Fixing housing, health, and education.

Housing, health, and education are unaffordable. So people think something must be done, and punishing the rich sounds like something. Hence Sanders.

Housing

Getting stuff zoned for building houses is basically illegal, and when you somehow bribe and litigate enough bureaucrats to get houses built, tends to be overrun by inferior races who make the housing very cheap by driving out whites – typically around a quarter of the cost of building stuff, so if you build, you lose your shirt and are underwater on your mortgage when you flee ethnic cleansing.

Reconquer these zones, and the price of housing should fall substantially, both because humans can move back into areas overrun by plains apes (gentrification) and because investors will have confidence they can build houses and not lose money.

That building houses is pretty much illegal is a special case of the problem that building anything tends to be illegal. Bureaucrats like to subdivide power into ever smaller bite sized chunks, so pretty soon, to get anything done, you need the OK of umpteen bureaucrats, each of whom wants a bribe of a substantial part of the added value – so the total squeeze will far exceed the added vale.

The solution is to gate many no men through one yes man. For any project there should be one bureaucrat who has the power to say yes, and the power to blow off a thousand bureaucrats saying no.

Reconquer unsafe areas, and make it legal to build stuff. Price of housing will fall radically.

Health

You will notice that in America, you can pay for surgery for your dog by swiping your credit card, while the same surgery for a human costs the price of a big house in a nice neighborhood plus a really nice car. So it has to be paid by absurdly expensive insurance.

Well, in India, Singapore, and Thailand, you can, and usually do, pay for that surgery by swiping your credit card.

Free market healthcare, healthcare for the rich in India, for the middle class in Singapore, and for the well off in Thailand, is simply affordable, in the sense that you can pay for pretty much any medical procedure using your credit card without exceeding your credit card limit – or at least without exceeding my credit card limit.

Nominally free market healthcare gets expensive because of cross subsidies. A hospital has a thousand NAMs show up who will not pay their bills, gives them abortions and diabetes treatment, then one white man shows up with an ear infection that needs a course of antibiotics, and hits him with a hundred thousand dollar bill. Indian healthcare is cheap for white people because the hospital you go to is full of whites and rich Indians – you are not providing a bed and food for thousands of poor Indians and it is efficient because genuinely free market. They post their prices up front, those are the real prices, and you go to the hospital that offers a fair price, whereas American hospitals will never tell you what it is going to cost.

Singapore has the best healthcare in the world, and the cheapest for the taxpayer, and reasonably cheap for the individual person needing medical services. Simply copy Singapore’s system. Singapore has forced savings accounts, so that when someone has an emergency, he has savings, rather than hitting up the taxpayer. For the very poor, the very unlucky, or the very sick in Singapore there is free government healthcare – complete with death panels and the usual government healthcare suck. Socialism for the very poor, capitalism for the affluent.

Copy Singapore

Education

Educrats are our priesthood, and priests always think people should spend more time in church. Hence degree inflation.

It is time for the dissolution of the monasteries. Confiscate the endowments.

It used to be that only pretty smart people, about equivalent to IQ 115, pretty close to the white intake of today’s Ivy League students, could pass the school leaving exam, administered at the start of white male puberty.

And the top of the top elite, did matriculation, the completion of high school, at about the completion of white male puberty.

At one time, employers could look at a school leaving certificate, issued at the start of white male puberty as a signal that a candidate not only had a great work ethic and a strong sense of follow-through but that they were cut from a different cloth from most average or above-average young people. It signaled something unique about the candidate and made it that they were somebody in whom it would make sense to invest.

Then our priesthood started issuing school leaving certificates to everyone

At one time, employers could look at a high school certificate, issued at the completion of white male puberty as a signal that a candidate not only had a great work ethic and a strong sense of follow-through but that they were cut from a different cloth from most average or above-average young people. It signaled something unique about the candidate and made it that they were somebody in whom it would make sense to invest.

Then our priesthood graduated everyone from high school.

At one time, employers could look at a college degree, issued long after a man should have gotten married and started fathering children, as a signal that a candidate not only had a great work ethic and a strong sense of follow-through but that they were cut from a different cloth from most average or above-average young people. It signaled something unique about the candidate and made it that they were somebody in whom it would make sense to invest.

Then our priesthood graduated everyone from college.

A college degree has become the new high school diploma: the minimum credential required to get even the most basic, entry-level job.

Degree inflation is proceeding faster and faster. 25 percent of people employed as insurance clerks have a BA, but twice that percentage of insurance-clerk job ads require one.

If you want something better than the most basic entry level job, you need an advanced degree – and by the time you get your advanced degree, all the women you might have married have spent years fucking one man after another, and their fertility is starting to be adversely affected by age and sexually transmitted diseases.

One of the mechanisms for ensuring adequate attendance at government indoctrination sessions – the state church – is that schools perform a sorting function. For the able and industrious to be sorted into the able and industrious category, they first have to attend X amount of time listening to government propaganda, where X is apt to increase without limit.

But that propaganda, that indoctrination, is against sorting – sorting is discrimination. We are therefore proceeding to subtler forms of discrimination, degrees in stupid, versus degrees in smart. The logical endpoint of this process is that everyone in America gets a PhD which costs six hundred thousand dollars, but most of the PhDs are in basketweaving and puppetry. The sorting function, which is the incentive to attend college, is continually sabotaged and subverted.

No one should run up large amounts of debt to get a degree in stupid.

Our elite is being stupidified by avoiding disparate impact. Anything that filters for smarts has disparate impact on women and blacks. Also, smart people tend to mansplain – give those affirmative actioned into jobs beyond their competence instructions and advice that they are incapable of following. In an environment where one has a large number of female affirmative action employees, filtering for political correctness is going to filter for stupidity since smart people will be perceived as discriminating against the less smart, no matter how pious and sincere their faith.

I propose degree deflation:

At puberty (measured by biology rather than chronological age, to avoid the disaster that ensues when you have twelve year old adult black men in the same classroom as twelve year old white male children), everyone gets a test that discriminates between the lower two thirds and the upper third.

The upper third get the option of going to special elite boarding school (real school) while the rest, if they feel inclined, can attend bullshit school to learn lies and bullshit as at present. (There would be too much outrage if we simply kicked them out) The intent is that after a while, bullshit high school empties out as people realize that it not worth anything, and then we can we burn them down, salt the earth, build condos where they stood, and send the teachers to the gulag in Alaska for re-education.

Smart kids can learn in elite high school maths to calculus and trig, science to special relativity, how to calculate pi from first principles, geography, history of western civilization, and can absorb the western culture and western civilization that university no longer teaches.

About one third are eligible for elite high school, about one third of those graduate at the completion of puberty.

This, of course, renders sorting function performed by the Ivy league redundant.

Ten percent of that 11 percent who graduate elite high school, the top one percent, people 135 and up, take an elite two year university course. This certificate is roughly comparable to Harvard Law, (except that it does not cover much law) rendering the existing academic system rather useless.

As the colleges empty out, confiscate the endowments, burn down the colleges, salt the earth, build condos where they stood, and send the professoriat to the gulag in Alaska for re-education, where they will be taught useful skills appropriate to their talents, and eventually re-integrated into the economy into positions that do not involve indoctrinating people. For Maths and Science people that will rarely be a problem, but the rest may well be learning how to say “Do you want fries with that?”. The re-education is conducted in Alaska because of the likelihood of trouble as the colleges shut down.

Attempting to use academic credentials to filter to smarter than the top one percent is unlikely to succeed, because of demand for lengthy recreational degrees. If we try to get an elite smarter than 135, going to need some new filtering mechanism. Also, using academic credentials as a filter means you are up against the bureaucratic imperative to expand. If one is supposedly in the business of educating people, one is naturally inclined to claim that the education is beneficial, and can benefit everyone, rather than acting as a filter. Thus academic institutions have an incentive to subvert their filter function, and thus an incentive to stupidify the elite.

We used to have a public service exam, a requirement for government employment in functions likely to exercise power, that was IQ heavy, though it also tested for diligence by requiring you to memorize a lot of useless nonsense. Unfortunately, this, of course, had disparate impact. Simply re-instituting the exam would dramatically improve elite function, and one could simply make it a substantially tougher exam for anyone in the system at a level likely to make policy.

Degree deflation, aptitude testing, and a gulag in Alaska.

160 Responses to “Fixing housing, health, and education.”

  1. Irving says:

    >Reconquer unsafe areas, and make it legal to build stuff. Price of housing will fall radically.

    In NYC and in other major American cities, unsafe areas are being reconquered, but the price of housing in those cities are rising, not falling. In Texas, but in places like Houston especially, housing is very cheap, and yet there’s no reconquista of unsafe areas going on their that I know of.

    • jim says:

      Reconquest stopped and was reversed under Obama and de Blasio.

      Housing cheap in Texas because you are allowed to build.

      • Irving says:

        >Reconquest stopped and was reversed under Obama and de Blasio.

        Gentrification is still continuing at a rapid pace in places like NYC, DC and Chicago. It may have slowed a bit in NYC, though.

        >Housing cheap in Texas because you are allowed to build.

        This was my point. It seems as if the reconquest of unsafe areas isn’t necessary so long as you, like Texas, allow builders to build.

    • Magus says:

      Cuz peeps who lived in suburbs are now going to NYC. You can’t look at NY only. Obviously if conditions improve in NY due to civilizTionary efforts, more demand for living in Ny relative to alternatives (other cities, suburbs) will emerge, and presumably cost of living elsewhere will drop ceteris paribus. Also other factors (mass immigration, increase in population, etc).

      Jims point still stands. Increase supply of de facto available housing in cities via increased security/rational laws/etc. And prices will drop all else equal.

  2. Irving says:

    Excuse me, I meant “Gentrification is still continuing at a rapid pace in places like San Francisco, DC and Chicago. It may have slowed a bit in NYC, though.

    • jim says:

      Yes, San Fran gentrifying just fine, because its ultra left city government cheerfully allows the cops the necessary jackboots.

      But you cannot build upwards or outwards any where near San Fran, even though there is plenty of unused land.

      Don’t think Chicago is gentrifying Nine areas have gentrified, fourteen have deteriorated. The black population is declining, but this represents the destruction of housing obtained by ethnically cleansing whites, not its replacement by white housing.

    • jim says:

      Chicago and NYC definitely not gentrifying. DC sucks. When blacks complain about gentrification, they often mean that ethnic cleansing of whites is not proceeding fast enough to compensate for their destruction of housing stock.

      • Dave says:

        Jim, sometimes you need to step back and take a deep breath. I live in NYC and despite DiBlasio and his crew of commies doing their level best to bring back the violence and dysfunction of the 70’s gentrification continues apace.
        Yes violence, particularly slashing/stabbings, has exploded in the last 6 months, but the real estate industry calls the shots and new buildings and demolitions to build new condos are going up everywhere in Manhattan and Brooklyn.
        The demographic change that has taken place in NYC in the last 20 years is astounding and continuous with no slowdown in sight.
        New condos filled with SWPL’s and their strollers have overtaken formerly industrial areas all over Brooklyn and Manhattan and now the developers have their sights set on Queens and even the Bronx. The developers move fast and there is a seemingly never ending supply of gullible white Midwesterners who want to live in a new condo right next to the projects.

        • Steve Johnson says:

          “The demographic change that has taken place in NYC in the last 20 years is astounding and continuous with no slowdown in sight.”

          Astounding?

          NYC was 80% white in the 1960s.

          • Dave says:

            And it will be again if current trends continue, and as I stated they show no signs of slowing down in Manhattan. Black people are being priced out of the city and according to census data Puerto Ricans are decamping for Florida and Pennsylvania at a steady pace.
            The degree to which white suburbanites have taken over large swathes of Brooklyn and formerly non white areas of Manhattan is a sight to behold.
            Formerly low scale industrial areas like the West side highway and the Hudson yards/Highline have seen a massive frenzy of high rise condo development filled with SWPL’s and wealthy Euros and Asians.
            Try doing some homework, like reading the local NY papers and real estate blogs for the past decade to confirm what I’m talking about.

            • jim says:

              Black people are being priced out of the city

              Black people were being removed from the city by arrest and imprisonment. Now that this is no longer the case they need some lebensraum because their current housing is disintegrating, The current slashing attacks are giving black people abundant high quality cheap housing.

