Category Archives: Social Problems

Repost: Average IQ’s of Liberals Versus Conservatives (with References)

Thought I would repost this with references. This finding is very robust in social science. Liberals are smart. Conservatives are idiots. That’s all there is to it, folks. But you knew that.

Jason Voorhees: Liberals in general have an IQ of 110 or above.

Quite an exaggeration. More like 105. 75% of the population has an IQ below 110. On the other hand, he is onto something.

We don’t call em conservatards for nothing, I guess.

Liberals are actually smarter than conservatives! Quite a bit smarter. And the more liberal you are, the smarter you. And the more conservative you are, the dumber you are. It’s a linear curve.

               IQ
Liberals       106  
Centrists      99
Conservatives  96

Source

I would argue that the reason for that is that conservatism is basically stupid. So of course stupid people support it. Fiscal conservatism is intelligent if you are rich and possibly if you are upper middle class, but it’s idiotic for everyone else because only the top 20% make money under rightwing economics. The entire 80% of the population loses money.

Political ideology

Ha ha! Conservatives are stupid! Liberals are smart! Something we always knew. No wonder they are called conservatards. Neener neener. Conservatives are so stupid they probably spell dumb “dum.” LOL.

Rightwing economics is a massive wealth transfer system from the poor and middle classes to the upper middle class and the rich. It’s basically a scam. Pure class war. Incidentally this has been proved all over the 3rd World, especially in Latin America. Surveys in Latin America under the neoliberal decades of failure showed that only the top 20% benefited under rightwing economics. The entire bottom 80% lost money. Furthermore, death rates skyrocketed and education figures collapsed. Neoliberalism has killed many millions of people. We may not have yet found a good alternative to capitalism, but capitalism surely continues to kill as sure as night follows day.

Oh and there is a reason why liberals control most US institutions. Although the idea of a liberal media is pathetic, 89% of media whores, I mean journalists, call themselves liberal. But universities are liberal. The only major US institution that is not liberal is business, which is conservative for basically self-serving interests because conservatism serves to line their pockets better while it picks the pockets of the poor and middle class. Steal from the poor and give to the rich. Reverse Robin Hood. That’s conservatism in action. The fact that the people calling themselves Christians in the US support Reverse Robin Hood is truly pathetic. Obviously they know nothing about how the Main Man lived his life.

References

Carl, Noah. 2014. Verbal Intelligence Is Correlated with Socially and Economically Liberal Beliefs. Intelligence, Volume 44, Pages 142-148.

Stankov, Lazar. 2009. Conservatism and Cognitive Ability. Intelligence, Volume 37, Issue 3, Pages 294-304.

Thompson, James. November 29, 2015. US Academics: Lefty and Liberal Because of High IQ? Unz.com.

Leave a comment

Filed under Capitalism, Christianity, Conservatism, Death, Economics, Education, Fascism, Health, Higher Education, Intelligence, Journalism, Latin American Right, Liberalism, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Psychology, Religion, Social Problems, Sociology

The Second American Civil War, 2016-?

Great post from Judith Mirville.

The country’s pretty much gone at this point in so many ways it’s not even funny. The MSM has completely forfeited its role as arbitrator of truth and instead has transformed into one of the most monstrous propaganda systems the world has ever seen.

The Republican Party is two states away from calling a Constitutional Convention after which they will rewrite the Constitution to end any government role in the well-being of the nation’s citizens. They will also finally dissolve civil rights once and for all, a project they have been whittling away at for a while now. The Voting Rights Act was just overthrown,  taking us back to the 1960’s. The Housing Rights Act is hardly enforced at all. All Republican Presidencies completely defund this arm, and the Democrats don’t do much better.

Every Republican President who comes in completely defunds the EEOC, which is the arm of the government that enforces the Civil  Rights Act in terms of job discrimination. With the EEOC defanged, businesses are very to discriminate as they wish.

The Citizens United case was a dagger deep in the heart of democracy which showed that America was a nation whose only real citizens were the rich and the corporations. The rest of us are servants, peons, sharecroppers, bonded labor, serfs, helots, prisoners or ragamuffin vagabonds.

America is the land of the 1%.

There’s nothing here for the rest of us, the 99%. We are superfluous, and I suppose with the new Trump Wealthcare Act, we are now encouraged to up and die.

The death of what was once a respectable tradition of the GOP began with Ronald Reagan and the move to the Hard Right. The country has been on a rightwing juggernaut ever since, much to its detriment.

Since 1980, we have seen endless conservative treatises to the effect that we are a republic, not a democracy. This requires a bit of shorthand. Whenever a conservative says that, he means he hates democracy.  Conservatives always hate democracy everywhere and and at all times, as conservatism is aristocratic rule by the divine right of kings. This is antithetical to democracy on its very face.

Democracy is rule by the people.

Conservatism is rule by feudal lords, kings, rajahs, czars, Dalai lamas, warlords, emperors, sultans, furhers, generalissimos, caudillos, strongmen, militarists and leaders for life. It is rule by the richest men, the aristocrats, the 1%,  over the 99%, where the money and wealth of the 99% is progressively shoveled upwards to the conservative royalists until the people become more and more impoverished.

When a conservative starts going on and on about how we are a republic, not a democracy, you need to listen very closely to that. He is showing just how much he hates rule by the common man, by the workers, by the salt of the earth, by the people. The state only exists for those wealthy enough to purchase in order to rule in their own name and for their own ends and means.

Since 2000, Republicans have stolen many elections with the use of hacking of computerized voting machines. Indeed Trump’s recent victory was stolen. Not only did he lose the popular vote but he also lost the electoral vote and we can prove it.

