Thursday, February 23, 2017

Secession is a young man's game

The political dissolution of the US is inconceivable to Boomers. That's not the case among younger Americans, who've had to live with the consequences of the Boomers' obsessive quest to find--or found--the mythical racial El Dorado.

A Reuters-Ipsos poll from 2014 found over 1-in-3 people under the age of 30 lending support to the idea of their state seceding from the union, compared to fewer than 1-in-6 people over the age of 60 feeling the same way.

A recent SurveryUSA poll out of California corroborates this. The percentages of Californians, by age cohort, who are opposed* to Calexit:

AgeRemain
18-3457%
50-6467%
35-4969%
65+80%

Hispanics, with 25% supporting, are the most likely to favor Calexit. Whites (13%) are the least likely to do, with blacks (16%) and Asians (18%) falling in between. Men (21%) are more likely than women (15%) to favor it.

* There are three responses to the question, "remain", "withdraw", or "not sure". This table lists only the "remain" percentages and thus may appear to overstate support for secession. The full results are here.

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

#resist is futile

The phrase "fake news" is a beast that has, in a matter of months, been entirely turned on the people who released it on us. Our appropriation has been so thorough that CultMarxists are now insinuating that it originated on the alt right, inspired of course by Hitler:


Having lost control of "fake news", they summoned bahamut "alternative facts" next. It was delivered in critical condition and dead within the week:


That's probably better for the Cathedral, as the alternative facts--human biodiversity, IQ, sexual dimorphism, crime rates, ad infinitum--turret is even easier to turn around on those who deploy it than the stated desire for "an honest conversation about race" is.

What's next?

This week I saw a dumpy middle-aged white woman (no ring) wearing a black t-shirt with white lettering that simply read "#resist". That term is as bad as the clumsy and confusing slogan "love trumps hate".

For one, it concedes a seductiveness about the thing--America First, Make America Great Again, Trump--that must be resisted. You don't get a woman to eat better by telling her over and over again to resist the temptation to have that piece of cheesecake or get a guy off his porn addiction by having him watch it while encouraging him to resist the urge to masturbate.

Its individualistic focus undercuts its crucial role in motivating people to join a cause bigger than themselves Parenthetically, this is why libertarianism's focus on "individual liberty" has a support ceiling of a few percent of aspergy, high IQ male WEIRDOs and no one else. Emphasis on the "non-aggression principle" is better (as a recruiting tool--that's not a subjective judgment on my part).

It's also feeble, exactly the sort of thing that appeals to post-menopausal SWPL women and no else. Something aspirational like "#TheResistance" evokes stronger imagery and is more compelling.

There's no risk in us discussing this. These covens of cat ladies are clueless. They're too self-indulgent to realize any of it. It's another illustration of how all we need is an even playing field to route our opposition.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Unpacking Milo

A few comments:

- Why did he contract with a major publisher like Simon and Schuster? Milo's celebrity has skyrocketed over the last year. He had become a powerful brand name in his own right, to such an extent that long before his book was even written--let alone published--it was a bestseller on Amazon. Simon and Schuster had nothing to do with that.

The only reason to use a major publisher today is to take advantage of their promotional infrastructure and reach, but Simon and Schuster offered Milo nothing in this regard. Major publishing houses take huge commissions compared to independent publishers and they exert more editorial control than independent publishers to boot. Additionally, major publishers, who release tens of thousands of titles each year, have no problem walking away from one of their own authors, even those as lucrative as Milo.

If Milo had gone with someone like Castalia House, the manufactured outrage made about old comments that have been in the public domain for a year, wouldn't have been able to cascade out of control like this one has.

He was also cut from the CPAC lineup. Why even sign up for that moribund gathering? Take a page out of "daddy's" book and leave the cuckservatives hanging (yes, I know Trump is speaking this year, but as a negotiator he knows he holds all the cards this time around while he emphatically would not have if he'd showed up last year--Trump's a master at understanding these sorts of dynamics).

- When you're launching an assault onto hostile territory as the Alt Right and Alt Lite are, to go on the defensive is to concede the battle. He should've reframed immediately by pointing out that having sex with teenagers is normal in the MENA countries all these so-called refugees are pouring into the West from. They're not just making off-colored jokes about it, they're boinking 14 year-olds--boys and girls--every day. Their prophet married a girl when she was six and took her virginity when she was nine.

- The Cathedral votaries who are crucifying Milo are using pedophilia as a pretext for doing so. They have no problem with it. To the contrary, many of these sickos are participants. Playing with fire is a good way to get burned. The constant heckling of a flamboyant fag for his alleged pedophilia is going to prime the public in a way that may not redound to the benefit of powerful people like Chuck Schumer, the Clintons, or Jeffery Epstein's other co-travelers in the not-so-distant future.

- As previously noted, this is purely opportunistic, insincere outrage. These videos have been on youtube for a year. From CNN (my emphasis):
The professional provocateur has resigned as an editor at Breitbart News amid a firestorm over unearthed comments in which he seemed to endorse sex between "younger boys and older men."

...

While Yiannopoulos has made a living off deliberately offensive statements, his comments on two recently discovered video clips proved too much, even for his friends and colleagues at Breitbart.
None of these people get exercised about pedophilia unless it is to pretend that pedophiles are no more likely to have relations with those of the same sex than normal people are. It was only when Milo got too big for his britches by humiliating a couple of black stooges in front of a national audience that they strung him up:


- This is another example of why punching to the right in an attempt to placate the left isn't just despicable, it's futile. Milo has repeatedly celebrated Richard Spencer being battered on camera. A lot of good that did him. Disavowing the few who aren't afraid of thunder means you're on your own when the storm clouds roll in.

- Homosexuality is deviancy:



What Milo is getting at here--that the issue isn't age per se but pubescence--is easily comprehensible in biological terms when heterosexuals are involved. The lust of a man for a female who is showing signs of fertility isn't pedophilia. Her age is irrelevant. That doesn't mean the lust is socially or culturally optimal--it's clearly not in the 21st century Western world, where life cycles are slower now than they were millennia ago--but biologically it's perfectly normal.

He does a poor job expressing as much because homosexuality isn't biologically normal, it's deviant. The strong demarcation between pre- and post-pubescence that exists as a subconscious indicator of sexual interest for heterosexuals is hazier for homosexuals. Because the sex is non-reproductive, it's not driven by indications of fertility. Consequently, gays and straights have trouble expressing their sexual proclivities to one another.

- Finally, I'm surprised he didn't try to play it off by attributing it to his Greek heritage. It wouldn't even be a purely rhetorical ploy--the types of relationships he is flirting with here characterize the most normalized variety of male-to-male relationships in ancient Greece. I suppose appearing to throw the heroic Greeks under the bus to save yourself wouldn't do much for his fan base.

Sunday, February 19, 2017

Wealth correlates with intelligence

Searching for data on the relationship between wealth and intelligence almost inextricably leads to a study by a guy out of Ohio State saying that there isn't one. He used the National Longitudinal Study of Youth (NLSY), the same one Murray and Herrnstein used for The Bell Curve.

It's not my intention to cast aspersions on what he found. The GSS, however, offers an alternative finding. The following table shows the average IQ as estimated from mean wordsum results converted to IQ scores assuming a white average of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 by wealth category. To allow wealth formation to have occurred and to avoid racial confounding, results are restricted to non-Hispanic whites aged 35-70 years old (n = 824):

WealthIQ
Less than $100k98.2
$100k-$500k101.4
$500k-$1M105.7
$1M+105.8

The differences aren't huge but they clearly exist. The correlation between wordsum scores and income in the GSS is 50% stronger than it is between wordsum scores and wealth (r-values of .27 and .18, respectively), a result I admittedly found surprising. I'd assumed that if anything wealth would correlate more strongly with income, the lottery winner who is broke a decade later or the former NBA player who is similarly so a decade after his career ends as salient examples of why.

On the other hand, a lot of wealth comes from inheritance. Income is primarily a function of an individual's capabilities while wealth is more a function of the capabilities of his family.

The consequences of regression to the mean are blunted in the case of wealth but not so much in the case of income. A sharp guy with modest parents may earn a lot but having not started with much--while also shouldering a financial burden on behalf of his family--never accumulates that many assets. And the modest son with rich parents may not be able to command much of a salary, but affluence will still roll downhill to him.

GSS variables used: BORN(1), RACECEN1(1), WEALTH(1-5,6-8,9,10-15), AGE(35-70), CONINC

Saturday, February 18, 2017

Transsexuality is a mental disorder

Larry Wilmore, who despite fully embracing his blackety-black victimhood passes the brown paper bag test, asserts that gays are no more mentally disordered than straights are, a claim Milo Yiannopolous disputes:



The percentages of people, by sexual orientation, who suffered from "stress", depression" or "problems with emotions" in the last month:

OrientationMentalProbs
Heterosexual44.5%
Bisexual55.9%
Homosexual61.7%

Milo is right, Wilmore is wrong.

The GSS only began asking about sexual orientation in 2008, so all responses (n = 3,238) are from that year onward, well into the era of gays being celebrated as quasi-sacred objects rather than condemned as buggers.

The survey doesn't inquire about trannies, who are also discussed in the full video clip above, but it's likely that, from best to worst mental health, the ordering goes heterosexuals, followed by bisexuals, then homosexuals, and finally to trannies, the large majority of whom presumably have poor mental health.

GSS variables used: MNTLHLTH(0,1-30), SEXORNT