Monday, November 30, 2015


If this doesn't inspire a desire for perpetually expanding suffrage to everyone and everything, nothing will:

Saturday, November 28, 2015

Miscellany of brief items

++Addition++See Tangoman's arguments for the necessity of an ethno-state in the comments.


- I use a termite bait station to keep termites from getting into my house because I know their presence will lower my family's quality of life. I support the construction of a border fence to keep illegal immigrants from south of the border out of my country because I know their presence will lower my family's quality of life. As it is not fear but simple prudence that compels me in both of these cases, the terms "termitephobic" and "xenophobic" are both equally inapplicable for describing my behavior.

- Assuming a stable population, even at the most theoretically violent, where martial prowess and an unrelenting focus on pugilistic tactics would put the Spartans to shame, the average person can, at the very maximum, only kill one person over the course of his entire lifetime. This occurred to me when I recently heard Lew Rockwell talking about how incredibly unnerving an experience it is for the vast majority of people to be put in a the situation of having to take another person's life, irrespective of the context. To have killed more than one person is to be an extreme historical rarity.

- These shirts are floating around my neck of the woods:

There is some grim satisfaction in watching the same people who superciliously call Kansas "Brownbackistan" now criticize the governor for resisting the transformation of his state into something that will genuinely move it in the direction of resembling an actual crapistan.

- Using the image above as a segue, the percentages of self-identified homosexuals who have engaged in heterosexual sex is 34.4% for gay men and 66.1% for lesbians. The percentages of self-identified heterosexuals who have engaged in homosexual sex is 6.1% for men and 5.3% for women.

Some non-exhaustive conjecture on why homosexuals engaging in heterosexual sex is significantly more likely than heterosexuals engaging in homosexual sex is: A relatively tiny pool of potential preferred partners for gays, perceived social pressure to conform to a non-deviant lifestyle, and the existence of more of a sexual spectrum for those exhibiting sexual dysfunction than for those with normal sexual function.

- Answers to the question "Would you be more or less likely to support for president a candidate who is Jewish?" among Hispanic, black, and white Republican survey respondents:



White Republicans

That's a less likely-to-more likely breakdown of 70.6%-29.4% for Hispanics, 70.8%-29.2% for blacks, and 60.0%-40.0% for white Republicans. This in spite of the fact that white Republicans are almost certainly more likely to be cognizant of the fact that Bernie Sanders--a man they'd never vote for--is Jewish than blacks or Hispanics are.

When it comes to the fracturing of the Coalition of the Fringes, it's more a question of when than of if.

- Finally, AE is now active on twitter, so engage me there as well if you're so inclined.

(Post title courtesy of John Derbyshire)

2012 presidential support among single women

Heartiste writes:
Since universal suffrage was passed into law, women voters have pushed America toward the extreme far Left. Now we have a biological underpinning that helps explain why. The liberal, social safety net, open borders preferences of women align with the political preferences of effeminate men (like John Scalzi, Alex Pareene, and Ezra Klein). The effeminate men never had much of a political voice until they were able to hitch the behemoth female voting bloc to their cause. And now we have gay marriage, mudsharking on prime time TV, and slut walks featuring half-naked fat chicks.
The evidence is overwhelming and indisputable among women unmoored by the oppressive patriarchal institution of marriage. The electoral intentions of never married women on election day, 2012:

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

Donald Samson

In the first debate, Trump refused to swear off an independent run if he didn't win the Republican nomination. With a prerequisite of good faith, he subsequently pledged to support the eventual nominee. The GOP establishment, now finally beginning to panic about the prospect of Trump actually getting the nod (these people are really, really bad at noticing things), is working feverishly to unite the entire field against him.

Trump responded to that egregious breach of good faith by calmly leaning up against a pillar of the Republican temple:
Donald Trump's presidential campaign warned the Republican Party on Tuesday about donors pooling funds for attack ads, saying Republicans must treat him fairly if they want to keep him from launching an independent bid.

Trump lawyer Michael Cohen told CNN that if Republican donors backing different presidential candidates come together for an anti-Trump advertising campaign, it would be a "bad, bad decision."
The analogy isn't perfect. Samson's mojo was stolen by a duplicitous tramp, his eyes were gouged out, and he committed suicide in a final bout of vengeful rage. If Trump brings the walls of the Republican party crashing down in 2016, he'll walk off into the sunset even more influential, famous, and admired than he was before he stepped into that corrupted temple.

With total immodesty, recall what was asserted here a few months ago because it bears repeating:

The Republican party needs to be reformed or reduced to rubble. Trump is making damned sure one of those two outcomes occur.

Sunday, November 22, 2015

Saturday, November 21, 2015

It's the immigration, stupid

Polling on immigration often appears to be all over the place. Wording is crucial. When the choices are "deport everyone" and "secure the border and then offer a path to citizenship", the Cathedral can manufacture headlines to try and create an illusion of amnesty as a political winner. When the questions are more objectively designed, it becomes clear that restrictionism is the populist position.

Over the summer, Reuters approached the issue in the most straightforward manner I've ever come across. In terms of fleshing out public sentiment, the approach is bar none. Respondents were asked about what should be done with illegal immigrants in the US. Only two committal answers--"deport most or all of them" and "allow most or all of them to stay"--along with a third "unsure" cop-out option, were offered as responses.

Reuters' interactive polling application allows for cross tabular data to be presented in graphical form, too.

First, the country as a whole:

Most people still prefer US to be a nation of laws

This is strikingly similar to the results from a recent poll on the Obama/Ryan plan to wave in 10,000 Syrian refugees.

The racial differences are stark. Whites:

Most whites would like to have a country


The only known issue for which black opinion is not monolithic


¡Solidaridad etnica!

Asian results are inaccessible due to insufficient sample size.

Drilling down a little further reveals why Trump's bold candidacy announcement and his incorrigible refusal to yield an inch in the intervening months--choosing instead not only to stand his ground but to advance forward--has been a political masterstroke. Fortunately, it also substantially increased the odds that Western civilization will survive the 21st century.

White Republicans (pardon the redundant adjective):

Flavor text source here.

To show this isn't a cherry-picked artifice, data for the entire month are included. September 10th was selected above because it was end date of the 5-day polling period with the highest number of respondents over the period Reuters administered the survey question.

Of migrants and moralities

Rorchach test of moral valuation
Slave morality -- It was an evil thing Europeans did to American Indians, so they deserve to have something similar done to them.

Master morality -- This was bad for the people who allowed it to happen to them. We will not allow it to happen to us.

Nietzsche's duality is applicable not just in the case of an individual internet meme, but on mass migration from relatively dysfunctional, violent, chaotic places to relatively functional, non-violent, controlled places more generally. Jayman may hate to quote her, but the point is so blatantly obvious that he isn't going to contest its validity:

Other than for the purposes of moral posturing and virtue signalling, there are no compelling reasons* to do it.

Humorously, as of late social justice warriors have been emphasizing the divine sanction of their mission. To many of these people, history started when they were in grade school. The religious and historical ignorance of the arguments they put forward are a consequence of this ignorance. An example of the former:

As told in Luke, the story is that Joseph and Mary were returning to Joseph's ancestral home to register for a mandatory Roman census. It's not a tale of fleeing persecution at all. To the contrary, it's a story of being legally compelled to return home.

Which, you know, is what a lot of people want the refugees to do (and what one presidential candidate has pledged to make them do).

And of the latter:

The sermon on the mount putatively occurred 600 years before Islam came into existence. Yikes.

* From a nationalist or a citizenist perspective--if the objective is the demographic displacement of white America, the reasons for support are obvious.

Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Death by Kasich

A recent Associated Press headline reads "Democratic insiders rate Rubio, Kasich as tough to beat, not Trump or Carson". The AP asked Democratic superdelegates who they thought potentially presented Hillary Clinton her toughest electoral challenge. Rubio came out on top with 37%. Kasich was second at 26%, and ¡Jabe! was third with 20%. Trump got just 9%.

Kasich was managing director of Lehman Brothers when it collapsed. He is a caricature of everything that is wrong with the contemporary Republican party. He even figured out how to be booed at the most recent GOP debate. He's an uglier, more grating, less successful version of Mitt Romney--exactly the wrong kind of person to garner the middle American support essential for Republicans to have a shot (here's Trump channeling the sentiments of just about everyone who knows who Kasich is).

The attempt to propel Kasich and amnesty point man Rubio to the top is nakedly self-serving. The goodwill electoral advice offered to Republicans from Democratic insiders is about as genuine as the advice that Hispandering is the way to go. If the GOP listens to what we say they are sure to beat us, but we can't help but be helpful anyway!

Fortunately, Ipsos-Reuters' interactive polling explorer allows a check on these presumably self-serving assertions made by Democratic insiders. Here are the results from the most recent rolling 5-day period on who among those voting for Obama in 2012 would vote for on the Republican side if they had to vote for someone:

And here is the same for those who self-describe as political independents:

Nationalism (or citizenism) has broad appeal. The Establishment really, really hates that.

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

New York Times effect on man

From an op-ed in the NYT comes this line:
It feels like the terrorists have flung open a door and burst into a room with a dense, uncomfortable atmosphere, packed with people ready to succumb to hysteria at the slightest trigger.
Coordinated attacks that killed at least 129 people and injured far more as they engaged in regular social activities qualifies as "the slightest trigger". Chill out, people, no big deal!

A couple of student body members being bullied into stepping down because they refused to stand in solidarity with the largely fabricated and picayune grievances that caused top MU administrators to resign, however, is certainly not evidence of succumbing to hysteria at "the slightest trigger", however.

Western civilization is sick, very sick. We await a terminal diagnosis.

Saturday, November 14, 2015

More on Murray

Read the title, don't say it, because he emphatically is not. He is one of the intellectual titans of the HBD movement. But his apparent visceral disdain for Trump renders him unable to maintain his composure when the subject in question is perceived to be anywhere near the GOP front runner's orbit. Murray earlier today (issue here):

Fully fleshing out someone's position when it is presented in fewer than 140 characters is rarely a sure thing, but I read this as insinuating that Trump supporters posture about human migration and that amnesty supporters (of which Murray self-describes himself as) need to make sure they are thinking about and analyzing it to counter that posturing.

It's unclear that Murray is even aware that John Derbyshire is an unapologetic Trump supporter. By linking to his article in this context, Murray is obviously admitting that Derb is among those who are "thinking, analyzing, not posturing". Oops.

Trump supporters are the only ones who have been doing that. Serious thinking about the National Question has been and continues to be done by people who tend to view the Trump phenomenon is a positive rather than a negative development (to put it mildly).

On the other hand, maybe I'm misreading what is intended by Murray to be humble admonishment of those of a like mind, as in "Trump sucks but he and his supporters are substantively dealing with this while we're ignoring it or serving up embarrassing boilerplate about it in the WSJ and NYT".

Thursday, November 12, 2015

Trump on Mizzou

Killer instincts:

Bernie Sanders, aka the blacks' bitch (even though they'll never vote for him), put out a statement saying "it's time to address structural racism on college campuses." Hillary Clinton at least had the sense to maintain a degree of separation and merely retweeted a staffer who wrote "racism has no place anywhere, let alone an institution of learning". Carson, to his credit, bandied about the awkward phrase "politically correct police", in this context referring to the 'activists' and not to tongue-tied cops. Both ¡Jabe! and Rubio, put in the uncomfortable position of having to react extemporaneously, unsurprisingly had no comment.

Narrative Collapse is already occurring. It feels hyperbolic to even use the word "collapse" because the accusations are so petty:

- An alleged fecal swastika on a restroom wall for which there is no evidence of its existence other than the assertion of one black 'activist' (He didn't have a cell phone to take a picture? The immaculate defecation!)

- A drama queen who fabricated a UFO KKK sighting.

- A drunk guy muttering a racial slur (standard fare in the realm of black entertainment).

- Some loser over an hour away making empty threats, anonymously, on the internet (who ever heard of crazy things being said anonymously on the internet?!)

Meanwhile, those not usually tuned in to the goings on in Columbia might be surprised to hear that over the last several months there have been several instances of white MU students being severely beaten by blacks in and around the campus.

As Columbia is less than two hours away my anecdotes may be skewed, but the reactions to these pathetic resignations I've heard--even from SWPLs I know--underscores the sense that we really are beginning to see the inchoate stirrings of white consciousness in the US. Comment sections on all the articles I've read corroborate this. It is a predictable consequence of demographic change and the dispossession that accompanies it.

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

Middle America, this is what your sons are dying for

Today's Google doodle:

Racial characteristics compared (from 2014 US Census data):

Google more than doubles black and Hispanic representation and inflates Asian representation by a factor of almost ten. Even the obligatory stodgy old whites are shown to the sides and at a distance. Everyone wins! Well, except for American Indians, it must be conceded. Regrettable. Looks like Silicon Valley is indeed in need of more diversity training.

Sexual characteristics compared:

Girl power x7!

The distributions showing who has made the ultimate sacrifice would be even more retrograde than the demographic distributions of actual veterans, who--to our great shame!--do not look enough like America.

As we remember Jesus, so they will remember us.

Parenthetically, yes, the hand-waving man is Asian, probably Filipino. Here's a close up. The eyes confirm it:

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

The "I" word

During the fourth Republican presidential debate, Fox News flashed a word chart in which the size of words corresponded to the alleged concern about the words, the larger the words the greater the alleged concern and the smaller the words the lesser the alleged concern.

Conspicuously missing was a term that, according to Google Trends over the last month, has garnered more search interest than any of the putative top four concerns on people's minds has.

ImmigrationTaxesHomeland SecurityCampaign Finance, and Size of Government

Fourth Republican presidential debate

A little liveblogging.


John Kasich, managing director of Lehman Brothers when it collapsed, is explaining what the federal government should do when a company like, well, Lehman Brothers becomes insolvent. This guy is a caricature of everything that is wrong with the contemporary Republican party.


Carly Fiorina says we need more troops in Germany. I guess 38,000 isn't enough.


Donald Trump says we shouldn't fight the rest of the world's battles for them. He suggests we should learn from our past mistakes. Jeb Bush wants more Iraqs, Afghanistans, and Vietnams. If nothing else, Trump deserves a medal for destroying Bush's campaign.


Someone get Kasich a tissue. He's like a door-to-door salesman who won't let you go back to dinner.


Rubio's phrase "committed isolationist" translates to "not being devoted to trying to police the world, install liberal democracies at the point of a gun in tribalistic societies that don't want them, and possibly start World War III in the process".

The neoconservative movement is alive and well in Marco Rubio.


Jeb Bush: "[blah blah blah] and the government would get the revenue to make things better."

Good grief.


Imagine if car insurance was like health insurance. Your insurance would pay for you to fill your tank, get your car washed, have your windows detailed, and change your oil. But when your motor or transmission went out, they'd max out coverage at $100 and you'd have to pay the rest.

 Insurance should protect against catastrophe while allowing market pressures to keep costs down for the routine stuff. The American health care system works in the exact opposite way, and consequently costs are absolutely out of whack.


Trump/Cruz 2016. It's enough to get a guy to vote Republican again.


Donald Trump points out that the US should do what Israel does. It works for them, it'll work for us.

Then he refers to Eisenhower's Operation Wetback. The US did it 60 years ago. We can do it now.

Donald Trump crushes, crushes, crushes political correctness. He is the only candidate who understands the National Question at all.

Why is John Kasich still allowed to waste everyone's time? What a joker.


Benghazi is a bigger scandal than Watergate, and Watergate brought down the Nixon administration. Props to Carson for calling Hillary Clinton out on presiding over it.


Rand Paul finally talks about the federal reserve and insinuates that inflation--despite what the Keynesians and the monetarists argue--is actually a bad thing. The power to create fiat money that is not tied to anything of concrete value is the power to perpetually tax the entire population, and to do so furtively. If the real value of a dollar stayed constant, or even decreased, there would be no need to increase the minimum wage for people to enjoy a higher standard of living.

Why did it take this guy four debates to pick up where his dad left off?


Supply and demand operate in the labor market. Cut out the tens of millions of illegal immigrants who increase the pool of unskilled labor at a time when that unskilled labor is becoming less and less useful and wages will rise.

Sunday, November 08, 2015

Trumping the sewer rats again

A high-brow Hispanic 'activist' group followed up the release of its cinematic masterpiece with an offer to pay $5,000 to anyone who would call Donald Trump a racist while he hosted SNL, a production that is recorded live in front of a studio audience in the SWPL paradise of midtown Manhattan.

I have to confess to being surprised that someone didn't go for it. It provided an easy virtue signalling opportunity, with a couple extra minutes tacked onto the 15 minutes of fame a heckler would've been able to enjoy if he had pledged to donate the $5k to an immigrant outreach center. It didn't happen, though, presumably because Trump did what he needed to do to ensure that it wouldn't happen. There's no excuse for underestimating Trump's framing ability at this point, so shame on me for not assuming he'd turn it around to his advantage.

To flip the script by making a joke out of the activist group and have it delivered by a high-profile Jew like Larry David--the caricature of a miserly old Jew if ever there was one (he impersonates Bernie Sanders, after all)--is to demonstrate masterful stagecraft:

I hadn't watched SNL since high school, and I won't watch it again anytime soon. But as has been said here before, Trump is worth paying attention to.

Saturday, November 07, 2015

Black cities and dead bodies

Steve Sailer, commenting on the how the head of the DEA, following similar remarks from the head of the FBI, recently insinuated that the year-over-year increase in violent crime is in part a consequence of police being reluctant to confront criminal behavior for fear of their every move being subject to intense (and hostile) public scrutiny:
One way to check this is to look at my graph of the 60 biggest cities ranked in order of increase in murder victims from pre August 9, 2014 to the same time period in 2015 (based on Carl Bialik’s data in FiveThirtyEight.) The biggest absolute increases have been in heavily black cities.

The Obama Administration’s promotion of BlackLivesMatter rageaholics seems to be encouraging blacks to murder blacks.

Okay, heavily black Baltimore tops the chart, but Memphis--which has a population that is almost identically black (63.1% to 63.3%, respectively)--is second to the bottom. Chicago is near the top, but Raleigh, a city in the South, has seen an absolute decrease in homicides. It's basically a wash. Racists will see what they want to see!

Fortunately, regression analysis can help resolve this dispute. Using Census quick facts data, we find that the correlation between the percentage of a city's population that was black in the 2010 census and the absolute change in the number of homicides it experienced in the first seven months of 2015 compared to the first seven months of 2014 is .44 (p-value = .0006).

When a single variable correlates this robustly with an outcome in the social sciences, it's worth paying attention to, even more so when we take into consideration potential discrepancies in the geography of police jurisdiction in 2015 and the geography of Census city designations in 2010. Noise and imprecision in measurement will virtually always weaken perceived correlative relationships. In other words, the true relationship is probably even higher than .44.

Steve is one of the best in the business at noticing patterns, so it comes as little surprise that his general impression has empirical validation.

A plausible and seemingly obvious consequence of the "black = good, white = bad" narrative, embodied most saliently in the Black Lives Matter movement, is that blacks feel let off the leash. A corollary to that, though, is that whites tend to feel even more restrained (at least until they come to a breaking point and abruptly and savagely tear the arm off of the hand that has been slapping their cheeks for a generation).

When blacks, who already behave relatively poorly, are encouraged to behave with still less restraint than before and relatively well-behaved whites are simultaneously shamed for even allowing a putatively improper thought to materialize in the recesses of their minds, the gap in civilized behaviors between blacks and whites grows yet wider. Falsely portraying predatory blacks as victims pushes blacks to be more predatory. Falsely portraying white victims as predators pushes whites to become more sheepish (again, for some period of time before the threshold of tolerance is breached).

For awhile, it's great for race-hustling grievance mongers and virtue-signalling ethnomasochistic whites alike. Good things have a tendency of coming to an end, though.

Muslim atheists

Razib's post comparing Islamic cultural beliefs across several countries got me wondering about Islamic identity in the US. While the question of whether the adjective "Jewish" is a religious or an ethnic one is given consideration, no one would think to ask a similar question if the adjective in question was "Catholic", let alone "Christian".

The innocent reason inquiring about Jewishness in this context makes sense is because a substantial number of self-identified Jews are also self-described atheists or agnostics. People who identify as Christian are virtually all theists. If they come from an ancestrally Christian tradition but are atheists or agnostics by belief, they identify as having no religion. Many Jews do not do this.

The Muslim tendency in the US appears* to fall in between that of Jews and Christians. The following table shows the percentages of self-identified Protestants, Catholics, Jews, and Muslims who also self-identify as atheistic or agnostic:


GSS variables used: YEAR(1998-2014), RELIG(1,2,3,9), GOD(1-2)

* The small Muslim sample is worth noting. Sample sizes are 6913, 3329, 231, and 65 for Protestants, Catholics, Jews, and Muslims, respectively.

Thursday, November 05, 2015

Trumping the sewer rats

The current like-to-dislike ratio is 907-to-11,773, or 7%-to-93%.

Having ruined the land south of the Rio Grande, they've left their undesirable homes and now they're here crashing ours. They're not humble about it. They're not gracious about being able to live among people who create better civilizations than they do. Nope, they're just entitled little ingrates.

Similar to the Establishment's disdain for Trump, this high-brow hit job is backfiring.

Tuesday, November 03, 2015

Bernie Sanders has no chance

Looking at the racial composition of his support, one could be forgiven for assuming Bernie Sanders to be a Republican rather than a Democrat. As the last couple Republican presidential candidates found out, that's scarcely enough to make it happen in the general election. It doesn't come close to cutting it on the left.

In 2008, through the course of the Democratic primary season, Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama 56.0%-44.0% among whites and 63.7%-36.3% among Hispanics. Because she got trounced 14.9%-85.1% among blacks, however, she lost the nomination. 

Sanders is losing to Clinton among blacks the same way Clinton lost to Obama among blacks in 2008 and he's losing among Hispanics the same way Obama lost to Clinton among Hispanics in 2008. NAMs comprise over 40% of the Democratic electorate, so a candidate who gets trounced by them has to turn the tables almost as severely among whites. Sanders isn't even winning there.

While a devious dissident might hope Sanders pulls that off, ripping the Fringe Coalition apart in the process, he isn't going to come close. His only real base of support exists among young white leftists, a cohort that constitutes about 15% of the Democratic electorate and less than 5% of the entire US adult population, and a cohort that is shrinking in significance by the day.

VP Bernie, then.

GSS variables used: YEAR(2010-2014), RACECEN1(1), AGE(18-29), POLVIEWS(1-3)

Sleeping smarts

Speaking of sleep, it is often remarked that a perceived reason for difficulty falling asleep lies in an inability to turn one's mind off. This conventional explanation for the perceived problem, if there is truth in its existence, would presumably afflict the intelligent more than it would dullards.

Stretching, one might think the GSS suggests that to be the case. The following table shows the percentages by intelligence* who report either "often" or "sometimes" having trouble falling or staying asleep:

RaceBad Sleep
Really Smarts61.6%
Pretty Smarts59.9%
Pretty Dumbs64.3%
Real Dumbs44.4%

The "often" response for those with a wordsum score of 5 is strikingly high. It might be a transcription error or could just be noise. If we combine the bottom two intelligence groupings together, the amalgamated Dumbs becomes 56.8%, which gives us a consistent but quite modest inverse relationship between intelligence and sleeping well. Make of it what you will. It's posted mostly because I ran the numbers and so might as well make the cross-tab results available.

GSS variables used: SLPPRBLM(1-2)(3-4), WORDSUM(0-3)(4-5)(6)(7-8)(9-10), BORN(1)

* Respondents are broken up into five categories that roughly forms a normal distribution; Really Smarts (wordsum score of 9-10, comprising 13% of the population), Pretty Smarts (7-8, 26%), Normals (6, 22%), Pretty Dumbs (4-5, 27%), and Real Dumbs (0-3, 12%).