Jonathan Simon of Code Red says that the era of election theft from 2000-2107 will be an era of increasingly extreme politics. His reasoning is quite simple. If the Republicans are going to win elections no matter how the people vote, then there are no restrictions on their behavior. They can do whatever they want to without fear of being voted our of office.

The politicians of the aristocracy (the Republican Party) are constrained by fears of being voted out of office. When they no longer have to fear being voted out of office, they can do whatever they want without any fear of the consequences.

Hence we see the extreme Republican Wealthcare Act that throws 23 million off their health care and pulls the plug out from under millions of newborn babies, tens of millions of children, half of the elderly and almost all of the poor. It’s a death sentence for countless Americans. That’s right. A lot of people are going to die, all so the rich can get a tax cut. The Top 400 earners in the US are going to get a $4 billion tax cut with this unspeakably cruel act. Ordinarily, politicians would be afraid to be thrown out of office for voting for such a monstrosity (81% of the public opposes it), but as the Republicans have rigged elections to always win, they have to fear of being voted out so they can act and vote fearlessly.

To me Trump is the proof that the country founded by Franklin and Jefferson rebuilt by Lincoln and Roosevelt just no longer exists: there is no longer any common soul uniting it. The Democratic and Republican parties, though both equally corrupt and dangerous for the survival of humanity, no longer refer to the same country and civilization.

The only thing equivalent elsewhere in the world is the difference between India and Pakistan or between Israel and Palestine: the difference between both in unbridgeable, and the only thing that can bring both under a common government is military occupation of one by the other.

Let’s get over it: Abraham Lincoln’s endeavor never succeeded actually: the Dixieland was occupied and wrought a slow motion revenge onto the rest of the country thanks to military industries and media industries being located in it. It is a different civilization altogether, where doing productive work, or worse still, harboring a mere mental concern for the common good, is considered a shame and something that should be reserved to prisoners and dark people having committed an offence in their previous life. The only other country like that on Earth is the Indo-Gangetic plain where Hinduism and caste are the law of the land.

Lincoln tried to give a common ideal to all Americans, the self-made man, the idea that however lowly is your station of departure in life, there is no limit to your success in life as an entrepreneur, an inventor, a scholar or even a president if you put it the right amount of the right kind of personal effort.

Get over it: the Dixieland never accepted that creed, it is a blasphemy of the God they adore not only as regards Blacks and Mexicans but as regards all social classes the Whites form themselves…and most of the Western Plains conquest was done by Dixielanders even though nominally under Union flag.

Kennedy, exactly one century later, seeing that both countries never united actually, tried to respect the Southern Civilization in the framework of a grander humanistic scheme by devising Political Correctness and multiculturalism as we have been knowing them, and it has proven equally futile an enterprise as Lincoln’s. The Dixieland and the Flyoverland just pounced upon the opportunity given by multiculturalism to enclose themselves in their own cultural no-go zones and also succeeded in having allied recently-immigrated ethnic groups in their enterprise.

However diverse is India, there is just no place in it for Pakistanis, they will rather consider nuclear war rather than accepting diversity of creeds: in the same way, in Kennedy’s new diverse America, there is no place for Dixieland; they already know that multiculturalism is a Marxist scheme organized by extraterrestrials to destroy natural law as they define it.

Secession is the only solution for America.

The present state of America is a Cold War between both countries with presumed spies and traitors from the other side being submitted to punishments and exclusion from professional work as harsh as in the Soviet-occupied parts of Europe (the only thing missing up to know is a new Berlin Wall as in Eastern Germany in the 1950’s just before they built it, but it is Trump’s promise he will never recoil from).

It is also a military occupation of Democratic America by a Republican government in a sweet revenge for the Reconstruction Era: when the Republican cut social programs, they don’t even do it to make their own 1% richer but to punish and crush back down in Third World style misery the 99% of the lands they feel they occupy like the Nazis did in German-occupied France and Eastern Europe during the 1940’s, together with the local 1% as collaborators.

Like the Hitler-led Germans they are ready to suffer themselves all kinds of miseries and revert to Feudal Age renouncement to all modern comforts just to go on with what they feel is their duty : killing once for all the civilization of the Enlightenment.

All KKK-approving lands should have been realistically subject to military occupation following that of Hitler’s Germany, and American citizenship be given back to their own people only on a piecemeal basis as to meritorious Germans at that time. The Civic Rights Movement should have been a military operation with humanistic militants trained for close combat during the Sixties and early Seventies, and devisers of the so-called Southern Strategy within the Republican Party should have been put to death for high treason before the foe.

All strategic industry, especially aerospace, military and media, should have been moved out of that perimeter into friendly territory. But now it is too late: they are the occupiers themselves. It is time for the decent part of America to organize military resistance together with foreign allied countries supporting or just tolerating humanism in the world however undemocratic they are themselves.

Make no mistake about it: the people of Flyover America, now onwards to be known as Murrica, consider all forms of upward social mobility and all endeavors to make the world better as the cardinal sin against their God’s law and the ability to make money in a zero sum game as the physical manifestation of their God’s grace.

They consider that over-educated people, that is to say educated beyond their own capacity to make money and for another aim than personal financial success, have forfeited their right to life, liberty and happiness and should be treated as Indian Untouchables. They actually stick to that dogma with far more fanaticism and less humanity than right-wing Hindu Indians themselves, most of whom abide by that rather play a humorous game in comparison, and all they ask from an Untouchable is not to be educated in Sanskrit and other sciences they consider sacred. They have no problem with one who succeeds to make himself known as an English writer.

