The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Moderation or Monomania?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


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

The concept of diminishing marginal returns suggests that it makes sense to pursue policies that sound like a good idea only in moderation: if you do X and it seems to succeed, then maybe doing Y is a good idea, but Z probably is not at all a good idea.

But in the real world, nobody ever seems to expect diminishing marginal returns: Hey, X worked, and Y didn’t blow up the world, so Z must be a slam dunk.

iSteve commenter JoeyJoeJoe writes:

After more than a half century of political observation, I think that human beings just aren’t capable of sophisticated thought. They can hold on to one idea, and carry it to its logical conclusion, then overthrow it with another idea, and repeat the process. They can’t seem to debate limits or tradeoffs.

This is intricately related to Hegel (thesis-antithesis-synthesis), and it is intimately related to Thomas Kuhn’s structure of scientific revolutions (essentially, a prevailing philosophy dominates science-even to the point of science actually attempting to defend it rather than refute it-the antithesis of science-until its inherent contradictions make it impossible to defend, when a ‘scientific revolution’ takes place and a new idea takes root).

The one idea that the West has been holding onto for my entire life (and basically since perhaps 1965) is EQUALITY. Those of us on the Right somehow think there has been an ongoing battle between EQUALITY and MERIT, but it really hasn’t been happening. EQUALITY dominates, and wins, in spite of its obvious inaccuracies (and just as in a scientific dominant idea, those inaccuracies are not reasons to question the doctrine: they are reasons to question opponents of the doctrine). It will continue to dominate until its inherent contradictions are too much for the theory to bear, and a new dominant theory (a ‘political revolution’) will replace it with something else (who knows that that is).

This is why the structure of discussion of race in the country over the last 50 years has been what it is.
Old Theory: races are inherently differently abled
New Theory: races are equal
Problem: Give blacks access, and they don’t do much with it
Solution (not ‘maybe races aren’t equal after all…’) : give blacks more stuff to help them (affirmative action).
Problem: They still don’t seem to be doing much with it
Solution (not ‘hmm, time to rethink our thesis..’): give blacks more stuff to help them (reparations, different standards of achievement, etc etc).
Problem: we shall see.

This is tied to the ‘scramble for America,’ because if all races and peoples are equal: there is no logical endpoint for immigration (I think we all sense this). America will not wake up at 50% white (or 40% or 30% or …) and suddenly say: ‘THIS multiculturalism is just right.’ There is no plausible argument for it (just as, under the prevailing theory of EQUALITY, 90% white-before mass immigration even started-wasn’t a logical endpoint for immigration).

This is true of every political argument in our society (homosexuality is morally equal to heterosexuality. Transvestitism is morally equal to homosexuality is morally equal to heterosexuality. XXX is equal to transvestitism… and so on).

So until EQUALITY is overthrown as the prevailing philosophy of modern politics, there is really no answer or argument against it. Immigration will continue, and reparations will continue, until one of two things happen:
1) EQUALITY is no longer the prevailing philosophy of the West (and USA in particular), or
2) The USA is no longer attractive to immigration-when the USA economically no different from places immigrants come from, immigrants won’t want to come here.

Hide 98 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. wren says:

    Well, why is it that we can’t talk and think about EQUALITY?

    Control left.

    To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself. That was the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word ‘doublethink’ involved the use of doublethink.’

    I know nothing of reptilians, but I liked this.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    , @CCZ
  2. Glaivester says: • Website

    The other issue is – people who benefit from the equality dogma making certain that won’t let us question whether or not there are diminishing marginal returns.

    It’s not simply human stupidity – there are people who know equality is stupid and who are still pushing it because they are evil and selfish.

    • Agree: Bill Jones, ic1000
    • Replies: @Moses
  3. jim jones says:

    Evolution has left us with a set of values that regard “fairness” as desirable, the Left is able to exploit those inbuilt values to make themselves seem morally superior to the Right.

  4. when the USA economically no different from places immigrants come from, immigrants won’t want to come here.

    If only it were just that. The wreckage underway, however, isn’t just limited to America’s economic health. In fact, every single thing which made our civilization great, and every single thing which made our nation worth living in, is under assault and much of it well on its way to oblivion.

    We’re going to end up with a third-world cesspool exactly the same as the worst ones on earth, and that will go for living standards, lack of safety, public hygiene, pestilence, environmental depredations, political and legal corruption, internecine warfare, and a race to the bottom in every other sphere, including education, religion, and commerce.

    And none of it had to happen.

  5. bomag says:

    “All Men Are Created Equal” seems to be the rock upon which we dash the ship of our civilization.

    But we countenance great economic inequality: the Gates, Bezos, and mega-corporations. Our public lotteries are rather gross in their large payouts, when fairness would dictate that for each dollar of lottery purchase, the patron would receive seventy cents after the drawing. (!) We seem comfortable with the idea of great economic wealth randomly bestowed upon people.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  6. Sean says:

    The idea that great wealth and democracy can’t exist side by side runs right up through the Enlightenment and classical liberalism, including major figures like de Tocqueville, Adam Smith, Jefferson and others. It was more or less assumed.

    Aristotle also made the point that if you have, in a perfect democracy, a small number of very rich people and a large number of very poor people, the poor will use their democratic rights to take property away from the rich. Aristotle regarded that as unjust, and proposed two possible solutions: reducing poverty (which is what he recommended) or reducing democracy. James Madison, who was no fool, noted the same problem, but unlike Aristotle, he aimed to reduce democracy rather than poverty. He believed that the primary goal of government is “to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority.” As his colleague John Jay was fond of putting it, “The people who own the country ought to govern it.” Madison feared that a growing part of the population, suffering from the serious inequities of the society, would “secretly sigh for a more equal distribution of [life’s] blessings.” If they had democratic power, there’d be a danger they’d do something more than sigh. He discussed this quite explicitly at the Constitutional Convention, expressing his concern that the poor majority would use its power to bring about what we would now call land reform. So he designed a system that made sure democracy couldn’t function. He placed power in the hands of the “more capable set of men,” those who hold “the wealth of the nation.”

