interests of the rich.

One thing that Americans can’t seem to get through their thick heads is that these class interests are typically antagonistic to each other. I’ve been explaining this to otherwise intelligent Americans (mostly middle class Whites) for decades and it never seems to sink in. Middle and working class White Americans operate under the perpetural delusion that the class interests of the rich are the same as their own class interests.  What’s good for the rich is good for working and middle class Whites. The roots of these form of political Down’s Syndrome can be traced to an idiotic culture, boosterism, a casino mindset, grossly exaggerated expectations, can-do thinking, and general worship of rich men that working and middle class Whites have been engaging in for a very long time now.

I got some news for you.

The class interests of the rich are generally directly antithetical to the class interests of the middle and lower middle classes, the low income, and the poor. What’s good for the rich is bad for all of these folks. Every time the rich win, all of these folks lose. That’s why these classes should not care anything about the stupid stock market. I call the stock market The Index of Evil. The stock market responds to whatever is good for the rich. Whatever is bad for the rich, which is almost always good for the rest of these classes is bad for the stock market. In other words, if these other classes start to succeed in their class interests, the stock market will go down. And every time these classes get screwed, the stock market goes up just a bit more. So quit cheering on the stupid stock market!

As noted above, it works the other way. Typically, everything that is good for these other classes is bad for the rich. Money doesn’t grow on trees. For the other classes to prosper, they generally have to take money from other classes, often the rich. In capitalism, class war is perpetual. What this boils down to is that most of the classes are trying to take money for at least some of the other classes in order to enrich themselves.

The behavior of the rich in most capitalist societies is to progressively take more and more money from these other classes and put it in the pockets of the rich. And if  you study rich people long enough, one thing you will realize is that the rich never have enough money. I am serious. Your average billionaire is a hungry man, slavering for every nickel he can scrape up. I suppose it is like a drug where the more you do, the more you want and crave.

For 40 years now, US politics has been all about taking money from these other classes and giving it to the rich and the upper middle class. Now if you are rich or upper middle class, this was a damn good deal. But if you are in those other classes, it’s been slow motion hell on wheels, a doomed road trip to progressive immiseration.

What I am saying here is that the outcome of this race is already foreseen. We might as well not even bother. Who cares which rich man wins? The “liberal” rich man or the “conservative” rich man, what difference does it make. Each one is guaranteed to pursue his class interests as a gazillionaire, which will always be bad for most of the rest of us.

The outcome of the election can be foretold with little effort:

Rich 1, People 0.

3 Comments

Filed under American, Capitalism, Conservatism, Culture, Democrats, Economics, Government, Left, Liberalism, Marxism, Midwest, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Republicans, Social Problems, Sociology, US Politics, USA, Whites

Donald Trump: Dotard

Asked about Donald Trump, a former Wharton professor said,

Donald Trump was the dumbest goddam student I ever had.

A reporter recently noted:

Professor Kelley told me 100 times over three decades that ‘Donald Trump was the dumbest goddam student I ever had.’ I remember his emphasis and inflection — it went like this — “Donald Trump was the dumbest goddam student I ever had.’

Another biographer, Gwenda Blair, wrote in 2001 that Trump was admitted to Wharton on a special favor from a “friendly” admissions officer. Obviously he couldn’t have gotten in otherwise.

But let’s get real here for a second. Donald Trump can’t even read! I told you he was a pinhead. I suppose he has dyslexia. It is said that he reads at a 5th grade level. His aides make sure to give him briefs that are no longer than one page long. If longer than that, make sure to include charts, drafts, and drawings. Jesus. That sounds like the reading materials you might create for a child.

Let’s face it though. Trump’s illiteracy is exactly what his arrogantly ill-educated and aggressively ignorant deplorable base wanted, right? They hate technocrats and experts, people who read, weigh facts, and make proposals based on evidence, preferring low-brow, shoot-from-the-hip, unreflective living. Trump is their anti-intellectual hero, exactly what they voted for.