7 Comments

Filed under American, Anti-Racism, Civil Rights, Conservatism, Culture, Death, Democrats, Discrimination, Education, Government, Health, Hinduism, History, Housing, India, Law, Pakistan, Political Science, Politics, Racism, Regional, Religion, Republicans, Social Problems, Sociology, South, South Asia, US, US Politics, USA

PUA/Game: Single Men as a Societal Problem

Single men live much shorter lifespans because they don’t have a woman to take care of them. Men hate going to the doctor. Single men drink more, take drugs more, gamble more, eat poorly, do not mind their health, get into more fights with other men, commit more crimes, drive faster, and take more risks. All of that adds up to a shorter lifespan. Single men are actually a problem for society, and this was one reason that the marriage institution was put into place.

The Gold Rush was a great example of what happens when you flood a state with countless single men from all over the world with greed in their eyes, guns in their pants, and no women to control them. The crime rate in the Gold Rush was 20-30X what it is now. That was exclusively a feature of a hordes of single men, little or no law enforcement, lots of guns, and way too much gold and money. They had hangings in the Gold Rush camps every weekend. Men would get roaring drunk on Friday and  Saturday night, go to the hangings on Saturday afternoon, and clean up and go to church on Sunday. The few women who came to California were prostitutes, and there were not nearly enough of those.

Society realized long ago that single men were a problem and were bad for society. Landlords used to charge them higher rents because they caused more problems. Many occupations discriminated against single men. Eventually it became quite taboo to be single past a certain age when it would be assumed you were homosexual or there was something wrong with you. A lot of the prejudice was simply homophobia but it was also rooted in a deep conviction that the fewer single men you had around, the better and that marriage ameliorated a lot of societal problems.

Prescriptions on premarital sex for women and extramarital sex for everyone made it difficult for single men to get sex without paying for it. These restrictions on women were in part to control female sexuality as all societies do, but they were also as a weapon to be wielded against single men.

“You want sex? Well then, get married. You want to be a bachelor? No problem. No pussy then, guy.”

Back in my father’s day it was not an exaggeration that many men married for sex. Sure, they were in love with their wives too in many cases, but women really do not want to hear about how many men married for sex back then.

2 Comments

Filed under California, Crime, Gender Studies, History, Law enforcement, Man World, Modern, Psychology, Regional, Romantic Relationships, Social Problems, Sociology, US, USA, West, Women

73% of Venezuelans Continue to Support Chavismo

Tulio: Robert, I have two friends from Venezuela, a married couple, the female is white, the male is dark brown. I assure you they are not racist, they have never called me “mono” and they have been completely and 100% kind to me as long as I’ve known them. I have even visited them and stayed in their home, and they have visited me and stayed in mine. Never seen their bank account but I’m pretty sure they are not rich.

They are probably middle class by Venezuelan definition. They are 100% opposed to Chavismo. I don’t even know where they fall on the left-right continuum per se. They really don’t even talk much politics with me outside of opposing the condition their country is in. They are now living in Santiago, Chile where they worked and resided since the rise of Chavez, but frequently go to Venezuela to see family. I’m not an expert of Venezuelan internal affairs by any means. I’ve gotten a lot of my info directly from them.

Neither of them seem “right wing” to me in any sense that I understand the term. They seem to want nothing more than a stable, functional and non-authoritarian government. I also see massive marches in Caracas. I can’t believe all those tens of thousands of people are rich, right wingers. When I see close up photos of the crowd, they look like just ordinary Venezuelans to me. You seem to be painting a broad brush here and assuming anyone against Chavismo is a hard right-winger

Any Venezuelan who has the money to travel out of the country to the US or back and forth to Chile all the time, all by plane, is by definition not middle class. I would call those people upper middle class.

There will never be a government like they want in there as long as Chavismo is in because the Opposition will always be rioting in the streets and tearing stuff up like they have been doing ever since he got in. These people say they want a non-authoritarian government, but they supported the coup against Chavez. The first things the putschists did was to dissolve Congress, the National Assembly and Courts and put in martial law. They put a dictatorship in as soon as the coup took power.

The poster’s friends say they want a non-authoritarian state, but they support the extreme dictatorship that took power in the coup. The Opposition riots in the streets and calls for a coup every time they lose an election. This is because every time they lose an election, they insist against all evidence that it was stolen from them. Their calculus is that the only legitimate elections are the ones that they win. If the other side wins, it’s automatically stolen due to fraud, and we need to have a military coup to put “democracy” back in power. That ideology does not sound very democratic to me.  To the Opposition,  the definition of democracy is “when we win.” The definition of dictatorship is “when the other side wins.” Sound like a democratic project?

streambe_701e8e79-0687-3fce-8148-a667ce920929--1399436008

A decptively large Opposition crowd in Venezuela. You will not find one working class, low income or poor person in that crowd. Everyone is middle class to rich. And no matter how big that crowd is, the Chavista march will always be a lot bigger. That crowd represents 27% of the population. That’s called a minority movement.

They lack majority support. That crowd is the upper class, the upper middle class and unfortunately a lot of the middle class. There are a lot of middle class people in those crowds.

This is where the poster is getting his ideology from. Them and their lies. The Venezuelan Opposition is out of their minds. They are not rational and they are not honest. They lie constantly. They are as bad as Trump and the Trumpster Republicans, and in fact, both movements are very similar.

The project of the Opposition is extreme rightwing. I told you that they regularly call Chavez mono and that they removed Bolivar’s portrait because he was a bit too swarthy and not White enough and replaced it with a more proper Nordic one. The poster’s friends may not be racist reactionaries, but a lot of the people in the Opposition are very racist, and the poster’s friends are not denouncing that. I guess they are OK with it.

The project of the Opposition is to dismantle all of Chavismo and to go back to the way it was.

