The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Judge Kozinski's "Ordeal of Civility"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The New York Times editorial board is mad that the Constitution makes it harder to fire federal appeals court judge Alex Kozinski than it has been to fire most of the other guys caught up in Weinsteingate:

Who Will Judge the Judge?
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD DEC. 14, 2017

… And if Judge Kozinski were anything but a federal judge with life tenure, he’d most likely be out of a job by now.

Last week, The Washington Post reported the allegations of six women who had worked for the judge as clerks or staff members, and who accused the judge in detail of crude behavior and sexual harassment.

Heidi Bond, who clerked for Judge Kozinski in 2006 and 2007, said he repeatedly called her in to look at pornography on his computer, and asked if she was aroused by it. On her personal blog, she described how he privately showed her his “knock chart,” a list of women he had sex with in college.

That’s not terribly judicious behavior, especially for a guy with about a 180 IQ. Like Harvey Weinstein, James Toback, Brett Ratner, etc. etc. Kozinski has a high Id to Superego ratio relative to his IQ.

When I was a kid, National Review was fascinated by a 1974 book by the New York Irish-American sociologist John Murray Cuddihy, The Ordeal of Civility: Freud, Marx, Lévi-Strauss, and the Jewish Struggle with Modernity. Cuddihy had been trained by New York Jewish intellectuals, and he turned his hyper-intellectualized style back on Jewish intellectuals. Forty plus-years ago, this kind of turn-about was seen as fairly fair play, and Cuddihy was nominated for a National Book Award. But since then he and his book have disappeared down the memory hole.

I’ve only read a couple of chapters of The Ordeal of Civility. Cuddihy’s style isn’t too my taste. I’d sum up the idea as that, as Heinlein said, “An armed society is a polite society,” and Ashkenazi society wasn’t very armed and thus was, despite its high literacy rate, pretty crass. So it ended up less civil than gentile polite society of similar wealth levels, which caused post-Jewish Enlightenment Jews a lot of distress and agitation when they tried to enter the broader society.

In a new article in Thermidor, Hoyt Thorpe summarizes Cuddihy in relation to Trump’s highly Jewish crassness:

Trump And The Return Of Pre-Modern Incivility

… Cuddihy looked to the daily face-to-face interactions of humans to divine another, perhaps more important, influence on the western psyche: the personal experience of Civil Religion. Cuddihy found that many, especially outsiders and minorities, experienced Civil Religion as a religion of civility – a “protestant esthetic” of bourgeois manners that was less about substantive values than about proper etiquette and interpersonal respect. In essence, Cuddihy had found the western rituals underlying our Civil Religion to be experienced by many as something closer to the “empty formalism” Bellah insisted our Civil Religion was not.

The Trump era has stimulated a renewed and impassioned commentary on civility that raises fundamental questions about the nature and role of civility in American democracy, as well as the future of our civil religion and how it is experienced by America’s ever-changing electorate. Cuddihy’s unique account of how certain groups have experienced civility provides an incisive explanation for Trump civility commentary today and ultimately serves as an unsettling portent about the future of our civil religion.

Civility and Counter-Culture

Cuddihy describes civility as a ritual exchange of “gifts” among strangers enabling us to “live with unknown others without transforming them into brothers or enemies.” This ritual carries with it a differentiation between private and public behavior and spaces, with social appearances, respectability, and censorship (both self- and other-directed) coming to dominate the public sphere. In western Protestant society, civility demands public humility about one’s wealth and power, respect for strangers, and censorship of one’s private convictions about individuals and groups. The development of civility in western history is, for Cuddihy, bound to the refinement of “barbaric” behaviors, with the prototypical example being the refinement of the feudal baron into the high-modern aristocrat.

One of Cuddihy’s arguments was that the counter-culture ideologies that radically altered the course of western civilization in the 20th century originated in attacks upon civility. Such attacks reflected in one way or another outsider or minority anxieties about the relationship between civil rights and civility, of being accepted as a full and equal citizen in society, not just in terms of being granted political equality, but also in terms of being socially accepted by others as equal. Among the various counter-culture movements, Cuddihy selected Freudian psychoanalysis and Marxism as two of his most important case studies.

Freud experienced civility as a sham ritual sublimating man’s natural, barbaric impulses: the formal and respectful rituals of romantic love merely covered up with successive layers of refinement the brute reality of the sexual transactions between individuals. Other aspects of civility merely concealed the shocking Freudian “truth” of childhood sexuality and incest fantasies. Of course, such “scientific” reductions were not new to a western society increasingly secularized by Darwin and Newton. But the way in which Freud communicated his observations to the world was seemingly contrived to scandalize his audience. Many of Freud’s colleagues lamented the impudence with which Freud discussed sexuality, and his correspondence is littered with stubborn declarations against self-censorship or euphemizing. This was, at least in Freud’s view, because psychological malaise could only be ameliorated by attacking the euphemisms with which the superego and society censored the brute reality of human existence. “A science cannot be bourgeois,” declared the founder of psychoanalysis, for bourgeois etiquette was merely a veil of petty lies obscuring our view of the truth.

But behind the putative therapeutic and scientific goals of Freud’s project, Cuddihy argues, lurked the mischievous motivations of a counter-cultural prankster. In one speech, for example, Freud mused about a “malicious fellow” preventing women from euphemizing their bathroom breaks as “picking flowers” by distributing a document at a party that revealed the true meaning behind the innocent euphemism. Indeed, in Hannah Arendt’s dismissive estimation, psychoanalysis was nothing more than a “modern form of indiscretion.” Whatever Freud’s ultimate motivations were, his remedy was a compromise with the religion of civility: indiscretions only were to be expressed during a closed analytic session. This compromise ultimately marks Freud, in Cuddihy’s analysis, as a conservative or reform critic of civility to be contrasted with Marx, whose radical attack on the bourgeois order admitted of no compromise.

… In a brilliant set of analogies, Cuddihy shows how closely Freud and Marx’s seemingly distinct projects converge on the function of civility. Just as the west deluded itself into thinking that love had eliminated selfish haggling from courtship, so it had also deluded itself that modern capitalism had eliminated selfish haggling from exchange. The industrial revolution may have attempted to sublimate the selfishness of the feudal west under Calvinism, but Marx’s experience with the Prussian censor helped him see through the conceit. His therapy for a hypocritical, deluded society was, like Freud’s, an uncensored confrontation with the brute facts underlying bourgeois society.

Jews have taken on the role of societal SuperEgo, while wanting to remain the Id in private. This is an unstable combination, as the high proportion of Jews who have gotten in trouble in Weinsteingate attests.

 
Hide 272 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Freud experienced civility as a sham ritual sublimating man’s natural, barbaric impulses:

    Our barbaric impulses NEED sublimating; it is like wearing clothes to ward off the cold.

    Our civilization has cast off the clothes that checked barbaric impulses and is now, figuratively, naked and freezing to death. Thanks, Freud et al.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Trump’s crassness and incivility were only noteworthy to Gutmenschen because he was coming from a relatively right-wing, pro-American perspective. For years before Trump announced his candidacy, blatantly hateful rhetoric towards whites (and males) had already been universally accepted on the left. Despite their laughably transparent rhetoric, leftists aren’t against bigotry and hate speech. Not at all. They just want to have a monopoly on the right to be bigoted and hateful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Trump isn't crass or uncivil.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Just speculating here, but it appears that the bulk of Ashkenazi male-line ancestry is, ultimately, of East Mediterranean provenance, related to the modern Lebanese – in fact, just like the Biblical narrative goes, never mind that ‘Khazar’ nonsense -.

    One salient characteristic – amongst many! – that seems to characterize men from that particular Mediterranean shore is a rather turbocharged carnal libido. Like the ‘normal’ male libido, but only more so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It is said that, in the main the present day population of Malta are the direct descendants of the ancient Phoenicians, a population which must be a close relation of modern Ashkenazi.

    There was a large migration of Maltese to the Britain of the 1950s and 1960s. They incurred a degree of unpopularity amongst a certain strata of the British population for their real - or alleged - propensity to 'live off immoral earnings' , ie a marked tendency to brothel keeping and pimpdom.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. I’d sum up the idea as that, as Heinlein said, “An armed society is a polite society,” and Ashkenazi society wasn’t very armed and thus was, despite its high literacy rate, pretty crass.

    Interesting observation. Though coarse (“rude, crude, or vulgar”) would fit better than crass (“lacking sensitivity, refinement, or intelligence”).

    In terms of personal presentation and interaction presentation, respectable politeness seems to be a (gentile) middle-class, bourgeois thing much more than a mark of the nobility – the people descended from those who were truly armed, whose ancestors hundreds of years ago came by their positions by the sword.

    Musil observed that a caste of lords always remains somewhat barbaric, that at meals the high bourgeois who have become rich strictly observed ceremonial uses of forks and knives while the aristocrats often ate with their hands, that the speech and conversation were “perfect” among bourgeois whereas the lords slipped into speech reminiscent of that of cabdrivers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Why do my posts on Sailer's blog go into moderation for hours while others' posts appear quickly?
    , @AP
    Steve - why do my comments on your blog go into moderation for hours?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    Just speculating here, but it appears that the bulk of Ashkenazi male-line ancestry is, ultimately, of East Mediterranean provenance, related to the modern Lebanese - in fact, just like the Biblical narrative goes, never mind that 'Khazar' nonsense -.

    One salient characteristic - amongst many! - that seems to characterize men from that particular Mediterranean shore is a rather turbocharged carnal libido. Like the 'normal' male libido, but only more so.

    It is said that, in the main the present day population of Malta are the direct descendants of the ancient Phoenicians, a population which must be a close relation of modern Ashkenazi.

    There was a large migration of Maltese to the Britain of the 1950s and 1960s. They incurred a degree of unpopularity amongst a certain strata of the British population for their real – or alleged – propensity to ‘live off immoral earnings’ , ie a marked tendency to brothel keeping and pimpdom.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Another version of this unstable combination is the two contrasting supreme arbiters of morality in the US:

    * highbrow journalists and intellectuals from NPR/the New York Times/the universities/etc.,

    vs.

    * lowbrow (but virtuous and high-minded) comedians Stewart/Colbert/John Oliver/Silverman/Amy Schumer/etc.

    They are increasingly the same kind of people, but one side still has a strong (if cracking and increasingly condescending and self-parodic) veneer of civility, while the other wallows in crassness and makes it a virtue.

    [typos in your post: “too my taste”, “has the high proportion attests”]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. “An armed society is a polite society,”

    Not true of blacks and Amish/Quakers.

    Blacks are armed and crass.

    Amish/Quakers are unarmed and polite.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    Not true of blacks and Amish/Quakers.

    Note that Heinlein didn't make the converse statement, that an unarmed society is a rude society. So Heinlein doesn't say anything on the Quakers, although Steve has used the strong interpretation for explaining Jewish rudeness. Methinks that Jewish rudeness towards the Goyim stems more from considering Goyim as beasts, and various rules that amount to being able to do whatever you want to the Goyim as long as you don't get caught or bring ire against the Jewish community. However, I am not sure that Jewish rudeness or crassness does not extend to other Jews. In an ethny held together by argument, it's going to breed argumentative a**holes to an extent. There are plenty of Jewish non-a**holes though, and Jews don't have a monopoly on a**holish behavior.

    As to blacks, if you look at earlier literature, they understood the power dynamic of the times. "Bwana, masaa" type expressions were common. These days you have rap culture that doesn't go well with the armed society. And the result is likely an increase in deaths. But really blacks are low IQ and relatively violent, and this is expressed in higher per capita homicide rates wherever they are.

    Among more intelligent races, I think the armed society = polite society holds well. In feudal societies where the knights/samurai walked around armed, and duels might be fought, you had a lot of politeness. Both Japanese and English had differentiation for words based on where one sits in the pecking order. E.g. thee, thine, thou etc.
    , @anon
    Blacks are armed and crass.

    They are, but they have their own weird form of politeness. If you listen to interviews with gang-bangers, they always talk about how they have a really strict code of behavior on the streets. You hear about people getting shot for looking at someone the wrong way, and according to them, that's really true. They have rules about who can and can't say what to whom, and it can be enforced with extreme violence.

    They're still really vulgar, but there are rules of etiquette they have to follow. It's just a different set of rules. It's more about "disrespect" than vulgarity.

    You're right about the Amish, though.
    , @Dr. X

    Amish/Quakers are unarmed and polite.
     
    Amish are armed. I've seen them hunting with rifles.

    They just won't fight for the Imperial Government...
    , @Olorin
    I don't know where you got the idea that Amish are unarmed and polite, but probably the same places you got the view that Quakers are that.

    Amish are armed, you can bet. They simply draw the line at fighting to protect the society that harbors and succors and privileges them and builds the roads they drive their horses on.

    Quakers are some of the most impolite bastards I've ever met, as they foist their ideals on others and get hoity-toity at any pushback and react to strong disagreement with various forms of shunning.

    As for Amish being polite, go DuckDuck the terms

    amish puppy farm
    amish incest
    amish sexual abuse
    amish child abuse

    I'd say their politesse has a very specific form, and much of it is to spin outsiders' view of themselves. They are among the shrewdest, most hard-nosed and stingy, tribal and nepotistic SOBs I've ever known. I knew a farmer in Ohio who called them the "button Jews" (button referring to their disdain for zippers and velcro).

    I won't argue with your point about blacks, however.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Very perceptive: the jewish struggle with the id (Philip Roth). I can report that the schoolmarmish aspect of the New York City Board of Education (thank you P.S. 119) in the 1940s helped many jewish male youth to aspire to and acquire civility. The current struggle against white-supremacy civility in the classroom by the diversity crowd is striking.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. And so the very polite, and very well-armed, Crackers have taken Mr. Trump as their representative in Washington. It appears that despite their rough ignorance they have lost appetite for the pretty lies making the dish of Civility in the modern Politick, and have pledged conditional fealty to the man who has promised to finally address the dinner invitations extended to all of the myriad other tribes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. In other words, Jews are a bunch of hard-up Al Czerviks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. Sailer should go after the sneaky, money-grubbing WASP rats too. Although Hollywood slime Harvey Weinstein makes it fun to focus on the Jew.

    The WASP / Jew ruling class of the American Empire is evil and it must be destroyed. Starting over a century ago, Organized Jewry began its march through the various power centers of the American Empire. The Jewish control of certain financial power centers gave them leverage to steal their way into all the other power centers that keep the American Empire together. The Jews have stolen their way into the ruling class, alongside the sneaky, perfidious New England WASP old money mob.

    This WASP/Jew ruling class is inherently unstable. Eventually the Great Lakes Germans and the Anglo-Celtic Southerners would figure out that they are no more than government mules for the treasonous, money-grubbing rats in the WASP / Jew ruling class.

    Much more than some disgusting Jew Judge or a Hollywood Jew sex fiend, the George W Bush presidency illuminated the evil of the WASP / Jew ruling class. George W Bush, although he did have mid-Atlantic ancestry and some portions of non-Saxon and non-Angle blood, was the perfect example of New England money-grubbing, Mammonite scum. George W Bush naturally gravitated towards the unassimilated Jews in the rancid Neo-Conservative crowd.

    President Trump was the direct beneficiary of the Great Awakening of the Great Lakes Germans and the Southern Anglo-Celts in regards to the rancidity of the WASP / Jew ruling class.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Curle
    “President Trump was the direct beneficiary of the Great Awakening of the Great Lakes Germans and the Southern Anglo-Celts ”

    I pray you are correct that this represents a permanent change of perspective. One Great Lakes guy who never got the message, Paul Ryan, is stepping down. Maybe Miss Lindsey will take a que from Paul and get out while the getting’s good.

    Not a second too soon.
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Charles, you’ve been on about Jews and WASPs for quite some time, and I respect your doggedness. But it seems a bit ironic that you slam WASPs so relentlessly—aren’t you yourself a WASP from New Hampshire? Have not the New England WASPs, “ruling class” or not, made New England a pretty great place to live and be from for the past four centuries?

    It’s true that as of late, some of the formerly ascendant WASPs have completely lost the plot—but it’s erroneous to slam “old money” as being part of a mere “money-grubbing mob.” See the names of plank donors of hospitals, museums, parks and (once) great schools in the Boston area, for example.

    The Protestant work eth(n)ic combined with intelligent, cultured noblesse oblige made for a great region and Nation. I do agree that it is indeed a shame that some WASPs have become unconcerned if “the stock of the Puritans die”— with a little help from their aforementioned friends, (#40) of course.

    A decent recent book that surveys New England architecture, history, culture:

    https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781493019168/A-Home-Called-New-England-A-Celebration-of-Hearth-and-History

    https://www.amazon.com/Home-Called-New-England-Celebration/dp/1493018469

    , @Corvinus
    Cool story, bro.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Id and superego don’t really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren’t there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power – even though they don’t exist, humans behave as if they did.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abe

    Id and superego don’t really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren’t there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power
     
    Yep, Jack, that’s the thing- I remember in the 80’s how seriously everyone who was intellectually anyone took Freud, and thinking that while this whole id/ego/superego thing made sense, the whole secretly wanting to kill my dad to sleep with my mom thing made absolutely no sense, but that’s supposed to be subconscious, so am I a rube for not accepting this thing that goes against every fiber of my being and is literally supposed to be unprovable simply because all the smart, sophisticated people say I should? Being a dissident on that was the beginning of my intellectual nonconformism, and honestly as socially trying as being a Trump supporter is today.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    I agree up to the period before "However". They don't exist and writers like Steve oughtn't to reference them as though they do.
    , @anonymous-antimarxist

    Id and superego don’t really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren’t there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power – even though they don’t exist, humans behave as if they did.
     
    All humans or just Jews???

    Because once again Freud projects Jewish tendencies towards perverse behavior, these tendencies being influenced culturally, genetically or both, on to the gentile masses. Freud calls this the Id Then Freud attempts to claim that the only reason gentiles do not exhibit these paraphilia at the same rate as Jews do is because of an often unhealthful suppression of them. Freud calls this the Superego.

    Why does Freud do all this??? Is it because time and time again Freud identifies with historical figures like Hannibal who he wishes would have been able to destroy Rome which he clearly identifies with Christendom.
    , @Rifleman

    Cuddihy shows how closely Freud and Marx’s seemingly distinct projects converge on the function of civility.
     
    Howard Stern is a modern day American version of the same project.

    Stern's mission seemed to be a relentless assault on the WASPs from the point of view of a hideously ugly, sexually vulgar low rent Jew from Long Island.

    Trump routinely appeared on Stern's show and was a listener of it for 20+ years.

    Stern's format included a relentless sexual harassment of his female guests over commercial broadcast radio.

    I don't know if would be tolerated today. Now he's hiding on satellite radio and even more obscene.

    Stern's fundamental obsession is the sexual relations between black males and White women. Especially in pornography and among his celebrity guests.

    It has always been obvious to me that in no small way this is his fascination with "degrading" White women/shiksas by fixating on this "defilement" of White America's women black males.

    James Toback shares the same world view and made a movie expressing it called "Black and White". He has also fixated on the sexuality of Mike Tyson and Jim Brown.

    Brett Ratner apparently was the liaison between somewhat naive White girls and black alleged rapist Russell Simmons.
    , @guest
    I don't know how "brain structures" would confirm or disconfirm them, since they are theories of Mind, not Brain.

    But yes, they were invented out of thin air. And no, they don't have much explanatory power. Unless you really, really want them to.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. What a feast!

    bored identity wished Sailer allowed this one to churn longer on back burner ; since this marvelous bouquet garni of Steve’s Spiced Reasons would create one of the greatest Taki dishes ever served .

    Meaning: even Jack D has to joyfully slurp on this one and then beg for seconds.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. The Ordeal of Civility is so obtuse because what Cuddihy is trying to say is Freudianism really is just a projection of the admission to the nature of Jewish perversity onto Christian culture.

    Likewise Marx is all about critiquing the Jewish exploitation of others, especially the goyim, but of other Jews as well if necessary(or possible), but then again projecting it all upon the goyim.

    If Steve finds Cuddihy to be obscurantist then E. Michael Jones may be more accessible.

    For E Michael Jones, “The Ordeal of Civility” presented by Jews is really just their rejection of Logos as symbolized by their persecution of Jesus Christ.

    E. Michael Jones on The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    anonymous-antimarxist:

    I have read Jones's The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit but was unaware of your presented video.

    Since it's been some time since I read the book, watching the video should prove quite interesting!

    It's amazing what interesting things (yours included) are presented on the UR. Thanks.
    , @Rifleman

    If Steve finds Cuddihy to be obscurantist then E. Michael Jones may be more accessible.
     
    Please, I had never heard of this Jones but after watching some of the video he is clearly a dumb, white trash type guy play acting at being intellectual and viewing the world through an old fashioned Christian simpleton, anti-semitic worldview.

    Stick with Cuddihy. Don't link him with this moron.
    , @attilathehen
    E. Michael Jones is an RCC groid/gloid lover who would OSCULUM INFAME black/Asian priests-popes. His "blame the Jews for everything" shtick is his way of not dealing with whom is really causing problems in the world - the RCC/Zioevangizers/Freemasons.

    I watch his youtubes and he never fails to come up with something idiotic. He criticizes pornography which is fine, but blames it all on the Jews. Sure, Alfred Kinsey and Hugh Hefner needed the Jews for their "work."

    He doesn't believe there are Caucasian/white people. He says he's not white, he's German/Irish. Madness!!!

    He believes philosophy is the way to deal with world problems. He travels to Iran where of course he has an audience for his anti-Semitic nonsense. But he has never once said that Islam is a Christian heresy.

    He doesn't deal with IQ - which is the starting point of everything.

    He rants about usury and capitalism. There is nothing wrong with people wanting to make an honest profit. He conveniently forgets the parable of the talents.

    I'm not a semitophile. I want Jews out of the West and in Israel. This is why I support Israel because we need a place for the Jews. Jones will babble about the poor Palestinians. Most Palestinians are Muslims with an average IQ of 85. They are racially mixed, like most North Africans and can easily be absorbed by neighboring Arab countries.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Heidi Bond, who clerked for Judge Kozinski in 2006 and 2007, said he repeatedly called her in to look at pornography on his computer, and asked if she was aroused by it. On her personal blog, she described how he privately showed her his “knock chart,” a list of women he had sex with in college.

    I thought open sexuality is not only healthy but empowering and liberating. If Slut Pride is good, why not Stud Pride? If women say they should act and dress like sluts but not be judged for it, why shouldn’t men act like studs and not be judged for it?

    Sexuality has been publicized and normalized, with every Disney idol growing up to be a whore. If women are encouraged to act more ‘natural’ and uninhibited, why shouldn’t it apply to men as well?
    Also, just look at how tattoos have become normalized, even among the elites. So, the message is there are no longer any improprieties. Anything goes.
    Also, it is a fact that women now have potty mouths just like men and talk dirty at the workplace with the men. Movies show this all the time. Youtube is full of female vlogs with potty mouths and candid sexual talk as if sex is nothing more special than shaking hands. And stuff like Tinder encourage sex to be a casual hookup thing. Boys and girls are encouraged to lose virginity as soon as possible.
    There are articles about how adultery is a good thing.

    When sex has been casualized, what is wrong with boing behavior? It is now ‘normal’, like talking about food. If Kosinski had asked the women to look porn images, how is it different from asking them to look at images of food? If we are to treat sex as a loose casual thing, why be uptight about it?

    On the one hand, progs say we should treat sex as just a casual thing like eating a burger. We should lose our inhibitions and hangups. They even promote nudie Femen and vile Pussy Riot that goes for lewd public displays in churches. Women are encouraged to sexualize public spaces as much as possible as a Human Right. And ‘twerking’ has been elevated to national pastime. Kids are taught the wonders of butt ‘sex’ at a young age. Cosmo and other girly mags are porny with advice how women should ‘peg their men’ and think dildo all the time.

    A giant statue of Monroe was put up where everyone could ogle at her panties.

    http://www.trbimg.com/img-5328713c/turbine/chi-marilyn-monroe-statue-chicago-defaced-graffiti-20110827

    Progs push this kind of culture but are now whining about how lewd and vulgar people are acting.

    It’s like women protesting Trump’s alleged sexual abuses by wearing pussy hats and costumes. “We protest Trump’s stud behavior by declaring ourselves shameless sluts.” It’s pornography and puritanism combined. Pornitanism.

    It’s like blacks wallowing in culture of violence but throwing fits about violence done to blacks.
    It’s like homos wallowing in culture of pansyass vulgarity and flamboyance but bitching about how people find them ridiculous.
    It’s like Jews wallowing in a culture of hostility and nastiness but getting so antsy about hostility shown to Jews.

    If you start a forest fire, it can destroy your side too. But we live in such an egotistical and ‘ethnotistical’ age. Some groups want to subvert rules and act more freely… but are shocked when greater licentiousness or lack of inhibitions lead to behavior by other groups that offend them.
    Homos still haven’t owned up to the fact their sicko behavior led to AIDS disaster in the 80s. If anything, they were turned into saints and gifted with ‘pride’ parades, ‘gay marriage’, and homomania as new religion. Identity Politics is shocked that whites also want an identity.

    Personally, I think society would be better with more inhibitions and proprieties. But progs mock such notions as passe and call for Miley-Cyrus/Lena-Dunham kind of behavior. But when (white) men get into the spirit of this New Normal, the progs throw a fit!

    Progs do see the problems that Conservatives see(and have often noted) but they cannot admit their role in creating this ugly culture. So, they are trying to restore proper behavior at the top because fish rots from the head. But condemning individuals without addressing the foulness of the culture in general and the fact that this culture has been vulgarized esp by Jewish pornographers, black rappers, feminist slut priders,and flaming homos is to see the trees but not the forest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes
    Sex, nudity, porn (tearing down every last vestige of traditional propriety) were said to be liberating, empowering--doubly so for women. Then the law of unintended consequences intervenes, and the prog-left auditions for Captain Renault's role of being shocked, shocked!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful! I come here for Steve’s world-beating droll sense of humor, and here he gives me something incredibly substantive and fascinating to chew on. In real life I am much more polite and congenial than my political blog Internet persona would have you believe, so it’s fascinating to be introduced to a sharp thinker like Cuddihy who can give clear, memorable examples of the practice of civility, yet also discuss it in its broader context, as I take so much of it for granted in daily life. Will almost certainly get that book if there is an electronic edition available.

    Some random observations: yes, what happened to our freedom to make public, armchair ethnological observations (i.e. Pollack/Italian/Jew/WASP jokes)? It was so uncontroversial I remember it being a frequent staple of even kiddy fare like MAD MAGAZINE.

    I’ve also thought that a return to some sort of dueling convention might be to the overall good of our society. Let some tension out before it builds up too much and people get massacred. Instead of passively aggressively snarking through the next 3 years, or maintaining this feverish dream of Russia collusion/impeachment-any-day now, wouldn’t it be better for the psyches of even the most low-T, soy boy, yaaaz-queen! liberals to be able to call out Trump when he says something particularly outrageous, and instead of stewing on it to further derangement of their psyches, say “All right, Trump! You and Trevor Noah, at dawn, pistols at 100 paces!”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Yes, one of the aspects of our current society irks me the most is just how humorless it has become. I feel as though I'm having tea with a bunch of bitter, stern church ladies. Even when discussing non-believers, they can only muster vitriol. Everything is far too serious for them to joke about.
    , @Haven Monahan
    It's interesting that only non-conformist dissident outsiders like Sailer, Derbyshire, my friend Hoyt Thorpe and yourself have the audacity to violate social norms to consider ethnological and anthropological features openly, honestly and without euphemism and pretty lies.

    I haven't yet finished thinking about what this "violation" of contemporary prevailing notions of politeness means, much less have I finished picking the shards of glass out of the scars in my tenderest of flesh. Even though none of these fellows, Sailer, Derbyshire, nor Thorpe are Jewish, I'm left asking myself what has emboldened them to break the rules of good manners like this?

    I also find the concepts of Id, Ego & Superego useful metaphors to understand our personal psychology, even if no dissection of the human brain has ever been able to reveal these organs. I obviously came of age well after the heyday of psychoanalysis, but I do see the potential value of awareness of one's one instincts and impulses to understand and manage one's mind and behavior. Likewise our understanding of our actual cultures has diminished as these have disappeared into a blind spot that may neither be examined or discussed because any honest consideration of these features is viewed as criticism and taken as offense. Instead of genuine examination, we're fed platitudes and idealized images that bear little resemblance with the shameful, dirty, beastly and often embarrassingly dionysian aspects of the reality.

    Sailer is the therapist we need for our time. In addition to psychoanalysis therapy, there is a vital need for cultural-analysis. Find the courage to peer into the dark heart to understand hidden cultural motives for our behavior that fuel so much misunderstanding and conflict. Our very reluctance and cowardice to confront these probably doom us to endless unsatisfactorily unresolved conflicts between our tribes. "Diversity is our strength" is the empty platitude aimed to placate us and make us ignore the real problems and conflicts between citizens, neighbors and colleagues hailing from different tribes and traditions. Rather than demanding that we actually put in effort to understand the different kinds of motives and styles of negotiation we are dealing with and to create institutions that could hope to accommodate these diverse styles of interaction, we've chosen to close our eyes, see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil in order to hold on to the fiction that "we're supposed to be all exactly the same progressive Universal Unitarian rainbow flag worshipping, Whole Foods shopping, bourgeois bohemians with the same tastes and values but with different pigmentation, features and stature." Indeed this expectation of uniformity of values and tastes is such hypocritical contradiction to the oft proclaimed yet apparently hollow pieties to "diversity."

    Perhaps independent outsiders like Sailer's will continue to influence the more authoritative voices of the establishment to examine our cultural differences with a greater honesty that actually respects the integrity of these people much more by viewing all their features and foibles without the need to replace these with more palatable idealized fantasies. What makes Sailer's observations and musings about various cultures and ethnicities so remarkable and constructive is that he's never rude, condescending or dismissive about it. Sometimes his observations are obviously jarring, especially to any forged in this context of a culture that views such frank but statements beyond the tolerable range of polite discourse. Despite the many calls for frank discussions of race, almost nobody demanding this actually wants anything resembling frankness or even real discussion for that matter. Sailer's indifference to the kind of etiquette that prohibits the honest consideration of various races and cultures has exacted a great cost of his exclusion from the Cathedral establishment, marginalizing a voice that might have otherwise been rewarded with more social success and status had he given his "cultural superego" more control and bitten his tongue to compromise in order to choose a different trajectory. Yet his indifference to these rules of etiquette have freed him to explore territory other less courageous but otherwise great minds have ignored and have fueled his curiosity to understand the real reasons, motives and origins for behaviors and characteristics of the various cultures. Even though he's already violated this key taboo, he's not completely dispensed with civilization and become something like another Andrew Anglin. Absent civilization, men don't monstrous barbarity doesn't automatically erase the nobility, humanity and dignity that exist along with the selfishness and wrath that compete with them. Even when examining the most difficult areas aspects of weaknesses that challenge or bedevil the various races and cultures, Sailer does so with a tenderness that shows a genuine desire to appreciate the reality and depth of all of their features and characteristics, not only the good ones that their idealized image of themselves wish to incorporate and present for a public image of their "cultural ego."

    Perhaps the Id, Ego and Superego are useful after all, even as metaphors also for races, nations and cultures to understand themselves? Will Dr. Sailer and others continue their thankless mission to help therapy these? How can communities most in need of therapy be moved to seek help to gain a better awareness of themselves?
    , @njguy73

    I’ve also thought that a return to some sort of dueling convention might be to the overall good of our society. Let some tension out before it builds up too much and people get massacred. Instead of passively aggressively snarking through the next 3 years, or maintaining this feverish dream of Russia collusion/impeachment-any-day now, wouldn’t it be better for the psyches of even the most low-T, soy boy, yaaaz-queen! liberals to be able to call out Trump when he says something particularly outrageous, and instead of stewing on it to further derangement of their psyches, say “All right, Trump! You and Trevor Noah, at dawn, pistols at 100 paces!”
     
    You show me a piece of paper saying that, I'll cramp my hand to sign it.

    You put it on a ballot, I'll blister my thumb to push the "Yes" button.

    You put dueling on TV, I'll tune in, put down the remote, take the phone off the hook, pull up the popcorn and beer, and settle in.

    , @Redman
    As a resident of a “super zip” outside of NYC, I can say we have reached peak oppressiveness on speech. To express any support for Trump is the equivalent of favoring the release of all pedophiles from prison.

    More and more we live in a society of unexpressed opinions, and it ain’t healthy. Jack D’s complaints about Freud notwithstanding.

    If DC is half as stultifying as NYC, I pray for our Country.
    , @Curle
    “ In real life I am much more polite and congenial than my political blog Internet persona would have you believe,”

    Have you thought of ending the public niceness? Do you stay silent when, at the office, some SJW scapegoats whites for black crime and dysfunction? Have you thought of what millions of us pushing back might achieve?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. 1) Dave Pinsen said here on iSteve, that Trump was never looked upon as an anti-semite – until recently.

    2) Now you talk about Trump as the prototypical New York Jew in his crass ways with the public – and the world in general (women…).

    3) Then there’s this Id and SuperEgo thing you’re – in a pretty ironic way (since this is Freud, isn’t it) – refering to.

    4) This all sounds as if to say, that the now somewhat ehe – over-orchestrated – Jewish “Id” would – following your logic, no – best be understood as a product of (freudian, of course) rationalisiation. The Jewish SuperEgo, I now could conclude, should by and by acknowledge, in your opinion, that there is this dirty little thing called – IT, and that it’s very powerful and hard to be conquered or civilized, even though it might turn out to be so small, that even the most advanced brain-scan technology can’t – up to this day – detect it.

    And what goes this all to show – I’m not that sure, but at least, it makes Trump in the end definitely look Jewish (maybe freakishly so – but anyhow – Leon Wieseltier seemed to even cultivate such a freakish Jewism, didn’t he -might have been even more successful in doing so by colouring his hair, as the Donald does?).

    Ok and now what: I think now of your lines from a few weeks back, which claimed, that the world might end in a desaster, if Jewish – – hysteria, grounded (rooted) deeply in the family-dynamics (=the setting…) of the Fiddler on The Roof (it’s not a verbal quote, but a correct reference, methinks) – ok: That this Fiddler-on-the-Roofy Jewish tendency to react hysterically instead of in a polite way – – might hint at the superpower of the Jewish Id – aka: The superdanger of it (“it” meaning The (freudian) ID, ok).

    We, I might conclude, if a bit exhausted, really, I have to admit, ehe: We might all be a tad better off, if only the Donald and the Jews would adhere more to Freud and – start to tame their ID a bit.
    - If this would be right, I could agree with you in the way I tried to labor on above.

    But I could not really say, what that then might lead to, especiallly since the consequences of all this stufff would all occur somewhen in the future. (What the future is concerned, we’re all of us amateurs, – and this can’t be any other way, unless we pretended to be God (=the real thing, as far as SuperEgos are concerned. And even then: This would still be nothing but shallow depths and flawed winds = pure and simple pretensions – at best, and a complete desaster necessarily – in all other cases (sigh)).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    The current hysteria (and that is exactly what it is - hysteria is derived from the Greek word for "uterus") has everything to do with Trump and nothing to do with the Id vs. Superego per se. The reason so many prominent men are being implicated is that "pussy grabbing" is EXACTLY what most (if not all) high-T, alpha males do and have done since we were silver back gorillas. And women have never complained about this, in fact they encourage it and when they are at their most fertile they do everything they can to attract the attention of the alpha.

    In the past, when prominent men were revealed to be pussy grabbers, their treatment by the Left was completely dependent on whether the men did or did not have the right set of Leftist beliefs. If they were not Leftist, then any pussy grabbing behavior was said to make them "hypocrites" - publicly they espoused bible thumping, privately they pursued 14 year old girls. And so they had to go on grounds of hypocrisy (since Biblical morality itself no longer exists - it's no problem if men lie with men, etc.).

    But, if their beliefs were in line with the Left, they were immune. Some feminists said of Bill Clinton that they would themselves be willing to pleasure him it that is what it took to keep someone of his correct belief system in office. Harvey Weinstein was widely known to be a pussy grabber but his political contributions and correct beliefs gave him immunity up until recently. Even at the moment when his bubble burst, his first statement was that he was going to devote himself to hunting down fascists so everyone please back off and let me continue working for the Cause.

    AND the fact that the men in question were no longer peak alphas and that the women who are attacking them are also past their own sell-by dates, was not an issue. Bill Clinton doddered around the Hillary campaign and was seen (sometimes) by her side and it was no problem. The only reason he did not feature even more prominently was due to Hillary's ego and not because he was a persona non-grata pussy grabber.

    So what has changed - first of all, it is no longer necessary to protect the Clintons. But more importantly, Trump is still in office. He appeared to have gotten away with his pussy grabbing despite not being a Leftist. The Russia thing appears not to be a sure bet - maybe they will get close to Trump and take down Jr. or Kushner, but the man himself will probably be unreachable. Trump himself had not done anything new to put pussy grabbing back in the news, so it was necessary to start a fire elsewhere, even if elsewhere meant throwing a few of your icons into the fire. That these were somewhat over the hill icons made them expendable anyway so it was not so much a bug but a feature.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @Abe
    Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful! I come here for Steve’s world-beating droll sense of humor, and here he gives me something incredibly substantive and fascinating to chew on. In real life I am much more polite and congenial than my political blog Internet persona would have you believe, so it’s fascinating to be introduced to a sharp thinker like Cuddihy who can give clear, memorable examples of the practice of civility, yet also discuss it in its broader context, as I take so much of it for granted in daily life. Will almost certainly get that book if there is an electronic edition available.

    Some random observations: yes, what happened to our freedom to make public, armchair ethnological observations (i.e. Pollack/Italian/Jew/WASP jokes)? It was so uncontroversial I remember it being a frequent staple of even kiddy fare like MAD MAGAZINE.

    I’ve also thought that a return to some sort of dueling convention might be to the overall good of our society. Let some tension out before it builds up too much and people get massacred. Instead of passively aggressively snarking through the next 3 years, or maintaining this feverish dream of Russia collusion/impeachment-any-day now, wouldn’t it be better for the psyches of even the most low-T, soy boy, yaaaz-queen! liberals to be able to call out Trump when he says something particularly outrageous, and instead of stewing on it to further derangement of their psyches, say “All right, Trump! You and Trevor Noah, at dawn, pistols at 100 paces!”

    Yes, one of the aspects of our current society irks me the most is just how humorless it has become. I feel as though I’m having tea with a bunch of bitter, stern church ladies. Even when discussing non-believers, they can only muster vitriol. Everything is far too serious for them to joke about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Redman
    I recommend the piece Steve cited above “Trump And The Return Of Premodern Incivility.” It discusses the end of comedy in the last decade, which is something I’ve noticed. But would say it’s more like in the last 5 years.

    Humor has really fallen off the edge of the anglosphere ...which is why Trump has such appeal: He’s the Rodney Dangerfield president, and that’s a good thing.

    His tweets are funny and honest, the way prog humor can not be in the current era.
    , @Redman
    I recommend the piece Steve cited above “Trump And The Return Of Premodern Incivility.” It discusses the end of comedy in the last decade, which is something I’ve noticed. But would say it’s more like in the last 5 years.

    Humor has really fallen off the edge of the anglosphere ...which is why Trump has such appeal: He’s the Rodney Dangerfield president, and that’s a good thing.

    His tweets are funny and honest, the way prog humor can not be in the current era.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @Jack D
    Id and superego don't really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren't there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power - even though they don't exist, humans behave as if they did.