            • jim says:

              White fertile age female Amanda Morris was slashed on a corner. On one side of the corner, all the bystanders are black. On the other side of the corner, all the passers by are white. The man who slashed her was homeless and black.

              Random my ass! It is a grab for lebensraum by a man who would personally and urgently benefit from driving whites out. The location and the target and the perpetrator are as far from random as they can possibly be.

        • jim says:

          Yes violence, particularly slashing/stabbings, has exploded in the last 6 months, but the real estate industry calls the shots and new buildings and demolitions to build new condos are going up everywhere in Manhattan and Brooklyn.

          Particularly slashings of fertile age white females in areas adjacent to black areas. Rumor has it that five hundred white women have been shockingly disfigured by black males seeking to cleanse whites out of desirable buildings.

          That is not gentrification, that is ethnic cleansing of whites. Look at the blood on the ground, not the peities emitted by real estate salesmen whistling in the dark. Does not take very many slashings to put those condos underwater on their debt.

          They call these attacks “random” but the photos always show a black man, and usually show a fair skinned woman, white or mestizo, and the practical consequence of these attacks is that blacks get to move out of the buildings they have ruined into nice new buildings, those new condos of which you speak, which they then ruin in turn.

          There are ten slashing attacks per day, all by black men, primarily targeting white or whitish fertile age women, these attacks near the boundaries between the nice areas (not yet overrun by blacks) and the bad areas (already overrun by blacks)

          That is not consistent with gentrification.

          They call these attacks random, because they are not in the slightest bit random, and inexplicable, because the explanation is glaring in your face and frequently yelled out by the attackers.

          • Dave says:

            Well, I certainly know it’s not random, as do most New Yorkers regardless of what the media says.
            I have lived here for 27 years and the demographic changes in large sections of Brooklyn and formerly ghettoish parts of Manhattan is very real and unmistakable. Even Steve Sailer has repeatedly pointed to census and real estate data showing that black people are voluntarily leaving, or being priced out of, New York. Harlem is being resettled by whites in large numbers. Spike Lee complains that his former childhood home in Ft. Green, Brooklyn is now mostly white.
            Is real push back occurring ? Absolutely !
            Is it enough to shut down the entire real estate industry and send millions of SWPL’s fleeing back to Wisconsin ? Not even close.

            • jim says:

              have lived here for 27 years and the demographic changes in large sections of Brooklyn and formerly ghettoish parts of Manhattan is very real and unmistakable.

              Sure. Mayor “Stop and Frisk” Bloomberg reconquered large parts of New York City from the savages by locking them up and keeping them locked up.

              But that was politically intolerable, so the evil fascist Mayor “Stop and Frisk” Bloomberg was replaced by saint Bill de Blasio, patron saint of blacks who slash white women on the boundary of the ghetto and then get a few days in a comfy jail cell before being released to slash some more.

              And under saint Bill de Blasio, gentrifiers get their women’s faces slashed, and therefore flee the boundary zone, thus making cheap housing full of nice stuff available to the slashers.

          • jay says:

            ”Bloomberg reconquered large parts of New York City from the savages by locking them up and keeping them locked up.”

            Problem is he didn’t institute capital punishment for murder,rape,kidnapping and fraud proven beyond reasonable doubt.

            Hence allowing future releases of such criminals into the streets.

          • jay says:

            As well as capital punishment for purjury regarding capital crimes after thorough investigation also proved beyond reasonable doubt.

      • Irving says:

        Chicago and nyc are gentrifyied, and DC is actually pretty awesome. Have you been there recently?

  3. Mackus says:

    Heh. There was an episode of South Park, where homeless people were ruining newly gentrified areas. But cops didn’t want to help totally SJW-fied townspeople, since some episodes ago, townspeople were all “f the racist pigs” et all. So they worked out a deal, where townspeople literally turn around while cops cheerfully club homeless minorities.

  4. viking says:

    Ill just comment on first sentence for now. This is classic left ratchet strategy. create a bad policy and use its unintended consequences to create more bad policies. Almost all left policies are created to fix older left policies one would almost think they purposely create bad policy in the beginning.

  5. Dave says:

    Summary: Everything government does to make some thing more affordable ends up making that thing less affordable, and of lower quality.

    The solution: Let the government spend itself into hyperinflation. The plains apes will provide free meat to ease the human population into a gold-based economy. You can’t fake gold, so that fixes 99% of our economic distortions right there.

  6. Glenfilthie says:

    Jim do you think a high IQ trumps human nature?

    My point is that a lot of these problems are tied to greed, corruption and weak character. Setting that demographic up with all the power might not be a good thing because I can see them abusing it the same way lower IQ vibrants would – the current president of the US comes to mind…

    • Zach says:

      Thus capitalism was born. Saved the masses.

      A much easier plan to implement is to emphasize entrepreneurship and hard work. Hard work required, which will self filter for hard work, both high and avg IQ.

  7. Zach says:

    This post was hilarious. If only this could be done.

    • jim says:

      You can do anything with bayonets.

      They integrated schools by poking white female children with bayonets. While what I propose would involve poking people with bayonets it would not require such an egregious and embarrassing application of bayonets.

      • Zach says:

        I tried this today. Went to my business, walked up to all the chicks, and said:

        “Leave damn you!”

        Poked them until they cooked us food, or babysat. I type this from prison.

        I meant I can’t see our society transitioning to something that makes sense. I’m a pessimist. I think human beings are unfit to exist in harmony. Fair or not, the doers have to congregate, and set up nation states. This is why I simply will not be friends with people who I think are enemies. A Bernie Sanders voter, is my enemy, for example. My circle of friends is very small!

        tmi

  8. Irving says:

    Where the education reforms are concerned, recognize that education is the way it currently is because they’re mainly the way they are not only to give the future elites suitably prestigious credentials, but also to soak up all of that youth unemployment. Tony Blair want to boost university enrollments for exactly this reason.

    • jim says:

      education is the way it currently is … to soak up all of that youth unemployment

      And they made it effectively illegal to build physical things, like housing on vacant land, and raised the minimum wage, in order to create youth unemployment.

  9. Cloudswrest says:

    I read somewhere that a lot of Detroit is returning to wilderness. It’s even visible by satellite. This does not surprise me. Detroit has a Northern temperate climate. It gets cold in winter. Blacks are a tropical people. Keeping warm in winter requires discipline and/or maintenance of high tech HVAC. Since all the whites who maintain the place are gone the blacks are being forced out by Mother Nature.

  10. Cloudswrest says:

    Steve Sailer claims the new program is to move NAMs out of the inner cities and to the suburbs, forcing diversity on the middle class whites, using Section 8, etc., tearing down all the projects and freeing up the inner inner for SWPLs and elite.

    • jim says:

      Steve is right about the progressive plan, but the slashers like it where they are. Not the first time the low part of the alliance ignored the high part of the alliance.

    • Steve Johnson says:

      Steve Sailer is amazingly optimistic about the sanity of progressives.

      • Oliver Cromwell says:

        Yep. Sailer tries to find out who benefits from policies that are motivated by religion and not by benefiting anyone, including the originators of the policies.

        Leftists are moving diversity to the suburbs in genuine belief that this will enrich the suburbs and fix the problems of diversity. Once they have destroyed the suburbs, they will move diversity back into the inner cities.

        If leftists realised that diversity causes problems wherever it is and can’t be improved, they would simply support segregation.

    • Irving says:

      Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, or AFFH, is the official name of the program.

      HUD is the department in charge of implementing the program, but that department is probably the most demographically NAM and women department in government in terms of the people who work their, and so of course they don’t know what is actually going on. The people who actually wrote up the program were likely not affiliated with HUD at all, as the program seems to have come straight from the higher levels of the Cathedral, and so we can be assured that the people who wrote it were probably pretty smart and well-aware of what they were doing, whatever Jim wants to say.

      Clearly it isn’t an accident that this program, if applied, will leave plenty of open property in prime locations in the cities to be bought up on the cheap, developed and sold at extravagant prices to overpaid SJWs. Nevertheless, I don’t think that that the part of the program which says that the inner city blacks should be forcibly settled in white middle-class suburban communities will ever be implemented. I suspect that this provision was put in there in order to make it seem that the planners weren’t simply expelling the inner city blacks from the cities en masse, that they actually have a benevolent reason (i.e. fighting racism) in mind for doing what they’re doing, which is expelling blacks. I doubt that the government really wants to provoke a legal battle with the powerful homeowner associations, nor is it likely that they would want to instigate the race war that would inevitably follow the forced settling of inner city blacks into white middle class suburban communities.

      Read E. Michael Jones’ fantastic The Slaughter of Cities, in which it is shown that though the government brought blacks from the south into the northern cities in the ’60s under the pretext of ‘integration’, the reason the government really brought into the northern cities was in order to undermine the unions and, more importantly, to undermine their white ethnic neighborhoods. Jones’ story makes quite a bit of sense and it is backed up by plenty of evidence. If the government really wanted ‘integration’, they would have brought in the blacks but forced the whites in these cities to stay. Instead, blacks were brought in but, as Jones shows, whites were given every incentive, including financial, to move to the suburbs, thereby facilitating the creation of even more separation between the races than there likely was prior to the ’60s..

      Jones’ book is a good book to study so as to understand what AFFH is all about. The government likes to use the pretext of ‘integration’ or ‘fighting racism’ in order to pursue ends far different from their stated one of promoting ‘integration’ or ‘fighting racism’. In this case, I don’t think the goal is to ruin white middle class suburban communities. There’s plenty of space in America and it would make no sense for the government to pick a fight with the homeowner associations when the government can just drop the inner city blacks in the middle of nowhere, away from everyone else. The government has been doing something similar with refugees and third world immigrants for a long time. It is no coincidence that there are huge Kurdish communities in the most rural parts of Tennessee, or a huge Ethiopian community in South Dakota. It seems likely in my opinion that in the end, the government will fix on some random rural place in the middle of Arkansas that is extremely sparely populated but which is ~99 percent white, drop the inner city blacks there, and claim victory for having ‘integrated’ blacks in this previously ~99 percent white area.

      • Irving says:

        One more thing. The fact that inner city blacks don’t have jobs will make it easier for the government to resettle them in the way that I expect. There are no jobs in Wyoming but this doesn’t matter for inner city blacks, because they’re reliant on EBT and Section 8 and not on wages paid for honest work.

        • jim says:

          Does not work.

          They need to predate on white people. Only way to get them to stay in the middle of nowhere is slavery.

          Even with EBT and stuff, most blacks just cannot look after themselves.

          • Irving says:

            >They need to predate on white people. Only way to get them to stay in the middle of nowhere is slavery.

            They can predate on white people even when left to themselves in Wyoming, that’s the point.

            >Even with EBT and stuff, most blacks just cannot look after themselves.

            So are you saying that there’s someone looking after blacks in the inner cities?

          • peppermint says:

            (1) No, which is why they live in filth

            (2) Yes, because they are monitored by probation officers, endless governmental and quasi-governmental programs, etc. I once met a man whose job it was to paint the Section Ape apartments.

            (3) Once upon a time they lived with dignity with White-style families, jobs, some of them could even afford cars, and the top 1% whined that Whites didn’t want to hang out with any of them. So desegregation happened. Now they live in filth.

            (4) Niggers are going to go back to working, having honest money, and families, and will even take care of their own housing projects, as soon as the government stops these insane policies, and we know that because they used to.

            (5) https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Unemployed_men_queued_outside_a_depression_soup_kitchen_opened_in_Chicago_by_Al_Capone%2C_02-1931_-_NARA_-_541927.jpg
            This is the height of Jim Crow segregation. Racist Whites blame African-Americas for their problems, resent their presence, and leer contemptuously at the African-American gentlemen they have forced to the back of the line. The African-Americans are more afraid than angry since they all know someone who has been lynched by the KKK.

          • Irving says:

            >(1) No, which is why they live in filth

            And they can just as well live in filth in Wyoming, like the Indians on the reservations do, except probably filthier.

            >(2) Yes, because they are monitored by probation officers, endless governmental and quasi-governmental programs, etc. I once met a man whose job it was to paint the Section Ape apartments.

            Ha! “Section Ape” — good one!