This is what happens when an entire political party disdains education, intellect, learning, scholarship, etc. We are on the road to Idiocracy. From Dan Quayle to George W Bush to Sarah Palin and now Trump. Heaven help us.

People who lived in New York during the Trump Era report in:

Nobody actually liked Donald Trump. Even then. He was obnoxious, if colorful. My (Old School Conservative, WWII vet) Jr. High teachers (I went to school in a fairly conservative area) cited Donald as evidence of crass 1980’s materialism and of how far this “younger generation” of 80’s yuppies had strayed from their generation’s principles of decency. Donald Trump was always a predictable turd.

I am/was a yuppie, and I and my yuppie NYC buddies all loathed Trump,not only because of his crassness but because we knew that he was a lying grifter and an unmeritorious opportunist.

If you want to know what Donald Trump is really like, ask New Yorkers. The suffered through him for decades. Nobody but nobody but nobody in New York likes that man!

35 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Education, Higher Education, Northeast, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Republicans, US Politics, USA

Why Doesn’t He Hurry Up And Die Already?

His name is Henry the K., but we leftwing children of the revolutions of the 1960’s always just referred to him as “Satan.”

People who truly know me know that I came out of the Vietnam War protest era, although I actually worked for Richard Nixon’s aptly named CREEP at age 15 in 1972, at my mother’s behest, for which I will always forgive her.

However, in 1968, I went door to door with my Cold War Liberal father campaigning for “Clean Gene” Eugene McCarthy, a forgotten Democratic politician who ran on a strict antiwar banner in the fateful Democratic primaries of 1968. I was only ten years old.

The well known riots at the Democratic Convention came later that year. I remember those also. Mayor Daley turned his police loose on protesters and many relatively peaceful protesters were badly beaten by police. A nearby park in Chicago was taken over by protesters and named “People’s Park.” Inside the convention, an equal amount of chaos ensued, with the party coalescing around establishment candidate Hubert Humphrey, who did not run on an antiwar ticket. I remember Humphrey well too. He seemed a decent enough man at the time.

The Chicago Seven were later placed on trial for conspiracy after the demonstrations. They included Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, and a number of others, mostly Jewish. They were represented famously by Jewish radical attorney William Kunstler, who has always been one of my favorite people. Although my father was against the Vietnam War, he really hated those hippies. He used to inveigh against “Ay-bie Hoffman.”

By 1974, I’d added long hair, rock music, LSD and marijuana to my high school studies. I hung out with hippies, potheads and acidheads. I remember once David A H, a bisexual hippie senior who nevertheless always left me alone. He used to take windowpane LSD by putting it right on his eyeball.

Nixon was one of our villains. You have to understand that in that era, if you identified with the hippie movement, still going gangbusters in 1975, Nixon was probably automatically your enemy. Hating him was almost a cultural requirement. He represented, all in one man, of everything we were against. The perfect human voodoo doll.

One day David said matter of factly, “Nixon always looks like he hasn’t shit in a month.” A good one-liner!

I always felt that that was one of the best summaries of Tricky Dicky I’d ever heard.

K. was Nixon’s right-hand man. Although he was not an attractive man, ponderous, overweight, nerdy, homely and bespectacled, he had an odd reputation as a playboy, often seen escorting various actresses in public. I remember one morning at the breakfast table my father was looking at the latest pic of him with some comely model draped on his arm.

“Boy,” my father remarked. “This administration’s really got problems if Kissinger’s their playboy.” A good zinger!

The more I read about this man, the more convinced I am that he is something approaching pure evil. He has to be a psychopath of some sort. He’s one cold-blooded bastard at least. He look in his face and you see a man with heart of ice. There are probably few people as hated among my anti-Vietnam War cohort as this man. I’m getting very impatient waiting for him to kick off so I can dance on his grave. He’s stuck around far too long already.

Just hurry up and die already, Henry!