    Conflict rather than conversion is the basis of social change. Max Planck had it right about how new scientific truth does not win by convincing opponents, they just die off. “Science advances one funeral at a time”.

    The one idea that the West has been holding onto is the rich trying to combat the potentially formidable power represented by the ethic cohesion of former working class now increasingly poverty prone whites.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Kratoklastes
  7. We were sold Affirmative Action and its ilk under the guise of equality of opportunity. But the definition of ‘equality’ has since changed from ‘equality of opportunity’ to ‘equality of outcome.’ In order to achieve equality of outcome, equality of opportunity must be eliminated.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
  8. The logical end point for immigration is when this country is enough of a sh_thole that few, if any, people want to come here. That’s a ways away still, but another 50-100 million more…

  9. Yes, the USA is weak on the subtlety of real synthesis, while strong on fake thesis / antithesis. In terms of economic & social policies and not just PR bluster, we really just have one party: the Neoliberal Uniparty. But on divide-and-conquer social issues, there is a lot of thunderous fake debate, a lot of fake thesis / antithesis.

    Take homosexuality. Society does not have to constantly promote homosexuality as an alternative to thousands of years of traditional marriage to accept the presence of a minority of gay people, gracefully, admitting their strengths.

    Wokesters are House Proud of their work to make everything in the USA perfectly equal, but earlier societies did a much better job at synthesizing opposites than Wokester America, a place where more cultural ruins and resentments are being created than any constructive syntheses.

    Several of Renaissance Italy’s greatest artists were gay, including Michaelangelo, who was verified gay. The 16th century Italians didn’t make such a big issue of it. They didn’t urge Michaelangelo and Leonardo to broadcast their gayness in the town square every five minutes, organizing a 16th century Gay Pride Parade.

    They just let Michaelangelo and Leonardo focus on their work, and work they did. Michaelangelo was a total workhorse, churning out an astonishing amount of the finest caliber art across different mediums, even architecture. His gayness did not cut down on his commissions, including from the church. God—not men—is supposed to judge.

    The gay Michaelangelo did all that while taking financial responsibility for a bunch of heterosexual relatives who were anything but responsible, respectable citizens despite their conventional sexuality. And yet, due to their gay relative’s multi-century fame, they, too, live on in history.

    A society can synthesize the better parts of liberal tolerance for individuals with the conservative solidity of core values that keep the overall social order intact. The whole Renaissance did that: melding Christianity with Antiquity in a respectful way, not in a thoughtless, trashing, debunking, radical-Displacement kind of way.

    • Agree: Clyde
    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
  10. The problem is that good people, through laziness and lack of attention to the long-term trends in politics, will not, and DID NOT, stick to principles. There was no need for moderation.

    Affirmative Action: WRONG
    US Gov’t interference in freedom of association: WRONG
    Forcible re-distribution of hard-earned money (welfare): WRONG
    Out-of-control Feral Gov’t that DOESN’T CARE what YOU want on immigration: WRONG

    I hate to piss off 1/2 of the commenters here, cause I like you all (95%), but you not only brought this on yourselves (if you are old enough), but you are still bringing all this stuff on!

    “Oh, no, but, but, Libertards, Principles, Constitution, OH MY!”

    I will refer back to the last possible chance America had to really put the kibosh on all the societal destruction, via a man named Barry Goldwater:

    “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”

    If you could have spent time fighting the rise of the US Feral Gov’t Beast, and you didn’t, you shouldn’t be pointing that finger – you’ve got 3 more fingers pointing back at you, yeah. Fuck moderation.

    • Replies: @Thea
    , @MBlanc46
  11. How stupid do you have to be to think diversity is our strength AND all people are exactly alike? Contradictory concepts both of which are completely wrong. IQ is a clumsy attempt to measure intelligence. Why does it bottom out at zero? Why not a negative IQ?

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    , @Anon
  12. El Dato says:

    In this department, going un-selfconsciously full steam ahead till the Nazi Problems mount:

    Poland cancels Israeli visit over WWII property restitution row after mass protests in Warsaw

    Poland is a special case as there tons of people that it has to restitute to and that it has to be restituted from, having been moved, removed and recomposed in various forms while not being angelic either on nor off the battlefield.

    Anyway, do not pay attention to headlines like “Israeli home demolitions skyrocket in Jerusalem“. This has nothing to do with future restitutions or anything.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  13. Those of us on the Right somehow think there has been an ongoing battle between EQUALITY and MERIT, but it really hasn’t been happening.

    That may be somewhat true. But it is also true that the notion of meritocracy does indeed survive on the liberal left … though only meritocracy among whites. If blacks are unemployed, it’s because of white racism. If whites are unemployed, however, it’s because they’re lazy. So for the modern, anti-working-class left, there is only equality between the races. Within the white race though, some are definitely superior to the rest.

    That’s why the large number of unemployed whites or the statistical reality that whites are now the only race in America whose lifespans are (on average) decreasing can never disprove the supposed existance of ‘white privilege’ to a modern liberal. Such a person would simply respond, ‘Why, with all the advantages of white privilege they had, the fact that they amounted to nothing just proves how lazy and worthless they really are!’ That’s how they can justify their own jobs while denying them to the rest.

  14. jb says:

    Overthrowing the idea of Equality makes a lot of sense. Another idea I think needs to be overthrown is Oppression Explains Everything. From the point of view of the Left, oppression is the only acceptable explanation for human problems.

    The thing of course is that sometimes oppression is real. Blacks really were oppressed 100 years ago. But it’s not the only explanation — sometimes people fail and suffer due to their own brokenness or inadequacy. And of course the two explanations are not mutually exclusive — they can both apply at the same time. But the Left finds that explanation emotionally intolerable, because they see it as “blaming the victim,” and thinking that way is just evil — in fact it’s exactly (exactly!) like telling a rape victim that she deserved to be raped. So what we need to do is overthrow the idea that oppression explains everything, and get people to accept that sometime, to a greater or lesser degree, the victim really can be to blame.

    • Replies: @William Badwhite
  15. How about equity? Declare Affirmative Action completed and move on.