    Id and superego don’t really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren’t there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power

    Yep, Jack, that’s the thing- I remember in the 80’s how seriously everyone who was intellectually anyone took Freud, and thinking that while this whole id/ego/superego thing made sense, the whole secretly wanting to kill my dad to sleep with my mom thing made absolutely no sense, but that’s supposed to be subconscious, so am I a rube for not accepting this thing that goes against every fiber of my being and is literally supposed to be unprovable simply because all the smart, sophisticated people say I should? Being a dissident on that was the beginning of my intellectual nonconformism, and honestly as socially trying as being a Trump supporter is today.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Dear Shinzo,
    I always knew you were a Trump supporter. Now I know you were a Freud doubter, I have renewed confidence on your Yasukuni visits, etc.
    , @Jack D
    Humans are stuck with religion whether we like it or not. "Sophisticates" tried to get rid of Moses and Jesus and replace them with Freud and Marx - the old guys' stories were just superstitions, the new guys were telling you the "scientific" truth. Freud gave you a scientific understanding of human behavior, Marx gave you a scientific understanding of economic behavior. And even more important, not only did they tell you the diagnosis but they also prescribed the cure - analysis and socialism.

    Well it turns out that there was nothing "scientific" about Freud and Marx - they just invented new fairy tales, the way Joseph Smith invented Mormonism. Converts to their system just switched from one religion to a different religion. In the Soviet Union, no one made pilgrimages to Christian saints anymore, but millions made the pilgrimage to see the body of Lenin.

    Like any religion, Freudianism and Marxism have articles of faith. We often make fun of leftists for believing things that defy all common sense and evidence, even to the point that it sometimes kills them. But the religious faithful have been doing that forever.

    Every religious believer believes that his religion is the True Religion and leftists are no different. The difference is that people who are traditional religious believers understand that they are religious believers - it's not a sin to make a leap of faith, to believe in miracles, it's actually a requirement for most religions. If you only believe that which you can touch and see and explain scientifically, you don't really have faith.

    Leftists are in denial. They cling to the belief that they are more sophisticated than the rubes who still have religion and that their belief system is purely logical and rational and evidence based, even though it clearly isn't.
    , @AnotherDad

    Yep, Jack, that’s the thing- I remember in the 80’s how seriously everyone who was intellectually anyone took Freud, and thinking that while this whole id/ego/superego thing made sense, the whole secretly wanting to kill my dad to sleep with my mom thing made absolutely no sense,
     
    Yep. I knew who i wanted to sleep with and it damn sure didn't include my mom.

    Freud was just a weird dude. And the demand that everyone was supposed to take his stupid oedipal b.s. seriously was a pretty good wake up call--probably for a lot of folks--of the foolishness of intellectuals, and specifically of Jews to run off into the weeds with their ridiculous fantasies yet pretend that they are intellectually serious.
    , @kihowi
    I've discovered that old people who were part of that get really annoyed when your remind them of it. I had an old lady basically growl at me for making a jokey reference.
    , @Anonymous
    Yes Freudianism was everywhere in the 1970s and 80s, even places you wouldn't expect to find it, like serious academic history books. Then in the 1990s it suddenly disappeared.
    , @It's All Ball Bearings
    Even the girls at the San Dimas Mall knew Freud was a perv.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. If this post doesn’t get a comment from James J. O’Meara, I’ll be very disappointed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. Steve, I very much doubt Kozinski has an IQ of 180. What’s your source?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Steve's point is that Kozinski is smart enough to know that showing porn to female coworkers is a dumb thing to do; assigning a ludicrously high IQ to Kozinski is a way to emphasize that, by way of exaggeration.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. One last thing, though- it was only about a month ago 60 MINUTES brought Kozinski out of mothballs to dedicate a whole segment to him (for our non-U.S. readers, a 20 minute slot on this Sunday night news program is probably the biggest stage in America for serious TV). I don’t think he had a book out from CBS’s publishing division to promote, and they were very gracious in hand-waving away his porn server controversy from 10 years ago, so what was the point of talking to this non-Supreme Court judge in the twilight of his career NOW? It seemed he was being brought on to do the standard Fake News conservative case against-X thing (here Trump, but when they dug up Barry Goldwater in 1994 it was against the ban on gays in the military). But now they’re turning on him. Is this coincidence, is the Dweeb State mad at him for not slamming Trump harder on TV, or is there something more interesting at play?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lugash
    60 Minutes are masters of pushing The Narrative without you noticing. Koz, whitewashing America's assistance to Saudi Arabia's barbaric Yemeni war, the Duke Rape hoax, etc. My favorite one was where they drug John Le Carre(or the actor who portrays him) out of retirement to give a "rare" interview. It's the standard recap of his career until the end, when Le Carre sagely intones that Russia is the gravest threat to the UK and US. All part of the scheme to turn public opinion against Russia, while ignoring things like, say, 22 preteen girls getting vaporized at an Ariana Grande concert.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @Jack D
    Id and superego don't really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren't there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power - even though they don't exist, humans behave as if they did.

    I agree up to the period before “However”. They don’t exist and writers like Steve oughtn’t to reference them as though they do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @Abe

    Id and superego don’t really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren’t there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power
     
    Yep, Jack, that’s the thing- I remember in the 80’s how seriously everyone who was intellectually anyone took Freud, and thinking that while this whole id/ego/superego thing made sense, the whole secretly wanting to kill my dad to sleep with my mom thing made absolutely no sense, but that’s supposed to be subconscious, so am I a rube for not accepting this thing that goes against every fiber of my being and is literally supposed to be unprovable simply because all the smart, sophisticated people say I should? Being a dissident on that was the beginning of my intellectual nonconformism, and honestly as socially trying as being a Trump supporter is today.

    Dear Shinzo,
    I always knew you were a Trump supporter. Now I know you were a Freud doubter, I have renewed confidence on your Yasukuni visits, etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Oh boo hoo, she has to glance at porn and hear about the Judge’s conquests. Did he lock her in a room or try to extort sexual favors? If so, I sympathize. If not, go get a job somewhere else, lady.
    #GetOverItSnowflake

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Hell no. A woman is not a quote snowflake for not wanting to be subjected to that disgusting, intrusive, disrespectful, and potentially intimidating treatment; rather, she is what used to be called a lady.

    Try it on our daughters and we won't care that the perverted bully is a judge.

    If that allegation is true, then to Hell with "the judge."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. If the judge actually did all of those things, viewing porn at work etc., it shows, in my opinion, a terrible lack of character. There should be no life time appointments at any judicial level, including the Supreme Court.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Federal judges are subject to impeachment by Congress. If what Judge Kozinski did really makes him unfit for office then Congress can get rid of him.

    Lifetime appointment is valuable but perhaps not essential for an independent judiciary. Certainly you don't want judges to be like political appointees who get swept out every time the administration changes. But on the other hand, many states require state judges to stand for periodic retention elections where the voters can get rid of them and you can't say that these states don't have an independent judiciary.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Just as the west deluded itself into thinking that love had eliminated selfish haggling from courtship, so it had also deluded itself that modern capitalism had eliminated selfish haggling from exchange. The industrial revolution may have attempted to sublimate the selfishness of the feudal west under Calvinism…

    I haven’t read Cuddihy, but there is linguistic research on civility. It agrees more with Heinlein than with Thorpe. One way to investigate how they differ is the issue of other-directed censorship. In Heinlein’s “armed society”, this is less likely. In Thorpe’s Civic Religion society, it’s inevitable (see gay wedding cake controversies). It makes sense that Jews would have less civility in the Heinlein sense, as the culture they were coming from could afford confrontation, but not in the Thorpe sense, as the culture they were integrating into was relatively homogenous compared to our melting pot/salad bowl. Again, I haven’t read Cuddihy, but I wonder if this writer is summarizing him accurately.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. Hoyt Thorpe? A character from I Am Charlotte Simmons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. @Abe

    Id and superego don’t really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren’t there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power
     
    Yep, Jack, that’s the thing- I remember in the 80’s how seriously everyone who was intellectually anyone took Freud, and thinking that while this whole id/ego/superego thing made sense, the whole secretly wanting to kill my dad to sleep with my mom thing made absolutely no sense, but that’s supposed to be subconscious, so am I a rube for not accepting this thing that goes against every fiber of my being and is literally supposed to be unprovable simply because all the smart, sophisticated people say I should? Being a dissident on that was the beginning of my intellectual nonconformism, and honestly as socially trying as being a Trump supporter is today.

    Humans are stuck with religion whether we like it or not. “Sophisticates” tried to get rid of Moses and Jesus and replace them with Freud and Marx – the old guys’ stories were just superstitions, the new guys were telling you the “scientific” truth. Freud gave you a scientific understanding of human behavior, Marx gave you a scientific understanding of economic behavior. And even more important, not only did they tell you the diagnosis but they also prescribed the cure – analysis and socialism.

    Well it turns out that there was nothing “scientific” about Freud and Marx – they just invented new fairy tales, the way Joseph Smith invented Mormonism. Converts to their system just switched from one religion to a different religion. In the Soviet Union, no one made pilgrimages to Christian saints anymore, but millions made the pilgrimage to see the body of Lenin.

    Like any religion, Freudianism and Marxism have articles of faith. We often make fun of leftists for believing things that defy all common sense and evidence, even to the point that it sometimes kills them. But the religious faithful have been doing that forever.

    Every religious believer believes that his religion is the True Religion and leftists are no different. The difference is that people who are traditional religious believers understand that they are religious believers – it’s not a sin to make a leap of faith, to believe in miracles, it’s actually a requirement for most religions. If you only believe that which you can touch and see and explain scientifically, you don’t really have faith.

    Leftists are in denial. They cling to the belief that they are more sophisticated than the rubes who still have religion and that their belief system is purely logical and rational and evidence based, even though it clearly isn’t.

    Read More
    • Agree: Johann Ricke, ic1000
    • Replies: @TheJester

    Leftists are in denial. They cling to the belief that they are more sophisticated than the rubes who still have religion and that their belief system is purely logical and rational and evidence-based, even though it clearly isn’t.
     
    Thank you. That describes just about every leftist I have ever known or read about who hopes to replace reality with their personalized dystopias that create curated societies that they hope to force the rest of us to live in ... for our own sakes of course. How generous of them!

    The Superego, the Ego, and the ID ... the Father, the Holy Ghost, and the Son. Things change but nothing changes, albeit at a great personal cost to humanity and everyone involved in the social anarchy that leftists ferment in their arrogant delusions about human nature and what is Good.

    Perhaps the last 500 years of Western Civilization can be encapsulated as an ideological dispute between Calvin and his omniscient God who destroys the capacity for free will .. and the Nietzschean "will to power" where mortal humans presume the attributes of divinity that give them the power to change all aspect of human nature and human existence through simple acts of free will, i.e. their genders.

    In the meantime, the rest of us try to live our lives with our families as best we can in the interlude between the madness inherent in both extremes.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson II
    Agree.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. 2 small corrections: not “too my taste”, but “to my taste” (of course), and at the end not “has the high proportion” but “as the high proportion” . . .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. @Buffalo Joe
    If the judge actually did all of those things, viewing porn at work etc., it shows, in my opinion, a terrible lack of character. There should be no life time appointments at any judicial level, including the Supreme Court.

    Federal judges are subject to impeachment by Congress. If what Judge Kozinski did really makes him unfit for office then Congress can get rid of him.

    Lifetime appointment is valuable but perhaps not essential for an independent judiciary. Certainly you don’t want judges to be like political appointees who get swept out every time the administration changes. But on the other hand, many states require state judges to stand for periodic retention elections where the voters can get rid of them and you can’t say that these states don’t have an independent judiciary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Lifetime appointment is valuable but perhaps not essential for an independent judiciary.

    Unfortunately, like everything in the government, what the founders intended and what really happened are two different things. The lifetime appointment was intended to remove politics from the judiciary. However, the lifetime appointment means that putting the person with the right political persuasion on the court becomes even more important. Add in the Congressional oversight process where they are grilled about their political beliefs. For good measure throw in the judges oversized opinions about their intellects leading to ridiculous convoluted reasoning in their decisions to support their politics that make no sense to average people and we have the mess we have now.
    , @Brabantian
    It's quite true it is formally easy for Congress to remove any judge, in terms of the Constitution of the United States - which makes Congress supreme in removing any & all United States judges, including the Supreme Court justices, merely for 'bad behaviour', which can be sexual peccadilloes or just not honouring the US Constitution in their decisions - no allegation of crime is necessary

    This power is almost never used, however, with Congress acting as if submissive to the erroneous myth that US judges are 'supreme', whereas the US Constitution makes it clear that it is Congress that is on top, with unlimited powers to impeach judges in the House, and have the Senate conduct a trial & quickly order their removal. The Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee is the key person to start this process.

    However, in 1998, US Congressman Sonny Bono - yes the pop star other half of the long-ago Sonny & Cher singing duo - who was on the Judiciary Committee, was murdered whilst investigating corruption, in what former FBI agents declared was one of the many USA political assassinations (there are a whole string of suspiciously dead US Congressmen, federal & Supreme Court judges, etc if you care to dig a little).

    It is said as well that the now-departing John Conyers, who had been Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was threatened with murder whilst his wife was criminally charged and jailed, when Conyers - fooled by the Obama fraud in 2008 - was about to launch a massive anti-corruption campaign of hearings against USA bribe-taking judges, who jail innocent blacks and maul US citizens in general. Needless to say, no such hearings were ever held, despite the massive Judiciary Committee members have on crimes amongst the 865 USA federal and supreme court judges.
    ---
    And speaking of 'abused women' accusations ... how about this case, where a young girl injured by a wild kangaroo attack down under, had her photo spread about as an alleged case of schoolboys beating up young schoolgirls:
    https://40.media.tumblr.com/31d6d07d31303d3c2d1c9421124b093a/tumblr_nr2rczJSPC1trxogwo1_500.jpg

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. @AP

    I’d sum up the idea as that, as Heinlein said, “An armed society is a polite society,” and Ashkenazi society wasn’t very armed and thus was, despite its high literacy rate, pretty crass.
     
    Interesting observation. Though coarse ("rude, crude, or vulgar") would fit better than crass ("lacking sensitivity, refinement, or intelligence").

    In terms of personal presentation and interaction presentation, respectable politeness seems to be a (gentile) middle-class, bourgeois thing much more than a mark of the nobility - the people descended from those who were truly armed, whose ancestors hundreds of years ago came by their positions by the sword.

    Musil observed that a caste of lords always remains somewhat barbaric, that at meals the high bourgeois who have become rich strictly observed ceremonial uses of forks and knives while the aristocrats often ate with their hands, that the speech and conversation were "perfect" among bourgeois whereas the lords slipped into speech reminiscent of that of cabdrivers.

    Why do my posts on Sailer’s blog go into moderation for hours while others’ posts appear quickly?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    My comments can linger in purgatory for days.
    , @Anon
    Are you an adoring fan?
    , @Anonymous
    It's because he doesn't like you very much. I'm in the same boat, which is why I now post anonymously. Impossible to maintain any sort of dialogue when your trenchant, perceptive and clever posts are held up for days while puerile tripe shows up instantly.

    But I digress. The real fact of the matter is that approval here is very much like religious grace--you either have it, or you don't. Not much you can do about it really.
    , @dr kill
    Because your commenting history demonstrates you do not always post with the civility required by the moderator. Steve wishes (or his employer wishes him) to “live with unknown others without transforming them into brothers or enemies.”
    Welcome to the club.
    , @AndrewR
    You gotta pony up the shekels to fund Sailer's idle lifestyle.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. 2 small corrections: not “too my taste”, but “to my taste” (of course), and at the end not “has the high proportion” but “as the high proportion” . . .

    you needn’t publish this . . .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. “many states require state judges to stand for periodic retention elections where the voters can get rid of them and you can’t say that these states don’t have an independent judiciary.”

    Yes you can. Florida Supreme Court 2000 presidential election.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  35. That’s not terribly judicious behavior, especially for a guy with about a 180 IQ.

    Steve, in this whole affair, you’ve managed to overlook a different explanation for all this, which is that high IQ people are different, sexually, from low IQ people. I recall reading in one of the early sex studies (Shere Hite?) that blue collar people were more genitally fixated than white collar people. In context, this didn’t mean white collar people were “nicer” or more “love dovey”, it meant white collar people were more turned on by psychological things like dominance or betrayal…

    Yeah, maybe Kozinski’s homegrown pornography server is ultimately tracable to the Roman destruction of the Temple, or maybe people like Kozinski just naturally rise to a higher level of satiation, as they do a higher level of incompetence.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. @Abe

    Id and superego don’t really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren’t there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power
     
    Yep, Jack, that’s the thing- I remember in the 80’s how seriously everyone who was intellectually anyone took Freud, and thinking that while this whole id/ego/superego thing made sense, the whole secretly wanting to kill my dad to sleep with my mom thing made absolutely no sense, but that’s supposed to be subconscious, so am I a rube for not accepting this thing that goes against every fiber of my being and is literally supposed to be unprovable simply because all the smart, sophisticated people say I should? Being a dissident on that was the beginning of my intellectual nonconformism, and honestly as socially trying as being a Trump supporter is today.

    Yep, Jack, that’s the thing- I remember in the 80’s how seriously everyone who was intellectually anyone took Freud, and thinking that while this whole id/ego/superego thing made sense, the whole secretly wanting to kill my dad to sleep with my mom thing made absolutely no sense,

    Yep. I knew who i wanted to sleep with and it damn sure didn’t include my mom.

    Freud was just a weird dude. And the demand that everyone was supposed to take his stupid oedipal b.s. seriously was a pretty good wake up call–probably for a lot of folks–of the foolishness of intellectuals, and specifically of Jews to run off into the weeds with their ridiculous fantasies yet pretend that they are intellectually serious.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @Jack D
    Id and superego don't really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren't there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power - even though they don't exist, humans behave as if they did.

    Id and superego don’t really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren’t there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power – even though they don’t exist, humans behave as if they did.

    All humans or just Jews???

    Because once again Freud projects Jewish tendencies towards perverse behavior, these tendencies being influenced culturally, genetically or both, on to the gentile masses. Freud calls this the Id Then Freud attempts to claim that the only reason gentiles do not exhibit these paraphilia at the same rate as Jews do is because of an often unhealthful suppression of them. Freud calls this the Superego.

    Why does Freud do all this??? Is it because time and time again Freud identifies with historical figures like Hannibal who he wishes would have been able to destroy Rome which he clearly identifies with Christendom.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @Jack D
    Federal judges are subject to impeachment by Congress. If what Judge Kozinski did really makes him unfit for office then Congress can get rid of him.

    Lifetime appointment is valuable but perhaps not essential for an independent judiciary. Certainly you don't want judges to be like political appointees who get swept out every time the administration changes. But on the other hand, many states require state judges to stand for periodic retention elections where the voters can get rid of them and you can't say that these states don't have an independent judiciary.

    Lifetime appointment is valuable but perhaps not essential for an independent judiciary.

    Unfortunately, like everything in the government, what the founders intended and what really happened are two different things. The lifetime appointment was intended to remove politics from the judiciary. However, the lifetime appointment means that putting the person with the right political persuasion on the court becomes even more important. Add in the Congressional oversight process where they are grilled about their political beliefs. For good measure throw in the judges oversized opinions about their intellects leading to ridiculous convoluted reasoning in their decisions to support their politics that make no sense to average people and we have the mess we have now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    The most important and under-discussed theme of the Trumpening is the crisis of authority. I don't need a secret clearance to have problems with the CIA after Iraq, a law degree to have problems with a judiciary that giggles at the Constitution, a press card to have problems with the BBC relying on migrant advocates as experts or insisting that no-go zones do not exist, or a medical degree to have issues with big pharma or insurance-dictated medicine. And because these things are so blindingly obvious I do not need ad-purchasing Russian hackers to spread this feeling.
    , @dr kill
    Also, because until very recently in human history lifetime meant in your robust, clear-thinking fifties not your senile 90's. Allow me to crib from from the Bezos Bum-Wad.

    A shorter life span for the justices is clearly part of the answer. Seventeen of the first 38 justices to die while in office died prior to their 70th birthday, and four of these, Wilson (56), Iredell (48), Trimble (52), and Barbour (58), died before reaching the age of 60. In contrast, the six justices who have retired since 1990—Souter (age 69), Stevens (90), O’Connor (75), Blackmun (85), White (76), and Marshall (83)—had either reached, or were approaching, their 70th birthdays at the time they stepped down.

    I imagine an individual SC Justice as Grand Duke of his fiefdom, eventually being captured by it and running it for his serfs. After all, if he does not persevere, how will they shoe their children? It's not like any of them can earn a living in the real world. I am only SWAGging here, but I'm betting there are at least 100 households invested in keeping a old senile crone ( I'm looking at you, Ginzburg) tied on her destrier.

    What a way to run a country.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. For those wishing to read “The Ordeal of Civility” but find it impenetrable do to its New York graduate school intellectual prose style due to Cuddihy’s need to be oblique; try this audiobook version with chapter by chapter interpretation by Alex Linder.

    https://theendofzion.com/2016/09/18/the-ordeal-of-civility-by-john-murray-cuddihy-audiobook/

    For those special snowflakes who might have the conniptions if I do not provide a trigger warning.

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

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. Ashkenazi society wasn’t very armed and thus was, despite its high literacy rate, pretty crass. So it ended up less civil than gentile polite society of similar wealth levels, which caused post-Jewish Enlightenment Jews a lot of distress and agitation when they tried to enter the broader society.

    BTW, this alone probably explains 90% of the country club thing. Not having these guys chasing your daughters–having them find suitable gentile husbands–was the rest of it. But just not wanting to be around tedious Jewish behavior in your golfing and drinking down time must have been the bulk of it.

    I had a couple Jewish grad school friends who while definitely Jewish in outlook, were pleasant intellectual, sporting, socializing companions. But there were several other guys … uh, no thanks. (And this was the 80s–a couple generation of American socialization in–not the 20s.) No idea how Kozinski behaves with other guys as opposed to women, but he just comes across in these annecdotes as a jerk. (Not a confident alpha tactically tickling the femnine id, but just a jerk.) Maybe it worked for him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist

    BTW, this alone probably explains 90% of the country club thing. Not having these guys chasing your daughters–having them find suitable gentile husbands–was the rest of it. But just not wanting to be around tedious Jewish behavior in your golfing and drinking down time must have been the bulk of it.
     
    Speaking of which....

    A rare film that told it like it is.

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

    Perhaps because it is based on a actual first person remembrance.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Barber

    Oy Vey!!! Did it ever rustle some Jewish jimmies!!!

    British Film Gives ‘An Education’ in Anti-Semitism
    http://jewishjournal.com/culture/arts/74638/


    Jenny: “Oh, and by the way … David’s a Jew, a wandering Jew. So watch yourself.”

    We were only 15 minutes into the film and this was the second reference to the “Wandering Jew,” an age-old, European anti-Semitic stereotype. The British coming-of-age film, “An Education,” had gotten rave reviews, yet the more I watched, the more the character of David Goldman resembled the parasitical Jew of “Der Ewige Juden” (“The Eternal Jew”) — one of the infamous 1930s Nazi propaganda films I had studied in Peter Loewenberg’s class at UCLA.
     

    , @Anon
    It goes beyond women. Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he's being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff. This is profoundly irritating to someone who's been properly brought up.

    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them. Making a terrible scene in public is a major faux pas in WASP culture, because one of the defining characteristics of people who run things in life is that they are hard to rattle, they stay in control of their emotions, they fix problems quickly and easily, and they do all of these things with panache.

    The generation of Jews who complained about not getting into the country clubs were only 1-2 generations themselves from being peasants on the Russian shtetl, and they were taught peasant manners.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @Dieter Kief
    1) Dave Pinsen said here on iSteve, that Trump was never looked upon as an anti-semite - until recently.

    2) Now you talk about Trump as the prototypical New York Jew in his crass ways with the public - and the world in general (women...).

    3) Then there's this Id and SuperEgo thing you're - in a pretty ironic way (since this is Freud, isn't it) - refering to.

    4) This all sounds as if to say, that the now somewhat ehe - over-orchestrated - Jewish "Id" would - following your logic, no - best be understood as a product of (freudian, of course) rationalisiation. The Jewish SuperEgo, I now could conclude, should by and by acknowledge, in your opinion, that there is this dirty little thing called - IT, and that it's very powerful and hard to be conquered or civilized, even though it might turn out to be so small, that even the most advanced brain-scan technology can't - up to this day - detect it.

    And what goes this all to show - I'm not that sure, but at least, it makes Trump in the end definitely look Jewish (maybe freakishly so - but anyhow - Leon Wieseltier seemed to even cultivate such a freakish Jewism, didn't he -might have been even more successful in doing so by colouring his hair, as the Donald does?).

    Ok and now what: I think now of your lines from a few weeks back, which claimed, that the world might end in a desaster, if Jewish - - hysteria, grounded (rooted) deeply in the family-dynamics (=the setting...) of the Fiddler on The Roof (it's not a verbal quote, but a correct reference, methinks) - ok: That this Fiddler-on-the-Roofy Jewish tendency to react hysterically instead of in a polite way - - might hint at the superpower of the Jewish Id - aka: The superdanger of it ("it" meaning The (freudian) ID, ok).

    We, I might conclude, if a bit exhausted, really, I have to admit, ehe: We might all be a tad better off, if only the Donald and the Jews would adhere more to Freud and - start to tame their ID a bit.
    - If this would be right, I could agree with you in the way I tried to labor on above.

    But I could not really say, what that then might lead to, especiallly since the consequences of all this stufff would all occur somewhen in the future. (What the future is concerned, we're all of us amateurs, - and this can't be any other way, unless we pretended to be God (=the real thing, as far as SuperEgos are concerned. And even then: This would still be nothing but shallow depths and flawed winds = pure and simple pretensions - at best, and a complete desaster necessarily - in all other cases (sigh)).

    The current hysteria (and that is exactly what it is – hysteria is derived from the Greek word for “uterus”) has everything to do with Trump and nothing to do with the Id vs. Superego per se. The reason so many prominent men are being implicated is that “pussy grabbing” is EXACTLY what most (if not all) high-T, alpha males do and have done since we were silver back gorillas. And women have never complained about this, in fact they encourage it and when they are at their most fertile they do everything they can to attract the attention of the alpha.

    In the past, when prominent men were revealed to be pussy grabbers, their treatment by the Left was completely dependent on whether the men did or did not have the right set of Leftist beliefs. If they were not Leftist, then any pussy grabbing behavior was said to make them “hypocrites” – publicly they espoused bible thumping, privately they pursued 14 year old girls. And so they had to go on grounds of hypocrisy (since Biblical morality itself no longer exists – it’s no problem if men lie with men, etc.).

    But, if their beliefs were in line with the Left, they were immune. Some feminists said of Bill Clinton that they would themselves be willing to pleasure him it that is what it took to keep someone of his correct belief system in office. Harvey Weinstein was widely known to be a pussy grabber but his political contributions and correct beliefs gave him immunity up until recently. Even at the moment when his bubble burst, his first statement was that he was going to devote himself to hunting down fascists so everyone please back off and let me continue working for the Cause.

    AND the fact that the men in question were no longer peak alphas and that the women who are attacking them are also past their own sell-by dates, was not an issue. Bill Clinton doddered around the Hillary campaign and was seen (sometimes) by her side and it was no problem. The only reason he did not feature even more prominently was due to Hillary’s ego and not because he was a persona non-grata pussy grabber.

    So what has changed – first of all, it is no longer necessary to protect the Clintons. But more importantly, Trump is still in office. He appeared to have gotten away with his pussy grabbing despite not being a Leftist. The Russia thing appears not to be a sure bet – maybe they will get close to Trump and take down Jr. or Kushner, but the man himself will probably be unreachable. Trump himself had not done anything new to put pussy grabbing back in the news, so it was necessary to start a fire elsewhere, even if elsewhere meant throwing a few of your icons into the fire. That these were somewhat over the hill icons made them expendable anyway so it was not so much a bug but a feature.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jus' Sayin'...
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Trump never claimed to do any "pussy grabbing."
    , @Dieter Kief
    It definitley hit me, when theToronto psychologist Jordan B. Peterson said in one of his videos, that many a hysterical women today is out of her mind - and that he doesn't know really, what to do - i. e.: He doesn't (doesn't!) know, how to react, when confronted with those "crazy women".

    These things might have to do with the Id and the superEgo insofar, as many of the accompanying strange ways of behavior are so far from discourse, that - in the end - even the pretty verbal JBP gives in and says, he's stuck.

    PS

    The good old days, when subjects like these could be written - and made fun of, of course, in MAD - see Abe's post above, No. 16.
    Or when, I could add, in the German satirical monthly "TITANIC" there could be a hole page with the sigh in a cartoon of one of the true Frankfurtian masters, Friedrich-Karl Wächter, if I remember right: This exclamatory sigh read: "It's about time, women return to normal again!" - meant as a counterpunch against the (often times intimidating and/ or curious) 80ies exaggerations of the Women's Lib movement.

    , @Jeff Albertson
    Even if he really "was going to devote himself to hunting down fascists", it's a strategic error;
    We're his biggest, if not only, supporters.

    #HarvDidNothingWrong!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Heidi Bond, who clerked for Judge Kozinski in 2006 and 2007,

    The one thing glaring in this hissy is that the strong confident liberated woman we were promised in say 1970 has still yet to arrive.

    I’m not knocking Heidi Bond because i don’t have a clue how she’s reporting this other than that it happened. But many of these reports come in with the whole “i was stunned and overwhelmed” and “i couldn’t speak out because of the great consipracy of silence”.

    I read Dahlia Lithiwick’s report and thought–there are plenty of easy snappy rejoinders to Kozinski’s trite “what are you wearing” come on. Western Civ didn’t hide women off as harem. Western men and women have been associating for thousands of years. And women are supposed to be comfortable dismissing sexual invitations–as comfortably as any of the tacky sales come-ons we are all bombarded with.

    You’d think these gals would brush off jerk-judge and then–sisterhood!–alert all their gal pals that Kozinski is going to hit you with pervy clumsy come-ons. Kozinski would have “a reputation” that everyone knew about, and that would be that. It’s not like were getting rumors of serial unwanted groping, or promotions for sex or rape. This should have been a guy getting a widely known rep as tactless, clumsy, sex-obsessed perv and life goes on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    A damsel-in-distress gets a lot more sympathy than a cynical whore.
    , @Abe

    The one thing glaring in this hissy is that the strong confident liberated woman we were promised in say 1970 has still yet to arrive.
     
    Right. Remember how well into the '80's it was common to portray women slapping or throwing a drink in the face of men who had stepped over the line, who had gotten too 'fresh'? And this wasn't alternative or edgy stuff, I'm talking about CHEERS or MOONLIGHTING on Thursday night prime time. I recall it even being acceptable (at least as portrayed in film) for hot chicks to pour their beers over the heads of dweebs who didn't realize they were hopelessly out of the leagues, and shouldn't even be trying to open them.

    To extend Patton Oswalt- 'The male-feminist hypocrite sexual harasser is to the 2010's what the self-attestedly fierce, powerful but in real-life passive and victimized riot-GRRRRL is to the 2000's what the closeted-gay family values conservative preacher is to the 1990's"

    , @27 year old

    Western men and women have been associating for thousands of years. And women are supposed to be comfortable dismissing sexual invitations
     
    I don't really disagree with your point, but I'm not sure how much experience they really have with that, and especially if you zoom out to an evolutionary timescale.

    Until the Sexual Revolution (tm) , how common was it really for women to be solicited for sex?

    A not yet married young girl was owned by her father who would not take kindly to random men soliciting her for sex. Married girl obviously owned by their husband and soliciting one I think had a credible threat of getting killed attached to it.

    With marriage at much younger ages than today, I don't think that "single women" were really a thing. Prime reproductive age women were not just wandering around on their own in big anonymous cities.

    And going back to evolution, way way back, all women were owned by the top male, who definitely discouraged other males from soliciting.

    So I dunno. Like I said I agree with you, but I'm not sure if history really supports that women should have plenty of experience and be good at this because western civilization.

    And - they definitely aren't equipped to handle this specific scenario where we made a tiny little world called a federal court and made Kozinky the king shit within that world, and then on top of that he's the girls boss so he directly controls her economic livelihood, and then he hits on the girl. A lot of parts of her are saying "yup, sounds good Judge, let me open my legs right now" and so it's expected that she would not know what to do.

    , @Neuday
    There is no politcal power to be gained by this approach, you toxic kulak pig.
    , @MikeCLT
    Perhaps today's women need to watch some old Mae West movies to learn how to brush off boors.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. And if _______ were anything but a federal judge with life tenure, he’d most likely be out of a job by now.

    Probably the first time that argument has been used by a progressive in our lifetime. Any principle or anti-principle is fair game for progressives to alternatively adopt then renounce as long as it serves their interests at the time.

    I wonder what if this author feels the same way about judicial tenure with regards to the gay black judge from California who went around lying to audiences about his brother being murdered by the klan? (This is the judge who said it was OK for California schools to ban wearing the American flag on Cinco de Mayo.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  44. @Jack D
    Federal judges are subject to impeachment by Congress. If what Judge Kozinski did really makes him unfit for office then Congress can get rid of him.

    Lifetime appointment is valuable but perhaps not essential for an independent judiciary. Certainly you don't want judges to be like political appointees who get swept out every time the administration changes. But on the other hand, many states require state judges to stand for periodic retention elections where the voters can get rid of them and you can't say that these states don't have an independent judiciary.

    It’s quite true it is formally easy for Congress to remove any judge, in terms of the Constitution of the United States – which makes Congress supreme in removing any & all United States judges, including the Supreme Court justices, merely for ‘bad behaviour’, which can be sexual peccadilloes or just not honouring the US Constitution in their decisions – no allegation of crime is necessary

    This power is almost never used, however, with Congress acting as if submissive to the erroneous myth that US judges are ‘supreme’, whereas the US Constitution makes it clear that it is Congress that is on top, with unlimited powers to impeach judges in the House, and have the Senate conduct a trial & quickly order their removal. The Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee is the key person to start this process.

    However, in 1998, US Congressman Sonny Bono – yes the pop star other half of the long-ago Sonny & Cher singing duo – who was on the Judiciary Committee, was murdered whilst investigating corruption, in what former FBI agents declared was one of the many USA political assassinations (there are a whole string of suspiciously dead US Congressmen, federal & Supreme Court judges, etc if you care to dig a little).

    It is said as well that the now-departing John Conyers, who had been Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was threatened with murder whilst his wife was criminally charged and jailed, when Conyers – fooled by the Obama fraud in 2008 – was about to launch a massive anti-corruption campaign of hearings against USA bribe-taking judges, who jail innocent blacks and maul US citizens in general. Needless to say, no such hearings were ever held, despite the massive Judiciary Committee members have on crimes amongst the 865 USA federal and supreme court judges.

    And speaking of ‘abused women’ accusations … how about this case, where a young girl injured by a wild kangaroo attack down under, had her photo spread about as an alleged case of schoolboys beating up young schoolgirls:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. A term limit for federal judges of a decade or two or three, with no possibility of reappointment, would certainly preserve judicial independence, while ensuring that judges can’t retain their power until their last feeble, senile breath. I’m going to elide any discussion of how this might impact the current politically fraught processes of nominating and approving federal judges.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. O/t: the state of peer review in GlobSouth studies – British tax dollars at work.

    http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1532708617746422

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. But behind the putative therapeutic and scientific goals of Freud’s project, Cuddihy argues, lurked the mischievous motivations of a counter-cultural prankster.

    Way too polite. Freud was deliberately creating a weapon system to be used to dismantle gentile Western civilization.

    In general, Jews are largely responsible for the decimation of manners and civility in America, despite “Miss Manners” herself being a Jew (but then, like many Jews, she found a seam of gold and knew precisely how to mine it effectively) (as did those Progressive sister weapons Ann Landers and Dear Abby). All that contempt for “bourgeois morality” has played havoc with American society and given us the nation of raw, warring factions that we have now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Way too polite. Freud was deliberately creating a weapon system to be used to dismantle gentile Western civilization.

    Citation needed.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. In Germany, were Jews such as Freud and Marx considered crass? Teutons aren’t known for their politeness. (NuYawk manners go all the way back to New Amsterdam.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    I can't speak authoritatively but I have read a little in this area and I think there was a kind of equal and opposite complaint -- the "falsely polite" Jew showing you up with his excessive ingratiating. German brusqueness is a kind of honesty tied to humility, so anyone using too many pleases has something to hide or is putting on airs. Jewish impoliteness is a self-consciousness of power. Weinstein's not in trouble because women are coming forward, he's in trouble because Hollywood is collapsing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @AnotherDad

    Heidi Bond, who clerked for Judge Kozinski in 2006 and 2007,
     
    The one thing glaring in this hissy is that the strong confident liberated woman we were promised in say 1970 has still yet to arrive.

    I'm not knocking Heidi Bond because i don't have a clue how she's reporting this other than that it happened. But many of these reports come in with the whole "i was stunned and overwhelmed" and "i couldn't speak out because of the great consipracy of silence".

    I read Dahlia Lithiwick's report and thought--there are plenty of easy snappy rejoinders to Kozinski's trite "what are you wearing" come on. Western Civ didn't hide women off as harem. Western men and women have been associating for thousands of years. And women are supposed to be comfortable dismissing sexual invitations--as comfortably as any of the tacky sales come-ons we are all bombarded with.

    You'd think these gals would brush off jerk-judge and then--sisterhood!--alert all their gal pals that Kozinski is going to hit you with pervy clumsy come-ons. Kozinski would have "a reputation" that everyone knew about, and that would be that. It's not like were getting rumors of serial unwanted groping, or promotions for sex or rape. This should have been a guy getting a widely known rep as tactless, clumsy, sex-obsessed perv and life goes on.

    A damsel-in-distress gets a lot more sympathy than a cynical whore.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. “I’m not knocking Heidi Bond because i don’t have a clue how she’s reporting this other than that it happened. ”

    I know Heidi Bond. She’s a reliable witness and one of the smarter people I have ever met. In general, I agree with your other comments, although dealing with one’s boss puts a different spin on matters.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    She’s also a bit uptight and maybe a 4 on a good day if you’re a chubby chaser. See Heartiste.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @AnotherDad

    Ashkenazi society wasn’t very armed and thus was, despite its high literacy rate, pretty crass. So it ended up less civil than gentile polite society of similar wealth levels, which caused post-Jewish Enlightenment Jews a lot of distress and agitation when they tried to enter the broader society.
     
    BTW, this alone probably explains 90% of the country club thing. Not having these guys chasing your daughters--having them find suitable gentile husbands--was the rest of it. But just not wanting to be around tedious Jewish behavior in your golfing and drinking down time must have been the bulk of it.

    I had a couple Jewish grad school friends who while definitely Jewish in outlook, were pleasant intellectual, sporting, socializing companions. But there were several other guys ... uh, no thanks. (And this was the 80s--a couple generation of American socialization in--not the 20s.) No idea how Kozinski behaves with other guys as opposed to women, but he just comes across in these annecdotes as a jerk. (Not a confident alpha tactically tickling the femnine id, but just a jerk.) Maybe it worked for him.

    BTW, this alone probably explains 90% of the country club thing. Not having these guys chasing your daughters–having them find suitable gentile husbands–was the rest of it. But just not wanting to be around tedious Jewish behavior in your golfing and drinking down time must have been the bulk of it.

    Speaking of which….

    A rare film that told it like it is.