 

3 Comments

Filed under Cannabis, Cold War, Culture, Democrats, Hallucinogens, History, Intoxicants, Jews, Left, LSD, Politics, Pop Culture, Regional, Republicans, US Politics, USA, Vietnam War, War

Trench Warfare in East Ghouta

East Ghouta trench warfare. Good Lord that fighting looks brutal. Some truly vicious close-range trench warfare can be seen in this video. This what war looks like – the real thing. I will say that SAA and allied Palestinian, government and Arab Nationalist militias have very high morale from all the footage I have seen. It’s amazing as I am sure they are taking serious casualties. I saw a video today of a Syrian village of ~400 in 2011. 13% of its men were military age, and seven years later, almost all of them are dead, fighting for the government. Don’t let anyone fool you into thinking that the government forces are not taking serious casualties.

There is so much I could say about this operation. Let us just say that everything you are hearing in the US and Western media is completely biased and a lot of it is flat out lies. The civilians in the area largely support the Syrian Army and oppose the Al Qaeda-type rebels.

The rebels have been using East Ghouta for years as a base to shell Damascus. Damascus gets shelled almost every day for years now by these character. The mortars are usually just aimed at the city but in recent months a number have targeted the Russian Embassy and meeting between various Russians, military and aid organizations, in the area. It is thought that the rebels do not have the ability to target Russians with this accuracy. What is going on here is that US, Turkish, UAE, Qatari, Saudi, Jordanian and Israeli intelligence (mostly US) is working closely with the rebels in an effort to deliberately target Russians. So the US is actually killing Russians in Syria deliberately and has been doing so forever.

Mostly this shows the folly of pacifists or isolationists ever voting Republican. Republicans have been the party of the hawks ever since the Cold War and it hasn’t slowed down yet. Of course Trump shifted to ultra-hawk because he is a hard US conservative and almost all of these people are fanatical warmongers. The Republicans have been far more hawkish than the Democrats since 1946.

The Democrats may be the party of Humanitarian Bombers, but the Republicans don’t even pretend to that. Instead, it’s all about how many people you can kill, civilians or not. Civilian deaths in Syrian and Iraq skyrocketed after Trump “took the gloves off” (something Republicans always do – gloves are for soft Democratic girly men). Why was this a good thing? Why did Trump massacre all of these Syrian and Iraqi civilians and why are bloodthirsty Americans cheering for this slaughter?

When East Aleppo was liberated, there were intense negotiations at the end to rescue 12 US intelligence officers who were holed up with the Al Qaeda rebels until the bitter end. Websites even published the names of these men.

Here again, the Western media is screaming. Humanitarian corridors to evacuate civlians have been activated and regular aid convoys are getitng through. The strikes have been mostly surgical as in East Aleppo. The US is just freaking out because it’s Al Qaeda type jihadis are getting defeated in this Damascus suburb. The US wants to keep its jihadis in East Aleppo to rain mortars down on Damascus every day to show that Assad cannot even control his own capital. It’s mostly an appearances thing, but then appearances and symbolism play greater roles in warfare than most know.

There haven’t been any hospitals stricken in Ghouta. Remember when “the last hospital in East Aleppo” got destroyed 15-20 times over a period of months. It was always “the last hospital in Aleppo.” How many last hospitals in Aleppo were there? There can’t have been more than one. The artillery and airstrikes in Aleppo were mostly surgical. Many of the hospitals bombed had long since been taken over as rebel bases. This is something the US media never told you. Yes, some civilians are getting their property taken away from them, but that is because they supported the rebels. It has nothing to with ethnicity and there is no ethnic cleansing. Sunni Arabs who supported Assad are to some extent displacing Sunni Arabs who supported the rebels.

