The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Esquire: The Thought Police Are Bad for Your Kids
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The editor of Esquire explains the magazine’s cover story about that normal American boy that elicited so much hate:

Why Your Ideological Echo Chamber Isn’t Just Bad For You
It’s also bad for your kids.

FEB 12, 2019

I have a son, a fifteen-year-old. He’s the eldest of three, with two sisters who are three and six years younger. At present, the stress of life for my daughters appears to primarily come from the kind of adolescent rites of passage …

Up until about two years ago, so was my son. Admittedly, the change began when he entered high school, the age when curious kids are expected to start grappling with the cold reality of how the world works. Soon after that, November 8, 2016, rolled around, and national life has since entered what might be called a fresh hell. We disagree as a country on every possible cultural and political point except, perhaps, one: that private life, as a result, has also become its own fresh hell. This has made the very social fabric of modern democratic civilization—watercooler BS, chats with cabbies and total strangers, dinner parties, large family gatherings—sometimes feel like a Kafkaesque thought-police nightmare of paranoia and nausea, in which you might accidentally say what you really believe and get burned at the stake. A crackling debate used to be as important an ingredient of a memorable night out as what was served and who else was there. People sometimes even argued a position they might not have totally agreed with, partly for the thrilling intellectual exercise playing devil’s advocate can be, but mostly for the drunken hell of it. Being intellectually puritanical was considered backward. More often than not, it was all a lot of fun.

These days, most of us have splintered off into our own ideological echo chambers, regurgitating the talking points of Fox or CNN or MSNBC, depending on your taste in agitprop. These are different kinds of safe spaces, ones in which we’ve all agreed to agree, nodding in unison like a herd of bobbleheads. As adults, it’s actually pretty easy to cop out: We don’t have to go to school, that bossy institution that pokes and prods you while people you don’t particularly like get to watch. Add to this the passions and change this moment has unleashed—#MeToo, gender fluidity, Black Lives Matter, “check your privilege,” and #TheFutureIsFemale—and the task of grappling with the world has to be more complicated for kids than it’s ever been.

It certainly seems that way for my son …

 
Hide 81 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. After Trump’s State of the Union speech there was angry shouting about how he was using the uniting/dividing thing to mean united with him. I thought:
    –Well, duh. I don’t think it’s really done to tell people, let us go be united somewhere else, but without all of us.
    –This is exactly what I have been thinking every time NPR tries to babble about the same idea. They are dividing with the idea of being united because, coupled with their censorship of white victimhood and problems with globalization, the potential for dissent is written off the page.
    But here is American Fleet Street to tell us about echo chambers.
    ———-
    The guy who set fire to Comet Ping Pong is a professional film actor with an IMDB page.
    Just like the guy who shot at a door there.
    https://www.imdb.com/name/nm7831483/

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You should have clicked it to see the fashion shot of the magazine editor. He looks like a high-status albeit semi-dandyish Whiteman who could easily be working somewhere else more remunerative. There is a possibility he's sincere about this project, better than 50% odds. But it's the wrong venue -- Esquire like all magazines is dominated by whiney gays who are on board w/ enstupidated multi-cult USA
  2. TL;DR

    What is the point you’re trying to make about whatever is written there? Write at least one sentence when you post stuff like this.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    His point is that Esquire has painted itself into a corner and cannot now play the reasonable guy.
    , @Autochthon
    If you're so damned stupid, lazy, or both that you cannot be bothered to review a brief passage taking one minute (at most two minutes) to read, then piss off and don't waste others' time – least if all his! – with imperious and petulant demands to Steve Sailer to accommodate your impudence.

    TL;DR: Eat a bushel of dingleberries.
  3. @Anon
    TL;DR

    What is the point you're trying to make about whatever is written there? Write at least one sentence when you post stuff like this.

    His point is that Esquire has painted itself into a corner and cannot now play the reasonable guy.

  4. a series on growing up now—white, black, LGBTQ, female—that will continue to appear in coming issues

    So, I’m guessing this is Steve’s last linking to Esquire in coming months

    • Replies: @Trevor H.
    How very little you know about Steve, or this place.
    , @Alec Leamas


    a series on growing up now—white, black, LGBTQ, female—that will continue to appear in coming issues
     
    So, I’m guessing this is Steve’s last linking to Esquire in coming months

     

    Yes, naturally. There is a dearth of navel-gazing material about bespoke identities, and Sailer is determined to shield it from everyone.
  5. Anonymous[750] • Disclaimer says:
    @J.Ross
    After Trump's State of the Union speech there was angry shouting about how he was using the uniting/dividing thing to mean united with him. I thought:
    --Well, duh. I don't think it's really done to tell people, let us go be united somewhere else, but without all of us.
    --This is exactly what I have been thinking every time NPR tries to babble about the same idea. They are dividing with the idea of being united because, coupled with their censorship of white victimhood and problems with globalization, the potential for dissent is written off the page.
    But here is American Fleet Street to tell us about echo chambers.
    ----------
    The guy who set fire to Comet Ping Pong is a professional film actor with an IMDB page.
    Just like the guy who shot at a door there.
    https://www.imdb.com/name/nm7831483/

    You should have clicked it to see the fashion shot of the magazine editor. He looks like a high-status albeit semi-dandyish Whiteman who could easily be working somewhere else more remunerative. There is a possibility he’s sincere about this project, better than 50% odds. But it’s the wrong venue — Esquire like all magazines is dominated by whiney gays who are on board w/ enstupidated multi-cult USA

  6. Related to topic. So I’m trying to rent a house. Here’s a recent email exchange:

    ad replyer: Hi my name is Karen X. I am interested in inquiring about your one bedroom.apt for rent..
    Please call me at xxx-xxx-xxxx at your conveneince.
    Thank you

    Landlord: Email inquiries only.

    ad replyer: This is a little weird. With all the things happening in this world to women. No thank you. I will stay where Im at. If this was on the up and up, it would not be so anonomys. I didnt go to school for Criminal Justice for nothing

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    All spelling as it appeared in the original?
    , @dvorak

    ad replyer: Hi my name is Karen X.
     
    hi my name is Karen O.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIIxlgcuQRU
    , @Autochthon
    Meh. You deserve each other, you being so damned superiour you cannot take a simple phone call.
  7. I subscribed to Esquire in high school. I remember my dad stopping for full-serve gas, and the proprietor noticing me in the back seat reading it. He said he got it once, but it was “all ads”.

    It can’t be any better now.

    • Replies: @Cortes
    http://www.hardcasecrime.com/books_bios.cgi?entry=bk145
  8. We’ve reached the Parody Event Horizon.

    • LOL: sayless
    • Replies: @Clifford Brown
    Well, I just finished the article and completely agree with it. Deep Thinker Greg Brady is spot on. Sadly, I think he is a man without a country, and without a job if he does not get in line fast.

    There has to be some aspiring junior editor gunning to take him down over this wrong think.

    , @J.Ross
    my excellent jacket of
    RRRRRRRICHHH HONGKONGIAN HERRINGBONNNNE
    but if only my chair, she had a back ...
  9. @Clifford Brown
    We've reached the Parody Event Horizon.

    https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/esq040119edletter001-copy-1549913581.jpg

    Well, I just finished the article and completely agree with it. Deep Thinker Greg Brady is spot on. Sadly, I think he is a man without a country, and without a job if he does not get in line fast.

    There has to be some aspiring junior editor gunning to take him down over this wrong think.

    • Agree: Trevor H.
  10. @Clifford Brown
    We've reached the Parody Event Horizon.

    https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/esq040119edletter001-copy-1549913581.jpg

    my excellent jacket of
    RRRRRRRICHHH HONGKONGIAN HERRINGBONNNNE
    but if only my chair, she had a back …

    • Replies: @dvorak

    my excellent jacket of
    RRRRRRRICHHH HONGKONGIAN HERRINGBONNNNE
    but if only my chair, she had a back …
     
    You want a men's magazine EIC not to dress like a dandy?

    Normcore is so five years ago.
    https://www.esquire.com/style/a31914/norm-macdonald-normcore-photos/
  11. These supercilious journalists realize that they have played such a yuge role in dividing American people, and, once it gets personal for them (especially if they have teenage boys) fear sets in. They have inadvertently marginalized their own sons while fanning the flames of “evil, smirk-faced, baseball cap-wearing, fratty-frat boys” every chance they got at work, back in The City. It kinda’ sucks when you realize that your baby is a teenager now, and your work (and your colleagues’ work) have demonized men so many times these past few years.

    The fact that the author lives in suburban Connecticut is very telling since the Northeast is the most socially competitive area in the country, particularly, wealthy towns with the good schools and all that. If you have had to leave NYC because you couldn’t afford a large apartment on a journalist’s salary to pay for private schools, moving to the burbs of Jersey or CT for big house but public schools, is an attractive solution. However, I get the sense that the author now realizes that the Common Core (in all New England public schools) curriculum is soul-crushing for his son. CC indoctrinates all students to toe the PC line; accept all the stuff he mildly complains about, and mostly, it demonizes males; and drums on on about white male privilege in a subtle and insidious way.

    My sons, fortunately, got thru HS (and, before AP courses were revised) and did not have the frequent reminders that “boys are bad, particularly white ones.” And, in our town, my sons had several boys OD and die…some committed suicide, especially, the ones that were not confident or social…and, it was several years before teenage suicide and despair appeared to be a concern among NYT readers. Ironically, they all thought by living in a wealthy town with good schools, drugs and malaise would be non-existant. My theory has always been that marginalizing/demonizing (both by public pushing this & CC curriculum) boys has lead to the despair. And, the franchises of Latinos selling heroin/fentanyl are especially interested in rich towns.

    It seems to me that the author almost wishes his son could be somewhere like Northern Wisconsin, hunting, playing video games, having a nice rational gf, being a normal kid like Ryan Morgan. Certainly, Ryan seems level headed as he doesn’t like to smoke dope, drink or waste time being miserable, hanging out with losers. And, most dads would be so proud if their kid is willing to do stuff with them (hunting, in this case) and choose something as important, practical, and lucrative for a career as Environmental Science/Engineering…where they could live anywhere, and not get stuck in expensive, soul-killing, pretentious suburbs like in Connecticut.

    My psychiatrist friend (mostly works with young men) is just flooded with new patients. And, the OD deaths are still not abating -they are especially high this time of the year. My message to journalists and SJWs: Yah, boys get it; they get it that all of you think they suck, and look in the mirror as to how they got to feel this way – beware because kharma bites back.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    If anything..tbis is my most important post on Steve's blog...ever.
  12. The author looks like Haven Monahans weird uncle who supplies him with Roofies.

  13. Yes, there are way too many people stuck in their echo chambers.

    I am a liberal, but I post on both liberal and conservative forums. As regular posters on Steve’s blog have figured out, I am not here to troll, or to spread the latest left-wing talking points.

    I don’t like liberals who come to conservative sites to troll. Nor do I care for conservatives who go to liberal sites to troll.

    I am here to listen, to get a different POV, and sometimes find common ground with conservatives.

    Sometimes I get flack posting on liberal sites because I don’t always follow the liberal party line. I had some people accuse me of racism today because I said I thought people who have not been vaccinated should not be permitted into the US and we should pay special attention to folks from countries with low vaccination rates, such as Europe, Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew?

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    There are some in the left-wing echo chamber who can’t understand why I don’t break off contact with Trump supporters.

    Well, the sweetest, kindest people I know in this world are my wife’s parents. They are Trump supporters. No way in Hell am I going to break off ties with them. Or recently I chatted with the man who has been living with and loving my cousin, they met after her husband died. Very decent and kind fellow. Oh, he’s a Trump supporter.

    Michael Moore used to describe conservatives as being people like your dependable brother-in-law who are great people but perhaps being taken advantage of by the Republicans. I agree. Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    I once had an elementary school teacher who was married to a railroad man. She thought of people in railroad terms, as the liberals being the engine and the conservatives the brakes.

    I am not religious, but the Bible talks of God creating a great variety of people. The world works better when some are artists and others are engineers. Similarly, some people are born predisposed to being liberal or conservative, while others are just following their tribe. Someone needs to look at things in a new light, and try something new, and someone else has to make sure we don’t throw away everything that made us great in the first place.

    • Replies: @Svigor

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.
     
    Then the Democrats go on Twitter and get you doxxed and make up all kinds of lies about you and get you fired and make you unemployable, the end.

    Thx for the boomer advice, tho.

    Protip: the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, and they have nothing to teach humans, beyond how to live with a caved-in head. They fucking like being traitors to their race. Avoid. As for non-whites, you have about as much of a chance of talking them out of leftism as you do of talking them out of non-whiteness.

    , @Svigor
    The equivalency argument is so basic bitch, so nineties (I'm being very generous there), so boomer.

    Actually, that's insulting to boomers. Congrats - never saw myself saying something like that.

    The left are the party of gulags, terror, and megadeath. That's their history. Censorship, intolerance, persecution, fanaticism, inquisitions... these are inherent to leftism. That's what leftism is. It's gotten so obvious even in just the American context that you have to have a caved-in head to miss it.

    P.S; you are a boomer, right? C'mon, be the first leftist not to dodge. Just fucking admit it.

    , @Harry Baldwin
    Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking.

    I have a friend from childhood who is a liberal, a very intelligent guy. He likes to needle me about my conservative views, but I no longer bother responding. I realize he can't understand my arguments, as the facts I bring up are utterly unknown to him. For example, he is unaware of any recent scandals attached to the Clintons, such as Uranium One. If I were to get into subjects like racial differences in intelligence, I think he'd have a coronary. Thirty or forty years ago a political discussion might not have had to get into that, but today, with the globalists flooding Western countries with low-IQ Third Worlders and blaming all their dysfunction on white racism, it's hard to argue the issues without getting into group differences.

    We get along very well on a personal level, but I don't think political discussion is worthwhile at this point. I've already heard and long-since rejected all the things he has to say, and nothing I might say would be comprehensible to him. If someone hasn't figured a few things out by the time he's pushing 70, like me, he never will.

    , @Neil Templeton
    We'll throw everything away to hasten the fall and eventual humility, the steady state. Ego will rise again, but it needs a quiet time to build energy.
    , @BenKenobi
    You take forever to say nothing.
    , @PhysicistDave
    Paleo Liberal wrote:

    It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.
     
    Well... I have found, over the years, that if I tell far-right conservative acquaintances that I think God does not exist, Jesus may be mythical, heroin and prostitution should be legalized, America should have stayed out of all of our wars after the Revolution, etc., they will proabably disagree with me but will not fly into a hysterical fit.