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

    Perhaps because it is based on a actual first person remembrance.

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

    Oy Vey!!! Did it ever rustle some Jewish jimmies!!!

    British Film Gives ‘An Education’ in Anti-Semitism

    http://jewishjournal.com/culture/arts/74638/

    Jenny: “Oh, and by the way … David’s a Jew, a wandering Jew. So watch yourself.”

    We were only 15 minutes into the film and this was the second reference to the “Wandering Jew,” an age-old, European anti-Semitic stereotype. The British coming-of-age film, “An Education,” had gotten rave reviews, yet the more I watched, the more the character of David Goldman resembled the parasitical Jew of “Der Ewige Juden” (“The Eternal Jew”) — one of the infamous 1930s Nazi propaganda films I had studied in Peter Loewenberg’s class at UCLA.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist
    Talk about keeping an eye on who your daughters are dating....

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlie_Kloss#Personal_life

    She has been dating businessman and investor Joshua Kushner since 2012.[76][77]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Kushner
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @anonymous-antimarxist

    BTW, this alone probably explains 90% of the country club thing. Not having these guys chasing your daughters–having them find suitable gentile husbands–was the rest of it. But just not wanting to be around tedious Jewish behavior in your golfing and drinking down time must have been the bulk of it.
     
    Speaking of which....

    A rare film that told it like it is.

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

    Perhaps because it is based on a actual first person remembrance.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Barber

    Oy Vey!!! Did it ever rustle some Jewish jimmies!!!

    British Film Gives ‘An Education’ in Anti-Semitism
    http://jewishjournal.com/culture/arts/74638/


    Jenny: “Oh, and by the way … David’s a Jew, a wandering Jew. So watch yourself.”

    We were only 15 minutes into the film and this was the second reference to the “Wandering Jew,” an age-old, European anti-Semitic stereotype. The British coming-of-age film, “An Education,” had gotten rave reviews, yet the more I watched, the more the character of David Goldman resembled the parasitical Jew of “Der Ewige Juden” (“The Eternal Jew”) — one of the infamous 1930s Nazi propaganda films I had studied in Peter Loewenberg’s class at UCLA.
     

    Talk about keeping an eye on who your daughters are dating….

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlie_Kloss#Personal_life

    She has been dating businessman and investor Joshua Kushner since 2012.[76][77]

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

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Jews have taken on the role of society SuperEgo, while wanting to remain the Id in private.

    That’s not bad.

    Jews are the New Boss, worse than the Old Boss. From Henry Ford to Michael Milken. Frankly, they’re too crazy to be in charge.

    a “protestant esthetic” of bourgeois manners that was less about substantive values than about proper etiquette and interpersonal respect.

    Interpersonal respect sounds like a substantive value to me.

    “A science cannot be bourgeois,”

    Conveniently, Psychology is not science.

    bourgeois etiquette was merely a veil of petty lies obscuring our view of the truth.

    Fortunately, Jews have their own veil of lies to replace it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  54. @AnotherDad

    Heidi Bond, who clerked for Judge Kozinski in 2006 and 2007,
     
    The one thing glaring in this hissy is that the strong confident liberated woman we were promised in say 1970 has still yet to arrive.

    I'm not knocking Heidi Bond because i don't have a clue how she's reporting this other than that it happened. But many of these reports come in with the whole "i was stunned and overwhelmed" and "i couldn't speak out because of the great consipracy of silence".

    I read Dahlia Lithiwick's report and thought--there are plenty of easy snappy rejoinders to Kozinski's trite "what are you wearing" come on. Western Civ didn't hide women off as harem. Western men and women have been associating for thousands of years. And women are supposed to be comfortable dismissing sexual invitations--as comfortably as any of the tacky sales come-ons we are all bombarded with.

    You'd think these gals would brush off jerk-judge and then--sisterhood!--alert all their gal pals that Kozinski is going to hit you with pervy clumsy come-ons. Kozinski would have "a reputation" that everyone knew about, and that would be that. It's not like were getting rumors of serial unwanted groping, or promotions for sex or rape. This should have been a guy getting a widely known rep as tactless, clumsy, sex-obsessed perv and life goes on.

    The one thing glaring in this hissy is that the strong confident liberated woman we were promised in say 1970 has still yet to arrive.

    Right. Remember how well into the ’80′s it was common to portray women slapping or throwing a drink in the face of men who had stepped over the line, who had gotten too ‘fresh’? And this wasn’t alternative or edgy stuff, I’m talking about CHEERS or MOONLIGHTING on Thursday night prime time. I recall it even being acceptable (at least as portrayed in film) for hot chicks to pour their beers over the heads of dweebs who didn’t realize they were hopelessly out of the leagues, and shouldn’t even be trying to open them.

    To extend Patton Oswalt- ‘The male-feminist hypocrite sexual harasser is to the 2010′s what the self-attestedly fierce, powerful but in real-life passive and victimized riot-GRRRRL is to the 2000′s what the closeted-gay family values conservative preacher is to the 1990′s”

    Read More
    • Replies: @dr kill
    Yes, it's very clear that women are now tired of 'having it all' and demand that some strong man care for them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. So, uh… anyone else like Philip Roth’s chances this year for the Nobel Prize?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abe
    I joke, so to explain himself since we have so many 27 year olds ;-) on here now (a good thing!):

    Philip Roth is clearly being shunned for the Nobel Prize in literature (one can make the case Naipaul was maybe more worthy and Coetzee about equally worthy, but to give it to short-story scribbler Alice Munro??? Or Dylan?, which is the real nail in the coffin, since now the Committee can say they've done their duty by Jews and it'll be another 25 years before they consider any more Jewish honorees). The question is- why? I thought it was partially the anti-Jewish/Palestinian solidarity thing (while Roth is no Avigdor Lieberman, I think he has clearly expressed his support for Israel's right to exist), partly the anti-white male thing, and partly the pro-feminist/anti-thrusting sex fiend thing. with it sliding over time: from 70% (pro-Palestine)-15%-15% in the 90's, to 25%-50% (anti-white male)-25% in the 2000's, to 5%-15%-80% ([email protected] grabber) in CURRENT YEAR.

    And yet despite losing relevancy over the last 10-20 years, who is now the most prophetic, ribald, visionary grand old man of letters on the planet (OK, maybe Houellebecq, but the translated excerpts I've seen have left me cold; I promise to sit down and finish ELEMENTARY PARTICLES in 2018, though)? The fact that THE NEW YORK TIMES is calling for the extra-Constitutional liquidation of Federal judge Alex Portnoy (or is that Mickey Sabbath? or is that David Kepesh?) who is the son of Holocaust Survivors (think THE COUNTERLIFE and "Philip Roth"'s chase after WWII war criminal John Demjanjuk), achieves fame and power under a Republican President, and now in his twilight but still virile 60's is brought low by another SJW moral panic (think THE HUMAN STAIN, which while about race, also had a few sharp words to say about the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal at the beginning)?

    It's Philip Roths world (or maybe computer-simulated virtual reality according to Elon Musk)- we're just living (or MOB'ing) in it.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Glad to see my Bro Hoyt Thorpe is cultivating his voice.

    It’s time I let mine be heard too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  57. I read the book after you mentioned it years ago. I’ll always be grateful, it is indeed a great book. It explains a lot of the Jewish intellectual priorities, which have been hugely influential.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  58. @Abe

    Id and superego don’t really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren’t there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power
     
    Yep, Jack, that’s the thing- I remember in the 80’s how seriously everyone who was intellectually anyone took Freud, and thinking that while this whole id/ego/superego thing made sense, the whole secretly wanting to kill my dad to sleep with my mom thing made absolutely no sense, but that’s supposed to be subconscious, so am I a rube for not accepting this thing that goes against every fiber of my being and is literally supposed to be unprovable simply because all the smart, sophisticated people say I should? Being a dissident on that was the beginning of my intellectual nonconformism, and honestly as socially trying as being a Trump supporter is today.

    I’ve discovered that old people who were part of that get really annoyed when your remind them of it. I had an old lady basically growl at me for making a jokey reference.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. “One of Cuddihy’s arguments was that the counter-culture ideologies that radically altered the course of western civilization in the 20th century originated in attacks upon civility.”

    Importantly, they also originated in attacks upon Reason. Socrates insisted that Reason was the only virtue. He didn’t say Reason is a technical skill or IQ quotient – it is a moral virtue. And it isn’t one among many moral virtues – it is the ONLY virtue.
    When people interrupt others in the middle of their sentence, talk harder, louder and faster, shout down opposing speakers, attack their opponent’s motives with slander and ad hominim, they aren’t just violating some quaint formalities of civil etiquette. They are destroying the conditions necessary for Reason to take place. Just as you can’t play a baseball game if everyone is trying to kill each other with baseball bats, you can’t have a rational disussion if people use words like throwing rocks.
    Steven Pinker in his books decries Honor Cultures as practicing an ethical code born of violence and petulance. I always thought of Honor as a product of the Reason Culture – we insist on civility because it is a necessary condition for thinking.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  60. @AP

    I’d sum up the idea as that, as Heinlein said, “An armed society is a polite society,” and Ashkenazi society wasn’t very armed and thus was, despite its high literacy rate, pretty crass.
     
    Interesting observation. Though coarse ("rude, crude, or vulgar") would fit better than crass ("lacking sensitivity, refinement, or intelligence").

    In terms of personal presentation and interaction presentation, respectable politeness seems to be a (gentile) middle-class, bourgeois thing much more than a mark of the nobility - the people descended from those who were truly armed, whose ancestors hundreds of years ago came by their positions by the sword.

    Musil observed that a caste of lords always remains somewhat barbaric, that at meals the high bourgeois who have become rich strictly observed ceremonial uses of forks and knives while the aristocrats often ate with their hands, that the speech and conversation were "perfect" among bourgeois whereas the lords slipped into speech reminiscent of that of cabdrivers.

    Steve – why do my comments on your blog go into moderation for hours?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymouse
    A recent comment of mine was deleted because I prematurely referenced Philip Roth.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @Jack D
    The current hysteria (and that is exactly what it is - hysteria is derived from the Greek word for "uterus") has everything to do with Trump and nothing to do with the Id vs. Superego per se. The reason so many prominent men are being implicated is that "pussy grabbing" is EXACTLY what most (if not all) high-T, alpha males do and have done since we were silver back gorillas. And women have never complained about this, in fact they encourage it and when they are at their most fertile they do everything they can to attract the attention of the alpha.

    In the past, when prominent men were revealed to be pussy grabbers, their treatment by the Left was completely dependent on whether the men did or did not have the right set of Leftist beliefs. If they were not Leftist, then any pussy grabbing behavior was said to make them "hypocrites" - publicly they espoused bible thumping, privately they pursued 14 year old girls. And so they had to go on grounds of hypocrisy (since Biblical morality itself no longer exists - it's no problem if men lie with men, etc.).

    But, if their beliefs were in line with the Left, they were immune. Some feminists said of Bill Clinton that they would themselves be willing to pleasure him it that is what it took to keep someone of his correct belief system in office. Harvey Weinstein was widely known to be a pussy grabber but his political contributions and correct beliefs gave him immunity up until recently. Even at the moment when his bubble burst, his first statement was that he was going to devote himself to hunting down fascists so everyone please back off and let me continue working for the Cause.

    AND the fact that the men in question were no longer peak alphas and that the women who are attacking them are also past their own sell-by dates, was not an issue. Bill Clinton doddered around the Hillary campaign and was seen (sometimes) by her side and it was no problem. The only reason he did not feature even more prominently was due to Hillary's ego and not because he was a persona non-grata pussy grabber.

    So what has changed - first of all, it is no longer necessary to protect the Clintons. But more importantly, Trump is still in office. He appeared to have gotten away with his pussy grabbing despite not being a Leftist. The Russia thing appears not to be a sure bet - maybe they will get close to Trump and take down Jr. or Kushner, but the man himself will probably be unreachable. Trump himself had not done anything new to put pussy grabbing back in the news, so it was necessary to start a fire elsewhere, even if elsewhere meant throwing a few of your icons into the fire. That these were somewhat over the hill icons made them expendable anyway so it was not so much a bug but a feature.

    Trump never claimed to do any “pussy grabbing.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Trump:

    you know I'm automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it's
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don't even wait
    01:21
    anyone you're a star they let you do it
    01:22
    you can do anything whatever you want
    01:24
    grab them by the pussy I can do anything

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPomcb0_IaE

    Are you saying this is fake? Or are you hair splitting and say he does not say that HE personally has ever done this but that "you" (one) can do this if they are a star. I understand that legally speaking Trump or his lawyers might make an argument like that (or say that he was just bragging - "locker room talk" and that in real life he would never do such a thing).

    But, please, let's be real - he is probably describing something that he has in fact done and more than once. Now it was never meant to be public and should never had been recorded or released. For that matter, he should not have bragged about it either. But I believe that he is actually telling the truth about the possibilities that are open to stars in general and I have no reason to believe that Trump would not have acted upon such availability once he realized that he fell in the "star" category himself. I really don't think any less of him for it. Note also that he is clearly describing a consensual relationship, not a rape. This is the way that powerful men have always interacted with females and the way that females are programmed to interact for the last million years.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. That’s not terribly judicious behavior, especially for a guy with about a 180 IQ.

    What evidence is there that Kozinski has an IQ of 180.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. @AnotherDad

    Heidi Bond, who clerked for Judge Kozinski in 2006 and 2007,
     
    The one thing glaring in this hissy is that the strong confident liberated woman we were promised in say 1970 has still yet to arrive.

    I'm not knocking Heidi Bond because i don't have a clue how she's reporting this other than that it happened. But many of these reports come in with the whole "i was stunned and overwhelmed" and "i couldn't speak out because of the great consipracy of silence".

    I read Dahlia Lithiwick's report and thought--there are plenty of easy snappy rejoinders to Kozinski's trite "what are you wearing" come on. Western Civ didn't hide women off as harem. Western men and women have been associating for thousands of years. And women are supposed to be comfortable dismissing sexual invitations--as comfortably as any of the tacky sales come-ons we are all bombarded with.

    You'd think these gals would brush off jerk-judge and then--sisterhood!--alert all their gal pals that Kozinski is going to hit you with pervy clumsy come-ons. Kozinski would have "a reputation" that everyone knew about, and that would be that. It's not like were getting rumors of serial unwanted groping, or promotions for sex or rape. This should have been a guy getting a widely known rep as tactless, clumsy, sex-obsessed perv and life goes on.

    Western men and women have been associating for thousands of years. And women are supposed to be comfortable dismissing sexual invitations

    I don’t really disagree with your point, but I’m not sure how much experience they really have with that, and especially if you zoom out to an evolutionary timescale.

    Until the Sexual Revolution ™ , how common was it really for women to be solicited for sex?

    A not yet married young girl was owned by her father who would not take kindly to random men soliciting her for sex. Married girl obviously owned by their husband and soliciting one I think had a credible threat of getting killed attached to it.

    With marriage at much younger ages than today, I don’t think that “single women” were really a thing. Prime reproductive age women were not just wandering around on their own in big anonymous cities.

    And going back to evolution, way way back, all women were owned by the top male, who definitely discouraged other males from soliciting.

    So I dunno. Like I said I agree with you, but I’m not sure if history really supports that women should have plenty of experience and be good at this because western civilization.

    And – they definitely aren’t equipped to handle this specific scenario where we made a tiny little world called a federal court and made Kozinky the king shit within that world, and then on top of that he’s the girls boss so he directly controls her economic livelihood, and then he hits on the girl. A lot of parts of her are saying “yup, sounds good Judge, let me open my legs right now” and so it’s expected that she would not know what to do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @AnotherDad

    Heidi Bond, who clerked for Judge Kozinski in 2006 and 2007,
     
    The one thing glaring in this hissy is that the strong confident liberated woman we were promised in say 1970 has still yet to arrive.

    I'm not knocking Heidi Bond because i don't have a clue how she's reporting this other than that it happened. But many of these reports come in with the whole "i was stunned and overwhelmed" and "i couldn't speak out because of the great consipracy of silence".

    I read Dahlia Lithiwick's report and thought--there are plenty of easy snappy rejoinders to Kozinski's trite "what are you wearing" come on. Western Civ didn't hide women off as harem. Western men and women have been associating for thousands of years. And women are supposed to be comfortable dismissing sexual invitations--as comfortably as any of the tacky sales come-ons we are all bombarded with.

    You'd think these gals would brush off jerk-judge and then--sisterhood!--alert all their gal pals that Kozinski is going to hit you with pervy clumsy come-ons. Kozinski would have "a reputation" that everyone knew about, and that would be that. It's not like were getting rumors of serial unwanted groping, or promotions for sex or rape. This should have been a guy getting a widely known rep as tactless, clumsy, sex-obsessed perv and life goes on.

    There is no politcal power to be gained by this approach, you toxic kulak pig.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Civility has been subverted into a tool used by the elite to get you to play by their rules. If you acquiesce, you’ve already lost.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  66. The problem is that privileged white men still think they can get away with piss poor behavior

    Men of Color respect women and do not treat them poorly. That is why white girls crave Men of Color and are increasingly having their children

    Speaking of judges

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/15/politics/judicial-nominee-questions-flub/index.html

    Can you people do anything right?

    Read More
    • Troll: ScarletNumber
    • Replies: @Laugh Track

    Men of Color respect women and do not treat them poorly. That is why white girls crave Men of Color and are increasingly having their children
     
    Hilarious TD! You go, girl!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @AnotherDad

    Heidi Bond, who clerked for Judge Kozinski in 2006 and 2007,
     
    The one thing glaring in this hissy is that the strong confident liberated woman we were promised in say 1970 has still yet to arrive.

    I'm not knocking Heidi Bond because i don't have a clue how she's reporting this other than that it happened. But many of these reports come in with the whole "i was stunned and overwhelmed" and "i couldn't speak out because of the great consipracy of silence".

    I read Dahlia Lithiwick's report and thought--there are plenty of easy snappy rejoinders to Kozinski's trite "what are you wearing" come on. Western Civ didn't hide women off as harem. Western men and women have been associating for thousands of years. And women are supposed to be comfortable dismissing sexual invitations--as comfortably as any of the tacky sales come-ons we are all bombarded with.

    You'd think these gals would brush off jerk-judge and then--sisterhood!--alert all their gal pals that Kozinski is going to hit you with pervy clumsy come-ons. Kozinski would have "a reputation" that everyone knew about, and that would be that. It's not like were getting rumors of serial unwanted groping, or promotions for sex or rape. This should have been a guy getting a widely known rep as tactless, clumsy, sex-obsessed perv and life goes on.

    Perhaps today’s women need to watch some old Mae West movies to learn how to brush off boors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes
    Perhaps women should stop pretending the last 50 years didn't happen--the sexual revolution, women's liberation, female empowerment, grrl power! and all the rest.

    The cognitive dissonance is large. They want all the opportunities and advantages of the male sex with none of the burdens and responsibilities. When they can't carry their weight or measure up they want subsidies and preferences. When all else fails they want to be protected from harsh reality--when it turns out that, despite their insistence, reality can't be altered to accommodate their desires.

    The law of unintended consequences is unrelenting.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @Abe
    So, uh... anyone else like Philip Roth's chances this year for the Nobel Prize?

    I joke, so to explain himself since we have so many 27 year olds ;-) on here now (a good thing!):

    Philip Roth is clearly being shunned for the Nobel Prize in literature (one can make the case Naipaul was maybe more worthy and Coetzee about equally worthy, but to give it to short-story scribbler Alice Munro??? Or Dylan?, which is the real nail in the coffin, since now the Committee can say they’ve done their duty by Jews and it’ll be another 25 years before they consider any more Jewish honorees). The question is- why? I thought it was partially the anti-Jewish/Palestinian solidarity thing (while Roth is no Avigdor Lieberman, I think he has clearly expressed his support for Israel’s right to exist), partly the anti-white male thing, and partly the pro-feminist/anti-thrusting sex fiend thing. with it sliding over time: from 70% (pro-Palestine)-15%-15% in the 90′s, to 25%-50% (anti-white male)-25% in the 2000′s, to 5%-15%-80% ([email protected] grabber) in CURRENT YEAR.

    And yet despite losing relevancy over the last 10-20 years, who is now the most prophetic, ribald, visionary grand old man of letters on the planet (OK, maybe Houellebecq, but the translated excerpts I’ve seen have left me cold; I promise to sit down and finish ELEMENTARY PARTICLES in 2018, though)? The fact that THE NEW YORK TIMES is calling for the extra-Constitutional liquidation of Federal judge Alex Portnoy (or is that Mickey Sabbath? or is that David Kepesh?) who is the son of Holocaust Survivors (think THE COUNTERLIFE and “Philip Roth”‘s chase after WWII war criminal John Demjanjuk), achieves fame and power under a Republican President, and now in his twilight but still virile 60′s is brought low by another SJW moral panic (think THE HUMAN STAIN, which while about race, also had a few sharp words to say about the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal at the beginning)?

    It’s Philip Roths world (or maybe computer-simulated virtual reality according to Elon Musk)- we’re just living (or MOB’ing) in it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abe

    It’s Philip Roth's world
     
    And just to close the iSteve circle- what was the Mossad thinking when it let Black Cube enable Harvey Weinstein (regardless of how overstated its connections were, Mossad must have had a basic idea, no?) I mean Weinstein is the JUD SUSS of the 2010's- as bad as Madoff was, Harvey's 10x worse for the image of Jews, especially coming as he did on the heels of Anthony Weiner- actually make that 20x worse.

    So assuming it had a basic understanding of his extracircullars, and maybe even through Black Cube helped enable them, WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY THINKING in not putting more of a leash on him? When Bibi tweeted in support of Trump's wall earlier this year out of nothing more than bro-tastic solidarity (and yes, Jack, I think it helps that Bibi has an IDF commando background), Israel's Deep State I'm sure told him to cut it out, to not associate Israel's image with a controversial and (in the world-at-large hugely unpopular President over an issue that was none of Israel's concern, and since then Netanyahu has remained discreetly silent. So why then did it let Harvey run amok? Is this proof that even the more capable Deep State establishments can make YUUGE tactical errors, or is it a false flag (riddles inside enigmas, mazes inside labyrinths) to lull us into a false sense of complacency about how fallible the in-reality super-powerful/super-competent Deep State is?

    , @Jake
    "And yet despite losing relevancy over the last 10-20 years, who is now the most prophetic, ribald, visionary grand old man of letters on the planet ..."

    That's easy as pie: Cormac McCarthy.
    , @Pericles
    Let him console himself with a piece of liver.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad

    Ashkenazi society wasn’t very armed and thus was, despite its high literacy rate, pretty crass. So it ended up less civil than gentile polite society of similar wealth levels, which caused post-Jewish Enlightenment Jews a lot of distress and agitation when they tried to enter the broader society.
     
    BTW, this alone probably explains 90% of the country club thing. Not having these guys chasing your daughters--having them find suitable gentile husbands--was the rest of it. But just not wanting to be around tedious Jewish behavior in your golfing and drinking down time must have been the bulk of it.

    I had a couple Jewish grad school friends who while definitely Jewish in outlook, were pleasant intellectual, sporting, socializing companions. But there were several other guys ... uh, no thanks. (And this was the 80s--a couple generation of American socialization in--not the 20s.) No idea how Kozinski behaves with other guys as opposed to women, but he just comes across in these annecdotes as a jerk. (Not a confident alpha tactically tickling the femnine id, but just a jerk.) Maybe it worked for him.

    It goes beyond women. Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he’s being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff. This is profoundly irritating to someone who’s been properly brought up.

    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them. Making a terrible scene in public is a major faux pas in WASP culture, because one of the defining characteristics of people who run things in life is that they are hard to rattle, they stay in control of their emotions, they fix problems quickly and easily, and they do all of these things with panache.

    The generation of Jews who complained about not getting into the country clubs were only 1-2 generations themselves from being peasants on the Russian shtetl, and they were taught peasant manners.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    1-2 generations themselves from being peasants on the Russian shtetl, and they were taught peasant manners

    If they were peasants they would be docile and agreeable. Jews were never peasants. They were aggressive merchants.
    , @Twinkie

    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them. Making a terrible scene in public is a major faux pas in WASP culture...
     
    It’s not just WASPs. All upper crust people in civilized societies were expected to behave this way.
    , @Anon
    It goes beyond women. Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he’s being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff. This is profoundly irritating to someone who’s been properly brought up.

    And Jews didn't want to break bread with tainted goyim.

    But most Jews don't act like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVHYyrsW_Ok

    Greeks are more likely to act like that. If you want a scene, go with Greeks. Colorful people.

    Also, it's part of American mythos to make fun of table manners. It's the Jacksonian side of Americanism. Excessive manners are Old World and crusty.

    American Way is to have manners but to keep it simple. It's like serving steaks and taters in MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE. It doesn't have to be fancy... but Liberty took it too far when he tripped someone over. The Duke aint asking for nothing fancy. But he don't want to eat his meat off the floor.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nI_BKLpSFQg

    But there is the populist side of Americanism that just loves to make fun of fancy manners.

    https://youtu.be/JzzE6XLbC8M?t=1m27s

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1LRD3DtFAo

    Lucille Ball show with Desi as gangster

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMvHX-kh5VM

    The joint doesn't have to be fancy. Mocking decorum is part of American Populism.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Tzs4hUjLCo

    The chicken or the egg question. Consider a film like HIS GIRL FRIDAY, one of the hectic and high energy movies ever made. It was directed by Hawks and has Anglo characters but was written by Ben Hecht who was Jewish. Was Hecht projecting Jewish personality types onto Anglos or did he pick up on Anglo-American energy of irreverence and freedom himself?

    In some ways, it was the Jews who felt intimidated by the animal energy of Anglo Americans who were into rugged stuff like hunting, boxing, and football. In the West, the gunmen and saloon brawlers were usually big white guys like Chuck Connors in BIG COUNTRY. Jews usually ran businesses and stayed out of trouble like the guy in CIMARRON. So, the gentle wasp vs pushy Jew dichotomy is a bit misleading, and it may not have become an issue if Jews didn't rise to the top so fast. Among the hoi polloi, fancy manners was not a thing, especially among the Scots-Irish in the South and Indiana. Whose Ear?

    Also, Jews weren't alone in 'bad manners'. Greeks, Southern Italians, 'dumb' Poles, and etc all came from crude backgrounds. Jewish manners stood out not so much against the American Masses but against American elites. I mean a pushy Jew would hardly would have seemed out of place in some joint frequented by bikers, Negroes, hillbillies, or etc.
    It stood out because rapidly rising Jews suddenly found themselves in the world of upper crust where manners did matter, and such manners had to be developed over time.

    As for Jewish Energy in America, to what extent did Jews infuse Americanism with Jewish chutzpah and to what extent did Jews channel the democratic individualism of anti-elitist America? Did Jews take the Western Saloon brawl and turn it into a pie fight? Add some zany humor to it?

    Same goes for Jews and Negroes. It went back and forth. Jews took a lot from black music, but they became so influential as music merchants and composers that they, in turn, influenced black music. Brill Building often had Jews writing black-style music for black performers. Phil Specter expanded the black idiom, and other blacks took from it as well.

    Figures like Ayn Rand and Norman Mailer are both very American and very Jewish. Rand was born high-energy but her personality really came alive in the world of American Freedom created by Anglo energies. She infused Americanism with her energy but she also channeled American energy, and much of it was not Jewish.
    And Mailer obviously channeled a lot of manhood mythos from Hemingway who was into sports and hunting.

    America was made by 'rude' men with big personalities. Andrew Jackson certainly but recently Donald Trump. John Huston, Sam Peckinpah, Howard Hawks, D.W. Griffith, Raoul Walsh were pretty wild guys. And they loved the irreverent aspect of American Culture. And some of them burned out because they pushed too hard. If only Peckinpah had more sense. He could have lasted as long as Sidney Lumet who was more cautious and sensible. Indeed, it was often the case that gentiles crashed and burned because they had less self-control than Jews did. In general, Jewish rock stars seemed to have longer lifespans than gentile ones. And Jewish actors survived and aged better than someone like Mickey Rourke that wild Irishman.

    And there is the Irish thing. If the Brits were able to keep the Irish down for a long time, the Irish rose pretty fast in democratic America, and Middle America became Anglo-Irish in attitude, esp as so many big cities were ruled by Irish Machine even if Wasp held positions at the top.
    And Irish were feisty. Irish men were unpleasant because long long ago, Ireland was reputed to have all these beautiful women(like Patricia Neal and Maureen O'Hara), so Vikings and others came to Ireland to steal the beauties. So, Irish men had to become the tough and rude Fighting Irish to beat back the horndogs from around the world.

    Indeed, anti-black race-ism lasted longer in the US because the Irish element of Americanism was more resistant to blacks.
    , @njguy73

    Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he’s being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff.
     
    I'm Jewish, and I LOL'ed at Jackie Mason's routine about Jews and Gentiles in restaurants. My father was exactly like that.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V4zYe23QLg
    , @Anon
    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them.

    I think, in a way, that was the problem.

    If wasp elites had some of that viking warrior stuff, it would have been more difficult to mess with them.

    The problem of all elites is they want to pretend that their power is clean and respectable. But all power is built on arrrgh. Consider the military industrial complex. People who run such industries have nice homes and send their kids to nice colleges. But what do they build? Bombs and guns that kill people.
    I'll bet people who run food industries live in nice mansions and are respectable, but what is that wealth built on? Slaughtering cows and pigs and turning pork bellies into 'bacon'.
    And I'll bet the top shareholders of Charmin act respectable and live in nice homes. But what is their wealth built on? "TP for my bunhole".

    So, all wealth is 'dirty'. But those who reach the top wanna seem above such stuff. They launder their reputation via status, honors, and manners.
    In some ways, fancy restaurants are offensive. All those people and their elegant etiquette and eating stuff with French words. But they are just chewing dead animals massacred in slaughter houses.

    The rich make money from the 'filth' of the world but want to seem 'clean'. It's like we have a massive sewage system to hide the pee and poo. Now, I'm not against the sewage system as it's pretty great. But we've learned to hide pee and poo so well that we almost believe that they are part of human reality. We've learned to hide the horrid aspects of life so well that we look to fiction to get our dose of horror in genre movies.

    This makes the rich very dishonest. Their wealth is based on 'world of shi*" but they pretend they are above it. They hold their noses high. It's like the Lord in Kurosawa's RAN being rudely reminded that his power was built on bloodbath and violence. He got so privileged and full of himself that he thought the world honored him for his glory and magnificence. But the minute he loses real power, the brutal dynamics of power come into play and turn everything upside down.

    Now, the lower world is more honest. Barbarians are among the most honest folks. It's like Uther in EXCALIBUR is a real bastard but he's an honest bastard. If he wants stuff, he goes for it and hides nothing.
    But such brutal honesty cannot create and sustain civilization. For civilization to work, there has to be rules, principles, and honor. But, the danger is that the elites may come to believe that their elevated world is independent of the real 'dirty' world.

    The proper formula is to suppress and control the barbaric and violent side of man but to never forget that everything is really built on violence, brutality, and ruthlessness. Even in the most peaceful community, there is constant violence in killing animals for food. Also, nature has to be fought back constantly in order to maintain civilization. And if borders are not maintained, the poor folks will always invade richer nations. EU is being invaded by mobs from the poor world. It's animal behavior 101. Wolves and Deer go where there is more food.



    Nature is violent and is always trying to reclaim things from civilization. If humans were to vanish from earth, nature will take back everything man built in no time.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wy7Q6wazD_E

    Man must know he is a part of nature, but in order to have civilization, he must be more than nature.
    One problem is being too close to nature, in which case, man will just be a savage or barbarian.
    The other problem is believing that mans' world can be independent of nature, like the elites in ZARDOZ. In fact, even as mankind controls and shapes nature, it is a product of nature and dependent on nature, as E.O Wilson says without ants working the soil, so much of life will perish and mankind will too. Mankind depends on ant poo.

    The elites are best when they do rise high and try to maintain principles and such BUT ALSO remind themselves that their real power is built on violence and ruthlessness in unity with the rabble. I mean America wasn't built on Indians and animals kindly agreeing to remove themselves so as to allow Europeans to settle and build stuff. No, they had to be beaten back.

    Now, if whites were ONLY ruthless and violent, they could not rise above barbarism. But if whites forget or reject the fact that all Orders(theirs included) are built on brutality and violence, they will lose out because they will no longer have the stomach for True Ways of Power.
    The elites must control the barbarians. Barbarians must be turned into Centurions. But elites must never forget that Centurions are essentially trained barbarians. And without the ruthless use of force and power, the Order cannot be maintained.

    And for much of American history, the elites knew this. They had no illusions about the source of American power. Sure, they believed in liberty and dignity of man and all that, but they also knew that such ideas alone did nothing. America was made with real violence and real brutality. And farm work was hard, and factories were tough places, and American wealth was built on labor and hardship.

    But over time, the elites in both US and EU grew overly detached from the Reality. They wanted to believe that their power and prestige were totally clean and respectable. Since so much of Western power and wealth were built on violence, conquest, and brutality(as in all parts of the world), they were vulnerable to criticism and infected with 'white guilt'. If they weren't so deluded, it wouldn't have mattered. If accused of violence and past oppression, they would have said, "Yeah, we bashed a lot of heads and stuff. But so did all other cultures and civilizations."
    But because white elites got so full of themselves, they simply didn't know how to deal with criticism that sought to morally delegitimize their wealth and power.
    Because they became obsessed with maintaining their clean status and manners, they were held back from saying anything that might be deemed crude, vulgar, or unworthy. And this self-restraint made them vulnerable to pointed criticism. It's like Bill Buckley forever felt shame for having lost his cool in his debate with Gore Vidal.

    It was this culture of restrained respectability that paradoxically made the most powerful people in America the most vulnerable before the Jewish challenge. Indeed, Jews could never have taken over less powerful elements of American society since the lower depths are filled with shameless unrestrained people who talk shit. Jews gained power over ALL Americans only because they took power from the Wasps. Via elite institutions, Jews could lord over everyone.
    Consider how Italians react when Jews piss them off:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKDgjLf_rk4

    And consider how blacks react to Jews at the ground level.

    https://youtu.be/vDlul5OV9Do?t=6m22s

    If US society had no elite domain and only existed from poor class to middle class, Jews would not be ruling this country. Even if Jews are smarter than poor people, working class people, and middle class people, those peoples tend not to be very restrained. If Jews accuse them, they accuse back and push back. It's like Albert Brooks being totally defenseless against the big guy who punches him in LOST IN AMERICA.
    Office politics is one thing. It could get one fired. But street politics is another. It could get one killed.

    So, even though blacks, Italians, Irish, 'dumb Polacks', and etc had less power than Wasp elites, Jews had less chance of gaining control of them at the street level than gaining control over Wasps. Why? Wasp elites had a culture of self-restraint to maintain dignity, and it would have been unbecoming to rant like Nicky Santoro. Now, if a Jewish guy complained about 'antisemitism' to a bunch of 'greaseballs', they would have laughed. They didn't care respectability and dignity. They were about power and 'gimme what's mine(and yours)'.

    https://youtu.be/ADTG-GTEo-E?t=1m10s

    Now, imagine if the Wasp elites had been more Jacksonian and Trumpian long ago and didn't take no shi* from no one. Suppose their motto was 'Nice is Vice'. (Jews used shamelessness to subvert and undermine respectable Wasp prestige and power, but shameless is a double-edged sword. If whites also adopt it, they will be less likely to feel 'white guilt'. That was why Jews hated shameless Trump. When pressed about David Duke endorsing him, Trump's attitude was "I don't know, I don't care." It was shameless, and this frustrated Jews. Even Pat Buchanan, when pressed on such issues, looked a bit troubled and defensive. Trump's attitude was more like Howard Stern's.)

    Anglos were esp vulnerable because the British developed a rather hoity-toity effeminate style. While this whoopity doopery toughened up somewhat in the US, the Wasp elites in America still retained some of it, and this style was allergic about giving offense to anyone. It was just... not gentlemanly or sportsmanshiplike.

    And yet, Anglo and Wasp power had been built on violence, brutality, and etc. As long as the Anglo elites maintained a key alliance with white muscle(power of the white mob) in good cop and bad cop manner, the white race was safe.

    After all, even though the elites seek to maintain order and support higher principles, they need enforcers to do the dirty work when push comes to shove. It's like diplomats are useless without soldiers. Without the threat of the Big Stick, speaking softly doesn't go very far. It's because there is the big stick that even soft words carry great weight. It's like Don Vito Corleone. He speaks calmly, but people listen. And Paulie doesn't have to say much. He has the connections. If he pushes a button, he can have someone killed. Tommy is louder than Paulie, but Paulie got much more pull.

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

    Elites need to rise from the rabble in order to create and maintain an Order. But they must never forget their power derives from the rabble. It's like top of the tree is still part of the tree with roots in the ground.
    If Uther in EXCALIBUR can't rise above barbarism because he's too brutal, Arthur eventually forgets the connection to the land and people until Perceval finds the Grail of truth.

    It's like the scene in TIME BANDITS. The rather well-mannered Robin Hood acts nice and hands out stuff to people. But the people are then punched in the face to be reminded of the true nature of power. Hood's niceness is built on brutality. He takes and he gives.
    With niceness alone, he would be nowhere.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=167IhlXnN2Y

    Jews understand this in Israel, a nation where rabbis and rabble understand one another. The Jews elites do maintain a civilized order with higher principles and all, BUT it's all understood that the system will continue only so along as the elites represent the people and the people, as soldiers, kick butt in the name of Jewish Unity and Power. They know 'nice is vice'. The Awful must co-exist with Lawful. In the end, the Power decides and bends the law just like superman bends steel. Law, on its own, has no will. It bends to the Will to Power, and Tribal Power is stronger than individual power.

    But look at the wasp elites in US and Anglo elites in the UK. They want to be totally respectable and 'clean'. They don't want to be associated with the real sources of white power: conquest, wars, blood and soil and toil, ruthlessness, awesome race-ism, and etc. They want to speak softly without the Big Stick... so the stick was taken by another power that uses it to threaten the Wasps.

    Homogeneity was the strength of the Anglos and Wasps. Spartans were powerful but they had one huge weakness. They were the 10% that ruled over helots who were the 90%. As helots were regarded as slaves and property, they was no connection between the Spartans as elite people and helots as the rabble. In contrast, despite class hierarchy, the British folks came to see themselves as one people. The elites understood, "You and the land are one."

    But over time, the elites got too full of themselves. They got too 'clean' and didn't want to be associated with the 'dirty' business of real power that requires the use of the rabble. So, they just abandoned the rabble to rot away while welcoming 'diversity' to prove how redeemed they are. Diversity as detergent for the sins of UK. Of course, what the elites are really doing is importing a new rabble at odds with the native rabble. The native rabble no longer feel led by the native elites, and the new rabble feel no connection to the elites. And globalists exploit these contradictions.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @Jack D
    Id and superego don't really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren't there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power - even though they don't exist, humans behave as if they did.

    Cuddihy shows how closely Freud and Marx’s seemingly distinct projects converge on the function of civility.

    Howard Stern is a modern day American version of the same project.

    Stern’s mission seemed to be a relentless assault on the WASPs from the point of view of a hideously ugly, sexually vulgar low rent Jew from Long Island.

    Trump routinely appeared on Stern’s show and was a listener of it for 20+ years.

    Stern’s format included a relentless sexual harassment of his female guests over commercial broadcast radio.

    I don’t know if would be tolerated today. Now he’s hiding on satellite radio and even more obscene.