            Anyway, they can have probation officers, etc., in Wyoming too. They needn’t live in Chicago to have access to those services, which I doubt are actually helpful for them anyway.

            >(3) Once upon a time they lived with dignity with White-style families, jobs, some of them could even afford cars, and the top 1% whined that Whites didn’t want to hang out with any of them. So desegregation happened. Now they live in filth.

            I don’t think the economy as it is today has much room for potentially working class blacks. Even working class whites are being expelled from the labor market right now, and the dire socioeconomic consequences of this are just now becoming obvious to even SJWs. If even these whites have been so unfortunate, it seems unlikely that the blacks would fare any better were the government to cut their EBT.

            >(4) Niggers are going to go back to working, having honest money, and families, and will even take care of their own housing projects, as soon as the government stops these insane policies, and we know that because they used to.

            That ship has sailed, see above.

            • jim says:

              That ship has sailed, see above.

              You are an idiot.

              In the depths of the depression, blacks worked, had families, were far more law abiding than today. With the application of proper authority, they can make fine citizens.

              If we look at successful black states, they apply firm measures, and these firm measures simply work on blacks.

              There is plenty of work to be done that low IQ people can do – and the fact that America in general and DC in particular is looking increasingly third world tells us that that work needs to be done, should be done, and is not being done.

          • Irving says:

            >You are an idiot.

            I haven’t insulted you once every since I began posting on this blog, and yet you continually abuse me. Please stop.

            >In the depths of the depression, blacks worked, had families, were far more law abiding than today. With the application of proper authority, they can make fine citizens.

            >If we look at successful black states, they apply firm measures, and these firm measures simply work on blacks.

            I agree that blacks can, with proper management, be made to be law abiding and to do productive, if low IQ work. I was operating under the assumption, though, that things would continue as they are now, with the availability of low IQ jobs decreasing in the West continuing and the lack of proper management remaining a problem

            >There is plenty of work to be done that low IQ people can do – and the fact that America in general and DC in particular is looking increasingly third world tells us that that work needs to be done, should be done, and is not being done.

            Like what?

            • jim says:

              >You are an idiot.

              I haven’t insulted you

              The problem is that you repeatedly refuse to acknowledge that crimethink arguments have been made, or that crime thoughts have even been expressed, and fail to respond, simply repeating your original claim as if it had never been rebutted, or even disputed, as if no one could possibly disagree and no one ever had disagreed Argument by Chutzpah.

              It is just not a legitimate method of argument. It is dishonest, stupid, and irritating.

              In the case in question: The destruction of the working class is not because the white working class has ceased to be valuable, but because the Cathedral makes them carry incompetent blacks on their backs (which is what destroyed the Detroit motor car industry) and criminalizes the kind of work that you need working class people to do – the production of physical things.

              If we allow people to produce physical things there will be plenty of work for the white working class. If we apply proper discipline to blacks, there will be plenty of work for the better kind of black – and we send the worse kind of black to prison or slave labor, which means we get a much higher proportion of the better kind of black.

              You presuppose that social decays is simply reality, no one’s fault, cannot possibly be changed, on a blog that wants to undo social decay. You are not debating, you are simply asserting with immense confidence – without bothering with any need for arguments, on a blog that regularly puts forward arguments.

              If you argue, I will address your arguments. If you simply repeat your original assertions with ever increased confidence, you are a liar and a fool.

            • jim says:

              >There is plenty of work to be done that low IQ people can do – and the fact that America in general and DC in particular is looking increasingly third world tells us that that work needs to be done, should be done, and is not being done.

              Like what?

              Repairs, cleanup, maintenance, rebuilding, and a coat of paint.

              Go through the major East Asian airports, and compare with major US airports.

              You cannot build anything because needs too many permits, and you don’t want to maintain or repair what has been built because property rights are insecure. You might find yourself selling land with a house on it that cost a hundred thousand to build for fourteen thousand. So you let it decay, fearing that at any time you might have to run for your life.

          • Irving says:

            >The problem is that you repeatedly refuse to acknowledge that crimethink arguments have been made, or that crime thoughts have even been expressed, and fail to respond, simply repeating your original claim as if it had never been rebutted, or even disputed, as if no one could possibly disagree and no one ever had disagreed Argument by Chutzpah.

            This is precisely what I was accusing you of before, simpy repeating arguments without acknowledging rebuttals or refutations, concerning the cannibalism in Africa issue but I never insulted you over it.

            >You presuppose that social decays is simply reality, no one’s fault, cannot possibly be changed, on a blog that wants to undo social decay.

            I recognize that social decay is happening, and I agree that it would be better if they wouldn’t exist, but my perspective is that the social decay is happening for reasons that aren’t exclusive to the machinations of Cathedral functionaries. I simply think that the entry of billions of third worlders into the global labor market, plus technological advancement, has made it much more difficult for low skill laborers in the first world to earn decent wages. I don’t think it is fair for you to call me an idiot for pointingredients to these factors, or for being unconvinced by the alternative views offerred here on this issue

            • jim says:

              >The problem is that you repeatedly refuse to acknowledge that crimethink arguments have been made, or that crime thoughts have even been expressed, and fail to respond, simply repeating your original claim as if it had never been rebutted, or even disputed, as if no one could possibly disagree and no one ever had disagreed Argument by Chutzpah.

              This is precisely what I was accusing you of before, simpy repeating arguments without acknowledging rebuttals or refutations, concerning the cannibalism in Africa issue but I never insulted you over it.

              Your accusation was itself chutzpah. You never attempted to rebut the argument that cannibalism was routine, normal, and socially acceptable in some substantial parts of black Africa, but simply assumed that rebuttal had been successfully made.

              I also recommend you read up on cannibalism in Haiti.

              Obviously Haitian rulers would not participate in cannibalistic religious rites unless a very substantial proportion of the common people adhered to cannibalistic voodoo – the elite eat children sacrificed to the serpent in order to cater to their subjects’ superstitions. Which only makes sense if many, probably most, Haitians adhere to a religion that requires them to ritually eat small portions of sacrificed children.

          • peppermint says:

            — The destruction of the working class is not because the white working class has ceased to valuable, but because the Cathedral makes them carry incompetent blacks on their backs

            Worse: makes them promote incompetent blacks, ensuring that nothing gets done. That’s why offspring happened when it did.

            Even worse: makes them hire malicious blacks, ensuring that less than nothing gets done. You just can’t have any kind of facility if you can’t guarantee your staff aren’t going to deliberately damage your product. That’s why the cities are totally shut down now.

          • pdimov says:

            “The destruction of the working class is not because the white working class has ceased to be valuable, but because the Cathedral makes them carry incompetent blacks on their backs (which is what destroyed the Detroit motor car industry) and criminalizes the kind of work that you need working class people to do – the production of physical things.”

            That, but also because the Cathedral has successfully convinced the Irvings of the world that the working class is useless and dying off, which has made them organize things with that assumption in mind, turning it into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

          • pdimov says:

            Hence self-driving cars.

          • pdimov says:

            “I simply think that the entry of billions of third worlders into the global labor market…”

            There’s simply no such thing.

          • Irving says:

            >Your accusation was itself chutzpah. You never attempted to rebut the argument that cannibalism was routine, normal, and socially acceptable in some substantial parts of black Africa, but simply assumed that rebuttal had been successfully made.

            This is BS. I addressed every single argument that you made in order to show that cannibalism is rampant in Africa.

            At first, you claimed that Nigerians were “eating each other” and I denied that this is the case. Then, as evidence, you referenced the hoax article which purported to show that a Nigerian restaurant owner was deliberately selling his patrons human flesh, but because it is a hoax article, there’s no point trying to rebut or refute the claims of the article.

            Next, you went on to make a serious of claims for which you provided no hard evidence whatsoever. You claimed, for example, that it is to be expected that people who wander outside of the “safe areas” in Liberia would be killed and eaten, that most rural Africans (and, since most Africans do not live in cities, and because Africa has no suburbs, this basically means most Africans) have tasted human flesh, that the social and collective nature of the few confirmed instances of cannibalism of Africa suggests that the practice is prevalent there, and that the only reason why blacks don’t do cannibalism in the West in the way that you claim they do in Africa is because of a lack of supply.

            I addressed these claims by pointing out that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the first two claims are true; that the third claim is not by itself untenable by that reference to other groups of people (i.e. the Chinese) with whom cannibalism is obviously not rampant, but among whom social and collective acts of cannibalism have been reported and confirmed, would seem to suggest that the simple fact that a group has committed social and collective acts of cannibalism is not sufficient evidence to conclude that cannibalism is rampant among them; and that the fourth claim is patently false, that there is plenty of supply for cannibals in Western societies, and that if they refuse to engage in cannibalism in the West, it is because of other factors that are keeping them from it.

            As far as my own argument was concerned, all that it was based on was on my belief that cannibalism is something that is not likely to be rampant within any population, though some populations may do it more than others, and that for this reason, before we accuse a population of engaging in rampant cannibalism, there must be sufficient evidence that would allow us to do so, evidence that you distinctly failed to provide.

            >I also recommend you read up on cannibalism in Haiti.

            I wouldn’t even know where to begin. Why don’t you refer me to the sources that you yourself have examined?

            • jim says:

              I addressed every single argument that you made

              Liar

              Cannibalism in Africa is usually social and collective. A bunch of people, gathered together for reasons unrelated to cannibalism, typically soldiers, rioters, or a criminal gang, eat someone.

              This can only happen if most people are in fact cannibals

              You compared this to starvation cannibalism happening among other peoples, but in the African incidents, no one is starving. Thus cannibalism is routine and commonplace in Africa, whereas in your counter examples of other races, social and collective cannibalism only happened when people were starving to death.

              In the case of Haiti, you could have argued that though cannibalism is social and collective, it occurs among people gathered together for that purpose, in that they are worshipers whose religion requires human sacrifice and cannibalism of children. You did not make that argument, instead dismissing with immense confidence and outrageous chutzpah the existence of religious cannibalism in Haiti. However if you had made that argument, the willingness of the rulers of Haiti to flatter and accommodate the priests and priestesses of cannibalism and human sacrifice indicates it is a quite widespread and popular religion.

          • Jack says:

            >my belief that cannibalism is something that is not likely to be rampant within any population,

            This reminds me of a certain song:

            http://lyricstranslate.com/en/почему-аборигены-съели-кука-why-did-aborigines-eat-cook.html

          • Irving says:

            >You compared this to starvation cannibalism happening among other peoples, but in the African incidents, no one is starving. Thus cannibalism is routine and commonplace in Africa, whereas in your counter examples of other races, social and collective cannibalism only happened when people were starving to death.

            The Chinese were cannibalizing each other during the Mao-induced famine because they were starving to death, but the Chinese are not eating baby soup and consuming capsule pills made out of aborted fetuses today because they are starving to death, they are doing it because they think that it’ll improve their health and/or their sexual performance. Note too that these latter two examples constitute social and collective acts of cannibalism.

            I will note as well that there are allegations that the ‘baby soup’ story is a hoax. But, the ‘baby soup’ accusations have been going around for some time, and they seem plausible enough given the fact that there has actually been cases where arrests have been made of people attempting to sell capsule pills made out of aborted fetuses to Chinese people outside of China. There was apparently a big bust of this kind not too long ago in South Korea.

            • jim says:

              You can go anywhere in China and not get mugged. You cannot go anywhere in Africa and not get eaten, nor is baby soup an indicator that you are likely to be eaten or mugged in China.

              If abortion is not exactly the same thing as murder (and recall the outrage from the supposed pro lifers when Trump said that women who commit abortions of near term babies should face some minor penalty) fetus pills are not exactly the same thing as killing some outsider and holding a barbecue.

          • Irving says:

            Also, the pictures that typically accompany the baby soup stories are pretty damning.

          • Irving says:

            I never denied that there might be cannibalism in Haiti, I just asked for your sources.

          • peppermint says:

            Irving, first you say that from what “we” know about human nature, cannibalism is never social or collective.

            Then you say that Jeffery Dahmer proves that Whites are as guilty of this sin against IMAGO DEI as niggers.

            Then you say that gooks commit cannibalism all the time, which somehow in your mind reduces the guilt of niggers?

            Maybe niggers aren’t even guilty of anything because they simply aren’t us? Do you think alligators are guilty when the #1 predator of baby alligators is other alligators?