There was another false flag chemical weapons attack in Ghoutha earlier, championed by pathological liar Nicki Haley. Western officials warned of the attack earlier, a sure sign that this was another false flag. So far, all chemical weapons attacks in Syria have been rebel false flags. I have studied all of them, and I haven’t seen one attack by the Syrian government yet. The Syrian government simply does not use chemical weapons. It’s not that they are nice people. If you are a rebel or rebel supporter, you may be arrested and taken prisoner by the army and transferred to a military prison. The death rate is high in that prisoner and 10-15,000 prisoners may have already been executed, mostly by hanging. That said, chemical weapons and massacres of villagers are not the SAA’s style. They’re nasty, but they are just not that type of nasty.

Of course, a few days after the fake attack, the SAA liberated this Ghouta town and promptly discovered a chemical weapons factory.  The rebels had been producing their own chemicals and then releasing them in false flag attacks as they have been doing since the start of the war. Even the US military now admits that most if not all of the chemical weapons attacks in this war so far  were not  done by the Syrian government. Amazing – the military tells the  truth where the controlled (US Pravda) media  never does.

Ghouta is 70% cleared. Many rebels have left on buses to be bussed to other rebel zones,mostly in Idlib. A number of others have taken advantage of an amnesty program that has been offered by the government for years now. Today, 10,000 civilians fled to safety via a humanitarian corridor. The rebels have been firing at these corridors for some time now, shooting at civilians who are trying to flee. A number have been killed in this way.

1 Comment

Filed under Arabs, Conservatism, Democrats, Eurasia, Europe, Geopolitics, Iraq, Islam, Israel, Jordan, Journalism, Middle East, Military Doctrine, Palestine, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Radical Islam, Religion, Republicans, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sunnism, Syria, Turkey, US Politics, USA, War

Why Do Alt-Right Antisemites Love Super-Jew Donald Trump, the Jewiest Gentile of Them All?

Trump is the worst neocon president that has ever lived. No President has ever been closer to Israel and no President has ever been as “Jewish” as Donald Trump. Everything about Trump screams the sleazy, debased, aggressive, lying, cheating and stealing culture that the Jews have created in New York. If you want to know why New Yorkers are so loud, brash, rude, arrogant, unpleasant and greedy then look no further than the fact that New York has the largest Jewish culture outside of Israel.

New York is about a lot of ethnicities, but to say it is not Jewish is not correct at all. Nevertheless, it is as Italian, Irish and now Dominican, Puerto Rican, and Black as it is Jewish and most of these ethnicities have damaged New York as much as the Jews if not more so. Further, most of them have adopted their own loud, brash, in your face culture which is also particular to Africanized or better yet Arabized Sicilians who form the base of New York Italian culture.

And I assure you that the Catholic Italians/Irish and the Jews hate each other, but it’s not because one group is crooked and the other is not. More precisely, it is that they are all three crooks and this is a case of nearly organized crime level ethnic criminal groups (almost gangs) or competition among criminal groups. There are no good guys in New York. Anyone with a shred of decency left that charnelhouse some time ago.

Considering that Trump has now made Israel nearly the official 51st state of Israel (it was de facto before and it is de jure now) and the fact that he out-Jews 90% of Jews (and not in a good way – put a skullcap on Trump and this lying, cheating, conspiring, swindling schemer would be quite at home in either The Protocols or Der Strumer) – one is mystified by the Alt Right’s support of this ultra-Jew called Donald Trump?

Does the Alt Right hate Jews? If so, why support the Jewiest Gentile around, Donald Trump?

Does the Alt Right love Jews? Well, that explains the Trump love but not their anti-Semitism.

Is Trump one of the good Jews and the rest part of the rat Jews? Hardly. If Trump converted tomorrow, millions of Jews would wring their hands and rue the day. “This is not a good day for the Jews!” They would cry.

It’s hard to understand why the fanatical anti-Semites on the Alt Right love this super-Jew Trump so much. I just don’t get it.

10 Comments

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Blacks, Conservatism, Crime, Culture, Dominicans, Hispanics, Irish, Israel, Italians, Jews, Middle East, Neoconservatism, Northeast, Organized Crime, Political Science, Politics, Puerto Ricans, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Republicans, The Jewish Question, US Politics, USA

Are There Any Americans Who Don’t Engage in Pure Black and White Thinking?