    Stern’s fundamental obsession is the sexual relations between black males and White women. Especially in pornography and among his celebrity guests.

    It has always been obvious to me that in no small way this is his fascination with “degrading” White women/shiksas by fixating on this “defilement” of White America’s women black males.

    James Toback shares the same world view and made a movie expressing it called “Black and White”. He has also fixated on the sexuality of Mike Tyson and Jim Brown.

    Brett Ratner apparently was the liaison between somewhat naive White girls and black alleged rapist Russell Simmons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rifleman
    24:20 Howie gets right to the point:

    Harvey Weinstein on Howard Stern Show

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjYuR92NfZg
    , @Stan Adams
    Stern has, on occasion, gone after yentas. During the Lewinsky scandal, he did a parody faux-Beatles song called "I Wanna Use My Mouth."

    He also exploited this schizophrenic woman for a couple of years:
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LZyKNkSvdP0

    None of her Stern clips are SFW, but if you're looking for an introduction to Jewish crassness, there are worse places to start:
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XHBiNZCeDvw
    , @ScarletNumber
    You obviously don't listen to Stern anymore. He has toned down his act to become more mainstream. He is on satellite for the money.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. And if Judge Kozinski were anything but a federal judge with life tenure, he’d most likely be out of a job by now.

    I do think that something should be done about tenure for life. Watching judges and justices slowly fall prey to senile decay is no fun for anyone. How about a 16-year tenure? That’s four presidential terms….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abe

    I do think that something should be done about tenure for life. Watching judges and justices slowly fall prey to senile decay
     
    The single GREATEST act any American patriot could do for our country right now would be to follow around Judge Ruth Zombie Ginsburg and record (Project Veritas-style) incontrovertible proof of her decrepitness and senility so that the Senate would be FORCED to replace her. That chick ain't running on anything but clerk fumes by now.
    , @Flip
    I think a mandatory retirement age at 70 is warranted.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Abe
    I joke, so to explain himself since we have so many 27 year olds ;-) on here now (a good thing!):

    Philip Roth is clearly being shunned for the Nobel Prize in literature (one can make the case Naipaul was maybe more worthy and Coetzee about equally worthy, but to give it to short-story scribbler Alice Munro??? Or Dylan?, which is the real nail in the coffin, since now the Committee can say they've done their duty by Jews and it'll be another 25 years before they consider any more Jewish honorees). The question is- why? I thought it was partially the anti-Jewish/Palestinian solidarity thing (while Roth is no Avigdor Lieberman, I think he has clearly expressed his support for Israel's right to exist), partly the anti-white male thing, and partly the pro-feminist/anti-thrusting sex fiend thing. with it sliding over time: from 70% (pro-Palestine)-15%-15% in the 90's, to 25%-50% (anti-white male)-25% in the 2000's, to 5%-15%-80% ([email protected] grabber) in CURRENT YEAR.

    And yet despite losing relevancy over the last 10-20 years, who is now the most prophetic, ribald, visionary grand old man of letters on the planet (OK, maybe Houellebecq, but the translated excerpts I've seen have left me cold; I promise to sit down and finish ELEMENTARY PARTICLES in 2018, though)? The fact that THE NEW YORK TIMES is calling for the extra-Constitutional liquidation of Federal judge Alex Portnoy (or is that Mickey Sabbath? or is that David Kepesh?) who is the son of Holocaust Survivors (think THE COUNTERLIFE and "Philip Roth"'s chase after WWII war criminal John Demjanjuk), achieves fame and power under a Republican President, and now in his twilight but still virile 60's is brought low by another SJW moral panic (think THE HUMAN STAIN, which while about race, also had a few sharp words to say about the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal at the beginning)?

    It's Philip Roths world (or maybe computer-simulated virtual reality according to Elon Musk)- we're just living (or MOB'ing) in it.

    It’s Philip Roth’s world

    And just to close the iSteve circle- what was the Mossad thinking when it let Black Cube enable Harvey Weinstein (regardless of how overstated its connections were, Mossad must have had a basic idea, no?) I mean Weinstein is the JUD SUSS of the 2010′s- as bad as Madoff was, Harvey’s 10x worse for the image of Jews, especially coming as he did on the heels of Anthony Weiner- actually make that 20x worse.

    So assuming it had a basic understanding of his extracircullars, and maybe even through Black Cube helped enable them, WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY THINKING in not putting more of a leash on him? When Bibi tweeted in support of Trump’s wall earlier this year out of nothing more than bro-tastic solidarity (and yes, Jack, I think it helps that Bibi has an IDF commando background), Israel’s Deep State I’m sure told him to cut it out, to not associate Israel’s image with a controversial and (in the world-at-large hugely unpopular President over an issue that was none of Israel’s concern, and since then Netanyahu has remained discreetly silent. So why then did it let Harvey run amok? Is this proof that even the more capable Deep State establishments can make YUUGE tactical errors, or is it a false flag (riddles inside enigmas, mazes inside labyrinths) to lull us into a false sense of complacency about how fallible the in-reality super-powerful/super-competent Deep State is?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glaivester
    Well, Weinstein is a big Clinton supporter, and Clinton associate Paul Begala was pouring money into helping the Labor coalition (the Zionist Union), in the last Israeli election. Remember that Harvey's contacts with Black Cube came through former Israeli PM Ehud Barak (i.e. Labor). Labor helps Weinstein, Weinstein helps Clinton, Clinton helps Labor.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @Rifleman

    Cuddihy shows how closely Freud and Marx’s seemingly distinct projects converge on the function of civility.
     
    Howard Stern is a modern day American version of the same project.

    Stern's mission seemed to be a relentless assault on the WASPs from the point of view of a hideously ugly, sexually vulgar low rent Jew from Long Island.

    Trump routinely appeared on Stern's show and was a listener of it for 20+ years.

    Stern's format included a relentless sexual harassment of his female guests over commercial broadcast radio.

    I don't know if would be tolerated today. Now he's hiding on satellite radio and even more obscene.

    Stern's fundamental obsession is the sexual relations between black males and White women. Especially in pornography and among his celebrity guests.

    It has always been obvious to me that in no small way this is his fascination with "degrading" White women/shiksas by fixating on this "defilement" of White America's women black males.

    James Toback shares the same world view and made a movie expressing it called "Black and White". He has also fixated on the sexuality of Mike Tyson and Jim Brown.

    Brett Ratner apparently was the liaison between somewhat naive White girls and black alleged rapist Russell Simmons.

    24:20 Howie gets right to the point:

    Harvey Weinstein on Howard Stern Show

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. WHY ARE ORTHODOX JEWS SO RUDE?

    https://jewinthecity.com/2014/09/why-are-orthodox-jews-so-rude/

    He made an interesting point and explained that a culture of politeness is a very American phenomenon, whereas Hasidic culture stems from the Old Country which operated very differently – more distant, more serious.

    Manners, multiculturalism, and the battle of Stamford Hill

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/manners-multiculturalism-and-the-battle-of-stamford-hill-2040039.html

    I could tell stories, of unbelievable haughtiness by leaders of Anglo-Jewry, which would have led to diplomatic incidents if the Christians involved weren’t afraid of being accused of anti-Semitism. I suppose I’m afraid of that, too.

    Growing Up Hasidic — and Racist

    https://forward.com/culture/jewishness/307190/growing-up-hasidic-and-racist/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  75. @syonredux

    And if Judge Kozinski were anything but a federal judge with life tenure, he’d most likely be out of a job by now.
     
    I do think that something should be done about tenure for life. Watching judges and justices slowly fall prey to senile decay is no fun for anyone. How about a 16-year tenure? That's four presidential terms....

    I do think that something should be done about tenure for life. Watching judges and justices slowly fall prey to senile decay

    The single GREATEST act any American patriot could do for our country right now would be to follow around Judge Ruth Zombie Ginsburg and record (Project Veritas-style) incontrovertible proof of her decrepitness and senility so that the Senate would be FORCED to replace her. That chick ain’t running on anything but clerk fumes by now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @prusmc
    Unfortunately, after the Alabama senate outcoming she might be replaced with so.eo e more lucid but having the same SJW perspective.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. @Abe
    Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful! I come here for Steve’s world-beating droll sense of humor, and here he gives me something incredibly substantive and fascinating to chew on. In real life I am much more polite and congenial than my political blog Internet persona would have you believe, so it’s fascinating to be introduced to a sharp thinker like Cuddihy who can give clear, memorable examples of the practice of civility, yet also discuss it in its broader context, as I take so much of it for granted in daily life. Will almost certainly get that book if there is an electronic edition available.

    Some random observations: yes, what happened to our freedom to make public, armchair ethnological observations (i.e. Pollack/Italian/Jew/WASP jokes)? It was so uncontroversial I remember it being a frequent staple of even kiddy fare like MAD MAGAZINE.

    I’ve also thought that a return to some sort of dueling convention might be to the overall good of our society. Let some tension out before it builds up too much and people get massacred. Instead of passively aggressively snarking through the next 3 years, or maintaining this feverish dream of Russia collusion/impeachment-any-day now, wouldn’t it be better for the psyches of even the most low-T, soy boy, yaaaz-queen! liberals to be able to call out Trump when he says something particularly outrageous, and instead of stewing on it to further derangement of their psyches, say “All right, Trump! You and Trevor Noah, at dawn, pistols at 100 paces!”

    It’s interesting that only non-conformist dissident outsiders like Sailer, Derbyshire, my friend Hoyt Thorpe and yourself have the audacity to violate social norms to consider ethnological and anthropological features openly, honestly and without euphemism and pretty lies.

    I haven’t yet finished thinking about what this “violation” of contemporary prevailing notions of politeness means, much less have I finished picking the shards of glass out of the scars in my tenderest of flesh. Even though none of these fellows, Sailer, Derbyshire, nor Thorpe are Jewish, I’m left asking myself what has emboldened them to break the rules of good manners like this?

    I also find the concepts of Id, Ego & Superego useful metaphors to understand our personal psychology, even if no dissection of the human brain has ever been able to reveal these organs. I obviously came of age well after the heyday of psychoanalysis, but I do see the potential value of awareness of one’s one instincts and impulses to understand and manage one’s mind and behavior. Likewise our understanding of our actual cultures has diminished as these have disappeared into a blind spot that may neither be examined or discussed because any honest consideration of these features is viewed as criticism and taken as offense. Instead of genuine examination, we’re fed platitudes and idealized images that bear little resemblance with the shameful, dirty, beastly and often embarrassingly dionysian aspects of the reality.

    Sailer is the therapist we need for our time. In addition to psychoanalysis therapy, there is a vital need for cultural-analysis. Find the courage to peer into the dark heart to understand hidden cultural motives for our behavior that fuel so much misunderstanding and conflict. Our very reluctance and cowardice to confront these probably doom us to endless unsatisfactorily unresolved conflicts between our tribes. “Diversity is our strength” is the empty platitude aimed to placate us and make us ignore the real problems and conflicts between citizens, neighbors and colleagues hailing from different tribes and traditions. Rather than demanding that we actually put in effort to understand the different kinds of motives and styles of negotiation we are dealing with and to create institutions that could hope to accommodate these diverse styles of interaction, we’ve chosen to close our eyes, see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil in order to hold on to the fiction that “we’re supposed to be all exactly the same progressive Universal Unitarian rainbow flag worshipping, Whole Foods shopping, bourgeois bohemians with the same tastes and values but with different pigmentation, features and stature.” Indeed this expectation of uniformity of values and tastes is such hypocritical contradiction to the oft proclaimed yet apparently hollow pieties to “diversity.”

    Perhaps independent outsiders like Sailer’s will continue to influence the more authoritative voices of the establishment to examine our cultural differences with a greater honesty that actually respects the integrity of these people much more by viewing all their features and foibles without the need to replace these with more palatable idealized fantasies. What makes Sailer’s observations and musings about various cultures and ethnicities so remarkable and constructive is that he’s never rude, condescending or dismissive about it. Sometimes his observations are obviously jarring, especially to any forged in this context of a culture that views such frank but statements beyond the tolerable range of polite discourse. Despite the many calls for frank discussions of race, almost nobody demanding this actually wants anything resembling frankness or even real discussion for that matter. Sailer’s indifference to the kind of etiquette that prohibits the honest consideration of various races and cultures has exacted a great cost of his exclusion from the Cathedral establishment, marginalizing a voice that might have otherwise been rewarded with more social success and status had he given his “cultural superego” more control and bitten his tongue to compromise in order to choose a different trajectory. Yet his indifference to these rules of etiquette have freed him to explore territory other less courageous but otherwise great minds have ignored and have fueled his curiosity to understand the real reasons, motives and origins for behaviors and characteristics of the various cultures. Even though he’s already violated this key taboo, he’s not completely dispensed with civilization and become something like another Andrew Anglin. Absent civilization, men don’t monstrous barbarity doesn’t automatically erase the nobility, humanity and dignity that exist along with the selfishness and wrath that compete with them. Even when examining the most difficult areas aspects of weaknesses that challenge or bedevil the various races and cultures, Sailer does so with a tenderness that shows a genuine desire to appreciate the reality and depth of all of their features and characteristics, not only the good ones that their idealized image of themselves wish to incorporate and present for a public image of their “cultural ego.”

    Perhaps the Id, Ego and Superego are useful after all, even as metaphors also for races, nations and cultures to understand themselves? Will Dr. Sailer and others continue their thankless mission to help therapy these? How can communities most in need of therapy be moved to seek help to gain a better awareness of themselves?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    Have you ever tasted Mogen-David extra-heavy malaga wine with soda water and lime juice?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @syonredux

    And if Judge Kozinski were anything but a federal judge with life tenure, he’d most likely be out of a job by now.
     
    I do think that something should be done about tenure for life. Watching judges and justices slowly fall prey to senile decay is no fun for anyone. How about a 16-year tenure? That's four presidential terms....

    I think a mandatory retirement age at 70 is warranted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    I think a mandatory retirement age at 70 is warranted.
     
    Don't airline pilots have to retire at 60? Or maybe they could demonstrate fitness. A once-a-year cage match with the bailiff - gotta win two out of three years or retire.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. It’s very common for Jews to boast about their lack of civility, and I see as a overcompensation for a lack of physical stature. It may work in the Northeast, but it goes over like a lead weight down South. My wife had a scrawny accountant/business development contracted to her workplace call himself the “Hebrew Hammer.” His presence at a workplace staffed with Scots-Irish and Italian women was a morale bust, but her delusional boss thought he was the kick in the pants the company needed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  79. @Abe
    I joke, so to explain himself since we have so many 27 year olds ;-) on here now (a good thing!):

    Philip Roth is clearly being shunned for the Nobel Prize in literature (one can make the case Naipaul was maybe more worthy and Coetzee about equally worthy, but to give it to short-story scribbler Alice Munro??? Or Dylan?, which is the real nail in the coffin, since now the Committee can say they've done their duty by Jews and it'll be another 25 years before they consider any more Jewish honorees). The question is- why? I thought it was partially the anti-Jewish/Palestinian solidarity thing (while Roth is no Avigdor Lieberman, I think he has clearly expressed his support for Israel's right to exist), partly the anti-white male thing, and partly the pro-feminist/anti-thrusting sex fiend thing. with it sliding over time: from 70% (pro-Palestine)-15%-15% in the 90's, to 25%-50% (anti-white male)-25% in the 2000's, to 5%-15%-80% ([email protected] grabber) in CURRENT YEAR.

    And yet despite losing relevancy over the last 10-20 years, who is now the most prophetic, ribald, visionary grand old man of letters on the planet (OK, maybe Houellebecq, but the translated excerpts I've seen have left me cold; I promise to sit down and finish ELEMENTARY PARTICLES in 2018, though)? The fact that THE NEW YORK TIMES is calling for the extra-Constitutional liquidation of Federal judge Alex Portnoy (or is that Mickey Sabbath? or is that David Kepesh?) who is the son of Holocaust Survivors (think THE COUNTERLIFE and "Philip Roth"'s chase after WWII war criminal John Demjanjuk), achieves fame and power under a Republican President, and now in his twilight but still virile 60's is brought low by another SJW moral panic (think THE HUMAN STAIN, which while about race, also had a few sharp words to say about the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal at the beginning)?

    It's Philip Roths world (or maybe computer-simulated virtual reality according to Elon Musk)- we're just living (or MOB'ing) in it.

    “And yet despite losing relevancy over the last 10-20 years, who is now the most prophetic, ribald, visionary grand old man of letters on the planet …”

    That’s easy as pie: Cormac McCarthy.

    Read More
    • Agree: Thea, PV van der Byl
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. John P. Marquand’s novel, The Late George Apley, provides a wonderful and deeply sympathetic depiction of the “protestant esthetic” of our dying civil religion as it shaped the life of one man.
    This review sums up it all up in three paragraphs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  81. @Anon
    It goes beyond women. Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he's being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff. This is profoundly irritating to someone who's been properly brought up.

    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them. Making a terrible scene in public is a major faux pas in WASP culture, because one of the defining characteristics of people who run things in life is that they are hard to rattle, they stay in control of their emotions, they fix problems quickly and easily, and they do all of these things with panache.

    The generation of Jews who complained about not getting into the country clubs were only 1-2 generations themselves from being peasants on the Russian shtetl, and they were taught peasant manners.

    1-2 generations themselves from being peasants on the Russian shtetl, and they were taught peasant manners

    If they were peasants they would be docile and agreeable. Jews were never peasants. They were aggressive merchants.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    They were aggressive merchants.
     
    In Confucian societies merchants were generally held in very low regard. The social hierarchy went from scholar-gentry to soldiers to peasants, then to artisans, only then to merchants, just above slaves and outcasts.

    Merchants were thought to be vulgar, avaricious, rootless, cowardly, and dishonorable. Most certainly NOT the types who should be in charge of a society.
    , @Anon
    To assume that all Jews living in the Russian shtetl were merchants is really naive. Some of them were, but plenty of them were not.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. “Courtesy” is the word Kenneth Clarke used. In his 1969 book (and tv series), he defined courtesy as “the ritual by which we avoid hurting other people’s feelings by satisfying our own egos.”

    Read More
    • Agree: Twinkie
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  83. In all the years that people have complained about the Ninth I wonder if anybody ever foresaw something like this. Well, maybe not with women.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  84. @Jack D
    Humans are stuck with religion whether we like it or not. "Sophisticates" tried to get rid of Moses and Jesus and replace them with Freud and Marx - the old guys' stories were just superstitions, the new guys were telling you the "scientific" truth. Freud gave you a scientific understanding of human behavior, Marx gave you a scientific understanding of economic behavior. And even more important, not only did they tell you the diagnosis but they also prescribed the cure - analysis and socialism.

    Well it turns out that there was nothing "scientific" about Freud and Marx - they just invented new fairy tales, the way Joseph Smith invented Mormonism. Converts to their system just switched from one religion to a different religion. In the Soviet Union, no one made pilgrimages to Christian saints anymore, but millions made the pilgrimage to see the body of Lenin.

    Like any religion, Freudianism and Marxism have articles of faith. We often make fun of leftists for believing things that defy all common sense and evidence, even to the point that it sometimes kills them. But the religious faithful have been doing that forever.

    Every religious believer believes that his religion is the True Religion and leftists are no different. The difference is that people who are traditional religious believers understand that they are religious believers - it's not a sin to make a leap of faith, to believe in miracles, it's actually a requirement for most religions. If you only believe that which you can touch and see and explain scientifically, you don't really have faith.

    Leftists are in denial. They cling to the belief that they are more sophisticated than the rubes who still have religion and that their belief system is purely logical and rational and evidence based, even though it clearly isn't.

    Leftists are in denial. They cling to the belief that they are more sophisticated than the rubes who still have religion and that their belief system is purely logical and rational and evidence-based, even though it clearly isn’t.

    Thank you. That describes just about every leftist I have ever known or read about who hopes to replace reality with their personalized dystopias that create curated societies that they hope to force the rest of us to live in … for our own sakes of course. How generous of them!

    The Superego, the Ego, and the ID … the Father, the Holy Ghost, and the Son. Things change but nothing changes, albeit at a great personal cost to humanity and everyone involved in the social anarchy that leftists ferment in their arrogant delusions about human nature and what is Good.

    Perhaps the last 500 years of Western Civilization can be encapsulated as an ideological dispute between Calvin and his omniscient God who destroys the capacity for free will .. and the Nietzschean “will to power” where mortal humans presume the attributes of divinity that give them the power to change all aspect of human nature and human existence through simple acts of free will, i.e. their genders.

    In the meantime, the rest of us try to live our lives with our families as best we can in the interlude between the madness inherent in both extremes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @Stan Adams
    In Germany, were Jews such as Freud and Marx considered crass? Teutons aren't known for their politeness. (NuYawk manners go all the way back to New Amsterdam.)

    I can’t speak authoritatively but I have read a little in this area and I think there was a kind of equal and opposite complaint — the “falsely polite” Jew showing you up with his excessive ingratiating. German brusqueness is a kind of honesty tied to humility, so anyone using too many pleases has something to hide or is putting on airs. Jewish impoliteness is a self-consciousness of power. Weinstein’s not in trouble because women are coming forward, he’s in trouble because Hollywood is collapsing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Weinstein’s not in trouble because women are coming forward, he’s in trouble because Hollywood is collapsing.

    What does this mean?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Contra isn’t Seinfeld about clueless losers trying desperately to figure out and follow the rules?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Just like elites and poor tend to vote the same way -- Democratic -- while the Middle leans more to Republicans, maybe same applies to attitude.

    Maybe very high intelligence and very low intelligence are both 'rude' than the middle.

    Among the dummies, they don't appreciate finer things and are stuck in childishness.

    Among the highly intelligent, the reasons could be numerous. Some are aspergy, meaning they are very good at certain mental skills but clueless about other things. Some genius types are like this.
    But there could be other reasons too. If you're very smart, all the rules and etiquette may seem foolish, pompous, and ridiculous. Notice comedians tend to be high IQ, and they find human behavior funny as hell, esp because so many people try to be so 'serious' about stuff. Marx Brothers is about high IQ mocking respectable pretensions.

    So, if dummies lack manners cuz they don't get it, the super-smarties may lack manners because they get it all-too-well and find it rather silly.

    Manners tend to be elitist, but it also checks the elites. It's like traditional Japan. The elites had elegant manners, and that meant they were better than the masses. But the manners restrained their behavior too and expected them to follow certain behavioral codes. It also served as a straitjacket on them. Manners both elevated and imprisoned them.
    To a very smart person, these manners may seem stifling, stultifying, and suffocating.
    If Woody Allen were a Jewish samurai and faced with seppuku, I wonder how he would react to the ritualized madness.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. existence. “A science cannot be bourgeois,” declared the founder of psychoanalysis, for bourgeois etiquette was merely a veil of petty lies obscuring our view of the truth.

    I kinda like veils….

    But now all is to be changed. All the pleasing illusions, which made power gentle and obedience liberal, which harmonized the different shades of life, and which, by a bland assimilation, incorporated into politics the sentiments which beautify and soften private society, are to be dissolved by this new conquering empire of light and reason. All the decent drapery of life is to be rudely torn off. All the superadded ideas, furnished from the wardrobe of a moral imagination, which the heart owns, and the understanding ratifies, as necessary to cover the defects of our naked, shivering nature, and to raise it to dignity in our own estimation, are to be exploded as a ridiculous, absurd, and antiquated fashion.

    Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  88. @MarkinLA
    Lifetime appointment is valuable but perhaps not essential for an independent judiciary.

    Unfortunately, like everything in the government, what the founders intended and what really happened are two different things. The lifetime appointment was intended to remove politics from the judiciary. However, the lifetime appointment means that putting the person with the right political persuasion on the court becomes even more important. Add in the Congressional oversight process where they are grilled about their political beliefs. For good measure throw in the judges oversized opinions about their intellects leading to ridiculous convoluted reasoning in their decisions to support their politics that make no sense to average people and we have the mess we have now.

    The most important and under-discussed theme of the Trumpening is the crisis of authority. I don’t need a secret clearance to have problems with the CIA after Iraq, a law degree to have problems with a judiciary that giggles at the Constitution, a press card to have problems with the BBC relying on migrant advocates as experts or insisting that no-go zones do not exist, or a medical degree to have issues with big pharma or insurance-dictated medicine. And because these things are so blindingly obvious I do not need ad-purchasing Russian hackers to spread this feeling.

    Read More
    • Agree: Desiderius
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. @AP
    Why do my posts on Sailer's blog go into moderation for hours while others' posts appear quickly?

    My comments can linger in purgatory for days.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  91. @Abe

    I do think that something should be done about tenure for life. Watching judges and justices slowly fall prey to senile decay
     
    The single GREATEST act any American patriot could do for our country right now would be to follow around Judge Ruth Zombie Ginsburg and record (Project Veritas-style) incontrovertible proof of her decrepitness and senility so that the Senate would be FORCED to replace her. That chick ain't running on anything but clerk fumes by now.

    Unfortunately, after the Alabama senate outcoming she might be replaced with so.eo e more lucid but having the same SJW perspective.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @Anon
    It goes beyond women. Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he's being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff. This is profoundly irritating to someone who's been properly brought up.

    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them. Making a terrible scene in public is a major faux pas in WASP culture, because one of the defining characteristics of people who run things in life is that they are hard to rattle, they stay in control of their emotions, they fix problems quickly and easily, and they do all of these things with panache.

    The generation of Jews who complained about not getting into the country clubs were only 1-2 generations themselves from being peasants on the Russian shtetl, and they were taught peasant manners.

    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them. Making a terrible scene in public is a major faux pas in WASP culture…

    It’s not just WASPs. All upper crust people in civilized societies were expected to behave this way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes
    I think there's a point to be made about being well-bred, and it has nothing to do with being upper crust. Two generations ago, middle class families (and working class families with aspirations for their children) raised children by imbuing good manners, politeness, etiquette--the habits of comportment and personal conduct. Even public schools insisted on good discipline and decorum (there were no problems with bullies that weren't quickly rectified). Personal habits that last a lifetime.

    Today, such is sadly out of fashion.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. Full disclosure: I’m of Ashkenazi background myself.

    There are many emotional differences between Mediterranean and Northern European people and some emotional differences between the Ashkenazim and other Mediterraneans.

    Meds are more outwardly emotional than Nords. More shouting, tears, drama of all sorts, within families and without. This looks undignified and unpleasant until one realizes how Nords deal with emotional stress. It drives them to drink. If you think that’s more sensible or dignified, you might be a drunk. The optimal choice is of course to avoid both of these stereotypical behaviors.

    I don’t think Jews are more or less outwardly emotional than other Med peoples. We’re more neurotic, but that’s a different thing. By neuroticism I mean the constant fear that bad things will happen to you, that whatever you’re doing will fail, that everything is going to hell in general. High anxiety. Italians, Spaniards, Arabs, etc. are more into confidence. But it’s not a quiet confidence like you’d see among Nords. It’s the boastful, showboating kind. Which can look awesome when done the right way, don’t get me wrong.

    Why are Meds more outwardly emotional than Nords? Most likely because over the past 10,000 years Meds tended to live in larger communities. Earlier advent of agriculture, warmer climate supporting higher population density.

    If most of your interactions are with the inanimate forces of nature, getting outwardly emotional in times of stress serves little purpose. If most of your interactions are with people, things are different. People can be bullied, shamed, cajoled, impressed, etc.

    Why are Ashkenazim neurotic? That I don’t really know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Why are Meds more outwardly emotional than Nords?

    They got more Negroid mixture.
    , @Twinkie

    Why are Meds more outwardly emotional than Nords? Most likely because over the past 10,000 years Meds tended to live in larger communities. Earlier advent of agriculture, warmer climate supporting higher population density.
     
    East Asians achieved high density living early as well, but are not prone to outward emotionality. Your hypothesis needs some work.
    , @Anon
    Why are Meds more emotional than Nords?

    "Kiss me, Hardy!"
    Maybe a reverse explanation-- hard-drinking Brits and Scandies take out their frustrations on the bottle. Or maybe it's latent Calvinist influence. How do Poles act?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @utu
    1-2 generations themselves from being peasants on the Russian shtetl, and they were taught peasant manners

    If they were peasants they would be docile and agreeable. Jews were never peasants. They were aggressive merchants.

    They were aggressive merchants.

    In Confucian societies merchants were generally held in very low regard. The social hierarchy went from scholar-gentry to soldiers to peasants, then to artisans, only then to merchants, just above slaves and outcasts.

    Merchants were thought to be vulgar, avaricious, rootless, cowardly, and dishonorable. Most certainly NOT the types who should be in charge of a society.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. @AP
    Why do my posts on Sailer's blog go into moderation for hours while others' posts appear quickly?

    Are you an adoring fan?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @utu
    1-2 generations themselves from being peasants on the Russian shtetl, and they were taught peasant manners

    If they were peasants they would be docile and agreeable. Jews were never peasants. They were aggressive merchants.

    To assume that all Jews living in the Russian shtetl were merchants is really naive. Some of them were, but plenty of them were not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    To assume that all Jews living in the Russian shtetl were merchants is really naive. Some of them were, but plenty of them were not.

    I was making the point that they were not farmers or peasants. Framers were a tiny minority. Yes, not all of them were merchants but there were many craftsmen who also engaged in selling their products.

    http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Shtetl

    The shtetl was also marked by occupational diversity. While elsewhere in the Diaspora Jews often were found in a small number of occupations, frequently determined by political restrictions, in the shtetl Jewish occupations ran the gamut from wealthy contractors and entrepreneurs, to shopkeepers, carpenters, shoemakers, tailors, teamsters, and water carriers.
     

    https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/polish-jewry-between-the-wars/
    The Jewish economic structure was significantly different from that of the surrounding population. While a majority of ethnic Poles were employed in agriculture, in 1931 about 96 percent of Polish Jews worked in non-farm occupations, mainly as artisans, traders, or small shopkeepers. Small minorities were industrialists or members of the liberal professions, though they comprised a higher percentage of these professions than the percentage of Jews in the population. In 1931, 56 percent of doctors and one-third of lawyers and other legal professionals were Jewish.

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @Jack D
    The current hysteria (and that is exactly what it is - hysteria is derived from the Greek word for "uterus") has everything to do with Trump and nothing to do with the Id vs. Superego per se. The reason so many prominent men are being implicated is that "pussy grabbing" is EXACTLY what most (if not all) high-T, alpha males do and have done since we were silver back gorillas. And women have never complained about this, in fact they encourage it and when they are at their most fertile they do everything they can to attract the attention of the alpha.

    In the past, when prominent men were revealed to be pussy grabbers, their treatment by the Left was completely dependent on whether the men did or did not have the right set of Leftist beliefs. If they were not Leftist, then any pussy grabbing behavior was said to make them "hypocrites" - publicly they espoused bible thumping, privately they pursued 14 year old girls. And so they had to go on grounds of hypocrisy (since Biblical morality itself no longer exists - it's no problem if men lie with men, etc.).

    But, if their beliefs were in line with the Left, they were immune. Some feminists said of Bill Clinton that they would themselves be willing to pleasure him it that is what it took to keep someone of his correct belief system in office. Harvey Weinstein was widely known to be a pussy grabber but his political contributions and correct beliefs gave him immunity up until recently. Even at the moment when his bubble burst, his first statement was that he was going to devote himself to hunting down fascists so everyone please back off and let me continue working for the Cause.

    AND the fact that the men in question were no longer peak alphas and that the women who are attacking them are also past their own sell-by dates, was not an issue. Bill Clinton doddered around the Hillary campaign and was seen (sometimes) by her side and it was no problem. The only reason he did not feature even more prominently was due to Hillary's ego and not because he was a persona non-grata pussy grabber.

    So what has changed - first of all, it is no longer necessary to protect the Clintons. But more importantly, Trump is still in office. He appeared to have gotten away with his pussy grabbing despite not being a Leftist. The Russia thing appears not to be a sure bet - maybe they will get close to Trump and take down Jr. or Kushner, but the man himself will probably be unreachable. Trump himself had not done anything new to put pussy grabbing back in the news, so it was necessary to start a fire elsewhere, even if elsewhere meant throwing a few of your icons into the fire. That these were somewhat over the hill icons made them expendable anyway so it was not so much a bug but a feature.

    It definitley hit me, when theToronto psychologist Jordan B. Peterson said in one of his videos, that many a hysterical women today is out of her mind – and that he doesn’t know really, what to do – i. e.: He doesn’t (doesn’t!) know, how to react, when confronted with those “crazy women”.

    These things might have to do with the Id and the superEgo insofar, as many of the accompanying strange ways of behavior are so far from discourse, that – in the end – even the pretty verbal JBP gives in and says, he’s stuck.

    PS

    The good old days, when subjects like these could be written – and made fun of, of course, in MAD – see Abe’s post above, No. 16.
    Or when, I could add, in the German satirical monthly “TITANIC” there could be a hole page with the sigh in a cartoon of one of the true Frankfurtian masters, Friedrich-Karl Wächter, if I remember right: This exclamatory sigh read: “It’s about time, women return to normal again!” – meant as a counterpunch against the (often times intimidating and/ or curious) 80ies exaggerations of the Women’s Lib movement.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    What does he mean by "out of their mind"? What does he see as the cause?
    , @Anonymous
    Yes absolutely.

    Remember "Trigglypuff"? I remember thinking at the time: this is just an old-fashioned hysterical female straight out of the Victorian era. There's nothing new under the sun.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. @BB753
    Steve, I very much doubt Kozinski has an IQ of 180. What's your source?

    Steve’s point is that Kozinski is smart enough to know that showing porn to female coworkers is a dumb thing to do; assigning a ludicrously high IQ to Kozinski is a way to emphasize that, by way of exaggeration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Kozinski is famous for being extra intelligent, even for a judge. Whether 180 is his precise IQ, I do not know.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @Jack D
    Humans are stuck with religion whether we like it or not. "Sophisticates" tried to get rid of Moses and Jesus and replace them with Freud and Marx - the old guys' stories were just superstitions, the new guys were telling you the "scientific" truth. Freud gave you a scientific understanding of human behavior, Marx gave you a scientific understanding of economic behavior. And even more important, not only did they tell you the diagnosis but they also prescribed the cure - analysis and socialism.

    Well it turns out that there was nothing "scientific" about Freud and Marx - they just invented new fairy tales, the way Joseph Smith invented Mormonism. Converts to their system just switched from one religion to a different religion. In the Soviet Union, no one made pilgrimages to Christian saints anymore, but millions made the pilgrimage to see the body of Lenin.

    Like any religion, Freudianism and Marxism have articles of faith. We often make fun of leftists for believing things that defy all common sense and evidence, even to the point that it sometimes kills them. But the religious faithful have been doing that forever.

    Every religious believer believes that his religion is the True Religion and leftists are no different. The difference is that people who are traditional religious believers understand that they are religious believers - it's not a sin to make a leap of faith, to believe in miracles, it's actually a requirement for most religions. If you only believe that which you can touch and see and explain scientifically, you don't really have faith.

    Leftists are in denial. They cling to the belief that they are more sophisticated than the rubes who still have religion and that their belief system is purely logical and rational and evidence based, even though it clearly isn't.

    Agree.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. @Rifleman

    Cuddihy shows how closely Freud and Marx’s seemingly distinct projects converge on the function of civility.
     
    Howard Stern is a modern day American version of the same project.

    Stern's mission seemed to be a relentless assault on the WASPs from the point of view of a hideously ugly, sexually vulgar low rent Jew from Long Island.

    Trump routinely appeared on Stern's show and was a listener of it for 20+ years.

    Stern's format included a relentless sexual harassment of his female guests over commercial broadcast radio.

    I don't know if would be tolerated today. Now he's hiding on satellite radio and even more obscene.

    Stern's fundamental obsession is the sexual relations between black males and White women. Especially in pornography and among his celebrity guests.

    It has always been obvious to me that in no small way this is his fascination with "degrading" White women/shiksas by fixating on this "defilement" of White America's women black males.

    James Toback shares the same world view and made a movie expressing it called "Black and White". He has also fixated on the sexuality of Mike Tyson and Jim Brown.

    Brett Ratner apparently was the liaison between somewhat naive White girls and black alleged rapist Russell Simmons.

    Stern has, on occasion, gone after yentas. During the Lewinsky scandal, he did a parody faux-Beatles song called “I Wanna Use My Mouth.”

    He also exploited this schizophrenic woman for a couple of years:

    None of her Stern clips are SFW, but if you’re looking for an introduction to Jewish crassness, there are worse places to start:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    In doing so, he would be shaming them, discouraging promiscuity. Elesewhere, was he encouraging it?

    That would be two very different kinds of "going after."

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. Always. Be. Critiquing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes
    That would be Jodi Kantor of the New York Times...

    What's the saying? Physician, heal thyself...
    , @Harold
    Seems like good advice.

    Of course, she already knows the answers she is going to come to—the stories she has swallowed, uncritically, told her who the bad guys are and who the good guys are. They even told her, in that semi-Sapir-Whorf fashion, who the ‘who’s are.

    Another question should be: who decides which stories get told.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Coarse behavior is a matter of degree. What would raise eyebrows in Mayfair would not in other parts of England, or on the Continent.

    Much of the Cuddihy kerfuffle may be ascribed to culture shock and awareness of some Other. When that Other is verbally adept and loud, expect reactions and pushback. WASP pushback is muted since vulgar, so shunning and country club exclusion must suffice. Ethnic pushback is more immediate but less acknowledged. Memories are longer in ethnic neighborhoods even if they fade eventually.

    Cuddihy and his book examples are stand-ins for America and her squabbling identity groups native and newly arrived.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  103. @Jack D
    The current hysteria (and that is exactly what it is - hysteria is derived from the Greek word for "uterus") has everything to do with Trump and nothing to do with the Id vs. Superego per se. The reason so many prominent men are being implicated is that "pussy grabbing" is EXACTLY what most (if not all) high-T, alpha males do and have done since we were silver back gorillas. And women have never complained about this, in fact they encourage it and when they are at their most fertile they do everything they can to attract the attention of the alpha.

    In the past, when prominent men were revealed to be pussy grabbers, their treatment by the Left was completely dependent on whether the men did or did not have the right set of Leftist beliefs. If they were not Leftist, then any pussy grabbing behavior was said to make them "hypocrites" - publicly they espoused bible thumping, privately they pursued 14 year old girls. And so they had to go on grounds of hypocrisy (since Biblical morality itself no longer exists - it's no problem if men lie with men, etc.).

    But, if their beliefs were in line with the Left, they were immune. Some feminists said of Bill Clinton that they would themselves be willing to pleasure him it that is what it took to keep someone of his correct belief system in office. Harvey Weinstein was widely known to be a pussy grabber but his political contributions and correct beliefs gave him immunity up until recently. Even at the moment when his bubble burst, his first statement was that he was going to devote himself to hunting down fascists so everyone please back off and let me continue working for the Cause.

    AND the fact that the men in question were no longer peak alphas and that the women who are attacking them are also past their own sell-by dates, was not an issue. Bill Clinton doddered around the Hillary campaign and was seen (sometimes) by her side and it was no problem. The only reason he did not feature even more prominently was due to Hillary's ego and not because he was a persona non-grata pussy grabber.

    So what has changed - first of all, it is no longer necessary to protect the Clintons. But more importantly, Trump is still in office. He appeared to have gotten away with his pussy grabbing despite not being a Leftist. The Russia thing appears not to be a sure bet - maybe they will get close to Trump and take down Jr. or Kushner, but the man himself will probably be unreachable. Trump himself had not done anything new to put pussy grabbing back in the news, so it was necessary to start a fire elsewhere, even if elsewhere meant throwing a few of your icons into the fire. That these were somewhat over the hill icons made them expendable anyway so it was not so much a bug but a feature.