          • Irving says:

            Peppermint, quit distorting my arguments and putting words in my mouth.

            I never said that social and collective acts of cannibalism are contrary to human nature. I said that it is contrary to human nature for cannibalism to be rampant among a numerically significant group of people.

            Also, I pointed out the example of Jeffrey Dahmer to show that although there may be instances of cannibalism in a society, that we shouldn’t infer from that that cannibalism is rampant within that society.

            Moreover, I mentioned the reported and confirmed instances of social and collective acts of cannibalism among the Chinese in order to force Jim into drawing a conclusion that he and everyone else knows is patently false.

            More specifically, his argument seems to be that because the reported and confirmed instances of cannibalism that have come out from Africa were social and collective in nature, we can therefore conclude that cannibalism is rampant in Africa, because social and collective acts of cannibalism can only happen among populations that routinely engage in cannibalism. Well, the Chinese are engaging in social and collective acts of cannibalism too, so according to Jim’s logic, we must say that cannibalism is rampant among the Chinese. My point is that unless we reject the idea that social and collective acts of cannibalism can only occur among populations with whom cannibalism is rampant, we will be backed into a corner, and will be forced to falsely accuse the Chinese of routinely engaging in cannibalism.

          • peppermint says:

            » and will be forced to falsely accuse the Chinese of routinely engaging in cannibalism.

            Yes, I do accuse the chinks and gooks of routinely engaging in cannibalism, on precisely the evidence you and Jack give.

          • peppermint says:

            https://www.google.com/search?q=bantu+pygmy+cannibalism

            by the way, when it is possible to accuse the cannibals of being racist, the Cathedral does notice cannibalism amongst niggers

          • Irving says:

            >You can go anywhere in China and not get mugged. You cannot go anywhere in Africa and not get eaten

            Irrelevant

            >If abortion is not exactly the same thing as murder

            What no one can deny is that abortion involves the killing of a human being. Whether abortion constitutes murder–and in my opinion, it absolutely does–is another question.

            >fetus pills are not exactly the same thing as killing some outsider and holding a barbecue.

            The consumption of fetus pills constitutes cannibalism, and the very fact that the fetuses are consumed in pill form suggests that it is a social and collective act, given that the pills could never be produced and sold were there not doctors, manufacturers, smugglers, etc., available to make it happen.

            The difference between consuming fetus pills and “killing some outsider and holding a [human] barbecue” is essentially the same difference that exists between purchasing a chicken sandwich from McDonald’s and killing a chicken yourself and making the chicken sandwich yourself. Which is to say that it in the end it is the same thing, and the only difference is in who is killing and preparing the meat. But in the end of the day, the meat is still human, or chicken.

            • jim says:

              >You can go anywhere in China and not get mugged. You cannot go anywhere in Africa and not get eaten

              Irrelevant

              This is exactly what I mean by “argument from chutzpah”:

              Your argument is dishonest. You are stupid liar. Of course it is relevant that are not going to get mugged, let alone eaten in China whereas in Africa, likely mugged almost anywhere, and in some rural areas, likely eaten.

              Placenta eating in China is not an indication of risk of being mugged or eaten. African muggings culminating in a barbecue of the victim are an indication of risk of muggings and cannibalism. We can argue about how high the risk is, but it simply dishonest to suggest that the behaviors are comparable, or are an indication of comparable risk.

          • pdimov says:

            “… the very fact that the fetuses are consumed in pill form…”

            The only source of that “very fact” is a Korean documentary that hasn’t been confirmed by anyone else.

            The soup is likely a hoax – also of Korean origin – probably derived from Zhu Yu’s “art exhibit”.

            In other news,

            http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-08-15/health/ct-met-placenta-consumption-20130816_1_placenta-baby-blues-breast

          • Irving says:

            >The only source of that “very fact” is a Korean documentary that hasn’t been confirmed by anyone else.

            A Korean documentary appears to have been responsible for bringing attention to the practice, but there have been actual reported busts of smugglers dealing in these fetus pills.

            >The soup is likely a hoax – also of Korean origin – probably derived from Zhu Yu’s “art exhibit”.

            The only thing that I’ll say about the soup is that 1) the pictures accompanying the numerous articles that have been published on this issue, both in the papers and online, look pretty damning, 2) it doesn’t surprise me that a custom such as this would develop among the more backward ignorant Chinese peasants, who for decades have been compelled by their government to abort their babies at staggeringly and horrifyingly high rates, and 3) it makes intuitive sense that people who think that the consumption of aborted fetuses is good for one’s health and improves one’s performance in bed would eat baby soup, especially in cases where the more hygienic fetus pills are unavailable.

          • Irving says:

            It turns out that one of the ‘debunkings’ attempting to prove that the fetus pills are not actually a thing concedes that the Korean government has confiscated pills made of human flesh confiscated from China, but claims that it is unknown whether the pills were made of fetuses specifically as opposed to the flesh of people of all ages.

          • pdimov says:

            “A Korean documentary appears to have been responsible for bringing attention to the practice, but there have been actual reported busts of smugglers dealing in these fetus pills.”

            A Korean documentary is responsible for the insinuation that those pills contain dead babies. It’s much, much more likely that they contain placenta.

            Consuming the placenta is a Chinese folk tradition (apparently gaining a foothold in Chicago). Eating babies… is not.

            “… it doesn’t surprise me that a custom such as this would develop among the more backward ignorant Chinese peasants…”

            Because superior understanding of human nature and its universals.

          • Irving says:

            >Your argument is dishonest…Of course it is relevant that are not going to get mugged, let alone eaten in China whereas in Africa, likely mugged almost anywhere, and in some rural areas, likely eaten.

            I said that it was irrelevant because I don’t see any obvious connection, whether on the individual or on the population level, between a propensity to mug and a propensity to cannibalize. My position on this question does not make me stupid or a liar.

            >Placenta eating in China is not an indication of risk of being mugged or eaten.

            This isn’t about placenta eating, its about baby eating. From what I’ve read, the Korean government continues to justify its confiscation of these pills by saying that they are “human flesh pills”, and the Chinese government has yet to deny that these ‘human flesh pills’ are being produced in and exported from its country, at least not that I know of. Also, I don’t discount the damning footage contained on that Korean documentary which was apparently broadcasted on a government-owned TV station. Therefore, I see no reason to retract my claim that the consumption of these pills constitutes cannibalism.

            As well, there is the issue of the ‘baby soup’.

            Besides this, I agree that you are more likely to be mugged in rural Africa than rural China

            >African muggings culminating in a barbecue of the victim are an indication of risk of muggings and cannibalism.

            OK, but how routinely? This is the question.

            >We can argue about how high the risk is,

            This is what I’ve been trying to do all along. You are taking a few examples taken mostly from two relatively sparsely populated countries, Liberia and Congo, who have both been in the midst of some of the most bloody civil wars in history, and trying to extrapolate those examples and attribute the behaviors exhibited in them to all Africans. I can ask you once again for hard evidence to justify your claim that most Africans have at one point or another tasted human flesh, but I’m sure you’ll just abuse me again.

            >but it simply dishonest to suggest that the behaviors are comparable, or are an indication of comparable risk.

            I don’t say that the Chinese and the Africans are behaviorally comparable, I’m simply saying that your stated rationale for saying that most Africans have tasted human flesh would seem to apply to other groups of people, including the Chinese.

            • jim says:

              I said that it was irrelevant because I don’t see any obvious connection, whether on the individual or on the population level, between a propensity to mug and a propensity to cannibalize.

              Obviously people who are not going to mug you are not going to eat you. You find this hard to believe?

              >We can argue about how high the risk is,

              This is what I’ve been trying to do all along

              No you have not. You have been arguing from chutzpah. Bare assertions and denials.

              But, let us assess the risk.

              If we know of one case of mugging of a random victim by a random thug, hard to estimate how common muggings are

              If we know of one case were one random guy mugged someone and took his wallet, and the next random guy took the victim’s shoes, and the third random guy took the victim’s shirt and then started kicking the victim in the head, we can easily estimate that muggings are common, and if you are an outsider, nearly certain.

              Similarly, with African cannibalism. The mob kills someone, roasts him, and random people show up for some meat. Therefore, the random average guy in the army, or the random average guy in the mob, or the random average guy in the gang, is a cannibal.

          • Irving says:

            It just occurred to me that the question of baby soup, fetus pills, etc., in China is a question that Spandrell can probably answer for us. Would you be able to get him to give us one?

            • jim says:

              I know Chinese eat placentas. Very much doubt they eat fetuses. And if they do eat fetuses, I doubt that Spandrel has any more knowledge about fetus eating than I do.

              • jim says:

                I have just been informed that they do in fact eat thumb sized fetuses. Am surprised and shocked.

                But still, this is significantly different from the Haitian practice of sacrificing and eating children that have just started puberty, and the African practice of killing and eating some unfortunate who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

          • Irving says:

            >I have just been informed that they do in fact eat thumb sized fetuses. Am surprised and shocked.

            As far as I’m concerned, this is confirmation that the reports of Chinese eating baby soup and of consuming fetus pills are true.

            >But still, this is significantly different from the Haitian practice of sacrificing and eating children that have just started puberty, and the African practice of killing and eating some unfortunate who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

            How is it “significantly different”? Both are cannibalism. It doesn’t surprise me, of course, that cannibalism in China is done differently from the way it is done in Africa..

            But our entire debate hinges on the frequency of cannibalism in Africa. If I have misunderstood you, please correct me, but your argument is that because the reported and confirmed cases of cannibalism in Africa are typically social and collective acts, we can infer that cannibalism is rampant in Africa, because social and collective acts of cannibalism can only transpire in societies in which cannibalism is rampant. If you want to adjust or retract this claim, and to defend your position in some other way, do so, but if you choose not to, I insist that you also say that cannibalism is also rampant in China, because of the social and collective nature of the cannibalism that is occurring in China.

            Otherwise, you can, with me, say that the simple fact that social and collective acts of cannibalism has occurred in some place, whether in Africa or China or anywhere else, does not mean that cannibalism is rampant in that place.

            • jim says:

              How is it “significantly different”? Both are cannibalism.

              Consuming pills containing thumbsized fetuses is not an indicator that you will be mugged, let alone eaten, if you go to china.

              Consuming adults and pubertal children is an indication you will be mugged, and quite possibly eaten, if you go to subsaharan Africa.

              You wont be eaten if you go to Haiti, since they only sacrifice and eat virgins or purported virgins of both sexes, but the fact that they sacrifice and eat people who are sufficiently grown to be potentially capable of sex indicates that you will be mugged if you go to Haiti.

            • jim says:

              but your argument is that because the reported and confirmed cases of cannibalism in Africa are typically social and collective acts, we can infer that cannibalism is rampant in Africa, because social and collective acts of cannibalism can only transpire in societies in which cannibalism is rampant. If you want to adjust or retract this claim, and to defend your position in some other way, do so, but if you choose not to, I insist that you also say that cannibalism is also rampant in China, because of the social and collective nature of the cannibalism that is occurring in China.

              You are not even trying to make sense. Socially and collectively killing some guy in the street and eating him is different from socially and collectively abusing the bodies of aborted fetuses.

          • Irving says:

            >Consuming pills containing thumbsized fetuses is not an indicator that you will be mugged, let alone eaten, if you go to china.

            >Consuming adults and pubertal children is an indication you will be mugged, and quite possibly eaten, if you go to subsaharan Africa.

            All of this may or may not be true, but the main point of contention between us turns on the question of the frequency of cannibalism in Africa, and of the actual number of Africans who have ever tasted human flesh.

            You say that cannibalism in Africa happens often and that most rural Africans, which is to say most Africans, period, have tasted human flesh. I say that we haven’t sufficient evidence to conclude that cannibalism happens often and that it is extremely unlikely, for various reasons, that most Africans have ever tasted human flesh. You have given your rationale for your position but I have shown that the reasoning behind your rationale would also lead us to believe that cannibalism occurs often in China and that most Chinese have tasted human flesh. Are you prepared to say that cannibalism in China happens often, and that most Chinese have tasted human flesh, or are you going to admit that your position on cannibalism in Africa is on shaky ground, and will you consequently change your justification for your position or else retract your position altogether?