  16. Right now it’s all about the money, and is a direct result of replacing hard currency (i.e. the gold-backed dollar of the Bretton Woods system) with social-democratic scrip. In the course of the last 50 years, we’ve gone from “tax and spend” (the guns-and-butter boondoggles of the Great Society) to “borrow and spend” (the massive deficits of Reaganite neoliberalism) and now we’re on to “print and spend” (full-blown debt monetization through quantitative easing). The next logical step in this progression is pure helicopter money, which currently goes under the fashionable name of Universal Basic Income; but it is likely that financial disaster would strike before we actually get there.

    Seen in economic terms, the great project of racial equalization is just another massive misallocation of capital enabled by an eschewing of market mechanisms and hard currency in favor of a redistributive government with its own central bank, now bloated and out of control. In this respect it is no different from tight oil fracking, ride hailing services, electric cars, and the rest of the Silicon Valley unicorns which are unable to generate a natural profit. Without forced wealth redistribution, none of this stuff could or would exist. Yes, these all have significant ideological components, but that is a natural inference from the fact that they have no intrinsic economic rationale.

    When Uncle Sam can no longer exert its influence through dollar-hegemony, the bubbles of the late dollar age are going to liquidate in spectacular fashion. At that point Affirmative Action will be about as valuable as tulip bulbs.

    It will happen. It cannot not happen. It’s just a matter of time.

    • Agree: Mark G.
  17. Oh, speaking of Moderation, Steve, thanks for the quick Moderation, rather than some of that Monomania. ;-}


    (I’d actually first thought that’s what this post was about, when you first had it titled “Moderation”.)

  18. “Immigration will continue, and reparations will continue, until one of two things happen….”

    IOW, the beatings will continue until morale improves.

  19. JoeyJoeJoe is quite right. I’d add too that the last fifty or sixty years have also been the era of television, of the concentration of media ownership and of the centralizing of nearly all cultural power. It’s only in the last few years that we’ve started to burst out from under the monocultural and monomaniacal slab of concrete they poured over the rest of us.

    “Embrace, extend, and extinguish”* wasn’t just Microsoft’s method of operation, it was how the West was won after WW2.


  20. Moses says:

    It’s hard to make a man understand something when his livelihood depends on him not understanding it.

  21. Benjaminl says:

    True, but you have to mention FREEDOM too.

    Today’s conception of Freedom amounts to: “I should be able to gas up my car’s engine with dish soap, and water my plants with paint thinner, and if you don’t like that, you’re a BIGOT.”

    Without a substantive concept of the good, Freedom amounts to complete anomie and alienation: perfect for Woke Capital to mainline “Free people” with a continuous stream of Soma.

  22. @WorkingClass

    It makes sense if one believes that cultural and racial differences are wonderful but are also superficial. Person X wears a turban while Person Y wears lederhosen but deep down, they’re all Anglo-American liberals and world federalists.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @ChrisZ
  23. You forgot one:

    3) EQUALITY in the West is no longer good for the Jews

  24. ChrisZ says:

    Solid observations by Joey. A couple of days back on the “Western Civ is Afro” thread, I gave this reply to an interesting comment by TelfoedJohn:

    In the 1960s the West set aside experience for experimentation. That hopeful spirit of “What if…?” may have been noble, and was certainly generous. But by most any measure, all the experiments have run their course by now. The results were not what the most optimistic proponents wanted. But the choice now is to accept those results, however unsavory they seem from the perspective of 1970, or submerge yourself in a fantasy world to protect your vintage feelings.

    This blog is often about the difference between those two choices.

    To follow up on that: Zman on his blog makes the point that we’re doomed to lose as long as we accept and endorse the moral universe of the Left. I paraphrase; but I take that to mean that (e.g.) “racism” is only bad according to a moral understanding that exalts “Equality” (among other things) above all other considerations. But that assertion is itself a choice, and there are alternate choices that would result in a diminished value for the transgression of racism.

    Currently, the tribunes of the Right reflexively concede the moral superiority of the Left when they express outrage over being called “racists.” But it’s possible that the moral architecture of “Equality,” though ascendant, is crumbling under the exposure of its empirical flaws, and the real battle being waged is among alternate moralities vying to replace it.

    Clearly such an alternative is being built on the “Dissident Right.” What’s unclear is whether the obsessive weirdness we observe on the Left is a genuine movement towards a workable moral structure, or a kind of neurotic reaction to the undeniable failure of the Equality system.

    Even if the latter proves to be the case, there’s no guarantee that it won’t come to dominate for some time. Human societies have lived under insane moral systems before.

    • Agree: Travis
  25. theMann says:

    Ah. Equality.

    Non-White = White
    Gay = Straight
    Stupid = intelligent
    Fat ugly short Chick = tall slender beautiful chick.

    The push for equality is everywhere the attempt of the inferior to equate themselves with the superior. When you call them out on it, the results are genuinely amusing.

    Just be armed when you call them out on it.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
  26. “But quotas sound fair!”

  27. Thea says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    It was baked into the cake from the beginning that the American experiment would fail. The basis of enlightenment liberalism violates human nature and the history of all relationships that developed between people.

    As Mark Richardson at Oz conservative writes, “ liberalism has no brakes.”

    Autonomy is not the highest good and cannot hold society together.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  28. @Ozymandias

    In order to achieve equality of outcome, equality of opportunity must be eliminated.

    Worthy of Orwell, and speaks volumes.

  29. Anon[277] • Disclaimer says:

    1. all people are exactly alike
    2. diversity is our strength

    But: 1 contradicts 2

    1a. All people are exactly alike: each has something unique to contribute
    2. Diversity is our strength.

    There ya go.

    Now the problem is, are all unique contributions equally valuable?

    White contribute science, democracy, etc.
    Negroes contribute jazz, rape and murder.

    But: rape and murder is due to White racism.

    Therefore, both are equally valuable.

    Therefore, diversity is strength.