They are going to take it all down – the free health care, the free education, the neighborhood councils and circles, the public housing, the redistribution of oil income to the people, the cheap government-subsidized food and household goods to the people, the free houses given to the people, the public spending on infrastructure, the whole nine yards. Before Chavez came in, you never went to the doctor, the dentist or the eye doctor because you could not afford it. You either got over the medical issue or you died. Raw sewage ran down the streets of the shantytowns on the hills. In 1989, 91% of the people could afford only one meal a day and that was the same percentage of people in poverty. Venezuela had always been like this since Independence. The oligarchy had always been in charge and had never lifted one damn finger for the people.

All of the opposition politicians want to go back to that. All of them. The poster’s friends may not realize this, or perhaps they do not care. The Latin American middle class has always lined up with the Extreme Right project of the rich and the oligarchs, much to their detriment. This is because they consider the opposition to that  project to be Communists, and they think that is worse.

In Latin America, it’s Commies or Fascists. That’s your choice. Pick your poison. That’s because moderation or a Centrist project never works down there. The problems are too severe, and Centrist projects never touch the power of the oligarchs, so nothing ever changes.

Venezuela has never been more democratic than under Chavez. Venezuela has the freest press in Latin America. The authoritarian dictatorship crap is another big fat lie the Opposition made up.

73% of the Venezuelan people continue to support the Chavista Project because it’s the only one that’s for the people. The Opposition has no numbers. Those people you see marching above are part of the 27% opposition, and that is why they never win. I would also point out that pro-government marches happen at the same time as those Opposition marches, and they are almost always much bigger. You just never read about them in the Western media.

Those 73% are not stupid. They remember life back when the oligarchy ruled. They know that the Opposition wants to go directly back to that and not change one thing. This has been their project from Day One. Yes, it is a very far right, reactionary project. Compared to what the Opposition wants, most of the people want to stay with Chavismo.

14 Comments

Filed under Chile, Conservatism, Fascism, Government, Latin America, Latin American Right, Left, Marxism, Political Science, Politics, Racism, Regional, Social Problems, Sociology, South America, Venezuela, White Racism

Down with Colin Flaherty

I did not even bother to watch much of this video because his videos and articles make me so sick. The problem is that this guy’s whole shtick is that he is not racist at all in any way whatsoever! No really. That’s exactly what he says. And that’s how he comes across, endlessly, in article after article and video after video. And that is exactly why this man is so dangerous.

Mr. Flaherty is a journalist, and a good one at that. But in his middle age, he has decided to branch out into the area of Black crime, except that his focus has a twist – it’s all about Black crime against Whites. The subtext of every Flaherty article or video is that Black people are deliberately singling out Whites to attack as hunters single out prey. Nothing could be more nonsensical. Blacks do not preferentially prey on Whites. It’s nonsense. 89% of Black homicides are of other Black people. Most Black crime is Black on Black crime. Much is made of Black men raping White women, but Black men rape Black women at 5X the rate that they rape White women. There are all sorts of nutty arguments that try to deal with these uncomfortable truths while keeping the lousy theory alive.

The principal one was symbolized by the noted theory of Le Griffe du Lion, a very racist White professor of…get this…sociology! He did some fancy mathematics showing that Black people mostly see other Black people all day long and don’t see many White people. So of course they prey mostly on their own kind. That’s who they are around all the time! If Blacks were around Whites just as much as they were around Blacks, their propensity to hunt Whites preferentially as a predator hunts its prey (Le Griffe’s exact words) would come out.

But the other side can play that game too. There are 6X more Whites than Blacks. If Blacks displayed no preference at all in victims, they would kill 6X more Whites than Blacks, right? This argument spouts the rejoinder of “But they are only around their own kind all day…” which is probably a tautology and is certainly not falsifiable, so it fails as theory on its face.

Flaherty wrote a book called, White Girl Bleed a Lot. It’s all about Black crime against Whites. Yes Blacks commit some very bad crimes against Whites. But they commit just as bad or worse crimes against their own kind. So only writing about Black crime against Whites is lying in a sense, and worse, you are selling a form of poison to the masses. Racist poison. A really nasty racist poison.

Because nothing drives Whites up the wall more than the idea that Blacks preferentially prey on them as victims. Some of these theorists even go as far as to say that Blacks are waging a low level guerrilla war against Whites. Oh what nonsense.

But if you study ethnic conflicts all over the world, one of the things that sets off massacres and ethnic cleansings is the notion that Group B, the outgroup, is trying to kill us, Group A.

Hitler set off the genocide by saying the Jews were trying to exterminate Germans.

The Rwandan genocide was set off in the same way.

The Sunni-Shia wars start off in exactly the same way. ISIS propaganda goes to great lengths to show how the Shia are preferentially singling out and slaughtering the Sunni. “They’re trying to kill us all,” is the message.

This was the line that the Young Turks used to kill 1.7 million Armenians. “The Armenians were starting a war against the Turks and they were trying to kill all the Turks.”

The genocide against Muslims in Bosnia was set off Serbian lies that, “The Muslims were trying to kill the Serbs.”

Even the anti-Communist slaughters of the last century which the US fully participated in, each and every one of them, were predicated on the idea that the Communist killers were going to seize power and kill lots of people.

Hitler justified his genocide against the Jews by saying that they were Communists and that the Communists were mass murderers who were “killing millions of Christians” in the Ukraine. Yes, the fake Holodomor, the terror famine that never even happened, was used as a pretext for the Holocaust. Remember that the next time any of you wants to rant about “Stalin’s terror famine.” Every time you say that, you are repeating Nazi propaganda. Does it make you feel good to parrot Hitler?

Many of the massacres of Indians were predicated on the notion that the Indians “were coming to kill us all.” In the original wording of the Declaration of Independence, there is language about how savage the Indians fought, knowing none of the rules of decency in wartime. “They’re savages, so we need to kill them all.” See how that works?