            >You are not even trying to make sense. Socially and collectively killing some guy in the street and eating him is different from socially and collectively abusing the bodies of aborted fetuses.

            The Chinese are not “abusing the bodies of aborted fetuses”, they are eating them, which is cannibalism.

            • jim says:

              All of this may or may not be true, but the main point of contention between us turns on the question of the frequency of cannibalism in Africa, and of the actual number of Africans who have ever tasted human flesh.

              You are behaving in an absolutely stereotypically Jewish fashion. Argument by chutzpah.

              We have already established that in some substantial areas most Africans are cheerfully willing to eat someone who has been murdered in front of them and you deny that fact, you just lying, by repeatedly ignoring what has been repeatedly established.

              Nor you have not presented any similar evidence of similar events ever occurring in China or Europe, the nearest equivalent being people dying of hunger eating someone who has died of hunger.

              Your behavior is dishonest, disgusting, and vile.

          • peppermint says:

            He’s going for technically correct, which is the best kind of correct. So yeah, cannibalism among chinks and gooks. No way to estimate how common it is, but it is tolerated enough to be done at an industrial scale.

            And if you squint at it enough, there’s no real evidence of industrial scale long pig packing in Africa, since all the evidence is racist and thus probably fake.

            Meanwhile… when is Irving going to admit that there are these peoples in Africa, Bantus and Pygmies, and the Bantus like to eat the Pygmies because they are just that racist? Should be easy for him, right?

            • jim says:

              Yes, if we go with his (perfectly reasonable) definitions, he is technically correct. But in actual substance, he is a damned liar.

              Any term stands for a group of things, and the archetype of cannibalism is grabbing some people who lack local power and local friends, for example bastard children, members of an unpopular minority group, people who look weird, or strangers from far away, killing them and eating them. This archetype is distinctively black, and distinctively African.

          • Jack says:

            Among Africans the savagery stems from low IQ and high aggression; they’re impulsive, or characterized by high time preference. This isn’t so with the Asians. With Asians the issue is that they’ve been selected for diminished empathy and especially a weak sense of disgust. Thus, eating cockroaches and other insects, drinking menstrual blood (Valentine’s Day in Japan), drinking liquid feces (“ttongsul”, common in Korea), Yullin Festival in China wherein pets such as dogs and cats are butchered en masse, see also the practice of dolphin drive hunting, and yes, cannibalism occurs as well; besides this culinary monstrosity, there’s Japanese porn, the most depraved you can imagine featuring women injected with enemas and forced to drink their own diarrhea, etc. This lack of a sense of disgust can be a force for good, though, such as with Filipinos having no problem wiping the arses of elderly strangers for a living. Not to mention the fact that Asians don’t shirk from genetic engineering and the development of advanced robotics. Another peculiarity of East Asians is that like Semitic Arabs and North Africans, death doesn’t scare them, and they often prefer it to dishonor. This attitude used to be common among Jews back when Jews were actually fully Semitic, which is no longer the case.

            I recall Jim denouncing the concept of racial purity for Whites, calling for establishing a racial-civilizational union between Whites and Asians. Well I’m glad Jim no longer holds this view. This is not to disparage the Asians completely. I’ve been reading recently the works of Nitobe Inazo, Kakuzo Okakura, and Lafcadio Hearn about different aspects of Japanese culture – what a glorious race! (Not superior to Northwestern Europeans, but certainly superior to kikes) But just as they should retain their racial purity, so should Whites – and indeed, Nature made it so that Happas — White-Asian hybrids — are thoroughly dysfunctional, just as Hitler “””unscientifically””” proclaimed about mongrels in general in Mein Kampf. Speaking of the Fuhrer, he would have cooperated with the Zionists if only the British and International Jewry (overwhelmingly non-Zionist at the time) allowed it, but no, they’d have none of it, because he dared hurt the delicate feelings of the Jewish avowed enemies of human civilization, and because the British had to placate the Arabs. But that’s a digression.

          • Irving says:

            >Yes, if we go with his (perfectly reasonable) definitions, he is technically correct. But in actual substance, he is a damned liar.

            If I’m correct, then I’m correct, and not deserving of the enormous amount of abuse that you’ve been directing my way.

            >Any term stands for a group of things, and the archetype of cannibalism is

            eating human flesh.

            >grabbing some people who lack local power and local friends, for example bastard children, members of an unpopular minority group, people who look weird, or strangers from far away, killing them and eating them. This archetype is distinctively black, and distinctively African.

            All you’re saying is that when black Africans do cannibalism, they do it in a particularly unsophisticated way. But you are now changing the terms of the discussion.

            The original question concerned the frequency of cannibalism in Sub-Saharan Africa, and the actual percentage of black Africans who have actually, at one point or another, consumed human flesh. You have given your reasons for why you think that cannibalism happens often, and with the participation of most people, in black Africa. But using your reasoning, I have shown that it is possible to also conclude that cannibalism happens at least as frequently, and with at least as much participation of the population, in China.

            So again, I ask you, are you willing to concede that your reasoning may in fact be flawed? or, are you prepared to follow your reasoning to its logical conclusion, and conclude that cannibalism happens just as frequently, and with just as much mass participation, in China as in black Africa?

            • jim says:

              All you’re saying is that when black Africans do cannibalism, they do it in a particularly unsophisticated way.

              A particularly subhuman and menacing way, the way that is the archetype of cannibalism.

          • Corvinus says:

            “Among Africans the savagery stems from low IQ and high aggression; they’re impulsive, or characterized by high time preference.”

            Actually, the savagery is among European whites during the Age of Exploration with their high IW and high aggression; they’re impetuous and maniacal.

            “This isn’t so with the Asians. With Asians the issue is that they’ve been selected for diminished empathy and especially a weak sense of disgust. Thus, eating cockroaches and other insects, drinking menstrual blood (Valentine’s Day in Japan), drinking liquid feces (“ttongsul”, common in Korea), Yullin Festival in China wherein pets such as dogs and cats are butchered en masse, see also the practice of dolphin drive hunting, and yes, cannibalism occurs as well”

            Actually, these practices are not widespread as you believe.

            “besides this culinary monstrosity, there’s Japanese porn, the most depraved you can imagine featuring women injected with enemas and forced to drink their own diarrhea, etc.”

            Actually, that’s not just Japanese porn, but extreme porn committed by all ethnic groups equally.

            “This lack of a sense of disgust can be a force for good, though, such as with Filipinos having no problem wiping the arses of elderly strangers for a living.”

            Actually, whites engage in this practice, too.

            ” This is not to disparage the Asians completely. I’ve been reading recently the works of Nitobe Inazo, Kakuzo Okakura, and Lafcadio Hearn about different aspects of Japanese culture – what a glorious race! (Not superior to Northwestern Europeans, but certainly superior to kikes)”

            Actually, one cannot make that determination, given the fact that a person of one group will naturally focus on their contributions at the expense of other groups.

            “But just as they should retain their racial purity, so should Whites – and indeed,”

            Actually, whites can make their own individual decisions regarding who they interact with and who they procreate with. Why are you opposed to freedom of association?

            Nature made it so that Happas — White-Asian hybrids — are thoroughly dysfunctional”

            Actually, white-Asian hybrids are thoroughly functional.

            You’re really not that bright.

            • jim says:

              Actually, the savagery is among European whites during the Age of Exploration with their high IW and high aggression; they’re impetuous and maniacal.

              Compare Rhodesia and the Congo under white rule, with Rhodesia and the Congo before and after white rule.

              Actually, that’s not just Japanese porn, but extreme porn committed by all ethnic groups equally.

              Japanese porn is way more depraved than anyone else’s porn, by far. This has gotten much worse since the massive testosterone decline following their defeat in World War II, but it was already somewhat depraved even before World War II.

              Japan is by far the world’s leading producer of weird and depraved porn.

          • Corvinus says:

            “Compare Rhodesia and the Congo under white rule…”

            Depravity by whites. They came in, took things they wanted. But according to you, they dindunuffin.

            “with Rhodesia and the Congo before and after white rule.”

            Before white rule, they were fine. Did they even openly desire it as a collective group? After white rule, devastation and ruin. Thanks white colonizers!

            “Japanese porn is way more depraved than anyone else’s porn, by far.”

            Actually, that’s a value judgement, not a statement of fact.

            • jim says:

              “Compare Rhodesia and the Congo under white rule…”

              Depravity by whites. They came in, took things they wanted. But according to you, they dindunuffin.

              We brought peace, order, justice, personal safety, roads, clean water, etc.

              “what have the romans ever done for us” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9foi342LXQE

          • peppermint says:

            American porn is filled with nigger dicks and cunnilingus.

            Japanese porn has bukkake and tentacle monsters.

            To a feminist, Japanese porn is depraved, but, since they’re not White, feminists can’t really denounce their culture. But cuckservativesc can go where feminists can’t, as antifa can go where police can’t.

      • jim says:

        Nevertheless, I don’t think that that the part of the program which says that the inner city blacks should be forcibly settled in white middle-class suburban communities will ever be implemented.

        But it is in fact being implemented, producing a huge increase in crime in formerly crime free areas. White woman are getting raped and childre beaten up in areas where this was formerly unheard of, making leafy green suburbs that formerly were suitable for white men to stash their wives and children unsuitable for this purpose.

        • Irving says:

          AFFT isn’t your usual “let’s create Section 8 housing in a suburban town” initiative, it’s stated purpose is different , it is to move the entire inner city black population into the suburbs.

          • peppermint says:

            …which, of course, changes its effects, as Obama’s middle eastern wars for democracy opportunity diversity freedom have different effects from GWB’s middle eastern wars for oil.

  11. Cloudswrest says:

    Speaking of real estate development, back in the late 1980s I was at a Palo Alto city council meeting to protest some gun ban they were trying to pass (and did despite overwhelming audience opposition). What stuck in my mind was there was an agenda item where some representative of the Stanford Shopping Center was there to plead for some expansion to the shopping center. The city council was warm to the idea provided the shopping center build some low income housing somewhere they had in mind. I was gobsmacked (at the time) at this blatant extortion.

  12. Spoons says:

    We have plenty of houses. The problem is that so many of them are filled with immigrants. According to some chart by Pew we could have a population of 252 million people if the 1965 immigration act hadn’t passed. Instead we have 324 million people. Deport the extra 72 million and suddenly the housing stock effectively increases by 29%*. The housing stock that is currently available increases by far more, a couple hundred percent. Prices would collapse, the worst houses would be left to rot, and new construction would be almost unnecessary.

    The only problem is that this new affordability would allow the criminal class (blacks) to spread their disruption. That could be thwarted by various simple measures (police tactics, laws supporting segregation, etc…)

    *actually not as much, because Americans don’t cram a dozen people into each house.

  13. Alf says:

    > Ten percent of that 11 percent who graduate elite high school, the top one percent, people 135 and up, take an elite two year university course.

    Is this compatible with Yarvin’s post against IQism?

    • Oliver Cromwell says:

      Yarvin is soft-defecting because he wants to be allowed to run a business.

    • jim says:

      Yarvin tells us to stop trying to teach low IQ people algebra and instead give them dignified and useful work appropriate to their abilities. So yes.

      Part one of my plan is that we resume building physical things.

      Part three of my plan is that two thirds of the population leaves school and starts work at the beginning of puberty.

    • peppermint says:

      the most ridiculous PC-approved new idea is the idea that most people are permanently unemployable so there needs to be communism or whatever. Moldbug mentioned this idea, floated the idea that there are always places that don’t have ditches where it would be preferable for there to be ditches, and eventually concluded that mass production of certain things needs to be banned to give jobs to people like the USSR did.

      There are observably tons of things that need doing in our current world. Any nigger can with proper oversight repave roads and sidewalks. Unemployment is a purely politically caused problem, that will resolve itself immediately when a bunch of laws including civil rights are repealed.

      What caused the Great Depression of the ’30s? No one seems to have a real answer to that, but just how bad was it, anyway? The “Real GDP” figure has recovered since 2009, but productivity is increasing through technology. Here’s what Depression-era unemployed men looked like, in the only US picture on the Wikipedia page about the Great Depression: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Unemployed_men_queued_outside_a_depression_soup_kitchen_opened_in_Chicago_by_Al_Capone%2C_02-1931_-_NARA_-_541927.jpg There are two niggers there, which aren’t robbing the others. They are all better dressed than employed people of my generation. The sidewalk is clean and does not have grass growing between the tiles. The brick buildings are not covered with spray paint and paint covering spray paint. The glass windows do not have metal shutters to close at night. The steps to the building, however, need a new coat of paint.