  30. Speaking of policy proposals: California has plans in the works to keep Trump off the ballot in 2020. It appears that very few Republicans recognize the gift horse this represents. Leave them to it. Letting it happen will be a colossal P.R. victory.

    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal
    , @Ibound1
  31. @jb

    Maybe quibbling a bit over the definition of “oppressed”. You say “Blacks really were oppressed 100 years ago” though I would argue that they were just not allowed to destroy society. They were kept segregated because people that knew them best knew they were significantly different from whites.

    Nothing structural prevented them from becoming successful on their own.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    , @CCZ
    , @Reg Cæsar
  32. PSR says:

    2) The USA is no longer attractive to immigration-when the USA economically no different from places immigrants come from, immigrants won’t want to come here


    I think most of us suspect this is the road we are going down. Sadly, this country will have to become a godawful mess before Somalis and Nigerians and El Salvadorans would rather stay at home. To say that it will be nothing like what we have known is a huge understatement.

  33. CCZ says:
    @Mr McKenna

    ‘We’re going to end up with a third-world cesspool….”

    You mean like this??

    • Replies: @Technite78
  34. JoeyJoeJoe is an astute observer of American life.

  35. ChrisZ says:
    @Cagey Beast

    A delightful fossil you’ve unearthed, Cagey. This was the central myth of the West in the last half century. That myth is now in its death throes, but large populations refuse to acknowledge the fact.

    What’s interesting to me is that if you were to post a cartoon from the same era (mid-20th-century) depicting its conception of dinosaurs–as sluggish, dimwitted, and visibly reptilian–clever people would roll their eyes and scold you for promulgating outmoded, out-of-date information. “We now know better,” they’d assert, with pride and condescension.

    But the same people will embrace the present cartoon as “state of the art,” in terms of the conception of man it presents. And they’re willing to enforce that understanding, too. I guess that shows how powerful those fundamental myths can be.

    • Agree: Cagey Beast
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
  36. Thursday says:

    On the difference between right wing and left wing. To keep it brief, right wing means more tolerant of inequality and left wing means less tolerant of inequality.

    There’s quite a bit of diversity that falls under the term right wing: traditionalist conservatism, libertarianism, fascism. Many of those things are incompatible and often pretty antagonistic towards each other. But they all tend to be more tolerant of some form of inequality than the left, which is a more consistent leveling impulse.

    Some complications: 1. the terms are relative, 2. individual people and social movements can be opposed to inequality in one area while being ok with it in another, and 3. since, it is impossible to function without hierarchy, all left wing movements, no matter how absolute their opposition to inequality in theory, will, in practice, set up their own hierarchies.

    Finally, all religions conceive of reality in a fundamentally hierarchical way, which means that they are going to be in constant conflict with those who want to make everything as absolutely equal as possible. To put it another way, religion has an ineradicable right wing component.

  37. Bill H says: • Website

    Equality would be great, if equality was what the “oppressed” wanted. But equality is not the goal. The goal is to switch the roles, so that those who are presently “empowered” become the “oppressed,” while those who are presently “oppressed” become “empowered.”

    You think the “MeToo” movement wants women to be equal to men? They do not. They want men to be beaten down into subjugation.

  38. Emotional people like JoeyJoeJoe and all those pitched political rhetoric see it in terms of equality.

    But the real political fight is positive-rights vs negative-rights, i.e., having the duty to give someone advantage because that one qualifies as a member of a group versus having the right to have one’s current state unharmed, or the right to be left alone.

    “Equality, encouraged as the ultimate political aspiration, takes the social standard from the lowest order of the people and all that it cannot debase to that level, it excludes from public life, if it does not drive it out of the country…As the equality can only be acquired at the expense of liberty, the greater the equality is, the more complete is the loss of liberty and a tyranny necessarily succeeds.”

    ~ George Washington Hosmer, 1883

  39. Dave Pinsen says: • Website


  40. I think there’s some viewpoints that get drowned out in both the liberal and conservative echo chambers.

    Problems: give blacks access, and they still don’t do much with it
    Solution: maybe the current theory of all races being equal is wrong… but maybe we should still provide _access_ to all because there will always be enough people who don’t conform to the median and a meritocratic system should by and large support them

    Replace blacks with women and the answer still holds. I seriously doubt aiming for xx% representation is a good idea: maybe most women biologically, genetically and socially don’t want to rise the corporate ladder. But for the few who do, being given the opportunity and a fair shot is key.

    Talking about headwinds, and bias, that minorities face is also useful self-reflection. But that really is all that it can be —- to force equal *representation* as opposed to equal opportunity seems to be overcorrection.

  41. The concept of diminishing marginal returns suggests that it makes sense to pursue policies that sound like a good idea only in moderation: if you do X and it seems to succeed, then maybe doing Y is a good idea, but Z probably is not at all a good idea.

    I like to apply this to defenses of Obamacare as Romneycare. As if the Commonwealth of Massachusetts were the United States.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  42. Whiskey says: • Website

    Almost every one here is wrong. The guiding spirit of the age is not equality. It is a Master Race. Just a Black Master Race.

    Call it the Reverse Hitler.

    It’s what you get when society is run on female consumerism. The Black Master Race.

    Watch any commercial.

  43. Anonymous[116] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s not a political ideology, or even dogma.

    It is a religious cult pursued by its devotees with maniacal zeal.
    The core belief of this cult is vicarious sacrifice – not in the Christian sense of ‘killing the Messiah – but the purely insidious and revolting doctrine of ‘good whites’ making a big display of their zeal with the doctrine of dumping on ‘bad whites’ less fortunate than them, that is the nature of their sacrifice, which is more in the way of a psychopathic coward than a devotee of a faith.

  44. Travis says:

    people hate to admit they were wrong. This is why it took so long for scientists to agree to the germ theory of disease. “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

    Similar with every communist regime. They never blamed the theory of marxism. First they blame the counter-revolutionaries, then they blame the peasants then they blame the leaders, then the marxists insist that communism was never done correctly , which is why it failed.

    similar with equality. The many who promoted equality between the races and multiculturalism will never admit being wrong. Instead they doubled down on it and came up with new reasons why it failed. School Integration failed because there were not enough white students, thus busing began. Busing failed so they blamed racism and the teachers. When overt racism no longer could be found they invented micro-racism. They blame the curriculum , the teaching methods, school discipline. Too many people invested too much of their lives investing in equality. The supreme court even validated racial quotas soon after our nation passed civil rights laws which banned discrimination because they realized quickly that banning discrimination based on race would not result in “equality” and thus we need racial discrimination against whites to create “equality”.