In Indonesia in 1965, there was supposedly a Communist coup to take over the government. All the world’s media reported it exactly that way. Except that it never happened. There was a fake Communist coup to take over the government. “The Communists tried to take over and they are going to kill millions of people” lie was then used as an excuse to kill 1 million Communists all over Indonesia in only a few months. Most were hacked to death with machetes. Islamic fundamentalists were used by the US and Indonesia in this slaughter.

The CIA was on the scene immediately and they supplied the new government with lists of known Communists. These lists were then used to single out people for killing. The US media then lied about the whole affair, with the execrable New York Times leading the charge. Later there was an attempt to bury this mass slaughter as “unfortunate but necessary and a good idea in the long run.” It was only years or even decades that we learned the truth about the fake coup and the mass slaughter. The Left was devastated in Indonesia and has remained in a meager state to this day. Obviously people in Indonesia have gotten the message about what happens to Leftists.

Hence it follows that once White people get it in their heads that “the Blacks are trying to kill us” we can set ourselves up for some serious persecutions of Blacks based on that narrative. I doubt if we will start massacring Blacks, but “the Blacks are trying to rape and kill Whites” was always the excuse for lynchings and Jim Crow.

It’s an ugly narrative, and it’s a lie.

I could write articles about this sort of thing too. I see articles all the time about Black people acting terrible, killing each other, killing White people, you name it. 98% of the time, I choose not to write about it. Why write about it? Yes, we know Black people commit tons of crime, including violent crime. Yes, we know Black men have a high homicide rate.

Yes, we know that Black men kill many White people – but they kill far more Black people and by and large, they prey mostly on their own kind.

Looking at the larger picture, Black criminals simply prey on other humans. They rob, rape and kill Hispanics, Asians, Whites and Blacks. They attack everyone. They are not real particular. And the evidence shows that if anything, they by far preferentially select their own kind for violence and they preferentially select against White victims. So if anything, Blacks prefer to prey on their own kind and it looks like Blacks actively avoid preying on Whites. If that’s the reality, then it’s quite a poisonous stew to cook up to sell the lie that Blacks preferentially attack Whites. “They’re coming to kill us! The Blacks are trying to kill us White people!” It’s not only a lie, but it’s a very dangerous lie, a mental poison with grave effects.

Just to see what sort of vibes Flaherty is churning up, look at the commenters. Looks like Niggermania, Chimpout, American Renaissance and Stormfront. There are all sorts of very vicious and ugly remarks against Black people as a race on there. So even if Flaherty really is a non-racist as he insists, look at all the wild racism that his irresponsible (or worse) videos and articles sprout. He’s fertilizing the land with poison, watching the weeds he watered grow and take over the land and choke out all the good and  decent crops, all the while protesting that he had nothing to do with it, he was just some innocent farmer trying to grow crops. Yeah. Crops of weeds.

Whenever I see that language, I think, “This person is promoting hatred against Phil, Tulio and Alpha.” I think that’s unacceptable. None of these Black people do much of anything wrong, they all live like good, law abiding citizens, and in short, they are good people. Selling hate propaganda against good people just because they are Black is just wrong.

And that is why you, Mr. Flaherty, are wrong.

And that is why you, Mr. Flaherty, are promoting a very dangerous lie.

156 Comments

Filed under Amerindians, Armenians, Asia, Blacks, Christianity, Crime, Europe, History, Indonesia, Islam, Jews, Journalism, Left, Marxism, Modern, Near Easterners, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, SE Asia, Serbians, Shiism, Social Problems, Sociology, Sunnism, Turks, USA, USSR, White Racism, Whites

My Reaction to the BBC Show “Three Girls,” by Magneto

My Reaction to the BBC Show Three Girls

by Magneto

I was very surprised when I saw the three-episode drama series “Three Girls” on BBC. It is a drama about the true events of Pakistani men grooming and raping young White British school girls. The reason I was surprised was because I never expected such a Cultural Marxist, pro-multiculturalism channel like the BBC to ever show anything which might give a negative impression on immigrants.
The first reaction most people will get after watching that is to feel anger and hate towards Pakistani men and to want to expel them from the UK. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Three Girls show caused the membership in White Supremacist organizations to double or triple. It’s a very disturbing show that is guaranteed to get an emotional reaction out of people.
But on thinking a bit deeper I realized that why should I feel angry? After all, these are the same White western women who have been shitting on White men for decades now and treating White men like shit in the name of feminism. Why should I care if they get raped? White women have treated White men like shit for decades, and now all of a sudden White men are supposed to jump to their defense? After years of White women screaming they are independent and don’t need a man’s help?
White women have effectively betrayed their own race by accepting feminism. Men do not have a duty to help people who have betrayed them. White women disrespect nice, normal White men as “nice guy Beta males,” go jump on the cock of the first Pakistani man they can find, and when things go wrong, expect the same nice guy Beta male White men to come to their defense and rescue them?
Sorry ladies, but you made your bed and now you have to lie in it. How many tens of millions of White men’s lives have been destroyed by White women in divorce? How many hundreds of thousands of White men have been driven to suicide after having their kids kidnapped by their ex-wives in divorce court and denied custody or visitation rights? And where was the White female outcry about this? There was none. White women have effectively stated that they could care less if the divorce system is so unfair to men that it drives men to suicide.
White women have raped tens of millions of White men in divorce court but now expect White men to feel an obligation to “save them” from the invading barbarian hordes who rape them? I don’t think so.
To make matters even worse, if a White male dares to even verbally protest against the anti-male feminist legal system, he is a “misogynist”. That’s like saying Jews who verbally protest against Nazis murdering them are being “racist against Nazis”. This is how badly feminism has infected the West. If a man so much as dares to suggest that men should be treated like human beings with human rights, he is a misogynist. As a result, tens of millions of younger men have become alienated from society, and this has led to the rise of ultra-conservative politicians beginning to win elections.
There is also somewhat of a generational divide in terms of this issue. Baby Boomer and Generation X men, basically any man over the age of 40, did not grow up in a man-hating feminist society. Women were still somewhat feminine and good during the youth of the Boomers and Gen Xers. But Millennial men and Generation Z men have grown up from birth in an anti-male feminist society, and that is why the majority of younger men are anti-feminist. Older men simply can’t comprehend this because they didn’t grow up in such a society.
The message that younger men have gotten from society and women in general is very clear- you hate us and don’t need us. Therefore do not be surprised when men do not come to the defense of women when women are in very real trouble.

