A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
iSteve Blog
Nothing Ever Changes

So I’m out of touch for two days; then I look at the papers and find … nothing has changed. From the top story in the NYT early Wednesday morning:

Shooting Accounts Differ as Holder Schedules Visit to Ferguson

FERGUSON, Mo. — As a county grand jury prepared to hear evidence on Wednesday in the shooting death of a black teenager by a white police officer that touched off 10 days of unrest here, witnesses have given investigators sharply conflicting accounts of the killing.

Some of the accounts seem to agree on how the fatal altercation initially unfolded: with a struggle between the officer, Darren Wilson, and the teenager, Michael Brown. Officer Wilson was inside his patrol car at the time, while Mr. Brown, who was unarmed, was leaning in through an open window.

Many witnesses also agreed on what happened next: Officer Wilson’s firearm went off inside the car, Mr. Brown ran away, the officer got out of his car and began firing toward Mr. Brown, and then Mr. Brown stopped, turned around and faced the officer.

Even leaving aside Brown’s preceding crimes in the convenience store, how is this supposed to be one of the Defining Events of Our Time, a Searing Indictment of the National Crisis of the White Racist Power Structure Murdering Black Babies, rather than just another local police blotter item of crazy ass behavior in the ‘hood? I don’t care what race you are, if you are in a dispute with a cop and thrust your head into his police car and then his gun goes off hurting and no do doubt scaring him, it’s highly like additional bad things are going to happen.

This is not to defend everything the cop did, just to say that let’s step back and look at the big picture. Respectable Opinion had decided that this case is the one that they want to exploit for their profound ideological ends. And yet, as with so many of these Moral Lessons for Whites from Tawana Brawley on down, it turns out to be just another piece a crap case.

Partly this is inherent in the dominant High-Low coalition against the Middle. The Democrats need to hold their coalition together by ginning up hatred of Evil White Men. They can use their dominance of the media to put out the bassline message but they need Incidents, ideally involving white men murdering innocent black babies. But, that just doesn’t happen much, our entire system is obsessed with punishing it when it does happen, and the Obamas and Holders and the press are dependent upon potential examples being brought forward to their attention by mobs exacting pogroms upon convenience stores for snitching. And mobs are notable bad at careful evaluation of the evidence.

Hence, the media’s war on whites keeps turning into one fiasco after another.

It’s time to ask tough questions about the ideological power structure in the modern world. If the power players in charge of molding our worldviews keep humiliating themselves and only preserve their facades of competence by changing the subjects — e.g., Eric Holder now wants to investigate an incident involving the Ferguson PD five years ago — or claiming that more investigation is needed so they don’t have to admit their mistakes — hey, Eric, how’s your investigation into bringing double jeopardy charges against George Zimmerman coming after only 13 months — maybe we a different worldview and a different establishment.

• Tags: Ferguson Shooting 
Hide 425 Comments

425 Comments to "Nothing ever changes"

  1. syon says:


    Derrida increasingly was playing games in his latter career, but early on, as in White Mythology, he was quite clear. Anyone can read that essay and see for themselves.

    Actually, the reverse is true. Derrida became more plain-speaking towards the end of his career. Cf, for example, SPECTERS OF MARX, where Derrida makes his political views quite clear. It’s also interesting to note that SPECTERS seems to be especially popular nowadays…

    Apparently non-Jewish Europeans would have to have been committing national suicide for a thousand years for it to be admitted that they have, relatively speaking, had rather universalist ideologies. It is true that emancipatory policies like banning slavery were not national suicide, but the rhetoric was universalist. If you look at it overall, there is a pattern.

    And these universalist ideologies have their sources in the non-Nordic Mediterranean world (Paul, Stoic philosophy, etc). This is the reverse of what KM’s Nordic hypothesis would have predicted…

    Apparently you think if non Jewish Europeans were not flying about in jet planes a thousand years ago, that proves subsequent non-Jewish European aerospace technology innovation could have had nothing to do with the genetic traits of non-Jewish Europeans.

    MMM, as noted above, dear fellow, the problem lies in the fact that the well-spring of these universalist notions lies in the Mediterranean, not in the North. Couple that with the fact that things like the rise of anti-slavery sentiment are less than three centuries old, and KM’s theory that Nordics are innate Kantians starts looking like special pleading….

  2. syon says:

    @reiner Tor

    Nothing could be further from the truth. MacDonald explicitly states the criteria based on which he categorizes scholarship as “ethnic activism”. He even gives examples of Jewish scholars whose work he considers disinterested scholarship, even though the scholars themselved were obviously not disinterested. Apparently you never read The Culture of Critique.

    Oh, I did read it, dear fellow. And I made note of the way in which he carefully examined figures like Boas, scrutinizing their biographies for any sign of what might be taken for ethnocentrism (cf, for example, his dilating on Mead’s Prussian dig regarding Boas).

    As for disinterested scholarship…..Well, he did make reference to Einstein…..Of course, given that Einstein’s field was physics, one suspects that the opportunities for advancing the Jewish evolutionary agenda were somewhat limited, at least in terms of the actual scientific work…

    As to your examples of Nordic ethnocentrism, apparently you didn’t understand my point. My point was that a few or even many examples only prove that Nordics are capable of ethnocentrism. But nobody stated the opposite. You need to put these examples into context, e.g. by comparing Nordics and other races or ethnic groups in similar situations,

    Which is what I did. I see little difference between, say, Stalin and Hitler….Well, Stalin was more cautious and less obviously racially motivated….

    or create studies comparing their behavior in similar situations from childhood on. Like Germans vs Japanese after WW2, which of these feels more guilt because their own ethnic group broke universal moral standards, and which of them is still ethnocentric regardless. Or studies comparing Norwegian vs Vietnamese children. Or something similar. MacDonald’s thesis needs more research, but can’t be disproved by a few counter-examples.

    And such research would need to screen-out the effects of ideology, childhood moral conditioning, etc.

    Just to be more explicit, what needs to be shown is whether Nordics are not any more predisposed to moral universalism than others like Chinese, Jews, Africans, Middle Easterners etc. Because that was MacDonald’s original assertion.

    And also bear in mind that KM’s thesis holds that non-Nordic Europeans are less disposed to moral universalism than Nordics….

    Obviously MacDonald’s statement about Nordics is a mere statistical assertion, i.e. that on average, Nordics are more predisposed to moral universalism and less predisposed to moral particularism than others, and nowhere did he state that Nordics were incapable of moral particularism.

    Which is why events like the Thirty Years War and the Cromwellian Conquest of Ireland are important. If Nordics differ on a statistical level, we should expect to see less “other” directed violence committed by Nordics in the distant past.

  3. Sean says:

    “Actually, the reverse is true. Derrida became more plain-speaking towards the end of his career. Cf, for example, SPECTERS OF MARX, where Derrida makes his political views quite clear. It’s also interesting to note that SPECTERS seems to be especially popular nowadays…”

    Then it should be easy for you to quote us some of it, I would be interested in an example of this plain speaking, which you claim for the later Derrida. I have already given my example, and I think it is clear that in White Mythology he was talking about actual genetic white men.
    “And these universalist ideologies have their sources in the non-Nordic Mediterranean world (Paul, Stoic philosophy, etc). This is the reverse of what KM’s Nordic hypothesis would have predicted…”

    The Aztecs had the wheel. The Ancient Greeks had a steam engine.

  4. Current Commenter says:

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

Remember My Information 

Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
Subscribe to All iSteve Comments via RSS
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
Not What Tom Jefferson Had in Mind
ABC's Epic Steel-cage Smackdown
What the facts tell us about a taboo subject
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?