    Even if he really “was going to devote himself to hunting down fascists”, it’s a strategic error;
    We’re his biggest, if not only, supporters.

    #HarvDidNothingWrong!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. @Abe
    I joke, so to explain himself since we have so many 27 year olds ;-) on here now (a good thing!):

    Philip Roth is clearly being shunned for the Nobel Prize in literature (one can make the case Naipaul was maybe more worthy and Coetzee about equally worthy, but to give it to short-story scribbler Alice Munro??? Or Dylan?, which is the real nail in the coffin, since now the Committee can say they've done their duty by Jews and it'll be another 25 years before they consider any more Jewish honorees). The question is- why? I thought it was partially the anti-Jewish/Palestinian solidarity thing (while Roth is no Avigdor Lieberman, I think he has clearly expressed his support for Israel's right to exist), partly the anti-white male thing, and partly the pro-feminist/anti-thrusting sex fiend thing. with it sliding over time: from 70% (pro-Palestine)-15%-15% in the 90's, to 25%-50% (anti-white male)-25% in the 2000's, to 5%-15%-80% ([email protected] grabber) in CURRENT YEAR.

    And yet despite losing relevancy over the last 10-20 years, who is now the most prophetic, ribald, visionary grand old man of letters on the planet (OK, maybe Houellebecq, but the translated excerpts I've seen have left me cold; I promise to sit down and finish ELEMENTARY PARTICLES in 2018, though)? The fact that THE NEW YORK TIMES is calling for the extra-Constitutional liquidation of Federal judge Alex Portnoy (or is that Mickey Sabbath? or is that David Kepesh?) who is the son of Holocaust Survivors (think THE COUNTERLIFE and "Philip Roth"'s chase after WWII war criminal John Demjanjuk), achieves fame and power under a Republican President, and now in his twilight but still virile 60's is brought low by another SJW moral panic (think THE HUMAN STAIN, which while about race, also had a few sharp words to say about the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal at the beginning)?

    It's Philip Roths world (or maybe computer-simulated virtual reality according to Elon Musk)- we're just living (or MOB'ing) in it.

    Let him console himself with a piece of liver.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Wait, isn’t Weinsteingate merely a continuation of Weinergate? If Hillary’s election loss triggered this mass outing of progressive perverts, shouldn’t Anthony Weiner be honored for triggering that loss…that triggered the mass outing?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  106. The Imp of the Perverse versus The Imp of the Pervert.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  107. @Anon
    “An armed society is a polite society,”

    Not true of blacks and Amish/Quakers.

    Blacks are armed and crass.

    Amish/Quakers are unarmed and polite.

    Not true of blacks and Amish/Quakers.

    Note that Heinlein didn’t make the converse statement, that an unarmed society is a rude society. So Heinlein doesn’t say anything on the Quakers, although Steve has used the strong interpretation for explaining Jewish rudeness. Methinks that Jewish rudeness towards the Goyim stems more from considering Goyim as beasts, and various rules that amount to being able to do whatever you want to the Goyim as long as you don’t get caught or bring ire against the Jewish community. However, I am not sure that Jewish rudeness or crassness does not extend to other Jews. In an ethny held together by argument, it’s going to breed argumentative a**holes to an extent. There are plenty of Jewish non-a**holes though, and Jews don’t have a monopoly on a**holish behavior.

    As to blacks, if you look at earlier literature, they understood the power dynamic of the times. “Bwana, masaa” type expressions were common. These days you have rap culture that doesn’t go well with the armed society. And the result is likely an increase in deaths. But really blacks are low IQ and relatively violent, and this is expressed in higher per capita homicide rates wherever they are.

    Among more intelligent races, I think the armed society = polite society holds well. In feudal societies where the knights/samurai walked around armed, and duels might be fought, you had a lot of politeness. Both Japanese and English had differentiation for words based on where one sits in the pecking order. E.g. thee, thine, thou etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Thou/etc is the second-person singular pronoun, cognate with similar words in every other Indo-European language. Nothing to do with feudalism since it long predates feudalism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. “An armed society is a polite society,” and Ashkenazi society wasn’t very armed and thus was, despite its high literacy rate, pretty crass.

    Not really. You should pick up a book about Jewish humor (E.g. Michael Weks’ Born to Kvetch). You’ll learn that Yiddish was a very clean language — even Yiddish insults. There’s none of the Anglo-Saxon fixation on the f word, or on crude exhortations to engage in this or that sex act, or to introduce this or that foreign object into your various orifices.

    Or you could save time and stick to your ignorant prejudices. They do seem to sell well here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    You’ll learn that Yiddish was a very clean language — even Yiddish insults.

    What does the word "schmuck" mean?

    or on crude exhortations to engage in this or that sex act, or to introduce this or that foreign object into your various orifices.

    Until the past fifty years or so, how common were those in any language, though?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @AndrewR
    Trump's crassness and incivility were only noteworthy to Gutmenschen because he was coming from a relatively right-wing, pro-American perspective. For years before Trump announced his candidacy, blatantly hateful rhetoric towards whites (and males) had already been universally accepted on the left. Despite their laughably transparent rhetoric, leftists aren't against bigotry and hate speech. Not at all. They just want to have a monopoly on the right to be bigoted and hateful.

    Trump isn’t crass or uncivil.

    Read More
    • Troll: AndrewR
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @Opinionator
    Trump never claimed to do any "pussy grabbing."

    Trump:

    you know I’m automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it’s
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don’t even wait
    01:21
    anyone you’re a star they let you do it
    01:22
    you can do anything whatever you want
    01:24
    grab them by the pussy I can do anything

    Are you saying this is fake? Or are you hair splitting and say he does not say that HE personally has ever done this but that “you” (one) can do this if they are a star. I understand that legally speaking Trump or his lawyers might make an argument like that (or say that he was just bragging – “locker room talk” and that in real life he would never do such a thing).

    But, please, let’s be real – he is probably describing something that he has in fact done and more than once. Now it was never meant to be public and should never had been recorded or released. For that matter, he should not have bragged about it either. But I believe that he is actually telling the truth about the possibilities that are open to stars in general and I have no reason to believe that Trump would not have acted upon such availability once he realized that he fell in the “star” category himself. I really don’t think any less of him for it. Note also that he is clearly describing a consensual relationship, not a rape. This is the way that powerful men have always interacted with females and the way that females are programmed to interact for the last million years.

    Read More
    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    It's not splitting hairs at all. Trump admits to doing some things in that tape. The infamous "grabbing" he doesn't admit to doing. The most likely reason is that it's not something he would do.
    , @Jack Highlands
    Never watched the whole thing before - is Beta Billy Bush cringe AF or what?
    Lays it down yet again for those needing to know: looks are often insignificant in men.
    OTOH, one could argue Billy's flying excellent wing.
    , @anon
    The thing about this is, this part doesn't really seem true:

    you know I’m automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it’s
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don’t even wait

    The problem with that is, I've seen videos of him around beautiful women, and he really doesn't do that. It seems to be exaggeration for humorous effect.

    So the problem with the "grab 'em by the pussy" thing is, that kind of sounds like exaggeration as well. The people who get so worked up about it are assuming that he's being 100% literal when he says that, even though we all know that Trump exaggerates and says goofy stuff like that all the time.

    So the situation we have is a bunch of people who think Trump lies about everything, who insist, in this case, that he's telling the literal truth, when it's pretty obvious he's just doing his usual goofball patter.

    I'm not saying he's never done anything like that. But that statement doesn't prove much one way or the other.

    Of course, I still think the best response is to point out that Hillary Clinton wanted to turn America into Brazil, and that's a lot worse than grabbing someone. If there was a candidate who wasn't so vulgar, who also didn't admit to wanting to turn America into a third-world country, I would've voted for them, but since there wasn't, what choice did I have?

    , @J.Ross
    Everyone including the fake-outraged understands that Trump is casually and colloquially describing the shocking reversal of sexual rules that is only possible when you are a known success, and that he is not talking about manually seizing an internal organ.
    We live in the daylight world, where men are assumed to always want sex, and women are assumed to never want sex. Then you get both real success and notoriety -- not a meaningless lottery ticket but some masterful accomplishment that brings admiration with the millions, and the girls push their way into your lap. That's what he's talking about.
    , @Forbes
    What confounds many people is that what Trump said is true.

    Women who are in awe of a man--for whatever reason, e.g. wealth, a celebrity or star (however defined), or just sexy--will let a man do pretty much anything because the woman wants the man. She is the prey and he is the predator, yet to earn his prey, he must act as predator. It's nature, and natural.

    For most people, this behavior is foreign to their experience--or it's so fleeting they don't understand or recognize it.
    , @Difference maker
    He is telling the truth. There is also reason to believe he wasn't the most ardent partaker

    There will be a qualitative difference between a Weinstein who women have to sleep with if they are thots, to women throwing themselves at somebody

    While "they" are trying to get Trump, we should not be normalizing actual perverts and sleazebags
    , @MarkinLA
    Why is he any different that Gene Simmons and his interest in photography. I remember seeing a TV show where Gene and Paul Stanley were talking about Kiss and Paul made a joke about Gene's interest in photography.

    Part of the deal for a groupie to sleep with Gene was that he take a Polaroid of her in bed. He said he had 3000 pictures.

    Yeah, Gene isn't a politician but why is there a distinction? None of these women seemed to complain about Trump until now?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    “An armed society is a polite society,”

    Not true of blacks and Amish/Quakers.

    Blacks are armed and crass.

    Amish/Quakers are unarmed and polite.

    Blacks are armed and crass.

    They are, but they have their own weird form of politeness. If you listen to interviews with gang-bangers, they always talk about how they have a really strict code of behavior on the streets. You hear about people getting shot for looking at someone the wrong way, and according to them, that’s really true. They have rules about who can and can’t say what to whom, and it can be enforced with extreme violence.

    They’re still really vulgar, but there are rules of etiquette they have to follow. It’s just a different set of rules. It’s more about “disrespect” than vulgarity.

    You’re right about the Amish, though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    but there are rules of etiquette they have to follow.

    Badiquette.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. “That’s not terribly judicious behavior, especially for a guy with about a 180 IQ.”

    Profoundly gifted guys are weirdos. They all need minders.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  113. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @International Jew

    “An armed society is a polite society,” and Ashkenazi society wasn’t very armed and thus was, despite its high literacy rate, pretty crass.
     
    Not really. You should pick up a book about Jewish humor (E.g. Michael Weks' Born to Kvetch). You'll learn that Yiddish was a very clean language — even Yiddish insults. There's none of the Anglo-Saxon fixation on the f word, or on crude exhortations to engage in this or that sex act, or to introduce this or that foreign object into your various orifices.

    Or you could save time and stick to your ignorant prejudices. They do seem to sell well here.

    You’ll learn that Yiddish was a very clean language — even Yiddish insults.

    What does the word “schmuck” mean?

    or on crude exhortations to engage in this or that sex act, or to introduce this or that foreign object into your various orifices.

    Until the past fifty years or so, how common were those in any language, though?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    What does the word “schmuck” mean?

    It means jewel, at least in German.

    There is some question whether the Yiddish word comes from the German. Alternate explanations are that it is a sort of rhyming slang. A little boy's organ is a "shteckl" (a little stick) , rhymed into shmekl and schmuck is a back formation from the diminutive . This seems too convoluted to me (usually the diminutive is derived from the main noun, not the other way around). Or else it is from the old Polish smok meaning grass snake (schlong means snake so this is not implausible).

    But anyway, the word schmuck is a million times more common in English than it is in Yiddish, at least in respectable households. Perhaps this word was used among Yiddish gangsters or longshoremen or whatever but among the middle classes it was extremely rare to use profanity, ever (and when you did, it was usually in Polish or Russian, not in Yiddish).

    Amusingly, a very common curse in Yiddish was "Geh [go] kerbenye matri". In Yiddish, it means "bug off" and is considered relatively mild - something that even moms might say to their kids if they are annoying them. It's not considered strong at all. But in the original Russian it is "idti [go] k ebene materi," which literally means "go to [your] fucked mother" and is very obscene. I think most Yiddish speakers didn't even realize what they were saying.
    , @Dave Pinsen
    According to Ed West, "fart" is one of the oldest words in English.

    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/941835859350786048
    , @Carol
    According to Hollywood, we all spoke that way since Forever.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    It goes beyond women. Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he's being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff. This is profoundly irritating to someone who's been properly brought up.

    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them. Making a terrible scene in public is a major faux pas in WASP culture, because one of the defining characteristics of people who run things in life is that they are hard to rattle, they stay in control of their emotions, they fix problems quickly and easily, and they do all of these things with panache.

    The generation of Jews who complained about not getting into the country clubs were only 1-2 generations themselves from being peasants on the Russian shtetl, and they were taught peasant manners.

    It goes beyond women. Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he’s being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff. This is profoundly irritating to someone who’s been properly brought up.

    And Jews didn’t want to break bread with tainted goyim.

    But most Jews don’t act like this:

    Greeks are more likely to act like that. If you want a scene, go with Greeks. Colorful people.

    Also, it’s part of American mythos to make fun of table manners. It’s the Jacksonian side of Americanism. Excessive manners are Old World and crusty.

    American Way is to have manners but to keep it simple. It’s like serving steaks and taters in MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE. It doesn’t have to be fancy… but Liberty took it too far when he tripped someone over. The Duke aint asking for nothing fancy. But he don’t want to eat his meat off the floor.

    But there is the populist side of Americanism that just loves to make fun of fancy manners.

    Lucille Ball show with Desi as gangster

    The joint doesn’t have to be fancy. Mocking decorum is part of American Populism.

    The chicken or the egg question. Consider a film like HIS GIRL FRIDAY, one of the hectic and high energy movies ever made. It was directed by Hawks and has Anglo characters but was written by Ben Hecht who was Jewish. Was Hecht projecting Jewish personality types onto Anglos or did he pick up on Anglo-American energy of irreverence and freedom himself?

    In some ways, it was the Jews who felt intimidated by the animal energy of Anglo Americans who were into rugged stuff like hunting, boxing, and football. In the West, the gunmen and saloon brawlers were usually big white guys like Chuck Connors in BIG COUNTRY. Jews usually ran businesses and stayed out of trouble like the guy in CIMARRON. So, the gentle wasp vs pushy Jew dichotomy is a bit misleading, and it may not have become an issue if Jews didn’t rise to the top so fast. Among the hoi polloi, fancy manners was not a thing, especially among the Scots-Irish in the South and Indiana. Whose Ear?

    Also, Jews weren’t alone in ‘bad manners’. Greeks, Southern Italians, ‘dumb’ Poles, and etc all came from crude backgrounds. Jewish manners stood out not so much against the American Masses but against American elites. I mean a pushy Jew would hardly would have seemed out of place in some joint frequented by bikers, Negroes, hillbillies, or etc.
    It stood out because rapidly rising Jews suddenly found themselves in the world of upper crust where manners did matter, and such manners had to be developed over time.

    As for Jewish Energy in America, to what extent did Jews infuse Americanism with Jewish chutzpah and to what extent did Jews channel the democratic individualism of anti-elitist America? Did Jews take the Western Saloon brawl and turn it into a pie fight? Add some zany humor to it?

    Same goes for Jews and Negroes. It went back and forth. Jews took a lot from black music, but they became so influential as music merchants and composers that they, in turn, influenced black music. Brill Building often had Jews writing black-style music for black performers. Phil Specter expanded the black idiom, and other blacks took from it as well.

    Figures like Ayn Rand and Norman Mailer are both very American and very Jewish. Rand was born high-energy but her personality really came alive in the world of American Freedom created by Anglo energies. She infused Americanism with her energy but she also channeled American energy, and much of it was not Jewish.
    And Mailer obviously channeled a lot of manhood mythos from Hemingway who was into sports and hunting.

    America was made by ‘rude’ men with big personalities. Andrew Jackson certainly but recently Donald Trump. John Huston, Sam Peckinpah, Howard Hawks, D.W. Griffith, Raoul Walsh were pretty wild guys. And they loved the irreverent aspect of American Culture. And some of them burned out because they pushed too hard. If only Peckinpah had more sense. He could have lasted as long as Sidney Lumet who was more cautious and sensible. Indeed, it was often the case that gentiles crashed and burned because they had less self-control than Jews did. In general, Jewish rock stars seemed to have longer lifespans than gentile ones. And Jewish actors survived and aged better than someone like Mickey Rourke that wild Irishman.

    And there is the Irish thing. If the Brits were able to keep the Irish down for a long time, the Irish rose pretty fast in democratic America, and Middle America became Anglo-Irish in attitude, esp as so many big cities were ruled by Irish Machine even if Wasp held positions at the top.
    And Irish were feisty. Irish men were unpleasant because long long ago, Ireland was reputed to have all these beautiful women(like Patricia Neal and Maureen O’Hara), so Vikings and others came to Ireland to steal the beauties. So, Irish men had to become the tough and rude Fighting Irish to beat back the horndogs from around the world.

    Indeed, anti-black race-ism lasted longer in the US because the Irish element of Americanism was more resistant to blacks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    Something that always fascinated me about John Ford's work was his concern for the ceremonies of innocence (to borrow a phrase from Burke). His soldiers and settlers live on the knife-edge of civilization, but that merely increases their appreciation for parties and dancing. Hence, the way that life at the eponymous Fort Apache is structured around formal dances and celebrations....until Henry Fonda's martinet of a colonel arrives and disrupts everything.....


    And then there's the wonderfully symbolic moment when Henry Fonda's Wyatt Earp goes from barbarous drover to civilized defender of the community in My Darling Clementine:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG8iDnC85ww
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Seems a stretch to me that Kozinski showed porn to female subordinates because Ashkenazi Jews in medieval times weren’t armed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  116. @anon
    Blacks are armed and crass.

    They are, but they have their own weird form of politeness. If you listen to interviews with gang-bangers, they always talk about how they have a really strict code of behavior on the streets. You hear about people getting shot for looking at someone the wrong way, and according to them, that's really true. They have rules about who can and can't say what to whom, and it can be enforced with extreme violence.

    They're still really vulgar, but there are rules of etiquette they have to follow. It's just a different set of rules. It's more about "disrespect" than vulgarity.

    You're right about the Amish, though.

    but there are rules of etiquette they have to follow.

    Badiquette.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. @Glossy
    Full disclosure: I'm of Ashkenazi background myself.

    There are many emotional differences between Mediterranean and Northern European people and some emotional differences between the Ashkenazim and other Mediterraneans.

    Meds are more outwardly emotional than Nords. More shouting, tears, drama of all sorts, within families and without. This looks undignified and unpleasant until one realizes how Nords deal with emotional stress. It drives them to drink. If you think that's more sensible or dignified, you might be a drunk. The optimal choice is of course to avoid both of these stereotypical behaviors.

    I don't think Jews are more or less outwardly emotional than other Med peoples. We're more neurotic, but that's a different thing. By neuroticism I mean the constant fear that bad things will happen to you, that whatever you're doing will fail, that everything is going to hell in general. High anxiety. Italians, Spaniards, Arabs, etc. are more into confidence. But it's not a quiet confidence like you'd see among Nords. It's the boastful, showboating kind. Which can look awesome when done the right way, don't get me wrong.

    Why are Meds more outwardly emotional than Nords? Most likely because over the past 10,000 years Meds tended to live in larger communities. Earlier advent of agriculture, warmer climate supporting higher population density.

    If most of your interactions are with the inanimate forces of nature, getting outwardly emotional in times of stress serves little purpose. If most of your interactions are with people, things are different. People can be bullied, shamed, cajoled, impressed, etc.

    Why are Ashkenazim neurotic? That I don't really know.

    Why are Meds more outwardly emotional than Nords?

    They got more Negroid mixture.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @Jack D
    Trump:

    you know I'm automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it's
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don't even wait
    01:21
    anyone you're a star they let you do it
    01:22
    you can do anything whatever you want
    01:24
    grab them by the pussy I can do anything

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPomcb0_IaE

    Are you saying this is fake? Or are you hair splitting and say he does not say that HE personally has ever done this but that "you" (one) can do this if they are a star. I understand that legally speaking Trump or his lawyers might make an argument like that (or say that he was just bragging - "locker room talk" and that in real life he would never do such a thing).

    But, please, let's be real - he is probably describing something that he has in fact done and more than once. Now it was never meant to be public and should never had been recorded or released. For that matter, he should not have bragged about it either. But I believe that he is actually telling the truth about the possibilities that are open to stars in general and I have no reason to believe that Trump would not have acted upon such availability once he realized that he fell in the "star" category himself. I really don't think any less of him for it. Note also that he is clearly describing a consensual relationship, not a rape. This is the way that powerful men have always interacted with females and the way that females are programmed to interact for the last million years.

    It’s not splitting hairs at all. Trump admits to doing some things in that tape. The infamous “grabbing” he doesn’t admit to doing. The most likely reason is that it’s not something he would do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. @Glossy
    Full disclosure: I'm of Ashkenazi background myself.

    There are many emotional differences between Mediterranean and Northern European people and some emotional differences between the Ashkenazim and other Mediterraneans.

    Meds are more outwardly emotional than Nords. More shouting, tears, drama of all sorts, within families and without. This looks undignified and unpleasant until one realizes how Nords deal with emotional stress. It drives them to drink. If you think that's more sensible or dignified, you might be a drunk. The optimal choice is of course to avoid both of these stereotypical behaviors.

    I don't think Jews are more or less outwardly emotional than other Med peoples. We're more neurotic, but that's a different thing. By neuroticism I mean the constant fear that bad things will happen to you, that whatever you're doing will fail, that everything is going to hell in general. High anxiety. Italians, Spaniards, Arabs, etc. are more into confidence. But it's not a quiet confidence like you'd see among Nords. It's the boastful, showboating kind. Which can look awesome when done the right way, don't get me wrong.

    Why are Meds more outwardly emotional than Nords? Most likely because over the past 10,000 years Meds tended to live in larger communities. Earlier advent of agriculture, warmer climate supporting higher population density.

    If most of your interactions are with the inanimate forces of nature, getting outwardly emotional in times of stress serves little purpose. If most of your interactions are with people, things are different. People can be bullied, shamed, cajoled, impressed, etc.

    Why are Ashkenazim neurotic? That I don't really know.

    Why are Meds more outwardly emotional than Nords? Most likely because over the past 10,000 years Meds tended to live in larger communities. Earlier advent of agriculture, warmer climate supporting higher population density.

    East Asians achieved high density living early as well, but are not prone to outward emotionality. Your hypothesis needs some work.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    A lot of East Asian entertainment is sentimental, sappy and melodramatic. Northern Euros hate stuff like that, find it ridiculous, laugh at it. So yes, I think they're less friendly to outward shows of emotion than East Asians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. @Jack D
    Trump:

    you know I'm automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it's
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don't even wait
    01:21
    anyone you're a star they let you do it
    01:22
    you can do anything whatever you want
    01:24
    grab them by the pussy I can do anything

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPomcb0_IaE

    Are you saying this is fake? Or are you hair splitting and say he does not say that HE personally has ever done this but that "you" (one) can do this if they are a star. I understand that legally speaking Trump or his lawyers might make an argument like that (or say that he was just bragging - "locker room talk" and that in real life he would never do such a thing).

    But, please, let's be real - he is probably describing something that he has in fact done and more than once. Now it was never meant to be public and should never had been recorded or released. For that matter, he should not have bragged about it either. But I believe that he is actually telling the truth about the possibilities that are open to stars in general and I have no reason to believe that Trump would not have acted upon such availability once he realized that he fell in the "star" category himself. I really don't think any less of him for it. Note also that he is clearly describing a consensual relationship, not a rape. This is the way that powerful men have always interacted with females and the way that females are programmed to interact for the last million years.

    Never watched the whole thing before – is Beta Billy Bush cringe AF or what?
    Lays it down yet again for those needing to know: looks are often insignificant in men.
    OTOH, one could argue Billy’s flying excellent wing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Whiskey
    Contra isn't Seinfeld about clueless losers trying desperately to figure out and follow the rules?

    Just like elites and poor tend to vote the same way — Democratic — while the Middle leans more to Republicans, maybe same applies to attitude.

    Maybe very high intelligence and very low intelligence are both ‘rude’ than the middle.

    Among the dummies, they don’t appreciate finer things and are stuck in childishness.

    Among the highly intelligent, the reasons could be numerous. Some are aspergy, meaning they are very good at certain mental skills but clueless about other things. Some genius types are like this.
    But there could be other reasons too. If you’re very smart, all the rules and etiquette may seem foolish, pompous, and ridiculous. Notice comedians tend to be high IQ, and they find human behavior funny as hell, esp because so many people try to be so ‘serious’ about stuff. Marx Brothers is about high IQ mocking respectable pretensions.

    So, if dummies lack manners cuz they don’t get it, the super-smarties may lack manners because they get it all-too-well and find it rather silly.

    Manners tend to be elitist, but it also checks the elites. It’s like traditional Japan. The elites had elegant manners, and that meant they were better than the masses. But the manners restrained their behavior too and expected them to follow certain behavioral codes. It also served as a straitjacket on them. Manners both elevated and imprisoned them.
    To a very smart person, these manners may seem stifling, stultifying, and suffocating.
    If Woody Allen were a Jewish samurai and faced with seppuku, I wonder how he would react to the ritualized madness.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D
    Trump:

    you know I'm automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it's
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don't even wait
    01:21
    anyone you're a star they let you do it
    01:22
    you can do anything whatever you want
    01:24
    grab them by the pussy I can do anything

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPomcb0_IaE

    Are you saying this is fake? Or are you hair splitting and say he does not say that HE personally has ever done this but that "you" (one) can do this if they are a star. I understand that legally speaking Trump or his lawyers might make an argument like that (or say that he was just bragging - "locker room talk" and that in real life he would never do such a thing).

    But, please, let's be real - he is probably describing something that he has in fact done and more than once. Now it was never meant to be public and should never had been recorded or released. For that matter, he should not have bragged about it either. But I believe that he is actually telling the truth about the possibilities that are open to stars in general and I have no reason to believe that Trump would not have acted upon such availability once he realized that he fell in the "star" category himself. I really don't think any less of him for it. Note also that he is clearly describing a consensual relationship, not a rape. This is the way that powerful men have always interacted with females and the way that females are programmed to interact for the last million years.

    The thing about this is, this part doesn’t really seem true:

    you know I’m automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it’s
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don’t even wait

    The problem with that is, I’ve seen videos of him around beautiful women, and he really doesn’t do that. It seems to be exaggeration for humorous effect.

    So the problem with the “grab ‘em by the pussy” thing is, that kind of sounds like exaggeration as well. The people who get so worked up about it are assuming that he’s being 100% literal when he says that, even though we all know that Trump exaggerates and says goofy stuff like that all the time.

    So the situation we have is a bunch of people who think Trump lies about everything, who insist, in this case, that he’s telling the literal truth, when it’s pretty obvious he’s just doing his usual goofball patter.

    I’m not saying he’s never done anything like that. But that statement doesn’t prove much one way or the other.

    Of course, I still think the best response is to point out that Hillary Clinton wanted to turn America into Brazil, and that’s a lot worse than grabbing someone. If there was a candidate who wasn’t so vulgar, who also didn’t admit to wanting to turn America into a third-world country, I would’ve voted for them, but since there wasn’t, what choice did I have?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    If you can't trust Trump to not overstate his success, who can you trust?
    , @Jack D

    The problem with that is, I’ve seen videos of him around beautiful women, and he really doesn’t do that.
     
    You're kidding right? Obviously he doesn't just rape women in public. He was talking about what goes on behind closed doors. Now maybe he was exaggerating his success with the ladies - he's no Bill Clinton. But judging by what you have seen him do in public? That's worthless. Even Harvey Weinstein would bring the women to his hotel room first.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. @peterike

    But behind the putative therapeutic and scientific goals of Freud’s project, Cuddihy argues, lurked the mischievous motivations of a counter-cultural prankster.

     

    Way too polite. Freud was deliberately creating a weapon system to be used to dismantle gentile Western civilization.

    In general, Jews are largely responsible for the decimation of manners and civility in America, despite "Miss Manners" herself being a Jew (but then, like many Jews, she found a seam of gold and knew precisely how to mine it effectively) (as did those Progressive sister weapons Ann Landers and Dear Abby). All that contempt for "bourgeois morality" has played havoc with American society and given us the nation of raw, warring factions that we have now.

    Way too polite. Freud was deliberately creating a weapon system to be used to dismantle gentile Western civilization.

    Citation needed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Citation needed.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/books/review/adventures-in-the-orgasmatron.html
    Little did Freud know how his intellectual discoveries would transform America, which he dismissed as an "anti-paradise" or a "gigantic mistake." Though he feared that Americans would enthusiastically "embrace and ruin psychoanalysis" by popularizing it and watering it down, he already suspected that his theories would in some way shake the country to the core. While watching the waving crowds from the deck of his ship as it docked in New York, he turned to his fellow analyst Carl Gustav Jung and said, "Don't they know we're bringing them the plague?"
     

    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a342/beb8bc59dc106f7a7f3f4336a00c0a61ba2f.pdf
    Hannibal, with whom I had achieved this point of similarity, had been my favourite hero during my years at the Gymnasium; like so many boys of my age, I bestowed my sympathies in the Punic war not on the Romans, but on the Carthaginians. Moreover, when I finally came to realize the consequences of belonging to an alien race, and was forced by the anti-Semitic feeling among my classmates to take a definite stand, the figure of the Semitic commander assumed still greater proportions in my imagination. Hannibal and Rome symbolized, in my youthful eyes, the struggle between the tenacity of the Jews and the organization of the Catholic Church.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. @J.Ross
    I can't speak authoritatively but I have read a little in this area and I think there was a kind of equal and opposite complaint -- the "falsely polite" Jew showing you up with his excessive ingratiating. German brusqueness is a kind of honesty tied to humility, so anyone using too many pleases has something to hide or is putting on airs. Jewish impoliteness is a self-consciousness of power. Weinstein's not in trouble because women are coming forward, he's in trouble because Hollywood is collapsing.

    Weinstein’s not in trouble because women are coming forward, he’s in trouble because Hollywood is collapsing.

    What does this mean?

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    It is my belief that Hollywood had much more influence and ability in the past, and, for many reasons, this vitality is declining. In other words, in the Thirties, the Fifties or even the Eighties, this would not be what it is, but in all those eras, ticket sales, audience loyalty, and cultural market share would also be dramatically higher.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. @anon
    The thing about this is, this part doesn't really seem true:

    you know I’m automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it’s
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don’t even wait

    The problem with that is, I've seen videos of him around beautiful women, and he really doesn't do that. It seems to be exaggeration for humorous effect.

    So the problem with the "grab 'em by the pussy" thing is, that kind of sounds like exaggeration as well. The people who get so worked up about it are assuming that he's being 100% literal when he says that, even though we all know that Trump exaggerates and says goofy stuff like that all the time.

    So the situation we have is a bunch of people who think Trump lies about everything, who insist, in this case, that he's telling the literal truth, when it's pretty obvious he's just doing his usual goofball patter.

    I'm not saying he's never done anything like that. But that statement doesn't prove much one way or the other.

    Of course, I still think the best response is to point out that Hillary Clinton wanted to turn America into Brazil, and that's a lot worse than grabbing someone. If there was a candidate who wasn't so vulgar, who also didn't admit to wanting to turn America into a third-world country, I would've voted for them, but since there wasn't, what choice did I have?

    If you can’t trust Trump to not overstate his success, who can you trust?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. @Anon
    It goes beyond women. Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he’s being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff. This is profoundly irritating to someone who’s been properly brought up.

    And Jews didn't want to break bread with tainted goyim.

    But most Jews don't act like this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVHYyrsW_Ok

    Greeks are more likely to act like that. If you want a scene, go with Greeks. Colorful people.

    Also, it's part of American mythos to make fun of table manners. It's the Jacksonian side of Americanism. Excessive manners are Old World and crusty.

    American Way is to have manners but to keep it simple. It's like serving steaks and taters in MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE. It doesn't have to be fancy... but Liberty took it too far when he tripped someone over. The Duke aint asking for nothing fancy. But he don't want to eat his meat off the floor.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nI_BKLpSFQg

    But there is the populist side of Americanism that just loves to make fun of fancy manners.

    https://youtu.be/JzzE6XLbC8M?t=1m27s

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1LRD3DtFAo

    Lucille Ball show with Desi as gangster

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMvHX-kh5VM

    The joint doesn't have to be fancy. Mocking decorum is part of American Populism.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Tzs4hUjLCo

    The chicken or the egg question. Consider a film like HIS GIRL FRIDAY, one of the hectic and high energy movies ever made. It was directed by Hawks and has Anglo characters but was written by Ben Hecht who was Jewish. Was Hecht projecting Jewish personality types onto Anglos or did he pick up on Anglo-American energy of irreverence and freedom himself?

    In some ways, it was the Jews who felt intimidated by the animal energy of Anglo Americans who were into rugged stuff like hunting, boxing, and football. In the West, the gunmen and saloon brawlers were usually big white guys like Chuck Connors in BIG COUNTRY. Jews usually ran businesses and stayed out of trouble like the guy in CIMARRON. So, the gentle wasp vs pushy Jew dichotomy is a bit misleading, and it may not have become an issue if Jews didn't rise to the top so fast. Among the hoi polloi, fancy manners was not a thing, especially among the Scots-Irish in the South and Indiana. Whose Ear?

    Also, Jews weren't alone in 'bad manners'. Greeks, Southern Italians, 'dumb' Poles, and etc all came from crude backgrounds. Jewish manners stood out not so much against the American Masses but against American elites. I mean a pushy Jew would hardly would have seemed out of place in some joint frequented by bikers, Negroes, hillbillies, or etc.
    It stood out because rapidly rising Jews suddenly found themselves in the world of upper crust where manners did matter, and such manners had to be developed over time.

    As for Jewish Energy in America, to what extent did Jews infuse Americanism with Jewish chutzpah and to what extent did Jews channel the democratic individualism of anti-elitist America? Did Jews take the Western Saloon brawl and turn it into a pie fight? Add some zany humor to it?

    Same goes for Jews and Negroes. It went back and forth. Jews took a lot from black music, but they became so influential as music merchants and composers that they, in turn, influenced black music. Brill Building often had Jews writing black-style music for black performers. Phil Specter expanded the black idiom, and other blacks took from it as well.

    Figures like Ayn Rand and Norman Mailer are both very American and very Jewish. Rand was born high-energy but her personality really came alive in the world of American Freedom created by Anglo energies. She infused Americanism with her energy but she also channeled American energy, and much of it was not Jewish.
    And Mailer obviously channeled a lot of manhood mythos from Hemingway who was into sports and hunting.

    America was made by 'rude' men with big personalities. Andrew Jackson certainly but recently Donald Trump. John Huston, Sam Peckinpah, Howard Hawks, D.W. Griffith, Raoul Walsh were pretty wild guys. And they loved the irreverent aspect of American Culture. And some of them burned out because they pushed too hard. If only Peckinpah had more sense. He could have lasted as long as Sidney Lumet who was more cautious and sensible. Indeed, it was often the case that gentiles crashed and burned because they had less self-control than Jews did. In general, Jewish rock stars seemed to have longer lifespans than gentile ones. And Jewish actors survived and aged better than someone like Mickey Rourke that wild Irishman.

    And there is the Irish thing. If the Brits were able to keep the Irish down for a long time, the Irish rose pretty fast in democratic America, and Middle America became Anglo-Irish in attitude, esp as so many big cities were ruled by Irish Machine even if Wasp held positions at the top.
    And Irish were feisty. Irish men were unpleasant because long long ago, Ireland was reputed to have all these beautiful women(like Patricia Neal and Maureen O'Hara), so Vikings and others came to Ireland to steal the beauties. So, Irish men had to become the tough and rude Fighting Irish to beat back the horndogs from around the world.

    Indeed, anti-black race-ism lasted longer in the US because the Irish element of Americanism was more resistant to blacks.

    Something that always fascinated me about John Ford’s work was his concern for the ceremonies of innocence (to borrow a phrase from Burke). His soldiers and settlers live on the knife-edge of civilization, but that merely increases their appreciation for parties and dancing. Hence, the way that life at the eponymous Fort Apache is structured around formal dances and celebrations….until Henry Fonda’s martinet of a colonel arrives and disrupts everything…..

    And then there’s the wonderfully symbolic moment when Henry Fonda’s Wyatt Earp goes from barbarous drover to civilized defender of the community in My Darling Clementine:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @Dieter Kief
    It definitley hit me, when theToronto psychologist Jordan B. Peterson said in one of his videos, that many a hysterical women today is out of her mind - and that he doesn't know really, what to do - i. e.: He doesn't (doesn't!) know, how to react, when confronted with those "crazy women".

    These things might have to do with the Id and the superEgo insofar, as many of the accompanying strange ways of behavior are so far from discourse, that - in the end - even the pretty verbal JBP gives in and says, he's stuck.

    PS

    The good old days, when subjects like these could be written - and made fun of, of course, in MAD - see Abe's post above, No. 16.
    Or when, I could add, in the German satirical monthly "TITANIC" there could be a hole page with the sigh in a cartoon of one of the true Frankfurtian masters, Friedrich-Karl Wächter, if I remember right: This exclamatory sigh read: "It's about time, women return to normal again!" - meant as a counterpunch against the (often times intimidating and/ or curious) 80ies exaggerations of the Women's Lib movement.

    What does he mean by “out of their mind”? What does he see as the cause?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    He's making fun of (some of) the feminists for having crossed the line between rationality and - hysteria. Indirectly he claims, that they therefor have lost their good temper - and their humor. Returning to normal would then mean to cool down and take it easy at times and find that point again, where you are able to laugh - not least about your feminist self!

    There were two writers/ caricaturists (both masters in their field) at the satirical monthly TITANIC, who could, within a left framework, apply such critique, and nobody used to bother in the eighties- with the exeption of the most humorless and bitter in the women's lib movement and some authoritarin leftists.
    Ah, the other witty&brave and highly productive man was Chlodwig Poth. His best known book in this realm was a book of self-reflective Comic-Strips called My progressive Everyday Life (Mein progessiver Alltag).

    PS

    I never - ever! - found an essay or an article from an American or Englisch writer about Chlodwig Poth or Friedrich Karl Waechter. This stuff seemed to be clearly over the head - for liberal Americans and Englishmen especially. Or maybe it was the beginnign of this whole PC-way of - eheh - "thinking". Then clearly, Poth and Waechter were - what: Anti-emancipative wrong-headed blokes.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. @Anon
    To assume that all Jews living in the Russian shtetl were merchants is really naive. Some of them were, but plenty of them were not.

    To assume that all Jews living in the Russian shtetl were merchants is really naive. Some of them were, but plenty of them were not.

    I was making the point that they were not farmers or peasants. Framers were a tiny minority. Yes, not all of them were merchants but there were many craftsmen who also engaged in selling their products.

    http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Shtetl

    The shtetl was also marked by occupational diversity. While elsewhere in the Diaspora Jews often were found in a small number of occupations, frequently determined by political restrictions, in the shtetl Jewish occupations ran the gamut from wealthy contractors and entrepreneurs, to shopkeepers, carpenters, shoemakers, tailors, teamsters, and water carriers.

    https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/polish-jewry-between-the-wars/
    The Jewish economic structure was significantly different from that of the surrounding population. While a majority of ethnic Poles were employed in agriculture, in 1931 about 96 percent of Polish Jews worked in non-farm occupations, mainly as artisans, traders, or small shopkeepers. Small minorities were industrialists or members of the liberal professions, though they comprised a higher percentage of these professions than the percentage of Jews in the population. In 1931, 56 percent of doctors and one-third of lawyers and other legal professionals were Jewish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. @Anon
    Heidi Bond, who clerked for Judge Kozinski in 2006 and 2007, said he repeatedly called her in to look at pornography on his computer, and asked if she was aroused by it. On her personal blog, she described how he privately showed her his “knock chart,” a list of women he had sex with in college.