Alex: Robert, thanks for the warm welcome.

I’ve been reading your blog for a while and I would say that your views defy categorization, which I find refreshing. Of course, you’re free to apply any label you like to yourself. I personally have been exposed to enough narrow ideologies to find most such labels distasteful. I would rather people apply labels like ‘open-minded’, ‘numerate’, or ‘principled’ to themselves instead of an ideological designator which is as much about tribal affiliation as it is about personal philosophy. If people were really honest, they could even apply terms like ‘selfish’, or ‘biased towards short-term outcomes’ and nobody could fault them because we’re all that way to some extent.

Of course I am a man of the Left and I always have been. I am a liberal, progressive, socialist, whatever you want to call it. Exactly.

And the problem is that in the US, you pretty much have to define yourself as liberal or conservative. I suppose it is possible to be a Centrist, but I don’t hear many folks identifying that way.

Of course I am a man of the Left and I always have been. I am a liberal, progressive, socialist, whatever you want to call it.

However, once you designate yourself on the left of the spectrum like that, you are given a checklist of 1,000 different issues, and you have to check the “liberal” position on every single damn one of them. If you fail to check even one, everyone on the Left flips out, says you are not a liberal/progressive/socialist/whatever, and instead you are a reactionary/conservative/fascist/Nazi/Republican. Well, I am not any of the latter. I have examined all of those philosophies in great detail, and I despise those people. I do not fit in with them at all. However, only conservatives have been friendly to me, even though their philosophy is crap. Everyone on the Left by and large hates my guts.

So I am a man without a country, so to speak.

Really if you gave me a list of Left positions, I might check most of them. More importantly, if you gave me a list of rightwing opinions, I would not check too many of them. But I would check a few. But you can’t even check a few, you see. You can’t even check one.

Let me give you another example. I think a $15 minimum wage is a terrible idea. But I am very much pro-worker. I just don’t think that is the way to deal with working class problems in the US. That would cause more problems then it would cure. When I say that, everyone on the Left gets outraged and says, “I thought you were for the workers!” As in, if you are  pro-worker, you have to support a $15/hr wage. Well, I am pro-worker, and I think that wage is a terrible idea.

Everything is black and white here. I like a lot of what Putin does, but I agree that he does some bad things, and I will gladly rattle them off. When I do this, Putin-haters (everyone) is outraged and yells, “I thought you were pro-Putin! See, even you admit he’s bad.”

You see in the US you have to take positions. If you hate Putin, nothing he does is good. Same with Trump, Assad, Kim Jong Il, or other bogeymen. Most everyone on the Left in the US says all of these men are pure evil. If you point out that these people are good or correct in some certain way, everyone flips out. “You support Kim Jong Il!” Well, no I don’t, but he has the right to defend his country.

People who are pro-Democrat or anti-Assad or whatever will never admit that there is one bad thing about Democrats or one good thing about Assad. You can’t.

If you say one bad thing about Democrats, they’re not “good” anymore. If you say one good thing about Assad, he’s not “bad” anymore.

Let’s say we are talking Putin. My conversation partner is a Putin-hater. Literally everything Putin does is pure evil. I am taking the opposite point and supporting Putin on a number of issues. But if I concede Putin is bad in one way, my partner starts jumping up down and yelling, “Even you say he’s bad!”

If you concede one point, if you say you’re guy is bad in even one way, in the US, you just lost the argument. Because the other guy never concedes a point. In the US, the way people think is that the person who never concedes on anything wins, and the person who concedes a point or two loses.

Literally almost everyone I meet in this country is exactly like this. Most people I have known in my life are like this. I know several people with 140+ IQ’s, and they are complete black and white thinkers, so it’s not down to intelligence.