96 Comments

Filed under Britain, Conservatism, Crime, Europe, Feminism, Gender Studies, Guest Posts, Law, Man World, Pakistanis, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Social Problems, Sociology, South Asians, Whites

“Are Brown Women the Answer for White Men?” by Magneto

Are Brown Women the Answer for White Men?

by Magneto

You don’t have to be a sociologist to figure out that feminism has hit White women the hardest. Feminism has influenced and affected all races of women, of course. But it seems that White women have become the most toxic women on the planet due to it. Is there some racial or cultural reason for this? I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about this and here are some of my ideas.

White women have never been an oppressed race of women. Throughout history, White women have been the most privileged and spoiled race of women on earth. White women were treated like queens and never had to do manual labor outdoors in the hot sun like Black slave women or Brown women working in hot kitchens to cook meals for their families. White women never even had to learn to cook because they would just hire a Brown woman to do the cooking for them.

So you have this category of extremely privileged women who have developed a massive ego superiority complex over hundreds of years, and then you brainwash them with the idea that they are oppressed? Of course they will swallow such nonsense. It’s like a spoiled child. If you tell a spoiled child that they are a victim and are suffering from oppression, the spoiled child will believe you. Not because they are oppressed, but because they have become such extremely selfish people due to years of being spoiled.

Therefore the root cause seems to be selfishness. I think it’s safe to say that White women are the most selfish race of women on this planet. Of course there are some rare exceptions, but for the most part, do you see White women sacrificing their own happiness to serve their families the way that Brown and Black women do? Can you imagine a White woman voluntarily staying home to lovingly raise her children the same way that Brown women do?

Nope. White women are brainwashed that they need to live and experience the world and they can settle down later on in life. So while Brown and Black women are at home raising children and taking care of their families, White women are travelling all over the world and getting pumped and dumped like trashy whores.

I remember that I briefly dated a Mexican woman after I had just had a pretty bad experience with a White American woman. I was talking to the Mexican girl and telling her about the White girl, and the Mexican girl said, “She sounds like a very selfish person”. It really hit me at that point how different White women and Brown women are. Looking at that sexy Mexican girl with her dark brown skin, dark eyes, and black hair, I felt so attracted to and connected with her. I had never really had that kind of connection with a White woman, ever.

To summarize what I am trying to express in an overly simplistic way. If you marry a White woman, expect to get treated like shit by her, and there is a very real possibility she will divorce you, kidnap your kids from you, destroy you financially and emotionally in divorce, and then use the kids and custody as a weapon of extortion against you to try to literally drive you to suicide. White women are the embodiment of extreme selfishness. Now, on the other hand, if you marry a Brown or Black woman? You can expect to come home every day to a loving wife who will treat you with respect, who will lovingly raise your children, and who will be supportive of you and be a partner with you instead of a competitor.

White women have simply lost the ability to be good wives and mothers. I sometimes doubt if White women were ever good wives and mothers at any time in human history or if they have always been such extremely selfish creatures. Brown women are natural and are the embodiment of feminine grace and beauty. I think many White men realize all of this on a subconscious level, and that is why so many White guys marry Asian or Brown women.

White women are truly the Achilles heel of the White race. The Western world is in a state of total collapse right now, and it is directly the result of White women’s selfish life choices. I would advise all sane White males to turn towards Brown, Asian, or Black women and live a peaceful and happy life with them. Leave trashy White women behind and let them get pumped and dumped by White Trash trailer park garbage. Already it is happening. White men who are married to Asian, Brown, or Black women make $10K more dollars per year on average than White men who are married to White women. So that’s just more proof that if you’re a White male and want to have a successful life, the best option for you is to marry an Asian, Brown, or Black woman. Marrying a White woman is the quickest way to financial and emotional ruin.

74 Comments

Filed under Asians, Blacks, Feminism, Gender Studies, Guest Posts, Hispanics, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Romantic Relationships, Social Problems, Sociology, Whites, Women

“Latest Feminist Trend – Call All Men Pedophiles,” by Magneto

Latest Feminist Trend – Call All Men Pedophiles

by Magneto

Apparently calling all men rapists has gotten tiring for feminists, so now they need a new straw man label to throw at men. Well that new label is to call all men pedophiles. I believe Robert recently dealt with this exact issue.

Let’s say a woman sees something you wrote and doesn’t like it? Rather than logically refute your article, it would be much easier for her to just start throwing pejoratives at you. Nowadays calling men rapists doesn’t carry much weight since they’ve beaten that one to death. Instead the main pejorative women throw at you when they can’t defeat you in an argument is to just call you a pedophile.

One time I was on a Facebook group and I mentioned that I am married to a foreign woman. Immediately some White woman started attacking me and calling me a pedophile. Do White women even realize how racist they are? They are implying that non-White women are all just a bunch of girly dolls and slaves who cannot think for themselves, and thus any man who marries them must be a pedophile. Because after all, docile, feminine, non-feminist foreign women aren’t big, strong, independent women like White women. White women are implying that only White women are “mature adults,” and non-White women are all just “immature children”.