    I thought open sexuality is not only healthy but empowering and liberating. If Slut Pride is good, why not Stud Pride? If women say they should act and dress like sluts but not be judged for it, why shouldn't men act like studs and not be judged for it?

    Sexuality has been publicized and normalized, with every Disney idol growing up to be a whore. If women are encouraged to act more 'natural' and uninhibited, why shouldn't it apply to men as well?
    Also, just look at how tattoos have become normalized, even among the elites. So, the message is there are no longer any improprieties. Anything goes.
    Also, it is a fact that women now have potty mouths just like men and talk dirty at the workplace with the men. Movies show this all the time. Youtube is full of female vlogs with potty mouths and candid sexual talk as if sex is nothing more special than shaking hands. And stuff like Tinder encourage sex to be a casual hookup thing. Boys and girls are encouraged to lose virginity as soon as possible.
    There are articles about how adultery is a good thing.

    When sex has been casualized, what is wrong with boing behavior? It is now 'normal', like talking about food. If Kosinski had asked the women to look porn images, how is it different from asking them to look at images of food? If we are to treat sex as a loose casual thing, why be uptight about it?

    On the one hand, progs say we should treat sex as just a casual thing like eating a burger. We should lose our inhibitions and hangups. They even promote nudie Femen and vile Pussy Riot that goes for lewd public displays in churches. Women are encouraged to sexualize public spaces as much as possible as a Human Right. And 'twerking' has been elevated to national pastime. Kids are taught the wonders of butt 'sex' at a young age. Cosmo and other girly mags are porny with advice how women should 'peg their men' and think dildo all the time.

    A giant statue of Monroe was put up where everyone could ogle at her panties.

    http://www.chicagonow.com/chicago-quirk/files/2012/05/my-marilyn-monroe-statue-chicago-tacky-tourist-photos-x-214x300.jpg

    http://www.trbimg.com/img-5328713c/turbine/chi-marilyn-monroe-statue-chicago-defaced-graffiti-20110827

    Progs push this kind of culture but are now whining about how lewd and vulgar people are acting.

    It's like women protesting Trump's alleged sexual abuses by wearing pussy hats and costumes. "We protest Trump's stud behavior by declaring ourselves shameless sluts." It's pornography and puritanism combined. Pornitanism.

    It's like blacks wallowing in culture of violence but throwing fits about violence done to blacks.
    It's like homos wallowing in culture of pansyass vulgarity and flamboyance but bitching about how people find them ridiculous.
    It's like Jews wallowing in a culture of hostility and nastiness but getting so antsy about hostility shown to Jews.

    If you start a forest fire, it can destroy your side too. But we live in such an egotistical and 'ethnotistical' age. Some groups want to subvert rules and act more freely... but are shocked when greater licentiousness or lack of inhibitions lead to behavior by other groups that offend them.
    Homos still haven't owned up to the fact their sicko behavior led to AIDS disaster in the 80s. If anything, they were turned into saints and gifted with 'pride' parades, 'gay marriage', and homomania as new religion. Identity Politics is shocked that whites also want an identity.

    Personally, I think society would be better with more inhibitions and proprieties. But progs mock such notions as passe and call for Miley-Cyrus/Lena-Dunham kind of behavior. But when (white) men get into the spirit of this New Normal, the progs throw a fit!

    Progs do see the problems that Conservatives see(and have often noted) but they cannot admit their role in creating this ugly culture. So, they are trying to restore proper behavior at the top because fish rots from the head. But condemning individuals without addressing the foulness of the culture in general and the fact that this culture has been vulgarized esp by Jewish pornographers, black rappers, feminist slut priders,and flaming homos is to see the trees but not the forest.

    Sex, nudity, porn (tearing down every last vestige of traditional propriety) were said to be liberating, empowering–doubly so for women. Then the law of unintended consequences intervenes, and the prog-left auditions for Captain Renault’s role of being shocked, shocked!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. @Stan Adams
    Stern has, on occasion, gone after yentas. During the Lewinsky scandal, he did a parody faux-Beatles song called "I Wanna Use My Mouth."

    He also exploited this schizophrenic woman for a couple of years:
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LZyKNkSvdP0

    None of her Stern clips are SFW, but if you're looking for an introduction to Jewish crassness, there are worse places to start:
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XHBiNZCeDvw

    In doing so, he would be shaming them, discouraging promiscuity. Elesewhere, was he encouraging it?

    That would be two very different kinds of “going after.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. @anon
    You’ll learn that Yiddish was a very clean language — even Yiddish insults.

    What does the word "schmuck" mean?

    or on crude exhortations to engage in this or that sex act, or to introduce this or that foreign object into your various orifices.

    Until the past fifty years or so, how common were those in any language, though?

    What does the word “schmuck” mean?

    It means jewel, at least in German.

    There is some question whether the Yiddish word comes from the German. Alternate explanations are that it is a sort of rhyming slang. A little boy’s organ is a “shteckl” (a little stick) , rhymed into shmekl and schmuck is a back formation from the diminutive . This seems too convoluted to me (usually the diminutive is derived from the main noun, not the other way around). Or else it is from the old Polish smok meaning grass snake (schlong means snake so this is not implausible).

    But anyway, the word schmuck is a million times more common in English than it is in Yiddish, at least in respectable households. Perhaps this word was used among Yiddish gangsters or longshoremen or whatever but among the middle classes it was extremely rare to use profanity, ever (and when you did, it was usually in Polish or Russian, not in Yiddish).

    Amusingly, a very common curse in Yiddish was “Geh [go] kerbenye matri”. In Yiddish, it means “bug off” and is considered relatively mild – something that even moms might say to their kids if they are annoying them. It’s not considered strong at all. But in the original Russian it is “idti [go] k ebene materi,” which literally means “go to [your] fucked mother” and is very obscene. I think most Yiddish speakers didn’t even realize what they were saying.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    This seems too convoluted to me (usually the diminutive is derived from the main noun, not the other way around). Or else it is from the old Polish smok meaning grass snake (schlong means snake so this is not implausible).

    Fascinating. I wasn't really expecting the whole etymology of it, but I find that kind of thing interesting.

    But the fact remains, it means what I thought it did: a slang term for the male rodney.

    But anyway, the word schmuck is a million times more common in English than it is in Yiddish


    I have no idea if you're being serious here or not, but if you are, how could you possibly know this? Are you professing knowledge of the slang usage of the whole sweep of Yiddish-speaking people, for all those centuries? I believe most of the things I read on the internet, but I'm not sure about this.

    Perhaps this word was used among Yiddish gangsters or longshoremen or whatever but among the middle classes it was extremely rare to use profanity, ever

    OK, well, I don't know whether I believe this or not, but I believe that it's somewhat true in general, like it's true of all people. Like, when I was in rougher circumstances as a kid, I'd hear people getting called a "cocksucker" on at least a daily basis. Now that I run in more semi-respectable circles, I hardly ever hear it.

    But then, this could be because it would be considered a compliment nowadays. It's hard to tell.

    Of course, this is somewhat context-dependant too. For example, if Thomas Wolfe isn't lying to me, New York City lawyers swear like sailors, to compensate for the fact that they're a bunch of weasels sitting in a room, figuring out ways to out-weasel each other.

    (Speaking of which, when does the book club start, Steve?)

    But in the original Russian it is “idti [go] k ebene materi,” which literally means “go to [your] fucked mother” and is very obscene. I think most Yiddish speakers didn’t even realize what they were saying.

    Or, maybe they did, and their relationship with vulgarity is more complicated than you were letting on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. @Flip
    I think a mandatory retirement age at 70 is warranted.

    I think a mandatory retirement age at 70 is warranted.

    Don’t airline pilots have to retire at 60? Or maybe they could demonstrate fitness. A once-a-year cage match with the bailiff – gotta win two out of three years or retire.

    Read More
    • Replies: @William Badwhite
    "Don’t airline pilots have to retire at 60?"

    It was raised to 65 (from 60) about 10 years ago. Also a pilot who serves as pilot-in-command (i.e. the captain) is required to have a 1st class FAA medical, which requires a physical (eyes, blood pressure, etc) every 6 months. Or to be more accurate, the medical expires after 6 months so the pilot is actually getting a new one each time.

    There are other types of commercial aviation in which a pilot can work past 65 (freight, flying charters, flight instructing, etc) but for scheduled passenger carrying operations, 65 is the end.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. @Opinionator
    Way too polite. Freud was deliberately creating a weapon system to be used to dismantle gentile Western civilization.

    Citation needed.

    Citation needed.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/books/review/adventures-in-the-orgasmatron.html
    Little did Freud know how his intellectual discoveries would transform America, which he dismissed as an “anti-paradise” or a “gigantic mistake.” Though he feared that Americans would enthusiastically “embrace and ruin psychoanalysis” by popularizing it and watering it down, he already suspected that his theories would in some way shake the country to the core. While watching the waving crowds from the deck of his ship as it docked in New York, he turned to his fellow analyst Carl Gustav Jung and said, “Don’t they know we’re bringing them the plague?”

    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a342/beb8bc59dc106f7a7f3f4336a00c0a61ba2f.pdf
    Hannibal, with whom I had achieved this point of similarity, had been my favourite hero during my years at the Gymnasium; like so many boys of my age, I bestowed my sympathies in the Punic war not on the Romans, but on the Carthaginians. Moreover, when I finally came to realize the consequences of belonging to an alien race, and was forced by the anti-Semitic feeling among my classmates to take a definite stand, the figure of the Semitic commander assumed still greater proportions in my imagination. Hannibal and Rome symbolized, in my youthful eyes, the struggle between the tenacity of the Jews and the organization of the Catholic Church.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Interesting. I wonder what he meant with that "plague" comment. Assuming anecdote has been accurately reported, it is difficult to imagine someone straightforwardly regarding his work as akin to spreading plague. Was it instead sarcasm? Was he mocking his critics as being paranoid?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. @Abe
    Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful! I come here for Steve’s world-beating droll sense of humor, and here he gives me something incredibly substantive and fascinating to chew on. In real life I am much more polite and congenial than my political blog Internet persona would have you believe, so it’s fascinating to be introduced to a sharp thinker like Cuddihy who can give clear, memorable examples of the practice of civility, yet also discuss it in its broader context, as I take so much of it for granted in daily life. Will almost certainly get that book if there is an electronic edition available.

    Some random observations: yes, what happened to our freedom to make public, armchair ethnological observations (i.e. Pollack/Italian/Jew/WASP jokes)? It was so uncontroversial I remember it being a frequent staple of even kiddy fare like MAD MAGAZINE.

    I’ve also thought that a return to some sort of dueling convention might be to the overall good of our society. Let some tension out before it builds up too much and people get massacred. Instead of passively aggressively snarking through the next 3 years, or maintaining this feverish dream of Russia collusion/impeachment-any-day now, wouldn’t it be better for the psyches of even the most low-T, soy boy, yaaaz-queen! liberals to be able to call out Trump when he says something particularly outrageous, and instead of stewing on it to further derangement of their psyches, say “All right, Trump! You and Trevor Noah, at dawn, pistols at 100 paces!”

    I’ve also thought that a return to some sort of dueling convention might be to the overall good of our society. Let some tension out before it builds up too much and people get massacred. Instead of passively aggressively snarking through the next 3 years, or maintaining this feverish dream of Russia collusion/impeachment-any-day now, wouldn’t it be better for the psyches of even the most low-T, soy boy, yaaaz-queen! liberals to be able to call out Trump when he says something particularly outrageous, and instead of stewing on it to further derangement of their psyches, say “All right, Trump! You and Trevor Noah, at dawn, pistols at 100 paces!”

    You show me a piece of paper saying that, I’ll cramp my hand to sign it.

    You put it on a ballot, I’ll blister my thumb to push the “Yes” button.

    You put dueling on TV, I’ll tune in, put down the remote, take the phone off the hook, pull up the popcorn and beer, and settle in.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    OT/

    So, apparently Arizona State has something called the “School of Social Transformation”. Here is the list of majors:

    African and African American Studies
    Asian Pacific American Studies
    Justice and Social Inquiry
    Social and Cultural Pedagogy
    Women and Gender Studies

    I was surprised that there was no Chicanx studies, so I looked it up and there’s actually a whole “School of Transborder Studies”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  136. Heidi Bond complains that her career was derailed, but she went on to clerk for two US supreme court justices, and to be a law professor.

    Also she writes pornography for a living now, so I don’t think she would have been shocked to have been asked about porn.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  137. @anon
    The thing about this is, this part doesn't really seem true:

    you know I’m automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it’s
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don’t even wait

    The problem with that is, I've seen videos of him around beautiful women, and he really doesn't do that. It seems to be exaggeration for humorous effect.

    So the problem with the "grab 'em by the pussy" thing is, that kind of sounds like exaggeration as well. The people who get so worked up about it are assuming that he's being 100% literal when he says that, even though we all know that Trump exaggerates and says goofy stuff like that all the time.

    So the situation we have is a bunch of people who think Trump lies about everything, who insist, in this case, that he's telling the literal truth, when it's pretty obvious he's just doing his usual goofball patter.

    I'm not saying he's never done anything like that. But that statement doesn't prove much one way or the other.

    Of course, I still think the best response is to point out that Hillary Clinton wanted to turn America into Brazil, and that's a lot worse than grabbing someone. If there was a candidate who wasn't so vulgar, who also didn't admit to wanting to turn America into a third-world country, I would've voted for them, but since there wasn't, what choice did I have?

    The problem with that is, I’ve seen videos of him around beautiful women, and he really doesn’t do that.

    You’re kidding right? Obviously he doesn’t just rape women in public. He was talking about what goes on behind closed doors. Now maybe he was exaggerating his success with the ladies – he’s no Bill Clinton. But judging by what you have seen him do in public? That’s worthless. Even Harvey Weinstein would bring the women to his hotel room first.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    You’re kidding right?

    No, Jack, I am not. He describes himself as being drawn to them like a magnet. Now matter how much you want to pretend to believe it, this is obviously not literally true.

    Now, he could be exaggerating a little, or he could be exaggerating a lot. But it's obviously hyperbole.

    Which, again, is the kind of thing he does all the time.
    , @Brutusale
    True enough that Trump is no Bill Clinton. Trump's least attractive leavings are far more comely than Bubba BJ's hottest (legal) conquest.

    The aforementioned Howard Stern had former NBA star Charles Barkley on one day when Barkley was riffing on the famous people he has partied with. He told a story about being at the Trump penthouse (when Trump was between wives) for a shindig and it was full of supermodels. The line that I remember best is when Barkley said that the hot tub looked like egg-drop soup by the end of the night!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @Anon
    It goes beyond women. Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he's being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff. This is profoundly irritating to someone who's been properly brought up.

    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them. Making a terrible scene in public is a major faux pas in WASP culture, because one of the defining characteristics of people who run things in life is that they are hard to rattle, they stay in control of their emotions, they fix problems quickly and easily, and they do all of these things with panache.

    The generation of Jews who complained about not getting into the country clubs were only 1-2 generations themselves from being peasants on the Russian shtetl, and they were taught peasant manners.

    Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he’s being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff.

    I’m Jewish, and I LOL’ed at Jackie Mason’s routine about Jews and Gentiles in restaurants. My father was exactly like that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @Opinionator
    Weinstein’s not in trouble because women are coming forward, he’s in trouble because Hollywood is collapsing.

    What does this mean?

    It is my belief that Hollywood had much more influence and ability in the past, and, for many reasons, this vitality is declining. In other words, in the Thirties, the Fifties or even the Eighties, this would not be what it is, but in all those eras, ticket sales, audience loyalty, and cultural market share would also be dramatically higher.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Also, it’s part of American mythos to make fun of table manners. It’s the Jacksonian side of Americanism. Excessive manners are Old World and crusty.

    I suppose it depends on where you draw the line. Personally, I think e.g. scooping your soup away from you makes perfect sense, but maybe 1 in 50 Americans know it’s “proper.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes

    Excessive manners are Old World and crusty...
     
    ...are what people say when they have none.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. @Abe

    Id and superego don’t really exist. Freud just invented them out of thin air. Now that we know more about brain structures, they simply aren’t there. However, they are surprisingly useful constructs that have a lot of explanatory power
     
    Yep, Jack, that’s the thing- I remember in the 80’s how seriously everyone who was intellectually anyone took Freud, and thinking that while this whole id/ego/superego thing made sense, the whole secretly wanting to kill my dad to sleep with my mom thing made absolutely no sense, but that’s supposed to be subconscious, so am I a rube for not accepting this thing that goes against every fiber of my being and is literally supposed to be unprovable simply because all the smart, sophisticated people say I should? Being a dissident on that was the beginning of my intellectual nonconformism, and honestly as socially trying as being a Trump supporter is today.

    Yes Freudianism was everywhere in the 1970s and 80s, even places you wouldn’t expect to find it, like serious academic history books. Then in the 1990s it suddenly disappeared.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    Yes Freudianism was everywhere in the 1970s and 80s, even places you wouldn’t expect to find it, like serious academic history books. Then in the 1990s it suddenly disappeared.
     
    Feminists noticed that Freud had had the audacity to formulate a theory of femininity using explanatory mechanisms such as penisneid.

    He was intellectual persona non grata after that.

    By the way, it was more like the 1960s and early to mid 1970s, I think.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. @Jack D
    Trump:

    you know I'm automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it's
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don't even wait
    01:21
    anyone you're a star they let you do it
    01:22
    you can do anything whatever you want
    01:24
    grab them by the pussy I can do anything

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPomcb0_IaE

    Are you saying this is fake? Or are you hair splitting and say he does not say that HE personally has ever done this but that "you" (one) can do this if they are a star. I understand that legally speaking Trump or his lawyers might make an argument like that (or say that he was just bragging - "locker room talk" and that in real life he would never do such a thing).

    But, please, let's be real - he is probably describing something that he has in fact done and more than once. Now it was never meant to be public and should never had been recorded or released. For that matter, he should not have bragged about it either. But I believe that he is actually telling the truth about the possibilities that are open to stars in general and I have no reason to believe that Trump would not have acted upon such availability once he realized that he fell in the "star" category himself. I really don't think any less of him for it. Note also that he is clearly describing a consensual relationship, not a rape. This is the way that powerful men have always interacted with females and the way that females are programmed to interact for the last million years.

    Everyone including the fake-outraged understands that Trump is casually and colloquially describing the shocking reversal of sexual rules that is only possible when you are a known success, and that he is not talking about manually seizing an internal organ.
    We live in the daylight world, where men are assumed to always want sex, and women are assumed to never want sex. Then you get both real success and notoriety — not a meaningless lottery ticket but some masterful accomplishment that brings admiration with the millions, and the girls push their way into your lap. That’s what he’s talking about.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Are you saying this is fake? Or are you hair splitting and say he does not say that HE personally has ever done this but that “you” (one) can do this if they are a star.

    It would help if you didn’t selectively quote like a shyster. IIRC, he plainly says “you can grab em,” not “I grab em.” Seems like a pretty important “hair” to separate the abstract from the concrete.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  144. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    The problem with that is, I’ve seen videos of him around beautiful women, and he really doesn’t do that.
     
    You're kidding right? Obviously he doesn't just rape women in public. He was talking about what goes on behind closed doors. Now maybe he was exaggerating his success with the ladies - he's no Bill Clinton. But judging by what you have seen him do in public? That's worthless. Even Harvey Weinstein would bring the women to his hotel room first.

    You’re kidding right?

    No, Jack, I am not. He describes himself as being drawn to them like a magnet. Now matter how much you want to pretend to believe it, this is obviously not literally true.

    Now, he could be exaggerating a little, or he could be exaggerating a lot. But it’s obviously hyperbole.

    Which, again, is the kind of thing he does all the time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    We lived in a messed-up world of mixed signals.

    Is it wrong for a professional to be discussing/showing porn at work? I would say yes.

    But Kozinski grew up during the Sexual Revolution when attitudes changed. And women must take some of the blame.

    In RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING Buchanan recounts how he had some friend for dinner who saw Bergman’s VIRGIN SPRING(which has a rape scene), and the guy was talking about it when Father Buchanan got angry and fumed about men in his house don’t talk about such stuff in front of womenfolk. A real patriarch.

    But people today would find such notions ridiculous or even offensive. Shield women from such stuff? Women need protection? Oh no, that is condescending and patriarchal. But at the time same, we are now told students and minorities must be protected from stuff that might ‘trigger’ them.

    When I grew up, there was sexy and raunchy stuff everywhere. Not as bad as today, but it was there all over the place. And my sister who was two yrs older than me told me about what girls at school talk about. Sex, sex, movies like CARRIE, and such stuff. And when we moved to the suburbs, she said the main topics were sex and drugs. Some of the things she told me about her friends were truly mindblowing(either bad parenting or pop culture influence is truly pernicious), but thankfully she had better things on her mind.

    Things were hardly different in respectable middle class community. In high school freshman yr, a bunch of girls were talking about PORKY’S, and they thought the scene with the fat woman yanking on the guy’s pud was hilarious. Boys and girls had no qualms about talking about all sorts of sexual stuff. They loved to watch the same vulgar standup comedies and TV shows like Saturday Night Live and Eddie Murphy.

    In middle school, in our Washington DC trip, our school met up with another school at the hotel, and a Jewish girl from that school was really slutty and flirtatious with the guys, and the guys got Too Excited and too grab-happy, and then she was a puddle of tears. She got more than she bargained for. Nothing really happened, but if you throw meat to the dogs, they come to bite. But women can be pretty horny too. One Jewish guy(who later turned out to be homo) came out of the shower and was holding a pillow over his groin. A bunch of girls ran into the room and did their best to tear that pillow from him. I figured I’d give the girls some help, but the panicked fella held onto the pillow for dear life.

    A Jewish kid who went on a trip to Israel told me he met up with a NY contingent, and in the hotel room, he was confronted with a Jewish girl who stood in the room with her boobs out. When he reminded her of the situation, her reply was No Big Deal since all the guys had seen her boobies already.

    All throughout the 70s and 80s, the movie MASH played often and it made fun of moralists. It was cool to be raw and raunchy and pull the shower curtains to show off a woman’s nudity.

    There’s a scene in GHOST WORLD where the girl asks the Buscemi character to take her to an adult book store.

    Such attitude is common among girls who grew up after the Sexual Revolution. Kozinski grew up during the sexual revolution when the idea that men had to shield women from some kind of stuff was considered passe, even offensive.

    If anything, people today might find Cybil Sheperd’s reaction in TAXI DRIVER kind of odd since female journals today discuss nothing but sex, sex, and porny behavior of all kinds.

    And I think girls today will find Mrs. Robinson cooler than Elaine who turns her head away from a strip tease. She’s soooo old-fashioned.

    Feminists have been elevating Miley Cyrus and Lena Dunham as role models for young girls. Girls should grow up with that kind of attitude and sensibility. They should be raw, raunchy, shameless, and vulgar. And if men cannot stand such women, they are ‘weak’ and ‘threatened’.

    But now, my oh my, these precious ladies have been traumatized by men who have boing on their minds.

    And these feminists are okay big tranny men using women’s room and big tranny men entering women’s sports and kicking women’s ass. But all of a sudden, they are sooooooo traumatized by Charlie Rose’s nudity?

    Maybe using men to mock women was okay and acceptable when the women were wasps, like blonde hot lips houlihan in MASH. But now that so many Jewish women are moving up, they don’t want to be bothered.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    All throughout the 70s and 80s, the movie MASH played often and it made fun of moralists. It was cool to be raw and raunchy and pull the shower curtains to show off a woman’s nudity.
     
    WOKE feminists hate Altman's MASH; I have a female colleague who uses it in her class to demonstrate the "routinization of '70s cinematic misogyny."

    And I think girls today will find Mrs. Robinson cooler than Elaine who turns her head away from a strip tease. She’s soooo old-fashioned.
     
    Another film that is getting to be in bad odor. Lots of my feminist colleagues have talked about how that movie is deeply problematic.....
    , @guest
    It's not hard to understand why Cybil Shepherd is creeped out by being escorted to a porn flick. Creepy Travis Bickle took her. If she had been taken by Don Juan instead, she might have been swept off her feet.

    Travis is allowed to speak to her, and even to take her out for a date. But he's not allowed to directly proposition her with sex, which is how she interprets it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. Or not offering your hand to women (if they want to shake hands, they offer); seems kinda relevant today, in light of the Pence Rule, the Hug Debate, groping, etc; call manners stuffy if you want, but I suppose this emerged so men wouldn’t have a social convention to use as an excuse to paw women. Precisely the sort of thing needed in a rougher age.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  147. You’re kidding right? Obviously he doesn’t just rape women in public. He was talking about what goes on behind closed doors. Now maybe he was exaggerating his success with the ladies – he’s no Bill Clinton. But judging by what you have seen him do in public? That’s worthless. Even Harvey Weinstein would bring the women to his hotel room first.

    You seem deliberately obtuse. He made his point well, and clearly.

    Trump’s “groping” is about a guy telling another guy stories. What’s funny is that there isn’t an army of democrat women filing charges against Trump for groping them; maybe they’re too busy with the Democrat men for now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  148. @Charles Pewitt
    Sailer should go after the sneaky, money-grubbing WASP rats too. Although Hollywood slime Harvey Weinstein makes it fun to focus on the Jew.

    The WASP / Jew ruling class of the American Empire is evil and it must be destroyed. Starting over a century ago, Organized Jewry began its march through the various power centers of the American Empire. The Jewish control of certain financial power centers gave them leverage to steal their way into all the other power centers that keep the American Empire together. The Jews have stolen their way into the ruling class, alongside the sneaky, perfidious New England WASP old money mob.

    This WASP/Jew ruling class is inherently unstable. Eventually the Great Lakes Germans and the Anglo-Celtic Southerners would figure out that they are no more than government mules for the treasonous, money-grubbing rats in the WASP / Jew ruling class.

    Much more than some disgusting Jew Judge or a Hollywood Jew sex fiend, the George W Bush presidency illuminated the evil of the WASP / Jew ruling class. George W Bush, although he did have mid-Atlantic ancestry and some portions of non-Saxon and non-Angle blood, was the perfect example of New England money-grubbing, Mammonite scum. George W Bush naturally gravitated towards the unassimilated Jews in the rancid Neo-Conservative crowd.

    President Trump was the direct beneficiary of the Great Awakening of the Great Lakes Germans and the Southern Anglo-Celts in regards to the rancidity of the WASP / Jew ruling class.

    “President Trump was the direct beneficiary of the Great Awakening of the Great Lakes Germans and the Southern Anglo-Celts ”

    I pray you are correct that this represents a permanent change of perspective. One Great Lakes guy who never got the message, Paul Ryan, is stepping down. Maybe Miss Lindsey will take a que from Paul and get out while the getting’s good.

    Not a second too soon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. @Abe
    Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful! I come here for Steve’s world-beating droll sense of humor, and here he gives me something incredibly substantive and fascinating to chew on. In real life I am much more polite and congenial than my political blog Internet persona would have you believe, so it’s fascinating to be introduced to a sharp thinker like Cuddihy who can give clear, memorable examples of the practice of civility, yet also discuss it in its broader context, as I take so much of it for granted in daily life. Will almost certainly get that book if there is an electronic edition available.

    Some random observations: yes, what happened to our freedom to make public, armchair ethnological observations (i.e. Pollack/Italian/Jew/WASP jokes)? It was so uncontroversial I remember it being a frequent staple of even kiddy fare like MAD MAGAZINE.

    I’ve also thought that a return to some sort of dueling convention might be to the overall good of our society. Let some tension out before it builds up too much and people get massacred. Instead of passively aggressively snarking through the next 3 years, or maintaining this feverish dream of Russia collusion/impeachment-any-day now, wouldn’t it be better for the psyches of even the most low-T, soy boy, yaaaz-queen! liberals to be able to call out Trump when he says something particularly outrageous, and instead of stewing on it to further derangement of their psyches, say “All right, Trump! You and Trevor Noah, at dawn, pistols at 100 paces!”

    As a resident of a “super zip” outside of NYC, I can say we have reached peak oppressiveness on speech. To express any support for Trump is the equivalent of favoring the release of all pedophiles from prison.

    More and more we live in a society of unexpressed opinions, and it ain’t healthy. Jack D’s complaints about Freud notwithstanding.

    If DC is half as stultifying as NYC, I pray for our Country.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. @MikeCLT
    Perhaps today's women need to watch some old Mae West movies to learn how to brush off boors.

    Perhaps women should stop pretending the last 50 years didn’t happen–the sexual revolution, women’s liberation, female empowerment, grrl power! and all the rest.

    The cognitive dissonance is large. They want all the opportunities and advantages of the male sex with none of the burdens and responsibilities. When they can’t carry their weight or measure up they want subsidies and preferences. When all else fails they want to be protected from harsh reality–when it turns out that, despite their insistence, reality can’t be altered to accommodate their desires.

    The law of unintended consequences is unrelenting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    You relax the rules, you empower the predators. Wasn't this the chief goal of the sexual revolution? C'mon! Everybody's doing it.

    Look at what's happened to the homos. How many hundreds of thousands have died awful deaths, in just a couple decades, in the prime of life, because the predatory alphas demanded there be no hesitation? They went from the closet to the graveyard without much time in between.

    Oh, and remember, it's actually a small minority of women who want the male jobs and opportunities without the responsibilities. Most of us want our women jobs and our woman spaces.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D
    What does the word “schmuck” mean?

    It means jewel, at least in German.

    There is some question whether the Yiddish word comes from the German. Alternate explanations are that it is a sort of rhyming slang. A little boy's organ is a "shteckl" (a little stick) , rhymed into shmekl and schmuck is a back formation from the diminutive . This seems too convoluted to me (usually the diminutive is derived from the main noun, not the other way around). Or else it is from the old Polish smok meaning grass snake (schlong means snake so this is not implausible).

    But anyway, the word schmuck is a million times more common in English than it is in Yiddish, at least in respectable households. Perhaps this word was used among Yiddish gangsters or longshoremen or whatever but among the middle classes it was extremely rare to use profanity, ever (and when you did, it was usually in Polish or Russian, not in Yiddish).

    Amusingly, a very common curse in Yiddish was "Geh [go] kerbenye matri". In Yiddish, it means "bug off" and is considered relatively mild - something that even moms might say to their kids if they are annoying them. It's not considered strong at all. But in the original Russian it is "idti [go] k ebene materi," which literally means "go to [your] fucked mother" and is very obscene. I think most Yiddish speakers didn't even realize what they were saying.

    This seems too convoluted to me (usually the diminutive is derived from the main noun, not the other way around). Or else it is from the old Polish smok meaning grass snake (schlong means snake so this is not implausible).

    Fascinating. I wasn’t really expecting the whole etymology of it, but I find that kind of thing interesting.

    But the fact remains, it means what I thought it did: a slang term for the male rodney.

    But anyway, the word schmuck is a million times more common in English than it is in Yiddish

    I have no idea if you’re being serious here or not, but if you are, how could you possibly know this? Are you professing knowledge of the slang usage of the whole sweep of Yiddish-speaking people, for all those centuries? I believe most of the things I read on the internet, but I’m not sure about this.

    Perhaps this word was used among Yiddish gangsters or longshoremen or whatever but among the middle classes it was extremely rare to use profanity, ever

    OK, well, I don’t know whether I believe this or not, but I believe that it’s somewhat true in general, like it’s true of all people. Like, when I was in rougher circumstances as a kid, I’d hear people getting called a “cocksucker” on at least a daily basis. Now that I run in more semi-respectable circles, I hardly ever hear it.

    But then, this could be because it would be considered a compliment nowadays. It’s hard to tell.

    Of course, this is somewhat context-dependant too. For example, if Thomas Wolfe isn’t lying to me, New York City lawyers swear like sailors, to compensate for the fact that they’re a bunch of weasels sitting in a room, figuring out ways to out-weasel each other.

    (Speaking of which, when does the book club start, Steve?)

    But in the original Russian it is “idti [go] k ebene materi,” which literally means “go to [your] fucked mother” and is very obscene. I think most Yiddish speakers didn’t even realize what they were saying.

    Or, maybe they did, and their relationship with vulgarity is more complicated than you were letting on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. @Abe
    Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful! I come here for Steve’s world-beating droll sense of humor, and here he gives me something incredibly substantive and fascinating to chew on. In real life I am much more polite and congenial than my political blog Internet persona would have you believe, so it’s fascinating to be introduced to a sharp thinker like Cuddihy who can give clear, memorable examples of the practice of civility, yet also discuss it in its broader context, as I take so much of it for granted in daily life. Will almost certainly get that book if there is an electronic edition available.

    Some random observations: yes, what happened to our freedom to make public, armchair ethnological observations (i.e. Pollack/Italian/Jew/WASP jokes)? It was so uncontroversial I remember it being a frequent staple of even kiddy fare like MAD MAGAZINE.

    I’ve also thought that a return to some sort of dueling convention might be to the overall good of our society. Let some tension out before it builds up too much and people get massacred. Instead of passively aggressively snarking through the next 3 years, or maintaining this feverish dream of Russia collusion/impeachment-any-day now, wouldn’t it be better for the psyches of even the most low-T, soy boy, yaaaz-queen! liberals to be able to call out Trump when he says something particularly outrageous, and instead of stewing on it to further derangement of their psyches, say “All right, Trump! You and Trevor Noah, at dawn, pistols at 100 paces!”

    “ In real life I am much more polite and congenial than my political blog Internet persona would have you believe,”

    Have you thought of ending the public niceness? Do you stay silent when, at the office, some SJW scapegoats whites for black crime and dysfunction? Have you thought of what millions of us pushing back might achieve?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Yes, one of the aspects of our current society irks me the most is just how humorless it has become. I feel as though I'm having tea with a bunch of bitter, stern church ladies. Even when discussing non-believers, they can only muster vitriol. Everything is far too serious for them to joke about.

    I recommend the piece Steve cited above “Trump And The Return Of Premodern Incivility.” It discusses the end of comedy in the last decade, which is something I’ve noticed. But would say it’s more like in the last 5 years.

    Humor has really fallen off the edge of the anglosphere …which is why Trump has such appeal: He’s the Rodney Dangerfield president, and that’s a good thing.

    His tweets are funny and honest, the way prog humor can not be in the current era.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Yes, one of the aspects of our current society irks me the most is just how humorless it has become. I feel as though I'm having tea with a bunch of bitter, stern church ladies. Even when discussing non-believers, they can only muster vitriol. Everything is far too serious for them to joke about.

    I recommend the piece Steve cited above “Trump And The Return Of Premodern Incivility.” It discusses the end of comedy in the last decade, which is something I’ve noticed. But would say it’s more like in the last 5 years.

    Humor has really fallen off the edge of the anglosphere …which is why Trump has such appeal: He’s the Rodney Dangerfield president, and that’s a good thing.

    His tweets are funny and honest, the way prog humor can not be in the current era.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. @Anon
    We lived in a messed-up world of mixed signals.

    Is it wrong for a professional to be discussing/showing porn at work? I would say yes.

    But Kozinski grew up during the Sexual Revolution when attitudes changed. And women must take some of the blame.

    In RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING Buchanan recounts how he had some friend for dinner who saw Bergman's VIRGIN SPRING(which has a rape scene), and the guy was talking about it when Father Buchanan got angry and fumed about men in his house don't talk about such stuff in front of womenfolk. A real patriarch.

    But people today would find such notions ridiculous or even offensive. Shield women from such stuff? Women need protection? Oh no, that is condescending and patriarchal. But at the time same, we are now told students and minorities must be protected from stuff that might 'trigger' them.

    When I grew up, there was sexy and raunchy stuff everywhere. Not as bad as today, but it was there all over the place. And my sister who was two yrs older than me told me about what girls at school talk about. Sex, sex, movies like CARRIE, and such stuff. And when we moved to the suburbs, she said the main topics were sex and drugs. Some of the things she told me about her friends were truly mindblowing(either bad parenting or pop culture influence is truly pernicious), but thankfully she had better things on her mind.

    Things were hardly different in respectable middle class community. In high school freshman yr, a bunch of girls were talking about PORKY'S, and they thought the scene with the fat woman yanking on the guy's pud was hilarious. Boys and girls had no qualms about talking about all sorts of sexual stuff. They loved to watch the same vulgar standup comedies and TV shows like Saturday Night Live and Eddie Murphy.

    In middle school, in our Washington DC trip, our school met up with another school at the hotel, and a Jewish girl from that school was really slutty and flirtatious with the guys, and the guys got Too Excited and too grab-happy, and then she was a puddle of tears. She got more than she bargained for. Nothing really happened, but if you throw meat to the dogs, they come to bite. But women can be pretty horny too. One Jewish guy(who later turned out to be homo) came out of the shower and was holding a pillow over his groin. A bunch of girls ran into the room and did their best to tear that pillow from him. I figured I'd give the girls some help, but the panicked fella held onto the pillow for dear life.

    A Jewish kid who went on a trip to Israel told me he met up with a NY contingent, and in the hotel room, he was confronted with a Jewish girl who stood in the room with her boobs out. When he reminded her of the situation, her reply was No Big Deal since all the guys had seen her boobies already.

    All throughout the 70s and 80s, the movie MASH played often and it made fun of moralists. It was cool to be raw and raunchy and pull the shower curtains to show off a woman's nudity.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYTl9G6HoW0

    There's a scene in GHOST WORLD where the girl asks the Buscemi character to take her to an adult book store.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-WIdvrGLDU

    Such attitude is common among girls who grew up after the Sexual Revolution. Kozinski grew up during the sexual revolution when the idea that men had to shield women from some kind of stuff was considered passe, even offensive.

    If anything, people today might find Cybil Sheperd's reaction in TAXI DRIVER kind of odd since female journals today discuss nothing but sex, sex, and porny behavior of all kinds.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJfOea-OVEg

    And I think girls today will find Mrs. Robinson cooler than Elaine who turns her head away from a strip tease. She's soooo old-fashioned.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh3Ma1YpjuQ

    Feminists have been elevating Miley Cyrus and Lena Dunham as role models for young girls. Girls should grow up with that kind of attitude and sensibility. They should be raw, raunchy, shameless, and vulgar. And if men cannot stand such women, they are 'weak' and 'threatened'.

    But now, my oh my, these precious ladies have been traumatized by men who have boing on their minds.

    And these feminists are okay big tranny men using women's room and big tranny men entering women's sports and kicking women's ass. But all of a sudden, they are sooooooo traumatized by Charlie Rose's nudity?

    Maybe using men to mock women was okay and acceptable when the women were wasps, like blonde hot lips houlihan in MASH. But now that so many Jewish women are moving up, they don't want to be bothered.

    All throughout the 70s and 80s, the movie MASH played often and it made fun of moralists. It was cool to be raw and raunchy and pull the shower curtains to show off a woman’s nudity.

    WOKE feminists hate Altman’s MASH; I have a female colleague who uses it in her class to demonstrate the “routinization of ’70s cinematic misogyny.”

    And I think girls today will find Mrs. Robinson cooler than Elaine who turns her head away from a strip tease. She’s soooo old-fashioned.