Humans just can’t seem to handle cognitive dissonance. They can’t deal with gray areas. Gray areas make people nuts. A gray area means the good guy’s not good anymore, and the bad guy’s not bad anymore. We can’t have that.

Ever since I appeared on the Net, people have been screaming that my politics is utterly irrational and insane. That is simply because I am Left on some things and Right on others. In America, apparently that is the definition of insanity. Recently someone commented that I am “all over the place.” That’s right. If you live in a permanent gray area, you will always be all over the place.

Which brings me to my original question: Just how many Americans are not black and white thinkers? I would also like to ask if it is a human characteristic rather than an American one. Will you generally find the same black and white thinking everywhere you go in the world?

4 Comments

Filed under American, Asia, Conservatism, Culture, Democrats, Economics, Eurasia, Left, Liberalism, Middle East, NE Asia, North Korea, Political Science, Politics, Psychology, Regional, Republicans, Russia, Socialism, Syria, US Politics, USA

Economics and White Racism/Nationalism in the US and Europe

Beauregard writes: Not all WN’s are NS. There is sort of a natural anti-government slant with them as they believe it unjustly compels Whites to support non-Whites through taxes or other.

In the US, White nationalists are all Libertarians and Republican type conservatives, no exceptions at all. Well, very few are not Libertarians and almost none of them oppose laissez faire economics and neoliberalism. At least of the typical US variety you see on the main US White nationalist sites. White nationalism in the US is a Libertarian movement – full stop, almost no exceptions.

The only exceptions would be a few of these Left of the Alt Right types coalescing around Rabbit and his site. Those are sort of leftwing White nationalists. A lot of people say that that makes no sense, but really it does. Ethnic nationalism doesn’t have to be rightwing. Rabbit is a liberal/Left type on almost every single issue other than race. How dare we call him a rightwinger.

In Europe, Libertarian White nationalists basically do not exist. There is literally no such thing. All Nazi and White nationalist types in Europe are socialists – usually national socialists. There are really no Libertarians period in Europe – the closest is the Tories and UKIP in the UK, but the UK has finally gotten sick and tired of Thatcherite neoliberalism, which was continued by the execrable Tony Blair.

Inequality has exploded and the UK is turning into a smaller version of the US. Why any sane nation on Earth would want to model itself on the United States is beyond me, but the general atmosphere in the UK now is US-type Republican Party politics for the Tories and disgusting Hillary/DNC corporate liberals in the Labor Party promoted by the Guardian and other fake left outfits. There has been a huge fight in the Labor Party over its soul as corporate branch of party seemed to have the power and the money, but they were defeated by a Sanders-style insurgency with Corbyn, who is now being predictably red-baited.

So racist Libertarianism is a peculiar American disorder, but it may have analogues in the ultra-capitalist reactionary politics of the Philippines and Latin America, in which the White and Chinese elites preside over a de facto Libertarian stripped state, the motivation for which being anti-Malay racism on the party of the Chinese and anti-mestizo, Indian, mulatto and Black racism on the part of the Latin American White elites. That’s probably as close of an analogue to US Libertarian racism (the Republican Party is a de facto ultra-racist party, as the reason for the Libertarianism, neoliberalism and government stripping is rooted in White racism seeing no use for government and government as a drain on White taxpayers to fund mestizo and Black good for nothing layabout criminals.)

Stormfront has always had a large socialist (national socialist) section possibly because all of the European forums are made up more or less completely of socialists. Tom Metzger, as nasty as he is, was at least for the workingman. This Heimbasch with his Traditionalist Workers Party seems to be onto a pro-worker project also. At this point, I’d rather support a pro-worker Nazi that a Goddamned corporate Democrat with neoliberal economics, neoconservative foreign policy and the Cultural Left on social issues. Neoliberals kill far more people every year than Nazis anyway. How many people do Nazis actually kill in a year? A handful? How many do neoliberals kill? Millions.