I also dealt with this recently. I’m friends with a lot of younger people from Generation Z (people born after the year 2000) because I really get along well with them. Why do I get along well with them? Because they are all very red-pilled. They all hate feminism, multiculturalism, and SJWs. Being friends with them gives me a feeling of hope for the future, and as a result I became a much more positive person.

So I randomly message a lot of people on Facebook and Instagram, just chatting and getting to know random people. I messaged some White chick from the UK. She asked me my age, and I told her I am in my 30’s. She reacted in a shocked way and said she was 14. I said cool, that’s fine with me.

Then she added me to a private chat group with her mom, dad, and brother and sister and the name of the chat group was “Pedo Help”. They started attacking me and accusing me of being a pedophile, and I told them “What the fuck is wrong with you people? What kind of horrible parents you are that you would brainwash your children to believe the whole world is out to get them, and everyone over age 30 is a pedophile. You should be ashamed of yourselves. And by the way, I’m friends with tons of younger people and none of them have ever accused me of being a pedophile before.”

Then they posted a picture I had posted of an Indian chick and I laughed, typing “LOL” and wrote “That girl is over 18, by the way”. I kept telling the mom that she is a horrible mother and should be ashamed for filling her children’s head with so much fear. The mother was probably 35 or so, a member of the Millennial SJW Generation. I finally just told her to go fuck herself, left the chat and blocked them all.

Unfortunately, the Millennial generation is the worst generation to ever exist. The vast majority are radical SJWs, and this is perhaps why the younger generation, Gen Z, is rejecting all of their SJW bullshit. I can’t wait for Generation Z to reach voting age, so they can start voting against the Millennials’ bullshit SJW politics. Millennial women are all total cancer. They are the worst feminists you will ever encounter.

Now what has been the practical result of this “All men are pedophiles” feminist hysteria?

The result is that men are afraid to even help a child if the child is in a life or death situation. Let’s say a child is drowning in a swimming pool. Most men would be afraid to jump in and help the child for fear that their SJW parents might accuse him of being a pedophile. The toxic man-hatred of Western women has reached such a point that many men are outright saying that they would never help a woman even in a life or death situation. For instance if a woman was getting raped in the street. Many men have openly stated that they would not help the woman because if they stop and help the woman, she might very well accuse him of trying to rape her too.

Western women have completely destroyed men’s natural instinct to protect women. Just think about that. That is the degree of man-hatred that Western women possess. They have successfully pissed off men to such an extent that men will refuse to help them even in a life or death situation. Congratulations, ladies. You got what you wanted. You have been telling us men for decades that you hate us and don’t need us. Fine. Next time you are getting raped or beaten or robbed in the street? Don’t be surprised when no man comes to your aide. You are truly on your own now and have attained the independence that you claimed you have wanted all this time. Enjoy, ladies!

30 Comments

Filed under Cultural Marxists, Feminism, Gender Studies, Guest Posts, Man World, Mass Hysterias, Pedophile Mass Hysteria, Race/Ethnicity, Radical Feminists, Social Problems, Sociology, Whites, Women

Psychological Effects of Their Work on Slaughterhouse Workers

Good comment from Kim, one of our excellent commenters. It’s not related to the murder case, but it shows you Delphi may not be the idyllic small Indiana town that everyone thinks it is. There is a very high percentage of RSO’s for such a small town, apparently related to the slaughterhouse in town. Slaughterhouse employees in turn develop psychological effects that would be at odds with the image of a peaceful and easy-going small town.

So beneath the cozy image, there does seem to be a very dark undercurrent running under the town of Delphi.

Kim: This is an article cited from another site about Registered Sex Offenders (RSO’s) and meat-packing plants. It may not be relevant to the crime, but it paints a grittier picture of the Delphi area.

Originally Posted by Blighted Star

No, you read right the first time. Those 54 RSO’s are are all linked to the very small town of Delphi, population 3,000. Check the other “known addresses” on most of them & you’ll see “Indiana Packers Co-op” (or something like it) on over 40 out of the 54 – because the abattoir up the road from the high bridge seems to have a hiring program for RSO’s. They’ve got men designated “sexually violent offenders” working on their kill floor & it doesn’t seem to occur to them that in that particular field of employment, it’s not necessarily a good thing to hire people who might be enjoying their work.

Holy crap!

This excerpt is taken from:

Killing for a Living: Psychological and Physiological Effects of Alienation of Food Production on Slaughterhouse Workers

By Anna Dorovskikh University of Colorado at Boulder

http://scholar.colorado.edu/cgi/view…xt=honr_theses

In Perpetration-Induced Traumatic Stress: The Psychological Consequences of Killing, the study by Rachel M. MacNair describes Perpetration-Induced Traumatic Stress as a from of post-traumatic stress disorder with symptoms of drug and alcohol abuse, panic, depression, paranoia, dissociation, anxiety, and depression stemming from the act of killing.

One study found that slaughterhouse workers, especially those responsible for the direct delivery of the act of killing and participating in the process of slaughter on a daily basis, may be susceptible to PITS as form of PTSD (Dillard, 2008).

One of the symptoms of PITS is having recurring dreams of violent acts, and there are several reports of workers being taken to the mental hospital for treatment of severe cases (Dillard, 2008). Certain jobs like having the responsibility to be the first to kill the animal may have stronger effects on the worker than other jobs. Oftentimes substance abuse of drugs such as methamphetamine (Schlosser, 2002) and alcohol is very common amongst slaughter employees as a coping mechanisms of the emotional toll (Dillard, 2008).

A former hog-sticker (worker who stabs hogs to bleed to death) said, “A lot of the slaughterhouse hog killers have problems with alcohol. They have to drink, they have no other way of dealing with killing live, kicking animals all day long. If you stop and think about it, you’re killing several thousand beings a day” (Dillard, p. 397, 2008).

Another employee explains that slaughter workers can’t care about animals they’re killing.

“The worst thing, even worse than the physical danger, is the emotional toll of the job. If you work in that stick pit for any period of time, you develop an attitude that lets you kill things but doesn’t let you care. You may look a hog in the eye that’s walking around down in the blood pit with you, and think, God, that really isn’t a bad-looking animal. You may want to pet it. Pigs down on the kill floor have come up and nuzzled me like a puppy. Two minutes later I had to kill them by beating beat them to death with a pipe.

Use of a pipe to kill hogs came up quite a few times reading through literature and general websites. Another employee interviewed said: “It’s called `piping.’ All the drivers use pipes to kill hogs that can’t go through the chutes. Or if you get a hog that refuses to go in the chutes and is stopping production, you beat him to death. Then push him off to the side and hang him up later” (Eisnitz, p. 53, 2009).

Some employees even report killing animals for fun without feeling any remorse, suggesting that they are suffering psychological damage to the point of developing abnormal cruelty. Mental changes of this sort would generate concern amongst the general population (Dillard, 2008).

Several studies on empathy amongst farmers in animal agriculture show that slaughterhouse workers and farmers exhibit lower levels of empathy towards animals than the general population. Desensitization was not an uncommon factor amongst the employees of this sector (Dillard, 2008).

A study done on butchers working in the slaughterhouse and retail meatpacking business revealed that as butchers work in a negative environment almost every single day, they displayed the highest levels of somatization and anger hostility among the general occupation of butchery. Once factors like age and education were accounted for, this study of 82 male butchers found higher rates of work accidents, injuries, physical disorders, use of alcohol and drugs, as well as a higher employee turnover (Emhan et al. 2012).

Usually fully aware of the kills that go on every single day, the workers either become very distressed and leave the job or they become numb and begin to display signs of apathy. Some even begin to enjoy the infliction of pain (Helle 2012). Some become less empathetic under conditions of stress as well. See this example:

“This is kind of hard to talk about. You’re under all this stress, all this pressure. And it really sounds mean, but I’ve taken prods and stuck them in their (hogs’) eyes and held them there.” (Eisnitz, p. 53, 2009).

Lower empathy in slaughterhouse workers may be responsible for higher crime rates in neighborhoods where such facilities are located including homicides carried out in a manner of animal slaughtering practices (Dillard, 2008). Amy Fitzgerald, a sociologist investigating the effects of slaughterhouses on communities tested a “Sinclair effect,” a theory Upton Sinclair proposed more than 100 years ago, noting that slaughterhouses had negative effects on workers and communities through increases in crime and unemployment rates.

5 Comments

Filed under Agricutlure, Alcohol, Animals, Anxiety Disorders, Crime, Depressants, Depression, Domestic, Intoxicants, Labor, Mental Illness, Midwest, Mood Disorders, Pigs, Psychology, Psychopathology, Regional, Serial Killers, Social Problems, Sociology, Speed, Stimulants, USA

Some Possible Policies for Improving the Black Problem in the US

Some Random Asshole: Robert, what James said her excellently represents the rational and fair view on race. Yeah, there are quite a few more feeble minded and uncivilized ones and really not that many smart ones among Blacks or Mexicans when compared to Whites or Asians, but there are exceptions everywhere. And even the fucked up ones are often not that bad and just need some guidance and welfare or something, even if they wont amount to much in life. Didn’t you think as much when you taught at Black schools?

The only thing is, you need to realize that we really just do not need to increase their numbers and its very important for us to stay majority White and Asian and stop certain groups from immigrating here. Its no offense to the other groups, they should be treated with respect and care…but at the same time, its ultimately disastrous to increase their numbers to the point where they become the majority. Its a fair balance, I think.

Treat them nice but do not bring in any more. Both ideas are crucial to the survival of civilized society.

You are new to the site, right? I have been arguing this fact for a long time now. I do not care too much about Mexicans, but Blacks definitely are a problem race. Now you ask me what I propose to do about that?

Honestly I am not sure if this is much that can be done!

Support Black politics. I love the Black Congressional Caucus. That’s one of my favorite groups in government. I love John Lewis. The legislation that the Blacks like and promote in Congress is reasonable, and support most all of it. Keep on doing that.

Keep on fighting real racism against Blacks because that just makes them even angrier, crazier and more hair-triggered than they already are.

I would even like to figure out why they are so damned violent and maybe give them a pill or something to lower their testosterone levels perhaps and calm them down. Liberals go start raving berserk when I say that. They scream, “Tuskegee! Tuskegee! Tuskegee! Tuskegee! Tuskegee!” I would make it voluntary of course. Say you are a Black man and you keep getting in trouble, keep acting violent, keep going to jail or prison, can’t control your temper or your impulses. Maybe you start figuring that your biology might be screwing up your life and you are getting tired of being a loser. Maybe some of these Blacks might take some pill we could make that caused them to lash out and screw up so much. What’s wrong with that? Why am I evil for saying that?

And of course, number one really, quit importing them, dammit. If you have a problem group of people, first of all, you quit bringing in even more of them and making the problem bigger.

However, I would allow anyone of any race with say a minimum 100 IQ to come to the US. I do not anticipate a big problem with this. If a 100 IQ Black or Hispanic wishes to come here, I do not see why we should not let him in.

76 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Asians, Blacks, Government, Hispanics, Immigration, Intelligence, Liberalism, Political Science, Politics, Psychology, Race Realism, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Social Problems, Sociology, US Politics, USA, Whites