      Here’s the first Google result for great depression. See how clean everything is https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/American_union_bank.gif

      • Bowman says:

        I’m not too sure about this one way or the other, but:
        1. It sure seems like there are people who aren’t worth hiring at any price–who will cost you more by stealing or dicking around (or in enforcement to stop them from stealing or dicking around) than they’ll make for you by working. “Proper management” is eliding a lot here. You mention paving–well, would you pay Moldbug’s perfectly nice kid with an IQ of 70 $7.50 an hour to fill in the pothole near your house?
        2. Even if there are people worth hiring at less than hashtag fight for fifteen or whatever, are they worth hiring at rates sufficient to keep them peaceful? Again, “proper management” covers a whole lot here. It’s all well and good to shake your fist at those commies on the Warren Court, but if my choice is between working for literal starvation wages (which I fear is all that many people’s labor might be worth) or getting uppity and taking a bullet, well. And if the real answer here is that bullets are cheap, then see 3).
        3. As far as I can tell, a lot of the relevant concern is not current technological unemployment so much as the risk of technological unemployment as automation improves. It’s one thing to deal with an unemployable 5%, quite another when everybody with an IQ under 145 can be outperformed by a free smartphone app and an autonomous drone. I’m not convinced that this is actually how it’s going to go–it may be, for example, that we all end up hiring human butlers and masseurs and personal chefs with the surplus we have from efficient robotic production–but if it does, the bullets solution boils down to transhumanist accelerationism. Which is certainly a consistent position one could take.

        Also, good point on the FDNY below.

      • pdimov says:

        “Even if there are people worth hiring at less than hashtag fight for fifteen or whatever, are they worth hiring at rates sufficient to keep them peaceful?”

        This is another myth. Although it’s not as much a myth as a fantasy of bloodthirsty leftists, who project their feelings onto the poor. You can recognize these people by the theories of false consciousness they develop to explain why the masses don’t act as they think they ought to act (slaughter the rich when paid “not enough”).

        • Bowman says:

          To be clear, I’m talking about a situation in which the marginal product of someone’s labor is nonzero, but less than the cost of feeding them and supplying them with a pot to piss in. Are there any such people? (I think so, but I’m not sure.). If so, what do you do about them once you do away with the barriers to employment?

          • pdimov says:

            Not in practice, not counting outliers, otherwise slavery wouldn’t have worked.

          • Dave says:

            > Are there any such people?

            Yes, in desperately overpopulated countries like Egypt and India. Not here; we have plenty of unused land where surplus people could be settled and made to grow their own food if they can’t earn their bread any other way.

  14. replace costly, time-consuming diplomas with SATs, Wondericks, and other IQ-like proxies, to signal competence. Employers realize that GPAs are becoming diluted due to grade inflation. Stop wasting so much money on special ed, and focus more resources on the top 5%, who are, statistically speaking, more likely to contribute to the economy and technology than the bottom 5%, yet the bottom gets vastly more funding. Healthcare? Ration by IQ for expensive procedures when payment is not an options; advocate euthanasia for costly incurable diseases when payment is not an option. 5% of patients are consuming 50-80% of healthcare resources, typically for rare diseases and end of life care, which is a big waste.

    • Cloudswrest says:

      IQ tests for employment were effectively outlawed by Griggs v. Duke Power Co.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griggs_v._Duke_Power_Co.

      -CW

      • but we’re talking about hypothetical policy. Also explains why there is a push by the left to make these standardized tests easier. But in some instances tests are allowed is the employer can disprove disparate impact by showing that the test is sufficiently applicable to the job, but this is often very costly for the employer.

      • Bowman says:

        “Effectively outlawed” is a bit much. At least in “”””consulting”””” and some tech fields, lots of companies will give you thinly disguised IQ tests as the first part of the interview process. I assume they figure they’ll be able to settle and/or show that the test is “reasonably related” to the performance of job tasks–which at least in a programming context it very likely is.

        The other thing to remember is that education also signals a willingness to sit down, shut up, and do what you’re told in a timely fashion, and I reckon lots of employers value that. IIRC, IQ and noncognitive skills are somewhat correlated since everything good is somewhat correlated, but maybe not enough to make good hiring decisions with. As Bryan Caplan likes to point out (inb4 >Bryan Caplan), previous work experience would be a better signal of noncognitive skills than either education or some goofy-assed personality inventory, but this is no longer feasible for many, partly for reasons discussed upthread.

    • peppermint says:

      That 5% of patients thing is PC, which means it’s probably false. What is somewhat PC but not really, which means it’s probably true, is what Donald Trump has said about health care cost transparency. In fact, health care cost transparency would fix that 5% problem almost completely. What is not PC, and true, is that niggers get fertility treatment and healthcare for their children for free while Whites need to pay for abortions and pay through the nose for healthcare for their children.

      It’s expensive to have White kids.

      It’s expensive to send White kids to schools where they won’t get beat up while the administrators look the other way, so much so that most of the children of what was the middle class in the ’80s understands in their bones even if not in words that niggers have privilege over them and on some level resent it.

      Those White kids need to keep their record clean, go to college, then to graduate school, and now they still can’t get a job because affirmative action makes it illegal to produce anything that a nigger can’t produce without massive administrative overhead.

      The exception was the tech industry, which is currently being affirmative actioned, because that worked so well for manufacturing.

      The exception is startups that the joke passed around on Facebook is you sell your startup before you have to hire your first woman.

      Jim sees the problems in housing, health, and education, because those are influenced more deeply by government policy, so were problems back in the ’80s and ’60s. It’s the current year, the rot has destroyed manufacturing and is expected to soon destroy tech.

      White men already understand that government scholarships, government welfare, government job placement services, and so on, are not for them. White men are giving up on competing with other White men to be SJWs to try to get the jobs that they won’t get anyway, everyone expects the economy to get worse and worse as time goes on and social security not to exist when and if they make it to 65 and them not to be able to afford much less receive health care from the government.

      And you can tell from seeing the occasional surly Facebook post from young White men. Conserving and retreating was for previous generations. Since we can’t reproduce, we are biologically programmed to fight for the right to reproduce.

      • pdimov says:

        “The exception was the tech industry…”

        A communist country always runs on unprincipled exceptions, or is North Korea.

  15. […] gets all magisterial again Fixing housing, health, and education. A series of solutions whose elegance and simplicity is matched only by his wry wit in describing […]

  16. My own meditations on this topic have led me to a simple conclusion:

    (1) Abolish public education

    (2) Allow colleges to admit students by whatever means they see fit. This will be by the personal recommendations of tutors and teachers recognized by the college.

    Let nature take her course.

    Very few people need to be educated. Most people need to know how to do basic math and change tires.

    90% of humanity are serfs, inside, and always will be. Trying to change this is vainglorious hubris.

    • Corvinus says:

      “My own meditations on this topic have led me to a simple conclusion (1) Abolish public education”

      Indeed, a simple conclusion not rooted in logic.

      “(2) Allow colleges to admit students by whatever means they see fit. This will be by the personal recommendations of tutors and teachers recognized by the college.”

      Which is already done now. Great insight, genius.

      “Very few people need to be educated. Most people need to know how to do basic math and change tires.”

      Actually, most people want to be educated. Whether or not they choose to is up to them.

      “90% of humanity are serfs, inside, and always will be.”

      So, I would surmise you are the 10%, correct? How? Why? What makes YOU special?

      “Trying to change this is vainglorious hubris.”

      According to who, YOU?

  17. […] Donald: Fixing housing, health, and education. A concise and entertaining thought experiment on how to fix these obviously broken aspects of […]

  18. […] Fixing housing, health, and education. […]

  19. Deurbanize. I am going to post longer about it, but basically low-IQ people thrive far better in rural villages, because it is closer to the EEA and thus more instinctive problem-solving can be used. Cities as highly artificial environments should be only for the high-IQ and thus small, a city should be a campus and a trading port written somewhat larger.

    There is nothing sadder that masses of low-IQ brown and sometimes white trash living urban/suburban where they cannot meaningfully employ their natural skillsets, there is almost nothing they can do that brings them satisfaction and a feeling of success, and thus turn to destructive behavior. Natural peasants living in cities is pretty much the worst idea ever and I don’t even know why – jobs are part of the reason, but I think the core reason, back to Ancient Rome even, is that living close to political decision makers enables one to exert pressure on them, thus welfare.

    If I was dictator I would simply just give the proverbial forty acres and a mule to the welfare clients (white thrash included) and not let them sell it. Sink or swim. Keep cities small and elite, keep natural peasants in their proper environment, and everybody is better off.

    Also, ship out all lower-IQ jobs to the country. I don’t know how exactly, but why is it hard to bus people from a village to a factory? If there are few villages with workforce and natural resources around, why aren’t factories out in the country and not in urban industrial zones?

    • pdimov says:

      “Natural peasants living in cities is pretty much the worst idea ever and I don’t even know why – jobs are part of the reason, but I think the core reason, back to Ancient Rome even, is that living close to political decision makers enables one to exert pressure on them, thus welfare.”

      You state the real reason and then immediately dismiss it for your favored explanation, even though peasants flock to cities that aren’t centers of political decision making or dispensing any welfare.

      Cities do produce jobs for peasants.

    • Corvinus says:

      “Deurbanize. I am going to post longer about it, but basically low-IQ people thrive far better in rural villages, because it is closer to the EEA and thus more instinctive problem-solving can be used.”

      What specific scientific and archaeological evidence are you able to provide to support your theory?

      “Cities as highly artificial environments should be only for the high-IQ and thus small, a city should be a campus and a trading port written somewhat larger.”

      Should be according to whom? See, you are acting just like a liberal. Posing pie-in-the-sky ideas that sound ideal but lack any sound implementation in reality.

      “There is nothing sadder that masses of low-IQ brown and sometimes white trash living urban/suburban where they cannot meaningfully employ their natural skillsets, there is almost nothing they can do that brings them satisfaction and a feeling of success, and thus turn to destructive behavior.”

      So, how are you able to exclusively make this determination? Are not people themselves able to decide what is meaningful to them? Must they seek your guidance in such matters?

      “If I was dictator I would simply just give the proverbial forty acres and a mule to the welfare clients (white thrash included) and not let them sell it. Sink or swim. Keep cities small and elite, keep natural peasants in their proper environment, and everybody is better off.”

      You wouldn’t last a day as dictator. Moreover, there is no observably such thing as “natural peasants”. It is a concept you made up to lend credibility to your argument.

      “Also, ship out all lower-IQ jobs to the country. I don’t know how exactly…”

      But that’s your job as a dictator. You’re suppose to have a basic idea.

  20. Alex says:

    Gentrification is going on quickly in Logan Square in Chicago, a neighborhood that went mostly hispanic with attendant drug and crime problems. Now the “plains apes” are out demonstrating against gentrification driving up property values. Blacks and hispanics are a curse in large numbers, they are okay if kept below say 10%, more than that they bring in too many relatives and bring everything down. Can I steal “plains apes”? Alex

  21. Guy says:

    Surprised you’re discussing the cost of assets (housing) without bringing up the Federal Reserve and QE. For sure, part of the problem is giving housing to NAMs through the Community Reinvestment Act. But now that housing has failed, the reason it’s not affordable is more a government and financial institution problem.

    The home ownership rate is near 50 year lows. The price of housing is simply too high compared to demand. In a free market, the price must come down to meet demand. Demand has been artificially inflated by the Fed policies (QE1,2,3,Twist) all of which have piled substantial money into mortgage backed securities (MBS) to inflate housing prices.

    After demanding to rescind the Glass Steagal Act in the name of free market capitalism, the banks demanded to rescind free market capitalism to get bailed out for their failed bets on housing. Yes, NAMs play a big role, but the bigger issue is a government who uses them as a weapon against badwhites, and the rapacious nature of our FIRE economy.

    • jim says:

      I have attempted to build a house on land that I owned that was covered in jungle and had not been used by humans in a century. I paid a lot of money to “consultants” (bagmen) and in the end nothing came of it.

  22. Corvinus says:

    Jim’s blog represents lunacy. It’s a trainwreck, one that I find solace in the fact that his bloviations are impotent. Let’s take a look at this carnival of idiocy.

    “When blacks complain about gentrification, they often mean that ethnic cleansing of whites is not proceeding fast enough to compensate for their destruction of housing stock.”

    
So I imagine you have direct quotes and evidence in which Americans blacks specific indicate that they openly desire to systematically engage the action you are claiming.

    “Rumor has it that five hundred white women have been shockingly disfigured by black males seeking to cleanse whites out of desirable buildings.”

    
To Jim, rumor constitutes evidence. It’s easy on his part to take half-truths and inaccuracies and wild generalizations to frame his argument.

    “You can do anything with bayonets.”

    Jim, it would require guts on your part direct your anger toward a two-year-old nigglet by slicing their throat. Praytell, what religious passage are you able to cite that enables a man or woman to engage in unsolicited violence toward a child?

    “They integrated schools by poking white female children with bayonets. While what I propose would involve poking people with bayonets it would not require such an egregious and embarrassing application of bayonets.

    “With the application of proper authority, they can make fine citizens.”

    Yes, them darkies need supervision, i.e. your brand of propaganda.

    “Jim, sometimes you need to step back and take a deep breath.”

    Considering that his wife runs the household, he doesn’t have time.

    “The problem is that you repeatedly refuse to acknowledge that crimethink arguments have been made, or that crime thoughts have even been expressed, and fail to respond, simply repeating your original claim as if it had never been rebutted, or even disputed, as if no one could possibly disagree and no one ever had disagreed Argument by Chutzpah. It is just not a legitimate method of argument. It is dishonest, stupid, and irritating.”

    

What is dishonest, stupid, and irritating is how Jim automatically labels counterarguments to his position as being part and parcel to having been indoctrinated, i.e. neutered by leftism. In this manner, that counterargument from his perspective is automatically null and void, and thus no refutation is required…because “crimethink”.

    “If we allow people to produce physical things there will be plenty of work for the white working class.”

    
You are speculating. You do not know for certain. Moreover, the modern economy is increasingly about services and technological innovations. Machines generally make the stuff for us.

    “If you simply repeat your original assertions with ever increased confidence, you are a liar and a fool.”

    Jim, this is your wheelhouse!

    “You never attempted to rebut the argument that cannibalism was routine, normal, and socially acceptable in some substantial parts of black Africa,”

    William Arens, author of The Man-Eating Myth: Anthropology and Anthropophagy, basing his thesis on a detailed analysis of numerous “classic” cases of cultural cannibalism cited by explorers, missionaries, and anthropologists. Often, these stories were steeped in unsubstantiated reports or based on second-hand or hearsay evidence. Often, these accusations helped characterize indigenous peoples as “uncivilized” and “primitive”. An example of the sensationalism of cannibalism and its connection to imperialism was in the Japan’s 1874 expedition to Taiwan. As Eskildsen describes, there was an exaggeration of cannibalism by Taiwanese aboriginals in Japan’s popular media such as newspapers and illustrations at the time.

    Reports of cannibalism were recorded during the First Crusade, as Crusaders allegedly fed on the bodies of their dead opponents following the Siege of Ma’arrat al-Numan. Amin Maalouf also alleges further cannibalism incidents on the march to Jerusalem, and to the efforts made to delete mention of these from western history. During Europe’s Great Famine of 1315–1317 there were many reports of cannibalism among the starving populations. In North Africa, as in Europe, there are references to cannibalism as a last resort in times of famine.

    Jim is unable to provide specific evidence that rural Africans perpetually engage in cannibalism, or that this threat is even likely. He would rather purposely distort contrary positions and label them as vile.

    • peppermint says:

      » Jim, it would require guts on your part direct your anger toward a two-year-old nigglet by slicing their throat. Praytell, what religious passage are you able to cite that enables a man or woman to engage in unsolicited violence toward a child?

      what the fuck?

      (1) who said Jim wants to kill niglets? did Jim say he wants to kill niglets?
      (2) why would Jim want to cite any religion as justification for killing niglets?
      (3) did you just say you would do anything if it comes with a plausible-sounding religious citation? if so, how many niglets has your wife adopted as embryos?

      • Corvinus says:

        (1) who said Jim wants to kill niglets? did Jim say he wants to kill niglets?

        You know damn well the answer, white Nigger. Think about it. No mo’ niggles, no mo’ problem. Of course he won’t say it directly, he’s too civilized.

        Jim’s the one advocating calling for college professors to be sent to a gulag for “re-education. The next logical step is to eradicate other problems as well.

        (2) why would Jim want to cite any religion as justification for killing niglets?

        He has used Bible passages to support his perverted views, why stop now?

        (3) did you just say you would do anything if it comes with a plausible-sounding religious citation?

        No, YOU made that claim and attributed it me. Don’t you have your own white brood to attend to? After all, the white race is counting on you to raise your fair share. Are you doing your part?

        • peppermint says:

          That’s right, everyone who isn’t a cuck is a mass-murder nazi. That’s the first and last argument cuckstains and progressives give for their cuckold religion.

          • Corvinus says:

            I’m just using your logic against you, so don’t blame me. Everyone buta Nazi is a cuckstain and progressive. Thats the first and last argument Nazis give for upholding their ideology.

            Shouldn’t you be making dinner for your white children?

          • peppermint says:

            Yes, every White who isn’t a Nazi is a cuckold, usually either of the cuckstain or progressive variety. You appear to be both.

            The difference is, this whole mass murder Nazi archetype is completely bogus historically and currently.

          • Corvinus says:

            “Yes, every White who isn’t a Nazi is a cuckold, usually either of the cuckstain or progressive variety. You appear to be both.”

            It’s so easy for you to make these generalizations. It requires no thinking on your part. I’m sure your children find your insight fascinating. Completely whack, but fascinating.

    • jim says:

      William Arens, author of The Man-Eating Myth: Anthropology and Anthropophagy, basing his thesis on a detailed analysis of numerous “classic” cases of cultural cannibalism cited by explorers, missionaries, and anthropologists. Often, these stories were steeped in unsubstantiated reports or based on second-hand or hearsay evidence.

      William Arens is, like yourself, a barefaced liar. Compare his account of Bernal Díaz del Castillo reports, with what Bernal Díaz del Castillo actually claims to have seen up close and personal.

      We have a pile of eyewitness accounts, such as that of Bernal Díaz del Castillo, and William Arens just plain lies barefaced that they are not eyewitness accounts.

      • Corvinus says:

        Here is where your ignorance is shown for all to bear witness.

        While there is universal agreement that a number of groups practiced sacrifice, there is a lack of scholarly consensus as to whether cannibalism was widespread. That is, the EXTENT of the practice is currently debated. In particular, Arens is questioning the reliability of these accounts regarding the preponderance of cannibalism in those societies, NOT individual instances of this practice being observed. Now, the accounts by Bernal Dias del Castillo was from his own worldview. Each person’s worldview has a particular bias. While the accounts are accurate, they may be certain things in those accounts that warrants scrutiny.

        Do you even understand nuance?

        You then proceed to double down in abject stupidity by making the audacious claim that cannibalism of several group of people, past and present, occured daily at worst or extensive at best. In particular, you stated that most African today have tasted human flesh. You must offer sufficient evidence to support these specific conclusions.

        In particular, do you have eyewitness accounts that this practice indeed happens regularly in rural Africa?

        That most people generally have tasted human flesh?

        Where is your pile of eyewitness accounts?

        Don’t take it out on us because your wife ordered you to watch reruns of Matlock with her tonight while your friends are out carousing.

        • jim says:

          While there is universal agreement that a number of groups practiced sacrifice, there is a lack of scholarly consensus as to whether cannibalism was widespread. T

          There are some scholars who lie barefaced, and should another scholar call them on it, several black professors with room temperature IQ and base ball bats will pay that disagreeable scholar a little visit.

          Related to Jim’s law of poster girls, Jims law of lying scholars:

          William Arens lies barefaced about what Bernal Díaz del Castillo said, therefore everything said by William Arens is a lie, and what he does not like about Bernal Díaz del Castillo is that Bernal Díaz del Castillo told the truth.

          Cannibalism was universally practiced in Mexico by everyone, as described by the eyewitness Bernal Díaz del Castillo and many other eyewitnesses, and is still widely practiced in Haiti, as described by the eyewitness Sir Spenser Saint John, and substantial parts of subsaharan Africa, as described by innumerable eyewitnesses, though in Haiti they don’t murder and eat random strangers, so though you might be murdered and robbed in Haiti, you are unlikely to be murdered and eaten. Whereas there are substantial parts of rural black Africa where should you visit, you probably will be murdered and eaten.

          • Irving says:

            Two problems, among several others, that I had with Castillio was with his account, an account which lacked all plausibility and verisimilitude, of Montezuma, and as well I remember thinking that the numbers that he gave of the opposing armies in the battles in which he witnessed or participated were much too high to be believable.

            >is still widely practiced in Haiti, as described by the eyewitness Sir Spenser Saint John

            I like to read old books too, but don’t you think that maybe, just maybe, eyewitness accounts of cannibalism from the nineteenth century are a bit dated, and that more recent sources must be cited in order to back up your claim of the current existence of the practice of cannibalism in Haiti?

            • jim says:

              Two problems, among several others, that I had with Castillio was with his account, an account which lacked all plausibility and verisimilitude, of Montezuma, and as well I remember thinking that the numbers that he gave of the opposing armies in the battles in which he witnessed or participated were much too high to be believable.

              I have read him, and you are nuts. There is nothing unreasonable about his account of Montezuma, and the battle numbers are quite modest for an agricultural society in which all land was under production and all males were required to fight. Cortez and Diaz say that Mexican cities were vastly larger than contemporary Spanish cities, and the archaeology supports this. If big cities, big armies. Also, Spain was feudal, hence low levels of mobilization, whereas the Mexicans had total mobilization, every adult male. So we would expect Indian armies to be vastly larger than contemporary European armies.

              From Charles the Hammer to the French Revolution, whites deployed small well equipped well trained elite armies, rather than mass armies. Indians deployed mass armies so we would expect their armies to be vastly larger than contemporary European armies.

              Further, those arguing that the battle numbers were too high also propose very high population numbers for the pre columbian population, which would make the battle numbers far too low, given total mobilization.

          • Irving says:

            >There is nothing unreasonable about his account of Montezuma

            I don’t have the text in front of me, and its been over a year since I read it, but I distinctly recall Castillio describing Montezuma as someone well-disposed towards the Spaniards, who took an interest in their technology and religion, who wanted nothing more than to submit to Ferdinand and Isabella, who was by nature gentle and nonviolent, and who was even good friends with Castillio and his people, but who, despite himself, just couldn’t keep himself from observing his native religion, and from devouring human flesh. This simply struck me as an extremely unlikely combination of characteristics for someone in Montezuma’s position to have.

            There’s also the fact that Castillio was responding to other accounts of the conquistadors’ activities which painted the conquistadors in an unfavorable light. Putting aside the question of whether Castillio exaggerates the barbarism of the Aztecs, he seems somewhat inordinately interested in, on the one hand, depicting Pizarro in as positive way as possible, while depicting his opponents among the Spainards, who would go on to write the accounts that Castillio is attempting to refute, in a purely negative light, likely with the intention of discrediting their side of the story in the eyes of the reader.

            You say that all accounts agree that the pre-Columbian Indians were cannibals, but the people Castillio is setting out to refute seem to claimed — I say ‘seem’ because I haven’t actually read them, I’m going off of the second-hand familiarity I have with them — that the cannibalism they were engaged in wasn’t as prevalent as Castillio would later make it seem.

            There are other stuff that I can say, but I’d have to go back and reread the text.

            • jim says:

              I don’t have the text in front of me, and its been over a year since I read it, but I distinctly recall Castillio describing Montezuma as someone well-disposed towards the Spaniards, who took an interest in their technology and religion, who wanted nothing more than to submit to Ferdinand and Isabella, who was by nature gentle and nonviolent, and who was even good friends with Castillio and his people, but who, despite himself, just couldn’t keep himself from observing his native religion, and from devouring human flesh. This simply struck me as an extremely unlikely combination of characteristics for someone in Montezuma’s position to have.

              A technologically superior people with the capacity to conquer you show up. You are Montezuma. You are going to make nice, partly because you want peace and higher technology, partly to play for time because you hope you can copy sufficient bits of their technology to defend yourself.

              It rapidly becomes apparent that these people are cruel bandits who intend to take everything you have, their technology is hard to copy, and playing for time is becoming increasingly expensive.

              That is how I interpreted Montezuma as depicted by Castillio. Montezuma was trying to cut a deal where he stays King and keeps some of his stuff and his people get access to higher technology, Cortez wanted to be King and take everything.

              Also, priestly power. Cortez probably could have a cut a deal with Kings. Could not cut a deal with priests. Priests are worried that Kings will cut a deal whereby religious cannibalism ends, and priests wearing human skins are replaced by a new bunch of priests wearing crosses. So we see a power struggle between priests insisting on war to the end and Kings who are impressed by Cortez’s military capability and are thinking they could cut a deal to get some of that.

          • Corvinus says:

            “There are some scholars who lie barefaced, and should another scholar call them on it, several black professors with room temperature IQ and base ball bats will pay that disagreeable scholar a little visit.”

            This is what fascinates me about Jim. All he is has to do is state that the counter evidence presented that calls into question his assertion is a “barefaced lie”. It’s completely illogical.

            Moreover, list the incident(s) in which several black professors have engaged in the act you described.

            “Whereas there are substantial parts of rural black Africa where should you visit, you probably will be murdered and eaten.”

            Ok, so where is the specific evidence? See, you make up a standard that you demand everyone else adhere to, then when you are asked to meet that same standard, you outright refuse.

            “that the cannibalism they were engaged in wasn’t as prevalent as Castillio would later make it seem.”

            
Exactly. The onus is now on Jim to offer proof that Arens is a “bald faced liar”, rather than merely state it.

            Listen, don’t take it out on us because you watched three hours of Matlock reruns while you’re old lady nagged you about your household chores.

            • jim says:

              This is what fascinates me about Jim. All he is has to do is state that the counter evidence presented that calls into question his assertion is a “barefaced lie”. It’s completely illogical.

              We know that William Arens is, like yourself, a barefaced liar, because we can compare what he claims Bernal Díaz del Castillo said (William Arens claims Castillo says he heard about cannibalism third hand), with what Bernal Díaz del Castillo actually said (Castillo says he saw cannibalism happening right in front of him continually).

              And we can infer the existence of a team of large black professors with baseball bats and room temperature IQs from the widespread disinclination to call William Arens on it.

        • Corvinus says:

          Is there a wealth of primary sources that prove cannibalism existed in Aztec society? Yes.

          Should Arens be taken to task if he denies this fact? Yes.

          Should you be taken to task for insisting that Aztec society engaged then, and African society engages now, in cannibalism as a widespread, perpetual, daily occurrence rather than a particular religious practice, without considering historical context? Absolutely.

          Now, make sure to note I agree that cannibalism is an uncivilized act before accusing me of condoning this practice or supporting it or believing in it or whatever fag bullshit stunt you are known to pull.

          By the way, where is the specific evidence, i.e. first hand accounts, that substantial parts of rural black Africa today, should you visit, will lead a person to probably be murdered and eaten?

          Cortés made definite observations of acts and threats of cannibalism—sometimes both at once, as when the Spaniards’ Indian allies caused dismay among the Aztecs by showing the latter pieces of their butchered countrymen. Of the Aztecs’ suspicion that the Spanish ate men, the Aztecs believed the Spanish to be gods, and the Aztecs believed gods mutilated and consumed men. Thus, Europeans and the “savages” feared the others were cannibals, but on opposite grounds: the Europeans because they thought the Aztecs, from their cultural superiority standpoint, were something less than men, and the Aztecs because they thought the Europeans, from a religious perspective, were supreme deities.

          That the notices of the actual eating on a daily basis, that they greedily consumed human flesh as a longstanding, perpetual practice, I’m sure you have sources from your archives to prove it.

          Because the Spanish assumed that if sacrifices were being made, and human flesh was being hung on poles, that naturally this cultural practice was “the norm”, i.e. embedded as part of their society from cradle to grave.

          Stated another way—the Spanish would think that the practice was universal, rather than unique; that, to the Spanish, the practice of eating flesh was part of the Aztec diet, consumed as a meal on a regular basis, rather than the practice of eating flesh was part of the Aztec religion, prepared as a form of communion in a specific ceremony.

          Therefore, it is not surprising that the erroneous assumption would become an established “fact” by the Spanish and subsequent European historians about cannibalism without realizing the context of human sacrifices. This gradual transformation of what little evidence is available for Aztec cannibalism would serve as the basis to legitimize conquest of “heathens”.

So, future European explorers encounter “savages” who in their eyes are wholesale cannibals without any attempt to check the truth of the claim. Other travelers and academics repeat the initial accusation so often it acquires the status of truth, despite never having been substantiated that truth in the first place.

          Now, let’s get back to the real question before you revert back to being a little bitch and ignore it completely. Where is the specific evidence, i.e. first hand accounts, that substantial parts of rural black Africa today, should you visit, will lead a person to probably be murdered and eaten?

          • jim says:

            Stated another way—the Spanish would think that the practice was universal, rather than unique; that, to the Spanish, the practice of eating flesh was part of the Aztec diet, consumed as a meal on a regular basis, rather than the practice of eating flesh was part of the Aztec religion, prepared as a form of communion in a specific ceremony.

            In addition to religious cannibalism, they also chowed down on the war dead, without priests or ceremony, which is pretty good evidence as human flesh as just an ordinary meal.

            Similarly Captain Cook may have been eaten because the Hawaiians attributed special magical qualities to him, but when they ate ten of his ordinary English seamen …

            Religious cannibalism tends to result in warrior cannibalism, and warrior cannibalism is not very different from gangs of thugs robbing and eating passers by.

            Conversely, once religious cannibalism is eradicated by fire and steel, warrior cannibalism tends to fade away, though this obviously depends on a race’s potential for civilization.

          • Corvinus says:

            “In addition to religious cannibalism, they also chowed down on the war dead, without priests or ceremony, which is pretty good evidence as human flesh as just an ordinary meal.”

            Pretty good evidence. Which means you are making a judgement, which is not the same as absolute truth.

            Do you have first hand accounts? Cite

            “Similarly Captain Cook may have been eaten because the Hawaiians attributed special magical qualities to him, but when they ate ten of his ordinary English seamen …”

            “May” is not the same as “was”. In other words, you don’t know.

            “Religious cannibalism tends to result in warrior cannibalism, and warrior cannibalism is not very different from gangs of thugs robbing and eating passers by.”

            Tends to result. Again, not absolute truth. Ok, proof? Cite.

            So, little bitch, where is the specific evidence, i.e. first hand accounts, that substantial parts of rural black Africa today, should you visit, will lead a person to probably be murdered and eaten?

            • jim says:

              “In addition to religious cannibalism, they also chowed down on the war dead, without priests or ceremony, which is pretty good evidence as human flesh as just an ordinary meal.”

              Pretty good evidence. Which means you are making a judgement, which is not the same as absolute truth.

              Do you have first hand accounts? Cite

              Castillo. I cannot recall the page number, but it was during the battle in the city when they were taking a very long time to advance a very short distance, because they had to rebuild the causeway.

          • peppermint says:

            » where is the first hand account of some journalismfag going to coontown and getting eaten

            lol

            but wasn’t there some story a few years ago where a white guy sold a slave to another african tribe which ate the slave? and it was racist of the white guy because he violated the Prime Directive?

          • Corvinus says:

            “Castillo. I cannot recall the page number…”

            Of course you can’t.

            So, little bitch, where is the specific evidence, i.e. first hand accounts, that substantial parts of rural black Africa today, should you visit, will lead a person to probably be murdered and eaten?

            The more you purposely avoid this question, the more foolish you look, which I thought wasn’t possible. So is it Murder, She Wrote reruns tonight with you and the Mrs.?

            And, then there is our dear Peppermint, you crack me up.

            “but wasn’t there some story a few years ago where a white guy sold a slave to another african tribe which ate the slave? and it was racist of the white guy because he violated the Prime Directive?”

            I don’t know, was there “a story”?

            • jim says:

              So, little bitch, where is the specific evidence, i.e. first hand accounts, that substantial parts of rural black Africa today, should you visit, will lead a person to probably be murdered and eaten?

              There is ample evidence that there are parts of rural Africa where whites will be murdered on sight. Drive past and the whole village comes after you swinging machetes, having created a booby trap down the road that will get your car stuck. I don’t have evidence for what happens to the bodies of those whites but these are a subset of the parts of Africa for which we do have evidence of cannibalism, and people treating cannibalism as routine and normal.

          • peppermint says:

            okay, I can’t find that story anywhere, but here, have a JewTube video, faggot

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CPyJ3wppD4

          • Corvinus says:

            “There is ample evidence that there are parts of rural Africa where whites will be murdered on sight.”

            You made the claim that substantial parts of rural black Africa today, should you visit, will lead a person to probably be murdered and eaten, that people there engage in cannibalism on a daily basis as a part of their normal diet.

            Prove it, little bitch.

            “Drive past and the whole village comes after you swinging machetes, having created a booby trap down the road that will get your car stuck.”

            Whole village, huh? Booby trap down the road? And whites are toast in this situation? Where is the evidence, little bitch?

            ” I don’t have evidence for what happens to the bodies of those whites but these are a subset of the parts of Africa for which we do have evidence of cannibalism, and people treating cannibalism as routine and normal.”

            Yes, evidence of cannibalism, but routine and normal? Ok, where is the definitive proof, little bitch?

          • Corvinus says:

            Of course you couldn’t find the story. And, so what, you provided me with something we already know–Cannibalism occurs in Africa.

            But that is not in dispute. Be a white knight and save Jim from distress–Where is the evidence that substantial parts of rural black Africa today, should you visit, will lead a person to probably be murdered and eaten, that people there engage in cannibalism on a daily basis as a part of their normal diet?

            Perhaps you can take ten minutes out of your day from your worship of Hitler to do something actually productive.

          • Steve Johnson says:

            “You made the claim that substantial parts of rural black Africa today, should you visit, will lead a person to probably be murdered and eaten, that people there engage in cannibalism on a daily basis as a part of their normal diet.

            Prove it, little bitch.”

            You’re the little bitch here. Jim proves that he believes what he writes – by not visiting rural black Africa.

            Why don’t you take your bitch ass to the danger-free rural Africa and report back? Or even Detroit?

            Yeah, thought not. You claim to disagree yet act in every way exactly like someone who agrees with Jim’s argument.

          • pdimov says:

            “but wasn’t there some story a few years ago where a white guy sold a slave to another african tribe which ate the slave?”

            That seems to have happened in 1890.

            http://modernnotion.com/james-jameson-10-year-old-girl-eaten-cannibal/

          • peppermint says:

            » so what, you provided me with something we already know–Cannibalism occurs in Africa.

            guy of tribe A eats guy of tribe B in broad daylight in front of witnesses and is then interviewed on the Big Black Cock network that is owned by the Queen, who is owned by the State Department

            they interview one of the guys who ate the victim

            “these soldiers are Christians… some of them carry the flesh of he enemies they’ve killed”

            “to some Christians, [the guy who ate the other guy] is a hero”

            literally everywhere else on Earth, cannibalism has to be done in secret

          • Corvinus says:

            Lil’ Stevie, how cute for you to ride to Jim’s defense. You’re too tall for this ride.

            And my dearest Peppermint, how hard did you bang on your keyboard when you wrote yet another rant?

          • Steve Johnson says:

            “You’re too tall for this ride.”

            At least you noticed one thing successfully – I do tower over you.

          • Corvinus says:

            “At least you noticed one thing successfully – I do tower over you.”

            In being intellectually sterile, assuredly.

  23. […] We were warned. Aristocracy > Dictatorship. Democracy ignores threats and its own values. Altruism ruins health care, education and housing. Cryptic stirrings. Aggregation: here und […]

  24. […] Jim’s solutions to housing, health and education look pretty shitty, here are better ones: […]

  25. […] might find Jim’s blog, and he might seem interesting but then you get to an article where he says that husbands basically […]

Leave a Reply