    On the other hand, if I suggest to liberal acquaintances that government-controlled and -funded schools should be abolished, that Social Security is unconstitutional, that bakers should be free not to bake wedding cakes for gays, or that there should be open discussions about the accuracy of climate-change models or whether there are genetic differences among ethnic groups in intelligence... well, let's just say it ends badly.

    Maybe it's just that conservatives (both political and religious) have known for a long time that they are on the outs with the ruling elite and so have grown accustomed to serious disagreements.

    But, in any case, as someone who is most surely neither a liberal nor a conservative (nor a moderate, for that matter: the one-dimensional political spectrum is naively... one dimensional), I have found for decades that the Left is much, much more intolerant than the Right.
    , @Nico

    a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.
     
    Re: liberals leading the fight against the Axis: very insular and American-centric view of the problem. In any case the treachery of the Roosevelt crowd obviously wasn’t to lead the charge against the Axis but to sell out legitimate U.S. and Western interests to the U.N. for ideological niceties right afterwards.

    Re: liberals leading the fight against Communism, you’ve got to be kidding. I’ll grant you moderate and conservative Democrats and even some liberal ones like the Kennedys were sincere in their worry about Communism but as a whole they never seriously tried to dislodge the traitors in the academic and cultural sphere who when not Communists themselves were actively cultivating and protecting Marxism.

    If you’re not too American-centric you may be referring to the fact that most of the post-Communist regimes in Russia and Eastern Europe were nominally social-liberal/social-democratic. That that faction also botched the aftermath is evident in the rampant criminal terror that ravaged Russia in the 1990s as well as in the visceral disgust pretty much all Eastern Europeans have developed in recent years for anything even slightly left of center (even Czechia’s “left-wing populist” president is a Trump supporter and far to the right of any western leader except MAYBE Salvini).
    , @Almost Missouri

    "it was liberal[s] who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists."
     
    Axis, maybe. Communists? When liberals weren't themselves card-carrying Communists, they were—and still are—sympathetic fellow-travelers. They actively hid Communist crimes, actively justified them when they couldn't hide them, actively propagandized for Communists and against America, and actively sought to demoralize American resistance to Communism and encourage American surrender to and accommodation of Communism.

    So, in short, no, liberals did not lead the fight against Communism. In fact, come to think of it, liberals only "led" the fight against the Axis by writing newspaper propaganda and giving political speeches. The actual men leading in the actual front lines doing the actual fighting and the actual dying were typically not liberals. Liberals are generally cowards.

    , @William Badwhite

    Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.
     
    Umm, no. "Liberals" definitely did not lead any fights against communists. Liberals spent most of the cold war deriding Republicans as hysterical war mongers, and applauding every murderous communist asshole they could find. It wasn't conservatives rolling around in Che Guevara t-shirts and pining for Daniel Ortega. American liberals were openly and enthusiastic supporters of communism from the days of Walter Duranty lying in the NYT about Stalin's crimes all the way to the every end, denouncing Reagan for turning up the heat on the Soviets. And when the Berlin wall came down and the USSR finally started to fall apart, liberal reaction wasn't to cheer, but to say "see, they weren't that bad. Just like we've been telling you".
    , @obwandiyag
    Everybody on here is living in a 1950s dream world of categories that no longer exist. This is the playground for the black-white fallacy, the either/or fallacy, the false dichotomy fallacy, bifurcation-nutty set.

    Both Democrats and Republicans are confused brainwashed fools. Likewise for conservatives and liberals. Although there are two kinds of each. The hypocrites and the true-believers. It is only the true believer type, like most on here, that causes all the problems. The hypocrites know it is all a crock.
  14. @Paleo Liberal
    Yes, there are way too many people stuck in their echo chambers.

    I am a liberal, but I post on both liberal and conservative forums. As regular posters on Steve’s blog have figured out, I am not here to troll, or to spread the latest left-wing talking points.

    I don’t like liberals who come to conservative sites to troll. Nor do I care for conservatives who go to liberal sites to troll.

    I am here to listen, to get a different POV, and sometimes find common ground with conservatives.

    Sometimes I get flack posting on liberal sites because I don’t always follow the liberal party line. I had some people accuse me of racism today because I said I thought people who have not been vaccinated should not be permitted into the US and we should pay special attention to folks from countries with low vaccination rates, such as Europe, Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew?

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    There are some in the left-wing echo chamber who can’t understand why I don’t break off contact with Trump supporters.

    Well, the sweetest, kindest people I know in this world are my wife’s parents. They are Trump supporters. No way in Hell am I going to break off ties with them. Or recently I chatted with the man who has been living with and loving my cousin, they met after her husband died. Very decent and kind fellow. Oh, he’s a Trump supporter.

    Michael Moore used to describe conservatives as being people like your dependable brother-in-law who are great people but perhaps being taken advantage of by the Republicans. I agree. Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    I once had an elementary school teacher who was married to a railroad man. She thought of people in railroad terms, as the liberals being the engine and the conservatives the brakes.

    I am not religious, but the Bible talks of God creating a great variety of people. The world works better when some are artists and others are engineers. Similarly, some people are born predisposed to being liberal or conservative, while others are just following their tribe. Someone needs to look at things in a new light, and try something new, and someone else has to make sure we don’t throw away everything that made us great in the first place.

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    Then the Democrats go on Twitter and get you doxxed and make up all kinds of lies about you and get you fired and make you unemployable, the end.

    Thx for the boomer advice, tho.

    Protip: the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, and they have nothing to teach humans, beyond how to live with a caved-in head. They fucking like being traitors to their race. Avoid. As for non-whites, you have about as much of a chance of talking them out of leftism as you do of talking them out of non-whiteness.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    Thx for the boomer advice, tho.

    This is one of those times I could both lol and agree. Don't ever change, Svigor.

    I'm thinking re: Paleo Liberal's advice, you just try it walking down MLK Blvd at 2am. It's kind of easy to have that attitude living in a college town where nearly everyone you meet is > 100 IQ and relatively non-violent.
    , @Anonym
    Protip: the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, and they have nothing to teach humans, beyond how to live with a caved-in head. They fucking like being traitors to their race. Avoid. As for non-whites, you have about as much of a chance of talking them out of leftism as you do of talking them out of non-whiteness.

    Exactly. Non-whites be like... we are over here, in your country, well, our country now. Why should we vote for something other than living off your taxes and inviting our relatives into your country, when it's already working pretty darn well?

    A lot of the liberals are conflicted, the last of their line, their own children non-white. So in a generation those boomers die off, and you have an even more solid bifurcation between whites voting their self interest and non-whites voting against it. The kind of polarization that may well lead to war. And why wouldn't it? Good fences make good neighbors.

    This "echo chamber" argument... it talks as if conservatives and white nationalists aren't exposed to other arguments. We are. We read mainstream press and watch mainstream TV from time to time, and see how much it lies to us. And over our lives, for most of us there was a long time when mainstream blue-pilled, frankly Jew-produced crap was all we consumed.

    On the other hand, find me a white liberal or leftist who reads Breitbart, or unz.com. There are not many. There are plenty of Jews, but monitoring the opposition is kinda what they do and evidently a lot of them are all-in on the whole white genocide project, riding the tiger.

    So this guy, who I'm not sure whether he's Jewish or white, guessing mostly white, is wondering out loud what the wages of his own treason are for his son. In a kind of muted, timidly equanimous way. I guess better late than never.
    , @Peter Akuleyev
    „the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, “



    Pretty much every white male with an IQ over 110 is a Democrat these days, thanks to Trump. The GOP is a party of old men and low IQ whites that has turned its back on America.
  15. @Paleo Liberal
    Yes, there are way too many people stuck in their echo chambers.

    I am a liberal, but I post on both liberal and conservative forums. As regular posters on Steve’s blog have figured out, I am not here to troll, or to spread the latest left-wing talking points.

    I don’t like liberals who come to conservative sites to troll. Nor do I care for conservatives who go to liberal sites to troll.

    I am here to listen, to get a different POV, and sometimes find common ground with conservatives.

    Sometimes I get flack posting on liberal sites because I don’t always follow the liberal party line. I had some people accuse me of racism today because I said I thought people who have not been vaccinated should not be permitted into the US and we should pay special attention to folks from countries with low vaccination rates, such as Europe, Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew?

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    There are some in the left-wing echo chamber who can’t understand why I don’t break off contact with Trump supporters.

    Well, the sweetest, kindest people I know in this world are my wife’s parents. They are Trump supporters. No way in Hell am I going to break off ties with them. Or recently I chatted with the man who has been living with and loving my cousin, they met after her husband died. Very decent and kind fellow. Oh, he’s a Trump supporter.

    Michael Moore used to describe conservatives as being people like your dependable brother-in-law who are great people but perhaps being taken advantage of by the Republicans. I agree. Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    I once had an elementary school teacher who was married to a railroad man. She thought of people in railroad terms, as the liberals being the engine and the conservatives the brakes.

    I am not religious, but the Bible talks of God creating a great variety of people. The world works better when some are artists and others are engineers. Similarly, some people are born predisposed to being liberal or conservative, while others are just following their tribe. Someone needs to look at things in a new light, and try something new, and someone else has to make sure we don’t throw away everything that made us great in the first place.

    The equivalency argument is so basic bitch, so nineties (I’m being very generous there), so boomer.

    Actually, that’s insulting to boomers. Congrats – never saw myself saying something like that.

    The left are the party of gulags, terror, and megadeath. That’s their history. Censorship, intolerance, persecution, fanaticism, inquisitions… these are inherent to leftism. That’s what leftism is. It’s gotten so obvious even in just the American context that you have to have a caved-in head to miss it.

    P.S; you are a boomer, right? C’mon, be the first leftist not to dodge. Just fucking admit it.

    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal
    I am a few months younger than Steve.
    The difference is, there were 48 states when Steve was born, and 49 when I was born.

    I knew some people who were at Rice when Steve was there. One guy who had been a math grad student was one of the craziest guys I knew. He and I once did a road trip to Rice and Houston, and afterwards I was trying to figure out how we survived without getting into a car wreck or getting stomped by rednecks or stomped by Mexicans or getting arrested.
  16. anon[354] • Disclaimer says:

    Debate 101
    1. Listening to your friends give opinions you already believe in is indoctrination.
    2. Listening to your enemies attack your beliefs forces you to defend your beliefs.
    3. Defending your beliefs forces you to consider what might be wrong with your beliefs.
    4. Considering what might be wrong with your own beliefs forces you to attack your own beliefs.
    5. Attacking your own beliefs is the beginning of education.
    6. Your enemies are your friends because they help you attack your own weakness.
    7. Hypocrites are hypo-critical. They are people who don’t attack their own weakness.
    8. Scientists don’t try to prove their hypothesis. They conduct experiments to try to dis-prove their hypothesis. The more their hyposthesis survives these repeated attacks, the more willing the scientists are to tentatively believe it.

    Life is tough. Once you accept that life is tough, it becomes less tough. It becomes joyful toughness instead of non-existence in life.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    But if your friends are political naifs who argue in bad faith with attacks that are not legitimate, you aren't being made amy stronger and your friendship is sacrificed.
    , @Counterinsurgency
    Nah. Look at my conversation with Corvus. Pilpul [1] did force me to reconsider my own beliefs, and decide that they _hadn't even been addressed_. The pilpul consisted of simple contradiction. Eventually I figured out that he was doing more good than harm by demonstrating the existence of a deceptive argumentation form.

    In a work or social environment, the pilpul is a distraction while the person to whom you are talking knifes you for being politically incorrect.

    _Please_ don't encourage participation in what amounts to a setup for a sucker punch. The results will be on your conscience. It's as bad as advising people to take out their cellphone and check when a stranger on the street asks what time it is.

    Counterinsurgency

    1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilpul
  17. @Paleo Liberal
    Yes, there are way too many people stuck in their echo chambers.

    I am a liberal, but I post on both liberal and conservative forums. As regular posters on Steve’s blog have figured out, I am not here to troll, or to spread the latest left-wing talking points.

    I don’t like liberals who come to conservative sites to troll. Nor do I care for conservatives who go to liberal sites to troll.

    I am here to listen, to get a different POV, and sometimes find common ground with conservatives.

    Sometimes I get flack posting on liberal sites because I don’t always follow the liberal party line. I had some people accuse me of racism today because I said I thought people who have not been vaccinated should not be permitted into the US and we should pay special attention to folks from countries with low vaccination rates, such as Europe, Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew?

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    There are some in the left-wing echo chamber who can’t understand why I don’t break off contact with Trump supporters.

    Well, the sweetest, kindest people I know in this world are my wife’s parents. They are Trump supporters. No way in Hell am I going to break off ties with them. Or recently I chatted with the man who has been living with and loving my cousin, they met after her husband died. Very decent and kind fellow. Oh, he’s a Trump supporter.

    Michael Moore used to describe conservatives as being people like your dependable brother-in-law who are great people but perhaps being taken advantage of by the Republicans. I agree. Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    I once had an elementary school teacher who was married to a railroad man. She thought of people in railroad terms, as the liberals being the engine and the conservatives the brakes.

    I am not religious, but the Bible talks of God creating a great variety of people. The world works better when some are artists and others are engineers. Similarly, some people are born predisposed to being liberal or conservative, while others are just following their tribe. Someone needs to look at things in a new light, and try something new, and someone else has to make sure we don’t throw away everything that made us great in the first place.

    Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking.

    I have a friend from childhood who is a liberal, a very intelligent guy. He likes to needle me about my conservative views, but I no longer bother responding. I realize he can’t understand my arguments, as the facts I bring up are utterly unknown to him. For example, he is unaware of any recent scandals attached to the Clintons, such as Uranium One. If I were to get into subjects like racial differences in intelligence, I think he’d have a coronary. Thirty or forty years ago a political discussion might not have had to get into that, but today, with the globalists flooding Western countries with low-IQ Third Worlders and blaming all their dysfunction on white racism, it’s hard to argue the issues without getting into group differences.

    We get along very well on a personal level, but I don’t think political discussion is worthwhile at this point. I’ve already heard and long-since rejected all the things he has to say, and nothing I might say would be comprehensible to him. If someone hasn’t figured a few things out by the time he’s pushing 70, like me, he never will.

    • Agree: Digital Samizdat
  18. @Paleo Liberal
    Yes, there are way too many people stuck in their echo chambers.

    I am a liberal, but I post on both liberal and conservative forums. As regular posters on Steve’s blog have figured out, I am not here to troll, or to spread the latest left-wing talking points.

    I don’t like liberals who come to conservative sites to troll. Nor do I care for conservatives who go to liberal sites to troll.

    I am here to listen, to get a different POV, and sometimes find common ground with conservatives.

    Sometimes I get flack posting on liberal sites because I don’t always follow the liberal party line. I had some people accuse me of racism today because I said I thought people who have not been vaccinated should not be permitted into the US and we should pay special attention to folks from countries with low vaccination rates, such as Europe, Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew?