70 Comments

Filed under Asia, Asians, Black-White (Mulattos), Britain, Capitalism, Chinese (Ethnic), Conservatism, Economics, Ethnic Nationalism, Europe, Fascism, Government, Latin American Right, Left, Liberalism, Libertarianism, Malays, Mestizos, Mixed Race, National Socialism, Nationalism, Neoconservatism, Neoliberalism, Philippines, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Republicans, SE Asia, Socialism, US Politics, USA, White Nationalism, White Racism, Whites

A Primer on Mark to Market

This is a repost from the old site:

Some conservatives, of course, are blaming the current economic chaos on too much regulation instead of the obvious cause of it that any moron can figure out, lack of regulation. This is especially popular on White Nationalist websites, where the line is that all regulation of business is evil for White people.

I would like to point that although the conservatives are reeling from this latest economic meltdown and their philosophy is in tatters (rejected by the media elite who used to support them to the hilt more than anyone else), some conservatives are starting to fight back.

The market meltdown was not caused by the lack of regulation that everyone knows caused it; instead, it was caused by the conservative bogeyman of too much regulation. But this is not going over very well. Outside of the Fanatics’ Bullpen and the Republican Party, no one is buying. Even the US rightwing media is not so stupid as to buy into this one.

The “mark to market rule”* controversy is an interesting one.

But nevertheless, mark to market is being put forward as one of the stupider regulations that supposedly either helped bring this mess on or is making it worse. So says Paul Craig Roberts (unapologetic Reaganite incredibly featured on Counterpunch) here, here and here, and Fareed Zakaria, Newsweek columnist and apologist for neoliberal globalism and US imperialism disguised as reasonable and thoughtful analyst.

Mark to market was put in to keep these corporate rats from lying about their assets and their bottom lines. Amid the catastrophes caused by the rampant accounting fraud and crime accompanying Enron and the other messes, the mark to market rule was instituted. What it means is simple: corporations have to list assets and debts as they really are, not as they think they are in their fairy tale fantasies.

What corporations were doing was this: Suppose I have assets that are worth $10X. That looks pretty bad for my bottom line, so I “re-evaluate them” with the help of some friendly local accountant firm criminals, and now automagically they are actually worth $100X. Why?

Because my accountant criminal buddies and I decided that my assets are actually undervalued, and are worth much more than the market says they are worth. So I get to fool investors, inflate my bottom line and pretend that my insolvent company is actually rolling in it.

Seems like an obvious abuse, no? Seems like a reasonable regulation, no?

Turns out after all that mark to market is sheer government evil. Evil big government is forcing angelic corporations to tell the truth about their net worth instead of lying as they always do, even in their sleep, and this harming the glorified US economy.

Nowadays, banksters and other financial criminals are holding all sorts of assets that are said to be worth, say, $100X. In truth, no one even knows what they are worth, and there is no way to figure it out. Their true value is so low that the banksters act like these assets are toxic waste.

Mark to market means they have to mark them at $30X or $2X or whatever the market says this crap is worth. But what they really want to do is lie and pretend that it’s worth $100X.

Why? Because if the corporations tell the truth about how much their assets are really worth, instead of how much they lie and inflate their worth at, investors will pound their two-bit penny stocks into the ground where they deserve to be pounded.

But that’s bad for the economy. We can’t afford to have the stocks of insolvent companies pounded into the dirt on the basis of honest accounting of assets and debits. Instead, it is necessary to lie, paint a turd to look like a Michelangelo, and keep the sucker/investors marching in the door and laying out the cash. To tell the truth will wreck the economy. To save the economy, we must legalize lying once again.

Does any of this make sense in any rational world? Of course not.

These are the rarefied debates that occupy our ruling elites in these trying times.

*I am not an economist, and I may not have correctly characterized the mark to market rule or the arguments for or against it. If you think I have this wrong, head to the comments or email and let me know.

4 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Crime, Economics, Government, Imperialism, Journalism, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Politics, Racism, Reposts From The Old Site, Republicans, US Politics, White Nationalism