    Most Americans in 1965 knew that Blacks were not as intelligent as whites. Even most of those promoting “equality” knew this to be true. Which is why they fought to close the gaps by changing laws to promote equality of outcome. One reason we moved so fast from banning discrimination against Blacks to legalizing discrimination against Whites was because many people did not believe in equality between the races. Under President Nixon we started affirmative action because he and others knew ending discrimination against Blacks would not result in equality of outcome. Thus from the beginning the promotion of equality was done by two primary groups , those who believed in equality and those who knew Blacks were inferior but wanted to feel good about themselves by promoting a racial spoils system to close the gaps. Others promoted affirmative action as a method to address past injustices. So their were multiple forces which combined to promote discrimination against whites. But after 50 years this has failed, and created more grievances as even Blacks realize affirmative action has failed to create equal outcomes. Thus the demand for more to be done and the continued search for explanations of why blacks still fail to achieve equal outcomes..

    Today there is even more evidence that racial equality does not exist. Genetics is demonstrating what many already suspected 60 years ago. We recently discovered that Caucasians and Negroids are not only different races but different types of hybrids, Whites are a hybrid between 2 species, neanderthals and Homo Sapiens. Negroids are a hybrid of a different archaic hominoid species and have no neanderthal DNA. But because those in power have been advocating for equality for 60 years they will never admit to being wrong and will find new “solutions” to force equality of outcome. The final solution is currently underway, the elimination of the white race. This is being done with open borders, suppressing the white birth rate and miscegenation.

    • Agree: jim jones
    • Replies: @Anon
  45. @theMann

    For sure the last three are better than the comparisons. But is white really better than non-white? I’d say, “different”, but then I’d stop. That’s like saying men are better than women. No, we’re just different, and that’s a good thing.

    Most of us think of equality as No Bullies. Whether it’s big gov’t, unions, aristocrats, the police, gangs, domineering parents, domineering big siblings, church authorities, nepotists, loud-mouths, punks, perverts, you name it. Just because I’m weaker than you are doesn’t mean you get to push me around. I get my fair standing in society and in the law.

    A big problem shows up with nepotism. How is it that the mayor’s family and friends seem to get all the local contracts? Why is everybody working for that company inter-related? Should all the cops really be Irish? Do the children of the wealthy get a leg-up in college admissions? Here all of us get our inequality hairs standing up on our necks.

  46. @Reg Cæsar

    As if! Shoulda kicked that hellhole out of the Union long ago.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  47. J1234 says:

    ….I think that human beings just aren’t capable of sophisticated thought. They can hold on to one idea, and carry it to its logical conclusion, then overthrow it with another idea, and repeat the process. They can’t seem to debate limits or tradeoffs.

    Good working definition of radicalism.

  48. @HammerJack

    I am not s Trump supporter at all.
    I am a Democrat and I hope we can get a good Democrat to beat Trump.

    That being said, I agree that states keeping Trump off the ballot , or attempting to, could easily backfire.

    I am not completely sure, since gerrymandering doesn’t seem to ever backfire. I wonder where the line in the sand lies.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  49. Problem: They still don’t seem to be doing much with it
    Solution (not ‘hmm, time to rethink our thesis..’): give blacks more stuff to help them (reparations, different standards of achievement, etc etc).

    See this cartoon:

  50. @ChrisZ

    One of the only things they’d have a problem with would be the depiction of mankind starting out in the Holy Land, rather than East Africa.

  51. @CCZ

    The narrator provides us with an excellent example of the art of saying a lot of words without saying very much of substance. He could have simply said “This is disgusting, and something should be done about it”, and then stopped talking… but he feels compelled to talk for 52 seconds repeating the same few words and phrases over and over again. I’m sure he could have continued for another 52 minutes without adding anything of further significance.

    • Replies: @CCZ
  52. Thinker says:

    The left’s Diversity Industrial Complex is hitting all parents of college students in the pocketbooks:

    Breitbart News has written about the growth of diversity offices on college campuses over the past few years. Take, for example, the University of Michigan — whose diversity office has an $11 million payroll for its 100 employees. The newly appointed Vice President of Diversity at Ohio University will make $200,000 per year. Despite staffing dozens of employees, it remains unclear what campus diversity offices contribute to university life.

    Mark J. Perry, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, argues that the unnecessary and sudden expansion of diversity offices may be contributing to the dramatic rise in the cost of college tuition.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
  53. Thinker says:

    When the left talks about “equality”, they don’t mean equality of opportunity, because equal opportunity naturally leads to unequal outcome due to difference in aptitude, attitude, drive etc. What they mean is equal outcome. That’s what they want.

    At the top of the Diversity food chain in every college, you will almost always see a Jewish male. This diversity racket is entirely the work of Jews, with a few token blacks to divert attention.

  54. Ibound1 says:

    If states leave Trump off the ballot, it is civil war. Not saying there will be fighting but it is civil war. There are certain understandings we all have that are unwritten but they go into making us a nation. We have lost most of those things but this will be one loss too far. There is no nation if Trump is kept off the ballot in any state. The entire Russia farce was very close to the edge but the system pulled back at the last moment. But this? This will end the nation – a bit quicker than even I expected.

  55. anon[416] • Disclaimer says:

    Hayek wrote about the tension between extended order ethics and small group ethics. Equality is the prime virtue of small group ethics and is hardwired into our homo sapiens psyches from the millennia we spent in hunter gatherer societies before we found ourselves in the big city.

    Million of pages have been written trying to justify equalitarianism as a political doctrine and millions have died because of it.

    And now that we’re just one big happy global family, everyone and everybody must be equal.

    Europeans have been by far the most successful in creating extended order societies. Certainly had much to do with the Hajnal line. And now after all those centuries of human, social, philosophical and political evolution – Somalia, here we come.

  56. @Endgame Napoleon

    There are some paleoconservative authors who would say you have no idea what you’re talking about.

  57. @Thea

    Baked into the cake? Why did it take 150 years, and arguably 200 to fail then? That doesn’t sound like no cake. You got some better places/times for human beings to have lived that beats America of those years? I guess people just forget …

  58. “I hope we can get a good Democrat to beat Trump.”

    ‘A good Democrat‘, you say.

    Finding a vegetarian cannibal ( again !? ) shouldn’t be such a big issue, since your Party of Fringes had already let a thousand Venus flytrap flowers bloom.

    Feed them, Seymour – your paleo is a perfect dietary fit to their needs.

  59. stop making this so complicated. it’s jewish social influence. you can measure and mark the history of all this stuff in almost exactly the same way we can radio carbon date stuff. jews show up, then suddenly this crazy, insane stuff starts happening. it’s that simple. don’t over think it, joeyjoejoe.

    don’t create elaborate, overarching frameworks which attempt to encompass and explain all human activity since the beginning of time to try to account for recent insanity. that’s totally unnecessary, like the greeks trying to invent circular paths for astronomical objects instead of just accepting they were other objects orbiting the earth.

    intelligent humans have no problem not being insane, in countries where jews don’t suddenly show out of of nowhere on a historical timeline. the insanity happening in the west is not happening elsewhere. i wonder why.

    i shall call this occam’s dreidel.

  60. CCZ says:

    New York City news stations identified the person posting the video as a 33 year old black construction worker (he was even interviewed) so, if a white “Becky” had filmed and posted this “third world” scene (especially with the “homeless” black “passengers”), the narration might have been short but the cries of racism and belittling black bodies would have been very loud and long.

  61. @Whiskey

    Watch any commercial.

    On what?

    Get rid of your TV connection, Whiskey, or YOU are part of the problem.

  62. @wren

    If you have power, you can intimidate the opposition, as he says. Whether or not you have power, you can simply mock them.

    As in this cute T-shirt:

    Well, Tuesday is cute.

    • Replies: @bored identity
    , @Anonymous
  63. @Paleo Liberal

    I am a Democrat and I hope we can get a good Democrat to beat Trump.

    Sam Francis is dead. But there’s still Bill Kauffman.

  64. @Achmed E. Newman

    Actually, I think the white states should have kicked out the not-so-white states around the time of the Mexican War. Unfortunately, the wrong states seceded.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  65. MBlanc46 says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I’ve still got a large “In Your Heart You Know He’s Right” button, with a faded black paper border, for wearing on the day after the 1964 election.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  66. MBlanc46 says:
    @William Badwhite

    Blacks in the deep South were kept under pretty tight control. They were needed as agricultural labor and attempts to be anything else but a farm laborer were were discouraged.

  67. CCZ says:

    More of the “transgender” agenda:

  68. @MBlanc46

    Not always true.

    There were a number of blacks who were skilled laborers. A few even set up businesses, such as barber shops.

    As the book “Gone With the Wind” pointed out, in some cases house servants were running the show when Massa was too dumb. For example Uncle Peter runs the household of Scarlett’s Aunt Pitypat.

    Sometimes I wonder if that is the reason why the average black American have a much higher IQ than the average African. Field slaves were worked to death in the early days, while house slaves and artisans and skilled workers could survive and reproduce.

  69. @Reg Cæsar

    Actually, Tuesday also comes with a few stipulations:

  70. dfordoom says: • Website

    “All Men Are Created Equal” seems to be the rock upon which we dash the ship of our civilization.

    But we countenance great economic inequality

    It’s almost as if those who are running things want us to focus on imaginary inequalities (like homosexuals and women supposedly being oppressed) in order to distract us from noticing economic inequalities.

    If you were a cynic you might conclude that they don’t believe for one second in equality, they just want to protect their own wealth and power.

  71. dfordoom says: • Website

    He believed that the primary goal of government is “to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority.”

    And that’s been the aim of government ever since.

  72. CCZ says:
    @William Badwhite

    Much has been written on the the rise of “black business” in post-Civil War America, all within the confines of segregation.

    Although from Wiki, the text is sourced to professional historians.

    The most rapid growth [in black businesses] came in the early 20th century. The National Negro Business League, promoted by college president Booker T. Washington, opened over 600 chapters, reaching every city with a significant black population.

    By 1920, there were tens of thousands of black businesses, the great majority of them quite small. The largest were insurance companies. The League had grown so large that it supported numerous offshoots, including the National Negro Bankers Association, the National Negro Press Association, the National Association of Negro Funeral Directors, the National Negro Bar Association, the National Association of Negro Insurance Men, the National Negro Retail Merchants’ Association, the National Association of Negro Real Estate Dealers, and the National Negro Finance Corporation.

    Historian Juliet Walker calls 1900–1930 the “Golden age of black business.” According to the National Negro Business League, the number black-owned businesses doubled from 20,000 in 1900 to 40,000 in 1914. There were 450 undertakers in 1900, rising to 1000. Drugstores rose from 250 to 695. Local retail merchants – most of them quite small – jumped from 10,000 to 25,000.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  73. anon[335] • Disclaimer says:

    These things make people stupid:

    1. Feelings. Feelings are inherently stupid. You see this when you watch people caught up in feelings you do not share.

    2. Beliefs. Beliefs hold the brain together. Without dogma people fall apart psychologically.

    3. Thinking is a rare skill. If you let go of your feelings and beliefs it is possible to hold yourself together with intelligence (Reason), but this is hard full-time work and requires a well-above average brain. Most people cannot be expected to do this. They must h0ld themselves together with feelings and beliefs.

    Feelings and belief always prove false, so people stay on their false course until reality hits them in the face.

  74. Duke84 says:
    @Mr McKenna

    The U.S. will become northern Central America.Many parts of it are already there.

  75. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Certain kinds of tacos are of course to be strictly avoided.

  76. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:

    Blacks as a group were better off in many ways under segregation. Since all blacks were segregated against, if you will, the talented tenth had business and professional opportunities for dealing with mainstream and underclass blacks who had to deal with them. In the civil rights era blacks abandoned black businesses and professionals wholesale in favor of white businesses, which often did feature better price and selection and quality. However, these talented tenth types provided guidance and stability to the black “community”. After integration, talented tenth blacks became to an extent honorary whites and often abandoned contact with mainstream blacks. Others became preachers, undertakers and politicians and often cynically exploited the black masses.

    Integration meant the end of Negro League baseball, which blacks turned out to far prefer to Major League integrated baseball in the long run. Blacks generally only patronize black music and black churches, and strongly prefer black oriented movies, but they have little other outlets for blackness that aren’t destructive-modern black music is often very corrosive,i.e., gangsta rap.

    Saying this in public is a bad idea, of course.

  77. @William Badwhite

    They were kept segregated because people that knew them best knew they were significantly different from whites.

    Petit apartheid isn’t real segregation. Only grand apartheid fits the bill.

  78. @Whiskey

    “Watch any commercial.”

    Christ on crutches, you’re a bore. And a blind one at that.

    (((Who))) produces, directs, edits, and pays for these commercials? Is it Basketball-Americans who wield all this media clout?

    How do you say “psy-ops” or “methodical demoralization” in Ebonics?

    • Replies: @ah2thoughte
    , @Reg Cæsar
  79. fenster says:

    Your post about how marginal thinking is hard is one of my favorite posts of yours over the years, and I am constantly seeing evidence of its usefulness. The more I think of it, though, I see another tension under the surface. To me it seems that it is not so much that any one individual is incapable of thinking in marginal terms. I mean, when you lay out a situation in which marginal thinking is needed in the small-scale immediate moment I think people get it.

    But the human condition consists of individual brains needed to process things that solve individual problems but social ones too. There is no fine line between the two concepts (as with races or mountains/hills) but one can grasp the difference between the easier application of marginal thinking to salad dressing versus social equality. We speak of a hive mind but so far at least we don’t really have one. We have individual processors gamely struggling to work with memes that are expected to find traction across communities, nations and worlds. It is an awkward fit.

    • Replies: @fenster
  80. @The Germ Theory of Disease

    Chevy Chase? Is that you? Got to be, all that whacky boomer waffle about Bertolt Brecht. Hey guys, Chevy Chase is commenting as he’s ‘between acting jobs’. Can we keep him Steve? Can we please?

  81. fenster says:

    Put another way Kahneman’s System 1 can show a better fit between individual and society since a lot of the instinctive ways we see things are held in common. But when we get to System 2 (where we will more likely find marginal thinking) things are different. An individual may reason out a problem with marginal thinking using System 2 but he still faces a world in which most people use System 1. And while an individual might motivate himself to take a different path on the basis of a difficult rational thinking through of something large groups require simpler morality-based arguments to move.

  82. @MBlanc46

    NICE! I know that buttons were very big, even through the 1980’s. It was the coolest thing to make your own buttons, a good bit after AuH20’s time. Maybe I should get one of yours on ebay and wear it to see who has a clue.

    My Mom said that my Dad was still hopeful through the 1964 election returns on TV – no red and blue states back then, it was Black and White – and he kept saying “wait until they get west of the Mississippi!”. #SAD

  83. @Reg Cæsar

    Now’s the time. Go for it. Nobody’s got a gun to your … wait …

    The idea was various States as “experiments in democracy”. That doesn’t work when you force them to stay in, as if it’s the mob or CIA.

  84. @MBlanc46

    Its tough to advance beyond farm laborer when one is illiterate. Yes I realize there weren’t excellent public schools being offered to them, however neither were they typically available to poor whites. Anyway as I said in my comment, its a minor point (quibbling over the definition of oppressed). The original commenters point was a good one.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  85. @Paleo Liberal

    Sometimes I wonder if that is the reason why the average black American have a much higher IQ than the average African.

    The higher IQ for American blacks vs African blacks is likely a function of white admixture as well as improved nutrition in-utero.

    Field slaves were worked to death in the early days, while house slaves and artisans and skilled workers could survive and reproduce.

    Not so much. Slaves were expensive. Regardless of the morality of it, destroying your own property didn’t make economic sense. Also the slave trade ended in 1807, so the only way to increase slave holdings was for them to reproduce.

  86. @Sean

    Aristotle didn’t understand rent-seeking, and/or why concentrated interests have greater influence over policy than diffuse (individual) interests.

    In his defence, he wasn’t really thinking of the sham of ‘representative’ democracy – his idea was more like direct democracy.

    If he had turned his mind to the sorts of things that are predictable (and observed) consequences of representative democracy, he would have been against it –
    • the principal-agent problem
    • bureaucratic and regulatory capture
    • rent-seeking
    • corruption (generally)
    • Holmström’s Theorem (the impossibility of keeping to a budget constraint)
    • The Arrow Impossibility Theorem and Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem (ordinal voting cannot reflect social preferences)

  87. After more than a half century of political observation, I think that human beings just aren’t capable of sophisticated thought

    That’s true of most human beings, not all human beings.

    The Smart Fraction (the top 5% by any broad cognitive measure) are capable of sophisticated thought; the other 19 out of 20… nup.

    For those with more exacting standards as to what constitutes “sophisticated” it’s probably sensible to rarify the selection even more.

    If you only consider people who are in the ‘Level V’ range on a PIAAC test, you’ll have slightly less than 1% of the population, but those people will have literacy and numeracy competencies that enable them to…


    perform tasks that involve searching for and integrating information across multiple, dense texts; constructing syntheses of similar and contrasting ideas or points of view, or evaluating evidence and arguments. They can apply and evaluate logical and conceptual models, and evaluate the reliability of evidentiary sources and select key information. They are aware of subtle, rhetorical cues and are able to make high-level inferences or use specialised background knowledge (OECD (2013) Table 4.5 p69)



    understand mathematical information that may be less explicit, embedded in contexts that are not always familiar and represented in more complex ways. Tasks require several steps and may involve the choice of problem-solving strategies and relevant processes. Tasks tend to require the application of number sense and spatial sense; recognising and working with mathematical relationships, patterns, and proportions expressed in verbal or numerical form; and interpretation and basic analysis of data and statistics in texts, tables and graphs (OECD (2013) Table 4.5 p69 again)

    The median adult in the OECD does not hit Level III (Rammstein et al, 2013, Table 1 p9) – which used to be referred to as “the minimum required for individuals to meet the complex demands of everyday life and work in the emerging knowledge-based economy” – (ABS (2006) p8).

    When the median US adult failed to reach Level III, the OECD was pressured to remove that language from the definition.

    Bear in mind that the OECD PIAAC studies refer to a very specific large subset of human beings: collectively they are the wealthiest, most educated 1.3 billion of the current human herd (and quite possibly the wealthiest, most educated 1.3 billion who have ever lived in one defined geographical extent).

    We can quibble about whether some specific non-OECD country has OECD-level metrics (e.g., China, Russia, India), but if you split the herd into OECD and non-OECD the ‘wealthiest, most educated subset’ statement is unassailable. And of course if you go down to a micro level, the Sultan of Brunei and his ilk are very rich, and the professoriat at any major non-OECD university are collectively very bright… but there’s not 1.3 billion of either.

    So less than 1% of the wealthiest, most educated human beings can do what I would expect from a reasonably bright 15 year old (I’ve done the PIAAC Test – it’s not artificially hard).

    Make PIAAC Level V (or Level IV in a pinch) a precondition for the franchise, and I might abandon my antipathy towards representative democracy (just kidding – I will never abandon that antipathy because it’s a mathematical conclusion, not just a preference).

    PIAAC References

    Repository: OECD PIAAC Publications

    Key Documents:

    OECD (2013), OECD Skills Outlook 2013: First Results from the Survey Of Adults Skills
    • Table 4.5 (p69) provides a description of the broad capacities at each skill level for literacy and numeracy;
    • pp63-67 give an overview of what adults can do at each of the five assessed literacy levels;
    • pp75-78 do the same for numeracy;
    • pp 87-90 do likewise for problem-solving.

    Rammstedt et al (2013) PIAAC 2012: Overview of the Main Results
    • p5 gives the mapping from raw test scores to the 5 assessment levels;
    • pp7-8 give examples of test criteria for the different levels
    • Table 1 on p9 gives the median score/PIAAC level for each OECD country.

    [ABS2006]: Australian Bureau of Statistics, “Adult Literacy and Life Skills Survey: User Guide, 2006
    • p8 gives the relevant definition of Level III as the “minimum required (etc)”

  88. Lagertha says:

    my kids got out at the nick of time.

    I see many universities and colleges going bankrupt from now (some already closed) until 2030. Baby boomers sent the last of their progeny to college last year, and, from now on, most top 2-5% of Americans (the ones that actually, pay more taxes since their salaries are taxed), are finished with college students in their home.

    The Gen X & Y, older Millennial parents are far more poorer than the Boomers. Most of their kids (I’m just talking about white kids – non Jewish kids) will eschew small private colleges and large private Uni’s, because most kids have realized that the $$$$ is in STEM majors.

    Publics are just growing their dorms/programs/staff because they have been wrong/off of the yield for a few years now. Ergo, they are accepting an additional 5,000 students…and, able to accommodate them in new, sparkling dorms.

    Most kids are going to the American Southland/Mountain West/Plains where the tuition is the smallest.

    So happy that I am 1 year away from the last tuition payment!!!! yippeee! And, I missed the huge, uncontrolled, angry & self-righteous, diversity-mad, administrative state that has attached itself like Alien to the student body….and taxpaying parents’ income.

  89. Lagertha says:

    got thru – this is parents paying for tuition.

  90. @The Germ Theory of Disease

    They’re still teaching general relativity in physics departments, as if postal clerks were scientists. What’s that about?

  91. After more than a half century of political observation, I think that human beings just aren’t capable of sophisticated thought.

    Stephen Barone did a fascinating piece on this in Reason 32 years ago, running democracy through Piaget’s theory of mental development.

    Ron has saved it for us:

  92. Anonymous[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @El Dato

    The Poles have the benefit of learning from the experiences of other countries, particularly the Swiss, in this matter. The lesson of the Swiss affair is you don’t give these people anything, no matter how reasonable and moderate the initial demands are. Because they are just the initial demands, and once you accept them, the demands will escalate and escalate and just keep escalating.

    • Replies: @Anon
  93. Anon[409] • Disclaimer says:

    The problem with acknowledging the germ theory of disease is that it exposed doctors as mass-murderers.

    Countless people died in the 19th century due to poor hygiene practices by doctors. Indeed, hospitals were notorious for killing their patients. No matter how ill you were, you were safer out of them.

    No doctor was going to accept that he spent his career thoughtlessly killing people, and the medical profession was going to react violently to any suggestion of the kind. Literally–Semmelweis was killed by these people for this reason.

    (And anyone who thinks this kind of thing is ancient history should research the suspicious death of W.D. Hamilton in 2000.)

  94. Anonymous[339] • Disclaimer says:
    @Paleo Liberal

    Field slaves were worked to death in the early days,

    No they weren’t.

  95. Anonymous[339] • Disclaimer says:
    @William Badwhite

    Its tough to advance beyond farm laborer when one is illiterate.

    It’s hard to “advance” beyond farm laborer when there aren’t many non-farm labor jobs. Most of the jobs back then (white or black) were of the manual labor variety.

  96. Anon[410] • Disclaimer says:

    Poland is a special case as there tons of people that it has to restitute to and that it has to be restituted from, having been moved, removed and recomposed in various forms while not being angelic either on nor off the battlefield.

    If the Poles owe restitution to anyone, it is to Germans.

  97. BB753 says:
    @Mr McKenna

    “And none of it had to happen.”

    The powers that be certainly made sure it had to happen, the sooner, the better.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?