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    There are some in the left-wing echo chamber who can’t understand why I don’t break off contact with Trump supporters.

    Well, the sweetest, kindest people I know in this world are my wife’s parents. They are Trump supporters. No way in Hell am I going to break off ties with them. Or recently I chatted with the man who has been living with and loving my cousin, they met after her husband died. Very decent and kind fellow. Oh, he’s a Trump supporter.

    Michael Moore used to describe conservatives as being people like your dependable brother-in-law who are great people but perhaps being taken advantage of by the Republicans. I agree. Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    I once had an elementary school teacher who was married to a railroad man. She thought of people in railroad terms, as the liberals being the engine and the conservatives the brakes.

    I am not religious, but the Bible talks of God creating a great variety of people. The world works better when some are artists and others are engineers. Similarly, some people are born predisposed to being liberal or conservative, while others are just following their tribe. Someone needs to look at things in a new light, and try something new, and someone else has to make sure we don’t throw away everything that made us great in the first place.

    We’ll throw everything away to hasten the fall and eventual humility, the steady state. Ego will rise again, but it needs a quiet time to build energy.

  19. @newrouter
    Related to topic. So I'm trying to rent a house. Here's a recent email exchange:

    ad replyer: Hi my name is Karen X. I am interested in inquiring about your one bedroom.apt for rent..
    Please call me at xxx-xxx-xxxx at your conveneince.
    Thank you

    Landlord: Email inquiries only.


    ad replyer: This is a little weird. With all the things happening in this world to women. No thank you. I will stay where Im at. If this was on the up and up, it would not be so anonomys. I didnt go to school for Criminal Justice for nothing

    All spelling as it appeared in the original?

  20. @anon
    Debate 101
    1. Listening to your friends give opinions you already believe in is indoctrination.
    2. Listening to your enemies attack your beliefs forces you to defend your beliefs.
    3. Defending your beliefs forces you to consider what might be wrong with your beliefs.
    4. Considering what might be wrong with your own beliefs forces you to attack your own beliefs.
    5. Attacking your own beliefs is the beginning of education.
    6. Your enemies are your friends because they help you attack your own weakness.
    7. Hypocrites are hypo-critical. They are people who don't attack their own weakness.
    8. Scientists don't try to prove their hypothesis. They conduct experiments to try to dis-prove their hypothesis. The more their hyposthesis survives these repeated attacks, the more willing the scientists are to tentatively believe it.

    Life is tough. Once you accept that life is tough, it becomes less tough. It becomes joyful toughness instead of non-existence in life.

    But if your friends are political naifs who argue in bad faith with attacks that are not legitimate, you aren’t being made amy stronger and your friendship is sacrificed.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @anon
    Agreed - rational debate is like a baseball game. The players have to make a good faith effort to play the game the right way. If someone starts swinging the bat at your head instead of at the ball, you don't have to keep making your own good faith effort to play the game with them. You don't have to be their friend either.
  21. [email protected]#$ him!!!

    He’s one of the reasons for this bullshit. Notice he didn’t not only not back off from the deranged left, he didn’t back off from the left. They’re indistinguishable now. I used to know honest lefties twenty years ago, but they get it worse than the right, so they’re parrots now.

    Same as all of those (introspective, or whatever) lefties two years ago. Did their thinking that a lot of my racial/ethnic cohort voted one way, maybe I should really give some deep thought to it? Nope. It was a blip. My Bosnian professor was amazed as hell that the war broke out while he was teaching in the US. Sarajevo was Happy Fun Place for him (a deep, deep lefty (though not a commie)).

  22. @Paleo Liberal
    Yes, there are way too many people stuck in their echo chambers.

    I am a liberal, but I post on both liberal and conservative forums. As regular posters on Steve’s blog have figured out, I am not here to troll, or to spread the latest left-wing talking points.

    I don’t like liberals who come to conservative sites to troll. Nor do I care for conservatives who go to liberal sites to troll.

    I am here to listen, to get a different POV, and sometimes find common ground with conservatives.

    Sometimes I get flack posting on liberal sites because I don’t always follow the liberal party line. I had some people accuse me of racism today because I said I thought people who have not been vaccinated should not be permitted into the US and we should pay special attention to folks from countries with low vaccination rates, such as Europe, Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew?

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    There are some in the left-wing echo chamber who can’t understand why I don’t break off contact with Trump supporters.

    Well, the sweetest, kindest people I know in this world are my wife’s parents. They are Trump supporters. No way in Hell am I going to break off ties with them. Or recently I chatted with the man who has been living with and loving my cousin, they met after her husband died. Very decent and kind fellow. Oh, he’s a Trump supporter.

    Michael Moore used to describe conservatives as being people like your dependable brother-in-law who are great people but perhaps being taken advantage of by the Republicans. I agree. Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    I once had an elementary school teacher who was married to a railroad man. She thought of people in railroad terms, as the liberals being the engine and the conservatives the brakes.

    I am not religious, but the Bible talks of God creating a great variety of people. The world works better when some are artists and others are engineers. Similarly, some people are born predisposed to being liberal or conservative, while others are just following their tribe. Someone needs to look at things in a new light, and try something new, and someone else has to make sure we don’t throw away everything that made us great in the first place.

    You take forever to say nothing.

  23. @newrouter
    Related to topic. So I'm trying to rent a house. Here's a recent email exchange:

    ad replyer: Hi my name is Karen X. I am interested in inquiring about your one bedroom.apt for rent..
    Please call me at xxx-xxx-xxxx at your conveneince.
    Thank you

    Landlord: Email inquiries only.


    ad replyer: This is a little weird. With all the things happening in this world to women. No thank you. I will stay where Im at. If this was on the up and up, it would not be so anonomys. I didnt go to school for Criminal Justice for nothing

    ad replyer: Hi my name is Karen X.

    hi my name is Karen O.

    • Replies: @Nickvegas
    Well played, Gentle Person!
  24. @J.Ross
    my excellent jacket of
    RRRRRRRICHHH HONGKONGIAN HERRINGBONNNNE
    but if only my chair, she had a back ...

    my excellent jacket of
    RRRRRRRICHHH HONGKONGIAN HERRINGBONNNNE
    but if only my chair, she had a back …

    You want a men’s magazine EIC not to dress like a dandy?

    Normcore is so five years ago.
    https://www.esquire.com/style/a31914/norm-macdonald-normcore-photos/

  25. @Paleo Liberal
    Yes, there are way too many people stuck in their echo chambers.

    I am a liberal, but I post on both liberal and conservative forums. As regular posters on Steve’s blog have figured out, I am not here to troll, or to spread the latest left-wing talking points.

    I don’t like liberals who come to conservative sites to troll. Nor do I care for conservatives who go to liberal sites to troll.

    I am here to listen, to get a different POV, and sometimes find common ground with conservatives.

    Sometimes I get flack posting on liberal sites because I don’t always follow the liberal party line. I had some people accuse me of racism today because I said I thought people who have not been vaccinated should not be permitted into the US and we should pay special attention to folks from countries with low vaccination rates, such as Europe, Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew?

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    There are some in the left-wing echo chamber who can’t understand why I don’t break off contact with Trump supporters.

    Well, the sweetest, kindest people I know in this world are my wife’s parents. They are Trump supporters. No way in Hell am I going to break off ties with them. Or recently I chatted with the man who has been living with and loving my cousin, they met after her husband died. Very decent and kind fellow. Oh, he’s a Trump supporter.

    Michael Moore used to describe conservatives as being people like your dependable brother-in-law who are great people but perhaps being taken advantage of by the Republicans. I agree. Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    I once had an elementary school teacher who was married to a railroad man. She thought of people in railroad terms, as the liberals being the engine and the conservatives the brakes.

    I am not religious, but the Bible talks of God creating a great variety of people. The world works better when some are artists and others are engineers. Similarly, some people are born predisposed to being liberal or conservative, while others are just following their tribe. Someone needs to look at things in a new light, and try something new, and someone else has to make sure we don’t throw away everything that made us great in the first place.

    Paleo Liberal wrote:

    It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    Well… I have found, over the years, that if I tell far-right conservative acquaintances that I think God does not exist, Jesus may be mythical, heroin and prostitution should be legalized, America should have stayed out of all of our wars after the Revolution, etc., they will proabably disagree with me but will not fly into a hysterical fit.

    On the other hand, if I suggest to liberal acquaintances that government-controlled and -funded schools should be abolished, that Social Security is unconstitutional, that bakers should be free not to bake wedding cakes for gays, or that there should be open discussions about the accuracy of climate-change models or whether there are genetic differences among ethnic groups in intelligence… well, let’s just say it ends badly.

    Maybe it’s just that conservatives (both political and religious) have known for a long time that they are on the outs with the ruling elite and so have grown accustomed to serious disagreements.

    But, in any case, as someone who is most surely neither a liberal nor a conservative (nor a moderate, for that matter: the one-dimensional political spectrum is naively… one dimensional), I have found for decades that the Left is much, much more intolerant than the Right.

    • Replies: @Trevor H.
    Agreed. As one who also has to straddle the artificial and exaggerated bifurcation between Right and Left, I've found that the R guys and girls are vastly more tolerant of difference, even of differences which irk them.

    Lefties on the other hand will write you out of polite society, refuse to acknowledge you further, tell everyone they know also to shun you, and try to get you fired from your job--if possible prevented from further employment. Even or especially if what you've said is simply scientific fact.

    It may well be that Lefties are simply intolerant, but I think two other factors are that they hold the whip hand in our society, and power corrupts; and there's the matter that most of their beliefs rely on a kind of religion rather than science. And the punishments for religious transgressions have always been more severe than for civil or academic offenses.

    , @Peter Akuleyev
    „that Social Security is unconstitutional,“

    Well that one is just silly and will make you enemies among Republicans as well. Not every bad policy is unconstitutional. You are outing yourself as an unpleasant crank when you say things like that.
  26. anon[354] • Disclaimer says:
    @J.Ross
    But if your friends are political naifs who argue in bad faith with attacks that are not legitimate, you aren't being made amy stronger and your friendship is sacrificed.

    Agreed – rational debate is like a baseball game. The players have to make a good faith effort to play the game the right way. If someone starts swinging the bat at your head instead of at the ball, you don’t have to keep making your own good faith effort to play the game with them. You don’t have to be their friend either.

    • Agree: Autochthon
  27. @Svigor

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.
     
    Then the Democrats go on Twitter and get you doxxed and make up all kinds of lies about you and get you fired and make you unemployable, the end.

    Thx for the boomer advice, tho.

    Protip: the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, and they have nothing to teach humans, beyond how to live with a caved-in head. They fucking like being traitors to their race. Avoid. As for non-whites, you have about as much of a chance of talking them out of leftism as you do of talking them out of non-whiteness.

    Thx for the boomer advice, tho.

    This is one of those times I could both lol and agree. Don’t ever change, Svigor.

    I’m thinking re: Paleo Liberal’s advice, you just try it walking down MLK Blvd at 2am. It’s kind of easy to have that attitude living in a college town where nearly everyone you meet is > 100 IQ and relatively non-violent.

    • Agree: bomag
  28. One suspicions that if the author didn’t have a son, he wouldn’t have written the article.

    • Replies: @William Badwhite
    I feel bad for the son having this clown for a father.

    It'll be almost as bad as some ghetto kid with no father at all, except instead of taking drug dealers, afleets, and people that shout curse words into microphones for his examples of adult maleness, he'll learn to be cowardly, effete', and self-hating.
  29. @Svigor

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.
     
    Then the Democrats go on Twitter and get you doxxed and make up all kinds of lies about you and get you fired and make you unemployable, the end.

    Thx for the boomer advice, tho.

    Protip: the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, and they have nothing to teach humans, beyond how to live with a caved-in head. They fucking like being traitors to their race. Avoid. As for non-whites, you have about as much of a chance of talking them out of leftism as you do of talking them out of non-whiteness.

    Protip: the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, and they have nothing to teach humans, beyond how to live with a caved-in head. They fucking like being traitors to their race. Avoid. As for non-whites, you have about as much of a chance of talking them out of leftism as you do of talking them out of non-whiteness.

    Exactly. Non-whites be like… we are over here, in your country, well, our country now. Why should we vote for something other than living off your taxes and inviting our relatives into your country, when it’s already working pretty darn well?

    A lot of the liberals are conflicted, the last of their line, their own children non-white. So in a generation those boomers die off, and you have an even more solid bifurcation between whites voting their self interest and non-whites voting against it. The kind of polarization that may well lead to war. And why wouldn’t it? Good fences make good neighbors.

    This “echo chamber” argument… it talks as if conservatives and white nationalists aren’t exposed to other arguments. We are. We read mainstream press and watch mainstream TV from time to time, and see how much it lies to us. And over our lives, for most of us there was a long time when mainstream blue-pilled, frankly Jew-produced crap was all we consumed.

    On the other hand, find me a white liberal or leftist who reads Breitbart, or unz.com. There are not many. There are plenty of Jews, but monitoring the opposition is kinda what they do and evidently a lot of them are all-in on the whole white genocide project, riding the tiger.

    So this guy, who I’m not sure whether he’s Jewish or white, guessing mostly white, is wondering out loud what the wages of his own treason are for his son. In a kind of muted, timidly equanimous way. I guess better late than never.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Anonym
    Yeah, I know that Breitbart and even unz.com are both "Jew produced" but they are unlike anything mainstream. Breitbart is really mainstream Trumpist Republican, or at least Campaign Trumpist.
  30. @Anonym
    Protip: the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, and they have nothing to teach humans, beyond how to live with a caved-in head. They fucking like being traitors to their race. Avoid. As for non-whites, you have about as much of a chance of talking them out of leftism as you do of talking them out of non-whiteness.

    Exactly. Non-whites be like... we are over here, in your country, well, our country now. Why should we vote for something other than living off your taxes and inviting our relatives into your country, when it's already working pretty darn well?

    A lot of the liberals are conflicted, the last of their line, their own children non-white. So in a generation those boomers die off, and you have an even more solid bifurcation between whites voting their self interest and non-whites voting against it. The kind of polarization that may well lead to war. And why wouldn't it? Good fences make good neighbors.

    This "echo chamber" argument... it talks as if conservatives and white nationalists aren't exposed to other arguments. We are. We read mainstream press and watch mainstream TV from time to time, and see how much it lies to us. And over our lives, for most of us there was a long time when mainstream blue-pilled, frankly Jew-produced crap was all we consumed.

    On the other hand, find me a white liberal or leftist who reads Breitbart, or unz.com. There are not many. There are plenty of Jews, but monitoring the opposition is kinda what they do and evidently a lot of them are all-in on the whole white genocide project, riding the tiger.