    Another film that is getting to be in bad odor. Lots of my feminist colleagues have talked about how that movie is deeply problematic…..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Will any of them notice that films like The Graduate and MASH were big Jewish Liberation milestones?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. @Glossy
    Full disclosure: I'm of Ashkenazi background myself.

    There are many emotional differences between Mediterranean and Northern European people and some emotional differences between the Ashkenazim and other Mediterraneans.

    Meds are more outwardly emotional than Nords. More shouting, tears, drama of all sorts, within families and without. This looks undignified and unpleasant until one realizes how Nords deal with emotional stress. It drives them to drink. If you think that's more sensible or dignified, you might be a drunk. The optimal choice is of course to avoid both of these stereotypical behaviors.

    I don't think Jews are more or less outwardly emotional than other Med peoples. We're more neurotic, but that's a different thing. By neuroticism I mean the constant fear that bad things will happen to you, that whatever you're doing will fail, that everything is going to hell in general. High anxiety. Italians, Spaniards, Arabs, etc. are more into confidence. But it's not a quiet confidence like you'd see among Nords. It's the boastful, showboating kind. Which can look awesome when done the right way, don't get me wrong.

    Why are Meds more outwardly emotional than Nords? Most likely because over the past 10,000 years Meds tended to live in larger communities. Earlier advent of agriculture, warmer climate supporting higher population density.

    If most of your interactions are with the inanimate forces of nature, getting outwardly emotional in times of stress serves little purpose. If most of your interactions are with people, things are different. People can be bullied, shamed, cajoled, impressed, etc.

    Why are Ashkenazim neurotic? That I don't really know.

    Why are Meds more emotional than Nords?

    “Kiss me, Hardy!”
    Maybe a reverse explanation– hard-drinking Brits and Scandies take out their frustrations on the bottle. Or maybe it’s latent Calvinist influence. How do Poles act?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. @Twinkie

    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them. Making a terrible scene in public is a major faux pas in WASP culture...
     
    It’s not just WASPs. All upper crust people in civilized societies were expected to behave this way.

    I think there’s a point to be made about being well-bred, and it has nothing to do with being upper crust. Two generations ago, middle class families (and working class families with aspirations for their children) raised children by imbuing good manners, politeness, etiquette–the habits of comportment and personal conduct. Even public schools insisted on good discipline and decorum (there were no problems with bullies that weren’t quickly rectified). Personal habits that last a lifetime.

    Today, such is sadly out of fashion.

    Read More
    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Anon
    The weight of British public-school novels is against there having been no problems with bullies not quickly rectified.
    , @Twinkie

    Two generations ago, middle class families (and working class families with aspirations for their children) raised children by imbuing good manners, politeness, etiquette–the habits of comportment and personal conduct.
     
    “Aspiration” is a key word there. The upper crust led with good manners and to a great extent enforced them. The others followed. The great affluence of the country after WWII led the middle class to aspire higher for their children and to take on the trappings, e.g. college education and gentlemanly/ladylike manners. It’s their children who revolted and gave us the horror shows that followed in the 60’s and on.
    , @Anon
    Agree, personal and group issues. In diplomatic circles, a word used when assessing a bilateral relationship is "irritants" as in 'what are the irritants in this relationship that will color the President's meeting with so and so.' (border water rights, disputed pieces of land, etc) The word was useful when understanding the role of protocol in interpersonal relationships. If you know how to address a person, or where you can expect to be seated, conduct a meeting or in general how to act, you won't upset others or be upset yourself and can hopefully get your work done smoothly. Protocol works in institutional settings as common politeness in everyday life.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. @Anonymous
    https://twitter.com/jodikantor/status/941308738606174209

    Always. Be. Critiquing.

    That would be Jodi Kantor of the New York Times…

    What’s the saying? Physician, heal thyself…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Right now there is a fad among Leftists to read 1984 - somehow to them, Trump is Big Brother or something. It's easy to see affirmation of your belief system everywhere, but what you see depends on what your belief system is. The petals of a flower remind religious believers that the earth was created in 6 days. To an evolutionist, they are proof of evolution.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. “ In real life I am much more polite and congenial than my political blog Internet persona would have you believe,”

    Have you thought of ending the public niceness? Do you stay silent when, at the office, some SJW scapegoats whites for black crime and dysfunction? Have you thought of what millions of us pushing back might achieve?

    I too am much more polite and congenial in real life than online. Speaking for myself, I don’t hesitate to call out bullshit when I hear it. In fact, that’s usually what I say, when I hear bullshit: “bullshit.” You don’t have to be impolite to call out bullshit (though I suppose I could be more decorous than literally calling “bullshit.”).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  160. @Abe
    One last thing, though- it was only about a month ago 60 MINUTES brought Kozinski out of mothballs to dedicate a whole segment to him (for our non-U.S. readers, a 20 minute slot on this Sunday night news program is probably the biggest stage in America for serious TV). I don’t think he had a book out from CBS’s publishing division to promote, and they were very gracious in hand-waving away his porn server controversy from 10 years ago, so what was the point of talking to this non-Supreme Court judge in the twilight of his career NOW? It seemed he was being brought on to do the standard Fake News conservative case against-X thing (here Trump, but when they dug up Barry Goldwater in 1994 it was against the ban on gays in the military). But now they’re turning on him. Is this coincidence, is the Dweeb State mad at him for not slamming Trump harder on TV, or is there something more interesting at play?

    60 Minutes are masters of pushing The Narrative without you noticing. Koz, whitewashing America’s assistance to Saudi Arabia’s barbaric Yemeni war, the Duke Rape hoax, etc. My favorite one was where they drug John Le Carre(or the actor who portrays him) out of retirement to give a “rare” interview. It’s the standard recap of his career until the end, when Le Carre sagely intones that Russia is the gravest threat to the UK and US. All part of the scheme to turn public opinion against Russia, while ignoring things like, say, 22 preteen girls getting vaporized at an Ariana Grande concert.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Are you Lugash?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. @Jack D
    Trump:

    you know I'm automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it's
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don't even wait
    01:21
    anyone you're a star they let you do it
    01:22
    you can do anything whatever you want
    01:24
    grab them by the pussy I can do anything

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPomcb0_IaE

    Are you saying this is fake? Or are you hair splitting and say he does not say that HE personally has ever done this but that "you" (one) can do this if they are a star. I understand that legally speaking Trump or his lawyers might make an argument like that (or say that he was just bragging - "locker room talk" and that in real life he would never do such a thing).

    But, please, let's be real - he is probably describing something that he has in fact done and more than once. Now it was never meant to be public and should never had been recorded or released. For that matter, he should not have bragged about it either. But I believe that he is actually telling the truth about the possibilities that are open to stars in general and I have no reason to believe that Trump would not have acted upon such availability once he realized that he fell in the "star" category himself. I really don't think any less of him for it. Note also that he is clearly describing a consensual relationship, not a rape. This is the way that powerful men have always interacted with females and the way that females are programmed to interact for the last million years.

    What confounds many people is that what Trump said is true.

    Women who are in awe of a man–for whatever reason, e.g. wealth, a celebrity or star (however defined), or just sexy–will let a man do pretty much anything because the woman wants the man. She is the prey and he is the predator, yet to earn his prey, he must act as predator. It’s nature, and natural.

    For most people, this behavior is foreign to their experience–or it’s so fleeting they don’t understand or recognize it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corn
    “Women who are in awe of a man–for whatever reason, e.g. wealth, a celebrity or star (however defined), or just sexy–will let a man do pretty much anything because the woman wants the man. She is the prey and he is the predator, yet to earn his prey, he must act as predator. It’s nature, and natural.”

    After the Billy Bush tape broke in the news last year Scott Adams shared an anecdote on his blog. A female friend of his met a multimillionaire or billionaire somewhere. He asked for her number, she gave it, he asked her out on a date. She was to come to his house and have dinner.(Probably cooked by a private chef.) She arrives, he greets her, then he asks her, “Are we having sex before or after dinner?”

    Mind you if Joe the Plumber or Jerry the Stock Clerk tried that approach he’d get smacked across the face for his gall. So Scott Adams asked her what happened next. She grinned and said, “Well, we had sex, it was good too.”

    Trump wasn’t bragging to Billy Bush about sexual assault on that tape. He was schooling a younger man in the ways of the world. Namely, when you’re loaded women make themselves more available to you. Which is true, even if women like to stammer and harumph it’s only what’s on the inside that matters.
    , @sabril
    The corollary is that a lot of women don't understand this about themselves or don't like to admit it to themselves or others. Especially if the man is (or has become) physically unattractive.

    So that if they have a sexual encounter with the man, they may later convince themselves that it was an assault or even a rape. Often they literally forget that they subtly escalated the situation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Steve forgets (and apparently so does Cuddihy, whose cited work and its misrepresentation of Freud deserves oblivion) that the most trenchant critic of bourgeois sexual repression was not a Jew but the son of a Lutheran pastor. His name was Nietzsche.

    Re-associating WASPs with stereotypical prissiness does not make WASP culture more attractive. It does, however, explain why WASPs are perennially obsessed with the secretly envied figure of the lecherous Jew. It also helps explain why in America a decennial sex panic is obligatory.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II
    So says the Old Asperger's Leftist. And this:

    misrepresentation of Freud deserves oblivion
     
    is a classic tribal response. No true Jew can be the Freud of Cuddihy, right?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. @Abe

    It’s Philip Roth's world
     
    And just to close the iSteve circle- what was the Mossad thinking when it let Black Cube enable Harvey Weinstein (regardless of how overstated its connections were, Mossad must have had a basic idea, no?) I mean Weinstein is the JUD SUSS of the 2010's- as bad as Madoff was, Harvey's 10x worse for the image of Jews, especially coming as he did on the heels of Anthony Weiner- actually make that 20x worse.

    So assuming it had a basic understanding of his extracircullars, and maybe even through Black Cube helped enable them, WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY THINKING in not putting more of a leash on him? When Bibi tweeted in support of Trump's wall earlier this year out of nothing more than bro-tastic solidarity (and yes, Jack, I think it helps that Bibi has an IDF commando background), Israel's Deep State I'm sure told him to cut it out, to not associate Israel's image with a controversial and (in the world-at-large hugely unpopular President over an issue that was none of Israel's concern, and since then Netanyahu has remained discreetly silent. So why then did it let Harvey run amok? Is this proof that even the more capable Deep State establishments can make YUUGE tactical errors, or is it a false flag (riddles inside enigmas, mazes inside labyrinths) to lull us into a false sense of complacency about how fallible the in-reality super-powerful/super-competent Deep State is?

    Well, Weinstein is a big Clinton supporter, and Clinton associate Paul Begala was pouring money into helping the Labor coalition (the Zionist Union), in the last Israeli election. Remember that Harvey’s contacts with Black Cube came through former Israeli PM Ehud Barak (i.e. Labor). Labor helps Weinstein, Weinstein helps Clinton, Clinton helps Labor.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. @Svigor

    Also, it’s part of American mythos to make fun of table manners. It’s the Jacksonian side of Americanism. Excessive manners are Old World and crusty.
     
    I suppose it depends on where you draw the line. Personally, I think e.g. scooping your soup away from you makes perfect sense, but maybe 1 in 50 Americans know it's "proper."

    Excessive manners are Old World and crusty…

    …are what people say when they have none.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. @Forbes
    I think there's a point to be made about being well-bred, and it has nothing to do with being upper crust. Two generations ago, middle class families (and working class families with aspirations for their children) raised children by imbuing good manners, politeness, etiquette--the habits of comportment and personal conduct. Even public schools insisted on good discipline and decorum (there were no problems with bullies that weren't quickly rectified). Personal habits that last a lifetime.

    Today, such is sadly out of fashion.

    The weight of British public-school novels is against there having been no problems with bullies not quickly rectified.

    Read More
    • LOL: fnn
    • Replies: @Forbes
    Small samples reveal outliers, is all. British public school novels not particularly representative of US middle class life in the second half of the 20th century.

    British public school novels, lacking bullies and cold showers, wouldn't exist as a genre.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. @Rifleman

    Cuddihy shows how closely Freud and Marx’s seemingly distinct projects converge on the function of civility.
     
    Howard Stern is a modern day American version of the same project.

    Stern's mission seemed to be a relentless assault on the WASPs from the point of view of a hideously ugly, sexually vulgar low rent Jew from Long Island.

    Trump routinely appeared on Stern's show and was a listener of it for 20+ years.

    Stern's format included a relentless sexual harassment of his female guests over commercial broadcast radio.

    I don't know if would be tolerated today. Now he's hiding on satellite radio and even more obscene.

    Stern's fundamental obsession is the sexual relations between black males and White women. Especially in pornography and among his celebrity guests.

    It has always been obvious to me that in no small way this is his fascination with "degrading" White women/shiksas by fixating on this "defilement" of White America's women black males.

    James Toback shares the same world view and made a movie expressing it called "Black and White". He has also fixated on the sexuality of Mike Tyson and Jim Brown.

    Brett Ratner apparently was the liaison between somewhat naive White girls and black alleged rapist Russell Simmons.

    You obviously don’t listen to Stern anymore. He has toned down his act to become more mainstream. He is on satellite for the money.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rifleman

    You obviously don’t listen to Stern anymore. He has toned down his act to become more mainstream. He is on satellite for the money.
     
    You obviously didn't listen to the Weinstein interview I posted.

    Stern hasn't toned down his sexual act at all. He has become even more pornographic and obscene.

    He has toned down his Bob Grant, right wing racial act, no doubt.

    His satellite radio owner is a transsexual Jewish lunatic married to a black female, so he has to tone it down.

    Plus he's now a rich, Hampton's Jew not a Nassau county prole Jew so he is distancing himself from his older prole New York honesty about "the blaaks".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    It goes beyond women. Your average well-bred WASP does not want to eat at the same table with some neurotic, fussy Jewish guy who tantrums over what he's being served and who is rude and harassing to the waitstaff. This is profoundly irritating to someone who's been properly brought up.

    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them. Making a terrible scene in public is a major faux pas in WASP culture, because one of the defining characteristics of people who run things in life is that they are hard to rattle, they stay in control of their emotions, they fix problems quickly and easily, and they do all of these things with panache.

    The generation of Jews who complained about not getting into the country clubs were only 1-2 generations themselves from being peasants on the Russian shtetl, and they were taught peasant manners.

    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them.

    I think, in a way, that was the problem.

    If wasp elites had some of that viking warrior stuff, it would have been more difficult to mess with them.

    The problem of all elites is they want to pretend that their power is clean and respectable. But all power is built on arrrgh. Consider the military industrial complex. People who run such industries have nice homes and send their kids to nice colleges. But what do they build? Bombs and guns that kill people.
    I’ll bet people who run food industries live in nice mansions and are respectable, but what is that wealth built on? Slaughtering cows and pigs and turning pork bellies into ‘bacon’.
    And I’ll bet the top shareholders of Charmin act respectable and live in nice homes. But what is their wealth built on? “TP for my bunhole”.

    So, all wealth is ‘dirty’. But those who reach the top wanna seem above such stuff. They launder their reputation via status, honors, and manners.
    In some ways, fancy restaurants are offensive. All those people and their elegant etiquette and eating stuff with French words. But they are just chewing dead animals massacred in slaughter houses.

    The rich make money from the ‘filth’ of the world but want to seem ‘clean’. It’s like we have a massive sewage system to hide the pee and poo. Now, I’m not against the sewage system as it’s pretty great. But we’ve learned to hide pee and poo so well that we almost believe that they are part of human reality. We’ve learned to hide the horrid aspects of life so well that we look to fiction to get our dose of horror in genre movies.

    This makes the rich very dishonest. Their wealth is based on ‘world of shi*” but they pretend they are above it. They hold their noses high. It’s like the Lord in Kurosawa’s RAN being rudely reminded that his power was built on bloodbath and violence. He got so privileged and full of himself that he thought the world honored him for his glory and magnificence. But the minute he loses real power, the brutal dynamics of power come into play and turn everything upside down.

    Now, the lower world is more honest. Barbarians are among the most honest folks. It’s like Uther in EXCALIBUR is a real bastard but he’s an honest bastard. If he wants stuff, he goes for it and hides nothing.
    But such brutal honesty cannot create and sustain civilization. For civilization to work, there has to be rules, principles, and honor. But, the danger is that the elites may come to believe that their elevated world is independent of the real ‘dirty’ world.

    The proper formula is to suppress and control the barbaric and violent side of man but to never forget that everything is really built on violence, brutality, and ruthlessness. Even in the most peaceful community, there is constant violence in killing animals for food. Also, nature has to be fought back constantly in order to maintain civilization. And if borders are not maintained, the poor folks will always invade richer nations. EU is being invaded by mobs from the poor world. It’s animal behavior 101. Wolves and Deer go where there is more food.

    [MORE]

    Nature is violent and is always trying to reclaim things from civilization. If humans were to vanish from earth, nature will take back everything man built in no time.

    Man must know he is a part of nature, but in order to have civilization, he must be more than nature.
    One problem is being too close to nature, in which case, man will just be a savage or barbarian.
    The other problem is believing that mans’ world can be independent of nature, like the elites in ZARDOZ. In fact, even as mankind controls and shapes nature, it is a product of nature and dependent on nature, as E.O Wilson says without ants working the soil, so much of life will perish and mankind will too. Mankind depends on ant poo.

    The elites are best when they do rise high and try to maintain principles and such BUT ALSO remind themselves that their real power is built on violence and ruthlessness in unity with the rabble. I mean America wasn’t built on Indians and animals kindly agreeing to remove themselves so as to allow Europeans to settle and build stuff. No, they had to be beaten back.

    Now, if whites were ONLY ruthless and violent, they could not rise above barbarism. But if whites forget or reject the fact that all Orders(theirs included) are built on brutality and violence, they will lose out because they will no longer have the stomach for True Ways of Power.
    The elites must control the barbarians. Barbarians must be turned into Centurions. But elites must never forget that Centurions are essentially trained barbarians. And without the ruthless use of force and power, the Order cannot be maintained.

    And for much of American history, the elites knew this. They had no illusions about the source of American power. Sure, they believed in liberty and dignity of man and all that, but they also knew that such ideas alone did nothing. America was made with real violence and real brutality. And farm work was hard, and factories were tough places, and American wealth was built on labor and hardship.

    But over time, the elites in both US and EU grew overly detached from the Reality. They wanted to believe that their power and prestige were totally clean and respectable. Since so much of Western power and wealth were built on violence, conquest, and brutality(as in all parts of the world), they were vulnerable to criticism and infected with ‘white guilt’. If they weren’t so deluded, it wouldn’t have mattered. If accused of violence and past oppression, they would have said, “Yeah, we bashed a lot of heads and stuff. But so did all other cultures and civilizations.”
    But because white elites got so full of themselves, they simply didn’t know how to deal with criticism that sought to morally delegitimize their wealth and power.
    Because they became obsessed with maintaining their clean status and manners, they were held back from saying anything that might be deemed crude, vulgar, or unworthy. And this self-restraint made them vulnerable to pointed criticism. It’s like Bill Buckley forever felt shame for having lost his cool in his debate with Gore Vidal.

    It was this culture of restrained respectability that paradoxically made the most powerful people in America the most vulnerable before the Jewish challenge. Indeed, Jews could never have taken over less powerful elements of American society since the lower depths are filled with shameless unrestrained people who talk shit. Jews gained power over ALL Americans only because they took power from the Wasps. Via elite institutions, Jews could lord over everyone.
    Consider how Italians react when Jews piss them off:

    And consider how blacks react to Jews at the ground level.

    If US society had no elite domain and only existed from poor class to middle class, Jews would not be ruling this country. Even if Jews are smarter than poor people, working class people, and middle class people, those peoples tend not to be very restrained. If Jews accuse them, they accuse back and push back. It’s like Albert Brooks being totally defenseless against the big guy who punches him in LOST IN AMERICA.
    Office politics is one thing. It could get one fired. But street politics is another. It could get one killed.

    So, even though blacks, Italians, Irish, ‘dumb Polacks’, and etc had less power than Wasp elites, Jews had less chance of gaining control of them at the street level than gaining control over Wasps. Why? Wasp elites had a culture of self-restraint to maintain dignity, and it would have been unbecoming to rant like Nicky Santoro. Now, if a Jewish guy complained about ‘antisemitism’ to a bunch of ‘greaseballs’, they would have laughed. They didn’t care respectability and dignity. They were about power and ‘gimme what’s mine(and yours)’.

    Now, imagine if the Wasp elites had been more Jacksonian and Trumpian long ago and didn’t take no shi* from no one. Suppose their motto was ‘Nice is Vice’. (Jews used shamelessness to subvert and undermine respectable Wasp prestige and power, but shameless is a double-edged sword. If whites also adopt it, they will be less likely to feel ‘white guilt’. That was why Jews hated shameless Trump. When pressed about David Duke endorsing him, Trump’s attitude was “I don’t know, I don’t care.” It was shameless, and this frustrated Jews. Even Pat Buchanan, when pressed on such issues, looked a bit troubled and defensive. Trump’s attitude was more like Howard Stern’s.)

    Anglos were esp vulnerable because the British developed a rather hoity-toity effeminate style. While this whoopity doopery toughened up somewhat in the US, the Wasp elites in America still retained some of it, and this style was allergic about giving offense to anyone. It was just… not gentlemanly or sportsmanshiplike.

    And yet, Anglo and Wasp power had been built on violence, brutality, and etc. As long as the Anglo elites maintained a key alliance with white muscle(power of the white mob) in good cop and bad cop manner, the white race was safe.

    After all, even though the elites seek to maintain order and support higher principles, they need enforcers to do the dirty work when push comes to shove. It’s like diplomats are useless without soldiers. Without the threat of the Big Stick, speaking softly doesn’t go very far. It’s because there is the big stick that even soft words carry great weight. It’s like Don Vito Corleone. He speaks calmly, but people listen. And Paulie doesn’t have to say much. He has the connections. If he pushes a button, he can have someone killed. Tommy is louder than Paulie, but Paulie got much more pull.

    Elites need to rise from the rabble in order to create and maintain an Order. But they must never forget their power derives from the rabble. It’s like top of the tree is still part of the tree with roots in the ground.
    If Uther in EXCALIBUR can’t rise above barbarism because he’s too brutal, Arthur eventually forgets the connection to the land and people until Perceval finds the Grail of truth.

    It’s like the scene in TIME BANDITS. The rather well-mannered Robin Hood acts nice and hands out stuff to people. But the people are then punched in the face to be reminded of the true nature of power. Hood’s niceness is built on brutality. He takes and he gives.
    With niceness alone, he would be nowhere.

    Jews understand this in Israel, a nation where rabbis and rabble understand one another. The Jews elites do maintain a civilized order with higher principles and all, BUT it’s all understood that the system will continue only so along as the elites represent the people and the people, as soldiers, kick butt in the name of Jewish Unity and Power. They know ‘nice is vice’. The Awful must co-exist with Lawful. In the end, the Power decides and bends the law just like superman bends steel. Law, on its own, has no will. It bends to the Will to Power, and Tribal Power is stronger than individual power.

    But look at the wasp elites in US and Anglo elites in the UK. They want to be totally respectable and ‘clean’. They don’t want to be associated with the real sources of white power: conquest, wars, blood and soil and toil, ruthlessness, awesome race-ism, and etc. They want to speak softly without the Big Stick… so the stick was taken by another power that uses it to threaten the Wasps.

    Homogeneity was the strength of the Anglos and Wasps. Spartans were powerful but they had one huge weakness. They were the 10% that ruled over helots who were the 90%. As helots were regarded as slaves and property, they was no connection between the Spartans as elite people and helots as the rabble. In contrast, despite class hierarchy, the British folks came to see themselves as one people. The elites understood, “You and the land are one.”

    But over time, the elites got too full of themselves. They got too ‘clean’ and didn’t want to be associated with the ‘dirty’ business of real power that requires the use of the rabble. So, they just abandoned the rabble to rot away while welcoming ‘diversity’ to prove how redeemed they are. Diversity as detergent for the sins of UK. Of course, what the elites are really doing is importing a new rabble at odds with the native rabble. The native rabble no longer feel led by the native elites, and the new rabble feel no connection to the elites. And globalists exploit these contradictions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    I couldn't help but notice that the fake wrecked statue of liberty was much younger and cuter than the actual Statue of Liberty:

    http://i1.wp.com/www.nicksconey.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/statue-of-liberty3.jpg

    One looks like a classical goddess and the other looks like a bimbo with her face painted green. What's up with that?
    , @anon
    You’re wrong.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. @anon
    You’ll learn that Yiddish was a very clean language — even Yiddish insults.

    What does the word "schmuck" mean?

    or on crude exhortations to engage in this or that sex act, or to introduce this or that foreign object into your various orifices.

    Until the past fifty years or so, how common were those in any language, though?

    According to Ed West, “fart” is one of the oldest words in English.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    Fart goes back to Proto Indo-European:

    Old English feortan, ultimately from PIE *perd- (source also of Old High German ferzan, Old Norse freta, Danish fjerte, Sanskrit pard, Greek perdein, Lithuanian perdžiu, persti, Russian perdet), of imitative origin.
     
    https://www.etymonline.com/word/fart
    , @anon
    Well, that's not surprising. Farting has been around a lot longer than spears, even.

    It's a bodily function, but it's not really a sexual reference, or even necessarily an insult. You have to call it something, after all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @Forbes
    I think there's a point to be made about being well-bred, and it has nothing to do with being upper crust. Two generations ago, middle class families (and working class families with aspirations for their children) raised children by imbuing good manners, politeness, etiquette--the habits of comportment and personal conduct. Even public schools insisted on good discipline and decorum (there were no problems with bullies that weren't quickly rectified). Personal habits that last a lifetime.

    Today, such is sadly out of fashion.

    Two generations ago, middle class families (and working class families with aspirations for their children) raised children by imbuing good manners, politeness, etiquette–the habits of comportment and personal conduct.

    “Aspiration” is a key word there. The upper crust led with good manners and to a great extent enforced them. The others followed. The great affluence of the country after WWII led the middle class to aspire higher for their children and to take on the trappings, e.g. college education and gentlemanly/ladylike manners. It’s their children who revolted and gave us the horror shows that followed in the 60’s and on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. @Dieter Kief
    It definitley hit me, when theToronto psychologist Jordan B. Peterson said in one of his videos, that many a hysterical women today is out of her mind - and that he doesn't know really, what to do - i. e.: He doesn't (doesn't!) know, how to react, when confronted with those "crazy women".

    These things might have to do with the Id and the superEgo insofar, as many of the accompanying strange ways of behavior are so far from discourse, that - in the end - even the pretty verbal JBP gives in and says, he's stuck.

    PS

    The good old days, when subjects like these could be written - and made fun of, of course, in MAD - see Abe's post above, No. 16.
    Or when, I could add, in the German satirical monthly "TITANIC" there could be a hole page with the sigh in a cartoon of one of the true Frankfurtian masters, Friedrich-Karl Wächter, if I remember right: This exclamatory sigh read: "It's about time, women return to normal again!" - meant as a counterpunch against the (often times intimidating and/ or curious) 80ies exaggerations of the Women's Lib movement.

    Yes absolutely.

    Remember “Trigglypuff”? I remember thinking at the time: this is just an old-fashioned hysterical female straight out of the Victorian era. There’s nothing new under the sun.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @syonredux

    All throughout the 70s and 80s, the movie MASH played often and it made fun of moralists. It was cool to be raw and raunchy and pull the shower curtains to show off a woman’s nudity.
     
    WOKE feminists hate Altman's MASH; I have a female colleague who uses it in her class to demonstrate the "routinization of '70s cinematic misogyny."

    And I think girls today will find Mrs. Robinson cooler than Elaine who turns her head away from a strip tease. She’s soooo old-fashioned.
     
    Another film that is getting to be in bad odor. Lots of my feminist colleagues have talked about how that movie is deeply problematic.....

    Will any of them notice that films like The Graduate and MASH were big Jewish Liberation milestones?

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Will any of them notice that films like The Graduate and MASH were big Jewish Liberation milestones?
     
    I've heard a few female academics make noises about the "male Jewish triumphalism" of The Graduate...and how that triumph excluded women, POC, and LGBTQs (quite an alphabet soup there)....
    , @utu
    50 Years Later, Just How Jewish Was ‘The Graduate?"
    https://forward.com/culture/387524/50-years-later-just-how-jewish-was-the-graduate/
    , @Dan Hayes
    Steve,

    I agree with you that MASH was a big Jewish Liberation milestone. But the actual basis for the TV series was way, way different.

    The author of the book that led to the series, former US surgeon Richard Hornberger, hated TV's take on his own creation. His son stated that his father was a political conservative who did not like the liberal tendencies portrayed by Alan Alda in the series. For that matter I always detested Alda's snarky MASH performances.

    I believe that Hornberer was not against the Korean War (or any war) per se. But he was against the senseless Army bureaucracy - echoes of C Northcote Parkinson!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. @Dave Pinsen
    Steve's point is that Kozinski is smart enough to know that showing porn to female coworkers is a dumb thing to do; assigning a ludicrously high IQ to Kozinski is a way to emphasize that, by way of exaggeration.

    Kozinski is famous for being extra intelligent, even for a judge. Whether 180 is his precise IQ, I do not know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gcochran
    "even for a judge" ?

    180 is highly unlikely.
    , @Simon in London
    I heard him speak/interact with a group of high powered UK lawyers. He's different from the normal 'smart lawyer guy' or 'smart Jewish lawyer guy' around IQ 140-150. I could well believe 160+. 180 seems implausible, as Greg says.
    , @william munny
    Most judges would have IQs slightly above average for an attorney but with better social skills, because they are either political appointments or elected officials. A typical federal circuit court judge should be much higher than the average attorney, because they usually have to prove themselves as lower court judges who demonstrate strong reasoning and writing skills. There are less than 200 circuit court judges in the country.

    I wonder how Trump's sister, who is also a federal circuit court judge, stacks up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @Steve Sailer
    Will any of them notice that films like The Graduate and MASH were big Jewish Liberation milestones?

    Will any of them notice that films like The Graduate and MASH were big Jewish Liberation milestones?

    I’ve heard a few female academics make noises about the “male Jewish triumphalism” of The Graduate…and how that triumph excluded women, POC, and LGBTQs (quite an alphabet soup there)….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. @Dave Pinsen
    According to Ed West, "fart" is one of the oldest words in English.

    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/941835859350786048

    Fart goes back to Proto Indo-European:

    Old English feortan, ultimately from PIE *perd- (source also of Old High German ferzan, Old Norse freta, Danish fjerte, Sanskrit pard, Greek perdein, Lithuanian perdžiu, persti, Russian perdet), of imitative origin.

    https://www.etymonline.com/word/fart

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. Id of the Yid: Our Apoplectic Invaders Considered

    http://library.flawlesslogic.com/yid.htm

    Consider Freud’s reaction to privacy. Within the insulated Jewish community of the shtetl, or Jewish ghetto, “privacy” was seen as abnormal — anyone desiring personal space must be hiding something and is suspect. It did not occur to Freud that Gentile culture, having developed into a larger society, may well have had good reasons for respecting the personal space of others. In the nineteenth century, Eastern European Jewry “mistakes privacy for secrecy.” The ways in which European Gentiles institutionalized the need to be private in public, or the need for decorum, is “lost on the Jewish intelligentsia of the nineteenth century. To them, it appears as so much hypocrisy.” Cuddihy quotes Philip Rieff’s Freud: The Mind of the Moralist: “What is for Freud ‘repression’ psychologically understood, is ‘secrecy’ morally understood. Secrecy is the category moral illness, for it provides a hiding place for false motives.”

    “Cuddihy’s presentation ironically draws upon the same motivation exposition techniques employed by Freud. When Jews sneer that Gentiles are embarrassed by sex and need to be “unmasked,” Cuddihy points out that what they’re trying to do is strip all humanity to base commonalities in an effort to make their crude, uncivilized selves feel more acceptable, all the while rudely ignoring the evolved and genuine social need for Gentile conventions. The Gentile is left shamed and confused, convinced that he must “let it all hang out” if he is to achieve mental health. Freud is revealed as a clever Jew pleased with himself for having pulled the Gentile’s pants down to point out to the assembled crowd that, like other mammals, this one’s got genitalia. Cuddihy coolly returns the favor. Freud himself might have had some insight on this, as he was reported to have once wondered: am I an original scientist or just a dirty Jew?”

    “But observe the damage done, and how Jews have deftly avoided blame for the misery caused. To the untutored, they are tough to spot, darting quickly from movement to movement under a cover of proclaimed universalism. For once an intellectual or political movement loses utility for Jews, they abandon it. I believe that the Jewish tendency so well described by Cuddihy finds its fiercest manifestation today in “neo-conservatism,” a two-headed beast of race-denying social liberalism and pro-Israel warmongering. Jews in government and media line up to feed this beast, which serves them nicely at the dawn of the new century. It looks “conservative” and thus beats the charge that Jews are liberals, yet pushes simultaneously for the American multiculturalism that makes them comfortable in the U.S., and the Jewish exclusionism that makes them comfortable in Israel. If there is a deviation from Cuddihy’s thesis, it is this: Neo-conservatism and other Jewish maneuvering is no “Jewish struggle” evocative of sympathy for a “Diaspora people.” It is child’s play for Jews. Jews no longer struggle with modernity, they define it. It is now White Americans who are strangers in a strange land. Life in deracinated America is the relevant struggle. It is our ordeal of incivility. Restoring racial sanity will require the emergence of a counterforce: our own intellectual elite, a group of racially conscious Whites disheartened enough by what they see happening to speak out, and inspired enough to lead the way out.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D

    Restoring racial sanity will require the emergence of a counterforce: our own intellectual elite, a group of racially conscious Whites disheartened enough by what they see happening to speak out, and inspired enough to lead the way out.”
     
    Lot's of luck with this Charlie. The disheartened aren't inspired and the inspired aren't disheartened. Donald J. Trump is about as close as you ever going to get and the man has Jewish grandchildren (who speak Mandarin). The Old America is never coming back. You are never going to unscramble this omelet.

    I say this more in sorrow than in glee - the Old America was not perfect but it was a heck of a better place than our current clusterfark. But you are not going to put Humpty Dumpty back together again, especially not if you take such pains to make as many enemies as possible.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @Fidelios Automata
    Oh boo hoo, she has to glance at porn and hear about the Judge's conquests. Did he lock her in a room or try to extort sexual favors? If so, I sympathize. If not, go get a job somewhere else, lady.
    #GetOverItSnowflake

    Hell no. A woman is not a quote snowflake for not wanting to be subjected to that disgusting, intrusive, disrespectful, and potentially intimidating treatment; rather, she is what used to be called a lady.

    Try it on our daughters and we won’t care that the perverted bully is a judge.

    If that allegation is true, then to Hell with “the judge.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. @KM32
    "I’m not knocking Heidi Bond because i don’t have a clue how she’s reporting this other than that it happened. "

    I know Heidi Bond. She's a reliable witness and one of the smarter people I have ever met. In general, I agree with your other comments, although dealing with one's boss puts a different spin on matters.

    She’s also a bit uptight and maybe a 4 on a good day if you’re a chubby chaser. See Heartiste.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    I understand that the pen name of Heidi Bond is Courtney Milan.

    Here is Courtney/Heidi in a flattering head shot:

    http://www.azquotes.com/public/pictures/authors/e7/3f/e73fae4f2b44ea924be24a7623b5cd41/556ece1c8efcd_courtney_milan.jpg


    and here is all of her:

    https://i.ytimg.com/vi/hcbJieA1XkI/maxresdefault.jpg

    Hilariously, notice how WE see Heidi on the left and the book cover of how Heidi presumably sees herself on the right. Note also the book title. It's impossible to parody these folks because they are self-parodying.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. @Steve Sailer
    Will any of them notice that films like The Graduate and MASH were big Jewish Liberation milestones?

    50 Years Later, Just How Jewish Was ‘The Graduate?”

    https://forward.com/culture/387524/50-years-later-just-how-jewish-was-the-graduate/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. @Jack D
    Trump:

    you know I'm automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it's
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don't even wait
    01:21
    anyone you're a star they let you do it
    01:22
    you can do anything whatever you want
    01:24
    grab them by the pussy I can do anything

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPomcb0_IaE

    Are you saying this is fake? Or are you hair splitting and say he does not say that HE personally has ever done this but that "you" (one) can do this if they are a star. I understand that legally speaking Trump or his lawyers might make an argument like that (or say that he was just bragging - "locker room talk" and that in real life he would never do such a thing).

    But, please, let's be real - he is probably describing something that he has in fact done and more than once. Now it was never meant to be public and should never had been recorded or released. For that matter, he should not have bragged about it either. But I believe that he is actually telling the truth about the possibilities that are open to stars in general and I have no reason to believe that Trump would not have acted upon such availability once he realized that he fell in the "star" category himself. I really don't think any less of him for it. Note also that he is clearly describing a consensual relationship, not a rape. This is the way that powerful men have always interacted with females and the way that females are programmed to interact for the last million years.

    He is telling the truth. There is also reason to believe he wasn’t the most ardent partaker

    There will be a qualitative difference between a Weinstein who women have to sleep with if they are thots, to women throwing themselves at somebody

    While “they” are trying to get Trump, we should not be normalizing actual perverts and sleazebags

    Read More
    • Replies: @Difference maker
    Though acknowledgement of the sleaze in certain industries is a public service
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. @Anon
    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them.

    I think, in a way, that was the problem.

    If wasp elites had some of that viking warrior stuff, it would have been more difficult to mess with them.

    The problem of all elites is they want to pretend that their power is clean and respectable. But all power is built on arrrgh. Consider the military industrial complex. People who run such industries have nice homes and send their kids to nice colleges. But what do they build? Bombs and guns that kill people.
    I'll bet people who run food industries live in nice mansions and are respectable, but what is that wealth built on? Slaughtering cows and pigs and turning pork bellies into 'bacon'.
    And I'll bet the top shareholders of Charmin act respectable and live in nice homes. But what is their wealth built on? "TP for my bunhole".

    So, all wealth is 'dirty'. But those who reach the top wanna seem above such stuff. They launder their reputation via status, honors, and manners.
    In some ways, fancy restaurants are offensive. All those people and their elegant etiquette and eating stuff with French words. But they are just chewing dead animals massacred in slaughter houses.

    The rich make money from the 'filth' of the world but want to seem 'clean'. It's like we have a massive sewage system to hide the pee and poo. Now, I'm not against the sewage system as it's pretty great. But we've learned to hide pee and poo so well that we almost believe that they are part of human reality. We've learned to hide the horrid aspects of life so well that we look to fiction to get our dose of horror in genre movies.

    This makes the rich very dishonest. Their wealth is based on 'world of shi*" but they pretend they are above it. They hold their noses high. It's like the Lord in Kurosawa's RAN being rudely reminded that his power was built on bloodbath and violence. He got so privileged and full of himself that he thought the world honored him for his glory and magnificence. But the minute he loses real power, the brutal dynamics of power come into play and turn everything upside down.

    Now, the lower world is more honest. Barbarians are among the most honest folks. It's like Uther in EXCALIBUR is a real bastard but he's an honest bastard. If he wants stuff, he goes for it and hides nothing.
    But such brutal honesty cannot create and sustain civilization. For civilization to work, there has to be rules, principles, and honor. But, the danger is that the elites may come to believe that their elevated world is independent of the real 'dirty' world.

    The proper formula is to suppress and control the barbaric and violent side of man but to never forget that everything is really built on violence, brutality, and ruthlessness. Even in the most peaceful community, there is constant violence in killing animals for food. Also, nature has to be fought back constantly in order to maintain civilization. And if borders are not maintained, the poor folks will always invade richer nations. EU is being invaded by mobs from the poor world. It's animal behavior 101. Wolves and Deer go where there is more food.



    Nature is violent and is always trying to reclaim things from civilization. If humans were to vanish from earth, nature will take back everything man built in no time.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wy7Q6wazD_E

    Man must know he is a part of nature, but in order to have civilization, he must be more than nature.
    One problem is being too close to nature, in which case, man will just be a savage or barbarian.
    The other problem is believing that mans' world can be independent of nature, like the elites in ZARDOZ. In fact, even as mankind controls and shapes nature, it is a product of nature and dependent on nature, as E.O Wilson says without ants working the soil, so much of life will perish and mankind will too. Mankind depends on ant poo.

    The elites are best when they do rise high and try to maintain principles and such BUT ALSO remind themselves that their real power is built on violence and ruthlessness in unity with the rabble. I mean America wasn't built on Indians and animals kindly agreeing to remove themselves so as to allow Europeans to settle and build stuff. No, they had to be beaten back.

    Now, if whites were ONLY ruthless and violent, they could not rise above barbarism. But if whites forget or reject the fact that all Orders(theirs included) are built on brutality and violence, they will lose out because they will no longer have the stomach for True Ways of Power.
    The elites must control the barbarians. Barbarians must be turned into Centurions. But elites must never forget that Centurions are essentially trained barbarians. And without the ruthless use of force and power, the Order cannot be maintained.

    And for much of American history, the elites knew this. They had no illusions about the source of American power. Sure, they believed in liberty and dignity of man and all that, but they also knew that such ideas alone did nothing. America was made with real violence and real brutality. And farm work was hard, and factories were tough places, and American wealth was built on labor and hardship.

    But over time, the elites in both US and EU grew overly detached from the Reality. They wanted to believe that their power and prestige were totally clean and respectable. Since so much of Western power and wealth were built on violence, conquest, and brutality(as in all parts of the world), they were vulnerable to criticism and infected with 'white guilt'. If they weren't so deluded, it wouldn't have mattered. If accused of violence and past oppression, they would have said, "Yeah, we bashed a lot of heads and stuff. But so did all other cultures and civilizations."
    But because white elites got so full of themselves, they simply didn't know how to deal with criticism that sought to morally delegitimize their wealth and power.
    Because they became obsessed with maintaining their clean status and manners, they were held back from saying anything that might be deemed crude, vulgar, or unworthy. And this self-restraint made them vulnerable to pointed criticism. It's like Bill Buckley forever felt shame for having lost his cool in his debate with Gore Vidal.

    It was this culture of restrained respectability that paradoxically made the most powerful people in America the most vulnerable before the Jewish challenge. Indeed, Jews could never have taken over less powerful elements of American society since the lower depths are filled with shameless unrestrained people who talk shit. Jews gained power over ALL Americans only because they took power from the Wasps. Via elite institutions, Jews could lord over everyone.
    Consider how Italians react when Jews piss them off:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKDgjLf_rk4

    And consider how blacks react to Jews at the ground level.

    https://youtu.be/vDlul5OV9Do?t=6m22s

    If US society had no elite domain and only existed from poor class to middle class, Jews would not be ruling this country. Even if Jews are smarter than poor people, working class people, and middle class people, those peoples tend not to be very restrained. If Jews accuse them, they accuse back and push back. It's like Albert Brooks being totally defenseless against the big guy who punches him in LOST IN AMERICA.
    Office politics is one thing. It could get one fired. But street politics is another. It could get one killed.

    So, even though blacks, Italians, Irish, 'dumb Polacks', and etc had less power than Wasp elites, Jews had less chance of gaining control of them at the street level than gaining control over Wasps. Why? Wasp elites had a culture of self-restraint to maintain dignity, and it would have been unbecoming to rant like Nicky Santoro. Now, if a Jewish guy complained about 'antisemitism' to a bunch of 'greaseballs', they would have laughed. They didn't care respectability and dignity. They were about power and 'gimme what's mine(and yours)'.

    https://youtu.be/ADTG-GTEo-E?t=1m10s

    Now, imagine if the Wasp elites had been more Jacksonian and Trumpian long ago and didn't take no shi* from no one. Suppose their motto was 'Nice is Vice'. (Jews used shamelessness to subvert and undermine respectable Wasp prestige and power, but shameless is a double-edged sword. If whites also adopt it, they will be less likely to feel 'white guilt'. That was why Jews hated shameless Trump. When pressed about David Duke endorsing him, Trump's attitude was "I don't know, I don't care." It was shameless, and this frustrated Jews. Even Pat Buchanan, when pressed on such issues, looked a bit troubled and defensive. Trump's attitude was more like Howard Stern's.)

    Anglos were esp vulnerable because the British developed a rather hoity-toity effeminate style. While this whoopity doopery toughened up somewhat in the US, the Wasp elites in America still retained some of it, and this style was allergic about giving offense to anyone. It was just... not gentlemanly or sportsmanshiplike.

    And yet, Anglo and Wasp power had been built on violence, brutality, and etc. As long as the Anglo elites maintained a key alliance with white muscle(power of the white mob) in good cop and bad cop manner, the white race was safe.

    After all, even though the elites seek to maintain order and support higher principles, they need enforcers to do the dirty work when push comes to shove. It's like diplomats are useless without soldiers. Without the threat of the Big Stick, speaking softly doesn't go very far. It's because there is the big stick that even soft words carry great weight. It's like Don Vito Corleone. He speaks calmly, but people listen. And Paulie doesn't have to say much. He has the connections. If he pushes a button, he can have someone killed. Tommy is louder than Paulie, but Paulie got much more pull.

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

    Elites need to rise from the rabble in order to create and maintain an Order. But they must never forget their power derives from the rabble. It's like top of the tree is still part of the tree with roots in the ground.
    If Uther in EXCALIBUR can't rise above barbarism because he's too brutal, Arthur eventually forgets the connection to the land and people until Perceval finds the Grail of truth.

    It's like the scene in TIME BANDITS. The rather well-mannered Robin Hood acts nice and hands out stuff to people. But the people are then punched in the face to be reminded of the true nature of power. Hood's niceness is built on brutality. He takes and he gives.
    With niceness alone, he would be nowhere.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=167IhlXnN2Y

    Jews understand this in Israel, a nation where rabbis and rabble understand one another. The Jews elites do maintain a civilized order with higher principles and all, BUT it's all understood that the system will continue only so along as the elites represent the people and the people, as soldiers, kick butt in the name of Jewish Unity and Power. They know 'nice is vice'. The Awful must co-exist with Lawful. In the end, the Power decides and bends the law just like superman bends steel. Law, on its own, has no will. It bends to the Will to Power, and Tribal Power is stronger than individual power.

    But look at the wasp elites in US and Anglo elites in the UK. They want to be totally respectable and 'clean'. They don't want to be associated with the real sources of white power: conquest, wars, blood and soil and toil, ruthlessness, awesome race-ism, and etc. They want to speak softly without the Big Stick... so the stick was taken by another power that uses it to threaten the Wasps.

    Homogeneity was the strength of the Anglos and Wasps. Spartans were powerful but they had one huge weakness. They were the 10% that ruled over helots who were the 90%. As helots were regarded as slaves and property, they was no connection between the Spartans as elite people and helots as the rabble. In contrast, despite class hierarchy, the British folks came to see themselves as one people. The elites understood, "You and the land are one."

    But over time, the elites got too full of themselves. They got too 'clean' and didn't want to be associated with the 'dirty' business of real power that requires the use of the rabble. So, they just abandoned the rabble to rot away while welcoming 'diversity' to prove how redeemed they are. Diversity as detergent for the sins of UK. Of course, what the elites are really doing is importing a new rabble at odds with the native rabble. The native rabble no longer feel led by the native elites, and the new rabble feel no connection to the elites. And globalists exploit these contradictions.

    I couldn’t help but notice that the fake wrecked statue of liberty was much younger and cuter than the actual Statue of Liberty:

    One looks like a classical goddess and the other looks like a bimbo with her face painted green. What’s up with that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    One looks like a classical goddess and the other looks like a bimbo with her face painted green.
     
    More like Dude (Looks Like a Lady) vs. Grumpy Cat
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. @Anon
    Well-bred WASPs were raised to deal with mishaps calmly and politely and not freak out over them.

    I think, in a way, that was the problem.

    If wasp elites had some of that viking warrior stuff, it would have been more difficult to mess with them.

    The problem of all elites is they want to pretend that their power is clean and respectable. But all power is built on arrrgh. Consider the military industrial complex. People who run such industries have nice homes and send their kids to nice colleges. But what do they build? Bombs and guns that kill people.
    I'll bet people who run food industries live in nice mansions and are respectable, but what is that wealth built on? Slaughtering cows and pigs and turning pork bellies into 'bacon'.
    And I'll bet the top shareholders of Charmin act respectable and live in nice homes. But what is their wealth built on? "TP for my bunhole".

    So, all wealth is 'dirty'. But those who reach the top wanna seem above such stuff. They launder their reputation via status, honors, and manners.
    In some ways, fancy restaurants are offensive. All those people and their elegant etiquette and eating stuff with French words. But they are just chewing dead animals massacred in slaughter houses.

    The rich make money from the 'filth' of the world but want to seem 'clean'. It's like we have a massive sewage system to hide the pee and poo. Now, I'm not against the sewage system as it's pretty great. But we've learned to hide pee and poo so well that we almost believe that they are part of human reality. We've learned to hide the horrid aspects of life so well that we look to fiction to get our dose of horror in genre movies.

    This makes the rich very dishonest. Their wealth is based on 'world of shi*" but they pretend they are above it. They hold their noses high. It's like the Lord in Kurosawa's RAN being rudely reminded that his power was built on bloodbath and violence. He got so privileged and full of himself that he thought the world honored him for his glory and magnificence. But the minute he loses real power, the brutal dynamics of power come into play and turn everything upside down.

    Now, the lower world is more honest. Barbarians are among the most honest folks. It's like Uther in EXCALIBUR is a real bastard but he's an honest bastard. If he wants stuff, he goes for it and hides nothing.
    But such brutal honesty cannot create and sustain civilization. For civilization to work, there has to be rules, principles, and honor. But, the danger is that the elites may come to believe that their elevated world is independent of the real 'dirty' world.

    The proper formula is to suppress and control the barbaric and violent side of man but to never forget that everything is really built on violence, brutality, and ruthlessness. Even in the most peaceful community, there is constant violence in killing animals for food. Also, nature has to be fought back constantly in order to maintain civilization. And if borders are not maintained, the poor folks will always invade richer nations. EU is being invaded by mobs from the poor world. It's animal behavior 101. Wolves and Deer go where there is more food.



    Nature is violent and is always trying to reclaim things from civilization. If humans were to vanish from earth, nature will take back everything man built in no time.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wy7Q6wazD_E

    Man must know he is a part of nature, but in order to have civilization, he must be more than nature.
    One problem is being too close to nature, in which case, man will just be a savage or barbarian.
    The other problem is believing that mans' world can be independent of nature, like the elites in ZARDOZ. In fact, even as mankind controls and shapes nature, it is a product of nature and dependent on nature, as E.O Wilson says without ants working the soil, so much of life will perish and mankind will too. Mankind depends on ant poo.

    The elites are best when they do rise high and try to maintain principles and such BUT ALSO remind themselves that their real power is built on violence and ruthlessness in unity with the rabble. I mean America wasn't built on Indians and animals kindly agreeing to remove themselves so as to allow Europeans to settle and build stuff. No, they had to be beaten back.

    Now, if whites were ONLY ruthless and violent, they could not rise above barbarism. But if whites forget or reject the fact that all Orders(theirs included) are built on brutality and violence, they will lose out because they will no longer have the stomach for True Ways of Power.
    The elites must control the barbarians. Barbarians must be turned into Centurions. But elites must never forget that Centurions are essentially trained barbarians. And without the ruthless use of force and power, the Order cannot be maintained.

    And for much of American history, the elites knew this. They had no illusions about the source of American power. Sure, they believed in liberty and dignity of man and all that, but they also knew that such ideas alone did nothing. America was made with real violence and real brutality. And farm work was hard, and factories were tough places, and American wealth was built on labor and hardship.

    But over time, the elites in both US and EU grew overly detached from the Reality. They wanted to believe that their power and prestige were totally clean and respectable. Since so much of Western power and wealth were built on violence, conquest, and brutality(as in all parts of the world), they were vulnerable to criticism and infected with 'white guilt'. If they weren't so deluded, it wouldn't have mattered. If accused of violence and past oppression, they would have said, "Yeah, we bashed a lot of heads and stuff. But so did all other cultures and civilizations."
    But because white elites got so full of themselves, they simply didn't know how to deal with criticism that sought to morally delegitimize their wealth and power.
    Because they became obsessed with maintaining their clean status and manners, they were held back from saying anything that might be deemed crude, vulgar, or unworthy. And this self-restraint made them vulnerable to pointed criticism. It's like Bill Buckley forever felt shame for having lost his cool in his debate with Gore Vidal.

    It was this culture of restrained respectability that paradoxically made the most powerful people in America the most vulnerable before the Jewish challenge. Indeed, Jews could never have taken over less powerful elements of American society since the lower depths are filled with shameless unrestrained people who talk shit. Jews gained power over ALL Americans only because they took power from the Wasps. Via elite institutions, Jews could lord over everyone.
    Consider how Italians react when Jews piss them off:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKDgjLf_rk4

    And consider how blacks react to Jews at the ground level.

    https://youtu.be/vDlul5OV9Do?t=6m22s

    If US society had no elite domain and only existed from poor class to middle class, Jews would not be ruling this country. Even if Jews are smarter than poor people, working class people, and middle class people, those peoples tend not to be very restrained. If Jews accuse them, they accuse back and push back. It's like Albert Brooks being totally defenseless against the big guy who punches him in LOST IN AMERICA.
    Office politics is one thing. It could get one fired. But street politics is another. It could get one killed.

    So, even though blacks, Italians, Irish, 'dumb Polacks', and etc had less power than Wasp elites, Jews had less chance of gaining control of them at the street level than gaining control over Wasps. Why? Wasp elites had a culture of self-restraint to maintain dignity, and it would have been unbecoming to rant like Nicky Santoro. Now, if a Jewish guy complained about 'antisemitism' to a bunch of 'greaseballs', they would have laughed. They didn't care respectability and dignity. They were about power and 'gimme what's mine(and yours)'.

    https://youtu.be/ADTG-GTEo-E?t=1m10s

    Now, imagine if the Wasp elites had been more Jacksonian and Trumpian long ago and didn't take no shi* from no one. Suppose their motto was 'Nice is Vice'. (Jews used shamelessness to subvert and undermine respectable Wasp prestige and power, but shameless is a double-edged sword. If whites also adopt it, they will be less likely to feel 'white guilt'. That was why Jews hated shameless Trump. When pressed about David Duke endorsing him, Trump's attitude was "I don't know, I don't care." It was shameless, and this frustrated Jews. Even Pat Buchanan, when pressed on such issues, looked a bit troubled and defensive. Trump's attitude was more like Howard Stern's.)

    Anglos were esp vulnerable because the British developed a rather hoity-toity effeminate style. While this whoopity doopery toughened up somewhat in the US, the Wasp elites in America still retained some of it, and this style was allergic about giving offense to anyone. It was just... not gentlemanly or sportsmanshiplike.

    And yet, Anglo and Wasp power had been built on violence, brutality, and etc. As long as the Anglo elites maintained a key alliance with white muscle(power of the white mob) in good cop and bad cop manner, the white race was safe.

    After all, even though the elites seek to maintain order and support higher principles, they need enforcers to do the dirty work when push comes to shove. It's like diplomats are useless without soldiers. Without the threat of the Big Stick, speaking softly doesn't go very far. It's because there is the big stick that even soft words carry great weight. It's like Don Vito Corleone. He speaks calmly, but people listen. And Paulie doesn't have to say much. He has the connections. If he pushes a button, he can have someone killed. Tommy is louder than Paulie, but Paulie got much more pull.

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

    Elites need to rise from the rabble in order to create and maintain an Order. But they must never forget their power derives from the rabble. It's like top of the tree is still part of the tree with roots in the ground.
    If Uther in EXCALIBUR can't rise above barbarism because he's too brutal, Arthur eventually forgets the connection to the land and people until Perceval finds the Grail of truth.

    It's like the scene in TIME BANDITS. The rather well-mannered Robin Hood acts nice and hands out stuff to people. But the people are then punched in the face to be reminded of the true nature of power. Hood's niceness is built on brutality. He takes and he gives.
    With niceness alone, he would be nowhere.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=167IhlXnN2Y

    Jews understand this in Israel, a nation where rabbis and rabble understand one another. The Jews elites do maintain a civilized order with higher principles and all, BUT it's all understood that the system will continue only so along as the elites represent the people and the people, as soldiers, kick butt in the name of Jewish Unity and Power. They know 'nice is vice'. The Awful must co-exist with Lawful. In the end, the Power decides and bends the law just like superman bends steel. Law, on its own, has no will. It bends to the Will to Power, and Tribal Power is stronger than individual power.

    But look at the wasp elites in US and Anglo elites in the UK. They want to be totally respectable and 'clean'. They don't want to be associated with the real sources of white power: conquest, wars, blood and soil and toil, ruthlessness, awesome race-ism, and etc. They want to speak softly without the Big Stick... so the stick was taken by another power that uses it to threaten the Wasps.

    Homogeneity was the strength of the Anglos and Wasps. Spartans were powerful but they had one huge weakness. They were the 10% that ruled over helots who were the 90%. As helots were regarded as slaves and property, they was no connection between the Spartans as elite people and helots as the rabble. In contrast, despite class hierarchy, the British folks came to see themselves as one people. The elites understood, "You and the land are one."

    But over time, the elites got too full of themselves. They got too 'clean' and didn't want to be associated with the 'dirty' business of real power that requires the use of the rabble. So, they just abandoned the rabble to rot away while welcoming 'diversity' to prove how redeemed they are. Diversity as detergent for the sins of UK. Of course, what the elites are really doing is importing a new rabble at odds with the native rabble. The native rabble no longer feel led by the native elites, and the new rabble feel no connection to the elites. And globalists exploit these contradictions.

    You’re wrong.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. @Lugash
    60 Minutes are masters of pushing The Narrative without you noticing. Koz, whitewashing America's assistance to Saudi Arabia's barbaric Yemeni war, the Duke Rape hoax, etc. My favorite one was where they drug John Le Carre(or the actor who portrays him) out of retirement to give a "rare" interview. It's the standard recap of his career until the end, when Le Carre sagely intones that Russia is the gravest threat to the UK and US. All part of the scheme to turn public opinion against Russia, while ignoring things like, say, 22 preteen girls getting vaporized at an Ariana Grande concert.

    Are you Lugash?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @Charles Pewitt
    Sailer should go after the sneaky, money-grubbing WASP rats too. Although Hollywood slime Harvey Weinstein makes it fun to focus on the Jew.

    The WASP / Jew ruling class of the American Empire is evil and it must be destroyed. Starting over a century ago, Organized Jewry began its march through the various power centers of the American Empire. The Jewish control of certain financial power centers gave them leverage to steal their way into all the other power centers that keep the American Empire together. The Jews have stolen their way into the ruling class, alongside the sneaky, perfidious New England WASP old money mob.

    This WASP/Jew ruling class is inherently unstable. Eventually the Great Lakes Germans and the Anglo-Celtic Southerners would figure out that they are no more than government mules for the treasonous, money-grubbing rats in the WASP / Jew ruling class.

    Much more than some disgusting Jew Judge or a Hollywood Jew sex fiend, the George W Bush presidency illuminated the evil of the WASP / Jew ruling class. George W Bush, although he did have mid-Atlantic ancestry and some portions of non-Saxon and non-Angle blood, was the perfect example of New England money-grubbing, Mammonite scum. George W Bush naturally gravitated towards the unassimilated Jews in the rancid Neo-Conservative crowd.

    President Trump was the direct beneficiary of the Great Awakening of the Great Lakes Germans and the Southern Anglo-Celts in regards to the rancidity of the WASP / Jew ruling class.

    Charles, you’ve been on about Jews and WASPs for quite some time, and I respect your doggedness. But it seems a bit ironic that you slam WASPs so relentlessly—aren’t you yourself a WASP from New Hampshire? Have not the New England WASPs, “ruling class” or not, made New England a pretty great place to live and be from for the past four centuries?

    It’s true that as of late, some of the formerly ascendant WASPs have completely lost the plot—but it’s erroneous to slam “old money” as being part of a mere “money-grubbing mob.” See the names of plank donors of hospitals, museums, parks and (once) great schools in the Boston area, for example.

    The Protestant work eth(n)ic combined with intelligent, cultured noblesse oblige made for a great region and Nation. I do agree that it is indeed a shame that some WASPs have become unconcerned if “the stock of the Puritans die”— with a little help from their aforementioned friends, (#40) of course.

    A decent recent book that surveys New England architecture, history, culture:

    https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781493019168/A-Home-Called-New-England-A-Celebration-of-Hearth-and-History

    https://www.amazon.com/Home-Called-New-England-Celebration/dp/1493018469

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    The reason I go after the WASP / Jew ruling class is to smash the current order in the American Empire. The American Empire is here until it is no more; the republic is never coming back; but the empire can begin to act more like a republic.

    I strictly define WASP to mean an Anglo Saxon New Englander from old money or from the cultural atmosphere of the Portland to Portland WASP continuum. George Washington was an Anglo-Norman and Andrew Jackson was an Anglo-Celt.

    The people of English ancestry -- as opposed to the WASPs -- in New England are great people, I love them. President Trump won the regular people of English ancestry in the New Hampshire GOP presidential primary. I bet John Kasich got the New Hampshire WASP vote. I know I am voter cohort baloney slicing, but it matters in politics and the culture.

    I think the WASP / Jew ruling class is out of gas. They survive because of the monetary extremist exertions of the Federal Reserve Bank. I cheekily like to say that Neo-Conservatism will be replaced by Neo-Normanism. The Saxons don't like the history of Senlac Hill and the Battle of Hatings in 1066.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. @utu
    Id of the Yid: Our Apoplectic Invaders Considered
    http://library.flawlesslogic.com/yid.htm
    Consider Freud's reaction to privacy. Within the insulated Jewish community of the shtetl, or Jewish ghetto, "privacy" was seen as abnormal -- anyone desiring personal space must be hiding something and is suspect. It did not occur to Freud that Gentile culture, having developed into a larger society, may well have had good reasons for respecting the personal space of others. In the nineteenth century, Eastern European Jewry "mistakes privacy for secrecy." The ways in which European Gentiles institutionalized the need to be private in public, or the need for decorum, is "lost on the Jewish intelligentsia of the nineteenth century. To them, it appears as so much hypocrisy." Cuddihy quotes Philip Rieff's Freud: The Mind of the Moralist: "What is for Freud 'repression' psychologically understood, is 'secrecy' morally understood. Secrecy is the category moral illness, for it provides a hiding place for false motives."

    "Cuddihy's presentation ironically draws upon the same motivation exposition techniques employed by Freud. When Jews sneer that Gentiles are embarrassed by sex and need to be "unmasked," Cuddihy points out that what they're trying to do is strip all humanity to base commonalities in an effort to make their crude, uncivilized selves feel more acceptable, all the while rudely ignoring the evolved and genuine social need for Gentile conventions. The Gentile is left shamed and confused, convinced that he must "let it all hang out" if he is to achieve mental health. Freud is revealed as a clever Jew pleased with himself for having pulled the Gentile's pants down to point out to the assembled crowd that, like other mammals, this one's got genitalia. Cuddihy coolly returns the favor. Freud himself might have had some insight on this, as he was reported to have once wondered: am I an original scientist or just a dirty Jew?"

    "But observe the damage done, and how Jews have deftly avoided blame for the misery caused. To the untutored, they are tough to spot, darting quickly from movement to movement under a cover of proclaimed universalism. For once an intellectual or political movement loses utility for Jews, they abandon it. I believe that the Jewish tendency so well described by Cuddihy finds its fiercest manifestation today in "neo-conservatism," a two-headed beast of race-denying social liberalism and pro-Israel warmongering. Jews in government and media line up to feed this beast, which serves them nicely at the dawn of the new century. It looks "conservative" and thus beats the charge that Jews are liberals, yet pushes simultaneously for the American multiculturalism that makes them comfortable in the U.S., and the Jewish exclusionism that makes them comfortable in Israel. If there is a deviation from Cuddihy's thesis, it is this: Neo-conservatism and other Jewish maneuvering is no "Jewish struggle" evocative of sympathy for a "Diaspora people." It is child's play for Jews. Jews no longer struggle with modernity, they define it. It is now White Americans who are strangers in a strange land. Life in deracinated America is the relevant struggle. It is our ordeal of incivility. Restoring racial sanity will require the emergence of a counterforce: our own intellectual elite, a group of racially conscious Whites disheartened enough by what they see happening to speak out, and inspired enough to lead the way out."

    Restoring racial sanity will require the emergence of a counterforce: our own intellectual elite, a group of racially conscious Whites disheartened enough by what they see happening to speak out, and inspired enough to lead the way out.”

    Lot’s of luck with this Charlie. The disheartened aren’t inspired and the inspired aren’t disheartened. Donald J. Trump is about as close as you ever going to get and the man has Jewish grandchildren (who speak Mandarin). The Old America is never coming back. You are never going to unscramble this omelet.

    I say this more in sorrow than in glee – the Old America was not perfect but it was a heck of a better place than our current clusterfark. But you are not going to put Humpty Dumpty back together again, especially not if you take such pains to make as many enemies as possible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    I say this more in sorrow than in glee
     
    Hmm, so there’s some glee?

    If the expression du jour of Weimerica has any credence, it won’t matter if the Old America (the past is a foreign country, and all that) fully returns—the future will likely see a bloody re-forging of a new American identity. If so, its racial and creedal makeup may be quite different than either the gloating, or resigned, projections purportedly show.

    The disheartened aren’t inspired and the inspired aren’t disheartened.
     
    Not all of us are disheartened. And many of those who were are becoming ‘woke’ and hardened. And not in a bitter way. But in a way that will fully embrace accelerating ‘interesting’ times.
    , @attilathehen
    (((Ivanka))) and her kids are a total loss. They don't count. The daughter Arabella speaks Mandarin so there will be a China man in her future. Jews have high intermarriage rates with blacks/Asians. The other 2 will marry accordingly. Deep down, I'm sureTrump is not happy with this. But there is nothing he can do. When he leaves the White House, we will never hear from the Trumps again.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. @Jack D
    I couldn't help but notice that the fake wrecked statue of liberty was much younger and cuter than the actual Statue of Liberty:

    http://i1.wp.com/www.nicksconey.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/statue-of-liberty3.jpg

    One looks like a classical goddess and the other looks like a bimbo with her face painted green. What's up with that?

    One looks like a classical goddess and the other looks like a bimbo with her face painted green.

    More like Dude (Looks Like a Lady) vs. Grumpy Cat

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. @anonymous
    She’s also a bit uptight and maybe a 4 on a good day if you’re a chubby chaser. See Heartiste.

    I understand that the pen name of Heidi Bond is Courtney Milan.

    Here is Courtney/Heidi in a flattering head shot:

    and here is all of her:

    Hilariously, notice how WE see Heidi on the left and the book cover of how Heidi presumably sees herself on the right. Note also the book title. It’s impossible to parody these folks because they are self-parodying.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. @Anon
    “An armed society is a polite society,”

    Not true of blacks and Amish/Quakers.

    Blacks are armed and crass.

    Amish/Quakers are unarmed and polite.

    Amish/Quakers are unarmed and polite.

    Amish are armed. I’ve seen them hunting with rifles.

    They just won’t fight for the Imperial Government…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. @Steve Sailer
    Will any of them notice that films like The Graduate and MASH were big Jewish Liberation milestones?

    Steve,

    I agree with you that MASH was a big Jewish Liberation milestone. But the actual basis for the TV series was way, way different.

    The author of the book that led to the series, former US surgeon Richard Hornberger, hated TV’s take on his own creation. His son stated that his father was a political conservative who did not like the liberal tendencies portrayed by Alan Alda in the series. For that matter I always detested Alda’s snarky MASH performances.

    I believe that Hornberer was not against the Korean War (or any war) per se. But he was against the senseless Army bureaucracy – echoes of C Northcote Parkinson!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. @Steve Sailer
    Kozinski is famous for being extra intelligent, even for a judge. Whether 180 is his precise IQ, I do not know.

    “even for a judge” ?

    180 is highly unlikely.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. Armed and polite, reminded of something Darwin says of the Gauchos in The Voyage of the Beagle

    With their brightly coloured garments, great spurs clanking about their heels, and knives stuck as daggers (and often so used) at their waists, they look a very different race of men from what might be expected from their name of Gauchos, or simple countrymen. Their politeness is excessive; they never drink their spirits without expecting you to taste it; but whilst making their exceedingly graceful bow, they seem quite as ready, if occasion offered, to cut your throat.

    One notes, not just armed, but willing to to use their arms.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  191. @Jack D
    Trump:

    you know I'm automatically attracted to
    01:16
    beautiful I just start kissing them it's
    01:18
    like a magnet just I don't even wait
    01:21
    anyone you're a star they let you do it
    01:22
    you can do anything whatever you want
    01:24
    grab them by the pussy I can do anything

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPomcb0_IaE

    Are you saying this is fake? Or are you hair splitting and say he does not say that HE personally has ever done this but that "you" (one) can do this if they are a star. I understand that legally speaking Trump or his lawyers might make an argument like that (or say that he was just bragging - "locker room talk" and that in real life he would never do such a thing).

    But, please, let's be real - he is probably describing something that he has in fact done and more than once. Now it was never meant to be public and should never had been recorded or released. For that matter, he should not have bragged about it either. But I believe that he is actually telling the truth about the possibilities that are open to stars in general and I have no reason to believe that Trump would not have acted upon such availability once he realized that he fell in the "star" category himself. I really don't think any less of him for it. Note also that he is clearly describing a consensual relationship, not a rape. This is the way that powerful men have always interacted with females and the way that females are programmed to interact for the last million years.

    Why is he any different that Gene Simmons and his interest in photography. I remember seeing a TV show where Gene and Paul Stanley were talking about Kiss and Paul made a joke about Gene’s interest in photography.

    Part of the deal for a groupie to sleep with Gene was that he take a Polaroid of her in bed. He said he had 3000 pictures.

    Yeah, Gene isn’t a politician but why is there a distinction? None of these women seemed to complain about Trump until now?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. @Anonymous
    https://twitter.com/jodikantor/status/941308738606174209

    Always. Be. Critiquing.

    Seems like good advice.

    Of course, she already knows the answers she is going to come to—the stories she has swallowed, uncritically, told her who the bad guys are and who the good guys are. They even told her, in that semi-Sapir-Whorf fashion, who the ‘who’s are.

    Another question should be: who decides which stories get told.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. @Old Left
    Steve forgets (and apparently so does Cuddihy, whose cited work and its misrepresentation of Freud deserves oblivion) that the most trenchant critic of bourgeois sexual repression was not a Jew but the son of a Lutheran pastor. His name was Nietzsche.

    Re-associating WASPs with stereotypical prissiness does not make WASP culture more attractive. It does, however, explain why WASPs are perennially obsessed with the secretly envied figure of the lecherous Jew. It also helps explain why in America a decennial sex panic is obligatory.

    So says the Old Asperger’s Leftist. And this:

    misrepresentation of Freud deserves oblivion

    is a classic tribal response. No true Jew can be the Freud of Cuddihy, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. @Dave Pinsen
    According to Ed West, "fart" is one of the oldest words in English.

    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/941835859350786048

    Well, that’s not surprising. Farting has been around a lot longer than spears, even.

    It’s a bodily function, but it’s not really a sexual reference, or even necessarily an insult. You have to call it something, after all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. @Forbes
    What confounds many people is that what Trump said is true.

    Women who are in awe of a man--for whatever reason, e.g. wealth, a celebrity or star (however defined), or just sexy--will let a man do pretty much anything because the woman wants the man. She is the prey and he is the predator, yet to earn his prey, he must act as predator. It's nature, and natural.

    For most people, this behavior is foreign to their experience--or it's so fleeting they don't understand or recognize it.

    “Women who are in awe of a man–for whatever reason, e.g. wealth, a celebrity or star (however defined), or just sexy–will let a man do pretty much anything because the woman wants the man. She is the prey and he is the predator, yet to earn his prey, he must act as predator. It’s nature, and natural.”

    After the Billy Bush tape broke in the news last year Scott Adams shared an anecdote on his blog. A female friend of his met a multimillionaire or billionaire somewhere. He asked for her number, she gave it, he asked her out on a date. She was to come to his house and have dinner.(Probably cooked by a private chef.) She arrives, he greets her, then he asks her, “Are we having sex before or after dinner?”

    Mind you if Joe the Plumber or Jerry the Stock Clerk tried that approach he’d get smacked across the face for his gall. So Scott Adams asked her what happened next. She grinned and said, “Well, we had sex, it was good too.”

    Trump wasn’t bragging to Billy Bush about sexual assault on that tape. He was schooling a younger man in the ways of the world. Namely, when you’re loaded women make themselves more available to you. Which is true, even if women like to stammer and harumph it’s only what’s on the inside that matters.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. @Haven Monahan
    It's interesting that only non-conformist dissident outsiders like Sailer, Derbyshire, my friend Hoyt Thorpe and yourself have the audacity to violate social norms to consider ethnological and anthropological features openly, honestly and without euphemism and pretty lies.

    I haven't yet finished thinking about what this "violation" of contemporary prevailing notions of politeness means, much less have I finished picking the shards of glass out of the scars in my tenderest of flesh. Even though none of these fellows, Sailer, Derbyshire, nor Thorpe are Jewish, I'm left asking myself what has emboldened them to break the rules of good manners like this?

    I also find the concepts of Id, Ego & Superego useful metaphors to understand our personal psychology, even if no dissection of the human brain has ever been able to reveal these organs. I obviously came of age well after the heyday of psychoanalysis, but I do see the potential value of awareness of one's one instincts and impulses to understand and manage one's mind and behavior. Likewise our understanding of our actual cultures has diminished as these have disappeared into a blind spot that may neither be examined or discussed because any honest consideration of these features is viewed as criticism and taken as offense. Instead of genuine examination, we're fed platitudes and idealized images that bear little resemblance with the shameful, dirty, beastly and often embarrassingly dionysian aspects of the reality.

    Sailer is the therapist we need for our time. In addition to psychoanalysis therapy, there is a vital need for cultural-analysis. Find the courage to peer into the dark heart to understand hidden cultural motives for our behavior that fuel so much misunderstanding and conflict. Our very reluctance and cowardice to confront these probably doom us to endless unsatisfactorily unresolved conflicts between our tribes. "Diversity is our strength" is the empty platitude aimed to placate us and make us ignore the real problems and conflicts between citizens, neighbors and colleagues hailing from different tribes and traditions. Rather than demanding that we actually put in effort to understand the different kinds of motives and styles of negotiation we are dealing with and to create institutions that could hope to accommodate these diverse styles of interaction, we've chosen to close our eyes, see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil in order to hold on to the fiction that "we're supposed to be all exactly the same progressive Universal Unitarian rainbow flag worshipping, Whole Foods shopping, bourgeois bohemians with the same tastes and values but with different pigmentation, features and stature." Indeed this expectation of uniformity of values and tastes is such hypocritical contradiction to the oft proclaimed yet apparently hollow pieties to "diversity."

    Perhaps independent outsiders like Sailer's will continue to influence the more authoritative voices of the establishment to examine our cultural differences with a greater honesty that actually respects the integrity of these people much more by viewing all their features and foibles without the need to replace these with more palatable idealized fantasies. What makes Sailer's observations and musings about various cultures and ethnicities so remarkable and constructive is that he's never rude, condescending or dismissive about it. Sometimes his observations are obviously jarring, especially to any forged in this context of a culture that views such frank but statements beyond the tolerable range of polite discourse. Despite the many calls for frank discussions of race, almost nobody demanding this actually wants anything resembling frankness or even real discussion for that matter. Sailer's indifference to the kind of etiquette that prohibits the honest consideration of various races and cultures has exacted a great cost of his exclusion from the Cathedral establishment, marginalizing a voice that might have otherwise been rewarded with more social success and status had he given his "cultural superego" more control and bitten his tongue to compromise in order to choose a different trajectory. Yet his indifference to these rules of etiquette have freed him to explore territory other less courageous but otherwise great minds have ignored and have fueled his curiosity to understand the real reasons, motives and origins for behaviors and characteristics of the various cultures. Even though he's already violated this key taboo, he's not completely dispensed with civilization and become something like another Andrew Anglin. Absent civilization, men don't monstrous barbarity doesn't automatically erase the nobility, humanity and dignity that exist along with the selfishness and wrath that compete with them. Even when examining the most difficult areas aspects of weaknesses that challenge or bedevil the various races and cultures, Sailer does so with a tenderness that shows a genuine desire to appreciate the reality and depth of all of their features and characteristics, not only the good ones that their idealized image of themselves wish to incorporate and present for a public image of their "cultural ego."

    Perhaps the Id, Ego and Superego are useful after all, even as metaphors also for races, nations and cultures to understand themselves? Will Dr. Sailer and others continue their thankless mission to help therapy these? How can communities most in need of therapy be moved to seek help to gain a better awareness of themselves?

    Have you ever tasted Mogen-David extra-heavy malaga wine with soda water and lime juice?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    Kkylie:

    No, I've never tasted Mogen-David extra-heavy malaga wine.

    But unfortunately I have tasted M-D's extra heavy soupy red wine which was utterly putrid. It was offered to me at a social event by very nice people who had absolutely no knowledge of alcoholic beverages.

    I am given to understand that M-D now produces some fairly acceptable wines.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. @Kylie
    Have you ever tasted Mogen-David extra-heavy malaga wine with soda water and lime juice?

    Kkylie:

    No, I’ve never tasted Mogen-David extra-heavy malaga wine.

    But unfortunately I have tasted M-D’s extra heavy soupy red wine which was utterly putrid. It was offered to me at a social event by very nice people who had absolutely no knowledge of alcoholic beverages.

    I am given to understand that M-D now produces some fairly acceptable wines.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. @anonymous-antimarxist
    The Ordeal of Civility is so obtuse because what Cuddihy is trying to say is Freudianism really is just a projection of the admission to the nature of Jewish perversity onto Christian culture.

    Likewise Marx is all about critiquing the Jewish exploitation of others, especially the goyim, but of other Jews as well if necessary(or possible), but then again projecting it all upon the goyim.

    If Steve finds Cuddihy to be obscurantist then E. Michael Jones may be more accessible.

    For E Michael Jones, "The Ordeal of Civility" presented by Jews is really just their rejection of Logos as symbolized by their persecution of Jesus Christ.

    E. Michael Jones on The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXfOctB-Psc

    anonymous-antimarxist:

    I have read Jones’s The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit but was unaware of your presented video.

    Since it’s been some time since I read the book, watching the video should prove quite interesting!

    It’s amazing what interesting things (yours included) are presented on the UR. Thanks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. Not to lower the tone, but I believe Kozinski sent a video of some mid-Eastern or Caucus guy getting chased around a paddock by a tumescent donkey whirring around the email servers of the ninth circuit about a decade back.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments