In Russia, there is freedom

August 31st, 2015

Recently a gay black journalist murdered a white woman and a white man because he hates whites. This happens all the time, continually, day and night, but was more newsworthy this time because he did it live on air and on Facebook and explained his reasons on Facebook.

In Russia, but not in America, the news reported this event as “a black man …”

We love Putin, because Putin defends freedom.

Trump: Empowering the powerless

August 27th, 2015

There is a rule that people like Jorge Ramos are entitled to act like like the subhuman savages that they are, and white males must respectfully suck it up.

Trump broke that rule.

People like Jorge Ramos should not be allowed out in public without a leash. All men are not created equal, and forcing people to act as if they were unavoidably and necessarily oppresses the superior.

This post categorized in culture rather than politics, because election campaigns are merely theater. Trump bouncing Jorge Ramos is more important than anything a president can do.

It begins

August 23rd, 2015

A huge flood of blacks from subsaharan Africa is pouring into Europe, since stopping them has very recently been made illegal, and when they arrive, they are guaranteed free food and housing, and the welfare state and feminist laws has left white pussy readily available, undefended, and defenseless.   What man in his right mind will protect a slut (assuming she wants to be protected, which is unlikely)?

A necessary consequence is that whites are going to be eliminated from Europe – probably not any time very soon, but now it begins:

Boris Palmer, the Green Party mayor of Tübingen, told Welt newspaper the town was struggling to find accommodation for migrants.

“The Police Law has clear rules. If there is a threat of homelessness in a city, vacant houses can be seized for accommodation,” Mr Palmer said.

And if they are not vacant now, they will be soon after a bunch of blacks move in next door.

These guys were sleeping in mud and thatch huts before they came, if they were not sleeping in the long grass. Now they get a house some white man built. And when they turn that house into a burned out ruin, after the fashion of Detroit, built by whites, burned by blacks, they will complain of racism and systematic discrimination because whites still have nicer stuff than they do, so they need to take more white stuff and wreck it also.

Blacks are like locusts. They take the stuff that white people built, for example the American inner city, destroy it, and then move on to take something else. They cannot be stopped because the state apparatus forbids white collective self defense, while encouraging black collective rioting, encouraging collective attacks on random isolated whites motivated by black hatred of whites and black sense of collective identity. This raises the cost of housing for white people to unaffordable levels, preventing family formation.

Whites move out from their houses because of state sponsored collective black violence, as is happening now in Baltimore and Ferguson, and blacks move in to houses white people built.

Trump plan to stop (nonwhite) immigration

August 17th, 2015

The Trump plan broadens the Overton Window by speaking the unspeakable.

Ann Coulter says “I don’t care if @realDonaldTrump wants to perform abortions in White House after this immigration policy paper. http://bit.ly/1EvT3Ja

Of course ending immigration is enormously popular.   Everyone is unhappy with the program to turn all white nations majority nonwhite in the fairly near future, but no one dares say so.  The program  will turn whites into a market dominant minority, and market dominant minorities usually get genocided or ethnically cleansed sooner or later, as for example Zimbabwe and large parts of South Africa.

The ideology justifying the eradication of whites is already in place and taught at every school.  White males cause poor performance of women and nonwhites by thinking evil thoughts at them.  They do this because they are just hateful and malicious.   For example after blacks acquired Detroit, whites, out of sheer hateful malice, turned it into a third world hell hole by thinking evil thoughts at it.  Since no amount of thought reform seems able to halt these evil thoughts, obviously white males have to be eradicated and white females bred with nonwhites.

Of course it is possible, that as in latin America, whites can manage the decline so as to avoid the usual fate of market dominant minorities.  In most latin American countries, people believe that they are all one race, and anyone who notices that they are not is apt to fall down several flights of stairs in a one story police station.   But I am not seeing any military, political, ideological or social preparation to manage the transition.  People continue to throw lighted matches into what will soon become a pool of gasoline.  Recall what was done to the Tutsi in the Congo with the full military and political support of the Cathedral.

Trump’s plan, despite being outside the recent Overton window, is oddly moderate. No plan to halt welfare for illegals, no plan to forcibly remove illegals already here.

Further, Trump’s plan relies on the cooperation of the courts, who will surely not cooperate.  Australia found it necessary to bypass the courts and  use direct military power, and use what are officially regional processing centres run by “civilian contractors” but are in fact prison camps run by the military (yes, those civilian contractors).

The Trump plan resembles the various anti immigration initiatives of the Australian labor party, which failed because of hostility and forcible resistance by government employees, and fraud and defiance by the courts.

Presidents cannot do $#!& unless they are prepared to use the military, as the Australian government finally did.  And the US military has become so PC in its upper ranks that it is far from clear that it would obey such orders.

Political correctness castrates men

August 12th, 2015

A public radio station (Government left wing propaganda station) had its staff testosterone levels tested. They all came out pathologically low, the highest being a gay New York Jew who almost made the official normal range (the official normal range being much lower than the actual normal range) Every one else was less than half the lower limit of the supposed normal range.

In the ensuing conversation, they remarked on how girly and effeminate public radio is.

“Todd had never been seen as especially manly during his life, but thought maybe here, in this group, compared to the rest of us, he might at least stand a chance”

“That at least someone would be girlier than I. If I cannot be the most manly in public radio, where the hell can I be the most manly?”

This suggests that filtering for political correctness is filtering for lack of manliness.

Alternatively filtering against “rape” and “sexual harassment” is filtering against manliness.

Or, and this is my preferred hypothesis, political correctness actually causes lack of manliness, that continually censoring one’s words and thoughts, continual crimestop, has the same effect as continually being defeated, humiliated, and degraded, in reducing testosterone levels, that crimestop lowers your ability to reproduce.

This would explain the continual and major drop in testosterone levels. It is not literal estrogen in the literal water supply, but metaphorical estrogen in the metaphorical water supply.

Intact fetal cadavers

August 7th, 2015

An anti abortion organization, posing as a fetal tissue buyer, gets planned parenthood to agree to arrange for twenty week babies to be born alive, and then supplied to the buyer.

At which point you are doubtless thinking “How mature is twenty weeks? Are they conscious?”

Here is a video of an unborn boy masturbating at fifteen weeks. (At 6:30 into the video) If he can beat himself off, he is conscious. (From fifteen weeks to birth, there is a male hormone surge, to ensure that little boys are born looking conspicuously different from little girls. During this hormonal surge, unborn and newly born males are apt to beat themselves off)

Of course, really it makes no moral difference whether the baby is killed one minute before birth or one minute after birth, and whether the still living but abandoned child is sold for profit. The profit just reminds us of what we are allowing people to do.

If children are not valuable, except as their parents value them, if they can be disposed of at whim, there is no moral basis to force men to provide child support, any more than they should provide cat support for cat ladies.

If children are inherently valuable, if allowing them to be killed brutalizes us all, because a society that can dispose of unwanted babies can dispose of unwanted pensioners, political troublemakers, etc, then women have no right to abort, still less to abort without paternal permission, and no right to behave in ways that deprive children of fathers.

It would seem that children have zero value except their mothers value them. And if their father values them, but their mother does not, they still have zero value. But, if their mother values them, they have infinite value – except that they can be denied their biological fathers.

So we go from infinite valuation of human life, to treating children as disposable garbage, accordingly as convenient for women, and inconvenient for men.

Skittles guy and female agency

August 1st, 2015

There has been a tremendous amount of research in how to sleep with as many women as possible, and it is relatively easy to obtain good scientific data on this question, because the experimenter can try one thing on a statistically significant sample of women, then another thing on a significant sample of women, then form theories based on the results, and test the theory with yet another significant sample of women. Heartiste is your best entry point into this research. Be warned that not all experimental results can be easily and accurately expressed in words. If having trouble with the words, check the words against a frame by frame analysis of video. Ninety percent of it is in movement and body language. Mating preceded language, and still does.

The optimal strategy for sleeping with as many women as possible is exemplified by Skittles Man.

However, this strategy is suboptimal for keeping women around. You are not going to fulfill your Darwinian imperative unless you keep a woman around.

We don’t have the scientific knowledge for keeping women around that we have for getting them into bed in the first place, but I probably know slightly more than most. Research on this topic is costlier and more time consuming, and one is always facing samples that are statistically inadequate and unlikely to be comparable.

After being sexed a while, girls want signs of love, which Skittles Man conspicuously fails to provide – but not signs of neediness, they want behavior that show you care for them, but not behavior that shows you want to please them.

Believing that women lack agency helps with this. If you think that what she wants is not necessarily relevant, that women lack agency, then giving her what you think she needs does not show neediness, but affection.

Women want to be owned. They want to be owned by someone that loves them, but not someone that needs them. If you don’t think women are entitled to make decisions, nor good at determining their best interest and acting on it, you will not be acting needy. If you simply believe that decisions are yours to make, that her decisions are made by your permission and are ultimately subject to your approval, if you don’t believe that women have agency, in the sense that they are not morally entitled to agency and are not good at exercising it, you will express that belief non verbally and she will gladly accept that belief – provided of course that that belief comes out of love.

If you want to reproduce, you should believe that women should be property, should be pets, are happier that way, and that a society that allows them agency is corrupt, ridiculous, immoral, and absurd.

How to stop mass illegal immigration to Britain

July 30th, 2015

Lately the British government has been making feeble ineffectual gestures vaguely in the general direction of attempting to slightly slow the flood of illegal immigrants, most of them black and Muslim, into Britain. This has resulted in dramatic scenes of disruption at the Calais truck terminal, but …

All of them get there in the end,’ he said. ‘No fence is too difficult – in the end, borders are there to be crossed.’

Actually not all borders are made to be crossed. America has been allowing unlimited third world immigration for some time, Britain first started allowing unlimited third world immigration in the late 1990s, and for a little while, starting around 2010 or so, every single white country, even Israel, was allowing unlimited third world immigration. Pretty soon Israel had a rush of sanity, declared an unprincipled exception for itself, and in 2013 or so, completely and totally ended illegal immigration. Very shortly afterwards, also in 2013, Australia abruptly, completely, and totally ended illegal immigration. New Zealand did the same, while furtively denying it was doing so, and piously weeping tears for the poor illegal immigrants. Australia is famous for this, for however lefty and progressive Tony Abbot’s government is, it takes no crap from the fans of illegal immigration, and, Trump like, makes no apologies, throwing those who would eliminate white nations into hysterics of outrage. The State Department is traumatized by severe cultural shock every time they have to deal with the Ambassador for People Smuggling Issues for Australia, even if Tony Abbot merely stands for a substantially slower rate of elimination of whiteness.

At present, if an illegal immigrant armed with a knife smashes his way onto a lorry headed for Britain, then, in the unlikely event a policeman removes him, he removes him a few hundred meters to the illegal immigrant camp, and a few minutes later, the illegal immigrant has another go, smashes his way into another lorry causing more damage. With this sort of law enforcement, indeed no fence is too difficult, for no wall can stand unless protected by men with the will to make it stand. Walls do not stop people, just as bullets do not kill people. People stop people. With the will to stop illegal immigration, illegal immigration can be halted abruptly and completely. Without the will, it cannot.

The solution of course is that illegal immigrants need to be removed, starting with those that do illegal things like trespassing on other people’s lorries while armed with a knife. Australia has created a number of “offshore processing facilities”, prison camps on remote islands run by the army and outside the jurisdiction of the judiciary. (Officially they are of course not prison camps, and officially they are run by “private contractors”, not the army.) You stick the illegal immigrant in an offshore prison camp resembling Gitmo, and when you get around to it, you return him home. If he claims asylum – well after being in prison for a few years, they usually stop claiming asylum and want to go home. If their home country does not want them back, you dump them on the beach regardless in an orange inflatable. Australia’s inflatables have become an increasingly familiar sight on third world beaches. Some of the inflatables have chains to restrain the more uncooperative occupants. If they are really stubborn about claiming asylum, and their claims are not entirely implausible, you find a third world country as poor or poorer than their original home, where they are not racially too much out of place, and send them there.

Now let us suppose that British Prime minister never finds the stones to do what Tony Abbot does. Then there is nothing to stop all of Africa from moving to Britain, for no wall can hold without the will to hold it. And if anyone lives in Africa, that is the sensible thing for him to do. In due course, rapidly increasing numbers of people will move till Britain becomes indistinguishable from Africa.

Kin altruism, reciprocal altruism, and ethnic altruism

July 28th, 2015

Kin altruism does not make much sense outside the nuclear family, or narrowly extended family. It can work in slightly larger groups if they deliberately practice inbreeding, but the groups are not much larger, and you get IQ depression from inbreeding.

So what explains the tendency of ethnics to stick together?

Well if people resemble you, they are predictable. You know you can trust them in some matters to some degree. So you do. This makes reciprocal altruism workable. Mix in outsiders, and you lose trust. Thus Jews thought they could trust Madoff to cheat gentiles, and not cheat his fellow Jews. Because Jewish cohesion has been diminishing for some time, this turned out to be a bad expectation.

Another thing that causes loss of trust is mandatory lying and betrayal. Hence when east Germany and west Germany were reunited, the east Germans appeared to the west Germans to be subhuman, even though there was no significant genetic difference. East Germans would not work unless someone was standing over them, and would cheat, lie, and steal for any momentary slight advantage. The difference seems to have diminished now that they have been living under the same political system for a while.

People are not going to be altruistic to whites just because they themselves are whites, and Jews are not altruistic to Jews just because they themselves are Jews. This is a Nazi fallacy. Comradeship of whites is no more workable than comradeship of the proletariat. Whites have always been primarily at war with whites. This is not caused by sneaky Jewish mind control rays. Man is wolf to man, and whites are wolf to whites.

Good behavior is trustworthy and honorable behavior, not benevolent behavior. People who claim to be benevolent to far away strangers seldom are, and when they are, their benevolence is disturbingly and dangerously selective and capricious. This is yet another reason why utilitarian theories of morality don’t work. Not only is no one utilitarian, no one is benevolent.

Altruism is unworkable for any group above a dozen or so people. Trust is scalable to vastly larger groups.

How to really win the “Hispanic” vote.

July 28th, 2015

If the Republican party seriously wanted the “Hispanic” vote, which of course it does not, because if it won the “Hispanic” vote it might win elections, and if it won elections, might have to implement its agenda, the way to go would be to split the “white Hispanics” from the indios and mestizos, and the indios and mestizos from the blacks. “Hispanics”, whether white, mestizo, and indio, really hate blacks, and the Democrats are the black party. It would be easy to take advantage of racial tensions to break “Hispanics” away from the democrat party. “Hispanic” children go to schools that impose equal disciplinary outcomes by racial quota, so that black kids get away with stuff that white and Hispanic kids face zero tolerance for.

So, find a prominent republican who is a fair skinned Mexican who speaks Mexican Spanish as his mother’s tongue. He tells them, in Spanish:

“Our kids are punished while black kids go unpunished, because Democrats are the black party, while Republicans are the white party. The schools are in chaos because of black misconduct. Do you want to be ruled by the black party or the white party?”

By and large the government quietly allows Mexicans collective self defense against blacks, while it does not allow whites collective self defense against blacks, but every so often, the Democrats, being the black party, give Mexicans the short end of that stick also. The Republicans could make hay out of such incidents.

Mexicans have a lot more contact with blacks than whites have contact with blacks, and are less brainwashed by Cathedral propaganda. Leftists keep telling republicans that Mexicans have old style Catholic values, are social conservatives, even though your local hospital is flooded with short fat pregnant Mexican women surrounded by a half dozen children by half a dozen different fathers getting free medical care for themselves and their grossly neglected children. Nah, they don’t have old style Catholic values, and neither does the Pope these days, they are not socially conservative, but they are race realists.

The left is run by white males, but their voter bank is a coalition of everyone against white heterosexual males. For Mexicans, problems with blacks are way more salient than problems with white heterosexual males. Electoral politics 101: Split the enemy coalition. Get some fair skinned Mexicans who don’t live in the bubble, who have friends and family exposed to black dysfunction, and have them stir up the $#!%. Are republicans worried about losing black votes? Bad black behavior is an enormous vote winner for republicans which they refuse to cash in. And never will choose to cash in.

The major victims by far of bad black behavior are Mexicans. Democrats are the black party. Republicans are the white party. You want to stir up anger at blacks among those nonblack democrats who live in the closest proximity to blacks. It really is that simple.

Instead the Republican party pursues sainthood for blacks, and always will.