    So this guy, who I'm not sure whether he's Jewish or white, guessing mostly white, is wondering out loud what the wages of his own treason are for his son. In a kind of muted, timidly equanimous way. I guess better late than never.

    Yeah, I know that Breitbart and even unz.com are both “Jew produced” but they are unlike anything mainstream. Breitbart is really mainstream Trumpist Republican, or at least Campaign Trumpist.

  31. @Anon
    TL;DR

    What is the point you're trying to make about whatever is written there? Write at least one sentence when you post stuff like this.

    If you’re so damned stupid, lazy, or both that you cannot be bothered to review a brief passage taking one minute (at most two minutes) to read, then piss off and don’t waste others’ time – least if all his! – with imperious and petulant demands to Steve Sailer to accommodate your impudence.

    TL;DR: Eat a bushel of dingleberries.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Pretty soon Steve will be posting bare links with mystery meat titles like Instapundit. Now he's just at the Ann Althouse stage of posting excerpts without a single comment. There's still time to save him.

    Never forget what happened to Mickey Kaus, bless his soul. He's drooling in a run-down apartment in Venice, living off his dwindling savings and posting indecipherable comments the meaning of which can only be understood by rolling back a hundred tweets.

    Steve is already a little too enamored of Twitter. Now he's Ann Althousing. There is a definite progression, and it's time for an intervention.
  32. That’s pretty edgy stuff. So has the author of that piece been fired yet?

  33. @newrouter
    Related to topic. So I'm trying to rent a house. Here's a recent email exchange:

    ad replyer: Hi my name is Karen X. I am interested in inquiring about your one bedroom.apt for rent..
    Please call me at xxx-xxx-xxxx at your conveneince.
    Thank you

    Landlord: Email inquiries only.


    ad replyer: This is a little weird. With all the things happening in this world to women. No thank you. I will stay where Im at. If this was on the up and up, it would not be so anonomys. I didnt go to school for Criminal Justice for nothing

    Meh. You deserve each other, you being so damned superiour you cannot take a simple phone call.

    • Replies: @Trevor H.
    I'd definitely screen people by email or other online method before wanting to speak with them on the phone. That doesn't mean I have a superior attitude; it just means that I value my time--and my sanity.
    , @res

    you being so damned superiour you cannot take a simple phone call.
     
    1. Do you really think a phone call with the person in the anecdote would have been simple?
    2. It's not just a single phone call. It is potentially many. Both with that same person and with others.
    3. If the person is not willing to write enough of an email to justify a phone call do you really want to be renting your property to them?
    4. It is helpful to have a transcript of interactions in case of later legal issues.

    P.S. I assume you have had bad experiences in the Bay Area rental market with its supply-demand issues so can at least understand where you might be coming from.
  34. @Anonymous

    a series on growing up now—white, black, LGBTQ, female—that will continue to appear in coming issues
     
    So, I'm guessing this is Steve's last linking to Esquire in coming months

    How very little you know about Steve, or this place.

  35. @Autochthon
    Meh. You deserve each other, you being so damned superiour you cannot take a simple phone call.

    I’d definitely screen people by email or other online method before wanting to speak with them on the phone. That doesn’t mean I have a superior attitude; it just means that I value my time–and my sanity.

    • Replies: @bomag
    I don't get it.

    Her initial e-mail address could be used for such correspondence; I figured that was an implied avenue.

    There is added information from a phone call: tone of voice; attitude; etc.

    I suppose facility with e-mail indicates a more intelligent, less troublesome tenant.
  36. @PhysicistDave
    Paleo Liberal wrote:

    It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.
     
    Well... I have found, over the years, that if I tell far-right conservative acquaintances that I think God does not exist, Jesus may be mythical, heroin and prostitution should be legalized, America should have stayed out of all of our wars after the Revolution, etc., they will proabably disagree with me but will not fly into a hysterical fit.

    On the other hand, if I suggest to liberal acquaintances that government-controlled and -funded schools should be abolished, that Social Security is unconstitutional, that bakers should be free not to bake wedding cakes for gays, or that there should be open discussions about the accuracy of climate-change models or whether there are genetic differences among ethnic groups in intelligence... well, let's just say it ends badly.

    Maybe it's just that conservatives (both political and religious) have known for a long time that they are on the outs with the ruling elite and so have grown accustomed to serious disagreements.

    But, in any case, as someone who is most surely neither a liberal nor a conservative (nor a moderate, for that matter: the one-dimensional political spectrum is naively... one dimensional), I have found for decades that the Left is much, much more intolerant than the Right.

    Agreed. As one who also has to straddle the artificial and exaggerated bifurcation between Right and Left, I’ve found that the R guys and girls are vastly more tolerant of difference, even of differences which irk them.

    Lefties on the other hand will write you out of polite society, refuse to acknowledge you further, tell everyone they know also to shun you, and try to get you fired from your job–if possible prevented from further employment. Even or especially if what you’ve said is simply scientific fact.

    It may well be that Lefties are simply intolerant, but I think two other factors are that they hold the whip hand in our society, and power corrupts; and there’s the matter that most of their beliefs rely on a kind of religion rather than science. And the punishments for religious transgressions have always been more severe than for civil or academic offenses.

    • Replies: @anon

    I think two other factors are that they hold the whip hand in our society, and power corrupts; and there’s the matter that most of their beliefs rely on a kind of religion rather than science.
     
    Yes, that is it exactly. The Left now has real power and that is driving much of their intolerance. And their beliefs are very much emotional faith-based dogma. If you disagree with Left beliefs you aren't just a debate opponent; you are a blasphemer. Blasphemers must be punished and purged, not tolerated.
  37. Hopefully the beginning of the end and not the end of the beginning for peak bulverism.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulverism

  38. @Svigor

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.
     
    Then the Democrats go on Twitter and get you doxxed and make up all kinds of lies about you and get you fired and make you unemployable, the end.

    Thx for the boomer advice, tho.

    Protip: the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, and they have nothing to teach humans, beyond how to live with a caved-in head. They fucking like being traitors to their race. Avoid. As for non-whites, you have about as much of a chance of talking them out of leftism as you do of talking them out of non-whiteness.

    „the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, “

    Pretty much every white male with an IQ over 110 is a Democrat these days, thanks to Trump. The GOP is a party of old men and low IQ whites that has turned its back on America.

    • Troll: L Woods
    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    Pete wrote:

    Pretty much every white male with an IQ over 110 is a Democrat these days, thanks to Trump. The GOP is a party of old men and low IQ whites that has turned its back on America.
     
    Uh, Pete? Been to America recently?

    I've got a friend who's a Jewish physician who voted for Trump. And a close acquaintance who is a Chinese immigrant.

    Y'know, white males with IQs over 110 would be just under half of the white males. Since the Dems do better among women and non-whites, and since Hillary must have gotten at least a few dumb white males, if you were right, Hillary would have trounced the Donald.

    She didn't.

    On the contrary, the Dems are careening so far to the Left that they are alienating long-time white liberals, such as Mark Penn, Dershowitz, Glen Greenwald, et al.

    I will admit, though, that if Hillary had not been a crook and if the current Dems were not crazy, Trump would indeed be in deep trouble. (Personally, I do assume that the Donald is financing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.)
    , @Alec Leamas

    Pretty much every white male with an IQ over 110 is a Democrat these days, thanks to Trump. The GOP is a party of old men and low IQ whites that has turned its back on America.
     
    I suppose this means that your fidelity to the GOP these days deserves no praise for you are not at all unusual.
    , @nebulafox
    Well... that doesn't mean they are being irrational. It doesn't take great intelligence for the sub-110 IQ non-bien-pensant white male to figure out that Trump is likely to screw him relatively less than Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney, does not actively hate him like the Democrats, and that the media is generally not to be trusted. Nor does intelligence always denote a better connection with reality, as history should well show.

    (Suffice it to say I think it's a little more complex, especially outside of the US. Most Chinese I've met think relations with the US are way better under Trump than they would have been under Hillary Clinton. I'm talking scientists and startup founders here along with the PRC Joe Six-pack types.)

  39. @PhysicistDave
    Paleo Liberal wrote:

    It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.
     
    Well... I have found, over the years, that if I tell far-right conservative acquaintances that I think God does not exist, Jesus may be mythical, heroin and prostitution should be legalized, America should have stayed out of all of our wars after the Revolution, etc., they will proabably disagree with me but will not fly into a hysterical fit.

    On the other hand, if I suggest to liberal acquaintances that government-controlled and -funded schools should be abolished, that Social Security is unconstitutional, that bakers should be free not to bake wedding cakes for gays, or that there should be open discussions about the accuracy of climate-change models or whether there are genetic differences among ethnic groups in intelligence... well, let's just say it ends badly.

    Maybe it's just that conservatives (both political and religious) have known for a long time that they are on the outs with the ruling elite and so have grown accustomed to serious disagreements.

    But, in any case, as someone who is most surely neither a liberal nor a conservative (nor a moderate, for that matter: the one-dimensional political spectrum is naively... one dimensional), I have found for decades that the Left is much, much more intolerant than the Right.

    „that Social Security is unconstitutional,“

    Well that one is just silly and will make you enemies among Republicans as well. Not every bad policy is unconstitutional. You are outing yourself as an unpleasant crank when you say things like that.

    • Replies: @Moses

    You are outing yourself as an unpleasant crank when you say things like that.
     
    And you are outing yourself as well.

    Thank you drive thru.
    , @PhysicistDave
    Peter Akuleyev wrote to me:


    [Dave]that Social Security is unconstitutional,“
     
    [PA]Well that one is just silly and will make you enemies among Republicans as well. Not every bad policy is unconstitutional. You are outing yourself as an unpleasant crank when you say things like that.
     
    Well, you know Pete, I was not asking for you (or anyone) to agree with me on every one of those points! My whole point was that some of my views annoy most liberals and some of my views annoy most conservatives, but the two groups behave differently when annoyed.

    But, since you seem to want to discuss the matter, the Tenth Amendment states:


    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
     
    Now, this would be completely pointless unless the Founders meant the phrase "delegated to the United States by the Constitution" to mean like somehow actually mentioned in the Constitution.

    So... where in the US Constitution do you see some power granted to the federal government by the Constitution that empowers the federal government to set up a national retirement system?

    It can't just be some vague phrase such as "to form a more perfect union," because that could just as easily imply anything at all, and then the Tenth Amendment would just be pointless.

    Now, I know of course that there is a silly view that anything not (yet) nullified by the Supreme Court is Constitutional, but, in fact, the Constitution nowhere grants the Supreme Court the power to definitively declare what is or is not Constitutional. (Yes, I know everyone thinks the Constitution does grant that power to the High Court, especially the Supreme Court itself! But read the actual document: it's just not there.)

    So, what you're left with is the fact that calling Social Security unconstitutional is indeed unpopular with both parties and both reigning political ideologies.

    Which is irrelevant to whether Social Security is or is not Constitutional.

    By the way, when I was a kid back in the '60s, lots of people on the Right recognized that Social Security is indeed unconstitutional.

    But, of course, back then there were some real men on the Right and even in the Republican Party.

  40. Anon[997] • Disclaimer says:
    @Autochthon
    If you're so damned stupid, lazy, or both that you cannot be bothered to review a brief passage taking one minute (at most two minutes) to read, then piss off and don't waste others' time – least if all his! – with imperious and petulant demands to Steve Sailer to accommodate your impudence.

    TL;DR: Eat a bushel of dingleberries.

    Pretty soon Steve will be posting bare links with mystery meat titles like Instapundit. Now he’s just at the Ann Althouse stage of posting excerpts without a single comment. There’s still time to save him.

    Never forget what happened to Mickey Kaus, bless his soul. He’s drooling in a run-down apartment in Venice, living off his dwindling savings and posting indecipherable comments the meaning of which can only be understood by rolling back a hundred tweets.

    Steve is already a little too enamored of Twitter. Now he’s Ann Althousing. There is a definite progression, and it’s time for an intervention.

  41. Does it occur to anyone that forcing children to go through privilege exercises or take sides in political discussions in class is abusive and intended to brainwash them?

    • Replies: @Moses
    The communists do this. It's called "Self-criticism sessions."

    It's a form of control by the Party.
  42. @Paleo Liberal
    Yes, there are way too many people stuck in their echo chambers.

    I am a liberal, but I post on both liberal and conservative forums. As regular posters on Steve’s blog have figured out, I am not here to troll, or to spread the latest left-wing talking points.

    I don’t like liberals who come to conservative sites to troll. Nor do I care for conservatives who go to liberal sites to troll.

    I am here to listen, to get a different POV, and sometimes find common ground with conservatives.

    Sometimes I get flack posting on liberal sites because I don’t always follow the liberal party line. I had some people accuse me of racism today because I said I thought people who have not been vaccinated should not be permitted into the US and we should pay special attention to folks from countries with low vaccination rates, such as Europe, Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew?

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    There are some in the left-wing echo chamber who can’t understand why I don’t break off contact with Trump supporters.

    Well, the sweetest, kindest people I know in this world are my wife’s parents. They are Trump supporters. No way in Hell am I going to break off ties with them. Or recently I chatted with the man who has been living with and loving my cousin, they met after her husband died. Very decent and kind fellow. Oh, he’s a Trump supporter.

    Michael Moore used to describe conservatives as being people like your dependable brother-in-law who are great people but perhaps being taken advantage of by the Republicans. I agree. Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    I once had an elementary school teacher who was married to a railroad man. She thought of people in railroad terms, as the liberals being the engine and the conservatives the brakes.

    I am not religious, but the Bible talks of God creating a great variety of people. The world works better when some are artists and others are engineers. Similarly, some people are born predisposed to being liberal or conservative, while others are just following their tribe. Someone needs to look at things in a new light, and try something new, and someone else has to make sure we don’t throw away everything that made us great in the first place.

    a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    Re: liberals leading the fight against the Axis: very insular and American-centric view of the problem. In any case the treachery of the Roosevelt crowd obviously wasn’t to lead the charge against the Axis but to sell out legitimate U.S. and Western interests to the U.N. for ideological niceties right afterwards.

    Re: liberals leading the fight against Communism, you’ve got to be kidding. I’ll grant you moderate and conservative Democrats and even some liberal ones like the Kennedys were sincere in their worry about Communism but as a whole they never seriously tried to dislodge the traitors in the academic and cultural sphere who when not Communists themselves were actively cultivating and protecting Marxism.

    If you’re not too American-centric you may be referring to the fact that most of the post-Communist regimes in Russia and Eastern Europe were nominally social-liberal/social-democratic. That that faction also botched the aftermath is evident in the rampant criminal terror that ravaged Russia in the 1990s as well as in the visceral disgust pretty much all Eastern Europeans have developed in recent years for anything even slightly left of center (even Czechia’s “left-wing populist” president is a Trump supporter and far to the right of any western leader except MAYBE Salvini).

  43. @Paleo Liberal
    Yes, there are way too many people stuck in their echo chambers.

    I am a liberal, but I post on both liberal and conservative forums. As regular posters on Steve’s blog have figured out, I am not here to troll, or to spread the latest left-wing talking points.

    I don’t like liberals who come to conservative sites to troll. Nor do I care for conservatives who go to liberal sites to troll.

    I am here to listen, to get a different POV, and sometimes find common ground with conservatives.

    Sometimes I get flack posting on liberal sites because I don’t always follow the liberal party line. I had some people accuse me of racism today because I said I thought people who have not been vaccinated should not be permitted into the US and we should pay special attention to folks from countries with low vaccination rates, such as Europe, Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew?

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    There are some in the left-wing echo chamber who can’t understand why I don’t break off contact with Trump supporters.

    Well, the sweetest, kindest people I know in this world are my wife’s parents. They are Trump supporters. No way in Hell am I going to break off ties with them. Or recently I chatted with the man who has been living with and loving my cousin, they met after her husband died. Very decent and kind fellow. Oh, he’s a Trump supporter.

    Michael Moore used to describe conservatives as being people like your dependable brother-in-law who are great people but perhaps being taken advantage of by the Republicans. I agree. Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    I once had an elementary school teacher who was married to a railroad man. She thought of people in railroad terms, as the liberals being the engine and the conservatives the brakes.

    I am not religious, but the Bible talks of God creating a great variety of people. The world works better when some are artists and others are engineers. Similarly, some people are born predisposed to being liberal or conservative, while others are just following their tribe. Someone needs to look at things in a new light, and try something new, and someone else has to make sure we don’t throw away everything that made us great in the first place.

    “it was liberal[s] who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.”

    Axis, maybe. Communists? When liberals weren’t themselves card-carrying Communists, they were—and still are—sympathetic fellow-travelers. They actively hid Communist crimes, actively justified them when they couldn’t hide them, actively propagandized for Communists and against America, and actively sought to demoralize American resistance to Communism and encourage American surrender to and accommodation of Communism.

    So, in short, no, liberals did not lead the fight against Communism. In fact, come to think of it, liberals only “led” the fight against the Axis by writing newspaper propaganda and giving political speeches. The actual men leading in the actual front lines doing the actual fighting and the actual dying were typically not liberals. Liberals are generally cowards.

  44. As adults, it’s actually pretty easy to cop out: We don’t have to go to school, that bossy institution that pokes and prods you while people you don’t particularly like get to watch.

    This is an interesting thought, which I like a lot!

    As an aside: My grandfather had an arrangement with the local school principal, that my father could leave school, whenever he wanted to. With his son, my grandfather had the following arrangement: In case he left school, he would have to help him with his business. This worked fine for years.

  45. @Peter Akuleyev
    „that Social Security is unconstitutional,“

    Well that one is just silly and will make you enemies among Republicans as well. Not every bad policy is unconstitutional. You are outing yourself as an unpleasant crank when you say things like that.

    You are outing yourself as an unpleasant crank when you say things like that.

    And you are outing yourself as well.

    Thank you drive thru.

  46. @Anonymous
    Does it occur to anyone that forcing children to go through privilege exercises or take sides in political discussions in class is abusive and intended to brainwash them?

    The communists do this. It’s called “Self-criticism sessions.”

    It’s a form of control by the Party.

  47. @anon
    Debate 101
    1. Listening to your friends give opinions you already believe in is indoctrination.
    2. Listening to your enemies attack your beliefs forces you to defend your beliefs.
    3. Defending your beliefs forces you to consider what might be wrong with your beliefs.
    4. Considering what might be wrong with your own beliefs forces you to attack your own beliefs.
    5. Attacking your own beliefs is the beginning of education.
    6. Your enemies are your friends because they help you attack your own weakness.
    7. Hypocrites are hypo-critical. They are people who don't attack their own weakness.
    8. Scientists don't try to prove their hypothesis. They conduct experiments to try to dis-prove their hypothesis. The more their hyposthesis survives these repeated attacks, the more willing the scientists are to tentatively believe it.

    Life is tough. Once you accept that life is tough, it becomes less tough. It becomes joyful toughness instead of non-existence in life.

    Nah. Look at my conversation with Corvus. Pilpul [1] did force me to reconsider my own beliefs, and decide that they _hadn’t even been addressed_. The pilpul consisted of simple contradiction. Eventually I figured out that he was doing more good than harm by demonstrating the existence of a deceptive argumentation form.

    In a work or social environment, the pilpul is a distraction while the person to whom you are talking knifes you for being politically incorrect.

    _Please_ don’t encourage participation in what amounts to a setup for a sucker punch. The results will be on your conscience. It’s as bad as advising people to take out their cellphone and check when a stranger on the street asks what time it is.

    Counterinsurgency

    1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilpul

  48. @Peter Akuleyev
    „that Social Security is unconstitutional,“

    Well that one is just silly and will make you enemies among Republicans as well. Not every bad policy is unconstitutional. You are outing yourself as an unpleasant crank when you say things like that.

    Peter Akuleyev wrote to me:

    [Dave]that Social Security is unconstitutional,“

    [PA]Well that one is just silly and will make you enemies among Republicans as well. Not every bad policy is unconstitutional. You are outing yourself as an unpleasant crank when you say things like that.

    Well, you know Pete, I was not asking for you (or anyone) to agree with me on every one of those points! My whole point was that some of my views annoy most liberals and some of my views annoy most conservatives, but the two groups behave differently when annoyed.

    But, since you seem to want to discuss the matter, the Tenth Amendment states:

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    Now, this would be completely pointless unless the Founders meant the phrase “delegated to the United States by the Constitution” to mean like somehow actually mentioned in the Constitution.

    So… where in the US Constitution do you see some power granted to the federal government by the Constitution that empowers the federal government to set up a national retirement system?

    It can’t just be some vague phrase such as “to form a more perfect union,” because that could just as easily imply anything at all, and then the Tenth Amendment would just be pointless.

    Now, I know of course that there is a silly view that anything not (yet) nullified by the Supreme Court is Constitutional, but, in fact, the Constitution nowhere grants the Supreme Court the power to definitively declare what is or is not Constitutional. (Yes, I know everyone thinks the Constitution does grant that power to the High Court, especially the Supreme Court itself! But read the actual document: it’s just not there.)

    So, what you’re left with is the fact that calling Social Security unconstitutional is indeed unpopular with both parties and both reigning political ideologies.

    Which is irrelevant to whether Social Security is or is not Constitutional.

    By the way, when I was a kid back in the ’60s, lots of people on the Right recognized that Social Security is indeed unconstitutional.

    But, of course, back then there were some real men on the Right and even in the Republican Party.

  49. Gee whiz! Guy, the howling mob wants your kid to die! Telling them that he’s in trouble means their program is succeeding. What’s the point? Maybe _you_ want your kid to die? You’re acting like it.

    Counterinsurgency

  50. @Peter Akuleyev
    „the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, “



    Pretty much every white male with an IQ over 110 is a Democrat these days, thanks to Trump. The GOP is a party of old men and low IQ whites that has turned its back on America.

    Pete wrote:

    Pretty much every white male with an IQ over 110 is a Democrat these days, thanks to Trump. The GOP is a party of old men and low IQ whites that has turned its back on America.

    Uh, Pete? Been to America recently?

    I’ve got a friend who’s a Jewish physician who voted for Trump. And a close acquaintance who is a Chinese immigrant.

    Y’know, white males with IQs over 110 would be just under half of the white males. Since the Dems do better among women and non-whites, and since Hillary must have gotten at least a few dumb white males, if you were right, Hillary would have trounced the Donald.

    She didn’t.

    On the contrary, the Dems are careening so far to the Left that they are alienating long-time white liberals, such as Mark Penn, Dershowitz, Glen Greenwald, et al.

    I will admit, though, that if Hillary had not been a crook and if the current Dems were not crazy, Trump would indeed be in deep trouble. (Personally, I do assume that the Donald is financing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.)

    • Replies: @Anon
    I think every white male with an IQ over 110, and below 120, is a Democrat these days. The multidimensional chess aspect is beyond a mere 110 guy.
  51. @Trevor H.
    I'd definitely screen people by email or other online method before wanting to speak with them on the phone. That doesn't mean I have a superior attitude; it just means that I value my time--and my sanity.

    I don’t get it.

    Her initial e-mail address could be used for such correspondence; I figured that was an implied avenue.

    There is added information from a phone call: tone of voice; attitude; etc.

    I suppose facility with e-mail indicates a more intelligent, less troublesome tenant.

    • Replies: @Trevor H.
    Speaking only for myself, it's a practical matter as much as anything. I have only so many hours in a day. Email and texting make tremendously good use of time. And someone's facility with language is--if anything--even more telling when writing than when speaking.

    There's no doubt that there are also advantages to the spoken word, and phone calls can be useful for clearing up misunderstandings. But it's also true that many people like to talk far more than you may like to listen.

    Better still, with written communications there's no shouting, no two people trying to talk at the same time, and best of all, you have time to edit your speech and tone down any likely provocations.

    You never have to figure out how to get off an email. Best of all, email and texting are available when you are: they're not demanding your attention right this minute. Which, if you think about it, is selfish and inconsiderate. So I do it only when absolutely necessary, and usually scheduled at that. YMMV.

  52. anonymous[369] • Disclaimer says:

    Along these lines, I’m talking to a fellow at work, an intelligent guy who is also a Progressive (no, they are not mutually exclusive, which is kind of scary).

    I ask, why should my buddy Armando G., from Spain (the area of former Ifni, in case you are interested), who is as white as any Italian-American kid from Long Island, be eligible for affirmative action due to his Hispanic surname?

    My co-worker replied: “Because people from Spain are not Hispanic.”

    End of discussion.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
    "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
    "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master—that's all."
  53. @Anonymous

    a series on growing up now—white, black, LGBTQ, female—that will continue to appear in coming issues
     
    So, I'm guessing this is Steve's last linking to Esquire in coming months

    a series on growing up now—white, black, LGBTQ, female—that will continue to appear in coming issues

    So, I’m guessing this is Steve’s last linking to Esquire in coming months

    Yes, naturally. There is a dearth of navel-gazing material about bespoke identities, and Sailer is determined to shield it from everyone.

  54. @Peter Akuleyev
    „the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, “



    Pretty much every white male with an IQ over 110 is a Democrat these days, thanks to Trump. The GOP is a party of old men and low IQ whites that has turned its back on America.

    Pretty much every white male with an IQ over 110 is a Democrat these days, thanks to Trump. The GOP is a party of old men and low IQ whites that has turned its back on America.

    I suppose this means that your fidelity to the GOP these days deserves no praise for you are not at all unusual.

  55. @Paleo Liberal
    Yes, there are way too many people stuck in their echo chambers.

    I am a liberal, but I post on both liberal and conservative forums. As regular posters on Steve’s blog have figured out, I am not here to troll, or to spread the latest left-wing talking points.

    I don’t like liberals who come to conservative sites to troll. Nor do I care for conservatives who go to liberal sites to troll.

    I am here to listen, to get a different POV, and sometimes find common ground with conservatives.

    Sometimes I get flack posting on liberal sites because I don’t always follow the liberal party line. I had some people accuse me of racism today because I said I thought people who have not been vaccinated should not be permitted into the US and we should pay special attention to folks from countries with low vaccination rates, such as Europe, Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew?

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    There are some in the left-wing echo chamber who can’t understand why I don’t break off contact with Trump supporters.

    Well, the sweetest, kindest people I know in this world are my wife’s parents. They are Trump supporters. No way in Hell am I going to break off ties with them. Or recently I chatted with the man who has been living with and loving my cousin, they met after her husband died. Very decent and kind fellow. Oh, he’s a Trump supporter.

    Michael Moore used to describe conservatives as being people like your dependable brother-in-law who are great people but perhaps being taken advantage of by the Republicans. I agree. Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    I once had an elementary school teacher who was married to a railroad man. She thought of people in railroad terms, as the liberals being the engine and the conservatives the brakes.

    I am not religious, but the Bible talks of God creating a great variety of people. The world works better when some are artists and others are engineers. Similarly, some people are born predisposed to being liberal or conservative, while others are just following their tribe. Someone needs to look at things in a new light, and try something new, and someone else has to make sure we don’t throw away everything that made us great in the first place.

    Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    Umm, no. “Liberals” definitely did not lead any fights against communists. Liberals spent most of the cold war deriding Republicans as hysterical war mongers, and applauding every murderous communist asshole they could find. It wasn’t conservatives rolling around in Che Guevara t-shirts and pining for Daniel Ortega. American liberals were openly and enthusiastic supporters of communism from the days of Walter Duranty lying in the NYT about Stalin’s crimes all the way to the every end, denouncing Reagan for turning up the heat on the Soviets. And when the Berlin wall came down and the USSR finally started to fall apart, liberal reaction wasn’t to cheer, but to say “see, they weren’t that bad. Just like we’ve been telling you”.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Tex
    I'd cut Paleo some slack. It was New Deal Democrats who got the ball rolling on the Cold War (Truman was a liberal for 1950). Kennedy and Johnson, utter liberals, were pretty determined to do something about Communism in Cuba and Southeast Asia. It got us the Bay of Pigs and the Vietnam War, so can you really accuse those two of being soft on Communism?

    Liberals obviously changed in the '60s-'70s. When I was a youngster in the late '70s-early '80s in the South, my Republican elders, who had been as Solid South Democrats as you could get, bemoaned the loss of the Scoop Jackson-type Democrats who would take a tough stand against America's enemies. Granted, some of those Solid South types were pretty critical of the New Deal too, fifty years too late to do much.

    Of course the guns were all turned in the wrong direction and the real rot came from inside. You don't need Marxist ideology to destroy a country.

    Jackson was a super hawk on emmigration, apparently not connecting that with immigration. Reagan (a one-time self-described liberal) was the perfect Cold Warrior, he literally won the Cold War. When it came to immigration, he gave the USA a significant and highly dangerous injury.
  56. @Redneck farmer
    One suspicions that if the author didn't have a son, he wouldn't have written the article.

    I feel bad for the son having this clown for a father.

    It’ll be almost as bad as some ghetto kid with no father at all, except instead of taking drug dealers, afleets, and people that shout curse words into microphones for his examples of adult maleness, he’ll learn to be cowardly, effete’, and self-hating.

  57. @Autochthon
    Meh. You deserve each other, you being so damned superiour you cannot take a simple phone call.

    you being so damned superiour you cannot take a simple phone call.

    1. Do you really think a phone call with the person in the anecdote would have been simple?
    2. It’s not just a single phone call. It is potentially many. Both with that same person and with others.
    3. If the person is not willing to write enough of an email to justify a phone call do you really want to be renting your property to them?
    4. It is helpful to have a transcript of interactions in case of later legal issues.

    P.S. I assume you have had bad experiences in the Bay Area rental market with its supply-demand issues so can at least understand where you might be coming from.

    • Replies: @Autochthon
    My relevant experience is as a landlord near San José, and I was never such a smug prick as to not take a phone call from an interested person, nor was I ever inconvenienced for it. Your reasoning exemplifies the whole problem with the growing class of entitled rentiers who ruined America, and modern life generally; reversing the questions illustrates the point nicely, though I'll clarify by substituting "landlord" (i.e., one renting or interested in renting property) rather than your vague "person" (meant, by context, to refer to a would-be tenant); I've also fixed your misuse of pronouns:

    1. Do you really think a message via electronic mail to the landlord in the anecdote would have been simple?
    2. It’s not just a single message via electronic mail. It is potentially many. Both with that same landlord and with others.
    3. If the landlord is not willing to answer a simple phone call to justify a a message via electronic mail, do you really want to be renting a property from him.

    Your fourth point is just stupid; as a matter of fact, the best thing you could possibly do if you are paranoid about litigation is to keep as much preliminary communication as possible to an informal, unrecorded chat via telephone.

    From a merely pragmatic view, the most common, and the threshold, question, in such cases is "Is the place still available?," because it may of course have been let five minutes before the enquiry was made. A well-adjusted landlord will be happy to affirm that it is and then direct the caller to please submit a formal application in writing, or to confirm the pace is indeed no longer available but to thank the caller for his interest. This sort of exchange is how civilised persons used to communicate about such matters until quite recently, when merchants started viewing customers, landlords tenants, employers employees, and politicians constituents, as their bitches, rather than coequals participating in the quid pro quo exchange the law and custom of contract – including the social contract – presupposes.

    What's really going on here, of course, is that the rentier, as I indicated, reckons himself so damned superiour to the rabble who might merely want to let a place (not be landed men of quality, such as himself, wot!) that he has decided it is for these rabble to bow and scrape and meet his peccadilloes about just how he may be communicated with, and they shall sit and write messages containing all the data he has demanded, for his to review, or not, at his leisure, and that he shall casually decide whether to respond, and to whom, and when, and on what terms, if and when he can be bothered.

    In short, he is become the Soup Nazi of real estate, all enabled by his belief (right or wrong, though, increasingly, right) that overpopulation is on his side and if the serfs don't like his impertinence, they shall go homeless.

    Only they won't go homeless for too long, at the end of the day, because one day, as Molyneux has put it, "they take an entirely different approach" – any student of French history will tell you.
  58. @Peter Akuleyev
    „the small number of whites who are still Democrats are waaaaaay beyond saving, “



    Pretty much every white male with an IQ over 110 is a Democrat these days, thanks to Trump. The GOP is a party of old men and low IQ whites that has turned its back on America.

    Well… that doesn’t mean they are being irrational. It doesn’t take great intelligence for the sub-110 IQ non-bien-pensant white male to figure out that Trump is likely to screw him relatively less than Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney, does not actively hate him like the Democrats, and that the media is generally not to be trusted. Nor does intelligence always denote a better connection with reality, as history should well show.

    (Suffice it to say I think it’s a little more complex, especially outside of the US. Most Chinese I’ve met think relations with the US are way better under Trump than they would have been under Hillary Clinton. I’m talking scientists and startup founders here along with the PRC Joe Six-pack types.)

  59. @ Paleo Liberal

    “. . . .Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew? ”

    The amount of TB, pertussis, measles and other diseases that are ostensibly prevented by vaccinations plus other weird diseases found amongst out Lah-teen-oh border jumper populations certainly belies that assertion.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  60. @Paleo Liberal
    Yes, there are way too many people stuck in their echo chambers.

    I am a liberal, but I post on both liberal and conservative forums. As regular posters on Steve’s blog have figured out, I am not here to troll, or to spread the latest left-wing talking points.

    I don’t like liberals who come to conservative sites to troll. Nor do I care for conservatives who go to liberal sites to troll.

    I am here to listen, to get a different POV, and sometimes find common ground with conservatives.

    Sometimes I get flack posting on liberal sites because I don’t always follow the liberal party line. I had some people accuse me of racism today because I said I thought people who have not been vaccinated should not be permitted into the US and we should pay special attention to folks from countries with low vaccination rates, such as Europe, Africa and parts of Asia. (Latin America has the highest vaccination rates of any region in the world, so perhaps Latins should be more readily admitted). Apparently that is a racist idea. Who knew?

    I am reminded of one of the most successful self-help books. It might’ve been the 7 Habits, or maybe not. Anyway, the book, written in a more tolerant time, said if you are a Republican you should seek out friends who are Democrats to expand your thinking. Similarly, if you are a Democrat, seek out Republicans as friends.

    There are some in the left-wing echo chamber who can’t understand why I don’t break off contact with Trump supporters.

    Well, the sweetest, kindest people I know in this world are my wife’s parents. They are Trump supporters. No way in Hell am I going to break off ties with them. Or recently I chatted with the man who has been living with and loving my cousin, they met after her husband died. Very decent and kind fellow. Oh, he’s a Trump supporter.

    Michael Moore used to describe conservatives as being people like your dependable brother-in-law who are great people but perhaps being taken advantage of by the Republicans. I agree. Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.

    I once had an elementary school teacher who was married to a railroad man. She thought of people in railroad terms, as the liberals being the engine and the conservatives the brakes.

    I am not religious, but the Bible talks of God creating a great variety of people. The world works better when some are artists and others are engineers. Similarly, some people are born predisposed to being liberal or conservative, while others are just following their tribe. Someone needs to look at things in a new light, and try something new, and someone else has to make sure we don’t throw away everything that made us great in the first place.

    Everybody on here is living in a 1950s dream world of categories that no longer exist. This is the playground for the black-white fallacy, the either/or fallacy, the false dichotomy fallacy, bifurcation-nutty set.

    Both Democrats and Republicans are confused brainwashed fools. Likewise for conservatives and liberals. Although there are two kinds of each. The hypocrites and the true-believers. It is only the true believer type, like most on here, that causes all the problems. The hypocrites know it is all a crock.

  61. @Svigor
    The equivalency argument is so basic bitch, so nineties (I'm being very generous there), so boomer.

    Actually, that's insulting to boomers. Congrats - never saw myself saying something like that.

    The left are the party of gulags, terror, and megadeath. That's their history. Censorship, intolerance, persecution, fanaticism, inquisitions... these are inherent to leftism. That's what leftism is. It's gotten so obvious even in just the American context that you have to have a caved-in head to miss it.

    P.S; you are a boomer, right? C'mon, be the first leftist not to dodge. Just fucking admit it.

    I am a few months younger than Steve.
    The difference is, there were 48 states when Steve was born, and 49 when I was born.

    I knew some people who were at Rice when Steve was there. One guy who had been a math grad student was one of the craziest guys I knew. He and I once did a road trip to Rice and Houston, and afterwards I was trying to figure out how we survived without getting into a car wreck or getting stomped by rednecks or stomped by Mexicans or getting arrested.

  62. @dvorak

    ad replyer: Hi my name is Karen X.
     
    hi my name is Karen O.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIIxlgcuQRU

    Well played, Gentle Person!

  63. anon[242] • Disclaimer says:
    @Trevor H.
    Agreed. As one who also has to straddle the artificial and exaggerated bifurcation between Right and Left, I've found that the R guys and girls are vastly more tolerant of difference, even of differences which irk them.

    Lefties on the other hand will write you out of polite society, refuse to acknowledge you further, tell everyone they know also to shun you, and try to get you fired from your job--if possible prevented from further employment. Even or especially if what you've said is simply scientific fact.

    It may well be that Lefties are simply intolerant, but I think two other factors are that they hold the whip hand in our society, and power corrupts; and there's the matter that most of their beliefs rely on a kind of religion rather than science. And the punishments for religious transgressions have always been more severe than for civil or academic offenses.

    I think two other factors are that they hold the whip hand in our society, and power corrupts; and there’s the matter that most of their beliefs rely on a kind of religion rather than science.

    Yes, that is it exactly. The Left now has real power and that is driving much of their intolerance. And their beliefs are very much emotional faith-based dogma. If you disagree with Left beliefs you aren’t just a debate opponent; you are a blasphemer. Blasphemers must be punished and purged, not tolerated.

  64. Amazing how many people here have a completely distorted view of what leftists and liberals are like.

    It comes from spending all your time in the right wing bubble.

    Here are what should be obvious to anyone outside of a bubble.

    1. Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right. I live in one of the most left-wing cities in the country (Madison), and I used to live in the most left-wing part of NYC (the Village). Believe it or not, one runs across conservatives, and nobody wants to harm them. I’ve had conservative friends at work, and nobody cared. Extreme example— I once saw someone with a huge Nazi tattoo jogging through the most left-wing part of Madison, and nobody bothered him.

    Fox News made up lies a few years back about violent left-wing protests in Madison. Bullshit. I saw some of the protests, and they were completely peaceful and polite. I talked to a cop, and he said he chatted with the protesters at lot, and they were very friendly and respectful to him. He even took their side. Fox showed some clips of violent protests in Madison, with sunny weather and palm trees. In the real world it was snowing and 12 degrees outside and no violence. I walked around the capitol building between protests, and there was no litter. The protesters cleaned up everything.

    2. Some on here can’t tell the difference between the moderate left and the most extreme leftists. I mean, they can’t tell the difference between liberals like Truman and Johnson who sent troops to Korea and Vietnam to fight Communism, and Stalin. They seem to think the Swedes and Danish are building gulags. Well, there are those who don’t let reality interfere with their beliefs.

    • Troll: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @C. ThunderCock
    "Well, there are those who don’t let reality interfere with their beliefs." Well on that we can agree, I'm talking to one right now. You're going to say with a straight face that the vast majority of committed leftists are against right wing "nazis" having their lives destroyed (both financially/socially, as well as potentially physically) for standing up for themselves? You're either lying or are seriously overestimating the good nature of your more cognizant co-conspirators (you presumably being the more "unwitting" party).
    , @Trevor H.

    Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right.
     
    Although I am by no means a person "of the right," I can surely say that you are living in some kind of dream world. Right wingers -- the real ones, not the ones you see on TV -- are vastly more tolerant than lefties. Partly it comes from being relatively powerless. I realise that if you live in a bubble like Madison or Ann Arbor it will look different.
    , @Oleaginous Outrager

    Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right.
     
    No, they just don't want anyone to the right of Mao to have a voice, and they should be shunned and permanently unemployed if they try. But there's no persecution! Are you serious?

    They seem to think the Swedes and Danish are building gulags.
     
    Clearly you're the one who's confused. No one on here thinks the Nordics are building gulags, we know they've rolled over to turd world invaders like bitches in heat so they can look virtuous.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson 3

    1. Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right.
     
    Right! The bakers in Oregon, trolled by Leftists, did not get their business, and their house, taken away by a majority of Lefists! And the baker in Colorado, after Leftists failed in the first round, is onto the second round where Leftists are busy trying to do the same. And that wonderful Leftist super majority of non-persecuting, non-hurters is standing up for freedom! Right?

    "Very few people on the left..." "Very few Muslims..." "Very few Soviets..." "Very few Cubans..." "Very few Chinese..." "Very few Venezuelans..."

    Leftism is a sick ideology. The Leftist complement of the "Very few" has done nothing to prevent that sick ideology from spreading more human misery and suffering than the rest of human misery and suffering combined.
    , @Mr. Rational

    Amazing how many people here have a completely distorted view of what leftists and liberals are like.

    It comes from spending all your time in the right wing bubble.
     

    Bull.  Right-wing people live in a world saturated with middle-left to extreme-left propaganda and talking points and laws; we know them better than you, because WE are their targets.  We can't refuse to do business with blacks or design wedding cakes for queers.  We can't even know the HIV status of people whose bodily fluids we may have to deal with.  But if we express an unapproved opinion we are often doxxed and our employers harassed into firing us.  Your talk about a "bubble" is complete projection.  YOU live in one.

    1. Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right.
     
    But you stand up for the ones who do.  When Antifa or BAMN or BLM go up against "insensitive" speakers on college campuses or shoot police officers, YOU are silent.  When "gun control" (victim disarmament) groups try to take away people's only defense against common criminals and violent mobs, YOU stand for the oppressors.  Where were YOU when the guy who went to counter-protest BLM in your own city was railroaded for defending himself against the Black mob that took exception to his First Amendment-protected words?  I notice that this incident has been memory-holed, I can't find it any more.

    2. Some on here can’t tell the difference between the moderate left and the most extreme leftists.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBhzJnJIilI
    When you are silent when those on your side are literally calling for White genocide, how could we?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q90kmUbEv7c
    Go play in traffic.  On an expressway.
  65. The big question at the moment with liberal political correctness, is why the English-speaking world isn’t moving to the right on immigration. Centre-right parties in Britain and Australia are now more liberal on immigration than the far left in Germany, while Trump is getting clobbered by liberal elites for being about as right-wing on immigration as Macron or Merkel post 2015.

    Suspicion has to fall on all the cashed up globalist/leftist organisations that have their headquarters in the US and UK. When you have the UN, Open Society Foundation, Amnesty International, Tides Foundation, World Bank, SPLC, ADL etc on your doorstep and pushing globalist ideology 24/7 its pretty hard to push for conservative immigration measures.

  66. @Reg Cæsar
    I subscribed to Esquire in high school. I remember my dad stopping for full-serve gas, and the proprietor noticing me in the back seat reading it. He said he got it once, but it was "all ads".

    It can't be any better now.
  67. @res

    you being so damned superiour you cannot take a simple phone call.
     
    1. Do you really think a phone call with the person in the anecdote would have been simple?
    2. It's not just a single phone call. It is potentially many. Both with that same person and with others.
    3. If the person is not willing to write enough of an email to justify a phone call do you really want to be renting your property to them?
    4. It is helpful to have a transcript of interactions in case of later legal issues.

    P.S. I assume you have had bad experiences in the Bay Area rental market with its supply-demand issues so can at least understand where you might be coming from.

    My relevant experience is as a landlord near San José, and I was never such a smug prick as to not take a phone call from an interested person, nor was I ever inconvenienced for it. Your reasoning exemplifies the whole problem with the growing class of entitled rentiers who ruined America, and modern life generally; reversing the questions illustrates the point nicely, though I’ll clarify by substituting “landlord” (i.e., one renting or interested in renting property) rather than your vague “person” (meant, by context, to refer to a would-be tenant); I’ve also fixed your misuse of pronouns:

    1. Do you really think a message via electronic mail to the landlord in the anecdote would have been simple?
    2. It’s not just a single message via electronic mail. It is potentially many. Both with that same landlord and with others.
    3. If the landlord is not willing to answer a simple phone call to justify a a message via electronic mail, do you really want to be renting a property from him.

    Your fourth point is just stupid; as a matter of fact, the best thing you could possibly do if you are paranoid about litigation is to keep as much preliminary communication as possible to an informal, unrecorded chat via telephone.

    From a merely pragmatic view, the most common, and the threshold, question, in such cases is “Is the place still available?,” because it may of course have been let five minutes before the enquiry was made. A well-adjusted landlord will be happy to affirm that it is and then direct the caller to please submit a formal application in writing, or to confirm the pace is indeed no longer available but to thank the caller for his interest. This sort of exchange is how civilised persons used to communicate about such matters until quite recently, when merchants started viewing customers, landlords tenants, employers employees, and politicians constituents, as their bitches, rather than coequals participating in the quid pro quo exchange the law and custom of contract – including the social contract – presupposes.

    What’s really going on here, of course, is that the rentier, as I indicated, reckons himself so damned superiour to the rabble who might merely want to let a place (not be landed men of quality, such as himself, wot!) that he has decided it is for these rabble to bow and scrape and meet his peccadilloes about just how he may be communicated with, and they shall sit and write messages containing all the data he has demanded, for his to review, or not, at his leisure, and that he shall casually decide whether to respond, and to whom, and when, and on what terms, if and when he can be bothered.

    In short, he is become the Soup Nazi of real estate, all enabled by his belief (right or wrong, though, increasingly, right) that overpopulation is on his side and if the serfs don’t like his impertinence, they shall go homeless.

    Only they won’t go homeless for too long, at the end of the day, because one day, as Molyneux has put it, “they take an entirely different approach” – any student of French history will tell you.

    • Replies: @res
    Interesting to get such a vehement response. I enjoy your comments here, but thought (and still think) you missed on that one. Sorry if I struck a nerve.

    On to the substance.

    Your flipping the landlord/tenant usage in my points wasn't a great move. Let's take them one by one.

    1. Do you really think a message via electronic mail to the landlord in the anecdote would have been simple?
     
    Not for that tenant, but probably simpler than a phone call. And achieving the same outcome in less time.

    2. It’s not just a single message via electronic mail. It is potentially many. Both with that same landlord and with others.
     
    Right. It is also beneficial to the tenant to have those many communications happen asynchronously along with a written record to help keep them straight. I am shocked someone as smart as you thinks your rewrite of point 2 is anything but a self-refuting comment on your part.

    3. If the landlord is not willing to answer a simple phone call to justify a a message via electronic mail, do you really want to be renting a property from him.
     
    This is your best point. But what it comes down to is this particular landlord and tenant combination is not a good one. And finding it out in the fashion described was more efficient than having a phone call.

    Your fourth point is just stupid; as a matter of fact, the best thing you could possibly do if you are paranoid about litigation is to keep as much preliminary communication as possible to an informal, unrecorded chat via telephone.
     
    Only if you are doing something which truly is illegal (and calling my point stupid is ridiculous, why are you so emotional about this issue?). You live in the Bay Area, who is more likely there to get a better response in some kind of "racist!" or "discrimination!" he said, she said situation? Perhaps my perspective is colored by being generally unwilling to lie while encountering distressingly many people who seem willing (if not eager) to lie in situations like this.


    From a merely pragmatic view, the most common, and the threshold, question, in such cases is “Is the place still available?,” because it may of course have been let five minutes before the enquiry was made.
     
    Of course. And having that happen by email in asynchronous fashion makes much more sense. Text may be a decent alternative, but why spend a phone call on a simple yes/no question? Your point also explains why I so frequently see Craigslist posts which say things like "if the post is up it's still available."

    I get your frustration with the rentier class, but do you really think this is a good example of the bad behavior you are upset with?

    BTW, you never rented at all in your time in the Bay Area? That is rather exceptional.

    P.S. And please leave off with the patronizing. Or at least make a better response if you are going to act like that.

    P.P.S. An excellent example of the entitlement you decry here is when you are making a request of someone (as the prospective tenant was here) you demand they communicate on your terms. To flip the script, if I am a landlord reaching out to a prospective tenant (say if they placed an ad) it would be appropriate for me to communicate in the fashion they prefer (or walk away). As another example, I tend to prefer email or text (depending on how ephemeral the conversation is), but when I encounter a Craigslist ad which says "please call" I either do that or pass the ad by.
  68. @Paleo Liberal
    Amazing how many people here have a completely distorted view of what leftists and liberals are like.

    It comes from spending all your time in the right wing bubble.

    Here are what should be obvious to anyone outside of a bubble.

    1. Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right. I live in one of the most left-wing cities in the country (Madison), and I used to live in the most left-wing part of NYC (the Village). Believe it or not, one runs across conservatives, and nobody wants to harm them. I’ve had conservative friends at work, and nobody cared. Extreme example— I once saw someone with a huge Nazi tattoo jogging through the most left-wing part of Madison, and nobody bothered him.

    Fox News made up lies a few years back about violent left-wing protests in Madison. Bullshit. I saw some of the protests, and they were completely peaceful and polite. I talked to a cop, and he said he chatted with the protesters at lot, and they were very friendly and respectful to him. He even took their side. Fox showed some clips of violent protests in Madison, with sunny weather and palm trees. In the real world it was snowing and 12 degrees outside and no violence. I walked around the capitol building between protests, and there was no litter. The protesters cleaned up everything.

    2. Some on here can’t tell the difference between the moderate left and the most extreme leftists. I mean, they can’t tell the difference between liberals like Truman and Johnson who sent troops to Korea and Vietnam to fight Communism, and Stalin. They seem to think the Swedes and Danish are building gulags. Well, there are those who don’t let reality interfere with their beliefs.

    “Well, there are those who don’t let reality interfere with their beliefs.” Well on that we can agree, I’m talking to one right now. You’re going to say with a straight face that the vast majority of committed leftists are against right wing “nazis” having their lives destroyed (both financially/socially, as well as potentially physically) for standing up for themselves? You’re either lying or are seriously overestimating the good nature of your more cognizant co-conspirators (you presumably being the more “unwitting” party).

  69. @bomag
    I don't get it.

    Her initial e-mail address could be used for such correspondence; I figured that was an implied avenue.

    There is added information from a phone call: tone of voice; attitude; etc.

    I suppose facility with e-mail indicates a more intelligent, less troublesome tenant.

    Speaking only for myself, it’s a practical matter as much as anything. I have only so many hours in a day. Email and texting make tremendously good use of time. And someone’s facility with language is–if anything–even more telling when writing than when speaking.

    There’s no doubt that there are also advantages to the spoken word, and phone calls can be useful for clearing up misunderstandings. But it’s also true that many people like to talk far more than you may like to listen.

    Better still, with written communications there’s no shouting, no two people trying to talk at the same time, and best of all, you have time to edit your speech and tone down any likely provocations.

    You never have to figure out how to get off an email. Best of all, email and texting are available when you are: they’re not demanding your attention right this minute. Which, if you think about it, is selfish and inconsiderate. So I do it only when absolutely necessary, and usually scheduled at that. YMMV.

  70. @Paleo Liberal
    Amazing how many people here have a completely distorted view of what leftists and liberals are like.

    It comes from spending all your time in the right wing bubble.

    Here are what should be obvious to anyone outside of a bubble.

    1. Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right. I live in one of the most left-wing cities in the country (Madison), and I used to live in the most left-wing part of NYC (the Village). Believe it or not, one runs across conservatives, and nobody wants to harm them. I’ve had conservative friends at work, and nobody cared. Extreme example— I once saw someone with a huge Nazi tattoo jogging through the most left-wing part of Madison, and nobody bothered him.

    Fox News made up lies a few years back about violent left-wing protests in Madison. Bullshit. I saw some of the protests, and they were completely peaceful and polite. I talked to a cop, and he said he chatted with the protesters at lot, and they were very friendly and respectful to him. He even took their side. Fox showed some clips of violent protests in Madison, with sunny weather and palm trees. In the real world it was snowing and 12 degrees outside and no violence. I walked around the capitol building between protests, and there was no litter. The protesters cleaned up everything.

    2. Some on here can’t tell the difference between the moderate left and the most extreme leftists. I mean, they can’t tell the difference between liberals like Truman and Johnson who sent troops to Korea and Vietnam to fight Communism, and Stalin. They seem to think the Swedes and Danish are building gulags. Well, there are those who don’t let reality interfere with their beliefs.

    Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right.

    Although I am by no means a person “of the right,” I can surely say that you are living in some kind of dream world. Right wingers — the real ones, not the ones you see on TV — are vastly more tolerant than lefties. Partly it comes from being relatively powerless. I realise that if you live in a bubble like Madison or Ann Arbor it will look different.

  71. @Paleo Liberal
    Amazing how many people here have a completely distorted view of what leftists and liberals are like.

    It comes from spending all your time in the right wing bubble.

    Here are what should be obvious to anyone outside of a bubble.

    1. Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right. I live in one of the most left-wing cities in the country (Madison), and I used to live in the most left-wing part of NYC (the Village). Believe it or not, one runs across conservatives, and nobody wants to harm them. I’ve had conservative friends at work, and nobody cared. Extreme example— I once saw someone with a huge Nazi tattoo jogging through the most left-wing part of Madison, and nobody bothered him.

    Fox News made up lies a few years back about violent left-wing protests in Madison. Bullshit. I saw some of the protests, and they were completely peaceful and polite. I talked to a cop, and he said he chatted with the protesters at lot, and they were very friendly and respectful to him. He even took their side. Fox showed some clips of violent protests in Madison, with sunny weather and palm trees. In the real world it was snowing and 12 degrees outside and no violence. I walked around the capitol building between protests, and there was no litter. The protesters cleaned up everything.

    2. Some on here can’t tell the difference between the moderate left and the most extreme leftists. I mean, they can’t tell the difference between liberals like Truman and Johnson who sent troops to Korea and Vietnam to fight Communism, and Stalin. They seem to think the Swedes and Danish are building gulags. Well, there are those who don’t let reality interfere with their beliefs.

    Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right.

    No, they just don’t want anyone to the right of Mao to have a voice, and they should be shunned and permanently unemployed if they try. But there’s no persecution! Are you serious?

    They seem to think the Swedes and Danish are building gulags.

    Clearly you’re the one who’s confused. No one on here thinks the Nordics are building gulags, we know they’ve rolled over to turd world invaders like bitches in heat so they can look virtuous.

  72. @Paleo Liberal
    Amazing how many people here have a completely distorted view of what leftists and liberals are like.

    It comes from spending all your time in the right wing bubble.

    Here are what should be obvious to anyone outside of a bubble.

    1. Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right. I live in one of the most left-wing cities in the country (Madison), and I used to live in the most left-wing part of NYC (the Village). Believe it or not, one runs across conservatives, and nobody wants to harm them. I’ve had conservative friends at work, and nobody cared. Extreme example— I once saw someone with a huge Nazi tattoo jogging through the most left-wing part of Madison, and nobody bothered him.

    Fox News made up lies a few years back about violent left-wing protests in Madison. Bullshit. I saw some of the protests, and they were completely peaceful and polite. I talked to a cop, and he said he chatted with the protesters at lot, and they were very friendly and respectful to him. He even took their side. Fox showed some clips of violent protests in Madison, with sunny weather and palm trees. In the real world it was snowing and 12 degrees outside and no violence. I walked around the capitol building between protests, and there was no litter. The protesters cleaned up everything.

    2. Some on here can’t tell the difference between the moderate left and the most extreme leftists. I mean, they can’t tell the difference between liberals like Truman and Johnson who sent troops to Korea and Vietnam to fight Communism, and Stalin. They seem to think the Swedes and Danish are building gulags. Well, there are those who don’t let reality interfere with their beliefs.

    1. Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right.

    Right! The bakers in Oregon, trolled by Leftists, did not get their business, and their house, taken away by a majority of Lefists! And the baker in Colorado, after Leftists failed in the first round, is onto the second round where Leftists are busy trying to do the same. And that wonderful Leftist super majority of non-persecuting, non-hurters is standing up for freedom! Right?

    “Very few people on the left…” “Very few Muslims…” “Very few Soviets…” “Very few Cubans…” “Very few Chinese…” “Very few Venezuelans…”

    Leftism is a sick ideology. The Leftist complement of the “Very few” has done nothing to prevent that sick ideology from spreading more human misery and suffering than the rest of human misery and suffering combined.

  73. @William Badwhite

    Certainly a kinder approach than Ann Coulter calling all liberals “traitors”, ignoring it was liberal who led the fights against both the Axis and the Communists.
     
    Umm, no. "Liberals" definitely did not lead any fights against communists. Liberals spent most of the cold war deriding Republicans as hysterical war mongers, and applauding every murderous communist asshole they could find. It wasn't conservatives rolling around in Che Guevara t-shirts and pining for Daniel Ortega. American liberals were openly and enthusiastic supporters of communism from the days of Walter Duranty lying in the NYT about Stalin's crimes all the way to the every end, denouncing Reagan for turning up the heat on the Soviets. And when the Berlin wall came down and the USSR finally started to fall apart, liberal reaction wasn't to cheer, but to say "see, they weren't that bad. Just like we've been telling you".

    I’d cut Paleo some slack. It was New Deal Democrats who got the ball rolling on the Cold War (Truman was a liberal for 1950). Kennedy and Johnson, utter liberals, were pretty determined to do something about Communism in Cuba and Southeast Asia. It got us the Bay of Pigs and the Vietnam War, so can you really accuse those two of being soft on Communism?

    Liberals obviously changed in the ’60s-’70s. When I was a youngster in the late ’70s-early ’80s in the South, my Republican elders, who had been as Solid South Democrats as you could get, bemoaned the loss of the Scoop Jackson-type Democrats who would take a tough stand against America’s enemies. Granted, some of those Solid South types were pretty critical of the New Deal too, fifty years too late to do much.

    Of course the guns were all turned in the wrong direction and the real rot came from inside. You don’t need Marxist ideology to destroy a country.

    Jackson was a super hawk on emmigration, apparently not connecting that with immigration. Reagan (a one-time self-described liberal) was the perfect Cold Warrior, he literally won the Cold War. When it came to immigration, he gave the USA a significant and highly dangerous injury.

    • Replies: @William Badwhite

    Liberals obviously changed in the ’60s-’70s
     
    That was 50 years ago. So liberals have been wrong on communism for 50 years now.

    You cite Johnson and Kennedy as liberals. Kennedy was not liberal (beyond his personal immorality), while Johnson's administration had quite a few liberals, but Johnson's own compass was oriented towards Johnson having more power rather than any concrete principles. I'd add Walter Duranty, Alger Hiss, and Harry Hopkins to the liberal pile.

    Jackson was a super hawk on emmigration, apparently not connecting that with immigration.

     

    Scoop Jackson was not a liberal.

    There were (quite a few) Democrats that were anti-communist, but very few liberals. And they definitely did not "lead the fight". Paleo doubtlessly means well, but it seems he hasn't been paying attention to politics for at least 25 years.
  74. @Paleo Liberal
    Amazing how many people here have a completely distorted view of what leftists and liberals are like.

    It comes from spending all your time in the right wing bubble.

    Here are what should be obvious to anyone outside of a bubble.

    1. Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right. I live in one of the most left-wing cities in the country (Madison), and I used to live in the most left-wing part of NYC (the Village). Believe it or not, one runs across conservatives, and nobody wants to harm them. I’ve had conservative friends at work, and nobody cared. Extreme example— I once saw someone with a huge Nazi tattoo jogging through the most left-wing part of Madison, and nobody bothered him.

    Fox News made up lies a few years back about violent left-wing protests in Madison. Bullshit. I saw some of the protests, and they were completely peaceful and polite. I talked to a cop, and he said he chatted with the protesters at lot, and they were very friendly and respectful to him. He even took their side. Fox showed some clips of violent protests in Madison, with sunny weather and palm trees. In the real world it was snowing and 12 degrees outside and no violence. I walked around the capitol building between protests, and there was no litter. The protesters cleaned up everything.

    2. Some on here can’t tell the difference between the moderate left and the most extreme leftists. I mean, they can’t tell the difference between liberals like Truman and Johnson who sent troops to Korea and Vietnam to fight Communism, and Stalin. They seem to think the Swedes and Danish are building gulags. Well, there are those who don’t let reality interfere with their beliefs.

    Amazing how many people here have a completely distorted view of what leftists and liberals are like.

    It comes from spending all your time in the right wing bubble.

    Bull.  Right-wing people live in a world saturated with middle-left to extreme-left propaganda and talking points and laws; we know them better than you, because WE are their targets.  We can’t refuse to do business with blacks or design wedding cakes for queers.  We can’t even know the HIV status of people whose bodily fluids we may have to deal with.  But if we express an unapproved opinion we are often doxxed and our employers harassed into firing us.  Your talk about a “bubble” is complete projection.  YOU live in one.

    1. Very few people on the left want to persecute or any way hurt people on the right.

    But you stand up for the ones who do.  When Antifa or BAMN or BLM go up against “insensitive” speakers on college campuses or shoot police officers, YOU are silent.  When “gun control” (victim disarmament) groups try to take away people’s only defense against common criminals and violent mobs, YOU stand for the oppressors.  Where were YOU when the guy who went to counter-protest BLM in your own city was railroaded for defending himself against the Black mob that took exception to his First Amendment-protected words?  I notice that this incident has been memory-holed, I can’t find it any more.

    2. Some on here can’t tell the difference between the moderate left and the most extreme leftists.

    When you are silent when those on your side are literally calling for White genocide, how could we?

    Go play in traffic.  On an expressway.

  75. Godfrey Elfwick is 27 and happy to be a genderqueer Muslim atheist, born white in the wrong skin. From an early age, xe knew xe was special. At the tender age of 14 months, xe was already making protest banners in support of marginalized people while xir’s older brother Moneer, played with his toys, oblivious to his sibling’s struggles.

    At the age of seven, xe was the first genderqueer transracial child to have xir’s artwork featured on the UK children’s art show Art Attack, with xir’s powerful visual depiction of how it felt to be born a white male, but deep down know you are a black woman:

  76. Anonymous[806] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous
    Along these lines, I'm talking to a fellow at work, an intelligent guy who is also a Progressive (no, they are not mutually exclusive, which is kind of scary).

    I ask, why should my buddy Armando G., from Spain (the area of former Ifni, in case you are interested), who is as white as any Italian-American kid from Long Island, be eligible for affirmative action due to his Hispanic surname?

    My co-worker replied: "Because people from Spain are not Hispanic."

    End of discussion.

    “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
    “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
    “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

  77. @Autochthon
    My relevant experience is as a landlord near San José, and I was never such a smug prick as to not take a phone call from an interested person, nor was I ever inconvenienced for it. Your reasoning exemplifies the whole problem with the growing class of entitled rentiers who ruined America, and modern life generally; reversing the questions illustrates the point nicely, though I'll clarify by substituting "landlord" (i.e., one renting or interested in renting property) rather than your vague "person" (meant, by context, to refer to a would-be tenant); I've also fixed your misuse of pronouns:

    1. Do you really think a message via electronic mail to the landlord in the anecdote would have been simple?
    2. It’s not just a single message via electronic mail. It is potentially many. Both with that same landlord and with others.
    3. If the landlord is not willing to answer a simple phone call to justify a a message via electronic mail, do you really want to be renting a property from him.

    Your fourth point is just stupid; as a matter of fact, the best thing you could possibly do if you are paranoid about litigation is to keep as much preliminary communication as possible to an informal, unrecorded chat via telephone.

    From a merely pragmatic view, the most common, and the threshold, question, in such cases is "Is the place still available?," because it may of course have been let five minutes before the enquiry was made. A well-adjusted landlord will be happy to affirm that it is and then direct the caller to please submit a formal application in writing, or to confirm the pace is indeed no longer available but to thank the caller for his interest. This sort of exchange is how civilised persons used to communicate about such matters until quite recently, when merchants started viewing customers, landlords tenants, employers employees, and politicians constituents, as their bitches, rather than coequals participating in the quid pro quo exchange the law and custom of contract – including the social contract – presupposes.

    What's really going on here, of course, is that the rentier, as I indicated, reckons himself so damned superiour to the rabble who might merely want to let a place (not be landed men of quality, such as himself, wot!) that he has decided it is for these rabble to bow and scrape and meet his peccadilloes about just how he may be communicated with, and they shall sit and write messages containing all the data he has demanded, for his to review, or not, at his leisure, and that he shall casually decide whether to respond, and to whom, and when, and on what terms, if and when he can be bothered.

    In short, he is become the Soup Nazi of real estate, all enabled by his belief (right or wrong, though, increasingly, right) that overpopulation is on his side and if the serfs don't like his impertinence, they shall go homeless.

    Only they won't go homeless for too long, at the end of the day, because one day, as Molyneux has put it, "they take an entirely different approach" – any student of French history will tell you.

    Interesting to get such a vehement response. I enjoy your comments here, but thought (and still think) you missed on that one. Sorry if I struck a nerve.

    On to the substance.

    Your flipping the landlord/tenant usage in my points wasn’t a great move. Let’s take them one by one.

    1. Do you really think a message via electronic mail to the landlord in the anecdote would have been simple?

    Not for that tenant, but probably simpler than a phone call. And achieving the same outcome in less time.

    2. It’s not just a single message via electronic mail. It is potentially many. Both with that same landlord and with others.

    Right. It is also beneficial to the tenant to have those many communications happen asynchronously along with a written record to help keep them straight. I am shocked someone as smart as you thinks your rewrite of point 2 is anything but a self-refuting comment on your part.

    3. If the landlord is not willing to answer a simple phone call to justify a a message via electronic mail, do you really want to be renting a property from him.

    This is your best point. But what it comes down to is this particular landlord and tenant combination is not a good one. And finding it out in the fashion described was more efficient than having a phone call.

    Your fourth point is just stupid; as a matter of fact, the best thing you could possibly do if you are paranoid about litigation is to keep as much preliminary communication as possible to an informal, unrecorded chat via telephone.

    Only if you are doing something which truly is illegal (and calling my point stupid is ridiculous, why are you so emotional about this issue?). You live in the Bay Area, who is more likely there to get a better response in some kind of “racist!” or “discrimination!” he said, she said situation? Perhaps my perspective is colored by being generally unwilling to lie while encountering distressingly many people who seem willing (if not eager) to lie in situations like this.

    From a merely pragmatic view, the most common, and the threshold, question, in such cases is “Is the place still available?,” because it may of course have been let five minutes before the enquiry was made.

    Of course. And having that happen by email in asynchronous fashion makes much more sense. Text may be a decent alternative, but why spend a phone call on a simple yes/no question? Your point also explains why I so frequently see Craigslist posts which say things like “if the post is up it’s still available.”

    I get your frustration with the rentier class, but do you really think this is a good example of the bad behavior you are upset with?

    BTW, you never rented at all in your time in the Bay Area? That is rather exceptional.

    P.S. And please leave off with the patronizing. Or at least make a better response if you are going to act like that.

    P.P.S. An excellent example of the entitlement you decry here is when you are making a request of someone (as the prospective tenant was here) you demand they communicate on your terms. To flip the script, if I am a landlord reaching out to a prospective tenant (say if they placed an ad) it would be appropriate for me to communicate in the fashion they prefer (or walk away). As another example, I tend to prefer email or text (depending on how ephemeral the conversation is), but when I encounter a Craigslist ad which says “please call” I either do that or pass the ad by.

  78. @PhysicistDave
    Pete wrote:

    Pretty much every white male with an IQ over 110 is a Democrat these days, thanks to Trump. The GOP is a party of old men and low IQ whites that has turned its back on America.
     
    Uh, Pete? Been to America recently?

    I've got a friend who's a Jewish physician who voted for Trump. And a close acquaintance who is a Chinese immigrant.

    Y'know, white males with IQs over 110 would be just under half of the white males. Since the Dems do better among women and non-whites, and since Hillary must have gotten at least a few dumb white males, if you were right, Hillary would have trounced the Donald.

    She didn't.

    On the contrary, the Dems are careening so far to the Left that they are alienating long-time white liberals, such as Mark Penn, Dershowitz, Glen Greenwald, et al.

    I will admit, though, that if Hillary had not been a crook and if the current Dems were not crazy, Trump would indeed be in deep trouble. (Personally, I do assume that the Donald is financing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.)

    I think every white male with an IQ over 110, and below 120, is a Democrat these days. The multidimensional chess aspect is beyond a mere 110 guy.

  79. @Tex
    I'd cut Paleo some slack. It was New Deal Democrats who got the ball rolling on the Cold War (Truman was a liberal for 1950). Kennedy and Johnson, utter liberals, were pretty determined to do something about Communism in Cuba and Southeast Asia. It got us the Bay of Pigs and the Vietnam War, so can you really accuse those two of being soft on Communism?

    Liberals obviously changed in the '60s-'70s. When I was a youngster in the late '70s-early '80s in the South, my Republican elders, who had been as Solid South Democrats as you could get, bemoaned the loss of the Scoop Jackson-type Democrats who would take a tough stand against America's enemies. Granted, some of those Solid South types were pretty critical of the New Deal too, fifty years too late to do much.

    Of course the guns were all turned in the wrong direction and the real rot came from inside. You don't need Marxist ideology to destroy a country.

    Jackson was a super hawk on emmigration, apparently not connecting that with immigration. Reagan (a one-time self-described liberal) was the perfect Cold Warrior, he literally won the Cold War. When it came to immigration, he gave the USA a significant and highly dangerous injury.

    Liberals obviously changed in the ’60s-’70s

    That was 50 years ago. So liberals have been wrong on communism for 50 years now.

    You cite Johnson and Kennedy as liberals. Kennedy was not liberal (beyond his personal immorality), while Johnson’s administration had quite a few liberals, but Johnson’s own compass was oriented towards Johnson having more power rather than any concrete principles. I’d add Walter Duranty, Alger Hiss, and Harry Hopkins to the liberal pile.

    Jackson was a super hawk on emmigration, apparently not connecting that with immigration.

    Scoop Jackson was not a liberal.

    There were (quite a few) Democrats that were anti-communist, but very few liberals. And they definitely did not “lead the fight”. Paleo doubtlessly means well, but it seems he hasn’t been paying attention to politics for at least 25 years.

  80. @Lagertha
    These supercilious journalists realize that they have played such a yuge role in dividing American people, and, once it gets personal for them (especially if they have teenage boys) fear sets in. They have inadvertently marginalized their own sons while fanning the flames of "evil, smirk-faced, baseball cap-wearing, fratty-frat boys" every chance they got at work, back in The City. It kinda' sucks when you realize that your baby is a teenager now, and your work (and your colleagues' work) have demonized men so many times these past few years.

    The fact that the author lives in suburban Connecticut is very telling since the Northeast is the most socially competitive area in the country, particularly, wealthy towns with the good schools and all that. If you have had to leave NYC because you couldn't afford a large apartment on a journalist's salary to pay for private schools, moving to the burbs of Jersey or CT for big house but public schools, is an attractive solution. However, I get the sense that the author now realizes that the Common Core (in all New England public schools) curriculum is soul-crushing for his son. CC indoctrinates all students to toe the PC line; accept all the stuff he mildly complains about, and mostly, it demonizes males; and drums on on about white male privilege in a subtle and insidious way.

    My sons, fortunately, got thru HS (and, before AP courses were revised) and did not have the frequent reminders that "boys are bad, particularly white ones." And, in our town, my sons had several boys OD and die...some committed suicide, especially, the ones that were not confident or social...and, it was several years before teenage suicide and despair appeared to be a concern among NYT readers. Ironically, they all thought by living in a wealthy town with good schools, drugs and malaise would be non-existant. My theory has always been that marginalizing/demonizing (both by public pushing this & CC curriculum) boys has lead to the despair. And, the franchises of Latinos selling heroin/fentanyl are especially interested in rich towns.

    It seems to me that the author almost wishes his son could be somewhere like Northern Wisconsin, hunting, playing video games, having a nice rational gf, being a normal kid like Ryan Morgan. Certainly, Ryan seems level headed as he doesn't like to smoke dope, drink or waste time being miserable, hanging out with losers. And, most dads would be so proud if their kid is willing to do stuff with them (hunting, in this case) and choose something as important, practical, and lucrative for a career as Environmental Science/Engineering...where they could live anywhere, and not get stuck in expensive, soul-killing, pretentious suburbs like in Connecticut.

    My psychiatrist friend (mostly works with young men) is just flooded with new patients. And, the OD deaths are still not abating -they are especially high this time of the year. My message to journalists and SJWs: Yah, boys get it; they get it that all of you think they suck, and look in the mirror as to how they got to feel this way - beware because kharma bites back.

    If anything..tbis is my most important post on Steve’s blog…ever.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Lagertha
    Yah. We are doomed
  81. @Lagertha
    If anything..tbis is my most important post on Steve's blog...ever.

    Yah. We are doomed

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution